26

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

IIRC the notion of Winter and Kidd being gay is suggested in Fleming's original novel, though obviously the very camp element was added by the filmmakers. Fleming put some very odd and old fashioned ideas into print about homosexuality, which is sad but a reflection of his upbringing and his generation

27

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Dirty Punker wrote:

Nonsense, you never offended me or anyone.
It's just that so many people are taking a stab at it these days and it wouldn't be hard to imagine.
If you check every single topic, you will find that I never made a ranking and probably never will.
But...if I ever did it would probably be around there on my list.
Anyway, Bond movies should be action packed movies with a good balance between storytelling and fun (just like you said).
However, there are some which lean more on fun than depth and that's why I like Diamonds so much. Stupidly good fun.
Not appropriate post-OHMSS though.
I would still think that say, Octopussy would be a better movie overall. It still had plenty of jokes and it was all around better made, in my opinion.
zaphod, I apologize.

My bad, seems like I was over sensitive. No need to apologise.

Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.

28

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

IanFryer wrote:

IIRC the notion of Winter and Kidd being gay is suggested in Fleming's original novel, though obviously the very camp element was added by the filmmakers. Fleming put some very odd and old fashioned ideas into print about homosexuality, which is sad but a reflection of his upbringing and his generation

If I remember correctly, *Wint and Kidd were going to have their way with Tiffany in the novel?

Also speaking about Tiffany, Fleming best female character after Vesper, any sort of depth is thrown out the window in the movie.

a reasonable rate of return

29

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Thunderpussy wrote:

The Bond films and Books are filled with odd characters. In DAF the killers happen to be gay.
How many straight women killers have we had,..... is that part of some anti female agenda ?
DAF is a camp film, most of the characters reflect  this , even Blofeld.
  It's the old mistake of judging  old movies by todays political standards.  If they were making
DAF today,  I guarantee  it would be a very different film.
  Torchwood  is a favourite of mine, I own all the episodes. The lead character Cpt Jack. Is an
openly gay, heroic,  action hero.   ajb007/martini   so the times are a changing.   ajb007/wink

I think it is reasonable to see a problematic representation of people used for humor and "humm.... they might want to think about that." I also think nothing is wrong using what we know now to analyse a work as long as you know what time something was made in. This is not a US production but due to the time and the themes it is very Hays code to me. Sissy = bad, gay = up to no good.It is just an observation and I think it is valid.

https://filmicmag.com/2015/08/01/from-s … ode-queer/

I've always wanted to have Christmas in Turkey

30

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Absolutely  valid  ajb007/martini  although DAF is tame compared
To British tv comedies of the time.  ajb007/wink   Watching some
Of those will leave you open mouthed in astonishment  !

“I didn’t lose a friend, I just realised I never had one.”

31

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Thunderpussy wrote:

Absolutely  valid  ajb007/martini  although DAF is tame compared
To British tv comedies of the time.  ajb007/wink   Watching some
Of those will leave you open mouthed in astonishment  !

One of my favorite movies is "Holiday Inn." I basically can't repeat half the dialog. Oh, so problematic but so good!

I've always wanted to have Christmas in Turkey

32

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Dirty Punker wrote:

If I remember correctly, *Wint and Kidd were going to have their way with Tiffany in the novel?

They strip her and beat her up somewhat- we've been specifically told by Felix that Wint is a sadist. Whether they intend to go any further isn't stated (sexually, that is- they do intend to kill her).

33

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Barbel wrote:
Dirty Punker wrote:

If I remember correctly, *Wint and Kidd were going to have their way with Tiffany in the novel?

They strip her and beat her up somewhat- we've been specifically told by Felix that Wint is a sadist. Whether they intend to go any further isn't stated (sexually, that is- they do intend to kill her).

I think that Wint had her on top of a table (?). I need to re-read Diamonds again. Once I finish LALD and MR, of course.

a reasonable rate of return

34

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Nope, she's on a stool.

One thing I've never understood is that Wint and Kidd are cast the wrong way round- their descriptions in the book match Putter Smith and Bruce Glover reasonably well, but Smith should be Wint and Glover should be Kidd!

35

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Barbel wrote:

Nope, she's on a stool.

One thing I've never understood is that Wint and Kidd are cast the wrong way round- their descriptions in the book match Putter Smith and Bruce Glover reasonably well, but Smith should be Wint and Glover should be Kidd!

Yeah but I can't imagine Putter Smith delivering his lines as well as Glover did but then again, we'll never know.

a reasonable rate of return

36

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Of course, but just change their names round- keep the lines the same!

37

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

VesperMelograno wrote:

the idea of two queer men being "off" serial killer types is very homophobic and very Hays Code. It is seriously like they were writing John Wayne Gacey into the film. But two men with strange voices and a lust for death. Stabbing/ shooting / death (in a Shakespeare sense) = penetration is not very creative.

I always heard 1 person in 20 is gay whether we (or they) know it or not
so there's been 24 Bond films, each with its own evil henchmen, its statistically inevitable one of those evil henchmen would be gay ... it would be unfair and unrealistic to not have a gay evil henchmen in at least one of the films
the problem is this film makes them look silly. But this film makes everyone look silly, even Bond. Maybe not Q: he is cleaning up in the casino, but everybody else in this film is playing the fool.

38

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

I see nothing wrong with having a gay bad guy. To me Silvia read as queer and he is my favorite villain/ Bond character ever. What bothers me is the trappings of super hackneyed formulas. Like, really, they could not come up with anything better that that? It is more that it makes me roll my eyes when I see it. And I do not think my eyes would have rolled if they guys could act at all. It just read like the writers were making fun of queer people in an elementary school way (in my opinion.) It was not like "In Like Flint" where it was very clear satire. BUT I think this is an observation on one aspect of the characterization and I do not think the film should be trashed because of it.

I've always wanted to have Christmas in Turkey

39

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Oddly enough, Diamonds are Forever may be the first time a gay couple in a bonafide relationship are shown onscreen in a mainstream film -- which is to say they obviously love each other, hold hands, get jealous, work as a team, and don't hide their relationship.  It is done as camp, but at the same time, it's more than films would usually show -- somewhat like how The Simpsons, despite criticism for being crude, ironically was the only show at one time in America that showed a family that wasn't divorced, had parents who loved each other, ate together at the table, regularly attended church, and had limits to their barbs.

40

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Gassy Man wrote:

Oddly enough, Diamonds are Forever may be the first time a gay couple in a bonafide relationship are shown onscreen in a mainstream film -- which is to say they obviously love each other, hold hands, get jealous, work as a team, and don't hide their relationship.  It is done as camp, but at the same time, it's more than films would usually show

I agree. Despite the fact they're villains, I don't think they're an awful representation. If anything isn't the Oedipus-complex, homosexual Silva a more negative or simplistic representation? Wint and Kidd are badass. Silva's a stereotyped mess.

1. TWINE  2. FYEO  3. MR  4. TLD  5. TSWLM 6. OHMSS  7. DN  8. OP  9. AVTAK  10. TMWTGG  11. QoS 12. GE  13. CR  14. TB  15. FRWL  16. LTK  17. GF  18. SF  19. LaLD  20. YOLT  21. TND  22. DAD  23. DAF.

"If you'll forgive me, that's a little too scented for my palate."

41

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

heartbroken_mr_drax wrote:

homosexual Silva

Isn't Silva bisexual rather than homosexual?

42

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Barbel wrote:
heartbroken_mr_drax wrote:

homosexual Silva

Isn't Silva bisexual rather than homosexual?

I think of Silva is a blanket term "queer." He seems like he just does whatever, with whomever, when the mood strikes him.

I've always wanted to have Christmas in Turkey

43

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Gassy Man wrote:

Oddly enough, Diamonds are Forever may be the first time a gay couple in a bonafide relationship are shown onscreen in a mainstream film -- which is to say they obviously love each other, hold hands, get jealous, work as a team, and don't hide their relationship.  It is done as camp, but at the same time, it's more than films would usually show -- somewhat like how The Simpsons, despite criticism for being crude, ironically was the only show at one time in America that showed a family that wasn't divorced, had parents who loved each other, ate together at the table, regularly attended church, and had limits to their barbs.

That is a very good point ajb007/martini  It is nice to see that it is two men who do really love one another. All of the other stuff kind of gets in the way of focusing on the positive aspects of the dynamic.

I've always wanted to have Christmas in Turkey

44

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

VesperMelograno wrote:
Gassy Man wrote:

Oddly enough, Diamonds are Forever may be the first time a gay couple in a bonafide relationship are shown onscreen in a mainstream film -- which is to say they obviously love each other, hold hands, get jealous, work as a team, and don't hide their relationship.  It is done as camp, but at the same time, it's more than films would usually show -- somewhat like how The Simpsons, despite criticism for being crude, ironically was the only show at one time in America that showed a family that wasn't divorced, had parents who loved each other, ate together at the table, regularly attended church, and had limits to their barbs.

That is a very good point ajb007/martini  It is nice to see that it is two men who do really love one another. All of the other stuff kind of gets in the way of focusing on the positive aspects of the dynamic.

One nice touch was Wint's quick reaction - one of grief, and anger - when Kidd dies. Glover telegraphed that well.

45

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Doctor Who wrote:
VesperMelograno wrote:
Gassy Man wrote:

Oddly enough, Diamonds are Forever may be the first time a gay couple in a bonafide relationship are shown onscreen in a mainstream film -- which is to say they obviously love each other, hold hands, get jealous, work as a team, and don't hide their relationship.  It is done as camp, but at the same time, it's more than films would usually show -- somewhat like how The Simpsons, despite criticism for being crude, ironically was the only show at one time in America that showed a family that wasn't divorced, had parents who loved each other, ate together at the table, regularly attended church, and had limits to their barbs.

That is a very good point ajb007/martini  It is nice to see that it is two men who do really love one another. All of the other stuff kind of gets in the way of focusing on the positive aspects of the dynamic.

One nice touch was Wint's quick reaction - one of grief, and anger - when Kidd dies. Glover telegraphed that well.

From that point on, he was probably thinking "DIE YOU BASTARD!".
There are times where I do want the villain to win. Notable examples are here and in the end of GoldenEye. Both of them should've killed Bond.
Why should Bond be the only one to be able to avenge his loved ones?
There are other times where I really do want Bond to kill the villain...and times that I thought the villain's death was a bit too much even if he did deserve (most of it) like Stromberg in TSWLM (nobody needs to have their balls blown off, it's a waste of bullets unless of course it was the original ending for Blofeld in Spy. Then it would've been perfect!).

a reasonable rate of return

46

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Today, for the first time in at least a decade, I re-watched DAF, since I’m currently re-listening to the audiobook version of the novel – which is, needless to say, very different to the film. Returning to the latter without any high expectations and well aware of its numerous flaws, I found it surprisingly enjoyable.

Yes, Charles Gray plays Blofeld like a Batman villain – his priceless delivery of lines such as “Prepare my bathosub” and “I do so hate martial music” had me laughing out loud. The Electronic Voice Disguiser was also pure Batman. If Adam West had taken the Bond role he’d have been right at home.

Enjoyed Jimmy Dean’s James Stewart-ish turn as Willard Whyte.

Would’ve preferred Van Nutter or Hedison as Leiter, obviously.

Wint & Kidd were a great double act. The duo’s comeuppance, though, was surprisingly nasty.

John Barry’s music – great, of course.

Excellent fight in the lift.

Even the bloated, beetle-browed Connery of memory seemed more engaged and enthusiastic than I recalled, enjoying the opportunity to send himself up. But I still didn’t like the way Tiffany Case devolved from tough cookie to ditzy klutz and was utterly helpless in fight scenes.

The film really set the tone for the '70s Bonds, for better or worse. There was even a kind of proto Sheriff Pepper.

Plus I was reminded of DAF’s curious influence on Blade Runner, of all films.

Next one lined up for a re-watch is LTK, but I’m waiting until the right mood strikes.

47

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Danvers Nettlefold wrote:

Yes, Charles Gray plays Blofeld like a Batman villain – his priceless delivery of lines such as “Prepare my bathosub” and “I do so hate martial music” had me laughing out loud. The Electronic Voice Disguiser was also pure Batman. If Adam West had taken the Bond role he’d have been right at home.

and by coincidence, Jill St John played the Riddler's moll Molly in the very first episode ever of the Batman teevee series!


Danvers I've been enjoying your recent series of posts. You must come introduce yourself properly in the Welcome & Comings & Goings thread

48

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

In DAF Connery plays a jaded Bond, self-reflexively conscious of his own star persona while mildly amused/incredulous at the pop art decadence of the fantasy world through which he's sauntering. It's a subtle and engaging performance, an exercise in knowing light comedy and a plausible take on the character at this point in the franchise (if we just accept a de-emphasis on any post-OHMSS revenge themes): a pleasure to watch. The theme song captures perfectly the ethos of this performance.

I agree with the criticism that DAF's representation of gay identity as a signifier of off-beat, deviant villainy is essentially homophobic, even given the overall camp tenor of the film; but to point out and critique all problematic cultural and minority stereotypes across the Bond franchise would take a book; DAF is hardly a lone offender.

Last edited by Shady Tree (25th May 2019 19:45)

49

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

Shady Tree wrote:

In DAF Connery plays a jaded Bond, self-reflexively conscious of his own star persona while mildly amused/incredulous at the pop art decadence of the fantasy world through which he's sauntering. It's a subtle and engaging performance, an exercise in knowing light comedy and a plausible take on the character at this point in the franchise (if we just accept a de-emphasis on any post-OHMSS revenge themes): a pleasure to watch. The theme song captures perfectly the ethos of this performance.

An excellent analysis with which I agree entirely.

DAF was was intended as post-OHMSS damage limitation exercise, a return to the self-spoofing, crowd-pleasing 'glory days' of GF. Consequently, the revenge element was short-changed, even deemed unimportant.

50

Re: Diamonds Are Forever - a study in characterization

heartbroken_mr_drax wrote:
Gassy Man wrote:

Oddly enough, Diamonds are Forever may be the first time a gay couple in a bonafide relationship are shown onscreen in a mainstream film -- which is to say they obviously love each other, hold hands, get jealous, work as a team, and don't hide their relationship.  It is done as camp, but at the same time, it's more than films would usually show

I agree. Despite the fact they're villains, I don't think they're an awful representation. If anything isn't the Oedipus-complex, homosexual Silva a more negative or simplistic representation? Wint and Kidd are badass. Silva's a stereotyped mess.


The bit where he enjoys having a bomb shoved up his arse just because he’s gay is rather off. But, it was the time.

I watched DAF on telly the other week: I haven’t spotted just how dreary it is before. Sean is noticeably better than he was in YOLT- he’s got far more twinkle. But not very much actually happens and the film is very low on memorable or attention-grabbing incident. It’s one of the very worst.