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
How can you be getting irate over a spoiler for a novel almost 60 years old? SF fair enough but FRWL? We are discussing all matters Bond here, do we now have put spoiler warnings on everything we say because someone may not have seen a film or book that have spent decades in the public domain? Ludicrous.
In case you ever get round to reading the bible Brady theres a shock twist - Jesus isnt dead! He comes back to life and flies off into the sky. Not very credible but I suppose its a fairly original twist although I prefer Keyser Soze in the Usual Suspects myself.
Shit I should have put a spoiler alert there shouldn't I? Sorry old chap.
It doesn't matter how old something is, it shouldn't be spoiled. I don't expect everyone to understand this, because let's be honest, ignorance roams free in this world. Some aren't as old as others, or haven't been able to find the novels or films accessible as of yet, so does that make it okay for it to be spoiled for them? Hell no. Don't much care for the Bible myself. If I am going to read science fiction I'll pick up H.G. Wells. But if you feel cool spoiling things for others like a child, fine by me. As a matter of fact, this place looks more like a preschool day by day as of late.
Echo was helpfully answering someone's question about FRWL in a thread called 'The James Bond Questions Thread.'
Now call me Mr Pedantic but that's a thread that suggests to me that things about James Bond are likely to be discussed.
Just a thought but I would advise you to probably steer clear of such threads (and indeed such messageboards and websites) as you are likely to catch annoying snippets of information that might spoil your yet to be enjoyed enjoyment of whichever books and films that are not 'accessible' to you (although seeing as you have an Internet connection to come on here I don't see where you live that means you can't get Netflix or Amazon - the Antarctic, Amazon rainforest or an African village maybe?)
But it's a bit rich to come on a thread about James Bond on a James Bond messageboard on a James Bond website and then whine when - quel surprise - people are discussing stuff about James Bond and, let's be honest, a pretty insignificant plot point at that!
I come here to discuss. The spoiler tags are here for a reason, not just for kicks and giggles. Everyone can toss off regardless.
Maybe next time we should put 'Ouromov dies in GE' under spoiler tags, in case someone hadn't seen GE yet !
SPOILER ! Not everyone has seen the film and knows Koskov is a villain !!
such as, we talk extensively each day about the James Bond releases and elaborate on every detail and incident that occured since Connery first uttered the immortal line, but we never think for a moment about anyone who has yet to see every release or there are surely some out there who read these pages and who actually haven't seen every twenty-two of the official releases etc. So essentially, we are giving away important spoilers every now and again, even if it is, all rather unintentional. I kind of looked at things in a different light for a moment
The mature response of a man who knows he's lost the argument and yet he has the chutzpah to berate others for turning the place into a 'pre-school'?
Pathetic Sir.
If you start wanting spoiler tags for you, in that case everyone should have their spoiler tags for what they don't know yet.
How funny it would be if you had to put
I couldn't agree more (or should that be Moore!), overrated Bond director who didn't know the character - hell he even thought Burt Reynolds would have made a good Bond!
Hamilton was very Hit-or-Miss. Goldfinger and Live and Let Die were 2 strong entries but TMWTGG and DAF were two of the weakest in the series. And yes Burt Reynolds as Bond would've been a disaster.
Live and Let Die and Diamonds Are Forever are the two best of Hamilton in my opinion, with The Man with the Golden Gun being just all right, and Goldfinger being hogwash.
Although I do admit GF is overrated I still think it's great entertainment and has Connery in his prime. It's not at the top of my rankings but I still think it's miles ahead of Brosnan's films, Connery's ladder 3 films, and 3 of Moore's.
For me it's #21 right before On Her Majesty's Secret Service, which is my #22 easily. Hahaha, I know it sounds crazy, but neither GF or OHMSS get my Bond groove going. I don't see why people regard them as classics honestly.
A question that I thought of the other day, although I have answered it myself later.
In the film AVTAK, but gives Tibbett the cheque for 5 million dollars, and ask him to get M to put a trace on it.
But, Tibbett is killed before he can do this.
How then does Chuck Lee later discuss with Bond the number of S.Suttons in the US?
After the murders of three of Bonds allies, she switches sides after Zorin leaves her to die.
Being chased up the Eiffel tower and leaping off. Murdering Tibbett in the carwash and Chuck Lee in his car. As well as attempting to kill Bond at various points of the movie.
And Bond sides with her too. Doesn't he seek some sort of vengence, at least for Tibbett, but the others also.
Nope, AVTAK has alot to answer for.
You know I've never really thought of that, but you're right, that is dumb that she ever switched sides, because we should have gotten a proper Bond revenge for the death of three allies, one of them being very close! I mean, I never liked the fact that she switched sides, but I think that one of the finest scenes in all of Bond comes when May Day sacrifices herself. That alone probably can justify the unnecessary plot twist of her character.
Would have been dark as hell for Roger Moore but let me tell you: I would have cheered!
Bomb blows up- "For Tibbet"- then the blimp shows up and the movie continues as normal
What do you think??
You sir have made my day already!! Hahahahahahaha!! I think that's what might have actually happened! All we need now is a shot of Bond turning to the camera and letting out a big laugh!
But no turning to the camera and laughs please - that would surely have spoiled it
It's a pity Sutton wasn't on the damn thing too when it blew up :-<
I understand the age of the actor and age of the character are 2 different things but surely EON couldn't have expected a babyfaced 34 year old Sean Bean to be able to pass for a man in his mid 50s and have the audience believe it. If they absolutly had to have Bean in the role they could've atleast aged him with makeup.
The role was originally written for Anthony Hopkins, which would have made a lot more sense, agewise.
Trevelyan was 27 years old at the time of the Severnaya incident and his presumed 'death', so we fast forward almost a decade, but at the time of his fathers suicide, the timeline would of been 21 years before, i.e, 1965 at the time of incident, supposing Severnaya took place in 1986, nine years before the actual Goldeneye timeline. It seems likely the event took place some years after WWII, his father lived with it for long enough before it came to a head and Trevelyan's plan for revenge on the British Government, or maybe there was a genuine mix up with years and ages. I wasn't aware of the Hopkins thing, but whatever is going on, it's best that Sean Bean got to play the role over the other (I'm tired btw)