Search results

With three credited scriptwriters and five credited directors, the 1967 release of Casino Royale saw a gang of multifaceted James Bond 007s facing off against an army of beautiful, hypersexualised, personality-less female spies, headed by the real James Bond’s neurotic, insecure, American nephew Jimmy. Perhaps this wasn’t Fleming’s intended storyline for Bond’s first outing at Casino Royale, but the resulting parodic outing absorbed and commented upon some of the inherent gendered archetypes of Fleming’s work. What the 1967 Casino Royale accomplishes is a narrative which contrasts varieties of masculinity which are segmented forms of the masculinity defined by Fleming’s Bond. This chapter compares the masculinity of Bond developed in Fleming’s novel, before examining the representations of masculinity inherent within the four key male characters: Sir James Bond (David Niven), Evelyn Tremble (Peter Sellers), Cooper (Terence Cooper) and Dr Noah/Jimmy Bond (Woody Allen). By showing the depictions of masculine elements each of these characters embodies, along with the metanarrative elements of each performer’s persona, this chapter aims to identify how the 1967 Casino Royale both faithfully depicts the masculine elements of Bond while at the same time satirizing Bond’s particular brand of masculinity. This examination ultimately argues that this segmentation of Bondian masculinity is the core point of cohesion in a deeply incoherent, parodic film adaptation of Fleming’s novel.

David Altheide has provided a sociological story that may not resemble the fabled bed time stories of your youth, or even the moral parables that guide our commonsensical understanding of the everyday world. However, the story has some resemblance to Hans Christian Anderson's “The Emperor's Clothes,” especially with regard to his observation that we Americans have accepted and complied with policies, directives, and rationalizations that seemed problematic in the first place and downright odious in retrospect (see Cetola, Willer, & Macy, 2005, pp. 1010–1011). Just as Denzin (2007, pp. 449–451) noted with regard to the “one percent doctrine” (if something can happen once it will therefore happen again), Altheide points out the simple fact that our fears, lacking logical premise, have instead become dressed up in vivid colors on television screens. We as citizens seem mesmerized by an apparently inevitable concept that if we fear it, it will indeed come. A few years ago Glassner (2000) discussed how fear mongers create a false logic of inevitability. Currently, Altheide extends this argument to show how such logic has become clothed in the regalia of patriotism, news void of context, and incessant anger.

When Rambo Last Blood hit the screens in 2019 to an almost unanimous thumbs down from the critics, it seemed as if Sylvester Stallone's ‘last outing’ as his iconic action hero, John Rambo was to bow out with more of a violent whimper than a spectacular bang. But action heroes never really do know when to quit. There is always one last mission to undertake. In an online interview in September 2019, Stallone indicated that Rambo 6 could well be on the cards. This chapter will discuss not only ideas about ‘Rambo’ as a character and his character arc, but posit the idea that Stallone, through the process of gerontology, has moved through the decades to become not a simplification or distillation of a cinematic action hero, but rather a much more complex one that asks questions about the politics of the era, masculinity, fragility and ageing.

In the present chapter, we present the case study of the only woman film director who has ever won an Academy Award for Best Director, Kathryn Bigelow. We analyzed 43 written interviews of Kathryn Bigelow that have appeared in the popular press in the period 1988–2013 and outlined eight main themes emerging regarding her exercise of leadership in the cinematic context. We utilize three theoretical frameworks: (a) paradoxical leadership theory (Lewis, Andriopoulos, & Smith, 2014; Smith & Lewis, 2012); (b) ambidextrous leadership theory (Rosing, Frese, & Bausch, 2011), and (c) role congruity theory (Eagley & Karau, 2002) and show how Bigelow, as a woman artist/leader working in a complex organizational system that emphasizes radical innovation, exercised paradoxical and ambidextrous leadership and challenged existing conventions about genre, gender, and leadership. The case study implications for teaching and practice are discussed.