453 replies to this topic

[antovolk]

One thing I did not quite catch in my first viewing - maybe someone can clear this up:
 

Spoiler

When Blofeld asks if anyone wants to take over the assignment of killing The Pale King, why does the Italian guy gets assasinated by Hinx?  Just a show of force by Blofeld?  Also, all the others at the table seem to be sensible business men/women.  Hinx is a wordless brute.  Wouldn´t it have made more sense to only introduce him as an enforcer? 

Spoiler

It's Hinx's way of stating his credentials - showing Blofeld and the others at the meeting that he os up to the task.

[RMc2]

Glad you agree RMc2! And your second point makes total sense - I think this time I was looking too much into things and questioning it to fill the gaps in my own brain.

 

Lol there are lots of things I missed too! Bit worried by Barbara's comments on the red carpet about wanting Mendes back... Hope it's just more of the hype!

[bonds_walther]

One thing I did not quite catch in my first viewing - maybe someone can clear this up:

Spoiler

When Blofeld asks if anyone wants to take over the assignment of killing The Pale King, why does the Italian guy gets assasinated by Hinx? Just a show of force by Blofeld? Also, all the others at the table seem to be sensible business men/women. Hinx is a wordless brute. Wouldn´t it have made more sense to only introduce him as an enforcer?

Agreed. The Italian (I thought he was spanish) guy seems to be a reliable soldier of Spectre. Let him be killed that way is poor management from Blofeld

I read it as Hinx showing Bloferhauser what he is all about. I didn't think that 'Number One' put Hinx up to it. However, sitting by and letting the killing happen helps to illustrate his ruthlessness and lets every other member of SPECTRE know that no-one is irreplaceable.

Reminded me of the electrocution of the SPECTRE member in TB.

[Hansen]

Not really.
In TB, it was punishment.
Here, it is for free.
Not the same impact on the team

And I hope that SPECTRE members are somehow irreplaceable. Otherwise, it would be an association of common bandits, making it not very frightening nor dangerous

[Vauxhall]

Seems he wasn't convinced he was the man for job, so wanted to open the field to others. At that stage, Hinx entered the fray and showed his credentials.

[bonds_walther]

Not really.
In TB, it was punishment.
Here, it is for free.
Not the same impact on the team

And I hope that SPECTRE members are somehow irreplaceable. Otherwise, it would be an association of common bandits, making it not very frightening nor dangerous

Perhaps the chap in question lacked 'absolute integrity'? As we all know, anyone who does in the world of SPECTRE meets a sticky end.

[stromberg]

 

Not really.
In TB, it was punishment.
Here, it is for free.
Not the same impact on the team

And I hope that SPECTRE members are somehow irreplaceable. Otherwise, it would be an association of common bandits, making it not very frightening nor dangerous

Perhaps the chap in question lacked 'absolute integrity'? As we all know, anyone who does in the world of SPECTRE meets a sticky end.

 

I saw it that way that he was part of the Italian team, who screwed up the Mexico job. He may also have known that the Italian team failed in killing Sciarra's widow. The guy was doomed from the very beginning. It was just a reminder for the rest of the gang that SPECTRE doesn't tolerate any failure. and maybe a bit of showing off for Bond, as he knew he was there.

[Guy Haines]

I've been with one of my political colleagues tonight and he and his lady both thought SPECTRE was great (and were amused when yours truly revealed the octopus symbol on the mobile wallpaper and watch face! ;-) )

My colleague mentioned something which never occurred to me;

Spoiler

the death of Hinx and those barrels - reminiscent of Jaws. And he didn't mean the Bond movie character, but the film.

[Mr_Wint]

Well, just came back from my first viewing. There's a few good scenes here and there, but overall it is a clunky mess.

Spoiler

The poor version of Blofeld and his evil-brother link to James Bond is by far the worst aspect of this movie. How they could mess up the whole Blofeld/SPECTRE mythology like this goes beyond my understanding.

I feel that this incarnation of Blofeld/SPECTRE is way over the top. The SPECTRE organisation is too big and Blofeld's planning skills are insane. He is responsible for every bad thing that has happened in Bond's life. Yes, all Bond girls died because of him. And of course he has a photo of every villain in Bond's life... one for each room. He's everywhere, knows everything, can see everything and has prepared everything in great detail. But then the movie had to end, so Bond randomly just shoots him down with his PPK. It is also amazing who easy it is to get into a SPECTRE meeting these days.

[SecretAgentFan]

I've been with one of my political colleagues tonight and he and his lady both thought SPECTRE was great (and were amused when yours truly revealed the octopus symbol on the mobile wallpaper and watch face! ;-) )

My colleague mentioned something which never occurred to me;

Spoiler

the death of Hinx and those barrels - reminiscent of Jaws. And he didn't mean the Bond movie character, but the film.

 

Ha!  That actually makes sense, alluding to another legendary henchman.  If intended, this is a great inside joke!

[Guy Haines]

I've been with one of my political colleagues tonight and he and his lady both thought SPECTRE was great (and were amused when yours truly revealed the octopus symbol on the mobile wallpaper and watch face! ;-) )
My colleague mentioned something which never occurred to me;

Spoiler

the death of Hinx and those barrels - reminiscent of Jaws. And he didn't mean the Bond movie character, but the film.

 
Ha!  That actually makes sense, alluding to another legendary henchman.  If intended, this is a great inside joke!

Well, we tend to forget that these film makers do have a life outside Bond. I think someone on the writing or direction side remembered that scene, put two and two together and thought "great idea". And unlike some inside jokes in past Bonds which were in your face this one was subtle but apt.

[sharpshooter]

I haven't seen the movie, but from I've heard about Hinx:

Spoiler

I like they made him mute, ala Jaws in TSWLM. And like Jaws, he only speaks once and during his final scene. Seems like a good tradeoff to me.

[FlemingBond]

Spoiler

 

my question for those that have seen it is , does Bond and Oberhauser's past relationship really add anything to the plot or Oberhauser's character??

Edited by FlemingBond, 31 October 2015 - 09:00 PM.

[Hansen]

Spoiler

my question for those that have seen it is , does Bond and Oberhauser's past relationship really add anything to the plot or Oberhauser's character??

As a matter of fact, it weakens it

[whitesox]

 

Spoiler

my question for those that have seen it is , does Bond and Oberhauser's past relationship really add anything to the plot or Oberhauser's character??

As a matter of fact, it weakens it

 

I agree.

[Vauxhall]

I wouldn't say it weakens it. Whether you agree with the choice to include it or not, the plot would be nothing without it.

[Guy Haines]

Spoiler

About Blofeld.

 

In the book "Thunderball" there's a whole chapter about him - named "Spectre" - which is very informative. In the films, up to now - nothing. From FRWL to DAF - and NSNA - he's just "there", stroking that cat and ordering global mayhem.

 

The Craig Bond films inhabit a different universe - right from the first I've considered them separate from what went before even though there are "oh so clever" nods to what went before, notably the recurring DB5. I'm not obsessive about trying to fit them into the 1962-2002 timeline. That said, the film makers were this time, at least so far as the "classic" elements.

 

So, I'm not altogether surprised that Blofeld has been given a makeover. I'm surprised it worked for me - he's really Oberhauser but adopted the maternal name Blofeld and dug up the "Ernst Stavro" bit from somewhere in the family tree (a neat inversion of what happened in OHMSS when our villain was desperately seeking respectability and anything but the name Blofeld!)

 

Bond and Franz as "brothers" - they aren't, and it wouldn't surprise me if there's more to the murder of Oberhauser senior than sonny boy being jealous. The whole "Oberhauser" business was taken from the short story "Octopussy" and there's a cache of gold mentioned in it. What's to say junior knew about it and was impatient for senior to hand it over? It would explain how he could finance his life in big crime. The whole "I became a criminal because of you Bond" might just be another ploy to wind 007 up. Bond "interfered" with Blofeld's world when back in CR he ruined Le Chiffre's schemes. Everything since then has been indirect - Blofeld pleased with himself that Vesper and M died because it hurt Bond. Embellishment, I'd say.

 

If we revisit Blofeld in movie 25 I think we'll find there's more to his motives than wanting to get one over on Bond. Like all Bond villains, he's a disturbed individual - he  could have taken the path he took even if young James hadn't spent two winters with his family.

[FlemingBond]

i went back and looked at Octopussy and was surprised from that they made a character. How they jumped to where they went i really can't understand

as for the prior movies

Spoiler

 

what was so great about Blofeld is he was a mystery. i don't get this thing to make everything 'personal'. they just had Silva- M in the last film. They already had 006 vs. 007 in Goldeneye. To me it weakens Blofeld

[SecretAgentFan]

I wouldn't say it weakens it. Whether you agree with the choice to include it or not, the plot would be nothing without it.

 

Absolutely.  For me, it actually strengthens it.

[Hansen]

 

I wouldn't say it weakens it. Whether you agree with the choice to include it or not, the plot would be nothing without it.

 

Absolutely.  For me, it actually strengthens it.

 

The plot would have focus on the control of information thru 9-eyes (which is very loyal to Blofeld obsession as described in the books) and would have been more developped. The subplot about the protection of Madeleine would have still worked, same for the subplot about M vs C.

And Blofeld would not have been wasted.

I do not see what the relationship between Bond/Oberhauser brings to the story either dramatically or emotionally

To me, it is a very low point in a great Bond film

[SecretAgentFan]

The relationship ties everything together and raises it to another level, IMO.

[Mr_Wint]

 

 

I wouldn't say it weakens it. Whether you agree with the choice to include it or not, the plot would be nothing without it.

 
Absolutely.  For me, it actually strengthens it.

 

The plot would have focus on the control of information thru 9-eyes (which is very loyal to Blofeld obsession as described in the books) and would have been more developped. The subplot about the protection of Madeleine would have still worked, same for the subplot about M vs C.
And Blofeld would not have been wasted.
I do not see what the relationship between Bond/Oberhauser brings to the story either dramatically or emotionally
To me, it is a very low point in a great Bond film

 

Agree, it adds nothing to the film. If anything, it weakens both Bond and the villain.

Spoiler

I wish they had taken a totally different approach with Blofeld for this film. Waltz is too well-known and a little bit weak for the role. He lacks that chilling voice that the character needs. An unknown actor from the theatre scene would have been much better. And call me old-fashioned, but Blofeld's face should have been hidden for this film! Never let Bond and Blofeld meet face to face. Give us a fascinating story from Blofeld's earlier life but make it dubious whether this is true or invented by himself. Dark and mysterious like Keyser Söze.

And for god sake, do not make Blofeld/SPECTRE too powerful! It should be a small group with brilliant criminal brains that manipulates others. As an example, they should NOT be able to watch M addressing his staff... Remember that Fleming portrayed the British Intelligence as competent, and not the convoluted mess we see in this film.

What we now got is a waste with so much potential.
The first mistake was to use SPECTRE/Blofeld for the Craig era. Craig didn't need it, and EON should have played this card to introduce Bond #7 with a big bang. The second mistake was that the writers never really cared about Blofeld. All Mendes cared about was the family issues. First Blofeld was a woman, then it was an African guy and then... nobody. Even as late as one month before shooting, the filmmaker weren't sure if Blofeld was in this movie or not. That's how you get this result...

[Harmsway]

Mr. Wint, Blofeld was *always* in the movie. Don't take the code names as indications that EON/Mendes were uncertain about his inclusion.

[Mr_Wint]

Mr. Wint, Blofeld was *always* in the movie. Don't take the code names as indications that EON/Mendes were uncertain about his inclusion.

 

That's not true and you know it.

[SecretAgentFan]

It´s really strange: the more I think about the film the more I like it.

 

I´ll probably have to eat my hat for voicing lukewarm concerns directly after watching it for the first time.

 

The interesting thing, for me, is that with Mendes at the helm again I was expecting a film very similar in tone with SKYFALL.  SPECTRE, however, is very different - despite some thematic ideas carried on.  

 

I guess my advice for anybody who loved SKYFALL is to not expect SKYFALL 2.

[sharpshooter]

I like Skyfall - it's a top tier Bond film and I don't really have much to criticise. Nor do I really want to criticise it. However I don't believe it's 'above the Bond genre' or anything. It's not without moments of suspending disbelief so we can go along with the ride. SPECTRE's tone may be more relaxed in places (I'll be okay with that), but I don't think the plot contrivances will be drastically dissimilar to what has gone before to be honest. 

[SecretAgentFan]

IMO, the SPECTRE plot hangs together pretty well. For me, it´s the last 20 minutes which could have benefitted from being a little less... um... Bondian - but the events are unspooling more logically than those in SKYFALL, I must admit.

[Vauxhall]

Mr. Wint, Blofeld was *always* in the movie. Don't take the code names as indications that EON/Mendes were uncertain about his inclusion.

 
That's not true and you know it.

No, Harmsway is right. The character was always there; it was just how they decided to portray him/her that wasn't nailed down.

[Mr_Wint]

Mr. Wint, Blofeld was *always* in the movie. Don't take the code names as indications that EON/Mendes were uncertain about his inclusion.

 
That's not true and you know it.

No, Harmsway is right. The character was always there; it was just how they decided to portray him/her that wasn't nailed down.

Sounds like a contradiction. How rough was the sketch of the character if the sex wasn't decided?

They did not create a character called Ernst Stavro Blofeld and then built a movie around that. Instead, they created a bunch of characters and then they tried to figure out which one they should called "Blofeld".

Spoiler

It was a lesbian women in March 2014, Charlotte, then it was M, then an african warlord, Stockmann, Oberhauser etc. etc.

[Harmsway]

Mr. Wint, Blofeld was *always* in the movie. Don't take the code names as indications that EON/Mendes were uncertain about his inclusion.

That's not true and you know it.

It's very true, Mr. Wint.

It was a lesbian women in March 2014, Charlotte, then it was M, then an african warlord, Stockmann, Oberhauser etc. etc.

The female Blofeld and African warlord approaches didn't last long, for obvious reasons. Those were put aside early in the process.

They considered making M a villain, but it's not clear that he was ever going to be Blofeld. It seems that M was going to function the way C does in the finished film.

"Stockmann" was never a real name they intended to use. The studio notes make it clear that the name was just a substitute for the name "Blofeld" to hide the fact that the character was going to be used.