• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Christoph Waltz is the new Bond villain

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rich!

Member
thefro said:
Also I'll be mad if Bond 25 isn't based off the unused elements from You Only Live Twice novel now.
Click to expand...

It actually seems, if this news is true, that they're taking elements from Ian Fleming's Octopussy novel that weren't used in that film (Hans Oberhauser is in that novel, and Waltz would be Blofeld posing as Oberhauser's son).

I think it's true. It's plausible, and this isn't a typical example of tabloid trash - it's referencing a little-known character from a Fleming novel, who has ties to Bond's past. That would fit in perfectly with the progression of Craig's Bond (Oberhauser stood in for his parents for a bit after their death), and we already know the story in the last few Craig films will be connected in an arc.

and of course, if it's true, it will FINALLY ensure everyone shuts the fuck up about that godawful "bond is a codename" theory.
 
X

xandaca

Member
thefro said:
They'd better tie Blofeld into the last 3 movies. Craig doesn't have enough time left with the character for them not to.

Also I'll be mad if Bond 25 isn't based off the unused elements from You Only Live Twice novel now.
Click to expand...

I'm not joking when I say I've been waiting almost all my life to see the Garden Of Death put on film. Can't believe it's never been done, it's one of the creepiest and coolest things Fleming ever wrote.
 
S

Solo

Member
thefro said:
Also I'll be mad if Bond 25 isn't based off the unused elements from You Only Live Twice novel now.
Click to expand...

I doubt they'll ever make that as a film, sadly. Not to mention they kinda can't now without remaking OHMSS, and they've said no to remakes.

Shame, because if they ever decide to end the series (I know - LOL), a one two punch of an OHMSS remake/faithful YOLT would be how to do it.
 
X

xandaca

Member
Solo said:
I doubt they'll ever make that as a film, sadly. Not to mention they kinda can't now without remaking OHMSS, and they've said no to remakes.

Shame, because if they ever decide to end the series (I know - LOL), a one two punch of an OHMSS remake/faithful YOLT would be how to do it.
Click to expand...

They could do it with Blofeld as the head of Quantum and Bond getting his final revenge for Vesper's death. Would render QoS a bit pointless, but it wasn't exactly the most substantial movie to begin with.
 
R

Rich!

Member
he better still have a cat though, damnit

I was going to post about how he could potentially be the first Blofeld with hair in an EON film since Thunderball in 1965....and then I remembered Charles Gray as Blofeld in Diamonds are Forever:

38.jpg


the same film which had Blofeld in drag:

6a00d83451675669e2017d40ca7de0970c-pi


now I wish I hadn't remembered.
 
K

Konka

Banned
thefro said:
They'd better tie Blofeld into the last 3 movies. Craig doesn't have enough time left with the character for them not to.

Also I'll be mad if Bond 25 isn't based off the unused elements from You Only Live Twice novel now.
Click to expand...

You'll likely be mad then because that is such a specific request I highly doubt it will happen.
 
R

Rich!

Member
Konka said:
You'll likely be mad then because that is such a specific request I highly doubt it will happen.
Click to expand...

Why? They've been taking elements from the novels that haven't been used yet ever since Licence to Kill in 1989 (based around a significant storyline from Live and Let Die). It's a regular occurence and a regular source of plot points for the film writers - and so far, that example is one that has not been used yet.

I see it happening. Easily.
 
B

BertramCooper

Banned
Awesome. Figured it would only be a matter of time before Blofeld came back, now that the McClory legal issues have finally been sorted out.

I hope they make him the head of Quantum. I'd rather keep that storyline going rather than trying to bring back SPECTRE. Quantum is basically a SPECTRE analogue anyway, so they might as well double down on it.
 
S

SpacePirate Ridley

Member
Gonzalez said:
I hope he's playing none other than Bond arch villain, Ernst Stavro Blofeld.
Click to expand...

If the ending of Skyfall is any indication of James Bond returning to its roots, and the phrase in the article of Batista doing a memorable henchman (Jaws? Oddjob?), I wouldn't be surprised if Waltz is actually Blofeld.
And it could be glorious.
It's time for archnemesis to return, I don't give a fuck if it's kind of cheesy in this era (superheroes movies still do it sometimes with great praise).

EDIT
Its is Blofeld indeed! Holy shit im going to love this movie.
 
K

Konka

Banned
SpacePirate Ridley said:
If the ending of Skyfall is any indication of James Bond returning to its roots, and the phrase in the article of Batista doing a memorable henchman (Jaws? Oddjob?), I wouldn't be surprised if Waltz is actually Blofeld.
And it could be glorious.
It's time for archnemesis to return, I don't give a fuck if it's kind of cheesy in this era (superheroes movies still do it sometimes with great praise).
Click to expand...

Yeah, Skyfall brought back Q, Moneypenny and a male M.
 
A

AuthenticM

Member
So is he going to be the head of Quantum or are they going to forget this ever happened ? Cause that storyline was clearly not finished.
 
K

Konka

Banned
Peru said:
All questionable decisions. At least bringing back Moneypenny.. they better have some plan with this.
Click to expand...

They're as essential characters to the James Bond universe as Bond himself and Craig himself wanted to see their reintroduction into the universe.

“We’ve finished this story as far as I’m concerned. We’ve got a great set of bad guys. There is an organization that we can use whenever we want to. The relationship between Bond and M is secure and Felix is secure. Let’s try and find where Moneypenny came from and where Q comes from. Let’s do all that and have some fun with it.”
Click to expand...


http://collider.com/movie/article.asp/aid/10063/tcid/1
 
S

Solo

Member
Konka said:
They're as essential characters to the James Bond universe as Bond himself
Click to expand...

Couldn't disagree more. Having Q there for trademark comedic scenes and gadgets and Moneypenny to bat around innuendo with Bond adds nothing of value. Probably the two parts of the formula I was happiest to see jettisoned in Casino Royale and was incredibly disappointed to see return in Skyfall.
 
P

Peru

Member
Moneypenny has never been more than a one-note joke. Never at any point. Re-introducing her is a kick in the nuts to people who liked the new direction.
 
K

Konka

Banned
Peru said:
Moneypenny has never been more than a one-note joke. Never at any point. Re-introducing her is a kick in the nuts to people who liked the new direction.
Click to expand...

And it's a nod to the people who liked the series for every movie that came before CR.
 
P

Peru

Member
It's possible Moneypenny will be reconfigured as a more serious love interest of Bond, or one of the 'people who look at screens and talk about Bond' regulars, or something, and it's theoretically possible it will work well, but even so the way they introduced her in Skyfall was shameful, just shameful. Active agent.. "not fit for this".. kicked to the curb and offered a secretary position.
 
R

Rich!

Member
BertramCooper said:
Just because Craig and Wilson/Broccoli might agree on something doesn't mean Craig should be given creative input.
Click to expand...

But he should be. Every single Bond actor has had creative input. Every single one - Dalton and Moore had the most.

Why would Craig be the exception? Being Bond is known as not just another film role - the actor playing Bond offers far, far more than that.
 
B

BertramCooper

Banned
richisawesome said:
But he should be. Every single Bond actor has had creative input. Every single one - Dalton and Moore had the most.

Why would Craig be the exception? Being Bond is known as not just another film role - the actor playing Bond offers far, far more than that.
Click to expand...

Moore is actually a perfect example of why a Bond actor shouldn't be given creative input.

Dalton, being a Fleming aficionado, is at the other end of the spectrum, but you can't expect every single Bond actor to be as committed to authenticity as he was.

The writing and production teams should certainly craft stories that play to the actor's strengths, but I don't think a Bond actor should ever be allowed to directly influence any major creative decisions. There's more downside than upside to that.
 
B

Blader

Member
Don't see the big deal about Q and Moneypenny, they hardly amounted to much of anything in the old movies; literally one or two scenes apiece. Think they get used as easy scapegoats for why many of the old movies were so bad, when they were really just bad films because they were bad films.
 
P

Peru

Member
I think a dialogue with an actor about how the role should be portrayed is a good thing and undoubtedly the actors doing Bond have influenced the direction directly and indirectly through the kind of actors they are. I very much doubt Craig is behind the re-introduction of any character or something major like that though.

Konka said:
And it's a nod to the people who liked the series for every movie that came before CR.
Click to expand...

I love old Bond, but forcing the most offensive relic of that age into the modern Bond stories makes me unwell. It's not that in isolation so much as what they've done to the role gallery with Skyfall.

Blader said:
Don't see the big deal about Q and Moneypenny, they hardly amounted to much of anything in the old movies; literally one or two scenes apiece. Think they get used as easy scapegoats for why many of the old movies were so bad, when they were really just bad films because they were bad films.
Click to expand...

They're not bad movies, but many of them are goofily comical movies and those characters work as simple comic relief, something which clashes with Craig's Bond series. Moneypenny is a bit different from Q in that she's also a kind of character tied to certain roles in the workplace which are no longer.
 
R

Rich!

Member
I'm quite happy with Moneypenny and M being put back into smaller background/story setup roles.

The focus should be on Bond, and solely Bond.
 
V

ViewtifulJC

Banned
Blofeld doesn't have to be bald, and considering how its been riffed by everybody from Dr. Claw in Inspector Gadget to Dr. Evil in Austin Powers, I assume he won't be sitting in a giant chair petting a cat, either.
 
B

BertramCooper

Banned
Peru said:
I think a dialogue with an actor about how the role should be portrayed is a good thing and undoubtedly the actors doing Bond have influenced the direction directly and indirectly through the kind of actors they are. I very much doubt Craig is behind the re-introduction of any character or something major like that though.
Click to expand...

This is basically what I'm getting at.

The style and tone of a Bond actor's performance undoubtedly has an impact on current and future films, but a Bond actor shouldn't ever be given a seat at the table on major creative matters. On micro issues, sure. On macro issues, nope.

"Because Craig wants it" is not a proper justification for why a Bond film should go in a particular direction.
 
Q

QuicheFontaine

Member
Solo said:
Couldn't disagree more. Having Q there for trademark comedic scenes and gadgets and Moneypenny to bat around innuendo with Bond adds nothing of value. Probably the two parts of the formula I was happiest to see jettisoned in Casino Royale and was incredibly disappointed to see return in Skyfall.
Click to expand...

But didn't Q say "What did you expect, an exploding pen? We don't do that anymore" in Skyfall? I don't think he's going to be the same comic relief that the original Q was.
 
R

Rich!

Member
QuicheFontaine said:
But didn't Q say "What did you expect, an exploding pen? We don't do that anymore" in Skyfall? I don't think he's going to be the same comic relief that the original Q was.
Click to expand...

He still was there to offer comic relief in skyfall and will be in bond 24 onwards too - it just will be of a different kind to Llewlyn/Cleese's humour.
 
B

BertramCooper

Banned
Having watched the first season of Penny Dreadful this summer, I was relatively hopeful that John Logan's screenplay could pull off a classy sort of camp that would be appropriate for the franchise.

Then they brought back Purvis and Wade for rewrites and I got considerably less optimistic.
 
B

BertramCooper

Banned
Skyfall sounded so incredible on paper, and the result was just a mess.

But what really makes it a nightmare is that it was a colossal financial success, which reinforces all of the shitty creative decisions made on it.

And if there's anything we can count on from the Bond franchise, it's that once EON have found something that resonates with the public, they'll beat it until it's a putrid, maggot-ridden, bloated corpse of a horse.
 
J

Jason's Ultimatum

Member
BertramCooper said:
Having watched the first season of Penny Dreadful this summer, I was relatively hopeful that John Logan's screenplay could pull off a classy sort of camp that would be appropriate for the franchise.

Then they brought back Purvis and Wade for rewrites and I got considerably less optimistic.
Click to expand...

Jez Butterworth did the final rewrite.
 
S

Sn4ke_911

If I ever post something in Japanese which I don't understand, please BAN me.
Just saw in the news they will shoot some scenes where i live (Austria/Tirol)

They said a
helicopter chase scene, lot's of explosions and maybe snow mobiles
will be in it.
 
B

Blader

Member
Personally I think Skyfall improved way more on rewatch. I liked it fine enough the first time but enjoyed it a lot more on a second viewing. I don't think calling it a nightmarish, turgid, shitty mess is in any way an accurate reading of the film lol. Then again, when your spectrum for criticism pivots from "AMAZEBALLS" to "VILE FILTH" I guess there isn't much room for a middle ground...

BertramCooper said:
Having watched the first season of Penny Dreadful this summer, I was relatively hopeful that John Logan's screenplay could pull off a classy sort of camp that would be appropriate for the franchise.

Then they brought back Purvis and Wade for rewrites and I got considerably less optimistic.
Click to expand...

Purvis and Wade also wrote Casino Royale, so who knows where they'll land.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Bond 25 title revealed: No Time To Die
2
53
3K
lock2k replied
THR: Apple, Amazon Join Race for James Bond Film Rights
2 3
103
10K
Stiflers Mom replied
Joel McHale In Talks For Valiant’s ‘Quantum And Woody’
26
3K
Sojgat replied
  • Locked
Rumour: Monica Bellucci's Monica Bellucci to play role in Bond 24
2
78
25K
CloudyTuba replied
  • Locked
007 SPECTRE |OT| It's me, Austin. It was me all along, Austin.
38 39 40 41 42
2K
164K
NotTheGuyYouKill replied
Top Bottom