Best Of

James Bond: the British owners made a nice mess of the IP themselves to be honest. Escapist entertainment requires the protagonist to escape.

The clear path forward is to make it a period piece. The cars, fashion, music, locations. The main issue bond has had is the big bad in real life is China but they are such a big market for movies they daren’t show that on film.

I think the Craig films were generally pretty good, and a bit of a change from the paint-by-numbers, repetitive approach that the Brosnan era (and before that, Moore) ended up falling into.

Their failing was in trying to tie everything together and write an “ending” for the era (modern screenwriters are generally appalling at writing effective and logical endings).

I think it’s probably time that the series did trade on its nostalgia again. A period piece, as you say, would probably work pretty well nowadays.

It is the 21st Century obsession with arcs. It ruined Dr Who; it ruined Star Whatever; it ruined James Bond. Out went the inter-film reset button, to be replaced by the accumulation of in-universe lore over multi-year story arcs until collapsing under the weight of its own internal logic.

Arcs are good so long as the stories being told are good. Many of the best franchises are good because of good arcs.

Star Wars (original trilogy), Back to the Future, Godfather and in recent years Dark Knight and the MCU Infinity Wars.

It needs to be done well. It needs a compelling overarching vision that tends to require someone who understands what they're doing and plans it out well.

Bad storytelling is a failure whether in an individual story or an arc.

Harry Potter was a brilliant example of a series, with a great overarching plot arc and story, great characters that grew with the series, and superb world-building. It all generally just works. The films are slightly more uneven, but still excellent.

The extensions to the universe (in film form) were flops IMV - because they failed in all those areas. Unlike the book series, there was no magic. Having magic in the story does not make the story magic.

I thought the Harry Potter films were awful, because they couldn't fit in all the material required for the overarching plot arc. They end up relying on the viewer knowing the books well enough to fill in the gaps.

James Bond: the British owners made a nice mess of the IP themselves to be honest. Escapist entertainment requires the protagonist to escape.

The clear path forward is to make it a period piece. The cars, fashion, music, locations. The main issue bond has had is the big bad in real life is China but they are such a big market for movies they daren’t show that on film.

I think the Craig films were generally pretty good, and a bit of a change from the paint-by-numbers, repetitive approach that the Brosnan era (and before that, Moore) ended up falling into.

Their failing was in trying to tie everything together and write an “ending” for the era (modern screenwriters are generally appalling at writing effective and logical endings).

I think it’s probably time that the series did trade on its nostalgia again. A period piece, as you say, would probably work pretty well nowadays.

It is the 21st Century obsession with arcs. It ruined Dr Who; it ruined Star Whatever; it ruined James Bond. Out went the inter-film reset button, to be replaced by the accumulation of in-universe lore over multi-year story arcs until collapsing under the weight of its own internal logic.

Arcs are good so long as the stories being told are good. Many of the best franchises are good because of good arcs.

Star Wars (original trilogy), Back to the Future, Godfather and in recent years Dark Knight and the MCU Infinity Wars.

It needs to be done well. It needs a compelling overarching vision that tends to require someone who understands what they're doing and plans it out well.

Bad storytelling is a failure whether in an individual story or an arc.

Harry Potter was a brilliant example of a series, with a great overarching plot arc and story, great characters that grew with the series, and superb world-building. It all generally just works. The films are slightly more uneven, but still excellent.

The extensions to the universe (in film form) were flops IMV - because they failed in all those areas. Unlike the book series, there was no magic. Having magic in the story does not make the story magic.

When I worked in a bookshop, the first two Harry Potter books had just come out and weren't quite the massive phenomenon they became. I recommended them to a mother who wanted something to help a child deal with the loss of a family member. I think the books are great at addressing death and loss for children.

And so the enshittification of James Bond has commenced. The government really needs to think about having restrictions on foreign ownership/control of culturally significant property. Amazon are going to take a great franchise and ruin it and ruin it's legacy.

What's happened?

Amazon seem to believe that using pictures of guns in advertising pictures for James Bond would be triggering for folk.

That must be why Amazon refuse to stream any films and series with any gun violence, well apart from the James Bond films they show, and the millions of other films etc where there are guns and shootings.

Bezos doesn’t strike me as being particularly woke or anything so I’m guessing he will be a bit annoyed at this and get it fixed.

That Reacher show, there is absolutely no over the top violence in that, other than perhaps 75% of every single episode.

James Bond is sex, sadism and snobbery, all wrapped up in the Union Jack.

The Americans can do the sex, badly, and definitely the sadism - but they absolutely cannot do the snobbery, or the Britishness.

How many surgeons live in council houses?

Maybe quite a lot, I don't believe there is a maximum salary for social housing. Once you have the house you get to stay there.

I'm not sure we know why they came to the country - if it was as refugees it might explain the council house.

I can’t help but feel that there should be a maximum salary. Why should public resources be used to subsidise the housing costs for those that can afford?

The arguments that the left used when the Tories suggested it was that (I) it would break up communities; (II) it was unfair to kick people out of their houses; others argued that it created a disincentive to improve your finances.

No one seemed to consider that state resources were limited and that they should be deployed to those who need them the most

I’d avoid a cliff edge - but perhaps a sliding scale so that at, say, 67% of the median wage you are paying current levels of subsidised rents up to, say, 120% of median wage where you pay the full market rent

You could even have it so the sliding scale went above 100%. So if you're on 200% of median wage, say, you pay 120% of market rent. A sort of gentle encouragement to free the space up for someone on a lower income. And if you don't do, at least the council has more money.

James Bond: the British owners made a nice mess of the IP themselves to be honest. Escapist entertainment requires the protagonist to escape.

The clear path forward is to make it a period piece. The cars, fashion, music, locations. The main issue bond has had is the big bad in real life is China but they are such a big market for movies they daren’t show that on film.

I think the Craig films were generally pretty good, and a bit of a change from the paint-by-numbers, repetitive approach that the Brosnan era (and before that, Moore) ended up falling into.

Their failing was in trying to tie everything together and write an “ending” for the era (modern screenwriters are generally appalling at writing effective and logical endings).

I think it’s probably time that the series did trade on its nostalgia again. A period piece, as you say, would probably work pretty well nowadays.

It is the 21st Century obsession with arcs. It ruined Dr Who; it ruined Star Whatever; it ruined James Bond. Out went the inter-film reset button, to be replaced by the accumulation of in-universe lore over multi-year story arcs until collapsing under the weight of its own internal logic.

Rightwinger Sanae Takaichi elected by the ruling LDP to be the new PM of Japan

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2pmy7m72lo

Twas ever thus - wrong kind of woman?

She’s against gay marriage and doesn’t think women should be allowed to keep their maiden names on marriage, IIRC. You can imagine why some people might oppose her stances.

If you don't like gay marriage, don't get gay married.

It really doesn't seem complicated to me.

Also gay people have always been allowed to get married. Just not, previously, to people they loved.