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

17172747677100

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,960
    I originally planned on seeing it three to five times this past weekend, but only managed to catch it on Thursday. I think I'll see it once or twice next weekend and a few times over my Thanksgiving Break, if the opportunity presents itself.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Spectre is a decent Bond movie but I'm still waiting for the writers and director who can make it both classic Bond and original.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Getafix wrote: »
    Spectre is a decent Bond movie
    Decent? Decent?
    You are off my Christmas Card list, man.
    :-\"
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 11,425
    I'm trying to be generous.
  • cmacy007 wrote: »
    The BOTTOM LINE... I came to the film with the wrong expectations. Now that I've seen it 5 times. I absolutely love the things they got right, and just like Bond says, It's a matter of perspective!! Think back across 50 years. There's plenty of little screw ups, missing details, and rather lame parts of lots of the films...maybe folks forget the Tarzan yell, the awful CGI wave of DAD, way too many satellites and diamonds, etc.. I think us true Bond fans just get over it, and love every film. We do have to wait years for each one.... no sense in hating them. The cinematography and scenery alone in this film take you to a special place and every part of the film that takes you back in time to another Bond moment that made some of us fans to begin with is truly touching.
    Everything up to the third act (with exception to Batista's "SHOOT") was truly remarkable. After that, yeah.. fire the writers, but love BOND and love SPECTRE!

    Nope, I don't love every film, I even abhor one of them. I don't think it makes me less of a fan to want a quality film for one of my favorite franchises. That's the place where my criticism, and the criticism of many fans, comes from.
  • tqbtqb
    Posts: 1,022
    I really enjoyed the movie, it's not perfect of course. But i really don't understand some of the harsh criticism.
  • Posts: 11,425
    lalala2004 wrote: »
    cmacy007 wrote: »
    The BOTTOM LINE... I came to the film with the wrong expectations. Now that I've seen it 5 times. I absolutely love the things they got right, and just like Bond says, It's a matter of perspective!! Think back across 50 years. There's plenty of little screw ups, missing details, and rather lame parts of lots of the films...maybe folks forget the Tarzan yell, the awful CGI wave of DAD, way too many satellites and diamonds, etc.. I think us true Bond fans just get over it, and love every film. We do have to wait years for each one.... no sense in hating them. The cinematography and scenery alone in this film take you to a special place and every part of the film that takes you back in time to another Bond moment that made some of us fans to begin with is truly touching.
    Everything up to the third act (with exception to Batista's "SHOOT") was truly remarkable. After that, yeah.. fire the writers, but love BOND and love SPECTRE!

    Nope, I don't love every film, I even abhor one of them. I don't think it makes me less of a fan to want a quality film for one of my favorite franchises. That's the place where my criticism, and the criticism of many fans, comes from.

    Totally agree with you. I am always reassured when I hear someone say they hate one of the films.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    lalala2004 wrote: »

    Nope, I don't love every film, I even abhor one of them. I don't think it makes me less of a fan to want a quality film for one of my favorite franchises. That's the place where my criticism, and the criticism of many fans, comes from.
    Hey I was no fan of SF, but I love SP.... it's all good, all the time.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 1,009
    tqb wrote: »
    I really enjoyed the movie, it's not perfect of course. But i really don't understand some of the harsh criticism.

    I loved it, but I think I understand many of the criticisms: it's going back to the original formula, with both its virtues and faults.

    What I don't understand is why this has taken so many people by surprise: I remember reading that during pre-production Sam Mendes stated he was taking the film to a more formulaic and funny-ha-ha approach.
  • Posts: 11,425
    chrisisall wrote: »
    lalala2004 wrote: »

    Nope, I don't love every film, I even abhor one of them. I don't think it makes me less of a fan to want a quality film for one of my favorite franchises. That's the place where my criticism, and the criticism of many fans, comes from.
    Hey I was no fan of SF, but I love SP.... it's all good, all the time.

    SP is a step up from SF definitely.
  • chrisisall wrote: »
    lalala2004 wrote: »

    Nope, I don't love every film, I even abhor one of them. I don't think it makes me less of a fan to want a quality film for one of my favorite franchises. That's the place where my criticism, and the criticism of many fans, comes from.
    Hey I was no fan of SF, but I love SP.... it's all good, all the time.

    I actually like them all for one reason or another, but I'm still guessing what makes a person think that abhorring even four or five films in such a huge franchise makes them less of a fan. I think it goes to show that Lalala has his/her standards, and this is great.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Lalala?

  • AceHole wrote: »

    Call me a brazen old traditionalist - but other than Blades (if they ever get around to it) I'd prefer if M was a good boy and stayed put in central London, without getting mixed up in the finale, thank you very much. Same goes for blee**** Moneypenny.

    Same for me. If it works in terms of the plot (like if Bond goes to a club with M or plays golf with Tanner), then fine. Otherwise keep them inside MI6 - this isn't Mission Impossible.

  • Posts: 11,425
    I agree.

    TLD was the last classic Bond movie
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Getafix wrote: »
    I agree.

    TLD was the last classic Bond movie
    I'd say LTK, but we're so close here I won't argue.
  • I'd lump TLD, LTK, GE and CR into the 'classic Bond' conversation. They're all decidedly different films, but they do so many different things so well. I've never really bought into the notion that 'classic Bond' has to have this element, or that element.

    I've also never been of the mind set that CR broke the mold for a Bond film - just that it did things well that we hadn't seen in so long - or did things that fit Fleming's version of the character that we hadn't seen on screen before. People seem to look at CR as if it's totally devoid of all humor and fun and I don't think anything could be farther from the truth.

    And with GE, I think every film that tries to go over the top with it's plot should look at GE as a reference point. The plot involves shooting an EMP from a satellite and sending England back to the stone age. Yet it all works because they're able to humanize the conflict between the characters in the film (similar to how I feel like a larger than life plot in TB works so well). Bond and the Bond girl have legitimate chemistry, there's a true distaste between Bond & the villain, and no one really feels totally superfluous to the plot.

    Then there's TLD & LTK which are the two most underrated films of the entire series. A shame Dalton didn't get at least one (or 3) more films.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Birdleson wrote: »
    With SKYFALL I think we saw Daniel's Bond go as far in that direction as he is capable of and still make it work.
    I respectfully disagree. Every smirk & smile was well played IMHO.
    No Bond (or any other movie he's been in) has ever seen him been more engaging or entertaining.
  • chrisisall wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I agree.

    TLD was the last classic Bond movie
    I'd say LTK, but we're so close here I won't argue.

    Curious. Like Getafix, I find that LTK was the first great departure from the Bond formula; however, reducing the movie to its bare bones, it still respects it! Maybe that's why it's my favorite movie OF ALL TIME, not counting the main reason: IMHO it's a glorified and very inspired Cannon Films-like flick.

    I dunno if you guys made it here, but I have a personal... Let's call it... "Bond Cycle": The trendy Bond, formed by the movies that tried to cash in the current cinema trends:

    LALD: Blaxplotation
    TMWTTG: Martial arts films
    MR: Star Wars Craze
    LTK: Cannon Films-type super-macho action flicks
    QOS: Bourne series

    Many times I think on adding OHMSS and its faux experimental feel and the lysergic orgy that is DAF.


  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I consider the entire Brosnan Era was a response to the action hero craze.
    I agree.
    But in a good way.
    All Bond eras have their positives.
  • chrisisall wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I consider the entire Brosnan Era was a response to the action hero craze.
    I agree.
    But in a good way.
    All Bond eras have their positives.

    But of course they do!
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    Nothing wrong with hating one or more of the films.
    I certainly have a very strong dislike (hate is perhaps too strong a term) for one or two of the films and would switch the channel if they are being shown on tv. ‘Love’ is reserved for the likes for FRWL, FYEO, TLD and CR. Doesn’t mean they are the best in my mind, but it does mean I am most fond of these ones, for sometimes unquantifiable reasons.

    I don't quite love SP - it does too many stupid things like M, Q and MP fannying about in the subplot too much & it‘s too sparsely directed - but I did enjoy it very much and would put it far above the dour, plodding melodrama that is SF in any ranking.
  • imranbecks wrote: »
    22922394631_0075992c8a_c.jpg

    @imranbecks you are in Singapore right? Just curious how enthusiastic the Bond fans are in SG.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 384
    LALD: Blaxplotation
    TMWTTG: Martial arts films
    MR: Star Wars Craze
    OCTOPUSSY: Indiana Jones
    LTK: Cannon Films-type super-macho action flicks
    GE: Post Die Hard style
    TND: Trying to top True Lies mixed with HK action mania (10 years too late)
    QOS: Bourne 3 (film that happens within, or a few mn after the one before)
    SF : TDK
    SP: DKR
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Stamper wrote: »
    SP: DKR

    I don't get this comparison.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    RC7 wrote: »
    Stamper wrote: »
    SP: DKR

    I don't get this comparison.

    More of a Star Trek into darkness kind of vibe, methinks...
  • Posts: 11,425
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I agree.

    TLD was the last classic Bond movie
    I'd say LTK, but we're so close here I won't argue.

    Curious. Like Getafix, I find that LTK was the first great departure from the Bond formula; however, reducing the movie to its bare bones, it still respects it! Maybe that's why it's my favorite movie OF ALL TIME, not counting the main reason: IMHO it's a glorified and very inspired Cannon Films-like flick.

    I dunno if you guys made it here, but I have a personal... Let's call it... "Bond Cycle": The trendy Bond, formed by the movies that tried to cash in the current cinema trends:

    LALD: Blaxplotation
    TMWTTG: Martial arts films
    MR: Star Wars Craze
    LTK: Cannon Films-type super-macho action flicks
    QOS: Bourne series

    Many times I think on adding OHMSS and its faux experimental feel and the lysergic orgy that is DAF.


    Yes, it's one of the reasons I sometimes feel a bit ambiguous about LTK. With hindsight it's the first film to have the 'Bond goes rogue' storyline that now seems to be the basis of almost every film. It made me feel uncomfortable when I first saw it. It's like they've forgotten he's supposed to be an MI6 agent and not a superhero/action figure.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    Getafix wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I agree.

    TLD was the last classic Bond movie
    I'd say LTK, but we're so close here I won't argue.

    Curious. Like Getafix, I find that LTK was the first great departure from the Bond formula; however, reducing the movie to its bare bones, it still respects it! Maybe that's why it's my favorite movie OF ALL TIME, not counting the main reason: IMHO it's a glorified and very inspired Cannon Films-like flick.

    I dunno if you guys made it here, but I have a personal... Let's call it... "Bond Cycle": The trendy Bond, formed by the movies that tried to cash in the current cinema trends:

    LALD: Blaxplotation
    TMWTTG: Martial arts films
    MR: Star Wars Craze
    LTK: Cannon Films-type super-macho action flicks
    QOS: Bourne series

    Many times I think on adding OHMSS and its faux experimental feel and the lysergic orgy that is DAF.


    Yes, it's one of the reasons I sometimes feel a bit ambiguous about LTK. With hindsight it's the first film to have the 'Bond goes rogue' storyline that now seems to be the basis of almost every film. It made me feel uncomfortable when I first saw it. It's like they've forgotten he's supposed to be an MI6 agent and not a superhero/action figure.

    EoN really need to buck this trend for the next one. It's growing tiresome.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    The most uncomfortable element of SP for me (apart from the Blofeld shoehorn angle) was DC channeling late era Connery/Moore in some places. It didn't work so well for me.

    There was plenty of humour in CR pre-Vesper death (I'm not sure why people tend to forget this) but it was early Connery (DN/FRWL) style humour and it worked for DC's portrayal. Moreover, his seduction of Solange suited his characterisation - it felt natural. In SF, he didn't channel anything, but rather, gave us DC's own brand of sarcastic wit (museum Q intro).

    In SP, I find he is attempting to channel later era (TSWLM+) Roger Moore humour in particular in some places, and as Pierce Brosnan found out (to his detriment) this is not a place you should really go. Nobody does that like Moore (it's natural to him). That's why I found the Lucia seduction a little creepy....and not smooth. I think a lot of folks are feeling this way, hence the negative comparisons to Moore's era in some of the reviews (if you don't do this well then it doesn't come off well).

    When he's doing the DC thing (which he does with the Q interactions) in SP, it works perfectly though.

    This is why I think Mendes just doesn't quite get how to do this properly (there is an 'inserted' rather than an 'organic' appearance to some of his tropes and callbacks.....both in this film and in SF, which remind me uncomfortably of Apted/Tamahori). I realize it's tricky, but he's not up to it. Even Forster did the callbacks better in QoS (including the oil drenched Fields, which was just a quick cut anyway). Campbell knows how to do it best though.

    My 2nd viewing is today, and let's see how I feel about it after this.
  • Posts: 11,425
    AceHole wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I agree.

    TLD was the last classic Bond movie
    I'd say LTK, but we're so close here I won't argue.

    Curious. Like Getafix, I find that LTK was the first great departure from the Bond formula; however, reducing the movie to its bare bones, it still respects it! Maybe that's why it's my favorite movie OF ALL TIME, not counting the main reason: IMHO it's a glorified and very inspired Cannon Films-like flick.

    I dunno if you guys made it here, but I have a personal... Let's call it... "Bond Cycle": The trendy Bond, formed by the movies that tried to cash in the current cinema trends:

    LALD: Blaxplotation
    TMWTTG: Martial arts films
    MR: Star Wars Craze
    LTK: Cannon Films-type super-macho action flicks
    QOS: Bourne series

    Many times I think on adding OHMSS and its faux experimental feel and the lysergic orgy that is DAF.


    Yes, it's one of the reasons I sometimes feel a bit ambiguous about LTK. With hindsight it's the first film to have the 'Bond goes rogue' storyline that now seems to be the basis of almost every film. It made me feel uncomfortable when I first saw it. It's like they've forgotten he's supposed to be an MI6 agent and not a superhero/action figure.

    EoN really need to buck this trend for the next one. It's growing tiresome.

    I really find it odd that they still think Bond going rogue constitutes an original plot. In LTK and even QOS it had some credibility because you could see the genuinely personal dimension, but it's become a lazy cliche now. You wonder if they're capable of doing a straight Bond on a regular mission movie anymore, just working for and with HMSS, like a professional.

    It's not a country club, after all.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 24
    Getafix wrote: »
    AceHole wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I agree.

    TLD was the last classic Bond movie
    I'd say LTK, but we're so close here I won't argue.

    Curious. Like Getafix, I find that LTK was the first great departure from the Bond formula; however, reducing the movie to its bare bones, it still respects it! Maybe that's why it's my favorite movie OF ALL TIME, not counting the main reason: IMHO it's a glorified and very inspired Cannon Films-like flick.

    I dunno if you guys made it here, but I have a personal... Let's call it... "Bond Cycle": The trendy Bond, formed by the movies that tried to cash in the current cinema trends:

    LALD: Blaxplotation
    TMWTTG: Martial arts films
    MR: Star Wars Craze
    LTK: Cannon Films-type super-macho action flicks
    QOS: Bourne series

    Many times I think on adding OHMSS and its faux experimental feel and the lysergic orgy that is DAF.


    Yes, it's one of the reasons I sometimes feel a bit ambiguous about LTK. With hindsight it's the first film to have the 'Bond goes rogue' storyline that now seems to be the basis of almost every film. It made me feel uncomfortable when I first saw it. It's like they've forgotten he's supposed to be an MI6 agent and not a superhero/action figure.

    EoN really need to buck this trend for the next one. It's growing tiresome.

    I really find it odd that they still think Bond going rogue constitutes an original plot. In LTK and even QOS it had some credibility because you could see the genuinely personal dimension, but it's become a lazy cliche now. You wonder if they're capable of doing a straight Bond on a regular mission movie anymore, just working for and with HMSS, like a professional.

    It's not a country club, after all.
    Precisely. As I said before, Bond's insubordinate, downright hostile responses to M and C just doesn't ring true for a character who's supposed to have reached the rank of Commander in the Royal Navy.

    To any logical person, it's completely reasonable for M to want to know
    what Bond was doing in Mexico City, destroying a good part of a city block and then wrestling with the pilot of a helicopter above a square packed with thousands of people
    .

    Bond may have had an emotional loyalty to Dench's M, but I find it impossible to believe that someone with this much problem with authority could have made it beyond the first few weeks in the Navy, let alone become a trusted 00 agent.

    As has been said before, Bond going rogue and falling out of trust with MI6 has now become the default plot.

    Is it that difficult to write a story where he is trusted to take on a challenging standalone mission with a clear, pressing threat and accomplishes it, working largely on his own and without the supporting cast of Spooks?

    Desk
Sign In or Register to comment.