{paginate}
1 of 1
{/paginate}
James Bond villains blamed for nuclear’s bad image
Posted: 21 January 2012 09:49 AM   [ Ignore ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5147
Joined  2005-01-27

Since this is kinda nutty I posted it under conspiracies.

The evil villains in James Bond movies are being blamed for casting a long-lasting shadow over the image of nuclear power, says the president of the Royal Society of Chemistry.

Prof David Phillips says that Dr No, with his personal nuclear reactor, helped to create a “remorselessly grim” reputation for atomic energy.

Prof Phillips was speaking ahead of the 50th anniversary of the movie.

The chemistry organisation says it wants a “renaissance” in nuclear power.

Prof Phillips says the popularity of the Dr No movie from 1962 created an enduringly negative image of nuclear power - as something dangerous that could be wielded by megalomaniacs with aspirations to world domination.
Unfair image

The villain of the movie, planning mass destruction from his secret Caribbean hideout, eventually dies in the cooling pool of his nuclear reactor, having been foiled by James Bond, played by Sean Connery.

Against a background of the cold war and a nuclear arms race, the movie showed a world of intelligence agencies, glamorous spies, secretive assassins and underground laboratories.

But the Royal Society of Chemistry, which promotes the work of chemical sciences, says that it also meant that millions of people who saw the film saw nuclear technology being presented as a “barely-controllable force for evil”.

Later Bond villains, as part of their cat-stroking, laser-pointing, world-destroying repertoire, also had nuclear ambitions.

When there are worries about nuclear safety - such as following the tsunami in Japan - the Royal Society of Chemistry fears that the public reaction is still shaped by such emotive, negative associations.

As such, Prof Phillips says that when nuclear power is discussed “it is not at all surprising that the public at home and abroad are sceptical”.

“But the RSC asserts that nuclear power has to be part of the future national energy mix, in which it plays a major role, complemented by renewable sources. Fossil fuels have to be eradicated for people to live in a healthy environment.”

“Let’s say yes to nuclear and no to Dr No’s nonsense.”

‘Unsafe’

This message was not accepted by the Green Party - which argued that Bond movies reflected concerns rather than created them.

“Although James Bond is fiction, the truth is that nuclear power is dangerous, dirty and unsafe,” said spokesperson, Penny Kemp.

“It is improbable to think that people’s perceptions have been influenced solely by The World is Not Enough, but this film came after the Chernobyl disaster so the film was merely picking up on a real fear people have of nuclear power. And rightly so.”

Richard George of Greenpeace said: “A handful of Bond films haven’t tarnished the nuclear industry’s reputation. They’ve managed to do that all by themselves.

“I don’t think they’ve got a top secret fake volcanic island though. But if they did, it would probably be cheaper to build than a nuclear power station.”

BBC News

 Signature 


“By the sweat on our brows, and the strengths of´╗┐ our backs…Gentlemen. Hoist the Colours! And you, madam, I warn you, I know the entire Geneva Convention by heart!”
Trust me.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 January 2012 10:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5527
Joined  2007-03-14
Unfairly Balanced - 21 January 2012 09:49 AM

Since this is kinda nutty I posted it under conspiracies.

The evil villains in James Bond movies are being blamed for casting a long-lasting shadow over the image of nuclear power, says the president of the Royal Society of Chemistry.

Prof David Phillips says that Dr No, with his personal nuclear reactor, helped to create a “remorselessly grim” reputation for atomic energy.

Prof Phillips was speaking ahead of the 50th anniversary of the movie.

The chemistry organisation says it wants a “renaissance” in nuclear power.

Prof Phillips says the popularity of the Dr No movie from 1962 created an enduringly negative image of nuclear power - as something dangerous that could be wielded by megalomaniacs with aspirations to world domination.
Unfair image

The villain of the movie, planning mass destruction from his secret Caribbean hideout, eventually dies in the cooling pool of his nuclear reactor, having been foiled by James Bond, played by Sean Connery.

Against a background of the cold war and a nuclear arms race, the movie showed a world of intelligence agencies, glamorous spies, secretive assassins and underground laboratories.

But the Royal Society of Chemistry, which promotes the work of chemical sciences, says that it also meant that millions of people who saw the film saw nuclear technology being presented as a “barely-controllable force for evil”.

Later Bond villains, as part of their cat-stroking, laser-pointing, world-destroying repertoire, also had nuclear ambitions.

When there are worries about nuclear safety - such as following the tsunami in Japan - the Royal Society of Chemistry fears that the public reaction is still shaped by such emotive, negative associations.

As such, Prof Phillips says that when nuclear power is discussed “it is not at all surprising that the public at home and abroad are sceptical”.

“But the RSC asserts that nuclear power has to be part of the future national energy mix, in which it plays a major role, complemented by renewable sources. Fossil fuels have to be eradicated for people to live in a healthy environment.”

“Let’s say yes to nuclear and no to Dr No’s nonsense.”

‘Unsafe’

This message was not accepted by the Green Party - which argued that Bond movies reflected concerns rather than created them.

“Although James Bond is fiction, the truth is that nuclear power is dangerous, dirty and unsafe,” said spokesperson, Penny Kemp.

“It is improbable to think that people’s perceptions have been influenced solely by The World is Not Enough, but this film came after the Chernobyl disaster so the film was merely picking up on a real fear people have of nuclear power. And rightly so.”

Richard George of Greenpeace said: “A handful of Bond films haven’t tarnished the nuclear industry’s reputation. They’ve managed to do that all by themselves.

“I don’t think they’ve got a top secret fake volcanic island though. But if they did, it would probably be cheaper to build than a nuclear power station.”

BBC News

While that may be true for the older generation I doubt many of the younger generation have seen that movie and so would not be influenced by it.  However they may be influenced by their parents and other people who have seen the movie.  I also think that most people who saw the movies, like me, are aware they are just movies and much of the stuff is just Hollywood embellishment.

 Signature 

Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you’re a mile away and you have their shoes.

Seen on a tshirt - “If life gives you melons you may be dyslexic”

When life hands you lemons make apple juice. Then laugh while life tries to figure out how you did it.

My blog
My Website

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 January 2012 04:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  141
Joined  2010-09-21

Actually, Dr. No was having no trouble with his nuclear reactor until a British agent deliberately sabotaged it, causing it to explode.

Hmm…Prof David Phillips…Royal Society of Chemistry.

Isn’t the Royal Society of Chemistry a British organization?  And Prof. Phillips works for them?  And they want to blame Dr. No for a nuclear incident caused by a British agent employed by Her Mjesty?

The conspiracy is that the Royal Society of Chemistry is trying to switch the blame from one of their own countrymen… the same countryman that re-routed a couple ICBMs with nuclear warheads ( from cities they were aimed at, which was OK ) to 2 submarines with crews, rather than to 2 isolated unoccupied spots on Earth ( in the film The Spy Who Loved Me).

 Signature 

“Facts are meaningless - you could use facts to prove anything that’s even remotely true!

“Weaseling out of things is what separates us from the animals. Except the weasel.” ... H Simpson

“The voices in my head may not be real, but they have some good ideas.”

Profile
 
 
   
{paginate}
1 of 1
{/paginate}