› ›

SPECTRE - Your reviews. NO SPOILERS.

1…2526283031…34

Comments

  • DarrenDarren
    Posts: 9
    After being stuck in South America on business for the past 3 weeks I got back yesterday and finally got to the local IMAX last night. Pleased to report - thoroughly enjoyed Spectre! After reading some of the negativity on here I was preparing to be disappointed. But no, thought it was great. A Bond film through and through. Not without its problems (as all Bond movies are ) but overall really good. I even thought the Sam Smith song sounded good within the context of the movie. Yes there were plot holes all over the place - but it's a Bond film and it was no more or less preposterous than any of the others. It's called escapism.

    If I had to criticise anything - they could have done without the London finale. Too contrived. Also keep the London team behind the desk. Fiennes excellent as M and also Q is good but the others - way too much screen - time.

    For the future - Mendes has to go. No more of this "emotional journey" crap - get back to Bond on a straightforward mission. Also I think that DC has gone as far as he can with the role. The Spectre ending tied things up pretty nicely and I think he should bow out now while he's ahead. A younger guy is needed.

    I will try for a second viewing in the next few days.

  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Very fair review I think.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    Darren wrote: »
    Also keep the London team behind the desk. Fiennes excellent as M and also Q is good but the others - way too much screen - time.

    I call this the "Star Trek movie series effect" It's when it's felt that secondary characters need their share of screen time.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Get rid of Kinnear as Tanner!

    He's awful.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Poor Roy :-<
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    Perhaps people should think back a bit more about their very first viewing and cherish that experience a bit more. I see exactly the same scene-to-scene dissection with this film as compared to "Skyfall". Compared to 2007/2008 social media has become way more important. Especially since the Wikileaks, there seems to be more scrutiny on the internet. Same with films.

    You know, I'm going to say something bold. If "SPECTRE" was a Marvel-film. Or another entry in the Christopher Nolan-led "Dark Knight Trilogy", people would have been way more forgiving with this film. Sadly, the Bond tag is as much as an advantage as well as a huge disadvantage (too much history to come up with comparisons).
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Not sure about that. The Marvel films tend to be more sure footed. They know what they're trying achieve. Characters are consistent etc. I also think Marvel have a 'plan' in terms of where the next film and the character are going.

    EON never seem to quite know what they're trying to achieve from film to film. It's all a bit slapdash and all over the place. Consequently the films tend to be very hit or miss, with little consistency.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Getafix wrote: »
    Not sure about that. The Marvel films tend to be more sure footed. They know what they're trying achieve. Characters are consistent etc. I also think Marvel have a 'plan' in terms of where the next film and the character are going.

    EON never seem to quite know what they're trying to achieve from film to film. It's all a bit slapdash and all over the place. Consequently the films tend to be very hit or miss, with little consistency.
    Agreed. I was thinking about this the other day. I almost want them to be forced to do a little snippet/teaser at the end of each film like how Marvel does, just to 'force' their hand to think more strategically.

    Like how they used to have the guts to say "James Bond will return.....in " " " . I realize there are no more Fleming novels to adapt, but that doesn't mean they can't have a larger plan when they set out to make a film. As we discussed elsewhere, some directorial consistency (without big ego's) would help as well.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    True. I know you'll probably disagree but I am sort of glad Mendes has done two. Even though I don't like SF, it's nice that there are now two films that actually have some common elements by the same director. It sort of allows to re establish roots. Rather than chopping and changing constantly there's a sense of there being a distinct era.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Not sure about that. The Marvel films tend to be more sure footed. They know what they're trying achieve. Characters are consistent etc. I also think Marvel have a 'plan' in terms of where the next film and the character are going.

    EON never seem to quite know what they're trying to achieve from film to film. It's all a bit slapdash and all over the place. Consequently the films tend to be very hit or miss, with little consistency.
    Agreed. I was thinking about this the other day. I almost want them to be forced to do a little snippet/teaser at the end of each film like how Marvel does, just to 'force' their hand to think more strategically.

    Like how they used to have the guts to say "James Bond will return.....in " " " . I realize there are no more Fleming novels to adapt, but that doesn't mean they can't have a larger plan when they set out to make a film. As we discussed elsewhere, some directorial consistency (without big ego's) would help as well.

    Bond is no Marvel. And Marvel is no Bond. I think it's way easier to devise a roperly structured narrative with so many characters from that universe.

    Bond doesn't have that advantage. It is limited by it's one, single character: James Bond 007.

    Also try to see that from the perspective of the Bond producers.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Getafix wrote: »
    True. I know you'll probably disagree but I am sort of glad Mendes has done two. Even though I don't like SF, it's nice that there are now two films that actually have some common elements by the same director. It sort of allows to re establish roots. Rather than chopping and changing constantly there's a sense of there being a distinct era.
    I agree to some extent. I did find tonal inconsistency between the two products though, which I've never 'felt' before from two consecutive films with the same director. FRWL/GF & MR/FYEO did the same thing, but the directors were different. It's a little jarring. The question now is what direction do they continue with, tonally, in terms of the James Bond character.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I'm going to contradict myself and acknowledge there is a tonal difference between SF and SP.

    SF definitely feels like a Mendes Film. SP is actually much more reminiscent of Nolan.

    Perhaps the benefit in this case is just having a director who is not starting from scratch. I personally feel SP is the better of the two, which I partly attribute to this being Mendes' second outing.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    One last thing about Marvel movies. They are very consistent with their action...or shall I call it.....action porn? Most action I see in Marvel movies are bloated fistfights, destroying entire scycrapers, lifting up entire cities, space battles, battles on microscopic levels ("Ant-Man"), battles on macroscopic levels, battles in space, freerunning-Marvel-style, you name it.

    I have to say this then: I prefer the inconsistency of the action sequences in "SPECTRE" and "Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation" over the consistency of boring action porn from "Marvel".
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    well, the marvel movies are based on super powered comic book beings, so of course there's going to be all sorts of crazy action. some of it is boring (the action in man of steel, a DC/WB movie) and some of it is a dream come true for long time comic book readers. To expect anything less is a naïve. That being said, with the odd few excellent standouts, the action in Bond movies over the last 30 years have been a bit underwhelming. As things stand, if you want great action in a spy movie, you're better of watching Bourne.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,978
    @Gustav_Graves, I'm right there with you. I'm terribly negative when it comes to superhero movies anymore, they just don't do it for me. I really enjoyed the two 'Captain America' movies, but after the trailer for the new one, it's just looking like another overly-CG explosion fest that I'll inevitably pass on.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    The original Iron Man & Winter Soldier are my two favourite Marvel movies. If we get one of such amazing quality every few years or so I'm happy.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Yes i think superhero movies must surely be approaching the end of the road or burn out?!

    The first Toby McGuire Spider-Man was excellent I thought but since then I've lost interest. Ditto I preferred Burton and Keaton's Batman to Nolan and Bale's.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,978
    @Getafix, I wish that was the case, but with 'Batman v Superman,' 'Suicide Squad,' this entire new DC Universe of upcoming movies, the standalone new 'Batman' trilogy we'll get, some more standalone Superman movies, and the rest of the entries in Phase 3 or 19 or whatever it is for the Marvel universe, we'll have a steady stream of these for the next decade, at least.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    It's all about the execution. Marvel is inconsistent no doubt, but I certainly like some of their product very much indeed. Winter Soldier is a standout movie for me, as is Iron Man. I didn't mind Iron Man 3 or Ant Man either.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I rarely watch them unless I'm flying
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    chrisisall wrote: »
    The original Iron Man & Winter Soldier are my two favourite Marvel movies. If we get one of such amazing quality every few years or so I'm happy.

    Count me in there as well.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Enjoyed SP more last night. Like eating sugary cookies in the dark.

    Cinema fairly full btw... curious as to how holiday weekend will turn out.

    Older crowd. Maybe waiting until off to see film?
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    Enjoyed SP more last night. Like eating sugary cookies in the dark.

    Cinema fairly full btw... curious as to how holiday weekend will turn out.

    Older crowd. Maybe waiting until off to see film?

    Yes, it's definitley one you enjoy more the second or third time. Which is a sign that it's a grower and that its reputation may well improve with time. The opposite of SF IMO.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    Word of mouth counts still.
  • andmcitandmcit
    Posts: 1,068
    I totally loved SP as soon as I saw it, with the subtleties picked up on and appreciated even more in the following 3 viewings. Not the case with SF even where I practically had to force myself to view the subsequent viewings as I so wanted to like it.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    It's amazing how SF still solicits disgust from those who didn't like it. I didn't realize it was so off putting to some. I enjoyed it, but it was definitely flawed.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's amazing how SF still solicits disgust from those who didn't like it. I didn't realize it was so off putting to some. I enjoyed it, but it was definitely flawed.
    I can watch it much more easily now that I get where his 'help' was coming from.

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,978
    chrisisall wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's amazing how SF still solicits disgust from those who didn't like it. I didn't realize it was so off putting to some. I enjoyed it, but it was definitely flawed.
    I can watch it much more easily now that I get where his 'help' was coming from.

    I've yet to do this, but as I've said before, I am looking forward to a rewatch of SF solely for this reason.
  • andmcitandmcit
    Posts: 1,068
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's amazing how SF still solicits disgust from those who didn't like it. I didn't realize it was so off putting to some. I enjoyed it, but it was definitely flawed.
    I can watch it much more easily now that I get where his 'help' was coming from.

    I've yet to do this, but as I've said before, I am looking forward to a rewatch of SF solely for this reason.

    I maybe missed this - care to help fill the gaps or point me to the right thread!?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,978
    @andmcit, because of SP, Blofeld discusses how he was the author of all of Bond's pain, and how every time he interfered and meddled in his affairs, he took someone from him. It kind of patches up the massive plot hole of how Silva planned everything that he did in SF, and knowing that SPECTRE was behind it all and assisting, it makes me interested in going back and rewatching that, imagining Blofeld behind the scenes pulling all the strings.
Sign In or Register to comment.