OHMSS questions

minigeffminigeff EnglandPosts: 7,884MI6 Agent
It's Sunday morning and I'm watching OHMSS.

However, a few things are puzzling me.

1) Is the blond climber another 00?

2) Why doesn't Blofeld recognise Bond?

3) Was the real Sir Hilary a double agent, as it was his misinformation about the ancestral home of the Bleuchamp family that raised doubts about 007's cover.
'Force feeding AJB humour and banter since 2009'
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org

Comments

  • BodieBodie Posts: 211MI6 Agent
    Number 3 has always puzzled me.

    1. Campbell is another MI6 agent. Never pointed out in the movie but in the novel he is number 2 Station Z Zurich.
    2. Blofeld not recognising Bond is just one of those things where you have to go with the flow and accept. It came about because they filmed the novels out of sequence. OHMSS comes before YOLT in the novels but the order is reversed in the movies. When they decided to film OHMSS close to the book they had to stick with Blofeld not having met Bond before. On the other hand it could be that Bond had become a master of desquise and has desquised himself as an Australian pretending to be an English baronet hoping to totally confuse the enemy.
    3. Has neve made any sense. One of the few bits of bad script writing in a great movie.

    Hope this helps.
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,802Chief of Staff
    Great answer from Bodie there...

    With Q2, you have the fact that Blofeld has changed too....maybe Eon wanted to carry on with Lazenby and his films as a seperate entity to the Connery films..?...seems logical if they thought that Lazenby would carry on...and perhaps Eon didn't think Bond would last this long, so didn't give it much thought...?...

    Q3 has always been the ONLY niggle I have with OHMSS....interesting idea that perhaps Sir Hilary could have been a double-agent...but why would SPECTRE need him...?...and IF he was, it would open up many more plot holes that it covers...I reckon it just one of those things that they got wrong and couldn't work out how to fix it and couldn't think of a better way for Blofeld to find out that Sir Hilary was Bond...or perhaps Blofeld just used that line (knowing it to be wrong) to see IF Bond would fall for it and give his cover away..?... :s
    YNWA 97
  • Dalkowski110Dalkowski110 Posts: 1,314MI6 Agent
    Believe it or not, the nitpicker typing this message actually never had a problem with point number three. Honestly, I always assumed Sir Hilary's info was wrong and Blofeld's was right.

    Since my father is an amateur genealogist and I actually know professional genealogists, I know that they're human and make mistakes. Not huge ones, else they'd not be able to keep their profession, but minor ones here and there. Otherwise, you'd not see genealogists out to disprove other genealogists. Also, sometimes, the amateur really IS right. I can cite an example of Dad logging onto ancestry.com and disproving the birthplace of one of my multi-times great grandfathers that had been restated by several genealogists. The professionals literally missed it due to an error in immigration records without checking said multi-times great grandfather's birth certificate!
    By the way, are you gonna eat that?
  • Sir Hillary BraySir Hillary Bray College of ArmsPosts: 2,174MI6 Agent
    I can only chalk it up to a mistake on Bray's part that Bond followed, not knowing any better. Who knows, maybe it was an error by Bray's assistant who had been doing all the detailed research on the De Bleuchamps. If you accept the discontinuity of Bond and Blofeld not knowing each other in the film, Blofeld would have no reason (other than general caution) to doubt that "Bray" was who he said he was, and would not instruct someone to give "Bray" false information in an attempt to smoke him out. I think Bond/Bray simply misstated a detail, and Blofeld became suspicious. I suspect that Sir Miles has it right -- this was simply a slight hole in the script that no one paid much attention to nor could figure out how to correct.
    Hilly...you old devil!
  • BIG TAMBIG TAM Wrexham, North Wales, UK.Posts: 773MI6 Agent
    Re. Q3. I always see Bond's blunder as an excuse for Blofeld to imprison Bond in a (relatively) easy to escape from situation & propel us & Bond into the last action-packed act. One could argue that by messing up so, it serves to humanise Lazenby's Bond even more. But I'd say it's more another convenient plot device to move things along. What happened in the book? I've never read it & would be interested to know.

    Even the best of the Bonds are full of plot holes if one scrutinises closely enough. I don't think plot logic is that high on the list of priorities with the Bond team.
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,471MI6 Agent
    The book is different, as Bond is never uncovered in Blofeld's presence, they never have a little chat with their guises down. It's more ominous in a way, because Bond sort of twigs or figures out his cover is blown and decides to preempt things under cover of darkness, ie make his get away from Piz Gloria skiing at night, as in the film. Later they figure out in a seasonal meeting with M what Blofeld is up to vis a vis germ warfare.
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • sinlumsinlum Posts: 223MI6 Agent

    I seem to be digging up a lot of old threads 😉


    Here's my two cents on the original questions raised:


    1) Is the blond climber another 00?

    It's never mentioned in the film who he really is. In the book yes, the film no.


    2) Why doesn't Blofeld recognise Bond?

    I mentioned this one in another thread. My view is basically both men are trying to pretend not to notice the other to outfox their rival. I found there were at least two other threads in these forums with users who shared my view as well.


    3) Was the real Sir Hilary a double agent, as it was his misinformation about the ancestral home of the Bleuchamp family that raised doubts about 007's cover.

    Definitely not. Bond makes the mistake.

    Sir Hilary Bray says to Bond in his office "You might try inviting him to Augsburg. The de Bleuchamps have been coming from there for generations". He never says anything about the tombs.

    Later Bond says to Blofeld when they meet "It would be very helpful if you could accompany me on a visit to Augsburg".

    Bond adds "The ancestral home of the de Bleuchamp family. There are notable de Bleuchamp tombs in the cathedral".

    It is Bond alone who mentions that the de Bleuchamp tombs are in the cathedral. Sir Hilary Bray never claimed that.

  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,471MI6 Agent

    Well, alright but point 3 slightly contradicts point 2 - there is no cover to be blown if the two already recognise one another.

    One mad aspect is the way Bond has his specs on so - like Clark Kent - he can appear to be a different person to his superman guise, but - d'oh! - takes them off the very first time he meets Blofeld anyway.

    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • emtiememtiem SurreyPosts: 5,965MI6 Agent

    1) Is the blond climber another 00?

    It's never mentioned in the film who he really is. In the book yes, the film no.

    Yeah, my theory which I mention a lot is that Campbell actually works for Draco rather than MI6: there's more evidence in the film to say the former than the latter!

  • sinlumsinlum Posts: 223MI6 Agent

    I would say that Bond possibly thinks he is getting away with Blofeld not recognising him immediately in the office. Bond was meant to look "Japanese" when Bond met Blofeld in YOLT so he possibly thinks that his facial appearance may look different enough to Blofeld in OHMSS.

    After Blofeld captures Bond, the fact that he mentions the mistake of the de Bleuchamp tombs I think is his way of pouring salt into Bond's wounds.

  • chrisno1chrisno1 LondonPosts: 3,614MI6 Agent

    1) Is the blond climber another 00?

    Tricky one. When I wrote a Fan Fiction of OHMSS, I created a bridging scene that tells the reader Campbell is specifically an MI6 agent. Not so in OHMSS, although the clues are ambiguous. Campbell is first seen helping Bond break into the safe; he is working on a Draco Construction site, the logo is clearly seen in the long shot of the building site. This would also explain why the safe cracker / photocopier is such a bulky device when Bond used a pocket device to open a safe in YOLT. If he had the pocket device, he would only need to photo the evidence; easily done no doubt. A large device such as this could easily be something dreamed up by Draco's brigade although exactly why they would need it is unclear.

    It isn't clear why Draco would send a man to watch Bond's movements. Tracy mentions that her father knew where Bond was, so Draco might have sent a man to follow him. Bond is obviously aware of who he is.

    However, Blofeld, during his confrontation with Bond, implies that Campbell is from MI6 as he suggests the agents who follow Bond may be as incompetent as Campbell.

    I always assumed Campbell was MI6 as that is how Fleming wrote it, but in the film it is not made explicitly clear and can be interpreted either way. Ultimately, it doesn't hurt the film because whichever line you take, the narrative still works.

    2) Why doesn't Blofeld recognise Bond?

    @sinlum point about YOLT was always my take on why Blofeld fails to recognise Bond immediately - especially as when Osato first meets Bond [as Mr Fisher] it is the identification of the Walther PPK that marks him as an imposter - there is no mention, not by Ostao or Helga Brandt, that he is Bond, they always call him Mr Fisher.

    Now, can someone confirm this for me: in the volcano control centre, does Osato recognise Bond from his features or his voice? If it is from his features, that ninja makeup was rubbish; if it was from his voice... well, now that makes the makeup rather good. Except, how did Blofeld know his prisoner was James Bond? Did they find a Walther PPK again? Do we see Blofeld checking it out?

    the issue makes no sense at all when looking back to FRWL where Spectre even had a 'double' of Bond as bait for Red Grant.

    Meanwhile, in TB, the Spectre agents seem as clueless as Osato.

    The failure of enemy agents to recognise Bond always causes me to doubt Roger Moore's assertion that the Bond character is unrealistic because everybody knows who he is and what he drinks. They do not. Only a few people do, those with genuine intel. It is Simon Templar aka The Saint who everybody recognises.

    The issue really does become a minefield and to be honest, it is best simply to forget about it. As I have often attested, these films were made at a time when there were no fan forums like this and before we could watch endless repeats on DVD etc. Continuity hiccups such as this were never much of a concern. Not so now, so it is strange there are still so many unironed issues in modern films.

    3) Was the real Sir Hilary a double agent, as it was his misinformation about the ancestral home of the Bleuchamp family that raised doubts about 007's cover.

    @sinlum point above is correct

Sign In or Register to comment.