Bobby Roberts
Banned
Well, shit.
Now to find out who it was that lied to us.
Now to find out who it was that lied to us.
007 SPECTRE |OT| It's me, Austin. It was me all along, Austin.
- Thread starter Rich!
- Start date
- Status
Just back from it, a bit disappointed. Felt the plot was very bare and was overly predictable, Waltz was underused and didn't really make any sort of an impact and even the set-pieces didn't wow me (apart from perhaps two). Felt like it relied a little too much on old formulas and ones that have been used a lot since those particular ones began. Ending was OK,
but yeah seems to leave a door open for Craig and at the same time seems to close it.
AHA-Lambda
Member
Hmm, I'm feeling another Skyfall disappointment coming :/
Will find out for myself in 2 days.
Will find out for myself in 2 days.
Spoiler free thoughts.
It's a mess. The action's mostly great, everything around it is shambolic. Very Star Trek Into Darkness-y, overburdened with poorly considered references to previous movies. Links to Craig's previous entries don't work at all, and the key continuity decision behind the villain is catastrophically misguided. The first half of the movie is generally good, especially the sensational pre-titles sequence (wonderful to have the gunbarrel back where it belongs), but the whole thing rather collapses in on itself in the second half.
Daniel Craig is occasionally good, often bored. Lea Seydoux does charismatic, sweet work in a nothing role. Christoph Waltz is badly miscast. Monica Bellucci is barely in it and Dave Bautista, while a great presence, is only there for the muscle. Naomie Harris' Moneypenny gets the least to do of all the MI6 staff, despite being the most action capable. Andrew Scott has nothing to work with, and gives nothing back.
There's some good stuff in there, with humour that mostly works (thanks to Ben Whishaw's dry delivery) and a willingness to have fun which Craig's movies have often lacked. Could do with being half an hour shorter - the narrative structure moves Bond from point A to B to C, etc, lacking any variation or surprise - having one location fewer, and finding a willingness to be its own thing rather than constantly referencing the past and trying to tie everything together, usually very badly. The score is forgettable and the film looks nice, but not especially distinctive. The ingredients for a great film are all there, and with even token consideration, could have at least equalled Skyfall (which I love). Instead, it's marginally ahead of the joyless Quantum. The highs are very high, the lows very low.
6/10, I think. Can't imagine repeat viewings would help it much.
EDIT: To answer two questions from this thread, no, the NOC list from Skyfall is not mentioned in any way, and the OHMSS theme/remix is not used.
It's a mess. The action's mostly great, everything around it is shambolic. Very Star Trek Into Darkness-y, overburdened with poorly considered references to previous movies. Links to Craig's previous entries don't work at all, and the key continuity decision behind the villain is catastrophically misguided. The first half of the movie is generally good, especially the sensational pre-titles sequence (wonderful to have the gunbarrel back where it belongs), but the whole thing rather collapses in on itself in the second half.
Daniel Craig is occasionally good, often bored. Lea Seydoux does charismatic, sweet work in a nothing role. Christoph Waltz is badly miscast. Monica Bellucci is barely in it and Dave Bautista, while a great presence, is only there for the muscle. Naomie Harris' Moneypenny gets the least to do of all the MI6 staff, despite being the most action capable. Andrew Scott has nothing to work with, and gives nothing back.
There's some good stuff in there, with humour that mostly works (thanks to Ben Whishaw's dry delivery) and a willingness to have fun which Craig's movies have often lacked. Could do with being half an hour shorter - the narrative structure moves Bond from point A to B to C, etc, lacking any variation or surprise - having one location fewer, and finding a willingness to be its own thing rather than constantly referencing the past and trying to tie everything together, usually very badly. The score is forgettable and the film looks nice, but not especially distinctive. The ingredients for a great film are all there, and with even token consideration, could have at least equalled Skyfall (which I love). Instead, it's marginally ahead of the joyless Quantum. The highs are very high, the lows very low.
6/10, I think. Can't imagine repeat viewings would help it much.
EDIT: To answer two questions from this thread, no, the NOC list from Skyfall is not mentioned in any way, and the OHMSS theme/remix is not used.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
If you see it in a theater period it's probably in 4k. Most exhibitors upgraded from 2k projection a few years ago at the latest.
Yes for the cinematography, some really beautiful shots in this film.
CR is the best though. You mixed them up, silly.
I really wish they'd get further away from... Bond and his personal trials?
That might sound ridiculous, but all of the Craig movies have had an unusual focus on Bond as a developing character, bringing up issues of his past and integrating them as not side-shows, but key plot developments.
My favorite Bond movies were formulaic, and I liked them that way.
The classic Bond villain wasn't trying to destroy James Bond and his friends - his primary objective was far more sinister, and that was the sole focus. Bond's motivations were 1-dimensional: save the world, avert catastrophe, etc.
Just stick with the formula, Sony. Bond is investigating some small scale deal. It turns into a big scale deal. He finds a super villain with a truly sinister plot. He chases said villain and stops them at the last minute. No mentions of Bond's past. No mentions of it "becoming personal" except for a few key accents. Keep it simple.
That might sound ridiculous, but all of the Craig movies have had an unusual focus on Bond as a developing character, bringing up issues of his past and integrating them as not side-shows, but key plot developments.
My favorite Bond movies were formulaic, and I liked them that way.
The classic Bond villain wasn't trying to destroy James Bond and his friends - his primary objective was far more sinister, and that was the sole focus. Bond's motivations were 1-dimensional: save the world, avert catastrophe, etc.
Just stick with the formula, Sony. Bond is investigating some small scale deal. It turns into a big scale deal. He finds a super villain with a truly sinister plot. He chases said villain and stops them at the last minute. No mentions of Bond's past. No mentions of it "becoming personal" except for a few key accents. Keep it simple.
HIGH DEF JEFF
Banned
I hate to be nitpicky (mentioned this earlier), but do they bring up the agent lost Silva stole in Skyfall. When rewatching it the other day it really bothered me how important it wad for 45 minutes and then dropped as soon as Silva got caught.
I think I would really like a personal plot if they'd thought of it beforehand, in this movie
Blofeld claims he was planning all this all along, but like, we all fucking know he wasn't. They wrote that in for this movie, all that other shit was in no way connected to this. I think they tried and failed to make something personal and hitting to bond, but they tried it with Skyfall too and though I love that one it also didn't really pay off there either ultimately. I know Blofeld will be back - they definitely kept him alive for a reason, but I think if they're gonna do a big overarching thing they need to plan it ahead, and much better.
I seriously hate CR. With a passion.
Fancy Clown
Member
How
ViewtifulJC
Banned
I'm sorry
like I am sorry for you, like how you feel sorry for all those blind orphans you know potential parents will never choose for adoption.
Yoshichan
And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
hmmm
So someone who hates CR loves this movie...
Solo I don't think you'll be enjoying this movie all that much
From everything I'm reading, it seems to be a clone of Skyfall.
I'm still curious to see what people who loved CR and hated Skyfall(like me) think about it.
Solo I don't think you'll be enjoying this movie all that much
From everything I'm reading, it seems to be a clone of Skyfall.
I'm still curious to see what people who loved CR and hated Skyfall(like me) think about it.
On the subject of the score I thought it was OK actually. Not amazing but there were a few decent tracks in there along the way I felt. Also in regards to plot,
anyone else find it rather annoying how simple everything to do with SPECTRE (the group) was? Then again that was the forced nature of Craig's Bond's past being moulded into a new narrative.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
It doesn't have to even do the tropey "Bond is on vacation at a spa resort and uncovers a dastardly plot" type thing. I mean I do want that, obviously, just not all of them. That kind of plot did get repeated too often in the past. There are other spy stories you can tell. But yeah the laser focus on Bond and everything being "THIS TIME ITS EVEN MORE PERSONAL" is certainly grating, assuming that's basically what Spectre is too.
So for someone who was interested in going because of the first trailer and how creepy it was, but has been steadily put off by the other trailers since I'm guessing I'd be better off waiting for it on blu ray?
I was hoping it was going to maintain that very creepy atmosphere from the first trailer, but that was probably wishful thinking.
I was hoping it was going to maintain that very creepy atmosphere from the first trailer, but that was probably wishful thinking.
HIGH DEF JEFF
Banned
All I want is for James to walk into M's office, get an envelope with a mission, maybe a gadget from Q and be on his way.
Tired of the same shit you described and Im reallllly fucking tired of Bond with an earpiece. M, sometimes that dope Tanner, yapping in his ear. Leave the guy alone.
Echoes my thoughts. Was a bit disappointed. Second half nearly ruined the movie.
Hopefully a new Bond is being considered.
Pilgrimzero
Member
I'm somewhat excited, but I fear the plot will be really bad like the previous film. Plot holes the size of a truck in that one.
DirtyManos
Member
I'll watch it just to see the C-X75 actually being driven.
Don't really care about anything else.
Don't really care about anything else.
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
Ugh. This does not bold well. Amazing how the studio fucked up the reboot of the franchise.
Well, here's hoping Bourne 5 is good.
Well, here's hoping Bourne 5 is good.
APZonerunner
Member
My thoughts. Going to spoiler tag everything just to be 100% safe for everyone, so here's a wall of black that's essentially my little review. With spoilers, to be sure:
Anyway, I liked it, but it's a sadly very flawed movie, especially for its length. As far as the Craig era goes, it shits all over Quantum and is marginally better than (the vastly overrated) Skyfall, so that's that. Excited to see what's next.
- Beautifully shot, wonderful cinematography, brilliant locations. The lengthy opening shot (I'm sure it's more than one stitched together via CGI, admittedly) is really very impressive.
- Monica Bellucci is wasted, sadly. Shame.
- Lea Seydoux is NOT, however. She's excellent, and actually ultimately makes for a strong Tracey substitute, even though the 'I love you' comes at a bizarre, forced moment. Also, something about her expressions throughout is just mindblowingly alluring.
- Hinx is a great henchman in the finest Bond tradition. The decision to give him next to no dialogue isn't exactly inspired, but it somehow works with this guy far better than it worked with many others. It feels like too long since we've had a good, strong henchman like this - the last to mind is probably Mr. Stamper in Tomorrow Never Dies, and he sort of sucks (apart from how he has an entire warhead dropped on his foot and merely goes "argh" which remains hilarious)
- The Bloefeld reveal is handled tactfully, and the manner in which he receives his iconic scars is well done. Further, they LOOK great. He feels like a good modern recreation of that villain, and what's more in partially functioning as an origin story this actually manages to give him an additional layer or two. The performance is good, but it does feel like he lacks motivation in places beyond simply being insane (there's echoes of Dark Knight Joker here, incidentally). He needs more time, another movie, maybe more, to truly develop, but he COULD be something great. It's just a shame he's come so late in Craig's tenure; what really should've happened was that Quantum should've been Spectre and it should've been him in that movie, but obviously the rights issues didn't allow that, for better or worse. Getting the cat in was a nice touch.
- On that topic, the way Spectre is retconned back into Craig's era is piss poor, even if it allows for Blofeld to do some gleefully twisted stuff, like putting up pictures of Vesper and M in SIS HQ for Bond to discover during the finale.
- Thought the car chase was a bit of a bore. The film seemed to agree that the chase itself wasn't interesting enough when it decided to drop an exposition scene, with Bond on the phone to Moneypenny, into the middle of it. What?
- Train fight is an excellent tribute to From Russia with Love and Live & Let Die and is excellently shot. It actually makes for astonishingly unlike Bond reasoning for why the female lead falls for Bond after initially spurning his advances, too; they beat Hinx together, they both nearly die, and they fuck in the heat of that adrenaline-filled come down, and that then leads to other places. On board. Works better than it usually does in Bond.
- I generally really enjoy how all the old Bond traditions folded into this movie; the slightly over the top but still believable villainous lair is handled better here than in both Quantum's Desert Palace thing and Skyfall's deserted island. Blofeld's cat, the exploding watch being subtly introduced "the alarm is loud," a traditional silent henchman - it just works. Where it borrows from the past it tends to excel in adapting it.
- The flip side -- the new elements fall flat on their face. All the stuff with the peripheral MI6 characters risks turning the series into Bond and Friends off the back of Skyfall's success in using M in a different way. Because of the stakes this works here, but we really need to see them used as a framing device for a largely unrelated mission next time. The entire CIS sub plot is a wet fart, though, and Mr. Moriarty is wasted.
- Similar to the Bond and Friends comment, the time is coming where we need a story that isn't a personal character study for Bond (we've had Origin, Revenge, and two Personal Missions in a row now) but a story where he's injected into it and has his character moments but the world isn't revolving around him. Similarly the MI6 characters would be spun away from the plot as part of this. Basically, we need a more formulaic 'here's your mission, off you go' structure soon. I think the time has come again.
- You can definitely see where the concerns about the script from Sony (in the email leaks) came from, as the back third really meanders and struggles to find steam, and yet it STILL feels too long. A shame.
- Didn't like the score again. Bring back David Arnold, ta.
- On the Ending: This does leave it open for Craig. They can sunset Craig's Bond era and do some sort of soft reboot if they want (though I wouldn't want to see another CR, more another Goldeneye where a new man saunters in and some of the old lore is forgotten alongside it) or they can essentially adapt the OHMSS/Diamonds revenge quest into a new movie. One could absolutely see a fifth and final Craig film opening with his marriage to Swann, her assassination by Blofeld, and then the subsequent quest. I'd actually like to see their take on this, so I hope Craig sees out his option to do a fifth.
- Monica Bellucci is wasted, sadly. Shame.
- Lea Seydoux is NOT, however. She's excellent, and actually ultimately makes for a strong Tracey substitute, even though the 'I love you' comes at a bizarre, forced moment. Also, something about her expressions throughout is just mindblowingly alluring.
- Hinx is a great henchman in the finest Bond tradition. The decision to give him next to no dialogue isn't exactly inspired, but it somehow works with this guy far better than it worked with many others. It feels like too long since we've had a good, strong henchman like this - the last to mind is probably Mr. Stamper in Tomorrow Never Dies, and he sort of sucks (apart from how he has an entire warhead dropped on his foot and merely goes "argh" which remains hilarious)
- The Bloefeld reveal is handled tactfully, and the manner in which he receives his iconic scars is well done. Further, they LOOK great. He feels like a good modern recreation of that villain, and what's more in partially functioning as an origin story this actually manages to give him an additional layer or two. The performance is good, but it does feel like he lacks motivation in places beyond simply being insane (there's echoes of Dark Knight Joker here, incidentally). He needs more time, another movie, maybe more, to truly develop, but he COULD be something great. It's just a shame he's come so late in Craig's tenure; what really should've happened was that Quantum should've been Spectre and it should've been him in that movie, but obviously the rights issues didn't allow that, for better or worse. Getting the cat in was a nice touch.
- On that topic, the way Spectre is retconned back into Craig's era is piss poor, even if it allows for Blofeld to do some gleefully twisted stuff, like putting up pictures of Vesper and M in SIS HQ for Bond to discover during the finale.
- Thought the car chase was a bit of a bore. The film seemed to agree that the chase itself wasn't interesting enough when it decided to drop an exposition scene, with Bond on the phone to Moneypenny, into the middle of it. What?
- Train fight is an excellent tribute to From Russia with Love and Live & Let Die and is excellently shot. It actually makes for astonishingly unlike Bond reasoning for why the female lead falls for Bond after initially spurning his advances, too; they beat Hinx together, they both nearly die, and they fuck in the heat of that adrenaline-filled come down, and that then leads to other places. On board. Works better than it usually does in Bond.
- I generally really enjoy how all the old Bond traditions folded into this movie; the slightly over the top but still believable villainous lair is handled better here than in both Quantum's Desert Palace thing and Skyfall's deserted island. Blofeld's cat, the exploding watch being subtly introduced "the alarm is loud," a traditional silent henchman - it just works. Where it borrows from the past it tends to excel in adapting it.
- The flip side -- the new elements fall flat on their face. All the stuff with the peripheral MI6 characters risks turning the series into Bond and Friends off the back of Skyfall's success in using M in a different way. Because of the stakes this works here, but we really need to see them used as a framing device for a largely unrelated mission next time. The entire CIS sub plot is a wet fart, though, and Mr. Moriarty is wasted.
- Similar to the Bond and Friends comment, the time is coming where we need a story that isn't a personal character study for Bond (we've had Origin, Revenge, and two Personal Missions in a row now) but a story where he's injected into it and has his character moments but the world isn't revolving around him. Similarly the MI6 characters would be spun away from the plot as part of this. Basically, we need a more formulaic 'here's your mission, off you go' structure soon. I think the time has come again.
- You can definitely see where the concerns about the script from Sony (in the email leaks) came from, as the back third really meanders and struggles to find steam, and yet it STILL feels too long. A shame.
- Didn't like the score again. Bring back David Arnold, ta.
- On the Ending: This does leave it open for Craig. They can sunset Craig's Bond era and do some sort of soft reboot if they want (though I wouldn't want to see another CR, more another Goldeneye where a new man saunters in and some of the old lore is forgotten alongside it) or they can essentially adapt the OHMSS/Diamonds revenge quest into a new movie. One could absolutely see a fifth and final Craig film opening with his marriage to Swann, her assassination by Blofeld, and then the subsequent quest. I'd actually like to see their take on this, so I hope Craig sees out his option to do a fifth.
Anyway, I liked it, but it's a sadly very flawed movie, especially for its length. As far as the Craig era goes, it shits all over Quantum and is marginally better than (the vastly overrated) Skyfall, so that's that. Excited to see what's next.
The horror!
I understand your larger argument, but you know, there have been 20 of those formulaic movies where Bond is just Bond, and he gets a mission and goes. Four movies out of 24 that actually inject some character development into our leading man -- and actually builds the movies around his arc -- is a rare and welcome break from the mold and, for me at least, kind of the major selling point of Craig's run.
Unknown Soldier
Member
If you want the old Bond formula, go fire up some Roger Moore Bond flicks. Or better yet, all of the Brosnan era flicks outside of Goldeneye. Brosnan's Bond movies were the definition of soulless action formula pictures.
I like the way Craig era Bond has more to fight for than saving the world, spouting one-liners, and fucking the Bond Girls. I guess 'THIS TIME ITS EVEN MORE PERSONAL THAN THE LAST 2 TIMES' gets old for some people but damn, Bond has had decades of the formula you love so much, go watch those movies if that's what you want.
Fancy Clown
Member
The horror!
I understand your larger argument, but you know, there have been 20 of those formulaic movies where Bond is just Bond, and he gets a mission and goes. Four movies out of 24 that actually inject some character development into our leading man -- and actually builds the movies around his arc -- is a rare and welcome break from the mold and, for me at least, kind of the major selling point of Craig's run.
Agreed. Especially if the movie is gonna be 2+ hours it damn well better have some character development.
Incendiary
Banned
I've liked all three Craig films, so since all the reviews seem to be placing it between [favorite Craig movie] and [least favorite Craig movie] on the spectrum, I think I'll probably enjoy it.
And personally, I like that Craig's series has had a slightly different tone than the other Bond films. Goldeneye was the first Bond movie I ever saw, so I grew up in Brosnan era Bond (and watched the other Moore/Dalton/Connery flicks later) and appreciate the campy, action-adventure style. But the different style suits Craig's Bond, I think - and undoubtedly if a new Bond is cast after this one, a different style more geared towards old "save the world from a moon laser" campy Bond may suit that actor better and I'd be okay with that, too. But going back to the old formula of Bond while Craig is still the main actor would just feel silly in my opinion.
And personally, I like that Craig's series has had a slightly different tone than the other Bond films. Goldeneye was the first Bond movie I ever saw, so I grew up in Brosnan era Bond (and watched the other Moore/Dalton/Connery flicks later) and appreciate the campy, action-adventure style. But the different style suits Craig's Bond, I think - and undoubtedly if a new Bond is cast after this one, a different style more geared towards old "save the world from a moon laser" campy Bond may suit that actor better and I'd be okay with that, too. But going back to the old formula of Bond while Craig is still the main actor would just feel silly in my opinion.
The horror!
I understand your larger argument, but you know, there have been 20 of those formulaic movies where Bond is just Bond, and he gets a mission and goes. Four movies out of 24 that actually inject some character development into our leading man -- and actually builds the movies around his arc -- is a rare and welcome break from the mold and, for me at least, kind of the major selling point of Craig's run.
They could always do it in a different way though.
It sounding like this one does the same as QoS and Skyfall. This time, it's personal from shit from the past.
Rather than doing it like Goldeneye or License to Kill.
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
I hate it too. You can still have character development, like in CR.
Skyfall wasn't about a threat from Bond's past (more M's really), it just used his house as a setting in the third act.
I absolutely love CR and Skyfall. Must have watched both 3-4 times each, maybe more over the years, especially after I bought the steelbook blu-rays of each. That said I wasn't too keen on QoS. To those who have seen it, is it closer in quality, plot and pacing to CS and Skyfall, or QoS?
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
We haven't gotten any yet.
demosthenes
Member
I want a mix of this and the post you quoted.
Discotheque
Banned
any people who love quantum of solace? yeah i'm not sure they exist.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
The horror!
I understand your larger argument, but you know, there have been 20 of those formulaic movies where Bond is just Bond, and he gets a mission and goes. Four movies out of 24 that actually inject some character development into our leading man -- and actually builds the movies around his arc -- is a rare and welcome break from the mold and, for me at least, kind of the major selling point of Craig's run.
I don't have a problem with character development, but we're watching this to get a spy thriller (with some hot babes and maybe a cool car), not a four part character study on the man. Quantum of Solace was totally unnecessary, and imo the angle they took with Bond retiring then coming out of retirement and being super old and grizzled in what was to be only his third of five films (barring some kind of extention or early retirement) was another misstep. Not that Skyfall was a bad film, but those character beats were not why it was enjoyable, in fact I'd say they were some of the least enjoyable parts of it. M's arc with the villain was decent, although I think the villain character himself was simultaneously too powerful and omniscient and "too" invested in his revenge plot. Was a bit out there for someone like that to be in movies that are trying to be more serious but eh. At least he wasn't trying to slide California into the ocean to sell microchips I guess. The stories since CR have been weak, and the character development is not even particularly good.
There is no consensus amongst people dissatisfied with the Craig films. I don't hate them, except maybe Quantum. I can only speak for myself. But it would be fallacious to say that we can't retain good elements while also sliding into a more familiar context for Bond. Casino Royale is probably a good example here, it becomes personal because of his involvement with Eva, not because it turns out that Le Chifre bullied him in high school. Indeed James is there on a mission, with a specific purpose. Had there been a watch laser or bat-shark-repellant (not saying it needed it, just hypothetically) it would not have wrecked anything.
Variety is fine. I'm not sad we got CR the way we did. One of the best loved classic bonds is OHMSS, which very much involves character development. But at some point we will finally need to launch James as somebody who can have a plot for a movie, then move onto the next. He's an employee of the British Secret Service, not just out for revenge or hunting the ghosts of his past every time. Let him do secret service stuff more than just as a foot note attached to the rest of the story. I'm not sure how much character development you can really retain long term without rebooting it again or something, realistically speaking this is like a comic book where the character is going to last a million billion years and fifty actors.
I like all of the Craig movies to varying degrees but CR is my favorite, then Skyfall, then Quantum.
I loved the initial atmospheric teaser of Spectre but the later trailers make it seem pretty generic. Cautiously optimistic about it not sucking, but even if it does, it's been a great run for Craig.
I loved the initial atmospheric teaser of Spectre but the later trailers make it seem pretty generic. Cautiously optimistic about it not sucking, but even if it does, it's been a great run for Craig.
- Status