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

1246715

Comments

  • BirdlesonBirdleson San Jose, CAModerator
    Posts: 26,070
    I thought SKYFALL was pretty decent when I first saw it, a mid-level Bond film, with some great moments. I definitely couldn't understand the hype. Since then it's become a Top Ten (barely) for me. I still dislike most of the third act, but the rest is strong enough I to compensate. And I love the epilogue.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 15,933
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I thought SKYFALL was pretty decent when I first saw it

    I thought it a mess. But SP has made me totally rethink this.
  • Seven_Point_Six_FiveSeven_Point_Six_Five Southern California
    Posts: 1,193
    I was initially opposed to the idea of Blofeld making a comeback, at least for the remainder of the Craig era. He just didn't seem like a proper fit for Craig's films. However, after seeing the first teaser, I had to eat my words because it really looked like they were going to pull it off.

    Now after seeing the final product, I can honestly say I have slightly warmed to the idea of Blofeld's return. Though in the end, it would have been better if they would had just pocketed the whole Blofeld storyline and went down a different route.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    edited November 2015 Posts: 2,138
    I was initially opposed to the idea of Blofeld making a comeback, at least for the remainder of the Craig era. He just didn't seem like a proper fit for Craig's films. However, after seeing the first teaser, I had to eat my words because it really looked like they were going to pull it off.

    Now after seeing the final product, I can honestly say I have slightly warmed to the idea of Blofeld's return. Though in the end, it would have been better if they would had just pocketed the whole Blofeld storyline and went down a different route.

    I think they gave too much away in the trailers. There was no need to show the scene with Oberhauser saying "author of all your pain". Seydoux was allowed to tell jounos prior to release her character was White's daughter. They could have even kept Jesper Christensen return quiet, so that there was some element of surprise in the movie. Imagine we did not know and we only learn with Bond that the Pale King is Mr White?.

    I think that is what I am most disappointed with, that there was nothing left to surprise you with. And I did not read any of the leaks, only mainstream media coverage on the build up. But it felt like I had already seen the film on first viewing.

    With Skyfall I did not know before viewing that Dame Judi would die at the end, it was a good element of surprise. The finale was pretty well guarded. The trailers were short and did not give much away.


  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 9,794
    I was initially opposed to the idea of Blofeld making a comeback, at least for the remainder of the Craig era. He just didn't seem like a proper fit for Craig's films. However, after seeing the first teaser, I had to eat my words because it really looked like they were going to pull it off.

    Now after seeing the final product, I can honestly say I have slightly warmed to the idea of Blofeld's return. Though in the end, it would have been better if they would had just pocketed the whole Blofeld storyline and went down a different route.

    I think they gave too much away in the trailers. There was no need to show the scene with Oberhauser saying "author of all your pain". Seydoux was allowed to tell jounos prior to release her character was White's daughter. They could have even kept Jesper Christensen return quiet, so that there was some element of surprise in the movie. Imagine we did not know and we only learn with Bond that the Pale King is Mr White?.

    I think that is what I am most disappointed with, that there was nothing left to surprise you with. And I did not read any of the leaks, only mainstream media coverage on the build up. But it felt like I had already seen the film on first viewing.

    With Skyfall I did not know before viewing that Dame Judi would die at the end, it was a good element of surprise. The finale was pretty well guarded. The trailers were short and did not give much away.

    M's death was all over the mainstream media. Incidentally, if I recall correctly you were adamant that Waltz was not Blofeld, so that must surely have come as a surprise to you? You were convinced that Scott had the gig.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    edited November 2015 Posts: 2,138
    RC7 wrote: »
    I was initially opposed to the idea of Blofeld making a comeback, at least for the remainder of the Craig era. He just didn't seem like a proper fit for Craig's films. However, after seeing the first teaser, I had to eat my words because it really looked like they were going to pull it off.

    Now after seeing the final product, I can honestly say I have slightly warmed to the idea of Blofeld's return. Though in the end, it would have been better if they would had just pocketed the whole Blofeld storyline and went down a different route.

    I think they gave too much away in the trailers. There was no need to show the scene with Oberhauser saying "author of all your pain". Seydoux was allowed to tell jounos prior to release her character was White's daughter. They could have even kept Jesper Christensen return quiet, so that there was some element of surprise in the movie. Imagine we did not know and we only learn with Bond that the Pale King is Mr White?.

    I think that is what I am most disappointed with, that there was nothing left to surprise you with. And I did not read any of the leaks, only mainstream media coverage on the build up. But it felt like I had already seen the film on first viewing.

    With Skyfall I did not know before viewing that Dame Judi would die at the end, it was a good element of surprise. The finale was pretty well guarded. The trailers were short and did not give much away.

    M's death was all over the mainstream media. Incidentally, if I recall correctly you were adamant that Waltz was not Blofeld, so that must surely have come as a surprise to you? You were convinced that Scott had the gig.

    God you are going to defend this to the bitter end, dredging the sea bed now are you not? No to be honest it lacked any imagination . I was expecting a twist that never came. Why not just have Waltz and cast him as Blofeld, it was rather embarrassing as it was fooling really nobody in the end. Skyfall did not suffer from the leaks to which Spectre did. Again your defending something which is blatantly obvious, there was far too much information given away between video blogs, trailers and interview.

    We knew what the PTS would be
    The order of the locations
    What Scott's role was
    That Waltz's character would be someone from Bonds past. But we knew who cause they showed the photograph.
    We knew Oberhauser was already, and that Waltz was Oberhauser.
    We knew there would be an explosion in Morocco.
    We knew Swann was Whites Daughter.
    We knew what everyone was wearing.
    We knew all about the car, the high point of the car chase was in the trailer.
    We knew Dame Judi M would appear in a video.
    We knew MI6 was still a ruin.
    We Knew White was returning


    I don't remember such level of detail being given away in the franchise before a film before. It was almost like EON concede many would have seen the leak script and decided that rather than fight it, the best way to sell the film was to sell how well executed the scenes were and gave away more than they normally would. I bet in future script drafts are done by secure post in future and no digital copies will be allowed.

    I remember nothing which gave away the M death story in Skyfall, I read mainstream media every day as part of my job, maybe I was lucky enough to have avoided that and got to enjoy that surprise. it changes nothing, it is the worst formed Bond script in since DAD.
  • RC7RC7
    edited November 2015 Posts: 9,794
    RC7 wrote: »
    I was initially opposed to the idea of Blofeld making a comeback, at least for the remainder of the Craig era. He just didn't seem like a proper fit for Craig's films. However, after seeing the first teaser, I had to eat my words because it really looked like they were going to pull it off.

    Now after seeing the final product, I can honestly say I have slightly warmed to the idea of Blofeld's return. Though in the end, it would have been better if they would had just pocketed the whole Blofeld storyline and went down a different route.

    I think they gave too much away in the trailers. There was no need to show the scene with Oberhauser saying "author of all your pain". Seydoux was allowed to tell jounos prior to release her character was White's daughter. They could have even kept Jesper Christensen return quiet, so that there was some element of surprise in the movie. Imagine we did not know and we only learn with Bond that the Pale King is Mr White?.

    I think that is what I am most disappointed with, that there was nothing left to surprise you with. And I did not read any of the leaks, only mainstream media coverage on the build up. But it felt like I had already seen the film on first viewing.

    With Skyfall I did not know before viewing that Dame Judi would die at the end, it was a good element of surprise. The finale was pretty well guarded. The trailers were short and did not give much away.

    M's death was all over the mainstream media. Incidentally, if I recall correctly you were adamant that Waltz was not Blofeld, so that must surely have come as a surprise to you? You were convinced that Scott had the gig.

    God you are going to defend this to the bitter end, dredging the sea bed now are you not? No to be honest it lacked any imagination . I was expecting a twist that never came. Why not just have Waltz and cast him as Blofeld, it was rather embarrassing as it was fooling really nobody in the end. Skyfall did not suffer from the leaks to which Spectre did. Again your defending something which is blatantly obvious, there was far too much information given away between video blogs, trailers and interview.

    I'm not defending anything, I'm offering an alternative to the hysteria that seems to be enveloping the naysayers. I get that we all have differing opinions on what is good and what is not, but some of the negativity seems skewed. You're angry about not being surprised. That's fair enough. But once the dust settles we re watch the films (and that is what we do and why we're here) for the value of the performances, the visuals, the direction etc. All these elements seem fairly top notch to me. The Blofeld reveal to me is not appealing for it being a surprise, it is appealing because it's brilliantly written and performed and infinitely watchable. For the record, the idea of Scott being the big bad, in the context of the film, is a terrible idea.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    RC7 wrote: »
    I was initially opposed to the idea of Blofeld making a comeback, at least for the remainder of the Craig era. He just didn't seem like a proper fit for Craig's films. However, after seeing the first teaser, I had to eat my words because it really looked like they were going to pull it off.

    Now after seeing the final product, I can honestly say I have slightly warmed to the idea of Blofeld's return. Though in the end, it would have been better if they would had just pocketed the whole Blofeld storyline and went down a different route.

    I think they gave too much away in the trailers. There was no need to show the scene with Oberhauser saying "author of all your pain". Seydoux was allowed to tell jounos prior to release her character was White's daughter. They could have even kept Jesper Christensen return quiet, so that there was some element of surprise in the movie. Imagine we did not know and we only learn with Bond that the Pale King is Mr White?.

    I think that is what I am most disappointed with, that there was nothing left to surprise you with. And I did not read any of the leaks, only mainstream media coverage on the build up. But it felt like I had already seen the film on first viewing.

    With Skyfall I did not know before viewing that Dame Judi would die at the end, it was a good element of surprise. The finale was pretty well guarded. The trailers were short and did not give much away.

    M's death was all over the mainstream media. Incidentally, if I recall correctly you were adamant that Waltz was not Blofeld, so that must surely have come as a surprise to you? You were convinced that Scott had the gig.

    God you are going to defend this to the bitter end, dredging the sea bed now are you not? No to be honest it lacked any imagination . I was expecting a twist that never came. Why not just have Waltz and cast him as Blofeld, it was rather embarrassing as it was fooling really nobody in the end. Skyfall did not suffer from the leaks to which Spectre did. Again your defending something which is blatantly obvious, there was far too much information given away between video blogs, trailers and interview.

    We knew what the PTS would be
    The order of the locations
    What Scott's role was
    That Waltz's character would be someone from Bonds past. But we knew who cause they showed the photograph.
    We knew Oberhauser was already, and that Waltz was Oberhauser.
    We knew there would be an explosion in Morocco.
    We knew Swann was Whites Daughter.
    We knew what everyone was wearing.
    We knew all about the car, the high point of the car chase was in the trailer.
    We knew Dame Judi M would appear in a video.
    We knew MI6 was still a ruin.
    We Knew White was returning


    I don't remember such level of detail being given away in the franchise before a film before. It was almost like EON concede many would have seen the leak script and decided that rather than fight it, the best way to sell the film was to sell how well executed the scenes were and gave away more than they normally would. I bet in future script drafts are done by secure post in future and no digital copies will be allowed.

    I remember nothing which gave away the M death story in Skyfall, I read mainstream media every day as part of my job, maybe I was lucky enough to have avoided that and got to enjoy that surprise. it changes nothing, it is the worst formed Bond script in since DAD.

    You forgot to mention that the trailer showed us 97.3% of both the car chase and plane crash so that when they finally arrived in the film your reaction was 'meh. I've already seen that. Show me something new.'

    Also good point earlier about all this bullshit secrecy about who is playing Blofeld. The film's called SPECTRE FFS and you've cast Christoph Waltz so I think we can all do the math. For Blofeld to played by anyone other than Waltz would be short changing the audience.

    So just scrap the Oberhauser thing altogether and be bold enough to just slap your cock on the table and state 'yeah we've got Christoph Waltz and he's playing f**king Blofeld. Your move MI, UNCLE and Kingsman!'

    Instead of this pathetic, whiny crap 'no no he's playing Franz Oberhauser' that fooled nobody.

    The only way you could have pulled this off is if Waltz actually was playing Oberhauser and then in the final scene on the bridge as M does his little 'Her Majesty's lily livered government is going to place you in an easily escapable cell' speech a red dot appears on Oberhauser's forehead and he is taken out by a sniper.

    Cut to the sniper, a flame haired woman, packing up her kit and having it away on a high speed bike. She calls to report that 'it is done'.

    Cut to Daniel Day Lewis stroking the cat 'Sorry Franz. But this organisation does not tolerate failure.'
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 9,794
    Cut to Daniel Day Lewis stroking the cat 'Sorry Franz. But this organisation does not tolerate failure.'

    This would've made me shit my knickers. He was always my first choice ESB. I hope they use him in the future, with a new Bond and as a back to basics Blofeld.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    RC7 wrote: »
    Cut to Daniel Day Lewis stroking the cat 'Sorry Franz. But this organisation does not tolerate failure.'

    This would've made me shit my knickers. He was always my first choice ESB. I hope they use him in the future, with a new Bond and as a back to basics Blofeld.

    Can just picture him with the long white hair as per OHMSS novel. Would even have probably chopped off his ear lobes and cut half his nostril away as he's such a perfectionist!
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 9,794
    RC7 wrote: »
    Cut to Daniel Day Lewis stroking the cat 'Sorry Franz. But this organisation does not tolerate failure.'

    This would've made me shit my knickers. He was always my first choice ESB. I hope they use him in the future, with a new Bond and as a back to basics Blofeld.

    Can just picture him with the long white hair as per OHMSS novel. Would even have probably chopped off his ear lobes and cut half his nostril away as he's such a perfectionist!

    And the green lenses. It would be incredible.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    RC7 wrote: »
    I was initially opposed to the idea of Blofeld making a comeback, at least for the remainder of the Craig era. He just didn't seem like a proper fit for Craig's films. However, after seeing the first teaser, I had to eat my words because it really looked like they were going to pull it off.

    Now after seeing the final product, I can honestly say I have slightly warmed to the idea of Blofeld's return. Though in the end, it would have been better if they would had just pocketed the whole Blofeld storyline and went down a different route.

    I think they gave too much away in the trailers. There was no need to show the scene with Oberhauser saying "author of all your pain". Seydoux was allowed to tell jounos prior to release her character was White's daughter. They could have even kept Jesper Christensen return quiet, so that there was some element of surprise in the movie. Imagine we did not know and we only learn with Bond that the Pale King is Mr White?.

    I think that is what I am most disappointed with, that there was nothing left to surprise you with. And I did not read any of the leaks, only mainstream media coverage on the build up. But it felt like I had already seen the film on first viewing.

    With Skyfall I did not know before viewing that Dame Judi would die at the end, it was a good element of surprise. The finale was pretty well guarded. The trailers were short and did not give much away.

    M's death was all over the mainstream media. Incidentally, if I recall correctly you were adamant that Waltz was not Blofeld, so that must surely have come as a surprise to you? You were convinced that Scott had the gig.

    God you are going to defend this to the bitter end, dredging the sea bed now are you not? No to be honest it lacked any imagination . I was expecting a twist that never came. Why not just have Waltz and cast him as Blofeld, it was rather embarrassing as it was fooling really nobody in the end. Skyfall did not suffer from the leaks to which Spectre did. Again your defending something which is blatantly obvious, there was far too much information given away between video blogs, trailers and interview.

    We knew what the PTS would be
    The order of the locations
    What Scott's role was
    That Waltz's character would be someone from Bonds past. But we knew who cause they showed the photograph.
    We knew Oberhauser was already, and that Waltz was Oberhauser.
    We knew there would be an explosion in Morocco.
    We knew Swann was Whites Daughter.
    We knew what everyone was wearing.
    We knew all about the car, the high point of the car chase was in the trailer.
    We knew Dame Judi M would appear in a video.
    We knew MI6 was still a ruin.
    We Knew White was returning


    I don't remember such level of detail being given away in the franchise before a film before. It was almost like EON concede many would have seen the leak script and decided that rather than fight it, the best way to sell the film was to sell how well executed the scenes were and gave away more than they normally would. I bet in future script drafts are done by secure post in future and no digital copies will be allowed.

    I remember nothing which gave away the M death story in Skyfall, I read mainstream media every day as part of my job, maybe I was lucky enough to have avoided that and got to enjoy that surprise. it changes nothing, it is the worst formed Bond script in since DAD.

    You forgot to mention that the trailer showed us 97.3% of both the car chase and plane crash so that when they finally arrived in the film your reaction was 'meh. I've already seen that. Show me something new.'

    Also good point earlier about all this bullshit secrecy about who is playing Blofeld. The film's called SPECTRE FFS and you've cast Christoph Waltz so I think we can all do the math. For Blofeld to played by anyone other than Waltz would be short changing the audience.

    So just scrap the Oberhauser thing altogether and be bold enough to just slap your cock on the table and state 'yeah we've got Christoph Waltz and he's playing f**king Blofeld. Your move MI, UNCLE and Kingsman!'

    Instead of this pathetic, whiny crap 'no no he's playing Franz Oberhauser' that fooled nobody.

    The only way you could have pulled this off is if Waltz actually was playing Oberhauser and then in the final scene on the bridge as M does his little 'Her Majesty's lily livered government is going to place you in an easily escapable cell' speech a red dot appears on Oberhauser's forehead and he is taken out by a sniper.

    Cut to the sniper, a flame haired woman, packing up her kit and having it away on a high speed bike. She calls to report that 'it is done'.

    Cut to Daniel Day Lewis stroking the cat 'Sorry Franz. But this organisation does not tolerate failure.'

    "You forgot to mention that the trailer showed us 97.3% of both the car chase and plane crash so that when they finally arrived in the film your reaction was 'meh. I've already seen that. Show me something"

    Exactly this is how I felt about most of the movie. I would have accepted the fault more if I didn't leave the cinema feeling like it was my second viewing.

    RC7 you said "But once the dust settles we re watch the films (and that is what we do and why we're here) for the value of the performances, the visuals, the direction etc. All these elements seem fairly top notch to me. The Blofeld reveal to me is not appealing for it being a surprise, it is appealing because it's brilliantly written and performed and infinitely watchable"

    Brilliantly written? seriously? its a disaster of a script. The fact that the film script is reliant upon the prior 3 films means that as stand alone film appearing on TV means nothing to those who have not seen the prior films, I took my wife to a second screening, shes not a die hard fan but she watches the films when there on TV, she had seen most of CR and Skyfall but she was asking "who is this", "what does that mean". It is therefore not a strong stand alone film. When we left the cinema she said "that was a rip off of Star Trek and the The Dark Knight. I had no defence to that.

    But basically what you are saying RC7 is we should accept the manic mis-pace, unimaginative story, and underuse of some of the greatest actors/actresses of the last 10 years because it's filmed nicely and has some good stunts so we should all sing it's praises. I am dumbstruck. This film had a whopping budget and was so hyped, fans deserved better than a patchwork job. Even Mendes and Craig have both said they were rewriting the script even during filming.

    John Logan was hired to write Skyfall and two futher films he had 3 years prior to the first production meeting to deliver a quality script. But after his failing with Skyfall when P&W were called in to inject some more Bond in to it, that deal changed and Spectre became a Logan & P&W effort from the start. But still it was then "not funny enough" so Butterworth is brought in and he got his sticky fingers on it. Very much a case of too many cooks spoiled the broth. Logan, P&W should not return. A good writer can and has produced magic on their own for many years, on this we have had 4 writers plus Craig and Mendes's input and is clear it disrupted the flow to accommodate everyone. If Logan can't deliver alone hire someone from the many talented other writers out there who can.

  • I am happy.
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 15,671
    I am happy.

    I'm beyond happy! :-bd
  • RC7RC7
    edited November 2015 Posts: 9,794
    RC7 you said "But once the dust settles we re watch the films (and that is what we do and why we're here) for the value of the performances, the visuals, the direction etc. All these elements seem fairly top notch to me. The Blofeld reveal to me is not appealing for it being a surprise, it is appealing because it's brilliantly written and performed and infinitely watchable"

    Brilliantly written? seriously? its a disaster of a script.

    I said the Blofeld reveal is brilliantly written. I didn't say the whole film was brilliantly written, it's quite clearly stated in the quote of mine you used.
    But basically what you are saying RC7 is we should accept the manic mis-pace, unimaginative story, and underuse of some of the greatest actors/actresses of the last 10 years because it's filmed nicely and has some good stunts so we should all sing it's praises. I am dumbstruck. This film had a whopping budget and was so hyped, fans deserved better than a patchwork job. Even Mendes and Craig have both said they were rewriting the script even during filming.

    You don't have to accept anything. I can find a lot of positives in this movie. Perfect it is not, but I'm trying to offer a different perspective to those like yourself who are frothing at the mouth. Where have I asked people to sing it's praises? All I've said is take a breath and watch it with a different hat on. Try a beret and a doobie.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    edited November 2015 Posts: 2,138
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 you said "But once the dust settles we re watch the films (and that is what we do and why we're here) for the value of the performances, the visuals, the direction etc. All these elements seem fairly top notch to me. The Blofeld reveal to me is not appealing for it being a surprise, it is appealing because it's brilliantly written and performed and infinitely watchable"

    Brilliantly written? seriously? its a disaster of a script.

    I said the Blofeld reveal is brilliantly written. I didn't say the whole film was brilliantly written, it's quite clearly stated in the quote of mine you used.
    But basically what you are saying RC7 is we should accept the manic mis-pace, unimaginative story, and underuse of some of the greatest actors/actresses of the last 10 years because it's filmed nicely and has some good stunts so we should all sing it's praises. I am dumbstruck. This film had a whopping budget and was so hyped, fans deserved better than a patchwork job. Even Mendes and Craig have both said they were rewriting the script even during filming.

    You don't have to accept anything. I can find a lot of positives in this movie. Perfect it is not, but I'm trying to offer a different perspective to those like yourself who are frothing at the mouth. Where have I asked people to sing it's praises? All I've said is take a breath and watch it with a different hat on. Try a beret and a doobie.

    It won't detract from the disappointment, had the story and dialogue been as strong as CR with that cast and Dan's performance we could have been talking about the greatest ever Bond, rather than a discussion about whether watching again after the hype makes the film any better. I am a massive fan of Dan's tenure but I want to shake him and ask him what was he doing conceding to the nonsense he argued should be left out of it before agreeing to take on the role, I can only conclude that he is not taking it as seriously for "artistic merit" as he once was and has accepted Bond will be the pinnacle of his acting career and more comfortable with this now.

    But like a lot of fans after Brosnan who lost faith, bought in to Dan's gritty Bond we joined the journey and bought in to his gritty, real Bond. We paid our hard earned cash to see CR, Stuck by it after the not so strong QOS and defended Skyfall to those old school fans who wanted gadgets, cars and boat chases who so heavily criticised it. But Spectre is like if Dalton had done Moonraker after TLD or LTK. IMO Dan should have stuck with his consistent interpretation from his first 3 films instead of the almost parody in Spectre.



  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 9,794
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 you said "But once the dust settles we re watch the films (and that is what we do and why we're here) for the value of the performances, the visuals, the direction etc. All these elements seem fairly top notch to me. The Blofeld reveal to me is not appealing for it being a surprise, it is appealing because it's brilliantly written and performed and infinitely watchable"

    Brilliantly written? seriously? its a disaster of a script.

    I said the Blofeld reveal is brilliantly written. I didn't say the whole film was brilliantly written, it's quite clearly stated in the quote of mine you used.
    But basically what you are saying RC7 is we should accept the manic mis-pace, unimaginative story, and underuse of some of the greatest actors/actresses of the last 10 years because it's filmed nicely and has some good stunts so we should all sing it's praises. I am dumbstruck. This film had a whopping budget and was so hyped, fans deserved better than a patchwork job. Even Mendes and Craig have both said they were rewriting the script even during filming.

    You don't have to accept anything. I can find a lot of positives in this movie. Perfect it is not, but I'm trying to offer a different perspective to those like yourself who are frothing at the mouth. Where have I asked people to sing it's praises? All I've said is take a breath and watch it with a different hat on. Try a beret and a doobie.

    It won't detract from the disappointment, had the story and dialogue been as strong as CR with that cast and Dan's performance we could have been talking about the greatest ever Bond, rather than a discussion about whether watching again after the hype makes the film any better. I am a massive fan of Dan's tenure but I want to shake him and ask him what was he doing conceding to the nonsense he argued should be left out of it before agreeing to take on the role, I can only conclude that he is not taking it as seriously for "artistic merit" as he once was and has accepted Bond will be the pinnacle of his acting career and more comfortable with this now.

    But like a lot of fans after Brosnan who lost faith, bought in to Dan's gritty Bond we joined the journey and bought in to his gritty, real Bond. We paid our hard earned cash to see CR, Stuck by it after the not so strong QOS and defended Skyfall to those old school fans who wanted gadgets, cars and boat chases who so heavily criticised it. But Spectre is like if Dalton had done Moonraker after TLD or LTK. IMO Dan should have stuck with his consistent interpretation from his first 3 films instead of the almost parody in Spectre.

    You're painting a very b+w picture re. fans wanting the fantastical vs. the real world. SP strikes a balance for me and I think a lot of people can buy that.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    It won't detract from the disappointment, had the story and dialogue been as strong as CR with that cast and Dan's performance we could have been talking about the greatest ever Bond, rather than a discussion about whether watching again after the hype makes the film any better.
    SP is no CR. I think nearly everyone acknowledges that. What's interesting is that even those who like it acknowledge that, and did so from the very beginning (I saw that in reviews here before I saw it). That to me is interesting, because in many cases, when one likes something, particularly a new film, one has a tendency for initial hyperbole. There has been limited positive hyperbole around SP, which is telling.
    But like a lot of fans after Brosnan who lost faith, bought in to Dan's gritty Bond we joined the journey and bought in to his gritty, real Bond. We paid our hard earned cash to see CR, Stuck by it after the not so strong QOS and defended Skyfall to those old school fans who wanted gadgets, cars and boat chases who so heavily criticised it. But Spectre is like if Dalton had done Moonraker after TLD or LTK. IMO Dan should have stuck with his consistent interpretation from his first 3 films instead of the almost parody in Spectre.
    You have a point. As I said, the change in tone in his performance is jarring for some, myself included. It was a good performance, but one more transition film in between would have been preferred.

    PS: - I had mentioned the lack of emotional resonance with characters in SP. I forgot to mention the cinematography. That is one thing that I always felt that SF really delivered on. It was a stunningly beautiful film to behold, and that too (in addition to connection to characters) led many to forgive its flaws. In my mind Deakins is the unsung hero of SF. Van Hoytema, good though he may have been, did not deliver the same spectacle in SP for me. There was obvious CGI work in the pretitles, and despite his incredible 'framing' of nearly every shot, the monotonous colour palette detracted from the experience.

    PS: I just watched the Mockingjay 1 on blu ray yesterday, and noticed the same kind of monotony in the colour palette. I also see this in some Marvel films. Usually it's the CGI loaded films. I think over time EON will regret this decision, because it will date SP and does take away from the superb shot framing.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    bondjames wrote: »
    It won't detract from the disappointment, had the story and dialogue been as strong as CR with that cast and Dan's performance we could have been talking about the greatest ever Bond, rather than a discussion about whether watching again after the hype makes the film any better.
    SP is no CR. I think nearly everyone acknowledges that. What's interesting is that even those who like it acknowledge that, and did so from the very beginning (I saw that in reviews here before I saw it). That to me is interesting, because in many cases, when one likes something, particularly a new film, one has a tendency for initial hyperbole. There has been limited positive hyperbole around SP, which is telling.
    But like a lot of fans after Brosnan who lost faith, bought in to Dan's gritty Bond we joined the journey and bought in to his gritty, real Bond. We paid our hard earned cash to see CR, Stuck by it after the not so strong QOS and defended Skyfall to those old school fans who wanted gadgets, cars and boat chases who so heavily criticised it. But Spectre is like if Dalton had done Moonraker after TLD or LTK. IMO Dan should have stuck with his consistent interpretation from his first 3 films instead of the almost parody in Spectre.
    You have a point. As I said, the change in tone in his performance is jarring for some, myself included. It was a good performance, but one more transition film in between would have been preferred.

    PS: - I had mentioned the lack of emotional resonance with characters in SP. I forgot to mention the cinematography. That is one thing that I always felt that SF really delivered on. It was a stunningly beautiful film to behold, and that too (in addition to connection to characters) led many to forgive its flaws. In my mind Deakins is the unsung hero of SF. Van Hoytema, good though he may have been, did not deliver the same spectacle in SP for me. There was obvious CGI work in the pretitles, and despite his incredible 'framing' of nearly every shot, the monotonous colour palette detracted from the experience.

    PS: I just watched the Mockingjay 1 on blu ray yesterday, and noticed the same kind of monotony in the colour palette. I also see this in some Marvel films. Usually it's the CGI loaded films. I think over time EON will regret this decision, because it will date SP and does take away from the superb shot framing.

    Thanks for your comments, I agree. I think that Bond is heading towards that Superhero cinema universe to draw in $$$ that it's lost something along the way. I agree Deakins work on SF was incredible, Phil Méheux on CR was stunning at times as well especially the fly by shots of the train to Montenegro. But again Spectre is glossy and the gloss attempts to cover the cracks, just didn't convince me.

    Bond 25 needs to go back to basics for me, step away from the attempts to replicate films like TDK and Star Trek ITD and Bourne. Ditch the origin stuff now. Bond, MP Flirt, M Mission, Investigate, Women, Villain, battle, victory credit. I do not want to see London for anymore than 5 minutes in Bond 25. I don't want Q, MP or M having anymore screen time than a few minutes, they should not be in the field or central to the plot.

    I know it is doubtful as he is in his 70's but Martin Campbell is the only man alive who can redress the balance and salvage the mess after Spectre, Mark Gatiss is probably the best man to deliver a solid script. Most fans see this, surely EON can too. Time to move on from Mendes, Logan and P&W.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 15,933
    But Spectre is like if Dalton had done Moonraker after TLD or LTK.
    I see profound exaggeration is a specialty of yours. B-)
    I loved SPECTRE not only for being a great Bond, but being such a great Bond that it makes the movies BEFORE it better! ^:)^
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    chrisisall wrote: »
    But Spectre is like if Dalton had done Moonraker after TLD or LTK.
    I see profound exaggeration is a specialty of yours. B-)
    I loved SPECTRE not only for being a great Bond, but being such a great Bond that it makes the movies BEFORE it better! ^:)^

    I would give a decent response if your comment had any foundation to it, Spectre is so far detached from Dan's prior films I don't see how my comments over Dalton and Moonraker are exaggerated. Ok Chrisisall Spectre makes Skyfall and Casino Royale better films, I think I will leave that for others to respond to. Ludicrous womble troll comment.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 10,440
    I actually thought the Dalton in MR comment was meant in a good way. Like if you took the best bits of MR and added Dalton, think how awesome it would be! Bond and Flash Gordon mash up!

    Apart from that annoying girl, I have to admit I rather like MR (a guilty pleasure).
  • zerozerozerozero The far far east
    Posts: 43
    I've seen it just the once so far and, whereas with Skyfall I kept going back, with this one, I've held off for some reason. Not that I didn't enjoy it; there were some strange atmospherics going on, especially in the meteor crater HQ scenes, which had an eeriness which, for some reason, reminded me slightly of John Gardner's Nobody Lives Forever

    But there were things I just didn't follow. For instance, why did Mr White need a secret room with a GPS thing (apparently left switched on all the time) when he could have used a hand-held GPS unit to locate Blofeld's lair? And I kept thinking Hinx would be back near the end, but he wasn't and that made his sudden demise rather a letdown.

    As a two-fingered salute to Kevin McClory the film was great, right down to the Nehru collar and Persian cat! That, in itself was almost worth the price of admission. The poisonous old boil kept us from seeing Blofeld in Bond for decades, just because he was peeved with Eon. God's sakes.

    There was also something about the way Blofeld was sitting smugly in his helicopter, ready for his private entertainment to start, that made me chuckle. I kind of liked that ending actually.

    I just hope they avoid silly cliches next time. Blofeld and Bond as foster brothers. I saw that one coming the minute they showed us the scorched photo in the teaser trailer. Accompanied by the Bond theme on nursery chimes. Nah, I think SPECTRE needed better motivation than a sociopathic teenager's hatred for his dad. Someone above said Purvis and Wade need to go. Yes I think so too.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 15,933
    Getafix wrote: »
    I actually thought the Dalton in MR comment was meant in a good way. Like if you took the best bits of MR and added Dalton, think how awesome it would be! Bond and Flash Gordon mash up!
    Wow, when you put it that way, it could have been a blast!

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited November 2015 Posts: 12,997
    The script for Dalton's 3rd film in 1991 had robots in it, so it seems that no matter how dark/gritty a Bond tenure starts, EON will always go towards MR/YOLT as the tenure progresses. Bond movies keep switching between dark and OTT, so I don't see how after 53 years and 24 movies people can still be shocked by the tone shifts.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 15,933
    I doubt that the robot thing would have really happened with Dalton... but yeah, your point is taken.
    Thing is, now we not only have a Bond for every mood in the series, now we have a Bond for every mood just inside of Craig's tenure as well! :)>-
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    The script for Dalton's 3rd film in 1991 had robots in it, so it seems that no matter how dark/gritty a Bond tenure starts, EON will always go towards MR/YOLT as the tenure progresses. Bond movies keep switching between dark and OTT, so I don't see how after 53 years and 24 movies people can still be shocked by the tone shifts.

    You know I almost thought they went this route deliberately, so that when they introduce the next Bond actor they can introduce him as gritty

    Connery - Dr No - Gritty tenure got softer/silly
    Moore in LALD 1st film Gritty tenure got softer/silly
    Lazenby - No Comment
    Dalton - TLD - Gritty
    Brosnan - Goldeneye - Gritty tenure got softer/silly

    Craig same path.

    I wonder if it is a ploy to help with the first of a new actors films be more a of hit.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 15,933
    Trouble with your observation here is that SPECTRE is neither soft nor silly- it has perfect measures of absurd & unlikely balancing out its gritty. It's NOT like a Moonraker, it more like a Thunderball. I'm just so glad they finally made a Bond that measures up to my high standards! =D>
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 31,901
    Now that I think about it, there were actually quite a few people who felt Scott (or someone unannounced) would be Blofeld, so there HAD to be some of you who were genuinely surprised (somehow) with Waltz's unveiling as ESB.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 10,440
    The script for Dalton's 3rd film in 1991 had robots in it, so it seems that no matter how dark/gritty a Bond tenure starts, EON will always go towards MR/YOLT as the tenure progresses. Bond movies keep switching between dark and OTT, so I don't see how after 53 years and 24 movies people can still be shocked by the tone shifts.

    I love the tonal shifts.

    For me what's important is whether it's a good or bad movie.

    I love YOLT, and secretly quite enjoy MR, but can't stand DAD.

    So I don't really care if the film is dark, light, OTT or 'serious' - I just want it to do whatever it's doing really well.
Sign In or Register to comment.