On November 9th, the new James Bond movie, Skyfall will be released. Early reviews are incredibly positive, and the movie is receiving buzz as potentially one of the year’s best. Despite all of the hype, I remain a bit skeptical. Some of that comes from the terrible last film (Quantum of Solace). However, one of the main reasons I am hesitant about the movie is the franchises long history of sexism, camp, and patriarchy.
“But the films have changed!!!” Sort-of. I personally loved the 2006 re-boot, Casino Royale. The movie had far more substance and far less camp then previous Bond films. The film was a far cry from franchise’s previous movies, which were steeped in sexism and terrible puns, such as “Pussy Galore” and “Molly Goodhead.” However, Bond remains Bond. He is still a hyper masculine character who seduces both overly sexualized “damsels in distress” and the obligatory bad girl who works for the main villain.
In fact, I recently raged about the terribleness of the “classic” Bond movies to a friend, who linked me to this YouTube video. Yup, that’s a minute and forty seconds of James Bond hitting women. I’d advise staying away from the comments section, in which the top posts encourage this “awesome” behavior as “how a man should act.” Sure, the movies came out in a different time, but that doesn’t mean this is ok.
As I said before, I give lots of credit to Casino Royale for changing some of the terrible paradigms of the past. However, Bond is the same character at his core. He is still the same super masculine hero. He still seduces multiple women per movie, usually there just to serve as “eye candy” or plot devices. The formula has worked for a long time, and even though it appears that some changes have been made, the overall idea is the same.
Overall, this post brings me back to my previous post in which I asked “where do you draw the line?” How many questionable elements ruin an entire product? Should people accept the negative elements of a new James Bond movie? Should we laud Bond films like Casino Royale because it “toned down” some of the abhorrent elements of the “classic” Bond films? Can we look back and accept the old Bond films because of the context of the time? Do they get a free pass because “that’s just how things were”? I mean, James Bond really exemplifies what we think of as a spy. The movies spawned countless spin-offs and serves as a point of cultural reference. Isn’t there something positive to that amidst all the negative?
I realize that I am creating more questions than answers here. I also realize that as a huge movie fan in general, I will see most movies that generate the amount of positive reviews as Bond is getting. Hence, I will likely see this movie. As for the above questions, finding the answer might be too complicated for even her majesty’s finest secret agent to figure out.
ShoutOut! James Madison University 
And like most popular points of “cultural interest” are steeped in patriarchal norms and the inherent sexism and misogyny that comes along for the ride.
Pretty much sums up the Bond series, no? I’d say enjoy the movie, but try not to let your critical faculties become engaged, as they tend to ruin “good movies”.
LikeLike
Personally, I think this idea of divorcing “critical faculties” from enjoyment is pretty problematic. This idea is basically tantamount to saying, “Patriarchy is ok if it’s for a good cause,” or saying “I’ll let this one slide because I really like the movie.” To me, patriarchy is never ok even if I like the movie. I think it is possible to critique a film by enjoying some parts and disliking others. But I think the notion of leaving your criticism at the door is flawed, especially under the justification of ruining a good movie.
LikeLike
The problem is that we’re swimming in it. One could literally be angry 24/7. It burns you out if you’re not careful. It is always weighing on my thoughts, and I’m lucky I can “turn it off” as I do belong to the dominant class, so I can pretend once and awhile that things are ‘fine’.
But as a woman, who has no choice and gets to live it from sun-up to sun-down… that is some pretty heavy shite to always have on your plate – hence turning off the blaming for the sake some downtime might not be such a bad thing.
As always, IBTP.
LikeLike
[“The problem is that we’re swimming in it. One could literally be angry 24/7. It burns you out if you’re not careful.”]
If she’s not careful? What you’re still saying is that we should accept this patriarchy in “SKYFALL” with a blind eye. Frankly, I don’t think we should. I don’t care how angry we get. It’s a lot better than pretending that it’s okay. And I can say the same about the real world.
LikeLike
I’m in two minds about the new Bond. I don’t think I do actually want to see it because I’d probably just get annoyed at the way that women are treated and that would ruin the rest of the film for me.
LikeLike