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
Bringing back SPECTRE and Blofeld to begin with was a lazy idea. While it does an admirable job of tying together the entire Craig era, and retconning the Quantum organization from the first two Craig era films, the basic idea of what the film is doing is resurrecting elements that the series hasn't used in over forty years and bringing them into the present day. Given the legal issues that have surrounded the SPECTRE organization throughout its history, one can't blame the powers that be for wanting to use it once they managed to get a hold of it though one can fault them for using it when it really wasn't necessary. The step-brother thing doesn't bug me that much though, yet again, did it really need to be Blofeld?
timdalton007
Define "admirable."
I prefer Quantum to Spectre if im honest.
Spectre in SP was actually weaker than Quantum...all those operators standing up when Blofeld closed his tablet ..where were they when needed ??
The windsurfing in DAD, in the same way as the Bondola scene in MR, is certainly cringe-worthy. However, they are not an essential part of their respective movies.
Spectre is about the Spectre reveal. It also pisses all over the heritage of a Fleming novel. That makes it worse in my opinion.
I'd say McClory wouldn't have been dense and trite enough to have a childhood connection between Bond and Blofeld.
In addition, comparing the CGI windsurf scene to the Blofeld reveal, the CGI crap is only a few seconds running time whereas that torture/reveal scene goes on forever.
There is, however, a way out for EON in regards to the Spectre/Oberhauser reveal that may not be 100% pleasant, but at least it would make sense.
Remember that on the train, when Madeleine asks Bond why he's chosen the life he has, he says, "I'm not sure I ever really had a choice."
This isn't a throwaway line. It's an extremely important, revealing thing for him to say. Bear with me:
Lets' say that Hannes Oberhauser was a criminal mastermind and the first head of Spectre, back in the 50s and 60s. The Bonds were old family friends, unaware of his criminal ties. As we now know, young James was taken in by Oberhauser and then adopted by a new family... but perhaps this second adoption arrangement was set up by MI6. Young James was viewed as a key military and intelligence recruit because of his ties to Oberhauser. But then he died, as did Franz, and the need to use Bond this way was no longer thought necessary. (Think of this as a "The Departed" type scenario.) All James knew/knows is that he was recruited and trained very early on. To what end? Well, maybe that's what he'll learn in Bond 25.
I know. Sounds ridiculous. But I think it's EON's only way out of this mess: the Bond-Blofeld connection was not exactly by chance.
Very interesting. While I'd prefer if they kept away from the personal stuff, should they choose to go down this route, your theory would be the direction I'd like them to take.
No. Please get rid of all the emotional objectives and personal childhood connections between Bond and other characters.
I agree you could have made it a bit better if they had shown us something from the childhood, some backflashs or leaps in time as it was done in "Departed". Maybe I would have been more interested in the relationship between the two characters.
But even then, it would still be a mess because SP is not a standalone film but part of a franchise of unique villain characters. A personal relationship is effective once or twice but after that it becomes tiresome and completely unbelievable. Hence the emotions seem forced. It is as if Bond would fall in love in all his films. It is not believable.
The Blofeld reveal in YOLT is about as garbage as it gets, a beyond sub-par meeting between Bond and the head of SPECTRE that failed to meet every standard set by the previous movies as there was a structured lead-up to that moment in the volcano. Sean and Donald's scenes together amount to little beyond Blofeld pointing a gun at Bond and Bond doing nothing about it, as if he's begging to be shot. No tension, no drama, nothing. At least in SP both Daniel and Christoph play their roles with more of an essence and agency than their 67 incarnations.
As for plot lines that smash the narrative to pieces, we are always so quick to simply accept that Blofeld doesn't recognize James Bond when the man comes to his Piz Gloria facility with literally no disguise on whatsoever in OHMSS. This is one of the most illogical happenings in the Bond series, something that would make the film a laughing stock in this day and age (imagine if in the next film Christoph's Blofeld doesn't recognize Dan's Bond for over an hour of screen time?), yet because it's a 60s movie it gets a pass. There's a large part of this that must also be down to the ultimate blinder of good sense, nostalgia.
Following OHMSS things could have gotten even worse. In DAF Goldfinger's twin would've come back to get at Bond for killing his brother? Come on, now. Adding in all the obscene things that actually did happen in the 70s and beyond as well, from the horrid comedy and one-liners to the overall campiness of the era that made a mockery of what Bond used to be (earnest spy thrillers) and you've got more eyesores than an optometrist's office.
My point being that it's been far, far worse, not only from a technical standpoint but also a narrative standpoint. The classic films all have a special place in all of our hearts, but it becomes important to call them out for doing the same thing the films of today do, and accept that they were never perfect films either.
Except From Russia with Love, of course.
That's not a bad idea @TripAces and it may well be the single best way to reconcile everything after the reveal. Might also explain the Judi Dench's M defence of him throughout the earlier films as well, knowing that piece of information in the back of her mind.
timdalton007
Pierce was made to look a right prat in that scene. If I'd been him I would sued the visual effects department.
I agree with this, except the Newman bit.
Nothing.
Ever.
And second the rat speech which is the low point in the whole series.
I could feel my family and friends eyes all looking at me in total mirth.
I love the 'camp' in Bond films.
You mean in Skyfall? That was an awesome speech! I thought it was one of the highlights of Skyfall.
The Blofeld reveal however, commits a greater sin. Not one single person involved in DAD expected the public to take any of its goofy aspects serious. Sam Mendes and his team on the other hand give you the impression that their forced personal links are the most meaningful things ever to occur in the franchise.
Whereas the Craig era I was fully invested in and felt cheated with the SPECTRE reveal, it's not just a silly scene that has no real relevance to the plot, it changes how the whole Craig period is now seen.
Blohauser for me is the worst crime the series ever committed, turning Bond's most iconic adversary into a childhood spat.
yeah I agree with that, I just shrugged it away as a plot device. but the CGI for DAD was terrible. who thought 'gosh that looks GREAT!' when they were editing it for release.