The Unseen Blofeld
A correspondent asks the following:
I am just curious if you know why Eon didn’t simply show Anthony Dawson in the Bond films where Blofeld appears and dub his voice again by Eric Pohlmann for the sake of continuity and consistency. After all, they have often used actors seen as other characters in different roles, like Charles Gray.
In the earliest films, Eon did care about consistency. We see this in FRWL, the second Bond film; Kronsteen references Dr. No by name. In Goldfinger, the third film, there is a reference to the gadget-briefcase from the previous film. However, Goldfinger is also the first departure from continuity; the replacement of Jack Lord as Felix Leiter. Lord wanted too much money, and Eon discovered that a replacement actor did no harm. So blame Jack Lord for the rotating hat of actors like Charles Gray.
Back to Blofeld. From the beginning, Broccoli & Saltzman had a vision of a continuing series with a continuing nemesis for Bond. SPECTRE is introduced late in the books—in Thunderball, the eighth of Fleming’s twelve novels. In the novels, Blofeld then returns for OHMSS and YOLT. But Eon wanted a thread of consistency, an overarching menace, and Blofeld fit the bill perfectly.
But menace can’t be introduced all at once, or it’s not menacing. Jacques Tourneur understood this in 1942, when he filmed Cat People without ever showing the titular monster. Now, I don’t have my reference materials in front of me, but I believe that it was Terence Young who put a cat in Blofeld’s lap, but it was the producers who decided that Blofeld’s face would not be seen. Undoubtedly, these film professionals were very familiar with a classic like Cat People, and understood that a tease is as important in creating fear as it is in creating arousal. To this day, many fans are disappointed by Donald Pleasance’s appearance in YOLT, and wished that Eon had sustained the mystery. However, by 1967, there was a huge fan outcry for Blofeld’s face to be revealed: Which is proof that the shadows had worked their magic.
September 7, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Would have been nice if EON could have waited to show Blofeld’s face until OHMSS instead of YOLT. That would have made Telly Savalas’s excellent portrayl of Blofeld so much more exciting and believable. By DAF the character of Blofeld is simply a cartoon.
September 7, 2007 at 2:43 pm
I absolutely despise Savalas’s performance. I know mine is a minority view, but to me, Blofeld is elegant, and Savalas is a gangster.
September 8, 2007 at 6:27 am
Donald Pleasance’s appearance in YOLT was hardly elegant either. How did the books portray Blofeld?
September 8, 2007 at 7:59 am
I thought Savalas was terrible also. Actually, Gray should have been Blofeld from the start. He fits Fleming’s description in the novel OHMSS.
September 8, 2007 at 8:12 am
Well, Blofeld had extensive plastic surgery in the books, so that his appearance was different in Thunderball and OHMSS. In Thunderball…
In OHMSS, he has lost a great deal of weight, his nose is hawklike, and of course he has no ear lobes.
September 8, 2007 at 1:04 pm
Yes you are right, he did have plastic surgery. I don’t remember Blofeld ever being bald, though, like they portray him in YOLT and OHMSS. If I am not mistaken he also has hair in OHMSS.
September 8, 2007 at 2:41 pm
Yes he does.
September 10, 2007 at 12:04 pm
So then who is your favorite Blofeld?
September 10, 2007 at 8:59 pm
Max von Sydow. I’m so sorry he was in such a bad movie, but NSNA’s true strength is its cast.
September 11, 2007 at 10:53 am
Okay I am getting a bit off topic, and maybe making myself seem a bit ignorant, but where do we stand in the cronological order of James Bond at the moment in relation to the films? I am a bit confused as to exactly when CR takes place and wondering, even though he was shoved down a smokestack in FYEO, if Blofeld could ever return for an more appropriate death? Never ever liked how Bond never truly got to avenge the death of his wife in true Bondian fashion as happened in the novel YOLT. Also, how does EON deal with the fact Bond has been around for nearly fifty years in film, but never ages?
September 11, 2007 at 1:31 pm
Another one that deserves a whole post, Zippertuck. I’m going to start writing it now!
September 12, 2007 at 2:39 pm
[...] Recent Comments Zippertuck on Happy Birthday Eric SerraDeborah Lipp on The Unseen BlofeldDeborah Lipp on Happy Birthday Eric SerraZippertuck on Happy Birthday Eric SerraZippertuck on The Unseen Blofeld [...]
September 15, 2007 at 9:37 pm
I hated casino Royal it left-out Q and Moneypenny )and if you don’t like those YOU ARE NOT A BOND FAN!!!). All the gagets and moneypenny’s little crush seperates the from outher spy movies. Also there was no JAMES BOND THEME that is the icieing on the cake that is what makes a Bond film a Bond film. It was also boring who wants to watch a poker mach for an HOUR. It had some action but not enough. Here is what makes a great bond film BOND THEME, GAGETS, Q, MONEPENNY, HIS, ATITUDE, HIS LOOK, ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE STUNTS, O AND DID A SAY THE JAMES BOND THEME. O and by the way the screewsd the crap out of the story line. Bond 22 better be better
September 16, 2007 at 3:46 am
Well, James Bond, you are entitled to your opinion, but most Bond fans loved CR. You are wrong to say that if you don’t love this or that, “you are not a Bond fan.” Bond fans have diverse opinions, and while we may disagree with one another, we should always respect one another’s sincere love of 007.
Finally, you are wrong that CR lacked the Bond theme. It was played at the very end.
September 18, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Man where did James Bond come from?!? A little touchy if you ask me. Has he obviously never seen Dr. No? No Q in that. Obviously James Bond has never read his namesake’s books. Compared to him I loved CR.