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
Thanks for the informative reply @ImpertinentGoon. I didn't know that and this sounds like another (of endless) reasons why I want to see NTTD.
That is/was my dream: a Blofeld with a similar background to the novels'.
Controversial opinion: I'm all for the return of unknown veteran actors to play villains.
It was my dream too. That they'd return to the Blofeld of the novels. No bald head, no stroking of the white cat and no sitting plotting in a chair for most of the film. Just a chance to start over and reaffirm the character for a new age of Bond films more faithful to the source material. To be fair they did at least adapt in part the novel Thunderball in Spectre. However, the inclusion of the material from 'Octopussy' married to the scriptwriters' soap opera like background for the relationship between Blofeld and Bond was much less welcome!
By clash, I meant difference in opinions, not that they necessarily had any kind of fight or argument. Waltz spoke about working with Mendes in multiple interviews a few years ago. Here's one of his quotes, though this one only suggests they weren't on the same page: "I cannot claim that I’ve really nailed Blofeld. Overall, it held water and was O.K. But it wasn’t what I’ve been looking for. I was searching for more inspiration. An actor can only be really good when there are shared possibilities."
Would be interesting. Ever since the 80s it's like EON has felt the need to cast prolific character actors as the villain, especially if they won various awards. Though Robert Davi was a notable exception.
I'd say both Mads Mikkelsen and Mathieu Amalric were, when cast, fairly unknown veteran actors.
Other controversial opinion: I would not have minded Blofeld killing Oberhauser in the past, in circumstances akin to the original short story, sort of taking the role of Dexter Smythe. Blofeld could have used the gold as investment funds to build Spectre. Coincidental, yes, but nothing unbelievable, no more no less implausible than the original short story.
Probably outside their home countries they’re “unknown”, but they were already award winning actors by the time they did Bond, which is what EON is going for these days.
Contrast that to Robert Davi in 1989.
Forgotten I wished. Great villain sadly not. Forgettable yes, absolutely.
@MakeshiftPython they were both relatively unknown internationally.
Are you saying Robert Davi wasn't as well known in the US or internationally at the time he did Licence to Kill or rather that he wasn't at that time award-winning? I'm not disputing what you're saying. I'm just genuinely curious as I don't really know for sure one way or the other. Would like to hear more from you on this, @MakeshiftPython.
True, but she was not say Julia Roberts or Nicole Kidman. With the last three main villains now, including NTTD, you have Oscar winning actors. I think it would be nice to have a veteran actor that is relatively unknown.
This post nails it!!
Telly Savalas is surely one at least. I don't think you could call his Blofeld campy, could you?!
He wasn't campy, but there was something lacking.
He’s the best Blofeld so far by a Country mile. He has the physical preference that the Blofeld of the books had.
Waltz more than conveys psychopathy and competence as a villain. I even detect a bit of Fleming's YOLT Blofeld--a bit nuts, and a bit eager to feign boredom at Bond's antics. He's certainly not nearly as foppish as Gray, or as obviously ridiculous as Pleasance. He feels camp in the way, say, Max Zorin is. Maybe a bit less than Zorin.
It's a movie cliché version of psychopathy and not convincing for a second. Bardem did a a better job but also had better material to work with--he didn't have heavily rely on his mannerisms or invoke endless tropes from past Blofelds. Everything about Waltz's Blofeld feels second-hand. As for competence, if I was a member of Spectre I'd demand the boss's resignation.
That's a stretch. Many Bond villains are a bit nuts and wish to rid themselves of Bond and his antics.
His earlobes.
Excellent! :D
I'm just glad they didn't drag Bunt into SP.
She has ears like an elephant!
Pretty much both.
Mikkelsen and Amalric weren't exactly household names but they weren't "unknown" given the accolades they earned before and since. Most Bond villains were played by highly acclaimed character actors, which is why Robert Davi kind of sticks out like a sore thumb.
Well, his organization seems to be doing fairly well up to the final reel!
With regard to YOLT, I meant his odd, casual attitude while dealing with Bond in the torture scene. "I can't hear you, James." The way he was making an effort to look bored. I guess I just didn't pick up on mannerisms that reminded me of previous Blofelds. Do you mean body language, or manner of speaking?
But yeah, it is a James Bond movie, so he's doing a movie psychopath thing of course, like Bardem or Walken. It's not a David Fincher joint!
:))
...aas in? Personally I find Davi's performance extremely well done. A very convincing character.
He reminded me of YOLT Blofeld too. Problem is, that's too early. I'd be fine to have a Blofeld lose his mind like that, but not when he's just been introduced.
Anyway, for now I blame lazy writing for the films shortcomings. It's really time for P&W to go.