Bond-Spectre

[Aztek463]

I'll do my best Neg

It's hard to make promises when Sam Smith's music is known for making pants suddenly go flying off their owners.*

*Not really.

 

[MusicEd921]

It's hard to make promises when Sam Smith's music is known for making pants suddenly go flying off their owners.*

*Not really.

Ugh his Bond song will be making bricks suddenly go flying at him

 

[Aztek463]

Ugh his Bond song will be making bricks suddenly go flying at him

That's okay, he doesn't like singing it anyways.

 

[dangermouse]

Yup, I saw that interview. And he did well in singing it, but the falsetto is a nice way to ruin a fairly decent song. When he sings without falsetto, he can sing. So I don't know why he uses falsetto. in no universe does a falsetto sound good. Only Morten Harket (AHA) got away with it, and even then....
I predict the song will be the first to go in a fanedit!

 

[TM2YC]

I predict the song will be the first to go in a fanedit!

You heard it here. No edits allowed to the opening Mexico sequence that preceeds the song .

I heard/read a lot of comments that 'Spectre' has "Gigantic plot holes that you could drive a ->insert name of large vehicle here<- through and that the whole story made zero sense". I didn't really notice any that I recall, so I'm curious to know what these people are referrring to? IF YOU DO KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION SPOILER TAG IT!

 

[Aztek463]

I heard/read a lot of comments that 'Spectre' has "Gigantic plot holes that you could drive a ->insert name of large vehicle here<- through and that the whole story made zero sense". I didn't really notice any that I recall, so I'm curious to know what these people are referrring to? IF YOU DO KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION SPOILER TAG IT!

"Plot hole" is the new buzzword for "parts of a movie that weren't over-explained." One of the more popular ones is "How did Bruce Wayne get back to Gotham in The Dark Knight Rises?" That's simply a question, a valid one sure, but not a plot hole.

 

[dangermouse]

Woo! Finally saw and my initial impression is that it is fantastic, maybe the best Craig Bond, and close to From Russia with Love which is my favourite.
I loved the pacing of the movie: the fact that we had time to absorb the relationships, see the locations, feel what was going on. Great stuff.
Needs another viewing to give it a proper assessment.

Reveal message

Have to say though, that I really thought Tracey, I mean, Madeline was going to be shot in the back by Blofeld! Am very glad they didn't go that route.
But - did anyone watch righ to the end? Did they or did they not say "James Bond will return".
Is this the end for Bond? Or just for Craig? Or will they just kill Tracey to kick start the next film?

 

[TM2YC]

Starts off funny, begins to get annoying and then gets really funny again like all the best repititious jokes...

 

[theslime]

"Plot hole" is the new buzzword for "parts of a movie that weren't over-explained." One of the more popular ones is "How did Bruce Wayne get back to Gotham in The Dark Knight Rises?" That's simply a question, a valid one sure, but not a plot hole.

^^^A THOUSAND TIMES THIS. The giant hangup with plot holes (and in TV and comics: retcon) is destroying online film criticism.

 

[Aztek463]

Some retcons are okay to complain about. To take a comics example: there's a character in The Walking Dead who lost their hand fairly early on. To have that suddenly reappear and for everyone to act like it was there all along would be pretty lame. Same with undoing a major character's death (goodness knows there have been many)!

You have to take it all in context. But little small things (which clickbait articles love) are usually not worth the trouble of even pointing out.

 

[dangermouse]

Here's a fanedit idea:

Reveal message

When he's drilled by Blofeld, doesn't he say he'll lose his balance etc - but that never happens? I totally expected him to be swaying around and she'd have to get him out or he'd do something Bond-ish to get them out. But instead he becomes Rambo and shoots people in his shirt-sleeves - by far the weakest scene in the film.
A quick fix of that is simply to show them running out of the room, then shooting the gas pipe to set off the explosion. Have the guys at the helicopter start to react then cut to Bond picking them off. Run to 'copter.
The swaying could maybe be done with the camera - blurry, ringing in the ears after the explosions, making it look like they're swaying and she's supporting him?

On the same scene - why didn't the memory probe work? It went in - did Bond do something to resist it or did Blofeld miss?

 

[LastSurvivor]

Okay, saw this at the weekend in London.... overall, I really enjoyed it and thought it was better than Skyfall. However, on a personal level I didn't like the attempts to....

Reveal message

try and tie all the Daniel Craig Bond films together. I mean, I get Quantum perhaps being part of Spectre, but to try and get Le Chiffe and Silva in there too, hmmmm, didn't like it. To me it prevented Spectre from having an identity of its own and the film suffers for it.

Plus, Blofeld being a kind of brother to Bond??? Hated that too

Well, should I find time next year, I think I know what I may well be fanediting

 

[TM2YC]

In response ^...

Reveal message

on a personal level I didn't like the attempts to try and tie all the Daniel Craig Bond films together. I mean, I get Quantum perhaps being part of Spectre

I always kinda imagined Quantum was part of Spectre, so it felt right for me.

Plus, Blofeld being a kind of brother to Bond??? Hated that too

Agreed, I thought the idea was dumb and cliched but I could maybe have lived with it, if the film had done anything with the idea on any level.

Well, should I find time next year, I think I know what I may well be fanediting

Good. This film really need some rescoring IMO (Mostly to add the Bond-Theme to those Bond-Theme appropriate moments where it was crying out for it) and you are a master at rescoring Bond based on previous edits.

 

[theslime]

Some retcons are okay to complain about. To take a comics example: there's a character in The Walking Dead who lost their hand fairly early on. To have that suddenly reappear and for everyone to act like it was there all along would be pretty lame. Same with undoing a major character's death (goodness knows there have been many)!

Sure, some are stupid. But in TV shows, it's really hard to make a show for several years without screwing up some aspect of continuity. The obsessions with details and retcon made Lost fans into pedantic assholes, while (strangely) Breaking Bad got away with retconning not just key parts of the plot, but even the setup to the ending itself (which Gilligan, unlike Lindelof and Cuse, literally made up as he went along). Gilligan basically says that planning everything in advance all the time is limiting the options you have to make the show better later on, and I agree with him. If Aaron Paul hadn't had such great chemistry with Cranston, he would have been killed off in the first season finale (as was the original plan), and we can all agree that that would have been a terrible waste. My other favourite retcons: the entire character of Benjamin Linus from Lost, and the Black Lodge of the Twin Peaks finale.

Retcons in comics are a special breed, they're mostly there because the continuity porn crowd would go ape (even moreso than usual, that is) if there wasn't a reason for a character's reappearance after death. I'm of the opinion that continuity across a wide variety of stories every month - and for decades! - is basically a fool's errand, but I see the appeal too. That said, I do enjoy continuity-spanning stories like Final Crisis and the original "Flash of Two Worlds!" story, so I guess I'm really just a hypocrite.

 

[Nimibro]

Sure, some are stupid. But in TV shows, it's really hard to make a show for several years without screwing up some aspect of continuity. The obsessions with details and retcon made Lost fans into pedantic assholes, while (strangely) Breaking Bad got away with retconning not just key parts of the plot, but even the setup to the ending itself (which Gilligan, unlike Lindelof and Cuse, literally made up as he went along). Gilligan basically says that planning everything in advance all the time is limiting the options you have to make the show better later on, and I agree with him. If Aaron Paul hadn't had such great chemistry with Cranston, he would have been killed off in the first season finale (as was the original plan), and we can all agree that that would have been a terrible waste. My other favourite retcons: the entire character of Benjamin Linus from Lost, and the Black Lodge of the Twin Peaks finale.

Retcons in comics are a special breed, they're mostly there because the continuity porn crowd would go ape (even moreso than usual, that is) if there wasn't a reason for a character's reappearance after death. I'm of the opinion that continuity across a wide variety of stories every month - and for decades! - is basically a fool's errand, but I see the appeal too. That said, I do enjoy continuity-spanning stories like Final Crisis and the original "Flash of Two Worlds!" story, so I guess I'm really just a hypocrite.

I completely agree with you, after years of linear story-telling getting some stuff wrong is probably inevitable and in the end retcons are probably inevitable as well.

I do get why retcons have a bad rep though - in a lot of mediums (especially comics) it seems like a cheap tool to escape from consequences or reset the status quo ("One More Day" would be a good example), but it is pretty nifty when used correctly (Grant Morrison is a pro at this for example).

 

[Aztek463]

Sure, some are stupid. But in TV shows, it's really hard to make a show for several years without screwing up some aspect of continuity. The obsessions with details and retcon made Lost fans into pedantic assholes, while (strangely) Breaking Bad got away with retconning not just key parts of the plot, but even the setup to the ending itself (which Gilligan, unlike Lindelof and Cuse, literally made up as he went along). Gilligan basically says that planning everything in advance all the time is limiting the options you have to make the show better later on, and I agree with him. If Aaron Paul hadn't had such great chemistry with Cranston, he would have been killed off in the first season finale (as was the original plan), and we can all agree that that would have been a terrible waste. My other favourite retcons: the entire character of Benjamin Linus from Lost, and the Black Lodge of the Twin Peaks finale.

Retcons in comics are a special breed, they're mostly there because the continuity porn crowd would go ape (even moreso than usual, that is) if there wasn't a reason for a character's reappearance after death. I'm of the opinion that continuity across a wide variety of stories every month - and for decades! - is basically a fool's errand, but I see the appeal too. That said, I do enjoy continuity-spanning stories like Final Crisis and the original "Flash of Two Worlds!" story, so I guess I'm really just a hypocrite.

Having a long term plan can be a blessing and a curse. It's okay to have an outline, but you don't want to be too detailed so you can grow your story and characters. Even when I do a preliminary cutlist for a fan edit, not everything is set in stone. As for Breaking Bad: Aaron Paul worked out wonderfully, so it would have been a waste killing him off. That said, if he hadn't been as good or didn't click with Bryan Cranston as much (or at all) losing him wouldn't have been that big of a loss so early in the series.

To me, there is no reason apart from flashbacks for a character to appear after death.

 

[Nimibro]

Just saw it, and while it was a lot better than Quantum of Solace, it was really, really uneven as a film. Most of the films in these series had a certain role in James' character arc (Casino Royale was the introduction and first steps, Skyfall was a deconstruction etc.) but i really didn't get if the film wanted to explore Bond's nature as a killer and if he can live a normal life or just do a fun homage to the earlier films. In general it kinda felt like this film was a response to all the people who didn't like the new films for not being like "the old ones".

There were a lot of really good components in this film, things like the opening sequence

I won't be suprised if this would get fan-edited down the line because there's so much to cut or change, i did do my own mental cutlist in the theater:

Reveal message

• For the love of all that is sacred, Sam Smith's song. Something like Muse or even David Bowie could work i dunno, even a different Sam Smith song for all i care.
• The MI5/Denbigh subplot is unnecessary, and feels like the Mallory subplot from Skyfall even though it's probably the only way the peripheral characters (M, Q, Moneypenny) do anything.
• The romance between Lea Seydoux and Bond needs to be way more gradual, in the film one scene they're on good terms and the next she's really into him for some reason. And then after they dispose of the bad guy they (almost comically) jump eachother to Sam Smith's tune.
• Blofeld's relation to Bond just doesn't work on so many levels, it's one thing to try and make him stand on his own but it undercuts the last 3 films in the franchise almost completely, which is sad because Waltz was on his a-game.

I think the main problem with the film is that conceptually, it's entirely lost. If it tries to do the same kind of de-construction it did with Skyfall, only this time testing James' ability to lead a normal life, it doesn't work at that at all. Some interesting approaches (although less practical) would be:

• Keep Bond and Blofeld brothers, but somehow have it play out so both of them are on a set path because of their parents' death. IE both of them are acting on what they consider their nature, and instead of Blofeld killing his dad and becoming a supervillain because plot, it would make him a man scarred by circumstance - like Bond.
• Cut the Blofeld as Bond's Brother subplot, but (maybe using other Christoph Waltz films) imply that his end goal is almost entirely philantrophic - Have Blofeld believe in the righteousness of whatever Spectre's cause is. From a different perspective, you have a hired assasin trying to kill a noble philantrohist.
• Somehow use Spectre/Blofeld as an analogy for the filmmakers/audience - Using the fact that the last 3 films were all orchestrated and have the film be Bond's existential crisis - is he just a character, running around just to entertain a veilled audience watching him from afar?

These are all really impractical but i think on a scriptwriting level they could have made for a more interesting film.

On a technical level, the film had a weird green tint to it most of the time. A regrade of this film could really benefit it because it's otherwise beautiful.

 

[DominicCobb]

Caught this last night and have had the chance to mull it over since. Bottom line, I loved it, but I have some specific issues.

Reveal message

For the most part the film works almost without issue until they get off the train in the desert. Then things start to derail. The problem is the stakes just aren't that great in the finale. I think they were trying to go for an emotional finale like Skyfall, the problem was the emotion just wasn't quite there. There were some interesting ideas that were hinted at, but ultimately Bond was challenged enough as a character/human being.

What they should have done was they had this whole theme of family throughout, but it should have been developed more. Post-Skyfall Bond should have become more insular and forsaken his colleagues on his new mission, blaming himself for M's death. Of course no man is an island and all that and Bond has people who care for him and he cares for them, so at the end of the film Blofeld should have them all tied up at MI6 (not just Swann, but M, Moneypenny, Q, and Tanner). They also sort of hinted that Bond's going for a real relationship at the end so if they did a little more about how he is afraid of commitment after Vesper it would have made his choice at the end more powerful.

Couple other little bits. Didn't mind the C bits but I feel like a lot of those scenes were repeating the same bits. Also, surely they were about a rewrite away from having the UK vote against his surveillance program and having a terror attack in London be the climactic set piece? Also random idea but while watching I thought C was going to end up being Blofeld's son and then kill him and take his place at the end of the film.

Like many I wasn't super happy about the Bond and Blofeld brothers aspect (or that Blofeld was retroactively behind it all), but I don't think I would have minded it too much if his plot and motivations made more sense.

So a weak third act but for the most part this was a super fun ride. Probably not as good as Casino Royale or Skyfall but much better than Quantum of Solace and a lot of other films in the franchise. Especially love all the little callbacks and the humor.

Really looking forward to a fan edit that improves the score, that was my other big issue.

 

[DominicCobb]

On a technical level, the film had a weird green tint to it most of the time. A regrade of this film could really benefit it because it's otherwise beautiful.

Didn't notice any green tint. Don't think a regrade is necessary. This film is beautiful already.

 

[dangermouse]

Yes, Spectre was incredibly beautiful. Cinematography par excellence!