Was SPECTRE a disappointment?

1121315171821

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    My biggest issue is reintroducing SPECTRE and Blofeld four films into an era. It doesn't have the same buildup or weight as it would've had they actually been lingering about and causing damage in Bond's world properly from the start, not retroactively. When you opt to kill BOTH of them off in the very next film, what was the point?
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited August 2022 Posts: 1,711
    echo wrote: »
    It lasts about five minutes too long and ushers in Brofeld. What's to like about that? Blofeld seems petty, not a criminal mastermind.

    The suspense should have been in the execution of whoever that guy was, as it was in all the old SPECTRE scenes (FRWL, TB, YOLT). If you're going to buy the rights to SPECTRE back, at least get that part right.

    I'm pretty sure the whole scene is about five minutes, but maybe that was a cute way of saying every single second of it is terrible.

    I guess doing the exact same thing as Thunderball, etc was one option, but Bond's look of terror vs Blofeld's calm control really works for me. What's petty about Blofeld saying, "Hey James Bond, I know you're there. Took you long enough"?
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    My biggest issue is reintroducing SPECTRE and Blofeld four films into an era. It doesn't have the same buildup or weight as it would've had they actually been lingering about and causing damage in Bond's world properly from the start, not retroactively. When you opt to kill BOTH of them off in the very next film, what was the point?

    I know I always just love everything Spectre, but I really think SP-NTTD gives the fullest Spectre story in the series, and we do see them at their most powerful, and it's pretty significant.

    I also thought NTTD was able to cash Spectre's check pretty well. Doubling down on the mild retcon worked wonders for me in terms of making it feel real.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,547
    echo wrote: »
    It lasts about five minutes too long and ushers in Brofeld. What's to like about that? Blofeld seems petty, not a criminal mastermind.

    The suspense should have been in the execution of whoever that guy was, as it was in all the old SPECTRE scenes (FRWL, TB, YOLT). If you're going to buy the rights to SPECTRE back, at least get that part right.

    They didn't buy the rights to Spectre back, they won them back after a years-long legal battle. A little harder to time. But I agree, they could have executed the return a lot better; my understanding was they used Spectre and Blofeld as a way to lure Sam Mendes back, which probably wasn't the right move either, but one can see why they wanted to recapture that Mendes magic.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,179
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    My biggest issue is reintroducing SPECTRE and Blofeld four films into an era. It doesn't have the same buildup or weight as it would've had they actually been lingering about and causing damage in Bond's world properly from the start, not retroactively. When you opt to kill BOTH of them off in the very next film, what was the point?

    True. And yet, one could argue that SPECTRE was reintroduced in CR. 😉
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited August 2022 Posts: 6,296
    echo wrote: »
    It lasts about five minutes too long and ushers in Brofeld. What's to like about that? Blofeld seems petty, not a criminal mastermind.

    The suspense should have been in the execution of whoever that guy was, as it was in all the old SPECTRE scenes (FRWL, TB, YOLT). If you're going to buy the rights to SPECTRE back, at least get that part right.

    They didn't buy the rights to Spectre back, they won them back after a years-long legal battle. A little harder to time. But I agree, they could have executed the return a lot better; my understanding was they used Spectre and Blofeld as a way to lure Sam Mendes back, which probably wasn't the right move either, but one can see why they wanted to recapture that Mendes magic.

    It was a settlement.

    https://variety.com/2013/biz/news/james-bond-right-dispute-ends-after-50-years-1200837571/
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    My biggest issue is reintroducing SPECTRE and Blofeld four films into an era. It doesn't have the same buildup or weight as it would've had they actually been lingering about and causing damage in Bond's world properly from the start, not retroactively. When you opt to kill BOTH of them off in the very next film, what was the point?

    True. And yet, one could argue that SPECTRE was reintroduced in CR. 😉

    One certainly could but I never see it that way. There's nothing throughout CR-SF that has me feeling like Blofeld is secretly pulling the strings and they're never even a thought in my head when I rewatch them.

    I'd certainly love to see another take on the group and Blofeld himself in the next era, provided they map that out from the start to a degree. I know they won't be able to get every single script finalized and complete before filming begins on the first but a little consistency would go a long way.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,152
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I mostly watch SP late at night, when the world has gone to bed and all is quiet, when my surroundings are completely dark, and when I'm just as isolated as Bond and Madeleine.
    Same. I've watched SP literally dozens of times and it's alway alone and at night. I love that the whole third act is at night and London looks empty. I like being awake when the world's asleep and that's how SP's London finale feels.

  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,711
    Creasy47 wrote: »

    One certainly could but I never see it that way. There's nothing throughout CR-SF that has me feeling like Blofeld is secretly pulling the strings and they're never even a thought in my head when I rewatch them.

    I definitely thought after CR, and certainly after QOS, "Oh, they're doing a secret criminal organization thing like SPECTRE...!
  • CharmianBondCharmianBond Pett Bottom, Kent
    Posts: 557
    Yeah I hadn't really thought of that before but maybe that's why I quite like it too, it's like a slight eeriness that mirrors the emptiness of Bond's soul. I think the colour grading is a mistake for much of the film but there's a great deal of style in SPECTRE that gets missed because of it.
  • Agent_Zero_OneAgent_Zero_One Ireland
    Posts: 554
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »

    I have probably explained this before, but the way I see it, Bond and Madeleine are two lone souls--both orphaned, both alone.

    They're a perfect match. I love how she shuts down Bond's interview as soon as he says "L'Americain," just as he shut down an interview as soon as "Skyfall" was mentioned in the previous film. It's a nice thing they did there.

    Right? That's why I feel like they are made for each other.

    Well, they literally are, from a screenwriting perspective! :))

    But yeah, while I can sympathize with those who don't think the development of the romance was good enough (I thought it was more than fine for a film of this genre), I can't understand not appreciating Madeleine as being exactly the right character for James Bond.

    I don't think a flaboyant, spunky, extraverted lady would've been the right match for Craig's Bond. Maybe Roger's Bond could have handled such a girl better. ;-)

    Anya Amasova? She's also a loner, or what about Melina Havelock?
    Solitaire, she's also loner, Mr. Big held her like his slave.

    And Moore's Bond could be also easily annoyed by such attitude of women, think of his reaction towards Bibi Dahl, or heck he's even annoyed towards Anya, when she's trying to outweigh him.

    I think it's Dalton who could have handled those, both Kara and Pam (she's also flamboyant, and spunky) were both extroverted, same for Lazenby, the Angels of Death, or even Connery, think of Pussy Galore or Tatiana Romanova.

    But Moore? I'm not sure, he's a bit of Old Fashioned guy, a conservative one in my view.
    I read Moore's Bond as conservative, but not in the kind of cranky way Connery's is.
  • Agent_Zero_OneAgent_Zero_One Ireland
    Posts: 554
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    My biggest issue is reintroducing SPECTRE and Blofeld four films into an era. It doesn't have the same buildup or weight as it would've had they actually been lingering about and causing damage in Bond's world properly from the start, not retroactively. When you opt to kill BOTH of them off in the very next film, what was the point?
    If only they didn't name the organisation in QOS, then they could've retconned it into SPECTRE in a smoother, more climactic way.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,179
    Venutius wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I mostly watch SP late at night, when the world has gone to bed and all is quiet, when my surroundings are completely dark, and when I'm just as isolated as Bond and Madeleine.
    Same. I've watched SP literally dozens of times and it's alway alone and at night. I love that the whole third act is at night and London looks empty. I like being awake when the world's asleep and that's how SP's London finale feels.

    We are very much alike, then. I love to watch all the Bonds at night, but SP is a special nocturnal Bond for me.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited August 2022 Posts: 7,547
    Love the nocturnal takes on Spectre. I'm with you @Venutius about being awake when the world is asleep. Nighthawks is my favourite painting. ;)
    echo wrote: »

    Fair enough! Thanks for the link.

  • Posts: 1,985
    Not just a disappointment, but a major disappointment. The fourth film in the DC series had the opportunity to do something quiet exciting. Instead the opportunity was squandered for a surprise plot point. The real surprise was how dumb the idea of the adopted brother was. It added nothing to the series. Seriously? When people ask, "Who was SPECTRE?" Are we really going to say, "Bond's adopted brother." Even if one views each Bond in his own parallel universe, you cannot help but relate things to previous films. Rewatching YOLT and OHMSS with the adopted brother connection stuck in one's brain practically ruins those films.

    And then there's Blofeld. The casting of CW--which probably seemed an inspired choice prior to filming--was such a let down. Even Telly Savalas--who might not appear on anyone's potential Blofeld list--was far more interesting than Waltz. Then the reprise of the role in NTTD--this time with YOLT eye scar--and throw in an equally boring villain wearing a Phantom of the Opera mask (it's really Noh theatre, I know.) Three successive films featured a different Blofeld actor. CW could easily have been dumped for a more interesting portrayal. Villains are such an important part of crime and spy dramas. They need to be larger than life and memorable. Slow and calm like a snake about the strike is not terribly exciting. Waltz and Malek are not Anthony Hopkins. Two very accomplished actors wasted opportunities to be really great villains. The only pain Blofeld was the master of was the pain of seeing a wasted opportunity. Maybe it was the writing, the direction, or maybe they were just poor casting choices. Neither SP nor NTTD are bad films. But both could have been so much more.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,296
    I wish SP had fully adapted the Burgess TSWLM idea of the new guard (Spectre) coming in and assassinating the old guard (Quantum) in a palace coup. I think Waltz would have been good playing opposite Christensen.

    I guess they kind of, sort of did used that idea in NTTD. But that was more a revenge plot on Bond, which really wasn't necessary, except to explain how the nanobots infect families.

    But compare Bond giving up his life to escape the nanobots for Madeleine and Matilde to, say, May Day exploding herself to save Silicon Valley in AVTAK. I don't know, the second one just makes more sense.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Not just a disappointment, but a major disappointment. The fourth film in the DC series had the opportunity to do something quiet exciting. Instead the opportunity was squandered for a surprise plot point. The real surprise was how dumb the idea of the adopted brother was. It added nothing to the series. Seriously? When people ask, "Who was SPECTRE?" Are we really going to say, "Bond's adopted brother." Even if one views each Bond in his own parallel universe, you cannot help but relate things to previous films. Rewatching YOLT and OHMSS with the adopted brother connection stuck in one's brain practically ruins those films.

    And then there's Blofeld. The casting of CW--which probably seemed an inspired choice prior to filming--was such a let down. Even Telly Savalas--who might not appear on anyone's potential Blofeld list--was far more interesting than Waltz. Then the reprise of the role in NTTD--this time with YOLT eye scar--and throw in an equally boring villain wearing a Phantom of the Opera mask (it's really Noh theatre, I know.) Three successive films featured a different Blofeld actor. CW could easily have been dumped for a more interesting portrayal. Villains are such an important part of crime and spy dramas. They need to be larger than life and memorable. Slow and calm like a snake about the strike is not terribly exciting. Waltz and Malek are not Anthony Hopkins. Two very accomplished actors wasted opportunities to be really great villains. The only pain Blofeld was the master of was the pain of seeing a wasted opportunity. Maybe it was the writing, the direction, or maybe they were just poor casting choices. Neither SP nor NTTD are bad films. But both could have been so much more.

    Does the fact that Blofeld encounters Bond in OHMSS, and not know who he is, bother you less?

    I am no fan of the foster brother element to SP, mostly because it was unnecessary. But now that DC's five films are done and in the past, it sort of works thematically and doesn't bother me nearly as much as it did 7 years ago.
  • Posts: 1,985
    TripAces wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »

    Does the fact that Blofeld encounters Bond in OHMSS, and not know who he is, bother you less?

    Less? More? I don't know. Just disappointed that the films are so inconsistent.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    The last time I watched Spectre I really enjoyed it, aside from the Brofeld part.

    Looking back at the Daniel era now with hindsight, I wonder what his 4th film would have looked like if they left Spectre in a drawer (like they did with Casino during the Pierce era) I doubt Bond would have fought Quantum and I doubt they would have referenced previous films as much. Maybe it would have been more exciting?
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,152
    Waltz as Blofeld is frustrating more than anything - because on paper, it works brilliantly. It just didn't catch fire on the screen. I get that they were going for understated menace as opposed to Silva-style bravura flamboyance, but...too much understatement, not enough menace, I guess.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,547
    Every once in awhile this thread gets bumped and I always expect the new post to just be "yes".
    I agree about Waltz though, but maybe I wasn't as frustrated by it; I was fairly happy with what we got from Waltz on screen.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited September 2022 Posts: 3,789
    Venutius wrote: »
    Waltz as Blofeld is frustrating more than anything - because on paper, it works brilliantly. It just didn't catch fire on the screen. I get that they were going for understated menace as opposed to Silva-style bravura flamboyance, but...too much understatement, not enough menace, I guess.

    For me, it's the opposite, I do find Waltz' acting that carried the mediocre writing, his dialogues weren't that good, but I think it's Waltz' performance that carried it, he's menacing enough that he could conceal the flaws of the character.

    The idea of a Bond villain having some personal connections to Bond isn't really good, I mean Bond works for the Government, he's an Agent serving the England, then to have the villain all of a sudden his relative was a bit of "it's a small world" thing for me, it's too exclusive, and made it looked like that Bond compromised England more because of his personal connections, his step brother.

    That's why I'm not a fan of "everything revolving around Bond himself", he should be as one of the backgrounds of the plot, while still keeping him as the Central Character.

    Though, I would have liked it more if it's a relative of a former villain trying to make some revenge against England and Bond (maybe, an avenging relative of one of Bond's past villains).
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    Waltz as Blofeld is frustrating more than anything - because on paper, it works brilliantly. It just didn't catch fire on the screen. I get that they were going for understated menace as opposed to Silva-style bravura flamboyance, but...too much understatement, not enough menace, I guess.

    For me, it's the opposite, I do find Waltz' acting that carried the mediocre writing, his dialogues weren't that good, but I think it's Waltz' performance that carried it, he's menacing enough that he could conceal the flaws of the character.

    The idea of a Bond villain having some personal connections to Bond isn't really good, I mean Bond works for the Government, he's an Agent serving the England, then to have the villain all of a sudden his relative was a bit of "it's a small world" thing for me, it's too exclusive, and made it looked like that Bond compromised England more because of his personal connections, his step brother.

    That's why I'm not a fan of "everything revolving around Bond himself", he should be as one of the backgrounds of the plot, while still keeping him as the Central Character.

    Though, I would have liked it more if it's a relative of a former villain trying to make some revenge against England and Bond (maybe, an avenging relative of one of Bond's past villains).

    Like Goldfingers twin brother in DAF?
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,996
    Recently re-watched all the Craig's and I really can't watch SP in it's entirety anymore.

    The PTS is really good IMO and I even like the theme song...
    The Bond/M scene is abysmal and Bond comes across as a total knob. Then it's all fine up to the Spectre meeting, which just doesn't do it for me anymore. Then it's a big skip to L'American which is a nice moody scene. (Love that night shot looking over Tangier)
    The Train scenes I find are the best moments in the film with one of the best Bond fights in the series. The meeting Blofeld scenes are all just OK, and I rather like the torture scene.

    After that I can't watch anymore....

    I love all the other Craig's to varying degrees and can watch all of them from beginning to end. One bad egg out of 5 ain't bad I suppose...
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,547
    It's interesting because I basically agree with all of your points, yet I rank Spectre quite highly.
    100% agree about the M meeting scene; I hate how Bond acts so disrespectfully in front of M, just doesn't suit their relationship as we know it (although I suppose it fits in this "Post-Judy Gareth Mallory As M Craig" continuity. I think I hold the entirety of the Rome stuff in higher regard than you perhaps (Bond stealing the DB10 and driving into Rome to the end of the car chase).
    Love the Tangier stuff, really love the train stuff, love the lair and the torture scene despite some bad writing, and I find everything afterwards a bit boring and tacked on (except Bond and Blofeld speaking on either side of the glass... really love that).
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,996
    It's interesting because I basically agree with all of your points, yet I rank Spectre quite highly.
    100% agree about the M meeting scene; I hate how Bond acts so disrespectfully in front of M, just doesn't suit their relationship as we know it (although I suppose it fits in this "Post-Judy Gareth Mallory As M Craig" continuity. I think I hold the entirety of the Rome stuff in higher regard than you perhaps (Bond stealing the DB10 and driving into Rome to the end of the car chase).
    Love the Tangier stuff, really love the train stuff, love the lair and the torture scene despite some bad writing, and I find everything afterwards a bit boring and tacked on (except Bond and Blofeld speaking on either side of the glass... really love that).

    Yeah, the confrontation either side of the glass isn't bad, but it's stuck in the middle of a mainly terrible third act.
  • Junglist_1985Junglist_1985 Los Angeles
    edited September 2022 Posts: 1,031
    It’s simple folks…

    During a Daniel Craig marathon, simply:

    - Stop Spectre after Blofeld’s base explodes (assume Blofeld survives and is captured).
    - Immediately start No Time To Die.
    - Stop watching NTTD after Bond handles the SUV’s and Logan In Norway (assume Safin was also killed).
    - Cut back to Bond and Mad driving into sunset from Spectre.


    James Bond Will Return
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,547
    lol

    In a Craig marathon, I simply:

    Swap Spectre and NTTD.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,711
    I'd probably read Casino Royale and then watch the other four. :)

    (Nah, I'd just watch all five)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    I think I'm at the point where I genuinely feel like I've seen SP more than enough times. I'll still probably include it in my Bondathons, for the sake of completion, but I'll never return to it otherwise.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    I think the 6 year wait for NTTD hurt Spectre. Normally with a Bond film you watch it a few times, 2-4 years later you've got another one to focus on, but that wait made everybody (myself included) nitpick Spectre to death
Sign In or Register to comment.