Spectre (Bond 24)

JustTheOne

Ok is how I'd describe it.

Pretty much seen it all before nothing new.

Christopher waltz badly underused.

6\10.

irishchris

VG31 wrote: »

I wasn't mad on Spectre at all. The recent films are all too dark with complicated plots (although it seemed to suit Skyfall). I would much prefer a return to the simpler styles of the Sean Connery films. Roger Moore may not have been that great as 007 but at least he was humorous and his films are light and enjoyable. Craig's Bond is barely human and has virtually no sense of humour.
When I sit down to watch a film, I much prefer the light but yet still thrilling films like Goldfinger, The Spy Who Loved Me etc. to the recent Bond films which rely to much on intense action sequences.
I think Craig should let Spectre be his last Bond. Someone like Connery or Brosnan is needed who can be true to Fleming's character but still have the humour and charm.

Of the opposite opinion entirely. Thought the previous Craig bond movies were excellent and provided a darker more suspense filled plot compared to this blasé movie full of unthoughtout plots.

Aw I really enjoyed it
explosions guns suits pretty cars!
the plot hole criticisms are all perfectly true but i didnt mind

Loughc

bluewolf wrote: »

Aw I really enjoyed it
explosions guns suits pretty cars!
the plot hole criticisms are all perfectly true but i didnt mind

I enjoyed it too. It's as James Bond as they come. Leave your brain at the door type enjoyment.

heebusjeebus

MI 5 was the best Bond movie this year.
Strangely similar storylines too.

Memnoch

Boring and pointless. The opening was fine but apart from that, nothing really to praise about it. The action sequences were pretty tedious and by the numbers.

Unearthly

Surprised at the mostly negative opinions on here. I thought it was quite entertaining.

The train fight was highlight for me

heebusjeebus

Unearthly wrote: »

Surprised at the mostly negative opinions on here. I thought it was quite entertaining.

The train fight was highlight for me

I was taken out of that fight due to the lack of a score in that scene. Added to the mediocrity of it really.

Wedwood

Speaking of the newer Bond soundtracks, what's the story leaving out the title songs, Spectre being the latest culprit.

I've collected many Bond soundtracks over the years and was disgusted to find Daniel Craig's movies don't include the theme song on their soundtracks. The centrepiece of a Bond soundtrack is the title song, so why release a CD without the main part ?

John Barry would turn in his grave !

FunLover18

Ok I have to talk about the ending.

say what you will about QoS by the end of the film Bond is a cold killer who knows not to let his emotions get involved his work. Bond's arc in CR and QoS takes him from young(ish) agent who's a bit of a lad and a rogue who falls for the best Bond girl we've seen in Craig's films, one who doesn't take his ****, to a young agent who was always a bit of a rogue who's love has been turned against him and murdered, he goes on a murderous rampage killing anyone he finds connected to the organisation responsible until finally he becomes the cold, fairly heartless secret agent we all love. It's why CR and QoS being bookended by the amateur gun barrel scene in the bathroom and the one we all know is so perfect. Having that James Bond give the MI6 for Lea Seydoux's character makes no ****ing sense in the context of CR and QoS and we've seen nothing in either Skyfall or Spectre to justify such a turnaround and sudden show of vulnerability. If anything the needless personal stakes introduced in both of those films should have had the opposite affect and he should have become even more emotionally detached.

In regard to humour, Craig can't do one liners or quips. For me Craig's best comedy moment as Bond is the torture scene in CR, he can do that dry, wicked sense of humour which suits Bond but he's not Roger Moore.

BuilderPlumber

Hope to get to see this early next week. Do not like going to the cinema too early as a noisy crowd could ruin it.

I am looking forward to it and will have to see if this is as good as Skyfall. Personally, I love Craig's Bond and he can deliver the humour when he wants like the 'terrible waste of good Scotch' quote in Skyfall. Whether Bond should be humorous at all is another debate but some people prefer the more serious Bonds and others the lighter ones. I see merits in all of them and they all belong to different eras. I think that Brosnan's era was the weakest (nothing wrong with Brosnan's Bond btw but his later 2 films were rather dull especially his last and it would have been good to see Brosnan in something of the calibre of Skyfall or Casino Royale). Dalton's 2 films were excellent and exactly what we now enjoy with Craig. These 2 were way ahead of their time. Moore's Bond tends to be underrated and most of his films are fun and feature good action. Moonraker is the critics pet hate but is likeable and a good action film not unlike the more respected The Spy Who Loved Me. Octopussy is my favourite of his films and is action packed and also has a good plot that leads up to a series of great concluding action scenes.

If Moore was heavy on comedy, that was his style and yes it progressed from relatively little in Live and Let Die to much more in his last films. A lot of the comedy scenes revolved around the Q character but these were there as early as Goldfinger and were continued even in Dalton's time too. So some comedy as well as the action and world domination plots have always been part of the film Bond.

Will SPECTRE be the new OHMSS that divides fans? We have to wait and see. Anyway, I have a feeling I will love it and come out of the cinema and say this along with Mad Max Fury Road was the best film this year.

flangemeistro

Went to see Spectre last night with the father, brother, nephew and uncle, it's a tradition with us for the last five bond movies and it is by far the best of the most recent bond movies and definitely the best film I've seem in almost two years.

It's two and a half hours long but we didn't check our watches once.

The scenes are some of the grandest and jaw dropping in recent memory, from helicopter acrobatics over 20000 extras in Mexico city to a high octane car chase through the splendid streets of Rome it has everything.

You can tell that the majority of these scenes are also staged and not green screened like so many blockbusters nowadays.

It gave a fair few nods to the Bonds of old while still keeping relevant with the overlying theme of big brother spying on everyone.

And let's not forget the stunning bond girls. Spectacular, epic, stupendous, there are not enough superlatives to describe it. A must see.

Looking back over the last few pages it's blatantly obvious that people need to lighten up, people love to bitch and moan and over analyse.
For Christ sake it's a bond movie, it's far fetched dodging 100 bullets from 20 henchmen while he pops everyone in the head with his first shot.
One post particularly stuck in my mind when the poster asked why didn't the villain just kill bond when he had so many chances, are you actually being serious? Have you ever actually seen a bond movie?
Oh and all the niche hipster nods of approval to Skyfall because it was "dark" "gritty" and "cold" , it's not Christopher nolans batman series guys, it's not cool to like the bond movie that is the furthest from the actual bond genre.

This is a return to the Bonds of old so if you are a true bond fan and want a highly enjoyable 2 and half hours for your €10 then go see this and don't let the wannabe Donald Clarks in their berets with twirly ended moustaches put you off.

10/10

JustTheOne

flangemeistro wrote: »

Went to see Spectre last night with the father, brother, nephew and uncle, it's a tradition with us for the last five bond movies and it is by far the best of the most recent bond movies and definitely the best film I've seem in almost two years.

It's two and a half hours long but we didn't check our watches once.

The scenes are some of the grandest and jaw dropping in recent memory, from helicopter acrobatics over 20000 extras in Mexico city to a high octane car chase through the splendid streets of Rome it has everything.

You can tell that the majority of these scenes are also staged and not green screened like so many blockbusters nowadays.

It gave a fair few nods to the Bonds of old while still keeping relevant with the overlying theme of big brother spying on everyone.

And let's not forget the stunning bond girls. Spectacular, epic, stupendous, there are not enough superlatives to describe it. A must see.

Looking back over the last few pages it's blatantly obvious that people need to lighten up, people love to bitch and moan and over analyse.
For Christ sake it's a bond movie, it's far fetched dodging 100 bullets from 20 henchmen while he pops everyone in the head with his first shot.
One post particularly stuck in my mind when the poster asked why didn't the villain just kill bond when he had so many chances, are you actually being serious? Have you ever actually seen a bond movie?
Oh and all the niche hipster nods of approval to Skyfall because it was "dark" "gritty" and "cold" , it's not Christopher nolans batman series guys, it's not cool to like the bond movie that is the furthest from the actual bond genre.

This is a return to the Bonds of old so if you are a true bond fan and want a highly enjoyable 2 and half hours for your €10 then go see this and don't let the wannabe Donald Clarks in their berets with twirly ended moustaches put you off.

10/10

Idiotic post.

Slating people for having different opinion.

johnny_ultimate

Criticise the film, not the people who like/dislike it. As per forum charter, any more posts along those lines will receive warnings or infractions. Thanks.

fluke

Who's Donald Clark? Does he make the shoes?

tailgunner

Yeah, that comes across as more of a review of the other posts here than a review of the film. Weird.

Saw Spectre last night. I know what to expect from a Bond film, so I can get over the usual tropes, but when Casino Royale and Skyfall offered so much more, it's hard not to be disappointed. Not a bad film really, but pretty much Bond-by-numbers.

FunLover18

flangemeistro wrote:

Looking back over the last few pages it's blatantly obvious that people need to lighten up, people love to bitch and moan and over analyse. For Christ sake it's a bond movie, it's far fetched dodging 100 bullets from 20 henchmen while he pops everyone in the head with his first shot. One post particularly stuck in my mind when the poster asked why didn't the villain just kill bond when he had so many chances, are you actually being serious? Have you ever actually seen a bond movie? Oh and all the niche hipster nods of approval to Skyfall because it was "dark" "gritty" and "cold" , it's not Christopher nolans batman series guys, it's not cool to like the bond movie that is the furthest from the actual bond genre.

flangemeistro wrote:

Looking back over the last few pages it's blatantly obvious that people need to lighten up, people love to bitch and moan and over analyse. For Christ sake it's a bond movie, it's far fetched dodging 100 bullets from 20 henchmen while he pops everyone in the head with his first shot. One post particularly stuck in my mind when the poster asked why didn't the villain just kill bond when he had so many chances, are you actually being serious? Have you ever actually seen a bond movie? Oh and all the niche hipster nods of approval to Skyfall because it was "dark" "gritty" and "cold" , it's not Christopher nolans batman series guys, it's not cool to like the bond movie that is the furthest from the actual bond genre.

Don't give me this bull**** about being a true Bond fan. I've seen all the Bonds and I love them and accept them for what they are and what they are is very different tonally from actor to actor. I have no problem with villains constructing elaborate plans to kill Bond in the likes of Goldfinger or Live and Let Die but Craig's Bond reboot set out to distance itself from the sillier elements in Bond. If you were to watch CR and Spectre back to back it would be very hard to believe they were the same franchise, as mentioned earlier just compare the two torture scenes from both. CR is dark gritty and works, Bond is stripped and completely emasculated because Le Chiffre is in just as much **** in as Bond, he's not torturing Bond for pleasure he's torturing him because he's desperate and needs his money. Compared to Spectre where Oberhauser is torturing Bond for ****s and giggles because his father liked him more, come on, it's bollocks. Skyfall (which for the record I disliked just as much as spectre) and Spectre are perfectly acceptable Bond films if what you want is the old Bond cliches and nods and winks to the oldies but they're so different tonally from CR and QoS in the same way that Diamonds Are Forever is so tonally different from Goldfinger.

I remember when CR came out people did complained about the Bourne-Ness off it but a lot of people also agreed that Bourne franchise gave the Bond franchise a long deserved kick up the arse and CR was very well received overall. Then suddenly QoS tanked critically (because apparently a man hoarding water supplies is more ridiculous that Silva's elaborate plan to kill one old lady or Oberhausers plan to ... Survey everyone (I don't even know what his plan was)), the anniversary came around and everyone wanted the old Bond back with all the silliness that goes with it. As I said spectre and skyfall are acceptable Bond films but compared to what they did with the character and the potential shown in CR and QoS they're a very bitter disappointment.

fin12

Looking forward to seeing this, I really do hope its better than the last two because I thought the last two James Bond films were terrible but I loved Casino Royale, one of my favorite bond films.

farmerjj

Saw bond last night, good film. (nothing more to say no point in comparing it to old bonds or craigs last few,i just enjoyed it as a film)

Agricola

Looking forward to seeing this.
I think you have to accept Bond films are a bit like McDonald's burgers. Theres list of ingredients that all have to be included in each and every one, theres zero room for deviation for the people making them and everyone eating them knows what they are going to get.

Goodshape

Surprised at all the negative reviews here! I thought it was great.

Loved seeing more of the old Bond formula back; the recent films have seemed almost a little embarrassed about them in the wake of Austin Powers and so many other spoofs. With Spectre they seemed comfortable again. Updated and modern, yes, but confident enough in what they've got to just let Bond be Bond, James Bond. With Martini's, girls, cars, guns, secret lairs, fluffy white cats... just what the doctor ordered.


I was left wondering where Monica Bellucci had gone though. With all the talk of finally getting an age-appropriate Bond girl, she's very quickly ditched for someone who'd be more 'age-appropriate' playing Bond's daughter. Left a sour taste.

Otherwise, loved it.

FutureGuy

I came out of Spectre in the same frame of mind as I did Star Trek into Darkness. Great film but, Jesus H. Christ the number of waster opportunities!

First and foremost. They essentially spunked away Blofeld, one of the most iconic Bond villians of all time. What's worse is they get one of the best actrs of our geneation to play the role. Horribly underused.

Monica Belluci. Would like to have seen alot more of her. Wasted. As above.

I just though there were some spots that could have been epic but were wasted. For example, it would have been amazing to see Seadoux's character tied up in the very place M used to sit, while Blofeld watched on. That would have been superb. In addition, I HATED Jinx say "****" just before he died. Again, a tiny thing but there was no exchange between Bond or Jinx all film. Just cold eye contact. When Jinx was just about to die, he should have just started at Bond and died. That would have been a far better end to the character. Both realising Bond had won.

The needle torture. Came to absolutely nothing. Crazy awesome evil lair. Userused.

The reconning of the last 3 villains was also annoying. Silva from Skyfall was amazing, no need to tarnish him to say he was working for Blofeld.

This ranks a little below Casino Royale. Skyfall 10, Casino Royal 8.5, Spectre 8, QoS 5. However, the more I think about it, Spectre will probably drop a little.

Awful theme though. Give me Casino Royale and Skyfall any day.

eeguy

FutureGuy wrote: »

Awful theme though. Give me Casino Royale and Skyfall any day.

I absolutely hate Sam Smith's whiney moaning, and thought the theme sounded awful on the radio, but it seemed to work in the opening credits.

El Diablo Blanco

eeguy wrote: »

I absolutely hate Sam Smith's whiney moaning, and thought the theme sounded awful on the radio, but it seemed to work in the opening credits.

I'm neutral on Smith, myself, but thought the song really worked and the whole opening credits sequence was the best thing about the film!

Das Kitty

El Diablo Blanco wrote: »

I'm neutral on Smith, myself, but thought the song really worked and the whole opening credits sequence was the best thing about the film!

That octopus was dreadful. It was like something out of scooby doo.

I'm not keen on the Smith song either. It goes nowhere.

thomasm

Like Bond films but this just left me feeling flat. I know you have to leave your brain at the door but this stretched that caveat too far. Could do with cutting at least 30-40 mins out of it.

The ending

with a girl strapped to bomb and a timer lacks so much imagination and originality

, the scene

where he breaks the ropes off his hands !!!!

The usual stuff with villains with no ability to hit a target are par for the course. Waltz as stated was criminally underused and the torture scene was just kinda bizarre.

6.5/10 for me.

eeguy

flangemeistro wrote: »

Looking back over the last few pages it's blatantly obvious that people need to lighten up, people love to bitch and moan and over analyse.
For Christ sake it's a bond movie, it's far fetched dodging 100 bullets from 20 henchmen while he pops everyone in the head with his first shot.
One post particularly stuck in my mind when the poster asked why didn't the villain just kill bond when he had so many chances, are you actually being serious? Have you ever actually seen a bond movie?
Oh and all the niche hipster nods of approval to Skyfall because it was "dark" "gritty" and "cold" , it's not Christopher nolans batman series guys, it's not cool to like the bond movie that is the furthest from the actual bond genre.

If you were writing about a Roger Moore Bond then I'd agree with you, but modern audiences want an intelligent, plot driven, interesting, edgy Bond, not a caricature Superman, with women who swoon uncontrollably at his feet. Austin Powers has that sewn up.

What we got had more in common with a run of the mill thriller like the Bourne Legacy.

dr.kenneth noisewater

eeguy wrote: »

I absolutely hate Sam Smith's whiney moaning, and thought the theme sounded awful on the radio, but it seemed to work in the opening credits.

Agree with this, hate the song but worked with the intro

MilesMorales1

The song worked a lot better in context than just as a song.

FortuneChip

I exSPECTREd better

Giruilla

Absolute garbage. The opening scene was so promising.. long take, mystery, something different, then it fell into the same tired routine we've seen before. The constant changes of location felt jarring.. the return to London tired.

Bond used to use various locations to show how exotic they were.. take you to somewhere you hadn't been before. Now the locations are used to wedge in some set piece. Most of the scenes could have been filmed in a studio or any random country. The location setting scenes are all too rushed.

As a Bond fan, can't help but bemoan again the lack of gadgets. It's like Omega had a deal that their watch had to be the sole 'gadget' (if you can call a non defined explosive watch that) in the film.

Daniel Craig has no charisma.

Farty88

Just speculation but is this the first time Daniel Craigs bond has done the iconic opening scene of shooting at the screen in a scope type thing following him great film overall had no problems with it loved opening credits all the way thru to the end can't fault it hope it does really well for them alot of thought creativity and iconic bond traits put into it great job in my opinion it's up there with the best

FunLover18

Farty88 wrote:

Just speculation but is this the first time Daniel Craigs bond has done the iconic opening scene of shooting at the screen in a scope type thing following him

It's the first time he's done it at the beginning of the film, it's at the end of QoS.

franer1970

Is anyone planning to go or has been to one of the middle of the night Spectre screenings? If so why??
For example at Vue in Liffey Valley on Saturday morning it's on at 00:10, 00:40, 01:10, 01:50, 02:20, 02:50, 03:50, 04:20, 04:50, 05:30 etc etc. Same thing at Odeon Blanchardstown. It's been out since Tuesday so it's hardly an opening day rush,
I could sort of understand maniac Star Wars fans lining up at that hour, but for a Bond movie...very strange.

MilesMorales1

franer1970 wrote: »

Is anyone planning to go or has been to one of the middle of the night Spectre screenings? If so why??
For example at Vue in Liffey Valley on Saturday morning it's on at 00:10, 00:40, 01:10, 01:50, 02:20, 02:50, 03:50, 04:20, 04:50, 05:30 etc etc. Same thing at Odeon Blanchardstown. It's been out since Tuesday so it's hardly an opening day rush,
I could sort of understand maniac Star Wars fans lining up at that hour, but for a Bond movie...very strange.

Well they're advertising 24 hour screenings of Bond aren't they? Gotta keep it going.

FunLover18

franer1970 wrote:

Is anyone planning to go or has been to one of the middle of the night Spectre screenings? If so why?? For example at Vue in Liffey Valley on Saturday morning it's on at 00:10, 00:40, 01:10, 01:50, 02:20, 02:50, 03:50, 04:20, 04:50, 05:30 etc etc. Same thing at Odeon Blanchardstown. It's been out since Tuesday so it's hardly an opening day rush, I could sort of understand maniac Star Wars fans lining up at that hour, but for a Bond movie...very strange.

Do the distributors have a say in things like that? By releasing on Monday they're obviously going for the biggest opening "weekend" possible, could this be part of that?

flangemeistro

FunLover18 wrote: »

Don't give me this bull**** about being a true Bond fan. I've seen all the Bonds and I love them and accept them for what they are and what they are is very different tonally from actor to actor. I have no problem with villains constructing elaborate plans to kill Bond in the likes of Goldfinger or Live and Let Die but Craig's Bond reboot set out to distance itself from the sillier elements in Bond. If you were to watch CR and Spectre back to back it would be very hard to believe they were the same franchise, as mentioned earlier just compare the two torture scenes from both. CR is dark gritty and works, Bond is stripped and completely emasculated because Le Chiffre is in just as much **** in as Bond, he's not torturing Bond for pleasure he's torturing him because he's desperate and needs his money. Compared to Spectre where Oberhauser is torturing Bond for ****s and giggles because his father liked him more, come on, it's bollocks. Skyfall (which for the record I disliked just as much as spectre) and Spectre are perfectly acceptable Bond films if what you want is the old Bond cliches and nods and winks to the oldies but they're so different tonally from CR and QoS in the same way that Diamonds Are Forever is so tonally different from Goldfinger.

I remember when CR came out people did complained about the Bourne-Ness off it but a lot of people also agreed that Bourne franchise gave the Bond franchise a long deserved kick up the arse and CR was very well received overall. Then suddenly QoS tanked critically (because apparently a man hoarding water supplies is more ridiculous that Silva's elaborate plan to kill one old lady or Oberhausers plan to ... Survey everyone (I don't even know what his plan was)), the anniversary came around and everyone wanted the old Bond back with all the silliness that goes with it. As I said spectre and skyfall are acceptable Bond films but compared to what they did with the character and the potential shown in CR and QoS they're a very bitter disappointment.

So good you quoted me twice.
Outstanding movie. A return to form.
And the box office takings will prove this.

Loughc

FunLover18 wrote: »

Do the distributors have a say in things like that? By releasing on Monday they're obviously going for the biggest opening "weekend" possible, could this be part of that?

Yep spot on. That's exactly why it was released on Monday.

johnny_ultimate

flangemeistro wrote: »

And the box office takings will prove this.

The box office takings will only reflect the fact that the film cost around anywhere between $150-300 million to make and in and around the same again to market.

Franchise sequels in 2015 are designed to the point where they pretty much cannot possibly not make money. Quality, high or low, barely factors into the numbers.

flangemeistro

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

The box office takings will only reflect the fact that the film cost around anywhere between $150-300 million to make and in and around the same again to market.

Franchise sequels in 2015 are designed to the point where they pretty much cannot possibly not make money. Quality, high or low, barely factors into the numbers.

The movie making costs and marketing will all be subtracted from the overall box office takings, hence why it will be called "profits" .
Christ it's film making 101.
To suggest that the more that is spent on a movie reflects how much it will make in the box office is nonsense.
Have you heard of waterworld.

johnny_ultimate

flangemeistro wrote: »

Have you heard of waterworld.

Yes, and I've also heard of the likes of John Carter, The Lone Ranger, Tomorrowland, 13 Ronin etc... You will notice they're not franchise sequels

All I'm saying is that the last decade or so (even in the relatively short space between Pierce Brosnan's Bond retirement and Spectre) has seen the rise of hyper expensive 'mega blockbusters' - where a combination of high budgets, brand awareness and aggressive blanket marketing (and IMO a discernible lack of creative risks) has ensured it is almost impossible for them to fail. At worst they 'underperform' and take in a mere $600-700m - a number only 'disappointing' in the context of obscenely large spends in the first place. The concept of the contemporary blockbuster have been so distorted that studios feel the only way to avoid a proper flop is to spend even more money on making them and selling them, even if it cuts into their profit margin or requires box office numbers approaching the billion mark to be deemed a genuine success. It doesn't discount the potential breakout hits or anything, but shows why big budget new franchises are reasonably thin on the ground.

This is not a slight nor a complement towards these films, merely an observation that even if Spectre was another Die Another Day or The Force Awakens another Episode 1 the Hollywood hype machine would still guarantee a hit. After all, if the box office was determined primarily by quality, the list of top grossers would look very different indeed

franer1970

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

Well they're advertising 24 hour screenings of Bond aren't they? Gotta keep it going.

24hr screenings yeah, at the expense of any other film anyone might like to see. In Blanchardstown, bar a few kiddies films and The Last Witch Hunter at 11.30pm, there's nothing but Spectre this Saturday.
A case of go to Bond or go to hell it seems.

BuilderPlumber

FutureGuy wrote: »

I came out of Spectre in the same frame of mind as I did Star Trek into Darkness. Great film but, Jesus H. Christ the number of waster opportunities!

First and foremost. They essentially spunked away Blofeld, one of the most iconic Bond villians of all time. What's worse is they get one of the best actrs of our geneation to play the role. Horribly underused.

Monica Belluci. Would like to have seen alot more of her. Wasted. As above.

I just though there were some spots that could have been epic but were wasted. For example, it would have been amazing to see Seadoux's character tied up in the very place M used to sit, while Blofeld watched on. That would have been superb. In addition, I HATED Jinx say "****" just before he died. Again, a tiny thing but there was no exchange between Bond or Jinx all film. Just cold eye contact. When Jinx was just about to die, he should have just started at Bond and died. That would have been a far better end to the character. Both realising Bond had won.

The needle torture. Came to absolutely nothing. Crazy awesome evil lair. Userused.

The reconning of the last 3 villains was also annoying. Silva from Skyfall was amazing, no need to tarnish him to say he was working for Blofeld.

This ranks a little below Casino Royale. Skyfall 10, Casino Royal 8.5, Spectre 8, QoS 5. However, the more I think about it, Spectre will probably drop a little.

Awful theme though. Give me Casino Royale and Skyfall any day.

I have yet to see it. Early next week is my plan. However there are things I know about its storylines.

One is

the bringing together of the last 3 films' villains as all working for Blofeld. It is obvious that the villains of CR and QoS are the same organisation and this is the intention. It is also obvious why Quantum and SPECTRE could be sister organisations thus linking CR, Qos and SPECTRE. Skyfall's villain was not connected to Quantum in the film and it seems a bit like if in Thunderball, it was revealed Goldfinger was also a SPECTRE agent when that was not the intention. I do not mind this but Silva in Skyfall seemed more personal in his revenge mission against M. I do not think someone like Blofeld would have any time for someone else's personal revenge mission. Look what happened to Dano in Love/Hate when he pursued Nidge: his IRA boss, Tony, warned him not to pursue it and when he did, the IRA had him kneecapped and left for dead.

The other is

they ditched the backstory for Blofeld. In the books, he was a Polish WW2-era opportunist made good. He is not linked to the Oberhauser character who is in Fleming's Octopussy. Not sure if this is good or not. Blofeld's earlier film incarnation is not given any backstory btw.

eeguy

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

I have yet to see it. Early next week is my plan. However there are things I know about its storylines.

One is

Look what happened to Dano in Love/Hate when he pursued Nidge: his IRA boss, Tony, warned him not to pursue it and when he did, the IRA had him kneecapped and left for dead.

Can't believe you ruined that for me... Should have spoilered you spoiler! :eek::eek::eek:

Baggy Trousers

FutureGuy wrote: »

This ranks a little below Casino Royale. Skyfall 10, Casino Royal 8.5, Spectre 8, QoS 5. However, the more I think about it, Spectre will probably drop a little.

You thought Skyfall was higher than Casino Royale?
I thought Skyfall was good but 20 minutes too long.

For me:
Casino Royale = 9
Skyfall = 7.5
QoS = 2
Spectre = TBD

The Black Oil

Spectre largely gets a thumbs up from me. I did enjoy the nods to past films, I was expecting more quips and one liners. Early morning screenings with young families is the wrong audience for the ripple effect of humour, in my experience.

On the whole it felt cohesive and yet, it's too long, imo. The opening sequence was great. Theme song OK, in context. The government aspect of the plot had a whiff of 24 about it.

There has been some talk about

"completion" and you get that sense fairly early on, it's burned into the credits. Whether that means the Spectre network alone is now done with, or Craig's Bond is about to hand in his Walther PPK, I'm not entirely sure.

Death by beer keg - shout out to the yellow barrels in Jaws? Weirdly, that death didn't feel very final to me.
Q's hacking was less annoying this time around.
Didn't notice much egregious product placement
M in the field again - good.
Proposed new joint intelligence HQ - ugly.

Kevin McCloud of Grand Designs would kick that thing into touch.

Léa Seydoux...

philstar

The Black Oil wrote: »

Spectre largely gets a thumbs up from me. I did enjoy the nods to past films,

every bond movie has a nod to films past

whats with all this retrospective?? its getting tiresome

jpfahy

Did anyone get the Jaws reference in the movie? (the shark movie,not the bond baddie)

Wedwood

philstar wrote: »

every bond movie has a nod to films past

whats with all this retrospective?? its getting tiresome

Maybe the nods to the past indicates people's taste for the 'grittier' Craig movies is changing, perhaps back to the lighter tone of the earlier movies.

Or maybe it indicates Bond needs a holiday after Craig's successful reboot

FunLover18

Wedwood wrote:

Maybe the nods to the past indicates people's taste for the 'grittier' Craig movies is changing, perhaps back to the lighter tone of the earlier movies.

It started with Skyfall which was released on the anniversary (I want to say 75th) of the franchise, not the date just the year, which also happened to be the same year as the Jubilee and the London Olympics. It was a very nostalgic year for Britain and imo added hugely to the success of Skyfall. I think Bond films have always nodded to their predecessors but skyfall and Spectre have been the most blatant in this regard.