SPECTRE - Your reviews. NO SPOILERS.

12829303234

Comments

  • Posts: 814
    Well I saw several times & I Love it. Daniel Craig was great.
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,204
    Seen it twice so far. I give it a solid good rating of *** out of ****. The best Craig Bond film made post-CR and the first one since CR that I went to see in the cinema twice on its first run. Looking forward to its release on Blu-ray/DVD.
  • Posts: 5,767
    Bounine wrote: »
    It's also a pity that they've just fallen back on the old, tired, fast paced style that a number of the contemporary films utilise, when we got some good, solid character movement in CR and SF. Well, good for an action thriller that is. Spectre could have been such a better film if they'd cut out two of the locations and given us something more along the lines of OHMSS and CR in terms of characterisation (minus the OHMSS montage scene of course ;) ).
    It´s funny you should speak of fast paced style. I found SP utterly lame, while I find films like LALD or TMWTGG comfortably fast paced.

  • Posts: 2,560
    boldfinger wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    It's also a pity that they've just fallen back on the old, tired, fast paced style that a number of the contemporary films utilise, when we got some good, solid character movement in CR and SF. Well, good for an action thriller that is. Spectre could have been such a better film if they'd cut out two of the locations and given us something more along the lines of OHMSS and CR in terms of characterisation (minus the OHMSS montage scene of course ;) ).
    It´s funny you should speak of fast paced style. I found SP utterly lame, while I find films like LALD or TMWTGG comfortably fast paced.

    When I was referring to "fast paced" Bond films I was referring to the Brosnan era that are too fast paced. While the films that precede these are relatively fast paced, they give you time to breath unlike in the Brosnan era. Spectre is an entertaining film but also disappointing in that there is no real down time like in CR for example, no character movement and just full of plot holes with no real story. We find out that Spectre are the masters behind everything that has happened to Bond and it seems to be executed in such a throw away manner. Honestly, what the hell is going on in the Bond writing department?!
  • Have to admit i don't understand the hate this film is getting, especially in the states.Craig's first 2 Bond films were quite dark and a bit short on fun which is fine for a film or two but after Quantum Of Solace i found myself wanting the fun and spectacle back, we got a glimpse of it in Skyfall but in Spectre it's back properly .
    Granted it does go downhill a bit in the third act but it doesn't fall off a cliff like Die Another Day does.
    nitpicking aside It's a couple of hours of escapism and fun and i refuse to think that's a bad thing .
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,289
    QOS & SP are my two favourites of Craig's tenure.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2015 Posts: 23,883
    I thought CR had a heck of a lot more fun in it than SP did. Intelligent humour, wit & characterizations that were believable, relatable and mature, despite some actor's short time on screen. I don't get this thing about CR being dark. It wasn't dark at all except for the ending after Vesper drowned. Up to then its tone was damn near perfect for a Bond film. An incredible espionage driven thriller the likes of which EON hadn't made in decades.
  • edited December 2015 Posts: 5,767
    Have to admit i don't understand the hate this film is getting, especially in the states.Craig's first 2 Bond films were quite dark and a bit short on fun which is fine for a film or two but after Quantum Of Solace i found myself wanting the fun and spectacle back, we got a glimpse of it in Skyfall but in Spectre it's back properly .
    Granted it does go downhill a bit in the third act but it doesn't fall off a cliff like Die Another Day does.
    nitpicking aside It's a couple of hours of escapism and fun and i refuse to think that's a bad thing .
    IMO it has a lot of good elements, e.g. fun and spectacle, but that´s not enough if the film as such is not told well.



    bondjames wrote: »
    I thought CR had a heck of a lot more fun in it than SP did. Intelligent humour, wit & characterizations that were believable, relatable and mature, despite some actor's short time on screen. I don't get this thing about CR being dark. It wasn't dark at all except for the ending after Vesper drowned. Up to then its tone was damn near perfect for a Bond film. An incredible espionage driven thriller the likes of which EON hadn't made in decades.
    I have to say you´re right, @bondjames.

  • Posts: 485
    Have to admit i don't understand the hate this film is getting, especially in the states.Craig's first 2 Bond films were quite dark and a bit short on fun which is fine for a film or two but after Quantum Of Solace i found myself wanting the fun and spectacle back, we got a glimpse of it in Skyfall but in Spectre it's back properly .
    Granted it does go downhill a bit in the third act but it doesn't fall off a cliff like Die Another Day does.
    nitpicking aside It's a couple of hours of escapism and fun and i refuse to think that's a bad thing .

    I'm pleased you enjoyed it and hope not too many people clamour to tell you you're wrong to have done so.

    There are a few regrettable aspects but it's absolutely not the franchise killing disaster that some profess it to be.

    Comments like the film being dirt that deserves to be swept under the carpet are making this a depressing forum as of late.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,289
    SPECTRE rounds out Craig's tenure rather nicely IMO. We have all kinds now, early Bond, LTK-type Bond, washed-up Bond and now BIG Bond. I'm about as happy as I can be with it all.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2015 Posts: 23,883
    chrisisall wrote: »
    SPECTRE rounds out Craig's tenure rather nicely IMO. We have all kinds now, early Bond, LTK-type Bond, washed-up Bond and now BIG Bond. I'm about as happy as I can be with it all.
    I agree. He's pretty much done it all now in the space of four films, so if he decides to wrap it up and move on, that's fine with me.

    I have a feeling we got the kind of film we got this time precisely because that's what he wanted. I really don't see where he can go from here creatively without repeating himself.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,487
    The last 23 films have been repetition, so what do you mean?
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,289
    Plus there's the knee. He gave his ligament for Bond, and for us. He's really paid his dues IMO.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    The last 23 films have been repetition, so what do you mean?
    I meant Craig's arc with the character. He is an actor's actor and he took this role on for a reason, and reluctantly, from what I heard. He wanted to do something with it creatively, and it's likely he's done that now. Taken it from inception back to where it was prior to the reboot. I've always felt that was his objective - hence his remark earlier this year that if he did another, it would only be for the money now.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    SPECTRE rounds out Craig's tenure rather nicely IMO. We have all kinds now, early Bond, LTK-type Bond, washed-up Bond and now BIG Bond. I'm about as happy as I can be with it all.
    I agree. He's pretty much done it all now in the space of four films, so if he decides to wrap it up and move on, that's fine with me.

    I have a feeling we got the kind of film we got this time precisely because that's what he wanted. I really don't see where he can go from here creatively without repeating himself.
    Now I think about it it did seem like they were setting up for the next guy. Especially at the end.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,487
    The next goyim is Craig. Money is an artform of its own.
  • edited December 2015 Posts: 2,560
    bondjames wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    SPECTRE rounds out Craig's tenure rather nicely IMO. We have all kinds now, early Bond, LTK-type Bond, washed-up Bond and now BIG Bond. I'm about as happy as I can be with it all.
    I agree. He's pretty much done it all now in the space of four films, so if he decides to wrap it up and move on, that's fine with me.

    I have a feeling we got the kind of film we got this time precisely because that's what he wanted. I really don't see where he can go from here creatively without repeating himself.

    It's just a matter of maintaining the character movement according to the story. Also, dialogue can be introduced regarding how Bond has developed some qualms regarding killing and without constant danger in his life he becomes bored. You know, stuff straight from the books. There are all sorts of new avenues that can be explored. I always thought that it would be good if some dialogue could be introduced where M accuses Bond of becoming too complacent in the job.

  • edited December 2015 Posts: 832
    I liked spectre, but i'm afraid that the oberhauser/ personal stuff significantly brings it down. Nobody wanted that, except for mendes, and it is oppressively bad. Its just like this personal thing that I cant understand how anyone could buy, and i'm even more surprised that mendes let it pass when its so obviously underdeveloped Aside from that though, I absolutely loved it so its a bit of a shame. Have to catch it on blu ray to decide how much it brings it down.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,289
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    I liked spectre, but i'm afraid that the oberhauser/ personal stuff significantly brings it down.
    To me it's like in LTK when Felix sounds a bit too happy on the phone with Bond at the end- I can easily pay no attention to it so it doesn't ruin things for me....
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,184
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    I liked spectre, but i'm afraid that the oberhauser/ personal stuff significantly brings it down.
    To me it's like in LTK when Felix sounds a bit too happy on the phone with Bond at the end- I can easily pay no attention to it so it doesn't ruin things for me....
    This. It didn't bother me either. When I first read about it months before the film came out, the idea pissed me off, but the way it's executed in the film is very subtle and not in your face so it worked well for me and didn't bother me. Blofeld brings it up once, Bond doesn't pay it any mind and moves on and so do I.
  • edited December 2015 Posts: 2,560
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    I liked spectre, but i'm afraid that the oberhauser/ personal stuff significantly brings it down. Nobody wanted that, except for mendes, and it is oppressively bad. Its just like this personal thing that I cant understand how anyone could buy, and i'm even more surprised that mendes let it pass when its so obviously underdeveloped Aside from that though, I absolutely loved it so its a bit of a shame. Have to catch it on blu ray to decide how much it brings it down.

    I hated that there was a personal connection between Bond and the villain. I thought that they went too far here. I actually think that it cheapens Bond's back story. It's too Hollywood/cliched.
  • edited December 2015 Posts: 832
    Murdock wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    I liked spectre, but i'm afraid that the oberhauser/ personal stuff significantly brings it down.
    To me it's like in LTK when Felix sounds a bit too happy on the phone with Bond at the end- I can easily pay no attention to it so it doesn't ruin things for me....
    This. It didn't bother me either. When I first read about it months before the film came out, the idea pissed me off, but the way it's executed in the film is very subtle and not in your face so it worked well for me and didn't bother me. Blofeld brings it up once, Bond doesn't pay it any mind and moves on and so do I.

    I didn't expect it to bother me, but it sort of is a theme throughout the film with bond looking at the picture at the beginning and then madaline asking him about it. Like I said, I still really dont know with this one and will have to wait for blu ray
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,726
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    So again, Bond is not Bourne. Bourne is not Bond.
    I don't think anyone is disputing this at all. At least not what I can see.

    The point that is being made, as I see it, and which I agree with, is that Bond can and should make better use of the locations that they visit. Immerse us in the experience. Teach something about the location or the locals via the script.....incorporate some aspect of the experience into it. This was something that Bond did so well in the past. Examples include (off the top of my head):

    1. Jamaica in DN
    2. Istanbul in FRWL (including Hagia Sophia & Bosphorous - night and day between this film and TWINE), as well as the Orient Express
    3. Nassau in TB including Junkanoo
    4. Japan in YOLT (including saki and sumo)
    5. Switzerland in OHMSS including skiing and bob sledding
    6. Vegas in DAF including Circus Circus and the shows
    7. Louisiana & New York in LALD
    8. Hong Kong/Kowloon/Macau and Thailand in TMWTGG (my favourite because I visited the Thai location that was used where the kid was thrown in the water as well as the Peninsula Hotel with the Rolls Royces) as well as martial arts training
    9. Egypt in TSWLM (absolutely stunning use of pyramid locations and the Karnak temple)
    10. Rio in MR - the cable car sequence and the Carnaval festival


    In SP we got the Day of the Dead, which was great and a return to form. It was just a few shots though, and it was only in the pretitles. A little bit more time in Mexico using those locations would have been nice. Same in Rome which is a truly magnificent locale.

    Some non-Bond examples that come to mind (there are many more of course) which I recall being really good include:

    1. The International - massive shootout at Guggenheim museum in NYC. Great use of Istanbul rooftops, as well as coldness/modernity of Berlin, Germany
    2. Bourne Identity - Paris
    3. Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol - Dubai including sand storm (so Bondian that one)
    4. Mission Impossible 3 - Vatican and Shangai
    5. Angels and Demons - Rome - superb use of churches and other locales
    6. Da Vinci Code - Paris Louvre in particular
    7. National Treasure - Washington DC

    So we can inject Bond like glamour while still using the locations more effectively to teach something about the culture and the people. They did a better job before imho, and it almost seems like the locations are more postcard photographic backdrops these days without being more immersive and all encompassing cultural experiences.

    It's just a preference. No right or wrong.

    For me it's a complete mystery why you leave it so many -basically ALL- recent Bond films. All Bond films from FYEO and onwards are not there. And then you 'hail' certain sequences from Bourne and Mission Impossible as they are using the locations better than all of the Bond films from FYEO until SP. Sorry @BondJames. I don't buy it.

    Why can't you just admit that you actually prefer these films over the Bond films. Just do it for once. And I feel quite sorry for you....that you had such a mediocre experience with the recent Bond films. I really feel sorry that you can not find the joy anymore in a film like SP, which IMO uses Morocco in a much much better, exotic and luxury way as compared to Morocco in RN.

    Some other examples:
    01. CR: Exteriors of Karlovy Vary, doubling for Casino Royale and Hotel Splendide, including terraces and aerial shots of Karlovy Vary.
    02. SP: Entire Morocco sequence, including aerial views of the Desert Express train, Tanger and wide shots of the Moroccan desert and the (fake...though didn't seem fake to me) Crater where Blofeld lives.
    03. SF: I really don't know why people hate the Scotland locations so much. I truly loved them. Those grim, desolate, rainy and cold aerial views of Scotland. This is how the nature of Scotland really is. Did I see the Ben Nevis somewhere?
    04. QOS: The wonderful Atacama Desert, with in it that desolate hotel. Although it was doubling for Bolivia, I found it magnificent.

    So really, I think my list above was a bit necessary, as you failed to mention them. And obviously you couldn't care for them, otherwise they would have been in your list.
    Once again @Gustav_Graves, you miss the point. The point is nuanced, and not black and white. The point was that they did it better in the past. Not that they are not doing it at all now. Of course they are. Just not as well, imho.

    You can see I was going in sequence and gave sufficient examples of prior films where they did it well. If you want more recent examples, then allow me to continue:

    1. FYEO - Corfu, Cortina and Greece - particularly the mountaintop finale
    2. OP - India of course, and Berlin
    3. AVTAK - poor use of San Fran imho
    4. TLD - Vienna - superb use. As well as Bratislava (I've been to both locations and they got it spot on here)
    5. LTK - Florida Keys - done so well that True Lies aped it later
    6. GE - Monaco is absolutely stupendous. Probably one of the best recent (relatively speaking) use of classic location.

    I have already mentioned in a previous post how brilliant I thought the location use in QoS was (Haiti/Breganz - although I would have preferred more of Siena that I could actually see), and of course we all know that CR is a masterpiece in more ways than one, and used locations (Lake Garda) very well. What is the point of mentioning that again when we already acknowledged those two earlier films.

    SF - no one is hating on Scotland. It was a nice cinematic backdrop that's all. They didn't really delve in to the location.

    SP - no, Morocco didn't do it for me unfortunately.

    Again, I stand by my point that it was done better before and can be done better again. It's a personal preference, but my view is certainly not as one dimensional as you characterize it, and I just needed to point that out. Sorry if I offend you by stating my personal preferences, but that's life I guess. You can't please everyone.

    Meh... can't agree that Vienna was well used. It doubled as Bratislava quite well, but the scenes actually set in Vienna were limited to cliched tourist ideas of what the Austrian capitol is about...
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2015 Posts: 23,883
    AceHole wrote: »
    Meh... can't agree that Vienna was well used. It doubled as Bratislava quite well, but the scenes actually set in Vienna were limited to cliched tourist ideas of what the Austrian capitol is about...
    It's the best use of Vienna that I can remember in a major motion picture until MI-RN came along earlier this year. Sure it's touristy, but what does one expect from a Bond film (they almost always flash the tourist elements - witness India in OP).

    Regarding Bratislava, they got the flavour down. It's understandable they didn't shoot there given it was part of the Soviet Union at the time.
    Bounine wrote: »
    I hated that there was a personal connection between Bond and the villain. I thought that they went too far here. I actually think that it cheapens Bond's back story. It's too Hollywood/cliched.
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    I didn't expect it to bother me, but it sort of is a theme throughout the film with bond looking at the picture at the beginning and then madaline asking him about it. Like I said, I still really dont know with this one and will have to wait for blu ray
    Brother from another mother didn't bother me as much as it has others. It was ridiculous but everyone sort of brushed it off when it was revealed during the torture scene, as if it was a throwaway, so I can live with it no matter how contrived it may be.

    More upsetting for me was the author of pain retcon. That reeks of TDKR, and so I can't buy it, especially after SF's parallels to TDK. The only difference was Silva was thrown in to the mix here (probably to avoid direct comments about plagiarism) while the Joker was left out of the League of Shadows.

    I agree that the blu ray will be key for where this film will sit with me in the canon. I hope they give us something really great, with superior resolution and sound mix, to increase the excitement quotient.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,487
    Mendes has said he wanted to use Blofeld in Skyfall, but there was no way he could do it in a proper way.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited December 2015 Posts: 4,116
    bondjames wrote: »
    I thought CR had a heck of a lot more fun in it than SP did. Intelligent humour, wit & characterizations that were believable, relatable and mature, despite some actor's short time on screen. I don't get this thing about CR being dark. It wasn't dark at all except for the ending after Vesper drowned. Up to then its tone was damn near perfect for a Bond film. An incredible espionage driven thriller the likes of which EON hadn't made in decades.

    I agree. Really IMO no Bond film is truly dark in tone.

    And disagree but neither is any Batman film. Characters like the Joker maybe dark but the film itself not really.

    That's just my opinion.

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited December 2015 Posts: 11,135
    Mendes has said he wanted to use Blofeld in Skyfall, but there was no way he could do it in a proper way.

    Mendes has said a lot of stuff. Let EoN leave him to talk to himself while we get in a new director who just gets on with doing what should be done instead of blabbing about shoulda, coulda, wouldas.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,726
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Mendes has said he wanted to use Blofeld in Skyfall, but there was no way he could do it in a proper way.

    Mendes has said a lot of stuff. Let EoN leave him to talk to himself while we get in a new director who just gets on with doing what should be done instead of blabbing about shoulda, coulda, wouldas.


    This. Mendes is an idea guy. He has lots of good ideas (and some less great ones), but for me he struggles to weave them all into a coherent Bond movie.
    SF & SP are full of things where I find myself thinking "oh yeah, I see what he's trying to do there...", but they ultimately come across as poorly executed.
  • Posts: 5,767
    AceHole wrote: »
    Meh... can't agree that Vienna was well used. It doubled as Bratislava quite well, but the scenes actually set in Vienna were limited to cliched tourist ideas of what the Austrian capitol is about...
    What reason is there not to use cliched tourist ideas in a franchise that established itself providing 2h holiday trips? What reason is there to say it´s Vienna and not show some tourist highlights?

  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,726
    boldfinger wrote: »
    AceHole wrote: »
    Meh... can't agree that Vienna was well used. It doubled as Bratislava quite well, but the scenes actually set in Vienna were limited to cliched tourist ideas of what the Austrian capitol is about...
    What reason is there not to use cliched tourist ideas in a franchise that established itself providing 2h holiday trips? What reason is there to say it´s Vienna and not show some tourist highlights?

    I can get on board with the Prater scenes - that is indeed a staple of Vienna and many Viennese go there for a good time. But the waltzing couples in front of Schönbrunn?? That was just plain daft.
Sign In or Register to comment.