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
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/S-fn_wwzDoscAiw7KWl-vIwbtD4/appointments
Saltzman's difficulties appear to have started in 1969 when he borrowed money from a Swiss bank to buy shares of Technicolor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Saltzman
By the '70s, Bond had a lot of challenges, Lazenby and Connery's departures and Broccoli and Saltzman's in-fighting.
The financial troubles with UA hadn't yet started; that emerged in the late '70s/early '80s.
It's a miracle Bond survived. ;)
YOLT: Cubby
OHMSS: Harry
DAF: Cubby
LALD: Harry
TMWTGG: Cubby
Had things continued that way, TSWLM would have been run by Saltzman. Would be interesting to see how that turned out.
It was news to me last year when I read Moore's LALD diary.
This forum in a nutshell.
Lol how embarrassing, posted this in the wrong thread XD. Meant to post this in the “Who Should/Could Be The Next Bond” Thread after that huge paragraph someone posted there.
Quite so ! I think it is fair, though, to characterize the tonal shift in the 1970s as being much more pronounced.
Oh absolutely
I feel like that would either be the absolute best or worst Bond film.
If Lee Tamahori and Marc Forster got the gig again, I’d be very concerned.
Ben is done?
Shocked he is doing this right as the movie is in a sensitive time position for awards season. I know he isn't nominated for anything, but it's hurting his coworkers' chances. To some fans, he's lucky this scene existed at all; I'd have cut anything with the characters in their personal homes. And I'm gay.
Having Bond flirt with Silva did more for gay audiences than anything they could ever do with Q. It's the hard truth, but he needs to be aware of the role he plays and not let it distract from the greater story.
I don't think this guarantees Ben is done, and maybe this is his way of making sure Q has more to do if he does decide to return with the next actor? This could be a warning shot from him: I want a bigger role.
What else would they have done with his boyfriend in NTTD? Have them show up as a couple to Bond's funeral? Does anyone really want that scene?
Oh I enjoyed that scene. And the later one in M's office where Q feigns surprise is one of the funnier moments - I really love Bond's reaction.
I guess he's thinking more in terms of it being a bit of a breakthrough moment in a 007 film (yes, I know: Wint & Kidd, but they were baddies and it wasn't an entirely progressive portrayal) rather than having a specific plot in mind.
But it kind of makes a nice little trilogy of unseen offscreen partners after 'Penny's in Spectre and M's in CR.
Yes it does. What doesn't make sense?
For it to go somewhere. He says that.
Great. I'm not sure what your point is.
He's just saying he would have liked it to go somewhere but was happy to leave it because he knew it wasn't worth raising as an issue on a film like this. I'm not sure what the problem is.
Don't forget this isn't some big statement he's issued: it's just a passing thought in an interview which has been pulled out as a news item by another outlet.
All Bond fans do is carp on about how awful everyone who makes the films are, from Purvis & Wade to the Broccolis to the tea ladies; but the second any of them expresses just the mildest touch of disappointment in a script themselves, they're suddenly terrible.
Speak for yourself.
For it to go somewhere, in a Bond film.
This is part of why I'd rather have less well-known names in those roles to begin with. Having big names makes the films want to use them more and naturally makes the actors want to do more.
This is why I concur with @CraigMooreOHMSS that EON should just hire smaller names for the MI6 crew. However, I think casting Judi Dench and John Cleese back in the 90s set a precedent for casting known names and EON isn’t gonna change that unless there’s change in management.
He has a right to make complaints and public comments, but it makes me question his perspective on the whole Bond family dynamic. With Eon you're smart to just want to be along for the ride, focus on the people behind it. Bond ironically objects to vanity rather efficiently. I see little value for the actor in vocalizing half-hearted sentiments so soon after the fact, for him or for me.
I'm not the one complaining about the person in a Bond film! :))
I still don't know what you're saying doesn't make sense.
I'm not sure I'd say Whishaw was a huge name beforehand, I doubt most cinemagoers in the US would have known him in 2012. He had an excellent career already, but then someone like Bernard Lee wasn't exactly new to films when the Bond series started (Dr No appears to have been his 65th film!).
If every actor is thinking about their individual character and how to improve it then I'm not sure how that makes the film somehow worse. He quite clearly states in this interview that he'd have liked it to go somewhere but knew this film wasn't the sort of film where that could happen and he didn't pursue it. Now we've got fans having a go at him for daring to think on the set, inside his own head and nowhere else, that he'd have liked a minor plot to go somewhere.
Sorry, I'm a bit angry about the shambles going on in a big famous house in London today, so it means I haven't really got much patience with people criticising someone for doing their job properly for a change.
Just ignore it then! :) It doesn't matter!
I think you're probably right there, for better or for worse. It's not really a wrong approach either - it's just not one that interests me all that much.
Whishaw was pretty well known in the UK though, I think. Maybe not a superstar, by any means, but a respected dramatic actor. He'd even killed a future James Bond! :) I'd seen him in quite a few things before Skyfall came around. Granted, they were mostly supporting roles.
Yeah, I don't think it's fair at all to have a go at Whishaw for wanting to bring something to it; that is, as you say, his job and he's very good at it. For me, it doesn't really make the film better or worse - it's just indicative of a direction that isn't really to my taste (or to put it another way, a reason why I want to see a Bond film). The Moneypenny scene in SP was a bit of a groaner for me as well, for similar reasons; although part of that was simply down to the execution of it. Of all places, in the middle of an action scene? But anyway, I digress.
I think if we're saying they shouldn't employ respected dramatic actors then the films are going to go downhill fast! :D
Yeah I don't think it was the idea of Moneypenny having a life that was the problem with that scene, it was just in the wrong place, as you say.
I think actors looking after their characters has always made the films better. If Desmond Llewelyn had decided to just give up on that idea that Guy Hamilton gave him of disliking Bond because he broke his gadgets and just start reading the lines aloud again, the films would have lost a bit of gold.
As it is, crucially this is something which Whishaw didn't even ask for. He knew it wasn't right for the film and wouldn't have happened, he actually agrees with everyone criticising the idea. He'd have just liked it to satisfy himself, that's all.
Well that's fine: but for me, expanding characters that I don't have much interest in seeing expanded is another way for them to go downhill! So it's a tough one to balance.
Did you think Q got a huge amount of character development in this one then? It didn't seem to be massively about him to me, he just had a bit of comedy business and it added some variety to what would have been another lab scene.
I guess we didn't need to see M's house and that he likes butterfly collecting in OHMSS, but it seemed brief enough.