SPECTRE - Press reviews and personal reviews (BEWARE! Spoiler reviews allowed)

13435373940100

Comments

  • edited October 2015 Posts: 11,425
    I enjoyed SP so am not here to slag it off. However, picking up on some of the things I found odd is quite interesting.

    One of these was why did the writers/Mendes have Bond make phone call midway through the car chase. It totally removed any sense of urgency and danger from that sequence. It's overlong and doesn't really add much.

    Another really odd thing is that we have too many villains and too many climactic scenes. C and Blofeld seems to be overdoing it. It's almost like two plots/ two movies rolled into one, with neither given enough space to breath. So although it's a long movie, you don't get very much in the way of plot or character development.

    And the two climactic confrontations - the desert base and the London sequence just detract from each other. The first feels a bit perfunctory, and the second almost redundant.

    Still, while these are weird elements I've come to expect from Purvis and Wade and Mendes, I thought this was a much better film than SF.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,584
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    I've tried to think of this as a stand alone movie, ie: no previous knowledge of Bond (Not easy as I've been watching the series for over 45 years). How would it have been reviewed if it was a stand alone movie, I think it would have gotten around 59% on rotten tomatoes instead of the current 76%. I think that far too many are cutting this film too much slack, it's got a couple of great bits, a few more good bits but a hell of a lot of medioctrity, end of term report, could do better.

    This has been the year of the spy film & so far IMHO there have been 2 films much better than SP, kingsman for one & MI Rougue Nation for two.

    Rubbish.

    Why don't you say what you really think, those who can't expand & resort to one word responses IMO have already lost the argument....

    Really? Not in this case I assure you. I thought your perspective on this matter was and is rubbish. Nothing more and nothing less.

    That's personal, I could attack your opinion by saying it's rubbish but I wouldn't, because it's below me, I would just say that you have that opinion, I disagree but you have the right to hold by it. Opinions can never be rubbish because everyone's view can be different & as such there are many angles, that's democracy & free speech old boy.

    Opinions can certainly be rubbish and in this case I and the good Doctor @doubleoego agree that yours fits the bill. Again, feel free to explain where the number 59 comes from.

    Add me to your swelling ranks old chap because I'm sorry SpectreNumberTwo but the assertion that Kingsman was a better film than SP is farcical.

    I'd bigged Vaughan up as a potential Bond director on the strength of the superb Kick Ass but repeating the same trick he did with that film but for the spy genre was beyond him.

    Kingsman had its moments but the car chase alone in SP encapsulated everything Kingsman tried to achieve with more class and panache.

    Yes I would admit to being a tad disappointed with SP but don't for one moment think anybody out there does it better than Bond. SP delivers all the spy genre clichés people expect and films like MI and Kingsman try to ape but it does them better and with more style. Non of the three films mentioned had stunning plots. The difference is when the story stutters SP is still a James Bond film at the end of the day and that counts for a hell of a lot when your name is merely Ethan Hunt or some chav scrote whose name eludes me.

    To me this illustrates the great problem with fan sites, I've probably been watching Bond longer than all of you, my first taste was a double bill in 1968 of FRWL & GF & I was hocked from then on, I've seen every single film on it's release since OHMSS (Still one of the best for a lot of fans), I read most of the flemming material during my time at school, because I love Bond it means I don't just accept every installment as the best thing since frozen pizza, I look at each one including novels with a critical eye, always insisting that they meet a high standard & if they don't I'm not robotic enough to accept sub-standard without comment, I believe that both MI & Kingsman were better paced & plotted which is an OPINION nothing more.
    After all the comments I've read this evening, I wonder if all you guys would think Bond was wonderful if it was a camp carry on movie, if you never question or criticise then you may as well be a robotic zombie. So to paraphrase Gerrad Butler in Olympus has fallen lets play a game of F**k Off, you go first.

    You liked Kingsmen more? In addition to questionable taste, you and maybe a couple of others seemed to have just joined this forum with the only intent to bash SPECTRE and insult long term forum members.

    Debate is fine and voicing opinion is fine... we won't all agree.

    But maybe a bit more forum decorum might be in order ;)

    Ok I will wade in here.

    This all erupted because @SpectreNumberTwo didn't rate the film as highly as other spy films released this year, which is his prerogative.

    Please everyone do not resort to insults. And if one member insists on dismissing another's opinion as 'rubbish' it's really like red rag to a bull and anyone would get upset.

    I'm sure @SpectreNumberTwo wants to enjoy the forum and get along with other members, and I'm sure our usual long standing members are more than willing to welcome him and his opinions.

  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    " Can't we all, just get along ? " :D
  • StrangwaysStrangways London, England
    Posts: 21
    I watched Spectre at the Picturehouse Central last night and I hugely enjoyed the film. I found it to be an improvement on the wonderfully atmospheric but utterly incoherent Skyfall.

    The retcon of the previous Craig continuity was very well done. Enough information was given to convince that Quantum was a part of (or predecessor to) Spectre but not too much information. The plot, in general, held together without any gaping plot holes (unlike CR and SF).

    The action scenes were generally well-done although only the train scene was a real standout. The opening sequence was good but the CGI in the helicopter fight scene was all too apparent on a big screen.

    The reveal of Blofeld in the opening Spectre meeting was very very good and I enjoyed Waltz's performance although I would have loved for him to have had a little more to do / say. The boyhood relationship between Bond and Blofeld seemed unnecessary - it wasn't nearly as naff as it could have been but it also didn't really go anywhere - they just knew each other briefly as boys and the relationship contributed to Blofeld's daddy issues. That whole strand of the story could have been dropped without damage.

    The relationship with Madeleine didn't have the depth it seemed to require.

    It was interesting that M introduced himself as "Mallory, 00 Section". I understand that MI5 and MI6 have now merged but that seems like quite a demotion.

    The final scene certainly feels like a swansong for Craig but we shall see - there is
  • Posts: 11,425
    Strangways wrote: »
    I watched Spectre at the Picturehouse Central last night and I hugely enjoyed the film. I found it to be an improvement on the wonderfully atmospheric but utterly incoherent Skyfall.

    The retcon of the previous Craig continuity was very well done. Enough information was given to convince that Quantum was a part of (or predecessor to) Spectre but not too much information. The plot, in general, held together without any gaping plot holes (unlike CR and SF).

    The action scenes were generally well-done although only the train scene was a real standout. The opening sequence was good but the CGI in the helicopter fight scene was all too apparent on a big screen.

    The reveal of Blofeld in the opening Spectre meeting was very very good and I enjoyed Waltz's performance although I would have loved for him to have had a little more to do / say. The boyhood relationship between Bond and Blofeld seemed unnecessary - it wasn't nearly as naff as it could have been but it also didn't really go anywhere - they just knew each other briefly as boys and the relationship contributed to Blofeld's daddy issues. That whole strand of the story could have been dropped without damage.

    The relationship with Madeleine didn't have the depth it seemed to require.

    It was interesting that M introduced himself as "Mallory, 00 Section". I understand that MI5 and MI6 have now merged but that seems like quite a demotion.

    The final scene certainly feels like a swansong for Craig but we shall see - there is

    I agree with all of this. Loved the train sequence and the brief reference to the title song.

    I would add that Ben Whishaw has transformed from one of the most annoying characters in the series to an excellent Q in the space of one movie. I loved the way they'd tweaked the character so he's not only a computer nerd but also handing proper hardware. And the part is much better written (and funnier) this time.

    I even thought Naomi Harris was better this time as well, although not sure she's particualrly good casting.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Agreed, I love Ben as Q.
  • Posts: 3,278
    Getafix wrote: »
    One of these was why did the writers/Mendes have Bond make phone call midway through the car chase.
    Same thing happened with the snowplane action setpiece, where it was intercut with Q in the skilift. Stuff like that works in Star Wars, but not in the Bond universe, IMO.
  • NicNac wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    I've tried to think of this as a stand alone movie, ie: no previous knowledge of Bond (Not easy as I've been watching the series for over 45 years). How would it have been reviewed if it was a stand alone movie, I think it would have gotten around 59% on rotten tomatoes instead of the current 76%. I think that far too many are cutting this film too much slack, it's got a couple of great bits, a few more good bits but a hell of a lot of medioctrity, end of term report, could do better.

    This has been the year of the spy film & so far IMHO there have been 2 films much better than SP, kingsman for one & MI Rougue Nation for two.

    Rubbish.

    Why don't you say what you really think, those who can't expand & resort to one word responses IMO have already lost the argument....

    Really? Not in this case I assure you. I thought your perspective on this matter was and is rubbish. Nothing more and nothing less.

    That's personal, I could attack your opinion by saying it's rubbish but I wouldn't, because it's below me, I would just say that you have that opinion, I disagree but you have the right to hold by it. Opinions can never be rubbish because everyone's view can be different & as such there are many angles, that's democracy & free speech old boy.

    Opinions can certainly be rubbish and in this case I and the good Doctor @doubleoego agree that yours fits the bill. Again, feel free to explain where the number 59 comes from.

    Add me to your swelling ranks old chap because I'm sorry SpectreNumberTwo but the assertion that Kingsman was a better film than SP is farcical.

    I'd bigged Vaughan up as a potential Bond director on the strength of the superb Kick Ass but repeating the same trick he did with that film but for the spy genre was beyond him.

    Kingsman had its moments but the car chase alone in SP encapsulated everything Kingsman tried to achieve with more class and panache.

    Yes I would admit to being a tad disappointed with SP but don't for one moment think anybody out there does it better than Bond. SP delivers all the spy genre clichés people expect and films like MI and Kingsman try to ape but it does them better and with more style. Non of the three films mentioned had stunning plots. The difference is when the story stutters SP is still a James Bond film at the end of the day and that counts for a hell of a lot when your name is merely Ethan Hunt or some chav scrote whose name eludes me.

    To me this illustrates the great problem with fan sites, I've probably been watching Bond longer than all of you, my first taste was a double bill in 1968 of FRWL & GF & I was hocked from then on, I've seen every single film on it's release since OHMSS (Still one of the best for a lot of fans), I read most of the flemming material during my time at school, because I love Bond it means I don't just accept every installment as the best thing since frozen pizza, I look at each one including novels with a critical eye, always insisting that they meet a high standard & if they don't I'm not robotic enough to accept sub-standard without comment, I believe that both MI & Kingsman were better paced & plotted which is an OPINION nothing more.
    After all the comments I've read this evening, I wonder if all you guys would think Bond was wonderful if it was a camp carry on movie, if you never question or criticise then you may as well be a robotic zombie. So to paraphrase Gerrad Butler in Olympus has fallen lets play a game of F**k Off, you go first.

    You liked Kingsmen more? In addition to questionable taste, you and maybe a couple of others seemed to have just joined this forum with the only intent to bash SPECTRE and insult long term forum members.

    Debate is fine and voicing opinion is fine... we won't all agree.

    But maybe a bit more forum decorum might be in order ;)

    Ok I will wade in here.

    This all erupted because @SpectreNumberTwo didn't rate the film as highly as other spy films released this year, which is his prerogative.

    Please everyone do not resort to insults. And if one member insists on dismissing another's opinion as 'rubbish' it's really like red rag to a bull and anyone would get upset.

    I'm sure @SpectreNumberTwo wants to enjoy the forum and get along with other members, and I'm sure our usual long standing members are more than willing to welcome him and his opinions.

    Thank You, NicNac.
  • Posts: 198
    I saw SPECTRE yesterday and I really enjoyed it! It has beautiful cinematography, a fabulous opening, great cast and lots of great humor! I thought there were a lot of highlights in the movie:

    - Opening sequence
    - Main Titles
    - Rome (tension in the meeting room, the car chase)
    - Meeting with Mr. White
    - Hoffner Klinik
    - Train fighting scene ("Shit!")
    - The scene in Marocco where Bond and Swann meet Oberhausen in the room with the meteorite, a very tense scene until Oberhausen after a silence gets back to business with Bond and Swann.
    - Ending

    I think this is definitely not Craig's last Bond movie.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    RC7 wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Spectre is good. My main issue is the fact that Bond falls in love so easily and doesn't seem to care about avenging Vesper anymore!

    He found his Solace. He takes a moment and tosses it aside. It's one of the best bits of the movie and directly feeds into his feelings for Swann.

    Ok, fair enough. However, how can he love Swann after a day or so???
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 198
    suavejmf wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Spectre is good. My main issue is the fact that Bond falls in love so easily and doesn't seem to care about avenging Vesper anymore!

    He found his Solace. He takes a moment and tosses it aside. It's one of the best bits of the movie and directly feeds into his feelings for Swann.

    Ok, fair enough. However, how can he love Swann after a day or so???

    Maybe because everything in his life is a bit of a rollercoaster? As he said before to Swann (in the train), he doesn't think too much about it (his life, his choices made).
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Muddyw wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Spectre is good. My main issue is the fact that Bond falls in love so easily and doesn't seem to care about avenging Vesper anymore!

    He found his Solace. He takes a moment and tosses it aside. It's one of the best bits of the movie and directly feeds into his feelings for Swann.

    Ok, fair enough. However, how can he love Swann after a day or so???

    Maybe because everything in his life is a bit of a rollercoaster? As he said before to Swann (in the train), he doesn't think too much about it (his life).

    Ok I'll take that point. But countering that, wouldn't that make him harder to 'reach' ala CR???
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 389
    For all the other's, let's please just agree to disagree, I'm not here to have a slanging match because I didn't think SP or SF were great. It also doesn't mean I have a downer on Daniel Craig's era, I just think these films could & should have been sharper scripted with a more coherent story & I'm one of those people who just wish they would get rid of the GF DB5, it belongs in the 60's, I loved CR, it's in my top five Bond film's.

    Which for you all are as follows in no particular order
    GF, FRWL, CR, TSWLM, OHMSS

    Because I'm dissappointed in SP doesn't mean I won't ever watch it again, I will but like SF maybe not until it's on blu-ray, I watch all the Bond film's at least once a year (Except DAD, one has to have limits :))). So you see I don't think SP & SF are that bad I just think they were not great.

    I was asked why I thought it was mediocre, there were many problems for me that would take pages to go through but as an example one of the biggest in SP that annoyed me was the Blofield/Oberhauser reveal,

    ESB -"I'm Ernst Stavro Blofield",
    JB - "Catchy Name" (something like that, sorry if not exactly what DC said)
    ESB - "Named after my mother's side of the family"

    Where did the Ernst Stavro bit come from, Blofield yes mothers maiden name, cool, but the first names, he just made them up, sorry but it's lame scripting.

    For me what was a brilliant & tense moment, I mean you'll never look at a dentist's chair the same, was spoilt because the producers thought let's keep this villans identity secret so the puplic will go OOOH, so spoil a great moment for the worst kept secret in Hollywood.

    So please cut ME some slack Guy's & Girl's, I was just really disappointed, which makes me sad.
  • Posts: 11,425
    suavejmf wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Spectre is good. My main issue is the fact that Bond falls in love so easily and doesn't seem to care about avenging Vesper anymore!

    He found his Solace. He takes a moment and tosses it aside. It's one of the best bits of the movie and directly feeds into his feelings for Swann.

    Ok, fair enough. However, how can he love Swann after a day or so???

    Good point. It seems clear to me that Bond cannot and should not fall for someone again in the same way as he did for Vesper. His heart is broken. His defences are up. He can still connect and care, but not sure he's going to fall in love.

    I would have liked to see a few scenes of Bond and Swann having more fun- a clearer indication of what it is that Bond sees in her and likes. She has to be a good time girl IMO - someone to lift his spirits and distract him from reality. That's why the interrogation on the train is a bit of wasted opportunity - it's okay but I think Bond would find her questioning annoying not attractive. Hell, the film was long enough to allow a lot more development of the characters, the romance etc., a la OHMSS.

    Any way, whatever the reason, the Bond-Swann thing feels a bit perfunctory and unconvincing or unexplained.
  • RC7RC7
    edited October 2015 Posts: 10,512
    suavejmf wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Spectre is good. My main issue is the fact that Bond falls in love so easily and doesn't seem to care about avenging Vesper anymore!

    He found his Solace. He takes a moment and tosses it aside. It's one of the best bits of the movie and directly feeds into his feelings for Swann.

    Ok, fair enough. However, how can he love Swann after a day or so???

    He never actually says he loves Swann. She says she loves him. It's an intense set of circumstances that finds two people together on a journey to apparent death. She's seemingly isolated and then this hero figure appears from nowhere to sweep her off her feet. What do people expect, a couple of cheeky Nando's and a few theatre trips before they jump in bed and then several months of dating before they eventually fall in love? Come on, it works perfectly in the circumstances, hence her saying she'll walk away when they return to London. The whole of Austria/Tangiers/Morocco are concerned with extenuating circumstances and their relationship is intensified because of it.
    Getafix wrote: »
    Good point. It seems clear to me that Bond cannot and should not fall for someone again in the same way as he did for Vesper. His heart is broken. His defences are up. He can still connect and care, but not sure he's going to fall in love.

    I would have liked to see a few scenes of Bond and Swann having more fun- a clearer indication of what it is that Bond sees in her and likes. She has to be a good time girl IMO - someone to lift his spirits and distract him from reality. That's why the interrogation on the train is a bit of wasted opportunity - it's okay but I think Bond would find her questioning annoying not attractive. Hell, the film was long enough to allow a lot more development of the characters, the romance etc., a la OHMSS.

    Any way, whatever the reason, the Bond-Swann thing feels a bit perfunctory and unconvincing or unexplained.

    Disagree, she works perfectly because she understands his life pretty acutely. She's a woman who has hit the bottom, she wants to escape and she knows he does too. She gives him that choice. She's not just a distraction, she's a viable partner.
  • RC7RC7
    edited October 2015 Posts: 10,512
    -
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,584
    We are calling this out as two people falling in love, but Is it ever made clear that Bond loves Swann?

    She walked away from him towards the end and he barely hesitated before carrying on with his mission, and only walked away with her after he rescued her and defeated ESB.

    Secondly she told him she loved him, but I never heard him say the same back (he may have done and I could've missed it). I don't think it's clear that they are especially in love. I think Bond feels a great deal of sympathy for her and is very attracted to her, but he doesn't feel about her as he did Vesper. He left the service, but that could have been for many reasons.

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    NicNac wrote: »
    We are calling this out as two people falling in love, but Is it ever made clear that Bond loves Swann?

    She walked away from him towards the end and he barely hesitated before carrying on with his mission, and only walked away with her after he rescued her and defeated ESB.

    Secondly she told him she loved him, but I never heard him say the same back (he may have done and I could've missed it). I don't think it's clear that they are especially in love. I think Bond feels a great deal of sympathy for her and is very attracted to her, but he doesn't feel about her as he did Vesper. He left the service, but that could have been for many reasons.

    Precisely. As I said above. I'm not sure everybody has actually watched this film properly. Maybe it takes a few viewings.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,584
    RC7 wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    We are calling this out as two people falling in love, but Is it ever made clear that Bond loves Swann?

    She walked away from him towards the end and he barely hesitated before carrying on with his mission, and only walked away with her after he rescued her and defeated ESB.

    Secondly she told him she loved him, but I never heard him say the same back (he may have done and I could've missed it). I don't think it's clear that they are especially in love. I think Bond feels a great deal of sympathy for her and is very attracted to her, but he doesn't feel about her as he did Vesper. He left the service, but that could have been for many reasons.

    Precisely. As I said above. I'm not sure everybody has actually watched this film properly. Maybe it takes a few viewings.

    Sorry @RC7 I wrote down my thoughts before reading your post, which basically said it all. :\">
  • I think the Swann/Bond relationship is based on Bond's word to her father, he likes her, cares for her, fancies her (Hot bod in that dress), but love? maybe, it wasn't really fleshed out enough for me & Lea Seydoux was woefully underused for such a good actress.
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 198
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Muddyw wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Spectre is good. My main issue is the fact that Bond falls in love so easily and doesn't seem to care about avenging Vesper anymore!

    He found his Solace. He takes a moment and tosses it aside. It's one of the best bits of the movie and directly feeds into his feelings for Swann.

    Ok, fair enough. However, how can he love Swann after a day or so???

    Maybe because everything in his life is a bit of a rollercoaster? As he said before to Swann (in the train), he doesn't think too much about it (his life).

    Ok I'll take that point. But countering that, wouldn't that make him harder to 'reach' ala CR???

    Only Swann told him he loves him, during the torture, I think driven to hopefully get Bond back. Bond did not return those words. At the end of the movie he just wants to give it a chance I think. MI6 and MI5 are a mess at that stage. So everything is unclear. Bond just completed his mission given by the previous M.

    And in the old movies after a completed mission Bond always ends up with the Bondgirl somewhere on (authorized or not) leave. So I don't overthink walking away with Swann too much.

    And didn't he found his solace after QoS? Also in SPECTRE we see him put an interrogation tape with Vesper away. So we might think he definitely closed that part of his life.
  • One thing I did like was her falling asleep drunk & JB sleeping in the chair, that was good, a proper gentleman, Connery's bond might have taken advantage of her, not the gentlemanly thing to do.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited October 2015 Posts: 9,117
    For all the other's, let's please just agree to disagree, I'm not here to have a slanging match because I didn't think SP or SF were great. It also doesn't mean I have a downer on Daniel Craig's era, I just think these films could & should have been sharper scripted with a more coherent story & I'm one of those people who just wish they would get rid of the GF DB5, it belongs in the 60's, I loved CR, it's in my top five Bond film's.

    Which for you all are as follows in no particular order
    GF, FRWL, CR, TSWLM, OHMSS

    Because I'm dissappointed in SP doesn't mean I won't ever watch it again, I will but like SF maybe not until it's on blu-ray, I watch all the Bond film's at least once a year (Except DAD, one has to have limits :))). So you see I don't think SP & SF are that bad I just think they were not great.

    I was asked why I thought it was mediocre, there were many problems for me that would take pages to go through but as an example one of the biggest in SP that annoyed me was the Blofield/Oberhauser reveal,

    ESB -"I'm Ernst Stavro Blofield",
    JB - "Catchy Name" (something like that, sorry if not exactly what DC said)
    ESB - "Named after my mother's side of the family"

    Where did the Ernst Stavro bit come from, Blofield yes mothers maiden name, cool, but the first names, he just made them up, sorry but it's lame scripting.

    For me what was a brilliant & tense moment, I mean you'll never look at a dentist's chair the same, was spoilt because the producers thought let's keep this villans identity secret so the puplic will go OOOH, so spoil a great moment for the worst kept secret in Hollywood.

    So please cut ME some slack Guy's & Girl's, I was just really disappointed, which makes me sad.

    I cant harbour a grudge with a bloke who speaks as much sense as you do in the paragraph I've put in bold. Agree 100%

    Yes I was disappointed with parts of SP as I expected it to be better - especially the writing - but it's still a very good Bond film. And even an average Bond film is better than most of the pretenders out there.

    I think we are probably kindred spirits old chap as I too strive for the perfection that keeps eluding EON despite it seemingly not being rocket science. They have so many of the right pieces in place but just keep coming up short.

    All that said Kingsman was a pile of bollocks and way more disappointing than SP so you haven't got a clue what you're talking about :)
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    For all the other's, let's please just agree to disagree, I'm not here to have a slanging match because I didn't think SP or SF were great. It also doesn't mean I have a downer on Daniel Craig's era, I just think these films could & should have been sharper scripted with a more coherent story & I'm one of those people who just wish they would get rid of the GF DB5, it belongs in the 60's, I loved CR, it's in my top five Bond film's.

    Which for you all are as follows in no particular order
    GF, FRWL, CR, TSWLM, OHMSS

    Because I'm dissappointed in SP doesn't mean I won't ever watch it again, I will but like SF maybe not until it's on blu-ray, I watch all the Bond film's at least once a year (Except DAD, one has to have limits :))). So you see I don't think SP & SF are that bad I just think they were not great.

    I was asked why I thought it was mediocre, there were many problems for me that would take pages to go through but as an example one of the biggest in SP that annoyed me was the Blofield/Oberhauser reveal,

    ESB -"I'm Ernst Stavro Blofield",
    JB - "Catchy Name" (something like that, sorry if not exactly what DC said)
    ESB - "Named after my mother's side of the family"

    Where did the Ernst Stavro bit come from, Blofield yes mothers maiden name, cool, but the first names, he just made them up, sorry but it's lame scripting.

    For me what was a brilliant & tense moment, I mean you'll never look at a dentist's chair the same, was spoilt because the producers thought let's keep this villans identity secret so the puplic will go OOOH, so spoil a great moment for the worst kept secret in Hollywood.

    So please cut ME some slack Guy's & Girl's, I was just really disappointed, which makes me sad.

    Slack given ..fresh start. Wish you had enjoyed but thanks for sharing.

  • edited October 2015 Posts: 389
    For all the other's, let's please just agree to disagree, I'm not here to have a slanging match because I didn't think SP or SF were great. It also doesn't mean I have a downer on Daniel Craig's era, I just think these films could & should have been sharper scripted with a more coherent story & I'm one of those people who just wish they would get rid of the GF DB5, it belongs in the 60's, I loved CR, it's in my top five Bond film's.

    Which for you all are as follows in no particular order
    GF, FRWL, CR, TSWLM, OHMSS

    Because I'm dissappointed in SP doesn't mean I won't ever watch it again, I will but like SF maybe not until it's on blu-ray, I watch all the Bond film's at least once a year (Except DAD, one has to have limits :))). So you see I don't think SP & SF are that bad I just think they were not great.

    I was asked why I thought it was mediocre, there were many problems for me that would take pages to go through but as an example one of the biggest in SP that annoyed me was the Blofield/Oberhauser reveal,

    ESB -"I'm Ernst Stavro Blofield",
    JB - "Catchy Name" (something like that, sorry if not exactly what DC said)
    ESB - "Named after my mother's side of the family"

    Where did the Ernst Stavro bit come from, Blofield yes mothers maiden name, cool, but the first names, he just made them up, sorry but it's lame scripting.

    For me what was a brilliant & tense moment, I mean you'll never look at a dentist's chair the same, was spoilt because the producers thought let's keep this villans identity secret so the puplic will go OOOH, so spoil a great moment for the worst kept secret in Hollywood.

    So please cut ME some slack Guy's & Girl's, I was just really disappointed, which makes me sad.

    I cant harbour a grudge with a bloke who speaks as much sense as you do in the paragraph I've put in bold. Agree 100%

    Yes I was disappointed with parts of SP as I expected it to be better - especially the writing - but it's still a very good Bond film. And even an average Bond film is better than most of the pretenders out there.

    I think we are probably kindred spirits old chap as I too strive for the perfection that keeps eluding EON despite it seemingly not being rocket science. They have so many of the right pieces in place but just keep coming up short.

    All that said Kingsman was a pile of bollocks and way more disappointing than SP so you haven't got a clue what you're talking about:)

    OK I liked Kingsman better, get over it :P, it was different & irrevarent, whilst also paying a certain homage to our favourite agent & made for a fraction of the SP budget IMO was better paced & written, but your point about average Bonds being better than most is also true, I mean compared to Man from UNCLE it's way better, maybe we could put our heads together a write EON that perfect script.
  • Posts: 203
    I don't understand this either! how hard can it be to put together a coherent script with a good story? it might be because so many writers are involved and there is no singular vision? why did Logan screw up so badly? if eon, sam and dan were working with him closely? I think CR benefited because of the story by Fleming? Maybe once they decide on the story and the hook(s), they should try to keep it intact? who would do a good bond story out of the writers out there? will the mad men scribe Matthew Weiner be able to pull it off for bond 25? I am asking cause I have not watched the mad men series. thanks
  • Posts: 4,617
    The more writers that have an input , the more mushy its gonna get, like the design of a car. (the Mini was not designed by a committee or a great painting, or indeed a spy novel etc), they need to find one talented writer, trust them and just let them get on with it.
    (Iv'e tweeted Gatiss to clear his diary )
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 203
    patb wrote: »
    The more writers that have an input , the more mushy its gonna get, like the design of a car. (the Mini was not designed by a committee or a great painting, or indeed a spy novel etc), they need to find one talented writer, trust them and just let them get on with it.
    (Iv'e tweeted Gatiss to clear his diary )

    @patb Gatiss? is that the guy who is writing the new SH series? If so, that would be good. He's SH stories are pretty solid. But then again, aren't they using ACDoyles stories as a starting block? I believe he was impressed with SP? could be wrong. what about Matthew Weiner? I thought EON has already commissioned him to write bond 25?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    patb wrote: »
    The more writers that have an input , the more mushy its gonna get, like the design of a car. (the Mini was not designed by a committee or a great painting, or indeed a spy novel etc), they need to find one talented writer, trust them and just let them get on with it.
    (Iv'e tweeted Gatiss to clear his diary )

    Not going to happen, unfortunately.
Sign In or Register to comment.