
Bond's Human Shield in TSWLM
#1
Posted 20 February 2007 - 07:32 AM
This scene is unforgiveable whatever the woman's motivations are. Judging by her scream she was unaware of Sandor. So "family friendly" Roger coldbloodedly kills an innocent woman! However if she was really was in on it this means that his kiss made her change her mind(!!!!!!). This is of course is incredibly stupid.
#2
Posted 20 February 2007 - 07:40 AM
#3
Posted 20 February 2007 - 07:41 AM
I think it was meant to be assumed that she was in on the attempted hit, and if she was its no worse then what Connery's Bond did on at least two occasions.
So why did she scream when she saw Sandor? Did Roger's kiss change her mind?
#4
Posted 20 February 2007 - 08:46 AM
In The Spy Who Loved Me Bond goes to Fekkesh's place and finds a woman. He kisses her of course but she screams when she sees Sandor with a gun and Bond uses her as a human shield as he throws her into the bullet's path killing her. He shows no remorse for this. Bond then coldbloodedly kills Sandor, presumabely for shooting the woman yet it was his own damn fault: he turned her into the path of the bullet!
This scene is unforgiveable whatever the woman's motivations are. Judging by her scream she was unaware of Sandor. So "family friendly" Roger coldbloodedly kills an innocent woman! However if she was really was in on it this means that his kiss made her change her mind(!!!!!!). This is of course is incredibly stupid.
Had he not, HE would have taken the bullet which would have been even more stupid (from his pov). And, strictly speaking, Rog didn't kill her. As we know from the previous film, it's the finger that pulls the trigger...
Edited by dee-bee-five, 20 February 2007 - 09:20 AM.
#5
Posted 20 February 2007 - 09:14 AM
A little collateral damage, therefore, is acceptable.
#6
Posted 20 February 2007 - 11:11 AM
So why did she scream when she saw Sandor? Did Roger's kiss change her mind?
I agree with you, the scene is somewhat confusing... I've always thought that. But I just cant see the writers having Bond of all people use an innocent woman as a shield. Take away the scream and its really no different then similar scenes in Thunderball and Goldfinger.
I've always kind of taken it that yes, as you say, like many woman before her she changed her mind when Bond kissed her. Either that or she was in on it, but wasnt expecting it to happen right then. Maybe she was told that she was only going to spy on Bond and didnt know she was being used as a lure.
#7
Posted 20 February 2007 - 11:40 AM

#8
Posted 20 February 2007 - 12:53 PM
Your boss says, "A guy's coming around snooping and we want him dead. You keep him distracted and Sandor will take care of him."
You say, "Okay."
The guy shows up. He's a letch and goes for a kiss. Well, that's one way to distract him (plus, he's handsome), so you give in.
Then out of the corner of your eye you see Sandor taking aim with a pistol. He's at least 50 feet away and you, meanwhile, are standing about one millimeter away from his target. You have no idea how good a shot Sandor is.
I don't know about you, but I'd try and discourage Sandor from taking the shot.
#9
Posted 20 February 2007 - 04:50 PM
So "family friendly" Roger coldbloodedly kills an innocent woman!
That's a bit of a stretch, even if she wasn't in on it (which I believe she was)...
#10
Posted 20 February 2007 - 04:57 PM
My take is that she knew she was going to be used as shielding and therefore was about to die. I take it that she was trying to warn Sandor to hold his fire; but given the speed with which the events unfolded, she just couldn't get it out of her mouth in time.I think it was meant to be assumed that she was in on the attempted hit, and if she was its no worse then what Connery's Bond did on at least two occasions.
So why did she scream when she saw Sandor? Did Roger's kiss change her mind?
#11
Posted 20 February 2007 - 05:46 PM
Well, let's imagine this scene from the girl's point of view.
Your boss says, "A guy's coming around snooping and we want him dead. You keep him distracted and Sandor will take care of him."
You say, "Okay."
The guy shows up. He's a letch and goes for a kiss. Well, that's one way to distract him (plus, he's handsome), so you give in.
Then out of the corner of your eye you see Sandor taking aim with a pistol. He's at least 50 feet away and you, meanwhile, are standing about one millimeter away from his target. You have no idea how good a shot Sandor is.
I don't know about you, but I'd try and discourage Sandor from taking the shot.
My take is that she knew she was going to be used as shielding and therefore was about to die. I take it that she was trying to warn Sandor to hold his fire; but given the speed with which the events unfolded, she just couldn't get it out of her mouth in time.
Yep, that's how I see it too. In fact, it's her scream to Sandor that implicates her -- thus Bond is free to use her as a shield. Silly girl.
But it is a little unclear. Maybe a tweak in her performance would have helped. Her scream is a little too much the scream of a victim instead of self-preservation.
#12
Posted 20 February 2007 - 06:07 PM
*Ding!*But for such a small part, I'm sure she was hired for her looks and not acting abilities. Oh, well.

She may not have known whether Sandor would shoot Bond as planned or turn and shoot her...you never know with these assassin types...
#13
Posted 20 February 2007 - 06:40 PM
Maybe she was told that she was only going to spy on Bond and didnt know she was being used as a lure.
But she was still innocent then.
Anyway they should have taken out the scream, makes things clearer.
#14
Posted 20 February 2007 - 06:53 PM
So "family friendly" Roger coldbloodedly kills an innocent woman!
Well, Moore's Bond isn't always the family-friendly character most associate with his films.
#15
Posted 20 February 2007 - 06:55 PM
But for such a small part, I’m sure she was hired for her looks and not acting abilities. Oh, well.
Indeed. But of course the producers are always careful to hire only the most talented actresses for the larger roles. LOL
#16
Posted 20 February 2007 - 08:44 PM
#17
Posted 20 February 2007 - 09:00 PM
That's right. He sure showed that quiche who's boss!I don't see the problem. It's a classic example of Fleming's ruthless Bond watching his own back to get the job done, perfectly played by Roger Moore, who was a much harsher 007 than people give him credit for.

#18
Posted 20 February 2007 - 10:23 PM
#19
Posted 20 February 2007 - 10:30 PM
#20
Posted 20 February 2007 - 11:53 PM
Well, let's imagine this scene from the girl's point of view.
Your boss says, "A guy's coming around snooping and we want him dead. You keep him distracted and Sandor will take care of him."
You say, "Okay."
The guy shows up. He's a letch and goes for a kiss. Well, that's one way to distract him (plus, he's handsome), so you give in.
Then out of the corner of your eye you see Sandor taking aim with a pistol. He's at least 50 feet away and you, meanwhile, are standing about one millimeter away from his target. You have no idea how good a shot Sandor is.
I don't know about you, but I'd try and discourage Sandor from taking the shot.
Good point, well made. Altho it could be said to be a tad harsh calling Rog's Bond 'a letch'. Oversexed, yes. Frisky even...
#21
Posted 21 February 2007 - 01:39 AM
Felicca is part of the plan to kill Bond, she is in Fekkesh's apartment as bait. At the last moment she has a change of mind (for whatever reason). Her shout of "No!" seems to me a desperate attempt to warn Sandor (not to shoot) & Bond (because at that same moment she appears to be trying to push him away. She then inadvertantly takes the bullet that was mean't for Bond, rather than him using her as a shield.
Well said sir!! After all, if Bond had been using her as a shield, he would probably have come up with a clever comment on her demise, but he didn't
#22
Posted 21 February 2007 - 02:56 AM
#23
Posted 21 February 2007 - 06:28 AM
Well not really... In that scenario shes still an enemy agent, or at least working for the opposition. So shes still a villain, just not as bad a one.But she was still innocent then.
#24
Posted 21 February 2007 - 11:58 AM
Edited by dee-bee-five, 21 February 2007 - 11:59 AM.
#25
Posted 21 February 2007 - 12:33 PM
Since sex was out of the question, ol Rog had no use for her. Still, it was a bit cold, wouldn't you say?
As for Sandor.... a VERY disappointed peeping tom?
Edited by capungo, 21 February 2007 - 12:33 PM.
#26
Posted 21 February 2007 - 01:17 PM
Good point, well made. Altho it could be said to be a tad harsh calling Rog's Bond 'a letch'. Oversexed, yes. Frisky even...
Sorry, "letch" was the first word that came to mind for a guy who says, in essence, "Hello. Let's make out." LOL
And don't forget, in the previous two films, we'd seen Roger's Bond trick a virgin into bed by exploiting her faith in Tarot (he didn't seduce her, he CONNED her), steal a last bout of sex from an enemy agent before pulling a gun on her ("Thanks for the sex, Rosie. By the way, I know you're a bad guy, so talk or I'll kill you") and accept an offer of sex from a woman desperate for his protection ("You can have me, too, if you want," says Andrea resignedly, already accustomed to being used sexually by Scaramanga. Sure enough, Mr. Sensitivity takes her up on it...with another girl in the wardrobe, no less. "Don't worry darling, your turn will come").
Of course in the later films, Roger's all chivalry and manners, turning down the teenage Bibi, keeping his paws off Melina til the end of FYEO and playing the knight in armor to save Octopussy and Stacey when it would've been easier (and in Stacey's case preferable) to let them die. But at the start of his run, Roger's Bond was not only a letch but a cad of the first order, bless his heart.
Between them, I think Sean and Roger got more lovin' than any of the Bonds. The difference is that in Seans' films, it seems to be the women who can't keep their hands off him, while in Roger's it's the other way around.
#27
Posted 21 February 2007 - 10:51 PM
#28
Posted 25 February 2007 - 04:54 AM
Between them, I think Sean and Roger got more lovin' than any of the Bonds. The difference is that in Seans' films, it seems to be the women who can't keep their hands off him, while in Roger's it's the other way around.
So you're saying Sean's Bond is a helpless victim of the women's advances? Forgetting Ms Galore in the barn scene are we?
#29
Posted 25 February 2007 - 11:17 AM
#30
Posted 27 February 2007 - 02:10 PM
I think someone pointed out in the DVD documentary that in certain situations they were trying to make Roger too Sean (when he beat up women etc.) and they scaled back on this in Moonraker and the later films. It really works, FYEO remains a close tense plot, whilst still having Roger play Roger Moore Bond, rather than in TMWTGG where he's treading Sean Connery waters.