› ›

In time, will SP be more or less appreciated?

1…4546474951

Comments

  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,252
    Regardless of our thoughts we can hardly call spectre a failure
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    w2bond wrote: »
    Regardless of our thoughts we can hardly call spectre a failure

    Not a commericial failure anyhow. But remember how is spoken about number one and two on the list of best commercial movies. ;)
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,824
    Getafix wrote: »
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    @bondjames
    just omit all the American critics and SP would skyrocket to ratings similar to Skyfall.

    SPECTRE failed the American audience but it was a roaring success elsewhere.

    It's LTK all over again.

    Except that back in 1989 the US market was far more important than it is now.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    @bondjames
    just omit all the American critics and SP would skyrocket to ratings similar to Skyfall.

    SPECTRE failed the American audience but it was a roaring success elsewhere.

    It's LTK all over again.

    Except that back in 1989 the US market was far more important than it is now.
    From a strictly box office gross perspective, yes. However, it's still very important from a profitability perspective. Studios are based there and production costs are measured in US$. It's also my understanding that profitability per butt in seat is higher in the US (due to cost sharing with distributors/exhibitors overseas).

    It's also still very important culturally, since word of mouth spreads from this market. As an example, films like Terminator Genesys were big hits overseas but yet a sequel wasn't guaranteed until Arnie and Cameron said they would be back with yet another reboot.
  • stun_harvestingstun_harvesting
    Posts: 337
    I imagine Spectre would be a film that people would prefer to forget, especially if they do the right thing and start moving away from the CR arc and abandoning the terrible things that SP did to Blofeld.

    If SP is just the start of the series heading in that direction, then it'll be remembered, but not very fondly.

    I can't seem to think of a scenario where it'd be remembered well.
  • RobertsonRobertson
    Posts: 170
    Less.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited August 2017 Posts: 9,020
    .
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    stun_harvesting wrote: »
    I imagine Spectre would be a film that people would prefer to forget, especially if they do the right thing and start moving away from the CR arc and abandoning the terrible things that SP did to Blofeld.

    If SP is just the start of the series heading in that direction, then it'll be remembered, but not very fondly.

    I can't seem to think of a scenario where it'd be remembered well.

    The Blofeld argument is only valid for us informed fans.
    The general audience that saw SP didn't even know who Blofeld is or if they heard of the name had no idea of his past in the films.
    The Oberhauser / Blofeld thing is completely unimportant for future assessment of the film.

    So it makes the whole pissing all over the character even more offensive then.

    If the public have no idea and don't care in the slightest (which I agree with) EON were aiming the whole stepbrother concept and dismal Blofeld reveal at us fans.

    If that's how they really feel about us I'd sooner they'd have just come round and physically shat through my letterbox and delivered a good Bond film instead.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited August 2017 Posts: 9,020
    .
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    After EON has insulted us fans with the mainstreamed to death SF that has a plot like an episode of Grey's Anatomy the Blofeld insult was very forgivable as it is a mere sentence in the film. SF sadly is an insult from start to finish.
    @TheWizardOfIce

    I agree. I'm no fan of Brofeld, but overall I prefer SP to SF.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    After EON has insulted us fans with the mainstreamed to death SF that has a plot like an episode of Grey's Anatomy the Blofeld insult was very forgivable as it is a mere sentence in the film. SF sadly is an insult from start to finish.
    @TheWizardOfIce

    Where I believe people have an issue is that SF extrapolates on and adds to the almost transparent layer of backstory we have of Bond. SP takes two elements of the Fleming canon, one being arguably 'the' classic villain, and smashes them together.

    One takes liberties, the other singlehandedly rewrites Fleming. One attempted something different, the other thought it could have its cake and eat it.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Neither film is all that. But SF is definitely overrated around here.
  • stun_harvestingstun_harvesting
    edited June 2017 Posts: 337
    Agreed. Skyfall tried too hard to be its own thing and ended up deviating too much from classic Bond, while Spectre attempted to hark back to classic Bond too much and ended up doing damage to the series' memory with its handling of Blofeld. Both were dull films on the whole as well, IMO. Though I did enjoy the theme songs. Much better than that disgrace that QoS offered us.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited June 2017 Posts: 11,425
    @stun_harvesting, it's refreshing to hear someone speak the truth about these two overblown behemoths.

    Let's say it again, because it's worth repeating - Skyfall and Spectre are actually both dull.

    Forget all the baloney on here about how SF is an art house masterpiece - the prospect of watching these two frankly makes doing the ironing seem like an appealing prospect.

    For me, Mendes has been a bit of a flop as a Bond director. But as with the Brosnan era, you can't deny he's been a commercial success.

  • stun_harvestingstun_harvesting
    edited June 2017 Posts: 337
    Getafix wrote: »
    @stun_harvesting, it's refreshing to hear someone speak the truth about these two overblown behemoths.

    For me, Mendes has been a bit of a flop as a Bond director. But as with the Brosnan era, you can't deny he's been a commercial success.

    Thanks. I love pomp and camp (I came to Bond in the 70's, after all) but what I don't like is ruining parts of the series, especially a character as significant as Blofeld, and particularly given that he wasn't even created on the screen by the Craig era. For the same reason, I'm less tolerant of FYEO trashing Blofeld than MR "trashing" Jaws (who was a creation of TSWLM, which was worked on by pretty much the same people as MR). For me, MR was more of a dial-up of TSWLM, whereas SP was a genuine misstep, IMO.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited June 2017 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote: »
    @stun_harvesting, it's refreshing to hear someone speak the truth about these two overblown behemoths.

    Let's say it again, because it's worth repeating - Skyfall and Spectre are actually both dull.

    Forget all the baloney on here about how SF is an art house masterpiece - the prospect of watching these two frankly makes doing the ironing seem like an appealing prospect.

    For me, Mendes has been a bit of a flop as a Bond director. But as with the Brosnan era, you can't deny he's been a commercial success.

    Skyfall was the best cinematic experience with Bond I've ever had. Dull? Pah.

    Spectre I agree though is a bit of a disappointment.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited June 2017 Posts: 11,425
    I came out of SF depressed. After seeing SP I was just bored.

    Overlong, badly written snore-fests.

    I'd still rather watch SP though as the good bits are better than SF IMO.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Yes, I agree with @stun_harvesting. I recognized immediately that Mendes had done his own thing with SF. That's what I liked about it actually. I recall walking out of the theatre and thinking to myself: 'well, that was different'. It was refreshing. Unlike some, I still enjoy that different take on the proceedings. It's a unique entry to me, just like FRWL is.

    SP is just a rehash to me. Repeats of things done better before. Tired and uninspired. In that respect it reminds me most readily of TND. I rank them both quite closely.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    One of the big weaknesses of the Craig era is the films are over long. That's another reason I like QoS.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Getafix wrote: »
    One of the big weaknesses of the Craig era is the films are over long. That's another reason I like QoS.

    Yes,i have to agree with that.
    QoS is definitely my 'go to' Craig film,a lot easier to watch and less draining than the other 3.

  • GetafixGetafix
    edited June 2017 Posts: 11,425
    The others require a concerted effort not to fall asleep - which is not really a good sign with a Bond film.

    That's not to say that they're bad, but for me I literally don't want to have to make any effort while watching Bond. The 60s films (apart perhaps from the overrated TB) are all wonderful. No effort required at all. Pure entertainment.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    I feel the same about the 60's but find GF more overrated than TB.
  • stun_harvestingstun_harvesting
    Posts: 337
    Getafix wrote: »
    The others require a concerted effort not to fall asleep - which is not really a good sign with a Bond film.

    For me, that would be a sin for a Bond film.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,883
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I feel the same about the 60's but find GF more overrated than TB.
    Yes, with the 60's efforts I am most likely to fall asleep during the later half of YOLT & GF, and not during TB.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    The GF knocking on here always astounds me.

    Bored of GF? Bored of life I say!
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,824
    Getafix wrote: »
    One of the big weaknesses of the Craig era is the films are over long. That's another reason I like QoS.

    I actually prefer when Bond movies are longer.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Getafix wrote: »
    The TB knocking on here always astounds me.

    Bored of TB ? Bored of life I say!

  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    The TB knocking on here always astounds me.

    Bored of TB ? Bored of life I say!

    He he :

    TB > GF

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,471
    Getafix wrote: »
    The GF knocking on here always astounds me.

    Bored of GF? Bored of life I say!

    I loved it as a kid, felt it was a big snoozefest during my teenage years, and now I've regained a massive appreciation and love for the film over the last several years. This one's far from boring, in my opinion.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Glad to hear someone speaking up for GF. A work of art - if this series ever produced one - GF is it.
Sign In or Register to comment.