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
A similar feeling you mention came to mind for just a few seconds, when NTTD begins with Bond at Vesper's gravesite....and the winds blows as her theme plays.
I think Dominic Greene's name referred to his cover: an eco friendly businessman, but also his ultimate goal: making a lot of money through his scheme.
Why did I not see this before ?!!? Doh !
Things like these make the movie age better with time! It still makes money when people go back and stream or buy the movie. I hope the producers can understand that a re-release makes sense at this point.
you beat me to it, I also thought it reminiscent of the Bond-Brand connection.
The problem with Seydoux is that her relationship with Bond doesn't work in SP, but it does in NTTD. NTTD is infinately better than SP in its engagement with the public and its storytelling. Somehow the action in SP never feels threatening, it never feels like danger. The chase through Rome? nah. feels like the one on the ice in DAD, with the latter one more fitting to the film. The fight in the skyscraper? well, it's impossible to tell who's who, it looks like a sort of art show and it doesn't feel like it is actually a fight. The only one that works is the fight on the train.
But there, again, the storytelling fails. I can imagine such an experience would bring Swann and Bond together, but instead of holding her (like he did with Vesper) they just turn into two rabbits and go for it. That was a bit too fast, which takes the whole purpose of the fight away.
Later on, she just 'breaks up' with him and walks off. Say what? her timing is impeccible there as well (for the script), but I just can't believe that if you honestly cared for someone, you take that time and place to just dissapear. Very convenient for BLofeld of course, as I said, good timing, but it makes little sense for inter-human communication.
I actually do like the moment where she says goodbye in London. Seydoux performs the scene well and Newman's music is achingly sad, but again, as you mentioned, it comes about abruptly and makes little sense and is obviously just there so she can conveniently get captured.
Seydoux and Craig are both good actors. I agree, they played off one another much better in NTTD. Maybe part of it was down to how Craig played Bond as more smug and detached in SP. He's very cold and even kind of haughty in the scene where Bond and Swann first meet, though I think Seydoux also plays that scene very well.
The section in L'Americain showed promise, but that only involved Swann spurning Bond. We never had a great scene showing them falling in love. I suppose the opportunity for that would have been on the train, but through all the jokes about dirty martinis and moments of firearm prep the chemistry is never actually built.
A different performance from Craig and an ironing of SP's script issues might have made for better chemistry between the two.
The action in NTTD was not that down-to-earth...DC unfortunately had his own case of most Bond actors where their films become less down to earth or somewhat careless in terms of quality in certain technical ways.
The music in the Blofeld birthday party shootout in Cuba felt like a Heineken commercial.
All the criticisms of QoS made the producers think of correcting the wrong things. They think that people want more action, simple plot and plot-focused, gadgets, tropes, formulas....oh, and less character driving pieces.
Bond: I'll come back for you when it's all over.
Madeleine: No, I can't.
Bond: No, you can't stay here, or...
Madeleine: I can't stay here. I have a kidnapping to attend.
Bond: As the victim or the perpetrator?
Madeleine: The victim.
Bond: Oh.
(awkward pause)
Bond: Well, you just go and get yourself kidnapped. We'll talk later. Maybe.
Hey, it could have gone a different way...
Madeleine: I can't stay here. I have a kidnapping to attend.
Bond: As the victim or the perpetrator?
(awkward pause)
Bond: As the victim or the perpetrator...
Madeleine: We'll talk later. Gotta go. K, bye!
Haha!
Bond: "Secrets, lack of communication... I can already tell this relationship is going to be the death of me."
To quote from an iconic 60s film : What we HAVE here...is...failure to communicate !
In all seriousness, this whole scene feels so stilted and almost comedic.
True, but I like the Bond from QoS better than the more smug, arrogant SP and NTTD one, allthough in NTTD he's compensating that with his love for Madeleine and (their) daughter. And he has good reason to do so: h's not likely to judge M, but he clearly went too far with the project. But in SP his arrogance makes no sense, other than that he's keeping info from his new boss. That's hardly what Bond would do, and after SF we thought, or, at least I thought they'd come to trust eachother. I absolutely don't like the line 'yes, you're right. you do have a difficult day ahead'. M is absolutely right to give Bond a thrashing and to my mind there's absolutely nothing that should keep Bond from telling M what former M send to him. He'd be on a genuine mission that way.
Revealed later, C watches everyone. 00s. Agents. Everyone.
That's the usefulness of an agent, to take things on the nose or chin in spite of bureaucracy and protocols when necessary.
Perhaps, but there's no reason to be such an a** about it. And at that moment C hasn't got that power yet. Of course Bond senses these things.... Whereas we find out only half way through the film. It just doesn't work for me. Bond should be about investigating, not about knowing everything beforehand. It's one of the flaws of SF as well, but there it's the villain who, apparently, timed everything to a tee, including derailing a metro in case Bond would charge after him.
I know Judi's M says to Bond it is all about who you trust, and we learn that he trusts nobody, but then again he does trust her... So it just doesn't add up. After M letting Bond team up with Q and Moneypenny at the end of SF, you might expect Bond to at least trust him. Or was C already walking around? What brings me to the next point: M is the head of MI6, the 00-section falls directly under his control, at least, that's how it used to be. Now it seems M is head of the 00-section, which became a department? Worrying that. All that is quite a mess if you ask me.
To me the point is Bond is established, Mallory is the one with the learning curve in his new role. It's not about rank and position or that Bond is a know-it-all, it's that he knows how things work. If he shares too much early on, they all get shut down before he has a chance to shake things up and ferret out the bad guys.
Later Mallory realizes this, and comes to trust 007's judgment.
More than just knowing the Rules, if I can say that.
What if it could be the name of the QoS re-edit? Like QoS: Sleep of the Dead edition....it'll help fans cope with the death of DC's Bond.....Danny Boyle said that the character would be formed again via a mutation or Dr. Who-like approach to excuse the next actor as to why he would play JB after Craig.
a quantum re-edit would be nice. i think quantum would've been positively received by the public if it had been a bit easier to follow.
but the reason why i think they won't do that is because it may not look good from an artistic standpoint to have multiple versions of something. its harder to be immersed in something when you know its just a version of versions. (maybe i could word this better, but i hope my general point gets across)
I understand what you mean from the artistic standpoint but with QoS, the studio involvement was what forced the editing to be rushed. When studio involvement messes up a film, as did Warner Bros with Batman on more than one occasion.....first with driving Tim Burton away per McDonalds' marketing team's wishes....and secondly with Justice League.....but look what happened with Justice League: The Snyder Cut... .it shows that fans could have the final say in things because in the end it's their money.
The Bond franchise has had a lot of respect for and influence from the Batman movies. And each franchise has had their studio interference for the worse. QoS got rushed into post production, SF had to dumb down its plot and become less of a sequel to QoS, SP had its ending changed into a more campy style all in the name of studio interference.
The parallels of the Bond and Batman franchise go beyond sharing borrowed crew members. In fact, the ending of QoS between Bond and M is very similar to the ending of Batman Returns.....Both protagonists don't get the girl in the end and yet her spirit is present but her absence is heartbreakingly felt. All the while, each protagonist is talking to their respective mentors amidst the snowy environment surrounding them with well-done musical scores.
Danny Elfman and David Arnold who each scored Batman Returns/Justice Leagues and QoS respectively follow a similar school of musical style....one that is well-detailed and can help bring out an emotion.
Thomas Newman and Hans Zimmer each have their own strengths but these were not demonstrated well in their Bond movies as much as other projects. They relied more on percussion and simplistic tunes.
Lol, how right he was!
I do think Seydoux plays it well and Newman was perfectly on point, but the writing is stilted and unmotivated, and the confused look Craig pulls and the way he asks, "No, you can't stay here or...?" always seemed to me like something straight out of Archer. Like Archer completely misunderstanding something someone said for comedic effect. I don't know why the scene was written or directed that way, but as @CommanderRoss says, it really just was there to allow Madeleine to get captured.
Boyle said Bond could come back through a mutation? Like his molecules floating in the Pacific come across some toxic waste and he turns into a gelatinous Bond-thing like Senator Kelly in X-Men? I could be down for that. But wouldn't the next Bond still be saddled with worrying he's going to pass the killer nanobots on to Madeleine and Mathilde? Maybe the next movie could start with an opening scroll that explains the mutation neutralized the nanobots. That way you bypass the whole issue and Bond Thing could live with Madeleine and Mathilde in Norway and commute to London by dissolving into the ocean and riding the currents.
Or there's the "Code Name" theory I guess...but Bond Thing just sounds like an easier way of going about it. Boyle has my vote for B26.
You're onto something here. But perhaps Bond Thing doesn't have to worry about killing his family anymore, because they already died, when a piano being lifted into an apartment fell on them. Then Bond Thing decides to investigate the shady piano moving organization that has been causing pianos to fall on key government officials all over the world. Later, he (it?) discovers their most nefarious plan yet: to drop a giant piano on the whole world, crushing everyone.
"Choose your next witticism carefully, Bond Thing. In another moment, you will...B-flat." /:)
Therein lies the problem: Mallory is introduced to us in a way that we expect him to be already understanding the game. 'there's more to him than you think'. Bond learns to trust him in the Silva firefight, and then once again Mallory, wounded, covers for Bond and his not-communicated plan. It's already clear that Mallory is ready to cover Bond, to trust him. It's also already clear that he's not on the 'bad side'. So in the end of SF Bond does trust Mallory, and yet at the start of SP we're back at square one. Bond may have always been a loner and yes, more often than not he may heve hidden something for the respective M's, but he was never disrespectful. The part you reference to, C's omnipresence, hasn't been mentioned yet, so we have to presume Bond himself doesn't know SP has that long tentacles.
More on the name of Greene, which I always loved: it is evocative of nature and environment, of course, but also money, greed and let's not forget, corruption.
It's kind of fitting with the evil organisation as well: we have Mr White, Mr Greene, Silva (Silver) and at its head... Blofeld (Bleuchamp/Bleuville, hence Blue).
C was a sort of Guy Haines.
By looks, Cyclops in NTTD looked like Yusef.
Fiennes did the right thing. That would have been a terrible idea.