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
No, I think you're on to something: Obruchev = Boris in Goldeneye.
As noted among the comments for the Pentex video, the similarities stretch "from the colleagues messing with each other, to the one somewhat antisocial russian collegaue who gets the most flack, who then goes on to betray his colleagues by letting in a group of operatives who massacre everyone they see, steal a weapon that requires two people to operate, and abduct the antisocial russian colleague."
Happily he did have some non-annoying moments-- but he was only slightly better than Boris. However, the filmmakers obviously know something more than I do: anecdotally speaking, my daughters loved this character and thought he was funny (something I was completely immune to was this character's "humour").
Me too.
For me it was a good counterpoint to everything else that was happening around him. We could have had the film without him, but IMO it would have been overwhelmingly serious; I like that he acted as a sort of "palate-cleanser" in his scenes. Never got annoying for me, but I know some of the people I saw the film with didn't agree with me. ;)
I just felt the humour so jarring and a throwback to a time I thought we had left in the past.
I’m with @NickTwentyTwo and @matt_u, I found him a fun inclusion. Some of his humor during the attack of Safin’s base didn’t land so I’d have probably toned that down a bit, but I think he’s great in the lab raid and Cuba sequences.
I'm Italian and my future wife is Russian.
Yeah, it's a little bit frustrating... :D
Yes, definitely a caricature, but often a weirdly funny one, as in his diversionary nonsequitor on the phone with Safin, "Yesss ... I like animalsssss." The actor’s delivery there always gets a laugh. But as with Safin his "vision" for the value of Heracles itself is barely touched upon except as a measure of the character's intentionally deplorable, if funny arrogance. So, yes, a stock villain to some extent.
Primo. Ash. Nomi's petty interactions with Bond over the number in some non-existent competition, trying to needle him but pretty much failing and gathering some respect along the way. Paloma's enthusiasm in everything she did starting to undress Bond to move the mission along, chugging every drink presented to her whether she was ready or not, problem-solving how to get Valdo and picking up a cigar along the way. Safin had funny lines as well. Parents!
Valdo was at once funny while horrifically vacant of morality, soulless. The most dangerous kind.
I'm sure I read somewhere that Fiennes actually selected the painting from a shortlist.
Anyway, I was just reading Fleming's Moonraker, and I think I might have noticed a reference NTTD's ending makes to a bit of Bond's biography in the book. (I haven't seen this particular reference discussed in this thread, but my apologies if it's been examined elsewhere).
(Spoilers for both NTTD and the Moonraker book:)
Granted, Brand has a better idea for how they will thwart the Moonraker, so Bond's reference isn't explored further. However, I did a little digging on the internet, and the "boy on the burning deck" is a reference to a poem called Casabianca (discussed at length here: https://yamm.finance/wiki/Casabianca_(poem).html)
The poem is an elegy for a young man who died in the 1798 Battle of the Nile, who died refusing to desert his post on a burning ship, and was apparently taught in elementary schools in the US and UK until at least the 1950s.
The poem reads in part:
Yet beautiful and bright he stood,
As born to rule the storm;
A creature of heroic blood,
A proud though childlike form.
and
With mast, and helm, and pennon fair,
That well had borne their part—
But the noblest thing which perished there
Was that young faithful heart.
Reading that part in the book (and then reading more about the poem on the internet), I thought it fascinating (and somewhat moving) that Craig's Bond should meet his fate in a similar way, refusing to abandon ship while the fire rained down -- a similarity that surely would have pleased the Bond of the books.
The OTHER Easter Egg I noticed that I didn't see referenced yet in this thread is that, when Q and Bond first meet in Skyfall, Q boasts of the damage he could do while in his pajamas, while Bond argues for a man on the ground knowing when a trigger has to be pulled (or not pulled). Both men get to demonstrate their points at the end of NTTD, with Q providing support while clad in his pajamas, while Bond pulls (and doesn't pull) several triggers (and also opens the blast doors and sacrificing himself, something Q cannot do from his pajamas).
Cheers!
WELCOME!!! Nice post!
Thank you! Glad to be here!
She does, and as he takes his shirt off, he asks a question, she then immediately turn back answering looking straight at him LOL
And I love the part about the pyjamas and Bond having to be there to do a physical thing to make sure the mission succeeds. I personally think they could have made that connection a bit more obvious - in SF Bond says sometimes a trigger doesn’t have to be pulled. Apart from the ending of SP, which doesn’t work in this context, we never get back to that idea, I think - but it is still a fantastic touch.
I don’t know if we mentioned it here already, but to me the scene where Bond is first opening the blast doors is a nod to the old Q scenes, where he starts to explain some complicated Gadget and Bond just instinctively knows how to use it. Doesn’t he even say something like „Now listen closely, 007.“?
Excellent post!
The whole story is about the conflict between taking lives and giving life. It's seen from the point of view of a secret agent with a license to kill, who fixes things by killing people, even if he starts, at the end of Spectre, to realize that there may be more to life than this. Yet, in the PTS, because his life is threatened and he has just reminisced about Vesper's treason, he quickly switches back to "killer mode". He can't understand why Madeleine is acting like this, assumes she has also betrayed him (despite all evidence). When Blofeld makes him lose his temper during his confrontation, he once again wants to strangle him. When Madeleine tells him about Safin, he says something like, "There's a million reasons to stop this man, you just gave me one to kill him."
And, of course, Safin stands out among other Bond villains as he has no goal besides taking lives. Of course, many of them have been insane, but they always had some kind of goal they wanted to achieve, an excuse to their madness. Blofeld wanted control... and to drive his foster brother crazy, regardless of the collateral damage. Safin considers that his legacy will just be how he reshaped the world by killing millions.
Then, you have Madeleine, whose priority is to protect her child, something Bond totally misread when in Matera, as he assumed her behaviour and her silence were only due to him and Spectre. It's interesting to see that, as soon as he knows about Mathilde, he immediately realizes why Madeleine acted this way and it's obvious to him he was dead wrong. He doesn't even have to say it, Craig's body language conveys it. And in the finale, he embraces this point of view, as he's now ready to give his life even to protect a child he's hardly spent time with, just as Madeleine was ready in Matera to face Bond leaving her, as he wasn't ultimately fit to raise a child with her.
Now, when we see the credits, it becomes even more obvious, with three main parts. We start with decaying statues and figures, including Britannia (the Psi symbol that Bond has during the mission on the island, I guess that Kleinman was quick to see the potential with this "trident thing" in the dialog for the credits), then we have DNA consisting of firing guns (a combination of Bond and Safin's weapons), but the last part is about plants and flowers growing. It may reference the poisons also cultivated by Safin, but the credits are supposed to end on an uplifting note, and the main image in this part is actually the foreshadowing of Mathilde, the flower that grows inside Madeleine.
And ultimately, contrary to Safin, to Blofeld and even to Mallory (who was naive enough to assume that there was a thing such as perfectly targeted killing), something will survive Bond. And it's a positive legacy. He still made the world a better place, not just by killing enemies and bad guys, but by doing for a reason that even justified his own sacrifice.
Jamaica when Bond enjoy peace and quiet, but not for long.
War and Peace are returning theme in Daniel Craig era.
In And around NTTD:
When i watch trailers from the movie the first one i notice was
In 2020 official plan release date
Ana de Armas.
Home theme.
Refer back to hidden rooms of Mr White (Hidden places theme)
Valdo comment why Nomi kills him.
Bond is star in a room.
Bond id card
Tomorrow Never Dies reference:
War ships
General is ask to launch the missiles.
Bond have balls for his job
Let the mayhem begin. Let party started.
---
I always have two i have liked to see Universel be next to help MGM after Sony and Fox left (and for two movies). 1. Earth. The World. 2. The movie starts wit Universal logo changed in the dots. Universal be part of the plot include nice trowback to words of Mr White in QOS (Repeat in Spectre). It be his words and Chinees wall in QOS maintitle i must about The World and predict Bond 23 take place in China. One of biggest country in world. Then you have lyrics of Adele (Stand all together at Skyfall).
Very happy there did Dots twist and as bonus it be in black & white. As symbol of grey zone (vague).
It makes that ending beat of the film: sunlight, smile, three balls of light into the tunnel/gun barrel all the richer!