Goldeneye

Question: Is Goldeneye a reboot? From what I remember, there's no clear evidence that it is a reboot like Casino Royale, but there's also no evidence that it's in the same universe as the previous movies. Licence to Kill is, because Tracy's death is mentioned, and it's clear that Bond and Felix have been close friends for decades.

MikeH

Answer: It's definitely not meant as a reboot. While there may not be any explicit references to earlier Bond films, plenty of them lack those. It may feel like a reboot because, as the first Bond film made after the end of the USSR, it had to establish Bond's place in a post-Cold War world; hence his terse exchange with the new M (Judi Dench) early in the film about how he is a "relic", and the fact that this story has its origins in the Cold War and many of its villains are ex-Soviet officials and such. It's more a transitional film in the series than a reboot.

Revealing mistake: During the draining of the water in the dish, some shots show the water moving backwards. For instance, at a particular moment, masses of water jump up, arc toward the opening, and fall in it. The most likely reason is that, during the filming, the special effects people took a shot of a replica of the dish filling with water, then edited it the other way to show that the water was emptied from the dish. (01:42:00)

More mistakes in Goldeneye

Natalya Simonova: How can you be so cold?
James Bond: It's what keeps me alive.
Natalya Simonova: No. It's what keeps you alone.

More quotes from Goldeneye

Trivia: The "dish" in "Cuba" isn't some prop designed for the film, nor is it in Cuba. It's actually the Arecibo Observatory, an antenna in Puerto Rico designed to look into space for radio waves and other signs of intelligent life.

More trivia for Goldeneye

Question: How did Alec survive being shot at the start only to return later in the film. It's something that I can't figure out, as James saw him get shot.

Ssiscool

Chosen answer: The real answer, which I believe was explained better in the game or in special features. Regardless, I did hear, is that Ourumov wasn't aiming directly at Alec's head, but to the side and shot the ground behind him. But made it look like he shot him in the head. Alec would have felt the bullet whiz by him.

Quantom X

That makes more sense.

Ssiscool

It has been a while since I watched the movie, and my copy is a VHS... but I believe if you watch very closely you can actually see the bullet hit the ground behind him with a tile breaking. I don't remember for sure if you can, but I seem to remember they did add that little effect.

Quantom X

Answer: But what about the Russian soldier who was nervous and fired at the gas tanks, only to be shot by Ourumov? Did he fake his death too?

That's a valid point. Ourumov never reloaded.

Ssiscool

Answer: He was shot with a blank cartridge. What that means is that the casing in the gun chamber didn't contain a live bullet; instead of killing him, the gun simply gave off a realistic flash that tricked Bond into thinking Alec had been shot. As explained later in the film, Alec's death was staged between himself and Ourumov.

Cubs Fan

Wouldn't James know it was a blank round? Lack of blood for example?

Ssiscool

Ourumov shot Alec and the Russian soldier with the same gun but, only the soldier was actually killed.

But that doesn't work, because even blanks can be deadly at close range.

MrMovieBuff

More questions & answers from Goldeneye

Join the mailing list

Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.