He tries way too hard to be funny and its so obvious he's just a Felix Leiter ripoff. I actually would have preferred it if David Hedison had returned as Felix in Wade's place and had a prosthetic leg as he did in the novels.
shareI also hated this character, and both this and TND suffered because of him.
shareExactly, he's a pathetic Felix Leiter ripoff and he wasn't funny. Honestly the only characters I thought were even remotely interesting in Goldeneye were Bond and Trevelyan.
shareMan, what a way too exaggerate.😐
shareHe's not a good character.
shareNo, but to say the movies actually suffer because of him...
shareThey do, he ruins the scenes hes in, he should have stayed dead after TLD
sharePerhaps the scenes, but hardly the movies.
shareEh, Goldeneye and Tomorrow Never Dies were nothing special. They were just average Bond films and nothing I had never seen before.
shareAnd that's because of the Jack Wade character???
GoldenEye is easily my favourite Bond movie. What previous Bond movie was similar to it?
It ripped off Diamonds Are Forever as it was just another run of the mill film where the villain has a giant space laser. It wasn’t just Jack Wade, it was Ourumov, Boris, Dmirti, Natalya, Xenia, M, Tanner, moneypenny, etc. The only characters I thought were interesting were Bond and Trevalyen. I ranked it 15th
shareA space laser is pretty much the only similarity. The Bond movies do it all the time. License to Kill is very similar to Live and Let Die, for example.
I thought Xenia was great! I liked Natalya because she seemed like a real person and wasn't a bimbo like a lot of earlier Bond girls. What the hell was wrong with Moneypenny???😐
Naw there are other similarities I pointed out, Goldeneye was just Bond by the numbers , nothing special about it. Xenia was annoying and her constant orgasms got old, Natalya was annoying and the actress wasn’t good. Moneypenny didn’t leave an impression on me and I never really liked Samantha Bond in general, Lois Maxwell understood the role and knew how to play it. Again I ranked it 15th
shareWell yeah, similarities with other Bond movies instead of just Diamonds are Forever. They do that all the time, that's what the fans want. When they don't do it, the fans don't react positively, like with License to Kill.
Totally disagree with you on the girls. Times change and so did Moneypenny. The character had become rather old-fashioned. I thought GoldenEye did a great job ushering in the post-Cold War era.
And that's fine but at the same time that means that Goldeneye was just your run of the mill Bond film and didn't do anything that broke away from the formula, it was a safe Bond film and in the end was totally average. I didn't think Samantha Bond was a good actress that's all, no one will ever be as good as Lois Maxwell, no one (Naomi Harris is decent though).
As for your other point it doesn't matter that 006 was Bond's colleague, he was Bond's equal and that had already been done before and I actually do think Scaramanga was a better villain than Treveyln.
I didn't like Dalton as Bond but the films he was in were well written (and Licence To Kill is a much better Bond film than Goldeneye)
The Satellite was Treveyln's device, he was using it to carry out his evil scheme and it ended up being what killed him, that was also done in Dr. No and then Bond is even interrupted from getting it on with the leading lady because his CIA pal with a bunch of marines interrupts him, same thing happened in Dr. No
Again I don't think Goldeneye was a bad film, it's certainly better than films like Moonraker or Quantum of Solace, at the same time though it did nothing that hadn't already been done before (I know the Bond series is repetitive, Goldeneye is no exception) and it didn't do that great of a job doing it, I thought You Only Live Twice was a much better film about a madman using space technology to take over the world with his evil plan. It's 15th for me, nowhere near the top.
I think it totally matters Trevelyan was Bond's former friend and colleague. The betrayal played an important part in the story and the charaterization of Bond.
I think the similarities you mention are pretty minor and the kind that can be found in any Bond movie because they follow a formula. I think OHMSS and LTK are the only ones that really tried to do something different.
I really think GoldenEye brought something new to the table by amping up the action (it's a rollercoaster ride) and showing a Bond who's charming and witty while also vulnerable and human. It also feels more modern. TLD is a favourite of mine, but still feels a bit old-fashioned. And GE is way more realistic than most Bond movies. Blofeld's evil plan in YOLT is kinda out there. Trevelyan doesn't want to take over the world, he wants to steal money. Not a typical Bond villain, whose motives are usually way more grandiose.
Bond's been betrayed before, again Goldeneye did nothing new.
They are not minor, the entire ending of Goldeneye came directly from Dr. No, it's the same damn ending down to the last detail which further proves that Goldeneye brought nothing to the table nor did it do the formula in a unique way, it was just more of the same. Goldeneye did not up the action, there was just as much action all throughout the 80's from FYEO to LTK. Bond was always charming, and the films are always representative of the times that they were released so every Bond film feels modern when it first comes out. TLD felt modern back in 1987, GE felt modern back in 1995, FRWL felt modern back in 1963. Ummmm Goldeneye is anything but realistic, a giant space lazer that sends out EMP waves is about as unrealistic as you can get. Also there is no way Treveylyn could have built that entire station in Cuba without anyone knowing about it, I see no difference between Treveyln's plan and Blofeld's plan, except the finale of YOLT was much more well done than in GE, both were over the top and ridiculous but YOLT was a ton of fun, while GE was mediocre. Ummmmmmmmmmm I think just about every single Bond villain's scheme was to make money, so yeah Treveyln's plan was again nothing we haven't already seen.
I feel that LTK tried to do something different however fans were really not ready for the dark, gritty, angry Bond in 1989 so they just went back to the same old same old in GE and there's nothing wrong with that, Bond films often recycle the formula and the plots but let's not pretend Goldeneye was anything more than it was.
When was the villain a personal friend who betrayed him???
Yes, those things are minor, especially if you consider this is a series that follows a formula. Now I'm far from a Bond expert, but I do mix up scenes sometimes because the movies are all so similar.
I said in GE Bond was charming and witty while ALSO vulnerable and human. I haven't seen a lot of that before. He was absolutely not like Moore. GE is definitely more action-packed. It's one thing always critics always emphasize. The Bond movies were also very clearly from the Cold War era, GE succeeded in taking the franchise into the post-Cold War world.
The satellite laser may not exist in our world, but the idea is not at all far-fetched. An EMP nuclear bomb actually exists. And Trevelyan did not build that station. It was secretly built by the Soviets on the territory of its communist ally Cuba. Ourumov was one of the few who knew about it.
Like you said yourself, the typical Bond villain wants to control the world. Trevelyan also has a personal motive and isn't evil for the sake of being evil, like basically all SPECTRE villains.
I'm not pretending anything, I've told you exactly what GE was. Now chillax, there's no reason to be so prickly.
Bond was betrayed in For Your Eyes Only, The Living Daylights and Licence To Kill
Right the series follows a formula, Goldeneye followed that formula and therefore did not bring anything new to the table.
Bond was all three of those characteristics throughout the entire franchise, that's part of his character. However I do agree Brosnan was a great Bond but that's not really what we are discussing. Goldeneye was no more action packed than any of the Bond films in the 80's. Of course Goldeneye takes place in the post Cold War Era, that's when it was made. Kind of like how Octopussy took place during the Cold War Era, or Licence To Kill took place when the South American Drug Trade was a big thing.
The lazer satellite was very far fetched and it was directly recycled from Diamonds Are Forever. Doesn't matter if Treveylyn built it at all, he was using it for his evil plan and he was eventually killed by it, just like how Dr. No was using the nuclear reactor for his evil plan and was killed by it.
Plenty of the previous Bond villains had personal motives as well however now you are arguing something that I never contested, I did say I enjoyed Trevelyns character, he and Bond were the only two remotely interesting characters in the whole movie.
Not being pricky at all, Goldeneye was nothing more than your average spy thriller. Licence To Kill attempted to deviate from the formula, fans didn't like it so the Bond Producers went the safe route with Goldeneye, again there's nothing wrong with that but let's not pretend Goldeneye is anything more than what it really is. What's interesting is often I have heard people ask: What's the best Martin Campbell film: Goldeneye or Casino Royale, Ummmm I actually think Mask of Zorro is better than both of them combined together.
Bond had NOT been betrayed before by a former friend and colleague.
Brosnan brought a lot to his character, but a lot is also in the writing.
Bond is all about Cold War politics, kudos to GE to put a new spin to it.
The laser satellite really wasn't far-fetched. Just look up EMP weaponry.
Hey, you complained it was unrealistic that Trevelyan could build such a satellite base. Well, he didn't. And he was killed when Bond dropped him, the broken antennae just finished him off. It's not like it was death by laser beam.
Okay, again, I'm not pretending anything. You ARE being prickly, buddy!
- Bond had been betrayed before, who betrayed him is irrelevant since him being betrayed is enough to constitute a recycled plot point. You'd might as well say that Die Another Day brought something new to the table since it was the only one where Bond has surfed.
- Brosnan was a great Bond, there was nothing about the script that expanded or added emotional depth to the character
- Goldeneye was the first one since the end of the Cold War, it would make total sense to have it be about Post-Cold War, NONE of the other films could do that because they took place during the cold war.
- The Lazer Satellite was just as far fetched as Bond going into space, I know how an EMP works, there is not EMP Lazer Satellite, it was far fetched just like Moonraker was. Heck it sounds like the kind of thing that would come out of Austin Powers and that's a parody and is supposed to be ridiculous.
- Treveylyn could have lived if it weren't for the dish landing on him, and by that logic you could say that Bond defeated Dr. No and the reactor just finished him off, just like in Goldeneye. Again Goldeneye directly ripped off Dr. No.
- Treveylyn was never Bond's friend, he was always going to betray him, he was always an Enemy of England, watch the film again and pay attention.
- No being prickly at all, just calling it like it is, Goldeneye while not a bad film didn't bring anything new to the table and is not Top 10 material. Also Mask Of Zorro is a far better Martin Campbell film, the characters and the plot who written much better.
Sorry, but there's a big difference if he gets betrayed by a friend and colleague. It was referred to multiple times in the movie. In what other movie was this an important issue?
Bond taking things personally regarding Trevelyan was written in the script.
Uhm, adapting Bond to the post-Cold War situation is easier said than done. GE did a great job as a transitional movie that still made reference to the Cold War, while adjusting the franchise to the new political reality.
The idea of an EMP satellite is not far-fetched at all. There are already small scale EMP laser weapons, so it's actually a technical possibility. https://fas.org/irp/agency/army/mipb/1997-1/merkle.htm
I just rewatched Dr. No's death scene and you're definitely reaching. Dr. No fights Bond, who then gets away, and No slowly submerges into the reactor because he's unable to climb up. Not exactly the same as Bond making the decision to drop Trevelyan from a great height because he feels betrayed. Carver's death scene in TND was more similar. I'm not saying Trevelyan's demise is highly original, but the villain dying by the means of their own device is a very common theme in the franchise. GE is not ripping off a specific movie, it's weird to hold that against it.
Way to miss the point. The issue is not whether Trevelyan considered Bond a friend (he must've have, if he considered asking Bond to join his organization), but whether Bond did. And I disagree, there's nothing in the movie that suggests he was going to betray England as soon as MI6 recruited him. His hatred seems to have developed slowly.
Yeah, I get GE is not your favourite movie, but you're being unnecessarily harsh and grasping at straws, really. You say GE is not Top 10 material, I say it's the best Bond movie because it has the perfect balance of action, humour and realism. I enjoy it more than the others. I said nothing about Mask of Zorro, although I never enjoyed that one.
- Except Treveylyn was never Bond's friend, Treveyln always hated the British Government and Bond was just a means to an end for him. Bond's been betrayed frequently, this is nothing new and if you think Goldeneye did something new by having Bond be betrayed by a fellow MI6 agent you'd might as well say Casino Royale did something new because it's the first Bond film to have a pinball machine in it.
- It was not written very well, I mean Natalya had to basically break the 4th wall in one scene to tell the audience how Bond was feeling, very poor exposition.
- The lazer satellite was just as far fetched as it was in Diamonds Are Forever and Die Another Day, and was just as ridiculous as Bond going into Space. It sounds like the kind of thing Dr. Evil would come up with. Again it's nothing that hasn't already been done to death yet your premise is that Goldeneye did something new, it didn't, it just recycled the same old plots.
- The end of Dr. No and Goldeneye are exactly the same: Bond defeats the villain with the villains own device, then he and the girl escape and are about to make love until they are interrupted by CIA pal with marines, it's the EXACT same ending yet you are trying to claim it was new and revolutionary. Also I told you earlier the villain is defeated by his own device in all 4 Brosnan films, I pointed out Dr. No because that came before Goldeneye.
- There was no adapting Bond for post Cold War, they just made a film about Bond after the Cold War which made perfect sense considering it was made after the Cold War, it's just like how they adapted Moonraker for the sci-fi craze of the late 70's after the release of Star Wars. Bond films always adapted to the time period in which they were set. Same thing with Casino Royale, cell phones were becoming very popular and they were therefore used often to propel the plot forward, unlike in the novel which took place in the 1950's where no one knew what a cell phone was.
I have no clue where you get the idea that Trevelyan didn't consider Bond a friend. He didn't join M16 to get revenge, he was recruited. Just because he grew to despise his job, doesn't mean he never saw Bond as a friend. But that's beside the point. It's about the fact that Bond considered him a friend.
One, does the pinball machine play a role in the plot of the movie and the characterization of Bond? Two, if it's the first movie to feature a pinball machine, then it's the first movie to do so. So is GE the first to feature a villain who was a friend and colleague of Bond who betrayed him or wasn't it?
So the entire script is bad because of one or two lines? Natalya did not need to say it, it was already very clear how Bond was feeling. So at worst it was just unnecessary dialogue. But that scene served another purpose, which was evident in the next scene.
Don't conflate two issues. You said the laser satellite was unrealistic, I pointed out it's not. If you won't bother reading the link, I can't help you any further. The SU developing a secret weapon based on existing technology is not as far-fetched as a MI6 agent going into space to fight the villains on some hidden space station.
You're putting words in my mouth. I never said Trevelyan's death scene was revolutionary, I actually said it followed a common theme in the franchise. But you claimed it was a rip-off. I just rewatched it and it's not. They both die at their base, that's it. Bond and the girl making out while rescuers interrupt or are looking for them has been done tons of times since Dr. No. It's basically become an inside joke. Why is this a problem all of a sudden?
Uhm, you can't just take a typical Cold War premise and drop it in a different era. You need to find a story to make it fit. They could've immediately started out with a story like like Tomorrow Never Die, but they didn't. You definitely need to watch GE again to see what kind of transitional movie it is with still many references to the Cold War, while adjusting Bond to the realities of this new world. It's actually one of the best parts of the movie.
There is nothing in the script to even remotely suggested Bond and Treveylyn were ever friends, the first time we see them it is beyond obvious that he was planning on betraying England. Balls in your court to prove they were once legitimate friends and there is simply no proof from what we are shown in the film, all we are shown is that he's a sworn enemy of England and was planning on betraying England.
Trevelyn's betrayal plays little role in Bond's character, how did he progress as a character? How did he change as a character? He didn't from what we see in the film he's just the same guy so yes that is comparable to there being a pinball machine in Casion Royale. Actually the pinball machine does play a role in the plot, the African guy if he had been obsessed with playing pinball he may not have met with Le Chiffre and wouldn't have invested his money and then the plot wouldn't happen.
Yet the script felt the need to remind the audience of how Bond was feeling, that's called poorly executed exposition and the fact that it had to come from Natalya is just weird. When characters have to announce how other characters are feeling that when you know your script is in trouble. Star Wars Episode VII had the same problem.
Actually they are both equally far fetched as space shuttles really do exist and by your logic the space battle in Moonraker also could have happened.
Let's see here, both villains die when they are killed by the device they were going to use to enact their evil plan, both times the girl and Bond narrowly escape, both times they are about to have sex, both times the CIA contact interrupts their sexy time and both times he is accompanied by marines. If you can't see it's the exact same thing you are either very biased or very deluded.
The fact that the movie even took place after the cold war is actually pretty irrelevant. The post Cold War elements only justified one line of dialogue. There could have been a renegade Russian general along with traitors in any Bond film like Octopussy. Being Post Cold War is totally irrelevant to the story. You could set the film before the Cold War and you would only have to change one line of dialogue. The villains plot still could have gone forward just like it did with Octopussy which was set during the Cold War.
You have a very odd taste in movies but you do you. Personally I think you only like this to begin with because of the video game, sure it's speculation but I've found that is true in many cases.
Trevelyan calls him "friend" several times. Natalya asks Bond if he was his friend. YOU are the one trolling ME!
Okay, how much does Bond EVER evolve in a movie??? Even in LTK everything is the same as before! Anyway, at first, Bond is motivated to avenge his friend's death. When he discovers the truth, he struggles finishing him off, even at the end. Throughout the movie, it's something personal to him. And it's directly related to the plot! Get out with your stupid pinball machine. Come up with a better example.
Bond doesn't exactly spill his guts, so it's not weird at all that Natalya would ask him about it. She knew nothing about Trevelyan. My only problem is that the dialogue is a little cheesy. It could've been a more natural conversation. Anyway, two lines. Totally ruins the movie, of course...
Superpowers develop secret (EPM) weapons. After the Cold War there was a real fear these weapons could fall into the wrong hands. MI6 agents don't go into space to fight villains on a secret space station no government knows about. Get real.
Sigh...they do NOT die in the same manner. But even if they did, it's actually a recurring theme about karma getting back at the villain in an ironic way. The same goes for Bond making out with the girl and getting caught. And Bond making out at sea is even more common! I never said this movie was original in that regard, but why is it an issue if it's a gimmick of the franchise?
It must've been ages since you last saw the movie, because there are multiple post-Cold War references throughout. And the plot is about (former) government employees going rogue and taking advantage of the chaos after the fall of the SU. They didn't just take a random story that could've taken place at any time, they found a new purpose for Bond in the modern era.
If you consider my taste odd, I'll take it as a compliment. I've never played the videogame in my entire life, I didn't even know about it until a few years ago. Now act like an adult, please.🙄
Again Bond may have thought they were friends but as far as we know Treveylyn was always going to betray him. Again if you think that Trevelyn all of a sudden in the teaser sequence decided to defect you don't get the movie.
Your second paragraph demonstrates that Goldeneye is just more of the same as I have been saying. Bond rarely evolves, Goldeneye is no exception. I would say he evolved in OHMSS however.
That scene was very poor exposition, it's as if the director wasn't quite sure if the audience understood what was going on so they had Natalya break the 4th wall and announce it to the audience, it shows how little faith they had in the audience's intelligence.
They don't send EMP weapons into outer space and turn them into space lasers and they certainly didn't back in 1995 which you also claim one of the films bright spots was it adapted to the time period yet at the same time it throws that out the door for some bizarre sci fi aspect. Space Shuttle's existence, there is an International Space Station, Moonraker is realistic by your own logic.
I don't need to anymore explain to you how it rips off the end of Dr. No, I have shown you that it is beat by beat the exact same thing and if you are too blinded by your nostalgia that's on you.
The references have absolutely nothing to do with the plot, all you have to do is swipe out a few lines of dialogue and not much would have changed. THe plot could have been about a current Soviet General doing the exact same thing. The fact that it takes place after the cold war has zero impact on the plot nor does it show any kind of creative genius on the part of the writers.
"Act like an adult" I have been, you've been acting like a crybaby child screaming that not everyone likes his movie. It's not that great kid, get out there and see more movies.
There's no evidence whatsoever that Trevelyan planned to betray MI6 from the very first day he joined them. And even less that he would betray Bond, since he even says he thought about asking Bond to join him. Are you purposely being stupid? I never even implied that he decided to defect right then and there, that's totally impossible if he needed Ourumov to fake his death. I'm saying that when he decided to defect, he had no choice but to betray his friend Bond because he knew he would never betray his country.
No, you somehow hold it against this movie that Bond hardly evolves, when that's the case with almost every Bond movie. I never said this movie did anything revolutionary in that regard (just different), I even said that only OHMSS and LTK really tried to something different than usual.
Natalya didn't understand what was going, so that's not a problem. The dialogue should just've been less melodramtic and more inquisitive. But again, the horror of those few lines lines!!!
Compared to Bond's gadgets an EPM laser satellite is not far-fetched at all. Superpowers have been working for decades on EPM weapons. Laser satellites exist and EPM lasers exist. The problem is less the technology and more the financing. If you read back what I said, then you'll see that the mere existence of a space shuttle is not my problem with Moonraker. You need to stop putting words in my mouth.
I have rewatched the ending and described exactly to you how different it is. You need to list more similarities than "killed by own device". Like many Bond villains Dr. No and Trevelyan die in a manner that's related to their evil plan. It's a recurring theme that's part of the formula.
Now you are absolutely reaching. Bond is a secret agent who gets sent by the government to stop the villain from executing their evil plan. That's the premise of every Bond movie. Strip one of those movies from every detail and you can use it again and again. Well duh! This movie did a great job capturing the transition from Cold War to post-Cold War. If you want to give this movie credit for something, it’s that.
Bond movies and “creative genius”? When did that ever happen???
Read back again. I NEVER screamed that not everyone likes this movie. Don’t forget that YOU responded to me first and then started talking about things unrelated to the Jack Wade character. I just tried to have a civil conversation with someone with a different opinion. You’re the one talking like a 13-year old, insisting the movie is bad, not backing up your claims, putting words into my mout and acting all sensitive. Cut the crap and get back to a normal conversation if that’s at all possible.
You don't understand a burden of proof do you? All we have to go on are scenes where Treveylyn is definitely evil, you are asserting there was a time when he and Bond got along and were friends and he wasn't evil. Since you can't demonstrate that I reject your premise. It's OK, basic logic is hard for some people.
I realize Bond rarely evolves, it is you however who thinks that Goldeneye is above all other Bond films and I am showing you it isn't, it's just more of the same.
Yet the scene plays out as if she does know, she doesn't ask questions she just announces what we the audience and the characters already know, that is poor exposition. Han and Leia did the same thing in The Force Awakens and it's equally shameful.
Right but you said that this film was above all other Bond films, yet it had the same ridiculous gadgets and plot devices that the other ones have, heck the laser satellite came directly from Diamonds Are Forever, just about the exact same thing. Goldeneye is again more of the same.
Thank you for conceding that Goldeneye follows the formula. I agree many Bond films recycle plot elements from previous films. Licence To Kill recycled from Live And Let Die, The Spy Who Loved Me recycled from You Only Live Twice. For Your Eyes Only recycled from On Her Majesty's Secret Service and Goldeneye recycles from Dr. No. I pointed out at least 4 ways in which the two scenes are identical, if you can't understand by this point there is literally no hope for you.
You have yet to establish how Goldeneye "established the transition from the Cold War", first of all the plot could have taken place during the Cold War, secondly all Bond films are reflective of the times in which they were released, third if you remove a few lines of dialogue you'd never even guess it was a post Cold War movie. You keep saying that like you're a broken record yet you haven't provided one shred of evidence.
Thank you for conceding that this film displayed no level of "creative genius." It didn't. Now the early Bond films showed some, I'd say Licence To Kill did, but Goldeneye did not.
I have backed up my claims sufficiently, you have just been tap dancing around with the same old broken record. I'm sorry your movie really isn't that good but that's no ones fault but your own. It's alright, I'm a true James Bond fan and I am more than happy to re-educate you if you promise to listen and have a positive attitude.
My god, you are really silly. Where's your proof that Trevelyan had been "evil"? We didn't see it in the opening scene and neither did Bond. He was actually surprised that Trevelyan was the villain, which shows you he never showed any sign of being evil before. And they called each other FRIENDS.
I did not say GE is the best because of character development. No Bond movie sticks out head and shoulders above the rest in the respect. Best not to judge Bond movies on that.
It's a very tiny moment that could've been executed better. Not exactly proof of a shoddy script.
GE actually had very few gadgets. And I already explained the EPM laser satellite is not that far-fetched.
I'm not conceding anything. I've kept mentioning that GE follows the formula in many ways. Are you even paying attention?
Trevelyan was NOT killed by his own device. He was fatally wounded after Bond dropped him and then a piece of someone else's device he used broke off and finished him off. Not the same as Dr. No who fell ito the reactor because he couldn't climb up. So Bond and the girl were interrupted by the CIA while making out. Well, there are way more similar scenes in other movies where Bond gets caught while making out at sea. By the way, I need to stress again that I never said these things were highly original in GE.
The transition already happened in the beginning between the Cold war scene and the post-Cold War scene, then there was the scene with M, the former Soviet government employees going rogue and using a hidden weapon from the Soviet era that the new government knew nothing about, the villain's plan not connected to any Cold War politics, the former KGB agent becoming a gangster, Bond moving freely in Russia and friendly relations between Russia and the West. There's a whole bunch of stuff, you obviously need to watch the movie again.
You're reading things that aren't there. I never implied in the first place that GE had "genius" writing. But none of the Bond movies have, LTK was just one step above a Miami Vice episode. Bond movies have to be taken for what they are, rather silly spy adventures.
It's laughable if you really think you've backed up your claims. All you can say is: Bond and Trevelyan weren’t friends (when they literally said they were), GE totally ripped off Dr. No because “killed by own device” and PINBALL MACHINE!
Those things aren’t even related to what I said I found different about the movie.
Not silly at all just calling it like it is. Yeah he was surprised that Trevelyn was the enemy because he thought Trevelyn was dead. It's quite odd to see someone alive who you were sure you saw get his brains blown out. You have provided no proof of any moment where Bond and Trevelyn were friends so therefore your premise is rejected. You don't understand the movie.
You've not provided any reason why Goldeneye is anything higher than mediocre but you yourself said it was the best one. I have destroyed that premise.
It was incredibly forced exposition that just showed how little the director thought of the audience's intelligence. We all understood what was going on we didn't need Natalya to spell it out for us. Also she's a horrible actress.
Uh Goldeneye had plenty of gadgets, Car with stinger missiles, exploding pen, belt that can be used to swing out of places. The Bond movies of the 80's didn't have many gadgets, Goldeneye went back to the 70's where Bond was all about the gadgets.
You've also said that Goldeneye is the best Bond film and I have effectively demonstrated that it's nothing more than average, it doesn't stand out and it doesn't even do the formula any better than any other Bond film like Octopussy or A View To A Kill.
It's the exact same thing, Treveylen was alive until the satellite fell on him which was a result of Bond's actions. Dr. No was alive until he fell into the reactor which was boiling because of Bond's actions. It's the same damn thing. You are being disingenuous (or completely stupid, I can't decide which).
You've still not established how setting the film after the Cold War was anything spectacular. As I've already said all Bond films adapted to the times like Live And Let Die adapted to the blaxploitation films of the 70's and Moonraker adapated to the sci-fi craze.Explain to me how this couldn't have just been General Orlov's plan? How does it being set after the Cold War impact the plot at all aside from a few lines of
Really? He should feel shocked and betrayed when all along Trevelyan had shown signs of being evil??? Bond felt betrayed by a friend, that's why he says he kills him for "me". Yes, you're being silly. You need to accept they were friends because they LITERALLY said it.
You haven't destroyed anything, you've just gone on about Bond and Trevelyan not being friends, GE supposedly ripping off Dr. No because "killed by device" and a freaking pinball machine. You haven't even addressed what I thought was good about the movie.
That car did absolutely nothing in the movie. Dalton's car in TLD was much more over the top. Those other gadgets aren't that ridiculous either compared to most other movies. But why are gadgets a problem to you all of a sudden?
You've demonstrated nothing, some of the things you've stated aren't even correct. Your main argument seems to be how it ripped off Dr. No, but even that doesn't prove how the movie is mediocre. Trevelyan was clearly dying after the fall and Bond didn't even plan on the antennae breaking off. He was however fully aware the reactor was on and lowering when he pulled down Dr. No. It's not the exact same thing unless 99% of other villains' deaths are the exact same thing.
Of course you just dismiss my arguments about the post-Cold War setting. No surprise there. What you mention is genre, which is totally not the same as adjusting a Cold War premise to the new political reality.
-continued-
dialogue. I've seen the movie many times and I understand it far better than you do. It's not a good movie.
Exactly, Bond films are typically silly spy adventures and Goldeneye is no exception. Thanks for conceding
OK let me spell this out: BOND MAY HAVE THOUGHT THEY WERE FRIENDS BUT THEY WEREN'T BECAUSE TREVEYLYN WAS SECRETLY GOING TO BETRAY HIM AND THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT. THEREFORE THEY WEREN'T FRIENDS. You have no evidence to suggest they ever were friends and there's nothing about the film that suggests Treveylyn was ever a loyal supporter of the British Government. So what you think that he became a government agent, knew all about how the government screwed his father over and then one day decided "hey that was wrong, I'm going to go rogue and kill millions of people in revenge". That makes absolutely no sense. You're pathetic attempts of defending this film are getting pretty laughable and I will continue to bring up the pinball machine until you concede that Bond being betrayed was nothing out of the ordinary for a Bond film. He's been betrayed multiple times.
My advice is just get over Goldeneye, it's not that good and go out and watch some other movies.
It's funny what you consider "conceding". I don't think I ever said Bond movies were NOT silly spy adventures.
I never even implied Trevelyan was a loyal supporter of the government. I'm saying that he wasn't out for revenge from day one. AND I'm saying he was friends with Bond. He certainly treated him like a friend and that's what's most important because that's where the feeling of betrayal comes in.
Buddy, you're the pathetic one here. For some reason you're losing your mind over the fact that I like this movie, so you feel the need to attack me personally. You claim this movie belongs somewhere in the middle on your list, but looking at the way you're trying to refute every single thing makes it seem like this one is at the bottom. Calm the freak down and just enjoy the movie next time you watch it.
I've seen plenty of movies, including all Bond movies and this one remains my favourite. Deal with it. The Corona crisis will blow over eventually, no need to get so worked up about nothing.
Show me the line of dialogue that demonstrates he was not always out for revenge? Because it was established he always knew what the British Government did to his family.
I never attacked you personally, I just called it like it was, you're the one freaking out because not everybody likes this movie and I think in the back of your mind you know it's beyond overrated. You definitely need to see some more movies, there are so many out there that mop the floor with Goldeneye, it's really not that good.
Show me the line of dialogue that shows he was out to get revenge from day one. It's simple logic. He joins the organization and does nothing to sabotage their missions until years later when all he does is leave to start a criminal empire??? Boy, he certainly showed them! Anyway, he and Bond said they were friends. You need to drop this.
You say you never attacked me personally and then you go on to attack me personally. Hilarious. Now grow the hell up.
Yes, there are plenty of movies better than GE. The other Bond movies are not among them and neither is Mask of Zorro.
I don't need to show you anything because it's not my burden of proof. You asserting there was a time when they were friends, that never occured during the course of the film nor was it ever hinted at in any line of dialogue. Unless you can show me there was a time when they were friends then I am justified in thinking the opposite. You just tried to shift your burden of proof onto me which is cowardly.
I never attacked you personally, I attacked your position because it's ludicrous but never you personally.
Totally wrong, I explained why other Bond films along with Mask Of Zorro are better. I think the only reason you are defending Goldeneye is because you think its the cool thing to do. Mask of Zorro had better action, a better script, an amazing score by James Horner, thrilling action, and one of the best climactic battles I have ever seen. Goldeneye is just bland and forgettable.
Uhm hello, it IS your burden of proof because you said they weren't friends because Trevelyan had been evil all along. You've shown no evidence for that at all. Again, in the movie they literally called each other 'friend', not once did Trevelyan say he faked being Bond's friend. And don't forget, the point was that Bond felt betrayed because HE did consider Trevelyan a friend.
Don't lie, you did attack me personally. You started out calling me "deluded" and accusing me of having an "odd taste" in movies, which is an attack on my person, NOT my arguments. It only progressed from there with you calling me "stupid" at one point.
Why in the world would it be considered "cool" to defend GE??? We were talking about Jack Wade and all of a sudden you felt the need to tell me GE was no good. Seems like YOU think it's cool to criticize it...
I don't care about Mask of Zorro, it has nothing to do with this discussion. Stop mentioning it.
Totally wrong, I don’t need to prove that they were never friends, first of all you can’t prove a negative secondly since it’s your assertion they were since you can’t prove it then my position is the default position. We have no idea what their relationship was before the events of the film but you are just making stuff up. I don’t know if they were friends or not but because I can’t prove they weren’t doesn’t mean you’ve proven they were.
Those weren’t personal attacks I was just calling it like it is. I think you are just trying to be cool by defending Goldeneye, and I think you just want to fit in, sure it’s speculation but it’s my opinion. Also I was ready to drop Mask if Zorro until you brother it up again so blame yourself for that one
The default position is that they were friends because they literally say they were friends, BOTH of them. Trevelyan being evil doesn't negate that. So if you claim it's not true, you need to prove it.
Calling me stupid is a personal attack, it has nothing to do with my argument
Fit in with whom? Where are all these "cool" GE loving folks I'm trying to impress??
Why would it be the default position??? There is not ONE SINGLE scene in the entire movie where they are actually friends. I don't believe you when you say they were ever friends and since you can't justify it I am going to not believe you for the time being. Bond thought they were friends much like he thought Kristatoes was a reliable Greek contact and Koskov really was a defector. The Bond/Trevelyn relationship was nothing we hadn't already seen before.
No personal attacks at all, everything I've said has been based on A) The film and B) things you have said.
Right now it seems to be the "cool thing" to love this movie, again I concede this is speculation but I do believe you are just following the bandwagon.
It's the default position because they literally say they were friends MULTIPLE times. They clearly treat each other as friends in the opening, but after that they're not friends anymore, so obviously there's no other scene like that. Bond feeling betrayed by a friend whose death he felt guilty over is not at all the same as being betrayed by the others. He didn't even seem to like those guys!
No, calling me stupid has nothing to do with my argument.
What or where is this bandwagon??? I haven't seen it nor do I care about it.
Are you completely incapable of following a simple discussion???? It's called Treveylyn lied (yeah imagine a James Bond villain not being completely honest) and Bond simply thought they were friends but they weren't. It was clearly established that Alec was a traitor and lied to Bond and that was apparent ever since the beginning. You have not provided any proof that they were ever legitimately friends so therefore it's natural for me to be skeptical of your claim and not believe it. Until you provide proof it's the default position to not believe you. There's nothing special about Alec and Bond's relationship, there are other instances of Bond losing a partner and wanting revenge for it (like every Bond film in the 80's) and there are plenty of instances where Bond is betrayed. This is nothing new to the Bond franchise.
I called you stupid because you demonstrated you are stupid.
Ummm all over the internet and society, it's cool to like Goldeneye and I think you just want to fit in, my evidence: You not being able to justify what's so great about it.
There is no evidence that Trevelyan lied about being a friend. He refers to him as a friend multiple times and doesn't ever say that he faked it all that time. The fact that he considered asking Bond to join him, but decided against it because he knew he would choose the mission over his friend, shows there was more to their relationship.
But you're not focusing on the most important part of the argument. Bond THOUGHT they were friends and there are NOT plenty of instances of Bond losing a partner who turns out to have been a traitor.
"I called you stupid because you demonstrated you are stupid."
Now that's the definition of a personal attack. If my argument is really stupid, then DISPROVE it, don't attack my person.
You must be living in your own little world, because society hardly discusses Bond movies and on the internet there's a great scala of different opinions, this website being proof of it. I mean, really, what's your age that you believe this nonsense?
I don't have to provide evidence he was never a friend, you are the one claiming they were, that never took place at any point during the film and what both characters say isn't trustworthy because A) Alec is a villain and B) Bond didn't know he was a villain. Therefore since you can't back up your claim it is logical for me to not believe you. I don't believe you and if you can't prove it then I'm fully justified in not accepting the position they were ever friends. Your quote actually refutes your own case, it establishes that Alec was evil long before the start of the film, also it doesn't prove that they were friends, Bond may have thought they were but according to your own quote they weren't because during the time Alec was referring to he was going to betray the government therefore making them not friends. I never attacked you personally, you demonstrated you were stupid so I just called it like it was. Society discusses Bond films all the time, it's a popular franchise, people talk repeatedly about what their favorite Bond is and there are plenty of Bond countdown videos on youtube.
You're talking out of your ass, I never said they were still actual friends during the movie. To Trevelyan Bond was his friend until he made the decision to betray him which was obviously before the movie, although to Bond they were friends until Trevelyan's supposed death. Yes, I'm saying they were friends because that's what they literally said in the movie. You want me to post the quotes? If you think I'm wrong then back it up or shut up.
You're moving goal posts by the way, the issue was not whether their friendship was still going strong at the start of the movie, the issue was that they had been friends and Bond was upset over the personal betrayal.
We're discussing the movie, not me, so calling me stupid is a personal attack. You should just try to disprove my arguments instead.
When I talk to people in real life, Bond hardly ever comes up, except for the new movies. There are videos of EVERYTHING on Youtube, you're talking about diehard fans and I feel no desire to "fit in" with them. If you look at the IMDb rating, GoldenEye is in 6th place, so you exaggerate. I would have to love the Craig movies to be considered "cool".
I am not talking out of my ass, you said that Goldeneye brought something new to the table because Bond was betrayed by his friend yet you have not shown me one shred of proof they were ever friends. Sure Bond thought that he was his friend just like he thought Kristatoes was his ally. He even defended Kristatoes to Columbo who turned out to be an ally. Yes it was said in the movie but Treveylyn was talking from Bond's perspective, they weren't friends though therefore the film did not bring anything new to the table. I have backed it up completely yet you are immune to logic and/or common sense.
Did not move the goal post at all, I asked you to prove they were at any point actual friends and you haven't. You haven't established that Alec turned evil after he met Bond when all evidence seems to suggest otherwise. Even if it didn't I would still be justified in not believing you.
But you are stupid so it's just calling it like it is.
Being ranked 6th is still beyond overrated, as I said it's not top 10 material. Well whenever I talk to people Bond comes up a lot and everyone seems to be fanboying in their pants over Goldeneye, it's not that good and you have yet to establish it's anything more than average. As for the Craig films they are all over the place, he has two great ones (CR and SF), one average about on the level of Goldeneye (Spectre) and one godawful piece of shit (QOS).
The evidence is that they literally said it in the movie! Stop making a fool of yourself. There is no evidence in the movie that Trevelyan faked his friendship with Bond from day one. Thinking you've been betrayed by a friend who turns out to be the main villain is SO different than being betrayed by an ally you hardly know. Bond was NOT bothered by that throughout the movie.
You did move the goal posts, because the point was that Bond felt betrayed by a friend and colleague and how it affected him, NOT how real their friendship was when Trevelyan betrayed Bond.
You haven't proved whatsoever that I'm stupid, but more importantly, it has nothing to do with the freaking issue. It only proves how immature you are.
I don't give a shit if you think it's overrated and I don't give a shit what the fanboys you supposedly talk to think. There is no pressure whatsoever to like this movie. I like Dalton and he's still not a popular Bond, while I despise Craig. So there you go.
And it was said by someone who A) Is a villain and therefore unreliable and B) he was referring to a time period where THEY WERE NOT FRIENDS! The time period he was referring to he clearly was going to betray Bond and the government and therefore they weren't friends. How many times do I have to spoonfeed this to you?
Did not move the goalpost at all. Bond was never betrayed by a friend and it affected him ZERO as a character, or if it did the film clearly didn't give a shit enough to address it.
Well I'm a very blunt person and I get right to the point, I tell it like it is. If you have a problem then go find another thread to troll.
That's fine and I said the films Dalton was in were quite good. Good for you you don't like Craig, I even flat out said that one of his films was a godawful piece of shit. What's your point?
Why are you hammering on the time period? The suggestion they were friends obviously goes back further than the first few minutes of the movie. And how does it matter he's a villain? He has no good reason to pretend to be Bond's friend from day one, being colleagues was good enough. If you want to be so silly to believe he did, then go right ahead. The point is that Trevelyan had always treated treated Bond like a friend and that's why he felt so betrayed. I already told you how if affected him, I'm not sure what else you expected the movie to do. Did Natalya need to break the 4th wall even more???
You don't tell it like it is, you make statements without backing them up and resort to namecalling.
My point is obviously that I don't care about supposedly popular or "cool" opinions. I like what I like.
It makes a huge difference. The time Alec was referring to was a time when Bond and Alec WERE NOT friends, therefore you don't get to cite that as evidence. It matters that he's the villain because that means he isn't trustworthy . The rest of your first paragraph is assumptions, of course he's going to act like a loyal British agent, if he didn't they might suspect that I don't know he faked his death and defected to the Russians which is what actually happened. At the end of the day you still haven't proven one bit that Bond and Alec were ever friends therefore your point that Goldeneye did something new is debunked. I didn't name call, I just made a statement, it was like calling the grass green. It actually is "cool" right now to hate on Craig, I've seen plenty of people online hate on him so no you aren't going against social norms by not liking Craig.
What the freak are you going on about? He simply referred to the fact they used to be friends, NOT a time period. Acting like a loyal British agent does NOT mean pretending to be friends with one of your colleagues. You need to stop making a fool of yourself. Trevelyan and Bond were friends, Bond still believed they were when Trevelyan supposedly died and he felt guilty, then he felt upset finding out Trevelyan had betrayed him and M16 and realized he had to kill him. That's what happened in the movie, stop being in denial.
Calling me stupid when we're discussing a Bond movie is childish namecalling. Stop being so pathetic.
Well, I've seen plenty of people hate on GE (right here on MC even), so your point is moot. And I've hated Craig from the very first moment, not just "right now".
Anyway, I think Dalton is excellent and The Living Daylights is one of my other favourite Bond movies. Aren't I cool??? I'm totally hanging with the hip crowd!
Are you capable of following a simple discussion? The time period he referred to they WERE NOT friends!!! Therefore you have no evidence Bond was ever betrayed by a friend. Are you mentally challenged or something? If so let me know because that means I need to lay off or I'm a bully.
It's not namecalling, it's stating the obvious.
"Well, I've seen plenty of people hate on GE (right here on MC even), so your point is moot. And I've hated Craig from the very first moment, not just "right now"."
Good for you, you don't like Craig, there are plenty of people who don't. I don't see too many people hating on GE, I see plenty of people fanboying in their pants over it.
"Anyway, I think Dalton is excellent and The Living Daylights is one of my other favourite Bond movies. Aren't I cool??? I'm totally hanging with the hip crowd!"
Now you're arguing against things I never asserted.
Wth? He didn't refer to a specific time period by calling him friend, just to the fact they had been friends before he betrayed Bond. What kind of shit are you on???
Did Bond feel betrayed by a friend? Hell yeah! Natalya made that pretty clear.
The only obvious thing you're stating by calling me stupid and mentally challenged, is that you're immature and can't back up your claim with actual arguments.
There've been several in this thread alone who didn't like GE all that much. You exaggerate...as usual.
You asserted that I tried to be "cool" by saying I like GE. Since when is liking Dalton and TLD a "cool" opinion???
Ummm yeah he did, he was getting on Bond's ass about setting the timers for 3 minutes instead of 6 and said that 007's loyalty was always to the mission not his friend. During that scene they were not friends, Alec was going to betray him at that point. He was saying that from Bond's perspective he put the mission over his friend but they weren't actually friends, Alec was going to betray him at that point. Let me make this clear: WHETHER OR NOT BOND THOUGHT THEY WERE FRIENDS IS MEANINGLESS, YOU HAVEN'T ESTABLISHED THAT THERE WAS EVER A TIME WHEN THEY WERE FRIENDS.
"Did Bond feel betrayed by a friend? Hell yeah! Natalya made that pretty clear."
Whether he felt he was his friend or not is irrelevant, he wasn't his friend at the time you cited.
"The only obvious thing you're stating by calling me stupid and mentally challenged, is that you're immature and can't back up your claim with actual arguments."
Strawman, I did not call you mentally challenged, I asked if you were, if you aren't then just say so and I'll drop it.
"There've been several in this thread alone who didn't like GE all that much. You exaggerate...as usual."
The overwhelming majority seems to think this average and forgettable film is somehow top 10 material, how they arrived at that conclusion is baffling.
"You asserted that I tried to be "cool" by saying I like GE. Since when is liking Dalton and TLD a "cool" opinion???"
I said nothing about TLD, you are arguing against something I never asserted.
The TIMER was a reference to that specific moment. Calling him a friend was a reference to the whole time they knew each other. This is so simple to understand. And I never "cited" they were friends during the events of the movie.
I've been pointing this out from the very beginning since you started this nonsense. It is absolutely IMPORTANT and RELEVANT that Bond believed they were friends because that was the point I was making. This movie addressed how Bond felt betrayed by a friend and how it affected him. It was not about Trevelyan supposedly faking their friendship in the years before the movie. That's totally meaningless. You can hang on to your silly believe that he faked it from day one for some unknown reason. It's totally unrelated to what I'm arguing.
You are the king of strawmen! And of ad hominems, because suggesting I'm mentally challenged is an attack on my person NOT my argument.
I don't see any overwhelming majority here or anywhere else, so the idea that I'm trying to "fit in" is ludicrous. You're just a fanboy who's crying because his favourite movie isn't everybody else's favourite movie. Grow up.
You asserted I was trying to be "cool". Liking TLD isn't exactly cool, so your theory flies right out of the window.
And yet you still can't provide any proof that they were ever friends nor that there was a time when Trevelyn knew Bond and he wasn't going to betray him. The only incidents you have pointed out are clearly points when he was going to betray Bond therefore he wasn't his friend.
It doesn't matter at all if Bond thought they were friends or not, first of all the film does absolutely nothing with that concept, secondly you said Goldeneye was special because Bond was betrayed by a friend yet you have not provided one shred of evidence they ever were friends, I have debunked every example you have given.
I have not one time strawmanned you, not one.
"I don't see any overwhelming majority here or anywhere else, so the idea that I'm trying to "fit in" is ludicrous. You're just a fanboy who's crying because his favourite movie isn't everybody else's favourite movie. Grow up."
I see it quite clearly, the fact that you don't says a lot.
"You asserted I was trying to be "cool". Liking TLD isn't exactly cool, so your theory flies right out of the window"
I never once brought up TLD, YOU did, again you are arguing things I never said. I never once said that you were following a bandwagon by liking TLD. What you are doing is you are building a case that I never made all so you can tear it down, it's disingenuous on your part.
Being friends is not one or two incidents, it's a relationship that existed before the events of the movie. They referred to each other as friends, so there's enough reason for me to assume they were friends. It's entirely possible to be friends with a person and to ultimately betray them. Again, you can hold to your silly notion that Trevelyan faked his friendship from day one, but the fact that he betrayed him years later does not prove it in any way. So you need to stop saying I'm wrong.
Natalya said, "He was your friend". And we know he betrayed Bond. Ergo, Bond was betrayed by a friend. And I already explained how the issue was addressed in the movie.
The whole "they weren't friends" thing is already one example of a strawman. Another is the crap about Dr. No and other stuff I didn't even mention was original.
Okay, post all the evidence of GE's overwhelming popularity and compare it directly to the popularity of all other Bond movies. After that you need to provide evidence that it affected my opinion of the movie in any way.
You are being disingenuous by twisting my words. I never said you said anything about TLD. My case is that you're accusing me of trying to be cool by jumping on GE's bandwagon. How am I trying to be cool if I'm not jumping on the bandwagon that Dalton's films suck? Your argument is really weak.
I never said it was, I was dismissing your evidence that they were friends. You said they were friends because of that quote Alec gave and that quote is not valid because he was referring to a time when they definitely weren't friends and he's the villain and isn't trustworthy. I see no evidence that they were ever friends so therefore I dismiss your claim. Again Alec said that quote under the assumption that Bond thought they were friends but that doesn't mean they really were, they definitely weren't when he reset the timers. All you have is speculation and guesses.
"Natalya said, "He was your friend". And we know he betrayed Bond. Ergo, Bond was betrayed by a friend. And I already explained how the issue was addressed in the movie."
Bond thought he was his friend, they never were. Also Natalya isn't reliable she wasn't there.
"The whole "they weren't friends" thing is already one example of a strawman. Another is the crap about Dr. No and other stuff I didn't even mention was original."
I never said they weren't ever friends, I just don't accept that they were friends. There's a difference.
"Okay, post all the evidence of GE's overwhelming popularity and compare it directly to the popularity of all other Bond movies. After that you need to provide evidence that it affected my opinion of the movie in any way."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qiabtsvtj48&t=2s
I also don't need to provide evidence as I was very upfront about the fact that it was speculation on my part. Learn how to read.
"You are being disingenuous by twisting my words. I never said you said anything about TLD. "
Then there's no reason to bring up TLD, you can have whatever opinion you want about TLD, that's not what we're discussing.
"My case is that you're accusing me of trying to be cool by jumping on GE's bandwagon. How am I trying to be cool if I'm not jumping on the bandwagon that Dalton's films suck? Your argument is really weak."
I never asserted there was a bandwagon that the Dalton films sucked, again you're arguing against something I never claimed.
Again, the TIMER refers to a specific moment. Trevelyan calling Bond 'friend' refers to the kind of relationship they had in the past.
I said that Trevelyan was Bond's former friend to point out that personal betrayal was a theme of this movie. You said that I was wrong and they had NEVER been friends, even though you have no proof for that whatsoever. All you could've said is, "I disagree, I believe Trevelyan faked being Bond's friend". And then I would've said, "Well, whatever, THAT'S NOT MY POINT!
Natalya says it and he acknowledges everything she says. Bond feels betrayed by a friend, that's my entire freaking point.
You literally said they were NEVER friends. I don't care if you don't accept it, I already said you could hold on to that silly belief. That's not MY POINT.
Wow, one video of one person! You should probably check out the GE vs. LTK thread on here, it has a whole scala of different opinions.
You should've shut up about your dumb speculation as soon as I pointed out how ridiculous it was.
Dear god, what's wrong with you that you miss the point every time? You asserted I was trying to be cool by jumping on a bandwagon. We can go with ANY movie I like which is not considered 'cool' to like. It just shows how ridiculous your assertion is.
Alec said that when Bond changed the timer he was putting the mission over his FRIEND, so yes he was referring to that specific moment, they weren't friends in that specific moment nor do you have any evidence they ever were friends, so I reject your premise.
"I said that Trevelyan was Bond's former friend to point out that personal betrayal was a theme of this movie. You said that I was wrong and they had NEVER been friends, even though you have no proof for that whatsoever. All you could've said is, "I disagree, I believe Trevelyan faked being Bond's friend". And then I would've said, "Well, whatever, THAT'S NOT MY POINT!"
Yet you've yet to establish they were at any point in time friends. I don't know if you're right or wrong, I don't know you haven't proven they were friends so I reject your claim. I never claimed they were never friends. Learn to read.
"Natalya says it and he acknowledges everything she says. Bond feels betrayed by a friend, that's my entire freaking point."
He felt betrayed by his friend but we don't know if he was his friend which means you are not justified in saying that GE did something new by having Bond be betrayed by his friend.
"You literally said they were NEVER friends. I don't care if you don't accept it, I already said you could hold on to that silly belief. That's not MY POINT."
Wrong, my premise is that you haven't proven that they were friends. I don't have to prove they weren't friends to not accept your assertion that they were friends. Think of it this way if I say there's a Loch Ness Monster and you don't believe me that doesn't mean you are claiming there isn't one.
"Wow, one video of one person! You should probably check out the GE vs. LTK thread on here, it has a whole scala of different opinions."
I can post more if you'd like, you asked for proof and I gave it.
"You should've shut up about your dumb speculation as soon as I pointed out how ridiculous it was."
I admitted at the very beginning it was speculation, obviously it got under your skin because you continued to bring it up.
"Dear god, what's wrong with you that you miss the point every time? You asserted I was trying to be cool by jumping on a bandwagon. We can go with ANY movie I like which is not considered 'cool' to like. It just shows how ridiculous your assertion is."
I was talking about the Goldeneye Bandwagon, how you feel about TLD is a non sequitur.
Right, so Bond was only Trevelyan's friend for that specific moment when he set the timer. Don't be do incredibly silly. The use of 'friend' refers to their entire relationship from the moment they met till the moment Trevelyan supposedly died.
You said, "Treveylyn was never Bond's friend". You've provided no proof for that. I don't need to prove they were friends, because that wasn't my point.
Haha, good lord, now you want to play a game of semantics! "Technically they might not have been "friends", because perhaps, maybe, there's a chance Trevelyan might not have considered Bond a real friend." Get out. Trevelyan's perception of their relationship doesn't even matter, because it's Bond we follow. The theme is that Bond is affected by the betrayal of a man he considered a friend, which was new to the franchise.
I'm not sure how many videos by individuals you are planning to post, but they're hardly proof of an overwhelming popularity. At least post something on a larger scale, like the IMDb rating.
I already explained your speculation was not true and absurd, but instead of accepting it, you've continued to defend it.
No, you suggesting I'm trying to be "cool" by jumping on a bandwagon is a non sequitur.
"Again, the TIMER refers to a specific moment. Trevelyan calling Bond 'friend' refers to the kind of relationship they had in the past."
He was talking about from Bond's perspective, Bond thought they were friends but there's no indication that they really were as it was clearly established that Alec was going to betray the British.
"I said that Trevelyan was Bond's former friend to point out that personal betrayal was a theme of this movie."
Yet the movie did nothing with it so it's not a theme of the film.
"You said that I was wrong and they had NEVER been friends, even though you have no proof for that whatsoever. All you could've said is, "I disagree, I believe Trevelyan faked being Bond's friend". And then I would've said, "Well, whatever, THAT'S NOT MY POINT!"
No I said you didn't prove that they were friends, there is a difference. It is established though that Alec did fake being Bond's friend and there's no evidence it was ever legitimate.
"Natalya says it and he acknowledges everything she says. Bond feels betrayed by a friend, that's my entire freaking point."
So then do you concede that you can't prove that the friendship was ever legitimate?
"You literally said they were NEVER friends. I don't care if you don't accept it, I already said you could hold on to that silly belief. That's not MY POINT."
Wrong, my premise is that you haven't proven their friendship was real.
"Wow, one video of one person! You should probably check out the GE vs. LTK thread on here, it has a whole scala of different opinions."
Are you just repeating yourself? I said I could provide more videos if you want here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZHoIZAe18k
"You should've shut up about your dumb speculation as soon as I pointed out how ridiculous it was."
What you are saying is consistent with my speculation so no I will not.
You can be friends with someone first and then betray them. The movie addressed Bond being affected by the betrayal of his former friend throughout the movie, you just choose to ignore it
I literally quoted you: "Treveylyn was never Bond's friend". You have no proof of that. It is not established that Trevelyan faked being Bond's friend the whole time he knew him. I'm not conceding anything, you should admit that you have no evidence to claim I'm wrong to believe Trevelyan and Bond were ever friends.
I don't care about proving their friendship was real, THAT WASN'T MY POINT.
Do you not get that you would have to post a HUGE amount of videos by individuals to prove GE's overwhelming popularity compared to other Bond movies?
Your speculation is based on absolutely nothing. If I'm jumping on GE's bandwagon because I want to be cool, then why would I not jump on other bandwagons? You only make yourself look ridiculous by even suggesting it. And if you won't shut up about it, then don't blame me for responding to it.
What does make sense is my speculation that you're a crybaby fanboy who can't accept that his favourite movie isn't everybody else's favourite.
"You can be friends with someone first and then betray them. The movie addressed Bond being affected by the betrayal of his former friend throughout the movie, you just choose to ignore it"
So show me the evidence they were actually friends? The only instance you pointed to they were very much not friends.
"I literally quoted you: "Treveylyn was never Bond's friend". You have no proof of that. It is not established that Trevelyan faked being Bond's friend the whole time he knew him. I'm not conceding anything, you should admit that you have no evidence to claim I'm wrong to believe Trevelyan and Bond were ever friends."
And that's a logical conclusion seeing that you can't provide once piece of evidence that they actually were friends, during the entire course of the film they were not friends.
"I don't care about proving their friendship was real, THAT WASN'T MY POINT."
Actually it is, your point was that GE was the first time Bond was betrayed by his friend, you have yet to demonstrate that.
"Do you not get that you would have to post a HUGE amount of videos by individuals to prove GE's overwhelming popularity compared to other Bond movies?"
Would you like more?
"Your speculation is based on absolutely nothing. If I'm jumping on GE's bandwagon because I want to be cool, then why would I not jump on other bandwagons? You only make yourself look ridiculous by even suggesting it. And if you won't shut up about it, then don't blame me for responding to it."
My speculation is based on what I have observed here and what I have observed in society. I was openly honest when I conceded from the very beginning that it was speculation. I don't know what else you want.
"What does make sense is my speculation that you're a crybaby fanboy who can't accept that his favourite movie isn't everybody else's favourite".
What is my favorite movie? I don't think I've even talked about that, all I've said is that GE isn't my favorite.
Bond called Trevelyan a friend and Trevelyan called Bond a friend, so I'm going to say they were friends until someone proves they weren't. I don't need to show you any more proof, because whether they were legitimate friends wasn't my point. I mean, how many freaking times do I need to tell you that you can stick to your silly belief that Trevelyan faked his friendship with Bond from day one???
No, a logical conclusion would be to say, "I disagree, I BELIEVE that Trevelyan faked his friendship with Bond." Instead you stated as fact that they were NEVER friends, even though you have no proof.
Who the freak cares they were never friends DURING the movie? (Which is a lie, because Bond was definitely a friend in the beginning) They're referring to their relationship that goes back to BEFORE the movie.
Again, you're trying to play a pathetic game of semantics. So we can't call someone a 'friend' anymore because we can't look inside their head and be sure they mean it? Get real. Bond was under the impression he was a friend and so was the audience until he popped up again. THAT is the point.
I would like to see some links that show GE's OVERWHELMING popularity compared to other Bond movies.
So society is your mother's basement? Your speculative skills are utter crap and it would be best for everyone to stop using them.
I speculate your favourite Bond movie is one that you feel isn't popular enough.
"Bond called Trevelyan a friend and Trevelyan called Bond a friend, so I'm going to say they were friends until someone proves they weren't. I don't need to show you any more proof, because whether they were legitimate friends wasn't my point. I mean, how many freaking times do I need to tell you that you can stick to your silly belief that Trevelyan faked his friendship with Bond from day one???"
Bond thought they were friends but we don't know if they actually were because when the movie first starts Alec was going to betray Bond. When Alec said Bond was his friend he was talking about from Bond's perspective, from Bond's perspective he did put the mission over his friend and that was what he was referring to. Still doesn't change the fact there is no evidence they were friends. It's not my belief that Alec was always faking it, there is a reason to think that though because he always knew what happened to his family and you can't prove that they were ever friends so me not accepting your claim is rational.
"No, a logical conclusion would be to say, "I disagree, I BELIEVE that Trevelyan faked his friendship with Bond." Instead you stated as fact that they were NEVER friends, even though you have no proof."
Is that a concession? If so thanks. There's no reason to think their friendship was at any point legitimate.
"Who the freak cares they were never friends DURING the movie? (Which is a lie, because Bond was definitely a friend in the beginning) They're referring to their relationship that goes back to BEFORE the movie."
No they were definitely not friends at the start, unless you want me to believe that Oromov and Alec set telepathic messages to each other and were like "hey let's betray the British and the Russians" and they came up with a plan that took 9 years right on the spot. That's ludicrous.
"Again, you're trying to play a pathetic game of semantics. So we can't call someone a 'friend' anymore because we can't look inside their head and be sure they mean it? Get real. Bond was under the impression he was a friend and so was the audience until he popped up again. THAT is the point."
Strawman I didn't say that, I said there was no evidence that their friendship was legitimate and you haven't provided anything other than assumptions and leaps in logic.
"I would like to see some links that show GE's OVERWHELMING popularity compared to other Bond movies."
Here's another: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08eZP5jBDc0
"So society is your mother's basement? Your speculative skills are utter crap and it would be best for everyone to stop using them."
What the hell are you talking about? I have my own house I don't live in my mothers basement.
"I speculate your favourite Bond movie is one that you feel isn't popular enough."
Wrong it's Goldfinger
According to your logic anyone who betrays a friend isn't a real "friend", and therefore we can't ever say someone was "betrayed by friend". That is complete BS.
Alec always knowing what happened to his family does not prevent him from forming an actual friendship with Bond. Alec calling Bond 'friend', wanting him to be part of his plan and the fact there was no reason to fake a friendship with Bond from day one is enough reason to think they were friends. But I've already told you a hundred times that you can hold on to your silly belief (which *I* don't accept), because THAT WASN'T MY POINT. My point is that Bond was "betrayed by a friend", and since it's shown from Bond's perspective, there's nothing wrong with that claim.
If you think I conceded to anything, then you need to read that again. I was talking about what YOU should've said.
"No they were definitely not friends at the start, unless you want me to believe that Oromov and Alec set telepathic messages to each other and were like "hey let's betray the British and the Russians" and they came up with a plan that took 9 years right on the spot. That's ludicrous."
What the freaking hell are you talking about??? You need to read again what I said...again.
No strawman. They called each other friends, but according to you I can't call them friends because Trevelyan was "evil" so he might not have meant it. And stop lying, you stated that "Treveylyn was never Bond's friend".
So 3 videos from 3 indivuals? Not exactly overwhelming. My IMDb link still beats that.
And I speculate that Goldfinger is not popular enough according to you. I noticed it wasn't number 1 in the video! 😁
"According to your logic anyone who betrays a friend isn't a real "friend", and therefore we can't ever say someone was "betrayed by friend". That is complete BS."
Strawman I didn't say that, if you could establish there was a time when they were legitimate friends I would consider it, as it stands you haven't so therefore I reject your premise that they were ever at any point friends. It also makes sense considering we knew that Alec was aware of what happened to his family when he joined the service.
"Alec always knowing what happened to his family does not prevent him from forming an actual friendship with Bond. Alec calling Bond 'friend', wanting him to be part of his plan and the fact there was no reason to fake a friendship with Bond from day one is enough reason to think they were friends. But I've already told you a hundred times that you can hold on to your silly belief (which *I* don't accept), because THAT WASN'T MY POINT. My point is that Bond was "betrayed by a friend", and since it's shown from Bond's perspective, there's nothing wrong with that claim."
Totally wrong, if you plan on betraying the person and using them as a pawn in your scheme then that's not a friendship.
"What the freaking hell are you talking about??? You need to read again what I said...again."
I made myself quite clear, Alec was most certainly going to betray Bond as soon as we the audience met him, in order for you to override that you have to establish that they had a legitimate friendship before the movie began which you haven't.
"No strawman. They called each other friends, but according to you I can't call them friends because Trevelyan was "evil" so he might not have meant it. And stop lying, you stated that "Treveylyn was never Bond's friend"."
So what are you saying? That if someone betrays someone and uses them in their scheme to undermine the government then that's a sign of friendship? I'd hate to see how you treat your enemies if you consider that friendly.
"So 3 videos from 3 indivuals? Not exactly overwhelming. My IMDb link still beats that."
Would you like more videos? Here's another: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdL1VruWmvs
"And I speculate that Goldfinger is not popular enough according to you. I noticed it wasn't number 1 in the video! 😁"
Good for you, I personally don't care about your speculations, mine seem to be driving you nuts however.
I have no intention of making you consider whether they were legitimate friends. That's a complete strawman.
"Alec was most certainly going to betray Bond as soon as we the audience met him, in order for you to override that"
Lol, you're ridiculous. I've said multiple times that he obviously wasn't a friend anymore in that opening scene! Stop it with the strawmen!
There's no reason to assume Trevelyan was going to use Bond specifically as a pawn, even if you believe he was going to betray M16 from day one. He doesn't choose his partner for a mission.
There's enough reason for me to call Trevelyan and Bond friends. You can call them 'fake friends' of 'frenemies' or something like that, I don't care. But you know what, let's go back to one of your earlier replies to me where you said:
"Also I don't see anything in the film that suggests they were anything more than colleagues. I mean they had like 2 minutes of screentime before Treveylyn went away for like an hour."
It's so freaking obvious that you totally forgot the friends aspect in the movie! You just moved goalposts to save face. That's why you changed your tune from STATING they were "NEVER friends" to saying there's no EVIDENCE they were "LEGITIMATE friends" Well, it doesn't surprise me, since you thought Trevelyan had built the satellite dish in Cuba...
Anyway. No, they were clearly "more than colleagues". And their relationship went back further than those 2 minutes on screen.
"Good for you, I personally don't care about your speculations, mine seem to be driving you nuts however."
Lol! Says the nutcase who's going absolutely bonkers about me saying Trevelyan and Bond were friends! But hey, I saw Goldfinger was rated nr. 3 on IMDb! Are you trying to be cool by jumping on some bandwagon???
You pretty much need to post thousands of videos to prove your point. Good luck!👍
"I have no intention of making you consider whether they were legitimate friends. That's a complete strawman."
In that case I have no reason to accept they ever were legitimate friends therefore I don't accept Bond was betrayed by his friend.
"Lol, you're ridiculous. I've said multiple times that he obviously wasn't a friend anymore in that opening scene! Stop it with the strawmen!"
Therefore again you can't prove there was ever a time when their friendship was legitimate.
"There's no reason to assume Trevelyan was going to use Bond specifically as a pawn, even if you believe he was going to betray M16 from day one. He doesn't choose his partner for a mission."
Except he did use him as a pawn, if you pay attention you'll know.
"There's enough reason for me to call Trevelyan and Bond friends. You can call them 'fake friends' of 'frenemies' or something like that, I don't care. But you know what, let's go back to one of your earlier replies to me where you said:"
Show me where in the movie it was established that their friendship was legitimate, and I'm not talking about Alec saying that Bond thought they were friends or Natalya revealing that Bond thought they were friends. What I mean is evidence they were friends at one point and Alec was not going to betray England or use Bond.
"It's so freaking obvious that you totally forgot the friends aspect in the movie! You just moved goalposts to save face. That's why you changed your tune from STATING they were "NEVER friends" to saying there's no EVIDENCE they were "LEHITIMATE friends" Well, it doesn't surprise me, since you thought Trevelyan had built the satellite dish in Cuba..."
You still haven't established that their friendship was ever real, do you understand after the 50th time I've told you???
"Anyway. No, they were clearly "more than colleagues". And their relationship went back further than those 2 minutes on screen."
Prove it
"Lol! Says the nutcase who's going absolutely bonkers about me saying Trevelyan and Bond were friends! But hey, I saw Goldfinger was rated nr. 3 on IMDb! Are you trying to be cool by jumping on some bandwagon???"
You can accuse me of going on a Bandwagon all you want, I'm not bothered by it, you clearly are losing your shit over it though. And I didn't go bonkers, I asked you to back up your assertion and so far you haven't.
"You pretty much need to post thousands of videos to prove your point. Good luck!👍"
Show me where you got that standard from? How do you know it needs to be thousands of videos?
And you can't prove that before the opening scene they were NEVER legitimate friends (or that Trevelyan was going to use Bond specifically as a pawn from day one), so CASE CLOSED.
As I've said A MILLION TIMES, I don't care if you don't accept they were legitimate friends, I never had any intention to convince you of it and I'll continue to say that Bond was betrayed by a friend because up till now no one has proved me wrong!
Haha, now you're going to pretend you always meant they weren't "legitimate friends"! Uhm, hello, even a "fake friend" is "more than a colleague". And Bond certainly was more than a colleague to Trevelyan. How many colleagues do you call "friend" without there being some kind of personal relationship?
As for their relationship going back further than those 2 minutes on screen, well, that's obvious.
You ARE absolutely bonkers! I've backed up my assertion and also disproved YOUR assertion that they were not "more than colleagues". Now I don't give a flying hoot if you accept my assertion, you haven't proved me wrong. Now let it go. Go bother the cool kids who all love Goldfinger.
"Show me where you got that standard from? How do you know it needs to be thousands of videos?"
Because Casino Royale alone has 87.236 10-rating votes. Good luck!
"And you can't prove that before the opening scene they were NEVER legitimate friends (or that Trevelyan was going to use Bond specifically as a pawn from day one), so CASE CLOSED."
Again that's not my burden of proof, you asserted that GE was new because Bond was betrayed by his friend so therefore it's your burden of proof to prove that they were legit friends and you've come nowhere close to it. You're trying to shift your burden of proof onto me which is a logical fallacy.
"As I've said A MILLION TIMES, I don't care if you don't accept they were legitimate friends, I never had any intention to convince you of it and I'll continue to say that Bond was betrayed by a friend because up till now no one has proved me wrong!"
Logical fallacy, a claim isn't true until disproven, a claim is only true if it is proven. That's why the defense has no burden of proof in a court case, it's all on the prosecution, if the prosecution (you) doesn't prove their case then you have to vote not guilty (not accepting they were ever legit friends)
"Haha, now you're going to pretend you always meant they weren't "legitimate friends"! Uhm, hello, even a "fake friend" is "more than a colleague". And Bond certainly was more than a colleague to Trevelyan. How many colleagues do you call "friend" without there being some kind of personal relationship?"
If I found out that "friend" was using me as a pawn then they would not be my friend and I would know the "friendship" in the past wasn't legitimate.
"As for their relationship going back further than those 2 minutes on screen, well, that's obvious."
But you can't establish they had a legitimate friendship which is what I've been asking you to do.
"Because Casino Royale alone has 87.236 10-rating votes. Good luck!"
How did you determine that was the standard? Also I don't care what people think about my subjective opinion, you however are falling apart because of how I feel about your subjective opinion.
One, this isn't a courtroom. Two, Bond and Trevelyan being legitimate friends is NOT what I was arguing. You are the one who shifted goalposts and made it all about that. I've probably said a thousand times by now that you can hold on to your silly belief that Bond and Trevelyan were "fake friends" or "frenemies" from day one.
"If I found out that "friend" was using me as a pawn then they would not be my friend and I would know the "friendship" in the past wasn't legitimate."
And still Bond acknowledges Trevelyan was a friend. It doesn't matter what YOU would feel or think.
I can keep calling them friends, because there's enough reason to think so and you haven't proven me wrong.
Anyway, back to your original assertion:
"Also I don't see anything in the film that suggests they were anything more than colleagues"
Uhm, they were definitely MORE than colleagues. Pay attention!
Don't worry, buddy, I'm not falling apart, I'm just exposing your laughibly immature debating skills.
I've got 87.236 10-rating votes for the nr. 1 movie Casino Royale. You need to provide a lot more videos to prove GE's OVERWHELMING popularity in comparison.
"One, this isn't a courtroom. Two, Bond and Trevelyan being legitimate friends is NOT what I was arguing. You are the one who shifted goalposts and made it all about that. I've probably said a thousand times by now that you can hold on to your silly belief that Bond and Trevelyan were "fake friends" or "frenemies" from day one."
It doesn't have to be a courtroom, it's not logical to accept any claim that can't be debunked, by that logic it's logical to accept the Loch Ness Monster, Flying Spaghetti Monster and any other fabrication I can pull out of my butthole. I never shifted the goalpost I have been very consistent. You can't prove their friendship was ever legitimate so I am not going to accept it.
"And still Bond acknowledges Trevelyan was a friend. It doesn't matter what YOU would feel or think."
Right he thought Trevelyn at the time was his friend, that doesn't make the friendship real.
"I can keep calling them friends, because there's enough reason to think so and you haven't proven me wrong."
I'll bring you back to what a burden of proof is, you can't just throw out any assertion you like and think they'll be true as long as they can't be proven false. That would mean the defendant would have to prove himself innocent every time he was accused of something no matter how ridiculous the accusation is, if you don't like the courtroom analogy fine, the 5th grader's classmate says "he called me a name", and by your logic the kid would be expelled unless he could prove he didn't call her a name, despite the fact that he denies calling her that and the other student has no proof or witnesses.
"Also I don't see anything in the film that suggests they were anything more than colleagues"
Watch the opening scene, there is nothing about them that suggests any kind of deep friendship, plus you can't prove their friendship was real.
"I've got 87.236 10-rating votes for the nr. 1 movie Casino Royale. You need to provide a lot more videos to prove GE's OVERWHELMING popularity in comparison."
First you need to define an objective system that proves which film is better than which and not just some system you came up with, it has to be recognized as the objective system. Also I'm not sure if you read what I said but I couldn't care less what you think about my opinion, you seem to care a lot about what I think about your opinion.
You have NOT been consistent. You just keep twisting and turning, deflecting and moving goalposts.
It started when I said Bond was "betrayed by a (former) friend and colleague", using the same term both Bond and Trevelyan used to describe each other (so nothing wrong with that). You responded to that arguing that you didn't see anything that suggested they were "more than colleagues". Obviously I responded to that by arguing they were FRIENDS as opposed to MERE COLLEAGUES (real friends vs. fake friends wasn't the issue you raised). Then you first stated they were NEVER friends, before turning it into a discussion about whether there's evidence they were LEGITIMATE friends.
Obviously you were only trying to save face, which explains why you keep hammering the issue even when I say that YOU CAN HOLD ON TO YOUR SILLY BELIEF because that issue is not what my point was about.
"the 5th grader's classmate says "he called me a name", and by your logic the kid would be expelled unless he could prove he didn't call her a name"
Ridiculous analogy. No one's getting expelled here. *I* can choose to believe the kid and YOU can choose not to believe the kid. And we did hear Bond and Trevelyan call each other friends. So bye bye to your logic.
I said nothing about a DEEP friendship. Even pretending to be a friend is "more than colleagues".
Posting Youtube videos is an objective system??? 3 Videos from 3 individuals show GE's OVERWHELMING popularity, how exactly???
I don't care about what you think of my opinion. As I've said a TRILLION times, you can hold on to your silly belief. This is about your immature debating skills, like ridiculous speculation, shifting goalposts, non sequiturs and deflection. I'm very willing to just go back on topic and address your original argument:
"I don't see anything in the film that suggests they were anything more than colleagues"
Uhm, they were definitely MORE than colleagues. Pay attention!
"You have NOT been consistent. You just keep twisting and turning, deflecting and moving goalposts."
I have been completely consistent, all I wanted was for you to back up your assertion and you haven't.
"It started when I said Bond was "betrayed by a (former) friend and colleague", using the same term both Bond and Trevelyan used to describe each other (so nothing wrong with that). You responded to that arguing that you didn't see anything that suggested they were "more than colleagues". Obviously I responded to that by arguing they were FRIENDS as opposed to MERE COLLEAGUES (real friends vs. fake friends wasn't the issue you raised). Then you first stated they were NEVER friends, before turning it into a discussion about whether there's evidence they were LEGITIMATE friends."
Again Bond thought that Alec was his friend (which you can't prove he was) , and Alec was talking from Bond's perspective, you still need to prove their friendship was legitimate.
"Ridiculous analogy. No one's getting expelled here. *I* can choose to believe the kid and YOU can choose not to believe the kid. And we did hear Bond and Trevelyan call each other friends. So bye bye to your logic."
A very legitimate analogy, the kid who accused the other kid needs to provide evidence. The accused kid is not guilty unless he can prove himself not guilty. If you believe the accuser then you are using poor logic and by that standard anyone who says anything you'll believe which means you don't have any system of determining the truth.
"Posting Youtube videos is an objective system??? 3 Videos from 3 individuals show GE's OVERWHELMING popularity, how exactly???"
Never said it was, I was however demonstrating that many people seem to think GE is top 3 material and it's nowhere close, Heck if we just considered the Connery films and GE it still wouldn't even crack the top 3.
"I don't care about what you think of my opinion. As I've said a TRILLION times, you can hold on to your silly belief. This is about your immature debating skills, like ridiculous speculation, shifting goalposts, non sequiturs and deflection. I'm very willing to just go back on topic and address your original argument"
I haven't done any of those things, I have just been holding you accountable for your assertions, you can't just make any baseless claim and expect logical people to believe it, it's called evidence and you' haven't provided any.
"Uhm, they were definitely MORE than colleagues. Pay attention!"
PROVE IT!!!
Oh lordie, you're absolutely obsessed with a point I wasn't even trying to make just to save face! No, you haven't been consistent. First you asserted they weren't "more than colleagues" and eventually you argued there's no evidence they were ever "legitimate friends"!
Your analogy sucks because the result isn't anyone getting expelled. You can just choose to believe the kid or not. And in this case there's reason to believe him, because it isn't just one kid's word against the other, we both hear them call each other "friend"! It comes down to the interpretation of that word. And hey, hypocrite, it was poor logic to say they were "never friends", because you have no way of knowing or proving it!
I have backed up my belief they were friends, you just don't want to accept it. I don't care, that wasn't even my point anyway. Now while you continue moving goalposts, deflecting and twisting, I'll get back to your original assertion:
"I don't see anything in the film that suggests they were anything more than colleagues"
Uhm, they were definitely MORE than colleagues. Pay attention!"
"PROVE IT!!!"
Lol! I already have! They call each other 'friend' and colleagues don't do that unless there's a personal relationship as well. We can see that from Bond's perspective there's more than just a professional relationship. And even a fake friend is more than a colleague, because you create a relationship on a personal level.
Well, I did ask you for proof of GE's overwhelming popularity and in response you posted those 3 videos, so...
"Oh lordie, you're absolutely obsessed with a point I wasn't even trying to make just to save face! No, you haven't been consistent. First you asserted they weren't "more than colleagues" and eventually you argued there's no evidence they were ever "legitimate friends"!"
For the last time: If you can't prove their friendship was legitimate then I don't believe you when you say it was.
"Your analogy sucks because the result isn't anyone getting expelled. You can just choose to believe the kid or not. And in this case there's reason to believe him, because it isn't just one kid's word against the other, we both hear them call each other "friend"! It comes down to the interpretation of that word. And hey, hypocrite, it was poor logic to say they were "never friends", because you have no way of knowing or proving it!"
Now you're making stuff up, I didn't say anything about the teacher knowing the kids had called each other names before, the only evidence is one kids accusation vs. the other kids denial. It's logical to not believe the assertion (accusation) unless there is evidence but you would determine the kid was guilty and would expel him unless he proved himself innocent, that's not how logic works.
OK drop the whole "we heard them call each other friend" because I have proven that doesn't prove it was a legit friendship because Bond thought they were friends but they weren't (at least at the start of the movie) and Alec was speaking through Bond's perspective. That doesn't prove they were ever legit friends.
"I have backed up my belief they were friends, you just don't want to accept it. I don't care, that wasn't even my point anyway. Now while you continue moving goalposts, deflecting and twisting, I'll get back to your original assertion:"
No you haven't, all you've given me is speculation and baseless assertions.
"Lol! I already have! They call each other 'friend' and colleagues don't do that unless there's a personal relationship as well. We can see that from Bond's perspective there's more than just a professional relationship. And even a fake friend is more than a colleague, because you create a relationship on a personal level."
I'll refer you back to what I've been saying over and over again: BOND THOUGHT THEY WERE FRIENDS BUT THEY WEREN'T BECAUSE ALEC WAS GOING TO BETRAY HIM AND USE HIM AS A PAWN, THAT IS NOT A FRIENDSHIP!!!! WHEN ALEC SAID HIS LOYALTY WASN'T TO HIS FRIEND HE WAS SPEAKING THROUGH BONDS PERSPECTIVE AND THAT FROM HIS PERSPECTIVE HE DID PUT THE MISSION OVER HIS FRIEND EVEN THOUGH THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THE FRIENDSHIP WAS EVER LEGITIMATE!!! Is that clear? Do you understand the words coming out of my mouth?
"Well, I did ask you for proof of GE's overwhelming popularity and in response you posted those 3 videos, so.."
Would you like more videos?
Wow, you don't even get what's wrong with your analogy! Unlike the teacher who didn't hear anything, we actually DID hear something (T and B calling each other friends). You just choose to interpret it differently. I didn't pull the assertion that they were friends out of my ass, it's based on SOMETHING that you have witnessed as well. But more importantly, no one's getting expelled here, we each choose to believe what we want to believe. And again, it was poor logic by you to say they were "never friends", because you have no way of knowing or proving it!"
For the TRILLIONTH freaking time, I don't care if you believe me, it wasn't my point anyway! You can hold on to your silly belief that Trevelyan faked their friendship from day one! I have given you facts (T and B calling each other friends), but you just choose not to accept it. Fine, go right ahead. Again, not my point!
Now while you keep trying to save face by deflecting I'll go back to your original assertion:
"Also I don't see anything in the film that suggests they were anything more than colleagues"
Uhm, they were definitely MORE than colleagues. Pay attention!
"Do you understand the words coming out of my mouth?"
Do you understand that none of what you said proves your assertion that they were not "more than colleagues"??? Bond was definitely a friend to Trevelyan. And even if Trevelyan faked his friendship with Bond, it means they were "more than colleagues".
"Would you like more videos?"
Only videos that prove GE's OVERWHELMING popularity.
No my analogy is legit. The teacher didn't hear anything and there's no evidence their friendship was ever legitimate. Your "evidence" was debunked when it was determined that the moment they were referring to they were very much not friends at that moment. So yes my analogy was spot on.
"For the TRILLIONTH freaking time, I don't care if you believe me, it wasn't my point anyway! You can hold on to your silly belief that Trevelyan faked their friendship from day one! I have given you facts (T and B calling each other friends), but you just choose not to accept it. Fine, go right ahead. Again, not my point!"
And it's been determined that at some point during there "friendship" it was not legitimate and that delegitimizes your entire premise because now you have to prove that there was a time when their friendship was legitimate and you can't.
You have also not provided any evidence that they were ever more than colleagues, from their interactions I don't see any proof that their "friendship" was any more than Bond and 009's in Octopussy.
So do you want more videos yes or no? GE is overrated I have proven that beyond a reasonable doubt.
No, your analogy is shit, because this isn't about one word against the other, but a different interpretation of the exact same evidence. Also, it was poor logic by you to say they were "never friends", because you have no way of knowing or proving it!"
AGAIN, my premise wasn't that they were LEGITIMATE friends. What I stated was that "Bond was betrayed by a former friend and colleague". I used 'friend' because,
One, Trevelyan was referred to as a friend.
Two, just like Trevelyan I was speaking from Bond's perspective. And if he can refer to a time they weren't legitimate friends, so can I!
Now let's return to your original assertion that they weren't more than colleagues.
"You have also not provided any evidence that they were ever more than colleagues, from their interactions I don't see any proof that their "friendship" was any more than Bond and 009's in Octopussy."
They never referred to each other as friends. And even you acknowledged that Bond believed they were friends, which is more than colleagues.
"So do you want more videos yes or no? GE is overrated I have proven that beyond a reasonable doubt."
Lol! Good luck with that in court! The judge might want to know what standard you used for that! 🤣
No, it doesn't seem you can provide videos that show GE's overwhelming popularity.
My analogy is legit, in both instances there is not convincing evidence either way so therefore it's all a he said she said, therefore it's logical to not accept the claim. I don't have to prove they were never friends, if you can't prove they were friends which you can't then I'm justified in not accepting it.
"AGAIN, my premise wasn't that they were LEGITIMATE friends. What I stated was that "Bond was betrayed by a former friend and colleague". I used 'friend' because"
Then therefore GE didn't do anything new and original by having Bond be betrayed by his "friend" as something similar happened in FYEO, TLD and LTK so your premise is dismissed.
"They never referred to each other as friends. And even you acknowledged that Bond believed they were friends, which is more than colleagues."
Bond seemed pretty upset that 009 was murdered and even avenged him by killing Miscka (or whatever his name was), it's just as logical to say he was friends with 009 as it was to say he was friends with 006.
By your own words this isn't a court case and it proves that GE is overrated, it's not even top 10 material yet those people seem to think it's top 3 material, not even close.
No, it's not legit because it isn't as flimsy as one word against the other. It's not like I'm saying Trevelyan's a transvestite, which, although possible, isn't suggested in any way.
"Then therefore GE didn't do anything new and original by having Bond be betrayed by his "friend" as something similar happened in FYEO, TLD and LTK so your premise is dismissed."
None of those people were referred to as "friend" and there was no indication of a personal relationship. Your dismissal is dismissed.
"it's just as logical to say he was friends with 009 as it was to say he was friends with 006."
Except that the word "friend" was never used. Now if you like to believe they were friends, I have no problem with that. It's unrelated to the discussion, though.
"By your own words this isn't a court case and it proves that GE is overrated, it's not even top 10 material yet those people seem to think it's top 3 material, not even close"
You're the one who brought up the court case analogy. Your videos prove nothing except that there are 3 individuals who consider it top 3 material. Arguing a movie is bad by pointing out its perceived flaws is one thing. Arguing it's "overrated" is so completely subjective it just makes you look like a fool to actually argue it.
"No, it's not legit because it isn't as flimsy as one word against the other. It's not like I'm saying Trevelyan's a transvestite, which, although possible, isn't suggested in any way."
It isn't flimsy at all, the only evidence you have that they were friends is they used the word "friend" but there is a ton of reasonable doubt behind it and you can't trust it as I have demonstrated.
"None of those people were referred to as "friend" and there was no indication of a personal relationship. Your dismissal is dismissed."
Koskov and Bond seemed to be friends, Leiter and Killifer were friends so yeah it's not that new of a concept.
"Except that the word "friend" was never used. Now if you like to believe they were friends, I have no problem with that. It's unrelated to the discussion, though."
It was heavily implied that they were just as much friends as he was with 006, he seemed to be quite satisfied when he avenged 009.
I know it's subjective, I never said it was anything other than my subjective opinion and I stand by it, Goldeneye is very overrated, it's not even top 10 material. The top 10 Bond films are: Goldfinger, For Your Eyes Only, Skyfall, From Russia With Love, Casino Royale (LOST so many points because of that fucked up gunbarrel), Thunderball, The Spy Who Loved Me, Licence To Kill, Live And Let Die, Dr. No
Bond and Trevelyan referring to each other as 'friend' (certainly not the only thing) is A LOT more than some kid claiming something was said, for which there is no evidence whatsoever. If you don't want to trust it, go right ahead, I already said you can hold on to your silly believe that Trevelyan faked his friendship with Bond from day one.
"Koskov and Bond seemed to be friends, Leiter and Killifer were friends so yeah it's not that new of a concept."
Lol, Koskov and Bond were NOT friends. Bond was actually pretty annoyed with him. Killifer seemed a friendly colleague of Leiter, but he wasn't Bond's friend and not the main villain.
'It was heavily implied that they were just as much friends as he was with 006, he seemed to be quite satisfied when he avenged 009."
If you want to believe 009 was his friend, that's fine. 009 did not betray Bond, though.
You actually stated as fact that it was overrated and told me that I actually know it's overrated as well. It can be your opinion that it's overrated, but don't be so foolish to use it against me as some kind of argument. Your top 10 is obviously not everybody else's top 10. It certainly isn't mine.
"Bond and Trevelyan referring to each other as 'friend' (certainly not the only thing) is A LOT more than some kid claiming something was said, for which there is no evidence whatsoever. If you don't want to trust it, go right ahead, I already said you can hold on to your silly believe that Trevelyan faked his friendship with Bond from day one."
And I've already established reasonable doubt upon them just calling each other "friend" so you are going to have to provide further evidence. As it stands now you have not proven they were ever legitimate friends.
"Lol, Koskov and Bond were NOT friends. Bond was actually pretty annoyed with him. Killifer seemed a friendly colleague of Leiter, but he wasn't Bond's friend and not the main villain."
Koskov and Bond did seem to be friends, far more than Alec and Bond did and Felix and Killifer definitely were friends so it seems a character was betrayed by a friend in just the previous film.
"You actually stated as fact that it was overrated and told me that I actually know it's overrated as well. It can be your opinion that it's overrated, but don't be so foolish to use it against me as some kind of argument. Your top 10 is obviously not everybody else's top 10. It certainly isn't mine."
Goldeneye is definitely the most overrated film and here is my evidence: 1) The videos demonstrate that for some reason it's considered to be Top 5 material --> 2) You have yet to demonstrate how its better than anything that came before it, GE is Bond by the numbers, it's the Force Awakens of the James Bond series. (although I would much rather watch GE than Force Awakens, I'd rather watch Disaster Movie over Force Awakens)
No, all you did was give your reason why you think Trevelyan was Bond's fake friend from day one. As I said, you're free to hold on to that silly belief. The two of them being legitimate friends was never my point anyway.
Bond and Koskov had never even met before! And they hardly got to know each other as Koskov got "kidnapped" only a few hours after defecting. And Bond did not seem to like him at all. The black DEA guy seemed way closer to Felix than Kilifer. I see no evidence they were more than friendly colleagues, but hey, if you want to believe they were friends, go right ahead. I said "Bond was betrayed by a former friend and colleague", I wasn't talking about minor characters (one of whom was totally insignificant). The theme of LTK was Bond taking revenge on behalf of his best friend.
The fact that you consider 3 videos from 3 individuals "evidence" for your completely subjective claim shows your immature debating skills. I don't need to demonstrate GE is "better" because that was never what I was arguing. I don't give a shit that you'd rather watch those other movies, it's just one of many opinions. Maybe that's something you should realize when you get so upset about my and other people's opinion on GE.
Actually I provided reasonable doubt that their friendship was ever legitimate. You are going to have to provide more evidence than the films dialogue to prove your case.
When Bond and Koskov were at the safe house they seemed very much to be friends just like Bond and Alex, and Killifer was clearly Felix's friend, he even invited the guy to his wedding, also Felix was in shock when he realized he was betrayed by his friend.
Again I can post more videos if you'd like but I have demonstrated that GE is severely overrated and you have not demonstrated that GE did anything that puts it above your average Bond adventure, GE is Bond by the numbers at best and it doesn't deserve to be in the Top 10.
Actually no, you've provided your reason for why you believe they're friendship was fake from day one (Trevelyan was a meanie), just like I provided my reasons for believing their friendship was not fake from day one (e.g. Trevelyan had no reason to do so because he had no idea he was going to be on a mission with Bond years down the road). But more importantly, I don't need to provide any evidence, because, AGAIN, whether they were legitimate friends was not "my case".
Only a few hours had passed since his defection and Bond had not seen Koskov since he put him in the pipeline to Austria. Bond was just trying to be a nice guy, he was DEFINITELY not his friend. He had no problem seeing Koskov for who he really was. Please don't be so silly as to claim that.
We don't know if Kilifer had actually been invited to the wedding, he came to brief Felix in. But again, if you want to believe they were friends, go right ahead. Kilifer was not Bond's friend nor was he the main villain. Bond being betrayed by a former friend and colleague was NOT a theme of that movie.
Posting 3 (or 4 or 5 or 6, etc.) videos by individuals does NOT demonstrate whatsoever that GE is "overrated" since that's something completely subjective. It's simply your OPINION that GE does not deserve in the Top 10. Do you finally understand that???
Actually I don't need to provide a reason why their friendship was fake, you made the assertion it was real so now it's your burden of proof. Since we know that Alec is not reliable since he has a history of deceiving people and it was firmly established that Bond was duped there is not convincing evidence they ever had a legitimate friendship, therefore GE did not break any new grounds.
"Only a few hours had passed since his defection and Bond had not seen Koskov since he put him in the pipeline to Austria. Bond was just trying to be a nice guy, he was DEFINITELY not his friend. He had no problem seeing Koskov for who he really was. Please don't be so silly as to claim that."
They acted very friendly with each other as he was getting Koskov out of Bratizlava, that is plenty of evidence they were friends and then he betrayed Bond before Trevelyn.
"We don't know if Kilifer had actually been invited to the wedding, he came to brief Felix in. But again, if you want to believe they were friends, go right ahead. Kilifer was not Bond's friend nor was he the main villain. Bond being betrayed by a former friend and colleague was NOT a theme of that movie."
Felix didn't tell him to leave so clearly they were friends. If they weren't friends Felix wouldn't have even talked to him. Doesn't matter if he was the main villain or not, he was betrayed and Felix was betrayed by his friend.
"Posting 3 (or 4 or 5 or 6, etc.) videos by individuals does NOT demonstrate whatsoever that GE is "overrated" since that's something completely subjective. It's simply your OPINION that GE does not deserve in the Top 10. Do you finally understand that???"
I never said it wasn't objective, I was very clear from the beginning this was my subjective opinion and I can back it up. Strawman on your part.
It's so incredibly mindboggling how much you fail to understand.
I never asked for your reason for thinking their friendship was fake from day one, but you provided it yourself when you said Alec is unreliable. And I gave my reasons (which in no way were disproven by you) why I believe otherwise, even though I didn't need to do so because it was never my point.
I'll continue to say "Bond was betrayed by a former friend (and colleague)", because Trevelyan was referred to as a "friend" and it's all from Bond's perspective anyway.
Bond had never even met Koskov! Koskov had heard of Bond's reputation, but Bond wasn't even aware of that! You obviously need to see the movie again.
Kilifer and Felix were friendly and that's all I can say about it. You can believe they were friends. Yes, it CERTAINLY does matter that "Bond being betrayed by a former friend and colleague" is absolutely not a theme of that movie.
Stop with the foolishness. You have been trying to sell your opinion as fact. You said that you've "proven" that GE is overrated "beyond a reasonable doubt", which is impossible since it's a completely subjective assertion.
OK let me make this very clear: I DO NOT NEED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE THAT THEY WEREN'T FRIENDS BECAUSE THAT ISN'T WHAT I ASSERTED! YOU SAID THEY WERE YET YOU CAN'T DEMONSTRATE IT AND I HAVE CAST REASONABLE DOUBT UPON ALL EVIDENCE YOU HAVE PROVIDED. THEREFORE I DON'T ACCEPT YOUR ASSERTION THAT GE DID SOMETHING NEW BY HAVING BOND BETRAYED BY A "FRIEND", THERE'S NO EVIDENCE HE WAS. DO YOU GET IT NOW?
I have watched the film several times and they seemed very friendly with each other just as much as Alec and Bond were in GE as were Felix and Kilifer. Bond being betrayed is nothing new.
I have provided reasonable doubt as to whether they were friends or not. When Bond thought he was friends with Alec they really weren't because Alec was going to use him as a pawn in his plan to betray the British Government. That's not being a friend, now you have to prove they were friends before the start of the film and that there was a time when Alec had no intention of betraying the British AND he knew Bond at that time AND they were friends. The ball is in your court and you have quite a burden of proof to meet. Also you can only use dialogue from the film, if there's some Bond Goldeneye fan fiction that's not canon.
Why the freaking hell are you shouting??? It's YOU who doesn't understand. Either that or you're still trying to deflect to save face because you'd totally forgotten they were "more than colleagues".
As I've said multiple times by now, I never asked you to provide evidence!!! It was of your own accord that you gave your reason for believing Trevelyan faked their friendship from day one. YOU'RE FREE TO HOLD ON TO THAT SILLY BELIEF, but I do not accept your claim of reasonable doubt, because, as I already explained in previous posts, Trevelyan ultimately betraying MI6 does not in any way prove that he had any reason to fake his friendship with Bond from day one. My reasons are legitimate, so if you say I'm WRONG, then YOU need to provide some evidence. And I don't have to prove my assertion to you because, more importantly, IT WAS NEVER MY FREAKING POINT!
My point is that Bond was "betrayed by a former friend colleague" and I'll keep calling Trevelyan 'friend' because that's how he was referred to in the movie and it's all from Bond's perspective anyway.
You are out of your mind if you truly think Koskov and Bond were friends. You've provided no proof for it whatsoever, being friendly means nothing. You're just grasping at straws here. Moreover, Koskov and Kilifer were not Bond's friends and colleagues, so "Bond being betrayed by a former friend and colleague" was definitely a new theme.
"Why the freaking hell are you shouting??? It's YOU who doesn't understand. Either that or you're still trying to deflect to save face because you'd totally forgotten they were "more than colleagues"."
If I shout maybe you'll actually pay attention, and it's not my assertion they weren't friends, I don't buy your assertion they were friends.
"It was of your own accord that you gave your reason for believing Trevelyan faked their friendship from day one."
Strawman, I just said I didn't buy that they were legitimate friends because you haven't provided any evidence.
" I do not accept your claim of reasonable doubt, because, as I already explained in previous posts, Trevelyan ultimately betraying MI6 does not in any way prove that he had any reason to fake his friendship with Bond from day one."
What part of I'm not asserting he faked his friendship do you not understand? I don't accept that their friendship was legitimate because A) It was well established that he was a traitor and had a history of deceiving people and B) You haven't proven their friendship was legitimate. Every piece of "evidence" you've provided I have debunked.
"My reasons are legitimate, so if you say I'm WRONG, then YOU need to provide some evidence. And I don't have to prove my assertion to you because, more importantly, IT WAS NEVER MY FREAKING POINT!"
Your reasons are not legitimate I debunked all of your assertions and I don't have to provide any evidence because this is your claim not mine, you aren't automatically right unless I prove you wrong, that's not how evidence or logic works.
"My point is that Bond was "betrayed by a former friend colleague" and I'll keep calling Trevelyan 'friend' because that's how he was referred to in the movie and it's all from Bond's perspective anyway."
Fucking hell man, it was established in the film that Bond was deceived and used as a pawn, that casts a shitload of doubt over their entire friendship, regardless of whether I can prove the friendship was faked or not is a non sequitur, if you can't prove it's legitimate then we don't accept it is.
"You are out of your mind if you truly think Koskov and Bond were friends. You've provided no proof for it whatsoever, being friendly means nothing. You're just grasping at straws here. Moreover, Koskov and Kilifer were not Bond's friends and colleagues, so "Bond being betrayed by a former friend and colleague" was definitely a new theme"
Not grasping at straws at all and you still have not established that Bond was betrayed by a friend. Again Goldeneye is the Force Awakens of the James Bond Series, it's just the same thing we've already seen before just repackaged.
No, you're shouting because YOU are not paying attention. You've debunked absolutely nothing. Trevelyan being a traitor doesn't say anything about how his relationship with Bond started out. Zilch! Your argument is rejected.
It's not MY assertion that they were friends, it's the movie's assertion. Whether they were ever 'legitimate' friends was never the assertion, for the billionth time! You first claimed Trevelyan was just Bond's equal after which I pointed out that he was Bond's friend as well (it's in the movie!). In response you asserted that they weren't "more than colleagues" (which I debunked). Realizing your mistake you turned the discussion and claimed they were "never friends" and then demanded evidence from me that they were "legitimate friends", an assertion I didn't even make. Not only is that deflection, it's deceitful.
I don't give a flying hoot if you don't think they were legitimate friends, it's your choice to be obstinate. What this has been about is the movie's theme that "Bond was betrayed by a former friend and colleague". AND SINCE TREVELYAN'S REFERRED TO IN THE MOVIE AS 'FRIEND' AND THE BETRAYAL IS FROM BOND'S PERSPECTIVE ANYWAY, I'll continue referring to him as 'friend'. Deal with it!
And oh yeah, I dismiss your ridiculous assertion that Bond and Koskov were friends, because you've provided not a scratch of evidence whatsoever!
No I'm shouting because you aren't listening to what I'm saying. I have debunked your entire premise. If Alec was going to betray the British as soon as he met Bond then THEY WEREN'T FRIENDS!!! Friends don't betray and use each other. You have to establish that there was a time when Alec wasn't going to betray the government and everything we know about him suggests otherwise.
If you don't assert that they were friends then therefore GE did not break new ground by having Bond being betrayed by his friend and he has been betrayed before so this is once again showing that GE just recycled the formula like every other Bond film (not that there's anything wrong with that but don't pretend it's something it isn't).
Dude it doesn't matter if Trevelyn referred to them as friends, he betrayed Bond, as far as we know he was always going to betray him, therefore they weren't friends.
I've provided just as much evidence that Bond and Koskov were friends as you have provided that Bond and Alec were friends. Face it kid, GE is Bond by the numbers.
"If Alec was going to betray the British as soon as he met Bond then THEY WEREN'T FRIENDS!!!"
Two false assumptions. One, you have no evidence that Trevelyan was going to betray the British as soon as he met Bond. Two, it's a logical fallacy to infer that just because he was going to betray the government, he wouldn't be able to build a real friendship with Bond.
"If you don't assert that they were friends then therefore GE did not break new ground by having Bond being betrayed by his friend"
Wrong. I didn't assert they were LEGITIMATE friends. Just like the movie I simply asserted they were friends. Bond had never been betrayed before by a colleague he also had a friendship with (doesn't matter whether it wasn't genuine on Trevelyan's part!) and who turned out to be the main villain as well.
"I've provided just as much evidence that Bond and Koskov were friends as you have provided that Bond and Alec were friends."
You're absolutely delusional! They only knew each other for 5 minutes, never called each other friends and Bond was hardly brokenhearted over Koskov's betrayal.
Now stop your nonsense. Even the other guy who dislikes GE as much as you do thinks Bond being betrayed by Trevelyan was an original idea.
I didn't make any assumptions, I asked you to defend your assumption that there was a time period where Bond and Alec were friends, Alec knew the entire time that the British betrayed his family and that is a huge obstacle you have to work around in order to prove your point which you haven't. Also you misused the term "logical fallacy".
Yes it does matter if the friendship was legitimate, you can't say that he was betrayed by his friend unless you can prove that they were at one point legitimate friends. All you have is speculation. If you can't prove this then him being betrayed by Alec is no different than him being betrayed by Kristatoes.
I am not being delusional at all, Bond and Koskov seemed to have a comradery (sp?) much like Bond and Alec, I'm not assuming they were friends but I am proving that there is just as much justification in calling them friends as it was Bond and Alec, which is pretty much nothing.
Your last sentence was an actual logical fallacy, it doesn't matter how many people believe something, that has no bearing on whether it's actually true, the entire world could believe the world is flat and that wouldn't make it so. As of now you have yet to demonstrate that GE is anything special and I have already demonstrated that it did recycle plot elements from previous films.
You did make assumptions and I did use the term correctly. It's a false deduction that Trevelyan and Bond were never friends just because Trevelyan betrayed the British government.
Also, stop being deceitful and act like this is about you simply asking me to prove my assertion that they were friends. YOU asserted they weren't more than colleagues and I explained they were. Then you suddenly turned it into an issue about whether they were legitimate friends, after which I responded that was never my point.
"you can't say that he was betrayed by his friend unless you can prove that they were at one point legitimate friends."
I don't have to do any such thing. The movie asserted they were friends, so I can call them friends.
"that there is just as much justification in calling them friends as it was Bond and Alec, which is pretty much nothing."
Stop making a fool of yourself. Again, Bond and Koskov only knew each other for 5 freaking minutes and never called each other friends. Your ridiculous argument is dismissed.
"it doesn't matter how many people believe something, that has no bearing on whether it's actually true, the entire world could believe the world is flat and that wouldn't make it so."
Dude, you told me I knew GE was overrated just because YOU think it is. You are absolutely absurd.
I reject your premise, we know that Alec can't be trusted and you can't demonstrate to me that they were ever legit friends as in there was a time when he wasn't going to betray Bond. You are making assumptions.
If you can't prove they were friends then I'm justified in not accepting that they were and I choose to.
"I don't have to do any such thing. The movie asserted they were friends, so I can call them friends."
Actually it doesn't, the movie makes it very clear that Alec can't be trusted which causes a reasonable person to doubt their friendship.
"Stop making a fool of yourself. Again, Bond and Koskov only knew each other for 5 freaking minutes and never called each other friends. Your ridiculous argument is dismissed."
I saw just as much friendship in Bond/Koskov as I did with Alec/Bond. You also have no proof of how long Bond/Alec knew each other.
GE is overrated, I have demonstrated that it is nothing more than your average Bond film and the acting was subpar. It's not even Martin Campbell's best film (Mask of Zorro), yet some people hail it as top 2 material and it's not even close to that. Die Another Day was better than GE.
My premise is NOT that they were legit friends, how many times do I have to tell you that? Now you can reject it as much as you want, but I'll continue to refer to them as friends because there's a basis for that in the movie. Your assertion that they were NEVER friends is actually more of an assumption.
"Actually it doesn't, the movie makes it very clear that Alec can't be trusted which causes a reasonable person to doubt their friendship."
He never stated that he always faked being Bond's friend. Now you can choose to interpret the events in such a way that you doubt their friendship and anybody else can choose to interpret them differently.
Bond knew Koslov only for 5 minutes. He knew Trevelyan long enough to call him a friend. Case closed, your ridiculous premise is dismissed.
You truly have delusions of grandeur. All you have demonstrated is your SUBJECTIVE opinion that GE is overrated.
"Die Another Day was better than GE."
🤣🤣🤣 You freaking troll!
Good, then in that case your premise is dismissed that GE did something new by having Bond being betrayed by a "friend" since you just conceded that I was right that there is no basis to say their friendship was ever legitimate. Your concession is noted.
"He never stated that he always faked being Bond's friend. Now you can choose to interpret the events in such a way that you doubt their friendship and anybody else can choose to interpret them differently"
Again it's your burden of proof to prove that their friendship was at one time legitimate but since you just conceded that you can't demonstrate it your concession is still noted.
"Bond knew Koslov only for 5 minutes. He knew Trevelyan long enough to call him a friend. Case closed, your ridiculous premise is dismissed."
You already conceded that you can't determine that their friendship was every legit
Oh I'm a troll because my opinion is different than yours? You sure have a high, arrogant opinion of yourself. Get over yourself you aren't that special and your opinion isn't all that interesting. Yes I like DAD over GE, sure DAD has some silly moments but it did something interesting with Bond's character while GE was just run of the mill, plus DAD threw a lot of stuff in there for the dedicated fans that casual fans are not going to pick up on. GE is beyond overrated and I honestly don't think people like yourself would think as highly of it if it weren't for the videogame.
Freaking hell. Two months later and you're still repeating the same nonsense. AGAIN, my premise was never that their friendship was legitimate, so it's impossible to dismiss it. And I certainly never conceded there is no basis to say their relationship was legitimate, you seriously lack reading comprehension skills.
Now back to what started this ridiculous discussion, namely YOUR premise that Bond and Trevelyan were NOT anything more than colleagues. The burden of proof is on YOU!
Your premise that they were NEVER friends is also dismissed, since you haven't been able to prove it.
I'm calling you a troll because you're acting ridiculous. You deflect, deceive, put words in my mouth and resort to namecalling and other immature behavior. It's just impossible to take you seriously. And you're the one with the arrogant attitude believing that calling a movie overrated is something objective and telling people who disagree that they actually do know the movie is overrated.
I already told you. I have never played the videogame, I didn't even know about it until years later and I have actually very little interest in videogames. So get over yourself , you immature little boy.
Get over it kid, no one is twisting your arm to respond, you did that on your own freewill, I got a little busy but don't worry I'm not going to forget about you, you are a very special poster and a very definite source of entertainment for me. Thank you again for conceding that you can't demonstrate their friendship was ever legitimate. That means Goldeneye didn't do something new by having Bond be betrayed by a friend, we don't know if they were ever friends.
"Now back to what started this ridiculous discussion, namely YOUR premise that Bond and Trevelyan were NOT anything more than colleagues. The burden of proof is on YOU!"
Wrong that was never my premise, my premise was that you haven't demonstrated they were legit friends and you admitted you can't demonstrate it, I don't have a burden of proof kid, you might want to do your homework before you post.
"I'm calling you a troll because you're acting ridiculous. You deflect, deceive, put words in my mouth and resort to namecalling and other immature behavior. It's just impossible to take you seriously. And you're the one with the arrogant attitude believing that calling a movie overrated is something objective and telling people who disagree that they actually do know the movie is overrated."
I'm sorry you can't take even the slightest amount of scrutiny or criticisms but that is no ones fault but your own. GE is overrated and I have fully demonstrated that it is. You don't know what you're talking about kid and I think you need to quit playing the victim.
Sure, you just keep deflecting, deceiving, insulting, putting words in my mouth and exhibiting other immature behavior.
In the meantime, I'll just go back to the start of this discussion, when YOU claimed that Bond and Trevelyan were "not more than colleagues" and then that they were "never friends". You haven't been able to prove either premise. So there's nothing for me to concede to.
In the movie Bond calls Trevelyan a friend, so I'll keep saying till the end of time that "Bond was betrayed by a friend". Just suck it up.
Your idea of criticising my viewpoints consists of constantly calling GE overrated and accusing me of liking a videogame I've never even played. You are hilariously hypocritical. You act like an immature, little boy who after more than two months is still unable to comprehend his OPINION is 100% subjective. Serious question, do you have Asperger's???
"Sure, you just keep deflecting, deceiving, insulting, putting words in my mouth and exhibiting other immature behavior."
I have done nothing of the sort, you just described your own debate tactics. Sorry kid to burst your bubble
"In the meantime, I'll just go back to the start of this discussion, when YOU claimed that Bond and Trevelyan were "not more than colleagues" and then that they were "never friends". You haven't been able to prove either premise. So there's nothing for me to concede to."
I don't have to concede to anything, you've conceded you can't prove that their friendship was ever legitimate therefore my position is the default position. Better luck next time kiddo.
"In the movie Bond calls Trevelyan a friend, so I'll keep saying till the end of time that "Bond was betrayed by a friend". Just suck it up."
He may have thought they were friends but there was never a time you can prove they were legit friends.
I am going to go ahead and dismiss that disgusting comment you made about aspergers, you are trying to use that as an insult and it's disturbing behavior at best on your part.
I have not deflected, deceived, insulted, put words in your mouth or exhibited other immature behavior. In fact, I've been to the point without resorting to personal attacks.
AGAIN, I've conceded to nothing whatsoever. My premise was NEVER that Bond and Trevelyan were "legitimate" friends.
And AGAIN, I'll just go back to the start of this discussion, when YOU claimed that Bond and Trevelyan were "not more than colleagues" and then that they were "never friends". In the movie Bond calls Trevelyan a friend, so that's actually the DEFAULT POSITION. You haven't been able to prove either of your two premises, so I'll keep saying till the end of time that "Bond was betrayed by a friend" until you are able to do so.
The fact that you consider my serious inquiry about Asperger's an insult says more about you than me. If you do have Asperger's, it would explain your behavior and maybe even excuse some of it. If you don't, it means you're a very disturbed and disgusting person yourself. So what is it?
"I have not deflected, deceived, insulted, put words in your mouth or exhibited other immature behavior. In fact, I've been to the point without resorting to personal attacks."
You absolutely have and I have never once insulted you personally, you have. Learn to take your own advice kid.
"AGAIN, I've conceded to nothing whatsoever. My premise was NEVER that Bond and Trevelyan were "legitimate" friends."
You just did concede, are you really too stupid to keep up with your own premise?
"And AGAIN, I'll just go back to the start of this discussion, when YOU claimed that Bond and Trevelyan were "not more than colleagues" and then that they were "never friends". In the movie Bond calls Trevelyan a friend, so that's actually the DEFAULT POSITION. You haven't been able to prove either of your two premises, so I'll keep saying till the end of time that "Bond was betrayed by a friend" until you are able to do so."
You just admitted that you can't prove their friendship was ever legitimate, therefore it's the default position to not accept they ever were legit friends therefore you aren't justified in saying GE did something new by having Bond be betrayed by his friend, I don't need to disprove your claim, you need to prove your claim and you just conceded that you couldn't.
"The fact that you consider my serious inquiry about Asperger's an insult says more about you than me. If you do have Asperger's, it would explain your behavior and maybe even excuse some of it. If you don't, it means you're a very disturbed and disgusting person yourself. So what is it?"
The fact that you would use Aspegers as an insult just shows your lack of character. Just giving you some helpful advice so that you can be a decent person but apparently you have no interest in that.
Unlike you, I have not deflected, deceived, insulted, put words in your mouth or exhibited other immature behavior.
AGAIN, I've conceded to nothing whatsoever. My premise was NEVER that Bond and Trevelyan were "legitimate" friends.
Bond and Trevelyan referred to each other as friends, therefore it's the DEFAULT POSITION. If you claim they were "never friends", it's up to YOU to provide proof. So far you have failed to do so. I'll keep saying till the end of time that "Bond was betrayed by a friend" until you succeed.
My Asperger's comment was NOT an insult. I mentioned TWICE that it was a serious question. After 3 months of you deflecting, deceiving, insulting, putting words in my mouth and exhibiting other immature behavior simply because you can't accept a different opinion, I have the right to ask what I'm dealing with. So is your deflection to be taken as an affirmative answer?
If you call people stupid just for having another opinion, you really shouldn't talk about how to be a decent person. Just some helpful advice...
"Unlike you, I have not deflected, deceived, insulted, put words in your mouth or exhibited other immature behavior."
Instead you just continue to repeat yourself over and over again and then play the victim because you can't handle someone having a different opinion than you, grow up kid.
"AGAIN, I've conceded to nothing whatsoever. My premise was NEVER that Bond and Trevelyan were "legitimate" friends."
Glad you agree with me, your concession remains noted.
"Bond and Trevelyan referred to each other as friends, therefore it's the DEFAULT POSITION. If you claim they were "never friends", it's up to YOU to provide proof. So far you have failed to do so. I'll keep saying till the end of time that "Bond was betrayed by a friend" until you succeed."
That goes out the door kid when you find out that Trevelyn had been lying to him the entire time. Now you have to prove that they were legit friends before Trevelyn betrayed him, you have yet to prove that.
"My Asperger's comment was NOT an insult. I mentioned TWICE that it was a serious question. After 3 months of you deflecting, deceiving, insulting, putting words in my mouth and exhibiting other immature behavior simply because you can't accept a different opinion, I have the right to ask what I'm dealing with. So is your deflection to be taken as an affirmative answer?"
You meant it as an insult, but it's OK I'm a lot more mature than you are and it doesn't bother me, it's just a representation of your desperation now that you have to resort to pathetic, middle school level personal insults instead of debating the facts, you really suck at this.
"If you call people stupid just for having another opinion, you really shouldn't talk about how to be a decent person. Just some helpful advice..."
I never did that, I just pointed out the absurdity of your position.
One month later and still all you can do is deflect, deceive, insult, put words in my mouth and exhibit other immature behavior. If anybody needed evidence you've got Asperger's, here it is. It's okay, I don't even hold it against you, it just makes it entirely clear it's futile trying to reason with you. It seems there are lots of other posters who have concluded the same.
And rest assured, I don't concede to anything. I'm sticking to the default position that Bond was betrayed by a friend because that's how they refer to each other. You, however, have still not proven your original premise that Bond and Trevelyan were "not more than colleagues" and then that they were "never friends". But I'm aware your condition prevents you from doing so. Good luck with the rest of your life, you definitely need it!
"One month later and still all you can do is deflect, deceive, insult, put words in my mouth and exhibit other immature behavior. "
LOL I just felt like messing with you, giving you a false sense of security and teasing you with the idea that I went away.
"If anybody needed evidence you've got Asperger's, here it is. It's okay, I don't even hold it against you, it just makes it entirely clear it's futile trying to reason with you. It seems there are lots of other posters who have concluded the same."
You most certainly did mean that as an insult but I don't care, I have plenty of confidence in myself. You however are clearly a demented individual who uses disabilities against people.
"And rest assured, I don't concede to anything. I'm sticking to the default position that Bond was betrayed by a friend because that's how they refer to each other. You, however, have still not proven your original premise that Bond and Trevelyan were "not more than colleagues" and then that they were "never friends". But I'm aware your condition prevents you from doing so. Good luck with the rest of your life, you definitely need it!"
You admitted that you couldn't demonstrate that their friendship was ever for real, therefore your position has no merit to it. Again you are trying to shift your burden of proof to me, my position is that there isn't any proof their friendship was ever for real and you conceded to that so the way it stands now it's game set and match for myself.
- Watch the movie again, he was always evil, even at the very beginning of the film where he apparently "dies". He was in league with Oromov from the beginning.
- I am not being unnecessarily harsh, I am holding it to the same standard all films are held to and you are the one claiming it did something new and refreshing and I have proven it's just the same old same old. It's not the best Bond film, nowhere close, Goldfinger, For Your Eyes Only, From Russia With Love, etc. mop the floor with it as does Mask of Zorro. (my point there is it's not even Martin Campbell's best film)
Well yeah, that scene took place 2 seconds before he faked his death. He had already decided by then to betray his friend. It says absolutely nothing about their relationship in the years before. If anything, their interaction suggested they were pretty close.
You're nitpicking and using a different standard. Now you have a right to your opinion, but you haven't proved me wrong in any way. I explained what GE did different than before, but you bring up unrelated stuff, which you're not convincingly able to back up either, to be honest.
GE is the best Bond movie and Mask of Zorro sucks. There you go!🙄
And if you honestly think that Treveylyn just decided right then to betray England then you didn't fully understand the film. Trevelyn was never Bond's friend and was always going to betray him. The film made it quite clear. Bond may have thought Treveylyn was his friend (I see nothing from the film to conclude that but I also can't rule it out), but Trevelyn was never a friend, he was always a traitor. He wanted revenge for the way his family was treated by the British Government, they knew the entire time about his background but they just figured that he didn't remember which they were wrong about. The movie made all of this quite clear, are you sure you paid attention?
Not nitpicking at all, you claimed that Goldeneye was the best Bond film ever and did something the franchise had never done before and I have shown you that it's really just more of the same. Again what you think is new and has never been done before in the franchise is me saying the same thing about Casino Royale being the first Bond film to have a pinball machine.
LOL OK now it's obvious you're just saying the opposite of whatever I say but I'll entertain you for a little bit. Mask of Zorro had compelling characters that you cared about, very well choreographed fight scenes, an amazing score by James Horner, witty humor that didn't feel forced and one of the best climactic fight scenes I have ever seen. The entire time you want to root for Anthony Hopkins to get his daughter back because he was robbed of her when she was just an infant and he had to spend 20 years knowing she was being raised by his sworn enemy. Goldeneye just recycled what we had already seen in the previous 16 movies, again it didn't do it badly just at the same time it didn't stand out. I'm getting to the point where I can't take you seriously anymore, I don't think you really think Goldeneye is that great, I think you're just trying to be annoying and troll.
I don't think you got the movie! My point is that it took Trevelyan a long time to finally make the decision to leave M16. He did not join it in order to get revenge, he was recruited. He probably was trained along Bond and even if his past had been bothering him all that time, there's nothing to stop him from forming a real friendship with Bond. They did missions together and probably hung out. So much so, that he even considered asking Bond to join his criminal empire. But as I said, that's beside the point. Bond considered Trevelyan a friend. If you really enjoy the characters, then you should be able to appreciate that part of their relationship because that's what makes it interesting!
A freaking pinball machine is totally not the same as something that's relevant to the plot and character development. I explained exactly what I found to be different than before. You brought up unrelated stuff that, as I already pointed out, is not as similar as you make it out to be and are simply recurring themes in a franchise.
Obviously I was poking fun at you. I honestly don't like Mask of Zorro, though.
Good god, I can't believe how immature you are just because someone else likes a movie better than you do. 🙄 I actually do think GE is the best Bond movie (a lot of people do, so no need to act surprise) and I never said it's because it's the most original of all Bond movies. It's primarily because it's got a great balance of everything and does things right for the most part.
I get the movie clearly, how do you know it took him a long time to make the decision to leave MI6? Even if it did that is a non sequitur because there is absolutely no indication that his decision came about after he met Bond and it certainly didn't happen during the course of the film. Trevelyn was always evil during the course of the film and I see nothing that even remotely suggests there was a friendship between the two. Bond has also been pissed before when one of his allies is killed off like Ferrara, Sir Godfrey Tibbett, Vijay, Saunders, Sharkey, Quarrell, Kerim Bey, etc. Again nothing new to the table.
Yes the pinball machine is a legitimate comparison, Goldeneye was the first film where Bond is betrayed by an MI6 agent just like Casino Royale is the first film where there is a pinball machine. What does it matter? The fact that Treveylen has a connection to MI6 is nothing significant. Another plot thread they recycled is not only is there a renegade Russian General (Ouromov/Orlov) but there is also a superior to that general who serves as a reminder to the audience that Russia is not the enemy just one member of the Russian Army (Gogol/Dmitri), so yeah there's another way Goldeneye ripped off Octopussy.
Yeah I figured you were just saying that to be immature. Mask of Zorro however to me wipes the floor with Goldeneye and I have explained why in detail.
I have also effectively explained why you have a weird taste in movies because Goldeneye is really all that different than the previous 16 films, it's nowhere near the top, to me it's actually on the bottom half. It did not have a great balance and the characters were annoying (aside from Bond and Trevelyn). People seem to think it deserves bonus points because it brought something new to the table and it didn't. It's your standard run of the mill Bond film about a crazed villain with a freakin' lazer satellite.
EDIT: Also another unrealistic moment, Bond dives off a cliff after an empty plane that is about to crash and he somehow floats into it, takes control of it and doesn't die. That's as preposterous as him wind surfing a tsunami or going into outer space.
Uhm, why would he leave MI6 at age 30 or something if he had wanted to leave since day 1? It's not like he was forced to work there. For whatever reason he accepted the position and even if he had always felt conflicted, there's no reason not to build up a friendship with other employees. And Trevelyan wasn't necessarily "evil", he was severely traumatized, which does not make him uncapable of bonding with others. If both characters referring to the other as 'friend' isn't enough, then you just don't want to see it, which is utterly ridiculous.
The pinball machine is totally irrelevant to the plot. Trevelyan and his relationship with Bond is not. Their close working and personal relationship allowed him to mislead and use Bond to fake his death and become the criminal mastermind he ended up being.
YOU werd being immature, I just gave you a taste of your own medicine. You can keep repeating it's no different than the previous 16 movies (as opposed to which Bond movies???), but that doesn't make it a fact...just a weird opinion.
Yes, that plane scene was very unrealistic. I don't think I ever claimed this movie was true to life. We're talking Bond here. What's the problem? Did it rip off Dr. No???
Maybe he didn't have a way to fake his death? Maybe he wanted to establish himself with MI6 more so that they would never suspect him of anything? Doesn't matter, he certainly didn't come up with the plan randomnly during the pre-title sequence so therefore you are not justified in asserting that they were ever friends, the only times we ever saw them together they were definitely not friends. Also FYI appealing to your own ignorance is not an effective debate strategy. Ummmm he tried to kill millions of people, he very much is evil, you have a weird definition of the word evil.
The pinball machine is relevant to the plot as much as Bond being betrayed by a friend is, in fact it is more relevant if you ask me. If the African Warlord was more interested in the pinball game he may have blown off Le Chiffre and therefore the plot wouldn't have been able to happen so therefore the pinball machine is the device that sets the plot in motion. You could remove the pinball machine and you would have actually lost more of the plot than you would have if Bond never thought Trevelyn was his friend (again no indication they ever were friends).
I "werd" being immature??? What does that mean? Also you didn't give me any taste of medicine, all you did was show your own immaturity. I haven't just repeated that it's no different than the other 16 films, I have demonstrated repeatedly that it was.
You were the one who praised the action, well the action is unrealistic, even more than him wind surfing to escape a falling glacier or him fighting in outer space. Goldeneye had unrealistic action sequences just like the majority of Bond movies (example: Him water skiing behind a plane with no skies)
So are you also blind and deaf that you missed the very evident camaraderie in the opening scene? More importantly, though, they refer to each other as FRIENDS! Case closed.
When did Trevelyan try to kill millions of people? Perhaps the EPM laser could result in the deaths of people and I'm sure Trevelyan didn't care if that was the consequence of his taking revenge. But he was not a psychopath being evil for the sake of being evil. There's no reason to doubt his word that Bond was a friend. He was just a friend he had no choice but betraying.
Drop the pinball machine. Nothing in the movie suggests that it affected the plot or the characters's actions and it isn't heard from again. You're desperately grasping at straws. Move on.
Oh no, a typo, the horror!!! I have no problem showing immaturity to someone who's immature. It's funny that bothered you so much. You have not compared all 16 movies and explained how they're similar or different. It's just an empty statement.
I said they amped up the action, I didn't say it was realistic. But apart from that scene, the action wasn't actually that ridiculous.
The comradery means nothing because Treveylyn was already evil and was going to betray Bond, they weren't friends in that scene, pay attention better next time.
Ummmmm did you not watch the scene where the EMP caused two planes to crash? And now they are going to do that over a highly populated area. Natalya even says people will die. Whether he had a motivation or not is irrelevant, pretty much all of the Bond villains had a motivation therefore it's more of the same.
I am not dropping the pinball machine until you concede that Bond being betrayed was nothing new. The Pinball machine impacts the plot far more than anything you've put forward.
I have pointed out plenty of examples of why Goldeneye is similar and/or flat out rips off the other films, again the entire ending is beat for beat the exact same thing from Dr. No and the central plot device is the same damn thing from Diamonds Are Forever.
The action was very ridiculous, another example, Bond is running through that little library, the Russians below them have perfect shots and someone manage to not hit either Natalya or Bond. Xenia's death was over the top and ridiculous as well, so was the entire finale.
Sorry kid, but Goldeneye is nothing more than your average Bond adventure. A lot of them follow a formula, this is no exception.
Do you have anything else to add to this discussion? This is pretty much your last chance to prove your argument.
As far as Bond was concerned they were friends. Trevelyan already knew by then he had to betray Bond, but that doesn't mean he didn't act as friendly as ever. He clearly did, because Bond was devastated by his death.
So there are millions of fighter jets in London? I'm sure people were going to die, but NOT millions. That was not Trevelyan's goal, it was just a consequence he didn't care about. There's no reason the assume Trevelyan didn't develop and actual friendship with Bond.
Yeah sure, Trevelyan wants to wipe out the human race and start a new civilization. He didn't care about ruling the world like a Blofeld, he wanted revenge. It was more personal than most villains.
You need to drop the pinball machine because it's totally unrelated to the plot and characters. And you also need to point out when the villain was someone who personally betrayed Bond.
Then describe every single beat to me, beause the only thing I saw is that their demise was connected to their evil plan. Of course Xenia's death was over the top, that's how it's supposed to be in a Bond movie. It's still in the realm of realism, though, unlike Yaphet Kotto's death in LALT, for example.
GE did follow the formula, it also did some things differently, which I've already mentioned. Not sure why you hold it against this movie when there are only 2 movies that are an exception.
Funny when a baby like you thinks he can dictate the rules...
Your reason why Goldeneye did something new was because he was betrayed by his friend, well it seems you haven't established they were friends. Bond was betrayed earlier by someone he thought was his ally in For Your Eyes Only, The Living Daylights and Licence To Kill. Goldeneye just kept the trend going and didn't do anything new or revolutionary, nor did they add any new angles to the Bond franchise. The World Is Not Enough kind of it with the Elektra subplot even though it wasn't done well.
Natalya said quite clearly "real people will die", was she lying? Also the entire power supply of London just crashes, you are going to have car crashes all over the place and yes people will die.
You act like the villain having a motive is something new, it isn't at all, Dr. No's motives were clearly established so if you're trying to say that Treveylyn having a revenge motive is something new to the franchise well it seems they once again ripped off Dr. No.
It's not unrelated to the plot, if the African warlord got distracted any further by the pinball machine he never would have met with Le Chiffre and the whole movie wouldn't have happened, if anything the pinball machine is like the money in Psycho, it propels the plot forward. I have told you 3 examples where Bond was betrayed by someone who he thought was his ally.
I have already explained every single beat to you at least 3 times, go back and read. Thanks for conceding that about Xenia's death, another example of how Goldeneye is just more of the same.
You've not established anything different Goldeneye did differently. Your main premise was that it was set Post Cold War and I countered that by proving that aside from a few lines of dialogue it has little to no bearing on the plot. General Orlov very well could have used this plot in Octopussy, he could have hijacked the Goldeneye and used that to destroy the Air Force Base.
I do dictate the rules because I am the only one acting with any degree of logic
They were FRIENDS! They literally said it. Bond definitely considered him a friend, that's why he was so upset and that's what's most important, because he felt betrayed personally. An ally is not the same as a friend who turns main villain. So now that we've established they were friends, especially in the eyes of Bond, we can move on.
Yes, real people will die. Did I say they wouldn't??? But Trevelyan did not, in your words, "try to kill millions".
Villains having motives was not new, villains having personal motives was. Dr. No's motive for his evil plan was just the typical SPECTRE motive.
The Cold War was not my MAIN premise, it was one of my arguments and I already listed a bunch of things that were more than just lines. Apparently you just choose to ignore them. Yes, let's remove all of the details so that every movie is the same. I'm sure Titanic can be stripped down to a Bond movie...
You're speaking with the logic of a Trevelyan.
OK if Treveylyn was going to betray Bond then they WEREN'T friends. The only scenes we saw them together in Treveylyn was definitely going to betray him so you have no evidence there was ever a time when the opposite was true. It was also established that 00's have a very short life expectancy so that goes against your case as well.
OK he's firing the EMP over London, there are millions of people there, you saw what that thing did to Russia. You are splitting hairs here and playing semantics. His plan would have resulted in deaths, he wasn't just going to steal money.
Watch Dr. No again he very clearly had personal motives that were understandable, you really don't get these movies do you?
Sorry you have yet to establish that the Post Cold War concept you keep claiming is anything more than a few lines of dialogue, you also didn't answer my question, why couldn't this plan be General Orlov's? I see no way that Titanic could be a Bond movie, now you're just being silly.
You can be friends with someone within a week, so that means nothing. They were friends up till the moment Trevelyan decided he had no choice but to betray Bond. The evidence that they were friends is in the words they literally say in the movie. But I'm not going to have 2 separate discussions with you on this, keep it limited to one post.
No, the point is that Trevelyan isn't some psychopath who kills as many people as possible for the thrill of it. He wanted to ruin England financially and didn't care about collateral damage. His plan was still horrible, but nothing indicates that he wasn't capable of building up a friendship with someone.
Dr. No joined SPECTRE for personal reasons, but his evil plan in the movie was an order from SPECTRE. But I never claimed no other villain had personal motives, I said Trevelyan wasn't a typical villain.
I've listed a bunch of things about the post-Cold War concept and it was more than just a few lines. You're in denial.
I already said you can strip down ANY Bond movie and rehash it any way you want. The same goes for Titanic. Replace the iceberg with a device by Dr. No and you've got your Bond movie...
Also Bond goes up against someone supposed to be his equal which we already saw in The Man With The Golden Gun
shareNot exactly the same as going against a former friend and colleague.
shareBond's been betrayed before. Also I don't see anything in the film that suggests they were anything more than colleagues. I mean they had like 2 minutes of screentime before Treveylyn went away for like an hour.
shareUhm, Trevelyan calls Bond his friend several times. Their interaction in the beginning is also clearly very amicable. And Bond takes Trevelyan's death personally. M even warns him about it. And then there's the scene at the beach. Bond's clearly emotional and Natalya also refers to Trevelyan as his friend. So plenty of hints.
I'll concede the idea of betrayal by a former 00 was a good idea. The sad thing is, that's it. It's a good idea and they don't really do much with it. That's pretty much a metaphor for Brosnan's tenure in the role (it's not his fault).
shareAlso renegade Russian General like that hasn’t been done before. Also the end rips off the ending of Dr No (villain is killed by his own device, lair blows up, Bond and girl are about to have sex but are interrupted by CIA pal who has an army of marines with him).
Goldeneye brought nothing new to the table, it was the same as your average Bond film, now did it do it well? Kind of, it’s not the worst but still nowhere near the Top 10
"villain is killed by his own device, lair blows up, Bond and girl are about to have sex but are interrupted by CIA pal who has an army of marines with him"
I thought that happened in every Bond movie!😆
GoldenEye had the perfect combination of action, humour and seriousness/realism. And I love Brosnan as Bond.
Exactly, Goldeneye was just Bond going through the motions and checking off the boxes, nothing special at all about it. I totally disagree with your last statement, the action was over the top, there was no more realism than Moonraker, and the humor wasn’t funny. Brosnan was a good Bond unfortunately he didn’t get very good scripts. Dalton was the opposite, he was a bad Bond but got great scripts
shareWoah, wait a minute, Dalton was an excellent Bond!
shareHe was the best Bond.
shareI like him best after Brosnan, who's more charming and better looking.
shareI can't really rate Brosnan because I feel he never got to play the Bond he wanted to play. Moore did. Dalton did. But Brosnan didn't.
Brosnan was the most stylish Bond. He wore the best suits.
I do think his other movies did not live up to their potential, and I think they had a lot of potential. But besides some stupid oneliners his performance was pretty much flawless.
Yes, he had the best look.
Also the only two I can think of where the villain is killed by his own device are Dr. No, and all four Brosnan films. So by the time Goldeneye came out the only other one to do that was Dr. No
shareThe satellite was not exactly Trevelyan's "own device". Their deaths aren't comparable either.
shareI would've preferred Felix Leiter, but no to Hedison.
shareI agree he was bad. He kind of reminds me of a poor man´s Tom Arnold. The same actor played a villain in The Living Daylights so it seemed a bit silly to bring him back as a good guy.
shareExactly, as I said before they should have just brought Leiter back.
shareIf you have not already I would greatly recommend watching the Mystery Science Theater 3000 episodes of "Mitchell" and "Final Justice". They both star Joe don Baker (aka Jack Wade)
shareJack Wade is the only memorable and enjoyable part of this otherwise dull movie.
shareYo, Jimbo!
shareSheriff J.W. Pepper > Jack Wade
share