No “Bond, James Bond” in QUANTUM OF SOLACE

Posted by Matt Holmes. Last modified on September 21st, 2008 at 08:14am

No “Bond, James Bond” in QUANTUM OF SOLACE

Only three 007 movies in the past have not featured the immortal line “Bond, James Bond” but the tradition ending new series which remember has already dropped Q and Miss. Moneypenny from it’s canon, will not feature the popular catchphrase in the upcoming QUANTUM OF SOLACE.

The Independent also say the similarly used catchphrase, “shaken, not stirred” won’t make it to the dance either, both were used in CASINO ROYALE as an introduction for Daniel Craig as Bond but aren’t required here.

‘There was a “Bond, James Bond” in the script,’ said director Marc Forster. ‘There are several places where we shot it as well, but it never worked as we hoped. I just felt we should cut it out, and [producers] Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson agreed, and Daniel agreed, too. It’s nice to be open-minded about the Bond formula. You can always go back to them later on.’

Of course, they are probably quite right on this one. We have already witnessed Bond’s introduction, we hardly need to see him telling us just who he is once again, it is a little corny, which the new Bond movies have done well disposing of from the cheese climax that was DIE ANOTHER DAY.

Though the character of Q, I do think should certainly be re-instated and should really have featured from the get go. When you have a franchise like Chris Nolan’s BATMAN which features a modern day version of Q in Morgan Freeman and how such an established actor can bring a dark film comic relief to the fun scenes of seeing Bruce get his hands on new technology, you almost can’t believe the new Bond series hasn’t done something similar.

Ajay Chowdhury, the editor of Kiss Kiss Bang Bang magazine claims that no-one missed Miss. Moneypenny and Q from CASINO ROYALE. Well I did, didn’t you?

via - commander bond

Categories: Casino-Royale, Daniel-Craig, Movie News, Quantum of Solace

9 Comments »

The Q and Moneypenny question is a good one. No, I don’t think many people missed them from Casino Royale, but that was meant to be an “origin” story detailing how Bond became Bond. Those 2 characters are part of the daily routine of the seasoned Bond, not the life of the new kid.

I think these characters would fit nicely into a 3rd film. When Bond has completed his personal revenge and settles into a regular routine of simply working for a living, he could strike up a relationship with Q branch, eventually getting personal service from Q himself. Meanwhile, his visits to base result in some idle flirting with M’s secretary, which turns into something of a regular game…

The problem is that these would be gentler, more light-hearted moments. Given the intensity of the new Bond, would this detract from the formula? Moneypenny could be a major distraction if not handled properly, while Q would be an invitation for future directors to lean heavily on the gadgets again - we don’t want another invisible car!

Comment by aphexbr | September 21, 2008

Didn’t miss them but it’d be nice to see them eventually.

Comment by Dave | September 21, 2008

i’m sure they’ll introduce q and moneypenny at a stage when they feel it appropriate, and hopefully, when it’s organic to the story, rather than part of a formula that they feel they must adhere to. it’s a good sign that catchphrases and peripheral characters aren’t being forced into the films at present, it means they can get on with telling a good, compelling story.

oh, and, where the hell did that central image used in this article come from? that’s new isn’t it?

p.s.
“shaken, not stirred” was not featured in casino royale…or at least it was not said by bond himself. someone else asked him “shaken or stirred?”, i believe bond’s words were “do i look like i give a damn?!”

Comment by fanboy d | September 21, 2008

soundtrack art. cool.

Comment by fanboy d | September 21, 2008

I feel like the “Bond, James Bond” phrase isn’t needed in this film because it was done well at the end of Casino Royale. I do sort of think “shaken, not stirred” could be used though because it really wasn’t used in the last film.
I’d like to see Q at some point though and I agree with the earlier comment that the character would fit well in a 3rd film.

Comment by Cait | September 21, 2008

I didn’t miss them. There is no need to inject forced jokes into a hard-boiled spy thriller. I am worried about the idea of CGI and a car chase in this film.

Comment by Stephen | September 21, 2008

“worried about the idea of… a car chase in this film”

wtf? its james bond not ken frikkin loach!

Comment by Paul | September 21, 2008

I thought the lack of a by-the-book car chase in Casino Royale was great. I don’t want them to rely on action movie formulas, and car chases are the biggest one.

Comment by Stephen | September 22, 2008

No Bond James bond is bull! I have been watching Bond since 1965 and the line is a tradition! No MoneyPenny No Q no catch phrases! Lets not turn Bond into Bourne!

Comment by Randy C. | October 4, 2008