It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I think the thematic 'meat' of the film changed from Logan's script to P&W's draft.
Eventually, SP became a very timely film for 2015 about the surveillance state, the Snowden leaks and governmental control. However, this wasn't always the intention.
It seems that initially John Logan wanted to make a film about Britain's past colonial history. In Logan's draft, Blofeld is an African warlord with a grudge against Britain going back to their colonial days. It would also be revealed that Blofeld's real name is Joseph Ki-Embu (Chiwetel Ejoifer had agreed to play the role).
Blofeld's ultimate aim was the destroy England. He planned to do this by blowing up the Houses of Parliament. The finale would have involved Blofeld arriving on the Thames in a tanker. He would then raid the House of Parliament and chastise the MPs and delegates in attendance before killing them. Bond would arrive and a huge fight would start and eventually lead to the climax at the top of Big Ben. I think the boat chase and finale on Westminster Bridge was also in play as it was one of the big sets that needed to be built and was eventually created at Pinewood using LED screens like 'The Mandalorian.' (In the final film, the bones of this sequence are still there but replaced with the abandoned MI6 building and boat 'chase')
Colonialism as a theme is a really interesting idea, giving the villain a compelling motivation with some rich thematic texture. In fact, I can see them revisiting this idea in a post-BLM world. However, in a post-2020 world, it may not work so well with a white hero saving the day from a black villain. But if they did cast an ethnic actor as Bond, it would make for some seriously rich material.
However, I can see why Mendes and Eon bailed. Colonism wasn't exactly on the news agenda in 2015 and didn't have that edgy/'ripped from the headlines' feel then. On the other hand, Snowden did. But 2015 feels like lightyears ago politically. So don't be surprised if this idea remerges. In fact, a lot of these ideas were worked into Black Panther and the international debate concerning monuments...SP could have been very prescient for 2015.
I'm not saying colonialism isn't an important subject or that I'd have a problem with a black Blofeld (before that gets misconstrued), but as presented here I don't think they work. Does he even have a 'Spectre'?
I cant really get my head around the logic of introducing a multi-film "evil organisation" in the fourth (and potentially last) film of a Bond actor's reign, especially as the Craig era had introduced (half arsed, admittedly) Quantum as the big bad organisation.
'Spectre' as an organisation should've been kept back and used as the background bad guys for Bond Actor Number 7, and been threaded throughout their films as they were for Connery's.
Could you rename the organisation in Spectre, to say Quantum, and would it drastically affect the film? No, it wouldn't. S.P.E.C.T.R.E, as portrayed in Spectre, adds nothing.
Brofeld was useless re plot and provided no additional stakes. It was not needed (its been done to death). C effectively framing the double 0 team (via Bond) could get the Home Secretary onto C's side and M is placed into a hard decision.
PS on top of building opposite embassy, Bond is shot with tranquiliser gun and, whilst asleep, henchman places Bond's hand onto his "personalised" pistol grip and shoots diplomat as he exits embassy. (therefore bullet is matched) Bond wakes alone with spent cartridge by his side and ambulances in the street. Who will believe him? The personalised pistol grip now is a liablilty as it "proves" he took the shot. Meanwhile, large amount of cash appears in Bond's bank account - has Bond turned hired killer? (getting carried away, sorry).
If we ask EON to be completely honest with themselves, they would tell us that the moment M threw the file to Bond in SF, saying 'Are you ready to get back to work?'....that was the beginning of Craig's Bond resuming standalone missions with his personal matters put behind him. I would say Mendes is the reason why Craig's Bond is still batting his personal Demons, coz Mendes felt SF wasn't a complete story and chose to continue it with SP.
Or, at the very least, they could have gone back to the TSWLM draft in which rebels stormed SPECTRE and overthrew the leaders...that could easily be accompanied by a line, "Quantum is the past. We're Spectre now."
I like it :)
I don't know if anything should be held back to be honest: if you've got something, stick it in the film you're making right now. So I can see why they decided to go for it, and I don't think using Blofeld or Spectre is a bad idea in itself. I certainly think doing the big evil meeting and crater base etc. is a better embracing of the concept than turning him an African warlord, which isn't Blofeld at all.
I don't think it's built on intrinsically bad ideas: Nine Eyes, C, Spectre... none of it is a bad groundwork. It's just that they try and graft it onto his other films (Blofeld somehow behind it all) rather than perhaps give him some pain in this film (patb's framing of Bond works here), and you have Dench's M just giving him exposition rather than a meaningful reason to act. And yes, I think there's nothing wrong with giving Bond motivation beyond being just given a mission by M.
Same here. I'd go with Nine Eyes in spite of its flaws. Especially since Ejiofor is a tad young to be bent on revenge for British colonialism! And I'll put my foot down on a black Blofeld : not keen on it at all. He's meant to be an Eastern European man (so no, not Meryl Streep either) who thinks he's got French aristocratic blood. Making him an angry African warlord bent on revenge just changes him beyond recognition. They could have used Buonaparte Ignace Gallia, who although Haitian in the source material would have made the transition a little bit better (albeit with a name like this he'd more likely come from French colonies).
I don't think that's a massive reason to not cast a black actor. They got Telly Savalas to do it in a broad New York accent! :) And in this one he seems more keen to take up his family name of Blofeld than he does de Bleuchamp.
But I agree that making him an African warlord who is actually angry about political issues of the past just makes him into someone else. The final version of him we get in Spectre is at least vaguely consistent with the original Blofeld's motivations and methods.
If they were insistent upon a revenge angle for Blofeld, they should have just gone for it and not muddied the waters with a ripped-from-the-headlines/warmed-over-Snowden plot. Something like that one Gardner book where there's a bounty on Bond's head.
Although I suspect the Nine Eyes plot is also there to give Fiennes more scenes.
Again, I need to chew that over a bit more, I'm not sure of it 100%. I guess it would make more sense for Dench M to be telling him to go after Mr White's daughter as at least she has some sort of reason to know who she is: we know Mr White was on her radar because we saw them meet. In a weird sort of way it would kind of give a good reason for Bond's affection towards Swann too.
On another level, I've always thought that rather than le Chiffre, Greene etc. turning out to have all been Spectre agents, it would have been better if they had been Spectre's enemies, who Blofeld had secretly been pulling Bond's strings to destroy for him. If you have to tie the previous films together (and I don't think you do) doesn't it make him a bit more interesting to have made him a manipulator of Bond's life for his own gain?
It might be for the Questions thread, but I always wondered if Telly Savalas was cast as Blofeld partially because Blofeld is half Greek and because Savalas played a man of Polish origins as Kojak. I think Savalas' take on Blofeld is not quite perfect, but his cultural background and his appearance makes him far closer to the novel Blofeld than Charles Gray or Donald Pleasence. Given the name, casting an Austrian actor makes at least some sense.
And yes, I agree that the Nine Eyes was somewhat consistent to Blofeld's background as described in TB.
Also, Skyfall didn't setup a sequel yet we got one anyway.
Interesting, yes. Or maybe she'd even gone to (dead)M.
Bit of a reach I think. More likely it's because he was bald (like Pleasance's Blofeld) and really good! :)
Yep, the whole epilogue of Skyfall (back in the old office) was meant to be a blank slate set up for the next film. A rejuvenated Bond, a new MI6 team, unencumbered by the past, ready to push forward onto new adventures. A classic Bond adventure.
At least that is how I interpreted it.
Perhaps there was a missed opportunity within the PTS? When your characters are in masks, you can have fun with the plot and the audience re who is who and who has met who. (the reveal of Bond in the PTS is just wasted, zero drama or impact)
A mask is, after all , a disguise, a threat, and Bond is meant to be a spy. Perhaps a masked Swann was going to be abducted by a masked bad guy and masked Bond saves her (then the reveal). "Bond" pulls away mask "James Bond" Far more intriguing re the audience wondering whats happening (whos good and who's bad?) , etc. (and more intriguing re their initial meeting/ralationship). Then much more time to build chemistry (it was dreadfully lacking)...
slow day at work..............
True, SP had elements to make it a Top Bond film....that's why it always annoys us more when we discuss it. The mask thing would have really worked....The more we discuss SP, the more we see the missed opportunities.
I do agree.
I think Nine Eyes was added as it tied into two ideas: (1) The modern surveillance-state paranoia; and (2) The theme developed in Skyfall that MI6 is outdated and redundant.
I actually like the idea. It contrasts well with M being an old bureaucrat and C being younger working in a sleek office with new toys. It also works with the decision to have the finale in the empty carcass of the old MI6 building which (much like it's ideas and values) is a ruin.
Sam Mendes speaks of the surveillance theme and it's threat to civil liberties below. He also speaks about the dynamic within MI6 and how it was important to have the character of C in order to show Britain aren't the 'good guys.'
It's also worth noting that Barbara Broccoli was planning on making an Edward Snowden biopic at Sony in 2014 before being beaten by Oliver Stone. So Eon clearly thought it was a great idea for a film.
I do agree though that Joseph Ki-Embu just isn't Blofeld. Even though the whole Oberhauser angle was botched in the final film, the conception of the character is still clearly associated with the character of Blofeld. It still feels like that character, albeit reinvented.
That's not to say a black actor could not play Blofeld. I think that's more than feasible, especially if someone as talented as Chiwetel Ejoifer was available.
But I think Joseph Ki-Embu, an African Warlord with a grudge against England, sounds like his own character. In fact, he sounds like a really good character! I can imagine Ejoifer playing the role in a future Bond film. Get Barry Jenkins to direct and Sope Dirisu as Bond and you're off!
The same thing could be said for the end of QoS. But Mendes simply couldn't help himself, in either film.
I think Logan's initial concept was for it to be a masked Carnivale, in Venice. Then it got moved to Mexico City, and changed to The Day of the Dead, where they now have an actual Day of the Dead celebration.
That's the cultural impact of even a bad Bond film.
Yeah there's something there, but the motivation sounds a bit wishy-washy. To be honest a lot of these films struggle finding good motivation for their villains: all of the recent Mission Impossible films have had villains who want to blow up the world because it's over-populated and needs a bit of thinning out, which is pretty vague, and Bond hasn't fared much better. So from that point of the view the 'Bro-feld' thing at least attempts to give some personal motivation to try and drive the film beyond the slightly dull surveillance aspect, even if it is a bad idea. So I don't mind these 'personal' things at all: the villain plots are usually so vague as to be worth drawing our attention away from.
I kind of wish they'd look to Casino Royale and realise you maybe don't need someone who wants to destroy the world, you just need someone trying to make money or even just get out of a situation. Skyfall's plot is good: an old betrayed agent turns against M - that works. Nice and simple and it's dramatic.
If they wanted to make Blofeld's resentment of Bond personal then surely they'd already done it by making Bond responsible for defeating all of his previous plans in the preceding movies? Not that his dad taught Bond how to ski. Or if you wanted one on an actual personal level you've got C who works in the same building: you could find a personal beef with Bond there, I'm sure, and keep Blofeld as a bit more removed and distant.
Exactly @Mallory, and they still could have done all of that while bringing back SPECTRE.
He was good, but I never thought he was that good to be honest. In any case, that he was of Greek origins seems a heck of a coincidence to me. And he does look like the novel Blofeld albeit ironically not from OHMSS.