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
Hence this post from me @RogueAgent ;-) :
Some interesting fact here that directly relates to Ian Fleming's short novel "Octopussy":
Now let's combine the above story from "Octopussy" with the news from yesterday's Daily Mail on Sunday-article, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2845621/You-weren-t-expecting-007-BLOFELD-S-Bond-having-kittens-evil-foe-returns-double-Oscar-winner-Christoph-Waltz-tipped-play-him.html :
Thanks @DoubleoNothing for mentioning this today in another insightful Skype-conversation. It completely escaped me ;-).
But I think The Daily Mail is drawing conclusions a bit too soon. Or in any case....there's a possibility that The Daily Mail can not fit the puzzle together completely just yet ;-). I know firmly believe Franz Oberhauser is a character in the film, most likely played by Waltz. But for me that tells me there's more behind all this. You just can not turn Oberhauser into Blofeld.
I think there's a possibility that Oberhauser slowly turns from ally into villain during the film. We actually see the process of Oberhauser turning into a villain. That leaves an opening to the character of Blofeld. Perhaps Dexter Smythe is Blofeld. And if that's the case there's a possibility that we get a very very late reveal during the movie of Blofeld. And perhaps because of that we probably won't even find out during the press conference which actor is hired to play Blofeld.
And suddenly, the Rettenbachferner glacier in Austria also makes more sense. Actually, the entire filming in Austria makes sense now. Also, I'm delighted to see how John Logan/Neal Purvis/Robert Wade/ Jezz Butterworth still manage to put new Fleming source material into a Bond film. Every Bond fan who admires Ian Fleming must like this bit of news ;-). And Bond 24 is now directly linked to wintersports and skiing.
The Oberhauser question is interesting. It's possible the Mail source doesn't know his Fleming as well as Eon. In fact its probable. Eon may very well be introducing Waltz as son of Fleming's Oberhauser and evolving him into Blofeld. This is plausible as Oberhauser Jr is a new non-Fleming character. This would also give Eon a Fleming reference for the film, which they ( babs and MGW) do like to do.
The Mail source may not have quite understood what he was being told.
The Oberhauser angle does tie in nicely with Fleming's OP, and the Austria and glacier angle.
My guess is that Eon is planning on introducing Oberhauser Jr and that he will morph into Blofeld. It all fits. My guess is that the Mail reporter didn't quite understand what he was being told, about Oberhauser being a "ruse".
btw @graves that big long post above, you also posted in the other thread. I'm not sure why your posts are so special that they need to be spammed over multiple threads.
No-one else on the board does this btw ie copies and pastes their posts into multiple threads. But I guess you are special.
Doesn't this give writers of future installments the license to reuse other iconic former Bond villians like Jaws and Goldfinger? Will there be another Dr. No? Will they bring back Tracey?
I'd rather see the series move forward instead of bringing in characters from the past.
I totally think it's a bad, stupid and lazy idea. You're not alone here my friend.
Many do. I think on the contrary it is a great idea. And read this thread again: I don't think they should reuse the Blofeld of the movies, but adapt properly this time the Blofeld from the books.
I think @Ludovico many forummembers in this topic are worrying way way too much about these things. It's merely the name that is being rumoured, while in fact we don't know a thing how the actual role will come across in the actual finished film. I call it "navel staring" on merely the plain, at this moment content-less name. Please let me elaborate.
EXAMPLE 1 - SILVA: In my personal opinion I thought Silva was -if I'm comparing in a nitpicky, geeky way- a sort of re-invented 'Doctor No'. He had a fairly late, but nonetheless grand entrance as a big Bond villain. He had physical mutulations on his body (an entire jaw prothesis with fake teeth). He used the art of computer hacking to bring violence, destruction in London and to avenge his feelings on "M". The original 'Doctor No' had no hands, used the art of 'toppling' to let missile programs derail (call it the antique version of 'hacking') and had, at least for Honey, a rather fearful entrance in the 2nd half of the film.
Had Silva really been renamed 'Doctor No', but had the actual written role stayed intact and had Javier Bardem played Doctor No exactly like he would have played Silva, then suddenly we should have been worried more? What a piece of nonsense. Yes, they would have used the name 'Doctor No' then, but he would be re-invented completely to today's standards no. So, this is just a name-thing.
EXAMPLE 2 - 'LE CHIFFRE': Let's say "Casino Royale '67" was an official EON production. Is it then justified to worry more about the use of the name Le Chiffre in the more faithful movie adaptation "Casino Royale '06"? Off course not! The role would still have been played by Mads Mikkelsen as enigmatic as ever. Moreover, do not forget that 'Le Chiffre' from the 2006 film was quite a bit different from the fat French banker with-walking-stick-turned-gun from the actual novel. Mads' version was suave, slim, rather attractive and had a bleeding eye. He was an Albanian chess protégé. Any problems with that re-invention? Not from my part.
EXAMPLE 3 - 'STROMBERG': Now that I call an example the-other-way-around. Yes, his name was different from the 1967 version of Blofeld in "You Only Live Twice". But other than that.....well....come on guys. Stromberg was a copy of Blofeld. And if Kevin McGlory hadn't interferred, than Curt Jürgens would have been named Blofeld anyway. For sure. Now this Stromberg....I found that a lame, uninspired copy of Blofeld really. Both Donald's version of the man and Curt used buttons to kill people. How...creative. So did I find the 1977 villain more uninspiring and from a creative perspective boring, simply because of his name? Off course not. It was the role that was written for him that I found uninspiring.
TO SUMMARIZE: At this particular stage of the Bond 24 production I find it slightly preposterous how certain people "fear" for the fact that after Bond 24 -the whole damn film isn't even in production yet- we suddenly get flooded by a "recycle craze" of villain names that have been used in previous Bond films, like Goldfinger and Mr Big.............when in essence we should worry about HOW the damn villain works in the finished film, regardless of the name tag!
If the name Goldfinger will be used for Bond 25, then it wouldn't be a shameless character of the man we saw in the 1964 film. We know by now how EON and B&M master the art of "re-inventing". But even more so, THIS is not going to happen. Goldfinger as name will not be re-cycled. We saw Silva in SF no? New name, perhaps slightly reminiscent, in a modern way, of Dr. No. But alltogether completely re-invented.
The reason why Blofeld is being discussed so heavily, to an extent that at this stage I'm ready to kill myself, is that at times I tend to see the Bond films with a marketing-eye as well. I simply love the brand names "Blofeld" and "S.P.E.C.T.R.E", as they have brand recognition (much more than Goldfinger IMO), history, phonetically sound wunderful, and were created by Fleming. But sjee, if you read my entire dissertation above, then you must know by now that EON and B&M would not bring Blofeld back to make him a copy of a copy of Strom"Blofeld"berg (TSWLM) and Blofeld (YOLT). They know better by now. Also, unless Goldfinger, Blofeld and S.P.E.C.T.R.E. can be used as an umbrella to completely different villains. Fleming's essence of creating S.P.E.C.T.R.E and Blofeld was because of this.
And guess what, we already saw a revived "S.P.E.C.T.R.E." in "Quantum Of Solace". But it was named QUANTUM as we all know. Had B&M and EON obtained the rights from McGlory's estate 10 years earlier, then perhaps we would have seen the re-booted S.P.E.C.T.R.E., by the exact name, in the 2008 film.
SHORT FINAL CONCLUSION: Stop it. Don't post too black-and-white by saying "Keep Blofeld dead!". Trust EON, B&M, Sam Mendes and the screenplaywriters a bit more. The orthodox fears and elaborately formulated problems, from for example @RC7, are at this stage slightly ridiculous. Especially when you take into account the above examples.
And, after 52 eventful, creative, inspiring years, it's an illusion to think that the power of a 'name' has the possibility of destroying the entire portrayal of a villain. If you can see parts of past Bond villains in newly named characters (Silva), then you know what I mean. Or if you can't compare Blofeld in Bond 24 with previous Blofelds because he has been re-invented completely and is entirely different from what initial fears told you, then you know what I mean.
No, but what if, the name was changed from Silva into Dr. No? What then? Would you still say the same? You get my point?
Never mind anyway. You don't get my point. I've written such a lengthy post. I tried to give good examples of why we put so much importance on a name or brand, whereas we know from the past how the actual characters or roles appeared in the final product...the final film.
Even if Eon had called Silva, Dr. No, the fanbase would have screamed. DN lives on Crab Key. That's his story. Bring back No, and you need Honey, Quarrel and Strangways too. The movie becomes a remake of a story that was brilliantly done first time out.
That's why I have suggested elsewhere that remakes, maybe be left to a Fleming-faithful HBO side project.
Blofeld on the other hand is not bound by one story. Eon let him loose all over the franchise a long time ago.
Re-introducing him in the new timeline is wide open. You can do anything with him.
Personally I would like to see the Quantum arc tied up. There were loose ends left dangling at the end of QoS.
Tying it up is easy. I honestly do think B24 will involve some resolution of the Quantum organization, as well as reintroducing Ernst and Spectre. It will be very interesting to see how its done, if its done.
I am encouraged by the report that Jesper Christensen was seen boarding a plane for London.
Mind you, he could just be attending to see the changing of the guards, or for any number of reasons....BUT maybe he is attending to reprise his role as White!
Yes. It's a bad idea and it's unnecessary. Beginning with "SKYFALL", the franchise seemed to be making an attempt to recapture the "glory" of the past. And there is nothing more artistically dull than an attempt to recapture the past. Why couldn't they return to the QUANTUM storyline from Craig's first two movies?
I would however, be disappointed if they reused villains that have all been resolved, like for instance, Goldfinger, Dr NO, Alec Trevelyan etc.. because then it is a remake.
Seeing that former pope Benny played Palpatine, another villain role for yet another pope would be stretching it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/01/stephen-hawking-bond-villain_n_6252192.html
Stephen Hawking says he wants to play a Bond Villain. Thats strange because I feel like he already has somehow...
The thing is his predecessor was an actor and apparently a talented one. Give him decades of experience, he would have been great. He was also a very fit man, very much into sport, so would have been excellent in the fight scene against Lazenby.
Simple, direct, Bond in every way.
Errrrrrr? Have we not had that already?
By the way, I'm so happy Thomas Newman returns. Very curious how his music for the film develops from here.
And now the big question. WILL Blofeld be re-introduced like I wanted to see him re-introduced? Slowly, nuanced, carefully, at the very end of the film? Will he only have a cameo in this one? And....surprised there were no questions about this.....but IS the actual actor playing Blofeld being kept secret, being kept under tight wraps ;-)?
Because I find it a bit.....weird if Franz Oberhauser is nothing more than a fake name...
Not on Mendes' watch!