› ›

SPECTRE Production Timeline

1…123124126128129…870

Comments

  • boldfingerboldfinger
    edited April 2014 Posts: 5,767
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote:
    Wait, wait, wait, Quantum was not named at all in Casino Royale. Mr White echoes SMERSH's agent in the novel, and even in Fleming's books one can argue that as an antagonist, SMERSH would "turn into" SPECTRE. Eon did not own the rights of SPECTRE at the time of Casino Royale.

    Then Quantum is named in Quantum of Solace. And that's what I call shoehorning : name an organization so that it "explains" the title of the movie, which comes from Ian Fleming short novel in which "Quantum" is not linked in any way to any organization. Eon did not have the rights of SPECTRE at that time either.

    Then, no Quantum at all in Skyfall. And since then Eon finally owns the rights of SPECTRE.

    I think that Quantum has existed only because of a legal limbo and a weird title, and will be remembered as such in the future.
    If Quantum wa shoehorned in then that was a lucky break, because it´s a brilliant organisation with a fantastic name, and the turnaround of meaning from Fleming´s short story to the film is absolutely fine.
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    and maybe do what QoS sort of lacked, and actually make them organized.
    They way they were organised had much more potential than the classic SPECTRE hierarchy. Quantum was much more Hydra than Captain America´s Hydra. A bunch of shareholders. Not one guy pulling the strings, but a web of string-pullers. If you take out one or two, there´ll still be a lot left, and perhaps new ones rising after. All there is to do with SPECTRE is take down Blofeld. Quantum can take on any form they like, exactly because they are organised like that.
    Getafix wrote:
    Frankly, I am keen they don't get into a pattern of having too much cross referencing between films. The odd link here and there is fine and I don't actually mind if Quantum or Spectre or whatever returns. But I like my films to stand alone - to feel like one satisfying installment in their own right.+
    This.

  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I guess Quantum is modelled a little on Al Queda in that sense - that it is multi-headed.
  • Matt_HelmMatt_Helm
    Posts: 908
    Most of all, a organization "that has its people everywhere " is simply intriguing beyond measure,since it opens the door to the widest array of story lines. Just think of all the paranoia (and thrill)inducing possibilities, that would be possible.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Most of all, a organization "that has its people everywhere " is simply intriguing beyond measure,since it opens the door to the widest array of story lines. Just think of all the paranoia (and thrill)inducing possibilities, that would be possible.
    A bit like X-Files. Agree, the possibilities are endless.

  • Matt_HelmMatt_Helm
    Posts: 908
    Getafix wrote:
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    SaintMark wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    I don't remotely care whether Quantum returns or not.

    I would like it if they finished the tale of this organistaion, by whatever name, first it was a big threat and then...................?

    I would not mind if Mendes would not return, not a fan of his work and not a fan of his work with 007. Yoo bad he gets a second chance. O:-)

    I am a Mendes sceptic. I am not a fan of SF, but am curious as to what he can achieve with a fresh script without any Purvis and Wade input.
    There was a lot in terms of the ideas and ambition behind SF that I approved of. I just felt the execution, plot and script let it down.

    As I said before - don't expect too much. Logan has yet to deliver a script, that is even remotely original let alone logical. What he has delivered so far are the nadirs of two of my favorite franchises (= Bond and Star Trek ), at least storywise. I can see a pattern forming here.
    About the ideas and ambition behind SF stuff - well if they aren't executed well they are worth just about nothing. You see one can start writing a novel with the ambition to write the greatest book ever, but if he fails his ambition doesn't redeem him one bit.

    I am trying to remain positive, but admit I share your doubts.

    I watched the Last Samari the other day and the plot and script are incredibly generic and clunky. He does have a good turn of phrase though sometimes. Gladiator, although again, very derivative, has some brilliant lines.

    You might have a point here. I don't know,who has written them,but Bonds dialog with Q was quite excellent (I love the pajamas line), as were Silvas first few introductory lines.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    SaintMark wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    I don't remotely care whether Quantum returns or not.

    I would like it if they finished the tale of this organistaion, by whatever name, first it was a big threat and then...................?

    I would not mind if Mendes would not return, not a fan of his work and not a fan of his work with 007. Yoo bad he gets a second chance. O:-)

    I am a Mendes sceptic. I am not a fan of SF, but am curious as to what he can achieve with a fresh script without any Purvis and Wade input.
    There was a lot in terms of the ideas and ambition behind SF that I approved of. I just felt the execution, plot and script let it down.

    As I said before - don't expect too much. Logan has yet to deliver a script, that is even remotely original let alone logical. What he has delivered so far are the nadirs of two of my favorite franchises (= Bond and Star Trek ), at least storywise. I can see a pattern forming here.
    About the ideas and ambition behind SF stuff - well if they aren't executed well they are worth just about nothing. You see one can start writing a novel with the ambition to write the greatest book ever, but if he fails his ambition doesn't redeem him one bit.

    I am trying to remain positive, but admit I share your doubts.

    I watched the Last Samari the other day and the plot and script are incredibly generic and clunky. He does have a good turn of phrase though sometimes. Gladiator, although again, very derivative, has some brilliant lines.

    You might have a point here. I don't know,who has written them,but Bonds dialog with Q was quite excellent (I love the pajamas line), as were Silvas first few introductory lines.

    Silva's entrance was fantastic. At that point I thought we were really in for something special. But for me, everything achieved during the build up to the island is rapidly blown away once the action returns to London and the nonsense begins.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    marketto007 wrote:
    Here's the video of Sam Mendes interview for Charlie Rose.

    http://www.hulu.com/watch/622076

    Thanks @marketto007! I could listen to that man all day :)
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,844
    Sometimes I think if Blofeld turns up it should only be to mark the beginning of the tenure of Craig's succesor.

    Then some other times I keep thinking on how great it would be to have Simon Russell Beale as Blofeld.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    We also need to consider whether the new Bond following Craig's tenure will be that same Bond or a different one in another universe. If the former, Quantum/Blofeld could be introduced in Bond 24 or 25 to play out over the upcoming films of the new actor's Bond adventures, but if it's the latter then time is running out to wrap this Quantum thing up.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,844
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    We also need to consider whether the new Bond following Craig's tenure will be that same Bond or a different one in another universe. If the former, Quantum/Blofeld could be introduced in Bond 24 or 25 to play out over the upcoming films of the new actor's Bond adventures, but if it's the latter then time is running out to wrap this Quantum thing up.

    Well, it is VERY early to tell, but I would say they'll probably want it to be in the same universe the way the original continuity (to use this term loosely) were: allusions to the death of Tracy, recurring appearances of SPECTRE and/or Blofeld in the early ones, Quarrel Junior, Felix Leiter, etc. And with all the rights over Blofeld and SPECTRE with them, they can really keep things consistent.

    Oh, and thinking about Quarrel, it makes me notice something: LALD was filmed more than ten years after DN, yet they made an allusion to a very minor character. In the audiences, some probably noticed, some did not. Why would modern audiences have such short attention span when it comes to Quantum, or indeed Blofeld?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I'll have really bad separation anxiety when Dan's era ends; he is such a great Bond and his tenure has added so much richness to the character. It's like contemplating college and adulthood when in elementary school: you know it's coming but you never actually think it'll happen, until it inevitably (and sadly) does.
  • Suivez_ce_parachuteSuivez_ce_parachute
    edited April 2014 Posts: 2,015
    Ludovico wrote:
    For closure [Quantum] need to be fought again. Or their absence need to be explained at the very least.

    The last time Bond fought someone for closure from past movies, that was at the end of the PTS of FYEO. This was again actual shoehorning there. I don't think anyone want that kind of explanation again.

    For instance, we were never explained why Sylvia Trench was no longer Bond's girlfriend anymore after DN/FRWL. In Goldfinger, well, she's gone, no one knows what happened to her. It didn't do the franchise much harm it seems, and I've never read anyone here wondering about her whereabouts, and yet she was very close to Bond.

    Anyway, I hope that in the last act of Bond 24/25/26... we won't get to see Tanner rise and shout "Heil Quantum !" or whatever. You know, in Craig's timeline, Tanner didn't appear until Quantum, and in it he tries for a split second to tell M she should ignore Greene.. hm.. weird :) We could even have M suffering from Stockholm Syndrom with the IRA, some members of whom are now in Quantum :)
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Most of all, a organization "that has its people everywhere " is simply intriguing beyond measure,since it opens the door to the widest array of story lines. Just think of all the paranoia (and thrill)inducing possibilities, that would be possible.

    But then we would go from Ian Fleming's Bond to John Gardner's Bond, wouldn't we ? I'm not expert of the latter, but I feel the double/triple cross and all the paranoia is far more closer to Gardner's efforts than to Fleming's books. They tried something with Elektra but I don't think it was memorable. Ditto with QOS' Mitchell, almost no screen time before appearing as a traitor.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote:
    For instance, we were never explained why Sylvia Trench was no longer Bond's girlfriend anymore after DN/FRWL. In Goldfinger, well, she's gone, no one knows what happened to her. It didn't do the franchise much harm it seems, and I've never read anyone here wondering about her whereabouts, and yet she was very close to Bond.
    She wasn´t very close to Bond, she was a fling, all we see of her is flirting with Bond or lying in his arms. Yeah ok in that sense she was very close to Bond...
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote:
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Most of all, a organization "that has its people everywhere " is simply intriguing beyond measure,since it opens the door to the widest array of story lines. Just think of all the paranoia (and thrill)inducing possibilities, that would be possible.

    But then we would go from Ian Fleming's Bond to John Gardner's Bond, wouldn't we ? I'm not expert of the latter, but I feel the double/triple cross and all the paranoia is far more closer to Gardner's efforts than to Fleming's books. They tried something with Elektra but I don't think it was memorable. Ditto with QOS' Mitchell, almost no screen time before appearing as a traitor.
    Everthing depends also to a large degree on the execution, e.g. Electra and Raynard. It´s not like a lot of Bond films have a lot to do with Fleming´s novels.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,844
    Silvia Trench, while I love her for what she is and would love to see more Bond girls like her, is not exactly on the same level of importance as Quantum. As for Blofeld being shoehorned in FYEO, this was due to legal constraints more than anything. And in spite of those, they still felt the need to end this arc, however dismissively. And who is to say that they would take the EXACT same road with Quantum?
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,506
    Can't get that Mendes interview to play for some reason? Not even on the MI6 article either? Will try it again later today and hopefully it will have been resolved?
  • Suivez_ce_parachuteSuivez_ce_parachute
    Posts: 2,015
    I'm afraid Quantum won't die only here :) On board for Bond24, we've got the director who never used Quantum, and a writer who never used Quantum, the director say he wants to continue the themes of his movie that never used Quantum, and the writer said Bond should always fight Blofeld, not Quantum. And yet the very same persons who can draw logical conclusions galore about the future of the movies on many, many points, insist about Quantum.

    Who but fans remember Quantum, is the real question. Very few, I think. The "Q" logo of Quantum didn't enter the movie world. "Q" is still the gadget man for the crowd, not a sign of a world threat.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote:
    I'm afraid Quantum won't die only here :) On board for Bond24, we've got the director who never used Quantum, and a writer who never used Quantum, the director say he wants to continue the themes of his movie that never used Quantum, and the writer said Bond should always fight Blofeld, not Quantum. And yet the very same persons who can draw logical conclusions galore about the future of the movies on many, many points, insist about Quantum.

    Who but fans remember Quantum, is the real question. Very few, I think. The "Q" logo of Quantum didn't enter the movie world. "Q" is still the gadget man for the crowd, not a sign of a world threat.

    Very true. Less than 10% chance Quantum is going to return I think. MGW would have to insist on them coming back and having strained so hard to get Mendes back, I doubt they're going to force him to do anything he doesn't want to do.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    Getafix wrote:
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote:
    I'm afraid Quantum won't die only here :) On board for Bond24, we've got the director who never used Quantum, and a writer who never used Quantum, the director say he wants to continue the themes of his movie that never used Quantum, and the writer said Bond should always fight Blofeld, not Quantum. And yet the very same persons who can draw logical conclusions galore about the future of the movies on many, many points, insist about Quantum.

    Who but fans remember Quantum, is the real question. Very few, I think. The "Q" logo of Quantum didn't enter the movie world. "Q" is still the gadget man for the crowd, not a sign of a world threat.

    Very true. Less than 10% chance Quantum is going to return I think. MGW would have to insist on them coming back and having strained so hard to get Mendes back, I doubt they're going to force him to do anything he doesn't want to do.
    The Bond producers were very successfully keeping the series fresh. If they want to bring back a name (and it isn´t more than that, because the concept has been there all the time) that existed 50 years ago in 7 out of 23 films, and whose disappearance didn´t mar the franchise in the least (perhaps because the name itself had become such a campy cliché), then they´re of course free to do it, but it would be a dead end.
    If Logan says Bond should only battle Blofeld, he´s degrading him to a comic book superhero, and he´s ignoring the majority of Bond films. Wasn´t there a demand that the people involved in the franchise should love and respect the series?
    Actually I don´t care if they bring Blofeld or SPECTRE back, as long as they really pull it off and make a bloody good film.

  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    boldfinger wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote:
    I'm afraid Quantum won't die only here :) On board for Bond24, we've got the director who never used Quantum, and a writer who never used Quantum, the director say he wants to continue the themes of his movie that never used Quantum, and the writer said Bond should always fight Blofeld, not Quantum. And yet the very same persons who can draw logical conclusions galore about the future of the movies on many, many points, insist about Quantum.

    Who but fans remember Quantum, is the real question. Very few, I think. The "Q" logo of Quantum didn't enter the movie world. "Q" is still the gadget man for the crowd, not a sign of a world threat.

    Very true. Less than 10% chance Quantum is going to return I think. MGW would have to insist on them coming back and having strained so hard to get Mendes back, I doubt they're going to force him to do anything he doesn't want to do.
    The Bond producers were very successfully keeping the series fresh. If they want to bring back a name (and it isn´t more than that, because the concept has been there all the time) that existed 50 years ago in 7 out of 23 films, and whose disappearance didn´t mar the franchise in the least (perhaps because the name itself had become such a campy cliché), then they´re of course free to do it, but it would be a dead end.
    If Logan says Bond should only battle Blofeld, he´s degrading him to a comic book superhero, and he´s ignoring the majority of Bond films. Wasn´t there a demand that the people involved in the franchise should love and respect the series?
    Actually I don´t care if they bring Blofeld or SPECTRE back, as long as they really pull it off and make a bloody good film.

    This
  • Matt_HelmMatt_Helm
    Posts: 908
    boldfinger wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote:
    I'm afraid Quantum won't die only here :) On board for Bond24, we've got the director who never used Quantum, and a writer who never used Quantum, the director say he wants to continue the themes of his movie that never used Quantum, and the writer said Bond should always fight Blofeld, not Quantum. And yet the very same persons who can draw logical conclusions galore about the future of the movies on many, many points, insist about Quantum.

    Who but fans remember Quantum, is the real question. Very few, I think. The "Q" logo of Quantum didn't enter the movie world. "Q" is still the gadget man for the crowd, not a sign of a world threat.

    Very true. Less than 10% chance Quantum is going to return I think. MGW would have to insist on them coming back and having strained so hard to get Mendes back, I doubt they're going to force him to do anything he doesn't want to do.
    The Bond producers were very successfully keeping the series fresh. If they want to bring back a name (and it isn´t more than that, because the concept has been there all the time) that existed 50 years ago in 7 out of 23 films, and whose disappearance didn´t mar the franchise in the least (perhaps because the name itself had become such a campy cliché), then they´re of course free to do it, but it would be a dead end.
    If Logan says Bond should only battle Blofeld, he´s degrading him to a comic book superhero, and he´s ignoring the majority of Bond films. Wasn´t there a demand that the people involved in the franchise should love and respect the series?

    Words of wisdom!
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,844
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote:
    I'm afraid Quantum won't die only here :) On board for Bond24, we've got the director who never used Quantum, and a writer who never used Quantum, the director say he wants to continue the themes of his movie that never used Quantum, and the writer said Bond should always fight Blofeld, not Quantum. And yet the very same persons who can draw logical conclusions galore about the future of the movies on many, many points, insist about Quantum.

    Who but fans remember Quantum, is the real question. Very few, I think. The "Q" logo of Quantum didn't enter the movie world. "Q" is still the gadget man for the crowd, not a sign of a world threat.

    I never said we will have Quantum, but that we cannot dismiss it entirely, for Bond 24 or whatever. Of course Mendes never used Quantum, neither did Campbell, as at that time the organization was not named.

    And I'm all for a return of Blofeld, but the two are not mutually exclusive.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,844
    boldfinger wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote:
    I'm afraid Quantum won't die only here :) On board for Bond24, we've got the director who never used Quantum, and a writer who never used Quantum, the director say he wants to continue the themes of his movie that never used Quantum, and the writer said Bond should always fight Blofeld, not Quantum. And yet the very same persons who can draw logical conclusions galore about the future of the movies on many, many points, insist about Quantum.

    Who but fans remember Quantum, is the real question. Very few, I think. The "Q" logo of Quantum didn't enter the movie world. "Q" is still the gadget man for the crowd, not a sign of a world threat.

    Very true. Less than 10% chance Quantum is going to return I think. MGW would have to insist on them coming back and having strained so hard to get Mendes back, I doubt they're going to force him to do anything he doesn't want to do.
    The Bond producers were very successfully keeping the series fresh. If they want to bring back a name (and it isn´t more than that, because the concept has been there all the time) that existed 50 years ago in 7 out of 23 films, and whose disappearance didn´t mar the franchise in the least (perhaps because the name itself had become such a campy cliché), then they´re of course free to do it, but it would be a dead end.
    If Logan says Bond should only battle Blofeld, he´s degrading him to a comic book superhero, and he´s ignoring the majority of Bond films. Wasn´t there a demand that the people involved in the franchise should love and respect the series?
    Actually I don´t care if they bring Blofeld or SPECTRE back, as long as they really pull it off and make a bloody good film.

    Is the name Blofeld a caricature? His appearance in YOLT is, his white angora or Persian cat is... But his name? The general public doesn't know his name!
  • ZekidkZekidk
    Posts: 3,169
    So SM is "scouting locations"? Any news or hints of where?

  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited April 2014 Posts: 13,350
    Scandinavia seems likely to feature due to the two recent Bond girl screen tests.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Scandinavia seems likely to feature due to the two recent Bond girl screen tests.

    A baddy base in the fjords would be cool...
  • ZekidkZekidk
    edited April 2014 Posts: 3,169
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Scandinavia seems likely to feature due to the two recent Bond girl screen tests.

    TMWTGG had two swedes in Thailand
    OP had two swedes in India
    TND had one dane... in London.

    But I would love for Bond to go to Scandinavia!
    Getafix wrote:
    A baddy base in the fjords would be cool...

    I'm thinking 'Inception' here. Craig in the snow, plz.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited April 2014 Posts: 11,425
    Zekidk wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Scandinavia seems likely to feature due to the two recent Bond girl screen tests.

    TMWTGG had two swedes in Thailand
    OP had two swedes in India
    TND had one dane... in London.

    But I would love for Bond to go to Scandinavia!
    Getafix wrote:
    A baddy base in the fjords would be cool...

    I'm thinking 'Inception' here. Craig in the snow, plz.

    There has to be snow!

    I read somewhere that Mendes had recently taken his first ever skiing holiday. Cannot be a coincidence, surely? I think he wanted to get a sense for what skiing is like and work it into the movie in a magical way.

    Can only hope.

    Yes, the look and feel of some of Nolan's more 'architectural' movies is something I'd love to see in Bond. I think we will have to wait for that though - probably until post Craig, if ever.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    edited April 2014 Posts: 5,767
    Ludovico wrote:
    Is the name Blofeld a caricature? His appearance in YOLT is, his white angora or Persian cat is... But his name? The general public doesn't know his name!
    Then that would render his return useless.
    Getafix wrote:
    Yes, the look and feel of some of Nolan's more 'architectural' movies is something I'd love to see in Bond. I think we will have to wait for that though - probably until post Craig, if ever.
    I think by then that kind of look will be outdated. It made a big entrance, but it doesn´t have a long shelf life.

  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    boldfinger wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    Is the name Blofeld a caricature? His appearance in YOLT is, his white angora or Persian cat is... But his name? The general public doesn't know his name!
    Then that would render his return useless.
    Getafix wrote:
    Yes, the look and feel of some of Nolan's more 'architectural' movies is something I'd love to see in Bond. I think we will have to wait for that though - probably until post Craig, if ever.
    I think by then that kind of look will be outdated. It made a big entrance, but it doesn´t have a long shelf life.

    It would require a good production designer to keep it looking up to date.

    I appreciated the way Nolan's films offered an updated idea of how a Bond movie might look though. The homages to early Bond and Ken Adam were very clear.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Well, certainly QOS mirrored Ken Adams.
Sign In or Register to comment.