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

17273757778100

Comments

  • Posts: 4,617
    Yes, he is overdue to just follow orders and get the job done
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    edited November 2015 Posts: 1,731
    Bond 'going solo' has been done so many times since DAD but never has it really had the same impact as on it's first attempt.
    The Hemingway house scene in LTK had genuine weight to it because it was the 1st time (cinematic) Bond had truly opposed M's authority and you felt Bond's 'farewell to arms' was genuine.
    Credit to Dalton & Robert Brown for pulling this scene off in a thoroughly believable way, I might add...
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    AceHole wrote: »
    Bond 'going solo' has been done so many times since DAD but never has it really had the same impact as on it's first attempt.
    The Hemingway house scene in LTK had genuine weight to it because it was the 1st time (cinematic) Bond had truly opposed M's authority and you felt Bond's 'farewell to arms' was genuine.
    Credit to Dalton & Robert Brown for pulling this scene off in a thoroughly believable way, I might add...
    Yes, that LTK scene was a great one. It had resonance because it was the first time (although we almost went there with OHMSS via resignation).

    Now, rogue is almost a trope.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,584
    bondjames wrote: »
    In SP, I find he is attempting to channel later era (TSWLM+) Roger Moore humour in particular in some places, and as Pierce Brosnan found out (to his detriment) this is not a place you should really go. Nobody does that like Moore (it's natural to him). That's why I found the Lucia seduction a little creepy....and not smooth. I think a lot of folks are feeling this way, hence the negative comparisons to Moore's era in some of the reviews (if you don't do this well then it doesn't come off well).

    I would have assumed the comparisons to Moore's era would be more to do with the exploding airbag than the Lucia seduction.
    If the 'reviews' you speak of are from critics then that is about as deep as they will dig. For them Bond films are odd memories and obvious moments recalled.

    I saw the sight gags in SP more in line with early era Moore (slicing the bus in half for example) . Later era Moore is probably a step too far for Daniel Craig.

    As for the seduction technique - who knows, you may be right. It was more forceful than in CR (Solange) that's for sure. But maybe Bond realised he had little time on his hands and needed to work fast on Lucia.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    edited November 2015 Posts: 1,731
    NicNac wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    In SP, I find he is attempting to channel later era (TSWLM+) Roger Moore humour in particular in some places, and as Pierce Brosnan found out (to his detriment) this is not a place you should really go. Nobody does that like Moore (it's natural to him). That's why I found the Lucia seduction a little creepy....and not smooth. I think a lot of folks are feeling this way, hence the negative comparisons to Moore's era in some of the reviews (if you don't do this well then it doesn't come off well).

    I would have assumed the comparisons to Moore's era would be more to do with the exploding airbag than the Lucia seduction.
    If the 'reviews' you speak of are from critics then that is about as deep as they will dig. For them Bond films are odd memories and obvious moments recalled.

    I saw the sight gags in SP more in line with early era Moore (slicing the bus in half for example) . Later era Moore is probably a step too far for Daniel Craig.

    As for the seduction technique - who knows, you may be right. It was more forceful than in CR (Solange) that's for sure. But maybe Bond realised he had little time on his hands and needed to work fast on Lucia.

    I wouldn't say SP had any 'later-era Moore' gags going on, that would be genuinely ridiculous. SP's goofy moments were about in line with a TSWLM-level of light-heartedness, just before things got truly silly...
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    NicNac wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    In SP, I find he is attempting to channel later era (TSWLM+) Roger Moore humour in particular in some places, and as Pierce Brosnan found out (to his detriment) this is not a place you should really go. Nobody does that like Moore (it's natural to him). That's why I found the Lucia seduction a little creepy....and not smooth. I think a lot of folks are feeling this way, hence the negative comparisons to Moore's era in some of the reviews (if you don't do this well then it doesn't come off well).

    I would have assumed the comparisons to Moore's era would be more to do with the exploding airbag than the Lucia seduction.
    If the 'reviews' you speak of are from critics then that is about as deep as they will dig. For them Bond films are odd memories and obvious moments recalled.

    I saw the sight gags in SP more in line with early era Moore (slicing the bus in half for example) . Later era Moore is probably a step too far for Daniel Craig.

    As for the seduction technique - who knows, you may be right. It was more forceful than in CR (Solange) that's for sure. But maybe Bond realised he had little time on his hands and needed to work fast on Lucia.

    Yes @NicNac, I did not write that properly above, seguing too quickly to the Lucia seduction to make a point that was not clear.

    The Lucia seduction part just felt 'forced' to me, literally as well as figuratively. It fell flat, because there was no wit to accompany it. The wit was there with Moore, and with Craig in CR/Solange (with the Aston gag - it was 'coolly' done).

    With the Moore comparisons, yes, I am referring to the gags and the lines, which although a nice throwback, just come across as 'inferior' to what has come before. If you're going to homage, you have to do it better imho, and that is where I think it doesn't quite scale the prior heights (difficult to do when you're channeling Moore for humour as others have found out since).
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,584
    bondjames wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    In SP, I find he is attempting to channel later era (TSWLM+) Roger Moore humour in particular in some places, and as Pierce Brosnan found out (to his detriment) this is not a place you should really go. Nobody does that like Moore (it's natural to him). That's why I found the Lucia seduction a little creepy....and not smooth. I think a lot of folks are feeling this way, hence the negative comparisons to Moore's era in some of the reviews (if you don't do this well then it doesn't come off well).

    I would have assumed the comparisons to Moore's era would be more to do with the exploding airbag than the Lucia seduction.
    If the 'reviews' you speak of are from critics then that is about as deep as they will dig. For them Bond films are odd memories and obvious moments recalled.

    I saw the sight gags in SP more in line with early era Moore (slicing the bus in half for example) . Later era Moore is probably a step too far for Daniel Craig.

    As for the seduction technique - who knows, you may be right. It was more forceful than in CR (Solange) that's for sure. But maybe Bond realised he had little time on his hands and needed to work fast on Lucia.

    Yes @NicNac, I did not write that properly above, seguing too quickly to the Lucia seduction to make a point that was not clear.

    The Lucia seduction part just felt 'forced' to me, literally as well as figuratively. It fell flat, because there was no wit to accompany it. The wit was there with Moore, and with Craig in CR/Solange (with the Aston gag - it was 'coolly' done).

    With the Moore comparisons, yes, I am referring to the gags and the lines, which although a nice throwback, just come across as 'inferior' to what has come before. If you're going to homage, you have to do it better imho, and that is where I think it doesn't quite scale the prior heights (difficult to do when you're channeling Moore for humour as others have found out since).

    Yes, got you now. totally agree about how cool those CR scenes were.

    As for Moore It's difficult because although Moore was a perfect fit for the mid to late 70s, the humour displayed in SP is typical of early Bonds but not necessarily Moore. As early as GF and the ejector seat we were seeing the sort of jokes that made the difference for the film series. Bond films took off because of the laugh out loud moments (as much as anything else) and the silly gadgets. SP wanted to recapture some of that. 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.

    But why not indeed? Other franchises took the Bond humour and hammered it into the ground (Lethal Weapon, Die Hard etc). So why shouldn't Bond reclaim it? Whether it sits well in Craig's films, yes that's an argument. But the early era gags were not ridiculous. And apart from the airbag and sofa, there was nothing much I can recall from that time. The parachute in the AM is probably more Brosnan than Moore.

    The Lucia seduction had no humour, true. But it wasn't that which bothered me about the scene. It was Bond's assertion to Lucia that 'you'll be alright' because he has a friend called Felix. Well, 2 minutes ago she said he had bought her 5 minutes (or something) and I had a horrible feeling that Bond wasn't 100% convinced that Felix would get to her before the next hitman. I was genuinely concerned for her, but never got any resolution later in the film. Did Bond learn nothing from M's lectures after the deaths of poor Agent Fields, or Solange?
  • Stamper wrote: »
    LALD: Blaxplotation
    TMWTTG: Martial arts films
    MR: Star Wars Craze
    OCTOPUSSY: Indiana Jones
    LTK: Cannon Films-type super-macho action flicks
    GE: Post Die Hard style
    TND: Trying to top True Lies mixed with HK action mania (10 years too late)
    QOS: Bourne 3 (film that happens within, or a few mn after the one before)
    SF : TDK
    SP: DKR

    Good sir: =D>
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Well said @NicNac.

    It's true that there were many in the general public who were looking for a return to the Bond humour, because that's what they associate with Bond. That's what made him 'cool' for them. That's what they remembered about films like GF etc, along with the gadgets. I found a great balance of authentic humour in CR & SF, but I realize many of the general public may not have got the subtlety of it and wanted more 'in your face'.

    I don't have a problem with them returning to more 'humour' in general, but the gags (like the parachute) I could really do without (just a personal preference). I grew up on those gags, and they've been done before and better. It's really difficult to replicate them or homage them. For example, the ejector seat was made fun of in Cannonbal Run if I recall correctly....and here it's done again after being alluded to in SF already. It's like just hammering the gag again and again. That's what I mean about not scaling the heights of the past. I didn't mind the couch scene, but that should have probably been where they stopped that.

    Regarding the verbal humour, again yes, I realize that Arnie's late 80's films and Willis' Die Hard in particular really took the Moore vibe and ran with it brilliantly. However, to me, those throwaway lines really worked with Arnie and particularly Bruce. It fit their portrayal perfectly. It fit their persona and characterization.

    Don't get me wrong, DC does the SP humour very well (far superior to Dalton I think) but he feels more Brosnan to me than Connery/Moore, in the sense that it does look like he's 'trying'. When he does his sarcasm thing (like he did in the museum with Q in SF, or like he did in SP with Q) it just seems 'uniquely DC' and not like he's 'trying', if you know what I mean. One is natural to him and the other is not and I can tell, no matter how great of an actor he is.

    I realize I'm being picky (which I normally am - can't help that), but I think these things are what are remembered, once the inevitable dust settles. The balance and the authenticity.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    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.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,584
    Well, if we didn't get picky @bondjames we would soon run out of things to talk about. ;)

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    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.

    This sofa shot was perfectly balanced DC humour imo. I didn't find it jarring, just entertaining.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    edited November 2015 Posts: 1,731
    RC7 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.

    This sofa shot was perfectly balanced DC humour imo. I didn't find it jarring, just entertaining.

    Never mentioned that I didn't find it entertaining or that I didn't like it. It was great - but it most definitely threw me.
    And you can't honestly think it's typical DC era humour, surely?
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 183
    bondjames wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    In SP, I find he is attempting to channel later era (TSWLM+) Roger Moore humour in particular in some places, and as Pierce Brosnan found out (to his detriment) this is not a place you should really go. Nobody does that like Moore (it's natural to him). That's why I found the Lucia seduction a little creepy....and not smooth. I think a lot of folks are feeling this way, hence the negative comparisons to Moore's era in some of the reviews (if you don't do this well then it doesn't come off well).

    I would have assumed the comparisons to Moore's era would be more to do with the exploding airbag than the Lucia seduction.
    If the 'reviews' you speak of are from critics then that is about as deep as they will dig. For them Bond films are odd memories and obvious moments recalled.

    I saw the sight gags in SP more in line with early era Moore (slicing the bus in half for example) . Later era Moore is probably a step too far for Daniel Craig.

    As for the seduction technique - who knows, you may be right. It was more forceful than in CR (Solange) that's for sure. But maybe Bond realised he had little time on his hands and needed to work fast on Lucia.

    Yes @NicNac, I did not write that properly above, seguing too quickly to the Lucia seduction to make a point that was not clear.

    The Lucia seduction part just felt 'forced' to me, literally as well as figuratively. It fell flat, because there was no wit to accompany it. The wit was there with Moore, and with Craig in CR/Solange (with the Aston gag - it was 'coolly' done).

    With the Moore comparisons, yes, I am referring to the gags and the lines, which although a nice throwback, just come across as 'inferior' to what has come before. If you're going to homage, you have to do it better imho, and that is where I think it doesn't quite scale the prior heights (difficult to do when you're channeling Moore for humour as others have found out since).

    I agree with some of the points you make about the humour elements but the Lucia seduction scene was top notch for me. One of my favourite moments of the whole film!

    It didn't feel forced to me, Bond senses the opportunity to get what he wants (information and sex) and takes it with cool authority. Not uncomfortable watching I didn't think. Bond "reads" her like a book and uses it to his advantage. The whole scene I find smoking hot with good chemistry between them. I felt any wit would have detracted from the scene.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    AceHole wrote: »
    RC7 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.

    This sofa shot was perfectly balanced DC humour imo. I didn't find it jarring, just entertaining.

    Never mentioned that I didn't find it entertaining or that I didn't like it. It was great - but it most definitely threw me.
    And you can't honestly think it's typical DC era humour, surely?

    It depends what you define as 'typical DC era humour'. CR did it well, QoS similarly, but fleetingly and there were some total clunkers in SF. I felt like this was perfectly suited to DC, but situationally different from what we'd seen before. To be fair I went in expecting a little more fun, so it didn't throw me.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    edited November 2015 Posts: 2,138
    NicNac wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    In SP, I find he is attempting to channel later era (TSWLM+) Roger Moore humour in particular in some places, and as Pierce Brosnan found out (to his detriment) this is not a place you should really go. Nobody does that like Moore (it's natural to him). That's why I found the Lucia seduction a little creepy....and not smooth. I think a lot of folks are feeling this way, hence the negative comparisons to Moore's era in some of the reviews (if you don't do this well then it doesn't come off well).

    I would have assumed the comparisons to Moore's era would be more to do with the exploding airbag than the Lucia seduction.
    If the 'reviews' you speak of are from critics then that is about as deep as they will dig. For them Bond films are odd memories and obvious moments recalled.

    I saw the sight gags in SP more in line with early era Moore (slicing the bus in half for example) . Later era Moore is probably a step too far for Daniel Craig.

    As for the seduction technique - who knows, you may be right. It was more forceful than in CR (Solange) that's for sure. But maybe Bond realised he had little time on his hands and needed to work fast on Lucia.

    Yes @NicNac, I did not write that properly above, seguing too quickly to the Lucia seduction to make a point that was not clear.

    The Lucia seduction part just felt 'forced' to me, literally as well as figuratively. It fell flat, because there was no wit to accompany it. The wit was there with Moore, and with Craig in CR/Solange (with the Aston gag - it was 'coolly' done).

    With the Moore comparisons, yes, I am referring to the gags and the lines, which although a nice throwback, just come across as 'inferior' to what has come before. If you're going to homage, you have to do it better imho, and that is where I think it doesn't quite scale the prior heights (difficult to do when you're channeling Moore for humour as others have found out since).

    Yes, got you now. totally agree about how cool those CR scenes were.

    As for Moore It's difficult because although Moore was a perfect fit for the mid to late 70s, the humour displayed in SP is typical of early Bonds but not necessarily Moore. As early as GF and the ejector seat we were seeing the sort of jokes that made the difference for the film series. Bond films took off because of the laugh out loud moments (as much as anything else) and the silly gadgets. SP wanted to recapture some of that. 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.

    But why not indeed? Other franchises took the Bond humour and hammered it into the ground (Lethal Weapon, Die Hard etc). So why shouldn't Bond reclaim it? Whether it sits well in Craig's films, yes that's an argument. But the early era gags were not ridiculous. And apart from the airbag and sofa, there was nothing much I can recall from that time. The parachute in the AM is probably more Brosnan than Moore.

    The Lucia seduction had no humour, true. But it wasn't that which bothered me about the scene. It was Bond's assertion to Lucia that 'you'll be alright' because he has a friend called Felix. Well, 2 minutes ago she said he had bought her 5 minutes (or something) and I had a horrible feeling that Bond wasn't 100% convinced that Felix would get to her before the next hitman. I was genuinely concerned for her, but never got any resolution later in the film. Did Bond learn nothing from M's lectures after the deaths of poor Agent Fields, or Solange?

    BOND 25 -EON Production presents Ian Flemings - James Bond In Carry on again Spectre.

    Starring Jim Dale as Bond and the ghost of Sid James as Blofeld.

    35jcd95.jpg

    Drop the comedy for Bond 25, I appreciate Jez Butterworths sense of humour but it was too much just for the sake of it. And the whole thing about Bond was now rubbish because it now lacks humour that John Cleese started. it was almost like someone paid attention to the demented old fool.

    Dan's Bond is better gritty and serious with the odd cheeky quip.
  • Posts: 24
    It's the quality of the comedy that I find most problematic with SP.

    There's no doubting that Craig's Bond is capable of delivering wit, such as in his verbal sparring with Vesper on the train in Casino Royale.

    It was cleverly written, made Bond seem clever and likeable, and was perfectly in keeping with the situation and plot.

    But what little attempted 'comedy' I can discern in SP is just so insipid and lazy. Bond asking a mouse 'Who sent you?' Identifying himself as 'Mickey Mouse'?

    A $1 BILLION franchise, and this is the best they can come up with? It didn't raise even a smile, let alone a chuckle, I'm afraid.

    Craig has shown he's capable of delivering a funny line as Bond, and unless we want 007 as an emotionless killing machine I'd argue, done in the right way, that a sense of humour is an important and welcome part of the character.

    Just like Brosnan before him, with Purvis and Wade's Christmas cracker gags like 'edifice complex', Craig was ill-served by the 'screenwriters' on Spectre.

    Desk
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Desk wrote: »
    It's the quality of the comedy that I find most problematic with SP.

    There's no doubting that Craig's Bond is capable of delivering wit, such as in his verbal sparring with Vesper on the train in Casino Royale.

    It was cleverly written, made Bond seem clever and likeable, and was perfectly in keeping with the situation and plot.

    But what little attempted 'comedy' I can discern in SP is just so insipid and lazy. Bond asking a mouse 'Who sent you?' Identifying himself as 'Mickey Mouse'?

    A $1 BILLION franchise, and this is the best they can come up with? It didn't raise even a smile, let alone a chuckle, I'm afraid.

    Craig has shown he's capable of delivering a funny line as Bond, and unless we want 007 as an emotionless killing machine I'd argue, done in the right way, that a sense of humour is an important and welcome part of the character.

    Just like Brosnan before him, with Purvis and Wade's Christmas cracker gags like 'edifice complex', Craig was ill-served by the 'screenwriters' on Spectre.

    Desk
    +1. I agree.

    Mickey mouse a$#h@!e no less. Who comes up with this rubbish.

    There were too many shades of 'Circle of Life' (another stinker, this time from SF) for my liking. Fell flat then and fell flat now. This humour was more unintelligent imho, and that's what I didn't like. Less witty and more low-brow. Less CR & more DAD (but no where near as bad). So I'm an elitist. Sue me.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    Desk wrote: »
    It's the quality of the comedy that I find most problematic with SP.

    There's no doubting that Craig's Bond is capable of delivering wit, such as in his verbal sparring with Vesper on the train in Casino Royale.

    It was cleverly written, made Bond seem clever and likeable, and was perfectly in keeping with the situation and plot.

    But what little attempted 'comedy' I can discern in SP is just so insipid and lazy. Bond asking a mouse 'Who sent you?' Identifying himself as 'Mickey Mouse'?

    A $1 BILLION franchise, and this is the best they can come up with? It didn't raise even a smile, let alone a chuckle, I'm afraid.

    Craig has shown he's capable of delivering a funny line as Bond, and unless we want 007 as an emotionless killing machine I'd argue, done in the right way, that a sense of humour is an important and welcome part of the character.

    Just like Brosnan before him, with Purvis and Wade's Christmas cracker gags like 'edifice complex', Craig was ill-served by the 'screenwriters' on Spectre.

    Desk

    The Mickey Mouse 'joke' was tepid and out of character (something John McLane would have said in Die Hard, perhaps..?) , I'll give you that. But I found the rest of the comedy worked quite well - the sofa was surprising and not completely unrealistic (as NicNac said - it has to be somewhere) and the car chase was goofy but very 'James Bond' and Craig's imperative "DON'T!" tot he Austrian security guard was right on the money.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    edited November 2015 Posts: 2,138
    AceHole wrote: »
    Desk wrote: »
    It's the quality of the comedy that I find most problematic with SP.

    There's no doubting that Craig's Bond is capable of delivering wit, such as in his verbal sparring with Vesper on the train in Casino Royale.

    It was cleverly written, made Bond seem clever and likeable, and was perfectly in keeping with the situation and plot.

    But what little attempted 'comedy' I can discern in SP is just so insipid and lazy. Bond asking a mouse 'Who sent you?' Identifying himself as 'Mickey Mouse'?

    A $1 BILLION franchise, and this is the best they can come up with? It didn't raise even a smile, let alone a chuckle, I'm afraid.

    Craig has shown he's capable of delivering a funny line as Bond, and unless we want 007 as an emotionless killing machine I'd argue, done in the right way, that a sense of humour is an important and welcome part of the character.

    Just like Brosnan before him, with Purvis and Wade's Christmas cracker gags like 'edifice complex', Craig was ill-served by the 'screenwriters' on Spectre.

    Desk

    The Mickey Mouse 'joke' was tepid and out of character (something John McLane would have said in Die Hard, perhaps..?) , I'll give you that. But I found the rest of the comedy worked quite well - the sofa was surprising and not completely unrealistic (as NicNac said - it has to be somewhere) and the car chase was goofy but very 'James Bond' and Craig's imperative "DON'T!" tot he Austrian security guard was right on the money.

    SPECTRE the film that starts with Bond falling and a helicopter, and ending with Bond Falling and a helicopter, following on from a film called Skyfall in which another helicopter crashes I think that says it all about the lack of imagination. Maybe Sam Mendes should bring back Lee Majors Fall guy and Airwolf in a mash up movie to satisfy his endless desire of helicopters.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited December 2015 Posts: 4,399
    .
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020

    Io sono Topolino, chi sei?



    was one of the funniest moments and not out of character at all, especially because Bond speaks Italian.

    Bloody brilliant and priceless:))
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited November 2015 Posts: 4,586
    The mouse/Mickey Mouse appearances in the film aren't necessarily comic bits. The weren't intended to be. Bond was being sarcastic with the Mickey Mouse comment (even a bit arrogant).

    But most of all, the mouse allusions work off the cat connection to ESB. It's about cat-and-mouse, creating a pretty important symbol for the film. I will need to view it again to see other suggestions of cat-and-mouse...also a continuation of the rats theme in SF. It's a stretch, but cats also like to chase and catch birds, like cuckoos.
  • Posts: 24
    AceHole wrote: »
    Desk wrote: »
    It's the quality of the comedy that I find most problematic with SP.

    There's no doubting that Craig's Bond is capable of delivering wit, such as in his verbal sparring with Vesper on the train in Casino Royale.

    It was cleverly written, made Bond seem clever and likeable, and was perfectly in keeping with the situation and plot.

    But what little attempted 'comedy' I can discern in SP is just so insipid and lazy. Bond asking a mouse 'Who sent you?' Identifying himself as 'Mickey Mouse'?

    A $1 BILLION franchise, and this is the best they can come up with? It didn't raise even a smile, let alone a chuckle, I'm afraid.

    Craig has shown he's capable of delivering a funny line as Bond, and unless we want 007 as an emotionless killing machine I'd argue, done in the right way, that a sense of humour is an important and welcome part of the character.

    Just like Brosnan before him, with Purvis and Wade's Christmas cracker gags like 'edifice complex', Craig was ill-served by the 'screenwriters' on Spectre.

    Desk

    The Mickey Mouse 'joke' was tepid and out of character (something John McLane would have said in Die Hard, perhaps..?) , I'll give you that. But I found the rest of the comedy worked quite well - the sofa was surprising and not completely unrealistic (as NicNac said - it has to be somewhere) and the car chase was goofy but very 'James Bond' and Craig's imperative "DON'T!" tot he Austrian security guard was right on the money.
    The car chase gag with the little car wasn't terrible, but it added to the general sense of unreality around the whole sequence.

    An Aston Martin concept car is being driven by an undercover secret agent through otherwise deserted streets of Rome, being pursued by a hulking henchman crammed into another hypercar, and our hero is so non-plussed by the threat that he takes time away from it to make a non-urgent phone call?

    Unlike Casino Royale, the humour in Spectre didn't lend credibility to the story - it detracted from it and weakened it further.

    Bond never felt like he was in any particular sense of peril, and there were no clearly defined stakes beyond C's nebulous intelligence system. Along with the insipid humour, I allowed it all to wash over me, on reflection finding a film that made sense, but was flimsy, tepid and forgettable.

    Desk
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    Desk wrote: »
    But what little attempted 'comedy' I can discern in SP is just so insipid and lazy. Bond asking a mouse 'Who sent you?' Identifying himself as 'Mickey Mouse'?

    A $1 BILLION franchise, and this is the best they can come up with? It didn't raise even a smile, let alone a chuckle, I'm afraid.
    Oh I am in SUCH a good mood from seeing SPECTRE that I can't even get a wee bit pissed at comments like this! :D
    In the theatre I saw it at, there was laughter at both of those moments. I was an early show here, the kind that's usually empty even if it's a hit (I wanted a guaranteed seat), and the theatre was at least 50% full and all real Bond fans. We 'got' everything. The sofa gag was brilliant. There was no comedic moment that didn't get a least a mild chuckle.

    Ah, SPECTRE, how do I love thee? Let me count the ways... :x
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    Desk wrote: »
    AceHole wrote: »
    Desk wrote: »
    It's the quality of the comedy that I find most problematic with SP.

    There's no doubting that Craig's Bond is capable of delivering wit, such as in his verbal sparring with Vesper on the train in Casino Royale.

    It was cleverly written, made Bond seem clever and likeable, and was perfectly in keeping with the situation and plot.

    But what little attempted 'comedy' I can discern in SP is just so insipid and lazy. Bond asking a mouse 'Who sent you?' Identifying himself as 'Mickey Mouse'?

    A $1 BILLION franchise, and this is the best they can come up with? It didn't raise even a smile, let alone a chuckle, I'm afraid.

    Craig has shown he's capable of delivering a funny line as Bond, and unless we want 007 as an emotionless killing machine I'd argue, done in the right way, that a sense of humour is an important and welcome part of the character.

    Just like Brosnan before him, with Purvis and Wade's Christmas cracker gags like 'edifice complex', Craig was ill-served by the 'screenwriters' on Spectre.

    Desk

    The Mickey Mouse 'joke' was tepid and out of character (something John McLane would have said in Die Hard, perhaps..?) , I'll give you that. But I found the rest of the comedy worked quite well - the sofa was surprising and not completely unrealistic (as NicNac said - it has to be somewhere) and the car chase was goofy but very 'James Bond' and Craig's imperative "DON'T!" tot he Austrian security guard was right on the money.
    The car chase gag with the little car wasn't terrible, but it added to the general sense of unreality around the whole sequence.

    An Aston Martin concept car is being driven by an undercover secret agent through otherwise deserted streets of Rome, being pursued by a hulking henchman crammed into another hypercar, and our hero is so non-plussed by the threat that he takes time away from it to make a non-urgent phone call?

    Unlike Casino Royale, the humour in Spectre didn't lend credibility to the story - it detracted from it and weakened it further.

    Bond never felt like he was in any particular sense of peril, and there were no clearly defined stakes beyond C's nebulous intelligence system. Along with the insipid humour, I allowed it all to wash over me, on reflection finding a film that made sense, but was flimsy, tepid and forgettable.

    Desk

    Agreed with all this. Great post.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited December 2015 Posts: 4,399
    .
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,423
    Exactly @haresot - it's late at night in both London and Rome. One wouldn't expect to find many people up that late.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 24
    HASEROT wrote: »
    Desk wrote: »
    The car chase gag with the little car wasn't terrible, but it added to the general sense of unreality around the whole sequence.

    An Aston Martin concept car is being driven by an undercover secret agent through otherwise deserted streets of Rome, being pursued by a hulking henchman crammed into another hypercar, and our hero is so non-plussed by the threat that he takes time away from it to make a non-urgent phone call?

    Unlike Casino Royale, the humour in Spectre didn't lend credibility to the story - it detracted from it and weakened it further.

    i highlighted that specific portion of your quote, because i can't think of too many times where Bond WASN'T so non-plussed by the threat he is currently in - especially when it came to a vehicle chase..

    - the boat chase at the end of FRWL
    - the Aston Martin chase in GF - christ, at one point Bond even looks annoyed that GF's men are still giving chase.
    - Little Nelly
    - the double decker bus chase / boat chase in LALD
    - Ski chase / Lotus chase (as car and as sub) in TSWLM
    - the Aston chase in TLD

    there are plenty more chase moments in the series that aren't named here that i feel Spectre's perfectly fall in line with.... thats part of what makes Bond - BOND.. he isn't bothered or doesn't lose his cool under these intense situations.. he could have an entire Russian army following him, and he chooses to sled down a hill in a cello case..

    speaking of how empty the streets were.. i could've sworn hearing something - perhaps from one of Mendes' vlogs from on set, that they were shocked just how empty Rome gets in the middle of the night (at least where they were at).... keep in mind, it was supposed to be midnight, or a little after - and not every major city is like New York.... it's far more plausible a scenario than demoing half of St. Petersburg with a tank ;)
    There's remaining cool in difficult circumstances, and then there's being so completely disengaged and unconcerned with proceedings that you think it's an appropriate time to make a non-urgent phone call.

    If Bond is so unconcerned and disengaged with what's going on, then the audience is, too.

    I'm surprised he didn't then start filing his nails or picking some parsley from between his teeth using the rear-view mirror.

    Desk
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    @Desk The hate is swelling in you now. Take your SPECTRE weapon. Use it. I am unarmed. Strike me down with it. Give in to your anger. With each passing moment you make me more of a fan...
Sign In or Register to comment.