Vesper was a two-timing whore?

VinnyMac

I watched Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace again, and I realized something. Has anyone else come to the conclusion that Vesper was really just a two-timing whore? Of course, we all like Bond, and everyone wants to see their hero's love-interest in a positive light, so they make excuses for what she did and overlook things, but look at the facts:

She had a boyfriend, who she "loved" and was planning to go back to. She used another man (Bond) so that she could steal his money to save her boyfriend. In the process, she had sex with the other man (Bond) and cheated on her boyfriend (who she "loved"). In the end she didn't have a change of heart or decide to do the right thing; SHE WENT THROUGH WITH STEALING THE MONEY and tried to use it!

Of course, you can try to soften the blow by pointing out that her boyfriend was a criminal (this is one of the "excuses" that I mentioned earlier), but she didn't know that, and neither did we before QoS. She thought that he was a great guy, but she still cheated on him and used Bond for money.

...sounds like a two-timing whore to me. Thoughts...?

AlphaOmegaSin

Well in the Novel, she is a two timing Whore as well. But in the case of being a double Agent. It is rather humorous what Bond has to say about her at the end )

Nick37

When Vesper sleeps with Bond, she's under the assumption her lover was already dead. He points out the necklace and the fact that she's not wearing it before the takes the money:

Bond: You stopped wearing the necklace.


Vesper: Yes. It was time.


Bond: Time enough to get over someone?


Vesper: To realize sometimes you can forget the past.


By allowing herself to fall in love with Bond, she sacrificed the douchebag she thought was her fiance' They go through that in the closing dialogue with Bond and M at the end. She was specifically there to keep Bond from winning, and she failed that objective. After LeChiffre is killed, they re-negotiate. They'll let Bond live, in exchange for the money. M even says as much in the dialogue:

Bond: Why should I need more time? The job's done, and the bitch is dead.


M: James......did you ever ask yourself why you weren't killed that night? Isn't it obvious? She made a deal to spare your life
in exchange for the money. I'm sure she hoped they would let her live. But she must have known she was going to her death. And now we'll never know who was behind this.


Two-timing whore? No. Almost a martyr in a way. At the end, she realizes that while he may love her too, Bond will never forgive her betrayal, so she kills herself. She gave the money to White's organization, knowing she'd likely die, but that Bond would live. She had a chance to live after Bond killed everyone, but she couldn't live with herself for bond hating her, and ended things.

VinnyMac

Nick37 wrote:

When Vesper sleeps with Bond, she's under the assumption her lover was already dead. He points out the necklace and the fact that she's not wearing it before the takes the money:

Bond: You stopped wearing the necklace.


Vesper: Yes. It was time.


Bond: Time enough to get over someone?


Vesper: To realize sometimes you can forget the past.


By allowing herself to fall in love with Bond, she sacrificed the douchebag she thought was her fiance' They go through that in the closing dialogue with Bond and M at the end. She was specifically there to keep Bond from winning, and she failed that objective. After LeChiffre is killed, they re-negotiate. They'll let Bond live, in exchange for the money. M even says as much in the dialogue:

Bond: Why should I need more time? The job's done, and the bitch is dead.


M: James......did you ever ask yourself why you weren't killed that night? Isn't it obvious? She made a deal to spare your life
in exchange for the money. I'm sure she hoped they would let her live. But she must have known she was going to her death. And now we'll never know who was behind this.


Two-timing whore? No. Almost a martyr in a way. At the end, she realizes that while he may love her too, Bond will never forgive her betrayal, so she kills herself. She gave the money to White's organization, knowing she'd likely die, but that Bond would live. She had a chance to live after Bond killed everyone, but she couldn't live with herself for bond hating her, and ended things.

That sounds like a great re-imagining and romanticizing of the story, but I do believe that she'd given him the wrong account number and had the money deposited into that account LONG before the scene that you mentioned. She simply hadn't withdrawn it yet. When Bond told her to type in "V-E-S-P-E-R," the money went to a different account than what Bond expected.

The part that your romantic revisioning left out is the phone call that Bond received immediately after the conversation that you quoted...where M pointed out that the money had never been deposited into the account that it was supposed to be in (because it was in another account, thanks to Vesper).

She had the money misdirected, slept with Bond, had that conversation that you quoted and then left to get the money from the account that she'd had it sent to. I don't remember her "knowing" that her boyfriend was dead either. That's just more re-imagining, spinning and reading into things based on what we found out in QoS. I'll be happy to double-check, but I don't remember seeing anything in CR that indicated that she thought that he was dead. As far as I could tell, taking off the necklace was simply her being caught up in the affair that she was carrying on with Bond.

....sounds like a two-timing whore to me.

Nick37

"The part that your romantic revisioning left out is the phone call that Bond received immediately after the conversation that you quoted...where M pointed out that the money had never been deposited into the account that it was supposed to be in (because it was in another account, thanks to Vesper)."

And you're forgetting the part where she left her phone behind so he could follow her.

Bond: She left her cell phone. She must have known I'd check it.


M: She knew you were you.



You're also forgetting the text message she sent to Bond after she leaves the hotel room to make the money drop, giving Bond Mr. White's name and telephone #. Without her giving Bond that information, we wouldn't have the ending to the movie where Bond shoots White in the leg and takes him captive.

Before he answers the phone call from M, Vesper's phone dings that she has a new message. It's forgotten about as Bond takes off to follow her. She also wears a bright red dress, making her stand out from the crowd, again, so Bond could easily follow her.

After the conversation with M, He then looks through her belongings (Including shells from their beach encounter), and scans the phone network. Lo and behold, there's a message from Vesper saying, "For James" That gives the Mr. White info.

Yes, she deposited the money in the wrong account, but if she was trying to fvck bond over, why make the money drop when she's with him? Why not transfer it from that account to another account and eliminate the need to withdraw the money period? Because she wanted the men there and wanted Bond to follow her so he could kill them.

Why leave the information for Mr. White? She went through on her end of the bargain, but she did everything in her power to make sure Bond could track down Mr. White and get the money back. Again, she wouldn't have done that unless she was on Bond's side.

No we never officially find out her boyfriend is dead, but the tone of her voice, the sadness, and the necklace being gone, IMO, indicate she's accepted he'd dead.

Asp9mm

VinnyMac wrote:

That sounds like a great re-imagining and romanticizing of the story, but I do believe that she'd given him the wrong account number and had the money deposited into that account LONG before the scene that you mentioned. She simply hadn't withdrawn it yet. When Bond told her to type in "V-E-S-P-E-R," the money went to a different account than what Bond expected.

The part that your romantic revisioning left out is the phone call that Bond received immediately after the conversation that you quoted...where M pointed out that the money had never been deposited into the account that it was supposed to be in (because it was in another account, thanks to Vesper).

She had the money misdirected, slept with Bond, had that conversation that you quoted and then left to get the money from the account that she'd had it sent to. I don't remember her "knowing" that her boyfriend was dead either. That's just more re-imagining, spinning and reading into things based on what we found out in QoS. I'll be happy to double-check, but I don't remember seeing anything in CR that indicated that she thought that he was dead. As far as I could tell, taking off the necklace was simply her being caught up in the affair that she was carrying on with Bond.

....sounds like a two-timing whore to me.

She didn't transfer the money to the wrong account. The money was in a holding account awaiting transfer. Vesper was then supposed to transfer the money from that holding account to the Treasury. Again it's clear in the film that it went to a holding account that Bond knew about as he could get the details anytime he wanted from Mendel.

Nick37 is right, she clearly let the past go. Which meant her old boyfriend. That is made very clear in the film. But she was on borrowed time, and you could see that in her face when it caught up with her as Gettler showed up unexpectedly in Venice. From that point on she knew her running was over.

VinnyMac

Asp9mm wrote:

She didn't transfer the money to the wrong account. The money was in a holding account awaiting transfer. Vesper was then supposed to transfer the money from that holding account to the Treasury. Again it's clear in the film that it went to a holding account that Bond knew about as he could get the details anytime he wanted from Mendel.

Nick37 is right, she clearly let the past go. Which meant her old boyfriend. That is made very clear in the film. But she was on borrowed time, and you could see that in her face when it caught up with her as Gettler showed up unexpectedly in Venice. From that point on she knew her running was over.

lol...It's only "clear" when you're looking for a positive spin or a glimmer of hope. Like I said, everyone wants their hero to win and to find the Juliet to his Romeo. The money was held in a holding account DURING the competition and was transferred to the winner's account afterwards. Vesper had access to the accounts. Bond had the password that would confirm the transfer after he won.

As far as "letting go of the past" goes, you can call it that if it makes you feel better to idealize things and create a fairytale ending. What I saw was someone, who may very well have had feelings for Bond, get caught up in her vacation and start to feel a bit of remorse about what she was about to do to the poor sucker who was lying across from her. Everything that you said is "clear" is only clear because you want it to be.

....two-timing whore.

Nick37

What is clear is that I'm looking at someone who will blindly ignore all proof to the otherwise to prove his "Point" about Vesper. Someone who thinks he has all the answers, but little evidence to prove the contrary. I have provided excerpts from the script to back up my theories, something you have not. All you do is dismiss it without providing any real reason why, other than, "No, I told you so, because this is what *I* think."

It's also clear it's useless to continue this conversation with you, and I see it was pointless to start. You only want those who side with you to comment, which is a useless thread to start in a 'Discussion forum."

Good day, sir.

VinnyMac wrote:

Asp9mm wrote:

She didn't transfer the money to the wrong account. The money was in a holding account awaiting transfer. Vesper was then supposed to transfer the money from that holding account to the Treasury. Again it's clear in the film that it went to a holding account that Bond knew about as he could get the details anytime he wanted from Mendel.

Nick37 is right, she clearly let the past go. Which meant her old boyfriend. That is made very clear in the film. But she was on borrowed time, and you could see that in her face when it caught up with her as Gettler showed up unexpectedly in Venice. From that point on she knew her running was over.

lol...It's only "clear" when you're looking for a positive spin or a glimmer of hope. Like I said, everyone wants their hero to win and to find the Juliet to his Romeo. The money was held in a holding account DURING the competition and was transferred to the winner's account afterwards. Vesper had access to the accounts. Bond had the password that would confirm the transfer after he won.

As far as "letting go of the past" goes, you can call it that if it makes you feel better to idealize things and create a fairytale ending. What I saw was someone, who may very well have had feelings for Bond, get caught up in her vacation and start to feel a bit of remorse about what she was about to do to the poor sucker who was lying across from her. Everything that you said is "clear" is only clear because you want it to be.

....two-timing whore.

Sir Miles

Nick37 wrote:

What is clear is that I'm looking at someone who will blindly ignore all proof to the otherwise to prove his "Point" about Vesper. Someone who thinks he has all the answers, but little evidence to prove the contrary. I have provided excerpts from the script to back up my theories, something you have not. All you do is dismiss it without providing any real reason why, other than, "No, I told you so, because this is what *I* think."

I agree with you...looks like this guy hasn't sat down and watched the film properly...or just doesn't understand/follow it...

Higgins

Nick37 wrote:

What is clear is that I'm looking at someone who will blindly ignore all proof to the otherwise to prove his "Point" about Vesper. Someone who thinks he has all the answers, but little evidence to prove the contrary. I have provided excerpts from the script to back up my theories, something you have not. All you do is dismiss it without providing any real reason why, other than, "No, I told you so, because this is what *I* think."

Sounds a little bit like yourself: "Dalton's movies have been highly successfully on the box office and he was widely accepted by the audience"

No matter which numbers I presented you

Nick37

Yawn. You just can't stop following me around, can you? Like a little dog that no matter how much you ignore, attaches itself to your leg and begs you for attention. Alright, here's your attention. Back into the kennel with you. Didn't you send me a heartfelt PM where you screamed about being "Done with me?" Yet you just can't stay away.



Bondtoys: I will follow you around until you admit that nasty Welshman was a terrible James Bond who was hated by audiences and who's movies suck, and then I'll post with you FOREVER and EVER AND EVER.

Bondtoys wrote:

Nick37 wrote:

What is clear is that I'm looking at someone who will blindly ignore all proof to the otherwise to prove his "Point" about Vesper. Someone who thinks he has all the answers, but little evidence to prove the contrary. I have provided excerpts from the script to back up my theories, something you have not. All you do is dismiss it without providing any real reason why, other than, "No, I told you so, because this is what *I* think."

Sounds a little bit like yourself: "Dalton's movies have been highly successfully on the box office and he was widely accepted by the audience"

No matter which numbers I presented you

Peppermill

This was such a nice place when I joined a few years ago... Too bad this happens to 9 out of 10 threads.

PPK packer

Is a "two-timing whore" a good thing or a bad thing?

Sir Miles

Peppermill wrote:

This was such a nice place when I joined a few years ago... Too bad this happens to 9 out of 10 threads.

I don't think its quite THAT bad...but it would be nice if people could converse with each other and respect differing viewpoints....alas though, some are just here to troll and to deliberately cause arguments/offence...

Silhouette Man

Namely the incessant bickering between two members that shall remain nameless. 8-) Plus, this thread is full of trolling spam. The use of the word 'whore' is ill-advised in a thread title, methinks. 8-)

AlphaOmegaSin

I think it's all past our Bedtime me thinks.

Asp9mm

VinnyMac wrote:

lol...It's only "clear" when you're looking for a positive spin or a glimmer of hope. Like I said, everyone wants their hero to win and to find the Juliet to his Romeo. The money was held in a holding account DURING the competition and was transferred to the winner's account afterwards. Vesper had access to the accounts. Bond had the password that would confirm the transfer after he won.

As far as "letting go of the past" goes, you can call it that if it makes you feel better to idealize things and create a fairytale ending. What I saw was someone, who may very well have had feelings for Bond, get caught up in her vacation and start to feel a bit of remorse about what she was about to do to the poor sucker who was lying across from her. Everything that you said is "clear" is only clear because you want it to be.

....two-timing whore.

I think you need to watch the film again. You've clearly missed some important plot points.

Napoleon Plural

Vesper is all ready to dump her boyfriend when she realises how much she means to Bond, in that he used her name for the password. However, what happens next?

Bond makes his little finger joke, he jumps on her and tries to give her a good seeing 2. But that's when he turns out to be rubbish in bed, so she reverts to plan A, to nick the money!

In fact, maybe Le Chiffre's rope torture did have its effect, and he can't get it up. Explains why we don't see him making out much in the other films, and those he does cop off with have to die - Bond is the one behind it, trying to ensure they don't rat on him and grass him up for being a crap lover.

VinnyMac

...calling it like it is -{

Thunderpussy

Given the standards set by "The Only Way is Essex"
I say Vesper was "Quite the lady"

PPK packer

Isn't the title of this thread a little harsh.

Perhaps we should say she was just "indecisive" or acting on her prerogative to changer her mind... Like you can't blame Bond for trying.

VinnyMac

PPK packer wrote:

Isn't the title of this thread a little harsh.

Perhaps we should say she was just "indecisive" or acting on her prerogative to changer her mind... Like you can't blame Bond for trying.

lol...remember those wise words when your wife/gf decides to "act on her prerogative to change her mind." You're probably only saying that because you have a "movie-crush" on her. People will explain away and reframe anything for someone who they like (even a fictional character) )

Asp9mm

VinnyMac wrote:

PPK packer wrote:

Isn't the title of this thread a little harsh.

Perhaps we should say she was just "indecisive" or acting on her prerogative to changer her mind... Like you can't blame Bond for trying.

lol...remember those wise words when your wife/gf decides to "act on her prerogative to change her mind." You're probably only saying that because you have a "movie-crush" on her. People will explain away and reframe anything for someone who they like (even a fictional character) )

And when people dislike a character.... exactly the opposite as you have quite inelegantly proven. This thread quite obviously stems from something deeper than some movie character angst. Get a grip and find the reality in the fact it's only a movie and Vesper isn't a real person doing real things. She's a fictional character entirely written by men. Not real and not worth getting all upset about.

Barbel

Asp9mm wrote:

find the reality in the fact it's only a movie.

I totally agree with your point but it's been two movies, and a TV adaptation, and of course the Fleming book it all sprang from. The Vesper character ("Valerie" in the 54 TV version) has always been ambiguous (yes, even in the 67 film), although I personally find "two-timing whore" far too harsh.

Thunderpussy

Barbel wrote :

I personally find "two-timing whore" far too harsh.

You should change the one you go to ...........
........ " Too much pain, Not enough Discipline " ( High Anxiety )

But I agree it's not the sort of discription I'd use.

Firemass

Vesper Lynd= West Berlin

Barbel

Thunderpussy wrote:

Barbel wrote :

I personally find "two-timing whore" far too harsh.

You should change the one you go to ...........
........ " Too much pain, Not enough Discipline " ( High Anxiety )

But I agree it's not the sort of discription I'd use.

) ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scgO8Vfh1qU

7289

Isn't Vesper supposed to be a contradictory, confusing charecter. She springs from the shadow world of Cold War espionage, where nothing is what it seems, even oo7.

Lovely charecter, and in CR'06 played by a very skilled actress. As fans we got a good deal on that flick .... "two timing whore" - no - classic Bond girl - yes!