Set in London...
#1
Posted 05 May 2009 - 07:17 PM
Take for example this little nugget (nudge nudge to certain readers out there).
Just last week I was in a plush London albergo having a cocktail when I overheard a very drunk, loud and cheerful Georgian-Russian businessman/casino owner bragging about his lifestyle in London - women, cars, drinks, coke, the works. He said he didn't give a about English laws and broke every one he could. When asked if he ever wanted to return home he thought his friend was asking him about Georgia, so he said he would soon return home and furthermore loudly bragged that they were working on 'regime change' in Georgia. His friend cringed hoping nobody had heard the exchange and apologetically replied that he had thought fatso's homeland was Russia.
Having heard this golden nugget of information I thought about forwarding it to the relevant people, but no doubt the jolly big Georgian, physically remarkably like the Le Chiffre who appeared in Fleming's first Bond novel, was already under the watch of the Security Services. Who in his position and with his background (a few years back he had been put under 18 months house arrest by Putin for bribing a finance minister) wouldn't be under surveillance?
So it was to my non-surprise that within a week of hearing that a Russian backed coup attempt in Georgia (today) failed because the Georgian government had been tipped off. Good surveillance by our boys no doubt. I wonder what will happen to the loud mouth (I know his name) now? Will he be punished for speaking carelessly and ruining Russia's plans or will they continue plotting their coup? Russia has Georgia on their mind (a Hoagy Carmichael reference for you lot!).
#2
Posted 05 May 2009 - 07:50 PM
#3
Posted 05 May 2009 - 08:53 PM
#5
Posted 05 May 2009 - 09:17 PM
A film where our man is up against some rough round the edges gangster sorts would be a good reason to use London more. It;d also suit Craig down to the ground.
#6
Posted 05 May 2009 - 10:41 PM
And also, if there was a plot involving something along the lines of the jolly fat man shooting his mouth off, it would be likely that Bond would visit Russia ad/or Georgia over thecourse of the story. It would be inevitable as you'd already set it up as being an important part of the plot, so you'd have no choice but to follow through.
#7
Posted 05 May 2009 - 11:54 PM
The problem with the film being set entirely in London is that MI6 and Bond have little to no jurisdiction there. I know THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH subverted this, but that was intended to show an attack on MI6 more thanit was to show Bond in action in London.
That what I was thinking.
#8
Posted 06 May 2009 - 12:45 AM
Have you read Charlie Higson's Double or Die? While I doubt we'll ever see a Bond film set predominantly in London, this is a terrific Bond book that is just that.
#9
Posted 06 May 2009 - 03:07 PM
Welcome aboard, manwiththegoldenpenny.
Have you read Charlie Higson's Double or Die? While I doubt we'll ever see a Bond film set predominantly in London, this is a terrific Bond book that is just that.
Double or die is brilliant. But the thing is, it's not Lavish and exotic which people are mostly looking for. I was born and raised in Hackney, East London and now live in the suburbs of Rainham Essex bur reaing about all those gritty London locations was fun brilliant and exciting to me because it was all the more easier to picture and respect the imagination. DoD is a fantastic gritty young Bond book. I always picture the boy to look like a mixture of Connery and Craig, which he does as depicted in the illustration lol.
#10
Posted 06 May 2009 - 03:43 PM
#11
Posted 06 May 2009 - 04:02 PM
#12
Posted 06 May 2009 - 04:09 PM
I also like the idea of a Bond adventure entirely set in London and we got it in Double or Die which, I agree, is brilliant. The fact that it's 1933 London does make it exotic. Highgate Cemetery, the Hunterian, the pneumatic railway, the casino, the Docklands, a Bond Girl who's part of a street gang...suburb.
I think those are excelent qualities to make an excellent action thriller which DoD is. But I wouldn't categorise it as exotic in the traditional sense that primarily exists within a Bond film.
That being said, they really need to start adapting these young Bond books into animated films. It would be bananas.
#13
Posted 06 May 2009 - 04:13 PM
Nope, as an MI6 staff member he's supposed to operate outside the United Kingdom, any threat within UK borders in MI5 durisdiction (how do you spell that word anyway? That way seems wrong to me).To be honest it sounds a bit boring. Technically he's not allowed to operate there anyway, is he?
#14
Posted 06 May 2009 - 04:21 PM
#15
Posted 06 May 2009 - 07:28 PM
Let's not forget Moonraker (book) is entirely set in the UK. Bond also has some action in London in Doubleshot, Colonel Sun, Scorpius and No Deals Mr. Bond.
Still, it would be a rare occurrence. MI6 is equivalent to the CIA. Largely operate outside the homeland.
#16
Posted 08 May 2009 - 07:11 AM
As to the MI6-MI5, maybe something happened to MI6 people inside the UK, and the two services need to work together. Bond would be the MI6 side of the cooperation, and the MI5 liaison could be ... Moneypenny? Introducing her to the series, with Bond convincing her to switch to MI6 by the end of the movie.
OK, just a thought.
#17
Posted 08 May 2009 - 07:18 AM
The problem with the film being set entirely in London is that MI6 and Bond have little to no jurisdiction there. I know THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH subverted this, but that was intended to show an attack on MI6 more thanit was to show Bond in action in London.
While you are accurate, I'm afraid niceties like that have been abandoned by the current quasi-fascist British government, which has seemingly declared war on its own people. The Evil Empire is much closer to home than some people care to acknowledge.
A rogue Bond v. Gordon Brown (the self-proclaimed saviour of the world)... Now that I would like to see.
#18
Posted 08 May 2009 - 04:16 PM
The problem with the film being set entirely in London is that MI6 and Bond have little to no jurisdiction there. I know THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH subverted this, but that was intended to show an attack on MI6 more thanit was to show Bond in action in London.
While you are accurate, I'm afraid niceties like that have been abandoned by the current quasi-fascist British government, which has seemingly declared war on its own people. The Evil Empire is much closer to home than some people care to acknowledge.
A rogue Bond v. Gordon Brown (the self-proclaimed saviour of the world)... Now that I would like to see.
The head of Quantum revealed:
What evil thoughts lie behind that fiendish smirk?
#19
Posted 09 May 2009 - 05:56 AM
Yes, I see absolutely no bias in your post.The problem with the film being set entirely in London is that MI6 and Bond have little to no jurisdiction there. I know THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH subverted this, but that was intended to show an attack on MI6 more thanit was to show Bond in action in London.
While you are accurate, I'm afraid niceties like that have been abandoned by the current quasi-fascist British government, which has seemingly declared war on its own people. The Evil Empire is much closer to home than some people care to acknowledge.
A rogue Bond v. Gordon Brown (the self-proclaimed saviour of the world)... Now that I would like to see.
#20
Posted 10 May 2009 - 09:33 AM
#21
Posted 10 May 2009 - 12:34 PM
The problem with the film being set entirely in London is that MI6 and Bond have little to no jurisdiction there. I know THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH subverted this, but that was intended to show an attack on MI6 more thanit was to show Bond in action in London.
While you are accurate, I'm afraid niceties like that have been abandoned by the current quasi-fascist British government, which has seemingly declared war on its own people. The Evil Empire is much closer to home than some people care to acknowledge.
A rogue Bond v. Gordon Brown (the self-proclaimed saviour of the world)... Now that I would like to see.
The head of Quantum revealed:
What evil thoughts lie behind that fiendish smirk?
We have had far worst recent PM's than Gordon Brown he's just the tip of the iceberg
#22
Posted 13 May 2009 - 03:00 AM
Live and Let Die? Though I guess Mr Big was posh in his UN persona.I do quite like the idea of Bond facing off against someone who isn't a posh type.
#23
Posted 13 May 2009 - 07:33 AM
I see absolutely no bias in your post.
Absolutely none...
We have had far worst recent PM's than Gordon Brown
Well, I suppose that's subjective. The warmonger Blair was, I suppose, "worse" in some respects, but I can't recall another PM who was allegedly so nasty and petulant as Brown (met him once, years ago; took an instant dislike to him). Harold Macmillan was PM when I was born, so I haven't exactly had an embarrassment of riches during my lifetime. Thatcher stood out like a sunflower on a dung heap, of course, and I guess she spoiled me. The rest of 'em put together hadn't got the balls she had.
#24
Posted 13 May 2009 - 09:13 AM
I'd go with that. It would be hard if not impossible for a Bond film to limit its canvas to one night (and constant night shoots do not go down well with cast and crew) but that would work.London is such a potentially cinematic/photogenic city it's a shame film-makers generally only shoot it in a bland picture-postcard style. Personally I like the idea of a Collateral inspired London-set Bond movie, running the course of just one night with 007 tearing around the capitol in some sort of race-against-time plot, maybe directed by Juan Carlos Fresnadillo who's 28 Weeks Later was one of the few visually interesting recent films to based in this particular city.