1

Topic: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

Is it just me that doesn't see why Eve has to shoot Bond?
I get why he has to be shot by Patrice, so they can use the shrapnel to trace him but I don't get why they couldn't just combine the two so Bond only gets shot once.
Him being shot twice and surviving the fall off the bridge is just overly unrealistic in my opinion, I know it's symbolic of Bond surviving against all odds on the screen and everything but they could've still done that if he had only been shot once.

"You are about to wake when you dream that you are dreaming"

2

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

I think Eve had to shoot Bond because if it had Been Patrice who
Pushed him off the train, Then Bond would of Failed, But by having
Him accidently  shot by Eve, Means Bond faliure wasn't his Fault. Just
the inexperience of a rookie agent.
   As for being shot twice and surviving a huge fall, Well he is James Bond.
So can do things we simple Mortals would fail at.  ajb007/lol

“I didn’t lose a friend, I just realised I never had one.”

3

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

Because she was ordered to take the shot. Simple.

She wasn't aiming to hit Bond, she was aiming to hit Patrice.

"Watch the birdie, you bastard!"

Favourite Bond films list

4

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

I think the order from M is particularly odd.
Instead giving her best agent every opportunity to retrieve the hard drive she orders an out-of-her-depth rookie to have a go at possibly helping Bond, or possibly guaranteeing the loss of the hard drive. Utterly preposterous.

"I could be a millionaire, if I had the money" Clifford T Ward

5

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

It did serve to give Bond and the soon to be known as Moneypenny a bit of a backstory, plus he could feel all betrayed at M giving the order and so on.

"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

Roger Moore 1927-2017

6

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

The order from M and shot from Eve sets up the whole story.  It's about betrayal and what M does and how far she goes to protect the UK's interests.  The fact that Silva and Bond where both on the end of M's harsh decision making is the reason for the film.  She made Silva what he was and she made Bond too, except one ends up looking to kill her while the other is out to protect her.

..................http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a77/darkcrown_1969/Asp9mmSIG-1-2.jpg...............

7

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

Asp9mm wrote:

The order from M and shot from Eve sets up the whole story.  It's about betrayal and what M does and how far she goes to protect the UK's interests.  The fact that Silva and Bond where both on the end of M's harsh decision making is the reason for the film.  She made Silva what he was and she made Bond too, except one ends up looking to kill her while the other is out to protect her.

+1. Really well put

1- CR. 2- OHMSS. 3- FRWL. 4- GF. 5- DN. 6- TLD. 7- SF. 8- TSWLM. 9- GE. 10- LTK.
11- TB. 12- OP. 13- LALD. 14- TMWTGG. 15- FYEO. 16- YOLT. 17- TND. 18- QoS.
19- TWINE. 20- AVTAK. 21- MR. 22- DAF. 23- DAD.

8

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

Sir James Moloney wrote:
Asp9mm wrote:

The order from M and shot from Eve sets up the whole story.  It's about betrayal and what M does and how far she goes to protect the UK's interests.  The fact that Silva and Bond where both on the end of M's harsh decision making is the reason for the film.  She made Silva what he was and she made Bond too, except one ends up looking to kill her while the other is out to protect her.

+1. Really well put

Agree

"Felix Leiter, a brother from Langley."

9

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

You summed it up Nicely Asp9mm.   ajb007/martini

“I didn’t lose a friend, I just realised I never had one.”

10

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

Kent007 wrote:

Is it just me that doesn't see why Eve has to shoot Bond?
I get why he has to be shot by Patrice, so they can use the shrapnel to trace him but I don't get why they couldn't just combine the two so Bond only gets shot once.
Him being shot twice and surviving the fall off the bridge is just overly unrealistic in my opinion, I know it's symbolic of Bond surviving against all odds on the screen and everything but they could've still done that if he had only been shot once.

The whole PTS showed how far the Bond series has fallen in the 50 years. Nothing about it can attach itself to Bond legacy. It is a mishmash of action that the producers demonstrated their lack of respect for the audience. If there is any message is in it, it gets lost in the product placement and totally lack of credulity.

"And if I told you that I'm from the Ministry of Defence?" James Bond  - The Property of a Lady

11

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

perdogg wrote:
Kent007 wrote:

Is it just me that doesn't see why Eve has to shoot Bond?
I get why he has to be shot by Patrice, so they can use the shrapnel to trace him but I don't get why they couldn't just combine the two so Bond only gets shot once.
Him being shot twice and surviving the fall off the bridge is just overly unrealistic in my opinion, I know it's symbolic of Bond surviving against all odds on the screen and everything but they could've still done that if he had only been shot once.

The whole PTS showed how far the Bond series has fallen in the 50 years. Nothing about it can attach itself to Bond legacy. It is a mishmash of action that the producers demonstrated their lack of respect for the audience. If there is any message is in it, it gets lost in the product placement and totally lack of credulity.

Can you explain why you think that?

1- CR. 2- OHMSS. 3- FRWL. 4- GF. 5- DN. 6- TLD. 7- SF. 8- TSWLM. 9- GE. 10- LTK.
11- TB. 12- OP. 13- LALD. 14- TMWTGG. 15- FYEO. 16- YOLT. 17- TND. 18- QoS.
19- TWINE. 20- AVTAK. 21- MR. 22- DAF. 23- DAD.

12

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

perdogg wrote:
Kent007 wrote:

Is it just me that doesn't see why Eve has to shoot Bond?
I get why he has to be shot by Patrice, so they can use the shrapnel to trace him but I don't get why they couldn't just combine the two so Bond only gets shot once.
Him being shot twice and surviving the fall off the bridge is just overly unrealistic in my opinion, I know it's symbolic of Bond surviving against all odds on the screen and everything but they could've still done that if he had only been shot once.

The whole PTS showed how far the Bond series has fallen in the 50 years. Nothing about it can attach itself to Bond legacy. It is a mishmash of action that the producers demonstrated their lack of respect for the audience. If there is any message is in it, it gets lost in the product placement and totally lack of credulity.

I couldn't disagree more. I'm sorry that for you the message got "lost in the product placement", but it was pretty clear to me as the film progressed that the message was precisely as Asp9mm described it. The PTS was as exciting and "Bond-like" as those in many of the previous Bond films.

"Felix Leiter, a brother from Langley."

13

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

Sir James Moloney wrote:

Can you explain why you think that?


The comparison I gave earlier regarding the PTS was Dalton-Bond role in Bratislava in The Living Daylights.

In TLD, Dalton-Bond took charge of situation as opposed in SF where Bond has been reduced to just a member of functional collective. Bond is no longer the focal point of his movie, he is now somewhat like Ethan Hunt in the Mission Impossible movies.

Maybe EON really doesn't have the confidence in Craig they claim.

"And if I told you that I'm from the Ministry of Defence?" James Bond  - The Property of a Lady

14

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

perdogg wrote:

The whole PTS showed how far the Bond series has fallen in the 50 years. Nothing about it can attach itself to Bond legacy. It is a mishmash of action that the producers demonstrated their lack of respect for the audience. If there is any message is in it, it gets lost in the product placement and totally lack of credulity.

Credulity?  As in Bond seeing an assassin reflected in a girl's pupils; Bond breaking down the "fourth wall" to reference "the other fella;" Bond packing a parachute in his skiing gear; Bond scooping up a wheelchair-bound man with a helicopter strut; Bond "towing" a runaway airplane, etc., etc. . . .

I have to admit, the complaint about product placement is becoming tired.  Yes, Bond films are notorious for product placement, but they've done it almost since the beginning; and they're neither better nor worse than any other films.  I saw Iron Man 3 this afternoon, and it's loaded with brand names--beers, computers, cars, gasoline companies, you name it.

As for the PTS itself, the more I see it the more I like it.  It's a series of beautifully-executed action pieces.  It's well-shot, well-edited, and fast-moving.  It's also over-the-top in a way that's reminiscent of the Moore or Brosnan films, with this difference: Brosnan and especially Moore would be winking at the audience, but Craig grits his teeth and takes it all seriously, as if he could actually be killed, and that conviction makes a fun series of sequences into an exciting one.

Vox clamantis in deserto

15

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

perdogg wrote:

Maybe EON really doesn't have the confidence in Craig they claim.

I don't see how one could come to that conclusion. Even if one were to agree that Bond isn't the focus of Skyfall, which I don't, is there any doubt that Bond is the focus of CR and QOS? So clearly from the start the producers had confidence in Craig's ability to carry the films. And just because there are other agents and personnel involved in the PTS. that doesn't diminish the fact that Bond is indeed the primary driving force as he pursues Patrice in an effort to retrieve the hard drive. There doesn't appear to me to be such a tremendous shift away from PTSs in other Bond films, and certainly nothing to suggest that Bond's role is being downplayed.

"Felix Leiter, a brother from Langley."

16

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

perdogg wrote:

The comparison I gave earlier regarding the PTS was Dalton-Bond role in Bratislava in The Living Daylights.

In TLD, Dalton-Bond took charge of situation as opposed in SF where Bond has been reduced to just a member of functional collective.

Yeah, it's a pity Bond didn't have a woman with big boobs to distract someone.  Q standing nearby to complete the mission for him, and an overriding reliance on the audience not picking apart a very silly scene.

..................http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a77/darkcrown_1969/Asp9mmSIG-1-2.jpg...............

17

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

Asp9mm wrote:
perdogg wrote:

The comparison I gave earlier regarding the PTS was Dalton-Bond role in Bratislava in The Living Daylights.

In TLD, Dalton-Bond took charge of situation as opposed in SF where Bond has been reduced to just a member of functional collective.

Yeah, it's a pity Bond didn't have a woman with big boobs to distract someone.  Q standing nearby to complete the mission for him, and an overriding reliance on the audience not picking apart a very silly scene.

I am not sure what you referring to about women having big boobs. I don't recall saying anything about women with boobs.

"And if I told you that I'm from the Ministry of Defence?" James Bond  - The Property of a Lady

18

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

Hardyboy wrote:

As for the PTS itself, the more I see it the more I like it.  It's a series of beautifully-executed action pieces.  It's well-shot, well-edited, and fast-moving.  It's also over-the-top in a way that's reminiscent of the Moore or Brosnan films, with this difference: Brosnan and especially Moore would be winking at the audience, but Craig grits his teeth and takes it all seriously, as if he could actually be killed, and that conviction makes a fun series of sequences into an exciting one.

Very well-said! ajb007/martini

"Felix Leiter, a brother from Langley."

19

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

Thank you, sir!

Vox clamantis in deserto

20

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

Come on, HB....you above all should know you just can't waltz back here posting sensible and well reasoned thoughts with a clearly defined logic....its just not on, old man ajb007/biggrin

YNWA: Justice For The 96

The Joy Of 6

21

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

perdogg wrote:
Asp9mm wrote:
perdogg wrote:

The comparison I gave earlier regarding the PTS was Dalton-Bond role in Bratislava in The Living Daylights.

In TLD, Dalton-Bond took charge of situation as opposed in SF where Bond has been reduced to just a member of functional collective.

Yeah, it's a pity Bond didn't have a woman with big boobs to distract someone.  Q standing nearby to complete the mission for him, and an overriding reliance on the audience not picking apart a very silly scene.

I am not sure what you referring to about women having big boobs. I don't recall saying anything about women with boobs.

It was one of the main devices in the PTS of Living Daylights.  If you are going to suggest that PTS is superior to Skyfall's, then you can't ignore the exceptionally weak points like this.

..................http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a77/darkcrown_1969/Asp9mmSIG-1-2.jpg...............

22

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

Blackleiter wrote:
Hardyboy wrote:

As for the PTS itself, the more I see it the more I like it.  It's a series of beautifully-executed action pieces.  It's well-shot, well-edited, and fast-moving.  It's also over-the-top in a way that's reminiscent of the Moore or Brosnan films, with this difference: Brosnan and especially Moore would be winking at the audience, but Craig grits his teeth and takes it all seriously, as if he could actually be killed, and that conviction makes a fun series of sequences into an exciting one.

Very well-said! ajb007/martini

i second that, you nailed it saying how Craig takes it seriously making us believe hes actually could be killed compared to the nods and winks that previous Bonds had that removed the sense of danger to the character.

23

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

In this short Interview Sam Mendes makes some of the Points
raised By Hardyboy. How DC takes it very seriously.
http://youtu.be/_hw9ZDJO0E8

and another short one, Showing how When not working ( I'm always
Bond ) he's not so serious.   ajb007/lol
http://youtu.be/IFzjl8YJ5YE

“I didn’t lose a friend, I just realised I never had one.”

24

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

Asp9mm wrote:
perdogg wrote:
Asp9mm wrote:

Yeah, it's a pity Bond didn't have a woman with big boobs to distract someone.  Q standing nearby to complete the mission for him, and an overriding reliance on the audience not picking apart a very silly scene.

I am not sure what you referring to about women having big boobs. I don't recall saying anything about women with boobs.

It was one of the main devices in the PTS of Living Daylights.  If you are going to suggest that PTS is superior to Skyfall's, then you can't ignore the exceptionally weak points like this.

It's not in TLD's pts though is it?

"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

Roger Moore 1927-2017

25

Re: Why have Eve shoot Bond?

Hardyboy wrote:
perdogg wrote:

The whole PTS showed how far the Bond series has fallen in the 50 years. Nothing about it can attach itself to Bond legacy. It is a mishmash of action that the producers demonstrated their lack of respect for the audience. If there is any message is in it, it gets lost in the product placement and totally lack of credulity.

Credulity?  As in Bond seeing an assassin reflected in a girl's pupils; Bond breaking down the "fourth wall" to reference "the other fella;" Bond packing a parachute in his skiing gear; Bond scooping up a wheelchair-bound man with a helicopter strut; Bond "towing" a runaway airplane, etc., etc. . . .

I have to admit, the complaint about product placement is becoming tired.  Yes, Bond films are notorious for product placement, but they've done it almost since the beginning; and they're neither better nor worse than any other films.  I saw Iron Man 3 this afternoon, and it's loaded with brand names--beers, computers, cars, gasoline companies, you name it.

As for the PTS itself, the more I see it the more I like it.  It's a series of beautifully-executed action pieces.  It's well-shot, well-edited, and fast-moving.  It's also over-the-top in a way that's reminiscent of the Moore or Brosnan films, with this difference: Brosnan and especially Moore would be winking at the audience, but Craig grits his teeth and takes it all seriously, as if he could actually be killed, and that conviction makes a fun series of sequences into an exciting one.

I agree about the tiredness regarding product placement.  Has no one read the
bloody novels?  Fleming threw them in all over the place.  The point of doing it was to ground the adventures in reality.  He wasn't the first to do it but he sure
used it well.