
Blofeld/Telly Savalas
#1
Posted 27 May 2004 - 02:55 PM
#2
Posted 27 May 2004 - 09:16 PM
And welcome to CBn, Kalel577!
#3
Posted 27 May 2004 - 10:26 PM
#4
Posted 28 May 2004 - 01:05 AM
Trivia Question: Which Friends actor/actress is related to Telly Savalas and what is their relation?
#5
Posted 28 May 2004 - 02:08 AM
#6
Posted 28 May 2004 - 02:39 AM
I have an idea, that it might be Courtney Cox?Telly may have had a commitment to the television show, Kojak, in 1971.
Trivia Question: Which Friends actor/actress is related to Telly Savalas and what is their relation?
#7
Posted 28 May 2004 - 11:28 AM

#8
Posted 28 May 2004 - 11:49 AM
He is the Godfather of Jennifer Aniston! I knew that without researching. I'm full of useless informationTelly may have had a commitment to the television show, Kojak, in 1971.
Trivia Question: Which Friends actor/actress is related to Telly Savalas and what is their relation?

#9
Posted 28 May 2004 - 02:47 PM
#10
Posted 28 May 2004 - 02:53 PM

#11
Posted 28 May 2004 - 04:03 PM
#12
Posted 28 May 2004 - 04:05 PM
#13
Posted 28 May 2004 - 11:06 PM
And the cool George Sanders-like Donald Grey was both too aloof and ultimately too campy.Blofeld should never be a transvestite.Grey once played a very spooky very frightening character in the horror film The Devil Rides Out but Eon didn't want that from him.For Diamonds Are Forever,Eon wanted a clown.
But Savalas was a man of action.He was just sophisticated enough to verbally spar with the elegant Teresa di Vincenzo("Oh Master of the World"),and also believably tough enough to credibly leap into the forefront when pursuing 007.Telly's Blofeld was a dangerous character and a great adversary for James Bond.
I like the Unseen Blofeld of the earlier movies best-replete to the long graceful hands and the eerie speaking voice, but Telly Savalas was the best of the Blofelds to be seen on the screen.His Kojak series kept him too busy to appear in DAF but by then,Eon had already decided to take 007 the comedic route and he was probably better off not reprising his role.
Edited by Willie Garvin, 28 May 2004 - 11:09 PM.
#14
Posted 29 May 2004 - 02:21 AM
I always wondered why they never even had Pleasence reprise the role from You Only Live Twice into On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, but then the thought of "changing his appearance."I think it had a lot to do with there not being any direct link from OHMSS to DAF. The producers just didn't want any linkage, hence the no direct mention of Bond's motive for revenge and/or Tracy.
They never were the best at actor continuation occasionally in the Bond series. (Felix Leiter)
#15
Posted 29 May 2004 - 02:48 AM
#16
Posted 29 May 2004 - 02:49 AM
#17
Posted 29 May 2004 - 07:27 PM
I agree, W.G. Telly Savalas is the only one of the Blofeld's that are seen that carries any real menace. I like both Donald Pleasance and Charles Gray as actors, but they were miscast as Blofeld.I've always prefered Telly's Ernst Stavro Blofeld over any of the other actors who've given a face to this terrorist.He's the only one of the actors who is physically close to Ian Fleming's description(right down to the Greek heritage).He's the only Blofeld who has a truly menacing presence.There's a sense of danger about him the other Blofeld actors don't have.The elfin Donald Pleasance version was ridiculous.An egg that cracked on the boil.His cat was more commanding-- more fearsome.
And the cool George Sanders-like Donald Grey was both too aloof and ultimately too campy.Blofeld should never be a transvestite.Grey once played a very spooky very frightening character in the horror film The Devil Rides Out but Eon didn't want that from him.For Diamonds Are Forever,Eon wanted a clown.
But Savalas was a man of action.He was just sophisticated enough to verbally spar with the elegant Teresa di Vincenzo("Oh Master of the World"),and also believably tough enough to credibly leap into the forefront when pursuing 007.Telly's Blofeld was a dangerous character and a great adversary for James Bond.
I like the Unseen Blofeld of the earlier <A TITLE="Click for more information about movies" STYLE="text-decoration: none; border-bottom: medium solid green;" HREF="http://search.target...VDw">movies</A> best-replete to the long graceful hands and the eerie speaking voice, but Telly Savalas was the best of the Blofelds to be seen on the screen.His Kojak series kept him too busy to appear in DAF but by then,Eon had already decided to take 007 the comedic route and he was probably better off not reprising his role.
The unseen Blofeld was a figure of real menace. The mind can create and imagine menace that the filmmakers can rarely match. When Blofeld's face is revealed in YOLT under the guise of Donald Pleasance's scarred face you do indeed wonder if the cat is more fearsome than Blofeld. How can this man possibly be the head of SPECTRE? Telly Savalas restored some credibility to the character of Blofeld in OHMSS, but that was all lost by turning Charles Gray's Blofeld into a camp figure in DAF. What a way for Eon to treat Bond's arch-nemisis.
#18
Posted 29 May 2004 - 07:48 PM
If there was ever a villain that ended on such a bad note, Ernst Stavro Blofeld may have been it. Savalas was excellent, and has grown in my views of him as a good villain, although I think Pleasence did a fair job. Gray was much too light as this supreme villain, and his finale, along with the quick pretitles in For Your Eyes Only are useless in giving a good ending to this villain.The unseen Blofeld was a figure of real menace. The mind can create and imagine menace that the filmmakers can rarely match. When Blofeld's face is revealed in YOLT under the guise of Donald Pleasance's scarred face you do indeed wonder if the cat is more fearsome than Blofeld. How can this man possibly be the head of SPECTRE? Telly Savalas restored some credibility to the character of Blofeld in OHMSS, but that was all lost by turning Charles Gray's Blofeld into a camp figure in DAF. What a way for Eon to treat Bond's arch-nemisis.
#19
Posted 29 May 2004 - 08:05 PM
A great villain such as Ian Fleming's Ernst Stavro Blofeld deserved better treatment and more respect from Eon. And yes, Qwerty, Blofeld did indeed deserve a more fitting finale than the one he was supposedly given in the pre-title sequence of FYEO.If there was ever a villain that ended on such a bad note, Ernst Stavro Blofeld may have been it. Savalas was excellent, and has grown in my views of him as a good villain, although I think Pleasence did a fair job. Gray was much too light as this supreme villain, and his finale, along with the quick pretitles in For Your Eyes Only are useless in giving a good ending to this villain.
#20
Posted 29 May 2004 - 08:07 PM
His death(s) (Diamonds Are Forever, For Your Eyes Only) are just bad.
#21
Posted 29 May 2004 - 08:40 PM
To be fair, they did indeed treat the character of Ernst Stavro Blofeld with respect early on. Sooner or later they had to put a face to this unseen arch-nemisis of Bond because the audience would have demanded it. As I said in a previous post, the mind can create and imagine menace that the filmmakers can rarely match, so it was never going to be easy for them to find the right actor who could convincingly portray Ernst Stavro Blofeld when the time came to reveal his face in YOLT.I think they had alot of respect for his film character early on, when his face remained unseen, now those were, are, and continue to be excellent scenes in the films. But as they moved on, it seemed occasionally that he didn't get the same authority and class that they could have made his character have.
His death(s) (Diamonds Are Forever, For Your Eyes Only) are just bad.
In my opinion, there are two actors that have appeared in the Bond films who would have been very convincing as the head of SPECTRE and portray a real threat, real menace, real danger. Those actors are Robert Shaw and Christopher Lee.
#22
Posted 29 May 2004 - 08:45 PM
When I was younger I couldn't wait to rent You Only Live Twice because I heard that this was the Bond film that let you saw his face, and I loved every bit of it. I still think it worked well, but it just seems now to me, that the faceless version is stronger at showing off this villain.As I said in a previous post, the mind can create and imagine menace that the filmmakers can rarely match, so it was never going to be easy for them to find the right actor who could convincingly portray Ernst Stavro Blofeld when the time came to reveal his face in YOLT.
In my opinion, there are two actors that have appeared in the Bond films who would have been very convincing as the head of SPECTRE and portray a real threat, real menace, real danger. Those actors are Robert Shaw and Christopher Lee.
Those two names you mentioned would have indeed been interesting choices, Lee could have possibly been quite good at the role.
#23
Posted 29 May 2004 - 09:08 PM
In terms of physical presence Robert Shaw would have the edge over Christopher Lee as Ernst Stavro Blofeld. You would look at Shaw and instantly know that this is a man to fear and a man to treat with respect. In terms of intelligence Christopher Lee would have the edge. It takes more than brawn to become head of SPECTRE and it would be easy to believe Lee as the criminal mastermind.Those two names you mentioned would have indeed been interesting choices, Lee could have possibly been quite good at the role.
#24
Posted 29 May 2004 - 09:24 PM
I think that's why I might prefer Lee better in the role. I wouldn't want to see a total villain with just physical presence, I think Lee could have a very menacing intelligence and wit in the role, Robert Shaw seemed perfectly casted for his Red Grant, which was indeed a misture of intelligence and physical presence, but his strength really showed through.In terms of intelligence Christopher Lee would have the edge. It takes more than brawn to become head of SPECTRE and it would be easy to believe Lee as the criminal mastermind.
#25
Posted 30 May 2004 - 08:19 AM
Another good candidate as Blofeld would have been Joseph Wiseman.
#26
Posted 30 May 2004 - 02:59 PM
I've often thought that Christopher Lee with his majestic presence and voice of doom would have been the perfect Blofeld-not for one film but for all three adaptations of the Blofeld Trilogy:Thunderball,On Her Majesty's Secret Service and You Only Live Twice.And with one man as James Bond--a commited and interested Sean Connery.I respect Lazenby and all that, but the trilogy needs Sean.By then Sean would be a full partner with Cubby and Harry at Eon-as he always should have been so all 3 of these films would mean a great deal to him.He'd be in top shape throughout.And of course, the Blofeld Trilogy would be filmed in it's proper chronological order this time around.And if Lee wasn't available, the excellent Peter Wyngarde might be good choice for Blofeld.Now there's a voice...Or Nigel Green-another strong performer.Men with the ability to make Blofeld a fearsome figure--as opposed to a comedic one.As I said in a previous post, the mind can create and imagine menace that the filmmakers can rarely match, so it was never going to be easy for them to find the right actor who could convincingly portray Ernst Stavro Blofeld when the time came to reveal his face in YOLT.
In my opinion, there are two actors that have appeared in the Bond films who would have been very convincing as the head of SPECTRE and portray a real threat, real menace, real danger. Those actors are Robert Shaw and Christopher Lee.
When I was younger I couldn't wait to rent You Only Live Twice because I heard that this was the Bond film that let you saw his face, and I loved every bit of it. I still think it worked well, but it just seems now to me, that the faceless version is stronger at showing off this villain.
Those two names you mentioned would have indeed been interesting choices, Lee could have possibly been quite good at the role.
And after a considerably more faithful adaptation of the final Blofeld adventure,it'd be the end of SPECTRE for the series.The You Only Live Twice screenplay could diverge from the novel in that 007 wouldn't fall and lose his memory after having killed Blofeld.Instead,he'd return to Britain.This would allow for the films to continue without missing a beat.In fact,the films that followed these might be the best ones to change tone and introduce Roger Moore's more genial 007 to the screen.
Edited by Willie Garvin, 30 May 2004 - 03:20 PM.