The new "S.P.E.C.T.R.E." syndicate compared with the "Bilderberg Group"

edited November 2015 in SPECTRE Posts: 11,119
I don't know if S.P.E.C.T.R.E. in "SPECTRE" was modelled by Sam Mendes after the real-life secretive organisation, the so-called 'Bilderberg Group' (founded by the Dutch, British and Polish shortly after WW II). But for me it really looked like the Bond-equivalent of the Bilderberg Group:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants
bilderberg-7.gif
bilderberg-partecipanti1.jpg

Its task are to protect Western prosperity by uniting the USA, Canada, Australia and most of the original founding members of the European Members. Most Royals are members (make no mistake, the Dutch Royals are more powerful than the British Royals. Currently, the abdicated Queen Beatrix is still one of the most influential members). And there are political members. Usually with one conservative and one liberal member from each country. For instance in my country The Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte (conservative) and Alexander Pechtold (chairman largest progressive-liberal party) are member.

One of the co-founders, Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld was the grandfather of the current Dutch King, King Willem of Orange-Nassau. He actually worked during WW II in London on the Naval Intelligence Department. Ian Fleming, the author of agent 007, got the task to run a thorough background check on the man, who was thought to be an ex-member of the Nazi's by the British government, which eventually could not be proven.

Later on, Ian Fleming and Bernhard of Lippe had frequent luncheons together. And he actually named a character of the novel "Thunderball" after him: Count Lippe. Who also appears in the film.

Criticism on the obscure and secretive Bilderberg Group
Because of its working methods to ensure strict privacy, the Bilderberg Group has been criticised for its lack of transparency and accountability. Due to its privacy, Bilderberg has been accused of several conspiracies. This outlook has been popular on both extremes of the political spectrum, even if they disagree about the exact nature of the group's intentions. Some on the left accuse the Bilderberg group of conspiring to impose capitalist domination, while some on the right have accused the group of conspiring to impose a world government and planned economy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/is-bilderberg-a-conference-on-world-affairs-or-a-powerful-global-cabal-depends-on-who-you-ask/2012/06/01/gJQA5uqx7U_story.html

So make no mistake, "SPECTRE" is a way more relevant Bond-film than many of us in here think ;-).

Comments

  • Does anyone in here actually agree with me that the revived S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-syndicate in "SPECTRE" was way better and believable than The Syndicate in "Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation"?
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    I don't know if S.P.E.C.T.R.E. in "SPECTRE" was modelled by Sam Mendes after the real-life secretive organisation, the so-called 'Bilderberg Group' (founded by the Dutch, British and Polish shortly after WW II). But for me it really looked like the Bond-equivalent of the Bilderberg Group:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants
    bilderberg-7.gif
    bilderberg-partecipanti1.jpg

    Its task are to protect Western prosperity by uniting the USA, Canada, Australia and most of the original founding members of the European Members. Most Royals are members (make no mistake, the Dutch Royals are more powerful than the British Royals. Currently, the abdicated Queen Beatrix is still one of the most influential members). And there are political members. Usually with one conservative and one liberal member from each country. For instance in my country The Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte (conservative) and Alexander Pechtold (chairman largest progressive-liberal party) are member.

    One of the co-founders, Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld was the grandfather of the current Dutch King, King Willem of Orange-Nassau. He actually worked during WW II in London on the Naval Intelligence Department. Ian Fleming, the author of agent 007, got the task to run a thorough background check on the man, who was thought to be an ex-member of the Nazi's by the British government, which eventually could not be proven.

    Later on, Ian Fleming and Bernhard of Lippe had frequent luncheons together. And he actually named a character of the novel "Thunderball" after him: Count Lippe. Who also appears in the film.

    Criticism on the obscure and secretive Bilderberg Group
    Because of its working methods to ensure strict privacy, the Bilderberg Group has been criticised for its lack of transparency and accountability. Due to its privacy, Bilderberg has been accused of several conspiracies. This outlook has been popular on both extremes of the political spectrum, even if they disagree about the exact nature of the group's intentions. Some on the left accuse the Bilderberg group of conspiring to impose capitalist domination, while some on the right have accused the group of conspiring to impose a world government and planned economy.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/is-bilderberg-a-conference-on-world-affairs-or-a-powerful-global-cabal-depends-on-who-you-ask/2012/06/01/gJQA5uqx7U_story.html

    So make no mistake, "SPECTRE" is a way more relevant Bond-film than many of us in here think ;-).

    Personally I found the Quantum opera meeting a lot more like Bilderberg.

    That was one aspect of SP that disappointed. For a film called SPECTRE there wasn't much SPECTREing going on. One good meeting but after that? Where was the grandiose plan? Where were the armies of the guys in jump suits? SPECTRE HQ is practically deserted. Bond shoots about three blokes and he's out of there. The finale consists of Ernst and the pilot. Where are his bodyguards and plan B?
  • I don't know if S.P.E.C.T.R.E. in "SPECTRE" was modelled by Sam Mendes after the real-life secretive organisation, the so-called 'Bilderberg Group' (founded by the Dutch, British and Polish shortly after WW II). But for me it really looked like the Bond-equivalent of the Bilderberg Group:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants
    bilderberg-7.gif
    bilderberg-partecipanti1.jpg

    Its task are to protect Western prosperity by uniting the USA, Canada, Australia and most of the original founding members of the European Members. Most Royals are members (make no mistake, the Dutch Royals are more powerful than the British Royals. Currently, the abdicated Queen Beatrix is still one of the most influential members). And there are political members. Usually with one conservative and one liberal member from each country. For instance in my country The Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte (conservative) and Alexander Pechtold (chairman largest progressive-liberal party) are member.

    One of the co-founders, Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld was the grandfather of the current Dutch King, King Willem of Orange-Nassau. He actually worked during WW II in London on the Naval Intelligence Department. Ian Fleming, the author of agent 007, got the task to run a thorough background check on the man, who was thought to be an ex-member of the Nazi's by the British government, which eventually could not be proven.

    Later on, Ian Fleming and Bernhard of Lippe had frequent luncheons together. And he actually named a character of the novel "Thunderball" after him: Count Lippe. Who also appears in the film.

    Criticism on the obscure and secretive Bilderberg Group
    Because of its working methods to ensure strict privacy, the Bilderberg Group has been criticised for its lack of transparency and accountability. Due to its privacy, Bilderberg has been accused of several conspiracies. This outlook has been popular on both extremes of the political spectrum, even if they disagree about the exact nature of the group's intentions. Some on the left accuse the Bilderberg group of conspiring to impose capitalist domination, while some on the right have accused the group of conspiring to impose a world government and planned economy.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/is-bilderberg-a-conference-on-world-affairs-or-a-powerful-global-cabal-depends-on-who-you-ask/2012/06/01/gJQA5uqx7U_story.html

    So make no mistake, "SPECTRE" is a way more relevant Bond-film than many of us in here think ;-).

    Personally I found the Quantum opera meeting a lot more like Bilderberg.

    That was one aspect of SP that disappointed. For a film called SPECTRE there wasn't much SPECTREing going on. One good meeting but after that? Where was the grandiose plan? Where were the armies of the guys in jump suits? SPECTRE HQ is practically deserted. Bond shoots about three blokes and he's out of there. The finale consists of Ernst and the pilot. Where are his bodyguards and plan B?

    Well, the grandiose plan was the "Nine Eyes Program" (and applying the CNS-Network on MI-6 via S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-controlled subsidiaries, like Blofeld's lair in Morocco). Sound pretty grandiose to me.

    I think the QUANTUM-set-up looked pretty dumb. Like the new S.P.E.C.T.R.E. also the Bilderberg Group meets in strict secrecy. Meeting in an opera is just nice to look at, but so prone to leaks and loss of secrecy.

    For me the S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-meeting worked way better than the QUANTUM-meeting. Especially since it looked like a re-imagined, more gothic, more sinister and deadly version of the "Thunderball" meeting. And, no cheesy electrocution, but killing someone with metal nails (first the soul), and then snapping his neck (death of the body). Loved it :-).
  • PropertyOfALadyPropertyOfALady Colders Federation CEO
    Posts: 3,497
    Sorry to go off topic @Gustav_Graves but when I went to see Spectre, that scene made some of the audience squeamish (gasps and such), but I knew what was coming so it wasn't that bad for me. Creepy? Definitely.
  • Sorry to go off topic @Gustav_Graves but when I went to see Spectre, that scene made some of the audience squeamish (gasps and such), but I knew what was coming so it wasn't that bad for me. Creepy? Definitely.

    I think that's because audiences need ACTION. Like the ACTION from "Avengers 2", or "Furious 7":-). Big popcorn action....eh sorry....ACTION :-).

    I don't give a rat's ass (to re-imagine Silva's story about rats a bit) about other people falling asleep. It tells you more about what people are expecting. Perhaps Bond has become a bit too....sophisticated for them.

    I am usually fascinated by the more quiet, less action-heavy scenes. And with those the Craig-films usually excell and stand out from other action franchises.

    --> The poker game in "CR"
    --> The rope torture scene in "CR"
    --> The opera scene in "QOS"
    --> The oiled Bond-girl scene in "QOS"
    --> The intro of Silva in "SF"
    --> The Tennyson speech in "SF"
    --> The S.P.E.C.T.R.E. board meeting in "SP"
    --> The dentist drill torture in "SP"

    In my opinion? All highlights that you won't really find in other 'spy films'. And with your last sentence I agree......it was creepy indeed. The death of that Spanish S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-member, THAT'S how I like Bond films to be :-).
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 251
    The "Nine Eyes Programme" is basically a larger version of the real life "Five Eyes" set up after WW2 to gather intelligence on a global scale, and is still operating - hence the data sharing between US and GCHQ.

    The advent of the Internet and smartphones have provided a rich data stream for Five Eyes to analyse, supported by Google and Microsoft - who are Bilderberg members
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 251
    You can see how money is so powerful in the West - governments rely on private donations who then dictate policy in return for their cash, the media are owned by international big business to guide our voting, the US (and UK) military are on hand to keep any rebel countries/leaders in check, Google and Microsoft keep us all under surveillance - that the idea of the Bilderberg group forming the basis of a World Government is not so far fetched.

    The only question is whether they are good guys or bad.
  • PropertyOfALadyPropertyOfALady Colders Federation CEO
    Posts: 3,497
    Sorry to go off topic @Gustav_Graves but when I went to see Spectre, that scene made some of the audience squeamish (gasps and such), but I knew what was coming so it wasn't that bad for me. Creepy? Definitely.

    I think that's because audiences need ACTION. Like the ACTION from "Avengers 2", or "Furious 7":-). Big popcorn action....eh sorry....ACTION :-).

    I don't give a rat's ass (to re-imagine Silva's story about rats a bit) about other people falling asleep. It tells you more about what people are expecting. Perhaps Bond has become a bit too....sophisticated for them.

    I am usually fascinated by the more quiet, less action-heavy scenes. And with those the Craig-films usually excell and stand out from other action franchises.

    --> The poker game in "CR"
    --> The rope torture scene in "CR"
    --> The opera scene in "QOS"
    --> The oiled Bond-girl scene in "QOS"
    --> The intro of Silva in "SF"
    --> The Tennyson speech in "SF"
    --> The S.P.E.C.T.R.E. board meeting in "SP"
    --> The dentist drill torture in "SP"

    In my opinion? All highlights that you won't really find in other 'spy films'. And with your last sentence I agree......it was creepy indeed. The death of that Spanish S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-member, THAT'S how I like Bond films to be :-).

    I will say that Craig's Bond should win the award for "Most Tortured Bond". I don't know what's worse: having your balls whipped with a rope or having your brain stuck with a drill by someone who's clearly crazy.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    I don't know if S.P.E.C.T.R.E. in "SPECTRE" was modelled by Sam Mendes after the real-life secretive organisation, the so-called 'Bilderberg Group' (founded by the Dutch, British and Polish shortly after WW II). But for me it really looked like the Bond-equivalent of the Bilderberg Group:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants
    bilderberg-7.gif
    bilderberg-partecipanti1.jpg

    Its task are to protect Western prosperity by uniting the USA, Canada, Australia and most of the original founding members of the European Members. Most Royals are members (make no mistake, the Dutch Royals are more powerful than the British Royals. Currently, the abdicated Queen Beatrix is still one of the most influential members). And there are political members. Usually with one conservative and one liberal member from each country. For instance in my country The Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte (conservative) and Alexander Pechtold (chairman largest progressive-liberal party) are member.

    One of the co-founders, Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld was the grandfather of the current Dutch King, King Willem of Orange-Nassau. He actually worked during WW II in London on the Naval Intelligence Department. Ian Fleming, the author of agent 007, got the task to run a thorough background check on the man, who was thought to be an ex-member of the Nazi's by the British government, which eventually could not be proven.

    Later on, Ian Fleming and Bernhard of Lippe had frequent luncheons together. And he actually named a character of the novel "Thunderball" after him: Count Lippe. Who also appears in the film.

    Criticism on the obscure and secretive Bilderberg Group
    Because of its working methods to ensure strict privacy, the Bilderberg Group has been criticised for its lack of transparency and accountability. Due to its privacy, Bilderberg has been accused of several conspiracies. This outlook has been popular on both extremes of the political spectrum, even if they disagree about the exact nature of the group's intentions. Some on the left accuse the Bilderberg group of conspiring to impose capitalist domination, while some on the right have accused the group of conspiring to impose a world government and planned economy.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/is-bilderberg-a-conference-on-world-affairs-or-a-powerful-global-cabal-depends-on-who-you-ask/2012/06/01/gJQA5uqx7U_story.html

    So make no mistake, "SPECTRE" is a way more relevant Bond-film than many of us in here think ;-).

    Personally I found the Quantum opera meeting a lot more like Bilderberg.

    That was one aspect of SP that disappointed. For a film called SPECTRE there wasn't much SPECTREing going on. One good meeting but after that? Where was the grandiose plan? Where were the armies of the guys in jump suits? SPECTRE HQ is practically deserted. Bond shoots about three blokes and he's out of there. The finale consists of Ernst and the pilot. Where are his bodyguards and plan B?

    Well, the grandiose plan was the "Nine Eyes Program" (and applying the CNS-Network on MI-6 via S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-controlled subsidiaries, like Blofeld's lair in Morocco). Sound pretty grandiose to me.

    I think the QUANTUM-set-up looked pretty dumb. Like the new S.P.E.C.T.R.E. also the Bilderberg Group meets in strict secrecy. Meeting in an opera is just nice to look at, but so prone to leaks and loss of secrecy.

    For me the S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-meeting worked way better than the QUANTUM-meeting. Especially since it looked like a re-imagined, more gothic, more sinister and deadly version of the "Thunderball" meeting. And, no cheesy electrocution, but killing someone with metal nails (first the soul), and then snapping his neck (death of the body). Loved it :-).

    Think you are confusing the word grandiose with dull here.
  • I don't know if S.P.E.C.T.R.E. in "SPECTRE" was modelled by Sam Mendes after the real-life secretive organisation, the so-called 'Bilderberg Group' (founded by the Dutch, British and Polish shortly after WW II). But for me it really looked like the Bond-equivalent of the Bilderberg Group:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants
    bilderberg-7.gif
    bilderberg-partecipanti1.jpg

    Its task are to protect Western prosperity by uniting the USA, Canada, Australia and most of the original founding members of the European Members. Most Royals are members (make no mistake, the Dutch Royals are more powerful than the British Royals. Currently, the abdicated Queen Beatrix is still one of the most influential members). And there are political members. Usually with one conservative and one liberal member from each country. For instance in my country The Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte (conservative) and Alexander Pechtold (chairman largest progressive-liberal party) are member.

    One of the co-founders, Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld was the grandfather of the current Dutch King, King Willem of Orange-Nassau. He actually worked during WW II in London on the Naval Intelligence Department. Ian Fleming, the author of agent 007, got the task to run a thorough background check on the man, who was thought to be an ex-member of the Nazi's by the British government, which eventually could not be proven.

    Later on, Ian Fleming and Bernhard of Lippe had frequent luncheons together. And he actually named a character of the novel "Thunderball" after him: Count Lippe. Who also appears in the film.

    Criticism on the obscure and secretive Bilderberg Group
    Because of its working methods to ensure strict privacy, the Bilderberg Group has been criticised for its lack of transparency and accountability. Due to its privacy, Bilderberg has been accused of several conspiracies. This outlook has been popular on both extremes of the political spectrum, even if they disagree about the exact nature of the group's intentions. Some on the left accuse the Bilderberg group of conspiring to impose capitalist domination, while some on the right have accused the group of conspiring to impose a world government and planned economy.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/is-bilderberg-a-conference-on-world-affairs-or-a-powerful-global-cabal-depends-on-who-you-ask/2012/06/01/gJQA5uqx7U_story.html

    So make no mistake, "SPECTRE" is a way more relevant Bond-film than many of us in here think ;-).

    Personally I found the Quantum opera meeting a lot more like Bilderberg.

    That was one aspect of SP that disappointed. For a film called SPECTRE there wasn't much SPECTREing going on. One good meeting but after that? Where was the grandiose plan? Where were the armies of the guys in jump suits? SPECTRE HQ is practically deserted. Bond shoots about three blokes and he's out of there. The finale consists of Ernst and the pilot. Where are his bodyguards and plan B?

    Well, the grandiose plan was the "Nine Eyes Program" (and applying the CNS-Network on MI-6 via S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-controlled subsidiaries, like Blofeld's lair in Morocco). Sound pretty grandiose to me.

    I think the QUANTUM-set-up looked pretty dumb. Like the new S.P.E.C.T.R.E. also the Bilderberg Group meets in strict secrecy. Meeting in an opera is just nice to look at, but so prone to leaks and loss of secrecy.

    For me the S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-meeting worked way better than the QUANTUM-meeting. Especially since it looked like a re-imagined, more gothic, more sinister and deadly version of the "Thunderball" meeting. And, no cheesy electrocution, but killing someone with metal nails (first the soul), and then snapping his neck (death of the body). Loved it :-).

    Think you are confusing the word grandiose with dull here.

    Then we disagree ;-).
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    I don't know if S.P.E.C.T.R.E. in "SPECTRE" was modelled by Sam Mendes after the real-life secretive organisation, the so-called 'Bilderberg Group' (founded by the Dutch, British and Polish shortly after WW II). But for me it really looked like the Bond-equivalent of the Bilderberg Group:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants
    bilderberg-7.gif
    bilderberg-partecipanti1.jpg

    Its task are to protect Western prosperity by uniting the USA, Canada, Australia and most of the original founding members of the European Members. Most Royals are members (make no mistake, the Dutch Royals are more powerful than the British Royals. Currently, the abdicated Queen Beatrix is still one of the most influential members). And there are political members. Usually with one conservative and one liberal member from each country. For instance in my country The Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte (conservative) and Alexander Pechtold (chairman largest progressive-liberal party) are member.

    One of the co-founders, Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld was the grandfather of the current Dutch King, King Willem of Orange-Nassau. He actually worked during WW II in London on the Naval Intelligence Department. Ian Fleming, the author of agent 007, got the task to run a thorough background check on the man, who was thought to be an ex-member of the Nazi's by the British government, which eventually could not be proven.

    Later on, Ian Fleming and Bernhard of Lippe had frequent luncheons together. And he actually named a character of the novel "Thunderball" after him: Count Lippe. Who also appears in the film.

    Criticism on the obscure and secretive Bilderberg Group
    Because of its working methods to ensure strict privacy, the Bilderberg Group has been criticised for its lack of transparency and accountability. Due to its privacy, Bilderberg has been accused of several conspiracies. This outlook has been popular on both extremes of the political spectrum, even if they disagree about the exact nature of the group's intentions. Some on the left accuse the Bilderberg group of conspiring to impose capitalist domination, while some on the right have accused the group of conspiring to impose a world government and planned economy.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/is-bilderberg-a-conference-on-world-affairs-or-a-powerful-global-cabal-depends-on-who-you-ask/2012/06/01/gJQA5uqx7U_story.html

    So make no mistake, "SPECTRE" is a way more relevant Bond-film than many of us in here think ;-).

    Personally I found the Quantum opera meeting a lot more like Bilderberg.

    That was one aspect of SP that disappointed. For a film called SPECTRE there wasn't much SPECTREing going on. One good meeting but after that? Where was the grandiose plan? Where were the armies of the guys in jump suits? SPECTRE HQ is practically deserted. Bond shoots about three blokes and he's out of there. The finale consists of Ernst and the pilot. Where are his bodyguards and plan B?

    Well, the grandiose plan was the "Nine Eyes Program" (and applying the CNS-Network on MI-6 via S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-controlled subsidiaries, like Blofeld's lair in Morocco). Sound pretty grandiose to me.

    I think the QUANTUM-set-up looked pretty dumb. Like the new S.P.E.C.T.R.E. also the Bilderberg Group meets in strict secrecy. Meeting in an opera is just nice to look at, but so prone to leaks and loss of secrecy.

    For me the S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-meeting worked way better than the QUANTUM-meeting. Especially since it looked like a re-imagined, more gothic, more sinister and deadly version of the "Thunderball" meeting. And, no cheesy electrocution, but killing someone with metal nails (first the soul), and then snapping his neck (death of the body). Loved it :-).

    Think you are confusing the word grandiose with dull here.

    Then we disagree ;-).

    A grandiose SPECTRE plan involves nuclear missiles, billions of dollars in ransom and sharks with fricking lasers.

    A dull one has some pseudo Assange/Snowden cyber intelligence stuff that no one really cares about.

  • I don't know if S.P.E.C.T.R.E. in "SPECTRE" was modelled by Sam Mendes after the real-life secretive organisation, the so-called 'Bilderberg Group' (founded by the Dutch, British and Polish shortly after WW II). But for me it really looked like the Bond-equivalent of the Bilderberg Group:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants
    bilderberg-7.gif
    bilderberg-partecipanti1.jpg

    Its task are to protect Western prosperity by uniting the USA, Canada, Australia and most of the original founding members of the European Members. Most Royals are members (make no mistake, the Dutch Royals are more powerful than the British Royals. Currently, the abdicated Queen Beatrix is still one of the most influential members). And there are political members. Usually with one conservative and one liberal member from each country. For instance in my country The Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte (conservative) and Alexander Pechtold (chairman largest progressive-liberal party) are member.

    One of the co-founders, Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld was the grandfather of the current Dutch King, King Willem of Orange-Nassau. He actually worked during WW II in London on the Naval Intelligence Department. Ian Fleming, the author of agent 007, got the task to run a thorough background check on the man, who was thought to be an ex-member of the Nazi's by the British government, which eventually could not be proven.

    Later on, Ian Fleming and Bernhard of Lippe had frequent luncheons together. And he actually named a character of the novel "Thunderball" after him: Count Lippe. Who also appears in the film.

    Criticism on the obscure and secretive Bilderberg Group
    Because of its working methods to ensure strict privacy, the Bilderberg Group has been criticised for its lack of transparency and accountability. Due to its privacy, Bilderberg has been accused of several conspiracies. This outlook has been popular on both extremes of the political spectrum, even if they disagree about the exact nature of the group's intentions. Some on the left accuse the Bilderberg group of conspiring to impose capitalist domination, while some on the right have accused the group of conspiring to impose a world government and planned economy.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/is-bilderberg-a-conference-on-world-affairs-or-a-powerful-global-cabal-depends-on-who-you-ask/2012/06/01/gJQA5uqx7U_story.html

    So make no mistake, "SPECTRE" is a way more relevant Bond-film than many of us in here think ;-).

    Personally I found the Quantum opera meeting a lot more like Bilderberg.

    That was one aspect of SP that disappointed. For a film called SPECTRE there wasn't much SPECTREing going on. One good meeting but after that? Where was the grandiose plan? Where were the armies of the guys in jump suits? SPECTRE HQ is practically deserted. Bond shoots about three blokes and he's out of there. The finale consists of Ernst and the pilot. Where are his bodyguards and plan B?

    Well, the grandiose plan was the "Nine Eyes Program" (and applying the CNS-Network on MI-6 via S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-controlled subsidiaries, like Blofeld's lair in Morocco). Sound pretty grandiose to me.

    I think the QUANTUM-set-up looked pretty dumb. Like the new S.P.E.C.T.R.E. also the Bilderberg Group meets in strict secrecy. Meeting in an opera is just nice to look at, but so prone to leaks and loss of secrecy.

    For me the S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-meeting worked way better than the QUANTUM-meeting. Especially since it looked like a re-imagined, more gothic, more sinister and deadly version of the "Thunderball" meeting. And, no cheesy electrocution, but killing someone with metal nails (first the soul), and then snapping his neck (death of the body). Loved it :-).

    Think you are confusing the word grandiose with dull here.

    Then we disagree ;-).

    A grandiose SPECTRE plan involves nuclear missiles, billions of dollars in ransom and sharks with fricking lasers.

    A dull one has some pseudo Assange/Snowden cyber intelligence stuff that no one really cares about.

    That's only part of it. S.P.E.C.T.R.E. is also a 'brotherhood', a 'fraternity'. Something Blofeld openly said in "Thunderball". It's also an organisation that, thanks to fear and scare, it maintains complete loyalty.

    Also, look at "FRWL". I call that S.P.E.C.T.R.E. at his best. But the most thrilling scenes actually were those meetings of Blofeld with Kronsteen and Klebb. The siamese fighting fish-tale (repeated by Silva in "SF") and killing Kronsteen with poisonous shoes gave extra gravita to the eerie, creepy and scary feeling of it. And in "SPECTRE" that was wonderfully re-imagined, with a great gory death sequence (lovely, those iron finger nails dripping with blood)....and Blofeld saying "Cuckoo!!". Lovely!
  • MrcogginsMrcoggins Following in the footsteps of Quentin Quigley.
    Posts: 3,138
    I don't know if S.P.E.C.T.R.E. in "SPECTRE" was modelled by Sam Mendes after the real-life secretive organisation, the so-called 'Bilderberg Group' (founded by the Dutch, British and Polish shortly after WW II). But for me it really looked like the Bond-equivalent of the Bilderberg Group:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants
    bilderberg-7.gif
    bilderberg-partecipanti1.jpg

    Its task are to protect Western prosperity by uniting the USA, Canada, Australia and most of the original founding members of the European Members. Most Royals are members (make no mistake, the Dutch Royals are more powerful than the British Royals. Currently, the abdicated Queen Beatrix is still one of the most influential members). And there are political members. Usually with one conservative and one liberal member from each country. For instance in my country The Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte (conservative) and Alexander Pechtold (chairman largest progressive-liberal party) are member.

    One of the co-founders, Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld was the grandfather of the current Dutch King, King Willem of Orange-Nassau. He actually worked during WW II in London on the Naval Intelligence Department. Ian Fleming, the author of agent 007, got the task to run a thorough background check on the man, who was thought to be an ex-member of the Nazi's by the British government, which eventually could not be proven.

    Later on, Ian Fleming and Bernhard of Lippe had frequent luncheons together. And he actually named a character of the novel "Thunderball" after him: Count Lippe. Who also appears in the film.

    Criticism on the obscure and secretive Bilderberg Group
    Because of its working methods to ensure strict privacy, the Bilderberg Group has been criticised for its lack of transparency and accountability. Due to its privacy, Bilderberg has been accused of several conspiracies. This outlook has been popular on both extremes of the political spectrum, even if they disagree about the exact nature of the group's intentions. Some on the left accuse the Bilderberg group of conspiring to impose capitalist domination, while some on the right have accused the group of conspiring to impose a world government and planned economy.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/is-bilderberg-a-conference-on-world-affairs-or-a-powerful-global-cabal-depends-on-who-you-ask/2012/06/01/gJQA5uqx7U_story.html

    So make no mistake, "SPECTRE" is a way more relevant Bond-film than many of us in here think ;-).

    Personally I found the Quantum opera meeting a lot more like Bilderberg.

    That was one aspect of SP that disappointed. For a film called SPECTRE there wasn't much SPECTREing going on. One good meeting but after that? Where was the grandiose plan? Where were the armies of the guys in jump suits? SPECTRE HQ is practically deserted. Bond shoots about three blokes and he's out of there. The finale consists of Ernst and the pilot. Where are his bodyguards and plan B?

    Well, the grandiose plan was the "Nine Eyes Program" (and applying the CNS-Network on MI-6 via S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-controlled subsidiaries, like Blofeld's lair in Morocco). Sound pretty grandiose to me.

    I think the QUANTUM-set-up looked pretty dumb. Like the new S.P.E.C.T.R.E. also the Bilderberg Group meets in strict secrecy. Meeting in an opera is just nice to look at, but so prone to leaks and loss of secrecy.

    For me the S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-meeting worked way better than the QUANTUM-meeting. Especially since it looked like a re-imagined, more gothic, more sinister and deadly version of the "Thunderball" meeting. And, no cheesy electrocution, but killing someone with metal nails (first the soul), and then snapping his neck (death of the body). Loved it :-).

    Think you are confusing the word grandiose with dull here.

    Then we disagree ;-).

    A grandiose SPECTRE plan involves nuclear missiles, billions of dollars in ransom and sharks with fricking lasers.

    A dull one has some pseudo Assange/Snowden cyber intelligence stuff that no one really cares about.

    Hear hear .
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    I don't know if S.P.E.C.T.R.E. in "SPECTRE" was modelled by Sam Mendes after the real-life secretive organisation, the so-called 'Bilderberg Group' (founded by the Dutch, British and Polish shortly after WW II). But for me it really looked like the Bond-equivalent of the Bilderberg Group:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants
    bilderberg-7.gif
    bilderberg-partecipanti1.jpg

    Its task are to protect Western prosperity by uniting the USA, Canada, Australia and most of the original founding members of the European Members. Most Royals are members (make no mistake, the Dutch Royals are more powerful than the British Royals. Currently, the abdicated Queen Beatrix is still one of the most influential members). And there are political members. Usually with one conservative and one liberal member from each country. For instance in my country The Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte (conservative) and Alexander Pechtold (chairman largest progressive-liberal party) are member.

    One of the co-founders, Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld was the grandfather of the current Dutch King, King Willem of Orange-Nassau. He actually worked during WW II in London on the Naval Intelligence Department. Ian Fleming, the author of agent 007, got the task to run a thorough background check on the man, who was thought to be an ex-member of the Nazi's by the British government, which eventually could not be proven.

    Later on, Ian Fleming and Bernhard of Lippe had frequent luncheons together. And he actually named a character of the novel "Thunderball" after him: Count Lippe. Who also appears in the film.

    Criticism on the obscure and secretive Bilderberg Group
    Because of its working methods to ensure strict privacy, the Bilderberg Group has been criticised for its lack of transparency and accountability. Due to its privacy, Bilderberg has been accused of several conspiracies. This outlook has been popular on both extremes of the political spectrum, even if they disagree about the exact nature of the group's intentions. Some on the left accuse the Bilderberg group of conspiring to impose capitalist domination, while some on the right have accused the group of conspiring to impose a world government and planned economy.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/is-bilderberg-a-conference-on-world-affairs-or-a-powerful-global-cabal-depends-on-who-you-ask/2012/06/01/gJQA5uqx7U_story.html

    So make no mistake, "SPECTRE" is a way more relevant Bond-film than many of us in here think ;-).

    Personally I found the Quantum opera meeting a lot more like Bilderberg.

    That was one aspect of SP that disappointed. For a film called SPECTRE there wasn't much SPECTREing going on. One good meeting but after that? Where was the grandiose plan? Where were the armies of the guys in jump suits? SPECTRE HQ is practically deserted. Bond shoots about three blokes and he's out of there. The finale consists of Ernst and the pilot. Where are his bodyguards and plan B?

    Well, the grandiose plan was the "Nine Eyes Program" (and applying the CNS-Network on MI-6 via S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-controlled subsidiaries, like Blofeld's lair in Morocco). Sound pretty grandiose to me.

    I think the QUANTUM-set-up looked pretty dumb. Like the new S.P.E.C.T.R.E. also the Bilderberg Group meets in strict secrecy. Meeting in an opera is just nice to look at, but so prone to leaks and loss of secrecy.

    For me the S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-meeting worked way better than the QUANTUM-meeting. Especially since it looked like a re-imagined, more gothic, more sinister and deadly version of the "Thunderball" meeting. And, no cheesy electrocution, but killing someone with metal nails (first the soul), and then snapping his neck (death of the body). Loved it :-).

    Think you are confusing the word grandiose with dull here.

    Then we disagree ;-).

    A grandiose SPECTRE plan involves nuclear missiles, billions of dollars in ransom and sharks with fricking lasers.

    A dull one has some pseudo Assange/Snowden cyber intelligence stuff that no one really cares about.

    That's only part of it. S.P.E.C.T.R.E. is also a 'brotherhood', a 'fraternity'. Something Blofeld openly said in "Thunderball". It's also an organisation that, thanks to fear and scare, it maintains complete loyalty.

    Also, look at "FRWL". I call that S.P.E.C.T.R.E. at his best. But the most thrilling scenes actually were those meetings of Blofeld with Kronsteen and Klebb. The siamese fighting fish-tale (repeated by Silva in "SF") and killing Kronsteen with poisonous shoes gave extra gravita to the eerie, creepy and scary feeling of it. And in "SPECTRE" that was wonderfully re-imagined, with a great gory death sequence (lovely, those iron finger nails dripping with blood)....and Blofeld saying "Cuckoo!!". Lovely!

    I agree the SPECTRE meeting was good but then where did all those SPECTRE agents go?

    It was just Ernst and Hinx.

    In FRWL you've got Blofeld, Klebb, Grant, Kronsteen.

    In TB you've got Blofeld, Largo, Fiona, Lippe, Vargas.

    In YOLT you've got Blofeld, Osato, Helga, Hans.

    And in all three there's lots of SPECTRE business going on.

    I can't help feeling the whole Oberhauser thing was utterly superfluous and unnecessary. Drop that and we can concentrate on the threat of SPECTRE more but of course every film has to be personal now and every terrorist group on the planet has to have a reason to want Bond dead.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Robotswana
    Posts: 38,606
    Sorry to go off topic @Gustav_Graves but when I went to see Spectre, that scene made some of the audience squeamish (gasps and such), but I knew what was coming so it wasn't that bad for me. Creepy? Definitely.

    In my cinema a guy actually died.

    After I poked his eyes out for talking out loud during the film.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    I can't help feeling the whole Oberhauser thing was utterly superfluous and unnecessary. Drop that and we can concentrate on the threat of SPECTRE more but of course every film has to be personal now and every terrorist group on the planet has to have a reason to want Bond dead.

    Agreed. It was terribly executed imho.

    They should have just left Blofeld for B25 and concentrated in SP on building the threat up again....which they started with in QoS. Or done that SPECTRE meeting as they did and not done the 'Blofeld/Oberhauser reveal to Bond' until B25 i.e. keep him in the shadows until then.

    There are many possible reasons for this mess, some of which include:
    1. Mendes not committing up front to two ..... so they can't confirm the direction they will take until they get to work on B25
    2. Craig being cagey about returning
    3. studio negotiations

    Anyways, a massive missed opportunity imho, and we end up with an undeveloped and somewhat insipid plot, with too much crammed in.
  • I someone ever reading my previous post? SPECTRE is more than just a big buddy hijacking atomic bombs.

    Look at FRWL!
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 11,119
    bondjames wrote: »
    I can't help feeling the whole Oberhauser thing was utterly superfluous and unnecessary. Drop that and we can concentrate on the threat of SPECTRE more but of course every film has to be personal now and every terrorist group on the planet has to have a reason to want Bond dead.

    Agreed. It was terribly executed imho.

    They should have just left Blofeld for B25 and concentrated in SP on building the threat up again....which they started with in QoS. Or done that SPECTRE meeting as they did and not done the 'Blofeld/Oberhauser reveal to Bond' until B25 i.e. keep him in the shadows until then.

    There are many possible reasons for this mess, some of which include:
    1. Mendes not committing up front to two ..... so they can't confirm the direction they will take until they get to work on B25
    2. Craig being cagey about returning
    3. studio negotiations

    Anyways, a massive missed opportunity imho, and we end up with an undeveloped and somewhat insipid plot, with too much crammed in.

    You're basically....destroying the very essence of the plot...of the very movie here.

    I am sorry but I think you're again exaggerating, using terms like "mess" and "terribly". I stand by my initial opening post, that I loved that entire scene inside that Rome Palace. I think some people need to rewatch FRWL (SPECTRE yaught sequences), TB (very short Paris headquarter sequence) and OHMSS (using Angels of Death for spreading diseases?? :-P).

    Regarding the 'threat' in QOS. Although I love the opera scene, I think it was a weird plan to meet during an opera. Lovely for a film, but completely unrealistic. And by doing so, they made QUANTUM entirely vulnerable. Thus: Goodbye QUANTUM for me.

    You know what I think the problem is with us sometimes? We're spoiled brats. We're comparing too much. We are suffering from "comparing sickness". That's the real reason.

    I personally think everything worked rather well. And I rather liked the personal touch of it. In the early Bond films every element was just "there"....almost in a DUMB kind of way. Bond was just "THERE" in "DN", without knowing how he turned 007. "SPECTRE" was just "THERE". Blofeld's scar was just "THERE" in "YOLT". Moneypenny, Q, they all were just "THERE".
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    I can't help feeling the whole Oberhauser thing was utterly superfluous and unnecessary. Drop that and we can concentrate on the threat of SPECTRE more but of course every film has to be personal now and every terrorist group on the planet has to have a reason to want Bond dead.

    Agreed. It was terribly executed imho.

    They should have just left Blofeld for B25 and concentrated in SP on building the threat up again....which they started with in QoS. Or done that SPECTRE meeting as they did and not done the 'Blofeld/Oberhauser reveal to Bond' until B25 i.e. keep him in the shadows until then.

    There are many possible reasons for this mess, some of which include:
    1. Mendes not committing up front to two ..... so they can't confirm the direction they will take until they get to work on B25
    2. Craig being cagey about returning
    3. studio negotiations

    Anyways, a massive missed opportunity imho, and we end up with an undeveloped and somewhat insipid plot, with too much crammed in.

    You're basically....destroying the very essence of the plot...of the very movie here.

    I am sorry but I think you're again exaggerating, using terms like "mess" and "terribly". I stand by my initial opening post, that I loved that entire scene inside that Rome Palace. I think some people need to rewatch FRWL (SPECTRE yaught sequences), TB (very short Paris headquarter sequence) and OHMSS (using Angels of Death for spreading diseases?? :-P).

    Regarding the 'threat' in QOS. Although I love the opera scene, I think it was a weird plan to meet during an opera. Lovely for a film, but completely unrealistic. And by doing so, they made QUANTUM entirely vulnerable. Thus: Goodbye QUANTUM for me.

    You know what I think the problem is with us sometimes? We're spoiled brats. We're comparing too much. We are suffering from "comparing sickness". That's the real reason.

    I personally think everything worked rather well. And I rather liked the personal touch of it. In the early Bond films every element was just "there"....almost in a DUMB kind of way. Bond was just "THERE" in "DN", without knowing how he turned 007. "SPECTRE" was just "THERE". Blofeld's scar was just "THERE" in "YOLT". Moneypenny, Q, they all were just "THERE".

    I think you're missing my point. I said keep the SPECTRE meeting. My concern is with the 3rd act of the film. I stand by that. I though it was a mess with too many elements thrown in.

    They should have kept this as the originally developed two parter, and let things play out over the two film arc. That way, they could have developed the story more carefully and let things 'reveal' in a more tonally balanced fashion. They just crammed too many subplots and arcs into the 2.5 hrs here, and it didn't work as well (for me) as it would have if if they had either let it play out over two films, or if they'd eliminated some of the elements they included.

    I actually preferred the Quantum meeting. Sure it wasn't the best place to meet (as Bond noted) but it was different, and probably the best scene in that film (including Arnold's score). So good in fact, that it was imitated/homaged (and improved upon imho) in this years MI-RN. That's high praise indeed, when your rival takes a page from your playbook in such a direct way.

    The SP one was ok, but it could have been executed better. I would have preferred Bond find his way there a little more inventively than just walking up to the door and flashing a ring (I preferred the way he improvised in QoS by taking the guy's tux). Just my view.

    Again, my issues with this film don't pertain to that meeting. That's the least of my concerns.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 11,119
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I can't help feeling the whole Oberhauser thing was utterly superfluous and unnecessary. Drop that and we can concentrate on the threat of SPECTRE more but of course every film has to be personal now and every terrorist group on the planet has to have a reason to want Bond dead.

    Agreed. It was terribly executed imho.

    They should have just left Blofeld for B25 and concentrated in SP on building the threat up again....which they started with in QoS. Or done that SPECTRE meeting as they did and not done the 'Blofeld/Oberhauser reveal to Bond' until B25 i.e. keep him in the shadows until then.

    There are many possible reasons for this mess, some of which include:
    1. Mendes not committing up front to two ..... so they can't confirm the direction they will take until they get to work on B25
    2. Craig being cagey about returning
    3. studio negotiations

    Anyways, a massive missed opportunity imho, and we end up with an undeveloped and somewhat insipid plot, with too much crammed in.

    You're basically....destroying the very essence of the plot...of the very movie here.

    I am sorry but I think you're again exaggerating, using terms like "mess" and "terribly". I stand by my initial opening post, that I loved that entire scene inside that Rome Palace. I think some people need to rewatch FRWL (SPECTRE yaught sequences), TB (very short Paris headquarter sequence) and OHMSS (using Angels of Death for spreading diseases?? :-P).

    Regarding the 'threat' in QOS. Although I love the opera scene, I think it was a weird plan to meet during an opera. Lovely for a film, but completely unrealistic. And by doing so, they made QUANTUM entirely vulnerable. Thus: Goodbye QUANTUM for me.

    You know what I think the problem is with us sometimes? We're spoiled brats. We're comparing too much. We are suffering from "comparing sickness". That's the real reason.

    I personally think everything worked rather well. And I rather liked the personal touch of it. In the early Bond films every element was just "there"....almost in a DUMB kind of way. Bond was just "THERE" in "DN", without knowing how he turned 007. "SPECTRE" was just "THERE". Blofeld's scar was just "THERE" in "YOLT". Moneypenny, Q, they all were just "THERE".

    I think you're missing my point. I said keep the SPECTRE meeting. My concern is with the 3rd act of the film. I stand by that. I though it was a mess with too many elements thrown in.

    They should have kept this as the originally developed two parter, and let things play out over the two film arc. That way, they could have developed the story more carefully and let things 'reveal' in a more tonally balanced fashion. They just crammed too many subplots and arcs into the 2.5 hrs here, and it didn't work as well (for me) as it would have if if they had either let it play out over two films, or if they'd eliminated some of the elements they included.

    I actually preferred the Quantum meeting. Sure it wasn't the best place to meet (as Bond noted) but it was different, and probably the best scene in that film (including Arnold's score). So good in fact, that it was imitated/homaged (and improved upon imho) in this years MI-RN. That's high praise indeed, when your rival takes a page from your playbook in such a direct way.

    The SP one was ok, but it could have been executed better. I would have preferred Bond find his way there a little more inventively than just walking up to the door and flashing a ring (I preferred the way he improvised in QoS by taking the guy's tux). Just my view.

    Again, my issues with this film don't pertain to that meeting. That's the least of my concerns.

    No, I don't miss your point. I do think however that you concern too much. It's a film for goodness sake. Try to enjoy it a bit first. In another topic I actually just posted something about the fact that I ACTUALLY LIKED the 2nd half. So, it all makes me rather depressed @BondJames to read all this.

    Actually, if you read carefully my topic "So who's going to play Ernst", then you know I actually agreed with you about that part. BUT, I changed my mind. I think it all worked perfectly in this way as well.

    So you have lots of issues with "SPECTRE". Well, I feel sorry for you then. One last thing: I think S.P.E.C.T.R.E. as a syndicate worked miles better than The Syndicate in "Rogue Nation". The Syndicate was just a lame name given to all these masked henchman from Soloman Lane. Well, then we can name Silva's gang "T" (of "Terrorism" in "S.P.E.C.T.R.E."). At least with S.P.E.C.T.R.E. you saw an extensive group of members behind one hell of a big table, a massive parking lot full of expensive cars. The Syndicate didn't have that.

    Also, let's get back on topic a bit. I didn't create this topic predominantly to lust all the flaws of 'our' S.P.E.C.T.R.E. and to start another tiresome comparison about flaws of the syndicate. I created this topic to compare it with the Bilderberg Group. And I actually wanted to focus on some of the elements that did work...and that are realistic enough in today's geopolitical environment.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Robotswana
    Posts: 38,606
    The joke is that MI6 is much closer to SPECTRE in real life.
  • The joke is that MI6 is much closer to SPECTRE in real life.

    That's not a joke. That's a very valid and good observation. Ian Fleming did create S.P.E.C.T.R.E. as some kind of anti-MI6.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    So you have lots of issues with "SPECTRE".

    Yes, indeed I do, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy it, for being a Bond film. It's all relative. I rank it 10 out of 24, which means it can't be all bad to me.

    Of course, I wish they'd come up with a better, more taut plot after 3 years and all that money.

    It is what it is, and make no mistake, I'll enjoy it, like I enjoy all the Bond films (apart from TWINE). It is not above reproach or criticism however. Nothing is, as far as I'm concerned. So I won't be singing its praises unanimously......it doesn't mean I don't like it or wish it could be better....

    As a whole though, I preferred the tight plotting/action and shorter, more crisp flow to MI-RN, even if the Syndicate was indeed 'lame'.....or is that 'Laine'..

    So my concerns are script and directorial, not with anything else.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    So you have lots of issues with "SPECTRE".

    Yes, indeed I do, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy it, for being a Bond film. It's all relative. I rank it 10 out of 24, which means it can't be all bad to me.

    Of course, I wish they'd come up with a better, more taut plot after 3 years and all that money.

    It is what it is, and make no mistake, I'll enjoy it, like I enjoy all the Bond films (apart from TWINE). It is not above reproach or criticism however. Nothing is, as far as I'm concerned. So I won't be singing its praises unanimously......it doesn't mean I don't like it or wish it could be better....

    As a whole though, I preferred the tight plotting/action and shorter, more crisp flow to MI-RN, even if the Syndicate was indeed 'lame'.....or is that 'Laine'..

    So my concerns are script and directorial, not with anything else.

    Opinions. I am happy for you.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    So you have lots of issues with "SPECTRE".

    Yes, indeed I do, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy it, for being a Bond film. It's all relative. I rank it 10 out of 24, which means it can't be all bad to me.

    Of course, I wish they'd come up with a better, more taut plot after 3 years and all that money.

    It is what it is, and make no mistake, I'll enjoy it, like I enjoy all the Bond films (apart from TWINE). It is not above reproach or criticism however. Nothing is, as far as I'm concerned. So I won't be singing its praises unanimously......it doesn't mean I don't like it or wish it could be better....

    As a whole though, I preferred the tight plotting/action and shorter, more crisp flow to MI-RN, even if the Syndicate was indeed 'lame'.....or is that 'Laine'..

    So my concerns are script and directorial, not with anything else.

    Opinions. I am happy for you.
    Isn't everything mate?

    Regarding comparisons to the Bilderberg Group, I thought QoS was far more relevant (in terms of the key players who were introduced during Tosca). There was an air of menace when Tanner picks up all the connections on his computer as Bond sends the photos in. It felt more 'real' and more like what we know is going on behind the scenes today (folks with "fingers in many pies").

    Also, it showcased Government realpolitik (as noted by the Foreign Secretary who says as much in a face to face meeting with M, by the CIA chief Gregg Beam who tells Felix to toe the line: "yeah we should only deal with nice people", and finally by Medrano who caves in to Greene./Quantum at the end in order to get what he wants).

    It was very deftly handled in QoS and it did reflect Bilderberg.

    Best lines:
    "But you should know something about me and the people I work with. We deal with the left or the right, with dictators or liberators. If the current president had been more agreeable. I wouldn't be talking to you. So, if you decide not to sign, you will wake up with your balls in your mouth and your willing replacement standing over you. If you doubt that, then shoot me, take that money and have a good night's sleep."

    "Say you're right. Say Greene is a villain. If we refused to do business with villains,we'd have almost no one to trade with. The world's running out of oil, M. The Russians aren't playing ball. The Americans and Chinese are dividing up what's left. Right or wrong doesn't come into it. We're acting out of necessity."


    "You know who Greene is...and you wanna put us in bed with him. You are kidding, right?" - "Yeah. You're right. We should just deal with nice people."

    "You are getting this for free. Venezuela, Brazil, now Bolivia. With you tied up in the Middle East. South America is falling like dominoes. You don't need another Marxist giving... national resources to the people, do you?" - "Well, we can hardly be expected... to do something about a coup... we know nothing about."


    "We do nothing to stop a coup in Bolivia, and in exchange, the new government gives America... the lease to any oil found." - "If it's oil you want." - "Well, you didn't find diamonds, did you?"

    "You know, I was just wondering what South America would look like if nobody gave a damn about coke or communism". - "It's always impressed me the way you boys have carved this place up." - "I'll take that as a compliment coming from a Brit."


    Brilliant.
  • Posts: 7,945
    what annoys me is Quantum and the new spectre are the same organization doing the same things yet there are those who think spectre is cooler then Quantum simply because of the name...
  • DannyBoy1994DannyBoy1994 Wales
    Posts: 21
    Risico007 wrote: »
    what annoys me is Quantum and the new spectre are the same organization doing the same things yet there are those who think spectre is cooler then Quantum simply because of the name...
    No, Risico, the reason some of us prefer SPECTRE more than Quantum is because Fleming invented them. They are the arch-nemesis of Bond, just like Hydra in the marvel universe, Scorpio in the Alex Rider books, and Moriarty in the Sherlock universe. Quantum were a mistake. They should never have been invented. The only reason it exists is because the Bond producers did not have the rights to SPECTRE, so they came up with Quantum. The only relation it has to the Bond universe in the short story, 'Quantum of Solace'. It is basically a hangover of the years Bond has been without SPECTRE. You only need to look at the SP reviews to see the amount of arguments about 'why weren't Quantum mentioned more?' Why? Because they were pointless!
    They should have kept the organisation anonymous as they were forced to in CR until they got the rights to SPECTRE back.

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Robotswana
    Posts: 38,606
    I think SMERSH were the arch nemesis of Bond more than SPECTRE which only featured towards the end, and they even had some previous SMERSH members in their ranks.
  • DragonpolDragonpol The Crazy World of David Dragonpol
    Posts: 13,422
    I think SMERSH were the arch nemesis of Bond more than SPECTRE which only featured towards the end, and they even had some previous SMERSH members in their ranks.

    True.
Sign In or Register to comment.