A little disappointing, but still enjoyable.

Rating: 7/10 (21 December 2015)

For those who haven't seen this newest Bond film yet, I want to clear up a few illusions that this film creates, because you might have heard other reviewers or friends pass them off as facts. (By this I don't mean that you should disregard whatever you've heard already, just take it lightly.) Firstly, it creates an illusion of being a throwback to the original Bond films by bringing back the villainous organization of SPECTRE and giving it a happier ending than the other Craig movies. However, the climatic scene was a little too decision based for a traditional Bond movie. Typically, Bond doesn't worry about making decisions, he just acts so that the audience gets to see him be awesome (because how cool can a super spy be if he's always dithering about whether to shoot the guys he's fighting). Second, the trailer made it seem like it was trying to out-do Skyfall in being even darker. In reality, it has a much lighter feel than both Royale and Skyfall, which was possibly the most serious, most complicated, and least formulaic Bond of all. On that note, Spectre also creates the illusion of complexity, but this happens with many action driven movies now. The way that the other three Craig-Bond movies tie in to this one makes sense, but you can tell that it wasn't the original plan to connect them in this way. Fourth is the illusion of character depth. It's true that with all characters the goal is always to create the illusion of depth, but there are undeniably characters that have more humanity and depth than others. In Spectre, they broke from the stone cold Bond we saw in Skyfall and tried to give him a little more heart by having him decide to SPOILER ALERT leave behind being an assassin at the end and having a more emotional relationship with Madeleine Swan. Madeleine is introduced as strong woman, but this is never really shown or maintained. There is little transition from her being completely resistive to Bond to having strong feelings for him. Blofeld is made to seem like a very psychological villain like Heath Ledger's Joker, but just comes off as being menacing and little more than that. Finally, the opening scene is not one continuous take as it appears to be.
The story, as often happens with Bond films, takes us to various locations, while having everything link back to MI6 in London. Here, the London conflict is a bit more prominent and seems to be a continuation of the issues M was having in Skyfall (being Judi Dench's M). The political battle between the new M and Max Denbigh, or C, is a bit more socially pertinent than Bond's international journey. Most of the story focuses on Bond trying to fulfill the old M's wishes and confront Obenhauser/Blofeld. He gets help from Eve Moneypenny and Q, who reprise their roles from Skyfall. The reveal near the end of Denbigh working for Blofeld wasn't all that shocking, mostly because it didn't change the stakes at all. Had Denbigh not already been an adversary, the revelation would have been more effective, and that sort of thing happens a lot in movies. On that subject, there are a couple of interesting connections between Bond and Blofeld that come up near the end of act 2 (which is like the end of the middle of the movie for those who aren't familiar with three-act structure).
Action is a big element of course, and I would say the technical workers delivered on some big and grand set pieces. There is a bit of vehicular action with fight scenes involving cars, boats, helicopters, a plane, and a train. Most of the action is rather impersonal with just a couple of gunshots quick blows to an undeveloped adversary. The one exception to this is the fight with Hinx (Dave Bautista), who is rather reminiscent of Odd Job from Goldfinger. I'll also warn those who are wondering that there is a little bit of invincibility mode throughout.
The acting, script, directing and camera-work were mostly unremarkable. I think they tried to give Daniel Craig a little more to do with his character in this one instead of just being stone cold all the time. He even had a few moments of comic relief, of which there was very little in Skyfall. I wasn't very impressed with Lea Seydoux's performance, but Bond girls typically aren't picked based on their acting capabilities. In fact, the way Bond seduces his two women in this movie was nothing short of ridiculous.
My main recommendation for prospective viewers is that it is very different from Skyfall, which I've probably already implied a few times. It's a lot more about being entertaining than interesting. So don't expect it to be your favorite Bond or top Goldfinger or Royale (which seem to be regarded as the best two). So if you're wondering whether it's worth your money, I would be hesitant. You'll likely enjoy it to an extent, but seeing it in theaters or buying it before seeing it might make you feel like you wasted $15-$30. Overall Rating: 8.2/10.