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
The missed opportunity and the Blofeld situation are what makes it one of the worse, at least DAF has that Barry score and one of the best theme tunes of the series, SPECTRE hasn't even got that going for it.
Also, agreed with @TheWizardOfIce. Expectations were very high for Spectre. Mine certainly were, and I have no problem admitting that my high expectations contributed to my disappointment.
People had very specific expectations, too - SPECTRE and Blofeld were back after 30 or 40 years and no doubt every single Bond fan had an idea of what they wanted to see. Hell, I don't think any previous Bond film was ever burdened with such expectations! Mendes was faced with reinventing SPECTRE/Blofeld while also keeping them recognizable. Personally, there are many directions I would have enjoyed... A plot about surveillance and a paint-by-numbers Blofeld with a tacked-on childhood connection to Bond is decidedly not one of them.
Thing is I don't even understand why you're comparing it to DAD, DAF or MR. It's a totally different type of Bond film.
That's the guy who invented the ballpoint, isn't it?
Anyway, @Brady and @Wizard, time to cool off a bit guys. @Brady, you have bravely defended SP on a Bond-forum, which is admireable. It's been an interesting discussion up until now, with fair points made on both sides. Why stop now? We don't have to agree here, and I think everyone has played nicely on topic until now. Nothing wrong with that now is there?
It seems brutally cruel to say SP jumped the shark when about 85% of it is far more competent, stylish, dark, beautifully made, well acted, impressive than most of the 70s output and the majority of Brozza's tenure. But, alas, there's no other term for it.
Stuff like the elephant winning the slots, the kung fu schoolgirls, the Bondola, the fire truck chase, the invisible car and parasurfing are all blatant jumping the shark moments that cannot be argued with.
The key difference between the above and SP is that those are just moments which can be forgotten in an instant. With SP it's shark jumping is woven into the plot and character motivations so that it permeates the entire fabric of the film.
The other shark jumping moments are like Dr No's radioactive contamination - superficial and you can just rinse it off with no ill effects.
With SP it's like you were one of the guys ordered to lob lumps of graphite off the roof at Chernobyl - the contamination has permeated into your bone marrow.
It affects not only the earlier films of the Craig era but will ripple into the future also as wherever they go from here I can't see how they can satisfactorily resolve the issues it has raised without even more convoluted writing; but as they've got P&W on board I'm sure they'll give it a crack.
Oh shit ,I forgot about that....*runs out to quickly buy a Liverpool shirt !*
Thankfully it hasn't yet spoiled my enjoyment of his prior efforts (I just choose to ignore the uncomfortable revelations of childhood jealousy spouted by Blobherhouser). As an example, when viewing QoS last night, not once did I consciously connect the White we see here with the frail old man in SP (even though I obviously knew he was supposed to be the same man). The fact that he looks so different in the last film helps me to ignore the connection.
I am concerned however that a future entry could ruin all of this for me though, especially if they choose to go down the continuation path. As you note, they have created a few roadblocks for themselves on account of this hubris and misjudged recklessness.
I think the only safe way forward would be to entirely ignore it, or alternatively mention something 'in passing', like they did in QoS when there was a brief mention of Le Chiffre at MI6 HQ (during the discussion about tagging notes). Blink and you'll miss it, but the connection is there for those who want to see it.
And earlier in Sienna when M tells him the Americans wanted Le Chiffre alive,and Bond says they should have made a deal with a priest.
It all works in brilliantly without dragging the past out,as you say.
Definitely...although I would still love a stand-alone film with no references at all.
Whether that can happen with Craig now though,i doubt it unfortunately.
They've made their bed now with Craig's Bond I feel.
Ok you can say they learnt from their mistakes and gave us CR but then just 3 films later they do exactly the same and foist stepbrothergate on us.
I haven't read much of the Sony leaks stuff but what I have read it mostly seems to be the studio execs saying this won't do and needs more work.
That's two out of five films now where EON have been unable to see the iceberg looming before them and correct their course before steaming straight into it. How are these things being allowed to slip through the net into the final script?
So whilst I have reasonable faith that the next film will be decent enough (although God alone knows the best way to dig themselves out of this narrative cul de sac) I have absolutely no confidence that two or three films after that we shall once again be asking 'How could they possibly think that was a good idea?'
Funny, SF is a monumental shark jumper for me.
Bond 'dieing', then inexplicably popping up in Thailand with some hot chick a scene or two later. CGI flesh eating monsters, pointless tube train crashes, mummy issues. M haunted by some twdious nonsense from her past (again - thanks P+W). DB5 yawn inducing scenes. It smacks from start to finish of a writing team that have hit the buffers.
SP if anything dials it back. Yes Brofeld is an abomination but as you say 85% of the movie is pretty good - that's a high hit rate by historical Bond standards.
Is that really Thailand? I doubt it.
Wherever it was it looked utterly depressing.
As you can see,by the long queue,most of the members here are there already,including me due to my obsession with killing Kara Milovy.
I however am completely sane!
SF overrated maybe but QOS? It may be the least appreciated of the Craig Bonds critically! If it is overrated then what is an underrated Bond movie?
But back on topic I think Spectre will be overall more appreciated with time. Not as a great Bond movie but a good if flawed Bond movie that is part of a solid tenure.