SKYFALL: FANS' REACTIONS - GUARANTEED SPOILERS

1656668707199

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    @bondbat007, absolutely. I just had a feeling it was going to happen - another death for a character we barely knew - but how close he was to Bond and how much he helped out, it would have been a real shame to introduce him and instantly kill him off, all because of Bond.

    Exactly like Severine, I suppose, excluding how close they were to one another.
  • Posts: 2,081
    So not "exactly like", right? ;)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    Tuulia wrote:
    So not "exactly like", right? ;)

    Haha, yes. Terrible wording of mine ;)
  • hoppimikehoppimike Kent, UK
    Posts: 290
    bondbat007 wrote:
    hoppimike wrote:
    Hm, and strange that some people didn't like GoldenEye... what was wrong with it?

    It's the great thing about Bond fans. I can't see why you don't like Skyfall and you and I both can't see why others don't like Goldeneye.

    haha very true :)

    I guess it's all evolved so much and changed so many times, different people will enjoy different incarnations and variations more than others.

    Then of course, some will get pulled into the fanbase from that variation as opposed to the one that pulled other people in! No wonder we have such a variation of opinion!
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    bondbat007 wrote:
    Creasy47 wrote:
    Such a random comment, but I'm really glad that Kincade didn't die during the finale of the film, just for the sake of his death deriving from Bond bringing it to his front door. I would've felt terrible.

    It would have been the predictable thing for Kincade to die. I was half expecting it. When Silva walked into the church and shot the wall next to Kincade I half jumped out of my seat. I'm very glad he didn't die. It would have been too much for Bond for sure

    I jumped too, mate. I thought that after seeing Silva point and shoot Kincade would be shown in a close up with red bleeding through his shirt, but when it just hit the wall my heart went back inside my chest with no worries. #:-S
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 3,327
    hoppimike wrote:
    I think though that the series should be allowed to evolve. I like the 90s and 00s styles... Skyfall I guess echoed the older films more in some ways. Again, it's all personal preference.

    I wonder which films would be Fleming's favourites :-)
    I'd hazard a guess it would be the early 60's Bond's, OHMSS, FYEO, TLD, LTK, CR and SF......but that's just my interpretation of the novels. I suggest you read them when you get chance, as they are far better than the films.

    When you get round to watching the campy Moore films, you will see comparisons with Brosnan's interpretation of Bond, and when you finally get round to watching Dalton's films, you'll see comparisons with Craig's grittier Bond.

    Apologies if a few of us lynched you on your first postings.....Bond is a sensitive subject around these parts. ;)

    As for GE, I think its a very poor Bond film, but probably better than AVTAK, OP and the rest of Brosnan's other flicks.
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 11,189
    hoppimike wrote:
    I think though that the series should be allowed to evolve. I like the 90s and 00s styles... Skyfall I guess echoed the older films more in some ways. Again, it's all personal preference.

    I wonder which films would be Fleming's favourites :-)
    I'd hazard a guess it would be the early 60's Bond's, OHMSS, FYEO, TLD, LTK, CR and SF......but that's just my interpretation of the novels. I suggest you read them when you get chance, as they are far better than the films.

    When you get round to watching the campy Moore films, you will see comparisons with Brosnan's interpretation of Bond, and when you finally get round to watching Dalton's films, you'll see comparisons with Craig's grittier Bond.

    Apologies if a few of us lynched you on your first postings.....Bond is a sensitive subject around these parts. ;)

    As for GE, I think its a very poor Bond film, but probably better than AVTAK, OP and the rest of Brosnan's other flicks.

    Well apparently Fleming hated Dr No when he first saw it as legend goes (you must already know that)...and that film made his novel look more realistic in comparison.

    However I agree that Fleming would like (or at least "appreciate") those other films. Never been too sure about what he'd think about LTK though - I think he would prefer CR.

    Just curious, why don't you like OP?
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 3,327
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Just curious, why don't you like OP?
    Other than Moore looking passed it by 1983, Tarzan swings and telling snakes to `hiss off'. Need I say anyore......

    ;)
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 11,189
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Just curious, why don't you like OP?
    Other than Moore looking passed it by 1983, Tarzan swings and telling snakes to `hiss off'. Need I say anyore......

    ;)

    I always felt that with OP that the good outweighs the bad. The good being the jewel smuggling Hitchcock like plot, Maud Adams, Kamal Kahn, the India setting etc.
  • Well, I've seen all the Bond films of course, and read all the books, not sure it makes my opinion more or less qualified when I say I don't like Skyfall. Less as far as the producers are concerned, as they'll be aiming at the great masses when it comes to box office.

    What I can say is that it just doesn't make me feel the way I felt as a kid watching the old classic Bonds. Okay, chalk it up to getting older maybe, but I can feel that way watching a film again: parts of Django Unchained, all of Kill Bil Vol 1, that kind of thing.
  • Posts: 1,497
    Well, I've seen all the Bond films of course, and read all the books, not sure it makes my opinion more or less qualified when I say I don't like Skyfall. Less as far as the producers are concerned, as they'll be aiming at the great masses when it comes to box office.

    What I can say is that it just doesn't make me feel the way I felt as a kid watching the old classic Bonds. Okay, chalk it up to getting older maybe, but I can feel that way watching a film again: parts of Django Unchained, all of Kill Bil Vol 1, that kind of thing.

    Did you have the same feeling with CR and QOS as you did with SF? At what point did you find the Bond films start to lose the feel of the classic ones? Curious, because a lot has changed in the past 20 years of the franchise, whereas in the first 25 years, a lot of the same principals were still involved throughout--namely Cubby Broccoli and Richard Maibaum.
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 1,220
    I don't mean this as a negative, but Skyfall didn't feel like a classic Bond at all. I mean there were classic elements such as the DB5, larger than life villain, humor, 1960's style suits, but it didn't have the old school Bond feel. The film was very stylish, but not so much in the "classic Bond" way I hear people speak of. The vibe I got was more of a Casino Royale meets The Dark Knight feel, but that's precisely what I feel a modern Bond movie should be.
  • Posts: 1,817
    @battleshipgreygt
    Well SF has more humour than CR and QOS and maybe that is more "classical". But I think the real feeling of the "classic Bond" comes with the ending, the new characters and the location. It reestablish classic Bond... but as much as I like SF, it is not an average or classical Bond in my opinion. On the contrary it is an outlier (and a great one!)
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    0013 wrote:
    @battleshipgreygt
    Well SF has more humour than CR and QOS and maybe that is more "classical". But I think the real feeling of the "classic Bond" comes with the ending, the new characters and the location. It reestablish classic Bond... but as much as I like SF, it is not an average or classical Bond in my opinion. On the contrary it is an outlier (and a great one!)

    There are elements in SF which are very classical, others not. It's what makes the film special. I'll be borrowing from my (original fan) mother's opinion when she saw the film and tried to make a review without spoiling it to me "it's both old and new at the same time, but it's pure Bond".
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited February 2013 Posts: 13,356
    MI6 and Bond himself should always be 'old' but his world is forever 'new' and always changing. If this is how future films play out, I wouldn't mind one bit. Can't wait to see the next one and find out if this holds true or not.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Samuel001 wrote:
    MI6 and Bond himself should always be 'old' but his world is forever 'new' and always changing.

    A saliant point, and why they need to never have the bloody DB5 return, scrap the 60's nostalgia and kick on into the future. Nostalgia is the death knell of any franchise.
  • hoppimikehoppimike Kent, UK
    Posts: 290
    RC7 wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    MI6 and Bond himself should always be 'old' but his world is forever 'new' and always changing.

    A saliant point, and why they need to never have the bloody DB5 return, scrap the 60's nostalgia and kick on into the future. Nostalgia is the death knell of any franchise.

    I mostly agree. I only like that stuff in dribs and drabs :)
  • Posts: 1,817
    Sandy wrote:
    0013 wrote:
    @battleshipgreygt
    Well SF has more humour than CR and QOS and maybe that is more "classical". But I think the real feeling of the "classic Bond" comes with the ending, the new characters and the location. It reestablish classic Bond... but as much as I like SF, it is not an average or classical Bond in my opinion. On the contrary it is an outlier (and a great one!)

    There are elements in SF which are very classical, others not. It's what makes the film special. I'll be borrowing from my (original fan) mother's opinion when she saw the film and tried to make a review without spoiling it to me "it's both old and new at the same time, but it's pure Bond".

    Well, there's something true: the tension between old and new is not only an element in the story but also in the movie itself, making it hypertextual.

    But SF is more than a mere repetitive Bond release. For example, I love that the villains attack Bond's lair instead of the opposite as in the previous movies. They turned upside down this classical element!
  • jka12002jka12002 Banned
    Posts: 188
    Hell no one liked Goldeneye the movie, but Goldeneye the game was a hit. How ironic
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    jka12002 wrote:
    Hell no one liked Goldeneye the movie, but Goldeneye the game was a hit. How ironic

    I know, weird hey? Can't believe one guy paid $350m for one ticket.
  • jka12002jka12002 Banned
    Posts: 188
    RC7 wrote:
    jka12002 wrote:
    Hell no one liked Goldeneye the movie, but Goldeneye the game was a hit. How ironic

    I know, weird hey? Can't believe one guy paid $350m for one ticket.

    350 mil for one ticket? Damn i would expected a table infront of the screen with wine,caviar and 5 sexy girls with the movie

  • edited February 2013 Posts: 3,494
    BAIN123 wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Just curious, why don't you like OP?
    Other than Moore looking passed it by 1983, Tarzan swings and telling snakes to `hiss off'. Need I say anyore......

    ;)

    I always felt that with OP that the good outweighs the bad. The good being the jewel smuggling Hitchcock like plot, Maud Adams, Kamal Kahn, the India setting etc.

    I agree, and feel that way about QOS as well. Both have their issues for me but in the end they get the job done and provide some memorable viewing.
    Sandy wrote:
    0013 wrote:
    @battleshipgreygt
    Well SF has more humour than CR and QOS and maybe that is more "classical". But I think the real feeling of the "classic Bond" comes with the ending, the new characters and the location. It reestablish classic Bond... but as much as I like SF, it is not an average or classical Bond in my opinion. On the contrary it is an outlier (and a great one!)

    There are elements in SF which are very classical, others not. It's what makes the film special. I'll be borrowing from my (original fan) mother's opinion when she saw the film and tried to make a review without spoiling it to me "it's both old and new at the same time, but it's pure Bond".

    I salute your Mom both as an original and as an observation. She raised you right, that's exactly what Skyfall is and one I dutifully observed, an engrossing and entertaining blend of old and new designed that way for the big anniversary. I still cringe when I think about the 40th, they got it right this time.



  • hoppimikehoppimike Kent, UK
    edited February 2013 Posts: 290
    jka12002 wrote:
    Hell no one liked Goldeneye the movie, but Goldeneye the game was a hit. How ironic

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113189

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/goldeneye

    It got good ratings on both IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes. 82% on Rotten Tomatoes which is only 10% lower than Skyfall and on IMDb it's only 0.7 lower than Skyfall.

    Anyway erm, I've just been rewatching Skyfall with my sister and we're about 55 minutes in. Up until this point I really don't HATE it, I just find it a bit of a downer. Like, it's quite negative in general - rather morbid intro sequence, less impressive MI6 (I know it's the old one apparently, but still), no exciting gadgets from Q, Bond performing worse, constant little quips about Craig's age.

    Other than that I have no major complaints at this point in the movie. I like the Shanghai style and action scenes.

    I think the focus on China is interesting though given the current global political scene, seems strangely coincidental that this film has such a large portion of the storyline revolving around China.

    That's about it for now, just wanted to share that! :)
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 11,425
    It's a shame you never really get a real sense of Bond properly being in China. No street scenes. No Bond being chased through the new years festivities with fire crackers and confusion. It all feels so studio bound. John Glen would have done it properly!
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 2,081
    hoppimike wrote:
    less impressive MI6 (I know it's the old one apparently, but still), no exciting gadgets from Q, Bond performing worse, constant little quips about Craig's age.

    If you're not even half way through, yet, it's not "the old" MI6.
    The comments aren't about Craig's age, but Bond's. ;) They are hardly "constant", either. Mallory says "it's a young man's game", but immediately after it also mentions that Bond has been seriously injured, so the age isn't the only or even the main issue there. And... what else? If you're counting Q's comment about "the old war ship" as a comment on Bond, that would still total two comments. Where else does his age come up in dialogue? Eve's "old dog, new tricks"? And that's it I think.

    Nice that you're finding something to enjoy a little, too, though. :)

  • DCisaredDCisared Liverpool
    Posts: 1,329
    Getafix wrote:
    It's a shame you never really get a real sense of Bond properly being in China. No street scenes. No Bond being chased through the new years festivities with fire crackers and confusion. It all feels so studio bound. John Glen would have done it properly!

    I love Skyfall but I would have to agree with this
  • hoppimikehoppimike Kent, UK
    edited February 2013 Posts: 290
    Tuulia wrote:
    hoppimike wrote:
    less impressive MI6 (I know it's the old one apparently, but still), no exciting gadgets from Q, Bond performing worse, constant little quips about Craig's age.

    If you're not even half way through, yet, it's not "the old" MI6.
    The comments aren't about Craig's age, but Bond's. ;) They are hardly "constant", either. Mallory says "it's a young man's game", but immediately after it also mentions that Bond has been seriously injured, so the age isn't the only or even the main issue there. And... what else? If you're counting Q's comment about "the old war ship" as a comment on Bond, that would still total two comments. Where else does his age come up in dialogue?

    Nice that you're finding something to enjoy a little, too, though. :)

    And "old dog, new tricks". That's 3... but 3 in only less than an hour and that's only the ones we can remember!

    Yeah it's definitely interesting watching it again.
    DCisared wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    It's a shame you never really get a real sense of Bond properly being in China. No street scenes. No Bond being chased through the new years festivities with fire crackers and confusion. It all feels so studio bound. John Glen would have done it properly!

    I love Skyfall but I would have to agree with this

    I agree too, although I'm not sure if it only felt strange to me because I had already heard that the only foreign location was Turkey before I saw the film. I didn't think the China bits were too bad but yeah they did feel a tad isolated.
  • Sandy wrote:
    0013 wrote:
    @battleshipgreygt
    Well SF has more humour than CR and QOS and maybe that is more "classical". But I think the real feeling of the "classic Bond" comes with the ending, the new characters and the location. It reestablish classic Bond... but as much as I like SF, it is not an average or classical Bond in my opinion. On the contrary it is an outlier (and a great one!)

    There are elements in SF which are very classical, others not. It's what makes the film special. I'll be borrowing from my (original fan) mother's opinion when she saw the film and tried to make a review without spoiling it to me "it's both old and new at the same time, but it's pure Bond".

    I agree, but like I said many remarked that when they watched it, it felt like a classic Bond film, but it didn't really to me and I don't have any issue with that because I didn't necessarily want it to. It felt like a very contemporary, new Bond film which tipped it's hat to the past. I'm excited to see what they can produce in Bond 24 with their gazes fully shifted forward.
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 2,081
    @hoppimike, you wrote while I was editing my comment. :)

    2 or 3 comments, and only Q's is a quip of sorts, but the interpretation of it is not even clear. In a 2 hour 24 min movie even 3 (if you count all of those) short comments is hardly constant, and only Mallory's is obvious in meaning - but age isn't his main point, either. Based on that data Bond's age wasn't made much of an issue and certainly wasn't commented upon constantly.
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 11,425
    hoppimike wrote:
    Tuulia wrote:
    hoppimike wrote:
    less impressive MI6 (I know it's the old one apparently, but still), no exciting gadgets from Q, Bond performing worse, constant little quips about Craig's age.

    If you're not even half way through, yet, it's not "the old" MI6.
    The comments aren't about Craig's age, but Bond's. ;) They are hardly "constant", either. Mallory says "it's a young man's game", but immediately after it also mentions that Bond has been seriously injured, so the age isn't the only or even the main issue there. And... what else? If you're counting Q's comment about "the old war ship" as a comment on Bond, that would still total two comments. Where else does his age come up in dialogue?

    Nice that you're finding something to enjoy a little, too, though. :)

    And "old dog, new tricks". That's 3... but 3 in only less than an hour and that's only the ones we can remember!

    Yeah it's definitely interesting watching it again.
    DCisared wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    It's a shame you never really get a real sense of Bond properly being in China. No street scenes. No Bond being chased through the new years festivities with fire crackers and confusion. It all feels so studio bound. John Glen would have done it properly!

    I love Skyfall but I would have to agree with this

    I agree too, although I'm not sure if it only felt strange to me because I had already heard that the only foreign location was Turkey before I saw the film. I didn't think the China bits were too bad but yeah they did feel a tad isolated.

    Yeah it's odd to me. I really thought Mendes was going to capture the 'feel' of the older films. Those large crowd scenes where Bond gets lost in a mass of party goers were such a staple of the Connery and Moore eras. It's one of the reasons I enjoy the opera scene in QoS - it captures a real location and a sense of Bond in the thick of real life events like the old films used to.

    The references to the past in SF were so literal I was shocked - the DB5 and M's old office coming back at the end seemed like such dumb ways to hark back. Brosnan had done all that stuff so many times already it just felt totally unoriginal. I expected much more from Mendes.
Sign In or Register to comment.