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
Above him there is the Queen. Bond is on her Majesty's secret service.
We can discuss monarchy all you want and for the record I'm republican, but however symbolic she is the head of the state. Hence Bond's boss, who always talked about her with reverence.
There will be a complexity to Mallory, I think. Fiennes' M has already more background than Bernard Lee's had.
While I agree that they will work on this relationship and that it will benefit the movies going forward, I personally thought very highly of Bernard Lee as M and the way he was characterized.
For, me, it's not necessary to try and flesh out relationships and backgrounds of all the various supporting characters in a Bond film. I found so much more depth in some of the older Connery Bonds for instance than in TWINE, even though they attempted to flush out M in the latter movie.
As an example, there were several small moments between Lee's M and Moore's & Connery's Bonds that really leant insight into his character over time.....what kind of man he was. That to me was enough, because Lee had the kind of acting gravitas to be convincing for that type of character.
We had some small insights in SF for Mallory as well. For example when he questions M at the start, and when he questions Bond about not coming back, or when he lets Tanner and Q lay the breadcrumbs. All these little things can, over time, build up the character in the viewer's mind, as long as the actor portraying the role has what it takes to be consistent with the character. I think Fiennes has what it takes for this kind of delicate exposition over time.
In a nutshell, what I'm saying is I prefer subtle buildup of a character, rather than in your face direct exposition, which I found we got a lot of with Dench's M, particularly in SF & TWINE.
No chance. Waltz is Blofeld.
Of course!!!! =))
Sorry fanboys. ;)
It is certainly the most likely scenario. Mark Strong gave very good reasons why he was seen with Craig, for one. And Christoph Waltz fits both the bill of actors cast as villains in the Craig era so far and the Blofeld background.
I wish him more appearances as Mallory in future movies.
Agreed.
Thought Bernard Lee was perfect of course and now glad to have a man back behind M's desk; while Judi Dench didn't diminish the role, I think a man as M provides better chemistry between Bond and his superior. I see Fiennes' M as a few years older than Bond...enough difference in age so Bond respects him as a superior and probably a slightly more experienced man, but close enough in age so Bond can see a little more "eye to eye" with him than Bond did with Lee's M.
Love the "breadcrumbs" scene in SF with Q and Tanner, M walks in etc. and says "carry on", not to mention his quick-thinking gunplay at the public inquiry.
Heck, there was a time I wanted him as James Bond. Fiennes was linked to the character and was I think considered before GoldenEye was written and released.
He seemed relegated to having to repeat the same old scene over again with Andrew Scott.
I remember when Ralph was cast in SF. It came so early in the process that many dismissed the news (it also didn't help that Fiennes is often associated with playing villains and seemed like the bland and obvious casting choice that tabloids can be relied upon to invent).
Mallory is used so effectively in SF; when he's introduced we know immediately that he's an overly bureaucratic force who is trying to force out the more wizened Judi Dench. Naturally we don't like him. Furthermore, because he's Ralph Fiennes we are inherently suspicious of him and reckon he's likely the villain of the piece (when I saw SF in the cinema by friend leaned over after Mallory's first scene and whispered "he's the villain".)
Slowly Mallory wins us over. He shows he's courageous, adept and willing to take risks. Once Judi is gone, we've glad that it's him who succeeds her.
One of the more stupid ideas that came from the Sony leaks was the notion that Mallory would be a Spectre agent. I'm glad Ralph fought against this.
In Spectre, Mallory is underused. The new M seems to be an overworked and slightly exasperated soul. He's attempting to hold together his department but he's being forced out and, subsequently is seeing the old guard crumble with him.
Mallory seems to lack fight, he wants to sell the virtues of MI6 but struggles against C's brash modernism. I like this aspect of the character and it suits the middle-aged Fiennes well. What makes it even better is the moment at the end before he arrests Blofeld where M orders the policeman to stand down by saying "Mallory. 00 Section." There is such resolve and determination in M at that point. I think it's a great character arc - albeit slight and undernourished.
I also like the moment where M drives Bond in the car at the end. There's a sense of them both going into battle together. Also it's something we haven't seen Bond ever do - team up with a male authority figure and theres a great sense of comradeship.
So.....hopes moving forward? I want Ralph to continue throughout the next Bond's run. I suspect that the 007 films will become lighter in feel moving forward. I wouldn't be surprised if Ralph's marvellous comic credentials come into play (see Hail Caesar and Grand Budapest Hotel). It's interesting to note that Bernard Lee's M originally was presented as a hard-assed authority figure but by the Moore films he played a lot of deadpan comedic beats....
When Andrew Scott and Christoph Waltz (Moriarty and Hans Landa to Fiennes' Voldemort) were cast, I was expecting they would be used as misdirection regarding Blofeld's identity (EON seemed desperate to make a mystery out of this). Instead, it turned out that Scott was the most obvious turncoat ever, and Waltz was... just Blofeld, no bones made about it other than a transparent name swap. Boring. I wanted Scott and Waltz to play Blofeld's underlings, might have been a fun gimmick to show how very evil Bond's big bad really is.
I watched TMWTGG the other day, and Lee's shift into playing comedy was something I noticed. I actually would like if M had a more comedic role - not out-and-out funny, but playing a sort of straight man to Bond (who wouldn't be a comedian, either). Just a lighter touch to the relationship.
Well Kingsley Amis always considered M to be something of a villain in his The James Bond Dossier (1965) singling out 'For Your Eyes Only' (1960) as an example of M's moral cowardice and of getting Bond to do his dirty work for him. It might go some way to explain M's kidnapping and torture in his later Bond novel Colonel Sun (1968) as well.
I like Ralph Fiennes as M, and I hope he stays on. Why should Judi Dench get treated like Bond royalty? If Kingsley Amis lived to see how Purvis and Wade wrote M (and Bond in general), he would bashed them as hard as he did John Gardener in the 80s.