SPECTRE

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