54 replies to this topic

[Dr.Mirakle32]

I am not a fan of the "James Bond-007" codename theory, never have been, but a particular scene in QoS made me think Eon could be tinkering with going in that unfortunate direction.

Spoiler

When Mathis is dying in Bond's arms, he admits that "Rene Mathis" was only a cover name, and Bond gives him a peculiar look. From a story perspective, why couldn't Mathis just be his real name?

That look could be interpreted in many ways,the most obvious is sadness, but could it also be implying that "Bond" is also a cover name?

I relly hope not, and would rather keep CR/QoS as a straight character reboot, which they were intended, but it does leave an intersting direction. Even though he is still "James Bond" before getting his first kills, maybe they assigned him that name first, as a preperation for being the new 007. Maybe Connery through Pierce was one Bond (due to the Tracy references and what not,) and Craig is the second.

[Loomis]

Personally, I support the codename theory, so I'd be fine with the idea.

[[dark]]

Actually, this is something I went away from Quantum of Solace unclear about: was "Mathis" a code name? If so, what a pointless development; it added nothing to the story or the character.

I found myself really disappointed that Mathis was killed off, but if "Mathis" wasn't even his real name (and with no good reason as to why it wasn't), it's a definite insult to the character, in my view.

[Ravenstone]

I do hate the 'code name' theory.

I took Bond's comment about Mathis not being a good cover name as being ironic. That is, not only did the 'cover' not work because Quantum blew it, but it was his real name as well. Others take it to mean it's because it's a French surname and 'Mathis' is Italian. That's a possibility, but it seems a stretch. My explanation works for me, though, although others may differ.

[Mike00spy]

Not this again.

I do hate the 'code name' theory.

I took Bond's comment about Mathis not being a good cover name as being ironic. That is, not only did the 'cover' not work because Quantum blew it, but it was his real name as well.

That was my take as well.

Edited by Mike00spy, 18 November 2008 - 10:20 PM.

[Mister Asterix]

Actually, this is something I went away from Quantum of Solace unclear about: was "Mathis" a code name? If so, what a pointless development; it added nothing to the story or the character.

I found myself really disappointed that Mathis was killed off, but if "Mathis" wasn't even his real name (and with no good reason as to why it wasn't), it's a definite insult to the character, in my view.

I didn’t mind them killing Mathis. The willingness to kill a major reoccurring character adds drama, because now you never know will die.

I was bothered by the Mathis codename as well, it just wasn’t Fleming’s character in a man who was mostly felt ripped from the page. But I was talking to a friend of mine who is a Bond film fan and has never read the books, and he said he felt the mention of ‘cover name’ was a touching moment where Bond and Mathis were admitting the frailties of their profession.

With that in mind I realised the cover name thing, while it doesn’t work for the Rene Mathis of the book world who works for Deuxième Bureau, it does work rather well for Rene Mathis, Operative of Her Majesty’s Secret Intelligence Service.

[jaguar007]

JAMES BOND IS NOT A CODENAME!!!

[sorking]

I took Bond's comment about Mathis not being a good cover name as being ironic. That is, not only did the 'cover' not work because Quantum blew it, but it was his real name as well.

This is the meaning as far as I can see, too.

Mathis uses his own name the same way Bond does...and it makes him easier to target. Aside from the personal moment this lighthearted-but-practical discussion presents, as with so many things it posits Mathis as a man Bond could end up being. Never able to shake off the MI6 life even when retired in exotic climes with the honey of his choice...

[Righty007]

Quantum of Solace didn't use the "code name theory." René Mathis was the cover name he was given during the Casino Royale mission. Bond was given Arlington Beech but he chose not to use it. René Mathis chose to use his Mathis cover name and thus Bond only knew him as Mathis.

[Johnboy007]

No codename theory. Why give him that codename and then give him covernames?

Real name: James Bond
Code names: Arlington Beech, Robert Sterling

End of discussion.

[Kilroy6644]

I took Bond's comment about Mathis not being a good cover name as being ironic. That is, not only did the 'cover' not work because Quantum blew it, but it was his real name as well.

That's the way I saw it. It caught me off guard at first. "What do you mean Mathis is his cover name?!"

[Double-Oh Agent]

I found myself really disappointed that Mathis was killed off, but if "Mathis" wasn't even his real name (and with no good reason as to why it wasn't), it's a definite insult to the character, in my view.

I hated him being killed off. And then to top it off Bond tosses him into a dumpster?! What the hell? Bond would never do that. And I don't see why Bond wouldn't try to get Mathis to hospital. Even if it was on the other side of town, Bond would have done all he could and broken all sorts of traffic laws to get him there in time. You're right, it was definitely an insult to a great character.

I do hate the 'code name' theory.

I took Bond's comment about Mathis not being a good cover name as being ironic. That is, not only did the 'cover' not work because Quantum blew it, but it was his real name as well.

I too hate the codename theory, but that is the way I saw it as well.

[00Twelve]

If he had been working for MI6 (what other agency would he be working for?), then why would M refer to him as "Rene Mathis" after the death scene if it was only a code name?

Holds as much water as the James Bond codename theory. Or a collander.

It was his real name. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

[[dark]]

I took Bond's comment about Mathis not being a good cover name as being ironic. That is, not only did the 'cover' not work because Quantum blew it, but it was his real name as well.

Next time I watch Quantum of Solace, I'll definitely be paying close attention to see if this works. If not, it's such a left-field development to throw into a scene with that kind of emotional weight.

I didn’t mind them killing Mathis. The willingness to kill a major reoccurring character adds drama, because now you never know will die.

I was bothered by the Mathis codename as well, it just wasn’t Fleming’s character in a man who was mostly felt ripped from the page. But I was talking to a friend of mine who is a Bond film fan and has never read the books, and he said he felt the mention of ‘cover name’ was a touching moment where Bond and Mathis were admitting the frailties of their profession.

With that in mind I realised the cover name thing, while it doesn’t work for the Rene Mathis of the book world who works for Deuxième Bureau, it does work rather well for Rene Mathis, Operative of Her Majesty’s Secret Intelligence Service.

I do agree that Mathis' death added drama by bumping off a character who most fans (or, at least, fans of the novels) would have assumed as "safe" (who next? Felix Leiter? M? Tanner?). I guess my disappointment was simply that we won't see any more of Giancarlo Giannini's superb representation of a truly Flemingian character.

I hated him being killed off. And then to top it off Bond tosses him into a dumpster?! What the hell? Bond would never do that. And I don't see why Bond wouldn't try to get Mathis to hospital. Even if it was on the other side of town, Bond would have done all he could and broken all sorts of traffic laws to get him there in time. You're right, it was definitely an insult to a great character.

As for the dumpster thing, I'm in two minds about it. It's definitely one of the darker things we've ever seen Bond do. I can totally see how it would divide fans. Like pretty much everything in Quantum of Solace, I'll needed to see the film a second time to come to a conclusion, but my first instinct was that it simply magnified the shock of such a brilliant character being killed off.

[Mister Asterix]

Quantum of Solace didn't use the "code name theory." René Mathis was the cover name he was given during the Casino Royale mission. Bond was given Arlington Beech but he chose not to use it. René Mathis chose to use his Mathis cover name and thus Bond only knew him as Mathis.

Well summed up, Rights.

[Pierce - Daniel]

He's Mathis to me and always will be.

What did Gemma even call him.....I was a little shocked and a little dissapointed. The producers have made clear that Bond is supposed to be the same man in every film, Mathis is the Mathis Felming wrote about. The codename line is just a touching little moment where Bond and him put aside professions and look at each other as frieds, as that is what they have become. Very good.

[Aston V8]

Quit trying to make these films make sense in some sort of sequential order. Shot out of order of the books, different actors, 46 year span, reboot... Just enjoy...

[DavidJones]

I'm not sure if I support the codename theory.

 

Moore-Bond putting flowers on Tracey's grave: couldn't he be doing that out of respect for Lazenby-Bond, who may have died?

 

IN TSWLM, when Anya asks him about Tracey, he could be pretending to be irritated, befitting his 'cover'.

 

The World Is Not Enough: Bond would say that was his family-moto, again as befitting his cover.

 

License to Kill: Felix says he was married once. Was Lazenby-Bond the only person to ever once be married?! And he may have been his best man because he had known him for the last four years, maybe they had got to know each other rather well; or maybe he was there as a proxy for Moore-Bond.

[AMC Hornet]

...or maybe new agents aren't given the name 'James Bond' while on active duty to keep the legend alive (a la Casino Royale '67), but after they've retired or been killed and are being written about. That's when the character details such as martinis and Tracy would be added to the file. That way you could even attribute the successful missions of more than one active agent to 007 at the same time. That would really confuse the enemy.

 

It would also explain why Bond was so different after surviving near-death at the end of FRWL, and why Gardner's Bond is so different from Fleming's (and Roger's from Sean's, etc).

 

Remember Louis Erskine, star agent of Quinn Martin's The FBI series? There was no single agent who solved all those cases - he was a composite character created to protect the anonymity of the real agents.

 

If there is any credence to the 'code name' theory, this is the only way it makes sense.

[tdalton]

The code-name theory is nonsense.  Always has been.

[Guy Haines]

Again I agree with tdalton. James Bond is one person who just happens to have been played by different actors on screen. Not the first time that's happened with a character on screen - think Sherlock Holmes, Superman, Batman etc.

 

The nearest we might have had to explaining why Bond looks different from one actor to another - and I'm not sure there was any substance to this - was an idea when George Lazenby became Bond that would have started OHMSS with Bond undergoing plastic surgery and emerging with a new face, Lazenby's. I'm sure I read this in one of the many books on the Bond films I own, and thank goodness it wasn't taken up. (DoubleNoughtSpy is the real expert here on OHMSS and I'm sure he can advise about this "idea".)

 

The "codename theory" is simply a way of getting round the fact that six actors have played Bond in the official series, all different, five of them in a continuing series and the latest in a reboot. I can't see any point in this theory. In a series that has lasted this long a change of actor as Bond was inevitable.

[Messervy]

The code-name theory is nonsense.  Always has been.

 

 

Again I agree with tdalton. James Bond is one person who just happens to have been played by different actors on screen. Not the first time that's happened with a character on screen - think Sherlock Holmes, Superman, Batman etc.

 

The nearest we might have had to explaining why Bond looks different from one actor to another - and I'm not sure there was any substance to this - was an idea when George Lazenby became Bond that would have started OHMSS with Bond undergoing plastic surgery and emerging with a new face, Lazenby's. I'm sure I read this in one of the many books on the Bond films I own, and thank goodness it wasn't taken up. (DoubleNoughtSpy is the real expert here on OHMSS and I'm sure he can advise about this "idea".)

 

The "codename theory" is simply a way of getting round the fact that six actors have played Bond in the official series, all different, five of them in a continuing series and the latest in a reboot. I can't see any point in this theory. In a series that has lasted this long a change of actor as Bond was inevitable.

Yep; utter nonsense. Just because some people have difficulty coping with the fact that there's been various actors doesn't mean one must come up with a "code name" concept... It's just plain irrelevant to pretend that everything's realistic here! It's a fictional character in a long-lasting series, so obviously there'll be various actors and various time contexts. Why should we invent concepts just to try and make believe that there's a realilty to all this?...

[thecasinoroyale]

They want to make James Bond timeless, a man working as an un-seen hero for every generation, where every film is as important to that generation and time as the next.

 

James Bond is one man. Time and the world may change around him as will his portrayal, but James Bond is James Bond. The one and only Bond.

[Odd Jobbies]

I am not a fan of the "James Bond-007" codename theory, never have been, but a particular scene in QoS made me think Eon could be tinkering with going in that unfortunate direction.

I'm not a fan of this idea either and had the same trepidation when i first watched this scene, which is an obvious cue for the reveal that Bond is also a code name.

 

It would be a completely unnecessary move by Eon that would forever undermine the character's connection to the source material. Big mistake!

 

Hopefully they won't try to have Craig or M hand over the reigns to the successor - 007 retires or is killed and 008 assumes the mantle. It's hard to imagine a scenario in which i'd stop watching new Bond movies, but that would most definitely do it.

[SecretAgentFan]

 

I am not a fan of the "James Bond-007" codename theory, never have been, but a particular scene in QoS made me think Eon could be tinkering with going in that unfortunate direction.

I'm not a fan of this idea either and had the same trepidation when i first watched this scene, which is an obvious cue for the reveal that Bond is also a code name.

 

It would be a completely unnecessary move by Eon that would forever undermine the character's connection to the source material. Big mistake!

 

Hopefully they won't try to have Craig or M hand over the reigns to the successor - 007 retires or is killed and 008 assumes the mantle. It's hard to imagine a scenario in which i'd stop watching new Bond movies, but that would most definitely do it.

 

 

Which scene would that be?

[tdalton]

 

 

I am not a fan of the "James Bond-007" codename theory, never have been, but a particular scene in QoS made me think Eon could be tinkering with going in that unfortunate direction.

I'm not a fan of this idea either and had the same trepidation when i first watched this scene, which is an obvious cue for the reveal that Bond is also a code name.

 

It would be a completely unnecessary move by Eon that would forever undermine the character's connection to the source material. Big mistake!

 

Hopefully they won't try to have Craig or M hand over the reigns to the successor - 007 retires or is killed and 008 assumes the mantle. It's hard to imagine a scenario in which i'd stop watching new Bond movies, but that would most definitely do it.

 

 

Which scene would that be?

 

 

I think the scene in question is the one in which Bond and Mathis discuss Mathis' cover name just before Mathis dies.

[Odd Jobbies]

DrMirakle32 kindly hid the scene details under a spoiler tag in the OP.

 

tdalton is quite right that it's Mathis' death scene, in which Mathis reveals that his name is in fact not his real name.

 

It's because Bond asks Mathis about his name that suggests Bond has reason to think it's not real, ergo it suggests a common practise of using a fake name.

 

Therefore there's the subsequent suggestion that 'Bond' may well be such a name - one given to him by MI6, rather than his late parents.

 

So, could 'Bond' be an MI6 'hand-me-down' name?

 

One sincerely hopes not.

 

ETA:

In Skyfall is the family home referred to as the 'Bond' family home? I'm sure albert finney called him James, but did he use the word 'Bond'. If so, then it seems Eon has decided not to make Bond a 'codename'. I'd have to watch it again, but it seems odd to have the Bond ancestral home in the story, along with an old family employee who calls him James, if Eon are intending to make 'James Bond' a codename when it's time to replace Craig.

Edited by Odd Jobbies, 28 April 2014 - 02:18 PM.

[Messervy]

DrMirakle32 kindly hid the scene details under a spoiler tag in the OP.

 

tdalton is quite right that it's Mathis' death scene, in which Mathis reveals that his name is in fact not his real name.

 

It's because Bond asks Mathis about his name that suggests Bond has reason to think it's not real, ergo it suggests a common practise of using a fake name.

 

Therefore there's the subsequent suggestion that 'Bond' may well be such a name - one given to him by MI6, rather than his late parents.

 

So, could 'Bond' be an MI6 'hand-me-down' name?

 

One sincerely hopes not.

 

ETA:

In Skyfall is the family home referred to as the 'Bond' family home? I'm sure albert finney called him James, but did he use the word 'Bond'. If so, then it seems Eon has decided not to make Bond a 'codename'. I'd have to watch it again, but it seems odd to have the Bond ancestral home in the story, along with an old family employee who calls him James, if Eon are intending to make 'James Bond' a codename when it's time to replace Craig.

Well, actually, you even see Bond's parents' grave in SF... So, unless one assumes that MI6 also give codenames for dead people, we can safely say that the "codename theory" is once and for all pretty well burried (no pun intended, of course!).

[tdalton]

Exactly.  The events of Skyfall disprove this "theory", not that there was ever much, if any, evidence to support it in the first place.

Edited by tdalton, 28 April 2014 - 03:26 PM.

[Odd Jobbies]

Well, actually, you even see Bond's parents' grave in SF... So, unless one assumes that MI6 also give codenames for dead people, we can safely say that the "codename theory" is once and for all pretty well burried (no pun intended, of course!).

 

Yep, i'd forgotten about that - well done. Although it's a franchise that never took continuity that seriously to begin with, i hope that they stick those graves in the Bond canon with a big 'do not contradict' label on them.

 

But i still think that it's plain as the nose on your face that this idea was definitely being hinted at with the Mathis death scene. They've just seen sense and changed their minds about it when it came to Skyfall.

Edited by Odd Jobbies, 28 April 2014 - 04:38 PM.