Lifted from the headlines - Elliot Carver in Tomorrow Never Dies

I've been thinking a lot recently about Elliot Carver as the villain of the piece in Tomorrow Never Dies (1997). It's interesting to note that the plot was inspired by media moguls like William Randolph Hearst, Robert Maxwell (same suicide cover off yacht used by M to explain Carver's death) and Rupert Murdoch (of phone-hacking 2011 scandal fame). It is a fact that Hearst did say to his journalists "You provide the pictures, I'll provide the war". He is credited with partly instigating the 1898 Spanish-American War through his media empire as the world's foremost media mogul at the time. Benson's novelisation has lots of juicy detail on Carver's background and on Lord Roverman, his father who was also a media mogul.

What are our thoughts on the role of the real-world presentation of media moguls in Tomorrow Never Dies, on how the plot of the film is literally lifted out of the newspaper headlines and News 24 culture of the late 1990s? Is it a satire or grimly close to reality - Fox News, Sky News right-wing commentary etc., The Sun, The Times etc. Political worldview through The Sun - famous politcal headlines like 'Up Yours, Delors', 'It was The Sun wot won it' (John Major's shock election win in 1992 after backing from The Sun) and 'Brown's Lost It' (2009) - meaning The Sun's support of New Labour).

Is starting a war for increased TV/satelllite/radio/newspapers and magazines really credible or does it smack of a parody/satire/a step too far. I remember reading in an early magazine piece on Tomorrow Never Diesthat Carver had seen how the ratings of his media empire had vastly increased during the 1991 Gulf War (this probably comes from Benson's novelisation) and he associated war/conflict with increased audience/ratings. Even Bond questions the sense of starting a war between Britain and China (presumably World War III) for ratings - shades of Karl Stromberg in TSWLM creating his own underwater world - merely (as he puts it) accelerating the process of the decadence and decline of civilisation and of Ernst Stavro Blofeld in YOLT - both of which are massive influences on this film, mind.

So, what are your thoughts on Elliot Carver, Tomorrow Never Dies and media moguls in the world of James Bond. I think it works well, but it could easily have been preposterous if it had went the other way.

See this interesting 1998 article by Fraser Engerman over on HMSS for more details:

http://www.hmss.com/films/carver/

It seems that the bugging/phone-hacking/celebrity privacy scandal of Summer 2011 has added a new topicality to this (almost) 15 year old film. As a final note, I think that Tomorrow Never Lies would have been a much better title, but it was apparently missread by a staff member in a fax at EON and was never fixed...shame.

Also, I have read on the site that Harmsway was originally meant to have been the villain's name and the handover of Hong Kong back to Red China was originally meant to have been the plot - any further details on this - books or articles where one can find out more on this? This is all new to me. Would love to know more about the fascinating early draft of Tomorrow Never Dies if any members here would care to throw their hats into the ring.

There is an early draft of TND floating around on the net somewhere... Hamburg was changed from Venice, and it originally involved the Carnivale - which I think would be a fantastic backdrop to a Bond film, akin to the Junkanoo.

But I've always found Carver very underrated, and really like how the film questions how much power the media has, because ultimately, it is the connection between the public and what's happening in the world.

While the character of Carver was interesting, the film ultimately didn't utilize the unlimited possibilities of a villainous media baron. If he can topple governments with a single broadcast, what prevents him from turning an entire nation or the world against Bond and MI6? He's a villain that, in theory, doesn't need to do anything himself to cause chaos, just tilt the worlds perspective in the right direction instead. We've seen today that a media scandal can compromise security organizations through either their agents or their senior staff.

Alas, instead we got a standard Bond villain plot and only a passing mention at Carver manipulating the world through his empire.

Any further interest? - the Leveson Inquiry into Press Standards has made this film very relevant again after some 15 years, that and the 2011 phone-hacking scandal that brought the News of the World down with it!

I've always considered Carver to be a filmic version of Ted Turner. He employes a Berkeley radical (Gupta), and get a load of the speech with which he launches Carver Media Group:

I want to assure my viewers that I, Elliot Carver, have spoken with the Prime Minister in London and the Chairman in Beijing and offered my services on an impartial. . .

With its printing presses that run 24 hours a day and its satellite facilities linking every last person. . .

Why did I do it you ask? The answer is simple. Power. The power to illuminate the far corners of the globe not for higher profits but for higher understanding between the people of this great planet.

And what do I get in return? Worldwide domination, complete, utter, worldwide domination, but not over governments or ideologies, or tyranny and isolation. . .

But tonight I give to you my Declaration of Principles, a promise to the men and women of this planet, my brothers and sisters whom I so humbly serve.

I promise to report the news without fear or failure. I promise to be a force for good in this world, fighting injustice, crushing intolerance, battling inhumanity, striking a blow for freedom at every turn. Yes, that is the goal of the Carver Media Group and empire.

That is typically pious Leftist cant that could have been written for T. Turner by his doting wife Jane Fonda.

Tubes wrote:

 If he can topple governments with a single broadcast, what prevents him from turning an entire nation or the world against Bond and MI6?  He's a villain that, in theory, doesn't need to do anything himself to cause chaos, just tilt the worlds perspective in the right direction instead.  

Old thread, but, wouldn't it seem too obvious for only Carver's paper to start reporting on things with an anti-MI6 angle without something to actually report on, and further, why would the rest of the world care? As you know, in the film, there was an international incident, and with the encoder confusing both the British and the Chinese of the whereabouts of the ship, almost starts a war in order to sell newspapers - and people flock to TOMORROW in order to read it first. Perhaps in the film, there could have been some further exploration into how Carver could manipulate the world against MI6 and Bond, but there is no reason for Carver to do that until after Bond starts to really change the course of Carver's plan - as it would then be an act of vengeance, and Carver's not really into that, given how he handled the Paris/Bond situation (and after so many Bond films on vengeance, it's quite refreshing!).

Thinking of this now, I imagine the direction Carver would have taken his power, had he eventually succeeded after Bond destroyed the stealth boat, is after some time (and war had already broken out), shame MI6 for Britain (and the Chinese SIS for China) for not having adequate skill or intelligence for knowing that a GPS encoder sent the ship off course and was manipulated, and how the whole thing could have been prevented if the SIS agencies were better equipped, etc.

I liked the idea of Carver, however, I don't think they did as much as they could with it and the character kind of fell flat. With that said, I still enjoy TND a lot. Is it a great film? No. But it's a pretty fun Bond film that doesn't get the credit it deserves. It's the only non-revenge Bond films we had since the 80s. It has a few comedic moments that get a bit too silly and Teri Hatcher is meh. But, overall I think it has a nice balance of serious and silly. Wai-Lin is a very solid Bond girl who gets overlooked to often.

I think, if anything, Tomorrow Never Dies was a bit ahead of its time. I think if the film was made today it would resonate a lot more in the smart phone world and all the media hacking going on.

Speaking of, has someone made a KrautElectrocutor app yet?

I think that Carver was an excellent idea for a more modern Bond villain, and honestly he isnt all that unrealistic. Starting a war for ratings is a stupid and horrible thing to do, but it would certainly give him an edge in those events as the one guy that knows exactly what is going on.

I wonder though, what his plan long term was. He had the advantage in these early events, since he was the one orchestrating them, but once his war started for real it would all be out of his control. At that point he wouldnt have any more extra influence than any other news organization.

Are "ratings" still a big thing when it comes to news? Surely the measure now is the number of clicks.

I think the point I made in another thread is that Carver's plot, if it makes any sense at all, only has relevance in a world where print and television are the only ways by which people can get news.

Always goo to see more love for TND.

Aligning himself with General Chang would be a dangerous alliance. The trade off for Carver would be exclusive broadcasting rights, but for Chang, he could use Carver as a means of manipulating future world events to benefit China's interests.

CJB wrote:

Are "ratings" still a big thing when it comes to news? Surely the measure now is the number of clicks.

I think the point I made in another thread is that Carver's plot, if it makes any sense at all, only has relevance in a world where print and television are the only ways by which people can get news.

Clicks are important, but people have caught onto clickbait. TV ratings are as important now as in the 90s. It's another medium, and cross pollination for a news outlet on TV to internet, to printed press would all lead back to Carver's company.

FieldsMan wrote:

CJB wrote:

Are "ratings" still a big thing when it comes to news? Surely the measure now is the number of clicks.

I think the point I made in another thread is that Carver's plot, if it makes any sense at all, only has relevance in a world where print and television are the only ways by which people can get news.

Clicks are important, but people have caught onto clickbait. TV ratings are as important now as in the 90s. It's another medium, and cross pollination for a news outlet on TV to internet, to printed press would all lead back to Carver's company.

Carter's goal wasnt to achieve success through normal tactics anyway. He wanted to boost viewership by creating newsworthy events, which he would naturally have first access to as the one who set those things in motion. He also brokered that sketchy deal with the Chinese general to get exclusive rights in exchange for illegal activities.

KingCobra686 wrote:

FieldsMan wrote:

CJB wrote:

Are "ratings" still a big thing when it comes to news? Surely the measure now is the number of clicks.

I think the point I made in another thread is that Carver's plot, if it makes any sense at all, only has relevance in a world where print and television are the only ways by which people can get news.

Clicks are important, but people have caught onto clickbait. TV ratings are as important now as in the 90s. It's another medium, and cross pollination for a news outlet on TV to internet, to printed press would all lead back to Carver's company.

Carter's goal wasnt to achieve success through normal tactics anyway.  He wanted to boost viewership by creating newsworthy events, which he would naturally have first access to as the one who set those things in motion.  He also brokered that sketchy deal with the Chinese general to get exclusive rights in exchange for illegal activities.

Exactly. And those illegal activities is what would create greater reach for Carver, and grant greater control to China.

Russia is tampering with GPS signals regarding the whereabouts of their ships.

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/gnss-hacking-spoofing-jamming-russians-screwing-with-gps-2019-4?r=US&IR=T

Not only has TND predicted the prominence of fake news, remote control technology in cars, smart phones (including finger print scanners) and Teri Hatcher as a desperate housewife, it has also forecast a device just like Gupta's GPS Encoder.

Let the mayhem begin.

Well, we'll know when ships disappear up the Northwest Passage and are never seen again. Nothing Russia does surprises.

Delicious.

Check to see if exclusive broadcast rights have been signed away to undisclosed parties for the next hundred years...

I'm more inclined to see if Teri Hatcher is somehow involved and needs a little pumping.