The hype about the new Bond on TV shows an ugly faced actor who (if we should believe Time magazine ) shows off his muscles.

Great. A gay icon. Pumping Iron II.

The Bond franchise might be “old” but does have a tradition.

The stunts are unexpected.
They will always talk of James “working” and then show him with a beautiful woman.

There is a joking quality to the plot. It’s not supposed to be serious. The action sequences are good, and include surprises.

The evil men are weird, but not too weird, megalomaniacs.

One would not, for example, expect an Osama Bin Laden in a cold mountain cave complete with video studio trying to take over the world.

In a Bond movie, the caves would be modern and opulent, his four wives obedient and gorgeous, and (of course) at least one of the wives/mothers/girlfriends would turn against Osama’s megalomania to help Bond because he was just so….just so…well, this is a family blog, but you get the idea.

Bond was gorgeous, but he was also…romantic. This is what keeps wives like me patient while my husband ogles the Bond women.

You see, women don’t love biceps, but a sense of humor. A twinkle in the eye. A take charge man, but one you can trust to save you and the world, and if he will be gone tomorrow, well, at least you had Paris. (or Monaco, or the Bahamas).

So the promo of a grim ugly Bond, even one with biceps, is not exactly what I want to watch for two hours.

Sean Connery still makes women twitter at age 70 plus. Roger Moore did not “feel” as dangerous, but was great with the understatement. Pierce Brosnan? Not funny enough, but easy on the eyes.

Now check the photos.

Daniel Craig and Sean Connery as James Bond
The right stuff? Daniel Craig and Sean Connery as James Bond

Connery looks hard and dangerous.
The new Bond? Looks like he’s searching for a pacifier.
Yes, I know.

The Bond series is immoral and sexist.

But the movies were so exaggerated that no one would take Bond as a roll model.
As for the Bond girls: Classic women. And classy. I wonder how many feminists noticed that most were scientists, spies, karate experts, pilots, explorers etc. Not Bimbos.

So if they really wanted to change Bond, they should have just made a a new hero with a new name. Instead, they used the name/franchise and claimed they “humanized” him.
Right. But who wants an icon “remade”?

NapoleonSolo at aintitcool news liked it, and notes the Tarentino influence on the film.

Well, that makes it clear for me. I am no fan of Tarentino’s sadistic violence.

The “bedhopping of the sixties”, as the UKTelegraph remarks, might be passe, but I don’t think that obscene violence is a good substitution.

—————————–
Nancy Reyes is a retired physician and lives in the rural Philippines with her husband, eight dogs, three cats and a large extended family

Be Sociable, Share!