Bond #24: SPECTRE

Oh and yes the theme song for this one is COMPLETE AND UTTER GARBAGE like a perfect example of throwaway bond theme trash, where Adele's Skyfall should probably be right there with Goldfinger or Thunderball as a classic regardless of the franchise, this one is just absolute effluvium on its face. IT WON AN OSCAR because our society is a self-congratulating compost pile.

^^ all OTM except you should have hated it. it didn't think much of its audience.

...Adele's theme song?

Sam Smith's, isn't it (Spectre)?

https://media.giphy.com/media/Go3UGSproOkg0/giphy.gif

Adele's theme is a worse offender

Adele's theme is the very worst theme of the franchise

Adele's theme feels like 1/3 strength watered-down Bond theme pastiche but Smith's is actively atrocious probably beating Cornell's for worst

ha xpost

I like Cornell's. And I don't mind Adele's, though it's not doing anything interesting with the format.

Adele's song is fine. Not great, not terrible.

Sam Smith's would be better if he could still sing it.

Adele's song entire recorded output is fine. Not great, not terrible.

Rolling In The Deep is a banger, the pastiche of Skyfall beats the forgettableness of most of the last 30 years' efforts

That's what I'm saying

although the Duran Duran one wasn't exactly forgettable

now i'm going to have view to a kill stuck in my head again

I've a big soft spot for the A-ha, the Living Daylights being the first Bond I saw in the cinema prob has a lot to do with it.

since duran duran the only ones i'd put above adele are a-ha, gladys knight, and maybe garbage

was really hoping for more Belluci in this movie

although the Duran Duran one wasn't exactly forgettable

It was outside the 30-year window, boom guess what you're old, Mr Bond. Are your joints aching? Is your drive fading?

Skyfall is the best Adele song.

are you here to mess up this thread like the political one with your weird opinions?

This was shockingly bad, really. Just really hollow and boring and badly acted - Batuista's the single good performance but he doesn't get enough scenes. Highlight was Andrew Scott's Wile E Coyote arm-waving as he suspends in the air before plummeting to his death.

Mostly I was just curious about how Bond escapes the exploding M16 building at the end. So - Blofeld has taken the time to make little photostats of Bond's old buddies but he... leaves a giant net for Bond to jump into and save himself? Why is there a net at the bottom of the building anyway?

This is bad and dumb (and anything good about it the new Mission Impossible did a million times better) but I liked and respected it more than Skyfall. PRobably because it's the most phoned in movie Sam Mendes has ever done, meaning it's less Sam Mendes-y.

anything good about it the new Mission Impossible did a million times better

otm, new MI was really good

It's still too Sam Mendes-y!
If his uniting shtick seems to be "look pretty, don't sweat about massive holes, here's a jerk man for your enjoyment!" that seems to be consistent since American Beauty.

*plot holes

Mendez is utter waste

His best bond is still prob the second one, which had zero highlights and far fewer absolutely stupid holes or do-you-see moments and could have passed for a moore-era frippery as opposed to nolanisation of the franchise

New MI is the absolute balls and shouldve swept the oscars

I like how the M:I movies have elaborate setpieces. The Bond movies just go, "Let's do another motorboat bit," or "We could set it in MEXICO."

This was by favourite bad line/tautology, which apparently someone thought was good enough to use as a PR pullquote:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQPtb5wWEAE4CNl.jpg

looks like a magazine ad for an offshore bank

http://youtu.be/v9DmcxIZ_fA

this movie was just so grim. in casino royale everyone seemed to be having so much fun, this one seemed so bored with itself. it wasn't *boring* exactly, there was a lot to like here and there. mexico city tracking shot, bond's quick escape from the 'eyes wide shut' party, lea seydoux, dave bautista...but idk. the fact that everything in the craig movies has to be tied together, and not just tied together but personally related to bond's childhood, and in such a gloomy way. ugh who cares, more international intrigue and less 'the creepy kid i knew when i was a kid grew up into the world's most destructive troll'.

Why is there a net at the bottom of the building anyway?

Because the building was in the process of being demolished and it was presumably there to catch demolition rubble.

I think it was because they were still using the boat dock and there was a giant hole from the prior explosion that stuff kept falling through

source: the beginning where they're in the boat dock and James looks up and says "wow guess I won't get hit by any rocks today huh"

this movie was just so grim. in casino royale everyone seemed to be having so much fun, this one seemed so bored with itself. it wasn't *boring* exactly, there was a lot to like here and there. mexico city tracking shot, bond's quick escape from the 'eyes wide shut' party, lea seydoux, dave bautista...but idk. the fact that everything in the craig movies has to be tied together, and not just tied together but personally related to bond's childhood, and in such a gloomy way. ugh who cares, more international intrigue and less 'the creepy kid i knew when i was a kid grew up into the world's most destructive troll'.

― nomar, Wednesday, October 26, 2016 2:19 PM (twenty-eight minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this has been the problem w/ all the craig bond movies after casino imo

yeah. i've probably said this already itt but Casino Royale saved the franchise from death and the lesson they took was somehow not "make more good Bond movies" but "oh good everyone loves Bond again let's go right back to the shit that drove them away the first time"

Don't really agree with that. While the Craig movies have a lot of flaws (I despise the second and fourth installments), going for a more sad-faced, comic book-like serialized deep backstory was not what the old Bond films had to offer. For better or worse they reflect the time they were made, just like all the other Bond films.

Also, Skyfall is great. But we've been over this countless times. I hardly doubt it drove anyone away, though, it was an insane success on every level, right? Spectre was disappointing though.

skyfall is kinda bollocks but goddamn it looks amazing

basically the problem is that sam mendes is terrible and should be locked in a dungeon for the rest of his life

Well, mostly you're right, but he did make Skyfall, so he's not entirely terrible.

he's great at hiring cinematographers!

Watched Casino Royale recently - it's actually way more cheerful and cheesey than I remembered - much closer Goldeneye than Skyfall. Wish they'd stayed on that course.

Re: the cinematography - the only other Bond film with great art direction is OHMSS - that's a great looking film. Skyfall looks more like... semi-professional Instagram. And the opening sequence to Spectre is so ugly and incoherent.

i think you've got the direction of influence backwards with 'semi-professional Instagram' - the extent that skyfall looks like instagram (which i'd argue is... not much) is more of a reflection of the influence of roger deakins on the art of photography than the other way round

I guess I'm using Instagram as shorthand for "pretty but affectless". That works for Barton Fink but I'm not sure it's the right choice for a Bond movie - and then the sumptuousness just ends up highlighting how pedestrian the script is.

Anyway - it's a fun film until Bardem shows up.

okay, i see where you're coming from - the script is pretty dire but i can't knock deakins for putting together some beautiful-looking sequences. i'd say all sam mendes' films are 'pretty but affectless' to greater or lesser degrees, and the 'pretty' part is kinda mostly down to working with great cinematographers.

The script gets out of the way and allows the images and the scenery to tell the story. I love how the hunt for Bardem goes. Bond takes out bullets from shoulder 'oh, only three guys in the world uses this kind of bullet and one of them is in Shanghai -> Amazing but kinda pointless action sequence in Shanghai, at the end of which Bond finds a casino chip 'oh, this chip comes from a casino in Macao' -> Cool but kinda pointless action sequence in Macao, at the end of which Bond just jumps on a boat that takes him to Bardem... It's effective as hell and makes no sense at all. But who cares about making sense when you got neon?

Also, it's not just pretty pictures. Skyfall is about anxieties of empire, it's no coincidence that Bond travels to the east-west hotspots Shanghai and Macao, and then goes to an island Japan managed to fuck up on it's own.

i think the golden age bonds are about the anxieties of empire; skyfall was about the anxieties of making a bond movie after bourne and batman

also about showcasing premium products with attractive people in exotic locales

another thing that bothered me, maybe not in another Bond film but in this one, was that he was told to stand down and then decides the best way to exercise caution and keep a low profile is to drive a stolen prototype car to Italy. from england!

man the Brosnan bonds where they had to shoehorn in bullshit Ford-era Jaguars were some awkward product placements