Controversial opinions about Bond films

DEKE_RIVERS

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

I think there were many rewrites and that's why the character was a mess.

Why would he even care about Bond or the Cold War?

He cares about Bond for a couple of reasons. Firstly Bond represents everything about MI6 he hates - that sense of loyalty towards Britain etc. In the graveyard scene that hatred is framed around what happened to his parents ultimately. That and Bond is the reason he's been scarred.

None of this is a problem with character motivation as far as I can tell, and it's all made clear in the film. The only issue is perhaps how contrived it all is but that's all very typical Bond film stuff. Few question it when watching the film because Travelyan's central motivation is so strong.

Why did he expect any kind of loyalty from Bond? Trevelyan worked for himself from the beginning.

From what I remember the only mention of that is he says (again, rather mockingly during the graveyard scene) that he considered asking Bond to join him but ultimately knew he wouldn't do it.

Honestly, it's all there in the film. I haven't watched it in a good while now and even I can make sense of this. I really don't think beyond basic contrivances there's an issue with character motivation here (and none of what we've talked about really falls under that).

Ludovico wrote: »

Bean was a tad young to play Trevelyan though, but overall I think the character was a great villain and perfectly played.

As for how he got in cahoots with Orumov, I think it's easy to imagine: as an MI6 operative he probably had access to intel about high ranking officers in the Red Army and could easily identify one that could be corrupted. In the last year of the USSR, I don't think he would have been short on candidates. Discreetly getting in touch with him should have been easy too.

In my head canon, the facility they destroy in the PTS has been previously emptied of weapons and later sold by Trevelyan to kick-start the Janus Syndicate.

Oh yeah, he's way too young for the character's background. But I guess it's worth it having Bean play the part.

That'd probably be a way of recruiting Ouramov. There's nothing that says it couldn't be the case anyway. Again, it's such background detail and most audiences don't care. It's a relatively easy plot point to go along with.

Yeah but I think he expected too much loyalty from Bond with Trevelyan being a traitor and wanting to kill him at the beginning of the film. Didn't Ourumov work for him then?

It doesn't make sense. It was never that friendship that they try to sell us.

007HallY

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

I think there were many rewrites and that's why the character was a mess.

Why would he even care about Bond or the Cold War?

He cares about Bond for a couple of reasons. Firstly Bond represents everything about MI6 he hates - that sense of loyalty towards Britain etc. In the graveyard scene that hatred is framed around what happened to his parents ultimately. That and Bond is the reason he's been scarred.

None of this is a problem with character motivation as far as I can tell, and it's all made clear in the film. The only issue is perhaps how contrived it all is but that's all very typical Bond film stuff. Few question it when watching the film because Travelyan's central motivation is so strong.

Why did he expect any kind of loyalty from Bond? Trevelyan worked for himself from the beginning.

From what I remember the only mention of that is he says (again, rather mockingly during the graveyard scene) that he considered asking Bond to join him but ultimately knew he wouldn't do it.

Honestly, it's all there in the film. I haven't watched it in a good while now and even I can make sense of this. I really don't think beyond basic contrivances there's an issue with character motivation here (and none of what we've talked about really falls under that).

Ludovico wrote: »

Bean was a tad young to play Trevelyan though, but overall I think the character was a great villain and perfectly played.

As for how he got in cahoots with Orumov, I think it's easy to imagine: as an MI6 operative he probably had access to intel about high ranking officers in the Red Army and could easily identify one that could be corrupted. In the last year of the USSR, I don't think he would have been short on candidates. Discreetly getting in touch with him should have been easy too.

In my head canon, the facility they destroy in the PTS has been previously emptied of weapons and later sold by Trevelyan to kick-start the Janus Syndicate.

Oh yeah, he's way too young for the character's background. But I guess it's worth it having Bean play the part.

That'd probably be a way of recruiting Ouramov. There's nothing that says it couldn't be the case anyway. Again, it's such background detail and most audiences don't care. It's a relatively easy plot point to go along with.

Yeah but I think he expected too much loyalty from Bond with Trevelyan being a traitor and wanting to kill him at the beginning of the film. Didn't Ourumov work for him then?

It doesn't make sense. It was never that friendship that they try to sell us.

Right...

I really don't know if you've not seen this film in a while (you seem to be misremembering some stuff) or are grasping at straws a bit to try and justify how Travelyan is a bad character (I really don't think it's working and most of this is explained by recounting basic details of the plot/dialogue and has nothing to do with his motivations at this point).

All Travelyan said was he considered asking Bond to join him at one point but knew he wouldn't because he's too loyal to MI6. That feeds into how he views Bond and his hatred for MI6 (which centres ultimately around what happened to his parents). Yes, Ourmaov worked for him and their partnership worked in the way I described previously.

I'm just not sure what your issue is with this film/character at this point.

DEKE_RIVERS

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

I think there were many rewrites and that's why the character was a mess.

Why would he even care about Bond or the Cold War?

He cares about Bond for a couple of reasons. Firstly Bond represents everything about MI6 he hates - that sense of loyalty towards Britain etc. In the graveyard scene that hatred is framed around what happened to his parents ultimately. That and Bond is the reason he's been scarred.

None of this is a problem with character motivation as far as I can tell, and it's all made clear in the film. The only issue is perhaps how contrived it all is but that's all very typical Bond film stuff. Few question it when watching the film because Travelyan's central motivation is so strong.

Why did he expect any kind of loyalty from Bond? Trevelyan worked for himself from the beginning.

From what I remember the only mention of that is he says (again, rather mockingly during the graveyard scene) that he considered asking Bond to join him but ultimately knew he wouldn't do it.

Honestly, it's all there in the film. I haven't watched it in a good while now and even I can make sense of this. I really don't think beyond basic contrivances there's an issue with character motivation here (and none of what we've talked about really falls under that).

Ludovico wrote: »

Bean was a tad young to play Trevelyan though, but overall I think the character was a great villain and perfectly played.

As for how he got in cahoots with Orumov, I think it's easy to imagine: as an MI6 operative he probably had access to intel about high ranking officers in the Red Army and could easily identify one that could be corrupted. In the last year of the USSR, I don't think he would have been short on candidates. Discreetly getting in touch with him should have been easy too.

In my head canon, the facility they destroy in the PTS has been previously emptied of weapons and later sold by Trevelyan to kick-start the Janus Syndicate.

Oh yeah, he's way too young for the character's background. But I guess it's worth it having Bean play the part.

That'd probably be a way of recruiting Ouramov. There's nothing that says it couldn't be the case anyway. Again, it's such background detail and most audiences don't care. It's a relatively easy plot point to go along with.

Yeah but I think he expected too much loyalty from Bond with Trevelyan being a traitor and wanting to kill him at the beginning of the film. Didn't Ourumov work for him then?

It doesn't make sense. It was never that friendship that they try to sell us.

Right...

I really don't know if you've not seen this film in a while (you seem to be misremembering some stuff) or are grasping at straws a bit to try and justify how Travelyan is a bad character (I really don't think it's working and most of this is explained by recounting basic details of the plot/dialogue and has nothing to do with his motivations at this point).

All Travelyan said was he considered asking Bond to join him at one point but knew he wouldn't because he's too loyal to MI6. That feeds into how he views Bond and his hatred for MI6 (which centres ultimately around what happened to his parents). Yes, Ourmaov worked for him and their partnership worked in the way I described previously.

I'm just not sure what your issue is with this film/character at this point.

I remember the movie well. Why is he angry with Bond if he is the traitor? And Bond thought he was dead!

He was asking too much loyalty from Bond for no reason. OK, he was a bad guy but even he should know that he was the traitor.

007HallY

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

I think there were many rewrites and that's why the character was a mess.

Why would he even care about Bond or the Cold War?

He cares about Bond for a couple of reasons. Firstly Bond represents everything about MI6 he hates - that sense of loyalty towards Britain etc. In the graveyard scene that hatred is framed around what happened to his parents ultimately. That and Bond is the reason he's been scarred.

None of this is a problem with character motivation as far as I can tell, and it's all made clear in the film. The only issue is perhaps how contrived it all is but that's all very typical Bond film stuff. Few question it when watching the film because Travelyan's central motivation is so strong.

Why did he expect any kind of loyalty from Bond? Trevelyan worked for himself from the beginning.

From what I remember the only mention of that is he says (again, rather mockingly during the graveyard scene) that he considered asking Bond to join him but ultimately knew he wouldn't do it.

Honestly, it's all there in the film. I haven't watched it in a good while now and even I can make sense of this. I really don't think beyond basic contrivances there's an issue with character motivation here (and none of what we've talked about really falls under that).

Ludovico wrote: »

Bean was a tad young to play Trevelyan though, but overall I think the character was a great villain and perfectly played.

As for how he got in cahoots with Orumov, I think it's easy to imagine: as an MI6 operative he probably had access to intel about high ranking officers in the Red Army and could easily identify one that could be corrupted. In the last year of the USSR, I don't think he would have been short on candidates. Discreetly getting in touch with him should have been easy too.

In my head canon, the facility they destroy in the PTS has been previously emptied of weapons and later sold by Trevelyan to kick-start the Janus Syndicate.

Oh yeah, he's way too young for the character's background. But I guess it's worth it having Bean play the part.

That'd probably be a way of recruiting Ouramov. There's nothing that says it couldn't be the case anyway. Again, it's such background detail and most audiences don't care. It's a relatively easy plot point to go along with.

Yeah but I think he expected too much loyalty from Bond with Trevelyan being a traitor and wanting to kill him at the beginning of the film. Didn't Ourumov work for him then?

It doesn't make sense. It was never that friendship that they try to sell us.

Right...

I really don't know if you've not seen this film in a while (you seem to be misremembering some stuff) or are grasping at straws a bit to try and justify how Travelyan is a bad character (I really don't think it's working and most of this is explained by recounting basic details of the plot/dialogue and has nothing to do with his motivations at this point).

All Travelyan said was he considered asking Bond to join him at one point but knew he wouldn't because he's too loyal to MI6. That feeds into how he views Bond and his hatred for MI6 (which centres ultimately around what happened to his parents). Yes, Ourmaov worked for him and their partnership worked in the way I described previously.

I'm just not sure what your issue is with this film/character at this point.

I remember the movie well. Why is he angry with Bond if he is the traitor? And Bond thought he was dead!

He was asking too much loyalty from Bond for no reason. OK, he was a bad guy but even he should know that he was the traitor.

I'm not sure I'm following you at this point... I've told you a couple of times now that Travelyan dislikes Bond because he represents everything he dislikes about MI6 and he's the reason behind his facial scarring. He said he considered asking Bond to join him (presumably prior to the events of the PTS, which makes a lot of sense as he'd have someone on the inside helping him fake his death) but knew he wouldn't. Like, he simply thought about it but knew it wasn't an option. That's it.

I think you're getting in knots overthinking this at this point, and I'm not sure how much sense you're making. Anyway, I'll end it here :)

DEKE_RIVERS

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

I think there were many rewrites and that's why the character was a mess.

Why would he even care about Bond or the Cold War?

He cares about Bond for a couple of reasons. Firstly Bond represents everything about MI6 he hates - that sense of loyalty towards Britain etc. In the graveyard scene that hatred is framed around what happened to his parents ultimately. That and Bond is the reason he's been scarred.

None of this is a problem with character motivation as far as I can tell, and it's all made clear in the film. The only issue is perhaps how contrived it all is but that's all very typical Bond film stuff. Few question it when watching the film because Travelyan's central motivation is so strong.

Why did he expect any kind of loyalty from Bond? Trevelyan worked for himself from the beginning.

From what I remember the only mention of that is he says (again, rather mockingly during the graveyard scene) that he considered asking Bond to join him but ultimately knew he wouldn't do it.

Honestly, it's all there in the film. I haven't watched it in a good while now and even I can make sense of this. I really don't think beyond basic contrivances there's an issue with character motivation here (and none of what we've talked about really falls under that).

Ludovico wrote: »

Bean was a tad young to play Trevelyan though, but overall I think the character was a great villain and perfectly played.

As for how he got in cahoots with Orumov, I think it's easy to imagine: as an MI6 operative he probably had access to intel about high ranking officers in the Red Army and could easily identify one that could be corrupted. In the last year of the USSR, I don't think he would have been short on candidates. Discreetly getting in touch with him should have been easy too.

In my head canon, the facility they destroy in the PTS has been previously emptied of weapons and later sold by Trevelyan to kick-start the Janus Syndicate.

Oh yeah, he's way too young for the character's background. But I guess it's worth it having Bean play the part.

That'd probably be a way of recruiting Ouramov. There's nothing that says it couldn't be the case anyway. Again, it's such background detail and most audiences don't care. It's a relatively easy plot point to go along with.

Yeah but I think he expected too much loyalty from Bond with Trevelyan being a traitor and wanting to kill him at the beginning of the film. Didn't Ourumov work for him then?

It doesn't make sense. It was never that friendship that they try to sell us.

Right...

I really don't know if you've not seen this film in a while (you seem to be misremembering some stuff) or are grasping at straws a bit to try and justify how Travelyan is a bad character (I really don't think it's working and most of this is explained by recounting basic details of the plot/dialogue and has nothing to do with his motivations at this point).

All Travelyan said was he considered asking Bond to join him at one point but knew he wouldn't because he's too loyal to MI6. That feeds into how he views Bond and his hatred for MI6 (which centres ultimately around what happened to his parents). Yes, Ourmaov worked for him and their partnership worked in the way I described previously.

I'm just not sure what your issue is with this film/character at this point.

I remember the movie well. Why is he angry with Bond if he is the traitor? And Bond thought he was dead!

He was asking too much loyalty from Bond for no reason. OK, he was a bad guy but even he should know that he was the traitor.

I'm not sure I'm following you at this point... I've told you a couple of times now that Travelyan dislikes Bond because he represents everything he dislikes about MI6 and he's the reason behind his facial scarring. He said he considered asking Bond to join him (presumably prior to the events of the PTS, which makes a lot of sense as he'd have someone on the inside helping him fake his death) but knew he wouldn't. Like, he simply thought about it but knew it wasn't an option. That's it.

I think you're getting in knots overthinking this at this point, and I'm not sure how much sense you're making. Anyway, I'll end it here :)

But why does he blame Bond? Bond thought he was dead and in any case Trevelyan wanted to kill him first.

007HallY

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

I think there were many rewrites and that's why the character was a mess.

Why would he even care about Bond or the Cold War?

He cares about Bond for a couple of reasons. Firstly Bond represents everything about MI6 he hates - that sense of loyalty towards Britain etc. In the graveyard scene that hatred is framed around what happened to his parents ultimately. That and Bond is the reason he's been scarred.

None of this is a problem with character motivation as far as I can tell, and it's all made clear in the film. The only issue is perhaps how contrived it all is but that's all very typical Bond film stuff. Few question it when watching the film because Travelyan's central motivation is so strong.

Why did he expect any kind of loyalty from Bond? Trevelyan worked for himself from the beginning.

From what I remember the only mention of that is he says (again, rather mockingly during the graveyard scene) that he considered asking Bond to join him but ultimately knew he wouldn't do it.

Honestly, it's all there in the film. I haven't watched it in a good while now and even I can make sense of this. I really don't think beyond basic contrivances there's an issue with character motivation here (and none of what we've talked about really falls under that).

Ludovico wrote: »

Bean was a tad young to play Trevelyan though, but overall I think the character was a great villain and perfectly played.

As for how he got in cahoots with Orumov, I think it's easy to imagine: as an MI6 operative he probably had access to intel about high ranking officers in the Red Army and could easily identify one that could be corrupted. In the last year of the USSR, I don't think he would have been short on candidates. Discreetly getting in touch with him should have been easy too.

In my head canon, the facility they destroy in the PTS has been previously emptied of weapons and later sold by Trevelyan to kick-start the Janus Syndicate.

Oh yeah, he's way too young for the character's background. But I guess it's worth it having Bean play the part.

That'd probably be a way of recruiting Ouramov. There's nothing that says it couldn't be the case anyway. Again, it's such background detail and most audiences don't care. It's a relatively easy plot point to go along with.

Yeah but I think he expected too much loyalty from Bond with Trevelyan being a traitor and wanting to kill him at the beginning of the film. Didn't Ourumov work for him then?

It doesn't make sense. It was never that friendship that they try to sell us.

Right...

I really don't know if you've not seen this film in a while (you seem to be misremembering some stuff) or are grasping at straws a bit to try and justify how Travelyan is a bad character (I really don't think it's working and most of this is explained by recounting basic details of the plot/dialogue and has nothing to do with his motivations at this point).

All Travelyan said was he considered asking Bond to join him at one point but knew he wouldn't because he's too loyal to MI6. That feeds into how he views Bond and his hatred for MI6 (which centres ultimately around what happened to his parents). Yes, Ourmaov worked for him and their partnership worked in the way I described previously.

I'm just not sure what your issue is with this film/character at this point.

I remember the movie well. Why is he angry with Bond if he is the traitor? And Bond thought he was dead!

He was asking too much loyalty from Bond for no reason. OK, he was a bad guy but even he should know that he was the traitor.

I'm not sure I'm following you at this point... I've told you a couple of times now that Travelyan dislikes Bond because he represents everything he dislikes about MI6 and he's the reason behind his facial scarring. He said he considered asking Bond to join him (presumably prior to the events of the PTS, which makes a lot of sense as he'd have someone on the inside helping him fake his death) but knew he wouldn't. Like, he simply thought about it but knew it wasn't an option. That's it.

I think you're getting in knots overthinking this at this point, and I'm not sure how much sense you're making. Anyway, I'll end it here :)

But why does he blame Bond? Bond thought he was dead and in any case Trevelyan wanted to kill him first.

Personally I'd be annoyed at Bond too if I was a revenge driven villain who got half my face blown up due to his decision. I'd probably also dislike him anyway as he's everything I'd dislike about MI6/Britain. Anyway, what's he going to say to Bond? 'I know you thought I was dead fam, so no worries about scarring my face. Easy mistake to make'.

It's really not complicated, and nothing to do with Travelyan's overall motivation. It's just an antagonism with Bond :) Don't overthink it mate.

DEKE_RIVERS

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

I think there were many rewrites and that's why the character was a mess.

Why would he even care about Bond or the Cold War?

He cares about Bond for a couple of reasons. Firstly Bond represents everything about MI6 he hates - that sense of loyalty towards Britain etc. In the graveyard scene that hatred is framed around what happened to his parents ultimately. That and Bond is the reason he's been scarred.

None of this is a problem with character motivation as far as I can tell, and it's all made clear in the film. The only issue is perhaps how contrived it all is but that's all very typical Bond film stuff. Few question it when watching the film because Travelyan's central motivation is so strong.

Why did he expect any kind of loyalty from Bond? Trevelyan worked for himself from the beginning.

From what I remember the only mention of that is he says (again, rather mockingly during the graveyard scene) that he considered asking Bond to join him but ultimately knew he wouldn't do it.

Honestly, it's all there in the film. I haven't watched it in a good while now and even I can make sense of this. I really don't think beyond basic contrivances there's an issue with character motivation here (and none of what we've talked about really falls under that).

Ludovico wrote: »

Bean was a tad young to play Trevelyan though, but overall I think the character was a great villain and perfectly played.

As for how he got in cahoots with Orumov, I think it's easy to imagine: as an MI6 operative he probably had access to intel about high ranking officers in the Red Army and could easily identify one that could be corrupted. In the last year of the USSR, I don't think he would have been short on candidates. Discreetly getting in touch with him should have been easy too.

In my head canon, the facility they destroy in the PTS has been previously emptied of weapons and later sold by Trevelyan to kick-start the Janus Syndicate.

Oh yeah, he's way too young for the character's background. But I guess it's worth it having Bean play the part.

That'd probably be a way of recruiting Ouramov. There's nothing that says it couldn't be the case anyway. Again, it's such background detail and most audiences don't care. It's a relatively easy plot point to go along with.

Yeah but I think he expected too much loyalty from Bond with Trevelyan being a traitor and wanting to kill him at the beginning of the film. Didn't Ourumov work for him then?

It doesn't make sense. It was never that friendship that they try to sell us.

Right...

I really don't know if you've not seen this film in a while (you seem to be misremembering some stuff) or are grasping at straws a bit to try and justify how Travelyan is a bad character (I really don't think it's working and most of this is explained by recounting basic details of the plot/dialogue and has nothing to do with his motivations at this point).

All Travelyan said was he considered asking Bond to join him at one point but knew he wouldn't because he's too loyal to MI6. That feeds into how he views Bond and his hatred for MI6 (which centres ultimately around what happened to his parents). Yes, Ourmaov worked for him and their partnership worked in the way I described previously.

I'm just not sure what your issue is with this film/character at this point.

I remember the movie well. Why is he angry with Bond if he is the traitor? And Bond thought he was dead!

He was asking too much loyalty from Bond for no reason. OK, he was a bad guy but even he should know that he was the traitor.

I'm not sure I'm following you at this point... I've told you a couple of times now that Travelyan dislikes Bond because he represents everything he dislikes about MI6 and he's the reason behind his facial scarring. He said he considered asking Bond to join him (presumably prior to the events of the PTS, which makes a lot of sense as he'd have someone on the inside helping him fake his death) but knew he wouldn't. Like, he simply thought about it but knew it wasn't an option. That's it.

I think you're getting in knots overthinking this at this point, and I'm not sure how much sense you're making. Anyway, I'll end it here :)

But why does he blame Bond? Bond thought he was dead and in any case Trevelyan wanted to kill him first.

Personally I'd be annoyed at Bond too if I was a revenge driven villain who got half my face blown up due to his decision. I'd probably also dislike him anyway as he's everything I'd dislike about MI6/Britain.

It's really not complicated, and nothing to do with Travelyan's overall motivation. It's just an antagonism with Bond :) Don't overthink it mate.

I don't overthink, they overwrite...

007HallY

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

007HallY wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

I think there were many rewrites and that's why the character was a mess.

Why would he even care about Bond or the Cold War?

He cares about Bond for a couple of reasons. Firstly Bond represents everything about MI6 he hates - that sense of loyalty towards Britain etc. In the graveyard scene that hatred is framed around what happened to his parents ultimately. That and Bond is the reason he's been scarred.

None of this is a problem with character motivation as far as I can tell, and it's all made clear in the film. The only issue is perhaps how contrived it all is but that's all very typical Bond film stuff. Few question it when watching the film because Travelyan's central motivation is so strong.

Why did he expect any kind of loyalty from Bond? Trevelyan worked for himself from the beginning.

From what I remember the only mention of that is he says (again, rather mockingly during the graveyard scene) that he considered asking Bond to join him but ultimately knew he wouldn't do it.

Honestly, it's all there in the film. I haven't watched it in a good while now and even I can make sense of this. I really don't think beyond basic contrivances there's an issue with character motivation here (and none of what we've talked about really falls under that).

Ludovico wrote: »

Bean was a tad young to play Trevelyan though, but overall I think the character was a great villain and perfectly played.

As for how he got in cahoots with Orumov, I think it's easy to imagine: as an MI6 operative he probably had access to intel about high ranking officers in the Red Army and could easily identify one that could be corrupted. In the last year of the USSR, I don't think he would have been short on candidates. Discreetly getting in touch with him should have been easy too.

In my head canon, the facility they destroy in the PTS has been previously emptied of weapons and later sold by Trevelyan to kick-start the Janus Syndicate.

Oh yeah, he's way too young for the character's background. But I guess it's worth it having Bean play the part.

That'd probably be a way of recruiting Ouramov. There's nothing that says it couldn't be the case anyway. Again, it's such background detail and most audiences don't care. It's a relatively easy plot point to go along with.

Yeah but I think he expected too much loyalty from Bond with Trevelyan being a traitor and wanting to kill him at the beginning of the film. Didn't Ourumov work for him then?

It doesn't make sense. It was never that friendship that they try to sell us.

Right...

I really don't know if you've not seen this film in a while (you seem to be misremembering some stuff) or are grasping at straws a bit to try and justify how Travelyan is a bad character (I really don't think it's working and most of this is explained by recounting basic details of the plot/dialogue and has nothing to do with his motivations at this point).

All Travelyan said was he considered asking Bond to join him at one point but knew he wouldn't because he's too loyal to MI6. That feeds into how he views Bond and his hatred for MI6 (which centres ultimately around what happened to his parents). Yes, Ourmaov worked for him and their partnership worked in the way I described previously.

I'm just not sure what your issue is with this film/character at this point.

I remember the movie well. Why is he angry with Bond if he is the traitor? And Bond thought he was dead!

He was asking too much loyalty from Bond for no reason. OK, he was a bad guy but even he should know that he was the traitor.

I'm not sure I'm following you at this point... I've told you a couple of times now that Travelyan dislikes Bond because he represents everything he dislikes about MI6 and he's the reason behind his facial scarring. He said he considered asking Bond to join him (presumably prior to the events of the PTS, which makes a lot of sense as he'd have someone on the inside helping him fake his death) but knew he wouldn't. Like, he simply thought about it but knew it wasn't an option. That's it.

I think you're getting in knots overthinking this at this point, and I'm not sure how much sense you're making. Anyway, I'll end it here :)

But why does he blame Bond? Bond thought he was dead and in any case Trevelyan wanted to kill him first.

Personally I'd be annoyed at Bond too if I was a revenge driven villain who got half my face blown up due to his decision. I'd probably also dislike him anyway as he's everything I'd dislike about MI6/Britain.

It's really not complicated, and nothing to do with Travelyan's overall motivation. It's just an antagonism with Bond :) Don't overthink it mate.

I don't overthink, they overwrite...

:)) No, no overthinking going on here.

DEKE_RIVERS

The character has too many motivations as if he wanted to justify himself. Maybe his parents were from Liverpool and it was all a lie. At the end of the day, his story doesn't make much sense.

And the love-hate relationship with Bond is a bit silly. He may be gay, perhaps that justifies his over-hatred of Bond.

There is a better movie somewhere. ;)