66 replies to this topic

[univex]

3/5 from the NME.

 

How much you enjoy this may depend on how you feel about Bond in general. If you miss the old days, with the world in elaborate peril and everything done with a big wink, this is a solid example of that. If you preferred the lower stakes but tighter storytelling of the new era, Spectre may feel like your dad’s Bond.

http://www.nme.com/r...s-artists/16306

 

That "Spectre may fell like your dad´s Bond"sentence made my mind and day. I clearly remember a DUD review saying the film was "not your dad´s Bond" and I distinctively recall being very scared of that particular observation. So it is truly a joy to hear this one IS my dad´s Bond. Thank heavens for that. I´ve been waiting for it ever since the turn of the millenium (even though I loved CR, QOS and SF).

[RMc2]

3/5 from Radio Times

 

(who I usually find are spot on, albeit not always when it comes to Bond films)

[Revelator]

The excellent Daily Keyframe blog has an often updated post tracking Spectre reviews:

https://www.fandor.c...mendess-spectre

[jamie00007]

"Spectre will go down as Craig's stab at going full-blown BOND - big, bold and a bit more like Roger Moore."

Sounds exactly what I wanted this movie to be. I find it amusing that some of the less positive reviews complain about lack of character development and substance (like critics said about basically every Bond film before Casino Royale), but honestly, as much as I loved the other Craig films, we've had enough of that stuff, time for some old fashioned Bond fun. Which the positive reviews seem to imply the film has in spades.

[Guy Haines]

As it happens, I'm old enough to be a first time around fan of "your Dad's Bond", having watched these films since 1970. So I know what fans here are getting at.

But am I detecting the beginnings of a bit of a backlash against what's gone before from 2006 onwards?

I actually appreciated the character development side of things and reading some of the reviews I don't think we're quite through with them yet - there's this little business of what Bond's "secret" that he won't tell anyone actually is, for a start.

I'm hoping that SPECTRE turns out to be a 21st century equivalent of the mid 60s Bond movie - GF or TB and already one reviewer has called it Craig's YOLT. But there are other things this "Dad aged" fan is also looking for - and hoping doesn't turn up - and I'm hoping that in trying to create a more classic Bond movie the film makers haven't thrown out the character baby with the bathwater. I'm also hoping the one liners are up to 60s standards - dropped dead pan and straight, which for me actually makes them funnier.

[SecretAgentFan]

But am I detecting the beginnings of a bit of a backlash against what's gone before from 2006 onwards?

 

It´s the natural order of things.  Build it up, tear it down.  Make fun of previous eras - only to wish them back a few years later.

 

It seems SPECTRE does offer more of the "old Bond" - something which has never been a hit with critics.  Do you remember the reviews for the Connery and Moore films?

 

It will be interesting to see how this will develop with BOND 25.  SPECTRE seems to have gone the THUNDERBALL route: bigger, trying to top everything that came before.

 

Will BOND 25 therefore be pared down again?  Craig´s "For your eyes only"?

[jamie00007]

I don't think it's backlash or tearing anything down, just the natural cycle. Like so many of us wanted a darker, grittier, character driven Bond film after DAD. I'm a HUGE fan of the Craig era, I consider it second only to the first four Connery films as the best of Bond. So Im certainly not tearing it down when I say I'm really ready for a change of pace and some traditional Bond fun and thrills.

[RMc2]

 

But am I detecting the beginnings of a bit of a backlash against what's gone before from 2006 onwards?

 

It´s the natural order of things.  Build it up, tear it down.  Make fun of previous eras - only to wish them back a few years later.

 

It seems SPECTRE does offer more of the "old Bond" - something which has never been a hit with critics.  Do you remember the reviews for the Connery and Moore films?

 

It will be interesting to see how this will develop with BOND 25.  SPECTRE seems to have gone the THUNDERBALL route: bigger, trying to top everything that came before.

 

Will BOND 25 therefore be pared down again?  Craig´s "For your eyes only"?

 

 

It seems to be less of a backlash and more of a return to norm, like you say. The dividing line between critics so far seems to be those who love traditional Bond fun & scale, and those who want more of the dark, emotional Craig stuff (or who just want SkyFall Revisited).

 

It would make sense for Bond 25 to send Craig's Bond off on a quieter, more thoughtful note.* A bittersweet farewell, perhaps?

 

 

*it's completely wrong to imply SPECTRE isn't thoughtful without seeing it, but hope you know what I mean!

[Guy Haines]

Actually, the reviews are reading a bit of both into SPECTRE. The review from the Daily Express - yep, the paper with the world's "most accurate" weather forecasts! ;-) - goes on quite a bit about Bond being troubled by the fact that people close to him were killed in the previous Craig films and this is a theme of SPECTRE, as well as the return of more traditional elements. Probably a tribute to Mendes, Craig and so on that reviewers detect both. As another review said, SPECTRE is a "morbid" movie with its references to death - while the "Independent" reviewer compared it to a "Wagnerian version of a Milk Tray ad." (And you've got to be a bit nearer my advanced years to remember "And all because the lady loves Milk Tray"! ;-)

[FlemingBond]

to me Casino Royale set the perfect tone. there was sexiness, flirtiness to it. it was like the Connery movies. but they seem to be stuck on the gloom ever since then.

[JohnnyWalker]

Really just sounds like a wild ride of a Bond film, the one review I read made stuff in the film sound brilliantly ridiculous.

[Guy Haines]

to me Casino Royale set the perfect tone. there was sexiness, flirtiness to it. it was like the Connery movies. but they seem to be stuck on the gloom ever since then.

The review in The Sun newspaper does compare SPECTRE favourably with Casino Royale. I agree about CR 2006. It took me back to my days of watching Connery.

[Toxteth_OGrady]

Heard Chris Evans on BBC Radio 2 this morning saying that many of the reviews in the Sunday newspapers were 3 star, with one 2 star.

[RMc2]

Pretty negative review here, but non-specific to avoid spoilers.

 

Edited by RMc2, 27 October 2015 - 09:55 PM.

[S K Y F A L L]

Thanks for posting the video. There isn't much none spoilers to read right now.

[Simon]

They way and the sheer speed at which the film's story bashes from one scene to the next, I thought it was closer to 'Craig's Thunderball' which also moved very quickly through the story elements.

 

Did anyone see much made of the metal thumbs?  We saw it after much inspection of images, and Bautista said in interview that his character had his 'thing', but I saw very little mention of them in the film.

[thecasinoroyale]

Pretty much only used once, and that we saw in the trailers. After that, nothing came of them at all so a very disposable gimmick which could have been used better to really give him his "thing".

[Guy Haines]

Pretty much only used once, and that we saw in the trailers. After that, nothing came of them at all so a very disposable gimmick which could have been used better to really give him his "thing".

Trouble is, I sat in the theatre many years ago when a similar scene occurs in a certain Shakespeare play. All suggested - off stage as I recall but plenty of screams - and I heard a thud in the audience. A member of it had fainted at the mere imagining of what was going on. Maybe the producers worried about that - after all they needed a 12A certificate.

[Simon]

Yeah, I was just talking with someone in the office about this and we too were thinking perhaps there were chasing the 12A cert.

[Vauxhall]

Yeah, I was just talking with someone in the office about this and we too were thinking perhaps there were chasing the 12A cert.

I think there was something last week saying the producers actively asked what would need to be cut to get it to 12A, and one of the things was a shot showing the outcome of a gruesome attack.

That must be Hinx's first effort.

[thecasinoroyale]

I'd have loved to have seen that, seeing as we glimpsed it in the trailers. I wonder if it'll make the international cut.

[sharpshooter]

I'd have loved to have seen that, seeing as we glimpsed it in the trailers. I wonder if it'll make the international cut.

Hopefully. The CR stairwell fight was trimmed as well I think, and Australia received the full version. So we'll see. 

[SkyfallCraig]

My no-spoiler review:

http://www.jborbisno...spoiler-review/

[sharpshooter]

My no-spoiler review:

http://www.jborbisno...spoiler-review/

I enjoyed reading your review. Good job. 

[agentbug]

I second that, sharpshooter.

[The Shark]

 

Pretty much only used once, and that we saw in the trailers. After that, nothing came of them at all so a very disposable gimmick which could have been used better to really give him his "thing".

Trouble is, I sat in the theatre many years ago when a similar scene occurs in a certain Shakespeare play.

 

Mendes threw in a few allusions to the Bard in SPECTRE, namely Titus Andronicus (Hinx's introduction) and Richard III (Bond seducing a widow at the funeral of the husband he slew). Crafty bugger.

[Harmsway]

Judging by Twitter, the US press is going to be harder on the film than the UK press.

[sharpshooter]

Judging by Twitter, the US press is going to be harder on the film than the UK press.

Can't say I'm surprised. 

[deth]

My no-spoiler review:

http://www.jborbisno...spoiler-review/

 

I had to stop reading as there are spoilers... in the form of you laying out the order of locations, and who's in them. I'd rather not know what's next after each scene.

[sharpshooter]

Australian reviewer Paul Byrnes gives it 4/5.

 

http://www.smh.com.a...104-gkpx5u.html