The New James Bond Film Is Called Spectre

The New James Bond Film Is Called Spectre

The upcoming 24th Bond outing has a title as well as some title font. See?

The title was revealed via the official Bond Twitter account. Spectre, of course, is the global terrorist organisation that appeared in earlier Bond films like Dr. No. It is truly the greatest acronym ever created, standing for SPecial Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion.

Daniel Craig will once again return as the famous spy, and the picture will be once again helmed by Sam Mendes. There will be a Fiat.

Spectre will be out in late 2015.

The 24th James Bond 007 film is called... [Twitter]


Comments

    IF this is HALF as enjoyable and great as Skyfall, it will be the best movie to hit cinemas since 2012!!

    (I REALLLY LOVED SKYFALL!!)

    *HYPE*

      I liked the overall tone of Skyfall and enjoyed it at the cinema, but after going over it in my head there are soooo many plot holes it becomes ridiculous. I know Bond films are supposed to be over the top, but having gaping plot holes isn't part of that.

      Let's hope this one has a more believable storyline.

        Have you SEEN the earlier James Bond films? I don't think any after From Russia With Love didn't have plot chasms. And thank Whomever they did because that ridiculousness is what made them so fun and enjoyable, you've just got to switch your brain off for some movies.

          Of course there's the over the top campy nature of the bond world, but it feels like they are actively trying to get rid of that in favour of a more gritty, realistic, modern feel and if you are going to do that your plot has to be grounded as well.

          But then again there's ridiculous - which is the impossible made real for filmic purposes where the bond films most certainly exist, and then there's the erroneous - where things don't make sense and are illogical, no matter what the context. That's the difference I see on the old vs the new bonds.

        Plot holes are the laziest reason to dislike a film, the only films without plot holes are the ones you didn't pay attention to enough. There are literally THOUSANDS of angles to a film, there's photography, camera, lighting, script, pacing, performance, sound etc... Each including a plethora of story decisions. All of these things tell story but it's almost like film makers shouldn't even bother, the audience's expectations don't seem to progress much further than basic plot. And that's all they focus on. There's a reason critics rarely mention plot holes in reviews. They're simply too small a section of the story (which includes all the shit above and isn't simply plot) and the very idea of a blind spot that makes part of the story ambiguous is prevalent in all works of art.

        It's not that you need to switch your brain off, maybe the contrary. Plot holes are known to film makers and often the make the decision not to include it because pacing may serve the story far more than the detail being cut would, it's sad that critique these days only seems to be based on plot holes. Skyfall attempted to raise the quality of the blockbuster to such a lofty standard, actually making a FILM with characters and technique... Sucks though because plot holes.

          Plot holes are the LAZIEST crutches for writers.

          If the entire plan for the villain makes NO SENSE AT ALL then the movie is let down. All the people that worked so hard on it are let down by poor writing. The story of a movie is probably the most important part, without a story it's not a movie, just a collection of images.

          When the story has massive, glaring oversights in the name of 'cool explosions' that is considered LAZY. You could easily write in better motivations, or a slightly more detailed explanation, a deeper back story or just simply make it more nuanced and tighter and it would serve the movie overall much better. Many of these oversights can be fixed easily and still retain the film's pacing and overall feeling.

          I just want to add the main reason for my dislike (which even seems like too strong a word, I don't even feel that strongly about it) is the main villains revenge arc which is as follows (with help from Cinema Sins for brevity):

          Silva sets up explosion at MI6 forcing them to move into tunnels (ok)

          Gets himself captured by luring Bond to his Lair in a bunch of far fetched and tenuous ways (it's Bond, so OK)

          Then proceeds to break out, because he SOMEHOW knew they would hook up his laptop and solve the encryption AND the exact time this would happen (...OK i guess)

          He somehow knew Bond would find him at the right moment to follow him (...righto)

          He would have also EARLIER placed explosions at the EXACT RIGHT SPOT so that when Bond caught up to him he could try and get him run over by a train (...ahhh no I don't think so)

          He gets away and dresses like a cop and heads to the courthouse where M is
          - SOMEHOW he orchestrated all these events so they would all line up to this exact day AND time (What? How? Huh?)

          He finally gets to the courthouse to exact his meticulously planned plot of revenge and...

          he walks in, fires a couple of shots from a handgun and runs away.

          TERRIBLE PLAN. TERRIBLE WRITING.

          Then later he shows up with a massive bunch of gun toting mercs AND a helicopter and still can't kill an old lady.

          Then the whole thing devolves into Home Alone 6. (???)

          Then he gets stabbed. And not even in an ironic way.

          I still kind of like it though, if only for the overall feel of it. It's got good cinematography and decent acting (Silva is rad) too.

            Fair points, but I didn't have a problem with those plot holes. I think with Silva being a Bond villain, there are certain assumptions that he would have been a certain type of crazy. Its well established he's a pretty successful hacker and that he has an army at his disposal. Sure, his revenge plans were quite elaborate, but this was kind of true to his character and he always wanted to kill M face to face. His plan would have succeeded at the courthouse if it wasn't for Mallory, which I think is a key scene in establishing his character as a pre-cursor to being the next M.

      I loved Skyfall as well. It wasn't perfect but it was damn beautiful to look at.

      I loved Skyfall. So damn good. After the resounding 'meh' that was Quantum of Solace, I was pretty happy!

      Yeh Skyfall was awsome. I felt it nailed the whole Bond vibe and yet gave its own unique spin on the franchise. Casino Royale was awesome, but it felt a bit like a Bourne movie to me, and Quantum of Solace was like Casino Royale part 2. but Skyfall really brought in some traditional Bond elements, changing things up but without feeling too campy (even though I loved the old Roger Moore films).

      - The komodo dragon fight (a throwback to whenever Bond was up against some kind of dangerous animal)
      - Silva's evil lair (hoping Spectre has an even better evil lair)
      - Silva with his metal jaw (the villain with a unique trait, also kinda looked like Jaws when he took his metal jaw out).
      - M as the damsel in distress
      - The Austin DB5 (had goosebumps when this was revealed, even had the old ejecter button).

    The best part of this announcement is Christoph Waltz and Andrew Scott joining the cast. Swoon.

      Even better is possibility that Waltz will be stroking a white cat...

    Im so glad their bringing back SPECTRE. Casino royale and quantum of solace seemed to be setting things up for a SPECTRE return but then Skyfall had its own story. Probably because quantum wasn't very good they had to refresh things a bit. Skyfall showed their trying to do a modern take on the Connery era of films and this is another step towards that.

    I cant wait. Hopefully it doesn't come off as corny like it did in the Moore/Brosnon films.

      Yeh with the same director on board and that cast, this should be awesome.

      Aparently the 'Quantum' organisation was meant to be the modern day 'Spectre' due to the producers not having the legal rights to use certain Bond properties, namely Spectre and villains like Blofeld, but now that's all sorted they can finally be used. Definitely keen to see how the modern day interpretation of Spectre will be.

      Last edited 05/12/14 11:16 am

    So they actually got the rights back for SPECTRE then? Sweet! They can retcon Quantum as a front of some kind for them since they were always a stand in when they didn't have the rights anyway

    I hope they choose a good actor for Blofeld.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now