300 replies to this topic

[Captain Tightpants]

Not if he's agreed to be the villain

That's a very fair point. It's just let down by one tiny point: he hasn't agreed to play a villain.

[Skudor]

I think there's room for things to move around a little, even with what we have good reason to believe:

Spoiler

DD-M gets discretited and replaced with RF-M. At this point we are shocked at DD-M's villainy. Then, rather predictably, it turns out that RF-M is actually the villain, who gets dispatched by 007. Not sure why I'm putting this in spoilders...

I'd personally rather they didn't do something this cliched, though (be much better if DD-M simply was a little crooked in the past and had to resign, or got killed (my personal preference)).

[Odd Jobbies]

I think there's room for things to move around a little, even with what we have good reason to believe:

Spoiler

DD-M gets discretited and replaced with RF-M. At this point we are shocked at DD-M's villainy. Then, rather predictably, it turns out that RF-M is actually the villain, who gets dispatched by 007. Not sure why I'm putting this in spoilders...

Yep, that's exactly what i just proposed a moment ago:

With M under a cloud of false suspicion (created by Fiennes) Fiennes would move into M's role - he'd be the new M, Bond's new boss. Thus Bond takes it upon himself to go rogue against his own boss to prove Dench innocent. This would start off as under the radar investigation, but Fiennes would soon brand Bond enemy of the state and have double-Os after him.

I had no idea this had been 'leaked', but to my mind it puts Bond up against fellow double-Os.

That's an exciting prospect that hasn't been done yet! There was potential for this in LTK, but they didn't follow through with double-Os hunting Bond.

Now, we're all expecting Bardem to be an 'exotic' villain of some kind, but what if he's actually another double-O ? In cahoots with Fiennes, or truly thinking Bond corrupt, either way is promising, but the latter would perhaps break the format too much by not building to a satisfying face-off between the two.

[Guy Haines]

Just a comment on Skyfall's villain (s?) - how is it that, some two months after filming started, we still don't know the names of the characters being played by Messrs. Bardem and Fiennes - assuming, of course, that the latter is playing a villain and is not, as has been rumoured, appearing as M's successor.

I find it curious because, when previous Bond films have been announced, we've known within days if not hours that an actor has been cast as a villain named........... but not this time. We know the names of the leading ladies - Severin and Eve, and that Q is back, but beyond that, nothing.

Which makes me wonder. Are the producers planning the return of a villain from the past, re-booted for 2012? - draw your own conclusions as to who! Or is there some other reason why, well into February 2012, we are no wiser as to who exactly Javier Bardem and Ralph Fiennes are playing?

[Captain Tightpants]

Or is there some other reason why, well into February 2012, we are no wiser as to who exactly Javier Bardem and Ralph Fiennes are playing?

Because the entire film has been shrouded in secrecy. And not just the kind of coincidental secrecy of something slipping by the masses and EON never bothering to correct it - I'm talking about active secrecy, with the film-makers going out of their way to keep as much as possible under wraps for as long as possible. I personally doubt that Fiennes and Bardem are playing revived and reimagined characters, and I think that EON have decided to keep everything secret instead of a few key items because if they start giving away bits and pieces, people will be able to assemble them into something resembling the finished product.

[Skudor]

It's possibly secrecy for the sake of itself. Or because one or more of the cast members is playing a re-invented past character (Wishaw as Q and possibly Fiennes as a new Messervy) and they decided to keep it all very hush-hush to help hide the ones that would otherwise spoil the plot a bit. Eve's surname is apparently a secret because it's amusing (in a similar vein as Strawberry Fields).

As much as I'd like it, I doubt it's anything to do with Blofeld or similar - although usage of an unused name from the novels isn't impossible, it's not like there's much there.

Or is there some other reason why, well into February 2012, we are no wiser as to who exactly Javier Bardem and Ralph Fiennes are playing?

Because the entire film has been shrouded in secrecy. And not just the kind of coincidental secrecy of something slipping by the masses and EON never bothering to correct it - I'm talking about active secrecy, with the film-makers going out of their way to keep as much as possible under wraps for as long as possible. I personally doubt that Fiennes and Bardem are playing revived and reimagined characters, and I think that EON have decided to keep everything secret instead of a few key items because if they start giving away bits and pieces, people will be able to assemble them into something resembling the finished product.

Which ironically they have done by giving the clapper boards - we almost have a full story board already (ok... a bit exaggerated). I find that rather ironic given all the other secrecy - they could have just given us the same close ups but with date and location rather than a clapper board and scene number.

[Pussfeller]

For Bardem, I can understand not revealing the character's name even if it were original, because it would reveal his nationality. But that doesn't apply to Fiennes' character. We already know that he's British. If his name were something original, I think they would reveal it, the same way they revealed "Clair Dowar". The fact that his character has not been named seems very suspicious to me.

[DamnCoffee]

Rather interesting that the film is shrouded in total secrecy, but we pretty much have the entire structure of the story anyway, what with the clapperboards and everything.

[Zorin Industries]

Rather interesting that the film is shrouded in total secrecy, but we pretty much have the entire structure of the story anyway, what with the clapperboards and everything.

Do we? I don't think the main beats of SKYFALL's storyline are known at all.

And clapperboard numbers on photos taken by official sources to promote a film that is indeed shrouded in secrecy are not necessarily going to be related to the scenes behind them. I wouldn't say they have conveyed the structure of anything.

[Royal Dalton]

Yes, and that's a good thing at this point.

But we'll know the plot before the film is released.

[Captain Tightpants]

Which ironically they have done by giving the clapper boards - we almost have a full story board already (ok... a bit exaggerated). I find that rather ironic given all the other secrecy - they could have just given us the same close ups but with date and location rather than a clapper board and scene number.

We have the structure - we don't really have any details as to the plot. We can (and have) line up all of the clapperboards in order, and we could come up with a dozen different explanations as to how the story plays out.

[Pussfeller]

We know more than nothing, but less than something.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Anything? :-S

[Guy Haines]

Came across this in today's Independent.

http://www.independe...ro-7573733.html

The headline of the article is a bit misleading, especially when the article appeared in the Independent's sister paper, the "i". In fact it is more about Bardem, his life and interests than about Skyfall. The "i" headline for the same article was "Living the Dream as a Bond villain".

So, we are still not much more enlightened about his character than before. But interesting nevertheless.

[S K Y F A L L]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsYrGIQnmxo
After seeing this trailer I could see Fiennes playing Blofled however I've got my heart set on him playing the new M. I can't think of anyone else who would be a better fit to play M. He's only 49 years old and could play the role for 20 years maybe 30. Along with Ben Whishaw playing the new Q it would give the films some great familiarity like the originals.




To me it would be as if the series has gone full circle and the next M after him could be another female M. I'm not saying he should be playing the original M.

His character is the most exciting to me in Skyfall. I'd like to see a thread for his character.

Edited by S K Y F A L L, 24 March 2012 - 12:52 AM.

[Vauxhall]

Well, we now know that Fiennes won't be Blofeld and probably won't be a villain, per se - but I expect that he won't be a particularly likeable figure. My guess is that they'll write SKYFALL in such a way that he could reappear in BOND 24 and we'd buy him as the new M, however his character will almost certainly be less favourable towards Bond than Dench's M.

[Pussfeller]

Or he could simply be presented as a colder, more distant kind of boss. The intimacy between Dench-M and Craig-Bond is based on the fact that Bond is a raw recruit whose character is unproven and must be felt out. If a new M took over, he would inherit Bond as a seasoned, dependable agent whose feelings and motivations are (apparently) a matter of record. The new M would not bother to get personal with such an agent. He could afford to be brusque and businesslike, indifferent to Bond's inner life. He could spare himself the sentimental rubbish.

[Captain Tightpants]

But they could still have something resembling the kind of friendship we saw between Bond and Lee's M. Not openly friends, but with a sense of camaraderie.

[Vauxhall]

But they could still have something resembling the kind of friendship we saw between Bond and Lee's M. Not openly friends, but with a sense of camaraderie.

Yes, despite the great acting it could produce, I don't particularly want to see Craig and Fiennes at each other's throats throughout. I think it's inevitable that if they were to go down the route of a Fiennes M in future movies, one film would be dedicated to a prickly relationship between Bond and M, which blossoms into the two men respecting each other. Clichéd, but extremely likely, I imagine.

[Shrublands]

I think the title of this thread should be changed as Fiennes is not officially cast as a villain.
Also, the “Which Fleming title...” thread has been locked for sometime, but is still pinned, thus creating clutter at the top of the board. Can’t it be unpinned now?

[Jim]

Wish/command interface paradigm.

[Shrublands]

Wish/command interface paradigm.

Cheers Jim – you’re a gent.

[Chief of SIS]

Didn't know where else to put it. Not really topic creation worthy but cool interview with Bardem.

GQ - Javier Bardem


Not much on Bond, but this is awesome. Note from Mendes:

He would take his lines from the Bond script, translate it to Spanish, understand it, feel it, mold it, and translate it back again into English.

Edited by Chief of SIS, 20 September 2012 - 10:52 PM.

[Iceskater101]

^ That's pretty sweet. I can't wait for this film and I am already gathering a group to go see it at midnight. I think Javier Bardem will make a great James Bond villain.

[QuantumOfRoyale]

But they could still have something resembling the kind of friendship we saw between Bond and Lee's M. Not openly friends, but with a sense of camaraderie.

Yes, despite the great acting it could produce, I don't particularly want to see Craig and Fiennes at each other's throats throughout. I think it's inevitable that if they were to go down the route of a Fiennes M in future movies, one film would be dedicated to a prickly relationship between Bond and M, which blossoms into the two men respecting each other. Clichéd, but extremely likely, I imagine.

Lee always seemed to be firm but fair with Connery, sort of like a father figure. The best examples of their relationship are in TB, where Lee sarcastically notes Bond's tardiness to the World Council meeting, yet later sticks up for him when the Minister of Defence doubt's one of Bond's hunches.

Connery and Lee did have respect and sometimes disdain for each other, but they did have what no other Bond-M dynamic had: a subtle friendship.

I hope to see that return to the dynamic with Craig and Fiennes.

[univex]

But they could still have something resembling the kind of friendship we saw between Bond and Lee's M. Not openly friends, but with a sense of camaraderie.

Yes, despite the great acting it could produce, I don't particularly want to see Craig and Fiennes at each other's throats throughout. I think it's inevitable that if they were to go down the route of a Fiennes M in future movies, one film would be dedicated to a prickly relationship between Bond and M, which blossoms into the two men respecting each other. Clichéd, but extremely likely, I imagine.

Lee always seemed to be firm but fair with Connery, sort of like a father figure. The best examples of their relationship are in TB, where Lee sarcastically notes Bond's tardiness to the World Council meeting, yet later sticks up for him when the Minister of Defence doubt's one of Bond's hunches.

Connery and Lee did have respect and sometimes disdain for each other, but they did have what no other Bond-M dynamic had: a subtle friendship.

I hope to see that return to the dynamic with Craig and Fiennes.

Well said. Couldn´t agree more with all of the above ^

[Pussfeller]

It has to be a relationship of the "he's the best we've got, but I'd never tell him" variety. Bond has a high enough opinion of himself without being coddled by the boss.

[QuantumOfRoyale]

It has to be a relationship of the "he's the best we've got, but I'd never tell him" variety. Bond has a high enough opinion of himself without being coddled by the boss.

Exactly. It'll be a nice departure from:

M: "Bond, stop killing people!"
Bond: "No."
M: "Bond, stop killing people!"
Bond: "No."
M: "I'll take away your license to kill!"
Bond: "Okay."

ONE COMPLETED MISSION LATER

M: "Bond, I need you back."
Bond: "Okay."

*repeat cycle*

[Armand Fancypants]

Connery and Lee did have respect and sometimes disdain for each other, but they did have what no other Bond-M dynamic had: a subtle friendship.

I hope to see that return to the dynamic with Craig and Fiennes.

I would argue that Moore and Lee had a degree of this for TSWLM and MR, and Lazenby too.

Mankiewicz seems to have written M as an interminable grump who just whines and bitches about everything. He gets some good lines, but there's no modulation there. Can't go back to that. I think if you're going to go the harsher M the Robert Brown portrayal works to a degree, but the relationship does lack a bit of life. We didn't get much of it, but the Dalton/Brown relationship was most reminiscent of Connery/Lee, methinks.

While we're talking about friendships at MI6, it'd be awfully nice if Bond and Tanner were, y'know, friends.

[QuantumOfRoyale]

Connery and Lee did have respect and sometimes disdain for each other, but they did have what no other Bond-M dynamic had: a subtle friendship.

I hope to see that return to the dynamic with Craig and Fiennes.

I would argue that Moore and Lee had a degree of this for TSWLM and MR, and Lazenby too.

Mankiewicz seems to have written M as an interminable grump who just whines and bitches about everything. He gets some good lines, but there's no modulation there. Can't go back to that. I think if you're going to go the harsher M the Robert Brown portrayal works to a degree, but the relationship does lack a bit of life. We didn't get much of it, but the Dalton/Brown relationship was most reminiscent of Connery/Lee, methinks.

While we're talking about friendships at MI6, it'd be awfully nice if Bond and Tanner were, y'know, friends.

Anything to get Rory Kinnear more screen time! Bill Tanner was probably the most enjoyable part of QoS. And...I can't really explain why