318 replies to this topic

[sharpshooter]

 

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.  

I agree with seawolfnyy. QoS did receive a mixed reaction, but nonetheless, the events of the film happened. If SPECTRE unifies the Craig era as a whole, that also includes QoS.

[FlemingBond]

As much as i've really loved the Craig era , i've gotten to the point i would like the mood to lighten a bit. Like some of the early parts of CR. Skyfall , upon repeated watching, is very gloomy looking. SPECTRE seems to be more of the same. 

And i just really don't see the point of tying the villain into Bond. "We once knew each other mr. bond...." come on,

[Vauxhall]

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'd expect a selection of namechecks or references for the past few films, direct or otherwise - Vesper, Le Chiffre, Greene, Quantum, Silva, the old M and most importantly, the bulldog statue.

Edited by Vauxhall, 28 March 2015 - 02:44 PM.

[tdalton]

 

 

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.  

I agree with seawolfnyy. QoS did receive a mixed reaction, but nonetheless, the events of the film happened. If SPECTRE unifies the Craig era as a whole, that also includes QoS.

 

 

I think he's talking about Quantum of Solace having a major impact on SPECTRE in the way that Casino Royale and Skyfall probably will.  I don't agree that that will be the case.  It'll be referenced, mainly due to White's presence.

 

If they go to great lengths to tie the events of Quantum of Solace to SPECTRE, they'll end up doing a great deal to weaken Quantum of Solace as a film.  Even though they never followed through with it, part of what made that film good was the idea that there was this sinister organization working in the background that Bond had to unravel.  If SPECTRE turns them into some dumb lackeys that folded at the first hint of trouble, then that does a disservice to Quantum of Solace.  Then again, perhaps that would be the point.

[Harmsway]

I hate Quantum of Solace, but there's no way EON retcons it out of existence. The fact that Mr. White appears here is confirmation of Quantum of Solace's canonical status.

[marktmurphy]

Looks nice but I wouldn't have minded a little bit of action in there.

[PeteNeon]

Very astute tdalton, this scene is very likely after the Oberhauser/table scene.

 

They can easily get around mentioning Quantum in just one line between Bond and White "so this is where you've been hiding" etc. It's just the sort of rubbish you can bet they'll do! But I hope they will have a good couple of lines addressing Quantum's links to SPECTRE, not just White's.

[Odd Jobbies]

 

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...

 

 

Thanks! And yes, i'm also very curious about Scott - feels like they're sidelining his character on purpose. So it wouldn't surprise me if there's a trick ending: Waltz is currently the head of SPECTRE and we assume he'll be revealed as Blofeld. But once Bond 'removes' him Scott emerges to reveal himself as Blofeld - one of SPECTRE's fostered children (would also create a context for why Blofeld's obsessed with his own lineage).

 

So Bond had been doing Blofeld's (Scott) bidding all along by creating a power vacuum in SPECTRE - this would involve Scott being working in the government, or the security servicesand posing as an ally at first, pointing him in Oberhauser's direction - probably planted the burnt photo and certificate in MI6 forensics. That would be a pretty neat twist upon a twist.

 

For me it's pretty certain that Mr White is Hans Oberhauser, Bond's foster-father - that's just too good a twist for Logan and Mendes to resist. The question is who will be Blofeld? Franz Oberhauser (Waltz) or Scott's mysterious character?

Edited by Odd Jobbies, 28 March 2015 - 03:47 PM.

[Odd Jobbies]

I'm sure Quantum will be name-checked as just one tentacle of the octopus.

 

I'd like to see SPECTRE become the acronym of a high class fostering organisation with charity funding from the UN and EU. That'd be pretty sinister, witty and apt if they had a hand in Bond's fostering.

Edited by Odd Jobbies, 28 March 2015 - 03:49 PM.

[The Dove]

Hmm.. Interesting theory, Odd Jobbies! I like it a lot!! We'll see come November..

[JCRendle]

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...

 
Thanks! And yes, i'm also very curious about Scott - feels like they're sidelining his character on purpose. So it wouldn't surprise me if there's a trick ending: Waltz is currently the head of SPECTRE and we assume he'll be revealed as Blofeld. But once Bond 'removes' him Scott emerges to reveal himself as Blofeld - one of SPECTRE's fostered children (would also create a context for why Blofeld's obsessed with his own lineage).
 
So Bond had been doing Blofeld's (Scott) bidding all along by creating a power vacuum in SPECTRE - this would involve Scott being working in the government, or the security servicesand posing as an ally at first, pointing him in Oberhauser's direction - probably planted the burnt photo and certificate in MI6 forensics. That would be a pretty neat twist upon a twist.
 
For me it's pretty certain that Mr White is Hans Oberhauser, Bond's foster-father - that's just too good a twist for Logan and Mendes to resist. The question is who will be Blofeld? Franz Oberhauser (Waltz) or Scott's mysterious character?

Only problem I can see with your theories is age difference, there are only 8 or so years between Christensen and Waltz, so I doubt the Oberhauser Snr/Jr theory. The rest is entirely workable and an interesting theory.

[seawolfnyy]

The only issue I see with Mr. White being Oberhauser Sr. is the Grand Canyon-sized plot hole of them not knowing each other at the end of Casino Royale and the beginning of Quantum of Solace. Mr. White specifically mentioned having been interested to meet Bond because of what he heard from Vesper. I like the idea that Bond maybe has been unknowingly groomed by SPECTRE to eventually join them, but not that Mr. White is Bond's foster father.

[Odd Jobbies]

 

 

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...

 
Thanks! And yes, i'm also very curious about Scott - feels like they're sidelining his character on purpose. So it wouldn't surprise me if there's a trick ending: Waltz is currently the head of SPECTRE and we assume he'll be revealed as Blofeld. But once Bond 'removes' him Scott emerges to reveal himself as Blofeld - one of SPECTRE's fostered children (would also create a context for why Blofeld's obsessed with his own lineage).
 
So Bond had been doing Blofeld's (Scott) bidding all along by creating a power vacuum in SPECTRE - this would involve Scott being working in the government, or the security servicesand posing as an ally at first, pointing him in Oberhauser's direction - probably planted the burnt photo and certificate in MI6 forensics. That would be a pretty neat twist upon a twist.
 
For me it's pretty certain that Mr White is Hans Oberhauser, Bond's foster-father - that's just too good a twist for Logan and Mendes to resist. The question is who will be Blofeld? Franz Oberhauser (Waltz) or Scott's mysterious character?

 

Only problem I can see with your theories is age difference, there are only 8 or so years between Christensen and Waltz, so I doubt the Oberhauser Snr/Jr theory. The rest is entirely workable and an interesting theory.

 

Good point, but I could believe White is late 70s and Waltz around 50 - is that enough difference?

 

I just got reminded elsewhere that Fleming's inspiration for Blofeld was Alistair Crowley. Seems irrelevant until you look at the allusions to LALD; Craig's outfit and the day of the dead Mexico shoot - i've read that's for the pre-titles, which would feel very similar to LALD's New Orleans street parade pre-titles. So could these be clues that like LALD there's an occult element to SPECTRE?  That'd be a barrel, or cauldron of fun!

Edited by Odd Jobbies, 28 March 2015 - 04:28 PM.

[tdalton]

I think it would be better if they just made SPECTRE out to be 'regular' bad guys in the sense that there's no relationship to Bond.  We've already had the familial drama in Skyfall, with the whole mother-son relationship with Bond and M as well as the brotherly, mirror-image thing between Bond and Silva.  Making SPECTRE's origin as convenient as being boiled down to a family relationship with Bond is far too big of a coincidence and would also tread on far too much of the same ground as Skyfall.

[Odd Jobbies]

The only issue I see with Mr. White being Oberhauser Sr. is the Grand Canyon-sized plot hole of them not knowing each other at the end of Casino Royale and the beginning of Quantum of Solace. Mr. White specifically mentioned having been interested to meet Bond because of what he heard from Vesper. I like the idea that Bond maybe has been unknowingly groomed by SPECTRE to eventually join them, but not that Mr. White is Bond's foster father.

Yes, absolutely. So that'd have to be kind of the point - that he doesn't recognise him - why? Maybe simply because it was for a brief time, so long ago. That'd be as clunky as Silva having somehow had a bomb placed in just the right place to have a tube train crash down on Bond as he's about to be captured. The point of my sarcasm is that there's president for such clunky writing, so it may indeed be that Bond simply didn't remember White/Hans Oberhauser from so long ago. I hope not!

 

If i were writing this i'd have the fostering process entail some kind of brain-washing/conditioning - priming the child to be put into place (such as Bond's route to MI6) without knowledge that he's a SPECTRE asset. Then, when the time comes he's 'triggered' (anyone seen The Manchurian Candidate?).

 

There is of course a president for Bond being brain-washed in the opening of Fleming's TMWTGG. Also there's the brain washing in Eon's OHMSS.

 

Money mentions a 'big secret' in Bond's past. I'm guessing that it's time 'missing' from his childhood (brain-washed away by Hans/White) and his only clues are the photo and adoption certificate. It could also be the secret of his parent's mysterious deaths and their true identities.

I think it would be better if they just made SPECTRE out to be 'regular' bad guys in the sense that there's no relationship to Bond.  We've already had the familial drama in Skyfall, with the whole mother-son relationship with Bond and M as well as the brotherly, mirror-image thing between Bond and Silva.  Making SPECTRE's origin as convenient as being boiled down to a family relationship with Bond is far too big of a coincidence and would also tread on far too much of the same ground as Skyfall.

It's not a coincidence if Bond's rise through the military and secret service had been contrived and manipulated by SPECTRE from the get-go.

 

And weren't Quantum  already the regular bad guy secret organisation?  SPECTRE has to mean more than that, or what's the point?

Edited by Odd Jobbies, 28 March 2015 - 04:39 PM.

[seawolfnyy]

Yea, Quantum were the generic bad guys. Clearly, SPECTRE is on a completely different level.

[tdalton]

That wouldn't make it a coincidence, but it would also be highly unnecessary.  SPECTRE doesn't have to have personal ties to up the ante on Quantum.  All they have to do is have larger, more tangibly frightening goals that are a bit more in-your-face than Quantum's.  Quantum's goals were, albeit very frightening (possibly killing a large population of people by forcing a drought, financing terrorism), more in the background for the average joe.  SPECTRE's goals should be on a more grand scale.  They don't need to be, and shouldn't be, personally tied to Bond at the outset.  Later on, if they revisit the idea of Blofeld murdering Bond's wife, then it should turn personal, but not before.

[FlemingBond]

generic bad guys? the organization that the CIA and  MI6 didn't know about ?!

[seawolfnyy]

Well, we still don't know what SPECTRE's ultimate goals are. We know they're back, but what do they want to do? I don't think they are going to be stealing nuclear bombs and holding the world hostage or ransoming a country's natural resources. But they could be behind the inquiries to MI6 or they could be trying to recruit Bond into their numbers. Maybe Oberhauser has a secret castle in the Caribbean or Japan. We'll have to wait and see there.

[x007AceOfSpades]

Oberhauser probably has his own agenda towards Bond, but that doesn't mean the same thing for SPECTRE.

[seawolfnyy]

Oberhauser probably has his own agenda towards Bond, but that doesn't mean the same thing for SPECTRE.

Tienes razón.

[x007AceOfSpades]

 

Oberhauser probably has his own agenda towards Bond, but that doesn't mean the same thing for SPECTRE.

Tienes razón.

 

[ElFenomeno]

The final scene of Skyfall blatantly promised something aka returning to the good old missions of old.

I thought that we'll have a scene in this movie of Bond walking into M's office for a new mission.

[tdalton]

The final scene of Skyfall blatantly promised something aka returning to the good old missions of old.

I thought that we'll have a scene in this movie of Bond walking into M's office for a new mission.

 

Agreed.  That finale went through all of the trouble of that awkward trouble of squeezing every last bit of Bond iconography as they could into a minute or so of film in order to announce, seemingly, that we were back to something resembling business as usual.  Guess not.

[x007AceOfSpades]

Maybe that mission promised at the end of Skyfall is what leads Bond to Mexico after Marco Sciarra.

[seawolfnyy]

Anything' possible.

[x007AceOfSpades]

Exactly

[JCRendle]

The final scene of Skyfall blatantly promised something aka returning to the good old missions of old.
I thought that we'll have a scene in this movie of Bond walking into M's office for a new mission.

Agreed.  That finale went through all of the trouble of that awkward trouble of squeezing every last bit of Bond iconography as they could into a minute or so of film in order to announce, seemingly, that we were back to something resembling business as usual.  Guess not.

What in the teaser says that we aren't seeing Bond in M's office getting a mission briefing? It's a 1m37s teaser for a feature length film. Just because they haven't shown a briefing scene, doesn't mean it's not going to happen.

[Vauxhall]

The final scene of Skyfall blatantly promised something aka returning to the good old missions of old.I thought that we'll have a scene in this movie of Bond walking into M's office for a new mission.

Agreed.  That finale went through all of the trouble of that awkward trouble of squeezing every last bit of Bond iconography as they could into a minute or so of film in order to announce, seemingly, that we were back to something resembling business as usual.  Guess not.

What in the teaser says that we aren't seeing Bond in M's office getting a mission briefing? It's a 1m37s teaser for a feature length film. Just because they haven't shown a briefing scene, doesn't mean it's not going to happen.

Indeed. Plus...

Spoiler

We already know from one of the behind the scene videos that Bond has a briefing in M's office.

[JCRendle]

Indeed. Plus...

Spoiler

We already know from one of the behind the scene videos that Bond has a briefing in M's office.

I was going to post this, but held back because this wasn't the spoiler sub-section.