The Girls' Room

1235731

Comments

  • Although the cinematic bond picked-up almost superhero type characteristics over the years, it seems Ian Flemming's original intention with the novels was that it would be the situations and environments that were fantastical, rather than Bond himself:

    "When I wrote the first one in 1953, I wanted Bond to be an extremely dull, uninteresting man to whom things happened; I wanted him to be a blunt instrument...when I was casting around for a name for my protagonist I thought by God, (James Bond) is the dullest name I ever heard." Ian Flemming.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    More than an extraordinary man, I always view Bond as a man who does extraordinary things when faced with extraordinary situations.
  • Posts: 6,601
    Sandy wrote:
    More than an extraordinary man, I always view Bond as a man who does extraordinary things when faced with extraordinary situations.

    Yes, but that does put hin above average IMO, because most of us wouldn't be able to react like he or his heroines do. He is already special, as he is a killer. We tend to forget that, because he is a killer, we like.

  • Posts: 6,601
    Although the cinematic bond picked-up almost superhero type characteristics over the years, it seems Ian Flemming's original intention with the novels was that it would be the situations and environments that were fantastical, rather than Bond himself:

    "When I wrote the first one in 1953, I wanted Bond to be an extremely dull, uninteresting man to whom things happened; I wanted him to be a blunt instrument...when I was casting around for a name for my protagonist I thought by God, (James Bond) is the dullest name I ever heard." Ian Flemming.

    Interesting, but would a dull man survive even the first of his novels? To react to the situations, Flemming put him in, he had to have certain abilities, you wouldn't find in a dull, average man IMO...

  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,973
    Germanlady wrote:
    Although the cinematic bond picked-up almost superhero type characteristics over the years, it seems Ian Flemming's original intention with the novels was that it would be the situations and environments that were fantastical, rather than Bond himself:

    "When I wrote the first one in 1953, I wanted Bond to be an extremely dull, uninteresting man to whom things happened; I wanted him to be a blunt instrument...when I was casting around for a name for my protagonist I thought by God, (James Bond) is the dullest name I ever heard." Ian Flemming.

    Interesting, but would a dull man survive even the first of his novels? To react to the situations, Flemming put him in, he had to have certain abilities, you wouldn't find in a dull, average man IMO...
    Well, his only real trait in the novels is his exeptional stamina, and his unwillingness to kill just becouse it was ordered. I.e. in ' The Man With The Golden Gun' he's given a very good opportunity to kill Scaramanga early on, but he doesn't.

    I think people can have exeptional stamina (like book-Bond) and the survival instict, but I guess they seldom find it out. Which is a good thing. I personally have been in one hefty fight which could've ended very badly (even deadly for me), and I prefer it not to happen again..

  • edited May 2012 Posts: 678
    @GL:

    Well it all depends what you mean by dull I suppose. Many apparently ordinary men are capable of bravery and courage when pushed to by circumstances. And that was particularly true of the generation of men to which Flemming belonged.

    Many men who are apparently boring on the outside have very fertile and fascinating mental lives, whilst other men who are flashy and flamboyant on the outside are actually quite dull on the inside.

    Kind of like the Chinese Ying/Yang thing: everything contains the seed of it's opposite?
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    I want to write more later but I cannot now (no time).
    Just to say:
    Thanks for all the interesting and thoughtful discussion. I for one appreciate it.

    Bond, James Bond:
    Definitely not average (and I first met Bond thru the books; read all of them). Fleming may have had that in mind at first but the character grew bolder and with more definite tastes.
    Truly dull spies (on the outside, what they appear to be) are interesting and successful of course; Harry Palmer, Geroge Smiley to name two characters. But that is not the kind of character or story of james Bond.

    Bond takes us to another level in nearly every way - and it is escapism in the best sense.
    For me, I want to be with Bond and I want to live like him - meaning I am attracted to the Bond character as a female, on many levels; but I also thoroughly enjoy the action and excitement of what Bond goes thru in the movies. So I feel like I am in on that action. I never visualize myself just being an adoring female only watching as James saves the world. I like to relate to the main Bond girl - but I also feel that I am part of the action. Hard to explain, but I enjoy all of the pulse pounding parts of a James Bond movie (and book); I like getting into his head a bit, too.

    So to say that I, as a woman, only (as in nothing else) want to be with him or get saved by him or bed him, is not all of it for me. Oh that is true, believe me! But I get more out of a good Bond film than just keeping myself in the passive observer role.

    Oh, gotta run - more tomorrow.
    It's 5:40 in the morning as I finish this; too early for a martini but tonight ... well, cheers! B-)

    (and thanks for the update on your username, Lord - interesting!) I barely know BlackAdder, but want to see more some day.
  • Posts: 6,601
    @GL:

    Well it all depends what you mean by dull I suppose. Many apparently ordinary men are capable of bravery and courage when pushed to by circumstances. And that was particularly true of the generation of men to which Flemming belonged.

    Many men who are apparently boring on the outside have very fertile and fascinating mental lives, whilst other men who are flashy and flamboyant on the outside are actually quite dull on the inside.

    Kind of like the Chinese Ying/Yang thing: everything contains the seed of it's opposite?

    Totally agree...you mean characters, that James Stewart often portrayed - if you are old enough to remember him, that is ;)
    If we agree, that this is true in reality and Bond was meant to be such a man, they started off wrong already with choosing Connery IMO. I am not one of those, who put him on a godlike pedestrial, but he sure didn't look like such an average man.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    Well, when I said I don't see Bond as extraordinary I didn't mean ordinary either if you know what I mean ;) just not a superhero type of character, which in my opinion makes him even more fascinating! He's a man, with qualities and (a lot of ) flaws but when facing extraordinary circumstances he behaves extraordinarily! Cheers to that ladies (and a few gentlemen too) martinismiley.gif
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I think a little of Bond's characteristic of surviving and thriving in the face of danger is in all of us. If we are dedicated to fight steadfast against the force apposing us there is a certain hidden drive that keeps us going, almost superhuman in our darkest hours. That for my money is interesting. There is no feeling like being faced with an insuperable challenge and just jumping with everything you've got at it. Those are moments where I feel very Bondian.
  • Posts: 6,601
    I think a little of Bond's characteristic of surviving and thriving in the face of danger is in all of us. If we are dedicated to fight steadfast against the force apposing us there is a certain hidden drive that keeps us going, almost superhuman in our darkest hours. That for my money is interesting. There is no feeling like being faced with an insuperable challenge and just jumping with everything you've got at it. Those are moments where I feel very Bondian.

    @Sandy: Yes, at least Bond isn't so much about superhero magic but about - like we said - a human, who is good at certain things and has the nerve and brains to be good even in situations, that are new to him.

    @Brady: I agree - it gets the blood boiling for sure and makes you feel alive.

  • Posts: 135
    Germanlady wrote:
    FireSkull wrote:
    @Germanlady Batman's for real.

    So, you're a Batman fan? Slap me, but I didn't rate his Batman. He was good in a couple of other films, but his Batman was weak IMO. (I know, I am in the minority with this given the success of TDK)

    TDK was a good movie but Batman Begins gave me goosebumps during the entire movie. Something that can really be done.

    Another reason why I like the reboot James Bond. Casino Royale was the movie Bond can get the closest to being real.

    TDK was hyped partly because of Heath Ledger's death, the movie lived up to the height but wasn't as good as Batman Begins.

  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    @FireSkull since when did this thread become the Batman thread? I thought this was the girls room. I'm sorry if I may sound rude but it seems like you are trying to bomb this thread for some reason!
  • Posts: 6,601
    Nice weekend, Ladies!! Have a relaxed and good one :)
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    Another week and I didn't put my ideas into work, mainly because I had a lot of (real) work.
    Have a nice weekend!
  • Posts: 6,601
    Sandy wrote:
    Another week and I didn't put my ideas into work, mainly because I had a lot of (real) work.
    Have a nice weekend!

    Yup, we have to have our priorities ;)
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    OK, I stole this shamelessly from another thread (but they were talking about Bond girls for some reason ...)

    To marry ... ? (which Bonds)

    To have "sexual things with" (using the guys' phrases here) but not marriage? (which Bonds)

    For moi, off the top of my head, I am going with -
    Marriage and sexual things: Roger's Bond and Craig's Bond
    Sexual things: Sean's Bond and Dalton's Bond
    out in the cold: Lazenby
  • Posts: 6,601
    For fun and the luxuries: Rogers Bond
    For sexual things: Dans Bond
    For marriag: None
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    To help ladies, the choices were which Bond girl would you marry, which would you take to Vegas, and which would you do "sexual things" with. So just change Bond girls to Bond and have fun fantasizing. :)
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    Germanlady wrote:
    For fun and the luxuries: Rogers Bond
    For sexual things: Dans Bond
    For marriag: None

    Same thing here @Germanlady.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    To help ladies, the choices were which Bond girl would you marry, which would you take to Vegas, and which would you do "sexual things" with. So just change Bond girls to Bond and have fun fantasizing. :)

    Thanks. I don't like Vegas, though.

    Fun and luxuries? I like that ... but I need to Brosnan for that category for me, along with some sexual things, too (yeah, I like Pierce).

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    To help ladies, the choices were which Bond girl would you marry, which would you take to Vegas, and which would you do "sexual things" with. So just change Bond girls to Bond and have fun fantasizing. :)

    Thanks. I don't like Vegas, though.

    Fun and luxuries? I like that ... but I need to Brosnan for that category for me, along with some sexual things, too (yeah, I like Pierce).

    Yeah, you could just change "who would you take to Vegas" to "who would like to have a wild night of hijinks with".
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    To help ladies, the choices were which Bond girl would you marry, which would you take to Vegas, and which would you do "sexual things" with. So just change Bond girls to Bond and have fun fantasizing. :)

    Thanks. I don't like Vegas, though.

    Fun and luxuries? I like that ... but I need to Brosnan for that category for me, along with some sexual things, too (yeah, I like Pierce).

    Yeah, you could just change "who would you take to Vegas" to "who would like to have a wild night of hijinks with".

    Well, I know the expression "What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas." I just don't like it and it doesn't apply to me. So ... I'll just stick to "sexual things, etc." because that includes any and all wild night/s. for me" ;) But thanks for responding.
  • Posts: 6,601
    So - question to the guys - which Bond girl would you -

    marry
    have just sex
    take to your friends party

    add whatever other question you have...
  • Posts: 1,370
    Germanlady wrote:
    So - question to the guys - which Bond girl would you -

    marry
    have just sex
    take to your friends party

    add whatever other question you have...

    You're spoiling us with an abundance of choice. You ladies had only 6 Bonds to choose from; we have dozens of Bond girls!

    Not to be a killjoy but I feel like I can never answer these types of questions. A person with an "average" body can be a more skilled, innovative, and passionate lover than someone with an "incredible" body. The person with the fun, flirty attitude may not be the most fun to be with one-on-one...etc, etc. So while I can appreciate how sexy a celebrity or character looks and acts I usually don't end up fantasizing about them.

    So having said that I'll try...

    Marry: Tracy. She's lived enough life that she won't get bored in a few years feeling like she's missed out on experiences that she never had, she's exorcised her demons, and she has that supreme confidence and sense of fun that never gets old.

    Sex: Can't make a choice. Chemistry is too important and I've never actually met any of the ladies in question...;-)

    Party: So many choices but Fields really made an impression on me. Great sense of humour and mischievousness. Anyone who can show that much personality in so little screen time is someone I'd like to spend time with.



  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited May 2012 Posts: 28,694
    Marry-Vesper.
    Sex-Plenty, Natalya, Solange, Pam, Pussy, Vesper.
    Party-Vesper (she's so wonderfully presentable), Pam.

    Well, as if no one saw this coming. If I had the complete choice, it would be exactly this:

    Marry: Vesper
    Sex: Vesper
    Party: Vesper

    There is no other Bond girl I would rather be around.
  • Posts: 12,837
    Germanlady wrote:
    So - question to the guys - which Bond girl would you -

    marry
    have just sex
    take to your friends party

    add whatever other question you have...

    marry: Kara
    just sex: Onnatop
    take to friends party: Bouvier
  • edited May 2012 Posts: 6,601
    @Lord - Marry Tracy? Great choice IMO, because she sure was a woman of substance.
    Fields looked like fun. Why not have her for sex, too? She was certainly dressed for the occasion, when she first met Bond, so I assume, she knows, what she is doing..

    @Brady - Thanks. I certainly got the Vesper vibes - even as a woman. But do you agree, that she looked her best with no Make up in the bath room?

    @royale - Onnatop, isn't that the one, who did all the gymnastics? So, good choice, I imagine.

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @Germanlady, Eva has such impeccable natural beauty she is just as radiant without makeup as she is with it. She is very 40s/50s, and that is partly why I love her so much. She makes me think of Lauren Bacall.
  • Posts: 6,601
    @Germanlady, Eva has such impeccable natural beauty she is just as radiant without makeup as she is with it. She is very 40s/50s, and that is partly why I love her so much. She makes me think of Lauren Bacall.

    Must say, I am not a fan of her heavy Make up, but she does have that charisma of leading ladies of the past. I liked her look in the Golden Compass - smokey eyes...

Sign In or Register to comment.