|
Sprinkler Systems
Uhaul move
Lawn care
Roses and trees
Ford Parts
Chrysler Parts
Lake Powell
New IPod Touch Apps
New IPhone Apps
IPhone Apps
IPad Information
IPad Apps
Android APPS
Android Games APPS
Android Systems
Android Tablets APPS and Beyond
Smartphone Apps
Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools
Tablet PC
Car Sharing Car Leasing
Tabler Pc
Fly Fishing
Toyota Cars
Vacation Rentals
Stock market
NYSE
SSE Stock
Freight & Shipping News
Gluten
Lactose
Gout
My Coupon Life
Campgrounds Check
Outdoor
Kitchen Design and Redoo
Bath Remodeling
Palm Springs
Las Vegas Vacation Tipps
Lake Powell Boating
Homes for lease
Electric and green Car Blog
Pearls and diamonds
Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App
Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
|
Miscellaneous / Verschiedenes » alt.fan.james-bond » LIMP AND LET DIE:)
| LIMP AND LET DIE:) [message #219032] |
Sa, 11 Februar 2006 01:17 |
|
Amusing post over at AICN -
"They should rename this movie to LIMP AND LET DIE. Or maybe
THUNDERBALLS. Seriously, a half hour of Daniel Craig whimpering while
he gets his nuts thwacked with a big stick is so unappetizing. I think
the poster for this movie should be very simple. Just the title of the
film beneath a large ice pack."
Actually, there is a serious point to his post. The sight of 'Craggy
Craig' as Bond getting his you-know-what whacked could put some people
off.
"Fancy going to see the new Bond film? It's the one with that rough
looking guy getting hit in the genitals."
"No thanks, dear. I've got a headache."
:P
LLC
|
|
|
| torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219063 ] |
Sa, 11 Februar 2006 18:59 |
|
On 10 Feb 2006 16:17:01 -0800, "La La Cupcake (the unknown teletubby)"
<booby [at] myself.com> wrote:
>Amusing post over at AICN -
>
>"They should rename this movie to LIMP AND LET DIE. Or maybe
>THUNDERBALLS. Seriously, a half hour of Daniel Craig whimpering while
>he gets his nuts thwacked with a big stick is so unappetizing. I think
>the poster for this movie should be very simple. Just the title of the
>film beneath a large ice pack."
>
>
>Actually, there is a serious point to his post. The sight of 'Craggy
>Craig' as Bond getting his you-know-what whacked could put some people
>off.
>
>"Fancy going to see the new Bond film? It's the one with that rough
>looking guy getting hit in the genitals."
>
>"No thanks, dear. I've got a headache."
That sounds about right, except...
It seems that for the last few years, torture is "in"...
although the fact that it's so officially "in vogue" probably means
that the fad is about to pass.
I personally don't like it, although it sometimes makes an appearance
in movies that I like for other reasons; The Empire Strikes Back comes
to mind.
Anyway, I didn't like it in the book, and I didn't like that there
wasn't much more to the book besides that one scene. So perhaps if
they're adding more scenes to the movie, the torture scene will become
(proportionally) a much smaller part of the experience.
Anyway, I won't mind when every third movie or TV show doesn't have
some guy getting tortured!
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219066 ] |
Sa, 11 Februar 2006 19:32 |
|
> Anyway, I won't mind when every third movie or TV show doesn't have
> some guy getting tortured!
There was an article about this in the UK's Independent last week . It's not
a nice trend is it?
(There's also a particularly unsettling torture scene in the Colonel Sun
book).
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219072 ] |
Sa, 11 Februar 2006 21:27 |
|
suave harv wrote:
> > Anyway, I won't mind when every third movie or TV show doesn't have
> > some guy getting tortured!
>
> There was an article about this in the UK's Independent last week . It's not
> a nice trend is it?
>
> (There's also a particularly unsettling torture scene in the Colonel Sun
> book).
Are you guys in the right newsgroup?
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219079 ] |
Sa, 11 Februar 2006 22:02 |
|
You realize this series is about a guy who kills people for the
government, right?
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219102 ] |
So, 12 Februar 2006 01:14 |
|
> You realize this series is about a guy who kills people for the
> government, right?
Depictions of torture are different from basic Hollywood 'shoot 'em ups'. I
suppose it's a taste thing. It's what you feel comfortable with.
Sorry if we upset your newsgroup, mister!
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219103 ] |
So, 12 Februar 2006 01:49 |
|
suave harv wrote:
> There was an article about this in the UK's Independent last week . It's not
> a nice trend is it?
>
> (There's also a particularly unsettling torture scene in the Colonel Sun
> book).
There's a hilarious bit in the drunken Fleming / Raymond Chandler
conversation which was recorded for the BBC where Chandler asks Fleming
why there are so many scenes in his books where Bond gets beaten or
tortured, and Fleming stammers his way through a
not-particularly-convincing reply.
However, I think there's an important point in that in both these
scenes and in other similar scenes throughout the Fleming canon it's
the hero who suffers, and it's a way of demonstrating how evil and
sadistic the bad guy is, whereas in a film like 'Man on Fire' or 'The
Punisher' it's the hero who's doing the alleged torturing. A big
difference in my book. Whatever Fleming's personal sexual tastes
(let's not even go there, huh?) the oft-mooted 'sadism' in his books is
never dished out by the supposed good guy.
Fleming would well have known that torture was sort-of-titilating to
some readers, and as a writer of commercial fiction might even have
seen it as a way to sell a few more books, but he makes it perfectly
clear that the guys doing this stuff are pretty depraved. It's no
different from the way in which a lot of crime thrillers exploit our
fascination with criminal activities even though we'd never want to do
such things ourselves and most likely feel that people who do this in
the real world are repulsive. I'd run a mile if I met someone like
Cody Jarrett in person, and he's not a character who I would ever want
to be like in the slightest, but when I'm watching Cagney in 'White
Heat' I'm mesmerised and want to see as much of this guy as possible.
The bottom line is that as long as things like violence and even
torture are handled in the right way, they're perfectly legitimate
elements in drama. One wonders what sort of cinema the moralistic,
pro-censorship brigade want: without conflict, which very often means
people doing bad things to each other, drama doesn't exist. I don't
want to see torture celebrated or glorified, and I worry that films
like 'Man on Fire' do so, but to say it should be completely verboten
as a dramatic tool is an over-reaction IMHO.
Best
Phil
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219104 ] |
So, 12 Februar 2006 01:57 |
|
Incidentally, although I'm sure this has been posted many times before,
the Fleming / Chandler conversation can be found here:
http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/Ian-Fleming-Raymond-Chan dler.mp3
As a bonus, it's introduced by Philip French, IMHO one of the UK's
greatest film critics ever.
Best
Phil
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219116 ] |
So, 12 Februar 2006 07:45 |
|
On 11 Feb 2006 16:49:14 -0800, "phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com"
<phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote:
>suave harv wrote:
>
>> There was an article about this in the UK's Independent last week . It's not
>> a nice trend is it?
>>
>> (There's also a particularly unsettling torture scene in the Colonel Sun
>> book).
>
>There's a hilarious bit in the drunken Fleming / Raymond Chandler
>conversation which was recorded for the BBC where Chandler asks Fleming
>why there are so many scenes in his books where Bond gets beaten or
>tortured, and Fleming stammers his way through a
>not-particularly-convincing reply.
>
>However, I think there's an important point in that in both these
>scenes and in other similar scenes throughout the Fleming canon it's
>the hero who suffers, and it's a way of demonstrating how evil and
>sadistic the bad guy is, whereas in a film like 'Man on Fire' or 'The
>Punisher' it's the hero who's doing the alleged torturing. A big
>difference in my book. Whatever Fleming's personal sexual tastes
>(let's not even go there, huh?) the oft-mooted 'sadism' in his books is
>never dished out by the supposed good guy.
>
>Fleming would well have known that torture was sort-of-titilating to
>some readers, and as a writer of commercial fiction might even have
>seen it as a way to sell a few more books, but he makes it perfectly
>clear that the guys doing this stuff are pretty depraved. It's no
>different from the way in which a lot of crime thrillers exploit our
>fascination with criminal activities even though we'd never want to do
>such things ourselves and most likely feel that people who do this in
>the real world are repulsive. I'd run a mile if I met someone like
>Cody Jarrett in person, and he's not a character who I would ever want
>to be like in the slightest, but when I'm watching Cagney in 'White
>Heat' I'm mesmerised and want to see as much of this guy as possible.
>
>The bottom line is that as long as things like violence and even
>torture are handled in the right way, they're perfectly legitimate
>elements in drama. One wonders what sort of cinema the moralistic,
>pro-censorship brigade want: without conflict, which very often means
>people doing bad things to each other, drama doesn't exist. I don't
>want to see torture celebrated or glorified, and I worry that films
>like 'Man on Fire' do so, but to say it should be completely verboten
>as a dramatic tool is an over-reaction IMHO.
You've done a great bit of writing there, but it hardly offsets the
simple problem:
Once I see a guy I like getting tied up to have pain inflicted on him,
I'm no longer enjoying myself.
Sure, it shows how depraved the villains are, but I don't need that
much proof that a villain is depraved. A simple declaration that he
wants to blow up Fort Knox, or Miami, is plenty for me to go enjoy a
Bond movie.
(Yes, I grew up on the Bond movies first. I later discovered the
books and, while I found them intriguing, still found them cold and
not something I wanted to spend much time immersing myself into.
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219126 ] |
So, 12 Februar 2006 10:08 |
|
>From now on in Bond movies 007 will shoot, garrot, stab, strangle and
blow up people as nicely as possible.
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219127 ] |
So, 12 Februar 2006 10:09 |
|
phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:
> Incidentally, although I'm sure this has been posted many times before,
> the Fleming / Chandler conversation can be found here:
>
> http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/Ian-Fleming-Raymond-Chan dler.mp3
>
> As a bonus, it's introduced by Philip French, IMHO one of the UK's
> greatest film critics ever.
>
> Best
>
> Phil
NICE FIND!!!
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219140 ] |
So, 12 Februar 2006 18:21 |
|
JHause wrote:
> NICE FIND!!!
I'm sure somebody else posted it here some time ago, so the credit
belongs to whoever that was rather than to me...
Best
Phil
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219141 ] |
So, 12 Februar 2006 18:35 |
|
dgates wrote:
> You've done a great bit of writing there, but it hardly offsets the
> simple problem:
>
> Once I see a guy I like getting tied up to have pain inflicted on him,
> I'm no longer enjoying myself.
>
> Sure, it shows how depraved the villains are, but I don't need that
> much proof that a villain is depraved. A simple declaration that he
> wants to blow up Fort Knox, or Miami, is plenty for me to go enjoy a
> Bond movie.
>
> (Yes, I grew up on the Bond movies first. I later discovered the
> books and, while I found them intriguing, still found them cold and
> not something I wanted to spend much time immersing myself into.
Certainly I can understand that point of view - but there's the added
problem that if EON dropped the torture scene from CR there'd be a huge
fuss about it on forums (fora?) like this one. In fact, my greatest
worry is that the scene may end up drawing inappropriate laughter from
some audiences. It'll be a bloody difficult sequence to get right,
especially given that the actual violence will have to be done
implicitly, and if it's pitched wrongly you can imagine how some
sections of the audience might take it the wrong way.
Best
Phil
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219167 ] |
Mo, 13 Februar 2006 09:25 |
|
On 12 Feb 2006 09:35:24 -0800, "phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com"
<phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote:
>dgates wrote:
>
>> You've done a great bit of writing there, but it hardly offsets the
>> simple problem:
>>
>> Once I see a guy I like getting tied up to have pain inflicted on him,
>> I'm no longer enjoying myself.
>>
>> Sure, it shows how depraved the villains are, but I don't need that
>> much proof that a villain is depraved. A simple declaration that he
>> wants to blow up Fort Knox, or Miami, is plenty for me to go enjoy a
>> Bond movie.
>>
>> (Yes, I grew up on the Bond movies first. I later discovered the
>> books and, while I found them intriguing, still found them cold and
>> not something I wanted to spend much time immersing myself into.
>
>Certainly I can understand that point of view - but there's the added
>problem that if EON dropped the torture scene from CR there'd be a huge
>fuss about it on forums (fora?) like this one.
Well... Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that simply mean they
might irritate a couple hundred of the millions of people they're
targeting with their movie?
That said, there's certainly no reason to go out and film "CASINO
ROYALE" and not have Bond get tortured. Heck, if they dumped that,
what would they keep in??
>In fact, my greatest
>worry is that the scene may end up drawing inappropriate laughter from
>some audiences. It'll be a bloody difficult sequence to get right,
>especially given that the actual violence will have to be done
>implicitly, and if it's pitched wrongly you can imagine how some
>sections of the audience might take it the wrong way.
I'm sure it'll play just fine. Bond's been tortured in the last two
movies, and betrayed by women in the last two movies. I doubt that
either will come as much of a shock to moviegoers who pay to see
Casino Royale.
"Chiff... I'm all in!"
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #219169 ] |
Mo, 13 Februar 2006 09:25 |
|
If this new CR Bond character is behaving badly and executing people
outright like the literary character, you suddenly have two problems
that Fleming faced in the novels:
1) Bond is an anti-hero who can be an outright bastard. So the villain
has to behave a lot worse than Bond for the audience to care. (Bond
can wreck Goldfinger's card game and sleep with his girlfriend that
night as long as Goldfinger gets back at him by suffocating the girl
with gold paint.)
2) If the audience knows Bond will win and they know the villain will
be vanquished before they even read/watch the story, then the author
has to make them hate the villain so much that they will stick around
just to SEE him vanquished by Bond.
And what better way than to have that villain gleefuly torture the hero
in the worst way possible? A lot of revisionist literary critics just
attribute Fleming's grueling torture scenes to his love of S&M,
apparently forgetting he was a smart, engaging writer who needed to
find a way to involve his audience by more than sexual titilation.
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #224835 ] |
Di, 14 Februar 2006 02:40 |
|
dgates wrote:
> I'm sure it'll play just fine. Bond's been tortured in the last two
> movies, and betrayed by women in the last two movies. I doubt that
> either will come as much of a shock to moviegoers who pay to see
> Casino Royale.
As I've said before, that strangulation scene in TWINE is as nasty and
perverse as anything I've seen in a Bond movie, and could have come
straight out of Fleming's wildest fantasies.
Best
Phil
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #224836 ] |
Di, 14 Februar 2006 02:53 |
|
JHause wrote:
> 1) Bond is an anti-hero who can be an outright bastard. So the villain
> has to behave a lot worse than Bond for the audience to care. (Bond
> can wreck Goldfinger's card game and sleep with his girlfriend that
> night as long as Goldfinger gets back at him by suffocating the girl
> with gold paint.)
He can be a bastard, but IMHO Fleming's Bond wrestles with his
conscience far more than his filmic counterpart. Fleming's character
will behave badly and then ruminate on the consequences - although
admittedly that's rare when it comes to the women in his life - whereas
the character in the films knows little self-doubt. One touch I do
like in LTK is after Bouvier tells Bond that there's more to what's
going on than his personal vendetta. I think the brief look on
Dalton's face as he wonders whether he is, in fact, doing the right
thing is very well done.
> And what better way than to have that villain gleefuly torture the hero
> in the worst way possible? A lot of revisionist literary critics just
> attribute Fleming's grueling torture scenes to his love of S&M,
> apparently forgetting he was a smart, engaging writer who needed to
> find a way to involve his audience by more than sexual titilation.
I'm not sure about 'revisionist': the criticisms of sadism were
levelled against Fleming at the time, and in that interview I posted
even his friend Raymond Chandler seems to be joshing him slyly about
his taste for torture scenes and what that might imply. Maybe the
reading public's willing acceptance of such scenes says more about them
than it does about Fleming...
Best
Phil
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #224842 ] |
Di, 14 Februar 2006 05:34 |
|
Dgates wrote:
> That sounds about right, except...
>
> It seems that for the last few years, torture is "in"...
> although the fact that it's so officially "in vogue" probably means
> that the fad is about to pass.
Well, it's not like they included a torture scene in the openning
credits of a recent Bond film or anything.
===
= DUG.
===
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #224844 ] |
Di, 14 Februar 2006 05:39 |
|
JHause wrote:
> If this new CR Bond character is behaving badly and executing people
> outright like the literary character, you suddenly have two problems
> that Fleming faced in the novels:
> 2) If the audience knows Bond will win and they know the villain will
> be vanquished before they even read/watch the story, then the author
> has to make them hate the villain so much that they will stick around
> just to SEE him vanquished by Bond.
Ah... but doesn't the villain get vanquished by Smersh, and they simple
release Bond...
As I recall Bond's big action moment in the novel was to push his chair
out sharply at the casino.
===
= DUG.
===
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #224845 ] |
Di, 14 Februar 2006 05:41 |
|
phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:
> He can be a bastard, but IMHO Fleming's Bond wrestles with his
> conscience far more than his filmic counterpart. Fleming's character
> will behave badly and then ruminate on the consequences - although
> admittedly that's rare when it comes to the women in his life - whereas
> the character in the films knows little self-doubt.
It's hard to do on film.
===
= DUG.
===
|
|
|
| Re: torture in movies (was Limp and Let Die) [message #224860 ] |
Di, 14 Februar 2006 22:29 |
|
Duggy wrote:
> It's hard to do on film.
Fair point. I think bits of it surfaced in Dalton's movies, and those
moments were very well done, but in general it's easier to do in prose.
Best
Phil
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Do Mai 24 21:28:10 CEST 2012
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,07983 Sekunden |
