Why do Bond and Blofeld not recognise each other in OHMSS?

Comments

• Napoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,467MI6 Agent

  May 2011

  Well, the order of the books are reversed. The book OHMSS was the first meeting between the two and the director decided to do it much like the book, sort of ignoring the meeting in the last part of the film YOLT.
  
  There was an original plot to explain Bond's physical transformation to Lazenby by having him with plastic surgery after an accident, which would have explained why Blofeld doesn't recognise Bond, but that got junked.
  
  Of course, having two different actors play both Bond and Blofeld makes it a bit easier to bring off, but it is a plot hole unless you take the view that OHMSS is a sort of standalone movie.

  "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."
  
  Roger Moore 1927-2017
• chrisno1 LondonPosts: 3,601MI6 Agent

  May 2011

  Napoleon has it right; Peter Hunt prefers to image OHMSS as a stand alone film, with none of the associated timelines of the others. In that respect it could actually be the VERY FIRST adventure in a time line, but I'm getting off subject.
  There is a very brief explanation in the films and books: Tanaka refers to 007 having to "become Japanese" including (one assumes) the removal of his chest hair, hence that odd scene in an elaborate manicure salon.
  This was Roald Dahl's attempt to update what occurs in the novel. There 007 is given a complete makeover, including staining his skin, which initially fools Blofeld, but not Irma Bunt.
  The movie doesn't quite make enough of this angle - Bond is recognised by Blofeld immediately, despite them never having met and the only thing previously identifying him is his Walther PPK (Osato & Helga admit this after Bond visits his office). Tanaka's make up girls can't be that good, because Osato clearly recognises who he is! And for that matter, so do we. But given Blofeld never knew exactly what Bond looked like in the first place, he could certainly have been confused when a couple of years later 007 appears with a fey upper crust accent, a mole on his cheek and a dimple in his chin.
  More curious is what happened to Blofeld's scar?
  And how did he get it in the first place? If you use the theory that OHMSS is the VERY FIRST adventure, Blofeld's scar could have occured from his collison with the overhanging tree branch on the bob sleigh run. Of course he loses the scar in DAF because he's undergoing reconstructive plastic surgery.
  See how nicely this all fits together?
  Hell, I'm taking this way too seriously. It's only a movie....
• Wint and Kidd far-out AustraliaPosts: 109MI6 Agent

  May 2011

  I always took it that Bond didn't recognize Blofeld because he had already had plastic surgery because Bond had seen what he looked like in YOLT. Then in DAF he had further plastic surgery and commissioned the making of dispensable doubles to try to protect himself from Bond's potential revenge for Tracy.
  
  As for Blofeld not knowing Bond that's tougher to explain but it is possible that Blofeld was pretending he didn't realize who he was to put Bond into a sense of false security while he planned to trap him out.

  Roger Moore is my favourite 007 R.I.P.
• Thunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,792MI6 Agent

  May 2011

  I always went with the "each film stands alone " line, so OHMSS could be placed before YOLT if you wanted.

  "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
• Denzil2222 Posts: 77MI6 Agent

  May 2011

  I get very annoyed when some Bond fans have such a major problem with bad continuity in Never say Never Again but have no problem with Eon bad continuity in ohmss and others
• Wint and Kidd far-out AustraliaPosts: 109MI6 Agent

  May 2011

  Denzil2222 wrote:

  I get very annoyed when some Bond fans have such a major problem with bad continuity in Never say Never Again but have no problem with Eon bad continuity in ohmss and others

  
  Well I would agree with NSNA in particular because it isn't even part of the official series franchise. It's only a remake of the 4th official Bond film Thunderball. It makes no sense to gripe about the "continuity" at all.

  Roger Moore is my favourite 007 R.I.P.
• SilentSpy Private Exotic AreaPosts: 765MI6 Agent

  May 2011

  When I was young and originally watched OHMSS I turned off the tape after the "this never happened to the other fella" line. I had never been pulled out of a movie before like that and Connery was Bond to me. After getting pass that situation (years later I might add), I was able to look pass the Blofeld problem and enjoy one of the best Bond films in the series. The films have continuity at times but not strict continuity. It's too bad but all series that go pass a few films tend to drop bits and pieces here and there.

  "Better late than never."
• Andy007 Posts: 100MI6 Agent

  May 2011

  To me, i assume the reason why Blofeld didn't recognise 007 was because he's disguised as Sir Hillary Bray. This only gets him so far. Without being dressed as Sir Hillary - Blofeld would have known.
  - As for the scar, Donald Pleasance was given the terrible scar to increase his screen presence. It was thought he lacked menace & the scar would define him. I guess with a new actor (Telly Savalas)- they felt a scar wasn't needed, as he had a tougher approach. It's not ideal for continuity though. Don't get me started on DAF - Charles Gray badly miscast (the silly Blofeld clone plot) with hair- followed by a drag-queen cameo! it's a farce.
• Napoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,467MI6 Agent

  May 2011

  All very well - but a plothole here is that while Bond goes to the trouble of wearing specs, he actually takes them off when he first meets Blofeld. D'oh!

  "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."
  
  Roger Moore 1927-2017
• Blood_Stone Posts: 184MI6 Agent

  June 2011 edited December 2011

  Charles Gray badly miscast

  
  Ironically, he was the actor that was closest to the novel Blofeld in terms of looks...minus the effiminacy of course.