But what do they resolve, other than Bond is going to watch over White's daughter? Did they even bother to mention Vesper in any meaningful way? The scene just seemed there to introduce a plot point -- nothing remarkable.
I can't really see them discussing Vesper - I mean, it's a two and half HOUR film - NOT two and a half DAYS )
They can't possibly 'fit' everything in...
Oh, come on now. They had time for that cheesiness about White being upset that Blofeld went after women and children . . . when Quantum not only went after Vesper, when it's implied White killed Le Chiffre's girlfriend, and when Quantum bankrolled terrorists and cut off an entire nation's water supply, both of which affect women and children. If they had time for such an obviously hollow line, they could have worked in dialogue about Vesper.
All they had to do was rework the dialogue so the conversation mentioned Vesper. It could have been as simple as:
White: He made us push Vesper too hard. If it means anything, I opposed it.
Bond: Your honor as a gentleman?
White: See for yourself. There are tapes --
Bond: It doesn't matter now.
Then, when we get to the scene later in the hotel, Bond's decision not to watch the tape takes on even greater meaning. Blofeld's "author of all your pain" line takes on greater resonance.
Sorry...doesn't work for me at all...Vesper wasn't an 'innocent'...he'd have no compunction about leaving her to her fate...
I can't really see them discussing Vesper - I mean, it's a two and half HOUR film - NOT two and a half DAYS )
They can't possibly 'fit' everything in...
Oh, come on now. They had time for that cheesiness about White being upset that Blofeld went after women and children . . . when Quantum not only went after Vesper, when it's implied White killed Le Chiffre's girlfriend, and when Quantum bankrolled terrorists and cut off an entire nation's water supply, both of which affect women and children. If they had time for such an obviously hollow line, they could have worked in dialogue about Vesper.
All they had to do was rework the dialogue so the conversation mentioned Vesper. It could have been as simple as:
White: He made us push Vesper too hard. If it means anything, I opposed it.
Bond: Your honor as a gentleman?
White: See for yourself. There are tapes --
Bond: It doesn't matter now.
Then, when we get to the scene later in the hotel, Bond's decision not to watch the tape takes on even greater meaning. Blofeld's "author of all your pain" line takes on greater resonance.
Sorry...doesn't work for me at all...Vesper wasn't an 'innocent'...he'd have no compunction about leaving her to her fate...
This doesn't surprise me. 8-) But how does this exchange make Vesper an "innocent"? It just suggests that White didn't think they needed to go that far to get what they wanted. From Blofeld's point of view, though, it was perfect to push her to the point of suicide and hurting Bond in the process. White's opposition for practical purposes wouldn't matter to Blofeld, who would see it as disloyalty, and thus help lead to his elimination of White later.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,746Chief of Staff
But how does this exchange make Vesper an "innocent"? It just suggests that White didn't think they needed to go that far to get what they wanted. From Blofeld's point of view, though, it was perfect to push her to the point of suicide and hurting Bond in the process. White's opposition for practical purposes wouldn't matter to Blofeld, who would see it as disloyalty, and thus help lead to his elimination of White later.
Pardon ?
Did I say it did ?
You don't explain why White would care...which doesn't surprise me 8-)
A scene is supposed to do one or more of three things:
1. Move the plot forward;
2. Demonstrate character;
3. Reflect theme.
The scene with Mr. White does all three.
1. It provides the "bridge" to Madeleine, but it also causes Bond to think about who he is. Will he also end up alone in an abandoned cottage waiting for death to come wearing a familiar face? This sets up the ending of the film where Bond decides to walk away from his role as assassin for Queen and Country.
2. It tells us something about the character of the two men. Mr. White was obviously a bad man but he loves his daughter and this spark of humanity provides a connection between Bond and Mr. White. Bond is willing to do anything to complete his mission, even trust a man he hates. By the end of the movie he has re-thought this single-minded attitude toward life.
3. Finally, the theme of the movie is trust, which brings us full circle to CR. By the end of the movie Bond has learned to trust Swann. The theme is demonstrated in this scene when Bond hands Mr. White a loaded gun, trusting that White's love of his daughter and wanting Bond to protect her will override any other considerations.
A scene is supposed to do one or more of three things:
1. Move the plot forward;
2. Demonstrate character;
3. Reflect theme.
The scene with Mr. White does all three.
1. It provides the "bridge" to Madeleine, but it also causes Bond to think about who he is. Will he also end up alone in an abandoned cottage waiting for death to come wearing a familiar face? This sets up the ending of the film where Bond decides to walk away from his role as assassin for Queen and Country.
2. It tells us something about the character of the two men. Mr. White was obviously a bad man but he loves his daughter and this spark of humanity provides a connection between Bond and Mr. White. Bond is willing to do anything to complete his mission, even trust a man he hates. By the end of the movie he has re-thought this single-minded attitude toward life.
3. Finally, the theme of the movie is trust, which brings us full circle to CR. By the end of the movie Bond has learned to trust Swann. The theme is demonstrated in this scene when Bond hands Mr. White a loaded gun, trusting that White's love of his daughter and wanting Bond to protect her will override any other considerations.
But how does this exchange make Vesper an "innocent"? It just suggests that White didn't think they needed to go that far to get what they wanted. From Blofeld's point of view, though, it was perfect to push her to the point of suicide and hurting Bond in the process. White's opposition for practical purposes wouldn't matter to Blofeld, who would see it as disloyalty, and thus help lead to his elimination of White later.
Pardon ?
Did I say it did ?
You don't explain why White would care...which doesn't surprise me 8-)
Then there really isn't anything to talk about. We'll leave it at that.
Having Bond chat with Mr. White about Vesper wouldn't have served any purpose.
The film is about Bond's evolution from a blunt instrument to becoming a fully realized human being. This happens in part through his relationship with Swann, a woman who can understand what it means to be an assassin.
The movie is about moving forward. Reliving his time with Vesper would be a step back. That's why it's important that he ignores the Vesper videotape.
I enjoyed the scene, two men who hate each other, have to make a deal
to help each other -{ Bond gets what he wants, information. While Mr White
gets, someone to finish his work, and bring down Blofeld.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
But they already relive the time. She's in the credits animation, and there's the issue of the videotape. And since White was integrally involved in her death -- and she texted Bond post mortem about him -- it's a lost moment of resolution. One of the things I keep seeing from critics is how dumb the script is. in this, I agree. It has a lot of one-liners and a few good lines of dialogue, but on the whole, it's thin. The rest of the film props it up rather than the other way around. The "meat" people were looking for is not there and evidenced by all the missed opportunities, not the least of which is to give Blofeld more to do, too.
But they already relive the time. She's in the credits animation, and there's the issue of the videotape. And since White was integrally involved in her death -- and she texted Bond post mortem about him -- it's a lost moment of resolution. One of the things I keep seeing from critics is how dumb the script is. in this, I agree. It has a lot of one-liners and a few good lines of dialogue, but on the whole, it's thin. The rest of the film props it up rather than the other way around. The "meat" people were looking for is not there and evidenced by all the missed opportunities, not the least of which is to give Blofeld more to do, too.
I do agree the script is thin in places, mostly in failing to fully flesh out Blofeld and Swann. A little more polish and hard work on the script could've resulted in a truly great movie, not just a great Bond movie, but a great movie. It's a little bit of a missed opportunity, but still a very good film.
The reason characters from previous films, not just Vesper, are shown in the credits is that this movie is the culmination of the story arc that started in CR.
I enjoyed the scene, two men who hate each other, have to make a deal
to help each other -{ Bond gets what he wants, information. While Mr White
gets, someone to finish his work, and bring down Blofeld.
Blofeld always lives on somehow. (for the next film(s) ) but are the next couple of Bond films going to have Blofeld
as the continuing villain, or will they intoduce a new individual not connected to Spectre?
It could be the 1960s plots all over again. Once you start Blofeld, only a legal injunction can stop his appearance !
Bleuville.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,746Chief of Staff
But how does this exchange make Vesper an "innocent"? It just suggests that White didn't think they needed to go that far to get what they wanted. From Blofeld's point of view, though, it was perfect to push her to the point of suicide and hurting Bond in the process. White's opposition for practical purposes wouldn't matter to Blofeld, who would see it as disloyalty, and thus help lead to his elimination of White later.
Pardon ?
Did I say it did ?
You don't explain why White would care...which doesn't surprise me 8-)
Then there really isn't anything to talk about. We'll leave it at that.
Ah...so you can't explain it...fair play to you for owning up -{
YNWA 97
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I would simply point toward Blofeld's remark that White had gotten 'weak.' I interpret this as a lifetime of death wearing one's spirit down, which would explain a possible epiphany on White's part: This is too much.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
It still seems like uninspired writing, though, Loeff -- show the weakness rather than just tell. Imagine if the Professor Dent scene in Dr. No had occurred with as clumsy a scene. Dent comes to kill Bond, but even though the pillows are there, Dent never fires. I guess we got fooled! We see the gun, though, so I guess that's supposed to be enough to know Dent's intentions. Bond then disarms Dent and proceeds to talk to him. Instead of finding out anything relevant about how Bond deduced it would be him or that he works for some larger organization, they confine their discussion to talking about how Dent did not get tenure at his university. He tells us all about his past and this one scholar there who never liked him. Bond is fascinated, never really asking him about who sent Dent and why. Then, instead of Dent grabbing for the gun and getting the drop on Bond, he lunges at Bond, they tussle, and the pistol goes off, wounding Dent, who in his delirious state, mutters the name "Dr. No." Bond now knows he must seek out this Dr. No, advancing the plot. No tension or real drama, but people walk out saying how interesting it was to learn about Dent, and so forth.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited November 2015
I was actually just defending your proposed dialogue above, Gassy White's 'weakness,' i.e. his empathy for Vesper is implied by your dialogue.
Tough room...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Haha, sorry, Loeff. I've been off today. I have a very sick pet and been rushing from vet to animal hospital. That's not a good excuse, but my attention has not been focused like it should be. I see how "This is too much" supports what I said. Thank you. {[]
In the SPECTRE board meeting, they discuss their success introducing more young girls into the entertainment industry, or something like that. I assumed Mr White's comment about "women and children" was in reference to that new action: it was a step too far. Like Don Vito drawing the line at drugs in the Godfather. And Blofeld could not tolerate White's disent, so he had him poisoned.
As for mentioning Vesper, what exactly did Bond have left to discuss? He already knew how she was coerced into working for Quantum (evil boyfriend), had pretty definitive proof of her love and regret (she commits suicide and, according to M, traded herself to save Bond back on the ship), and he had made peace with her death (sparing the evil boyfriend and dropping the necklace at the end of QoS). Besides that, why would he expose a weak spot to an enemy?
I thought it was a well acted and engaging scene and in keeping with both men's characters. But that's just me
In the SPECTRE board meeting, they discuss their success introducing more young girls into the entertainment industry, or something like that. I assumed Mr White's comment about "women and children" was in reference to that new action: it was a step too far. Like Don Vito drawing the line at drugs in the Godfather. And Blofeld could not tolerate White's disent, so he had him poisoned.
This, exactly. I also understood the mention to "Women and children" as one linked to forced prostitution / pornography. And the "weakening" of Mr White (as seen by Blofeld et al.) too. I had a number of issues with the film (brief summary: correct but not great, easily forgettable) but this wasn't one of them.
"Enjoy it while it lasts."
"The very words I live by."
White's cabin is full of surveillance cameras. So he knows whatever he says to Bond is being captured on video by SPECTRE, as we see later on. If White wanted to help Bond and save Madeleine, he'd have provided Bond with the name of the clinic in a more clandestine manner (i.e. writing it on a piece of paper that he blocks from camera view).
By giving Bond - and SPECTRE - Madeleine's location, White is using Madeleine as bait. Blofeld wants Bond captured alive; this is why White doesn't kill Bond when Bond gives White his gun. White kills himself because he has betrayed his daughter.
I loved Mr. White in this film. I love that Bond films finally have some continuity, as a lifelong fan. Spectre is an underrated Bond film. Their easy capture of Blofeld in the end was a little weak - I kind of think they should have let him escape to become an inaccessible nemesis - he needs to escape - if they have any vision they'll let him become a supervillain again.
I appreciate seeing Mr White again, and I'm glad that he gets a proper death scene (in a retconning film for which tieing loose ends matters), but I agree with comments about how unconvincing his apparent change of heart is. Jesper Christensen puts emotional heft into his line about how he disapproves of SPECTRE's victimisation of "women and children" - it's the organisation that's changed, he suggests, rather than his own moral code - but in his first scene in CR he was utterly amoral, a Blofeld type himself, brokering the financial arrangements of the leader of a terrorist militia, Obanna, whose victims would certainly have included civilians. Blofeld considers that Mr White's gotten "weak" but it's rather more a case of the writers putting the different plot requirements of the different movies ahead of any careful concerns about consistent characterisation: Mr White's renunciation of SPECTRE is a classier take on the same sort of clunky change of heart foisted on atomic scientist Kutze aboard the Disco Volante in TB.
The fact that Mr White's role now includes being a parent may relate to his softening. Hitherto, any personal life he may have had would have been irrelevant. Incidentally, it's interesting that White gives no response at all when Bond asks him if he has a son he needs to protect - Bond guesses next that it must be a daughter. It's tempting to wonder whether, in this familial saga, the unmentioned (or unmentionable) son, a character who would be Madeleine's brother, might pitch up in the next movie...
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 53 years.
Comments
Sorry...doesn't work for me at all...Vesper wasn't an 'innocent'...he'd have no compunction about leaving her to her fate...
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Because ????
Pardon ?
Did I say it did ?
You don't explain why White would care...which doesn't surprise me 8-)
1. Move the plot forward;
2. Demonstrate character;
3. Reflect theme.
The scene with Mr. White does all three.
1. It provides the "bridge" to Madeleine, but it also causes Bond to think about who he is. Will he also end up alone in an abandoned cottage waiting for death to come wearing a familiar face? This sets up the ending of the film where Bond decides to walk away from his role as assassin for Queen and Country.
2. It tells us something about the character of the two men. Mr. White was obviously a bad man but he loves his daughter and this spark of humanity provides a connection between Bond and Mr. White. Bond is willing to do anything to complete his mission, even trust a man he hates. By the end of the movie he has re-thought this single-minded attitude toward life.
3. Finally, the theme of the movie is trust, which brings us full circle to CR. By the end of the movie Bond has learned to trust Swann. The theme is demonstrated in this scene when Bond hands Mr. White a loaded gun, trusting that White's love of his daughter and wanting Bond to protect her will override any other considerations.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
+1 this is what I got from the scene too.
CR/QoS, TLD, DN, GE, TSWLM, LTK, TND, TWiNE, TMWTGG, TB
http://www.iconicalternatives.com/author/james-brosnan/
https://www.instagram.com/shawn.michael.bongiorno/
The film is about Bond's evolution from a blunt instrument to becoming a fully realized human being. This happens in part through his relationship with Swann, a woman who can understand what it means to be an assassin.
The movie is about moving forward. Reliving his time with Vesper would be a step back. That's why it's important that he ignores the Vesper videotape.
to help each other -{ Bond gets what he wants, information. While Mr White
gets, someone to finish his work, and bring down Blofeld.
I do agree the script is thin in places, mostly in failing to fully flesh out Blofeld and Swann. A little more polish and hard work on the script could've resulted in a truly great movie, not just a great Bond movie, but a great movie. It's a little bit of a missed opportunity, but still a very good film.
The reason characters from previous films, not just Vesper, are shown in the credits is that this movie is the culmination of the story arc that started in CR.
Edited to eliminate a lack of comprehension on my part. -{
Blofeld always lives on somehow. (for the next film(s) ) but are the next couple of Bond films going to have Blofeld
as the continuing villain, or will they intoduce a new individual not connected to Spectre?
It could be the 1960s plots all over again. Once you start Blofeld, only a legal injunction can stop his appearance !
Bleuville.
Ah...so you can't explain it...fair play to you for owning up -{
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Tough room...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Eeet's all good, all da time mon!
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
As for mentioning Vesper, what exactly did Bond have left to discuss? He already knew how she was coerced into working for Quantum (evil boyfriend), had pretty definitive proof of her love and regret (she commits suicide and, according to M, traded herself to save Bond back on the ship), and he had made peace with her death (sparing the evil boyfriend and dropping the necklace at the end of QoS). Besides that, why would he expose a weak spot to an enemy?
I thought it was a well acted and engaging scene and in keeping with both men's characters. But that's just me
but I do think it was Radiation poisoning of some sort.
This, exactly. I also understood the mention to "Women and children" as one linked to forced prostitution / pornography. And the "weakening" of Mr White (as seen by Blofeld et al.) too. I had a number of issues with the film (brief summary: correct but not great, easily forgettable) but this wasn't one of them.
"The very words I live by."
By giving Bond - and SPECTRE - Madeleine's location, White is using Madeleine as bait. Blofeld wants Bond captured alive; this is why White doesn't kill Bond when Bond gives White his gun. White kills himself because he has betrayed his daughter.
n.n.n.
The fact that Mr White's role now includes being a parent may relate to his softening. Hitherto, any personal life he may have had would have been irrelevant. Incidentally, it's interesting that White gives no response at all when Bond asks him if he has a son he needs to protect - Bond guesses next that it must be a daughter. It's tempting to wonder whether, in this familial saga, the unmentioned (or unmentionable) son, a character who would be Madeleine's brother, might pitch up in the next movie...