Ben Whishaw's character.
#31
Posted 12 May 2012 - 04:26 PM
#32
Posted 12 May 2012 - 04:49 PM
Basil Fawlty?To be quite frank, I absolutely don't give a about this character or actor. Even though it is Q, it is not interesting in the slightest bit. There will only be one Q and we all know who that is.
#33
Posted 12 May 2012 - 05:36 PM
#34
Posted 12 May 2012 - 06:49 PM
#35
Posted 12 May 2012 - 10:58 PM
To be quite frank, I absolutely don't give a about this character or actor. Even though it is Q, it is not interesting in the slightest bit. There will only be one Q and we all know who that is.
I couldn't agree more, Alec McCowen just owned the part in Never Say Never Again.
Edit: or perhaps you mean the original Major Boothroyd, as portrayed by Peter Burton, no?
#36
Posted 12 May 2012 - 11:34 PM
Ok guys, all these Q puns are Q'ute, but can we try and stay on topic?
That will be quite easily done, or Q.E.D. as I like to put it.
#37
Posted 26 May 2012 - 08:54 PM
#38
Posted 26 May 2012 - 10:08 PM
#39
Posted 30 May 2012 - 11:48 PM
#40
Posted 31 May 2012 - 12:01 AM
Waterproof underpants would come in handy, too.
#41
Posted 31 May 2012 - 12:54 AM
#42
Posted 31 May 2012 - 01:13 AM
A phone small enough to fit in one's pocket, with a built-in camera for spy photos, and the ability to access information online from anywhere.
Maybe call it an iQPhone?
#43
Posted 31 May 2012 - 01:18 AM
#44
Posted 31 May 2012 - 01:31 AM
Boring. Bond needs lethal gizmos that you can't order on Amazon. Not another variant on an iPhone.
I can assure you I wasn't serious. I want him to have something I don't have in my own pocket right now. As a private investigator I have numerous little gadgets (mostly concealed video cameras, and other similar devices) so I, too, want him to have something different than what I take to work every day, and a lethal gizmo sounds about right. But I like the simple things, such as the attache case in FRWL and rebreather in TB, and not the over the technological top laser watches, etc. Simple but handy tools like a small knife in his shoe heels or lockpicks under the lining of his belt get me excited, as they are so plausible, though, admittedly, they are probably under-appealing to many general audiences.
#45
Posted 31 May 2012 - 02:24 AM
To be quite frank, I absolutely don't give a about this character or actor. Even though it is Q, it is not interesting in the slightest bit. There will only be one Q and we all know who that is.
Well that's a very defeatist attitude. You might as well say they shouldn't bother making Bond films anymore - that it's all been a pointless, boring exercise ever since Connery. To be honest, I do think Sean Connery totally owned the role of James Bond, along with Terence Young he invented the movie adaptation. That doesn't mean I don't appreciate and thoroughly enjoy a good Bond film with another actor in, in fact that variety is what has kept the films so popular for such an extraordinary length of time.
Sorry I don't agree with you at all there. Whishaw is an excellent actor and will surely give the piece some real personality. He and Daniel Craig are old friends too, so they have a natural amicable chemistry to work with.
#46
Posted 31 May 2012 - 11:43 PM
#47
Posted 01 June 2012 - 03:36 AM
You mean we won't get to see Bond scaling the tallest building in the world with a sticky glove?I hope the gadgets aren't anything like Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol, I though they were a little to far fetched, although I still enjoyed the film though.
Actually, what made the movie work for me was the fact that Cruise did all his own stunts. Even with some of the far fetched gadgets, it still felt real. I'd call it my favorite of the Mission: Impossible films.
On the topic of Whishaw, I can't believe they've keep him completely under the radar along with many other aspects of the film. I'm sure his appearance will be 'Q'uite memorable.
#48
Posted 20 June 2012 - 10:25 PM
Q: "Here is your new tie, 007. Push this here and it hardens into a sword. Try and take good care of it, its worth several thousand dollars and cost far more to develop."
#49
Posted 20 June 2012 - 10:46 PM
I wouldn't mind Q mentioning how expensive a gadget was. For example;
Q: "Here is your new tie, 007. Push this here and it hardens into a sword. Try and take good care of it, its worth several thousand dollars and cost far more to develop."
That would be the worst gadget ever! But I do know what you mean, we´re in a global crisis afterall That being said, I´d love it if Bond didn´t give a damn
#50
Posted 20 June 2012 - 11:28 PM
Push this here and it hardens into a sword."
I can see it now, he gets into an amorous embrace and it gets pushed accidently.
“Is that a tie that turns into a sword or are you just pleased to see me?” says Eve producing a straight blade razor.
#51
Posted 21 June 2012 - 11:18 AM
If such a conversation does take place I would hope he uses the word pounds, not dollars.Q: "Here is your new tie, 007. Push this here and it hardens into a sword. Try and take good care of it, its worth several thousand dollars and cost far more to develop."
#52
Posted 24 June 2012 - 06:12 PM
Bond could then later make a line out of it; "There is several thousand pounds well spent" or what not.
#53
Posted 25 June 2012 - 01:05 PM
#54
Posted 01 July 2012 - 05:58 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk...rammes/b00tw2b9
There's no secret made of the fact that he's Q. He won't reveal anything about what he gives Bond, though!
#55
Posted 01 July 2012 - 09:56 PM
#56
Posted 01 July 2012 - 10:13 PM
I look forward to his scene in the film and not only to how he plays the character, but how he interacts with Daniel.
#57
Posted 01 July 2012 - 10:16 PM
#58
Posted 02 July 2012 - 12:40 AM
#59
Posted 02 July 2012 - 08:58 AM
I believe he'll have more than just one scene, and will pop up at various points through SKYFALL. Good news, as I'm a fan of Whishaw's previous performances.
He seemed to say Q was barely in it in that interview, although he could have been talking about Q in Bond films in general.
#60
Posted 02 July 2012 - 10:46 AM
If this new Q ends up like M and assists Bond in the field, involved with all the action and all the threats, he's going to lose the impact that the character had by way of an armourer and gadget-man to help Bond survive in the field, not join him side by side, cowering in the corner as Bond protects him and he has to take a gun to protect himself.
If less is more for Whishaw in this, I'll welcome it as, to be honest, none of his previous roles win me over so I hope he delivers a good, warm and memorable performance as Q, because no matter what, Desmond Llewelyn will never be far from our thoughts in this benchmark role.