Controversial opinions about Bond films

1647648650652653707

Comments

  • Posts: 15,218
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I just read this article below and my reaction: Hell no!

    https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/amazon-reportedly-james-bond-scifi/amp/

    I wouldn't worry to much about that one, considering the publication, @Ludovico. They are well known for creating fiction.

    Can't help bit worry.
  • Posts: 1,926
    The Internet is so much fun with sites like that. Where to start? The writer claims MR and DAD were among the worst received films in the series, but doesn't bother to clarify whether he's referring to critical and fan reaction or to box office.

    Both films were huge box office draws. MR was following Star Wars' lead, but it hardly tried to "ape" it and the box office proved it was with large success, not little. DAD's problems went beyond just the gadgets, it was a mess all around.

    Claiming the MCU could be an influence is another huge stretch. It could be argued that Bond is a superhero, but a completely different thing than MCU in its approach.

    Lastly, what's with the manipulated Idris Elba picture in the QoS pose? Why not just put it out there you think he'll be the next Bond instead of inserting that randomly.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,201
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Like I always say, Spectre was a good first draft. Just needed a few more.

    To be honest, they really could've done with Phoebe, maybe then we wouldn't be hoping for No Time to Die to be Madeleine's saving grace.

    Good god no.If Phoebe Waller Bridge had a hand in the Spectre script,Madeline would have never stopped banging on about womens rights and shouted REBELLION! every 5 seconds!

    Sounds like someone’s been watching too much Doomcock/Midnight’s Edge videos.

    Better watch out! I hear PWB wants to cut off Bond’s penis and not shave her armpits!
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited June 2021 Posts: 18,336
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Like I always say, Spectre was a good first draft. Just needed a few more.

    To be honest, they really could've done with Phoebe, maybe then we wouldn't be hoping for No Time to Die to be Madeleine's saving grace.

    Good god no.If Phoebe Waller Bridge had a hand in the Spectre script,Madeline would have never stopped banging on about womens rights and shouted REBELLION! every 5 seconds!

    Sounds like someone’s been watching too much Doomcock/Midnight’s Edge videos.

    Better watch out! I hear PWB wants to cut off Bond’s penis and not shave her armpits!

    Le Chiffre already tried that and look how he ended up. A cautionary tale if there ever was one. ;)
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,230
    BT3366 wrote: »
    Lastly, what's with the manipulated Idris Elba picture in the QoS pose? Why not just put it out there you think he'll be the next Bond instead of inserting that randomly.

    Those edits always make me chuckle!
  • Posts: 9,853
    Looks like Peak had a whole array of unused concept posters for the movie:
    b51df8e78f0ca6f36b146e1b7c50f904.jpg

    The red and black one is easily my favorite, but the others are very cool as well and could have been fitting with maybe a bit more polish.

    I genuinely wish someone would take one of these and add the Fleming title The Property of a lady then coming summer 1991


    I love Dalton as bond
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,336
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Looks like Peak had a whole array of unused concept posters for the movie:
    b51df8e78f0ca6f36b146e1b7c50f904.jpg

    The red and black one is easily my favorite, but the others are very cool as well and could have been fitting with maybe a bit more polish.

    I genuinely wish someone would take one of these and add the Fleming title The Property of a lady then coming summer 1991


    I love Dalton as bond

    Me too. Dalton's my favourite Bond.

    I'm sure that could be easily arranged for someone that knows what they're doing.
  • Posts: 15,218
    I'm still learning the ropes of my new job, but it made me reappraise both SF and SP. And in light of this, I'd say Silva might be the most realistic and plausible villain of the Bond franchise.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,573
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'm still learning the ropes of my new job, but it made me reappraise both SF and SP.

    What job do you get to consider Bond films in? I want that job :D
    Ludovico wrote: »
    And in light of this, I'd say Silva might be the most realistic and plausible villain of the Bond franchise.

    The more time goes on and we see the general dodginess and corruption around us, I tend to think that Carver is actually the most plausible.
  • Posts: 1,650
    Carver was historically inspired. You may research the Spanish-American War and the newspaper competition that fanned tempers, particularly between Hearst's NY Journal and Pulitzer's NY World.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Since62 wrote: »
    Carver was historically inspired. You may research the Spanish-American War and the newspaper competition that fanned tempers, particularly between Hearst's NY Journal and Pulitzer's NY World.

    Why go that length? Mass media are totally crooked, period.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,336
    Since62 wrote: »
    Carver was historically inspired. You may research the Spanish-American War and the newspaper competition that fanned tempers, particularly between Hearst's NY Journal and Pulitzer's NY World.

    Yes, Carver quotes from Hearst in the film. I have a book somewhere on that war and the "yellow journalism" that defined it. There were other inspirations for Carver nearer to our own time too, mind.
  • Posts: 15,218
    I'm still learning the ropes of my new job, but it made me reappre
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'm still learning the ropes of my new job, but it made me reappraise both SF and SP.

    What job do you get to consider Bond films in? I want that job :D
    Ludovico wrote: »
    And in light of this, I'd say Silva might be the most realistic and plausible villain of the Bond franchise.

    The more time goes on and we see the general dodginess and corruption around us, I tend to think that Carver is actually the most plausible.

    Without getting into details, I sell cybersecurity solutions. And nope, Carver is just a banal, by the number evil businessman, an amateur criminal. Silva is actually a proper hacker: doing something because he can. In the last few days, FujiFilm and JBS have been victims of ransomware attacks. That scene when Silva explains to Bond what he can do with a click, we'll, it's very, very, very true.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited June 2021 Posts: 8,230
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Silva is actually a proper hacker: doing something because he can. In the last few days, FujiFilm and JBS have been victims of ransomware attacks. That scene when Silva explains to Bond what he can do with a click, we'll, it's very, very, very true.

    The same thing happened to the health service here where I am. No work phones, no work emails for two weeks now. Insane level of power that can bring systems to their knees in seconds.
  • Posts: 15,218
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Without getting into details, I sell cybersecurity solutions. And nope, Carver is just a banal, by the number evil businessman, an amateur criminal. Silva is actually a proper hacker: doing something because he can. In the last few days, FujiFilm and JBS have been victims of ransomware attacks. That scene when Silva explains to Bond what he can do with a click, we'll, it's very, very, very true.

    The same thing happened to the health service here where I am. No work phones, no work emails for two weeks now. Insane level of power that can bring systems to their knees in seconds.

    That's the thing: Silva exists and there's many of him.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited June 2021 Posts: 16,573
    Since62 wrote: »
    Carver was historically inspired. You may research the Spanish-American War and the newspaper competition that fanned tempers, particularly between Hearst's NY Journal and Pulitzer's NY World.

    Well he literally mentions Hearst in the film! :)
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'm still learning the ropes of my new job, but it made me reappre
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'm still learning the ropes of my new job, but it made me reappraise both SF and SP.

    What job do you get to consider Bond films in? I want that job :D
    Ludovico wrote: »
    And in light of this, I'd say Silva might be the most realistic and plausible villain of the Bond franchise.

    The more time goes on and we see the general dodginess and corruption around us, I tend to think that Carver is actually the most plausible.

    Without getting into details, I sell cybersecurity solutions. And nope, Carver is just a banal, by the number evil businessman, an amateur criminal. Silva is actually a proper hacker: doing something because he can. In the last few days, FujiFilm and JBS have been victims of ransomware attacks. That scene when Silva explains to Bond what he can do with a click, we'll, it's very, very, very true.

    I find hackers to be banal: the Carvers of this world are far more insidious and not amateur at all. The media barons who control our politics, choosing who gets to be the leaders in charge of our nations? They’re the real villains of our time, not some by the numbers hackers attacking some camera company. That’s just some criminals.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited June 2021 Posts: 8,230
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Without getting into details, I sell cybersecurity solutions. And nope, Carver is just a banal, by the number evil businessman, an amateur criminal. Silva is actually a proper hacker: doing something because he can. In the last few days, FujiFilm and JBS have been victims of ransomware attacks. That scene when Silva explains to Bond what he can do with a click, we'll, it's very, very, very true.

    The same thing happened to the health service here where I am. No work phones, no work emails for two weeks now. Insane level of power that can bring systems to their knees in seconds.

    That's the thing: Silva exists and there's many of him.

    100%. It's been quite the experience seeing the impact it has had on the staff here. Thankfully my department has a lot of subcontractors so the work has carried on at a decent capacity outside the main system. Of course, the worst bit is the number of patients whose personal information has been compromised. Scary stuff.
  • Posts: 15,218
    mtm wrote: »
    Since62 wrote: »
    Carver was historically inspired. You may research the Spanish-American War and the newspaper competition that fanned tempers, particularly between Hearst's NY Journal and Pulitzer's NY World.

    Well he literally mentions Hearst in the film! :)
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'm still learning the ropes of my new job, but it made me reappre
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'm still learning the ropes of my new job, but it made me reappraise both SF and SP.

    What job do you get to consider Bond films in? I want that job :D
    Ludovico wrote: »
    And in light of this, I'd say Silva might be the most realistic and plausible villain of the Bond franchise.

    The more time goes on and we see the general dodginess and corruption around us, I tend to think that Carver is actually the most plausible.

    Without getting into details, I sell cybersecurity solutions. And nope, Carver is just a banal, by the number evil businessman, an amateur criminal. Silva is actually a proper hacker: doing something because he can. In the last few days, FujiFilm and JBS have been victims of ransomware attacks. That scene when Silva explains to Bond what he can do with a click, we'll, it's very, very, very true.

    I find hackers to be banal: the Carvers of this world are far more insidious and not amateur at all. The media barons who control our politics, choosing who gets to be the leaders in charge of our nations? They’re the real villains of our time, not some by the numbers hackers attacking some camera company. That’s just some criminals.

    The real Carvers would be more dangerous than the TND Carver, but I never felt Carver in the film was anything more than an eccentric amateur criminal who happened to have money. As for hackers, I'm still learning, but there's nothing banal about them. They now have full criminal networks, just like a criminal mob and they are now a serious threat to national security. And they're not merely hurting some camera company: banks, insurance companies, governments, academia, health organisations, all of then are targets, all of them are vulnerable. JBS is a major meat supplier, the most important in the world in fact. The ransomware affected a fifth of the US meat supply. Potentially it can have dire economic consequences, heck, in the future such attack could cause widespread famin. We're not talking about one dude stealing a pensioner's savings to buy himself a big screen telly. We're talking about very ruthless criminals highly specialised. At the induction I even joked that I felt like in a James Bond movie.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited June 2021 Posts: 1,714
    Yeah I don't understand the concern about "Real Carvers". Jeff Bezos has owned the Washington Post for quite some time, and to no negative end. Most media outlets report things that actually happened, at worst occasionally adding a commercially-motivated level of alarmism. The worst major media I can think of is obviously Fox News, and even they are following the lead of their lunatic viewers more than they are the sort of ideal world Rupert Murdoch would wish to promote.

    And Movie Carver, keep in mind, got most of his plot going not with his newspaper and radio empire, but with guns, a stealth boat, a magic torpedo, and some new-fangled thing called GPS. :))

    Indeed, he was sort of hacking the GPS!

    The loss of faith in institutions is more dangerous than whatever Reuters or CNN are "up to". During the COVID crisis, surely the paranoids and conspiracy theorists who don't believe anything in the "lying mainstream media" have done more harm than that media has.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited June 2021 Posts: 16,573
    I think when you look at how no Prime Minister has been elected without Murdoch’s approval in the last 40-odd years, and how they dance around to appease him, it’s not exactly the stuff of conspiracy theories and calling his type ‘banal’ just seems mad to me. I don’t see how anyone could be okay with someone controlling our politics like that. Fox News is most certainly not just following the viewers: they played a huge part in getting Trump elected. They told their viewers to follow him.
    Yes of course cyber security is important (Silva on the other hand is a petty criminal, doing it for personal revenge against one woman), but that doesn’t mean it’s the only important thing in the world and everything else is just chicken feed.
  • Posts: 15,218
    Well I'm no fan of Fox News and Murdoch, but they're acting within the limits of legality(ish). In any case, Carver used traditional criminal methods (as @ProfJoeButcher pointed out) to ultimately print and sell more newspapers. Kind of a dated now, in this numerical age. Silva's motivation was personal, but the methods used were of borderline apocalyptic proportions and his day to day activities extremely damagable. And we learn in SP he was part of a much bigger picture.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,573
    Well yes, their being legal (mostly: certainly not always as we saw with The News of The World) is what makes them disturbing: they pick the lawmakers.

    And if you only want to talk about Carver as depicted in the movie rather than the much more sinister media barons he represents, he was going to put a missile into Beijing and start a war, killing thousands. Silva’s hacking got a handful of MI6 agents killed and the ultimate aim was to kill one woman. If we’re talking petty criminals.. :)
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited June 2021 Posts: 1,714
    mtm wrote: »
    I think when you look at how no Prime Minister has been elected without Murdoch’s approval in the last 40-odd years, and how they dance around to appease him, it’s not exactly the stuff of conspiracy theories and calling his type ‘banal’ just seems mad to me. I don’t see how anyone could be okay with someone controlling our politics like that. Fox News is most certainly not just following the viewers: they played a huge part in getting Trump elected. They told their viewers to follow him.
    Yes of course cyber security is important (Silva on the other hand is a petty criminal, doing it for personal revenge against one woman), but that doesn’t mean it’s the only important thing in the world and everything else is just chicken feed.

    I don't know much about the Prime Minister situation, but you're not right about Fox, Murdoch and Trump. Fox and Murdoch were not pro-Trump during the 2016 primary, and to some extent relished a Clinton presidency because of what it would do for their business model. They got with the program later.

    Fox News was the first to (correctly) call Arizona for Biden and has spent the last six months scrambling to keep viewers from switching to new, even crazier networks. They're captive to Trump and their audience.

    Edit: I had put "call Arizona for Trump"!
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,230
    It's Silva's skills and abilities, not his motivations, that make him a relatively plausible real world villain.

    In Carver's case, I'd say it's the other way round. It's his motivations (controlling the world through media) that make him identifiable with real life barons - but it's obviously sensationalised to include the fact he has a private army, a stealth ship, and a missile.

    In a real-world scenario, neither are small fry.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,714
    It's Silva's skills and abilities, not his motivations, that make him a relatively plausible real world villain.

    In Carver's case, I'd say it's the other way round. It's his motivations (controlling the world through media) that make him identifiable with real life barons - but it's obviously sensationalised to include the fact he has a private army, a stealth ship, and a missile.

    In a real-world scenario, neither are small fry.

    But people are giving TND's script too much credit. Carver's motivation is that he wants exclusive broadcast rights in China. And he uses military technology to accomplish it.

    And in the real world, most mass media headed by a baron type generally report all the same regional and occasionally global events in largely the same way.

    A creepier villain might be a Silva-type tech guy who controls events through fringe online media and has an actual ideology.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    It's Silva's skills and abilities, not his motivations, that make him a relatively plausible real world villain.

    In Carver's case, I'd say it's the other way round. It's his motivations (controlling the world through media) that make him identifiable with real life barons - but it's obviously sensationalised to include the fact he has a private army, a stealth ship, and a missile.

    In a real-world scenario, neither are small fry.

    In the real world, it is the same people that own and control the mass media and the arms manufacturers, so it s pretty spot on.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,230
    It's Silva's skills and abilities, not his motivations, that make him a relatively plausible real world villain.

    In Carver's case, I'd say it's the other way round. It's his motivations (controlling the world through media) that make him identifiable with real life barons - but it's obviously sensationalised to include the fact he has a private army, a stealth ship, and a missile.

    In a real-world scenario, neither are small fry.

    But people are giving TND's script too much credit. Carver's motivation is that he wants exclusive broadcast rights in China. And he uses military technology to accomplish it.

    And in the real world, most mass media headed by a baron type generally report all the same regional and occasionally global events in largely the same way.

    A creepier villain might be a Silva-type tech guy who controls events through fringe online media and has an actual ideology.

    But wasn't his control of the Chinese market just one step of his ultimate aims? He mentioned "world wide domination" in his speech in Hamburg. Granted, it's been a while since I've seen TND but I always found that his plan for China wasn't an endgame for him and he had plenty more things to come.

    I'm going to bow down to anyone here who has superior knowledge of media barons (I know their names, that's about it!) as my initial assumption was always that their only ideology was money and/or power. That's what made it more tangible to me, in a sense.

    Yeah, the TND script absolutely takes an inch and runs a mile with the concept and retrofits it to Bond villain archetypes with the private army, stealth ship lair, henchmen etc. but I do give it credit for going there at all.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited June 2021 Posts: 16,573
    mtm wrote: »
    I think when you look at how no Prime Minister has been elected without Murdoch’s approval in the last 40-odd years, and how they dance around to appease him, it’s not exactly the stuff of conspiracy theories and calling his type ‘banal’ just seems mad to me. I don’t see how anyone could be okay with someone controlling our politics like that. Fox News is most certainly not just following the viewers: they played a huge part in getting Trump elected. They told their viewers to follow him.
    Yes of course cyber security is important (Silva on the other hand is a petty criminal, doing it for personal revenge against one woman), but that doesn’t mean it’s the only important thing in the world and everything else is just chicken feed.

    I don't know much about the Prime Minister situation, but you're not right about Fox, Murdoch and Trump. Fox and Murdoch were not pro-Trump during the 2016 primary, and to some extent relished a Clinton presidency because of what it would do for their business model. They got with the program later.

    Yes, when he decided to push for Trump over the other Republican candidates, he got elected. They don’t follow, they lead.
    See also Brexit.

    I very much recommend watching The Rise of the Murdoch Dynasty on iPlayer. Ian Hislop made a great programme about fake news throughout history too, starting with Hearst of course who pretty much literally did what Carver was shown trying to.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited June 2021 Posts: 1,714
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I think when you look at how no Prime Minister has been elected without Murdoch’s approval in the last 40-odd years, and how they dance around to appease him, it’s not exactly the stuff of conspiracy theories and calling his type ‘banal’ just seems mad to me. I don’t see how anyone could be okay with someone controlling our politics like that. Fox News is most certainly not just following the viewers: they played a huge part in getting Trump elected. They told their viewers to follow him.
    Yes of course cyber security is important (Silva on the other hand is a petty criminal, doing it for personal revenge against one woman), but that doesn’t mean it’s the only important thing in the world and everything else is just chicken feed.

    I don't know much about the Prime Minister situation, but you're not right about Fox, Murdoch and Trump. Fox and Murdoch were not pro-Trump during the 2016 primary, and to some extent relished a Clinton presidency because of what it would do for their business model. They got with the program later.

    Yes, when he decided to push for Trump over the other Republican candidates, he got elected. They don’t follow, they lead.
    See also Brexit.

    I very much recommend watching The Rise of the Murdoch Dynasty on iPlayer. Ian Hislop made a great programme about fake news throughout history too, starting with Hearst of course who pretty much literally did what Carver was shown trying to.

    No. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/05/why-rupert-murdoch-decided-to-support-trump.html

    Of course Murdoch would support the Republican against Hillary Clinton, but Fox, and Murdoch specifically, was not pushing Trump in the primary. Murdoch instructed the moderator at the GOP primary debate Fox hosted to hammer Trump. It was widely covered.

    Hoax, by Brian Stelter, is an entire book about Fox and its relationship with Trump, and is based on hundreds of interviews with people who work there. I recommend it.

    https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/12/politics/rupert-murdoch-trump-tweets/index.html
  • Posts: 1,650
    Would the Villain in TND have been more compellingly eeeeevil (please forgive the Austin Powers reference, but, let's face it, the Bond producers have borrowed lately from AP and Kingsmen, which owe their existence to Spoofing Bond !) had he done more of the killing himself, directly, with blood literally on his hands ? Giving the orders to shoot one side's vessel in order to get them angry at the suspected other side, not realizing that a third party was in play is a time-honored Villain's ploy -- DN, YOLT -- so perhaps the producers thought it would be enough. That's pretty darn cold-blooded. But, again, perhaps as a Villain he might have been more hate-worthy if, for example, he occasionally got his own hands dirty and killed victims so gruesomely that he sickened his own henchman, Mr. Stamper. At the end of TND when Stamper is dead, there's not much threat, it seemed to me even on first viewing in the theater, to Carver trying to kill Bond. That same problem was overcome with DN since the audience already had seen how he could crush even metal objects with his replacement hands. Rosa Klebb had a poison shoe blade, so retained some threat. Goldfinger ? Well, he did have a pistol and was prepared to fire it in a pressurized cabin high above the earth. Largo was a pretty good threat, physically. Blofeld in YOLT ? Not so much. In OHMSS, oh yeah. One could go on. Of course, they can't all be physically dangerous, but when not, given them a weapon ! Even with what he had at his disposal, Carver ? Mmmnotsomuch. So, if he were a civilized-seeming person, but with a hidden evil streak -- and perhaps a favored method of killing, a la Red Grant and the strangulation wire -- he may have been (a) more of a surprise to Bond and (b) more of a threat in the eyes of the audience, particularly if the audience understood that Bond did not regard Carver as a threat once Bond got past Mr. Stamper.

    [Of course, Doctor No was missing hands, and Blofeld had an egg-drop face due to scarring in YOLT, so perhaps Carver needed a disfigurement to be more upsetting. (Would a missing manhood have worked ? Or were they leaving that for AP's villain Goldmember -- hence his name -- to have that condition 5 years later ? Perhaps the producers simply realized that picking on someone due to their appearance -- ie, they're more hateworthy because of disfigurement -- has a base, childish aspect to it. Much can be made in a story wherein the hero has a problem of some sort and the villain is physically fine and charming -- as in Motherless Brooklyn -- to go against baser inclinations.]
Sign In or Register to comment.