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

1235

Comments

  • NicNac wrote:
    He should've been planning his wife's funeral.

    He was on the phone to Bond, not an Undertakers.
    Getafix wrote:
    Isn't the 'fishing trip' meant as a bit of a dark joke by Felix? I think that's how I've alway taken it.

    Come to think of it that would make lots of sense.
    NicNac wrote:
    Look I'm not really bothered, I don't watch Bond films to pick them apart when they don't make sense, otherwise I would be here for a month. Just trying to make the point that even the most earnest and grounded Bond films don't necessarilly make sense just because they are earnest and grounded.

    I agree. They're only films after all.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,567
    You know, I've never made that connection about 'fishing trip'. In fact LTK seems to have the fish/water theme running through it. Never really noticed it.

  • Getafix wrote:
    JamesStock wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    I agree with you to an extent. I assure you I am not the kind of cinema goer who is generally drawn to mindless popcorn movies who needs everything spelled out. I am struck by the difference in the quality between the storytelling in SF, which is disjointed and the tight but rich storytelling in a film like American Beauty. Also I am not convinced that P+W are always fully in control of what they are doing. The torture scenes at the start of DAD seem to have virtually no significance to the rest of the plot. I'd argue they've done a similar thing in SF. Bond 'dies' and presumably goes through some existential crisis while bumming around on the beach and then comes back and before long is right as rain. If you find the explanation that you've given for this transformation a rich and satisfying piece of cinematic storytelling then that's obviously your prerogative, but I found it deeply disappointing and a missed opportunity to tell a genuinely complex and interesting tale of fall, return and redemption.

    I would say the story to be told was the one about M, not Bond. To me, Skyfall centers around how M manages her decisions. She essentially orders high-probability death sentences for two individuals for the hope of "the greater good." There lies the contrast: you have Bond, who even knowing what went on when he was shot, he decides to come back and join the ranks and then you have Silva who is so immersed in revenge from a similar situation. M is very human though. You know that M does care when making those decisions which is illustrated with her relationship with Bond. (The bulldog is a prime symbol of this.) The train sequence also illustrates it, because from what information she is given, M orders the shot as a last resort option. From that point forward Skyfall plays out the political and personal consequences of those decisions through Bond's eyes.

    I don't see how the storytelling is disjointed. They've just recently toyed with loyalty/existential crisis; the story I think you're looking for has been already told in Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. The "fall" is Casino Royale, and the "return and redemption" is Quantum of Solace. This time, that process has been matured and resolved. I think the Skyfall story inherently assumes that the audience knows that tale and builds off of it focusing on the flipside of that situation: M & Silva.

    I know. I guess I still can't quite accept that they made a Bond movie that is actually about M. And that they made M the least sympathetic she's ever been. So it's a film about a not very nice woman messing up. I think I just struggled to care enough what happened to her.

    Leave it to the site owner to put it into perspective. Right. Back on topic, this isn't about LTK.

    When I think about this, I think of the GE speech to Bond when Dench's M is introduced, where she says Bond is wrong if he thinks she doesn't have the balls to send a man to his death, but that she wouldn't do it on a whim. You can see her struggling with that thought in the PTS, but instead of trusting Bond like he rightly calls her out on upon her return, she instead trusts Moneypenny to take the shot. This is part of her character's motivation to opt for desk duty. Yes she does better later on in Macau and at the hearing, but it's obvious the thought of costing someone their life is not one she can internally handle in the manner Bond, and M for that matter, can.

    On other occasions she has spoken about getting the facts before making informed decisions. In Silva's case, that ties in with the first statement. She ascertained the fact that Silva was causing trouble beyond his mission and although I'm sure you can assume she tried to control him as a valued asset, he couldn't be reined in. She got 6 agents back who were willing to follow orders, and the Chinese off of her back. Sacrificing Silva for what she felt was the greater good was the decision that made the most sense to her, to what she assumed would be his death. As she also determined he would likely not be completely sure she set him up to be captured, she also correctly determined he would take his pill rather than leak information. Otherwise a 00 would have put a bullet in his head, and then we'd have no story to be told.

    It wouldn't be the first time she made a bad decision, but this one happened to cost her big time. Bond rescued her from a doozy in TWINE, and if she had not made the ultimate bad decision to fight rather than stay out of sight as Bond had told her to, she may well have lived through this. Even Tanner once called her the "evil queen of numbers". But there was the more practical matter of Dench not continuing the role going forward, so rather than giving her the normal amount of time, they obviously chose to give her M a big sendoff for her 17 years of contributions and a conclusive ending rather than suffer the humiliation of forced retirement, which seems to be where it was heading until Silva decided to shoot up her competency inquiry. You can't always please everyone as evidenced by people's personal preferences in these films indicate when polled, but most people both here and according to the good word of mouth driving the movie to heights not seen since the golden era of the 1960's, indicate most people understood the plot and were entertained.

    The movie is more than just about M. It's also about introducing her replacement and reintroducing the new Q and Moneypenny. You simply can't just introduce them without looking cheap, they wanted to tell the story about how they came to be in their jobs and build the relationships they would have with Bond going forward. Bond still has the majority of screen time in number of minutes as he should but in this case, which is something I focused more on, it was ultimately about bringing him full circle from CR. Unlike QOS until the latter part of the film where he finally got the point, this time he knew what his job entailed right from the start and how to carry out in the manner he was expected to. Yes he was upset that he thought he had proved that to M and like Silva, felt betrayed by her lack of trust. It was pretty much normal, straight up Bond when he returned like I had hoped save for the physical issues and no mention of the prior two films. Yet there was still a feeling due to those issues and the reintroductions that he hadn't fully come circle that came across to me, whether or not it was intended is something only EON or the writers can answer.




  • Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    Isn't the 'fishing trip' meant as a bit of a dark joke by Felix - i.e. he's gonna need a bigger boat if he's going to catch that shark. I think that's how I've alway taken it.

    No, that is just you being twisted ;)
  • doubleonothingdoubleonothing Los Angeles Moderator
    Posts: 864
    @SirHenryLeeChaChing

    Very nice post, Sir Henry.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Isn't the 'fishing trip' meant as a bit of a dark joke by Felix - i.e. he's gonna need a bigger boat if he's going to catch that shark. I think that's how I've alway taken it.

    No, that is just you being twisted ;)

    On this occasion, I don't think I'm reading too much into it.
  • Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Isn't the 'fishing trip' meant as a bit of a dark joke by Felix - i.e. he's gonna need a bigger boat if he's going to catch that shark. I think that's how I've alway taken it.

    No, that is just you being twisted ;)

    On this occasion, I don't think I'm reading too much into it.

    I don't think many people would have picked up on it in that way. Thinking about it perhaps a slight irony was indeed intended by the script writers.

    The film even ends with Bond and Pam in water and a fish winking at the camera.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Isn't the 'fishing trip' meant as a bit of a dark joke by Felix - i.e. he's gonna need a bigger boat if he's going to catch that shark. I think that's how I've alway taken it.

    No, that is just you being twisted ;)

    On this occasion, I don't think I'm reading too much into it.

    I don't think many people would have picked up on it in that way. Thinking about it perhaps a slight irony was indeed intended by the script writers.

    The film even ends with Bond and Pam in water and a fish winking at the camera.

    I hadn't taken it that far... all a bit fishy if you ask me. ;0
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 3,494
    @SirHenryLeeChaChing

    Very nice post, Sir Henry.

    Thanks, it's appreciated :)

    Sometimes I think people see M as only this infallible character based on the prior two, stiff upper lip and all. They weren't beyond making mistakes either, they just downplayed them and let Bond clean up the mess. Dench did a wonderful job of humanizing M. I'm thinking Fiennes will be going back more towards Lee and Brown, but still be heavily involved.


  • Posts: 14,798
    It irked me a bit. Not that Eve was a field agent in the first place, but that she became Moneypenny. But sometimes otherwise competent people end up in the wrong job, which is what happened here. And not all secret agents come from the army.
  • bond50bond50 Banned
    Posts: 42
    On the Moneypenny character ,Something awful again Mendes and Craig probably dreamed up in a whiff while chatting over coffee on the dimly lit set.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 202
    Getafix wrote:
    This is my view completely. Just wondering how you square this with enjoying the film though? Didn't you find it intensely annoying that practically everyone within MI6 is depicted as utterly incompetent. M, Moneypenny, Q and even Bond are all pretty useless throughout, making weird decisions and not really being very effective.

    Wouldn't this qualify as commentary on the modern intelligence agencies?

    The trouble with Bond, M, and Q was arrogance, and thinking they were 'on top of their game' when they really weren't.

    M was getting the boot because of her actions. Bond wasn't going to be put back in the field if M hadn't lied about his performance. The filmmakers never addressed Q's slip-up. He'd probably be canned in reality. On the other hand, he is supposed to be one of the top techies in the entire world. It'd be foolish to lose an asset like that, even if he did mess up.

    It's just a movie, though.
  • Posts: 14,798
    It does not bother me that Eve made mistakes and was not the best field agent. She was not meant to be an operative and she was certainly not a 00 or meant to be. She could drive and she could shoot. That she became Moneypenny bothers(bothered?) me more. I always imagined Moneypenny to be a competent secretary, with a civil servant background, maybe a secretary in the military. But I never imagined her a former operative. Maybe she was a station agent doing mostly secretarial work, trained to do other things in case of emergencies, but trained in shooting I saw it as a bit of a stretch. In other word, I like the Eve character, I am certain Naomie Harris will make a great Moneypenny (although too sexy for my taste), I am just not convinced about the transition from Eve to Moneypenny.
  • Posts: 11,425
    MrBrown wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    This is my view completely. Just wondering how you square this with enjoying the film though? Didn't you find it intensely annoying that practically everyone within MI6 is depicted as utterly incompetent. M, Moneypenny, Q and even Bond are all pretty useless throughout, making weird decisions and not really being very effective.

    Wouldn't this qualify as commentary on the modern intelligence agencies?

    The trouble with Bond, M, and Q was arrogance, and thinking they were 'on top of their game' when they really weren't.

    M was getting the boot because of her actions. Bond wasn't going to be put back in the field if M hadn't lied about his performance. The filmmakers never addressed Q's slip-up. He'd probably be canned in reality. On the other hand, he is supposed to be one of the top techies in the entire world. It'd be foolish to lose an asset like that, even if he did mess up.

    It's just a movie, though.

    Yes that's what I thought as well. I just couldn't square everyone at MI6 being totally useless with it being a Bond film though. It kind of made it even more depressing. A sort of critique of modern Britain - arrogant, complacent, incompetent. Bond used to be an escape from the harsh realities of a Britain in decline. Now it feels like an even more depressing version of reality.
  • bond50bond50 Banned
    Posts: 42
    She must of been hired on some minority program the Goverment runs.
  • Posts: 6,601
    bond50 wrote:
    She must of been hired on some minority program the Goverment runs.

    And who hired YOU? Just asking. You sound like some lunatic being on a war assignment.
  • bond50 wrote:
    She must of been hired on some minority program the Goverment runs.

    Let me state again,that of all the MI6 Staff we get to know during the Movie she is doubtless the most competent by far so I really wonder what your comment is aiming at.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 5,745
    bond50 wrote:
    She must of been hired on some...

    Woah buddy, keep those thoughts to yourself. Feel free to believe them, but don't post them.


    Flagged.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    bond50 wrote:
    She must of been hired on some...

    Woah buddy, keep those thoughts to yourself. Feel free to believe them, but don't post them.


    Flagged.
    On a role today, aren't we. Sick of riding the rough saddle and taking the bull by the horns? Admirable.
  • Posts: 5,745
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    bond50 wrote:
    She must of been hired on some...

    Woah buddy, keep those thoughts to yourself. Feel free to believe them, but don't post them.


    Flagged.
    On a role today, aren't we. Sick of riding the rough saddle and taking the bull by the horns? Admirable.

    I don't see why anyone feels comfortable posting such trash. You can be a disgusting person if you want, I shouldn't have to share the experience though.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    bond50 wrote:
    She must of been hired on some...

    Woah buddy, keep those thoughts to yourself. Feel free to believe them, but don't post them.


    Flagged.
    On a role today, aren't we. Sick of riding the rough saddle and taking the bull by the horns? Admirable.

    I don't see why anyone feels comfortable posting such trash. You can be a disgusting person if you want, I shouldn't have to share the experience though.

    I completely understand, mate. Part of the reason why this forum has fallen from grace as of late.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 6,601
    Maybe the fall from grace has also to do with the fact, that individuals like Bond 50, who clearly have nothing but mischief in mind, are allowed to spread their wings for times to come without anybody taking action, that brings the whole affair to a quick ending.
    IMO, that is what brings this forum to the present low.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Germanlady wrote:
    Maybe the fall from grace has also to do with the fact, that individuals like Bond 50, who clearly have nothing but mischief in mind, are allowed to spread their wings for times to come without anybody taking action, that brings the whole affair to a quick ending.
    IMO, that is what brings this forum to the present low.

    Freedom of speech. You'll just have to ignore it.
  • Posts: 5,745
    RC7 wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    Maybe the fall from grace has also to do with the fact, that individuals like Bond 50, who clearly have nothing but mischief in mind, are allowed to spread their wings for times to come without anybody taking action, that brings the whole affair to a quick ending.
    IMO, that is what brings this forum to the present low.

    Freedom of speech. You'll just have to ignore it.

    Yes freedom of speech, but when that speech is racist, and specifically against forum rules in this case, it's unacceptable.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    RC7 wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    Maybe the fall from grace has also to do with the fact, that individuals like Bond 50, who clearly have nothing but mischief in mind, are allowed to spread their wings for times to come without anybody taking action, that brings the whole affair to a quick ending.
    IMO, that is what brings this forum to the present low.

    Freedom of speech. You'll just have to ignore it.

    Our governments ignore it, so it shouldn't be too hard for us to do so as well.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 6,601
    [.
  • Posts: 14,798
    I don't think Eve was incompetent. She was maybe out of her depth, but not incompetent.
  • bond50bond50 Banned
    edited December 2012 Posts: 42
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    Maybe the fall from grace has also to do with the fact, that individuals like Bond 50, who clearly have nothing but mischief in mind, are allowed to spread their wings for times to come without anybody taking action, that brings the whole affair to a quick ending.
    IMO, that is what brings this forum to the present low.


    Freedom of speech. You'll just have to ignore it.

    Yes freedom of speech, but when that speech is racist, and specifically against forum rules in this case, it's unacceptable.

    Question .... Just how is a Government minority program racist ? Or do you just think the word minority is racist if so in what way genius ?

    The definition of racism makes no mention of minorities, this is an assumption of your own you are adding. If you wish to debate whether minorities can be racist, fine, but you cannot add a non-existent clause into a definition. All the definition mentions is members of other races.

    Do you not think that the English empire in India held racist attitudes towards the Indians? The whites were the minority but they certainly considered themselves superior to the majority Indians. Therefore, according to the definition of racism you quoted above, they were racist. Which race was the majority/minority is not relevant according to your quoted definition.
  • bond50 wrote:
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    Maybe the fall from grace has also to do with the fact, that individuals like Bond 50, who clearly have nothing but mischief in mind, are allowed to spread their wings for times to come without anybody taking action, that brings the whole affair to a quick ending.
    IMO, that is what brings this forum to the present low.


    Freedom of speech. You'll just have to ignore it.

    Yes freedom of speech, but when that speech is racist, and specifically against forum rules in this case, it's unacceptable.

    Question .... Just how is a Government minority program racist ? Or do you just think the word minority is racist if so in what way genius ?

    The definition of racism makes no mention of minorities, this is an assumption of your own you are adding. If you wish to debate whether minorities can be racist, fine, but you cannot add a non-existent clause into a definition. All the definition mentions is members of other races.

    Do you not think that the English empire in India held racist attitudes towards the Indians? The whites were the minority but they certainly considered themselves superior to the majority Indians. Therefore, according to the definition of racism you quoted above, they were racist. Which race was the majority/minority is not relevant according to your quoted definition.

    Like your "review" of SF, what you write shows your own attitudes and opinions more clearly than you realize. No matter how much you try to punch up your writing with flowery prose or try to deflect by adding in other streams of conversation (like above) you reveal what matters to you by what you choose to say, be offended by, or repeat several times.

    For example, your response to how Eve was hired as an agent in the first place is that "She must of been hired on some minority program the Goverment (sic) runs." The fact that your first thought ran to this is very revealing. Eve shows great competence in the film. Nowhere does she make a big mistake or show a lack of skill, the only thing that even remotely approaches that is when she is ordered to take a bad shot (against her own judgement and advice) and believes she has killed a fellow agent, leading to a few seconds of shock (her worst fear in that scene has come true) and the ultimate decision that she doesn't want to be out in the field where could be forced into a similar situation again.

    The fact that you believe that a black character "must" have been hired because of a government (note the correct spelling) program shows what you believe about different races, hence the reason that the word "racist" was used. People aren't saying that such a government program is racist, they are saying that you believing that's the only way that Eve would be hired is such. Given the clear issues that you have revealed yourself to have with gays, women, manliness, and minorities I don't believe many posters will respond to you directly. Normally I would not, but I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and hope that they can see the way that they are making themselves look once it's pointed out to them. Having been raised in a racist, misogynistic, and homophobic family I know better than anyone how people can grow, become more mature, and become better people if given a chance. But they also have to be willing to take it, and look at themselves with a critical eye and want to become a better person.

    And BTW, freedom of speech does not equal freedom from criticism.

Sign In or Register to comment.