RugbyRebels

I assumed this was going to be about Claire Koeber feeling forced into resigning from Haringey Council owing to the bullying and sexism within Labour, which I thought was going to be a rare move away from a Pangloss stance on the state of the Labour part. Had it been about that then yes it would have been (yet another) step too far. As is then by all means bring up the sexism inherent within Bond, but people are free to not watch the films or read the books, free to think him an action figure but not a hero, and so on and so on.

Also a step too far is Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding arriving at court not bothering to wear a suit

No. Don’t like it, don’t watch it. If here’s no demand the, no more films will be made. If there is a demand then they will make more and perhaps some of the me to element will realise there are other opinions held in this world.

Hmmm? Don't like; Don't watch? Is that really how we're going to face up to a franchise that consistently portrays its central character as the archetype of British hero, while giving naught but the most miserly hint of condemnation to his predatorial sexual misconduct along the way?

The problem is not those who are offended and who have, presumably, already made the decision not to watch, but those adorable little feckwits who watch it for the explosions and haven't the sense to recognise that the good guy brassing up the North Koreans ceases to be the good guy when he takes to raping anything in a skirt. Perhaps if the Bond franchise started casting Liz Carr in the roles of Dr Goodhead and its like, instead of Lois Chiles (I had to look those names up) ...?

A few years ago an attempt to re-make The Dambusters floundered on the outrageous issue of the historically accurate name of Guy Gibson's dog. How the feck, therefore, does this miserably predictable bang-fest of a film franchise with its rapists' charter continue to find the funding to make, let alone an audience puerile enough to sit through its output.

Digby wrote:Also a step too far is Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding arriving at court not bothering to wear a suit

To be fair, Olding was wearing a suit, albeit an off the peg job that, with the white shirt looks like the sort of ensemble that a shop-lifter would buy (Or rent) for a day in court. Jackson has gone for the clean-cut schoolboy look, presumably in an effort to convince the court that his balls haven't dropped yet.

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:

Digby wrote:Also a step too far is Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding arriving at court not bothering to wear a suit

To be fair, Olding was wearing a suit, albeit an off the peg job that, with the white shirt looks like the sort of ensemble that a shop-lifter would buy (Or rent) for a day in court. Jackson has gone for the clean-cut schoolboy look, presumably in an effort to convince the court that his balls haven't dropped yet.

My bad, I saw Olding was wearing a jacket and trousers but on the photo I saw it didn't look like a suit

I'm trying to understand this and failing. The films that were made in the 60's and 70's were of their time. Is there a suggestion that a Bond film made in 2018 would portray Bond the same way?

I really don't know what to make of it, next someone will be telling me they're not going to make any more Carry on.. films....

Myself I don't enjoy films like the Fast and Furious, or the horror films such as Saw, and I have seen more than one film from each franchise. And based on what I've seen I simply don't watch those films again or seek out others in the series, why anyone needs more choice than this isn't remotely clear. I do like the Bond films though, all of them actually even if in different ways. I'd also say yes the Bond film have some disturbing scenes, but so do many books adapted to film, and given in the Bond books you can find this line when talking of a sexual encounter and how he wanted to see tears and desire from Vesper and that each time he had sex with her (or penetrated her, I forget which) would carry with it 'the sweet tang of rape' was anyone expecting the character not to have issues?

And that line is just simply there in the first book, and I can remember being shocked by it when reading it many, many years back. But what's the solution, ban books with nasty characters or characters with good and bad in them? Book burning can't possibly be a solution.

I don’t think that the problem lies in Bond being portrayed as a promiscuous abuser of women, but rather that the film franchise has consistently portrayed this as a virtue or as a laughable failing. The books are a different issue as Flemming’s early literary version of the character is not nearly as persistently one-dimensional as the Brocolli screen versions.

I don’t have a problem with literature or film depicting violence or criminality; I do have a problem with a film franchise that consistently portrays its lead character’s letcherous and abusive behaviour as a quaint and quintessentially British quality.

Why not just carry on as the books intended but make it clear that this behaviour is unacceptable and due to deep psychological isssues from his past. He can be both a hero and deeply flawed.
Once again, just making the issue disappear from debate doesn’t mean the problem goes away.

Better yet, have him catch a dose of syphilis from a Belizian child-prostitute and let’s see his perfectly deserved demise unfold while he waits in a Belmopan prison pending charges of statutory rape and being arse-raped himself by the local drug barons?

Q can send him the odd parcel containing ingeniously camouflaged tubes of KY jelly and in the end 008 can come and deliver a coup de grace with a lump hammer as the final denouement? I’d go and watch that.

I take it you're not really a fan then?

What gave it away?

You learn to read people in my job, pick up the subtleties and such like.

Say’s the driver of Dundee’s knacker-wagon.

To be fair, he has my measure.

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:Say’s the driver of Dundee’s knacker-wagon.

To be fair, he has my measure.

He can pick up any chick he likes in Lochee

I’ve news for you; they’re about to release the latest in the ‘Confessions of’ films. Confessions of a Paramedic starring Baz and set in Edinburgh’s Pubic Triangle. It tells the story of one man’s adventures amid the exploding falsies epidemic which strikes the lap-dancing girls in the Spring of 2018!

If ever a man deserved a bout of the clap and a bu99ering in a third world jail its this Baz chap.

Clap? It was more like a standing ovation if I'm honest.

I grew out of James Bond films when I was about 12. That's all I have to say on the matter. Thank you for your time.

Bond films are dull dinosaurs man. Same basic structure, with some opportunistic rooting of women along the way. Put the franchise out of it's misery, I say. Or make it a comedy.

morepork wrote: Same basic structure, with some opportunistic rooting of women along the way.

One could easily say this is how Aaron Smith approaches life, and yet many people enjoy watching him play rugby and see no reason to end the viewing of such

I know it’s early but that has to be in the running for post of the year!

Bond Films: as relevant as a cheeky knee trembler in an airport disabled toilet facility.