DrLex

When B13 came out in 2004, its incredible parkour scenes were jaw-dropping. I watched it again just yesterday and this film has aged very well: the scenes are still jaw-dropping. Keep in mind that there is very little CGI besides the fake images of the wall around the district. Most of the action stunts are real. This should not come as a surprise, because one of the main actors is the founder of the parkour concept. Parkour relies on various skills to move quickly through an urban environment in ways that would soon result in an ambulance ride without the required training.

The action is the real star of this movie, the cartoonish story is just filler but is interesting enough to act as glue between the action scenes. Furthermore there is some good humor to lighten it all up. Definitely not a masterpiece in storytelling, but that is not what you should watch this film for. This is meant to be pure entertainment, and it delivers.

I apologize in advance that this will not so much be a review of this episode, as it is my opinion of what is wrong with the way many seem to be watching and rating TV shows and movies nowadays.

As for the episode itself, it was better than I expected from the single-sentence summary I read before watching it. The story has a tragic aspect to it, because it involves a woman who was specifically raised with the sole purpose of being nothing but a gift, to be handed over during the signing of a peace treaty. The story ends with a rather unexpected twist that makes it all the more tragic. What makes the episode particularly nice, is that it gives us a more personal look into Picard's personage than we're generally used to. Despite the serious subject matter, there are quite a bit of humorous scenes to lighten it up. Highly recommended.

Now, as I stated before, my only expectations of this episode were based on a single sentence that summarizes the plot. For the rest I know I am watching an early nineties show with a mid-sized budget and a tight schedule. I am fully aware it is not as refined as present-day shows written by people who studied all the flaws in all older shows in televised history. Therefore I do not expect the same rigor. There was a particular moment in this episode where I thought: "boy, that is some poor security for a 24th-century space ship." However, it was obvious that this part of the story was completely secondary to the main subject, therefore I immediately ignored it under suspension of disbelief. When going through the other reviews however, I find another recent one that completely disses the entire episode just because of that exact same shortcut in the plot.

Yes, a Ferengi simply walking into a cargo bay that was earlier on explicitly requested to have increased security, is sloppy writing. But no, this does not break the entire episode as the reviewer insinuates. Maybe if this episode would have been released today this would be unacceptable, but it is 24 years old. If you're going to apply present-day expectations to something from a quarter century ago, it may be better not to watch it at all.

This is not the first time I bump into a review like that. Even beyond TV and movie reviews I notice this same kind of behavior being on the march: creating completely unreasonable expectations based on either incomplete information or inappropriate frames-of-reference, or both; and then being extremely disappointed when those expectations are not perfectly met. That is one sure way to be disappointed with pretty much everything. If you want to go back to enjoying things, make minimal assumptions about them. Take things for what they are, not what you thought them to be based on whatever rigid models or misleading advertisements (like movie trailers, which I avoid if I can). Of course, whoever wants to turn themselves into a complete sourpuss, is free to ignore this advice, but I would appreciate it if one would not try to spread this kind of acidity across the world.

Watching 'Spectre' feels familiar. In fact, at times it is all too familiar. When the credits rolled, my overall impression was that I had been served a "Best of Bond" compilation. Every scene, with the exception of just a few, reminded of a classic Bond film, the script reminded of classic Bond films, the villain, the gadgets, the cars… You get my drift. The result is well-made and entertaining, but no more than that. There are no surprises and there are only few memorable moments.

I cannot give this more than a 7 because I base my scores on how often I would like to watch a movie again. Since this already felt like I had seen it all before during its first viewing, I can only give it a score that means "I would only want to watch this again maybe once or twice".

Spectre seems to suffer from the same problem of creative stagnation as many a contemporary blockbuster: it feels as if someone trained a large neural network by feeding it all the existing material, and then asked it to generate something similar. The result is merely a linear combination of what is already known. There is no attempt to break outside the established box. This is playing it safe, but it will never produce a 'wow' factor that makes people recommend the film as a must-see. If the next few films are made according to the same recipe, the public will lose interest in Bond films altogether.

The bottom line is, if you want to watch a Bond film as you know it, Spectre will not disappoint. If you want to experience something new however, you will be disappointed.