Was SPECTRE a disappointment?

179111213

Comments

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 5,725
    You know, I'm something of a megalomaniacal supervillain myself.
  • Posts: 1,170
    Birdleson wrote: »
    On the other hand, what was that bit about Mexico City ringing a distant bell? That contradicts him being involved with Bond, or even aware of their later interactions, from Casino to SP.

    Well, the "distant bell" line only contradicts this misunderstanding people have about Blofeld dedicating his life to hurting Bond.

    Blofeld "destroying Bond's world" is a natural consequence of Bond involving himself with Spectre plots. It's not Blofeld's primary mission, nor any kind of secondary mission (well, not until the final act of Spectre). The Mexico City activity "rang a distant bell", and "in a way" Bond is "responsible" for the criminal path Oberhauser took. The film is not claiming that the plots of CR, QOS, and SF were Blofeld trying to get at Bond, and that wouldn't work anyway, given the natures of some of those plots.

    I do wonder if when Kananga tells Bond he's been "a relatively minor nuisance", some viewers take this at face value as well. I've seen many people who think Madeliene in NTTD is genuinely trying to trick Bond into thinking he's not Mathilde's father. I don't think Oberhauser/Blofeld, Madeleine, or Kananga should be that hard to understand....
  • Posts: 1,618
    I think it's a natural consequence of EON making the plots of these films so personal over the years. CR is just as much about Bond's romance with Vesper, his learning who to trust and who not to trust, and about his evolution into the "Bond we all know and love" as it is about beating Le Chiffre at a card game. QOS is as much about Bond seeking to find his "quantum of solace" with regards to Vesper as it is about stopping Quantum's coup attempt in Bolivia. Every facet of SF's plot is intertwined in the personal lives of either Bond or M, and their relationship is also a major cornerstone of the film as well. Then you can go back to the Brosnan films and find similar personal elements that are very much present in those films as well, even if the films retain more of an adherence to the original formula.

    With that in mind, there's clearly a pattern that EON has followed since Barbara Broccoli became one of the driving creative forces within EON. The films have had a consistently, and increasingly, personal bent under her leadership, which is why a lot of people are going to seize on those elements as they are found in SP's script. After all of the personal angles they've had since 1995 (and, actually, you could go back to LTK in 1989), for them to then make Ernst Stavro Blofeld, Bond's supposed greatest nemesis, into someone with whom Bond has a relationship that dates back to their childhood and then, retroactively makes him the reason that everything that has happened in these new films has happened to Bond, and then have him make speeches about Bond being the reason he's gone down this path and taking pleasure in destroying Bond's world, EON is at the very least willingly opening the door for people to make that reading of the film. As with any art form, it's also very possible to make a different reading of it, but EON definitely put the building blocks there for anyone to seize on should they see it in the script or should they be inclined to make that reading of the material.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,124
    Birdleson wrote: »
    On the other hand, what was that bit about Mexico City ringing a distant bell? That contradicts him being involved with Bond, or even aware of their later interactions, from Casino to SP.

    Well, the "distant bell" line only contradicts this misunderstanding people have about Blofeld dedicating his life to hurting Bond.

    Blofeld "destroying Bond's world" is a natural consequence of Bond involving himself with Spectre plots. It's not Blofeld's primary mission, nor any kind of secondary mission (well, not until the final act of Spectre). The Mexico City activity "rang a distant bell", and "in a way" Bond is "responsible" for the criminal path Oberhauser took. The film is not claiming that the plots of CR, QOS, and SF were Blofeld trying to get at Bond, and that wouldn't work anyway, given the natures of some of those plots.

    I do wonder if when Kananga tells Bond he's been "a relatively minor nuisance", some viewers take this at face value as well. I've seen many people who think Madeliene in NTTD is genuinely trying to trick Bond into thinking he's not Mathilde's father. I don't think Oberhauser/Blofeld, Madeleine, or Kananga should be that hard to understand....

    When this foster brother relationship does not lead to anything in Blofeld's motivation, why is it in the film at all? It doesn't make any sense.
  • edited January 17 Posts: 1,170
    GBF wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    On the other hand, what was that bit about Mexico City ringing a distant bell? That contradicts him being involved with Bond, or even aware of their later interactions, from Casino to SP.

    Well, the "distant bell" line only contradicts this misunderstanding people have about Blofeld dedicating his life to hurting Bond.

    Blofeld "destroying Bond's world" is a natural consequence of Bond involving himself with Spectre plots. It's not Blofeld's primary mission, nor any kind of secondary mission (well, not until the final act of Spectre). The Mexico City activity "rang a distant bell", and "in a way" Bond is "responsible" for the criminal path Oberhauser took. The film is not claiming that the plots of CR, QOS, and SF were Blofeld trying to get at Bond, and that wouldn't work anyway, given the natures of some of those plots.

    I do wonder if when Kananga tells Bond he's been "a relatively minor nuisance", some viewers take this at face value as well. I've seen many people who think Madeliene in NTTD is genuinely trying to trick Bond into thinking he's not Mathilde's father. I don't think Oberhauser/Blofeld, Madeleine, or Kananga should be that hard to understand....

    When this foster brother relationship does not lead to anything in Blofeld's motivation, why is it in the film at all? It doesn't make any sense.

    Well they're not foster brothers and the film doesn't say they are. But I assume the backstory is a result of EON not being able to wait to use Blofeld and deciding to create a certain dynamic by other means. I've grown to quite like that dynamic, but I know I'm in a tiny minority there!
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 4,797
    dalton wrote: »
    I think it's a natural consequence of EON making the plots of these films so personal over the years. CR is just as much about Bond's romance with Vesper, his learning who to trust and who not to trust, and about his evolution into the "Bond we all know and love" as it is about beating Le Chiffre at a card game. QOS is as much about Bond seeking to find his "quantum of solace" with regards to Vesper as it is about stopping Quantum's coup attempt in Bolivia. Every facet of SF's plot is intertwined in the personal lives of either Bond or M, and their relationship is also a major cornerstone of the film as well. Then you can go back to the Brosnan films and find similar personal elements that are very much present in those films as well, even if the films retain more of an adherence to the original formula.

    With that in mind, there's clearly a pattern that EON has followed since Barbara Broccoli became one of the driving creative forces within EON. The films have had a consistently, and increasingly, personal bent under her leadership, which is why a lot of people are going to seize on those elements as they are found in SP's script. After all of the personal angles they've had since 1995 (and, actually, you could go back to LTK in 1989), for them to then make Ernst Stavro Blofeld, Bond's supposed greatest nemesis, into someone with whom Bond has a relationship that dates back to their childhood and then, retroactively makes him the reason that everything that has happened in these new films has happened to Bond, and then have him make speeches about Bond being the reason he's gone down this path and taking pleasure in destroying Bond's world, EON is at the very least willingly opening the door for people to make that reading of the film. As with any art form, it's also very possible to make a different reading of it, but EON definitely put the building blocks there for anyone to seize on should they see it in the script or should they be inclined to make that reading of the material.

    And Michael G. Wilson?
  • Not a disappointment....but the real question is: did the acquisition and immediate usage of the Spectre rights ruin the vibe of Daniel Craig's first two movies, if not, the first three?

    Couldn't they have used some better established and credible characters such as Yusef, Guy Haines, and even Mr. White (differently) had they kept Quantum with a larger story arc?
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 1,046
    I'd've preferred Quantum to remain the overarching organisation. But then, I'd've preferred Mr. White to have been killed at the end of QOS, the style of CR and QOS to have remained throughout Craig's tenure, no retconning of SF into a wider arc, etc. Doesn't mean I don't love what we did get, because I do - but there's so many what ifs and if onlys too.
  • I was actually hoping to see a storyline with Quantum and Spectre as two aligned but separate organizations -- Quantum being composed of crooked but "legitimate" interests intent on dominating the world through their money and connections, and Spectre being the more brazenly criminal operation. When the two engage in a battle for supremacy, Bond gets caught in the middle. Of course, with the end of "Craig continuity" that idea has become entirely moot -- but it could have been interesting... In this scenario, Spectre's unrestrained operational style would have eventually overcome and absorbed the more "sedate" Quantum, leaving Mr. White out in the cold... and that's why we find him as we do in B24. Just an idea...
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 4,797
    What QoS lacked was a scene linking Bolivia to Quantum's larger plans...not far off from Stacey Sutton's (!) realization in AVTAK that "They'll kill millions."

    Was Bolivia a test run for controlling all of South America? So much--too much--was left unsaid, a casualty of the writers' strike, I'm sure.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 1,046
    'South America's falling like dominoes' - so maybe!
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,244
    Okay, seriously, my only real gripe with the film at all is that Hinx didn't show up for a second round/final fight.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 1,046
    That's certainly a legitimate gripe. Instant third act elevation, right there.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,124
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Okay, seriously, my only real gripe with the film at all is that Hinx didn't show up for a second round/final fight.

    Unfortunately, Guy Hamilton wasn't the director... :-)
  • Posts: 1,170
    echo wrote: »
    What QoS lacked was a scene linking Bolivia to Quantum's larger plans...not far off from Stacey Sutton's (!) realization in AVTAK that "They'll kill millions."

    Was Bolivia a test run for controlling all of South America? So much--too much--was left unsaid, a casualty of the writers' strike, I'm sure.

    I don't think the strike had anything to do with Greene's plot. After all, it's more ambitious than anything Le Chiffre or Silva were up to.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,124
    echo wrote: »
    What QoS lacked was a scene linking Bolivia to Quantum's larger plans...not far off from Stacey Sutton's (!) realization in AVTAK that "They'll kill millions."

    Was Bolivia a test run for controlling all of South America? So much--too much--was left unsaid, a casualty of the writers' strike, I'm sure.

    I don't think the strike had anything to do with Greene's plot. After all, it's more ambitious than anything Le Chiffre or Silva were up to.

    That is true. As much as I am not a fan of QoS I have never minded its down to earth plot. Nobody ever complained about Le Chiffre's simple but interesting plot of using samll terroristic attacks for betting against the stock market. A fine and realistic villain's plot for the modern Bond era, just like the one in QoS. Unfortunately they went back to World domination in the last two Bond films...
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 4,797
    I think the water plot, which was a smart, forward-thinking one, would have been more clearly developed had the writers' strike not intervened, and more drafts written.

    It seems pretty obvious to me that Haggis had already worked out the Vesper angle in this film (which is why everyone praises those scenes) but the water one, not quite.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 1,332
    A big problem with Spectre is it was built on rocky foundations.
    They couldn't get Mendes back initially, Daniel was reluctant to do more than one film, the third act wasn't nailed down. All that before you even start shooting

    Perhaps looking back it was a mistake to not leave the rights to Spectre in a drawer for Bond #7, like they had with the rights to Casino while Pierce was Bond
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    edited January 25 Posts: 4,085
    It's funny how Quantum looked a more intelligent and stylish organisation than Spectre itself. If they allowed Quantum be, Craig's Bond would have eventually met its leader in his last Bond film and it wouldn't have been Blofeld.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,636

    GadgetMan wrote: »
    It's funny how Quantum looked a more intelligent and stylish organisation than Spectre itself.

    And they didn't wear rings letting everyone know they worked for a sinister secret organisation 😁
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,194
    Quantum had the Q pin… XD
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,244
    matt_u wrote: »
    Quantum had the Q pin… XD

    That was clever. Casual observers would think they were just fans of the character from the Star Trek shows.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,194
    Yeah. Sure.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,244
    matt_u wrote: »
    Yeah. Sure.

    Nuns. No sense of humour. ;)
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 12,036
    Yes, besides Bond finding the Q pin at Tosca, you can pick out Quantum members who wear it at Greene's charity fundraiser. Lackeys like Elvis don't get one.
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    Posts: 3,293
    I watched SP once again last Friday.
    PTS? Not perfect but overall very good (the fight in the helicopter should somehow be more exciting...don't know what it is, but it isn't as great as it should be)
    The song? I like it more than the majority but it really doesn't fit the movie title and the visuals.
    The first meeting with M? A bit odd. Instead of getting orders for a cool mission (as expected after the SF finale), Bond is mean and prefers to be thrown out. And why the stuff about "C"?? Ah, because of the ending...
    Bond at home? A bit boring
    Bond and Tanner on the boat? Ok...but this scene is also a bit slow...

    Bond meets Q? Awesome. Very funny. I love this guy. So many funny moments. The banter between Bond ans Q is a great as in the best Q scenes from the good old times between Connery and Llewelyn.

    The transition to Rome? Great
    The funeral? A bit boring
    Lucia at home? Very good.
    The Spectre meeting? I don't like much. Too slow. Odd.
    The car action? Okay, chould be more exciting but at least the last part with the "backfire" and music stands out .
    Bond landing with the parachute? Very stylish. Love it.
    Bond in Altaussee? Christensen is a great actor...however, the whole scene isn't that exciting. A bit slow. THe music when Bond is seen on the Lake isn't fitting at all and the moment when Bond is looking for White in the house is a bit boring.

    Does Bond ever search anything for a minute in another movie? No, because it is boring;)

    Bond meets Madeleine? Okay. I like her.
    Cool to see Q there but does it make any sense that he is there? Don't think so...

    "No, stay"! Cool stuff:)

    The snow action? Not as half as great as it should be :(

    L'americain? Not bad, but a bit slow. As said before: Bond should never been searching anything for a minute or longer...it is a bit boring...

    The train scenes: The first talk is now much more appreciated due to the NTTD PTS. The martini and the talk befpre the fight: I like it a lot.
    The fight? Bloody awesome!!!
    THis film could be much better than I had in mind!!!

    No, wait...
    Bond and Madeleine in the desert: Stylish but a bit boring
    Arriving at SP base: a bit boring
    The meteor talk: Boring
    I could go on: But the rest is either boring or even ridiculously bad written.

    I know I repeat what the majority is saying: Overall, there is so much wasted potential and we feel the length.

    SP falls out of my top 20 for the first time. Only better ranked than TWINE, MR, DAF and DAD.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,244
    SP had some boring bits, yeah. It's not bad if you compare it to MR, but it pales besides the likes of FRWL or TLD.
    Basically, we got two great ones from Craig.
    Come to think of it, we got two great ones from Pierce & Timothy also. Only Connery gave us a bunch...
  • chrisisall wrote: »
    SP had some boring bits, yeah. It's not bad if you compare it to MR, but it pales besides the likes of FRWL or TLD.
    Basically, we got two great ones from Craig.
    Come to think of it, we got two great ones from Pierce & Timothy also. Only Connery gave us a bunch...

    And Roger too!
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,244
    chrisisall wrote: »
    SP had some boring bits, yeah. It's not bad if you compare it to MR, but it pales besides the likes of FRWL or TLD.
    Basically, we got two great ones from Craig.
    Come to think of it, we got two great ones from Pierce & Timothy also. Only Connery gave us a bunch...

    And Roger too!

    Well, yeah, he gave us a bunch of very entertaining ones, but great? Maybe his first two... TSWLM was okay... FYEO was really good...
  • chrisisall wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    SP had some boring bits, yeah. It's not bad if you compare it to MR, but it pales besides the likes of FRWL or TLD.
    Basically, we got two great ones from Craig.
    Come to think of it, we got two great ones from Pierce & Timothy also. Only Connery gave us a bunch...

    And Roger too!

    Well, yeah, he gave us a bunch of very entertaining ones, but great? Maybe his first two... TSWLM was okay... FYEO was really good...

    I think FYEO and TSWLM were both great, and LALD and OP are also good films too, the others I think are slightly mediocre
Sign In or Register to comment.