I realise the proportions aren't quite right.... but I like these pics.. and see that Bond would have something that was stylish, but above all functional, and easy to leave...with not much upkeep needed. (I kinda like the idea of a loft type flat... with beams and bricks....?)
I like the idea of a housekeeper... but definitely a part time one... someone who stocks the fridge with milk and eggs, and keeps the post off the mat. (Oh and Olives too! )
No pets, fish or otherwise... an no plants either... there would be no point )
and how about this....
with
and
She's worth whatever chaos she brings to the table and you know it. ~ Mark Anthony
I like the pics that Lexi posted. I could see that as Bond's place
My own personal view of Bond's pad is slightly different.
I imagine it having very thick, dark curtains. A large fireplace. Leather chesterfields. A big oil painting over the fireplace. Plenty of books.
I don't think that Bond is a big reader, we only get odd references to Military history ,Golf and card sharing. If he needs to know/learn anything he will read up/research. Today it would be Wikipedia. He also has very little nostalgia, so it would predominantly modern maybe with a few older family things. He dislikes Clubbiness, so I don't think that Chesterfields would feature, maybe as an heirloom though.
But that's just how I have pictured it reading the old novels.
I realise the proportions aren't quite right.... but I like these pics.. and see that Bond would have something that was stylish, but above all functional, and easy to leave...with not much upkeep needed. (I kinda like the idea of a loft type flat... with beams and bricks....?)
I like the idea of a housekeeper... but definitely a part time one... someone who stocks the fridge with milk and eggs, and keeps the post off the mat. (Oh and Olives too! )
No pets, fish or otherwise... an no plants either... there would be no point )
and how about this....
with
and
Mrs Zaphod thinks no to the double sinks and Bath (too indulgent) but perhaps a Sauna to sooth aching muscles. He would have a killer multi jet shower of course
I'd go for a more colonial vibe, though without the wicker chairs, it may hold bad associations for our new Bond.
"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Thunderbird 2East of Cardiff, Wales.Posts: 2,778MI6 Agent
Domino - thanks from the Flikr link, the pics are lovely! Yes, thats the kind of place I can imagine!
Lexi - I think you have the QoS vibe perfectly. (That is a compliment) The style is reminicent of M's bathroom from what little we saw of it.
Aesthetically though, its horrible. Wicks meets Ikea meets any major hotel chain. - Good description NP! These stand alone baths always remind me of roman emperor's wallowing in a tin bath, and the sinks (those ain't basin's def sinks!) look like those ornamental flower tubs, carted indoors and dumped on the counter. As my Gran would say "The taste is aw in their mooth!"
This is Thunderbird 2, how can I be of assistance?
Should be modernized a bit, because the details of the Bond platform we've seen, are rather a very classic style, and that may be fine for the 60's, but not a Bond XXI century, I guess living as we saw from M in Casino Royale
Should be modernized a bit, because the details of the Bond platform we've seen, are rather a very classic style, and that may be fine for the 60's, but not a Bond XXI century, I guess living as we saw from M in Casino Royale
Interesting pics back there, with framed pics of veteran cars in Dr No replaced by framed pics of old ships (possibly more accurate) in LALD. That's more what I'd have in mind, though Moore's is perhaps a bit too gentleman's club and lush. His pad should have a stop-off vibe, not too comfy. I would have it as Moore's place but 30 per cent smaller somehow, with the vague air of it being Govt subsidised.
After seeing the trailer and having a better idea of what the movie will look like do you think we will see Bonds apartment? If we do I am thinking it should look like the flat from layer cake.
After seeing the trailer and having a better idea of what the movie will look like do you think we will see Bonds apartment? If we do I am thinking it should look like the flat from layer cake.
No idea, but I would really like to. The worry is that the Skyfall back story may make Bond too posh (ancestral home and all that). It's going to be tricky to hit the right note. For me it's important that Bond has the mannerisms and habits of the impoverished upper class, but crucially he is not a rich man. He has the income of a middle ranking civil servant (currently circa 60k sterling Is my best guess) plus a small private income. Fleming was at pains not to make Bond a rich man, which is one of the elements we should preserve. Some of the suggestions made so far are just too expensive for his means. Bottom line is it needs to be cool, but not too aspirational. Perhaps one or two iconic pieces (an Eames or Arne Jacobson arm chair perhaps )
Should be modernized a bit, because the details of the Bond platform we've seen, are rather a very classic style, and that may be fine for the 60's, but not a Bond XXI century, I guess living as we saw from M in Casino Royale
There are lots of people living in older, 'classic' houses, so I don't think it's inconceivable that Bond is still living in the same flat that the literary Bond did in the 1960s, with older antique furniture that seems to feature in Fleming's novels a fair bit.
For me it's important that Bond has the mannerisms and habits of the impoverished upper class, but crucially he is not a rich man. He has the income of a middle ranking civil servant (currently circa 60k sterling Is my best guess) plus a small private income. Fleming was at pains not to make Bond a rich man, which is one of the elements we should preserve.
Brick and wood. A shiny chesterfield sofa in marroon or black. Black Levelor blinds. A very modern computer desk with a large monitor. A cocktail cart in the corner. University or Military awards on the fireplace mantle. A coffee cup with the Union Jack on it. A long coat hanging on the door.
I would enjoy seeing Bond's flat in SKYFALL, but as others have mentioned, it would have to be in it for a reason, though if it is, I'm sure it might have to do with M. Why is she in Scotland with Craig? It seems as though part of the plot is after the attack on MI6 he is the only one she truly trusts and he takes her there possibly to hide her (?). Is it possible he may initially take her to his flat only to realize they will be compromised there and have to flee to his ancestral home? Is she killed during the attack on the estate? These would be interesting plot lines. Since they show Craig with some stubble, it also seems that he has either left the Service at the beginning of the film or perhaps is on an extended leave (possibly to take time out to see if he does want to continue in the Service), when MI6 is attacked forcing him back into action.
In either scenario, showing his flat would work in the film, even if it were for a very brief time. Given that, members wonder what it would be like today since Craig is a rebooted version of the 20th century Bond.
Since most of today's audience are not that familiar with the literary Bond's life and have just the films to go by, the writers are open to put him any place in London they want and have his flat look anyway they want (within reason).
However, I don't see why they would not place him in the same place as in the books (Chelsea) in the same flat off Kings Road in that anonymous tree lined square. There are those who don't believe he could afford the area, not to mention having a full time live-in housekeeper. I would argue that he could for the following reasons:
1. Income as Principal Officer in Service, £38000. Income from possible
family inheritance (?). Could be substantial, because his father
was a rep for Vickers Armaments, who may himself may have had a
small fortune from family inheritence as well as a sizeable income. It
would account for how he could pay for is son's tuition to Eton and
Fettes.
2. Income from gambling, anywhere from £20000 to £65000 annually.
How? Bond is considered the best gambler in the Service (not a small
organization). If so, he could easily make this amount in his leisure
time (and according to the novels his leisure time is spent on golf,
gambling and women). That is based on the average amount
professional gamblers make. If he invested a lot of his winnings in
a good portfolio, who's to say he could not afford the flat and May?
Not to mention that garaged and maintained Bentley (used maybe, but
it's still a Bentley!).
3. Bond owns the flat. I figured this out by Fleming's material. In
Moonraker, as Bond is contemplating how to spend his winnings after
his game with Drax, he considers using some of it to paint his flat.
Now if he still owned on it, wouldn't he have considered paying some
or all of what he still owed on it, rather than a coat of paint (and a
stock of champagne and new golf clubs)? So if he owns an expensive
flat in Chelsea, that would leave a large chunk of change for him to
use elsewhere - for instance, the services of May (who may or may
not have also been the former housekeeper of his aunt and or
parents, in which case he took her in feeling her as part of his late
family and if she had a pension, probably would not have to pay her
much to look after him - she may have even refused any from him
considering their history and that he was giving her a free place to
live.
4. It has been said someone like Bond today would not have someone
like May. First, there is no basis for this. Despite what the films show,
Bond actually spends most of his career in London and in his flat and
at the HQ. His missions are only once or twice a year and even then
they only last a short time. Having a housekeeper would free him
from doing the weekly dreary domestic chores that would allow him
to focus on his career and leisure pursuits as well as be able to take
off anywhere at a moments notice, so he would not have to worry
about cancelling his mail, the garbage and having his place cleaned or
not having a meal anytime he needed.
Also, domestics are not some relic of the past. There are thousands
working today as nannys, live- in or partime houskeepers.
As far as what I think Bond's (Craig's) flat would look like, I'll leave that for another posting as this one has gotten so bloody long already!
There are those who don't believe he could afford the area, not to mention having a full time live-in housekeeper. I would argue that he could for the following reasons:
If I were in charge of writing an official explanation, I would just say that the flat is provided by the Service. Their top agents, who spend so much time abroad on assignment, aren't expected to pay for accommodations that they rarely enjoy, so housing is part of the job package - various cottages and flats owned and maintained by MI6 within a short distance of headquarters for when agents MUST be called in on an emergency assignment. And they'd probably be packed full of surveillance equipment to make sure one of their agents doesn't turn traitor, too.
And because Bond has no rent, he can afford a housekeeper out of pocket.
I would enjoy seeing Bond's flat in SKYFALL, but as others have mentioned, it would have to be in it for a reason, though if it is, I'm sure it might have to do with M. Why is she in Scotland with Craig? It seems as though part of the plot is after the attack on MI6 he is the only one she truly trusts and he takes her there possibly to hide her (?). Is it possible he may initially take her to his flat only to realize they will be compromised there and have to flee to his ancestral home? Is she killed during the attack on the estate? These would be interesting plot lines. Since they show Craig with some stubble, it also seems that he has either left the Service at the beginning of the film or perhaps is on an extended leave (possibly to take time out to see if he does want to continue in the Service), when MI6 is attacked forcing him back into action.
In either scenario, showing his flat would work in the film, even if it were for a very brief time. Given that, members wonder what it would be like today since Craig is a rebooted version of the 20th century Bond.
Since most of today's audience are not that familiar with the literary Bond's life and have just the films to go by, the writers are open to put him any place in London they want and have his flat look anyway they want (within reason).
However, I don't see why they would not place in the same place as in the books (Chelsea) in the same flat off Kings Road in that anonymous tree lined square. There are those who don't believe he could afford the area, not to mention having a full time live-in housekeeper. I would argue that he could for the following reasons:
1. Income as Principal Officer in Service, £38000. Income from possible
family inheritance (?). Could be substantial, because his father
was a rep for Vickers Armaments, who may himself may have had a
small fortune from family inheritence as well as a sizeable income. It
would account for how he could pay for is son's tuition to Eton and
Fettes.
2. Income from gambling, anywhere from £20000 to £65000 annually.
How? Bond is considered the best gambler in the Service (not a small
organization). If so, he could easily make this amount in his leisure
time (and according to the novels his leisure time is spent on golf,
gambling and women). That is based on the average amount
professional gamblers make. If he invested a lot of his winnings in
a good portfolio, who's to say he could not afford the flat and May?
Not to mention that garaged and maintained Bentley (used maybe, but
it's still a Bentley!).
3. Bond owns the flat. I figured this out by Fleming's material. In
Moonraker, as Bond is contemplating how to spend his winnings after
his game with Drax, he considers using some of it to paint his flat.
Now if he still owned on it, wouldn't he have considered paying some
or all of what he still owed on it, rather than a coat of paint (and a
stock of champagne and new golf clubs)? So if he owns an expensive
flat in Chelsea, that would leave a large chunk of change for him to
use elsewhere - for instance, the services of May (who may or may
not have also been the former housekeeper of his aunt and or
parents, in which case he took her in feeling her as part of his late
family and if she had a pension, probably would not have to pay her
much to look after him - she may have even refused any from him
considering their history and that he was giving her a free place to
live.
4. It has been said someone like Bond today would not have someone
like May. First, there is no basis for this. Despite what the films show,
Bond actually spends most of his career in London and in his flat and
at the HQ. His missions are only once or twice a year and even then
they only last a short time. Having a housekeeper would free him
from doing the weekly dreary domestic chores that would allow him
to focus on his career and leisure pursuits as well as be able to take
off anywhere at a moments notice, so he would not have to worry
about cancelling his mail, the garbage and having his place cleaned or
not having a meal anytime he needed.
Also, domestics are not some relic of the past. There are thousands
working today as nannys, live- in or partime houskeepers.
As far as what I think Bond's (Craig's) flat would look like, I'll leave that for another posting as this one has gotten so bloody long already!
Agree totally on all of this.
My take on the Chelsea flat of the books was that it was the Bond family's London home, likely where Bond grew up and which he inherited upon his parents' deaths.
None of CmdrAtticus' facts could not be updated for 2012. Whether that would be EON's intention for Craig Bond, based upn Vesper's rather poor analysis, is another mattter....
There are those who don't believe he could afford the area, not to mention having a full time live-in housekeeper. I would argue that he could for the following reasons:
If I were in charge of writing an official explanation, I would just say that the flat is provided by the Service. Their top agents, who spend so much time abroad on assignment, aren't expected to pay for accommodations that they rarely enjoy, so housing is part of the job package - various cottages and flats owned and maintained by MI6 within a short distance of headquarters for when agents MUST be called in on an emergency assignment. And they'd probably be packed full of surveillance equipment to make sure one of their agents doesn't turn traitor, too.
And because Bond has no rent, he can afford a housekeeper out of pocket.
An interesting take on the flat idea. However, as I posted, Bond (and as it would be with the other 00's) spends most of his time in London and only gets the overseas assignments a couple of times a year. Part of that is due to the fact that the grief and soul eating (as well as the physical beating) they go through in these deadly jobs takes such a toll that it takes them a while to recover from them if they survive. They also have to spend a great deal of
their time studying intelligence and maintaining their skills in monthly training exercises in all the areas they are required to master. Now, the films will never show this side of Bond's life to any extent (except for brief cameos that
he's had with Q Branch), since they've been more about the action and the mission and pretty much left Bond's personal life out of it (which is why people have come to seem him as just a superman/action hero). That's why it was a relief to finally see him humanized by Craig when he has to recoup medically after his torture in CR. As far as the flat being provided by the Service, in real life (or perhaps in the novels) they may provide a housing allowance, but that would be all. However, since they rebooted the franchise, they can do anything with his personal life, and so they could easily go with the idea you suggest in your post.
When I bought my place, I did give some consideration to Bond, of course. My pad is a two story flat, with views over Battersea Power Station so not far from Chelase and of course Vauxhall. I have a large bedroom, with king sized bed. The living space is white walls, with brown finishes (curtains and soft leather suite). Not Buckingham Palace, but a great size, fab location and of course I hope very Bondian!
All well and good, but what you could get in 1950s central London ain't what you can get today.
Now you have to be really minted.
Added to which, it doesn't pay to show Bond to be too well off, alienates those not on a pretty penny. He needs a pad that most people can look at and think, yeah, I could stretch to that, where taste is the main factor, not opulence. And where it doesn't look permanent, so he could have just landed on his feet for a few years, like many of us do, in a nice pad.
All well and good, but what you could get in 1950s central London ain't what you can get today.
Now you have to be really minted.
Added to which, it doesn't pay to show Bond to be too well off, alienates those not on a pretty penny. He needs a pad that most people can look at and think, yeah, I could stretch to that, where taste is the main factor, not opulence. And where it doesn't look permanent, so he could have just landed on his feet for a few years, like many of us do, in a nice pad.
By that rule, though, a wardrobe of Tom Ford kit is knocked out of consideration... and we know LOTS of that is appearing.
Thunderbird 2East of Cardiff, Wales.Posts: 2,778MI6 Agent
All well and good, but what you could get in 1950s central London ain't what you can get today.
Now you have to be really minted.
Added to which, it doesn't pay to show Bond to be too well off, alienates those not on a pretty penny. He needs a pad that most people can look at and think, yeah, I could stretch to that, where taste is the main factor, not opulence. And where it doesn't look permanent, so he could have just landed on his feet for a few years, like many of us do, in a nice pad.
Sorry Nap, I agree with you on the crazy house prices in London millions i the really well to do areas! Bond may have a place subsidised / rented through MI6? In fact since he spends so much of his time globe-trotting that would make sense. Mind you, I am running from the assumption that we can;t take previous material into account what with the reboot etc. I may have this completely the wrong way round, based on earlier posts by others.
However the whole Bond should not seem too well off ship has already sailed! A vintage Aston is not a cheap commodity - esp with fuel costs and spares these days. (Mind you an Aston, any version is not cheap anyway!) Bonds wardrobe, the accessories, and even his developing attitude to living the high life in food and booze from CR - its clear he has access to disposable income that the vast majority of us in the audience can only dream of. However, seeing the kind of life he leads it's one of the things that we in the audience can appreciate. - The fact we can't physically share it is the "narrative code" price we pay for not being Bond and doing the dangerous if not without exception lethal things he can get away with every time. - Its part of the mythos of the character to me.
Getting back on track - in the end, if we do see his home, here's hoping it has some relevance to the story. - Such as he is having a stopover in London before going somewhere else, or perhaps is recuperating from mild injuries in action?
This is Thunderbird 2, how can I be of assistance?
PPK 7.65mmSaratoga Springs NY USAPosts: 1,231MI6 Agent
I like the idea of a Mews cottage with an attached garage for the Aston Martin to be parked in. Also in my imagination Bond's flat would likely have fairly simple decorations such as university and military awards, may be some naval inspired paintings. Also I see him as having mostly classical furniture rather than ultra modern, like a wooden desk rather than glass and steel so he can do paperwork from home.
There's surely all the difference between having a few grand to fork out for accessories - nice watch, nice clobber - and didn't he get his Aston for 'free' at the casino - and forking out a couple of mill on a property.
When you look at interior decorating in Bond movies one often thinks of vintage furniture and art in modern rooms. Dr. No's lair springs to mind. What about going in the oposite direction for Bond's appartment? I would like to see a more than hundred years old building with modern, functional furniture and a few examples of modern art? I have seen some pictures from the private quarters of the Norwegian king and queen at the royal palace in Oslo. The queen is very interested in art and design and I have to say she has pulled of the mix of old building/new furniture and art very well.
I don't think Bond's appartment should look too expensive and arty. It should come accross as the very functional appartement of a single man who has some sense of style. The old building/new interior style would show this, since good modern furniture usually is more functional than in the past. The solution could in fact bee seen as a way of showing what the Bond franchise should be: timeless foundations, modern functionality. :007)
All well and good, but what you could get in 1950s central London ain't what you can get today.
Now you have to be really minted.
Added to which, it doesn't pay to show Bond to be too well off, alienates those not on a pretty penny. He needs a pad that most people can look at and think, yeah, I could stretch to that, where taste is the main factor, not opulence. And where it doesn't look permanent, so he could have just landed on his feet for a few years, like many of us do, in a nice pad.
I think your comment is a bit odd, considering one of many reasons people go see the films is that bit of wish fulfillment of having tailored gear, swiss watches, Aston Martins, expensive meals and drink and staying at 5 star resorts in exotic places. So showing Bond in an affordable studio- sized flat would not alienate the audience?
There may be a few Londoners who might watch such a scene showing Craig in even a modest appearing two bed flat in Chelsea and wonder, "how could he afford that?", but given the kinetic, fast driven nature of the Bond film narratives - where such a scene would probably only last a minute or two, I personally doubt if most would think twice about it - especially if it shows him leaving it to jump in his £120,000 Aston (inspite of it being Q Branch supplied).
Are you a Londoner? Property prices are a sore point for many.
Someone on a decent salary could fork out for a bit of clothing and sort of live the dream, so that wouldn't alienate. A nice show-off pad, I mean the size of LALD (though that got scaled down a bit from what Harry S wanted) might grate as it would basically mean Bond is a millionaire. The Aston and Lotus, they're company cars, it's just not the same. However, if it were sort of implied that the pad was govt sponsored, then that would be different.
It's funny how some stuff can alienate and other stuff not. If we really knew Bond's star sign, for instance, for those who believe in all that stuff, it might alienate.
Now when I watch Disney's Peter Pan, I think, ugh, the Darling family. Four storey house in Belgravia, snotty brats, plus parents doing a Kate and Gerry McCann, leaving them alone while they go out to the theatre.... Makes me quite sympathise with Captain Hook.
No, I'm not a Londoner (I'm American, but my grandparents were from Scotland).
Can't imagine how crazy it's going get when the games begin (although between the Queen's celebration and all the security for these events, I'm sure the town is already swamped (though great for the retailers!).
I know what you mean about the jealousy bit. We have a TV series here in the States called Selling New York, and it's followed by one called Selling London. They show realtors who sell only high-end luxury properties. It's shocking what the prices are, and amazing how the sellers and buyers discuss them as if they were buying and selling a stick of furniture. It's nice to see the shots of London though.
Your right, showing a flat the size Bond had in LALD would probably be much, which is why I think a modest, small one that was spartanly furnished would seem more reasonable and not give people the impression he's loaded financially. As far as it being government sponsored, that's another one of those details the producers would leave out as it would not have anything to do with the plot. They would not showcase it in anyway as they did in LALD, just have it in as a matter of fact, as in showing Craig stopping in to pick up something he needed (another gun and his passport or some document, etc.). Since they already show him jogging in the trailer, it might show him leaving to do this or arriving following his workout.
It's fun for members to speculate on the details of Bond's life, but when it comes to film, good filmmakers keep the visuals and the flow of the plot at the front and either gloss over such details or just ignore them.
You mentioned Bond's Aston being a company car, but I thought according to the reboot of the series and CR, Craig won the Aston in the card game, in which case it would be his personal car.
Comments
I like the idea of a housekeeper... but definitely a part time one... someone who stocks the fridge with milk and eggs, and keeps the post off the mat. (Oh and Olives too!
No pets, fish or otherwise... an no plants either... there would be no point
and how about this....
with
and
My own personal view of Bond's pad is slightly different.
I imagine it having very thick, dark curtains. A large fireplace. Leather chesterfields. A big oil painting over the fireplace. Plenty of books.
But that's just how I have pictured it reading the old novels.
Mrs Zaphod thinks no to the double sinks and Bath (too indulgent) but perhaps a Sauna to sooth aching muscles. He would have a killer multi jet shower of course
I'd go for a more colonial vibe, though without the wicker chairs, it may hold bad associations for our new Bond.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Lexi - I think you have the QoS vibe perfectly. (That is a compliment) The style is reminicent of M's bathroom from what little we saw of it.
Aesthetically though, its horrible. Wicks meets Ikea meets any major hotel chain. - Good description NP! These stand alone baths always remind me of roman emperor's wallowing in a tin bath, and the sinks (those ain't basin's def sinks!) look like those ornamental flower tubs, carted indoors and dumped on the counter. As my Gran would say "The taste is aw in their mooth!"
I thought Lexi did a great job attempting to imagine a modern bond pad.... Definitely QoS as tb2 says....
But we have had a glimpse in the dim and distant....
And finally his front door
A good pad is somewhere you can live and let others die...
This is what I most imagine.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
No idea, but I would really like to. The worry is that the Skyfall back story may make Bond too posh (ancestral home and all that). It's going to be tricky to hit the right note. For me it's important that Bond has the mannerisms and habits of the impoverished upper class, but crucially he is not a rich man. He has the income of a middle ranking civil servant (currently circa 60k sterling Is my best guess) plus a small private income. Fleming was at pains not to make Bond a rich man, which is one of the elements we should preserve. Some of the suggestions made so far are just too expensive for his means. Bottom line is it needs to be cool, but not too aspirational. Perhaps one or two iconic pieces (an Eames or Arne Jacobson arm chair perhaps )
There are lots of people living in older, 'classic' houses, so I don't think it's inconceivable that Bond is still living in the same flat that the literary Bond did in the 1960s, with older antique furniture that seems to feature in Fleming's novels a fair bit.
I agree with you entirely.
In either scenario, showing his flat would work in the film, even if it were for a very brief time. Given that, members wonder what it would be like today since Craig is a rebooted version of the 20th century Bond.
Since most of today's audience are not that familiar with the literary Bond's life and have just the films to go by, the writers are open to put him any place in London they want and have his flat look anyway they want (within reason).
However, I don't see why they would not place him in the same place as in the books (Chelsea) in the same flat off Kings Road in that anonymous tree lined square. There are those who don't believe he could afford the area, not to mention having a full time live-in housekeeper. I would argue that he could for the following reasons:
1. Income as Principal Officer in Service, £38000. Income from possible
family inheritance (?). Could be substantial, because his father
was a rep for Vickers Armaments, who may himself may have had a
small fortune from family inheritence as well as a sizeable income. It
would account for how he could pay for is son's tuition to Eton and
Fettes.
2. Income from gambling, anywhere from £20000 to £65000 annually.
How? Bond is considered the best gambler in the Service (not a small
organization). If so, he could easily make this amount in his leisure
time (and according to the novels his leisure time is spent on golf,
gambling and women). That is based on the average amount
professional gamblers make. If he invested a lot of his winnings in
a good portfolio, who's to say he could not afford the flat and May?
Not to mention that garaged and maintained Bentley (used maybe, but
it's still a Bentley!).
3. Bond owns the flat. I figured this out by Fleming's material. In
Moonraker, as Bond is contemplating how to spend his winnings after
his game with Drax, he considers using some of it to paint his flat.
Now if he still owned on it, wouldn't he have considered paying some
or all of what he still owed on it, rather than a coat of paint (and a
stock of champagne and new golf clubs)? So if he owns an expensive
flat in Chelsea, that would leave a large chunk of change for him to
use elsewhere - for instance, the services of May (who may or may
not have also been the former housekeeper of his aunt and or
parents, in which case he took her in feeling her as part of his late
family and if she had a pension, probably would not have to pay her
much to look after him - she may have even refused any from him
considering their history and that he was giving her a free place to
live.
4. It has been said someone like Bond today would not have someone
like May. First, there is no basis for this. Despite what the films show,
Bond actually spends most of his career in London and in his flat and
at the HQ. His missions are only once or twice a year and even then
they only last a short time. Having a housekeeper would free him
from doing the weekly dreary domestic chores that would allow him
to focus on his career and leisure pursuits as well as be able to take
off anywhere at a moments notice, so he would not have to worry
about cancelling his mail, the garbage and having his place cleaned or
not having a meal anytime he needed.
Also, domestics are not some relic of the past. There are thousands
working today as nannys, live- in or partime houskeepers.
As far as what I think Bond's (Craig's) flat would look like, I'll leave that for another posting as this one has gotten so bloody long already!
If I were in charge of writing an official explanation, I would just say that the flat is provided by the Service. Their top agents, who spend so much time abroad on assignment, aren't expected to pay for accommodations that they rarely enjoy, so housing is part of the job package - various cottages and flats owned and maintained by MI6 within a short distance of headquarters for when agents MUST be called in on an emergency assignment. And they'd probably be packed full of surveillance equipment to make sure one of their agents doesn't turn traitor, too.
And because Bond has no rent, he can afford a housekeeper out of pocket.
Agree totally on all of this.
My take on the Chelsea flat of the books was that it was the Bond family's London home, likely where Bond grew up and which he inherited upon his parents' deaths.
None of CmdrAtticus' facts could not be updated for 2012. Whether that would be EON's intention for Craig Bond, based upn Vesper's rather poor analysis, is another mattter....
An interesting take on the flat idea. However, as I posted, Bond (and as it would be with the other 00's) spends most of his time in London and only gets the overseas assignments a couple of times a year. Part of that is due to the fact that the grief and soul eating (as well as the physical beating) they go through in these deadly jobs takes such a toll that it takes them a while to recover from them if they survive. They also have to spend a great deal of
their time studying intelligence and maintaining their skills in monthly training exercises in all the areas they are required to master. Now, the films will never show this side of Bond's life to any extent (except for brief cameos that
he's had with Q Branch), since they've been more about the action and the mission and pretty much left Bond's personal life out of it (which is why people have come to seem him as just a superman/action hero). That's why it was a relief to finally see him humanized by Craig when he has to recoup medically after his torture in CR. As far as the flat being provided by the Service, in real life (or perhaps in the novels) they may provide a housing allowance, but that would be all. However, since they rebooted the franchise, they can do anything with his personal life, and so they could easily go with the idea you suggest in your post.
Now you have to be really minted.
Added to which, it doesn't pay to show Bond to be too well off, alienates those not on a pretty penny. He needs a pad that most people can look at and think, yeah, I could stretch to that, where taste is the main factor, not opulence. And where it doesn't look permanent, so he could have just landed on his feet for a few years, like many of us do, in a nice pad.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
By that rule, though, a wardrobe of Tom Ford kit is knocked out of consideration... and we know LOTS of that is appearing.
Sorry Nap, I agree with you on the crazy house prices in London millions i the really well to do areas! Bond may have a place subsidised / rented through MI6? In fact since he spends so much of his time globe-trotting that would make sense. Mind you, I am running from the assumption that we can;t take previous material into account what with the reboot etc. I may have this completely the wrong way round, based on earlier posts by others.
However the whole Bond should not seem too well off ship has already sailed! A vintage Aston is not a cheap commodity - esp with fuel costs and spares these days. (Mind you an Aston, any version is not cheap anyway!) Bonds wardrobe, the accessories, and even his developing attitude to living the high life in food and booze from CR - its clear he has access to disposable income that the vast majority of us in the audience can only dream of. However, seeing the kind of life he leads it's one of the things that we in the audience can appreciate. - The fact we can't physically share it is the "narrative code" price we pay for not being Bond and doing the dangerous if not without exception lethal things he can get away with every time. - Its part of the mythos of the character to me.
Getting back on track - in the end, if we do see his home, here's hoping it has some relevance to the story. - Such as he is having a stopover in London before going somewhere else, or perhaps is recuperating from mild injuries in action?
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I don't think Bond's appartment should look too expensive and arty. It should come accross as the very functional appartement of a single man who has some sense of style. The old building/new interior style would show this, since good modern furniture usually is more functional than in the past. The solution could in fact bee seen as a way of showing what the Bond franchise should be: timeless foundations, modern functionality. :007)
http://www.google.no/imgres?um=1&hl=no&sa=N&biw=1024&bih=653&tbm=isch&tbnid=MEVPFPBfZQXrCM:&imgrefurl=http://orfeuspublishing.com/no/kunst/kongens-hus/&docid=_Vl1uqsO-9TZOM&imgurl=http://orfeuspublishing.com/files/cache/7003038eb7acb80e85d8b0d914c7487d.jpg&w=297&h=327&ei=3Y7QT6GVDKSi4gSYpbirDA&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=461&vpy=295&dur=403&hovh=160&hovw=145&tx=103&ty=204&sig=106480811995189391087&page=4&tbnh=148&tbnw=134&start=56&ndsp=17&ved=1t:429,r:10,s:56,i:218
http://static.vg.no/uploaded/image/bilderigg/2012/05/08/1336475160381_338.jpg
Here is an example of modern furniture in another old house:
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT6CCFYKQXd-m9zZIk-kjmyuqQ0DHkoNZMtflzeZWXDXxKBvAQs_0m_30vR
http://housedesignarchitecture.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/modern-interior-renovation-old-house.jpg
If you ignore the orange plastic chair in the last picture you get an idea of what I'm going for.
I think your comment is a bit odd, considering one of many reasons people go see the films is that bit of wish fulfillment of having tailored gear, swiss watches, Aston Martins, expensive meals and drink and staying at 5 star resorts in exotic places. So showing Bond in an affordable studio- sized flat would not alienate the audience?
There may be a few Londoners who might watch such a scene showing Craig in even a modest appearing two bed flat in Chelsea and wonder, "how could he afford that?", but given the kinetic, fast driven nature of the Bond film narratives - where such a scene would probably only last a minute or two, I personally doubt if most would think twice about it - especially if it shows him leaving it to jump in his £120,000 Aston (inspite of it being Q Branch supplied).
Are you a Londoner? Property prices are a sore point for many.
Someone on a decent salary could fork out for a bit of clothing and sort of live the dream, so that wouldn't alienate. A nice show-off pad, I mean the size of LALD (though that got scaled down a bit from what Harry S wanted) might grate as it would basically mean Bond is a millionaire. The Aston and Lotus, they're company cars, it's just not the same. However, if it were sort of implied that the pad was govt sponsored, then that would be different.
It's funny how some stuff can alienate and other stuff not. If we really knew Bond's star sign, for instance, for those who believe in all that stuff, it might alienate.
Now when I watch Disney's Peter Pan, I think, ugh, the Darling family. Four storey house in Belgravia, snotty brats, plus parents doing a Kate and Gerry McCann, leaving them alone while they go out to the theatre....
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Can't imagine how crazy it's going get when the games begin (although between the Queen's celebration and all the security for these events, I'm sure the town is already swamped (though great for the retailers!).
I know what you mean about the jealousy bit. We have a TV series here in the States called Selling New York, and it's followed by one called Selling London. They show realtors who sell only high-end luxury properties. It's shocking what the prices are, and amazing how the sellers and buyers discuss them as if they were buying and selling a stick of furniture. It's nice to see the shots of London though.
Your right, showing a flat the size Bond had in LALD would probably be much, which is why I think a modest, small one that was spartanly furnished would seem more reasonable and not give people the impression he's loaded financially. As far as it being government sponsored, that's another one of those details the producers would leave out as it would not have anything to do with the plot. They would not showcase it in anyway as they did in LALD, just have it in as a matter of fact, as in showing Craig stopping in to pick up something he needed (another gun and his passport or some document, etc.). Since they already show him jogging in the trailer, it might show him leaving to do this or arriving following his workout.
It's fun for members to speculate on the details of Bond's life, but when it comes to film, good filmmakers keep the visuals and the flow of the plot at the front and either gloss over such details or just ignore them.
You mentioned Bond's Aston being a company car, but I thought according to the reboot of the series and CR, Craig won the Aston in the card game, in which case it would be his personal car.