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 felt like the Skyfall one was trying to be too retro. Like everything else in the movie, it came off as cheap to me.
In contrast, I ADORED the CR gunbarrel and think it's the best I've seen :)
To be honest... I honestly think people favour nostalgia over innovation. And that makes Hoppimike sad! lol :)
(I do understand though that it was the 50 year anniversary so that may have been the sole reasoning for it)
Hmm, I'm not so sure CR is as box unticked as people think. Sure, there were changes in how the formula was implemented but I think looking closely, CR doesn't stray too far from the tried and true. I'd have to watch both movies again but from what I can remember, SF departs from the formula the most out of Craig's 3 film's so far.
A very interesting point that has been brought up is, Bond's continuous failure through out the movie. Sure he prevented the deaths of further agents being exposed and Bond killed Silva but did that really matter in the end? Maybe. Maybe not. It can be argued that Silva's plan was to kill M and in the end M was killed. However, to be fair, it Silva wanted M killed on his own terms. Silva failed to do just that at the hearing and at SF lodge, he didn't know M's wound was fatal. He acknowledged she was hurt and then proceeded to have her kill them both. Bond steps in and interrupts and kills Silva but before he dies, Silva faces Bond and expresses his frustration of his plan being thwarted again and Bond leans in and utters, 'last rat standing'. Looking back at Silva's line earlier, 'We can eat each other or eat everyone else'. It can appear that Bond's victory over Silva does indeed matter, as, Silva is faced with acknowledging that it is he who has failed to kill M and Bond and will no longer be able to kill anyone else or continue any further off colour activities.
Additionally, what I also find interesting about SF is, the whole movie highlights the imperfections of M and Bond and is a massive departure from the previous movies where Bond often succeeds. SF is the only Bond movie where failure from the secret service dominates as a result of their actions. I actually find it to be a refreshing change to be honest because it's different and reflects a dynamic of realism where things can go very wrong and consequences occur and the hero/protagonist still inspires even though things have been botched up. The damage has been done but Bond is still triumphant in the face of an overwhelming defeat. He's lost but he hasn't lost if that makes sense. I don't particularly want to see Bond failing like he did in SF too often in additional movies but I think for this movie at least, it's an interesting turn of events that departs from the conventional heroic victory and shows the other side of when things have and can go wrong. I think this is a very interesting way to have taken elements from the novels and implementing Bond's short comings into a movie in a way that's never been done before.
In terms of content I would probably agree with you, I was referencing iconography more than anything. For that I'd say CR is still more original.
I do like your case for it being an alternative POV we haven't quite seen before, I definitely think this is an interesting angle, for me personally I don't think it was quite executed as well as you explain. For me it overstretches itself with a few too many elements and doesn't quite tie them up as a whole. However, it certainly will remain a unique entry in the canon for sure.
Not a problem at all, I was just pointing it out.
I'm relatively indifferent to that. I loved the CR gun barrel, but then it did benefit from the moment it was given to shine in. Brilliant idea. The SF gun barrel wasn't allowed such an indulgence but otherwise, I can't see too big a contrast with the CR gun barrel.
Oh please. Let me get this, 'the gun barrel was trying to be retro'. In what way? How? It's *just* another gun barrel. Honestly, no-one set down going, hey, let's make all 15 seconds of the gun barrel sequence deliberately different than the CR gun barrel because people will notice that we're trying to go back to... Say, @hoppimike, to what indeed? Forget it, they simply recorded a gun barrel sequence for the end of the movie. Don't think too hard about it.
Can't disagree with such a strong opinion. :-)
well, surely you can see it's designed to look like the old ones?
I suppose I can let them off as it's the 50 year anniversary after all. I just hope that they continue to move into the future with the next films!
I'd like a redesign. I'm not a fan of the QOS/SF desgin at all, they should bring back the classic one or the Brosnan one. Oh, and they should move it back to the start. I can't stress that enough.
I'm not sure if I get your point. In what way is the SF gunbarrel anymore retro than say the QOS, DAD, TWINE, TND, or GE gunbarrels? The gunbarrel has been used in everyfilm, with essentially the same sequence. It's always been 'retro', because they have been using the same idea since Dr. No! The only way I could see your argument maybe, is if they opened with "Harry Saltzman & Barbara Broccoli presents" text (subbing in Babs and MGW names instead)", or maybe given DC a hat and change the 'look' of the barrel to match that of the old ones - youtube the Dr. No GB if you need a reference. Of course this would look silly, but this not what they did with SF. I honestly haven't the slightest clue of where you're coming at with this and think you are just grasping for straws to find things you don't like about SF.
Funny you say that. When I watch the Connery films I'm always surprised by just how much Barry used the Bond theme. He uses it all over the place - Bond enters his hotel room and checks its for bugs - cue Bond theme. May be John Barry wrote scores the way a 12 year old would, but something about it worked for me.
I agree that it can be over used, but the flip side of that it is the recent annoying tendency towards NOT using it at the obvious moment. I guess the composers these days think that's being clever or breaking the mould. When the lack of the Bond theme is combined with no memorable original themes then you get very dull music - as with SF.
A-freakin-men.
They do actually work the Bond theme (or a variation) into the score of SF on several occasions. I think the theme is probably featured more here than it was in films like TSWLM, FYEO and LTK. I could be wrong but I don't remember all that many instances in those films when the original theme was played full belt.
Instances in Skyfall:
-When Bond jumps onto the train in the PTS
-When Bond arrives in Macu
-When Bond has had the fight around the lizards
-When the helicopters arrive on the island to capture Silva ("latest thing from Q-Branch, its called a radio")
-The courtroom shootout
-The reveal of the DB5/when it gets blown up
-the closing scenes with Malory as the new M
Personally I'd rather them underuse it than over-use it anyway.
The more I listen to the soundtrack the more I appreciate it in fact. It doesn't sound "generically Bond" but at the same time has a bit of that aspect in it.
Funny you say that. When I watch the Connery films I'm always surprised by just how much Barry used the Bond theme. He uses it all over the place - Bond enters his hotel room and checks its for bugs - cue Bond theme. May be John Barry wrote scores the way a 12 year old would, but something about it worked for me.
[/quote]
That's because this very brillant Theme spells DANGER IN PROGRESS like no other tune in Movie History!
Actually, the Skyfall gunbarrel is a lot closer to that of the old aesthetically. But, I know how much you love to pick at the film for every little thing, so reason is completely out of the equation here.
The soundtrack really doesn't work for me there are tons of scenes dieing for an extended bit of music that is unmistakably Bond music and that lasts for longer than 10 seconds.
That's the point I was making :)
And that is what you hate about it? Not a fan of the classics, then?
The equivalent of playing the Imperial March over any scenes featuring the rebel alliance. The scoring of a film is one of the most considered elements. A bad score can be as ineffective as a bad performance or poor direction. It's a completely essential component of story telling.
I just don't like it when a series seems too stuck in its past.
I can let them off I guess though as it was the anniversary. But I deffo prefer the CR one! It's very cool!
CR's was a nice one off. And the CGI bullet was a pointless addition but up until then the DAD one was good.
Ummm...so you mean EVERY Bond movie is too stuck in the past??? Because they all feature pretty much the same gunbarrel sequence with a few minor differences. But otherwise it's the same concept. True, CR was the first to really work in the GB in a different way, but other than that film, you could have picked Quantum of Solace instead of Skyfall and it's the same damn argument. I simply don't get your "it's the 50th anniversary so it's ok" point, because the SF gunbarrel isn't anymore retro than the last 22.
* "not like this, not like him"
* "the circle of life"
* "latest thing from Q branch, it's called a radio"
* "didn't need the other one either"
* When Bond says: "I do hope that wasn't for me" it wasn't delivered wonderfully but the dialogue itself isn't too bad but then Silva says: "no, but this is". That dialogue is pretty lame.
I wonder if now that Logan is writing and P & W are out that we might finally get a Bond film with humour that is without the cheese. Probably wishful thinking, but we'll see in two years time...
Everything else in SF is cool, although in terms of Harris as Moneypenny at this stage I would just say that she gave an okay performance - not great but not poor either. She just doesn't seem as natural as she could be when she is flirting with Bond. Some people just aren't particularly good at flirting in real life but whoever plays Moneypenny should be. What I don't like is the way they revealed who Eve was at the end. It didn't come across as particularly natural to me. I would have preferred it if let's say a new MI6 employee came into her office and asked if she was Eve Moneypenny and that they had to look at some documents or something like this. Penny would tell him/her that that's correct and that she would be with him/her in a moment then it would continue on from there where Tanner comes out of M's office and Bond goes in.
It's too bad that Silva's character wasn't developed more but unfortunately this film is mostly about M so she took up a good bit of the story. What I fear about future Bond films is that Moneypenny and M and maybe even Q, will have fairly substantial roles and might overshadow Bond to a certain degree. If this is the case then I wish they had have just cast talented but unknown actors in these roles so they only have minor screen time which is the way it should be. Still, if they're not featured too often then it might be okay. I do think Fiennes and Whishaw are great in their respective roles.
This be my short experience after the visit, from a year a go who at earlier in this thread.
(I at biggest part in spoiler tag to save room.)
In this year i have seen Skyfall for a second time on 20 June 2013 when i get the change to see it again on tv , tv premiere from 16 June who i record be on some pay channel who i get for a couple of months for free in DVD style So that it not take to long before i watch it again and litle bit get same feeling as with last time that happend be with DAD SE dvd include Studio credits and gunbarrel.
As people read later, i also have problem with digital filming/cinematography of the movie and view my second view it look a litle bit better. But stil i think it is disapointed movie. In specialy after the more creative QOS, i also have trouble with the things Eon try to let comeback.
I expect next year or mabey somewhere in March or April 2015 it wil be on open channel tv (with expect i think will be without the studio credits like CR and QOS and without the end Gunbarrel like QOS) and i wil record it to skip the comercials and watch it.