12 replies to this topic

[Cody]

Entertainment Weekly writer Darren Franich has tried to work out why things get kind of odd in the final act:

 

A serious attempt to understand the ending of SPECTRE

 

Despite the title, I think it's something that most readers will find to be quite silly.

[Professor Pi]

I just read this, and actually, a lot of it makes sense.  I'd almost forgive the scriptwriters for co-opting this idea to start Bond 25. 

[deth]

It's a good article actually, despite the theory he proposes being wrong.

[RMc2]

That's brilliant. Thanks for sharing!

[Mr. White's Son]

Yes, brilliant indeed! My initial reaction was similar: that the ending has a kind of dreamlike logic to it. I even see the similarities with Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" though it's hard to tell if they are intended, not that it matters.

What a fascinating ending; I predict Bond fans will be debating it forever!

Outside of the above interpretation, I would take exception to the idea that we should see in Bond a man who doesn't change. Bond does change within the course of the film, and Swann is the catalyst for it, from cold-hearted bastard to a man capable of--or at least the blossoming of a kind of love. I think we can first see that in the wonderful scene where Bond attempts, needlessly as it turns out, to teach Swann the basics in using a gun. And he's charmed and won over by her, especially after the L'Americain episode. So much so that he ends up throwing his own gun away at the end, as if at one with Swann's own feelings about them.

[Professor Pi]

That last bit is a good point.

 

A quotation from the movie popped in my head that makes me think some of the filmmakers had this interpretation in mind:

 

"I came here to kill you." - Bond

 

"I thought you came here to die." - Blofeld.

 

"It's all a matter of perspective." - Bond

 

And the rest of the movie is from Bond's perspective.  He finally gets the girl, the car (which he clearly loved having), and the MI6 building is demolished, symbolically ending his tenure. 

[Guy Haines]

Just one problem with Bond in a "dream-like" state - barely a mention of the sub plot going on and the real reason 007 is back in London - to stop Max Denbigh, Blofeld "ally" and his Nine Eyes project. The old MI6 building and a showdown between 007 and ESB in there is symbolic, to be sure, and I think rather more could have been made of that meeting inside between Bond and Blofeld - but equally there could have been more time spent in Blofeld's base perhaps with;

Bond battling Blofeld from his end trying to destroy SPECTRE's Nine Eyes receiver whilst in London Q, M and Moneypenny are battling Denbigh to stop Nine Eyes becoming operational.

On balance I come down on the side of symbolism, though I sympathise with those who think it could have been better handled. As for the dreamlike ending - in your dreams! ;-)

[Professor Pi]

It's a tempting way to solve not only SPECTRE's issues, but Bond series continuity.  Not only is the ending a dream, but so is Dr. No through Die Another Day, NSNA, and even CR67.  

 

"I've been here before ... "

 

[Guy Haines]

I doubt if it would work. The whole series of films from 1962 to 2002 as one big dream?

Nope. Sorry. No way. As credible as season nine of the TV show Dallas in which, having been killed off in season eight, Bobby Ewing miraculously re-appears because his wife Pam dreamt the whole thing. ;-)

[Professor Pi]

Well, EON will never explicitly film that, I agree.  But checkout the soundtrack tracklist sequence:

 

17 A Reunion

18 Day of the Dead (source music)

19 Tempus Fugit

 

It's all chronological except this source music from the PTS placed right where the torture sequence is.  And "Tempus Fugit" means "Time flies."  Then, Newman starts recycling Skyfall cues heavily after this point in the film.  I'll have to go see SPECTRE again, but I think there's evidence for this interpretation of the ending.  I'm certainly finding it compelling, and a fun argument to have at the pub!  It's actually led me to appreciate the film more.

[Dustin]

It's certainly something you'd rather expect from Iain Banks than from a Bond film. It's probably more due to the natural ups and downs of a troubled production than any kind of daring story idea. We'd know about that by now.

[Silva25]

Yes, brilliant indeed! My initial reaction was similar: that the ending has a kind of dreamlike logic to it. I even see the similarities with Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" though it's hard to tell if they are intended, not that it matters.

What a fascinating ending; I predict Bond fans will be debating it forever!

Outside of the above interpretation, I would take exception to the idea that we should see in Bond a man who doesn't change. Bond does change within the course of the film, and Swann is the catalyst for it, from cold-hearted bastard to a man capable of--or at least the blossoming of a kind of love. I think we can first see that in the wonderful scene where Bond attempts, needlessly as it turns out, to teach Swann the basics in using a gun. And he's charmed and won over by her, especially after the L'Americain episode. So much so that he ends up throwing his own gun away at the end, as if at one with Swann's own feelings about them.

 

It's less that he doesn't change for me and more that said change feels very unearned and forced/tacked on.  I COULD have been made to buy it (I bought it with Tracy and Vesper), but the execution here was lacking.

[FlemingBond]

so it was all a dream