318 replies to this topic

[stromberg]

 

Two new press images from Sony:

 

Where did you find these pictures? Link please.

 

Sony Press release. But I'm certain they'll show up anywhere, soon.

[tdalton]

Still not entirely sure if I like it or not as a whole yet. 

 

Pros:

• Mr. White
• The shot from behind Bond at the funeral in, I'm guessing, Rome.  Very cool and unsettling shot, almost like something that could be found in a horror film.
• The SPECTRE meeting
• No M
• The cinematography.  This could top Deakins' work on Skyfall.

 

Cons:

• Skyfall 2
• Bond and Blofeld...I mean "Oberhauser", are brothers?  Old friends?  I guess we're turning the tables on Austin Powers and borrowing from them now.
• Moneypenny
• Yay!  More trust issues.

Edited by tdalton, 28 March 2015 - 01:31 AM.

[Gobi-1]

New images from the Mexico set at http://www.slashfilm...pectre-trailer/

[The Shark]

More trust issues.

 

That's the one issue I had, but hey it's just one line, right, RIGHT??!!

[stromberg]

[Hockey Mask]

Gorgeous.

[dtuba]

Well, I must admit that the trailer makes me a little worried.Why? Because

 

 

More trust issues.

 

That's the one issue I had, but hey it's just one line, right, RIGHT??!!

 

That's why.

[dirtymind]

I wonder why they're hiding Waltz' face. Maybe he has a scar?

[tdalton]

Well, I must admit that the trailer makes me a little worried.Why? Because

 

 

More trust issues.

 

That's the one issue I had, but hey it's just one line, right, RIGHT??!!

 

That's why.

 

This is why I think that people who argue about the gunbarrel being at the beginning or the end or whatnot are really missing the point of it all.

 

Clearly... the only two things you need to make a Bond film a "Bond" film are James Bond and trust issues. 

[dtuba]

 

Well, I must admit that the trailer makes me a little worried.Why? Because

 

 

More trust issues.

 

That's the one issue I had, but hey it's just one line, right, RIGHT??!!

 

That's why.

 

This is why I think that people who argue about the gunbarrel being at the beginning or the end or whatnot are really missing the point of it all.

 

Clearly... the only two things you need to make a Bond film a "Bond" film are James Bond and trust issues. 

 

At least in this century, yes.

[007jamesbond]

Trust issue is common especially in the spy world where anyone could be bad 

[Hockey Mask]

"Welcome James. It's been a long time. And finally, here we are."

Did anyone feel like this was directed directly at them like I did.

Good too see you too SPECTRE. Finally.

[FredJB007]

I thought the trailer was great.
Creepy, suspenseful.
And Mr. White!
I can't wait for November.

[Double-Oh Agent]

 

Still not entirely sure if I like it or not as a whole yet. 

 

Pros:

• Mr. White
• The shot from behind Bond at the funeral in, I'm guessing, Rome.  Very cool and unsettling shot, almost like something that could be found in a horror film.
• The SPECTRE meeting
• No M
• The cinematography.  This could top Deakins' work on Skyfall.

 

Cons:

• Skyfall 2
• Bond and Blofeld...I mean "Oberhauser", are brothers?  Old friends?  I guess we're turning the tables on Austin Powers and borrowing from them now.
• Moneypenny
• Yay!  More trust issues.

 

Pretty much agree with you. It really was a teaser in every sense of the word. But what it did show had me both liking it and dreading where the film could be going.

 

On the plus side the SPECTRE meeting is great and creepy. I like how you can't see any of the major players' faces. Really adds to the sinister setting. Also, the footage looks incredible. Very nicely shot. And it is great to see Mr. White again.

 

On the negative side, what have they done to Mr. White? He looks like a shell of his former self and nowhere near as cool and dangerous as he was in Casino Royale and Quantum Of Solace. Without having seen any spoilers, the teaser makes it look like Christoph Waltz is the son of Hannes Oberhauser, Bond's Alpine skiing instructor after the loss of his parents.   Can't say I'm wild about that possible scenario. His enemy is the son of the man who was like a second father to Bond? Potentially, his greatest enemy is his "brother"?!!! Why does everything have to be so personal? Why can't we just have a regular, fun Bond adventure a la The Spy Who Loved Me? These trust issues are turning the Craig era into the worst traits of the John Gardner novels.

[SecretAgentFan]

New images from the Mexico set at http://www.slashfilm...pectre-trailer/

 

I love the shot of Bond casually jumping from roof to roof!

[Vauxhall]

Just occurred to me that they never got around to actually announcing Jesper Christensen was back as Mr White. No doubt now though really!

[tdalton]

Trust issue is common especially in the spy world where anyone could be bad 

 

Yes, but generally your more successful spy films are a bit more subtle about it.  The amount of times the word "trust" is said during the Craig era must be staggering.

[Agent 76]

 

 

• The shot from behind Bond at the funeral in, I'm guessing, Rome.  Very cool and unsettling shot, almost like something that could be found in a horror film.

I had the exact same thought. Very horror.like shot, the color grading adds to that also. terrific

[Odd Jobbies]

Fantastic teaser

 

My guess:

 

Mr White is Bond's foster-father.... It makes perfect sense when you think about it.

 

Bond and M wondered why White had saved Bond from le Chiffre and pondered that it was because Vesper had offered herself in his place, but that doesn't totally add up. M and Bond didn't know that White had also been in a position to kill Bond when he was cradling the dead Vesper and chosen not to. When the audience are left knowing something like that, but the principal character is kept unaware it's usually because the writers intend to use that later.

 

Why is Bond at the log cabin in the mountains? Bond suggests that the meeting  with Waltz/Blofeld led him there, probably so that White could reveal his true identity hoping that might bring Bond into the circle with Blofeld - make him an ally. Bond arrives and is stunned to find the allusive, tired Mr White waiting (cast aside from SPECTRE now his son, Blofeld has taken the reigns perhaps). The big moment here will be Bond's discovery that the dastardly Mr White is in fact Bond's foster-father and has been kinda' looking out for him all along (explaining why they might've cut the original ending from QoS)

 

White also said in CR that they'd been watching Bond for some time - why? Maybe because Bond is his foster-son and SPECTRE have pulled strings through the years to get him into MI6 hoping to one day turn him with this revelation. And that would be a great central question in for this film - can SECTRE recruit Bond - that's why Waltz was expecting Bond and pleased to welcome him to their fold - he wants to recruit him.

 

Also, the funeral is probably White's - Bond having killed him to draw out his associates at the funeral (Bellucci). I think Bond killing his own foster-father will be too rich a tapestry for Logan to resist.

 

So White is Oberhauser, Bonds foster-father and Waltz is the missing child in the photo, Franz, Oberhauser Jnr , alias Blofeld. 

 

For what it's worth, that's my theory. Speculation is great fun

 

ETA: Mendes suggested that SPECTRE is something slightly different this time round. Speculation: An old and insidious fostering organisation. They place children with potential (Bond's parents were known spies) with foster-parents whom are SPECTRE assets with the aim of conditioning them and pulling strings to get them into privileged positions, such as MI6. Some are kept in house, like Blofeld, some placed into situations, like Bond - perhaps all it takes is a phrase to have them then step into line at the required time.

 

The notion of SPECTRE using children is something so sinister that Fleming would've been proud of it: Chitty Chitty Bang Bang meets Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.

 

SPECTRE as the ultimate 'Kiddy-catchers'

 

To take it a step further, SPECTRE may have been responsible for the deaths of Bond's parents in the mountain accident in order to get their hands on young Bond and make him this asset - many years in the planning. Of course Mr White/Oberhauser Snr would've have been the trigger man - Bond's Foster-parent and parent killer simultaneously.

Edited by Odd Jobbies, 28 March 2015 - 01:32 PM.

[Charles Robinson]

This first Teaser Trailer for me is excellent and especially for us, the fans. It has some details that only we can observe.

Clearly there is a relationship with "Skyfall", but I think it is not continuity type like a sequel. What Miss. Moneypenny gives to James Bond apparently are some documents that survived the explosion and destruction of Skyfall Lounge. And for me that is the only connection to the previous film.

In these documents we see a picture of a man with two childrens. I assume that is the young James Bond with his skie instructor Hannes Oberhauser and his son Franz Oberhauser.

This trailer shows little, but tell us a lot. And only see on screen Miss. Moneypenny, James Bond, Lucia Sciarra, Mr. White and the silhouette of Franz Oberhauser (or Ernst Stavro Blofeld).

Edited by Charles Robinson, 28 March 2015 - 11:59 AM.

[Harmsway]

Clearly there is a relationship with "Skyfall", but I think it is not continuity type like a sequel. What Miss. Moneypenny gives to James Bond apparently are some documents that survived the explosion and destruction of Skyfall Lounge. And for me that is the only connection to the previous film.

There's also the damage done to the Vauxhall Cross building.

[Messervy]

Having seen the teaser trailer, I'm now less thrilled. Yet another "personal" Bond, with yet another trust issue. How boring! Soooo diisapointed! Sure, it looks splendid visually. But it's yet another copy/paste of the previous issues.

When will they finally come up with the real Bond again?
I'm so sick of those same issues being dealt with to death.
They really will kill all the interest I have watching Bond movies.

Same old, same old.

[doubler83]

Consider me sufficiently teased.

[Messervy]

Well, to me, it seems (I know it's only a teaser trailer) unoriginal. Yet another "ghost from the past"...

It's really a "been there/done that" vibe.

[Turn]

Wasn't part of the appeal of James Bond that he had a shadowy side without too much information about him? We liked him as is. Now it's about, as the saying goes, TMI.

 

A different teaser, I'll give it that. Some nice stuff. But it didn't give me near the rush and thrill the also recently-released MI: Rogue Nation Trailer did. Maybe that just means the next trailer will be better with more excitement. Here's to hoping.

[mummyboy11]

Fantastic teaser

 

My guess:

 

Mr White is Bond's foster-father.... It makes perfect sense when you think about it.

 

Bond and M wondered why White had saved Bond from le Chiffre and pondered that it was because Vesper had offered herself in his place, but that doesn't totally add up. M and Bond didn't know that White had also been in a position to kill Bond when he was cradling the dead Vesper and chosen not to. When the audience are left knowing something like that, but the principal character is kept unaware it's usually because the writers intend to use that later.

 

Why is Bond at the log cabin in the mountains? Bond suggests that the meeting  with Waltz/Blofeld led him there, probably so that White could reveal his true identity hoping that might bring Bond into the circle with Blofeld - make him an ally. Bond arrives and is stunned to find the allusive, tired Mr White waiting (cast aside from SPECTRE now his son, Blofeld has taken the reigns perhaps). The big moment here will be Bond's discovery that the dastardly Mr White is in fact Bond's foster-father and has been kinda' looking out for him all along (explaining why they might've cut the original ending from QoS)

 

White also said in CR that they'd been watching Bond for some time - why? Maybe because Bond is his foster-son and SPECTRE have pulled strings through the years to get him into MI6 hoping to one day turn him with this revelation. And that would be a great central question in for this film - can SECTRE recruit Bond - that's why Waltz was expecting Bond and pleased to welcome him to their fold - he wants to recruit him.

 

Also, the funeral is probably White's - Bond having killed him to draw out his associates at the funeral (Bellucci). I think Bond killing his own foster-father will be too rich a tapestry for Logan to resist.

 

So White is Oberhauser, Bonds foster-father and Waltz is the missing child in the photo, Franz, Oberhauser Jnr , alias Blofeld. 

 

For what it's worth, that's my theory. Speculation is great fun

 

ETA: Mendes suggested that SPECTRE is something slightly different this time round. Speculation: An old and insidious fostering organisation. They place children with potential (Bond's parents were known spies) with foster-parents whom are SPECTRE assets with the aim of conditioning them and pulling strings to get them into privileged positions, such as MI6. Some are kept in house, like Blofeld, some placed into situations, like Bond - perhaps all it takes is a phrase to have them then step into line at the required time.

 

The notion of SPECTRE using children is something so sinister that Fleming would've been proud of it: Chitty Chitty Bang Bang meets Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.

 

To take it a step further, SPECTRE may have been responsible for the deaths of Bond's parents in the mountain accident in order to get their hands on young Bond and make him this asset - many years in the planning. Of course Mr White/Oberhauser Snr would've have been the trigger man - Bond's Foster-parent and parent killer simultaneously.

 

Hum...you just blew my mind. It actually might be possible. 

And about the complaints about the stand-alone or follow-up or trust issues in the Craig era...i'll give the writers and Mendes a break. I'm sure Barbara, Michael and Craig realise what a near catastrophy QoS could've become being so dependent on CR. Surely they're gonna salt Spectre with enough elements to minimize the feeling of a "follow-up"...

 

I'm really anxious about knowing what kind ofcharacter Andrew Scott will be...is sociopathic-genious-"Jokerish" take on Moriarty in ^Sherlock gives opportunity to create a great villain.

 

In November we'll see...

[PeteNeon]

I really hope they namecheck Quantum. I don't want them to beat around the bush and be all cryptic about it.

 

It's going to be such a cop-out if White gets killed without really explaining himself, Bond chases after the killer, and that's how he's lead to SPECTRE.

[tdalton]

I really hope they namecheck Quantum. I don't want them to beat around the bush and be all cryptic about it.

 

It's going to be such a cop-out if White gets killed without really explaining himself, Bond chases after the killer, and that's how he's lead to SPECTRE.

 

Judging from the trailer, Bond has already attended the SPECTRE meeting when he sees Mr. White, since he says that White's name came up at a (non-MI6) meeting, so that scenario seems extremely unlikely.

 

I also hope they name-check Quantum, but I'm not holding my breath.  I wouldn't be surprised if they retconned Quantum of Solace out of existence.

Edited by tdalton, 28 March 2015 - 01:50 PM.

[seawolfnyy]

I really hope they namecheck Quantum. I don't want them to beat around the bush and be all cryptic about it.
 
It's going to be such a cop-out if White gets killed without really explaining himself, Bond chases after the killer, and that's how he's lead to SPECTRE.

 
Judging from the trailer, Bond has already attended the SPECTRE meeting when he sees Mr. White, since he says that White's name came up at a (non-MI6) meeting, so that scenario seems extremely unlikely.
 
I also hope they name-check Quantum, but I'm not holding my breath.  I wouldn't be surprised if they retconned Quantum of Solace out of existence.

I don't think Quantum of Solace will be retconned away. My feeling from this is that once MI6 and the CIA learned of Quantum's existence (and from all the info given to them by Greene) the organization was disbanded by the true overlords in SPECTRE. Mr. White, being such a major player in the failed Quantum, is now I hiding from SPECTRE. I think it makes the events of QoS as important to SPECTRE as Casino Royale and Skyfall.

[tdalton]

 

 

I really hope they namecheck Quantum. I don't want them to beat around the bush and be all cryptic about it.
 
It's going to be such a cop-out if White gets killed without really explaining himself, Bond chases after the killer, and that's how he's lead to SPECTRE.

 
Judging from the trailer, Bond has already attended the SPECTRE meeting when he sees Mr. White, since he says that White's name came up at a (non-MI6) meeting, so that scenario seems extremely unlikely.
 
I also hope they name-check Quantum, but I'm not holding my breath.  I wouldn't be surprised if they retconned Quantum of Solace out of existence.

I don't think Quantum of Solace will be retconned away. My feeling from this is that once MI6 and the CIA learned of Quantum's existence (and from all the info given to them by Greene) the organization was disbanded by the true overlords in SPECTRE. Mr. White, being such a major player in the failed Quantum, is now I hiding from SPECTRE. I think it makes the events of QoS as important to SPECTRE as Casino Royale and Skyfall.

 

 

We'll see, but I doubt it.  Of all the Craig films that EON could added significance to, I can't see it being Quantum of Solace, given the level of disdain everyone seems to have for it.