MGM & Producers finally settle with McClory Estate

1246789

Comments

  • Murdock wrote:
    @Revelator I'm completely fine with Moneypenny, Q and Felix because there regulars who have in appeared in more Fleming novels than Blofeld. I'm against Blofeld coming back because He's already been in six movies! (FYEO included!) His best appearances have been in three of those six. He's been exhausted. Quantum isn't fan-service because It's completely different than SPECTRE. You clearly want Blofeld back because YOU want him back. By YOUR logic we should just bring back ever villain and Reboot every Bond movie. Thanks but No thanks. Bring on "Originality" I'm sick of rebooting characters because it's popular.
    I may have liked Star Trek Into Darknes
  • Murdock wrote:
    @Revelator I'm completely fine with Moneypenny, Q and Felix because there regulars who have in appeared in more Fleming novels than Blofeld. I'm against Blofeld coming back because He's already been in six movies! (FYEO included!) His best appearances have been in three of those six. He's been exhausted. Quantum isn't fan-service because It's completely different than SPECTRE. You clearly want Blofeld back because YOU want him back. By YOUR logic we should just bring back ever villain and Reboot every Bond movie. Thanks but No thanks. Bring on "Originality" I'm sick of rebooting characters because it's popular.
    I may have liked Star Trek Into Darkness but I was still opposed to the re-use of Khan. It was a lost opportunity to do something different, but at least Peter Weller as Admiral Marcus made a great Villain as well.
    You want Blofeld back, fine write a fan-fic. But I'd preferred James Bond villains's stay current and up to date. too many movies have megalomaniacs as villains. I want something new. Silva was a breath of fresh air. He managed to be a silly but psychotic villain with an air of being Over to top without becoming another Gustav Graves. Keep Blofeld in 1962-2002 Era Bond.

    Very friendly of you referring to me. Allthough I am pretty sure you don't mean it that friendly.

    Regarding Khan, I agree. But then again, the whole movie felt like a remake of 'Star Trek II'.

    Something I hated to see. But does that mean you can't re-use the name of a character? That's bullshit. As long as it's done RIGHT, not in the Khan-way. And to di it right, Blofeld should not become another cat stroking bald headed gay.

    Look how they re-introduced characters like 'M', 'Leiter', 'Q', 'Moneypenny' and even Bond himself. I think you can bring back Blofeld, as long as they do it RIGHT. They changed 'Le Chiffre' from the novel. Originally he was fat and ugly. In the movie he was more like a counterpart of 007. As suave as 007, just bit more over the top, with Hitler haircut, bleeding eye and perfectly black Armani suit. They even went further with Bond villain Silva.....and it worked too. I wanna bet they could do something similar with a Fleming original character: Blofeld.
  • Murdock wrote:
    @Revelator I'm completely fine with Moneypenny, Q and Felix because there regulars who have in appeared in more Fleming novels than Blofeld. I'm against Blofeld coming back because He's already been in six movies! (FYEO included!) His best appearances have been in three of those six. He's been exhausted. Quantum isn't fan-service because It's completely different than SPECTRE. You clearly want Blofeld back because YOU want him back. By YOUR logic we should just bring back ever villain and Reboot every Bond movie. Thanks but No thanks. Bring on "Originality" I'm sick of rebooting characters because it's popular.
    I may have liked Star Trek Into Darkness but I was still opposed to the re-use of Khan. It was a lost opportunity to do something different, but at least Peter Weller as Admiral Marcus made a great Villain as well.
    You want Blofeld back, fine write a fan-fic. But I'd preferred James Bond villains's stay current and up to date. too many movies have megalomaniacs as villains. I want something new. Silva was a breath of fresh air. He managed to be a silly but psychotic villain with an air of being Over to top without becoming another Gustav Graves. Keep Blofeld in 1962-2002 Era Bond.

    Very friendly of you referring to me. Allthough I am pretty sure you don't mean it that friendly.

    Regarding Khan, I agree. But then again, the whole movie felt like a remake of 'Star Trek II'.

    Something I hated to see. But does that mean you can't re-use the name of a character? That's bullshit. As long as it's done RIGHT, not in the Khan-way. And to di it right, Blofeld should not become another cat stroking bald headed gay.

    Look how they re-introduced characters like 'M', 'Leiter', 'Q', 'Moneypenny' and even Bond himself. I think you can bring back Blofeld, as long as they do it RIGHT. They changed 'Le Chiffre' from the novel. Originally he was fat and ugly. In the movie he was more like a counterpart of 007. As suave as 007, just bit more over the top, with Hitler haircut, bleeding eye and perfectly black Armani suit. They even went further with Bond villain Silva.....and it worked too. I wanna bet they could do something similar with a Fleming original character: Blofeld.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited November 2013 Posts: 16,359
    I'm sorry if I came off rude or insulting. It wasn't my intention. This topic makes me frustrated I honestly don't know why. I'm going to try to make this my definitive unbiased response.

    I don't want the name Ernst Stavro Blofeld to return. I would like the way Fleming wrote him to come to life on screen yes. But I'd rather he be a new villain. The changing appearances of the character is actually a great concept. When I say I don't want Blofeld back, I'm not saying it because I don't want the Bald guy with the scar and white cat to come back. I'm saying I don't want him back because it would be a big WTF moment and mess up continuity.

    Blofeld died in the original timeline yes. So technically he can return. BUT! I don't want it to be "Ernst Stavro Blofeld".

    I'm happy EON finally had McClory's rights. Maybe this will mean the beginning of something great.

    I know half the forum hates Quantum because they were boring and are a clone of SPECTRE. But that right now is irrelevant. Quantum (Whether you like the organization or not.) still exists. They are still around. You can't just create something and build it up to this massive thing without doing something with it. Quantum needs closure.

    What we know of Quantum is this. They are a politically fueled organization. They have members from all over the world. They have the ability to influence Governmental shifts from the most baron country to America and the United Kingdom. That is a pretty big and dangerous thing. Sure what we saw of them So Far wasn't very exciting but given a second chance, they could be even bigger and better than SPECTRE. I think Quantum deserves a second chance. I'm not saying call the next Bond film Quantum of Return no. But I'm saying we have a big loose end that needs a climax.

    Back to Blofeld. The character Blofeld that Fleming wrote (Post Thunderball) Is a very cool and evil villain and should be adapted properly. But why should he be called Blofeld? Why can't EON Adapt Blofeld and make him a new character. I like the name Guntram Shatterhand. It's very gothic and mysterious. By doing this, everyone get's what they want. A proper adaptation to the Blofeld character, while making him a new and original threat. Does he have to run Quantum? No. He could have a hidden agenda much like Silva.

    I'm sorry for overreacting. I hope this explains my side of things better.
  • edited November 2013 Posts: 4,622
    IMHO opinion there are two types of Bond movies.
    First type: Those where Bond battles Blofeld and Spectre, GF or DN and then there are the rest.
    GF and DN were both one and out, but the iconic quintessential Bond super-villian, Ernst Stavro Blofeld can go on forever.
    More Blofeld, please please please. Again, Blofeld as main villain in every film would be just fine. Eon can build-up other villains as various and sundry eccentric Spectre operatives or rivals that challenge the great Ernst.
    "Keel Bond!" " Making mudpies 007?" The repartee and history between these two iconic nemeses is so much fun.
    Bond and Blofeld compliment each other. Bond exists to thwart and destroy the likes of Blofeld. Ernst revels in dodging his attempts and challenging the worthy adversary with one bombastic scheme after another.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    timmer wrote:
    IMHO opinion there are two types of Bond movies.
    First type: Those where Bond battles Blofeld and Spectre, GF or DN and then there are the rest.
    GF and DN were both one and out, but the iconic quintessential Bond super-villian, Ernst Stavro Blofeld can go on forever.
    More Blofeld, please please please. Again, Blofeld as main villain in every film would be just fine. Eon can build-up other villains as various and sundry eccentric Spectre operatives or rivals that challenge the great Ernst.
    "Keel Bond!" " Making mudpies 007?" The repartee and history between these two iconic nemeses is so much fun.
    Bond and Blofeld compliment each other. Bond exists to thwart and destroy Blofeld. Ernst revels in dodging his attempts and challenging his worthy adversary with one bombastic scheme after another.

    So your saying Blofeld should be the villain of every Bond movie?
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited November 2013 Posts: 9,117
    Murdock wrote:
    I'm saying I don't want him back because it would be a big WTF moment and mess up continuity.

    What continuity? In the Craig era every single character Fleming created bar Vesper, Le Chiffre and Mathis is theoretically up for grabs.

    I see your point. That's the trouble with this reboot stuff - it gives you such an easy way out. Don't bother writing a totally original script, just toss in a few of the familiar reference points and wrap it up in some new clothing and you're well on you're way to the bilion dollar mark.

    Look at the reaction in the cinema on opening night when the DB5 is revealed.
  • edited November 2013 Posts: 12,837
    @RC7 EXACTLY. Blofeld coming back doesn't mean SPECTRE have to, it doesn't even mean he has to be head of Quantum. There are so many different directions they could take with the character.

    @Murdock Quantum doesn't "need" closure. You and other big fans want closure. However the general public (the people that matter), couldn't give a toss about them. They weren't properly destroyed at the end of QOS. So what? What's the point in bringing back and destroying hardly anybody liked or remembers just to please a few hardcore fans, what sense would that make from EON's POV?

    And why take the Blofeld character from one of the books and then rename him? You say it's because of originality but it's not really being original is it, adapting Blofeld from the books and naming him after an alias he used. You're not using an original villain, you're not even using an original name. It's still Blofeld so why not call him as such? What would be the point in changing his name?

    The general public, even those who didn't care either way about QUANTUM, will ask eternal questions about what happened to them until they are sent packing.

    I hate to break it to you but:

    1. 95% of the general public already forgot all about Quantum about 5 minutes after they left the cinema. SF didn't address the unresolved questions about Quantum and where was the public outcry as it was powering to $1 billion?

    2. The public just go to a Bond film, as they have done for 50 years, for some action, adventure, beautiful girls, gadgets and good old fashioned entertainment. It's a matter of supreme indifference to them to have a continual story arc running through the films. If this mattered then the series would have ended after from FRWL (and counting that as a sequel to DN is a stretch given the only reference is Kronsteen's comment about the death of DN).


    The whole Quantum thing might be a massive issue to some people on here but we represent about 0.00001% of EON's target audience. The impression you get is everyone concerned realised QOS was a bit of a misstep and they are overjoyed to get back on track with SF. I don't really see why they will feel the need to unearth memories of QOS by reintroducing the lacklustre Quantum given that most of the audience has already forgotten it and doesn't really care anyway.

    This is what I've been trying to say but you've put it better than I ever could. Very well said.
  • edited November 2013 Posts: 4,410
    Here's an interesting article with quotes from the relevant parties working on Bond 24:

    http://blogs.indiewire.com/thompsononhollywood/bond-settlement-paves-the-way-for-the-return-of-blofeld

    Logan's comments have look been known but it is Mendes's comments that are the most interesting. Mendes is the main creative force behind Bond 24 ad he explicitly says that he wants to revisit villains from Bond's past in the rebooted era; Blofeld therefore seems the most ready for re-interpretation especially considering his long-standing role as Bond's arch-nemeies in the films and books.

    I say the Mendes has got to cast Daniel Day-Lewis. Though I doubt he'd do it, but if one director could convince him it would be Mendes.

    255239~Daniel-Day-Lewis-Posters.jpg

    Edit: This is even more interesting:

    http://www.the007dossier.com/007dossier/post/2013/03/30/James-Bond-Reloaded-007

    An interivew with Broccoli & Wilson promoting Skyfall in SFX magazine; read the quotes here:
    http://www.the007dossier.com/007dossier/Magazines/sfx-2012-11-nov/sfx-2012-11-nov-050-050.jpg
    http://www.the007dossier.com/007dossier/Magazines/sfx-2012-11-nov/sfx-2012-11-nov-053-053.jpg

    Clearly Wilson says that EON had the rights to Blofeld back in Oct 2012, so i'm not sure what settlement was reached this week with McClory's estate,
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,254
    Interesting thread, this.

    Firstly, I never liked McClory. Whatever his business with Fleming, he shouldn't have gone against EON productions this way. Fleming may have walked away with the story but Harry and Cubby just wanted to make films. I understand that they would have made money on elements, like SPECTRE and Blofeld, that McClory co-created but I'm fairly confident they could have come to a much better arrangement than the bitter fights in court. Plus, McClory's claims were ludicrous. He had contributed to one novel in the second half of Fleming's series - and indirectly to a few more after TB - but suddenly he wanted nothing less than a competing film franchise.

    Secondly, I'm glad SPECTRE and Blofeld are back home. I've read, with great interest, the arguments pro and contra introducing both in the Craig era. My own views in the matter are simple: I am confident that both Blofeld and SPECTRE can return to the post-SF world of Bond. Obviously the filmmakers would be smarter now than to just copy the bald, scarred Blofeld. Give us a Benedict Cumberbatch or some such actor and a good script and the new Blofeld will convince.

    As for Quantum, I'm not sure. I don't think too many people are concerned with Quantum but neither do I think that too many people would have trouble accepting Quantum's return in Bond 24. People catch up pretty quickly these days. Furthermore, a shadow organization behind Quantum or, who knows, against Quantum, might spice things up. I wouldn't immediately throw the option of a Quantum versus Spectre plot out the window. Again, it all boils down to whether or not you have a talented screen writer.

    Am I saying that we must have Blofeld and Spectre come back? No. But deep down inside, I have my weaknesses as a fanboy and here's the bloody truth: I'd love to have them back.
  • Posts: 6,396
    I'm not really bothered one way or another if Blofeld is brought back although I do agree that it is highly likely we'll see this character again considering the lengths EON have gone to secure the rights. All that matters to me is that we continue to get decent scripts.

    I agree with @TheWiz regarding Quantum. I don't think the general public A) remember them at all or B) give 2 hoots whether they return or not. All of which tells me how insipid and unmemorable an organisation they are. It was a nice idea but poorly executed in QoS.

    I always hated the idea that the organisation were only named Quantum midway through production as though it was EON's way of trying to justify the use of Quantum Of Solace as the film's title (which received a fair old amount of negative press at the time).

  • edited November 2013 Posts: 11,119
    Here's an interesting article with quotes from the relevant parties working on Bond 24:

    http://blogs.indiewire.com/thompsononhollywood/bond-settlement-paves-the-way-for-the-return-of-blofeld

    Logan's comments have look been known but it is Mendes's comments that are the most interesting. Mendes is the main creative force behind Bond 24 ad he explicitly says that he wants to revisit villains from Bond's past in the rebooted era; Blofeld therefore seems the most ready for re-interpretation especially considering his long-standing role as Bond's arch-nemeies in the films and books.

    I say the Mendes has got to cast Daniel Day-Lewis. Though I doubt he'd do it, but if one director could convince him it would be Mendes.

    255239~Daniel-Day-Lewis-Posters.jpg

    Edit: This is even more interesting:

    http://www.the007dossier.com/007dossier/post/2013/03/30/James-Bond-Reloaded-007

    An interivew with Broccoli & Wilson promoting Skyfall in SFX magazine; read the quotes here:
    http://www.the007dossier.com/007dossier/Magazines/sfx-2012-11-nov/sfx-2012-11-nov-050-050.jpg
    http://www.the007dossier.com/007dossier/Magazines/sfx-2012-11-nov/sfx-2012-11-nov-053-053.jpg

    Clearly Wilson says that EON had the rights to Blofeld back in Oct 2012, so i'm not sure what settlement was reached this week with McClory's estate,


    Concerning this link: http://www.the007dossier.com/007dossier/Magazines/sfx-2012-11-nov/sfx-2012-11-nov-050-050.jpg
    Why was this last sentence left unnoticed all this time? To summarize the facts, that every journalist should have taken into account:

    <<< Broccoli says that the filmmakers havent's abandoned the shadowy QUANTUM organisation, gameplayers behind the last two films. Broccoli: "No, I think it's still out there, but we just don't refer to it in this particular film." Tantalisingly, Wilson reveals that they have the rights to bring back Blofeld and SPECTRE, cornerstones of big-screen Bond that vanished in legal battles for long decades. Broccoli: "We believe we can use them." >>>

    And I do agree with Mr. Wilson that the old SPECTRE with their extortion methods and the cat-stroking bald headed man are a little dated. But like Wilson, I've been saying constantly that bringing back a more realistic Blofeld; a Blofeld working in today's society, would most likely work.

    Concerning the date of this article: Why was this never mentioned on the homepage of MI6-HQ? I call this news. A good journalist would even do some bakground search on this and confirms it in a news article on this website. I frequently referred to it and all I got was remarks from other fans that returning Blofeld would be "stupid". Especially in this topic: <url>http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/1760/so-who039s-going-to-play-ernst-in-bond-24-and-bond-25#Item_360</url>;

    Yes, sometimes passion gets the better of me in my posts. I have a tendency for reacting too much. And I am sorry for that. But we are all fans no? Thanks a lot for posting this @Pierce2Daniel :-)!
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359

    Quantum doesn't "need" closure. You and other big fans want closure. However the general public (the people that matter), couldn't give a toss about them. They weren't properly destroyed at the end of QOS. So what? What's the point in bringing back and destroying hardly anybody liked or remembers just to please a few hardcore fans, what sense would that make from EON's POV?

    @thelivingroyale first off you keep saying I'm this Big Quantum fanboy and I'm not. I thought Quantum (Especially Greene) was not that great. I don't appreciate that. I've been here for three years, you know who I am and what my interests in Bond films are. Don't treat me like i'm TouchMyButtons because I want Quantum to come back want and Blofeld to stay in the past.

    Hell I could have called you and whoever else want's Blofeld back Blofeld fanboys if I wanted too. But I didn't because I'm more adult than that and I'm trying to have a civil debate.
    And why take the Blofeld character from one of the books and then rename him? You say it's because of originality but it's not really being original is it, adapting Blofeld from the books and naming him after an alias he used. You're not using an original villain, you're not even using an original name. It's still Blofeld so why not call him as such? What would be the point in changing his name?

    It is being original for one, We've never had a villain called Shatterhand and two we can finally have the Novel Blofeld made while making it something fresh and exciting without having to re use "classic iconic villains". I'm trying to play devil's advocate here. Why adapt Mr. Big and call him Doctor Kananga?

    But people also don't like change. You have to also continue continuity. It's James Bond not some independent film series. It's like What if Connery's era stopped mentioning SPECTRE after Goldfinger?

  • edited November 2013 Posts: 12,837
    Murdock wrote:
    @thelivingroyale first off you keep saying I'm this Big Quantum fanboy and I'm not

    I never said that. I said only big fans want Quantum back, meaning big James Bond fans. A better way of putting it is this: nobody outside of a Bond fansite wants Quantum back.
    Murdock wrote:
    It's like What if Connery's era stopped mentioning SPECTRE after Goldfinger?

    Well it would've been a shame but I really doubt the public at the time would've been up in arms about it.

    The difference is that by Goldfinger, SPECTRE had already proven to be an interesting organisation and they'd produced some classic villains already (Dr No, Blofeld, Rosa Klebb and Red Grant). Whereas Quantum are a poor SPECTRE rip off that have given us Mr White and Dominic Greene.
  • edited November 2013 Posts: 1,548
    Apart from Silva , EOn have constantly failed to introduce a "classic" Bond villain ever since the Dalton years at least. (my namesake Le Chiffre, memorably played by Mads Mikkelson, is obviously a Fleming creation and cannot be classed as original). I therefore would welcome Blofeld back and can quite easily envisage a Heather Ledger style (as Joker) modern re-interpretation to fit in with the Daniel Craig era. As long as the right actor is cast obviosly ie Day-Lewis, Cumberbatch, Sheen etc, that sort of calibre. Shame we are unlikely to see Sir Anthony Hopkins who I believe would be brilliant.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited November 2013 Posts: 16,359
    Murdock wrote:
    @thelivingroyale first off you keep saying I'm this Big Quantum fanboy and I'm not

    I never said that. I said only big fans want Quantum back, meaning big James Bond fans. A better way of putting it is this: nobody outside of a Bond fansite wants Quantum back.
    Murdock wrote:
    It's like What if Connery's era stopped mentioning SPECTRE after Goldfinger?

    Well it would've been a shame but I really doubt the public at the time would've been up in arms about it.

    Sorry I misread your post. I think someone else called me a fanboy and it rubbed me the wrong way.
  • Is it so difficult to envision a revived and renewed villain with the name Blofeld in Bond 24 or Bond 25? Has it been really that long? Are younger fans now finally getting tired of the 'classic Bond films', that because of that Blofeld has become a dumb, gay weirdo with a cat?

    Come on dear fans. Exactly THAT is the reason to revive Blofeld and to adapt him to today's political environment we live in. Look what they did with The Joker' in 'Batman Begins'. It didn't really made the movie bad no?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    Is it so difficult to envision a revived and renewed villain with the name Blofeld in Bond 24 or Bond 25? Has it been really that long? Are younger fans now finally getting tired of the 'classic Bond films', that because of that Blofeld has become a dumb, gay weirdo with a cat?

    Come on dear fans. Exactly THAT is the reason to revive Blofeld and to adapt him to today's political environment we live in. Look what they did with The Joker' in 'Batman Begins'. It didn't really made the movie bad no?

    Well my reasoning is also that all reboots today are getting formulaic. Bringing back classic villains, have them get captured so there plans can go on and they escape that sort of thing.

    I want EON and Bond to be innovative and dominate the genre again. When Bond first made it to the cinema, everyone wanted to Be like Bond with tons of knock off spy movies and such. I want Bond to continue being a trendsetter, not trend follower.
  • Murdock wrote:
    Is it so difficult to envision a revived and renewed villain with the name Blofeld in Bond 24 or Bond 25? Has it been really that long? Are younger fans now finally getting tired of the 'classic Bond films', that because of that Blofeld has become a dumb, gay weirdo with a cat?

    Come on dear fans. Exactly THAT is the reason to revive Blofeld and to adapt him to today's political environment we live in. Look what they did with The Joker' in 'Batman Begins'. It didn't really made the movie bad no?

    Well my reasoning is also that all reboots today are getting formulaic. Bringing back classic villains, have them get captured so there plans can go on and they escape that sort of thing.

    I want EON and Bond to be innovative and dominate the genre again. When Bond first made it to the cinema, everyone wanted to Be like Bond with tons of knock off spy movies and such. I want Bond to continue being a trendsetter, not trend follower.

    I partially agree with you. But what you mention mostly counts for franchise films. In a way, franchise films are never original. Even the 2nd Bond film FRWL 'stole' quite a few elements from Hitchcock's 'North By Northwest'.

    I think one can still be original......within frame of the Bond franchise. A franchise that is among us for 51 years now. But it is inevitable that a certain amount of recycling is taking place. We just need to do it.....differently.
  • StrelikStrelik Spectre Island
    edited November 2013 Posts: 108
    I always hated the idea that the organisation were only named Quantum midway through production as though it was EON's way of trying to justify the use of Quantum Of Solace as the film's title (which received a fair old amount of negative press at the time).
    I agree. It is curious how something that was cavalierly tacked-on as an afterthought during a film's rushed production has been accorded such undue weight and oversized significance by some viewers. For me, the Quantum hullabaloo wasn't very compelling. One can discern that Eon was just making stuff up as they went along. As "a criminal group," Quantum isn't very distinctive and is easily replaceable.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    Murdock wrote:
    Is it so difficult to envision a revived and renewed villain with the name Blofeld in Bond 24 or Bond 25? Has it been really that long? Are younger fans now finally getting tired of the 'classic Bond films', that because of that Blofeld has become a dumb, gay weirdo with a cat?

    Come on dear fans. Exactly THAT is the reason to revive Blofeld and to adapt him to today's political environment we live in. Look what they did with The Joker' in 'Batman Begins'. It didn't really made the movie bad no?

    Well my reasoning is also that all reboots today are getting formulaic. Bringing back classic villains, have them get captured so there plans can go on and they escape that sort of thing.

    I want EON and Bond to be innovative and dominate the genre again. When Bond first made it to the cinema, everyone wanted to Be like Bond with tons of knock off spy movies and such. I want Bond to continue being a trendsetter, not trend follower.

    I partially agree with you. But what you mention mostly counts for franchise films. In a way, franchise films are never original. Even the 2nd Bond film FRWL 'stole' quite a few elements from Hitchcock's 'North By Northwest'.

    I think one can still be original......within frame of the Bond franchise. A franchise that is among us for 51 years now. But it is inevitable that a certain amount of recycling is taking place. We just need to do it.....differently.

    Well whatever the case, I know EoN won't let me down. It's not a movie killer for me. I think with the current trend of movies and Hollywood sacrificing creativity for the sake of cashing in on classic names, I think I'm getting cynical. I just don't want EoN to make the same mistakes Hollywood are making.
  • edited November 2013 Posts: 3,494
    Murdock wrote:
    @thelivingroyale first off you keep saying I'm this Big Quantum fanboy and I'm not

    I never said that. I said only big fans want Quantum back, meaning big James Bond fans. A better way of putting it is this: nobody outside of a Bond fansite wants Quantum back.
    Murdock wrote:
    It's like What if Connery's era stopped mentioning SPECTRE after Goldfinger?

    Well it would've been a shame but I really doubt the public at the time would've been up in arms about it.

    The difference is that by Goldfinger, SPECTRE had already proven to be an interesting organisation and they'd produced some classic villains already (Dr No, Blofeld, Rosa Klebb and Red Grant). Whereas Quantum are a poor SPECTRE rip off that have given us Mr White and Dominic Greene.

    This is your opinion and that of Wiz, who you are more than happy to back up in claims of "95% of the audience forgot about QUANTUM when they left the theater". Well, to that I say where has the research been conducted to prove your claims that no one cares about QUANTUM? As has been pointed out, the producers themselves have clearly stated that they have not abandoned QUANTUM. Just as in Goldfinger, they went with an unrelated villain and created a wildly popular film. If we apply the same logic you two are espousing, then Cubby and Harry should have abandoned SPECTRE (which was not referred to after 1967) and Blofeld, not mentioned after 1971 except for the all too unnamed appearance in 1981. It may hard for you two and others to believe in your rush to dump QUANTUM in the garbage can of history, but what can be proven is that CR and QOS made more money, adjusted for inflation, than both FRWL and DN.

    History also tells us that Thunderball outdid Goldfinger in money, meaning that technically it rode on GF's tidal wave of success much more than the prospect of SPECTRE's return. I really don't feel it would much matter to the general public whether QUANTUM was brought back or Blofeld and SPECTRE were reintroduced, but BOND24 is going to ride on a whole lot of goodwill generated by Skyfall and for those reasons there is no reason to dump QUANTUM now than SPECTRE then- it's us hardcores who remember a villain and entity from 1971, not the general public who however does remember QUANTUM and personal dislike of QOS doesn't detract from the fact that they are the better known quantity these days. The only difference I see between QUANTUM and SPECTRE after two films is the absence of a head baddie. And an unexplored opportunity to improve a concept that became a joke in 1971 and a villain that's been skewed to the point that he was killed off in 1981. So until the research appears, my opinion is that as far as I am concerned, I've made the better argument for keeping QUANTUM and ending them properly within a storyline that reintroduces Blofeld and maybe SPECTRE later on down the line. Probably the best opinion of all that I've heard is that no organization nor a "blast from the past" is needed. An interesting villain like Silva is apparently all you do need nowadays to make a crapload of money.

  • Posts: 15,229
    A question for people here who are against the name Blofeld being reused, because it is associated with Dr Evil: who among the general public even knows his name, associate the name Blofeld with the spoofed character?

    I am happy for Blofeld to return, in the right time and done well (which means faithful to the books). But what matters to me the most, is that the character is done properly, so it means close to Fleming's Blofeld. I would rather have a crypto-Blofeld with another name, than a character named Blofeld, but completely different than the source material. I am all for the return of Blofeld, the character Blofeld. People compared him to Moriarty, and it is very fitting. But like the original Moriarty, he has to be more than a name: recurring adversary (even though Moriarty was only recurring after his death in the original Holmes canon), nemesis of Bond, absolutely, but like Moriarty in the Conan Doyle stories used sparingly. Fleming had Blofeld appear for three novels. That is a fine number. It allows to create a real antagonism and avoid the "villain of the week" feel that would banalize the character and destroy his menace.
  • ggl007ggl007 www.archivo007.com Spain, España
    Posts: 2,541
    This week´s statement may be a question for the fans. What would you think about possible Blofeld return?

    Well, if it´s done well and with respect I´m all in. But don´t forget Quantum and Mr. White!!
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    @Ludovico. I don't want Blofeld to return by name. only. Like you I'd rather have the crypto-Blofeld with another name. Like Guntram Shatterhand. I know if EoN readopted him it wouldn't be Baldy with the Cat. But I'd rather he be adapted but not have the name Blofeld.
  • edited November 2013 Posts: 13
    Agreed with the poster who said if they went to the trouble to get the rights back, they plan on using SPECTRE/Blofeld. If not in the next film then surely the next. i think its just the dose of nostalgia the series needs right now. If they insist on bringing back the undercooked Quantum organization, let the plot be some kind of Spectre/Quantum war with Spectre ending up the victor. Just don't waste too much time on it, Quantum should be sent off yes, but not in a meaningful way. They haven't earned that privilege.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    If Quantum were so easily forgotten after QoS then surely, as the organization is still out there and remains a threat, they can return and be better utilised. We all know QoS had a shoddy production schedule but with arguably better talent involved and more than enough time to prepare a great script who's to say Quantun can't be better realised next time they show up. I want to see Quantum return and I sure as hell don't want then fully dismantled in one movie either. I think there's great potential to be explored with Quantum with or without Blofeld but like all things, it all depends on the writing and overall execution. I get that some people would rather not see Quantum or Blofeld ever again but it's short sighted to not see or acknowledge any potential merit in them being used again, if handled properly.
  • Posts: 15,229
    Murdock wrote:
    @Ludovico. I don't want Blofeld to return by name. only. Like you I'd rather have the crypto-Blofeld with another name. Like Guntram Shatterhand. I know if EoN readopted him it wouldn't be Baldy with the Cat. But I'd rather he be adapted but not have the name Blofeld.

    But my question remains: why not name this crypto-Blofeld (presuming he is faithful to the original, Fleming's Blofeld) Blofeld? It's not like the general public has any idea about who he is. By that I mean when they think of the Dr. Evil spoof, they think of that character in Bond movies that stroke a cat, had a bald head and a scar. The name Blofeld means nothing to them.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited November 2013 Posts: 9,117

    This is your opinion and that of Wiz, who you are more than happy to back up in claims of "95% of the audience forgot about QUANTUM when they left the theater". Well, to that I say where has the research been conducted to prove your claims that no one cares about QUANTUM? As has been pointed out, the producers themselves have clearly stated that they have not abandoned QUANTUM. Just as in Goldfinger, they went with an unrelated villain and created a wildly popular film. If we apply the same logic you two are espousing, then Cubby and Harry should have abandoned SPECTRE (which was not referred to after 1967) and Blofeld, not mentioned after 1971 except for the all too unnamed appearance in 1981. It may hard for you two and others to believe in your rush to dump QUANTUM in the garbage can of history, but what can be proven is that CR and QOS made more money, adjusted for inflation, than both FRWL and DN.

    History also tells us that Thunderball outdid Goldfinger in money, meaning that technically it rode on GF's tidal wave of success much more than the prospect of SPECTRE's return. I really don't feel it would much matter to the general public whether QUANTUM was brought back or Blofeld and SPECTRE were reintroduced, but BOND24 is going to ride on a whole lot of goodwill generated by Skyfall and for those reasons there is no reason to dump QUANTUM now than SPECTRE then- it's us hardcores who remember a villain and entity from 1971, not the general public who however does remember QUANTUM and personal dislike of QOS doesn't detract from the fact that they are the better known quantity these days. The only difference I see between QUANTUM and SPECTRE after two films is the absence of a head baddie. And an unexplored opportunity to improve a concept that became a joke in 1971 and a villain that's been skewed to the point that he was killed off in 1981. So until the research appears, my opinion is that as far as I am concerned, I've made the better argument for keeping QUANTUM and ending them properly within a storyline that reintroduces Blofeld and maybe SPECTRE later on down the line. Probably the best opinion of all that I've heard is that no organization nor a "blast from the past" is needed. An interesting villain like Silva is apparently all you do need nowadays to make a crapload of money.

    Well I dont see any 'research' suggesting that there is any public clamouring that QUANTUM should return so until you furnish us with it my conjecture is as valid as your assertion that 'the general public does remember QUANTUM'. Given that I'm not about to spend an afternoon standing in the rain on a street corner quizzing the general public then you are correct: my theory is based on pure speculation although I would ask can you remember the name of the villain or his organisation in, say, the Transporter films or the Expendables? Unless you are a die hard fan I would posit that the answer is 'no'. Well its the same for the general cinema going audience where QUANTUM is concerned - its just another film and while they are watching it they understand what is going on but once they are finished its all forgotten.

    SPECTRE and Blofeld have the following on their side to lodge themselves in the public consciousness:

    * Taken from Fleming's books (lets ignore the Mcclory thing for the time being - although its just possible some people remember SPECTRE because of the trial)
    * They feature in some classic Bond films that people have possibly seen several times over the years be it at the cinema on telly or video.
    * Simple numerical advantage (featuring in 7 films - 9 if you include FYEO and NSNA - to 2 and I'm being generous giving you CR there as QUANTUM are never mentioned).
    * They are so well known that the bald guy with cat and phrases like 'Mr Bond I've been expecting you' make send ups such as Austin Powers possible.

    Please outline your arguments as to why QUANTUM is 'the better known quantity these days' because it seems to me that the only card you have to play is the fact its more recent. But that card hardly strikes me as being the 9 of hearts; QOS is 5 years old - can you remember every detail of some film you saw in 2008?

    Anyway without a MORI poll to be back me up I realise anything I say can be refuted as only speculation so I'll leave the argument there.

    And I rather refute the idea that QUANTUM now is identical to what SPECTRE was in 65. For a start EON had three Fleming novels featuring SPECTRE/Blofeld still to adapt rather than building on an organisation whose name was an afterthought to try and make the incomprehensible (to the public) title make sense and whose only appearance in the Bond universe was in one very shaky and cobbled together script for a film that even Daniel Craig admits was deeply flawed.

    However, you are of course correct in saying that it really doesnt matter to the public if QUANTUM is brought back and also right that the likes of Austin Powers (and DAF!) mean SPECTRE is a joke (and to be honest it does sound rather childish these days) so bringing it back doesnt really work for me in the Daniel Craig era.

    If EON want to bring back Blofeld then probably QUANTUM is the best way to do it. Similarly if EON want to persist with the lacklustre QUANTUM then a nice way of breathing some life into it would be to bring back Blofeld and maybe reveal him at the end of Bond 24 and then have him as main villain for 25.

    However much as the idea of a Cumberbatch or Day Lewis Blofeld is attractive I'm still far from convinced Blofeld returning is a good idea for the very simple reason that how do you do Fleming's Blofeld justice without bringing back Tracy? Before you know it we are into remake territory (although in fairness a Daniel Craig remake of OHMSS with Daniel Day Lewis as Blofeld? Thats way too interesting a proposition to resist).

    I think there are a few ways to go with this if they are set on doing it (and the quotes from Babs, MGW and Mendes above would seem to indicate its a distinct possibility). Either Murdock's suggestion of calling the head of QUANTUM Guntram Shatterhand, which gives a nice little nod to the fans but at the same time doesnt really need to be Blofeld, or make Blofeld a woman and give it to an actress with the chops to deliver.

    A revamped Blofeld a la Heath Ledger's joker played by a quality actor doesnt turn me completely off but I dp wonder how you can have his animosity with Bond build up if you erase Tracy from proceedings (and please somebody dont suggest he kills/kidnaps M, MP or Q for gods sake)?
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited November 2013 Posts: 6,380
    Couple of quick things. If MGM and Danjaq spent money getting the rights to SPECTRE and Blofeld, they're damn well going to use them. Otherwise, what's the point?

    The main point is to keep them out of the hands of others. The last thing MGW and BB want is another rival film. Whether they use the rights to Blofeld and SPECTRE or not is an open question.

    Wow, what a big deal it is that the Fleming-Broccoli-McClory feud has finally ended. The lawsuit almost certainly contributed to Fleming's demise.
Sign In or Register to comment.