Calling Spectre the biggest misstep in the James Bond franchise may be a bit of an overstatement; to say that it’s a missed opportunity of titanic proportions would be more accurate. Failing to build on the momentum he so brilliantly generated with the game-changing entry Skyfall, director Sam Mendes delivers a curiously dull movie that goes in so many different directions it’s as if the filmmaker switched gears as to his approach multiple times during its making. Is this supposed to be an extended homage to significant adventures in Bond’s past? Did Mendes decide it would be a good idea for star Daniel Craig to channel Sean Connery, Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan at key points in the film? And just why aren’t plot threads that are supposed to connect the previous three outings to this one explored and explained more fully?

I should be running the breathtaking stunts over and over in my mind after seeing a James Bond movie, not mulling questions of this kind. The very fact that none of the action set pieces come immediately to mind less than 24 hours after seeing Spectre is a testament to how misguided the film is. As far as the mission at the center of the movie is concerned, it’s pretty standard stuff. Opening with an elaborate sequence set during Day of the Dead festivities in Mexico City, Bond is on the trail of a terrorist set to commit a crime that would kill thousands. He succeeds in catching and killing his prey but his actions create a domino effect that takes him to various points around the globe in an effort to track down the headquarters and leader of a vast criminal network that he finds has been hiding in plain sight for years.

It takes over 90 minutes for the film to get to the meat of the problem, and along the way we are treated to allusions to From Russia with Love, Goldfinger and On Her Majesty’s Secret Service among others, inserted for no other reason than to see if long-time fans of the franchise are paying attention. If anything, I suspect they were inserted to distract us from the fact that the story is going nowhere fast and that Mendes and the script cobbled together by four different writers has nothing new to show us.

What’s most frustrating about Spectre are the many missed opportunities it contains. As Klaus Oberhauser, Christoph Waltz brings a degree of intelligence and confidence to the Bond villain role that he winds up being far more interesting than our hero. His presence creates a sense of anticipation that never pays off, as his motivation seems a bit petty and vague while the script’s efforts to tie in events from the other three Craig entries comes off as a good idea that wasn’t fully developed. We’re left wanting more where Oberhauser and these back-stories are concerned, not the trademark of a successful Bond adventure.

It certainly won’t take you long to figure out what the lynchpin is where this entry’s plot for world domination is concerned, and that it seems rather yesterday certainly doesn’t help. Neither does Craig’s performance, which borders on somnambulism. His difficulty in delivering a withering bon mot makes one long for Roger Moore, while his efforts to recreate Connery’s cool are labored. The actor has always brought a slightly viscous edge to the role that allowed him to put his own stamp on it. Having blazed their own trail with Skyfall, it’s a mystery as to why Craig and Mendes would be content with placing one foot so firmly in the past with Spectre.

Contact Chuck Koplinski at [email protected].