Deathmatch 2024

Special Interest Games
1

Another year.

Time hasn’t just flown over me on its one-way trip, it’s broken the sound barrier and smashed itself into a wall. So brisk a wind. Where does it all go? What have I achieved? Ah well.

June is imminent - already - and this means Deathmatch once more. We cannot escape the daily cycle of violence. Group stage voting in the first category - Villains - will open on June 1.

Gird your loins, my lovelies, and prepare for Death.

10 Likes
2

IMG_0049

9 Likes
3

b96596af-bfa3-4864-bae9-2141e82d8318_text

6 Likes
4

6 Likes
5

daniel-craig-lets-goo

5 Likes
6

IMG_0085

3 Likes
7

I will lay my head down to sleep tonight, and upon waking Deathmatch will be underway.

4 Likes
8

Ok, so with the Group Stage of Villains already done and dusted and deathmatched for 2024, results so far…

Group A Played W D L F A GD % Pts
OHMSS Blofeld (1) 4 4 0 0 64 11 53 85.2 12
Stromberg 4 3 0 1 49 26 23 64.8 9
Zorin (10) 4 2 0 2 45 31 14 59.2 6
Elektra 4 1 0 3 22 54 -32 29 3
Graves 4 0 0 4 9 67 -58 11.9 0

Where does one draw the line between consistent and predictable? That the group with Die Another Day in it leads to a wholesale and pleasing battering of Die Another Day is predictable (albeit not the worst performance across the groups). That OHMSS Blofeld remains atop a peak, appropriate and consistent. Seedings in flux - this is a theme - but Zorin gets through as a Lucky Loser. Stromberg lurking just below the surface, as ever.

Group B Played W D L F A GD % Pts
Goldfinger (9) 4 4 0 0 57 10 47 85.2 12
Drax (2) 4 3 0 1 48 20 28 70.6 9
Dr No 4 2 0 2 38 29 9 57.2 6
Khan & Orlov 4 1 0 3 18 49 -31 26.7 3
Koskov & Whitaker 4 0 0 4 7 60 -53 10.4 0

Another bride. Another June. Another sunny honeymoooooooooooooooooooon. Another reason, another season, to find Koskov & Whitaker languishing dead last again. (It scans, in the original Klingon). Possibly outcomes one could easily have foreseen, with Goldfinger yet again starting the Deathmatches in a strong position - can it last? Do I care?

Group C Played W D L F A GD % Pts
Silva (3) 4 4 0 0 59 12 47 83.2 12
Sanchez (8) 4 2 1 1 40 33 7 55.5 7
YOLT Blofeld 4 2 1 1 39 32 7 54.5 7
DAF Blofeld 4 1 0 3 30 42 -12 41.6 3
Safin 4 0 0 4 11 61 -50 15.3 0

Touch messy, this one, although a clear final place. DAF Blofeld a (very) Lucky Loser but that’s a rough showing for the (relatively) newbie. Solid performance by last year’s knockout winner, there, but not the best of the Group Stage; may there be tumult to come? Very tight between Sanchez and YOLT Blofeld, two villains probably at the differing ends of the spectrum for the Bond films, one being very silly indeed and massively unrealistic, and the other being YOLT Blofeld.

Group D Played W D L F A GD % Pts
Le Chiffre(7) 4 4 0 0 57 15 42 79.2 12
Scaramanga (4) 4 3 0 1 50 22 28 69.5 9
Trevelyan 4 2 0 2 41 41 0 57 6
Carver 4 1 0 3 21 21 0 30.2 3
Greene 4 0 0 4 10 61 -51 14.3 0

He has a slightly underpowered weapon, after all. Again, a clear loser and again, a tend of more recent villains generally being a bit 'bish. Trevelyan squeaks by as a Lucky Loser, but a very neutral performance suggests he won’t have much say in too many of the later stages. Especially if speaking in that bizarre accent of his.

Group E Played W D L F A GD % Pts
Klebb & Grant (5) 4 4 0 0 61 11 50 84.7 12
Largo (6) 4 3 0 1 47 25 22 65.3 9
Kananga 4 2 0 2 37 35 2 51.4 6
Kristatos 4 1 0 3 18 54 -36 25 3
Oberhauser Blofeld 4 0 0 4 17 55 -38 23.7 0

I see Klebb & Grant as a gestalt and will stick with that, not least because it makes me slightly fizzy. Much of a muchness elsewhere although there will be some impact upon the content of “pots” for next year’s draw. I can tell you are thrilled. 17 votes accrued to Oberhauser Blofeld - how? Rigged, I’d say. Imagine me orange whilst saying that, if it helps.

Form table - Group Stage - Villains

Name (seed) Form % Group Stage outcome
1 OHMSS Blofeld (1) 85.2 Winner A
2 Goldfinger (9) 85.2 Winner B
3 Klebb & Grant (5) 84.7 Winner E
4 Silva (3) 83.2 Winner C
5 Le Chiffre (7) 79.2 Winner D
6 Drax (2) 70.6 Runner-Up B
7 Scaramanga (4) 69.5 Runner-Up D
8 Largo (6) 65.3 Runner-Up E
9 Stromberg 64.8 Runner-Up A
10 Zorin (10) 59.2 Lucky Loser 1
11 Dr No 57.2 Lucky Loser 2
12 Trevelyan 57 Lucky Loser 3
13 Sanchez (8) 55.5 Runner-Up C
14 YOLT Blofeld 54.5 Lucky Loser 4
15 Kananga 51.4 Lucky Loser 5
16 DAF Blofeld 41.6 Lucky Loser 6
17 Carver 30.2
18 Elektra 29
19 Khan & Orlov 26.7
20 Kristatos 25
21 Oberhauser Blofeld 23.7
22 Safin 15.3
23 Greene 14.3
24 Graves 11.9
25 Koskov & Whitaker 10.4

The difference between the top two only being goal difference and therefore tighter than one of Mr Craig’s horrid suits, the Second Round usually pukes up some massive fluctuations so still a lot to play for here. However, if asked “Is this The World is Not Enuff’s year?” the answer is …no. Again. The usual suspects towards the bottom of it, and their tendency to be on the whole slightly “newer” (I still consider 1981 to be yesterday), does set the mind thinking that whatever or whoever gets cast in the top job, some attention really needs to be spent on getting a really good (bad?) badhat in place because it’s all been a bit insipid of late, too frequently…

5 Likes
9

Form table after Second Round - Villains

A Name Form % (%change) / place change
1 Goldfinger 84.82 (-0.38) / +1
2 OHMSS Blofeld 83.72 (-1.48) / -1
3 Silva 83.2 (-) / +1
4 Klebb & Grant 82.2 (-2.5) / -1
5 Le Chiffre 77.8 (-1.4) / -
6 Drax 78.14 (+2.54) / -
7 Stromberg 68.5 (+3.7) / +2
8 Largo 60 (-4.68) / -
9 Scaramanga 58.94 (-10.56) / -2
10 Sanchez 56.62 (+1.12) / +3
11 Zorin 50.7 (-8.5) / -1
12 Dr No 50.2 (-7) / -1
13 YOLT Blofeld 49.16 (-5.34) / +1
14 Trevelyan 48.94 (-8.06) / -2
15 Kananga 44.46 (-6.94) / -
16 DAF Blofeld 38.84 (-2.76) / -
17 Carver 30.2
18 Elektra 29
19 Khan & Orlov 26.7
20 Kristatos 25
21 Oberhauser Blofeld 23.7
22 Safin 15.3
23 Greene 14.3
24 Graves 11.9
25 Koskov & Whitaker 10.4

A bit of a shuffle as ever, with seeds out at this stage being Largo, Scaramanga and Zorin, at least one of which had underperformed. Still disgruntled at four of the bottom five being within the last six villains. It might only be worth bringing it all back again if they get the villain right, and I will moan about this until they do, so expect another twenty-odd years of that.

5 Likes
10

Form table after Quarter-Finals - Villains

Name Form % (%change) / place change
1 Goldfinger 83.83 (-0.99) / -
2 OHMSS Blofeld 78.53 (-5.19) / -
3 Silva 78.1 (-5.1) / -
4 Klebb & Grant 76.4 (-5.8) / -
5 Le Chiffre 74.5 (-3.3) / -
6 Drax 68.85 (-4.29) / -
7 Stromberg 60.6 (-7.9) / -
8 Largo 60
9 Scaramanga 58.94
10 Sanchez 52.4 (-4.22) / -
11 Zorin 50.7
12 Dr No 50.2
13 YOLT Blofeld 49.16
14 Trevelyan 48.94
15 Kananga 44.46
16 DAF Blofeld 38.84
17 Carver 30.2
18 Elektra 29
19 Khan & Orlov 26.7
20 Kristatos 25
21 Oberhauser Blofeld 23.7
22 Safin 15.3
23 Greene 14.3
24 Graves 11.9
25 Koskov & Whitaker 10.4

Despite some brutal and close Quarter-Final matches with the players taking huge chunks out of each other, the placings don’t change - but still could. Averages take a tumble for all, which is likely to impact the overall position at year’s end. Some heavy-hitters in the Semi-Finals, hitting each other…heavily.

4 Likes
11

Form table after Semi-Finals - Villains

Name Form % (%change) / place change
1 Goldfinger 81.93 (-1.9) / -
2 Klebb & Grant 76.4 (-) / +2
3 OHMSS Blofeld 74.82 (-3.71) / -1
4 Silva 73.71 (-4.39) / -1
5 Drax 68.95 (-) / +1
6 Le Chiffre 67.61 (-6.89) / -1
7 Stromberg 60.6
8 Largo 60
9 Scaramanga 58.94
10 Sanchez 52.4
11 Zorin 50.7
12 Dr No 50.2
13 YOLT Blofeld 49.16
14 Trevelyan 48.94
15 Kananga 44.46
16 DAF Blofeld 38.84
17 Carver 30.2
18 Elektra 29
19 Khan & Orlov 26.7
20 Kristatos 25
21 Oberhauser Blofeld 23.7
22 Safin 15.3
23 Greene 14.3
24 Graves 11.9
25 Koskov & Whitaker 10.4

A very close Semi-Final between OHMSS Blofeld and Silva, decided by just the one vote, ruptures the form table significantly, allowing the demonic coalition of Klebb & Grant to take some advantage. A Final emerges between the top two seeds, but possibly unlikely that Goldfinger will be caught on form? A weightless Drax drifts upwards, and even with all the jiggery and pokery, perhaps those are the top ten villains? One still thinks that bottom five points to something amiss with the series of late.

3 Likes
12

Is it me, or are the older villains going to place higher out of nostalgia and new ones have the advantage of fresh memory? Moore and Dalton’s villains don’t really stand a chance outside of Jaws.

2 Likes
13

Nostalgia, for me, always a winner. But of the newer ones there just weren’t that many great villains. Except Silva.

1 Like
14

I think Drax holds up well. But in general, I think older villains had more leeway in their characterizations. And even as stunts/sequences/settings became more exotic/outlandish, villains moved in a counter-trend toward realism and believability.

DAF Blofeld would never work today (and I know, for many he did not work back then), but we still get invisible cars and impossible stunts and self-annihilation by missiles.

3 Likes
15

Roger’s my guy, and 70s/80s Bond was my jam, but if we’re honest the villains in that period were rarely stand-outs. Even Drax can go either way; his cold, Vulcan-like delivery is either intimidating or somnambulent depending on your POV.

I’ve been inconsistent with these polls from year to year. If the question is who’s the “better” (ie more iconic, unforgettable, etc) villain, Goldfinger will always come out on top for me but if the question is who would win if they were all locked in a room and only one could walk out alive, obviously Auric would be toast about 30 seconds in. How I vote depends on how I choose to interpret the question each year, but the “Sideswipes” – with their “pick the one you can live without” approach – holds sway this time. The Moore and Dalton era villains are generally the most expendable elements in those films; I would sacrifice most of them if the alternative was losing various gags, gadgets, side characters and stunts I consider more important to one film or other. Sometimes they’re just kind of “there,” you know?

4 Likes
16

Agreed to a degree. But I do enjoy and miss those old male villains like Stromberg and Drax, simply because I could believe that they had amassed enough money for their minions to do their bidding. And their maliciousness had something enjoyably evil Bond really had to work against.

The Moore era perfected those, even if Khan was outwardly too handsome and Zorin so much younger - still they really had that crazy businessman vibe which started… well, with Blofeld.

Sanchez worked very well, too, as a macho version of that. But I never really enjoyed Trevelyan (too much wanna be Bond), considered Carver too chin-strokey, Renard too tiny and Graves, well, even more chin-strokey, and LeChiffre, well, too smug and rope-strokey to be scary.

I do enjoy Greene as that wormy undervillain and Safin as the snakey sadist, though.

And am I the only one who thinks that Silva is kind of a modern remake of DAF Blofeld, just as much in love with himself, only more emo-motivated? They share what the best villains do: they enjoy what they are and what they do.

5 Likes
17

Lee’s Scaramanga comes to mind - but the way Silva plays the ‘exalted homosexual’ camp act - until he meets Dench, his handler and ultimate mother figure - indeed recalls DAF Blofeld.

2 Likes
18

I agree that there was something effective and almost defining in the way “Classic” Bond was so often pitted against older, wealthy foes with the veneer of social acceptability. For me it worked in tandem with Bond’s superiors being stuffy, tweedy establishment types: in that context, Bond represented a younger, less rigid and more adaptable kind of British hero, a man of “action” even standing still in a bespoke suit. Naturally that had to give way a bit with Roger, who caught up in age to his adversaries and handlers and in some cases passed them. Then when Roger’s successors showed up and the emphasis was more on the rough and tumble, Bond’s foes needed to be more of a physical equal and less of a “looking down the nose” geriatric billionaire. In all, I liked the old balance better, with Bond somehow straddling every important line: contemporary but still somehow traditional, forever toppling men in power but in a way that restored the status quo rather than upending it, etc.

But with all that said, Goldfinger provided the blueprint for “unprincipled billionaire” and all who followed would always live to some degree in his sizable shadow.

6 Likes
19

They might just have been on telly more so have had more time to bed into the collective awareness.

3 Likes
20

Right, so we have a winner for the Villains Deathmatch

Winner: Goldfinger
Runner-Up: OHMSS Blofeld
3rd place: SIlva
4th place: Le Chiffre

More to come later.

Voting opens June 8 for the Group Stage of the next category - Songs. Can anything break Live and Let Die’s streak?

(The “Film” category has been retired, so that 12 individual categories will establish “Best Film” at the end of the year. “Spinning this all out unnecessarily” really doesn’t do that sufficient justice).

Final form table for Villains

Name Form % (%change) / place change
1 Goldfinger 78.64 (-3.29) / -
2 Klebb & Grant 76.4
3 Silva 72.83 (-0.88) / +1
4 OHMSS Blofeld 71.02 (-3.8) / -1
5 Drax 68.95
6 Le Chiffre 63.32 (-4.29) / -
7 Stromberg 60.6
8 Largo 60
9 Scaramanga 58.94
10 Sanchez 52.4
11 Zorin 50.7
12 Dr No 50.2
13 YOLT Blofeld 49.16
14 Trevelyan 48.94
15 Kananga 44.46
16 DAF Blofeld 38.84
17 Carver 30.2
18 Elektra 29
19 Khan & Orlov 26.7
20 Kristatos 25
21 Oberhauser Blofeld 23.7
22 Safin 15.3
23 Greene 14.3
24 Graves 11.9
25 Koskov & Whitaker 10.4
3 Likes