Why criticism on "Skyfall" never truly gained ground (but flourishes in small fan circles)

11112141617

Comments

  • The climax of SF is the only part that is full of tension and suspense. Except for the great PTS nothing than blah blah blah happens up to Macau and some strangely choreography fight? dance? in a skyscraper, if beautifully shot.

    I'm pretty sure in 10 years SF will only be remembered for the 50th Anniversary that accompanied it and Adele.

    SF did feel flat and dreary a lot of the time. But the lead-up to Silva's interruption of M's speech was suspenseful I suppose.

    Unfortunately since CR we have lost that suspense feel.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    bondjames wrote: »
    It really looked to me like they were just trying to find a way, any way, to wrap it up by that point (the helicopter downing I mean). Sloppy.

    I am sort of with you here, @bondjames. The problem with Mendes Bond films is that he seems to love helicopter imagery. Whether it's Silva's "Boom Boom" entrance upon Scotland (Apocalypse Now reference?), the explosion and crash of that craft, the SP helicopter tussle or the finale's smash up, it's all a bit too overdone.

    I agree that it feels sloppy. Mendes clearly wanted some way to have Blofeld symbolically fall from grace and crash in the helicopter, injured and in pain on the ground like Ozymandias on that bridge to convey a fallen empire, and the only way he and his team could figure out how to do that is by Bond shooting at the helicopter's weak spot with his PPK. We do see Bond really try over and over to get his shot before succeeding, it's just not really that climactic of an action to be honest. In the history of Bond finales, this doesn't get the heart pumping. And because we opened the film with a helicopter fight, that couldn't be rehashed. But because the helicopter imagery returns for the finale, it feels redundant anyway, making me question if they should've just gone for it regardless, though I can't think of a way to get Bond on the helicopter with Blofeld. Dammit.

    The biggest issue with SP content wise is that it's front-loaded, and heavily so. We get a lot of the big, meaty action in the first half, and then not much in the second. The biggest piece of the film is the one that opens it, so SP puts itself in a weird spot where it peaks literally out of the gate from an action standpoint such that anything beyond that save for the Hinx and Bond train fight feels lesser.

    The biggest problem I personally have with SP's action is how disconnected and anti-visceral it feels. We only really see Bond throw a punch and get his own hands dirty a few times here and there, and these last for only a few seconds. All the rest of the action is vehicular in nature: we get Bond causing chaos in a car, in a plane, on a boat; anything but a bike, really. The issue with this, however, is that we don't really feel any emotive investment in this action. Because we can't even see Bond in the car and plane sections (for the most part) we're disconnected almost entirely from whatever impact his actions could have. In the train fight however, and in every Bond fistfight, we feel the punches because we can see Bond and we latch on to him in those desperate moments of survival. Those visceral, man to man moments were missing in SP, big time. I've never cared for chases or other kinds of vehicular action when a well choreographed fist fight gives you all the raw power you need to feel in a high octane moment.

    SP could have been heavily improved with a more emotional core moment, akin to SF's Tennyson scene, and more in your face and "present" action with Dan like the Hinx fight or QoS's pulse pounding Slate face-off. I like the movie, but I agree that we should see Bond's pain at what Blofeld and SPECTRE have done to him in a more overt fashion, brining it back to my concern about a slightly off emotional core. I can see why some feel Bond doesn't have much of a reaction to the news of Franz being alive and his hand in SPECTRE, and one close-up where 007 realizes the organization's involvement in his past would've been stellar and gone a long way to showing how the awareness troubles him.

    The thing that complicates all this is Blofeld's "author of all your pain" line. I think it was a poor phrase to use because it makes people think that Blofeld was committed solely to dismantling Bond's life, and he set out to do that purposely and without any other interest in the past. Is anyone else bugged by this as much as I am?

    95.gif
  • Posts: 6,432
    Skyfall is a film I consistantly have had the same opinion toward more than any film in the series. I enjoy the first hundred minutes then it all falls apart for me.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Skyfall is a film I consistantly have had the same opinion toward more than any film in the series. I enjoy the first hundred minutes then it all falls apart for me.

    What you probably intended to say is: "the first 70 minutes"

    After Silva enters the screen the movie comes close to unwatchable for half an hour.
  • GettlerGettler USA
    Posts: 326
    I enjoyed the Skyfall final very much, but not on a suspenseful scale.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited March 2016 Posts: 4,043
    The climax of SF is the only part that is full of tension and suspense. Except for the great PTS nothing than blah blah blah happens up to Macau and some strangely choreography fight? dance? in a skyscraper, if beautifully shot.

    I'm pretty sure in 10 years SF will only be remembered for the 50th Anniversary that accompanied it and Adele.

    Wishful thinking that films reputation is already set my friend, it might change in the fanbase but SF will clearly be rememeber more fondly than SP.

    You obviously have convinced yourself that a film lacking suspense and danger is a masterpiece so it's futile arguing.

    It just goes to show us Bond fans have very differing views, I will gladly admit that SF is far from perfect and even my no. 1 OHMSS has it's flaws but you've convinced yourself one of the most devisive Bond films of the last 30 years is a masterpiece.

    I don't think any Bond film is a masterpiece, the genre that Bond inhabits has one true masterpiece and I'm afraid that is Raiders of the Lost Ark, no Bond film has got that close.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Skyfall is a film I consistantly have had the same opinion toward more than any film in the series. I enjoy the first hundred minutes then it all falls apart for me.

    What you probably intended to say is: "the first 70 minutes"

    After Silva enters the screen the movie comes close to unwatchable for half an hour.

    Do you really think Bardem is that bad an actor?

    At least he put some effort in, Waltz and actor we expected to do wonders with the role just phoned his performance in.

    Mads set the bar and I'm afraid no other actor has delivered like him, Almaric was underwritten but did well with the material he was given but Christoph just slummed it.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Skyfall is a film I consistantly have had the same opinion toward more than any film in the series. I enjoy the first hundred minutes then it all falls apart for me.

    What you probably intended to say is: "the first 70 minutes"

    After Silva enters the screen the movie comes close to unwatchable for half an hour.

    Do you really think Bardem is that bad an actor?

    At least he put some effort in, Waltz and actor we expected to do wonders with the role just phoned his performance in.

    Mads set the bar and I'm afraid no other actor has delivered like him, Almaric was underwritten but did well with the material he was given but Christoph just slummed it.

    He's not a bad actor, but his performance he one of the worst things in the franchises history. It's best not to look directly at it.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited March 2016 Posts: 4,043
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Skyfall is a film I consistantly have had the same opinion toward more than any film in the series. I enjoy the first hundred minutes then it all falls apart for me.

    What you probably intended to say is: "the first 70 minutes"

    After Silva enters the screen the movie comes close to unwatchable for half an hour.

    Do you really think Bardem is that bad an actor?

    At least he put some effort in, Waltz and actor we expected to do wonders with the role just phoned his performance in.

    Mads set the bar and I'm afraid no other actor has delivered like him, Almaric was underwritten but did well with the material he was given but Christoph just slummed it.

    He's not a bad actor, but his performance he one of the worst things in the franchises history. It's best not to look directly at it.

    I don't personally see it, I think Bardem is great in SF I have no problem looking at it, considering the garbage we got in the Brosnan era, Jonathan Pryce is atrotious in TND and don't get me started on Toby Stephen's effort in DAD.

    I think Silva comes across dangerous a wild card, maybe close to Ledger's Joker but far more threatening than Hans Landa diet in SP.

    I was really expecting Waltz to knock it out the park, Han Landa in Inglourious is a revelation but here he's just so safe.

    Silva will go down as one of the most memorable Bond villains of the series.

    SPECTRE is going to go down as the one where Bond found out Blofeld was his brother and people will reference Austin Powers, I'm afraid the damage is done and all the fan love from JasonBond006 isn't going to undo it.

    Never let Mendes & P&W near another Bond film again.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Bardem is a great actor but Silva is a bag of dousche.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    @Shardlake

    SF will indeed be remembered more in the future, it was a phenomenon which had partly to do with the movie itself, partly because of the incredible hype that went on before it (50th Anniversary).

    Raiders Of The Lost Ark just may be the best movie of the 80's. Maybe Star Trek Wrath Of Khan comes close or is better, depending if you really want to compare them.

    I believe some Bond movies could be considered masterpieces, cinematically. FRWL comes to mind and OHMSS of course. I don't see why they couldn't have been nominated or won Best Picture for example.
    If nowadays Lord Of The Rings can do it, and movies like Avatar (for Christ's sake) and Mad Max Fury Road get Best Picture nominations (and the latter wins 6) why not a Bond movie.

    CR should have gotten nominations and wins. Eva Green just stole the show. Mikkelsen was Oscar worthy as well imo.
    SF's cinematography is freaking fantastic and to hell with the Academy for not giving Deakins his Oscar.
    Albert Finney is one of my favourite actors. He is bloody kicking ass in SF, and I wish he had more to do in the movie.
    It's funny that so many criticise the Skyfall Scotland sequence when this is clearly the best thing in the movie. At least Bardem has not much dialogue there which is a good thing, because for me, Silva almost ruins the movie, bad OTT acting and worst dialogue ever of a villain imho.
    The first 70 minutes of SF are absolutely ok, there should be more action but it's ok. Then it becomes almost unwatchable up to when Bond and M go to Scotland as I mentioned, when the movie is at its best.
    I'll give it another chance in the new Bondathon I've started. I will try to ignore Silva as good as I can :))
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Skyfall is a film I consistantly have had the same opinion toward more than any film in the series. I enjoy the first hundred minutes then it all falls apart for me.

    What you probably intended to say is: "the first 70 minutes"

    After Silva enters the screen the movie comes close to unwatchable for half an hour.

    Do you really think Bardem is that bad an actor?

    At least he put some effort in, Waltz and actor we expected to do wonders with the role just phoned his performance in.

    Mads set the bar and I'm afraid no other actor has delivered like him, Almaric was underwritten but did well with the material he was given but Christoph just slummed it.

    He's not a bad actor, but his performance he one of the worst things in the franchises history. It's best not to look directly at it.

    I don't personally see it, I think Bardem is great in SF I have no problem looking at it, considering the garbage we got in the Brosnan era, Jonathan Pryce is atrotious in TND and don't get me started on Toby Stephen's effort in DAD.

    I think Silva comes across dangerous a wild card, maybe close to Ledger's Joker but far more threatening than Hans Landa diet in SF.

    I was really expecting Waltz to knock it out the park, Han Landa in Inglourious is a revelation but here he's just so safe.

    Silva will go down as one of the most memorable Bond villains of the series.

    SPECTRE is going to go down as the one where Bond found out Blofeld was his brother and people will reference Austin Powers, I'm afraid the damage is done and all the fan love from JasonBond006 isn't going to undo it.

    Never let Mendes & P&W near another Bond film again.

    If you like Silva, more power to you.

    you're right, Toby Stephens is one of the worst things in DAD, never mind invisible cars. Compare him to Mads Mikkelesen, no contest.

    P&W are what's holding the franchise back from returning to its former glory.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Skyfall is a film I consistantly have had the same opinion toward more than any film in the series. I enjoy the first hundred minutes then it all falls apart for me.

    What you probably intended to say is: "the first 70 minutes"

    After Silva enters the screen the movie comes close to unwatchable for half an hour.

    Do you really think Bardem is that bad an actor?

    At least he put some effort in, Waltz and actor we expected to do wonders with the role just phoned his performance in.

    Mads set the bar and I'm afraid no other actor has delivered like him, Almaric was underwritten but did well with the material he was given but Christoph just slummed it.

    He's not a bad actor, but his performance he one of the worst things in the franchises history. It's best not to look directly at it.

    I don't personally see it, I think Bardem is great in SF I have no problem looking at it, considering the garbage we got in the Brosnan era, Jonathan Pryce is atrotious in TND and don't get me started on Toby Stephen's effort in DAD.

    I think Silva comes across dangerous a wild card, maybe close to Ledger's Joker but far more threatening than Hans Landa diet in SF.

    I was really expecting Waltz to knock it out the park, Han Landa in Inglourious is a revelation but here he's just so safe.

    Silva will go down as one of the most memorable Bond villains of the series.

    SPECTRE is going to go down as the one where Bond found out Blofeld was his brother and people will reference Austin Powers, I'm afraid the damage is done and all the fan love from JasonBond006 isn't going to undo it.

    Never let Mendes & P&W near another Bond film again.

    If you like Silva, more power to you.

    you're right, Toby Stephens is one of the worst things in DAD, never mind invisible cars. Compare him to Mads Mikkelesen, no contest.

    P&W are what's holding the franchise back from returning to its former glory.

    To anyone who actually liked Bardem's performance and dialogue: Good for you. For me that is Austin Powers level.
    Imagine a guy like Mikkelsen had played Silva. Bardem was just wrong.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Toby Stephens is one of the worst things in DAD.
    ENNNNHHH! Wrong guess Hans!
    =))
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited March 2016 Posts: 8,395
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Toby Stephens is one of the worst things in DAD.
    ENNNNHHH! Wrong guess Hans!
    =))

    He delivers every line in the same sniggering, sneering manner. I think he might not have got the memo that a villain has to have more to them than that. I stand by my previous comment. [-(
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Toby Stephens is one of the worst things in DAD.
    ENNNNHHH! Wrong guess Hans!
    =))

    He delivers every line in the same sniggering, sneering manner. I think he might not have got the memo that a villain has to have more to them than that. I stand by my previous comment. [-(
    Toby chewed the scenery beautifully in a movie that demanded it of him. I stand by my previous sarcasm.
    =))
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    chrisisall wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Toby Stephens is one of the worst things in DAD.
    ENNNNHHH! Wrong guess Hans!
    =))

    He delivers every line in the same sniggering, sneering manner. I think he might not have got the memo that a villain has to have more to them than that. I stand by my previous comment. [-(
    Toby chewed the scenery beautifully in a movie that demanded it of him. I stand by my previous sarcasm.
    =))

    I suppose your right. I love to see actors who ignore the facts and give it their all anyway. As it is I view him as complicit in the mutiny of the franchise I love. :-S
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    Why are people making it out as if Silva is an unpopular villain? He made the top five in the villain elimination game (one of the most popular games to date).

    Personally, I like him just fine. Suitably creepy.
  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,252
    Just a small vocal minority
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Why are people making it out as if Silva is an unpopular villain? He made the top five in the villain elimination game (one of the most popular games to date).

    Personally, I like him just fine. Suitably creepy.

    Well anything SF comes close to winning in the elimination games. That's no argument :))

    I don't believe Silva is unpopular in general by the way. I don't believe he is one of the most popular either. He's just one of many Bond villains.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    w2bond wrote: »
    Just a small vocal minority
    Those are the worst.
  • Posts: 6,432
    Skyfall is a film I consistantly have had the same opinion toward more than any film in the series. I enjoy the first hundred minutes then it all falls apart for me.



    What you probably intended to say is: "the first 70 minutes"

    After Silva enters the screen the movie comes close to unwatchable for half an hour.

    You are most likely right with the time, soon as Bond gets off the Chimera my interest wains dramatically.

  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    @Chrisisall. I too loved Toby Stephens as a villain. He's also very good as Bond in the
    BBC radio versions of the Bond novels. So he's been both Bond and a villain. :D
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    The suspense and tension in QoS, SF and SP has never been able to reach the levels in CR, or anything near that. CR brought the most tense moments in the series in many decades, and I expect that it will be at least another few years before we can get some moments that are equally or even comparably tense and suspenseful.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I was filled with Tension in the SP torture scene, still wince thinking about it.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    That was quite tense at first, but as soon as the watch came up everything was predictable. It still wouldn't be that bad if it weren't for the stupid scene afterwards where Bond is miraculously healed and gunning down goons with ease.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Oddly that's the same with the Die Hard films. As soon as Bruce Willis turns up all
    Tension and suspended is lost ( in my opinion) as he usually wins :D
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,583
    It's difficult for me to go back and re-imagine how I felt, suspense-wise, when seeing one of these films for the first time. I have now seen CR and QoS so often (and it's been nearly ten and eight years since their release) that I can't recall at all.

    SF: The PTS was intense; the duel (with the shot glass on Severine's head) was particularly intense; the chase through the subway and the final scenes Skyfall were also suspenseful.

    SP: The PTS, yes; the train fight; the race through the old MI6 building; I also found the scene with Lucia, coming home after the funeral, to be especially effective--as we see the two hitmen in the bg. But the films two big moments, the escape from the crater and the downing of Blofeld's helicopter, are way too ho-hum.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    SPECTRE lacks suspense like no other Craig entry, those 2 sequences that finish film are some of the laziest moments the series has seen in years.

    Craig in all his previous entries has felt in danger after the PTS he never feels in jeopardy at all. Even the torture chair moment is defused as soon as we see the watch.

    While echoing the Moore era like some have been begging for since DC put on the tux and holstered the walther he has been neuteted of any real fear and tension. Compare this to the ball whacking moment in Casino and it's all plain to see, Craig's Bond should never be saved by anything as generic as a bloody watch.

    P&W were bought on board to inject more humour and Bondian moments to SP. Instead of delivering material more keeping with Daniel's portrayal they stick the kind of nonsense we thought had all been jettisoned when Craig had signed on.

    Yet some who clearly dislike this era claim this more like the Bond they like. So ticking the boxes and trowling on the cliches makes it Bond does it? Are you sure you actually like the character and not just a collection of elements that remind of the past as opposed to a compelling three dimensional human being?

    I never known Craig's Bond seem so safe and un-threatened till this film.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    To quote one of my favourite villains:

    Give the people what they want.

    SPECTRE obviously was what they wanted. So everything is as it should be.

    In 2012 they wanted the hype, the celebration of the Anniversary and a Bond movie that resembled some great moments of the past, they wanted the drama, the soap.

    In 2015 they wanted the Bond back they've known for decades that worked so well.

    Everything is as it should be.
Sign In or Register to comment.