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
No. You're hedging your bets there, Ice. Very sensible approach. I concur.
The point is who is this guy that people should take note of what he says? I'm sure he knows his stuff about law but what has that got to do with anything? Do you get a Michelin starred chef to fix your gearbox?
I'm pretty confident I could piss an MA in Bond if such a degree existed but do I go on legal websites and spunk off my opinion on Lord Denning's judgments on tort law? No because I would be coming from a position of zero authority same as this bloke.
If he wants to sign up as a new member and voice his opinion like the rest of us then fine but lets not pretend the bloke has any gravitas in the world of Bond just because he went to Yale. This site is one of the few great seats of Bondian learning if you ask me with many of the great minds in the world of Bondology (copyright @Dragonpol) concentrated here.
The only other institution I would say is worthy of joining the Bond Ivy League is EON. The likes of IFP are more like Wolverhampton Polytechnic.
Chalk this whole thing up to Prof. Carter indulging his fiction writer's tendencies.
So here it is: Blofeld's cat was in fact a familiar spirit, a channel if you wish for a demon from the pit of hell. In fact, Blofeld the man, always changing appearances from movies to movies, is just a shell, inside, in lieu of soul, there is a demon. So when you see him changing face from movie to movie, it is because he changes host body. And this is why he does not recognise Bond in OHMSS: Blofeld the demon has never been in this body and is watching Bond through the eyes of his human host.
Very well said, as always. Yes, I think we do have a very intellectual/academic set of people here on MI6 Community. As such, it is the best Bond forum around by a country mile. MI6 HQ has its own website and magazine and is a place of research into less known areas of Bondology and I am glad to be a member of such a community of fans and experts. I myself am a law graduate, so I'm familiar with Lord Denning and his tort judgements. And Eon is certainly worthy of us and we of them!
The mind boggles...
Why wouldn't Blofeld (the demon) be able to recognize Bond in OHMSS? If the demon is only changing from host to host it should still have the memories of its past experiences in other hosts and be able to recognize 007 no matter whose body they are now inhibiting. And yes, I am aware how bonkers this all sounds...
Bonkers, yes, but very good point there, Brady!
Because the eyes are different. YOLT Blofeld had this deep scar, his eye was bad, so he didn't see Bond clearly. Now OHMSS Blofeld had very good eyes, hence he was not sure of what his previous incarnation saw. Of course, every host brings a slight alteration in the personality of the avatar of the devil Blofeld, which explains the change of attitudes of both Blofeld towards Bond, and Bond towards Blofeld.
Yes, it is bonkers, but still makes more sense than the codename theory or the M is Silva's mother theory.
Good comeback there, @Ludovico.
If the demon couldn't recognize Bond, he would still be able to recognize 007's voice and how he conducted himself. Plus, your theory may indicate that Blofeld will act differently towards Bond depending on the demon's host, but why would Bond still be able to instantly recognize Blofeld every time he sees him, regardless of whether its host is Pleasence, Savalas or Gray Blofeld? If your theory held up, Bond wouldn't know Blofeld from Joe because he always changed hosts, and wouldn't realize his arch enemy was there in the flesh next to him. So is Bond in on Blofeld's ability to take on different hosts, and if so, how the hell can he tell when Blofeld (the demon) has taken a new host and who that host is?
And of course the change of behavior is only relatively subtle: Blofeld is still attached to his familiar spirit, he is still evil, etc.
And on a side note, I hope nobody thinks I am serious.
I'm still curious to hear your explanation of the end of LALD btw :)
Can you not see the difference between the two?
No, the other is just taking the piss out of all these loony theories. That's the difference.
As for Brady's objection regarding Bond recognizing Blofeld every time... Well, of course Bond movies don't have to be 100% realistic.
Well to be frank, no films are 100% realistic (not including documentaries). A movie can be endlessly naturalistic, yet that doesn't change the fact that it's all a bunch of actors and extras doing their jobs to make it seem real. I think every film requires a certain suspension of disbelief, regardless of its genre or content because of this factor.
Oh, so he's a fiction writer, then? That explains his totally fictional theory about Skyfall then!
Also note a supernatural entity do exist in Bond movies : Baron Samedi. He didn't choose something totally alien to the Bond universe, that's not as far-fetched as a theory using the Matrix for instance...
Well, for the fun of it, allow me to defend the "Yale Professor Skyfall Theory" :)
- Silva uses an anagram on the Youtube channel in Skyfall. So he likes anagrams. The "Think on your sins" could then hide an anagram indeed : "Your son isn't in HK".
- In the final act of this tragedy we have Bond, Kincade, Silva, and M. Kincade knew Bond as a kid, he was the fatherly figure to an orphan. Then, in order to bring balance in this scene, why M could not be the motherly figure Silva didn't have (orphans make the best recruit, and Silva was the best, according to M, join the dots...).
- Silva's real name is Tiago Rodriguez. Tiago = James... and Rodriguez is a very common name in Portuguese, a bit bland, a bit like... Bond in England.
- The McGuffin of the movie is a hard drive full of "hidden identities". Hidden identities are all over the place in this movie. Nothing is known about "Patrice" full name for instance. Or for "Severine"... And Silva is actually never named Raoul isn't he ? And Kincade is only Kincade too isn't he ?
- We're given the identity of M on screen (when Moneypenny gives the box to Bond) but it's still unknown for 99.99999% of the audience. So there could be another hint missed by 99.9999999% of the audience about someone else's identity...
- Moneypenny's identity is hidden from us until the very last minute. How could one imagine Bond going twice on the field with her and not knowing her name ? Clearly we're told something here...
- Kincade calls M "Emma" because he hears it that way. Hm, is the author of the script telling us the names are meaningless in this tragedy once more, that we should not infer family links or lack of them because of the names ?
- Look at M's face when she sees Silva for the first time in ages, or when he explains he was tortured.
- "Soon your past will be non existent", hm, something to hide, M ?
- Silva wears prosthetic teeth the whole movie. Except for one scene, which is the only scene in which we see his true figure. In all the other scenes, he's hiding something, here it's the only time he doesn't hide the truth. Need I remind you the only line he says during that scene ? :)
And here I'm only using elements in the movie. I could also use John Logan's other scripts, including the other one that was penned the same year as Skyfall's, about a son coming back to destroy everything in his mother's town :) I also do not use paranormal logic :)
They hint that he was one of her favorite agents before getting too reckless and losing her head, so obviously they have history. That's why she has always tried so hard to mold Bond into the best agent he can be, to stop him from turning into Silva 2.0. Her legacy lives on in Bond and the values he learned under her tutelage.
We' sure they knew each other before she was M, we're told in the movie...
Hm you mean Bond is her substitute son because her true one failed, and that's why Mallory notices she's very sentimental about all this ? :)
Considering that she had the power to sell him over the Chinese in exchange for loyal agents, she was likely in a position equal or nearly as equal to hers in the Craig era.
I think we're taking all this "son" stuff a bit too far. I wouldn't call either her son of any kind, especially not Silva who proved just how unworthy of M's tutelage he was by embracing his dark side. Regardless, I think M does have a maternal relationship with Bond, but it doesn't cross over into the "substitute son" territory and all that. I simply think that both care a lot about each other, and that M is instrumental in who Bond has grown to be as an agent because both respect each other so much and share a lot of the same qualities.
Yes... So?