SPECTRE (PG-13)
Released by Sony Pictures
Reviewed by Adam Mast
In SPECTRE, Bond is back, and while this latest entry in the enduring series is certainly bigger than ever, something is amiss. Returning director Sam Mendes knows how shoot a movie to be sure, but in the year of the spy movie, SPECTRE can’t hold a candle to the likes of the similarly themed MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE-ROGUE NATION. And despite its epicness, it isn’t as flat out entertaining as SPY or KINGSMAN. Even Steven Spielberg’s understated BRIDGE OF SPIES manages to trump SPECTRE in the drama department. Perhaps the high standard set by the much beloved SKYFALL was too much for this movie to live up to.
As SPECTRE opens, James Bond pursues a target in Mexico City during a Day of the Dead celebration. Following an exciting if over-the-top helicopter chase and a well sung but ultimately less-than-memorable Sam Smith theme song (which accompanies a strange opening credit sequence that would have been more appropriate in OCTOPUSSY), the actual plot is set into motion.
Something is eating at Bond, and while he’s reluctant to clue his superiors (including M, played by Ralph Fiennes) in on what exactly that “something” might be, lovely Moneypenny (played by Naomie Harris) is able to get to the truth. Don’t worry, no spoilers here, only to say that the contents of a mysterious video lead Bond on a rogue mission that brings him face to face with quietly villainous Oberhauser (Christoph Waltz) and a vicious, lumbering henchman called Hinx (played by Dave Bautista).
Of course, during his mission, Bond makes time for the ladies. In this case, the lovely women in question come in the form of the bombshell widow (played by Monica Bellucci) of a man Bond has on his target list and a new love interest (played by Léa Seydoux) who might just have the cure for 007’s lack-of-trust issues.
As expected, SPECTRE is a big globe-trotting adventure, and Mendes and cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytema shoot the stunning locales—most notably a gorgeous snowy Austrian backdrop—in breathtaking fashion. The action is plentiful, too, and includes among other things a ridiculous but entertaining sequence in which Bond mounts a rescue mission by way of plane, a car chase through Rome, and an intense, vintage Bond-inspired fist fight aboard a speeding train.
Unfortunately though, all the beautifully conceived action and stunning locales can’t keep SPECTRE from feeling over-bloated. And at a whopping 2 1/2 hours, how could it not feel over-bloated? The STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS-like misdirection involving a key character in the picture is fairly obvious and does nothing to help matters. Worse still, the bond (if you’ll pardon the pun) between Bond and his new love interest feels slight and phony. Some might argue that it’s ok because this is a James Bond movie and his womanizing ways simply come with the territory, but the film ultimately suffers as a result of their undercooked romance, particularly in the final act.
With his piercing blue eyes, undeniable confidence, and perfectly fitting physicality, Craig makes for a solid Bond; but admittedly, the constant brooding and pouting expression do tend to wear thin on occasion. Yes, this is an edgier incarnation of Bond. But seriously, would it hurt the guy to smile once in a while? Still, my wife wasn’t complaining. He is, without question, her favorite Bond. She adores him. I’ll stick with Connery.
Waltz is always a much-welcome (and immensely entertaining) onscreen presence, but we’ve seen him do the villain role countless times now (see INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, THE GREEN HORNET, WATER FOR ELEPHANTS, and, to a certain extent, BIG EYES), and quite honestly, it’s getting a little boring. At the very least though, it’s fun watching Waltz turn up the menace a couple of notches in the final act, even if he can’t quite rival the offbeat evil that was Javier Bardem’s Silva in SKYFALL.
The women here aren’t really given a whole lot to do. The gorgeous Bellucci shows up briefly in the first act, engages in a brief exchange with Bond, and promptly follows up that exchange with a little pillow talk, never to be seen in the film again. Seydoux has more to do as the primary Bond girl here, but even her Madeleine Swann is reduced to the damsel-in-distress role for much of the film.
Bautista is a ton of fun as silent henchman Hinx. Hinx is a decidedly old-school Bond villain. He’s simply on hand to look physically imposing, and physically imposing he is. It’s actually incredibly amusing that he only utters a single strategically placed word of dialogue in the entire film, and it’s a damn shame that it wasn’t an “f” bomb, because that would have been wholly appropriate given the context of his big moment.
The biggest problems with SPECTRE clearly rest in the writing. This film tries to do far too much. It throws in ridiculously over-the-top but fitting action and even a few moments of high camp; but at the same time, it desperately wants to be taken seriously in a “Dark Knight” sort of way. What’s more, SPECTRE ambitiously and somewhat foolishly tries to tie the Craig-era Bond films together in a way that feels overwrought rather than intriguing. Worse still, Bond’s arc in this picture is undefined. For the majority of the film, he’s painted as a cold individual, but in the anticlimactic final moments, he suddenly gains a conscience that makes very little sense. Surely, it is implied that his relationship with Madeleine has softened him, but again, there is so little chemistry between them and so little time invested in their so called relationship, that doesn’t come across at all. Ultimately, Bond’s final moment with Oberhauser, is strangely ineffective.
Again, SPECTRE isn’t a bad movie. But it does lack surprise, and despite the overall impressive look of the picture, the script falls flat. As far as Craig’s run as Bond goes, this one ranks above QUANTUM OF SOLACE, but it falls considerably short of matching the thrills and drama provided by CASINO ROYALE and SKYFALL.
Comments are closed.