Let's hear it for Rory Kinnear as Tanner!

1246

Comments

  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    edited August 2016 Posts: 6,759
    I don't know what it is about him but I really dislike Rory Kinnear's acting. I think he's the worst part in Penny Dreadful and he is nowhere near Michael Kitchen's Tanner in the 007 films. He's in fact rather dull and devoid of personality.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 6,759
    He's not as annoying as his whiny self-pitying character in PD, but he still has less charisma than a dying tree. I don't get why he's there. Save his salary on something more useful.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited August 2016 Posts: 9,117
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    He's not as annoying as his whiny self-pitying character in PD, but he still has less charisma than a dying tree. I don't get why he's there. Save his salary on something more useful.

    Im not fussed about saving money if it gets rid of him.

    I'd happily spend half the budget on another pointless explosion if Rory was at the centre of it.

    Mind you despite how much petrol, magnesium and phosphorus they set fire to, on the big screen if you blew up Rory it would still come out grey and sound like a fly farting.

    I think he's banned from flying as whenever he gets on a plane he causes instant depressurisation as he sucks the atmosphere out of anywhere he goes.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,567
    Rory K probably reflects a typical grey suit better than anyone else. I'm sure London is full of them, and he offers up the flip side of Bond so well (IMHO natch). I always feel that Tanner would love to be as rogue and daring as Bond but he simply can't help but play everything by the book.

    He's more concerned with Ts&Cs (should be a mod on here) and Health & Safety than taking a chance and defying M.

    And before anyone tells me this is MI6's second in command and how he should be dynamic for crying out loud, let me answer that now....................................SHUT UP AND LEAVE ME ALONE! I DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER YOUR STUPID QUESTIONS.

    There, that's my input.

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited August 2016 Posts: 9,117
    NicNac wrote: »
    Rory K probably reflects a typical grey suit better than anyone else. I'm sure London is full of them, and he offers up the flip side of Bond so well (IMHO natch). I always feel that Tanner would love to be as rogue and daring as Bond but he simply can't help but play everything by the book.

    I do agree that Rory seems to give off an almost homerotic admiration of Bond and clearly wishes that he had that confidence and swagger in life.

    I picture poor old Rory sat alone in his one bedroom flat eating a pod noodle (obviously just the standard chicken and mushroom. Nothing so daring as a Bombay Bad Boy for Rory) and watching Top Gear on Dave and dreaming about being Bond but at the same time knowing he never can be. It's quite tragic really I suppose.
    NicNac wrote: »
    And before anyone tells me this is MI6's second in command and how he should be dynamic for crying out loud, let me answer that now....................................SHUT UP AND LEAVE ME ALONE! I DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER YOUR STUPID QUESTIONS.

    The classic way to win an argument so beloved of religious fundamentalists!

    Remember that at the end of SF there was a period (who knows how long - an hour, a week, a month?) between M dying and Mallory being appointed when Rory was actually in charge of the nation's security!

    Just let that sink in for a minute.

    'Rory, Rory we've got solid intelligence that there's a terrorist attack imminent in London in the next hour! What she would do boss?'

    'Don't know about you guys but I intend to cower behind this table and hope it all goes away.'

    If SPECTRE had engineered such a dastardly scheme to put the country at risk we'd be speechless with admiration at their cunning. Probably why the Rory as a traitor idea was scrapped. They realised that Rory actually trying to help SPECTRE wouldn't actually be any different from him just not doing his job very well as normal.

    I think M summed up Rory being in charge best when she said 'ask yourselves - how safe do you feel?'



  • Posts: 4,599
    Sometimes these things can be turned to an advantage. Tanner in Kinnear form is now part of the furniture and the audience have an expectation of his behavior. So breaking with that pattern would be something that could be used to create intrigue and interest (plus there is a long term form of relationship between Bond and Tanner to be leveraged).
    So, for example, (just for the sake of argument), there was a mole within the team and it was suspected that one of the team was a traitor. The focus was on Tanner but Bond refused to believe it could be him. Bond digs deeper and finds that Tanner's daughter has been kidnapped by SPECTRE and he is being forced to pass secrets across. Tanner has been torn between his loyalty to the Queen and the safety of his daughter. Only Bond knows this so he works with Tanner to find a solution?

    Just ramblings but when you have a regular character who was been portrayed as dull, reliable etc, it does provide an opportunity to "flip" these values and provide an interesting and new scenario for the audience.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,567
    Serious question. Is Kinnear's Tanner character supposed to be second in command?
    He acts like M's PA, always by her (or his) side. A second in command would surely be elsewhere doing more important jobs than passing phone messages to M.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    patb wrote: »
    Sometimes these things can be turned to an advantage. Tanner in Kinnear form is now part of the furniture and the audience have an expectation of his behavior. So breaking with that pattern would be something that could be used to create intrigue and interest (plus there is a long term form of relationship between Bond and Tanner to be leveraged).
    So, for example, (just for the sake of argument), there was a mole within the team and it was suspected that one of the team was a traitor. The focus was on Tanner but Bond refused to believe it could be him. Bond digs deeper and finds that Tanner's daughter has been kidnapped by SPECTRE and he is being forced to pass secrets across. Tanner has been torn between his loyalty to the Queen and the safety of his daughter. Only Bond knows this so he works with Tanner to find a solution?

    Just ramblings but when you have a regular character who was been portrayed as dull, reliable etc, it does provide an opportunity to "flip" these values and provide an interesting and new scenario for the audience.

    I don't disagree with what you say except the fundamental crux of your hypothesis - namely that the audience have an expectation of how Tanner behaves.

    Sorry to break it to you but the audience have no recollection of Tanner. He's just a bloke in a suit who says stuff. If you changed the actor who portrayed Tanner in every film no one would even notice. The general audience regard him the same as they regard Villiers and that weird Welsh bloke in QOS. He's only an actual character to us on here. To the general public he's just reads things off a computer to M.

    If they made Rory a traitor the audience reaction would be 'That's a bit weird making that random bloke in a suit a traitor.'

    It would have the impact of Mitchell being revealed as a traitor i.e. not much because the audience don't view him as a full character in his own right but more of an extra who got lucky with a few lines of dialogue.
  • Posts: 4,599
    Have we ever seen him with any real capability to give orders? I had never considered his role as second in command. If/when M is on hols, surely the keys are not passed to Tanner?
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,567
    I'm the same @patb, maybe somewhere in the last 3 films it has been mentioned that he is SIC but from where I stand he seems to be M's Personal Assistant, with MP his secretary (assuming the two roles are different)
  • Posts: 4,599
    In so many situations (not just with Kinnear's Tanner) , his role is to gather information, filter and brief agents (something M is too busy for) as such, he becomes the lazy method for exposition which needs to be changed. Its become a cliche but not in a good way IMHO
  • Posts: 4,023
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    He's not as annoying as his whiny self-pitying character in PD, but he still has less charisma than a dying tree. I don't get why he's there. Save his salary on something more useful.

    Im not fussed about saving money if it gets rid of him.

    I'd happily spend half the budget on another pointless explosion if Rory was at the centre of it.

    Mind you despite how much petrol, magnesium and phosphorus they set fire to, on the big screen if you blew up Rory it would still come out grey and sound like a fly farting.

    I think he's banned from flying as whenever he gets on a plane he causes instant depressurisation as he sucks the atmosphere out of anywhere he goes.

    You could easily retcon that one to the Spectre explosion.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Tanner falls asleep in front of the mirror.
  • Posts: 19,339
    I don't mind Kinnear but still think Michael Kitchen was the best Tanner,and should have been given a decent run in the role...
  • Posts: 676
    NicNac wrote: »
    Rory K probably reflects a typical grey suit better than anyone else. I'm sure London is full of them, and he offers up the flip side of Bond so well (IMHO natch). I always feel that Tanner would love to be as rogue and daring as Bond but he simply can't help but play everything by the book.
    This idea you've written here doesn't really come through in the movies - Kinnear is basically a Basil Exposition type, with less personality - but I think your idea would be the perfect use of Tanner, if he has to appear in a Bond film. It would be entertaining to contrast the pale, overworked, pencil-pushing Tanner with Bond, who risks his life on dangerous missions in exotic destinations.

    Frankly, I'm surprised the films haven't explored this idea yet. We definitely don't need Tanner sticking around if he's just going to be M's assistant. Especially with Moneypenny back from her very long absence of 2 whole films.
  • Posts: 14,799
    NicNac wrote: »
    I'm the same @patb, maybe somewhere in the last 3 films it has been mentioned that he is SIC but from where I stand he seems to be M's Personal Assistant, with MP his secretary (assuming the two roles are different)

    Even if Tanner is second in command that doesn't mean he'd be suitable for the role. In The Sandbaggers Matthew Peele was second in command to C, very good as a right hand man, but proved catastrophic as potential successor. Now Bill Tanner does not have the same personality but I always understood he's a competent but dull civil servant.
  • Rory Kinnear as Tanner is one of the worst parts of the current Bond films imo. Lifeless, dull, pathetic. I'd cheer if the opening sequence of the next Bond film begins with him taking a bullet to the head. Good riddance.
  • Before I went to see Spectre, my girlfriend and I sat down to rewatch all the previous Daniel Craig Bond films. The next day we saw Spectre in IMAX. As soon as we left the cinema I brought up Tanner, and she had no idea who I was talking about. That's how much of an impression he's made in three films.

    Tanner could be a very interesting character, as people have said, the pencil pushing flip side of Bond, his best friend in the service. But they've turned him into an exposition machine.
  • edited August 2017 Posts: 19,339
    There is a new TV series about medics in Victorian times,a comedy,called Quacks,just started on BBC2 starring Rory as the main surgeon who likes to think he is the God of surgery but always cocks it up.

    But in this series he has a very deep brash voice,such charisma about him and an authority.
    It goes to show,and I think we all know this already,just how good and versatile an actor Rory is ,AND how much he is being wasted as the wimpy,quietly spoken,gormeless 007 fanboy as Tanner in the Bond films.

    They need to utilise his talents more,this comedy series proves that..such a waste.

    I cant post a picture on here atm but if you google it you will see.


  • Posts: 19,339
    Andrew Scott is Charles Dickens in episode 2 i'm watching atm...small world re Bond actors.
  • QsAssistantQsAssistant All those moments lost in time... like tears in rain
    Posts: 1,812
    He was a fine Tanner in those movies but ever since I watched him go to town on a pig in Black Mirror I can't look at him the same anymore.
  • Posts: 19,339
    barryt007 wrote: »
    There is a new TV series about medics in Victorian times,a comedy,called Quacks,just started on BBC2 starring Rory as the main surgeon who likes to think he is the God of surgery but always cocks it up.

    But in this series he has a very deep brash voice,such charisma about him and an authority.
    It goes to show,and I think we all know this already,just how good and versatile an actor Rory is ,AND how much he is being wasted as the wimpy,quietly spoken,gormeless 007 fanboy as Tanner in the Bond films.

    They need to utilise his talents more,this comedy series proves that..such a waste.

    Rory-Kinnear-Rupert-Everett-BBC-sitcom-Quacks-838395.jpg

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR_kUIdUJSsE1fSjR6K7-xoFGe5Yy7k_ZnefgwN6_qlPp04qCJU

    Quacks.jpg

    And Andrew Scott as a young Charles Dickens :

    145597.e1dc87f8-850a-4373-9ac9-ff49cbc26fc7.jpg


  • edited August 2017 Posts: 12,837
    My favourite Tanner is Robinson. He's basically the same character and Charles Salmon is a charismatic enough actor to stand out despite just being given exposition. And he always came across as mates with Bond because of little moments they gave him (Bond goes to say hi to him the moment he's handed over in DAD, he's the only one at MI6 Bond is on first name terms with and he's genuinely concerned when Bond is in danger in TND). I don't think I even noticed Tanner existed, in any of the films, before I became a member on here. But I noticed Robinson. Wouldn't have minded him getting a bigger role if Brosnan had done a fifth.

    Anyway I think that Tanner should have been the traitor like he was in one of the SP drafts. Pisses on Fleming a bit but Tanner is such a non character even in the books that would that matter? And it made perfect sense. He did it because he fears being sidelined as MI6 changes and why wouldn't he? We've all noticed how pointless he is. He realised he's just the exposition guy and they didn't really need him (helping Blofeld as a result), very meta. And him killing himself at the end rather than face Bond is very in keeping with the guy we saw hiding under the desk in Skyfall. I would have loved it. His presence in QoS and SF would have been retroactively given a purpose, his tiny little exposition role would have contributed to an actual character arc. Instead we got the mustache twirling C, who's fine (love most of his scenes with M), but you can tell he's a villain from the off. The twist there is a non event. Tanner being a mole would have had much more of an impact imo. I guess they could still do it with Bond 25 but I'm hoping for very little time spent in London and a lot spent in Japan in this one so I'd rather they just left it.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Anyway I think that Tanner should have been the traitor like he was in one of the SP drafts. Pisses on Fleming a bit but Tanner is such a non character even in the books that would that matter? And it made perfect sense. He did it because he fears being sidelined as MI6 changes and why wouldn't he? We've all noticed how pointless he is. He realised he's just the exposition guy and they didn't really need him (helping Blofeld as a result), very meta. And him killing himself at the end rather than face Bond is very in keeping with the guy we saw hiding under the desk in Skyfall. I would have loved it. His presence in QoS and SF would have been retroactively given a purpose, his tiny little exposition role would have contributed to an actual character arc. Instead we got the mustache twirling C, who's fine (love most of his scenes with M), but you can tell he's a villain from the off. The twist there is a non event. Tanner being a mole would have had much more of an impact imo. I guess they could still do it with Bond 25 but I'm hoping for very little time spent in London and a lot spent in Japan in this one so I'd rather they just left it.

    The problem with that whole idea is that the guy is basically a black hole in terms of screen presence. When you finally reveal your big twist where M confronts Tanner as Nine Eyes counts down to going live and says 'You bastard Bill. We trusted you as our friend but you've betrayed your country', 95% of the audience will turn to each other and say 'Who's this guy? Was he that bloke who stood behind Q out of focus at the edge of the frame earlier? What's he got to do with anything?'

    Yes it was obvious from the start but at least Andrew Scott came on and did his thing and was nice and odious in the role.

    By having Tanner revealed as the big twist you risk dragging an already underwhelming finale down even further as the audience couldn't care less about this guy (no matter how much I personally would have enjoyed his suicide scene).

    You could survey every member of the general public who has been to see the last 2 Craig films and they'd all be able to name M, MP and Q but not one of them would be able to say Rory's character name, if they remembered he was in it at all. The role just spouts a bit of exposition and stands in the background (this isn't Rory's fault in fairness). As far as the public are concerned you might just as well bring Villiers back or that little Welsh hobgoblin from QOS and have them as the mole.

    Even having Robinson or Kitchen's Tanner be revealed as a traitor in the Brosnan era wouldn't really have have worked as even though they are comparatively engaging and bring some life to their roles the audience would still only remember them as 'That MI6 bloke with M at the start.'

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,372
    @thelivingroyale, if we were to ever have a black Bond, I think Colin Salmon would've made for a great choice. Loved him as Robinson.
  • @TheWizardOfIce That's all true but if they went with that idea he would have got more screen time in SP (I think the idea was the MI6 crew all distrusting eachother because they knew one was a mole) so the audience would know who he was by the time it was revealed. So for them he would have filled the C role nicely even if they think he's a new character, and for us lot who actually know who he was it would have had more of an impact.
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @thelivingroyale, if we were to ever have a black Bond, I think Colin Salmon would've made for a great choice. Loved him as Robinson.

    I ageee he'd have been good, I think he was screentested when Craig got it. Surprised he isn't in more stuff to be fair. Obviously he's not going to be leading franchises but he's a solid supporting actor (could be a decent lead too if given the chance) and I'd expect him to pop up in more than he has. I remember seeing him in The Punisher, Alien vs Predator and an episode of Doctor Who. Think that's about it.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,372
    @thelivingroyale, was that the Thomas Jane version of 'The Punisher'? I don't recall him being in that. I can only think of him from the 'Resident Evil' series, 'London Has Fallen,' and AvP. Oh, and the criminally underrated 'Exam.' Lovely little single-location thriller.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited August 2017 Posts: 9,117
    @TheWizardOfIce That's all true but if they went with that idea he would have got more screen time in SP (I think the idea was the MI6 crew all distrusting eachother because they knew one was a mole) so the audience would know who he was by the time it was revealed. So for them he would have filled the C role nicely even if they think he's a new character, and for us lot who actually know who he was it would have had more of an impact.

    Oh my dear old chap you've walked straight onto the punch. The notion that giving Rory Kinnear more screen time is a way to improve things when the script is already on life support would see you sued for medical negligence.

    And cutting back and forth between Bond galavanting around Austria and Morocco and the Scooby gang amateur players acting out a poor man's Tinker, Tailor? Absolutely awful.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Rory Kinnear as Tanner is the worst element of the Craig era for me. He lacks charisma, screen presence and any ounce of interest whatsover.
  • Posts: 299
    I like Rory Kinnear as Tanner. For me he's a great minor character from MI6 crew.
    Maybe not on the same level as M or Ms. Moneypenny but I still like him enough to wish him to return in Bond 25
Sign In or Register to comment.