Plot Question

ufboy73

I have a question about a scene that I makes me wonder if i somehow missed something. During a break in the poker game at the casino, what is bond doing going up to le chiffre's room? He receives a gun in a mail envelope, uses a device to locate le chriffre's room and it certainly look like he is going to kill him (or at the least abduct him).

why is he doing this? at this point in the story, i thought the 'mission' was to defeat le chiffre at cards (in order to blackmail him into custody and turnover information on the 'big picture'). Secondly, why does bond even have vesper along at all at this point? you arm yourself and then bring a 'civilian' with you for the impending encounter?

help me out here - i thought the movie and script were terrific but this particular, seeming departure from the prescribed storyline is bugging me.

thanks

7289

It seemed to me that as Bond had just planted a "bug" in LeChiffre's inhaler he wanted to listen in on LeChiffre's conversations during the break in play. Since the "bug" was so small. prehaps its range was short and he had to get close to listen.

Picking up the pistol was a precaution, in case he was observed and challenged near LeChiffre's room. Taking Vesper does seem ill-advised though prehaps Bond saw her as additional "cover".

A reckless move by Bond. In this flick he is supposed to be learning, this bold move was indeed a mistake!!!

taity

Yeah, Id wondered about that too. It seems as if the writers wanted the staircase fight, and that was the only way to get it in.

Malko Linge

taity wrote:

Yeah, Id wondered about that too. It seems as if the writers wanted the staircase fight, and that was the only way to get it in.

It's often the problem in different opus but in CR particularly. Bravo for this one!-{

ufboy73

another thing thats been bugging me...

after the embassy killing, its shown that an unknown british agent has killed someone at the embassy (this is implied by the reaction of M and on a headline that le chiffre looks at on his computer on the boat).

how the hell would anyone know that bond is british, let alone a secret government agent from the interactions that he has had?

postman pat

Every Bond film seems to leave a few question marks...

highhopes

CTrent49 wrote:

ufboy73 wrote:

another thing thats been bugging me...

after the embassy killing, its shown that an unknown british agent has killed someone at the embassy (this is implied by the reaction of M and on a headline that le chiffre looks at on his computer on the boat).

how the hell would anyone know that bond is british, let alone a secret government agent from the interactions that he has had?

That has always baffled me, considering the only one Bond had spoken to during the entire sequence was Carter.

I think it's safe to say that the bomber, given his profession, wasn't entirely unaware that he was probably under surveillance and that he was being tailed for quite some time before, we, the movie audience, drop in on the action. His immediate flight at the sight of Carter would seem to be a bit of an overreaction if he had no idea what was up. And it's fair to say that he probably had at least a general idea of who he was wanted by. No doubt the embassy people who were apparently sheltering him had the same information.

ufboy73

highhopes wrote:

CTrent49 wrote:

ufboy73 wrote:

another thing thats been bugging me...

after the embassy killing, its shown that an unknown british agent has killed someone at the embassy (this is implied by the reaction of M and on a headline that le chiffre looks at on his computer on the boat).

how the hell would anyone know that bond is british, let alone a secret government agent from the interactions that he has had?

That has always baffled me, considering the only one Bond had spoken to during the entire sequence was Carter.

I think it's safe to say that the bomber, given his profession, wasn't entirely unaware that he was probably under surveillance and that he was being tailed for quite some time before, we, the movie audience, drop in on the action. His immediate flight at the sight of Carter would seem to be a bit of an overreaction if he had no idea what was up. And it's fair to say that he probably had at least a general idea of who he was wanted by. No doubt the embassy people who were apparently sheltering him had the same information.

i can see what you mean - jumping from you may be under surveillance by someone and knowing its a british government agent is quite a leap though (e.g. why not a cia agent - particularly since the intended target was on US soil, not british).

Smoke_13

Just a shot in the dark here...

perhaps Carter was identified as a British agent and the assumption that Bond must be one as well was made based on that.

highhopes

Smoke_13 wrote:

Just a shot in the dark here...

perhaps Carter was identified as a British agent and the assumption that Bond must be one as well was made based on that.

You should also keep in mind that the newspaper that ID'd him might have gotten the information from confidential sources -- that happens all the time; or that the embassy guy knew Bond was a British agent. We as a movie audience can't assume we've seen everything there is to see. But there are a million reasonable explanations. Maybe the bomber told the embassy guy that he was being chased by people he thought might be British agents. The embassy guy told the media. If the bomber is known to the British, why wouldn't Bond be known to the bomber's sponsors? LeChiffre knew Bond wasn't "Mr. Beach." Who knows? They do have Bond on camera -- that goes a long way to identifying someone. Maybe an enemy of Britain saw the tape, recognized Bond from somewhere else, and told the paper or told the embassy people who told the paper. How about this: Maybe an member of the opposition in Parliament told the paper they were meeting to read the head of of MI6 the riot act for an agent's shooting up an embassy. I could construct a dozen reasonable scenarios that would go with that headline.

ufboy73

highhopes wrote:

Smoke_13 wrote:

Just a shot in the dark here...

perhaps Carter was identified as a British agent and the assumption that Bond must be one as well was made based on that.

You should also keep in mind that the newspaper that ID'd him might have gotten the information from confidential sources -- that happens all the time; or that the embassy guy knew Bond was a British agent. We as a movie audience can't assume we've seen everything there is to see. But there are a million reasonable explanations. Maybe the bomber told the embassy guy that he was being chased by people he thought might be British agents. The embassy guy told the media. If the bomber is known to the British, why wouldn't Bond be known to the bomber's sponsors? LeChiffre knew Bond wasn't "Mr. Beach." Who knows? They do have Bond on camera -- that goes a long way to identifying someone. Maybe an enemy of Britain saw the tape, recognized Bond from somewhere else, and told the paper or told the embassy people who told the paper. How about this: Maybe an member of the opposition in Parliament told the paper they were meeting to read the head of of MI6 the riot act for an agent's shooting up an embassy. I could construct a dozen reasonable scenarios that would go with that headline.

thanks for the ideas - i cant honestly say that they seem too plausible to me but i see your point.

my question was more from the standpoint of did i miss something in the movie that would have indicated more explicitly how it happened. sure, one can always try and make up reasons why something happens in any film (limited only by ones own imagination i suppose) but i prefer loose ends tied up in my own mind.