Waltz will return for 2 Bond films

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/christoph-waltz-return-two-more-7106240

Apparently only if Craig does as well… Not sure how I feel about this. I'm done with Craig, and if a retcon job doesn't fix the writing of Oberhauser/Blofeld, I'd rather not see Waltz in the role, either. That said, we'd lose a great force that is Christoph Waltz.

FieldsMan wrote:

If a retcon job doesn't fix the writing of Oberhauser/Blofeld, I'd rather not see Waltz in the role.

I wish they retconned the "brother angle" thing too. But I'm also ready to farewell Craig and Waltz and have a fresh start with a new actor and a new story.

I like the idea of him returning but as said above if the story's sorted out. At the moment I visualise an Austin Powers II set-up (or was it III) where Bond visits Blofeld in prison and Blofeld taunts him about his Daddy issues.

Love to see Waltz and Fassbender in a scene Bond/Blofeld. Hmm? Fassbender isn't in the running? Never mind. Print it anyway.

I imagine if Fassbender's in, Waltz will come back..

There are many possibilities to retcon this… One explanation could be that Waltz's Oberhauser was pretending to be Blofeld at his request in order to distract Bond from a grander scheme that he is taking part in.

They can simply ignore the brother angle flat out, since SPECTRE barely did anything with that concept anyway. No need to retcon. I rather not try to undo a twist with yet another twist.

Waltz is Blofeld. Oberhauser is a distant memory.

For me, Waltz-feld will forever be tainted with that pseudo-CASINOROYALEian backstory. Plus he looks a D-grade cartoon villain with the scarring they gave him to look like Don Pleasance. Unfortunate that they decided to play on nostalgia and thus ignored how ridiculous it all looked in a post-Austin Powers world.

Hate to say it, but SPRECTUM is the first Bond film to make me think the whole show is ready for the glue factory.

I agree that Waltz's Blofeld is tarnished for the stupid backstory, but I will say that I do like the scarring. I wouldn't have minded if it wasn't included, but was pleased that they aren't afraid to tap into camp territory again. It's purely a cosmetic thing (no pun intended).

Makeshift Python wrote:

They can simply ignore the brother angle flat out, since SPECTRE barely did anything with that concept anyway. No need to retcon. I rather not try to undo a twist with yet another twist.

Waltz is Blofeld. Oberhauser is a distant memory.

What MP said.

Retconning would bring more attention to the inadequacies of SPECULUM when BOND 25 doesn't need or require BOND 24 to justify its existence. Just move on. Let B-24 be what it was. End the Craig-series on a high note, with Blofeld just choosing to come up with a huge, world-endangering plot simply because he can and wants to. Don't try and explain it. Don't try to analyze him. Just go whole hog and embrace Blofeld in all of his zany glory instead of trying to take half-measures like B-24 did... it should truly be everything or nothing. Throw it all out there...put it all on the line. Go balls-to-the-wall and quit trying to understand the motivations for what goes on in the films. We're all past that.

Walecs wrote:

I wish they retconned the "brother angle" thing too.

That would be hard to do without getting messy. The only thing I can think of is Blofeld researching Bond after discovering that it was Bond who disrupted all of his plans; after finding the connection to Franz Oberhauser, he adopts Oberhauser as his identity as a psychological trick.

Yeah that's another angle PM… And it fits with the 'changing faces of Blofeld' that was established in Connery's era.

Waltz could still return as Oberhauser.

The character's already ruined. Ditch Craig and Waltz and move on with another storyline.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Makeshift Python wrote:

They can simply ignore the brother angle flat out, since SPECTRE barely did anything with that concept anyway. No need to retcon. I rather not try to undo a twist with yet another twist.

Waltz is Blofeld. Oberhauser is a distant memory.

What MP said.

Retconning would bring more attention to the inadequacies of SPECULUM when BOND 25 doesn't need or require BOND 24 to justify its existence. Just move on. Let B-24 be what it was. End the Craig-series on a high note, with Blofeld just choosing to come up with a huge, world-endangering plot simply because he can and wants to. Don't try and explain it. Don't try to analyze him. Just go whole hog and embrace Blofeld in all of his zany glory instead of trying to take half-measures like B-24 did... it should truly be everything or nothing. Throw it all out there...put it all on the line. Go balls-to-the-wall and quit trying to understand the motivations for what goes on in the films. We're all past that.

Another thing is whatever grudge Blofeld would have on Bond at this point would have less to do with the foster brother thing and more about the fact that Bond ruined everything Blofeld had set up with SPECTRE.

Makeshift Python wrote:

Another thing is whatever grudge Blofeld would have on Bond at this point would have less to do with the foster brother thing and more about the fact that Bond ruined everything Blofeld had set up with SPECTRE.

All of the ideas I'm reading about regarding how to explain away Oberhauser/Blofeld sound terrible. Trying to re-explain what was already explained is a pointless task; audiences weren't confused with the explanation, they just didn't like it. We'd be getting into Bobby-Ewing-in-the-shower/ALIEN-3 territory if we tried to re-imagine the previous story. It proved to be a disaster for DALLAS (from which they never recovered) and likewise for ALIEN 3. I think EON has written themselves into a corner they're going to find very difficult to get out of without making the underlying problems seem even worse. More than likely audiences have simply moved on from SPECULUM and won't be motivated to go see BOND25 simply because that film attempts to clarify points in BOND24 that weren't in doubt. The best course of action would be to quietly move on from what was brought up in BOND24. Certainly by BOND25 audiences won't have two shits to give about Bond's inability to maintain an erection get over Vesper's death; most men would've moved on, gotten a new girlfriend, and/or gotten married 10 years onward from the death of a significant person. Wallowing around in personal misery doesn't make for a compelling movie.

All of the backstory that was used to explain Bond and Blofeld's connection was unnecessary to start with, so trying to explain the explanation would be even more irrelevant.

My first instinct is to suggest that the series move on completely from Craig, but if he's going to be brought back (and Waltz), a straight-up, classic, adventure-thriller may be in order, without any of the unnecessary character twists or exposition that have been in 23 and 24 (i.e. Moneypenny and Blofeld's reveal).

FieldsMan wrote:

Yeah that's another angle PM… And it fits with the 'changing faces of Blofeld' that was established in Connery's era.

I think it fits in with Spectre as well. One of the major themes of the film is redefinition, with Bond and Blofeld constantly trying to force the other to conform to a world on their terms. The entire sequence in Africa is a microcosm, one created by the struggle between Bond and Blofeld and completely isolated from the rest of the world.

Ultimately, I think Spectre will be remembered for how Bond 25 plays out. A lot of the film felt like pieces were being moved around. The plot hinges on the idea that SPECTRE could not exist in the real world because intelligence agencies would spot them immediately. Their plan for Nine Eyes was to close that problem off - they get intelligence before anyone else, so they can cover their tracks. The ending presents the world as being aware of SPECTRE, and in such a way that they can't retreat into the shadows. They have to go all in.

The problem is what to do with Blofeld. He has been detained, so he's out of play for now. Bond 25 would have to open with Blofeld escaping or being released. They could play with the idea of Blofeld loathing Bond to the point where it compromises his judgement; someone (Hugo van der Drache?) tries to take control of SPECTRE in Blofeld's absence, so Bond and M stage Blofeld's escape so that the two factions - Blofeld and the other - fight one another.

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

FieldsMan wrote:

Yeah that's another angle PM… And it fits with the 'changing faces of Blofeld' that was established in Connery's era.

I think it fits in with Spectre as well. One of the major themes of the film is redefinition, with Bond and Blofeld constantly trying to force the other to conform to a world on their terms. The entire sequence in Africa is a microcosm, one created by the struggle between Bond and Blofeld and completely isolated from the rest of the world.

Is it really about redefinition though? And if so, why so soon after SF redefined the existence of Britain's secret service?

Quote :

Ultimately, I think Spectre will be remembered for how Bond 25 plays out. A lot of the film felt like pieces were being moved around. The plot hinges on the idea that SPECTRE could not exist in the real world because intelligence agencies would spot them immediately. Their plan for Nine Eyes was to close that problem off - they get intelligence before anyone else, so they can cover their tracks. The ending presents the world as being aware of SPECTRE, and in such a way that they can't retreat into the shadows. They have to go all in.

The plot hinges on the Blofeld twist. Had the film focused on what you suggest would have meant a much more compelling film. The idea is in the film, but isn't explored with any sense of direction. Plus, why government agencies would go 'all in' so easily is beyond comprehension.

Quote :

The problem is what to do with Blofeld. He has been detained, so he's out of play for now. Bond 25 would have to open with Blofeld escaping or being released. They could play with the idea of Blofeld loathing Bond to the point where it compromises his judgement; someone (Hugo van der Drache?) tries to take control of SPECTRE in Blofeld's absence, so Bond and M stage Blofeld's escape so that the two factions - Blofeld and the other - fight one another.

I agree with your first sentence here. Having Waltz escape will probably mean some story revolving around the incompetence of Britain's security enforcers, which I've had enough of.

FieldsMan wrote:

Is it really about redefinition though?

That's what I see in it.

Quote :

I agree with your first sentence here. Having Waltz escape will probably mean some story revolving around the incompetence of Britain's security enforcers, which I've had enough of.

Here's how I'd do Bond 25:

Bond is sent on a mission to Australia to investigate the death of a British researcher under the guise of escorting his body home. Shortly after returning to London, he receives word that Felix Leiter has been taken prisoner while on assignment in Africa. However, the operation has been set up by Leiter to get Bond out of London without arousing suspicion. The researcher killed in Australia was looking into military applications colombite, an uncommon mineral that has shown promise as a near room-temperature semi-conductor that is only found in substantial quantities in Africa and China. Leiter is in Africa having followed a lead from Raoul Silva's operations; he is working with Anatol Gogol (Jeremy Irons?), an ex-KGB mastermind, who got to Africa by following Karikov (a bit player from QOS). Three separate investigations have led to the same place: colombite. In the time since Blofeld's arrest, SPECTRE has been led by Hugo Vanderdaatje (Michael Fassbender?), a South African mercenary-turned-business mogul who is trying to secure the reserves of colombite for SPECTRE. Bond identifies him by locating Marcelline Chibweza (Lupita Nyongo?), an MSF doctor who treated Vanderdaatje's men. Realising that Vanderdaatje can rebuild SPECTRE, Bond and M arrange to have Blofeld released in such a way that Blofeld thinks that he has escaped and is picked up by Melicharek (Daniel Bruhl?), the leader of a faction loyal to Blofeld and Blofeld and Vanderdaatje go to war. Bond uses this time to infiltrate a Chinese ministry and plant data that suggests that the colombite SPECTRE intended to sell them is impure, implying that Vanderdaatje was intending to rip the Chinese off. However, he is caught in the process as Blofeld uses his contacts in Beijing. Blofeld wins the SPECTRE civil war, and the final act of the film sees Bond and Vanderdaatje's loyalists abandoned in a Chinese ghost city used to test fallout from nuclear testing. Vanderdaatje is killed and Bond survives long enough to be rescued, but weakened by exposure to radiation, he is powerless to prevent Blofeld from walking away.

The only other alternative would be to try and do something to save the "daddy didn't love me enough" angle:

"Welcome, James. We've been waiting so long, and now ... here we are. I always wondered when and how we should meet, and it pains me to admit, but I never considered this. But now that we're here, I think I like it more than anything that I ever thought up before.

"I know how far you will go for answers - Russia, Bolivia; I know all about it. I was there. I know that you'll go to the ends of the earth to find out. I know that there's a burning question on your mind: did I kill your parents? If I was feeling punitive, I would make you work for it, but I'll spare you the disappointment: no.

"I liked your parents. Really, I did. Your father was a man of principle; mine, a sycophant. He was always trying to please everyone around him, but I always wanted him to stand for something, if only for a week; a day, even. But no. Not him. Never him.

"He was a member of this little club. That's what he called it - his 'club'. His one indulgence, a little wickedness on the side like a private joke as he profited off the secrets of others. But his club - Majestic-12, they called themselves then - took a dimmer view of his activities when he ignored their orders to stop dealing with Franco, and so they approached me - the dutiful, if neglected, son. And they offered me his place at the table in exchange for his life. I don't think that even they foresaw my willingness.

"Your parents' death was a tragic accident. But it served its purpose - inspiration. I never lacked the nerve to kill my own father, merely the means. But then Andrew and Monique fell to their deaths, and the solution presented itself. My father was an experienced climber, but he was complacent. Has he checked his gear, he would have spotted the acid-weakened ropes straight away. And so he died as he lived, so sure of himself that he never even considered that he was not loved by all of those around him.

"As for his little club, I don't think that they ever regretted accepting me into their ranks. I felt more like I was a part of a family than ever before. I suppose the irony is that they should have seen it coming when I ordered their deaths to take control."

It's not great ... but it's better than doing ads for Clash of Clans.

I never know whether to be intrigued, worried or amused about how you seemingly have several Bond plots just lying around 'ready to go'.

Yeah, I don't really know where they come from, either. Call it my version of fan fiction, since I don't have the patience to write a full story (and nobody reads them). I see, hear or read something interesting, and subconsciously file it away for later. In this case, it was an episode of "48 Hours" about the suspicious suicide of an American in Singapore; he had been working on Gallium Nitrade, a substance commonly used in mobile phones, but with potential military applications like long-range radar. And there is the conspiracy theory that China remotely hijacked Malaysian Airlines flighy MH370 because some of the passengers were working for a company called Freescale on semiconductivity. Since the basic plot of Moonraker - firing a missile on London as revenge for World War II - wouldn't really work in today's day and age, colombite could be reimagined as a potential near-room temperature semiconductor (the holy grail of this kind of research) that everyone wants to get their hands on. The idea kind of just went from there, but I am only really happy with the first part, with Bond going to Africa to rescue Felix.

I have thought it some more - the idea tends to take over until it is fully realised - and this is how I would do it:

Bond gets recruited to rescue Felix Leiter in Africa after Leiter was captured. However, this is a ruse established by Leiter to get Bond out of London without arousing suspicion. Leiter has been investigating Hugo Vanderdaatje, a South African Legionnaire-turned-business mogul who provides private security to African leaders. He is also a senior Spectre agent and the organisation's de facto leader since Blofeld's capture. Leiter needs Bond to extract Marcelline Chibweza, an MSF doctor working in the area who can identify Vanderdaatje. Vanderdaatje has been using his influence in the region to secure access to reserves of colombite, a relatively rare mineral that has shown promise as a near room-temperature semi-conductor. Bond discovers that Vanderdaatje has developed an isotope of colombite and plans to detonate a colombite device in the upper atmosphere. This will disperse the isotope around the world, and the unusual properties of colombite will interfere with the electromagnetic spectrum, effectively creating a communications blackout. At the same time, he intends to sell the colombite reserves to the highest bidder, which can be used to create a form of colombite shielding, allowing whoever possesses the colombite to monopolise all forms of electronic communication, both military and civilian.

Meanwhile, M oversees the interrogation of Blofeld, who is being kept in a minimum-security prison. M argues that Blofeld's crimes were so well-planned and executed that MI6 cannot prove that any crimes were committed. As such, the only thing they can hold him for is the wilful destruction of property - the demolition of Vauxhall Cross - a minor offence. M uses this tactic to antagonise Blofeld, and also challenges the idea that he ever knew Bond; this turns Blofeld into an unreliable narrator, with a backstory filled with gaps and contradictions. Ultimately, M is forced to release Blofeld when China claims that he is an informant with knowledge of an imminent attack that threatens their interests - Vanderdaatje's plan for the colombite bomb; the Chinese control the only notable colombite reserves outside of Africa and have been using colombite shielding on military hardware and consumer electronics for years. The successful detination of the bomb would give them military, technological and economic superiority for a generation. Unwilling to cause a diplomatic incident with Beijing, the Prime Minister orders Blofeld's release. Blofeld demands that Bond be the one to hand him over.

Having sabotaged Vanderdaatje's plans, Bond is recalled to oversee the exchange. Blofeld is handed over to the Chinese, but when the rocket launch fails, the Chinese forces and Vanderdaatje's men turn on one another. Bond kills Vanderdaatje, but is hit by a stray bullet and powerless to stop Blofeld escaping.

Control wrote:

The character's already ruined. Ditch Craig and Waltz and move on with another storyline.

I feel like I'm becoming a grumpy cynic, but I can't help but lean this way. I'd love a proper YOLT adaptation though, which the end of Spectre sets up nicely (although what are the odds of them going that route...?). I'm conflicted.

That foster brother angle in Spectre angered me even more than I thought it would, and it didn't lessen on second viewing. Maybe I'm just becoming a grumpy Bond fan.

I don't think that you could do a straight adaptation of YOLT. There might have been an opportunity to do it once, but that was decades ago. However, I think that you could do an adaptation that is faithful to the spirit of the novel. In the novel, the need for the Double-Oh section has passed, and Blofeld is no longer a threat to the world. And yet, Bond and Blofeld are inexorably drawn to one another to continue their fight, because by this point, neither one can rest while the other survives. Neither of them has any cause to fight the other any longer except for the fight itself. To Bond, Blofeld is the last great evil that needs to be vanquished before he can rest (and his amnesia is a kind of rebirth, a reward for triumph that allows him to be born anew and live a full and happy life without recalling the pain of the old); conversely, Blofeld sees Bond as the last barrier between the old world and the power to reshape it in his image. If that spirit of the novel could be caught on film, then I think YOLT is very adaptable. But I think that it would have to wait until BOND 26 - given the way SPECTRE ended, I don't think that adapting YOLT now would be effective.

Control wrote:

The character's already ruined. Ditch Craig and Waltz and move on with another storyline.

Agreed. They had a chance to revamp an iconic character - with a very solid actor to boot - and instead they went for Mike Myers in Days Of Our Lives.

Xenia93 wrote:

Control wrote:

The character's already ruined. Ditch Craig and Waltz and move on with another storyline.

I feel like I'm becoming a grumpy cynic, but I can't help but lean this way. I'd love a proper YOLT adaptation though, which the end of Spectre sets up nicely (although what are the odds of them going that route...?). I'm conflicted.

That foster brother angle in Spectre angered me even more than I thought it would, and it didn't lessen on second viewing. Maybe I'm just becoming a grumpy Bond fan.

It's not you. SPECTRE was inexcusable....no reason for a movie that had as many resources at its disposal to end up the way it did. An a-list roster of talent...$300 million dollars in production and marketing...a 3 year gap between releases....and it was absolutely atrocious. It makes me mad just thinking about it. A waste of time and money.

In some ways it reminds me of THE PHANTOM MENACE. It's like it was written by people who'd never seen the previous Bond films, or read any of the books, with a writing staff that couldn't cut it on a third-rate American soap opera. Was John Logan daring EON to laugh in his face when he turned in a script about Blofeld and Bond being brothers?

In fact, I think it pays put to the lie that the Gardner novels aren't worth adapting. How can Michael Wilson say with a straight face that the continuation novels (of any of the authors) are somehow lesser quality than what they got from John Logan and Jizz Butterworth? You're happy shelling out $4 million dollars to the "writers" of SPECTRE to write THAT CRAP about Bond and Blofeld being brothers, and another $10 million for Mendes to direct it and $25 million for Craig to star in it? God bless you EON!! (and Tiny Tim to) if you think flushing that amount of money down the toilet on an "original story" is somehow better than what you could've gotten by adapting ICEBREAKER or NOBODY LIVES FOREVER.

ICEBREAKER is exhausting with all of its double- and triple-crossing, while NOBODY LIVES FOR EVER is really just an extended chase that doesn't have the legs to last.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Xenia93 wrote:

Control wrote:

The character's already ruined. Ditch Craig and Waltz and move on with another storyline.

I feel like I'm becoming a grumpy cynic, but I can't help but lean this way. I'd love a proper YOLT adaptation though, which the end of Spectre sets up nicely (although what are the odds of them going that route...?). I'm conflicted.

That foster brother angle in Spectre angered me even more than I thought it would, and it didn't lessen on second viewing. Maybe I'm just becoming a grumpy Bond fan.

In fact, I think it pays put to the lie that the Gardner novels aren't worth adapting. How can Michael Wilson say with a straight face that the continuation novels (of any of the authors) are somehow lesser quality than what they got from John Logan and Jizz Butterworth? You're happy shelling out $4 million dollars to the "writers" of SPECTRE to write THAT CRAP about Bond and Blofeld being brothers, and another $10 million for Mendes to direct it and $25 million for Craig to star in it? God bless you EON!! (and Tiny Tim to) if you think flushing that amount of money down the toilet on an "original story" is somehow better than what you could've gotten by adapting ICEBREAKER or NOBODY LIVES FOREVER.

I don't think Michael G Wilson has much say anymore, unfortunately. Babs has taken over.