462 replies to this topic

[Guy Haines]

I agree with tdalton. What is the point of finally being able to use the characters - well, one character in particular - and the criminal syndicate from Thunderball and, using that syndicate's acronym as the film's title, if you don't actually use them in the film? They might as well have titled the film "Risico" - which, frankly, I was half expecting - kept Quantum as the villains and reveal that Quantum's boss is Franz Oberhauser, and that that really is his name - no cover names involved.

 

The SPECTRE of the new film won't be exactly the same as the one we remember from the 1960s, I'm sure. Times have changed and so have methods. But surely it makes some sort of sense that if you can finally re-invent the organisation you also re-invent the boss, and he's ultimately revealed to be Blofeld.

[Vauxhall]

On a different but related note: will people be bothered if SPECTRE isn't referred to as the Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion - or would it be acceptable as simply a criminal organisation?

[JCRendle]

If it's not mentioned, then Bond fans will still associate the organisation with that abbreviation through association - general movie-goers who don't know the history will, hopefully, just think "that's a cool name". I don't think it has to be spelled out.

[Shrublands]

Actually, I think it would be best not to explain what it stands for. Wouldn't it all sound a bit camp and silly nowadays?

Best that people who know, just know and those who don't... Well, it's just a cool name for a terror organisation.

[Orion]

Is it just me, or could the official Quantum logo easily morph into the spectre octopus?

[glidrose]

If it isn't Fleming's Blofeld then one has to wonder if it's also not Fleming's SPECTRE as well.  Which then, if one applies that same logic, why then would they bring back SPECTRE?

 

Apples and oranges. Brand/Blofeld are persons. Spectre/Blades are organizations. Remember Blades? What we got in DAD wasn't exactly Fleming's Blades but that didn't stop EON using the name. I'm just throwing this out, but it's not entirely unlikely they may go this route again. Use the organization name but not the person. Who knows? Perhaps the revamped Blofeld will have a name that sounds awfully close to ESB but isn't quite ESB. Say, Ernest Șerbănescu Blomfeld.

 

And why would they bring back SPECTRE? Because they can and perhaps it's a posthumous way of snubbing Kevin McClory and pleasing the fanboys.

[JCRendle]

Is it just me, or could the official Quantum logo easily morph into the spectre octopus?

 

I think the SPECTRE octopus would fit perfectly in the Quantum logo

[Orion]

 

Is it just me, or could the official Quantum logo easily morph into the spectre octopus?

 

I think the SPECTRE octopus would fit perfectly in the Quantum logo

 

Haha, Yes, quite.

What I mean is the top of the q could easily be the head with the bottom being the right shoulder (for want of a better term) of the octopus. It's like the SPECTRE logo has grown out of the Quantum logo (or the Quantum logo is the SPECTRE logo at a rudimentary stage given the order they where actually designed in)

[JCRendle]

 

 

Is it just me, or could the official Quantum logo easily morph into the spectre octopus?

 

I think the SPECTRE octopus would fit perfectly in the Quantum logo

 

Haha, Yes, quite.

What I mean is the top of the q could easily be the head with the bottom being the right shoulder (for want of a better term) of the octopus. It's like the SPECTRE logo has grown out of the Quantum logo (or the Quantum logo is the SPECTRE logo at a rudimentary stage given the order they where actually designed in)

 

[tdalton]

 

If it isn't Fleming's Blofeld then one has to wonder if it's also not Fleming's SPECTRE as well.  Which then, if one applies that same logic, why then would they bring back SPECTRE?

 

Apples and oranges. Brand/Blofeld are persons. Spectre/Blades are organizations. Remember Blades? What we got in DAD wasn't exactly Fleming's Blades but that didn't stop EON using the name. I'm just throwing this out, but it's not entirely unlikely they may go this route again. Use the organization name but not the person. Who knows? Perhaps the revamped Blofeld will have a name that sounds awfully close to ESB but isn't quite ESB. Say, Ernest Șerbănescu Blomfeld.

 

And why would they bring back SPECTRE? Because they can and perhaps it's a posthumous way of snubbing Kevin McClory and pleasing the fanboys.

 

 

It's not at all an apples/oranges debate.  Yes, I'm aware that Brand and Blofeld are people, that fact didn't escape me.  And EON hasn't ever been above changing a character over the course of their history, even if they did reverse course in the case of Brand/Frost.  

 

The best way to snubbing McClory would be to bring back both Blofeld and SPECTRE and then proceed to make a ton of money off of it.  Heck, I bet McClory would manage to get some posthumous enjoyment out of it if EON had the rights to bring back both characters and then managed to botch it by not even using Blofeld and then changing SPECTRE so radically that they didn't even resemble the original creation.  

Edited by tdalton, 18 January 2015 - 01:57 AM.

[007jamesbond]

we will hear the words "SPECTRE" but that should be it....no need to go further to say what each character stand for......Mendes and Craig would not have this title if they don't use the criminal organization 

[JCRendle]

I wouldn't exactly call the current iterations of Moneypenny and Q as being ripped from, or even closely resembling, Fleming's creations.

Technically, Q isn't a Fleming creation. He wrote the armourer, Boothroyd, but he was very different from the film versions, other than his initial Dr. No/FRWL portrayals - and, other than Q branch, the name Q wasn't used.

[Jim]

This old chestnut - but towards the end of chapter 3 of Casino Royale, M refers to Q as Q. Admittedly the character, such as there's any character, is different - but the label was there, if not used too often.

[Guy Haines]

The problem remains the film's title. A Bond movie titled "Spectre" which didn't feature a certain organisation - acronym or otherwise - and didn't at least mention ESB or "Number One" would seem a bit misleading. And not just to long term fans of the books and films. As soon as the title was revealed the media jumped in with "what is SPECTRE?" items and inevitable photographs of Messrs' Pleasence, Savalas, Gray and Von Sydow as Blofeld. Expectations have been raised about the return of this organisation and its chief.

 

That said, Sam Mendes was quoted as saying there would be a certain amount of mischief in this movie. (Although on introducing the title he admitted that many would know what SPECTRE meant, although he couldn't possibly comment - he knows very well what it is!) Perhaps the use of SPECTRE and its chief is one such example of mischief - in that it won't necessarily be what we expect.

[Shrublands]

The problem remains the film's title. A Bond movie titled "Spectre" which didn't feature a certain organisation - acronym or otherwise - and didn't at least mention ESB or "Number One" would seem a bit misleading. And not just to long term fans of the books and films. As soon as the title was revealed the media jumped in with "what is SPECTRE?" items and inevitable photographs of Messrs' Pleasence, Savalas, Gray and Von Sydow as Blofeld. Expectations have been raised about the return of this organisation and its chief.

 

 

But in what way is that a problem? At this stage, they want people to have things to talk about and speculate on. 

[Professor Pi]

Let's say they do have Blofeld, and the next movie is called Garden of Death.  Do they insist again that Dr. Guntram Shatterhand is not ESB?

 

Or it's not Blofeld, but the next movie is called Shatterhand.  Do we repeat this exercise all over again?

 

We know who it is, and we're probably disappointed if he's not.  The fun is in seeing how it unfolds.

[Guy Haines]

Which is why I maintain that "Spectre" will feature SPECTRE - in one form or another - and Oberhauser will turn out to be Blofeld. The character is, I think, being re-introduced just as Q, Moneypenny and the new M were. As mentioned above, the fun is in how it is done. The problem I mentioned is if, as some have suggested, "Spectre" has nothing to do with what we expect. It would be a redundant exercise if it didn't, imho.

[1q2w3e4r]

"Oberhauser" is referred to as "the Leader" by members of SPECTRE, they've done away with the numbering system.

 

Doesn't mean that he isn't Blofeld though as confusing as that may seem.

[Guy Haines]

So we have the Austrian (Or German?) Franz Oberhauser referred to as "The Leader" by his SPECTRE underlings? The word "fuhrer" in German can mean leader of course - although it has some unfortunate connotations. On the other hand I've just come across another German word - and German Cbn members please put me right if I'm wrong because I got it off "t'internet" - "Leiter" which I'm informed can also refer to a leader.

 

Who'd have thought it, eh? "Felix Leader"  Makes you wonder who should have been the senior partner in the Bond and Felix team!

[AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän]

I am sure the organization SPECTRE will be in the film, but I doubt ESB is. Why reveal everything at once?

[Pierceuhhh]

How can the ENTIRE SCRIPT HAVE BEEN LEAKED and we're still having these discussions?

 

I'm not sure what's worse - 1) that fans concoct pointlessly complicated theories like this that, if they turned out to be true, would just muddy the viewing experience for normal people and end up pleasing nobody, or 2) the fact that I half-suspect Eon might actually try something like this. There's not a sane person on earth that cares whether it's Ernst Stavro Blofeld or Ernest Serban or whatever.

[JCRendle]

How can the ENTIRE SCRIPT HAVE BEEN LEAKED and we're still having these discussions?

 
Not everyone wants to read the scripts - a lot of the fun is in the speculation.
 

I'm not sure what's worse - 1) that fans concoct pointlessly complicated theories like this that, if they turned out to be true, would just muddy the viewing experience for normal people and end up pleasing nobody,

 
We're Bond fans, we love concocting pointlessly complicated theories like this, even if they turn out to be true and would just muddy the viewing experience for normal people and end up pleasing nobody. Speculation is key.
 

or 2) the fact that I half-suspect Eon might actually try something like this. There's not a sane person on earth that cares whether it's Ernst Stavro Blofeld or Ernest Serban or whatever.

 
I think a lot of sane people would care - the fact that it's even debated proves this. Maybe you're the insane one for not seeing this (I say this in pure jest)

[tdalton]

 

How can the ENTIRE SCRIPT HAVE BEEN LEAKED and we're still having these discussions?

 
Not everyone wants to read the scripts - a lot of the fun is in the speculation.
 

 

There are also those of us who don't want to read material that has been stolen from EON.

[JCRendle]

How can the ENTIRE SCRIPT HAVE BEEN LEAKED and we're still having these discussions?

 
Not everyone wants to read the scripts - a lot of the fun is in the speculation.

 
There are also those of us who don't want to read material that has been stolen from EON.

This too

[Trevelyan 006]

 

 

How can the ENTIRE SCRIPT HAVE BEEN LEAKED and we're still having these discussions?

 
Not everyone wants to read the scripts - a lot of the fun is in the speculation.
 

 

There are also those of us who don't want to read material that has been stolen from EON.

 

There are also those of us who believe that what they may or may not have read was absolutely outdated and in turn irrelevant early script information.

 

Which I where I may or may not lay my hat... 

[Call Billy Bob]

 

 

 

How can the ENTIRE SCRIPT HAVE BEEN LEAKED and we're still having these discussions?

 
Not everyone wants to read the scripts - a lot of the fun is in the speculation.
 

 

There are also those of us who don't want to read material that has been stolen from EON.

 

There are also those of us who believe that what they may or may not have read was absolutely outdated and in turn irrelevant early script information.

 

Which I where I may or may not lay my hat... 

 

[Guy Haines]

Nice one, say no more squire!

 

Seriously, some of us are aware of details of the script, not the whole document, and are not completely convinced by what we've seen. Therefore I think speculation about the true identity of the film's villain is fair enough. Scripts have re-writes, sometimes hasty ones - the TND script was, reputedly, being re-written even as filming was under way.

 

For all we know there may turn out to be some significant differences between what was leaked and what the finished film looks like.

[Jim]

Don't take this too far, folks. Thanks.

[Shrublands]

An extract from Christoph Waltz's GQ interview from the addition that will be published on April 9th. But we did get very similar "I'm not playing Moneypenny" remarks from Naomie Harris in interviews last time.

 

http://www.gq-magazi...ranz-oberhauser

 

 

On whether he hesitated in doing a Bond film:

"I did, yes. I always hesitate... You ask yourself, hang on: what James Bond are we talking about? The thing about Spectre is that it is not the work of hack writers. It does not have a hack director. The actors are not hams. The action sequences in Mexico are extravagant to say the least. The scenes in Austria are traditional Bond action in the snow. These films with Daniel Craig have shifted the tone. They don't depend on a set formula that forces actors simply to go through the motions."

 

On whether he is playing the classic Bond villain Blofield:
"That is absolutely untrue. That rumour started on the Internet, and the Internet is a pest. The name of my character is Franz Oberhauser."

 

On whether a Bond film can be artistically fulfilling:

"A James Bond film can be artistically fulfilling. Absolutely it can. It can be complex and it can be interesting. I consider Bond movies to be an extension of popular theatre, a kind of modern mythology. You see the same sort of action in Punch and Judy, or in the folk theatre of various cultures, like Grand Guignol."

 

 

On achieving success later in his career:
"I do feel I can say - without smugness - that this feels good. I am entitled. I am entitled to judge the situation and say that yes: it feels good, and that yes, I agree with you. I feel like I served my time. I feel I have paid [my dues]."

 

The May issue of British GQ is on sale from Thursday 9 April 2015 in both print and as a digital edition that you can download for your iPhone, iPad, Kindle Fire or Android device.

 

[thecasinoroyale]

Ahh I was looking for this thread but couldn't see it, so I posted in the Non-Spoiler section (which the possible spoiler blanked).

 

From this I truly feel SPECTRE may be here, but we aren't getting Blofeld. Oberhauser may be our new Blofeld.

 

Has to be...right?

 

Ahhhh I love this is he / isn't he and how possible no-one will really know until seeing the film, regardless of what we think we know or don't!