Blofeld might be back

dalton wrote:

The only time I would want to see Blofeld return would be if they were to decide to adapt OHMSS correctly.

What's the problem with the version we've got?

I'm game for the return of Blofeld in some capacity. Give me fantastical Bond over 'gritty 'n' real' any day of the week. Hell, have Craig's Bond fight a big bloody squid à la Fleming's Doctor No.

G section wrote:

dalton wrote:

The only time I would want to see Blofeld return would be if they were to decide to adapt OHMSS correctly.

What's the problem with the version we've got?

There's plenty wrong with OHMSS, most notably the performance of Lazenby. That story requires, moreso than any of the other films, an established actor in the role of Bond as well as an actor who is far more talented than Lazenby.

The point I was trying to make, however, is that the only way I'd want to see Blofeld return is if they were to adapt the overall storyline that runs through OHMSS and YOLT properly, which they failed to do. Granted, the OHMSS story was rather faithfully told (although the film was not the masterpiece it's often made out to be), but YOLT was not. If you're going to have a faithful adaptation of YOLT, you have to precede it with a faithful adaptation of OHMSS.

Short of them going back and correcting the mistakes they made in adapting the OHMSS/YOLT storyline, Blofeld needs to stay out of the films and EON needs to keep moving forward.

j7wild wrote:

well, they rebooted the Bond Film Franchise with Casino Royale...

so why not?

bring Blofeld back and I liked John Gardner's idea that the new Blofeld will be a woman!!

After all, it's the year 2011 - women can be criminals mastermind too!

I think to do something unexpected and original at this point would be to actually cast Blofeld as a man. It's just too easy these days to say: "let's make this character black" or "let's make this character a woman" or "let's make this character gay". We've had a black Norweigan god in THOR; we've had a female "M"; we've had a Q of Pakistani/Indian descent in Carte Blanche. We've had "Q'ute" in the Gardner series. We have a black Felix in the current film series and maybe a black Moneypenny. If EON truly wants to shock me perhaps they could go with a straight-up, faithful adaptation of any of the characters or situations in the books without feeling the need to "update" the characters for modern audiences.

G section wrote:

dalton wrote:

The only time I would want to see Blofeld return would be if they were to decide to adapt OHMSS correctly.

What's the problem with the version we've got?

I'm game for the return of Blofeld in some capacity. Give me fantastical Bond over 'gritty 'n' real' any day of the week. Hell, have Craig's Bond fight a big bloody squid à la Fleming's Doctor No.

That would have to be a flashback pre CR, to explain how Craig's face got so messed up looking.

dalton wrote:

G section wrote:

dalton wrote:

The only time I would want to see Blofeld return would be if they were to decide to adapt OHMSS correctly.

What's the problem with the version we've got?

There's plenty wrong with OHMSS, most notably the performance of Lazenby.

Not really. Sure, he's a little rough around the edges the first act - but he hits the nail on the head in all the key scenes - the barn proposal, arguing with M, and Tracey's death. I also love his short phone call to Draco. Cool and self-assured. I doubt Connery would have done a better job.

Everything else - the music, screenplay, cinematography, direction, editing, and cast - is damn near perfect. Just because it didn't follow Fleming chronology ad verbatim, that's no release to do a remake.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

j7wild wrote:

well, they rebooted the Bond Film Franchise with Casino Royale...

so why not?

bring Blofeld back and I liked John Gardner's idea that the new Blofeld will be a woman!!

After all, it's the year 2011 - women can be criminals mastermind too!

I think to do something unexpected and original at this point would be to actually cast Blofeld as a man. It's just too easy these days to say: "let's make this character black" or "let's make this character a woman" or "let's make this character gay". We've had a black Norweigan god in THOR; we've had a female "M"; we've had a Q of Pakistani/Indian descent in Carte Blanche. We've had "Q'ute" in the Gardner series. We have a black Felix in the current film series and maybe a black Moneypenny. If EON truly wants to shock me perhaps they could go with a straight-up, faithful adaptation of any of the characters or situations in the books without feeling the need to "update" the characters for modern audiences.

Depends on context; my wife and I were talking this morning about the idea of an M. who is younger than Bond, a real upNcomer, and how that might play. It shouldn't bother Bond at all, because he wouldn't switch jobs, but that kind of M. might THINK Bond is resentful due to the age thing, and treat him accordingly.

When there was all the Rachel Weisz talk months back, I figured it was Blofeld's daughter-type role, but who knows if there even was anything to those stories?

[quote="MBalje"]

[/quote

No earlobes on that cat, is that an OHMSS variety?

trevanian wrote:

No earlobes on that cat, is that an OHMSS variety?

Poor cat looks like she has been abused.

Connery IS retired now, right? No chance he'd actually pull a Nimoy and come back into the fold for one more, playing the other side of the fence?

Sharky wrote:

dalton wrote:

G section wrote:

dalton wrote:

The only time I would want to see Blofeld return would be if they were to decide to adapt OHMSS correctly.

What's the problem with the version we've got?

There's plenty wrong with OHMSS, most notably the performance of Lazenby.

Not really. Sure, he's a little rough around the edges the first act - but he hits the nail on the head in all the key scenes - the barn proposal, arguing with M, and Tracey's death. I also love his short phone call to Draco. Cool and self-assured. I doubt Connery would have done a better job.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this. I never found Lazenby to be convincing as Bond. He's fairly wooden throughout the film and the only time he manages to really look as though he's suitable for the role is during the action sequences, even though it's hard to do there due to the frantic pace the editing in those scenes takes on.

Quote :

Everything else - the music, screenplay, cinematography, direction, editing, and cast - is damn near perfect. Just because it didn't follow Fleming chronology ad verbatim, that's no release to do a remake.

I'm not advocating a remake. I don't want to see Blofeld return at all. The only way that I would accept a Blofeld return would be if they felt it necessary to actually adapt YOLT for the big screen (which they have yet to do, as Connery's YOLT is in no way an adaptation of the novel), and the only way to do that would be to also remake OHMSS. I'm not in favor of that approach, however, and I'm more specifically not in anyway in favor of Blofeld returning.

Holmes gets re-adapted a dozen times a generation, but those stories still manage to hold up and entertain and every company that cranks out the Holmes stories inevitably turns to Moriarty sooner or later. Both the BBC and the Downey films are adapting Final Problem (to varying degrees of fidelity) this winter.

If the Holmes/Moriarty clash can be re-examined and made interesting more than once, then so can Bond/Blofeld. I'd be on board with a fresh interpretation of an iconic character.

Or, an adaptation that fits even slightly with the original descriptions of the man in the Fleming canon. Blofeld never once appeared in the films with those descriptions.

Either way, stifling a current version of him with the khaki suit, bald head and cat is as unimaginative as a bologna sandwich, and he's iconic enough as a spy villain to warrant a return.

Lazenby. wrote:

I think the character's reputational gravitas as the "daddy of all Bond villains" is enough to motivate them to gamble on bringing him back. All facts faced, the series has been almost completely devoid of iconic villains since we last saw Blofeld, and that was 40 years ago (if we discount what were basically cameo appearances in FYEO and NSNA, that is). Since Blofeld, there's only really been perhaps Jaws and arguably Scaramanga who have joined the iconic ranks of the likes of Ernst, Auric and Largo from the golden days of Bond villainy. Craig's Bond is just too strong to keep pitting him against unthreatening random Johnny Foreigners, and Bond's long four-year absence and the 50th Anniversary (not to mention the leeway a complete reboot has afforded them) could very easily make the return of old Ernie a very viable option for EON.

I relate to these sentiments. The timing is perfect to bring back a re-booted Blofeld. To my mind there are really 3 iconic Bond villains that tower above the others, those being DN, GF and Blofeld, but Blofeld is the only one of the three that can be re-cast and re-used in any situation. Fleming set the precedent by involving him in 3 different adventures, and Eon picked up that thread and expanded on the recurring villain theme.
I think what Logan means when he says that Bond should always be fighting Blofeld is that Blofeld is the quintessential Bond villain. You remove him from the equation and you simply end up with imitations, which is what Eon was forced to do because of Kevin McClory.
Stromberg, Zorin, even Kamal Khan, Carver and Gustav Graves were all variations of Blofeld. Better that Bond have regular battles with actual Blofeld. Even Eon's version of Drax had more in common with Blofeld than Fleming's Drax. Blofeld allows for continuity with classic Fleming Bond-villainy in the grand tradition of Bond mega-villains. Fleming's other lead villains have all been exhausted, but we've still got good old Ernst and Spectre.
The Man From Uncle battled Thrush from start to finish. Spectre is Bond's iconic nemesis.
So I would be real happy for a full-blown return of the man with the cat and the evil organization Spectre.
I would just ask that the cat be retained. Otherwise I don't care who they cast or how they redraw the character. We've already seen 4 different variations. (I'm including FRWL and TB but not FYEO) All similar but all different as well.
This could work. Its all very possible. I think even Babs might go for it, as even she might understand for the 50th anniversary the series might need a back to basics homage to its classic roots. She could still tweak the plot and the Blofeld character to her liking.
If this is indeed what she is planning and if she doesn't bastardize the character into something unrecognizable, I might put on a dress, and march for every loony progressive cause I can find for a whole month, just as a show of thanks to Babs, my new favourite producer, for bringing back the man with the cat.

Time to rain on the parade though. I don't think Logan actually said anything. He was pushed into responding and only affirmed something he was already on record as having said, so there may be nothing here. Plus Craig has pooh-poohed the idea in at least one televised sit-down interview, when he made the tired old Austin Powers argument. This is where Craig loses me. He seems to want to create his own Bond universe. I could be wrong. Craig may be more flexible to such ideas than he lets on. I'm not sure that even he knows what he wants. I think he just wants to do good films that will get critical respect. But at the very least, even if Craig is adamantly opposed, there is Bond life beyond Craig.
But seeing as Logan's remark has made headlines and is being reported all over hither and yonder, Eon at least would have to consider bringing back Ernst as a legitimate idea. Eon might even face pressure from Sony or MGM. The pressue might build.
In fact, I think because of all the pub that Logan's remarks have generated, Ernst's return is inevitable at some point. Blofeld is back on the table. This creates a real pressure to create something better. Might be safer to just go with it. Then your butt is covered with the money-men who tend to be fairly conservative. They like to go with what works.

Yeah it's quite obviously thin reporting. It says in the write-up that Martin Sheen was said to be in talks to play Blofeld... in reality, the rumour was Michael Sheen.

Loomis wrote:

Louis Armstrong wrote:

Why is Blofeld the only option if we're looking for a 'classic' Bond villain?

Because Blofeld spanned a number of Eon films, was recast every time and never died (definitively). I don't see why bringing him back should be any more wrong than bringing back Felix Leiter.

Sure, there are other "classic" villains, but I feel that Goldfinger belongs only in GOLDFINGER, Rosa Klebb only in FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, Scaramanga only in THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN, etc. (similarly, I don't think Tracy "belongs" in any film other than ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE, barring veiled references to her in other films, of course). I view Blofeld differently. He's never been tied to just one film.

I meant that they could reuse one of the other archetypes, rather than the 'mastermind' (as that's all Blofeld ended up being). Not actually use Goldfinger or anybody else again.

tiffanywint wrote:

Stromberg, Zorin, even Kamal Khan, Carver and Gustav Graves were all variations of Blofeld.

If so, then how do you define Blofeld?

Louis Armstrong wrote:

If so, then how do you define Blofeld?

If you throw those guys in, seems like basically anyone who is a jerk is Blofeld.

First, hello everyone, I too come in peace from MI6 and CBn and AJB007. Had many names over the last 10 years, univex, Sir. James Moloney, ..., Peter Sellers best character being the new one. Hope all goes well around here. Still gonna be on the other sites for the time being but I wish this forum a happy, healthy, long life. Always have been a peacefull chap, made many friends on those forums, hope to make even more here. Bond rules! Cheers

00Twelve wrote:

If the Holmes/Moriarty clash can be re-examined and made interesting more than once, then so can Bond/Blofeld. I'd be on board with a fresh interpretation of an iconic character.

Spot on. On another note, the first time I saw those indian railway falls, I thought of Reichenbach. Bond need his Moriarty. If this Blofeld rumour has any truth to it, I´ll be a happy fan.

Craig is a miserable humourless bastard.

Bond 23 is blighted by his very presence so there's no point discussing such 'will he/won\t he?'questions until his reign is over.

Avarice wrote:

Craig is a miserable humourless bastard.
Bond 23 is blighted by his very presence so there's no point discussing such 'will he/won\t he?'questions until his reign is over.

I fear this is probably the truth. Craig owns the franchise right now. You watch him in his interviews, you can see that he is uncomfortable discussing things like gadgets or Blofeld or any of the fun stuff, from the classic years. He tries to avoid outright dissing these elements, because he doesn't want to get in trouble, but what comes through is that he wants to do serious character driven Bond dramas, with of course the requisite big-budget action jammed in. That's his schtick and I don't think that's going to change. He's leary of anything that might make the films seem frivolous or Moonrakerish.
I do think the franchise is in a spot of trouble though. I don't have stats, but I have read in more than a few places, that dvd sales for QoS were awful. QoS was not the hit it was hoped to be in the American market. Cinema goers weren't compelled to add the film to their home collections. Although neither TMWTGG nor LTK did great dvd business either.
All told, QoS was a financial success It easily doubled its production-costs plus, however I don't think it was the big success that backers reasonably might have hoped it would be considering all the money that was pumped into the budget. It's also polarized fans.
So that said, I think Eon has to hit the next one out of the park, especially considering its the 50th anniversary Bond, so Craig might have to make some trade-offs to the lets-make-Bond-a-little-more-fun crowd. So I think for B23, all pov's will be represented, a compromise will be reached, and we get what we get. Whether Craig continues beyond B23 I think, will depend on how well the new film's box-office is.
If it underperforms, I think Craig is gone. MGM will step up to protect its investment and have a big say as to the tone of the next film. Craig will have to play along or leave. Craig I think would probably quietly step aside, assuming his continued participation would even be wanted, under such circumstances.
We shall see.

Louis Armstrong wrote:

If so, then how do you define Blofeld?

Blofeld is defined by the 5 early films that he was featured in. The super-villain with a big organization and grand plans.
As I said,Stromberg, Zorin, even Kamal Khan, Carver and Gustav Graves were all variations of Blofeld. Note variations, not copies.
But all of these guys could have been replaced by Blofeld with a little tweaking. They are all in the super-villain mode, super-rich, with exotic hideouts, armies of henchmen and grand plans for destruction. Stromberg was even created as a Plan B for Blofeld. Eon-Drax was very much a Blofeld derivative.
The challenge that Eon faces, minus a recurring super-villain like Blofed IMO, is that they would have to keep coming up with new variations on the super-villain. Blofeld however is the original. He is the mold and a pliable mold at that. He can be re-cast and re-jigged as needed and there is no longer the need to keep dreaming up imitations or variations on the same theme, like Stomberg or Zorin or Carver or Kamal Khan etc.
As someone else said Bond benefits from having his own Moriarity. And I think what Logan was saying is that Bond being larger than life, needs an in-kind adversary and Blofeld and Spectre fit the bill perfectly.

00Twelve wrote:

Holmes gets re-adapted a dozen times a generation, but those stories still manage to hold up and entertain and every company that cranks out the Holmes stories inevitably turns to Moriarty sooner or later. Both the BBC and the Downey films are adapting Final Problem (to varying degrees of fidelity) this winter.

If the Holmes/Moriarty clash can be re-examined and made interesting more than once, then so can Bond/Blofeld. I'd be on board with a fresh interpretation of an iconic character.

Or, an adaptation that fits even slightly with the original descriptions of the man in the Fleming canon. Blofeld never once appeared in the films with those descriptions.

Either way, stifling a current version of him with the khaki suit, bald head and cat is as unimaginative as a bologna sandwich, and he's iconic enough as a spy villain to warrant a return.

The difference is that the Holmes films stick within their original time period and setting. Bond does not.

If EON decided to reboot the series back to the 50's, then yes, Blofeld would absolutely work because he is a product of his time.

dr. strangelove wrote:

00Twelve wrote:

Holmes gets re-adapted a dozen times a generation, but those stories still manage to hold up and entertain and every company that cranks out the Holmes stories inevitably turns to Moriarty sooner or later. Both the BBC and the Downey films are adapting Final Problem (to varying degrees of fidelity) this winter.

If the Holmes/Moriarty clash can be re-examined and made interesting more than once, then so can Bond/Blofeld. I'd be on board with a fresh interpretation of an iconic character.

Or, an adaptation that fits even slightly with the original descriptions of the man in the Fleming canon. Blofeld never once appeared in the films with those descriptions.

Either way, stifling a current version of him with the khaki suit, bald head and cat is as unimaginative as a bologna sandwich, and he's iconic enough as a spy villain to warrant a return.

The difference is that the Holmes films stick within their original time period and setting. Bond does not.

If EON decided to reboot the series back to the 50's, then yes, Blofeld would absolutely work because he is a product of his time.

Back up there where I mentioned the BBC, I wasn't talking about the Granada series with Jeremy Brett. I was talking about Sherlock, one of the most entertaining adaptations of Holmes we've ever gotten. Which is set in 2010. And features Moriarty.

00Twelve wrote:

dr. strangelove wrote:

00Twelve wrote:

Holmes gets re-adapted a dozen times a generation, but those stories still manage to hold up and entertain and every company that cranks out the Holmes stories inevitably turns to Moriarty sooner or later. Both the BBC and the Downey films are adapting Final Problem (to varying degrees of fidelity) this winter.

If the Holmes/Moriarty clash can be re-examined and made interesting more than once, then so can Bond/Blofeld. I'd be on board with a fresh interpretation of an iconic character.

Or, an adaptation that fits even slightly with the original descriptions of the man in the Fleming canon. Blofeld never once appeared in the films with those descriptions.

Either way, stifling a current version of him with the khaki suit, bald head and cat is as unimaginative as a bologna sandwich, and he's iconic enough as a spy villain to warrant a return.

The difference is that the Holmes films stick within their original time period and setting. Bond does not.

If EON decided to reboot the series back to the 50's, then yes, Blofeld would absolutely work because he is a product of his time.

Back up there where I mentioned the BBC, I wasn't talking about the Granada series with Jeremy Brett. I was talking about Sherlock, one of the most entertaining adaptations of Holmes we've ever gotten. Which is set in 2010. And features Moriarty.

I love Sherlock. Of course it´s not the granada series, which is marvelous. Well, I agree with all your points there 00Twelve. I hope Blofeld is back, back from the novels that is.

tiffanywint wrote:

Avarice wrote:

Craig is a miserable humourless bastard.
Bond 23 is blighted by his very presence so there's no point discussing such 'will he/won\t he?'questions until his reign is over.

I fear this is probably the truth. Craig owns the franchise right now. You watch him in his interviews, you can see that he is uncomfortable discussing things like gadgets or Blofeld or any of the fun stuff, from the classic years. He tries to avoid outright dissing these elements, because he doesn't want to get in trouble, but what comes through is that he wants to do serious character driven Bond dramas

In total agreement. And, I might add, he is the perfect reflection of Barbara Broccoli. He's a mirror image of how she thinks about, and approaches, the series. It's like she's almost embarrassed to be part of the Bond series.

tiffanywint wrote:

Louis Armstrong wrote:

If so, then how do you define Blofeld?

Blofeld is defined by the 5 early films that he was featured in. The super-villain with a big organization and grand plans.
As I said, Stromberg, Zorin, even Kamal Khan, Carver and Gustav Graves were all variations of Blofeld. Note variations, not copies.
But all of these guys could have been replaced by Blofeld with a little tweaking. They are all in the super-villain mode, super-rich, with exotic hideouts, armies of henchmen and grand plans for destruction. Stromberg was even created as a Plan B for Blofeld. Eon-Drax was very much a Blofeld derivative.
The challenge that Eon faces, minus a recurring super-villain like Blofed IMO, is that they would have to keep coming up with new variations on the super-villain. Blofeld however is the original. He is the mold and a pliable mold at that. He can be re-cast and re-jigged as needed and there is no longer the need to keep dreaming up imitations or variations on the same theme, like Stomberg or Zorin or Carver or Kamal Khan etc.
As someone else said Bond benefits from having his own Moriarity. And I think what Logan was saying is that Bond being larger than life, needs an in-kind adversary and Blofeld and Spectre fit the bill perfectly.

I'm not a big fan of recurring villains, I don't mind the teasing build up, where there is a stand alone villain for one movie and a cameo of someone behind him, like Thunderball
but once the hero has a major confrontation with a villain I like it to be decisive and final
in fact when Tele-Blofeld hit the tree on the bobsleigh run that should have been the end of him
I find villains who keep escaping unsatisfying, I need closure
while villains who come back from the dead just make me groan and roll my eyes
(and villains who radically change their appearance from one movie to another are spell breakers)

so while almost any villain could be replaced by Blofeld, I'm very glad the producers decided to change tack for the Roger Moore years
I prefer a new villain along with new girls and new locations for each movie
it's always going to be a challenge to keep Bond fresh
how about Blofeld's son?
or would that be too much like "Scottie Evil"? Bond follows Powers?? Heaven forbid!!!

James Bond in - "Just A Little Bit Of History Repeating"
Bond - Where's Moneypenny?
Tanner - Austerity measures I'm afraid
Bond - That's a pity, I never did get round to… nice tan you've got there, just back from a Middle East assignment?
Tanner - What tan? my mother was from Trinidad
Bond - Strange, I never noticed before… is M in?
Tanner - Waiting for you
Bond - Good Lord!
M - What?
Bond - You’re a woman!
M - That's nothing, you're gay
Bond - What?!
M - We need you to go undercover, pose as a hairdresser
Bond - Hair salon eh? lots of totty then, can't I at least be bi?
M - Don't be ridiculous, the target we want you to turn is a man
Bond - Oh well, I'd better go and see if Q can fix me up with a set of exploding scissors or something
M - We had to let him go
Bond - Austerity measures?
M - This is serious 007, we think Blofeld may be back
Bond - Blofeld! thank God for something familiar at last!

tiffanywint wrote:

Avarice wrote:

Craig is a miserable humourless bastard.
Bond 23 is blighted by his very presence so there's no point discussing such 'will he/won\t he?'questions until his reign is over.

I fear this is probably the truth. Craig owns the franchise right now. You watch him in his interviews, you can see that he is uncomfortable discussing things like gadgets or Blofeld or any of the fun stuff, from the classic years. He tries to avoid outright dissing these elements, because he doesn't want to get in trouble, but what comes through is that he wants to do serious character driven Bond dramas, with of course the requisite big-budget action jammed in. That's his schtick and I don't think that's going to change. He's leary of anything that might make the films seem frivolous or Moonrakerish.
I do think the franchise is in a spot of trouble though. I don't have stats, but I have read in more than a few places, that dvd sales for QoS were awful. QoS was not the hit it was hoped to be in the American market. Cinema goers weren't compelled to add the film to their home collections. Although neither TMWTGG nor LTK did great dvd business either.
All told, QoS was a financial success It easily doubled its production-costs plus, however I don't think it was the big success that backers reasonably might have hoped it would be considering all the money that was pumped into the budget. It's also polarized fans.
So that said, I think Eon has to hit the next one out of the park, especially considering its the 50th anniversary Bond, so Craig might have to make some trade-offs to the lets-make-Bond-a-little-more-fun crowd. So I think for B23, all pov's will be represented, a compromise will be reached, and we get what we get. Whether Craig continues beyond B23 I think, will depend on how well the new film's box-office is.
If it underperforms, I think Craig is gone. MGM will step up to protect its investment and have a big say as to the tone of the next film. Craig will have to play along or leave. Craig I think would probably quietly step aside, assuming his continued participation would even be wanted, under such circumstances.
We shall see.

he doesn't "own" the franchise, but he is the front man for the people who do own it and his vision of Bond is in alignment with theirs, or he has bought into their vision, which is why they brought him on board
he performs in interviews, acting as the franchises public face
QoS was a miss step, but less so than TMWTGG or LTK in the past, so they will not be pressing the panic button just yet
they don't absolutely have to hit one out of the park, just make a few adjustments to get back on course ("on course" for them being CR)
like it or not, Craig still has a considerable body of fans and the perception of him as Bond is still hugely positive, despite QoS
so I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you…

Seve wrote:

QoS was a miss step, but less so than TMWTGG or LTK in the past, so they will not be pressing the panic button just yet they don't absolutely have to hit one out of the park, just make a few adjustments to get back on course ("on course" for them being CR)

I think the big difference here, is that TMWTGG and LTK did not follow very popular films. The reception to LALD and TLD was mild at best, compared to CR - which was coined "the best Bond in decades" by many. It's more the huge difference in reception than how QOS compares to other unipolar films in the franchise.

Sharky wrote:

Seve wrote:

QoS was a miss step, but less so than TMWTGG or LTK in the past, so they will not be pressing the panic button just yet they don't absolutely have to hit one out of the park, just make a few adjustments to get back on course ("on course" for them being CR)

I think the big difference here, is that TMWTGG and LTK did not follow very popular films. The reception to LALD and TLD was mild at best, compared to CR - which was coined "the best Bond in decades" by many. It's more the huge difference in reception than how QOS compares to other unipolar films in the franchise.

when I looked up the World wide box office figures a while ago, in a galaxy far far away, LALD had a biggest adjusted box office across the world of any Bond film, including TB

TB's reputation as the biggest of all resting on it's American box office performance apparently

-----------------------------------------USA----------- World
12/29/1965 Thunderball - $63,600,000 $141,200,000
6/13/1967 You Only Live Twice - $43,100,000 $111,600,000
12/18/1969 On Her Majesty's Secret Service - $22,800,000 $82,000,000
12/17/1971 Diamonds Are Forever - $43,800,000 $116,000,000
6/27/1973 Live and Let Die - $35,400,000 $161,800,000
(the figures above are not adjusted for inflation, but you get the idea)