It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I think the big difference between Craig's one-liners and the one from Brosnan are quite obvious. Craig's ones actually work. If it is the sexual innuendo between Bond and 'Q' or Bond and Silva, it created laughter in cinema. The one-liners were always part of a greater, memorable scene. Same with 'Casino Royale'''s torture scene.
The Brosnan one-liners are just famous for making Bond look suave in a fake, forced way. The way Brosnan talks...and comes out of the blue with a one-liner was camp and never really part of a memorable scene. Moreover, Brosnan's entire body language came over as fake, like he was saying "Look palls, I am Bond, so I don't need to fully prove myself OK?".
Having said that....for me Craig feels much more like today's Connery. And even better. We are truly living in some glorious Bond days that many of us have not really witnessed before. Given the fact that many fans here were not old enough to truly recall the early Connery-years.
For me as a Bond fan......I feel sheer horniness these days. DoubleONothing knows what I'm talking about ;-).
The only other real issue with SF for me (I certainly like most of the film) is that the plot is a little thin and it felt a little too tightly paced in parts like at the beginning when Bond is suffering from a bit of depression and boredom as in the books (the "enjoying death" scenes which I love but are too short) and the sex scenes. Not that I lust after sex scenes in Bond but if the love scene between Bond and Severine had have been a little longer with some dialogue then we would have known more about Severine and cared more when she was killed. In terms of the pacing, most of it was spot on though. It also seemed in parts that the writers and director were just crossing off all the Bond ingredient boxes like in the Brosnan era albeit more successfully. We don't have to have every Bond ingredient in a 007 movie. We didn't prior to the Brosnan era.
Villain's plots have always been simple and plain in Bond films: Villain has a scheme - Bond comes to MI6 - Bond gets a mission to counteract Villains scheme - Bond travels the globe - Bond kisses Bond girls - One final climax to kill the villain and its scheme.
That's. Basically. It.
Concerning re-introducing typical Bond elements. Gosh, I thought it was especially done in a nuanced, dosed way! The way Bond got a beautiful new Walther PPK with one tiny radio transmitter reminded ME of the From Russia With Love moment when Bond gets the attache case from Q.
On top of that.....the humour was never overdone, given the circumstances Bond was in.
The public isn't supposed to know who they are.
I had been programed, as a young boy, to pay homage at the alter of Sean Connery when it came to the topic of James Bond. I mean, who could argue the fact that the original was the best? The very best. From the moment Connery said those immortals words "The name's Bond, James Bond" in Dr.No, it set the bar and echoed forward through 22 more movies, 5 more actors, and just as many decades. But to cut this preeamble short, I'll just say that my Bond fan DNA has been rearranged....and Daniel Craig reigns supreme.
'Skyfall', in short, is a triumph. It is by far the best film in the series. Daniel Craig finds sure footing in a role, and a time that was meant for him to don the tuxedo. All of the pieces came together in an extraordinary piece of cinema. I say this as not only a Bond fan, but as a fan of movies.
'Skyfall' boasts the most distinguish cast ever assembled in a Bond picture....and under the sure and brilliant direction of Sam Mendes...holy Hell do they shine. First off, Dame Judi Dench's 'M' has never been so active in a Bond movie...and the depth of character we are given, along with the relationship between her and James Bond is both fitting and rich. It's this sort of character study and texture that I believe makes 'Skyfall' the monster of a film it is. It delivers in creating, adding to, and perfectly feeding the mythology and lore of Bond's story to the audience in a way that has never been done before, if only hinting at in 'Casino Royale'.
Ralph Fiennes is fantastic as Mallory...and I'll leave you to see the film to understand why I am so happy with his inclusion in this cast.
Both Bond girls are spot on and deliver the typical shades of modern Bond girls....one is stunningly enigmatic, the other is action oriented and flirtatious. The lack of innovation here shouldn't be viewed as a fault...because...you can mix it up as much as you want....but there needs to be the ingridients we all love and recognize in the Bond formula.
Ben Wishaw is exactly the right man for the role of 'Q'. It's a new age, and he very much represents the new generation, which is a vital part of the story and it's battle of 'the old ways' and 'the new ways'. I am loving how Winshaw portrays him...and I cannot wait to see more back and forth between him and Bond in the years to come.
Now, Javier Bardem....oh man. He will go down as one of the all-time greats for Bond villains. Right up there with Auric Goldfinger, Rosa Klebb, Red Grant, Dr. No....Bardem has done something amazing with this role...and he is one of the main reasons this movie is so astonishingly superb. He plays the role of 'Silva' with a quirky, flamboyant and disturbing menace that overshadows the blandness of more recent Bond baddies...and more impressively...secures himself a spot in the hall of the greats. Jaws would be proud...and very afraid.
The score by Thomas Newman is cool, clean, crisp and exciting. A music cue of particular brilliance is found two thirds of the way in during a back and forth of Jamed Bond running to the rescue, and M reciting Tennyson. Chills during that scene, and in fact chills abound throughout the film because of the stunning...and I mean stunning cinematography of Roger Deakins. ....I am calling it right here...Roger Deakins will at the very least be nominated come awards season for his work on 'Skyfall'...at the very least. The images he gives us are beautiful....and if your jaw doesn't drop during a sillohetted fight scene in Shanghai...then check your pulse....because he is a master...it is a travesty Deakins has never seen Oscar gold before...and I think this movie will be the one that sees him through to many accolades. This will be one of the works he is remembered for.
Sam Mendes, thank you for directing this film. I think you have made your best film to date. ...and that's with an impressive filmography including 'Road To Perdition' and 'American Beauty'.
'Skyfall'....wow. After waiting for four years since 'Quantum of Solace'...with uncertainty of there ever being another adventure with 007 again (MGM bankrupcy troubles)....you have delievered. The best way to put it is... You know when you have been waiting for a movie for a long time, and you finally see it....and it ends up fulfilling everything you had hoped for and even more? That is what 'Skyfall' just did for me. I am happy...just completely happy and satisfied. Not only is this movie the perfect way to celebrate the 50th year of a movie franchise that transforms me into a 13 year old boy with a grin on his face everytime I sit down to watch an entry...but this is what cinema is all about. This is escapism and movie magic at it's purest and most sublime...this is 'Skyfall'...and this is James Bond.
Well, those are my immediate thoughts after returning from the theater last night. We are lucky this year guys...this is a special one.
And for all we know, Q & Bond have passes that they can show to those guards that they work for MI6.
I just don't understand how you can complain about such little details.
Thanks so much @Sandy . He's just that good. I mean, every time/era has had the right Bond. But I think Daniel Craig transcends all of that now. 'Casino Royale' was a monumental achievement in its own right...but 'Skyfall' has cemented Craig at the head of the table. :)
He's got his knickers in a twist about people having issues. In his mind I think he was envisaging some kind of Bondian Utopian Jonestown, where we all came on here, agreed Skyfall was the best thing ever and then committed mass suicide. Life isn't worth living anymore. Bond cannot get better than this.
I beg you pardon?
There was a trend to put M's office in daft locations for variety in past films
Well, let him have his 15 martinis in Bond 24. ;) :>
Here is another view, quite hilarious.
I love these.
"It's another boring angsty po-faced PRE-Bond movie and I've pretty much given up on them giving us a fun, truly exciting popcorn adventure with the cool hero we used to know."
I agree a billion percent with you!
No pro-Craig Bond fans ever want to accept the following but it's true...
When the producers cast Daniel Craig they *killed off the inherent glamour of the James Bond franchise*. Who, hand on heart, would want to be Craig's James Bond? Okay, we accept the films are make believe fun, but growing up I wanted to be like the other Bond actors. Why would I want to be like Craig's James Bond? Is he suave or smooth? Nope. Do the current screenwriters and the producers try to make his storylines glamorous? Nope. As you say it's angst-ridden "save M!" "personal issues" "Bond rogue(ish)" stuff. All the glamour - the fantasy of James Bond's world is dulled by Craig's casting, his approach to the role. I expected this to happen when Craig was cast in 2005. He was never a smooth actor and it's no surprise all his Bond films pump up the angst and the 'issues' because there is no where else to go with his Bond. Can you imagine Craig making a Thunderball or Moonraker Bond film? I sure as heck can't. I think he'd be lost. In a perverse kind of way his Bond is one dimensional as Moore's 'fantasy version' but at least Moore made you think "wow, I'd love to be as charming and smooth as Moore's Bond." As mentioned, why would anyone want to be Craig's Bond?
People praise Craig as the best actor to play Bond but think of all the hundreds or thousands of actors you've watched in your life without any of the charm and sophistication of Connery or Moore or Brosnan. Doesn't that make them a bit different or special? I think so. And isn't that what Bond - the film version of Bond is? A bit different and special. I don't think Craig makes Bond different or special. Sure, he's a very human James Bond but I think the genius of the film version of James Bond was he wasn't that human, he was charming and confident and cool. And that's been lost or reduced with Craig's Bond films and it's a shame. And it's a shame the huge box office for Skyfall proves hardly anyone wants the old cool James Bond back. I think he's gone forever. I doubt the next James Bond actor will revert back to the old type. He's gone forever.
The Bond We All Know And Love Is BACK!
This is the perfect present for the 50th anniversary. After waiting for 4 years, I really expected a good film. Just not this good.
I loved all the performances, especially by Bardem and Craig. All the one-liners were nice, funny, and clever. The action did not disappoint at all, as some have feared. The cinematography is just brilliant. The CGI is well done. The only problem I had with it was that Berenice did not get enough screen time. Otherwise, this is an amazing Bond film. I will definitely see more showings after today.
Summary: I liked it, but honestly, less than I thought I would.
It's like two different films -- the first half (up until Silva's capture on the island) is a traditional Bond film, and I *loved* how it was going... but then suddenly the second half is a far more personal film, much lower-key, and more like an extended episode of Spooks (MI-5 for US viewers) than a Bond movie.
For several reasons, that bugs me.
1) It wouldn't bug me nearly as much if the first half hadn't been damn near perfect. I wanted more of that.
2) I realize that this is largely an issue for me because I write for a living, but the structure of this film is an absolute violation of action-adventure film writing and directing (and Bond films in particular). These films should build, build, build towards a HUGE climax. This film builds, builds, builds, and then suddenly gets very small and quiet and personal. And throwing in some explosions and a helicopter crash at the end doesn't really change that. It's just a really odd directorial choice.
3) I'm getting seriously tired of the "ticking off the checklist" origin set-up. It's 3 films in, and we're still having "ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED: DB5, MONEYPENNY, Q & LEATHER-DOOR OLD-BOY-NETWORK M." Fer chrissakes -- it's been 6 years. Can we finally just have a movie where Craig is Bond, and no more 'origin elements' need to be rolled out?
Don't get me wrong -- I like the film far more than I dislike it (for one thing, it's probably the most beautifully shot Bond film ever, from a cinematographic standpoint... and the direction on the pre-titles sequence alone makes up for the shaky-hand-cam BS of Quantum of Solace).
But those three things I list above did, really, prevent me from loving it, and made it much harder for me to ignore a slew of other, much smaller, negatives (Newman's score, the obviousness of "we came up a title, now we need to find someway to fit it into the film", the dodgy CG, and the entire theme of Bond being past his prime when Casino Royale told us he'd only just become a 00, etc.)
Still, though, I expect that it will do massive business in the US, perhaps surpassing all of the other Bonds.
I hold out hope for the next film to be more of an enjoyable exultation in the traditional Bond formula, through a Craig lens, than the oddly Freudian solemnity that at times weighed this film down.
The only thing you say that makes sense is " the best actor to play Bond". He could quite easily make a Thunderball but thankfully the Moonraker era of the Bond series has long gone (thankfully!).
As a long time Bond fan, what it fails to do doesn't take away from what I loved as a whole. I'd definitely see it all over again. Thoroughly enjoyable all the way up through the end even with its flaws.
Someone mentioned music as a downer, but I liked Adele's opening and there were moments in the soundtrack that almost seemed to want to reach back to the previous films. One thing that went through my mind was in hoping they would actually cut back on some of the environmental music and let certain scenes play out as raw such as when Connery's Bond fought Red Grant on the train in From Russia With Love.
Personally, I love Craig as Bond and am glad the series is taking a darker and grittier path. That's not to say I don't love the older films -- I do -- but one thing that I also love about the franchise is its ability to adapt whether it's in the Cold War in East Berlin or a play on Howard Hughes with Willard White in Diamonds are Forever. It's not always successful, but the series has always kept me on my toes on surprising me with what to expect in every film. Bottling the high profile hacking stories of the past few years into Bardem's character felt just as timely.
I do have one question:
For some reason, it sounded to me as if she said "If it's alright with you, I'll just stay here."...but I have a feeling I'm way off. Could anyone clarify?
Thanks so much in advance.
In reality please, please, please Barbara & Michael get Chris Nolan and give him his head without any interference.
Ok for the last time. The M that Dench plays in the four Brosnan films is a totally different M from the one she plays in the three Craig movies. The M Dench plays in GE is taking over from a previous M that Bond (Brosnan) had worked for as a Double 0 earlier. So that M had a secretary named Moneypenny who happened to be white. The M Dench plays in the three Craig films is M before Bond becomes a Double 0. If you just accept that there are two different M characters who happen to be played by the same actress it all makes sense.