Spectre: Reappraised, Reassessed

1679111214

Comments

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,091
    Tarantino's thoughts don't surprise me. On a first watch, if you're in love with the older Bond movies but you aren't as involved with them as we on this forum are, SP plays like a more overt greatest hits track (vs. SF's more organic winks).

    SF is definitely less of a Bond film in terms of template, and SP was much more consciously trying to go for something "classic" or "trope heavy." Tarantino would probably appreciate that, I'd guess. Speaking of which, I thought his newest movie was really good.

    My thoughts exactly.
  • Context for my reassessment (last viewing of Spectre was in July or so) : I recently re-watched DAD and Spectre, within a day or so of one another.

    I keep getting surprised every time I return to Spectre, after increasingly longer gaps between viewings, how little I enjoy it. I didn't use to mind the movie too much, but it seems to really get worse for me every time I see it unfortunately. In fact, while I found myself rather enjoying DAD, and save for a few moments, finding really only the last 20 minutes or so unwatchable, it took me two sittings to get through Spectre. It's just become so offensive to me and quite a slog to get through.

    Apologies for the dour take, but I can only be honest. I genuinely find Spectre to be now firmly at the bottom of the barrel. I can't think of a Bond movie I'd watch Spectre instead of at the moment, but hopefully that's just because I recently watched it. I was very pleasantly surprised by DAD, however.
  • 007InAction007InAction Australia
    edited December 2020 Posts: 2,373
    Kevin McClory's Spectre he wanted made so many years ago.

    EppRvoqXIAYiBdi?format=jpg&name=900x900
  • Posts: 1,906
    I'm curious how much money McClory racked up over the years trying to remount another Bond film. It seemed false starting announcements were being announced every couple years in trade publications.
  • ThunderballThunderball playing Chemin de Fer in a casino, downing Vespers
    edited December 2020 Posts: 814
    McClory liked having his name in the news. That’s why he made those announcements more than anything.

    Anyway, I still really enjoy and vigorously defend SP. I recognize it’s problems but to me it’s overall a good entry. I’m frankly flabbergasted when people say they enjoy DAD more than SP. I can feel my IQ tumble when I watch DAD. At worst I feel slightly annoyed at parts of the latter.
  • McClory liked having his name in the news. That’s why he made those announcements more than anything.

    Anyway, I still really enjoy and vigorously defend SP. I recognize it’s problems but to me it’s overall a good entry. I’m frankly flabbergasted when people say they enjoy DAD more than SP. I can feel my IQ tumble when I watch DAD. At worst I feel slightly annoyed at parts of the latter.

    Its really sad when you take into account McClory was, in a way, screwed out of his legacy. I dislike his attempts to derail the franchise as much as anyone, but still, I can't help but feel somewhat bad for the guy.
    Birdleson wrote: »
    It really is as simple as one's visceral reaction. I can argue and compare, but in the end SP leaves me flat and bored unlike any other film in the canon.

    Afraid I have the same opinion. I enjoy the PTS to an extent though, thought it had a great ending too.
  • Birdleson wrote: »
    It really is as simple as one's visceral reaction. I can argue and compare, but in the end SP leaves me flat and bored unlike any other film in the canon.

    Completely agree. Furthermore, DAD, for all its flaws, at least was a clear effort by all involved to make an exciting and great film, as misguided as it may have been. SP is so lazy in its writing, music, even setpieces, which I cannot say for DAD. Even Craig looks a bit bored in it.
  • TheBondFan wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    It really is as simple as one's visceral reaction. I can argue and compare, but in the end SP leaves me flat and bored unlike any other film in the canon.

    Completely agree. Furthermore, DAD, for all its flaws, at least was a clear effort by all involved to make an exciting and great film, as misguided as it may have been. SP is so lazy in its writing, music, even setpieces, which I cannot say for DAD. Even Craig looks a bit bored in it.

    Agreed. DAD is stupid, but fun. I can’t say that about SPECTRE.

    But personally I’d hate to keep bashing SPECTRE in a thread that’s about singing it’s praises; so for anyone who loves SPECTRE, good on you, I’m happy you get something out of the film!
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,722
    TheBondFan wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    It really is as simple as one's visceral reaction. I can argue and compare, but in the end SP leaves me flat and bored unlike any other film in the canon.

    Completely agree. Furthermore, DAD, for all its flaws, at least was a clear effort by all involved to make an exciting and great film, as misguided as it may have been. SP is so lazy in its writing, music, even setpieces, which I cannot say for DAD. Even Craig looks a bit bored in it.

    Agreed. DAD is stupid, but fun. I can’t say that about SPECTRE.

    But personally I’d hate to keep bashing SPECTRE in a thread that’s about singing it’s praises; so for anyone who loves SPECTRE, good on you, I’m happy you get something out of the film!

    To ME, DAD is stupidly exciting, whilst SP is comfortably reminiscent.
  • Posts: 7,002
    I will take SP over DAD any day of the week. SP has flaws, but DAD is an utter travesty from start to finish! (No, I dont think the first 30 min are good!)
  • Mathis1 wrote: »
    I will take SP over DAD any day of the week. SP has flaws, but DAD is an utter travesty from start to finish! (No, I dont think the first 30 min are good!)

    Ya know, sometimes it’s fun to watch Travesties unravel themselves ;)
  • TheBondFan wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    It really is as simple as one's visceral reaction. I can argue and compare, but in the end SP leaves me flat and bored unlike any other film in the canon.

    Completely agree. Furthermore, DAD, for all its flaws, at least was a clear effort by all involved to make an exciting and great film, as misguided as it may have been. SP is so lazy in its writing, music, even setpieces, which I cannot say for DAD. Even Craig looks a bit bored in it.

    Agreed. DAD is stupid, but fun. I can’t say that about SPECTRE.

    But personally I’d hate to keep bashing SPECTRE in a thread that’s about singing it’s praises; so for anyone who loves SPECTRE, good on you, I’m happy you get something out of the film!

    Agreed. Although isn't there an appreciation thread? I just gave my reassessment after not having seen it for a while. I thought this was the appropriate place, positive or negative.
  • edited December 2020 Posts: 2,152
    TheBondFan wrote: »
    TheBondFan wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    It really is as simple as one's visceral reaction. I can argue and compare, but in the end SP leaves me flat and bored unlike any other film in the canon.

    Completely agree. Furthermore, DAD, for all its flaws, at least was a clear effort by all involved to make an exciting and great film, as misguided as it may have been. SP is so lazy in its writing, music, even setpieces, which I cannot say for DAD. Even Craig looks a bit bored in it.

    Agreed. DAD is stupid, but fun. I can’t say that about SPECTRE.

    But personally I’d hate to keep bashing SPECTRE in a thread that’s about singing it’s praises; so for anyone who loves SPECTRE, good on you, I’m happy you get something out of the film!

    Agreed. Although isn't there an appreciation thread? I just gave my reassessment after not having seen it for a while. I thought this was the appropriate place, positive or negative.

    Fair enough, I’m just talking about myself in that scenario. Please don’t be discouraged, and I apologize if you have been! I keep forgetting this isn’t “A SPECTRE Appreciation thread”, but an “SPECTRE Reassessment thread”
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,133
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    I will take SP over DAD any day of the week. SP has flaws, but DAD is an utter travesty from start to finish! (No, I dont think the first 30 min are good!)

    They're both rubbish, just for different reasons
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,091
    SP is clearly the better film.

    DAD is utterly obnoxious.
  • edited December 2020 Posts: 3,291

    Its really sad when you take into account McClory was, in a way, screwed out of his legacy. I dislike his attempts to derail the franchise as much as anyone, but still, I can't help but feel somewhat bad for the guy.
    .

    The more I read about McClory, the more I dislike him. He put Fleming through the wringer when he wanted to release his TB novel (suffering a stroke during the court case I believe). Fleming was more at fault in how he dealt with the release of TB, but it felt like McClory got lucky once with his legal battle, and from then on for the rest of his life he would hang on the coat tails of Bond, pursuing legal battles wherever he could.

    Remember, McClory rejected all the Fleming novels and focused on his own script, which shows how much vision he lacked as a filmmaker. He didn't see the potential in the likes of FRWL or GF until they were released by EON, and from then on he wanted to hang on to the franchise for dear life, and have a piece of the action.

    Both TB and NSNA are not very strong scripts, and this is the only claim he had to Bond. I also think TB is the weakest of all the Bond novels, which again is quite telling of what a filmmaking genius McClory was. Fleming made the best of a crappy plot.



  • TheBondFan wrote: »
    TheBondFan wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    It really is as simple as one's visceral reaction. I can argue and compare, but in the end SP leaves me flat and bored unlike any other film in the canon.

    Completely agree. Furthermore, DAD, for all its flaws, at least was a clear effort by all involved to make an exciting and great film, as misguided as it may have been. SP is so lazy in its writing, music, even setpieces, which I cannot say for DAD. Even Craig looks a bit bored in it.

    Agreed. DAD is stupid, but fun. I can’t say that about SPECTRE.

    But personally I’d hate to keep bashing SPECTRE in a thread that’s about singing it’s praises; so for anyone who loves SPECTRE, good on you, I’m happy you get something out of the film!

    Agreed. Although isn't there an appreciation thread? I just gave my reassessment after not having seen it for a while. I thought this was the appropriate place, positive or negative.

    Fair enough, I’m just talking about myself in that scenario. Please don’t be discouraged, and I apologize if you have been! I keep forgetting this isn’t “A SPECTRE Appreciation thread”, but an “SPECTRE Reassessment thread”

    Oh no worries at all. I'm not discouraged, just wanted to make sure I understood properly the purpose of the thread.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    I loved both SP and DAD since the first viewing.

    The problem is I was 12 when I first saw DAD...

    R66h.gif

  • Its really sad when you take into account McClory was, in a way, screwed out of his legacy. I dislike his attempts to derail the franchise as much as anyone, but still, I can't help but feel somewhat bad for the guy.
    .

    The more I read about McClory, the more I dislike him. He put Fleming through the wringer when he wanted to release his TB novel (suffering a stroke during the court case I believe). Fleming was more at fault in how he dealt with the release of TB, but it felt like McClory got lucky once with his legal battle, and from then on for the rest of his life he would hang on the coat tails of Bond, pursuing legal battles wherever he could.

    Remember, McClory rejected all the Fleming novels and focused on his own script, which shows how much vision he lacked as a filmmaker. He didn't see the potential in the likes of FRWL or GF until they were released by EON, and from then on he wanted to hang on to the franchise for dear life, and have a piece of the action.

    Both TB and NSNA are not very strong scripts, and this is the only claim he had to Bond. I also think TB is the weakest of all the Bond novels, which again is quite telling of what a filmmaking genius McClory was. Fleming made the best of a crappy plot.



    That’s a good point. Also don’t forget how he screwed Jack Wittingham as well! Would you think it’s fair to say that McClory and all his original legal wrangling arguably brought about the death of Fleming himself? Fleming did have a heart attack shortly after all that nonsense started.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489

    Its really sad when you take into account McClory was, in a way, screwed out of his legacy. I dislike his attempts to derail the franchise as much as anyone, but still, I can't help but feel somewhat bad for the guy.
    .

    The more I read about McClory, the more I dislike him. He put Fleming through the wringer when he wanted to release his TB novel (suffering a stroke during the court case I believe). Fleming was more at fault in how he dealt with the release of TB, but it felt like McClory got lucky once with his legal battle, and from then on for the rest of his life he would hang on the coat tails of Bond, pursuing legal battles wherever he could.

    Remember, McClory rejected all the Fleming novels and focused on his own script, which shows how much vision he lacked as a filmmaker. He didn't see the potential in the likes of FRWL or GF until they were released by EON, and from then on he wanted to hang on to the franchise for dear life, and have a piece of the action.

    Both TB and NSNA are not very strong scripts, and this is the only claim he had to Bond. I also think TB is the weakest of all the Bond novels, which again is quite telling of what a filmmaking genius McClory was. Fleming made the best of a crappy plot.



    That’s a good point. Also don’t forget how he screwed Jack Wittingham as well! Would you think it’s fair to say that McClory and all his original legal wrangling arguably brought about the death of Fleming himself? Fleming did have a heart attack shortly after all that nonsense started.

    McClory was probably directly responsible for the death of not only Fleming, but everyone involved with Bond, up to and including Peter Lamont. I am afraid it isn t over yet, but may escalate. Who will be his next victim?
  • edited December 2020 Posts: 2,152

    Its really sad when you take into account McClory was, in a way, screwed out of his legacy. I dislike his attempts to derail the franchise as much as anyone, but still, I can't help but feel somewhat bad for the guy.
    .

    The more I read about McClory, the more I dislike him. He put Fleming through the wringer when he wanted to release his TB novel (suffering a stroke during the court case I believe). Fleming was more at fault in how he dealt with the release of TB, but it felt like McClory got lucky once with his legal battle, and from then on for the rest of his life he would hang on the coat tails of Bond, pursuing legal battles wherever he could.

    Remember, McClory rejected all the Fleming novels and focused on his own script, which shows how much vision he lacked as a filmmaker. He didn't see the potential in the likes of FRWL or GF until they were released by EON, and from then on he wanted to hang on to the franchise for dear life, and have a piece of the action.

    Both TB and NSNA are not very strong scripts, and this is the only claim he had to Bond. I also think TB is the weakest of all the Bond novels, which again is quite telling of what a filmmaking genius McClory was. Fleming made the best of a crappy plot.



    That’s a good point. Also don’t forget how he screwed Jack Wittingham as well! Would you think it’s fair to say that McClory and all his original legal wrangling arguably brought about the death of Fleming himself? Fleming did have a heart attack shortly after all that nonsense started.

    McClory was probably directly responsible for the death of not only Fleming, but everyone involved with Bond, up to and including Peter Lamont. I am afraid it isn t over yet, but may escalate. Who will be his next victim?

    That bastard! His reign of terror must come to an end! We have to protect Daniel Craig at all costs!
  • Posts: 3,291

    Its really sad when you take into account McClory was, in a way, screwed out of his legacy. I dislike his attempts to derail the franchise as much as anyone, but still, I can't help but feel somewhat bad for the guy.
    .

    The more I read about McClory, the more I dislike him. He put Fleming through the wringer when he wanted to release his TB novel (suffering a stroke during the court case I believe). Fleming was more at fault in how he dealt with the release of TB, but it felt like McClory got lucky once with his legal battle, and from then on for the rest of his life he would hang on the coat tails of Bond, pursuing legal battles wherever he could.

    Remember, McClory rejected all the Fleming novels and focused on his own script, which shows how much vision he lacked as a filmmaker. He didn't see the potential in the likes of FRWL or GF until they were released by EON, and from then on he wanted to hang on to the franchise for dear life, and have a piece of the action.

    Both TB and NSNA are not very strong scripts, and this is the only claim he had to Bond. I also think TB is the weakest of all the Bond novels, which again is quite telling of what a filmmaking genius McClory was. Fleming made the best of a crappy plot.



    That’s a good point. Also don’t forget how he screwed Jack Wittingham as well! Would you think it’s fair to say that McClory and all his original legal wrangling arguably brought about the death of Fleming himself? Fleming did have a heart attack shortly after all that nonsense started.

    McClory was probably directly responsible for the death of not only Fleming, but everyone involved with Bond, up to and including Peter Lamont. I am afraid it isn t over yet, but may escalate. Who will be his next victim?

    I hear he was also responsible for Sean Connery's death.
  • Posts: 3,291

    Its really sad when you take into account McClory was, in a way, screwed out of his legacy. I dislike his attempts to derail the franchise as much as anyone, but still, I can't help but feel somewhat bad for the guy.
    .

    The more I read about McClory, the more I dislike him. He put Fleming through the wringer when he wanted to release his TB novel (suffering a stroke during the court case I believe). Fleming was more at fault in how he dealt with the release of TB, but it felt like McClory got lucky once with his legal battle, and from then on for the rest of his life he would hang on the coat tails of Bond, pursuing legal battles wherever he could.

    Remember, McClory rejected all the Fleming novels and focused on his own script, which shows how much vision he lacked as a filmmaker. He didn't see the potential in the likes of FRWL or GF until they were released by EON, and from then on he wanted to hang on to the franchise for dear life, and have a piece of the action.

    Both TB and NSNA are not very strong scripts, and this is the only claim he had to Bond. I also think TB is the weakest of all the Bond novels, which again is quite telling of what a filmmaking genius McClory was. Fleming made the best of a crappy plot.



    That’s a good point. Also don’t forget how he screwed Jack Wittingham as well! Would you think it’s fair to say that McClory and all his original legal wrangling arguably brought about the death of Fleming himself? Fleming did have a heart attack shortly after all that nonsense started.

    I think the legal case didn't help his condition, but the 60 fags and a bottle of gin a day may have also gone some way to contributing to his death.... ;)

  • Its really sad when you take into account McClory was, in a way, screwed out of his legacy. I dislike his attempts to derail the franchise as much as anyone, but still, I can't help but feel somewhat bad for the guy.
    .

    The more I read about McClory, the more I dislike him. He put Fleming through the wringer when he wanted to release his TB novel (suffering a stroke during the court case I believe). Fleming was more at fault in how he dealt with the release of TB, but it felt like McClory got lucky once with his legal battle, and from then on for the rest of his life he would hang on the coat tails of Bond, pursuing legal battles wherever he could.

    Remember, McClory rejected all the Fleming novels and focused on his own script, which shows how much vision he lacked as a filmmaker. He didn't see the potential in the likes of FRWL or GF until they were released by EON, and from then on he wanted to hang on to the franchise for dear life, and have a piece of the action.

    Both TB and NSNA are not very strong scripts, and this is the only claim he had to Bond. I also think TB is the weakest of all the Bond novels, which again is quite telling of what a filmmaking genius McClory was. Fleming made the best of a crappy plot.



    That’s a good point. Also don’t forget how he screwed Jack Wittingham as well! Would you think it’s fair to say that McClory and all his original legal wrangling arguably brought about the death of Fleming himself? Fleming did have a heart attack shortly after all that nonsense started.

    I think the legal case didn't help his condition, but the 60 fags and a bottle of gin a day may have also gone some way to contributing to his death.... ;)

    Wait, you mean I you can’t treat your body like total garbage and expect to live? Darn it I’ve been deceived [-( [-(
  • Posts: 1,906

    Its really sad when you take into account McClory was, in a way, screwed out of his legacy. I dislike his attempts to derail the franchise as much as anyone, but still, I can't help but feel somewhat bad for the guy.
    .

    The more I read about McClory, the more I dislike him. He put Fleming through the wringer when he wanted to release his TB novel (suffering a stroke during the court case I believe). Fleming was more at fault in how he dealt with the release of TB, but it felt like McClory got lucky once with his legal battle, and from then on for the rest of his life he would hang on the coat tails of Bond, pursuing legal battles wherever he could.

    Remember, McClory rejected all the Fleming novels and focused on his own script, which shows how much vision he lacked as a filmmaker. He didn't see the potential in the likes of FRWL or GF until they were released by EON, and from then on he wanted to hang on to the franchise for dear life, and have a piece of the action.

    Both TB and NSNA are not very strong scripts, and this is the only claim he had to Bond. I also think TB is the weakest of all the Bond novels, which again is quite telling of what a filmmaking genius McClory was. Fleming made the best of a crappy plot.

    Completely disagree about the TB script. It features some of the best one-liners and makes up for some of the novel's problems. The film's problems are more technical than anything in the script, although the Derval double thing is a stretch, I'll give you that.

    How is the hijacking of bombs by a terrorist organization not a strong plot, particularly back then? The theft of all the gold in Fort Knox in the GF novel is so much more of a stretch.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited December 2020 Posts: 8,091
    What makes TB compelling?
  • I adore TB. I don't know how compelling it is, though, on an intellectual level. It's very visceral / sexual.
  • Posts: 3,291
    BT3366 wrote: »

    Its really sad when you take into account McClory was, in a way, screwed out of his legacy. I dislike his attempts to derail the franchise as much as anyone, but still, I can't help but feel somewhat bad for the guy.
    .

    The more I read about McClory, the more I dislike him. He put Fleming through the wringer when he wanted to release his TB novel (suffering a stroke during the court case I believe). Fleming was more at fault in how he dealt with the release of TB, but it felt like McClory got lucky once with his legal battle, and from then on for the rest of his life he would hang on the coat tails of Bond, pursuing legal battles wherever he could.

    Remember, McClory rejected all the Fleming novels and focused on his own script, which shows how much vision he lacked as a filmmaker. He didn't see the potential in the likes of FRWL or GF until they were released by EON, and from then on he wanted to hang on to the franchise for dear life, and have a piece of the action.

    Both TB and NSNA are not very strong scripts, and this is the only claim he had to Bond. I also think TB is the weakest of all the Bond novels, which again is quite telling of what a filmmaking genius McClory was. Fleming made the best of a crappy plot.

    Completely disagree about the TB script. It features some of the best one-liners and makes up for some of the novel's problems. The film's problems are more technical than anything in the script, although the Derval double thing is a stretch, I'll give you that.

    How is the hijacking of bombs by a terrorist organization not a strong plot, particularly back then? The theft of all the gold in Fort Knox in the GF novel is so much more of a stretch.

    The hijacking of the bombs is not really the issue. To me its lost by too much focus on SPECTRE and how it carries out the threat, Bond aimlessly on holiday in the Bahamas, and way too much underwater sequences.
  • edited December 2020 Posts: 2,112
    Watching it now, and whilst it is a very watchable film, the moment your brain engages with anything that is going on, it all falls apart.

    I hope Lea Seydoux has more to do in NTTD, a great actress with a very thinly written character here,
  • BT3366 wrote: »

    Its really sad when you take into account McClory was, in a way, screwed out of his legacy. I dislike his attempts to derail the franchise as much as anyone, but still, I can't help but feel somewhat bad for the guy.
    .

    The more I read about McClory, the more I dislike him. He put Fleming through the wringer when he wanted to release his TB novel (suffering a stroke during the court case I believe). Fleming was more at fault in how he dealt with the release of TB, but it felt like McClory got lucky once with his legal battle, and from then on for the rest of his life he would hang on the coat tails of Bond, pursuing legal battles wherever he could.

    Remember, McClory rejected all the Fleming novels and focused on his own script, which shows how much vision he lacked as a filmmaker. He didn't see the potential in the likes of FRWL or GF until they were released by EON, and from then on he wanted to hang on to the franchise for dear life, and have a piece of the action.

    Both TB and NSNA are not very strong scripts, and this is the only claim he had to Bond. I also think TB is the weakest of all the Bond novels, which again is quite telling of what a filmmaking genius McClory was. Fleming made the best of a crappy plot.

    Completely disagree about the TB script. It features some of the best one-liners and makes up for some of the novel's problems. The film's problems are more technical than anything in the script, although the Derval double thing is a stretch, I'll give you that.

    How is the hijacking of bombs by a terrorist organization not a strong plot, particularly back then? The theft of all the gold in Fort Knox in the GF novel is so much more of a stretch.

    The hijacking of the bombs is not really the issue. To me its lost by too much focus on SPECTRE and how it carries out the threat, Bond aimlessly on holiday in the Bahamas, and way too much underwater sequences.

    Agree with everything you just said.
    Mallory wrote: »
    Watching it now, and whilst it is a very watchable film, the moment your brain engages with anything that is going on, it all falls apart.

    I hope Lea Seydoux has more to do in NTTD, a great actress with a very thinly written character here,

    I don’t find Lea Seydoux that great, she just uninteresting as a presence, but that’s my opinion. The “love” story between Bond and Madeline is poorly done as well.
Sign In or Register to comment.