Pre-Title Sequences from Shortest to Longest

2»

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2022 Posts: 14,951
    What's FYEO's link? I can't see that TB has one either.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited October 2022 Posts: 7,526
    I think the only PTS with no links to the main film whatsoever is OP.

    Yep I thought so as well. I remember a thread about this, and I think if you want to really reach and connect OP's PTS to the rest of the film, I believe Polo is played in both.
    mtm wrote: »
    What's FYEO's link? I can't see that TB has one either.

    Damn, that's true. That PTS is much clearer in my mind and I can't see anything at all that connects it to the film.
  • edited October 2022 Posts: 2,897
    FYEO basically has no link to the rest of the film from what I can tell. Even TB at least had the fact that the scar Bond sustained from the fight was referenced again at Shurblands, and of course there's the water from the Aston's jet that blends into the titles/is a very broad visual in the film in general.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2022 Posts: 14,951
    Oh yes, good point, the widow does get a mention later. I guess he has the same car too, although I don't think you'd really call that a connection.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,111
    TMWTGG’s PTS spoiled the surprises of the final duel!
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited October 2022 Posts: 5,869
    I think the only PTS with no links to the main film whatsoever is OP.
    I think Goldfinger's was unrelated.
  • Posts: 2,897
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think the only PTS with no links to the main film whatsoever is OP.
    I think Goldfinger's was unrelated.

    I think the implication is that Bond is on holiday in Miami after his mission in the PTS. From what I recall Felix says something along the lines of 'must be slipping letting them get that close to you' or something which I think is meant to be a vague reference to it.

    I haven't watched it in a while though, so I must admit I'm not 100%.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    Yeah, I remember hashing out some loose connection... but I can't remember it now.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 13,929
    Yeah, the guy at the bar tells Bond about his flight to Miami.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    edited October 2022 Posts: 4,416
    Thunderballs PTS is also linked by Blofeld mentioning the death of Jaques Bouvier in the meeting
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    I mean to say the links are very minor in those mentioned titles. In the case of FYEO, I see the only one being that Bond exacts revenge for the death of a loved one, which we see with Melina. The big difference being tone since Blofeld’s death is played comedically and Hector Gonzales was more straightforward.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,979
    There’s only been six true self contained PTS anyway (GF, TB, FYEO, OP, TND, CR) so statistically speaking it’s more of a rarity for Bond than fans typically make them out to be.

    FYEO and OP are the only two.
  • Yes, GF and TB receive brief mentions, CR is of course part of Bond's character development in the film and his promotion to 00 status is referenced, and TND's is directly connected to the villain's scheme.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    Except what happens in the PTS of GF, TB, TND, and CR have no bearing on the main plots.

    The factory Bond blows up has no relation to Goldfinger’s scheme. Bond’s killing of Jaques Bouvier doesn’t pan out in Operation: Thunderball. Destroying the Arms Bazaar doesn’t any impact on Carver’s plans. And Dryden being a traitor that sells secrets of MI6 never factors in Le Chiffre and the organization.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    What’s the discussion? Whether they’re connected or whether they have any bearing on the plot?
    This feels like it’s veering into “thinking way too hard about it” territory.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    Just saying that in the grand scheme of things, they’re still very much standalone adventures in the way that the PTS for YOLT and OHMSS aren’t.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2022 Posts: 14,951
    Thunderballs PTS is also linked by Blofeld mentioning the death of Jaques Bouvier in the meeting

    Yes of course, great point.
    I mean to say the links are very minor in those mentioned titles. In the case of FYEO, I see the only one being that Bond exacts revenge for the death of a loved one, which we see with Melina. The big difference being tone since Blofeld’s death is played comedically and Hector Gonzales was more straightforward.

    Okay yeah, fair point. It's quite a strange choice for the film really as it makes Bond look like a total hypocrite when he tells her to 'dig two graves'! :D Almost makes you wonder if linking the two was unintentional.
    Except what happens in the PTS of GF, TB, TND, and CR have no bearing on the main plots.

    The factory Bond blows up has no relation to Goldfinger’s scheme. Bond’s killing of Jaques Bouvier doesn’t pan out in Operation: Thunderball. Destroying the Arms Bazaar doesn’t any impact on Carver’s plans. And Dryden being a traitor that sells secrets of MI6 never factors in Le Chiffre and the organization.

    In CR's case especially though the film is a story about Bond himself, so that we're introduced to him, his (new for this film) rather nasty world, and that he's earning his double 0s, is very much part of the story.
    What’s the discussion? Whether they’re connected or whether they have any bearing on the plot?
    This feels like it’s veering into “thinking way too hard about it” territory.

    I think my definition would be whether you could take the PTS in question and stick it onto another film, or swap it with another 'unconnected' one, and for it to be impossible to tell (apart from differences in lead actor, music etc. of course! :) )
    I think you could swap FYEO's with, say, OP's and not spot the change; whereas if you swapped TB's and GF's then you'd have some hanging references to Bouvar and Miami not quite connecting up. And CR's wouldn't fit on any other film. TND's wouldn't either, because although it's not massively connected, you are introduced to the GPS, the MI6 situation room and the characters of Gupta and Admiral Roebuck.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,690
    mtm wrote: »

    Okay yeah, fair point. It's quite a strange choice for the film really as it makes Bond look like a total hypocrite when he tells her to 'dig two graves'! :D Almost makes you wonder if linking the two was unintentional.
    .

    Someone here pointed out that Blofeld was the one setting out for revenge, not Bond. So it actually fits.
  • edited October 2022 Posts: 2,897
    mtm wrote: »

    Okay yeah, fair point. It's quite a strange choice for the film really as it makes Bond look like a total hypocrite when he tells her to 'dig two graves'! :D Almost makes you wonder if linking the two was unintentional.
    .

    Someone here pointed out that Blofeld was the one setting out for revenge, not Bond. So it actually fits.

    That's actually true to be fair... It's still somewhat negated by the fact that Bond later on in this same film kicks someone off a cliff to avenge Luigi, possibly the most forgettable ally in the entire series...

    Not that I think much thought was put into the FYEO script, but still...
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    The film also kind of messed with the order of scenes from the original story. In the short story, Bond gives the girl the “dig two graves” speech BEFORE he ultimately helps her kill at the pool.

    It is funny that in the climax as she’s about to kill Kristatos, Bond says “be prepared to dig those two graves”, someone should have reminded him that she already killed people, one of them to save his ass on the cliff.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    That's a great scene though, where Bond says the two graves thing, and Melina talks about Electra.
  • edited October 2022 Posts: 2,897
    The film also kind of messed with the order of scenes from the original story. In the short story, Bond gives the girl the “dig two graves” speech BEFORE he ultimately helps her kill at the pool.

    It is funny that in the climax as she’s about to kill Kristatos, Bond says “be prepared to dig those two graves”, someone should have reminded him that she already killed people, one of them to save his ass on the cliff.

    To be fair, while the line is in the short story the sentiment on Bond's part is very different. He's basically being sarcastic to Judy, and while it's clear he doesn't necessarily want her to be there, it's not due to wanting to 'save her soul' but due to how it will impact him. Actually if anything the fact that it becomes more directly a revenge mission probably makes it easier for him to go through with the whole thing, knowing Fleming's Bond.

    It's amazing how much Fleming material FYEO adapts, and yet how little it actually understands the character. Even if they wanted to lean into the idea of Bond warning the Bond girl about the pitfalls of revenge, why go about it like that? Bond's still a trained killer after all. He'd more likely be sympathetic to Melina's desire for revenge in this scenario, and would even say so. Perhaps he might not want her to get involved due to the fact that it might kill her ultimately (and maybe him too), but I don't think any other incarnation of Bond would start waxing lyrical and blabber on about the pitfalls of killing someone.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,111
    007HallY wrote: »
    The film also kind of messed with the order of scenes from the original story. In the short story, Bond gives the girl the “dig two graves” speech BEFORE he ultimately helps her kill at the pool.

    It is funny that in the climax as she’s about to kill Kristatos, Bond says “be prepared to dig those two graves”, someone should have reminded him that she already killed people, one of them to save his ass on the cliff.

    To be fair, while the line is in the short story the sentiment on Bond's part is very different. He's basically being sarcastic to Judy, and while it's clear he doesn't necessarily want her to be there, it's not due to wanting to 'save her soul' but due to how it will impact him. Actually if anything the fact that it becomes more directly a revenge mission probably makes it easier for him to go through with the whole thing, knowing Fleming's Bond.

    It's amazing how much Fleming material FYEO adapts, and yet how little it actually understands the character. Even if they wanted to lean into the idea of Bond warning the Bond girl about the pitfalls of revenge, why go about it like that? Bond's still a trained killer after all. He'd more likely be sympathetic to Melina's desire for revenge in this scenario, and would even say so. Perhaps he might not want her to get involved due to the fact that it might kill her ultimately (and maybe him too), but I don't think any other incarnation of Bond would start waxing lyrical and blabber on about the pitfalls of killing someone.

    Richard Maibaum said that about the execution of FYEO as well. He said only Connery could make it seem real. I think he’s a bit too blame as well, he didn’t write much memorable things for the movie.
  • edited October 2022 Posts: 2,897
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    The film also kind of messed with the order of scenes from the original story. In the short story, Bond gives the girl the “dig two graves” speech BEFORE he ultimately helps her kill at the pool.

    It is funny that in the climax as she’s about to kill Kristatos, Bond says “be prepared to dig those two graves”, someone should have reminded him that she already killed people, one of them to save his ass on the cliff.

    To be fair, while the line is in the short story the sentiment on Bond's part is very different. He's basically being sarcastic to Judy, and while it's clear he doesn't necessarily want her to be there, it's not due to wanting to 'save her soul' but due to how it will impact him. Actually if anything the fact that it becomes more directly a revenge mission probably makes it easier for him to go through with the whole thing, knowing Fleming's Bond.

    It's amazing how much Fleming material FYEO adapts, and yet how little it actually understands the character. Even if they wanted to lean into the idea of Bond warning the Bond girl about the pitfalls of revenge, why go about it like that? Bond's still a trained killer after all. He'd more likely be sympathetic to Melina's desire for revenge in this scenario, and would even say so. Perhaps he might not want her to get involved due to the fact that it might kill her ultimately (and maybe him too), but I don't think any other incarnation of Bond would start waxing lyrical and blabber on about the pitfalls of killing someone.

    Richard Maibaum said that about the execution of FYEO as well. He said only Connery could make it seem real. I think he’s a bit too blame as well, he didn’t write much memorable things for the movie.

    While I understand that Moore was given things to do in his first two movies that were more 'Connery-esque' than what his Bond would later become, I really think he was capable of leaning into that harder edge needed for such a scene to work properly. Actually if the writing had been stronger he could have done something very interesting with it. His Bond was distinct in many ways from Connery's, but he was still a man who killed people for a living, and understood when it had to be done. I mean, look at the scene in TSWLM when Anya figures out that Bond killed her boyfriend. Moore's Bond still has that hard edge to him, that 'it was kill or be killed' mentality, and yet ultimately the script has him say outright that he did kill him, so there's still that sense of humanity there. Moore plays it so well too.

    Again, there are so many more interesting ways that the scene, and ultimately this subplot of the film, could have been written. Moore could have great in a FYEO that actually had a well thought out script.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,111
    007HallY wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    The film also kind of messed with the order of scenes from the original story. In the short story, Bond gives the girl the “dig two graves” speech BEFORE he ultimately helps her kill at the pool.

    It is funny that in the climax as she’s about to kill Kristatos, Bond says “be prepared to dig those two graves”, someone should have reminded him that she already killed people, one of them to save his ass on the cliff.

    To be fair, while the line is in the short story the sentiment on Bond's part is very different. He's basically being sarcastic to Judy, and while it's clear he doesn't necessarily want her to be there, it's not due to wanting to 'save her soul' but due to how it will impact him. Actually if anything the fact that it becomes more directly a revenge mission probably makes it easier for him to go through with the whole thing, knowing Fleming's Bond.

    It's amazing how much Fleming material FYEO adapts, and yet how little it actually understands the character. Even if they wanted to lean into the idea of Bond warning the Bond girl about the pitfalls of revenge, why go about it like that? Bond's still a trained killer after all. He'd more likely be sympathetic to Melina's desire for revenge in this scenario, and would even say so. Perhaps he might not want her to get involved due to the fact that it might kill her ultimately (and maybe him too), but I don't think any other incarnation of Bond would start waxing lyrical and blabber on about the pitfalls of killing someone.

    Richard Maibaum said that about the execution of FYEO as well. He said only Connery could make it seem real. I think he’s a bit too blame as well, he didn’t write much memorable things for the movie.

    While I understand that Moore was given things to do in his first two movies that were more 'Connery-esque' than what his Bond would later become, I really think he was capable of leaning into that harder edge needed for such a scene to work properly. Actually if the writing had been stronger he could have done something very interesting with it. His Bond was distinct in many ways from Connery's, but he was still a man who killed people for a living, and understood when it had to be done. I mean, look at the scene in TSWLM when Anya figures out that Bond killed her boyfriend. Moore's Bond still has that hard edge to him, that 'it was kill or be killed' mentality, and yet ultimately the script has him say outright that he did kill him, so there's still that sense of humanity there. Moore plays it so well too.

    Again, there are so many more interesting ways that the scene, and ultimately this subplot of the film, could have been written. Moore could have great in a FYEO that actually had a well thought out script.

    Typical Richard Maibaum: blaming others for his writing shortcomings.
  • Posts: 2,897
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    The film also kind of messed with the order of scenes from the original story. In the short story, Bond gives the girl the “dig two graves” speech BEFORE he ultimately helps her kill at the pool.

    It is funny that in the climax as she’s about to kill Kristatos, Bond says “be prepared to dig those two graves”, someone should have reminded him that she already killed people, one of them to save his ass on the cliff.

    To be fair, while the line is in the short story the sentiment on Bond's part is very different. He's basically being sarcastic to Judy, and while it's clear he doesn't necessarily want her to be there, it's not due to wanting to 'save her soul' but due to how it will impact him. Actually if anything the fact that it becomes more directly a revenge mission probably makes it easier for him to go through with the whole thing, knowing Fleming's Bond.

    It's amazing how much Fleming material FYEO adapts, and yet how little it actually understands the character. Even if they wanted to lean into the idea of Bond warning the Bond girl about the pitfalls of revenge, why go about it like that? Bond's still a trained killer after all. He'd more likely be sympathetic to Melina's desire for revenge in this scenario, and would even say so. Perhaps he might not want her to get involved due to the fact that it might kill her ultimately (and maybe him too), but I don't think any other incarnation of Bond would start waxing lyrical and blabber on about the pitfalls of killing someone.

    Richard Maibaum said that about the execution of FYEO as well. He said only Connery could make it seem real. I think he’s a bit too blame as well, he didn’t write much memorable things for the movie.

    While I understand that Moore was given things to do in his first two movies that were more 'Connery-esque' than what his Bond would later become, I really think he was capable of leaning into that harder edge needed for such a scene to work properly. Actually if the writing had been stronger he could have done something very interesting with it. His Bond was distinct in many ways from Connery's, but he was still a man who killed people for a living, and understood when it had to be done. I mean, look at the scene in TSWLM when Anya figures out that Bond killed her boyfriend. Moore's Bond still has that hard edge to him, that 'it was kill or be killed' mentality, and yet ultimately the script has him say outright that he did kill him, so there's still that sense of humanity there. Moore plays it so well too.

    Again, there are so many more interesting ways that the scene, and ultimately this subplot of the film, could have been written. Moore could have great in a FYEO that actually had a well thought out script.

    Typical Richard Maibaum: blaming others for his writing shortcomings.

    Writers tend to do that sometimes, haha. That said I respect Maibaum for his contributions to Bond. I just think FYEO is a terrible film.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    007HallY wrote: »
    The film also kind of messed with the order of scenes from the original story. In the short story, Bond gives the girl the “dig two graves” speech BEFORE he ultimately helps her kill at the pool.

    It is funny that in the climax as she’s about to kill Kristatos, Bond says “be prepared to dig those two graves”, someone should have reminded him that she already killed people, one of them to save his ass on the cliff.

    To be fair, while the line is in the short story the sentiment on Bond's part is very different. He's basically being sarcastic to Judy, and while it's clear he doesn't necessarily want her to be there, it's not due to wanting to 'save her soul' but due to how it will impact him. Actually if anything the fact that it becomes more directly a revenge mission probably makes it easier for him to go through with the whole thing, knowing Fleming's Bond.

    Yeah, QOS is actually closer to that book with Bond trying to help prepare Camille for what to expect when she makes her kill.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2022 Posts: 14,951
    mtm wrote: »

    Okay yeah, fair point. It's quite a strange choice for the film really as it makes Bond look like a total hypocrite when he tells her to 'dig two graves'! :D Almost makes you wonder if linking the two was unintentional.
    .

    Someone here pointed out that Blofeld was the one setting out for revenge, not Bond. So it actually fits.

    Good point. It's difficult because they're both getting revenge in a way, but Blofeld is indeed the one who actually sets out to get it.
    007HallY wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    Okay yeah, fair point. It's quite a strange choice for the film really as it makes Bond look like a total hypocrite when he tells her to 'dig two graves'! :D Almost makes you wonder if linking the two was unintentional.
    .

    Someone here pointed out that Blofeld was the one setting out for revenge, not Bond. So it actually fits.

    That's actually true to be fair... It's still somewhat negated by the fact that Bond later on in this same film kicks someone off a cliff to avenge Luigi, possibly the most forgettable ally in the entire series...

    Also a good point! :)
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,979
    For My Revenge Only
Sign In or Register to comment.