When rewatching spectre after a few years I realised what an amazing film it actually is. It's far better than the reviews on here claim and after watching it a second time you will truly appreciate it far more than after the first watch.
1,321 Reviews
Brings back memories of a simpler time
nvjatinpochiraju5 July 2022
I have to say I was one of the few people who actually liked this movie. Its fun and over the top action sequences are heavily inspired by the Roger Moore Bond films. But that isn't a bad thing at all. Although the movie might lack its predecessor's cohesive plot, it certainly makes up for it with the biggest explosion in the world and the absolutely ridiculous plane chase sequence in the snow. Also the inclusion of the classic White tuxedo was a pleasant surprise. While it may not be as good as Casino Royale or Goldeneye and not as well written as Skyfall, it is certainly enjoyable to watch.
The train fight sequence is tension filled and the movie succeeded in reviving the old skool henchman.
Fella_shibby4 June 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I first saw this with my family in a theatre in 2015.
Revisited it recently on a dvd which I own n finished the Bond marathon.
This is the the twenty-fourth in the Bond series and the fourth film to feature Daniel Craig as James Bond.
This time Bond faces Blofeld, the head of the criminal organisation Spectre, who plans to launch a surveillance network to mastermind criminal activities across the globe.
Bond also faces Marco Sciarra n Mr. Hinx.
This time Bond gets to cool off with Monica Bellucci n Léa Seydoux.
The girl in Mexico is hot but Bond only gets to smooch her.
The background music and the character Mr. Hinx are the highlights.
The train fight sequence is tension filled.
But the helicopter sequence in Mexico is too much cgi filled n the scene where Bond shoots the copter is a bit far fetched along with the scene wher Bond rescues Dr Swan.
The silent nature of Mr Hinx (Bautista) succeeded in reviving the quiet henchman archetype of characters such as Jaws n Oddjob.
Revisited it recently on a dvd which I own n finished the Bond marathon.
This is the the twenty-fourth in the Bond series and the fourth film to feature Daniel Craig as James Bond.
This time Bond faces Blofeld, the head of the criminal organisation Spectre, who plans to launch a surveillance network to mastermind criminal activities across the globe.
Bond also faces Marco Sciarra n Mr. Hinx.
This time Bond gets to cool off with Monica Bellucci n Léa Seydoux.
The girl in Mexico is hot but Bond only gets to smooch her.
The background music and the character Mr. Hinx are the highlights.
The train fight sequence is tension filled.
But the helicopter sequence in Mexico is too much cgi filled n the scene where Bond shoots the copter is a bit far fetched along with the scene wher Bond rescues Dr Swan.
The silent nature of Mr Hinx (Bautista) succeeded in reviving the quiet henchman archetype of characters such as Jaws n Oddjob.
Mediocre and overbudgeted !
Dr_Sagan25 December 2015
Despite an initial action scene full of CGI that you can also experience in the trailer, this movie hasn't got too much to offer.
The main problem is the bad script and dialogs and the pretentious style which tries to keep the tradition of older Bond films incorporating some not-so-witty and cliché humor and ludicrous action sequences with nothing new to offer. Planes, helicopters, cars...Well we've seen it all before and in much better executions.
Also Blofeld (or should I say BLOWfeld), despite the fact he is the King of all previous villains, seems quite harmless.
Casino Royale (2006) is far more entertaining (I've watched it again recently) and engaging. Spectre is "Meh!" in almost every department including (unfortunately) the ladies.
Thomas Newman who serves as the composer of the film, is proved to be a bad decision too. At the beginning he tries to revive the good-old 007 theme in almost every scene and the outcome is sub-par to say the least. Later he replaces the music with the same note again and again (da-da-da-da-da-da-da). David Arnold did a great job in C.R. and should have been the composer in this too (although I doubt that he could save this movie).
And what's the deal with this lame song? Unsuitable for a Bond movie or any movie out there. Same goes for the same-o same-o intro sequence. The combination of these 2 makes it look like it was made by Liberace.
Overall: The whole movie is pale like the Pale King it mentions.
The main problem is the bad script and dialogs and the pretentious style which tries to keep the tradition of older Bond films incorporating some not-so-witty and cliché humor and ludicrous action sequences with nothing new to offer. Planes, helicopters, cars...Well we've seen it all before and in much better executions.
Also Blofeld (or should I say BLOWfeld), despite the fact he is the King of all previous villains, seems quite harmless.
Casino Royale (2006) is far more entertaining (I've watched it again recently) and engaging. Spectre is "Meh!" in almost every department including (unfortunately) the ladies.
Thomas Newman who serves as the composer of the film, is proved to be a bad decision too. At the beginning he tries to revive the good-old 007 theme in almost every scene and the outcome is sub-par to say the least. Later he replaces the music with the same note again and again (da-da-da-da-da-da-da). David Arnold did a great job in C.R. and should have been the composer in this too (although I doubt that he could save this movie).
And what's the deal with this lame song? Unsuitable for a Bond movie or any movie out there. Same goes for the same-o same-o intro sequence. The combination of these 2 makes it look like it was made by Liberace.
Overall: The whole movie is pale like the Pale King it mentions.
Enjoyable installment in Bond series with lots of noisy action, thrills, emotion and spectacular scenes
ma-cortes22 January 2019
Nice entry stars Daniel Craig as the tough, two-fisted James Bond who takes on nasty organization nicknamed Spectra with a octopus-like symbol . After a risked and disastrous assignment in Mexico, Bond is suspended. But he goes on his activities by tracking down a massive criminal syndicate. Then Bond receives a cryptic message from his dark past, it sends him pitted against a sinister and criminal group. It is led by a terrorist chief, Blofeld : Chistoph Waltz who has an ancient relationship with Bond's own childhood. While Q , Ben Wishaw, delivers him some rare and fantastic artifacts to carry out his dangerous missions. Shortly after, MI6 chief M : Ralph Fiennes is replaced by another boss, Andrew Scott. Later on, Bond meets the beautiful daughter, Lea Seydoux, of a long time enemy and then things go wrong.
Once again Bond confronts an ominous and bloody organization with terrorist purports . This film takes parts of other 007 episodes as the violent fight between Bond and a hunk contender : Dave Bautista on a train , similar to Sean Connery versus Robert Shaw in From Russia with love. And the impresssive finale including the stronhold facility in the sunny desert and its destruction bears remarkable resemblance to Quantum of solace. Nicely played by Daniel Craig, this is his fourth entry, first was Casino Royale, following Quantum of solace and Skyfall. He is well accompanied by a young Bond girl, Lea Seydoux, and another Bond woman, the mature Monica Bellucci, the eldest Bond girl. The heinous leader of the powerful organization Spectra is magnetically performed by usual villain Christoph Waltz. Adding regulars of the old franchise as M well played by Ralph Fiennes, Q finely acted Ben Wishaw and Naomy Harris as Moneypenny.
The film packs a colorful and glimmering cinematography by Hoyte Van Hoytema, shot in various locations as Mexico city, Austria and especially in London. As well as pounding and rousing musical score by Thomas Newman. The motion picture was well directed by Sam Mendes, though with no originaly. Mendes is a good director who has made some successful films played by important actors, such as : Jarhead, American Beauty, Revolutionary road, Road to perdition and another Bond movie : Skyfall. Rating: Above average. Well worth watching.
Once again Bond confronts an ominous and bloody organization with terrorist purports . This film takes parts of other 007 episodes as the violent fight between Bond and a hunk contender : Dave Bautista on a train , similar to Sean Connery versus Robert Shaw in From Russia with love. And the impresssive finale including the stronhold facility in the sunny desert and its destruction bears remarkable resemblance to Quantum of solace. Nicely played by Daniel Craig, this is his fourth entry, first was Casino Royale, following Quantum of solace and Skyfall. He is well accompanied by a young Bond girl, Lea Seydoux, and another Bond woman, the mature Monica Bellucci, the eldest Bond girl. The heinous leader of the powerful organization Spectra is magnetically performed by usual villain Christoph Waltz. Adding regulars of the old franchise as M well played by Ralph Fiennes, Q finely acted Ben Wishaw and Naomy Harris as Moneypenny.
The film packs a colorful and glimmering cinematography by Hoyte Van Hoytema, shot in various locations as Mexico city, Austria and especially in London. As well as pounding and rousing musical score by Thomas Newman. The motion picture was well directed by Sam Mendes, though with no originaly. Mendes is a good director who has made some successful films played by important actors, such as : Jarhead, American Beauty, Revolutionary road, Road to perdition and another Bond movie : Skyfall. Rating: Above average. Well worth watching.
Slightly disappointing but still really good
masonsaul30 September 2021
It's overly long, the pacing slows down too much in the second act and Christoph Waltz is massively underutilized but Spectre is still a really good Bond film that's thrilling, fun and epic whilst also being a more classical Bond film.
Daniel Craig is reliably perfect once again but with more charisma and a lot more quips compared to his previous films. Léa Seydoux, Ralph Fiennes, Naomie Harris, Dave Bautista and Ben Whishaw are all great.
Sam Mendes' direction is excellent, it's beautifully filmed and consistently stylish with extremely well filmed action sequences. The music by Thomas Newman is fantastic and the song by Sam Smith is also great.
Daniel Craig is reliably perfect once again but with more charisma and a lot more quips compared to his previous films. Léa Seydoux, Ralph Fiennes, Naomie Harris, Dave Bautista and Ben Whishaw are all great.
Sam Mendes' direction is excellent, it's beautifully filmed and consistently stylish with extremely well filmed action sequences. The music by Thomas Newman is fantastic and the song by Sam Smith is also great.
Not a masterpiece - but an entertaining love letter to the classic Bond films peppered with a healthy dose of irony
Fan-of-Rare-Movies5 November 2015
First off, let me get something out of the way here: I like to be entertained. Entertainment, as we all know, comes in different shapes and sizes; it can be smart, profound, intellectually stimulating and so forth – or it can just be escapist fun. Now what kind of entertainment you expect from a James Bond film is up to you; as for me, I go with fun. Regrettably, the last three 007 instalments fell a bit short in that department (at least for my taste), and since I expected this new film to be more of the same, I didn't exactly get my hopes up.
Well, I can only say I was pleasantly surprised (although judging from most reviews here, I seem to be in the minority). Instead of further exploring the somewhat dark, dramatic route the previous three films took - which, I must admit, worked very well in Casino Royale - Spectre unexpectedly goes in the exact opposite direction. Sam Mendes and John Logan apparently came to the conclusion that it was time to bring back one of the most crucial ingredients for Bond's success with audiences over the years: the fun.
Don't get me wrong; it's not suddenly ALL fun and games for Her Majesty's finest spy (and Craig still portrays him as a character driven by inner rage) - but the new film is a virtual celebration of the whole James Bond universe, from past to present, including the less grounded and over-the-top elements from the older films. In fact, after a stand-out intro sequence in classic fashion, the spy with a license to kill takes us on a ride which - tonally - feels like travelling back in time to the glory days of such classics as You Only Live Twice, Goldfinger or From Russia With Love (and it's a ride back in time in more senses than one).
This is supposed to be a spoiler-free review, so I won't go into any of the story details, but what unfolds after the introduction plays like a combination of the more grounded, serious Bond we've come to associate with Daniel Craig's films, and the more self-aware spy-romps of the Roger Moore era. It's a mix that doesn't always work and tone and pacing can be a bit uneven at times (especially during the third act), but Spectre largely succeeds in paying homage to many of the classic Bond films while still delivering the gritty action people come to expect from the newer instalments and staying true to the character Craig has so successfully made his own. And despite all the references and callbacks to classic 007 adventures, Spectre still manages to continue the storyline of the three previous films. So while his second entry in the world's longest living franchise is far from a perfect film, I believe Sam Mendes achieves exactly what he wants: he intentionally embraces the old Bond formula, but he also plays with it, twists it and introduces new story elements.
So my verdict: Spectre is a love letter to the classic Bond films, and while it might not be the masterpiece many people seem to have expected, there is a lot to enjoy here. It's a solid, almost classic Bond film with insane action, great set-pieces and a fantastic cast; upon first viewing, I'd rate it 7 stars out of 10.
Rare Film Gems For Cinephiles: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070242495/
Well, I can only say I was pleasantly surprised (although judging from most reviews here, I seem to be in the minority). Instead of further exploring the somewhat dark, dramatic route the previous three films took - which, I must admit, worked very well in Casino Royale - Spectre unexpectedly goes in the exact opposite direction. Sam Mendes and John Logan apparently came to the conclusion that it was time to bring back one of the most crucial ingredients for Bond's success with audiences over the years: the fun.
Don't get me wrong; it's not suddenly ALL fun and games for Her Majesty's finest spy (and Craig still portrays him as a character driven by inner rage) - but the new film is a virtual celebration of the whole James Bond universe, from past to present, including the less grounded and over-the-top elements from the older films. In fact, after a stand-out intro sequence in classic fashion, the spy with a license to kill takes us on a ride which - tonally - feels like travelling back in time to the glory days of such classics as You Only Live Twice, Goldfinger or From Russia With Love (and it's a ride back in time in more senses than one).
This is supposed to be a spoiler-free review, so I won't go into any of the story details, but what unfolds after the introduction plays like a combination of the more grounded, serious Bond we've come to associate with Daniel Craig's films, and the more self-aware spy-romps of the Roger Moore era. It's a mix that doesn't always work and tone and pacing can be a bit uneven at times (especially during the third act), but Spectre largely succeeds in paying homage to many of the classic Bond films while still delivering the gritty action people come to expect from the newer instalments and staying true to the character Craig has so successfully made his own. And despite all the references and callbacks to classic 007 adventures, Spectre still manages to continue the storyline of the three previous films. So while his second entry in the world's longest living franchise is far from a perfect film, I believe Sam Mendes achieves exactly what he wants: he intentionally embraces the old Bond formula, but he also plays with it, twists it and introduces new story elements.
So my verdict: Spectre is a love letter to the classic Bond films, and while it might not be the masterpiece many people seem to have expected, there is a lot to enjoy here. It's a solid, almost classic Bond film with insane action, great set-pieces and a fantastic cast; upon first viewing, I'd rate it 7 stars out of 10.
Rare Film Gems For Cinephiles: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070242495/
A Treat for Veteran Fans
williamcsteven12 November 2015
Spectre may be receiving mixed reviews within the community, but I believe that this is simply credited to the fact that Spectre differs from the other Craig Bond films like Casino Royale and Skyfall. This latest installment, in my own opinion, tips the hat to the old Bond-style of action that we loved in most of the earlier films. Granted it is not as brash as say Goldfinger, with character names such as Pussy Galore. But it doesn't exactly fit into the box of Daniel Craig's films either. This movie tells a story. It isn't just nice suits, and cars with beautiful woman surrounded by flying bullets in front of the canvas of a massive explosion (even if this film does boast the record for the largest stunt explosion in movie history). No, this movie gives us some nice character development. With a nod to the many years of Bond that has preceded Craig. It was a nice feeling to think that as a Bond fan across the the entire Franchise, that I was privy to some knowledge and little Easter eggs that maybe some of the newly converted fans (those that have joined the agency only since Craig assumed the 00-status) may not have caught on too. The only downside I could see anyone pointing out with this film is maybe the length of the film. This film could be reviewed as a rather long one, especially to those who might lose interest trying to involve themselves in a story that started back in the days of Connery. But if you are a fan of the entire franchise spanning across all 24 films, maybe even some of Flemming's original novel, then Spectre is a must see.
Not the best, but a decent edition
Harry_Gleeson1 October 2021
This is certainly not the best Bond film to be made, but it's another solid outing for Daniel Craig's 007.
I thought the action, as in pretty much all Bond films, was the standout for me. The train sequence was brilliantly choreographed and the climatic scene added some spectacular set piece action that will be etched into the Bond archives.
Performance wise all good as expected once more, however Christoph Waltz as the films leading antagonist provided his usual demonic demeanour and his appreance weaves nicely into the narrative that had been building through the films prior to Spectre.
This certainly does no harm to a group of films that has built itself up, especially since Craig has been at the helm, as one of the best action franchises of all time.
I thought the action, as in pretty much all Bond films, was the standout for me. The train sequence was brilliantly choreographed and the climatic scene added some spectacular set piece action that will be etched into the Bond archives.
Performance wise all good as expected once more, however Christoph Waltz as the films leading antagonist provided his usual demonic demeanour and his appreance weaves nicely into the narrative that had been building through the films prior to Spectre.
This certainly does no harm to a group of films that has built itself up, especially since Craig has been at the helm, as one of the best action franchises of all time.
Spectre is Nothing Short of Spectacular!!!
griffolyon128 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
If Skyfall was the deconstruction of James Bond, Spectre is the reconstruction. Daniel Craig has returned once more as 007, with Spectre marking his fourth (and potentially final) outing as the character. In Spectre, Bond follows a cryptic message from his past, which leads him to the evil criminal organization known as SPECTRE. After three films, this is the first of the Daniel Craig Bond films that feels more like the Sean Connery/Roger Moore-era Bond adventures, and that is a good thing.
Longtime Bond fans should know all about SPECTRE, who were the very same criminal organization that terrorized Bond for almost all of the Sean Connery films (save for Goldfinger). Due to some issues involving legal rights, the filmmakers have not been able to use SPECTRE since the early-to-mid Seventies. Ultimately, the rights were returned just a couple of years ago and now we have SPECTRE's triumphant return in a film that hits all of the beats one expects of a classic Bond adventure: exotic locales, an imposing henchman, some sultry Bond girls with troubled pasts, cool gadgets, and a maniacal villain in the form of Christoph Waltz's Franz Oberhauser. On top of all that, Spectre is chock full of great Bond moments. From an opening action sequence that features one of the finest Bond fight scenes ever, to a Swiss Alps duel between Bond in a plane and the bad guys in SUVs, Spectre finally turns Daniel Craig's Bond into the superhero the character once was, and the 12-year- old inside of me loves it. Of course, the single greatest element of Spectre is not necessarily it's throwback feel or the fact that it's the first Daniel Craig Bond that fully embraces the Bond mythos, but it's how this film effectively ties together all of Craig's Bond movies.
Featuring nods to the events of Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace, and Skyfall, Spectre kind of feels like the end to the whole enchilada. In some ways, that's good. It has been rumored that this might be Daniel Craig's last Bond film, and if it is, then it is an amazing end to his tenure. No other actor who has ever played Bond has had a run of films as strong as Craig's, and a large part of that is that all of these films have been direct sequels to the others. None of the other Bond films ever really acknowledged any character growth or story progressions from one film to the next, but the Daniel Craig movies all have. The Bond in Casino Royale was brash and impulsive. The Bond in Quantum of Solace was moody and violent in response to Vesper Lynd's death. As for Skyfall, Bond was tired and worn down, a relic searching for a purpose. And Spectre finds Bond struggling with the repercussions of his past while finding his heart and soul once again. By the time the credits roll on Spectre, you really feel as if a myth has been born and Bond is back in tip top shape, better than ever.
I give Spectre a 9 out of 10!
Longtime Bond fans should know all about SPECTRE, who were the very same criminal organization that terrorized Bond for almost all of the Sean Connery films (save for Goldfinger). Due to some issues involving legal rights, the filmmakers have not been able to use SPECTRE since the early-to-mid Seventies. Ultimately, the rights were returned just a couple of years ago and now we have SPECTRE's triumphant return in a film that hits all of the beats one expects of a classic Bond adventure: exotic locales, an imposing henchman, some sultry Bond girls with troubled pasts, cool gadgets, and a maniacal villain in the form of Christoph Waltz's Franz Oberhauser. On top of all that, Spectre is chock full of great Bond moments. From an opening action sequence that features one of the finest Bond fight scenes ever, to a Swiss Alps duel between Bond in a plane and the bad guys in SUVs, Spectre finally turns Daniel Craig's Bond into the superhero the character once was, and the 12-year- old inside of me loves it. Of course, the single greatest element of Spectre is not necessarily it's throwback feel or the fact that it's the first Daniel Craig Bond that fully embraces the Bond mythos, but it's how this film effectively ties together all of Craig's Bond movies.
Featuring nods to the events of Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace, and Skyfall, Spectre kind of feels like the end to the whole enchilada. In some ways, that's good. It has been rumored that this might be Daniel Craig's last Bond film, and if it is, then it is an amazing end to his tenure. No other actor who has ever played Bond has had a run of films as strong as Craig's, and a large part of that is that all of these films have been direct sequels to the others. None of the other Bond films ever really acknowledged any character growth or story progressions from one film to the next, but the Daniel Craig movies all have. The Bond in Casino Royale was brash and impulsive. The Bond in Quantum of Solace was moody and violent in response to Vesper Lynd's death. As for Skyfall, Bond was tired and worn down, a relic searching for a purpose. And Spectre finds Bond struggling with the repercussions of his past while finding his heart and soul once again. By the time the credits roll on Spectre, you really feel as if a myth has been born and Bond is back in tip top shape, better than ever.
I give Spectre a 9 out of 10!
A thrilling spectacle that ties together the Bond of old with the new.
lnvicta9 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Whether you like Daniel Craig as Bond or not, you can't deny he has been an integral part of the series' highest points. Casino Royale is one of the greatest action thrillers ever, let alone Bond movie, and Skyfall is right up there with Goldeneye as a quintessential Bond adventure. Following the magnificent Skyfall, Spectre had some huge shoes to fill, and for the most part, it delivers exactly what you'd expect. An attention-grabbing, tense opening fight scene, a lovely title sequence (whether the song is good is debatable), and an elaborate sinister plot surrounding James Bond that puts him up against his inner demons more than ever. Does it surpass Casino Royale or Skyfall? Definitely not, but as far as reintroducing the villainous organization SPECTRE into Bond canon after 40+ years, the film does more than a serviceable job, giving us a stylish action-adventure to boot.
SPECTRE is revealed to have been affiliated with some of Bond's biggest threats - Mr. White, Le Chiffre, Raoul Silva - all under the control of one puppeteer, the head of SPECTRE and James' archnemesis, Ernst Stavro Blofeld. It isn't much of a spoiler, as speculation was rampant ever since the first trailer (and hell, when the name of the movie was released). What's important is its execution, and Spectre leaves breadcrumbs for you to follow all the way through the belly of the beast. Not only is Bond under SPECTRE's crosshairs, but MI6 itself is experiencing a merger led by Max Denbeigh (Andrew Scott) who wants to eliminate the 00 division and focus solely on global intelligence. It's apparent early on that Blofeld has eyes everywhere, and while he works primarily in the shadows (Christoph Waltz only having 20 or so minutes of screen time), he poses a looming threat to Bond because of his sheer cunning and a past secret that unravels itself when the two finally meet.
Many parts of the film feel like a throwback to classic Bond. The icy environments, the car chase and gadgetry, the use of a massive threatening henchman, a train fight that is heavily reminiscent of From Russia With Love, and of course the modern birthing of Bond's greatest adversary. The acting all around is fantastic, with Craig continuing to impress as the suave womanizing secret agent. Thomas Newman turns in another wonderful musical score. But perhaps the most impressive feature is Sam Mendes' directing. The shots in this movie are absolutely gorgeous - the action scenes are incredible to watch and easy to follow, the landscapes are fresh and vibrant, and even the simplest of scenes - Bond and Blofeld walking up to each other for the first time - are quietly introspective yet palpably tense. Tension lingers throughout every moment of Spectre even when not much is happening, and the suspense is high enough to hold your interest for the full 2-and-a-half hours.
Spectre is not perfect. Much of what happens narratively is predictable, a few lines don't go over too well in context, and you eventually find something out about Blofeld that is pretty ridiculous taking previous Bond canon into account. Also, given Waltz's reputation for knocking villainous roles out of the park, he's noticeably underused here. But these flaws don't tarnish the pure entertainment value to be had. What you want in a James Bond movie is over-the-top action surrounding the world's greatest spy who's up against unbeatable odds yet still comes out on top thanks to his charisma and general badassery, and this is precisely what Spectre delivers. Daniel Craig may or may not return as Bond, and if he doesn't, this movie serves as a perfect send-off. But as the series constantly reminds us, "James Bond will return...," and Spectre is just another welcome chapter in the immense story of everybody's favorite super spy.
SPECTRE is revealed to have been affiliated with some of Bond's biggest threats - Mr. White, Le Chiffre, Raoul Silva - all under the control of one puppeteer, the head of SPECTRE and James' archnemesis, Ernst Stavro Blofeld. It isn't much of a spoiler, as speculation was rampant ever since the first trailer (and hell, when the name of the movie was released). What's important is its execution, and Spectre leaves breadcrumbs for you to follow all the way through the belly of the beast. Not only is Bond under SPECTRE's crosshairs, but MI6 itself is experiencing a merger led by Max Denbeigh (Andrew Scott) who wants to eliminate the 00 division and focus solely on global intelligence. It's apparent early on that Blofeld has eyes everywhere, and while he works primarily in the shadows (Christoph Waltz only having 20 or so minutes of screen time), he poses a looming threat to Bond because of his sheer cunning and a past secret that unravels itself when the two finally meet.
Many parts of the film feel like a throwback to classic Bond. The icy environments, the car chase and gadgetry, the use of a massive threatening henchman, a train fight that is heavily reminiscent of From Russia With Love, and of course the modern birthing of Bond's greatest adversary. The acting all around is fantastic, with Craig continuing to impress as the suave womanizing secret agent. Thomas Newman turns in another wonderful musical score. But perhaps the most impressive feature is Sam Mendes' directing. The shots in this movie are absolutely gorgeous - the action scenes are incredible to watch and easy to follow, the landscapes are fresh and vibrant, and even the simplest of scenes - Bond and Blofeld walking up to each other for the first time - are quietly introspective yet palpably tense. Tension lingers throughout every moment of Spectre even when not much is happening, and the suspense is high enough to hold your interest for the full 2-and-a-half hours.
Spectre is not perfect. Much of what happens narratively is predictable, a few lines don't go over too well in context, and you eventually find something out about Blofeld that is pretty ridiculous taking previous Bond canon into account. Also, given Waltz's reputation for knocking villainous roles out of the park, he's noticeably underused here. But these flaws don't tarnish the pure entertainment value to be had. What you want in a James Bond movie is over-the-top action surrounding the world's greatest spy who's up against unbeatable odds yet still comes out on top thanks to his charisma and general badassery, and this is precisely what Spectre delivers. Daniel Craig may or may not return as Bond, and if he doesn't, this movie serves as a perfect send-off. But as the series constantly reminds us, "James Bond will return...," and Spectre is just another welcome chapter in the immense story of everybody's favorite super spy.
Craig continues to prosper as James Bond (in possibly his swan song turn as 007 if rumor has it) and does so with a bang
george.schmidt9 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
SPECTRE (2015) ***1/2 Daniel Craig, Christoph Waltz, Lea Seydoux, Ralph Fiennes, Monica Bellucci, Ben Whishaw, Naomie Harris, Dave Bautista, Andrew Scott, Jasper Christensen, Alessandro Cremona, Stephanie Sigman (cameo: Judi Densch) Craig continues to prosper as James Bond (in possibly his swan song turn as 007 if rumor has it) and does so with a bang: out to avenge the recently departed M as well as confront the nefarious leader of the titular conspiracy group hellbent on sabotaging international security at any cost. Waltz is slimily evil as the notorious Blofeld and a continuing supporting crew for Bond including aces-up-his-sleeve Fiennes as the new M, spunky and sexy Harris as Moneypenny and crafty Whishaw as Q. Bautista's near mute turn as a brute echoing Robert Shaw's blond Russian thug of "From Russia With Love" and Richard Kiel's Jaws from Roger Moore's pair of flicks is indeed formidable and chilling. While there is little believable chemistry between Craig and new Bond gal Seydoux there is the little-used but always welcome sultry Bellucci to spice things up. Director Sam Mendes returns to the franchise pulling out all the stops including a one-take non-cut opening salvo pre-credit trek thru Mexico City's Day of the Dead ceremony with Bond tracking an assassin that involves a crumbling hotel and one helluva vertigo inducing chopper sequence. Fast, fun and fierce and by all means make sure to see it in a big-screen/IMAX venue just to invision an 80 foot high Bellucci :D
cool but not great
SnoopyStyle9 August 2016
Warning: Spoilers
James Bond (Daniel Craig) followed the previous M's instruction to kill Marco Sciarra. He only shows the message to Moneypenny (Naomie Harris). This leads to an embarrassing Mexico City incident for the new M (Ralph Fiennes) who suspends Bond. M is organizing a merger with MI-5 and C (Andrew Scott) is creating surveillance system "Nine Eyes" looking to shut down "00". Bond steals a car from Q (Ben Whishaw) to attend Sciarra's funeral where he meets his wife Lucia (Monica Bellucci). Using the stolen Sciarra ring, Bond infiltrates a Spectre meeting headed by Blofeld (Christoph Waltz). Dr. Madeline Swann (Léa Seydoux) is the daughter of a murdered Spectre agent and key to bringing down the organization.
With the return of Spectre, I was hoping for a great villain to take his place among the greats of Bond villains. Waltz barely gets up in his first scene and takes forever to return. He's a missed opportunity for a supervillain. Andrew Scott is the sleazy weasel but he's not that guy. This movie is exceedingly cool and filled with sharp action. It's missing something. It's missing greatness. It's missing the great memorable thing. The movie is sometimes a little slow with long expositions. The audience don't really need it. They already know who the bad guys are. They just need Bond to catch up and find them. This is a fine Bond movie but one that may be forgotten among the rest.
With the return of Spectre, I was hoping for a great villain to take his place among the greats of Bond villains. Waltz barely gets up in his first scene and takes forever to return. He's a missed opportunity for a supervillain. Andrew Scott is the sleazy weasel but he's not that guy. This movie is exceedingly cool and filled with sharp action. It's missing something. It's missing greatness. It's missing the great memorable thing. The movie is sometimes a little slow with long expositions. The audience don't really need it. They already know who the bad guys are. They just need Bond to catch up and find them. This is a fine Bond movie but one that may be forgotten among the rest.
Let down by poor script, confused tone
tjwb849 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
By the third time a helicopter flew into view, I was exhausted, and dreaded the prospect of yet another interminable and unconvincingly rendered crash scene.
The plot was an unappealing mess of recycled ideas. This film brings us yet another revenge story about someone who shares history with Bond but has since turned evil. That was precisely the plot of the last movie - and rather like the last three Star Trek films, most Batman films, the Superman reboot, this year's Avengers, etc.
Like last time, the stakes are raised by nebulous and non- frightening, yet world threatening (so we are told, but never shown) computer network technology.
The film once again focuses on the question: "are spies still relevant?" I don't find that to be an interesting premise for a Bond film. Why not just assume that the answer is 'yes' and make a fun and smart action movie with a heart? Casino Royale nailed this. If you really must cover the question of whether your main character is relevant, then at least deal with it once and accept the answer! In Skyfall we learned that you still want a man in the field. In this movie, we learn that you still want a man in the field (and, in case anyone was still not getting it, poor Ralph Fiennes in his role as a flaccid M spells it out literally).
While I liked both actors involved, I didn't care for the romance - the movie desperately wants to build it up to be something more than an just another Bond girl. That is an admirable idea, but since the result pales in comparison to the stellar romance in Casino Royale, it seems totally unconvincing when Bond sacrifices his entire career for her at the end. Holy moly - Bond settles down? For THIS girl? What an ending to Craig's character arc that started with Vesper's death (so much more meaningful than anything in any of the other Craig Bond films). Bam, all his emotional problems are solved, because he met a hot blonde. "I've got something better to do than all this!" (throws gun away, gets into car with whatshername). Gee, great ending.
All the interesting plot developments from Casino Royale and (and even Quantum of Solace to some extent), such as Bond's emotional state after losing Vesper and the Quantum organization, are chucked out the window. Skyfall discarded Quantum in favor of a good idea (Bond/M son/mother relationship) and a bad one ("is MI6 still relevant?"). Now, Quantum is back... Kinda. This time, it forms no threat at all - you see, it turns out this OTHER organization that THIS movie is about is even moar powerfuller. And it was really this other, super duper evil organization all along. Muahaha!
That is a tiresome plot twist if ever I've seen one. It completely missed the mark for me; it's weak to try and make your own plot look better by retroactively stating that all villains of the previous movies were really just pawns in this guy's game of chess.
And that's not the only aspect of Bond history that is severely diminished by this film. In Skyfall, we learned about Bond's youth, spent with an old Scottish dude named McAngus. I think. And, of course, his relationship with M.
This time, however, it turns out that Bond actually grew up in the Bavarian Alps with a couple of yodeling Germans named Oberhausen. Errr? Am I the only one confused here? (Possibly.)
Bond turns out to have a sort of surrogate brother, who is very blond, very German, and very jealous. Oh and he also happens to be a supervillain, with an enormous army, who somehow managed to stay absolutely hidden for all these years. There is a powerful and compelling reason for his having all these skills and resources: it's convenient for the plot.
And so, all previous Bond movies are reduced to one large scam operation, a plan by an Alpine superhero that makes absolutely no sense, in a failed attempt to give this movie a great villain. Christoph Waltz is a joy to watch, but he is never allowed to be a real threat. The man gets little to work with, as did Javier Bardem in the last one - criminally underused, awesome actors.
The film's tone was confusing. There is one gruesomely violent scene involving eyeballs - I don't enjoy seeing such aggressive violence, although here I seem to be in a vanishingly small minority. Call me old fashioned, but I was always happy that Bond films used polite violence: gentle fist fights until one guy faints, or perhaps someone shoots a gun and somewhere else, far away, someone falls to the floor.
Putting my personal feelings aside, it was jarring to have this scene be followed up by a cartoonish fist fight on a train, after which the eye-ripping guy is yanked out of a train by a rope, but not before realizing his predicament like Wile E. Coyote hanging over the ravine and saying "shit!". Is this a corny spy movie with train fights a la Bond vs Jaws? Where Bond leisurely glides a crashing airplane around for a few minutes and then humorously lands precisely on top of the bad guy's car? Or is it a somber drama about an aging man's career in a time when nobody knows whether spies are still relevant? Or does it want to be a raw, violent gangster film like Goodfellas, reveling in the sight of bad guys proving their credentials by maiming others?
Finally, I found the camera work jarring in many action scenes - shaky cam, etc. This may have been (partly) due to my sitting in the fourth row, though.
The plot was an unappealing mess of recycled ideas. This film brings us yet another revenge story about someone who shares history with Bond but has since turned evil. That was precisely the plot of the last movie - and rather like the last three Star Trek films, most Batman films, the Superman reboot, this year's Avengers, etc.
Like last time, the stakes are raised by nebulous and non- frightening, yet world threatening (so we are told, but never shown) computer network technology.
The film once again focuses on the question: "are spies still relevant?" I don't find that to be an interesting premise for a Bond film. Why not just assume that the answer is 'yes' and make a fun and smart action movie with a heart? Casino Royale nailed this. If you really must cover the question of whether your main character is relevant, then at least deal with it once and accept the answer! In Skyfall we learned that you still want a man in the field. In this movie, we learn that you still want a man in the field (and, in case anyone was still not getting it, poor Ralph Fiennes in his role as a flaccid M spells it out literally).
While I liked both actors involved, I didn't care for the romance - the movie desperately wants to build it up to be something more than an just another Bond girl. That is an admirable idea, but since the result pales in comparison to the stellar romance in Casino Royale, it seems totally unconvincing when Bond sacrifices his entire career for her at the end. Holy moly - Bond settles down? For THIS girl? What an ending to Craig's character arc that started with Vesper's death (so much more meaningful than anything in any of the other Craig Bond films). Bam, all his emotional problems are solved, because he met a hot blonde. "I've got something better to do than all this!" (throws gun away, gets into car with whatshername). Gee, great ending.
All the interesting plot developments from Casino Royale and (and even Quantum of Solace to some extent), such as Bond's emotional state after losing Vesper and the Quantum organization, are chucked out the window. Skyfall discarded Quantum in favor of a good idea (Bond/M son/mother relationship) and a bad one ("is MI6 still relevant?"). Now, Quantum is back... Kinda. This time, it forms no threat at all - you see, it turns out this OTHER organization that THIS movie is about is even moar powerfuller. And it was really this other, super duper evil organization all along. Muahaha!
That is a tiresome plot twist if ever I've seen one. It completely missed the mark for me; it's weak to try and make your own plot look better by retroactively stating that all villains of the previous movies were really just pawns in this guy's game of chess.
And that's not the only aspect of Bond history that is severely diminished by this film. In Skyfall, we learned about Bond's youth, spent with an old Scottish dude named McAngus. I think. And, of course, his relationship with M.
This time, however, it turns out that Bond actually grew up in the Bavarian Alps with a couple of yodeling Germans named Oberhausen. Errr? Am I the only one confused here? (Possibly.)
Bond turns out to have a sort of surrogate brother, who is very blond, very German, and very jealous. Oh and he also happens to be a supervillain, with an enormous army, who somehow managed to stay absolutely hidden for all these years. There is a powerful and compelling reason for his having all these skills and resources: it's convenient for the plot.
And so, all previous Bond movies are reduced to one large scam operation, a plan by an Alpine superhero that makes absolutely no sense, in a failed attempt to give this movie a great villain. Christoph Waltz is a joy to watch, but he is never allowed to be a real threat. The man gets little to work with, as did Javier Bardem in the last one - criminally underused, awesome actors.
The film's tone was confusing. There is one gruesomely violent scene involving eyeballs - I don't enjoy seeing such aggressive violence, although here I seem to be in a vanishingly small minority. Call me old fashioned, but I was always happy that Bond films used polite violence: gentle fist fights until one guy faints, or perhaps someone shoots a gun and somewhere else, far away, someone falls to the floor.
Putting my personal feelings aside, it was jarring to have this scene be followed up by a cartoonish fist fight on a train, after which the eye-ripping guy is yanked out of a train by a rope, but not before realizing his predicament like Wile E. Coyote hanging over the ravine and saying "shit!". Is this a corny spy movie with train fights a la Bond vs Jaws? Where Bond leisurely glides a crashing airplane around for a few minutes and then humorously lands precisely on top of the bad guy's car? Or is it a somber drama about an aging man's career in a time when nobody knows whether spies are still relevant? Or does it want to be a raw, violent gangster film like Goodfellas, reveling in the sight of bad guys proving their credentials by maiming others?
Finally, I found the camera work jarring in many action scenes - shaky cam, etc. This may have been (partly) due to my sitting in the fourth row, though.
With occasions of triteness, Spectre is satisfactory but not stupendous like Casino Royale
ArchonCinemaReviews7 November 2015
Resuming where Skyfall left off, Spectre points James Bond on a quest to discover and unearth truths behind the sinister organization responsible.
The 00 organization is under duress as the Centre of National Security attempts to take over control of all clandestine undertakings in the protection of the nation. Bond is on his own and off grid as he follows Spectre across the globe, with one mission in mind, to terminate it at the source. Much has changed for Bond since his first mission in Montenegro where he fell for the beautiful Vesper Lynd. On guard, 007's seductive charisma is set aside as he fervently pursues vengeance for M and truth for himself.
Daniel Craig has been James Bond for close to ten years now, a near unbelievable fact until you go back and realize the first film, Casino Royale, was released in 2006. Opening with a strong action sequence set during the Day of the Dead festivities in Mexico City, Spectre starts promisingly intense. Set in exotic locations with transcendentally tactile productions, Spectre satiates the audience's wanderlust craving. Something happens once Sam Smith's "Writings on the Wall" concludes, and the dark gritty James Bond we've grown to be enamored with takes several steps back toward the triteness of the 90s.
It was always going to be difficult for director Sam Mendes to supersede expectations set from the wildly successful Skyfall. The narrative had taken a complicated turn with deceit and bloodshed interwoven with treachery and malice. Mendes had teased us with a captivating scene set in a wintry tundra where a cloaked man compared Bond to a 'kite dancing in a hurricane'. It was enigmatic but furtively beguiling. Desperately longing for Spectre to capture this essence for the totality of its duration, it fails to meet expectations.
There is something intangibly weary about Spectre as a whole. The amorous allure inherently exuding from Bond is overdone and forced, injected into the plot to satisfy token assumptions. His unflinching execution of his license to kill has softened, leaving Bond to feel less like 007 and more like IMF agent Ethan Hunt who participates in a similar journey this year.
Do not mistake these criticisms of Spectre as a conclusion for it being substandard. The hand-to-hand fight sequences are marvelously intense and brutal, especially those against Dave Bautista. The narrative plots across Mexico, Rome, Austria and Morocco and does so without sacrificing the story too much. It just ends up feeling drawn out, as if it were going through the motions.
Spectre is vastly superior to the Pierce Brosnan 007 films, it is just in comparison to its peers that it fails to measure up and is more akin to them than the Craig films we've grown to love. With rare occasions of cheesiness that make you more laughably amused (especially at the senseless love scenes) than suspensefully entertained, we can only hope for a sensational Bond 25.
6.5/10
Please check out our website for full reviews of all the recent releases.
The 00 organization is under duress as the Centre of National Security attempts to take over control of all clandestine undertakings in the protection of the nation. Bond is on his own and off grid as he follows Spectre across the globe, with one mission in mind, to terminate it at the source. Much has changed for Bond since his first mission in Montenegro where he fell for the beautiful Vesper Lynd. On guard, 007's seductive charisma is set aside as he fervently pursues vengeance for M and truth for himself.
Daniel Craig has been James Bond for close to ten years now, a near unbelievable fact until you go back and realize the first film, Casino Royale, was released in 2006. Opening with a strong action sequence set during the Day of the Dead festivities in Mexico City, Spectre starts promisingly intense. Set in exotic locations with transcendentally tactile productions, Spectre satiates the audience's wanderlust craving. Something happens once Sam Smith's "Writings on the Wall" concludes, and the dark gritty James Bond we've grown to be enamored with takes several steps back toward the triteness of the 90s.
It was always going to be difficult for director Sam Mendes to supersede expectations set from the wildly successful Skyfall. The narrative had taken a complicated turn with deceit and bloodshed interwoven with treachery and malice. Mendes had teased us with a captivating scene set in a wintry tundra where a cloaked man compared Bond to a 'kite dancing in a hurricane'. It was enigmatic but furtively beguiling. Desperately longing for Spectre to capture this essence for the totality of its duration, it fails to meet expectations.
There is something intangibly weary about Spectre as a whole. The amorous allure inherently exuding from Bond is overdone and forced, injected into the plot to satisfy token assumptions. His unflinching execution of his license to kill has softened, leaving Bond to feel less like 007 and more like IMF agent Ethan Hunt who participates in a similar journey this year.
Do not mistake these criticisms of Spectre as a conclusion for it being substandard. The hand-to-hand fight sequences are marvelously intense and brutal, especially those against Dave Bautista. The narrative plots across Mexico, Rome, Austria and Morocco and does so without sacrificing the story too much. It just ends up feeling drawn out, as if it were going through the motions.
Spectre is vastly superior to the Pierce Brosnan 007 films, it is just in comparison to its peers that it fails to measure up and is more akin to them than the Craig films we've grown to love. With rare occasions of cheesiness that make you more laughably amused (especially at the senseless love scenes) than suspensefully entertained, we can only hope for a sensational Bond 25.
6.5/10
Please check out our website for full reviews of all the recent releases.
Great cast, bad script and directing
Pseudo_avatar2 November 2015
What do you get when you put Voldemort, Moriarty and that nazi villain from Inglourious Basterds in the same movie? If your first thought is "pure epicness", well, sadly you would be wrong. Even great character actors could not save this movie. The real problem lies in a poor scripting and directing. First of all, there is nothing in this movie that couldn't be guessed withing the first 10-minutes. The plot and so called "twists" are rather blatantly thrown in your face within the first minutes. Also, maybe not go with such obvious and typecast villain actors if there's supposed to be twists, hmm? Despite this, it was oddly difficult to comprehend what the heck was happening withing the first hour or so: Bond seemed to randomly go meet some people, and it took me half the scene to orient myself why he was doing what he was doing. I just kept waiting for the real plot to begin.
The movie just felt very lazy. There was a good idea somewhere there, but due to the lack of subtlety and anticipation, it just fell flat. It's also obvious that there will be a sequel to this Spectre thing, and I honestly don't know how they could kick any life to this born dead horse.
The blonde woman was a really bad casting call btw. She was lacking in the kind of toughness and charisma that she was meant to portray; she was instead just a pretty face in high heels. She was also too young to play an "Oxford and Sorbonne psychology graduate", and also too young for the now- graying Craig. Although, since Bond movies generally employ really young women, I'll let that one slide... but other than that, no real chemistry between her and Craig, she seemed almost resigned to play just another blonde one- night stand. Hence our surprise when all of a sudden they were supposed to be in love. What?!
Many of the movie's actors, some of who have played iconic villains in other movies and are therefore guaranteed to be actors worth their salt, were disappointing here. The script probably didn't give them much to work with.
C's character could have been completely written out of the script and nothing would have gone amiss. If anything, M's character could have been more throughoutly examined if that had been the case; a bureaucrat fighting for his unit in the face of an organisation-level change, against the demands of faceless "higher-ups" who send him memos or other impersonal communication. All in all, maybe die-hard fans are able to enjoy this, but for casual viewers like myself it just felt like a flat, money- grubbing Hollywood attempt to milk the franchise for all it's worth.
Stereotypical and often corny, it's an easily forgottable action movie which leaves viewers' heads blank enough to wonder totally arbitrary stuff during the movie. Examples include: why did Monica Bellucci have to awkwardly stand in grass wearing Lomboutins? The heels are clearly sinking into the ground. Why does it seem like there's no people in the entire cities of Rome and Vatican during the car chase? Is the sexy hentai tentacle opening in fact the most corny opening of all time? Is that what Putin would look like, if he was making out with Monica Bellucci? Did the Mr. White character intentionally channel Walter White/ Heisenberg in his near-death log- cabin times? I guess we'll never know. But for a budget of 300 million, I sure as heck expected better.
The movie just felt very lazy. There was a good idea somewhere there, but due to the lack of subtlety and anticipation, it just fell flat. It's also obvious that there will be a sequel to this Spectre thing, and I honestly don't know how they could kick any life to this born dead horse.
The blonde woman was a really bad casting call btw. She was lacking in the kind of toughness and charisma that she was meant to portray; she was instead just a pretty face in high heels. She was also too young to play an "Oxford and Sorbonne psychology graduate", and also too young for the now- graying Craig. Although, since Bond movies generally employ really young women, I'll let that one slide... but other than that, no real chemistry between her and Craig, she seemed almost resigned to play just another blonde one- night stand. Hence our surprise when all of a sudden they were supposed to be in love. What?!
Many of the movie's actors, some of who have played iconic villains in other movies and are therefore guaranteed to be actors worth their salt, were disappointing here. The script probably didn't give them much to work with.
C's character could have been completely written out of the script and nothing would have gone amiss. If anything, M's character could have been more throughoutly examined if that had been the case; a bureaucrat fighting for his unit in the face of an organisation-level change, against the demands of faceless "higher-ups" who send him memos or other impersonal communication. All in all, maybe die-hard fans are able to enjoy this, but for casual viewers like myself it just felt like a flat, money- grubbing Hollywood attempt to milk the franchise for all it's worth.
Stereotypical and often corny, it's an easily forgottable action movie which leaves viewers' heads blank enough to wonder totally arbitrary stuff during the movie. Examples include: why did Monica Bellucci have to awkwardly stand in grass wearing Lomboutins? The heels are clearly sinking into the ground. Why does it seem like there's no people in the entire cities of Rome and Vatican during the car chase? Is the sexy hentai tentacle opening in fact the most corny opening of all time? Is that what Putin would look like, if he was making out with Monica Bellucci? Did the Mr. White character intentionally channel Walter White/ Heisenberg in his near-death log- cabin times? I guess we'll never know. But for a budget of 300 million, I sure as heck expected better.
A Thrilling Addition to the Bond Saga
Zooha-4720716 February 2024
Spectre, another chapter in the James Bond series, garners a respectable 7/10 for its blend of suspense and high-quality filmmaking. This installment continues the legacy of the franchise, offering an action-packed and engaging experience.
The film's strength lies in its ability to weave a suspenseful narrative that keeps viewers engaged throughout. It delivers the thrilling action and intricate plot that fans have come to expect from a Bond film. The story is well-paced, blending intense action sequences with moments of intrigue and drama.
Spectre also excels in its visual presentation. The cinematography is striking, with each scene beautifully crafted to enhance the film's atmosphere. The action sequences are particularly well-executed, showcasing the high production values that are a hallmark of the Bond series.
The performances in Spectre are noteworthy. The cast brings depth to their characters, adding to the film's overall impact. Their portrayals contribute to the story's tension and excitement, making the characters' journey through the film more compelling.
The film's strength lies in its ability to weave a suspenseful narrative that keeps viewers engaged throughout. It delivers the thrilling action and intricate plot that fans have come to expect from a Bond film. The story is well-paced, blending intense action sequences with moments of intrigue and drama.
Spectre also excels in its visual presentation. The cinematography is striking, with each scene beautifully crafted to enhance the film's atmosphere. The action sequences are particularly well-executed, showcasing the high production values that are a hallmark of the Bond series.
The performances in Spectre are noteworthy. The cast brings depth to their characters, adding to the film's overall impact. Their portrayals contribute to the story's tension and excitement, making the characters' journey through the film more compelling.
A Return to Classic Fun Bond
bowieno9 November 2015
Finally we get to have some fun in the Daniel Craig era. Skyfall was good but underwhelming. This brings back the punches of classic Bond and has outstanding performances from Craig, Seydoux, and Waltz. Not to mention Harris (who is becoming crucial and wonderful in her character development), Fiennes, Winshaw, and Kinnear. Also Bellucci and Bautista serve their roles very well. Waltz was the funnest to watch and I always pegged him for this role of Bond villain since I first saw Inglorious Basterds and boy, he did not disappoint. He eats up his scenes and eschews the sadistic egomaniac with charm, style, and class. The scenery and shooting were breathtaking especially the shots in the Austrian Alps and the Train sequence was a great nod to the ghosts of Bonds past (From Russia with Love and The Spy Who Loved Me). Let's hope for many more.
Bond must never die Oh My
A_Different_Drummer18 November 2015
Reviewers notes humbly submitted:
1. This reviewer not only watched all the Sean Connery movies in theatres but read all the novels too. Does that date me?
2. The Biography Channel Special on Ian Fleming portrayed him as an ageing indolent frat boy who wrote his novels using a typewriter on the beach using the two finger method while cavorting. Hard to believe such innocent beginnings led to a franchise that just will not die.
3. Speaking of franchises, Hollywood is running out. Which is why Stallone was able to raise the cash to turn his C-rated Expendables series into an A level franchise. And why Fast and Furious -- which started out as a drama script not a special effects gimmick -- is the new Mission Impossible. So, against this backdrop, if you are going to do Bond, you do it big. At least that is what the producers thought. At 2 and half hours, however, the audience starts to wonder if .. maybe ... less is more?
4. Craig is good. Probably the best Bond since Sean. If only the writers and producers could support him the way he deserves.
5. The first reboot with Craig was the best, remains the best. The second was horrid. The bizarre entry which took place in his childhood home in the English countryside -- the one where a classic car was gratuitously machine-gunned for no obvious reason -- almost killed the franchise completely. This entry -- essentially a mishmash of Dr. No and the old Mannix TV show with a dollop of modern political correctness thrown in -- is OK, but will never make it to brilliant.
6. Times change, years pass. The gold standard for this sort of movie is the Damon/Bourne series, even more ironic because (so far) that franchise remains in limbo. The first reboot here was a close competitor. So far, no other instalment in this series has even come close.
1. This reviewer not only watched all the Sean Connery movies in theatres but read all the novels too. Does that date me?
2. The Biography Channel Special on Ian Fleming portrayed him as an ageing indolent frat boy who wrote his novels using a typewriter on the beach using the two finger method while cavorting. Hard to believe such innocent beginnings led to a franchise that just will not die.
3. Speaking of franchises, Hollywood is running out. Which is why Stallone was able to raise the cash to turn his C-rated Expendables series into an A level franchise. And why Fast and Furious -- which started out as a drama script not a special effects gimmick -- is the new Mission Impossible. So, against this backdrop, if you are going to do Bond, you do it big. At least that is what the producers thought. At 2 and half hours, however, the audience starts to wonder if .. maybe ... less is more?
4. Craig is good. Probably the best Bond since Sean. If only the writers and producers could support him the way he deserves.
5. The first reboot with Craig was the best, remains the best. The second was horrid. The bizarre entry which took place in his childhood home in the English countryside -- the one where a classic car was gratuitously machine-gunned for no obvious reason -- almost killed the franchise completely. This entry -- essentially a mishmash of Dr. No and the old Mannix TV show with a dollop of modern political correctness thrown in -- is OK, but will never make it to brilliant.
6. Times change, years pass. The gold standard for this sort of movie is the Damon/Bourne series, even more ironic because (so far) that franchise remains in limbo. The first reboot here was a close competitor. So far, no other instalment in this series has even come close.
On the story goes
nykbonds8 November 2015
The allure is definitely still there, and the movies continue to be fantastic entertainment. Isn't that what a movie is supposed to be? The reality is that Bond movies have been bringing people to the theaters for many decades now and probably will continue to do so. I don't put much credence in negative reviews or the suggestions that they should have done this or that, or this director is poor because and so on. The movie is very exciting, the locales are new and fantastic with neat tie ins to the other Daniel Craig movies in the series. If you like Bond movies, go see this, you will have great fun and that is what matters. I will get up tomorrow morning to go to my job at 3:00 in the morning, and hope that it isn't raining "ha!", and do my work, that is real life, this is a movie, and it was fantastic! Go, have a great time, if you can't or don't then you shouldn't have went in the first place, and above all, decide for yourself what you think, I suggest if you're going to complain, do it just before you leave for work, it might help you put things in perspective!!! Great movie, anxiously awaiting the next one!
I can somewhat bonded with this movie. It was mostly a good watch.
ironhorse_iv9 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Let's be honest, here. The dead is indeed alive. It's nice to see the words, Spectre come back from the dead, after a 40 year absence from the franchise. It has been way too long. The reason for this, is that when 1961's novel 'Thunderball', was being made; original James Bond author, Ian Fleming opt for some help from his friends, such as screenwriter, Kevin McClory & some others to make a film version of it. Only to screw them from writing credit, when the film script version was completed in 1964. This lead, to a long legal battle, between McClory & Fleming, until McClory won out, in 1976; retained the filming rights of the novel. With that deal, came the lost, at least ten previous own literary properties & titles. One of them, happen to be the Spectre Organization in which, James Bond fight against in the novel, Thunderball. Once, considered as a future James Bond title in the 1960s & 1980s, Spectre wasn't made into a movie, until November 2013, when Eon Production and McClory's estate formally settled the issue. This allow, MGM, Eon Production's mother company to acquire the full copyright film rights to the concept of Spectre and all of the characters associated with. Still, the production for this film was troublesome. First off, the movie went, highly over-budget, and over-schedule. Many of these problems, came from the fact, that Sony demanded rewrites after a 2014 email hack. They really want to cover up, and recon the leak spoilers, even beyond when filming started. This cause, the movie to have a very incredibly underwhelming and at times, nonsensical third act. I have to say, its shows. The main plot of James Bond (Daniel Craig) trying to unravel, a new terrorist organization, doesn't match, well, with the sub-plot of M (Ralph Fiennes) trying to stop, his government from creating, a unified New World Order surveillance network. It was very uneven. I also get that the movie takes place 18 months, after the events of 2012's Skyfall, but it really seem, like all the flaws that James Bond had, in the last movie, is non-existence in this film. It's really odd, how he can barely hit his target in the last movie, and now, he's has the power of improbably aiming skills. It's so jarring. What happen to all of his weaknesses? For an action movie, this is probably, the weakest in the Daniel Craig's James Bond series of films. There are way too much, badly done, CGI effects. It's always stale, when we see the same, repetitive action. Most of all, lots of bad guys just standing around, talking and making idiotic decision making. Still, they did, get some hits on Bond. Sad, the whole torturing scene isn't one of them. I didn't like the whole, non-selling. It was a bit confusing on what the hell, was going on! However, I do like the demolition scene that the villains plan. Still, the filming process must have been extremely miserable for both the returning director, Sam Mendes & main actor, Daniel Craig. There has been times, when, Craig had joked that he would rather slit his wrists than play 007 again, and Mendes threating to leave, the production. However, I guess, cooler heads prevails, because they were able to pull, the movie, off. It was far from being a total disaster! In my opinion, the movie that has James Bond's first encounter with the global criminal organization, Spectre, since 1971's Diamonds Are Forever was mostly alright to me. I have only a few problems with it. First off, the movie length. It's a really strained watch. Since, the movie does have some slow & often clichés parts, you really feel, the long runtime. Still, the movie does have a lot more, humor than the previous Daniel Craig's films. I like, how the writers were a lot more open to a lot of old school Bond mannerism. It's nice to see that side of Bond, again. Also, I do love the cool references to the older films. Great homages. I also like, how Moneypenny (Naomie Harris) & Q (Ben Whishaw) are given, more to do, than minor background characters. Some of the best scenes, are with those characters. However, this movie is missing the emotional drive. The chemistry between Bond and his main love-interest, Dr. Madeleine Swann (Léa Seydoux) is questionable at best, due to the age different. I really found, their love-affair, kinda forced. While Seydoux was alright as eye-candy. Her acting, not so much. Her French accent is a little distracting. I kinda wish, the minor, bond girl, that Monica Bellucci plays, had a bigger role in the plot. After all, Daniel Craig indeed love, working with her, the most. She might be 50, but she's still gorgeous. Christoph Waltz as the villain, Franz Oberhauser AKA Ernst Stavro Blofeld did a great job at being the charming host/criminal psychopath. I also didn't mind, Dave Batista's minor role as the henchmen. However, I kinda, wish, he had more lines. There was a lot of grief over Sam Smith's new Bond song: "Writing on the Wall, but it sounded grand and a fitting Bond song over the credits. It's not amazing, but sure it's better than a lot of other recent efforts like Madonna. I just didn't like the weird octopus porn opening, but I did dig, the Día de los Muertos opening with Thomas Newman's score. Cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytema did ensures that Mexico City are never less than ravishing. Don't care, if they got taxation benefits, because of that, but I didn't, how the movie travels from one exotic location to another. It was too much! Too hard to keep, track of it. Overall: While, it fails to pack the emotional punch. Spectre is 007 out of 10. It's still worth seeing.
You know his name.
DarkVulcan2913 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
James Bond(Daniel Craig) infiltrates a criminal organization known as Spectre, but soon discovers he might have a bigger connection to it then he thinks.
Daniel Craig once again knocks it out of the park has James Bond, but in this one he is a little more loose, then he was in the last ones. Characters M, Q, and Money Penny are giving more to do this time, then just being side characters. But Christoph Waltz really is who grabs you has the main bad guy, when he's on camera, you'll feel the chills going down your spine, he just has a menacing presence. David Bautista is also good in his role, has the main henchman. Action scenes are alright, nothing too spectacular. Bond girls are alright, just kind of there.
There are moments that it does pay homage to other bond films, but it stands on it own.
Daniel Craig once again knocks it out of the park has James Bond, but in this one he is a little more loose, then he was in the last ones. Characters M, Q, and Money Penny are giving more to do this time, then just being side characters. But Christoph Waltz really is who grabs you has the main bad guy, when he's on camera, you'll feel the chills going down your spine, he just has a menacing presence. David Bautista is also good in his role, has the main henchman. Action scenes are alright, nothing too spectacular. Bond girls are alright, just kind of there.
There are moments that it does pay homage to other bond films, but it stands on it own.
Easily Stylish,Swift even thought with a little bit lost of consistency of Skyfall concept
herman-787-13279618 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
This movie opens with Bond's solo mission hunting down Siaccra (the we found out that Siaccra is the last message of previous M) in the middle of "The Day of the Dead" parade of Mexico City. Bond's successfully fulfilled this unofficial mission after a breathtaking chase and fight inside helicopter in the air killed all his enemies.Bond also manage to steal Sciarra ring with an octopus logo.Bond got suspended for his action even though M realize that this unofficial mission prevent the mass bombing scenario.But,he is not stopping at all, this is only the beginning of his personal mission. Siaccra's death leads Bond to a gorgeous Italian widow Lucia Siaccra (Monica Belluci),and this gorgeous lonely that need a protector tips Bond about her late husband meeting point. And Bond didn't need waste time and directly entered the meeting point easily and finally not just see the face of Spectre's leader but surprisingly this person has connection with Bond's childhood. Frankly i hope Spectre is going to be the greatest Bond ever made - better than Skyfall.But i must admit there are few things that i felt that should be explore. When the leader of Spectre revealed himself to Bond, that really shocked and i think scared the hell out Bond, is one of the best momentum.When this Spectre mysterious leader Ernst Stavro Bloveld enter the room, sudden this large meeting hall become so chill, filled with fear, we only hear his voice that gives the feel of terror.But this momentum didn't maintained well. I think the story should explore more "space" for psychological battle between Bond and Ernst (a.k.a Franz Oberhauser that believed is dead decades ago in an accident that also killed Franz father). In Skyfall audiences were shown the psychological condition between love and hatred of Raoul Silva (ex 00 agent went rough who seek revenge for being abandoned and left for dead after Raoul's personal mission almost jeopardize the handover Hongkong from England back to China back in 1997). Maybe that Sam Mendez already to tired to explore this psychological things.Or just wanna focus on Bond's mission that really wanna put his misery to an end,cause Ernst recognition that for this past few years Bond's misery for the lost all that he love so much and devoted to is taken away by Ernst all along behind his collaborator in crime. This is the most apparent weakness of this Spectre. Craig performance is great, he can easily combined the drama side of this Bond character. Monica Belluci short performance but still can steal a few moments. I also give credit to Ben Whisaw as Q. and off course Waltz performance is good but not as strong as Javier's performance as villain in Skyfall. But however the early of Waltz's character appear is the best highlight in Spectre.
Ronald Bond
kalle_ankare4 April 2016
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is somewhat watchable if you manage to convince yourself that the hero is Ronald Bond, brother of the more famous and successful James Bond. Ronald of course, unlike his brother, is not the suave charmer and rascal type, but has more of a polish wrestler look and demeanor. This makes for some light comedy when Ronald is shown to be one of the few men that can't look smart and elegant wearing a suit, which incidentally only make him look more silly and distinctly out of place. Ronald also has to rely on fools luck more than skill and intelligence to save his ill conceived ways of handling things. At the start of the movie for instance, he manages to raze two entire blocks of houses whilst trying to perform the simple task of taking out a bad guy with a snipers rifle. Not only that, but he also manages to miss the intended target.
He then proceeds to chase said villain into a helicopter that takes off and flies around over a huge crowd of people. Unlike his brother James, who would simply have disposed of the bad guy and then asked the pilot to land at some convenient location, Ronald finds it a good idea to also try and take out the pilot at the same time although should he succeed, the heli would undoubtedly crash into the crowd. Fools luck saves him this time though.
We get another show of his ineptness later on when he escapes out of a window. Since the bad guys chasing him would have no option but to follow him the same route, his brother would undoubtedly just turned around, wait for them to exit and them pick them off one by one with his Beretta. Ronald here of course just continues running and tries to speed off in his car resulting in a car chase. Fortunately someone must have called in a bomb threat because the city, Rome, is almost completely devoid of people. I know this, because I have been in Rome, and there's people and cars everywhere.
Later on when a woman he has, like only an idiot can, fallen in love with at first site gets kidnapped by bad guys he proceeds to go after them in an aeroplane. His brother would of course just kept his distance, landed close to where the kidnappers cars stopped, and then snuck over to take care of business. Not so Ronald, he proceeds to attack them with the plane itself, seemingly without a plan. After failing miserably, as predicted, the plane crashes through a wood. Sheer luck however, not skill, eventually makes it so that he ends up at the same place as the baddies, most of them disposing of themselves in a crash, and thus lets him save the girl.
Ronalds plan for the end game has to be seen to be believed. After finding out somehow where the bad guy has his bad guy compound, Ronalds plan is simple; even though the villain knows his name, what he looks like and who he is, he will just go there, waltz right in, hope to be taken to the villain, tell him that he has come to kill him, and then do so. That's it, that's the whole plan. For some reason bringing a girl along also seems like a good idea.
The villain first does the obvious to thwart this "plan": send someone to dispose of this idiot en route. When this fails (on a train, incidentally also most likely bomb threatened, because like Rome before it, it's empty) this villain changes his mind for some reason, and instead of shooting the fool right in the face on sight when he arrives, proceeds to house him, give him a guided tour of his lair and then hit him over the head and torture him for a while whilst revealing some back story so ridiculous it must have had the writers rolling on the floor with laughter. One can't help wonder what Ronalds contingency plan was throughout all this.
The plot on it's whole is incomprehensible and stupid, apparently all the intelligence agencies in the world are about to pool into one giant data base that NONE of all the experts that thus must have been involved, with all their vast resources, have managed to find out is controlled by the bad guy. Incidentally, on the plus side, the bad guy also turns out to be an idiot who makes it only through luck. (watch how he miraculously survives not only the explosion of a hand grenade type watch (don't ask) thrown at him, but also the explosion of his whole bad guy hideout. (no explanation is of course given as to how he managed this) There's a fun sequence near the end that can only work if we assume that said bad guy spent some time printing out Ronald Bonds passport photo, as well as those of various friends and colleagues of his, and spent what must have been a considerable amount of time walking around a building taping these up presumable to unnerve Ronald when he arrives there. He also apparently went out to buy a spray can so the could spray "Bond" and an arrow on the wall. The latter implies that his plan actually hinged on the certainty that Bond would escape from the henchmen that captured him earlier on. There is however nothing that shows that the henchmen were intended to let him go so that he could reach this target, so why anyone would bother with the printing, spraying and taping when the odds of Ronald Bond actually getting there are extremely slim, is any ones guess.
All great fun though but watching James Bonds brother clown and clumsy his way through an adventure like this makes one long for an actual James Bond movie, it has been too long!
He then proceeds to chase said villain into a helicopter that takes off and flies around over a huge crowd of people. Unlike his brother James, who would simply have disposed of the bad guy and then asked the pilot to land at some convenient location, Ronald finds it a good idea to also try and take out the pilot at the same time although should he succeed, the heli would undoubtedly crash into the crowd. Fools luck saves him this time though.
We get another show of his ineptness later on when he escapes out of a window. Since the bad guys chasing him would have no option but to follow him the same route, his brother would undoubtedly just turned around, wait for them to exit and them pick them off one by one with his Beretta. Ronald here of course just continues running and tries to speed off in his car resulting in a car chase. Fortunately someone must have called in a bomb threat because the city, Rome, is almost completely devoid of people. I know this, because I have been in Rome, and there's people and cars everywhere.
Later on when a woman he has, like only an idiot can, fallen in love with at first site gets kidnapped by bad guys he proceeds to go after them in an aeroplane. His brother would of course just kept his distance, landed close to where the kidnappers cars stopped, and then snuck over to take care of business. Not so Ronald, he proceeds to attack them with the plane itself, seemingly without a plan. After failing miserably, as predicted, the plane crashes through a wood. Sheer luck however, not skill, eventually makes it so that he ends up at the same place as the baddies, most of them disposing of themselves in a crash, and thus lets him save the girl.
Ronalds plan for the end game has to be seen to be believed. After finding out somehow where the bad guy has his bad guy compound, Ronalds plan is simple; even though the villain knows his name, what he looks like and who he is, he will just go there, waltz right in, hope to be taken to the villain, tell him that he has come to kill him, and then do so. That's it, that's the whole plan. For some reason bringing a girl along also seems like a good idea.
The villain first does the obvious to thwart this "plan": send someone to dispose of this idiot en route. When this fails (on a train, incidentally also most likely bomb threatened, because like Rome before it, it's empty) this villain changes his mind for some reason, and instead of shooting the fool right in the face on sight when he arrives, proceeds to house him, give him a guided tour of his lair and then hit him over the head and torture him for a while whilst revealing some back story so ridiculous it must have had the writers rolling on the floor with laughter. One can't help wonder what Ronalds contingency plan was throughout all this.
The plot on it's whole is incomprehensible and stupid, apparently all the intelligence agencies in the world are about to pool into one giant data base that NONE of all the experts that thus must have been involved, with all their vast resources, have managed to find out is controlled by the bad guy. Incidentally, on the plus side, the bad guy also turns out to be an idiot who makes it only through luck. (watch how he miraculously survives not only the explosion of a hand grenade type watch (don't ask) thrown at him, but also the explosion of his whole bad guy hideout. (no explanation is of course given as to how he managed this) There's a fun sequence near the end that can only work if we assume that said bad guy spent some time printing out Ronald Bonds passport photo, as well as those of various friends and colleagues of his, and spent what must have been a considerable amount of time walking around a building taping these up presumable to unnerve Ronald when he arrives there. He also apparently went out to buy a spray can so the could spray "Bond" and an arrow on the wall. The latter implies that his plan actually hinged on the certainty that Bond would escape from the henchmen that captured him earlier on. There is however nothing that shows that the henchmen were intended to let him go so that he could reach this target, so why anyone would bother with the printing, spraying and taping when the odds of Ronald Bond actually getting there are extremely slim, is any ones guess.
All great fun though but watching James Bonds brother clown and clumsy his way through an adventure like this makes one long for an actual James Bond movie, it has been too long!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
