68 replies to this topic

[Harmsway]

Yes, it is clear that Vesper refused to give Bond the extra $5M because she was already being blackmailed and, thus, working for Le Chiffre. It still would have been odd to Bond to be refused like that, but the movie made the CIA offer come so quickly that it was realistic to imagine Bond forgetting that the young associate had just made a major decision that MI6 would never have realistically given her (or a 26 year old man).

Except that you have to remember Vesper's comment to Bond on the train. Remember, she's not working for MI6; she's a Treasury agent sent along to safeguard the government's money. She told Bond that $5 million more would be made available to him if she deemed it a prudent investment. That was part of the deal, and he knew it. So, like it or not, he knew he that had to convince her that he wouldn't lose more of the government's money, but realized that he had failed to do so. Given her multiple comments about his ego, he would have known that her assessment of him was a reasonable one.

Yeah. But it's a moment where the real motive is obscured by another one. She's really doing it because she's being blackmailed (which is why she has such a hard time with it in the scene... she does know Bond can do what he says he can do), but it's cloaked under the motivation of protecting the government's money.

[byline]

Yeah. But it's a moment where the real motive is obscured by another one. She's really doing it because she's being blackmailed (which is why she has such a hard time with it in the scene... she does know Bond can do what he says he can do), but it's cloaked under the motivation of protecting the government's money.

Absolutely. I understood that. But I was responding to VeteransAbroad's comment that Bond should have caught this refusal from Vesper as being off, somehow, as MI6 wouldn't have allowed her to make such a decision. The reason he accepted it was set forth in the scene on the train. He didn't like it, of course, but he had no choice because that was part of the agreement between the Treasury and MI6, that Vesper was there to safeguard the government's money, and she did have the right to refuse Bond that additional $5 million. Of course, neither the Treasury nor MI6 (nor Bond) were aware of what was really going on with Vesper, and what her real motivations were. But, in the context of what Bond and everyone else expected, Vesper's behavior wouldn't have raised any eyebrows. Her ability to justify her decision based on Bond's ego would have rung true with everyone . . . including Bond, much as he hated to admit it.

[LadySylvia]

Absolutely. I understood that. But I was responding to VeteransAbroad's comment that Bond should have caught this refusal from Vesper as being off, somehow, as MI6 wouldn't have allowed her to make such a decision.

I don't understand. If MI6 would not have allowed Vesper to make such a decision regarding the extra $5 million to get back into the game, why was she given this decision by MI6 and the Treasury Department in the first place? I mean, Vesper made it clear to Bond on the train that the decision to use the extra five million would be up to her. Why would he consider Vesper's refusal to do just that as "being off"?

Of course, neither the Treasury nor MI6 (nor Bond) were aware of what was really going on with Vesper, and what her real motivations were.

Are you saying that Vesper was being blackmailed from the beginning?

Edited by LadySylvia, 21 June 2007 - 08:48 PM.

[00Twelve]

Are you saying that Vesper was being blackmailed from the beginning?

I thought so, only because it is that way in the book (well, her working both sides, anyway), and they made no overt attempts to deviate. But that's just me.

[byline]

Absolutely. I understood that. But I was responding to VeteransAbroad's comment that Bond should have caught this refusal from Vesper as being off, somehow, as MI6 wouldn't have allowed her to make such a decision.

I don't understand. If MI6 would not have allowed Vesper to make such a decision regarding the extra $5 million to get back into the game, why was she given this decision by MI6 and the Treasury Department in the first place? I mean, Vesper made it clear to Bond on the train that the decision to use the extra five million would be up to her. Why would he consider Vesper's refusal to do just that as "being off"?

I guess I don't understand your question. Given the exchange between Vesper and Bond on the train, I thought it was readily apparent that an arrangement had been made between MI6 and the Treasury, possibly because M did not fully trust Bond with the government's money. Vesper said that $10 million had been wired to Bond's account in Montenegro, with a contingency of $5 million more if she -- Vesper -- felt it was a prudent investment. So obviously she was given that decision-making capacity on an official level. Whether it was by MI6 or the Treasury -- or some compromise between the two -- I'm not sure, but that was established prior to their arrival at the casino.

Of course, neither the Treasury nor MI6 (nor Bond) were aware of what was really going on with Vesper, and what her real motivations were.

Are you saying that Vesper was being blackmailed from the beginning?

Yes. This is just my take on it, but I'm assuming that as soon as Mr. White's organization found out that Vesper was the Treasury agent assigned to this mission, her boyfriend was kidnapped (or, at least, Vesper was made to believe that he'd been kidnapped), and the blackmail began. Her goal would have been to distract Bond enough to lose the poker game . . . and it was clear she'd already begun attempting this when she did not follow Bond's directions upon greeting him at the poker game, and ended up distracting him, not the other poker players. She knew that if she could get him to lose up until the $5 million buy-in, and then refuse to advance him the additional $5 million, he had no chance of beating Le Chiffre. But, of course, no one counted on Leiter backing Bond with the additional $5 million.

Edited by byline, 21 June 2007 - 11:55 PM.

[00Twelve]

For some reason, I never even considered that she might have refused to fund the re-buy deliberately, so Bond wouldn't beat Le Chiffre! Nice idea!

[byline]

For some reason, I never even considered that she might have refused to fund the re-buy deliberately, so Bond wouldn't beat Le Chiffre! Nice idea!

Mind you, I'm not saying that absolutely accurate. It's just my interpretation of what happened.

[00Twelve]

Oh I know...I just think it's a neat idea.

[byline]

Absolutely. I understood that. But I was responding to VeteransAbroad's comment that Bond should have caught this refusal from Vesper as being off, somehow, as MI6 wouldn't have allowed her to make such a decision.

I don't understand. If MI6 would not have allowed Vesper to make such a decision regarding the extra $5 million to get back into the game, why was she given this decision by MI6 and the Treasury Department in the first place?

Oops, now I understand your question. I was responding to VeteransAbroad, who insisted that Vesper did not have this decision-making capacity, and so her refusal should have raised a red flag with Bond. But, as you and I both noted, it was clear that Vesper did have the authority to refuse Bond the additional $5 million, and that was established in the exchange between Bond and Vesper on the train. So I think VeteransAbroad must have forgotten about that, or he would have realized that it's not a credible argument against that particular plot point.

Sorry, sometimes I'm a bit slow on the uptake!

Edited by byline, 22 June 2007 - 12:08 AM.