In time, will SP be more or less appreciated?

1161719212251

Comments

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I rewatched Skyfall around 5-8 times still don't see the hype...
    Me, too. Overtly overrated.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I rewatched Skyfall around 5-8 times still don't see the hype...

    In think it is overrated in some ways, and the talk of it surpassing CR is delirious I think, but I rank it highest of all, of course.

    I do think that SP does many things superior to SF, including the use of the MI6 team, the balance of tone (SF had some cringe-worthy one-liners), and it has a superior mood that feels ominous. I don't know which I prefer in a detailed ranking, but I just wanted to point out the areas where I thought SP excelled, because SF doesn't win every category, and in many areas the films are equally proficient, like with their respective themes and motifs.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I rewatched Skyfall around 5-8 times still don't see the hype...

    In think it is overrated in some ways, and the talk of it surpassing CR is delirious I think, but I rank it highest of all, of course.

    I do think that SP does many things superior to SF, including the use of the MI6 team, the balance of tone (SF had some cringe-worthy one-liners), and it has a superior mood that feels ominous. I don't know which I prefer in a detailed ranking, but I just wanted to point out the areas where I thought SP excelled, because SF doesn't win every category, and in many areas the films are equally proficient, like with their respective themes and motifs.
    +1
  • CASINOROYALECASINOROYALE Somewhere hot
    Posts: 1,003
    I rewatched Skyfall around 5-8 times still don't see the hype...

    In think it is overrated in some ways, and the talk of it surpassing CR is delirious I think, but I rank it highest of all, of course.

    I do think that SP does many things superior to SF, including the use of the MI6 team, the balance of tone (SF had some cringe-worthy one-liners), and it has a superior mood that feels ominous. I don't know which I prefer in a detailed ranking, but I just wanted to point out the areas where I thought SP excelled, because SF doesn't win every category, and in many areas the films are equally proficient, like with their respective themes and motifs.

    Agreed!
    One thing that always bothered me about Skyfall is the ending. You are in a remote location with the head of MI6 and Silva and his men are coming to kill you in one helicopter.. Bond shoots down Blofelds helicopter with his walther ppk in Spectre but in Skyfall his plan is to pull a home alone and hope for the best? You'd also think with all the other MI6 agents and 00s the new M would be smart enough to send back up.. I just never got that part. With today's technology and resources I mean hell they could even take out Silvas chopper with a drone.

    Maybe it's just me but I found the ending so stupid. 007 is a way smarter and better agent.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I rewatched Skyfall around 5-8 times still don't see the hype...

    In think it is overrated in some ways, and the talk of it surpassing CR is delirious I think, but I rank it highest of all, of course.

    I do think that SP does many things superior to SF, including the use of the MI6 team, the balance of tone (SF had some cringe-worthy one-liners), and it has a superior mood that feels ominous. I don't know which I prefer in a detailed ranking, but I just wanted to point out the areas where I thought SP excelled, because SF doesn't win every category, and in many areas the films are equally proficient, like with their respective themes and motifs.

    Agreed!
    One thing that always bothered me about Skyfall is the ending. You are in a remote location with the head of MI6 and Silva and his men are coming to kill you in one helicopter.. Bond shoots down Blofelds helicopter with his walther ppk in Spectre but in Skyfall his plan is to pull a home alone and hope for the best? You'd also think with all the other MI6 agents and 00s the new M would be smart enough to send back up.. I just never got that part. With today's technology and resources I mean hell they could even take out Silvas chopper with a drone.

    Maybe it's just me but I found the ending so stupid. 007 is a way smarter and better agent.
    Well said on every account. Bond is most stupidly portrayed in Skyfall the entire film makes me cringe. He always made the wrongest of the choices you'd wonder how did MI-6's best agent end up being one with thinkering like this. And people complained when in Quantum of Solace Bond was a reckless loose cannon.
  • CASINOROYALECASINOROYALE Somewhere hot
    Posts: 1,003
    I rewatched Skyfall around 5-8 times still don't see the hype...

    In think it is overrated in some ways, and the talk of it surpassing CR is delirious I think, but I rank it highest of all, of course.

    I do think that SP does many things superior to SF, including the use of the MI6 team, the balance of tone (SF had some cringe-worthy one-liners), and it has a superior mood that feels ominous. I don't know which I prefer in a detailed ranking, but I just wanted to point out the areas where I thought SP excelled, because SF doesn't win every category, and in many areas the films are equally proficient, like with their respective themes and motifs.

    Agreed!
    One thing that always bothered me about Skyfall is the ending. You are in a remote location with the head of MI6 and Silva and his men are coming to kill you in one helicopter.. Bond shoots down Blofelds helicopter with his walther ppk in Spectre but in Skyfall his plan is to pull a home alone and hope for the best? You'd also think with all the other MI6 agents and 00s the new M would be smart enough to send back up.. I just never got that part. With today's technology and resources I mean hell they could even take out Silvas chopper with a drone.

    Maybe it's just me but I found the ending so stupid. 007 is a way smarter and better agent.
    Well said on every account. Bond is most stupidly portrayed in Skyfall the entire film makes me cringe. He always made the wrongest of the choices you'd wonder how did MI-6's best agent end up being one with thinkering like this. And people complained when in Quantum of Solace Bond was a reckless loose cannon.

    Exactly!!
    I think the main issue with Craig's series is that they are trying to give him a backstory and focusing way to much on him being a "normal guy".. Bond is a secret agent who sleeps with a ton of hot girls, kills tons of guys, drives fancy cars, has spy gadgets and does the over the top stunts. He isn't Jason Bourne or on mission impossible.

    He's James Bond. It's time to go back to having Bond be bond.
  • M16_CartM16_Cart Craig fanboy?
    Posts: 541
    Spectre's plot was a product of a series of rushed rewriting. the execs told the writers that the 3rd act was lacking, so they decided to tack on the abandoned M16 building, Vesper tape and the villain being a part of Bond's past, because, heyyy, mann, this isn't just some random bulls***... It's All Connected mannn!!!!!
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,277
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    However I will defend to my grave that the third act, compared to the two prior, is a big let down. I don't think the film required another action set piece, and in my opinion the love story was rushed, with poor dialogue. What could have been a near perfect 2hr movie, becomes a 2hr 20min merely excellent one.
    I can agree with that. I'm personally not a fan of anything after 'ball buster', except of course for the incredible "Bond, James Bond" ending.

    Having said that, I'm not sure how else they really could have done the 'love' story and I'm glad they focused on the casino parts rather than overdoing time with the romance angle, because that's what makes CR so special (the casino scenes imho).

    I agree. They clearly focused the majority of effort to make sure the Casino scenes worked, and that's why the later scenes with Bond and Vesper alone, with nothing in the way of plot or objective to support them, seemed more like an afterthought. I honestly don't think the collapsing house set piece adds anything to the film other than serve as a set up to an overly melodramatic death scene. I recognise the thematic importance of Vesper's death in solidifying Bond's character, but once the main plot is sorted with you cannot simply coast on a burgeoning relationship. I think there is a touch of self-indulgence in the storytelling, perhaps treating the material with slightly more reverence than it deserves. IMO streamlining the third act and making a few choice edits elsewhere (that parkour chase is simply too long to be convincingly plausible) would help to truly earn CR the reputation it currently enjoys.
    I think I agree with you on the third act. It did have a touch of self indulgence to it & it could have been a little tighter at the end without the building theatrics. However, this probably translates better on screen than the novel ending, and general fans normally demand and expect a big finale (keeping in mind this was the first Bond film in 4 years and since DAD) so they probably really had no choice. It's a no-win situation really.


    This is the type of exceptionalism I'm talking about. This is exactly why CR has the 'gold dust' reputation it does. seventy-five percent of any great work is perceived in the work itself (i.e. it is quantifiable), the other twenty-five percent is conceived in the mind of the viewer. Once a film, book, album whatever reaches the threshold of seventy-five percent, the brain will change it's reality so it can achieve the rest. This comes from our built in instinct to see value in things, and our tendency to overestimate value in order to remain optimistic about our prospects of survival. Problem is, this makes ascertaining the 'actual value' of content (i.e being objective) rather than it's perceived value (groupthink) difficult. Part of the issue is that often something which, in isolation, would be considered 'weak' is excused due to it's relationship with the surrounding material. This is why any perceived issues the content does have are downplayed as being 'superficial'.

    Huh?

    Even if CR is considered 75% great, I would be hard-pressed to say SP is 75% great.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,197
    I know some casual fans who really liked SP at first and probably only viewing. Some even liked it much more than the other Craig films since they thought it was more similar to the Brosnan films which they enjoyed more than the Craig films. However the majority prefered Skyfall and especially Casino Royal.

    Many people here complain about the score and the step brother angle. I don't really mind both of this so very much. I mean the score is boring but it does not disturb me and it fits most of the sequences well. Bond films are no music videos so I don't mind that. The step brother plot is just stupid but is just a very small fragment of the entire film.

    My biggest complaint is that the film feels like a Best of Bond film where the writers tried to put everything in the film that Bond fans usually like, no matter whether this fit together at all: Therefore we need a train sequence, a snow sequence, a helicopter sequence, Blofeld and SPECTER, a romance between Bond and a Bond girl, a gadget from Q, a strong henchman, an outlandish villain lair, some emo Bond stuff....

    The problem is that you cannot just add all this things together and achieve something great. Sometimes less is more. Instead of all this boring car and helicopter chases, boring side plots and pointless globetrotting they should have tried to write an interesting and unique script....
  • Posts: 1,680
    Broccoli said Spectre had something every Bond fan would love. Spectre would have been better if Bond was more involved in the Nine Eyes plot instead of the MI6 team. The film is good but it was just as loose in terms of plot, if not more than Skyfall.

    The other problem I have is how Bond discovers & learns of Oberhauser. We see the first glimpse with the torn photo which was too much of a dead giveaway, While Bonds scene with Mr White was good this was an opportunity for more backstory & substance.

    Susbstance was an issue with SP.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,159
    SP is a film of parts, not of the sum of its parts. Coherence has been a bit of an issue in the last two Bond films. Individual scenes work very well but certain jumps between scenes happen fast, abruptly and almost illogically. Yet when I have to compare SP to SF, I do so favourably. Despite having a few problems of its own, SP comes off to me as a better Bond film than SF. I'm not even suggesting it's the better film of the two, but as a Bond film, SP seems to bring the goods in greater abundance than SF. Also, and I know this is very subjective, I love the images and sounds in SP so much more than I do in SF, with the single exception perhaps of Shanghai. Since music is half the film for me, personally, SP wins here too. Newman's compositions for SF are some that I still struggle with. His score for SP, by contrast, though borrowing heavily from SF, is simply put better, at least in my book. Seriously, I love the SP score whereas I'm sort of 'meh' on the SF score. I cannot overstate the impact a good score has on how much I like a film or not.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Imagine Barry scoring all the Craig films. 8-> Dammit...
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Imagine Barry scoring all the Craig films. 8-> Dammit...
    Take your Pick. ;)




  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Can't listen, it makes me yearn far too damn much.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, I know what you mean...It's the reason I made them in the first place. :((
  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    edited December 2016 Posts: 2,252
    GBF wrote: »
    I know some casual fans who really liked SP at first and probably only viewing. Some even liked it much more than the other Craig films since they thought it was more similar to the Brosnan films which they enjoyed more than the Craig films. However the majority prefered Skyfall and especially Casino Royal.

    Many people here complain about the score and the step brother angle. I don't really mind both of this so very much. I mean the score is boring but it does not disturb me and it fits most of the sequences well. Bond films are no music videos so I don't mind that. The step brother plot is just stupid but is just a very small fragment of the entire film.

    My biggest complaint is that the film feels like a Best of Bond film where the writers tried to put everything in the film that Bond fans usually like, no matter whether this fit together at all: Therefore we need a train sequence, a snow sequence, a helicopter sequence, Blofeld and SPECTER, a romance between Bond and a Bond girl, a gadget from Q, a strong henchman, an outlandish villain lair, some emo Bond stuff....

    The problem is that you cannot just add all this things together and achieve something great. Sometimes less is more. Instead of all this boring car and helicopter chases, boring side plots and pointless globetrotting they should have tried to write an interesting and unique script....

    Personally I *like* the return to formula. Problem is the action isn't particularly fun which could be covered up by a good score but wait the score is crap

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I'm not a fan of the heavy vehicular action in SP. I know Dan's injury forced them to work around it on the fly, but I have never been a fan of chases in Bond when they make up so much of the film. I wanted more of what we got in the Hinx fight, brutal fisticuffs with no score, where all the punches and kicks were felt like in QoS. I'd have killed to see Bond forced to face off with a massive amount of SPECTRE agents at Blofeld's lair as they all ran at him, for example, to produce a crazy sequence. It would have been a great set up for the torture scene, where Bond was unable to take on eight agents coming at him at once and they beat him unconscious; he'd then wake up in Blofeld's torture chair. The film needed more visceral, messy action like that.

    When I just see Bond in a vehicle I feel disconnected from him, like it might as well be anyone flying the plane or driving the car. But when he's in a shootout or in a bout, it's him there with nothing but his wits and strength to protect himself. So although the YOLT Nellie copter fight and LALD's chases are some of the most amazingly shot pieces of cinematic action, I will always take the scraps in films like FRWL, TLD, SP, CR and QoS over that stuff because I see Bond right in the thick of it and can attach myself to his plight directly.
  • M16_CartM16_Cart Craig fanboy?
    Posts: 541
    I agree with many of the comments on here.

    Mainly, that Spectre is the jack of all trades. It's mish-mash of many different things that don't add up together as a whole.

    It tried to give us a little bit of everything, and it succeeded in that department. It takes the checklist of 20 things everyone wants in a Bond movie and ticks nearly every box. But it doesn't excel or dominate in either any one of those things.

    Spy Who Loved Me had an amazing henchman. You Only Live twice had amazing scenery. Goldeneye had an amazing cast. All 3 of those are formula-driven, but at least they excelled in something.

    But even within the Bond formula, I think the series has too oft relied on big chase scenes, effectively just throwing money at the screen hoping people will be entertained, in place of skillful acting/directing/writing/artistry.
  • M16_CartM16_Cart Craig fanboy?
    edited December 2016 Posts: 541
    None of Spectre's problems are anything new. But the series has made too many of these mistakes before, and it's regressed back into it. We're heading into the 25th film and the 55th year of the series, and I'm less forgiving of rehashing.


  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2016 Posts: 23,883
    The Lotus/Helicopter/Bike/Car chase in TSWLM is still, to this day, one of the greatest pieces of car chase film making I've seen, especially given how old that film is. Everything about that scene is perfection to me, and I even see elements of it crop up these days in films like MI-RN and SP (in camera angles, concept and shot framing). I always look forward to it when I watch the film.

    The QoS pretitles chase is similarly amazing. It definitely draws on the visceral and kinetic Bourne template, but smartly frames it in the larger than life locales and atmosphere of James Bond.

    The key ingredients in both cases, even though they are very different, is the tension & danger level. One feels Bond is in danger in both instances. The editing and cinematography are also top notch, with outstanding contextual shots, colours and close up framing.

    I really look forward to another chase like these in a Bond film one day.
  • Posts: 19,339
    I think we would all be sitting here a lot happier if Blofeld escaped.Then Bond 25 would not be backed into the corner it finds itself in now,and the idea of a stand-alone,mission based Bond25 now seems less likely.

    If Blofeld had got away it would have shown a new generation of Bond fans that he can lose,sometimes the villain CAN get away,and this would have elevated Blofeld up to the super-villain and arch-enemy he should be.

    Also then,they could have made Bond25 a new stand-alone mission film,and reintroduced Blofeld whenever.
    Maybe Waltz wouldn't be free or would not want to play the role but that's no problem,Blofeld has always had a different face in each film.

    But,alas,because he was caught and made to look stupid and weak,he is now just another villain,and Bond 25 looks like it will have to be yet ANOTHER linked film rather than stand-alone.

  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,197
    @barryt007

    indeed. Bond25 will become very predictable because they have to do something with Blofeld. He will have to escape and we will again have some super villain scheme instead of a down to earth plot.

    BTW: Something that really annoyed me in both Mendes films is the illogical and absurd villain behaviour. In both films, the villains are really doing crazy things which are totally going into SciFi territory. I think of Silva's amazingly absurd escape, especially the subway scene and Blofeld kidnapping Bond and Madeleine in London. Bond destroyed Blofeld's headquarter, and out of the sudden Blofeld has the time to decorate the old mi6 building and invent some funny games in order to harm Bond? Wouldn't one believe Blofeld to put all his power in recovering from Bond's victory in the crater? It just feels so unnatural and rushed that Blofeld out of the sudden is back. I mean how much time has passed by in the meantime?


  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I think we would all be sitting here a lot happier if Blofeld escaped.Then Bond 25 would not be backed into the corner it finds itself in now,and the idea of a stand-alone,mission based Bond25 now seems less likely.

    If Blofeld had got away it would have shown a new generation of Bond fans that he can lose,sometimes the villain CAN get away,and this would have elevated Blofeld up to the super-villain and arch-enemy he should be.

    Also then,they could have made Bond25 a new stand-alone mission film,and reintroduced Blofeld whenever.
    Maybe Waltz wouldn't be free or would not want to play the role but that's no problem,Blofeld has always had a different face in each film.

    But,alas,because he was caught and made to look stupid and weak,he is now just another villain,and Bond 25 looks like it will have to be yet ANOTHER linked film rather than stand-alone.

    The other Craig films have explored themes of loss before, though, so doing that with Blofeld wasn't necessary. CR saw Bond lose the money to Quantum, QoS saw him lose Mathis while trying to stop Greene and Skyfall saw him able to defeat Silva's threat but still lose M. These movies blur the lines between winning and losing such that they are rendered both foggy and near indiscernible, like in reality.

    I like the idea of Blofeld, like Ozymandias, being brought down by his own hubris and made ironical because of it through his ego. It's the classic Blofeld mistake, where he thinks so highly of himself he never dreams of a counter move strong enough to usurp him, a fixture of Greek drama. Even in a captured state, you could do interesting things with him, like Bond having to stomach the British government using Blofeld's connections in exchange for favors in a twisted plea bargain.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    GBF wrote: »
    @barryt007

    indeed. Bond25 will become very predictable because they have to do something with Blofeld. He will have to escape and we will again have some super villain scheme instead of a down to earth plot.

    Not true.
  • Posts: 1,680
    Spectre is the first Craig film where Bond won & rode off with a girl. QOS comes in close second. CR & SF saw Bond fail the mission but stand tall at the end of the film.

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited December 2016 Posts: 15,423
    I'd rather they stop heading down this "down to earth" stuff. Not even the Fleming novels, that are considered the most realistic interpretation of the series, have "down to earth" plots for the most part.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Agreed. Embrace the comic flare.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    The thing with most people here that demand "down to earth" always want something like William Boyd's Solo, one of the worst Bond novels I've ever read. Bored me all the way down the road. No thanks. I'd take excitement over "auteur-writing" any day.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    Murdock wrote: »
    Agreed. Embrace the comic flare.

    Couldn't have put it better. As long as it doesn't devolve into self-parody.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Murdock wrote: »
    Agreed. Embrace the comic flare.

    Couldn't have put it better. As long as it doesn't devolve into self-parody.
    Agreed. Heaven forbid they step into the Kingsman territory. The comic-flare is a must, but logical relevance is also required.
Sign In or Register to comment.