Blofeld : Did you want him to escape from Bond,in the helicopter ? And what next ? (SP)

1234689

Comments

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I look at Spectre and see it as entertaining though I don't take much of what goes on in the film seriously, Blofeld usually does escape so it would have made sense. Unfortunately everything leading up to the last Blofeld scene is not particularly good, Spectre as a whole should have taken more risks considering the big return. I enjoy Spectre though it's not the film I wanted, it was a waste of a title and a waste of Blofeld return.

    You really hit on something there. The title alone had me so excited I could barely contain myself. Such potential and promise held in that word for us Bond fans.

    I remember when the title was revealed at the press reveal and I was so excited...then the movie came out 11 months later and I was and still am beyond disappointed.
  • Posts: 4,044
    I've often wondered what lies beyond disappointed.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,767
    patb wrote: »
    Re the pistol shot, I think (especially within the remit of the Craig era) that one has to draw a line between "best of the best" (in this case, the best shot), rather than "superhuman",
    taking down the chopper by hitting the rear exhaust port is a superhuman shot IMHO rather than a great shot. When the writers have to rely on Bond performing superhuman tasks, its not a good sign.
    Bond is meant to be human, not a member of The Avengers.
    I want to add, it's part of the mix that Craig Bond. Will. Not. Quit.

    So he saved the girl, escaped the explosion, gets out on the water, sees the villain, gives chase, fires on the chopper with available weapons, shifts to the PPK, keeps firing, and brings down the dragon. I mean, chopper.

    Bond film. I can rationalize the effect and the possibilities of a bullet entering the turbine exhaust from the rear and the result as seen on screen. And it's a Bond film. [It's also classic storytelling for action films and even legend, myth.]. It's wrong to apply new limitations to the Craig Bond films based on real world criteria that will never be applied to 1-20.

    Could have used an arrow or small sword. Here it was a bullet from a PPK. So I don't have any problem with it.

    960.jpg

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Bond used the force.
  • Posts: 676
    So he saved the girl, escaped the explosion, gets out on the water, sees the villain, gives chase, fires on the chopper with available weapons, shifts to the PPK, keeps firing, and brings down the dragon. I mean, chopper.
    Yes, the helicopter is the "dragon" in the story, not German Midget Brofeld.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,767
    No, that's not quite it.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,767
    Bond used the force.
    Well, I guess so, yes.

    And he got his Spidey-sense back in SKYFALL.

    aw-Bond-20121102172319991658-620x349.jpg

  • Posts: 676
    It's the latest thing from Q-Branch. It's called Spidey sense.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,277
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    It was very anti-climatic....they should have just used Blofeld's crater lair more ,put in a dinner and dialogue and then later in another scene built the tension to verbal sparring between Bond and Blofeld and then a big climactic battle,with Blofeld escaping...London didnt need to be used,Vauxhall Cross didnt need to blow up,and the MI6 Scooby Doo gang didnt need to parade around London in their 'Not a Mystery-Machine'.

    It's not rocket science,its the Bond formula that everyone loves.

    Sounds like a cross between the climaxes of Dr. No and YOLT.

    All those Morocco sets they built felt really underused. A waste of money and opportunity.
  • Posts: 15,106
    The climax in SP is inspired by the one in the novel DAF.

    Regarding the bullet thing yes it's far fetched but not impossible. Planes and helicopters have been brought down by a single bird in their rotor and sometimes a single bullet from a rifle. It's rare yes but less so than stopping your own heart willingly, driving an invisible car, or a submarine one, or even using an explosive pen.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,889
    Roadphill wrote: »
    It was probably the weakest climax of the entire series.

    Well either that or FYEO.*

    *Okay, the suspense when Bond is climbing is great but after that nothing interesting occurs and that makes up 10mins.

  • edited February 2017 Posts: 11,425
    Bond used the force.
    Well, I guess so, yes.

    And he got his Spidey-sense back in SKYFALL.

    aw-Bond-20121102172319991658-620x349.jpg

    All those who hate SP should have seen the warning signs with SF.

    SF is the most overrated Bond film in recent times, and SP one of the most unfairly criticised. Neither are masterpieces. They're probably both mid rankers with low rewatchability
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    Getafix wrote: »
    low rewatchability
    Can't say that for me - I find SF highly rewatchable.
  • Posts: 19,339
    SF works for me....it pushes the Bond ethos but it keeps level headed....
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,889
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    It was probably the weakest climax of the entire series.

    Well either that or FYEO.*

    *Okay, the suspense when Bond is climbing is great but after that nothing interesting occurs and that makes up 10mins.

    I disagree. It's one of only two where we don't have to sit through another damned explosion.

    I thought we were talking about the weakest climax, i.e. the least exciting one.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    SF and SP feel like 2 entirely different films to me, Mendes seemed to have something to prove with Skyfall but SPECTRE I think his mind wasn't on the job and was into deep, he didn't want to do that film and it shows.

    I've just ordered SPECTRE on Blu yesterday for just over £5 on Amazon market place, it's been over a year since I saw it, I'm perversely looking forward to it.

    Biggest disappointment of the series.
  • Posts: 19,339
    If you love Bond @Sharkdale then you have to take the good with the bad....SF was good...SP was bad...
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I know I've been a fan since 1977, even watched all the Pierce films at the cinema although I dislike all 4.

    The thing about SPECTRE is that I had invested in this era, a big Craig advocate. Some were wondering how Craig would fair in a Brosnan like adventure well now you know, not well.

    My frustration hasn't been more obvious than it has with this film, used to think if only with QOS but SP shows what a decent entry that was.
  • edited March 2017 Posts: 676
    A question (which I thought would be appropriate for this thread): how does the ending of Spectre make you feel emotionally? Are you relieved that Bond is out of the spy game? Are you happy he is with Madeleine?

    I ask because Spectre's ending - the stuff on the bridge - makes me feel very uneasy. The film establishes over and over and over that Bond cannot protect Madeleine. Letting Blofeld live basically seals Madeleine's fate. IMO, the ending makes Bond look like a fool and puts a portentous rain cloud over the whole film (not to mention the series' future).
  • Posts: 19,339
    I don't like the ending,unless this actually is Craig's departure,leaving the way open to a new Bond to come in.
    Emotionally I feel irritated by the whole ending,hence when I created this thread I mentioned I wanted Blofeld to get away,it would have been totally appropriate.
  • Posts: 676
    Certainly, Blofeld getting away would have been better. It would have avoided the troubling implications of Bond leaving Blofeld alive. But even then, Bond knows that staying with Madeleine is basically signing her death sentence. What a guy.
  • Posts: 4,603
    IMHO, mainstream movie fans want resolution. That has been one of the key ellements to classic, much loved movies through the years. There maybe exceptions (opening myself up) but, in general, the good guys kill the bad guys. From Terminator to Die Hard, from Shane to Alien, from Dirty Harry to....I could go on all day.
    And this is even more in focus when the key ellement of the Bond legend is the license to kill. This is what makes him exceptional. In the modern World of risk assesment, health and safely, etc , he is a man who can travel the planet and kill the bad guys (on our behalf) , he takes us back to the era of the Western, where a man could carry a gun without filling out forms etc, kill and walk away, no questions asked.
    So, as others have said, with the movie at an ending and the audience wanting, hoping and expecting resolution...Bond has THE bad guy in his sights, he changes his mind!!! (he has been trying to kill him).
    I am still in shock that this is how the writers thought it should end. I'm shrugging my shoulders right now.
  • Posts: 676
    @patb It is really strange to see Bond not kill Blofeld, the baddest of bads (although doing it in cold blood in front of a crowd would have been a bit much). You are right that we expect Bond to make those sorts of decisions, to kill his targets, because he's one of the few who can do so and get away with it. It's his job. Since when do Bond films end with the villain arrested?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,959
    You know what would've taken me by surprise, is if Bond shot him right in the head, mid-dialogue, and walked away.
  • edited March 2017 Posts: 676
    @Creasy47 Would it have taken you by surprise in a good way? When I saw Spectre for the first time in theatres, and Blofeld started crawling and Bond strolled out there with his gun... I for sure thought we were going to see basically an execution. It seemed to make sense. It was an unpleasant feeling, even if I did kinda want Bond to pull the trigger. (As I've said however, an unpleasant feeling is also created for me due to Bond not killing Blofeld! Spectre's whole ending just can't win, I guess.)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,959
    I feel like it was obvious, even way before filming, that Blofeld wasn't going to die in this, and if he did, then he'd be a "clone," something akin to what they do in DAF. There's no way they lost the rights for a few decades, just to bring the character back and kill him right off, so his arrest/escape was inevitable.

    I'd say that it would've been a good surprise had he killed him. Better than arresting him, anyway - he should've been an elusive figure for a few movies, like he was in the past.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I didn't really care if he shot him or not. That's how tuned out I was by that moment in the theatre. I just wanted to get out of there to be honest and couldn't believe what I had just witnessed.
  • Posts: 4,603
    Yes, agree, at the time, I was looking forward to a pint of Fullers and a packet of nuts, (that's not what should be in your head at the climax to a new Bond movie) its only with hindsight, you try to work out what the writers were thinking,
    just to add, we live in an era of high tech and suicide killings. We know that when the police chase a terror suspect, they rarely arrest as there are too many variables. The safest thing to do is shoot to kill. If anything, a cold execution is more warranted in this era than any other.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Warranted to kill a suspect?
  • edited March 2017 Posts: 11,425
    Shardlake wrote: »
    I know I've been a fan since 1977, even watched all the Pierce films at the cinema although I dislike all 4.

    The thing about SPECTRE is that I had invested in this era, a big Craig advocate. Some were wondering how Craig would fair in a Brosnan like adventure well now you know, not well.

    My frustration hasn't been more obvious than it has with this film, used to think if only with QOS but SP shows what a decent entry that was.

    I don't particularly see why SP is a Brosnan like adventure. It seems superior to the Brosnan films on almost every level.

    I know I'm in a minority but it was actually SF that reminded me most of the Brosnan era. I remember sitting there watching it and thinking how all the nostalgia, backward looking and nods and winks gave me this sinking feeling, like we'd gone back a decade.

    After SF, I sort of new what to expect from Mendes. I didn't go into SP with high expectations, which is probably why I enjoyed it more than most. The PTS alone lifts SP above its predecessor.
Sign In or Register to comment.