2 replies to this topic

[quantumofsolace]

http://www.huffingto..._b_2360755.html

[Guy Haines]

Some points well made, I think. The finale is the one part of SF which, spectacular though it is, makes one wonder if Bond has thought things through. Or as 006 might have put it - "Situation analysis, hopeless. You have no backup, no escape route." Which by the time Bond and M get to Skyfall is the case, one might say. Surely he should have had the seventh cavalry waiting in the form of MI6 backup, special forces etc to mop up Silva and his goon squad. And he certainly didn't bother to check if the gun cupboard was still fully stocked!

 

Except.... that it might not have mattered what Bond did. Silva is, we are told, a world class hacker and cyber-terrorist. Whatever secret plans MI6 might have hatched to protect or rescue M, he'd more than likely be on to them in no time. Perhaps Bond reasoned the only way to stop Silva was to confront him, literally on Bond's home ground.

 

It's true that Silva got what he wanted, but not directly, not in the way he expected it, and of course he died unfullfilled - the look on his face as he dies says it all ("Foiled again"!). Whether Bond should have answered for his actions in taking M to Skyfall is a good point. Then again, he wasn't the only character in the film making questionable judgement calls - M made several, including sending an unready Double O back into the field.

[Turn]

This kind of smacks of a columnist looking for a topic to write ahead on for when he's on holiday. It also checks a lot of the common thoughts - Connery ruled and the new guy is okay but still not as good; wife doesn't like Bond movies but will watch a certain actor; Bourne comparison, etc.

 

It's a movie. If they couldn't keep M safe before, what makes anybody think they could've in the wake of what happened in London? I think she would've wanted to go out that way since she probably figured her career was over and that was about it for her anyway. She died fighting to the end.

 

If you want to punish Bond then they should have thrown him out of the service after his actions in QoS. They didn't then, why now?

 

Bond doesn't follow the rules never has. More times than not it was his risks that paid off, and it's why we like him. Good people have died as a result of his actions. But he lives in a dangerous world. It's what makes Craig's Bond more complex and interesting. Sure we liked the other films where Bond always won, sometimes made fun of the villains and sent audiences home on a happy note in an amorous clinch with the lady. But this isn't the Moore or Brosnan era anymore. I'll take these more downbeat endings and a Bond that does unconventional things that don't result in always happy results.