27 replies to this topic

[Judo chop]

A thread to discuss M’s disposition towards Bond in general, but in particular just before Bond is detained at the hotel, and then after Bond escapes. I’m not 100% sure of what my thoughts are, and I’m a little iffy on the dialogue and sequence of events as well, so I’m hoping this thread blossoms into a good dissection of the scene.

The hotel lowdown, per my memory:

- Bond arrives @ the hotel and M gives him the “I think you’re so blinded by rage that you don’t care whom you hurt.” (I took the liberty of removing the clunky ‘inconsolable’ and, I think, correcting her grammar.) She says, “You can’t tell your friends from your enemies and so it’s time to come in.”

- Bond escapes in the elevator, and circles back around to encounter M in the hall. Bond immediately and demandingly says to M, “Fields showed courage in the line of duty. I want you to make a note of that in your report.”

- We see more MI6 agents coming in.

- Bond slips around the ledge avoiding more agents and out of the hotel.

- M tells Tanner, “I don’t give a what the CIA think, he’s my agent and I trust him.”

Previously, during the face-cream scene, Dench's performance has an air of cold calculation about it, making it sound as if M is feeling particularly certain that Bond is a loose cannon and needs to come in for everyone's good.

Later, when she’s called in to report to the Foreign Secretary, she appears to want to support Bond, but has no defense in her corner. (That scene DOES come after the face cream, doesn’t it?) And though her dialogue belies it, I sense the same attitude at the start of the hotel scene. I sense that she really wants to trust Bond but is getting too much pressure from the PM and other heads to really stand her ground.

Why the change?

And then, when Bond circles back around and makes the demand to include Fields’ courage in M's report, it seems M gains a strength she needs to stick by Bond’s side once and far, consequences be damned. I like Bond’s line – it’s a good character moment for him - but I’m not sure why it would turn M around.

Agree/disagree? Corrections to my memory of the lowdown? What's going on in M's head?

[ImTheMoneypenny]

Hmmm, I'm going to need to think a bit on this one.

Oh yes, that's just MI6 men, lead by Tanner, coming into the hotel. No CIA.

[Judo chop]

Hmmm, I'm going to need to think a bit on this one.

Oh yes, that's just MI6 men, lead by Tanner, coming into the hotel. No CIA.

Thanks, ITMP. I edited the question out. But it IS then Tanner to whom M says "I don't give a about the CIA", right?

[ImTheMoneypenny]

Hmmm, I'm going to need to think a bit on this one.

Oh yes, that's just MI6 men, lead by Tanner, coming into the hotel. No CIA.

Thanks, ITMP. I edited the question out. But it IS then Tanner to whom M says "I don't give a about the CIA", right?

Yep that's Tanner.

[Pierce - Daniel]

My take...

Greene tells Beam he needs to get rid of Bond, Beam says it should'nt be a probelm. After all he and the CIA are going to benefit from the Boliva coup. Bond in the mean time is going after Greene, and killing everyone in sight. He's already got rid of Slate, Haine's bodyguard and by the looks of it he's killed Rene Mathis, someone directly linked to his Casino Royale mission which ended with his girlfriend dying, to mi6 he looks like a loose cannon desperate for revenge. It's clear throughout he dosen't want revenge, he's motivated by his duty, he wants Quantum. M (perfectly played by Dench, her best scene has to be with Piggot-Smith, she plays nervous very well, a state very new to her character). It's clear after meeting him that mi6 and Britain are in on the whole Greene/Medrano coup, or at least there willing to turn a blind eye as long as they benefit. Bond is causing probelms by going after the bad guy he's putting the world at risk, when M corners him in the hotel her team find a dead Fields. Not a good sign, Bond's path seems to mean certain death for anyone, Field's death seems to be a calling card to the Americans and the British that there is oil and as long as Bond is in Boliva it's not theirs. M is forced to beleive that Bond is out to kill anyone who gets in his way, why? Because he wants revenge for Vesper's death, it's not the case, when Bond escapes mi6 and finds her again. Beam and Leiter have already placed the capture or kill on Bond, hense why the Foreign Secretary needs M to go get the ferile Bond, as the Americans and the Bristish have a respected interest in the Bolivan coup. M beleives Bond though, she seems to certain very early on that he's onto something, that's why she lets him go, and why he goes to the CIA, as there holding the cards and he needs to get Greene, it's just thankful Leiter isn't as cynical as Mr. Beam.

[Double-Oh Agent]

A thread to discuss M’s disposition towards Bond in general, but in particular just before Bond is detained at the hotel, and then after Bond escapes. I’m not 100% sure of what my thoughts are, and I’m a little iffy on the dialogue and sequence of events as well, so I’m hoping this thread blossoms into a good dissection of the scene.

The hotel lowdown, per my memory:

- Bond arrives @ the hotel and M gives him the “I think you’re so blinded by rage that you don’t care whom you hurt.” (I took the liberty of removing the clunky ‘inconsolable’ and, I think, correcting her grammar.) She says, “You can’t tell your friends from your enemies and so it’s time to come in.”

- Bond escapes in the elevator, and circles back around to encounter M in the hall. Bond immediately and demandingly says to M, “Fields showed courage in the line of duty. I want you to make a note of that in your report.”

- We see more MI6 agents coming in.

- Bond slips around the ledge avoiding more agents and out of the hotel.

- M tells Tanner, “I don’t give a what the CIA think, he’s my agent and I trust him.”

Previously, during the face-cream scene, Dench's performance has an air of cold calculation about it, making it sound as if M is feeling particularly certain that Bond is a loose cannon and needs to come in for everyone's good.

Later, when she’s called in to report to the Foreign Secretary, she appears to want to support Bond, but has no defense in her corner. (That scene DOES come after the face cream, doesn’t it?) And though her dialogue belies it, I sense the same attitude at the start of the hotel scene. I sense that she really wants to trust Bond but is getting too much pressure from the PM and other heads to really stand her ground.

Why the change?

And then, when Bond circles back around and makes the demand to include Fields’ courage in M's report, it seems M gains a strength she needs to stick by Bond’s side once and far, consequences be damned. I like Bond’s line – it’s a good character moment for him - but I’m not sure why it would turn M around.

Agree/disagree? Corrections to my memory of the lowdown? What's going on in M's head?

She starts doubting Bond because of all the dead bodies he's leaving in his wake, including the special branch man at the Bregenz opera. That, combined with the Bolivian authorities' claim that he killed their officers and Rene Mathis, make him look like a loose cannon blinded by revenge. However, what keeps her from totally washing her hands of Bond is that there are no eyewitnesses regarding the cops' and Mathis' killings (or of the special branch man for that matter) and the CIA's high office denial of their interest in Greene as well as the suspicious elite society members of Quantum leaving the opera early make it clear that something is definitely going on with Greene that is not on the up and up. Plus, everything Bond is uncovering is getting him closer to Quantum and unveiling Greene's plans.

Now what makes her trust Bond at the Bolivian hotel is that after she orders him to be taken back home, he returns to her after getting away from his MI6 detail. He doesn't try to immediately escape to carry on his acts of vengeance, he returns to talk to her and give a good report of Fields. By doing so, he shows that he is in control and thinking not only of himself but others. It is because of this that M knows Bond is thinking straight and has his priorities in order, and as a result, she can now trust him fully and let him finish his mission.

[double o ego]

You nailed it DOA. I think through out the movie, Bond was given a bum wrap. The first instance when M was questioning Bond's intentions was when they were in Mitchel's home and she very briefly had a go at him for killing him and not bringing him in for questioning. Bond doesn't even try to defend himself or explain the circumstances of what happened, there's probably no point but it was from that point anyway, where M had started making presumptions of where Bond's priorities were, which imo was a tad stupid because if Bond was the loose cannon she thought he was, there's no way he would have procured Mr White and brought him to the safe house. Bond would have beaten the info out of white and then killed him, probably on the spot too.

[00Twelve]

A thread to discuss M’s disposition towards Bond in general, but in particular just before Bond is detained at the hotel, and then after Bond escapes. I’m not 100% sure of what my thoughts are, and I’m a little iffy on the dialogue and sequence of events as well, so I’m hoping this thread blossoms into a good dissection of the scene.

The hotel lowdown, per my memory:

- Bond arrives @ the hotel and M gives him the “I think you’re so blinded by rage that you don’t care whom you hurt.” (I took the liberty of removing the clunky ‘inconsolable’ and, I think, correcting her grammar.) She says, “You can’t tell your friends from your enemies and so it’s time to come in.”

- Bond escapes in the elevator, and circles back around to encounter M in the hall. Bond immediately and demandingly says to M, “Fields showed courage in the line of duty. I want you to make a note of that in your report.”

- We see more MI6 agents coming in.

- Bond slips around the ledge avoiding more agents and out of the hotel.

- M tells Tanner, “I don’t give a what the CIA think, he’s my agent and I trust him.”

Previously, during the face-cream scene, Dench's performance has an air of cold calculation about it, making it sound as if M is feeling particularly certain that Bond is a loose cannon and needs to come in for everyone's good.

Later, when she’s called in to report to the Foreign Secretary, she appears to want to support Bond, but has no defense in her corner. (That scene DOES come after the face cream, doesn’t it?) And though her dialogue belies it, I sense the same attitude at the start of the hotel scene. I sense that she really wants to trust Bond but is getting too much pressure from the PM and other heads to really stand her ground.

Why the change?

And then, when Bond circles back around and makes the demand to include Fields’ courage in M's report, it seems M gains a strength she needs to stick by Bond’s side once and far, consequences be damned. I like Bond’s line – it’s a good character moment for him - but I’m not sure why it would turn M around.

Agree/disagree? Corrections to my memory of the lowdown? What's going on in M's head?

She starts doubting Bond because of all the dead bodies he's leaving in his wake, including the special branch man at the Bregenz opera. That, combined with the Bolivian authorities' claim that he killed their officers and Rene Mathis, make him look like a loose cannon blinded by revenge. However, what keeps her from totally washing her hands of Bond is that there are no eyewitnesses regarding the cops' and Mathis' killings (or of the special branch man for that matter) and the CIA's high office denial of their interest in Greene as well as the suspicious elite society members of Quantum leaving the opera early make it clear that something is definitely going on with Greene that is not on the up and up. Plus, everything Bond is uncovering is getting him closer to Quantum and unveiling Greene's plans.

Now what makes her trust Bond at the Bolivian hotel is that after she orders him to be taken back home, he returns to her after getting away from his MI6 detail. He doesn't try to immediately escape to carry on his acts of vengeance, he returns to talk to her and give a good report of Fields. By doing so, he shows that he is in control and thinking not only of himself but others. It is because of this that M knows Bond is thinking straight and has his priorities in order, and as a result, she can now trust him fully and let him finish his mission.

Dude, we agree on something in QOS!!

Kidding aside, I don't think I could put it much better than this. I don't think M knew that Fields was doing anything to proactively help Bond until he mentioned her courage. I'm sure she just thought Fields had merely been seduced by Bond and then killed only because of what he did. Bond's returning to her and commenting that Fields should be recognized indeed showed his control and initiative to not let things drop, as well as showing that Fields struck some little blow against Quantum (poor old Elvis...) and that was why she was killed. M realized for certain that Greene was not to be trusted, regardless of what compromises her government and the U.S. were willing to make.

[ImTheMoneypenny]

I think everyone's nailed this. I couldn't have said it better.

[Mr_Wint]

I don't understand how Bond could convince her so easily. I mean, he beated up four of her men 3 seconds earlier...

Like M said : "you don't care who you hurt". And the proof is in the elevator.

It's still very thin.

[FlemingBond]

I really didn't like how Bond was a rogue in these last two movies. M seems to constatly be saying " find Bond!" "get Bond!" "Track Bond!"

[Quincy]

M tells Tanner, “I don’t give a what the CIA think, he’s my agent and I trust him.”

I LOL'ed at this scene.

[DaveBond21]

I really didn't like how Bond was a rogue in these last two movies. M seems to constatly be saying " find Bond!" "get Bond!" "Track Bond!"

LOL, true. Plus she keeps on having to say "Sometimes we're so focussed on our enemies we forget to check the people we work with". I bet 007 feels like shouting "WELL, START CHECKING THEM!!!"

And Bond even alludes to this in the Bolivian hotel room when he comments "Can you trust these men?"

[Double-Oh Agent]

Why the change?

She starts doubting Bond because of all the dead bodies he's leaving in his wake, including the special branch man at the Bregenz opera. That, combined with the Bolivian authorities' claim that he killed their officers and Rene Mathis, make him look like a loose cannon blinded by revenge. However, what keeps her from totally washing her hands of Bond is that there are no eyewitnesses regarding the cops' and Mathis' killings (or of the special branch man for that matter) and the CIA's high office denial of their interest in Greene as well as the suspicious elite society members of Quantum leaving the opera early make it clear that something is definitely going on with Greene that is not on the up and up. Plus, everything Bond is uncovering is getting him closer to Quantum and unveiling Greene's plans.

Now what makes her trust Bond at the Bolivian hotel is that after she orders him to be taken back home, he returns to her after getting away from his MI6 detail. He doesn't try to immediately escape to carry on his acts of vengeance, he returns to talk to her and give a good report of Fields. By doing so, he shows that he is in control and thinking not only of himself but others. It is because of this that M knows Bond is thinking straight and has his priorities in order, and as a result, she can now trust him fully and let him finish his mission.

Dude, we agree on something in QOS!!

It was bound to happen at some point.

[double o ego]

M tells Tanner, “I don’t give a what the CIA think, he’s my agent and I trust him.”

I LOL'ed at this scene.

I actually hated this line. It makes M come off as ridiculously fickle. It should have been revised where she should have said how she NOW trusts him.

[Judo chop]

M tells Tanner, “I don’t give a what the CIA think, he’s my agent and I trust him.”

I LOL'ed at this scene.

I actually hated this line. It makes M come off as ridiculously fickle. It should have been revised where she should have said how she NOW trusts him.

A part of me tends to agree.

But if we understand who M is, it makes sense. She doesn’t look to the past, and thus has no regrets as she states at the end of the film. She needs to make calculated decisions and not second guess them. That is the professional way. So, during the face-cream scene she makes a decision based on the facts in her possession. Bond is rogue and needs to come in. And she looks the part. (hooray!)

At the hotel, however, she receives new information from Bond - evidence which allows her to make another informed decision; the decision to trust Bond. Not a touchy-feely “I vow until death doest us apart” decision, but a calculated and informed decision.

At that point she flips the switch. She thinks: “I AM going to trust him starting NOW.”

So yeah, I agree that a ‘now’ in there would really hammer the point home. At the same time it’s not critical to have, since we can understand her mentality without it. It’s only ‘ridiculously fickle’ if we take her statement right at face value, which we don’t have to do. ie. I have no problem reading the ‘now’ into the existing line.

Aaahhh. I feel better after thinking this through. Thanks folks.

[bourbon_no_ice]

Nobody here mentions the "run" note from his "mother".

[Publius]

It's quite simple, really. She's being torn in at least two directions. On the one hand, she has her professional duty to reign Bond in, to put him in his place when they have a meeting, etc.

But on a personal level, she knows that Bond is one of this world's rare moral absolutes (if nothing else, his occasional sloppiness is proof of this), on top of which he's a damn good agent (and the only one showing big, positive results in a profession where most results are piecemeal and mixed). She's not about to let him go.

And really, her highest duty is to her country, so her dilemma is letting Bond have as much breathing room as she can get away with giving him. Too little and the job might not get done, too much and the operation might get shut down altogether.

Let's not forget that this Dench-M is an old Cold Warrior being forced to play by the rules of a post-9/11 world (meanwhile, Brosnan's Dench-M was a creature of neither era, filling in the gap between the two as the politically correct 90s number-cruncher).

She hails from a time when global conflict was primarily a large-scale game of nation-state vs. nation-state, while Bond is on the same wavelength as the modern, stateless enemies who favor guerrilla-style tactics and aren't bound by borders or concerned with national sovereignty.

She remains an icon of a proud Britian fighting for its place in a constantly changing (and shrinking) world, but Bond is now more than ever an international figure, a hero who is very much a "citizen of the world." (If I ever get around to writing a review of QoS, which I hope to when I have more free time, that last point will probably be at the center of how I approach my analysis.)

Yet despite their stark difference in methods and perspectives, she has tremendous respect for (and probably prefers) his unwavering sense of right vs. wrong, of stamping out evil where it lies and dealing with the paperwork later.

So if her interactions with and reactions to Bond seem to flip-flop, it's only a natural consequence of her multiple allegiances and responsibilities, and like almost everything else in this film probably deliberate.

Sorry for the extremely indirect answer (if it even is one), but that's what I took from their relationship and M's apparent personality and worldview.

I really didn't like how Bond was a rogue in these last two movies. M seems to constatly be saying " find Bond!" "get Bond!" "Track Bond!"

How was Bond rogue in CR? I stand by my opinion that Bond going rogue was a primary theme in only LTK, and at best a secondary theme in only QoS. In DAD it seemed more like a cross between Bond on department-sanctioned leave (given how brief it was and how MI6 barely raised a finger about it) and an anniversary-inspired homage to Bond's frequent dabbling in working "off the clock," so to speak.

[Judo chop]

Nobody here mentions the "run" note from his "mother".

Glad you brought it up. Isn't the note from Fields?

Bond does say something to the effect of, "so that's what she meant" when he enters the room and sees MI6 waiting.

[bourbon_no_ice]

I thought the note was from M as they said it was from his mother. Actually, in the beginning of the movie it sounds like they are calling her "mum" on a few occastions but that's an entirely different story.

I thought that M was giving him his chance to carrry on but Bond opted to stand his ground and get what infomation he could to M and let the chips fall where where they may (although usually in his favor).

[byline]

I thought the note was from M as they said it was from his mother.

No, the hotel concierge said told Bond the note was from his wife. Then he looked over at Camille and hastily added, "The English woman." Bond opened the note from Fields, then went up to the hotel room, found M there and said, "So that's what she meant." (Referring to "Run" in Fields' note.)

Actually, in the beginning of the movie it sounds like they are calling her "mum" on a few occastions but that's an entirely different story.

Just a different pronunciation of "ma'am."

[Double-Oh Agent]

I thought the note was from M as they said it was from his mother.

No, the hotel concierge said told Bond the note was from his wife. Then he looked over at Camille and hastily added, "The English woman." Bond opened the note from Fields, then went up to the hotel room, found M there and said, "So that's what she meant." (Referring to "Run" in Fields' note.)

That's what I thought, too, which only further puzzles me (then when I saw it and now). If Fields wrote the note, how did she know M was there? Wouldn't she have been dead in the hotel room when M arrived? If she learned that M was only on her way, wouldn't Fields have waited to tell Bond personally. She couldn't have thought he'd be gone that long. Surely, M didn't leave the hotel after talking to Fields and return later? She'd have just remained in Bond's room waiting for him to return. Besides, wasn't Fields kidnapped at the party after tripping Elvis? This sequence just isn't clear.

[DamnCoffee]

Bond thought the note was reffering to M, at first. It wasn't, it was reffering to her being followed, probably by Greene's heavies, who later killed her, after she left the note.

[Publius]

If Fields wrote the note, how did she know M was there?

She didn't. The note was indeed in reference to Greene and his men. However, Bond didn't yet realize Fields was dead, and although his immediate reaction to the note was probably correct (he probably, and logically, assumed it was in reference to Greene), his reaction when unexpectedly finding M in the room was just as you heard it: "oh, so that's what she [meaning Fields] meant."

Only, Bond was wrong the second time and right the first time, as he would shortly discover (which only added to how much of an impact the gruesome realization had on him). In QoS, we do a lot of our learning alongside Bond in this way. I had no problem following this myself, but I can understand how you could be confused if you assumed Bond's comment was accurate.

[byline]

I thought the note was from M as they said it was from his mother.

No, the hotel concierge said told Bond the note was from his wife. Then he looked over at Camille and hastily added, "The English woman." Bond opened the note from Fields, then went up to the hotel room, found M there and said, "So that's what she meant." (Referring to "Run" in Fields' note.)

That's what I thought, too, which only further puzzles me (then when I saw it and now). If Fields wrote the note, how did she know M was there?

She didn't. Bond misinterpreted Fields' note to be referring to M because that's who he found upon entering the hotel room. And, after all, M did send Fields to get Bond, so that's what he put together in his mind.

However, Fields' note was actually referring to Greene and his men, whom she must have realized were coming after her and Bond. Fields left the note with the concierge as a warning to Bond, probably shortly before Greene got to her.

[Judo chop]

I thought the note was from M as they said it was from his mother.

No, the hotel concierge said told Bond the note was from his wife. Then he looked over at Camille and hastily added, "The English woman." Bond opened the note from Fields, then went up to the hotel room, found M there and said, "So that's what she meant." (Referring to "Run" in Fields' note.)

That's what I thought, too, which only further puzzles me (then when I saw it and now). If Fields wrote the note, how did she know M was there?

She didn't. Bond misinterpreted Fields' note to be referring to M because that's who he found upon entering the hotel room. And, after all, M did send Fields to get Bond, so that's what he put together in his mind.

However, Fields' note was actually referring to Greene and his men, whom she must have realized were coming after her and Bond. Fields left the note with the concierge as a warning to Bond, probably shortly before Greene got to her.

Agreed with the above. Craig sells the change in Bond's understanding too when he whips his head around at the closed doors blocking Fields' body. And then again when he feebly grasps at some kind of justification for why Greene would have killed Fields.

It's a 3-part sequence from Bond's point of view. The sort of stuff that makes QOS one of the most interesting Bond films of all time.

[Double-Oh Agent]

I think that you guys are probably correct, however this scene is not clear and should have been done better.

Oh, and thanks for clarifying.

[byline]

I think that you guys are probably correct, however this scene is not clear and should have been done better.

In my opinion, this is a deliberate style chosen for the entire film. We discover things as Bond does. Meaning that we go through the same twists and turns of discovery and realization as him, with little, if any, foreshadowing. The only thing I can recall seeing ahead of time -- and this was only seconds in advance -- was Slate's switchblade coming out right before knife fight in the hotel room in Haiti.

So the reason why this wasn't clear is that it wasn't clear to Bond, either. I like that choice in storytelling, because I enjoy pondering things afterward, then discovering new things on subsequent viewings. But not everyone likes that approach.