Are we all happy now that dust has settled? -Spectre Spoilers

in SPECTRE Posts: 1,296
I have been a member for a long time now, and I read the posts here from time to time. Well, this is a curious subject and a little touchy if I am to dig up evidence and catch my fellow friends in lies and backtracks and confusion , but none of that will be happenign because I want this to be postivive and constructive as a discussion. Take a deep breathe

Ok

I noticed a lot of members used to talk about how tired they were of hearing about Blofeld and spectre as possible come backs for the next film, some speaking of it as an impossibility, and thought it was a useless develpment for Bond of the 21st century. Now my question is, do you still feel that way ? Or did the new film convicne you that there was something to be had to Blofeld and the spectre thatt we see? My question is how do you feel about it now as compmared to before when it was nothing but fan rumour and wishful thinking, before the friends of Bond got their hand back on the rights to Blofeld.

How do I center posts this is a nightmare
«13456715

Comments

  • Posts: 582
    I feel the same before and after - great to have Blofeld and Spectre back.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    Posts: 7,338
    SPECTRE is my favorite Craig film.
  • Posts: 1,296
    Me too. This is the posts that inspired me :

    http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/8029/the-worst-thread-of-all-time-on-mi6/p3

    Here you see at least 6 credit posters posting about how they dont like the idea of Blofeld and feel he and Spectre would be useless in modern Bond film. So now I wonder about it.
  • Aziz_FekkeshAziz_Fekkesh Royale-les-Eaux
    Posts: 403
    I wasn't sold on the idea, but SP handled it satisfactorily.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    Quite happy. The only thing that disappoints me is that we don't know if Craig will return or not.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,580
    Couldn't be happier.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,281
    SPECTRE is my favorite Craig film.
    Yes, me too. All in all, an amazing effort.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,580
    Casino Royale, Skyfall, and Spectre are all tied for me.
  • Posts: 1,092
    I love how they tied it all together for his four films. Using Spectre the organization this way was brilliant.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 37,091
    I was initially disappointed in the idea since we had a perfect group set up with QUANTUM, but after the casting and plot were announced, I was a bit more excited about the idea. After seeing the film, I'm happy to see its return; Mendes handled it all wonderfully and gave a proper wrap-up to QUANTUM.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I don't mind them tying all the films together in fact I think it was a great idea and also bringing ESB and SPECTRE back but if they could have stopped themselves with tying it into Bond's childhood and making it about them having a past before it would have been much better.

    I really enjoyed SP but that element among others has me placing it no. 3 in my DC rankings behind SF & CR.

    I hope they can pick up with this for a possible 5th DC film but tone down the connection of the past and just make ESB a force to be reckoned with rather than a damaged case with childhood issues.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,281
    Shardlake wrote: »
    I really enjoyed SP but that element among others has me placing it no. 3 in my DC rankings behind SF & CR.
    SP is the one ring to rule them all!
    :)>-
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,281
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Great to see Blofeld and SPECTRE back, I just wish that I had found more enjoyment in watching the actual film.
    Did you need darkness and tragedy and angst to enjoy it? That's what Skyfall was. Not every Bond movie will be a post-9-11 downer filled with tears, but just wait. If they continue this arc in the next film, Lea will be killed & Dan will do a Dalton hunt & destroy.
    Then will you be happy?
  • Posts: 1,310
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Great to see Blofeld and SPECTRE back, I just wish that I had found more enjoyment in watching the actual film.
    Did you need darkness and tragedy and angst to enjoy it? That's what Skyfall was. Not every Bond movie will be a post-9-11 downer filled with tears, but just wait. If they continue this arc in the next film, Lea will be killed & Dan will do a Dalton hunt & destroy.
    Then will you be happy?
    I won't speak for @Birdleson, but all I would have wanted was a third act that didn't drag across the theater floor and an excellent, memorable score.

    I would have been at least satisfied then, even if not overly so.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 4,917
    I think they squandered the promise of CR. Hopefully Bond 25 will be better.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    I would have preferred if they had taken it forward from CR & Quantum personally, particularly the latter. They really were onto something with the Tosca meet, Tiarra Project, and some of the characters Mi6 discovered during Bond's interruption of said meet.

    I would have left Silva out of the retcon (despite the issues about his helpers and clairvoyance in SF) and focused on who killed Greene and why (it would have been nice if it was Hinx). Also, perhaps keep White involved in Quantum and have Bond more on his trail....a sort of chase between him and SPECTRE to find White first....make White's betrayal more meaningful.

    Not building on the Quantum thing was a mistake in my view.

    I'm with you @Birdleson. It's not about wanting darkness and tragedy for me either. It's about the way they executed the SPECTRE thing. They should have built from Quantum up rather than trying to reimagine SPECTRE TB meets and the like.....imho.
  • It's a disappointment for me. I was excited about the idea of Spectre and Blofeld, but the execution of it compared to the earlier films just fell flat. Minimal mystery, minimal build up, and a lackluster reveal. The name Ernst Stavro Blofeld means nothing to casual fans. The film fails to stand alone due to that one point.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,281
    Birdleson wrote: »
    And @chrisisall , I figured you'd be glad that, after seeing SP, I have found a new and fresh joy in and appreciation for some of the one that used to really get me down (i.e., TND, OP, MR and DAD).
    Sorry, MR is my least favourite Bond movie of all time (and so it will stay), and I don't need any new releases to help me appreciate older films... excepting that SP makes SF a lot more palatable for me explaining the goon force Silva has working for him.
    Relax my friend, these are our pastimes, not our reason for being. :-c
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,281
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Speak for yourself.
    I live for Bond.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,281
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Then we're in sync.
    I am frequently depressed, and Bond movies (among others) can lift me up from that. Seeing SF made me sink deep; SP lifted me up so high it's hard to describe.
    I guess it's all about where you're coming from in life....
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    edited October 2019 Posts: 3,157
    I know it wouldn't be a good idea, and they proved me right.
    Blofeld being Bond's stepbrother... c'mon... How many odds are there?
  • Posts: 11,425
    echo wrote: »
    I think they squandered the promise of CR. Hopefully Bond 25 will be better.

    Although I enjoyed SP, I agree with you. For this you can only really blame Mendes. CR wiped the slate clean and there was a sense they could re establish the series with interesting new twists and dimensions. Since Mendes has come on board all that is happened is that they've put much returned everything to how it was before.

    I suppose one view is that this was the whole point of the Craig era - that it was showing how Bond got to be the guy we knew from the previous films.

    The end result with SP was a sort of enjoyable Roger Moore-esquire romp. But that does seem a bit of a wasted opportunity.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Getafix wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    I think they squandered the promise of CR. Hopefully Bond 25 will be better.

    Although I enjoyed SP, I agree with you. For this you can only really blame Mendes. CR wiped the slate clean and there was a sense they could re establish the series with interesting new twists and dimensions. Since Mendes has come on board all that is happened is that they've put much returned everything to how it was before.

    I suppose one view is that this was the whole point of the Craig era - that it was showing how Bond got to be the guy we knew from the previous films.

    The end result with SP was a sort of enjoyable Roger Moore-esque romp. But that does seem a bit of a wasted opportunity.

  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,284
    I did enjoy the film, especially the second and third viewing. The first I didn't so much, but I blame that on personal setbacks, the fourth brought foreward the one thing that has been itching in the back of my mind and up till then couldn't really understand. There was something wrong not only with SPECTRE, but with SKYFALL as well. And to be honest, I think it's the writers. Yes, the dialogue has improved since Purvis and Wade got assistance, but the films lack originality. And it shows so much more in SPECTRE as the situations Bond find himself in are recycled even more so in SP. Take the ending: Blofeld is captured, but not killed. This means he has to escape at the biginning of the next film. Like Silva did half way through SF. Bond is going rogue.... again. It would've been far better if he'd been on a mission in Mexico as he should've trusted the new M after SF. M trusted him as head of the security committee and he took M (Old M) up to Scotland didn't he? The film wouldn't have to be that different but at least we'd have had Bond on a regular mission which perhaps got too much attention, forcing M to protect Bond and making it a race against the clock. We'd still have the headlines nod towards CR. But the writers are, imo, too hung up on themselves and former 'good ideas'. There's nothing new and fresh any more, and though I think Daniel played Bond exactly as he should, the film became, I don't want to say boring, but at least less entertaining becouse it was too predictable.

    It's now really time for Purvis and Wade to step back. They've done enough, had their successes, but they're now rehearsing. and that's not good.
  • zebrafishzebrafish <°)))< in Octopussy's garden in the shade
    edited November 2015 Posts: 3,516
    I did enjoy the film, especially the second and third viewing. The first I didn't so much, but I blame that on personal setbacks, the fourth brought foreward the one thing that has been itching in the back of my mind and up till then couldn't really understand. There was something wrong not only with SPECTRE, but with SKYFALL as well. And to be honest, I think it's the writers. Yes, the dialogue has improved since Purvis and Wade got assistance, but the films lack originality. And it shows so much more in SPECTRE as the situations Bond find himself in are recycled even more so in SP. Take the ending: Blofeld is captured, but not killed. This means he has to escape at the biginning of the next film. Like Silva did half way through SF. Bond is going rogue.... again. It would've been far better if he'd been on a mission in Mexico as he should've trusted the new M after SF. M trusted him as head of the security committee and he took M (Old M) up to Scotland didn't he? The film wouldn't have to be that different but at least we'd have had Bond on a regular mission which perhaps got too much attention, forcing M to protect Bond and making it a race against the clock. We'd still have the headlines nod towards CR. But the writers are, imo, too hung up on themselves and former 'good ideas'. There's nothing new and fresh any more, and though I think Daniel played Bond exactly as he should, the film became, I don't want to say boring, but at least less entertaining becouse it was too predictable.

    It's now really time for Purvis and Wade to step back. They've done enough, had their successes, but they're now rehearsing. and that's not good.

    I also think that one of the problems with SP (which I enjoyed a lot, nevertheless) is that it cites film-Bond history too often. The old clichés reappear, going rogue, bringing back the DB5 (I was relieved when it was destroyed in SF, thinking that now we can finally put that retro-clichee to rest), the over-confident villain who is too full of himself to even consider the prospect of failure (even though several previous attempts at Bond's life and brain remained unsuccessful).

    Also the ease with which Bond sailed through all of this is almost comedic, firmly rooted in Moore and DAF/Connery territory: Impeccably he steps out of the parachute, he conveniently lands on a sofa to soften a fall that would have killed him, and his brain seems to be rearranged as well, how else would he have escaped the debilitating effects of the second brain invasion? It was all a bit too easy, almost DAD-ish, if I dare say this.

    The question is: Can we really blame P&W for that? Nobody here knows which parts of the story were developed by them.
  • I liked the film, but I won't truly know how I feel about it until I see the followup. If Craig and Waltz (and even Seydoux, for that matter) don't return, I think I'll probably consider this a wasted opportunity and, ultimately, a failure. If they do return, then I might think Spectre is great. It's a very strange position to be in, one that I've never experienced at the end of a Bond movie before, but it's this weird feeling of tying up Craig's run but also setting up another sequel. An odd balance, to say the least.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    For me too much credibility and good work from Dan's prior films were sacrificed to accommodate Spectre's return and story. I think I would have accepted it more if they had not tried to link in every prior film. If they had left out the whole Silva as a Spectre agent sent by Blofeld had been left out, it really detracted from the Skyfall storyline where his purposes is about getting Dame Judi for in his eyes revenge, nothing more.

    There is major story hole, Blofeld takes credit for killing all his loved ones including Vesper, however if Blofeld is the driving force between the whole CR plot. You are meant to believe Blofeld was relying on
    1. Bond being made a "00".
    2. Bond being given the Mission to Madagascar.
    3. Bond falling for Vesper, after all it is Bond who pursues Vesper more than she pursues him. All so that Blofeld could hurt the man who in his eyes stole his fathers affection. Made him fall in love, then made her drown herself?

    It's an insult to anyone with intelligence. Nothing anyone can say can change my mind, this was a well acted, well executed disaster of a story line. The Cast carry the film. I think it what over adventurous from Mendes, I think he got carried away with scale and sacrificed on story. In time it won't be a good stand alone film because it relies on the 4 before it to make any sense.

    I would rather if they were bringing back Spectre that they left out the personal vendetta aspect. Spectre should have been unmasked as the overall organisation and Quantum were those funding it's birth.
  • Posts: 11,425
    I did enjoy the film, especially the second and third viewing. The first I didn't so much, but I blame that on personal setbacks, the fourth brought foreward the one thing that has been itching in the back of my mind and up till then couldn't really understand. There was something wrong not only with SPECTRE, but with SKYFALL as well. And to be honest, I think it's the writers. Yes, the dialogue has improved since Purvis and Wade got assistance, but the films lack originality. And it shows so much more in SPECTRE as the situations Bond find himself in are recycled even more so in SP. Take the ending: Blofeld is captured, but not killed. This means he has to escape at the biginning of the next film. Like Silva did half way through SF. Bond is going rogue.... again. It would've been far better if he'd been on a mission in Mexico as he should've trusted the new M after SF. M trusted him as head of the security committee and he took M (Old M) up to Scotland didn't he? The film wouldn't have to be that different but at least we'd have had Bond on a regular mission which perhaps got too much attention, forcing M to protect Bond and making it a race against the clock. We'd still have the headlines nod towards CR. But the writers are, imo, too hung up on themselves and former 'good ideas'. There's nothing new and fresh any more, and though I think Daniel played Bond exactly as he should, the film became, I don't want to say boring, but at least less entertaining becouse it was too predictable.

    It's now really time for Purvis and Wade to step back. They've done enough, had their successes, but they're now rehearsing. and that's not good.

    Totally agree.

    Poor writing has been the Achilles heal of the series for decades now.


  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    But the writers are, imo, too hung up on themselves and former 'good ideas'. There's nothing new and fresh any more, and though I think Daniel played Bond exactly as he should, the film became, I don't want to say boring, but at least less entertaining becouse it was too predictable.
    Not just the writers imho, but even the director and the producers. The history almost appears to have become a burden for some of these people. They don't know how to transcend it without appearing to regurgitate it.

    They should credit the audience with more intelligence firstly, like they did in CR/QoS. That is the direction they must continue with imho.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    edited November 2015 Posts: 2,138
    bondjames wrote: »
    But the writers are, imo, too hung up on themselves and former 'good ideas'. There's nothing new and fresh any more, and though I think Daniel played Bond exactly as he should, the film became, I don't want to say boring, but at least less entertaining becouse it was too predictable.
    Not just the writers imho, but even the director and the producers. The history almost appears to have become a burden for some of these people. They don't know how to transcend it without appearing to regurgitate it.

    They should credit the audience with more intelligence firstly, like they did in CR/QoS. That is the direction they must continue with imho.

    EON I have a new rule for you to follow now that the old rule of " When in doubt always go back to Fleming" can not be followed as there are no novels left to go back to.

    The new rule is "Bond should never parody itself, or repeat elements of a scene for the purposes of nostalgia".
Sign In or Register to comment.