54 replies to this topic

[double-O-Durg]

I like that ending Hitchcock Bond - but will Eon be daring enough to do tht?

Personally, when reading the book, I thought that Bond will be in a hotel room somewhere - he'll say his line on the phone. The camera stays on the phone after Bond has hung up and we'l see him in the background pickin up his jacket from the back of the chair and walking out the door. The End

[Skudor]

I would be nice if they went the On Her Majesty’s Secret Service way more than the other 19 - i.e. not the standard Bond+Girl ending.

[Monsieur B]

I would like to see the title for Bond 22 to be included in the ending credits, since P&W could very well have a title by now to give us. Whether or not it will be done is anyone's guess. Although I would love to see it.

JAMES BOND WILL RETURN IN THE UNDERTAKER'S WIND

Regarding the gunbarrel at the end of the film, I think that it would definately be different; it would certainly catch me off guard to see it but it would be interesting to see how it would look. It might even catch the general movie-going public off guard too since everyone is so accustomed to seeing the gunbarrel at the beginning.

Regarding the 'bitch is dead' line, it should be used to close the film; we would go absolutely nuts if it were used to close the film. It would definitely have an OHMSS air about it, the downbeat ending, no riding off into the sunset, no floating in a life raft in the middle of the ocean; an ending desperately needing to be used in a Bond film of this sort. I never thought about the sudden use of profanities being a shock but then again, when was the last time an average movie-goer saw Diamonds Are Forever? I think it's going to be refreshing to hear Bond utter that final line, the profanity might be a precursor to Bond returning to the chap he once was; a sexist, mysoginist dinosaur -- politically incorrect -- the man we know and love. One can only hope...

Edited by Monsieur B, 06 February 2006 - 04:39 PM.

[SirHilary]

I've believe that EON will pull it's punches and not have Bond say 'the bitch is dead'.I think that there will be an ulitmate confrontation with one of the villians (Solari perhaps?)at the end of the film, who will tell Bond that the 'the bitch is dead', instead. Vesper will not commit suicide as in the book, but be killed by those that employed her to betray Bond, probably because they realise she is in love with Bond and thus a risk to their operation. This will be the films denouement, where Bond learns that Vesper has been a double agent and that now she has been murdered. I expect that there will be a dramatic fight, where Bond will get to kick the living daylights out of the baddie!

I suspect that Bond will not be allowed to say 'the bitch is dead, now' for reasons of political correctness and given that this is a PG or 12 certificate film. I think it's a perfect line for the villan to say and makes for a dramatic ending and shows the moment Bond changes into the Bond he is going to be from that moment on (as in the book).

It's just a thought that occured to me that's all. Really, I'd rather they gave the line to Bond and the suggestions people have made on this board as to how they'd like the film to end with this line have been great.

However, we shall just have to wait and see what EON does with the script.

Edited by SirHilary, 06 February 2006 - 05:46 PM.

[Sanjuro007]

My hopes are somewhat similar to what others have posted...

1. "The bitch is dead now."

2. Abrupt cut to black, rather than a fade out.

3. The words "JAMES BOND WILL RETURN" appear onscreen accompanied either by a brassy James Bond theme OR the music that begins the From Russia With Love credit sequence (isn't the title "James Bond is Back"? Not sure). If Casino Royale lives up to expectations, I'm sure this promise of a sequel will be a moment where audiences will cheer.

4. Then just when you think it'll fade out, the word "IN" appears.

5. Then the title of Bond 22 appears, hopefully, eliciting more cheers.

6. Full-on James Bond theme.

6A. This won't happen, but god, wouldn't it be cool to include footage from the next Bond movie? Or -- if they've cast Q and Moneypenny by then, but haven't even begun work on the next one, then it might be interesting to include a mock teaser of sorts for Bond 22 -- reaction shots, classic Bond situations, maybe an explosion or two. The TV show Arrested Development did something similar by including scenes from "Next Week's Show" that never appear in the following episode. I wouldn't want the Bond folks to go THAT far. But a nice teaser that suggests what Bond 22 *might* be would be kinda interesting. That way, the producers can have their cake and eat it, too -- they'll have a "dark ending" to please the diehard fans (and probably the critics as well), but then something "upbeat" to remind casual viewers in a very definitive way that Bond will be back. Perhaps that deviates too far from the accepted formula, but it's a thought.

[doubler83]

Likewise to the person above, my hopes are similar to what has already been said.

1. They have to have "the bitch is dead now" line at the end of the film. Any other place would be blasphemous.

2. Definitely abruptly cut to black. No dilly-dallying around with a slow fade out.

3. I'd actually like to hear a slow, mysterious, haunting orchestral version of the James Bond theme. We've just had a suicide. Bond is torn. It's a depressing ending. Let's not spoil the feeling with an upbeat version of the Bond theme.

4. "JAMES BOND WILL RETURN IN" ...

5. Like a couple of people have said, it would be great to show a mock trailer or something from Bond 22. Like a scene perhaps between M and Q, discussing gadgets or something and M clicking on the intercom to Moneypenny and saying "Send 007 in, please". The door opens, and we see the back of Bond (but we don't see who is playing Bond - hopefully Craig).

6. Fade to black.

7. "NAME OF NEXT FILM".

Just my hopes. Casino Royale is going to rock!

Edited by doubler83, 05 March 2006 - 07:30 PM.

[Orion]

at the starting press conference and every other interview since Martin Campbell has said that the story is loyal to the book, the book being the events that makes Bond...Bond and that line, "The Bith Is Dead", is the very moment that he becomes Bond so chances are that will be either the final line of the film, which would work as the terrorist organisation is (Spoiler) apparently going to be recurring villain, kind of like SPECTRE but don't quote me on that my source, though mostly reliable, has been known to jump the gun, but theyve only done that once so i'm pretty sure it's accurate

Moderator’s note: Attchment removed at request of the copyright holder.

[Leeki]

u keep saying that orion!

[Orion]

Leeki this country has stalking laws you know

by the way i like your signature doubler83 one of my favourite lines from the series

[Auric64]

[quote name='Orion' post='527757' date='5 March 2006 - 19:34']
at the starting press conference and every other interview since Martin Campbell has said that the story is loyal to the book, the book being the events that makes Bond...Bond and that line, "The Bith Is Dead", is the very moment that he becomes Bond so chances are that will be either the final line of the film, which would work as the terrorist organisation is (Spoiler) apparently going to be recurring villain, kind of like SPECTRE but don't quote me on that my source, though mostly reliable, has been known to jump the gun, but theyve only done that once so i'm pretty sure it's accurate

[color="red"]Moderator

[Agent Spriggan Ominae]

[quote name='Auric64' post='528331' date='6 March 2006 - 12:08']
[quote name='Orion' post='527757' date='5 March 2006 - 19:34']
at the starting press conference and every other interview since Martin Campbell has said that the story is loyal to the book, the book being the events that makes Bond...Bond and that line, "The Bith Is Dead", is the very moment that he becomes Bond so chances are that will be either the final line of the film, which would work as the terrorist organisation is (Spoiler) apparently going to be recurring villain, kind of like SPECTRE but don't quote me on that my source, though mostly reliable, has been known to jump the gun, but theyve only done that once so i'm pretty sure it's accurate

[color="red"]Moderator

[Auric64]

[/quote]

This mention of Vesper`s death being the moment that makes Bond the agent we know, has been made by a number of forum members, and I think it is wrong.

In the book, Bond reads Vesper`s letter and as soon as he realises she is a double agent, he throws the letter down, and in that instance thinks nothing more of her. He ceases to love this girl and can only think of her now as a double agent.

What actually makes him the Bond we know, is him remembering the talk he has with Mathis, where Mathis tries to tell him not to resign, as there are others out there, (SMERSH) that need tackling.

It is Bond thinking of Vesper walking down the corridors of MI6, with documents in her hand, (and her being a double agent) that could have been so dangerous to agents like Bond out in the field. It is because of the threat of SMERSH double agents like Vesper that makes Bond realise that SMERSH is the target to hunt down and destroy. It is that thought that makes Bond the Bond we know. In that instance, Bond throws away any thoughts of resigning, and decides to go after SMERSH.

So if the producers/writers/director of CR use Vesper`s death as the catalyst for Bond becoming the agent we know and love, then they are wrong to do this, because it isn`t the case.

So much for sticking faithfully to the book.

Best

Andy
[/quote]

You see alot that you have mentioned while true, is one of the problems with adapting any book to the screen. It's alot easier in a novel to tell the reader what Bond is reading and what he thinks and remembers. The film medium is a different story. We won't be able to hear Bond's thought process and the moment where he becomes the Bond we all known and love. It is through Bond's actions, body language and of course what he says "The Bitch is dead", that will show his transformation. To the filmakers using Vesper's death and Bond's reaction to it to convey to the audience his mental chnage is the obvious route to go without using akward voice overs and such.
[/quote]

Well, we`ll have to agree to disagree there. None of us know for certain that Bond will be the only person in the room when he reads Vesper`s suicide note, (if there is a suicide note). If Bond needs to say something out loud, (for the benefit of the audience) it would be a good idea to have someone like Mathis there with him.

Again, a half decent scriptwriter, (if trying to stay faithful to the book) could make sure the following two scenes would be incorporated into the film. The first scene, earlier in the film, would be Bond telling Mathis that he is resigning, as he doesn`t know who the "Red Indians" are anymore.

The second scene, at the end of the film, when Bond has found Vesper dead, would show the audience Bond throwing the letter down and telling Mathis, (who is present) that he is right: there are organisations like SMERSH out there, as well as double agents like Vesper, that need to be tackled, and Bond has decided to tackle them.

That would tell the audience exactly what the reader was told when he/she read the book: that Bond now has a real purpose as a double 0 agent - to seek out and destroy SMERSH.

Yes, Mathis isn`t in the last scene of the book, but if he is in the last scene of the film, Bond can convey his thoughts to him, (and us the audience) and the point would get across that Bond is now the Bond we know and love.

Alternatively, this being a new Bond film, with new ideas, then why can`t Bond do a voiceover at the end, after having read Vesper`s letter, and say exactly the same as he could say to Mathis, but to himself, (and us the audicence). Afterwards, Bond goes over to the phone and then says the line, "The Bitch is dead, now."

Either way I think would work, but if they are just going to say, (or imply) that Vesper`s death hardens Bond into the Bond we know, I think it`s wrong.

Bond had very strong feelings for Tiffany Case, (stronger than any other Bond girl apart from Vesper and Tracy) which Tiffany reciprocated, by by the next novel, FRWL, Bond is on with the next mission. So I don`t think Vesper`s death IS the catalyst that the producers/director say it is to make Bond the hardened secret agent we know and love.

Best

Andy

[SecretAgentFan]

But it could be...

[Tajike]

My two cents:
Many ppl I know are all for a split screen to be used during the poker game. But what if we use this simple technique too during the final scenes. On the left they could show Bond entering the hotel and returning to his room. On the right they can show Vesper commiting suicide. The moment Bond opens the door of the room they can go back to one screen, let him read the death note *should be included/voice-over by Vesper*, call London, uttering the infamous final line and then just abruply cut to black. What happens after that I'd like to be a surprise for myself.

On the "catalyst" discussion: the moment Bond talks to Mathis in the hospital is the moment where he decides to keep on being a the blunt tool he is for the government. It's the death of Vesper that gives him a psychological slap in the face, knowing that this enemy (SMERSH) can occur in many forms and that it'll be impossible to trust ppl (that's what makes him the cold blooded person as we know him, I think).
In the movie I think it'll be impossible to convey this thought unless they plan to give this terrorist group a much bigger part than just offering a villain for every movie. Therefor I rather have the death of Vesper to be the catalyst for the Bond character in the movies (given the fact that most moviegoers haven't even read the books). This way the suicide can create the same shock to the viewers as it will be to Bond.

And now I invite you all to flame my humble opinion...

[Auric64]

My two cents:
Many ppl I know are all for a split screen to be used during the poker game. But what if we use this simple technique too during the final scenes. On the left they could show Bond entering the hotel and returning to his room. On the right they can show Vesper commiting suicide. The moment Bond opens the door of the room they can go back to one screen, let him read the death note *should be included/voice-over by Vesper*, call London, uttering the infamous final line and then just abruply cut to black. What happens after that I'd like to be a surprise for myself.

On the "catalyst" discussion: the moment Bond talks to Mathis in the hospital is the moment where he decides to keep on being a the blunt tool he is for the government. It's the death of Vesper that gives him a psychological slap in the face, knowing that this enemy (SMERSH) can occur in many forms and that it'll be impossible to trust ppl (that's what makes him the cold blooded person as we know him, I think).
In the movie I think it'll be impossible to convey this thought unless they plan to give this terrorist group a much bigger part than just offering a villain for every movie. Therefor I rather have the death of Vesper to be the catalyst for the Bond character in the movies (given the fact that most moviegoers haven't even read the books). This way the suicide can create the same shock to the viewers as it will be to Bond.

And now I invite you all to flame my humble opinion...

After Bond tells Mathis that he is resigning, Bond never mentions it again, so the reader has to assume that nothing has changed. Therefore Vesper`s death is not the catalyst, it is SMERSH, and the fact that the organisation can train other Vesper Lynd`s as double agents, and cause havoc to MI6 agents in the field.

To me, it is clear cut and absolute. If the film makers use Vesper then they are hoping that it is her death that changes Bond, but unless they can somehow convey this to the audience, (with Bond talking to someone) or the letter she leaves is written differently to the one in the book, (to put this point over) then it may not come over as clearly as they wanted it to.

And again, as I have said before, if the film makers WANT to do a faithful adaption, (and an adaption CAN be almost page for page like a book - see FRWL the book/film) then by changing the ending of the book, (or part of the ending) they are NOT being faithful.

Best

Andy

[Simon]

I think that the final line of the novel will be the true test of how far EON is willing to go in order to bring Bond closer to Fleming's Bond. If they cut that line out, then it will really weaken the film, ......

Only for the 0.5 percentile that know of its existence in the book and are expecting it in the film - I think.

Have the last scene with a closeup Bond in the Phonebooth saying the line "Yes dammit,..........

Phonebooth? It's not set in the sixties is it?

Has anyone actually seen anyone using a phonebooth in the last 5 years?

[Orion]

[quote name='Auric64' post='528331' date='6 March 2006 - 22:08']
[quote name='Orion' post='527757' date='5 March 2006 - 19:34']
at the starting press conference and every other interview since Martin Campbell has said that the story is loyal to the book, the book being the events that makes Bond...Bond and that line, "The Bith Is Dead", is the very moment that he becomes Bond so chances are that will be either the final line of the film, which would work as the terrorist organisation is (Spoiler) apparently going to be recurring villain, kind of like SPECTRE but don't quote me on that my source, though mostly reliable, has been known to jump the gun, but theyve only done that once so i'm pretty sure it's accurate

[color="red"]Moderator

[Auric64]

[quote name='Orion' post='528618' date='7 March 2006 - 16:30']
[quote name='Auric64' post='528331' date='6 March 2006 - 22:08']
[quote name='Orion' post='527757' date='5 March 2006 - 19:34']
at the starting press conference and every other interview since Martin Campbell has said that the story is loyal to the book, the book being the events that makes Bond...Bond and that line, "The Bith Is Dead", is the very moment that he becomes Bond so chances are that will be either the final line of the film, which would work as the terrorist organisation is (Spoiler) apparently going to be recurring villain, kind of like SPECTRE but don't quote me on that my source, though mostly reliable, has been known to jump the gun, but theyve only done that once so i'm pretty sure it's accurate

[color="red"]Moderator

[JimmyBond]

So? How faithful do they need to be? Sounds to me like they're going to be faithful to the tone and themes of Casino Royale. That's more than you can say about most of the Bond films of the 70s.

[Auric64]

So? How faithful do they need to be? Sounds to me like they're going to be faithful to the tone and themes of Casino Royale. That's more than you can say about most of the Bond films of the 70s.

That`s as maybe. But when the producers/director come out and actually say they are going to be faithful to the book, either they are or they`re not.

The concise Oxford dictionary defines the word faithful as "accurate; true to fact (a faithful account)."

Besides the ending, it looks as if the first half of the film is not going to be faithful to the first half of the book, either. I can accept that as, as I have said in a previous post, the first part of the book, (upto the beginning of the card game) is not particularly exciting, (even with the inclusion of the two men trying to blow Bond up with their bombs). The book has to be put into a more contemporary setting with a certain amount of action, and that`s fine.

The problem is, however, when the producers/director single out one particular scene that they want to remain faithful to, (as they say they are doing with the ending) wouldn`t it be a good idea to then get that part right, instead of making yourself look silly by stating that you are going to do something, and end up not doing it?

I guess, at the end of the day, the film makers can say what they like. If they end up doing something and it doesn`t make that much difference to the story or ending, (poetic licence I think it`s called) then they will do it. They won`t care if it upsets some of the Fleming fans, they`ll say it`s the wider audience they are aiming for.

It`s just a pity that they want to show the audience the defining moment that makes Bond who he is, and not show the real reason behind it.

Best

Andy

[stamper]

I was wondering if Bond was going to kill her, but then, it's already at the end, well nearly the end, before the long agony, of WINE.

Only those who have the script knows !

[Agent Spriggan Ominae]

Only those who have the script knows !

I know. It's driving me nuts. I don't mind spoilers. I like to read a script or find out what happens in a film before I see it so I have one version in my head of how it's going to be pulled off and see how that compares to the final product. I bought the DAD novelization before DAD hit the big screen. I wonder if the whole script will leak or someone will reveal somemore details. I know Cb.n has the script and even that bastard Moriarty at AICN. Please someone give some details! Not the whole the story. Just tell me what happens at the scene at MIA at the end of act one action scene. Or better yet how do Carlos and Demitrios get dispacthed. Anyone, Stax or Athena or whoever else has seen or read it. Just PM me the answers. I won't tell anyone and it wouldn't really ruin the story. Pretty please?

[Orion]

[quote name='Auric64' post='528686' date='7 March 2006 - 19:03']
[quote name='Orion' post='528618' date='7 March 2006 - 16:30']
[quote name='Auric64' post='528331' date='6 March 2006 - 22:08']
[quote name='Orion' post='527757' date='5 March 2006 - 19:34']
at the starting press conference and every other interview since Martin Campbell has said that the story is loyal to the book, the book being the events that makes Bond...Bond and that line, "The Bith Is Dead", is the very moment that he becomes Bond so chances are that will be either the final line of the film, which would work as the terrorist organisation is (Spoiler) apparently going to be recurring villain, kind of like SPECTRE but don't quote me on that my source, though mostly reliable, has been known to jump the gun, but theyve only done that once so i'm pretty sure it's accurate

[color="red"]Moderator

[Auric64]

[/quote]

no you misunderstood me thats the books ending and the WHOLE book is what makes Bond Bond
[/quote]

I think you are misunderstanding me as well. If the producers/director are sticking faithfully to the BOOK, then the ending only makes Bond who he is, at the END, not earlier.

And I say again, it is Bond deciding NOT to resign and go after SMERSH, which is the catalyst here, not Vesper`s death.

Fleming writes:

"He saw her now only as a spy. Their love and his grief were relegated to the boxroom of his mind. Later, perhaps they would be dragged out, dispassionately examined, and then bitterly thrust back with other sentimental baggage he would rather forget. Now he could only think of her treachery to the Service and to her country and of the damage it had done."

That doesn`t sound to me like someone STILL madly in love with the person he earlier wanted to marry, does it?

Then later, Fleming continues:

"He suddenly had a vision of Vesper walking down a corridor with documents in her hand. On a tray. They just got it on a tray while the cool secret agent with a Double O number was gallivanting round the world - playing Red Indians."

And the two paragraphs that nail, for me, without question, what changes Bond`s mind of resigning is the following:

"Well, it was not too late. Here was a target for him, right to hand. He would take on SMERSH and hunt it down. Without SMERSH, without this cold weapon of death and revenge, the MWD would be just another bunch of civil servant spies, no better and no worse than any of the western services."

"But now he would attack the arm that held the whip and the gun. The business of espionage could be left to the white-collar boys. They could spy, and catch the spies. He would go after the threat behind the spies, the threat that made them spy."

And that`s it, in a nutshell. If the producers/director don`t somehow include this in a dialogue between Bond and somebody else, or else have Bond do a voice over of himself thinking this then, as far as I am concerned, they are not portraying the proper reason for Bond`s change, and by not doing so, are not sticking faithfully to the novel.

Best

Andy
[/quote]


we appear to be going around in circles but my point is the is no catalyst, if mathis hadn't said that to bond, bond wouldn't be bond, if vesper hadn't betrayed him Bond wouldn't be bond and if Le Chiffre hadn't torchered him showing him the evil thats out there bond wouldn't be bond


that monologue you're referring to is it being summed up so if there loyal up to that point they won't need that monologue just a vengeful and determined look on Bond's (Daniel Craig's) face.
[/quote]

I don`t think we are going round in circles, more to the point being that communication is not getting through.

If you can read the above Fleming passages from the CR book and NOT understand that it is SMERSH that is the catalyst for Bond NOT retiring, then obviously you are just not seeing the wood for the trees

The talk that Matthis gave Bond did not, at that time, change Bond`s mind of retiring. Nowhere in the rest of the book did Fleming have Bond think again about his decision.

Right upto reading Vesper`s letter we have to believe that Bond is still going to resign. It is the thought of other double agents like Vesper, being controlled by SMERSH that makes Bond realise that he DOES have a job to do, and that job is to rid the world of SMERSH. Only then does he become the agent we know and which carries on with the next novel, LALD.

Now that it appears there is not going to be a SMERSH like agency for Craig`s Bond to fight, I think it is going to be difficult for the writers to have Bond vent his revenge on. If they are simply going to just use Vesper`s death, (and Bond`s love for her) as the catalyst for Bond becoming hardened, then, IMHO, they are wrong, and they are doing a disservice to all Bond fans, (and in particular Fleming Bond fans - and the cinema audience in general) by saying they are going to be faithful to the ending of the novel, but then completely change it for the ending of the film.

Best

Andy

[Orion]

alright fair enough im going to stop arguing as i doubt that either of us are going to get off our podiums.