I've never noticed that before...

1175176177178179181»

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 19,303
    And he uses a different finger each time, does that mean something?

    It’s how you can tell he’s a truly great actor: he varies his performance.

    “Hey Lee, I thought Bond might use his thumb for this one?”
    “Brilliant Pierce, no one knows the character like you”
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2 Posts: 19,303
    I've been having a casual flick through this thread as it's a really fun read, but this one has blown my mind a little:
    For your eyes only

    When in Q lab, the minor character Smithers has a weaponized cast on his arm that breaks away to melee a foe. His real arm is revealed underneath, but it doesn't appear to be the actor's actual arm. It looks disjointed and you can see the actor portraying Smithers move his right shoulder afterwards that moves the cast. It completely baffled me last night!



    Can anyone explain?

    I like to think I'm quite good at spotting movie tricks, but I must admit I completely fell for it here! I always thought that Smithers was stood slightly unnaturally right up against that wall because they'd set up the spring-loaded arm prop there and probably attached it in place, but I never thought of the more simple explanation that there's no clever mechanical prop here at all!
    His arm is in the cast and he's just swinging his arm to the side, smashing the prop head himself! Because the film told me it was a violent spring loaded thing I totally fell for it, but there's no need to go to all that trouble when you have an actor there who can move his own arms and a breakaway prop head. And the suspicious by-the-wall pose is because 'his' exposed right arm isn't his arm at all, it belongs to someone else, who's stood behind the wall sticking it through a hole.

    I really love the inventive thinking that's gone into this, it's kind of like a magic trick, almost. And it shows the magic of the movies: because they tell you a thing is what they say it is you just believe it without questioning, even if there's a big gap between a guy's upper and lower arm where his elbow should be!
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    edited October 2 Posts: 7,841
    Gogol's secretary Rublevitch reflects M's secretary Moneypenny's name. Since the Russian currency is the ruble, I thought that was rather clever. But I did never notice it before.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,998
    I wouldn't hate an Amazon Smithers spinoff. (Wonder if the Simpsons character was in homage to him?)
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,945
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    Gogol's secretary Rublevitch reflects M's secretary Moneypenny's name. Since the Russian currency is the ruble, I thought that was rather clever. But I did never notice it before.

    hahaha cool. Indeed, thank you for posting that.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,403
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    Gogol's secretary Rublevitch reflects M's secretary Moneypenny's name. Since the Russian currency is the ruble, I thought that was rather clever. But I did never notice it before.

    hahaha cool. Indeed, thank you for posting that.

    That being said, if I'm not mistaken, the ending "-vitch" (or "-vich") means "son of", is usually reserved for a patronym (as in Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin = Vladimir, the son of Vladimir, Putin), and doesn't really work as the only name for a woman. Apart from the fact that the equivalent of penny would be kopek, not ruble. Sorry to be a bean counter yet again.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,841
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    Gogol's secretary Rublevitch reflects M's secretary Moneypenny's name. Since the Russian currency is the ruble, I thought that was rather clever. But I did never notice it before.

    hahaha cool. Indeed, thank you for posting that.

    That being said, if I'm not mistaken, the ending "-vitch" (or "-vich") means "son of", is usually reserved for a patronym (as in Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin = Vladimir, the son of Vladimir, Putin), and doesn't really work as the only name for a woman. Apart from the fact that the equivalent of penny would be kopek, not ruble. Sorry to be a bean counter yet again.

    Well you're right, so no reason to apologise :)

    I still quite like the reference though.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,945
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    Gogol's secretary Rublevitch reflects M's secretary Moneypenny's name. Since the Russian currency is the ruble, I thought that was rather clever. But I did never notice it before.

    hahaha cool. Indeed, thank you for posting that.

    That being said, if I'm not mistaken, the ending "-vitch" (or "-vich") means "son of", is usually reserved for a patronym (as in Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin = Vladimir, the son of Vladimir, Putin), and doesn't really work as the only name for a woman. Apart from the fact that the equivalent of penny would be kopek, not ruble. Sorry to be a bean counter yet again.

    Indeed, you're not mistaken, if this is indeed meant as patronym. But Slavic people have a given name, patronym AND a surname, which can be derived from a patronym.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Slavic_name

    Allthough 'son of ruble' makes, as a name, little sense. But 'Rublekopecks' is impossible to pronounce.
  • I never met realised that girl on the CR67 poster is an actual girl with her back turned! I seen the poster for ages and for years and I originially thought it was like a cookie or biscuit cut off to vaguely resemble a woman. I think the guns made the trick; it makes her seem like her arms are unrealistically short and then with the lack of any human texture on the back it felt like a flat cut-out.

    I can't have been the only person to make that mistake, right?
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited 1:59pm Posts: 9,258
    I always wondered what the point was of including Bibi in FYEO, who appears to only be there as an annoying and superfluous character, it's only until now that I finally understood the filmmakers reason for including her.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 6,153
    I think Bibi was there for some comic relief. She also helps the audience understand more about Erich. We also get a glimpse into how Kristatos treats her and Brink adding a layer to his dastardly ways.

    Could the script function without her? Yes I suppose it could but the writers would need to find other ways to make the same points.
  • Posts: 6,057
    I always wondered what the point was of including Bibi in FYEO, who appears to only be there as an annoying and superfluous character, it's only until now that I finally understood the filmmakers reason for including her.

    Don’t leave us hanging 😂 what is the reason that you’ve only learnt today?
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,403
    I wonder if the writers included Bibi to show that there are limits to Bond's making out with younger girls, given that Melina/Carole is also young enough to be Bond's/Moore's daughter. But maybe just the right amount of years older than the Bibi character (I'll restrict this to the character here, since Bibi is obviously meant to be about 18 or even younger, when Holly-Lynn Johnson was in fact about 22 and only a bit more than a year younger than Carole Bouquet).
  • edited 7:43pm Posts: 16,149
    The inclusion of Bibi is two fold, IMO:
    1)To show that Bond, for all his womanising, has a healthy sexuality. He may seduce a duchess, but he will not dishonor a virgin, to quote out of memory Raymond Chandler about Philip Marlowe.
    2) To show that Kristatos is a creep. It adds another layer to his evil.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,403
    Ludovico wrote: »
    The inclusion of Bibi is two fold, IMO:
    1)To show that Bond, for all his womanising, has a healthy sexuality. He may seduce a duchess, but he will not dishonor a virgin, ...
    That being said, Bibi herself ridicules the people who think that she's still a virgin. And the fact remains that we also don't know if Melina (with her somewhat archaic ideas of how a Greek woman should be) was still a virgin herself or not. It's more about the female character's age IMO. Melina may well be in her late twenties (no offence to 23-year old Carole), but Bibi is clearly played to be more or less underage.
  • Posts: 2,441
    I think they just needed more Bond girls. You know, 3 girls like in Goldfinger.
  • Posts: 16,149
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    The inclusion of Bibi is two fold, IMO:
    1)To show that Bond, for all his womanising, has a healthy sexuality. He may seduce a duchess, but he will not dishonor a virgin, ...
    That being said, Bibi herself ridicules the people who think that she's still a virgin. And the fact remains that we also don't know if Melina (with her somewhat archaic ideas of how a Greek woman should be) was still a virgin herself or not. It's more about the female character's age IMO. Melina may well be in her late twenties (no offence to 23-year old Carole), but Bibi is clearly played to be more or less underage.

    Well, it was a figure of speech: I meant Bibi is still underage and innocent, to a degree. No longer a virgin, but I'm sure her first lovers were close to her age than Bond. As in, not old enough to be her father.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,998
    I always wondered what the point was of including Bibi in FYEO, who appears to only be there as an annoying and superfluous character, it's only until now that I finally understood the filmmakers reason for including her.

    Lynn Holly-Johnson was a huge star after Ice Castles, and I'm sure that's why she's in the film. I don't know if the role of Bibi was specifically created for her, but it kind of feels that way.

    The '80s saw a lot of stunt casting, including Vijay Amritraj and Grace Jones (who was originally slated for OP).
Sign In or Register to comment.