› ›

SKYFALL POLL (please visit once you've watched the film)

12346»

Comments

  • JBFan626JBFan626
    Posts: 1,497
    The best of Craig's Bond's IMO. But I still think EON has a lot of work to do to get the series back to it's glory.
  • ReganRegan
    Posts: 173
    1. Casino Royale
    2. Skyfall
    3. QoS
  • mealonwheelmealonwheel
    Posts: 1
    For me to say that Skyfall was a bad film would be too kind, it was the worst attempt at film making that I've seen for many a year. The 'stars', including Daniel Craig, do me a favour, he's so wooden, Javier Barden, must have be short of a few bob, what a waste of a good actor. What on earth was Albert Finney doing, in one shot he was seen waiting for the o k to move, again a crying shame for an actor well used to better things. Judi Dench, a message, stay away from the close up, too many lines too many years. There used to be included in the production crew, a person known as the Continuity, this was a person who would sit in on the making of the film with a brief to keep a eye on the continuity of a scene such as an actor opening a door with a hat on then appearing on the other side of the door without the hat? still happen's today! In the making of Skyfall the need for a Continuity was very apparent when J B was fighting a villian on the roof of a train, he, J B is shot in the back, -Right shoulder, later on the the wound is shown as the left shoulder, then at a later scene the wound has returned to the Right shoulder. I now read that the film is perhaps to be nomiinated for various awards, got to be joking!
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    edited December 2012 Posts: 4,012
    mealonwheel wrote:
    For me to say that Skyfall was a bad film would be too kind, it was the worst attempt at film making that I've seen for many a year. The 'stars', including Daniel Craig, do me a favour, he's so wooden, Javier Barden, must have be short of a few bob, what a waste of a good actor. What on earth was Albert Finney doing, in one shot he was seen waiting for the o k to move, again a crying shame for an actor well used to better things. Judi Dench, a message, stay away from the close up, too many lines too many years. There used to be included in the production crew, a person known as the Continuity, this was a person who would sit in on the making of the film with a brief to keep a eye on the continuity of a scene such as an actor opening a door with a hat on then appearing on the other side of the door without the hat? still happen's today! In the making of Skyfall the need for a Continuity was very apparent when J B was fighting a villian on the roof of a train, he, J B is shot in the back, -Right shoulder, later on the the wound is shown as the left shoulder, then at a later scene the wound has returned to the Right shoulder. I now read that the film is perhaps to be nomiinated for various awards, got to be joking!

    You just made me laugh! I don't have time for a long answer but I'll just pick one thing, the silliest one. You think you are so smart with all your continuity talk. See what I put in bold? There are things called mirrors, when people look at them things appear as... oh wait, a mirror image! The wound was always on the right shoulder >:)
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    Sandy wrote:
    mealonwheel wrote:
    For me to say that Skyfall was a bad film would be too kind, it was the worst attempt at film making that I've seen for many a year. The 'stars', including Daniel Craig, do me a favour, he's so wooden, Javier Barden, must have be short of a few bob, what a waste of a good actor. What on earth was Albert Finney doing, in one shot he was seen waiting for the o k to move, again a crying shame for an actor well used to better things. Judi Dench, a message, stay away from the close up, too many lines too many years. There used to be included in the production crew, a person known as the Continuity, this was a person who would sit in on the making of the film with a brief to keep a eye on the continuity of a scene such as an actor opening a door with a hat on then appearing on the other side of the door without the hat? still happen's today! In the making of Skyfall the need for a Continuity was very apparent when J B was fighting a villian on the roof of a train, he, J B is shot in the back, -Right shoulder, later on the the wound is shown as the left shoulder, then at a later scene the wound has returned to the Right shoulder. I now read that the film is perhaps to be nomiinated for various awards, got to be joking!

    You just made me laugh! I don't have time for a long answer but I'll just pick one thing, the silliest one. You think you are so smart with all your continuity talk. See what I put in bold? There are things called mirrors, when people look at them things appear as... oh wait, a mirror image! The wound was always on the left shoulder >:)

    I was just thinking the same @Sandy - it was the mirror shot. :-)
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,157
    Awesome! Simple optics to defeat laughable arguments. :D I'm so into this. ;-)
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    NicNac wrote:
    You just made me laugh! I don't have time for a long answer but I'll just pick one thing, the silliest one. You think you are so smart with all your continuity talk. See what I put in bold? There are things called mirrors, when people look at them things appear as... oh wait, a mirror image! The wound was always on the left shoulder >:)

    I was just thinking the same @Sandy - it was the mirror shot. :-)[/quote]
    DarthDimi wrote:
    Awesome! Simple optics to defeat laughable arguments. :D I'm so into this. ;-)

    I see my coffee break was well spent. Back to work!
  • prometheusprometheus
    edited December 2012 Posts: 11
    Loved SF.
    But cant see CR ever being topped.
    Best credits,best music,best Bond,best girl,best fights,best ever foot chase on film,best villain,best script,best arrangement of Bond theme.No Q,no corny one liners,no Moneypenny,no gadgets(except the defib. in the car,the only false move in the film)
    No bleedin women swimming in the credits.
    CR and SK much closer to hero of the books.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    prometheus wrote:
    Loved SK.
    But cant see CR ever being topped.
    Best credits,best music,best Bond,best girl,best fights,best ever foot chase on film,best villain,best script,best arrangement of Bond theme.No Q,no corny one liners,no Moneypenny,no gadgets(except the defib. in the car,the only false move in the film)
    No bleedin women swimming in the credits

    SK? Wouldn't it be SF? And why don't you like women in the credits?
  • prometheusprometheus
    Posts: 11
    Sandy wrote:
    prometheus wrote:
    Loved SK.
    But cant see CR ever being topped.
    Best credits,best music,best Bond,best girl,best fights,best ever foot chase on film,best villain,best script,best arrangement of Bond theme.No Q,no corny one liners,no Moneypenny,no gadgets(except the defib. in the car,the only false move in the film)
    No bleedin women swimming in the credits

    SK? Wouldn't it be SF? And why don't you like women in the credits?

  • prometheusprometheus
    Posts: 11
    It has been done to death
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    Just an advice, there is an edit button!
  • JWESTBROOKJWESTBROOK
    edited December 2012 Posts: 5,745
    NicNac wrote:
    Sandy wrote:
    mealonwheel wrote:
    For me to say that Skyfall was a bad film would be too kind, it was the worst attempt at film making that I've seen for many a year. The 'stars', including Daniel Craig, do me a favour, he's so wooden, Javier Barden, must have be short of a few bob, what a waste of a good actor. What on earth was Albert Finney doing, in one shot he was seen waiting for the o k to move, again a crying shame for an actor well used to better things. Judi Dench, a message, stay away from the close up, too many lines too many years. There used to be included in the production crew, a person known as the Continuity, this was a person who would sit in on the making of the film with a brief to keep a eye on the continuity of a scene such as an actor opening a door with a hat on then appearing on the other side of the door without the hat? still happen's today! In the making of Skyfall the need for a Continuity was very apparent when J B was fighting a villian on the roof of a train, he, J B is shot in the back, -Right shoulder, later on the the wound is shown as the left shoulder, then at a later scene the wound has returned to the Right shoulder. I now read that the film is perhaps to be nomiinated for various awards, got to be joking!

    You just made me laugh! I don't have time for a long answer but I'll just pick one thing, the silliest one. You think you are so smart with all your continuity talk. See what I put in bold? There are things called mirrors, when people look at them things appear as... oh wait, a mirror image! The wound was always on the left shoulder >:)

    I was just thinking the same @Sandy - it was the mirror shot. :-)

    =))
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Nice to see the film holding nicely onto its No 1 spot. :)
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,157
    I would like to thank all members who have participated in this thread for their vote. The statistics are interesting and given the amount of participants also trustworthy methinks. ;-)
  • agent006agent006
    Posts: 34
    Don't know about the mirror tricks but there were far many more idiotic things that actually did happen that made the film an utter joke IMO. I'd heard so many good reviews I was expecting something better than the last two DC disappointments and unfortunately was even more disappointed than I could have imagined. No strike that....I was angry and wanted a refund. Let's list a few reasons....

    1. Why the hell does M and the groundskeeper (GK) who you would think knows the grounds blindfolded need a flashlight to go as far away as possible in any direction and then is stupid enough to be waving it around like a search beacon...WTF?

    2. How the hell does Bond make it through a drop in the water from what must have been over 150 feet and after floating around underwater miraculously show up in some tropical paradise with a hot chick as though it were a swim in the pool....unless the entire movie was Bond's comatose dream. WTF?

    3. How the hell does Bond miraculously find a flare under ice cold lake in pitch dark conditions (The same conditions that required M and the GK to need a flashlight) and then escape back to shore like the man from atlantis....WTF?

    4. Why the hell does a super genius eccentrically wealthy villain would show up in person with a gun in the middle of downtown London Parliament at a meeting designed to relieve M of her duties knowing that the wheels were already in motion for her dismissal thanks to a crafty cyber attack. Oh yeah...the villain is actually 'The Joker' (Oddly looking a lot like the one from the TV show) WTF?

    5. Why did I waste good money on this film? Oh yeah I thought it was going to be a Bond film....not Home Alone meets The Dark Knight, meets a bad imitation of the Bourne Identity. WTF

    I could go on and on....

    Positives?...Q was cool, I liked Sévérine. Super hot and exotic. Everything a Bond chick should be. But what a waste to not have let that character develop. Or was it just a lift of the Maude Adams character from MWTGG? And I liked the entire 30 second reveal of the old DB5....and some real Bond music. Too bad they wasted the DB5 not letting it be used to full capability in a car vs chopper duel. As for the SF main title song....meh. This is way better:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgvu-ZntUhU

    Solutions? I suggest....they not only cast a NEW Bond that is less like Mark Walberg and more like Sean Connery, they go back to formula....GB at the beginning, more humor, exotic locales, Beautiful Women, Gadgets....and less stark dreary boredom. Enough with the derivative fodder. Of course this entire comment is pointless for those that actually think SF is "The best Bond film ever". IMO it's not even a Bond film. Nor is it worthy of being called one. Nuf said.
  • DrNoDrNo North Hollywood, California, USA
    Posts: 81
    Excellent. Made me re-evaluate Casino Royale and finally watch Quantum of Solace.
  • agent006agent006
    edited January 2013 Posts: 34
    Huh?
    mealonwheel wrote:
    For me to say that Skyfall was a bad film would be too kind, it was the worst attempt at film making that I've seen for many a year. The 'stars', including Daniel Craig, do me a favour, he's so wooden, Javier Barden, must have be short of a few bob, what a waste of a good actor. What on earth was Albert Finney doing, in one shot he was seen waiting for the o k to move, again a crying shame for an actor well used to better things. Judi Dench, a message, stay away from the close up, too many lines too many years. There used to be included in the production crew, a person known as the Continuity, this was a person who would sit in on the making of the film with a brief to keep a eye on the continuity of a scene such as an actor opening a door with a hat on then appearing on the other side of the door without the hat? still happen's today! In the making of Skyfall the need for a Continuity was very apparent when J B was fighting a villian on the roof of a train, he, J B is shot in the back, -Right shoulder, later on the the wound is shown as the left shoulder, then at a later scene the wound has returned to the Right shoulder. I now read that the film is perhaps to be nomiinated for various awards, got to be joking!

    Well said good fellow...couldn't agree more indubitably.

    1235-20121114-Skyfall.jpg

  • dramaticscenesofQOSdramaticscenesofQOS
    Posts: 1,282
    They tried too much to please fans of the old series. M is now a Bernard Lee clone...been there done that, what new thing can DC bring next? SF had its strengths though...ending was both bad and good depending on how you see it.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,157
    agent006 wrote:
    Huh?

    @agent006

    Welcome to the forums, sir. As you are a first time visitor, allow me please to inform you that we prefer not to find too many one-word posts in our threads. Also, @DrNo made his point very clear: he thinks of SF as an excellent Bond film. That's his opinion. You are of course allowed to try and counter that opinion with educated arguments but a 'Huh?' post usually indicates an end-of-the-line discussion. Thirdly, as double, triple, ... posts are considered spam, I have merged your double post into one. From here on, please avoid them. Thank you. :-)

  • agent006agent006
    Posts: 34
    I'd say they didn't try hard enough...if they had I wouldn't be writing scathing reviews....as for the ending, what exactly was good about it? Unless you mean the homage to M's old office. That 'epilogue' as it were was one of the few bits I liked. Excepting of course they should have chosen a more grandfatherly type M and a less buff and butch Money Penny...just my two cents
  • dramaticscenesofQOSdramaticscenesofQOS
    Posts: 1,282
    M and Bond could probably best work with its actors using a brotherly type of relationship rather than a bossy or uptight grandfather type. The whole raised eyebrows at Bond is too homagey....stop the homages to sh-- like GF. It's not going to bro g the movie back to life nor ia it going to turn urs into a sequel! If u want a sequel, go avenge Tracy's death without a comedic helicopter drop into a smokestack!
  • agent006agent006
    edited January 2013 Posts: 34
    DarthDimi wrote:
    agent006 wrote:
    Huh?

    @agent006

    Welcome to the forums, sir. As you are a first time visitor, allow me please to inform you that we prefer not to find too many one-word posts in our threads. Also, @DrNo made his point very clear: he thinks of SF as an excellent Bond film. That's his opinion. You are of course allowed to try and counter that opinion with educated arguments but a 'Huh?' post usually indicates an end-of-the-line discussion. Thirdly, as double, triple, ... posts are considered spam, I have merged your double post into one. From here on, please avoid them. Thank you. :-)

    Cheers good fellow....I'm afraid I'm still just wee perturbed at having been so disappointed at the bloody film that it appears my emotives are exuding somewhat extraneously. If you'll excuse me I'll try and curb my abrupt lack of exuberance for SF.

    As for the one word post, that was an honest one as I didn't quite understand whether it meant Dr. No was going to re-evaluate based on my negation of SF, or re-evaluate in a positive manner having actually enjoyed SF. Were this the latter I was somewhat confused being it followed the negation I had just posted, and and logically to me Dr. No's post made no sense...unless of course he ignored my post. Hence my confusion. Nonetheless, rather than appear to be a spectre agent looking to disrupt the system....I'll try and post more resolutely and with a more complete aire of resonance.

    "Shaken but not stirred"
  • agent006agent006
    Posts: 34
    dramaticscenesofQOS wrote:
    M and Bond could probably best work with its actors using a brotherly type of relationship rather than a bossy or uptight grandfather type. The whole raised eyebrows at Bond is too homagey....stop the homages to sh-- like GF. It's not going to bro g the movie back to life nor ia it going to turn urs into a sequel! If u want a sequel, go avenge Tracy's death without a comedic helicopter drop into a smokestack!

    I agree, no more homages...why not just make a new Bond film using the tried and proven formula. Exciting original opening sequence like ski parachuting off a cliff... (Not another motorcycle chase), and good Bond style music in the tradition of Barry, not Hans Zimmerish tones where they don't need to be. There's a reason the original Bonds were good...they made the films with class and logic. And more importantly, have a conclusion that involves a truly incredible demise for the arch villain. Is this really too much to ask for?
  • dramaticscenesofQOSdramaticscenesofQOS
    Posts: 1,282
    Well we already have 19 formula films in which it seems like every other one may be better to many fans. How about keeping it new with fresh ideas rather than carbon copies in a different decade?
  • agent006agent006
    edited January 2013 Posts: 34
    Because well...this is supposed to be a franchise. I have nothing against originality and fresh ideas. However, if the wheel's not broken why fix it? Classical music is still classical music no matter how many concerts or conductors get to play with it because it's good.

    The fans of the early Bonds from 'earlier decades' allowed this franchise to still exist....so why ignore the formula that many would argue were redundant...Yes maybe they were cyclical but it was a familiar structure classic era Bond aficionados looked forward to continuing infinitum. At least I did. We're talking through the Connery and early to mid Moore era, ending with Lewis Gilbert's Moonraker as far as I'm concerned. After that IMO...the empire of epic excellence began to crumble...

    Yet many would argue that was another time and place. Sure, so why does Mickey D endure? Why does the game of basketball endure? Because there are fewer changes rather than drastic. I have no problem with the changes...but I want the same game at the end of the day.

    I want a GB at the beginning of the film, an unbelievably incredible opening teaser sequence that has some sense of plausibility, sexy nubile silhouetted women (Thankyou team SF for at least doing that in part), a powerful epic sounding opening theme song (Why not bring back Tom Jones?), excellent signature set design (What happened to the killer work of Ken Adam?), The overt use of puns, wit and humor (Why no more Sheriff J.W. Cullpepper types?), Insane gadgets, and flying or submersible cars etc...and most importantly a lair destruction with lots of goons and loons fighting with submachine guns and grenades etc...

    Yes its a formula....but why remove the key ingredients? I believe the Bond films are a fantasy, yet why make them dreary and dull. Make them a vacation, not a depressing waste of money built around a massive marketing machine designed to draw in audiences based on a formula that is no longer there.

    silva_joker.jpg
  • SuperintendentSuperintendent A separate pool. For sharks, no less.
    Posts: 871
    Superintendent wrote:
    1. CR
    2. Skyfall
    3. QoS

    But I'm not voting yet, I need to see Skyfall a few more times to make a final decision.

    It's time to vote. :D

    Now that I've seen Skyfall several times and I still think it's excellent, my vote definitely goes to Casino Royale. I hope I'm wrong, but I doubt that any future Craig Bond film will top CR.

  • EspritEsprit
    Posts: 37
    Solid entry, but I like more for it's technical prowess than anything. The cinematography is extremely beautiful. The scenes in Shanghai really stand out to me! The series never looked better.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Casino Royale is a very close second for me. I voted Skyfall as best of the 3.
Sign In or Register to comment.