Given the critics predisposition to dismiss Bond films as formulamatic sub-artistic entertainment for the less enlightened (especially in the US) a three star review for a Bond film is the equivalent of a four star review for another film. It's like they subtract one star automatically because it's a Bond film. From what I am gleaning from the reviews (and I'm being careful to avoid reviews with spoilers) is that SPECTRE is a film that was made to the tastes of its core audience: Bond fans... but takes things to the next level by being crafted to an exceptionally high standard of overall film making and entertainment level that will resonate beyond the hardcore fan base resulting in another huge box office success. Bond films tend to be critic proof; but Bond films that get good reviews become blockbusters.
Given the critics predisposition to dismiss Bond films as formulamatic sub-artistic entertainment for the less enlightened (especially in the US) a three star review for a Bond film is the equivalent of a four star review for another film. It's like they subtract one star automatically because it's a Bond film. From what I am gleaning from the reviews (and I'm being careful to avoid reviews with spoilers) is that SPECTRE is a film that was made to the tastes of its core audience: Bond fans... but takes things to the next level by being crafted to an exceptionally high standard of overall film making and entertainment level that will resonate beyond the hardcore fan base resulting in another huge box office success. Bond films tend to be critic proof; but Bond films that get good reviews become blockbusters.
It's just a shame that for a long time. Every movie after Skyfall will be judged on how much money Skyfall made.
Yes that's true. Skyfall was marketed very well. The song also did wonders for that movie.
I wonder if "Writing's on the Wall" will help Spectre the same way. If someone released a film today called "Writing's on the Wall", Sam Smith fans would be running to see it. It's not going to have the same impact that Adele repeating the lyric "Skyfall" over and over again in her song did.
I can't see the song hindering the movie in any way. so it
will all help.
+1...Well...I agree now anyway, I wasn't sure about it when I first heard it, but it has really grown on me and I think it is great. It seems to suit the film very well (at least from the trailers anyway).
I have to say I prefer it to Skyfall, it seems to have a bit more emotion and the lyrics come across as more meaningful (at least to me anyway).
Craig appears like he has at least one or two (depending how long between films) Bond films left in him looks-wise. The good haircut helps for sure. Craig has done fresh new "00" Bond, hammered and burnt out Bond, and apparently more classic fully formed prime Bond now in SPECTRE. For 25, maybe another classic in his prime Bond and if they need a premise to squeeze one more out, maybe a retired Bond called back to service to save the world one more time for 26. -{
From the reviews we've got so far, I'm expecting somewhere between a 7.2 - 7.7 on IMDB in about a month when the rating stops going like crazy. I think as Bond fans we would probably love it, but as a non Bond film it probably won't work as well as Skyfall did as a stand alone.
I will make my own mind up when I see it at 8pm on Monday (UK).
The one thing that makes QOS in my opinion not as good as the others is the poor editing pure and simple. I have no problem with the story, it's the one film they tried to make like a Greengrass directed Bourne film. That works fine for Jason Bourne but not Bond.
If somehow when QOS celebrates a signifcant landmark and they could re edit the film I'm sure a lot of people like me would like it more.
As for Skyfall I enjoyed it tremendously apart from the last act where it becomes like a cross between the original Straw Dogs and Home Alone. I still can't fathom out why Bond couldn't tip up at Skyfall with a bagfull of top grade weapons.
Anyway this is how I rate QOS and Skyfall as Bond movies compared to the others with FRWL being my favourite so 10/10. CR being my 2nd favourite which I also rate at 10/10, and Goldfinger my third favourite but I still have to give it another 10/10.
My least favourites are FAVTAK (mainly because of Moores age, and the dreadful Beach Boys sound track over some amazing stunt sequences at the begining) 7/10 and obviously like most folk DAD (awful CGI, Maddonas theme plus a ton of other stuff) 6/10. (remember this is only my opinion).
I will make my own mind up when I see it at 8pm on Monday (UK).
The one thing that makes QOS in my opinion not as good as the others is the poor editing pure and simple. I have no problem with the story, it's the one film they tried to make like a Greengrass directed Bourne film. That works fine for Jason Bourne but not Bond.
If somehow when QOS celebrates a signifcant landmark and they could re edit the film I'm sure a lot of people like me would like it more.
As for Skyfall I enjoyed it tremendously apart from the last act where it becomes like a cross between the original Straw Dogs and Home Alone. I still can't fathom out why Bond couldn't tip up at Skyfall with a bagfull of top grade weapons.
Anyway this is how I rate QOS and Skyfall as Bond movies compared to the others with FRWL being my favourite so 10/10. CR being my 2nd favourite which I also rate at 10/10, and Goldfinger my third favourite but I still have to give it another 10/10.
My least favourites are FAVTAK (mainly because of Moores age, and the dreadful Beach Boys sound track over some amazing stunt sequences at the begining) 7/10 and obviously like most folk DAD (awful CGI, Maddonas theme plus a ton of other stuff) 6/10. (remember this is only my opinion).
So:
QOS 6.5/10
Skyfall 8/10
I agree with QOS. The editing makes the movie so hard to enjoy. And I don't like how Bond is being baby sat the entire movie by M. I find her really annoying in that film. With Mendes directing Spectre, he'll surely allow for proper editing again.
And by the way, Moore's movie is just AVTAK. FAVTAK is Fleming's short story, which the movie unfortunately has nothing at in common with apart from five words from the title. :007)
Given the critics predisposition to dismiss Bond films as formulamatic sub-artistic entertainment for the less enlightened (especially in the US) a three star review for a Bond film is the equivalent of a four star review for another film. It's like they subtract one star automatically because it's a Bond film. From what I am gleaning from the reviews (and I'm being careful to avoid reviews with spoilers) is that SPECTRE is a film that was made to the tastes of its core audience: Bond fans... but takes things to the next level by being crafted to an exceptionally high standard of overall film making and entertainment level that will resonate beyond the hardcore fan base resulting in another huge box office success. Bond films tend to be critic proof; but Bond films that get good reviews become blockbusters.
I couldn't have said it any better myself -{
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I agree with QOS. The editing makes the movie so hard to enjoy. And I don't like how Bond is being baby sat the entire movie by M. I find her really annoying in that film. With Mendes directing Spectre, he'll surely allow for proper editing again.
I got the same vibes with SF, since the whole team were communicating through wireless. Maybe it's how things roll these days, but I'd have preferred if Bond did the detective work himself
Critics consensus on Rotten tomatoes: Spectre nudges Daniel Craig's rebooted Bond closer to the glorious, action-driven spectacle of earlier entries, although it's admittedly reliant on established 007 formula.
- So that's interesting, like it ends up setting up Dr. No or something?
Critics consensus on Rotten tomatoes: Spectre nudges Daniel Craig's rebooted Bond closer to the glorious, action-driven spectacle of earlier entries, although it's admittedly reliant on established 007 formula.
- So that's interesting, like it ends up setting up Dr. No or something?
It means in style, like GF, YOLT, TSWLM, Brosnan's films, etc.
Dr. No isn't an action-driven spectacle by any means.
ok, i get it now, though those two statements seem to contradict each other
I also had a little theory:
Skyfall, when it first premiered in the UK it was sitting at about 97% positive reviews, then when it got to the States it dropped down to 92%
Skyfall focused on more emotion and less action. I have a theory that with Spectre it is going to be just the opposite. I think because there is more action and less emotion (as the critics are saying), that USA will enjoy it a bit more, we might see those numbers reverse. It may even be considered the Dark Knight of Bond movies (for lack of a better comparison)
Alittle disappointed reading some of the reviews about all the quirky humor. I know that, it's an old school bond thing...I definitely get it. As for myself, I really appreciated the "grown-upness" of the Craig era movies. Ah well....It's not like I still won't see this like three times in the theater
Interesting observation re Rotten Tomatoes: I noticed most "artsy fartsy" indie or foreign language films get higher overall ratings (lots of 89 to 100%) than more mainstream films. It will be interesting to see the results/views of movie goers when "SPECTRE" actually hits theaters in broad release.
It seems to me the humor isn't being cheesy like the Roger moore era, it is genuinely funny - well Skyfall didn't make me laugh, but you do get a big grin on your face at some parts like when he calls M a b****, the only cringe worthy one-liner from skyfall i'd say was at the end 'I was in deep water!" , and just think that was the last one-liner M ever heard him say. I am confident about the humor, Wade and Purvis were in charge of that, and they are really getting better as writers
Critics consensus on Rotten tomatoes: Spectre nudges Daniel Craig's rebooted Bond closer to the glorious, action-driven spectacle of earlier entries, although it's admittedly reliant on established 007 formula.
-{ Sounds good to me!
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I don't mind it having humour. I don't mind it having gadgets and outlandish plots. I also don't mind it being dark and gritty. It's all about balance. Too much of any of those things could bring the film down.
I've seen the film. It doesn't have the dramatic or emotional impact of Casino Royale or Skyfall, so when the end credits start rolling you're left feeling a little empty. There isn't much story and it's pretty obvious who's really who after all the fuss. The main flaw is the relationship between Bond and the villain isn't developed, to such a degree that you wonder if there was any point.
As with Skyfall there are issues with story logic and motivation, but this one gets away with it better due to the emphasis on classic-style Bond entertainment.
The pre-title sequence is as exciting as possible given some poor green screen work; the rest of the visual effects, by ILM this time, are fine. I found the much-hyped car chase a bit of a damp squib. The fight scene is the most satisfying bit of action.
There were a few moments when I wanted Thomas Newman to shut the *beep* up. A much better score could have helped this film quite a bit. Sam Smith's song doesn't screw up the titles too badly. An instrumental of it appears over one scene later in the film to at least try and tie things together.
Monica Bellucci fans will be disappointed with her limited screen time. Lea Seydoux gives the film its heart and soul; it almost feels like Madeleine's story is more important than Bond's. Fiennes, Harris and Whishaw are as good as before. Christoph Waltz enjoys his role playing Christoph Waltz. I don't watch Sherlock but I understand Andrew Scott is the same in everything, so I guess he's done the same here.
It's the funniest of the Craig films by some distance, with many of the laughs provided by Q.
Quantum of Solace haters will sadly be able to use this film as ammunition against that undervalued earlier Craig film, courtesy of the opening titles and a scene near the climax.
I'd keep your eyes closed during the title sequence if you're scared of octopuses (or 'octopi' if you prefer).
The film doesn't really stay in the memory for long which I guess is what ultimately prevents it from being a classic, but it's still good and those who have been missing all the classic Bond tropes will lap it up.
Those critics who gave it 3.5 out of 5 have it right, I think. Maybe a rewatch will push it up to 4/5 because I'll take it for what it is rather than what it isn't. It's certainly a flawed film, though, Bond or otherwise.
Comments
I saw that. The fact that he calls QOS "dire" makes me think this film is ever better than he says!
Sounds about right -{
Good spoiler free review over at MI6.
"Greatness From Small Beginnings."
I wonder if "Writing's on the Wall" will help Spectre the same way. If someone released a film today called "Writing's on the Wall", Sam Smith fans would be running to see it. It's not going to have the same impact that Adele repeating the lyric "Skyfall" over and over again in her song did.
will all help.
+1...Well...I agree now anyway, I wasn't sure about it when I first heard it, but it has really grown on me and I think it is great. It seems to suit the film very well (at least from the trailers anyway).
I have to say I prefer it to Skyfall, it seems to have a bit more emotion and the lyrics come across as more meaningful (at least to me anyway).
( I'm only guessing, no other information)
Context can't change Sam Smith's voice.
Best hair cut ever for DC!
The one thing that makes QOS in my opinion not as good as the others is the poor editing pure and simple. I have no problem with the story, it's the one film they tried to make like a Greengrass directed Bourne film. That works fine for Jason Bourne but not Bond.
If somehow when QOS celebrates a signifcant landmark and they could re edit the film I'm sure a lot of people like me would like it more.
As for Skyfall I enjoyed it tremendously apart from the last act where it becomes like a cross between the original Straw Dogs and Home Alone. I still can't fathom out why Bond couldn't tip up at Skyfall with a bagfull of top grade weapons.
Anyway this is how I rate QOS and Skyfall as Bond movies compared to the others with FRWL being my favourite so 10/10. CR being my 2nd favourite which I also rate at 10/10, and Goldfinger my third favourite but I still have to give it another 10/10.
My least favourites are FAVTAK (mainly because of Moores age, and the dreadful Beach Boys sound track over some amazing stunt sequences at the begining) 7/10 and obviously like most folk DAD (awful CGI, Maddonas theme plus a ton of other stuff) 6/10. (remember this is only my opinion).
So:
QOS 6.5/10
Skyfall 8/10
"Do you expect me to talk? "No Mister Bond I expect you to die"
I agree with QOS. The editing makes the movie so hard to enjoy. And I don't like how Bond is being baby sat the entire movie by M. I find her really annoying in that film. With Mendes directing Spectre, he'll surely allow for proper editing again.
And by the way, Moore's movie is just AVTAK. FAVTAK is Fleming's short story, which the movie unfortunately has nothing at in common with apart from five words from the title. :007)
I couldn't have said it any better myself -{
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I got the same vibes with SF, since the whole team were communicating through wireless. Maybe it's how things roll these days, but I'd have preferred if Bond did the detective work himself
- So that's interesting, like it ends up setting up Dr. No or something?
more like the Big epic Roger Moore Bonds ?
It means in style, like GF, YOLT, TSWLM, Brosnan's films, etc.
Dr. No isn't an action-driven spectacle by any means.
I also had a little theory:
Skyfall, when it first premiered in the UK it was sitting at about 97% positive reviews, then when it got to the States it dropped down to 92%
Skyfall focused on more emotion and less action. I have a theory that with Spectre it is going to be just the opposite. I think because there is more action and less emotion (as the critics are saying), that USA will enjoy it a bit more, we might see those numbers reverse. It may even be considered the Dark Knight of Bond movies (for lack of a better comparison)
out of place and could have been cut. -{
-{ Sounds good to me!
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
As with Skyfall there are issues with story logic and motivation, but this one gets away with it better due to the emphasis on classic-style Bond entertainment.
The pre-title sequence is as exciting as possible given some poor green screen work; the rest of the visual effects, by ILM this time, are fine. I found the much-hyped car chase a bit of a damp squib. The fight scene is the most satisfying bit of action.
There were a few moments when I wanted Thomas Newman to shut the *beep* up. A much better score could have helped this film quite a bit. Sam Smith's song doesn't screw up the titles too badly. An instrumental of it appears over one scene later in the film to at least try and tie things together.
Monica Bellucci fans will be disappointed with her limited screen time. Lea Seydoux gives the film its heart and soul; it almost feels like Madeleine's story is more important than Bond's. Fiennes, Harris and Whishaw are as good as before. Christoph Waltz enjoys his role playing Christoph Waltz. I don't watch Sherlock but I understand Andrew Scott is the same in everything, so I guess he's done the same here.
It's the funniest of the Craig films by some distance, with many of the laughs provided by Q.
Quantum of Solace haters will sadly be able to use this film as ammunition against that undervalued earlier Craig film, courtesy of the opening titles and a scene near the climax.
I'd keep your eyes closed during the title sequence if you're scared of octopuses (or 'octopi' if you prefer).
The film doesn't really stay in the memory for long which I guess is what ultimately prevents it from being a classic, but it's still good and those who have been missing all the classic Bond tropes will lap it up.
Those critics who gave it 3.5 out of 5 have it right, I think. Maybe a rewatch will push it up to 4/5 because I'll take it for what it is rather than what it isn't. It's certainly a flawed film, though, Bond or otherwise.