Home › Bond Movies › Skyfall
Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
bond 23, the return of blofeld
ok, i dont understand what the situation is with blofeld. I know kevin mcklory died and he had the rights, wether he left them to someone or whatever. But i recently noticed that blofeld was in the new goldeneye game, now that got me thinking. Does that mean MGM and EON have the rights to use blofeld in the film???. Presuming it does, who else would like to see blofeld unviel himself as the mastermind behind quantum in bond 23. It would be alot better than some buissness man messing with oil like in QOS. I think blofeld should return, now as this is a reboot and they're starting again, i say eventually after afew films bond destroys quantum but blofeld escapes and forms spectre, meaning that spectre once again become the main bad guys, and everything set before previous films has been explained. Then the rest of the films can be spent fighting spectre or an unrelated villian, what do you guys think???
Moved - Bond 23 discussion
Moved - Bond 23 discussion
^ 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
And i can't recall Blofeld in the GoldenEye 2010 game
Plus, they should have made CR so that he kills Vesper and Bond is after him and Quantum as a result, not some little nerd in a little flat pretending to love her.
Then Bond goes after the leader in QOS, destroys his plan but the leader gets away, then in Bond 23 he finds him and kills him like in YOLT (novel).
IMO Bond should have killed the original Blofeld in YOLT (film) like he did in the novel. But as the twits who were making the films made them all back to front, without OHMSS (film) happeneing before YOLT (film) they would not have been able to make OHMSS (film) in the future.
And don't get me started on the farcical 'remote control airways' scene in FYEO when Blofeld finally gets killed off down the chimney X_X
In short, don't bring back Blofeld, but have a new mysterious head in Bond 23 who gets revealed and then killed off. Then let Craig do one more film in Bond 24 with something completely seperate.
Now we get back to some kind of normality. The four year wait between films has only increased excitement or aggravated people further to see a "normal" film again, especially as the last one was Die Another Day.
Anyway, I'm going off-topic, though I don't feel there's a lot to say about Blofeld/Bond 23 anyway. We've covered that ground so many times before. Only that I bet EON don't even know who the head of Quantum is just and who's to say they will even be defeated? They may just appear in the odd film for years to come. I doubt it will concluded with Craig as Bond as many seem to want. Why ruin a great ready made set of villains you can do anything with?
Second, keep Quantum out of the title.
Third, have a post movie scene (like in both CR, the White "My name is Bond, James Bond" scene and QoS, the Canadian interview scene) where Quantum comes back at the end of B23 to lead into B24. But keep the rest of B23 away from Quantum.
I personally don't think the Quantum story line would ruin B23 if done correctly.
Not a sequence, a little scene. The white scene in CR was short, the Canadian scene in QoS was pretty short. Just something to bring Quantum back, so that we can get it out of the way at the start of B24
That the end of the seventh season of "NCIS" as an example. It had a Mexican drug cartel manipulating the characters into investigating a twenty year-old murder carried out by Gibbs. In the season finale, Gibbs was caught by the cartel, who attempted to blackmail him into becoming their operative. They threatened to kill his father if he did not comply, and the final shot of the season was of the cartel leader stepping into the father's store.
But then the opening scene of season eight had Gibbs Sr. as being well aware of the cartel's intentions, having been warned off-screen that they were coming for him. Indeed, the final scene of the seventh season actually took place several months after the rest of the season proper. The writers had crafted this nifty little thriller, and then blew it completely by having key events take place off-screen.
Compare that with the end of the sixth season, which saw Ziva leave the team and return to Mossad. The final shots showed her being captured and interrogated by a group of Somali terrorists. The start of the seventh season recreated this sequence entirely - shot for shot, timed to the minute - but ended with another character, Tony, being revealed as the prisoner. The episode then explained how everything played up to that point. It was a much stronger finale/premiere than the end of the seventh season and the start of the eighth. They did the same thing at the end of the fourth season, with a revelation that retroactively changed the entire season. And not just like the infamous "Dallas" it-was-all-a-dream ending. I won't spoil it, because it's one of the best endings to a television series, but the point is that the entire thing was carefully planned from the beginning.
What I'm trying to say is that you can't just end a Bond film with a cliffhanger and expect audiences to want more. That's what the writers of "Lost" did, keeping the audience's attention by piling more questions on top of them without providing answers to old questions. Halfway through the second season, you knew they were just making things up as they went, and the series finale was filled with plots that went unresolved. At the very least, a cliffhanger ending should be written with the first half-hour of the next film already written. Otherwise, you'll just end up with a situation where everything that gets built up is forgotten.
I still feel it's critical that if an event has consequences, then those consequences need to be explored.
You wouldn't even go for a blofeld - esque meeting scene of some sort. Maybe white with a mysterious figure, i.e. the head of quantum.
The shot being:
The camera sits behind crossed legs, with shiny red heels. Its obvious the character is sitting in a chair behind a desk.
A subtle knock is heard at the door that can be seen from this shot down a relatively long hallway. The knock is followed by Mr. White walking in (after no response from the mysterious character).
He walks down the long entrance way for a good 10 seconds before he stops, crosses his arms across his stomach, and says, "Madame...."
Boom, creds roll with the first line saying, James Bond Will Return in Blah Blah Bond 24
Get Mendes to return for B24 (if hes any good) and continue the story. That scene doesn't necessarily leave any plot holes, just simply states Quantum is returning in B24. And is fun. FUN. Have some F U N.
The concept is good don't get me wrong it just has to be done right and the payoff has to be even better for the next movie which would be in another 2 years. Personally, I'd rather have a complete movie ala GF; a separate adventure and isolated completely from anything to do with SPECTRE.
I personally want a stronger villain for once. Both of DC's baddies are weak Frenchmen. Someone who could stand up to Bond themselves would be nice for B23.
Second thing, why have Blofeld return when we have Quantum? Quantum could be the early Spectre I suppose. But I would really like to see a female head the organization.