663 replies to this topic

[Vauxhall]

Agreed, the very fact that they chose some real Fleming heritage over Duntrune castle is nothing but a good indicator.

Duntrune could easily double for Glencoe, and nobody would be any the wiser.

Sure, but my point is that it's just better that they went with the actual place. Some authenticity in the details by the film-makers is nothing but a good thing. It's also a nice, classy touch to celebrate the 50th.

Actually, instead of Duntrune Castle they went for some MoD land in Surry and a house made of plywood. But I don't see a problem - it's a film.

I'm wondering whether we're all looking at this the wrong way round, and the producers actually secured the area around Glencoe as a location first, or it was their first choice at least, and then have been working to find somewhere suitable to double for it during the action set piece (trying Duntrune, the Brecon Beacons and now Surrey), as they were unable to do that sequence there for whatever reason. Admittedly, I don't propose we'll ever know the answer to that!

[Shrublands]

Agreed, the very fact that they chose some real Fleming heritage over Duntrune castle is nothing but a good indicator.

Duntrune could easily double for Glencoe, and nobody would be any the wiser.

Sure, but my point is that it's just better that they went with the actual place. Some authenticity in the details by the film-makers is nothing but a good thing. It's also a nice, classy touch to celebrate the 50th.

Actually, instead of Duntrune Castle they went for some MoD land in Surry and a house made of plywood. But I don't see a problem - it's a film.

I'm wondering whether we're all looking at this the wrong way round, and the producers actually secured the area around Glencoe as a location first, or it was their first choice at least, and then have been working to find somewhere suitable to double for it during the action set piece (trying Duntrune, the Brecon Beacons and now Surrey), as they were unable to do that sequence there for whatever reason. Admittedly, I don't propose we'll ever know the answer to that!

My theory is it was a design thing. They intended altering Duntrune Castle with an extended set build, then there were going to be explosions and other requirements.

The look of the film was served better by building a house that exactly fitted the production designer’s vision and they could do what they liked with it.

The Brecon Beacons was just one of a number of places they toyed with to build the set.

[Leon]

Actually, instead of Duntrune Castle they went for some MoD land in Surrey and a house made of plywood. But I don't see a problem - it's a film.

Surrey? I'm confused - am I wrongly thinking that the scenes being filmed in Glencoe are the same that they were planning at Duntrune/Loch Crinan?

http://www.mi6-hq.co...oe_filming.php3

'Crew had been on location for a couple of days setting up beforehand, but Craig and Dench were only in Scotland for the day, along with 007's vintage Aston Martin DB5. Ben Collins (AKA The Stig) was also on location for driving duty, steering the DB5 towards an old estate.'




Are they building a replica of this estate then? If they are building an entire house on MoD land there's only one explanation of course - I don't blame them for not being able to blow a real estate up.

I was only talking about this use of the authentic location of Bond's (and Fleming's) father's birthplace at any rate. A nice touch.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Possibly several scenes in several different manor houses, then?

[Shrublands]

Actually, instead of Duntrune Castle they went for some MoD land in Surrey and a house made of plywood. But I don't see a problem - it's a film.

Surrey? I'm confused - am I wrongly thinking that the scenes being filmed in Glencoe are the same that they were planning at Duntrune/Loch Crinan?

http://www.mi6-hq.co...oe_filming.php3

'Crew had been on location for a couple of days setting up beforehand, but Craig and Dench were only in Scotland for the day, along with 007's vintage Aston Martin DB5. Ben Collins (AKA The Stig) was also on location for driving duty, steering the DB5 towards an old estate.'




Are they building a replica of this estate then? If they are building an entire house on MoD land there's only one explanation of course - I don't blame them for not being able to blow a real estate up.

I was only talking about this use of the authentic location of Bond's (and Fleming's) father's birthplace at any rate. A nice touch.

I think the Glencoe scenes come just before the manor house but are not the exact same scenes, but it’s all part of the Scottish sequence that will make up the bulk of Skyfall’s last act.

No, the house they are building in Surrey is not a replica of the above house, the plans show a similar sized building but a different one.
I think MI6 just have it wrong about 'filmed driving towards' it, I think the above house was used as a filming base - that would be too many manor houses.

[Captain Tightpants]

Was just thinking (and note this is all a wild theory stemming from some information posted in The Structure of Skyfall thread), we believe M and Tanner witness an attack on MI6 from Vauxhall Bridge, having previously been stopped by the police - presumably to prevent them getting closer. Now, let's assume that the presumed attack on MI6 will differ significantly from the attack in THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH. I'm thinking an attack from the skies (missile or otherwise). The presence of the police suggests to me that they already know an attack is coming, so perhaps that backs up the attack is something falling from the sky on a course for MI6... The obvious loophole here is why some the offending object can't be shot from the sky by jets or a missile defence. But I thought it was interesting; from the little we know, it appears they know an attack is imminent, but can't stop it.

What if it was a ground-based attack using an unconventional weapon? Security forces are always on the lookout for a dirty bomb or chemical weapon, but Bond films are known for having that slightly larger-than-life quality. What if the weapon used was something like pure capsaicin, the active ingredient in chili pepper?

[Col. Sun]

'Crew had been on location for a couple of days setting up beforehand, but Craig and Dench were only in Scotland for the day, along with 007's vintage Aston Martin DB5. Ben Collins (AKA The Stig) was also on location for driving duty, steering the DB5 towards an old estate.'




No, the house they are building in Surrey is not a replica of the above house, the plans show a similar sized building but a different one.
I think MI6 just have it wrong about 'filmed driving towards' it, I think the above house was used as a filming base - that would be too many manor houses.

Most likely they show the DB5 driving toward the Glencoe estate - and the Manor House in situ will be replaced with a digital matte of the Manor House they construct in Surrey. A very simple VFX shot for that establishing shot.

[Shrublands]

Most likely they show the DB5 driving toward the Glencoe estate - and the Manor House in situ will be replaced with a digital matte of the Manor House they construct in Surrey. A very simple VFX shot for that establishing shot.

Could be.

But they are filming an “Approach” in Surrey and they are using the landscape there.
The ‘chapel’ and the ‘priest hole exit’ are being constructed to have views of the house in the background. They are also constructing large gates and altering the road in for the sequence. And in the application to film on the MoD land, they write about the moorland and forestation doubling well for Scotland – so none of this make it sound as if the house is going to be matted over a house in the Glencoe. To me, the whole plot in Surrey is one large set and we'll see the house against its surroundings there together with all the other stuff built for the film.

My feeling is, Bond is not going to just drive up to the manor house and knock the door anyway.

[Ace Roberts]

I just went back through all the pages to see if I missed someone else suggesting this - but I did not spend time going through all the other threads - so if someone else suggested this I missed it. I'm beginning to think that the attack on Mi6 targeted "M" and her 00 department specifically - perhaps as suggested elsewhere for something she did (or didn't do) in her past. She is rushed over the bridge there by Tanner only to be too late. Possibly all the 00's (as suggested elsewhere - and the funeral scenes) are killed - except Bond who was absent - perhaps on leave (the beard). Bond is brought in to protect her by M's superior (Fiennes) - but is not happy about it because she withholds vital info from him. He takes her to his family home for safe keeping - leaving her in the care of a family member - perhaps an uncle (Fienney). He then goes off to pursue leads from the bombing - which lead him to Bardem.

[SecretAgentFan]

I just went back through all the pages to see if I missed someone else suggesting this - but I did not spend time going through all the other threads - so if someone else suggested this I missed it. I'm beginning to think that the attack on Mi6 targeted "M" and her 00 department specifically - perhaps as suggested elsewhere for something she did (or didn't do) in her past. She is rushed over the bridge there by Tanner only to be too late. Possibly all the 00's (as suggested elsewhere - and the funeral scenes) are killed - except Bond who was absent - perhaps on leave (the beard). Bond is brought in to protect her by M's superior (Fiennes) - but is not happy about it because she withholds vital info from him. He takes her to his family home for safe keeping - leaving her in the care of a family member - perhaps an uncle (Fienney). He then goes off to pursue leads from the bombing - which lead him to Bardem.

That actually sounds very logical. And interesting!

[Royal Dalton]

Albert Finney's supposed to be playing a high-ranking department official, isn't he?

Of course, he could still be Bond's uncle, or even M's husband, when it comes to that.

"007 must track down and destroy the threat, no matter how personal the cost."

[Mr. Blofeld]

...personal meaning "dead agents"?

[Skudor]

What was bound to happen? Bond's family home being featured?

I can think of plenty of ways for the house to be featured without it being a problem - like Bond and M being on the run (after a fashion) and using the manor as a safe house.

Slippage into soap territory. Broccoli and Wilson tend to like a bit of a personal angle and eventually those will run out or slip into any little angles that can be retrieved from the novels - such as heritage. Having said that, it's possible that this would be family property but be treated at arm's length - although that would take some skill (can they introduce family property without getting into some family back stories?).

The problem is that I don't see how it works casually - if it is really a Bond family house then I'm sure there would be more links to the family in the film. Where did this place suddenly spring from? Would they really have a physical relic of Bond's family history in this without other references to it?

There's a reason why Bond films worked so well without all the personal crap in the past - once you go down that path you end up in 5th season of dodgy TV show territory, having to constantly find new and outlandish personal angles.

It's not personal crap: Bond is allowed a family. We haven't seen his flat for forty years- would that be too personal now?

Seeing his flat is hardly personal - an interesting and pointless insight into where he lives, but thankfully not played too far.

Equally, a simple downplayed reference to a house he knows because it used to belong to the family is hardly a big deal in and of itself (if it was his dad's then presumably would now be Bond's in which case it's not his dad's house - so I'm guessing it was sold at some point). But I can't really see a route where this personal connection a safe house would have any point to it unless they are making more of the parents. And that's what I'm not comfortable with.

Bond films have always kept OO7 very impersonal and I think that's something that makes him stand apart from a lot of other franchises. We can focus on the immediate concerns of the movie and its plot rather than worry about how consistent this or that is with Bond and his past - because he barely has any. As soon as they go beyond throwaway references to climbing accidents and start weaving this personal history into the plot, then they're on thin ice.

How would Bond introduce the idea of this house? "My daddy used to own a house in the highlands, you can hide there?". I hope not.

If it really is family property then it's because somehow they've figured that the next fantastic personal aspect of Bond they can explore is the whole orphan situation. I'd much rather he just focused on getting foiling another dastardly plot.

Anyway, it's all pointless talk as I'm fairly sure the house as featured in the film has nothing to do with Bond's family - it's just reporters and others putting two and two together and making 20.

[Royal Dalton]

...personal meaning "dead agents"?

I take it as meaning that the resolution of the plot is personal to Bond in some way.

[SecretAgentFan]

Bond films have always kept OO7 very impersonal and I think that's something that makes him stand apart from a lot of other franchises. We can focus on the immediate concerns of the movie and its plot rather than worry about how consistent this or that is with Bond and his past - because he barely has any. As soon as they go beyond throwaway references to climbing accidents and start weaving this personal history into the plot, then they're on thin ice.

Well put! And somehow... the idea of Bond having parents... The literary Bond, yes. The movie Bond? Boy, I hope they have thought this out extremely well, should they actually go for this!

[Ace Roberts]

You know, Bond does not have to tell M anything about where he has taken her, other than its a safe house and the name of the man there that will keep an eye on her. It could even surprise Bond at the end of the film when she admits she knows this is his ancestor's home and the man is a relative.

[Vauxhall]

I'm not unduly worried by this. For all we know, there might be simply be a single throwaway line by Bond saying the manor house in Scotland was left to him by his parents, and then nothing is said of it again. It might even be the sort of casual reference that the writers included to try and please fanatic Bond followers like us!

[Pussfeller]

If the house itself were tied to Bond by family ties or inheritance, it would be a terrible choice for a hideout. Any competent supervillain would have the resources to track them down. "Boss, you know that one 00-agent we failed to kill? The one we're looking for? Well, he owns this mansion in Scotland..." Maybe the property belongs to a personal friend of Bond or M, perhaps a crook, a Scottish Zukovsky, perhaps someone MI6 did a favor for, and who is now doing a favor for them. It may be located in Bond's ancestral lands, but that would just be a thematic, atmospheric point, worthy of a throwaway comment or a minor plot point. For instance, Bond might recognize a geographical feature, or he might be collared by an old acquaintance and have to invent a story about why he's back in town. "Death in the family. Rather not talk about it."

[Shrublands]

It might even be the sort of casual reference that the writers included to try and please fanatic Bond followers like us!

Please?????

It would do the exact opposite with a Bond fanatic such as me – worse than double taking pigeons, Barbara Woodhouse references, invisible cars or any terrible idea yet.

[Vauxhall]

It might even be the sort of casual reference that the writers included to try and please fanatic Bond followers like us!

Please?????

It would do the exact opposite with a Bond fanatic such as me – worse than double taking pigeons, Barbara Woodhouse references, invisible cars or any terrible idea yet.

"Try and please..."

Emphasis on the try.

[Shrublands]

It might even be the sort of casual reference that the writers included to try and please fanatic Bond followers like us!

Please?????

It would do the exact opposite with a Bond fanatic such as me – worse than double taking pigeons, Barbara Woodhouse references, invisible cars or any terrible idea yet.

"Try and please..."

Emphasis on the try.

I see Vauxhall – just me getting a bit too worked up late at night. :-)
The Bond family thing does infuriate me. I must try to keep calm and carry on.

[Skudor]

Indeed. Ours is but to do or die, and overspeculate, and show up an pay. But mostly speculate.

After DAD I'm hardwired to expect the worst - but luckily I've been very pleasantly surprised with the last two.

[BourneAgainBond]

i didn't think the invisible car was that bad. the military has something like it already. if they have been showing it off, try and think about how long they've had it before showcasing it. i hear they say that whatever technology is available today area 51 had 50 years ago. its probably exaggerated but you get the point.

i though DAD was great up until the DNA plot line (should only be used for Blofeld, IMO), the ice palace/diamond mine/ecological preserve/personal race truck (wish they just picked one), and Icarus which was right from Bat-Man Forever, they might as well have ripped off Austin Powers's moon base/death star, Bond is do for another space adventure. lol

i don't understand why people think that there was no coming back from DAD, it was one of the highest grossing bonds films of its time. just like MR and FYEO wasn't that far be hide. if you ask me its just proof that the producers are more interested in money then pleasing their fan base, but then again i certainly don't represent the fan base.
http://www.the-numbe...s/JamesBond.php
Star Wars comes out, they put Bond into space. Star Wars prequels come out, they turn Bond into a CGI based film, never thought of it like that before.

[Skudor]

DAD was just a poor film on plenty of levels (from dialogue to CGI and outlandish gadgets). But, for me it was the ice surfing bit that broke me. That's the first time I've ever wanted to leave the cinema during a Bond film. I could have lived with the rest, just about. But that's not to say that it wasn't an entertaining film with lots of production and entertainment value for audiences to lap up.

[Shrublands]

DAD was just a poor film on plenty of levels (from dialogue to CGI and outlandish gadgets). But, for me it was the ice surfing bit that broke me. That's the first time I've ever wanted to leave the cinema during a Bond film.

That and the Sigmund Freud line in the song stop me ever wanting to watch it again. (The “Slick trigger finger for Her Majesty” in the QoS song has a similar result)
But the ice wave surfing is the worst moment in the whole series. It’s dreadful on so many levels. A bad idea, badly executed. And it goes on for so long. Even when it’s over, it’s still annoying, as there is supposed to have been this bloody giant wave, but Bond just lands and there is no spray or bluster in the air, nothing - the ambiance looks rather calm. The music in the sequence gets on my nerves too.

[Mr. Blofeld]

This is probably worse:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt_Kn4DggPg

[Skudor]

Not great, but it was 1971 and a bit more suspension of disbelief was required. The ice surfing was far worse than this.

[BourneAgainBond]

why didn't Bond just shot Zao, instead of the rope holding up the chandelier? and from a moving car, a one in a million shot.

i'd say the worst part is when you find out halle berry is in it. IMO

Edited by BourneAgainBond, 15 February 2012 - 11:17 PM.

[Shrublands]

why didn't Bond just shot Zao, instead of the rope holding up the chandelier?

Because it was directed by Lee “gormless” Tamahori. He wanted Zao to be eaten by a killer whale. The only reason he didn’t have that was because he thought it would not work unless Zao had been seen earlier in the film being cruel to a whale. That was honestly his “reasoning” – according to him.
The man is mad, and not in a interesting and creative way, just plain mad.

[The Shark]

This is probably worse:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt_Kn4DggPg

That has Sir John ing Barry and Asian-Man-On-Fire. I grant it amnesty.