62 replies to this topic

[Dr. Noah]

BTW, online gambling sites are now relaunching using CR as a model:

http://www.prweb.com...prweb439883.htm

[Matt_13]

Maybe she sends him not only because he's the best gambler, but he can also defend himself if he was to be attacked. M knows that if Bond wins Le Chiffre will more than likely try to kill him, you can't lose all that money and not be pissed. Thats my spin on it at least.

[Dr. Noah]

It's an idiot plot, no doubt.

In reality they'd probably just send Bond to kill the guy, or offer him protection and get whatever information they could off him. It's not like Britain would need the poker winnings.

Edited by Dr. Noah, 25 September 2006 - 09:19 PM.

[Matt_13]

Well come to think of it, "M really doesn't mind making a little money on the side".

[JimmyBond]

Well come to think of it, "M really doesn't mind making a little money on the side".

Well said.

[Matt_13]

Ha, thanks...I thought so.

[marktmurphy]

In addition to this and the other things that have been said, you don't send Joe Blow World Poker Champion to a high stakes game playing against a terrorist. Years of training and experience would go in to preparing someone for a situation such as this. Come on. Plus, M realizes that if it doesn't all work out with the game, perhaps an assassin that is trained to kill could simply eliminate the enemy. If we're going to pretend it's all real, then we must take a realistic approach to the plot (or as realistic as possible).

Because Bond's never been a bodyguard to anyone before? Send two men- one who's as perfect as can be at the poker, and one armed specıalıst to look after him. Why doesn't that make sense?

[DavidSomerset]

Because Bond's never been a bodyguard to anyone before? Send two men- one who's as perfect as can be at the poker, and one armed specıalıst to look after him. Why doesn't that make sense?

If this was a Roger era film , then we would not even be discussing about this. But now with all this hoohaa about realism and "only one explosion" our devious minds have started asking questions.

I hope Purvis, Wade and Paul Haggis has given some good reason for this other than "the Bond is a assassin" bit to cover this up otherwise the realism thing will not stand. Why cant they just make a Over the Top Bond movie and rake in the moolah?

[sharpshooter]

Bond gets chosen by M, and the writers as well so he can do some awesome stunts, and simply be cooler than everyone else!

[DavidSomerset]

... and earn more moolah for Babs and Michael. And EON. And Sony. Look at the multitudes who depend on Bond to save the world for them.

[Robert Watts]

It is easier to manage one person then two. Also, with no certainty on even the pro poker player winning, you're risking a hell of a lot more money buy hiring them (which itself would probably cost a pretty dime) and paying for their expensive hotel, car etc.

Bond also has the authorisation to act immediately in some form of crisis in the mission -- as seen in a certain scene of the script.

Also, it is a Bond film. No point trying to make sense of the plot holes. Fleming *just* got away with covering up a plot hole in From Russia With Love by saying that the Russians wanted to embarrass MI6 as well.

If you want a realistic explanation, it is a plot hole that occurs when you change the card game: the only decision making required in chemin de fer is how much to bet/whether to bet and whether or not to ask for another card on a five. Poker involves folding, betting, etc and some actual skill.

[Flash1087]

I think the theory that an actual poker champion couldn't be informed of the sensitivity of the mission would be spot on. The average poker player has never had to worry about the safety of the free world on top of everything, the additional pressure might be too much for him. Plus, there'd doubtless be some aspects of the mission a civilian couldn't be told.

[marktmurphy]

Because Bond's never been a bodyguard to anyone before? Send two men- one who's as perfect as can be at the poker, and one armed specıalıst to look after him. Why doesn't that make sense?

If this was a Roger era film , then we would not even be discussing about this. But now with all this hoohaa about realism and "only one explosion" our devious minds have started asking questions.

I hope Purvis, Wade and Paul Haggis has given some good reason for this other than "the Bond is a assassin" bit to cover this up otherwise the realism thing will not stand. Why cant they just make a Over the Top Bond movie and rake in the moolah?

No; I'm not really suggesting they should have made this realisitically- I'm not blaming the film-makers. We're just having a little fun as the plot to the film is intrinsically ridiculous; M would never want to beat Le Chiffre in real life- it's just silly.
But if it were real, and the game had to be won, she'd send a proper poker player with a bodyguard. Of course the player could handle the pressure- handlling pressure is what they do; and they wouldn't have to be able to look after themselves as the double 0 agent with them would look after them. It's just the logical way of doing it.

[DavidSomerset]

No; I'm not really suggesting they should have made this realisitically- I'm not blaming the film-makers. We're just having a little fun as the plot to the film is intrinsically ridiculous; M would never want to beat Le Chiffre in real life- it's just silly.
But if it were real, and the game had to be won, she'd send a proper poker player with a bodyguard. Of course the player could handle the pressure- handlling pressure is what they do; and they wouldn't have to be able to look after themselves as the double 0 agent with them would look after them. It's just the logical way of doing it.

Maybe she could have sent Ben Affleck to play Poker. After all he is the Cal state poker champ.
http://www.cbsnews.c...ain625235.shtml
And then he would have Jennifer Garner aka Sidney Bristow to protect him and kick rearsides if needed.

[Shrublands]

But if it were real, and the game had to be won, she'd send a proper poker player with a bodyguard. Of course the player could handle the pressure- handlling pressure is what they do; and they wouldn't have to be able to look after themselves as the double 0 agent with them would look after them. It's just the logical way of doing it.

But you

[Scamp]

I seem to recall that in the book M is very aware of James Bond's predisposition to gamble, and to win, and that as the plan was hatched in house it would seem logical to keep it in house. Also Bond would be trained NOT to make a drama out of a crisis and to react calmly under pressure, which is surely a prerequisite when playing high stakes anything! How he secures a place at the table etc is all part of the espionage/Bond ideal. A spy should be able to look and behave unobtrusively in particular situations and blend in, that's part of the premise of being a spy.

[ACE]

To take this back to the novel, M mentions Bond's foiling of a Romanian syndicate in Monte Carlo using marked cards and invisible ink (an episode expanded ingeniously by John Pearson in his great biography of 007). Bond also played cards regularly and socially. Fleming himself frequented casinos and clubs at a young age.

In the movie, there is no reason to suggest some of Bond's social life is not hinted at. And is there an early card game episode in the film which could demonstrate Bond's prowess?

Yup, the novel is NOT Bond Begins. However, an inexperienced "00", does not equal an inexperienced James Bond.

[David Schofield]

I think the real question here is: would MI6 try to bring down Le Chiffre via a card game.

In the novel, MI6 aim to cause his defeat at cards to embarrarss the Soviets and weaken the Communist cause in France. OK, not the most plausible spy plot, but not, even in the real world, the most ludicrous; if MI6 sees a benefit in embarrassment/weakening the cause, the casino plot has a certain plausibility.

How has this changed in the film? OK, the Soviet's are not involved but is it not so preposterous that there couldn't be a practical benefit to simply beating Le Chiffre at cards, rather tha just, say, kidnapping or killing him?

Can any of those who have read the script and understand the plot please enlighten me? I'm not suggesting it would legitimise the plot as "gritty and real", but it might help shift if from being considered an OTT fantasy.

[Shrublands]

And is there an early card game episode in the film which could demonstrate Bond's prowess?

Yes, there is.

[marktmurphy]

[quote name='Shrublands' post='614677' date='26 September 2006 - 10:35']
[quote name='marktmurphy' post='614667' date='26 September 2006 - 10:02']

But if it were real, and the game had to be won, she'd send a proper poker player with a bodyguard. Of course the player could handle the pressure- handlling pressure is what they do; and they wouldn't have to be able to look after themselves as the double 0 agent with them would look after them. It's just the logical way of doing it.
[/quote]

But you

[DavidSomerset]

......but from M's point of view sending two masters of their trade rather than a jack of all has got to be better, surely?

Yes, considerably.

[Shrublands]

[quote name='marktmurphy' post='614687' date='26 September 2006 - 10:55']
[quote name='Shrublands' post='614677' date='26 September 2006 - 10:35']
[quote name='marktmurphy' post='614667' date='26 September 2006 - 10:02']

But if it were real, and the game had to be won, she'd send a proper poker player with a bodyguard. Of course the player could handle the pressure- handlling pressure is what they do; and they wouldn't have to be able to look after themselves as the double 0 agent with them would look after them. It's just the logical way of doing it.
[/quote]

But you

[David Schofield]

[quote name='Shrublands' post='614692' date='26 September 2006 - 11:13']
[quote name='David Schofield' post='614684' date='26 September 2006 - 10:49']
I think the real question here is: would MI6 try to bring down Le Chiffre via a card game.

In the novel, MI6 aim to cause his defeat at cards to embarrarss the Soviets and weaken the Communist cause in France. OK, not the most plausible spy plot, but not, even in the real world, the most ludicrous; if MI6 sees a benefit in embarrassment/weakening the cause, the casino plot has a certain plausibility.

How has this changed in the film? OK, the Soviet's are not involved but is it not so preposterous that there couldn't be a practical benefit to simply beating Le Chiffre at cards, rather tha just, say, kidnapping or killing him?

Can any of those who have read the script and understand the plot please enlighten me? I'm not suggesting it would legitimise the plot as "gritty and real", but it might help shift if from being considered an OTT fantasy.
[/quote]

It goes like this:-

[spoiler] Basically, MI6 are trying to recruit Le Chiffre as an informer against his network of terrorist clients. He has gambled his client

[MarcAngeDraco]

I still think it's far more simple than that...

Most of the "World Poker Champions" would have had exposure as exactly that on TV/News/Internet and therefore would be unsuitable to slip into this sort of privately arranged high-stakes game without it being discovered that they were indeed a poker champion...

[bond_girl_double07]

Because "James, I need to go to the middle east and dig through sand for weeks looking for underground bunkers" is a really lame movie idea.. really lame real-life idea too actually..

I'm sure Fleming thought to himself, "what's fun"? the answer he (rightfully) came up with was gambling, drinking, fine food, sex, and violence

[Qwerty]

[Mods Note:

Topic moved to Spoilers section. While minor, there are few members who don't even want to know these details of the plot.

Thanks.]

[bernsmartin007]

Simple, if they sent a world champion poker player he'd be recognised by people there, as they are all big poker players. there is already a guest list for the game so someone has to remove one of the players and go in his place/in guise, so they need an agent to do it.

James Bond is renouned in the service as being a card shark, he's James Bond! James Bond would beat any poker champion anyway.

Edited by bernsmartin007, 27 September 2006 - 12:42 AM.

[Andrew]

Why would Le Chiffre take a risk in playing a professional that he may lose against? It would scare him off, he knows the odds wouldn't favor him.

[Vilain]

The, 'Professional poker player recruited with the agent going along to protect him' bit sounds like an average 'buddy cop' movie...

[DavidSomerset]

Unless the professional Poker player is the BOND GAL and is a regular hottie. Then Bond gets all the motivation required to protect her from bodily harm by sharing body warmth.
Kind of like what Christmas Jones was in TWINE or Stacey Sutton was in AVTAK.
In those movies, they could have as well, put a dialogue or 2 about how 007 learnt all about nuclear fission/fusion and geology during his degree at Cambridge, as I did learn when I did my MS at UFL.

Edited by DavidSomerset, 27 September 2006 - 08:41 AM.