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
Yes, but I go by a different name there, Sleeping_Beauty. I do edits there, but for the most part, I spend my time reading. I did one small edit on Pierce Brosnan's section about the trope "Always save the girl".
[/quote]
Yep, I'm a troper under the very same nick I use here, and I make some additions now and then... But they're just a few.
Another nice point, indeed.
If he said that today it would certainly make sense, but not in 1995. Ar they suggesting the movie does indeed take place after 2000? In the PTS, it doesn't say '9 years ago', but rather after the PTS it says '9 years later'
Or am I just reading too much into it, and Zukovsky was just making an odd comment?
http://filmschoolrejects.com/features/39-things-learned-banned-dr-no-commentary.php?utm_content=buffere4f8f&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Shouldn't 11. be "The changing of Bond’s Beretta to a Walther PPK results from a point in the book “From Russia With Love” (which proceeds the novel of “Dr. No”) in which Red Grant (not Rosa Klebb) almost kills him when the gun jams."?
I could be wrong, it's been awhile since I've read the book but I remember the gun jamming during Bond's fight with Grant.
I wondered about that too. If they wanted her dead, he could've just shot her in the face at the clinic.
I assumed either 1) they wanted to kill her somewhere isolated, or 2) Blofeld wanted her alive for some reason, maybe because she knew something.
(It's not like they could've framed her death as an accident, considering EVERYONE saw her being led away by Hinx and his men)
I always took it to be hyperbole rather than him literally meaning that they had entered in the 21st century - i.e. rather than being hyper relevant and ahead of their time, he was making the point that MI6 is rooted in the past - i.e. stuck in the 20th century with its Cold War - goes with the whole shtick of is Bond relevant now that the Cold War is over - i.e. Zukovsky, now not in the KGB but an arms dealer is done with all that and is looking to the future i.e. how to make money in the new Russia, so he's making the point that Bond, if he wants to join the future, should really give up on all this spy stuff and make money, like him.
Beside which, TWINE is clearly set after GE and the BBC news report about Elektra's kidnapping is pre-2000. Incidentally, the BBC changed the style of the 6 o'clock news from that style just about the time the film was released.
I never thought of this myself, but it's a certainly solid theory.
Sounds like an error in the viewer, not in the film. How can you see anything if you don't pay attention?
Is there another kind of solitaire? It looks like the normal kind that everyone learns as a kid. http://www.bicyclecards.com/how-to-play/solitaire/
https://www.quora.com/In-Quantum-of-Solace-during-the-plane-chase-scene-what-exactly-does-Bond-do-to-foil-the-fighter-jet
He didn't word it right but I think what he meant to say was that the action scenes in that movie are shot and edited like shit. This is coming from someone who has nothing against handheld cameras (I love 21st century Michael Mann films).
Great find @BMW_with_missiles.
Very interesting and I like the idea that Bond combined his knowledge of dogfighting, aeronautics, different aircraft spec and engine mechanics to out think the other pilot.
Although as the author points out the other pilot must have been a bit thick to end up being forced into the canyon wall. Superfluous and unecessary though it is I've always enjoyed this action sequence (well up until the embarrassing freefall sequence) and this adds an extra layer of depth that will certainly enhance my next viewing.
Mind you does anyone think a conversation that went into such aeronautical detail ever took place at an EON script meeting though? I'd be impressed if they did but I think they probably just said 'Bond causes the engine to smoke and the tailing pilot can't see and goes into the side of the canyon'.
Now can someone just explain how Bond manages to flip that boat in the air? I think he attaches it to an anchor and I'm assuming the anchor caught a rock but if the force was that much wouldn't the rope snap before the boat got flipped?
I have various types of solitaire in a book, and some of them are in the wonderful site you showed me. I'll have to give it a closer look to learn some easy card games to play with my family. So thanks, Sark, this will come in handy.
Of course. I just mentioned the 21st Century because a lot of people don't care for his post-Insider work (i.e. shooting on HD digital) - so that solidifies me as a true enthusiast haha. For example, I think Miami Vice followed by Collateral are his #2 and #3 behind Heat