some questions on dialogue and other nuisances I have

96mn1296mn12 Posts: 632MI6 Agent
we all know about the huge plot holes, but one always bothers me.

1) The Shanghai glove, when did he put in on before Patrice slips to his death?
2) Is everyone calling M "mum"? Why? What are they calling her?
3) Why is Finney calling her Emma?

Stuff like this aggravates me, especially coming from Sam Mendes.

Comments

  • Hold CommandHold Command LondonPosts: 366MI6 Agent
    1. A mystery.

    2. Ma'am as in farm, not ham, though Silva refers to her as 'Mommy'.

    3. Kincade must have misheard Bond on his intoduction and just assmued that no one is called M; Emma it is. (I quite like this, it adds some humanity to both Kincade, and M who feels no need to correct him.
  • 96mn1296mn12 Posts: 632MI6 Agent
    1. A mystery.

    2. Ma'am as in farm, not ham, though Silva refers to her as 'Mommy'.

    3. Kincade must have misheard Bond on his intoduction and just assmued that no one is called M; Emma it is. (I quite like this, it adds some humanity to both Kincade, and M who feels no need to correct him.

    1) it still pisses me off.... they were doing great to that point.

    2) So its a muted a, it still sounded to me like a u. The "mommy" bit was awesome.

    3) Agreed with you on that.

    Bonus question 4) What was Silva's infatuation with M aside from revenge? The ending scene made me think that she had feelings for her in very warped way, almost like a maternal figure to him. Otherwise why wouldn't he just blow her brains off right then and there, but instead he wanted to die with her with the same bullet? Seems like M was his reason for living, but he couldn't bare to live knowing she was death even if he was the reason she was death.

    Is someone a Psychiatrist here? :))
  • Hold CommandHold Command LondonPosts: 366MI6 Agent
    One thing that sprang to my mind: Did Bond actually need to take M with him to Scotland? Surely Q could have layed the same trail for RS whether Bond actually had M or not. Could he not have put M into hiding and led Silva on a wild goose chase to Scotland?
  • 96mn1296mn12 Posts: 632MI6 Agent
    One thing that sprang to my mind: Did Bond actually need to take M with him to Scotland? Surely Q could have layed the same trail for RS whether Bond actually had M or not. Could he not have put M into hiding and led Silva on a wild goose chase to Scotland?

    No, he didnt need to take M, however, since Skyfall is nowhere near technology, it was an advantage for bond. Now, once he found out there were no weapons in the manor, why didnt he have Q or another 00 send him a shiatload of weapons?

    One of those things...
  • Asp9mmAsp9mm Over the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,483MI6 Agent
    No time. Best to work with what you've got rather than wait for something that may be too late to use.
    ..................Asp9mmSIG-1-2.jpg...............
  • Gala BrandGala Brand Posts: 1,172MI6 Agent
    One thing that sprang to my mind: Did Bond actually need to take M with him to Scotland? Surely Q could have layed the same trail for RS whether Bond actually had M or not. Could he not have put M into hiding and led Silva on a wild goose chase to Scotland?

    Silva is such a computer wizard he would've seen through any rabbit trails young Q tried to lead him on.
  • Ens007Ens007 EnglandPosts: 863MI6 Agent
    My main gripe would be overuse of 'bloody' as a swear word & the term 'ma'am' being repeated a tad too often.

    Yes there's plot holes etc, but this doesn't detract from the film for me. Still find myself thoroughly enjoying it!
  • Asp9mmAsp9mm Over the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,483MI6 Agent
    Ma'am is how we refer to women in senior authority in the military. It's just how it is and is accurate to real life.
    ..................Asp9mmSIG-1-2.jpg...............
  • 96mn1296mn12 Posts: 632MI6 Agent
    Thanks ASP, being in Texas, we make it sound maaaaaa'aaaaam.

    (Talk about stereotypical)

    :))

    EDIT: here the formal way is madam, like meh-dam
  • Asp9mmAsp9mm Over the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,483MI6 Agent
    It's just the feminine of Sir over here. And that's how you address your male senior officers all the time, just like here in the UK. When we address a female officer of higher rank, as M is in Mil Intel, everyone with a military background like Bond and Tanner will always refer to her as Ma'am.
    ..................Asp9mmSIG-1-2.jpg...............
  • HigginsHiggins GermanyPosts: 16,618MI6 Agent
    But there is a difference in pronounciation between "Ma'am" and somtheing that sounds like "Mum" even in british english, isn't it?

    In previous Bonds, the pronounciation was like "ma'am" which now changed to a constant "mum" to fit the story, what I find a little disturbing.....
    President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.

    Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,417Chief of Staff
    Bondtoys wrote:
    But there is a difference in pronounciation between "Ma'am" and somtheing that sounds like "Mum" even in british english, isn't it?

    In previous Bonds, the pronounciation was like "ma'am" which now changed to a constant "mum" to fit the story, what I find a little disturbing.....

    I was always told to pronounce it either as 'mum' or 'mam' - never as "ma'am"....if pronounced the latter way you were always picked up on it.
    YNWA 97
  • Charmed & DangerousCharmed & Dangerous Posts: 7,358MI6 Agent
    96mn12 wrote:
    we all know about the huge plot holes, but one always bothers me.

    1) The Shanghai glove, when did he put in on before Patrice slips to his death?.

    He wears the gloves (not just the one, he's not Michael Jackson :) ) all the way through the Shanghai scene. I assumed it was because he was trying to look like a Chauffeur. I might be wrong though.

    That bit didn't bother me so much, but one thing did: why did Patrice go into a different building and go through that elaborate setup to kill the unknown 'art-viewer' (and who was he?). The bodyguards in the same room as the art-viewer were obviously in on it, as they drag him away. Why not just kill him in the same room?

    *scratches head* :s
    "How was your lamb?" "Skewered. One sympathises."
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,417Chief of Staff
    96mn12 wrote:
    we all know about the huge plot holes, but one always bothers me.

    1) The Shanghai glove, when did he put in on before Patrice slips to his death?.

    He wears the gloves (not just the one, he's not Michael Jackson :) ) all the way through the Shanghai scene. I assumed it was because he was trying to look like a Chauffeur. I might be wrong though.

    That bit didn't bother me so much, but one thing did: why did Patrice go into a different building and go through that elaborate setup to kill the unknown 'art-viewer' (and who was he?). The bodyguards in the same room as the art-viewer were obviously in on it, as they drag him away. Why not just kill him in the same room?

    *scratches head* :s

    Wouldn't this guy have bodyguards too, though ? And if he's killed from a different building then they can claim no knowledge of the assassin...I'm perplexed as to why people struggle to understand this :s
    YNWA 97
  • Charmed & DangerousCharmed & Dangerous Posts: 7,358MI6 Agent
    Sir Miles wrote:
    96mn12 wrote:
    we all know about the huge plot holes, but one always bothers me.

    1) The Shanghai glove, when did he put in on before Patrice slips to his death?.

    He wears the gloves (not just the one, he's not Michael Jackson :) ) all the way through the Shanghai scene. I assumed it was because he was trying to look like a Chauffeur. I might be wrong though.

    That bit didn't bother me so much, but one thing did: why did Patrice go into a different building and go through that elaborate setup to kill the unknown 'art-viewer' (and who was he?). The bodyguards in the same room as the art-viewer were obviously in on it, as they drag him away. Why not just kill him in the same room?

    *scratches head* :s

    Wouldn't this guy have bodyguards too, though ? And if he's killed from a different building then they can claim no knowledge of the assassin...I'm perplexed as to why people struggle to understand this :s

    Because they weren't his bodyguards: they show no emotion when he's killed, don't move a muscle, and then drag his body away... Either that or they are the world's worst bodyguards and hated their employer :))
    "How was your lamb?" "Skewered. One sympathises."
  • Silhouette ManSilhouette Man The last refuge of a scoundrelPosts: 8,644MI6 Agent
    96mn12 wrote:
    1. A mystery.

    2. Ma'am as in farm, not ham, though Silva refers to her as 'Mommy'.

    3. Kincade must have misheard Bond on his intoduction and just assmued that no one is called M; Emma it is. (I quite like this, it adds some humanity to both Kincade, and M who feels no need to correct him.

    1) it still pisses me off.... they were doing great to that point.

    2) So its a muted a, it still sounded to me like a u. The "mommy" bit was awesome.

    3) Agreed with you on that.

    Bonus question 4) What was Silva's infatuation with M aside from revenge? The ending scene made me think that she had feelings for her in very warped way, almost like a maternal figure to him. Otherwise why wouldn't he just blow her brains off right then and there, but instead he wanted to die with her with the same bullet? Seems like M was his reason for living, but he couldn't bare to live knowing she was death even if he was the reason she was death.

    Is someone a Psychiatrist here? :))

    On Bonus Question 4, agreed with you. There seemed to be many different strips of layers between the Silva-M relationship. This is exactly what makes Skyfall a good film first and a good Bond film second IMHO. You can tell that the film was directed by sam Mendes as there are many shades of grey in the film, most approprate for the fiftieth anniversary of the franchise.
    "The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
  • Hold CommandHold Command LondonPosts: 366MI6 Agent
    96mn12 wrote:
    we all know about the huge plot holes, but one always bothers me.

    1) The Shanghai glove, when did he put in on before Patrice slips to his death?.

    He wears the gloves (not just the one, he's not Michael Jackson :) ) all the way through the Shanghai scene. I assumed it was because he was trying to look like a Chauffeur. I might be wrong though.

    That bit didn't bother me so much, but one thing did: why did Patrice go into a different building and go through that elaborate setup to kill the unknown 'art-viewer' (and who was he?). The bodyguards in the same room as the art-viewer were obviously in on it, as they drag him away. Why not just kill him in the same room?

    *scratches head* :s

    No, bond removes them in the Mercedes and double checks his gun is ready for use.

    When is he hanging off of the lift you can clearly see he is gloveless: http://thesuitsofjamesbond.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Skyfall-Peacoat-2.jpg
  • Hold CommandHold Command LondonPosts: 366MI6 Agent
    Sir Miles wrote:
    Bondtoys wrote:
    But there is a difference in pronounciation between "Ma'am" and somtheing that sounds like "Mum" even in british english, isn't it?

    In previous Bonds, the pronounciation was like "ma'am" which now changed to a constant "mum" to fit the story, what I find a little disturbing.....

    I was always told to pronounce it either as 'mum' or 'mam' - never as "ma'am"....if pronounced the latter way you were always picked up on it.

    In HM's Armed Forces ma'am as in ham is the only accpeted usage, some female officers even insist on sir.
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,238MI6 Agent
    Asp9mm wrote:
    Ma'am is how we refer to women in senior authority in the military. It's just how it is and is accurate to real life.

    Odd, however, that they don't do it nearly so much if at all in, what, six other Bond films Judi Dench has been in...
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • sniperUKsniperUK UlsterPosts: 594MI6 Agent
    Asp9mm wrote:
    Ma'am is how we refer to women in senior authority in the military. It's just how it is and is accurate to real life.

    Odd, however, that they don't do it nearly so much if at all in, what, six other Bond films Judi Dench has been in...

    Well they have now got it right.
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,417Chief of Staff
    Sir Miles wrote:

    He wears the gloves (not just the one, he's not Michael Jackson :) ) all the way through the Shanghai scene. I assumed it was because he was trying to look like a Chauffeur. I might be wrong though.

    That bit didn't bother me so much, but one thing did: why did Patrice go into a different building and go through that elaborate setup to kill the unknown 'art-viewer' (and who was he?). The bodyguards in the same room as the art-viewer were obviously in on it, as they drag him away. Why not just kill him in the same room?

    *scratches head* :s

    Wouldn't this guy have bodyguards too, though ? And if he's killed from a different building then they can claim no knowledge of the assassin...I'm perplexed as to why people struggle to understand this :s

    Because they weren't his bodyguards: they show no emotion when he's killed, don't move a muscle, and then drag his body away... Either that or they are the world's worst bodyguards and hated their employer :))

    No...the bodyguards in the room are for Severine, I thought that was obvious...the guys bodyguards would have had to wait outside....or perhaps he did go alone...but it would still make sense to kill the guy from another building and therefore prove no collusion...if Patrice had killed the guy from the same room he would have had to kill Severine and her guards too....simples :D
    YNWA 97
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,792MI6 Agent
    In many ways I've given up on Watching films too closely, I've
    come to the conclusion to Not second guess the Director and
    Just watch the story he's put on Film.
    I assume Things happen off camera that we don't see, so
    this explains Gloves getting put on or taken off. This goes for
    all Movies I watch now, Not just the Bonds. ;)
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
  • 96mn1296mn12 Posts: 632MI6 Agent
    96mn12 wrote:
    we all know about the huge plot holes, but one always bothers me.

    1) The Shanghai glove, when did he put in on before Patrice slips to his death?.

    He wears the gloves (not just the one, he's not Michael Jackson :) ) all the way through the Shanghai scene. I assumed it was because he was trying to look like a Chauffeur. I might be wrong though.

    That bit didn't bother me so much, but one thing did: why did Patrice go into a different building and go through that elaborate setup to kill the unknown 'art-viewer' (and who was he?). The bodyguards in the same room as the art-viewer were obviously in on it, as they drag him away. Why not just kill him in the same room?

    *scratches head* :s

    No, bond removes them in the Mercedes and double checks his gun is ready for use.

    When is he hanging off of the lift you can clearly see he is gloveless: http://thesuitsofjamesbond.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Skyfall-Peacoat-2.jpg

    Yes he takes them off in the Merc, but look at it again, when he's walking in the aisle in the building, he's holding the gun and clearly without gloves. Anywho...
  • 96mn1296mn12 Posts: 632MI6 Agent
    Sir Miles wrote:
    Sir Miles wrote:

    Wouldn't this guy have bodyguards too, though ? And if he's killed from a different building then they can claim no knowledge of the assassin...I'm perplexed as to why people struggle to understand this :s

    Because they weren't his bodyguards: they show no emotion when he's killed, don't move a muscle, and then drag his body away... Either that or they are the world's worst bodyguards and hated their employer :))

    No...the bodyguards in the room are for Severine, I thought that was obvious...the guys bodyguards would have had to wait outside....or perhaps he did go alone...but it would still make sense to kill the guy from another building and therefore prove no collusion...if Patrice had killed the guy from the same room he would have had to kill Severine and her guards too....simples :D


    Agreed, those are her handlers, pretty obvious. However, she knew Patrice cus he also worked for Silva (the Macau bar, she asks Bond if he killed Patrice). How would that prove collusion? Obviously Patrice would not have killed her.
  • BlackleiterBlackleiter Washington, DCPosts: 5,615MI6 Agent
    I applaud your eminently reasonable approach to watching films, TP, and I share your view. For me the movies are much more fun that way.
    In many ways I've given up on Watching films too closely, I've
    come to the conclusion to Not second guess the Director and
    Just watch the story he's put on Film.
    I assume Things happen off camera that we don't see, so
    this explains Gloves getting put on or taken off. This goes for
    all Movies I watch now, Not just the Bonds. ;)
    "Felix Leiter, a brother from Langley."
  • CmdrAtticusCmdrAtticus United StatesPosts: 1,102MI6 Agent
    96mn12 wrote:
    One thing that sprang to my mind: Did Bond actually need to take M with him to Scotland? Surely Q could have layed the same trail for RS whether Bond actually had M or not. Could he not have put M into hiding and led Silva on a wild goose chase to Scotland?

    No, he didnt need to take M, however, since Skyfall is nowhere near technology, it was an advantage for bond. Now, once he found out there were no weapons in the manor, why didnt he have Q or another 00 send him a shiatload of weapons?

    One of those things...

    I think he did needed to take M for several reasons. One is that he felt personally responsible for her safety, and another is that he didn't believe that she could hide anywhere in London where Silva could not find her since the city is so enshrouded with security monitoring Silva could easily track her in some way - up til then he knew her locations during the whole film. Bond knew getting her to a remote area sans technology would leave Silva blind except for the tech crumbs Q scattered out that allowed him to track Bond to Skyfall. Another reason is that he felt he was the most capable person to protect her by that point, since the rest of the security enforcement went by the book and kept relying on electronic security measures. It was one of the main points of the plot - despite all the advances of technology when it comes to a nations or individuals security, it can still be thwarted by the most basic means (don't forget 9-11).
    Why doesn't he have Q send him weapons or something when they get to Skyfall and realize they don't have much in the way of armed defense? For one, there was no time. How would Q have them sent? Air dropped? Even if that were possible, it still left the defense of Skyfall to only him
    and Kincaid (who could shoot a shotgun, but he's still an old man). Yes, their homemade defensive traps looked elaborate and seemed like it would take a long time to set up, but the fact all three of them were engaged in it and probably were at it for most of a day it seemed to me to have provided sufficient time. Also, remember, Bond did not want anyone else involved in his scheme, since it wasn't sanctioned by MI6 so he didn't want anyone getting their careers damaged by helping him. He enlisted Q only because Q was the only one who could do the tech crumb dropping. Tanner went along because he was loyal to M., then Mallory agreed because he had been in the field and knew Bond was doing the right thing.
Sign In or Register to comment.