In time, will SP be more or less appreciated?

1181921232451

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    In response to a few posts ago, where @Getafix and @Mendes4Life called CR somewhat overrated if I understood them well, I'd like to say a few things. Obviously it's understandable that not everyone loves or has to love CR. I've always assumed that every Bond film finishes first on at least one person's list and also last on at least one other person's list. CR should be no different. Also, there are many things CR does very well, but it's probably not the only Bond film that does them so well.

    You see, we have a great James Bond with an amazing physical dominance over many of his foes, a superbly staged card game, an exceptionally clever plot, an inspiring sense of naturalism, an immensely well developed and attractive Bond girl... Each one of these elements can be found in other Bond films too. But what I have always considered to be the major strength of CR is that this film has all those great things packed in one single movie! In the Connery classics for example, I go to DN for starters, to FRWL for the main dish, to GF for desert and to TB and YOLT for some late-night snacks. With CR, however, I get the complete meal all at once.

    The film opens in a stunningly addictive way, never failing to pin me down in my seat, leaving me almost breathless with admiration for how much 007 power was conveyed in those first 3 or so minutes. The rest of the film offers one stroke of genius after the other, be it in terms of plot, acting, cinematography, or something else. And even after 2 hours and 20-something minutes of near-exhaustive worshipping, the final shots of Bond walking towards Mr White make me salivate with excitement and anticipation for what comes next. Then still, though I have known what comes next since 2008, I'm never not in the same state of exhilaration as I was in 2006 when I left the theatre with the promise that this James Bond - not just any James Bond but this James Bond - would return. Though GE is still my favourite Bond film, mostly due to my being at the proper age when that film was released - you might say it's my generation's Bond film or something like that, I don't know - CR is the only Bond film that doesn't let me down in any department whatsoever. Like magic, its call is irresistible and I, as one of its most fervid fans, cannot fully explain why.

    So while I agree with Getafix and Mendes that I may give the film perhaps too much credit, the problem is I cannot seem to cease revering CR with an almost religious fervour. I never completely joined the club of SF devotees, as that film has always existed in the shadows of the much better CR for me, no matter how good SF may or may not be. Many of the things people called "great" about SF slightly failed in my book when compared to CR. Silva a superb villain? Nah, surely not as great as Le Chiffre. Great action? Come on, the "parkour chase" and Miami International sequence top all of what SF has to offer. Yes, Naomi Harris. But she's no Eva Greene. And so on. I'm just saying that the 2012 hype surrounding SF felt a bit unfair to me, though I was pleased and proud as a Bond fan, because I was of the honest opinion that most if not all of that praise should have gone to CR. It's comparable I think to how I felt about the smashing success of The Dark Knight compared to the lukewarm reception Batman Begins had received box office wise. I was excited about The Dark Knight but I had hoped that Batman Begins would be able to retrospectively get some reappraisal too. And in this case I'm not even sure which Batman film I prefer over the other. In the case of the Craig Bonds, I do know for sure which film I consider the best. It's CR, leaps and bounds over the other three.

    A rousing post, @DarthDimi. It's amazing the endless list of elements CR nails that match or exceed earlier Bonds, even the classics, when it comes to design, Bond girls, drama, performance, action and on, and on and on. At the very most I could critique the final sequence in Venice with the falling house, but even that is classed as a nitpick in my mind when it comes to that film.

    I also stand with you about SF. I enjoy the film but the hype the film got from seemingly the whole world, calling it a better Bond film than CR AND the likes of FRWL and OHMSS made me chuckle. I agree that CR beats it in almost every way, but of course it's the only modern Bond that can stand toe to toe with the 60s era, so is it really any surprise? Daniel Craig's Bond has the rare distinction of peaking right out of the gate, and though that may disappoint some, most Bonds never get a film of that quality in their entire era.

    It's also extremely interesting to me how the first Fleming Bond book became the last to be made into a film. The origin tale of Bond, the birth of the hero became the modern classic with a fresh Bond debuting inside it, just as the literary Bond saw his debut in the novel's pages. It's all very fitting how it all worked out, and I wouldn't have it any other way. Without CR existing and me watching it dozens of times one summer when my Bond love was fresh, I would likely not be here today. I owe it so much.

    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    In response to a few posts ago, where @Getafix and @Mendes4Life called CR somewhat overrated if I understood them well, I'd like to say a few things. Obviously it's understandable that not everyone loves or has to love CR. I've always assumed that every Bond film finishes first on at least one person's list and also last on at least one other person's list. CR should be no different. Also, there are many things CR does very well, but it's probably not the only Bond film that does them so well.

    You see, we have a great James Bond with an amazing physical dominance over many of his foes, a superbly staged card game, an exceptionally clever plot, an inspiring sense of naturalism, an immensely well developed and attractive Bond girl... Each one of these elements can be found in other Bond films too. But what I have always considered to be the major strength of CR is that this film has all those great things packed in one single movie! In the Connery classics for example, I go to DN for starters, to FRWL for the main dish, to GF for desert and to TB and YOLT for some late-night snacks. With CR, however, I get the complete meal all at once.

    The film opens in a stunningly addictive way, never failing to pin me down in my seat, leaving me almost breathless with admiration for how much 007 power was conveyed in those first 3 or so minutes. The rest of the film offers one stroke of genius after the other, be it in terms of plot, acting, cinematography, or something else. And even after 2 hours and 20-something minutes of near-exhaustive worshipping, the final shots of Bond walking towards Mr White make me salivate with excitement and anticipation for what comes next. Then still, though I have known what comes next since 2008, I'm never not in the same state of exhilaration as I was in 2006 when I left the theatre with the promise that this James Bond - not just any James Bond but this James Bond - would return. Though GE is still my favourite Bond film, mostly due to my being at the proper age when that film was released - you might say it's my generation's Bond film or something like that, I don't know - CR is the only Bond film that doesn't let me down in any department whatsoever. Like magic, its call is irresistible and I, as one of its most fervid fans, cannot fully explain why.

    So while I agree with Getafix and Mendes that I may give the film perhaps too much credit, the problem is I cannot seem to cease revering CR with an almost religious fervour. I never completely joined the club of SF devotees, as that film has always existed in the shadows of the much better CR for me, no matter how good SF may or may not be. Many of the things people called "great" about SF slightly failed in my book when compared to CR. Silva a superb villain? Nah, surely not as great as Le Chiffre. Great action? Come on, the "parkour chase" and Miami International sequence top all of what SF has to offer. Yes, Naomi Harris. But she's no Eva Greene. And so on. I'm just saying that the 2012 hype surrounding SF felt a bit unfair to me, though I was pleased and proud as a Bond fan, because I was of the honest opinion that most if not all of that praise should have gone to CR. It's comparable I think to how I felt about the smashing success of The Dark Knight compared to the lukewarm reception Batman Begins had received box office wise. I was excited about The Dark Knight but I had hoped that Batman Begins would be able to retrospectively get some reappraisal too. And in this case I'm even sure which Batman film I prefer over the other. In the case of the Craig Bonds, I do know for sure which film I consider the best. It's CR, leaps and bounds over the other three.

    This. It's all well and good nitpicking from film to film and people have valid criticisms of CR, but sometimes you just have to stand back accept that certain things are just a cut above. It's cool and 'ironic' these days to suggest that QoS is better. It's just not. CR is a bona fide classic and everyone knows it, even if they can't admit it to themselves.

    @RC7 I like QoS far less. And I don't have issues with CR to be 'ironic' like some kind of millennial hipster. It's been discussed on multiple threads here how the plot is messy and overstuffed with "Bond begins" garbage that wasn't in the novel (although I agree the aesthetics are top notch). But feel free to carry on believing it's a masterpiece. I'd never try to make out like your opinion wasn't valid, or null and void...

    I never used the word masterpiece, but along with FRWL and OHMSS it's as close to a modern genre masterpiece as we've got. It's next level. Despite having some excellent moments, as an overall package QoS isn't close to the level achieved by that movie.

    Agreed, @RC7. CR is the sole modern movie that can stand convincingly next to FRWL and OHMSS without being laughed at when placed into a debate with them.
    Kind of boggles my mind, to be honest. One is classic Bond through and through that some people just seem to be obsessed with knocking how "awful" the underwater stuff is and how "it's slow". Cinematography, Connery, quips, epic scope, great story, good romance, great locale, memorable villains. Whereas almost SP's entire third act is just a mess after a promising first two acts. I still like it but TB is firmly enshrined in my top 10 were as SP as it stands never could be. The potential was there, but hell, DAD had some potential as well. Not to compare SP to the turd known as DAD, but squandered potential is what makes me downrate DAD so much. Thankfully SP could never get that bad.

    @Aziz_Fekkesh, I stand with you against the criminal criticism of Thunderball. What people call a boring first act I call a smart build-up to a high stakes plot as we get to spend time with SPECTRE and watch them develop their plot first hand as Bond and MI6 are juxtaposed against them (a unique Terence Young trademark). What they call boring underwater garbage I call the most amazing underwater cinematography in cinema history that kicks off with the stunning shot of the divers jumping off the plane and parachuting into battle.

    I mean, just the scenes with Bond and Fiona make the movie an instant classic, and when you add to that Sean's crazy amazing performance, Largo and Bond's meeting at the gambling tables, the Junkanoo chase, the scope of the NATO nuke plot, Adam's amazing briefing room set that makes you feel all the tension, the suits, the glamour, the location shooting and many more elements, it all comes together to create an insanely impressive movie that is the very definition of epic. I could listen to Bond stomp on Largo's ego all day, and the likes of Luciana Paluzzi make me lament how women like that aren't made anymore.

    Fiona is the definitive femme fatale villainess of Bond, a perfect deconstruction of the Bond girls that came both before and after who fall into Bond's arms in seconds and say, "I love you." She plays Bond like a fiddle and screws him for kicks (a move out of his playbook), prepared to kill him after. The scene with Sean and Luciana in bed where she bites his shoulder and ear characterizes her as a wild animal, and when the pair meet again on the dance floor as the gunmen swarm Bond, a film of this kind can rarely get this tense. I've seldom seen Bond so frightened as when he's shot and on the run in the Bahamas, and Fiona joins the likes of Grant as some of the few who brought 007 to the very doorstep of Death.

    Classic, absolutely classic.
  • I think it's still too new to say for certain , like all Bond films it'll have those who love it , those who aren't so keen and those for whom it's growing on them over time . But whaterver you think of it just remember , there is NO right or wrong answer when it comes to Bond , all opinions are welcome. It's all a matter of perspective.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Having given more thought to this since I last posted here, I think it will be more appreciated, at least from my perspective.

    Once it no longer has the position of 'most recent' Bond film (a spot I find almost offensive that it currently occupies given my problems with it) I think I will be more able to accept it, warts and all, just like I do DAD, DAF, AVTAK, TWINE.

    Moreover, once there is a subsequent Bond film which I hopefully find more agreeable, my disappointment with SP is likely to dissipate. That's what happened when CR replaced DAD as the latest entry. I now enjoy DAD for the uniquely humorous entry that it is because there have been far more serious entries since.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Over time I'm sure we will see SP as a "classic" just like the flawed classics of old. I still see DAD and DAF as better than SP just because wrong or right the filmmakers knew what they wanted and stayed on course.

    SP like the 67CR doesn't really know what it wants and doesn't even follow through. The love story being probably the most obvious element.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,275
    w2bond wrote: »
    GBF wrote: »
    I know some casual fans who really liked SP at first and probably only viewing. Some even liked it much more than the other Craig films since they thought it was more similar to the Brosnan films which they enjoyed more than the Craig films. However the majority prefered Skyfall and especially Casino Royal.

    Many people here complain about the score and the step brother angle. I don't really mind both of this so very much. I mean the score is boring but it does not disturb me and it fits most of the sequences well. Bond films are no music videos so I don't mind that. The step brother plot is just stupid but is just a very small fragment of the entire film.

    My biggest complaint is that the film feels like a Best of Bond film where the writers tried to put everything in the film that Bond fans usually like, no matter whether this fit together at all: Therefore we need a train sequence, a snow sequence, a helicopter sequence, Blofeld and SPECTER, a romance between Bond and a Bond girl, a gadget from Q, a strong henchman, an outlandish villain lair, some emo Bond stuff....

    The problem is that you cannot just add all this things together and achieve something great. Sometimes less is more. Instead of all this boring car and helicopter chases, boring side plots and pointless globetrotting they should have tried to write an interesting and unique script....

    Personally I *like* the return to formula. Problem is the action isn't particularly fun which could be covered up by a good score but wait the score is crap

    In the buildup to SP, I remember Gregg Wilson raving about the Austrian chase. The action was terrible and out of character for Bond (would he put Madeleine in that level of danger?). This scares me for future films if GW takes a larger role. Personally, I trust Babs more.
  • Posts: 1,680
    The plane/ Rover chase was okay. I would have preferred Hinx taking Madeline on the cargo plane & Bond boarding & giving fight.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,959
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    The plane/ Rover chase was okay. I would have preferred Hinx taking Madeline on the cargo plane & Bond boarding & giving fight.

    That would've been amazing, considering nobody would've been flying the plane!
  • Posts: 4,044
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    The plane/ Rover chase was okay. I would have preferred Hinx taking Madeline on the cargo plane & Bond boarding & giving fight.

    That would've been amazing, considering nobody would've been flying the plane!

    Kara!
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    echo wrote: »
    w2bond wrote: »
    GBF wrote: »
    I know some casual fans who really liked SP at first and probably only viewing. Some even liked it much more than the other Craig films since they thought it was more similar to the Brosnan films which they enjoyed more than the Craig films. However the majority prefered Skyfall and especially Casino Royal.

    Many people here complain about the score and the step brother angle. I don't really mind both of this so very much. I mean the score is boring but it does not disturb me and it fits most of the sequences well. Bond films are no music videos so I don't mind that. The step brother plot is just stupid but is just a very small fragment of the entire film.

    My biggest complaint is that the film feels like a Best of Bond film where the writers tried to put everything in the film that Bond fans usually like, no matter whether this fit together at all: Therefore we need a train sequence, a snow sequence, a helicopter sequence, Blofeld and SPECTER, a romance between Bond and a Bond girl, a gadget from Q, a strong henchman, an outlandish villain lair, some emo Bond stuff....

    The problem is that you cannot just add all this things together and achieve something great. Sometimes less is more. Instead of all this boring car and helicopter chases, boring side plots and pointless globetrotting they should have tried to write an interesting and unique script....

    Personally I *like* the return to formula. Problem is the action isn't particularly fun which could be covered up by a good score but wait the score is crap

    In the buildup to SP, I remember Gregg Wilson raving about the Austrian chase. The action was terrible and out of character for Bond (would he put Madeleine in that level of danger?). This scares me for future films if GW takes a larger role. Personally, I trust Babs more.

    I think GW will be fine.

    Madeline was already in danger ..one of those last ditch efforts.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,275
    The chase was boring.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    I blame the music. Here's the same chase with a more exciting tune.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,959
    echo wrote: »
    The chase was boring.

    The entire Austria action sequence does nothing for me, sadly. If I'm going to watch Bond pursue a Bond girl (who is in a car, being held hostage by the henchman) while he chooses to drive a large, cumbersome vehicle that will surely and inevitably lay waste to the surrounding environment, I'll pop in GE.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    It would've rocked as a ski sequence, where Bond ski down a massive slope just off the Hoffler clinic to reach the road at the base of the mountain in time to head off Hinx and the other agents in their vehicles, with SPECTRE agents on skis pursuing him.

    Because we didn't get this, I want to cry.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    And with a remix of the OHMSS theme it could have been glorious.
  • Posts: 3,336
    It would've rocked as a ski sequence, where Bond ski down a massive slope just off the Hoffler clinic to reach the road at the base of the mountain in time to head off Hinx and the other agents in their vehicles, with SPECTRE agents on skis pursuing him.

    Because we didn't get this, I want to cry.

    I agree, they really wasted that location to the max.

  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Yes the Rome chase didn't work and the snow sequence could have been better.

    Ugh just remembered the lingering shot of Moneypenny scoping out her frig. Why was that so important??

    Was Smith and Mendes deliberately sabotaging Bond?

    Oh yeah also forgot about the other Smith and his less than manly theme.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I thought I'd never EVER say this; and this isn't me being hyperbolic but for me, I think SP may actually be the worst Bond film of all 24 movies. Yes, the worst. I tried watching it the other day and it literally pained me. I couldn't get through it. Overall it's just so disappointing in every way. I can't stress enough how strongly I dislike this movie.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,275
    I think this was a problem throughout SP. Mendes never made the locations feel unique and special, with the exception of Mexico City, and perhaps Morocco. Forster had just as many locations but at least he made you feel them.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited January 2017 Posts: 4,116
    doubleoego wrote: »
    I thought I'd never EVER say this; and this isn't me being hyperbolic but for me, I think SP may actually be the worst Bond film of all 24 movies. Yes, the worst. I tried watching it the other day and it literally pained me. I couldn't get through it. Overall it's just so disappointing in every way. I can't stress enough how strongly I dislike this movie.

    I agree. Used to be the cheap poorly directed LTK that wasted Dalton's talent but no for me now its SP. Glen is a second rate director ...you got what could be expected but no excuse for Mendes. He should have done far better than undoing all the progress made by the series and not to mention embarrassing himself.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    I wouldn't say it's the worst. No way in hell. I'd take it over NSNA and the second act of DAD any day.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,275
    Craig's presence alone, and the PTS, land SP in my top half, just barely.
  • Posts: 7,653
    If SP is Craigs last 007 it will be remembered how Craig started with a bang and went out with a sizzle, even if it had the biggest real life explosion or the most overpriced car chase.
    Like Brosnan should have had Craig deserves a decent last movie and with SP he does most certainly keeps up the tradition of DAF, AVTAK, LTK & SP, poorish last outings even if Rogers was easily the best and original spy story.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,959
    It seems several of the actors went out on a bit of a whimper/dud, or those who managed to get four or more films, anyway: DAF, AVTAK, DAD, and SP.

    Granted, some of us probably rate these higher than others, but overall, it's hard to argue that all four of these have been found toward the bottom of a lot of our rankings. The only out-of-place one could be SP, as it seems to have a lot more supporters (who also rank it highly) than the former three films do.
  • edited January 2017 Posts: 7,653
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    It seems several of the actors went out on a bit of a whimper/dud, or those who managed to get four or more films, anyway: DAF, AVTAK, DAD, and SP.

    Granted, some of us probably rate these higher than others, but overall, it's hard to argue that all four of these have been found toward the bottom of a lot of our rankings. The only out-of-place one could be SP, as it seems to have a lot more supporters (who also rank it highly) than the former three films do.

    I expect that with a new 007 a few movies in his tenure SP will drop to the place it belongs a soft ending like too many actors had.

  • Posts: 1,631
    SaintMark wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    It seems several of the actors went out on a bit of a whimper/dud, or those who managed to get four or more films, anyway: DAF, AVTAK, DAD, and SP.

    Granted, some of us probably rate these higher than others, but overall, it's hard to argue that all four of these have been found toward the bottom of a lot of our rankings. The only out-of-place one could be SP, as it seems to have a lot more supporters (who also rank it highly) than the former three films do.

    I expect that with a new 007 a few movies in his tenure SP will drop to the place it belongs a soft ending like too many actors had.

    I would have to agree. A lot (and before people jump down my throat for saying this, I'm not saying that this is the case for all of the SP love out there) of the love for SP can be chalked up to it being the new Bond film. Bond films tend to be more beloved when they're the most recent one. With more rewatches and, eventually, more new films coming out, the opinion of SP will fall into place just like it has for all of the other films.

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,959
    @dalton, that's a reason why I'm excited for 'Bond 25,' because once that's out, I'd love to see my thoughts on SP in hindsight. Hell, I've made it obvious that I'm not a fan of SF - it was my least favorite film in the series at the time - but once SP released, I went back and found a lot more to appreciate in SF, bumping it up a rank so SP could take the dreaded last place position.
  • Posts: 1,631
    Something similar happened for me as well. I never had Skyfall ranked last, but I was pretty disillusioned with it after leaving the theater and never warmed to it at all during the stretch between its home release and the home release of Spectre. After a few failed attempts to watch SP at home, I popped in SF and thought to myself: what was I complaining about with this film, it really could have been so much worse, having now seen what a truly awful Bond film looked like with SP.
  • Posts: 1,680
    Spectre is better than YOLT, DAF, AVTAK & LTK, & DAD.

  • Posts: 386
    I have a theory that the Sam Mendes movies have limited replay value. Sure, they look amazing, and after the first viewing (usually in a buzzing cinema with great atmosphere) you walk out thinking they've done amazing things with Bond, but I am coming to the conclusion that SF and SP do not reward repeat viewings.

    The Mendes template for Bond is sumptuously mounted scenes with high style that fail to register once the discovery factor has worn off. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy both, but I'm not sure if SF or SP will ever have the same replay value as CR or even QoS.

    As an aside, I cannot recall a bigger writing disaster in the bond canon as that third act in SP. Just a trainwreck of screenplay craft.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2017 Posts: 23,883
    GetCarter wrote: »
    As an aside, I cannot recall a bigger writing disaster in the bond canon as that third act in SP. Just a trainwreck of screenplay craft.
    I'm inclined to agree. It's rather horrific, which is why I'd truly prefer if this entire team just be relegated to the history books, as the ending seems to infer.

    In time, I believe those who criticize this film (myself included) will be less vociferous in our negativity, because time heals everything. Having said that, I also believe the film will be less generously looked upon by those who love it now, because the latest film is always either most hated or most loved. Such is the way of things.
Sign In or Register to comment.