The What if NTTD is the last EON produced Bond film? page 62

15758596062

Comments

  • Posts: 1,998
    Waltz could have been a charming Blofeld or a fearful, villainous Blofeld. He chose neither. The script was not the problem.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,306
    I think Waltz himself is quoted as saying he didn't get a handle on the character.

    Which is interesting. Without good direction, an actor can sometimes make a s*** script work. The example I always give is Ewan McGregor in the Star Wars prequels. The counter-example is Natalie Portman in the Star Wars prequels.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited October 24 Posts: 4,521
    Waltz was cast also cast because of Austria / German background. Gary Oldman can't have played Blofeld because (hidden) story / Symbol is set up. Example both QOS and Spectre playing in Austria.

    Gary Oldman mabey only shared playing expression in his face / voice with Waltz, i not really liked him as Serius Black in the Harry Potter franchise. I switched role of Serius with Remus Lupos or earlier see him playing ''The Rat''. Back then when 3th novel was released we did not know David Thewlis chacter Remus going to date younger girl.
  • edited October 24 Posts: 4,170
    I genuinely don’t know what that could have looked like. Oldman tends to go big with some of his villains, and I think Waltz’s Blofeld was missing a bit of much needed madness in the performance. Then again he can also be really understated when he needs to be.

    Still would have involved the subplot about him and Bond knowing each other as kids, so not sure how much better it would have been in practice for a lot of us.
  • edited October 24 Posts: 15,125
    Really difficult one for me to imagine. I love Gary Oldman, but overall found him uneven as a villain. He's great when he plays thuggish/maniac badguys, like in Leon. But I found him utterly unconvincing as Dracula (mostly due to the poor writing, however). Blofeld is a foreign Eastern European villain, or at least continental. I think Oldman plays better English or Americans. I guess we might have had a very British Blofeld: his accent, his demeanor, etc.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,306
    I think someone from the continent would have been better. I have no idea who. Savalas was the closest they've gotten in overall look, despite his accent. The others are all rather pathetic.
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Being chauffeured by Tibbett
    edited October 30 Posts: 686
    It would be revealed that Blofeld is Bond's godfather (instead of his half-brother).
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,638
    It would be revealed that Blofeld is Bond's godfather (instead of his half-brother).

    Now that you say godfather, I’m picturing Gary Oldman doing either a Vito or Michael Corleone impression. Which to a degree should be how Blofeld acts, business wise.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,553
    Gary would have been characteristically amazing, I'm sure, but his performances do tend to be on the over the top side, IMO, and Blofeld needs to be grounded, again, IMO. Waltz too plays eccentric characters, but his performance here worked for me.
    The problem, as I think is well known, was not with the actor/acting but the writing. I would have done much differently with Blofeld in the Craig era, especially in NTTD. But replacing Waltz wouldn't have been high on my list of changes.
  • Posts: 15,125
    Gary would have been characteristically amazing, I'm sure, but his performances do tend to be on the over the top side, IMO, and Blofeld needs to be grounded, again, IMO. Waltz too plays eccentric characters, but his performance here worked for me.
    The problem, as I think is well known, was not with the actor/acting but the writing. I would have done much differently with Blofeld in the Craig era, especially in NTTD. But replacing Waltz wouldn't have been high on my list of changes.

    Agreed.

    And I'll add that Oldman playing a foreign villain might have come off as fake. His accent in Coppola's pseudo Drac was laughable.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    edited October 31 Posts: 5,436
    Good stuff about Gary Oldman playing Blofeld. It definitely would have impacted the film and the character.

    Lets dive into something that has been whispered about.

    Barbara and Michael are getting up there in age. Some think Michael is now more a figure head than an active part of the films. Barbara seems intent on other projects and is giving the appearance that Bond films or even a new adventure isn't a top creative priority for her. Some are mentioning that family businesses usually fold up after two generations. There appears to be no heir apparent to the family business.

    What if NTTD is the last EON produced Bond film?

    What would happen to the franchise if Barbara and family cash out and sell the family business to Amazon? Would this bring us fans satisfaction and happiness? Or is Bond an EON thing and no other creative talents could bring the adventures to life?

    What effect would a studio owning and controlling the Bond universe have on the series as a whole?
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,818
    I expect dark days for any departure from EON.

    It would trigger the end of the franchise, however excitingly well-introduced a first non-EON film was. Departure from the Bond character and Fleming, beyond measure of current criticisms. And reconsideration of the Craig Bond era and films prior.

    So the death of him or worse than. My positive outlook.
  • Posts: 1,998
    I doubt much will change.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,588
    We'd still get Bond films of varying quality, but eventually, oversaturation would kill it.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,818
    I should add, Bond would return at some later date. In some new form in the best case.

    And further diminish in ways not imaged.
  • Posts: 12,474
    Hmmm. Hard to really say for sure. I would say I’m in favor though if these long gaps persist and there is a refusal to shake up the writing department. These are solvable problems though once a new era begins, and hopefully exciting new blood is hired. P&W were far from all bad, but this franchise really needs new writing. The themes started to get repetitive and tired in the Craig era, and there was a tad too much melodrama at times going back to TWINE.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,638
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Hmmm. Hard to really say for sure. I would say I’m in favor though if these long gaps persist and there is a refusal to shake up the writing department. These are solvable problems though once a new era begins, and hopefully exciting new blood is hired. P&W were far from all bad, but this franchise really needs new writing. The themes started to get repetitive and tired in the Craig era, and there was a tad too much melodrama at times going back to TWINE.

    Yes, I agree with you. The writing needs to change. How many times can Bond resign or get suspended or get fired from MI6? Or an M who is not what they seem? Or poor decisions come back to haunt them, and Bond has to go through a sometimes too personal of a story. Like Richard Maibaum, I’m thankful for Purvis and Wade writing. They are great ideas men. Truly, not much was probably their fault.They arguably made SP better. But too many of story ideas that seem to have started with them need to go.

    As for Michael G Wilson, he looks and sounds so frail now. I think if he’s still alive for the next movie, he’ll probably do what Cubby did on GE. Oversee, but let Barbara and probably one of his sons call the shots. Next to Cubby and Harry, he is one of the most important people in the Bond media world. But I think it’s time that he retired and watched a Bond movie for enjoyment. Just so he could be surprised. Barbara definitely will stay on. She honors her father’s legacy. She’s a better long time producer for one franchise than many others are for several (cough, Kathleen Kennedy and her great connections with directors, cough). She will be around for Bond, and I support that. She may show favoritism, but she does have the best interest for Bond at heart.

    Maybe Gregg and David Wilson are going to be promoted sooner than we think. Overall, I know cinematic Bond isn’t dead. James Bond will return. For now, it’s just fun to speculate.
  • Posts: 4,170
    Depends on who gets the franchise I suppose, but I suspect in most cases it’d be a Star Wars situation. One relatively successful film which plays on superficial nostalgia followed by diminishing returns and then an over saturation of material (stupid stuff such as a Felix Leiter spin off show or something).

    That and I can’t see alternative producers weathering a lot of the stuff that’s been thrown at EON.
  • Posts: 15,125
    007HallY wrote: »
    Depends on who gets the franchise I suppose, but I suspect in most cases it’d be a Star Wars situation. One relatively successful film which plays on superficial nostalgia followed by diminishing returns and then an over saturation of material (stupid stuff such as a Felix Leiter spin off show or something).

    That and I can’t see alternative producers weathering a lot of the stuff that’s been thrown at EON.

    That's what I would fear. And a heavy reliance of iconic but superficial elements of the Bond franchise. Imagine a more serious, action orientated Austin Powers.
  • Posts: 1,369
    Ludovico wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Depends on who gets the franchise I suppose, but I suspect in most cases it’d be a Star Wars situation. One relatively successful film which plays on superficial nostalgia followed by diminishing returns and then an over saturation of material (stupid stuff such as a Felix Leiter spin off show or something).

    That and I can’t see alternative producers weathering a lot of the stuff that’s been thrown at EON.

    That's what I would fear. And a heavy reliance of iconic but superficial elements of the Bond franchise. Imagine a more serious, action orientated Austin Powers.

    Like the Brosnan era?
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,592
    I think there would be severe limits if Amazon completely took over. Possibly only being allowed to make feature films and no Amazon prime based shows. However, I do enjoy what they put out. Bosch, Fallout, Reacher, Jack Ryan etc are all shows that I highly enjoy
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 1,103
    I think there would be severe limits if Amazon completely took over. Possibly only being allowed to make feature films and no Amazon prime based shows. However, I do enjoy what they put out. Bosch, Fallout, Reacher, Jack Ryan etc are all shows that I highly enjoy

    True, but let's not forget the backlash they got for The Rings of Power, which is based on another literary work.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,592
    I think there would be severe limits if Amazon completely took over. Possibly only being allowed to make feature films and no Amazon prime based shows. However, I do enjoy what they put out. Bosch, Fallout, Reacher, Jack Ryan etc are all shows that I highly enjoy

    True, but let's not forget the backlash they got for The Rings of Power, which is based on another literary work.

    Never saw it or any LOTR films unless it was midnight and needed a sedative
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,306
    I think there would be severe limits if Amazon completely took over. Possibly only being allowed to make feature films and no Amazon prime based shows. However, I do enjoy what they put out. Bosch, Fallout, Reacher, Jack Ryan etc are all shows that I highly enjoy

    True, but let's not forget the backlash they got for The Rings of Power, which is based on another literary work.

    Never saw it or any LOTR films unless it was midnight and needed a sedative

    I thought I was the only one.

    I don't think Amazon cares about backlash. They rule the world.
  • Posts: 15,125
    Ludovico wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Depends on who gets the franchise I suppose, but I suspect in most cases it’d be a Star Wars situation. One relatively successful film which plays on superficial nostalgia followed by diminishing returns and then an over saturation of material (stupid stuff such as a Felix Leiter spin off show or something).

    That and I can’t see alternative producers weathering a lot of the stuff that’s been thrown at EON.

    That's what I would fear. And a heavy reliance of iconic but superficial elements of the Bond franchise. Imagine a more serious, action orientated Austin Powers.

    Like the Brosnan era?

    Without any remnant of soul.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,187
    Two things: 1) a non-EON Bond wouldn't feel like Bond because certain signature and iconic elements of the Bonds belong to EON, and 2) films, spin-offs, TV series, and too much of everything, basically the same curse that weighs down hard on Star Wars these days.
  • Posts: 16,170
    I do think it's possible NTTD is the last Eon Bond film. If Barbara and MIchael were to sell to Amazon, I suppose there's a greater chance the franchise would go to streaming like that Beverly Hills Cop movie. I rarely watch straight to streaming content myself. For a new Bond I might, though. But to me streaming is the modern version of direct to video.

    I really don't feel like Barbara and Michael would sell Bond, though. They're very protective of Bond. Why let somebody else come in and screw it up?

    Barbara and Michael could just retire. I think enough time would pass that Bond becomes a beloved memory to the general public with a 59 year catalogue of films to enjoy.

    When the novels become public domain, someone could come along and do their version of CASINO ROYALE, whether it be released cinematically or made for streaming. Sure it wouldn't have the Bond theme, titles, gunbarrel, etc, but I doubt that would bother the general public as long as it's solid and entertaining.

  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Posts: 4,521
    This is the end
    Hold your breath and count to ten
    Feel the Earth move and then
    Hear my heart burst again
    For this is the end
    I've drowned and dreamt this moment
    So overdue, I owe them
    Swept away, I'm stolen
    Let the sky fall
    When it crumbles
    We will stand tall
    Face it all together
    Let the sky fall
    When it crumbles
    We will stand tall
    Face it all together
    At Skyfall
    At Skyfall
  • Posts: 4,170
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I do think it's possible NTTD is the last Eon Bond film. If Barbara and MIchael were to sell to Amazon, I suppose there's a greater chance the franchise would go to streaming like that Beverly Hills Cop movie. I rarely watch straight to streaming content myself. For a new Bond I might, though. But to me streaming is the modern version of direct to video.

    I really don't feel like Barbara and Michael would sell Bond, though. They're very protective of Bond. Why let somebody else come in and screw it up?

    Barbara and Michael could just retire. I think enough time would pass that Bond becomes a beloved memory to the general public with a 59 year catalogue of films to enjoy.

    When the novels become public domain, someone could come along and do their version of CASINO ROYALE, whether it be released cinematically or made for streaming. Sure it wouldn't have the Bond theme, titles, gunbarrel, etc, but I doubt that would bother the general public as long as it's solid and entertaining.

    Thing is they are in the public domain in Canada and Japan. I think if it were going to happen it would have been attempted by now (the most we’ve gotten is an all female Casino Royale musical, which doesn’t clash with the films and is a nice Bond oddity. That and I guess a bunch of fan fiction being sold through Canada).
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited November 2 Posts: 16,428
    My hazy understanding of copyright and trademark means I think that although CR may go into public domain, Eon/MGM’s indefinite trademark on James Bond 007 means that if anyone makes a version of CR which could be confused for being the work of the trademark holders (ie Eon) then they could be open to being sued. That’s pretty much the situation around early Mickey Mouse now he’s gone public domain: if you do anything vaguely Disneyish with him then they’ll come down on you as the trademark holders.
    And as Eon’s Bond films have varied in style so widely over the course of the series, that only really leaves room for wildly different interpretations like all-female musicals or zombie versions. I’m happy to be corrected, but I don’t think we’ll ever get non-Eon Bond films which are in the style of the films we’ve become used to, at least not until Danjaq/MGM give up their trademark on 007, and why would they.
Sign In or Register to comment.