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
Yeah I'd definitely say you're right about that: I doubt that shot would be in the movie unless that's what they were trying to say.
I guess it could be, but I think the film really only suggests that Bond's actions cause the chain reaction and I'm happy to go with that. Maybe destroy it once he's escaped when you realise he's told the authorities about it but doing so before he's even out of the gates seems a bit hasty, unless it's actually an attempt to blow Bond up too. Do you mean it might be a way for Blofeld to fake his death? I guess that could make sense.
One thing I quite like about Spectre is that it shows Bond to be double-hard at most opportunities: normal guards and henchmen pose little threat to him and he even basically tells one of the guys at the clinic not to try! And here, because he's an awesome special forces type, he pretty easily picks off most of Blofeld's guards once he has an assault rifle. I rather like that.
I find the torture scene to be the turning point in the movie. How does Blofeld not damage Bond's brain when he seems so sure that his memory will now be gone? How does Blofeld escape so quickly after Bond leaves? Why or how is there this huge explosion? What's the point of a self destruct when it's only 2 people (one a civilian) escaping? The whole thing is a head scratcher.
If it was me I would have had the climax of the film here and forget all the London stuff. Have Blofeld escape after a battle with Bond and set it up for the next movie. If everyone suspected this was Craig's farewell and you have plans to use SPECTRE in future films why the bloody hell use them here?
2. It was made clear in the script that Bond caused the entire explosion. There was some exposition where Bond sees the gas tanks, shoots them, and they're engulfed in flames, and then Bond says to Swann, "If the gas tanks are all connected underground, then--" or something to that effect, right before our award winning explosion of Blofeld's lair.
They definitely could have done more, but Bay explosions to me always just look like a fireworks display.
Yeah I rather like that it's a very straight and simple shot showing you that it's a huge explosion. I think it looks great.
Must've been pretty nerve-wracking for the actors! Imagine messing that up!
Yes i guess the idea was for the "I'd recognise you anywhere" line to sort of be the cue for Madeline to realise how much she cares for Bond, but none of it quite lands- and it may have been better if Bond had used a gadget to disrupt the equipment or stop the needle from going in. I remember first seeing it and being quite excited by the idea that the drill actually went in and we're likely about to see Bond the most vulnerable he's ever been, but it just... doesn't work. And that is a little bit of a cheat- you can't really give the audience information like that and just decide not to follow up on it. It's unsatisfying.
He's the villain, after all.
Sure but that's not really how movie storytelling works: if you tell the audience something then you have to treat that as being true unless you make it clear that it's not. For the same reason the Mathis thing makes the end of CR rather muddled and confusing.
Agreed. Hate Le Chiffre's Mathis line.
Yes, me too. It's one of the only blemishes on the film script wise. They kind of clear it up during the phone call at the end; but it's one of the things I would have liked them to touch upon with a bit more clarity in QoS, where they instead use it as a punchline.
With Spectre what plays out on screen is clear to me storywise.
If he had said something along the lines of "some of your friends are, in fact, my friends" (but better written), or something similar to what he said but more vague, it would have been much better. Would have confirmed Bond's suspicion of Mathis in the minds of the audience, but then at the end, the audience would have realized he was talking about Vesper.
Yeah I think the foggiest bit is where Vesper leaves Bond in the restaurant and he has a little think and says ‘Mathis..!’ before running to his car. I’m still not entirely clear on what he was thinking here and I’ve seen it quite a few times! :)
On the subject of odd bits in CR, who are those people that Mathis has the corpses planted in the boot of their car at the hotel? They have a distinctive car so I assume we’re supposed to know them but I’m not sure they appear anywhere else..? Has a scene been chopped?
I agree, but it doesn't bother me too much in SP's ending because there are also several things I like about it. While I agree with what has been said about CR's ending being muddled and confusing; extremely so, IMO. They should have given Vesper a very different death.
That was the African warlord and his henchman that Bond killed in the stairwell. Mathis puts their bodies into Le Chiffre's driver's car.
"That ought to keep Le Chiffre looking over his shoulder for a while."
That was basically process of elimination, and Bonds refusal to view Vesper as a possible turncoat.
He couldn’t understand how Le Chiffre knew about his own tell... he figured Mathis had told him (he was the only one that Bond told... outside of Vesper).
Now finally through this thread I learn Mathis had been an ally all the time. :--) I had wondered in QoS whether he had changed sides because his death bothers Bond. But I admit I didn't care to think about the CR ending or QoS.
Yeah I get who the bodies are, but that's Le Chiffre's driver is it? Do we see him in other scenes? Does the car appear elsewhere?
The car, no. I don't think so. The driver does though, I think he's seen in the background of the hotel scenes. I'd have to rewatch that to confirm!
Gosh okay, I don’t remember spotting him. Do you get what I mean though? That balcony scene is presented like we’re supposed to recognise those guys and the car.
Yes, absolutely, I agree. Looking back on it, they should have used one of the goons that was more instantly recognisable. There were a couple of them in there - the distinctly bald chap who was with Le Chiffre on his boat earlier in the film would have been ideal.
While it's true that each time I've watched Casino Royale, I was never sure who the car belonged to specifically, or who they were arresting specifically, it was never enough to take me out of the film.
In my mind, it was someone associated with Le Chiffre, and that was enough for me.
Yeah, and it feels to me like a sign of a deleted scene along the way. That car is so distinctive (I think it’s some old American limo or something?) that it feels like it’s there because the audience are supposed to recognise it. I might be wrong but there seemed to be a few bits chopped out of CR (like all that business with the torn playing cards from the trailer).