21 replies to this topic

[plankattack]

SPOILERS (better be safe than sorry)


My apologies Goldfinger……..you are no longer the most overrated Bond film in my eyes.

I guess someone has to give a dissenting view and I feel a bit weird that it’s me. You all know me as a long-time CBner, always try to be fair and even-handed and I try hard not to troll or antagonize.

I love FRWL, the opening credits of CR are still an almost religious moment for how I feel about the celluloid Bond, and yes, I’ve been a defender of QoS, LTK, and sometime demented dead-ender when it comes to sticking up for TWINE. I’ve put the boot into DAD, taken a fair share of shots at John Glen, have stuck up for P&W, and have become more impressed with Babs and Mike the further they get from their father’s tenure. And I’m of the same generation as DC and Mendes, and like them, LALD was my first big screen experience all those years ago.

But I’m afraid SP….well, let me try and be as reasoned as possible. And fair warning, I’m not looking for a fight or to be expelled from this here domain, so maybe you could just help me find what I’m missing on this one.

So, in homage to Jim’s 007th Minute, here are my thoughts. And like the homage of the train fight in SP, it’s no doubt unasked for, completely obvious, tension-free, and ultimately a reminder (to paraphrase Jim) that your homage shouldn’t exist to just remind you how much better the original is.

Anway, we’ve been blessed with A-list director of stage and screen Sam Mendes, and as I’m ultimately going to lay my blame at his feet, what fairer way to shape my issues than through the prism of his resume (or Wikiipedia page).

JARHEAD
Roger Deakins, with unsurprising skill makes the Gulf landscape reflect Mendes’ take on Marine life. On the other hand (and maybe it was just my choice of seat in the cinema), the decision to bleed SP of reds and oranges, leaves a dull palate that flatters no-one. The expensive, no holds-barred spectacle of the PTS is sabotaged by how drab the Day of the Dead festival ends up appearing, and while the snow scenes stand out, that section only highlights how poorly the star is filmed the rest of the time. DC looked better in digital, in CR, in QoS, in Tomb Raider! And the desert base and its surroundings? Nope, it was no TSWLM by the Nile, that’s for sure. Hopefully it'll look better on the Blu Ray. Let me know.


OLIVER/CABARET
A good many have jumped on Newman’s seemingly rehashed score, so I won’t pile on. Yes, this is a sequel to SF. Those of us who know (and care – something I didn’t get from the casual audience) don’t need to be constantly reminded after the first twenty minutes of the film. (Though to be fair - that Mendes was still editing as little as three weeks ago couldn't have helped with the soundtrack).


ROAD TO PERDITION
Cast Paul Newman and you know you’re getting value for money. Cast Christoph Waltz and it’s the same thing. But SP criminally wastes Waltz, with Blofeld’s unconvincing motivation. I was nervous after the leaks about the backstory, but ultimately I could swallow my Fleming and buy in. What I couldn’t was Blofeld’s apparent desire to make 007 feel it – completely undone by scant screen-time and poor characterization. Waltz’s Blofeld – urbane yes, intelligent yes, potentially dangerous yes. And obsessed with getting one over Bond? No, this man has bigger fish to fry. Set up as evil mastermind with far-reaching plans, but who’s come this far obsessing over young James? Is that any less ridiculous than me saying that Goldinger wanted to get into Fort Knox just to show Bond that out-smarting him at golf was child’s play?

Waltz underused, Blofeld underused. Mendes has expressed his fondness for The Dark Knight, yet forgot that Nolan (while getting a terrific performance from Ledger) put his villain into the same centre stage as the hero without detracting from the story’s focus. No, you can’t edge out Bond in Bond-film, but Blofeld felt like little more than an add-on.


REVOLUTIONARY ROAD/AWAY WE GO
It was always going to be risky, following SF with a “story rooted in SF.” As others have said, Swann is a poorly written, poorly-served character. No blame on Seydoux, Swann’s appearance with an hour already gone means that it’s hard to create anything for the audience to invest in. Sure, Vesper doesn’t show up until an hour in CR, but then the remainder of the film is about the two of them, whereas here, Swann seems little more than a travelling companion.

Mendes wants to use her suffering as anchor for the film’s emotional core, yet the script has coughed up Kissy Suzuki with a different profession. If SP occurs in the aftermath of SF, why are we to believe Bond (criticized by many for his throwaway attitude at Severine’s death) is now all knight in armour for Swann. Because that’s how it works in a Bond film? No, the series has spent a decade attempting to re-distribute proper motivation for the characters, most importantly the lead, so to fall back on Bond just doing what he always does because he’s Bond, is lazy at best, betrayal at worst.


CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY
Tonal shifts are notoriously tough to pull off (though Dahl got away with it). Or maybe SP is Mendes homage to TMWTGG? Whatever it is, it doesn't work. What's left is at times incoherent, too often unengaging. Like the merging of Scaramanga and the Solex, Nine Eyes and Oberhauser never comes off. We're curious sure, but uninvested in either plot thread.

From scene to scene things are no better. SP veers from psychological drama to airbags in small cars (where’s that pigeon when you need him?), from Bond the lone hero on a mission, to M and the gang back home. From long talky sections, to sudden bursts of plodding action. Frankly we could’ve done with a little of QoS’s frenetic energy. I know everyone hates shakey-cam (“can we recut the boat chase”!!!!), well there’s no shakey cam in the mountain chase and that was a snoozer. Be honest with yourself – airport scene in CR, or mountain chase? Car chase in Rome? Or TND?

But the train fight? Absolutely no build-up. Any action sequence, in pure action film or thriller, succeeds on how the scene is set. In SP Swann and Bond are having dinner, then Hinx suddenly appears and punch-up ensues. I don’t think we even saw him get on the train? Or lurk around the station? The mechanics of both SP’s fight and FRWL’s are ultimately the same, but why does FRWL work? Because Bond and Grant face-off for 20 minutes until the tension explodes. In SP, why are we fighting? Oh, because Hinx is a henchman and well, we’ve been looking at family photos for a half-hour so we better have some action. Yes, finding a new angle on the old-fashioned fistfight must be tough. But as Mendes himself proved in SF, it can be done.

And as for poor old Hinx, why did we bother? Unlike Jaws and Oddjob, there’s no real effort to establish the character’s menace. Did he work for Blofeld or was he interviewing for a job? Who cares? He’s a big guy so he must be a bruiser!


AMERICAN BEAUTY
Middle age man takes a leave from his job, drives his dream car, and lusts after a woman young enough to be his daughter. And you thought I was talking about Kevin Spacey. (That was my homage to 007th Minute’s TWINE review. If you haven’t read that tome, do so!).

Mendes has an Oscar (deserved), and rightly gives enormous credit to Alan Ball’s script. But as he’s proved with other films, including SF, he is deserving of his A-list status. So ultimately SP is down to his direction, and the script he worked from. We’ll never know how many iterations the script when through. I can see a first-draft idea (with Chiwetel Ejiofor rumored as the villain). And I do feel that Blofeld is somehow grafted in to an already existing story going in a certain direction (a whole film built around Nine Eyes). How much of the story was plotted before EON got the rights back? Logan did say he went to work back in 2012, though how much of that survived we don’t know, but that was definitely before the legalities were settled. But what exists definitely feels, if not cobbled together, forced together.

I know everyone hates QoS – but when they had an unfinished script, they ramped up the action and the style, went lean and tried to get away with it in under 2 hours. In SP, it feels like they ramped up the exposition and the “melodrama” and added a half-hour. Like it or loathe it, QoS goes down easy, but I’m not sure I can say the same of the fatty, slow-footed SP.

Sorry guys, I just don’t get it. I keep hearing how this is “classic” Bond. I won’t profess to claim to know how to define that, but ultimately my issues with SP are not that’s it’s not a good Bond-film. No, I just don’t see it as a competent piece of story-telling. Yes, there are some great singular moments, as good as any in the series - the relationship with Q, the PTS, a couple of the throwaway lines. But for me the total felt so far less than the sum of the parts.

[Dustin]

Well, all I can say is that you are not alone there, plankattack; nothing much to add there from me. Only I'd rather have left this however-many-eyes thingy alone and concentrated on Blofeld. And I loved the photography myself. That aside you saved me writing my own review.

[Vauxhall]

Sorry to hear you didn't enjoy it plankattack. I disagree with quite a bit of that, particularly about Madeleine, but that's the beauty of the films I guess.

 

I would say though: the cinematography is by Hoyte van Hoytema, rather than Roger Deakins.

[Harmsway]

I'm not as down on the film as all that, but plankattack makes some good points.

SPECTRE is a disappointment.

[plankattack]

Sorry to hear you didn't enjoy it plankattack. I disagree with quite a bit of that, particularly about Madeleine, but that's the beauty of the films I guess.
 
I would say though: the cinematography is by Hoyte van Hoytema, rather than Roger Deakins.

You're right. We were clearly spoilt by Deakins' work on SF - and I think QoS looks great too. While I'm not a big fan of Interstellar, I thought van Hoytema's work was top-notch (a very different canvas, I know). My companion said that she felt they were going for a 40/50s-style sheen on SP. Neither of us are experts in these things, but I understood what she meant, but I didn't feel that it worked.

I agree - I was very harsh on the presence of the Swann character and maybe that's more as a reaction to how I feel about the explicit "retconning" of Bond's world in DC's tenure. Not to be antagonistic with this statement, but it was almost like bad fan fiction - the need to have to tie everything together.

I understand the desired effect, but in a strange way, Mr White remains as mysterious a character as when we first met him (and IMHO a somewhat peripheral character at best, a plot device in QoS) and I felt that script just wanted to position her as "his daughter" and then you let assume to fill in the blanks.

In retrospect, while I'm critical of some of the "talkier" stretches of the film, I actually could have done with a more meaty introduction at the clinic. The questionnaire scene a nice effort ("hey, that was a cool moment in SF, let's play on that") but I felt it was all too quickly shunted out of the way for the plane chase.

Both Vesper and Tracy are introduced in a far more leisurely and deliberate way - we get to know them as characters. Whereas I felt that Madeleine is almost rushed upon us - we get to know her backstory but we don't get to know her, other than she's not very welcoming to Bond. Again, her character feels more "plot device" than three-dimensional, and I do feel that's something the recent films have done very well.

[FlemingBond]

thank you for the review

[dirtymind]

Great review. My thoughts exactly.

[bill007]

The hacked Sony emails showed us just how far up the ladder inputs to this film came from.

 

Add a story-telling director to a pack of writers, producers, studio executives, and an actor-cum-co-producer, and you've go a lot of input.

 

Being uber-fans of 007, we each have our own well-educated expections of the next new film.

 

Sorry this one isn't a winner for you, plankattack.

[plankattack]

Add a story-telling director to a pack of writers, producers, studio executives, and an actor-cum-co-producer, and you've go a lot of input.

And this is the conundrum for me. Across the threads, we're all pointing out some terrific individual moments - no doubt a result of the above. And credit to Mendes for allowing that. Yet it doesn't come together for me. It's often been said that Bond-films are not auteur films, yet in this case I feel the lack of singular vision results in not enough glue to hold those parts together.

[saint mark]

nice review thank you, I was disappointing as well overall with this movie.

[bill007]

 

(Posting error by bill007.)

[bill007]

Agreed, with Harry and Cubby around, auteurism was never a possibility, lol.  Same with their successors, Barbara and Michael.  I, for one, am ready to move on to the next directors' vision.  I've seen enough of Bonds' backstory, however much I enjoyed this coda. 

[Pam Bouvier]

Disappointing is the right word for Spectre. Disappointing and rushed. I didn't hate it.  It wasn't unwatchable. But it was a let down for me. 

 

Nostalgia is fine but if you're going to remake classic scenes like FRWL's train fight it needs to be done well. I agree with the criticisms before my post. 

 

I wanted to love this film, so much so that I invited several friends and family members to join me on the 6th.   They seemed to love it but they aren't 007 fans.  This movie was the first a few of them had seen (shocking, I know, but true). 

 

I was looking forward to seeing how they would weave in what Fleming had left us into a new Spectre story with a new Blofeld.  I was intrigued by the idea that somehow Charmain Bond had raised not one but two young men...never occurred to me they would give Bond a foster father! Which could have been forgiven if care had been given to th3 details in this movie.

 

I've always said there is no such thing as a bad Bond  or Bond movie. That still hold true but this won't be one of those movies I see 5-10 times in the theater.

[LJones41]

My apologies Goldfinger……..you are no longer the most overrated Bond film in my eyes.

 

 

 

It still is in my eyes, with Skyfall ranked as the second most overrated Bond film.

[Vauxhall]

The hacked Sony emails showed us just how far up the ladder inputs to this film came from.

 

True, but I would imagine this is the same with pretty much every big budget blockbuster. The studios are determined to have their say in how it pans out, and I guess it's up to the producers to balance pleasing them and doing their own thing.

 

I felt the most noteworthy part of the emails was how Mendes and the producers obviously had considerable differences fairly early on in the process, and how fed up he was well before even getting started with filming.

[Revelator]

 

The hacked Sony emails showed us just how far up the ladder inputs to this film came from.

 

 

I usually have a low opinion of studio executives, but not in this case--their emails were almost all valid criticisms of problems that the filmmakers often failed to fix in the final film.
 

[plankattack]

The hacked Sony emails showed us just how far up the ladder inputs to this film came from.

 
I usually have a low opinion of studio executives, but not in this case--their emails were almost all valid criticisms of problems that the filmmakers often failed to fix in the final film.

If you go back and read those e-mails it is amazing how "prescient" some of them were. And it reminded me how much of Logan's first draft seemed to get pitched, which in turn led to time really becoming a factor in putting pressure on the production. I've long held the opinion that P&W's strength was always in turning a first draft which was then rewritten by others, whether it be Logan himself or Haggis. By going with Logan and seemingly not turning to other voices (whether it P&W or Butterworth) until much later in the process, plus the later acquisition of the Blofeld rights (as alluded to in the Empire podcast currently linked elsewhere in the threads), it does seem the that script and it's main thrusts were never quite locked down. Whether it be producers or Mendes, there doesn't appear from the correspondence to be anyone looking at it from a macro level, and it does seem that the script bounced around - I don't mean from person-to-person, but in that never was allowed to gel.

By all accounts the equally tortured QsS was probably in the same state by the time Haggis signed off on it, but with the writers' strike in place, Foster and team (including the lead) had no options but to knuckle down and make the film that they did. I am biased in liking QoS but I do feel that it's ultimately a more cohesive (I don't mean in the visuals, and I know, I'm just asking to get blasted for using the word!!! ) end product to me. It may not have the depth the some of us like to attribute to it, but it most certainly is what it is, with a thrust and pace that I feel SP lacks.

IMHO SP is, in the final product, a lot of fine moments and great ideas which are never quite cemented together. Rereading those e-mails only only illuminates for me, how the film ended up that way.

[Dustin]

The hacked Sony emails showed us just how far up the ladder inputs to this film came from.

I usually have a low opinion of studio executives, but not in this case--their emails were almost all valid criticisms of problems that the filmmakers often failed to fix in the final film.

If you go back and read those e-mails it is amazing how "prescient" some of them were. And it reminded me how much of Logan's first draft seemed to get pitched, which in turn led to time really becoming a factor in putting pressure on the production. I've long held the opinion that P&W's strength was always in turning a first draft which was then rewritten by others, whether it be Logan himself or Haggis. By going with Logan and seemingly not turning to other voices (whether it P&W or Butterworth) until much later in the process, plus the later acquisition of the Blofeld rights (as alluded to in the Empire podcast currently linked elsewhere in the threads), it does seem the that script and it's main thrusts were never quite locked down. Whether it be producers or Mendes, there doesn't appear from the correspondence to be anyone looking at it from a macro level, and it does seem that the script bounced around - I don't mean from person-to-person, but in that never was allowed to gel.

By all accounts the equally tortured QsS was probably in the same state by the time Haggis signed off on it, but with the writers' strike in place, Foster and team (including the lead) had no options but to knuckle down and make the film that they did. I am biased in liking QoS but I do feel that it's ultimately a more cohesive (I don't mean in the visuals, and I know, I'm just asking to get blasted for using the word!!! ) end product to me. It may not have the depth the some of us like to attribute to it, but it most certainly is what it is, with a thrust and pace that I feel SP lacks.

IMHO SP is, in the final product, a lot of fine moments and great ideas which are never quite cemented together. Rereading those e-mails only only illuminates for me, how the film ended up that way.

Well, I certainly agree with QOS. But in all fairness it has to be said when they started out with SKYFALL, the film that is currently the benchmark for the past-Cubby Broccoli era and the rare modern classic in Eon's quiver, that one started out in all likelihood with

1. Let's remake TMWTGG
2. Let's make M the Bond girl and make Bond a side character
3. Let's throw all our favourite scenes from books and films into a hat, draw a top ten and see how we can give them a twist

so SKYFALL should by all means have turned out as a horrible mess. But for all its plotholes it has a very distinctive theme and stringent storyline, the very things SPECTRE lacks for me.

[SecretAgentFan]

I could imagine that before SKYFALL the studio did not consider Bond to be a billion-dollar-maker.

 

After SKYFALL there just was too much pressure from too many sides.  Too many cooks in the kitchen.  Never good for a creative process.

[RMc2]

Thank you, plankattack, you echoed my thoughts on the film in a much better-expressed manner.

 

As for the leaked e-mails: the execs' criticisms of the latest drafts were spot-on. It's evident at the later stages that Mendes was either too fed up or too in love with his own ideas to make the changes. I wonder if a less 'auteur' director would have been stubborn enough to keep the flaws.

 

In all, though, I think history shows Bond shouldn't have the same director for consecutive films: it has disappointing results. Guy Hamilton, Lewis Gilbert, John Glen, and now Sam Mendes - only Terence Young managed a one-two knockout with Dr No and From Russia With Love.

[Silva25]

SPOILERS (better be safe than sorry)


My apologies Goldfinger……..you are no longer the most overrated Bond film in my eyes.

I guess someone has to give a dissenting view and I feel a bit weird that it’s me. You all know me as a long-time CBner, always try to be fair and even-handed and I try hard not to troll or antagonize.

I love FRWL, the opening credits of CR are still an almost religious moment for how I feel about the celluloid Bond, and yes, I’ve been a defender of QoS, LTK, and sometime demented dead-ender when it comes to sticking up for TWINE. I’ve put the boot into DAD, taken a fair share of shots at John Glen, have stuck up for P&W, and have become more impressed with Babs and Mike the further they get from their father’s tenure. And I’m of the same generation as DC and Mendes, and like them, LALD was my first big screen experience all those years ago.

But I’m afraid SP….well, let me try and be as reasoned as possible. And fair warning, I’m not looking for a fight or to be expelled from this here domain, so maybe you could just help me find what I’m missing on this one.

So, in homage to Jim’s 007th Minute, here are my thoughts. And like the homage of the train fight in SP, it’s no doubt unasked for, completely obvious, tension-free, and ultimately a reminder (to paraphrase Jim) that your homage shouldn’t exist to just remind you how much better the original is.

Anway, we’ve been blessed with A-list director of stage and screen Sam Mendes, and as I’m ultimately going to lay my blame at his feet, what fairer way to shape my issues than through the prism of his resume (or Wikiipedia page).

JARHEAD
Roger Deakins, with unsurprising skill makes the Gulf landscape reflect Mendes’ take on Marine life. On the other hand (and maybe it was just my choice of seat in the cinema), the decision to bleed SP of reds and oranges, leaves a dull palate that flatters no-one. The expensive, no holds-barred spectacle of the PTS is sabotaged by how drab the Day of the Dead festival ends up appearing, and while the snow scenes stand out, that section only highlights how poorly the star is filmed the rest of the time. DC looked better in digital, in CR, in QoS, in Tomb Raider! And the desert base and its surroundings? Nope, it was no TSWLM by the Nile, that’s for sure. Hopefully it'll look better on the Blu Ray. Let me know.


OLIVER/CABARET
A good many have jumped on Newman’s seemingly rehashed score, so I won’t pile on. Yes, this is a sequel to SF. Those of us who know (and care – something I didn’t get from the casual audience) don’t need to be constantly reminded after the first twenty minutes of the film. (Though to be fair - that Mendes was still editing as little as three weeks ago couldn't have helped with the soundtrack).


ROAD TO PERDITION
Cast Paul Newman and you know you’re getting value for money. Cast Christoph Waltz and it’s the same thing. But SP criminally wastes Waltz, with Blofeld’s unconvincing motivation. I was nervous after the leaks about the backstory, but ultimately I could swallow my Fleming and buy in. What I couldn’t was Blofeld’s apparent desire to make 007 feel it – completely undone by scant screen-time and poor characterization. Waltz’s Blofeld – urbane yes, intelligent yes, potentially dangerous yes. And obsessed with getting one over Bond? No, this man has bigger fish to fry. Set up as evil mastermind with far-reaching plans, but who’s come this far obsessing over young James? Is that any less ridiculous than me saying that Goldinger wanted to get into Fort Knox just to show Bond that out-smarting him at golf was child’s play?

Waltz underused, Blofeld underused. Mendes has expressed his fondness for The Dark Knight, yet forgot that Nolan (while getting a terrific performance from Ledger) put his villain into the same centre stage as the hero without detracting from the story’s focus. No, you can’t edge out Bond in Bond-film, but Blofeld felt like little more than an add-on.


REVOLUTIONARY ROAD/AWAY WE GO
It was always going to be risky, following SF with a “story rooted in SF.” As others have said, Swann is a poorly written, poorly-served character. No blame on Seydoux, Swann’s appearance with an hour already gone means that it’s hard to create anything for the audience to invest in. Sure, Vesper doesn’t show up until an hour in CR, but then the remainder of the film is about the two of them, whereas here, Swann seems little more than a travelling companion.

Mendes wants to use her suffering as anchor for the film’s emotional core, yet the script has coughed up Kissy Suzuki with a different profession. If SP occurs in the aftermath of SF, why are we to believe Bond (criticized by many for his throwaway attitude at Severine’s death) is now all knight in armour for Swann. Because that’s how it works in a Bond film? No, the series has spent a decade attempting to re-distribute proper motivation for the characters, most importantly the lead, so to fall back on Bond just doing what he always does because he’s Bond, is lazy at best, betrayal at worst.


CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY
Tonal shifts are notoriously tough to pull off (though Dahl got away with it). Or maybe SP is Mendes homage to TMWTGG? Whatever it is, it doesn't work. What's left is at times incoherent, too often unengaging. Like the merging of Scaramanga and the Solex, Nine Eyes and Oberhauser never comes off. We're curious sure, but uninvested in either plot thread.

From scene to scene things are no better. SP veers from psychological drama to airbags in small cars (where’s that pigeon when you need him?), from Bond the lone hero on a mission, to M and the gang back home. From long talky sections, to sudden bursts of plodding action. Frankly we could’ve done with a little of QoS’s frenetic energy. I know everyone hates shakey-cam (“can we recut the boat chase”!!!!), well there’s no shakey cam in the mountain chase and that was a snoozer. Be honest with yourself – airport scene in CR, or mountain chase? Car chase in Rome? Or TND?

But the train fight? Absolutely no build-up. Any action sequence, in pure action film or thriller, succeeds on how the scene is set. In SP Swann and Bond are having dinner, then Hinx suddenly appears and punch-up ensues. I don’t think we even saw him get on the train? Or lurk around the station? The mechanics of both SP’s fight and FRWL’s are ultimately the same, but why does FRWL work? Because Bond and Grant face-off for 20 minutes until the tension explodes. In SP, why are we fighting? Oh, because Hinx is a henchman and well, we’ve been looking at family photos for a half-hour so we better have some action. Yes, finding a new angle on the old-fashioned fistfight must be tough. But as Mendes himself proved in SF, it can be done.

And as for poor old Hinx, why did we bother? Unlike Jaws and Oddjob, there’s no real effort to establish the character’s menace. Did he work for Blofeld or was he interviewing for a job? Who cares? He’s a big guy so he must be a bruiser!


AMERICAN BEAUTY
Middle age man takes a leave from his job, drives his dream car, and lusts after a woman young enough to be his daughter. And you thought I was talking about Kevin Spacey. (That was my homage to 007th Minute’s TWINE review. If you haven’t read that tome, do so!).

Mendes has an Oscar (deserved), and rightly gives enormous credit to Alan Ball’s script. But as he’s proved with other films, including SF, he is deserving of his A-list status. So ultimately SP is down to his direction, and the script he worked from. We’ll never know how many iterations the script when through. I can see a first-draft idea (with Chiwetel Ejiofor rumored as the villain). And I do feel that Blofeld is somehow grafted in to an already existing story going in a certain direction (a whole film built around Nine Eyes). How much of the story was plotted before EON got the rights back? Logan did say he went to work back in 2012, though how much of that survived we don’t know, but that was definitely before the legalities were settled. But what exists definitely feels, if not cobbled together, forced together.

I know everyone hates QoS – but when they had an unfinished script, they ramped up the action and the style, went lean and tried to get away with it in under 2 hours. In SP, it feels like they ramped up the exposition and the “melodrama” and added a half-hour. Like it or loathe it, QoS goes down easy, but I’m not sure I can say the same of the fatty, slow-footed SP.

Sorry guys, I just don’t get it. I keep hearing how this is “classic” Bond. I won’t profess to claim to know how to define that, but ultimately my issues with SP are not that’s it’s not a good Bond-film. No, I just don’t see it as a competent piece of story-telling. Yes, there are some great singular moments, as good as any in the series - the relationship with Q, the PTS, a couple of the throwaway lines. But for me the total felt so far less than the sum of the parts.

I actually agree with a lot of this.  Although my problems with Hinx are a bit different than yours.  I thought that he actually was fairly menacing.  My big problem was simply this, if you want to do the "silent henchman" thing fine.  But then don't cast Dave Bautista in that role, it's a waste of his talents.  And the whole Bond/Madeleine thing had potential (age difference aside).  The execution was just lacking imo.  And it started out (although she was introduced into the movie too late imo) decent, and Craig and Seydoux are clearly trying to make it work.  But then they never really developed it sufficiently.

Edited by Silva25, 14 November 2015 - 08:30 PM.

[sharpshooter]

Re: Bond  and Madeleine:

 

Bond always maintained he gave Mr White his word to protect her. And as the film played out, she did need protecting, with Hinx on their trail. She was frosty to Bond on their first meeting, and pulled the curtains back on him at the L'Americain. I can buy their lovemaking on the train after the Hinx fight because they're relieved to be alive. And by the time Blofeld plays White's suicide video, she truly knows Bond is a man of his word.