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 still stand by my prediction. My spider sense says that , Waltz will be cast as Blofeld.
I am staying on record with that one.
Also I think there is only one more major actor to be named. Most Bond films feature 4 core characters beyond the recurring Mi6 characters.
So far we have Waltz, Seydoux and Buatista. One more to go, most likely another Bond girl. That's the standard recipe. Two Bond girls, two villains as featured characters.
And the cast doesn't need another real recognizable name.
The cast already has enough punch with Craig, Waltz and Seydoux, not to mention Fiennes.
You're right, there are worse things than going back to Fleming. The franchise is proof enough of this. I guess I'm just less inclined for them to pilfer Fleming specifics, because I feel like they're getting more a handle on how to balance the cinematic with the literary, something they'd moved away from significantly. If I were to go to Hitchcock for inspiration with a screenplay, I wouldn't pilfer a scenario wholesale, but I might be inspired by its structure and atmosphere. Going back to Fleming doesn't necessarily mean using actual content to me.
I will not be as daring as Timmer in my predictions, but I would say that there is a fair chance that Blofeld will reappear in the future, or at least a crypto-Blofeld. And it may be confirmation bias, but Waltz does share some characteristics with Blofeld (a malleable face, about the same age, he is also non British). From what we know of the character he will play, it does sound like it could be Blofeld. And it is true that they have been reintroducing in SF old characters. And out of three, two of them were revealed at the end. Alongside with M's old office. So if Waltz end up being revealed as Blofeld, I will not be surprised.
Aside from Moneypenny. Q and Mallory don't really count as "old" characters as they are actually new characters with the titles of old characters. Ben's Q isn't a reboot of Desmond's Q. He's a new character who share's the title of Q. Same goes for Mallory. He's not the same character Bernard Lee played. He's a new character who share's the title of M.
Lee as Miles Messervy M
i think that has more to do with theme of the story of Skyfall, than it was reinventing Miles Messervy... it was a call back to something old, something safe, something familiar - and that maybe (as Moneypenny put it) "The old ways still work best."
lets not also forget, that Robert Brown's M had the same exact look to his office.
but seeing as how EON wants to use the most out these actors in these roles nowadays, i highly doubt we'll see a return to the old familiar format of M and Moneypenny only appearing at the beginning and end of the films.... which i don't care if they have larger roles - i just don't want stories to have to revolve around them... if they have M checking in with Bond like in CR or QOS (sans the trust crap).. i am cool with it..... in terms of Moneypenny, i know they want to get more mileage out of her character - but at the end of SF, they already set her up for her desk job by her admitting "field work isn't for everyone." - by having her return to active field work to assist Bond completely contradicts the end of that film.... if they want to have her pop up, and give Bond info while he's out in the field, or maybe if they show her being more active from the confines of the MI6 HQ - fine i guess... i would just hope they don't fall into the trap of "Well, we have this actress, and we don't want to waste her in only 1 minute of the film."...... if that was the case, then they should've cast a complete unknown for that job.
I've posted a lot of my arguments in this topic. And I love discussing with everyone in here. Obviously there are people who support the idea of bringing back Blofeld and S.P.E.C.T.R.E, but perhaps even more Bond fans don't like that idea.
I will now try to post less in this topic. Or perhaps a good idea to close it? I've seen the topics I create, create a lot of division. And we know every one's opinions about this subject by now :-).
i wouldn't close... but maybe a slight renaming?
so instead of:
BOND 24: So who's going to play Ernst in future Bond installments?
maybe switching it to...
Who could play Blofeld in future Bond installments?
by removing the Bond 24 from the title of the thread, you immediately disassociate from the next film by leaving it more open and vague to other future Bond films... this makes the topic seem less like "It's happening" to more of a "if it does happen" .... i just think there would be less friction if the topic and subject were broached that way, instead of immediately putting him in the next film like it's confirmed to be happening..
i dont know, just a suggestion....
The new M is not Messervy in name, but there's all these throwbacks at the old days, as Timmer said. And Q is a very different character, but they still wanted a new Q. So why not a new nemesis? Which could be revamped old one. It's not like nostalgia was no part of SF.
But it was probably the most trite part of it. This nostalgia thing has to be eschewed in favour of genuine risk taking, much like CR did.
Regards bringing back Q and MP, I don't really feel like they're comparable. They were staples of the franchise until CR. You expected them as much as you'd expect a GB or a title sequence. Not so with Blofeld. After all, Tanner has been in as many films as Blofeld.
ugh.......... i'm not going to sucked into another one sided argument over this issue - i am not going to get myself worked up over something i have no control over... because if they intend to use him - terrific - it's not going to make me not want to see the new film, and it's no skin off my hide, i just hope it's a good film at the end of the day... but i've more than explained my reasoning as to why i would rather them just let Blofeld stay in the past....... this subject is a dead horse.. i'm not going to convince you that he isn't necessary.. and no matter how hard you try, your never going to convince me that he is... so agree to disagree or whatever.... but i am washing my hands of this subject..
Tanner never had the importance of Blofeld though. And they seem to want to show more of him in the franchise. Which I'm glad, he was a neglected character in the movies. As for Blofeld, he was in three novels only. But it is already more than Moriarty ever was in Holmes canon.
I'm not saying Blofeld is,essential to Bond. Heck, I'd settle for a crypto Blofeld, or even another nemesis entirely. But I do think Blofeld as written in the source material has his place and relevance in Bond.
That's not my point. Blofeld was an important adversary for a period, but you don't expect him to be in a film, where you would with MP and Q. I don't think resurrecting characters that have been a ubiquitous component of the franchise for fifty years is comparable to resurrecting one who appeared over the course of a decade, forty years ago.
This is just lazy, though. I'm not bothered about the comforting, safety net of nostalgia and I'm absolutely certain it will undo the franchise again if they persist with it.
I liked the old office also, but it's a bit like going back to an ex. I understand people feel comforted by what they know, but I think the formula of Bond gives a certain sense of that without having to roll out specific references to the past. They can invent within the framework of the film. I'd much rather have the Gunbarrel back at the start, it's more important than resurrecting any character, vehicle, location etc.
I'm not suggesting the GB is more important than 'characters', that would be borderline insane. I was suggesting that if we're looking to reintroduce elements of the franchise, restoring it to its rightful place at the start of the movies would top my list above resurrecting specific characters, vehicles etc. Having Blofeld in the movie might be fantastic, but might wholly miss the mark, having the GB just restores a necessary order and can only add to the overall joy of sitting down to watch a Bond movie. After that I'd happily take things I haven't seen before, over things I have, or versions of them.
So, if we stay on topic a bit......what needs to be done, according to an experienced movie professional like you, to make Blofeld and S.P.E.C.T.R.E. in future Bond films "work" perfectly?
I mean, let's say if the producers already made up their minds and Blofeld/S.P.E.C.T.R.E. are indeed in a future Bond film, what would you do, writing-wise, to hit the mark....in such a way that this new Blofeld is a fantastic achievement...
Shannon is far too young now. Winstone has the perfect body frame and almost perfect face for a TB Blofeld. He would need minimal makeup. My only reservation: he may be too British.