Read Mixed User Reviews for SPECTRE

6

JacobNov 27, 2015

Spectre is a fun film that follows the Bond formula and gives you everything you’d expect. The film does get a little too convoluted later on. There are a lot of twists and turns for an epilogue that is quite obvious. Nonetheless, the hero,Spectre is a fun film that follows the Bond formula and gives you everything you’d expect. The film does get a little too convoluted later on. There are a lot of twists and turns for an epilogue that is quite obvious. Nonetheless, the hero, villain, girl, etc. are all well done and the film is well shot. Regardless of length or convoluted the film is still worth it if only for the opening sequence, which might be the best thing in the film. Not as good as Skyfall but enjoyable.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

trooper1993Nov 6, 2015

The biggest flaw in this movie is the half-cooked script that probably was the result of good but unrelated bits and pieces stitched together in one single plot.

It's entertaining, yes. But for the amount of money they invested in it, IThe biggest flaw in this movie is the half-cooked script that probably was the result of good but unrelated bits and pieces stitched together in one single plot.

It's entertaining, yes. But for the amount of money they invested in it, I really can't see why they couldn't find a better script.… Expand

4 of 9 users found this helpful45

All this user's reviews

6

rob_vzDec 7, 2015

Great opening sequence before titles, but rest of the film was a relatively plotless hunt. Lots of nods to classic Bond set pieces, but ultimately a boring travelogue with guns.

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

ClariseSamuelsNov 24, 2015

Spectre is uneven to say the least. There are scenes that are everything Bond fans could wish for, and there are scenes that are borderline absurd. The most brilliant thing about Spectre is the pairing of Daniel Craig and the glamorous LéaSpectre is uneven to say the least. There are scenes that are everything Bond fans could wish for, and there are scenes that are borderline absurd. The most brilliant thing about Spectre is the pairing of Daniel Craig and the glamorous Léa Seydoux. Those two make a beautiful couple with the most intense romantic chemistry, and if Craig were not already married, one would swear that he fell in love on the set. Seydoux brings out the best in Craig.

Be that as it may, Spectre has glaring flaws. It would seem the producers, director, and writers had plenty of time to develop the script; nevertheless, the script is half-baked, and Craig does most of his acting during chase scenes and rescue scenes. His lines are terse and laconic, if not positively epigrammatic. Director Sam Mendes must have read the criticism about the female roles in Skyfall, because every Bond girl in Spectre (there are four of them!) is intelligent, fearless, and undeniably strong. Seydoux plays the main love interest in the role of Madeleine Swann, and although she fiercely denies being a damsel in distress, Bond has to rescue her at least three times (possibly four, if you count the train scene, where there is a question mark about who rescued whom). The first rescue scene in the Austrian Alps, where Swann is abducted by the bad guys, brings back the Bond of yore. Bond not only shows up on the tail of the bad guys who escape in their Range Rovers, but he is skillfully piloting a BN-2 Islander military plane commandeered on very short notice. Nothing in the script explains how he absconded so quickly with an airplane borrowed from the British Army. He simply shows up in the cockpit, and he proceeds to rescue Swann by crashing the plane. Unfortunately, it is precisely that kind of illogical plot with its preposterous premises that got Pierce Brosnan replaced by Craig in the Bond franchise.

Naomie Harris is back with a strong supporting role as Moneypenny. Ben Whishaw as Q has an improved persona, and he is no longer just the kid who still has “spots.” Ralph Fiennes continues as M, a role which he had just taken over at the end of Skyfall. He’s been rehearsing at home, it seems, because he has developed his M to perfection. Fiennes has turned M into a force to be reckoned with, at almost Oscar-level intensity and nearly out of place in a Bond film. We do not get to see enough of Monica Bellucci, now on record as the oldest Bond girl (age 50 at filming). She is dark, mysterious, and quintessentially beautiful, but her presence in Spectre is too brief. The fourth Bond girl is Stephanie Sigman, who hails from Mexico, and one suspects she nearly ended up on the cutting room floor. She shares an opening scene with Craig, who then leads her into a hotel room ostensibly to make love. Next thing she knows, he’s climbing out the window. She has one line for the entire film: “Where are you going?” And then she’s out. Christoph Waltz is not quite as evil as he was in Inglorious Bastards, but he gets scarier toward the end.

Mendes tries to pay homage to classic Bond, but his directorial heart is not in it. Bond mistakenly asks for a martini, shaken not stirred, at a health bar where he is instead served a green smoothie for vegans only. The classic Bond car shows up as a brand new Aston Martin DB10 intended for Agent 009, but Bond steals it and trashes the magnificent vehicle in a canal in Rome. When Bellucci’s character asks him his name, he doesn’t say it with his usual austerity because he is too busy kissing her, so he is still panting when he says, “Bond. James Bond.” Not the same effect.

Nevertheless, Craig is still handsome, dynamic, and charismatic. He’s good to go for another round, as long as he publicly apologizes for saying he would rather slit his wrists than play Bond again.… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

6

PunisherLHNov 6, 2015

Daniel Craig's 3rd best Bond Film, or 2nd Worst depending on how you want to look at it. My Main problem with this film is how they tried to link the 3 previous Bond Films to this one. It just didn't make much sense and was too unbelievableDaniel Craig's 3rd best Bond Film, or 2nd Worst depending on how you want to look at it. My Main problem with this film is how they tried to link the 3 previous Bond Films to this one. It just didn't make much sense and was too unbelievable and contradictory for me to be invested in the story. The lack of Christoph Waltz was very disappointing, as he only gets around 10-15 minutes screen time in a 150 minute film. I found the first hour and a half of the film to be pretty dull and boring, it picks up in the final hour and was quite enjoyable towards the end. It's better than Quantum Of Solace, but not as good as Casino Royale and definitely not as good as Skyfall.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

6

TyranianApr 11, 2019

Another decent entry in the never ending franchise, Spectre has good action though its story has issues.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

T-rodneyDec 1, 2015

Spectre was definitely a good film, but this is the case whereby the sequel did not pass it's predecessors . First of all the opening scene of the movie was great, it was well shot and fun but the tempo for the rest of the film went downhillSpectre was definitely a good film, but this is the case whereby the sequel did not pass it's predecessors . First of all the opening scene of the movie was great, it was well shot and fun but the tempo for the rest of the film went downhill from there.What this movie really had was solid performances, like Daniel Craig's performance as James Bond(gold as always), Benjamin Whishaw as Q was also good, and Ralph Fiennes as M who surprisingly filled Judi Dench shoes well, but Christoph Waltz as the villain was rather disappointing,he never really feels like he is part of the movie because his screen time is short and even when he is there he really didn't do much as Oberhauser(Blofeld), in the last act there was some hope, but all potential was wasted, don't get me wrong he wasn't a bad villain it's just that he didn't do much.The run-time of the film was okay for me, it didn't feel too long because of the chemistry between Léa Seydoux and Daniel Craig(even at times it felt a bit forced).Going in to this movie it was always going to be compared to Skyfall,which was amazing and going out of this film i wasn't as amazed, the plot was rather small compared to Skyfall making the risks not quite as big, which came off as a huge disappointment, but the film covered up with some one liner humour which the film pulled off so well and the action was okay not great but satisfying especially the car chase scenes which were awesome. Spectre was definitely not perfect, but i enjoyed this film, it tied up all of Daniel Craig's films neatly,came to a satisfying end, so overally not as great as Syfall but a good film in it's own right.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

MattyiceNov 6, 2015

While Spectre has its moments, specifically in the beginning and the end of the film, it ultimately falls flat. The film moves at a very sluggish pace, which leaves the audience terribly bored. Additionally, Christoph Waltz is completelyWhile Spectre has its moments, specifically in the beginning and the end of the film, it ultimately falls flat. The film moves at a very sluggish pace, which leaves the audience terribly bored. Additionally, Christoph Waltz is completely underutilized as a villain. He is in the film for a solid 10 minutes at disjointed scenes. However, Spectre does manage to keep the action (when it actually exists) intense and Craig is still a great 007. It's unfortunate that the Daniel Craig Bond era ends on a very "meh" note.… Expand

7 of 10 users found this helpful73

All this user's reviews

6

alexnodeFeb 13, 2016

The last two Films seemed that they were leading the franchise to an interesting place. Spectre went two steps back to "sex, run, crash with style and repeat". Really silly plot , nice style.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

NickLikesMoviesNov 14, 2015

... Overall, "Spectre" has great action scenes and beautiful cinematography, but falls flat in its writing and plot, and becomes one of the biggest disappointments of the year.

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

6

samichsupernovaDec 3, 2015

Disappointing. Craig is a great Bond but this script really felt tossed-together. I like the throwback quality to this film but attempts to ape some of Bond's better moments without properly motivating them fall flat. Waltz, Bellucci, andDisappointing. Craig is a great Bond but this script really felt tossed-together. I like the throwback quality to this film but attempts to ape some of Bond's better moments without properly motivating them fall flat. Waltz, Bellucci, and Bautista are all somewhat wasted. The two good action scenes are the opening sequence with the chopper and a bout with Bautista's character on the train. The car chase could and should have been done better. This film's high budget shows but it is lacking in the artistry fans expected, especially considering the good work Mendes did on Skyfall. Here the editing and cinematography are often at odds and the script is riddled with plot holes and inconceivable happenings. This film could have been so much better, but it simply lacks the layer of polish the other Craig Bond films had. Here's hoping Craig gets one more go as Bond as this was not a proper send-off.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

azgoodazDec 1, 2015

To be completely honest and straight forward. I'm not a Daniel Craig type of guy, I'm more of a Pierce Brosnan. Either way here is my honest review of Spectre.

The movie was kinda a let down. They should have upped the film rating fromTo be completely honest and straight forward. I'm not a Daniel Craig type of guy, I'm more of a Pierce Brosnan. Either way here is my honest review of Spectre.

The movie was kinda a let down. They should have upped the film rating from PG-13 to R to get more action/gory scenes in the movie that is usually limited by the PG-13 rating. I thought it had cliche moments, situations, and endings in the movie that you can probably guess what is going to happen next, even if you haven't watched the movie. In general, the movie did not feel like a James Bond film it felt more like a movie that separated itself from the series.

In sum, the movie needed more action. It did not have enough of gadgetry like how a James Bond film should have and more focused on adding 'fluff' to the storyline.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

jamessFeb 11, 2016

There are things to like about Spectre, and things that have grown stale. The opening Day Of The Dead scene was beautifully shot and well executed. The "one take" scene from the hotel room to the Mexican rooftops was very well done, but theThere are things to like about Spectre, and things that have grown stale. The opening Day Of The Dead scene was beautifully shot and well executed. The "one take" scene from the hotel room to the Mexican rooftops was very well done, but the helicopter fight went on a little long for my taste. The building collapse tried to recreate the Skyfall crane/train feeling, but felt a bit forced (nice landing on a convenient couch). So what happens? Bond gets suspended because of Mexico. What happens next? Bond goes rogue. AGAIN. How many Bond movies, hell, how many spy movies have the plot involving the agent going rogue? Almost every MI? 17 Bond movies? The train fight scene is a great throwback to the physical fistfights of the Connery days, and the car chase is slick, but somehow not as exciting as recent vehicle chases from the MI's or Bourne's. There's no sense of real danger. And that's about all there is to recommend. Much has been said about Craig sleepwalking through the role, and his slightly pursed-lip serious look gets a serious workout. Without Taratino's dialogue (just see The Green Hornet, The Three Musketeers, etc. or best..don't), Waltz is rather flat as the villain. Bellucci is wasted in her very small role for a two and half hour film. And that's the thing. Do we a two and half hour James Bond? About as much as we need a two and half hour Judd Apatow comedy. MI Rogue Nation told a better story, with better action and did it twenty minutes shorter.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

SergeantSozNov 19, 2015

People who are giving this a 10 are the people who don't understand the point of the 0 - 10 scale. If they hate it they give it a 0. If they love it they give it a 10. For me this was a good movie, but not a great movie. The opening scene wasPeople who are giving this a 10 are the people who don't understand the point of the 0 - 10 scale. If they hate it they give it a 0. If they love it they give it a 10. For me this was a good movie, but not a great movie. The opening scene was the best part and unfortunately in a 2 and a half hour movie, isn't a good thing. The biggest problem is the villain. He's hardly in the movie and he just doesn't deliver. It was all very underwhelming. I couldn't even tell you the film's climax because it just seemed like they were going through the motions and it just eventually ended. Its a classic cat and mouse chase and as usual the villain instead of just killing the protagonist, plays games with him and makes it possible for him to escape. There were a lot of spy movie cliches. Car chases, shootouts, fist fighting and he gets the girl. Its the same old routine. It was an entertaining movie but I wouldn't put it at the top of my list. If you like Bond movies, go see it.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

cryhardhumorNov 16, 2015

After a stand-out Skyfall, SPECTRE fails to be anything more than a supbar and admittedly disappointing chapter in the Bond saga with nothing playing out to it's full potential

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

6

TheApplegnomeJan 17, 2016

007 is back, way back to the old & classic days of action & thrills -- but I don’t recall forced romance, rushed plot-lines nor vague writing being a part of this ”shoot first, ask later-franchise”. It’s James Bond; intense & cliché-ish007 is back, way back to the old & classic days of action & thrills -- but I don’t recall forced romance, rushed plot-lines nor vague writing being a part of this ”shoot first, ask later-franchise”. It’s James Bond; intense & cliché-ish action isn’t something new to the genre, and it does bring some great & odd moments to the screen. It’s a great action-flick, but not more than that. The major lack of a better visualization of characters, protagonist as antagonist, are shockingly vague. There’re some understanding & depth to the plot & characters -- but there could have been so much more. Character development? Relatable romance? More originality? Character & plot motivation? A not-odd and non-fitting title-sequence? Nope, not much of that. Still an entertaining & eye-popping flick, yes -- but at the expense of the future of the franchise, that’s for sure.

Personal rating: 67/100
Critical rating: 70/100… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

ManiacUKNov 8, 2015

People are giving this movie the benefit of doubt purely because of the Bond brand, but the truth is that it makes for poor watching. Sure there's some great special effects and fantastic cinematography featuring a montage of some of the mostPeople are giving this movie the benefit of doubt purely because of the Bond brand, but the truth is that it makes for poor watching. Sure there's some great special effects and fantastic cinematography featuring a montage of some of the most beautiful places on earth, but the plot itself completely ruins anything the film had going for it. The storyline is unbelievably predictable but filled with more holes than Swiss cheese. The actions of the villains are moronic and their aims and motivations are so underdeveloped that you simply don't care. Bond is nothing more than an action hero with luck at every step. There's nothing smooth about how he operates in this film - he's not charming, not devious, not cunning, not smart and most certainly not subtle. In fact he could easily be described as a one man Delta force team because he just moves from location to location, wreaking havoc and running around guns blazing, leaving behind a trail of destruction. It is far more Rambo than it is Bond.

Basically if you're a huge Michael Bay fan and love movies where things get blown up or where heroes are able to escape any situation completely unscathed through no logic whatsoever, then you'll love this film. However if you're a classic Bond fan, you'll be bitterly disappointed - not because any of the casting, directing or music was that bad but simply because the writing was so absolutely dreadful it makes Transformers look like a masterpiece.… Expand

6 of 7 users found this helpful61

All this user's reviews

6

marcmyworksNov 10, 2015

Daniel Craig may not return as Bond and this film was meant to be a closure of his reboot of the Bond franchise (his Quadrilogy ending if you will). The concepts of Spectre being behind the events of the last three films is genius, howeverDaniel Craig may not return as Bond and this film was meant to be a closure of his reboot of the Bond franchise (his Quadrilogy ending if you will). The concepts of Spectre being behind the events of the last three films is genius, however this organization really does not do much. There aren't any huge twists and turns, and though beautifully shot, the script is barebones, the pacing odd and the music out of place. I would have loved to have seen something unexpected and powerful, however it truly comes across predictable. Daniel Craig, Ralph Fiennes and Ben Whishaw's performances are the saving grace, as Christoph Waltz is inches away from being type cast.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

6

violinguy88Nov 12, 2015

Let me put it to you this way. Spectre isn't as bad as Quantum of Solace but not nearly as good as Skyfall. The film is very pretty to look at. The opening scenes are tremendous, but the rest of the film just doesn't hold up.

The plotLet me put it to you this way. Spectre isn't as bad as Quantum of Solace but not nearly as good as Skyfall. The film is very pretty to look at. The opening scenes are tremendous, but the rest of the film just doesn't hold up.

The plot is a little old (Bond goes rogue to stop a menace that only he sees as dangerous), and the tie-ins to the previous 3 films are contrived and unnecessary. I don't mind the lack of humor as much as some reviewers because Craig's Bond is, well, a bad-ass. Imagine Daniel Craig hamming it up with the red-neck sheriff from Live and Let Die. Wouldn't work.

One thing I did love is Mendes' penchant for honoring previous films (not just the Craig ones). There are somewhat obvious nods to Goldfinger, You Only Live Twice, and even Man with the Golden Gun. The villain (skillfully played by Christoph Waltz) is menacing, but like the contrived tie-ins to Casino Royale and Skyfall, ultimately disappointing.

Spectre is much better than most of the Bond films of the last 20 years but unfortunately, it doesn't measure up against Skyfall and Casino Royale in quality.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

ahnehnoisNov 6, 2015

On the good side, it is the second most expensive film ever made, and it looks like it. The cinematography is gorgeous, and Thomas Newman clearly had fun writing this score.

On the bad side, the actual events that are being filmed aren'tOn the good side, it is the second most expensive film ever made, and it looks like it. The cinematography is gorgeous, and Thomas Newman clearly had fun writing this score.

On the bad side, the actual events that are being filmed aren't that interesting. The Bourne-style action and ruggedly humorless Daniel Craig characterization are more than a little tired, as is the series of references to Bond tropes. It isn't a great showing for the supporting cast either; Christoph Waltz and Monica Belucci might seem like casting coups, but they're both wasted, and Lea Seydoux is of course very, very pretty, but her character's archetypically fickle and irrational Bond girl behavior feels increasingly out of touch in a gritty 2010's movie.

Plot holes abound, the henchmen have the level of marksmanship you'd expect, and you'll wonder what kind of intelligence agency builds a massive prominent headquarters out of glass. None of this is really outside of the Bond ouvre, but it's getting tired. It's a fun movie at times, but it's trying to be realistic, unrealistic, and tongue-in-cheek all at the same time, and that just doesn't work.… Expand

13 of 18 users found this helpful135

All this user's reviews

6

Voodoo123Nov 9, 2015

A fun if tired entry that in the Daniel Craig films. I enjoyed watching this movie. I just wish they hadn't tried so hard with the fan service that crops up later on though. Didnt like the effort made to tie everything together from the craigA fun if tired entry that in the Daniel Craig films. I enjoyed watching this movie. I just wish they hadn't tried so hard with the fan service that crops up later on though. Didnt like the effort made to tie everything together from the craig plotlines here... felt like that decision was detrimental to the quality of its own self contained story.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

AcidwormApr 29, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Very disappointing overall. I love Craig's Bond which gives a lot of depth to the role with some backstory that the series never gave Bond, and his icy seriousness works well. However, he is a little light on the humor, which the character is most known for.

The movie is overlong, and makes poor use of the villain and his main henchman. I enjoy how the movie connects all the Craig installments, but the plot becomes very convoluted in the second half with a lot of confusing sub-plots and backstory that are not always properly explored. The first half of the movie is excellent, but the second half really drags it down.

The love scenes come across very jarring and forced. First Bond sleeps with Monica Belluci after killing her husband and it makes no sense that she would jump into his arms so easy. Then she is quickly forgotten. The lead-lady role is a poorly designed character. One minute she pushes Bond away having no sexual interest in him whatsoever giving off an image that she is a strong woman that can take care of herself and very unavailable to men, and then after a fight scene they are in each other's arms a couple scenes later, and she tells him a little later how much she loves him. This sudden change of behavior for her does not work.

Such a shame as the movie began so well and Skyfall left the series on a high note including a refreshing change in direction.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

diogomendesNov 7, 2015

Serviceable at best. Really disappointing considering the standards that its latest predecessor, "Skyfall", set. I know a lot of people are complaining about critics comparing those two movies, but honestly, the difference is quite notable.Serviceable at best. Really disappointing considering the standards that its latest predecessor, "Skyfall", set. I know a lot of people are complaining about critics comparing those two movies, but honestly, the difference is quite notable. "Spectre" lacked the emotional resonance and substance that made far better Bond movies a success. I'm not saying it isn't good, it's just that the action in this one didn't fare as I wanted. Even knowing it's a 007 film, it's really hard to give a pass to the preposterous set-pieces. Like that helicopter that was spinning around and never crashed, near the beginning of the movie. Or that plane that James Bond was driving, how the f*ck was the airplane still moving after losing its two wings and the tail? And how about hitting the car where the henchman (played by Dave Batista) was driving as well? I know the guy has lot of muscles, but c'mon, let's be realistic here.

Though the cinematography was fine, especially in Austria. Every frame well put together. All that snow was so pretty to look at. On the other hand, I pretty much enjoyed Daniel Craig's typically smooth and charismatic performance. As usual, he brings a sense of energy to its character that is not possible to resist. The Bond female was also a plus. As for the villain, well, he was, disappointing. Being the biggest nightmare Bond has ever had, this film doesn't truly accomplish in illustrating that. You don't feel like he's the most evil thing that has ever happened to James. More like another bad guy who just got in the main character's way. That scene where he reveals himself was spectacular though.

If the rumors are to be true, and this installment is the last one we will ever see from Sam Mendes and Daniel Craig, then I guess it's a decent send-off for the franchise. While ultimately lacking unforgettable action and a worthy foe, "Spectre" has still its thrills, and I would recommend it if you're a Bond fan. As for the others, you might just go with your friends for merely popcorn entertainment, or you can just wait for the DVD.

Final Score: 6.5/10… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

6

43in2014Nov 23, 2015

Do you remember how dull Quantum of Solace (or as I call it, Question of Sports) was? In that film, Bond had disobeyed orders and went about doing his own thing. He went from Place A to Place B and so on, following a trail, killing one personDo you remember how dull Quantum of Solace (or as I call it, Question of Sports) was? In that film, Bond had disobeyed orders and went about doing his own thing. He went from Place A to Place B and so on, following a trail, killing one person then another and another, found out one of MI5 employee is a double agent and he ultimately dies. Crucially, he saved a girl, not your typical 20th century dumb bond girl but a strong-willed girl who is out for revenge, he asked her if she knows what's it like to kill a person, they go into an seemingly empty desert, end up blowing up some villains' place, etc. Well, if you have seen that film, there's not really a point to see this one!

What an utter waste of $250m to repeat the same dull stuff again. If you need further proof of the laziness, two of the three writers of the Question of Sports have returned with copies of their previous script to do some minor editing and then submit as a new film!

Score: 3/5 (No half score) (Save your money and watch it on TV)… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

SwiftReviewsMar 29, 2016

It was a good movie, i would probably rank it last out of the other Daniel Craig bond films, i enjoyed it because it was a bond film but it didn't seem very original and it didn't really take any risks.

so the good points are, the openingIt was a good movie, i would probably rank it last out of the other Daniel Craig bond films, i enjoyed it because it was a bond film but it didn't seem very original and it didn't really take any risks.

so the good points are, the opening scene was fantastic, with an awesome helicopter scene that was unique and visually exciting. The music overall was good and the theme song matched the movie well.

Overall it was put together well with some really good action scenes but a lot of it wasn't very memorable. I didn't like the storyline, the plot points were poor. I am thinking they must be running out of ideas or something.

When compared to Skyfall this movie fails pretty badly.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

ovrthtop34Nov 8, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Spectre is a missed opportunity of a movie. First is Christoph Waltz. We are talking about an Academy Award winning actor who made Inglorious Basterds and Django Unchained more than just good movies. He made them great movies. He complimented the story, the screenplay, the director and the cast perfectly and made the entire film much better. Not so much with this film. Mendes missed this opportunity as a director as did the screenwriters. Instead of creating a supervillan to equal Bond, they minimized his talents and essentially shuffled him into the background. In all of the Bond films, has Blofeld been minimized this much? Maybe Diamonds are Forever, but not like this. But I digress. This is but one problem I have with the film. The screenplay seemed forced at times, not fluid, and the dynamic between Moneypenny and Bond is stale. Ralph Fiennes was sterile as M and Dave Bautista who was so awesome in Guardians of the Galaxy was minimized himself. Daniel Craig dominated, and one would expect this as he is the centerpiece, but Spectre is not just an organization, it was the driving force behind most of the early franchise and created a perfect antagonist for MI6 and while its central place is highlighted, it is Bond who always overshadows the other players. It comes back to Blofeld. Instead of firmly establishing him as the counterpoint to Bond and creating a tense mystery story, all is revealed in a lackluster, Deus Ex Machina manner.
There is no ingenious or elegant cat and mouse game that was played so well in films such as From Russia with Love. There is no “big reveal” of who this person is, not in comparison to what the franchise has established. I think this has a bit to do with the editing. It seemed pieced together in a not so organic manner. It is a departure from Casino Royale and Skyfall. The film is not devoid of its highlights. Tying up the loose ends with Mr. White was nicely done. It created a nice link to the character Madeleine Swann, but instead of wasting our time with the Day of the Dead scenes which opened way too slowly but did make use of the long scene in a good way, the audience could have been slowly introduced to the Swann character in a tense build-up that could have culminated in the chase/rescue scene. It is but one of the miscues of this film that seemed rushed in order to beat the hype of Star Wars and rekindle the excitement of Avengers and Jurassic World and the incredible Mad Max: Fury Road. This movie would have benefitted from another several months of shooting or editing or maybe refinement of the screenplay. While not a horrible movie, the entire franchise missed an opportunity. Instead of creating a cohesive and incredible follow up, we are left with a bit of an average Bond film and one that may fall within the middle of the pack in regards of memorable.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

6

courtpassantNov 12, 2015

Bond is bland. Chasing chasing chasing, womanizing, chasing chasing chasing. There is one fight scene that is amazin. Other than that, meh. This is no Skyfall. But I still love 007.

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

6

AliceofXDec 29, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The biggest problem with Spectre is that it feels like just another entry in a long series. Like a mid-season episode of a TV series that knows it doesn't have to try very hard. For the first half of the film I found myself bored because without an intriguing plot the action did little to entertain me.

The romance is unconvincing. Yes, I know that Bond always has a girl, but it appears that we as an audience have become too accustomed to it since the film's makers put in little effort to establish the romance. Sure, Bond is supposed to be a womaniser, but Madeleine is supposed to be something more instead of just another woman to be seduced. Why does Bond care for her other than because the plot dictates so?

But the thing that most intrigues me is why is this film so alike to Mission Impossible 5? It is basically the same plot in the same spy genre. Is it really a rip-off or just a symptom of Hollywood's chronic lack of originality?

That all said I can't say I disliked this film. It's a decent action film and it picks up toward the second half.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

Movi3R3vi3werNov 9, 2015

Daniel Craig continues his Bond journey with SPECTRE, a mostly forgettable Bond movie with some fun action set pieces and a good supporting cast. However SPECTRE suffers from a story that isn't all that interesting, completely wasting theDaniel Craig continues his Bond journey with SPECTRE, a mostly forgettable Bond movie with some fun action set pieces and a good supporting cast. However SPECTRE suffers from a story that isn't all that interesting, completely wasting the great Christoph Waltz and relying too heavily on the previous Bond formula that this series has tried avoided.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

6

walkabout_88Dec 28, 2015

Surprisingly campy at times, SPRECTRE delivers lots of fun action but fails to make any sense. It feels not as the epic conclusion of an ideal quadrilogy, and more like a tv season finale, trying hard to tie loose ends and raise interest forSurprisingly campy at times, SPRECTRE delivers lots of fun action but fails to make any sense. It feels not as the epic conclusion of an ideal quadrilogy, and more like a tv season finale, trying hard to tie loose ends and raise interest for what’s next. Waltz’s villain lacks any interesting motives in his nonsensical actions, and nothing feels genuine here. It is a feature that it’s also a cannibal of its own IP: it doesn’t play on its status nor its most famous Spectre organization, but it feeds on these things just to come up with something between the action scenes. Skyfall’s sense of urgency had probably raised the stakes a little too much, and no real character development appears on this installment, no new ideas. The initial tracking shot is probably the most fascinating item on this feature, and at least Mendes has mastered his skills in Bond visuals and action scenes. SPECTRE is nonetheless enjoyable, full of classic throwbacks one might have missed (film stock!) or not missed that at all (poorly drafted female characters and villains). It’s still fun to watch most of the time, but it has very little replay value.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

6

condythugNov 17, 2015

very average James Bond film with a poor storyline and VERY SLOW pacing throughout, as if it was always waiting for a moment for the movie to lift off; sadly it never did get beyond third gear.

nice acting by the villain and the usual hotvery average James Bond film with a poor storyline and VERY SLOW pacing throughout, as if it was always waiting for a moment for the movie to lift off; sadly it never did get beyond third gear.

nice acting by the villain and the usual hot and sexy actress but they can't save the movie. Q (the gadget boy) acted terribly and the whole movie is really a snore fest after halfway through when u just gave up waiting for the movie to move up a gear. if this movie wasn't a James Bond titled film, i am pretty sure it will do a lot worse in the box office and ratings.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

jlittle1404Mar 30, 2016

I thought a long time on this one and I don't think this Bond film was great but it wasn't the worst. Middle of the road action movie. Boring at times and will leave half the audience scratching their heads. I hope Daniel Craig comes back forI thought a long time on this one and I don't think this Bond film was great but it wasn't the worst. Middle of the road action movie. Boring at times and will leave half the audience scratching their heads. I hope Daniel Craig comes back for one more because this would be a low note to go out on.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Darkly_TranquilNov 20, 2015

Well made an generally entertaining, Spectre is neither a particularly good or particularly bad Bond film. There are solid performances all round, with a particularly gleeful turn from Christoph Waltz, and well executed action sequences, butWell made an generally entertaining, Spectre is neither a particularly good or particularly bad Bond film. There are solid performances all round, with a particularly gleeful turn from Christoph Waltz, and well executed action sequences, but the film runs at least 30-45 minutes too long and the story never really feels particularly well fleshed out to justify the runtime. Entertaining but unremarkable.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

Ripper89Nov 23, 2015

SPECTRE isn't a bad film, but the plot and the role of the main villain are incredibly week. The action is good, the acting isn't bad, but this movie is not as good as Skyfall. Sad way to say goodbye to Daniel Craig as James Bond, as he suitsSPECTRE isn't a bad film, but the plot and the role of the main villain are incredibly week. The action is good, the acting isn't bad, but this movie is not as good as Skyfall. Sad way to say goodbye to Daniel Craig as James Bond, as he suits the role perfectly in my opinion.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

6

FilmGobNov 6, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A cryptic message from Bond's past sends him on a trail to uncover a sinister organisation. While M battles political forces to keep the secret service alive, Bond peels back the layers of deceit to reveal the terrible truth behind SPECTRE.

Let me say that listening to Sam Smith's theme song for the very first time in the cinema is quite unpleasant, it just sounded like someone wailing uncontrollably. And the opening credits has cgi tentacles all over the place. We're off to a bad start.

As impressive as the opening scene is, where Bond chases 'Sciarra' through the Day of the Dead festival crowd, the fact that our hero thinks it's a good idea to punch the **** out of the pilot in an out of control helicopter, with a crowd of innocent people below, is baffling. The character of Bond feels schizophrenic as ever. I'm not sure what i'm supposed to think of a guy who, only after a minute of being acquainted, is bedding the widow (Monica Bellucci) of the assassin he killed earlier. And after a quick 'Ciao Bella' or whatever, she's not seen again. So much for the progressive choice of an age-appropriate Bond girl.

Mr White (Jesper Christensen) returns briefly as Bond pledges to protect his daughter, the fairly two dimensional Dr Madeleine Swann (Léa Seydoux). Together they travel from Rome, Austria, Tangier to track down Oberhauser (Christoph Waltz), leader of the mysterious Spectre, at his base of operations only a megalomaniac would be proud of. And yes, the big secret that isn't much of a secret, Oberhauser is actually Ernst Stavro Blofeld, pre and post face scarring.

There's plenty of fun nostalgia ahead with a brutal fight inside a speeding train with Mr Hinx (Dave Bautista), escaping a car chase using the ejector seat, escaping torture with an exploding wrist watch (of course, what else would it be!?) and then escaping the crumbling MI6 HQ by jumping into a safety net that came out of nowhere. Then it dawns on you that... this isn't anything new. Retro repetition, pandering, it's either what you want or what you dread.

The visuals are beautifully crisp and framed perfectly, thanks to director of photography Hoyte van Hoytema. Whether in frantic action scenes like the car chase on the streets of Rome, or dark indoor halls where the tense Spectre meeting takes place, it's what we expect from a modern Bond film. The score has moments of class but is mostly forgettable. Apart from one laugh out loud moment (during the car chase), the film is pretty much humorless, with little quips that didn't get much reaction from the audience.

Craig's run of Bond films suffer from an inconsistency in tone, direction and characters. Director Sam Mendes returns but there's still a lack of identity despite claims Bond is now 'Nolan-esque'. Did you want a return to over the top swagger of classic films after the modern but dire Skyfall? Well you're stuck between a rock and a hard place with Spectre. Go too hard edge, you get a Bourne clone. Go old school and you're left with a selfish, misogynistic pig for a hero. Never mind Daniel Craig, the whole franchise has run its course. All parody and little progress.… Expand

5 of 9 users found this helpful54

All this user's reviews

6

mathodusNov 6, 2015

There is always a blotch in a movie franchise, whether it be Star Wars Episode I or Batman & Robin, there are always at least one film that falls short. These movies fail to capture what made their franchises great by abandoning creativeThere is always a blotch in a movie franchise, whether it be Star Wars Episode I or Batman & Robin, there are always at least one film that falls short. These movies fail to capture what made their franchises great by abandoning creative storytelling and character development for fun whimsical tropes which are solely put in to gather audiences of a wide variety to buy tickets. These blotches and tropes have already existed in the Bond franchise, dating back to the Sean Connery era, but before you know it, lightning will strike again and again. Following the massive critical and financial success of Skyfall, the twenty-forth Bond film had kept people wondering "what's next for our hero?", "what new situations can you put him in that makes the story compelling and the character enthralling?". Well, filmmakers of course decided to make a nostalgia piece, ditching the dark character study of the previous films in the Daniel Craig Era for a cliched adventure film, full of deus ex machinas, quips, one-dimensional characters and completely amateur storytelling. There are more Hollywood cliches in this film than actual story. The only audience that would enjoy this movie is the people who have never seen any Bond films before, so that they have no frame-of-reference for a great Bond film, small children who cannot yet comprehend what makes a film good or bad, and 60+ year old retirees who feel a sense of nostalgia that connects this film with the campiness of the early days of the franchise, which by all means the filmmakers achieved. The main issue with this film is that the movie does not take itself seriously. Some may argue that Craig's Bond is too dark and brooding, but the people who think that do not understand that the change in character which made him seem more cold and human, realistically placed him within a setting that was both practical and compelling. Going back and representing the classic Bond tropes is an entertaining thought, but that is completely impractical and unoriginal. The best films which stand out above the rest are those that offer a unique story, a story that no one has yet thought of, a story that takes your mind within the screen, never once letting you get out of your seat, but to tell the truth, I never felt that. I wanted the film to end abruptly as soon as possible, and when the screen went dark, I rushed myself out of the theater, questioning why the filmmakers or Sony or whoever is responsible for this movie decided to change the mood and atmosphere of both the story and its characters. My best guess is that they simply decided to film an action/adventure, blockbuster, popcorn movie that you watch on a first date, and granted, they achieved that, but I enjoyed the franchise because of the changes made over the years which evolved from Sean Connery flying away in a jetpack to Daniel Craig holding a dying M in his arms. However, this film chose to make Bond a quipping, rebellious douche who conveniently gets out of ridiculous situations. Highs and lows have always existed, but when you get to the point of liking Austin Powers more than this movie, it has become an abyss. Let us hope that the next one is decent.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

6

RalfbergsNov 19, 2016

I liked it generally, but the plot lacked a bit , especially how James Bond got near to bad guys - either just casually going to them, or they kidnap him and just bring to their place etc. I mean it felt a bit dumb and maybe overused in someI liked it generally, but the plot lacked a bit , especially how James Bond got near to bad guys - either just casually going to them, or they kidnap him and just bring to their place etc. I mean it felt a bit dumb and maybe overused in some earlier Bond films - I bet they could have thought of something more interesting by now. There were some other parts where the movie lacked and it was mostly quite predictable, so that makes it a bit more boring.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

YoloSwag4DogeJun 16, 2016

I can't say the dialogue or plot was particularly engaging, but the action sequences are great. My greatest issue with the film was the musical score. I felt like I was watching some high end opera theater instead of an epic, high action bondI can't say the dialogue or plot was particularly engaging, but the action sequences are great. My greatest issue with the film was the musical score. I felt like I was watching some high end opera theater instead of an epic, high action bond film. It was quite off putting and really killed a lot of the excitement for me. Overall, I'd say it's a good movie, but not really memorable.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

6

CineAutoctonoJan 19, 2016

"SPECTRE" is a movie with lots of action and romance, but it was a little boring but very revealing , but I still doubt whether Daniel Craig as James Bond continues , if it continues as I'll get to see Daniel all the movies many times as"SPECTRE" is a movie with lots of action and romance, but it was a little boring but very revealing , but I still doubt whether Daniel Craig as James Bond continues , if it continues as I'll get to see Daniel all the movies many times as desired , and if not this may be the last of Daniel as James Bond , without hesitation Daniel Craig he has left a mark on this incredible saga.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

movieman2001Nov 6, 2015

I just saw Spectre and was a little disappointed, it was ok but it wasn't as good as Casino Royal or Skyfall. Both of those films are great but i will say that Spectre is better than Qauntum of Solace with was awful in my opinion.I will sayI just saw Spectre and was a little disappointed, it was ok but it wasn't as good as Casino Royal or Skyfall. Both of those films are great but i will say that Spectre is better than Qauntum of Solace with was awful in my opinion.I will say the opening sequence in mexico is very, very good, one of my favorite as far as the opening scenes go. It has a lot of action scenes throughout the movie but the story is where the real problem lies, first of all the vilian who is played by Christoph Waltz should be much better, but its not his fault its the script he was given to work with and the scenes with the bond girl character fell flat as well.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

6

Jollyjoe1000Mar 12, 2016

it was not that bad but just kinda off. Missing the charm of the other films(at least most of them) but I hope that daniel craig will be able to fix the bond series with a good new installment that will come in a few years.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

RichGGNov 7, 2015

Spectre was a marginally decent movie, it followed the outline of the past Bond movies structurally, but the story was a bore. Some scenes seemed too goofy to be in the film - almost a parody of itself, other scenes were mediore and a coupleSpectre was a marginally decent movie, it followed the outline of the past Bond movies structurally, but the story was a bore. Some scenes seemed too goofy to be in the film - almost a parody of itself, other scenes were mediore and a couple were fun. If you have money to blow, and have nothing else to see, then go for it. For the rest of you... it's a netflix movie for sure.… Expand

9 of 10 users found this helpful91

All this user's reviews

6

YorkManJan 25, 2016

Spectre is merely an average Bond movie. There's been much better and, unfortunately, there has been far worse.

The main crux of the problem stems from the need to tie together the overarching storyline set up in the previous three DanielSpectre is merely an average Bond movie. There's been much better and, unfortunately, there has been far worse.

The main crux of the problem stems from the need to tie together the overarching storyline set up in the previous three Daniel Craig outings, and the introduction of the organisation of Spectre, with Blofeld at its head, being the super secret 'umbrella' cartel that has been yanking Bond's chain.

Why is this a problem? Because it, in numerous ways, undermines the whole notion of what had come before. Especially the plot devices used in Quantum of Solace and then expanded on in Skyfall. This was the idea that Quantum was THE criminal cartel. Why bring back Spectre and Blofeld (and the need to create a backstory that links Bond and Blofeld together, having a shared childhood)? Because the producers of the film were able to secure usage of the name, nothing more, nothing less.

As a film, it's directed fairly well, the cinematography is fine, the musical score isn't that memorable, and the acting performances (on the whole) are ok(?). But as a whole, it doesn't really add up to much.
Craig as Bond is on autopilot and if he's brought back again for a fifth outing (to close off the Blofeld story arc) he needs a director who'll kick his arse and make him look at least like he cares.
Same with Christophe Waltz as Blofeld. It's clear this film is designed to introduce the character (the ending is left ambiguous), and it's not a spoiler in any sense to know Blofeld doesn't die!
But Waltz is also just acting by numbers in this movie.
For me though, the biggest acting issue is the casting of Lea Seydoux as the 'main' Bond girl. She's as wooden as a toothpick and not much better to look at. When the 'minor' Bond girl (played by Monica Belucci in a fairly small role) is so much more memorable, then the casting director got something very wrong indeed!!

But, if I'm being critical, it's the script that fails the most. Craig has established a Bond who is both rugged and emotive, both tough and free to show his fear. In Spectre he's very flat, with none of the suaveness and one liners that he's poured onto the screen in earlier films. Add to that a plot which revolves around the internal machinations of MI5, a power struggle in the 'boardroom' between M and and an up and coming 'techie' who believes field agents are an outmoded concept in the digital/cctv/smartphone/laptop world, and the actual actions scenes feel like a completely different movie.
The dialogue is cliched, and there's so much exposition (because of the dual storylines, and the need to keep the audience 'up to date') that I came away feeling like someone had pushed that secondary storyline so hard, as merely a means to have a substantial run-time for the movie. Believe me, they could knock it down to 90 minutes and have the 'other' storyline merely pop up as a rationale, a few throwaway lines here and there, and it wouldn't have changed the way the main story developed.

Overall, it's just average. It's never going to be hailed as a Bond classic, and that's fair enough. I am just hoping they pull out all the stops and go for a massive action finale for Craig's final outing!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

BibbitibobNov 22, 2015

A decent send off for Daniel Craig (if this truly is his last Bond outing), with a strong yet wasted performance from Christoph Waltz. It spends too much time paying homage to older entries, and is quite anti-climactic, but the actionA decent send off for Daniel Craig (if this truly is his last Bond outing), with a strong yet wasted performance from Christoph Waltz. It spends too much time paying homage to older entries, and is quite anti-climactic, but the action sequences and gorgeous cinematography help make Spectre enjoyable.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

EpicLadySpongeJan 8, 2016

It's almost there to a good score but this movie of 007 named Spectre has almost made it to the score of 7. It's pretty much decent and loving at the same time while it's lacking the excitement from the previous 007 movies.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

tobeeryDec 29, 2015

Visually, it's certainly great but I didn't care for the plot as I did with Skyfall, for example. Bond films are always formulaic conceptually, but this didn't seem to have that extra spice to lift it from the average action flick. Needed wayVisually, it's certainly great but I didn't care for the plot as I did with Skyfall, for example. Bond films are always formulaic conceptually, but this didn't seem to have that extra spice to lift it from the average action flick. Needed way more Waltz… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

NicoteenMar 9, 2016

" A moderate movie, a weak Bond. Skyfall was one of the best Bond movies of all time, so the sequel is never as good Skyfall (weak action, boring characters).. I like Christoph Waltz, but he couldn't save it. In the end it's entertaining for" A moderate movie, a weak Bond. Skyfall was one of the best Bond movies of all time, so the sequel is never as good Skyfall (weak action, boring characters).. I like Christoph Waltz, but he couldn't save it. In the end it's entertaining for a BD/DVD night, but not more.."

GENRE RATING (AGENT/THRILLER): 6.4
OVERALL RATING: 5.8… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

in_obsessionJan 31, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Coming off the high that was Skyfall, a lot of people were expecting a lot out of this movie. And did it deliver?

....not really, no. In fact, I'd venture to say that it's probably only a bit better than Solace and definitely not up to calibre with Skyfall's success. The most serious flaw (a flaw that many movies have tbh) is in it's villain. I admit the introduction leading up to him was interesting but then it just...stagnates. He spends so much time talking about what he's done but never actually does anything. Not to mention the fail that was Andrew Scott. Not as an actor because the way he looks Bond up and down...ahhh that was a beautiful Moriarty look there, but his entire part could have been erased and it probably would have been a better movie. Let's not even talk about the uselessness that was Bautista's character. There was no need for the dramatics of his introduction. In fact, there was so much that could have been cut out and that time used instead to introduce more by way of character depth to the main villain.

It's so sad when so many great actors get together to make what could have been a great movie but had a shoddy script to work with.

The gold in this film lies not with anything Bond does with his Bond girls or M getting down into the trenches or even Andrew Scott's subtle interest in all the men in this movie, but in the Bond/Q relationship. Shipping aside, their chemistry is absolutely wonderful and I wish desperately that they had focused more on that than with their sad excuse for a romance. Each scene with them together was filled with snark and just...so much perfection.

Watch this movie if you just want to watch a Bond movie, no matter how bad it is. It's at least better than Solace?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

JyroJyroJul 24, 2017

Unfortunately, we've seen this sort of film a thousand times before. Forgettable characters, unbelievable stunts and a poor attempt of 'connecting the dots'. It's a shame because Daniel Craig shines as effortlessly in this as he did in theUnfortunately, we've seen this sort of film a thousand times before. Forgettable characters, unbelievable stunts and a poor attempt of 'connecting the dots'. It's a shame because Daniel Craig shines as effortlessly in this as he did in the previous three films (he really has set a new mantle for Bond actors). Just as well the storyline isn't quite as hopeless as Quantum of Solace...… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

DomgwyDec 20, 2017

I have been trying to collect my thoughts on the latest entry to the Bond franchise for the best part of a day now….here goes nothing.

After three films of origin stories and departures from the Bond formula, the end of Skyfall finally sawI have been trying to collect my thoughts on the latest entry to the Bond franchise for the best part of a day now….here goes nothing.

After three films of origin stories and departures from the Bond formula, the end of Skyfall finally saw all the pieces in place for a return to the classic Connery-era Bond.

In many respects Spectre delivers on this promise. Ben Whishaw’s Q, Naomie Harris’ Moneypenny and a scene steeling Ralph Fiennes as the new M provide great energetic back up to Daniel Craig’s Bond as he embarks on his latest globe trotting mission.

I have always been a fan of Craig’s portrayal of the character, but in Spectre the actor has reached a new level. Here Bond is cocky, deadly and cold while simultaneously remaining witty, charming and at times even playful. However the film’s plot also allows Craig to display those rare moments of vulnerability as his past comes back to haunt him in the form of the shady organisation of the title.

Unfortunately it is also the plot that lets the film down. As is often the case with franchise films the end result is only as strong as the lead villain and their scheme. Although two time oscar winner Christoph Waltz delivers a subtly sadistic performance the writers have let him down in a major way.

The role of SPECTRE and Waltz’s Oberhauser in the film is often reduced to a MacGuffin, only there to give Bond motivation to move from one scene to the next. We spend the majority of the film waiting for Oberhauser to step out from the shadows and explain his organisations’ goals and motivations. When he is finally revealed however no such explanation is given. From the context of the secondary plot and a standout scene where the members of SPECTRE meet in Rome, the audience is left to piece together their scheme without being spoon fed via exposition.

For this reason above all Spectre is a film that demands repeat viewing. I feel like during my first watch, any time the plot was unclear or I missed a key line, it was ok because Waltz would inevitably spell it all out for me. The fact that this never happened is really to be comended. I feel that modern audiences (myself very much included) have now come to expect this overt kind of expository dialogue, so much so that when it is missing films feel incomplete and disjointed. However commendable though, this is still a major flaw that leads the last third of the film feeling decidedly anti-climatic.

Despite these plot concerns (and a somewhat misjudged and underdeveloped attempt to tie in Craig’s previous Bond films) Spectre certainly doesn’t disappoint when it comes to action set pieces and sharp dialogue.

With standout performances and some great action, if this is indeed to be Craig’s final outing it certainly gives the audience the Bond film they have been asking for ever since Casino Royale. Whether this is the Bond film we deserve however, is another matter entirely.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

AlanoSilvaPBFeb 24, 2023

Mais do mesmo, na minha opinião o melhor é o primeiro filme, o do Cassino. O roteiro não tem muita criatividade e parece que sempre é o mesmo filme, sem falar que é cheio de conveniências!

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

ErikTheCriticSep 26, 2018

It's not a bad movie, it's just not as good as I wanted it to be. The action and cinematography are masterful, however the film can be tiresome from time to time.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

MaxMyDogJun 11, 2019

My problems with this film relate to where the series has gone. connecting the previous films together. the story behind blofeld. love interests. that being said it is one of the best looking bond films made. right up there with skyfall.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Onlyclassicvg1Sep 10, 2022

A cryptic message from Bond's past sends him on a trail to uncover a sinister organization. While M battles political forces to keep the secret service alive, Bond peels back the layers of deceit to reveal the terrible truth behind SPECTRE.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

SoapNuggetJul 25, 2021

Eh, Spectre is fine. It's not the worst Craig Bond film, that is 100% Quantum of Solace, but Spectre is disappointing after Skyfall, still worth a watch

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

MrPajamasFeb 24, 2021

After the amazing Skyfall, there was another fall called Specter. The locations were great, but they didn't have a Skyfall, and especially the overall story faltered quite a bit. Although the action scenes were great, there weren't many ofAfter the amazing Skyfall, there was another fall called Specter. The locations were great, but they didn't have a Skyfall, and especially the overall story faltered quite a bit. Although the action scenes were great, there weren't many of them, but the music was great. Overall, I would say it's a good movie that I can recommend.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

511andahalfFeb 7, 2021

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Just a decent movie that has a lot of flaws. The film connects the last 3 Craig movies together when it had absolutely no reason to do so; CR, QOS, and SF all worked perfectly fine on their own. The whole topic of Blofeld being Bond's long lost brother is also very unnecessary and feels shoehorned in. Madeline, the Bond girl, is also one of the weaker Bond girls, she has 0 chemistry with Bond.

The film is partially saved thanks to some pretty good cinematography and a few good action scenes, like the helicopter fight and train fight. But overall, Spectre had a lot of potential to be really good and just fails to live up to its hype.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

SQRLYJul 25, 2021

The Bond franchise has seemed to settle into a good/mediocre movie pattern. After following the almost perfect Skyfall, this outing is rather bland and dull. The characters are hollow and leave us wondering what could have been.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

ChanekeCholoDec 13, 2021

I watched it this morning and I remember a little the history and is well, but for two hours and twenty eight minutes is very ambiguous, at the end gets boring and forgettable. The action scenes are great but not like in the past film. TheI watched it this morning and I remember a little the history and is well, but for two hours and twenty eight minutes is very ambiguous, at the end gets boring and forgettable. The action scenes are great but not like in the past film. The performances are well but the development of the characters are missing.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

liamexeDec 21, 2022

The real irony is that Bond has thrived for 53 years on a tried-and-true formula, only making adjustments when needed. He is at a worrying crossroads where, if confident stability is not established, his fictional descendants (Mission:The real irony is that Bond has thrived for 53 years on a tried-and-true formula, only making adjustments when needed. He is at a worrying crossroads where, if confident stability is not established, his fictional descendants (Mission: Impossible, espionage parodies like Kingsmen and The Man from U.N.C.L.E., and even superhero movies themselves) threaten to nudge him into irrelevance and antiquity. The abundance of incredible entertainment in Spectre's first half further supports Daniel Craig's argument that, yes, the world does unquestionably still need James Bond to return, which he has spent the last four films reiterating. It's time he began to think so for himself. And if another facelift is necessary to see that come to pass,… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

TVJerryNov 10, 2015

After the more serious focus on character and motivation in SKYFALL, director Sam Mendes again lets the movie's motivation drive the human side of James Bond (Daniel Craig). The plot is convoluted paranoia about worldwide surveillance, butAfter the more serious focus on character and motivation in SKYFALL, director Sam Mendes again lets the movie's motivation drive the human side of James Bond (Daniel Craig). The plot is convoluted paranoia about worldwide surveillance, but it's not especially threatening (neither is villain Christoph Waltz). There are international locales, but none are special. The woman aren't memorable and the love scenes are underplayed. With the proliferation of action flix these days, it's hard to make the action exciting or inventive. None of these deliver much new and some even evoke earlier Bond movies. Craig is steely serious and has almost no dialogue with the typical 007 smirk. At a running time of 1:48, the momentum winds down well before it's over. There's the typical franchise flash, but little of it ignites much fire or fun… Expand

4 of 6 users found this helpful42

All this user's reviews

5

intruder313Nov 13, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Feels like a mess of ideas smashed together rather than being edited down to a more cohesive script. The central plot is utter nonsense, the love story completely annoying and unrealistic there's far too much location hopping purely for the sake of it. Average at best and a shocking follow up to the amazing Skyfall.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

5

steelystanNov 11, 2015

While this iteration of Bond wasn't bad, it wasn't really good either. I found myself struggling to stay awake for the second half of the movie. Everything was predictable and had already been done by countless other movies. If I had toWhile this iteration of Bond wasn't bad, it wasn't really good either. I found myself struggling to stay awake for the second half of the movie. Everything was predictable and had already been done by countless other movies. If I had to describe this movie in one word it would be "boring".… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

BossukNov 10, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Spoiler alert:-
After watching this film, while I felt I had enjoyed the 2.5 hours in the cinema, I was never fully engrossed in the story I was presented. The characters themselves were well played but the overall story was just not very good. Given this was Bonds first real experience with Spectre, it never had any real tension or drama.
Pros
- DC as Bond. He is a good bond.
- Supporting cast from Q and M. A little light humour and the seriousness together.
- Opening scene in mexico.
- Blofeld - a good villian.
Negatives
- C - unfortunately, Andrew Scott played exactly the same character here as he did when he played Moriarty in Sherlock Holmes, which meant from the first line he spoke, you knew he was a bad guy. There was no surprise when it turned out he was.
- The story - The whole Spectre controlling the world at the same time as the C branch want to centralize all world intelligence agencies. We all knew what was going to happen. Because of this, there were no big revelations or surprises. Within the first 20 minutes of the film, you knew exactly what was coming. Very poorly done.
- Ending - Bond walking off with the girl. He tried to do this in Casino Royale. Make a choice between your job or the girl, and he choose the girl. Been there, done that. In 2 of the 4 films DC has done, he's chosen the girl over his job. It's old news.
- Some of the action scenes were OTT - in the scene in the desert, a small fire ended up blowing up the whole Spectre complex. WTF? why. That would never happen. This is just one that stuck in my head. Bond escaping from the spectre meeting in Switzerland. Tons of security going in, none coming out.

Overall the characters were well played. Unfortunately, they were acting out a poor story and no matter how they did it, it was always going to leave a sour taste.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

jsmith9525Nov 8, 2015

This movie is film-making at its laziest. There are many points where your reaction is "Wait... Why did that just happen?" And it is horribly predictable. Spectre is not a terrible movie--in fact, the beginning is brilliant--just not aThis movie is film-making at its laziest. There are many points where your reaction is "Wait... Why did that just happen?" And it is horribly predictable. Spectre is not a terrible movie--in fact, the beginning is brilliant--just not a very good one.… Expand

8 of 10 users found this helpful82

All this user's reviews

5

beingryanjudeFeb 18, 2016

One of the best opening sequences—and surely the most expensive—of any 007 film. Unfortunately, somewhere after the first 15 minutes, the film loses its footing and never recovers. Perhaps it’s the missing Judi Dench. Or, possibly, the lackOne of the best opening sequences—and surely the most expensive—of any 007 film. Unfortunately, somewhere after the first 15 minutes, the film loses its footing and never recovers. Perhaps it’s the missing Judi Dench. Or, possibly, the lack of screen time for a wonderful Christoph Waltz. Nevertheless, something isn’t quite right in wake of the brilliance that was SKYFALL in 2012.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

csw12Mar 22, 2016

Another James Bond film chooses to be ordinary. Just more typical car chases, slutty women, and a boring bad guy. Spectre is overlong and at times a corny, silly film.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

mcicepitNov 9, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The homage to Live and Let Die in the start is nice. The long continuous shot is something you did expect in a film like this, but works well. The fight in the chopper is cool, but did not take my breath away.
From here the film go into a slow crash dive.
The script has so many plot holes, all the mandatory things are there - maybe too many?
Why not look to OHMSS, that they have a large homage to? Don`t try to put in everything if it do not work. Make changes! That what made both OHMSS and Casino Royale great.
And in both these films we had female protagonists that could match JB in a much better degree.
The villain was a huge disappointment. You kind of think a mastermind with so big organization would be a bit more secretly, less, crazy, etc. Blofeld feels like a weak imitation of himself.
The most exciting thing that night, was to see the Star Wars trailer before the film and this is from a huge James Bond fan.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

5

srininet1Nov 22, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The critic reviews are mostly on target for this film. Thanks to the inevitable comparison with its predecessor Skyfall, this one falls well short of expectations. Lets see how it fares VS Skyfall
1. Opening Scene: Skyfall was much better, intense, and believable. Here, the shots of helicopter spinning out of control gets repetitive and boring

2. Plot: Both movies have a good plot but Skyfall edges ahead because it maintains sense of threat and danger till the very end, while here the sense of threat and danger gets diluted when Bond enters villain's headquarters in Morocco. Thereafter, its all boloney.

3. BGM: Skyfall all the way...here the music feels rehashed from Skyfall in some scenes and in others, lacks the punch to create the sense of danger/thrill

4. Cinematography: Skyfall again....watching this film makes me realize why people were praising Skyfalls cinematography to no end. Roger Deakins, you're sorely missed.

5 Title Song: Adele all the way.....Sam Smith's song sounds like a lullaby in comparison. Also, the VFX in opening credits looks creepy with octopus sliding on the screen

6.Action: Skyfall again - here the action looks kind of convenient and stupid - specially the way in which Bond gets onto a plane to rescue Lea in Austria and his plane crashes exactly where the villains were driving. Also the climax where he's able to rescue Lea and drive out of MI6 in a boat within 2 minutes, then take out the villain by shooting his helicopter!! That was laughable :D

7. Villain: The villain in this film is supposed to be the boss of all past Bond villains and in his introduction scene he exudes a sense of dread and respect out of fear. But everything changes once we hear him talk to Bond at his headquarters in Morocco. One feels this guy has lost it! Inviting your enemy to your den, showing him around like a guided tour, and then getting blown away! How moronic.....there is no sense of threat or danger to Bond from this idiot! Even in the climax, he tries to get away from the blast site in a helicopter before getting shot down by Bond. Oh come on! How silly of the BIG BOSS OF ALL CRIMINALS to do something like this!

All in all, Spectre comes as a BIG DISAPPOINTMENT because of the amateurish and cliched writing in the second half, alongwith direction to show that stupidity on screen… Expand

5 of 6 users found this helpful51

All this user's reviews

5

oDjentoDec 4, 2015

Spectre is admittedly an underwhelming and unsatisfying watch that is filmed with Bond fandom to try keep die-hard fans interested.
Still a far better watch than QoS, it is far inferior to Casino Royale and Skyfall. The opening tracking shotSpectre is admittedly an underwhelming and unsatisfying watch that is filmed with Bond fandom to try keep die-hard fans interested.
Still a far better watch than QoS, it is far inferior to Casino Royale and Skyfall. The opening tracking shot of the day of the dead Mexico setting feels like a clear but lovely hint of foreshadowment for a hopefully depressing and dark instalment of the Bond franchise, but it doesn’t lead up to anything. The action sequence here is relatively entertaining, and is shot well with a few bits of added comedy but fails in comparison to CR and Skyfall.
From here on out with have too much half assed moments. A car chase which isn’t exciting but more made for comedy, an Oberhauser (Waltz) who is horrendously under used, a menacing bad guy (Bautista) who is like the Darth Maul of Bond villains, and action set pieces which are trying to be big but don’t really excite. The plane sequence down the mountain is actually quite boring to be honest, and the train fight is pretty cool but just doesn’t end well; you can easily see what’s going to happen. The relationship between Bond and Seydoux’s character also seems rushed, forced and unbelievable, and to top things off the final sequence of the film is just such a punch below the gut, wholly unsatisfying. Even certain deaths of this film (almost all) are just underwhelming and not memorable, it’s like their deaths were written in as an after-thought in the script to get them out of the way.
Daniel Craig is still pretty charming as Bond in this film but still he can’t save the film. Also, Monica Bellucci’s character was completely dumped as soon as she was introduced, asking the question why did they promote her when they announced the cast if she has about 2 minutes of screen time.
A very unsatisfying end for Daniel Craig to go out as Bond. Hopefully he will return just one more time.
4.9/10… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

5

ozymandias79Dec 27, 2015

A lot of this film is very unintelligent and assumes the audience is too stupid to recognize it. If this was some trash movie aimed at young teens, it would be understandable but this a Bond film.Overall, its just a dumb action movie.

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

5

Jiano74Jan 25, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. An average Bond film should have been a lot better, Batista's (can't remember film name) car chase with Bond was bad should have been better. For this it is easier to refer to the characters by their real names as I can't remember character names. At first I didn't know why Christoph Waltz's character was spared at the end but then I fully understand when I realised who is character was, the white cat earlier in the film helped.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

UnurautareNov 18, 2015

This movie should be called "Jumping the shark", I didn't like or relate to any of the actors actors, bad acting, bad story, bad action scenes, boring music. Nothing new, they again try to present Bond as traumatized by losing women. I alsoThis movie should be called "Jumping the shark", I didn't like or relate to any of the actors actors, bad acting, bad story, bad action scenes, boring music. Nothing new, they again try to present Bond as traumatized by losing women. I also feel the love scene with the Bond girl was forced, since a human just died, they decide to "celebrate" it by having sex, wtf. I think the main problem was the weak villain, compared to Skyfall. They just seem to try to cash in on the success of Skyfall by trying to throw some of the same elements over and over without developing the characters, including the villains, further than in the previous movies, which is getting boring fast.… Expand

5 of 6 users found this helpful51

All this user's reviews

5

zurnzurnNov 10, 2015

The dull, hard edge of Craig's Bond doesn't fit the softer moments well, and a lot of the rest of the script shows shoddy workmanship too. Too bad, since it would have been nice to raise it to Léa Seydoux and Christoph Waltz's level. The endThe dull, hard edge of Craig's Bond doesn't fit the softer moments well, and a lot of the rest of the script shows shoddy workmanship too. Too bad, since it would have been nice to raise it to Léa Seydoux and Christoph Waltz's level. The end goes in for another sparse version of Bond as Skyfall tried, and frankly clumsily overplays the terrorist-NSA elements. If it was overdone in a smarter, or goofier way, it would have been better, but it does neither.

The opening action sequence was good though, and had an interesting setting.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

AxeTNov 8, 2015

The trailers relayed the impression this movie would be tired and uninspired. Never trust the trailers, but this time they were right. They feature exchanges such as, "Why did you come here Mr. Bond? -- I came to kill you. -- I thought youThe trailers relayed the impression this movie would be tired and uninspired. Never trust the trailers, but this time they were right. They feature exchanges such as, "Why did you come here Mr. Bond? -- I came to kill you. -- I thought you came to die. -- That's a matter of perspective." You must be joking? No, they weren't. You know the movie is going to be less than great just from the opening title sequence and song. Oh well. It's okay overall, but not near on the level of the best.
Here's my ratings for Daniel Craig's previous 007 outings:
"Casino Royale" 10 "Quantum Of Solace" 2 "Skyfall" 9.
My top five favorite Bond movies: "Moonraker", "The Spy Who Loved Me", "Goldfinger", "Casino Royale", "Skyfall". And the five worst in my book: "Die Another Day", "Quantum Of Solace", "A View To A Kill", "The World Is Not Enough", "License To Kill".… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

5

MrMovieBuffNov 6, 2015

Sorry Bond fans, I didn't want to do this but I did not enjoy this movie enough for it to be more than a 5/10 score...

...'Spectre' sees Daniel Craig in his fourth outing as the iconic British spy, James Bond and is the return for directorSorry Bond fans, I didn't want to do this but I did not enjoy this movie enough for it to be more than a 5/10 score...

...'Spectre' sees Daniel Craig in his fourth outing as the iconic British spy, James Bond and is the return for director Sam Mendes ('American Beauty' and 'Skyfall'). The screenplay is also written by the usual gang which includes John Logan ('Gladiator' and 'Hugo').

The movie opens with an impressive tracking shot with Bond in Mexico City which proves to be rewarding for some filmmakers. But just because a movie is impressively shot doesn't save its mediocrity. We then see the opening sequence which includes the Sam Smith song "Writing on the Wall" which is instantly forgettable, but we don't go to Bond films looking for a good opening song.

The story mostly involves Bond trying to protect the daughter of Mr. White (Jesper Christensen) who is played by French actress Lea Seydoux ('Inglourious Basterds' and 'Blue is the Warmest Color') who seems reluctant to trust Bond at first, but needs his protection anyway. The usual crew including M (Ralph Fiennes), Moneypenny (Naomie Harris) and Q (Ben Winshaw) return, and the chemistry between Craig and those actors are comedic which is great to see. But unfortunately, they are hardly together throughout the duration of the movie.

My biggest disappointments come from the following actors including; Monical Belucci, Dave Bautista and Christoph Waltz. They didn't have as much screen time as the trailers made it seem they have.

It just seems rather pointless to have these characters appear and they abruptly don't come back for the rest of the movie. Belucci and Bautista only have roughly 20 - 30 minutes of screen time each.

But the disappointment mainly comes from Christoph Waltz, who played such an iconic villain in 'Inglourious Basterds' (2009) and won his first Academy Award for it. So when I heard he was going to play a Bond villain, I thought he'd be perfect.

Waltz was wasted as the villain, I'm not sure if it's because of the screenplay, but he did not seem as menacing or intimidating as the ones played by Mads Mikkelsen ('Casino Royale') or Javier Bardem ('Skyfall'). We only get one scene of him torturing Bond, slightly, but that's it.

Ralph Fiennes as M has a few action scenes here and there, we see him handling a gun and defending everything he can, but this does not seem like something the M we know would do. The action should only be left to Bond only.

I am not sure if it's because 'Skyfall' (2012) had heightened my expectations, but this was just mediocre Bond fare almost made to the quality of 'Quantum of Solace' (2008). There are some scenes that happen for almost no reason, characters appear, then disappear, and other characters are wasted. It seemed like this was an unfinished product, but I wouldn't rank this as high as 'Casino Royale' (2006) or 'Skyfall' (2012), however, Daniel Craig is still convincing as Bond.

Great acting, just an underwhelming movie.… Expand

6 of 11 users found this helpful65

All this user's reviews

5

BarbudezNov 7, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. la defino con una sola palabra...ESTÚPIDA, bueno mejor dos.....MUY ESTÚPIDA.

Voy a contar esta parte Sin Spoilers, y luego aviso de los Spoilers

El problema general, es que Sam Mendes no tiene ni repajolera idea de llevar a James Bond, de una manera que no sea, la versión de Roger Moore o la de Sean Connery en sus momentos mas bajos, es decir, volvemos a los clichés mas rancios de 007 aderezado con villanos y situaciones dignas, como repito de un Roger Moore, en sus ultimos films, donde ya era un chiste y una caricatura grotesca de lo que era Bond.

Que problema tenía seguir con el estilo de Casino Royale?, se alejaba del Bond clásico, el de los gadgets, los villanos y planes rancios?, es lógico, es necesario reinventar el personaje, no podía volver otra vez a lo mismo, porque ya es anacrónico. Pero Mendes, es un señor que debe tener admiración por esa epoca ¿dorada? de Bond y cuando toma el control de Bond, volvemos a la epoca dorada, que desgraciadamente ya huele a rancio, y tenemos Skyfall ese truño de peli de Bond con villano de opereta con un tercer actor digno de Solo en Casa y plagado de guiños chorras para los fans, un desastre que tira por al borda toda las virtudes de Casino Royale.

Y nos encontramos con SPECTRE, que reconozco que la primera mitad va bien, perdonas las chorradas...pero llegan a la base del malo, y el guión entra en modo RANDOM, rozando niveles de Austin Powers, y por supuesto enlazando a las 3 anteriores como el puto culo.

Si te encantan las peliculas como Moonraker, Panorama para Matar o Muere otro Día, esta te parecerá una obra Maestra.

SPOILERS TOCHOS.

- Los titulos de inicio, es asombroso, ese homenaje al Hentai que se casca Mendes.

-La Base de SPECTRA, que explota de una manera tan absurdamente gratuita y tan RANDOM.

- El villano, Waltz que es el Hermanastro de Bond y que es Blofeld, una mezcla rancia entre el Nazi de Malditos Bastardos, un Voyeur y el Doctor maligno, .

-Enlazan espantosamente mal las 3 peliculas anteriores, TODOS LOS MALOS DE ESTE BOND, ERAN DE SPECTRA...PORQUE LLEVABAN EL MISMO ANILLO!!!....COMO? PERO....a ver si Bardem, iba muy a su puta bola....

-Batista tan desaprovechado.

-El CGI DIOS COMO CANTA POR TODOS LADOS.

-James Bond, con sus problemas de Cleptomanía.

-Folleteo gratuito tras la muerte de BATISTA (Desaprovechado de cojones)

- El plan, chorra no, lo siguiente...Dominar el mundo a traves del espionaje pero que una gran parte del presupuesto de SPECTRA, se dedique a joderle la vida a Bond.… Expand

0 of 4 users found this helpful04

All this user's reviews

5

Jess_HillNov 18, 2015

A disappointing addition to the franchise, with little to recommend it. Everything is bland, predictable, unsexy and lacklustre. There are some good stunts and action sequences, but you don't really care about the outcomes, and the pacing isA disappointing addition to the franchise, with little to recommend it. Everything is bland, predictable, unsexy and lacklustre. There are some good stunts and action sequences, but you don't really care about the outcomes, and the pacing is sluggish, meaning everything feels slow and lacking in tension. Bellucci is utterly wasted, Bautista has a single word line, and Waltz is as excellent as he can be with what he's been given. This is marginally better than Quantam of Solace, but that's hardly praise, and with the worst theme yet, it's ultimately unsatisfying. 5.37/10… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

wcrosherNov 6, 2015

Craig still fits the role incredibly well and the use of practical effects and solid camerawork are present, but Spectre misses the mark on its plot, its attempts to be more campy than its last three predecessors, and its stunning lack ofCraig still fits the role incredibly well and the use of practical effects and solid camerawork are present, but Spectre misses the mark on its plot, its attempts to be more campy than its last three predecessors, and its stunning lack of Christoph Waltz. Spectre tries to match with the amazing Bond films like Casino Royale and Skyfall, but instead reaches the points of Quantum of Solace.… Expand

4 of 6 users found this helpful42

All this user's reviews

5

StatlerWaldorfNov 7, 2015

Daniel Craig's got the right idea, whoever wrote this clearly did not. Or maybe they're just trying out some really high-concept redefinition of film convention, for I admit, as a two-and-a-half hour preview for the other three new-Bonds itDaniel Craig's got the right idea, whoever wrote this clearly did not. Or maybe they're just trying out some really high-concept redefinition of film convention, for I admit, as a two-and-a-half hour preview for the other three new-Bonds it works really well. You will leave without remembering much of what transpired, but really wanting to remember what happened in the first two movies. When you go to pirate them you will throw "Skyfall" into the mix just so you can see the intro again. Can you judge a Bond by its intro song? For "SPECTRE": yes. It warns you that they will be trying too hard to connect in the other films, it warns you that there are lazily-written love stories, and it generally does a good job of capturing the lack of oomf that defines "SPECTRE". Maybe it's better than "Quantum of Solace"? Maybe it's just hard to accept after "Skyfall". What made the Craig-Bonds work was their departure from the cartoonish form that used to define Bond. Tying this arc together with a wider nostalgia seems like a good idea, but "SPECTRE" ends up built on ill-fated nods to everything that came before it and little value of its own accord. You will have figured out the plot within the first 15 or so minutes-- it helps that it's been done before. This leaves Christoph Waltz as the main draw. The man was born to play a Bond villain, how could that not be perfect? I will tell you. Just don't give him any screen time. When he’s on screen, don’t let him say anything interesting unless he’s quoting another movie. I sort of wish they had cast Rob Brydon instead. How’s that for a nod?… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

5

dexshirtsNov 6, 2015

Worst Daniel Craig Bond film, and you can tell he's not really bothered about it. An 'original' story made for the cinema, which you can tell it's not a normal Bond movie. Poor storyline, predictable events and ridiculous situations. Too muchWorst Daniel Craig Bond film, and you can tell he's not really bothered about it. An 'original' story made for the cinema, which you can tell it's not a normal Bond movie. Poor storyline, predictable events and ridiculous situations. Too much linking back to the previous Bond movies. Contradictions and plot holes galore. Really frustrating movie.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

5

mace8704Nov 6, 2015

This is on par with Quantum of Solace, and that is not a compliment. The motivation of the villain is poorly developed. The romantic pacing between Craig and the two Bond girls is so hap hazard that I almost laughed in the theater becauseThis is on par with Quantum of Solace, and that is not a compliment. The motivation of the villain is poorly developed. The romantic pacing between Craig and the two Bond girls is so hap hazard that I almost laughed in the theater because Craig will go from coldly threatening them to passionately kissing them in literally seconds. The action sequences had a lot more CGI and reminded more of Brosnan era Bond than Craig's previous work. Maybe that's a good thing for you, but it's not for me.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

5

CandyVaDCNov 6, 2015

It entertained me and it was interesting to see the changes that this Bond film made to the regular Bond movie formula. Now apparently Bond has feelings and cares about a random girl enough to settle down. And all the women he beds now aren'tIt entertained me and it was interesting to see the changes that this Bond film made to the regular Bond movie formula. Now apparently Bond has feelings and cares about a random girl enough to settle down. And all the women he beds now aren't 18 year old beauty queens because now he starts the movie hooking up with a middle aged widow. I have to say that the main female lead later in the movie is less than stunning, compared to the typical Bond girls of yore, but that's probably intentional for some reason to show a different kind of beauty in this supposed evolved culture of ours where James Bond can be sexually attracted to a woman over 40 and a girl with less than supermodel looks and a rather average body. It was a bit jarring to see them so concerned with getting dressed up and changing into multiple fancy formal outfits as if they were attending the academy awards, when they were in the middle of no-where without much luggage. I guess that's how a spy packs for an emergency trip to save humanity at a moment's notice: perfectly coordinated outfits replete with matching sunglasses and accessories while they dodge bullets in immaculately tailored and freshly pressed Gucci couture. And when did Bond become so non-sexual and not take off his shirt even once? Yes, Daniel Craig is getting old, and there are shots in the movie where the lighting makes his face look like a deflated radial tire because it's so sunken in and wrinkled, but at least his chest must still look good I would imagine. Mind you, I'm glad I saw the film, and it entertained me, but it wasn't a movie that made you say, "Gee, that was the best Bond movie I've seen in a long time." Easily forgettable 15 minutes after you leave the theater.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

5

Movie-Freak-KKNov 8, 2015

I am actually surprised by how disappointing this film is. The action is redundant and dull, the pacing is often too slow., the sub-plot is boring and the villain is too weak ( Christop Waltz did great but underused ). Mission Impossible :I am actually surprised by how disappointing this film is. The action is redundant and dull, the pacing is often too slow., the sub-plot is boring and the villain is too weak ( Christop Waltz did great but underused ). Mission Impossible : Rogue Nation executed it so well, but Specre simply failed to do so.… Expand

4 of 6 users found this helpful42

All this user's reviews

5

SirFatPantsNov 14, 2015

The story is a little interesting, but there is way too much action, and not enough interesting things going on. The script, character development and technical functionalities are all really good though.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

5

Jabroni316Nov 15, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. SPECTRE would be a good stand-alone movie. But since it was meant to tie with the previous 3 Bond films, then it is a poorly written one. Apart from Mr White, it is not clear as to how Vesper, Le Chiffre, Greene, Medrano and Silva are all connected to SPECTRE or Franz. This is Bond supposedly at his weakest, losing Vesper and (the previous) M and watching his former colleague (Silva) sold out MI6 information and still unable to get along with (the new) M, and the double-O program to be shut down yet when he meets Franz, there is no emotional connection at all? Here is a man, whose father once took Bond under his wings and both were supposedly dead 20 years ago, suddenly appears in front of him and Bond just runs? Bautista plays Mr Hinx, supposedly an assassin, yet the only person he kills is a "competitor"?! This is just lazy writing.

Everything went well at the beginning until the meeting scene. This is the part where they got it all wrong. Here is an organisation always in the shadows, yet exposes the main boss to Bond immediately? It should have been Franz talking all the way until he mentions Bond's name only for the latter to turn around and immediately gets knock-out cold by Mr Hinx. Sciarra's replacement need not be killed by Mr Hinx. In fact, he's got a better role to play. Then the next scene should be a torture-yet-reconciliation scene between Bond and Franz. This should be a 10-15 mins scene where Franz explains how he survive and how Le Chiffre, Greene, Medrano and Silva are all connected to him (without mentioning SPECTRE). Franz then stops Mr Hinx from kiling Bond (as it would hinder C in accomplishing the "Nine Eyes Project"). Now, instead of Bond being ahead of Mr Hinx, it is Mr Hinx always a step ahead. Mr White should not be committing suicide, it should be Mr Hinx killing him (for protecting someone / something). When Bond arrives at Altaussee, he finds White dead and searches his body only to find the old father-daughter photo. Bond then goes to the secret basement room downstairs. Snooping around, he finds a name card of a Dr Swan (not knowing she is the daughter of White). Bond leaves on the cable car, asking Q and/or Moneypenny to search on Dr Swan. He then notices someone who resembles (Sciarra's replacement) dropping by the mountain-top clinic. Bond follows him. So instead of having the interview scene, this immediately moves into the scene where Q surprises Bond with his visit and after that, the whole action scene.

Now that Dr Swan is rescued, the 3 meet at Q's hotel room to discuss the next course of action. Although Dr Swan reveals that the organisation is known as SPECTRE, she does not know its full name, its history and its members. She says her father wants her to know less about SPECTRE as it would endanger the family. She then mentions to go the L'Americain. Same scenes all the way until Bond finds the secret door. While snooping around, Mr Hinx suddenly appears and knocks Dr Swan out cold and holds her hostage and telling Bond to drop his gun. Bond is then knock-out cold. Bond wakes up finding himself in the place (where he was supposed to find). Franz greets Bond by telling him that Bond does not have to find him, because he can find Bond anytime, anywhere. Same scenes til the blow-up

The scene where Dr Swan gets kidnapped should have been where Bond, in the car with M, gets a picture of Dr Swan tied to a chair from an unknown sender. From the background, Bond deduces it is the old MI6 building. So no need for the "kidnap Bond" scene. M will just drop Bond there and head straight for C. Same scenes all the way until the bullet-proof glass. This is where the meeting with Franz via a huge monitor. Franz tells Bond that he spared his life in Rome yet Bond did this (the scars and losing one eye) to him. Franz then mentions he has Dr Swan held in the building and that there is a 3 mins time bomb to be activated. Mr Hinx appears to then push the trigger and waves goodbye. Bond runs all the way up. He looks around and hears sounds from behind a door. This is where the moment Bond opens the door, it is Mr Hinx who greets him! Mr Hinx then points Bond to the chopper that left and Bond realize that Dr Swan is in there. Both men fight all the way and with 5 secs left, both jumped off the building. Bond is then shown to leave on a speedboat chasing the chopper while Mr Hinx is then shown heading to his car. With C dead, M, Q and Moneypenny are interrogated over the hacking and stopping of the Nine Eyes Project without official approval and causing political outrage. Without Bond and/or sufficient evidence linking C to Franz or that SPECTRE exist, MI6 is now suspended and Bond is now a wanted fugitive-cum-terrorist.

No car-chase scene and no train-fight scene. This is how SPECTRE should have been. Shadowy organisation with a mysterious boss. SPECTRE 2 begins where Bond searches for Felix and Lucia to find Swan and Franz and gather info on SPECTRE and its history and activities.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

MikeWoodardJrNov 19, 2015

'Spectre' may be the most disappointing Bond film in a long time. It fails to match the drama and intensity of 'Skyfall' with horribly slow pacing, and entertaining, but ultimately useless, time-filling action sequences. The first two-thirds'Spectre' may be the most disappointing Bond film in a long time. It fails to match the drama and intensity of 'Skyfall' with horribly slow pacing, and entertaining, but ultimately useless, time-filling action sequences. The first two-thirds of the movie give you no clear indication of what threat the SPECTRE organization actually is, beyond being a secret organization, and by the time the audience is filled in, it feels too little too late. Bond's interactions with his cohorts, and attempts at humor, fall flat almost every time. Christolph Waltz is a wasted talent as the villain, almost like how Venom was jammed into the ending of Spider-Man 3. There are too many times that the movie breaks suspension of disbelief, with many characters surviving what should be clear deaths, and the plot twists near the end of the film can be seen coming a mile away. While the last act of the film had some engaging moments and interesting ideas, their value is undercut by the plodding pace of the first hour and half/two hours. It's just a shame that 'Skyfall' set such a high bar to reach, as 'Spectre' may have been a fine sequel to 'Casino Royale,' (definitely better than 'Quantum') but unfortunately the film crashes the Bond series back down to Earth. There's enough popcorn entertainment for those just sitting back to enjoy the ride, but not enough substance for those looking for real good value out of their high ticket prices.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

5

Xan_RyilNov 21, 2015

Spectre is what I call, Quantum of Solace collides Mission Impossible 5, means disappointment squared. There is a reason why Spectre would be the worst Bond movie I have ever seen. I was excited was 3 things which were never happened to thisSpectre is what I call, Quantum of Solace collides Mission Impossible 5, means disappointment squared. There is a reason why Spectre would be the worst Bond movie I have ever seen. I was excited was 3 things which were never happened to this series before. Monica Bellucci, Lea Seydoux and ofcorse Skyfall.
There have been good Bond girls but never been such a magnificent, mysterious and furious combination. Where Bellucci has a cult following for being best Italian seductress, Seydous has been famous for her untamed method and flawless aura. But what a waste, none of the ladies were given the role to justify they hype they created with the casting. Seydoux’ character was the most confused in the film, one minute she is mourning her father and next she is flirting and seducing Bond. She very much reminds you of Olga Kurylenko from Quantum of Solace.
Enough with my outrage now little business. Opening sequence as well as background score was top notch so as Daniel Craige. The missing elements were the key one. Strong and focused story and powerful direction. Spectre had a strong structure, a childhood jealousy at a global level. But did they really have to mix it with Privacy Rights and internal failure of MI6? Especially if they were not good at handling it. Bond is known for perfection and skills but Spectre’s fight sequence leave too much on chance. Except the opening sequence and barehanded fight in train none of the action were impressive.
Finally, adding Bautista to the caste was such a bad decision. It is perhaps something they learned from Fast and Furious who added Dwayne Johnson few years ago. And Sam Mendes should be over with defaced antagonists. Perhaps he will then concentrate on what should go on in their minds.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

HanshallDec 6, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. If I had to sum up the film in one word, that word would be: soulless. It's baffling to really understand how Spectre went wrong, but I think I've managed to find some root causes.

On paper it has the potential to be on of the better films, and the retention of the majority of the Skyfall team should have delivered a polished, and concise movie about the introduction of Bond's greatest nemesis and cinema's original megalomaniac.

A strong opening scene ends up being extremely misleading for what is yet to come although predictably, Daniel Kleinman's title sequence is as slick as ever, even if Sam Smith's theme feels awfully out of place considering the subject matter at hand: global domination and the nature of surveillance.

Post-title sequence, the cracks begin to show. The narrative of the film is what lets the whole production down. At first it may be surprising considering the misleading credits mentions the writers as Logan, Wade and Purvis, the same writing trio as Skyfall, with Wade and Purvis being veritable veterans to Craig's stint as Bond, also writing both Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. The bulk of the writing was however done by Logan and director Sam Mendes. Wade and Purvis where brought in at the last minute to touch up some of the screenplay after Craig and Mendes were dissatisfied by the finished product.

Spectre then is a cautionary tale in what happens with a lack of peer-review. Ejecting Wade and Purvis may have been a decision motivated by finance, but right now it feels like it has backfired. Logan's writing is like a mish-mash of what is "expected" from a Bond film, but not necessarily well executed.

A bland car chase through the streets of Rome (or a non-descript back alley of Rome), decides to focus on some Moore-inspired humour, as what feels like 20% of the chase focuses on an overweight gentleman in a Fiat 500, it's an attempt at humour that outstays its welcome, but don't worry, the same car chase decides its also more interested in 009's taste in music and Bond's exasperation as Q forgets to load the car with ammunition. Compare this to Quantum of Solace's rip-roaring opening car sequence, where it gets dirty, bloody and brutal. The whole scene is indicative of the film over all. There is a lack of substance to every attempt at box-ticking the Bond tropes.

The romance sub-plot is hampered by Craig and Seydoux's barren desert of chemistry. Swann bizarrely decides she doesn't want to be part of the films climax, despite assisting Bond happily up to this moment, in what is some spectacularly awful writing. "I can't do this anymore" she crones, or words to that effect, then disappears until it's her turn to be rescued by Bond, again.

It's a far cry from Green's portrayal of Vesper in Casino Royale, who is shown to have her own agendas, her own vulnerabilities. The maturity of writing between Green's Vesper and Seydoux's Swann is perfectly exemplified with the brutal stairwell fight in Casino Royale and it's aftermath, compared to the train fight. In Casino Royale, Bond is bruised, bleeding and emotion exhausted, "get Mathis" he barks at Vesper and Vesper is left visibly traumatised by the events, allowing for her and Bond's emotional guards to drop in the shower scene that follows. In Spectre, Bond barely has a hair out of place after the train fight, makes a quip and he and Swann have sex. It's awkward and emotionally shallow writing.

Blofeld is barely worth mentioning, his scenes are sparse and we are left with virtually no rapport built between him and Bond for us to be invested in seeing his demise, a waste of a character. It's almost the opposite of Skyfall's Raoul Silva, a villain that gets extensive characterisation. The principle henchman portrayed by Bautista suffers from the same treatment. He pops up to be instantly whacked back down by Bond, there is very little tension in his scenes, he never "bests" Bond in the same way that Oddjob or Jaws did. We are told he is dangerous, but what we see is incompetence.

Overall, the film feels like it's Daniel Craigs first outing as Bond, as if he does not know what type of James Bond he wants to portray. The tone sways between an attempt to ground the film in some very contemporary political commentary with the "Nine Eyes" project (a plot thread which is dropped and left completely underdeveloped) to the inane, and dare I say, childish.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

DanielGFeb 20, 2016

Get ready to fall asleep. This is easily the worst bond title to come out in a long while. Even surpassing Quantum Solace for mediocrity. Its endless scenes of boring dialogue and stiff acting. The main antagonist played by Christoph WaltzGet ready to fall asleep. This is easily the worst bond title to come out in a long while. Even surpassing Quantum Solace for mediocrity. Its endless scenes of boring dialogue and stiff acting. The main antagonist played by Christoph Waltz barely gets any screen time. Keep in mind I never found Sky Fall to be that great either. I find these Daniel Craig bond movies to be more dialogue then actual entertainment. You can tell this movie was rushed into production and it shows. Everyone in the entire film just feels so out of place and you can tell it through their acting. Anyone who gives it anything beyond a 6/10 must have been watching another film. Its bad.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

Jimi360Mar 26, 2016

Spectre had the unfortunate pleasure of attempting to follow up on the huge acclaim and success of Skyfall. High hopes were put upon Spectre, including by myself, as one of the best actors in the world at the moment, Christoph Waltz, wasSpectre had the unfortunate pleasure of attempting to follow up on the huge acclaim and success of Skyfall. High hopes were put upon Spectre, including by myself, as one of the best actors in the world at the moment, Christoph Waltz, was snapped up as the villain. Despite this, Spectre never gets anywhere near the bar that Skyfall or previous Daniel Craig instalments have set.

What Spectre does well is progress the stories of some of the side characters, such as the new M (Ralph Fiennes) as he struggles with a few sub-plots within the film. Q is also an excellent character once again, adding some witty little remarks to Bond and his accomplices. Despite not speaking, aside one word, Dave Bautista is a terrifying bodyguard as Mr Hinx, and does everything he is asked.

The problem is here, there is absolutely nothing new. Spectre is just recycled plot points from Bonds of old and, though Craig and Waltz provide equally solid performances, but there is nothing to excel on the brilliance of Skyfall or Casino Royale from earlier in the franchise. There is a basic plot, with a standard villain, with standard motives, which is so disappointing considering the recent resurgence of Bond, as well as the potential of the cast.

Die-hard Bond fans may still enjoy this movie, but as someone who just wanted a good follow-up to Skyfall I was left disappointed, personally.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

LoafyApr 11, 2016

Spectre may not be the best, but rather enjoyable. The action scenes are great, Daniel Craig is the best James Bond ever. Though the new bond girl was rather annoying with unnecessary scenes with them.There is humor in the movie from time toSpectre may not be the best, but rather enjoyable. The action scenes are great, Daniel Craig is the best James Bond ever. Though the new bond girl was rather annoying with unnecessary scenes with them.There is humor in the movie from time to time that you can get a laugh at, which does get you back right to the pace of the film. What I hated the most of spectre was the villian Oberhauser. It was a very weak performance and wasn't as sinister as silva in skyfall. Overall...yes Skyfall is the better choice but Spectre is a fun and enjoyable movie to watch.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

hassallNov 27, 2016

This movie was ok, Its wasn't bad but it wasn't good.the start of the movie was good and quite exciting and after that it was boring nothing much really Happened.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

EverfieldsDec 20, 2017

Much like Daniel Craig's previous appearances as Bond, Spectre tries with little effort to invoke the feelings and atmosphere so often present in Bond films of decades past. The occasional reference is made to Bond's origins but the filmMuch like Daniel Craig's previous appearances as Bond, Spectre tries with little effort to invoke the feelings and atmosphere so often present in Bond films of decades past. The occasional reference is made to Bond's origins but the film falls short in delivering a truly exceptional experience as it seems unable to define it's own objective. The film is conflicted in it's pursuit of relevance whilst trying to tell the story of a character that was designed for the cold war era. As a result we are met with an archaic spy film existing in a contemporary culture no longer dependent upon physical espionage. A return to the classic era is badly needed to refresh this franchise and wow new audiences with the thrill of a great Bond adventure.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

TheQuietGamerMay 10, 2016

Watching Bond at the very beginning of the movie in Mexico City during the Day of the Dead with a beautiful woman on his arm and wearing a striking skeleton mask makes one thing very clear from the get go; that this is going to be a gorgeousWatching Bond at the very beginning of the movie in Mexico City during the Day of the Dead with a beautiful woman on his arm and wearing a striking skeleton mask makes one thing very clear from the get go; that this is going to be a gorgeous film. It even capitalizes on that with some surprising destruction that makes you think that the rest of the movie is going to be just as exciting as those opening minutes. However as soon as that surprisingly, yet appreciated, comedic ending to the scene happens it's straight to formula.

This is very much a case of been there, done that, and seen it all before. Formulaic to a T, there's almost no sense of excitement as I found myself predicting everything that would happen next. The plot tries hard to be something bigger than the average Bond affair by having a sense of connectivity to the previous Daniel Craig movies, but it follows the exact same formula the series has been using for years. Christoph Waltz plays a potentially cool villain who has some real ties to our hero. However a painful lack of screen time renders that moot.

Outside of a surprise fight between Craig and Bautista that literally comes out of nowhere the action suffers from the same problem; predictability. That's really the issue with everything in the movie. It's the same stuff we've seen over and over again in this very series making it's return once again. There are moments where it looks they wanted to add more depth to everything, but ultimately just ended up delivering the same old, same old. The perfect example of this is with the new "Bond girl."

There's a point in the movie where it becomes clear that they are setting up Léa Seydoux's character to be more meaningful to Bond than the typical one night stand. Someone he can actually end up settling down with. This however does not occur to the audience until the movie outright says it. Why? Because there's literally nothing to distinguish her from any of the more generic Bond girls that have come before her. Any chemistry between Seydoux and Craig is unnoticeable as Seydoux is playing the most generic of Bond girl stereotypes. She feels exactly as important to the plot as Monica Bellucci was earlier in the film. Basically just nothing more than a pretty face for Bond to have sex with. I was literally baffled when the movie tried to convince me there was any sort of actual connection between the two, much less love.

To be honest "SPECTRE" is a lot like the majority of Bond girls. Gorgeous to look at, but lacking any sort of originality or substance to back up those good looks. It actually ends up being worth less to the audience than a Bond girl is to Bond. At least Bond can get an afternoon of pleasure from a Bond girl before he casts her aside. The audience won't be able to even get that from this movie. It's an exercise in familiarity. A few bits of humor scattered throughout and dazzling views keep things from getting too dull, but they can't save the entire thing from being boring. I think it's time to revoke 007's license to kill.

4.5/10… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

4

namelessNov 9, 2015

I am a James Bond fan. I couldnt' wait to see this one. The first hour is great but the last 30 minutes is flat. There are thing in this movie, that many other actions movies have educated us aren't realistic to happen but in this movie theyI am a James Bond fan. I couldnt' wait to see this one. The first hour is great but the last 30 minutes is flat. There are thing in this movie, that many other actions movies have educated us aren't realistic to happen but in this movie they do.... aaarruuggh. Instead of the action speeding up it is a mix of too fast or too slow editing with illogical relationships. The director Sam Mendes has lost his touch. Something went terriblly wrong in finishing this movie. Go see Casino Royale or wait until it comes to TV (so you can fast forward), or go to another movie in the last 30 minutes so the good feeling won't be wasted. Movies live and die by the endings and you can watch this one die in the last 30 minutes with absurdities. It insults my intelligence. If this wasn't a James Bond film it would be rated lower.… Expand

5 of 8 users found this helpful53

All this user's reviews

4

crnppsclsFeb 28, 2016

The beginning of Spectre is sublime and good Bond. By which i mean the location, a little character development and damn good destruction, it is taken too far on the latter point however.

Same old rhetoric in mi5, Fiennes is good as M, BenThe beginning of Spectre is sublime and good Bond. By which i mean the location, a little character development and damn good destruction, it is taken too far on the latter point however.

Same old rhetoric in mi5, Fiennes is good as M, Ben Whishaw as Q is cool but not nearly nerdy and as intolerant, as you might expect of Bond's making light of his tech advances.

Naomie Was ok as moneypenny, whether this was because she was the only cast member bond didn't sleep with is another argument.

The plot was just abysmal however. Batista as a hench could've worked but didn't. Bond just jumped on every female that got screen time. Waltz at the antagonist just didn't work, mostly due to poor writing, he just came over like a mature emo that had issues with his childhood. Blofelt, by defenition should be idk more omnipotent.

For me the 'Bond' checklist was complete; doing anything female that moves 'Check'; expensive car chase 'check'; Mi5 in disarray 'Check"; Gaudy hench with no char development 'Check'; Saving the world 'check'. Not a bad checklist but it's just been done so much better in other movies.

This film could've been worked into the next fast and furious film and no-one would've batted an eyelid.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

geedupNov 30, 2015

Clocking in at nearly, 3 hours, this movie couldn't hold my attention. Which is a shame since the Bond series used to be very engaging-special effects, hotties, etc. Craig "called this one in" with his acting, while the story itself (althoughClocking in at nearly, 3 hours, this movie couldn't hold my attention. Which is a shame since the Bond series used to be very engaging-special effects, hotties, etc. Craig "called this one in" with his acting, while the story itself (although LONG) was not very intertwined or fresh ("james, they're gonna kick you out...you're suspended, etc). I'm glad I didn't spend two cents on this.Further, I hope the talk of a new James Bond is true, cause I can't watch more of Craig,… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

4

ReubenIsAGodNov 25, 2015

Yeah it was a film....didnt really like it all that much....it had some intresting ideas.....i loved the villian, for what little we saw of him, but as a whole this film just left a sour taste in my tounge. Just felt really hollow and clichéYeah it was a film....didnt really like it all that much....it had some intresting ideas.....i loved the villian, for what little we saw of him, but as a whole this film just left a sour taste in my tounge. Just felt really hollow and cliché as a whole. Had some really cheesy dialog as well, not in a fun way either. Had some awesome action, but what is action without a conflicting edge of your seat plot with heavy themes and an emotional journey.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

4

ArgeonNov 13, 2015

Ridiculously boring, absolutely cliche, and very uninspired Bond movie. From a terrible song to a terrible Bond girl to the terribly under-recognized villain to awful fight scenes. The only thing redeemable about this movie is the fact thatRidiculously boring, absolutely cliche, and very uninspired Bond movie. From a terrible song to a terrible Bond girl to the terribly under-recognized villain to awful fight scenes. The only thing redeemable about this movie is the fact that it has some very well shot pictures, but even then it has an awful mustiness to it.… Expand

4 of 6 users found this helpful42

All this user's reviews