The return of Blofeld to the James Bond franchise should have been epic, but instead Spectre is an overly long and uninspired entry that squanders its massive potential--but still boasts enough James Bond stuff to be moderately entertaining.

Daniel Craig returns as 007, and once again--because this theme wasn’t done to death in Skyfall--MI6 and the 00 program are being questioned for relevancy as new digital surveillance systems are implemented worldwide. But that doesn’t stop the secret agent from stumbling across a global terrorist organization that for reasons unexplained is behind all the shit that has happened over the last three movies.

Director Sam Mendes returns once again, but as talented of a director as he is, Spectre just doesn’t rank anywhere close to the best Bond films. Here’s why:

1. The plot sucks
The setup is fine--James Bond has finally stumbled across SPECTRE (wasn’t it Quantum before?) and is peeling back the layers to get at who is behind it all--but once the exposition is out of the way, the story crumbles under its own weight. There just isn’t much substance.

2. They made it personal… again
One of the problems with the plot is that the film tries to dig deeper into Bond’s past by (spoiler) tying SPECTRE and Blofeld to his childhood. We don’t need to know, nor do we care, about Bond’s background--it has never been consequential to the films, and it serves as a distraction, nothing more. Skyfall made things personal for him as well, but did it a lot better than Spectre.

3. The villains suck
Christoph Waltz is a terrific actor and has proven he can be a menacing villain, but boy is he terrible as Blofeld. Mendes doesn’t give him much screen time, but when he is around, he isn’t even remotely interesting. The other villains, both henchmen and masterminds alike, are even less memorable.

4. The climax sucks
Spectre has enough bursts of action and intrigue to maintain itself for a while, but the movie falls apart as it nears the end. Once Bond goes to Morocco (and then back to London), the action and story are chaotic and messy. Logic goes out the window, which takes away the impact of the action.

5. The action doesn’t compare
Speaking of action, Spectre just doesn’t live up to even some of its recent predecessors. Mendes delivers some decent sequences, but none of them are as elaborate or thrilling as what we’ve seen in Casino Royale or Skyfall, let alone some of the other Bond classics.

6. Art over excitement
When Sam Mendes was first announced to be taking over the Bond franchise, I was excited and worried. He’s a terrific director, but I had concern that he would try to do too much with what is an essentially an action franchise. Skyfall proved me wrong, but Spectre doesn’t always feel like a Bond movie. It’s a beautiful film, but had Mendes focused on the action and plot over pretty camera angles--and edited out 20 minutes--Spectre would have been a lot better.

7. Bond Girl boredom
Léa Seydoux has the look, but even her character’s name--Madeleine Swann--is dull. She is one of the least memorable Bond girls ever.

8. The theme song doesn’t work
The movie starts off on a poor note with a song that is perfectly good on its own, but completely bland for a Bond film. After a pretty decent opening sequence set in Mexico City, the theme song is an early indicator of the film’s later issues.

9. Where’s the Bond music?
On that note, the quintessential Bond soundtrack is missing from much of the movie, a surefire sign that Mendes forgot he was making a Bond film. The score just isn’t very good.

I’ve spent this review outlining the many, many things wrong with Spectre, but in the end, is it a terrible movie? No. While it misses the mark in many arenas, it’s still a serviceable action movie with great cinematography, solid acting and some enjoyable if forgettable action sequences.

It just could have, and should have been, so much more.

Review by Erik Samdahl.