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
Oh, that too. Compared to SF borrowing from older Bond movies (okay, it's 50th anniversary film) and dare I say from a little movie from 1996 called Mission Impossible. (there I said it...not the first one to say that)
Skyfall does still have it's Flemingian feel to it and is a Bond film with capital B (as is CR...even though CR's better). Silva is clearly the novel version of Scaramanga come to life in film. Or a variation of that character at least.
Need to see Skyfall again in a small screen.
As goes the tradition when a Bond film comes out on DVD, me and my dad sit down and watch it together. He liked the film itself (9/10), but not so much Craig (5/10). And for whatever difference it makes, that is from someone whom saw the early films in the cinema, but stopped going to see them in the 1970's because of the direction the series was going in. I didn't like it any more or less than my first viewing, in the cinema, I still would rank it 12th in the series.
When it comes to Bond, SF might as well cover itself in bleach, because TLD wipes the floor with it.
P.s. every other Bond movie bar FRWL and OHMSS might as well hide out in a fridge because CR nukes them all ;-)
Only just finished, but always an enjoyable and entertaining watch and two hours well spent and favorite Bond release once again
I watched SF with my family last week; they all enjoyed it, or so they led me to believe. (when I asked my mum what she enjoyed most about SF, she said “everything”).
Anyway....
Top notch casting, clever action and drama, and, it a cliché to say it, fantastic cinematography; all in all I was very pleased. In fact, I say it had the prefect amount of action and plot. Although I forgot that Bond was in his self imposed exile, for such a short time.
There were no “plot holes” that I could see, just some “plot inconsistencies”, that required the audience to stop for a minute, and think.
For example;
Plot inconsistencies:
Silva's hacking into MI6, whilst he was captured, thus releasing him from his electronically locked cell.
Reason:
MI6 had been forced to abandon the traditional home, and so, as Tanner said, they were on “war footing”, thus they didn't have time to find a suitable holding cell. Anyway it was Q's fault for attaching the laptop in the first place. Damn young pup...
Although, this is about as close to a “plot hole” in the movie, MI6's underground base in contacted to the Subway? Not very secure, is it? I know that Tanner goes on about “they're still finding tunnels”, but this is a scene even I found implausible.
Still, I can forgive these “plot inconsistencies”, due to the fact that Skyfall was so damn Fleming-esque.
The opening speech by Silva, like the backstory to Fleming's villains....
Bond not on his best form, i.e. FRWL, TB, YOLT, TMWTGG....
The Komodo Dragons – quite the not so benign bizarre...
Bond's apathy and “accidie”...
Bond's drinking and drug abuse...
Skyfall Lodge seems to be something Fleming imagined. In fact didn't Fleming grow up in a house, similar to Skyall?
I was undecided about Mr Craig's performance to play Bond; in Casino Royale he was fantastic and visceral, I thought that by end of CR we had come to the point were we could see, "that's our Bond!", and we know and love him,
but in Quantum of Solace, Craig-Bond seems to have retrograded; I was expecting to see some "character study" akin to the type we saw in CR, but it wasn't to be.
For SF, however, I'm more than satisfied; this is a proper sequel to CR, in that respect; a more rounded Bond performance by Mr Craig. Not quite as mesmerising as CR, but very good all the same. Now we need to see some "gentlemanly behaviour" from Craig in B24, and we'll be golden.
9/10 (8th/23)
Don't know why but thought after all the hatred towards it form most on here, me included, I would give it another watch.
It starts really well and then Madonna starts, singing? . What were they thinking using that song it is without doubt the very worst in the series. It just ruins the mood completely. Which is unfortunate as the strong start continues after it.
However as each minute passes the movie goes from stupid to absolutely ridiculous.
Well at least I wont have to watch it again for a while as I am once again convinced it is the worst in the series, by far.
Ah, Goldeneye. The movie where the actor playing the villain should have been Bond...
That crossed my mind several times whilst watching it today. Bean would have been a great bond.
How so? I am interested.
I like GE though comparing it to the likes of MR and TSWLM i found the picture Quality surprisingly poor. TND and TWINE felt flat to me. DAD seemed to make a better transition to bluray. Purely talking about picture quality.
Hmm...I have heard a lot of people saying the Brosnan era films don't look as great compared to the rest of the films.