5. The Cinematography Feels A Bit Like An Imitation
Skyfall was a big budget blockbuster that had an extended scene where it compared itself to a Turner painting and it didn't feel incongruous or high-reaching; put simply, it looked amazing. Roger Deakins has been ascended to the level of Cinematography God in recent years and based on his work there it's hard to complain. Deakins isn't back for Spectre, but being replaced by the no less competent Hoyte Van Hoytema (Interstellar, Her) means there's still a lot of eye-candy in here. The opening shot in particular is phenomenal (the best thing in the film for sure), an extended long take that covers a long stretch of Mexico City and encapsulates all elements of Bond's persona, although throughout his landscapes and locations look gorgeous. The problem is that while Skyfall took Bond's classic "borrow from whatever's popular" approach and inserted a grandiose style to just the right level, Spectre can go a bit too far. There's a shot where Bond walks up behind a character out of focus and has a conversation before the camera adjusts for the delivery of a potent line. This should convey of unknowing and fear, but the effect is far too noticeable to have the desired impact. Like a few scenes later on that use harsh lighting to be painfully minimalist, there's some great stuff on show, but it's all a bit obvious. The disparity between the two films isn't as massive here as it is with other points; Spectre's cinematography is at many points good, it just feels a bit like an imitation.
