› ›

SPECTRE: It grossed $880 Million Worldwide (..and 2015 was the biggest box office year so far)

1…969799101102…152

Comments

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/8685352

    Great article @Germanlady. I especially like this quote:
    ...and a surprising round of some slagging reviews preceded its November 6th North American launch. (It opened in the UK and some other nations a week earlier.)

    But surveys of actual film-going audiences gave high ratings to the film -- which, on balance, is terrific though not as good as Skyfall -- and Spectre has proved to be another huge hit

    My experience has been 'hit'. I've come across a lot of viewers, non-Bond fans in particular, who say they had a great time. Some were surprised how much. Obviously there have been those that weren't enamoured, but the strongest criticisms I've seen are from fans.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    RC7 wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/8685352

    Great article @Germanlady. I especially like this quote:
    ...and a surprising round of some slagging reviews preceded its November 6th North American launch. (It opened in the UK and some other nations a week earlier.)

    But surveys of actual film-going audiences gave high ratings to the film -- which, on balance, is terrific though not as good as Skyfall -- and Spectre has proved to be another huge hit

    My experience has been 'hit'. I've come across a lot of viewers, non-Bond fans in particular, who say they had a great time. Some were surprised how much. Obviously there have been those that weren't enamoured, but the strongest criticisms I've seen are from fans.

    Yup. I thought the same.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Good article. It is bizarre that the critics gave it such a slating in the US. May be if the audiences are enjoying it as much as this article suggests it will have the 'legs' to carry on and make a lot more money.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited December 2015 Posts: 4,399
    .
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    Getafix wrote: »
    Good article. It is bizarre that the critics gave it such a slating in the US. May be if the audiences are enjoying it as much as this article suggests it will have the 'legs' to carry on and make a lot more money.

    And bizarre it was. I've never seen such a huge discrepancy between English/Dutch (European) reviews that were posted on RT from October 26th and onwards....and the reviews that were from North-American newspapers/movie websites and that were posted shortly before, during and after November 6th. Let alone the huge drop in both critics and audience ratings on there. It was bizarre indeed.
  • mrgordiemrgordie
    Posts: 2
    Watch Spectre (2015) 2015 putlocker. Spectre (2015) Viooz. Spectre (2015) ,Watch Spectre (2015) Movie Online Free. Watch Spectre (2015), Watch Spectre (2015). Watch Home Online Free Movie, In Our Site We Have Movie Home 2014 Full Streaming HD 720px Available Alternative , Home HD 720p , Spectre (2015) Online Full/Free 2015 Viooz Provide Full MOvie Spectre (2015) Watch ONline Full.

    Click Here For Watch Spectre (2015)

    Click Here For Watch Spectre (2015)

    Direct access to watch Spectre (2015) movie, with excellent audio/video quality and virus free interface, Watch Spectre (2015) online at ultra fast data transfer rate, cost-free, virus-free access.Watch full stream Spectre (2015), Series for Free Online. Streaming Free Films to Watch Online including Series Trailers and Series Clips. Spectre (2015), Quick Links.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    mrgordie wrote: »
    Watch Spectre (2015) 2015 putlocker. Spectre (2015) Viooz. Spectre (2015) ,Watch Spectre (2015) Movie Online Free. Watch Spectre (2015), Watch Spectre (2015). Watch Home Online Free Movie, In Our Site We Have Movie Home 2014 Full Streaming HD 720px Available Alternative , Home HD 720p , Spectre (2015) Online Full/Free 2015 Viooz Provide Full MOvie Spectre (2015) Watch ONline Full.

    Click Here For Watch Spectre (2015)

    Click Here For Watch Spectre (2015)

    Direct access to watch Spectre (2015) movie, with excellent audio/video quality and virus free interface, Watch Spectre (2015) online at ultra fast data transfer rate, cost-free, virus-free access.Watch full stream Spectre (2015), Series for Free Online. Streaming Free Films to Watch Online including Series Trailers and Series Clips. Spectre (2015), Quick Links.

    Can somebody euthanize this troll?
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »


    And this one (and it shatters my feelings that in this forum Craig's portrayal as Bond in "SPECTRE" is barely...looked upon!):
    In Spectre, Craig's rather tortured take on the role, while retaining the grit of the actor's canny interpretation of Ian Fleming's literary conception, relaxes a bit into a suaver sort of self-confidence. He even exhibits a newfound compassion and sense of proportion.

    Must say, GG, I felt that often members here have expressed, how they were even blown away by his performance, by the confidence etc., and how they didnt think, he could do lighter. So, to be fair, I tbought, it was done justice.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited December 2015 Posts: 4,399
    .
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    HASEROT wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »


    And this one (and it shatters my feelings that in this forum Craig's portrayal as Bond in "SPECTRE" is barely...looked upon!):
    In Spectre, Craig's rather tortured take on the role, while retaining the grit of the actor's canny interpretation of Ian Fleming's literary conception, relaxes a bit into a suaver sort of self-confidence. He even exhibits a newfound compassion and sense of proportion.

    Must say, GG, I felt that often members here have expressed, how they were even blown away by his performance, by the confidence etc., and how they didnt think, he could do lighter. So, to be fair, I tbought, it was done justice.

    i have expressed my problems with aspects of SP in my review, and other times on the this forum...

    but i've also praised Craig's performance as well... He's gotten better, more relaxed, and more confident in each film - which really says a lot, because i felt like he nailed it right off the bat in CR... but i think now, especially in SP, he's letting a little bit more of himself into the role, which makes it that much more believable and convincing - from an acting standpoint.

    I fully agree. You can actually feel that, especially the humor, feels much more natural, much more improvised. His 4th outing feels a bit more improvised, and I love that. For instance the first meeting between Bond and "C" is so wonderful: "No :-)! I will call you "C". "C" it is", with Connery-esque wit :-).

    By the way, I'm again curious what Sir Sean Connery thinks of his latest Bond outings :-). I'm sure he sees a lot of himself in Craig's portrayal.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Like it was said, in this he is one step ahead as opposed to SF, where he was more reacting then acting. The performance in both films is accordingly.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »


    And this one (and it shatters my feelings that in this forum Craig's portrayal as Bond in "SPECTRE" is barely...looked upon!):
    In Spectre, Craig's rather tortured take on the role, while retaining the grit of the actor's canny interpretation of Ian Fleming's literary conception, relaxes a bit into a suaver sort of self-confidence. He even exhibits a newfound compassion and sense of proportion.

    Must say, GG, I felt that often members here have expressed, how they were even blown away by his performance, by the confidence etc., and how they didnt think, he could do lighter. So, to be fair, I tbought, it was done justice.

    Agreed. The consensus is Craig is phenomenal in SP and people here have been very vocal about it.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    edited December 2015 Posts: 11,119
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »


    And this one (and it shatters my feelings that in this forum Craig's portrayal as Bond in "SPECTRE" is barely...looked upon!):
    In Spectre, Craig's rather tortured take on the role, while retaining the grit of the actor's canny interpretation of Ian Fleming's literary conception, relaxes a bit into a suaver sort of self-confidence. He even exhibits a newfound compassion and sense of proportion.

    Must say, GG, I felt that often members here have expressed, how they were even blown away by his performance, by the confidence etc., and how they didnt think, he could do lighter. So, to be fair, I tbought, it was done justice.

    Agreed. The consensus is Craig is phenomenal in SP and people here have been very vocal about it.

    In all honesty, all I'm reading now in various topics is about all the flaws "SPECTRE" has. I really have to search hard to find some more elaborate review that goes into detail about Daniel Craig's performance as 007 in SP.

    By the way, I'm really glad that in here we find some more fans, yourself included, that are positive about Craig as Bond in this film. You included ;-).
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    You must have overlooked some of it. I am certainly very critical about all things DC, but read lots of appreciation here and elsrwhere. ;)
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    Here's the video giving a run through of the whole sequence for those that haven't seen it:



    I didn't know until I saw this a few weeks back that it was indeed real, which brings about a question of great importance: why the hell did they spend so much money on it when they could have just used effects and miniatures? I get wanting to have a world record honor and everything like that, but when the budget was already soaring, was throwing more money at this sequence really a sound investment?

    I think EON, Mendes and co. really expected this to blow people away in the theaters the way the DB5 reveal and the subway crash did, but I just wasn't mesmerized. Honestly, how many explosions have we seen now in this modern moviemaking period of ours with blockbusters out the wazoo? In a regular year we now see upwards of one hundred plus explosions through trailers, TV spots, behind the scenes featurettes and our own cinema-going experiences, so really, what's another explosion on the pile? I know it's Bond and it should be more special than the rest, but it just doesn't feel this way. Does anyone else reciprocate these feelings?

    Not at all on topic and mods will no doubt give me a slap but that video has wound me right up.

    I like a lot of what Mendes has done with Bond but when it comes to action he hasn't got a clue.

    Look at him dancing around with glee having just had a bigger explosion in his pants than was on screen.

    The train through the wall in SF was the same 'look it's really amazing Bond action because we did it for real you see.'

    F**k off. In both these amazing for real scenes Bond is just a bystander. Feeble Samuel.

    Let's talk about John 'journeyman director, all his films look like TV movies' Glen for a minute if you want to talk about Bond action. Instead of raping the budget like Fritzl's daughter meaning that the film will barely make its money back unless it gets $1 billion he lets Derek
    Meddings achieve the same effect for a 50th of the cost and then concentrates on delivering some proper Bond action like two men having a fight while HANGING OUT THE BACK OF A F**KING HERCULES FOR REAL!!!

    'Oh but Wizard Sam Mendes is an Oscar winning director' I hear you whine.

    Well when it comes to his Oscars, his poncey opening shots that are so important the gunbarrel has to be dropped and his f**king explosion that made Norris Mcwhirter moist I think it was Mr Roy Keane who said it best: 'Sam go and stick it up your bollocks!'

    Here's an idea EON if you're reading (and pay attention because this will save you millions): by all means get Mendes back to finish the Craig era because a lot of what he does is good but when he says 'I need a shockingly large amount of money to create a sequence for real but is actually not that good' you say to him 'Sorry Sam but we're going to take half that amount and keep it our pocket and then take the other half and spend it on some f**king writers and paying BJ Worth to come out of retirement and deliver something truly awesome. Stick it up your bollocks.'

    Ok I've finished now continue with the debate. The domestic gross, opening weekend, adjusted for inflation etc.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited December 2015 Posts: 11,425
    TheWizardOfIce wrote: »
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    Here's the video giving a run through of the whole sequence for those that haven't seen it:



    I didn't know until I saw this a few weeks back that it was indeed real, which brings about a question of great importance: why the hell did they spend so much money on it when they could have just used effects and miniatures? I get wanting to have a world record honor and everything like that, but when the budget was already soaring, was throwing more money at this sequence really a sound investment?

    I think EON, Mendes and co. really expected this to blow people away in the theaters the way the DB5 reveal and the subway crash did, but I just wasn't mesmerized. Honestly, how many explosions have we seen now in this modern moviemaking period of ours with blockbusters out the wazoo? In a regular year we now see upwards of one hundred plus explosions through trailers, TV spots, behind the scenes featurettes and our own cinema-going experiences, so really, what's another explosion on the pile? I know it's Bond and it should be more special than the rest, but it just doesn't feel this way. Does anyone else reciprocate these feelings?

    Not at all on topic and mods will no doubt give me a slap but that video has wound me right up.

    I like a lot of what Mendes has done with Bond but when it comes to action he hasn't got a clue.

    Look at him dancing around with glee having just had a bigger explosion in his pants than was on screen.

    The train through the wall in SF was the same 'look it's really amazing Bond action because we did it for real you see.'

    F**k off. In both these amazing for real scenes Bond is just a bystander. Feeble Samuel.

    Let's talk about John 'journeyman director, all his films look like TV movies' Glen for a minute if you want to talk about Bond action. Instead of raping the budget like Fritzl's daughter meaning that the film will barely make its money back unless it gets $1 billion he lets Derek
    Meddings achieve the same effect for a 50th of the cost and then concentrates on delivering some proper Bond action like two men having a fight while HANGING OUT THE BACK OF A F**KING HERCULES FOR REAL!!!

    'Oh but Wizard Sam Mendes is an Oscar winning director' I hear you whine.

    Well when it comes to his Oscars, his poncey opening shots that are so important the gunbarrel has to be dropped and his f**king explosion that made Norris Mcwhirter moist I think it was Mr Roy Keane who said it best: 'Sam go and stick it up your bollocks!'

    Here's an idea EON if you're reading (and pay attention because this will save you millions): by all means get Mendes back to finish the Craig era because a lot of what he does is good but when he says 'I need a shockingly large amount of money to create a sequence for real but is actually not that good' you say to him 'Sorry Sam but we're going to take half that amount and keep it our pocket and then take the other half and spend it on some f**king writers and paying BJ Worth to come out of retirement and deliver something truly awesome. Stick it up your bollocks.'

    Ok I've finished now continue with the debate. The domestic gross, opening weekend, adjusted for inflation etc.

    Great post. Carry on like this and you are in danger of being labelled a 'national treasure'.

    Fritzl's daughter... You're line in humour is so dark it comes out the other side into the light! Hilarious.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2015 Posts: 23,883
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »


    And this one (and it shatters my feelings that in this forum Craig's portrayal as Bond in "SPECTRE" is barely...looked upon!):
    In Spectre, Craig's rather tortured take on the role, while retaining the grit of the actor's canny interpretation of Ian Fleming's literary conception, relaxes a bit into a suaver sort of self-confidence. He even exhibits a newfound compassion and sense of proportion.

    Must say, GG, I felt that often members here have expressed, how they were even blown away by his performance, by the confidence etc., and how they didnt think, he could do lighter. So, to be fair, I tbought, it was done justice.

    Agreed. The consensus is Craig is phenomenal in SP and people here have been very vocal about it.
    I agree. Daniel Craig is the best thing about SP, and for the most part that is what people have been saying. I preferred his harder edged interpretation in CR/QoS to the slightly softer one in SF and SP personally, but from what I've seen/read, DC is seen as a positive. He has never given a 'bad' performance as Bond in my view. Just varying degrees of great.

    The comments I have seen on Seydoux have been mixed however.

    Bellucci very positive. Waltz positive but too brief and underused.

    In regards to the film itself, as I posted on this site before, here are the audience (not critic) consensus ratings as of now. If there are more sites that have aggregate user reviews, I'm interested to see what they are. They are usually the most accurate guide to how a film is perceived (note the number of users reporting on the top two):

    RT: 66% - 81,674 users
    IMDB: 7.1 - 123,146 users
    Metacritic: 6.9 - 576 users
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    bondjames wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »


    And this one (and it shatters my feelings that in this forum Craig's portrayal as Bond in "SPECTRE" is barely...looked upon!):
    In Spectre, Craig's rather tortured take on the role, while retaining the grit of the actor's canny interpretation of Ian Fleming's literary conception, relaxes a bit into a suaver sort of self-confidence. He even exhibits a newfound compassion and sense of proportion.

    Must say, GG, I felt that often members here have expressed, how they were even blown away by his performance, by the confidence etc., and how they didnt think, he could do lighter. So, to be fair, I tbought, it was done justice.

    Agreed. The consensus is Craig is phenomenal in SP and people here have been very vocal about it.
    I agree. Daniel Craig is the best thing about SP, and for the most part that is what people have been saying. I preferred his harder edged interpretation in CR/QoS to the slightly softer one in SF and SP personally, but from what I've seen/read, DC is seen as a positive. He has never given a 'bad' performance as Bond in my view. Just varying degrees of great.

    *relief* :-). Bravo @BondJames :-D! A more...positive-spirited remark from your side ;-).

    In any case, I fully agree with you here. Especially your last remark. All of Craig's outings as 007 are spot-on, but are also entirely related to the plot/story...hence the 'varying degrees' you are mentioning. I think most of us would agree that following characteristics of each outing are applicable to Daniel Craig:

    Daniel Craig as 'James Bond-007' in CR:
    --> The "Blunt/Naive/Emotional Bond":
    --> In here Daniel Craig portrays the Bond who just got his 00-licence. Obviously we witness a more naive Bond who bluntly works by his own experience, not the 00-experience. And we know how devastated he was after Vesper's death.

    Daniel Craig as 'James Bond-007' in QOS:
    --> The "Vengeful/Rogue/LooseCanon Bond":
    --> In here Daniel Craig portrays the agressive Bond who is out on revenge. He kills without his 00-licence in mind, and his emotions are clearly that of a very angry man. More than in CR he ignores MI6. A bit like Tim Dalton in LTK.

    Daniel Craig as 'James Bond-007' in SF:
    --> The "Assisting/Older/Bodyguard Bond":
    --> In here Daniel Craig portrays a Bond that is very much victim to the circumstances. Actually, one could say that in some instances, M clearly has the leading role, and Bond an assisting role. But don't forget: During the entire PTS Bond is already a more full-rounded Bond who listens much better to M (it has to be, four years after the events in QOS)! He's fully M's assistant/bodyguard. And at the end we see how he reports to the new M.

    Daniel Craig as 'James Bond-007' in SP:
    --> The "Funny/Comfortable/MissionBound Bond":
    --> In here Daniel Craig portrays the Bond we all love and care for...and that over a course of three adventures (four if you include SP). He's funnier, wittier and has his emotions better in check. He also comes across as a leader in the events, in which he judges the situations better. During some scenes I actually felt a huge Connery-vibe (TB? GF?).
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    *relief* :-). Bravo @BondJames :-D! A more...positive-spirited remark from your side ;-).
    Daniel Craig is the best thing about SP. Unquestionably. I said that in my initial review and I stand by it. He holds the film together, like he did QoS.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    bondjames wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    *relief* :-). Bravo @BondJames :-D! A more...positive-spirited remark from your side ;-).
    Daniel Craig is the best thing about SP. Unquestionably. I said that in my initial review and I stand by it. He holds the film together, like he did QoS.

    Yes I agree.
  • ChampionAlonsoChampionAlonso
    Posts: 389
    6.2/10 in Filmaffinity, which is good. Ratings are usually IMDB Rating -1 point. (SF has 6.6 and CR has 6.8).
    Professional reviews: 17 positive, 11 mixed and 2 negative.
    http://www.filmaffinity.com/es/film157007.html
    Another important score is Cinemascore. SP had A-
    http://www.cinemascore.com/
  • Suivez_ce_parachuteSuivez_ce_parachute
    Posts: 2,015
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    In all honesty, all I'm reading now in various topics is about all the flaws "SPECTRE" has. I really have to search hard to find some more elaborate review that goes into detail about Daniel Craig's performance as 007 in SP.

    Because as soon as some one says something quite positive, there's a guy who comes and criticizes him for not being positive enough, for not saying how incredibly great SF is compared to the incredible rubbish of the Bond franchise until then.

    So you're left with the negative persons that you keep on fueling every day by wanting to "prove" them they're wrong.

    Oh and btw, the French reviewers are very coherent with the North-America reviewers. So you'll have to do some French hating too.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    In all honesty, all I'm reading now in various topics is about all the flaws "SPECTRE" has. I really have to search hard to find some more elaborate review that goes into detail about Daniel Craig's performance as 007 in SP.

    Because as soon as some one says something quite positive, there's a guy who comes and criticizes him for not being positive enough, for not saying how incredibly great SF is compared to the incredible rubbish of the Bond franchise until then.

    So you're left with the negative persons that you keep on fueling every day by wanting to "prove" them they're wrong.

    Oh and btw, the French reviewers are very coherent with the North-America reviewers. So you'll have to do some French hating too.

    ....giphy.gif
    ;-)
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    But despite that, Frannce opened with a bang and we will now never find out quite how big it would have been.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    "Suivez_ce_parachute wrote:
    So you'll have to do some French hating too.

    I'm sure I can manage that!
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Germanlady wrote: »
    But despite that, Frannce opened with a bang and we will now never find out quite how big it would have been.

    Unfortunate turn of phrase... Unintended I know ;)
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Getafix wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    But despite that, Frannce opened with a bang and we will now never find out quite how big it would have been.

    Unfortunate turn of phrase... Unintended I know ;)

    Oh dear, you are right. Sorry. As you said, not intented.

  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I don't think anyone on here would be offended! Always best to see the funny side.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    In all honesty, all I'm reading now in various topics is about all the flaws "SPECTRE" has. I really have to search hard to find some more elaborate review that goes into detail about Daniel Craig's performance as 007 in SP.

    Because as soon as some one says something quite positive, there's a guy who comes and criticizes him for not being positive enough, for not saying how incredibly great SF is compared to the incredible rubbish of the Bond franchise until then.

    So you're left with the negative persons that you keep on fueling every day by wanting to "prove" them they're wrong.

    Oh and btw, the French reviewers are very coherent with the North-America reviewers. So you'll have to do some French hating too.

    ....giphy.gif
    ;-)

    Thanks for posting your screensaver.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    In all honesty, all I'm reading now in various topics is about all the flaws "SPECTRE" has. I really have to search hard to find some more elaborate review that goes into detail about Daniel Craig's performance as 007 in SP.

    Because as soon as some one says something quite positive, there's a guy who comes and criticizes him for not being positive enough, for not saying how incredibly great SF is compared to the incredible rubbish of the Bond franchise until then.

    So you're left with the negative persons that you keep on fueling every day by wanting to "prove" them they're wrong.

    Oh and btw, the French reviewers are very coherent with the North-America reviewers. So you'll have to do some French hating too.

    ....giphy.gif
    ;-)

    Thanks for posting your screensaver.
    Haha Thunderfinger you are the man. I'm cracking up! =))
Sign In or Register to comment.