This is a static copy of In the Rose Garden, which existed as the center of the western Utena fandom for years. Enjoy. :)
Dunno how many of you guys have seen Casino Royale yet (if you haven't, you'd really rather ought to), but I saw this post on the blog "Shakespeare's Sister" and immediately thought of the fine folks on this forum.
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/ … l-yes.html
That tabloid, as one commenter put it, made my inner Beavis explode. And hey, future canon Bondslash? What's not to like?
Enjoy!
- Leah, up far earlier than should be humanly necessary, go go neuro appt. --;
Offline
I have never wanted to see a James Bond movie before...
...now I do!
Offline
GOD DAMN YOU. I actually posted a thread right here about that but deleted it because I realized that's from an online blog and probably a huge load of crap. Also if you read what Craig said, he's not suggesting a gay scene, he's suggesting full frontal and arguing that should be fine given Doctor Who had gay scenes.
That said, I think it'd actually rather fit the character. He's supposed to be cold, heartless, and up for whatever it takes to do the job. If he can get his balls bashed in (loved that scene) he can get in on some mansex, I say.
As for the full frontal...why the hell not, except it'll make all the guys watching feel gay to look at Bond's wang. I think I should get full frontal as a tradeoff for this guy not wearing suits as well as Brosnan.
Offline
Every guy should be made to feel a little gay at some point in his life. Mostly because he is a little gay. Everyone is. Some are just more than others.
And the movie kicked ass.
Offline
It just strikes me as a bad move to make after Casino Royale was so, SO clearly redirecting the franchise to the male audience. Brosnan's Bond, I've noticed, was more popular with women. That would have been the Bond to introduce mansex in, because chicks love that stuff. Guys will just feel icky and disgusted. Except for the gay ones, who naturally will their damn heads off because Craig's got a killer body.
Offline
He does have a killer body all right, but his back needs a little work. Too chest-heavy, if he's not careful he'll get that round-shouldered look that professional bodybuilders often get.
Yes, I am aware that "professional bodybuilder" is an oxymoron, but I'm not about to argue semantics with someone who could pick me up and break me in half.
Straight men need to be desensitized to the ick factor of mansex. If they can enjoy womansex then they should shut up and deal. Especially since homophobic straight men are more likely to be physically aroused by gay porn than non-homophobic straight men.
Offline
ShatteredMirror wrote:
Straight men need to be desensitized to the ick factor of mansex.
Damn right.
I know Craig's got a nice body. I just don't like it. Apparently he's hung like an Akio though, so it's not surprising he's up for full frontal. I don't see it happening, there hasn't even been full female frontal in a Bond flick. Still. Would be interesting to say the least, if only for how the men will react.
I suspect half of them are in denial about wanting to fuck Bond anyway.
Offline
You felt Casino Royale was projected more at a male audience? Interesting. I didn't see it as leaning particularly hard one way or the other. Also interesting that women liked Brosnan's Bond...I only liked Goldeneye, really, because A.) it was less dumb than the others, B.) it was pretty quotable, and C.) Famke Janssen as Bad Bond Girl Xenia Onatopp(dark hair does her so much better than red). Tomorrow Never Dies was meh for story, though Michelle Yeoh = as always, World is Not Enough was more meh but had one of my favorite Bond songs in a while, and Die Another Day was flat-out dumb. My personal favorite Bond movies are You Only Live Twice and now Casino Royale, which has recently bumped Goldfinger down from second to third.
Offline
I liked "A View to a Kill" because it was goofy. Roger Moore was definitely the biggest clown of all the Bonds. And it had Christopher Walken in it.
Offline
I would definitely say Casino Royale was aimed squarely at men. There were some glory shots of shirtless Bond, yeah, but the focus this time was very much on Bond kicking ass, getting bloody, and blowing shit up. This is partly on account of Bond being 'new', but he's overall going to be a more rough and tumble guy. Brosnan's Bond was too classy to get blood on his suit, and spent more time chatting it up with bitches than he did with blowing things up. Most of the fans of Brosnan's Bond that I know are women. The guys refer back to Connery every time.
Brosnan's Bond movies were awful after Goldeneye. I just don't blame him. The scripts went to complete hell. Which is too bad because I had high hopes for Pryce as a Bond baddie, and Sophie Marceau was seriously some kind of holy god hot. For my personal tastes, I liked Brosnan's character better, but this was a much better movie than anything that he did post-Goldeneye. Call me shallow but I want my hot hot Brioni-wearing smarmy drowning in women Goldeneye Bond.
Actually screw that. Don't call me shallow. It's absurd to consider yourself shallow for having the proper reaction to a stimulus. Bond's not supposed to be high theater, it's supposed to be fun. I suppose, though, that Craig gets his female lusting horde anyway. He's just not my type. From what I'm told, girls wanted to have sex with Bruce Willis after seeing Die Hard. I hardly noticed him with Alan Rickman running around...
Offline