Mathieu Amalric's performance of Dominic Greene is severely underrated

Julius No M.D.

Greene has been oft ranked at the bottom of villains' lists and many felt that Amalric was a miscast. Bond fans had generally been interested in big burly villains with secret underground lairs and physical deformities and were disappointed when they got a less cartoonish villain.

First, I think Greene's plot is very original rather than another world domination with a super-weapon plot. Cornering human necessities is quite evil and quite a feasible plot. The fact that he himself is a rather weak spineless man being protected by a giant cryptic organization which gives him power, definitely makes him even more despicable and in some ways similar to the villains in our real world today.

Second, Amalric's acting is totally on point. He knows how to tone his voice in a eerily sinister way, knowing when to raise his temper and when to be authoritatively quiet. His character embodies the core DSM traits of a sociopath: glib charm, cunning, inflated self-worth, chronic liar, manipulative, parasitic, lacking in empathy, and impulsiveness. He really does the psychotic facial expressions with his eyes very well. He delivers his lines perfectly (I like how he says "Don't look at me like I'm STUPID!!! ... it's unattractive...). He's easily the most malicious villain of the Craig films.

chrisisall

His Greene is the most psychotic, and he played it REALLY well. -{

welshboy78

Yeah he played it very well, loved his interaction with Camille - just think as you rightly point out he is bottom of the pile due to his plan being more sensible then the norm

Thunderpussy

Greene was a great sleazy villain, and I love his speech to the
General at the hotel -{

chrisisall

Thunderpussy wrote:

Greene was a great sleazy villain, and I love his speech to the
General at the hotel -{

And if I'm not mistaken, Forster & Craig wrote it!

Loeffelholz

chrisisall wrote:

Thunderpussy wrote:

Greene was a great sleazy villain, and I love his speech to the
General at the hotel -{

And if I'm not mistaken, Forster & Craig wrote it!

You are essentially correct. At any rate, they made changes to the script during the WGA strike.

broadshoulder

Julius No M.D. wrote:

Greene has been oft ranked at the bottom of villains' lists and many felt that Amalric was a miscast. Bond fans had generally been interested in big burly villains with secret underground lairs and physical deformities and were disappointed when they got a less cartoonish villain.

Too true

His rivalry with Camile is superb. A much underrated villain..

Gassy Man

The actor was fine. The problem is that the script didn't really give him anything impressive to do.

cheld

He looks like a fish.

The Red Kind

He's more realistic and thus for many boring and bland.

QoS is an underrated film with some truly great Bond moments IMO

HatThrowingHenchman

IMO, he's not intimidating or anything, which is the main problem. He's just a ruthless businessman.
Bond could beat him up easily and he did so.

Agent Purple

As of now, I think he's an okay villain, not the worst BV (for me that dishonor goes to Grey's Blofeld). He gets the job done, but to me he doesn't make that much of an impression.

Chriscoop

I think he was a good villain and played well. He had a good mix of arrogance and general psychotic devilry. So did come across as a genuinely nasty piece of work. Qos is a great film IMHO! I really get a lot out of it.

Mooresflares

I think he is good, although a Bond villain shouldn't be seen eating an apple.

BondJasonBond006

Dominic Greene stands exemplary for what is wrong with QOS in general.

It could have been so much better with little effort and only little changed. Probably the worst job overall EON ever did.

Mathieu is great and I prefer him much to see over every other villain in the Craig era except brilliant Mads as LeChiffre.

heartbroken_mr_drax

BondJasonBond006 wrote:

It could have been so much better with little effort and only little changed.

I agree. He's just a little underwhelming based on his character and how he fits in with the scheme more than anything. I do think that the fight at the end is a bit pathetic - he's no match for Craig.

I do find the whole unknown super villain of the Craig era a bit frustrating to be honest.

welshboy78

I really wish Mendes had left the linking of all villains from previous 3 films well alone or if going down this path he could at the very least mentioned more about Quantum specifically to make the link between movies more believable. In SPECTRE he delivered it with little to no substance and it really feels like a lazy quick tie up when they wrapped up filming (hey guys - chuck a few pictures of the previous villains around the soon to be demolished HQ)

E.g. we should of seen some kind of specific fallout or hostile takeover.

If I'm honest i think they should have saved SPECTRE for the next era of Bond after DC left.

I liked the idea of Quantum however, now linking them with SPECTRE kind of reduces the variety of villains in the series instead of leaving them alone as another mighty organisation. Quantum was also a more "realistic" threat well suited to the DC era.

Silva should have been left alone as a non-linked standalone villain and with his "agent" back story did not need to be chucked into SPECTRE, there really was no reason to do this with him.

I do fear that if Waltz and DC return his whole tenure has been written (albeit not from the start) to revolve around one villain which kind of undoes the realism of the Daniel Craig era

I do enjoy SPECTRE but the more I think about what they have done to tie things up (which were unnecessary) make me mad

Napoleon Plural

Yeah, I mean without Spectre though Spectre wouldn't have had much going for it in a way. It might have required a name change, too. I liked the film, but have them as another new load of villains and it would just seem a bit wandering.

welshboy78

I had no problem with SPECTRE being reintroduced. It was the lame tie in with Casino Royale to Skyfall that irks me.

This makes it on film DC has technically been battling the same people since he became a 00 agent

Chriscoop

It's a ridiculous situation, quantum was the Spectre for the Craig era, to reintroduce Spectre was fine but unnecessary, we'd managed long enough without them, but quantum should have been wrapped up by bond first. I agree silva should be stand alone. My biggest problem is the whole author of all your pain! How can Blofeld predict every single move everyone made? What if Bond and vesper had of really disliked each other? or M hadn't been hit with a lucky ricochet? it's flimsy very flimsy.

BondJasonBond006

Chriscoop wrote:

It's a ridiculous situation, quantum was the Spectre for the Craig era, to reintroduce Spectre was fine but unnecessary, we'd managed long enough without them, but quantum should have been wrapped up by bond first. I agree silva should be stand alone. My biggest problem is the whole author of all your pain! How can Blofeld predict every single move everyone made? What if Bond and vesper had of really disliked each other? or M hadn't been hit with a lucky ricochet? it's flimsy very flimsy.

P+W will jump at any opportunity to turn Bond into a soap opera.

They started this with their very first script TWINE. And later just recycled TWINE for SF. They obviously think the audience is stupid enough not to notice.

I bet Bond 25 will recycle again TWINE/SF in some way.

Chriscoop

Let's hope they have a strict remit to stick when penning #25. The biggest weaknesses in the films they've been involved in is their writing!

Dirty Punker

BB said that she wanted Camille to return in a future Bond film.
Will anything come of that or will it be a classic case of Anya Amasova in View To A Kill, etcetera?