![Spectre [DVD] [2015]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81kus1J+yKL._SY300_.jpg)
![Spectre [DVD] [2015]](https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81kus1J+yKL._AC_UL116_SR116,116_.jpg)
![No Time To Die (James Bond) [DVD] [2021]](https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71T2aDKfmIL._AC_UL116_SR116,116_.jpg)
![Skyfall [DVD] [2012] [2017]](https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71kVLSKFghL._AC_UL116_SR116,116_.jpg)
![Skyfall [DVD] [2012] [2017]](https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71kVLSKFghL._AC_UL160_SR160,160_.jpg)
![Quantum of Solace [DVD] [2008] [2009]](https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/91KNFZ+llUL._AC_UL160_SR160,160_.jpg)
![Casino Royale (2006) [DVD] [2006]](https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81g5MtvsGtL._AC_UL160_SR160,160_.jpg)
![No Time To Die (James Bond) [DVD] [2021]](https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71T2aDKfmIL._AC_UL160_SR160,160_.jpg)
![The World Is Not Enough [DVD] [1999]](https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/5165N3BKW6L._AC_UL160_SR160,160_.jpg)
![Tomorrow Never Dies [DVD] [1997]](https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81yhrNFFagL._AC_UL160_SR160,160_.jpg)
SPECTRE is not a great Bond film but it is a very good one, the minuses - aside from a pitifully bad Andrew Scott in an unfortunately substantial supporting role (as the person behind me muttered in his third scene, "Who'd he *beep* to get the job?") - are more niggles than gaping sores. As the final scene of Skyfall which rebooted the series to its 60s prime indicated, it’s in many ways a more traditional Bond film than Craig’s previous films, adding a bit more Roger Mortis direlogue and another gadget filled Aston Martin for those in the US market that keep on kvetching about wanting more jokes and gadgets, but never enough so to drag it back to the series camp dog days of the early 80s. And, of course, it reintroduces SPECTRE and the series most iconic villain complete with a very 21st century spin on world domination, at once seeing himself as a technological visionary while pursuing a much more personal vendetta with Bond that is more than just being miffed at his plans constantly being foiled. And it’s quite a neat little scheme that ties in with the organisation’s criminal origins from the novels and the modern cyber surveillance era that governments put their trust in over those pesky human elements. Which, in turn, neatly ties in with the intriguing thread of uncertainty running throughout Craig’s tenure.
Over the course of four films we’ve seen Craig’s Bond progressing from the question of whether he'll make the grade to whether he'll keep his job - resigning for love, forced out by the new broom as unfit and, now that they're in that "Will he do another?" phase (of course he will), playing on the whole does he or doesn't he still work there thing as Whitehall bureaucrats who put their faith in drones to do what the old 00s used to do see his occasional bull-in-a-china-shop approach as the perfect excuse to close up MI5 and pension off M for good. Bond’s status is left noticeably open in the film’s postscript that could just as easily act as a wrapup for his era, just in case, but in many ways this is a continuation of the way the series has been feeling the need to justify its continued existence in an age when people claim that the lower grossing Bourne films - which lift so much so brazenly from the Bonds - supposedly make him irrelevant, just as with GoldenEye the series was making its case that it was still relevant after the fall of the USSR and a seven year hiatus, but it seems almost a defining feature of Craig’s flawed superspy and his learning curve.
Unfortunately the Whitehall subplot falls victim to Andrew Scott’s absolutely dreadful non-performance: an actor who only seems to be able to work in two registers, Graham Norton on steroids-style hysterical screaming queen or bored somnambulist mumbling his way through his dialogue in the dreariest way possible, he opts for the latter option here. While his stereotypical bean counting minor politician’s obsession with buzz words and technology is the kind of thankless role that a better or even merely competent actor could have made at least something out of, it just falls completely flat thanks to his droning delivery. Still, at least Tanya Roberts can now take comfort in only giving the second worst performance in a Bond film involving more than two lines of dialogue. The film’s other miscast is Thomas Newman, whose intentionally anonymous score doesn’t get in the way of the film but doesn’t lift it either, only briefly working in the car chase (which acknowledges the problems of trying to drive fast in Rome even in the middle of the night) and when he quotes the title song (or at least the section that sounds suspiciously like the intro to GoldenEye).
Thankfully the rest of the film is strong enough to overcome these problems. It’s both plot and character led rather than simply hoping from action set piece to set piece via the odd romantic liaison, giving the mission a very personal motive as Bond has to confront the ghosts of his past while also tying up all the loose ends from the previous films, such as the fate of Quantum and Jesper Christensen’s Mr White. Not that there isn’t the requisite action, the film kicking off with the most spectacular (in the cast of thousands epic sense of the word) pretitle sequence in any Bond film, Sam Mendes taking his lead from its Mexican Day of the Dead setting to throw in a Touch of Evil-inspired lengthy unbroken opening shot, and there’s a lengthy fight through several carriages of a train with Dave Bautista that almost threatens to rival the punch up in From Russia in Love but can’t resist ending on a joke that seems to have slipped in from an old Roger Moore film. And in many ways this does resemble one of the more serious Roger Moore films rather than the Connery-leaning previous Craig entries, with a lighter tone and the dry humour that usually goes over the heads of those complaining that the Craig films are completely humourless replaced by more obvious gags (the punchline to two separate scenes is the same four letter word) while the gadgets are simultaneously prominent and dismissed in a running gag that owes a little to Mission: Impossible Ghost Protocol. They haven't as overtly Americanized the formula as they so disastrously attempted with Licence to Kill (which was designed specifically to increase the franchise's appeal in the US and ended up being the least successful there), but this definitely leans more to Roger Moore's more serious and US-friendly Bonds than Connery.
It’s also a film that references Bond’s literary and cinematic heritage and reworks it in interesting ways. While there are a lot of nods to earlier films, they’re much more subtle than the constant poking in the ribs of Die Another Day, working more as Easter eggs for the hardcore Bond aficionados (there's a nice Hildebrandt Rarity reference that plays on how few people know the title, Q stays at the - presumably Tom - Pevsner Hotel, the title sequence starts off with a recreation of the Bond with no face OHMSS poster and, like the OHMSS title sequence, has clips of earlier adventures, and there’s even a riff on TV’s The Man From U.N.C.L.E.’s bulletproof glass pretitle sequence). It also puts a nice reversal on the traditional destroying the villain’s fortress finale by choosing a very different battleground for the final confrontation that brings things much closer to home, at once acknowledging the formula while reworking it in a different way than you initially expect. That approach is particularly intriguing in the way the writers weave the Oberhauser back story from the books (Oberhauser was Bond’s guardian after the death of his parents) into the Blofeld mythology of the films. Indeed, Christopher Waltz’s Oberhauser is given the same kind of introduction ‘Number One’ got in the first Bond films, a great entrance presenting him as a faceless figure dominating the room with a quietly commanding voice (his first line even sounds like Eric Pohlman’s Number One), and, thankfully, unlike other Oscar winners who can do menace tend to when cast as Bond villains – and yes Christopher Walken and Javier Bardem, I do mean you – he doesn’t camp the role up but plays it straight. The menace doesn’t come, but he remains a credibly motivated figure rather than a clownish stereotype.
One of the reasons the menace never really materialises is that he’s more of a manipulator than taking the direct approach. The film’s torture scene – which seems inspired as much by the 1973 BBC documentary Omnibus’ recreation of the circular saw scene from Goldfinger with Graham Crowden as the surgically clad villain as by the book itself – doesn’t really work because even though he’s in the same room, Waltz remains at a remove from his prey. It’s too hi-tech, too coldly remote, especially compared to the intimidating simplicity and directness of Casino Royale’s dank brutality: pushing buttons just doesn’t carry the discomfort of a shivering and completely vulnerable man tied to a chair and a villain casually swinging a length of very heavy rope. But it’s certainly no deal breaker, and it’s a character you feel still has places to go if they decide to bring him back.
One of the most pleasant surprises in the supporting cast is just how good Lea Seydoux is, particularly after how terrible (and very, very badly miscast) she was in Mission: Impossible Ghost Protocol. In many ways she’s the perfect partner for Craig’s version of the government assassin with commitment issues (and all three major characters in the film have issues stemming from their parents) and it would be intriguing to see her return in the next film to see how their relationship worked, or didn’t. It’s also nice to see M, Moneypenny, Q and Bill Tanner get out of the office and into the field to take care of business even if there is a bit of the Scooby Gang about it at the end when Paddington Q demonstrates his internet superpowers by hacking into the most complicated security system in the world in 25 minutes, and in a moving car under attack from baddies too. It’s not the only moment that strains even a Bond movie’s suspension of disbelief (Bond tracks down SPECTRE’s HQ because – wait for it – its mysterious boss hasn’t changed his mobile phone for years!) and there are moments of redundant direlogue like “You’ve got a secret. Something you don’t want to tell anyone” (thanks for the definition, guys), but then the Bond series has never been Le Carre territory.
All of which probably sounds more negative than positive, but while it’s a film that doesn’t scale the heights of the series, it’s a very entertaining entry that feels more like a two hour film than a two-and-a-half hour one, balancing some interesting ideas with the big action the Bond formula demands. And for most of those two-and-a-half hours, I was sitting there with a big smile on my face.
Sadly, as is increasingly the case as the physical media home video market declines, the extras package on the Blu-ray is nothing to write home about: a few inconsequential internet video blogs, a longer one on the opening sequence, stills gallery and three trailers.
Frequently bought together
Customers who bought this item also bought
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
Spectre review with Spoilers. - A solid Bond film that doesn't quite deliver anything new.
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 19 November 2015
Starting on the positive side and what I liked about Spectre, the visuals & cinematography are excellent. Whether it's the lakes and mountains of Austria, the London Skyline or Rome lit up at night with a gold tint, it all looks gorgeous. High production values help. The opening in Mexico provides an exciting action packed start to the film in the tradition of the Bond series. Daniel Craig has totally mastered the role and the story also follows on from Skyfall in delving a little more into Bond's backstory. Another thing I appreciate about Spectre is the use of stunts and practical effects, in a world where poorly rendered CGI is far too prominent, it's refreshing that films on this scale are still making an effort to create scenes that look real and believable.After Mexico, Bond's next destination is Rome which features a great car chase, some more revelation as well as an introduction to the bad guy's henchman who really looks the part. Monica Bellucci is introduced here too, though probably for less than 3 minutes of screen time. Odd considering the makers of Spectre gave themselves lots of pats on the back for casting an older woman, then they practically cut her out the film. Instead the main Bond girl is played by Lea Seydoux whose character does come off a little bland, though she's far from the worst Bond girl either and she does feel quite grounded and believable which was an element I did like. To be honest she is something of an underdeveloped sex object, but aren't most Bond girls? Bond next travels from Austria to Morocco before the climax takes place back in London. Lea Seydoux's relationship with Bond also seems to change depending on the weather, she gets all hot and steamy in North Africa.In general I'd say that my main complaint about Spectre is the lack of originality shown at times with far too many nods to previous films, the fight on a train with the beefy henchman (From Russian with Love), Spectre being revealed (Dr No), the Octopus imagery (Octopussy), rebooting Blofeld (You Only Live Twice), a chase in a carnival (Thunderball). Other cliches returning include the villain's hidden base, the gadgets and even the cat. The film also has some awkward jarring shifts in tone, trying to keep the film dark and gritty yet reintroduce those lighter elements from the old bond films, like the one liners and the super car.The plot is also identical to Captain America the Winter Solider, a very well received film which came out a year before this. In both films a new piece of dangerous technology is unveiled and the clock is ticking before it goes live. To make matters worse the intelligence organisation our hero works for has been secretly infiltrated by the enemy who plan to use that technology for their owns ends. At the climax of the film our hero and his small team of trusted friends launch an attack to stop the villain and unmask the traitor. It's so disappointing the writers of Spectre just copied this story instead of actually thinking up something original themselves, that would have meant too much effort I suppose....One of the things I think Spectre really lacked is a strong female character for Bond to interact with, like Vesper in Casino Royale and M in Skyfall. Spectre makes heavy references to Daniel Craig's other films, expect for Quantum of Solace (The critics didn't like that one). There's a clumsy attempt to try and tie them all together, "It's been me James, the author of all your pain." - Quite how exactly we're not really told...The whole motivation of the villain is also a bit unclear and daft, 'I was jealous of you James as a boy, so twenty years later ......I'm out to get you'....or something like that. ....The studio not admitting that Christoph Waltz would be Blofeld was a bit daft, everyone knew he would be. The way they refused to comment on his role just made it more obvious they were hiding it. In the end it was about as effective as the attempt to keep Khan's identity secret before Star Trek 2 came out. Keeping plot and character details hidden is becoming harder and harder to do these days and Sony didn't fall anybody with Blofeld. It was a question of not if but when he would turn up. The whole ending to, the idea that James Bond would want to quit the service and settle down with a woman as dull as the one he just met is a little hard to believe. The song also didn't quite do it for me, though again, it's far from the worst.Overall Spectre's not a terrible film, you have the globe trotting adventure, a strong cast, well executed fight scenes and it captures that cool element that is a James Bond movie should have, but comparing it to the other Daniel Craig Bond Films, Spectre leans more towards Quantum of Solace than it does Skyfall, it also really lacks originality and a solid well developed script.Thank you for reading.
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 19 November 2015
Images in this review
