James Bond books edited to remove racist references

191011121315»

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 4 Posts: 14,936
    I feel like these trigger warnings are mainly there to give columnists something to write about. Who cares.
    Good publicity for the BFI anyway, so that's good news.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,795
    mtm wrote: »
    I feel like these trigger warnings are mainly there to give columnists something to write about. Who cares.
    Good publicity for the BFI anyway, so that's good news.

    Perhaps working on the premise that all publicity is good publicity?

    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2024/jan/04/james-bond-trigger-warnings-really-for-audiences-benefit
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 4 Posts: 14,936
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I feel like these trigger warnings are mainly there to give columnists something to write about. Who cares.
    Good publicity for the BFI anyway, so that's good news.

    Perhaps working on the premise that all publicity is good publicity?

    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2024/jan/04/james-bond-trigger-warnings-really-for-audiences-benefit

    Yeah absolutely, they're reading about a John Barry season at the BFI and they've had two articles in the Guardian about it, sounds good. What's going to put anyone off going in that article you link to?

    It would be nicely ironic if there were people who got triggered by trigger warnings. If they do, they can't really complain about them, can't they? :D
  • edited January 4 Posts: 12,263
    Trigger warnings are the best “everyone wins solution” regarding problematic content. The potentially offensive material is recognized and warned of, but not tampered with and censored. As long as it remains only that and isn’t the first step towards the films being altered, I don’t care. While I still personally find it silly that things have to be made so clear-cut and audiences aren’t trusted to contextualize for themselves anymore, it really doesn’t matter if the art is still intact.

    I had a discussion just a couple days ago with a friend about how I’ve found it so off-putting how art these days has to go out of its way to beat the audience over the head about when someone does something wrong. That, and antiheroes are often not allowed to be as bad anymore, resulting in overly sanitized, boring, and “perfect” lead characters. Films are becoming too preachy, dumbed down, and one-dimensional, because critics are insisting that the questionable actions of characters within fiction are endorsements. It frustrates me how things have turned, but like I said at the start of this post, the trigger warnings are the only thing we’re going to get that won’t piss off one side or the other too much compared to just leaving things fully alone or censoring.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,795
    mtm wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I feel like these trigger warnings are mainly there to give columnists something to write about. Who cares.
    Good publicity for the BFI anyway, so that's good news.

    Perhaps working on the premise that all publicity is good publicity?

    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2024/jan/04/james-bond-trigger-warnings-really-for-audiences-benefit

    Yeah absolutely, they're reading about a John Barry season at the BFI and they've had two articles in the Guardian about it, sounds good. What's going to put anyone off going in that article you link to?

    It would be nicely ironic if there were people who got triggered by trigger warnings. If they do, they can't really complain about them, can't they? :D

    Maybe we need a trigger warning prior to the trigger warning? That should cover all bases. :D
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 4 Posts: 14,936
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I feel like these trigger warnings are mainly there to give columnists something to write about. Who cares.
    Good publicity for the BFI anyway, so that's good news.

    Perhaps working on the premise that all publicity is good publicity?

    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2024/jan/04/james-bond-trigger-warnings-really-for-audiences-benefit

    Yeah absolutely, they're reading about a John Barry season at the BFI and they've had two articles in the Guardian about it, sounds good. What's going to put anyone off going in that article you link to?

    It would be nicely ironic if there were people who got triggered by trigger warnings. If they do, they can't really complain about them, can't they? :D

    Maybe we need a trigger warning prior to the trigger warning? That should cover all bases. :D

    Haha! Great, yes indeed. I guess the Guardian article sort of works as that!

    When you think about how this story started, it's probably a Guardian journo who is also a BFI member (which is very easy to believe!) who got an email about the Barry season, clicked through, and saw some mention of some vague guidance, and they thought 'I can probably stir something up with this- especially if I whack a photo of Sean Connery on it'. It's not journalism, it's not investigating anything, it's just sitting at your desk, getting an email and then typing that up, hoping to get some reactions. It's all so depressingly dreary.

    It's probably been BFI policy for a while because they show a lot of archive content and probably have shown and do show stuff a lot more contentious than Bond, and they just have a fairly blanket policy on it to cover themselves against anyone complaining about what they've seen. There's nothing here.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,683
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Maybe we need a trigger warning prior to the trigger warning? That should cover all bases. :D

    German satire website "Der Postillon" suggested the same last August, when public TV station WDR started putting trigger warnings before reruns of 40- to 50-year old shows by comedian Otto Waalkes.

    https://der-postillon.com/2023/08/wdr-otto-hinweistafel.html

    The extra trigger warning reads (roughly translated): "Ahead of the following program, an information board will be shown. It contains a warning that sensitive people might consider patronizing and gaga-woke."




  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,795
    007HallY wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »

    That's not an instance of editing or censorship from what I understand but simply a 'trigger warning'.

    Whether or not those trigger warnings are required or should be there is a different matter, but they've not touched the actual films going from the article.

    Yes, that's quite true and I debated about whether to post the link here or not. In the end I did include it hear as a parallel with the sensitivity warnings at the start of the Fleming Bond novels published last year by IFP. I thought it would show that these warnings are happening across the board. I've even heard them being added to TV showings of films or TV series over the last few years here in the UK.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 23,283

    Jenny Hanley looks well.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 4 Posts: 14,936
    GB News love this sort of stuff.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited January 5 Posts: 17,795
    The airwaves, column inches (and not forgetting online content) need to be filled by something every day and I suppose that this subject is as easy as any to garner interest.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 4 Posts: 14,936
    It's as close to a non-story as I can imagine though. For example: where are these warnings actually appearing? On the website where you book the tickets; that's it as far as I can see. Probably in the listings booklets the BFI distributes too. Nothing actually in the cinema or on the screen. And it's for one screening on one screen in one single cinema. That's it.
    I wonder how much airtime they've devoted to this screening of an old film which 450 or so people in a city of 9 million will watch.

    And does You Only Live Twice contain outdated stereotypes? Yeah, probably.
  • MalloryMallory Do mosquitoes have friends?
    Posts: 2,056
    I do find it amusing, I mean isn't the BBFC certification in effect a trigger warning for the content of the film (I appreciate its primary purpose is to restrict the viewing of the film to age groups).

    Are the BFI expecting an audience who haven't seen the films before and aren't familiar with the content? Seems a bit weird, I would suspect most going to a BFI John Barry season will be fans of Barry and already very familiar with his work.

    I would only start getting annoyed if the BFI took it upon themselves to edit the films, which it doesnt seem like they're doing. So whats the problem? :D
  • edited January 5 Posts: 1,001
    It's a none-story. When they start editing the movies, then I'll moan.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 5 Posts: 14,936
    Mallory wrote: »
    Are the BFI expecting an audience who haven't seen the films before and aren't familiar with the content? Seems a bit weird, I would suspect most going to a BFI John Barry season will be fans of Barry and already very familiar with his work.

    But then I guess you may as well say what's the point in putting a synopsis of the film and a photo from it on the website as well if people booking it are familiar with the films. Websites just have information on them.
    And honestly, I've listened to a number of Barry soundtracks and never seen the films they're scoring. He did a lot of bad films! :)
    I do agree with you that there's no problem though.
  • edited January 5 Posts: 689
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Maybe we need a trigger warning prior to the trigger warning? That should cover all bases. :D

    German satire website "Der Postillon" suggested the same last August, when public TV station WDR started putting trigger warnings before reruns of 40- to 50-year old shows by comedian Otto Waalkes.

    https://der-postillon.com/2023/08/wdr-otto-hinweistafel.html

    The extra trigger warning reads (roughly translated): "Ahead of the following program, an information board will be shown. It contains a warning that sensitive people might consider patronizing and gaga-woke."




    We need trigger warnings of the new ones. The old ones were tested enough. ;)
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,795
    mtm wrote: »
    It's as close to a non-story as I can imagine though. For example: where are these warnings actually appearing? On the website where you book the tickets; that's it as far as I can see. Probably in the listings booklets the BFI distributes too. Nothing actually in the cinema or on the screen. And it's for one screening on one screen in one single cinema. That's it.
    I wonder how much airtime they've devoted to this screening of an old film which 450 or so people in a city of 9 million will watch.

    And does You Only Live Twice contain outdated stereotypes? Yeah, probably.

    Yes, as it doesn't feature anyone who identifies as a cat. What were they thinking?!
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 5 Posts: 14,936
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    It's as close to a non-story as I can imagine though. For example: where are these warnings actually appearing? On the website where you book the tickets; that's it as far as I can see. Probably in the listings booklets the BFI distributes too. Nothing actually in the cinema or on the screen. And it's for one screening on one screen in one single cinema. That's it.
    I wonder how much airtime they've devoted to this screening of an old film which 450 or so people in a city of 9 million will watch.

    And does You Only Live Twice contain outdated stereotypes? Yeah, probably.

    Yes, as it doesn't feature anyone who identifies as a cat. What were they thinking?!


    Who's this guy then? :D

    giphy.gif
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,795
    mtm wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    It's as close to a non-story as I can imagine though. For example: where are these warnings actually appearing? On the website where you book the tickets; that's it as far as I can see. Probably in the listings booklets the BFI distributes too. Nothing actually in the cinema or on the screen. And it's for one screening on one screen in one single cinema. That's it.
    I wonder how much airtime they've devoted to this screening of an old film which 450 or so people in a city of 9 million will watch.

    And does You Only Live Twice contain outdated stereotypes? Yeah, probably.

    Yes, as it doesn't feature anyone who identifies as a cat. What were they thinking?!


    Who's this guy then? :D

    giphy.gif

    I guess you could say they have fully transitioned! ;)
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited January 10 Posts: 4,440
    Skyfall-0228.jpg
    Before you begins

    When i watched Mad Men it was fun to see the mistakes and time changes.

    And we always have those remember...

    kw-pictos.png

    550x779.jpg
    Whyle above example made clear that not everything go very well with Scan/Dutch/Belgium deal.

    On some of my fanart i use suggestion tanksymbol that there should consider to at as symbol as note that include war elements.

    After We Collided / Doctor Strange 2 be one first that used 14 age symbol introduced begin 2022 together with 18 (Saw 10). Before that all three have got 16.

    Sometimes it is mabey not time yet or it will never be.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,936
    M_Balje wrote: »
    Skyfall-0228.jpg
    Before you begins

    Ha! That would be perfect :D
Sign In or Register to comment.