Douchebag of the Moment: Richard Cohen, Washington Post

[W. Rabbit]

Connery, 1950:



1962: a little more hair.



1974, slightly less muscle, far more hair.



Conclusion:

007 today has less hair, because it's not the 60s or 70s anymore.

[doofaloofa]

This guy is eating sour grapes because a fictional character has an exceptional physique? What the ****?

First off, Daniel Craig as 007 is a damn male role model. 44 and in great shape? Hell yeah! We should all strive to be that good to ourselves. That shot in Casino Royal when he emerges from the surf? Psychrometers spiked off the charts as every panty in the free world moisened when that hit the screen. And he isn't some roid freak or over-groomed, metro-candyass either. He's a naturaly healthy looking hunk-o-man. Effing MALE ROLE MODEL.

Women want to **** him, guys want to be him. That is EXACTLY the crtieria required of a lead man in a straight action film.

Choen misses the point completely when he complains that Bond is "too good looking". Bond isn't a real person anyways. He's a fantasy designed to appeal to all sexes and orientations in the audience. Which brings me to my next point;

Bond's role as a fictional chartacter; This guy is super human. He can outfight anyone (unless the story requires otherwise). He can seduce any woman and turn the tables on even the most calculating and ruthless honey pot ever to skank her way across the Brandenburg Gate. He wins machine gun fights with a piddly .380 acp cap gun. He can operate any vehicle. He can deductively reason on the fly and MacGuyver his way out of any situation under any kind of stress that a "fantasy dilema" can throw at him even if he's only got a few seconds to do it OR DIE!!!!! He can defuse anything. He can use any weapon. He's more agile than an olympic acrobat and has more stamina than long distnce runner. His luck never falters (unless the story requires it...) He does all this in a worsted wool tux which is never stained or ruffled(also unless the story requires otherwise...).

Finally, on top of all this completely super human fantasy action; "He's got really nice abs".

Seriously. All the over the top suspension of disbelief required to take the Bond ride and Mr. Choen's big caveat is the six pack?

Whatever, mang.....

IMHO. We are tipping right over the edge into a new Renaisance. The renaisance man of old was a jack of all trades. An artist, an engineer, a mathematician, a writer and a warrior. He had to be mentally competant (to create the great works) but also physically tough (to handle the "burn-a-fool tendencies" of the less enlightened around him). The exploits of the Medici family are a fine example of such people and the complicated times they lived in. As participants in a new renaisance we should expect to see more multi-disciplinarians with a decent six pack. It take brains to build a future, and it takes brawn to fight back the barbarians. Simple as that. A well rounded man has both.

To get to the point, while 007 is a fantasy character, he represents the miriad of disciplines required to be a "number one man" in todays world. He's quick whitted, exceedingly resourceful and can handle himself in a fight. He also looks sharp enough to spread his genes. These are all positive qualites to emulate. I for one think it's good that young men have this role model in counterpoint to say, 50 Cent?

Choen want's us to believe that a man must choose one discipline over the other in life. Mind or body. This is hardly true. While it is difficult to read on a treadmill, it is not so difficult to watch a film, listen to music or experience a book on tape. The internet has exposed all of us to the world at large for better or for worse. In any case it is virtualy impossible to insulate yourself from other cultures and their knowlege in todays modern world. Even total "meat heads" are still going to have a high degree of literacy and cultural exposure compared to their counterparts of a hundred or even fifty years ago. People are simply more concious of the world around themselves these days and have almost unlimited access to knowlege on a global scale. That means (oh horror of horrors) some physically exceptional people are also going to be quite smart. And as long as current trends continue, their ranks will swell.

For this reason I think the future man looks more like Dany Craig (smart and able) than Dicky Choen (past it and jealous).

JMHO.

Thats easy for you to say...you're living the dream!!!

[Diesel_tke]

I'm pretty sure I hate that guy.

[ChenPengFi]

Uhhhm no.

I want to be Denzel, but I get what you are trying to say.

That Daniel Craig makes his willy tingle?

[Mr. Machette]

So you're saying 50 Cent is not quick witted, can't handle himself in a fight, and isn't sharp enough to spread his genes?

50 cent is famous for exemplifying an unfair stereotype. (Black people as simple and brutish) I presented him as a character who is not as possitive a role model as 007. (Despite them both being fit, successful and desireable to many women.)

He's not a character you might say? Well, I'm aware that his stage persona is based upon his real persona, but it is still a dramatized projection of his ego. A detailed caricature of his id, but not the real person. For example; I bet he comes across with far more intelligence in a personal conversation than he does when mubling the lyrics to "In Da Club" while pretending to dry hump an invisible woman.

Though they do both share a perpensity for intoxication and womanizing. ;)

Though to be fair to Mr. "Fitty", here he is looking dapper in a tux:

"Shaken, not sturrrred."

[Mr. Machette]

That Daniel Craig makes his willy tingle?

I don't want to see what's in his spedo. I just want to have the effect on women that he has when in said spedo.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

IMHO. We are tipping right over the edge into a new Renaisance. The renaisance man of old was a jack of all trades. An artist, an engineer, a mathematician, a writer and a warrior. He had to be mentally competant (to create the great works) but also physically tough (to handle the "burn-a-fool tendencies" of the less enlightened around him). The exploits of the Medici family are a fine example of such people and the complicated times they lived in. As participants in a new renaisance we should expect to see more multi-disciplinarians with a decent six pack. It take brains to build a future, and it takes brawn to fight back the barbarians. Simple as that. A well rounded man has both.

To get to the point, while 007 is a fantasy character, he represents the miriad of disciplines required to be a "number one man" in todays world. He's quick whitted, exceedingly resourceful and can handle himself in a fight. He also looks sharp enough to spread his genes. These are all positive qualites to emulate. I for one think it's good that young men have this role model in counterpoint to say, 50 Cent?

I kind of agree with you. Certanily, the belief which states that this particular time period is somewhat analogue of the 15th century humanist renaissance is quite widespread, and that belief itself is evidence of a significant similarity between an important part of 15th century humanist's ideology and certain aspects of the "spirit" of our times: 1) the belief that certain ways of the old which pertain to the true essence of man are being reenacted and improved upon by the contemporary, 2) the belief that the latter was actually the case for 15th century humanism, 3) the projection of the modern's ideals onto a distant past's ideals, and the blurring of the intelectual history from which said modern ideals emerged (in other words, the omission of the in-betweens), resulting in the appearence of a "return of the ancient ways".

Oh, and yeah: Even though I believe that Bogart > All, the old fart's a douche. Working out takes such little time when compared to reading a book that his conclussion should be rephrased as: for each ripped muscle there is a passage not re-read for the third time in a wholelottapages tome.




PD: Been lurking the forum for years, i'll be around noob town to check in.
Saludos.

[Mr. Machette]

I kind of agree with you. Certanily, the belief which states that this particular time period is somewhat analogue of the 15th century humanist renaissance is quite widespread, and that belief itself is evidence of a significant similarity between an important part of 15th century humanist's ideology and certain aspects of the "spirit" of our times: 1) the belief that certain ways of the old which pertain to the true essence of man are being reenacted and improved upon by the contemporary, 2) the belief that the latter was actually the case for 15th century humanism, 3) the projection of the modern's ideals onto a distant past's ideals, and the blurring of the intelectual history from which said modern ideals emerged (in other words, the omission of the in-betweens), resulting in the appearence of a "return of the ancient ways".

Agreed. A big parralel I draw between the old renaisance and our current times is the Gutenberg printing press and the internet.

I don't think of it so much as a return to the old ways as much as I see it being the widespread dissemination of knowlege to far flung corners it had never before reached. Creating an unprecedented exchange of ideas and evolution of thought akin to what happened when the written word became accessible to all.

In Guttenbergs time it was the spread of litteracy and the sea change of thought that followed.

In our own time we are already litterate (mostly) but the great societies of the world remained somewhat isolated form each other by geography, language, culture, politics and the simple fact that it would take years of study for people from either side to truly exchange ideas and understand each other. Even then they would only be able to serve as interpretors trying to explain an alien culture to their uninitiates fellows back home.

Now those barriers no longer exist. A human being I might have never had any interaction with, thousands of miles across oceans from my home, of an ethnicity I may have never even heard of, can log onto youtube and instantly call me a ******.

Exciting times!

[Lampa]

Eh, this wasn't the anemic treatise against physical culture I was expecting from the excerpt. All he really says, with some annoying hyperbole meant to be a little inflammatory, is that he was upset that the Bond of Skyfall triumphed physically all the time rather than having to outsmart a much more powerful Oddjob or something like that.

I haven't seen the movie so I don't know if that's true. (I want to see it, life's just gotten in the way.) I will say as someone who does put in his time in the gym and very occasionally the ring, I do find the intellectual triumphs generally more satisfying. I mean, who was the cooler victor in Diggstown, Lou Gosset Jr. or James Woods?

I know the best answer to that is that they both represent one complete person but I just don't find the notion of saying Woods that offensive.

[Permalost]

On a Jamesbondian note: isn't asking for a martini "shaken, not stirred" kinda less classy than assuming that a fancy bartender would make a martini in a shaker? To me, it kinda sounds like a guy in a tuxedo requesting "Wine: bottle, not box."

EDIT: wow, been researching; didn't realize there were reasons on both sides.