SPECTRE (Improved) 2023... can now be viewed/downloaded
Someone
Posts: 1,586MI6 Agent
Hello all.
Inspired by articles like this
https://notperfectedyet.wordpress.com/2020/07/23/five-changes-to-the-spectre-script-that-could-have-improved-the-film/
And this:
I thought I would try to 'improve' Spectre. But there are ground rules. It can't be a page one rewrite, that would be too easy. Instead I will work within as much of the story as possible but fixing the 'problems' that many fans have with the film.
For example, while the third act will significantly change, the MI6 HQ demolition and bridge helicopter crash will still occur.
I have an idea for resolving the 'brother' plot point but won't reveal it for now.
The finished script won't be put online until next year hence the 2022 in the title.
Some key scenes are already done. Here is one, enjoy.
Someone Will Return.
Comments
"It's been a long time, but finally here we are. What took you so long?" to quote Franz Oberhauser.
I had to set aside this little project, so the planned 2022 finish was somewhat delayed, but I'm now, "back on the job" as Sir Roger might have said.
There are a whole bunch of plot issues that have to be dealt with Spectre.
Here's an updated scene that helps plug some of those plot holes.
I'm sorry, what am I reading about here ?
In the scene where C tells M and Moneypenny he is now heading the new committee, I've added a reference to Oberhauser to show a clear link between Oberhauser and C which wasn't made in the original film. In the original scene, Moneypenny has no lines, so I have given her some of M's dialogue. A problem with Spectre is the lack of a clear link between Oberhauser and C and the CNS building. Other scenes in the improved script also strengthen the link.
I've never thought there's any doubt that they're connected; especially from this exchange in the film between Bond and Blofeld:
007 - "I'm guessing our little friend C, he's one of your disciples"
Blofeld- "You could say that"
"And what does he get out of it?"
"Nothing. He's a visionary like me"
That's pretty clear isn't it?
But why does Bond feel confident to say, "I'm guessing our little friend C, he's one of your disciples"?
Because he understands Blofeld's plan:
"You set cities on fire and watch innocent people burn, so you can convince governments to join an intelligence network you've paid for. Not that complicated"
And he's just watched M's resignation speech in which he mentions handing over to C: as he says- not that complicated.
I'm not going to say that Spectre's script isn't without problems, but that isn't one of them. At no point is it unclear that C is a baddie and the Nine Eyes scheme is Blofeld's plan. Could it benefit from seeing Blofeld and C talk to each other? Maybe, but it works without. Are you still saying there's no link drawn between Blofeld and C, despite that line of dialogue?
I'd say a bigger issue is that Bond only meets C once, and after that the two strands of plot stay fairly divided which is a shame.
Yes, I am saying there's no link drawn between Blofeld and C, despite that line of dialogue.
The events for Bond are, Sciarra's death, M's video message, the funeral, the Rome meeting, Mr White's House, Hoffler Klinik, Tangiers, the train, the desert compound.
As you say Bond's strand is completely separate to the MI5/MI6 merger B plot strand.
The MI5/MI6 merger B plot strand is, Bond being told, C in M's office, Tanner telling Bond about merger, Tokyo meeting, M at CNS and given Bond, Moneypenny audio, and then M and Moneypenny late for the Foreign Office nine eyes approval meeting/double o program shutdown news.
There is a mention of the "global surveillance initiative" during the Rome meeting but it is brief and easily missed.
There's really no way for Bond to know about C's intentions beyond the merger and his guess at C's link with Oberhauser/Blofeld is really a leap.
Before the final act CNS building showdown, C could simply have been a naive stool pigeon.
Yes, I am saying there's no link drawn between Blofeld and C, despite that line of dialogue.
That doesn't make any sense. It draws the link in itself, it becomes clear to the audience. If it isn't clear through that, then your added line doesn't make it any clearer.
There's really no way for Bond to know about C's intentions beyond the merger and his guess at C's link with Oberhauser/Blofeld is really a leap.
That's why he says he's "guessing". But also Bond has learnt the city attacks are all coordinated and part of a plan (he discovers that in Rome) and then that forces through Nine Eyes (the plans for which Tanner told him about in the boat scene) and the double-O programme is then shut down; it's not much of a leap, it's just adding 2 and 2. Especially as he can see with own eyes Blofeld watching M resign on CCTV and gloating over it. It's pretty obvious, and then Blofeld confirms it. There is no doubt left in Bond's or the audience's minds that they are linked.
I ,and suspect you, had no problem understanding that C and Blofeld were working together when I first saw it in the cinema. This is a Bond movie, the plots aren't complex, the audience expect the villains to all be working together, especially when one is clearly doing something to advance the other's overall plan. You're finding an issue where there is none.
The point you've made about people knowing who the villains are because plots are simple, and related publicity for the film points to C being a villain, is valid, but I disagree that the internal logic of the story itself points clearly to C being Oberhauser's ally. That's the point I'm making, not that the audience doesn't make the connection, but Bond, within the internal logic of the story, is not in a position to easily guess.
It's true Bond learns of the link between Oberhauser's organisation and the Tunisian and Hamburg attacks at the Rome meeting. But the global surveillance initiative report is given in German, the audience knows what is said, but is Bond fluent in German? I think Craig's Bond is not shown to be fluent in any language. He has tourist level skills at best.
At no stage between Rome and the desert compound discussion is Bond told about the progress or lack of it for Nine Eyes. He's never even told that name. Q could have told Bond in Austria, but he doesn't.
Tanner does tell Bond about C potentially having access to "intelligence streams of nine countries" and mentions the intel failures over Hamburg and Tunisia strengthening C's hand, but is that any different to Gareth Mallory telling Judi Dench's M her time is up in Skyfall after the Istanbul debacle? And during the M meeting after Mexico, Bond is not told about Nine Eyes. He's only told about the merger and meets C.
Essentially, Bond is aware of the merger and how intel failures are giving C/MI-5 the upper hand and C could obtain multiple countries intelligence, but Bond is really chasing the organisation behind the bombings. Why should Bond know or think that C would have access to MI6 security camera feeds.
There is another related plot anomaly in Spectre, Oberhauser telling Bond he must know that the 00 program is "officially dead." In the leaked scripts Bond is told that by telegram while he and Madeleine are on the Tangiers train, but we see no contact between Bond and London after Austria.
It's true Bond learns of the link between Oberhauser's organisation and the Tunisian and Hamburg attacks at the Rome meeting. But the global surveillance initiative report is given in German, the audience knows what is said, but is Bond fluent in German? I think Craig's Bond is not shown to be fluent in any language. He has tourist level skills at best.
"Listen Moneypenny, Hamburg, Tunisa, Mexico City, they're all linked. It's one organisation coordinating multiple attacks"
At no stage between Rome and the desert compound discussion is Bond told about the progress or lack of it for Nine Eyes. He's never even told that name. Q could have told Bond in Austria, but he doesn't.
But in your your version Q informs M and Moneypenny offscreen. And yet for some reason it's impossible that he could have told Bond offscreen at any point.
In the film Bond knows about C's initiative, he's shown the outcome. He would have to be a moron to not draw the two together.
There is another related plot anomaly in Spectre, Oberhauser telling Bond he must know that the 00 program is "officially dead." In the leaked scripts Bond is told that by telegram while he and Madeleine are on the Tangiers train, but we see no contact between Bond and London after Austria.
He doesn't have to know beforehand, because Blofeld tells him there and then, and Bond doesn't reveal his hand by acting surprised. Regardless, it clues him into the fact that Blofeld and C are in it together. That's why he directly asks Blofeld if he and C are in it together. Basically everything you're saying would require Bond and the audience to be stupid. You're not giving either enough credit.
You can just admit you're wrong about this, it's the problem nowadays that no-one can just admit when they're mistaken. Maybe it's a Trump thing.
"But in your your version Q informs M and Moneypenny offscreen. And yet for some reason it's impossible that he could have told Bond offscreen at any point."
Yes, in my version Bond tells Q about Oberhauser and he tells M about Oberhauser offscreen but we know Q is going back to London and Bond is in contact with Q in Austria at the time he tells him about Oberhauser - see my post below.
In the film, Bond only uses a cellphone once, in Rome, and after that he doesn't use one.
I don't think Oberhauser's comment about the 00 program being dead shows a link, maybe that they kept it in for that reason, but for me it doesn't work.
Bond is not in contact with London after Austria and so the Foreign Office meeting where M is informed about the shutdown is not info that would have got to Bond. I think offscreen conversation assumptions is a cheat, and I think it's problematic.
As for admitting ones mistakes, maybe I'm not the one who can't admit they're wrong?
Anyway, there is plenty more to resolve in the script.
My SPECTRE (Improved) 2023 script is now available to view/download here:
salmon-selene-91.tiiny.site
All constructive comments are welcome.
Passive aggressive and spiteful comments will be ignored.
Enjoy!