It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
And I'll just say that I read the thread too fast! I just looked it over again. The poster I was getting annoyed with was not Matt007; it was AstonLotus. I apologize, @Matt007. I read his posts as continuations of yours.
@AstonLotus, I don't really apologize fully. I do find your posts with your "facts" on this thread a tad annoying ... but perhaps I did not need to word my response quite so strongly. If those handy "facts" were put in place, you would have a rather boring film. You can do that to any film really.
And I need to just post less in the evenings when I am so exhausted.
In QoS he goes to Haiti, doesn't even bother to check out the room of the bloke he kills, for clues. Brazenly hangs about doing Steve McQueen impressions around the villain's dock - subtle. Doesn't quiz the gal after he saves her.
Okay, he does kill the guy at the end, indirectly, and I guess it's clever how in both films the villain is killed by Quantum, that never occurred to me before. But we don't feel the joy of it, because we don't see Quantum's comeuppance and the organisation is left sketchy.
What has made Bond a global icon is his character traits and the fascinating situations he gets into. And thats the point. Its those human traits that make him relatable and interesting to the audiance, and makes him stand out more than lets say Superman. The only supernatural part about the man is his womanizing skills.
Just think of this: In every single film Bond gets captured by the villain in some way. Every single one! A coincidence? The filmmakers wants to portray him in critical and vulnerable situations. That's what creates excitement. That sence of vulnerability is what makes Bond work, and not least what makes this film work.
The thing that matters though, in a heroic sence, is that he allways prevails and saves the day in the end, no matter what obstacles gets in his way or what initial mistakes he might have done. That's what heroism is. Bond is not a worse spy in this film than in any other. Its just the nature and essence of Bond. Take it or leave it.
Not unlike the real MI6 then. Its history is not short of scandals, mismanagement, bad decisions, bad gambles, etc. And let's not get started about MI5, which nearly got run by a KGB mole.
how is that his fault?... he wasn't the one who ordered the shot (M) and he wasn't the one who pulled the trigger (Moneypenny)... if left on his own, we could have been almost certain that he would've recovered the drive and the list..
Bond was in no position to possibly save her... and Severine was a product of her own demise by her lousy taste in men... this same sort of thing has happened all the time to Bond... Jill and Tilly Masterson (GF), Paula Caplin (TB), Aki (YOLT), HIS WIFE (OHMSS), Plenty O'Toole (DAF), Rosie Carver (LALD), Andrea Anders (TMWTGG), Corinne Dufour (MR), Countess Lisl (FYEO), Paris Carver (TND), Fields (QOS)...... and thats not even counting the amount of Male allies he's let die either..... so does that mean in all those other films Bond is a lousy spy??
That wasn't his mission... his mission was to find out what Patrice was up to, and who he was working for... and given Bond's surroundings, he couldn't just rush Patrice - he very likely would've gotten himself shot and killed - being in a completely open room - except for the glass partitions, there wasn't anything to hide behind to make a better approach on Patrice - he had to quietly use the shadows..... remember, he almost did give away his position once to Patrice...
thats just nitpicking - and it bears nothing on your original statement..... so i wont even dignify it with an explanation..
it worked didn't it?.... i think so.... and if wasn't for one misplaced shot by one of Silva's men, M would've survived..... IN FACT M probably still could've survived had she told Bond that she had been shot, but she chose to keep it to herself - in essence, sacrificing herself so that Bond could get the job done - in way, repaying him for almost killing him at the start of the film... she trusted him to finish the job..
This thread came from something my mate said in the pub. Namely Bond kidnaps his boss to protect her and ends up getting her killed while Silva succeeds in his mission.
It's the equivalent of goldfingers bomb going off, but Bond killing him.
Or the goldeneye satellite exploding over London, but trevelyan dying.
Just an observation. The villains plot is fulfilled.
no it's not.... in Silva's perverse mindset, HE had to be the one that killed her - remember what he told his men "No one touch her, she is mine!"... anything otherwise and he would've felt cheated out of his life's mission - which is why he couldn't bring himself to kill her at the end..
Bottom line, Purvis & Wade handed in a mediocre script with recycled stuff from TWINE (but updated) & Logan did his best to punch it up, Mendes brought his considerable directing skills to bear, & Craig put his all into it.
They concocted a winner out of what could have easily been a total loser. No mean feat IMO.
But then don't listen to me, I forgive QOS' many 'sins' as well. :))
Agree though. As a whole the film is great. Would like to know more about logans contributions. Have high hopes for bond 24.
in terms of splitting hairs - i guess it's all how you view it.... personally, his efforts were all constructed so it could lead to him, and just him killing her - like in the courtroom - one of his men could've capped her right off the bat, but he had to be the one to do it - but he took too much time relishing the moment that the opportunity slipped through his fingers.... and it again speaks to why at the end he breaks down when she is shot "You're hurt??.. who did this to you??".... it's a perverse obsession with wanting her untouched or untainted before he could get to her, and knowing that she was dying and it wasn't by his hands personally makes all his works and efforts for nothing - which is why he turned the gun on himself (along with her) and wanted her to kill them both.... what else was there to live for? he had failed.....
recycling plot points is nothing new for Bond.... AVTAK is an updated GF, and MR is almost a carbon copy of TSWLM - and TND is a branch off the TSWLM tree as well... so that doesn't really bother me... besides, they took what worked in TWINE - scraped off the horse crap and recrafted it into a dynamite film....
and i'm one of the few that liked QOS from day one, despite it's shortcomings..
It makes sense to me why Bond would choose this strategy. He was only doing what he was trained to do. Mallory gambled and he got Silva's death from it but he lost something too.
Mallory wanted M out of the way anyway,he was pushing her into 'retirement',so she was expendable.
He got what he wanted : M gone and Silva dead.
I would agree with that, if it were set up in the film as such..... the reason we know The Joker in TDK is telling lies about his scars, is because on 2 different occasions he's told 2 different stories.... Silva had only told one story, and there was no case in the movie itself where we find out if what Silva was saying was a lie - another than the embellishment of "back then I was her favorite" could obviously be his ego talking... It's clear that Silva's agenda was to kill M - and his motives were revenge for being left to die - everything he did was targeted at her...... he obviously thought more of her than she did him, and that had eaten away at him for years and years - there is pretty much a bastard son / mother relationship between the two.
again, i think it's clear that what Silva is telling Bond is the truth.... because earlier on, M admits to Tanner that Bond didn't pass any of his tests - Silva, knowing the truth, uses this against Bond in an attempt to put doubt into 007's head about M's trust towards him
Mallory had no clue what happened to M until Bond was already halfway to Skyfall Lodge..... remember, Bold told Q (more or less) that only himself, Q, and M were to know what was going on - obviously later we see Tanner involved as well.... thats when Mallory came in like a headmaster of a school catching two students up past curfew lol..
No i know that he didnt know,but when he found out it made no difference,M was past her 'sell by date' and he just let Bond get on with it and whatever happened happened.
hmm...... never really thought of it that way.... personally I am inclined to think that he didn't have any sort of ulterior motive in letting Bond take her up to Scotland, that using M as bait would be the only way to get rid of Silva......... but, you present a very interesting way of looking at it as well.....
Yep,i just feel that this would explain why there was no assistance allocated to helping Bond and M and also it would save a rather large pension being issued,clearing the way for Mallory to slip into office and removing a 'reluctant to quit' M a lot easier.
And of course if Bond killed Silva and M survived then she still is made to retire,so no harm done either way - its win win.
It's nothing of the sort. Firstly, he doesn't kidnap her, to protect her. She's the pawn, he knows it and she knows it. It's her last hurrah. So, the villain's plot isn't fulfilled. Silva never sees 'M' die and he has no idea she's gravely injured - so in his final moment he has lost.
If Silva had wanted to merely kill her, he could have done it any point. MI6/M's apparent incompetence is brought in to view via Silva and his scheme. So when the time is right - the hearing - he strikes, but Bond screws it for him. Bond then takes the initiative, wanting to get her out of the highly surveilled city and on to a level playing field. That's why it's poetic that Bond takes him down, in front of 'M', with something as primitive as a knife. Had 'M' survived, the film wouldn't have had nearly the same resonance. It would have been a predictable, tired excuse for a conclusion. As it is, it delivers something a little more 'nuanced', although some detractors would of course disagree. If one doesn't like this narratively, that's fine, but it makes sense.
Ahhh, I get it now! Then in Bond 24 he'll be revealed as Lord Voldemort and makes it his mission to kill Bond with the Avada Kedavra curse to insure his secret is kept and his plan for domestic control of Britain is assured. Or something like that... :-\"
I didn't mind Dench kicking the bucket - infact, it was overdue. The amount of screentime she'd been eating up frankly required it.