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
I really am glad they incorporated more humor into it this time. It was one of the many factors that helped it feel like the most "classic" Bond film in a long time. I still can't rank it higher than #9 (where it will stay for now); my Top 8 are pretty hard to cut into. It is a nice, classic Bond adventure though.
Preparing a more sobre second-thought review. But make no mistake, I am good with this film. This was a big step forward for the Craig era, but there are areas where I think SP could have been better.
DC though was bang-on as Bond. For me this was his coming out film. He certainly had moments of Bond greatness in his previous 3 films, but those stories saddled him with character baggage (rookie Bond, interminable trust issues, old dog etc) but here in SP, DC is allowed to engage full Bond-on-mission posture, and he turns in a Connery worthy (and Connery is the standard) relaxed, self assured performance. He's both Bond smooth and Bond dangerous, but danger-Bond has never been a Craig issue anyway.
I also think Craig effortlessly delivers the quips . He shows a deft light touch. Like Connery, the one-liners don't get silly, as both uber-Bonds balance levity with an ever present sense of danger.
The other thing I really like about this film is the story.
I think Eon has deftly brought back both Ernst and Spectre, all the while neatly bringing the previous three films under the Spectre umbrella. Its been Bond versus Spectre all along. That is awesome.
Bond should always be battling Spectre IMO.
And with Spectre exposed as so damn big this time around, the organization looms as an ongoing pervasive threat.
No more replacement super villains such as Elliot Carver, Gustav Graves or Max Zorin types. In future such crime bosses would be working under Spectre auspices, much like Doctor No. This approach makes far more sense.
Going forward, it's 007 battling Spectre in it various guises and fronts, with Blofeld always behind the scenes, at least I hope.
If SP is as big as what we have been shown, all powerful supervillain knockoffs such as Carver, Graves, Zorin etc would have to be reconciled with SP.
SP runs all the big stuff.
At least this is where I hope we are going. Its what Eon did the first time around, with Spectre and/or Blofeld looming large in all the early films, but for GF.
Eon I believe intended to continue with Ernst and Spectre, if McClory hadn't been such an obstacle.
I very much like SP, but I'm finding it maybe a little sombre in general tone. It has a bit of a heavy feel. It lumbers along. I blame Mendes and Newman for this. Barry would have better used music to make exciting transitions from scene to scene.
Music I think was too operatic in parts. Sometimes it worked fine but not often enough.
And please find some way to incorporate the actual Bond theme in the film. And I mean full blow, not the little hints we got. The JB Theme would have worked great during the snow chase for example.
There were even QoS type musical interludes it seemed, most notable when Bond and Swann arrive in Tangiers. The QoS vibe worked for that very different Bond film, but I could have done without it in this one.
The torture scene with Blofeld was sterile. The set design was sparse cold and clinical.
I felt like I was being tortured too, which is not what I paid for. Compare with Connery on GF's laser table slab. Now that was a set!
I do like the exposition that was achieved in this scene with the cat making its first experiences though.
The no socks was offputting Dress this guy better. First thing I notice is that he is wearing no socks, because his pants are too short. They got the authentic Blofeld Nehru suit down nicely, but someone needed to finish dressing him. The no-socks was an unwanted distraction.
Still love the Mexico and Rome stuff. All of it! The snow stuff was real good, but again I thought the set design for the clinic was too sparse. Piz Gloria this place was not.
And where were the girls?! Swann, Lucia and Estrella and thats it?!
We only go three deep with the 3 leads and then zilch nada.
Nothing even remotely approaching a 4th. Not a fetching hotel receptionist, stewardess, Q lab assistant or Gift Bag girl (QoS) to be found anywhere. Not passerby tennis girls (CR) or girls decorating casinos or other exotic locales. Nothing, just 3 and out. I'm not counting MP.
Other Bond films, you can make a list of at least 7-8 or 10 plus beautiful creatures decorating the film landscape in various capacities. Even the Dalton films had girls everywhere.
No effort was made to populate the film with shapely figures but for the 3 main girls
Actually one of the diners in the train looked Bond-girl worthy but the camera didn't linger. There was no attempt to exploit her look. She was pure background
I am not counting the Mexico extras as they were like parts of a homogenous greater whole of costumed extras of all shapes and sizes.
There was no focus here on pulchritude. In that respect, Sigman was the sole focus which was fine.
I think its time to say goodbye to Mendes. He's made a couple of very interesting and noteworthy Bond films ( thank you for your contribution) but like others here I do fear what he might come up with next, in terms of character drama.
The whole Blofeld fixation with Bond as childhood rival for his daddy's affection was interesting......... but no not really. ;) Hopefully Ernst can move beyond too by next film.
Time to let go of Bonds past and move forward with a glorious new era of SP.
Give Craig a big Moonraker film. No danger of too OTT, because a great Bond like Craig can ground the whole thing, much the way Connery did with YOLT, while Rog-Bond couldn't ground MR.
Craig's Bond is so convincing he could keep a Derek Flint adventure grounded, whilst also maintaing a light touch when needed.
Craig has reached the rarefied Bond air, that Connery occupied I think. He's perfected the complete Bond persona IMO.
So thank you Sam, goodby Newman and Logan too, and lets get down to some good, exciting colourful Bond adventure.
==side note. I noticed an acknowledgement to the Kingsley Amis estate in the closing credits. Not sure what that was about, other than maybe the torture scene being lifted from his Colonel Sun. Wasn't the very twisted Sun inserting needles in Bond's ear in that book?
......bolded some lines to break-up the ramble. ~O)
This is by far the best review I've read so far including the professional ones from magazines and newspapers!!
=D>
Every word spot-on
Nice review. Yes the torture scene was taken from Colonel Sun, I think even some of the dialogue is straight out of the novel. I can't believe no one has brought it up until now.
It has, I've seen numerous references to the torture scene being from Colonel Sun.
Sono Topolino
That's what Craig is saying, he's speaking Italian :)
The thing is....Blofeld never really was a full-blown maniac. He's not a 'Silva 2.0'. I liked Waltz portrayal of Blofeld. And I think we need to get rid of the notion that more screentime is better for the role of a villain. It never worked this way in Bond films. Actually, the best Bond villains IMO have relatively little screentime and have been introduced fairly late (Think about the early Blofeld's from FRWL, TB, or Dr Julius No, or Silva).
The whole premise of it is great...terrorists having moles within the government to undermine them...I can see it being a real danger these days. I can generally buy how the plot links together, the puzzle pieces that lead Bond to the organisation. The massive weak link is how Blofeld is the mastermind of all previous movies, a tenuous link, put in only to give the Craig era some sort of continuity in some throwaway lines. And I really don't buy Blofeld's hating Bond this much to cause all that destruction.
Waltz's performance is excellent as usual, but it would've been much better if he was Blofeld all along without the contrived personal stuff. His name change reveal was just too casual and it seems like they got the rights back to Spectre half-way through filming and decided that last minute (I know they got it beforehand).
The rest of the supporting cast are excellent, the dialogue got many laughs from the audience particularly in the first half. A few were very underused, such as Monica Belluci (did she get the protection Bond promised?) and Mr Hinx (what's his motive? It felt like Blofeld wanted to dish out his revenge personally). The train fight was brutal and a highlight, and Hinx's end is something out of Looney Tunes (which is great).
Going in I heard whispers of the car chase being anticlimatic, and I can see why. The gags were pretty funny but the car is another severely underused cast member. DB5 re-appearance totally unnecessary - the DB10 should be the star of the show. I don't get what Mendes wants here. He destroys Bond (the personal missions, blowing up MI6 and his car) - it's like Mendes is destroying what Bond represents.. At least Silva's plan and Skyfall had an underlying message.
I felt the other action sequences were ok, but nothing jaw dropping. I noticed the starting camera follows Bond for a very long time which was neat. The gunbarrel at the beginning is welcome, but I don't understand why it doesn't open on the skull - that would've been perfect.
Just like many literary fans want Fleming's work showing through the movie, I'm very loyal to Barry's work. Newman's score sounds like what you'd expect from an American crime show. He leaves no mark on the musical legacy. I am going as far as to say it is my least favourite, yes, below Goldeneye and Licence to Kill's scores.
Overall I feel the characters have been hijacked from EON, and the films are going their own way (since Casino Royale). This for the most part has been a very brave direction and is certainly paying off, and I applaud the team for this. However, all I want is for a back to basics Bond film, which we got hints of in Spectre, and those parts I loved. So unfortunately I will be one of the negative nancy's here. This will be in the lower half of my rankings.
It's one of the funniest references in this film, and it's in there three times ;-). Just read this part of my review from page 77:
Having read all of the reviews, a new concern for me as that they are changing the nature of Bond forever as certain ellements of Bond cant be now changed. Its one thing to produce a movie that some people have issues with but the scripts and back stories will always be there. As well as create a great movie, scriptwriters surely have a duty of care re the long terms direction of Bond and this is a concern IMHO.
SF was interesting, we saw his old house and learnt a little about his parents. It should have stopped there. I think they have gone too far, what other villains are related or lived in the next village down the road or went to his school? what other secrets will we learn.
Amended to reflect another group of viewers.
That is so 'Total Recall' it's not funny. I actually like his idea here, about what actually happens when the drill hits the nerve.
Finally, that surreal escape from Blofeld HQ & the entire London confused/convoluted shenanigans makes sense.......a little.
The problems came subsequently. As I reflected back on it and its weaknesses, it started to unravel.
I'd been warned in advance that it was 'unmemorable', which I couldn't understand as I started watching - enjoying the fantastic, stand-out pre-title sequence.
However, I now see what was meant. The other action sequences, while looking like a lot money on the screen, aren't really innovative in such a way as to capture the imagination and stick in the mind.
The chase sequence through Rome? That's all it is. One car following another car at speed through empty streets. And haven't we seen the smaller car getting shoved ahead being used in another movie?
Similarly, the chase down the mountain? Bond opting to pursue in a plane is interesting, but ultimately he just uses his vehicle to ram the target vehicle to a halt.
The fight on the train? It's equal parts Red Grant in From Russia With Love and a conclusion which reminded me of Tee Hee in Live and Let Die.
The shoot-out at the crater headquarters was similarly unimaginative and pedestrian, while the MI6 chase to find the girl was again nothing we haven't seen done before in countless other movies.
I'll see what I make of it on a subsequent viewing, but more and more, it just feels like an unimaginative, reductive, highly derivative and generically forgettable entry into the Bond canon.
Desk
But then the last act was underwhelming. I hope that's only because Spectre is a two-parter. I left the cinema thinking that I want more, that it was too short, that despite the numerous action scenes, it didn't reach a climax. It needs to be continued and it needs to have more Christoph Waltz in it and a more credible story. I'm not even going to get into detail about what's wrong with it, I'm sure you all did by now.
It's a shame really to waste this cast and this type of budget on something that's not going to be memorable. I'm not totally disappointed with it though. l was impressed by the fact that it actually made me feel something and gave me the desire to talk about it and wonder about what's next. It felt like it was an art piece more than a movie. I rank it as #2 in DC's era after CR.
I can basically sum up my problems with the film in 6 bullet points
1. WAY too much humor I don't mind a bit of Humor but the whole Old man car sequence in Spectre was incredibly stupid. I also felt a lot of the one liners fell flat
2. Thomas Newman's Score: there wer WAY too many moments that sounded like they wer from Skyfall and/or Quantum of Solace and it just felt very samey mind you some of the score is good.
3. Sam Smith's song. It's a demo that some how never got worked on
4. Mr. White's Death Again such a cool and interesting Character and they turn him into basically Draco. Ok fine but still the whole Sucide thing just kind of annoyed me. Even people who hated Quantum of Solace still point out how great Mr. White was as a character.
5. Spectre and Blofeld remerging and being responsible for Quantum and Le Chiffe and silva etc... this is more of a I wish they would of done things differently.. I love the idea that Craig's films are interconnected. I honestly do however after Quantum of Solace those who loved Quantum, had all kinds of cool ideas about leadership etc. to make it all be Spectre and Blofeld kind of lame. Plus (maybe people complained about this as well) Spectre is doing some harsher things then Quantum but really it's still ruling the world ecnomically which was Quantum's goal. Gone are the days of nuclear weapon heists etc and yet everyone seems to embrace Spectre with open arms in spite of the differences between the new Spectre and Quantum are extremely slim
6. Fiennes's M not giving the mission. I still feel this is part of Dench's tenure as M even though she is dead because SHE gave 007 the mission. I love Dame Judi Dench I do but COME ON when is Fiennes M's tenure going to start.
Overall though there was some great postives
1. the Finale I liked honestly especially with M killing Max. I also like that even though Fiennes's M didn't put him on the Mission he was smart enough to realize 007 is still doing his job
2. the acting for the most part was spot on Waltz'z Oberhauser/blofeld had a few minor over the top moments but he was a refreshing change of pace from Bardem's Over the top Silva.
3. it is cool that Quantum was metioned by name three times and that Mr. White came back and that Dominic Greene was even reference (as well as Vesper) I honestly was afraid Quantum of Solace would of been ignored but it wasn't which is very cool
4. both sex scenes were really hot and the hottest they have been in years in my opinion (at least since Royale)
5. For the most part the action was brilliant
6. I love the locations and they were all user very well no location felt shoehorned in.
7. The Gunbarrel and Klienman's titles were SPOT ON had a song by Muse or Rush had accompanied the visuals it would of been fantastic.
8. The Ending does leave me with the same sense of wonderment and excitmend Casino Royale-Skyfall left me)
9. I loved the nod to the Hildebrand Rarity (considering it's my favorite of the unused titles)\
10. though Mr white does die his scene was still stand out in fact I would argue Mr. White really was amazing in all 3 of his films and gave stand out performances in all 3 which makes his sucide EVEN MORE annoying but oh well
And that sums it up. Over all the film was good. Not fantastic not bad just good 14 I think it ranks for me which is really not bad. I plan on rewatching all 24 over the span of a few months next year to really see where I place Spctre in the context of the franchise in Craig's era it comes in third behind Casino and Quantum.
How is the German version? Does he use Du or Sie?
I think if you make up a review that's solely a comparison chart of action sequences, yes obviously the movie will come across like a big disappointment to you. And that's not entirely fair. You can have so many original, completely new and unique action sequences in a Bond film, but even then they could not work.
And frankly, like I said in my review down below, people don't ask themselves anymore how a Bond film should turn out if they have so much criticism. And then they discover it's not so damn easy. Because a 53-year old franchise is prone to so much comparisons.
The reason "SPECTRE" perhaps worked for you after your 1st watch, is probably because you liked the humour in it. The story itself is very much like SF as well. It uses certain past historical events and elaborates about them in the present.
The reason "SPECTRE" worked for me, actually was the story. Bond is much more on a simple mission in this film. But then discovers how many tentacles are attached to this OHMSS-esque (rogue) mission. It felt a bit more 'detective-y', which I liked.
Furthermore, it saddens me to hear that the S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-board meeting and the dentist torture sequence didn't excite you. I think those were highlights of the film. So "CUCKOOO!!" open your eyes :-P
No, it isn't wrong. Though I highly doubt it. An advert is like 4 mins, a Bond film usually more than 140 mins. Moreover, that action sequence from the Heineken commercial basically is as 'humorous' as the action sequences from SP......and it wasn't even 'original', as it is more or less stolen from the "Octopussy" PTS.
The reason I found it reasonably enjoyable at first is because it wasn't a massive disappointment like Skyfall in that it had a plot that made sense and a hero who behaved in a reasonably heroic manner and whose actions were seen to actually have some bearing on the outcome.
There's also that novelty and excitement of it being a new Bond film, plus the initial faith and goodwill engendered by the spectacular PTS.
Ironically, though, it's a film which ultimately does feel as whispy, intangible and ethereal as a spectre.
The board scenes? I wasn't bored, but it didn't exactly have me gripped or on the edge of my seat.
The torture scene? If it felt like there was any real jeopardy, and not just a weak, easy repetition of something we've seen Bond endure and escape from before, then I'd have maybe cared a little.
As it is, I do like the theory developing that the villain's drill actually DID destroy Bond's mind, and that everything that follows, from his easy escape, blowing up the facility with a single bullet, taking on a small army, and walking into the sunset with the girl, is simply the fantasy of a now gibbering 007 who has been left dying in Blofeld's torture chair.
Nice way to end the Craig era, huh? ;-P
Desk
Well, obviously you are new to the forum. Welcome. We'll initiate you this this brotherhood properly....soon, very soon :-). With dentist drills perhaps. >:)
The theory doesn't hold up, as other "all in their head" films don't: because that final act involves characters' actions and stories that Bond is not aware of while sitting in that chair. If it is all Bond's POV at that point, then he needs to be in every scene of that final act. He isn't. Instead, we see the death of C, we understand more about Nine Eyes, we see the MI6 crew getting hit by a truck...etc. Sure, some of that can be in Bond's head, but why? And how?
We'll know whether or not EON were to ever go in this direction because Andrew Scott would be back as C. he never actually died.