Skyfall Questions (Spoilers)

12022242526

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    0013 wrote:
    Tuulia wrote:
    0013 wrote:
    2. After seeing at home, I put more attention to the gloves in Shanghai. Obviously is a big goof because sometimes he wears them and other time he doesn't. It really doesn't bother me. After all, Bond movies are full with goofs and they've become something as a tradition (as with the DVD restoration when the respected the visible crew in TMWTGG.)

    Are you sure there's some big goof? He takes his gloves off in the car, we see that. We don't see him put them back on, that's all, but we don't need to, do we? He has them on by the time he's approaching Patrice. It's not like he has them on/off/on/off/on/off/on or something. Anyway, I don't have the film yet, so maybe I remember it wrong.

    I just checked again. He's without gloves when he gets off the car, in the elevator and when he's getting closer to Patrice. Then, when he fight it's hard to tell but obviously he has them on he Patrice falls. Then they are gone when he checks the suitcase. My conjecture is that he puts his gloves on when he holst the gun approaching Patrice.

    Another question, why if the new digs are that well-guarded, M's flat is not?

    Bond only has one off in the car (testing the gun), none when he rides the elevator and approaches Patrice, and I figure he puts them back on as he waits to get Patrice off guard (since he wants to question him), and then he only has one on when he checks the suitcase (because he lost one when Patrice fell after holding onto Bond's hand).
  • Posts: 1,817
    0013 wrote:
    Tuulia wrote:
    0013 wrote:
    2. After seeing at home, I put more attention to the gloves in Shanghai. Obviously is a big goof because sometimes he wears them and other time he doesn't. It really doesn't bother me. After all, Bond movies are full with goofs and they've become something as a tradition (as with the DVD restoration when the respected the visible crew in TMWTGG.)

    Are you sure there's some big goof? He takes his gloves off in the car, we see that. We don't see him put them back on, that's all, but we don't need to, do we? He has them on by the time he's approaching Patrice. It's not like he has them on/off/on/off/on/off/on or something. Anyway, I don't have the film yet, so maybe I remember it wrong.

    I just checked again. He's without gloves when he gets off the car, in the elevator and when he's getting closer to Patrice. Then, when he fight it's hard to tell but obviously he has them on he Patrice falls. Then they are gone when he checks the suitcase. My conjecture is that he puts his gloves on when he holst the gun approaching Patrice.

    Another question, why if the new digs are that well-guarded, M's flat is not?

    Bond only has one off in the car (testing the gun), none when he rides the elevator and approaches Patrice, and I figure he puts them back on as he waits to get Patrice off guard (since he wants to question him), and then he only has one on when he checks the suitcase (because he lost one when Patrice fell after holding onto Bond's hand).

    You're right. I noticed after a detailed view. Though he doesn't loose the glove. He must took them off in order to examing the suitcase metter.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Glovegate.
  • Posts: 1,817
    RC7 wrote:
    Glovegate.

    And that's what I call the "magic glove".
  • Posts: 5,745
    At the end of Skyfall.. just a notice while listening to Mendes' commentary, when Eve hands Bond the bulldog.. she's wearing a jacket that is almost identical to one M was wearing earlier in the film. It's gray and white sort-of-plaid. Now, it is fit for Eve, but it's identical style and fabric to the jacket M was wearing.

    Just a note.. but why? Trying to introduce a new style? Lazy?
  • 0013 wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    Glovegate.

    And that's what I call the "magic glove".

    LOL, the "magic bullet" was in no way magic (if one uses science and computer modelling based on the Zapruder film instead of diagrams based on assumptions) so perhaps there's a fragment of film somewhere that can explain why Bond puts his gloves back on...

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    0013 wrote:
    0013 wrote:
    Tuulia wrote:
    0013 wrote:
    2. After seeing at home, I put more attention to the gloves in Shanghai. Obviously is a big goof because sometimes he wears them and other time he doesn't. It really doesn't bother me. After all, Bond movies are full with goofs and they've become something as a tradition (as with the DVD restoration when the respected the visible crew in TMWTGG.)

    Are you sure there's some big goof? He takes his gloves off in the car, we see that. We don't see him put them back on, that's all, but we don't need to, do we? He has them on by the time he's approaching Patrice. It's not like he has them on/off/on/off/on/off/on or something. Anyway, I don't have the film yet, so maybe I remember it wrong.

    I just checked again. He's without gloves when he gets off the car, in the elevator and when he's getting closer to Patrice. Then, when he fight it's hard to tell but obviously he has them on he Patrice falls. Then they are gone when he checks the suitcase. My conjecture is that he puts his gloves on when he holst the gun approaching Patrice.

    Another question, why if the new digs are that well-guarded, M's flat is not?

    Bond only has one off in the car (testing the gun), none when he rides the elevator and approaches Patrice, and I figure he puts them back on as he waits to get Patrice off guard (since he wants to question him), and then he only has one on when he checks the suitcase (because he lost one when Patrice fell after holding onto Bond's hand).

    You're right. I noticed after a detailed view. Though he doesn't loose the glove. He must took them off in order to examing the suitcase metter.

    No, Patrice is barely holding on to Bond's hand, and he slips as the gun comes off, the glove leaving Bond's hand and flying downwards (I presume) on the free air as does Patrice.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    0013 wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    Glovegate.

    And that's what I call the "magic glove".

    LOL, the "magic bullet" was in no way magic (if one uses science and computer modelling based on the Zapruder film instead of diagrams based on assumptions) so perhaps there's a fragment of film somewhere that can explain why Bond puts his gloves back on...

    Perhaps there was a third gloveman on the grassy knoll?
  • alphabetagagaalphabetagaga Hitchin, UK
    edited February 2013 Posts: 7
    http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_23_feb09_glencoe_filming.php3

    'on a trail which was closed to the public for the day.'

    anyone know the exact location of that trail?
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 5,745
    http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_23_feb09_glencoe_filming.php3

    'on a trail which was closed to the public for the day.'

    anyone know the exact location of that trail?

    It's in Glencoe, Scotland. Other than that, I'm not sure.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited February 2013 Posts: 13,356
    There was a video of a Scottish report from TV taken at the time that may give a little more information, if it can be found. It's hard to believe that was one year ago already! Time flies.
  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,044
    I just have two questions about the film.

    1) The persons who is dead in the hotelroom (except for Ronson) whom are they? Are they MI6 agents or are they allies to Patrice which Ronson killed?

    2) What do Silva means when he says "Chasing Spies" does he refer to Bond's current assignment when he chases Silva, or what?
  • X3MSonicXX3MSonicX https://www.behance.net/gallery/86760163/Fa-Posteres-de-007-No-Time-To-Die
    Posts: 2,635
    MrBond wrote:
    I just have two questions about the film.

    1) The persons who is dead in the hotelroom (except for Ronson) whom are they? Are they MI6 agents or are they allies to Patrice which Ronson killed?

    2) What do Silva means when he says "Chasing Spies" does he refer to Bond's current assignment when he chases Silva, or what?

    Firstly friend, at the 1st question, you mean in the beggining? Well if so, yes. They were MI6 agents that were hunting Patrice out.

    And at the second question, i believe it is what yourself told, that he was chasing Silva.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,382
    MrBond wrote:
    I am quite sure that from when Bond sat on the boat in Venice to when Bond shoots Mr. White it takes roughly a week. He might have sat up connections to find him and to trace Mr Whites pattern of how he lives and where he lives.

    Remember M's remark about when Bond last slept? It had to be sometime around the time of Vespers death. And i think that the events in QoS took a week or two and then Bond does some missions between QoS and SF which is 6 year span before SF picks up in the end of July of 2012.

    That is a good point. If CR is 06, QoS is likely that too (it wouldn't take that long to track White after all), and that means Skyfall is a truly matured Bond where he has had over half a decade more of field work. It would have been cool to get a shot of Bond's desk in Skyfall with some photos or trinkets from the missions that were to be taking place in between QoS and it.

    While I love the montage music in OHMSS, it never seemed to me Bond's style to keep mementos. Well, maaybe Vesper's picture.
  • Risico wrote:
    Here's one: unless Alex Dimitrios owned a retro-gadgeted Aston Martin DB5... why the hell does the DB5 have an ejector seat and machine-guns? It's clearly meant to be the DB5 from Connery's era (M knows about the ejector seat) so I guess it *isn't* the car Bond won in Casino Royale. Which leads to the question, why does it exist in this movie? It's stated in Skyfall that the car is Bond's personal property, but its got 1960s MI6 gadgets in it. I guess in the Craig Bond timeline, Dimitrios *must* have put the gadgets there himself and then Bond told M all about it. I can't think of another explanation! Apart from someone suggesting I "zip it".

    My guess is that it's Andrew Bond's car. Who knows, maybe he worked for MI6 too?

  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,044
    So I was watching Skyfall again last night and I watched through the end credits and there noticed something something new. It says that the movie was shot in "Turkey, China, JAPAN, Scotland and England"
    Old on for a second. Did they shoot something in Japan? I know that Silvas island was insured by the Hamisha Island outside the coast of Japan, but from what I know they did never shoot anything there. Or did they?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    MrBond wrote:
    So I was watching Skyfall again last night and I watched through the end credits and there noticed something something new. It says that the movie was shot in "Turkey, China, JAPAN, Scotland and England"
    Old on for a second. Did they shoot something in Japan? I know that Silvas island was insured by the Hamisha Island outside the coast of Japan, but from what I know they did never shoot anything there. Or did they?
    http://www.movie-locations.com/movies/s/Skyfall.html#.UUMDYo6IJUQ

    While most of it was shot at Pinewood, the faraway shots of the island are real.
  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,044
    MrBond wrote:
    So I was watching Skyfall again last night and I watched through the end credits and there noticed something something new. It says that the movie was shot in "Turkey, China, JAPAN, Scotland and England"
    Old on for a second. Did they shoot something in Japan? I know that Silvas island was insured by the Hamisha Island outside the coast of Japan, but from what I know they did never shoot anything there. Or did they?
    http://www.movie-locations.com/movies/s/Skyfall.html#.UUMDYo6IJUQ

    While most of it was shot at Pinewood, the faraway shots of the island are real.

    Hm, intresting. I always thought that was a recreated model that was CGI:ed into the ocean.
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 4,410
    MrBond wrote:
    MrBond wrote:
    So I was watching Skyfall again last night and I watched through the end credits and there noticed something something new. It says that the movie was shot in "Turkey, China, JAPAN, Scotland and England"
    Old on for a second. Did they shoot something in Japan? I know that Silvas island was insured by the Hamisha Island outside the coast of Japan, but from what I know they did never shoot anything there. Or did they?
    http://www.movie-locations.com/movies/s/Skyfall.html#.UUMDYo6IJUQ

    While most of it was shot at Pinewood, the faraway shots of the island are real.

    Hm, intresting. I always thought that was a recreated model that was CGI:ed into the ocean.

    I've been meaning to ask this for ages, thanks for reminding me.
    It's real?! It looks fake.

    Also, another thing; if the city had just been abandoned would the buildings really start to decompose and fall apart naturally? If so, how long do we think Silva may have been on that island for?

  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,044
    MrBond wrote:
    MrBond wrote:
    So I was watching Skyfall again last night and I watched through the end credits and there noticed something something new. It says that the movie was shot in "Turkey, China, JAPAN, Scotland and England"
    Old on for a second. Did they shoot something in Japan? I know that Silvas island was insured by the Hamisha Island outside the coast of Japan, but from what I know they did never shoot anything there. Or did they?
    http://www.movie-locations.com/movies/s/Skyfall.html#.UUMDYo6IJUQ

    While most of it was shot at Pinewood, the faraway shots of the island are real.

    Hm, intresting. I always thought that was a recreated model that was CGI:ed into the ocean.

    I've been meaning to ask this for ages, thanks for reminding me.
    It's real?! It looks fake.

    Also, another thing; if the city had just been abandoned would the buildings really start to decompose and fall apart naturally? If so, how long do we think Silva may have been on that island for?

    The real island were abandonded 1974, and Silva were abandonded 1997. So presumably he got around the island 1998-1999 dependning on if Silva escaped from the Chinese or if he was released by them.
  • Posts: 4,813
    I want an island :(
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I want an island :(
    I'll get you one for Christmas. ;)
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 498
    I want an island :(
    I'll get you one for Christmas. ;)

    I want a country!
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 2,015
    I've been meaning to ask this for ages, thanks for reminding me.
    It's real?! It looks fake.

    I did a short answer on the "too much CGI" thread, now that one can check the strong fake feeling on the large screen, by freezing the image of the movie on the little screen : the large shots are indeed fake, it's not even a real view modified by CG, it's a whole reconstruction "inspired" by the true location, IMO.

    Indeed I don't think anyone ever got there from the team, only a few FX photographers for the textures of a few buildings possibly.
    Also, another thing; if the city had just been abandoned would the buildings really start to decompose and fall apart naturally? If so, how long do we think Silva may have been on that island for?

    Compared to the true island, they removed the green wild life aspect that is there. But they also increased the amount of damages on the building they face when they arrive (on the top left), which is the view closest to the truth. So on one side it means a longer time than in real life, and on the other a shorter one !
  • I've been meaning to ask this for ages, thanks for reminding me.
    It's real?! It looks fake.

    I did a short answer on the "too much CGI" thread, now that one can check the strong fake feeling on the large screen, by freezing the image of the movie on the little screen : the large shots are indeed fake, it's not even a real view modified by CG, it's a whole reconstruction "inspired" by the true location, IMO.

    Indeed I don't think anyone ever got there from the team, only a few FX photographers for the textures of a few buildings possibly.

    I thought on the director's commentary Mendes said that the shot of the island when the helicopters were above it was of the real island...will have to check it again now...
  • Posts: 11,425
    MrBond wrote:
    MrBond wrote:
    So I was watching Skyfall again last night and I watched through the end credits and there noticed something something new. It says that the movie was shot in "Turkey, China, JAPAN, Scotland and England"
    Old on for a second. Did they shoot something in Japan? I know that Silvas island was insured by the Hamisha Island outside the coast of Japan, but from what I know they did never shoot anything there. Or did they?
    http://www.movie-locations.com/movies/s/Skyfall.html#.UUMDYo6IJUQ

    While most of it was shot at Pinewood, the faraway shots of the island are real.

    Hm, intresting. I always thought that was a recreated model that was CGI:ed into the ocean.

    I've been meaning to ask this for ages, thanks for reminding me.
    It's real?! It looks fake.

    Also, another thing; if the city had just been abandoned would the buildings really start to decompose and fall apart naturally? If so, how long do we think Silva may have been on that island for?

    That's the sad thing about allowing CGI to creep into the movies. When somethingis actually real these days you assume it's just CGI.
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 2,015
    I thought on the director's commentary Mendes said that the shot of the island when the helicopters were above it was of the real island...will have to check it again now...

    Well on this second view for instance, the most blatant is that what is seen on the right :

    781762right.jpg

    is nowhere to be found on the real location, while it should be easy to find (house on the rocks outside the wall, etc). But even when you look at the rest, it doesn't match anywhere, you can find some buildings here and there, but the overall looks like inspiration, not reality.


    hashima-1.jpg

    The closest to the truth in the movie is this building,

    abandoned-city-5.jpg

    but with more damages added (top left destroyed), and wild life removed.

    Note that furthermore, Hashima doesn't feature anywhere in the production notes distributed to the journalists by Eon, while it lists many other locations.
    Getafix wrote:
    That's the sad thing about allowing CGI to creep into the movies. When somethingis actually real these days you assume it's just CGI.

    That's also the sad thing about budget concerns : since they had a team actually in Shanghai, we've got more than 30 seconds of ininterrupted helicopter view of the real city to "use the money spent" (with possibly CG for the pool though !).

    And since they could not afford to be at Hashima to do similar helicopter views (IMO just some photographers from the VFX team were there to take the textures of some buildings), we've got I think only CG for it, with almost matte painting only, and certainly no helicopter overview of it (you'd have to re-create many parts in full 3d, 2d matte-like would not be enough)

  • edited March 2013 Posts: 12,837
    I have a question. I typed this in another thread but I didn't get an answer from anybody so I'll repost it here. It's about the "breadcrumbs" Q leaves. What are they?

    It's all well and good explaining that Q has left a trail digitally but of what? Even if it's things like Bond using his credit card at Mcdonalds on the way, how would Silva know? He wouldn't be able to check the computers of every single restaurant/pub/service station/cafe/fast food place between London and a remote Scottish mansion in the middle of bumfuck nowhere would he? Is it something to do with phones?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    @thelivingroyale, I don't believe it's ever confirmed, but I'd say it's a number of things: phone calls, credit card purchases, perhaps pictures of them going by cameras or something. Just a mixture of things that Silva could trace back (which makes it likely that it was credit card usage or phone calls) to Bond with ease. He hacked MI6, I'm sure he could do this just as easily.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I have a question. I typed this in another thread but I didn't get an answer from anybody so I'll repost it here. It's about the "breadcrumbs" Q leaves. What are they?

    It's all well and good explaining that Q has left a trail digitally but of what? Even if it's things like Bond using his credit card at Mcdonalds on the way, how would Silva know? He wouldn't be able to check the computers of every single restaurant/pub/service station/cafe/fast food place between London and a remote Scottish mansion in the middle of bumfuck nowhere would he? Is it something to do with phones?

    It's just a bit of bollocks. All this stuff is undermined by establishing the villain as an uber-hacker. Just another case of P&W thinking 'that'll do'. Why leave breadcrumbs? Why not just disappear and then issue a 'come and get me' once at Skyfall lodge. If Silva is the genius that's implied he's got it all covered anyway.
Sign In or Register to comment.