Spectre (2015) – A Ghost of its Predecessors

So Spectre has been running for about a week now and has already surpassed Skyfall’s opening weekend, but despite its success it seems to have divided opinion somewhat. With Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace and Skyfall, everyone was pretty much in agreement that they were fantastic, bad and great respectively, but now we are at an impasse, and there doesn't seem to be any real consensus as to whether Spectre is good or not. Of course, being British, I have seen the new Bond and so while it’s still hot in our minds, I've decided to summarise my general thoughts on the film and the things I picked up on; my first actual film review, if you like. I'm going to try and keep it somewhat short, so without further ado, let’s proceed.

First let’s establish, I enjoyed Spectre. As an action blockbuster, it’s a solid ride and hits all the marks you’d expect; expensive cars being trashed, attractive women, explosions etc. Compared to other blockbusters like Transformers, for example, this is an engaging and competent thriller. Then again, anything looks engaging and competent when compared to Transformers. Even Alien Resurrection looks competent compared to Transformers, but now we’re getting off topic. Spectre only really falters when you start to look at it as a Bond film, and particularly as a successor to the previously mentioned Casino Royale and Skyfall.

Here’s the problem; Casino Royale and Skyfall set the bar so high for the Bond series, that Spectre had an uphill struggle from the beginning. Compare it to those two films, especially Casino Royale, and of course it’s going to look disappointing; Casino Royale was and still is one of the best thrillers of the 2000s, and it came at a time when the Bond series was in dire need of some defibrillation. While Brosnan’s Bonds were good, and helped transition the classic Bond to a more modern audience, the series was approaching its 40^th anniversary, and the franchise was starting to grow tired. With the rise of more modern spy thrillers like The Bourne Identity, audiences were hankering after something darker, with more realistic violence and less comical villains. Casino Royale was exactly what we all wanted and so it was a major hit. But here’s the thing; Spectre is the fourth entry in this revival series, and so by now we’re expecting a dark, gritty Bond and what’s more we want it to reach the same level, if not surpass its earlier entries. So of course it’s going to seem disappointing when you hold it to those lofty expectations, but if you watch it with a fresh mind, it’s still the same Daniel Craig Bond and it’s still just as dark as ever.

That’s not to say Spectre isn't flawed; of course it’s flawed, that’s why I'm writing a post about it. Primarily, Spectre contains a lot of action set pieces, but the overarching story is loose, at best. The tighter focus and relatively simple plot of Casino Royale aren't present here, and the story sprawls both geographically and narratively. Bond’s in Mexico taking out some dude, then he’s in England where M tells him off, then suddenly he’s off to Italy where he discovers SPECTRE, then he’s off to some other dude who tells him to go to Austria so he goes to Austria and so on, and that’s not even half way through the film. I won’t go into too much plot detail because spoilers, but it really could do with a bit of a trim. It doesn't help that each of these location’s sequences are so brief it feels like we’re watching a best-bits compilation.

Then there’s the gender politics. While I am of course a supporter of equality, it’s rare for me to actually discuss it just because I find it ridiculous that we still have to discuss racism and sexism to the extent that we do. How come we’re creating supercomputers, exploring space, writing messages for extra-terrestrial life and progressively curing cancer yet we still can’t even treat each other right? Regardless, I feel something needs to be said about Spectre. It’s odd that Bond exists so prominently in our modern society whilst still being so old-fashioned in its masculinity. Bond is pretty much about fast cars, hot women and violence, and always has been, but today it seems really out of place. When we had Dame Judi Dench as M, even though Bond was still up to his usual tricks, the gender politics seemed slightly more evened out, and even Vesper from Casino Royale had a substantial role in the plot and Bond’s own character arc. But now we have a male M again, Bond’s questionable attitude to women seems more noticeable. He appears to have his way with three different women throughout the film: one in the opening sequence (supposedly, at least: we never see for sure), a widow of a dude he killed, which seemed very off, almost borderline rape, and the main Bond girl, Swan, who looks about half his age, if that. I'm not sure what to really say about it; it’s such an integral part of the Bond formula that it feels almost wrong to take it out, but it seems really unnatural and backwards in today’s society, especially as this is definitely a more modern interpretation of Bond. Not to mention (Spoilers) the climax of the film is literally Swan tied up and gagged in a building rigged to explode with a countdown timer. (End of Spoilers) Seriously.

And of course, we get the Aston Martin. After all the build-up and release of the new DB10, which was made pretty much for the film, you’d expect a lot from it. It does get a car chase, even with some gadgetry which greatly pleased my inner child, but it’s over so quickly; (Spoilers if you care about cars) Bond just dumps the car in the river after the brief chase and that’s it. Finished. This film, that was supposed to act as the main advertisement for the car, gives it barely fifteen minutes of screen time before trashing it. As a lover of Aston Martins, it was quite a disappointing dismissal of such a great looking car. And I'm really not comfortable with this trend of destroying the Aston Martin; it happened in Casino Royale and Skyfall as well, and I still find the DB5 being wrecked more emotional than M’s death. But then I'm weird like that. (End of Car Spoilers)

Lastly, the violence. It is a grittier more violent imagining of Bond as previously discussed, and now we've secured the 12A rating as a default, the violence wants to stretch its arms a bit, which I fully endorse. And some moments, such as Bond’s torture scene are particularly hard to watch, and Blofeld’s scarred eye looks fantastic. But there’s one particular moment that stands out as not quite hitting the mark. At the SPECTRE meeting, some unfortunate man gets his eyes gouged by a large burly black dude. Of course. However, this act is pathetically tame, to a nearly humorous degree. It probably doesn't help that I saw a similar act in Game of Thrones earlier that week (yes, I'm a little behind; cut me some slack) which was, of course, much more graphic. Just a decent sound effect or two would have helped. Especially thinking of a similar scene in Blade Runner; it’s not on screen particularly (unless you’re watching The Final Cut) but there’s enough information and sound effects to be suitably graphic without being as excessive as Game of Thrones. Maybe they tried to make it worse but were threatened with the 15 rating. Either way, it looks a bit pants as it is, and I can’t help but find it slightly comical, which I'm pretty sure isn't what they were going for.

Well, that about sums up all my main observations. It’s pretty safe to assume anything I didn't mention was generally sound (a good rule of thumb with my discussions). Overall, it’s definitely worth seeing, especially if you’re a fan of Bond, but don’t go in expecting Casino Royale. However, judging by the pattern that’s emerging, the next film (also to be Craig’s last) looks like it’s going to be fantastic, so let’s hope 2018’s entry really delivers. Okay, I think I've definitely exceeded what can be considered a ‘short’ review so we’ll close here for today. Besides, I've got some albums to revisit…

Spectre - 2015 – Sam Mendes - English

Score:   7

Recommendation: Medium

EDIT:  Oh yes, forgot to mention; the new theme song. While it has a decent tune and lyrics, it’s sung awfully. I don’t know who this Sam Smith guy is, but his ‘balls trapped in a vice’ singing style really doesn't do it for me, especially for a Bond song, which generally have deeper vocals. Get Adele back, she actually did it pretty well.

Summer Updates 2015

I'm back. As you may have seen, yesterday I managed to get my Metropolis post up after a week or so of trying to tweak it before forgetting about it for many months only to remember it, finish it off and post it all yesterday.

A lot of things happened in that four month stretch of inactivity, most notably my AS exams and the preparation for them, which I believe is a good enough excuse for my lack of posts (or, at least, it’s the best excuse you’re getting). But now I'm on my summer holiday, slumped in my chair failing to be a productive member of society, I'm going to try and get back on the horse and crack out a few more posts before I go back to college in September and, undoubtedly, get snowed under by the workload.

So, what do you guys have to look forward to? First thing, and probably the most exciting: Films! No, not just films I'm going to talk about on here, but actual films I've made! Yep, this year marks the first time I've actually managed to finish a video project that I can refer to as a film with a straight face, and there are plenty more to come. Here’s a quick run-through of what to expect:

•  Rapid Vengeance – The second film by me and my partner-in-crime Andrew, made last month in only three weeks for the end of our AS Film Studies. This has already been posted on Vimeo for all to see! (Link on the sidebar or click here)
• Maxwell – Me and Andrew’s first film, made for our Film Studies coursework between November 2014 and March 2015. Since it’s coursework, I can’t really post this until after results day, but you can expect this on Vimeo mid-to-late August.
• Specimen 23 – A short stop motion film I'm about to start work on. I've finally got a few technical difficulties ironed out, so hopefully I’ll start work on this within the next few days, and have it uploaded sometime in August.
• ‘Departure’ [Currently unnamed short film] – A quick little live action summer project I plan to make. I can’t say yet how long it will take or when we’ll start production, but it’s unlikely you’ll see this before September.

I’ll be making short notices on here to let you know when each of these have been uploaded, with appropriate links for you to follow as well.

Secondly, I’ll also be trying to make a few more blog posts, of course. I must admit, when I first started this blog, I already had a couple of ideas in mind of subjects to talk about, but unfortunately that idea backlog sort of dried up with the release of the Metropolis post yesterday. However, I'm definitely going to try and come up with some more interesting things to talk to you guys about, although forgive me if some of the new posts don’t reach the essay-size of previous posts, especially 2000 word epics like Michael. But I’ll definitely try to get a few up here before I go back in September.

Well, that's about it for today. Remember to check out Rapid Vengeance, follow my Vimeo for more films, and stay tuned here for more of my mildly cynical ramblings. Until next time.

Metropolis (1927) – The Real Tragedy of Cinema

It hasn't escaped my attention that the two main films I've talked about on this blog are both German films concerning crimes against children, both with single-word titles beginning with the letter M (or even being the letter M, in the former case). So, in the name of continuing this combo, let’s talk about another German film with a one-word title beginning with M. Although it’s not about paedophilia this time. Sorry.

The film in question is Metropolis, Fritz Lang’s science fiction classic of 1927, often credited as the grandfather of sci-fi films, inspiring some of the greats of the genre, including Star Wars and Blade Runner. Now, regular followers of this blog (if such creatures exist) might find this film and director ring a few bells. Well, that would be because Mr Lang is the director of M, which he made in order to recuperate his popularity after Metropolis flopped, as previously mentioned. Despite its initial poor performance though, Metropolis has gone on to become a classic piece of cinema, inspiring countless others.

The main thing I want to discuss here today is not my thoughts and feelings on the film itself, but instead Metropolis’s troubled history. It’s no secret that Metropolis is not a complete film; with its premier cut coming in at around 210 minutes, the most complete versions available today only have a mere 153 minutes of runtime, meaning nearly an hour of footage remains lost. Before the film even starts, a brief title reads as follows;

‘All that survive of the original “Metropolis” are an incomplete original negative and copies of shortened and re-edited release prints. Over a quarter of the film has to be considered lost.

The present version, which combines all of the surviving elements, attempts to recreate the film as it was shown at its premiere.'

It’s truly a heart breaking title card, and seeing it never fails to pluck away at my heart strings, but the worst part is that Metropolis has it pretty well off. For a film as long as it was, in the times when movie censorship was relentless and with such a disappointing initial gross, Metropolis is lucky to have so much of its runtime still intact, so that we can still watch and enjoy it today. But other silent films aren't so lucky. It’s said that around 90% of all silent films ever made are currently lost.

Just going to let that sink in for a second.

Back in the day, of course, no one was bothered with film preservation. Films were mostly spectacle at the time; with the illusion of motion being the USP, rather than the storytelling. A bit like nowadays. Huh, now that’s a cyclical narrative if ever I saw one. Anyway, once a film had made its initial cinema run, the tape was often simply overwritten by a new film, since tape was expensive back then. Not to mention the infamous flammability of the old film, made from Nitrocellulose, meaning that many films, if stored in warehouses, could be wiped out hundreds at a time if a fire was started.

The industry was young; they didn't know any better at the time, and similarly, film was a relatively unexplored medium. All the standard conventions in films we’re so familiar with today had to have started somewhere, and chances are this silent era was at least partly responsible. Le Voyage Dans La Lune inspired our love for Science-Fiction cinema, Un Chien Andalou sparked the experimental and risqué films I spoke of last time, and Nosferatu can be considered one of the many grandfathers of Horror films.

So think, with all the silent films we currently have, and how they've influenced the film industry as we know it, what about the others? The films that were lost, overwritten, burned?

If these films were destroyed before the right people saw them and took inspiration from them, potentially entire threads of film history could have been prevented from existing. Entire genres, technologies, franchises, even directors may cease to be.

Take me, for example. My writing of this blog, my knowledge of the industry, my obsession and love for films, all spiralled from my earliest memory; watching Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strike Back as a three year old child, a film that, along with the rest of its trilogy, was inspired by Metropolis. If Metropolis was destroyed before George Lucas ever saw it, Star Wars may never have been, and I would be a completely different person; my life changed beyond recognition, and I know I wouldn't be alone on that. Not to mention, all the other directors who were inspired by Star Wars would never have made the films they made, and you can start to see how big an effect this would have had.

Just consider for a moment that your favourite film may not exist. What if there was a certain silent film, made back in the 20's, destroyed in a fire, which one day would have become your favourite film, or perhaps inspired your favourite film? Except it never did, because the film was destroyed before you could get to it. Just sit and think about how different the history of film, nay, the history of humanity could have been if that 90% wasn't lost.

To quote Lang himself, “Why are you so interested in a picture which no longer exists?" Because that’s exactly what has happened, maybe not quite with Metropolis, but with others such as London After Midnight, the original Cleopatra, and The Fall of a Nation to name a few, they have simply ceased to exist, via our own carelessness in preserving arguably the most powerful and compelling form of art.

Some heavy stuff there, but I hope I've made you think. Who knows, maybe this post will inspire you. Maybe you will make a film, based on the subject of this post. Maybe your film will go on to inspire countless others to make their own films.

Maybe you’ll do what these films never got the chance to.