Stationary?

Ok, not wanting to sound dumb, but what the hell was the line about stationary? Bond seduces Agent Fields by asking her to help him search for the stationary... I must be missing something, it can't just be a case of terrible writing and/or delivery, can it? :#
Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:

http://apbateman.com
«1

Comments

  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,697MI6 Agent
    I agree secretagent,I've always found it to be a very clumsy line,It's not (just my opinion) clever,funny or sexy.I've posted my own suggestion months ago I'm sure others have better suggestions more in keeping with the witt of other Bond movies.Bond might of well just said to Fields "Sould we shag now and get it out of the way?,as You are the innocent who has to die later to show how evil Mr Greene is" :))
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 30,917Chief of Staff
    Ok, not wanting to sound dumb, but what the hell was the line about stationary? Bond seduces Agent Fields by asking her to help him search for the stationary... I must be missing something, it can't just be a case of terrible writing and/or delivery, can it? :#

    It is a case of terrible spelling, though.... :))

    Stationary = Not moving

    Stationery = Envelopes, etc
  • thesecretagentthesecretagent CornwallPosts: 2,151MI6 Agent
    So we've established I make the occasional spelling mistake, and that you are pedantic. I'm glad my mistake made you feel happier about yourself today. Back to the topic - I take it you didn't understand the line either then?
    Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:

    http://apbateman.com
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 30,917Chief of Staff
    So we've established I make the occasional spelling mistake, and that you are pedantic. I'm glad my mistake made you feel happier about yourself today. Back to the topic - I take it you didn't understand the line either then?

    No need to be so negative; I was simply amending your spelling in a hopefully humourous way.
  • thesecretagentthesecretagent CornwallPosts: 2,151MI6 Agent
    Barbel wrote:
    So we've established I make the occasional spelling mistake, and that you are pedantic. I'm glad my mistake made you feel happier about yourself today. Back to the topic - I take it you didn't understand the line either then?

    No need to be so negative; I was simply amending your spelling in a hopefully humourous way.

    It was as humourous as your music. Thank you for amending my spelling. I will be a better person for it.
    Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:

    http://apbateman.com
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 30,917Chief of Staff
    I will be a better person for it.

    Ill-mannered and ill-termpered as well as ill-informed; a poor combination. I'll stick to being pedantic.
  • thesecretagentthesecretagent CornwallPosts: 2,151MI6 Agent
    Barbel wrote:
    I will be a better person for it.

    Ill-mannered and ill-termpered as well as ill-informed; a poor combination. I'll stick to being pedantic.

    Surely you mean tempered. I'm not sure I know what "termpered" means. Could you just possibly have made a spelling mistake of your own? It happens doesn't it? Quite easy to do?

    I've had enough now. I'm sure you were just trying to be funny. I thought you were rude, that's all.
    Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:

    http://apbateman.com
  • HardyboyHardyboy Posts: 5,751Chief of Staff
    Separate corners, guys. Take it to private message if you have to.
    Vox clamantis in deserto
  • thesecretagentthesecretagent CornwallPosts: 2,151MI6 Agent
    No need.
    Close it if you have to. Nobody knows what the bloody stationery (learnt how to spell it at least ;)) line means anyway... :))
    Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:

    http://apbateman.com
  • Ricardo C.Ricardo C. Posts: 916MI6 Agent
    The Stationery line is just one of the many stupid things in Quantum of Solace. Bond asks about some writing paper and of a sudden Bond answers the door half naked. 8-)
  • gussguss South Wales, UKPosts: 195MI6 Agent
    From guss's wife.....he wants to get more friendly with her so he is making an excuse to get her into the bedroom, a little bit like "do you want to come and see my cd collection" any woman would recognise that as a suggestion to get her into bed. I knew immediately what he meant.;)
  • gussguss South Wales, UKPosts: 195MI6 Agent
    guss's wife, i actually thought it was a very sexy line and having been chatted up by Daniel a while back it brought a smile to my face.
  • Ricardo C.Ricardo C. Posts: 916MI6 Agent
    edited October 2010
    guss wrote:
    From guss's wife.....he wants to get more friendly with her so he is making an excuse to get her into the bedroom, a little bit like "do you want to come and see my cd collection" any woman would recognise that as a suggestion to get her into bed. I knew immediately what he meant.;)


    So...that line would get you into bed with a total stranger ? Be honest now. :))

    In all seriousness though, I understand what you are getting at but they cut to the door of the bedroom and then a half naked Bond opening the door. They should have had something in between to make it seem like Bond actually used his charms to get Fields into bed. Secoundly, to use such a line to get her into bedroom is something adkin to Screech from Saved By The Bell, not a deadly secret agent. Granted, James Bonds' seduction techniques have never been too realistic. This is a men's fantasy in which woman would pretty much throw themselves at 007 but not without James grabbing them by the arms and going in for the kill. In other words, he utimately uses himself to get all those willing woman.
  • LoeffelholzLoeffelholz The United States, With LovePosts: 8,853Quartermasters
    edited October 2010
    Okay...I'll be the one to stick up for this scene B-)

    I liked the line, and thought it was spot-on! The sexual tension and subtext between he and Fields make any dialogue essentially meaningless---there's a palpable connection between them, a kind of obvious shorthand between consenting adults. Both Bond and Fields know it; hence Fields' natural laughter in reaction to the starkly throwaway 'stationery' line. I find it a fairly clever moment---in that it works, for me, on multiple levels.

    But like so many other moments in QoS, it so needed another beat of a scene between them in that room, with eyes and physical reactions, etc., to buttress the moment. Sadly, once again Forster and his editor chose to cut instead of linger. Moments like this one are less obvious than the chop-chop-chop of the car chase, etc., but they hurt the film equally. Both overall narrative (the big picture) and individual lines of dialogue (the finer points) have a rhythm which---when it works---is almost musical. This hotel room moment is a good one, but diminished by a lack of support by the surrounding structure.

    Still and all, however brief, the moment works brilliantly for me ;)
    "Blood & Ashes"...AVAILABLE on Amazon.co.uk: Get 'Jaded': Blood & Ashes: The Debut Oscar Jade Thriller
    "I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
    "Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
  • Ricardo C.Ricardo C. Posts: 916MI6 Agent
    Okay...I'll be the one to stick up for this scene B-)

    I liked the line, and thought it was spot-on! The sexual tension and subtext between he and Fields make any dialogue essentially meaningless---there's a palpable connection between them, a kind of obvious shorthand between consenting adults. Both Bond and Fields know it; hence Fields' natural laughter in reaction to the starkly throwaway 'stationery' line. I find it a fairly clever moment---in that it works, for me, on multiple levels.

    That's an interesting movie you must have been watching. :p
  • LoeffelholzLoeffelholz The United States, With LovePosts: 8,853Quartermasters
    Ricardo C. wrote:
    Okay...I'll be the one to stick up for this scene B-)

    I liked the line, and thought it was spot-on! The sexual tension and subtext between he and Fields make any dialogue essentially meaningless---there's a palpable connection between them, a kind of obvious shorthand between consenting adults. Both Bond and Fields know it; hence Fields' natural laughter in reaction to the starkly throwaway 'stationery' line. I find it a fairly clever moment---in that it works, for me, on multiple levels.

    That's an interesting movie you must have been watching. :p

    It was! Pity you missed it.
    "Blood & Ashes"...AVAILABLE on Amazon.co.uk: Get 'Jaded': Blood & Ashes: The Debut Oscar Jade Thriller
    "I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
    "Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
  • Ricardo C.Ricardo C. Posts: 916MI6 Agent
    It was! Pity you missed it.

    ....


    You win this round. X-( ;)
  • j.bladesj.blades Currently? You must be joking?Posts: 530MI6 Agent
    I agree with Loeffelholz on this one! I really enjoyed the line but, it was a shame that we some how "blinked" and missed Bond seducing her into the bed. :# Which had we seen that, the seen would have been that much better. ;)
    "I take a ridiculous pleasure in what I eat and drink."

    ~ Casino Royale, Ian Fleming
  • LoeffelholzLoeffelholz The United States, With LovePosts: 8,853Quartermasters
    Ricardo C. wrote:
    It was! Pity you missed it.

    ....


    You win this round. X-( ;)

    :p :) You know...if there's one thing I've learnt in 5 years of hanging around on AJB, it's that---9.9 times out of 10---opinions don't change :))

    I'm a fan of QoS...but I lament some very key decisions made by the filmmakers---both during filming, and post-production. It could have been so much better than it was.
    "Blood & Ashes"...AVAILABLE on Amazon.co.uk: Get 'Jaded': Blood & Ashes: The Debut Oscar Jade Thriller
    "I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
    "Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
  • Ricardo C.Ricardo C. Posts: 916MI6 Agent
    Ricardo C. wrote:
    It was! Pity you missed it.

    ....


    You win this round. X-( ;)

    :p :) You know...if there's one thing I've learnt in 5 years of hanging around on AJB, it's that---9.9 times out of 10---opinions don't change :))

    I'm a fan of QoS...but I lament some very key decisions made by the filmmakers---both during filming, and post-production. It could have been so much better than it was.

    The only good desicion I feel they made was hiring Dennis Gassner. I hope he comes back for Bond 23.
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 9,045MI6 Agent
    Barbel wrote:
    So we've established I make the occasional spelling mistake, and that you are pedantic. I'm glad my mistake made you feel happier about yourself today. Back to the topic - I take it you didn't understand the line either then?

    No need to be so negative; I was simply amending your spelling in a hopefully humourous way.

    Er, it's spelt 'humorous'. :D

    http://www.chambersharrap.co.uk/chambers/features/chref/chref.py/main?query=humorous&title=21st

    You know what they say about people in glass houses... :))
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 30,917Chief of Staff
    You know what they say about people in glass houses... :))


    Yeah, well-

    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/humourous

    http://www.wordreference.com/definition/humourous

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/humourous

    ...and others too noomerrus* to mention would seem to agree with me. I am of course not immune to typos- I deserve the stick for "termpered" above!


    * that's another attempt at a joke, by the way.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,697MI6 Agent
    I find this line as an homage to another movie, the orignal line Being "So sould we shag Now, or shag later!"I 'm glad to see the writers starting to do an homage to other spy movies and even though we have to put up with all their bull on being more realistic, they infact are sneakily pushing Bond back to the swinging 60's Baby! :))
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
  • DanielCraig007DanielCraig007 Posts: 582MI6 Agent
    I have to remember that "stationery" line... :007)
  • DEFIANT 74205DEFIANT 74205 Perth, AustraliaPosts: 1,881MI6 Agent
    I've never understood the need to get so defensive when someone picks up on one's spelling mistakes. A mistake was made, and we all make them. Admit to it, then move on. There is absolutely no need to get defensive or aggressive about it. Yes, I am a stickler for spelling and grammar, and if I've made any mistakes at all, I'd rather people correct me than let me continue making that mistake. If that makes me a pedant, so be it. It's a tag I can live with.

    There, I've said my piece. As for the line in question, I believe (and I'm only guessing here) that it has something to do with Agent Fields supposedly (well, in Bond's mind, anyway) posing as his secretary. You're right, though, it was a terribly written line - there has been many instances of bad one-liners in Bond movies, Die Another Day was full of them. I don't know the real reason behind why that line was said.
    "Watch the birdie, you bastard!"

    Favourite Bond films list
  • bigzilchobigzilcho Toronto, ONPosts: 245MI6 Agent
    As far as one-liners go...it doesn't hold a candle to the likes of "But of course you are" and I'm not sure it was meant to.

    When I saw QOS in the theatre that line got one the biggest laughs in the movie. And, really, its not the line itself, but the delivery of the line.

    I'm with Loeff on this one. There is an obvious sexual tension in the room as Fields eyes follows Bond through the rooms.

    Has anyone pointed out that we are seeing Bond though HER eyes in this scene? (When you think about it, how many times has THAT happened in the series. Is this the first?)

    Because it is thru her eyes we become aware that WHATEVER Bond says next, it is a given she will jump into bed with him.

    Her face says it all.

    Since the majority of Bond-fans are male, we cannot relate to how women react to Bond.
    What shocks a lot of Craig-bashers is how many women find Craig to be drop-dead sexy, despite their cries that Craig is not handsome enough to be Bond.

    Simply put, women have not reacted this primally to a Bond's sexual charisma since Connery in the mid-60's.

    This scene is about how a WOMAN looks at Bond.

    And make no mistake, a lot of women would have jumped on top of Craig's Bond WAY before the stationary line.

    Craig's arrogance and swagger (check out the way he throws the keys away) are like catnip to women. It was palpable in the audience that first night at CR in 2006. Craig had grabbed the attention of women in a way that reminded us that Bond was not meant to be appreciated solely by fanboys.

    The ladies in the audience have made Craig a smash as 007. As men, we can appreciate Craig as a tough, ruthless 007 but it is how he has been recieved by women that cannot be underestimated.

    Classically handsome men like Roger, Dalton and Brosnan have their female admirers, to be sure, but it takes a Bond with rugged features and ice-cold attitude to make the ladies blush with excitement.

    Barbara Brocolli trusted her gut instinct as a woman, how else can you explain her choice of Craig as Bond? Cubby wouldn't have even LOOKED at Craig, simply because of his looks.

    To conclude, it does not matter WHAT Bond says in that moment. (Personally I find the delivery hilarious). The way Fields follows Bond with her eyes tells me that, like millions of women around the world, she will jump into bed with Bond...at the drop of a hat...no questions asked.

    Bond is Bond. He SHOULD be a fantasy figure to women as much he is to men.


    "Don't worry, you're not my type."
    "Smart?"
    "Single."
  • Ricardo C.Ricardo C. Posts: 916MI6 Agent
    I am sorry bigzilcho but you seem to be grasping on very little to justify that scene. I could not believe for a secound that this woman would fall for Bond so easily. All they did was explore a hotel room for a bit and Craig all of a sudden acts like a geek who is trying to score for the first time with a dumb line about stationery. Then we just cut to half naked Craig answering the door. Maybe, just maybe, that scene would have worked with smarter direction and more dialogue. Yes Feilds was starring at Bond but there is no reason for it at all.

    I don't think you could ever realistically have seduction scene in a James Bond film, or a lot of movies for that matter, but the key component is the "Alpha-Male" factor. For example when Bond wanted Miss Taro in Doctor No, he just took her. True there was the "Look, No Hands" line but look at his delivery. He wasn't acting like a geek, he was being a charmer. Also more importantly they were both sitting on the bed. You can have that suspension of disbelief at that point were they both would ultimately end up doing it.
  • bigzilchobigzilcho Toronto, ONPosts: 245MI6 Agent
    Sorry Ricardo, I agree to disagree.

    Perception all depends on the viewer.

    What you refer to Fields as "just looking" can be interpreted differently. I don't believe I am "grasping" to justify the scene. Is there as much sexual tension in the air as the scene in DN with Miss Taro? Perhaps not, but we are talking about a different era in the fields of seduction.

    I believe you avoided addressing my main point which is this scene is from Field's perspective, not Bond's.

    Bond is the object of desire. Think about that for a moment.

    Seduction is in the air, perhaps not the kind you would like, but the point that Fields is "staring at Bond for no reason at all" is kind of missing the point.

    There IS a reason she is staring: she finds Bond attractive. Period.

    As for Bond "acting like a geek" well, old man, I could refer to any number of women throughout the world who would say one word to you: "Wrong!"

    Obviously its all about interpretation. This is one of the best "seduction" scenes in the series because its absolutely cut and dried. Why waste time? Lets get to it.

    Crass? Sure it is. And lets face it, there is MUCH to be learned from the fact that women have been known to pursue and enjoy sex on their own terms.

    Of course its a dumb line. But sometimes, just sometimes, a woman will fall for a dumb line because of the man who is saying it.

    Sorry Ricardo I am not "grasping at very little". This scene is about a woman allowing herself to be seduced. Why do I say that? Because they shot it from HER perspective. Bond is the object of desire.

    That is the one thing male Bond-fans CANNOT comprehend about Daniel Craig: Women find him attractive. So to hear you twice referring to him as "acting like a geek" makes me laugh.

    Make no mistake, if I had my way, Craig would NEVER have become Bond. His looks are too rugged. But what shocked me since that first night at CR was how excited and vocal women were about Craig. And still are.

    The stationary scene is almost as if the filmmakers acknowledged that Craig has an animal magntism over women. Its not a leap to imagine women leaping at the chance to be alone in a hotel room with Craig.

    You "don't believe a woman can fall for Bond so easily", Ricardo? A lot of women would disagree.

    Done properly, Bond SHOULD make women woozy by his mere appearance.
    Just ask any woman who sighed when Craig stepped out of the surf in CR.

    That moment is now acknowledged as being as iconic to women as Ursula Andress' entrance was to men in DN.

    The point? In the end, its all about interpretation, my friend.


    "Hello Moneypenny, what gives?"
    "Me, given an ounce of encouragement."
  • Ricardo C.Ricardo C. Posts: 916MI6 Agent
    edited October 2010
    You are really not making your case bigzilcho. All you are doing is screaming about how females are attracted to Craig. I never denied this and the point is irrelevant. Bond has encountered a woman who has no desire to bed him the minute she sees him. Ergo, you have to make a set-up on the film. I am talking strictly about the realm of the film, not Daniel Craig the actor who would probably be mobbed by woman. That's a different topic.

    Now regarding this scene in question, I watched it again to get a fresh perspective and it's just as stupid as I remembered. The both go in the hotel room, the camera revolves around Fields, she glances around stares at Bond once, Bond makes some comment about stationery in such a manner that Craig really aknowleges how stupid the set up is, she walks in the bedroom, and then we cut to the front door. This all happened in the span of 30 secounds. Your telling me there some sort of great sexual tension in a half a minute or possibly less ? There is no thought, no construction, nothing in this scene that would make it remotely belivable in a film. It summarizes the weakness of the film perfectly, everything is just rushed. This is even worse than Roger Moore "seducing" that woman in Rio in Moonraker. At least the scene actually put the two in the same personal space before they screwed.

    The Doctor No example I used is quite relevant and there is nothing contemporary about that example. Bond is next to a woman wrapped in a towel, sitting on her bed, he sits next to her and moves in with a couple of lines. That build up is done correctly. Even before then Bond pulled that towel off her hair because he wants her. According to the laws of film exagerration, there is no where else to go but the couple in bed. That is real sexual tension. On the other hand you have James Bond walking around a hotel room while a women is just standing around, a random comment is made, and they are in bed.
  • bigzilchobigzilcho Toronto, ONPosts: 245MI6 Agent
    Well, Ricardo, like I said, its all a matter of interpretation.

    Just because you have an opinion that the scene is ineffective doesn't mean that I agree with you. Just a difference of opinion. Nothing else.

    If you don't "believe" in this scene is as being plausible between a Bond and a woman, well. then, what else can I say?

    By the way, no one is "screaming" (give me a break) about anything. Your point that no woman would fall for Bond so "easily" is backed up by my observation that women find a man like Bond attractive. The bad-boy syndrome at work.

    Its not as seductive and romantic as other scenes. Okay, good point...but does it matter?

    You don't HAVE to like this scene. But don't expect me to discard this scene because it is not as "correctly" handled as the one in DN.

    Its called having an opinion.

    Respecting each other's views is what its all about.


    "Ejector seat? You're joking."
    "I never joke about my work, 007."
Sign In or Register to comment.