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

19091939596100

Comments

  • Posts: 486
    Trigger wrote: »
    QoS is frustrating for me. The PTS car chase "feels" like it's awesome, I just wish it had been edited so that I could see how awesome it is!

    Controversial opinion here...but I'd say with more sedate editing it would actually be far less awesome. There's very little to the chase and when you think of the misfortune they had with injuries and accidentally sunk Aston Martins there is less to show for their efforts on screen here than the excessively criticised Rome chase in SP.

    The frantic pace and editing of the car chase it what makes it I think. Less so with the boat chase which I'd agree ruined it.
    Trigger wrote: »
    Another slightly frustrating thing for me is the fact that the PTS of the last 2 films has been THE action highlight of both movies as far as action sequences are concerned. Whilst the PTS should be fantastic and gripping, I don't think it should be by far the best action sequence of the movie.

    That's nothing new though is it? People felt like that with TWINE and the ski-jump in TSWLM is one of the most iconic moments in cinematic history let alone the film itself!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,461
    Just got back from seeing it (finally) for the second time. This movie might be Top 5 for me, damn good entertainment. So many cool moments and comedic scenes I had forgotten about, too. And the opening? The text and audio effects right before the PTS takes place is amazing, immediately gets me in the mood for it.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Cowley wrote: »
    Controversial opinion here...but I'd say with more sedate editing it would actually be far less awesome. There's very little to the chase and when you think of the misfortune they had with injuries and accidentally sunk Aston Martins there is less to show for their efforts on screen here than the excessively criticised Rome chase in SP.
    I agree. The editing of the QoS car chase....in particular the visceral nature of it....the immediacy and kinetic frenzy....along with the sound/roar of the engines.... is all part of what makes it 1st class imho. I would have personally preferred a just few more long range or high altitude shots of the chase from time to time (to provide perspective) but apart from that, it's near perfect.

    The boat sequence is far less successful as you said, as is the Siena rooftop/Mitchel chase/fight. I would have preferred more distance shots in both.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Just got back from seeing it (finally) for the second time. This movie might be Top 5 for me
    Welcome to my world (crisis Mr. Creasy).
    :))
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited November 2015 Posts: 10,588
    63%. Why, just why? I can't fathom it.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Yes 75% but not 63%.
  • Posts: 1,098
    Murdock wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    timmer wrote: »
    Going for 5th viewing Tuesday. Will just have to man up and brave Sam Smith vocals, needles in face tedium, and Blofelds sickly no-socked white legs
    Ride comes with a few bumps, but I'm ready to go again :D

    Am I the only one who loves the song but not the singer? I absolutely love Writing on the Wall. But I think Sam Smith's voice is borderline castrato voice and it lacks... Well it lacks something to give it justice.

    I feel the same way. I love the instrumental but Smith is wrong for the song. It's suited to a woman's voice. When he goes into those falsettos I feel almost embarrassed. This version is far superior.

    I agree.............good tune.........but as you say.......they should of got a woman to sing the song, it just sounded so uncomfortable for Smith to sing it, and as you say almost embarrassing.

  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,588
    I wonder what goes through their minds when seeing the transition of reviews after its premier in the US.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    It's sitting at 67% audience rating at RT, 7.2 at IMDB, & 6.9 User Score at Metacritic, so it's all reasonably consistent, no?
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's sitting at 67% audience rating at RT, 7.2 at IMDB, & 6.9 User Score at Metacritic, so it's all reasonably consistent, no?

    Yup.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,588
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's sitting at 67% audience rating at RT, 7.2 at IMDB, & 6.9 User Score at Metacritic, so it's all reasonably consistent, no?
    For nearly to weeks the reviews were mostly positive, sitting at 8/10 or 80/100. I know it's not huge, but you can definitely feel it in the air.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    jake24 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's sitting at 67% audience rating at RT, 7.2 at IMDB, & 6.9 User Score at Metacritic, so it's all reasonably consistent, no?
    For nearly to weeks the reviews were mostly positive, sitting at 8/10 or 80/100. I know it's not huge, but you can definitely feel it in the air.
    Do you mean before the US opening? The RT critic reviews? Yes, it dropped once the US critic reviews came in for sure.

    The audience/user % scores across those 3 sites I posted above are pretty consistent though. That must be a reasonable sample size of the viewing public to give some indication of a cross section of the public's overall view. It's scoring above QoS by about 5 - 10 pts I think.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited November 2015 Posts: 10,588
    bondjames wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's sitting at 67% audience rating at RT, 7.2 at IMDB, & 6.9 User Score at Metacritic, so it's all reasonably consistent, no?
    For nearly to weeks the reviews were mostly positive, sitting at 8/10 or 80/100. I know it's not huge, but you can definitely feel it in the air.
    Do you mean before the US opening? The RT critic reviews? Yes, it dropped once the US critic reviews came in for sure.

    The audience/user % scores across those 3 sites I posted above are pretty consistent though. That must be a reasonable sample size of the viewing public to give some indication of a cross section of the public's overall view. It's scoring above QoS by about 5 - 10 pts I think.

    Yep, that's what I mean. People were overall less enthusiastic before the US opening. Spectre is very much a film for the fans, a return to formula. I think many, particularly critics, were disappointed with this. But EON and Mendes must have known this was coming.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited November 2015 Posts: 4,116
    They tried to make a film that pleased and attracted a large audience. I don't think they saw the disappointment coming.

  • Haven't posted here in years but felt it appropriate to return and give a review of Spectre.

    After leaving the theatre I was conflicted, I didn't really know what to think of Spectre and it was unclear if I felt the film was good or bad. Maybe I'm being a negative nancy but I cannot love this film and appreciate it on the same level I do as Casino Royale and my other favourite Bond films. However the film is technically impressive and exceptional in several regards that make the film impossible to hate, unless you're one of those Craig haters I cannot comprehend. I was also expecting a very ham fisted performence by Christoph Waltz but I was actually really impressed; I love my Bond villains and he earned a good mark. I love the Title Sequence song by Sam Smith but didn't really like the title sequence visuals. Every time the film took a step in the right direction, it ruined itself by taking a step back; several sections of the film end in a cliche, boring or unintended humourous way, which leaves the climaxes lacking but overall content positive.

    Spectre is definitely a good film but I feel the writers missed their marks at several points in the script and couldn't come up with interesting and unique ways to get things done. The acting is great and the characters are good. The settings and cinematography are beautiful. The ending was poor and really left me unsatisfied.

    Overall I would give Spectre an 8/10, which (sadly) ranks it within the Top 10 since I cannot give more than 10 of the Bond films honest 8/10s. Spectre is just so much more visually stunning than older entries that relied more heavily on characters but Spectre also has great character acting carrying it too, which puts the classics to a bit of shame. The story/narrative is definitely the weakest element to Spectre but its not enough of a detractor to bring it down. Spectre is definitely weaker than Casino Royale and Skyfall but its better than QoS by a decent margin. I would consider Spectre on par with Goldfinger/Thunderball in the 6th - 10th best all-time range.
  • Posts: 5,745
    Birdleson wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Put more money into the writing, PLEASE.

    We can agree on that.

    Indeed. Someone tell Barbara I want to see all the money spent on high class actors in characters ON THE PAGE, and let it filter to the screen.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 372
    That's what they did with Logan and they got burned.
    They simply must choose better talent. I agree Mendes should let it drop. They should take Paul Greengrass because any fight in any of his Bournes is more exciting than anything in SPECTRE. And they are just two actors squaring off with each other, much less expensive than a car chase in an empty Rome.
    Greengrass could do a kickass Bond for 100 millions. The Victoria Station scene in Bourne 3 is the kind of stuff we should see in future Bond. Bond really being clever and more skilled than all the bag guys and their surveillance.
  • Posts: 5,767
    Ludovico wrote: »
    timmer wrote: »
    Going for 5th viewing Tuesday. Will just have to man up and brave Sam Smith vocals, needles in face tedium, and Blofelds sickly no-socked white legs
    Ride comes with a few bumps, but I'm ready to go again :D

    Am I the only one who loves the song but not the singer? I absolutely love Writing on the Wall. But I think Sam Smith's voice is borderline castrato voice and it lacks... Well it lacks something to give it justice.
    No, you´re not. Those are my thoughts exactly right from the start.


    bondjames wrote: »
    Cowley wrote: »
    Controversial opinion here...but I'd say with more sedate editing it would actually be far less awesome. There's very little to the chase and when you think of the misfortune they had with injuries and accidentally sunk Aston Martins there is less to show for their efforts on screen here than the excessively criticised Rome chase in SP.
    I agree. The editing of the QoS car chase....in particular the visceral nature of it....the immediacy and kinetic frenzy....along with the sound/roar of the engines.... is all part of what makes it 1st class imho. I would have personally preferred a just few more long range or high altitude shots of the chase from time to time (to provide perspective) but apart from that, it's near perfect.

    The boat sequence is far less successful as you said, as is the Siena rooftop/Mitchel chase/fight. I would have preferred more distance shots in both.
    While I absolutely came to love the car chase in QoS as it is (admittedly after repeated viewing), with those phenomenal backgrounds I wouldn´t see much of a problem if some of the shots were slightly longer.
    I love the pace of all the action scenes in QoS. At first sight, it looks like Bourne, but with repeated viewing it turns out completely different, much more reminiscent of Peter Hunt´s fast editing near the end of TB.



    jake24 wrote: »
    Spectre is very much a film for the fans, a return to formula. I think many, particularly critics, were disappointed with this.
    The return to the formula is beside the point actually, because it is things like constant color filtering or lame storytelling that disappoint.



    Stamper wrote: »
    That's what they did with Logan and they got burned.
    They simply must choose better talent. I agree Mendes should let it drop. They should take Paul Greengrass because any fight in any of his Bournes is more exciting than anything in SPECTRE. And they are just two actors squaring off with each other, much less expensive than a car chase in an empty Rome.
    Greengrass could do a kickass Bond for 100 millions. The Victoria Station scene in Bourne 3 is the kind of stuff we should see in future Bond. Bond really being clever and more skilled than all the bag guys and their surveillance.
    What, after QoS still after all these years getting constant flak for its fast cuts you want Greengrass, who, beside equally fast cuts, actually doesn´t even show the action in the frame?
    You have a good point about some clever ideas in those films, but it might be fair to assume the Bond producers on purpose relied on parts of their old formula, exactly to appear not like Bourne.
    I absolutely agree though that the next Bond film shouldn´t cost more than 100 million. And if they make a car chase, they should remember that there ARE films like Ronin, so there´s no excuse in the world for making another unexciting chase.

  • Posts: 11,425
    Stamper wrote: »
    That's what they did with Logan and they got burned.
    They simply must choose better talent. I agree Mendes should let it drop. They should take Paul Greengrass because any fight in any of his Bournes is more exciting than anything in SPECTRE. And they are just two actors squaring off with each other, much less expensive than a car chase in an empty Rome.
    Greengrass could do a kickass Bond for 100 millions. The Victoria Station scene in Bourne 3 is the kind of stuff we should see in future Bond. Bond really being clever and more skilled than all the bag guys and their surveillance.

    Greengrass would just give us shaky cam and Bourne riffs.

    The train fight in SP is fnatastic and just right for Bond film. One of the best fights in a Bond film for years IMO.
  • Posts: 6,804
    Well back from my fourth, and possibly last viewing of SP, til it comes out on blu-ray.
    My positioning of it at no. 7 still stands. Still enjoyed it, viewed in a half empty cinema, and with the wife in tow (She loved it!), everything I love about it still stands, but I do have trouble with that final section in London!
    Funny the things you notice later. Did anybody see a very strange close up shot of Mr. Hinx in the car chase, just as they drove the cars on the slant? it was as if he was computer generated or something. I noticed it on my third viewing, and thought it was just my eyes playing tricks, so I was ready for it this time. Odd moment. Apologies if someone has already said this, as there is so much going on here. Glad to see SP doing well at the box office. Well, onto watching it next on blu-ray, hopefully early next year. Always a different experience in your own home!
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,690
    Getafix wrote: »
    Stamper wrote: »
    That's what they did with Logan and they got burned.
    They simply must choose better talent. I agree Mendes should let it drop. They should take Paul Greengrass because any fight in any of his Bournes is more exciting than anything in SPECTRE. And they are just two actors squaring off with each other, much less expensive than a car chase in an empty Rome.
    Greengrass could do a kickass Bond for 100 millions. The Victoria Station scene in Bourne 3 is the kind of stuff we should see in future Bond. Bond really being clever and more skilled than all the bag guys and their surveillance.

    Greengrass would just give us shaky cam and Bourne riffs.

    The train fight in SP is fnatastic and just right for Bond film. One of the best fights in a Bond film for years IMO.

    I love Greengrass but IMO he is not right for Bond. However, there is a 'Bondian' version of Greengrass: Denis Villeneuve. He delivers nail-bitting thrillers just like Greengrass, but shows a lot more Bondian class in doing so.

  • Posts: 486
    Well as Greengrass seems incapable of promoting a Bourne film without bashing Bond I doubt he'd be getting asked in the near future.
  • Posts: 6,804
    Agree with you Cowley re Greengrass. And I reckon he would say no anyway, as he's back in Bourne territory again As for Villeneuve, I want to see how he handles Blade Runner 2, before I decide whether he could handle Bond.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited November 2015 Posts: 4,116
    Denis Villeneuve's name comes up a lot plus didn't he express an interest in Bond?
  • Posts: 6,804
    Hey Birdleson, keep meaning to apologise for our run in before. I was out of line. Sorry!
  • Posts: 6,804
    Ah, I said something stupid, and you picked me up on it etc etc. Anyway glad to move on! Anyone else cop that weird shot of Hinx in the car chase?
  • Posts: 14,816
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    Denis Villeneuve's name comes up a lot plus didn't he express an interest in Bond?

    That would be great and the logical choice to succeed to Mendes.
  • Posts: 198
    No Paul Greengrass please! His shaky cam is really a farce. To make it look like you're in with the action/movement is very very cheap. Because really, who in real life see things in action or movement that shaky? I don't. I saw Bourne the other day on TV. Great movie(s) but really, that shaky cam is very very ineffective and overrated and unnecessary!

    You see really nothing during those with seven or so camera's filmed fistfights whereas Sam Mendes his pace is really fantastic. You can follow every action without losing any tension. And still you can feel being there!

    Both the trainfight in Spectre and the stairwell fight in Casino Royale are really fantastic cinema! There is nothing else I expect from Bond.

    The same goes for J.J. Abrams with his lens flare gimmick. It adds nothing in most scenes. In some of his movies he even uses it way too much. It really is a distraction from the action and actors. I read somewhere he admitted that he probably overused the lens flare in some movies.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    It's sitting at 67% audience rating at RT, 7.2 at IMDB, & 6.9 User Score at Metacritic, so it's all reasonably consistent, no?

    It should have had an 77% audience rating at RT, 7.6 at IMDB, & 7.3 User Score at Metacritic.

    On top of that, it should have received a 7.7 Critics Rating on RT and a 7.0 Critics Rating on MetaCritic.

    Alas, the entire SonyLeaks (negative) publicity brought a whole new narrative to the production of "SPECTRE". Names like those of Idris Elba came out those leaks, as Amy Pascal's personal favourite to step in the shoes of Daniel Craig (Bitch!). What happened then was a re-focus of the (gossip) media on other aspects of the production. They zoomed in on "Who will be the next Bond Daniel?" and "I'd rather slash my wrists!". The goodwill from "Skyfall" therefore more or less diminished, as I do think that Americans are a bit more sensitive for these kind of words. They do prefer the pastiche of Tom Cruise than the straightforward "streetguy" that Danny Craig is.

    That's the real reason "SPECTRE" is rated how it is right now. Because in all honesty the film should have been rated lower than "Skyfall" and "Casino Royale", but not thát low!
  • Lancaster007Lancaster007 Shrublands Health Clinic, England
    Posts: 1,874
    So, to the mouse, L'Americain is I think an hotel, and in this hotel Mr White has made a false room with all his surveillance equipment in (the mouse leads Bond to this)…and nobody running the hotel has noticed? Or have I missed something?

    Its a villa not a hotel.

    Thanks, makes a bit more sense now.

    EDIT. Actually,no. It is a hotel, saw it again today and the word 'hotel' is above the word L'Americain, and Bond and Swann go into a reception, Swann talks to a clerk at the desk and they are then shown to their room!
Sign In or Register to comment.