13 replies to this topic

[JimmyBond]

I've not been around these parts in a while, so I thought I'd make a splash by making a bold proclamation such as that

 

Now let me clarify, I certainly don't think it's the best made of Craig's films. It's certainly not as ground breaking as Casino Royale was, but than again it's really hard to catch lightning in a bottle twice. It's also not as slick as Skyfall, while Skyfall was nearly as long as Spectre, it felt so much shorter, I think Spectre has some pacing problems, but certainly not as bad as I thought when I saw it in theaters (I've seen it twice now).

 

I also think this film has some of the most inventive action sequences of the series. Bond pursuing Hinx and his crew in the plane is probably my favorite, just because of how absurd it is, but it wouldn't be a Bond film without a little absurdity. I'm also in the minority I think in enjoying the Rome car chase, it doesn't really do anything new, but it's a solid action sequence which is played mostly for laughs which is not something I have a problem with. I do agree with others though and thought the streets were unusually bare, especially for midnight.

 

Christoph Waltz also sold me as Blofeld. Sure the reveal is played up as a twist, but he does the character justice in my opinion. Despite the familial connection they force on the character, he feels just as much as Blofeld as the previous actors. This is why I hope Craig comes back, I'd love to see this relationship explored some more and also see the character emerge as the real threat to Bond that he was in the 60s.

 

As I mentioned above, it does have some pacing issues, however it played better for me on the second viewing. When watching it in theaters I could really feel the length, but when I watched it on video the pace was much better, though it does lose me a bit when Bond is taking to Blofeld's headquarters (speaking of that, it's so cool to see an old fashioned villain HQ again). 

 

So in the same way I can say "Spy Who Loved me" is technically better than "Moonraker" I love "Moonraker more, just like I love "Spectre" over Craig's other films, even though it might not be the best made film.

[Tiin007]

Glad you enjoyed it, JimmyBond. 

 

While SPECTRE isn't my favorite Craig entry (that goes to Casino Royale), I certainly found it a worthy entry in the Bond canon. Despite a few notable flaws (Bond-Blofeld relationship, Bond going rogue yet again, too easy escape from the Moroccan lair, and the infuriating return of the DB5), the movie was nonetheless highly enjoyable, and having seen it four times already, my opinion of it has not wavered. 

 

I think time will be good to this one, primarily because many fans and casual cinema-goers created unfairly high expectations after Skyfall. (I think the same happened with The Dark Knight Rises after The Dark Knight, but I digress). 

[JimmyBond]

What is your issue with the DB5 returning? As presented in the Craig era it's Bond's personal car, and Q did repair it after the events of Skyfall, so I'm not really sure it inclusion is that bad.

 

No better or worse than it showing up in the Brosnan films 20 years ago.

[Tiin007]

It made sense in Casino Royale and Skyfall.

 

But after SPECTRE, it has really become too much. Epitomizes the overabundance of homages and references in this era. It's as if the series is mired in the past and refuses to move forward with new iconography.

 

Also, its destruction in Skyfall (along with Bond's childhood home) was quite symbolic. Represented a breaking with the past, especially since the series seemed so focused on self-references in DAD, QoS, and SF. Many of us had hoped that that would be the end of the DB5 (at least for a good many years), particularly as it was destroyed in epic fashion.

 

By bringing it back in SPECTRE, it's as if all of that was negated. Its destruction in Skyfall is now wholly meaningless, given that Q simply put it back together. Takes away from Skyfall.

 

Not to mention the fact that, given the shape it was in after the helicopter destroyed it, there is no way Q would've been able to repair it.

 

The new car in SPECTRE was great. Why keep looking towards the past by rehashing the DB5 over and over again? (The series had done quite well for itself all the way through Licence to Kill, providing us with new cars and gadgets instead of constantly winking at the audience.) 

 

By bringing back the DB5 again and again, the car sort of loses its glamour. It's too much at this point.

[Professor Pi]

The DB5 in Brosnan's movies made sense as you could sort of believe he was the same Bond as in Goldfinger, and that indeed, it became his personal car (one of the novelizations even talks about Q selling it to him with some modifications.)  But Craig had none of those missions, he was a rookie Bond.

 

Now, one could argue that it's the car he won in Casino Royale, and I was down with this for a while.  Even though the steering wheel switches sides, it could be done, albeit at some great expense.  But then the ejector seat joke in Skyfall ruined that.  Okay, Q equipped it with that--in record time no less, and just after having met Bond and saying Q Branch didn't go in for "exploding pens" anymore.

 

But then Q quips in SPECTRE,  "I did tell you to bring it back in one piece, not just one piece."  That's a direct reference to Desmond Lewellyn's quote in Goldfinger.  Okay, so maybe bEN wISHAW'S Q said it to DC's Bond off camera, but we saw Bond take it out of the garage when taking M to Skyfall.

 

No.  If Bond's going to have a personal car, make it the Bentley from the books.  Or crack a joke about a SAAB.  It'd be cheaper than the three new Aston Martin's he's totaled in four movies.

[DaveBond21]

Welcome back JimmyBond! Great to see you on here and glad you enjoyed it as much as I did.

 

I also have no problem with the DB5. I love seeing that car, and since continuity is irrelevant in the Bond movies, it doesn't matter which one it is and how he got it.

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

[RMc2]

The DB5 in Brosnan's movies made sense as you could sort of believe he was the same Bond as in Goldfinger, and that indeed, it became his personal car (one of the novelizations even talks about Q selling it to him with some modifications.)  But Craig had none of those missions, he was a rookie Bond.

 

Now, one could argue that it's the car he won in Casino Royale, and I was down with this for a while.  Even though the steering wheel switches sides, it could be done, albeit at some great expense.  But then the ejector seat joke in Skyfall ruined that.  Okay, Q equipped it with that--in record time no less, and just after having met Bond and saying Q Branch didn't go in for "exploding pens" anymore.

 

But then Q quips in SPECTRE,  "I did tell you to bring it back in one piece, not just one piece."  That's a direct reference to Desmond Lewellyn's quote in Goldfinger.  Okay, so maybe bEN wISHAW'S Q said it to DC's Bond off camera, but we saw Bond take it out of the garage when taking M to Skyfall.

 

No.  If Bond's going to have a personal car, make it the Bentley from the books.  Or crack a joke about a SAAB.  It'd be cheaper than the three new Aston Martin's he's totaled in four movies.

 

I like that he has the Aston Martin. I also appreciate that in SP they tried to explain how it got kitted out between CR and SF... but yes, they ended up just confusing the issue even more!

 

- "Bond, meet your new Quartermaster."

- "Hello Q."

- "Hello Bond. We don't make silly gadgets any more, and 00s aren't really necessary in this day and age."

[Later that evening, over the phone]

- "Hi Q, Bond again. Would you mind picking up my Aston Martin, converting it to a right-hand drive, installing machine guns and adding an ejector seat? Then return it to my private storage.Oh, and please tell M everything you're doing. I'll need it in a couple of days."

- "Sure."

[sharpshooter]

I also have no problem with the DB5. I love seeing that car, and since continuity is irrelevant in the Bond movies, it doesn't matter which one it is and how he got it.

Agreed. Q's line about bringing back one piece - just the steering wheel, got a good laugh in all my screenings. The fact Q Branch created a whole new car and didn't salvage scraps back together makes it plausible in my eyes. 

[Surrie]

To me, SPECTRE felt more "Bondian" than Craig's other installments, and I think that's what I missed the most! His previous films were all marred by his pain of losing Vesper and that meant we didn't see the traditional ending with Bond and the Girl. The return of Blofeld was a welcome one in my eyes, and apart from the pacing issues as mentioned above, I do feel this film will stand its ground in the long-term. I know Craig's era has been focussed on the whole 'before Bond was Bond' kind of story but I feel as though SPECTRE's ending took us to present day Bond, a Bond we all know and love!

[Guy Haines]

I'm going to have a go at watching all four Craig films this weekend in (fairly) rapid succession.

But one thing I suspect I might find on watching SPECTRE is that it tries hard to be a "classic" pre reboot Bond whilst also trying to be "Skyfall revisited" a point I've made in the past. The classic elements, whilst some are welcome, seemed to jar in my mind with the new 21st century Bond we now have (the cream DJ Bond wore on the train looked, to me, frankly dated.)

At the same time the revisiting of the themes of Skyfall was unecessary. Bond needed to confront Blofeld. He didn't need to find out that ESB used to know him in his youth because his dad cared for Bond after his parents died.

On reflection, I think a third way should have been to take up where the hard hitting but fun Casino Royale left off in terms of style and screenwriting rather than try and combine two different types of Bond movie in one. I can't say my enjoyment of SPECTRE was spoiled by it, although there were a couple of minor humour lapses in the Rome car chase I'd have left out, but I'm just thinking how it could have been even better.

By the way, after I've watched all four DC films again this weekend I reserve the right to revise my opinions! ;-)

[Surrie]

I'm going to have a go at watching all four Craig films this weekend in (fairly) rapid succession.

But one thing I suspect I might find on watching SPECTRE is that it tries hard to be a "classic" pre reboot Bond whilst also trying to be "Skyfall revisited" a point I've made in the past. The classic elements, whilst some are welcome, seemed to jar in my mind with the new 21st century Bond we now have (the cream DJ Bond wore on the train looked, to me, frankly dated.)

At the same time the revisiting of the themes of Skyfall was unecessary. Bond needed to confront Blofeld. He didn't need to find out that ESB used to know him in his youth because his dad cared for Bond after his parents died.

On reflection, I think a third way should have been to take up where the hard hitting but fun Casino Royale left off in terms of style and screenwriting rather than try and combine two different types of Bond movie in one. I can't say my enjoyment of SPECTRE was spoiled by it, although there were a couple of minor humour lapses in the Rome car chase I'd have left out, but I'm just thinking how it could have been even better.

By the way, after I've watched all four DC films again this weekend I reserve the right to revise my opinions! ;-)

 

Let us know what you think after the weekend!

[JimmyBond]

To play devils advocate regarding the DB5, the Craig films do go out of their way to build a stronger connection between films, so I could see why people have some problem with Q scoffing at gadgets in one film and then kitting out Bond with them in the next, but small stuff like that doesn't really bother me.

 

When I first heard about Bond and Blofeld's connection I didn't think it would work for me, but the way it's revealed in the film was actually (I thought) pretty well done. The fact that they were only foster brothers softens the blow, plus it's nice to get a look into Bond's past in the films, since we got it so rarely. I see that I pointed out I felt the familial connection was forced, well since I posted the initial topic last week I think I've softened to that plot point.

[sharpshooter]

To play devils advocate regarding the DB5, the Craig films do go out of their way to build a stronger connection between films, so I could see why people have some problem with Q scoffing at gadgets in one film and then kitting out Bond with them in the next, but small stuff like that doesn't really bother me.

I enjoy the irony of Q joking about an exploding pen in Skyfall, and giving him an exploding watch in SPECTRE. 

[Connerybond]

I would consider this as my favourite Craig Bond film Although CR is competing with it.  Not impressed with Waltz as Blofeld I should say.  he is not cut out to play the arch villain Blofeld..  That is just my opinion .  I watched the first Bond film in 1962 when Dr was released, having read the book in 1958.