Eva Green tips Bond 22 secret?

Loeffelholz

NOTE: Currently a Rumour...possibly a Spoiler...or outright BS...

Take this with the proverbial truckload of salt:

http://www.mi6forums.com/viewtopic.php?t=29135

MI6 is saying that Ms Green has hinted, in a recent magazine interview ('Arena'?), at a potential link between CR and Bond 22---apparently a Vesper cameo might take the form of a recorded video message...with plot links connecting to her pre-Bond former lover...

When coupled with my own suspicions that elements in the Bond Dossier on the CR website (007's missing mountain-climbing instructor/mentor) hint at future adventures, it seems likely (or at least possible) that they intend for a clear story arc to take place over the next couple of pictures...

Thank God. I don't think we've had nearly enough controversy this time round B-)

blueman

Makes sense. Kinda cool too, we've never had such a strong and direct link film-to-next-film...I was hoping they'd do something like this.

Number24

Sounds good. There was a bit of a link between the earliest films. But people must be ale to see Bond 22 without having seen CR first.

highhopes

I don't suppose this is really a spoiler, since I'm talking about the novel here, but wasn't Vesper's brother being held hostage behind the Iron Curtain, leading her to become a double agent? (I should remember, I just reread the book no long ago) They'd have to change his abductors to terrorists, but Bond could go and save the guy.

Moonraker 5

From The Times' Times2 section today...


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7-2422930,00.html

Tomorrow never dies?

Being a Bond girl carries certain responsibilities. It is necessary to appear in various gentlemen’s magazines half-wearing impractical outfits, and to say how devastatingly sexy you find the latest Bond chap.

For Eva Green, the French actress who plays Vesper Lynd in the 21st Bond film Casino Royale, there is also another duty. She will feature in the film after Casino Royale too, she lets slip in the new issue of Arena magazine.

Her mission? To reveal a secret. “Vesper betrayed Bond,” the actress says. “But it’s not really a betrayal because it’s to save his life and he doesn’t know that.”

In the 22nd film, she says: “You will discover what really drove her, what happened, why she did it.” This would be the first time a Bond film directly references the one before. Intrigued, I called the film company and was given the number for a girl in Helsinki, a mobile number ending in 007. “Is Bond 22 a prequel?” I ask. Her voice is mellifluous. “No,” she says. “But there will be a lot of unanswered questions. They will be answered in the next film.”

Or, as Miss Green tells the magazine: “It is a very complicated story.” I just hope the gadgets are complicated, too.

caractacus potts

in the novel it is her lover whos being held by the russians, who've blackmailed her
meaning shes actually cheating on the poor guy when shes with our hero

re that missing mountain climbing instructor mentioned in the 1st post, isnt that from Octopussy?
the bad guy in that story stole some Nazi gold at the end of WWII, and killed the only witness, his guide, who just happened to have been the person who taught our hero to climb mountains
so maybe they will finally film that one properly

re the question: do we now have to have seen CR to understand the first 20 movies?
we never had to before, this shouldnt change that
but itd be nice if the prequel somehow added new layers of meanings to them

hmmm, what if the rumoured revenge sequel were to be YOLT finally done properly?
now thatd rock

Grishenko

Why does this make more sense than the average rumor? Because unlike in the novel, there is no Soviet Union to stand as the continual opposition to Bond's efforts. As such, in the novel it made sense to have a boyfriend held hostage by the Soviets and no one caring.

However, who could the 2006 filmmakers have holding Vesper's man hostage if not Le Chiffre? It probably isn't a nation state's secret services, which means it's probably an organization.

If it is an organization, and if the mystery is not solved by Le Chiffre's demise at the end of CR, then who is leveraging Vesper's deceit? It sounds to me like the work of a SPECTRE-like organization materializing in the 21st century. If that is true, it makes sense that Bond would pursue that lead in the next film (and beyond?)...

Red Indian

***POSSIBLE SPOILER AHEAD***

Wasn't there some mention (when they were filming in the Bahamas) that one of the females (possibly Vesper) was in possession of a ring that was in the shape of some sort of Skull?

Moonraker 5

Red Indian wrote:

***POSSIBLE SPOILER AHEAD***

Wasn't there some mention (when they were filming in the Bahamas) that one of the females (possibly Vesper) was in possession of a ring that was in the shape of some sort of Skull?

Nope - think you might be getting confused with Vesper's Algerian love knot necklace,

which is specifically noted by Bond in the film, though Vesper changes the subject when Bond comments that whoever gave it to her was "a lucky man". It is not referenced again.

This love knot is the rotating "loading" image on the main Casino Royale website, so it must mean something...

highhopes

Grishenko wrote:

Why does this make more sense than the average rumor? Because unlike in the novel, there is no Soviet Union to stand as the continual opposition to Bond's efforts. As such, in the novel it made sense to have a boyfriend held hostage by the Soviets and no one caring.

However, who could the 2006 filmmakers have holding Vesper's man hostage if not Le Chiffre? It probably isn't a nation state's secret services, which means it's probably an organization.

If it is an organization, and if the mystery is not solved by Le Chiffre's demise at the end of CR, then who is leveraging Vesper's deceit? It sounds to me like the work of a SPECTRE-like organization materializing in the 21st century. If that is true, it makes sense that Bond would pursue that lead in the next film (and beyond?)...

A SPECTRE-like organization makes perfect sense. I also think it would be interesting for Bond to attempt to rescue the boyfriend of a woman he loved, even if she did betray him to LeChiffre -- it would give Bond a kind of nobility not unlike Bogart's when he gives up Ingrid Bergman to Paul Henreid. At any rate, if something like that is afoot, I like the idea of Bond being a little more emotionally complicated than he's been in the past.

Agent Wade

The first Bond movie to directly follow with story on the previous film . . . So that line in FRWL about taking reveng on Bond for killing Dr. No was just a throw-away eh? How about Bond's revenge on Blofeld for the death of his wife? Sherrif J.W. Pepper? Jaws?

Perhaps what they mean is that there's more motive for the action in the next movie rather than just a familiar link.

caractacus potts

where in DaF does 007 or blofeld make reference to the events of OHMSS?
sure Bonds piz'd at Blofeld in the opening scene, but he never says "you killed my wife", he might as well be piz'd cuz Blofeld escaped from that volcano HQ two movies previous
I think OHMSS takes place in its own continuity, and DaF is a sequel to YOLT, that the filmmakers chickened out after the percieved failure of OHMSS and pretended it never happened
tSWLM, FYEO, and LtK all refer to the death of Tracy, DaF does not

Dan Same

caractacus potts wrote:

where in DaF does 007 or blofeld make reference to the events of OHMSS?
sure Bonds piz'd at Blofeld in the opening scene, but he never says "you killed my wife", he might as well be piz'd cuz Blofeld escaped from that volcano HQ two movies previous
I think OHMSS takes place in its own continuity, and DaF is a sequel to YOLT, that the filmmakers chickened out after the percieved failure of OHMSS and pretended it never happened

That's an interesting theory but I actually think that DAF does follow on from OHMSS. The reason is that OHMSS made it quite clear that in that film Bond was chasing Blofeld due to his escaping in YOLT. Therefore I consider DAF to be a followup to OHMSS. Plus, Bond wasn't just p***ed in DAF; he was absolutely furious. I think his anger would have been personal rather than merely professional.

caractacus potts wrote:

tSWLM, FYEO, and LtK all refer to the death of Tracy, DaF does not

Even if one accepts your premise that OHMSS doesn't reference Tracey, what about TWINE? If only implicitly.

Nightshooter

Dan Same wrote:

Plus, Bond wasn't just p***ed in DAF; he was absolutely furious. I think his anger would have been personal rather than merely professional.

But he was only angry for, what, about five seconds?

Dan Same

Nightshooter wrote:

But he was only angry for, what, about five seconds?

Probably a bit more than that. However the fact that he was angry for such a short time is arguably due more to the chaotic nature of the script rather than the reason he was angry.

Loeffelholz

Still, it would have been better, IMRO, to reference the fact that Blofeld murdered Bond's bride on their wedding day, rather than simply having Bond slap a few people around, demanding to know where Blofeld was...

True, the script wasn't great, but (I think) this omission hints that Eon seemed to want to ignore OHMSS altogether, given the aborted Lazenby tenure (and diminished box office), as a means of saving face, whilst offering Connery a huge payday to reprise the role one final time. It seemed like, "Okay, we'll have Bond angry at the beginning of the picture, and then we can get on with the fun---and later, we can have Blofeld in drag!"

CR signals a return to the sort of literary-inspired, spirit-and-intent faithfulness that Eon was purposefully dodging when DAF was made. And I find that exciting

Therefore, a bit of genuine continuity---even a three-picture arc---is welcome news to me, particularly since the CR novel took pains to establish an ongoing motivation for Bond in his career: Defeating SMERSH.

General_Ourumov

For goodness sake, they need to stop faffing about and bring back Blofeld for the first (proper) time in nearly 40 years. It would be something akin to the resurrection of Batman's greatest foe - Joker, set to appear in the next film to be released.

So many film series are being revamped or dug up, I think it's time Blofeld was completely re-invented. Rather than have him as a stereotypical mastermind, the type spoofed inumerable times, make him much darker, scarier.

TonyDP

Dan Same wrote:

caractacus potts wrote:

where in DaF does 007 or blofeld make reference to the events of OHMSS?
sure Bonds piz'd at Blofeld in the opening scene, but he never says "you killed my wife", he might as well be piz'd cuz Blofeld escaped from that volcano HQ two movies previous
I think OHMSS takes place in its own continuity, and DaF is a sequel to YOLT, that the filmmakers chickened out after the percieved failure of OHMSS and pretended it never happened

That's an interesting theory but I actually think that DAF does follow on from OHMSS. The reason is that OHMSS made it quite clear that in that film Bond was chasing Blofeld due to his escaping in YOLT. Therefore I consider DAF to be a followup to OHMSS. Plus, Bond wasn't just p***ed in DAF; he was absolutely furious. I think his anger would have been personal rather than merely professional.

EON always played it loose and fast with continuity in the Bond movies and this is another maddening example.

You could make the case that Bond was hunting Blofeld for Tracy's murder. My only problem with that motivation is that it was Bunt who was the triggerman ... err, woman and no mention is made of her whatsoever. I know that Ilse Steppat was dead by this point, but Charles Gray looked nothing like Telly Savalas, so if Bond was really out for revenge, why not have a scene of him killing Bunt as well?

In the end, I guess we all believe what we want to believe or what fits our individual imaginations best. EON has seen to it that there will never be a definitive answer.