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 think Carver's tapping on his ancient-pre-iPod-era-device looked even more fake.
Ironical to see a Bond movie borrowing a back story from a Bond spoof?
Dr Evil having been revealed to be Austin Powers brother in Goldmember...
Aside from that it needed much more development during the movie to have been effective
I think your disappointment mainly lies in the actual character of Blofeld. Blofeld isn't a Silva, a Joker or...Hans Landa. He's way more subtle in the way he acts.
Either way, he came across as rather ineffectual
Le Chiffre wasn't over the top, but he was effective in creating a menacing presence
For whatever reason Waltz Blofeld doesn't do it for me
I found Fiennes M in his opening SP scene with Bond more nasty than anything Waltz manages
Really?
That’s it of course, I should have been paying attention rather than playing with my mobile phone all through the movie!
Thanks for pointing that out…
IMO from the moment the spotlight hit him in Rome I felt my heart sink
For me a great villain starts with his appearance and it takes some awfully good acting to overcome that deficiency.
For example, I watched Saboteur by Alfred Hitchcock last night, which is a master class in casting villains. They make you uneasy from the moment you first lay eyes on them, without the need for any strange scars or deformities
Thinking back to Inglorious Basterds I guess Waltz has more screen time to reveal his characters insidious evil, which is concealed beneath a veneer of civility, and the story gives him opportunities to demonstrate his true nature. However Bond villains don’t get that sort of screen time so they need to be able to rely on their appearance to establish their credentials IMO
So much of what is great about Waltz's Blofeld is subtle; he's not overtly evil or "out there" in his maniacal aims. Because of this, it's easy to miss what's so interesting about this version of the character if you aren't looking. He's got to stay hidden as the head of SPECTRE, and therefore, it makes perfect sense that he's been able to reign in the evil and anger that is set to burst clean from him. As @Gustav_Graves has been saying for a while now, he isn't the expected overt, loud and crazy villain. He's far more composed in his villainy and I think that adds to his creep factor. His insanity is completely in check, and all his acts are beyond justified inside his head.
The main things I enjoyed most about Waltz's Blofeld were his origins and his thirst for absolute control. The whole of his life beyond boyhood was predicated upon his uber-sensitive nature as a lad, when the slight hint of his father being more attentive to someone other than himself set him off. From that point in time it's no wonder his ambitions carry him to lead SPECTRE. He thirsts for power over others, for everyone to see what he can do. His work within SPECTRE, to gain control and spread fear through his power is a manifestation of his long-held urges to impress his father and others, to make them see how fantastic he is. This then creates in him a well cultivated smugness; a smugness that is so at ease inside of him that it goes beyond self-confidence and instead becomes natural, as if he was born with it.
Blofeld's need to have power and control over others is demonstrated in how he operates as well. One of the things that sent tingles up my spine was how all his SPECTRE agents stand at attention whenever he is around, as if they are drones programmed to follow. One minute these men and women are doing their work and conducting discussions amongst themselves, then Blofeld appears and they snap into a detached, hyper-alert state that cuts off all of the world around them but him. While we got the sense of fear SPECTRE agents had for Blofeld in the Connery films, here this is much more evident and far more unsettling by how much control and attention he commands from them without even speaking a word.
The meteorite at his base and his use of torture techniques also serves to color Waltz's Blofeld as a proud and narcissistic control freak. The meteorite being portrayed as an unstoppable force and presence that had created momentum for years in isolation before making its impactful mark on the world is an obvious parallel to what Blofeld perceives as his great effect on the world through the ominous SPECTRE, and later, on Bond's personal life in association with 007's then unbeknownst run-ins with the organization and how it has shaken his mind and body. This better than anything paints him as an unapologetic narcissist that thinks he's the best thing going, and more capable than any of making a mark on the world. It's like he's constantly shouting out, "Look at what your boy has done, daddy! Little old James couldn't do this!" He's a grown man but obviously still yearning for attention from a father long dead and gone. In many ways, his inner life is childlike, while his outward appearance is deceitful, as it makes him appear as a matured, in check adult. In many ways, he is far from this, still that same lost boy robbed of attention and approval at an age during which those scars never had a chance to properly heal, and as a result, they remain long after they left their mark.
In much the same way, the torture technique Blofeld uses characterizes him as a control freak better than anything in the film. His device's main purpose is to gradually make the victim lose control of bodily functions as a drill to a specific part of the body removes or disrupts things like human memory, movement and sensory solidarity. He sits in his chair, gleefully watching with great interest as his victims lose all control, forfeiting it to him against their will. They die knowing that he has taken their function away from them with an almost methodical, acute and surgical proficiency, nothing but an insignificant pawn or glorified guinea pig in comparison to him, the king on his spinny throne.
With all this in light, Bond's unwillingness to waste a bullet on him at the end of the London finale is the biggest insult, and the anger in his eyes is clear as James once again walks off standing tall and happy while he is once again left choking on his dust, Dr. Swann acting as an insert for his father this time around. I don't think it's over between he and Bond yet, and I'm interested to see what Blofeld does next, as he won't just lay down and die or go quiet. His voice must be heard.
Some aspects of Blofeld's character, like what he means by creating beauty out of horror and why he feels this mission is justified through his role in SPECTRE are things I look forward to examining in the future as my study of Waltz's portrayal continues.
I would have preferred had there been no connection between Bond And Blofeld other than one that evolved starting with the events of Casino Royale; Then, at some point in SPECTRE Blofeld would have said something to the effect:
'You were nothing to me but you kept getting in my way; then you became a distraction and now Mr. Bond I'm afraid you've become a threat. Over these years, without even trying, I became the author of all your pain and now I shall put you out of my misery.'
Or something like that ;)
Not even close. There were a number of scenes that harkened back to Dr.No and some of Blofeld's character portrayals definitely paralleled Wiseman's DN but Wiseman did a whole more and was far more menacing with shorter screen time compared to what we got with Waltz.
That's why in retrospect, I would have preferred a more substantial actor physically for this film.
Why is physical menace so important? The guy is a clever manipulator, an evil mastermind of the most powerfull criminal organiztion you could ever imagine and is on top of that completely mad. If there is one character who doesn't need a powerfull physical appearance its Blofeld.
not mad. In his next outing ( only a guess on my part) we may see a slightly
more unhinged portrayal of our favourite Baddie. ;)
When he didn't speak (in the aforementioned cases) he was more intimidating to me, because Waltz was able to convey the necessary menace convincingly in those cases.
However, in every instance where he was speaking, I personally found nothing terrifying about anything he said, particularly given the contrived situations they put him in during his short time on screen and the relative lack of tension in those scenes (for me at least). Even a great actor like Waltz can only do so much with what he's given.
At least a more physically intimidating actor could have conveyed the necessary menace tangibly, which I could have focused on.
As an example, I did find him slightly more terrifying when he had the scar at the end (which is not to say I am advocating for the scarring - I didn't like that shoehorned element either).
1. Blofeld in FRWL (1963)
2. Blofeld in TB (1965)
3. Blofeld in OHMSS (1969)
4. Blofeld in YOLT (1967)
5. Blofeld in DAF (1971)
8. Blofeld in Spectre (2015)
7. Blofeld in FYEO (1981)
I don't consider Never Say Never Again a Bond film, so I'm not even considering it here.