Saw SF again today, and I love the movie, but why, just why, did they have to go and blow up one of the most iconic cars in film history?
I feel it shows no purpose but to highlight Silva's cruelty.
Anyway, share your thoughts below....
Posted 02 April 2013 - 05:05 AM
Saw SF again today, and I love the movie, but why, just why, did they have to go and blow up one of the most iconic cars in film history?
I feel it shows no purpose but to highlight Silva's cruelty.
Anyway, share your thoughts below....
Posted 02 April 2013 - 05:33 AM
Posted 02 April 2013 - 07:52 AM
I was under the impression that the one Bond had was there in his garage untouched since '65.
Another DB5 doesn't really seem the same IMO.
(Actually, on second thought, it would be the same, provided it was the "classic" DB5.)
Edited by MajorBoothroyd, 02 April 2013 - 08:52 AM.
Posted 02 April 2013 - 06:53 PM
I'm probably in the minority here as I like the DB5 but never was fond of its return to the series in GE and subsequent entries. So I actually hoped there would be a chance for clean slate for the old battle horse. Still, I was pretty astonished when I learned it really was to be blown to pieces. Not that this would prevent a return...
Well, you are not alone. I am a big fan of the DB5, but the car does not make much sense in a modern Bondmovie. It is just cheap tricks used by the filmmakers to take maximum advantage of the Connery-Bond era.
Posted 02 April 2013 - 07:12 PM
No, I didnt feel a single pang of melancholy for the car. I was too busy enjoying the total f-ing destruction. Blow up an entire Austin Martin factory for all I care.
Posted 02 April 2013 - 08:35 PM
I was under the impression that the one Bond had was there in his garage untouched since '65.
Another DB5 doesn't really seem the same IMO.
(Actually, on second thought, it would be the same, provided it was the "classic" DB5.)
Eon pretty much can do as they please, I doubt the audience would really care about inconsistencies, as SKYFALL's DB5 can attest.
Well, a nice touch would be showing Bond in his spare time trying to screw together the charred wreck in his garage.
Posted 02 April 2013 - 08:59 PM
I'm probably in the minority here as I like the DB5 but never was fond of its return to the series in GE and subsequent entries. So I actually hoped there would be a chance for clean slate for the old battle horse. Still, I was pretty astonished when I learned it really was to be blown to pieces. Not that this would prevent a return...
Well, you are not alone. I am a big fan of the DB5, but the car does not make much sense in a modern Bondmovie. It is just cheap tricks used by the filmmakers to take maximum advantage of the Connery-Bond era.
Agreed.
To respond to the original post, I can't say that I was at all upset about Silva blowing up the Aston Martin, especially since the car shouldn't have made an appearance in Skyfall in the first place.
Posted 03 April 2013 - 02:50 AM
Remember he did win the car off of Mr. Dimitri in Casino Royale so it does (in an odd way) have a place in the Craig canon.
I will say that every time I saw the movie in a theatre (5x), the audience did a big "AHHHHHHH" when the lights go on in that garage and the car is revealed. The general public loved it.
However watching it get blown up did not make me cringe as much as watching Bond roll the newer Aston Martin whilst trying to avoid Vesper lying in the road.
Posted 03 April 2013 - 04:31 AM
I hope and think they'll be using the DBS in up coming films and that the DB5 is retired. Lord knows if the Bond films aren't doing so well they'll pull it out of retirement but normally when Bond's car is destroyed its retired, Moore's Lotus, Dalton's Austin, Brosnan's BMW's. Craig I suppose is the only one to destroy his vehicle (CR) and have it again in QOS only to kind of destroy again. When I try to imagine the film they make on the 100 th Anniversary I would think the DBS would be more fitting then the DB5. I think there are a few threads on this already too. Edit; I totally forgot about Connery crashing the DN5 in GF.
Edited by S K Y F A L L, 03 April 2013 - 04:55 PM.
Posted 03 April 2013 - 04:46 AM
Remember he did win the car off of Mr. Dimitri in Casino Royale so it does (in an odd way) have a place in the Craig canon.
Even that point is up in the air. As much as I would like to believe it's the same car, the steering wheel is on the other side. Yes, he could reconfigure it, but ... it's better not to think about it or try to justify it. Makes no sense whatsoever.
Posted 03 April 2013 - 10:26 AM
Love the DB5. It's my favourite and I also think it's the best. If we never see it again, it's had a good run. Six film appearances, seven if you count the TWINE deleted scene, numerous video games and worldwide recognition. Another one could come back, sure. But at the moment this does seem like a fitting thematic end. But as ever, the appeal will live on.
Posted 03 April 2013 - 12:09 PM
Remember he did win the car off of Mr. Dimitri in Casino Royale so it does (in an odd way) have a place in the Craig canon.
Even that point is up in the air. As much as I would like to believe it's the same car, the steering wheel is on the other side. Yes, he could reconfigure it, but ... it's better not to think about it or try to justify it. Makes no sense whatsoever.
And add an ejector seat...
Continuity is not the strong side of Craig's era. So I guess that we will see the DB5 back
Posted 03 April 2013 - 03:36 PM
Saw SF again today, and I love the movie, but why, just why, did they have to go and blow up one of the most iconic cars in film history?
I feel it shows no purpose but to highlight Silva's cruelty.
Anyway, share your thoughts below....
Bond's car gets destoryed in almost every movie if you think back on each one.
Crashed the DB5 in Goldfinger
Lotus blew up in FYEO
Self destruct Aston in TLD
BMW crashes off roof in TND
BMW sawed in half in TWINE
Aston flips over in CR
Aston gets all smashed and loses door in QOS
DB5 blown up in Skyfall
Edited by FlemingBond, 03 April 2013 - 03:36 PM.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 03:44 AM
Saw SF again today, and I love the movie, but why, just why, did they have to go and blow up one of the most iconic cars in film history?
I feel it shows no purpose but to highlight Silva's cruelty.
Anyway, share your thoughts below....
Bond's car gets destoryed in almost every movie if you think back on each one.
Crashed the DB5 in Goldfinger
Lotus blew up in FYEO
Self destruct Aston in TLD
BMW crashes off roof in TND
BMW sawed in half in TWINE
Aston flips over in CR
Aston gets all smashed and loses door in QOS
DB5 blown up in Skyfall
Ah, yeah. Got a major point there.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 01:58 PM
Am sure it will be back - again. With or without ejector seats, maybe with revolving plates instead.
It is fair to say, with any form of timeline now out the window, that 'a' DB5 getting blown up does not negate the possibility of 'another' one appearing.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 02:38 PM
I'd really prefer if they left that monument - for by now it is a monument - well alone in the future. I believe Bond was usually a man of the present or even the future, if only by five minutes, with little or no regard for the past. Let him have something from today, not a museum piece to fuss over. The one wrong note of SKYFALL in my view was Bond's rage over the destroyed Aston. That was not Bond, that was middle-aged, middle-classed suburbia guy crying over a scratch in his precious ride. When the Bond of the books and the early 'classic' films used to drive his cars hard and had no qualms to use them in pursuit of Le Chiffre or Drax, and to turn them into wrecks in the process.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 02:44 PM
I'd really prefer if they left that monument - for by now it is a monument - well alone in the future. I believe Bond was usually a man of the present or even the future, if only by five minutes, with little or no regard for the past. Let him have something from today, not a museum piece to fuss over. The one wrong note of SKYFALL in my view was Bond's rage over the destroyed Aston. That was not Bond, that was middle-aged, middle-classed suburbia guy crying over a scratch in his precious ride. When the Bond of the books and the early 'classic' films used to drive his cars hard and had no qualms to use them in pursuit of Le Chiffre or Drax, and to turn them into wrecks in the process.
Agreed.
The scene where the DB5 is destroyed was one of a few moments that had me rolling my eyes while watching Skyfall in the theater. I have no problem with them destroying the car (thrilled by it actually, as hopefully they'll retire it now), but Bond's reaction to it was just over-the-top and so far removed from Fleming's writing, which the Skyfall team continually try to convince us was the basis for pretty much everything in the film.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 03:29 PM
Well, in defence of the screenwriting I suppose that reaction was more aimed at the general audience with an aim at a chuckle and a satisfied 'now he's gonna give 'em hell' from the guys in the theatre. Which it did achieve. Still, could have done without that moment.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 05:41 PM
I'd really prefer if they left that monument - for by now it is a monument - well alone in the future. I believe Bond was usually a man of the present or even the future, if only by five minutes, with little or no regard for the past. Let him have something from today, not a museum piece to fuss over. The one wrong note of SKYFALL in my view was Bond's rage over the destroyed Aston. That was not Bond, that was middle-aged, middle-classed suburbia guy crying over a scratch in his precious ride. When the Bond of the books and the early 'classic' films used to drive his cars hard and had no qualms to use them in pursuit of Le Chiffre or Drax, and to turn them into wrecks in the process.
I'd really prefer if they left that monument - for by now it is a monument - well alone in the future. I believe Bond was usually a man of the present or even the future, if only by five minutes, with little or no regard for the past. Let him have something from today, not a museum piece to fuss over. The one wrong note of SKYFALL in my view was Bond's rage over the destroyed Aston. That was not Bond, that was middle-aged, middle-classed suburbia guy crying over a scratch in his precious ride. When the Bond of the books and the early 'classic' films used to drive his cars hard and had no qualms to use them in pursuit of Le Chiffre or Drax, and to turn them into wrecks in the process.
Agreed.
The scene where the DB5 is destroyed was one of a few moments that had me rolling my eyes while watching Skyfall in the theater. I have no problem with them destroying the car (thrilled by it actually, as hopefully they'll retire it now), but Bond's reaction to it was just over-the-top and so far removed from Fleming's writing, which the Skyfall team continually try to convince us was the basis for pretty much everything in the film.
While Bond's reaction may have been over the top for your tastes, it is perfectly consistent with Fleming's characterization of Bond. In Casino Royale, Fleming describes driving as the closest thing Bond has to a hobby. In the early novels, Bond is extremely attached to his old Bentley 4 1/2 Litre, which is over twenty years old. I'm afraid Dustin that Fleming's Bond did have a love of museum pieces despite your thoughts about him being a modern man. In Diamonds Are Forever, when Leiter playfully teases Bond's Bentley and its age, Bond bites back pretty "causically" and insults Felix's hot rod. Sure, Bond trashes his cars in the line of duty, but I'm pretty certain he is pretty broken up about the loss of his old Bentley at the end of Moonraker, at least for the colder, harder Bond of the earlier books. Also, he is very relieved in Casino Royale that it is still salvageable after that crash. (I can't double check at the moment since I have lent my copies of CR-MR to friends at the moment) So you can complain about not liking those aspects of Skyfall and the continuity problems regarding the DB5 and its gadgets, but Bond's possession of an antique sports car and his relationship with that vehicle in the film is strongly based on Fleming and it cannot be described as out of character.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 06:17 PM
I'd really prefer if they left that monument - for by now it is a monument - well alone in the future. I believe Bond was usually a man of the present or even the future, if only by five minutes, with little or no regard for the past. Let him have something from today, not a museum piece to fuss over. The one wrong note of SKYFALL in my view was Bond's rage over the destroyed Aston. That was not Bond, that was middle-aged, middle-classed suburbia guy crying over a scratch in his precious ride. When the Bond of the books and the early 'classic' films used to drive his cars hard and had no qualms to use them in pursuit of Le Chiffre or Drax, and to turn them into wrecks in the process.
>>>
I'd really prefer if they left that monument - for by now it is a monument - well alone in the future. I believe Bond was usually a man of the present or even the future, if only by five minutes, with little or no regard for the past. Let him have something from today, not a museum piece to fuss over. The one wrong note of SKYFALL in my view was Bond's rage over the destroyed Aston. That was not Bond, that was middle-aged, middle-classed suburbia guy crying over a scratch in his precious ride. When the Bond of the books and the early 'classic' films used to drive his cars hard and had no qualms to use them in pursuit of Le Chiffre or Drax, and to turn them into wrecks in the process.
Agreed.
The scene where the DB5 is destroyed was one of a few moments that had me rolling my eyes while watching Skyfall in the theater. I have no problem with them destroying the car (thrilled by it actually, as hopefully they'll retire it now), but Bond's reaction to it was just over-the-top and so far removed from Fleming's writing, which the Skyfall team continually try to convince us was the basis for pretty much everything in the film.
While Bond's reaction may have been over the top for your tastes, it is perfectly consistent with Fleming's characterization of Bond. In Casino Royale, Fleming describes driving as the closest thing Bond has to a hobby. In the early novels, Bond is extremely attached to his old Bentley 4 1/2 Litre, which is over twenty years old. I'm afraid Dustin that Fleming's Bond did have a love of museum pieces despite your thoughts about him being a modern man. In Diamonds Are Forever, when Leiter playfully teases Bond's Bentley and its age, Bond bites back pretty "causically" and insults Felix's hot rod. Sure, Bond trashes his cars in the line of duty, but I'm pretty certain he is pretty broken up about the loss of his old Bentley at the end of Moonraker, at least for the colder, harder Bond of the earlier books. Also, he is very relieved in Casino Royale that it is still salvageable after that crash. (I can't double check at the moment since I have lent my copies of CR-MR to friends at the moment) So you can complain about not liking those aspects of Skyfall and the continuity problems regarding the DB5 and its gadgets, but Bond's possession of an antique sports car and his relationship with that vehicle in the film is strongly based on Fleming and it cannot be described as out of character.
I beg to differ. Driving a vintage car daily throughout the year is a long way from storing one in near-mint condition. Sure, Bond may feel a pang of regret about finally having to abandon his four-litres-and-a-half at the end of MR. But ultimately it's just a car. Worth exactly a petrol can and a match, not more. Bond's cars may be true beauties, automotive sculptures. But Bond is a kerbside parker, having no use for garage doors to break one's fingernails or pampering mechanics.
'...Bond refused to be owned by any car. A car, however splendid, was a means of locomotion...and it must at all times be ready to locomote...'
Yes, Bond's first Bentley was already a bit of a museum piece in 1953. But that's not the reason he held on to it. Replacing it took serious funds and he had to wait until a benign Nazi presented him with a fitting cheque and a chance to rescue London from extinction...
Whereas Bond's refusal of modern American cars IIRC is mainly due to power steering, which in his view takes away the pleasure of driving and the feel for the road, a view shared by many European drivers of that time.
Edited by Dustin, 04 April 2013 - 06:36 PM.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 06:40 PM
How do you know it was Bond who parked the car in storage and kept it that way in Skyfall? M said all of his possessions had been put into storage on his "death". He could have driven it regularly and kept it parked outside his flat before MI6 packed all his stuff up and sold his flat. Too many assumptions underlie your argument.
Edited by TheManwiththeWaltherPPK, 04 April 2013 - 06:41 PM.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 06:50 PM
How do you know it was Bond who parked the car in storage and kept it that way in Skyfall? M said all of his possessions had been put into storage on his "death". He could have driven it regularly and kept it parked outside his flat before MI6 packed all his stuff up and sold his flat. Too many assumptions underlie your argument.
True. But my point is not so much the fact he had the DB5 than his reaction to its destruction in the firefight at Skyfall. He's using the car and its impressive firepower himself, so it's only reasonable to consider it a write-off right from the start. And it's already in a bad way after the first encounter with Silva's men. Giving a display of heightened fury just because the thing is blown to pieces moments later feels staged and out-of-character to me.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 07:03 PM
I can understand the staged criticism, and the reaction was arguably over the top for the literary Bond, but I don't think it is fair to say like tdalton did that such an interpretation of Bond has no basis in the Fleming. Without Newman's scoring, I don't think the moment would have been out of character for Bond even as you interpret him. He looks up, has a flicker of anger in his eye, and then coldly continues on with setting the explosives. I don't he loses his mind like some suburban yuppie when his midlife crisis car is scratched.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 07:30 PM
I can understand the staged criticism, and the reaction was arguably over the top for the literary Bond, but I don't think it is fair to say like tdalton did that such an interpretation of Bond has no basis in the Fleming. Without Newman's scoring, I don't think the moment would have been out of character for Bond even as you interpret him. He looks up, has a flicker of anger in his eye, and then coldly continues on with setting the explosives. I don't he loses his mind like some suburban yuppie when his midlife crisis car is scratched.
Oh, in cinematic terms it works fine, no doubt. I daresay most audiences loved it. It just feels out of place to me, especially since the thing has already taken serious abuse. I suppose you could argue both points, for and against it, on the basis of how much people like their Bond to be miffed in the face of death (which is what the scene gains its tension from, the ludicrousness of caring after he's been confronted with lethal force and violence). But on sober reflection I think this idea could have ended on the cutting room floor and we wouldn't have missed it.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 07:43 PM
I just don't see it as being something that Fleming's Bond would get that upset about. Yes, he enjoys his car in the novels, and he does feel some relief when it can be saved in CR, but the circumstances are very different. Bond doesn't go after Vesper expecting such trouble for his vehicle. He even doesn't seem all that concerned with rescuing Vesper, either, so when he wrecks the car, its more of an unforeseen incident that couldn't be avoided. SKYFALL sees Bond using the car as a shield far before its blown up, suggesting that he isn't all that concerned about its well being. He also doesn't seem all that angry about the fact that it's being riddled by gunfire at that point, but we're supposed to believe that he all of a sudden cares later? That's a bit of a stretch, I think.
It all goes back to EON's new portrayal of Bond as this immature individual. His reaction in SKYFALL, to me, seems more in line with that portrayal, as he is upset with his car being damaged by Silva moments after he himself put the car purposely in the line of fire, rather than coming from Fleming's portrayal, where Bond was a more mature character.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 08:40 PM
Not sure I get immaturity out of that moment, which was, I agree, a fanboy-type moment that was hyped by the music more than anything else. The fact is, Bond didn't do anything differently because the car was destroyed--he was already rigging the gas canisters when it happened. I think it just gave him one more thing for him to be p.o.'d about. It didn't bother me at all--probably in part because I'm one of the people who enjoyed seeing the DB5 brought back.
Posted 04 April 2013 - 08:54 PM
Not sure I get immaturity out of that moment, which was, I agree, a fanboy-type moment that was hyped by the music more than anything else. The fact is, Bond didn't do anything differently because the car was destroyed--he was already rigging the gas canisters when it happened. I think it just gave him one more thing for him to be p.o.'d about. It didn't bother me at all--probably in part because I'm one of the people who enjoyed seeing the DB5 brought back.
Posted 05 April 2013 - 06:10 AM
I love the DB-5 as well. Can't get enough of it. 007 pretty much destroyed it in Goldfinger but yet it came back in Thunderball. To bring it back all they have to do is have Q work his magic or simply acknowledge that Bond still has the one he won in CR. I hope it returns again.
Posted 05 April 2013 - 08:32 AM
Blowing up the DB5 wasn’t a result of legit fighting. It was unnecessary taunt by Silva given he couldn’t lure kill the man himself outside and kill him. Bond had no control over its fate, unlike when he was behind the wheel chasing Le Chiffre in CR when he technically did.
Outside the lodge as the first wave arrive, the DB5 sustained gunfire, but it wasn’t completely destroyed. It was salvageable and all in the line of duty. Bond could take that on the chin easier.
I think it comes down to personal angst against Silva. That comes across but I don’t think it’s done in an over the top way. Bond’s rigging the house to blow and looks up to see the destruction outside. That’s all he does. He becomes more resolute, but he’s not overdoing it expression wise. But yeah, if this is the last we see of the DB5, I’m cool. It can serve as it’s ‘end’, so to speak.
Posted 05 April 2013 - 05:48 PM
Personally i didn't notice that big of a reaction out of Bond about the Aston being blown up. Whatever reaction there was , was justified to me. I mean Silva was detroying it just to destroy it. Not to mention destorying Skyfall too, whether Bond had fond memories of it or not.