Who is the the best Written & Acted Villain in a Bond movie?

chrisisall

Not just "Best Villain" nor "Your Favourite Villain" but the villain (or villains) you feel were explored, explained & executed with exceptional thought & care.
For instance, I love Elliot Carver, but really, what's his real motivation? He's very 2 dimensional even if very entertaining IMO.
Dr. No had possibilities, but his screen time was very limited and his backstory never actually delved into.

So, for ME, I feel that Alec Trevelyan was the most 3 dimensional, fully fleshed out villain in the series- loved the dialogue, love the actor. Not my absolute favourite, but one of them and very compelling nonetheless.

Thoughts?

Blackleiter

Franz Sanchez from LTK.

chrisisall

Blackleiter wrote:

Franz Sanchez from LTK.

Okay, clearly he was great in many respects, but I feel that has to do more with the awesome actor than the writing. He wasn't particularly well 'fleshed-out' in terms of script, however Robert Davi did a marvellous job of bring that nasty character to life (see also: Goonies).

Thunderpussy

From TND, ............... General Chang? )

chrisisall

Thunderpussy wrote:

From TND, ............... General Chang? )

Well, you might have seen him in the hallway.... 8-)

GoldenEye85

Renard from The World is Not Enough. He cannot feel pain, can push himself harder and further than anyone else, his intentions are made pretty clear and quite soon in the movie, and we are lead through a good portion of the movie before we find out that he is just another super strong henchmen in the bond universe. That last part is the only strike against him. A wasted opportunity perhaps?

MooseWithFleas

Le Chiffre would be #1 for me. They do a great job covering his desperate struggle for survival. 006 is close behind, Silva is solid too.

60's: FRWL Trio: Love the machine of SPECTRE putting the perfect plan in place to take out 007 and steal the decoder.
70's: LALD Kananga/ Mr. Big: His plot is pretty reasonable and fleshed out.
80's: AVTAK - Max Zorin: I enjoy his backstory
90's: Trevelyan: Pretty clear here. Like his backstory and his reveal works perfectly.
00's: Le Chiffre
10's: Silva

chrisisall

MooseWithFleas wrote:

LALD Kananga/ Mr. Big: His plot is pretty reasonable and fleshed out.

Yes, but again, a supreme actor brought SO much to the party. As written it was pretty thin, no?

hehadlotsofguts

I thought Dr No was a well written villain despite the limited screentime he had. His backstory is explained well during the dinner scene. But why was he focusing solely on the US space program? What about the Russians? They refused him as well. This is the only aspect the screenwriters forgot to include.

Firemass

Max Zorin- Feels like a literary character. Extensive backstory about being a Nazi experiment. Ties with the KBG. Has a girlfriend. Interest in horse racing. Bigger ambitions to to destroy silicon valley. Played to perfection by Christopher Walken.

chrisisall

Firemass wrote:

Max Zorin- Feels like a literary character. Extensive backstory about being a Nazi experiment. Ties with the KBG. Has a girlfriend. Interest in horse racing. Bigger ambitions to to destroy silicon valley. Played to perfection by Christopher Walken.

I... can't find fault there.... -{

superado

This is tough to decide on. I think LeChifre was written and acted well. Depending if he's to be considered the chief villain of CR (or would that be Quantum?), his motivations in Operation CR, the poker game, were not based on greed, political domination or megalomania like the usual main Bond villain, but rather fear of death in restoring losses incurred by his organization and even occasionally drew sympathy from me.

However, best written/acted villain creds go to Sanchez IMO. Yes, Robert Davi's great acting drove the role, but I think his characterization was unique, in that greed and market dominance took the back seat to his unwavering code of loyalty and its flipside, betrayal, which was layered very well in his characterization.

ZorinIndustries

I enjoy Silva quite a bit. He's got a backstory that gives the audience insight to his character and why he behaves the certain way he does. Javier Bardem does a great job portraying the menace, often causing me to become uncomfortable. For example, in his climax with M, "Oh no, you're hurt! What have they done to you?"

AlphaOmegaSin

Agreed about Zorin being a Literary Character, is the Type of Villain Gardner would create.

Manxman

Scaramanga. A sort of parallel Bond without a moral compass, he has a jet-black sense of humour — knowing that his servant is hoping to have him murdered in order to inherit his property and possessions, he relishes the challenge that this presents him and accepts philosophically that sooner or later everyone has to die.

AlphaOmegaSin

Manxman wrote:

Scaramanga. A sort of parallel Bond without a moral compass, he has a jet-black sense of humour — knowing that his servant is hoping to have him murdered in order to inherit his property and possessions, he relishes the challenge that this presents him and accepts philosophically that sooner or later everyone has to die.

In the TMWTGG novel, Scaramanga is a Henchmen himself.

Manxman

Yes, the literary character is very different — and a lot less interesting. Pity the script didn't give Christopher Lee more screen time to develop his portrayal.

Number24

Sanchez in LTK and Le Chiffre in CR :007)

Firemass

Manxman wrote:

Scaramanga. A sort of parallel Bond without a moral compass, he has a jet-black sense of humour — knowing that his servant is hoping to have him murdered in order to inherit his property and possessions, he relishes the challenge that this presents him and accepts philosophically that sooner or later everyone has to die.

I would vote for Scaramanga, except I'm disappointed by how little he knows about his own solar energy operation.

Firemass

Blackleiter wrote:

Franz Sanchez from LTK.

I like how we get to know Sanchez thru Bond trying to become his friend. We almost admire Sanchez for his loyalty and fear him for his brutality. Great villain. Good choice Blackleiter.

Gassy Man

Goldfinger.

Gassy Man

Goldfinger.

always shaken

yes ,for me has to be Goldfinger, I know he is a criminal ,but he does have class, most of the other Bond villians are just ravin nut
jobs,

MooseWithFleas

chrisisall wrote:

MooseWithFleas wrote:

LALD Kananga/ Mr. Big: His plot is pretty reasonable and fleshed out.

Yes, but again, a supreme actor brought SO much to the party. As written it was pretty thin, no?

His backstory is not covered at all, but I enjoy his motives and developed scheme.

Sir Hillary Bray

Although I consider TMWTGG a weak entry, I have to go with Scaramanga on this one. He's given an interesting background, he has a plausible motivation for what he is doing, and he is superbly acted. Fair point made by Firemass that he seems oddly clueless about his own solar energy plant, but he still gets my vote.

DieAnotherDay

It's between Goldfinger and Elektra for me.
Goldfinger is just so darn entertaining every second he's on-screen and I love how he Bond has a bit of fun with him before things turn more serious later on. Elektra probably has the most screen-time of all the villains so we spend a lot of time with her and learn a lot about her character. Both are 10/10

chrisisall

Sir Hillary Bray wrote:

Although I consider TMWTGG a weak entry, I have to go with Scaramanga on this one.

Yes, he actually was one of the better ones now that you mention him... -{

DieAnotherDay

I'd also like to add Elliot Carver. I really feel he is the most underrated villain in the whole series + his dialogue is so memorable

chrisisall

DieAnotherDay wrote:

I'd also like to add Elliot Carver. I really feel he is the most underrated villain in the whole series + his dialogue is so memorable

Oh, I love Elliot. Jonathan did such a great job with him. Only thing is I'd like a glimpse as to how & why his madness overtook what must have at one time been at least a reasonably sane megalomaniac & precipitated such ferocious evil...

Blackleiter

superado wrote:

This is tough to decide on. I think LeChifre was written and acted well. Depending if he's to be considered the chief villain of CR (or would that be Quantum?), his motivations in Operation CR, the poker game, were not based on greed, political domination or megalomania like the usual main Bond villain, but rather fear of death in restoring losses incurred by his organization and even occasionally drew sympathy from me.

However, best written/acted villain creds go to Sanchez IMO. Yes, Robert Davi's great acting drove the role, but I think his characterization was unique, in that greed and market dominance took the back seat to his unwavering code of loyalty and its flipside, betrayal, which was layered very well in his characterization.

You have expertly encapsulated my feelings about Sanchez, and that's why he's my number one choice. -{

Dalkowski110

Alec Trevelyan, closely followed by Franz Sanchez. Why? Because they're not cartoon villains. They're both very three-dimensional (Sanchez to an extreme degree--how many other Bond villains out there have cracked a non-dark joke about someone on TV?) who we get to know and who are very well-developed. Both follow similar arcs in that they begin to lose it once their plans are foiled. With Trevelyan, it gets much more personal than it already was, and I suppose that's why I give him the nod over Sanchez. Typically, when a villain makes it personal, you move into "I weel keel you Meesta Bond!" territory, but in spite of his obssession, Trevelyan managed to avoid the cliches, which I thought was impressive. Sanchez, on the other hand, was so impressive simply because it was NEVER personal on his end (even if it was REALLY personal on Bond's end). Even at the end, when Bond asks him, "don't you want to know why?", he DOES want to know why. It's clear to him that it's personal with Bond, and still very much impersonal with him. To Sanchez, Bond is just another guy who has come along to ruin his day and must be dealt with accordingly.