I’ve met him before, such a lovely gentleman. My Grandmother lives down the road from the Pub (which is still open today), where Moore used to take his Grandmother to lunch in the 70’s. When I told him, he said " It’s STILL open?" ;D. The place has pictures of him from back then drinking with all the locals. Sounded like a great time, make a Bond film, pop back home to the pub, and off again to another Bond film ;D.
I went to see SPECTRE at the cinema on Monday, I enjoyed it, loved the pre-credits sequence, got to be one of the best.
I only have one gripe (apart from the Sam Smith song), I was looking forward to seeing Monica Bellucci in it and was disappointed that her screen time was very brief, despite her having her own 20ft high tarpaulin ad in the cinema!
I’m wondering what the two scenes were that were trimmed here to get the 12 rating, I’m wondering if it is two David Bautista scenes trimmed, where he gouges someones eyes out and maybe some on the train violence?
Went to see
tonight.
First impressions: if the first two Craig Bonds felt like Bourne, this fourth one feels a little like Marlowe. The script is constructed like a detective story, with Bond picking up clues (starting with a video message left for him by the late M.) which lead him from one place to another. But it’s of course a Bond movie, so it’s a Marlowe on a Big Budgets and on Steroids: the journey sends 007 around the globe and from one spectacular action sequence to another. My eyes still boggle and my ears still tingle.
I agree on most points with John’s review on the previous page: this one is fine, but scores a little below Skyfall, mainly because this ‘double ending’ doesn’t really work and some characters aren’t really fleshed out (notably Andrew Scott’s character of “C.”). Ralph Fiennes (as the new M.), Léa Seydoux and of course Monica Bellucci were assets and I won’t say too much on Christoph Waltz, he’s effective as the slimy villain, but I just can’t stand the guy. I must be one of the few people who didn’t like the opening sequence. Highlight: the fight in the train.
7+
A good review @scherpschutter, although in regards to the Brexit comment - others have actually taken the view that this is a post-Snowden Bond, warning of the potential evils of a surveillance society. The politics of Bond films are a murky thing of course, and deliberately so - like the recent Batman films, they can be construed as both conservative and liberal (and thus attract both audiences!).
Thanks for the link. Well, I guess that reading is possible too.
The film felt like a conclusion, but I read that Craig signed in for a fifth Bond. Probably this one was too successful. Nobody wants to kill that one particular goose, of course.
Spectre is a good Bond but again with a weak ending. Several really strong scenes, but just like in Skyfall the film doesn’t succeed as a satisfying whole, it all feels somehow artistically unconnected, and of course Spectre shares also the same flaws as Skyfall. Mendes is not that good in creating interesting characters which also function within the narrative.
The new sensibility which was brought to the franchise by Casino Royale, and which tackled the route to the sublime virtuosity of Quantum of Solace, is again often brought down to a lot of pseudo stuff. The potential to a great film was there in both Bonds by Mendes, but I can always see where the potential wasn’t used or only used in a half baked way. But as I said, some strong scenes along the way. 6,5/10
People may have seen this the Roger Moore Spectre trailer 
1 Like
Nice. What if …
But I actually got used to Craig in the Bond role, finally. He was too much Bourne to be Bond for me, but in Skyfall things got better, more Bondish so to speak, and in Spectre I even liked him as 007.
And, by the way, and 80+ Bond is Moore something for the afterlife, so let’s save Sir Roger’s comeback for later
Yes agree re Moore. When I was attending an audience with Roger Moore not so long ago the trailer above was played, and the audience went wild.
Like that. Well done and shows just how generic all the scenes are. Which of course is how we like it.
Actually I don’t see much from the Bourne films in the Bond films. Maybe I should rewatch the Bournes one day, they are nice but not very remarkable action films with some thriller aspects, but some seem to see a bit more in them.
I don’t like the idea of Bond having a backstory, especially the one that is revealed in Spectre.
In Skyfall it seemed okay, but in Spectre they’re pushing things too far.
If you turn him into a character of flesh & blood, the action also becomes a bit ridiculous: no person, not even the best special agent in the world, could ever survive so many dangerous situations and assaults on his life. A little backstory is enough to give a character some color, to lift him above pure cartoonish level, but it’s easily overdone
To be fair, the producers knew back in 2006 that carrying on in the Brosnan manner wasn’t going to work; and while the backstory introduced for Bond isn’t terribly original, I’d make a couple of points: 1) they’ve actually stuck fairly close to Fleming’s conception of Bond’s past and 2) whoever replaces Craig (either for the next film or the one after) will likely wipe the proverbial slate clean and another direction will be taken on.
First of all, I do appreciate how the new Craig Bonds try to tell the story of the origins of Bond, even though Bond is old and it is a post 9/11 world, so they are taking some creative liberties with the chronological order. But for the most part, that works. It is a retelling for the modern era. I think the first three Craig Bonds are an excellent trilogy of establishing 007 and telling how he became what he is. Casino Royale was an amazing Bond movie. Quantum of Solace was a minor, but by-the-book Bond movie, and Skyfall was so ambitious it almost carried too much weight. All of them have flaws, but they went to great lengths lifting the quality of the Bond franchise.
Spectre on the other hand I think was a pile of shit, the more I think about it. It has huge logical flaws, a lousy script, wastes characters and actors like cannon fodder, and presents the audience with a senseless arrangement of expensive scenery without proper reasoning and logic. There is so much ridiculous crap in this movie I can hardly take it seriously. This is a very unfortunate downward spin for the franchise and I hope they will at some point make it up.
Good points John & Seb. I’m actually rewatching the Craig Bonds, and watching them now as if they were a mini-series, more or less detached from the rest of the franchise. They aren’t really, of course, but I noticed that the two first Craig bonds (especially Quantum, a film I didn’t like thus far) work better within the context of the four movies forming a seperate Bond franchise
And yes, with a new bond they’ll start over again with a clean slate, don’t think anyone can take over this Craig Bond
Quantum of Solace is really the absolutely underrated Bond film. It is done with a pure cinematic feeling in every tiny second no other Bond film comes even close. The OUTW of the Bond series in conception and execution.
Keep saying it Stan and eventually someone will agree with you 
Well, I didn’t dislike it this time around …