Spectre (Bond 24)

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.

BuilderPlumber

The Black Oil wrote: »

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...

Death by beer keg? Had Darren, Tommy and Nidge anything to do with this!!

BuilderPlumber

FunLover18 wrote: »

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.

The background of Bond was not explored in earlier films. He more or less came in as an experienced agent in Dr No. No real backstory was given and his marriage to Tracy seemed to be the only personal aspects alluded to. The Bond of the books was more connected with past events and Craig's films are faithful to this. The background given to Bond, born to deceased Scottish parents Andrew Bond and Monique de la Croix as depicted in Skyfall was mentioned in the books. Not sure if Skyfall is mentioned as the name of his ancestral home in the books?

BuilderPlumber

flangemeistro wrote: »

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.

Waterword is to Mad Max films what Casino Royal 1967 is to Bond films.

FunLover18

BuilderPlumber wrote:

The background of Bond was not explored in earlier films. He more or less came in as an experienced agent in Dr No. No real backstory was given and his marriage to Tracy seemed to be the only personal aspects alluded to. The Bond of the books was more connected with past events and Craig's films are faithful to this. The background given to Bond, born to deceased Scottish parents Andrew Bond and Monique de la Croix as depicted in Skyfall was mentioned in the books. Not sure if Skyfall is mentioned as the name of his ancestral home in the books?

I was referring more to the in jokes than the plot references. As far as I can remember Skyfall and Spectre are the least subtle in their nodding and winking to previous films.

Sofiztikated

FunLover18 wrote: »

I was referring more to the in jokes than the plot references. As far as I can remember Skyfall and Spectre are the least subtle in their nodding and winking to previous films.

There's nodding and winking, and there's pointing and shouting.

seligehgit

Terribly underwhelmed by it.

AMKC

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.

You can not compare Spectre with Star Trek Into Darkness. They are totally different films. One came up with a new story that was cleverly linked to old story's in the Franchise the other was just pure lazy action film with no imagination or new ideas at all. They just done everything backwards pure lazy. I am a big fan of both but to me Spectre is in a totally different class.
I was willing to give the new Star Trek a chance even bought the first one on Blu-Ray as well has having seen it in the cinema more than once bit Into Darkness was just lame so no Blu-Ray no DVD either. I will give the third film a chance but it better be good or I will not bother with it anymore and will just stay with the 10 proper real Star Trek films and the five series of the franchise.

Avatar MIA

Can't remmber the last time I left a cinema completely underwhelmed.

Normally the cinema experience can add the wow factor to very limited movies. This time? Nothing.

What's worse, I have to sit through some up coming maggie smith movie next to make up for bringing my wife to this. :mad:

I liked Daniel Craig, but his legacy has been very badly damaged by this, imo.

eviltimeban

Avatar MIA wrote: »

I liked Daniel Craig, but his legacy has been very badly damaged by this, imo.

That's a bit much - if anything, it'll be cemented by the success of this movie and what he brought to Bond. If he walked away now, his status as one of the best and most successful Bonds would be assured.

Avatar MIA

eviltimeban wrote: »

That's a bit much

Before Spectre I was disappointed with the rumours Craig was leaving Bond. After the movie last night I'm happy for the franchise to move on.

I'm disappointed with that, and appreciate it's only a personal opinion.

eviltimeban

The franchise probably does need to move on, but I don't think Craig's legacy will have been damaged AT ALL. If they'd stopped with QoS or Skyfall had tanked, then sure. But Spectre has gotten solid reviews and will be a commercial hit (if not as big as Skyfall) around the world.

As for me, I enjoyed it when I was watching it - the opening tracking shot was cool and that was probably the most stylish way someone's ever been filmed walking over a rooftop. The action moved around a lot, but I liked the London scenes and the Austria set piece. I felt Waltz didn't live up to (my) expectations, but for the most part he was a good "baddie" - De Silva is still the best of the recent era however.

I feel I need to see it again to properly luxuriate in the whole Bond-ness of it all, as it was a very "Bond" movie. Question is, where to go from here? Sam Mendes said he made Spectre as Skyfall was a departure from the norm so it was time to bring it back to the classic style. But there's only so many times you can make the same movie. What direction will a new director and actor take it, I wonder? Less action, more actual spying?

I feel it would be good to let Bond rest for about a decade after Craig's run is over, see what the film landscape is like then, and respond to it.

Avatar MIA

eviltimeban wrote: »

I feel it would be good to let Bond rest for about a decade after Craig's run is over, see what the film landscape is like then, and respond to it.

From an artistic point of view that's debatable, from a commercial point of view highly unlikely.

eviltimeban

Avatar MIA wrote: »

From an artistic point of view that's debatable, from a commercial point of view highly unlikely.

I know, it'll never happen.

FunLover18

Avatar MIA wrote:

What's worse, I have to sit through some up coming maggie smith movie next to make up for bringing my wife to this.

I'm more excited about this than I was for Spectre.

In relation to Craig's legacy, I do wonder how he'll be viewed in years to come. I do think QoS will re evaluated down the line (or at least I hope so), but his first two films feel so different tonally. CR and QoS are like a new franchise but skyfall and Spectre could easily fit into the old Dr Who style franchise right behind Die Another Day

New Ice Age

Also left the cinema pretty underwhelmed.

It seemed to just jump about a bit in parts. Things just happened far too easily as though they were just trying to squeeze in aspects what Bond is known for the sake of it or to appease some fans.

Also felt they really blew it (no pun intended!) with Blofeld. It just wasn't as exciting an expose as it should've been.

Also, he escaped Blofeld's facility far too easily. I did enjoy the later scenes back in London a lot more though.

New Ice Age

***SORRY*** Used the wrong tags!!!

Unable to edit - keeps bringing me to a blank page! Help?

FunLover18

New Ice Age wrote:

***SORRY*** Used the wrong tags!!!

Can you copy and delete then paste onto new post?

banie01

I really enjoyed the fact that Craig's Bond outings followed a decent story arc, yes the movies all stand on their own merits but the thread of continuity across the arc was a big change to previous Bond incarnations.
That said, I went to Spectre last night and I note some folks mention underwhelmed...
I was much more than that, I was totally disappointed. The set pieces were magnificent!
Unfortunately they were not enough to rescue what is a very thrown together story.
This movie was a serious opportunity wasted!
Too much time and effort seems to be wasted on nods to the mythology, rather than actually crafting the story.

And as for the ending! It was awful! Bond having a road to Damascus moment and the whole Madeline Swann love angle! There was virtually 0 development of a relationship and we are supposed to buy the fact that Bond has a complete reversal of character to "swann" of into the sunset! Awful Awful ending

New Ice Age

FunLover18 wrote: »

Can you copy and delete then paste onto new post?

Couldn't. When I select 'edit' I just get a blank page.


Able to edit on mobile browser. Strange.

FunLover18

New Ice Age wrote:

Able to edit on mobile browser. Strange.

Hmmmm, it's almost like the Boards app is a pile of ****