James Bond: 007 - Spectre - Part 10

[The Batman]

This movie has cemented my opinion that any time a divisive movie comes out, there will always be people essentially trying to discredit fan criticisms or jump through hoops to justify questionable story decisions.

 

[Golgo-13]

It might have played better if this film showed the rise of Spectre, as opposed to having the audience believe than Spectre had been around all along.

They could have written it so that, due to the reveal of Quantum in QoS, the organization had decided to change itself into something else under the guise that Quantum had been dismantled/disintergrated due to the growing number of government agencies now looking into them, and that's how Spectre was formed.

 

[samsnee]

I just realized this movie borrows a plot point from Austin Powers in Goldmember, which was a spoof if Bond movies.

The circle is complete.

 

[Schlosser85]

I don't see what's inherently silly about a scene where a guy is brutally executed for his failure.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I thought SPECTRE was a middle of the road Bond film. Somewhere in the Octopussy, Living Daylights, License to Kill, Tomorrow Never Dies range.

 

[Frodo]

Here's a quick scenario I'd like to run by you; would it have been a retcon if they had done something more linear to explain the connection? Something like:

- Quantum, which already connects Le Chifre and Greene, was mortally wounded as an organization by Bond after Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.
- We find out that Silva had support and networking with another organization in Skyfall, not that he was working for anyone, but that they supported him logistically so he could move up his timetable.
- Bond kills the guy in the opening, and escapes the Rome meeting to find Mr. White.
- Mr. White reveals that one of Quantum's surviving members managed to steal the remaining resources from White by allying himself with numerous more mundane criminal enterprises, and supplied Silva with aid for the sake of damaging and distracting MI-6. Thus, the Spectre of Quantum was born.

Because that kind of scenario seems like a way to retcon a connection between Skyfall and the rest but keep it more logical, with the escalation of damage between the participating parties leading to the Bond-Bloefeld feud, as opposed to trying to make all previous players chess pieces of a spiteful step-sibling.

I would've been fine with that , though I still think you'd have half the people complain because they don't like the retcon idea in general.

 

[The Shape]

One of the worst aspects of Spectre, for me, was the "love" story. It was extremely forced, happened too quick, and ultimately made little sense.

 

[Frodo]

It might have played better if this film showed the rise of Spectre, as opposed to having the audience believe than Spectre had been around all along.

They could have written it so that, due to the reveal of Quantum in QoS, the organization had decided to change itself into something else under the guise that Quantum had been dismantled/disintergrated due to the growing number of government agencies now looking into them, and that's how Spectre was formed.

The great thing about the Connery films is that Spectre played out over several films , so by the time audiences saw OHMSS , the audience knew that it was all connected because they were all connected , save Goldfinger.

 

[godisawesome]

I don't see what's inherently silly about a scene where a guy is brutally executed for his failure.

Technically, the guy was killed because he didn't realize that in a group of drug traffickers and human slavers, "civil debate as to someone's adequacy at their job" translates to "a human tank is going to gouge out your eyes with his snap-on thumbnails, then break your neck so he can take your job."

Failure had nothing to do with it here.

I just realized this movie borrows a plot point from Austin Powers in Goldmember, which was a spoof if Bond movies.

The circle is complete.

And this is what made it inherently funny to a lot of us. Being able to see the exact outcome to every scenario, down to the unnecessary ones (like the Spectre base spontaneously combusting for no reason and there being no adequate threat outside of Hinx), and having seen Mike Myers make fun of it deadens almost any ability to take such things seriously.

So we look for the twists to the formula, like Kingsman's irreverent tone and extreme action. Playing it straight simply won't cut it with some audience members anymore.

 

[The Batman]

I thought SPECTRE was a middle of the road Bond film. Somewhere in the Octopussy, Living Daylights, License to Kill, Tomorrow Never Dies range.

I agree. The only thing exceptional about it is the PTS.

 

[The Shape]

The great thing about the Connery films is that Spectre played out over several films , so by the time audiences saw OHMSS , the audience knew that it was all connected because they were all connected , save Goldfinger.

True.

It might have been better for this film to simply introduce and reinforce the idea of an organization like Spectre. Explain that Quantum was a division of Spectre, hint that some of Bond's previous missions were connected to Spectre, show how big and far-reaching Spectre is, and have him tackle some kind of mission against Spectre's efforts. However, leave Blofeld out of it for the most part (aside from maybe showing him from the neck down or hearing him speak), and make Bond 25 the big "Bond vs. Blofeld" film -- and also Craig's last Bond film.

 

[Loki882]

Here's a quick scenario I'd like to run by you; would it have been a retcon if they had done something more linear to explain the connection? Something like:

- Quantum, which already connects Le Chifre and Greene, was mortally wounded as an organization by Bond after Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.
- We find out that Silva had support and networking with another organization in Skyfall, not that he was working for anyone, but that they supported him logistically so he could move up his timetable.
- Bond kills the guy in the opening, and escapes the Rome meeting to find Mr. White.
- Mr. White reveals that one of Quantum's surviving members managed to steal the remaining resources from White by allying himself with numerous more mundane criminal enterprises, and supplied Silva with aid for the sake of damaging and distracting MI-6. Thus, the Spectre of Quantum was born.

Because that kind of scenario seems like a way to retcon a connection between Skyfall and the rest but keep it more logical, with the escalation of damage between the participating parties leading to the Bond-Bloefeld feud, as opposed to trying to make all previous players chess pieces of a spiteful step-sibling.

This would have made FAR more sense/been FAR more coherent/believable than what we got.

 

[Loki882]

I think that is completely ignoring the script issues though. Maybe Vaughn could have pulled off the film better and maybe he couldn't, I think the script needed to be more in order though. Dump the secret Brothers angle and hell make Monica Bellucci Blofeld instead of just getting Waltz to do a lesser version of his usual shtick. I stole the Bellucci idea from someone.

That would be me, but it's ok.

 

[Black Narcissus]

 

[Frodo]

True.

It might have been better for this film to simply introduce and reinforce the idea of an organization like Spectre. Explain that Quantum was a division of Spectre, hint that some of Bond's previous missions were connected to Spectre, show how big and far-reaching Spectre is, and have him tackle some kind of mission against Spectre's efforts. However, leave Blofeld out of it for the most part (aside from maybe showing him from the neck down or hearing him speak), and make Bond 25 the big "Bond vs. Blofeld" film -- and also Craig's last Bond film.

Yeah. That's why I would recommend to those who didn't like Spectre the film , but maybe found the concept of the Spectre group interesting, to watch Dr.No, From Russia with Love, Thunderball, and On Her Majesty's Secret Service , assuming haven't seen them yet.

If you're looking for another Skyfall, you won't find them in those films either, but if i'd recommend those films to at least get an idea of why the filmmakers feel Blofeld and Spectre are such a big deal in Bond mythos .

 

[TeeKay]

Ambiguous writing is not necessarily "poor writing".

And IF that's the case, they did it poorly. You're the only one bring up the whole "ambiguous writing" to justify the films poor screenplay.

Sometimes being ambigious, can in fact, be clever. I have explained why I feel this is. You are welcome to your opinion.

And the unnecessary retcons and trying to connect things ended up ultimately being a minor part of the film and having very little impact, it was certainly not enough to bring the film and its own plot down.

It certainly did for me and other people who have expressed their opinions in this thread. It made the villain weak and his motives a bit muddled and even head scratching at times.

This movie has cemented my opinion that any time a divisive movie comes out, there will always be people essentially trying to discredit fan criticisms or jump through hoops to justify questionable story decisions.

Agreed.

 

[Golgo-13]

Was anyone else weirded out by the octopus in the credit sequence? I got implications of beastiality watching that sequence.

 

[Frodo]

This film cemented for me that this is just a movie , and that no one is going to agree with you on a film a 100% of the time whether the film is divisive or not. Ultimately if you don't like it, you don't like it. If you do like it , you do like it. Its a matter of taste and everyone's tastes and expectations are different , even those who may agree with you. And truthfully, i've seen more strident discussion over Man of Steel than Spectre.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

If a movie isn't divisive, it's not any good.

 

[The Guard]

And IF that's the case, they did it poorly. You're the only one bring up the whole "ambiguous writing" to justify the films poor screenplay.

I'm not "justifying" anything. I'm referring to ambiguity in terms of one major element of the screenplay, the connections to past films, not to the ENTIRE script.

Not everything someone says contrary to your opinion is an excuse. I'm pointing out another point of view, and an angle that many have not considered.

I don't think the screenplay is poor. I think it's about average. Ambiguity is a tool storytellers use. You thinking it's poor in this case or that the results are poor doesn't change that other people can interpret things as they see fit, including interpreting it positively.

It certainly did for me and other people who have expressed their opinions in this thread. It made the villain weak and his motives a bit muddled and even head scratching at times.

Agreed.

Good for you. I think his motives are pretty clear. I see nothing "muddled" about them. He wants revenge, he hates Bond, and he desires power. It's not rocket science, and it's not exactly handled in a confusing manner within the film.

As for the rest, we could "Yuh huh" and "nuh uh" all day, but it won't change anything. Opinions are opinions.

You and several others choose to take a more black and white approach to screenwriting and to storytelling. I do not.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

One of the worst aspects of Spectre, for me, was the "love" story. It was extremely forced, happened too quick, and ultimately made little sense.

Yeah, I thought it fell flat. I think for that aspect of the story and the ending of the film to work that they needed to do a good job with the love story and it just wasn't there. It was rushed and there wasn't any real chemistry between Craig and Seydoux. I'm not even asking for something as amazing as Bond/Tracy or Bond/Vesper, but it at least needed a relationship as believable as Bond/Kara Milovy or Bond/Melina Havelock.

In general I thought the exploration of vengeance and what it does to a person's soul that drives much of this film was handled much better in For Your Eyes Only.

 

[Hunter Rider]

 

[A Necessary Evil]

Probably will see this for a 3rd time next week.

 

[Sebastos]

First, oui oui Léa. Second, I'll be seeing this on Sunday.

 

[gwynplaine]

Great Bond film, definitely in my top 5.