[yasr_overall_rating]
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.
I am by no means a Bond aficionado. In fact, I often scurried away at the sight or sound of the older Bond films cropping up on the television, protesting the cheesy machismo image of the man darting across the screen. What some people saw as suave and classy, I viewed as cheap and misogynistic. But what did a 10 year-old me know about anything? In spite of my desire to escape Bond, Bond had already permeated my psyche through Nickelodeon kid culture (“Inspector Gadget” and “All That”) and the ever-popular Bond spoofing film series “Austin Powers” (which I was absolutely obsessed with). One may think, given these facts, that I may be a most incompatible candidate to review a Bond movie. But with that said, the reboot of the film series with Dainel Craig as James Bond won me over.
Craig is icy and calculating, with a small pocket of humanity hidden away. There’s a coarse charm about him that’s addicting as you watch him glide across the screen, sleek as a cat, from one disaster to another starting with “Casino Royale” and on through to “Spectre.” My hopes were high for “Spectre,” as I was still reeling from the moodiness and complexity of Sam Mendes’ “Skyfall.” But sometimes the anticipation is more fun than the actual product. The high is dampened once you get what you’ve been waiting for, expectations slashed and energy exhausted, the film rolls and the moment has passed.
With the expectations to trump the success of “Skyfall,” director Sam Mendes and writing staff (John Logan, Neal Purvis, & Robert Wade) fall a bit short with “Spectre,” nodding to more traditional Bond films, with cocky cheesy lines, white cats, and minimally verbal brutes. The very things that made me cringe as a kid. I often felt my face produce the sourest of scowls for these brief moments. “Spectre,” may indeed end up the red headed stepchild of the four films. But that isn’t to say “Spectre” didn’t dazzle with a bit of fashionable action and scenery.
We are taken to Mexico City, Rome, Austria, Morocco and London, with a rogue Bond (often with help from familiars Moneypenny (Naomie Harris) and Q (Ben Whishaw)) and Madeleine Swann (Léa Seydoux), the daughter of former nemesis, Mr. White, who is more than capable of taking care of herself but still, nonetheless susceptible to Bond’s charms. The threat of an all seeing and hearing, Big Brother-esque organization, the main cause of the world’s current turmoil, looms heavy, and the mastermind behind it all is all too familiar with Bond, roots and wounds running very deep.
The motivation to keep excited is dulled when the film folds out like predictable clockwork, and gives a lame attempt to hurriedly tie up all loose ends in a half-hearted reveal. Daniel Craig continues to hold his own and Léa Seydoux is refreshing (although I will never be able to buy into their romance), but as much as I adore Christoph Waltz, his character, Franz Oberhauser, was most disappointing. Perhaps past villainous incarnations jaded my expectations, or the fact that his destructive prerogatives boiled down to “daddy” issues left me entirely disenchanted.
“Spectre,” is sure to be a polarizing film among die-hard fans. It feels like the end, and it perhaps may be if the rumors turn out to be true concerning Daniel Craig’s departure from the film series. But regardless, whether or not “Spectre,” is deemed a failure, Daniel Craig still wins at being James Bond.
In theaters now
