But this is a brilliant discussion topic - hope you guys enjoy. REPLY
glennagirl May 28 2017, 16:07:43 I think if you follow the link you'll be fine to join in. REPLY
alynwa May 28 2017, 09:12:03 I just posted in DW. Will it automatically crosspost here? REPLY
glennagirl May 28 2017, 16:08:02 No, crossposting only applies to personal journals. REPLY
vmccooley May 28 2017, 09:59:57 Edited: May 28 2017, 16:06:24 Though I tend to see them through slash goggles, as I said in the previous post it's not necessarily in a sexual way. In the nature of spy shows - and "buddy" shows in general - women come and go, but the partnership remains the bedrock.
I know a lot of fans don't consider the return movie as "canon" - I'm 50/50 about it myself - but one thing about it felt true to me: neither man had married or maintained a lasting relationship. Despite the ridiculous reunion movie trope about "breaking partners up so we can have a dramatic reunion," they fell back into rhythm with ease.
"I will if you will" is a great line to me. They don't even need to say the words; they know each other so well. In the end, they decide to remain together. Whether friends or lovers, it is still their bedrock.
I'm not on Dreamwidth and they wouldn't let me post this anonymously, so I posted it here. REPLY
glennagirl May 28 2017, 16:13:19
I hope you'll consider DW, just for the sake of the 'what if' nature of LJ. I felt like this conversation might get too much attention since it is inclusive of the slash genre. As it is I was informed we have one of the top 25 entries today. I think the buddy/partner scenario is the bedrock of so much great literature. Alexander Dumas made it classic with The Three Muskateers, perhaps the greatest buddy adventure of all time. I personally accept the Return Movie, if for no other reason that the actors involved did it. I think Illya as the designer was the right way to go, and certainly he played that part on more than one occasion in the original series. Illya was the creative, the musician, the man most likely to go against the grain when he decided UNCLE wasn't going to rule his life. But that's for the stories, and I agree with you that in the second half of their lives they are much the same as in the first half. Single, still game for the adventure as long as it includes the other guy. REPLY
vmccooley May 28 2017, 16:40:20 Thanks, I'll look into it.
I've watched a number of reunion movies - I Spy Returns, Wild Wild West Revisited - and like MFU, there are pros and cons. Despite the flaws, I'm glad we have it.
I think the main thing is that they love each other, however one sees the nature of it. REPLY
fiorenza_a May 28 2017, 18:50:27 Edited: May 28 2017, 18:52:58
Slash isn't verboten - but there is an indication in the T&C's that it should be 'adult'. The approach seems to come from the same mindset that passed the reviled and heinous 'clause 28' into UK law. I.E. that 'gayness' corrupts the youth - like it was catching (and by implication, presumably a disease).
Since I can't do much about this mindset, I have decided to mark anything that might elicit any suggestion of romance, whether gay or otherwise, as adult. The Russians upped the rating on the live action Beauty and the Beast because of its gay content - but they did release the film.
So my thinking is, if Illya and Napoleon holding hands is adult, then so is Illya and Gaby (or, for that matter, Belle and the Beast) holding hands.
I couldn't do much about 'clause 28', but I boycott Russian vodka. REPLY
fiorenza_a May 28 2017, 19:20:53
I tried to reply to this earlier, but Lj ate my post!
Anyhow, the gist of what I tried to say was that I consider all non-canon slash as AU. I don't have much of a problem with either the 'Reunion' or 2015 movie, but I thought the 80's version of U.N.C.L.E. H.Q looked 'naff' - there really is no translation which really captures it's meaning, but in this context, 'cheap/low-rent' goes some way towards it - but Napoleon as art thief really irked me.
I know they usually use 'art' or 'jewel thief' to make someone sound dangerous without being sleazy, as drugs might do, but in this instance, art is sleazy. Worse than sleazy - after the war, a lot of private collections held Nazi looted art. It wasn't a clean market, it was tainted by the worst atrocities humankind has perpetrated.
So, even if you accept Napoleon as dishonest (and I don't), how can you accept him as decent? In my head canon, the only solution is to believe that he was actually working for an anonymous organisation to liberate and return the looted art - and that, at some point, he will be vindicated.
As for the actual question :0) I see the guys as friends in the show, brothers in arms who care deeply for each other - best mates who can tease and best each other without acrimony because they trust each other implicitly and love each other unconditionally. We don't know why Napoleon left U.N.C.L.E. - perhaps simply that he hit forty and couldn't bear to watch Illya still in the field without him. (I know Spikes came up with an imaginative take on the reasons for her Foothills series.) But it's clear at the beginning of the movie that he thinks he's left Illya cocooned in the protection of U.N.CL.E.
But I'm happy to read them as slash (to be fair, I've written them as slash, so it would be a bit rich to object!).
REPLY
glennagirl May 29 2017, 07:28:52 I didn't like the back story on Napoleon for the big movie. It seemed unnecessary to cast him with that kind of 'edginess', which is a sad testament to how heroes are built these days. I guess being a Korean war vet wasn't good enough for the director. As for Illya having anger management issues, that was a bad call IMO. I like the movie okay, all things considered, but those elements were way off for me. REPLY
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2017-05-29 12:34 pm (UTC)fiorenza_a
May 28 2017, 08:35:45
I haven't sorted out DW yet.
But this is a brilliant discussion topic - hope you guys enjoy.
REPLY
glennagirl
May 28 2017, 16:07:43
I think if you follow the link you'll be fine to join in.
REPLY
alynwa
May 28 2017, 09:12:03
I just posted in DW. Will it automatically crosspost here?
REPLY
glennagirl
May 28 2017, 16:08:02
No, crossposting only applies to personal journals.
REPLY
vmccooley
May 28 2017, 09:59:57 Edited: May 28 2017, 16:06:24
Though I tend to see them through slash goggles, as I said in the previous post it's not necessarily in a sexual way. In the nature of spy shows - and "buddy" shows in general - women come and go, but the partnership remains the bedrock.
I know a lot of fans don't consider the return movie as "canon" - I'm 50/50 about it myself - but one thing about it felt true to me: neither man had married or maintained a lasting relationship. Despite the ridiculous reunion movie trope about "breaking partners up so we can have a dramatic reunion," they fell back into rhythm with ease.
"I will if you will" is a great line to me. They don't even need to say the words; they know each other so well. In the end, they decide to remain together. Whether friends or lovers, it is still their bedrock.
I'm not on Dreamwidth and they wouldn't let me post this anonymously, so I posted it here.
REPLY
glennagirl
May 28 2017, 16:13:19
I hope you'll consider DW, just for the sake of the 'what if' nature of LJ. I felt like this conversation might get too much attention since it is inclusive of the slash genre. As it is I was informed we have one of the top 25 entries today.
I think the buddy/partner scenario is the bedrock of so much great literature. Alexander Dumas made it classic with The Three Muskateers, perhaps the greatest buddy adventure of all time.
I personally accept the Return Movie, if for no other reason that the actors involved did it. I think Illya as the designer was the right way to go, and certainly he played that part on more than one occasion in the original series. Illya was the creative, the musician, the man most likely to go against the grain when he decided UNCLE wasn't going to rule his life. But that's for the stories, and I agree with you that in the second half of their lives they are much the same as in the first half. Single, still game for the adventure as long as it includes the other guy.
REPLY
vmccooley
May 28 2017, 16:40:20
Thanks, I'll look into it.
I've watched a number of reunion movies - I Spy Returns, Wild Wild West Revisited - and like MFU, there are pros and cons. Despite the flaws, I'm glad we have it.
I think the main thing is that they love each other, however one sees the nature of it.
REPLY
fiorenza_a
May 28 2017, 18:50:27 Edited: May 28 2017, 18:52:58
Slash isn't verboten - but there is an indication in the T&C's that it should be 'adult'. The approach seems to come from the same mindset that passed the reviled and heinous 'clause 28' into UK law. I.E. that 'gayness' corrupts the youth - like it was catching (and by implication, presumably a disease).
Since I can't do much about this mindset, I have decided to mark anything that might elicit any suggestion of romance, whether gay or otherwise, as adult. The Russians upped the rating on the live action Beauty and the Beast because of its gay content - but they did release the film.
So my thinking is, if Illya and Napoleon holding hands is adult, then so is Illya and Gaby (or, for that matter, Belle and the Beast) holding hands.
I couldn't do much about 'clause 28', but I boycott Russian vodka.
REPLY
fiorenza_a
May 28 2017, 19:20:53
I tried to reply to this earlier, but Lj ate my post!
Anyhow, the gist of what I tried to say was that I consider all non-canon slash as AU. I don't have much of a problem with either the 'Reunion' or 2015 movie, but I thought the 80's version of U.N.C.L.E. H.Q looked 'naff' - there really is no translation which really captures it's meaning, but in this context, 'cheap/low-rent' goes some way towards it - but Napoleon as art thief really irked me.
I know they usually use 'art' or 'jewel thief' to make someone sound dangerous without being sleazy, as drugs might do, but in this instance, art is sleazy. Worse than sleazy - after the war, a lot of private collections held Nazi looted art. It wasn't a clean market, it was tainted by the worst atrocities humankind has perpetrated.
So, even if you accept Napoleon as dishonest (and I don't), how can you accept him as decent? In my head canon, the only solution is to believe that he was actually working for an anonymous organisation to liberate and return the looted art - and that, at some point, he will be vindicated.
As for the actual question :0) I see the guys as friends in the show, brothers in arms who care deeply for each other - best mates who can tease and best each other without acrimony because they trust each other implicitly and love each other unconditionally. We don't know why Napoleon left U.N.C.L.E. - perhaps simply that he hit forty and couldn't bear to watch Illya still in the field without him. (I know Spikes came up with an imaginative take on the reasons for her Foothills series.) But it's clear at the beginning of the movie that he thinks he's left Illya cocooned in the protection of U.N.CL.E.
But I'm happy to read them as slash (to be fair, I've written them as slash, so it would be a bit rich to object!).
REPLY
glennagirl
May 29 2017, 07:28:52
I didn't like the back story on Napoleon for the big movie. It seemed unnecessary to cast him with that kind of 'edginess', which is a sad testament to how heroes are built these days. I guess being a Korean war vet wasn't good enough for the director.
As for Illya having anger management issues, that was a bad call IMO. I like the movie okay, all things considered, but those elements were way off for me.
REPLY