The James Bond Questions Thread

Baltimore_007

To one of the above, at least the Whisper character killed someone, and was even an imposing figure. Elvis (what were they thinking), was merely an irrelevance of a character, totally devoid of any worthwhile characteristics. Just another poor and banal adversary of the Bond franchise we have seen so many times in recent years. The former was so much better, the more memorable villain. And that's the whole thing with the demise, it's openly ambiguous, as with the Tee-hee exit, but I always imagined that both characters survived. Maybe they didn't even deserve to die, so that's the way maybe they should be remembered

TheWizardOfIce

Baltimore_007 wrote:

To one of the above, at least the Whisper character killed someone, and was even an imposing figure. Elvis (what were they thinking), was merely an irrelevance of a character, totally devoid of any worthwhile characteristics. Just another poor and banal adversary of the Bond franchise we have seen so many times in recent years. The former was so much better, the more memorable villain. And that's the whole thing with the demise, it's openly ambiguous, as with the Tee-hee exit, but I always imagined that both characters survived. Maybe they didn't even deserve to die, so that's the way maybe they should be remembered

Oh yeah I forgot him killing Charlie. I was thinking all he did was drag Bond out when he was unconcious and then get locked in the cannister.

I apologise profusely Whisper old chap - you are in a whole different league to Elvis who will go down in history as a byword for pathetic.

samainsy

Heres another question (I have millions which I cant find out by internet)Why did Felix Leiter work for the DEA not the CIA in LTK?Why didnt Roger Moore drive an Aston Martin?Did Felix Leiter die in LTK?If not how did he still work for CIA or DEA or whatever after words in he lost his leg and arm and stuff?How come there was no Felix Leiter in the Brosnan era and they used Jack Wade instead?Did Wade and Leiter know each other?Why wasnt Leiter in OHMSS?

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

samainsy wrote:

Heres another question (I have millions which I cant find out by internet)Why did Felix Leiter work for the DEA not the CIA in LTK?Why didnt Roger Moore drive an Aston Martin?Did Felix Leiter die in LTK?If not how did he still work for CIA or DEA or whatever after words in he lost his leg and arm and stuff?How come there was no Felix Leiter in the Brosnan era and they used Jack Wade instead?Did Wade and Leiter know each other?Why wasnt Leiter in OHMSS?

Most of your questions could be answered if you just paid attention to the films and the rest are kind of obvious or unanswerable.

samainsy

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

samainsy wrote:

Heres another question (I have millions which I cant find out by internet)Why did Felix Leiter work for the DEA not the CIA in LTK?Why didnt Roger Moore drive an Aston Martin?Did Felix Leiter die in LTK?If not how did he still work for CIA or DEA or whatever after words in he lost his leg and arm and stuff?How come there was no Felix Leiter in the Brosnan era and they used Jack Wade instead?Did Wade and Leiter know each other?Why wasnt Leiter in OHMSS?

Most of your questions could be answered if you just paid attention to the films and the rest are kind of obvious or unanswerable.

I do FYI.Isnt DEA the Drug Enforcment Agency.And I've not seen LTK in donkeys years so I dont really know thats why I'm watching it now.

samainsy

Now this is a stupid question I was ment to ask last time but forgot how does he get his gun into other countries because in LTK you see him just grab it out of his pocket and America have tight security at airports.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

samainsy wrote:

Now this is a stupid question I was ment to ask last time but forgot how does he get his gun into other countries because in LTK you see him just grab it out of his pocket and America have tight security at airports.

It is called suspension of disbelief.

But if you want some kind of answer, since MI6 are stationed in many of the places he goes, he may simply get his equipment from one of the headquarters whenever he touches down.

They are escapist films, use your imagination.

samainsy

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

samainsy wrote:

Now this is a stupid question I was ment to ask last time but forgot how does he get his gun into other countries because in LTK you see him just grab it out of his pocket and America have tight security at airports.

It is called suspension of disbelief.

But if you want some kind of answer, since MI6 are stationed in many of the places he goes, he may simply get his equipment from one of the headquarters whenever he touches down.

They are escapist films, use your imagination.

Yeah but surley they do it in real life and in the newer films they dont have a station everywhere.Or he gets it in a parcel like in CR.

Murdock

What exactly killed the British Diplomat in LALD?

St_George

Murdock wrote:

What exactly killed the British Diplomat in LALD?

The high-pitched nature of the electronic squeal through his earpiece fries his brain. Or something like that.

Of course, he's actually an MI6 agent posing as a diplomat at the UN in order to monitor Kananga... ;)

0013

There's something in QOS I don't have remember well and I had not yet found the time to rewatch it (well, what I really want is to have a non-stop session of the Craig trilogy.)
Here it is: when Bond is in the boat with Camille we answers Dominic Greene when she aks if he's one of Greene's. But he didn't know him before. And then later he recognizes him. I haven't figure that out yet but perhaps I didn't put attention to some hidden detail.

Pierce2Daniel

Earlier in the film when Camille hijacks Bond on the sidewalk she says "Dominic didn't give you any trouble did he?" Later on the boat she says "Your not one of Greene's?"

Bond essentially puts two-and-two together and realises that the man he needs to hunt down is called Dominic Greene.

0013

You're right... it was a matter of connecting the dots. Thank you!

Ludovico

Here is one: why is Doninic Greene eating an apple when he arrives at La Perla de la Duna? There has to be a second degree meaning to this, but I am not sure which one.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

Ludovico wrote:

Here is one: why is Doninic Greene eating an apple when he arrives at La Perla de la Duna? There has to be a second degree meaning to this, but I am not sure which one.

I think you are looking WAY too deep into the film now, mate. :))

Ludovico

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

Ludovico wrote:

Here is one: why is Doninic Greene eating an apple when he arrives at La Perla de la Duna? There has to be a second degree meaning to this, but I am not sure which one.

I think you are looking WAY too deep into the film now, mate. :))

One thing I have learned from my years of studies in literature: if it is in it, it is significant. If it was not, then Greene would not have walked in eating an apple.

TheWizardOfIce

Ludovico wrote:

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

Ludovico wrote:

Here is one: why is Doninic Greene eating an apple when he arrives at La Perla de la Duna? There has to be a second degree meaning to this, but I am not sure which one.

I think you are looking WAY too deep into the film now, mate. :))

One thing I have learned from my years of studies in literature: if it is in it, it is significant. If it was not, then Greene would not have walked in eating an apple.

Think what you've done there is mistake literature with a hastily cobbled together script helmed by a pretentious arty director.

MrBond

Ludovico wrote:

Here is one: why is Doninic Greene eating an apple when he arrives at La Perla de la Duna? There has to be a second degree meaning to this, but I am not sure which one.

I belive that Greene eating the apple is a metaphor for Quantum eating the rescources of the world.

Ludovico

TheWizardOfIce wrote:

Ludovico wrote:

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

Ludovico wrote:

Here is one: why is Doninic Greene eating an apple when he arrives at La Perla de la Duna? There has to be a second degree meaning to this, but I am not sure which one.

I think you are looking WAY too deep into the film now, mate. :))

One thing I have learned from my years of studies in literature: if it is in it, it is significant. If it was not, then Greene would not have walked in eating an apple.

Think what you've done there is mistake literature with a hastily cobbled together script helmed by a pretentious arty director.

Let's put it this way, if Roland Barthes can find mythological significance to steak and chips, then Greene eating an apple has a significance, regardless of the quality of the script, the vanity of the director, or whatever.

MrBond wrote:

Ludovico wrote:

Here is one: why is Doninic Greene eating an apple when he arrives at La Perla de la Duna? There has to be a second degree meaning to this, but I am not sure which one.

I belive that Greene eating the apple is a metaphor for Quantum eating the rescources of the world.

Must be that. Also maybe a reference to the Original Sin/temptation? Green is Satan and Medrano is making a Faustian pact with him.

Master_Dahark

Sean Connery chewed on an apple in NSNA and then impaled it! That must mean something. ;)

Murdock

Master_Dahark wrote:

Sean Connery chewed on an apple in NSNA and then impaled it! That must mean something. ;)

Yes that represented the Bond franchise as a whole and Connery was the connecting point for McClory to impale his signature on it. :))

Master_Dahark

An error I made in the 'The single most competent and least competent Bond (NOT the actors!) performance' thread actually brings up an interesting question:
http://mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/6763/the-single-most-competent-and-least-competent-bond-not-the-actors-performance.#Item_7

002 wrote:

Master_Dahark wrote:

For most competent I'll go with The Living Daylights. Starting with the PTS and being the only OO agent to survive the ill fated training exercise,

No Agent 002 survived he was just shot by a paintball and failed the training exercise only 004 died

So where the hell was OO2 when Bond was stopping the assassin??? What, did he go home early because he was 'out'?

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

Ludovico wrote:

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

Ludovico wrote:

Here is one: why is Doninic Greene eating an apple when he arrives at La Perla de la Duna? There has to be a second degree meaning to this, but I am not sure which one.

I think you are looking WAY too deep into the film now, mate. :))

One thing I have learned from my years of studies in literature: if it is in it, it is significant. If it was not, then Greene would not have walked in eating an apple.

Hahaha, that's rich. Film, art and literature can mean whatever you want it to; they are interpretive mediums at heart. I sometimes get the feeling that people get brainwashed by reading Shakespeare and having it taught in school that every line the bloke wrote has some kind of symbolic significance to the great themes of the play and the world beyond, but that statement is rubbish to me. Maybe they were on set, Mathieu hadn't yet had a bite to eat for lunch, and Forster gave him an apple to eat and decided to roll the scene while he was doing it. My smart arse comment is just as logical or "correct" as any.

Ludovico

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

Ludovico wrote:

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

Ludovico wrote:

Here is one: why is Doninic Greene eating an apple when he arrives at La Perla de la Duna? There has to be a second degree meaning to this, but I am not sure which one.

I think you are looking WAY too deep into the film now, mate. :))

One thing I have learned from my years of studies in literature: if it is in it, it is significant. If it was not, then Greene would not have walked in eating an apple.

Hahaha, that's rich. Film, art and literature can mean whatever you want it to; they are interpretive mediums at heart. I sometimes get the feeling that people get brainwashed by reading Shakespeare and having it taught in school that every line the bloke wrote has some kind of symbolic significance to the great themes of the play and the world beyond, but that statement is rubbish to me. Maybe they were on set, Mathieu hadn't yet had a bite to eat for lunch, and Forster gave him an apple to eat and decided to roll the scene while he was doing it. My smart arse comment is just as logical or "correct" as any.

Well, yes and no, you need to back up your claims by evidence, although there is no notion of falsifiability in literature. Whether the significance is intentional or not is unimportant, it is there, it can be interpreted. Terence Young gave a cat for Blofeld to stroke, it was so the viewers could have their attention on something when the face of the villain was hidden. That the cat is an animal associated with Satan and witchcraft may be a happy coincidence, it is still there.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

Ludovico wrote:

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

Ludovico wrote:

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

Ludovico wrote:

Here is one: why is Doninic Greene eating an apple when he arrives at La Perla de la Duna? There has to be a second degree meaning to this, but I am not sure which one.

I think you are looking WAY too deep into the film now, mate. :))

One thing I have learned from my years of studies in literature: if it is in it, it is significant. If it was not, then Greene would not have walked in eating an apple.

Hahaha, that's rich. Film, art and literature can mean whatever you want it to; they are interpretive mediums at heart. I sometimes get the feeling that people get brainwashed by reading Shakespeare and having it taught in school that every line the bloke wrote has some kind of symbolic significance to the great themes of the play and the world beyond, but that statement is rubbish to me. Maybe they were on set, Mathieu hadn't yet had a bite to eat for lunch, and Forster gave him an apple to eat and decided to roll the scene while he was doing it. My smart arse comment is just as logical or "correct" as any.

Well, yes and no, you need to back up your claims by evidence, although there is no notion of falsifiability in literature. Whether the significance is intentional or not is unimportant, it is there, it can be interpreted. Terence Young gave a cat for Blofeld to stroke, it was so the viewers could have their attention on something when the face of the villain was hidden. That the cat is an animal associated with Satan and witchcraft may be a happy coincidence, it is still there.

If Young was going to make any kind of demonic statement about Blofeld, you would think the cat would have been black.

Ludovico

So what if he is white? Blofeld does not have horns either. He is still the Devil of Bond's universe.

Sir_James_Moloney

deleted

Soundofthesinners

What does Freelance hit Quarrel with in the club while they're interrogating her?

Murdock

Soundofthesinners wrote:

What does Freelance hit Quarrel with in the club while they're interrogating her?

I believe it's a bent spoon.

Master_Dahark

I thought it as the broken light bulb-- he was bleeding. Which made his nonchalance over it very impressive! He was the Proto-Jaws... no pain! :))