16 replies to this topic

[DaveBond21]

I was watching Casino Royale the other night and during the PTS it got me wondering whether or not Dryden's punishment is too harsh.

 

M doesn't mind him making money on the side, she prefers it if it isn't selling secrets. If you are a station chief and you are caught selling secrets to the opposition, other countries or the enemy, what is the usual punishment? Aren't you brought to trial at least and then imprisoned.

 

I can't imagine that you are eliminated by a 00 agent, without the chance to defend yourself?

 

What do you guys think?

[Dustin]

Well, given the fact M sold her star agent in Hong Kong to the Chinese, apparently for much less, it would seem Dryden still got a pretty good deal.

No idea, really. It's implied somehow Dryden was a very naughty boy, as members of intelligence services and agents frequently tend to be, simply because the choir boys don't get the juicy stuff the top brass expects from intelligence work. It's certainly not the usual way to treat a leak in the Service.

[Major Tallon]

Most, if not all, Western intelligence services would vehemently deny they do anything like the killing of Dryden.  If something that extreme were to be sanctioned, however, I doubt if they'd be the least interested in giving the target a chance to defend himself.

[AMC Hornet]

In John Gardner's The Liquidator, the old Chief explains the problem to Mostyn: too many leaks, too many double agents and defectors, too many embarrassing public trials exposing the Ministry's inefficiency - all because they can never bring evidence against their suspects.

 

"If only we had a way of acting without evidence," murmured Mostyn, Almost sacrilege, he thought, to suggest something which might imperil the sacred red tape.

"Well that's it, old son. That's just it. I've formulated a plan: drastic maybe...distasteful too, I shouldn't wonder, but I can see no alternative...as soon as we get the slightest whiff of trouble, the smallest sniff of a serious security risk, then - snap!" The Chief was nothing if not dramatic. "We liquidate 'em."

"We do what?"

"Liquidate 'em. Dispose of 'em, shoot 'em, give 'em the wooden overcoat, the deep six, the perpetual freeze, the big sleep, the chop. You follow the drift?"

"What are the chiefs of staff going to say?"

"Mostyn, have you not got it yet? We are not going to tell the bleeding chiefs of staff, nor the blasted PM, nor the adulterous Home Office, nor the sodding Foreign Office. And, particularly, we are not going to tell the fornicating Special Branch." (pp 25-26)

 

And so "L" is born.

 

I know that this is not canon (it is, however, my favorite exchange in the book), but the sentiment would be pretty much the same: 007 answers to M - the same M who, as Dustin points out, left Tiago Rodrigues to the Chinese when he got too stroppy. The only difference between the 00 section and SMERSH is the latter operated with the full knowledge and support of the Soviet presidium. In CR, a bullet was more expedient and less expensive than a trial - and less embarrassing, provided Bond does it cleanly and without leaving evidence.

 

And Bond is our hero.

[DaveBond21]

In John Gardner's The Liquidator, the old Chief explains the problem to Mostyn: too many leaks, too many double agents and defectors, too many embarrassing public trials exposing the Ministry's inefficiency - all because they can never bring evidence against their suspects.

 

"If only we had a way of acting without evidence," murmured Mostyn, Almost sacrilege, he thought, to suggest something which might imperil the sacred red tape.

"Well that's it, old son. That's just it. I've formulated a plan: drastic maybe...distasteful too, I shouldn't wonder, but I can see no alternative...as soon as we get the slightest whiff of trouble, the smallest sniff of a serious security risk, then - snap!" The Chief was nothing if not dramatic.

"We do what?"

"Liquidate 'em. Dispose of 'em, shoot 'em, give 'em the wooden overcoat, the deep six, the perpetual freeze, the big sleep, the chop. You follow the drift?"

"What are the chiefs of staff going to say?"

"Mostyn, have you not got it yet? We are not going to tell the bleeding chiefs of staff, nor the blasted PM, nor the adulterous Home Office, nor the sodding Foreign Office. And, particularly, we are not going to tell the fornicating Special Branch." (pp 25-26)

 

And so "L" is born.

 

I know that this is not canon (it is, however, my favorite exchange in the book), but the sentiment would be pretty much the same: 007 answers to M - the same M who, as Dustin points out, left Tiago Rodrigues to the Chinese when he got too stroppy. The only difference between the 00 section and SMERSH is the latter operated with the full knowledge and support of the Soviet presidium. In CR, a bullet was more expedient and less expensive than a trial - and less embarrassing, provided Bond does it cleanly and without leaving evidence.

 

And Bond is our hero.

 

Interesting thoughts.

 

By the way, if Dryden was section chief, why did Bond need to kill Fisher first?

 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[hilly]

 

 

Interesting thoughts.

 

By the way, if Dryden was section chief, why did Bond need to kill Fisher first?

 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

I'd always assumed that Fisher was going to kill Bond, as the latter was on to Dryden.It may well have been at Dryden's behest.

So Bond's first kill was self-defence as much as anything.

Was Dryden's punishment too harsh? Well, if he'd have let Bond be killed, in order to protect himself, then other agents may have gone the same way, so killing Dryden stopped future agent deaths.

[AMC Hornet]

Don't forget that Dryden also tried to shoot Bond.

[David_M]

 

 

Was Dryden's punishment too harsh? Well, if he'd have let Bond be killed, in order to protect himself, then other agents may have gone the same way, so killing Dryden stopped future agent deaths.

 

I like this, and it fits with M's doubts that Bond is really ready for the job.  Let's say he's put onto the Dryden case (pre-double-0 status) just to collect evidence or bring him in, but then is forced to kill Fisher when Dryden sends Fisher to stop his nosing around.  Bond reports the incident to M, who for the sake of expediency wants it all wrapped up fast: "Take out Dryden as well and that's your two kills, Bond.  You're a double-O."

 

Of course the extended cut of the sequence kind of contradicts the "Fisher started it" hypothesis, but let's just go on what made it into the actual film.

 

It would also fit with what we know of Judi's M that she might retro-actively declare Bond a Double-O to help with any red tape/repercussions from Fisher's killing after Bond commits it entirely without sanction.  But as convenient as the decision was in the moment. she came to second-guess it later on.

 

In fact, knowing her, I wouldn't be surprised if she put the "eager-for-his-kills" Bond on the assignment because the "secrets" Dryden sold were personally or professionally embarrassing for M herself, making the whole thing "quasi-" official in the first place.

[DaveBond21]

 

 

 

Was Dryden's punishment too harsh? Well, if he'd have let Bond be killed, in order to protect himself, then other agents may have gone the same way, so killing Dryden stopped future agent deaths.

 

I like this, and it fits with M's doubts that Bond is really ready for the job.  Let's say he's put onto the Dryden case (pre-double-0 status) just to collect evidence or bring him in, but then is forced to kill Fisher when Dryden sends Fisher to stop his nosing around.  Bond reports the incident to M, who for the sake of expediency wants it all wrapped up fast: "Take out Dryden as well and that's your two kills, Bond.  You're a double-O."

 

Of course the extended cut of the sequence kind of contradicts the "Fisher started it" hypothesis, but let's just go on what made it into the actual film.

 

It would also fit with what we know of Judi's M that she might retro-actively declare Bond a Double-O to help with any red tape/repercussions from Fisher's killing after Bond commits it entirely without sanction.  But as convenient as the decision was in the moment. she came to second-guess it later on.

 

In fact, knowing her, I wouldn't be surprised if she put the "eager-for-his-kills" Bond on the assignment because the "secrets" Dryden sold were personally or professionally embarrassing for M herself, making the whole thing "quasi-" official in the first place.

 

 

I like this idea, although of course as you say, the deleted cricket match scene suggests Bond goes after Fisher and doesn't explain why.

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

[David_M]

 

 

I like this idea, although of course as you say, the deleted cricket match scene suggests Bond goes after Fisher and doesn't explain why.

 

Not only does it not explain why, it's structurally almost exactly the same as the later sequence with the "parkour" stuff. (Baddie spots Bond on his tail, takes flight, they have a big fight).  

 

I can certainly see why they dumped it.

[winstoninabox]

Dryden says that if M had suspected him she'd have sent a 00, so he was expecting to be killed for what he'd done.

[Dustin]

Most, if not all, Western intelligence services would vehemently deny they do anything like the killing of Dryden. If something that extreme were to be sanctioned, however, I doubt if they'd be the least interested in giving the target a chance to defend himself.

Actually, they would play it very differently. Dryden opened a little sideline shop? Fine, they would just see to it he gets his hands on stuff they want going around. Depending on the quality of his former product - prior to his exposure - you could use Dryden for quite some time. No more need for his services? Let him sell some stuff the opposition knows is fake - they will take care of his retirement plan for you. If not - just leak his identity to some useful idiot in the media. Once it's out there some eager party will save you the trouble and the expenses...

[DaveBond21]

Dryden says that if M had suspected him she'd have sent a 00, so he was expecting to be killed for what he'd done.

 

That's a good point. But I still wonder whether the punishment fits the crime.

[tdalton]

If he was selling secrets to the other side, then he was guilty of treason.  The penalty for treason, at least until the last decade or two, was what Bond imposed upon him.

[DaveBond21]

Fair enough.

 

But as the Minister of Defence says in QOS, "If we refused to do business with villains, we'd have almost no-one to trade with..."

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[tdalton]

Fair enough.

 

But as the Minister of Defence says in QOS, "If we refused to do business with villains, we'd have almost no-one to trade with..."

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

I don't disagree.  I think that, if we'd seen the briefing with M regarding Dryden, that she'd probably framed it on the idea that he was a traitor and had to be dealt with.  

[sharpshooter]

Dryden got what he deserved. He got caught, and paid the price. Secret agents aren't friendly towards the enemy.