SPECTRE: Official Critics Review Topic (accumulative topic, NO SPOILERS, just links)

11112131517

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Cowley wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I will tell you whether I think it's fair or not tomorrow. Finally after this incredibly painful wait, I'll be able to see what all this fuss is about. Such a polarizing film apparently...

    Polarizing as to whether you thing it's better than SF maybe. Polarizing as to whether you think it's the right direction for the Craig films to go in, possibly.

    Polarizing as to whether it's a good or bad film? Surely not. I visit plenty of non Bond forums and in their film sections the forum members mostly enjoyed the film. I don't even see it as a 50/50 split in those who hate it to those who rate it.

    Some bad reviews from the US don't make it a polarizing film.

    Everyone is entitled to an opinion, including the critics. I'm sure your surveys of various sites reflect some views, but certainly not all views.

    Ultimately no matter what you, I or anyone here may think of it, the overall narrative will be written collectively by others, as it always is with these sort of things. Those with the largest bullhorns get to set the agenda and shape the story. Whether that's right or not is a different matter. One's personal opinion is most important of course.

    You'll get mine tomorrow.
  • Posts: 485
    Well okay but from my perspective of surveying things I just don't see a huge wade of "sheesh this new Bond film sucks" anti-hype in the manner of WOW but maybe it's different stateside and the knives are out.

    It'd be a shame is this 'narrative' goes negatively the way you fear and reduces the bond stock as it where when EON now shop around.
  • Posts: 485
    Cowley wrote: »
    Well okay but from my perspective of surveying things I just don't see a huge wade of "sheesh this new Bond film sucks" anti-hype in the manner of QOs but maybe it's different stateside and the knives are out.

    It'd be a shame is this 'narrative' goes negatively the way you fear and reduces the bond stock as it where when EON now shop around.

  • Posts: 1,068
    Personal reference and non scientific rule of thumb: I work in a small studio of seven of varying ages from early 30's to mid 60's and out of the five that have seen SP (two yesterday) every review has been good, superb or absolutely excellent. Of the remaining two, one is deaf and awaiting a copy with closed captions (not sure if just waiting for DVD) and likes the idea of seeing SP and the last doesn't bother with any film other than screened on TV. Not a bad roll call really.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    I actually am not seeing a negative narrative at present actually. I am seeing an 'as expected' narrative.

    If this film is more 'formulaic' (and I've heard views both to the contrary and views supporting this thesis here and elsewhere) then the rating is understandable. We cannot expect critics to give a pure 'Bond spectacle' like film a superior collective rating. I certainly wouldn't expect that from them, unless the narrative/story/script is tight.

    When I started reading the UK reviews, I could see in the reviews itself that some things weren't adding up. I could see it in the spoiler free reviews here too.

    The question is, in totality, given its script flaws, how does it stand up?.......how will it stand up in time?. That's the question. Will I personally see it overall positive or negative? That's what interests me the most.

    PS: The best spy film I've seen this year (by far) is MI-RN. Cruise delivered and then some with that film, even with my high expectations. I am excited to see if SP can do the same.
  • We're at 62% now. This is insane.
  • Posts: 1,314
    My main gripes are that although it follows the formula, it does so with little imagination, and therein lies the disappointment. It also peaks in the first 10 minutes.

    No one who came out of SF in 2012 would have thought Spectre would've basically been a film that wouldn't have looked out of place in the 70s.

    CR played with the formula and took risks. "Shaken or stirred""do I look like I give a Damn", and the Aston flip 20 seconds into the car chase.

    Credit to the Sony execs. Having read a few articles on the email leaks basically everything wrong with spectre was identified 18 months ago. They clearly couldn't fix it though.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    Ultimately no matter what you, I or anyone here may think of it, the overall narrative will be written collectively by others, as it always is with these sort of things. Those with the largest bullhorns get to set the agenda and shape the story. Whether that's right or not is a different matter.

    Or well, there will be no actual narrative anyone will agree upon, and some who will decide the narrative is a positive one will claim the most influent were the positive ones, and some others who will decide the narrative is negative will claim the most influent were the negative ones.

    Already some here explain the "Top Critics Rotten Tomatoes" ratings is more influent that the default "Rotten Tomatoes" ratings, and that the US blogs from Compuserve are not part of the narrative anyway :)



  • Posts: 485
    I imagine RT and IMDB ratings are all irrelevant once the bum is sat on the seat in the cinema but do matter if they persuade someone to give a film a miss.

    Would that happen with something like Bond which is event cinema, that is old farts like me make the effort to endure the cinema to see it but wouldn't otherwise go even for a 5/5 film.

    In a matter of days only word of mouth will now count in the US and how it has performed in the 2nd week here in the UK.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Cowley wrote: »
    In a matter of days only word of mouth will now count in the US and how it has performed in the 2nd week here in the UK.

    Yes, 2nd and especially 3rd (Thanksgiving) week in the US and how it drops off/or holds into weeks 2 and 3 in the UK. This is what I'm really interested in.

    Word of mouth has to be infectious to get casual fans to see it. That's what happened with SF. If it's just "it's ok" that won't get the casual fan into the seat on the margin. It has to be contagious. Bond has the inbuilt fan base but it has to go beyond that to create the SF level success outside the UK (barring week 1 when a lot of people will go just because it is SF's sequel).
  • bondjames wrote: »
    Already some here explain the "Top Critics Rotten Tomatoes" ratings is more influent that the default "Rotten Tomatoes" ratings, and that the US blogs from Compuserve are not part of the narrative anyway :)

    My ears are burning :D

    Generally speaking, there are obvious exceptions, but if you read them, the top critics seem to grasp "Bond history" more and are able to place Spectre more in context. Some lower critics and bloggers don't seem to be aware of Bond much before 1995 and are suddenly confused as to why there's big action and humor in a Bond movie! Hell, I've seen a few who don't seem to know of anything prior to Skyfall.

    And no, Compuserve is not part of any credible narrative in the year 2015. Deliciously ironic that a man working for a stuck-in-the-past antique Compuserve writes "where is Sean Connery when we need him so much?" :))
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    I just returned from the cinema one hour ago.

    The last time I have seen so many excited and happy-go-lucky people in one space was on the opening night of Skyfall.

    Spectre is showing on ALL screens it's insane. Movies like The Martian are banished from Switzerland for the next two days or are only shown once a day on smaller screens.

    Needless to say, after the film ended everybody was like totally in awe and exhilarated at the same time. That was different with Skyfall I have to say.

    The last time I have experienced that level of satisfaction of a large crowd at the cinema was with CR and GE.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    smitty wrote: »
    RT has too much sway as it is seriously flawed in many ways. Minor critics with little to no following get equal sway with the top critics read by millions. And you're right, there are way to many US critics, particularly web critics. But the site has a lot of clout these days as it is regularly quoted all over the place. And it is going to burn SP I'm afraid.

    I honestly don't think reviews matter, at all, with Bond. DAD got 57%, CR 95, and QOS 65, and all three made pretty much the same amount at the US box office (160, 167, 168). Now its always nice when a Bond film like CR or SF does get glowing reviews, but its still meaningless. If critics had any sway, CR would have made much more money.

    Generally, yes, this is true.

    However, when one is following a Bond film that is the top grosser, and which broke out from that general funk that Bond films were stuck in for many years (almost doubling the gross from the $160m trendline) then it did bring in new fans. Those new fans may not be sticky fans, and so may be persuaded, on the margin, by reviews and general social media fan enthusiasm about whether to see the film.

    I agree, its clear that Skyfall was the first Bond movie for a lot of people. That's why the Spectre teaser was smart, it clearly tied in to (and even name-checked) Skyfall. We're seeing ongoing sagas everywhere now, with Marvel, DC, Hunger Games, Hobbit etc etc. That's the big trend and EON have jumped on it, people like multi-film arcs that form a big picture with character journeys, callbacks and references.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 485
    bondjames wrote: »
    Cowley wrote: »
    In a matter of days only word of mouth will now count in the US and how it has performed in the 2nd week here in the UK.

    Yes, 2nd and especially 3rd (Thanksgiving) week in the US and how it drops off/or holds into weeks 2 and 3 in the UK. This is what I'm really interested in.

    Word of mouth has to be infectious to get casual fans to see it. That's what happened with SF. If it's just "it's ok" that won't get the casual fan into the seat on the margin. It has to be contagious. Bond has the inbuilt fan base but it has to go beyond that to create the SF level success outside the UK (barring week 1 when a lot of people will go just because it is SF's sequel).

    If the audience drastically dips for Thanksgiving I imagine there is no coming back from that?

    The one thing that goes against SP compared to SF is that it isn't a momentous Bond film. By that I mean some Bond films are seen as "the one where he marries", "the one where M dies" and
    as I doubt Blofeld returning is a huge draw
    SP may be seen as too inconsequential and business as usual to be a 'must-see' film.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 1,021


    i'm confused

    "i miss the wit, i miss the humour. theres not enough of it here"

    i thought everyone is saying there is too much wit..too much humour..for a DC bond film

    these reviews are all over the place. and this reviewer calls himself a Bond fan. He can't even pronounce SPECTRE correctly !
  • We're at 62% now. This is insane.
    Ouch, this will hardly ruin any of our enjoyment of the movie, but it's a little disheartening to see it fall even lower than QOS. One hopes it doesn't end up as rotten.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited November 2015 Posts: 9,020
    At 61% now on RT.

    I'm convinced most of the critics that bash Spectre are young people under 30 that have no understanding of the franchise and have grown up to CR, QOS and SF and can't bare to have a Craig movie that resembles movies of the past eras of Brosnan and Moore.
  • We're at 62% now. This is insane.
    Ouch, this will hardly ruin any of our enjoyment of the movie, but it's a little disheartening to see it fall even lower than QOS. One hopes it doesn't end up as rotten.

    Its gotten worse. 61%. Its 4% away from DAD. This is not possible. There is some hidden agenda with these negative US reviews.

  • Posts: 1,098
    We're at 62% now. This is insane.
    Ouch, this will hardly ruin any of our enjoyment of the movie, but it's a little disheartening to see it fall even lower than QOS. One hopes it doesn't end up as rotten.

    All i can is that really, all this does is highlight that the rating system at RT, is well out of sync.

    I've seen SP twice, and it is a far better film than QOS by a very long way, plus its much more enjoyable to watch, as the pace, and the editing of the film, allows the viewer to absorb the story, and to be able to see whats going on in the action scenes.

    Forget the Tomato people in the US............remember SP has had truly excellent reviews in the other countries it has played in so far!

  • We're at 62% now. This is insane.
    Ouch, this will hardly ruin any of our enjoyment of the movie, but it's a little disheartening to see it fall even lower than QOS. One hopes it doesn't end up as rotten.

    Its gotten worse. 61%. Its 4% away from DAD. This is not possible. There is some hidden agenda with these negative US reviews.

    Thankfully known youtubers like Stuckmann and Jahns have given it positive reviews and it's still sitting in the green zone over on metacritics, so hopefully this wont hurt the overall success of the movie, but the reaction to Spectre really seems like a case of either "This is exactly what Bond is, GREAT MOVIE." or "This is exactly what Bond is, MOVIE SUCKS" type of opinions.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    I don't but most critics and the audience and fans here simply hate QoS.

    I don't see/hear as much hate here with SP. So yea I don't get the rating. It's not fair at all.

    The fun and enjoyment factors have got to count for something.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 709


    i'm confused

    "i miss the wit, i miss the humour. theres not enough of it here"

    i thought everyone is saying there is too much wit..too much humour..for a DC bond film

    these reviews are all over the place. and this reviewer calls himself a Bond fan. He can't even pronounce SPECTRE correctly !

    Wow, another critic I can tell I have completely nothing in common with. Even ignoring the "HUGE BOND FAN WHO CAN'T EVEN PRONOUNCE SPECTRE" bit. Seriously, SPECTRE has been said out loud in countless Bond films that this guy claims to be a fan of. It's even said out loud numerous times in the film he's talking about. Ludicrous, and instant non-credibility as far as I'm concerned.

    "Bond is influenced by its imitators like Mission Impossible". WHAAAAT? Rogue Nation (which I enjoyed FWIW) BLATANTLY stole from QOS and SF, had a storyline about an MI6 rogue agent seeing revenge, and had Cruise hanging out in London and running round in a tuxedo in many scenes. So now a movie about a spy in a tuxedo with scenes in London is "imitating" Rogue Nation :)) 8-|

    Just out of curiosity I went and looked up his video review of Rogue Nation, and yep, no mention of it turning into an obvious Bond clone. Yet again we have a critic praising the imitators who steal from Bond and then thumbing down Bond for being Bond.

    I wonder if any of these people who say they miss the wit, gadgets, or Connery etc can just admit that what they really miss is their youth.
  • The film is being buried on Rotten Tomatoes. It's got the worse rating than QOS!

    There is such a wide divide from the enthusiastic 5-star reviews from London and the US critics (who sadly make up the bulk). This is really surprising and a little depressing, neither the film nor Mendes deserve this.

    Is there anyway we can point out the more positive reviews RT are neglecting to mention? Can we bring these tot heir attention?
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 1,021
    Concerning the RT score. I can imagine DC and SM in conversation. "**** the tomato score".
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 709
    The film is being buried on Rotten Tomatoes. It's got the worse rating than QOS!

    It's bizarre! OK check this out.

    QOS percentage is 65. Spectre is 61. So according to RT, QOS is the "better" movie.

    But then notice that QOS gets an overall 6.1/10 and Spectre gets 6.5. Wait, so Spectre IS better? Shouldn't that translate to 61% vs 65%?

    Click on Top critics and you see QOS drops to 40% and Spectre rises to 71. So now Spectre is 31% better?!

    Absurd.
  • Posts: 485
    Proof that facts and figures can always be manipulated to say whatever you want.

    I'm sure most of us are struggling to reconcile this with our own experiences of watching the film. It would suggest SP is likely to be the biggest Bond flop in the US since LTK?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Cowley wrote: »
    Proof that facts and figures can always be manipulated to say whatever you want.

    I'm sure most of us are struggling to reconcile this with our own experiences of watching the film. It would suggest SP is likely to be the biggest Bond flop in the US since LTK?

    Not necessarily. If this is a larger than life Bond film, then it is likely to be portrayed as a MR (rather than a TSWLM, which most of us would have liked - due to predecessor SF having taken all the accolades). These larger than life films still tend to make bucketloads of money in the US despite critical panning (err.....cough, cough......DAD).

    LTK was more of a dark Bond film. Much higher risk of massive failure at the US box office with that approach. So QoS is the one that likely would have suffered the most at the box office as a result (similar to LTK as a dark Bond film in a way). In fact, it was (being DC's biggest failure in constant inflation adjusted $ in the US).
  • Posts: 485
    You can't help wonder how LTK would have done in a multiplex cinema era. I saw it at the local 2 screen cinema and it was soon forced out by Batman and Indiana Jones.

    I recall people saying the only decent thing about LTK was the title song. Thank goodness the same wasn't said of WOTW and SP or we'd be well screwed!
  • Cowley wrote: »
    Proof that facts and figures can always be manipulated to say whatever you want.

    I'm sure most of us are struggling to reconcile this with our own experiences of watching the film. It would suggest SP is likely to be the biggest Bond flop in the US since LTK?

    Well that's going a bit far! There is zero indication that this will have any affect on box office. Example, 50 shades of grey had savage reviews and opened to $85 million. Fans are not influenced at all. But we'll have an early idea this time tomorrow.

    It may not be a critical success (yet still has every 2 out of 3 critics giving it a passing grade), but financially, SP would have to make less than $72 million in the US to do worse than LTK.
  • Posts: 485
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    Well that's going a bit far! There is zero indication that this will have any affect on box office. Example, 50 shades of grey had savage reviews and opened to $85 million. Fans are not influenced at all. But we'll have an early idea this time tomorrow.

    It may not be a critical success (yet still has every 2 out of 3 critics giving it a passing grade), but financially, SP would have to make less than $72 million in the US to do worse than LTK.

    A tad of an overreaction, I was saying the RT rating would suggest that. I absolutely don't think for one minute SP will bomb at the box office. I also said 'since' LTK not 'worse' than.

    Anyway there's enough of my earlier posts in this thread tonight to which I've said as you've done that fans will attend regardless.

    The real work will be how many of the fans can be impressed enough to persuade the casual cinema goers to see it.

    If the direction of the previous three Craig films hadn't have happened one wonders if SP would have got such a drubbing.
Sign In or Register to comment.