Basically, Gogol should have been waiting to pick her up at the bay, not follow her to a hotel he didn't know she would go to!
I'm not quite following you. Pola had her own corvette. Now I'm actually curious why she needed a pick-up by Gogol at all? As you said, it makes it more confusing to try and coordinate a ride.
It niggles me that it is obviously not Gogol (Walter Gotell) in the car when Pola gets in, but then suddenly Gogol is driving.
And is her abandoned corvette just going to be impounded by the San Fran Police department???
My current 10 favorite:
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
It niggles me that it is obviously not Gogol (Walter Gotell) in the car when Pola gets in, but then suddenly Gogol is driving.
That's strange Firemass, I was just going to post about this myself.
I don't mind too much about the obvious Roger Moore doubles. But who the hell is that in the car when Pola is getting in because it is certainly not General Gogol. I think it niggles me so much because by using a different camera angle it could have been so easily avoided.
TND has a timeline niggle, but so does QoS, even though I have no doubt that it has already been discussed but I can't find it anywhere....
I'm about 95% sure the invitation to the Greene Party fundraiser is dated 8.23.08 (pause it at 1080p quality here https://youtu.be/yQBGudrMQLQ?t=407) despite the fact that the film is said to have started 20 minutes after Casino Royale ends....
So either it was a continuity error again, or Bond is in a crazy rage from this betrayal for 2 years? And/or the time between Bond's conversation with M on the boat and finding Vesper's phone and the cut to Mr. White's Italian villa is 2 years?
TND has a timeline niggle, but so does QoS, even though I have no doubt that it has already been discussed but I can't find it anywhere....
I'm about 95% sure the invitation to the Greene Party fundraiser is dated 8.23.08 (pause it at 1080p quality here https://youtu.be/yQBGudrMQLQ?t=407) despite the fact that the film is said to have started 20 minutes after Casino Royale ends....
So either it was a continuity error again, or Bond is in a crazy rage from this betrayal for 2 years? And/or the time between Bond's conversation with M on the boat and finding Vesper's phone and the cut to Mr. White's Italian villa is 2 years?
I like to think it picks up 2 years later at the end of CR so QOS takes place in 2008, I mean MI6 is totally different as is a lot of things so I have trouble placing QOS in 2006 right after CR.
TND has a timeline niggle, but so does QoS, even though I have no doubt that it has already been discussed but I can't find it anywhere....
I'm about 95% sure the invitation to the Greene Party fundraiser is dated 8.23.08 (pause it at 1080p quality here https://youtu.be/yQBGudrMQLQ?t=407) despite the fact that the film is said to have started 20 minutes after Casino Royale ends....
So either it was a continuity error again, or Bond is in a crazy rage from this betrayal for 2 years? And/or the time between Bond's conversation with M on the boat and finding Vesper's phone and the cut to Mr. White's Italian villa is 2 years?
I like to think it picks up 2 years later at the end of CR so QOS takes place in 2008, I mean MI6 is totally different as is a lot of things so I have trouble placing QOS in 2006 right after CR.
Where are the two years? The first scene from QOS picks up moments after the last scene from CR.
TND has a timeline niggle, but so does QoS, even though I have no doubt that it has already been discussed but I can't find it anywhere....
I'm about 95% sure the invitation to the Greene Party fundraiser is dated 8.23.08 (pause it at 1080p quality here https://youtu.be/yQBGudrMQLQ?t=407) despite the fact that the film is said to have started 20 minutes after Casino Royale ends....
So either it was a continuity error again, or Bond is in a crazy rage from this betrayal for 2 years? And/or the time between Bond's conversation with M on the boat and finding Vesper's phone and the cut to Mr. White's Italian villa is 2 years?
I like to think it picks up 2 years later at the end of CR so QOS takes place in 2008, I mean MI6 is totally different as is a lot of things so I have trouble placing QOS in 2006 right after CR.
Where are the two years? The first scene from QOS picks up moments after the last scene from CR.
I like to think when Bond shoots White in the leg in CR that its 2008 which carries over into QOS and somewhat explains the changes between the two films.
I like to think it picks up 2 years later at the end of CR so QOS takes place in 2008, I mean MI6 is totally different as is a lot of things so I have trouble placing QOS in 2006 right after CR.
Where are the two years? The first scene from QOS picks up moments after the last scene from CR.
I like to think when Bond shoots White in the leg in CR that its 2008 which carries over into QOS and somewhat explains the changes between the two films.
But Bond's yacht from Venice is moored at Mr whites villa
Where are the two years? The first scene from QOS picks up moments after the last scene from CR.
I like to think when Bond shoots White in the leg in CR that its 2008 which carries over into QOS and somewhat explains the changes between the two films.
But Bond's yacht from Venice is moored at Mr whites villa
totally forgot that, still though its best not to delve too deeply into the continuity of this cause its all over the place )
I like to think when Bond shoots White in the leg in CR that its 2008 which carries over into QOS and somewhat explains the changes between the two films.
But Bond's yacht from Venice is moored at Mr whites villa
totally forgot that, still though its best not to delve too deeply into the continuity of this cause its all over the place )
Absolutely, continuity (or lack of it) is a special feature of the Bond franchise 8-)
A post of mine from six months or so ago on continuity:
Since I read the books first, my perspective is unavoidably different. I watched the 60s Bond movies as "films-of-the-books" and observed in real time how they gradually drifted away from their source material and began to form their own continuity. Being a Fleming fan, I was happier when they stuck to the original stories (updating them as necessary, and accepting that) and getting annoyed at what I saw as unnecessary deviations from them (eg, in YOLT Bond claims to have gone to Cambridge which is against what Fleming had written in that exact novel).
Fleming himself made continuity errors (the colour of Mary Goodnight's hair or the light outside M's office, the surname of Honey- though these can be rationalised quite easily) most glaringly with Bond's age- though there are clear reasons for that!
The important point is that when Fleming started writing the novels, or ten years later when Broccoli & co started making the films, no-one had the slightest idea that James Bond would still be thriving deep into the 21st century, with new films and novels arriving on a regular basis. The continuity had to fall apart, since no one man could have lived through all the adventures and experiences 007 is supposed to have had. At a certain point, the "original" Bond simply becomes too old to continue his adventures- whether that Bond is Fleming's (who was involved in WW2 and earlier before IF started writing about him in the 50s) or Broccoli's (who had been working for the Secret Service for ten years before DN).
As I've said before, the film makers decided to ignore Bond's age around the point that Dalton replaced Moore and treat 007 as ageless. In the literary world, John Gardner (in conjunction with Glidrose, later IFP) froze Bond in his 40s slightly earlier. These were active decisions, not lazily ignoring the facts, and make demands of the audience to either accept the conceit or give up following 007's adventures.
As we all know, this changed in the filmic world with CR06- in the literary world, things ran a little differently (Charlie Higson's "Young Bond" series for example, or William Boyd's "Solo")- which leads us to the situation as currently presented: James Bond is a mythical character as opposed to a fictional one. His stories can take place in the 30s (Steve Cole's "Shoot To Kill", published in 2014), the 2010s (SPECTRE, released 2015), or the 60s ("Solo", set in the 60s, published 2013)- a myth transcends all considerations of time.
So, to summarise: James Bond (007) is a mythical character as opposed to a fictional one. His adventures, be they literary or filmic, can occur any time between the 1930s (when he was a boy) and now (whenever now is- it's been the 1960s and the 2010s). He does not exist, he's a mythical hero in the same line as many before and no doubt after. You can sit back and enjoy the ride, or nitpick all you want- it won't change anything, he'll still be pulling his Walther PPK from his shoulder holster after we're all gone.
James Bond's adventures take place now- although two years elapsed between CR06 and QoS (as internal evidence shows), the events occur sequentially. It isn't consistent, and cannot be. Some can worry about the details, and that's their privilege. If one chooses not to, it's a lot more relaxing and enjoyable experience.
Where are the two years? The first scene from QOS picks up moments after the last scene from CR.
I like to think when Bond shoots White in the leg in CR that its 2008 which carries over into QOS and somewhat explains the changes between the two films.
But Bond's yacht from Venice is moored at Mr whites villa
And Bond's rage isn't something that would last 2 years... its most likely to have been a mistake.... but I still can't help but wonder if it wasn't, given Forster's attention to detail and earlier comments.
In FYEO, is there a point to Q meeting Bond in the church in Greece? Q has nothing to give Bond, neither information nor gadgets. He's just there for an amusing scene. Is there something I'm missing?
The scene was written for M, but given to Q since Bernard Lee had just died. No replacement was immediately cast, so Tanner was used in M's place in other scenes and Q in this one. It may have had some rewriting done- can't remember at this point.
I do agree, it's an excuse for a funny scene, although Q does
Say they have had no luck in finding the correct St Cyril's, letting
Bond once again save the day by mentioning he knew someone who
Might know.
I do remember the " Forgive me for I have sinned " got a big laugh in
The cinema, where I first watched it.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
The scene was written for M, but given to Q since Bernard Lee had just died. No replacement was immediately cast, so Tanner was used in M's place in other scenes and Q in this one. It may have had some rewriting done.
Even if it was M, what purpose would it serve other than for a laugh? All that effort to send an MI6 official across Europe for no reason.
In FYEO, is there a point to Q meeting Bond in the church in Greece? Q has nothing to give Bond, neither information nor gadgets. He's just there for an amusing scene. Is there something I'm missing?
Good point. It would have been nice if Q gave him a few gadgets to make it a worthwhile trip.
My current 10 favorite:
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
In Spectre when Bond sneaks in to the Spectre meeting, he hears them talking about the new global surveillance act and how it will play in Spectre's favour. Why doesn't Bond then warn MI6 straight away that there might be something dodgy about the upcoming Nine Eyes vote? The meeting exposition sounds like a pretty obvious clue that Spectre are trying to rig the vote somehow. They could have arrested C right away and we could have avoided the dull London finale!
Perhaps because Bond isn't meant to be in Rome at all, and he knows that his information won't be given its true import because of that?
But immediately after the meeting Bond tells Moneypenny during the car chase that the attacks in Germany, Tunisia and Mexico were all linked and all done by a single organization. So it's not like he's exactly withholding information from London just because he's gone rogue. He could have easily told Moneypenny about the Nine Eyes thing as well during that same phone call.
In DAD, the Aston is in the tube station. How? In London, anything on the tube is loaded onto the tracks at an Underground train depot. So how did Q get the car down there? And why? He's then got to get it back up and out onto the street for Bond to drive.
And in TWINE, why is Q's boat in a pool of water in like, the second floor of the building? What's the point of building a bay of water on the second floor of the building that doesn't lead to water for the boat to be put in?
Perhaps because Bond isn't meant to be in Rome at all, and he knows that his information won't be given its true import because of that?
But immediately after the meeting Bond tells Moneypenny during the car chase that the attacks in Germany, Tunisia and Mexico were all linked and all done by a single organization. So it's not like he's exactly withholding information from London just because he's gone rogue. He could have easily told Moneypenny about the Nine Eyes thing as well during that same phone call.
It was a very quick call during a car chase, and C was able to use what Bond did say as leverage against M. Bond was speaking unofficially to Moneypenny, since he wasn't supposed to be in Rome and she was helping him without sanction so wouldn't have been able to pass the info on.... I think!
How involved in Spectre was M (Dench) - it always niggles me that she sent Bond that video telling him to go to the funeral. She didn't give anything clearer. It was as if Bond had to join the dots because M couldn't tell him everything without being exposed.
Comments
I'm not quite following you. Pola had her own corvette. Now I'm actually curious why she needed a pick-up by Gogol at all? As you said, it makes it more confusing to try and coordinate a ride.
It niggles me that it is obviously not Gogol (Walter Gotell) in the car when Pola gets in, but then suddenly Gogol is driving.
And is her abandoned corvette just going to be impounded by the San Fran Police department???
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
That's strange Firemass, I was just going to post about this myself.
I don't mind too much about the obvious Roger Moore doubles. But who the hell is that in the car when Pola is getting in because it is certainly not General Gogol. I think it niggles me so much because by using a different camera angle it could have been so easily avoided.
I'm about 95% sure the invitation to the Greene Party fundraiser is dated 8.23.08 (pause it at 1080p quality here https://youtu.be/yQBGudrMQLQ?t=407) despite the fact that the film is said to have started 20 minutes after Casino Royale ends....
So either it was a continuity error again, or Bond is in a crazy rage from this betrayal for 2 years? And/or the time between Bond's conversation with M on the boat and finding Vesper's phone and the cut to Mr. White's Italian villa is 2 years?
Where are the two years? The first scene from QOS picks up moments after the last scene from CR.
What's so hard to understand-?
:v
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Since I read the books first, my perspective is unavoidably different. I watched the 60s Bond movies as "films-of-the-books" and observed in real time how they gradually drifted away from their source material and began to form their own continuity. Being a Fleming fan, I was happier when they stuck to the original stories (updating them as necessary, and accepting that) and getting annoyed at what I saw as unnecessary deviations from them (eg, in YOLT Bond claims to have gone to Cambridge which is against what Fleming had written in that exact novel).
Fleming himself made continuity errors (the colour of Mary Goodnight's hair or the light outside M's office, the surname of Honey- though these can be rationalised quite easily) most glaringly with Bond's age- though there are clear reasons for that!
The important point is that when Fleming started writing the novels, or ten years later when Broccoli & co started making the films, no-one had the slightest idea that James Bond would still be thriving deep into the 21st century, with new films and novels arriving on a regular basis. The continuity had to fall apart, since no one man could have lived through all the adventures and experiences 007 is supposed to have had. At a certain point, the "original" Bond simply becomes too old to continue his adventures- whether that Bond is Fleming's (who was involved in WW2 and earlier before IF started writing about him in the 50s) or Broccoli's (who had been working for the Secret Service for ten years before DN).
As I've said before, the film makers decided to ignore Bond's age around the point that Dalton replaced Moore and treat 007 as ageless. In the literary world, John Gardner (in conjunction with Glidrose, later IFP) froze Bond in his 40s slightly earlier. These were active decisions, not lazily ignoring the facts, and make demands of the audience to either accept the conceit or give up following 007's adventures.
As we all know, this changed in the filmic world with CR06- in the literary world, things ran a little differently (Charlie Higson's "Young Bond" series for example, or William Boyd's "Solo")- which leads us to the situation as currently presented: James Bond is a mythical character as opposed to a fictional one. His stories can take place in the 30s (Steve Cole's "Shoot To Kill", published in 2014), the 2010s (SPECTRE, released 2015), or the 60s ("Solo", set in the 60s, published 2013)- a myth transcends all considerations of time.
So, to summarise: James Bond (007) is a mythical character as opposed to a fictional one. His adventures, be they literary or filmic, can occur any time between the 1930s (when he was a boy) and now (whenever now is- it's been the 1960s and the 2010s). He does not exist, he's a mythical hero in the same line as many before and no doubt after. You can sit back and enjoy the ride, or nitpick all you want- it won't change anything, he'll still be pulling his Walther PPK from his shoulder holster after we're all gone.
James Bond's adventures take place now- although two years elapsed between CR06 and QoS (as internal evidence shows), the events occur sequentially. It isn't consistent, and cannot be. Some can worry about the details, and that's their privilege. If one chooses not to, it's a lot more relaxing and enjoyable experience.
Superman is generally 29. So when did his ship crash on Earth again--?
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
And Bond's rage isn't something that would last 2 years... its most likely to have been a mistake.... but I still can't help but wonder if it wasn't, given Forster's attention to detail and earlier comments.
Say they have had no luck in finding the correct St Cyril's, letting
Bond once again save the day by mentioning he knew someone who
Might know.
I do remember the " Forgive me for I have sinned " got a big laugh in
The cinema, where I first watched it.
Even if it was M, what purpose would it serve other than for a laugh? All that effort to send an MI6 official across Europe for no reason.
Good point. It would have been nice if Q gave him a few gadgets to make it a worthwhile trip.
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
Kinda like how fast Rocky Jr grows up in the Rocky films
"And I can't believe that Bond has a career after his face was plastered all over the press"
YOLT wants a word with you
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
But immediately after the meeting Bond tells Moneypenny during the car chase that the attacks in Germany, Tunisia and Mexico were all linked and all done by a single organization. So it's not like he's exactly withholding information from London just because he's gone rogue. He could have easily told Moneypenny about the Nine Eyes thing as well during that same phone call.
In DAD, the Aston is in the tube station. How? In London, anything on the tube is loaded onto the tracks at an Underground train depot. So how did Q get the car down there? And why? He's then got to get it back up and out onto the street for Bond to drive.
And in TWINE, why is Q's boat in a pool of water in like, the second floor of the building? What's the point of building a bay of water on the second floor of the building that doesn't lead to water for the boat to be put in?
It was a very quick call during a car chase, and C was able to use what Bond did say as leverage against M. Bond was speaking unofficially to Moneypenny, since he wasn't supposed to be in Rome and she was helping him without sanction so wouldn't have been able to pass the info on.... I think!
Or just crap plot points.