User Reviews

Underrated film right here, but it's set in a bad spot where it tries to do everything, including having a better ending. It does suffer from generic predictability, like the first meeting with a new character, you already know how the film is going to end. 8/10, Another good film.

Greetings from Lithuania. "Spectre" (2015) is an entertaining Bond movie. It a solid and sometimes great follow up to the "Skyfall" and it is a good entry into rebooted Bond franchise. Finally we do get to see the famous evil organization behind last 3 pictures, and it does not disappoint. Unfortunately there is one weak side. I thought that Christoph Waltz's character was not fully realized as an ultimate James Bond enemy. He is a great actor, but he wasn't fully and superbly used in here and this is the weakest and the only downside of "Spectre" in my opinion. Everything else here is superbly solid and very entertaining. Directing by great Sam Mendes was very solid and highly controlled. Pacing of this picture was good, at running time 2 h 15 min it mostly never drags and is an involving adventure. Opening was great, with seemingly one unbroken shoot in Mexico - superbly cool costumes as well. Action set pieces are the ones you could expect in this movie, they are great and looks as realistic as possible in this kind of movie. Overall, i enjoyed "Spectre" more than i thought I will be. After magnificent "Skyfall" i didn't believe that it would be possible to top it in the near future, and "Spectre" doesn't top "Skyfall". Nevertheless this is a great Bond movie that everyone can enjoy it.

This may be the weakest of the Bond movies starring Daniel Craig because it has so many unbelievable elements that are a throwback to the tongue-and-cheek entries much earlier in the franchise. Still okay as a popcorn flic.

Bond serisinin on yıllardır ekmeğini yediler. Yesinler de ben öyle bir yapım görmüyorum.

this is a very messy movie even more then Quantum of Solace imo and its a pretty generic Bond movie reverting back to story and plot elements we would see more from some of the older more comical Bonds and that makes it even messier since every other movie with Daniel Craig's Bond was going for a more grounded gritty tone the villain doesn't even have any real motivation besides hurting James Bond the actions scenes are pretty good and that might make the movie worth watching as a turn your brain off experience

Daniel Craig's fourth mile on the Bond treadmill, and with each installment he's gradually become more gentleman spy and less Jason Bourne in a tux. This time he's squared up against a reimagined Blofeld, played by a characteristically snooty, Machiavellian Christoph Waltz. That seems like good casting on the surface, but in practice it's something of an awkward fit. Perhaps the villain's uninspired master plan has something to do with his struggles. I know the threats of leaked personal data and unwarranted surveillance are hot topics in today's political spectrum, but this hardly seems like a grand scheme worthy of a vast, international criminal enterprise and the dogged attention of MI-6. Still, Bond and Blofeld find a way to spin that into a deranged torture scene, giant fireballs in the desert and a helicopter chase through the heart of London, so props for navigating such a bizarre progression. In fact, each of Spectre's action scenes are spectacular when removed from the larger narrative. We're rarely more than ten or fifteen minutes from the next chase via land, sea or air, and though we revisit several vehicles and locations, each pursuit feels fresh and original. There's a great sense of power in each, but also an impressive knack for scale and, surprisingly, grace that ties it all together. Too bad the accompanying plot is so overlong and monotonous, somehow both thin and under-explained. We skim from one location to the next like a sightseeing tour, but that often seems like it's more for show than to further the story. It's a shame, because in some senses this is the franchise is at its best - Dave Bautista's Mr. Hinx, for example, fits in right alongside the franchise's classic henchmen - but in others it's an under-cooked egg. A more daring conspiracy and deeper character motivation would've made this worlds better.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

“Spectre” is something of a disappointing addition to the 007 cinematic franchise, as the film’s story and presentation are wrought with exceedingly noticeable shortcomings that are hard to remedy. While the overall presentation is far from being an unwatchable collection of nonsensical scenes and overbearing characters, the chemistry between said characters and the narrative depth of its story leave much to be desired; a frustrating sentiment since the spy flick had enough moving components going in its favor to be so much more.Concerning the plot, the film begins where the last film “Skyfall” left off with Bond on the trail of an unknown adversary; an exchange that ends with the MI6 agent causing a great measure of seemingly-avoidable collateral damage. After finding himself at odds with his new boss and placed under house arrest for the careless execution of his unsanctioned mission, Bond is forced to take more covert actions with the begrudging assistance of Q to fulfill the former M’s final request. After several more run-ins with the shadow organization calling themselves “Spectre”, Bond locates former adversary Mr. White to learn as much as he can about the society’s intentions. Meanwhile, MI6 is drawing out its own conflict with an intelligence merger that threatens to shelf its existence for the sake of a state-of-the-art information monitoring initiative: Nine Eyes. Upon being tasked to find White’s daughter (Madeleine Swann) just before White ends his own life, Bond tracks her down with minimal effort and ends up whisking her away from the clutches of harm just as Spectre plays its hand. After some more action and some nonsensically-hastened romance, the two find themselves up against the head of Spectre, Ernst Blofeld, who is more than just a little interested in taking out Bond for a personal (albeit petty) motivation of his own. Following a decent two-part climax that resolves both Bond’s and MI6’s troubles, Bond is restored to his former capacity and drives off into the proverbial sunset with Swann at his side. While the overreaching narrative was better fleshed out than the likes of “Quantum of Solace”, and the villain presented felt more formidable than the previous one seen in “Skyfall”, the underlying issue that prevents “Spectre” from elevating itself above normality is its supreme lack of polish in all aspects. For example, the head goon in Spectre that spends half the movie pursuing Bond is flatter than a board; seemingly only there because most past iterations of Bond also had an antagonist under the primary villain for him to lock horns with. Additionally, the lack of proper set-up sabotages the potency of the threat Bond faces, as both Spectre and Blofeld’s connection to him felt fabricated and rushed to make them relevant for this film. Had the previous three films given Blofeld and his puppeteering subtle buildup, then this likely would not have been a problem.Concerning the characters, Daniel Craig delivers a so-so performance in his fourth go around under the mantle of James Bond. Though he isn’t nearly as despondent as he was in the prior two films, his mannerisms and charisma still felt lacking and a bit stiff. Likewise, Christoph Waltz’s (Blofeld) felt underwhelming in the long run, though a poor motive and backstory didn’t do his acting any favors. Lea Seydoux’s (Madeleine Swann) was reasonably decent for this film’s “Bond girl”, but the rushed plot surrounding her and Bond cut her opportunities to nurture a plausible romance with him short. The MI6 group (Moneypenny, Q, and M) all stayed about the same in performance to their introductions in the last film, though M came off as being overly strict for the sake of plot necessity. Lastly, Dave Bautista’s (Mr. Hinx) was fairly entertaining action-wise as Spectre’s chief muscle, but his aforementioned lack of any character development likened his role to the same level as a disgruntled gorilla in a suit. In terms of action sequences and quality of music, the film doesn’t disappoint, which in turn helps to camouflage some measure of plot shortcomings. If nothing else, they help to make the nearly two and a half hour runtime **** conclusion, “Spectre” is a middling experience that is worthy of a watch from fans or newcomers alike, but not much beyond that. Had several more coats of polish and fine-tuning been applied to the narrative, this penultimate Craig/Bond film could have been a surprisingly entertaining addition to the franchise’s lengthy collection of titles. Unfortunately, what was ultimately presented was a ghost of the movie’s potential: nothing more, nothing less.

Mais do mesmo, na minha opinião o melhor é o primeiro filme, o do Cassino. O roteiro não tem muita criatividade e parece que sempre é o mesmo filme, sem falar que é cheio de conveniências!

The real irony is that Bond has thrived for 53 years on a tried-and-true formula, only making adjustments when needed. He is at a worrying crossroads where, if confident stability is not established, his fictional descendants (Mission: Impossible, espionage parodies like Kingsmen and The Man from U.N.C.L.E., and even superhero movies themselves) threaten to nudge him into irrelevance and antiquity. The abundance of incredible entertainment in Spectre's first half further supports Daniel Craig's argument that, yes, the world does unquestionably still need James Bond to return, which he has spent the last four films reiterating. It's time he began to think so for himself. And if another facelift is necessary to see that come to pass,

With Daniel Craig as Bond, the movies tend to jump around the world from here to there as Bond chases one lead to another. It's almost like a bunch of half hour TV shows stitched together. But there is an underlying story and it allows for a lot of action to take place in every locale. One theme through the Daniel Craig movies is the "fire Bond from MI6," which is getting old after 4 movies.

Watch this one before No Time to Die since it's the "prequel" to it. Looks and feels like 007. Great Bond girls and 007 is witty, smart, and cool as ever.

This movie doesn't stand well on its own as it requires seeing Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace, and Skyfall beforehand to fully grasp its story. If you have seen all three of those beforehand, it actually becomes quite powerful and good to watch.

I actually think this film is the second-best film of the Daniel Craig 007 films, as it has a great supporting cast and great movie quotes overall great film.

I watched it this morning and I remember a little the history and is well, but for two hours and twenty eight minutes is very ambiguous, at the end gets boring and forgettable. The action scenes are great but not like in the past film. The performances are well but the development of the characters are missing.

As an uber-sleek and spit-polished take on the 007 formula, it reminded me a lot of the newest Mission Impossible movies, which sacrificed unique auteuristic spins for premium-grade stunt shows.

A good Bond movie. Craig is as great as always, and you can't ask more to Seydoux and Waltz performance-wise. Score and cinematography also stand out. Nonetheless the script has more flaws. Some pacing issues, some annoying "deus ex-machina", and some clumsily ended plots. It also has strong moments though (beginning, action scenes) .

SPECTRE feels lifeless and stale, trying to hard to seem like a smart film, but leaves audiences checking their watch more than Bond.

Out of 25 Bond movies, I'd place Spectre at 18/25. I watched it not 4 days ago. I can't remember a thing about it. The photography was very yellow for some reason. The story almost started being ok at some point, and then it turned to crap the very instant I thought the movie started showing competence. I do remember that I thought at some point "somehow it's started being just as silly as Roger Moore era Bond now". The action took too long and a lot of characterisation wasn't properly done. Honestly, even after rewatching bits of it, I can't even appreciate, or remember appreciating, anything about Spectre. The only positive and reason it's so high in my list is that Sam Mendes is a good director, Craig and Seydoux play well, actually every actor does his job well. But it's so uninteresting. No lines, no scenes, no plot points, nothing reall marks. It's competent work spent on a completely forgettable and uninteresting movie.

I enjoyed this film, I will repeat what I said in my Skyfall review because I think it's necessary, just ignore the first two films in the Daniel Craig saga! Léa Seydoux and Daniel Craig are wonderful in this film, the story was great, and the villain was also good (not remotely as the villain in Skyfall tho). To sum up, if you like bond films, you will probably enjoy this one as well.

Truthfully, I enjoyed the nods back to previous films, it is by no means amazing... but it is inspired by the NWO (SPECTRE) & domestic spying that is rampant with the Five Eyes (called Nine Eyes in Bondverse), NSA, Pegasus, Shadowdragon, etc. Far better than Judi Dench's M in Skyfall acting out a script that makes her obsolete and incompetent at her job.

I enjoyed this movie a lot. Indeed this is the best Bond I saw in my marathon with all 007 movies. Visually the pictures are perfect, especially in the first half of the movie. Almost every character here is interesting, especially Q improved a lot since the last movie. Ralph Fiennes as M has more scenes and he is much better than the ice cold and ugly Judi Dench. Christoph Waltz as Blofeld is a perfect cast, I still remember him as Col. Hans Lada in Inglourious Basterds. Daniel Craig is perfect as usual. Only the character Madeleine Swann is annoying in the beginning, but gets better. The story is a good one, I like the political statement here much better than in Skyfall. The action scenes are perfect, because they are much more realistic than in many other Bond movies. Also the hand fights are great, compare them with the Bond movies from the 60s and 70s... The biggest surprise is the humour. I never laughed in the all the Bond movies, sometimes the humour was even bad. But here, every joke is on point.

Eh, Spectre is fine. It's not the worst Craig Bond film, that is 100% Quantum of Solace, but Spectre is disappointing after Skyfall, still worth a watch

The Bond franchise has seemed to settle into a good/mediocre movie pattern. After following the almost perfect Skyfall, this outing is rather bland and dull. The characters are hollow and leave us wondering what could have been.

Mocny zjazd po świetnym Skyfall. Kolejna zła organizacja stojącą za wszystkim, przerysowany ten zły i jego dziwne połączenie z Bondem. Szkoda, bo był potencjał

After the amazing Skyfall, there was another fall called Specter. The locations were great, but they didn't have a Skyfall, and especially the overall story faltered quite a bit. Although the action scenes were great, there weren't many of them, but the music was great. Overall, I would say it's a good movie that I can recommend.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Spectre (2015) is a modern, stylish, entertaining 007 film. Craig's 3rd best entry. Should be considered as a borderline entry to franchise top 10 list. Co-starring Christoph Waltz as a new take on the old reliable villain Blofeld, grossed a whopping $879.6M worldwide - the second-biggest take for the franchise.

Spectre has got to be one of most underwritten movies ever, it has great actors in it, but none of them are given anything to do. It's boring, long (2 hrs 27 min.) and has the worst set of villains in bond history. People really outta stop defending this movie.

This is the worst Bond movie ever, filled with emotionless characters that I couldn't care less about. The pace of this film after a predictably exciting start is slow and boring. Unlike his fellow actors, Ben Whishaw as Q manages to portray the only believable human in this whole fake production. Why couldn't JB have been given a touch of Q's wit, humour or vulnerability? No wonder Daniel Craig wants out of this franchise - it's beneath his talent. Such a cacophony of totally forgettable dialogue, people and silly stunts is hard to imagine in a single movie and yet here it is. During one of the 'action' fights when James was being hammered by the evil assassin I noticed the person next to me had fallen asleep and was snoring. That person was an exceedingly eloquent critic.

Unpopular opinion but I prefer this over skyfall. While skyfall was amazing from a directorial standpoint it just felt bland and had no energy whereas here I felt like Craig was bond once again and was having fun in the role and eproved himself again to be the awesome spy we grown to love this decade. The cinematography is beautiful and the soundtrack was stellar ,not to mention some of the best action set pieces & sequences I've seen in a while especially the opening however it could have benefited from being at least twenty minutes shorter ,two hours and thirty minutes is a lot to ask for today's generation to sit through Definitely the second best bond in the Craig trilogy in my opinion. P.S writings on the wall was a masterpiece and smith deserved all the recognition.

Action was ok, I definitely like the darker tone and the music but I just couldn't bare seeing moronic things that J. Bond does. That's not reckless, that's just dumb. Antagonist is cringe worthy. He's just basically a villain who does whatever a villain does, no reason. Lastly, Bond's change of heart at the end of the movie felt forced. Skyfall remains the best film of Craig's era.

This is a huge step backward for the Craig era. It’s still gritty and hard edged like his other efforts but is marred by tossing in the cheeseball stuff from the old series like pointless monologues, unrealistic stunts and your typical train scene a la The Spy Who Loved Me and From Russia With Love only somehow more dull and pointless. This stuff doesn’t mesh well with what was once a gritty and more hard edged reboot with less focus on fantasy and more on realism. They even toss in Blofeld with a plot twist visible from a mile away with an even dumber one straight out of Austin Powers. Don’t know how they’re going to fix this mess with No Time To Die but based on it’s trailers it already looks much better than this slog. I’d suggest only watching this to be on board with No Time To Die. Otherwise you’re better off watching the other Daniel Craig Bond movies or the ones from the old Bond series.

This movie contain the structure classic of James Bond Films, action, intrigue and sexy womans, Sya Is beatiful! All actors has a decent performance, and a good direction of Sam, Is a decent film.

My problems with this film relate to where the series has gone. connecting the previous films together. the story behind blofeld. love interests. that being said it is one of the best looking bond films made. right up there with skyfall.

Another decent entry in the never ending franchise, Spectre has good action though its story has issues.

La última película hasta la fecha del Bond de Craig me deja un sabor agridulce. Spectre coge partes de Skyfall y desgraciadamente también otras de Quantum of Solace. Su primera mitad es muy buena, pero conforme se acerca el final empieza a desmoronarse y pierde bastante esencia de todo lo que ha construido durante la primera hora de metraje: he sentido que veía algun film de acción genérico y no a James Bond. De nuevo, interpretaciones brutales de Craig, Seydoux y Fiennes, así como del nuevo villano, Cristoph Waltz. El personaje femenino característico de la cinta me ha sabido a muy poco, mal construido y mal llevado durante toda la película, aunque la actriz cumple con su papel. La acción de nuevo muy bien dirigida: desde una elegante persecución por las calles de Roma en coches de alta gama hasta feroces tiroteos en alta montaña. En cuanto a la trama, me parece que han tirado de manera un poco descarada de las películas previas. En este aspecto no me ha agradado mucho: no he sentido al villano como un verdadero peligro en ningún momento y parece ser que tiene los mismos delirios de grandeza que Silva (Skyfall). Es una película sólida y entretenida, pero dado el gigantesco presupuesto, la posible extensa toma de referencias de Mendes en la saga (cuarta película y parece que siempre toca una buena y una "mala", alternando) y lo bien que se adapta Craig al papel del agente 007, creo que podrían haber exprimido esta última entrega mucho más. En cualquier caso, recomendada. Espero con ansias Bond 25.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

It's not a bad movie, it's just not as good as I wanted it to be. The action and cinematography are masterful, however the film can be tiresome from time to time.

Since always the 007 franchise has a special place in my personal cinematheque. I have all the movies and I really enjoy watching them. And although the majority are very good, of course, not all have been good. Some were real disappointments, however much the unconditional fans find it difficult to admit. For me, there is a difference between being a fan and being a blind. I loved to watch "Skyfall", I really enjoyed the honors that are made there to several others past movies (it was released during the celebration of the franchise's fifty years, and it made sense to pay these homage). Another point I loved about "Skyfall" was the way it made connections to previous films, creating a thread through these films since "Casino Royale", and I was excited to see how this was going to continue. And, unlike a lot of people, I've never put any objections to the way Daniel Craig plays Bond nor do I get homesick thinking the previous actors were better than him. Every actor who wore the 007 suit had his time and his personal way of being Bond, and that diversity helps franchise to become richer and appealing. It's my opinion on that. So, as you might imagine, I was really excited about "Specter". Of course, the title showed me one thing: Bloofeld was going to come back one way or another. And so it was. As always, Craig was well on the main character. Charismatic and seductive without losing the rough and dangerous look, he never lets us forget that he is a man on a mission. Christoph Waltz was compelling and Machiavellian and rose to the challenge of embodying one of the most iconic Bond villains. Ralph Fiennes, Ben Whishaw, Andrew Scott and Naomie Harris were impeccable in supporting roles. On the other hand, Lea Seydoux is far from being a memorable bond-girl with an uninspired performance, while veteran Monica Bellucci, despite her age, is much more sexy and could have been more interesting if she had a more active and important character. Sam Mendes is an excellent director, with good ideas, good casting skills and what appears to be a long-term plan for future films. However, the excessive length of the film, with a very slow pace sometimes and an ending that is, at least, disillusioning, showed me that this director has some difficulty in post-production work. For example, the pre-opening sequence in Mexico was more worthy of being a movie ending than what I saw in the end. Attempts to make humor or even some romance were also a resounding failure and suspense, that should be growing throughout the film, seem more to come in waves, growing and collapsing to re-grow in the next action sequence. Speaking of action, there's plenty to suit everyone, from car or train chases to truly unbelievable fights. All very well done but sometimes overdone and unbelievable. Soundtrack is unremarkable and Sam Smith's theme-song is boring, effeminate and far from the quality of its immediate predecessor (Adele's "Skyfall"), to give just one example. Thus, "Specter" proved to be a good addition to the franchise and a very positive continuation although, of course, not as good as the film that preceded it. Let's see what will come next.

Spectre is a blurred version of Skyfall, which although entertains and the action scenes are cool, the story is not interesting, the villain is horrible and the film has plenty of footage.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Mendes is a fanatic for arthouse system, a love letter he writes to Fleming, I wonder who will do the same to him. Spectre Mendes is a local seller. This time, breathing pure England-ness and all the patriotism towards it, the director, Sam Mendes is going global with household methods. And to me, it is an ode to this franchise. Never has been a film so formal and personal altogether, like this. Many have come and gone, including his own version in the previous round, but no one was this professional. They have been claiming James Bond's excellence and superiority in his work shamelessly, and never had even cared to prove it. But with a clean polished job comes Mendes, with a neatly poised futuristic world i.e. the present one in which we are living. His huge set pieces gives away the clues. Armed with a huge production budget, Mendes colors the film with ravishing locations and Ridley Scott's Blade Runner-isc captivating tone. Calculative steps and a simple pragmatic way out, from those steps, Daniel Craig is carrying a much heavy weight on his shoulder. Reinventing the character after a complete arc, he is given everything gift wrapped and untouched. And his version of sober Bond leaves a safe air in the room that is soothingly quiet and cathartic. Christoph Waltz, a mere pawn of the game, no matter how much he brags himself to be the puppeteer, he always stays a puppet. Despite of a brief appearance, Monica Bellucci casts an unbreakable spell on us from which even the lead, Lea Seydoux couldn't free us. Personally, I feel for Ralph Fiennes, hiding someone else's mistakes and correcting his own, to bring down an evil empire Spectre, his job is to justify all the chapters of the franchise keeping in contrast to the materialistic world, this current generation is drawn to, "A license to kill is also not a license to kill." he concludes.

If you are a fan of the old films then this is an exciting film, but most will find the film corny with over-the-top action sequences. Enjoyable for fans of the genre.

I have been trying to collect my thoughts on the latest entry to the Bond franchise for the best part of a day now….here goes nothing. After three films of origin stories and departures from the Bond formula, the end of Skyfall finally saw all the pieces in place for a return to the classic Connery-era Bond. In many respects Spectre delivers on this promise. Ben Whishaw’s Q, Naomie Harris’ Moneypenny and a scene steeling Ralph Fiennes as the new M provide great energetic back up to Daniel Craig’s Bond as he embarks on his latest globe trotting mission. I have always been a fan of Craig’s portrayal of the character, but in Spectre the actor has reached a new level. Here Bond is cocky, deadly and cold while simultaneously remaining witty, charming and at times even playful. However the film’s plot also allows Craig to display those rare moments of vulnerability as his past comes back to haunt him in the form of the shady organisation of the title. Unfortunately it is also the plot that lets the film down. As is often the case with franchise films the end result is only as strong as the lead villain and their scheme. Although two time oscar winner Christoph Waltz delivers a subtly sadistic performance the writers have let him down in a major way. The role of SPECTRE and Waltz’s Oberhauser in the film is often reduced to a MacGuffin, only there to give Bond motivation to move from one scene to the next. We spend the majority of the film waiting for Oberhauser to step out from the shadows and explain his organisations’ goals and motivations. When he is finally revealed however no such explanation is given. From the context of the secondary plot and a standout scene where the members of SPECTRE meet in Rome, the audience is left to piece together their scheme without being spoon fed via exposition. For this reason above all Spectre is a film that demands repeat viewing. I feel like during my first watch, any time the plot was unclear or I missed a key line, it was ok because Waltz would inevitably spell it all out for me. The fact that this never happened is really to be comended. I feel that modern audiences (myself very much included) have now come to expect this overt kind of expository dialogue, so much so that when it is missing films feel incomplete and disjointed. However commendable though, this is still a major flaw that leads the last third of the film feeling decidedly anti-climatic. Despite these plot concerns (and a somewhat misjudged and underdeveloped attempt to tie in Craig’s previous Bond films) Spectre certainly doesn’t disappoint when it comes to action set pieces and sharp dialogue. With standout performances and some great action, if this is indeed to be Craig’s final outing it certainly gives the audience the Bond film they have been asking for ever since Casino Royale. Whether this is the Bond film we deserve however, is another matter entirely.

Much like Daniel Craig's previous appearances as Bond, Spectre tries with little effort to invoke the feelings and atmosphere so often present in Bond films of decades past. The occasional reference is made to Bond's origins but the film falls short in delivering a truly exceptional experience as it seems unable to define it's own objective. The film is conflicted in it's pursuit of relevance whilst trying to tell the story of a character that was designed for the cold war era. As a result we are met with an archaic spy film existing in a contemporary culture no longer dependent upon physical espionage. A return to the classic era is badly needed to refresh this franchise and wow new audiences with the thrill **** Bond adventure.

Sam Mendes' Spectre was a film that got way more hate than it deserved. Daniel Craig is once again, an amazing James Bond. The action sequences were perfect. My main complaints are that the film has some pacing issues but also the film really underused it's villain, Ernst Blofeld/Franz Oberhauser

Unfortunately, we've seen this sort of film a thousand times before. Forgettable characters, unbelievable stunts and a poor attempt of 'connecting the dots'. It's a shame because Daniel Craig shines as effortlessly in this as he did in the previous three films (he really has set a new mantle for Bond actors). Just as well the storyline isn't quite as hopeless as Quantum of Solace...

OK, it looks good, it has decent enough action, but the rest isn't great. Unrealistic scenes and bad writing make this a generic bond movie, or worse. Watch Casino Royale.

the suspense is real the suspense is real the suspense is real the suspense is real the suspense is real the suspense is real the suspense is real the suspense is real