SPECTRE Review Thread

[dgoswald]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

The writing of this era on the whole is only a little less dodgy than Brosnan's last 2 Bond flicks (although admittedly much less campy) and I've only really liked Martin Campbell's direction so far.

A shade more than little less dodgy, absolutely.

The overall classier feel of the current era is miles better than the Brosnan films post-Goldeneye (I've yet to revisit TND so my memory of it isn't that great). As you said, if Connery returned for DAF it's not beyond the realms of possibility for Brosnan to return. Improbable but not impossible. I just think it could be a nice breakwater between Craig's Bond and the next younger Bond if there were a Brosnan Bond in the middle. Get Martin Campbell onboard to direct and I'd be in heaven.

[Nada]

I like all of Brosnan films (okay the second half of Die Another Day, not so much) and I think the current films could learn a thing or two from Brosnan's films. They feel like Bond films through and through and hit all of the beats on target. I would like a more traditional Bond adventure. Key word there is "adventure". The only Craig film I've loved is Casino Royale, because it was so close to the book and was a really great film.

[Infernal King]

Originally Posted by dgoswald

A shade more than little less dodgy, absolutely.

The overall classier feel of the current era is miles better than the Brosnan films post-Goldeneye (I've yet to revisit TND so my memory of it isn't that great). As you said, if Connery returned for DAF it's not beyond the realms of possibility for Brosnan to return. Improbable but not impossible. I just think it could be a nice breakwater between Craig's Bond and the next younger Bond if there were a Brosnan Bond in the middle. Get Martin Campbell onboard to direct and I'd be in heaven.

What about Craig's films seem classier to you than Brosnan's? I'm not trying to change your mind, just curious about this particular point you raised.

[dgoswald]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

What about Craig's films seem classier to you than Brosnan's? I'm not trying to change your mind, just curious about this particular point you raised.

I think the lack of tongue in cheek in Craig's Bond that Brosnan's Bond films nearly succumbed to is what I mean when I mention 'classier.' Don't get me wrong, I love the saucy one liners from the 60's and 70's Bond films, but I can't stomach that kind of tone in a modern Bond film. I like the straight-down-the-middle, reserved Bond as played by Craig due to it playing to his strengths, but I wouldn't be averse to a more quippier future Bond dependent on the actor in the role, but as long as there wasn't the return of the "cheap n cheerful" feeling that pervaded the tail end of Brosnan's tenure.

With Craig's Bond films they actually feel like huge events - as they should IMO - whereas the overall prestige and lustre of Bond (the character and his world) was slightly tarnished due to the dodgy creative vision Brosnan had to work with. That's what I'm essentially referring to when I use the term classier. It's a multi-faceted thing and I'm doing a poor job of articulating it, hehe, apologies.

[Geoff D]

Heck of it is though, there ARE plenty of one-liners in the Craig films (and other such gags, even the dour Skyfall had the ejector seat bit between Bond and M in the DB5) but because they're not delivered in that uber-cheesy Moore/Brosnan style they tend to get missed by people.

[dgoswald]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Heck of it is though, there ARE plenty of one-liners in the Craig films (and other such gags, even the dour Skyfall had the ejector seat bit between Bond and M in the DB5) but because they're not delivered in that uber-cheesy Moore/Brosnan style they tend to get missed by people.

Yep, the deadpan delivery by Craig makes even a potential guffaw seem quite bearable. Imagine if the scene featuring Madonna from DAD when she tells Bond he "handles his weapon well" was between her and Craig's Bond; it would be cringeworthy to the extreme, but Craig would respond in a way that would nullify the cheese factor, lol.

[Infernal King]

Originally Posted by dgoswald

I think the lack of tongue in cheek in Craig's Bond that Brosnan's Bond films nearly succumbed to is what I mean when I mention 'classier.' Don't get me wrong, I love the saucy one liners from the 60's and 70's Bond films, but I can't stomach that kind of tone in a modern Bond film. I like the straight-down-the-middle, reserved Bond as played by Craig due to it playing to his strengths, but I wouldn't be averse to a more quippier future Bond dependent on the actor in the role, but as long as there wasn't the return of the "cheap n cheerful" feeling that pervaded the tail end of Brosnan's tenure.

With Craig's Bond films they actually feel like huge events - as they should IMO - whereas the overall prestige and lustre of Bond (the character and his world) was slightly tarnished due to the dodgy creative vision Brosnan had to work with. That's what I'm essentially referring to when I use the term classier. It's a multi-faceted thing and I'm doing a poor job of articulating it, hehe, apologies.

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Heck of it is though, there ARE plenty of one-liners in the Craig films (and other such gags, even the dour Skyfall had the ejector seat bit between Bond and M in the DB5) but because they're not delivered in that uber-cheesy Moore/Brosnan style they tend to get missed by people.

Originally Posted by dgoswald

Yep, the deadpan delivery by Craig makes even a potential guffaw seem quite bearable. Imagine if the scene featuring Madonna from DAD when she tells Bond he "handles his weapon well" was between her and Craig's Bond; it would be cringeworthy to the extreme, but Craig would respond in a way that would nullify the cheese factor, lol.

Thanks for explaining, dgoswald.

I have to say though, I think Craig fails hard at deadpan. So it looks like we'll have to agree to disagree because I think Craig is abysmal at humor in these Bond flicks and that they don't feel any more like "events" than Brosnan's or most of the others.

I think this era is Bond movies for people who don't like Bond movies. Obviously, there are plenty of Bond fans who like/love CR/QoS/SF and most assuredly Spectre but there are also plenty of Craig fans who don't care about any of the previous 20 films. And that Craig's portrayal is the only good version of Bond, etc. Which is all fine because everyone's entitled to their own opinion. However, we're still in the deconstructionist phase of Craig's Bond and I have a feeling Spectre won't be a return to "classic Bond" like many are expecting/hoping.

I've never felt I'm watching a real Bond movie since Casino Royale, except for some of the bits of that film that were part of the original novel.

"What were you expecting? An exploding pen? We don't really go in for that sort of thing anymore." ha ha ha stupid old silly Bond movies. Ours are gritty 'n realistic! Now here's the same fingerprint gun Dalton received in Licence to Kill because we can't come up with any new gadgets.

Sorry, I just really hate this era and can't wait for it to be over.

[dgoswald]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

Sorry, I just really hate this era and can't wait for it to be over.

In a way I'd like Spectre to be the last Craig Bond film... despite having a soft spot for his era of Bond. It may sound like a contradiction, but I dunno, I like them for what they are, but am I saying I want the next Bond to adopt the same tone? No way. I think it's been a wonderful respite, a harder-edged Bond. I have no idea how they'll approach the next iteration of the character. I just hope the quality behind the camera in terms of an accomplished, top-rate crew can be retained for future films.

[Infernal King]

Originally Posted by dgoswald

In a way I'd like Spectre to be the last Craig Bond film... despite having a soft spot for his era of Bond. It may sound like a contradiction, but I dunno, I like them for what they are, but am I saying I want the next Bond to adopt the same tone? No way. I think it's been a wonderful respite, a harder-edged Bond. I have no idea how they'll approach the next iteration of the character. I just hope the quality behind the camera in terms of an accomplished, top-rate crew can be retained for future films.

I want to add that it sounds like I'm coming down hard on Craig but I actually think he's a good actor. Way too good for the films he's been given, apart from Casino Royale. Also, it's not his fault that he gets some pretty unfunny lines ("She's seasick") to deliver. Not even Moore could spin any kind of gold from that leaden dialogue.

I just don't think Quantum of Solace or Skyfall have lived up to the promise of Casino Royale (which I don't think is the Best Bond Ever like so many do). Spectre will undoubtedly be Skyfall Part II (only with more ludicrous twists this time), particularly since the trailers confirm the leaked script was genuine. If they had, I'd probably be singing the praises of a harder-edged Bond being a welcome respite as well.

I can only hope that Craig's last film isn't his worst (like with Connery, Moore and Brosnan) because I'm not sure if I could handle a Bond movie worse than QoS.

[levcore]

Quantum of Solace is awesome, never understood the hate for it. The only thing i don't like about it is some of the editing during the action scenes.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by levcore

Quantum of Solace is awesome, never understood the hate for it. The only thing i don't like about it is some of the editing during the action scenes.

No problem with liking it, but really how can you not understand the hate for it? The action scenes are very poorly edited and staged and the movie does not feel like a Bond movie, more a generic 2000's action film. Those are pretty easy complaints to understand, even if you disagree with them.

I think Quantum is alright, but I definitely understand why some hate it. Hell, I pretty much like all 23 Bond movies, but I understand why many like Diamonds are Forever or A View to a Kill are considered bad.

[levcore]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

No problem with liking it, but really how can you not understand the hate for it? The action scenes are very poorly edited and staged and the movie does not feel like a Bond movie, more a generic 2000's action film. Those are pretty easy complaints to understand, even if you disagree with them.

I think Quantum is alright, but I definitely understand why some hate it. Hell, I pretty much like all 23 Bond movies, but I understand why many like Diamonds are Forever or A View to a Kill are considered bad.

Well yeah i did mention about the editing in my original post. Other than that it feels like a Bond movie to me.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by levcore

Well yeah i did mention about the editing in my original post. Other than that it feels like a Bond movie to me.

I assume you saw the first 20 movies, right? I can't imagine Quantum feeling like a Bond movie to anyone, honestly. Not mocking you or anything, I just don't get it. It's very much a tonal departure. All the Craig films are to some extent, but Quantum really doubled-down on it.

[levcore]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I assume you saw the first 20 movies, right? I can't imagine Quantum feeling like a Bond movie to anyone, honestly. Not mocking you or anything, I just don't get it. It's very much a tonal departure. All the Craig films are to some extent, but Quantum really doubled-down on it.

Yeah I've seen all the Bonds, I grew up watching them etc.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by dgoswald

In a way I'd like Spectre to be the last Craig Bond film... despite having a soft spot for his era of Bond. It may sound like a contradiction, but I dunno, I like them for what they are, but am I saying I want the next Bond to adopt the same tone? No way. I think it's been a wonderful respite, a harder-edged Bond. I have no idea how they'll approach the next iteration of the character. I just hope the quality behind the camera in terms of an accomplished, top-rate crew can be retained for future films.

+1

As much as I love Craig's interpretation of Bond and have enjoyed his movies (even QoS, which may not be much of a Bond movie but is a fine action movie), I'm ready to go back to the more traditional Bond films. Craig's entire tenure will be about reinventing the character, which is fine, but now that Bond has been reinvented/updated, let's see him in some more standard films. Not every movie needs to be about unearthing some horrible secret in Bond's past or diving into the psychological/emotional scars of being a killer.

[Infernal King]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

+1

As much as I love Craig's interpretation of Bond and have enjoyed his movies (even QoS, which may not be much of a Bond movie but is a fine action movie), I'm ready to go back to the more traditional Bond films. Craig's entire tenure will be about reinventing the character, which is fine, but now that Bond has been reinvented/updated, let's see him in some more standard films. Not every movie needs to be about unearthing some horrible secret in Bond's past or diving into the psychological/emotional scars of being a killer.

Four straight movies of this has been, pardon the pun, overkill.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

Four straight movies of this has been, pardon the pun, overkill.

This.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

Four straight movies of this has been, pardon the pun, overkill.

Years from now people will look back on these movies as being products of their time, same as we do with all the Connerys-Brosnans: dark, gritty, psychologically complex, flawed hero going through (relatively) realistic adventures, etc. But hopefully movies like Mission: Impossible and Kingsman have shown that maybe it's time to go back to a lighter approach. Not saying Bond needs to be as over-the-top as it used to be in the 80s-90s, but the franchise has gone a bit too far into Nolan/Bourne territory. I still like the movies, but 4-5 movies like this is more than enough.

[Geoff D]

You're right, I suppose we could call it the Nolan effect.

[Nada]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

You're right, I suppose we could call it the Nolan effect.

I just wish they could get back to the tone of the Dalton films. Those films were grounded, for a Bond movie anyway, and had a strong, yet vulnerable and charismatic performance from Dalton. They felt like Fleming's Bond come to life. The humor was never overbearing, but it wasn't as dry and dismissive as the Craig films. And they struck a nice balance between humor and drama. I think Brosnan's films were pretty good at this too, at least the first three, though they were a bit more fanciful than Dalton's here and there. Aside from Casino Royale, they haven't really delved much into Bond's psyche in Craig's films, despite what the films would have you believe. They feel cold and distant, not at all like the pulpy, but grounded adventures Bond started as on the page. It's like they're afraid to be Bond movies, like we might accidentally have some fun or something.

With all that said, I do enjoy Quantum and Skyfall, but they haven't delivered on all of the promise of Casino Royale, which is in my top three Bond's, hands down.