[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

(COOLLIST) Bonding

Ireland traveller, computer geek (in a good way!), and neat guy
S.F. Eley wrote back about my James Bond and sexism comments:

Forwarded message:
> From: sfeley@borg.mindspring.com
> Subject: Re: (COOLLIST) Therapy, Magnapop, Rabbits
> 
> > I'm quite glad that last year's _Goldeneye_ made an
> > attempt to correct for some of these sins of the past.
> 
> It DID?  Sorry, I thought _Goldeneye_ was cool, but I have to
> disagree with you on the social stance.  Sure, M was a woman this
> time..  And sure, she chewed Bond out very thoroughly for his
> misogynistic and exploitive attitudes.  This was a nifty statement
> in the beginning of the movie..  And then for the rest of the movie,
> he does it anyway!  The female lead WANTS to spurn him for all those
> reasons, but of course ignores everything she says to herself and
> falls all over him anyway.  And the female villain (Anatopp?) is
> nothing but an oversexed caricature of a woman.  This was a movie
> that pretended to have some social merit, but betrayed itself pretty
> consistently throughout.  In that sense, it was classic Bond.

I agree with you on Anatopp, but I would like to speak in behalf of
the female lead in _Goldeneye_.  She really was a departure from
earlier Bond girls.  First, she was technically competent.  She did
more than pick up sea shells on the sea shore.  Second, her appeal was
not strictly physical.  Earlier women in Bond films were mainly eye
candy and McGuffins.  The female protagonist in _GoldenEye_ never went
for the overt sexual appeal, unless sweaters turn the audience on.
Instead, she was attractive because of her nature and
characterization.  On a different point, _GoldenEye_ shows Moneypenny
not as the single girl pining after her secret agent but as a happily
married woman that can hold her own with 007.

> I still liked the movie, of course..  I don't expect a statement I 
> can agree with in every movie I see.  Some movies, I gauge by their 
> ability to make me think, or captivate me emotionally.  Action 
> movies, I judge by the number of explosions.  It's important, I 
> think, not to criticize too deeply in areas where enlightenment was 
> never the idea in the first place.  If Bond movies trouble you, don't 
> give them your time..  For me, however, they're way too cheesy to be 
> taken that seriously.  And that's what makes them good.

Good points, Steve!  Bond movies in themselves aren't political statements,
but they do reflect society, especially its fantasies.  I think the
fantasies portrayed in _GoldenEye_ are much more acceptable and
realistic than the earlier Bonds.

BTW, two more 007 movies at the Paramount this weekend, including
_Goldfinger_!  I just saw _Dr. Strangelove_ and _The Manchurian
Candidate_, and I loved them both.  _Strangelove_ wasn't as stunning
as the first time I saw it, but it was just as funny.  The second
film, _The Manchurian Candidate_ was a very cool political thriller
about mind control starring Frank Sinatra.

Well, I gotta go.  Sleep beckons.
-- 
Benjamin L. Combee (combee@techwood.org) <URL:http://www.yak.net/combee/>
that public-access-TV-making, video-game-collecting, cryptography-pushing,
World-Wide-Web-explaining, fem-music-loving, bad-pun-creating guy in Austin
####
To unsubscribe from (COOLLIST), reply to this and tell me to delete you.
To see the (COOLLIST) archives, go to http://www.yak.net/coollist/.