Arthur C Clarke sort of predicted this. In The Ghost From the Grand Banks, Clarke has characters who made their first fortunes "photoshopping" cigars and cigarettes out of old movies because audiences found them objectionable in Clarke's fantasy future (2012) where everyone accepted and was horrified by how much cancer smoking caused.
I mean the movies are already self-censored to maintain a pg-13 rating. Like, how there are scenes where bond shoots dozens of henchmen with zero blood.
Eh... sort of. Apparently they've nixed the shitty photoshop images, but they're still going with stills from the movies that specifically WON'T show Bond holding a gun. Which is just... such a weird hill to die on, given the franchise in question.
Right? I'm not a fan of guns in real life, but these are movies about a spy with the license to kill. He has a gun in his frickin' logo! What comes next, a Terminator without a gun? Star Wars without lightsabers?
So much (lazy) effort which could've been easily avoided. Pretty sure every Bond movie has a promotional photo or at least a suitable movie still where he isn't brandishing a gun or doing any other morally ambiguos acts. And what's the whole point? These aren't kids' movies and especially in the USA I'm pretty sure even kids know what a gun is and what it's used for.
That's the part that I just don't get. Like, if for whatever dumb reason they're really dead set on NOT showing Bond with a gun in their promos (which is a real weird hill to die on, considering the franchise), then hire an actual fucking artist to just do a series of cool new promo posters. They could have turned around and sold them as merch and MADE MONEY. Instead it's like they grabbed Johnny the unpaid intern and told him to crank these out over his lunch break. It's just lazy and stupid.
And the other Bonds just standing there waiting for their turn. Even Daniel after that chair incident is good to go. A handjob from Pierce shall never go wasted. I heard that he even throw in some lip action for a cheeseburger.
Just read an article about this with an interesting take. Since most social media platforms “punish” images containing firearms, this could be just an SEO play to keep the movies ranking high in searches. Not sure if that’s true or not. And I agree that it’s stupid (just feature a different still from the film?!?). But it might not be a commentary on the guns themselves but rather a stupid way to try to manipulate search algorithms.
Search engines run by companies that own part of the film industry they're "punishing"?
(X) Doubt
SEO doesn't explain this nearly as well as people think. Google is a part owner of every aspect of the film industry, but most of all of the digital film industry with being the leading server service on earth. If two major film companies claimed losses on *DIGITAL SERVICES* due to firearms censorship, Google would change that yesterday. I don't buy it.
If the guns are the reason the algorithm is suppressing them, then it's still about the guns. I'm definitely pro gun control, but the strategy most people have for gun control seems to revolve around magically un-inventing them. I cannot understand such a stance.
On the surface yes. But the point of the article was that it’s actually about SEO, not philosophy. Amazon hasn’t “gone woke”. At the end of the day it’s just about the money.
Yeah, that doesn't make it any better. They did a terrible job. One of the biggest companies in the world did a shitty job at editing some photos for one of the most well known movie franchises. They could have gotten someone on Fiverr to do a better job. It shows their lack of care and effort. I've not seen much in the way of social media punishing images specifically, but any video, trailer, teaser whatever would inevitably include a gun and then still be punished. so it's a very limited 'fix'
no one knows, its super hieroglyphic and probably wrong (like guy accidentally picked the wrong pictures or whatever) and never explained themselves...its super annoying because you would want to solve it because it "cant be that difficult" but even brute forcing all possible permutations of every halfway reasonable meaning of those two pictures doesnt give anything that makes sense, infuriating...we desperately need the NSA to track down that post and force the guy to explained themselves...
I think the internet's consensus has arrived at "silently (quarter-)pounded". But if that's the case it's still a mystery why the original poster thought anyone would ever get it
There was a parody of Casino Royale in 1967 with David Niven as Bond, who was Fleming's choice for the role. So technically, it works. But the usual counting is for EON Productions Bonds only, which makes him the fifth.
Haiddon
I just have a question. what was the intent? it's not like they're removing guns from the movies
taez555
Now it just looks like they really enjoy masturbating.
morganfreemanslarynx
Who doesn't?
Telemapus
Arthur C Clarke sort of predicted this. In The Ghost From the Grand Banks, Clarke has characters who made their first fortunes "photoshopping" cigars and cigarettes out of old movies because audiences found them objectionable in Clarke's fantasy future (2012) where everyone accepted and was horrified by how much cancer smoking caused.
DdCno1
I could swear this was actually done to movies and TV shows at some point.
Noodlesocks
I am fully expecting the next bond to be family friendly and full of AI generated imagery.
qtRaven
The Bond movies were family friendly before Daniel Craig started getting his balls tortured on screen.
MapleSyrupMafia
If, you know, you ignore them forcing themselves on women.
100kr
It's so funny
Neknerp
I mean the movies are already self-censored to maintain a pg-13 rating. Like, how there are scenes where bond shoots dozens of henchmen with zero blood.
JayDeeDubs
They've already undone it
CheesecakePi
Eh... sort of. Apparently they've nixed the shitty photoshop images, but they're still going with stills from the movies that specifically WON'T show Bond holding a gun. Which is just... such a weird hill to die on, given the franchise in question.
sakasiru
Right? I'm not a fan of guns in real life, but these are movies about a spy with the license to kill. He has a gun in his frickin' logo! What comes next, a Terminator without a gun? Star Wars without lightsabers?
EdelwoodHikes
It seems Mr. Bond's license to kill has been revoked.
torillatavataan
No more double-o; just seven.
MediocreExtremist
only the one for open carry
EdelwoodHikes
Your license to question my witty jokes has been revoked as well.
Lurker55684
These are hilarious bad. Do John Wick covers next.
Orlandonuts
There's still a gun after the 007?
noonehasthisoneyet
It’s actually a penis. Amazon loves showing those in everything. ;)
Snooj
walkingdeadshhhhh.gif
emu314159127001
it's a staple gun
jrntn
Nobody accused them of being smart
SMarkt
james bond - license to kiss (my ass!)
brbscience
emu314159127001
Pierce Brosnan's Bond says, If looks could kill, well, i guess they're going to have to, since they aren't giving me a GUN!
Nuppiz
So much (lazy) effort which could've been easily avoided. Pretty sure every Bond movie has a promotional photo or at least a suitable movie still where he isn't brandishing a gun or doing any other morally ambiguos acts. And what's the whole point? These aren't kids' movies and especially in the USA I'm pretty sure even kids know what a gun is and what it's used for.
tinyfootprints
Yup. With 5% of the world's population and more than 30% of the world's gun deaths, American kids know what a gun is.
Ankylosaur
FlintNorth44
It's his hand
DannoWaso
https://media2.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTY1YjkxZmJlbGVteTRtcmV4NG94cG9qeGtiaWtocWY0enUybnF2YzBuMmo1YmN6diZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/QUENDfi6DEMLzQ0CKt/200w.mp4
UncleIrohnman
LinguisticBitch
I bet you’re fun at parties.
dirtylerker
GratuaCuun
Joms Baned
DirigibleOtter
Broad. Jowls Broad.
GratuaCuun
https://media3.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1OXVpenhmcXg4d2VhMXUxbWtibXEycHZrMTNqb255OHgxZmxmeTBudiZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/VLe9cJCjYWXLy/200w.webp
Brisanzbremse
Brought to you by 4Kids!
TheGreatAtomsk
remember thumbs&ammo? https://thumbsandammo.blogspot.com
WeirdWalker
Yikes. I'm getting a Star Wars Special Edition vibe from this. Also finger guns from Littlekuriboh or however his name was.
100kr
That guy was totally insane. Signed, a former LJ RPer.
GratuaCuun
RealityInflicted
I see at least four guns in total.
duktayp
Remember in ET the extraterrestrial when they turned all the guns into walkie talkies?
irespectfullycourtyermam
And Spielberg changed it back because he realised it looked stupid.
Cyanide555
Southpark did an episode on that one.
elvisdumbledore
*shitty male role model
Freeasabird2015
Hang on the company that worships guns and violence (not many movies without both) has done this? Fleming is probably spinning for two reasons now.
jaakkopaakkonen
Next he's going to macgyver his way from the villains without using any weapons whatsoever
3Davideo
I mean, it's not really that big of a deal in and of itself, but it bodes poorly for other sorts of executive meddling down the line.
GratuaCuun
BADLY - they did it BADLY
Like, I could do a better job than that and I'm a drooling imbecile with a ten year old computer :P
azazyel
IDK, kind of hope that they charged a lot to do it and then did a crappy job
doccynical
They probably used AI to do it. Like Amazon would pay a human.
doccynical
It's probably AI. Just think of how easy it will be to memory hole shit when a machine does it.
nojustsayitdont
Probably used AI.
CheesecakePi
That's the part that I just don't get. Like, if for whatever dumb reason they're really dead set on NOT showing Bond with a gun in their promos (which is a real weird hill to die on, considering the franchise), then hire an actual fucking artist to just do a series of cool new promo posters. They could have turned around and sold them as merch and MADE MONEY. Instead it's like they grabbed Johnny the unpaid intern and told him to crank these out over his lunch break. It's just lazy and stupid.
GratuaCuun
I've seen better photoshopping - like - *here* :P literally xD
77hnx994wv10
How can you be 007 Licensed to Kill without a gun
noone1415
He's from the UK. We used knives like a civilised society...
CheesecakePi
STDs?
psstuphere
🎶The man with the goldeneye🎶
GratuaCuun
He has a powerful ******
He charges a million a ****
An ******** that's second to none
The man with the golden ***
cousteau
Pierce just looks like he's giving a handjob to the invisible man.
Chromentor
And the other Bonds just standing there waiting for their turn. Even Daniel after that chair incident is good to go. A handjob from Pierce shall never go wasted. I heard that he even throw in some lip action for a cheeseburger.
Chereazi
I see 3 photoshopped bond movie posters and one photoshopped generic action movie poster, weird combination!
allenvasher3000
Correct
keys79
Just read an article about this with an interesting take. Since most social media platforms “punish” images containing firearms, this could be just an SEO play to keep the movies ranking high in searches. Not sure if that’s true or not. And I agree that it’s stupid (just feature a different still from the film?!?). But it might not be a commentary on the guns themselves but rather a stupid way to try to manipulate search algorithms.
Necrothean
Search engines run by companies that own part of the film industry they're "punishing"?
(X) Doubt
SEO doesn't explain this nearly as well as people think. Google is a part owner of every aspect of the film industry, but most of all of the digital film industry with being the leading server service on earth. If two major film companies claimed losses on *DIGITAL SERVICES* due to firearms censorship, Google would change that yesterday. I don't buy it.
keys79
Not Google. Social media platforms. There’s some crossover in SEO practices on social media from an advertiser’s perspective.
PhailRaptor
If the guns are the reason the algorithm is suppressing them, then it's still about the guns. I'm definitely pro gun control, but the strategy most people have for gun control seems to revolve around magically un-inventing them. I cannot understand such a stance.
keys79
On the surface yes. But the point of the article was that it’s actually about SEO, not philosophy. Amazon hasn’t “gone woke”. At the end of the day it’s just about the money.
somerandomusernamebecauseididntlikemyoldone
Yeah, that doesn't make it any better. They did a terrible job. One of the biggest companies in the world did a shitty job at editing some photos for one of the most well known movie franchises. They could have gotten someone on Fiverr to do a better job. It shows their lack of care and effort. I've not seen much in the way of social media punishing images specifically, but any video, trailer, teaser whatever would inevitably include a gun and then still be punished. so it's a very limited 'fix'
ConfusedConda
Yep. When in doubt, follow the money.
woozle
ballsoutflyer
"Last night I bondburger'd your sister"? What the hell does 'bondburger' mean?
AnythingMuchShorter
It's when you meant to just slap some meat on some buns, but end up forming a bond.
LordSutter
I still don't know what it's supposed to mean
RecurringNightmare
no one knows, its super hieroglyphic and probably wrong (like guy accidentally picked the wrong pictures or whatever) and never explained themselves...its super annoying because you would want to solve it because it "cant be that difficult" but even brute forcing all possible permutations of every halfway reasonable meaning of those two pictures doesnt give anything that makes sense, infuriating...we desperately need the NSA to track down that post and force the guy to explained themselves...
jrntn
I think the internet's consensus has arrived at "silently (quarter-)pounded". But if that's the case it's still a mystery why the original poster thought anyone would ever get it
BenderRodriguz1010
Same. Shot burger? Gun sandwich? Pistol bun??
AlwaysUpvotesCatgirls
Roger Moore Food?
gtollie
With the sister ? That’s disgusting 😜
ABrokenThing
The 6th bond, the 9th item on the menu. 69'd.
deweydecibel
Nice.
JohnWickdidnothingwrong
Thank you. That's a pretty long walk.
AnythingMuchShorter
What kind of fat ass knows the menu numbers of fast food burgers on sight
animi
That's a value meal if I've ever heard one.
emu314159127001
the menu isn't like that anymore
ABrokenThing
And he isn't bond anymore.
layinginbedfeelinglikeaquesarito
How much McDonalds do you have to eat to get this joke?
baconandmorebacon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHLXyMpMFFo
PackedCatMeowingPowerDensity
Hey now, you can also WORK at McDonalds for this to work.
Snooj
They just read the thread last time, that was the conclusion but it still had flaws. It remains unsolved.
ThisIsYourLifeNow
yes.
mikeatike
Username appropriate
ABrokenThing
Lmao
layinginbedfeelinglikeaquesarito
“Lotsa McDonalds Always Only”?
SlyMrFox
Isn't he the fifth? Or do they count Connery twice?
ABrokenThing
Its a technicality cuz of the casino Royale thing
Tezunegari
There was a parody of Casino Royale in 1967 with David Niven as Bond, who was Fleming's choice for the role. So technically, it works. But the usual counting is for EON Productions Bonds only, which makes him the fifth.
SlyMrFox
Yeah, but that also has several James Bonds in it and there was a tv movie before 1967 Casino Royale.
ABrokenThing
You are right but I'm gonna stubbornly stick to my guns on this one and close the "case" in my mind lol