Silly, simple and stylish

Rating: 7/10 (1 November 2015)

Recently, Spectre has had the greatest hype of any Bond film of all time, and hype comes with expectations. Did it live up to my expectations? Just about. It was another inventive, over-the-top and fun action movie.
The opening shot of the film is maybe the greatest of the franchise so far: a more than two-minute-long tracking shot introducing the setting and Daniel Craig's character. I cannot begin to tell you how utterly overcome with joy I was at this cinematic decision: not only did I admire the spectacular technicality of the shot, which effortlessly glided through rooms and across crowded streets - it also gave the entire sequence a stylish sheen that would have been otherwise difficult to accomplish.
I suppose the action is really where I should start with the review: it is the basis for any bond film, and this one was no exception. There are maybe four chase and fight scenes that I would have been glad with as the centrepiece of the film. And all of it was directed incredibly, with a beautiful blend of wide and close up shots and stunning choreography, which was above all creative (and somewhat even plausible). All of it is, of course, ridiculous, but the action was possibly the best of any Bond film yet, with only Skyfall and Casino Royale to rival it.
However, excellent action is just one thing that a truly great spy film needs, and another is a villain. It is unfortunate to say that, despite being Bond's archenemy, Blofeld was not as strong a villain as Silva or Le Chiffre. Mendez seemed to forget that he was a person too, and in Bond's (painfully short) encounters with him, he never lost his air of indestructibility, and was on top of Bond almost constantly. He was especially disappointing considering the expensively significant backstory that was wasted on his character, as well as his magnitude: one wishes that the leader of what was meant to be the world's greatest corporation would come down to Bond's level, be less immune and more charismatic.
The secondary characters were also quite a mixed bunch, although the majority were strong, completely compelling and very well developed. One of these was Ben Winshaw's Q, who, partly due to the portrayal, had an excellent comic timing and was a ray of light whenever he appeared in the script - sometimes I was routing for MI6 because of his character as much as Bond, who was again brilliantly conveyed by Daniel Craig, who continues (and possibly ends) his legendary run as Bond. Another character who added much to the film was C (or Max), played by Andrew Scott, who has always been a favourite of mine with an excellent role in the hit show Sherlock. I think that Scott, although very subtle, was maybe the best actor of the whole cast, with his performance single-handedly adding a dismissive and arrogant air to his character that the script frankly lacked.
On the other hand,I left the cinema feeling like as many characters, such as Miss Moneypenny and M, lacked the depth that they had the potential to have: in the last film, it seemed that M was somewhat ominous in the previous Skyfall, but it seemed that his character was simplified to a politically central "good guy", as was the case with Moneypenny. This is of course not to take anything away from the performances of Ralph Fiennes and Naomi Harris, because both took the script to its limits. I also feel as though Rory Kinnear's Tanner was one-dimensional at best, and requires development going into the next instalment.
This over-simplification was also the theme with the plot. It seemed that it was not as masterfully structured as its predecessors Skyfall and Casino Royale, and Bond stuck to one aim for the vast majority of the movie, which I think is a totally missed opportunity on the behalf of the writers. There were only truly three major scenes that I could consider landmarks or turning points in the movie. Of course this fulfils the three act structure traditional in bond movies, but the third, and maybe most interesting act in which we only then see the full potential of all characters, is too short, and the second, which is frankly the least interesting, is too long. As a moviegoer I was disappointed that they didn't fit more in.
Finally, I believe I should discuss is how 'Bond' this film is. As to this point, my review has been mixed, but something that I am delighted to say the film captured brilliantly was the true spirit of the franchise, which was achieved through the distinctive atmospheres of the settings and through well placed throwbacks to old-school bond movies, such as subtle references to "The Man With The Golden Gun" and "On Her Majesty's Secret Service". In fact, I can honestly say that, out of all of the Daniel Craig Bond movies, it is Spectre that is the most 'Bond'.
Overall, Spectre is a very good action movie, with wonderfully memorable and wholly original action sequences, and, while some of the characters and the plot lack the depth seen in Skyfall and Casino Royale, it grasps the idea of the franchise better than any. One last thing: should Daniel Craig continue for one more film? No. While he is the best bond ever, I believe that Spectre gave a good round-off to his character by linking all of his films superbly, and his character seems in a fit state to finish.