Spectre review

[cato]

You have got to be kidding... the whole movie made no sense and you never felt anything for any character throughout. The action was fun but everything else was just so awful

I loved the movie, and not because of the action. It was the personification of my ninth grade English teacher's advice: show, don't tell.

The plot was not complicated, but it made perfect sense to me. And I was entirely on Furiosa's side by the end. Dialogue is not the be all, end all. Charlize Theron was impressive as the lead. She absolutely made that movie work.

[Edouble]

Well, Oscar contenders generally want universal, wide critical acclaim because that is one of the ways a picture becomes a leading Oscar contender. But, I wasn't literally saying the films cared about their score, just making the point that 94% is the kind of number one would see from an Oscar contender. Here are the RT scores of last year's Best Picture contenders.

Selma - 99%
Boyhood - 98%
Whiplash - 94%
Birdman - 92%
Grand Budapest - 92%
Imitation Game - 90%
Theory of Everything - 80%
American Sniper - 72%

So, as you can see, from the initial 94% for Spectre, one would have expected it to be some kind of cinematic masterpiece. As I said, I disliked it more than others but I doubt there is anyone (not being paid by Sony) who would call this one of the finest films of the year.

Ah... Oscar contenders.

You said "Best Picture Oscar winners", which is completely different. Had you said Oscar contenders I would have inferred everything you wrote above and I never would have written my post.

[-jk]

The Longest Day had four directors IIRC -- not sure how many screenwriters.

Wasn't that a deliberate choice to both speed production and give tangibly different feels to each point of view?

-jk

[OldPhiKap]

Wasn't that a deliberate choice to both speed production and give tangibly different feels to each point of view?

-jk

I think so. And, of course, because it is crazy long. (And a D-Day tradition for about 40 years, now with my son)

[Olympic Fan]

Perhaps it's just confirmation bias, but multiple screenwriters always seems to be the kiss of death. Have there been good movies with 4 screenwriters?

Well, there is this film I like that started with an unperformed play written by two authors -- Murray Brandt and Joan Alison. The brothers Julius and Philip Epstein worked on the screenplay for awhile. When they left for another project, Howard Koch took over. Then a hack named Casey Robinson revised the entire script. Then the Epstein brothers returned and helped finish the script, coming up with the key plot development to save movie. But the famous last line of the film was composed entirely by the film's producer.

Casablanca should have been a mess. But it did pretty well despite four screenwriters (five if you credit Hal Wallis for the line "Louie, this could be the start of a beautiful friendship." ... seven if you include Brandt and Alison -- much of their work remains in the script).

Then there is Gone With the Wind, which also did pretty well.

Sidney Howard wrote the first version of the script. Then Ben Hecht was brought in to revise it. David O. Selznick, the producer, re-wrote huge segments of it. John Van Druten and Jo Swerling also did large parts of it. That's five screenwriters (even though Howard was the only one credited -- and that was done to honor him as he died just before the film was published).

GWTW also had four directors -- George Cukor started it. Victor Fleming did the bulk of the work (and got the official credit) and Sam Wood finished it up. In addition, William Cameron Menzies, the art director, directed the famous burning of Atlanta scene.

So sometimes multiple contributors do work.

[Dukeface88]

The Longest Day had four directors IIRC -- not sure how many screenwriters.

According to IMDB, 1 screenwriter and 4 "additional episodes written by". I assume that means they were writing separate story lines, which they could get away with since many of the plots and characters don't directly interact. Plus they were all presumably working off Ryan's book, so they couldn't go too crazy. Although it might help explain how the French commandos got the biggest set piece of the movie while the Canadians, who played a much larger role, don't get a single scene if the former were someone's pet project.

[BD80]

According to IMDB, 1 screenwriter and 4 "additional episodes written by". I assume that means they were writing separate story lines, which they could get away with since many of the plots and characters don't directly interact. Plus they were all presumably working off Ryan's book, so they couldn't go too crazy. Although it might help explain how the French commandos got the biggest set piece of the movie while the Canadians, who played a much larger role, don't get a single scene if the former were someone's pet project.

The Canadians were too polite to whine. The French brought wine ...

[weezie]

Well, they're putting the full court press on publicity-wise. At least that means more Daniel Craig sightings...
Gosh, he is epic-handsome.

[Reisen]

Well, they're putting the full court press on publicity-wise. At least that means more Daniel Craig sightings...
Gosh, he is epic-handsome.

I was in London for 7 days last month, and then spent an additional week split between Milan and Paris. I saw an absolute ton of ATL advertising for Spectre. London was, of course, crazy, but even Italy and France had a fair amount.

I also spent some time in both Canada and Hong Kong. Didn't seen nearly as much there, so it seems Europe is the (obvious) focus.

[Udaman]

Saw it today. As I sat there about half way through the movie I thought (and this is true) "I wonder if JE feels the same way I do about this movie so far. He must. Right?"

Then I got to the end and came back to my computer. And...

BINGO

I thought it was...in a word...awful. The bad guy made no sense. The plot made no sense. The locations made no sense. The "root evil" made no sense. The torture scene made no sense. The background story made no sense. The secondary bad guy (and how he came to power) made no sense.

And the action? So completely unbelievable it was laughable. Helicopter out of control but doesn't crash (and flies upside down several times)? Check. Crash landing an airplane that doesn't kill you? Check. Getting hit in a side impact that would definitely kill everyone in the car, but doesn't? Check. Villain having the chance to kill Bond, but instead doing something stupid? Check.

And the romance scenes? My God they were ridiculous. As JE said the opening one was like a class in bad acting and writing. And the main woman is easily young enough to be his daughter (and there was no chemistry at all).

There was one - one - scene that I enjoyed in the movie. A cool fight on a train. That's it. And it after it ends the next scene was so predictable and corny that I was laughing before, during and after. This was the worst Bond movie I've ever seen. By far. Kingsman was much, much, MUCH better. Not even close. I would say ten times better, but ten times zero is zero.

There's only one thing that JE and I disagree on. I think there's a chance (small one mind you, but a chance) it doesn't make the Top 6. There is nobody (and I mean NOBODY) who will go see this a second time. And it's long. 30 minutes too long at least. No repeat business. No word of mouth. It might make $80M in it's opening weekend. But it's going to fall 60% + next weekend, and the weekend after that Hunger Games will come in and smoke everything. It probably will end up in the Top 6...I think there's a chance it doesn't.

Man this movie was bad.

[cspan37421]

...
Casablanca should have been a mess. But it did pretty well despite four screenwriters ...

Then there is Gone With the Wind, which also did pretty well.

... So sometimes multiple contributors do work.

Well, this is the time when (a different) ignorant person would say, "Those are the exceptions that prove the rule" - which makes no sense in the modern sense of prove, but of course the phrase means to test the rule. So the "rule" actually fails.

I suppose I've just noticed lately that "multiple writers" is often the cause of death for (recent) bad movies. Apparently it's not a universal death sentence, at least not if you go well back in film history.

But as the saying goes, "Ever since I heard about confirmation bias, I've been seeing it everywhere!"
(Jon Ronson?)

[cspan37421]

I thought it was...in a word...awful.

Hasn't Daniel Craig been recently making negative remarks about his own feelings regarding playing Bond? I wonder if he knew this would be a stinker. Much more recently he's been playing ball, marketing wise, but a couple months ago I recall his attitude being far more negative. Perhaps a change will come sooner rather than later. But my guess is they need to change writers more than they need to change actors.

[sagegrouse]

The Canadians were too polite to whine. The French brought wine ...

The Canadians also got screwed out of credit in Argo.

[JasonEvans]

What's more, here is what some critics are saying about the film:

"A merely good-enough, but not great addition to the Bond canon." - Access Hollywood
"At heart it's another dopey Roger Moore outing, minus the dick jokes." - Metro
"Spectre is a film of sequences rather than sustained adventure." - The National
"wayward plotting and off-the-peg elements" - Sight and Sound
"At times clunky" - CinemaBlend.com
"Overlong and bloated" - We've Got This Covered
"Criminally overlong" - Irish Times
"For all its flaws, overreaching ambition and excessive running time..." - Radio Times
"The film lacks true substance" - IGN Movies
"It's easy to enjoy but hard to care about." - The List
"Let down by a weird mix of tone, a lack of plot and poorly defined characters." - WOW247

What do all these reviews have in common? They are all from critics who gave the film a positive rating on Rotten Tomatoes. This is what people who like the film are saying about it!

I continue to be amazed, as I read Rotten Tomatoes, at reviews that are classified as "positive" but contain tremendously negative comments about Spectre. It is almost like the critics want to support the film, but cannot quite get away from honestly pointing out its tremendous faults. In addition to the ones above, here are some more:

"Agent 007 needs to retire. There is nothing unique or original left to do with the franchise." - David Kaplan
"Unfortunately, Spectre is to Skyfall what Quantum of Solace was to Casino Royale; that is to say: less inspired in just about every way." - ScreenRant
"Spectre falls somewhere in the middle; it's not as routine as some of the Roger Moore films, but it falls short of the high standard set by the earlier Craig films and almost all the Connery films." - The Australian
"it spends so much time trying to fulfill its complex mandate that it's never able to enjoy itself." - Winnipeg Free Press
"Heavy on homage, short on originality." - Baton Rouge Advocate
"No Bond movie is as good as the first ten minutes of this Bond movie. The problem is there's 140 additional minutes of Bond movie that follow." - Student Edge
" it's a mishmash, leaving you shaken, not stirred." - New York Magazine
""Spectre" feels too much like a franchise in frustrating flux, which has more of a negative than positive effect." - Fox News

Again, these are the good reviews!

I was quite surprised to hear that Spectre had gotten an A- Cinemascore, which is obviously very solid. Apparently the audiences who go see it are not having the same negative reaction that I did (and Udaman shared). I guess I am not super surprised at that as the folks who go see it opening weekend are almost certainly die-hard Bond fans who will bask in all the references to past James Bond moments. There are certainly a number of aspects of Christoph Walz's bad guy that hearken back to images from very early in the Bond series when we were first getting to know Spectre as an organization which would be sorta fun for a fan of the series to enjoy, but is that really enough to give the movie a big thumbs up? Not for me... but perhaps for some other fans.

-Jason "looking like it is headed to about a $75 mil opening weekend -- very strong and, even if there is a 60% drop off next week, it will eventually be enough to put it in our Top 6 I believe" Evans

[Reisen]

I was quite surprised to hear that Spectre had gotten an A- Cinemascore, which is obviously very solid. Apparently the audiences who go see it are not having the same negative reaction that I did (and Udaman shared). I guess I am not super surprised at that as the folks who go see it opening weekend are almost certainly die-hard Bond fans who will bask in all the references to past James Bond moments. There are certainly a number of aspects of Christoph Walz's bad guy that hearken back to images from very early in the Bond series when we were first getting to know Spectre as an organization which would be sorta fun for a fan of the series to enjoy, but is that really enough to give the movie a big thumbs up? Not for me... but perhaps for some other fans.

Yep. Just got back from seeing it tonight. Jason and Udaman are on crack. It was very good. Not Casino Royale, but still held its own. A couple of observations (both reactions to things posted here, and other thoughts):

- The plot was fine. Good, even. I asked a few people who have seen it (including my wife, who saw it with me) what they thought of the film's plot, and they all enjoyed it. I honestly don't know how you could be lost about what was going on. It wasn't overly complicated.

- Bond's reason for going to each of the places couldn't be clearer. Rome, Switzerland, Tangiers, London; the film is all very clear about what he's after in each of those locations.

- We can't really talk in detail about what the bad guys are after without getting into spoilers, and the film just opened, so maybe we'll have another thread for that (or this thread in a week or two). I found it clear.

- I agree with Jason's sentiments about Monica Bellucci. Her part was too short.

- I was a little underwhelmed with Waltz, but my wife found him to be a great "creepy bad guy". I especially enjoyed what happened to him near the end. I thought the torture scene was intense in a good way.

- I agree that Bautista's lack of lines was annoying and silly. The scenes with him were fine, but his silence was distracting, and his only line was stupid.

- On the flip side, I was prepared not to like Seydoux (I haven't particularly liked her in other movies), but thought she was very good. The movie had a distinctly European feel, with a lot of spoken lines in other languages, and I liked the use of a French actress. I found her character compelling. She was quite sexy in Tangiers.

- I'll say this, you absolutely cannot complain about the action in this one being unbelievable and have liked Skyfall, or, for that matter, really any Bond movie. Getting hit in a side impact happens in just about every action movie, from Captain America 2, to the Bourne movies, to numerous Bond movies. The biggest complaint might be the airplane crash, but that was at least a cool and creative scene.

- In conclusion, the movie had enough depth, enough women, enough bad guys, enough cars, and enough action that I would easily see it again. I likely will over Thanksgiving. I think the A- Cinemascore will be representative of the film's general reception. It won't break records, but it will do fine, and will make our top 6.

[luvdahops]

Yep. Just got back from seeing it tonight. Jason and Udaman are on crack. It was very good. Not Casino Royale, but still held its own. A couple of observations (both reactions to things posted here, and other thoughts):

- The plot was fine. Good, even. I asked a few people who have seen it (including my wife, who saw it with me) what they thought of the film's plot, and they all enjoyed it. I honestly don't know how you could be lost about what was going on. It wasn't overly complicated.

- Bond's reason for going to each of the places couldn't be clearer. Rome, Switzerland, Tangiers, London; the film is all very clear about what he's after in each of those locations.

- We can't really talk in detail about what the bad guys are after without getting into spoilers, and the film just opened, so maybe we'll have another thread for that (or this thread in a week or two). I found it clear.

- I agree with Jason's sentiments about Monica Bellucci. Her part was too short.

- I was a little underwhelmed with Waltz, but my wife found him to be a great "creepy bad guy". I especially enjoyed what happened to him near the end. I thought the torture scene was intense in a good way.

- I agree that Bautista's lack of lines was annoying and silly. The scenes with him were fine, but his silence was distracting, and his only line was stupid.

- On the flip side, I was prepared not to like Seydoux (I haven't particularly liked her in other movies), but thought she was very good. The movie had a distinctly European feel, with a lot of spoken lines in other languages, and I liked the use of a French actress. I found her character compelling. She was quite sexy in Tangiers.

- I'll say this, you absolutely cannot complain about the action in this one being unbelievable and have liked Skyfall, or, for that matter, really any Bond movie. Getting hit in a side impact happens in just about every action movie, from Captain America 2, to the Bourne movies, to numerous Bond movies. The biggest complaint might be the airplane crash, but that was at least a cool and creative scene.

- In conclusion, the movie had enough depth, enough women, enough bad guys, enough cars, and enough action that I would easily see it again. I likely will over Thanksgiving. I think the A- Cinemascore will be representative of the film's general reception. It won't break records, but it will do fine, and will make our top 6.

Count me in your camp. Saw it last night with my 9-year old son (already a Bond fan). We both enjoyed it quite a bit, and had no real trouble following the plot.

To me, by far the worst thing about Spectre was the theme song, Sam Smith's "Writing on the Wall". I'm not a Smith fan generally, and don't care for his voice or think it is all that special. He is talented, though, and I can admit to liking some of his songs. But "Writing on the Wall" is an overwrought, melodramatic mess of a ballad that seems completely at odds with the tone of the movie.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Man this movie was bad.

BloomCountyReview.gif

[WV_Iron_Duke]

Am a Bond fan since the beginning having watched as a teen Ursula Andress swim out of the water in Dr. NO. I thought the plot was relatively easy to follow especially since I knew the background of the actor playing C. Loved the action scenes,especially the train fight, and the expanded role for Q.
What was disappointing was the lack of glamour scenes for the "Bond Girls". The lead only has one minute on the train. Despite the several "exotic" locales I so enjoy in Bond movies, the colors are mostly "washed out" and the color pallete for the entire movie somewhat bland and repetitive. One of the reasons I marked down Skyfall was because the last third of the movie was in the London subway and Scottish moors, not exactly exotic locales. But Skyfall as a blu-ray the picture is of "reference" quality. Spectre won't be a reference blu-ray because there just isn't that much to work with. The final action scenes were mildly disappointing. Entertaining to be sure but like Quantum of Solace a forgettable entry in the James Bond franchise.

[budwom]

yeah, after reading some of these reviews I expected something of a confusing, crummy movie, but instead found it to be decent entertainment (nothing more than that) with
a discernible plot. Fine by me, nice way to spend an afternoon with Mrs Womble, and who doesn't like a nice pile of dark chocolate non pareils???

[Tommac]

Saw Spectre last night and really enjoyed it. It's not really a stand alone Bond movie. You would greatly understand some of the plot and characters if you had already seen the other Craig Bond movies. I also get the feeling that it may really be Craig's last Bond. To me, Spectre was a dark movie. I preferred the mixture of drama, action and light comedy from some of the previous Bonds. I hope future Bonds lean more in that direction.