Spectre (2015)

[Athena]

Spectre is the twenty-fourth James Bond film produced by Eon Productions. It features Daniel Craig in his fourth performance as James Bond, and Christoph Waltz. Directed by Sam Mendes as his second James Bond film following Skyfall, and  written by John Logan, Neal Purvis, Robert Wade and Jez Butterworth. M, Q and Miss Moneypenny return, with the new additions of Léa Seydoux as Dr. Madeleine Swann, Dave Bautista as Mr. Hinx, and Monica Bellucci as Lucia Sciarra.

 

US Release Date: November 6, 2015.

[AimingforYoko]

Uh, Waltz hasn't been confirmed as Blofeld, has he? I believe his name is officially Franz Oberhauser. He very may well turn out to be Blofeld, but I don't think that particular cat is out of the bag yet.

Edited November 3, 2015 by AimingforYoko

[Danny Franks]

I saw it here in the UK last week. I don't think this review will contain any spoilers:

 

Didn't care for it one bit. But, of course, I'm not a Bond fan. My girlfriend is, which is why I went to see it.

 

My overall impression was that it's stupid, but it's the po-faced, hardheaded kind of stupid that doesn't make for entertaining movies. Bond is a dick, the women are there just so he has somewhere to stick his dick, and no one acts like a normal human being would in any scene. Daniel Craig spends most of the movie doing his best '16 year old girl selfie trout pout' for some reason.

 

I like Ben Whishaw and Ralph Fiennes, but they're so much better than this dreck. But like I said, I don't like Bond. My girlfriend enjoyed it, and so did a couple of other people I know, so I would assume that fans of the franchise will think it's the bee's knees.

[NumberCruncher]

I thought it was okay but definitely not as good as Skyfall. My main complaint was that it dragged on about about 30 minutes longer than it should have. I found myself itching to look at my phone just to assess how much more time was left. I think a big part of why it seemed like such a drag is that we are yet again subjected to another Bond history lesson full of angst with no real redemption--just him walking off at the end looking tired. Still I thought Christoph Waltz did a better job as the villain than Javier Bardem did in Skyfall because he managed to bring the crazy without going OTT.

Other thoughts: Ralph Fiennes does an admirable job as M, but Judi Dench's presence was sorely missed. Ben Whishaw was, by far, the best part of the film providing the only much-needed moments of levity.

I'm glad this is DC's last time around as Bond. I also hope that it's Mendes's last turn as director as both he and DC seem like they're over the whole thing and it definitely shows in this movie.

Edited November 3, 2015 by NumberCruncher

[lambertman]

Have to agree. I still had fun at the screening I attended last night, but on the whole it's a tick or two below QoS to be my least favorite Craig Bond movie.

 

The theme song is pretty abysmal, too.

[vavera4ka]

It was OK.

Daniel Craig still got it though. It was funny, there were shots where I looked at him and thought to myself "He is getting old. That's sad" And then a moment later it was "cold shower for one, please"

Also can't un-see Moriarti in Andrew Scott. Even if he were one of the good guys I wouldn't have believed it for one second

This movie added "Day of the Dead in Mexico City" to my bucket list.

PS. got a chuckle over "hey I kinda just killed your husband, let's have sex" scene. Cause that totally happens every day LOL

[KatWay]

bit of a waste of Christoph Waltz. He was excellent when he was on, but they kind of wasted him. Javier Bardem had much more to do in Skyfall, this is Blofeld, he should have had a much bigger role. I like Lea Seydoux but I wasn't feeling her with Craig. Honestly I just couldn't get over how much younger she looked. And I rolled my eyes so hard when she said "I love you" - please, girl, you met him like a week ago. I also rolled my eyes when in London, Bond was all "okay, fine, you and I go our separate ways, off you go, surely nothing bad will happen to you" and boom, she gets kidnapped. DUH. I legitimately expected her to be dead when Bond found her in the building because there really was no reason for Blofeld to have her actually be alive (Bond would go looking for her either way), but whatever, I guess they wanted a happy ending after all the depressing ones.

[tanita]

Not a bad movie, but IMO not even close to Skyfall.

 

The action was fantastic except the last action sequence and the end of the movie in general. It was very anticlimactic.

 

Also, I expect more from Waltz's character. He was supost to be the man behind every villain Bond met in the Craig era and he ended up rather underdeveloped and unimpressive. While there was a lot of mystery surrounding him in the first half of the film, his "daddy didn't love we as much as you" complex really ruined the mystic and strength of the character for me.

 

I kept expecting some double crossing action from Lea, but she was far more straight forward then I anticipated. To little Monica Belucci. They really reduced both of them to "Bond girls" trope. Was expecting much much more.

 

All in all, this was a very formulaic Bond and while not played out, it was missing the clear depth and flavor of the previous movie.

 

I consider Skyfall to still be the best Bond movie ever made.

Edited November 6, 2015 by tanita

[methodwriter85]

Well, Lea is 30 so she's not quite daughter age to Daniel Craig, but he did look pretty old and tired in this one. This definitely felt like the end for DC in the role.

 

Ben Whishaw. I just want to run my hands through his hair.

 

Skyfall was better, but eh, this closes out the Daniel Craig years nicely.

Edited November 6, 2015 by methodwriter85

[ribboninthesky1]

Ben Whishaw. I just want to run my hands through his hair.

 

Agreed.  

 

I thought this was just north of abysmal.  Bond is just shy of a comic book character anyway, but whoo boy, there was a lot of stupid.  Not only that - a lot of characters just standing around, not doing anything.  Especially Lea Seydoux's character.  I thought Skyfall was incredibly overrated and bloated, and I didn't realize Mendes returned for this one.  So basically, it had the same problems. He is supposedly scheduled to helm the next one.  If true, it likely won't matter who plays Bond, it'll be a mess.  

 

Still, I saw it in IMAX, so the cinematography was breathtaking.  Best thing about the film for me. 

 

I think Craig is a good Bond, but bless him, his films have basically been a crescendo of inanity. Totally get why he's over it, and basically phoned it in.  Only time he seemed to come alive was opposite Monica Bellucci and Naomie Harris, who was also wasted (not to mention poorly lit and made to look as homely as possible - good thing she's been kicking ass on the red carpet).  Basically, you have a stellar cast with crappy writing and direction, and there you have the Craig as Bond era. 

Edited November 6, 2015 by ribboninthesky1

[Shannon L.]

 

Still, I saw it in IMAX, so the cinematography was breathtaking.  Best thing about the film for me.

We watched Skyfall again last night in anticipation of Spectre and were commenting on how beautiful the cinematography was.  I haven't seen too many Bond movies, but, of the ones I've seen, they seem to be technically well done. 

 

So, we were going to go see this one on Saturday night, but you all have convinced me and my husband to wait until Sunday morning when it's 1/2 price.  That's too bad--we were hoping for something a lot better than what it sounds like we're getting. 

[ribboninthesky1]

If you enjoyed Skyfall, you may like this one.  The budget for the locations was well-spent.  I went in with low expectations, and got what I expected in terms of the "plot." But I was off work, wanted to see a movie, and Spectre was the only film currently released that I'd pay to see in the theater, mainly because I assumed it would be visually arresting, if nothing else.  

 

Granted, the Bond franchise has always skewed towards the absurd, but these recent films were supposedly more "grounded."  Yeah, there hasn't been all of the gadgetry, but to bookend the Craig era with, "the main, shadowy villain behind it all was Bond's brother via adoption and was responsible for everything because Daddy favored him" should be a SNL skit.  Not a legitimate Bond plot.   

[NumberCruncher]

The theme song is pretty abysmal, too.

Yes! I like Sam Smith as much as the next person but the theme song was the very definition of weak sauce. Pretty vocals, but very little energy...kind of like the movie itself.

[Ohwell]

I loved it, even a wee bit more than Skyfall.  I liked how all of the back stories tied together and the result being an all too human emotion--jealousy--in this case on Christolph Waltz's part.  

 

I like Judi Dench but I did not miss her at all, love Ralph Fiennes.

 

I, too, want to rub my fingers through Ben Whishaw's hair.

 

The only downside was Sam Smith's caterwauling.  

[thuganomics85]

Out of the Daniel Craig films, I would rank this third, behind Casino Royale and Skyfall (can't decide which one I prefer), although I did enjoy it more then Quantum of Solace (which I still can barely remember a damn thing about.  Something about water?  Gemma Arterton drowning in gold?  Olga Kurylenko was pretty cool though.) My main issues is I felt like they had the goods to have an almost perfect Bond film, but they kind of squandered it.

 

First, the "Bond girls."  I was extremely excited when I heard Monica Bellucci was casted, and I thought she did light up the screen with Craig.  And then she just... disappeared.  At least they didn't just have her knocked off to further Bond's anger (like, admittedly, Skyfall did), but it just felt like such a waste.  Then, there was Lea Seydoux, who seems more then capable, but I really didn't feel like Swan did anything, besides be angry at Bond at first, and then fall for him, and be regulated to just standing around.  Oh, and of course, the final acts ends with her getting captured and Bond having to heroically save her.  And if that final scene is any indication, I really can't buy them as an epic love story that is enough for Bond to hang it up.  I don't anyone would, really, although I guess the closest would have been Vesper Lynn.

 

Then, their were the Bond villains.  Christoph Waltz was pretty much born to play one.  And I loved every minute he was on screen.  Which... wasn't very much, really.  He showed up, disappeared for a hour or so, and then shows up for about thirty minutes as the end.  I was expecting more, especially he ends up being Bloefield of all people (has to go right up there with "Benedict Cumberbatch is Khan," as one of the worst kept secrets ever)  And his whole motivation was just some "We were adopted bros, and I have major jealously issues!" kind of thing.  Honestly, they kind of already did that with the twisted relationship between Bond, Silva, and Judi Dench's M. from Skyfall.

 

Oh, and I guess there were other villains too, but Batista was just your typical violent henchman there for the fights, and I kept seeing Andrew Scott as Moriarty.  So, I could barely keep it together when his character dies by falling from a building.  That's so Moriarty!

 

Finally, I just felt like Daniel Craig's performance was more one-note this time.  I really do get the sense he is over the franchise now.  Probably is a good time to get a new one soon.

 

On the positive front, I did think Ralph Fiennes and especially Ben Whinshaw were highlights as new M. and Q.  Naomie Harris too, but sadly Moneypenny didn't do much either.  Lame.

 

I liked all the callbacks to the past Craig films (Vesper!  Silva!  Le Chiffre!!), but I was kind of amused that besides Mr. White's stuff, Quantum wasn't used very much. It definitely seems to be the redhead stepchild of the Craig franchise.

 

The scenery was gorgeous.

 

I actually liked the look of the opening credits, but I'm not a fan of Sam Smith, so I wasn't feeling the song.

 

Hmm... overall, I enjoyed it when I was watching it, but I do find myself thinking of its flaws now that I've had timed.  I guess that overall, I agree with some of the stuff I read that this felt like the most "formulaic" of the last Bond films, which disappointed me.  I felt like the other three at least tried new things, even if they didn't always hit the mark with me (Quantum.)  Either way, I really do think another restart is in order.

Edited November 7, 2015 by thuganomics85

[benteen]

I found it too long, mostly dull and actually thought about walking out and going home.  It seems that the odd Daniel Craig Bond movies are great and the even Bond films are not good.  Daniel Craig seems to have one form of acting now as Bond and I really don't want to see him come back if he's going to give this lazy of a performance.

 

Waltz wasn't bad but the connection between his character and Bond was tenuous at best and absolutely did not need to be there.  It reminded me of that line from Spaceballs "I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate."  That was about the extent of it.  Didn't feel the whole mastermind of everything bit.

 

Like I said, waaay too long.  They let scenes linger on forever like Bond's initial introduction and the meeting scene.

 

I also noticed how the storyline where the government wants to scrap the 00 program is similar to the storyline in the last Mission Impossible movie.

 

It had its moments (at least Bond walked away with a clear victory.  I guess that's good) but I can think of better ways to spend my time.

Edited November 7, 2015 by benteen

[SeanC]

This movie doesn't work, I'm afraid.

 

Now, I could critique any number of plot points (like why Blofeld's henchman is still trying to kill Bond even though he's just heading right to Blofeld's residence, which is apparently where Blofeld wants him; or why M needed Bond to kill that guy and what exactly she knew about this whole situation), but the truth is, most movie plots, particularly in spy thrillers, can be picked apart.  People said, correctly, that if you think much about it, the villain's actions in Skyfall (or The Dark Knight, from which the former borrows heavily) are absurd.  But the reason that I thought Skyfall was a great Bond movie and this isn't is all in the character.  To me, the improbability of the villain's plan isn't a big deal, so long as the character dynamics compel, which in that movie they did; Silva was a strong villain, and the movie worked, because I bought his vendetta against M, and the way that this affected M and Bond.  Here they bring back Blofeld in a way that feels like the first draft of a script meant to create a closer link between Bond and Blofeld -- but like I said, it's a first draft, because there's just no there there.  It doesn't add anything noteworthy to Blofeld's character, or Bond's, and nor does the attempt to make this feel like the culmination of the previous Craig movies feel natural.

 

I quite like Waltz as Blofeld, for the record.  There are a few moments that he sells really well.  But there's just not much to the character, and even though the movie leaves him alive, I can't think of any pressing reason I'd want to see this character again, which is kind of failure.

 

I'm a big fan of Lea Seydoux, and she has some very good moments here (and, of course, looks amazing), but there's some very ropey plotting around this character, like her suddenly running off just before the climax (for a character reason that really has not been built up at all), solely so that she can be captured and used as a hostage in the final minutes.  More generally, I'm not how this character fits into the franchise.  Most Bond movies end with him heading off for some R&R with the main romantic interest, of course, but this movie drops the "love" bomb and his choosing to run off with her instead of killing Blofeld (another dilemma that really doesn't fly; Bond isn't the Punisher, and if we're meant to think he's being driven to the edge by this guy, I really didn't feel it) is played like some sort of turning point for the character.  I don't object to that in principle, mind you, but is that really going to be followed up on?

Edited November 7, 2015 by SeanC

[benteen]

I didn’t think they built up that whole “you don’t have to kill” thing enough to begin with.  It didn’t ring true at the end and I didn’t want to see it at the end.

 

Describing Blofeld and his plan as a first draft is a good description of it.

Edited November 7, 2015 by benteen

[benteen]

One of the (many) problems Spectre has is they decided to embrace continuity.  The Craig Bond films haven’t done well when they embrace continuity.  Quantum of Solace tried to do that by picking up where Casino Royale left off (a noble experiment) but it just didn’t work out.  Bond barely seemed like he even remembered Vesper in that one.  Spectre again embraces continuity and tries to put the three previous movies under its umbrella.  I get wanting to create a bigger picture but it was poorly executed and just doesn’t work.  Why they chose to emulate Quantum of Suckatude (an awful movie best forgotten) is beyond me.  I think they were so drunk with the success of Skyfall that they felt like they could do no wrong.

 

They established a tenuous at best connection between Waltz’s character and Bond and BARELY explore it.  It’s hard to even know what their connection was with each other.  It didn’t even have to be there.

 

One bit of continuity I did like was the return of Mr. White.  Jesper Christensen was great in that scene with Daniel Craig.

 

Like I said earlier, Craig looked like he was phone it in at this point.  I guess he’s eager to go back to doing movies that nobody watches.

Edited November 7, 2015 by benteen

[ribboninthesky1]

Along the lines of continuity, outside of Blofeld, the shadowy Spectre organization was flimsy as well. I'm not familiar with Spectre and Blofeld from past Bond films, but the inclusion in this film felt more like an homage than continuity.  I'm not sure how many movie-goers would remember or care that much.

 

Skyfall's Silva worked much better for me when I thought he had a bone to pick with the 007 organization in the aggregate (along with the film's underlying questions and legacy of British intelligence/imperialism) more than some personal vendetta against M.  How a film chooses to end resonates with me more than how it begins, and Skyfall's later half/third took a downturn for me that left an unsatisfying aftertaste.  And yet, TPTB decided to parallel that again in an even more haphazard fashion in Spectre.  Baffling.

 

On a positive note, I think Craig's more haggard appearance, deliberate or not, fits after Skyfall. It's one of the few things that makes sense.         

[tinaw]

Saw Spectre yesterday. I enjoyed it though there were unanswered questions.

The scenes from Mexico City and the day of the dead were amazing. That helicopter fight alone had me on the edge of my seat. I liked Bond and the doctor together. No one beats Eva Green though. Vesper Lynd was the ONE but the doctor is not a bad fit, to me anway.

I was disappointed in Waltz story though. They couldn't give a better reason then that. C as the other bad guy was a little easier to take.

Q had some of the best lines in the movie. "It tells time" haa. I wish money penny had more interaction with Bond this movie. That was what I liked about skyfall. Their banter was awesome throughout the movie.

As for the opening song. It was no Adeles Skyfall, but it was way better then the songs in CR and QoS. IMHO

The way this movie ended I could see DC being done with Bond. I would be okay with that too. Felt like an ending. I still hope he doesn't though

[FurryFury]

Had to see it because friends I've not seen in ages were coming. Ugh, not a fan of Bond in general, but that was AWFUL. I actually cheered a bit when they've shown Monica Belucci because I hoped that, for once, they've cast an age-appropriate love interest for the hero. Ha! As if!

 

I generally LOVE Christopher Waltz but there wasn't nearly enough of him. 

 

Why, or why wasn't this movie the one with Eva Green? At least I love Eva Green. I've heard she was in one of them (they've even shown her photo).

Or at least another Bond. Craig is boring and not attractive at all. I mean, the movie would have sucked anyway, but at least I could ogle the actor (Brosnan, for instance, was pretty hot in his day).

 

Q and Moneypenny were the only tolerable part of the movie.

 

And god, every time a female is helpless and has to be saved by the hero I want to smack the writers (or the producers). This is not the 50s!

Edited November 8, 2015 by FurryFury

[AimingforYoko]

As soon as people heard the title and who was playing the villain, everybody knew Waltz was Blofeld. Why even attempt the misdirect? Haven they learned from Cumberbatch as Khan (not Khan) and Marion Cotillard as Talia al Ghul (aka Miranda)? Once the secret is out, lean into it.

 

Overall, this was a middling effort. Congrats to Sony for breathing new life into the series, but now it's time for the next Bond.

[NoWillToResist]

My girlfriend enjoyed it, and so did a couple of other people I know, so I would assume that fans of the franchise will think it's the bee's knees.

 

Not me. :)

 

I was bored/annoyed through most of the movie and had my hands over my ears for large chunks of time because our theatre apparently thought if they just played the movie loud enough, it might drown out the drivel. (it didn't)

 

I've enjoyed the Craig as Bond films but this? Was shite. When I left the theatre, I just thought 'meh', but the more I talked it over with my husband, I had to downgrade it to 'what the fuck was that?'

 

We had recently re-watched Skyfall, figuring that we might need a refresher on the new faces, which ended up being great. The only downside is that I have to call a WORLD of bullshit on anything surviving the 20 billion megaton explosion that obliterated the place. So I'm to believe that, not only did PAPER survive the fireball, but paper which conveniently tells us the name of James's guardian and a photo which conveniently has a slight burn mark over the third person in a childhood photo? Oh my God, fuck off with that.

 

So, the big bad spanning all the DC Bond movies was...some dude's kid who felt slighted by his father's attention to orphaned James over a period of two years? And the father was just some regular Joe...not some multi-billionaire guy with a zillion useful contacts? Hell, I kind of wanted the bad guy to win because he apparently built one hell of an empire from fuck-all. But his motivation was horseshit. Just total horseshit, IMO.

 

I had to laugh retroactively at all the whining that was going on online about how Monica Belluci was too old to be a love interest for Bond and blah blah ageist-cakes. Wonder if there'd have been such a kerfuffle if they'd known she was going to take up all of 5 minutes of screentime?

 

And whoever wrote the actual love interest? Bah, fuck off. Oh, she knows how to shoot a gun? Well never mind that she's otherwise a warm body, damsel in distress, light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel symbol then. I was initially pleased when she told Bond that she wasn't going to sleep with him. I naively thought we'd get another Olga Kurylenko from QoS, but silly me, no! The lady doth protest too much. Of course, no more than 24 hours after that statement, they're jumping each others bones and she's got stars in her eyes and designs on retirement packages with James. Ugh. And then she sits there while Bond is getting needles shoved in places and does sweet fuck all until it's all over, just to profess her love (!?!?!?) to him. I literally scoffed out loud. I can understand attachment, but love? Sorry but fuck off. I ain't buying what they were trying to sell. But just to really seal my hatred, when they get back to London, she just...walks off on her own with a sayonara to James. Are you fucking kidding me? Why would you choose then to ditch him? Of course, there must be no danger now! Feel free to wander the dark streets alone. How else to get your dumbass snatched up and used as bait for your boy? Jesus Fuck. The fact that she was apparently desirable enough to make James Fucking Bond retire into domesticity was just a giant NO for me.

 

I felt a brief flicker of hope when Bond turned up at Q's workshop at the end. For a glorious moment, I thought he was going to tell Q that he's back in action because things didn't pan out with whatshername, but no, he was just visiting to pinch another car so that he could drive off with his dearest love. Barf.

 

Judi Dench's presence was sorely missed by me, though in retrospect, I'm thankful that she was spared appearing in this crap.

 

I was devastated that they killed her off in Skyfall. Perhaps they should have ended on that one. I actually got a little misty seeing her ugly ceramic bulldog figurine in Bond's apartment. He hates that thing, so the fact that he has it so prominently displayed in his home? Yeah...that made me happy/sad.

 

Everyone was wasted in this film. I never want to see it again.

[benteen]

Agreed about Judi Dench.  I like Ralph Finnes but Dench's M was much better.  But yeah, I'm glad she went on a great Bond instead of this drivel.

[Shannon L.]

 

My girlfriend enjoyed it, and so did a couple of other people I know, so I would assume that fans of the franchise will think it's the bee's knees.

 

Not me. :)

My daughter and I opted not to go, so my husband and son took one of my son's best friend and his friend's father.  My husband enjoyed it, but the other three Bond fans hated it.  I'm glad I didn't waste my time and money (because I was never a big Bond fan to begin with).

[phantom]

So I am a huge fan of the Bond franchise. I will watch any Bond movie when it's on TV (except Moonraker, blech) and am extremely forgiving of plot holes. This was a gorgeous movie - I felt I'd been on an expensive world tour by the end. I was disappointed to see the return of a patently stupid chase scene - the one in the Austrian mountains with the plane. It was something from a Brosnan or Roger Moore film. I was hoping for more Monica Belucci, and after name-dropping Felix Leiter early on I was hoping he would show up as well. 

 

I loved having M, Q and Moneypenny with their own related subplot. Rather than waiting around for Bond to show up, they moved the plot from their end as well. Having M as a former military man, rather than a lifelong bureaucrat is a nice touch. 

 

Waltz as Blofeld was delicious, but there was again too little of him and his two setups to kill/torture Bond didn't seem in line with his character - he was a more modern evil villain but had such throwback schemes. And speaking of that vendetta, how tenuous could that link be between the two? The whole movie hinged on the weakest premise, which is a shame. Loved seeing Mr. White again - his relationship with Bond over the past several movies was far more interesting than with Blofeld.

 

In terms of Craig movies, it ranks above Quantum of Solace, but below the other two. And Sam Smith's theme song effort made my ears hurt. 

[Traveller519]

I'd too put it in third in the Craig era Bond Films. Quantum of Solace was so utterly forgettable when I watched the Cinema Sins of it, I couldn't recall anything outside of the fact that there was a hotel in the Desert.

 

This one was just winking too hard to the camp era of by-the-note Bond Films, from Blofeld's Scar, to report to Q Branch, to a Snowy Local. But the biggest crime is both secondary characters were utterly forgettable. M and Q stood out far more than Blofeld and Swann. Le Chiffre's torturing of Bond with the Rope and the Chair was so impactful because of how violent, brutal, and low tech it was. Blofeld's "I'm going to drill into your brain" device, which then doesn't work, falls extremely flat. Especially as he glosses over taking credit for everything. Waltz is capable of much better emotional terrorism in those situations.

 

And Swann, she's done nothing to endear herself to the audience. She's a child of one of Bond's former acquaintances/frenemies that he feels some responsibility for. She has not real ties to anything other than being a quasi-loose end.

 

I agree that the cinematography was typically great of this iteration of the franchise. And I like the way Craig played Bond through the arc. The only point he was ever truly suave and you bought it was Casino Royale. Since then he's been haggard, and when the suavity comes out it feels put upon for the scenario, a man torn up doing what he knows he must.

[revbfc]

I liked it a lot more than most people on this board did. To all those who had problems, I hear you. The end did seem a little "on the nose." But I like that Blofeld isn't dead. It's set up perfectly for him to get out of custody and have Madeline killed in the next movie.

[Danny Franks]

I liked it a lot more than most people on this board did. To all those who had problems, I hear you. The end did seem a little "on the nose." But I like that Blofeld isn't dead. It's set up perfectly for him to get out of custody and have Madeline killed in the next movie.

 

As I understand it, that would be a trifecta of 'woman dies to give Bond manpain and motivation' for Daniel Craig's run? Perhaps there are more, but I'm thinking of Eva Green and Judi Dench's characters as the first two.

 

I guess that would sum up how the women really do only exist for Bond's convenience.

[revbfc]

As I understand it, that would be a trifecta of 'woman dies to give Bond manpain and motivation' for Daniel Craig's run? Perhaps there are more, but I'm thinking of Eva Green and Judi Dench's characters as the first two.

I guess that would sum up how the women really do only exist for Bond's convenience.

Or to stay true to the spirit of the novels where Blofeld kills Bond's wife.

[Danny Franks]

Or to stay true to the spirit of the novels where Blofeld kills Bond's wife.

 

Yeah, women serving no purpose other than to fuel Bond's ego and/or angst sounds very much in the spirit of the novels.

[SeanC]

Yeah, women serving no purpose other than to fuel Bond's ego and/or angst sounds very much in the spirit of the novels.

The series is about James Bond.  Every other character exists only to support him.

[benteen]

A writer for Entertainment Weekly attempts to make sense of the last hour of Spectre.  I don't buy it but it's an interesting theory nonetheless...

 

http://www.ew.com/article/2015/11/10/spectre-ending

 

It's fun trying to see the writer make sense of things.  I love the part where he points out that Bond and Blofeld have a shared past that they virtually never acknowledge, which is absolutely true.  The connection between them is so tenous and unexplored that it didn't need to be there.  Seriously, why was it even part of the movie when it was barely explored?

Edited November 11, 2015 by benteen

[revbfc]

Yeah, women serving no purpose other than to fuel Bond's ego and/or angst sounds very much in the spirit of the novels.

Oo-la-la! Somebody's gonna get laid in college.

[Danny Franks]

Oo-la-la! Somebody's gonna get laid in college.

 

I graduated college over a decade ago. Possibly one of the reasons I'm not impressed with misogynist works of fiction. But yeah, go back to thinking anyone who respects women is only doing it in an attempt to have sex. I'm sure that's how James Bond would see it.

[revbfc]

A writer for Entertainment Weekly attempts to make sense of the last hour of Spectre. I don't buy it but it's an interesting theory nonetheless...

http://www.ew.com/article/2015/11/10/spectre-ending

It's fun trying to see the writer make sense of things. I love the part where he points out that Bond and Blofeld have a shared past that they virtually never acknowledge, which is absolutely true. The connection between them is so tenous and unexplored that it didn't need to be there. Seriously, why was it even part of the movie when it was barely explored?

Good article. Yeah, that last hour made very little sense.

[Raja]

One thing for sure James Bond doesn't care about innocent Mexican people. Not only does he bring down two buildings but instead of walking away to fight another day he gets in a helicopter fight above a crowd of thousands, throwing two hundred pound human bombs out on them assuming the pilot didn't lose control.

 

About the only thing I liked was Bautista's Mr Hinx. I would mind if his henchman survived and returns like Jaws did in the 70s.

 

That last sequence really fell apart. I don't think the big guy who wears blue tights and a big red S on his chest could pull off a rescue and escape from a building that big in three minutes even with his  x-ray vision and super hearing. Then he shots down a helicopter with his pistol only to have special forces cops show up at the crash sight while firefighters just stood behind police tape waiting for another explosion and for all they know the deaths of any passengers. Then we are supposed to act surprised that he didn't use his revoked license to kill to murder someone in front of hundreds of witnesses and not in the shadows like much of his spy work was previously done.

Edited November 12, 2015 by Raja

[NoWillToResist]

As I understand it, that would be a trifecta of 'woman dies to give Bond manpain and motivation' for Daniel Craig's run? Perhaps there are more, but I'm thinking of Eva Green and Judi Dench's characters as the first two.

 

I guess that would sum up how the women really do only exist for Bond's convenience.

 

I loved the interview with Daniel Craig where he just totally rips into the hero-worship Bond gets. He flat out calls him a misogynist and seems happy that recently Bond has been surrounded by strong women who don't take his shit. :)

 

He also rather beautifully addressed the online complaints about Monica Belluci being too old to be a Bond girl: "I think you mean the charms of a woman his own age. We're talking about Monica Bellucci, for heaven's sake. When someone like that wants to be a Bond girl, you just count yourself lucky!"

 

I do find it interesting that, for a man who has such callous disregard for so many women in his life (at least as far as his sexual partners go), Craig's Bond was very much influenced by Vesper and M...so much so that he grieves them very heavily. I found it quite touching and a nice contrast to the usual way he treats women.

 

On a slight tangent, while I desperately mourn the loss of M, I think it was good FOR HER to have been killed in action. Her gov't wanted her to retire and she was all "um, fuck that noise, I'll leave when the job's done." And moments after the big bad is dead, she dies too. So, she got to see the end of that guy's tyranny and didn't have to suffer the 'indignity' of being put out to pasture. She went out right in the thick of things. I also appreciated that she was resourceful and improvised a bunch of weapons in Skyfall while being of advanced years.

Edited November 12, 2015 by NoWillToResist

[Raja]

It wasn't so much Monica Belluci's age but rather that her character had just buried her husband, even if he was unloved by her that made me cringe. There was no prior relationship as in The Summer of 42. I thought Bond had left that sort of behavior behind in the Connery era.

[revbfc]

The after funeral sex didn't ring true, but I did like that Bond got her in touch with Leiter so she could get to safety. Since we never saw Belucci's character again we can assume she didn't die. That's something Blofeld would have mentioned.

[NoWillToResist]

It wasn't so much Monica Belluci's age but rather that her character had just buried her husband, even if he was unloved by her that made me cringe. There was no prior relationship as in The Summer of 42. I thought Bond had left that sort of behavior behind in the Connery era.

 

I rolled my eyes a bit but since she didn't actually like her husband and was seemingly like a hostage of his, I didn't really have a problem with her being seduced by Bond.

 

I did have a problem with the hitmen following her outside for the kill, rather than just capping her ass in the house. Did they cringe at messing up the marble floors? Hitmen with interior design sensitivities....who knew? ;)

 

Personally, I cringed at Bond hooking up with his nemesis' daughter. She just seemed so very young and since Bond was sent to PROTECT her, it kind of made me view them as a guardian/ward relationship, so it squicked me out to see him entering a sexual relationship with her.

[Danny Franks]

I rolled my eyes a bit but since she didn't actually like her husband and was seemingly like a hostage of his, I didn't really have a problem with her being seduced by Bond.

 

I did have a problem with the hitmen following her outside for the kill, rather than just capping her ass in the house. Did they cringe at messing up the marble floors? Hitmen with interior design sensitivities....who knew? ;)

 

Personally, I cringed at Bond hooking up with his nemesis' daughter. She just seemed so very young and since Bond was sent to PROTECT her, it kind of made me view them as a guardian/ward relationship, so it squicked me out to see him entering a sexual relationship with her.

 

I cringed at both. The first, not so much because hooking up with a guy immediately after her disliked husband's funeral is unrealistic (though I think it is), but more because Daniel Craig just does not convince me he's a guy that women will drop their knickers for, within ten minutes of meeting him. He didn't even 'seduce' her, he just walked up to her and she started panting for him. And the second because Lea Seydoux did look so much younger than him, and the 'we almost died, let's fuck' thing is so clichéd it's painful. But then she apparently loves him a couple of days later? Man, he must be amazing in bed, huh?

 

Like I said, I just don't find the behaviour of any of these characters to be in keeping with real human beings. Monica Bellucci was in the film for absolutely no other reason than someone said, 'we need someone for Bond to fuck in act one'. But this is the seventh Bond movie I've seen, and I've thought they were all terrible, so it is what it is.

[revbfc]

Like I said, I just don't find the behaviour of any of these characters to be in keeping with real human beings. Monica Bellucci was in the film for absolutely no other reason than someone said, 'we need someone for Bond to fuck in act one'. But this is the seventh Bond movie I've seen, and I've thought they were all terrible, so it is what it is.

Normal, well-adjusted people don't become spies, assassins or international criminals. These are people who are trained to be cruel and inhuman, so I don't find that particular argument valid. Having said that, Bellucci should have had more screen time (and considering the run time, that could have been arranged).

[NoWillToResist]

I cringed at both. The first, not so much because hooking up with a guy immediately after her disliked husband's funeral is unrealistic (though I think it is), but more because Daniel Craig just does not convince me he's a guy that women will drop their knickers for, within ten minutes of meeting him. He didn't even 'seduce' her, he just walked up to her and she started panting for him. And the second because Lea Seydoux did look so much younger than him, and the 'we almost died, let's fuck' thing is so clichéd it's painful. But then she apparently loves him a couple of days later? Man, he must be amazing in bed, huh?

 

Like I said, I just don't find the behaviour of any of these characters to be in keeping with real human beings. Monica Bellucci was in the film for absolutely no other reason than someone said, 'we need someone for Bond to fuck in act one'. But this is the seventh Bond movie I've seen, and I've thought they were all terrible, so it is what it is.

 

I agree that Bond didn't really have to put much effort into seducing Belluci's character. I'm sure Craig is a lovely man, but I don't think he'd make me drop trou just for turning up, you know? But I'm sure there are people who were all "yeah girl, get it". Different strokes for different folks and all that. :)

 

Equally we knew nothing about her character, maybe she was always hot to trot. Their hook up didn't make me cringe per se, but yes it was utterly unnecessary for them to fuck. Nothing would have changed story-wise if they hadn't. But, as you've pointed out, this is Bond, so...yeah.

 

And yes the hate --> love business with Lea's character was utterly horrendous. It was bad enough having to watch them hit the sheets, but for the movie to try and sell it as some big love story? Um, sorry but no.

[Ariah]

I guess I'm ready for a new actor to take on Bond's moniker. I'm officially fed up with Craig.

 

After the film we had a little discussion with friends about the whole "5 seconds hook-up" with Bellucci. A beautifull woman, reduced to a mere side-piece. Within the context of the film, the sex-scene had no purpose. This Bond comes across like a predator, exploiting women's weaknesses. In Skyfall, he had sex with Silva's girl, a sex-slave survivor. And now he just take advantage of a widow. Why would a normal person do that?

 

It doesn't help that I find Craig weirdly similar to Vladimir Putin when he smiles....

 

Doctor Swann got points from me initially as she mocked Bond's womanizing. But soon she also fell prey to his "pelvic sorcery" in a scene so cliched the sound of ground teeth filled the cinema. Poor Mr White laughed so hard when he heard Bond will "protect" his daughter. He probably foresaw this scene.

 

Doctor Swann, described as a survivor and a resourcefull girl gets herself kidnapped in the final act - what a let down. I guess sex with Bond does that to women.

 

The only thing I liked unconditionally was the opening sequence up to the point when the window blew up (the single-camera shot De Palma inspired shot). But was it ever explained why the room blew up and took the building with it? Was it Bloefeld's evil schemeing? Was it Bond being his regular self and going for the overkill?

[revbfc]

@Ariah:

I think the explosion was because the bomb meant for the stadium was in the building and Bond detonated it by accident. That's just my guess and I can't think of a more plausible explanation.

[nicepebbles]

As a Bond film, I enjoyed it. Other than that, it just doesn't work.

 

There were several scenes in the movie that made me go, that was 5 minutes that could've been cut. This move could’ve been 2 hours easy. For instance, dude losing his eyes to that big, non-talking killer. What was the point of that scene? And how did we go from that to Blofield calling out James? I thought after the "Who are you? Mickey Mouse" exchange that henchmen who got on the phone was calling Blofield's man to say Bond has shown up. Then when Blofield walked in to the room, he would call James out then. I suppose the eye gauging scene was to show that guy was bad ass dude. We would've figured that out.

 

The opening sequence was a waste. The movie could've started with him on the damn rooftop waiting for what's-his-face to come into the room. We would've gotten the grandeur of the Day of the Dead celebration by what happened next.

 

My fanwank is Bond's parents had money. Blofield's dad had money. They were vacationing together. Or maybe Bond’s parents had moved there. Bond's parents are killed. Blofield's dad takes care of Bond. (Why? I don't know. Shouldn't he have gone back to Skyfall?) Blofied is jealous. Why? Who knows? I mean IRL CW is 12 years older than DC. So in the movie he should've been off living his own life totally okay with his dad being a decent human being by taking care of an orphan. Obviously, Blofield is batshit crazy and decides to kill his dad. Somehow another he winds up doing business with Spectre. Coincidentally enough Bond becomes a spy. Their paths cross. Because Blofield is BSC, he decides to get back at Bond for taking his daddy away. He became head of Spectre, wreaking havoc in the world, and getting back at Bond was a little side project.

 

That makes sense. What was on the scene? Not so much. You're not left with much of an impression if Spectre was just to get back at Bond or a side project. And if he hated Bond so much, why not kill him before he even turns 18? I feel like Bond didn't show an ounce of recognition of Blofield as the guy who spent 2 years of his life with. Was that intentional? If so, bad move.

 

Now I’m sometimes a sucker for people “falling in love under extreme circumstances” (Speed anyone?). This was not one of those times. One, I was not feeling Lea S as an actress. Two, those 2 were just not selling it. (Granted, I felt the same way about Casino Royale. The common denominator there? DC. So maybe it’s him?) I said to Mr. Nice after she said I love you. “I’m just going to pretend that didn’t happen.”

 

Q had more to do so that was nice. Moneypenny was wasted. M had some stuff to do. That was nice. I feel like the global surveillance SL was just tacked on. It was telegraphed from the word go that C would be a bad guy.

 

I can’t decide if like the song.

 

Thus far, Casino Royale and Skyfall are tied for my favorite DC Bond. This would be in second place. I haven’t seen QoS. This did feel like an end for him and I hope it is. I like DC as Bond and wouldn’t mind seeing him again. But if they need to replace him and the writers and director to shake things up, so be it.

[NoWillToResist]

Thus far, Casino Royale and Skyfall are tied for my favorite DC Bond. This would be in second place. I haven’t seen QoS.

I would rank QoS way ahead of this and I thought the plot of QoS was utterly ludicrous. QoS gets major points for Olga Kurulenko's character in my books. Her character was with Bond for a lot of the movie and (spoiler?) they don't have sex. That miracle alone puts QoS above this dreck. :D

[ribboninthesky1]

I also thought the bomb was accidentally set off by Bond when he was trying to take out the man in the white suit. 

 

I loved the interview with Daniel Craig where he just totally rips into the hero-worship Bond gets. He flat out calls him a misogynist and seems happy that recently Bond has been surrounded by strong women who don't take his shit. :)

 

I, too, have been entertained by Craig's "No Fucks Given" press tour.  He's been criticized for his attitude, but I don't think he's knocking the franchise as much as not pretending that James Bond is some kind of awesome character.  As you mention, as much worship as Bond and other fictional "heroes" receive, it's refreshing that he's not playing that game.  

 

I've always enjoyed the films for the locations, and why I prefer to see them in the theater. To me, the very things that supposedly make Bond such a skilled assassin are romantic turn-offs in every way.  But then, I've rarely found the "bad boy" trope appealing.  

 

And how awesome and subversive would it have been if Monica Bellucci's character was the one he wanted to "settle down" with? I mean, if you're rushing things, might as well turn the tables and make it a woman who's his peer. Bond is very much like these teenage dystopian franchises in that really talented people are utterly wasted.    

 

Now I’m sometimes a sucker for people “falling in love under extreme circumstances” (Speed anyone?). This was not one of those times. One, I was not feeling Lea S as an actress. Two, those 2 were just not selling it. (Granted, I felt the same way about Casino Royale. The common denominator there? DC. So maybe it’s him?) I said to Mr. Nice after she said I love you. “I’m just going to pretend that didn’t happen.”

 

You're not alone - Daniel Craig has rightfully played the character as one who wasn't interested in, and thus doesn't have, emotional attachments, especially with random women.  I wish the films would have supported that performance, but maybe that's too dark for this franchise.  But this era's insistence that he's in these relationships that have affected him SO deeply is something I've never bought into.  I've never thought much of Eva Green as Vesper, didn't think much of Lea Seydoux, either, though the writing did her ZERO favors. At least I understand M's impact on his life - they actually had some semblance of a relationship, and she's one who saw/accepted him as he is, and called him on his shit.  

Edited November 12, 2015 by ribboninthesky1