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
He just should have had more screen time to be properly developed, and as has been said, drop the childhood angle......it's rather irrelevant given the way it was mentioned and the way it played out, as if no one really gives a toss.
They could have let the whole thing revolve around Madeleine's childhood (Blofeld's impact on her via her father's fear) rather than both Bond and Madeleine. That would have helped to forge more of a connection with her character by Bond as well, although it would retread the Camille story a bit.
Blofeld could just be a mastermind who came after Bond because he interfered in his affairs, starting all the way back with LeChiffre and the bombmaker in CR.
On the contrary, the grinning and simpering Nancy that is Waltz's Blofeld bears no resemblance whatsoever to Fleming's bulky, otherworldly, and ice cold monster. Rather, he looks like Bond's personal physician in Shrublands.
Blofeld as seen in SPECTRE.
But I'm afraid Dr. No's minuscule screen time does hurt him and the film. He was such a captivating presence this viewer always feels a bit deprived at the end. DN would have benefited from having Joseph Wiseman on screen considerably more. But that's not a problem with Waltz-Blofeld because he's largely a cipher who doesn't possess an ounce of the proper Blofeld malevolence to begin with, so nothing lost really. Given, however, Waltz's lack of screen time, I fail entirely to see how you can conclude that he is a cerebral, asexual puritan.
Grinning Nancy. Brilliant.
The best Bond villains to me, always have the nicest openings, and have relatively short screentime.
Same with certain Bond girls. I don't get the criticism about 'screen time'. Sometimes it's entirely necessary to introduce a villain fairly late, or to kill off a secondary Bond-girl early on, for the sake of keeping the story going.....and to create 'memorable/gritty moments'.
Personally, I LOVED how Severine was killed off early, because it gave more gravita to the character of Silva. Blofeld in "SPECTRE" had actually two introductions, downtown Rome, at the Bilderberg-table, and then again in "Dr No"-esque fashion in his lair in Morocco.
Call me a bit psychotic :-P....but I loved the way Hinx killed off that inefficient Spanish SPECTRE-member :-P. I was even thinking.....push deeper with your nails Hinx! Right into his brains 8-X
A physician who drills dentist equipment in one's skull. A physician who coldly watches how the previous head of SPECTRE is being violently blinded (How would that feel actually...emptying eyeballs from its fluids?). A physician who takes pleasure in showing a video of Mr White's suicide to Madeleine Swann. A physician who takes pride in discovering when the soul actually leaves the body before death (Blofeld: "It was done after his eyes were popped out. He was physically perhaps still alive, but you felt that his soul already left.")
You can call him a nancy now, but let me drill some holes in your skull instead >:)
He appeared early in the movie which was really good.
His scene in the darkly lit meteor room was so brilliant. One of many instant classic scenes.
Silva was introduced after 75 minutes!! and then he said this:
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://youtube.com/embed/inPk9M0v320" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
could be out of an Austin Powers movie.
:)) This is totally taken out of context as I like the line but I appreciate the humour in your post :D For those that want to know how Blofeld is described in other novels
One thing I am absolutely certain now, is that the four Craig-films have way way better Bond villains than the four Brosnan films.
--> Le Chiffre
--> Mr White
--> Silva
--> Hinx
--> Oberhauser/Blofeld
In comparison I think....
--> Gustav Graves
--> Elliot Carver
--> Alec Trevelyan
--> Renard
...all lacked something real sinister. They were just 'there' most of the time. Only exception for me would be Elektra King. Delightful female villain.
Incomplete dear Gustav!
and Hinx doesn't count otherwise you have to put Onatopp and Stamper into the list as well.
For main villains my ranking:
1. Trevelyan
2. Le Chiffre
3. Carver
4. Greene
5. Graves
6. Renard
7. Silva
One of the false rumors I really liked before Skyfall came out was that Bond & Silvas fathers were 00s & Silvas father killed Bonds.
How much do you want to bet in the next film its revealed Oberhauser killed Bonds parents.
=)) =))
Seconded. The adoptive brother angle is too much...but this ? Ooooh noo....please no...
Having said that, Waltz is as always, awesome. If you're not paying attention, he phones it in. If you are, he nails every word, nuance, tilt of silhouetted head and never in a condescended actor fashion. I agree that he's never physically menacing, but there is definitely fear in the Rome mtg. His comic touches and craziness also underplay the fear factor in his lair, until he touches his tablet and the lights go dark and all the workers stand and face him in silence. It's about psychological control and he has it.
I'm looking forward to seeing how he continues the role. I do hope they avoid the bald cliche though and p adopt Blofeld's willingness to change his appearance for anonymity sake.
Also, was that Irma Bunt at the table?
Franz Oberhauser died 20 years ago, in avalanche along with his father. The man you are now talking to, the man that is in your head is, Ernst Stavro Blofeld.
Along those lines.
Waltz is just cashing the check, and second, he is nothing without Tarantino. He is a bad vilain in Green Hornet too.
Overall I suppose a hit, as he made what could have been a very campy character work.
It's in the attitude, not so much what he does as what he doesn't do: we don't see him drinking or smoking, his voice is cold and drone like, there's something of the eunuch in him. He doesn't even seem to have homosexual desires like say Silva had. Or to a lesser extend Le Chiffre.
Precisely.........I agree completely.
The SPECTRE meet and the funeral were great intro's. When he finally is revealed it reminded me a bit of Pleasance's intro in YOLT......a complete letdown. Maybe Blofeld should indeed always remain in the shadows because that's when he's best (including in the Connery films).
Having said that, the threat of Bardem's Silva was also more menacing before he arrived ("What do you know about fear?") but I loved his OTT entrance.
That said, I thought Waltz gave a very accomplished performance and the film on the whole was great fun. But enough of the Bond backstory now, I think.
Yet they seem to forget that even in Dr. No you didn't see Joseph Wiseman until near the very end of the movie, there was just this underlining sense of fear and mystery throughout, which I feel is exactly the same in SP.
It's not about how much screentime the character has its about what they do when they are on screen and Waltz played it to perfection, a real sense of evil and insanity behind those eyes.
Also how often is it that a Bond villain is left alive at the end of the movie?!
I can assure you he will be back.