It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
=))
I was engaged and having a great time. I guess it's all about expectations. It worked in the way a good old fashioned Rog flick would have done and that suited me fine. Could it have been an intense, high-octane road race? Sure, but it wasn't. It's nice to see Bond being nonchalantly cool as f*** now and again.
;))
So its not in your top 5 then?
Grand spectacle Bond but ultimately underwhelming and deflating
First off, I will say it comes across that a lot of hard work went into this film. I appreciate what the film-makers were doing to make this an epic Bond experience. The problem, though is it felt like they were trying to build a mansion on a flood plane - the whole project lacked a solid foundation (cough, cough - a solid script). So I don't care how pretty you decorate the film, without a strong script you are in trouble. Sadly I saw "the writing's on the wall", when I heard about the script problems, with Logan leaving, DC/Mendes pleading Purvis & Wade to comeback (major red flag!), and Mendes bringing his buddy Jez Butterworth to further touch up the script (too many cooks in the kitchen!) - So <b>Barbara Broccoli</b> and <b>Michael Wilson</b>, if you are reading this (and I know there's a chance you might! ;-), next time put your budget in the script please! -With love, from a humble fan :-D
A few things I did like:
*Nice to see Q laboratories again, and the classic office banter
*Hinx worked well as a menacing villain, one of the better characters in the film, but he could have had more screen time (more on that later)
*Actual Locations with the principal actors in them ( though a bit underused - more on that later)
*Real Explosions and mostly minimal CGI (or at least it wasn't so obvious)
*Mostly subtle product placement (I didn't notice much of it at all, which was refreshing after the virtual commercials the last few films have been)
*Spirit of adventure and mystery in the first hour was reminiscent of a classic Bond adventure, I always enjoy this in a Bond film: following the crumb trail
*Costume design was done well by Janey Temine - very classy
*DC does the deadpan, dry humor well in this without being over the top. The little one liners here and there are a hoot and got the audience laughing.
*On DC, I think this is the most comfortable I've seen him yet in the role, he's made the role his own and seems to fit into it seamlessly.
*The acting all around was superb - what can you say, they got some of the best
*Great job by the crew all around, they did a good job filming, staging, lighting, choreographing, etc. It still was a grand production. Just not so for the writing
Things I didn't care for:
*Rogue mission again! Starting to feel routine, like I'm watching the same Bond film over and over again. Why does Bond even work for MI6? He should just a be solo vigilante.
*Essentially the same PTS of the last 3 films - Bond chases some assassin through a public place to retrieve a clue
*Crammed too much into one movie - keep it simple. Characters didn't have enough time to develop, and some felt just shoehorned in. Hinx, for example should have stayed longer until the end to give him more impact (he was well played by Dave Bautista), instead he just felt like the end boss of stage 1 in a video game. We knew very little about him - actually nothing at all! Giving him a little backstory would have humanized him a bit and made him even more of a threat. Mr. White was a welcome return, but I didn't quite buy his change of heart - for his daughter I guess? We didn't get to know him that well in the first 2 films, so it didn't matter much that he turned semi-good in this one. On the love story, it was ridiculous that in one scene Madeline is rejecting Bond's advances, and a few scenes later she's falling into his arms, and few scenes after that she's professing her love for him (Star Wars prequels came to mind). I did like her character - but again, focus on the storytelling and really build up the relationship between the two to make it a genuine romance.
*Nice locations, but too many, and some underused. What I liked about the exotic locales in Bond films, was the flavor and vibrancy - locals busying about, the food, the sounds, the overall pulse. None of the locations (except for maybe Mexico City) captured that. Rome and Tangier have such rich culture and history too - a shame. The location can (and should) be a part of the storytelling (Dr. No is a good example of this), but it just seemed like the places were used just because it's a Bond film and should have a lot of foreign locales.
*Too much action - the story could barely breathe. Just as we're about to go somewhere interesting in character development - BAM! Hinx slams through the carriage. I blame Purvis and Wade (or maybe I should blame DC and Mendes) for needing more action. The action should help push the story along, not just be inserted here and there like a roller coaster ride.
*The crater laire should have been the finale, and not the old Mi6 building /London/Thames river- this goes back to the issues of a) cramming too much into one film and b). too many locations. This is the finale the film should be setting up - it should weave together all the plot points and conflicts into one climax - all the stakes are raised. Instead we're left with, "I'm here to kill you" "Oh Yeah? I'm here to kill you too! But I'll torture you a bit just for dramatic effect and monologue about meteors and cuckoos just for fun" (Btw, I did enjoy the meteor bit [reminiscent of Dr. No], but it wasn't enough). There's no real sense of threat or danger, or any epic obstacle the hero must overcome. Gosh, now that I think of it, M and Q are the real heroes in this story, by stopping the C and surveillence launch - hmm, should this have been the main plot of this film and not force Blofeld/Spectre into the story? :-?
*No development on the backstories - there was no sense of personal relationship with Bond and Blofeld. I had the same issue with M and Silva in SF. You need to create a real sense of a personal past for any current events in the film to stick. The brotherly connection was weak and undermines the villainy of Blofeld - he's supposed to be a criminal mastermind who has a broad encyclopedic knowledge of the world, much like Bond - but his evil ID; not his brother, and certainly not driven by a childhood jealousy - completely ludicrous. I would have been fine with a surrogate brother connection in the story, just not Blofeld. A better idea: have Bond's surrogate brother & father be presumed to be dead since his youth, have the story delve in to how much his stepfather really taught him about the world and helped make him the man he is today. Then reveal that they are in fact alive, but imprisoned BY Blofeld, only to be killed at the end. Really set up a hateful relationship between Bond and Blofeld.
So again, EON, please, please don't even begin to roll the cameras next time until you have a wham-bam, exciting, reviewed and edited, airtight script with a smooth narrative and arc, and full of surprises - I mean that with love, seriously, this will make a far superior film. That's the thing that really irks me, Spectre didn't have any surprises whatsoever - and yet had so much potential. It's was completely predictable. I already knew what was going to happen from the trailers. Hell, the title was a damn spoiler. Set it up better. Be bold. Be meticulous. Spend the $350 million budget on GOOD WRITERS. Get lesser known actors if you need to, with good writing they'll make it work.
...Bond in the cinema is always fun though! I still had a good time (mostly) :)>-
P.S. - the scar explanation was weak. Also, I'm now a Dave Bautista fan, what a nice guy! You could tell he worked really hard in this film. I'm happy for his success
The pre-titles sequence (despite the pretentious and unwarranted "the dead are alive" title card) is a fun sequence. That opening shot, as many have said, is a great technical achievement and a fine start to the film. The following action scene does not disappoint. I never minded Writing's on the Wall, but Klienman's titles takes it to another level. I love how footage from previous films were incorporated into the title sequence, harking back to OHMSS. Klienman is a master of his craft, no doubt.
I did enjoy Waltz's Blofeld despite some of the material and unforgivable limited screen time. He makes even the most banal of lines ("But I do," and "Goodbye James Bond") menacing and memorable. Hearing him saying something along the lines of, "My name is Ernst Starvo Blofeld" is pretty damned cool, I will admit. I'm a real fan of that concept and I hope he will return in a better film.
Despite not liking it initially, I've warmed up to the Blofeld backstory, but I still feel it comes across incomplete. Bond seems affected for the briefest of moments when he realizes Blofeld murdered his caring step-father, but it stops there. This is kind of a big revelation, but Bond hardly seems to care. With better set up, it could have been kind of a "I am your father moment" but instead comes across hollow.
I'm mixed on the whole "everything is connected" concept. I suppose it kind of patches up some plot holes in Skyfall where Silva seemed to have people in the most convenient of places, but the film doesn't delve into how exactly Blofeld was behind everything. He just says he was and that is kind of that. Eh, maybe they'll explain it in a later movie?
However, the list of disappointments are extensive. Madeline and Bond's relationship is forced and unbelievable - moreover Craig and Seydoux don't seem to have much chemistry. Seydoux's performance is uneven. Her initial scene with Craig in the clinic is decent as is her scene in L' Americain, but certain moments she seems miles away. She says, "I'm scared James" with the subtext of the T-1000.
With the exception of the pre-titles scene, the action is sterile, flat and interchangeable. The car chase is overlong and oddly intercut with that phone call, the plane chase carries a terrible cue from Newman and seems to just go on, the fight on the train admittedly starts well, but ends with Hinx's Daffy Duck inspired dispatching (it also has a poorly ADR'd line of "S***," which is set up all wrong and is therefore not funny), and Bond's shootout at the Spectre base is something right out of Commando.
Speaking of Hinx, what a missed opportunity with him. I really dug his intro scene and Bautista certainly had the screen presence to pull this role off, but the fact that he isn't Blofeld's right hand man is puzzling as is his surprising noninvolvement. In From Russia with Love, Grant's eventual death is incredibly satisfying because he had been meddling and screwing with Bond the whole film. So finally when Bond kills him there is kind of a, "YES" moment. (Same goes for Oddjob and Necros.) Hinx captures Swann, yes, but that is really all he does. I wish he and Bond would have had a stronger connection/rivalry - perhaps then Hinx's comeuppance would have been more satisfying.
Most of the liners and gags fell flat for me. The potential best line of the film is filtered ('C' stands for careless). The Mickey Mouse line falls flat twice, the airbag thing with the Fiat is dumb (it is also unacceptable for the Aston to be pushing the Fiat, have the speedometer show 70mph, and cut to the cars going no faster than 25mph. Jesus, speed up the footage at the very least), the line about the smoothie is a long winded piece of nothing, etc etc. The couch gag was alright, but I felt that Bond kind of lounges on it for too long and wears out the joke.
I thought the lobotomy sequence would put some pep in the film. But Blofeld drills holes into Bond's head saying things like, "This will affect your balance, this will affect your sight, this will affect your ability to recognize faces..." and then....none of that happens. Bond simply gets up and starts shooting up the place as if he was totally unaffected. What tension...what drama.
What ultimately sunk the film for me is the finale in London. It is incredibly sloppy, contrived and tedious: Madeline's constant changing attitudes and being captured yet again, M and the gang driving around London in their Mystery Machine ( @Birdleson, great analogy), and a video-game-boss-battle like moment where Bond shoots Blofeld's helicopter over and over and over again with his pistol. What tension...what drama.
I don't understand why EON continues to have a finale that intercuts between two scenes when it has failed in nearly every Bond film that came before it. In Spectre's case it is Bond looking for Madeline intercut with M fighting C. This type of ending failed in Die Another Day (Bond v Graves/Jinx v Frost) and it failed in Quantum of Solace (Bond v Greene/Camille v Medrano) and works no better here. Poor Andrew Scott; the C character is generic, totally unmemorable and his revelation as a Spectre agent is a surprise to no one whatsoever. Talk about wasting an actor in a role, sheesh.
I do appreciate them not offing Blofeld as to bring him back for later films, but Bond's choice to spare him to appeal to Madeline and prove her wrong about him being a cold, ruthless killer (blah blah blah) is cheesy. Moreover, the shot where Bond and Madeline walk off hand in hand is as bad as anything I've ever seen in a Bond film.
Daniel Craig himself is off. I don't mind him playing the role a touch lighter (there were hints of this in Skyfall), but his performance is weaker in Spectre. This is not the James Bond that I was completely captivated by in Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace (and I don't even like that film) and Skyfall. There is a difference between playing the role lighter and not being as invested, and I saw the latter.
The movie is a mess, and I'm honestly heartbroken. I went into the second viewing totally convinced that I was going to enjoy it... and for the first ten minutes, I thought I was going to. But if I had to sum up the film in a nutshell, it starts off well, becomes mostly serviceable until we get to London where it precedes to fly right off the road into the Thames.
I also heard that Monica Bellucci was in the film.
Normally it would be like this:
A Tuesday afternoon 16:45 hundred hours.
Cinema complex empty, except for the employees, a mother with her kid (having watched some kids movie), a strange loner with greasy hair (hopefully he'll not go watch the same movie as I).
Cinema hall, attendance 3 people, some movie is screening.
19:00 hours (after the movie) cinema complex lobby, approx. 25 people standing around.
Today it was like this:
A Tuesday afternoon 16:45 hundred hours.
Cinema complex lobby at least 30 people (employees not included), many more at the various bars drinking beverages.
Had actually to stand in line to get my ticket (took 5 minutes).
Cinema hall, attendance approximately 30 people. Spectre is screening.
19:30 hours (after Spectre) cinema complex lobby, crowded with countless people, eagerly awaiting the 20:00 hours screenings of Spectre.
It still stays at my current position in rank - 10 out of 24, for now.
My original review, on Nov 6th (in the non-spoiler section) where I tried to be balanced still stands, objectively, however.
I'm going to quickly bullet point some things I noticed this time around:
-DC was excellent. I did not feel the overly Roger Moore'esque portrayal that I felt the first time around.
Overall, he was very balanced. The problem is I had to see it twice to really 'feel' his portrayal. The first time it just seemed weird to me and schizophrenic. The reason is because we've had 9 long years of DC being one kind of Bond, and now out of the blue he's channeling all the other Bonds........after 9 yrs of consistency it's a bit too much to take in all at once......it's not like the other fella's who were churning them out every 2 yrs.
The problem is, how many casual fans are going to give this film a 2nd chance like I just did? Not too many I'd guess
----
-Seydoux -also excellent. However, her portrayal is perhaps a little too subtle to pick up all the nuances on first viewing. She's not all that dynamic, but rather more demure, and so I don't know if she's really making a good first impression on a lot of people. I've decided that I like her very much and would like to see her again.
I like how she said she shouldn't drink on the train because she's known to do 'crazy' things. No kidding! Jumping Bond like a 'b' in heat....I need me some of that....
----
-Waltz - also excellent. Again, way too subtle. Maybe he was the wrong actor for this job, even though he did a good job. Why? Because he is too well known for the Tarantino portrayals, and one just sees that in his face even when he's being someone entirely different.
Also, he's way too slight. They should have picked a more formidable actor, physically, in order to convey the necessary menace. Waltz did the best he could, but he is just not tall enough. It was especially noticeable during the meteor intro.
He needs to come back again
----
-Bautista - wasted. So much potential but did not live up to it, not because of his portrayal, but because of the situations they put him in.
He was introduced so menacingly in the SPECTRE meeting, and then right after that he chases Bond in one of the most dull car chases in the history of supercar chases (sorry.....even worse this time around). So any menace that he conveyed originally by poking that fella's eyes out was completely lost on me by the time the car chase was over.
He needs to come back again too
----
Other points to note include:
-that yellow tint was just annoying. One of the biggest missed opportunities in my opinion
-Rome was beautiful. So was Tangiers and the Volcano. Very well done
-London is the most overexposed city in the world right now. Enough please. It's losing its film lustre very quickly.
-the action sequences (particularly that car chase and the alpine plane sequence) must be the most boring way to spend money I've seen lately (unforgivable in a Bond film). Even the much touted Hinx train fight isn't all that great on 2nd watch (not bad though but it has a been there done that quality).
-score is top notch by Newman except in London for the finale where it's a little bit loud and overbearing
----
Final impression:
It's a great 'by the numbers' 'run of the mill' Bond film. It checks all the boxes, and gives the 'hardcore' fans what they want. I certainly enjoyed it more this time. However, it doesn't do anything more than that......at all. So it ends up feeling mediocre. Like an episode of a serial. There's a deja vu element.......nice but not necessary (after all we have a massive back catalogue to view if we want to reminisce)
It also fails because it tries to have it both ways and doesn't succeed very well in either way:
1. It tries to have consequence by tying Blofeld to everything, but nobody seems to give a toss and it's explained in such a cursory by the by way, that it seems very inconsequential
2. since the Blofeld connection seemed so dull, it would have been preferable if the actual plot (Nine Eyes) was more interesting and worthy. It wasn't, and so the film is flat here too.
At least with QoS, while the water subplot in Bolivia could make paint dry, DC's inner turmoil and angst was a suitable driver for the proceedings. Here that isn't there, and the Nine Eyes thing is similarly boring. So basically what we're left with is a a series of (dull) action sequences with some nice throw back fan favourite moments for Bond aficionados. Ultimately, it is, as has been said, a film for us Bond nutters.
As I said in my original review, it's fun, but it could have been so, so much more. I enjoyed it, but then it was made for me and me only.....since it's ultimately a 'love letter' to us fans.
The performances of the various actors are quite incredible in Spectre and I dare to say the best ever ensemble cast performance in any Bond movie, probably thanks to Sam Mendes, who is, I think unquestionably one of the great directors around.
I agree that if one doesn't pay enough attention, the subtleties in Seydoux's and Waltz's and even Scott's and Whishaw's performance can be missed.
After seeing it 4 times I have almost every single facial expression of Seydoux, Whishaw or Waltz in my mind.
Especially Seydoux also has every gesture and body language totally under control.
I must say I got this all by the first viewing, but then of course as an avid fan I did suck it all in intentionally.
"But I do."
I really love Waltz's delivery.
He makes a smallest pause before saying the word Brother and he says it with a hatefulness and disdainfulness that it's chilling.
One word, and Waltz manages to put an entire background and history in it.
That's called Greatness, he has fully deserved his two Academy Awards.
If Spectre would happen to be some serious drama movie (and not a Bond movie) that gets acknowledged by the Academy you could bet your house on it that they would nominate him again.
They are all quite different, I think the CR one is probably still my favourite, it's just so brilliantly cool and DC aces it, the Dryden put down and that visceral punch up it just sets the scene, it says this is not the Bond you've seen before.
Anyway I digress, as I said the lighthearted approach is not an issue, I found for the most part that DC sold his lines extremely well, the mickey mouse line was brilliant delivered and I thought the seduction scene with Lucia was spot on, Bond cuts to the chase and the chemistry with Monica is evident.
I even didn't mind the car chase, the lighthearted interaction between Bond and MP was fine as well as the airbag moment. Bond and White's moment were well delivered by both Dan & Jesper, nice bit of dialogue. Bond's introduction to Swann is fine although the chase is OK but I don't like it as much as the PTS or the Rome chase.
The film then redeems itself with the train car moment which leads to that terrific fight with Mr Hinx and the love scene.
The moments with Bond and Swann in Morocco and Bond discovering White's room with the mouse gag and the Vesper bit are all fine. It's just after this the film really drops. Bond's interactions with ESB and the torture sequence are great though they aren't followed with anything as memorable and the way Bond blows up the base so easily which leads to the old MI6 climax with team 00 section assisting. This moment feels as rushed as the desert base, it's all just so underwhelming after a great set up. The last sequence I didn't mind, about time DC got the girl and a happy ending but where does it go from here?
I think SPECTRE could easily have been a sequel to Skyfall like Mendes wanted without having ESB connected with Bond's childhood. They could have connected all the films together and still had ESB telling Bond he's behind everything, the whole brother element just seems like a lazy way to make it work and it stinks of Logan's touches. As I said before P&W with Butterworth most likely saved this from being much worse but the fact the script was allowed to get so along before they bought them in to save it from being a misery fest needs questioning.
Why they didn't just make a film that was full on Bond without all this, I much prefer Skyfall and was able to accept Bond's childhood being integral, I forgive the plot holes and ride with it because it feels more dramatic and thrilling throughout. SPECTRE feels so rushed at the end.
I thought the cast was great, Craig was so effortlessly playing Bond, I love all his performances in the role because all 4 show a variety none of the other actors have shown. The DC era has been fortunate with it's villain, choosing European actors has been a masterstroke. Mads, Bardem and even the underrated Almaric have been top notch and Waltz in my view does not book that trend. I was a big admirer of Javier's unhinged Silva but CW plays ESB more subtle and for the moments he gets he shines.
Team MI6 are shaping up nicely, Fiennes needs to continue to be M he's made for the part. Harris I liked in SF but she's definitely better here and Wishaw is a revelation, I enjoyed him in SF but he emerges as truly memorable new take on this well loved character. Scott is just playing C as you'd expect nothing that special. Belluci for her small moment is memorable and Seydoux does wonders with not a particularly well written role.
Bautista delivers one of the most memorable henchman in along time and doesn't need to say anything, I'd hope their is a possibility he would return.
While so many didn't like Mendes and what he did with SF I did but what he's done with SP is not something that sits well with me and on the strength of the flaws of this film despite initially saying I'd like him and Craig back to finish his tenure I think I'd like a new director and writing staff on DC's final film.
SF was different and using Bond's past once should have been enough and if he's going to continue to do this with another entry I'd rather not see the Mendes trilogy and let someone else craft what would possibly be Craig's swansong.
It appears that quite a few casual fans didn't really want DC to go so Bond, personally I didn't mind this but the criticism of SP seems to have been leveled at this area of the film. I'm thinking the next film might well go more gritty.
If Craig does return it's almost definitely going to be Bond Vs Blofeld but it worries me how SM would deal with this and which script writer they'd bring on, I imagine Logan is finished with Bond. If they did get P&W to fashion something he'll no doubt get someone to polish like Jez B.
The next film would be in a better place though if they hadn't tied Bond's childhood to the beginning of Blofeld and SM is likely to still riff on this, I just think they might have painted themselves into a corner with this. Unless they can just deliver a follow up that see's ESB escape and Bond have to track him down. How do you deal with his relationship with Swann?
This is the first time in the Craig era where I'm unsure what is going to happen next and half expect both of them to say we've had a good run and we've both decided to bow out on this one.
If Craig does go I don 't see why they can't just continue his timeline with a new Bond and just say the relationship didn't work out and Bond can get on with Operation Bedlam.
I agree 100%, I wouldn't mind if they pick some relatively not well known (like Mads was before CR for the mainstream audiences) European actor for B25. Or if they pick Jean Dujardian (he should be in more movies, seriously..he was even in spy parody movies..)
To make it even more clearer for non French viewers : Bond says "vous" to M, Q, Moneypenny.. and "tu" to Blofeld. It really is made clear these two share something IMO.
I agree @BondJasonBond006. I was paying attention to other things the first time around and didn't fully take in the nuances of all the actor's performances. Very good job by all, but as I said earlier, maybe a little too nuanced/subtle to be fully appreciated by the masses on first (and perhaps only theatre) viewing.
That's why I think it's true what they say.....that this is really first and foremost a film for us fans.
Seydoux in particular really impressed me this time around, as did Waltz. I didn't think they were bad the first time out, but I was able to really pick up finesse in both actor's performance this time.
This one is a definite grower on the acting front, but likely not on the plot front, sadly.
....but then again I know 0% of the french language so.. :D
vous = you (formal) tu = you (informal) i.e. as in someone you know well
I have a basic knowledge of French and am aware of such distinction and meaning from my classes.
I would have expected the 'tu' actually, based on the English version which I have watched. They are supposed to be very close (after all Oberhauser basically raised Bond after his parent's death) according to Blofeld's explanation during the torture sequence......there is obviously a very close history between them and Blofeld even says something about brothers knowing how to push each other's buttons during the MI6 finale when he sets off the timer.
So I'm assuming that 'tu' is the appropriate one to use.
Do you disagree?
My three years of French are slowly coming back.
My ex wife speaks Spanish ..colloquial not proper ..and German from being raised Lutheran.
Me speaks Texas Anglesh
Cool piece. That's where Vanilla Sky meets The Sixth Sense.
100% agree with this. I feel like even QoS had its moments of humor (although clearly not as much as CR). Skyfall tried to break the mold and go personal and dark for the 50th in a standalone film (or so we thought until SP was released) and I was fine with that.
I was really hoping for SP we'd see a film much more similar to the tone set in CR (and the tone that I feel QoS would've followed with had it not been so negatively impacted by the writer's strike). SP just never felt like it had a true direction. It was a jarring, odd tone that completely took me out of the movie in certain places. There was Moore era humor, but that's not even remotely close to what ruined the movie for me.
There were big things like the way the plot felt so disjointed and how there was little to no motivation for the characters in the film. And then there were smaller things like the way he dealt with M at the beginning. It was totally out of character for Bond no matter if we're talking about any Bond in any time period, dealing with any M. There was zero respect shown by Bond.
I'm hoping they pull a move like OHMSS did after YOLT and just ignore any and all continuity to the prior film. Have Blofeld out of prison without an explanation, give no mention to the events of Spectre, have Swann out of the picture, etc.
There's no way they actually do this because it would in a sense ruin Spectre pointless as a film after Bond 25 was released, but I can't help but think how awesome it'd be to spin Bond 25 as a brainwashed Bond in a reverse Shatterhand/YOLT arc from the novels.