The Future of Sex in the Bond films

2456714

Comments

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited May 2023 Posts: 17,691
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    In itself, no there's nothing wrong with sex in the Bond films. That's to say I don't there's too much or too little. As mentioned there's no issue with nudity and even the type of sex Bond has, while casual, is relatively 'vanilla' by most standards.

    I don't think the sex is what some people have a problem with when it comes to Bond films/Bond girls. Maybe that's another discussion though.

    The 'problem' is what I'd like to find out.

    Pretty much what was said by others above. A part is the portrayal of women.

    I can understand why some would have issues with something like the barn scene from GF too. Or Bond suddenly kissing Patricia in TB.

    Yeah, 'kissing her until she likes it' is certainly not cool and isn't coming back any time soon!

    In TB it was kind of slimy of him pushing himself on Patricia, but in GF Pussy could have stopped him any time with another simple Judo move- she was playing with him.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited May 2023 Posts: 4,443
    Mabey it is because the two Black actres always have strong body and behaviour but Bond and May Day feels uncomfortable and Bond and Jinx too.

    Mabey it is good Bond don't have sex with Nomi in NTTD, but mabey it wil work better with a between Bond girl. Rosie carver was close. Eve was a co-worker and shaving scene was moost sexy, but again possible of screen have done more.

    Daniel Craig/P&W proof self spot with naked Bond look a like in QOS (as comment on Bond monkey behaviour in CR at parkour chase) and when Bond half naked open door for Mathis is done for humor.

    More problem with stairs fight in CR (inspecialy with first view in cinema), the death body's at start in SF be good alternate.

    Sexy Intelligence Bond girls in my opnion be Melina, Kara, Triple X, Camile and mabey also Fields and Paloma whyle it more because of Gemma/Ana. Daniel Craig Bond girl taste for Vesper and Madeleine i don't see it.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,957
    chrisisall wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    In itself, no there's nothing wrong with sex in the Bond films. That's to say I don't there's too much or too little. As mentioned there's no issue with nudity and even the type of sex Bond has, while casual, is relatively 'vanilla' by most standards.

    I don't think the sex is what some people have a problem with when it comes to Bond films/Bond girls. Maybe that's another discussion though.

    The 'problem' is what I'd like to find out.

    Pretty much what was said by others above. A part is the portrayal of women.

    I can understand why some would have issues with something like the barn scene from GF too. Or Bond suddenly kissing Patricia in TB.

    Yeah, 'kissing her until she likes it' is certainly not cool and isn't coming back any time soon!

    In TB it was kind of slimy of him pushing himself on Patricia, but in GF Pussy could have stopped him any time with another simple Judo move- she was playing with him.

    I don't think it comes across like that: he literally forces himself down on her as she fights back and tries to writhe away from him.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,879
    mtm wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    In itself, no there's nothing wrong with sex in the Bond films. That's to say I don't there's too much or too little. As mentioned there's no issue with nudity and even the type of sex Bond has, while casual, is relatively 'vanilla' by most standards.

    I don't think the sex is what some people have a problem with when it comes to Bond films/Bond girls. Maybe that's another discussion though.

    The 'problem' is what I'd like to find out.

    Pretty much what was said by others above. A part is the portrayal of women.

    I can understand why some would have issues with something like the barn scene from GF too. Or Bond suddenly kissing Patricia in TB.

    Yeah, 'kissing her until she likes it' is certainly not cool and isn't coming back any time soon!

    In TB it was kind of slimy of him pushing himself on Patricia, but in GF Pussy could have stopped him any time with another simple Judo move- she was playing with him.

    I don't think it comes across like that: he literally forces himself down on her as she fights back and tries to writhe away from him.

    Is forcing himself onto Patricia in TB any different though?
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited May 2023 Posts: 17,691
    mtm wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    In itself, no there's nothing wrong with sex in the Bond films. That's to say I don't there's too much or too little. As mentioned there's no issue with nudity and even the type of sex Bond has, while casual, is relatively 'vanilla' by most standards.

    I don't think the sex is what some people have a problem with when it comes to Bond films/Bond girls. Maybe that's another discussion though.

    The 'problem' is what I'd like to find out.

    Pretty much what was said by others above. A part is the portrayal of women.

    I can understand why some would have issues with something like the barn scene from GF too. Or Bond suddenly kissing Patricia in TB.

    Yeah, 'kissing her until she likes it' is certainly not cool and isn't coming back any time soon!

    In TB it was kind of slimy of him pushing himself on Patricia, but in GF Pussy could have stopped him any time with another simple Judo move- she was playing with him.

    I don't think it comes across like that: he literally forces himself down on her as she fights back and tries to writhe away from him.

    Okay, maybe you just aren't fluent in martial arts. From the position she was in she could have easily rocked his socks & continued the fight. "I'm immune", remember? He just passed her test is all.
    This is not an okay to act like Bond with ordinary women! He was involved with a professional thief and a trained martial artist. Two pros playing in the hay...
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,548
    Benny wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    In itself, no there's nothing wrong with sex in the Bond films. That's to say I don't there's too much or too little. As mentioned there's no issue with nudity and even the type of sex Bond has, while casual, is relatively 'vanilla' by most standards.

    I don't think the sex is what some people have a problem with when it comes to Bond films/Bond girls. Maybe that's another discussion though.

    The 'problem' is what I'd like to find out.

    Pretty much what was said by others above. A part is the portrayal of women.

    I can understand why some would have issues with something like the barn scene from GF too. Or Bond suddenly kissing Patricia in TB.

    Yeah, 'kissing her until she likes it' is certainly not cool and isn't coming back any time soon!

    In TB it was kind of slimy of him pushing himself on Patricia, but in GF Pussy could have stopped him any time with another simple Judo move- she was playing with him.

    I don't think it comes across like that: he literally forces himself down on her as she fights back and tries to writhe away from him.

    Is forcing himself onto Patricia in TB any different though?

    I wonder how many boys who grew up watching Bond films thought it was a good idea to just kiss a girl they liked, and if they were pushed away, do it again because that always works for 007. ;-)
  • Posts: 7,500
    Benny wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    In itself, no there's nothing wrong with sex in the Bond films. That's to say I don't there's too much or too little. As mentioned there's no issue with nudity and even the type of sex Bond has, while casual, is relatively 'vanilla' by most standards.

    I don't think the sex is what some people have a problem with when it comes to Bond films/Bond girls. Maybe that's another discussion though.

    The 'problem' is what I'd like to find out.

    Pretty much what was said by others above. A part is the portrayal of women.

    I can understand why some would have issues with something like the barn scene from GF too. Or Bond suddenly kissing Patricia in TB.

    Yeah, 'kissing her until she likes it' is certainly not cool and isn't coming back any time soon!

    In TB it was kind of slimy of him pushing himself on Patricia, but in GF Pussy could have stopped him any time with another simple Judo move- she was playing with him.

    I don't think it comes across like that: he literally forces himself down on her as she fights back and tries to writhe away from him.

    Is forcing himself onto Patricia in TB any different though?

    Both scenes are very unpleasant.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,957
    chrisisall wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    In itself, no there's nothing wrong with sex in the Bond films. That's to say I don't there's too much or too little. As mentioned there's no issue with nudity and even the type of sex Bond has, while casual, is relatively 'vanilla' by most standards.

    I don't think the sex is what some people have a problem with when it comes to Bond films/Bond girls. Maybe that's another discussion though.

    The 'problem' is what I'd like to find out.

    Pretty much what was said by others above. A part is the portrayal of women.

    I can understand why some would have issues with something like the barn scene from GF too. Or Bond suddenly kissing Patricia in TB.

    Yeah, 'kissing her until she likes it' is certainly not cool and isn't coming back any time soon!

    In TB it was kind of slimy of him pushing himself on Patricia, but in GF Pussy could have stopped him any time with another simple Judo move- she was playing with him.

    I don't think it comes across like that: he literally forces himself down on her as she fights back and tries to writhe away from him.

    Okay, maybe you just aren't fluent in martial arts. From the position she was in she could have easily rocked his socks & continued the fight. "I'm immune", remember? He just passed her test is all.
    This is not an okay to act like Bond with ordinary women! He was involved with a professional thief and a trained martial artist. Two pros playing in the hay...

    Somehow I doubt the filmmakers were ‘fluent in martial arts’ either. What they were depicting clearly isn’t a woman playing along playfully. And if you encounter a woman squirming as you grip her, she’s not playing along either.
  • Posts: 7,500
    Of all flimsy excuses I have seen...

    Being a Bond fan doesn't entail blindly defending everything in the series. Some of the scenes in the early films are definitely very problematic, and we should acknowledge that.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 4,971
    jobo wrote: »
    Of all flimsy excuses I have seen...

    Being a Bond fan doesn't entail blindly defending everything in the series. Some of the scenes in the early films are definitely very problematic, and we should acknowledge that.

    Acknowledge sure. Put today's values on them and either censor or edit them or worse stop showing them would be wrong. In some cases they can spark a conversation and stand as a testament to how far we have come.

    Sadly Bond movies weren't the only ones to show a man dominating a female and her succumbing to it. I am of an age where the nudge nudge wink wink was no didn't always mean no.

  • edited April 18 Posts: 1,517
    deleted
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,957
    Not really: that's how it works. Folks dress like Bond, act like him etc. If they didn't then there would be no product placement going on in the films, but consumers like to associate with 007's values.
    No, they don't kill people because he does (people always say that but it's very silly: audience members aren't idiots).
  • edited April 18 Posts: 1,517
    deleted
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,957
    CrabKey wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Not really: that's how it works. Folks dress like Bond, act like him etc. If they didn't then there would be no product placement going on in the films, but consumers like to associate with 007's values.
    No, they don't kill people because he does (people always say that but it's very silly: audience members aren't idiots).

    Bond forcing a woman to kiss him has nothing to do with product placement and consumerism.

    I don't think you've quite understood what I said.
  • edited April 18 Posts: 1,517
    deleted
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2023 Posts: 14,957
    The existence of product placement, and that corporations believe in it to the extent that they pay millions on it, is proof that parts of the audience are influenced by Bond's image and behaviour, because he is presented as a sophisticated and aspirational figure.
  • edited April 18 Posts: 1,517
    deleted
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,548
    CrabKey wrote: »
    When you said that's not how it works, whose comment were you responding to? Maybe that's where the confusion lies. DarthDimi wondered how many boys who grew up watching Bond films thought it was a good idea to just kiss a girl they liked, and if they were pushed away, do it again because that always works for 007. My response that's a lot of weight to lay on a scene from a Bond film.

    @CrabKey
    Maybe I am, indeed, assuming too much influence from the Bonds on real life. Nevertheless, I have to confess that I have witnessed some rather embarrassing attempts at recreating the "Bond goes for the tongue until she likes it scene" within my circle of friends when we were a lot younger. And while a few isolated, personal experiences prove nothing, they have made me wonder about exactly how far some of this can go. Still, I am not disagreeing with you. This is most likely not worthy of closer examination. It was merely a thought... 😉
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    mtm wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    In itself, no there's nothing wrong with sex in the Bond films. That's to say I don't there's too much or too little. As mentioned there's no issue with nudity and even the type of sex Bond has, while casual, is relatively 'vanilla' by most standards.

    I don't think the sex is what some people have a problem with when it comes to Bond films/Bond girls. Maybe that's another discussion though.

    The 'problem' is what I'd like to find out.

    Pretty much what was said by others above. A part is the portrayal of women.

    I can understand why some would have issues with something like the barn scene from GF too. Or Bond suddenly kissing Patricia in TB.

    Yeah, 'kissing her until she likes it' is certainly not cool and isn't coming back any time soon!

    In TB it was kind of slimy of him pushing himself on Patricia, but in GF Pussy could have stopped him any time with another simple Judo move- she was playing with him.

    I don't think it comes across like that: he literally forces himself down on her as she fights back and tries to writhe away from him.

    Okay, maybe you just aren't fluent in martial arts. From the position she was in she could have easily rocked his socks & continued the fight. "I'm immune", remember? He just passed her test is all.
    This is not an okay to act like Bond with ordinary women! He was involved with a professional thief and a trained martial artist. Two pros playing in the hay...

    Somehow I doubt the filmmakers were ‘fluent in martial arts’ either. What they were depicting clearly isn’t a woman playing along playfully. And if you encounter a woman squirming as you grip her, she’s not playing along either.
    I believe I made that point in my post. BTW, the scene with Patricia in TB was really, REALLY wrong IMHO.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 4,971
    There are a few times when Bond's actions have been questionable. Most are a reflection of the times, but that doesn't condone or excuse the behaviour. Here is my list of questionable actions when it comes to making love.
    • TB when telling Pat he will go to her boss if she doesn't comply with his wishes.
    • GF when he forces himself on Pussy in the barn.
    • LALD when he tricks Solitaire into sleeping with him by stacking the cards.
    • TMWTGG when he stuffs Goodnight into the closet while he shags another woman.
    • MR when he asks Manuela what they can do in Brazil when one doesn't samba. While she doesn't resist it seems cringey that he would do this within minutes of meeting her.
    • AKTAK when he drops Kimberly Jones onto the bed in the sub. Clearly she is trying to keep it professional with Commander and he blatantly ignores and tells her there's three days to Alaska.
    • TWINE this one might be in reverse as Bond manipulates Dr. Goodflesh by sleeping with her to gain clearance to go after Renard.
    • CR his affair with Solange seems heartless and cruel, though one gets the opinion they didn't consummate. It costs Solange her life.
    • QOS women almost seem disposable in this film. He dumps on the dock and seems non-plussed by Fields death.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,957
    CrabKey wrote: »
    When you said that's not how it works, whose comment were you responding to? Maybe that's where the confusion lies.

    I said that's how it does work. I imagine that's where your confusion lies.
    CrabKey wrote: »
    DarthDimi wondered how many boys who grew up watching Bond films thought it was a good idea to just kiss a girl they liked, and if they were pushed away, do it again because that always works for 007. My response that's a lot of weight to lay on a scene from a Bond film.

    And I said that how Dimi described it is how it does work.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited May 2023 Posts: 5,979
    M_Balje wrote: »
    Daniel Craig/P&W proof self spot with naked Bond look a like in QOS (as comment on Bond monkey behaviour in CR at parkour chase) and when Bond half naked open door for Mathis is done for humor.

    Don't ever change.
  • edited April 18 Posts: 1,517
    deleted









  • Posts: 12,269
    He’s either going to be monogamous or have no sex at all. 99% sure.
  • edited April 18 Posts: 1,517
    deleted
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    CrabKey wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    He’s either going to be monogamous or have no sex at all. 99% sure.

    I'm holding out for the 1%.

    Bond without sex is like Star Wars without lightsabers.
    Opps, too much alcohol. :P
  • edited May 2023 Posts: 2,896
    The barn scene in GF is, as they say nowadays, "problematic." If it took place in 2023 Pussy could have had Bond charged with sexual assault. Looking at the scene, one could possibly argue (without wishing to defend it) that it's as tongue-in-cheek as the rest of the film: all it takes for antagonistic Pussy to switch sides is a kiss from Bond, which instantly changes her disinterest to love. On that level, the scene is a joke at how much of a male fantasy the character is. If we look at the novel, it takes even less for Pussy to switch sides--just being in Bond's proximity makes her do so. Again Bond is portrayed the ultimate male fantasy, in what is Fleming's most self-parodic book. But Book Bond didn't go to the extremes of his movie counterpart.

    Returning to the film, DarthDimi makes a good point that the scene might have led younger male viewers to imitate it. True, though there was a good chance they'd have already absorbed the message from plenty of other films and the surrounding culture. And fans who couldn't tell the films were fantasy were quickly disabused by reality of the notion that they could be Bond, or even Sean Connery. I've read several remarks from older Bond fans about how they discovered the hard way that attracting women turned out to be far more difficult than in the movies. Such is the danger of fantasy set in the "real" world.

    Richard Maibaum wrote somewhere that Fiona's remarks in TB--"James Bond, who only has to make love to a women and she stars to hear heavenly choirs singing. She repents, then immediately returns to the side of right and virtue"--were a direct response to criticism that Pussy's "conversion" in GF happened too easily. So one could argue that GF's screenwriter himself acknowledged that the barn scene didn't work. It played the fantasy as a violent joke. I think the scene would worked better if we already had subtle hints of Pussy being attracted to Bond and if the kiss had come about as the natural result of Bond and Pussy romping in the hay and having increasingly erotic bodily contact. After all, if the character is the ultimate male fantasy then he wouldn't have needed to force a kiss. That's what makes the barn scene in GF and Patricia scenes in TB especially jarring--they're unneccesary.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    Revelator wrote: »
    The barn scene in GF is, as they say nowadays, "problematic." If it took place in 2023 Pussy could have had Bond charged with sexual assault. Looking at the scene, one could possibly argue (without wishing to defend it) that it's as tongue-in-cheek as the rest of the film: all it takes for antagonistic Pussy to switch sides is a kiss from Bond, which instantly changes her disinterest to love. On that level, the scene is a joke at how much of a male fantasy the character is. If we look at the novel, it takes even less for Pussy to switch sides--just being in Bond's proximity makes her do so. Again Bond is portrayed the ultimate male fantasy, in what is Fleming's most self-parodic book. But Book Bond didn't go to the extremes of his movie counterpart.

    Returning to the film, DarthDimi makes a good point that the scene might have led younger male viewers to imitate it. True, though there was a good chance they'd have already absorbed the message from plenty of other films and the surrounding culture. And fans who couldn't tell the films were fantasy were quickly disabused by reality of the notion that they could be Bond, or even Sean Connery. I've read several remarks from older Bond fans about how they discovered the hard way that attracting women turned out to be far more difficult than in the movies. Such is the danger of fantasy set in the "real" world.

    Richard Maibaum wrote somewhere that Fiona's remarks in TB--"James Bond, who only has to make love to a women and she stars to hear heavenly choirs singing. She repents, then immediately returns to the side of right and virtue"--were a direct response to criticism that Pussy's "conversion" in GF happened too easily. So one could argue that GF's screenwriter himself acknowledged that the barn scene didn't work. It played the fantasy as a violent joke. I think the scene would worked better if we already had subtle hints of Pussy being attracted to Bond and if the kiss had come about as the natural result of Bond and Pussy romping in the hay and having increasingly erotic bodily contact. After all, if the character is the ultimate male fantasy then he wouldn't have needed to force a kiss. That's what makes the barn scene in GF and Patricia scenes in TB especially jarring--they're unnecessary.

    Wow, nice post!
  • edited April 18 Posts: 1,517
    deleted
Sign In or Register to comment.