Brad Whitaker
#1
Posted 18 August 2008 - 02:14 PM
#2
Posted 18 August 2008 - 02:24 PM
#3
Posted 18 August 2008 - 02:38 PM
#4
Posted 18 August 2008 - 02:43 PM
I liked his death aswell.
#5
Posted 18 August 2008 - 02:44 PM
I would rather him be the villain than Koskov.
He was OK. Not bad, not good.
I liked his death though.
If only he had died a lot sooner, before speaking or taking up any screen time.
#6
Posted 18 August 2008 - 02:54 PM
The word 'pathetic' comes to mind.
A horrible, unforgivable insult to Timothy Dalton's Bond is what he was.
Though it's Baker I mostly blame. I suspect Whittaker probably looked a lot better on paper.
#7
Posted 18 August 2008 - 02:58 PM
About as diabolical and dangerous as pudding.
The word 'pathetic' comes to mind.
A horrible, unforgivable insult to Timothy Dalton's Bond is what he was.
Though it's Baker I mostly blame. I suspect Whittaker probably looked a lot better on paper.
Agree on all points. Oh, what could have been. I think this is purely casting - it seems Baker has some bizarre hold on the Broccolis. Perhaps he knows the code for their Swiss bank account...
#8
Posted 18 August 2008 - 03:09 PM
But like said, that particular villain works for the film that has no grand "world domination" plot. You could say Whittaker is only half of the villain in TLD. Koskov is the other half. They complete one another (Not in a Wint-Kidd kind of way). Same could be said about almost everything seen on screen, and it ALL works for the films benefit. It let's Dalton shine as Ian Fleming's Bond. He is no doubt, the most Flemingggggian Bond of them all. Look and manner-wise.
#9
Posted 18 August 2008 - 03:15 PM
Lord knows he's been into enough of the chocolates...About as diabolical and dangerous as pudding.
The word 'pathetic' comes to mind.
A horrible, unforgivable insult to Timothy Dalton's Bond is what he was.
Though it's Baker I mostly blame. I suspect Whittaker probably looked a lot better on paper.
Agree on all points. Oh, what could have been. I think this is purely casting - it seems Baker has some bizarre hold on the Broccolis. Perhaps he knows the code for their Swiss bank account...
#10
Posted 18 August 2008 - 03:19 PM
About as diabolical and dangerous as pudding.
The word 'pathetic' comes to mind.
A horrible, unforgivable insult to Timothy Dalton's Bond is what he was.
Though it's Baker I mostly blame. I suspect Whittaker probably looked a lot better on paper.
Agree on all points. Oh, what could have been. I think this is purely casting - it seems Baker has some bizarre hold on the Broccolis. Perhaps he knows the code for their Swiss bank account...
We haven't seen Baker in a few films. Look out for him in Bond 23
#11
Posted 18 August 2008 - 03:22 PM
About as diabolical and dangerous as pudding.
The word 'pathetic' comes to mind.
A horrible, unforgivable insult to Timothy Dalton's Bond is what he was.
Though it's Baker I mostly blame. I suspect Whittaker probably looked a lot better on paper.
Agree on all points. Oh, what could have been. I think this is purely casting - it seems Baker has some bizarre hold on the Broccolis. Perhaps he knows the code for their Swiss bank account...
You could say the same about Maud Adams.
#12
Posted 18 August 2008 - 03:22 PM
#13
Posted 18 August 2008 - 04:12 PM
He can return in the form of a dialogue-free bystander in the crowd that Craig shoves out of the way during an exhilarating, no-holds-barred foot chase.[shudder] at the thought of Baker returning in any shape or form.
That’d be a nice fitting tribute to his characters of the past.
You could say what about Maud Adams?You could say the same about Maud Adams.
#14
Posted 18 August 2008 - 05:51 PM
#15
Posted 18 August 2008 - 05:58 PM
You could say what about Maud Adams?You could say the same about Maud Adams.
I think he meant; having traces of pudding on your lips. That, or cupcake crumbs.
#16
Posted 18 August 2008 - 06:47 PM
Their probably the biggest problem in what is generally one of the better Bond films made.
#17
Posted 18 August 2008 - 06:57 PM
#18
Posted 18 August 2008 - 07:21 PM
Wow. You're really shooting for the stars there Publius. In light of what we got with "John Doe" Baker, I'd have been happy with a Gary Busey.If they had managed to get David Bowie for Zorin in AVTAK, Christopher Walken would have made a great Whitaker. Or if they could have, Jack Nicholson.
#19
Posted 18 August 2008 - 07:25 PM
I'd have been happy with a Gary Busey.
#20
Posted 18 August 2008 - 07:34 PM
yyyep.I'd have been happy with a Gary Busey.
#21
Posted 18 August 2008 - 07:41 PM
#22
Posted 19 August 2008 - 12:24 AM
Like Octopussy, it suffers a little from too many villains, and an overly-elaborate plot.
#23
Posted 19 August 2008 - 01:05 AM
Why not Lance Henriksen?Wow. You're really shooting for the stars there Publius. In light of what we got with "John Doe" Baker, I'd have been happy with a Gary Busey.If they had managed to get David Bowie for Zorin in AVTAK, Christopher Walken would have made a great Whitaker. Or if they could have, Jack Nicholson.
Anyhow, "Brad" is such a dull, American name; how about "Vladek"?
#24
Posted 19 August 2008 - 02:20 AM
Bottom line, forgettable and not worthy of a Bond foe. As for Koskov being the other half, he acts so goofy there is no hint of menace to him. As much as I like TLD, it's really lacking much menace, save for Necros, the only decent villain, hanging in the shadows. But he's not really Red Grant, either.
#25
Posted 19 August 2008 - 02:36 AM
Hey, what was wrong with Stromberg? At least he was an improvement over the Blofeld of YOLT, and seems far superior to the Lite-version of him, Hugo Drax.I rank Whitaker just above Stromberg in the worst villain stakes. How bad can the man be, he never leaves his compound. Whereas Stromberg at least leaves Atlantis as he captures the American sub on the tanker, Whitaker doesn't. On the other hand, Whitaker gets up and around shooting at Bond. Stromberg hardly ever stands.
#26
Posted 19 August 2008 - 02:52 AM
I think I pretty much explained what's wrong with Stromberg. He has a cool, threatening voice, but that's about it. He pushes buttons to blow up helicopters and dispatch traitorous assistants, orders people around and spends more time at the dinner table than on evil plans.Hey, what was wrong with Stromberg? At least he was an improvement over the Blofeld of YOLT, and seems far superior to the Lite-version of him, Hugo Drax.I rank Whitaker just above Stromberg in the worst villain stakes. How bad can the man be, he never leaves his compound. Whereas Stromberg at least leaves Atlantis as he captures the American sub on the tanker, Whitaker doesn't. On the other hand, Whitaker gets up and around shooting at Bond. Stromberg hardly ever stands.
With the Blofeld of YOLT at least you got a cool make-up job, and his presence hangs over the film, you're finally going to meet him after four films. And he tries to kill Bond point blank rather than the goofy gun under the table thing Stromberg had.
As for Drax, he's far superior to Stromberg. Cool lines and demeanor, actually joins his operation rather than straying from it and has more screen time. You get a sense of the man.
#27
Posted 19 August 2008 - 04:35 AM
But:
According to our old friend Wikipedia:
"Baker was said to have actually tried out for the role of James Bond once for Live and Let Die"
Let's count our blessings on that score at least.
#28
Posted 19 August 2008 - 05:43 AM
I think I pretty much explained what's wrong with Stromberg. He has a cool, threatening voice, but that's about it. He pushes buttons to blow up helicopters and dispatch traitorous assistants, orders people around and spends more time at the dinner table than on evil plans.Hey, what was wrong with Stromberg? At least he was an improvement over the Blofeld of YOLT, and seems far superior to the Lite-version of him, Hugo Drax.I rank Whitaker just above Stromberg in the worst villain stakes. How bad can the man be, he never leaves his compound. Whereas Stromberg at least leaves Atlantis as he captures the American sub on the tanker, Whitaker doesn't. On the other hand, Whitaker gets up and around shooting at Bond. Stromberg hardly ever stands.
With the Blofeld of YOLT at least you got a cool make-up job, and his presence hangs over the film, you're finally going to meet him after four films. And he tries to kill Bond point blank rather than the goofy gun under the table thing Stromberg had.
As for Drax, he's far superior to Stromberg. Cool lines and demeanor, actually joins his operation rather than straying from it and has more screen time. You get a sense of the man.
My favourite incarnation of Blofeld is in FRWL. You can't see him, but just look at Kronsteen and Klebb's faces. They are utterly petrified. Only a proper villain can elicit such an reation from otherwise formidable baddies.
I don't believe you need to get moving, to be a sinister baddie. Stromberg is good because he doesn't have to do much, or even want to.
#29
Posted 19 August 2008 - 09:57 AM
Words can't describe how bad he was--or how desperate he seemed for a laugh.
But:
According to our old friend Wikipedia:
"Baker was said to have actually tried out for the role of James Bond once for Live and Let Die"
Let's count our blessings on that score at least.
Cubby really must have liked the guy. Blooming heck (that's if you want to believe Wikipedia).
Regarding Drax: he's probably my favourite Bond villian. Stromber is instantly forgettable.
Recasting Whitaker: How about Marlon Brando?
#30
Posted 19 August 2008 - 03:56 PM
You know, Skudor. If I could just get you to see that the LOTR series is essentially flawless, and that BRAVEHEART is free of sin, I think we might be best friends.Regarding Drax: he's probably my favourite Bond villian.
Drax has always been a favorite. In fact, I’ve got him as my absolute favorite in my profile… er, dossier, er… thing. Bond’s got a lot of great baddies to face; Kananga, Goldfinger, LeChiffre and OHMSS Blofeld are all pretty esteemed in my book as well, but Drax I think is just the most delicious. He hits the Bond baddie bulls-eye when he tiptoes up to that line of OTT, but doesn’t cross it. (In his character and dialogue alone, I mean. His devilish plan involving outer-space is silly and unfortunate, but beside the point here.)