Deathmatch 2024 - Sideswipes

Special Interest Games
381

Maybe they can use the “Never Say Never Again” trick:

(Think of Connery Bond, who appears to have chosen the right hotel room where a bomb won’t explode)

We now see the missiles hit again and then we see Bond walking away at a clearly different location and saying to himself: “Hum, did I make the right choice with either staying on that rotten island or swimming to the next one, where there is never anything to experience.”

Will some smart, observant viewers here shout: “But, but… didn’t we clearly see the missiles hitting Bond himself in the previous film?”

That, my dear friends, is the age-old serial film trick!

3 Likes
382

And then cut to a shot of Q looking amazed at a computer screen. “I guess you can get Heracles off of you after all”

3 Likes
383

September 4.

You are Barbara Broccoli (I love the trouser suits).

Reassured that the more sycophantic client fans will eventually support you anyway on their various media in the curious hope of a selfie, you have decided to stick to the decision that this is all one big story, and reinforce your Weltanschauung that the future of the Bond series lies in the past.

Accordingly, Bond 26 will expand the intermittently competent arc approach of the Craig Bubble-0-Seven pocket universe, and be retrofitted to all Bond films, regardless of their attitude decrepitude. That by making it all one very, very loosely strung together tale will help shift multiple unsold copies of The World is Not Enough is merely the incidental pleasure of extruding yet more money from the saps. You’re ectually doing this for the art, specifically those minature paper portraits of Monarchs and Presidents of varying values that neatly fold into your pocket. Hence the trouser suits, I s’pose.

Stuck as you now are for stories relevant to Bond himself, this grand plan opens up multiple stories personal to the villains, being those affected by the results of Bond’s actions in exploderating things and his then floating off blithely for family-friendly post-credits semi-raping. This keeps the door open to be heavily critical of Bond because it’ll all be his fault. Lovely. That’ll require Ac-Ting, won’t it?

After all, one is repeatedly forcefed that Diamonds are Forever’s development posited Goldfinger’s brother as the villain, therefore steering the old rusty tanker that is the Bond series this way would be A HOMAGE TO CUBBY’S LEGACY because that’s always tremendously, tremedously important, and something to use as exculpation when the time inevitably comes when even the most crawly enthusiast begins to doubt both it and their bizarre search for personal validation via your talent rather than any of their own.

Several high concept ideas have landed on your desk, scattering the dozens of neat piles of $1000 bills simply everywhere; tchoh! Still, best get down to some “work” to avoid accusations of possessing the productivity ethic of a cremated cat.

You can choose up to four of the below to develop further by commissioning a “script”. As matters stand, all fit the Bond 26 working title Aftermath Warpath Bloodbath, although that’ll have to change because you fear that some naughty, naughty critics will point to the vintage of the series and the gutless creakiness of this useless idea and consequently label it Hipbath Spongebath Bedbath.

  • The villain is the daughter of someone who, whilst taking the dog for a wee, was cleft in twain by scorching space debris from Drax’s galactic knocking-shop.
  • The villain is the nephew-by-marriage of the Chief Petty Officer of Stromberg One, who Bond (let’s face it) nuked.
  • The villain is the catamite of the Parisian taxi driver whose car Bond smashed to bits and who now wants to do the same to Bond.
  • The villain is someone scarred and burned and most annoyed as a result of The World’s Biggest Yet Most Underwhelming and Easily Caused Explosion (from Spectre, if you had forgotten, or chosen to).
  • The villain is the grandmother or something of the Nearly-Raped Waitress who ectually did not survive The Hotel Made Of Unnecessarily Dangerous Things, Do Have A Relaxing Stay (from Quantum of Solace, if you had forgotten, or chosen to).
  • The villain is the step-sibling of someone who was having a nice post-luncheon snooze in a hammock, lovely dream about hollyhocks and luge, when the Disco Volante landed on them.
  • The villain is Mrs Bell’s much-put-upon late-middle-aged son who faced bankrupting care-and-wiping bills for her and is only asking Bond for a small financial contribution to same, otherwise he will rain down lava on Las Vegas or somewhere equally pointless.
  • The villain is the secret lovechild of a Greek monk who received many red-hot splinters of ATAC through the back of their brain. He is also enraged that Q offensively dressed up as a priest for no readily discernible reason. Vicious retribution for cultural misappropriation shall be his!
  • The villain is some fat bloke who bought up the shattered Drax Corporation and the equally crumbled Carver Media Group and has accordingly become obsessed with repopulating on other planets whilst at the same time posting specious and under-educated rubbish on his social media platform.
  • The villain is the son of the man who took Bond in as an orphan, the son then out of apparent jealousy (?) murdering his father (?) and creating a global crime empire to spite Bond in some way (?) and… no wait, that’s awful.
  • The villain is an AI replica of Bond with all his prissy affectations and wristwatching, but with slightly more “Eeeee-Vil”, and this’ll work for the first film of a new Bond as the audience initially won’t know which one they are watching do the killing and the semi-raping, which adds tension and plot and stuff, and therefore whether this new interpretation is Light Bond or Dark Bond (other than assuredly being Poor Bond). (They’re going to do this, aren’t they?)
  • The villain is the vengeful third Masterson sister (Cheekyface Masterson), played by Dame Judi Dench (because she can be, continuity was smashed years ago). Good role for an older actor. You know they’ve considered this one.
0 voters
2 Likes
384

Unfortunately, all options are on the table to create an expanded universe (getting more nerds to watch everything, even those things Bond is never going to appear in). And having tons of villains (and, of course, an expanded Mi6 crew cast with Oscar nominees demanding to be part of the plot with meaty or mostly vegan character arcs and payoffs) leave almost no screen time for Bond which is fine (for one producer) because the biggest and beyond actor and object of one’s desire (not MGW‘s) has moved on to projects he really wants to do after his two decades of hard working and knee shattering opulence.

Still, the AI Bond idea actually is so terrible I freakin‘ love it. I really do. Many Bonds who actually look identically wreaking havoc and no one knows who is the brute assassin we all know and love - that is art house level brilliant. Although Charles Feldman might have to be paid off again.

2 Likes
385

I once knew a Parisian taxi driver - briefly, fleetingly, not socially - and can attest to their villainous potential. Do not cross the chauffeur de taxi.

4 Likes
386

New PTS for Bond 26

6 Likes
387

What I don’t understand is who they’re doing this charade for? Bond? They wanted him to somehow escape by impossible means and report back to MI6? I’m not sure that idea holds water because during their night meeting at statue park, Trevelyan says Bond was “supposed to die for me.” Perhaps the mock execution was for the Russian troops, but I’m unsure about that logic as well.

4 Likes
388

Typical of Purvis and Wade, they should really stop employing these hacks who don’t care about logic and…

Say what? That was not Purvis & Wade?

:nerd_face:

Well, with the right director who really gets Bond, like Martin Campbell, who is the best director the franchise ever had and…

What?

5 Likes
389

It really only makes sense if the plan had been for Bond to a) watch the execution and b) escape to report Trevelyan’s death. One might throw in Bond being captured, tortured and exchanged later in a prisoner swap - but the main goal would be to have Trevelyan officially off SIS books and probably the destroyed chemical weapons compound that the Russians already cleared out beforehand.

3 Likes
390

The villain is the younger widower-lover of Nick Nack. They met in prison (Nick Nack’s destination after being lowered from his mast basket), and the younger man fell for Nick Nack’s savoir faire, and the story he told of how Bond cheated him of Scaramanga’s fortune by pretending to be a mannequin (not a big stretch, that).

They had many happy years together running a B&B in Bournemouth, until Nick Nack’s death. Though he took great solace in this relationship, Nick Nack still harbored resentment/frustration over Bond’s treachery until the day he died, which darkened some aspects of an otherwise happy marriage.

5 Likes
391

I always thought Nick-Nack and Jaws would have been a great spin-off, a duo aiming to follow Wint and Kidd.

3 Likes
392

And kindle the wrath of Dolly?

4 Likes
393

September 5.

Back to the UnScene…

  • Something to explain why Kamal Khan would want to see Soviet occupation of Western Europe
  • Something to explain why Bond really has to contact Fekkesh when he knows about Max Kalba anyway
0 voters
3 Likes
394

Always assumed Khan was an opportunist and he would just move from place to place following the money.

2 Likes
395

Choosing Khan here (I have no idea about the Fekesh thing, it can’t be just an excuse for MooreBond smooching and using a woman as a human shield and throwing that white Oddjobb from the roof, although both moments are terrifically or rather terrifyingly entertaining for me, also TSWLM is my first and favorite Bond so I obediently love everything about it).

Khan (oooh, a year after KHAAAAAAN! Coincidence?) always strikes me as a guy incredibly irate about his own personal incompetence and basic irrelevance. So, paving the way for Soviet occupation of Europe (and maybe the USA, too, why not?) is probably his only chance for making history.

Silly, of course. Who would behave this way in real life?

Damn. Another Bond film being prescient. What does EON think, this is not The Simpsons (yet)!

Now I‘m contemplating even whether „Octopussy“ holds a second, well, third meaning which can be applied to Khan and his ilk.

2 Likes
396

India’s strategic makeup has always been difficult, on the fence. While officially non-aligned since 1950, the simple fact of India’s closeness to China and Russia makes strategic considerations significantly different from those of Western Europe.

At the time the USSR was heavily invested in a war in Afghanistan, bleeding out for years with little progress to show for it. Perhaps the simple reflection behind Khan’s support for the Russians was to have the lunatic Orlov run amok in Europe - rather than him pushing through Afghanistan southwards onto the subcontinent?

At any rate, Khan knew to make his profit on the scheme and might actually not even care a lot whether it succeeded or not. His chief deliberation was likely to get rid of Octopussy and anyone who might point their finger at him. Having them all at a spot that flushes them away would have been a bonus.

3 Likes
397

Yes, the idea that Khan as an exiled Afghan princeling may have interest in steering Orlov elsewhere has purchase but it’s not evident. As you say, his interest appears to be purely financial and tracks-covering, which is a bit dull, although I suppose nuking all the people in the know is a fairly flamboyant way of doing that. Still feels oddly underpowered though.

The motives of the 1980s villains are a bit odd, aren’t they?

Kristatos - presumably in it for money, ongoing patronage from the KGB?
Khan - in it for some jewellery, or something. Maybe.
Zorin - has watched Goldfinger (although his motive and method are the easiest ones to grasp).
Koskov & Whitaker - “catastrophically inefficient and over-engineered” is the polite label. “Uh?” is the less polite one.
Sanchez - just going through daily business as usual, the occasional maiming but essentially minding his own business, and then GrrrrrBond turns up to ruin things.

These are very curious people. We go from a slightly scrubby motive, to a complicated but under-motived plot with A BIG BOMB IN IT to a very basic plot with A BIG BOMB IN IT to a scheme that’s deuced tricky to unpick, to no scheme at all.

6 Likes
398

It turned out to be the motive of all the real world´s villains these days: money and power, no really hiding anymore behind anything, not really devising a complex scheme. Just, you know, being obnoxious.

A bit like influencers.

3 Likes
399

I expect a visit from one Bond., J accordingly.

3 Likes
400

I’d like to know why Kahn pronounces Octopussy in the manner that he does. That Orlov never actually says her name (based on a cursory Youtube deep dive) is a loss to the series. Having Berkoff scream “Octopussy” in a loud and demented voice is a real missed opportunity.

5 Likes