Parts of Bond Movies that Don't Make Sense

1910111214

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    timmer wrote:
    For years I wondered how Tiffany knew to follow Blofeld-in-drag out of the casino. How did she recongnize him, if they had never met and also considering that she wouldn't even know he existed.
    Until it was pointed out to me by another Bond fan, that the answer was so obvious, it was quite easy to overlook.
    Namely, that after Bond's adventures atop the Whyte House and his escape from the "walking my rat" episode, Blofeld's cover was fully blown. Bond and Leiter presumably simply filled Tiffany in. Now being Blofeld-knowlegable, Tiffany spotted the cat and gave chase, until she was caught. "Look what the cat dragged in."

    Or the script is just horrible. I think you are giving Tiffany too much credit as it is, since being all resourceful and competent isn't really her strong suit and instead you would likely find her in a corner picking her nose and staring off into space until Bond gave her an important order she would then try her best to mess up.
  • edited April 2013 Posts: 4,622
    She clearly followed the cat. The question that always perplexed though, was how did she know the significance of the cat, but of course the answer is obvious, when one understands that she had full access to Bond, Leiter, Q etc.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    timmer wrote:
    She clearly followed the cat. The question that always perplexed though, was how did she know the significance of the cat, but of course the answer is obvious, when one understands that she had full access to Bond, Leiter, Q etc.

    Pretty thin.

    We are to assume that Bond and Leiter fully brief her to the extent that after telling her of all his crimes for the last 10 years, the fact that he killed Bonds wife etc etc they dont neglect to tell her about the cat? Or that with her 'full access' to Bond, Leiter and Q she drags it out of them with her subtle interrogation techiniques?

    Why would they even tell her anyway? Shes not an agent and can they be sure she can be trusted?

    Or perhaps the point is they dont want to fill her in properly in case shes still dodgy so they just say if you see a bloke with a cat beware?

    But I think you are giving the scriptwriters way too much credit. DAF is very shoddily written is a much more credible theory for this scene.
  • edited April 2013 Posts: 4,622
    It is perfectly plausible that Bond would brief her on the true nature of the man that had been pulling her strings all this time, and who also tried to have her killed. She's now hanging out with the good guys. She's with Q in the casino. These are now her peeps. The big bad has a serious white-cat fetish. She picked up on that tidbit. It all fits.
    Granted the fact that I had to puzzle over this for years, suggests the film was lax regarding exposition of Tiffany's sudden ability to spot Blofeld in disguise. But the scene still works quite well. It keeps the film moving. The whole film is a dark-camp spyfy genre fantasy anyway with a twist of the bizarre. Suspension of disbelief is a given towards fully enjoying such films. An actual scene where she was witness to or part of a debrief would have bogged things down.
    I do like the way Hamilton puts his movies together. He keeps them moving. He doesn't sweat the details in how he gets from one place to another. If one cares it can be sussed out later, (like on a Bond dedicated message board) after the initial visceral excitement and thrill of the film has subsided.
  • edited April 2013 Posts: 4,813
    Hey cool, You Only Live Twice got featured on Cracked.com this morning!
    Cracked wrote:
    #1. You Only Live Twice -- Bond's Superiors Fake His Death, Immediately Blow His Cover

    http://www.cracked.com/article_20376_the-6-most-idiotic-decisions-by-authority-figures-in-movies_p2.html
  • Hey cool, You Only Live Twice got featured on Cracked.com this morning!
    Cracked wrote:
    #1. You Only Live Twice -- Bond's Superiors Fake His Death, Immediately Blow His Cover

    http://www.cracked.com/article_20376_the-6-most-idiotic-decisions-by-authority-figures-in-movies_p2.html

    Ha! It raises a very interesting point.
  • Posts: 4,762
    YOLT really does contradict itself in Bond's fake death. I mean, even during the villains' meeting in Blofeld's office in the volcano lair, Helga Brandt and Mr. Osato both say that they had seen Bond's death in the newspapers, and are surprised to hear that he is alive, even though they clearly saw him in Osato's office only days before! And the newspaper, shown at the beginning of the movie after the title song, has Bond's face SMOTHERED ALL OVER THE FRONT PAGE! There's no way they couldn't recognize him! ARRGG!
  • Posts: 4,813
    They should have done the 'famous' Japanese disguise when Bond first goes to Japan!!! That would have made too much sense apparently....
  • edited April 2013 Posts: 4,622
    Funny stuff but the Cracked report, I think is guilty of overstating the case for "blowing" Bond's cover. First of all YOLT is an escapist spyfy 007 film, made at the height of Bondmania, but they know this. Cracked is having fun with the absurdly overblown effort to trumpet Bond's death. They are not wrong, but within the context of the fantasy Bond world, Bond visiting Osato, and hoping to not be recongnized is not that far-fetched. As far as we know, its really only Blofeld that is up to speed on Bond's past exploits against Spectre. Brandt and Osato presumably glanced at the newspaper photo, or maybe they just heard about the Bond assasanination through the Spectre interweb network, but it is not an absolute that they would have identified Bond posing as chemical salesman. Anyway Bond routinely walks head-long into danger. He'd be happy to take the risk. He's a provocateur more than an undercover op. And at this stage, he only knew that there was something bad going down at Osato Chemicals, based on his adventures from the night before, but he hadn't clinched the Spectre connection yet.
    But we know why Eon "killed off" Bond at the beginning of the film. They did it for dramatic effect, and to have some fun with Fleming title. Plus Harry Saltzman had a thing about "killing" Bond, whenever that device could be worked into the film.
    From M's pov also, I don't think he would reasonably think that such a dramatically staged death, could do any more than buy some time anyway. Take some pressure off, as he said.
    Bond disguising as Japanese was not related to covering his identity as Bond. It was done so that he could fit in with the other ninjas as they merged with the Ama fishing village. He was disguising his whiteness, not his own identity.
    But still a funny little attempt from Cracked. Great to see such a memorable Bond film getting a nod, all these years later.
  • Posts: 1,708
    "Oddjob has had ninja training"

    Yup , as seen in Ninja Strikes Back ;)

    Re: Tawanese tycoon......they could've been far out at sea and nobody saw him plunge ;)
  • Posts: 1,708
    Wouldn't there be signs of strangulation if they found Tibbetts body ?

    About Oddjob in the hotel room......well if Jaws can hide in a tiny plane then anythings possible ;)
  • edited April 2013 Posts: 4,622
    Re Oddjob in the hotel room.Remember its a Guy Hamilton film. He doesn't sweat such details. As long as it could make sense, he tends not to explain further.
    My guess,and it's a guess because Hamilton doesn't give us enough to know for sure, is that Oddjob had been stalking Bond and Jill. He was outside the room or maybe lurking inside the suite,if the suite was big enough. He knew they were inside. He was biding his time. I'm guessing when Bond moved to the kitchen area, Oddjob sprung to action, entering the shag room with ninja like speed and grace, gave Jill a quick chop and then calmly chopped down the unsuspecting Bond.
    Bond was blathering on about champagne at the time, so his guard may have been down enough that Oddjob could cold-cock Jill without Bond knowing. That's my guess FWIW.
  • Posts: 101
    I am watching Diamonds Are Forever last night.
    The glitz, the glamour, what a treat.
    But was reminded of a part that's always confused me.
    When the tour guide in Amsterdam tells the story of "The Skinny Bridge".
    "Two sisters wanted to see each other every day, but they ran out of money, so zat is why zey call it ze skinny bridge."
    What?
    Huh?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
  • Posts: 5,634
    You'd do well to find a more comprehensive, or satisfactory, would be better, explanation than that. Amsterdam is such an exciting and hedonistic experience and all we got was a few shots of the city that year. It's a pity in retrospect, in that they could of given us so much more. More time spend on location than the mundane casinos of Vegas, of which, most will be familiar
  • edited April 2013 Posts: 388
    I haven't read through this entire thread so I hope this hasn't come up already.

    In A View to a Kill Bond discovers that his assistant, Sir Godfrey Tibbet, has been killed by May Day. Bond Is then knocked out and Max Zorin and May Day deliberately try to drown him by sinking his Rolls Royce in a lake.

    Does Bond:
    (a) Contact the French police and have Zorin and May Day arrested for murder and attempted murder?
    (b) Call in some fellow agents and take that genetically-engineered bleach-blond commie-nazi down!
    (c) Continue quietly observing Zorin as he goes about his business planning to flood the San Andreas fault.

    It actually has repercussions too as Zorin murders all of his employees.

    There is no reason for Bond not to take Zorin in before he leaves for San Francisco. It's maybe the biggest plot hole in all of the Bond films.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited April 2013 Posts: 9,117
    I haven't read through this entire thread so I hope this hasn't come up already.

    In A View to a Kill Bond discovers that his assistant, Sir Godfrey Tibbet, has been killed by May Day. Bond Is then knocked out and Max Zorin and May Day deliberately try to drown him by sinking his Rolls Royce in a lake.

    Does Bond:
    (a) Contact the French police and have Zorin and May Day arrested for murder and attempted murder?
    (b) Call in some fellow agents and take that genetically-engineered bleach-blond commie-nazi down!
    (c) Continue quietly observing Zorin as he goes about his business planning to flood the San Andreas fault.

    It actually has repercussions too as Zorin murders all of his employees.

    There is no reason for Bond not to take Zorin in before he leaves for San Francisco. It's maybe the biggest plot hole in all of the Bond films.

    Its a very good point.

    The best I can say is that with his money Zorin would have a very good brief and what actual evidence does Bond have?

    He didnt see Tibbet being killed and he was unconscious when they pushed the car in.

    All the authorities would have is Bonds word. A decent barrister would rip it to shreds:

    'So to sum up Mr Bond could not see either of my clients actually kill the deceased because he was not there. He could not see either of my clients attempt to kill him because at the time he was unconscious. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury this case is a farce and hangs on the evidence of a man who was either not present or not awake at the time when both the alleged crimes took place. If this man is the best the prosecution can offer you have no option but to acquit my clients.'

    The best they could ever get is if May Day left some DNA on Tibbet and forensic cold prove she did it. Zorin walks every time though.

    Although as you say after the 'enemy action' of killing Tibbet why doesnt M issue an assasination order and let Bond just take Zorin out? Why the need to find out what hes up to. Hes outside the law but they cant prove it so Bond should be allowed to use his licence to kill.
  • Posts: 5,994
    Well, for starters, Zorin fled the country as soon as Tibbett was dead. Then, let's not forget Bond's previous encounter with the french police. Not sure if the cops would have believed him after the chaos he caused in Paris.

    Plus, neither Bond or M could be sure that Zorin acted on his won here. Was he the main baddie, or a pawn in somebody else's employ ? And what was the plan anyway ? And couldn't it happen without Zorin being present ? Questions that had to be answered before taking actions.
  • edited April 2013 Posts: 388
    Gerard wrote:
    Well, for starters, Zorin fled the country as soon as Tibbett was dead.

    He hardly fled. He was flying around in a airship with his name emblazoned on it, making appointments with politicians and visiting his business interests.
    Gerard wrote:
    Then, let's not forget Bond's previous encounter with the french police. Not sure if the cops would have believed him after the chaos he caused in Paris.

    I don't think the police would refuse to investigate a murder, particularly when there is a body, just because the witness was involved in a bunch of traffic incidents. Indeed, as the traffic incidents occurred due to Aubergine's murder and one of the Tibbet suspects matched the description of the Aubergine suspect, it would make Bond's story far more credible.

    Plus, it's MI6 - they could always just go with my option B.
    Gerard wrote:
    Plus, neither Bond or M could be sure that Zorin acted on his own here. Was he the main baddie, or a pawn in somebody else's employ ? And what was the plan anyway ? And couldn't it happen without Zorin being present ? Questions that had to be answered before taking actions.

    Why does that matter? Zorin could be taken in and then Bond could continue investigating anyway. With the added bonus that MI6 have two key individuals in the case in custody and ready for interrogation and have enough dirt on the two of them to - at least potentially - convince them to talk.

    It's a common problem in Bond plots that the baddie doesn't just kill Bond when he has the chance, as Scott Evil famously pointed out, but this is the only incident I can think of where Bond could have and should have taken the bad guy in but just decided to let him carry on.

    (Just to be clear, these plot holes and continuity errors don't ruin my enjoyment of the films at all. If anything, I quite enjoy them.)
  • Posts: 1,708
    Amsterdam Connection used Ams better afa location is concerned ;)
  • edited April 2013 Posts: 4,622
    Hmmm. Yes @SirJames' option B does seem like something that should have been considered, in a real world scenario, however Bond movies such as a AVTAK are quite obviously not intended to be terribly realistic. Disbelief does need to be suspended.
    I guess, the Mi6 Bond method we see on display here, is basically to stay on the villain's trail and see what can be learned and ultimately thwarted. If they lose an agent or too, along the way, such is the spy game.
    Zorin may also have used his considerable influence and status though to get out of the country, even via airship. Mi6 wouldn't necessarily have the clout to roust him up before he could leave.
  • timmer wrote:
    Hmmm. Yes @SirJames' option B does seem like something that should have been considered, in a real world scenario, however Bond movies such as a AVTAK are quite obviously not intended to be terribly realistic. Disbelief does need to be suspended.

    Absolutely. I'm just having fun with it. Every Bond film (hell, every action / adventure film) has plot holes like this. I just thought this one was particularly interesting because it's unique - it's usually the villains who miss the opportunity to dispense with Bond, rather than vice-versa.

  • Posts: 5,634
    Watching Skyfall again recently, and don't think it's been mentioned, but when the subway attack occurs in London and the cars fall through the hole in the roof, why is the interior lighting still on. You would assume, as soon as the train left the tracks, the electricity would be discontinued and the train would be blacked out as a result of it, but all lighting remains operative ?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    Watching Skyfall again recently, and don't think it's been mentioned, but when the subway attack occurs in London and the cars fall through the hole in the roof, why is the interior lighting still on. You would assume, as soon as the train left the tracks, the electricity would be discontinued and the train would be blacked out as a result of it, but all lighting remains operative ?

    My only thought is that they're emergency lights.
  • hullcityfanhullcityfan Banned
    edited June 2013 Posts: 496
    Bond seems too happy that he's just killed someone most times and Felix Leiter was too happy at the end of LTK despite his wife just died and lost half a leg I would be really upset even if a guy I wanted dead for years was dead and all that happend. Also at the meeting in SF it's day when he arrives and day when he leaves and it couldn't be that dark when he picks up his Aston Martin DB5.
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 169
    Watching YOLT again recently brought up many questions that have already been addressed here. But I have a couple more. Why shoot Bond out of a torpedo tube to send him to Japan? I suppose sending 007 there a boat wouldn't have been as cool. Then the whole SPECTRE plan to capture space capsules makes little sense. Why pull them out of orbit and take them back to Earth? What for? At least when the plot was rehashed for TSWLM, it made sense for Stromberg to hijack (seajack?) the submarines in order to launch missiles from them later on. But in YOLT, why not just blow up the US and Soviet spacecraft as long as Blofeld had no use for them back in the volcano? Blasting the spacecraft out of orbit would have done just as much to push the superpowers to war without all that pointless hijacking (spacejacking?). Even Blofeld seemed to realize it near the end when he ordered the destruction of the SPECTRE rocket after it was done swallowing the final capsule. Which then leads to that awfully convenient destruct button... :-?
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    Dr_Yes wrote:
    Then the whole SPECTRE plan to capture space capsules makes little sense.
    Those are some interesting points @Dr_Yes. I guess the only thing that comes to mind is that if the plan failed Blofeld would still have hostages to bargain with and spacecraft to sell. Secret volcano lairs aren't cheap you know. They need to get the money back somehow!
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 4,622
    Yes, why destroy expensive space capsules when you can steal them, plunder their secrets. If you've got the capture-tech, why not use it.

    I think Bond was launched from a torpedo tube because they wanted him to swim ashore, so the tube was simple way to get him into the water.
    But maybe more to the point, it served as a suitably dramatic visual-worthy cinema scene. ;)
    ===
    I have a question re LALD. Rog receives the Queen of Cups card after his first night with Rosie Carver in San Monique.
    The card seems to tip Bond to the possibility that Rosie, or someone, might not be who they seem.
    Who are we to believe slipped him the tarot card? Solitaire maybe? Not likely. She wasn't in Bond's thrall yet, and Kananga kept a tight leash on her, I think.
    Possibly a friendly intelligence ally from CIA, that knew Rosie was a double?
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 169
    timmer wrote:
    Yes, why destroy expensive space capsules when you can steal them, plunder their secrets. If you've got the capture-tech, why not use it.

    Indeed, why not? Now, that's a good reason for the spacejacking, aside from the cinematic aspect that thrilled me when I saw YOLT the first time when I as a kid. But, anyway, you've convinced me.

    :D
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 533
    My guess,and it's a guess because Hamilton doesn't give us enough to know for sure, is that Oddjob had been stalking Bond and Jill. He was outside the room or maybe lurking inside the suite,if the suite was big enough. He knew they were inside. He was biding his time. I'm guessing when Bond moved to the kitchen area, Oddjob sprung to action, entering the shag room with ninja like speed and grace, gave Jill a quick chop and then calmly chopped down the unsuspecting Bond.
    Bond was blathering on about champagne at the time, so his guard may have been down enough that Oddjob could cold-cock Jill without Bond knowing. That's my guess FWIW.


    That doesn't answer the following question - why didn't Oddjob kill both Bond and Jill Masterson in that Miami hotel in GOLDFINGER?

    Why didn't Goldfinger use some kind of truth drug on Bond to learn what the latter really knew about his Fort Knox operation, back in Switzerland?

    Why did Bond kill Professor Dent in that stupid manner, when it would have been smarter to tranquilize the man, remove any cyanide pills from his body and interrogate him?

    Why did Quarrel have to pick up Bond's lousy shoes?
Sign In or Register to comment.