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
Comments
That's rather precious. Until SP the film came along, Quantum had every appearance of being international in scale, not a regional division of something else ie a new Spectre.
This is the problem when you make stuff up as you go along. ie the notion of Spectre hadn't even beenconceived until after the first 3 films were done.
Eon is trying to reverse engineer continuity with the previous three films.
Quantum had a Canadian operation running, revealed in QoS, involving the same guy who was scamming Vesper at Royale ( Youssef) Seems rather international to me, not SA focused.
@alexanderwaverly Yes Bond asks Mathis if that was even his real name during the dumpster discussion. What actually prompted him to ask that question is never actually revealed, I don't think.
Sure, Eon took liberties with Mathis as they have with Leiter too. Maybe as these guys weren't story specific, they figured they could use them as they saw fit in the films, eg Felix.
In the Fleming books, I think Mathis only figures in CR and FRWL. Killing him I think was an overreach, but not real grevious as he was relatively minor character in the Fleming canon. But still I didn't like it. Good rule I think, is if Fleming didn't kill a character, Eon or continuation authors need not kill them either.
What grates about the Hannes/Ernst relationship, is that it is so out of left field.
With other characters Eon is really only guilty of altering the character somewhat (Dikko, Krest) or expanding on them, but not so much radically connecting one character with another character from a different book.
Next we'll find that Pussy Galore and Domino are actually estranged siblings, or that Irma Bunt and Klebb are actually ugly half-sisters ( that I could believe actually).
Go nuts. Darko Kerim and Tiger Tanaka were frat brothers. MP is actually first cousin to, I don't know, let's say Gala Brand.....just for fun.
Yeah... what's wrong with that? In CR they had alluded to a bigger organisation, they had an obligation to explore that a bit further but in '08 they didn't have Blofeld and SPECTRE - if they did it would've been Octopus rings at the Opera and not Q pins.
SPECTRE is something EON have been wanting to use for a long time, and I suspect for Wilson it's been irksome ever since the original concept for TSWLM was scotched by McClory. This is called a retcon - it's a bit like Garry Shandling's inclusion in The Winter Soldier or even a lot of what George Lucas did with the Star Wars saga (Darth Vader originally only wore a suit because Ralph McQuarrie quaintly observed that he had to jump from ship-to-ship at the opening of the film, not because he's Luke's daddy and he's burned up).
You use what you can based on the materials themselves, and there's nothing that prevents you from treating Quantum as Greene's retinue, with White and Haines and Mitchell et al being SPECTRE operatives. Not unlike MI6 being MI6 and having a Double O section. If anything it enriches the muddled QoS, and furthermore by making Silva an operative it makes his omnipotence perhaps easier to stomach for those who were hung up on that kind of thing.
So, Peter Franks?
I also don't have a problem with them trying to pull all the four Craig films together either. It's taken EON 44 years to use SPECTRE again so why not infer they've been a part of Craig's Bond all along.
It's essentially what the rebooted Hawaii Five-0 (Five-O) did with McGarrett and Wo Fat. In the new version there's a "personal" connection.
https://hmssweblog.wordpress.com/2014/11/27/case-study-rebooting-an-arch-foe-non-007-spoiler/
:) He grew up real fast. More like Quarrel Sr. Only 11years. Rog had to fetch his own shoes though.
@4dot OK I can roll with the retcon.
For the record, prefer that Mathis was not killed, but as we learned at dumpster reveal, maybe that wasn't really Mathis. Does Mathis even really exist? hmmm
Don't care that Peter Franks was killed. Otherwise we never would have got "You just killed James Bond!"
Do care that Ernst is Hannes patricidal son. Re-boot Ernst clearly spent too much time watching DAD. Made him mad and prone to Pappy killing.
Wonder if Dexter Smythe in re-boot universe is now clear of conscience, with no long ago murder hanging over his head?So many questions.
That is what I wanted to hear. I couldn't give any less of a damn if it has "an emotional core" or if it's "true to Fleming." I love Bond for the gadgets, the girls, the one liners and the adventure. Seems to have all of these things. As well as a white cat and a gunbarrel at the start. This will be my favorite Craig film without a doubt. But I would still take Roger Moore over him any day.
So yeah - seems like a lot was cut down for time from the first half of the film. Which is a real shame and it shows in the first half especially. Stuff just moves on swiftly before it lands. Too streamlined A lot of touches sorely missed - the cameras gag with C and the lack of "Spooky" in the Rome chase is just the start, it felt sterile in the final film and it could've really improved it. There are other smaller bits that were changed for the worse but another big one is the whole dinner scene on the train is cut too short.....the whole "have you ever been in love" exchange will be sorely missed and really would've helped build Bond/Madeleine's relationship.
Madeleine - she's been made excessively polarising - one minute she's like "I'll kill you if you touch me" and 10 minutes later she says the three words. The Morocco hotel sequence in the final version is a bit ugh. That whole thing with Bond doing the complete opposite of what he usually does with Bond girls and Madeleine being drunk-surprised "why the f isn't he kissing me?" was a really nice touch and again, would've helped the relationship. Then the whole "I love you bit" at the SPECTRE base. Which brings me on to:
SPECTRE base and Blofeld reveal - Jesus - ok the torture scene was super great but it screwed everything up. Not only was the Blofeld name reveal is a bit cheesy anti-climax (in the December script it was an epic "oh-bloody-snap" moment from Bond, but then it left a plot hole), the whole "I love you" bit was just WHAT. Also I don't like how they made the whole scene with Blofeld showing Madeleine and Bond round the base about Madeleine and Bond. I would've much preferred what they had in the script with the cause-effect and blackmail demonstration, that was perfect, and how he eventually brought in M and Vesper, and then Mr White. The 'turn that off' bit in the final film was awesome though. And the white cat is welcome.
No complaints on third act changes, in fact it was damn strong. Although I missed some of the stuff on Westminster Bridge but that's probably a minor thing. It's literally in the final film just Bond about to kill Blofeld with the latter urging him to "finish it" and then Bond's like "I'm out of bullets". Then M does the arrest.
Also they cut the "we have all the time in the world" final line.
So yeah......most changes from December script, with the exception of Act 3 and the torture scene (ignoring the implications of said torture scene) are for the worse IMHO. Funny how I do all this with bloody Bond and not Hunger Games
I thought Waltz was excellent and nothing cheesy even that damned persian
Indeed. Silva was cheesy and OTT. Waltz pitched it just right for me. This is a villain that was in complete control of Bond's life, the author of his pain and Waltz played it accordingly.
I actually thought it was a great moment when the ESB was mentioned.
I'm guessing they took out the Louis Armstrong line so as not to box themselves in for potential sequel direction
But the fact that the line was even considered, shows that the OHMSS ending direction has been very much in play, and is probably still very much on the table.
I think Shatterhand and Castle of Death, Bond vs Blofeld revenge scenario, is still very possible.
I don't know how I feel if Bond 25 was titled Blofield or Ernst Stavro Blofeld etc. I wouldn't hate it but I am a little tired of the one word titles.
For me or at least how I view it Oberhauser/Blofield organization was Quantum but after M and Bond discovered the name they changed it to spectre. Why even in the interview process White point out how MI6 has no idea they even exist after the Opera House they know the name of the organization and several key members so White and Blofield essentially reorganize.
The issue I have is if they kept it close to Fleming Franz still works and Could be set up as much more interesting character.
If in stead of Franz killing Daddy and taking his mother's name because eh liked Bond better we have Dexter Smythe Killing Oberhauser and Franz Blaming Bond, saying men like him and Dexter are of the same cloth and during the torture scene Bond retorts that Hans was an adventurer too and Causes Franz to go through a sort of an identity crisis and then taking his Mother's named of Blofeld it makes for a more interesting dynamic and read far better then the sort of fan fiction we apparently got.
Again I haven't seen the film but based on everything surrounding it I feel like this might be third in terms of the Craig era and low top 10 in terms of Bond period.
It's not just based off of Blofeld being pissed Bond had a close relationship with his father. Blofeld explains that Bond was interfering with SP's activities and as such, Blofeld being the head took it personally and wanted to destroy Bond.
Precisely. SPECTRE is in operation irregardless of Bond's activities, it just so happens that Bond has become a thorn in their side over the last few films and ESB has used it as a morbid excuse to destroy Bond psychologically and physically. This isn't the main thrust of SPECTRE's operations (as evidenced in the meeting, where they outline various other nefarious operations), but it is something ESB has intermittently concerned himself with, culminating in the events of SP. It's made quite clear with effective use of dialogue, neither is it rammed home in unnecessary detail, or unexplained, another reason I prefer it to SF. I find the thrust of the movie and various subplots quite clear.
Interestingly, this was deleted from the film. After the MTS, the film opens with Bond’s briefing with M.
There are a few changes from the trailer:
-Moneypenny and Bond in his flat is entirely reshot for the final film. Instead of handing the Skyfall file to him in his apartment it takes place in a courtyard. In the trailer the scene seems quite ominous, in the final film it’s quite jocular.
-Bond tenderly holding Swan’s face as he kisses her on the train is cut. The scene plays out in a long shot.
-Waltz’s delivery of ‘Welcome James’
That’s it, I think…
Agree they cut out the heart of the film in the first hour, and destroyed the train dialog scene and all the resonance to CR. It's a shame, really. If they wanted to make a Nolan film, why not go all the way and make it a LONG film? It doesn't detract Nolan, or Cameron, from box office receipts. We need a director's cut on DVD.