Casino Royale: Men And PainThere's an element of comic-book male-fantasy in the Bond films that helps me to zone-out at times. I have all of the films. I found though that the character became more and more of a super-hero than a man as the series progressed, and found the last Brosnan film almost completely forgettable.
When they re-started with Casino Royale, I was immediately impressed with the opening credits. No naked woman dancing around. Pardon me for saying so, but if that's what I want to see, there are plenty of places I could go to. I don't need to be titillated in an embarrassing page-3 tradition, really; I don't. Not that I don't value the artistry and construction of some of the sequences. I don't think naked women were really necessary. So call me a prude. I was much happier with Casino Royale.
Now my focus is the following: Bond's comic-book incarnation, didn't ever seem to get hurt. His hair didn't even ruffle. Hmm. Highly suspicious that.
What I liked most about the new film, was that Bond was more of a man, in that he bruised, bled, experienced *pain*. Pain is good, because it's truthful. It's what a lot of life actually involves, at least my life does; maybe some people with spoons more silver than the rusting iron others might have had can't understand this, but well, they won't be reading my stories either I guess.
One doesn't admire the average Bond film for its sc
Here we have a lot of truth. Bond confirms elsewhere, in response to M, that becoming affected emotional is not his weakness. He plays with women: sex is a game, not about commitment, and not about emotion. I find this true of men who either have not matured emotionally, ever; or of men who are dead emotionally, because emotionally is how they have beeen slaughtered in a past relationship.
Later, Lynd talks of Bond putting his armour back on, meaning withdrawing emotionally; and he expresses complete vulnerability to her: no armour. On this, I wonder very often if men are not the more vulnerable of the sexes: emotionally, I mean. Just as killing is a part of Bond's job, and he can't be good at it if he lets his emotions in the way, I am very sure that in our knock-abouts in the world, those of us who maintain or seek to maintain the traditional role of bread-winner, *need* to not be over emotional. I wonder, if men, using their emotions less frequently, are more vulnerable emotionally because their "inexperience" means they are easier to hurt emotionally, and then find it harder to recover - with a tendency instead to withdraw, to *do* things rather than feel emotional pain? I am very sure than when Bond gives his next target a physical pounding, he feels much better for releasing the tension inside himself. Even feeling physical pain can be a comfort if it distracts from the far more devastating: emotional pain. Someone who cuts themself might be able to say more on this perhaps?
So, Bond, in his physicality and prowess, is never defeated physically. Yet an intelligent, and possibly committed and possibly loving woman, destroys him emotionally by the end of the film. And then he denies what she meant to him when M draws his attention to the facts. Very truthful. Makes me think about life. I liked it.