No Time To Die: Production Diary

1126012611263126512662507

Comments

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,206
    So did Waltz play Blofeld the way he wanted to or was he guided by Mendes? I would think the latter; Mendes seems to like his villains to have a quirky side, he got away with it with Silva but that approach diminished the threatening nature of Blofeld. With a more serious, mysterious, menacing approach, Waltz could have been great.
  • Posts: 7,417
    Watched 'Django Unchained' last night and i forgot how broad Waltz performance is. He does chew the scenery a bit more than i liked. But he is entertaining! I do like him in the meteor room scene in SP but apart from that, i agree i dont want him back. And anyway part of the excitement of a new Bond movie is finding out who is playing the new villain. I dont want same again!
  • Posts: 1,917
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    I was worried about SP the moment I read EON cast Waltz
    I wasn't worried but given his past villainous roles I recall thinking could they be more obvious in their casting who the villain is? No real excitement there.

    At least with the villains in CR and QoS they were actors I had no ideas of to base that off of. And with Bardem he wasn't doing a repeat of his No Country for Old Men villain, quite the opposite actually, making Silva the most fresh main villain in years.
  • Posts: 1,917
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Goldeneye only touched a little on Bonds relevance in the world, this is where it holds the upperhand compared to Craigs entries IMO.vGE is a good film & a good quality Bond film

    Bond & Silvas relationship was interesting, but it didnt come close to Bond & Treveylans 006 story.

    I don't want to turn this into a GE discussion, but I've never valued the Bond-Trevelyan story the way some do. One of the things GE does that doesn't work for me is suddenly involve Bond with another 00 after 16 films of never having worked directly with one previously and have us buy into this relationship of them being close and all that.

    In the rush to dismiss the memory of anything Dalton or LTK, people want to make that GE backstory fresh and exciting when at least Bond had a long history with Felix and felt the need to avenge him and his bride. On top of that we get Trevelyan's supposed vengeance story with his Cossack parents and all that and the lengths he went to to set it all up and it becomes even more far fetched.

    So in this case I find Silva far more interesting in his backstory without having to do a retcon with Bond's past and his thirst for vengeance.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    BT3366 wrote: »
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    I was worried about SP the moment I read EON cast Waltz
    I wasn't worried but given his past villainous roles I recall thinking could they be more obvious in their casting who the villain is? No real excitement there.

    At least with the villains in CR and QoS they were actors I had no ideas of to base that off of. And with Bardem he wasn't doing a repeat of his No Country for Old Men villain, quite the opposite actually, making Silva the most fresh main villain in years.
    I agree. Waltz is typecast as a villain due to his breakout role for Tarantino unfortunately. He pulled everything from his bag of tricks for that role and it was arguably too iconic. They should ensure they don't fall into this trap again.
    BT3366 wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Goldeneye only touched a little on Bonds relevance in the world, this is where it holds the upperhand compared to Craigs entries IMO.vGE is a good film & a good quality Bond film

    Bond & Silvas relationship was interesting, but it didnt come close to Bond & Treveylans 006 story.

    I don't want to turn this into a GE discussion, but I've never valued the Bond-Trevelyan story the way some do. One of the things GE does that doesn't work for me is suddenly involve Bond with another 00 after 16 films of never having worked directly with one previously and have us buy into this relationship of them being close and all that.

    In the rush to dismiss the memory of anything Dalton or LTK, people want to make that GE backstory fresh and exciting when at least Bond had a long history with Felix and felt the need to avenge him and his bride. On top of that we get Trevelyan's supposed vengeance story with his Cossack parents and all that and the lengths he went to to set it all up and it becomes even more far fetched.

    So in this case I find Silva far more interesting in his backstory without having to do a retcon with Bond's past and his thirst for vengeance.
    GE was a pseudo reboot of sorts and that's why they went this route. I didn't find it too difficult to believe, given we never saw Bond's backstory in the earlier films. Quite frankly it's still far easier to stomach than the infamous disgrace foisted upon us as a retcon with childhood brotherly hate in the last one.

    Your comments about LTK got me thinking though. I wonder how much involvement Babs had in that film. I remember reading an interview on this site that LTK was supposed to establish a 'new kind of Bond' and arguably it was a 'film ahead' because the emotional quotient was dialed up first in that film, and we have been subjected to this sort of thing ever since in one way shape or form.
  • NSGWNSGW London
    edited January 2018 Posts: 299
    https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/905616/James-Bond-25-Daniel-Craig-BLOFELD-SPECTRE-Christoph-Waltz-release-date-plot

    From the express, but looks like further confirmation that Waltz wont be returning.
  • edited January 2018 Posts: 5,767
    talos7 wrote: »
    So did Waltz play Blofeld the way he wanted to or was he guided by Mendes? I would think the latter; Mendes seems to like his villains to have a quirky side, he got away with it with Silva but that approach diminished the threatening nature of Blofeld. With a more serious, mysterious, menacing approach, Waltz could have been great.
    Waltz´ Blofeld looks to me as if Waltz offered a basic template from which to build a character, and Mendes didn´t pick up from there.

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Mendes downgraded the talent there was in Spectre as a whole. Waltz felt he never fulfilled what he wanted from the role.
  • Posts: 5,767
    BT3366 wrote: »
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    I was worried about SP the moment I read EON cast Waltz
    I wasn't worried but given his past villainous roles I recall thinking could they be more obvious in their casting who the villain is? No real excitement there.

    At least with the villains in CR and QoS they were actors I had no ideas of to base that off of. And with Bardem he wasn't doing a repeat of his No Country for Old Men villain, quite the opposite actually, making Silva the most fresh main villain in years.
    Not to mention that Bardem also played a villain in Collateral. All those three roles are like three completely different people. Waltz repeated a lot from his Basterds character in Django, yet he was very different at the same time. Blofeld was just Waltz doing basic standart moves, without any clear direction. I don´t imagine this is the intention of such a capable actor.

  • Andi1996RueggAndi1996Ruegg Hello. It's me, Evelyn Tremble.
    Posts: 2,005
    Donald Pleasence, Telly Savalas, Charles Gray, Christoph Waltz

    It's quite amazing how badly EoN resurrected Blofeld, it's almost impossible to have done it worse.

    Waltz is the only total miscast case I can think of. Not as a villain per se, if he just had been a villain named Franz Oberhauser it would have been ok, still a weak villain but ok.
    But he is Blofeld?? And the way they introduced him in this "clever" plot twist....
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Yep!

    I still wonder who was the genius behind the idea of the brothergate.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    I'll never fail to chuckle at the realization that the SP twist is the exact same twist in Goldmember.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I'll never fail to chuckle at the realization that the SP twist is the exact same twist in Goldmember.
    Indeed. And the sad thing is... when Silva was in that glass containment, people joked about it, saying it was taken from Goldmember. It's disturbing to think the Austin Powers film Eon tried to sue the hell out of, turned out to be an influence in Spectre.
  • edited January 2018 Posts: 5,767
    Wow, that would be even the third time they ripped off Austin Powers, after the "Giant Laser".


    Donald Pleasence, Telly Savalas, Charles Gray, Christoph Waltz

    It's quite amazing how badly EoN resurrected Blofeld, it's almost impossible to have done it worse.

    Waltz is the only total miscast case I can think of. Not as a villain per se, if he just had been a villain named Franz Oberhauser it would have been ok, still a weak villain but ok.
    But he is Blofeld?? And the way they introduced him in this "clever" plot twist....
    It could have worked splendidly if Waltz would have gotten some proper direction. You know, by the director.

  • edited January 2018 Posts: 832
    I never cared whatsoverer about the lack of suprise element about waltz in sp. That is less important to me than the excellent preformance as blofeld that he is capable of, he was made for that role, and would not have cared about imported elements from his other villainous roles. Hence I disagree with the view that he was miscast, predictable as it was, he was an excellent choice. I was extremely excited to see him as blofeld. The lack of material, plus mendes, really screwed it up. Blofeld was done so poorly in sp that eon must distance themselves from it. waltz should never return despite being the perfect choice, I would be opposed to him returning even with better material and direction.
  • Posts: 1,680
    Waltz had little to work with, the only scene he shines in is the meteorite scene & control room, the rome meeting is ok. Waltz had some chemistry with Craig but not enough to elevate his performance.

    Waltz wasnt the problem here, it was the choice of villian, I love almolst all elements of Bond with the exception of Blofeld, he was never an interesting character & I knew when he was announced the film would be divisive among the fans.

    I would have liked to see Oberhauser & White interact. that would have been interesting.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Blofeld is interesting if he gets the exposure he had in the original trilogy, and specifically OHMSS. What I hate about the cinematic incarnations of the character is that they have been never given the fair treatment that the Blofeld character as one had deserved.

    Donald Pleasance may be iconic to some, but I never found him interesting in the slightest. He portrayed the character as if he were a former bullied kid seeking revenge from the world.

    Charles Gray, even though I love his version of Blofeld due to extreme charisma, was again all the wrong choice for the character and merely made it as a leading megalomaniac helpless without his henchmen.

    Telly Savalas, even though physically apprehensive and threatening, lacked that villainous intimidation Blofeld was supposed to have. He just didn't seem as Bond's nemesis for me you'd love to hate.

    Christoph Waltz was a combination of Pleasance and Gray, with a little bit of Hans Lada thrown in. But, his character had very little room to breathe the viewer merely had any understanding of his character it didn't emotionally make sense why would he put Bond through all the misery he was supposed to have.

    Just ignore the cinematic incarnations and make Blofeld a devil incarnate who can have Bond's arse handed to him all by himself both psychologically and physically. That's what Blofeld should be like in a contemporary setting adventure.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,206
    Excluding the taste for human flesh, a Blofeld that has the charm and menace of Hopkins’ Dr Lecter is what I would like to see.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited January 2018 Posts: 15,423
    talos7 wrote: »
    Excluding the taste for human flesh, a Blofeld that has the charm and menace of Hopkins’ Dr Lecter is what I would like to see.
    With close quarters combat skills? I'd be all for it.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited January 2018 Posts: 8,206
    duplicate
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    Waltz wasn't the problem. He was an excellent choice to play Blofeld. The man needs another one of these...

    Daniel-Craig-and-Christoph-Waltz-hug-631378.jpg
  • Posts: 12,466
    Agreed. The problem was the writing. Waltz definitely could work as a good Blofeld if they cut out the personal angle and just let him make the role his own. Still, it may be better if they don’t bring Blofeld back at all in Bond 25.
  • edited January 2018 Posts: 832
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Agreed. The problem was the writing. Waltz definitely could work as a good Blofeld if they cut out the personal angle and just let him make the role his own. Still, it may be better if they don’t bring Blofeld back at all in Bond 25.

    Would like to agree, but they tried and blew it beyond expectations. They must distance themselves from it, no blofeld or spectre for a few films.
  • Posts: 5,767
    Just ignore the cinematic incarnations and make Blofeld a devil incarnate who can have Bond's arse handed to him all by himself both psychologically and physically. That's what Blofeld should be like in a contemporary setting adventure.
    This, with several exclamation marks.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2018 Posts: 23,883
    I'm still not convinced that Waltz could have been a convincing Blofeld in retrospect. He was the wrong man for the part. One whose reputation in a previous iconic role preceded him and set expectations unreasonably high. It should have therefore been apparent with hindsight that he would disappoint quite a few viewers.

    As has been mentioned by others, Bardem's roles (and particularly his villains) have been quite different. He was physically menacing in No Country For Old Men and therefore could go in a different direction and ham it up for SF. Moreover, he is an imposing man. Waltz in contrast was already hammy in Basterds, and he lacks the physical presence (see photo above- there's a man who's actually a fair bit shorter than Craig!) to go in the other direction and be intimidating without the ham. Bond villains need a little bit of exaggerated menace.

    That's not to excuse the writing, which was indeed abysmal and almost laughable.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    Donald Pleasence, Telly Savalas, Charles Gray, Christoph Waltz

    It's quite amazing how badly EoN resurrected Blofeld, it's almost impossible to have done it worse.

    Waltz is the only total miscast case I can think of. Not as a villain per se, if he just had been a villain named Franz Oberhauser it would have been ok, still a weak villain but ok.
    But he is Blofeld?? And the way they introduced him in this "clever" plot twist....

    I don't think the producers saw a future where everyone would own every film on little discs and play them over and over on TV sets. Bond films were bubble gum films to be enjoyed once and forgotten about. Changing the actor who played Blofeld was no big deal in the 60s as most people wouldn't remember the last film from two years ago anyway.

    Waltz was part of the new alternative history. They are less likely now to recast the role.
  • Posts: 4,615
    Happy to be corrected but Waltz was given a far greater challenge as his character had something long standing and very personal against Bond. To pull this off, you need much better script and much better direction (if, in fact, it was ever going to work) compared to the previous versions of Blofeld who wanted to "dominate the World " and 007 was getting in the way. They would have been just as happy killing 006 or 008.

    We all know this personal connection failed on every level and that does reflect poorly on Waltz. If it had been a more conventional, Bond "romp", I think he could have worked fine.
  • edited January 2018 Posts: 3,164
    Don't remember who posted this but there was a great idea in this thread about retconning the Bond/Blofeld connection a bit if they somehow make the personal connection to Oberhauser a reason Bond was picked for MI6 in the first place. Could tie in to an event that was mentioned in the original drafts as the 'seed' for this era's version of SPECTRE.
    Both White and Oberhauser/Blofeld served in the Foreign Legion in Morocco (with the platoon nicknamed Les Spectres de Pierre and their informal insignia being an octopus with its tentacles encircling the globe). One night, when the platoon ran out of food and were going hungry for days, Blofeld ended up just killing them all and essentially cannibalising them - with the exception of White.

    Maybe that's what puts Blofeld on MI6's map?
  • Posts: 19,339
    Kevin Spacey would have been a better choice for Blofeld,and,I would imagine,have been more sinister.
Sign In or Register to comment.