32 replies to this topic

[JCRendle]

How involved do you want Bond's colleagues in SPECTRE? In Skyfall, we had (Dench's) M's involvement as a major plot point - as it was in TWINE - to the point that it brought in a new M - and a new Q and Moneypenny,

 

It seems that the Bond films are returning to a classic Bond feel -  we had the souped up DB5, we have a stern male M in the vain of Bernard Lee, Q, MP etc.

 

So should they be used in a similar vain to the early films? Which was hinted at during the last scenes of Skyfall...

 

PTS only vaguely connected to plot - Title sequence - Bond sharing a wink and nod with Moneypenny - Bond and M - Bond sees Q who provides vehicle and or gadgets - Bond goes on mission - M returns at end of film.

 

Or are you happy with the newer dynamic from the latter half of the series, having Q pop up in the field, Moneypenny being more action orientated than just M's eyes and ears?

[Blofeld's Cat]

The problem with Dame Judi was that because she was such an icon in British cinema/theater she had to be used more than just as a peripheral character. Now that there's a new M I feel the right balance between office and field has been restored some what.

 

Although, now that there's a Q and Moneypenny again the urge to push them into the field more may be too tempting.

 

"Used in a similar vain to earlier films" is the way to go, for sure.

[Robinson]

I doubt Fiennes will be relegated to 5-10 minutes of screen time, the way Lee and Brown were. The same with Harris and the others for SPECTRE.

What I hope is that the writing created some truly witty dialogue between Bond and the MI6 staff. Some of the repartee between Brosnan and Samantha Bond seemed forced. You have to give credit to Lois Maxwell for her chemistry with all the Bond actors she played against.

[AMC Hornet]

Remember, Q doesn't like to fly, so he shouldn't be popping up too much.

 

But M and MP are handy with a gun, so there will be no containing them.

[Matt_13]

I think the opportunity to take a jab at Q's fear of flying is too great for the filmmakers to simply leave the matter unaddressed. I wouldn't be surprised if Q popped up somewhere outside the UK, extremely irritated by the fact that he had to leave his lab and hop on a cramped flying metal death machine with poor wifi and no leg space. As for M, I think they should keep him in London but absolutely give him his own side story about whatever politicking is taking place at MI6's expense, which at the very least seems to be what the press release indicates they're doing. A compelling political side story is always a welcome addition to a spy thriller in my opinion. As for Moneypenny, I want Eve providing tactical support like she did in the casino scene in Skyfall. One extended scene with her helping Bond in the field would provide another great opportunity for some fun dialogue and would not derail whatever else was taking place. I trust Mendes 110% to knock this one out. Everything I've seen and heard is music to my ears. I can't wait to see some footage. I really hope they have production blogs again. Those were always a nice surprise whenever they popped up.

[Fairbanks]

Yes, Q's fear of flying feels like the seed of a running joke, and a way of accounting for his tetchy hostility at being dragged out of his lab, into the field, as it were. In the leaked stuff,

Spoiler

Q sees a bit of thriller-y action in Austria, and later assists Bond remotely during the third act.

 His role in SPECTRE seems to be about as big as his role in SF.

[sharpshooter]

Moneypenny has been spotted visiting Bond's flat, so it's not going to be strictly office only encounters with the MI6 team in SPECTRE.

[Invincible1958]

I think, we will see a lot of the Whitehall brigade in SPECTRE:

 

Spoiler

According to the leaks M, Tanner and C will be mostly in London, but also travel to Japan, Moneypenny stays in London all the time. Q will be the big winner of this movie, going on a mission with Bond - like in LTK (but without boarding a plane)

[JCRendle]

Moneypenny has been spotted visiting Bond's flat, so it's not going to be strictly office only encounters with the MI6 team in SPECTRE.

 

True - but Moneypenny visited Bond in LALD at his place, but the film was still in the structure of the Classic Bond -  Bond meets with M and Moneypenny, who give him a mission - except that, instead of the MI6 office, it's Bond's flat.

[Agent 76]

As long as it makes sense storywise, show them yes.

[agentbug]

I'm a little concerned tbh - the official press release mentions M having political troubles to contend with. We must remember this is not a political drama, it's a Bond film. Nor do I like any urge to go the route of 'Bond is great and always right, the political people are always wrong and getting in his way.' Do we really need to keep cutting back to MI6 for political updates? In Skyfall it worked as was integral to the plot and the writing out of Judi Dench however to have this all again in the film immediately following it has me worried.

[JCRendle]

I'm a little concerned tbh - the official press release mentions M having political troubles to contend with. 

 

It could just be a small subplot at the beginning, and not a major part of the story. 

[1q2w3e4r]

I wouldn't be too concerned, it drives the plot forward and isn't a huge focus of the storyline.

[sharpshooter]

Yeah, I'm not worried. It's been said the art of a Bond movie is doing the same thing differently.

[billy007]

I'm sorry to be redundant,  any return to "the classic Bond feel" should be considered a homage to previous films.

The great thing about DC's take on the role is that his version of 007 practically goes rogue every film, with little or no tactical support from the "office".

Let M handle all the political BS without leaving London.  They are always trying to abolish the "00" section let M handle it as a sub plot. The trick is to find the proper amount of screen time for M,Moneypenny and Q. (Don't forget Tanner)

[thecasinoroyale]

I know with big name stars, like Dench, they become a leading star rather than supporting. Look at Dench in 'GoldenEye' 5 minutes, if that altogether? Still made an impact for all the right reasons.

 

More and more she lost that "M"  role to become a field agent and I didn't like it, culminating with the events in 'Skyfall'.

 

I loved it when MI6 staff stayed in/around MI6 and London or a base of operations. It made Bond feel grounded and have a 'safe haven' so to speak, and you knew that was the moment you'd get some great espionage scenes with the laying down of the mission ahead, not to mention the gadgets and banter going on.

 

I pray for that, for Fiennes to stay in and around London with no gun-fights or anything; in his position, he shouldn't be involved in that area now. That's Bond's job, and his security and agents jobs. Moneypenny should stay in London and Q also, along with Tanner et al.

 

There is one 00-agent in that group, and it's Bond; he's the man to risk it all for Queen and Country, and I want to see that tight-knit MI6 family we were teased with in 'Skyfall' to remain. They all had each others backs and it felt very close. If there are more plots involving traitors, corruption and what-not, I'll be very sad to see MI6 made out to be more feeble and weak then they should be, representing the heroes (which we all need to have belief in).

 

Rant DONE.

[AMC Hornet]

It was getting ridiculous in TMWTGG, TSWLM & MR with the whole MI6 staff jetting off to meet with Bond in the field, as if they worked for him. That's what station chiefs like Kerim, Campbell, Sadruddin and Saunders are for.

 

Set Bond up and let him loose, I say.

 

On the other hand, Mendes wouldn't have set Mallory and Moneypenny up with field experience just to leave them behind desks. I expect they will appear in the field, but hopefully they won't eclipse 007, like Dench was in danger of doing.

 

("You're still clinging to your faith in that old woman!")

[tdalton]

All of the MI6 support staff need to stay in London.  Tanner is probably the only one of them that I'd be OK with seeing in the field.  M needs to stay in London and hopefully there will be too little screentime for Moneypenny and Q to make it possible for them to appear in the field.

[007jamesbond]

Well M will be facing political faces so...... 

[plankattack]

I go back on forth on this one. No, not every film needs to have some subtext of political intrigue/M under pressure/etc etc. And the less time the likes of Moneypenny and Q are in the field, well the better. I do find it hard to envision new Q's presence in the field without a large dollop of humor attached. If nothing else, the "he doesn't like to fly" line in SF has already negatively "stereotyped" Whishaw's Q to some extent, boxing him in somewhat and forgoing the chance to do something more with it - IMHO a mistake on Mendes/Logan/P&W/whoever's part. I do fear that Q will be merely re-furbished than reimagined, a step back rather than a step forward (I share CBn's esteemed Jim's feelings on the character).

All this said, if Ray Fiennes is M, then I want to see Ray Fiennes on-screen. The two things go together - M is an important character in the Bond-world. No, the most important character other than Bond in the series, books and films. I do think that EON has underplayed the character over the years, reducing him to someone who just sends Bond off at the start of the story. If nothing else, I'm glad that Dench in the role forced the filmmakers to put more into the character. And that's why you can attract the likes of Fiennes to the role and the series. And you don't pay Ray Fiennes Ray-Fiennes-salary for Robert Brown screentime. Same with Tanner - the more Kinnear, the better. He's Bond's friend, rather than the EON-inflated office flirt that is Moneypenny.

I see OHMSS as the template for the very least you should see M in the story. Scenes scattered throughout the film - important, key to both own and Bond's character, well written, resonant. But LALD-style "Good luck 007" is nowhere near enough Ray Fiennes for me. To paraphrase that film - "Is that all it does?" Absolutely not - the reboot M needs to have the heft the series had shaved away.

[Royal Dalton]

All this said, if Ray Fiennes is M, then I want to see Ray Fiennes on-screen.

 

Well, it looks like your wish will be granted. Personally, I'd prefer to see M in just a few scenes, like Bertrand Lee and Ronald Brown, than popping up every few minutes like Julie Dench.

[tdalton]

 

All this said, if Ray Fiennes is M, then I want to see Ray Fiennes on-screen.

 

Well, it looks like your wish will be granted. Personally, I'd prefer to see M in just a few scenes, like Bertrand Lee and Ronald Brown, than popping up every few minutes like Julie Dench.

 

 

That's all I want to see from M as well.  They were coming very close to making M into almost a partner for Bond in the more recent films, especially in Skyfall, and that's not what I want to see when I go to see a Bond film.  It needs to be Bond out there on his own, perhaps with the help of a Bond girl or other ally (i.e. Felix) that he happens to run across while on the mission rather than having M hovering over him ever step of the way.

[Guy Haines]

The new M is, like his predecessor, played by a distinguished actor and when you hire someone like him you tend to want to use them for more than just a near cameo. So I can't see Ralph Fiennes' scenes being confined to one scene straight after the theme tune along the lines of "here's your next mission 007, go forth and do battle, come back in one piece and kindly return the DB 10 in one piece as well." Particularly since his character is much nearer Bond's in terms of age, and background. (Lt-Col. Mallory, ex-SAS)

 

There are plenty of older male actors out there who would have fitted the crusty old admiral model, and I suppose if the producers and screenwriters had wanted a Messervy type M they could have cast one. It's all part of remoulding M and the MI6 team for this century rather than the Bond films of fifty years ago. That and the communications equipment - those earpieces used in SF for example - allowing M to communicate with and even direct Bond from headquarters.

 

(Actually, they rather cleverly allow the actor playing M more screen time without leaving MI6.)

 

That said, there's one area they've no need to revive I think and that's taking the whole office abroad, as used to happen in the 1970s. Q in the field maybe, but why does the whole office team have to go on a jolly abroad when the SIS already has stations in place to support Bond?

[AMC Hornet]

^  Wot I said, in my last post.

[Vauxhall]

New interview with Rory Kinnear in the Evening Standard:

http://www.standard....h-10322803.html

 

"To pile on the pressure, during this rehearsal period he has eight or nine consecutive night shoots on the next Bond movie. In Spectre, due for release in November, he reprises the role of MI6’s ever-dependable Tanner. “I’m not entirely sure where sleepy peepy will pop in,” he says light-heartedly, though looking horrified. “We finish about 5am, then I’ve asked for 11am or noon starts here.” Will his children let him lie in? “Who knows?” he says ruefully. “Though it might even help the slightly deranged feel of it.”

 

After a day spent trying to convey the Kafkaesque on a travelator, a Bond movie might feel comfortingly steady. “Tanner remains stable” is as much as Kinnear will reveal about Spectre. “That’s what he’s there for: he’s just the table on which to rest things.”

 

Though sad to lose Judi Dench as his screen boss — her late husband, Michael Williams, was his godfather — he likes his MI6 posse. “Our gang of good guys — Ralph Fiennes, Ben Whishaw, myself and now Andrew Scott — have all spent quite a bit of time on the London stage.”"

[Marcin]

New interview with Rory Kinnear in the Evening Standard:
[...] “Our gang of good guys — Ralph Fiennes, Ben Whishaw, myself and now Andrew Scott — have all spent quite a bit of time on the London stage.”"

So, Andrew Scott is a "good guy" in SPECTRE? Interesting. I must say I expected him to be one of the villains..
Assuming of course that Kinnear wasn't bluffing.

[Vauxhall]

New interview with Rory Kinnear in the Evening Standard:
[...] “Our gang of good guys — Ralph Fiennes, Ben Whishaw, myself and now Andrew Scott — have all spent quite a bit of time on the London stage.”"

So, Andrew Scott is a "good guy" in SPECTRE? Interesting. I must say I expected him to be one of the villains..
Assuming of course that Kinnear wasn't bluffing.

Yes, that jumped out at me too. For now, I'm assuming he's bluffing.

[agentbug]

Hmm, that's a lot of good guys, no? Bond will barely have to lift a finger at this rate!

[Guy Haines]

"Good guy" Andrew Scott as in one of the "Whitehall team", which is what Sam Mendes said right at the outset of the announcement of Spectre's cast. He may be playing a good guy - but then again he may be a wrong 'un who is nominally part of the right side. We'll know who's who and what's what come November 2015.

[rubixcub]

Has anyone seen the new interview with Ben Whishaw from June 10th?  Very little said, but it does support the idea of the Whitehall team being in the field:

 

http://www.allocine....cmedia=19554298

 

Dave