28 replies to this topic

[AMC Hornet]

Mr. White: "The first thing you should know about us is that we have people everywhere."
M: "...I thought it was hyperbole. Florists use that expression."

007 has never had to match wits with a villain who has people so well placed (there was Miranda Frost, but since everyone seems to hate DAD so much, maybe they don't count that?).

Speculation about Mr. White being Quantum's #1 as well as the chief go-between, executioner and bottle-washer may be so much convenient misdirection. #1 may be the highest placed of all - right at the 'heart' of MI6.

My question is: who's the guy in bed with M in Casino Royale? Presumably he's the same guy who calls out "your line, dear." in QoS. But we never really see him, making him easier to recast when the time for unmasking comes.

How prone is M to pillow-talk? Working at home and being on 24-hour call would make it easy for a well-placed ear to pick up a lot of useful information. Sure, M's beau would have had to pass security clearance, but both Frost and Mitchell were vetted, so how effective is that?

This is my theory, anyway. I would hate to be right, as I always enjoy being surprised on opening night. What do you others out there think? If you think I'm bonkers, that's all right - I do too (probably from reading too much Gardner).

[Captain Tightpants]

Of course it could be Mr. White.

It would also be very poorly-written if that were the case. Everything we've seen from White suggests he is the Man Upstairs' right-hand man. His eyes, his ears and his voice, knowing everyone and everything in the organisation and charaged with clearing house when it goes badly. But not the actual Big Bad of the series.

Also, the guy in bed with M is her husband. It's been confirmed by the guy who plays him.

[AMC Hornet]

Of course, M was an analyst ,"an accountant - a bean counter more interested in my numbers than in your instincts" who considered Bond "a relic of the cold war...", yet later she says "Christ, I miss the cold war" as if she'd been a part of it at the time. If they can redefine her character to suit the script then surely her husband (who was never identied as such in the text of the films) could likewise be redefined?

Like I said, I hope I'm wrong. But at least it takes our minds off Mr. White and a rebooted Blofeld for a while.

Edited by AMC Hornet, 01 September 2010 - 09:58 PM.

[zencat]

[AMC Hornet]

Thanks, Zencat - that was a chuckle.

Is my idea really that bonkers?

[terminus]

Of course, M was an analyst ,"an accountant - a bean counter more interested in my numbers than in your instincts" who considered Bond "a relic of the cold war...", yet later she says "Christ, I miss the cold war" as if she'd been a part of it at the time. If they can redefine her character to suit the script then surely her husband (who was never identied as such in the text of the films) could likewise be redefined?

Like I said, I hope I'm wrong. But at least it takes our minds off Mr. White and a rebooted Blofeld for a while.

The M thing really doesn't hold up - the Brosnan M and the Craig M are clearly different characters (parallel versions, perhaps, at most). Brosnan M is an accountant, an evil queen of numbers who considers Bond a relic of the Cold War - whilst Craig M misses the Cold War and Daniel Craig's Bond could hardly be called a 'relic of the cold war' - he'd have been just twenty-two at the time of the fall of the Soviet Union (whilst Brosnan's Bond would have been in his late thirties).

They've not 'redefined the character to suit the script' - they're different characters entirely.

[Guy Haines]

That would be an interesting challenge for Bond - the "big bad" turning out to be someone at the heart of MI6, perhaps M him/herself? I could see how in a future film, as a one off once Dame Judi has retired, an M could be cast who turns out to be a traitor, deliberately sending Bond out to (almost) certain doom to throw him off the scent. There have been real life parallels of high level MI5/MI6 people who were revealed to be working for the USSR and its allies. Why not an M on the books of Quantum or some other adversary?

It has been done on screen before as well. Remember the Tom Cruise film version of Mission Impossible? Who turned out to be the big bad? Jim Phelps.

[K1Bond007]

Of course it could be Mr. White.

It would also be very poorly-written if that were the case. Everything we've seen from White suggests he is the Man Upstairs' right-hand man.

They've been on a Fleming kick so keep in mind that Ernst Stavro Blofeld was actually #2. The only difference here is that White gets his hands dirty while Blofeld (stupidly, at times) delegated duties to his underlings. I think it would actually be really smart to have him be the head without anyone really knowing it, which was a core philosophy of SPECTRE with the whole rotating numbers thing.

Who knows though.

I think my preference for Quantum would actually be for it to be run by the Spang brothers from Diamonds Are Forever. Unused Fleming characters, but it's also unique. That'd be Bond 24 and probably 25. My Bond 23, if I wrote it, would actually be a political thriller. Not your typical Bond film, obviously, but it'd be about Quantum using their "people everywhere" (especially the Government) to infiltrate the 00-section of MI6. They use their power to essentially overthrow M and put in their own puppet who directs investigations and so forth away from Quantum interests. Bond and maybe a couple other 00s don't go along and the whole section falls into disarray as they take sides. I like Dench, but it also might be time to go. I'd probably have her killed in there somewhere. This leaves the door open for M's replacement (Messervy) to get the house back in order. I'd also steal Charlie Higson's unused Blood Fever title: Double M.

[Aris007]

I hope your theory is wrong. Cause if it's right then it seems that Bond has turned in something like a mexican soap opera. I'm still in favour of the idea of M being a traitor.

And say Mr.White is the man in M's bed in Casino Royale, is M blind or something? Of course they meet each other late the other night at home. And if you think that he wears a mask or something then this sounds more like MI2.

So we can surely delete Mr.White from the list. Perhaps there another insider who works for Quantum. That's sensible.

[Guy Haines]

Of course it could be Mr. White.

It would also be very poorly-written if that were the case. Everything we've seen from White suggests he is the Man Upstairs' right-hand man.

They've been on a Fleming kick so keep in mind that Ernst Stavro Blofeld was actually #2. The only difference here is that White gets his hands dirty while Blofeld (stupidly, at times) delegated duties to his underlings. I think it would actually be really smart to have him be the head without anyone really knowing it, which was a core philosophy of SPECTRE with the whole rotating numbers thing.

Who knows though.

I think my preference for Quantum would actually be for it to be run by the Spang brothers from Diamonds Are Forever. Unused Fleming characters, but it's also unique. That'd be Bond 24 and probably 25. My Bond 23, if I wrote it, would actually be a political thriller. Not your typical Bond film, obviously, but it'd be about Quantum using their "people everywhere" (especially the Government) to infiltrate the 00-section of MI6. They use their power to essentially overthrow M and put in their own puppet who directs investigations and so forth away from Quantum interests. Bond and maybe a couple other 00s don't go along and the whole section falls into disarray as they take sides. I like Dench, but it also might be time to go. I'd probably have her killed in there somewhere. This leaves the door open for M's replacement (Messervy) to get the house back in order. I'd also steal Charlie Higson's unused Blood Fever title: Double M.

Not sure about the Spang brothers, unless they were portrayed in a very different way from their appearance in the novel Diamonds Are Forever. Ian Fleming's versions of American gangsters never seemed quite convincing to me. But twin villains running Quantum - that might work, and you could easily have the same actor playing both. Come to think of it, wasn't an early draft screenplay of what became the film DAF supposed to feature Goldfinger's twin brother as the main villain?

You've also come up with a similar idea to thoughts I've had about Bond's new superior being a wrong 'un, although my idea didn't have the whole department being riddled with Quantum types. I was thinking more of Bond being sent on a seemingly conventional mission against Quantum, but being foiled at various points, the villains seeming to be always one step ahead. Being Bond, he eventually overcomes the villains and their plot, but not without working out that only one person had high enough access to information to tip the bad guys off about Bond and his intentions - and that person had good reason to want Bond, the best Double-0 in the section, out of the way, permanently. Cue that scene from the book TMWTGG when Bond confronts M - the only differences being that it occurs at the end of the story rather than the start, that Bond isn't brainwashed, that this new M isn't what s/he seems, and that the scene ends with either M's demise or arrest.

The writer Peter Morgan claims to have devised a "shocking" story for Bond 23. I wonder if the various ideas being bounced around on this site, and this thread in particular, are close to it?

[hilly]

[quote name='AMC Hornet' timestamp='1283374431' post='1125462']
Mr. White: "The first thing you should know about us is that we have people everywhere."
M: "...I thought it was hyperbole. Florists use that expression."

I knew it! I've always had my suspicions about the girl with the dozen lilies in the florists in FYEO

[Zorin Industries]

It is worth noting that there is a history and cache to the M character in the Bond films and that would probably not be dumped on from a great height. You don't have Judi Dench as your M for over 15 years and make her a traitor. It makes a mockery of all that has gone before - brainwashed (which is an awful idea) or otherwise. Also, the "insider traitor" motif has been done to death in most Bond films since 1999 and is a little tired and - worst of all - in the audience's minds now.

I think Morgan's notion of "shocking" could well lie in the boldness of the story ideas and not yawnsome twists like the bosses are traitors. Besides, we already know Tim Pigott Smith's character is corrupt so where is the surprise?

[Loomis]

You don't have Judi Dench as your M for over 15 years and make her a traitor.

Not if you want to play it safe, no.

It makes a mockery of all that has gone before

I'm not so sure. I don't think Dench's M has ever really been a sympathetic character. Indeed, she's been fairly consistently drawn as a cold fish and an incompetent who doesn't know what's going on and who makes poor decisions. Furthermore, she's almost always been a complete bitch towards Bond in both the Brosnan and Craig eras. I'd certainly have no problem in buying the idea of M as a traitor (if she's somehow talked herself into believing that her treachery is ultimately for the greater good), although I don't imagine for a single second that Eon will go down that route.

[Guy Haines]

It is worth noting that there is a history and cache to the M character in the Bond films and that would probably not be dumped on from a great height. You don't have Judi Dench as your M for over 15 years and make her a traitor. It makes a mockery of all that has gone before - brainwashed (which is an awful idea) or otherwise. Also, the "insider traitor" motif has been done to death in most Bond films since 1999 and is a little tired and - worst of all - in the audience's minds now.

I think Morgan's notion of "shocking" could well lie in the boldness of the story ideas and not yawnsome twists like the bosses are traitors. Besides, we already know Tim Pigott Smith's character is corrupt so where is the surprise?

Couple of points. I wouldn't want Dench's M to be revealed as a villain. On the other hand, a successor, in place for just one movie, could be revealed as such. The "boss as bad guy" has been done before in other films, but never in Bond, and if handled properly it could have shock value. A leading lady, or supposed ally who turns out to be a wrong 'un we expect in these films. But M? Unthinkable.

Also, the character played by Tim Piggot-Smith may or may not be corrupt, but he was certainly behaving like the politician he was. They sometimes do deals with unsavoury types. It doesn't make them corrupt so much as brutally realistic.

[Bryce (003)]

Some fine and interesting theories here. I have a few of my own. I'll think on it, but do carry on.

[Zorin Industries]

You don't have Judi Dench as your M for over 15 years and make her a traitor.

Not if you want to play it safe, no.

It makes a mockery of all that has gone before

I'm not so sure. I don't think Dench's M has ever really been a sympathetic character. Indeed, she's been fairly consistently drawn as a cold fish and an incompetent who doesn't know what's going on and who makes poor decisions. Furthermore, she's almost always been a complete bitch towards Bond in both the Brosnan and Craig eras. I'd certainly have no problem in buying the idea of M as a traitor (if she's somehow talked herself into believing that her treachery is ultimately for the greater good), although I don't imagine for a single second that Eon will go down that route.

It's not about being "safe". It's about betraying the audience. Yes, surprise them by all means. But having M - as an example - as a traitor sticks two fingers up at the character and the audience. You cannot do ret-con things like this with Bond. Furthermore, it puts BOND in the wrong position of not seeing that one coming - which is not in his character at all (certainly not when it comes to his superiors who he has trusted for 50 cinematic years).

[AMC Hornet]

...say Mr.White is the man in M's bed in Casino Royale, is M blind or something? Of course they meet each other late the other night at home. And if you think that he wears a mask or something then this sounds more like MI2.

So we can surely delete Mr.White from the list. Perhaps there another insider who works for Quantum. That's sensible.

I wasn't suggesting that Mr. White is #1 and M's husband/lover, only that if Mr. White isn't #1, then maybe the faceless character who's always around while M is online at home could be - or could at least be another insider communicating with Quantum.

I'm surprised and delighted by the numerous and thoughtful responses to this thread. Keep it up! (And Hilly, I love your catch about the Flower girl. If Robbin Young's name appears on a future cast list, we'll know you were right!)

Edited by AMC Hornet, 02 September 2010 - 08:18 PM.

[MajorB]

They've been on a Fleming kick so keep in mind that Ernst Stavro Blofeld was actually #2. The only difference here is that White gets his hands dirty while Blofeld (stupidly, at times) delegated duties to his underlings. I think it would actually be really smart to have him be the head without anyone really knowing it, which was a core philosophy of SPECTRE with the whole rotating numbers thing.

Who knows though.

I think my preference for Quantum would actually be for it to be run by the Spang brothers from Diamonds Are Forever. Unused Fleming characters, but it's also unique. That'd be Bond 24 and probably 25. My Bond 23, if I wrote it, would actually be a political thriller. Not your typical Bond film, obviously, but it'd be about Quantum using their "people everywhere" (especially the Government) to infiltrate the 00-section of MI6. They use their power to essentially overthrow M and put in their own puppet who directs investigations and so forth away from Quantum interests. Bond and maybe a couple other 00s don't go along and the whole section falls into disarray as they take sides. I like Dench, but it also might be time to go. I'd probably have her killed in there somewhere. This leaves the door open for M's replacement (Messervy) to get the house back in order. I'd also steal Charlie Higson's unused Blood Fever title: Double M.

Small point: Blofeld was only #2 because the members' numbers were regularly rotated around the roster. (Administratively absurd, but never mind.) Functionally he was unquestionably number one.

Responding to other posts, I like the idea of Tim Piggott-Smith's character (the MoD?) being at the head of Quantum. It's exactly the kind of thing Quantum seems like it would do. Especially given that we know the Minister's right-hand man is with Quantum. It would be interesting, though, if at the end of B23, Bond has Tim P-S's character at gunpoint, and he says to Bond, "Arrest me, kill me, it makes no difference. Quantum's power doesn't rest in me or any one person. We're everywhere, Bond. Everywhere." That would be creepy.

Then if he shouted "Hail Hydra!" my life would be complete.

[Guy Haines]

You don't have Judi Dench as your M for over 15 years and make her a traitor.

Not if you want to play it safe, no.

It makes a mockery of all that has gone before

I'm not so sure. I don't think Dench's M has ever really been a sympathetic character. Indeed, she's been fairly consistently drawn as a cold fish and an incompetent who doesn't know what's going on and who makes poor decisions. Furthermore, she's almost always been a complete bitch towards Bond in both the Brosnan and Craig eras. I'd certainly have no problem in buying the idea of M as a traitor (if she's somehow talked herself into believing that her treachery is ultimately for the greater good), although I don't imagine for a single second that Eon will go down that route.

It's not about being "safe". It's about betraying the audience. Yes, surprise them by all means. But having M - as an example - as a traitor sticks two fingers up at the character and the audience. You cannot do ret-con things like this with Bond. Furthermore, it puts BOND in the wrong position of not seeing that one coming - which is not in his character at all (certainly not when it comes to his superiors who he has trusted for 50 cinematic years).

It would "stick two fingers up" if the current M was revealed as a traitor, and in my contributions I've never suggested this. Rather, that her successor is revealed as corrupted by the villains of the piece, presumably Quantum. They have "people everywhere", but not yet as heads of MI6. All I've suggested is that, for one story at least, Bond found himself taking orders from someone with, at the very least, divided loyalties, if not an out and out traitor. We've had one Double O go bad. There's no reason, unfortunately, why the corruption couldn't go higher up.

[Loomis]

It's not about being "safe". It's about betraying the audience. Yes, surprise them by all means. But having M - as an example - as a traitor sticks two fingers up at the character and the audience. You cannot do ret-con things like this with Bond. Furthermore, it puts BOND in the wrong position of not seeing that one coming - which is not in his character at all (certainly not when it comes to his superiors who he has trusted for 50 cinematic years).

It would "stick two fingers up" if the current M was revealed as a traitor, and in my contributions I've never suggested this.

Eon seems quite happy to sometimes put Craig's Bond in the wrong position of not seeing things coming - indeed, this would seem appropriate to the "origin story" flavour of his era.

I don't see why intelligent, nuanced filmmaking would be unable to accommodate the idea of Dench's M as a traitor (especially if her treachery isn't a clear-cut case of good-and-evil-right-and-wrong). She is only one M among many. Indeed, she is not even supposed to be - and cannot be - the same M from the Brosnan films, and I don't see that her treachery would be incompatible with her character arc thus far in CASINO ROYALE and QUANTUM OF SOLACE, which seems to me to portray her as devious, incompetent and unsympathetic (she even explicitly threatens Mr White with torture, which unless I'm severely mistaken is something that "the good guys" should never do).

Now, I'm not actually calling for M to be revealed as a traitor, or the head of Quantum, or whatever. But I do maintain that they could pull it off if they wanted to, although as I say I'm sure that they have no interest in going down that route. Similarly, Leiter could be revealed as a traitor. And before anyone says "Oh, but Felix is supposed to be Bond's friend!", I'll point out that Eon chose to kill off Mathis (who was never slain in any of the Fleming novels, and was never a double agent, come to that) and that Raymond Benson has to my knowledge taken at least one "good" character from Fleming and made him a villain.

I don't see that Eon isn't free to do whatever it likes with whichever characters it likes. Heck, the current Bond even has blond hair!

[Guy Haines]

It's not about being "safe". It's about betraying the audience. Yes, surprise them by all means. But having M - as an example - as a traitor sticks two fingers up at the character and the audience. You cannot do ret-con things like this with Bond. Furthermore, it puts BOND in the wrong position of not seeing that one coming - which is not in his character at all (certainly not when it comes to his superiors who he has trusted for 50 cinematic years).

It would "stick two fingers up" if the current M was revealed as a traitor, and in my contributions I've never suggested this.

Eon seems quite happy to sometimes put Craig's Bond in the wrong position of not seeing things coming - indeed, this would seem appropriate to the "origin story" flavour of his era.

I don't see why intelligent, nuanced filmmaking would be unable to accommodate the idea of Dench's M as a traitor (especially if her treachery isn't a clear-cut case of good-and-evil-right-and-wrong). She is only one M among many. Indeed, she is not even supposed to be - and cannot be - the same M from the Brosnan films, and I don't see that her treachery would be incompatible with her character arc thus far in CASINO ROYALE and QUANTUM OF SOLACE, which seems to me to portray her as devious, incompetent and unsympathetic (she even explicitly threatens Mr White with torture, which unless I'm severely mistaken is something that "the good guys" should never do).

Now, I'm not actually calling for M to be revealed as a traitor, or the head of Quantum, or whatever. But I do maintain that they could pull it off if they wanted to, although as I say I'm sure that they have no interest in going down that route. Similarly, Leiter could be revealed as a traitor. And before anyone says "Oh, but Felix is supposed to be Bond's friend!", I'll point out that Eon chose to kill off Mathis (who was never slain in any of the Fleming novels, and was never a double agent, come to that) and that Raymond Benson has to my knowledge taken at least one "good" character from Fleming and made him a villain.

I don't see that Eon isn't free to do whatever it likes with whichever characters it likes. Heck, the current Bond even has blond hair!

Indeed. While I wouldn't go as far as you suggest necessarily, you are right. They came perilously close to Leiter siding against Bond in QoS, didn't they? And yes, the good guys aren't supposed to do torture, but......well, there's torture and there's extraordinary rendition, which is what M was, quite topically, alluding to in that scene in QoS. As for the character from the Benson book, well, to quote Blofeld in the film OHMSS, his profession "was not entirely within the law". Not when Fleming created him, certainly not when Benson revived him.

[jamie00007]

I think some things you just dont mess with, whether they could pull it off or not. To me M is almost as an iconic a figure as Bond himself, no matter which version of M it is. For 50 years M has been incorruptible, a figure that Bond can always rely on to be trustworthy and do the right thing (even if its against Bond himself), and a grounding element in the series. It would be like Moneypenny being a traitor. I would hate to see that too.

It's also a cliche of this genre of film. The boss and and guiding figure of the main character being revealed as a traitor and having to be confronted has been done to death.

[Automan]

no no no.
Bourne is fighting his own bosses; Hunt had to kill Jim Phelps.
All we'd have to do is close down the MI6 and stop all treachery.

No; M is uncorruptable

[Guy Haines]

I think some things you just dont mess with, whether they could pull it off or not. To me M is almost as an iconic a figure as Bond himself, no matter which version of M it is. For 50 years M has been incorruptible, a figure that Bond can always rely on to be trustworthy and do the right thing (even if its against Bond himself), and a grounding element in the series. It would be like Moneypenny being a traitor. I would hate to see that too.

It's also a cliche of this genre of film. The boss and and guiding figure of the main character being revealed as a traitor and having to be confronted has been done to death.

A couple of points. First, M is part and parcel of the Bond canon, but then again of course, so is Bond himself. Which didn't stop Ian Fleming messing around with the character - who would have guessed that 007 would try to kill his own boss, in the book TMWTGG? It is possible to change the reader's or film goer's expectations of a character, provided you do it convincingly (whether you should do it is another matter - like others here, I've suggested the idea of Bond's next boss as one of Quantum's "people everywhere" as a plot idea that could be done.).

Secondly, perhaps the boss as bad guy theme has been done to death, though never before tried in this series. And having a superior who turns out to be not on the same side as you is not unknown in a secret agent story - or indeed in real life espionage.

[jamie00007]

Maybe its something they could do in a few movies down the track to shake things up again, but I dont need any more shaking up for a while. And Im not too keen on Bond films delving any more into internal MI6 politics.

[Messervy]

My thoughts on this are:

- Why would "Quantum's #1" have to be whitin MI6 (M or the man in her bed)? Sure, there are Quantum's people in MI6, but reading all your comments I get the idea that you want to have its #1 as a MI6 senior. But we could also argue, and it would be even more intersting (since, believe it or not, the world doesn't begin and end with MI6), about Quantum's #1 being someone from the PM staff (not the PM himself, of course! Well, ...), someone in Washington from the Administration, or someone from the "civil society" from another country (say, a rich and lunatic from an asian country).

- I think M's figure shouldn't be debased. M's the boss, the irremovable solid base for Bond, with whom Bond has a father-son kind of relation. It is absolutely vital to keep things this way.

[Guy Haines]

My thoughts on this are:

- Why would "Quantum's #1" have to be whitin MI6 (M or the man in her bed)? Sure, there are Quantum's people in MI6, but reading all your comments I get the idea that you want to have its #1 as a MI6 senior. But we could also argue, and it would be even more intersting (since, believe it or not, the world doesn't begin and end with MI6), about Quantum's #1 being someone from the PM staff (not the PM himself, of course! Well, ...), someone in Washington from the Administration, or someone from the "civil society" from another country (say, a rich and lunatic from an asian country).

- I think M's figure shouldn't be debased. M's the boss, the irremovable solid base for Bond, with whom Bond has a father-son kind of relation. It is absolutely vital to keep things this way.

If not an internal villain then why not have Quantum as similar to SPECTRE, but made up, not of cells from the Mafia, Union Corse, SS and so on, but - as hinted at with one of the opera goers who fled - ex MI6, CIA, KGB, Mossad, indeed any intelligence types you could think of? Displaced by the end of the cold war and seeking to profit from these uncertain times, and using their contacts inside these agencies, and governments, private sector, criminal syndicates and terror groups. Of course, it too has been done before - for example in the last series of "Spooks", with the "Nightingale" group.

I think what some of us contributing to this thread are considering is a nemesis for Bond which goes beyond another type of adversary which has also been done to death, the reclusive evil genius (white cat purely optional!)

[Messervy]

My thoughts on this are:

- Why would "Quantum's #1" have to be whitin MI6 (M or the man in her bed)? Sure, there are Quantum's people in MI6, but reading all your comments I get the idea that you want to have its #1 as a MI6 senior. But we could also argue, and it would be even more intersting (since, believe it or not, the world doesn't begin and end with MI6), about Quantum's #1 being someone from the PM staff (not the PM himself, of course! Well, ...), someone in Washington from the Administration, or someone from the "civil society" from another country (say, a rich and lunatic from an asian country).

- I think M's figure shouldn't be debased. M's the boss, the irremovable solid base for Bond, with whom Bond has a father-son kind of relation. It is absolutely vital to keep things this way.

If not an internal villain then why not have Quantum as similar to SPECTRE, but made up, not of cells from the Mafia, Union Corse, SS and so on, but - as hinted at with one of the opera goers who fled - ex MI6, CIA, KGB, Mossad, indeed any intelligence types you could think of? Displaced by the end of the cold war and seeking to profit from these uncertain times, and using their contacts inside these agencies, and governments, private sector, criminal syndicates and terror groups. Of course, it too has been done before - for example in the last series of "Spooks", with the "Nightingale" group.

I think what some of us contributing to this thread are considering is a nemesis for Bond which goes beyond another type of adversary which has also been done to death, the reclusive evil genius (white cat purely optional!)

Yes, but then I don't want Bond's nemesis to be Bond's boss. Call me old-fashioned, but M's the boss, the pivotal figure in the Service, he/she is no traitor.

[double o ego]

Of course it could be Mr. White.

It would also be very poorly-written if that were the case. Everything we've seen from White suggests he is the Man Upstairs' right-hand man. His eyes, his ears and his voice, knowing everyone and everything in the organisation and charaged with clearing house when it goes badly. But not the actual Big Bad of the series.

Also, the guy in bed with M is her husband. It's been confirmed by the guy who plays him.

Even though I stand by Dench is playing a completely different M character to the one she played in the Brosnan movies, that line about the cold war doesn't necessarily mean she was actively involved in British Intelligence during the time of the cold war. A woman in her position would obviously know how things worked with regards to protocol back then and given the present situation she was in during CR, wishing for things to go back to the cold war would make her job a lot simpler.