Some good for thought in this thread here! Especially with regard to the literary Bond being a genuine gearhead, who most certainly would've had a vehement response to his Bentley getting blown to shreds. Yet, and despite Craig's brilliant knack for exuding a sense of the literary Bond, I've always seen the literary Bond and the cinematic Bond as being two somewhat different men. With regard to cars, whereas the literary Bond has a nearly obsessive and reverential attitude towards cars, his personal vehicles especially. In contrast, with the cinematic Bond, whilst we see evidence of some enthusiasm towards cars, we also witness a whole lot of disdain too (which Q has constantly chided him, begging to 'bring her back in one piece'). Literary Bond sees cars as a hobby and an investment of personal time, energy and expense. Cinematic Bond sees cars as a means to an end, a tool of the trade that he has little to no concern for. If the 'tool' gets destroyed during the course of successfully completing a mission, then so be it. Oddly enough, it seems that the literary Bond is more sentimental, at least with regards to cars, than the cinematic Bond.
Now, I'm likely to set off some Bond fanboy buttons here. I am soooo over seeing that 1963 Aston Martin DB5 again and again and again!!! It always struck me as just mindless pandering to the casual Bond moviegoer. I can appreciate that it’s the 50th anniversary of Bond on film and all. Still, I kinda groaned inside when it was slipped into ‘Goldeneye’, back in ’95. Groaned again in ’97, with its brief cameo in ‘Tomorrow Never Dies’. With ‘Casino Royale’, at least they explain why Bond should have the car, with his winning it in a card game. So, I guess I shouldn’t be so put out, as CR gave a perfectly good reason for the DB5 as Bond’s personal car. And, I have to admit that I enjoyed the banter between Bond and M about the car in this film. Funny stuff, especially when Bond threatens to deploy the passenger ejector seat.
I've gotta admit, it was sooooo hard restraining myself in the theater, from cheering out loud when Silva’s helicopter blew the DB5 all to kingdom come! At long last, we’ll hopefully never see that beautiful old car in another Bond film ever again!!! Yay!!
That said, big thumbs down to what I honestly think was nothing more than pathetically shameless pandering to the audience again, on behalf of the filmmakers, with the dramatic musical cue and cut to Bond looking fiercely angry when the DB5 blew up. With cinema Bond in mind, that car, for all its iconic relation to Bond, is not akin to the Batcave. Some bad guy blows up Batman’s Batcave, I can fathom a dramatic music cue and cut to Batman being enraged. Cinematic Bond witnessing yet another car blowing up? Not so much.
Now, if an homage to the literary Bond's love of cars was what the filmmakers intended with Bond's reaction and music cue to the death of the DB5, then I would say kudos to them! Yet, ultimately, I truly suspect that the DB5's presence and subsequent demise in this film was for the sheer 'value' of cashing in on the nostalgia of the cinema-going public. To which I say "Oh DB5, we all love you still, but you overstayed your welcome and we bid thee farewell".