91 replies to this topic

[L4YRCAKE]

I'm glad that they didn't get Sean since it would have gotten people believing in that stupid code-name theory again.

Okay, I know what Mendes said in the interview, but c'mon:

1) The dialogue seems clearly written for Connery.

2) Going back to Scotland was a nod to Connery that Fleming retconned into the books after seeing Connery in the role and being unexpectedly pleased.

3) I think there's sufficient argument that Mendes plausibly could have said what he did because it sounded better than, 'Yeah, we wrote it for Sean, we wanted to underscore the idea of going back in time in order to move forward for Craig's Bond on the 50th and he wouldn't even have a discussion about it so we went with someone else.' And I say again, plausibly. But Mendes does have a habit of denying things, albeit for obvious reasons.

4) I think the line 'What is it you do again?' said by Finney was written to deflect any thought of the 'code name theory', which I also abhor.

1) Where do you see a valid reason for that?

2) Yes, it is common knowledge that Fleming used Connery´s heritage for the literary Bond after being impressed by him.

3) Mendes has a habit of denying things? Well, as much as anybody else has.

4) Why do you think that line deflects that theory?

1) I've only seen the film once so I'll have to paraphrase from memory, but I remember Kincaid saying things like, 'you've learned well from everything I taught you' to Craig's Bond. Much of his dialogue with Craig seemed, to me, to have double meaning, plus he was a groundskeeper that didn't flinch at the line about 'some men are coming to kill us, we're going to kill them first'.

4) That line perplexed me when I heard it, it seemed there for a reason. I'm aware I'm going out on a limb, but let's say you're John Logan and you're writing the dialogue, with the hopes that up to that point Connery may agree to take the role that you wrote for him, you could plausibly be aware that some viewers may think that Connery is actually supposed to be playing the original Bond, and that this potentially confirms that James Bond is a codeword. It would seem that this Kincaid would implicitly know that Craig's Bond is the latest in a long line of Bonds; asking him innocently and in complete surprise what exactly Bond does for a living would suggest otherwise. I think it's possible they wrote that and the majority of other lines with Connery in mind, didn't/couldn't get him or thought better of it, and kept the dialogue intact regardless.

Just my nerdy speculation, I realize some of it's far fetched, but I really do think the dialogue sounded like it was meant for Connery. I'm going to see Skyfall again soon, I very well may realize it was wishful thinking on second and third viewing.

[SecretAgentFan]

Trust me, they never wanted Connery for this. It´s only something some journalists (and geeks) want to happen for all the wrong reasons.

[stamper]

No, this is BS. The wole role is written for Connery. "Welcome to Scotland" after blowing up two bad guys. Cheering time if Connery had done it. There's also the finale in the chapel where Bond wins with a knife (Untouchables reference) and "I was ready before you were even born". Connery would have been awesome and great way to end his career for good.

[Dustin]

No, this is BS. The wole role is written for Connery. "Welcome to Scotland" after blowing up two bad guys. Cheering time if Connery had done it. There's also the finale in the chapel where Bond wins with a knife (Untouchables reference) and "I was ready before you were even born". Connery would have been awesome and great way to end his career for good.

Perhaps that's why it isn't Connery, he's not yet ready to end his career for good.

[Loomis]

Perhaps that's why it isn't Connery, he's not yet ready to end his career for good.

Really? I thought he announced his retirement from acting a few years ago. As far as I'm aware, 2003's THE LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMAN remains his most recent film.

[SecretAgentFan]

That´s right. Connery already has announced his retirement. And from what I have heard within the industry, Connery is just not interested in one last role.

[jsteed]

That´s right. Connery already has announced his retirement. And from what I have heard within the industry, Connery is just not interested in one last role.

Didn't Spielberg want Connery for Indy 4 but he declined. I highly doubt he would of even been interested in the Kincade role.

[SecretAgentFan]

That´s true. He told even Spielberg that "retirement is just too much fun".

[Dustin]

Oh, I forgot about Connery having retired already.

[stamper]

But a secret, unannouced, WV in X-Men like cameo (would have took a 5 days shoot) would have been HUGE.

[Dustin]

Sure. Only it wouldn't have been a surprise for long. I agree the part may have been written with Connery in mind. But that's not to mean it was written for him. Chances he would appear in a Bond film again were always slim to non-existent, no writer would have seriously counted on him.

[stamper]

The writer job isn't to cast

[Dustin]

Indeed.

[L4YRCAKE]

The writer's job has no control ultimately who is cast, but writers often write a role with a certain actor or type of actor in mind. The novel Rising Sun by Michael Crichton, for instance, was written with Connery in mind, long before the film even started being considered a possibility. The role of Royal Tenenbaum was originally written with Gene Wilder in mind, who turned it down. After Wes Anderson cast Gene Hackman in the role he started making claims that Hackman had always been his first and only choice, which was simply not true at all. The Bodyguard was written with Steve McQueen and Diana Ross to star, but McQueen proved... 'difficult'... on a few issues, and the script languished until it was finally made in the 90's.

Who knows? I personally believe much of the dialogue sounds quite pointedly meant for Connery, and Mendes' denials seem more to me about saving face; he could also just be playing coy towards Connery, perhaps they hope that they'll still be able to get him to appear in a future installment. But until those in the know say otherwise all we really can do is speculate.

[00 Brosnan]

I think it's a novel idea, but ultimately would be the wrong move. I agree with the reasons Sam Mendes gave about why the idea was abandoned early on.

[Kincade]

Kincade was a fascinating and charming character played perfectly by Mr. Finney. I loved his scenes!

[Vauxhall]

Kincade was a fascinating and charming character played perfectly by Mr. Finney. I loved his scenes!

With a username like that, I'd certainly hope so! Welcome to Scotland CBn.

[Hitmonk]

"Of course an elderly gamekeeper that Bond hasn’t seen for years doesn't know that he now works for the secret service."

But he does not Emma's first name without being introduced?

[plankattack]

"Of course an elderly gamekeeper that Bond hasn’t seen for years doesn't know that he now works for the secret service."

But he does not Emma's first name without being introduced?

No - I hear it that Bond introduces M as M, and Kincade calls her Emma.

I don't doubt that when they wrote the scene, somebody somewhere said "Could we get SC" but the character works without it being SC. But considering how intrical the Aston is to the action climax, the combination of SC as well as "his" gadget providing the initial edge in Bond's defense of the house, would have underlined the idea that Bond is two different people rather than one character. While other Bonds have driven the DB5, SC was the only one to have used the special version until now.

I just think it would have created too much needless energy, especially with the reviewers, who continually show their ignorance of the series by getting details wrong when referring to the older films and/or the source material.

[Hitmonk]

I was taking the name Emma literally as being her real first name. Thinking about it again what you say makes sense. Kincade probably misheard Bond and adopted the name "Emma" in error

[Judo chop]

Obviously if Connery were to do a cameo, the focus of the scene would naturally gravitate toward him. I think the best approach would be to fight against that gravity as much as possible. The cameo should still be relevant, but its relevance should be based in Bond and not Connery. My take is that it ought to be a scene with little or no dialogue shared between them, to keep the Connery character distant, but for his presence to exert some kind of attitude or emotional shift on Bond, all in a wink, wink manner. I’d want to see it as something respectful to Connery, nothing at his expense.

As a playful nod to Thunderball, for example. Connery plays a senior member of MI6 whom we can assume has had years of field experience, and has long since moved on to some other deskly, intelligence-based function. There’s a meeting of various agents of mixed age demographics, and M is giving some general briefing that applies to all of them. Unbeknownst to us, Connery’s character is already there, either with his back to the camera or with his face confused within the audience. Bond walks in late. M chides him as he takes his seat - I’m thinking raised theater-style seating - and we hear a muttered comment (delivered with a very familiar ackschent) from someone sitting somewhere above/behind him. It’s a comment at Bond’s expense piling on to the previous chastisement. This raises a small murmur of chuckles among the audience. As Bond turns to looks to see who on earth would take this unprovoked shot at his person, we see a number of faces with weak attempts to hold back smiles all pretending to know nothing, at the center of which is Connery’s, delivering one of his classic expressions. Camera goes back to Bond who is turning his posture back toward the front of the room with a perplexed, ‘WTF just happened’ look. M stares him down, apparently ready to blame Bond for this additional disruption as well, and says something sarcastic to the effect of “Your permission to continue, double-oh-seven?”

I dunno. Looks like it’d be fun in my head anyway.

As Kincade, no. I agree with most posters here. Connery’s presence as such a featured character would be all-consuming. It has nothing to do with how well Connery disappears into his character. The fault would not be his. There is simply too much history tied to Connery to smoothly integrate him into the existing story.

[seawolfnyy]

No, this is BS. The wole role is written for Connery. "Welcome to Scotland" after blowing up two bad guys. Cheering time if Connery had done it. There's also the finale in the chapel where Bond wins with a knife (Untouchables reference) and "I was ready before you were even born". Connery would have been awesome and great way to end his career for good.

I didn't see it as an Untouchables reference. If it is a reference, more than likely it would be to FYEO, for when Columbo kills Kristatos by throwing a knife it his back.

I was taking the name Emma literally as being her real first name. Thinking about it again what you say makes sense. Kincade probably misheard Bond and adopted the name "Emma" in error

That is what I surmised from it. Bond calls her M, but Kincade hears "Em" and thinks its short for Emma even though it's not. He could have said Emily too.

[Judo chop]

I was taking the name Emma literally as being her real first name. Thinking about it again what you say makes sense. Kincade probably misheard Bond and adopted the name "Emma" in error

That is what I surmised from it. Bond calls her M, but Kincade hears "Em" and thinks its short for Emma even though it's not. He could have said Emily too.

Getting pedantic about this, I don't think Kincade hears "Em" and thinks it's short for Emma. There's a subtle, natural "uh" that slips out when you say the letter "M", and so Kincade hears it exactly as 'Emma'. There's no reason why he'd think this lady's name would be a single letter, so his mind would go to the most logical place.

[plankattack]

Of course, if SC had played Kincade, he would have called her "Junior"........

[seawolfnyy]

I was taking the name Emma literally as being her real first name. Thinking about it again what you say makes sense. Kincade probably misheard Bond and adopted the name "Emma" in error

That is what I surmised from it. Bond calls her M, but Kincade hears "Em" and thinks its short for Emma even though it's not. He could have said Emily too.

Getting pedantic about this, I don't think Kincade hears "Em" and thinks it's short for Emma. There's a subtle, natural "uh" that slips out when you say the letter "M", and so Kincade hears it exactly as 'Emma'. There's no reason why he'd think this lady's name would be a single letter, so his mind would go to the most logical place.

Exactly, he doesn't think her name would be one letter so instead of believing it's just 'M', he thinks Bond means 'Em'. So he calls her Emma even though that is not what Bond meant.

[Iceskater101]

Of course, if SC had played Kincade, he would have called her "Junior"........

Haha, but no I wouldn't have wanted Connery to play this role, Finney did a perfect job!

[THX-007]

Of course, if SC had played Kincade, he would have called her "Junior"........

Does that mean he would drive birds into the rotors of Silva's helicopter? =)
"I suddenly remembered my Charlemagne: "Let my armies be the rocks and the trees — and the birds in the sky."

[byline]

As Kincade, no. I agree with most posters here. Connery’s presence as such a featured character would be all-consuming. It has nothing to do with how well Connery disappears into his character. The fault would not be his. There is simply too much history tied to Connery to smoothly integrate him into the existing story.

Yup. Last night, when I told hubby of this rumour, he believed it would have killed the film because that kind of stunt casting couldn't help but draw all the attention to Connery, and the story would have been lost.

[plankattack]

Of course, if SC had played Kincade, he would have called her "Junior"........

Does that mean he would drive birds into the rotors of Silva's helicopter? =)
"I suddenly remembered my Charlemagne: "Let my armies be the rocks and the trees — and the birds in the sky."

LOL

[Leon]

So it would have been a distraction, but the Aston Martin being the one from GF instead of the one from CR isn't? Get real guys. Connery don't look like younger Connery anymore, he would have made the character work. And again, friggin Jason Bourne creator is also Bond creator...

Eh, but they aren't the same. Sure the car can be a distraction if you care about forcing continuity onto a series that by it's very nature now is without continuity for artistic license. Sean Connery being in a new Bond film playing some other character who looked after Bond as a kid would be way more of a distraction. It's all about degree, as is everything.