I’d go with Madeleine recognizes someone, triggers the flashback, SPECTRE are on to them. And history repeats itself but this time Madeline sacrifices herself to save Bond. Bond goes on a personal hunt to track down the new head of SPECTRE, and needs Blofelds help to do so. SPECTRE now run by a mysterious Shatterhand and his #2 (Remi Malek, Irma Bunt?). In reality Shatterhand doesn’t exist, it’s Blofeld, who uses the entire charade to eacape. Cue Garden of Death. Amnesia. And a fitting finale to the Craig era.
Wouldn’t be surprised if Irma Bunt makes an appearance given all the early speculation around a female villain. Did Belucci’s character ever have an actual name? Only issue is that she’s a far cry from Flemings description.
Her character’s name was Lucia Sciarra (was mentioned in the movie). Just flicked through an early draft in which Bunt appears (first appearance in Morocco, handing Madeleine her dress) and they are clearly two different persons. I couldn’t find the exact scene, but I’m pretty sure that I read in one of the drafts that Oberhauser was one of the Intruders at White’s place.
He’s been keeping an eye on her all the time and watched her growing from a child to a woman (“I always loved to watch”) – making it clear that he wanted her for himself. Maybe they left that out because it resembled the Medrano/Camille connection too much.
I can still see them going the “Lucia is Irma” route. A draft is a draft, the original Irma character never made it into the movie. Oh, the irony: after almost 20 years, the everlasting rumor of Belucci as Bond girl finally became true in SPECTRE, and what happens? Here we go again, speculating if she’s going to be in the next one, too.
Another option is that we see young Madeleine shooting Irma Bunt (the love of Blofeld’s life?) in the flashback. Thing is, he would have mentioned it in SPECTRE…
Re: flashbacks, OHMSS did have one, sort of: Bond empties his office drawer and picks up souvenirs from previous missions (Honey’s knife, Red Grant’s watch) and we hear matching soundtrack bits. Also, the opening credits have scenes from previous movies in it.
I hope with all my heart that they avoid the “sacrificing female” trope–it was lame even in 1948, and neither Joan Fontaine’s talent nor Max Ophuls’ mise-en-scene were able to redeem it.
Oh God please no! The ‘I’m Oberhauser, no I’m Blofeld’ reveal fell flat enough and Blofeld is an iconic villain. An ‘I’m Mrs Sciarra, no I’m Irma Bunt’ reveal would be just met with puzzlement by the vast majority, as Irma Bunt was just a minor villain in a lesser known entry in the series. What next…? ‘I’m Silva, no I’m Nick Nack on stilts’!!!
While my mind salivates at the queer possibilities, I realize this puts me in the tiniest of minorities.
Thanks Mr.Hinx. I have always wondered why this reveal was received so negatively. Iconic yes–but Blofeld was played by three different actors (one of whom played another character in a previous Bond movie), so shape-shifting seems to be a Blofeld trademark. If identities are fluid, Oberhauser as Blofeld–why not? Being referred to as Blofeld is akin to being called Don Corleone in a Godfather movie–it is the mantle of (systemic) evil–who actually wears it is less important.
Cheers old friend. Yeah, the title sequence does give a bit of flashback but I always thought it was more to do with acknowledging that George was the same Bond and further with the soundtrack cues during the cleaning out of the desk. Always wondered about that. Honey’s knife? Maybe a parting gift. The TB re-breather? Just forgot to turn it into Q. Grant’s watch? Not so much. He and Tania were in a bit of a rush to hop the train, but in the novel he does make a point to clean Grant of all possessions, money and documents. Minor squabbles/details but still, with the first “changing of the guard” in the franchise, there was an effort make sure that everyone knew it was the same Bond minus the code name and thankfully abandoned plastic surgery ideas.
Interesting that they’d go to such an extensive effort to build an actual house in Norway for what we’re currently assuming to be a relatively brief flashback. Maybe it suggests the location itself will also be relevant in the current day.
I’ve been assuming that all the time. Simply building a new one makes things easier - and most likely cheaper at the end of the day. They’re not building a huge villa with bricks and steel. I guess that most houses are inhabited in this area, so it would be rather uncomfortable for the people who actually live there. They can also build the house camera fit instead of having to dabble with an existing one.
And no crazy Bond fans from all around the world will come along in the years to come and pester the family who lives there.
By the way, that pizza stunt is fabulous; Cranston threw the thing in exactly the way it resulted in the most pathetic outcome: pizza ejected from carton; pizza partially on the roof, partially on the driveway; carton sailing away like a shuttle booster. A whole host of partying Oscar nominees couldn’t have achieved this mess with a single move.
The flashback may happen while they’re there in present day. They visit her childhood place and she tells them about her first encounter with SPECTRE when she was little.
The silver thing might just be… a silver thing. Or the “heavy smoke machine” the article mentions or a device to store large quantities of dry ice.
