SPECTRE - Your reviews. NO SPOILERS.

1246734

Comments

  • Posts: 11,119
    RC7 wrote: »
    Tremendous.

    fff-ing tremendous :-P?
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    edited October 2015 Posts: 2,138
    Here's mine in a few lines my thorough thoughts are on the spoiler review thread.

    SPECTRE has a great first hour, reminds me of the start of Thunderball with Bond off solo in a fast pace hunt. The second half of the movie is not as strong, it felt like it lost its way. Because of that it does not sit well with Dan's prior films it's a bit too Holywood, there is a real lack of dialog. Score as people have already said lazy copy and paste effort from Skyfall, more Fleming is definitely required.

    The film is no CR but it's not awful I just felt it rushed, and considering it's 2hr 20 mins long you wonder why that is.

    Highlight: Ben Wishaw 's Q is fantastic
    Downer: Harris is just not right for MP

    5/10 same score I would give to TND.
  • Posts: 6,601
    Going through the tweets, it seems like 90% loved it, with some having problems with some of what was said here. All in all, I believe, they gonna have a success. Right now, I hope for around 900 mill.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Here's mine in a few lines my thorough thoughts are on the spoiler review thread.

    SPECTRE has a great first hour, reminds me of the start of Thunderball with Bond off solo in a fast pace hunt. The second half of the movie is not as strong, it felt like it lost its way. Because of that it does not sit well with Dan's prior films it's a bit too Holywood, there is a real lack of dialog. Score as people have already said lazy copy and paste effort from Skyfall, more Fleming is definitely required.

    The film is no CR but it's not awful I just felt it rushed, and considering it's 2hr 20 mins long you wonder why that is.

    Highlight: Ben Wishaw 's Q is fantastic
    Downer: Harris is just not right for MP

    5/10 same score I would give to TND.

    Yes I though the linger running time meant more characterisation. But it doesn't....it just means more globe trotting and sequences. The pre title sequence is good mind.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Here's mine in a few lines my thorough thoughts are on the spoiler review thread.

    SPECTRE has a great first hour, reminds me of the start of Thunderball with Bond off solo in a fast pace hunt. The second half of the movie is not as strong, it felt like it lost its way. Because of that it does not sit well with Dan's prior films it's a bit too Holywood, there is a real lack of dialog. Score as people have already said lazy copy and paste effort from Skyfall, more Fleming is definitely required.

    The film is no CR but it's not awful I just felt it rushed, and considering it's 2hr 20 mins long you wonder why that is.

    Highlight: Ben Wishaw 's Q is fantastic
    Downer: Harris is just not right for MP

    5/10 same score I would give to TND.

    Yes I though the longer running time meant more characterisation. But it doesn't....it just means more globe trotting and sequences. The pre title sequence is good mind.

  • Very good. Much more of an old-fashioned Bond film in many regards, not as dark as Skyfall and more fun too (though sinister). References loads of other Bond films and ties together all of Craig's Bond films too.

    Craig's Bond is closer to Fleming than any other I think, although the pacing and the plotting of the film has definitely evolved along different lines. The first half deliberately unfolds slowly - not all wall-to-wall action - although that allows some of the most beautiful cinematography ever seen in a Bond film to develop - as well as some gorgeous cues in the score. Felt a bit more like Lawrence of Arabia in that respect - old fashioned film-making... and in that it sits very highly in the Bond series (up there with OHMSS). Although the Action sequences are all a bit ubiquitous these days - particularly with the pounding drums that has to accompany them. I don't blame Thomas Newman for that, but if you look at the fight scenes in FRWL, for example, they are often scoreless with occasional stabs. The way they are cut now that wouldn't really work and it seems that Hollywood expects to hear pounding drums beating the whole way through.

    A lot to like and a lot to admire... although I'd still love him to "get a mission" and go on it, rather than every plot contriving around vendetta, personal circumstances, rescuing M etc...

    I need to sit with it for a bit and then go again to be able to see it in the context of the series, but I think you're all going to like it.

  • Posts: 14,000
    FourDot wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    which I blame it on Logan.

    Why him in particular when P&W and Butterworth had their hands on it more recently?

    Because that is one of his trademarks as a writer: dialogues and characters are stronger than the plot. Sometimes he glosses over things.
  • I hadn't expected to say this, but I was disappointed with SPECTRE. That said, the pre-title section was truly spectacular and fully matched the hype. Then came Sam Smith's dismal theme song, which only succeeded in defusing the excitement and anticipation the opening sequence had built up. From there on I found the film overly long, ponderous and even confused in places. The action sequences fully delivered, but the attempts at witty one-liners were embarrassing. Craig lacks the lightness of comedic touch so exemplified by Connery, Moore and, especially, Brosnan. However, there was an unintentional laugh-out loud continuity blooper (at least in my cinema!), when Madeleine (Léa Seydoux) fell asleep in her white dress and woke up in her slip! And what on earth were the British Board of Film Classification thinking in awarding SPECTRE a 12A certificate? Where was the "moderate violence" in the bloody eye-gouging scene or where Bond is being drilled in the head? Such scenes are not what draws audiences to the Bond films; indeed, between them, these two scenes saw the exiting of three families from my cinema last night. The immediate aftermath of the helicopter crash on Westminster Bridge and the arrest of 'Franz Oberhauser' was a complete anti-climax, leading to a very low-key end to the film. Audiences have come to expect more. Perhaps the screenplay writers had also lost interest and direction at this point?
    I have habitually seen every Bond film (commencing with Dr No) six times upon its release. I shall not be watching SPECTRE a second time.
  • Posts: 188
    @BlofeldsMoggie SPOILERS!!! Cheers for that! Sorry, had to flag.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Agreed, especially when there is a "Spoilers allowed" thread.
  • roko wrote: »
    @BlofeldsMoggie SPOILERS!!! Cheers for that! Sorry, had to flag.
    My apologies, also to DrGorner - this was my first posting. In my defence, I would point out that both these uncharacteristically violent scenes (for a Bond film) were referenced in a number of the UK press reviews prior to last night's World Première.
    But point taken!

  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,726
    SPECTRE has a great first hour, reminds me of the start of Thunderball with Bond off solo in a fast pace hunt. The second half of the movie is not as strong, it felt like it lost its way. Because of that it does not sit well with Dan's prior films it's a bit too Holywood, there is a real lack of dialog.

    Although not intended to sound positive, I think this is actually what most people wanted - a good old fashioned 'set-up' opening hour (à la TB, TSWLM) followed by an action packed second half with less emphasis on character (less than SF in any case).

    To be honest, I'm not looking to be wowed by incredibly deep, thought provoking cinema - this isn't a proposition by Wittgenstein, it's a James Bond movie.
    There was never going to be a win-win situation for the new movie on this forum – either SP was going to have too much angst & introspection (thus displeasing the ‘get back to basics & spectacle’ crowd) or it was going to be lighter on the dialog & subtlety and more spectacular - thus being dismissed as too 'flash-bang' or not deep enough…

    Dialog has never been 007's strong suit anyway… not since the glory days of early Connery at least, and CR was the only film since OHMSS that had a decent script.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    No problem @BlofeldsMoggie but ..............
    " This organisation does not tolerate failure ! " :D
    Welcome to MI6, by the way. :)
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,726
    roko wrote: »
    @BlofeldsMoggie SPOILERS!!! Cheers for that! Sorry, had to flag.
    My apologies, also to DrGorner - this was my first posting. In my defence, I would point out that both these uncharacteristically violent scenes (for a Bond film) were referenced in a number of the UK press reviews prior to last night's World Première.
    But point taken!

    Now this I'm pleased to hear. Always like a bit of an edge to Bond, LTK style... :>
  • Posts: 11,175
    The violence in Spectre I don't have a problem with. Someone above reminded me it was a 12A certificate. The violent scenes felt too strong for a 12.
  • Posts: 6,396
    My initial thoughts after last night's viewing. A solid, fun filled Bond film. I'll need to see it a few more times but I think CR is still the best of the current era and I probably enjoyed SF more. However, for those who hated SF, I think you'll have a blast with this one. There are some real high points (and quite a few lows) and I agree with a few others that it is DC's best Bondian performance to date. He breezes through the film with an air of impeccable confidence. Fiennes and Whishaw are also on top form. Some great humour and Waltz was a perfectly serviceable villain. The pre credits and train sequence are worth the ticket price alone.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,726
    My initial thoughts after last night's viewing. A solid, fun filled Bond film. I'll need to see it a few more times but I think CR is still the best of the current era and I probably enjoyed SF more. However, for those who hated SF, I think you'll have a blast with this one. There are some real high points (and quite a few lows) and I agree with a few others that it is DC's best Bondian performance to date. He breezes through the film with an air of impeccable confidence. Fiennes and Whishaw are also on top form. Some great humour and Waltz was a perfectly serviceable villain. The pre credits and train sequence are worth the ticket price alone.

    This makes me optimistic. I'll be seeing it on the 7th. But another train sequence..? Did we really need another train. Ugh.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Oh, for me the train sequence was a highlight of the film. :)
  • I hadn't expected to say this, but I was disappointed with SPECTRE.

    You just ruined the film for me. Why on earth would you post this in the spoiler free page?? Flog act.
  • Posts: 6,396
    AceHole wrote: »
    My initial thoughts after last night's viewing. A solid, fun filled Bond film. I'll need to see it a few more times but I think CR is still the best of the current era and I probably enjoyed SF more. However, for those who hated SF, I think you'll have a blast with this one. There are some real high points (and quite a few lows) and I agree with a few others that it is DC's best Bondian performance to date. He breezes through the film with an air of impeccable confidence. Fiennes and Whishaw are also on top form. Some great humour and Waltz was a perfectly serviceable villain. The pre credits and train sequence are worth the ticket price alone.

    This makes me optimistic. I'll be seeing it on the 7th. But another train sequence..? Did we really need another train. Ugh.

    I always like train sequences in a Bond film. And considering how long it's been since Bond went mano a mano with a henchman, it's well worth the wait.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,726
    AceHole wrote: »
    My initial thoughts after last night's viewing. A solid, fun filled Bond film. I'll need to see it a few more times but I think CR is still the best of the current era and I probably enjoyed SF more. However, for those who hated SF, I think you'll have a blast with this one. There are some real high points (and quite a few lows) and I agree with a few others that it is DC's best Bondian performance to date. He breezes through the film with an air of impeccable confidence. Fiennes and Whishaw are also on top form. Some great humour and Waltz was a perfectly serviceable villain. The pre credits and train sequence are worth the ticket price alone.

    This makes me optimistic. I'll be seeing it on the 7th. But another train sequence..? Did we really need another train. Ugh.

    I always like train sequences in a Bond film. And considering how long it's been since Bond went mano a mano with a henchman, it's well worth the wait.

    Oh alright then, I'll reserve judgement.
    I just find trains so... 'un-sexy'. Probably due to having used them to commute to work far too often in the past (:|
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Thanks for all the spoiler free reviews everyone.

    Being across the Atlantic, I won't be able to see SP until Nov 6th, sadly. It's been years since I've watched a Bond film at Odeon Leicester Sq in London, and it's one of my biggest regrets with moving to the other side of the pond. Having said that, there are compensatory benefits in the form of lower taxes, higher net incomes, bigger roads, cheaper cars and all that jazz etc. etc. (I'm trying to rationalize it obviously.......unsuccessfully).

    It looks like the totality of reviews coming in from MI6 fans is not dissimilar to the critics.....most like it very much and some aren't all that happy. Some elements work and others seem a little contrived. Oberhauser seems forgettable (which is interesting given most reviews have not focused on him and he's played by Waltz of all people). Many have said that the pretitles and train fight are the best thing about this film, which is curious.

    On the 6th, I guarantee you that I will cover my ears during Smith's song (no matter what anyone says here), and after that ordeal is over, I look forward to having a blast!
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Well, I keep getting in to fights on them, and I still enjoyed it. ;)
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 1,659
    To be honest, I'm not looking to be wowed by incredibly deep, thought provoking cinema - this isn't a proposition by Wittgenstein, it's a James Bond movie.
    There was never going to be a win-win situation for the new movie on this forum – either SP was going to have too much angst & introspection (thus displeasing the ‘get back to basics & spectacle’ crowd) or it was going to be lighter on the dialog & subtlety and more spectacular - thus being dismissed as too 'flash-bang' or not deep enough…

    Yes, it's impossible to please all Bond fans. If you want gritty and semi-realism and you don't get it - you're going to be a bit unhappy,

    and if you want a lighter more over-the-top fantasy Bond film and you don't get it - you're going to be a bit unhappy.

    The producers/writers have to go with their gut instinct and make the film they want to make, and hopefully, this will please the majority of fans. :) You can't please everyone.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    edited October 2015 Posts: 7,347
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    To be honest, I'm not looking to be wowed by incredibly deep, thought provoking cinema - this isn't a proposition by Wittgenstein, it's a James Bond movie.
    There was never going to be a win-win situation for the new movie on this forum – either SP was going to have too much angst & introspection (thus displeasing the ‘get back to basics & spectacle’ crowd) or it was going to be lighter on the dialog & subtlety and more spectacular - thus being dismissed as too 'flash-bang' or not deep enough…

    Yes, it's impossible to please all Bond fans. If you want gritty and semi-realism and you don't get it - you're going to be a bit unhappy,

    and if you want a lighter more over-the-top fantasy Bond film and you don't get it - you're going to be a bit unhappy.

    The producers/writers have to go with their gut instinct and make the film they want to make, and hopefully, this will please the majority of fans. :) You can't please everyone.

    I haven't seen it, so I don't know, but based on the reviews of others, it looks like they tried to do both with SPECTRE. That is my main concern, they tried to have their cake and eat it. Again, maybe that's not the case, but it would certainly be disappointing if it was. I myself have been eagerly awaiting a return of the larger than life, classic elements of Bond and if the film ends up being another personnal mission that attempts bind the Craig era into a neat package, as apposed to simply telling its own story, I would be devastated. :(

    If anyone could put my fears to rest without spoiling anything, It would be deeply appreciated.
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 158
    As much as I've enjoyed Daniel's previous 3 films,all the angst,pain and emotional stress he'd gone through left me a bit deflated. He himself has said numerous times that he slowly wanted to bring back all the elements and characters (Q,MP) that made Bond...BOND! I wanted a lighter touch this time. Gadgets on cars and watches,great humour. I loved SPECTRE. :)
  • With regards to Sam Smith's song... I've reached the conclusion that the song itself isn't that bad. The orchestral version of it used in the film is actually very romantic (it's on the soundtrack album too) and works well. It's just his voice I don't like!

    I'm not sure if that's an insult or a compliment to Sam Smith.
  • Posts: 3,164
    Watching it again later this afternoon. It doesn't blow away on first go, sure, but I think this will be a grower (plus I won't have the script in the back of my mind so much haha)
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,128
    Likewise I'm catching it again around 6:30
  • 007bondUK007bondUK England
    Posts: 25
    I think it needs a second viewing because honestly after it was over it felt a bit flat. Never had that feeling after Skyfall so sure the bar is set high but SPECTRE is too long and has some really stupid moments which make no sense with the established characters.

    Apart from the technically excellent opening tracking shot this so called best ever opening title sequence was dull.

    Thomas Newman's score is not a score. It's like an arrangement of unused cues from Skyfall. There is a constant drone of orchestral bars that just hang about all movie.

    Craig is excellent as always and maybe he has one more movie in him but then that would be the right time to hand over the reigns.
Sign In or Register to comment.