Which "feels" bigger, YOLT or SPECTRE?

Considering SPECTRE and YOLT's respective budgets, which one do you feel, in your opinion, delivers the biggest bang for the buck.
«13

Comments

  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited November 2015 Posts: 9,020
    YOLT because it has the best ever set built for any Bond movie.
    Ken Adam, you rule \m/

    I absolutely, absolutely love that they paid homage to the Volcano lair in Spectre with the crater lair.
    One more thing to just love Spectre.
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,183
    SPECTRE. It's a tighter focused film. YOLT, well in my most recent viewing anyway was a Boring retread of Thunderball.

    SPECTRE also has a lot of globetrotting elements while YOLT is 95% in Japan.

    SP also has a much better and enjoyable plot and villain. YOLT just feels like a misstep especially with the space stuff.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,284
    Bigger? YOLT.
    Better? SP.
  • Posts: 1,098
    The answer is quite obvious i.e. YOLT.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,487
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Bigger? YOLT.
    Better? SP.

    Yes, this.

    And SPECTRE has a better Oberhauser.
  • Posts: 154
    It might be better to ask MR or SP.

    I've not seen SP yet so I don't know but, to me, both TSWLM & MR were bigger & more epic than YOLT -- but MR was the biggest & most epic (though not a better movie than the other two).

    YOLT was 3rd biggest / most epic behind MR & TSWLM (but, again, I've net yet seen SP).
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    YOLT. By miles. Any Gilbert film is bigger than anything that's come before or since, scale wise, set wise, scope wise, location wise, etc. etc. etc.. Period. It's not even debatable.
  • Aziz_FekkeshAziz_Fekkesh Royale-les-Eaux
    Posts: 403
    What Thunderfinger said.
  • Perhaps my conception of "bigger" is idiosyncratic, but to me SP has a certain immensity, a heft, that is unmatched in Bond films. It's almost suffocating, with a nod to Sam Smith. So much is going on in SP. It's almost like there is too much to watch and assimilate. It's rather overwhelming. But this immensity also means that SP will repay many, many viewings.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,284
    Perhaps my conception of "bigger" is idiosyncratic, but to me SP has a certain immensity, a heft, that is unmatched in Bond films. It's almost suffocating, with a nod to Sam Smith. So much is going on in SP. It's almost like there is too much to watch and assimilate. It's rather overwhelming. But this immensity also means that SP will repay many, many viewings.

    When you put it like this, I am forced to agree.
  • YOLT feels like a bigger sleeping pill. I can hardly stay awake in it.... I-)
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,284
    lalala2004 wrote: »
    YOLT feels like a bigger sleeping pill. I can hardly stay awake in it.... I-)
    *sending a virtual smack for that*
    :))
  • chrisisall wrote: »
    lalala2004 wrote: »
    YOLT feels like a bigger sleeping pill. I can hardly stay awake in it.... I-)
    *sending a virtual smack for that*
    :))

    Nope, didn't feel it. That's how great of a sleep aid YOLT is. It's a great one for late night insomnia. I've used it on days when I've felt sick and I've wanted to take a nap (actually serious).
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    YOLT's bigger in the sense that the world was literally on the edge of WW3. I'm still not sure what would have happened if Bond had been an hour late in stopping SPECTRE in SP.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,284
    lalala2004 wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    lalala2004 wrote: »
    YOLT feels like a bigger sleeping pill. I can hardly stay awake in it.... I-)
    *sending a virtual smack for that*
    :))

    Nope, didn't feel it. That's how great of a sleep aid YOLT is. It's a great one for late night insomnia. I've used it on days when I've felt sick and I've wanted to take a nap (actually serious).

    I have to say you really made me laugh here. :))
  • lalala2004 wrote: »
    YOLT feels like a bigger sleeping pill. I can hardly stay awake in it.... I-)

    That's exactly how I feel about the Brosnan bonds!
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,726
    YOLT is another of these Bondfilms where 007 doesn't actually do very much... he's just sort of undergoing the whole story without really being a protagonist :-??
    I've noticed I tend not to re-watch the ones as often where Bond is idle for long periods.

    SPECTRE at least gives the viewer a James Bond who is 'doing' the whole way through the film...
  • bond_azoozbondbond_azoozbond Portland,OR
    Posts: 97
    I think representing SPECTRE in the 60's is way better than now .. Up to DAF for sure which sucks as hell .. Let see how bond 25,26 will shape and how it will be related to SPECTRE..
  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    edited November 2015 Posts: 2,243
    To answer the question literally and directly....YOLT. Gilbert definitely gives a sense of grandose and scale to the movies, whether you like them or not. Barry's (and Hamlisch) amazing scores help immensely in that regard too
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    YOLT definitely has the bigger sets. However, it pales in comparison to Moonraker.
  • Posts: 14,099
    Perhaps my conception of "bigger" is idiosyncratic, but to me SP has a certain immensity, a heft, that is unmatched in Bond films. It's almost suffocating, with a nod to Sam Smith. So much is going on in SP. It's almost like there is too much to watch and assimilate. It's rather overwhelming. But this immensity also means that SP will repay many, many viewings.

    I would agree with this actually. Sometimes too big. So many things happen in so little time. I was surprised there was no army battle in the end.
  • chrisisall wrote: »
    lalala2004 wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    lalala2004 wrote: »
    YOLT feels like a bigger sleeping pill. I can hardly stay awake in it.... I-)
    *sending a virtual smack for that*
    :))

    Nope, didn't feel it. That's how great of a sleep aid YOLT is. It's a great one for late night insomnia. I've used it on days when I've felt sick and I've wanted to take a nap (actually serious).

    I have to say you really made me laugh here. :))

    Mission accomplished :)
  • Posts: 5,767
    No question at all. YOLT feels bigger. The third act in SP felt more than anything like a confusion and deflation.


    Ludovico wrote: »
    Perhaps my conception of "bigger" is idiosyncratic, but to me SP has a certain immensity, a heft, that is unmatched in Bond films. It's almost suffocating, with a nod to Sam Smith. So much is going on in SP. It's almost like there is too much to watch and assimilate. It's rather overwhelming. But this immensity also means that SP will repay many, many viewings.

    I would agree with this actually. Sometimes too big. So many things happen in so little time. I was surprised there was no army battle in the end.
    So many things happen? What exactly?

  • Posts: 14,099
    boldfinger wrote: »
    No question at all. YOLT feels bigger. The third act in SP felt more than anything like a confusion and deflation.


    Ludovico wrote: »
    Perhaps my conception of "bigger" is idiosyncratic, but to me SP has a certain immensity, a heft, that is unmatched in Bond films. It's almost suffocating, with a nod to Sam Smith. So much is going on in SP. It's almost like there is too much to watch and assimilate. It's rather overwhelming. But this immensity also means that SP will repay many, many viewings.

    I would agree with this actually. Sometimes too big. So many things happen in so little time. I was surprised there was no army battle in the end.
    So many things happen? What exactly?

    Aborted terrorist attack in Mexico, one in South Africa, a couple of others, then a long chase/investigation from Italy to Morocco, MI6 and MI5 being merged, nine eyes being created, someone from Bond's past showing up, an old enemy becomes ally and commits suicide, the 00 section gets disbanded... I call that a lot of things.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    No question at all. YOLT feels bigger. The third act in SP felt more than anything like a confusion and deflation.


    Ludovico wrote: »
    Perhaps my conception of "bigger" is idiosyncratic, but to me SP has a certain immensity, a heft, that is unmatched in Bond films. It's almost suffocating, with a nod to Sam Smith. So much is going on in SP. It's almost like there is too much to watch and assimilate. It's rather overwhelming. But this immensity also means that SP will repay many, many viewings.

    I would agree with this actually. Sometimes too big. So many things happen in so little time. I was surprised there was no army battle in the end.
    So many things happen? What exactly?

    Aborted terrorist attack in Mexico, one in South Africa, a couple of others, then a long chase/investigation from Italy to Morocco, MI6 and MI5 being merged, nine eyes being created, someone from Bond's past showing up, an old enemy becomes ally and commits suicide, the 00 section gets disbanded... I call that a lot of things.

    It all just felt so inconsequential to me though......compared to saving the world from thermonuclear destruction (YOLT). Hence YOLT takes the win.
  • JNOJNO Finland
    Posts: 135
    YOLT was very big in 1967, I can imagine. For me, it has always been a bit boring and stupid film. Thanks, Roald, for screwing it!

    Spectre? Bigger in production-wise, smaller in story-wise. You know, SP never went to space... or nearly started the WWIII.

    So maybe YOLT is "bigger." All in all, SP is much better. Much better.
  • Ludovico wrote: »
    Perhaps my conception of "bigger" is idiosyncratic, but to me SP has a certain immensity, a heft, that is unmatched in Bond films. It's almost suffocating, with a nod to Sam Smith. So much is going on in SP. It's almost like there is too much to watch and assimilate. It's rather overwhelming. But this immensity also means that SP will repay many, many viewings.

    I would agree with this actually. Sometimes too big. So many things happen in so little time. I was surprised there was no army battle in the end.

    That's about the only box it didn't tick. That and a casino scene. And I don't mean this as criticism. I'll never downgrade a Bond film for trying too hard to be Bondian.

  • bondjames wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    No question at all. YOLT feels bigger. The third act in SP felt more than anything like a confusion and deflation.


    Ludovico wrote: »
    Perhaps my conception of "bigger" is idiosyncratic, but to me SP has a certain immensity, a heft, that is unmatched in Bond films. It's almost suffocating, with a nod to Sam Smith. So much is going on in SP. It's almost like there is too much to watch and assimilate. It's rather overwhelming. But this immensity also means that SP will repay many, many viewings.

    I would agree with this actually. Sometimes too big. So many things happen in so little time. I was surprised there was no army battle in the end.
    So many things happen? What exactly?

    Aborted terrorist attack in Mexico, one in South Africa, a couple of others, then a long chase/investigation from Italy to Morocco, MI6 and MI5 being merged, nine eyes being created, someone from Bond's past showing up, an old enemy becomes ally and commits suicide, the 00 section gets disbanded... I call that a lot of things.

    It all just felt so inconsequential to me though......compared to saving the world from thermonuclear destruction (YOLT). Hence YOLT takes the win.

    That's because we conceive "bigness" differently. For you, bigness means the implications of the villain's McGuffin. For me--and perhaps Ludovico--it means fullness of plot, and in my case, the level of activity that occurs in every frame and the grandeur of the imagery. It's dashed difficult to explain, but SP just has a monumentality about it. Reminds me of 2001: a Space Odyssey in that respect, or the Grand Canyon, or St. Marks Square in Venice.

  • Posts: 14,099
    And I didn't find the scope of SP inconsequential. On the contrary. In YOLT it seems so darn implausible and its benefits uncertain compared to the risks taken that the scope was lost in the surreal aspect of the plot.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    That's because we conceive "bigness" differently. For you, bigness means the implications of the villain's McGuffin. For me--and perhaps Ludovico--it means fullness of plot, and in my case, the level of activity that occurs in every frame and the grandeur of the imagery. It's dashed difficult to explain, but SP just has a monumentality about it. Reminds me of 2001: a Space Odyssey in that respect, or the Grand Canyon, or St. Marks Square in Venice.
    Fair enough. There is a certain weightiness to SP. I just didn't find it all that credible, which may have impacted my perception of it. There is a throw everything and the kitchen sink aspect to it, without stopping (directorially) to consider the emotional implications for everyone (or anyone for that matter).....so it was just somewhat lost on me and I focused more on the physical stuff on the screen, which YOLT captured better.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    And I didn't find the scope of SP inconsequential. On the contrary. In YOLT it seems so darn implausible and its benefits uncertain compared to the risks taken that the scope was lost in the surreal aspect of the plot.
    This is where we perceived it differently too. I find SP somewhat implausible (especially the coincidental retcon plot tie ins) as well. In both cases therefore, I tuned out emotionally and just focused on the spectacle, which as I said before, I found more 'big' in YOLT.
Sign In or Register to comment.