Saw it and enjoyed it but didn’t love it. One thing I didn’t get:
What was Spectre and Blofeld’s motivation? Was it just “get control over all the information to make crime easier” plus “torture Bond”? That’s a pretty weak motivation, I think.
I think you got it; if in doubt, summarize the plot of SKYFALL likewise and compare.
I thought the Skyfall motivation worked better – more personal, and it seemed more earned.
A good film. With all the homages to previous films, I fully expected Bloefeld to undertake a drive by shooting at the end.
Since Tracy has any Bond girl been serious love interest, Vesper was a honeytrap afterall.
Wife and I saw it last night and we both enjoyed it a lot. My wife even said it was one of her favorites, but I wouldn’t got that far. It was a decent Bond film… It wasn’t anything that will go down in history as an epic movie, but it was a couple of hours of enjoyment for bond fans.
I’m actually reading Ian Fleming’s Thunderball, which introduces Spectre.
Basically put, power is the goal. (that’s really not a spoiler)
I also quite enjoyed it. Don’t know why the general SDMB sentiment is so down. I didn’t much care for the theme song, but other than that it didn’t make any mistakes that I haven’t forgiven in other Bond flicks I think highly of.
One question:
Is it revealed who is in Moneypenny’s bed? When I first saw it, I was thinking it was Q, but then she wouldn’t have needed to make an excuse about whom she was on the phone with.
I enjoyed it.
As for the main bad guy’s motivation,
I didn’t think Bloefeld needed more motivation - he’s a crazy guy who wants power, and he has a personal beef with Bond from their childhood that makes him want to torture him (physically and mentally). No, it doesn’t make a lot of sense and it’s not what a normal person would do, but he’s not supposed to be normal. And it’s a Bond film, so of course it’s going to be a bit over the top.
My two complaints were
As noted, the Monica Belluci bit seemed completely tacked on, added only so they could generate press with “a Bond girl is over 50!” And Bautista’s evil henchman could have been given some personality. Give me Jaws any day, cheese and all.
No, just some random dude. She didn’t want random guy to get jealous about a call in the middle of the night.
Same here. I had a good old time. There’s probably some stuff that doesn’t hold up to intense scrutiny, but I don’t go to a James Bond flick to think about things that hard.
So here’s the theory:
Q is the missing Holmes sibling referred to in S3ep3 of Sherlock - real name might be Sherrinford.
Moriarty pulled a Reichenbach and wound up installing himself as “C”. He’s still #notdead, because reasons. That’s why Q got so personally involved in the action this time, instead of staying at HQ like he normally used to.
Whaddaya say?
I always complain about Bond films when I see them in the theater. Shelling out big bucks for tickets and overpriced popcorn tends to put me into a hypercritical mood. I enjoy them much more, years afterward, watching them at home on TV.
I noticed a lot of shout-outs to On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. The mountaintop hospital, and the heavy-handed family psychodrama. Also, in the MI6 headquarters, on the memorial wall, one of the names was “Emma Pill”.
I did not like the portrayal of Blofeld. He is supposed to be cold-bloodedly striving for wealth and power, not pursuing a personal squabble with Little Brother whom Daddy loved more than me. And making him Bond’s foster brother was just silly. The world is a big place, and not everything needs to be tied in with Bond’s backstory. This is global espionage, not high school cliques.
The torture scene was rather overwrought. On the other hand, it was something straight out of several Fleming novels, so I guess I should not gripe about that.
I sort of liked the portrayal of Dr. Swann. The scene where Bond undertakes to teach her to shoot a pistol amused me. Do you think she will disappear before the next movie, or will Blofeld kill her in the pre-credits scene?
I saw it a few days ago. Slightly entertaining, but formulaic. A lot of people say Bond films all have the same plot. There’s some truth in that, but most of them have something original and/ or memorable. This one, however, has not a shred of originality. And only one line that raised a laugh.
A few things about the plot I didn’t quite follow.
So, Bond and Mr White’s daughter go to the hotel that Mr & Mrs White had stayed in every year since their honeymoon. And there they discover a secret room behind a fake wall. How did White put that there? And why?
So, in the secret room Bond finds the location of SPECTRE base. He decides to go there, taking Dr Swann with him. Why? I thought he was supposed to be protecting her from them. Why take her into danger?
On the train they get attacked by a SPECTRE assassin. How did he know they were there? And how did he get there?
Then they are met at the station by a SPECTRE car. Again, how did they know Bond would be arriving then?
Then Blofeld tortures Bond. He had a torture chair all set up and waiting. If he wanted to torture Bond so badly, then why send the assassin on the train?
Bond escapes by using an exploding watch. Hang on, didn’t Q say last film that they don’t do that sort of thing any more?
No doubt there were others, but that’s all I can think of right now.
I imagine it will be something like this: https://youtu.be/4ONo_cA6qAU?t=1m22s
Saw it last night.
Pretty to look at. Beautifully filmed - liked the faux single take open. Nice action.
Of course a stupid plot, not a fatal flaw in a Bond movie if done with some fun. Or it can grab you with interesting characters. Either would do it. With good action stupid plot could be offset by either.
It had neither. Well Dr. Swann was engaging a bit. But dang their sex scene was beyond formulaic … all it was missing was the shot of the train going into a tunnel.
The torture scene just stupid but not stupid enough to be funny.
It was long and felt it. I shouldn’t be looking at my watch while at a Bond movie.
IMHO the weakest of the Craig Bond series. And I’ve liked him a lot. The closest to Connery’s thug with the veneer of sophistication.
I liked the opening sequence in Mexico City as well. It seemed long, and I kept waiting for Dr. Evil to appear and explain henchmen dying like flies, or the overly elaborate death scene, or sharks with frikken laser beams on their heads, bwahahaha, etc. Overall, OK escape film.
Did anyone else notice the tentacle sex depicted in the opening titles?
I liked it. Of course beautifully shot and directed with some great homages to OHMSS and others. The plot was a little thin but I’m sorry, you don’t watch Bond for the realistic plot, you watch Bond for the camp, the explosions, the women, and him being a badass. They tried a realistic plot in Quantum of Solace and that movie is widely regarded as “that really bad one” in the new series.
The one major regret? They really could’ve made Andrew Scott the main bad guy. He is a phenomenal actor and did an extremely good and chilling Moriarty in Sherlock. Making him some random asshole wanting to replace the 00 program with drones/intelligence wasn’t exciting. Maybe have him be the front leading man in SPECTRE and have Blofeld the guy behind the scenes. Or don’t have Blofeld at all. Either way Blofeld shouldn’t have been so easily defeated in one movie.
Is there any doubt that the director/producers are big Alan Moore fans? In Skyfall, they drop hints that M might be Emma Peel, later in life (See: LOEG, The Black Dossier), and in SPECTRE, they make the actor currently most famous for playing Moriarty the head of MI-5 (LOEG Vol. 1).
And the actor who plays Harry Potter’s nemesis is a good guy!
What hints?
My issue with Andrew Scott’s character…
I feel like it would have worked better if he was a patsy for Blofeld, someone who thought they were the good guy but was actually being played. Or if he was an actual sneering villain. Instead he’s just a Lawful Evil bureaucrat. I was somewhat entertained that he and Bond only met once in passing, and for the rest of the film, it was C vs M and Bond vs Blofeld.
My main issue with the primary villain…
It seemed to me that him being Bond’s brother was basically a gimme, even Bond seemed to clue in on it fairly quickly. At first I thought he was going to have been Bond’s blood brother rather than a foster brother though. Treating him as Bond’s brother first and making him Blofeld as the shocking reveal would have worked better if he was Blofeld first and then Bond’s brother in the shocking reveal instead.
I rather liked Bautista’s Jaws-esque character. Big mean physical guy who wears nice suits and carefully wipes the blood off of his hands after murdering a guy in front of a bunch of people. I’ll be honest, it was the handkerchief that sold him for me. Up until then, he was just a thug.