›

Goof of all goofs

AuricollaAuricolla Irish
in Bond Movies Posts: 7
Maybe I'm missing something here but there's a huge mistake in the Diamonds are forever movie. Bond hides in the back of the panel van which descends in a lift into the top secret underground research facility. He does his radiation shield stuff etc and gets rumbled.
He steals the moon buggy and drives out through the wall!!! And hey presto, he's back above ground.
At no point is he seen to go back up.
Am I imagining this?
New to forum so quite happy to be shown as a fool.
«1

Comments

  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    Posts: 528
    Only one?
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    edited May 14 Posts: 9,244
    Welcome, @Auricolla. I don't know but the moderators may find a thread that is already there and move your contribution, so be prepared as it's not meant to be unfriendly. Anyway, I don't think you're imagining it...but DAF is riddled with that kind of stuff 😒, starting, but not nearly limited to the Mustang car chase (flipping sides within a narrow alley) and a precise repetition of several of Sir Donald Munger's lines explaining the situation about the South African connection to Bond. With this competition, plus that of another 24 Bond movies, your thread title may appear somewhat hyperbolic...😉.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,703
    The whole film is a goof if you ask me.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 15,076
    Not a goof, just unseen events. Like an elevator ride or stair climb happening off-screen.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,703
    QBranch wrote: »
    Not a goof, just unseen events. Like an elevator ride or stair climb happening off-screen.

    Why did we never see James Bond going to the toilet? These films are so unrealistic.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 18,055
    For a super classy suave secret agent, we actually see Bond in the bogs a surprising amount of times, I'd say.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited May 14 Posts: 18,703
    mtm wrote: »
    For a super classy suave secret agent, we actually see Bond in the bogs a surprising amount of times, I'd say.

    That's true. We (mercifully) just don't see what he gets up to in there. It reminds me of the time that Evelyn Waugh sent Ian Fleming a toilet roll along with an ironic note asking to see more of Bond's other bodily functions. :D
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    edited May 15 Posts: 528
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Not a goof, just unseen events. Like an elevator ride or stair climb happening off-screen.

    Why did we never see James Bond going to the toilet? These films are so unrealistic.
    mtm wrote: »
    For a super classy suave secret agent, we actually see Bond in the bogs a surprising amount of times, I'd say.

    That's right, but secret agents (and other action heros) only go into the toilets for two reasons, either to exchange. pick up or drop off information / ransoms etc, or to fight henchmen / clean themselves up after fighting henchmen.

    Speaking of Jame Bond toilets...

    DZQLUD5BHML2YRUDPPBSWXWTBQ.jpg

    the-bathroom-stalls-at-the-piz-gloria-v0-boj6daj8nicd1.jpeg?auto=webp&s=54b26680c1f19cd87d910daba2b1e8100f27b443

    56197760_1142850749221062_238184704254148608_n.jpg?_nc_cat=104&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=127cfc&_nc_ohc=CPCC14FOu5YQ7kNvwFtlliZ&_nc_oc=AdmLCP7xjOHaGqP0tFlzV1Yw85n5fdsC8By1TO01Wp8Qd7lKUaM_rS50qG71IT44jnY&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent.fakl2-1.fna&_nc_gid=PCWVlgmXGtjFhXotVp_Q0Q&oh=00_AfJKW6pM4LLLIyyfNVlTlEo0WiEWBFb0WJzUsNUOP6rkeg&oe=684CCF92

    21646301001_91850ea749_z.jpg
  • mattjoesmattjoes Dakato Johnson
    Posts: 7,137
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Not a goof, just unseen events. Like an elevator ride or stair climb happening off-screen.

    Why did we never see James Bond going to the toilet? These films are so unrealistic.

    What a load of crap
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 15,076
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Not a goof, just unseen events. Like an elevator ride or stair climb happening off-screen.
    Why did we never see James Bond going to the toilet? These films are so unrealistic.
    Ah, that is the number one question. Number two as well.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,703
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Not a goof, just unseen events. Like an elevator ride or stair climb happening off-screen.

    Why did we never see James Bond going to the toilet? These films are so unrealistic.

    What a load of crap

    This thread has really went down the pan.
  • AuricollaAuricolla Irish
    Posts: 7
    QBranch wrote: »
    Not a goof, just unseen events. Like an elevator ride or stair climb happening off-screen.

    I can accept that for some things but the movie goes to certain lengths to emphasize that the lab is underground and far underground at that. Does it not follow that Bond should be shown to get back to land level? I think it's a big oversight.
    Not to mention that the walls of this super secret facility seems to be made of cardboard.
    Or that the moon buggy seems to have an incredibly high top speed. Who would you need to outrun on the moon?
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Welcome, @Auricolla. I don't know but the moderators may find a thread that is already there and move your contribution, so be prepared as it's not meant to be unfriendly. Anyway, I don't think you're imagining it...but DAF is riddled with that kind of stuff 😒, starting, but not nearly limited to the Mustang car chase (flipping sides within a narrow alley) and a precise repetition of several of Sir Donald Munger's lines explaining the situation about the South African connection to Bond. With this competition, plus that of another 24 Bond movies, your thread title may appear somewhat hyperbolic...😉.

    Thanks for the tip.
    Yes plenty of mistakes in this movie (A rough Diamond?) but that's part of the charm. It's become one of my favourite classic bonds and every time I watch it I see something new, good wise.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,703
    Auricolla wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Not a goof, just unseen events. Like an elevator ride or stair climb happening off-screen.

    I can accept that for some things but the movie goes to certain lengths to emphasize that the lab is underground and far underground at that. Does it not follow that Bond should be shown to get back to land level? I think it's a big oversight.
    Not to mention that the walls of this super secret facility seems to be made of cardboard.
    Or that the moon buggy seems to have an incredibly high top speed. Who would you need to outrun on the moon?

    That high speed setting was only fitted to the moon buggy so that the men who faked the moon landing in the studio could get to the pub at breakneck speed after 5pm on a Friday evening. Needs must.
  • AuricollaAuricolla Irish
    Posts: 7
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Auricolla wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Not a goof, just unseen events. Like an elevator ride or stair climb happening off-screen.

    I can accept that for some things but the movie goes to certain lengths to emphasize that the lab is underground and far underground at that. Does it not follow that Bond should be shown to get back to land level? I think it's a big oversight.
    Not to mention that the walls of this super secret facility seems to be made of cardboard.
    Or that the moon buggy seems to have an incredibly high top speed. Who would you need to outrun on the moon?

    That high speed setting was only fitted to the moon buggy so that the men who faked the moon landing in the studio could get to the pub at breakneck speed after 5pm on a Friday evening. Needs must.

    Moon landing faked?
  • AuricollaAuricolla Irish
    Posts: 7
    Auricolla wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Auricolla wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Not a goof, just unseen events. Like an elevator ride or stair climb happening off-screen.

    I can accept that for some things but the movie goes to certain lengths to emphasize that the lab is underground and far underground at that. Does it not follow that Bond should be shown to get back to land level? I think it's a big oversight.
    Not to mention that the walls of this super secret facility seems to be made of cardboard.
    Or that the moon buggy seems to have an incredibly high top speed. Who would you need to outrun on the moon?

    That high speed setting was only fitted to the moon buggy so that the men who faked the moon landing in the studio could get to the pub at breakneck speed after 5pm on a Friday evening. Needs must.

    Moon landing faked? What? Never.
    My Dad told me all about it, he never lied.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,703
    Auricolla wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Auricolla wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Not a goof, just unseen events. Like an elevator ride or stair climb happening off-screen.

    I can accept that for some things but the movie goes to certain lengths to emphasize that the lab is underground and far underground at that. Does it not follow that Bond should be shown to get back to land level? I think it's a big oversight.
    Not to mention that the walls of this super secret facility seems to be made of cardboard.
    Or that the moon buggy seems to have an incredibly high top speed. Who would you need to outrun on the moon?

    That high speed setting was only fitted to the moon buggy so that the men who faked the moon landing in the studio could get to the pub at breakneck speed after 5pm on a Friday evening. Needs must.

    Moon landing faked?

    It's not my personal opinion that it was faked, no. I was merely pointing out that that scene in DAF implies that the writers thought it was.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Dakato Johnson
    Posts: 7,137
    No, it wasn't faked. In fact, I'm writing this post from the moon.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,703
    mattjoes wrote: »
    No, it wasn't faked. In fact, I'm writing this post from the moon.

    As I'm wired to the moon I should be able to make a connection with you.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,244
    I don't believe the writers thought the moon landing was fake. I guess they were playing with the somewhat popular conspiracy theory that it was.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,703
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    I don't believe the writers thought the moon landing was fake. I guess they were playing with the somewhat popular conspiracy theory that it was.

    Yes, it's probably moreso that. It is rather curious and bizarre, so well in keeping with the tone of the test of the film. Those 70s Guy Hamilton Bond films were rather crazy and wild.
  • MonorailerMonorailer
    Posts: 39
    It's an interesting reading of the scene but I'm not sure it was intended as such. The whole Moon hoax theory only really took off later in the '70s, with the publication of We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle, a self-published book by conspiracy theorist Bill Kaysing, which came out in 1976. Would the idea have been in the popular consciousness when Diamonds was being made? Or was the scene simply intended to show astronauts practicing lunar manoeuvres? Maybe we're retro-fitting an explanation here...
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,703
    Monorailer wrote: »
    It's an interesting reading of the scene but I'm not sure it was intended as such. The whole Moon hoax theory only really took off later in the '70s, with the publication of We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle, a self-published book by conspiracy theorist Bill Kaysing, which came out in 1976. Would the idea have been in the popular consciousness when Diamonds was being made? Or was the scene simply intended to show astronauts practicing lunar manoeuvres? Maybe we're retro-fitting an explanation here...

    That's a very good point. It's just as likely it was some sort of practice or training for astronauts planning to go back to the moon. Or at least what the writers thought such training might look like.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,244
    @Monorailer, I guess you're right that the "fake moon landing" craze only took off a few years later. So I suppose the movie just tried to cash in on the general hype about the moon landings, including use of Lunar Roving Vehicles, during the Apollo program at that time. Especially since Howard Hughes, on whom Willard Whyte is largely modelled, was also involved with the NASA programs through his Hughes Aircraft Company.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 14,417
    Back to Connery, it's fortunate Bond wasn't subject to the effects of weightlessness.

    As the "astronauts" were.

    a1b3105ac1036cd696a6dac5ce1d15777982d52d.gifv
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,703
    They were clearly method actors.
  • AuricollaAuricolla Irish
    Posts: 7
    That's just another piece of Diamonds daftness. To add to my original point (focus guys) at some point did they just decide that the whole thing be treated as a send up? Obviously Bond movies were never intended to be regarded as profound and straight faced but even by the standards of the franchise at the time, Diamonds takes some beating.
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    Posts: 528
    Hopefully it will never be beaten

    Even Roger Moore at his worst couldn't quite match DAF for sillyness
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 18,055
    I was never 100% sure what was going on there either, but I thought there were film cameras shown? I can’t remember now; I was going more on the ‘faking’ rather than ‘training’ side, but I’m not sure.
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    Posts: 1,978
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Monorailer wrote: »
    It's an interesting reading of the scene but I'm not sure it was intended as such. The whole Moon hoax theory only really took off later in the '70s, with the publication of We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle, a self-published book by conspiracy theorist Bill Kaysing, which came out in 1976. Would the idea have been in the popular consciousness when Diamonds was being made? Or was the scene simply intended to show astronauts practicing lunar manoeuvres? Maybe we're retro-fitting an explanation here...

    That's a very good point. It's just as likely it was some sort of practice or training for astronauts planning to go back to the moon. Or at least what the writers thought such training might look like.


    That's what I've always thought.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,910
    RichardTheBruce wrote: »
    Back to Connery, it's fortunate Bond wasn't subject to the effects of weightlessness.

    As the "astronauts" were.

    a1b3105ac1036cd696a6dac5ce1d15777982d52d.gifv

    Aren't those supposed to be weighted suits?
Sign In or Register to comment.