007? Daniel Craig was more like 00.007. If it weren’t for fresh faces (first seen in Skyfall) reprising old characters, Spectre would have went over like a spilled martini.

This film is as convoluted as a funnel cake in the fryer. Christoph Waltz was more of a sketchy weasel than a sinister and deranged Bond villain. And it lacked the cheesy humor we have grown to love throughout the series. For instance, there was a moment where “Buy you a beer?” would have worked perfectly but it passed with only the assertion of an unoriginal expletive.

There was, however, entertainment value in Spectre and the vintage coloration of the green screen during the helicopter scene was a nice throwback to the 70s.

With Q (Whishaw), M (Fiennes), Moneypenny (Harris) and hopefully Idris Elba or Andrew Lincoln as the next Bond, the future of the franchise looks promising. For now, this is Clas, Film Clas and we pull no punches. Spectre downshifts to only 2.9 napkins out of 5.

One of the many teachings of my great friend and coffee coach is that you cannot “chase” latte art. That is, do not ruin the texture of the drink trying to draw a picture with milk foam. Aaron Sorkin, and all of us, could learn from this simple philosophy.

I thought this film was “chasing” that epic quotability Sorkin found in “A Few Good Men”. Fassbender delivered admirably but he was given a deluge of poignant lines in an attempt to transform Cupertino into The West Wing. This nudged the rhythm slightly askew as the dialogue, keeping pace with the mayhem before each product launch, was everything to this film.

Despite this obvious flaw, the picture can be lauded as a dynamic look into the personal relationships of a cultural icon. Seth Rogen and Kate Winslet were outstanding as the people, close to Jobs, who pushed back.

The products Steve Jobs created all get 5 napkin reviews. Steve Jobs, the movie, clicks on 3.8 napkins out of 5, leaving space in the iCloud for slightly better writing.

Mark Rylance’ portrayal of Rudolph Abel’s unflappable persona and stunning aptitude was fascinating. I can only hope for a film depicting his career in espionage starring none other. For now, we can marvel at this performance placed nicely in the breadbasket of an excellent movie.

Tom Hanks was the clear choice to play the lawyer plucked to defend a Russian spy in the face of overwhelming evidence, albeit circumstantial, and public displeasure. I needed to believe that there was a person as good as James Donovan at such a tense juncture in history. Hanks’ congeniality guides us amusingly through the rhetoric and deceit, at home and abroad, in his determined quest for fairness.

These gifted actors unwrapped a screenplay by the Coen Brothers. As masters of conflict dialogue, Joel and Ethan wrote brilliantly for characters trying to discover, hide and pilfer information.

This film suffered slightly from a lack of actual spying, considering the title. However, Rylance should cross the bridge from the Tonys to the Oscars this February. Bridge of Spies negotiates the release of 4.2 napkins out of 5.