› ›

Should EON lose the rights to Blofeld and SPECTRE?

13

Comments

  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    No, slowly, take some time for yourself, enjoy.......... :D
    Yes, I wish they'd put them out a little quicker too.
  • MrcogginsMrcoggins Following in the footsteps of Quentin Quigley.
    Posts: 3,144
    All good things come to those who wait
    Or so they say .
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Push the atmosphere button...
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited March 2016 Posts: 28,694
    I'm very much a proponent of the Rome SPECTRE meeting as well, which I've outlined in a previous post in the SP Appreciation thread. Best to just quote some of it here instead of repeating myself...
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    The beautiful Rome SPECTRE meeting is a great revival of the Connery era's more understated meet-ups between the organization. In SP, the meeting is steeped in eerie intrigue where heavy shadows, silence and whispers dominate the scene, a great auditory and visual representation of what SPECTRE is: not seen or heard, but making its marks. The photography is phenomenal, and the choice to forego a score for the scene amps up the tension as we hear the echoing tones of the members and Blofeld's whispers as he controls his men to do everything for him, from pulling out his chair to moving forth his microphone and ordering the other members around. It's a great introduction to his control-freak nature, and I think Waltz plays it spectacularly. The "cuckoo cuckoo" gives me chills every time. In addition, the dialogue between members as they brief the pack on ongoing operations is spectacularly TB and gives us a phenomenal idea of the nature of SPECTRE's control, and how powerful they are. This is an organization holding ransom life saving medicines from the people for crying out loud, playing God! Immaculate.

    I found the sequence to be quite interesting and unique for a Bond film. The scene and where it was set really gave a grand, echoing baroque flair to the classic SPECTRE meetings from the Connery era, which now look rather insignificant in comparison, I must say. Never in any other Bond film but a Craig one would we have a scene with an organization and main villain where barely any dialogue is uttered and most of the sequence moves on body language, echoes and whispers alone. It's so different and for me, that's what makes it spectacular.

    I will concede, however, that to get a glimpse of SPECTRE's power we should have seen more of their destruction of South Africa beyond the news footage to drive home that point. Maybe we'll get more of a chance in Bond 25 since everything has already been developed.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    They have only just got them back! Ofcourse they should not lose them and they never will now!
  • lady_xanaxlady_xanax
    Posts: 22
    doubleoego wrote: »
    With the quantum organisation, what was shown of them and alluded to in QoS was far more effective and intriguing than what we got with SP. Bond 25 has its work cut out to make things right.

    I'm inclined to agree. Quantum (even though the name is a bit shoehorned in) was nice and shady and fitted with the 'darker' tone of the era, whereas SPECTRE is more of a camp evil.

  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I didn't see anything camp in the Spectre organisation.
  • lady_xanaxlady_xanax
    Posts: 22
    Thunderpussy wrote: »
    I didn't see anything camp in the Spectre organisation.

    The flamboyancy works in the earlier films but it felt out of place here where Craig is supposedly a grittier 'modern' Bond. SPECTRE felt like more of a threat whereas Spectre really just seems like Blofeld and his groupies. It's fun but I would prefer it to feel more like an organisation.

  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    edited March 2016 Posts: 13,384
    Of course we all hold different opinions, but I found the spectre meeting. Grand in scale
    and quite scary, as you could see the look of fear on the faces of the members when they had to
    approach Blofeld. Not yo mention I loved the introduction of Mr Hinx. :)
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    I agree. Spectre in the film was very creepy and scary. The meeting in Rome as well as in Morocco. When Blofeld turns off the screens and all the Spectre agents stand up and face Bond it's terrifying. All of them could be armed and ready to kill Bond and Madeleine at a moments notice.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Yes. I loved that bit of choreography! :) as if all of Spectre was totally trained to
    Obey him.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    They looked like shadows, which is what that organization represents. :)
  • IncompetentHenchmanIncompetentHenchman
    Posts: 1,817
    Well they should not LOSE the rights. But I don't think they should use them, because it's been shown that they have no idea to use them originally. Spectre was wasted in Spectre. Go figure.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    Even if they haven't done a particularly good job with SPECTRE and Blofeld at the moment, there's no good that's going to come from some other company getting access to the rights.
  • IncompetentHenchmanIncompetentHenchman
    Posts: 1,817
    ForYourEyesOnly wrote: »
    Even if they haven't done a particularly good job with SPECTRE and Blofeld at the moment, there's no good that's going to come from some other company getting access to the rights.

    This. Would you people prefer that McClory's ghost took hold of Spectre? My answer is no.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited March 2016 Posts: 12,837
    Delete. Site did that thing it often does on mobile where it crashes and posts only half of what I've written before I'm even done.

    (0:06. Tried to get it to start at that point but I'm not techy enough to figure out who that works)
  • Mack_BolanMack_Bolan
    edited June 2017 Posts: 377
    I wouldn't give a damn.
  • identigraphidentigraph
    Posts: 1,052
    Personally, I have never found Blofeld to be particularly interesting on film. In the novels he is a more interesting character but so far has been pretty poorly presented on screen. Christoph Waltz just gave his usual performance.
    I would be quite happy to let Blofeld and Spectre stay in the past.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,197
    The problem with Blofeld and Spectre is that it makes a Bond film very predictable. The Spectre plans are often very similar. You know that there will be this overly evil man with the white cat. I don't find it very interesting.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited April 2016 Posts: 9,117
    Mack_Bolan wrote: »
    I wouldn't give a damn.

    What a quality first post. I really can't wait for further nuggets of wit and insight.
    identigraph wrote: »
    Personally, I have never found Blofeld to be particularly interesting on film. In the novels he is a more interesting character but so far has been pretty poorly presented on screen. Christoph Waltz just gave his usual performance.
    I would be quite happy to let Blofeld and Spectre stay in the past.

    I think you're probably right.

    His 'legendary' status is only due to killing Tracy. If you look at the books he only appears in one scene in TB and a couple in OHMSS. In YOLT he is pretty good but even then only gets a few chapters.

    Despite being given a trilogy, so to speak, he's not a patch on Drax or Goldfinger. Even Dr No makes as much impact and he only gets the one scene.

    In the films the uneven portrayals really haven't helped him and coupled with the Austin Powers factor he now feels almost as much of a cliche as the DB5 and 'shaken not stirred'.

    Again, ranking the film villains, I'd have Dr No, Goldfinger, Scaramanga and Le Chiffre ahead of any of the Blofelds and a strong case could also be made for Drax, Zorin, Sanchez and Silva.

    I don't know if anyone has seen Calvindyson's 'Blofeld ranking' video but he rates the best Blofeld appearance as a joint victory for FRWL and TB and he's absolutely right.

    The reveal of Blofeld has never lived up to the menace of the guy behind the desk with the cat and the sinister voice whose face we never see.
  • identigraphidentigraph
    Posts: 1,052
    Certainly the different actors playing the role doesn't help especially when YOLT, OHMSS and DAF were so close together. Culminating with the very strange choice of Charles Gray for DAF.

  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    Eric Pohlman/Anthony Dawson = menacing Blofeld
    Donald Pleasance = pantomime Blofeld
    Telly Savalas = hard man, physical Blofeld
    Charles Gray = camp Blofeld
    Christoph Waltz = whiny stepbrother Blofeld
  • stun_harvestingstun_harvesting
    Posts: 337
    Blofeld gets increasingly cliche the longer he stays in the series. But it's obvious that were it not for the lawsuit with McClory, EoN would've wanted to bring back Blofeld as the villain again (TSWLM, for instance, where Stromberg is obviously a redressed Blofeld).
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    stun_harvesting wrote: »
    Blofeld gets increasingly cliche the longer he stays in the series. But it's obvious that were it not for the lawsuit with McClory, EoN would've wanted to bring back Blofeld as the villain again (TSWLM, for instance, where Stromberg is obviously a redressed Blofeld).

    Yes, I was hoping for something a bit different in Spectre - but it's a cliche of a cliche.
  • stun_harvestingstun_harvesting
    Posts: 337
    Yeah, there was nothing original about him.
  • BlofeldsScarBlofeldsScar
    Posts: 90
    No, I don't think so. I think the problem is that Blofeld has become a cliché, without anyone thinking of how he can fit into the Bond films as an actual character. Blofeld can work on screen as a Bond villain, you just need the right people writing the script and making the film. He needs to be built up, his presence slowly growing as he becomes Bond's greatest enemy. At first, he sees Bond as a nuisance, a fly to be swatted, until eventually, he becomes obsessed by him, seeing Bond as a challenge, a true nemesis. I truly and honestly believe that one day, filmmakers will arrive to the Bond series who create a Blofeld portrayal that goes down as one of the greatest film villains of all time. I truly do believe that. Although it may be quite a few years down the line now!
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    BlofeldsScar wrote: »
    No, I don't think so. I think the problem is that Blofeld has become a cliché, without anyone thinking of how he can fit into the Bond films as an actual character. Blofeld can work on screen as a Bond villain, you just need the right people writing the script and making the film.

    Agreed.

    Blofeld is now where Bond was after DAD. He needs bringing back to basics but instead they just went with every cliche in the book.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    No, EON should've had the rights to Blofeld and SPECTRE a long time ago - but it is what it is...

    in terms of the question, should every villain be Blofeld?... Hell No... Blofeld is Bond's Moriarty - but IMO, he should be used sparingly - otherwise the character becomes too over-saturated and stale (because of his constant usage)... i personally like it better when Bond is going up against different villains, with their own different agendas.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,197
    But why do we need Blofeld if we don't want him as a cliche? What is Blofeld if he is not the man with the white cat and the absurd plans? It also makes no sense to have a returning character who is always different. It is already strange that we have had four actors who have played four different Blofelds. So I conclude it is not good to continue with Blofeld at all. The greatness of Bond has always been to have a great variety of Bond villains.
  • BlofeldsScarBlofeldsScar
    Posts: 90
    @GBF I always think Bond should have a great variety of villains, true. But I don't think Blofeld should be discarded entirely. The problem is that writers have tried to use him as a device and a cliche, in the films he might be the man with the white cat and the absurd plans, but in the books, he is not. There can be many different interpretations of a character, but no Bond film for me has ever truly captured what is interesting about Blofeld, a man obsessed with control and identity. If on screen he is fleshed out as an actual character, he can be a fascinating villain for Bond to go up against.
Sign In or Register to comment.