SPECTRE - Your reviews. NO SPOILERS.

1151618202134

Comments

  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Great, fans wanting a coherent plot are OCD. And how on earth did Q link all the people from a ring?

    Now that's true.
  • RC7RC7
    edited November 2015 Posts: 10,512
    Now we are in spoiler territory guys. Tag them.

    Re. Coherent plots -
    you don't need to know where Quantum fits into SPECTRE. It's not a plot point. All you need to know is that the previous villains were under ESB. They get that across, so plot = coherent.

    Re. The ring - I had assumed it had been passed around between the top brass, or they'd at least come into contact.There was a fingerprint and DNA scanner he was using. Stretching it, sure, same as the nano-blood, but in the world of the film it makes sense.
  • RC7 wrote: »
    Now we are in spoiler territory guys. Tag them.

    sorry, forgot we weren't in the spoiler thread

  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Me too, apologies.
  • suavejmf wrote: »
    Me too, apologies.

    Hi, you need to edit your post quoting me
  • Posts: 11,216
    Today is the day! 5 and a half hours for me.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    To all our international friends viewing the film this evening. Hope you guys have a blast!
  • Posts: 1,314
    Would anyone care to mention which country they are seeing it in when reviewing? Be interested if the reviews of the American critics tie in more with the American public. Maybe it's a cultural thing?

    I do think in the UK we are warm and fuzzy about Bond, because it's one of only a handful of global film exports. Bank holiday Monday's in the 80s-90s. Jumpers for goalposts...etc

    Maybe the critics here are kinder because he's one of us.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Maybe the critics here are kinder because he's one of us.

    While this is possible, I don't know if it's necessarily true. There is certainly a high level of pride in the UK regarding Bond post-SF's success (the success of the film sort of mirrored the narrative within the film......Bond was certainly not irrelevant, as demonstrated by the box office.......the British Bulldog could still show them a thing or two). In the throes of a recession (at the time), SF was a welcome morale boost.

    So inevitably, fan forums (like ours) and the British fans and media have a high degree of pride and expectations for Bond.......the excellent UK SF reviews set the stage for SF's stateside success last time around and perhaps there was a subconscious desire to repeat that this time which could have led into bias (not saying it did mind you).

    Having said that, one cannot glean an opinion on this from our sample size on this forum. It's way too small. I have seen negative reviews on this film from this forum as well. Additionally, it is possible that some members here may not be as open with their criticism at this moment (for fear of being shat on).

    That's why I've always said - you have to give it six months or so before you can know what people really think. People will be more forthcoming then, and will have had time to process fully. After the blu ray release.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,726
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Would anyone care to mention which country they are seeing it in when reviewing? Be interested if the reviews of the American critics tie in more with the American public. Maybe it's a cultural thing?

    I do think in the UK we are warm and fuzzy about Bond, because it's one of only a handful of global film exports. Bank holiday Monday's in the 80s-90s. Jumpers for goalposts...etc

    Maybe the critics here are kinder because he's one of us.

    YES. As an expat here in Belgium I notice that many of my fellow Brits, particularly those at the national newspapers, get all soft and cuddly around release time of a new Bond, wheras the mainland European media are more levelheaded and less influenced by the fuzzy warm afterglow of a long-gone tea guzzling empire...

    Belgian media has, by and large, called it a load of very entertaining tosh B-)
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    OK, time for a review. First of all I really, really liked this film. Second of all, this is not a perfect film but then again there is no perfect film. This is a film that could have gone terribly wrong but in my opinion went terribly right and I'm so happy for that :) When the first bits of script leaked I made the mistake of reading a couple of things and I hated what I read and I made a decision, I was going to stay away from major spoilers and it was the right decision. As I said, a lot of things could have gone terribly wrong but again it's not the story you tell but how you tell it and Mendes knows how to tell a good story.

    What I liked
    - Straight-forward story, plenty of fun and plenty of suspense as well.
    - Amazing, incredible performance by Craig. His quality as an actor never ceases to amaze me. He handles humour as well as he handles drama, he is effortlessly cool, he's badass, he walks as if he were a god amongst mortals.
    - MI6 regulars are amazing, all of them.
    - I kind of like the soundtrack, I think it works. Better than that I love the use of silence in some of the scenes because it adds extra creepiness.
    - PTS is awesome!
    - Car chase is great.
    - Morocco is great.
    - Waltz is oh so creepy.
    - Did I mention Craig is so cool it hurts?

    What I disliked
    - I know I'm in the minority but just like I didn't like the title sequence of SF I also didn't like the title sequence of SP. I really like how Kleinman likes giving hints to the story but that's not all, I really can't fully explain what it is. I eventually warmed to the SF sequence, perhaps that will also happen with this one. I defended WoTW but I also didn't think it worked with the sequence. I was a bit bored and couldn't wait for it to finish.
    - Léa Seydoux is a bit of a hit and miss, she's great in some scenes but in others her acting is very poor. What a shame.
    - Andrew Scott is a bit flat, not his usual great.
    - The eventual "demise" of the villains are all a bit rushed after a great build up. Can't explain without giving away spoilers.
    - Q pulls a trick with the ring (amongst others) that makes no sense at all. When will they hire a scientific advisor for these films? I could do it!
    - Bond and Madeleine's relatioship is doomed... ok, maybe this belongs in the like list.

    Final verdict: great, not perfect Bond film. I can see myself watching this one at all because it's such a great, fun film! It's a completely different beast from SF but it is not inferior to it. Even with all its problems I'm saying it, I LOVED SP and can't wait to watch it again!
  • Posts: 484
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Would anyone care to mention which country they are seeing it in when reviewing? Be interested if the reviews of the American critics tie in more with the American public. Maybe it's a cultural thing?

    I do think in the UK we are warm and fuzzy about Bond, because it's one of only a handful of global film exports. Bank holiday Monday's in the 80s-90s. Jumpers for goalposts...etc

    Maybe the critics here are kinder because he's one of us.

    I miss those days of speculating which Bond you'd get at the next Bank Holiday. Of course Christmas Day TV premieres in the 70s too!

    Although it feels like it should be TSWLM I think MWTGG is the most played Bond film on Christmas say. First Connery I ever saw was DAF on Christmas Day 1978.

    The UK press could be kinder on Bond but equally the US press could be less tolerant as they
    have their own successful spy franchises in Mission Impossible and Bourne.

    I think Bond did fine when it saw off the other competitors but ever since Raiders Of The Lost Ark we've had other successful action\thriller\comedy film franchise or another to be praised over Bond.
  • Seven_Point_Six_FiveSeven_Point_Six_Five Southern California
    Posts: 1,257
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Out of Craig's bond films how does it rank??? I am going to see it when it comes out. My first bond movie in theaters.

    If you like Brosnan and Moore Bond movies you'll love it.
    Otherwise you will be in trouble.

    From what I've heard about Spectre, it embraces the "Bond formula" far more than anything we have seen in the Craig era. If true, that worries me.
    Uh uh - the dreaded "Bond formula" which we all grew up on. Can't have that of course. So here's hoping that B25 will keep the action, the gadgets, the women and so forth at a minimum ;-)

    My point is that is that running back to the formula feels like it defeats the purpose of CR/QOS. I feel like Mendes and EON are essentially saying "Screw that cold, tough, emotional, grounded Bond we saw in CR/QOS, people want gadgets and one-liners!". Sure, I understand that is EXACTLY what many people want, but all that at the cost of a jarring shift in the characterization and tone of the films.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,405
    Yes, I thought as well. I prefer to see it as the natural evolution of the Bond films - get more and more fantastical, until we get to YOLT/MR/DAD excesses and then we start again.
  • Great, fans wanting a coherent plot are OCD.
    Fans that THINK that spectre has an incoherent plot are ocd


  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    =))
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    The problem lies with the DC era is how it's been so well received and acclaimed that things previous entries have been able to get away with are magnified and scrutinised over by those that don't like it.

    The amount of complaints about this era and it's plot holes when the whole series has been riddled with them. Yet SF is the most plot hole riddled film of the series according to some and it seems now SP which to me was pretty straight forward to follow is now riddled with holes. The praise for his era has made his detractors go in for the kill, very much like those who don't like Nolan's Bat films.

    I didn't see a film that says screw the previous films I saw a natural progression, it's not like Daniel Craig was grafted onto a Roger Moore film. We are still very much in his world and I don't see any other Bond in this film, even Dalton, yes probably the previous 3 but not SPECTRE no way.

    I agree with @RC7 when he says SP has elevated the DC era. Never have we had 4 so differing entries and if DC does return I imagine Bond 25 will be different as well.

    I also don't get this CR is a masterpiece and everything else pales notion. I've heard it said that Bond and Swann's conversation lacks the class of CR's, now don't get me wrong I like it allot it's a great intro to Vesper and the chemistry is great but at least SP's isn't got some ham fisted product placement like Royale.

    Also we have the little finger line, Sorry neither QOS, SF or SP have anything that bad. CR is flawed and the Miami segment is quite a generic sequence that rips off ROTLA, I think it's a great film but I prefer SF & SP.

    My ranking is

    1. SP
    2. SF
    3. CR
    4. QOS

  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited November 2015 Posts: 5,131
    To be fair you can find holes in any Bond plot. I love CR. But in all honesty why bother with the poker game. Simply kidnap Le Chiffre and threaten to kill him unless he provides information. Bond is suave fantasy, larger than life glamorous plotting, not fact.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,021
    Skyfall takes itself so seriously that plot holes cannot be forgiven that easily.
    If you do that kind of movie, the script has to be air tight, and the script of Skyfall is a Swiss cheese.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    I like Swiss cheese..

    I admit the potholes in SF were a bit jarring.

    But Bond films usually have at least some potholes. For example I never understood the fake bullets in TLD. Was Kara that stupid? And how can you fake a defection with blanks and not get caught? And why fake he really was defecting. Why shoot him? All he had to do was run across the street apparently.

    Ok off topic but I had to get that off my chest.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,021
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    I like Swiss cheese..

    I admit the potholes in SF were a bit jarring.

    But Bond films usually have at least some potholes. For example I never understood the fake bullets in TLD. Was Kara that stupid? And how can you fake a defection with blanks and not get caught? And why fake he really was defecting. Why shoot him? All he had to do was run across the street apparently.

    Ok off topic but I had to get that off my chest.

    Georgj faked his defection and to make it look real he made Kara pose as an assassin and make it look like she was hired by the KGB. Of course he couldn't risk being shot, so therefore he/she used blanks.
    I think that is very logical.
  • Posts: 1,098
    My very brief review of Spectre

    Film was very good..............best action sequence was the Train fight, which was really brutal. Best actor/actress in the film..............the mouse. :))
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,021
    mepal1 wrote: »
    My very brief review of Spectre

    Film was very good..............best action sequence was the Train fight, which was really brutal. Best actor/actress in the film..............the mouse. :))

    The mouse was stealing the scene, wait...no...the whole movie :))
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    I like Swiss cheese..

    I admit the potholes in SF were a bit jarring.

    But Bond films usually have at least some potholes. For example I never understood the fake bullets in TLD. Was Kara that stupid? And how can you fake a defection with blanks and not get caught? And why fake he really was defecting. Why shoot him? All he had to do was run across the street apparently.

    Ok off topic but I had to get that off my chest.

    Georgj faked his defection and to make it look real he made Kara pose as an assassin and make it look like she was hired by the KGB. Of course he couldn't risk being shot, so therefore he/she used blanks.
    I think that is very logical.

    If someone asked to use blanks and risk getting shot I wouldn't do it. :P

    Anyway maybe not a good example but the point was many a Bond film is guilty.

  • Posts: 3,336
    And the oscar for best supporting actor goes to....

    Mouse in SPECTRE
  • Posts: 3,336
    That would also be the bond franchises first acting nomination and win :)
  • Posts: 2,081
    And the oscar for best supporting actor goes to....

    Mouse in SPECTRE

    Are you sure about the category? (Not supporting actress?) I couldn't tell.

  • MansfieldMansfield Where the hell have you been?
    Posts: 1,262
    I much enjoyed it. More thoughts to come after its fully absorbed.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 37,102
    SF teeters on my least favorite Bond films, and now SP is a part of my most favorite Bond films. Absolutely fantastic entry that was a boatloads of fun and gave me everything I wanted: thrilling story, great characters, lots of insane action, a wonderful tracking shot, a nice score (though one of the only complaints I can come up with for this film is the overusage of SF tracks, which I didn't particularly care for), some beautiful cinematography, etc. I'll need to see it a few more times to totally come up with my likes, dislikes, etc., but it blew me away and I had a great, great time watching this. I feel like it'll only get better in my eyes with a second viewing. Totally floored, had a big smile on my face throughout, and was very, very happy to walk away feeling overjoyed and excited this time as opposed to disappointed and let down.
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,146
    I just got back from the cinema, I had a...BLAST! A wonderful time, My eyes were glued to the screen the entire time, This is now my number 2 favorite Bond film. It had the perfect ingredients. My only criticism is Newman's score and distracting reuse of multiple tracks from Skyfall. A little more Bond theme would have been nice but those are two minor quibbles. I loved the film and was well worth the wait. It's a wonderful year to be a Bond fan.

    Also on a random note, The theater I visited recently opened and reminded me of something Sir Ken Adam would design. A classy place with a classy film. Five stars, Best Spy film of 2015. Bond is back and going strong as ever.

    :-bd
Sign In or Register to comment.