› ›

SKYFALL: Is this the best Bond film?

1…3738404243…47

Comments

  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited November 2020 Posts: 5,970
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The odd thing there is that Bond didn't know who Q was until they met in the art gallery so unsure of when that interaction took place? And when Q would've given it to Bond?
    To extend on this point, isn't the idea that Bond already had this car before the events of the film so after his "death", it's stored away, and Q was the new quartermaster and hadn't met Bond yet. My only idea is that the car was given to him by the previous quartermaster between QoS and Skyfall if we're to avoid the idea of it being a refurbished version of the one he won - which then does create a plot hole with Q's dialogue in Spectre about bringing it back in one piece.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    lol good point about the CR DB5 being MI6 property, given that he won it while on the job.
    Although the money Bond won at Blades in Thunderball wasn't MI6 property; M had strong suggestions on what to use it for, but ultimately it was Bonds.

    The Blades game is a personal favour for M though, that really is off the books.
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    Still, I don't believe the SF and CR DB5s are the same. There's just no sense in making it RHD from LHD.

    Bond lives in London, why wouldn't he ask for it to be converted? I think, being a bit of a petrolhead, he just had a mate in the garage at Q Branch (before Whishaw Q arrived) who he got to do a bit of work on the side, and M turned a blind eye as it was still technically MI6 property and we know she indulged Bond occasionally. It's his personal car because he likes it, and he managed to persuade them it should be bulletproof because he uses it, but MI6 own it.
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    It's a personal car that exists outside of real explanation, except as fan service for the 50th anniversary.

    Yeah, ultimately it doesn't need to be explained, but it's fun to try! :)
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited November 2020 Posts: 7,547
    True about Blades, good point.

    Eh, I guess it holds some water but still doesn't do it for me. Too complex to think about in a satisfying way. Property of Bond's dad, from Operation Goldfinger, built by Desmond, does it for me. :D
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited November 2020 Posts: 5,131
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    Feeling relief that the M that served the entire Brosnan and Craig eras was gone is a pretty shocking opinion IMO. Judi’s M was brilliant, even if she didn’t make perfect decisions all the way through.

    She did a good job. But I’ve never been a fan.....I remember not being happy whilst first watching Goldeneye (and I was only 13! Ha ha). I prefer having a man in the role as per the original character. I’d love a scene in ‘Blades’ too....straight from the pages of Moonraker.

    Dench is my least favourite M:

    Lee
    Brown
    Fiennes
    Fox
    Dench

    I’m looking forward to the recasting of Q too. Hopefully to a more traditional less wimpy portrayal.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    Agent_Zero_One wrote: »
    Funnily enough, I dislike CinemaSins for various reasons.

    Again, from my perspective, if the emotion is built on nonsense, I can't get completely invested in it. I think it would've been quite possible to rewrite the film so that the same events occurred in a more logical way. Furthermore, I'm of the mindset that looking at film criticism from the lense of "but how did it make you feel?!" above all else is far more reductive than trying to judge the writing from a more balanced view.

    Then you pretty much constrict yourself taking that approach.

    But I don't blame anyone when it comes to Bond films. The franchise is largely plot driven, so SF putting more emphasis on story/character regardless of plot logic is not something fans are used to.

    Actually the nitpick that makes my eyes roll is when fans over-examine the presence of the DB5. Like trying to reconcile it with the DB5 featured in CR by suggesting Bond merely converted it to a left driver vehicle, trying to figure out how the same car from GF somehow made it's way into Craig's timeline. That it's "universe breaking".

    In my head it's all rather simple. The DB5 is not the same car from CR. Also given that SP added that the car was lended to Bond by Q, it would make more sense that it's a car that was possibly used by 00 agents from the 1960s, way before Craig Bond's time. There. Not a very complicated explanation.

    I think it can be the CR car, just because if MI6 happened to have identical cars in the 60s it would just be a bit of coincidence. I think Bond wins the car, but with company money while he's on a mission, so it's actually Her Majesty's property: so MI6 ships it back. Because he's friendly with someone in Q Branch (and maybe because M actually feels a bit sorry for him after's Vesper's death) he persuades them to convert it to RHD for him and sprinkle in a few gadgets from some old Q car they have laying around and basically get exclusive use of it. Hence in Spectre we see Q fixing it up and referring to it like it's a company car rather than Bond's personal motor- because it isn't. At the end of the film he just steals it but they turn a blind eye.

    But that's only if I feel like playing it and figuring out how it could happen as a little game for myself. In the film I don't actually care: he just has that car because he's James Bond, and that's enough for me.

    I like this as well. For me, Andrew James Bond was Sean Connery, and he decided to retire after DAF and move to Skyfall with Monique (and the DB5), where they had Andrew James Bond II (Daniel Craig). Both of which, of course, used their middle name in the service. ;)

    https://i.makeagif.com/media/4-18-2017/ycnGJh.gif
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    True about Blades, good point.

    Eh, I guess it holds some water but still doesn't do it for me. Too complex to think about in a satisfying way. Property of Bond's dad, from Operation Goldfinger, built by Desmond, does it for me. :D

    Ha! I like that :)

    Ooh I forgot: another clue that it's maybe owned by MI6 rather than Bond himself is that MI6 sell off all of Bond's property when they think he's dead, but the car is still there...
    (Although admittedly that may well be because he's hidden it, yes!)
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    mtm wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    True about Blades, good point.

    Eh, I guess it holds some water but still doesn't do it for me. Too complex to think about in a satisfying way. Property of Bond's dad, from Operation Goldfinger, built by Desmond, does it for me. :D

    Ha! I like that :)

    Ooh I forgot: another clue that it's maybe owned by MI6 rather than Bond himself is that MI6 sell off all of Bond's property when they think he's dead, but the car is still there...
    (Although admittedly that may well be because he's hidden it, yes!)

    I’m with @mtm on this one. How did he get all the gadgets into it?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,547
    suavejmf wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    Agent_Zero_One wrote: »
    Funnily enough, I dislike CinemaSins for various reasons.

    Again, from my perspective, if the emotion is built on nonsense, I can't get completely invested in it. I think it would've been quite possible to rewrite the film so that the same events occurred in a more logical way. Furthermore, I'm of the mindset that looking at film criticism from the lense of "but how did it make you feel?!" above all else is far more reductive than trying to judge the writing from a more balanced view.

    Then you pretty much constrict yourself taking that approach.

    But I don't blame anyone when it comes to Bond films. The franchise is largely plot driven, so SF putting more emphasis on story/character regardless of plot logic is not something fans are used to.

    Actually the nitpick that makes my eyes roll is when fans over-examine the presence of the DB5. Like trying to reconcile it with the DB5 featured in CR by suggesting Bond merely converted it to a left driver vehicle, trying to figure out how the same car from GF somehow made it's way into Craig's timeline. That it's "universe breaking".

    In my head it's all rather simple. The DB5 is not the same car from CR. Also given that SP added that the car was lended to Bond by Q, it would make more sense that it's a car that was possibly used by 00 agents from the 1960s, way before Craig Bond's time. There. Not a very complicated explanation.

    I think it can be the CR car, just because if MI6 happened to have identical cars in the 60s it would just be a bit of coincidence. I think Bond wins the car, but with company money while he's on a mission, so it's actually Her Majesty's property: so MI6 ships it back. Because he's friendly with someone in Q Branch (and maybe because M actually feels a bit sorry for him after's Vesper's death) he persuades them to convert it to RHD for him and sprinkle in a few gadgets from some old Q car they have laying around and basically get exclusive use of it. Hence in Spectre we see Q fixing it up and referring to it like it's a company car rather than Bond's personal motor- because it isn't. At the end of the film he just steals it but they turn a blind eye.

    But that's only if I feel like playing it and figuring out how it could happen as a little game for myself. In the film I don't actually care: he just has that car because he's James Bond, and that's enough for me.

    I like this as well. For me, Andrew James Bond was Sean Connery, and he decided to retire after DAF and move to Skyfall with Monique (and the DB5), where they had Andrew James Bond II (Daniel Craig). Both of which, of course, used their middle name in the service. ;)

    https://i.makeagif.com/media/4-18-2017/ycnGJh.gif

    Lol it’s all just fun, nothing to take too seriously.
  • Agent_Zero_OneAgent_Zero_One Ireland
    Posts: 554
    suavejmf wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    Feeling relief that the M that served the entire Brosnan and Craig eras was gone is a pretty shocking opinion IMO. Judi’s M was brilliant, even if she didn’t make perfect decisions all the way through.

    She did a good job. But I’ve never been a fan.....I remember not being happy whilst first watching Goldeneye (and I was only 13! Ha ha). I prefer having a man in the role as per the original character. I’d love a scene in ‘Blades’ too....straight from the pages of Moonraker.

    Dench is my least favourite M:

    Lee
    Brown
    Fiennes
    Fox
    Dench

    I’m looking forward to the recasting of Q too. Hopefully to a more traditional less wimpy portrayal.
    Just curious, but why do you consider Brown and Fox to be so good? They'd be far below Dench and Fiennes in my own estimation.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Brown was a pretty one-note M.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited November 2020 Posts: 16,383
    Yeah he was fine and did a decent enough job at harumphing and huffing and puffing, but not really anything special (and equally he wasn't given anything like Lee was with the "what would I do without you Miss Moneypenny" or light comic moments like the brandy- it was all pretty straightforward stuff. I guess he had his enormous glasses- they were funny). I can't see how anyone could look at Dench and say she did a worse job. If it's just simply because she's a woman... then I despair.
    Fox is doing a comedy voice, for heaven's sake.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited November 2020 Posts: 7,547
    Agent_Zero_One wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    Feeling relief that the M that served the entire Brosnan and Craig eras was gone is a pretty shocking opinion IMO. Judi’s M was brilliant, even if she didn’t make perfect decisions all the way through.

    She did a good job. But I’ve never been a fan.....I remember not being happy whilst first watching Goldeneye (and I was only 13! Ha ha). I prefer having a man in the role as per the original character. I’d love a scene in ‘Blades’ too....straight from the pages of Moonraker.

    Dench is my least favourite M:

    Lee
    Brown
    Fiennes
    Fox
    Dench

    I’m looking forward to the recasting of Q too. Hopefully to a more traditional less wimpy portrayal.
    Just curious, but why do you consider Brown and Fox to be so good? They'd be far below Dench and Fiennes in my own estimation.

    Hardcore traditionalism. He mentions in his post he doesn’t want M to be a woman.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    The fact that there is so much to talk about in this film, so many intricate details to cause deep conversation and debate, kind of suggests the film is a bloody important one in the canon.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    TripAces wrote: »
    The fact that there is so much to talk about in this film, so many intricate details to cause deep conversation and debate, kind of suggests the film is a bloody important one in the canon.

    “No, it isn’t! And I’ll keep bumping up this thread over and over just to remind everyone why it’s not the best!”
  • jobojobo
    Posts: 7,507
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    The fact that there is so much to talk about in this film, so many intricate details to cause deep conversation and debate, kind of suggests the film is a bloody important one in the canon.

    “No, it isn’t! And I’ll keep bumping up this thread over and over just to remind everyone why it’s not the best!”

    ;))
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    The fact that there is so much to talk about in this film, so many intricate details to cause deep conversation and debate, kind of suggests the film is a bloody important one in the canon.

    “No, it isn’t! And I’ll keep bumping up this thread over and over just to remind everyone why it’s not the best!”

    I didn't post that it's the best. Just that it's important.
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    edited November 2020 Posts: 3,327
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The odd thing there is that Bond didn't know who Q was until they met in the art gallery so unsure of when that interaction took place? And when Q would've given it to Bond?
    To extend on this point, isn't the idea that Bond already had this car before the events of the film so after his "death", it's stored away, and Q was the new quartermaster and hadn't met Bond yet. My only idea is that the car was given to him by the previous quartermaster between QoS and Skyfall if we're to avoid the idea of it being a refurbished version of the one he won - which then does create a plot hole with Q's dialogue in Spectre about bringing it back in one piece.

    The Aston Martin DB5 is the one from GF, and the audience is in on this, as is M and Bond, particularly with the shot of the gear lever top being lifted to reveal the red button.

    It's one of those moments in the franchise which is a nod to itself, and nothing to do with any kind of reality, the same way Lazenby says `this never happened to the other fella', or a janitor whistles the theme to GF in OHMSS.

    Its an in-joke to the series, a tribute, and one of the few moments in SF which is not meant to be taken that literally or seriously.

    For all of SF's faults (and it has many), I actually don't think the return of the DB5 and its GF gadgets is one of them.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    TripAces wrote: »
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    The fact that there is so much to talk about in this film, so many intricate details to cause deep conversation and debate, kind of suggests the film is a bloody important one in the canon.

    “No, it isn’t! And I’ll keep bumping up this thread over and over just to remind everyone why it’s not the best!”

    I didn't post that it's the best. Just that it's important.

    I was joking.

    I know you didn’t, but the title of the thread asks.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    Agent_Zero_One wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    Feeling relief that the M that served the entire Brosnan and Craig eras was gone is a pretty shocking opinion IMO. Judi’s M was brilliant, even if she didn’t make perfect decisions all the way through.

    She did a good job. But I’ve never been a fan.....I remember not being happy whilst first watching Goldeneye (and I was only 13! Ha ha). I prefer having a man in the role as per the original character. I’d love a scene in ‘Blades’ too....straight from the pages of Moonraker.

    Dench is my least favourite M:

    Lee
    Brown
    Fiennes
    Fox
    Dench

    I’m looking forward to the recasting of Q too. Hopefully to a more traditional less wimpy portrayal.
    Just curious, but why do you consider Brown and Fox to be so good? They'd be far below Dench and Fiennes in my own estimation.

    Hardcore traditionalism. He mentions in his post he doesn’t want M to be a woman.

    Exactly. I read the Blades scene in Moonraker and that’s how I want M to be. Dench can’t fulfil that for me.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    Agent_Zero_One wrote: »
    Funnily enough, I dislike CinemaSins for various reasons.

    Again, from my perspective, if the emotion is built on nonsense, I can't get completely invested in it. I think it would've been quite possible to rewrite the film so that the same events occurred in a more logical way. Furthermore, I'm of the mindset that looking at film criticism from the lense of "but how did it make you feel?!" above all else is far more reductive than trying to judge the writing from a more balanced view.

    Then you pretty much constrict yourself taking that approach.

    But I don't blame anyone when it comes to Bond films. The franchise is largely plot driven, so SF putting more emphasis on story/character regardless of plot logic is not something fans are used to.

    Actually the nitpick that makes my eyes roll is when fans over-examine the presence of the DB5. Like trying to reconcile it with the DB5 featured in CR by suggesting Bond merely converted it to a left driver vehicle, trying to figure out how the same car from GF somehow made it's way into Craig's timeline. That it's "universe breaking".

    In my head it's all rather simple. The DB5 is not the same car from CR. Also given that SP added that the car was lended to Bond by Q, it would make more sense that it's a car that was possibly used by 00 agents from the 1960s, way before Craig Bond's time. There. Not a very complicated explanation.

    I think it can be the CR car, just because if MI6 happened to have identical cars in the 60s it would just be a bit of coincidence. I think Bond wins the car, but with company money while he's on a mission, so it's actually Her Majesty's property: so MI6 ships it back. Because he's friendly with someone in Q Branch (and maybe because M actually feels a bit sorry for him after's Vesper's death) he persuades them to convert it to RHD for him and sprinkle in a few gadgets from some old Q car they have laying around and basically get exclusive use of it. Hence in Spectre we see Q fixing it up and referring to it like it's a company car rather than Bond's personal motor- because it isn't. At the end of the film he just steals it but they turn a blind eye.

    But that's only if I feel like playing it and figuring out how it could happen as a little game for myself. In the film I don't actually care: he just has that car because he's James Bond, and that's enough for me.

    I like this as well. For me, Andrew James Bond was Sean Connery, and he decided to retire after DAF and move to Skyfall with Monique (and the DB5), where they had Andrew James Bond II (Daniel Craig). Both of which, of course, used their middle name in the service. ;)

    https://i.makeagif.com/media/4-18-2017/ycnGJh.gif

    Lol it’s all just fun, nothing to take too seriously.

    I was joking too mate! Alan Partridge gets Bond wrong too.....that’s the joke.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    suavejmf wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    Agent_Zero_One wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    Feeling relief that the M that served the entire Brosnan and Craig eras was gone is a pretty shocking opinion IMO. Judi’s M was brilliant, even if she didn’t make perfect decisions all the way through.

    She did a good job. But I’ve never been a fan.....I remember not being happy whilst first watching Goldeneye (and I was only 13! Ha ha). I prefer having a man in the role as per the original character. I’d love a scene in ‘Blades’ too....straight from the pages of Moonraker.

    Dench is my least favourite M:

    Lee
    Brown
    Fiennes
    Fox
    Dench

    I’m looking forward to the recasting of Q too. Hopefully to a more traditional less wimpy portrayal.
    Just curious, but why do you consider Brown and Fox to be so good? They'd be far below Dench and Fiennes in my own estimation.

    Hardcore traditionalism. He mentions in his post he doesn’t want M to be a woman.

    Exactly. I read the Blades scene in Moonraker and that’s how I want M to be. Dench can’t fulfil that for me.

    This is actually a good point i haven't thought before, as moonraker is my favorite one to read more than any other.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    suavejmf wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    Agent_Zero_One wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    Feeling relief that the M that served the entire Brosnan and Craig eras was gone is a pretty shocking opinion IMO. Judi’s M was brilliant, even if she didn’t make perfect decisions all the way through.

    She did a good job. But I’ve never been a fan.....I remember not being happy whilst first watching Goldeneye (and I was only 13! Ha ha). I prefer having a man in the role as per the original character. I’d love a scene in ‘Blades’ too....straight from the pages of Moonraker.

    Dench is my least favourite M:

    Lee
    Brown
    Fiennes
    Fox
    Dench

    I’m looking forward to the recasting of Q too. Hopefully to a more traditional less wimpy portrayal.
    Just curious, but why do you consider Brown and Fox to be so good? They'd be far below Dench and Fiennes in my own estimation.

    Hardcore traditionalism. He mentions in his post he doesn’t want M to be a woman.

    Exactly. I read the Blades scene in Moonraker and that’s how I want M to be. Dench can’t fulfil that for me.

    I'd say M in TWINE is probably the closest the movie version has been to that, with personal relationships and confiding in Bond as an ally.
  • patbpatb
    edited November 2020 Posts: 4,615
    Interestingly, the DB5 reveal and use bugs me more than other plot holes as it serves little purpose. We get the "go ahead , eject me" and the use of the headlight guns during the finale. Due to these two tiny ellements, we now have a really useless timeline that raises far too many questions and took me straight out of the movie. A "bog standard DB5" would have done the trick. (could have come from CR?) or an overt reference ("where did this come from" "a lucky hand"). Thats the frustrating thing with SF. I love it to bits but it could still be so much better (like many things in life we love)
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited November 2020 Posts: 16,383
    patb wrote: »
    Interestingly, the DB5 reveal and use bugs me more than other plot holes as it serves little purpose.

    The purpose is the audience reaction, surely? And the whole theme of Bond going back to basics and back to the beginning.
    And it's got the gadgets in it because that's what you're promising when a Bond film shows us a silver DB5.
  • patbpatb
    edited November 2020 Posts: 4,615
    The reveal is good. Sometmes, a visual reference is enough. It's a silver DB5, we get it. Back to basics works better if it does NOT have the gadgets. Going back in time is one thing but I never interpreted it as going back into the SC era. (was there a jet pack in the boot?) Just makes no sense. The reveal is a nice moment but "eject me" crosses the line IMHO Possibly the Director being self indulgent as I have seen a few interviews where he mentions loving the toy car when he was a kid. I'd like to know if it was in the original scipt or added later.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    The fact that there is so much to talk about in this film, so many intricate details to cause deep conversation and debate, kind of suggests the film is a bloody important one in the canon.

    “No, it isn’t! And I’ll keep bumping up this thread over and over just to remind everyone why it’s not the best!”

    Exactly. If it was perfect they’d be nothing to talk about.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131

    mtm wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    Agent_Zero_One wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    Feeling relief that the M that served the entire Brosnan and Craig eras was gone is a pretty shocking opinion IMO. Judi’s M was brilliant, even if she didn’t make perfect decisions all the way through.

    She did a good job. But I’ve never been a fan.....I remember not being happy whilst first watching Goldeneye (and I was only 13! Ha ha). I prefer having a man in the role as per the original character. I’d love a scene in ‘Blades’ too....straight from the pages of Moonraker.

    Dench is my least favourite M:

    Lee
    Brown
    Fiennes
    Fox
    Dench

    I’m looking forward to the recasting of Q too. Hopefully to a more traditional less wimpy portrayal.
    Just curious, but why do you consider Brown and Fox to be so good? They'd be far below Dench and Fiennes in my own estimation.

    Hardcore traditionalism. He mentions in his post he doesn’t want M to be a woman.

    Exactly. I read the Blades scene in Moonraker and that’s how I want M to be. Dench can’t fulfil that for me.

    I'd say M in TWINE is probably the closest the movie version has been to that, with personal relationships and confiding in Bond as an ally.

    I can’t argue with that. But I just don’t like the female M. Just a personal preference.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Then I hope there’s a female M again more than ever.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited November 2020 Posts: 8,216
    Yeah, funnily enough I think Dench carries the aura of the M from the books the most in terms of her view of Bond as a person as well as an employee - certainly in the last couple of Brosnan films and then in CR and SF.

    I really wish we had gotten something akin to the Blades' scene with Lee, though. That really would have been something. The closest we get is that reference Bond makes to their "interesting experience" in Tokyo in FRWL.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    CraigMooreOHMSS wrote: »
    Yeah, funnily enough I think Dench carries the aura of the M from the books the most in terms of her view of Bond as a person as well as an employee - certainly in the last couple of Brosnan films and then in CR and SF.

    I really wish we had gotten something akin to the Blades' scene with Lee, though. That really would have been something. The closest we get is that reference Bond makes to their "interesting experience" in Tokyo in FRWL.

    Yeah he didn't quite to get to do the full-on friendly stuff, although he gets closer than most. The moments where they have a little twinkle of understanding, like in TMWTGG when he sends Bond on leave and free to get Scaramanga, are very nicely done.
Sign In or Register to comment.