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
If the producers want a seperate universe, then fine but dont have so many references to the other universe with a Bond oblivious that he seems to be in World full of references to another universe that he played no part in. Surely, there has to be a limit? You reach a point where there are so many references that it becomes untennable for the audience to seperate the universes and DC is wondering around some sort of James Bond tribute universe.
IMHO if you want the luxury of a self contained universe with the freedom to create a whole arc over 5 films, then that comes with some sort of obligation re originality and not referencing the other universe.
Ironically, the RM era was far better re originality and lack of call backs even though that was the same universe. We had writers, composers that did not need to whip out the DB5 when it suited or re-hash existing shound tracks.
PS if DC can have exactly the same car but be a different universe, can RM be in a different universe and still be widowed to someone with the same name? (Names are more common than car regs)
I just want to point out that a lot of Bond fans inhere loved this particular ending. Perhaps in time you will be able to at least not feel so betrayed.
My thoughts exactly, well put, also the V8 was the one driven by Dalton in TLD same reg again.
What you are asking it's impossible, because it will bring to Bond's end.
You says "If DC is not aware, then it's pure co-indidence that he had a 1964 Silver DB5 with ejector seat and machine guns in storage (same plate!?)? (he was obvioulsy aware of the ejector seat as was his boss.)", but this is not coincedence. It's how it works. It's part of the universe.
It's the same thing that having M; Q; Moneypenny for each Bond. You have M as Bond's boss, and you have DB5 as Bond's car.
It is part of the Bond "base kit", it doesn't necessarily imply that two Bonds are connected because they have the same car.
Otherwise M should not be there (or at least not be the same between PB and DC), Omega should not be the watch, MI6 should not be the employer, Bond should not be 007
Craig Bond even went as far as to have someone rip the left-hand drive DB5 he won in CR apart and completely re-build it as a right-hand drive car with loads of gadgets in time for Skyfall...
In a way you could say that reveal in Skyfall is when it all goes off the rails a little bit. I am writing this off the top of my head, but before that the call-backs were mainly of the origin story variety (meaning we are getting explanations for things we already know to be canon, like the car and the Dinner suits and so on) and from then on they are more and more disconnected from the actual reality of the Craig films and become floating meta-connections that don't make a lot of sense, but look cool.
I didn’t feel anything when Craig’s Bond died really as he’s my least favourite actor in the role.The whole Cuba sequence was a delight and felt for about 20 minutes that I was watching a real Bond film.I really hope the next actor and era brings back the fun ( and stand-alone films ) to the franchise.
Good points again, but don't you think the car becomes less cool each time it's used.
it's not the same db5, clearly
😉
We discussed this topic dozens of times. Basically that's up to personal interpretations. The SF DB5 could very well be the CR one but modified by Whishaw's Q predecessor as a favor to Bond...
These were the first rum
Yep.
It's normal, that people who don't like something will write more about it than people who
It's the same Blofeld, but in a different envoironmet. And that's true for every character. And first of all for Bond himself.
But every film builds its own surroundings. So each Film has only to be true to itself, not to the other films that came before or after.
So Felix can die in NTTD without ever being wounded by a shark before. And he can be wounded by a shark in LTK and not die. It's still te same charakter, portrayed in a different way only with the logic of the one film, that he's in at that moment.
good point.
but still, it could have been done for a mission we didn't see
Yes, and sorry I am dragging this old chestnut out again.
My point is that from then on they more and more did things that don't exactly grow out of the story but instead mean something to the audience or the filmmakers. I mean, in the official podcast, Cary Fukunaga says something along the lines of: I like the V8 Vantage, so I gave him the V8 Vantage. He already had a storage shed with a DB5 in it, he might as well have one with a V8 Vantage as well.
I am not even saying that is a bad thing. I am just trying to point out how incredibly meta these last three films specifically have become. Honestly, I don't even know, what I want to say or why I am even typing it. Beats working, I guess.
This is a good point, but easy enough to get around imo. I don’t remember any audience confusion around CR, because it was so different to DAD.
They could easily do the same again to make the next guy distinct, and signify that this is a different world. Sure, the gunbarrel and the theme music would be the same. But they could cast different MI6 regulars, they could go with a different car brand, they could go with a more heightened “classic” sort of aesthetic to contrast with the Craig era’s realistic one, etc.
I get where you’re coming from, I do agree that they’ve muddied the waters a bit by unnecessarily cribbing so much from the 60s. But that can be easily rectified imo. And in this day and age, I think audiences will have no trouble grasping the concept of a reboot.
It’s fine not to like it, but it isn’t fair to imply that it’s only gotten good reviews out of a sense of obligation. Plenty of blockbusters get panned nowadays, and Bond is no stranger to poor critic reviews.
I’m also not sure if the hardcore fanbase is big enough to be noteworthy. I’ve got friends in real life who have the blu ray boxset and used to buy the old video games, and pretty much everyone I know always sees the new Bond film (huge event here in Britain). But I don’t know anyone else who comes on sites like this, which is where most of the debate will be had. Most people will just see the film and then move on.
I don’t know how the film is being recieved by audiences, but I wouldn’t take this place as being representative of anything other than this place, and our money is a drop in the ocean compared to what the brand rakes in on the whole.
It’s never been official ( for legal reasons ) that the bald guy Moore’s Bond despatched at the beginning of FYEO was Blofeld.It was more of an in joke and Cubby Broccoli giving Kevin Mclory the middle finger.
YES, Agreed but what people are saying is, how does he have vehicles from the other films? it simply doesn't make sense.
The funniest moment of the entire film (and it felt like my audience were on the same page here) was when he knocked Primo's eye out in Matera and looked over the ledge with a bemused, "that's new!" expression on his face and the edit is generous enough that it allows that expression to sink in with the audience as well. That was genuinely very funny, and Craig has always done those moments extremely well. Which is why I have always not really been an advocate for his Bond to be all too "quippy". It simply wasn't where his strength lay, for me.
He just has those vehicles. No need for explanation. He has a V8 in his garage. So what?
Dalton played a Bond who had a V8 Vantage as his company car. Craig plays a Bond who has a V8 Vantage as one of his personal cars.
The train starts to move. The Dr. No inspired dots pop up onscreen. As the train speeds up the windows start to look like a negative film rewinding before our eyes. Then No Time to Die pops up onscreen. A beautiful metaphor of 59 years of Bond movies that led to this.
What a film.