SPECTRE: So who's going to play Ernst?

14849505153

Comments

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    matt_u wrote: »
    I'm sure Spectre has the best ensemble cast ever in a Bond movie.
    Waltz will be brilliant there I have no worries.
    I'm more worried about Bellucci just having little screen time or get wasted story wise. That would be a shame. I'm a big fan of hers.

    You're right the cast is amazing. What about Monica? She's a real beauty, she's hot etc etc but as an actress she's bad. Sometimes I think that her english is better than her italian. If you hear how she dubbed herself in the second trailer... oh my gosh...

    Speculating about Blofeld... you don't cast one of the best actors in the world in a movie called Spectre and you "just" let him play the son of Hannes Oberhauser... Waltz is definitely Blofeld IMHO and Scott would be a kind of "anti-M"... I remember an interview back when they were shooting in Mexico City in which Waltz - speaking about his character - said: "Maybe even him [Oberhauser] doesn't know who really is"...

    You don't cast the biggest actress in Holywood at the time and kill her in 15 minutes.. no wait Hitchcock did with Janet Leigh in Psycho..it's the movie business. Nobody is saying Waltz is just Oberhauser son. He may be the head of Spectre at the start of the film, he may be head of Qauntum, after all he does say "it's was me James, the author of all your pain". If he means Vesper etc that was Qauntums people not Spectre. But as I said we will soon find out. I really can't see Waltz do more than one Bond movie, I can see Scott doing more than one. You don't bring back Spectre for one film, not after all that it took to finally secure the rights from the McClory estate. And as I said previously Scott has not been allowed to give insight in to his character, the rest of the cast have Waltz included.

    If SPECTRE were responsible in part, or whole, for the events of CR and QoS then this could technically be classed as their third film. If they wanted to retcon SF and have Silva as an agent they could do that also, no problem. In that regard this could be seen as a culmination of the events of the previous trilogy of films.

    They aren't going to have Blofeld stick around like they did in the past IMO. I think they'll go for a big hit. This and possibly one more final film, if he were to return. But they aren't going to set up Scott or any other actor for a three, four, five film run. You get Waltz in for one or two and you nail it. You tie up the loose ends and send DC out on a high then recast with SPECTRE nowhere to be seen. Rest them again until their is an appetite for their return.

    That's how I would see it working best.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    RC7 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    I'm sure Spectre has the best ensemble cast ever in a Bond movie.
    Waltz will be brilliant there I have no worries.
    I'm more worried about Bellucci just having little screen time or get wasted story wise. That would be a shame. I'm a big fan of hers.

    You're right the cast is amazing. What about Monica? She's a real beauty, she's hot etc etc but as an actress she's bad. Sometimes I think that her english is better than her italian. If you hear how she dubbed herself in the second trailer... oh my gosh...

    Speculating about Blofeld... you don't cast one of the best actors in the world in a movie called Spectre and you "just" let him play the son of Hannes Oberhauser... Waltz is definitely Blofeld IMHO and Scott would be a kind of "anti-M"... I remember an interview back when they were shooting in Mexico City in which Waltz - speaking about his character - said: "Maybe even him [Oberhauser] doesn't know who really is"...

    You don't cast the biggest actress in Holywood at the time and kill her in 15 minutes.. no wait Hitchcock did with Janet Leigh in Psycho..it's the movie business. Nobody is saying Waltz is just Oberhauser son. He may be the head of Spectre at the start of the film, he may be head of Qauntum, after all he does say "it's was me James, the author of all your pain". If he means Vesper etc that was Qauntums people not Spectre. But as I said we will soon find out. I really can't see Waltz do more than one Bond movie, I can see Scott doing more than one. You don't bring back Spectre for one film, not after all that it took to finally secure the rights from the McClory estate. And as I said previously Scott has not been allowed to give insight in to his character, the rest of the cast have Waltz included.

    If SPECTRE were responsible in part, or whole, for the events of CR and QoS then this could technically be classed as their third film. If they wanted to retcon SF and have Silva as an agent they could do that also, no problem. In that regard this could be seen as a culmination of the events of the previous trilogy of films.

    They aren't going to have Blofeld stick around like they did in the past IMO. I think they'll go for a big hit. This and possibly one more final film, if he were to return. But they aren't going to set up Scott or any other actor for a three, four, five film run. You get Waltz in for one or two and you nail it. You tie up the loose ends and send DC out on a high then recast with SPECTRE nowhere to be seen. Rest them again until their is an appetite for their return.

    That's how I would see it working best.

    Problem. Bond got away with that in the past because you could have missions about soviet Russia, Communist China, North Korea. Politically such story lines would be inflamatory in the real world. They've done pretty much every other rogue trade or rich aristocrat with a goal of world domination. Making a film series about Bond hunting down and stopping Spectre is safe fuel for movie production fire. Even the theme of films from Brosnans era would not work today, too outlandish or risk of pissing off a country.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    I'm sure Spectre has the best ensemble cast ever in a Bond movie.
    Waltz will be brilliant there I have no worries.
    I'm more worried about Bellucci just having little screen time or get wasted story wise. That would be a shame. I'm a big fan of hers.

    You're right the cast is amazing. What about Monica? She's a real beauty, she's hot etc etc but as an actress she's bad. Sometimes I think that her english is better than her italian. If you hear how she dubbed herself in the second trailer... oh my gosh...

    Speculating about Blofeld... you don't cast one of the best actors in the world in a movie called Spectre and you "just" let him play the son of Hannes Oberhauser... Waltz is definitely Blofeld IMHO and Scott would be a kind of "anti-M"... I remember an interview back when they were shooting in Mexico City in which Waltz - speaking about his character - said: "Maybe even him [Oberhauser] doesn't know who really is"...

    You don't cast the biggest actress in Holywood at the time and kill her in 15 minutes.. no wait Hitchcock did with Janet Leigh in Psycho..it's the movie business. Nobody is saying Waltz is just Oberhauser son. He may be the head of Spectre at the start of the film, he may be head of Qauntum, after all he does say "it's was me James, the author of all your pain". If he means Vesper etc that was Qauntums people not Spectre. But as I said we will soon find out. I really can't see Waltz do more than one Bond movie, I can see Scott doing more than one. You don't bring back Spectre for one film, not after all that it took to finally secure the rights from the McClory estate. And as I said previously Scott has not been allowed to give insight in to his character, the rest of the cast have Waltz included.

    If SPECTRE were responsible in part, or whole, for the events of CR and QoS then this could technically be classed as their third film. If they wanted to retcon SF and have Silva as an agent they could do that also, no problem. In that regard this could be seen as a culmination of the events of the previous trilogy of films.

    They aren't going to have Blofeld stick around like they did in the past IMO. I think they'll go for a big hit. This and possibly one more final film, if he were to return. But they aren't going to set up Scott or any other actor for a three, four, five film run. You get Waltz in for one or two and you nail it. You tie up the loose ends and send DC out on a high then recast with SPECTRE nowhere to be seen. Rest them again until their is an appetite for their return.

    That's how I would see it working best.

    Problem. Bond got away with that in the past because you could have missions about soviet Russia, Communist China, North Korea. Politically such story lines would be inflamatory in the real world. They've done pretty much every other rogue trade or rich aristocrat with a goal of world domination. Making a film series about Bond hunting down and stopping Spectre is safe fuel for movie production fire. Even the theme of films from Brosnans era would not work today, too outlandish or risk of pissing off a country.

    I don't agree. There is and will continue to be plentiful fuel for the Bond fire and several incarnations of the character that have yet to be committed to the screen. It all depends on where they and the world finds itself post-Craig. You can get round directly politicising a situation with a little creativity and there are plenty more rogue entities outside of SPECTRE that can be conceived of. Personally I hope they go back to basics, strip it right back.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    @SirHilaryBray

    I think the TND plot is still relevant today if not even more relevant.
    There are those media moguls who would like to "make their own news" or dominate the world of media.
    One reason why TND holds up that well I think.

    The political correctness that has to happen in movies also bothers me. Just remember that unbelievable occurrence with The Interview. It was like a bad plot from a movie, but it was really happening!

    It will get increasingly difficult to find good plots for future Bond movies, except EON would decide to remake some of the Bond movies.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Lets hope they don't go into remake territory. That would ruin the magic for me.
  • Posts: 15,132
    Murdock wrote: »
    I'm sure a few didn't think Ralph Fiennes would do more than one film.

    That too.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512

    Most of the copy is just regurgitated theories born on this site.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    RC7 wrote: »

    Most of the copy is just regurgitated theories born on this site.

    ;)
  • Posts: 15,132
    RC7 wrote: »

    Most of the copy is just regurgitated theories born on this site.

    My thought exactly.
  • RC7 wrote: »
    Most of the copy is just regurgitated theories born on this site.
    But he also talks about something that was never touched upon here :)

  • Why does anybody think Oberhauser is Blofeld, doesn't make any sense, that's like saying the Joker is a childhood acquaintance of Bruce Wayne.
    Highly ridiculous.
    Even P+W can't have become that insane.

    I agree with you. My fear, though, being that Bond is a Sony property is that they'd try to replicate what they were doing with Amazing Spider-Man 2 and tie everything to Bond's childhood. I don't know why they would... it didn't work for ASM2.

    I'm still betting the Waltz as Blofeld stuff is misdirection. They've released photos of him wearing the Blofeld outfit, he had those CGI dots on his face filming the helicopter scene (which could have been kept more private on a set), and there are some theories that essentially go like, "you don't hire Waltz and not have him be Blofeld." Isn't that the essence of misdirection?
  • Posts: 11,119
    schulzch wrote: »
    Why does anybody think Oberhauser is Blofeld, doesn't make any sense, that's like saying the Joker is a childhood acquaintance of Bruce Wayne.
    Highly ridiculous.
    Even P+W can't have become that insane.

    I agree with you. My fear, though, being that Bond is a Sony property is that they'd try to replicate what they were doing with Amazing Spider-Man 2 and tie everything to Bond's childhood. I don't know why they would... it didn't work for ASM2.

    I'm still betting the Waltz as Blofeld stuff is misdirection. They've released photos of him wearing the Blofeld outfit, he had those CGI dots on his face filming the helicopter scene (which could have been kept more private on a set), and there are some theories that essentially go like, "you don't hire Waltz and not have him be Blofeld." Isn't that the essence of misdirection?

    Bond is not a Sony property. Bond is owned by EON Productions Ltd. and MGM. Sony is only contracted for co-financing and especially distribution.
  • schulzch wrote: »
    Why does anybody think Oberhauser is Blofeld, doesn't make any sense, that's like saying the Joker is a childhood acquaintance of Bruce Wayne.
    Highly ridiculous.
    Even P+W can't have become that insane.

    I agree with you. My fear, though, being that Bond is a Sony property is that they'd try to replicate what they were doing with Amazing Spider-Man 2 and tie everything to Bond's childhood. I don't know why they would... it didn't work for ASM2.

    I'm still betting the Waltz as Blofeld stuff is misdirection. They've released photos of him wearing the Blofeld outfit, he had those CGI dots on his face filming the helicopter scene (which could have been kept more private on a set), and there are some theories that essentially go like, "you don't hire Waltz and not have him be Blofeld." Isn't that the essence of misdirection?

    Bond is not a Sony property. Bond is owned by EON Productions Ltd. and MGM. Sony is only contracted for co-financing and especially distribution.

    Point taken. I was just trying to state that Sony has hands in both pies and the similar themes are concerning.

  • Posts: 11,119
    schulzch wrote: »
    schulzch wrote: »
    Why does anybody think Oberhauser is Blofeld, doesn't make any sense, that's like saying the Joker is a childhood acquaintance of Bruce Wayne.
    Highly ridiculous.
    Even P+W can't have become that insane.

    I agree with you. My fear, though, being that Bond is a Sony property is that they'd try to replicate what they were doing with Amazing Spider-Man 2 and tie everything to Bond's childhood. I don't know why they would... it didn't work for ASM2.

    I'm still betting the Waltz as Blofeld stuff is misdirection. They've released photos of him wearing the Blofeld outfit, he had those CGI dots on his face filming the helicopter scene (which could have been kept more private on a set), and there are some theories that essentially go like, "you don't hire Waltz and not have him be Blofeld." Isn't that the essence of misdirection?

    Bond is not a Sony property. Bond is owned by EON Productions Ltd. and MGM. Sony is only contracted for co-financing and especially distribution.

    Point taken. I was just trying to state that Sony has hands in both pies and the similar themes are concerning.

    After those SonyLeaks I'm not sure if EON/MGM want to continue the distribution and co-financing deal with Sony. Warner could really use an insane big franchise now. And also Universal is already doing a lot of distribution for the upcoming Bond film.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Isn't this the last Bond film SONY and EON/MGM are working on together?
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 15,132
    schulzch wrote: »
    Why does anybody think Oberhauser is Blofeld, doesn't make any sense, that's like saying the Joker is a childhood acquaintance of Bruce Wayne.
    Highly ridiculous.
    Even P+W can't have become that insane.

    I agree with you. My fear, though, being that Bond is a Sony property is that they'd try to replicate what they were doing with Amazing Spider-Man 2 and tie everything to Bond's childhood. I don't know why they would... it didn't work for ASM2.

    I'm still betting the Waltz as Blofeld stuff is misdirection. They've released photos of him wearing the Blofeld outfit, he had those CGI dots on his face filming the helicopter scene (which could have been kept more private on a set), and there are some theories that essentially go like, "you don't hire Waltz and not have him be Blofeld." Isn't that the essence of misdirection?

    That's the essence of a number of evidence backing up the Oberhauser is Blofeld theory.

    As for the true Franz Oberhauser, if there ever was one, he might have been dead for some time.
  • Posts: 1,548
    Denbigh as Blofeld. I can see it happening.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,981
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    Denbigh as Blofeld. I can see it happening.

    Why is that?
  • Posts: 15,132
    RC7 wrote: »
    Most of the copy is just regurgitated theories born on this site.
    But he also talks about something that was never touched upon here :)

    What? That Denbigh is ideologically opposed to MI6, M, Bond? That he is a modern man?
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    Denbigh as Blofeld. I can see it happening.

    As a cop-out sure.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Ludovico wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Most of the copy is just regurgitated theories born on this site.
    But he also talks about something that was never touched upon here :)

    What? That Denbigh is ideologically opposed to MI6, M, Bond? That he is a modern man?
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    Denbigh as Blofeld. I can see it happening.

    As a cop-out sure.
    Agreed. He's too weak looking to be Bond's nemesis. An underling sure but not Blofeld, let alone the head of SPECTRE.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,981
    While I'll truly be shocked if anyone other than Waltz is Blofeld, I'll also be real upset if they go with some cop out choice, making someone like Denbigh (or perhaps someone we don't see until the very end) into Blofeld.
  • Posts: 15,132
    I cannot picture Scott/Denbigh giving orders to Waltz/Oberhauser or Mr White, and actually have White tremble in fear.

    I know Andrew Scott has his fans because he played Moriarty. But I was never convinced by his Moriarty to begin with. And why would Bond's nemesis go mano a mano against... M? That would be another cop out.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    He's a number 5 at most. :))
  • Posts: 15,132
    Murdock wrote: »
    He's a number 5 at most. :))

    As Moriarty, in his speech and demeanor, Scott reminds me of... Toby Stephens as Gustav Graves. Now I'm sure Denbigh is far better written and will be played accordingly, and that Denbigh might be a capable underling. But Blofeld? Can't see it.

    And I have an hypothesis: is it possible that Denbigh, in spite of his flaws and even the fist fight he gets into with M, is actually a good guy? Denbigh could be manipulated to think M is actually a traitor, or vice versa.
  • JNOJNO Finland
    edited October 2015 Posts: 137
    My guess is that nobody´s going to play Ernst in SPECTRE. Oberhauser is Oberhauser and Denbigh is Denbigh. There may be some signs of old Ernst but I don´t believe he appears in the actual film.

    I believe they are going the same route as they did in the 60´s. Blofeld keeps hiding in the shadows and the other members of Spectre are doing the dirty work. And then bang! He will be revealed to the world. Maybe in Bond 27/28 or something.

    Maybe Craig´s job was to bring Spectre back and his successor will face Ernst in the future? And for the return of Ernst there are many Fleming storylines still unused (the original YOLT,TMWTGG etc).

    I just can´t believe that mr Waltz (or Scott either) has made a multipicture deal to play Ernst in the forthcoming films... but I also never couldn´t imagine that mr Fiennes was to become the new M.

    So it´s anybody´s guess!

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Still reckon Oberhauser is Blofeld, without a doubt. You don't get the rights to the character and cast Waltz as someone else. Everybody is overthinking it. He has to be Blofeld!
  • DariusDarius UK
    Posts: 354
    RC7 wrote: »
    Still reckon Oberhauser is Blofeld, without a doubt. You don't get the rights to the character and cast Waltz as someone else. Everybody is overthinking it. He has to be Blofeld!

    Steady on, @RC7! This is a spoilerphobe-friendly forum.
  • JNOJNO Finland
    Posts: 137
    It will be very interesting to see how it´s been made if Oberhauser actually turns out to be dear old Blofeld.

    "Hello, James. I am the author of all your pain, your old pal Franz Ober... now, wait a minute. Yeah, yeah. I WAS Oberhauser but in the end I decided it was too lousy a name. I am Ernst Stavro Blofeld nowadays. Fuck, how terrifying name is that? So, James. Forget about the Oberhauser thing. Remember: B-L-O-F-E-L-D. Hell yeah! The author of all your pain."

    Sorry for my BAD humour :(|)

    We shall see very soon how this all settles!
  • Posts: 11,119
    JNO wrote: »
    It will be very interesting to see how it´s been made if Oberhauser actually turns out to be dear old Blofeld.

    "Hello, James. I am the author of all your pain, your old pal Franz Ober... now, wait a minute. Yeah, yeah. I WAS Oberhauser but in the end I decided it was too lousy a name. I am Ernst Stavro Blofeld nowadays. Fuck, how terrifying name is that? So, James. Forget about the Oberhauser thing. Remember: B-L-O-F-E-L-D. Hell yeah! The author of all your pain."

    Sorry for my BAD humour :(|)

    We shall see very soon how this all settles!

    I still have NO CLUE at all of what's going to happen to Oberhauser. None! I haven't had that clueless anticipation in a long time! I will keep it that way ;-).
Sign In or Register to comment.