So how do you keep an actor of Craigs stature interested in the part if you don't show backstory?
The old days have gone forever. Either enjoy the new ones or settle back and enjoy Die another Day and the like.
It drives me mad that Bond cant move on. That people are stuck in the past...
So every Bond movie made from now onwards need to show backstory? And how is wanting a films ithout backstory being 'stuck in the past'? When you have a movie franchise, you can't make every movie a back story. The point of a backstory is so the audience knows why the main character does what he/she does. So, why, on the fourth Bond film of the new era, are we still learning about Bond's childhood? They aren't doing this because just having Bond do missions was outdated or wouldn't work today. We're not saying Bond can't move on, we're just saying it would be nice if this backstory thing was over and we was back to Bond just doing what he does best.
my guess is that broadshoulder thoroughly dislikes especially the Brosnan movies that he wants furure films to be somewhat of the opposite
Yep, got it in one
We all enjoyed the Moore era but after AVTAK there was need for a change. Luckily we got Sir Tim of Dalton who was like being dowsed with cold water. He was a proper actor who used to listen to his actor and adjust his respomse accordingly. They gave him great stories such as TLD and LTK. Not since the early Connery have we had a Bond who could act
Then the Brosnan era came along
Watching GE I thought we were going backwards. GE was riddled with cliches. It was a Bond movie riddled with enough nods to keep the fans happy. But to me we'd regressed to the Moore days - without the humour. Little did we know that it spawned a legion of fans who were happy with this. But after the gamechanging Dalton films I felt the films had gone backwards
Now we have in Craig a Bond that leans towards the literary side of Bond who can actually act. You get a fully fleshed Bond who you can do wonders with. And stories which show the backstory and are interlinked in some way..
Does that answer your question?
1. For Your Eyes Only 2. The Living Daylights 3 From Russia with Love 4. Casino Royale 5. OHMSS 6. Skyfall
Watching GE I thought we were going backwards. GE was riddled with cliches. It was a Bond movie riddled with enough nods to keep the fans happy. But to me we'd regressed to the Moore days - without the humour.
GoldenEye is a stale, half-eaten sandwich that Connery and Moore previously took bites out of. Spectre does all the Bond stuff far better.
Finally got round to watching Spectre last night at my local cinema. Well, Well, Well, Mendes and Craig have done it again. A thoroughly enjoyable romp, keeping you entertained for 2 and a half hours. Too many good pieces to choose for the highlight of the movie, Opening Sequence, Fight on the train, destruction of the Villains lair, torture scene, the list goes on. Only negative point for me, that there wasn't enough of Christoph Waltz. Hoping he'll be back in some way shape or form in the furute.
This is precisely my problem with the recent films, for all their admirable qualities I am bored to death with ' back-story Bond'. I liked SP more than I expected as I found elements of Skyfall trite and mawkish and feared more of the same this time. It feels to me that finally after four films we can move on from personal drama and get back to missions please.
So how do you keep an actor of Craigs stature interested in the part if you don't show
It drives me mad that Bond cant move on. That people are stuck in the past...
So every Bond movie made from now onwards need to show backstory? And how is wanting a films ithout backstory being 'stuck in the past'? When you have a movie franchise, you can't make every movie a back story. The point of a backstory is so the audience knows why the main character does what he/she does. So, why, on the fourth Bond film of the new era, are we still learning about Bond's childhood? They aren't doing this because just having Bond do missions was outdated or wouldn't work today. We're not saying Bond can't move on, we're just saying it would be nice if this backstory thing was over and we was back to Bond just doing what he does best.
" No no no, no more foreplay" I really do want Bond to move on and transcend his past. Drama becomes Soap Opera when it focuses internally rather than externally, when it becomes driven by its own Mythos and autocritical in nature. An actor like Daniel, or indeed whoever follows him, will be interested by the character ark which can of course have him face new challenges and learn things about his psyche which can relate to his past. Just no more instances where his past is the origin and architect. My problem is it seems like Bond can't seem to move on and the films reflect that by clumsily nodding to their own history and legacy. Move on indded, would that they would. For all that it's still top 5 for me so relax, nobody is raining on your parade. I thought we were here to have a considered and reasonable discussion as fans of the same thing.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
So I heared that during the scene in the MI6 ruins when Bond tries to shoot Blofeld, the SPECTRE octopuss logo can be seen in the glass (when Bond shoots the Bullet proof glass). I did not catch on to this personally as I've still only seen it once. But did anyone else catch it?
So I heared that during the scene in the MI6 ruins when Bond tries to shoot Blofeld, the SPECTRE octopuss logo can be seen in the glass (when Bond shoots the Bullet proof glass). I did not catch on to this personally as I've still only seen it once. But did anyone else catch it?
Yep...I thought it was quite obvious...and I've only seen it once myself.
She's worth whatever chaos she brings to the table and you know it. ~ Mark Anthony
So every Bond movie made from now onwards need to show backstory? And how is wanting a films ithout backstory being 'stuck in the past'? When you have a movie franchise, you can't make every movie a back story. The point of a backstory is so the audience knows why the main character does what he/she does. So, why, on the fourth Bond film of the new era, are we still learning about Bond's childhood? They aren't doing this because just having Bond do missions was outdated or wouldn't work today. We're not saying Bond can't move on, we're just saying it would be nice if this backstory thing was over and we was back to Bond just doing what he does best.
my guess is that broadshoulder thoroughly dislikes especially the Brosnan movies that he wants furure films to be somewhat of the opposite
Yep, got it in one
We all enjoyed the Moore era but after AVTAK there was need for a change. Luckily we got Sir Tim of Dalton who was like being dowsed with cold water. He was a proper actor who used to listen to his actor and adjust his respomse accordingly. They gave him great stories such as TLD and LTK. Not since the early Connery have we had a Bond who could act
Then the Brosnan era came along
Watching GE I thought we were going backwards. GE was riddled with cliches. It was a Bond movie riddled with enough nods to keep the fans happy. But to me we'd regressed to the Moore days - without the humour. Little did we know that it spawned a legion of fans who were happy with this. But after the gamechanging Dalton films I felt the films had gone backwards
Now we have in Craig a Bond that leans towards the literary side of Bond who can actually act. You get a fully fleshed Bond who you can do wonders with. And stories which show the backstory and are interlinked in some way..
Does that answer your question?
I'm with you too Broadshoulder....
I loved Tim D, and disliked Brozzers portrayed of Bond...although there are some aspects of his films I liked...but Craigs tenure and back story, through all the 4 movies are what make them great and far more engaging imo.
She's worth whatever chaos she brings to the table and you know it. ~ Mark Anthony
Did the tag line "James Bond Will Return" appear at the end of the film?
I've seen it once on the opening night (Monday UK) with my two sons and my best mate, however as soon as the film finished we were off.
It was late mind and they had to go to work the next day. So I didn't see it.
I haven't seen the film yet---but I guarantee it's there :007)
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
We Bond fans at James Bond Radio are currently running 30 Days of SPECTRE, where we release a new podcast every single day talking about a different aspect of the new film. We begin with a 100% spoiler free (no hints, no insinuations...nothing) episode all about our night at the red carpet premiere at the Royal Albert Hall. Obviously it's spoiler city from day 2 onwards, so if you haven't seen the film yet, I'd hold back on listening past the first episode.
BIG TAMWrexham, North Wales, UK.Posts: 773MI6 Agent
I've finally seen it at my local Odeon on Saturday morning. A comfortable experience with a pleasant gathering of about twenty people. I'm a 47 year old man & the film made me feel 7 again! I’m in the mood to offer some profound analysis.
“The dead are alive.” An ominous post-gunbarrel message for 007’s 24th cinematic adventure. Death is indeed the key to SPECTRE, a simple enough caper that on face value exists merely to embrace all that is classic about the franchise. But like the Baron Samedi-style skeleton mask Bond sports to weave his way through Mexico’s vibrant streets, this is a masquerade. There is a great drinking game to be had during this film – taking a swig every time it tips its hat to Bond’s 53 year legacy. And ten minutes in you’d be completely legless. Whether it be subtle (Bond’s landing on a sofa from a great height a la Connery’s entrance to Tanaka’s subterranean HQ) or overt (helicopter stunts straight from FOR YOUR EYES ONLY) this soaks up the past with brazen abandon. But it never feels derivative. What it does have is an eerie other-world feel continuing the solemn melancholy of SKYFALL.
Bond’s apartment is sparse, haunted by Bond himself. Judi Dench’s M is a ghostly presence, flickering RING-like from a TV. Monica Bellucci’s fallen Madonna awaits her fate, saved by silenced bullets. Rome & London are ghost towns, devoid of much in the way of inhabitation. Madeline Swann’s base of operations is more fitting of a villain, sitting implausibly inaccessible atop a snow-peaked mountain eyrie. A Moroccan ghost train – the Overlook Hotel on rails – comes from nowhere with no discernible destination, its few fellow travellers conveniently disappearing when things get rough. A Rolls Royce appears from nowhere to greet Bond & Swann at their NORTH BY NORTHWEST/ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST desert drop-off. And then we have the enigmatic villain, heading up an organisation that no longer exists as an acronym, suggesting simple mystery & illusion. As with much of its content there’s no tangible explanation for much of what happens. Things just do. It’s an undoubtedly satisfying adventure that ticks all the classic Bond boxes, but with an ethereal quality that lingers long in the mind.
Daniel Craig is now at a point in his stint – like Connery in THUNDERBALL & Moore in MOONRAKER – where acting Bond is imperceptible. He simply IS 007. And his MI6 cohorts feel like a comfortable family to cheerily play off. Fiennes & Whishaw are marvellous. One really wants to spend time with these people. And then there’s the baddie, Christoph Waltz. From his Dr No-style disembodied voice in Rome to his spilling-the-beans monologue to Bond, he’s an actor who effortlessly oozes menace with the minimum of effort. His sockless attire is a lovely touch, lending him a quirky look in keeping with the ‘60s vibe at this late stage of the tale. Some churlish comments have been made of Monica Bellucci & Leah Seydoux – the former’s lack of screen time, the latter’s lack of sex appeal. Both are nonsense criticisms. Director Sam Mendes knows how to co-ordinate this stuff & does so beautifully. At once different to SKYFALL but at the same time a fine companion to that London-set adventure, this will be a hard act to follow. But follow it they will. And they’ll do it with class. That’s the beauty of Bond. It’s always the same stuff but done in a way that though one may notice the repetition, one doesn’t really care.
Is it without fault? Of course not. No film ever is. Things flag a little when Bond & Swann reach L’Americain & one secretly yearns for a big commando raid on Blofeld’s crater base. But these pale into insignificance when Bond offers his gun & shoulder holster to the villain’s butler on a silver platter. As Moore did to Whisper in LIVE & LET DIE – yet more throwaway cheek that makes this particular Bond fan smile with glee. Stylish & bold with swagger & gall, it’s a very satisfying 007 picture indeed.
Excellent review BIGTAM, and one that I thoroughly agree with. Delighted by the film and have only nitpicks - these I have for even the greatest films in the series (Venice gondola final scene in FRWL anybody?)
Nitpicks include not hearing Hinx's last words before he left the train at speed and the destruction of MI6 HQ at the end - a little OTT. I like the idea put forward by BIGTAM about a commando assault - I'd have Bond leading an SAS/SBS team in a heartbeat.
Overall a 5 star film - Craig's third IMHO.
I agree with the last two posters. My (brief) review..
Gunbarrel at the start..thank God
Opening sequence..amazing and just has to be seen in a Cinema. Think the visuals would be severely diminished on TV and might make it seem a bit more mundane. Right from the word go when Craig dropped onto the sofa you could tell the humour element was being ramped up. I, for one, loved that element.
Title sequence was awesome I thought. Loved the use of the octopus. Even the song seemed reasonable played in context (still not a fan though).
Bond girls..considering all the hype Monica Bellucci was a complete throwaway character. Shame really because she had a lot more charisma than the main one. She was ok but not someone I could see Bond falling big time for.
Villians..Mr Hinx was awesome but could of done with more screen time. I kept thinking he was going to reappear towards the end and was disappointed when he didn't. Christopher Waltz played a terrific old fashioned, sinister adversary. What a great actor. His big reveal at the Spectre meeting was a tense and brilliant scene I thought.
The action..Loved the car chase through Rome, like everything else beautifully shot and packed with genuinely amusing bits based on the 'concept' car. Great Bond moment payoff at the end as well. Loved Bond chasing cars down with a plane in the Austrian bit. Completely over the top but proper old fashioned Bond (like much of the movie). The train fight was another great sequence. My only complaint was the rushed escape from the base in Tangiers. What a wonderful location shamefully underused. I understand why they had to get back to London but seemed a shame to me.
The nods to the classics..I for one absolutely love seeing all the classic Bond rehashes. Maybe its my age (46) but it gives me a lovely warm feeling seeing a 'proper' Bond film with everything we know and love in place. Its why I go to see these movies and this one left me with a big happy smile on my face. Bond is back ) .
Verdict..Preferred it to Skyfall which despite being a great film dragged for me in the final 40 minutes. I think this one could end up in my top 3 just because it was a great blend of old fashioned Bond with action and humour combined with a decent compelling plot (IMO). Not sure I could say its better than Casino Royale because somehow it seems such a different sort of film. Can't wait to see it again .
Footnote: I know we have to suspend disbelief but how the hell did Bond manage to not only manage to smuggle the Aston Martin out of Q branch but also get it shipped abroad and be driving it about a few hours later? Bond..only Bond lol :v
This time we’re talking about that unique and wonderful feature of the Bond films, the title sequence.
We discuss the visuals, the nods to the past vs the new stuff we’ve not seen before and we take a good look at Sam Smith’s Writing’s on the Wall. Will it turn the haters into lovers once they see it in the context of the film? Will they hate it even more? Let’s find out in today’s episode of James Bond Radio!
Sitting on Monday night in the cinema, having to wait half an hour before the film began, with rising excitement and anticipation,This chubby, 51 year old was gradually transported back to when he was a blond haired blue eyed 9 year old sitting in the local flea pit waiting for LALD to begin.
Finally it began, Gun barrel back in its traditional place, oh the joy of hearing the theme blasting out again. The pre title sequence, is fantastic, beautifully filmed and edited ( It has been announced that the “One continuous shot” used to introduce Bond. Was in fact three cleverly edited together ) To be honest I had already though that on first viewing . On entering the Hotel ( Panning to poster) and the girl in the hotel room asking Bond where he was going ( another panning shot) is where I think the cuts were made, as you have to change from out door to indoor lighting, only a guess on my part and in no way detracts from an inventive and skilful sequence. The establishing shot of the street full of people enjoying the festival is splendid ( and on second viewing ) you can see Bond waiting for the villain to walk through the crowd and pass by him.
The opening stunt section is fantastic; I didn’t notice any glaringly bad cgi work, although others have. Leading into Daniel Kleinman’s beautifully stylish Titles. I have loved all his work for Bond and Sam Smith’s haunting theme merges so well with the images. ( I’m one of the few who love the song).
A brief review of the film itself, It’s a mix of the very traditional Bond film. An opening scene with Bond and M, a Q lab sequence. In which Ben Whishaw gives a truly great performance as Q. No one can ever replace dear old Desmond but Ben has given us a very different character, very contemporary but also eager and funny. I love his DB5 joke, which he obviously finds hilarious , the others, …. Not so much ( I can identify with that ). Later on Q has his own moment of peril and I found my self, genuinely worried for him. ( Fans of Ben can see him in his own BBC spy series starting on 9th November).
The locations are beautiful, the cinematography in spectre is outstanding, it gives us almost a visual representation of the “ Fleming sweep” from the novels. The spectre board meeting, so much a part of some of the earlier films, with a silhouetted villain, speaking in a dull voice asking about the mundane business of fixing the price of much needed drugs and people trafficking. The introduction of the Henchman, a truly unsettling scene, almost from a horror film. Mr Hinx is the latest in a long line of wonderfully bizarre characters from the Series.
Lots of action, humour, romance. Even if not a Bond fan, spectre gives you your moneys worth. The second half of the movie, the pace changes, a more serious tone settles in, a little more depth to the characters is added, the romance between the two is enforced.
A familiar Villain’s liar, ( Base in a Volcano, now where have I see that ), with the
Usual Bond villain’s touch of having vibrant green grass in the middle of a desert. The
Design of the control room, I loved, even the act of at one point the lights dimming and all the control staff rising from their seats to turn to face their leader. Visually it was very effective.
The torture scene was very effective (for me anyway) I think most of us have a fear of drills, and the idea of someone drilling into your head, is as scary as hell. (I had a dental appointment the next day, so that didn’t help my anxiety).
It also uses some lines from the torture scene from Col Sun, as Bond begins his escape you can see the drills positioning themselves to drill out Bond’s eyes !
I simply love Bond’s escape from the villain’s compound. There’s just something about a Man in a white shirt firing a machine gun protecting a lady. That simply fills me with so many nostalgic memories of all those spy films from the 60s.
The final sequence back in London, is equally exciting. The safe house with the well know name to Bond fans, was a nice little touch. I was genuinely surprised to see the scar on the villains’ Face, I wasn’t expecting that. One last battle and Bond drives off with his latest romantic conquest.
I enjoyed spectre more the second time of watching, and was able to make a note of some of the little things that, just “tweaked my nipple of enjoyment “ ……….
As Bond and pretty lady are about to leave the lift in Mexico, they sway to the music.
I only realised that the laser attached to Bond’s gun wasn’t for targeting but rather was his vibration bug to hear the conversation.
Q, …… I just love the character. Congratulations to Ben for making the role his own.
Bond giving a friendly wave to one of the spectre thugs at the graveyard.
In the Villa as Bond and Monica are kissing and Bond explains he can help her. A tear rolls down her cheek, which I think is a way of showing that the lady has gone from despair, to having the chance of “Hope” being brought to her by Bond.
This may have been “Digitally” put in ( you can’t tell these days) but I prefer to believe this is just a consummate actress giving a role, everything she’s got !
The Car chase, so many funny moments, but especially Bond intrigued by who is in Moneypenny’s flat .
I’m very happy with spectre, it’s now my #2 Craig bond ( after CR), I have read about plot holes etc, But To be honest.
I’m not an educated guy ( as my spelling and grammar proves) my love for the Bond films and books, comes from my gut!, I’m not really interested in picking faults, I had a great night out, I enjoyed my self. So a big thanks to all at EON, the cast and crew, office staff etc, for letting me into Bond’s world for a few hours, and making me feel nine years old again. -{
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Interesting, insightful and thought provoking reviews chaps. Many thanks for posting.
I went to see it for the second time last night and it certainly is better second time round. I felt I could relax more and take more in. There are so many tiny things I missed first time round that are certainly not in there by accident. They've certainly put everything into this film.
I'm going to give it my final viewing on Saturday and I'm almost as excited as I was for my first! I just love Bond! :007)
Listen to JBR whilst I do my browsing on here - good stuff lads.
Second viewing tonight in odeon isense Birmingham.
Best conclusion statement so far which I agree with
Thunderpussy:
my love for the Bond films and books, comes from my gut!, I’m not really interested in picking faults, I had a great night out, I enjoyed my self. So a big thanks to all at EON, the cast and crew, office staff etc, for letting me into Bond’s world for a few hours, and making me feel nine years old again. ajb007/martini
I really enjoyed it if I'm being honest. The opening tracking shot, the credit sequence, Rome, Austria, Morocco - I loved it all...
My biggest problem was something I predicted with a great deal of concern almost a year ago - specifically regarding Blofeld's motivations and the effective rewriting of Bond's history. The film just didn't need Bond and Blofeld to effectively be half brothers...what did this add?! Nothing in my opinion, yet another example again of trying to "make it personal" to Bond and this alienated me in the process.
Otherwise great, though the climax was something of an anti-climax, if you will.
I also don't see that Bond and Swann riding off together means they are hitched, no more than when Bond and Goodhead flew around the Earth at the end of Moonraker...
Japanese proverb say, "Bird never make nest in bare tree".
S
In the Villa as Bond and Monica are kissing and Bond explains he can help her. A tear rolls down her cheek, which I think is a way of showing that the lady has gone from despair, to having the chance of “Hope” being brought to her by Bond.
This may have been “Digitally” put in ( you can’t tell these days) but I prefer to believe this is just a consummate actress giving a role, everything she’s got !
-{
Monica Bellucci gives it her all, like Severine, she gives her best performance in a shortened role. She's memorable
Like your new Avatar Thunderpussy..
1. For Your Eyes Only 2. The Living Daylights 3 From Russia with Love 4. Casino Royale 5. OHMSS 6. Skyfall
In my opinion this was a really enjoyable Bond film. I appreciated the nice touches of humour which have been missing in recent Bond movies. Ben Whishaw had a bigger role and was great. Craig was fantastic. Loved the locations (always like to see snow in a Bond film). Waltz was sinister, Bautista as Hinx made for one of the best henchman in Bond history and that train fight was awesome. Fantastic PTS. Lea Seydoux :x . Car chase was spectacular (loved Bond's escape and perfect landing). Great villains lair -{ . It was a long film but didn't feel long. This more than any of the other Craig films reminded me of the Bond films I used to watch on TV all those years ago and that is never a bad thing. A thumbs up from me. -{
My review comes later after my second viewing, but I can already say I'm very positive :007) But I have one comment already. Is it just my sour feelings from the sequence not being filmed in Norway or am I on to something: are te Austrian scenes from a location point of view a bit grey and dull? When Bond looks out of the airplane window it looks very good, but when he is on the ground the weather looks a bit grey and I feel the location doesn't look its best. I remember when Bond is in Madeline Swann's office and she says something like "don't let the view disturb you" - but the view looks a bit grey and overcast! Am I remembering it wrong?
I thought it was a good bond film with some solid moments but I wasn't wowed by it, last movie that I was in awe of was Interstellar.
I find that interesting as I'm completely the other way round: underwhelmed with Interstellar but loved Spectre. I would be delighted for C Nolan to direct a Bond one day even though the only film of his I really like is Inception.
Opinions eh? Would be a boring world if we all agreed all of the time.
Btw did anyone catch Hinx's final words? I missed what he said before he departed the train.
Comments
Yep, got it in one
We all enjoyed the Moore era but after AVTAK there was need for a change. Luckily we got Sir Tim of Dalton who was like being dowsed with cold water. He was a proper actor who used to listen to his actor and adjust his respomse accordingly. They gave him great stories such as TLD and LTK. Not since the early Connery have we had a Bond who could act
Then the Brosnan era came along
Watching GE I thought we were going backwards. GE was riddled with cliches. It was a Bond movie riddled with enough nods to keep the fans happy. But to me we'd regressed to the Moore days - without the humour. Little did we know that it spawned a legion of fans who were happy with this. But after the gamechanging Dalton films I felt the films had gone backwards
Now we have in Craig a Bond that leans towards the literary side of Bond who can actually act. You get a fully fleshed Bond who you can do wonders with. And stories which show the backstory and are interlinked in some way..
Does that answer your question?
Actually you may be right.. -{
" No no no, no more foreplay" I really do want Bond to move on and transcend his past. Drama becomes Soap Opera when it focuses internally rather than externally, when it becomes driven by its own Mythos and autocritical in nature. An actor like Daniel, or indeed whoever follows him, will be interested by the character ark which can of course have him face new challenges and learn things about his psyche which can relate to his past. Just no more instances where his past is the origin and architect. My problem is it seems like Bond can't seem to move on and the films reflect that by clumsily nodding to their own history and legacy. Move on indded, would that they would. For all that it's still top 5 for me so relax, nobody is raining on your parade. I thought we were here to have a considered and reasonable discussion as fans of the same thing.
YouTube channel Support my channel on Patreon Twitter Facebook fanpage
Yep...I thought it was quite obvious...and I've only seen it once myself.
I'm with you too Broadshoulder....
I loved Tim D, and disliked Brozzers portrayed of Bond...although there are some aspects of his films I liked...but Craigs tenure and back story, through all the 4 movies are what make them great and far more engaging imo.
I've seen it once on the opening night (Monday UK) with my two sons and my best mate, however as soon as the film finished we were off.
It was late mind and they had to go to work the next day. So I didn't see it.
"Do you expect me to talk? "No Mister Bond I expect you to die"
Yes
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
I haven't seen the film yet---but I guarantee it's there :007)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Oh i'm sure it was probably really obvious and I have somehow missed it anyway
YouTube channel Support my channel on Patreon Twitter Facebook fanpage
We Bond fans at James Bond Radio are currently running 30 Days of SPECTRE, where we release a new podcast every single day talking about a different aspect of the new film. We begin with a 100% spoiler free (no hints, no insinuations...nothing) episode all about our night at the red carpet premiere at the Royal Albert Hall. Obviously it's spoiler city from day 2 onwards, so if you haven't seen the film yet, I'd hold back on listening past the first episode.
Day 001: The Red Carpet Premiere http://jamesbondradio.com/spectre-01-the-red-carpet-premiere/
Day 002: The Pre-Title Sequence http://jamesbondradio.com/30-days-of-spectre-002-the-pre-title-sequence/
Enjoy :-)
Chris & Tom
“The dead are alive.” An ominous post-gunbarrel message for 007’s 24th cinematic adventure. Death is indeed the key to SPECTRE, a simple enough caper that on face value exists merely to embrace all that is classic about the franchise. But like the Baron Samedi-style skeleton mask Bond sports to weave his way through Mexico’s vibrant streets, this is a masquerade. There is a great drinking game to be had during this film – taking a swig every time it tips its hat to Bond’s 53 year legacy. And ten minutes in you’d be completely legless. Whether it be subtle (Bond’s landing on a sofa from a great height a la Connery’s entrance to Tanaka’s subterranean HQ) or overt (helicopter stunts straight from FOR YOUR EYES ONLY) this soaks up the past with brazen abandon. But it never feels derivative. What it does have is an eerie other-world feel continuing the solemn melancholy of SKYFALL.
Bond’s apartment is sparse, haunted by Bond himself. Judi Dench’s M is a ghostly presence, flickering RING-like from a TV. Monica Bellucci’s fallen Madonna awaits her fate, saved by silenced bullets. Rome & London are ghost towns, devoid of much in the way of inhabitation. Madeline Swann’s base of operations is more fitting of a villain, sitting implausibly inaccessible atop a snow-peaked mountain eyrie. A Moroccan ghost train – the Overlook Hotel on rails – comes from nowhere with no discernible destination, its few fellow travellers conveniently disappearing when things get rough. A Rolls Royce appears from nowhere to greet Bond & Swann at their NORTH BY NORTHWEST/ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST desert drop-off. And then we have the enigmatic villain, heading up an organisation that no longer exists as an acronym, suggesting simple mystery & illusion. As with much of its content there’s no tangible explanation for much of what happens. Things just do. It’s an undoubtedly satisfying adventure that ticks all the classic Bond boxes, but with an ethereal quality that lingers long in the mind.
Daniel Craig is now at a point in his stint – like Connery in THUNDERBALL & Moore in MOONRAKER – where acting Bond is imperceptible. He simply IS 007. And his MI6 cohorts feel like a comfortable family to cheerily play off. Fiennes & Whishaw are marvellous. One really wants to spend time with these people. And then there’s the baddie, Christoph Waltz. From his Dr No-style disembodied voice in Rome to his spilling-the-beans monologue to Bond, he’s an actor who effortlessly oozes menace with the minimum of effort. His sockless attire is a lovely touch, lending him a quirky look in keeping with the ‘60s vibe at this late stage of the tale. Some churlish comments have been made of Monica Bellucci & Leah Seydoux – the former’s lack of screen time, the latter’s lack of sex appeal. Both are nonsense criticisms. Director Sam Mendes knows how to co-ordinate this stuff & does so beautifully. At once different to SKYFALL but at the same time a fine companion to that London-set adventure, this will be a hard act to follow. But follow it they will. And they’ll do it with class. That’s the beauty of Bond. It’s always the same stuff but done in a way that though one may notice the repetition, one doesn’t really care.
Is it without fault? Of course not. No film ever is. Things flag a little when Bond & Swann reach L’Americain & one secretly yearns for a big commando raid on Blofeld’s crater base. But these pale into insignificance when Bond offers his gun & shoulder holster to the villain’s butler on a silver platter. As Moore did to Whisper in LIVE & LET DIE – yet more throwaway cheek that makes this particular Bond fan smile with glee. Stylish & bold with swagger & gall, it’s a very satisfying 007 picture indeed.
Nitpicks include not hearing Hinx's last words before he left the train at speed and the destruction of MI6 HQ at the end - a little OTT. I like the idea put forward by BIGTAM about a commando assault - I'd have Bond leading an SAS/SBS team in a heartbeat.
Overall a 5 star film - Craig's third IMHO.
Gunbarrel at the start..thank God
Opening sequence..amazing and just has to be seen in a Cinema. Think the visuals would be severely diminished on TV and might make it seem a bit more mundane. Right from the word go when Craig dropped onto the sofa you could tell the humour element was being ramped up. I, for one, loved that element.
Title sequence was awesome I thought. Loved the use of the octopus. Even the song seemed reasonable played in context (still not a fan though).
Bond girls..considering all the hype Monica Bellucci was a complete throwaway character. Shame really because she had a lot more charisma than the main one. She was ok but not someone I could see Bond falling big time for.
Villians..Mr Hinx was awesome but could of done with more screen time. I kept thinking he was going to reappear towards the end and was disappointed when he didn't. Christopher Waltz played a terrific old fashioned, sinister adversary. What a great actor. His big reveal at the Spectre meeting was a tense and brilliant scene I thought.
The action..Loved the car chase through Rome, like everything else beautifully shot and packed with genuinely amusing bits based on the 'concept' car. Great Bond moment payoff at the end as well. Loved Bond chasing cars down with a plane in the Austrian bit. Completely over the top but proper old fashioned Bond (like much of the movie). The train fight was another great sequence. My only complaint was the rushed escape from the base in Tangiers. What a wonderful location shamefully underused. I understand why they had to get back to London but seemed a shame to me.
The nods to the classics..I for one absolutely love seeing all the classic Bond rehashes. Maybe its my age (46) but it gives me a lovely warm feeling seeing a 'proper' Bond film with everything we know and love in place. Its why I go to see these movies and this one left me with a big happy smile on my face. Bond is back
Verdict..Preferred it to Skyfall which despite being a great film dragged for me in the final 40 minutes. I think this one could end up in my top 3 just because it was a great blend of old fashioned Bond with action and humour combined with a decent compelling plot (IMO). Not sure I could say its better than Casino Royale because somehow it seems such a different sort of film. Can't wait to see it again
Footnote: I know we have to suspend disbelief but how the hell did Bond manage to not only manage to smuggle the Aston Martin out of Q branch but also get it shipped abroad and be driving it about a few hours later? Bond..only Bond lol :v
This time we’re talking about that unique and wonderful feature of the Bond films, the title sequence.
We discuss the visuals, the nods to the past vs the new stuff we’ve not seen before and we take a good look at Sam Smith’s Writing’s on the Wall. Will it turn the haters into lovers once they see it in the context of the film? Will they hate it even more? Let’s find out in today’s episode of James Bond Radio!
http://jamesbondradio.com/30-days-of-spectre-003-the-title-sequence/
Sitting on Monday night in the cinema, having to wait half an hour before the film began, with rising excitement and anticipation,This chubby, 51 year old was gradually transported back to when he was a blond haired blue eyed 9 year old sitting in the local flea pit waiting for LALD to begin.
Finally it began, Gun barrel back in its traditional place, oh the joy of hearing the theme blasting out again. The pre title sequence, is fantastic, beautifully filmed and edited ( It has been announced that the “One continuous shot” used to introduce Bond. Was in fact three cleverly edited together ) To be honest I had already though that on first viewing . On entering the Hotel ( Panning to poster) and the girl in the hotel room asking Bond where he was going ( another panning shot) is where I think the cuts were made, as you have to change from out door to indoor lighting, only a guess on my part and in no way detracts from an inventive and skilful sequence. The establishing shot of the street full of people enjoying the festival is splendid ( and on second viewing ) you can see Bond waiting for the villain to walk through the crowd and pass by him.
The opening stunt section is fantastic; I didn’t notice any glaringly bad cgi work, although others have. Leading into Daniel Kleinman’s beautifully stylish Titles. I have loved all his work for Bond and Sam Smith’s haunting theme merges so well with the images. ( I’m one of the few who love the song).
A brief review of the film itself, It’s a mix of the very traditional Bond film. An opening scene with Bond and M, a Q lab sequence. In which Ben Whishaw gives a truly great performance as Q. No one can ever replace dear old Desmond but Ben has given us a very different character, very contemporary but also eager and funny. I love his DB5 joke, which he obviously finds hilarious , the others, …. Not so much ( I can identify with that ). Later on Q has his own moment of peril and I found my self, genuinely worried for him. ( Fans of Ben can see him in his own BBC spy series starting on 9th November).
The locations are beautiful, the cinematography in spectre is outstanding, it gives us almost a visual representation of the “ Fleming sweep” from the novels. The spectre board meeting, so much a part of some of the earlier films, with a silhouetted villain, speaking in a dull voice asking about the mundane business of fixing the price of much needed drugs and people trafficking. The introduction of the Henchman, a truly unsettling scene, almost from a horror film. Mr Hinx is the latest in a long line of wonderfully bizarre characters from the Series.
Lots of action, humour, romance. Even if not a Bond fan, spectre gives you your moneys worth. The second half of the movie, the pace changes, a more serious tone settles in, a little more depth to the characters is added, the romance between the two is enforced.
A familiar Villain’s liar, ( Base in a Volcano, now where have I see that ), with the
Usual Bond villain’s touch of having vibrant green grass in the middle of a desert. The
Design of the control room, I loved, even the act of at one point the lights dimming and all the control staff rising from their seats to turn to face their leader. Visually it was very effective.
The torture scene was very effective (for me anyway) I think most of us have a fear of drills, and the idea of someone drilling into your head, is as scary as hell. (I had a dental appointment the next day, so that didn’t help my anxiety).
It also uses some lines from the torture scene from Col Sun, as Bond begins his escape you can see the drills positioning themselves to drill out Bond’s eyes !
I simply love Bond’s escape from the villain’s compound. There’s just something about a Man in a white shirt firing a machine gun protecting a lady. That simply fills me with so many nostalgic memories of all those spy films from the 60s.
The final sequence back in London, is equally exciting. The safe house with the well know name to Bond fans, was a nice little touch. I was genuinely surprised to see the scar on the villains’ Face, I wasn’t expecting that. One last battle and Bond drives off with his latest romantic conquest.
I enjoyed spectre more the second time of watching, and was able to make a note of some of the little things that, just “tweaked my nipple of enjoyment “ ……….
As Bond and pretty lady are about to leave the lift in Mexico, they sway to the music.
I only realised that the laser attached to Bond’s gun wasn’t for targeting but rather was his vibration bug to hear the conversation.
Q, …… I just love the character. Congratulations to Ben for making the role his own.
Bond giving a friendly wave to one of the spectre thugs at the graveyard.
In the Villa as Bond and Monica are kissing and Bond explains he can help her. A tear rolls down her cheek, which I think is a way of showing that the lady has gone from despair, to having the chance of “Hope” being brought to her by Bond.
This may have been “Digitally” put in ( you can’t tell these days) but I prefer to believe this is just a consummate actress giving a role, everything she’s got !
The Car chase, so many funny moments, but especially Bond intrigued by who is in Moneypenny’s flat .
I’m very happy with spectre, it’s now my #2 Craig bond ( after CR), I have read about plot holes etc, But To be honest.
I’m not an educated guy ( as my spelling and grammar proves) my love for the Bond films and books, comes from my gut!, I’m not really interested in picking faults, I had a great night out, I enjoyed my self. So a big thanks to all at EON, the cast and crew, office staff etc, for letting me into Bond’s world for a few hours, and making me feel nine years old again. -{
I went to see it for the second time last night and it certainly is better second time round. I felt I could relax more and take more in. There are so many tiny things I missed first time round that are certainly not in there by accident. They've certainly put everything into this film.
I'm going to give it my final viewing on Saturday and I'm almost as excited as I was for my first! I just love Bond! :007)
And enjoying your podcasts like always JBR! Love the 30 days of SPECTRE concept!
YouTube channel Support my channel on Patreon Twitter Facebook fanpage
Second viewing tonight in odeon isense Birmingham.
Best conclusion statement so far which I agree with
Thunderpussy:
my love for the Bond films and books, comes from my gut!, I’m not really interested in picking faults, I had a great night out, I enjoyed my self. So a big thanks to all at EON, the cast and crew, office staff etc, for letting me into Bond’s world for a few hours, and making me feel nine years old again. ajb007/martini
I thought it was a good bond film with some solid moments but I wasn't wowed by it, last movie that I was in awe of was Interstellar.
My biggest problem was something I predicted with a great deal of concern almost a year ago - specifically regarding Blofeld's motivations and the effective rewriting of Bond's history. The film just didn't need Bond and Blofeld to effectively be half brothers...what did this add?! Nothing in my opinion, yet another example again of trying to "make it personal" to Bond and this alienated me in the process.
Otherwise great, though the climax was something of an anti-climax, if you will.
I also don't see that Bond and Swann riding off together means they are hitched, no more than when Bond and Goodhead flew around the Earth at the end of Moonraker...
Monica Bellucci gives it her all, like Severine, she gives her best performance in a shortened role. She's memorable
Like your new Avatar Thunderpussy..
I find that interesting as I'm completely the other way round: underwhelmed with Interstellar but loved Spectre. I would be delighted for C Nolan to direct a Bond one day even though the only film of his I really like is Inception.
Opinions eh? Would be a boring world if we all agreed all of the time.
Btw did anyone catch Hinx's final words? I missed what he said before he departed the train.