SPECTRE: And what would you like to maintain for Bond #25?

edited September 2016 in SPECTRE Posts: 11,119
Obviously there's a lot of talk on what should be improved. It's inherent to disappointment and failed expectations. But sadly, I think ever since I've been on this forum (2011) I only see the 'negatives' prevailing after every Bond film. Even during the post-2011 MI6-forums, "Casino Royale" was met with a lot of criticism and a lot of "This should be done better next time".

Therefore, I think it's interesting to turn the tables a bit and focus on the things that did go well and that should be considered as a huge improvement when compared with older Bond films. Hence I'm asking the question to all of you:

<< WHAT ELEMENTS FROM THE 24TH JAMES BOND 007 ADVENTURE, "SPECTRE", NEED TO RETURN TO BOND #25 WITHOUT A DOUBT?? >>

What aspects of Sam Mendes' directing style should absolutely return and should serve as a blueprint for future Bond directors who will take on the next James Bond installment? Please let me know :-).
«13

Comments

  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,243
    Good thread. Even though it's bottom ranked for me there's many positives.

    - interactions between the MI6 team
    - beautifully shot and acted
    - tense scenes between Bond and the villain
    - don't think themes are necessary in Bond films but the 'old and the new' worked well in Skyfall

    There's more but that's all I can think of now

  • This is not so much to do with Mendes but from Spectre in general, and won't apply to every film - I hope this is not too far off the OP.

    Spectre:
    1. Daniel Craig
    2. SPECTRE
    3. Much of the supporting cast, especially Fiennes, Whishaw and Harris, and ideally Seydoux, Waltz and Bautista.
    4. A strong central theme or idea that provides a context for Bond, though ideally not revenge or the role of MI6.
    5. Beautiful and contrasting locations, such as South Africa and Japan.
    6. The sense of classical grandeur and magnificence that we saw in Rome, Mexico and in Morocco.
    7. Primarily live action stunts, such as in Austria and Mexico.

    From the earlier Craig era:
    1. Felix
    2. Some of the brutal physicality of Casino and Quantum.
    3. DC's suits from Quantum.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,584
    I'm very keen on Waltz returning should they continue the same arc.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,569
    1. Daniel Craig. This one is fairly obvious.
    2. Waltz. Full of potential. Could be the best Blofeld if we work him right.
    3. The Spectre organisation. Even if Waltz doesn't return, we should come into contact with some of the lower ranked members directly or indirectly.
    4. Hoyte Van Hoytema. His work is superb.

    I'm indifferent to everything else.
  • Wishaw has to come back as Q, he could play the part for longer than Desmond did. Apart from that, nothing (at least nothing exclusive to SP) really "needs" to return, imo, and I say that as someone who loved the film. They could continue on from there if they chose to but it isn't necessary, it works well as an ending to the Craig era.

    I mean the production design, cinematography, etc, all ranged from good to great, but again I wouldn't say any of these "need" to return as we could do just as well with new ones. I guess Gary Powell is probably the closest to necessary as he's been responsible for some great stunts, one of the best of the series (crane jump), and I wouldn't want to lose him. So lets keep him on and give him a script with action scenes that really give him a chance to shine.

    Are there any brands people think need to return? I guess walther, if that counts. And probably Omega (either that or a rolex again). Personally I'd be glad if we saw the back of Aston Martin for a bit. I'd like the next Bond car to be truly distinctive, something different from the cars of the Craig era (ala Moore's lotus), and Tom Ford (again, nothing wrong with the suits, but I think the next actor should feel different). My worst fear is that they just stick him in a DB11 (or the new model for the year it releases) and call it a day, because while they're beautiful cars it's becoming a bit dull and formulaic now. Lets spice things up. A Jag maybe? They seem to have a good working relationship with EON, could be time to graduate from doing the villains cars to the real deal. Or perhaps give Mcclaren a call?

    I can think of something from the films pre Skyfall that needs to return: good memorable music (preferrably David Arnold but I wouldn't mind someone new). I watched Kingsman for the first time since the cinema last night and the soundtrack was fantastic, I couldn't help but think imagine if this guy composed SP instead of Newman.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    Slim pickings I'm afraid, but I suppose the regular supporting cast of M, Q and Moneypenny played by Fiennes, Whishaw and Harris respectively.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited September 2016 Posts: 15,534
    What aspects of Sam Mendes' directing style should absolutely return and should serve as a blueprint for future Bond directors who will take on the next James Bond installment?

    Factually, unless Mendes returns, absolutely nothing. If EON hire a new director for Bond 25, he should be expected to have his own directing style, not ape what Mendes, Campbell, Glen, Tamahori or whoever did in previous outings. This 'Mendes-is-everything' behaviour needs to stop now, and I say this as someone who did enjoy directing style in SF and SP. Mendes did SF, he did SP, he could do Bond 25. If he doesn't return, why in the hell would you want the new director to replicate his directing style? @Gustav you seem like you don't really understand what is expected from the franchise. Story-wise they can continue what Mendes started. But his directing style ends when he isn't the current director anymore.

    As for the question at hand - I want Fiennes and Wishaw to return.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Fiennes,Wishaw and Harris have to return...we need consistency....
  • edited September 2016 Posts: 11,119
    @Gustav you seem like you don't really understand what is expected from the franchise.

    That's quite a bold statement. And fairly untrue I might add. I think all the forummembers in here have at least to a certain extend an understanding what should be in a Bond film. And everyone in here has perfect expertise on the matter on hand, the Bond franchise.

    Moreover, this is a positive-spirited topic in which we could try to focus on the good things, the successful things, and the appreciated things of the newest Bond film and how they can applied again for the next one.

    There are already a lot of, critical, topics in which we all try so hard to sound like a better expert than the actual Bond film producers and Bond crew. And perhaps many of us here DO know things better than Barbara Broccoli or Sam Mendes. But, if you like it or not, they usually result in topics with a slightly negative undertone.

    So therefore I created a topic to counteract that a bit, to stay critical towards the future of the Bond franchise, but by also focusing on the good things and successful aspects. Because we should never loose sight of those.

    I always like to improve the next Bond film, to make the best Bond film possible. But by doing so you should not only focus on the flaws of the most recent Bond film, but also focusing on the good, successful, original and newly added aspects. Improve where necessary, but also maintain where necessary.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited September 2016 Posts: 15,534
    No, @Gustav_Graves, I was specifically talking about that you expect the next director to continue Mendes' directing style. That is factually not how the franchise work. Craig's successor won't base his take on the character on Craig, Brosnan or Connery, the next writers won't base their style on Purvis & Wade, the next composer won't base his music on Arnold, Newman, Serra, Conti or however, the next M won't base his acting on Fiennes, Brown or Lee, the next Q won't base his acting on Wishaw or Cleese or Desmond. Every new cast and crew must give their own take.

    Please realize that your suggestion is ludicrous. If you want EON to approach all directors by asking 'please direct the film in Mendes' style', well congratulations, Bond 25 will never be made because all directors will turn down the offer to do the film. Do you honestly believe they will approach Fincher, Villeneuve, Nolan or Campbell only to ask them to replicate what Mendes is doing? That is factually ridiculous and wrong, period. If EON want Nolan, Spielberg or even Scorsese, they will want these guys' own approach, not Mendes'. Each Bond director, actor, writer, composer are expected to have their own take on their respective job.

    Mendes' 'style' ends with his involvement. No possible arguments can be made to suggest otherwise. What he added to the franchise, like Fiennes' M, Whishaw's Q, Harris' MP or Waltz' Blofeld can indeed be carried on to Bond 25. It is his directing style that simply can not return without himself also coming back.
  • Posts: 19,339
    I think a fresh directorial approach for BOND25 would be a good thing,as long as the main actors all stay (with the exception of DC possibly,but that cant be helped) to keep the timeline and continuum going..
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Ben Whishaw. That's about it for me, in terms of what really must (has to) return.

    Oh, and Daniel Kleinman.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    No, @Gustav_Graves, I was specifically talking about that you expect the next director to continue Mendes' directing style. That is factually not how the franchise work. Craig's successor won't base his take on the character on Craig, Brosnan or Connery, the next writers won't base their style on Purvis & Wade, the next composer won't base his music on Arnold, Newman, Serra, Conti or however, the next M won't base his acting on Fiennes, Brown or Lee, the next Q won't base his acting on Wishaw or Cleese or Desmond. Every new cast and crew must give their own take.

    Please realize that your suggestion is ludicrous. If you want EON to approach all directors by asking 'please direct the film in Mendes' style', well congratulations, Bond 25 will never be made because all directors will turn down the offer to do the film. Do you honestly believe they will approach Fincher, Villeneuve, Nolan or Campbell only to ask them to replicate what Mendes is doing? That is factually ridiculous and wrong, period. If EON want Nolan, Spielberg or even Scorsese, they will want these guys' own approach, not Mendes'. Each Bond director, actor, writer, composer are expected to have their own take on their respective job.

    Mendes' 'style' ends with his involvement. No possible arguments can be made to suggest otherwise. What he added to the franchise, like Fiennes' M, Whishaw's Q, Harris' MP or Waltz' Blofeld can indeed be carried on to Bond 25. It is his directing style that simply can not return without himself also coming back.

    Indupitably.
  • No, @Gustav_Graves, I was specifically talking about that you expect the next director to continue Mendes' directing style. That is factually not how the franchise work. Craig's successor won't base his take on the character on Craig, Brosnan or Connery, the next writers won't base their style on Purvis & Wade, the next composer won't base his music on Arnold, Newman, Serra, Conti or however, the next M won't base his acting on Fiennes, Brown or Lee, the next Q won't base his acting on Wishaw or Cleese or Desmond.

    Please realize that your suggestion is ludicrous. If you want EON to approach all directing by asking 'please direct the film in Mendes' style', well congratulations, Bond 25 will never be made because all directors will turn down the offer to do the film. Do you honestly believe they will approach Fincher, Villeneuve, Nolan or Campbell only to ask them to replicate what Mendes is doing? That is factually ridiculous and wrong, period. If EON want Nolan, Spielberg or even Scorsese, they will want these guys' own approach, not Mendes'. Each Bond director, actor, writer, composer are expected to have their own take on their respective job.

    Mendes' 'style' ends with his involvement. No possible arguments can be made to suggest otherwise. What he added to the franchise, like Fiennes' M, Whishaw's Q, Harris' MP or Waltz' Blofeld can indeed be carried on to Bond 25. It is his directing style that simply can not return without himself also coming back.

    I think you can only read into my comments as a huge Sam Mendes appreciation topic. I'm fully aware that Sam Mendes is out, basta, gone, goodbye. But I just want to focus on the aspects from "SPECTRE" that people want to return. That's all. Do like the other people do. Come up with the things you like about "SPECTRE" and that you like to see return. I'm not here to portray myself as an EON-employee. I'm foremost a simple nerd.

    Also, I think you're wrong about certain things. Marc Forster clearly looked at "Casino Royale" and directed a sequel to that film. Even Sam Mendes was impressed by Martin Campbell and included some scenes in "Skyfall" that are reminiscent of "CR". Think about the cocktail scene in the Macau Casino, in which Bond clearly sees through Severine. An obvious reference to the Vesper-Bond dinner scene.

    But again, let me know what aspects you like to see return in Bond #25. Most likely it won't happen. But then again this is a fan forum, not an EON-conference call.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    No, @Gustav_Graves, I was specifically talking about that you expect the next director to continue Mendes' directing style. That is factually not how the franchise work. Craig's successor won't base his take on the character on Craig, Brosnan or Connery, the next writers won't base their style on Purvis & Wade, the next composer won't base his music on Arnold, Newman, Serra, Conti or however, the next M won't base his acting on Fiennes, Brown or Lee, the next Q won't base his acting on Wishaw or Cleese or Desmond. Every new cast and crew must give their own take.

    Please realize that your suggestion is ludicrous. If you want EON to approach all directors by asking 'please direct the film in Mendes' style', well congratulations, Bond 25 will never be made because all directors will turn down the offer to do the film. Do you honestly believe they will approach Fincher, Villeneuve, Nolan or Campbell only to ask them to replicate what Mendes is doing? That is factually ridiculous and wrong, period. If EON want Nolan, Spielberg or even Scorsese, they will want these guys' own approach, not Mendes'. Each Bond director, actor, writer, composer are expected to have their own take on their respective job.

    Mendes' 'style' ends with his involvement. No possible arguments can be made to suggest otherwise. What he added to the franchise, like Fiennes' M, Whishaw's Q, Harris' MP or Waltz' Blofeld can indeed be carried on to Bond 25. It is his directing style that simply can not return without himself also coming back.

    Indupitably.
    I agree. I'm actually looking forward to a new style for B25, and will be more able to accept Waltz's or even Seydoux's return under the control of a more competent action/thriller director, who is more familiar with the genre.
  • edited September 2016 Posts: 11,119
    bondjames wrote: »
    No, @Gustav_Graves, I was specifically talking about that you expect the next director to continue Mendes' directing style. That is factually not how the franchise work. Craig's successor won't base his take on the character on Craig, Brosnan or Connery, the next writers won't base their style on Purvis & Wade, the next composer won't base his music on Arnold, Newman, Serra, Conti or however, the next M won't base his acting on Fiennes, Brown or Lee, the next Q won't base his acting on Wishaw or Cleese or Desmond. Every new cast and crew must give their own take.

    Please realize that your suggestion is ludicrous. If you want EON to approach all directors by asking 'please direct the film in Mendes' style', well congratulations, Bond 25 will never be made because all directors will turn down the offer to do the film. Do you honestly believe they will approach Fincher, Villeneuve, Nolan or Campbell only to ask them to replicate what Mendes is doing? That is factually ridiculous and wrong, period. If EON want Nolan, Spielberg or even Scorsese, they will want these guys' own approach, not Mendes'. Each Bond director, actor, writer, composer are expected to have their own take on their respective job.

    Mendes' 'style' ends with his involvement. No possible arguments can be made to suggest otherwise. What he added to the franchise, like Fiennes' M, Whishaw's Q, Harris' MP or Waltz' Blofeld can indeed be carried on to Bond 25. It is his directing style that simply can not return without himself also coming back.

    Indupitably.
    I agree. I'm actually looking forward to a new style for B25, and will be more able to accept Waltz's or even Seydoux's return under the control of a more competent action/thriller director, who is more familiar with the genre.

    In what way would you like Swann and Blofeld to return?

    I always liked the idea of a Sylvia Trench-esque cameo for Madeleine. Especially length-wise. And with a bit more drama. A split-up for instance.

    Regarding Blofeld? I think it's pivotal that in Bond #25 Bond doesn't know about Blofeld, but not the other way around. A bit like in FRWL. Blofeld goes fully underground again. And while MI6 and Bond aren't aware of Blofeld or think he's dead (assassinate a Blofeld's doppelganger at the start of the film?), the viewer actually does.

    Good idea?
  • Posts: 19,339
    They cant put another 'Blofeld double' in though,it would be linked with DAF,and that's the last thing B25 will need !!
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited September 2016 Posts: 5,198
    I would like Craig to return. That's really it.

    But realistically, I suppose that Craig brings his baggage in the MI6 supporting cast. Waltz as Blofeld is a huge missed opportunity that can be corrected for one more film (if Craig goes, Waltz and Blofeld should as well). And I guess Madeleine needs to be dispatched onscreen, one way or another. I certainly don't want to see Bautista or Bellucci return (what more story could they possibly have?)--that would make seven cast carryovers (not including Craig). Time to make room for new characters!

    Damn you, Mendes, for the bloated cast carryovers! Perhaps SP should have blown up MI6 with Blofeld, Madeleine, M, Moneypenny, and Q all inside. Bond narrowly escapes via balloon but has amnesia (either from the explosion or from the torture).

    And the rest is history...
  • GBFGBF
    edited September 2016 Posts: 3,166
    The character "James Bond", preferably played by another actor.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited September 2016 Posts: 4,182
    barryt007 wrote: »
    They cant put another 'Blofeld double' in though,it would be linked with DAF,and that's the last thing B25 will need !!

    The scene in Spectre when Bond shooting on the glass, i thaught that going to be the end movie. With DAF and teaser trailer of Spectre in mind. How amazing it have been if spiderweb legs dive in to the credits like dropping blood and spiderweb work as as eye (gun) barrel. But i realy like blind barrel at start of movie and of course then we mist the Mi6 end.
  • barryt007 wrote: »
    They cant put another 'Blofeld double' in though,it would be linked with DAF,and that's the last thing B25 will need !!

    But.....how would you re-introduce Blofeld then? Let's not forget that Blofeld has been captured, and is probably sentenced, and could probably sent to prison. I think one could really re-introduce a Thunderball-esque scenario in which thee body double creates confusion.

  • bondjames wrote: »
    No, @Gustav_Graves, I was specifically talking about that you expect the next director to continue Mendes' directing style. That is factually not how the franchise work. Craig's successor won't base his take on the character on Craig, Brosnan or Connery, the next writers won't base their style on Purvis & Wade, the next composer won't base his music on Arnold, Newman, Serra, Conti or however, the next M won't base his acting on Fiennes, Brown or Lee, the next Q won't base his acting on Wishaw or Cleese or Desmond. Every new cast and crew must give their own take.

    Please realize that your suggestion is ludicrous. If you want EON to approach all directors by asking 'please direct the film in Mendes' style', well congratulations, Bond 25 will never be made because all directors will turn down the offer to do the film. Do you honestly believe they will approach Fincher, Villeneuve, Nolan or Campbell only to ask them to replicate what Mendes is doing? That is factually ridiculous and wrong, period. If EON want Nolan, Spielberg or even Scorsese, they will want these guys' own approach, not Mendes'. Each Bond director, actor, writer, composer are expected to have their own take on their respective job.

    Mendes' 'style' ends with his involvement. No possible arguments can be made to suggest otherwise. What he added to the franchise, like Fiennes' M, Whishaw's Q, Harris' MP or Waltz' Blofeld can indeed be carried on to Bond 25. It is his directing style that simply can not return without himself also coming back.

    Indupitably.
    I agree. I'm actually looking forward to a new style for B25, and will be more able to accept Waltz's or even Seydoux's return under the control of a more competent action/thriller director, who is more familiar with the genre.

    In what way would you like Swann and Blofeld to return?

    I always liked the idea of a Sylvia Trench-esque cameo for Madeleine. Especially length-wise. And with a bit more drama. A split-up for instance.

    Regarding Blofeld? I think it's pivotal that in Bond #25 Bond doesn't know about Blofeld, but not the other way around. A bit like in FRWL. Blofeld goes fully underground again. And while MI6 and Bond aren't aware of Blofeld or think he's dead (assassinate a Blofeld's doppelganger at the start of the film?), the viewer actually does.

    Good idea?

    No disrespect but that sounds like it'd be really annoying and not "pivotal" at all. We can argue whether they were right to do the whole Blofeld/Spectre thing in one film, but the fact is it's done now. Bond knows Blofeld, they've met and faced off. If they wanted to do a FRWL/TB esque film with Craig they should have done it before, they've lost their chance now. They've done the grand reveal so now Bond has to fight Blofeld. To bring Craig back, carry on with Blofeld and delay their final confrontation would probably be the worst possible move imo. Plus what happens if Craig doesn't want to do a 6th? The next actor has to finish off that story?

    I think if Craig comes back, have him back at MI6 with it being explained that domestic life didn't agree with him (he can avoid discussing Madeline, it can be a big plot point) and Blofeld would have to play a large role. How would people feel about Bond dying? It could be an interesting theme: we know Bond's unable to walk away (coming back from the dead in SF, leaving Madeline and returning to duty now) so could his refusal to quit be the end of him? I think it could make a great emotional ending. I'm not picturing some heroic sacrifice or anything, something smaller, maybe a stray bullet during the final battle that he doesn't even notice until it's over. It'd also have the added bonus of making it clear to audiences that the Craig era is self contained. I just think it'd be cool if the Craig era has some sort of ending (just as it had a clear beginning and middle). I think SP works well as an ending but if they want to do one more then they can't have him just go off into the sunset at the end again. They could just end it with him ready for missions and pass the baton to the next actor but I think it'd be more interesting to keep the DC films in their own continuity, ala the Dark Knight films.

    If Craig decides not to return, then Blofeld and Spectre shouldn't feature and it should be a soft reboot (I'd get a new Q and Moneypenny to reiterate this) imo. Straightforward mission to show the tone and direction they're now going for. Spectre could eventually come back but I'd leave it for at least a few films, and when they do return, I wouldn't want it to be Bond and Blofeld's first meeting again. Make it clear they've met before and that Bond knows about Spectre, but keep the details vague.
  • Posts: 19,339
    barryt007 wrote: »
    They cant put another 'Blofeld double' in though,it would be linked with DAF,and that's the last thing B25 will need !!

    But.....how would you re-introduce Blofeld then? Let's not forget that Blofeld has been captured, and is probably sentenced, and could probably sent to prison. I think one could really re-introduce a Thunderball-esque scenario in which thee body double creates confusion.

    I think it will be a simple case of SPECTRE busting Blofeld out of prison ...

  • barryt007 wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    They cant put another 'Blofeld double' in though,it would be linked with DAF,and that's the last thing B25 will need !!

    But.....how would you re-introduce Blofeld then? Let's not forget that Blofeld has been captured, and is probably sentenced, and could probably sent to prison. I think one could really re-introduce a Thunderball-esque scenario in which thee body double creates confusion.

    I think it will be a simple case of SPECTRE busting Blofeld out of prison ...

    That's more like the 'sylvester-stallone-in-the-the-expendables' way of doing things to be honest. SPECTRE is a slightly larger-than-life, evil, yet luxury and elegant manifestation of Fleming's mindset. Thus using a double or doppelganger to me sounds more logical and also more Spectre-esque.
  • Posts: 4,005
    All the prison guards will of course already work for Spectre. We have people everywhere.
  • edited September 2016 Posts: 12,724
    A double, Blofeld faking his death and Bond not finding out for the whole film, sorry @Gustav but these just seem like such contrived ways of continuing the story.

    If Craig returns, Madeline or no Madeline, he has to go for round two with Blofeld. They can't just leave him in prison and have a standalone film and they can't have Craig face a Largo/Klebb esque threat now. They've revealed Blofeld, it's done, so unless they want to leave SP as the ending (and reboot with a new actor) they need to commit to it.

    If Craig comes back, just have Spectre break Blofeld out of prison then Bond has to try and find him and stop whatever he's up to. No contrived doppleganger plots to delay the final confrontation. Lets just get things going and keep them straightforward (in the spirit of this, I'd prefer to not feature Madeline and write it as Bond was unable to settle down, but keep it as a plot point, mention it a lot and work it into Bond's character arc so the end of SP doesn't feel pointless).
  • edited September 2016 Posts: 11,119
    A double, Blofeld faking his death and Bond not finding out for the whole film, sorry @Gustav but these just seem like such contrived ways of continuing the story.

    If Craig returns, Madeline or no Madeline, he has to go for round two with Blofeld. They can't just leave him in prison and have a standalone film and they can't have Craig face a Largo/Klebb esque threat now. They've revealed Blofeld, it's done, so unless they want to leave SP as the ending (and reboot with a new actor) they need to commit to it.

    If Craig comes back, just have Spectre break Blofeld out of prison then Bond has to try and find him and stop whatever he's up to. No contrived doppleganger plots to delay the final confrontation. Lets just get things going and keep them straightforward (in the spirit of this, I'd prefer to not feature Madeline and write it as Bond was unable to settle down, but keep it as a plot point, mention it a lot and work it into Bond's character arc so the end of SP doesn't feel pointless).

    Well, I disagree. I actually think it's entirely contrived to spend a lot of time in the film to let Blofeld break out of prison. It lacks any.mystery. I think it's far better and, if performed well, to replace Blofeld by a double. It's not contrived, and way simpler. You could even try to make such a doppelganger ordeal more realistic by turning it into a necessary surgery to heal Blofeld's wounds, scars and infectious eye. Here you have it. No big truck please where a bunch of gangsters try to free Blofeld. I prefer the elegant doppelganger approach.

    And for the sake of secrecy it's also much better to assume that Blofeld is 'dead and finished' instead of letting the whole world know that Blofeld is alive after one of the biggest prison attacks in modern day history. Blofeld operates in the shadows, not as some kind of media mogul.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Every Bond fan out there,as soon as they see a doppleganger plotline,will say that EON are just being lazy and recycling the same thing from DAF,it would be a disaster .

    The Bond films have to remain grounded as they have done..SP is as fantastical as it should get - sticking Dopplegangers in , and Bond not knowing who Blofeld is,is just asking for serious criticism from fans,moviegoers and critics.

    Luckily that wont happen,EON,BB,Michael etc all have better common sense than that.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 38,233
    Surely the series can come up with something more original (after not having seen Blofeld in decades) than a body double/doppelgänger, ala DAF.
  • barryt007 wrote: »
    Every Bond fan out there,as soon as they see a doppleganger plotline,will say that EON are just being lazy and recycling the same thing from DAF,it would be a disaster .

    The Bond films have to remain grounded as they have done..SP is as fantastical as it should get - sticking Dopplegangers in , and Bond not knowing who Blofeld is,is just asking for serious criticism from fans,moviegoers and critics.

    Luckily that wont happen,EON,BB,Michael etc all have better common sense than that.

    I slightly updated my post @barryt007 :-).

    In any case, I dare you and @Creasy47;612354 to do better and come up with another idea to re-introduce Blofeld :-).

    Personally, if done correctly and more realistically, one could make a doppleganger scenario work.

    I just think your idea of re-introducing Blofeld isn't really working either. Hence I actually used your criticism to make a doppelganger appear more feasible and less the result of laziness.

    PS: I have been praying ever since pre-production of SF that SPECTRE would sooner or later return. Ibas an avid supporter in here of bringing back this wonderful Fleming-invention. And then, 6 years later, SPECTRE and Blofeld returned ;-).
Sign In or Register to comment.