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

17778808283100

Comments

  • Posts: 183
    tigers99 wrote: »
    AceHole wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    I thought the sofa in the PTS was quite funny, because I thought 'why not?', it had to be somewhere. But it was a jolt because this was the first joke of it's kind in Craig's era, and yes it came from a past era.

    You took the words right out of my mouth!

    It was a real WTF moment for me, whereas my wife, who's not such a Bond aficionado, just chuckled and muttered "ha, typical!"

    Except that it isn't typical, far from it. This was as if being hit with the proverbial nostalgic sledge-hammer. "AM I IN THE RIGHT MOVIE..??"

    Dumbstruck is exactly how I felt when seeing DC land on that sofa after the building collapsed. The new era of 'Bond conditioning' that we, the audience, have been put through ever since CR means that we were basically pre-programmed to expect Dan to meet a gritty, bone-crunching landing - replete with torn trousers and facial cuts à la QoS.

    I don't have a problem with DC films going this way as long as they don't go overboard. For me this type of humour started in Skyfall when Bond jumps on the train - 'He must be in a hurry' - which felt like it could have been in an earlier Bond film - but I felt that he pulled off the health and safety part of the gag well.

    So, big question for you. How would you add humour in the film then? As I see it, certain elements may remind you of the cheeky Roger Moore era. But I didn't see Daniel Craig jumping on the back of a train. And I didn't hear 007 whining about 009's music when he was played by Roger Moore?

    You know, we COULD go the "Casino Royale"-way and "Licence To Kill"-way...by not having humour.....but really? I think after 3 'emotionally deep' Bond films, the time was there to add a bit more humour. And again, for me the humour worked. It's the highlight of the entire film.

    Other than Spectre I would say Casino Royale has more humour than the other Craig films. I thought CR had a lot of humour in it, just that it was less "in your face" or OTT humour.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Trigger wrote: »
    tigers99 wrote: »
    AceHole wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    I thought the sofa in the PTS was quite funny, because I thought 'why not?', it had to be somewhere. But it was a jolt because this was the first joke of it's kind in Craig's era, and yes it came from a past era.

    You took the words right out of my mouth!

    It was a real WTF moment for me, whereas my wife, who's not such a Bond aficionado, just chuckled and muttered "ha, typical!"

    Except that it isn't typical, far from it. This was as if being hit with the proverbial nostalgic sledge-hammer. "AM I IN THE RIGHT MOVIE..??"

    Dumbstruck is exactly how I felt when seeing DC land on that sofa after the building collapsed. The new era of 'Bond conditioning' that we, the audience, have been put through ever since CR means that we were basically pre-programmed to expect Dan to meet a gritty, bone-crunching landing - replete with torn trousers and facial cuts à la QoS.

    I don't have a problem with DC films going this way as long as they don't go overboard. For me this type of humour started in Skyfall when Bond jumps on the train - 'He must be in a hurry' - which felt like it could have been in an earlier Bond film - but I felt that he pulled off the health and safety part of the gag well.

    So, big question for you. How would you add humour in the film then? As I see it, certain elements may remind you of the cheeky Roger Moore era. But I didn't see Daniel Craig jumping on the back of a train. And I didn't hear 007 whining about 009's music when he was played by Roger Moore?

    You know, we COULD go the "Casino Royale"-way and "Licence To Kill"-way...by not having humour.....but really? I think after 3 'emotionally deep' Bond films, the time was there to add a bit more humour. And again, for me the humour worked. It's the highlight of the entire film.

    Other than Spectre I would say Casino Royale has more humour than the other Craig films. I thought CR had a lot of humour in it, just that it was less "in your face" or OTT humour.

    CR is hilarious in parts, it's just masked by the gut punch at the end. There are loads of great quips and throwaway lines. They aren't 'gags', but they're very funny.
  • RC7 wrote: »
    Trigger wrote: »
    tigers99 wrote: »
    AceHole wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    I thought the sofa in the PTS was quite funny, because I thought 'why not?', it had to be somewhere. But it was a jolt because this was the first joke of it's kind in Craig's era, and yes it came from a past era.

    You took the words right out of my mouth!

    It was a real WTF moment for me, whereas my wife, who's not such a Bond aficionado, just chuckled and muttered "ha, typical!"

    Except that it isn't typical, far from it. This was as if being hit with the proverbial nostalgic sledge-hammer. "AM I IN THE RIGHT MOVIE..??"

    Dumbstruck is exactly how I felt when seeing DC land on that sofa after the building collapsed. The new era of 'Bond conditioning' that we, the audience, have been put through ever since CR means that we were basically pre-programmed to expect Dan to meet a gritty, bone-crunching landing - replete with torn trousers and facial cuts à la QoS.

    I don't have a problem with DC films going this way as long as they don't go overboard. For me this type of humour started in Skyfall when Bond jumps on the train - 'He must be in a hurry' - which felt like it could have been in an earlier Bond film - but I felt that he pulled off the health and safety part of the gag well.

    So, big question for you. How would you add humour in the film then? As I see it, certain elements may remind you of the cheeky Roger Moore era. But I didn't see Daniel Craig jumping on the back of a train. And I didn't hear 007 whining about 009's music when he was played by Roger Moore?

    You know, we COULD go the "Casino Royale"-way and "Licence To Kill"-way...by not having humour.....but really? I think after 3 'emotionally deep' Bond films, the time was there to add a bit more humour. And again, for me the humour worked. It's the highlight of the entire film.

    Other than Spectre I would say Casino Royale has more humour than the other Craig films. I thought CR had a lot of humour in it, just that it was less "in your face" or OTT humour.

    CR is hilarious in parts, it's just masked by the gut punch at the end. There are loads of great quips and throwaway lines. They aren't 'gags', but they're very funny.

    I think what sets the humour from the Craig films apart from, let's say the Moore-era, is the fact that they are much more part of the circumstances. If it's Daniel Craig running through a wall in CR, or Daniel Le Chiffre torturing him in CR, or Daniel jumping on a train in SF, or Daniel falling on a sofa in the PTS of SP, or Daniel 'trying out' Q's buttons in the car he stole from 009.......Daniel Craig never really utters a true Moore one-liner. Moore was the man who could do that, Brosnan failed by copying Moore, and Craig wisely avoids copying. I think it's just the combination of events combined with Craig's wonderful, "street-style", natural & mostly silent acting.

    And even if he reacts, it's never like a true Moore-one-liner. Examples:
    --> b]Bond is bedazzled when he just walked through a wall[/b ("Casino Royale", no need to put your pants straight)
    --> "Now the whole world is going to know you died scratching my balls!" ("Casino Royale", not something Roger Moore or Brosnan would have said)
    --> "Dammit, he killed him!" ("Quantum Of Solace", 'M' reacting to the strain of kills 007 leaves behind)
    --> "OOOOpen the Door!" ("Skyfall", when the train driver looks at Bond in astonishment)
    --> "Hmmm....what makes you think this is my first time??" ("Skyfall", and Silva responds "Ooowh Mr Bond!", adding even more humour)
    --> b]Bond looks around in astonishment when he falls on a sofa after the building collapsed[/b ("SPECTRE", you hear him thinking "WTF")
    --> "Sono Topolino!", b]Bond shows the S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-ring[/b ("SPECTRE", not really a Moore-one-liner. It's something only Craig would say)
    --> "Oooowh noooo!", b]Bond pushes the button and hears 009's music choice[/b ("SPECTRE", not to mention other events that 'happen' to 007 during the chase)
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    @Gustav_Graves

    Brosnan didn't fail at all and he didn't copy Moore. You just don't like him.

    Craig in SP does the Moore and the Brosnan perfectly, especially as he mixes it splendidly with his own style.
  • @Gustav_Graves

    Brosnan didn't fail at all and he didn't copy Moore. You just don't like him.

    Craig in SP does the Moore and the Brosnan perfectly, especially as he mixes it splendidly with his own style.

    It's just my opinion ;-). I feel Craig's humour, very slowly re-introduced and slightly increased over the course of 4 films, feels way more natural to me.

    I mean......
    James Bond in "Tomorrow Never Dies": "I would have thought watching your TV shows was torture enough." b]putting up a self-fulfilling smile, like he thinks he's funny[/b
    Did not work for me. Not at all.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    I'm in agreement with @Gustav_Graves on Brosnan channeling Moore, to his detriment.. I didn't see anything 'new' in his humour characterization, except that it was, for the most part, worse (there were a few exceptions here and there).

    I originally felt Craig did the same thing on my first watch of SP (and said so negatively here). On my 2nd watch however, I realized this is 'all Craig....all the way'. It's just a bit jarring, given how he's played it before (so one's initial thoughts/memories are of Moore - since he is known as the 'humorous Bond'). The difference is that his characterization is still 'Daniel Craig' with his own brand of sarcasm.......just a little more flippant than before. It's a subtle difference, but noticeable...
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    gklein wrote: »


    Guys? Above 6 mins of the 7,5 min car chase. I am sorry, but...I love it :)) =))! It's so funny, and it indeed reminds me a lot of the "FYEO"-car chase and the "UNCLE"-car chase. It has this joyous Remy Julienne-esque fun! And Bond's gestures...the way he responds to all these not-working gadgets is simply priceless. Not to mention 009's music choice =)). Oooowh, and WHY are people so serious when watching this sweet granddaddy in his Fiat 'Topolino' :-P?? It's so well executed.

    Other criticism I don't understand: "Those damned empty streets in Rome. It's unrealistic". Man, ENJOY this stuff. Put a smile on your face. And if you watch closely you see that Bond encounters this Fiat 'Topolino' 500 (also a reference to the light blue Fiat 500 from "GoldenEye"?), but is almost hit by two other vehicles (An Iveco truck, another SUV) and charmingly greets a beggar on the streets of Rome when Bond safely lands with his parachute. Priceless.

    One thing about the criticism regarding Hinx and that he is everywhere without a clear good reason: Rewatch Jaws in "TSWLM" and Grant in "FRWL". And then ask yourself what the HELL you expect from a henchman X( !

    I had sworn off Bond movies after my huge disappointment with Skyfall. So far, I've stuck w/that. I've still not seen Spectre. Hearing it was a more traditional Bond made me think I'd give it a chance. Also, hearing of the many negative reviews, that too made me want to see it (as I usually disagree w/most critics so suspected I'd actually like it.) Then I heard that the action scenes, which are very important for me, were all very weak. I also read that, while all the Bond boxes were checked (something I appreciate), it was done in a very non-inventive and unimaginative way (something I don't appreciate). This caused me to lose interest again.

    Well, this clip you posted is the first I've seen of the movie beyond the trailer clips. I have to say, while it isn't the most exciting car chase I've ever seen (and could indeed have used more danger & stunts), it's not that bad in the excitement department. While only slightly weak as action, it makes up for the lack excitement in spades by the way Mendez expertly blends humor into the chase w/out ever reducing it to silliness or comedy -- and I did indeed find it original and in high Bond style. (I loved Bond's jealousy over Moneypenny's guest!)

    And, for the first time, I truly LOVED Craig's portrayal of Bond (as witnessed in your clip) -- the casual confidence under pressure that has always been what Bond used to be about! This is BOND done right.

    For the first time, this old Bond fan is truly excited about seeing Spectre! This indeed appears to be the Craig Bond for which I've been waiting!

    I'm truly clueless everytime I hear someone call him/herself a Bond fan while even considering not watching the latest film!
    TripAces wrote: »
    So after seeing SP for a second time, I like it more. It's a classic, right up to the point where JB is being tortured, and it's there that the film loses its way. What I didn't notice/consider after the first viewing:

    1. Not sure why Hinx starts the fight on the train if ESB was planning on JB and MS arriving at his lair. Did Hinx go rogue?

    2. MS has an important line in the L'Americain, when she says she sees "two James." It speals to one of the film's themes: of duality. Blofeld isn't just a former foster brother to JB; he's a kindred spirit...a yin to the yang.

    3. When MS asks JB how/why he can live in hiding, always alone...shes actually talking about herself.

    Interesting points @TripAces, here's my two cents:

    1. I don't think ESB was planning of killing JB and MS, he wanted them dead and the occasion presented itself after Hinx didn't succeed.

    2. Interesting and possible, at the time I thought it might be a reference to the duality of Bond's own personality: the ruthless assassin vs the seductive and even caring man.

    3. Totally agree! Actually, after watching the film I think the title song might actually be written in Madeleine's POV, not Bond's.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    I'm in agreement with @Gustav_Graves on Brosnan channeling Moore, to his detriment.. I didn't see anything 'new' in his humour characterization, except that it was, for the most part, worse (there were a few exceptions here and there).

    I originally felt Craig did the same thing on my first watch of SP (and said so negatively here). On my 2nd watch however, I realized this is 'all Craig....all the way'. It's just a bit jarring, given how he's played it before (so one's initial thoughts/memories are of Moore - since he is known as the 'humorous Bond'). The difference is that his characterization is still 'Daniel Craig' with his own brand of sarcasm.......just a little more flippant than before. It's a subtle difference, but noticeable...

    Yep, I fully agree with you there :-).
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Brosnan had many very memorable one-liners. Of course he was intentionally a mix between the previous actors. And that worked.
    You don't have to like it of course.
    There are enough people who like/liked those movies and the humour in it.

    As for Craig, he finally is the proper full Bond character many of us long wanted.
    Thanks to Mendes everything worked out very well in Spectre. Another director may not have been able to tickle one of the greatest Bond performances ever out of Craig.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,589
    Sandy wrote: »
    gklein wrote: »


    Guys? Above 6 mins of the 7,5 min car chase. I am sorry, but...I love it :)) =))! It's so funny, and it indeed reminds me a lot of the "FYEO"-car chase and the "UNCLE"-car chase. It has this joyous Remy Julienne-esque fun! And Bond's gestures...the way he responds to all these not-working gadgets is simply priceless. Not to mention 009's music choice =)). Oooowh, and WHY are people so serious when watching this sweet granddaddy in his Fiat 'Topolino' :-P?? It's so well executed.

    Other criticism I don't understand: "Those damned empty streets in Rome. It's unrealistic". Man, ENJOY this stuff. Put a smile on your face. And if you watch closely you see that Bond encounters this Fiat 'Topolino' 500 (also a reference to the light blue Fiat 500 from "GoldenEye"?), but is almost hit by two other vehicles (An Iveco truck, another SUV) and charmingly greets a beggar on the streets of Rome when Bond safely lands with his parachute. Priceless.

    One thing about the criticism regarding Hinx and that he is everywhere without a clear good reason: Rewatch Jaws in "TSWLM" and Grant in "FRWL". And then ask yourself what the HELL you expect from a henchman X( !

    I had sworn off Bond movies after my huge disappointment with Skyfall. So far, I've stuck w/that. I've still not seen Spectre. Hearing it was a more traditional Bond made me think I'd give it a chance. Also, hearing of the many negative reviews, that too made me want to see it (as I usually disagree w/most critics so suspected I'd actually like it.) Then I heard that the action scenes, which are very important for me, were all very weak. I also read that, while all the Bond boxes were checked (something I appreciate), it was done in a very non-inventive and unimaginative way (something I don't appreciate). This caused me to lose interest again.

    Well, this clip you posted is the first I've seen of the movie beyond the trailer clips. I have to say, while it isn't the most exciting car chase I've ever seen (and could indeed have used more danger & stunts), it's not that bad in the excitement department. While only slightly weak as action, it makes up for the lack excitement in spades by the way Mendez expertly blends humor into the chase w/out ever reducing it to silliness or comedy -- and I did indeed find it original and in high Bond style. (I loved Bond's jealousy over Moneypenny's guest!)

    And, for the first time, I truly LOVED Craig's portrayal of Bond (as witnessed in your clip) -- the casual confidence under pressure that has always been what Bond used to be about! This is BOND done right.

    For the first time, this old Bond fan is truly excited about seeing Spectre! This indeed appears to be the Craig Bond for which I've been waiting!

    I'm truly clueless everytime I hear someone call him/herself a Bond fan while even considering not watching the latest film!
    TripAces wrote: »
    So after seeing SP for a second time, I like it more. It's a classic, right up to the point where JB is being tortured, and it's there that the film loses its way. What I didn't notice/consider after the first viewing:

    1. Not sure why Hinx starts the fight on the train if ESB was planning on JB and MS arriving at his lair. Did Hinx go rogue?

    2. MS has an important line in the L'Americain, when she says she sees "two James." It speals to one of the film's themes: of duality. Blofeld isn't just a former foster brother to JB; he's a kindred spirit...a yin to the yang.

    3. When MS asks JB how/why he can live in hiding, always alone...shes actually talking about herself.

    Interesting points @TripAces, here's my two cents:

    1. I don't think ESB was planning of killing JB and MS, he wanted them dead and the occasion presented itself after Hinx didn't succeed.

    2. Interesting and possible, at the time I thought it might be a reference to the duality of Bond's own personality: the ruthless assassin vs the seductive and even caring man.

    3. Totally agree! Actually, after watching the film I think the title song might actually be written in Madeleine's POV, not Bond's.

    @Sandy

    It is definitely open to interpretation. In an earlier post I mentioned the scene when Bond finds ESB behind the bulletproof glass. As they talk, we see ESB's reflection superimposed over Bond's face. It's a terrific shot. This is why Madeleine's line resonated with me the second time I saw the film.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Sandy wrote: »
    I'm truly clueless everytime I hear someone call him/herself a Bond fan while even considering not watching the latest film!

    Me too. Bonkers.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,584
    mepal1 wrote: »
    umm................there was some silly humour in CR.........i remember Bond running through a wall in the Parkour chase.........who would do that?........coz u dont know what the wall would of been made of, would you?.........good scene though, i liked it!

    It's plaster board. Bond could see it was, so could I. He ran through it because plasterboard is that fragile. He breaks through the same thing in SP to reveal the hidden room at L'Americain. The joke is that running through it saves time and is in contrast to the other guy's fancy jump through the window.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 154
    Sandy wrote: »

    I'm truly clueless everytime I hear someone call him/herself a Bond fan while even considering not watching the latest film!

    I said "old" Bond fan. I'm nearly 50 yrs old & started watching Bond movies at a very young age -- younger than I should have been allowed. In fact, unlike most Bond fans, I can't even tell you what my first Bond movie was that I watched on TV. I was so young that those old Connery Bonds all ran together for me in my young mind. I just remembering knowing who the character was & being enthralled with the imagery. TSWLM was the first I saw in the cinema. At 10 yrs old, I loved it.

    As I got older, I found them to be getting too silly & losing the balance (hated AVTAK). Enjoyed the Dalton era but then TWINE was the last one I really liked (though, like all Bond movies, it had problems). I thought DAD was ridiculous. Then the Craig era went too far the other way. I didn't like CR giving us a back story. I like Bond as a mystery. SF pushed it even further & gave us a boring melodrama on top of that. That was it for me.

    For me, MI took over from Bond in 2012. Ghost Protocol was one of the best "Bond" movies ever. ;-) (And Rogue Nation was pretty darn good too!) I'm now more a fan of that series.

    I had no intention of seeing SP. However, as I mentioned in my last post, hearing that SP was "classic Bond" caused me to come to this forum to hear what others are saying. I know that a *Craig* classic Bond wouldn't be too silly -- but, also, if *truly* classic, it also won't be a brooding melodrama like SF. Thus, I'm now thinking of seeing SP & giving Bond another chance. I'd love for him to regain his throne from MI for me.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,545
    Just got back from seeing the film at IMAX. I did really enjoy it, but will definitely need a second and third viewing.

    I have to agree that the third act fell flat and dragged on a bit too long, though I did genuinely forget about EST's scar, so that was a nice surprise at the end when he turned around.

    I know that there are more Bond references in this than you can poke a stick at, but honestly, the film didn't feel that Bond-like to me at all. I just sat there thinking, I know all these people are in a Bond film, but this really doesn't feel like one to me at all. I can only assume that this is because the film is such a departure from the tone from CR, QoS and SF that the lightness and humourous moments really stood out to me. I think I laughed more in the first 30mins of the film than I did in the last three combined.

    A much better score from Thomas Newman this time round, but I still can't help but wonder how much better the film would have been if they brought back David Arnold. I didn't particularly notice WOW during the title sequence, mostly because I hate octopus' and that was way too many tentacles for my stomach to handle.

    And I couldn't help noticing that Christoph Waltz ankles got more screen time than Daniel Craig's bare chest. What happened to him saying 'of course I get my kit off'!?
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    gklein wrote: »
    Sandy wrote: »

    I'm truly clueless everytime I hear someone call him/herself a Bond fan while even considering not watching the latest film!

    I said "old" Bond fan. I'm nearly 50 yrs old & started watching Bond movies at a very young age -- younger than I should have been allowed. In fact, unlike most Bond fans, I can't even tell you what my first Bond movie was that I watched on TV. I was so young that those old Connery Bonds all ran together for me in my young mind. I just remembering knowing who the character was & being enthralled with the imagery. TSWLM was the first I saw in the cinema. At 10 yrs old, I loved it.

    As I got older, I found them to be getting too silly & losing the balance (hated AVTAK). Enjoyed the Dalton era but then TWINE was the last one I really liked (though, like all Bond movies, it had problems). I thought DAD was ridiculous. Then the Craig era went too far the other way. I didn't like CR giving us a back story. I like Bond as a mystery. SF pushed it even further & gave us a boring melodrama on top of that. That was it for me.

    For me, MI took over from Bond in 2012. Ghost Protocol was one of the best "Bond" movies ever. ;-) (And Rogue Nation was pretty darn good too!) I'm now more a fan of that series.

    I had no intention of seeing SP. However, as I mentioned in my last post, hearing that SP was "classic Bond" caused me to come to this forum to hear what others are saying. I know that a *Craig* classic Bond wouldn't be too silly -- but, also, if *truly* classic, it also won't be a brooding melodrama like SF. Thus, I'm now thinking of seeing SP & giving Bond another chance. I'd love for him to regain his throne from MI for me.

    So you are an ex-Bond fan (whatever that means) and a MI fan, not an old Bond fan. We have an thread for the so-called "original fans" whose first Bond in the theatre was Connery, those are the old fans. By the way, and the daughter and grandaughter of "originals" my first memory involving anyone apart from my family is Roger Moore in TSWLM title sequence, now THAT is definitely what I call too young.
  • Ive seen it twice now. Here are my bulleted thoughts:

    - three times during the movie I removed myself from the film and thought 'this is beautiful, how do people hate this so much'
    1. once during the PTS during the helicopter sequence when the music comes back, a great Bondian moment
    2. Right after Hinx/Bond battle on the train - after the WOTW instrumental plays... everything from Madeline and Bond in the car to the theme over the train as it rolls through the desert. Love it.
    3. All of the Palazzo scenes

    - Plot-wise: I agree with how Blofeld's relationship with Bond is not needed, and simply Bond screwing with his plans suffices. More importantly is the speech M gave to C on when to not kill, and how it plays out with Bond on the bridge. Doesn't ruin it for me though.

    - Ultimately I wish they scrapped everything in London and had Morocco as the final location. Used the cut London time to spend it on the 2 minutes we get of Bellucci and make her feel worth it. More time in the lair in Morocco + the escape could have lasted 10 minutes. Same ending.

    Overall, after my first viewing, 8.5/10.... now... 7.5/10. I'll give it an 8.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 154
    Sandy wrote: »


    So you are an ex-Bond fan (whatever that means) and a MI fan, not an old Bond fan. We have an thread for the so-called "original fans" whose first Bond in the theatre was Connery, those are the old fans.

    "X-Bond fan", for me, implies I somehow have gone back on ever having been a fan. That's not the case. I'm still a fan of many Bond movies and I'm *open* to being a fan of the movies to come (if the balance is brought back). I just haven't liked the recent overly serious direction (any more than I liked the silly direction of the later Moore Bonds or DAD).

    What I really want to see is the *balance* of a serious dramatic espionage thriller, fun action/adventure & bit of fantasy camp that most of the Connery Bonds had, aspects of the Dalton Bonds had and a couple of the Brosnan Bonds had -- though, admittedly, in this day, that "balance" should lean more toward the serious than it did in Bond days of old. From what I'm hearing, SP fits the bill -- hence my new found desire to see it. (However, "balance" does *not* mean sticking dumb/silly moments in an otherwise serious movie, ie FYEO -- I'm talking overall *tonal* balance.)

    BTW, while I have recently enjoyed the MI movies more than Bond movies, I do think they lean a little too much to the silly side. I found the Benji character in Rogue Nation to be more annoying (ruining the action scenes) than humorous. The humor should be dry, witty & slightly sardonic. Somehow fuse the thrilling & inventive action set pieces and gadgets of Ghost Protocol (but without the cliche Bond plot) with the gritty drama of Casino Royale (but without the unwanted back story and the major plot faults) & you'd have my tonally perfect Bond movie with just the right & lightest touch of camp & humor.
  • RC7 wrote: »
    Trigger wrote: »
    tigers99 wrote: »
    AceHole wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    I thought the sofa in the PTS was quite funny, because I thought 'why not?', it had to be somewhere. But it was a jolt because this was the first joke of it's kind in Craig's era, and yes it came from a past era.

    You took the words right out of my mouth!

    It was a real WTF moment for me, whereas my wife, who's not such a Bond aficionado, just chuckled and muttered "ha, typical!"

    Except that it isn't typical, far from it. This was as if being hit with the proverbial nostalgic sledge-hammer. "AM I IN THE RIGHT MOVIE..??"

    Dumbstruck is exactly how I felt when seeing DC land on that sofa after the building collapsed. The new era of 'Bond conditioning' that we, the audience, have been put through ever since CR means that we were basically pre-programmed to expect Dan to meet a gritty, bone-crunching landing - replete with torn trousers and facial cuts à la QoS.

    I don't have a problem with DC films going this way as long as they don't go overboard. For me this type of humour started in Skyfall when Bond jumps on the train - 'He must be in a hurry' - which felt like it could have been in an earlier Bond film - but I felt that he pulled off the health and safety part of the gag well.

    So, big question for you. How would you add humour in the film then? As I see it, certain elements may remind you of the cheeky Roger Moore era. But I didn't see Daniel Craig jumping on the back of a train. And I didn't hear 007 whining about 009's music when he was played by Roger Moore?

    You know, we COULD go the "Casino Royale"-way and "Licence To Kill"-way...by not having humour.....but really? I think after 3 'emotionally deep' Bond films, the time was there to add a bit more humour. And again, for me the humour worked. It's the highlight of the entire film.

    Other than Spectre I would say Casino Royale has more humour than the other Craig films. I thought CR had a lot of humour in it, just that it was less "in your face" or OTT humour.

    CR is hilarious in parts, it's just masked by the gut punch at the end. There are loads of great quips and throwaway lines. They aren't 'gags', but they're very funny.

    I think what sets the humour from the Craig films apart from, let's say the Moore-era, is the fact that they are much more part of the circumstances. If it's Daniel Craig running through a wall in CR, or Daniel Le Chiffre torturing him in CR, or Daniel jumping on a train in SF, or Daniel falling on a sofa in the PTS of SP, or Daniel 'trying out' Q's buttons in the car he stole from 009.......Daniel Craig never really utters a true Moore one-liner. Moore was the man who could do that, Brosnan failed by copying Moore, and Craig wisely avoids copying. I think it's just the combination of events combined with Craig's wonderful, "street-style", natural & mostly silent acting.

    And even if he reacts, it's never like a true Moore-one-liner. Examples:
    --> b]Bond is bedazzled when he just walked through a wall[/b ("Casino Royale", no need to put your pants straight)
    --> "Now the whole world is going to know you died scratching my balls!" ("Casino Royale", not something Roger Moore or Brosnan would have said)
    --> "Dammit, he killed him!" ("Quantum Of Solace", 'M' reacting to the strain of kills 007 leaves behind)
    --> "OOOOpen the Door!" ("Skyfall", when the train driver looks at Bond in astonishment)
    --> "Hmmm....what makes you think this is my first time??" ("Skyfall", and Silva responds "Ooowh Mr Bond!", adding even more humour)
    --> b]Bond looks around in astonishment when he falls on a sofa after the building collapsed[/b ("SPECTRE", you hear him thinking "WTF")
    --> "Sono Topolino!", b]Bond shows the S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-ring[/b ("SPECTRE", not really a Moore-one-liner. It's something only Craig would say)
    --> "Oooowh noooo!", b]Bond pushes the button and hears 009's music choice[/b ("SPECTRE", not to mention other events that 'happen' to 007 during the chase)


    This, people like to harp on the Craig era for being too serious, but they are full of tiny little humorous moments. He doesn't go around spouting one-liners left and right, the humor comes in more subtle ways. I've always enjoyed the "park my car" scene in Casino Royale. The humor isn't as pronounced, but it's always there.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    A coworker of mine, around 40, recently saw it and I asked him what he thought. He loved the pts and thought the car chase and its conclusion was brilliant, but that it dragged big time in the middle. I am guessing he meant some of the scenes in Austria and the hotel in Morocco.(I have stayed in several Moroccan hotels by the way, and they all look like that). He fell asleep.

    Guess the dude likes action and hates talking in movies.
  • Seven_Point_Six_FiveSeven_Point_Six_Five Southern California
    Posts: 1,257
    Matt007 wrote: »
    It's a serviceable car chase but would have been miles better with a little more danger. Where's the threat? A near miss with a lorry 5 minutes in?

    Otherwise it's a series of beatifully executed
    Handbrake turns and little else.

    Tell me at what point you think Bonds life is in danger here?

    There was a moment where Hinx actually catches up with Bond and even pulled up beside him. Hinx didn't pull out his gun and start firing at Bond, he didn't ram into him or do any aggressive maneuvers to stop him. I didn't perceive any immediate threat. And then to make it worse, Bond decides to have an expository chat with Moneypenny mid chase. That didn't help create a sense of immediate danger either.
  • A coworker of mine, around 40, recently saw it and I asked him what he thought. He loved the pts and thought the car chase and its conclusion was brilliant, but that it dragged big time in the middle. I am guessing he meant some of the scenes in Austria and the hotel in Morocco.(I have stayed in several Moroccan hotels by the way, and they all look like that). He fell asleep.

    Guess the dude likes action and hates talking in movies.

    It's what made Marvel big, and made UNCLE flop ;)
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Zzzzz...you were saying?
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 154
    I know in my case, when I say the Craig Bonds have been too serious, I'm not so much talking about a lack of humor as a lack of fun. They leave me feeling dramatically worn-out & bored rather than exhilarated.
  • Posts: 154
    There was a moment where Hinx actually catches up with Bond and even pulled up beside him. Hinx didn't pull out his gun and start firing at Bond, he didn't ram into him or do any aggressive maneuvers to stop him. I didn't perceive any immediate threat.

    Good point. I was wondering the same thing. What was Hinx hoping to accomplish? Get Bond to pull over from intimidation?

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,723
    A coworker of mine, around 40, recently saw it and I asked him what he thought. He loved the pts and thought the car chase and its conclusion was brilliant, but that it dragged big time in the middle. I am guessing he meant some of the scenes in Austria and the hotel in Morocco.(I have stayed in several Moroccan hotels by the way, and they all look like that). He fell asleep.

    Guess the dude likes action and hates talking in movies.

    Oh no, there's a Brosnan fan working with you? How can you cope with such specimen? ;)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    Going to see it for the second time this weekend, and I'm somehow even more excited than I was the first time now that I know what enjoyment I have to look forward to.
  • Posts: 7,616
    Bondforever, my thoughts exactly. I still have issues with the final section in London. No offence to Londoners, but we had enough of that from SF. I also wish the final section stayed in Tangier, but how they would have done it, I'm not sure. I also wish they stayed in Austria for longer. And wouldn't it have been great if that fight scene with Hinx was right at the end. The most exciting sequence in the film, if you ask me. I hope for Bond 25, they stage the majority of the film in one major location. (Japan, perhaps?)
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    A coworker of mine, around 40, recently saw it and I asked him what he thought. He loved the pts and thought the car chase and its conclusion was brilliant, but that it dragged big time in the middle. I am guessing he meant some of the scenes in Austria and the hotel in Morocco.(I have stayed in several Moroccan hotels by the way, and they all look like that). He fell asleep.

    Guess the dude likes action and hates talking in movies.

    Oh no, there's a Brosnan fan working with you? How can you cope with such specimen? ;)

    Didn t ask him anymore than that. We work while at work. We are not French.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    A coworker of mine, around 40, recently saw it and I asked him what he thought. He loved the pts and thought the car chase and its conclusion was brilliant, but that it dragged big time in the middle. I am guessing he meant some of the scenes in Austria and the hotel in Morocco.(I have stayed in several Moroccan hotels by the way, and they all look like that). He fell asleep.

    Guess the dude likes action and hates talking in movies.

    Oh no, there's a Brosnan fan working with you? How can you cope with such specimen? ;)

    Didn t ask him anymore than that. We work while at work. We are not French.

    Ha. Awesome.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,423
    Saw it again today for the second time, and basicly it confirmed my initial feelings (all the good ones and also the bad - just a few).
    ]
    - The film does fall after Bond and Madeleine leave the train in Morocco and loses the edge, the suspense and the thrill that managed to keep till then;
    - the "foster brother" plot is totally unecessary. Blofeld is Blofeld, period. No need to "mess" up with Bond's (Ian Fleming's) background;

    8 out of 10

    Good post. One that mirrors my own thoughts. Especially the bit I highlighted above.
Sign In or Register to comment.