Skyfall - Aston DB5 all wrong in context of film

NapoleonPlural

I would point out that it's more than a Cannonball Run type cameo, as the gadgets are utilised to important effect. Mind you, how mercenaries walk past a car like that not even checking anyone is inside -especially as it's such a noticeable car, I mean I wouldn't ignore it.

RC7

JamesCraig wrote:

So now they had to explain how the car got those gadgets?

Omg.

What do you mean 'so now'? Surely this has been the crux of most people's arguments on this thread. If you think it's fine why are you even in this thread - to repeatedly tell us to stop 'moaning'.

JamesCraig

So this thread can only be filled with people who don't like something, then?

You might do it as well here: http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/4315/sf-db5-spoilers/p1#Item_31

RC7

JamesCraig wrote:

So this thread can only be filled with people who don't like something, then?

No, preferably people who have opinions, ideas, theories and answer questions put to them by other members, for the sake of discussion. Not people who simply follow a question with a question like a grumpy 5 year old would.

acoppola

Agentprovo wrote:

acoppola wrote:

With the fact that this a reboot of the series, the 1964 Aston is grossly out of place, It belongs in Goldfinger which to this day is still considered the best Bond film.

Roger, Tim and George had their own cars. Pierce also had the same car but it worked better for the tone of his films but by no means ideal. New Bond, new car! And it seems to be a technique they use to imply we are getting classic Bond. But it just reminds me of Connery's shadow as that car is a symbol of his era.

This is at the heart of my point, the car depicted in Skyfall is Sean's, it is classic Bond, even though he criticised it saying that the pedals where too close together, more for a women, but it does belong in 1964.
Daniel Craig is a good 007 for our time & he has a car, it's the DBS a brilliant modern car that fits, the only way the DB5 could have fitted was the unmodified version won in Casino Royale.

The new reboot era wants to fit in with the Bond films of the past. And that is my problem with the DB5. When you watch Goldfinger, you are going to ask why the same car is in Skyfall. It is too blatant a homage and to me an attempt to subliminally tell the audience the commonality of the Craig era to the Connery era. But it makes no sense in the serious context of the Craig films.

Another issue is that in Skyfall we are told by Q that gadgets like exploding pens are obsolete but then he has a car that is technologically out of date. So on one hand the gadgets are referenced as dated yet we are supposed to accept the DB5.

I would have preferred new gadgets and a new Aston.

If you can have an old car in Skyfall , then why are gadgets seen as out of date?. I am sure an exploding pen or similar gadget would still have it's use despite being in the digital age. Or am I also to believe that men no longer have fist fights because everything is done digitally?

JamesCraig

You've insulted me enough, RC7.

fire_and_ice

You could argue that skyfall is not another reboot, though its more a remake or homage.

i think the best way i can enjoy the movie is just see it for what it is a anniversary special/tribute and dismiss grievances i have about it and crack on to the next movie that won't be distracted by the 50th anniversary.

Sandy

trevanian wrote:

If it's his personal car, where did he get it kitted out? (why would THIS Bond CHOOSE to have an ejector seat installed, doesn't he like dealing with opponents in a hands-on way, up close n personal? Better still, where could he possibly go to get it kitted out w/o his masters knowing and/or having to approve/pay for it?

Too many questions raised, a great example of how credibility will get thrown out the window (or ejected through the roof) for the sake of a gag. Not that different from the dumb music cues from other films in the Moore pictures, except these cues are coming from a pre-reboot universe.

I don't know why so many people have problems with this. Here is my opinion, there are several very good, simple explanations for the DB5 and they all have to do with the fact that it's his personal car.
1. Bond in the books also had his personal car kitted, the same thing could happen here. This explains why M knew about the button. This might be the car he won at CR (although I don't think so) or a different one.
2. If the DB5 was standard issue for 00 agents in the 60's (this is important also for point 1) then Bond, loving the car as he did (obvious from CR), might have gotten hold of one of them for himself. This would also explain why M knew about the button.

Do you want me to continue?

Germanlady

In all four sceenings I went to, the Aston moment was always THE gasp from the adience moment. This is, what its all about, non? Timeline? Really? In Bond?

Asking them to EXPLAIN the gadgets is such poor argument These are nods to the past. What is so hard to understand or ecxept? Nobody seems to have a problem with it, except those few, who have a problem with about everything.

acoppola

Sandy wrote:

trevanian wrote:

If it's his personal car, where did he get it kitted out? (why would THIS Bond CHOOSE to have an ejector seat installed, doesn't he like dealing with opponents in a hands-on way, up close n personal? Better still, where could he possibly go to get it kitted out w/o his masters knowing and/or having to approve/pay for it?

Too many questions raised, a great example of how credibility will get thrown out the window (or ejected through the roof) for the sake of a gag. Not that different from the dumb music cues from other films in the Moore pictures, except these cues are coming from a pre-reboot universe.

I don't know why so many people have problems with this. Here is my opinion, there are several very good, simple explanations for the DB5 and they all have to do with the fact that it's his personal car.
1. Bond in the books also had his personal car kitted, the same thing could happen here. This explains why M knew about the button. This might be the car he won at CR (although I don't think so) or a different one.
2. If the DB5 was standard issue for 00 agents in the 60's (this is important also for point 1) then Bond, loving the car as he did (obvious from CR), might have gotten hold of one of them for himself. This would also explain why M knew about the button.

Do you want me to continue?

But considering this is a fresh start for Bond like the other films never existed, the DB5 makes no sense. Surely a modern agent would have the latest sophisticated gadgetry and car. For me that car is too much associated with Connery and when you have an actor like Craig, I do not see the point of them doing that.

It was Eon who wanted to start over and personally I saw no point of a reboot. A change of Bond actor is the reboot anyway, but they chose to jettison many aspects of the past and rebuild. The DB5 is nothing more than a safety net and a reassurance that Bond is still Bond. But someone like me is intelligent enough to deduce that and do not need such reminders.

I said this before, but if Christian Bale had the 1960's Batmobile in the Nolan films then it would take you out of the tone the new films are trying to set. It would immediately make you think back to another time. The DB5 likewise is too powerful a symbol of the past for me.

Someone like me who has watched all the Bond films will find the revisionism irksome.
And in Fleming's books the cars were pretty much contemporary.

I have no problem if you like the DB5 in the new films, but for me it is unnecessary.

And of course I am aware that continuity is not a strong feature in Bond films. Felix Leiter being one example.

nick_007

We really don't need two active threads on this.

http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/4315/sf-db5-spoilers/p2