DorkyFresh said:i dunno what S.P.E.C.T.R.E. is...
TripXyDE said:oh, i LOVE S.P.E.C.T.R.E.!!!
but because the bond movies which had them were the old ones, the treatment was sort of done in an oldies obscure fashion. it would be interesting to see SPECTRE done in today's standards
i love the whole Machiavellian attitude of the organization & the way they call themselves (Number One, Number Two, hehehehe... i'm a blofeld bloke)

Geo7877 said:There is no reason why the new organization can't be called SPECTRE.
Bishop2 said:Actually, there's a very good reason why they can't be called SPECTRE -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPECTRE#Copyright_issues
 
	SUPERBENITEZ said:One things for sure though, I'd prefer Bond to have a nemesis that goes beyond just one movie. My main beef with the Brosnan era is that there were too many 'throwaway' villains.
Warhammer said:I'd rather see SMERSH or just new ideas from the writers.

Everyman said:Agreed. Sadly, they could have given Brosnan-Bond recurring nemesis, which would have given a sense of continuity to his movies.
 t:, and of course the ever obnoxious Jack Wade.
t:, and of course the ever obnoxious Jack Wade.  Maybe they should've had Jack Wade go evil, but I guess Bond already killed Joe Don Baker once before.
 Maybe they should've had Jack Wade go evil, but I guess Bond already killed Joe Don Baker once before.Threshold said:Even if it isn't the real S.P.E.C.T.R.E., it would be cool to see another story arch revolve around an organization like that. I think that's when Bond is at his most badass, when he's running around and they're sending jaws or other friggers after him!
 
				