In GoldenEye Bond had a hunch that the Tiger helicopter might be stolen. That’s why he was in Monte Carlo. He reports back to MI6 when he encounters Onnatop but M orders him to only observe and not engage. Once he finds Admiral Farrel’s body he knows the Tiger is about to be stolen but is too late.
Back at MI6 Tanner tells Bond “To bad the evil Queen of Numbers wouldn’t let you play your hunch.” Bond and M argue about it in their meeting. Bond is angry that M didn’t take his warning seriously where her predecessor might have. It why their relationship is initially frosty.
It wasn’t a coincidence. Bond was deliberately there because he feared the Tiger might be stolen.
hoxa9, welcome, thanks for that great review, I feel for you, and I also felt much as you did watching the movie’s climax. I was underwhelmed [see my review where ever it is] . I agree entirely that this realism nonsense - which is simply an excuse to depress the hell out of an audience - has denied me any joy watching Bond post 2008. I admire the films, sure, but I don’t love them. The violence is horrifically over the top, the internal monologues played out externally grate, the fantasy characters have all vanished. I’d like a modern Bond movie - well, any movie, in fact - to try just to entertain me, but they really don’t.
On that note, I wonder why they needed to show Bond as he was blown up, versus cutting away a few seconds earlier which would have given some fans bothered by the ending a quantum of hope, and given a little flexibility for future storytelling. Would have been much easier for me to move past!
Partially agree, partially disagree. I think it’s all about balance. I don’t need Bond CGI surfing, but also don’t need to meet his daughter or watch him essentially beg the girl to take him back. That was uncomfortable and decidedly un-Bondian, though Craig acted his butt off in the scene. I think you have to split the difference. PWB & CaryF should get to take another crack at it.
I’m happy we got what we did. When they announced the villain was Safin, I thought they’d abandoned that storyline. But when I saw Poison Garden on the CD, … yes! Had they titled the film Garden of Death or mentioned Guntram Shatterhand as the villain, it would have spoiled the story.
I’ve given up on being upset when EON makes a choice I wouldn’t have. Instead, I try to focus on enjoying what they did and strived for, because that’s what’s out there and what they offered us. There’s no third Dalton, or fifth Brosnan film, so I’m not going to lose any sleep over what might have been Property of a Lady. Rather, I try to enjoy what they put out. For Quantum of Solace, that takes some work. For Spectre, that takes lowering of expectations. But for CR, SF and NTTD, I’m content with the product as is… Ecstatic even.
Unless this has been addressed above, or is something explained in the film that I missed whilst having a doze, couldn’t Bond’s EMP watch affect / disrupt / throughly knacker the nanobots?
I think it was mentioned once or twice - might have been an exit for the writers. Or perhaps a red herring, I think I remember having read Fukunaga had a couple of versions of the ending to throw off the news hounds in case somebody talked.
Unless of course they rely on Zorin’s chip technology that can withstand the blast of an EMP (a blast that would otherwise bugger one’s toaster right up). Happy to take it as a reference rather than a plot hole.
Alternatively, it isn’t a plot hole and Q’s too thick to realise and point it out to Bond. It’s all Q’s fault. The big thicky. Or his revenge for Bond drinking his wine, uninvited.
