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
Do you really think I'm the guy that deliberately wants to spread half-truths? Anyway, ou are right regarding the facts. Thank you.
I'm actually glad Ejiofor is not in SF. I was not convinced about him as a villain to begin with, but with a minor role why waste good money on an expensive actor when a lesser known one can do just as well? If not better, as Ejiofor's fame may have been a distraction to his role. Andrew Scott is very capable and lesser known, both are imo brilliant assets.
Anyway, I'm also happy to learn Ejiofor was apparently never considered for a villain.
In all honesty, I usually do read carefully. Just not with the criminal SonyLeaks affair. I'll do it next time :-), as I usually do.
I read a tiny bit (it seemed very detailed so I stopped) and it appears legit to me. The notes, grammar and spelling included, are exactly as I've experienced. I can't comment any further as I don't want to read them in detail.
So much potential here for Bondian exploits... :D
Yep, I back you up re: the quality of script notes.
It is really scary though, especially when related to previous Bond films. I remember very well the terrorist attack on the MI6-building in TWINE. Many people must have thought "Aaaah, well, this can only happen in movies". At least, a terrorist attack on western soil. Well, we know what happened only two years later, 9.11.2001.
Or what about General Orlov saying in OP, with glaring, narcistic posture: "The West is decadent, and divided!" Well, look who's acting to that quote now. The famous Mr Putin.
And then off course the cyber attack on MI6 in London in SF, causing death and destruction. Well, the SonyLeaks do not cause death, but they do create havock, and obviously people need to take responsibility and need to step down. Just like "M" had to appear in front of a committee.
Sometimes it is scary how events from past Bond films become reality, in a way, in the present and future.
Now that I really think about it, is the 300 million budget THAT high? Wasn't QoS 250 million? If you look at the final result of QoS and compare it to what SPECTRE proposes which includes the salaries of the cast, locations, action set pieces and the fact that it's not going to be a bullet - short movie I think whatever issues positive or negative regarding the budget shouldn't even be an issue. What was the budget for SF? With the resourceful ways they made use of locations or at least the illusion of foreign locations Mendes did quite a decent job so with an extra 50 or so million and everything that we do know about this movie, things come off as acceptably reasonable.
Yes, that is an amazing photo. If I recall it correctly it's included in the SF shooting Bond book.
Friday, Dec 12 2014
Ed Sheeran has ruled out singing the theme to new James Bond movie Spectre, claiming that "it would sound a bit wet".
Speaking to Digital Spy and others at the BBC Music Awards, the 'Thinking Out Loud' singer said that his style of singing isn't suited to the 007 film series.
http://www.digitalspy.com/music/news/a616134/ed-sheeran-on-new-james-bond-movie-im-too-wet-to-sing-spectre-theme.html?rss
Time Magazine:
http://time.com/3618903/spectre-james-bond-movie/#3618903/spectre-james-bond-movie/
Screencrush:
http://screencrush.com/spectre-bond-and-blofeld-a-brief-history-of-007s-greatest-adversary/
Techcentral:
http://www.techcentral.co.za/new-bond-raises-spectre-of-ian-fleming/53205/
Slashfilm (includes the wunderful fan trailer that has gone viral the past days):
http://www.slashfilm.com/history-of-spectre/
The Dissolve (includes the wunderful fan trailer):
http://thedissolve.com/news/4255-get-a-lesson-in-james-bond-history-thanks-to-this-/
FirstShowing.net (includes the wunderful fan trailer):
http://www.firstshowing.net/2014/recap-the-movie-history-of-spectre-with-this-classic-007-trailer/
It's especially nice to read some of the comments that non-Bond-fans make. For instance on that Slashfilm-article:
"I haven't seen the OLD Bond Movies, just from Goldeneye forward.
Maybe we will see the rise of Blowfeld/Spectre, how he got his scar."
Truly funny :-P
Or from FirstShowing.net:
"I remember seeing this as a kid for the first time... they just dont make movies like this anymore.."
Be prepared lady :-D!
But for now......(thanks to Martin den Herder from http://www.jamesbondclub.nl/) ;-):
Mike Ryan | 2 hours ago
Rumors are flying that even though Christoph Waltz’s character is technically named Franz Oberhauser in the next James Bond installment, ‘Spectre,’ he’s actually playing Bond’s arch-nemesis, Ernst Stavro Blofeld. The now two-time Oscar winner, Waltz, is currently promoting his Golden Globe nominated turn in Tim Burton’s ‘Big Eyes.’
On Friday, I spoke to Waltz (the full interview will publish next week) and Waltz, for his part, is adamant he’s playing Franz Oberhauser. He was also very careful with the way he phrased his answer and I have no doubt that for most (or maybe all) of the film his character’s name is Franz Oberhauser. Let’s say Waltz is playing Blofeld (which makes a lot of sense), well, it’s not really up to Waltz to reveal that if the studio and filmmakers want to keep that a secret. And, to preface, Waltz was pretty open to talking about the next James Bond movie and why he wanted to be in the movie. He was just not quite as open when it came to talking about the character. I mention this because his answer is obviously short, but I don’t want to at all give the impression that Waltz was being glib—in person, he’s about as charming as they come.
Anyway, here is Waltz’s answer when I told him that people don’t believe he’s just playing a character named Franz Oberhauser.
No, That’s a fact. I can guarantee.
Has he heard the rumors?
Yeah, yeah. I have. The character is called Franz Oberhauser. F-R-A-N-Z, Oberhauser, and I don’t need to spell that.
So, that’s Waltz explanation. Next week we will have a lot more with Waltz about ‘Big Eyes,’ his place in Hollywood, hosting ‘SNL,’ and yes, why he took the role of “Franz Oberhauser” in a James Bond movie.
http://screencrush.com/christoph-waltz-bond-villain-spectre-interview/
What conspiracy theorists should note is that Waltz never confirms Oberhauser and Blofeld are different people. Maybe Oberhauser is Oberhauser, but as leader of SPECTRE, he's called Blofeld? Or maybe Waltz is a red herring altogether. As CNN reported after reading emails between Sony executives that were leaked out as part of the company's massive security breach, Blofeld is a part of "Spectre," though it was not clear if Waltz was playing the role. Waltz is not the only new castmember in the Bond film, which follows 2012's "Skyfall": Monica Bellucci, Lea Seydoux, Dave Bautista and Andrew Scott are also in the cast, so maybe one of them is playing Blofeld instead.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/12/christoph-waltz-blofeld_n_6316908.html?utm_hp_ref=entertainment&ir=Entertainment
Yeah i heard this story whilst at work today, I like Ed Sheeran but i do not think he has the right sound for Bond! Sorry Ed!
Fleming introduced both at the same time.