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
I couldn't tell from the performance or the interviews if he was into it anyway.
The same applied to SF too. Silva's "what's yours?" in the trailer was so much better imho.
It threw the whole scene out of balance by mixing the takes. Part of the time he sounds sinister, and part of the time he's uses a completely different tone of voice. If you're not paying close careful attention, you could easily think two different characters are speaking.
Although that rag, for whatever reason, has been accurate on a number of 007 related stories. Most of them were done by Baz Bamigboye, who left the Bond beat in late 2014. But one non-Bamigboye story that panned out was the one that said Waltz was going to play Blofeld although he'd be introduced as Oberhauser.
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
Naturally, like a lot of fans here, I was disappointed with the way Blofeld and Spectre were handled in the film.
Mendes really fudged the character. I don't even really mind the whole half-brother angle, however, I feel that if you are going to include that aspect it's important to build the film around the idea. In my opinion the whole "cuckoo" plot felt undercooked and something of an afterthought thrown in give Bond an unnecessary emotional resonance to the villain.
It's most shocking when you consider that the entire subplot could have been ditched in the editing room and it wouldn't have effected the film at all.
The December script had a fantastic card game scene that built on this relationship and the cringeworthy torture scene was so perfunctory and cliched in comparison.
Additionally, despite his rhetoric of not wanting to dissect his characters, Waltz has become rather one-note of late. He plays the same charismatic and articulate villains in same bland Hollywood movies - the latest he's churning out is next month's Tarzan.
Despite this I felt that he didn't quite indulge in his usual pantomime tricks. He plays Blofeld with a cold aloof menace, only occasionally going into his typical grab-bag of tricks.
I felt we needed more of him in SP. The film seems to set him up for a return - in many ways SP is "Blofeld Begins" as we see the classic iconography reappear and fall into shape.
Finally, I got such a kick outta seeing Waltz with that terrific scar on his face. Also I loved Bond's line "You're a hard man to kill, Blofeld". The film needed more scenes like the confrontation in the Mi6 HQ!
Funnily enough Waltz's best performance in the film is when he's in silhouette in Rome. If only they let him cameo in the shadows here and cast another actor to play Franz Oberhauser, setting Blofeld up for Bond 25.
Hopefully they have learned from the mistakes of Spectre. I have my doubts though, although we'll really have an idea whether they have or not when we find out who is writing the next one.
Agreed.
If we have a new Bond in the next film, they'll probably rise to the occasion, as they seem to do so most of the time when they're introducing a new actor. What I'd like to see is that kind of effort and creative spark applied to a film that wasn't an actor's debut.
Or just the opposite and not hide. Might have encouraged the newer gens of Bond fans to brush up on the character.
But really not so much that. Just it would not have necessary to hide the fact.