It is the geopolitical threat of our time.
Why nothing about SPECTRE?
-
Because most people aren't capable of 'handling' politics at that level. All of the recent spy movies have been about the same thing:
Captain America Winter Soldier = HYDRA
Mission Impossible 5 = The Syndicate
The Man From UNCLE = Stray post-war Nazis
007 = SPECTREPeople can only be introduced to the machinations of globalist politics through exaggerated fiction, otherwise reality becomes overbearing and causes depression and anxiety for the lowly masses. Now, back to my books on British Federalism and secret societies striving toward world government. It's totally just a conspiracy theory, though! There is no reality. All politics is exactly as it is presented by billion dollar multinational corporations! No hidden agendas exist anywhere!
-
It's totally just a conspiracy theory, though! There is no reality. All politics is exactly as it is presented by billion dollar multinational corporations! No hidden agendas exist anywhere!
Which is exactly what someone in a secret conspiratorial society bent on global destruction would say.
-
Actually, Ian Fleming used SPECTRE as a villain instead of the Soviets because he assumed the Cold War wouldn't last very long and wanted a long-standing plausible villain.
Because most people aren't capable of 'handling' politics at that level. All of the recent spy movies have been about the same thing:
Captain America Winter Soldier = HYDRA
Mission Impossible 5 = The Syndicate
The Man From UNCLE = Stray post-war Nazis
007 = SPECTRE
People can only be introduced to the machinations of globalist politics through exaggerated fiction, otherwise reality becomes overbearing and causes depression and anxiety for the lowly masses. Now, back to my books on British Federalism and secret societies striving toward world government. It's totally just a conspiracy theory, though! There is no reality. All politics is exactly as it is presented by billion dollar multinational corporations! No hidden agendas exist anywhere! -
Actually, Ian Fleming used SPECTRE as a villain instead of the Soviets because he assumed the Cold War wouldn't last very long and wanted a long-standing plausible villain.
Because most people aren't capable of 'handling' politics at that level. All of the recent spy movies have been about the same thing:
Captain America Winter Soldier = HYDRA
Mission Impossible 5 = The Syndicate
The Man From UNCLE = Stray post-war Nazis
007 = SPECTRE
People can only be introduced to the machinations of globalist politics through exaggerated fiction, otherwise reality becomes overbearing and causes depression and anxiety for the lowly masses. Now, back to my books on British Federalism and secret societies striving toward world government. It's totally just a conspiracy theory, though! There is no reality. All politics is exactly as it is presented by billion dollar multinational corporations! No hidden agendas exist anywhere!Pray tell, what did Ian Fleming have to do with the production of this recent film?
-
^ Oralie. You're a fool. SPECTRE (or Quantum or whatever) has been the villains behind the curtain in each of the Daniel Craig Bond films. That probably speaks to the desire of producers to make modern-day remakes of early Bond movies, not because "most people aren't capable of handling politics at that level." HYDRA is, again, the villain from the comics. Same goes for Man from UNCLE. MI5 seems to be ripping off the idea from Bond. None of your examples support your, frankly stupid point.
-
^ Oralie. You're a fool. SPECTRE (or Quantum or whatever) has been the villains behind the curtain in each of the Daniel Craig Bond films. That probably speaks to the desire of producers to make modern-day remakes of early Bond movies, not because "most people aren't capable of handling politics at that level." HYDRA is, again, the villain from the comics. Same goes for Man from UNCLE. MI5 seems to be ripping off the idea from Bond. None of your examples support your, frankly stupid point.
Have you seen Moonraker? Have you read the book? You notice anything about those two things??
Quantum of Solace was based on Bechtel's purchase of the water supply in Bolivia, you f**king ignorant tool. You call me a fool, but have no idea what the f**k you are talking about. You're "analyzing" the "mythology" that can be (and is) invented off-screen for comicon fanboys to wet their pants over. You don't get my point because you're f**king ignorant, not read in media, and have reacted emotionally to my comments.
"MI5 seems to be ripping off the idea from Bond."
This is another instance of you speaking out of your ass. The Syndicate was always the antagonist of the old TV show. Whether it was ripped off of the Bond novels, I don't know. To a certain extent I'd guess all modern spy movies are rip offs of Bond. Lawrence of Arabia is the more realistic spy movie (Parrallax View and Marathon Man being another genre of spy thrillers which atre more realistic than the Bondesque), but there is no way an audience today would get the screen presentation of large geopolitical string pullers over a fifty year period of time without spy gadgets and some hammed up bad guy explaining his clearly malicious intentions.
-
Also, Xmas, what did Ian Fleming have to do with the new movie? You seem to imply that his intent is somehow expressible as what is in theaters now...
So you basically acknowledge that each of your examples of depoliticization or whatever, were actually remakes/comic book films using the source material and had nothing to do with depoliticization.
The new movie's villains are inspired by the old movies' villain, which was a cultural icon in the 60s (white cat, creepy voice, etc.). Ian Fleming was the original writer of the books on which those movies were based. Ian Fleming used SPECTRE instead of the Soviets as villains for the SPECIFIC reason of thinking the Cold War would end soon. You don't seem to be able to follow this logic, so I suggest drawing a flowchart. Maybe use the box of crayons next to your computer...
-
Also, Xmas, what did Ian Fleming have to do with the new movie? You seem to imply that his intent is somehow expressible as what is in theaters now...
So you basically acknowledge that each of your examples of depoliticization or whatever, were actually remakes/comic book films using the source material and had nothing to do with depoliticization.
The new movie's villains are inspired by the old movies' villain, which was a cultural icon in the 60s (white cat, creepy voice, etc.). Ian Fleming was the original writer of the books on which those movies were based. Ian Fleming used SPECTRE instead of the Soviets as villains for the SPECIFIC reason of thinking the Cold War would end soon. You don't seem to be able to follow this logic, so I suggest drawing a flowchart. Maybe use the box of crayons next to your computer...Hahah! You still think Fleming's vision has something to do with new films! What a joke. Fleming does not matter! These new movies are totally detached from his fiction.
http://www.coha.org/latin-america-water-politics-coups-and-james-bond/
What does that ^ have to do with
??
NOTHING! You're trying to say that irrelevant things are relevant! You're an idiot!!
SPECTRE = USSR stand in = irrelevant! It is a notiong from 50 years ago. The large multinational corporations that produce Bond movies aren't making his stories to the T. They are using his character's name. Bond doesn't even smoke anymore! Pretty soo he won't even be a womanizer!
HYDRA, in the Winter Soldier, was an reference to Project Paperclip. In the movie Nazis are secretly running the the US intelligence community. How can you think that is in anyway a reference to comics from the 1950s? HYDRA of the comics was an overt villain not a rogue faction of the good guys.
HYDRA = Nazis
Shield = CIA
-
Huh? I never said that anything was based on the books. I said that the books used SPECTRE out of convenience, it became popular in the 1960s and the current movie's creators (Brocolli et al.) wanted the overarching villain to return for the reboot. Frankly, how you get an overarching vision in Quantum of Solace is beyond me, half the movie was written by Marc Foster and Daniel Craig due to the writer's strike. Much like the article you cite, your line of reasoning is bereft of a point.
As for the HYDRA point, now you're just making stuff up. HYDRA may not have infiltrated shield in the comics, but Nazis never infiltrated the highest ranks CIA in real life. But, I bet you'll make some non sequitor point about Operation Gladio now.
But, you know, it's easier to argue against a straw man than a real argument, so I understand why you'd take such the former approach.
Also, Xmas, what did Ian Fleming have to do with the new movie? You seem to imply that his intent is somehow expressible as what is in theaters now...
So you basically acknowledge that each of your examples of depoliticization or whatever, were actually remakes/comic book films using the source material and had nothing to do with depoliticization.
The new movie's villains are inspired by the old movies' villain, which was a cultural icon in the 60s (white cat, creepy voice, etc.). Ian Fleming was the original writer of the books on which those movies were based. Ian Fleming used SPECTRE instead of the Soviets as villains for the SPECIFIC reason of thinking the Cold War would end soon. You don't seem to be able to follow this logic, so I suggest drawing a flowchart. Maybe use the box of crayons next to your computer...Hahah! You still think Fleming's vision has something to do with new films! What a joke. Fleming does not matter! These new movies are totally detached from his fiction.
http://www.coha.org/latin-america-water-politics-coups-and-james-bond/
What does that ^ have to do with
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Your_Eyes_Only_%28short_story_collection%29#.22Quantum_of_Solace.22
??
NOTHING! You're trying to say that irrelevant things are relevant! You're an idiot!!
SPECTRE = USSR stand in = irrelevant! It is a notiong from 50 years ago. The large multinational corporations that produce Bond movies aren't making his stories to the T. They are using his character's name. Bond doesn't even smoke anymore! Pretty soo he won't even be a womanizer!
HYDRA, in the Winter Soldier, was an reference to Project Paperclip. In the movie Nazis are secretly running the the US intelligence community. How can you think that is in anyway a reference to comics from the 1950s? HYDRA of the comics was an overt villain not a rogue faction of the good guys.
HYDRA = Nazis
Shield = CIA -
"how you get an overarching vision in Quantum of Solace is beyond me"
Please describe 'the overarching vision' you attribute to me. That art imitates life?
Also, do you know what Goldfinger was about? Or Diamonds are Forever? Or Moonraker? What do Fort Knox, South Africa, and space weapons have in common?
"Nazis never infiltrated the highest ranks CIA in real life."
So now, either, your analysis turns literal or you expect the movie to be telling you literally true things. How dumb and/or inconsistent are you? You're right the Nazis never infiltrated that high in the CIA. They didn't need to because the CIA invited them in and, later, came around to most of the Nazi perspectives anyway. You're actively not understanding this. You need to read a lot about media, intelligence history, and propaganda instead of scanning news articles and pondering how you can shift your perspective to something potentially more defensible.
How the 'political commentary' of the Winter Soldier eludes you is beyond me. Nazis in the CIA, MKULTRA, drone warfare, guilty before crime - the movie is about the US intelligence community from every angle. "All the time while Captain America was asleep HYDRA festered within Shield"; while true American principles were absent the CIA turned into Nazis - that's the message. For God's sake Robert Redford was the bad guy. How many CIA related movies does that guy have to make for you to get what he's saying?
The Dark Knight is more complicated and even it is straightforward. Batman is the CIA/NSA...Bruce Wayne is the assumed to be moral segment of the capitalist elite...do they get to break the law to save the law and preserve their interests when the well meaning, but nevertheless corrupt and inept politicians have ruined the political system? The bad guys are those not motivated by money and organized crime but the good guys are rich and do not follow the law. The recent Lone Ranger was about similar things, but with Locke and Rousseau.
Or if you want another easy one, all three Iron Man movies are about corrupt competitors in the arms industry attempting to gain control over the entire arms market. The third one is about an arms dealer attempting to manufacture terror to extort political systems. Sounds like the military industrial complex to me!
Look at the string of movies that have come out or will come out that expose the general public to intelligence rela...See full post
Movies are how the public is simultaneously pacified and acclimated to realities that are unacknowledged by the real authorities - those notions, about the intelligence community, are controlled by the input of the intelligence community! They set the public's perceptual parameters, where fact ends and fiction begins. James Bond and Jack Ryan, they are the good guys, you know they are the good guys because of the flag they wear. They are, often, sole sources of good in otherwise secretive or corrupt organizations. However, there are no good guys in reality. There is no sole moral crusader taking on the system from within and winning - Jack Ryan never tells the President to go f**k himself. That perspective is a pacification tool; it is the mere fictionalization of reality that makes reality digestible. Think how sad Clear and Present Danger would have been if Jack Ryan was bribed at the very start and there is no conflict in the movie - those soldiers all die and they never figure out what happened. Or if James Bond lost all that money in Casino Royale, appeared as a terrorist in the news half an hour later, and was dead by the end of the movie, a disgraced traitor to the Crown. Both of these would be far more realistic depictions of the events in the respective movies, but provide no acclimation or pacification. The point is to relieve the depression people feel when they are confronted with the grim realities of imperial/globalist politics.