Let's talk about Spectre's torture scene

145791013

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    In both CR & GE the DB5 was used effectively and appropriately, in my view - in exciting scenes that drove the narrative forward. Not in SF & certainly not in SP. It's a matter of finesse - not throwaway.

    I wouldn't let Campbell off the hook so lightly personally.

    In GE and CR it serves the exact same function - we're introducing a new Bond so just to hammer it home to you we'll have him drive the DB5. 'Look it's James Bond see. It must be because he's driving the same car as Sean.'

    It just shows a lack of confidence in what you are doing.

    To keep on dredging it up smacks of the sort of thing Tamahori would do.

    In the first 16 films it featured twice.

    In the subsequent 8 it has featured in 6.

    That's overkill which ever way you look at it.
    True enough. I'll forgive GE because that scene is just pure class (aesthetically and just as a post-music titles opener......you can't go wrong with a Monaco chase).

    CR could have been avoided, although it was a nice way to get Solange in the sack.

    That damn thing is indestructible now it seems.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,574
    bondjames wrote: »
    In both CR & GE the DB5 was used effectively and appropriately, in my view - in exciting scenes that drove the narrative forward. Not in SF & certainly not in SP. It's a matter of finesse - not throwaway.

    I wouldn't let Campbell off the hook so lightly personally.

    In GE and CR it serves the exact same function - we're introducing a new Bond so just to hammer it home to you we'll have him drive the DB5. 'Look it's James Bond see. It must be because he's driving the same car as Sean.'

    It just shows a lack of confidence in what you are doing.

    To keep on dredging it up smacks of the sort of thing Tamahori would do.

    In the first 16 films it featured twice.

    In the subsequent 8 it has featured in 6.

    That's overkill which ever way you look at it.

    Technically it's five as Apted had the sense to delete the DB5 scene from TWINE.

    So it didn't appear there, in DAD or in QOS.

    Well I am counting TWINE - infra red at the end.

    Fair enough. At least its presence was minor there, though.
  • Posts: 5,767
    And I find it rather repulsive how you blaim Mendes for being Nolan-esque, when it is actually Campbell you start pointing fingers at.
    Mendes is channelling Nolan though with SP.
    Moreover, may I remind you that Bond is a franchise? One could equally reason to get rid of Q, Moneypenny, M, Tanner, because they look too much like a Clone of the "Mission: Impossible" team.
    May I remind you that exactly that is being seriously discussed in one other thread? Because there are people having that problem. The old MI6 office constellation had no similarity with the M:I team, the current one has. Simple as that.

  • edited November 2015 Posts: 4,622
    The DB5 is a running gag promoted by Mendes with Craig's blessing.
    This Bond enjoys the car as his personal hobby car and Q indulges him.
    This Bond couldn't possibly understand the iconic significance the car holds with the character (himself) but we the audience can.
    It's just a quirky Mendes homage.
    I find it harmless, as it's not supposed to make any real sense.
    Did we notice that Q said there wasn't much left of the car, post Skyfall lodge, but the steering wheel.
    This is a Mendes jab at the 10 billion or so,pages worth of forum discussions about the steering wheel being on the wrong side of the car in SF.

    But yes I do think the car was re-introduced with both Broz and Craig to connect them with the series iconic early history.
    Mendes though has decided to double down on what Campbell started and milk the gag for all its worth.
    I think what niggles though is that he didn't make any attempt to properly connect his car with the car from CR, which drove us all bonkers, which I think ensured that it was coming back, along with steering wheel dialogue jab.
    Notice Whishaw delivers the line in a mischievous manner.

    Oh and ICYMI, I hate the torture scene!

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,651
    Some are looking far too much into this. Mendes and co. weren't actively condemning those who were so bored they took to their keyboards to whine about the DB5 and its role in SF. He had far better things to do and far greater responsibilities to meet than begin such a trivial crusade.

    Personally, I think the DB5's presence serves far more than just fan service in the Craig films. Dan's Bond is often characterized as a traditionalist that prefers old ways over the new, and what could be more iconic of a bygone era than the DB5? The car fits his sensibilities well, and aids in characterizing him as a man, which I don't think the Brosnan era did quite so well, if at all. There its purpose seemed very much just to scream "look at me, an image of the past," but here it means much, much more.
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    "Dan's Bond is often characterized as a traditionalist that prefers old ways over the new"

    Except for when his tailor is involved.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I can't really agree on the DB5 having more relevance in this era than the Broz era. In that we got a pretty kick-ass chase and a fleeting glimpse. Yeah, it was a tip of the hat to bygone days and past glories, but in this era it's been front and centre to the point it's used in promotional ads and was pretty much billed as one of the stars of SF (hell, it appeared on the red carpet). It's become an albatross under Mendes' stewardship. Beautiful car, but let's not flog a dead horse. If we don't feature equally beautiful 'modern' classics, where do we go in 50 years time? Or do we have Bond getting into a 100 year old, several million pound car?
  • Posts: 5,767
    timmer wrote: »
    The DB5 is a running gag promoted by Mendes with Craig's blessing.
    This Bond enjoys the car as his personal hobby car and Q indulges him.
    This Bond couldn't possibly understand the iconic significance the car holds with the character (himself) but we the audience can.
    It's just a quirky Mendes homage.
    I find it harmless, as it's not supposed to make any real sense.
    Did we notice that Q said there wasn't much left of the car, post Skyfall lodge, but the steering wheel.
    This is a Mendes jab at the 10 billion or so,pages worth of forum discussions about the steering wheel being on the wrong side of the car in SF.

    But yes I do think the car was re-introduced with both Broz and Craig to connect them with the series iconic early history.
    Mendes though has decided to double down on what Campbell started and milk the gag for all its worth.
    I think what niggles though is that he didn't make any attempt to properly connect his car with the car from CR, which drove us all bonkers, which I think ensured that it was coming back, along with steering wheel dialogue jab.
    Notice Whishaw delivers the line in a mischievous manner.
    I believe the DB5 wouldn´t be such an issue if it were done a bit more subtle.
    Although the direction its presentation took in SP is promising ;-).


    Some are looking far too much into this. Mendes and co. weren't actively condemning those who were so bored they took to their keyboards to whine about the DB5 and its role in SF. He had far better things to do and far greater responsibilities to meet than begin such a trivial crusade.

    Personally, I think the DB5's presence serves far more than just fan service in the Craig films. Dan's Bond is often characterized as a traditionalist that prefers old ways over the new, and what could be more iconic of a bygone era than the DB5? The car fits his sensibilities well, and aids in characterizing him as a man, which I don't think the Brosnan era did quite so well, if at all. There its purpose seemed very much just to scream "look at me, an image of the past," but here it means much, much more.
    It would if it weren´t done so brutally as in SF.
    IIRC Mendes himself mentioned that he was very relieved that people cheered at the car´s appearance in SF, and that he wanted to do such things more often. So you´re right, he´s not checking the internet, but the cinemas.

  • RC7RC7
    edited November 2015 Posts: 10,512
    boldfinger wrote: »
    I believe the DB5 wouldn´t be such an issue if it were done a bit more subtle.

    If EON announced that after DC we'd never see the DB5 in another film, I'd be more than happy. For 30 years they had the good sense to experiment and then for the last twenty they've been treating it like a canonical trope akin to the gunbarrel, or the title sequence, which it absolutely isn't.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,487
    And now even this torture thread has turned into a DB5 discussion.

    It s torture. The title of the tread is even "Let s talk about Spectre s torture scene".

    Haha, oh well.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    And now even this torture thread has turned into a DB5 discussion.

    It s torture. The title of the tread is even "Let s talk about Spectre s torture scene".

    Haha, oh well.

    The inclusion of the DB5 is the biggest torture of all.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,406
    Lesioning the fusiform gyrus could result in face blindness, but the drill that [REDACTED] uses goes nowhere near the gyrus - it in fact drills through the mandible and would’ve entered Bond’s mouth. At best doing nothing, at worst giving bond a wicked bad sinusitis or meningitis.
    (Via IMDB)

    Taken of Yahoo.com, via IMBD

    I guess Bond would've been fine. ;)
  • edited December 2015 Posts: 4,622
    The Mendes use of the DB5 has now gone so far off the rails that's its become cornball crowd pleaser, as if there really was any doubt.
    The anachronistic presence of the thing, fully tricked out no less, in SF was one thing, but with SP there is no doubt at all about what he is doing.

    OK we get it. nudge nudge. Little treat for the fans.
    But the thing was blown to bits in SF, yet Q is somehow putting it back together, having managed to salvage not much more than the "steering wheel" wink wink.

    That Sammy, what a card. Mendes running gag on steroids. It's not supposed to make any sense of course, so I don't care. I'll just yuk along.

    Campbell re-introduced it twice to give both the new Brozzer-and-Craig Bonds a cinematic connection with the series iconic early years. He managed to finesse some half-arsed context in both GE and CR, but with Mendes it's gag city all the way.
    Nothing going on here that's supposed to make any sense at all.
    Oddjob could crush the thing in his scrap yard pulveriser, and Q would happily put it back together, so Bong could go puttering about in it with his girlfriends.

    The torture scene btw is still terrible, awful, stupid and horrible, plus bad, and not good, not to mention completely overshadowed by Blofelds sockless pasty white legs.
  • Interestingly here is some concept art from Spectre that clearly shows the orginial card game/dinner scene.

    $_57.JPG
    http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NzUwWDEwMDA=/z/5M0AAOSwfZ1WYL3P/$_57.JPG

    The art direction seems to be in total contrast to Oberhauser's information room, for that reason I kinda like it. I enjoy that his private quarters are a little more theatrical and flamboyant.
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,184
    I wish that was left in. That would have been awesome.
  • Posts: 3,336
    That looks cool, hope we will get alot of behind the scenes stuff from the blu'ray
  • Posts: 107
    I give a thumbs up to the tension filled torture scene. I think it's the most "escapiest" scene in the Craig era where you are like he's screwed, how is he gonna get out of this one?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Chang wrote: »
    I give a thumbs up to the tension filled torture scene. I think it's the most "escapiest" scene in the Craig era where you are like he's screwed, how is he gonna get out of this one?
    I think they showed the watch on his wrist early on, so I sort of knew that was going to be his way out.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,651
    And I'm pretty sure we never find out in any way shape or form that Bond's watch is a makeshift, get out of jail free card explosive. Unless I somehow missed the obvious.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Q essentially told him there is an explosive in it when he gave it to him in London (the alarm is very loud or something along those lines). So when they started showing it on his wrist, it was clear to me that this was his way out, if he could find a way to arm it and get it away from him. When Madeline unexpectedly walked up to him, that was his out, and he took it.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,651
    bondjames wrote: »
    Q essentially told him there is an explosive in it when he gave it to him in London. So when they started showing it on his wrist, it was clear to me that this was his way out, if he could find a way to arm it and get it away from him. When Madeline unexpectedly walked up to him, that was his out, and he took it.

    I don't remember that at all. The only things I remember Q saying in reference to the watch were "it tells time" and "the alarm is loud," nothing else.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Exactly, the alarm being loud is an inside joke to an explosive - "if you get my meaning" he says. That's what I took from that bit between them at least. I didn't think it could be anything else. A bit obvious for me, but if others didn't get it, then the scene could be more tense.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,651
    bondjames wrote: »
    Exactly, the alarm being loud is an inside joke to an explosive - "if you get my meaning" he says. That's what I took from that bit between them at least. I didn't think it could be anything else. A bit obvious for me, but if others didn't get it, then the scene could be more tense.

    When I saw SP the first time, I thought Q was using the discussion about the watch and its alarm to let Bond know that the DB10 had a loud alarm, subtly giving him permission to try and steal it from 009. However, when I saw Q's angry reaction to its later theft, I was confused.

    All this time it was him telling Bond the watch could go boom? Man, that really should've been more clear.
  • Posts: 1,098
    I understood that Q meant the alarm was a bomb. :)
  • Interestingly here is some concept art from Spectre that clearly shows the orginial card game/dinner scene.

    $_57.JPG
    http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NzUwWDEwMDA=/z/5M0AAOSwfZ1WYL3P/$_57.JPG

    The art direction seems to be in total contrast to Oberhauser's information room, for that reason I kinda like it. I enjoy that his private quarters are a little more theatrical and flamboyant.

    They were going to be playing cards WHILE having dinner? Wouldn't that have made the cards terribly messy?

    "I'll see your 500, and raise you another 500 and a chicken wing." ;)
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,289
    I remember Q saying in reference to the watch were "it tells time" and "the alarm is loud," nothing else.
    And that was hilarious and got a great laugh in my theatre. It was only when the camera focused on it later that I suspected the 'alarm' *might* be more than that. I love that I rarely overthink a movie upon first viewing because it increases the YES!!! factor!
    :D
  • imranbecksimranbecks Singapore
    edited December 2015 Posts: 959
    I think the torture scene was just an excuse of direct product placement for Omega. I'm not complaining because I love anything to do with Bond's watch. Anyway, the scene was executed well although it seemed kinda rushed and it also felt like it was solely made for the watch. Along with the huge Omega logo on the dial which can be seen clearly during that scene countless of times. That was great screentime for the brand. Also proving why the Nato strap came in handy. I think Bond would've had a difficult time removing the watch tied up like that if it was on a bracelet. What bothered me is how Bond knew how to activate the bomb. I don't recall Q briefing him on how to arm it unless it came with an instruction manual somewhere...LOL
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,289
    imranbecks wrote: »
    I don't recall Q briefing him on how to arm it unless it came with an instruction manual somewhere...LOL
    He just activated the alarm.
  • imranbecksimranbecks Singapore
    Posts: 959
    chrisisall wrote: »
    imranbecks wrote: »
    I don't recall Q briefing him on how to arm it unless it came with an instruction manual somewhere...LOL
    He just activated the alarm.

    The actual watch from Omega doesn't have an actual alarm. So how would he know how to activate the alarm? This isn't some digital G-Shock watch...LOL
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,184
    imranbecks wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    imranbecks wrote: »
    I don't recall Q briefing him on how to arm it unless it came with an instruction manual somewhere...LOL
    He just activated the alarm.

    The actual watch from Omega doesn't have an actual alarm. So how would he know how to activate the alarm? This isn't some digital G-Shock watch...LOL

    Still press here do I?
    goldeneye06.JPG
Sign In or Register to comment.