Die Another Day vs Spectre.

13468913

Comments

  • Posts: 1,165
    Both lower tier movies for sure, but ultimately DAD is more fun and enjoyable than SP which I do find self important, naval gazing and dull at worst. The energy throughout is lacking and it only serves to undo all the previous Craig instalments by retconning it to have Blofeld be behind all the prior adventures.
    Neither one is as bad as DAF, TMWTGG or QOS.
  • Posts: 250
    Both have good ideas kicking about. Spectre is anemic and cumbersome but it keeps the faint heartbeat of those ideas alive even through its snoozer of a second half. Die Another Day starts to bleed as soon as we hit the clinic on the island and then collapses in a screaming heat after the twist is revealed.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Die Another Day knows what it wants. Spectre is lost at sea. Adrift.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Die Another Day knows what it wants. Spectre is lost at sea. Adrift.

    Amen, sir. 100% facts.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Die Another Day knows what it wants. Spectre is lost at sea. Adrift.

    100% facts.

    LOL.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    When we're led to believe Spectre is built entirely out of hate for daddy because he showed some attention to a pre-teen orphan "over the course of two winters", and that the said plot twist is simply to undermine and ruin the life of that person you hated from the get-go so you can rub it in his face and feel big about it, that alone is worth triple the facepalm. As hard as it comes.

    And if that one element was to be sold as quality storytelling that people find novel and a nice touch, then that in itself speaks volumes. We've got nothing to discuss.

    Die Another Day is your simple Nick Fury comic book story overseen by Jim Steranko, starring James Bond. That's what it is. It knew the form it took and was not ashamed to blast the doors open with its ridiculous (albeit amusing, and not comedic as some of you misleadingly label it) and over-the-top action adventure instruments.

    I'll take that over some pretentious kitchen sink drama that doesn't know which form to take to please everyone and deliver an epic fail product solely because it tried to sell it as an intellectual piece of cinema, much like Skyfall. The difference is that the latter at least knew where it was going and executed it the way Mendes wanted it as opposed to the mess Spectre had become.
  • Posts: 4,023
    I think DAD started out with the aim of being serious and a hard hitter, didn’t it? I remember Brosnan speaking early on in filming about how it would be a tough one. Somewhere after that it seemed to be overtaken by fantasy and comedy.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    At least spectre is a good one time watch cinema action film. DAD isn’t even that.
  • Posts: 19,339
    At least spectre is a good one time watch cinema action film. DAD isn’t even that.

    Is it ?

  • Posts: 250
    DAD's first act suggest something a little more psychological and inquisitive than the banal nonsense that it becomes. The suggestion that it knew what it was going for is ludicrous. Nothing about Bond being tortured and potentially out of step with a post-9/11 world is conversant with car duels and robocop battles and whatnot.

    Funnily enough the director's one good film is an actual kitchen sink drama.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    When we're led to believe Spectre is built entirely out of hate for daddy because he showed some attention to a pre-teen orphan "over the course of two winters", and that the said plot twist is simply to undermine and ruin the life of that person you hated from the get-go so you can rub it in his face and feel big about it, that alone is worth triple the facepalm.

    It's true that Bond is indirectly responsible for the path Blofeld took, but this is just a fundamental topos that belongs to so many other stories. The bad guy who becomes bad because of the good guy. That's what "nemesis" means: "anyone or anything which seems to be the inevitable cause of someone's downfall". Nothing strange, nothing new. Same about patricide.

    Having said that I'd like to point out that Blofeld NEVER became the head of a terrorist organization in order to undermine Bond, since Blofeld never cared about Bond for 30 years, at least until Bond became a double 0 and started to INTERFERE with Blofeld's dirty affairs. It was Bond that (unknowingly) came back to Blofeld's life, not vice versa. That's the point. The fact that Bond started to interfere with Blofeld's plans back in CR - something that lead the head of SPECTRE to undermine Bond's closer interests since all the previous villains were never able to kill him - doesn't mean the whole movie is based upon this hate you're talking about. The whole movie is built upon SPECTRE's plan to control the whole world, while the personal connection between the two is just the result of a previous brief relationship. Something clearly established after almost 2 hours of globetrotting. Blofeld's actions towards Bonds are just the result of Bond's work against his interests, not vice versa.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    barryt007 wrote: »
    At least spectre is a good one time watch cinema action film. DAD isn’t even that.

    Is it ?

    I really liked it the first time I saw it. It’s got some good action and some cool locations. Only after subsequent viewings did the true poor writing sink in. So I think as a casual viewer , yeah spectre is far superior to DAD
  • DAD - 4/10
    SP - 7.5/10

    DAD is the worst film of the official EON franchise.
  • Posts: 6,727
    CraterGuns wrote: »
    DAD - 4/10
    SP - 7.5/10

    DAD is the worst film of the official EON franchise.

    You're too generous to DAD!
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    matt_u wrote: »
    When we're led to believe Spectre is built entirely out of hate for daddy because he showed some attention to a pre-teen orphan "over the course of two winters", and that the said plot twist is simply to undermine and ruin the life of that person you hated from the get-go so you can rub it in his face and feel big about it, that alone is worth triple the facepalm.

    It's true that Bond is indirectly responsible for the path Blofeld took, but this is just a fundamental topos that belongs to so many other stories. The bad guy who becomes bad because of the good guy. That's what "nemesis" means: "anyone or anything which seems to be the inevitable cause of someone's downfall". Nothing strange, nothing new. Same about patricide.

    Having said that I'd like to point out that Blofeld NEVER became the head of a terrorist organization in order to undermine Bond, since Blofeld never cared about Bond for 30 years, at least until Bond became a double 0 and started to INTERFERE with Blofeld's dirty affairs. It was Bond that (unknowingly) came back to Blofeld's life, not vice versa. That's the point. The fact that Bond started to interfere with Blofeld's plans back in CR - something that lead the head of SPECTRE to undermine Bond's closer interests since all the previous villains were never able to kill him - doesn't mean the whole movie is based upon this hate you're talking about. The whole movie is built upon SPECTRE's plan to control the whole world, while the personal connection between the two is just the result of a previous brief relationship. Something clearly established after almost 2 hours of globetrotting. Blofeld's actions towards Bonds are just the result of Bond's work against his interests, not vice versa.
    Blofeld taking that path just because Hannes Oberhauser showed some care towards a young Bond in a short period of time is nothing short of laughable. The definition of nemesis that being born out of rivalry could have been done in a manner that's believable. Not because he hated Bond or how his father treated the latter in a short period of time so his jealousy leads to his super-villainy. That's outrageous.

    A believable blast from the past story angle is done perfectly in GoldenEye. But, all that came after it, from the flimsy Paris Carver up to the present Franz Oberhauser have been godawfully executed. I can't fathom the idea of a "nemesis" birthing out of childhood rivalry being anything that's slightly convincing. A twelve year old's idea of creating an epic where the protagonist is the center of the universe and has to thwart enemies that take the life form of a past figure Bond had apparently done wrong. Up next: A school bully Bond twisted the arm of resulted in expelling the both of them from Eton, and now that school bully becomes a suppervillain to take revenge from Bond, joining villains like Silva and Franz Oberhauser's rogue gallery. What is sold as coincidental couldn't be any more the unconvincing. If only it was compelling to begin with. It's not a small world.

    While a lot of people here are against the idea of the retcon that tied all of the previous films in one entry, I wasn't against it at all. But, I sure as hell despise the execution that went awry. Like you said, "nothing new". And so it was. Nothing new. Just a pale adoption of the cliches today's stories in various formats are built around. Nothing worth one's while that warrants the mindblowing aim it took but misfired.
    At least spectre is a good one time watch cinema action film. DAD isn’t even that.
    I yawned throughout the action sequences the last time I watched Spectre, looking at my watch, waiting for the film to be over. With Die Another Day, as ridiculous as it is, I never get bored with.
    vzok wrote: »
    I think DAD started out with the aim of being serious and a hard hitter, didn’t it? I remember Brosnan speaking early on in filming about how it would be a tough one. Somewhere after that it seemed to be overtaken by fantasy and comedy.
    Well, if Die Another Day is a comedy, I can't imagine what Airplane! and The Naked Gun are.
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 7,653
    STLCards3 wrote: »
    I can tolerate Brother-In-Lawgate much better than the embarrassing dialogue and craptastic CGI. SP is no masterpiece, but DAD is the only film in the series that I have no interest in watching at all.

    -1

    SP is lacklustre with a few moments that entertain, DAD while daft as mad cow has some brilliant fun in the movie and Toby Stephens is a total maniac and a proper baddie.
  • QQ7QQ7 Croatia
    Posts: 371
    DAD over SP any day of the week.

    It's at least remotely fun and captivating.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited February 2019 Posts: 4,343
    matt_u wrote: »
    When we're led to believe Spectre is built entirely out of hate for daddy because he showed some attention to a pre-teen orphan "over the course of two winters", and that the said plot twist is simply to undermine and ruin the life of that person you hated from the get-go so you can rub it in his face and feel big about it, that alone is worth triple the facepalm.

    It's true that Bond is indirectly responsible for the path Blofeld took, but this is just a fundamental topos that belongs to so many other stories. The bad guy who becomes bad because of the good guy. That's what "nemesis" means: "anyone or anything which seems to be the inevitable cause of someone's downfall". Nothing strange, nothing new. Same about patricide.

    Having said that I'd like to point out that Blofeld NEVER became the head of a terrorist organization in order to undermine Bond, since Blofeld never cared about Bond for 30 years, at least until Bond became a double 0 and started to INTERFERE with Blofeld's dirty affairs. It was Bond that (unknowingly) came back to Blofeld's life, not vice versa. That's the point. The fact that Bond started to interfere with Blofeld's plans back in CR - something that lead the head of SPECTRE to undermine Bond's closer interests since all the previous villains were never able to kill him - doesn't mean the whole movie is based upon this hate you're talking about. The whole movie is built upon SPECTRE's plan to control the whole world, while the personal connection between the two is just the result of a previous brief relationship. Something clearly established after almost 2 hours of globetrotting. Blofeld's actions towards Bonds are just the result of Bond's work against his interests, not vice versa.
    Blofeld taking that path just because Hannes Oberhauser showed some care towards a young Bond in a short period of time is nothing short of laughable. The definition of nemesis that being born out of rivalry could have been done in a manner that's believable. Not because he hated Bond or how his father treated the latter in a short period of time so his jealousy leads to his super-villainy. That's outrageous.

    A believable blast from the past story angle is done perfectly in GoldenEye. But, all that came after it, from the flimsy Paris Carver up to the present Franz Oberhauser have been godawfully executed. I can't fathom the idea of a "nemesis" birthing out of childhood rivalry being anything that's slightly convincing. A twelve year old's idea of creating an epic where the protagonist is the center of the universe and has to thwart enemies that take the life form of a past figure Bond had apparently done wrong. Up next: A school bully Bond twisted the arm of resulted in expelling the both of them from Eton, and now that school bully becomes a suppervillain to take revenge from Bond, joining villains like Silva and Franz Oberhauser's rogue gallery. What is sold as coincidental couldn't be any more the unconvincing. If only it was compelling to begin with. It's not a small world.

    1. It's not laughable. We're not dealing with a sane person. Blofeld is clearly a psychopath with a twisted mind, as the movie clearly established, and since we're talking about fan fiction the fact that he killed his father because he felt betrayed by him out of envy it's not that laughable. People kills for less even in the real world.

    2. Having said that it's clear that you're blowing the "foster brother" angle/nemesis out of proportion. As I said before Blofeld never searched for Bond out of vengeance, so it's pretty obvious he didn't care about him at least until Bond started to interfere with his business. That's the point. And that's why the "foster brother" angle is just a little part of all the equation. The primary reason Blofeld went against Bond was because Bond jeopardized all his plans, not because he just hated him, as established in the movie. It's so clear.
  • Posts: 4,023
    matt_u wrote: »
    When we're led to believe Spectre is built entirely out of hate for daddy because he showed some attention to a pre-teen orphan "over the course of two winters", and that the said plot twist is simply to undermine and ruin the life of that person you hated from the get-go so you can rub it in his face and feel big about it, that alone is worth triple the facepalm.

    It's true that Bond is indirectly responsible for the path Blofeld took, but this is just a fundamental topos that belongs to so many other stories. The bad guy who becomes bad because of the good guy. That's what "nemesis" means: "anyone or anything which seems to be the inevitable cause of someone's downfall". Nothing strange, nothing new. Same about patricide.

    Having said that I'd like to point out that Blofeld NEVER became the head of a terrorist organization in order to undermine Bond, since Blofeld never cared about Bond for 30 years, at least until Bond became a double 0 and started to INTERFERE with Blofeld's dirty affairs. It was Bond that (unknowingly) came back to Blofeld's life, not vice versa. That's the point. The fact that Bond started to interfere with Blofeld's plans back in CR - something that lead the head of SPECTRE to undermine Bond's closer interests since all the previous villains were never able to kill him - doesn't mean the whole movie is based upon this hate you're talking about. The whole movie is built upon SPECTRE's plan to control the whole world, while the personal connection between the two is just the result of a previous brief relationship. Something clearly established after almost 2 hours of globetrotting. Blofeld's actions towards Bonds are just the result of Bond's work against his interests, not vice versa.
    Blofeld taking that path just because Hannes Oberhauser showed some care towards a young Bond in a short period of time is nothing short of laughable. The definition of nemesis that being born out of rivalry could have been done in a manner that's believable. Not because he hated Bond or how his father treated the latter in a short period of time so his jealousy leads to his super-villainy. That's outrageous.

    A believable blast from the past story angle is done perfectly in GoldenEye. But, all that came after it, from the flimsy Paris Carver up to the present Franz Oberhauser have been godawfully executed. I can't fathom the idea of a "nemesis" birthing out of childhood rivalry being anything that's slightly convincing. A twelve year old's idea of creating an epic where the protagonist is the center of the universe and has to thwart enemies that take the life form of a past figure Bond had apparently done wrong. Up next: A school bully Bond twisted the arm of resulted in expelling the both of them from Eton, and now that school bully becomes a suppervillain to take revenge from Bond, joining villains like Silva and Franz Oberhauser's rogue gallery. What is sold as coincidental couldn't be any more the unconvincing. If only it was compelling to begin with. It's not a small world.

    While a lot of people here are against the idea of the retcon that tied all of the previous films in one entry, I wasn't against it at all. But, I sure as hell despise the execution that went awry. Like you said, "nothing new". And so it was. Nothing new. Just a pale adoption of the cliches today's stories in various formats are built around. Nothing worth one's while that warrants the mindblowing aim it took but misfired.
    At least spectre is a good one time watch cinema action film. DAD isn’t even that.
    I yawned throughout the action sequences the last time I watched Spectre, looking at my watch, waiting for the film to be over. With Die Another Day, as ridiculous as it is, I never get bored with.
    vzok wrote: »
    I think DAD started out with the aim of being serious and a hard hitter, didn’t it? I remember Brosnan speaking early on in filming about how it would be a tough one. Somewhere after that it seemed to be overtaken by fantasy and comedy.
    Well, if Die Another Day is a comedy, I can't imagine what Airplane! and The Naked Gun are.

    Shirley you can.
  • Posts: 7,653
    I still found this Blofeld version the weakest one so far Christoph Waltz did phone in his acting, he did the same thing as QT let him do with the difference that QT can actually write dialogue for his actors.
    Silva suffered the same fate the actor playing him does do the same bad guy routine time after time.
    At least in CR and QoB both baddies were more believeable even if one was a real dick but it did add to the part, he was an original version. To bad they went for big names who in essence did not bring anything new to the table.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited February 2019 Posts: 15,423
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    When we're led to believe Spectre is built entirely out of hate for daddy because he showed some attention to a pre-teen orphan "over the course of two winters", and that the said plot twist is simply to undermine and ruin the life of that person you hated from the get-go so you can rub it in his face and feel big about it, that alone is worth triple the facepalm.

    It's true that Bond is indirectly responsible for the path Blofeld took, but this is just a fundamental topos that belongs to so many other stories. The bad guy who becomes bad because of the good guy. That's what "nemesis" means: "anyone or anything which seems to be the inevitable cause of someone's downfall". Nothing strange, nothing new. Same about patricide.

    Having said that I'd like to point out that Blofeld NEVER became the head of a terrorist organization in order to undermine Bond, since Blofeld never cared about Bond for 30 years, at least until Bond became a double 0 and started to INTERFERE with Blofeld's dirty affairs. It was Bond that (unknowingly) came back to Blofeld's life, not vice versa. That's the point. The fact that Bond started to interfere with Blofeld's plans back in CR - something that lead the head of SPECTRE to undermine Bond's closer interests since all the previous villains were never able to kill him - doesn't mean the whole movie is based upon this hate you're talking about. The whole movie is built upon SPECTRE's plan to control the whole world, while the personal connection between the two is just the result of a previous brief relationship. Something clearly established after almost 2 hours of globetrotting. Blofeld's actions towards Bonds are just the result of Bond's work against his interests, not vice versa.
    Blofeld taking that path just because Hannes Oberhauser showed some care towards a young Bond in a short period of time is nothing short of laughable. The definition of nemesis that being born out of rivalry could have been done in a manner that's believable. Not because he hated Bond or how his father treated the latter in a short period of time so his jealousy leads to his super-villainy. That's outrageous.

    A believable blast from the past story angle is done perfectly in GoldenEye. But, all that came after it, from the flimsy Paris Carver up to the present Franz Oberhauser have been godawfully executed. I can't fathom the idea of a "nemesis" birthing out of childhood rivalry being anything that's slightly convincing. A twelve year old's idea of creating an epic where the protagonist is the center of the universe and has to thwart enemies that take the life form of a past figure Bond had apparently done wrong. Up next: A school bully Bond twisted the arm of resulted in expelling the both of them from Eton, and now that school bully becomes a suppervillain to take revenge from Bond, joining villains like Silva and Franz Oberhauser's rogue gallery. What is sold as coincidental couldn't be any more the unconvincing. If only it was compelling to begin with. It's not a small world.

    1. It's not laughable. We're not dealing with a sane person. Blofeld is clearly a psychopath with a twisted mind, as the movie clearly established, and since we're talking about fan fiction the fact that he killed his father because he felt betrayed by him out of envy it's not that laughable. People kills for less even in the real world.

    2. Having said that it's clear that you're blowing the "foster brother" angle/nemesis out of proportion. As I said before Blofeld never searched for Bond out of vengeance, so it's pretty obvious he didn't care about him at least until Bond started to interfere with his business. That's the point. And that's why the "foster brother" angle is just a little part of all the equation. The primary reason Blofeld went against Bond was because Bond jeopardized all his plans, not because he just hated him, as established in the movie. It's so clear.
    You're using the term "established" very liberally here. It'd be established if it was spilled out in a detail that strikes the bolt to what would be coherently sensible. In Franz Oberhauser's case, there was none of that. His character was half-baked. Every single time he was given the opportunity to thrive in terms of character development, it was cut short. Only petty people kill for less and Blofeld isn't supposed to be that. I think you said it yourself what Spectre is: Fan fiction. A very bad one at that. The very same reason I find Anthony Horowitz's novel, Forever and A Day to be ridiculously weak.

    That said, I don't hate Spectre. Never have. I find it as weak as most of the Bond films in the early seventies and the whole of eighties, but for different reasons. In Spectre's case, it's the plot that doesn't hold itself together. Not by a long mile.

    The foster brother angle is enough to undermine what Blofeld is about. We're talking the standards of Dr. Evil and Austin Powers here. His envious hatred of Bond that led him to that path is very obvious right to the face of the viewer. All that talk about cuckoo's nest whatsoever is enough of an establishment to point out the fact that his jealousy gave birth to his antagonistic behaviour and inauguration to what he has become. Unfortunately, it doesn't hold water.

    As for Bond interfering with his plans, no arguments from me. That's what made Bond and Blofeld sworn enemies in the first place, and the hatred between them grew without either of them knowing each other prior to their first meeting as adult enemies on the opposite sides of the fence. Rarely a law enforcement officer had a connection with an underworld leader that motivated them both to become the opposite of one another and sanction battles. That's built through their professional careers. That's real-life. The other way around is what you'd see in the likes of High School Musical and whatnot.
    vzok wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    When we're led to believe Spectre is built entirely out of hate for daddy because he showed some attention to a pre-teen orphan "over the course of two winters", and that the said plot twist is simply to undermine and ruin the life of that person you hated from the get-go so you can rub it in his face and feel big about it, that alone is worth triple the facepalm.

    It's true that Bond is indirectly responsible for the path Blofeld took, but this is just a fundamental topos that belongs to so many other stories. The bad guy who becomes bad because of the good guy. That's what "nemesis" means: "anyone or anything which seems to be the inevitable cause of someone's downfall". Nothing strange, nothing new. Same about patricide.

    Having said that I'd like to point out that Blofeld NEVER became the head of a terrorist organization in order to undermine Bond, since Blofeld never cared about Bond for 30 years, at least until Bond became a double 0 and started to INTERFERE with Blofeld's dirty affairs. It was Bond that (unknowingly) came back to Blofeld's life, not vice versa. That's the point. The fact that Bond started to interfere with Blofeld's plans back in CR - something that lead the head of SPECTRE to undermine Bond's closer interests since all the previous villains were never able to kill him - doesn't mean the whole movie is based upon this hate you're talking about. The whole movie is built upon SPECTRE's plan to control the whole world, while the personal connection between the two is just the result of a previous brief relationship. Something clearly established after almost 2 hours of globetrotting. Blofeld's actions towards Bonds are just the result of Bond's work against his interests, not vice versa.
    Blofeld taking that path just because Hannes Oberhauser showed some care towards a young Bond in a short period of time is nothing short of laughable. The definition of nemesis that being born out of rivalry could have been done in a manner that's believable. Not because he hated Bond or how his father treated the latter in a short period of time so his jealousy leads to his super-villainy. That's outrageous.

    A believable blast from the past story angle is done perfectly in GoldenEye. But, all that came after it, from the flimsy Paris Carver up to the present Franz Oberhauser have been godawfully executed. I can't fathom the idea of a "nemesis" birthing out of childhood rivalry being anything that's slightly convincing. A twelve year old's idea of creating an epic where the protagonist is the center of the universe and has to thwart enemies that take the life form of a past figure Bond had apparently done wrong. Up next: A school bully Bond twisted the arm of resulted in expelling the both of them from Eton, and now that school bully becomes a suppervillain to take revenge from Bond, joining villains like Silva and Franz Oberhauser's rogue gallery. What is sold as coincidental couldn't be any more the unconvincing. If only it was compelling to begin with. It's not a small world.

    While a lot of people here are against the idea of the retcon that tied all of the previous films in one entry, I wasn't against it at all. But, I sure as hell despise the execution that went awry. Like you said, "nothing new". And so it was. Nothing new. Just a pale adoption of the cliches today's stories in various formats are built around. Nothing worth one's while that warrants the mindblowing aim it took but misfired.
    At least spectre is a good one time watch cinema action film. DAD isn’t even that.
    I yawned throughout the action sequences the last time I watched Spectre, looking at my watch, waiting for the film to be over. With Die Another Day, as ridiculous as it is, I never get bored with.
    vzok wrote: »
    I think DAD started out with the aim of being serious and a hard hitter, didn’t it? I remember Brosnan speaking early on in filming about how it would be a tough one. Somewhere after that it seemed to be overtaken by fantasy and comedy.
    Well, if Die Another Day is a comedy, I can't imagine what Airplane! and The Naked Gun are.

    Shirley you can.
    Now now. Don't call me Shirley. I'm no Bassey. :D
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    I'm using that term properly and because of that I don't have anything to add.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    If it were used properly, it'd have filled in the blanks.

    As it goes, it all boils down to personal tastes. You appreciate that aspect, I don't. I'm very fine with it. Different strokes for different folks, as they say.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    IMO both movies drag. Whenever I watch 'em I stop caring about both as they reach the climax on the Antonov and in London.

    The Antonov finale has great music and I especially love Graves' demise (Time to face gravity!) but to be honest I'd be happier had the movie climax taken place at the Ice Palace and had it been shorter.

    I'm afraid there's nothing salvageable about SPECTRE's London chase. The music is just a rehash of The Moors, Blofeld's photo tunnel makes no sense. Though I love Blofeld's line "Look around you, James. This is what's left of your world. Everything you stood for, everything you believed in, a ruin."

    Overall SPECTRE is the one I enjoy the most, but there are many things I'd change about both anyway.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited February 2019 Posts: 4,343
    As it goes, it all boils down to personal tastes. You appreciate that aspect, I don't. I'm very fine with it. Different strokes for different folks, as they say.

    At least here we can all agree. :)

    I just want to add that I clearly don't think SP is perfect and it's pretty evident that Blofeld ended up half baked, as u like to say. But I always loved the overall product. I think I saw it 20 times, something like that.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited February 2019 Posts: 15,423
    matt_u wrote: »
    As it goes, it all boils down to personal tastes. You appreciate that aspect, I don't. I'm very fine with it. Different strokes for different folks, as they say.

    At least here we can all agree. :)

    I just want to add that I clearly don't think SP is perfect and it's pretty evident that Blofeld ended up half baked, as u like to say. But I always loved the overall product. I think I saw it 20 times, something like that.
    Hey, no harm done. My apologies if I came off as antagonistic.

    Spectre isn't perfect, but there are a lot of scenes that are quite Bondian. Despite what the majority of fans think of the pre-title sequence, I for one find it compelling enough to say it's one of the best in the series. Especially the bit where Bond exits the balcony and walks forward with the tracking shot as the Bond Theme plays. I wish we could get more of that in the future.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    matt_u wrote: »
    As it goes, it all boils down to personal tastes. You appreciate that aspect, I don't. I'm very fine with it. Different strokes for different folks, as they say.

    At least here we can all agree. :)

    I just want to add that I clearly don't think SP is perfect and it's pretty evident that Blofeld ended up half baked, as u like to say. But I always loved the overall product. I think I saw it 20 times, something like that.
    Hey, no harm done. My apologies if I came off as antagonistic.

    Spectre isn't perfect, but there are a lot of scenes that are quite Bondian. Despite what the majority of fans think of the pre-title sequence, I for one find it compelling enough to say it's one of the best in the series. Especially the bit where Bond exits the balcony and walks forward with the tracking shot as the Bond Theme plays. I wish we could get more of that in the future.

    That was a really good sequence, yes. I also love the sequences in the train + the arrival at Blofeld's liar. Very Bondian. In that train I felt like being in a time machine. I quite liked also Newman's score in that scenes.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    As it goes, it all boils down to personal tastes. You appreciate that aspect, I don't. I'm very fine with it. Different strokes for different folks, as they say.

    At least here we can all agree. :)

    I just want to add that I clearly don't think SP is perfect and it's pretty evident that Blofeld ended up half baked, as u like to say. But I always loved the overall product. I think I saw it 20 times, something like that.
    Hey, no harm done. My apologies if I came off as antagonistic.

    Spectre isn't perfect, but there are a lot of scenes that are quite Bondian. Despite what the majority of fans think of the pre-title sequence, I for one find it compelling enough to say it's one of the best in the series. Especially the bit where Bond exits the balcony and walks forward with the tracking shot as the Bond Theme plays. I wish we could get more of that in the future.

    That was a really good sequence, yes. I also love the sequences in the train + the arrival at Blofeld's liar. Very Bondian. In that train I felt like being in a time machine. I quite liked also Newman's score in that scenes.
    Agreed. Loved the Casablanca vibes it left. Newman's character themes (for Lucia and Madeleine) were great pieces. The front garden in Blofeld's lair was a great production design, something you'd see in an old Bond film. Wish there was more of that, though. The Blofeld lair needed a lot more to be explored.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    edited February 2019 Posts: 1,532
    I've always enjoyed the hell out of DAD, apart from some of the terrible CGI and dialogue. It knows what it is and fully embraces the sillier side of Bond films. Don't take it too seriously.

    I enjoyed SP quite a bit the first couple times I watched it and had it in the middle of my ranking. Unfortunately, apart from the Rome and Morocco scenes, it bores the mod edit out of me now. It's the only film in the series that I wouldn't mind never watching again.
  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    edited February 2019 Posts: 5,185
    I actually feel much the same way about the two.
    They both start out amazingly, in the first third i would almost say they are my favorite movie of their respective lead actors. And then around the halfway point everything starts going downhill, and the last third of each movie is a complete mess.

    Though If i had to, i would pick DAD for Brosnans best or second best performance in it.
Sign In or Register to comment.