SPECTRE Leaks Discussion (allowed on ONLY this thread) MAJOR PLOTLINE SPOILERS!

1104105107109110112

Comments

  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited October 2015 Posts: 4,343
    The way they decided to re-introduce "Blofeld" sounds so silly (in the movie). To me the crater/liar set piece sounds very camp right now.
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 3,164
    It's funny, at this moment I and a few others are feeling a bit like those popular book series fans (like Harry Potter or Hunger Games) who are uneasy on changes from the page to the screen...

    Well either way bring on Monday. If the overall tone of the piece is a bit more fun and campy, an OTT reveal like this may just work!
  • DrShatterhandDrShatterhand Garden of Death, near Belfast
    edited October 2015 Posts: 805
    antovolk wrote: »
    It's funny, at this moment I and a few others are feeling a bit like those popular book series fans (like Harry Potter or Hunger Games) who are uneasy on changes from the page to the screen...

    Well either way bring on Monday. If the overall tone of the piece is a bit more fun and campy, an OTT reveal like this may just work!

    You've hit it right on the head there. I always justified to myself that reading the script was no different really to reading a book of a movie I knew was coming out. I guess I hadn't really contemplated that there may be further, fairly drastic, revisions before it actually hit the screen. A mixture I guess of excitement to see what has been changed, tinged with trepidation that some of my favourite bits may have been binned!
  • Posts: 3,164
    antovolk wrote: »
    It's funny, at this moment I and a few others are feeling a bit like those popular book series fans (like Harry Potter or Hunger Games) who are uneasy on changes from the page to the screen...

    Well either way bring on Monday. If the overall tone of the piece is a bit more fun and campy, an OTT reveal like this may just work!

    You've hit it right on the head there. I always justified to myself that reading the script was no different really to reading a book of a movie I knew was coming out. I guess I hadn't really contemplated that there may be further, fairly drastic, revisions before it actually hit the screen. A mixture I guess of excitement to see what has been changed, tinged with trepidation that some of my favourite bits may have been binned!

    It's also incredibly ironic in my case too as I never really felt this sort of source material attachment when it came to HP or THG.....I go into the films with an incredibly open mind and just let the filmmaker do the work - but no, here with SPECTRE, karma is biting me back :)) Guess that part of it is as this is 1. the script (not a book) that 2. is from the start of filming.........
  • DrShatterhandDrShatterhand Garden of Death, near Belfast
    Posts: 805
    Makes me wonder how original Fleming fans felt when the movies came out. If this site existing back in 1962. I can imagine the comments..."I've just seen Dr. No and have to say I'm NOT impressed - can't believe they cut out the giant squid..what a bloody shambles" lol
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited October 2015 Posts: 4,343
    antovolk wrote: »
    If the overall tone of the piece is a bit more fun and campy, an OTT reveal like this may just work!

    I really hope but "on paper" to me just doesn't really work... The poker game in the december script was more subtle in terms of revealing the truth about Oberhauser but I really didn't like the story behind it... the "here we are again" vibe was forced imho. But now it feels even worse, the way they played with the Oberhauser family connection. The fact that Franz decided to use her mother's family name instead of Oberhauser is silly... and I ask again: what about "Ernst Stravro"? Maybe it was the name of his grandfather, LOL.
  • It's funny how I have become almost possessive over a leaked script that I was never supposed to read in the first place! I agree with others on here that I'm actually starting to get scared that my favorite bits have been changed or removed. I hear that "Spooky" isn't played during the car chase, which is a shame. Now I just hope they haven't taken out my favorite line in the whole script: "I thought he'd never shut up."
  • Posts: 61
    matt_u wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    If the overall tone of the piece is a bit more fun and campy, an OTT reveal like this may just work!

    I really hope but "on paper" to me just doesn't really work... The poker game in the december script was more subtle in terms of revealing the truth about Oberhauser but I really didn't like the story behind it... the "here we are again" vibe was forced imho. But now it feels even worse, the way they played with the Oberhauser family connection. The fact that Franz decided to use her mother's family name instead of Oberhauser is silly... and I ask again: what about "Ernst Stravro"? Maybe it was the name of his grandfather, LOL.

    wiki once mentioned that Ernst was from the father side, and Stavro was mother's maiden name. tsk tsk....

    I'd rather they keep the Legion backstory for Mr.O.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    dire399 wrote: »
    wiki once mentioned that Ernst was from the father side, and Stavro was mother's maiden name. tsk tsk....

    I'd rather they keep the Legion backstory for Mr.O.

    Okay, but his father's name in the movie is Hannes Oberhauser...
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,024
    Wasn't Hannes not his real father, or was that just on a different draft?
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited October 2015 Posts: 4,343
    According to the movie (and the guy who saw it) Oberhauser killed his father Hannes and took his mother's family name (Blofeld).

    On the other hand, I have to day that the idea of the december draft behind Blofeld's true identity never convinced me... sounds pretty strange that a genius, a man who knows and controls everything, doesn't even know his f*****g real identity. :-/
  • Posts: 39
    bondsum wrote: »

    No, not aimed at you @dmwalker. In actual fact, I was one of the few defending you here.

    Anyway, reviews will start trickling out maybe late tonight or tomorrow.

    Then please accept my sincere apologies. I only drop in here now and then and there has been - and continues to be - so much nastiness towards me that I reacted rather impulsively. Sorry. Really.

    I must say, I've been quite shocked by the hostility. As I've said before, I came here with the best of intentions, to pass on some information to fellow Bond fans. I expected a debate: I got personal abuse and idiotic comments.

    I stand by everything I've written here and in other threads. I was told what I was told, however that plays out, by the sources I cited. The meat of what I said - that SPECTRE was embarked upon by both Mendes and Craig in the understanding that this would be his last - has been borne out by the vast majority of press reports and interviews with Craig himself. You will hear for yourselves Craig confirming that there is NO contract for him to return on the Graeme Norton show tonight, I believe, so everyone who has claimed this as a fact is, as I've said on numerous occasions, simply wrong.

    I made direct contact with a respected member here to establish my credentials and he has vouched for me being genuine. I haven't seen the film yet but it's true that I haven't read anything yet that makes sense of both my sources saying it would be "impossible" for Craig to return so I don't know exactly what was meant by that; except that many are saying the whole film has a sense of finality about it. Again, as I've said, if my motive was to get attention I wouldn't have included a detail like that. But if you think that - or even Craig deciding to return - is definitive proof that I was lying, well - so be it. It's not the way the world works; but then I don't see any evidence that the likes of mcdonbb have any understanding of that, in any case.

    When the dust settles I'll no doubt find out what exactly transpired in the conception of SPECTRE, as I think there is much that is yet to be told. I would have thought people here would be interested in that but I really have neither the time nor the inclination to spend time on a site where a few ignorant obsessives seem intent on making me feel uncomfortable and unwelcome.

    So trust me when I say that I'm sure nobody will mourn the fact that I'm ending my short membership of this site. No doubt this will look like an admission of guilt to some but my pride doesn't trump the fact that life is short and I'm not looking for new ways to feel angry or insulted. To those who've been supportive - hell, to those who've just been basically civil and decent - thank you. To the few malevolent idiots who have made this so unpleasant... well, good luck with your lives. I get the feeling you'll need it.

    (By the way, I know there are some fans of the BBC's SPOOKS here. If you've watched that series, you'll have seen some of my screenwriting work. DM Walker is a pseudonym.)



  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Yay! Good luck to you, too
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited October 2015 Posts: 4,116
    dmwalker wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »

    No, not aimed at you @dmwalker. In actual fact, I was one of the few defending you here.

    Anyway, reviews will start trickling out maybe late tonight or tomorrow.

    Then please accept my sincere apologies. I only drop in here now and then and there has been - and continues to be - so much nastiness towards me that I reacted rather impulsively. Sorry. Really.

    I must say, I've been quite shocked by the hostility. As I've said before, I came here with the best of intentions, to pass on some information to fellow Bond fans. I expected a debate: I got personal abuse and idiotic comments.

    I stand by everything I've written here and in other threads. I was told what I was told, however that plays out, by the sources I cited. The meat of what I said - that SPECTRE was embarked upon by both Mendes and Craig in the understanding that this would be his last - has been borne out by the vast majority of press reports and interviews with Craig himself. You will hear for yourselves Craig confirming that there is NO contract for him to return on the Graeme Norton show tonight, I believe, so everyone who has claimed this as a fact is, as I've said on numerous occasions, simply wrong.

    I made direct contact with a respected member here to establish my credentials and he has vouched for me being genuine. I haven't seen the film yet but it's true that I haven't read anything yet that makes sense of both my sources saying it would be "impossible" for Craig to return so I don't know exactly what was meant by that; except that many are saying the whole film has a sense of finality about it. Again, as I've said, if my motive was to get attention I wouldn't have included a detail like that. But if you think that - or even Craig deciding to return - is definitive proof that I was lying, well - so be it. It's not the way the world works; but then I don't see any evidence that the likes of mcdonbb have any understanding of that, in any case.

    When the dust settles I'll no doubt find out what exactly transpired in the conception of SPECTRE, as I think there is much that is yet to be told. I would have thought people here would be interested in that but I really have neither the time nor the inclination to spend time on a site where a few ignorant obsessives seem intent on making me feel uncomfortable and unwelcome.

    So trust me when I say that I'm sure nobody will mourn the fact that I'm ending my short membership of this site. No doubt this will look like an admission of guilt to some but my pride doesn't trump the fact that life is short and I'm not looking for new ways to feel angry or insulted. To those who've been supportive - hell, to those who've just been basically civil and decent - thank you. To the few malevolent idiots who have made this so unpleasant... well, good luck with your lives. I get the feeling you'll need it.

    (By the way, I know there are some fans of the BBC's SPOOKS here. If you've watched that series, you'll have seen some of my screenwriting work. DM Walker is a pseudonym.)



    Your credibility was lost not when you shared your vague revelations but when you lower yourself to calling forum members ..ok me..a pimple.

    I cannot stand pretense. Why didn't state your credentials before to back up your claim?

    You came off as a rude pompous troll. Please stop with your insults toward me. I will stop as well.

    Of course I took a jab at you. And for the record I am up in the air as to whether Craig will elect to return or not. The reviews all indicate the film ties up a lot of loose ends in the Craig era. That obviously doesn't mean Craig can't return though...

    No I get the impression more from Craig's interviews and the history that he's done ..that he has reached his goal for Bond.

    So here we are. I wish we had not had fought on here as we did. Ok yesterday was a jab at you but I'm not going to continue in that vein.

    Seems odd now but at least thanks for sharing.

  • There is definitely a sense of finality to Spectre as @dmwalker suggests. The film consciously attempts to try and stitch together the loose threads from CR, QOS and SF (there are plenty of references to characters and events from those films throughout). Many of the themes and ideas alluded to in those early films (and also the Fleming novels) do come to a head. In particular, there has always been a thread throughout Fleming’s books that Bond wishes for a better life away from the secret service, but having chosen the life of an assassin he has to resign himself to his inevitable fate.

    He falls in love with Madeline and she reminds him that there can be a life beyond Mi6 (something he hadn’t thought possible after Vesper). Furthermore, Bond gets to confront the man behind all “his pain” and defeat him. Having put to bed his past ghosts and rekindled his lust for life, he happily resigns and drives off into the sunset.

    It feels like an ending to the Craig era and for all purposes it works in such a manner.

    However, there are clear opportunities to expand the story. Most obviously, they can bring back Madeline and Blofeld back (Waltz really deserves the chance to redeem himself) and do a proper version of Fleming’s YOLT. However, how would the story end? Madeline dies, Bond sets out for revenge, only to retire at the end? Wouldn’t this just be the same repetitive arc that the Craig era has just put us through?

    There isn’t really a way to do ‘another Bond film’, it would either have to be a continuation of Spectre or a reboot.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited October 2015 Posts: 4,116
    Or just a straight Bond film new star new direction.... they set up the new revisioned SPECTRE and Blofeld to use at will. Don't know just guessing.

    I don't think Bond will end or was written to end. To much work has been done to reinvigorate the series.

    Maybe they will judge from the commercial and critical reaction when the film has run its course.

    Last comnent. Mendes and Craig as a partnership IMO only were both the best thing to happen to Bond and the worse thing. Bond is back into a corner now as a story and financially as a franchise in terms of affordability.

    Bond needs a fresh start.
  • Posts: 4,599
    Yes, I think they have got bogged down now with some of the narratives and the connections. Time for a good, old fashioned, stand alone movie, free from the shackles and constraints of previous movies or Bond's family history/love life (but with a superb Q and M) - just go out there and get the bad guys, it's not rocket science
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    I agree @patb. ....speaking of rocket science I don't think Anthony Horowitz is gonna like SP.

  • SkyfallCraigSkyfallCraig Rome, Italy
    Posts: 630
    @Pierce2Daniel was there a year after the James Bond will return line? Do we know when he will return?
  • SkyfallCraigSkyfallCraig Rome, Italy
    Posts: 630
    @Pierce2Daniel was there a year after the James Bond will return line? Do we know when he will return?
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    In a way I'm glad they didn't do a OHMSS reference...just would have pigeon holed them into having to do a follow up. Now it's open they don't have to as I understand it.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Just have them break up. We've never seen that happen.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited October 2015 Posts: 4,116
    You know the producers once said and I think both Brosnan and Craig said too that thanks to Austin Powers the camp had to be taken out if Bond.

    Before that the McGlory legal battles...

    Looks like with SP they are reclaiming what was theirs to begin with ...namely the cinematic Blofeld.
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 2,015
    dmwalker wrote: »
    I would have thought people here would be interested in that but I really have neither the time nor the inclination to spend time on a site where a few ignorant obsessives seem intent on making me feel uncomfortable and unwelcome.

    You made a very strong point that we were idiots to think the end of the leaked script could still be the end of the movie. Even though we saw from paparazzi photos the shooting of the end of the movie as described in the leaked script !

    Well, turns out we were not idiots. As we tried to explain to you, the fact that "Craig simply cannot return" seems to come from the atmosphere it's the end of the road at the end of the movie, and not from Bond's death and the codename theory, or some other hypothesis you made.

    You were somehow unlucky that you had insider info (something I never doubted, mythomaniacs are quite easy to spot, and they are actually very rare here) about a movie who had a leaked screenplay (something you didn't take much into account while talking to us).

    I think you should have read the leaked script before coming to a forum and somehow claiming you were the only one having some real information :)

    Your most valuable input was IMO your information Craig cannot really do action scenes anymore. But it will be very hard to convince some here ! :)


  • Dwalker fraud and attention seeking - good radiance and don't come back as someone else thankyou.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Gone five seconds and I miss him already
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    I feel he's watching us... he's there but we saw him... :-S
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Yes, but his invisible drug wore off
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Yes, but his invisible drug wore off

    Typo ...trying to use voice text. Not sure what I was saying lol.

    Just read first part :)

  • edited October 2015 Posts: 2,015
    jamesdut wrote: »
    Dwalker fraud

    I don't think so (at all).

    But then I've been called a fraud myself when I wrote about the hearsays about Logan for instance :)

    Funny Internet, you can be in touch with insiders, but then you don't believe them ! On the other hand some BBC guy tweets that the song will be a duo by Sam Smith and Ellie Goudling written by Radiohead, and quite a few "experts" here don't spot the joke !

    @Pierce2Daniel my only question is : does C feel like a patch for the story in the movie as strongly as it feels in the script ?
Sign In or Register to comment.