Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
In this Discussion
casino royale's ending is misleading
I think casino royales ending is misleading. Craig takes out white, smiles and says "bond, james bond", and the bond theme plays for the credits. It makes you think that you've just seen bonds origin, and that you've seen him really become 007.
THEN next film, bond is actually even less like bond than CR. And you realise he hasn't actually transformed into the bond we know yet. Kind of misleading.
THEN next film, bond is actually even less like bond than CR. And you realise he hasn't actually transformed into the bond we know yet. Kind of misleading.
^ 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
But that is the hidden message of it. Normaly it not be problem he said Bond James Bond and Arnold let play the theme as Bond doing some typical Bond, but this time it not be typical but the other way around. Also because Bond hold a big weapon.
the plan was for Quantum Of Solace (then Bond 22) to be a direct sequel to CR from the very start... it was an idea that Babs and Michael had contemplated doing for a long time (a sequel or continuation).
Casino Royale is misleading in that it is NOT an origin's story. The only transformations we see in his character are 1). He is promoted to '00' status. This idea is not explored very deeply at all, only that he killed two guys to earn it. 2). His emotional attachment to women has been desensitized by being betrayed by Vesper.
The problem is Daniel Craig as Bond at 38, is not convincing to play out the transformation of "bond, james bond" from beginning to end, and as a man just coming to terms with his emotions at his age is a ridiculous idea. A younger actor would have worked, in that he could be emotionally vulnerable and a bit of a loose cannon. We don't see Bond really develop his skills throughout the movie, because he already has them! He's already a fully qualified agent, capable of hunting down villains. Also, he's already established as a detached playboy, and not some optomistic romantic, by his triste with Solange. So that erases the emotional transformation story the film-makers were going for with the whole Vesper love story.
Origin stories go deeper into the past of how the character becomes who they become. Just take Batman Begins by contrast, which looks at the character at a young age and the psychology that drove him to become who he was, and then followed by the intensive training to get him where he needed to go. There's none of this in CR. It's simply a standard Bond film (albeit still a good one). We the audience know he's James Bond. So the idea that some how this character has 'become' James Bond by the end of the movie is preposterous.
QOS is just more of the same. Bond is still doing the outrageous stunts, driving the fast cars, license to kill, wears the suits, beds the women. Don't get me wrong, it's Bond, and it's all great. It's just to force this idea, that there is some sort of origin story developing of "becoming James Bond" is ludicrous, and is one of the major problems I have.
I don't buy this at all. There is quite a bit of Bond character development throughout the film, most notably in his scenes with M. (1) Bond kills the African bomber/M says she promoted him too early (2) Bond tracks down the Miami bomber/M wonders what the hell he is up to (3) M sends Bond to Montenegro against her better judgment (4) Vesper comments on Bond's recklessness before he gets into the elevator (5) Vesper refuses to give Bond money to buy back into the poker game because he is reckless (6) Bond recklessly tries to take Le Chiffre out before Felix stops him (7) Bond and M discuss Vesper's death on the boat.
I'm sorry, but Goldfinger can't touch FRWL and TB in my book.
Was QoS bad? For some of us it wasn't. It was a taut adult thriller with a stunning leading man.
Maybe if people smear it loudly enough the mud will stick. Or they hope it will. I can make up my own mind.
I am not a big fan of QOS, but there is a lot of truth in what you say.
This isn't character development. The first three instances are merely M's reflection of Bond. Also, she doesn't treat him any differently in QOS. How has he changed? He hasn't. The other three points are other people commenting/reacting to Bond's perceived recklessness. Even if he is reckless, how is he any less reckless by the end of the movie, and what does any of that have to do with his promotion?
The thread title is about the END of CR and what it meant for QOS, NOT what was actually IN CR. What is reckless for you in QOS? M doesn't treat him differently, true, but this is actually HER misjudgement, because she keeps thinking, he is out for revenge, when he is not. Camille is. So - not Bond is making the mistakes, M is, which she admits after his escape. He is my agent and I trust him..
So - you might not like QOS, but Bond did his job without letting emotion get in his way. IMO, that is what Bond is supposed to do.
QFT
I think they decided to try the origin story then bottled it. And a good thing too. I dont want some twentysomething just out of nappies strapping on the shoulder holster.
If they want to adapt the Young Bond stories one day then fine but we dont need a Batman Begins style thing with Bond as a kid because Fleming never really told us. I wouldnt mind a bit of John Pearsons biography being done as a period piece but thats never going to happen. I certainly dont want any more of this rebooted biog they brought out for CR that Bond was a SAS veteran of Iraq or Afghanistan like something Andy Mcnab would come up with.
QoS is no way as bad as people WANT to make it out to be...
Obviously, we disagree. Bond decided to kill the bomber--this is his first choice to exercise his new license to kill (character development, in my view)--rather than bring him into MI6, which got M mad.
1. Driving a motor bike into the boat chase, for some girl who nearly shot him a scene earlier, and then screwing up her whole plan in the process. 2. Shooting the British advisor at Tosca. 3. Disobeying Fields directives and thereby his superiors for him to board back to London.
Whether or not she is right or wrong, she still mistrusts him and as I said above, this doesn't have anything to do with how HE has developed but how M views him. In QOS, M still treats him the same way and Bond still reacts the same way: with defiance. How has Bond changed? My original point was based on whether or not we see Bond develop and transform into a 00 agent in Casino Royale. We don't. He already has the skills and know how of 00 agent from the start. Therefore the ending of CR, where he smiles and says "bond, james bond", and then the bond theme plays for the credits to suggest that he has "become Bond" IS misleading, because he was already Bond from the beginning, not much has changed.
Ok, I know where you going with this...he changes as a character because by the end, rather than killing White he brings him in, right? I see that and that's a good point. But this to me doesn't suddenly make him "Bond, James Bond, 007" because of his newfound discretion in killing/sparing his targets. Afterall, he doesn't spare Greene the same fate.
@JBFan626 You got lots of interesting points there. The reason for the film, character and everything being as it is is that CR simultaneously attempts to go into Bond´s "beginning" and pick up where Brosnan left. I´m not sure how well it does that, but the sheer boldness of it is inspiring IMO ;) .
Yeah it was. But it was meant to be a bond film. Like I've said before, QOS would be a decent action film if it wasn't a james bond film, but it is, and the film seems to forget that.