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
You are asking HIM of all people? He has made clear in endless posts, how he things the plotline and everything else infact is crap. No need to engage him again on it IMO.
I doubt anybody here is eager to hear it all over again...
;))
The question is: is that going to be enough to keep Fiennes happy?
Possibly not. Maybe his M can develop into a more central role at some point but for now I personally don't want to see M as a main central character as happened with Judy Dench's M as it now needs a change in direction where it is all about Bond, the girl and the villain. I think Fiennes is a splendid actor and choice BTW.
Yes. And M, just like the villain (but that is for another topic), should be smarter than Bond. More organised, more analytical. I dream to see in the movies a scene like in the novel TB, where M practically uncovers Blofeld's plan in front of Bond, simply through a series of deductions. I think Fiennes could deliver it perfectly.
That's a great idea. While I find it amusing when Bond one-ups M a la DAF, M should be smarter.
Agreed. I've mentioned before that I'd love a short, single scene of Craig's Bond and Wright's Leiter enjoying themselves together during a mission - either having a drink together or a meal in a restaurant, waiting for the next "event" to happen. But I'd love to see Bond and Tanner in their shirtsleeves with loosened ties playing cards together and having a drink in the office long after working hours (especially smiling and ribbing each other). Again, it could be a scene of a few seconds and then they're called in to an emergency briefing. But it would add so much to any future scenes with the two of them.
I hope we get back to more scenes between them, I won't anticipate a full on Fleming-esque relationship but I grew tired of the naughty schoolboy act with Dench. Bond always had a lot of respect for M in the books and that needs to come back.
@007InVT I know the bad word the really bad word the F word in Skyfall you know what I'm talking about don't you its worse than flipping.
At the start of the film and in several scenes subsequent he is giving M a bollocking so its pretty clear hes her superior.
So how come in the final reel he has been demoted to her job which from all that we have seen before is obviously a lesser role?
It makes more sense for Tanner (although insipid Rory Kinnear as M fills me with terror) or Bond to be promoted rather than Mallory being forced to take a pay cut.
Agree about Kinnear, no charisma whatsoever.
I'm not concerned about Mallory taking the lesser role, I think it restores order as Bond should respect M a lot more than he did Dench in that silly Mumsy relationship they had.
Good point. Although it seems he's her nominal superior. As he's moving to a highly prestigious and active role I think it makes sense. There's a line in FYEO (the short story) where Bond reflects that Messervy turned down the guaranteed offer of Fifth Sea Lord to become head of the secret service so it sort of fits with Fleming.
I see a lot of people saying hes very good as Tanner but Michael Kitchen exuded more authority in a much smaller role. Kinnear just comes across more of a male Moneypenny. Of course this could be a fault with the script which basically makes him M's dogsbody.
If they were going to bother to reboot everything why not have Tanner on the mission in the PTS and have him injured as in the books and let him be the field agent who is forced to give up office work and then have Eve just come in as Mallorys girl from the Shanghai scenes onwards and then reveal at the end shes Moneypenny and that Tanner has given up field work to be deputy.
As it is I feel we have rather been foisted with Kinnear as a stock MI6 regular from now on, without any actual character being established. He might as well be the same character as Robinson or the guy in CR who googles Skyfleet.
Tentative but I'll give it you I suppose as youre backing it up with a quote from Fleming.
Lets just say that the shootout in the select committee made him remember he likes to get his hands a bit dirtier than his current deskbound role so he applied after M died even though it was technically not as prestigious a role as he already had.
Thats the first interesting thing youve said.
Does that debunk the crappy 'SF is a prequel to DN' theory as if it was true she wouldnt say this in FRWL as she has already been in SF?
Quite agree 0013.
This is confusing since CR why dont we jsut say Bond had his Licence to Kill taken off him? Between DAD & CR and then he had to do the sam stuff to get it back?
Mallory was the head of a committee, not quite M's superior. Being the head of MI6 is a prestigious, vital position.
M's position, or C's in real life's MI6, can be offered from someone from inside MI6 or outside. But if it was inside, a former head of stations or Deputy Head would be more logical choices than Tanner or Bond, especially the latter.
I could personally never understand how SF could possibly be a DN prequel. CR and QOS, yes I could because Bond is new to the game. Not so in SF, it's more like where DAD left off , but obviously much improved.
I think Mendes or someone said it as a throwaway remark meaning by the end of SF we have come full circle and are back where everything is in position for business as usual but some idiots (the same sort of people who believe in the codename theory or ask why Judi's M remains in place after DAD if we've rebooted) took it rather too literally.