›

The James Bond Questions Thread

1…184185187189190…210

Comments

  • LocqueLocque Escaped from a Namur prison
    edited June 2020 Posts: 262
    Sorry if this has come up before, but in Octopussy, why does Orlof smash the original Fabergé egg? He seems to be under the impression it's the fake, but why didn't Kamal tell him they had managed to recover the real one?
  • marcmarc Universal Exports
    Posts: 2,610
    I also like this Sharif/Gray theory, and it makes sense. Unfortunately I can't tell whether it's true since I had rarely ever heard the voices of the two before. (probably a good thing since it might have impaired DAF more for me to know about Rocky Horror etc.)
    Locque wrote: »
    Sorry if this has come up before, but in Octopussy, why does Orlof smash the original Fabergé egg? He seems to be under the impression it's the fake, but why didn't Kamal tell him they had managed to recover the real one?
    Perhaps he wanted to save this good news for a moment of being criticized by Orlov.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,426
    Locque wrote: »
    Sorry if this has come up before, but in Octopussy, why does Orlof smash the original Fabergé egg? He seems to be under the impression it's the fake, but why didn't Kamal tell him they had managed to recover the real one?

    Yes it's the fake one. He was unaware of Bond's switch at Sotheby's so he decides to smash it. I am not sure why Kamal doesn't share that it's the real one. The only thing I can think of is it happened so fast and he didn't have time to stop it. Plus if he did stop it he fails to discover the homer and that Bond has escaped his room.
  • LocqueLocque Escaped from a Namur prison
    Posts: 262
    But Sotheby's sold the real one.

    I get that it's a plot device to have Kamal Khan discover the bug, but there are so many different ways he could have found it that would have made it less confusing.

  • marcmarc Universal Exports
    Posts: 2,610
    Perhaps Kamal thought he had bought the real one at Sotheby's and then was keen on winning the (supposedly) fake one back in the Backgammon game to cover up the forgery. It's well possible he didn't realize it was the real one that got destroyed.

    This view is supported here:
    https://bondfanevents.com/why-did-general-orlov-smash-a-costly-faberge-egg-in-octopussy/
  • GerardGerard
    Posts: 5,993
    Oh he did ! Remember, he winced when Orlov destroyed the egg.
  • LocqueLocque Escaped from a Namur prison
    Posts: 262
    marc wrote: »
    Perhaps Kamal thought he had bought the real one at Sotheby's and then was keen on winning the (supposedly) fake one back in the Backgammon game to cover up the forgery. It's well possible he didn't realize it was the real one that got destroyed.

    This view is supported here:
    https://bondfanevents.com/why-did-general-orlov-smash-a-costly-faberge-egg-in-octopussy/

    Eh... I'm not convinced.

    The reason Bond made the switch was to see what the buyer would do: if he's on the level, he'd notice it was a fake and complain to Sotheby's, but if not, he'd keep quiet, not wanting to draw unwanted attention.

    In real life of course it's always possible someone buys a fake artwork and never finds out, but by the rules laid out by the story, Kamal is supposed to find out. Remember, the forgeries don't stand up to much scrutiny, the Kremlin expert recognises the almost immediately, and it's unlikely Kamal or one of his forgers wouldn't recognise their own work.

    Also, it makes a lot more sense for Kamal, having bought a fake egg, to go after the real one, than for him, thinking he already has the real one, to go after a fake (which he can always claim to know nothing about).

  • LocqueLocque Escaped from a Namur prison
    Posts: 262
    Here's a possibility I hadn't thought of before: perhaps Kamal told Orlov the real one was the fake, hoping he'd take the fake back to Moscow and leave him with the authentic Fabergé.
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,136
    I've never understood why the Faberge egg stuff in OP is so confusing. Bond switches the fake egg for the real egg at the Sotheby's auction.
    When Bond produces the egg at the back gammon game against Kamal as collateral, Kamal realises that Bond has conned him at the auction.
    Bond and MI6 know that Kamal is going to try and get the egg back, so install a microphone / tracker into the egg (still the real one)
    Kamal sends Magda and Gobinda to retrieve the egg, which they do and take the egg and a captured Bond to the Monsoon palace.
    General Orlov arrives at the Monsoon palace to finalise the plan for their deadly scheme, and believes the egg Kamal has is the fake, smashing it.
    Kamal knows this is the real egg, and is confirmed to him, when he locates the microphone / tracker in the smashed remains of the egg.
  • marcmarc Universal Exports
    Posts: 2,610
    That makes a lot of sense, but it doesn't answer the original question by @Locque (nice starting point to discuss theories) why Kamal didn't tell Orlov about the real egg.
    Gerard wrote: »
    Oh he did ! Remember, he winced when Orlov destroyed the egg.
    He might have winced because of the efforts to produce the fake one. But I agree, at this point Kamal must have known which one was the real egg.
    Locque wrote: »
    perhaps Kamal told Orlov the real one was the fake, hoping he'd take the fake back to Moscow and leave him with the authentic Fabergé.
    I think that would have been very risky. Orlov had his ways to find out, and Kamal might have had a hard time explaining to Orlov it had been Bond's fault.
  • LocqueLocque Escaped from a Namur prison
    edited July 2020 Posts: 262
    Not so much a question about the plot as about the production:

    During the airbase battle in TLD, Koskov (Jeroen Krabbé) runs his army vehicle into an incoming airplane and there's a huge explosion that you'd think would kill everyone involved, but a few seconds later, there's a shot showing he somehow survived.

    Later, he's arrested and sent back to Moscow, making him, along with Blofeld and Jaws, one of the few villains ever to survive a Bond-movie.

    I've often wondered if the character wasn't supposed to die in the explosion, but the producers made a last-minute decision to keep him alive, to potentially turn him into a recurring character.

    Anyone with any knowledge on the making of TLD who can confirm or deny this?
  • bigladiesmanbigladiesman
    edited July 2020 Posts: 1,009
    Locque wrote: »
    Not so much a question about the plot as about the production:

    During the airbase battle in TLD, Koskov (Jeroen Krabbé) runs his army vehicle into an incoming airplane and there's a huge explosion that you'd think would kill everyone involved, but a few seconds later, there's a shot showing he somehow survived.

    Later, he's arrested and sent back to Moscow, making him, along with Blofeld and Jaws, one of the few villains ever to survive a Bond-movie.

    I've often wondered if the character wasn't supposed to die in the explosion, but the producers made a last-minute decision to keep him alive, to potentially turn him into a recurring character.

    Anyone with any knowledge on the making of TLD who can confirm or deny this?

    Theory, not fact: It’s one of the Moore-esque moments the movie kept at the end, unlike the magic carpet ride, which ended up cut (and a good decision it was). That said, after watching Hot Fuzz or Toy Story 3-4 one can see that Dalton is a gifted comedian, but, yeah, his Bond wasn't supposed to be funny, and that's good.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,426
    I recall at the time in the press junkets that Krabbe, the actor who played Koskov, was openly lobbying to come back in a future installment. In a recent James Bond and Friends watch-along they mentioned that the producers decided to change it up and created the insert shot of Koskov surviving. Maybe they were thinking of plans.

    Also Pushkin was talked about being the new Gogol and that he would return in future films.
  • marcmarc Universal Exports
    edited July 2020 Posts: 2,610
    Sorry for being a little off topic, but:


    (alternate ending for TLD - 1min. video)

    A return of Pushkin would have been great, and I also like Koskov a lot.
  • LocqueLocque Escaped from a Namur prison
    edited July 2020 Posts: 262
    thedove wrote: »
    I recall at the time in the press junkets that Krabbe, the actor who played Koskov, was openly lobbying to come back in a future installment. In a recent James Bond and Friends watch-along they mentioned that the producers decided to change it up and created the insert shot of Koskov surviving. Maybe they were thinking of plans.

    Koskov could have been the Robbie Coltrane character from GE and TWINE: a former KGB agent now two-bit gangster, that's exactly what Koskov would be after the fall of the Soviet Union.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    Sorry if this has been asked before or is a very very dumb question (I'm new to this community):

    Is M the Head of MI6 or the Head of the 00 Section? Or is MI6 solely the 00 section in the Bond universe? I'm specifically thinking of the Craig era here.
    Now, I know that M is in name the Head of the whole of MI6 but there is never any mention of any other section of the Service I feel like. In SP the discussions between M and Denbigh revolve mostly around abolishing the 00 section and somehow this seems to entail the demotion/firing of M even though there would be loads of other responsibilities for the head of the foreign intelligence service.
    And how would closing the 00 Section fold MI6 into MI5 (might be misremembering that part)? They have different jurisdictions.
    Along the same lines Dench's M apparently has direct mission control over Bond's outings and appears in various international locales (Bahamas, Bolivia, Italy and Russia off the top of my head) to brief/debrief one agent (albeit the best agent they have). That hardly seems like sensible use of the time of the head of a huge government agency.

    All of this seems much more logical, if M leads a much smaller organisation, which consists of 00 Agents and support staff and is part of a larger intelligence operation where all the boring analysis and so on takes place.

    I know the answer to all this is probably: Well, it's movies... But as a bit of a government/bureaucracy nerd I always wonder about this when watching the films. All I want is an official MI6 organisational chart, dammit!
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 1,970
    M is the head of the entire MI6. He or she is the boss of all the sections.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,426
    Welcome to the boards @ImpertinentGoon wonderful to have new faces. I agree that the SP portrayal seemed to indicate that M was head of only the double-o's. But in reality M would be the head of the entire organization.

    I would love to see them explore what John Gardner did in the early novels of his and have the double-0 section abolished and he keeps Bond in a Special Services section. I think it would be cool and has potential for some good drama.
  • ggl007ggl007 www.archivo007.com Spain, España
    Posts: 2,541
    What is this thing on the table, close to Churchill's head?
    bHMG9fl.jpg
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,426
    Looks to be a container of some kind with a side sleeve. I would be tempted to say matches to light the fire in the fireplace could be stored in there, but that's a total guess.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    ggl007 wrote: »
    What is this thing on the table, close to Churchill's head?
    bHMG9fl.jpg

    The real question is: Why is Churchill wearing blackface?
  • ggl007ggl007 www.archivo007.com Spain, España
    Posts: 2,541
    thedove wrote: »
    Looks to be a container of some kind with a side sleeve. I would be tempted to say matches to light the fire in the fireplace could be stored in there, but that's a total guess.

    Good guess, but they should be near the chimney, shouldn't they?

    Another look:
    8AQg7hv.jpg
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,136
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Am I correct that the classic DB5 will now have appeared in eight Bond films? GF, TB, GE, TND, CR, SF, SP, NTTD.

    Have i forgotten any?

    Isn't it in TWINE when R is searching for Bond and Christmas in Turkey. Using the heat seeking satellite mode on the computer?
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,792
    IMCDB says it's in a deleted scene only in TWINE. Their list of 73 film/other appearances is also worth a look.

    TWINE https://www.imcdb.org/vehicle_197031-Aston-Martin-DB5-1964.html

    http://www.imcdb.org/search.php?resultsStyle=asList&sortBy=0&make=Aston+Martin&model=DB5&modelMatch=1&modelInclModel=on


    Then there is the thermal image. Not sure what can be confirmed there.

    b74e329e6b775a0ad68561c1a82c88d926435e66.png
    73e3c262d3eec5c57da807669bf5656cad6304f5.png
  • marcmarc Universal Exports
    Posts: 2,610
    ggl007 wrote: »
    thedove wrote: »
    Looks to be a container of some kind with a side sleeve. I would be tempted to say matches to light the fire in the fireplace could be stored in there, but that's a total guess.

    Good guess, but they should be near the chimney, shouldn't they?

    Another look:
    8AQg7hv.jpg
    ¡Si estuviera al lado de la chimenea, no podriamos verlo en la pelicula! :--)

  • ggl007ggl007 www.archivo007.com Spain, España
    Posts: 2,541
    marc wrote: »
    ggl007 wrote: »
    thedove wrote: »
    Looks to be a container of some kind with a side sleeve. I would be tempted to say matches to light the fire in the fireplace could be stored in there, but that's a total guess.

    Good guess, but they should be near the chimney, shouldn't they?

    Another look:
    8AQg7hv.jpg
    ¡Si estuviera al lado de la chimenea, no podriamos verlo en la pelicula! :--)

    Good try, but I don't buy it...

    Buen intento, pero no me lo creo ;)

    Too clean for something chimney-related :)

    Demasiado limpio para algo relacionado con chimeneas :)
  • marcmarc Universal Exports
    Posts: 2,610
    ¡Tiene que ser un gadget de Q Branch!
    Si un villano entra, el gadget va a matarlo. :)
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,179
    Are you lads talking about how Bond and Christmas are enjoying a bit of how's-your-father? :D
  • ggl007ggl007 www.archivo007.com Spain, España
    Posts: 2,541
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Are you lads talking about how Bond and Christmas are enjoying a bit of how's-your-father? :D

    Nope. For the record, it was @thedove who brought chimneys into the conversation.

    In GF look what happened to the "thing":
    o3SkPTS.png

    But that can't be this, can it?
    bHMG9fl.jpg
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,426
    No I don't think it can be. The legs on it are completely different to me.
Sign In or Register to comment.