10 replies to this topic

[YOLT]

I know I am in the minority but in my view Spectre was the best of Craig. However thats not because its a great movie, its just better than the first three (CR, QS and SF). After all those years I thought that I was really watching something close to a Bond movie which I really am happy about. And no my favourite movies are not TSWLM or DAD, they are FRWL and YOLT and TLD. 

 

Spectres' biggest problem is the 'motivation of Blofeld'. It just comes from nowhere. The script had big issues. Other weaknesses are:

 

The 'title song'

Lack of unity in the screenplay

Nearly everything of the highly boring and dull London scenes (the last 10 minutes - still better than Skyfall's dreadful ending)

 

The positive points are:

 

The action scenes: really enjoyed all of them

Hinx

Use of the MI6 and especially Q

Madeline Swan

use of locations

the torture scene

 

 

and of course Craig himself.

 

One big suggestion to EON: please do not end the movies at night/evening. 

 

 

[RMc2]

Interesting to hear your views, YOLT.

 

Would you mind clarifying what you mean by listing the 'boring and dull London scenes' as a weakness, but the 'use of MI6' as a strength? The two coincided throughout the film (with the exception of Q, of course).

 

 

 

One big suggestion to EON: please do not end the movies at night/evening. 

 

I absolutely agree here. Please bring back the visual vivacity of CR.

 

It's a shame because they could have limited the grand finale to SPECTRE's meteor base. The darkness of the interior halls would have sufficiently fulfilled Mendes' desire for a dark mood and introspective atmosphere (especially if they'd emphasised the fraternal relationship), while escaping into the daylight would have served as nice, simple 'breaking into the light/free of oppression' symbolism.

 

I'm increasingly feeling that a lot of SPECTRE's problems stem from Mendes' insistence on locating the finale in London. It removes a lot of the urgency and severely limits Waltz's meaningful screentime, which is my major issue with the film. A very strong 130 minute film could have resulted from ending the story in the meteor base, with a properly tense and hard-fought escape.

[plankattack]

Nearly everything of the highly boring and dull London scenes (the last 10 minutes - still better than Skyfall's dreadful ending)

YOLT, do you mean the action at Skyfall lodge, or the last scene with Bond in M's office with the red leather door? IMHO, the latter is the second best ending in the whole series after Bond, James Bond in CR. (okay, for different reasons "We have all the time in the world" is on that list too).

[byline]

I absolutely agree here. Please bring back the visual vivacity of CR.

I agree on this. Of all the minor quibbles I've had with various films in the Craig era, this is probably the dominant one. I feel like the post-Casino Royale films have all been rather drab in color, which mutes the visual intensity. I would like to see a return to a higher color saturation in future films.

[Guy Haines]

Interesting to hear your views, YOLT.
 
Would you mind clarifying what you mean by listing the 'boring and dull London scenes' as a weakness, but the 'use of MI6' as a strength? The two coincided throughout the film (with the exception of Q, of course).
 
 

One big suggestion to EON: please do not end the movies at night/evening.

 
I absolutely agree here. Please bring back the visual vivacity of CR.
 
It's a shame because they could have limited the grand finale to SPECTRE's meteor base. The darkness of the interior halls would have sufficiently fulfilled Mendes' desire for a dark mood and introspective atmosphere (especially if they'd emphasised the fraternal relationship), while escaping into the daylight would have served as nice, simple 'breaking into the light/free of oppression' symbolism.
 
I'm increasingly feeling that a lot of SPECTRE's problems stem from Mendes' insistence on locating the finale in London. It removes a lot of the urgency and severely limits Waltz's meaningful screentime, which is my major issue with the film. A very strong 130 minute film could have resulted from ending the story in the meteor base, with a properly tense and hard-fought escape.

If you think about it there was no need for Bond to be back in London at all for the finale. M and Q tackled the Whitehall end of SPECTRE's plan perfectly well between them. We could have had a finale part of the film in which Bond was in an extended battle with Blofeld on the latter's home territory - with Madeleine still in peril and having to be rescued - while having to stop "Nine Eyes" information being received in the desert - with M & Q doing their bit in London.

But I guess the writers and directors couldn't resist the symbolism of Bond and Blofeld battling it out amidst the "ruins" of Bond's life which Blofeld claimed to have been behind.

[YOLT]

 

Interesting to hear your views, YOLT.
 
Would you mind clarifying what you mean by listing the 'boring and dull London scenes' as a weakness, but the 'use of MI6' as a strength? The two coincided throughout the film (with the exception of Q, of course).
 
 

One big suggestion to EON: please do not end the movies at night/evening.

 
I absolutely agree here. Please bring back the visual vivacity of CR.
 
It's a shame because they could have limited the grand finale to SPECTRE's meteor base. The darkness of the interior halls would have sufficiently fulfilled Mendes' desire for a dark mood and introspective atmosphere (especially if they'd emphasised the fraternal relationship), while escaping into the daylight would have served as nice, simple 'breaking into the light/free of oppression' symbolism.
 
I'm increasingly feeling that a lot of SPECTRE's problems stem from Mendes' insistence on locating the finale in London. It removes a lot of the urgency and severely limits Waltz's meaningful screentime, which is my major issue with the film. A very strong 130 minute film could have resulted from ending the story in the meteor base, with a properly tense and hard-fought escape.

If you think about it there was no need for Bond to be back in London at all for the finale. M and Q tackled the Whitehall end of SPECTRE's plan perfectly well between them. We could have had a finale part of the film in which Bond was in an extended battle with Blofeld on the latter's home territory - with Madeleine still in peril and having to be rescued - while having to stop "Nine Eyes" information being received in the desert - with M & Q doing their bit in London.

But I guess the writers and directors couldn't resist the symbolism of Bond and Blofeld battling it out amidst the "ruins" of Bond's life which Blofeld claimed to have been behind.

 

 

My problem was not Bond being in London but the scenes being as if they were from a Tv series. The end in Skyfall had also the same problem: 10 or 15 mins of immense darkness without any point. I can only blame one person: Sam Mendes.

 

Bond films are known for their visual vivacity not for their magnificent scripts. TND for example, I movie which I really like, also has he same problem: some dark studio shootings with no aim.

 

The use of colours and locations are the real features that makes Bond movies different and special. Its the locations that provide the unique Bondian feel. The first thing that I remember from YOLT that it is set in Japan, or the magnificent usage of the Mediterranean countries in FYEO. Its the pleasure to fantasize a place with nearly impossible events. 

 

No matter how good the script is. There can be Bond movies without M, Q, the gunbarell etc. as we had before. However it will be the end of Bond without locations and colourful images...

[chrisno1]

Thanks, YOLT. a short gesture, but I enjoyed your last post about colourful daytime settings. Yes, Craig's Bond does seem to spend an awful lot of time running around at night, even CR had two night bound chases. Hark back to GF, we only have one sequence set at night in the whole movie (exluding the PTS). A very colourful film that one.

[DaveBond21]

Thanks, YOLT. a short gesture, but I enjoyed your last post about colourful daytime settings. Yes, Craig's Bond does seem to spend an awful lot of time running around at night, even CR had two night bound chases. Hark back to GF, we only have one sequence set at night in the whole movie (exluding the PTS). A very colourful film that one.

 

There is a lot of night in the Brosnan films too.

 

On the London scenes, Mendes and others keep on saying how great it was to be able to film in London and how cooperative the authorities were. In comparison to issues with India (access refused), Rome and Mexico, over the last 2 movies, London has felt very easy for them, and so it has been very tempting to film more there.

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

[tdalton]

 

 

On the London scenes, Mendes and others keep on saying how great it was to be able to film in London and how cooperative the authorities were. In comparison to issues with India (access refused), Rome and Mexico, over the last 2 movies, London has felt very easy for them, and so it has been very tempting to film more there.

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

Perhaps EON should look for more accessible locations the next time around.  There really wasn't anything about the Rome sequence that necessitated it being in Rome.  Bond goes to a funeral, seduces the widow, and then goes to the SPECTRE meeting.  That could have been done just about anywhere.  The meeting was, for me, one of the biggest disappointments of the film.  That should have been a great moment, yet it was completely underwhelming.  They already did the secret meeting thing much better with the Quantum of Solace Tosca sequence two films back.  

[SecretAgentFan]

Have to disagree here - I thought the meeting was one of the best scenes in the film.  And Rome, the eternal city, was the right choice IMO as a background.  However, the cinematography didn´t do this location justice.  I´m blabbering on again about the cinematography, I know - but look at any film using Rome as location (even Woody Allen´s "To Rome with Love") and you get so much more atmosphere and interesting views.

[Surrie]

 

I absolutely agree here. Please bring back the visual vivacity of CR.

I agree on this. Of all the minor quibbles I've had with various films in the Craig era, this is probably the dominant one. I feel like the post-Casino Royale films have all been rather drab in color, which mutes the visual intensity. I would like to see a return to a higher color saturation in future films.

 

 

Yes - agree here regarding the visuals in Craig's post-CR films. Although, I might be jumping to conclusions here but maybe this was intentional from EON... Bond is still suffering the loss of Vesper. The use of colour in TV and Film to convey emotion has always been a point of interest for many, maybe EON are aware of this.