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

14344464849100

Comments

  • There has already been a female spy in Bond (quite a few in fact) so nothing new there.

    It's people saying they want things included because it's the 'next step' that bothers me.

    You begun this by saying you assumed the character of Q was gay, for no reason other than that the actor is gay. I would venture that you didn't assume so much as you hoped he was gay.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    Way off topic guys with your dispute. Take it private and sort it out.
  • Posts: 342
    He's not the same Q as Desmond, so he can be a bit more contemporary
    and anything that keeps Bond relevant, in my opinion is a good thing.
    The days of an all white, all straight service have gone. ;)
    This isn't something I'm fighting for, I merely assumed that the new Q was gay.

    Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the Service would know that gay spies were commonplace in the middle of the 20th century. Indeed, it was somewhat of a standing joke, to the extent that a gay Bond would almost have been a cliche - perhaps that is partially why Bond is so alpha-heterosexual
  • RC7RC7
    edited November 2015 Posts: 10,512
    There has already been a female spy in Bond (quite a few in fact) so nothing new there.

    It's people saying they want things included because it's the 'next step' that bothers me.

    You begun this by saying you assumed the character of Q was gay, for no reason other than that the actor is gay. I would venture that you didn't assume so much as you hoped he was gay.

    Well, you'd be wrong. But then you have been about a lot of things, so perhaps we should leave it there. I'm not here to oppose your shaky viewpoints, just to offer my own.

    For the record, the fact that what I said has courted such opposition says more than I ever could. Adieu.
  • An assumption conjured out of absolutely nothing then, unless Ben Wishaw only plays gay characters.

    I agree to leave it there and let the jury ponder on that.
  • Posts: 3,278
    Third viewing today. This time without any anxiety. I am puzzled why it keeps dropping on RottenTomatoes and IMDB, since I think it's a huge step up, compared to the overpraised plothole-ridden Skyfall. Was it Craig's vulnerability in SF that made it? Because SP luckily has none of that!
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Third viewing today. This time without any anxiety. I am puzzled why it keeps dropping on RottenTomatoes and IMDB, since I think it's a huge step up, compared to the overpraised plothole-ridden Skyfall. Was it Craig's vulnerability in SF that made it? Because SP luckily has none of that!

    Yes, it seems some people don't want to see Bond actually being untouchably cool. I bloody love it. This is a different take from Craig, but not one that is a leap. It makes sense off the back of three films in which he's been psychologically battered and bruised. You can see in the opening 'M' scene, he seems totally at one with himself, care-free and focussed. Like a weight has been lifted. He's in control. It's a joy to watch.
  • RC7 wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Third viewing today. This time without any anxiety. I am puzzled why it keeps dropping on RottenTomatoes and IMDB, since I think it's a huge step up, compared to the overpraised plothole-ridden Skyfall. Was it Craig's vulnerability in SF that made it? Because SP luckily has none of that!

    Yes, it seems some people don't want to see Bond actually being untouchably cool. I bloody love it. This is a different take from Craig, but not one that is a leap. It makes sense off the back of three films in which he's been psychologically battered and bruised. You can see in the opening 'M' scene, he seems totally at one with himself, care-free and focussed. Like a weight has been lifted. He's in control. It's a joy to watch.

    Slightly reminiscent of the old Sean Connery & Bernard Lee moments.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Third viewing today. This time without any anxiety. I am puzzled why it keeps dropping on RottenTomatoes and IMDB, since I think it's a huge step up, compared to the overpraised plothole-ridden Skyfall. Was it Craig's vulnerability in SF that made it? Because SP luckily has none of that!

    Yes, it seems some people don't want to see Bond actually being untouchably cool. I bloody love it. This is a different take from Craig, but not one that is a leap. It makes sense off the back of three films in which he's been psychologically battered and bruised. You can see in the opening 'M' scene, he seems totally at one with himself, care-free and focussed. Like a weight has been lifted. He's in control. It's a joy to watch.

    Slightly reminiscent of the old Sean Connery & Bernard Lee moments.

    Precisely.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Darius wrote: »
    This, in my opinion, is really what makes the "I love you" line in the later torture scene a real cringer, if ever there were one. Goodness me, it even outdoes "Yo momma" from DAD, and that's a huge admission because I believe that DAD is a rightly vilified movie.

    Jesus. Youve gone too far now surely mate!!
  • Posts: 4,622
    @timmer, would you please make me a list of all these films, that show in the 50s Female, black and gay intelligence officers ? I'd love to see them.
    I wonder why the press made such a big fuss over a female M etc, when apparently spy films have always been full of strong female, black and gay characters. ;)
    You mentioned the days of an all white all straight service as being gone.
    I simply suggested such days probably never existed.
    As for films, Bond did arbitrarily cast Charles Gray as an obviously gay Henderson in YOLT circa 1967. Flemings Dikko Henderson was anything but.
    Maybe EON was trying to reflect the presence of loyal gay men in the service, as opposed to the traitorous activities of the Cambridge gang of Burgess Blunt, homintern activities etc exposed in the Philby affair.
    Or maybe Cubby and Saltz just had a hankering to cast the talents of Gray, who of course was invited back for a much bigger role, 4 years later.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Did you manage to grab the straw @Timmer. I can't see from here.
  • Posts: 7,531
    Well ,went last night for only my second viewing. Still think its bloody brilliant, and it seemed much shorter. I have to apologise to what I said about Thomas Newman, his score is much better than I thought, particularly the action cues in the helicopter fight, Rome car chase. And that fight on the train is fantastic. Really wish they could of used that at the end, like the way they used to, just as you thought the film was over, the henchman coming back at Bond! On that note, SP only flaw I can see is the finale in London. Still a bit of a let down, although its extremely well done, and give me Ralph Fiennes M loading his gun side by side with Bond than that silly bomb making nonsense with Judi Denchs M at the end of SF.
    It will be next week before I see again, but I think I can safely say that SP is going to be high on my list of favourite Bond movies.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I never thought Henderson was gay in YOLT, I guess we all see what we want to
    see ;) ( I am joking ) but I never thought Henderson was gay. His line about getting things from the doorman at the Russian embassy, meant information.
    Obviously I could be wrong,but I never got that impression.
  • Charles Gray was gay so according to @RC7 we can assume Henderson is also gay.
  • RC7RC7
    edited November 2015 Posts: 10,512
    Charles Gray was gay so according to @RC7 we can assume Henderson is also gay.

    You make no sense in the online world, so it's to be assumed you don't in the real world either.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I don't think @RC7 ever made that connection, you may be reading too much
    into it. ;)
  • Oh come on, lighten up guys.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Oh come on, lighten up guys.

    Naomi Harris is black in real life and on film. True fact.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 562
    @RC7 Really, you want to go back there? No problem with Naomi Harris, attractive girl.
  • RC7RC7
    edited November 2015 Posts: 10,512
    @RC7 Really, you want to go back there? No problem with Naomi Harris, attractive girl.

    I don't want to go anywhere. Just saying some people bring a little of themselves to roles, whether that's aesthetic or emotive.
  • Posts: 486
    I never thought Henderson was gay in YOLT, I guess we all see what we want to
    see ;) ( I am joking ) but I never thought Henderson was gay. His line about getting things from the doorman at the Russian embassy, meant information.
    Obviously I could be wrong,but I never got that impression.

    I think it can often be wrong to attach an actor's sexuality to a role they're playing but the "...amongst certain other things..." from Henderson sounds like scripted innuendo to me. Always raises a smile anyway.
  • Posts: 486
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Well ,went last night for only my second viewing. Still think its bloody brilliant, and it seemed much shorter. I have to apologise to what I said about Thomas Newman, his score is much better than I thought, particularly the action cues in the helicopter fight, Rome car chase.

    I had thought Backfire was quite tuneless when first debuted on Classic FM but it's a favourite on the soundtrack now. A half decent action theme from Newman for once!
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 4,622
    Actually I find myself relating with all of the main posters chiming in here.

    @rc7 yes a scene of Whishaw rolling over to find a man in his bed, could be interpreted as simply a nod. Benign. Just playing with the character a bit.
    In fact the scenario would be almost identical to what Eon did with Gray in YOLT. Eon created a gay Henderson.
    And the character was 100% gay IMO. Not only Gray's depiction of the character screams gay, but the doorman line ("among other things") all but cements it.
    At the very least, Eon is inviting us to interpret this character as gay, without hitting one over the head with it.
    The motivation I believe, had everything to do with Gray being able to convincingly pull this character off. The fact that Gray is gay ( which I actually didn't know till now - not being up on my Charles Gray lifestory details, beyond the 2 Bond films that he did)
    I'm sure Gray being gay did spark the idea. A decision was made to dispense with Fleming's Aussie Dikko Henderson, probably because he was such an OTT character, that might have distractred from Connery's Bond alpha dominance.
    Having Gray play to type seems like an obvous consideration too.
    Could have even been Gray's idea. Gray brought a gay touch to Blofeld too, 4 years later. I say touch, as Blofelds sexuality in DAF was somewhat ambiguous, as Ernst also did take notice of Tiffany's cheeks.
    So if Whishaw were to roll over in bed to a man, a la Dench-M in GE, I do think it could be interpreted as simply a nod. The fact that Whishaw is gay, is what would probably spark the idea, BUT this is hypothetcial. Eon has not actually gone down this road, so there is actually nothing to discuss.
    We don't know anything about new Q's personal life and that's probably a good thing.
    The main focus should always be on the stridently hetero Bond and his relentless pursuit of Bond Girl-kind.
    Mind you pc types would try to use such a hypothetical Q scenario to advance their broader social/political agenda. And I do make the distinction between PC and liberal.
    PC have a social/political agenda. Liberals are just well, liberal, in their outlook.
    So @scaramanga 's concerns are valid concerning possible motivations for such a scenario, but the scenario, ipso facto, does not have to be agenda motivated.
    It could be quite benign, BUT again it hasn't happened, so there really is nothing to discuss.

    As for gays in the secret service,as @Troy pointed out it was almost a cliche.
    Fleming's portrayal of Bond as alpha-hetero was almost playing against type.
    Fleming's Bond is very much fantasy, in that he is a manifestation of Fleming's idealized alpha version of himself, which is whyBond is so much fun. Audiences relate to this uber-hetero alpha-male fantasy, even if one is not remotely like Bond in real life.
    He's just a very relatable character. We can live vicariously.
    Fleming though does a good job of making the character seem real. He makes attempts to ground the character too.
    Contrast with Le Carre ( who like Fleming, also has serious real-life secret service credentials). Le Carre's spy world has no problem accomodating Blunt and Burgess types characters.
    I prefer Fleming obviously, but I've read several Le Carre's too. You don't find many James Bond like characters in his books.

    As for a female 00. Faulks actually created one in his his Devil May Care book. A featured character in the book, even if the reveal came late.
    Even in the films Jinx and Wai Lin were of 00 type, at least in terms of abilities.
    Agent XXX was bs though. She was about as dangerous as Dolly, one movie later.
  • Posts: 1,068
    Did MP ever shoot / kill anybody or was just working alongside a double 0 agent before actually taking out friendly agents and then becoming desk bound? Haven't dwelled all that much on my visits to SF.
  • Charles Grey was gay himself, that's a given and as so, which some have already commented on, an actor who couldn't help but bring some of his personality to the role he played, which to most hetero males did bring out their gaydar. However IMHO he brought a certain gravitas to both roles he played in the Bond franchise, a proper lovey a la Ian Mckellan, but does it make it wrong or bad, no, so God rest his soul and thanks for making a childhood memory of the campist most fun Blofield in the series.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    timmer wrote: »
    Mind you pc types would try to use such a hypothetical Q scenario to advance their broader social/political agenda. And I do make the distinction between PC and liberal.
    PC have a social/political agenda. Liberals are just well, liberal, in their outlook.
    So @scaramanga 's concerns are valid concerning possible motivations for such a scenario, but the scenario, ipso facto, does not have to be agenda motivated.
    It could be quite benign, BUT again it hasn't happened, so there really is nothing to discuss.

    Absolutely. Thankfully, I believe that pretty much 99.9% of the people on this board aren't pushing a political agenda (from either side). I think this is where @Scaramanga2 got confused, as he was accusatory in his assumptions. I never accused him of anything. As you say, it's all hypothetical anyway and I wish I hadn't made the comment as I didn't realise it would rile people in quite the way it did.
  • Posts: 486
    Charles Grey was gay himself, that's a given and as so, which some have already commented on, an actor who couldn't help but bring some of his personality to the role he played, which to most hetero males did bring out their gaydar. However IMHO he brought a certain gravitas to both roles he played in the Bond franchise, a proper lovey a la Ian Mckellan, but does it make it wrong or bad, no, so God rest his soul and thanks for making a childhood memory of the campist most fun Blofield in the series.

    Charles Gray was terrific and his Blofeld was probably a camper character than others he's played where he is usually a cad or a toff.

    Even when he delivers the line "Such nice cheeks too, if only they were brains" it's done with a sense of detachment from sexual luring.

    For what it's worth I just think some of Q's lines and behaviour are funnier and more resonant if you regard him as Gay. We're also free to make that interpretation as there is nothing to the contrary. I smile at the "I really really hate you right now" line as to anyone eavesdropping they'd think it was a bickering Gay couple rather than a 00 agent and his Quartermaster.
  • DariusDarius UK
    edited November 2015 Posts: 354
    patb wrote: »
    Sir Hillary's wife was sorted all this (have you read about her plot for the next Bond) I agree with all your observations and the only way to sort them is to view them in a different light/context. Was Swann falling in love or seducing Bond for later exploitation? All of your observations are based on the assumption that she is genuine in her feelings for Bond. The "I love you" line could take on a whole different dimension if we go down the genius route of Sir Hillary's wifes concept.

    Yes, I have read Sir Hillary's wife's treatment, and you're right -- viewed in this context, the relationship between Bond and Swann makes more sense. The trouble is, we only have the context of what we see in the movie right now and if the producers are planning to contextualise this along the lines of Sir Hilary's wife's outline in the next movie, then they are leaving us with a rather limp and languid relationship in the inevitable three year gap that ensues between SP and Bond 25.

    Maybe @SirHilaryBray should tweet his wife's phone number to MGW and BB.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 4,622
    Charles Grey was gay himself, that's a given and as so, which some have already commented on, an actor who couldn't help but bring some of his personality to the role he played, which to most hetero males did bring out their gaydar. However IMHO he brought a certain gravitas to both roles he played in the Bond franchise, a proper lovey a la Ian Mckellan, but does it make it wrong or bad, no, so God rest his soul and thanks for making a childhood memory of the campist most fun Blofield in the series.
    Yes, Gray as Henderson was awesome. He commands the entire scene with Connery.
    Sean basically plays foil to Gray's performance. I first saw the movie when I was 12, so Henderson being gay didn't even register then.
    I can see why Eon brought him back to play Ernst. He's a really smooth actor.
    He is my favourite Blofeld. He actually kind of resembles Fleming's Blofled circa YOLT - a big man with square jaw - but with more personality and not as crazed. Gray brought a more sophisticated civilized level of derangement.
    I'd like to see some other Gray films. Does he always play camp. Even Henderson was somewhat camp.
    The gayest character, at least flamboyant wise, in DAF was Glover as Wint,but he wasn't playing to type. Good acting job. A couple of years later he played a solid no-nonsense, very straight deputy to Joe Don Bakers Buford Pusser in Walking Tall.

    Two more sleeps till SP in IMAX. I know in advance I will very much like this film. I've known since reading the Dec draft, and member reviews only reinforce, especially from those who also read the Dec draft.

    I do think the Bond Swann love angle is there because the writers have all along been toying with brazen OHMSS parallels.
    It seems that ultimately they toned this element down. Most notably Bond's "We have all the time in the world" line to Swann at end of movie being dropped.
    The Bond-Swann romance thus may not be quite convincing, as the filmmakers never quite committed to what they were doing with it, in both the present and going forward.
    Still I think there is potential for an OHMSS/YOLT continuation scenario in Bond25 if Eon choose to go that route.
    I'll have a better personal sense of that, when I actually see the story brought to life.

Sign In or Register to comment.