How did Eve qualify as a field agent in the first place?

2456

Comments

  • edited December 2012 Posts: 129
    MrSenor wrote:
    Firstly Bond was never a former member of either the SAS or SBS, he may have trained with them in various continuation novels, Bond was a commander in the Royal Navy Reserve. MI6 recruits directly from the general public & from all areas of society regardless of sex or ethnicity, it's more about your educational qualifications, no military experience required, all training is given plus most important you have to be a British citizen with at least 10 years residency. So Eve's character could have been a field agent.

    @Baltimore's point is good in the real world however if she had just shot the other guy, there wouldn't have been a movie.

    Uh, Craig's Bond has directly been specified as having been in the SBS during his time in the Royal Navy. It was even on the official Casino Royale movie site. Perhaps you're a stubborn Fleming purist or don't understand the nature of the 'reboot' and the potential changes that can be made to a protagonist's history.


    Yes I'm a Fleming purist, you can say what you like on a web site, reboot or no reboot, don't make it so, believe me that it's highly unlikely in the real world that a non marine naval reservist would be accepted for selection.

    It's all fiction at the end of the day so don't get uptight friend, no offence intended.

    In the real world I served with many female operators many were better than the men of "The Regiment" at the time, basically because they blended, didn't stand out like the Specials did at the time. (Back in the 80's, the SAS were nicknamed the Freddies as most were drawn from the Para's & looked like a bunch of Mercury Clones)

    Eve is a character in a play, not real, however I've met the fresh faced inexperienced MI6 uni-girl, very smart, quite fit, but to be honest all doctrine & basic training, so in some respects the character of Eve as a novice field agent was believable.
  • RC7RC7
    edited December 2012 Posts: 10,512
    Germanlady wrote:
    Tobester95 wrote:
    Is it me or do a lot of people nowadays find it difficult to suspend their belief and just watch a movie? People seem to expect characters in a film to react exactly how they would react, but that's not life. In real life, people make weird decisions and are imperfect. Things also sometimes happen a certain way. It's not even unique to Skyfall, people seem to have the smallest gripes with movies and then try to paint them as a massive flaw.

    It just looks this way Tobester - most here are actually able to enjoy the film, as does the rest of the world - they are just done with arguing with the few you read here. ;)

    Everyone views films in a different way. My expectations are not the same as yours and nor are either of ours the same as anyone else's. There are so many contributing factors that have been discussed all over this forum. Suspending your disbelief does not necessarily mean a film will be more enjoyable, it might be that some people are looking for something more and why shouldn't they? They're the audience afterall. Some people are voracious consumers others want to be challenged.
  • Posts: 6,601
    Amen!
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 7,653
    First she was bad because she was a black Moneypenny and now she is bad as a field operative. Some people just will say anything to make other believe their incredible crappy thoughts or mindsets. WHats next complaining about a blond 007.............wait a moment....................... L-)
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 6,601
    SaintMark wrote:
    First she was bad because she was a black Moneypenny and now she is bad as a field operative. Some people just will say anything to make other believe their incredible crappy thoughts or mindsets. WHats nect complaining about a blond 007.............wait a moment....................... L-)

    Now isn't THAT all too true? But they found a new field with this thread to share their being annoyed fest with us - again...no surprises here...thankfully they have the Dalton films to enjoy ;)
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I'm sure everyone would have a much easier life on this forum if they were as sycophantic as you @Germanlady. Maybe some of them actually believe what they say without having to garner the assurances of others.
  • Posts: 158
    What is the story of
    the new M?

    What was the
    old M's
    story?

    What is the
    new Q's
    story?

    Not everything has to be told, unless we have an extra couple of hours!
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 129
    I've been on the site for a short time know but what the hell is going on. There's so many personal attacks, look people lets just agree to disagree. If we all thought the same the world would be a sterile place, I'm thinking 1984 (George Orwell).
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I've been on the site for a short time know but what the hell is going on. There's so many personal attacks, look people lets just agree to disagree. If we all thought the same the world would be a sterile place, I'm thinking 1984 (George Orwell).

    Basically if you raise an issue about SF on here there are a small band of people who take it upon themselves to make it personal. That's despite the fact none of the negative comments I've seen have been personal, purely observations directed at the film. You're right, it would be sterile.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 12,837
    Germanlady wrote:
    Now isn't THAT all too true? But they found a new field with this thread to share their being annoyed fest with us - again...no surprises here...thankfully they have the Dalton films to enjoy ;)

    Most of us aren't annoyed. I liked the film, so did Brady, Creasy, etc, and they're still talking about it. She was incompetent. There's a difference between discussing something about the film and bitching about it. Relax, you're precious film isn't being criticised.

    And since you bought up Dalton, I'm not sure I believe you've even seen his films. Maybe you saw TLD once years ago but that's it. Maybe give them a rewatch, you might like them.

    @RC7 You've got the right idea.
  • doubleonothingdoubleonothing Los Angeles Moderator
    Posts: 864
    The admins created a fantastic forum for people to share their views and discuss Bond, the moderators work hard to make sure that people adhere to the forum rules and try to keep the place running smoothly. But it is the members that set the tone of the forum. If people want a pleasant place where they can chat about Bond films and more, it is down to them to make it a nice place, by being courteous and respectful of others.
    Recently, there seems to have been a number of members who simply resort to name calling, personal attacks, posts that incite arguments and flaming etc etc.
    the mods and admins do their best, but it's down to all of us to make sure the forum is the best it can be. Don't respond to these individuals. Don't become baited. If you see a post that is deliberately offensive or inciting argument, simply flag it for the mods.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 7,653
    There is nothing in this thread that is offensive, perhaps some folks that feel stepped on their toes because they disagree but that is the nature of a forum, some discussion between different views.
    If that is not possible than you have no forum but one view that should be shared by all.

    Eve is no more incompetent than 007 he is responsible for the death of his boss. Jeez and he is a 00, the elite of field agents! :D
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    People that see M's death as a failure by Bond just don't get the point of the film.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 12,837
    People that see M's death as a failure by Bond just don't get the point of the film.

    I think it was a failure by Bond. He wanted to protect her, she was killed, I don't think there's any way around that.

    But I didn't mind that. SF shows that even James Bond messes up sometimes. But for Bond 24, I'd like a film with a more happy ending and a Bond that doesn't mess up that much.

    Let's give Craig a normal Bond film now, with M not being used more and a story that isn't "this time it's personal"
  • doubleonothingdoubleonothing Los Angeles Moderator
    Posts: 864
    Going back to the OP, I know there are plenty of women in UKSF. I know a woman who was formally SRR, for example.
    I think it's entirely reasonable that Eve should be a field agent.
  • Posts: 7,653
    People that see M's death as a failure by Bond just don't get the point of the film.

    People that deny M's death as a failure by Bond just do not get the point of the movie, Bond is no longer the superman he used to be. It is more EON's wish to make him something different from before and with SF they finaly managed that.

  • Alec Trevelyan 006 in GE to Bond - "I might as well ask you if all those vodka martinis ever silence the screams of all the men you've killed... or if you find forgiveness in the arms of all those willing women for all the dead ones you failed to protect".

    Bond has failed to protect many before, most recently Sévérine & M in skyfall, the attraction of the character has always been that he is flawed, he makes mistakes, but he never lets himself be distracted from the mission, even in Skyfall the idea of taking M to the family house was to draw Silva to a remote location to finish him for good, unfortunately M was collateral damage.
  • After I finished rolling my eyes at the same bunch of characters who have to repeat every single SF complaint in every thread, if I recall correctly didn't Bond tell M to stay out of sight and not get involved? And didn't she fire at a Silva guy and then get hit by a bullet?

    Right. Now, was it Bond's fault Oddjob knocked him out and Jill was suffocated? How about Countess Lisl still running after Bond told her to stop? M dying all of a sudden seems to be this big deal about how this Bond failed but the series is full of examples where Bond failed, as Spectre just pointed out.
    RC7 wrote:
    I'm sure everyone would have a much easier life on this forum if they were as sycophantic as you @Germanlady. Maybe some of them actually believe what they say without having to garner the assurances of others.

    As I feel you likely see me as someone who's tried to be open minded regarding SF's flaws yet still a supporter of the film, I think it works both ways here.
  • Right. Now, was it Bond's fault Oddjob knocked him out and Jill was suffocated? How about Countess Lisl still running after Bond told her to stop? M dying all of a sudden seems to be this big deal about how this Bond failed but the series is full of examples where Bond failed, as Spectre just pointed out.

    He's failed before and he failed in SF. I don't see anything wrong with that.
  • Right. Now, was it Bond's fault Oddjob knocked him out and Jill was suffocated? How about Countess Lisl still running after Bond told her to stop? M dying all of a sudden seems to be this big deal about how this Bond failed but the series is full of examples where Bond failed, as Spectre just pointed out.

    He's failed before and he failed in SF. I don't see anything wrong with that.

    This is what I've said Bond's attitude is Sh*t happens, move on.
  • Right. Now, was it Bond's fault Oddjob knocked him out and Jill was suffocated? How about Countess Lisl still running after Bond told her to stop? M dying all of a sudden seems to be this big deal about how this Bond failed but the series is full of examples where Bond failed, as Spectre just pointed out.

    He's failed before and he failed in SF. I don't see anything wrong with that.

    This is what I've said Bond's attitude is Sh*t happens, move on.

    Exactly. I know he got emotional about Vesper, Tracy and now M but if he beat himself up over every single death he caused then he wouldn't be very good at his job.
  • Right. Now, was it Bond's fault Oddjob knocked him out and Jill was suffocated? How about Countess Lisl still running after Bond told her to stop? M dying all of a sudden seems to be this big deal about how this Bond failed but the series is full of examples where Bond failed, as Spectre just pointed out.

    He's failed before and he failed in SF. I don't see anything wrong with that.

    There isn't, but some people just feel compelled to say anything to justify their position without first considering what they are talking about.

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    As I feel you likely see me as someone who's tried to be open minded regarding SF's flaws yet still a supporter of the film, I think it works both ways here.

    Absolutely.
  • RC7 wrote:
    As I feel you likely see me as someone who's tried to be open minded regarding SF's flaws yet still a supporter of the film, I think it works both ways here.

    Absolutely.

    Agreed.
  • And for the record, I think it's completely unfair to compare Harris to any prior Moneypenny with only one performance. She had good chemistry with Craig and did it without resorting to potty mouthed lines and scenes that are an abomination of Lois' legacy.

    Fatherhood calls, see you around another time.
  • Samantha Bond was alright. I never had a problem with her lines and she had good chemistry with Pierce.

    I didn't mind Harris but like I said, I'm not a fan of them giving Moneypenny this big backstory about how she shot Bond.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    SaintMark wrote:
    People that see M's death as a failure by Bond just don't get the point of the film.

    People that deny M's death as a failure by Bond just do not get the point of the movie, Bond is no longer the superman he used to be. It is more EON's wish to make him something different from before and with SF they finaly managed that.

    You aren't even applying the underlying themes of the film. Oh, never mind. I will point it out in my future review.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 129
    SaintMark wrote:
    People that see M's death as a failure by Bond just don't get the point of the film.

    People that deny M's death as a failure by Bond just do not get the point of the movie, Bond is no longer the superman he used to be. It is more EON's wish to make him something different from before and with SF they finaly managed that.

    You aren't even applying the underlying themes of the film. Oh, never mind. I will point it out in my future review.

    Look say what you mean, what is your view point, all I see is that M was a means to an end, Bond used her, but never wanted her to die, is it a failure? Maybe not he killed Silva, so threat eliminated, mission completed, but the Bitch is dead?
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 11,425
    Surely there is a difference between allowing Severine and Jill Masterson to die and getting the head of MI6 killed?

    What does Bond say when he turns up for work the next day?

    Bond: 'Oh, sorry guys, yeah, bit of a shame. M's dead. Oh well. Where's my next mission to c*ck up?'

    Mallory: 'Here you go Bond. (Hands bond file). I'm afraid I won't be joining you this time. Got bit of an old war wound - giving me gyp. Do take a bit more care this time, won't you Bond' (winks to camera)

    Bond: 'Right you are sir! Watch yourself while I'm away. Don't want you getting into any accidents, do we?'

    Bond walks out to the Some Mothers Do 'Av 'Em theme tune.

  • edited December 2012 Posts: 5,745
    Well the film had been implying since the PTS that she had to die. Over and over she states how she's not going to leave her office before she feels she's set things right in the world, so the only way for her to go would be to die.

    I read the plan to take M to Scotland was meant to lure Silva away from hurting innocent people, and bring him out of his comfort zone. I mean of course Bond didn't want M to die, but they were luring Silva out, not hiding M away.

    She even accepts in the car that she is bait in Bond's plan. What happens to bait? It gets eaten.

    Again, the plan was not to 'save' M. Let had Q go back and point Silva directly to her. The plan was to lure Silva out and stop him. Bond succeeded in that.
Sign In or Register to comment.