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
Most things in SP served no purpose whatsoever,alas.
OMG that just occurred to me, purvis and wade are such fools
That would be C recording MP speaking to Bond on the phone wouldn't it?
I possibly think you're reading too deeply into a script that doesn't even get the basics right let alone has hidden subtleties such as this.
Not liking the film is one thing. Referring to other content to deny a simple point made is another thing entirely.
I'm obviously incredibly thick so can you please walk me through it?
How does the opening scene with M refer to the smart blood highlighting 'the point to M that MI6 shouldn't want to watch their own agents.'?
The whole 'point' (using that loosely as IMO it serves practically zero purpose) of the smart blood is that M does want to keep track of his agents isn't it? It's only later when he realises C watches everyone that he perhaps starts to have misgivings of the intrusive surveillance agenda C is pushing.
Then you pretty much stated my point. M was mistaken, and reconsidered his approach to Bond.
I'm referring to the concept that no M should know everything Bond does in the field (though any M can be compelled to ask/pursue a little too much, under pressure from bureaucrats or otherwise). It's not limited to Spectre. And it's related to the M-OO7 meeting. Then later the M-C exchange. Then finally M having dinner wanting to be rid of the smart blood capability and recognizing Bond is best left to his own devices. Smart blood is decent brainstorming of a concept. To apply to potential victims of kidnapping, not MI6 agents acting off the official record books.
But hey, like Dr. Sigmund Freud said to his daughter regarding her dream: sometimes a banana is just a banana.
That's only because the smart blood is compromised because C is feeding the data back to Blofeld. There's no reason M should really change his mind except that the smart blood was now undermining Bond's chances of success.
But this whole thing goes back to the start of the Craig era and the obsession (largely borne of wanting to give Judi Dench more screentime) that Bond be in contact with HQ at all times and which reached its zenith in the Mendes era with Bond constantly wearing an earpiece like a CIA agent and the Scooby gang going mobile on the streets of London.
Bond should by and large be on his own and left to sort things out for himself.
Fiennes M saw the big picture. That's not limited to any single item in the plot.
Sometimes a film is so god damn retarded that it is a disgrace on a 50+ year franchise.
- Did Connery perform the gun barrel walk for this film during its production or is that recycled material?
- Why was the line, "... even though the industry prides itself on the loyalty and devotion of its workers" repeated so shortly after it had been spoken once already by Sir Donald? I understand the necessity of emphasising something but the entire sentence is repeated verbatim. Is there an artistic point to it that I've been missing for all these years or is it lazy screen writing? Furthermore, that line is neither particularly well-written, nor funny, nor crucial to the scene, is it? Why, in a film that cost 7 million dollars in 1971, is this line spoken twice? What don't I understand? AAAH!
Could be. I don't like it though. ;-)
My brain definitely doesn't like it, but that's the closest I've come to putting some logic behind him repeating it. I remember the first time it clicked for me that he was repeating himself, I thought it was a disc error or something.
I think you have hit the nail on the head.
Just symptomatic, I think, of the complacent and lazy way the three 70s Hamilton films were put together.
I wonder if this one opens new doors to the brothergate angle for a few amount of harmless laughs.
Waltz here is playing a Nazi sailor who's having a dinner with Fleming and Lady O'Neill.
Waltz as a Nazi having dinner? He's probably just waiting for the cream.
He really must've been the author of all his pain. :))
It is based on Pearson's bio, it was filmed in the real Goldeneye and it doesn't end with CR, as usual, but includes also the Goldeneye times with Noel Coward or Ivar Bryce. Even the real James Bond (the ornithologist) appears as a character!
Ah, and apart from Waltz there was also a role for Deborah Moore.
Quite entertaining... for connosieurs, of course.
Stellar cast, though. And Charles Dance is very pleasant to watch, it's almost like watching Fleming's Bond wandering around the screen. I like the film for what it is, and it's a lot better than most of the subsequent efforts, excluding the BBC miniseries.