› ›

Is Skyfall losing its gloss and appeal ?

1…3031333536…59

Comments

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,801
    Sark wrote: »
    Saying that SF has plot holes that detract from the enjoyment, particularly on repeat viewing, is not mindless hatred. Particularly people who supported Craig's first two outings. I think relatively few of the people who don't think SF is the be all end all of Bond hate it, I certainly rate it much higher than DAD.
    I don't hate SF, I'm just pretty disappointed in it. The film that immediately preceded is one of my favourites. BUT... I do like DAD more than SF. ;)
  • ChangChang
    Posts: 107
    If you take out dumb subway crash scene and Silence of the Lambs copycat scene it's a lot better. New Q guy is kinda lame.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited March 2015 Posts: 15,718
    With DN, LTK, QOS, TMWTGG and since this week DAD and AVTAK being far more entertaining than I used to remember, I am now on a mission to be defend the outings that are not often on the top-end of rankings on these forums. SF might be next for me, with all the negative comments about it! :D
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    I don't know what Dench was thinking, her acting was reminisnt of a high school play.

    Wow, Someone actually dares to criticise Dench's acting :-O
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    In terms of the dialogue the main line I have a problem with is "sometimes the old ways are the best".

    Saying it once is fine but twice and each time by a different character seems forced.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    In terms of the dialogue the main line I have a problem with is "sometimes the old ways are the best".

    Saying it once is fine but twice and each time by a different character seems forced.

    Coupled with the fact you're hit over the head with it at various instances throughout the film. 'It's called a radio'.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    @BeatlesSansEarmuffs, so if we aren't the biggest fans, then we're 'stubborn haters'? I have many issues with the film (and outside the film, such as people who treat SF like a perfect work of art, which it isn't. No movie is.) and even more criticism, but a hater I am not. I just don't love SF like I wanted to. I expected more.

    If my lack of enjoyment of a film that takes itself so seriously, yet also contains so many plot holes, brands me as 'stubborn,' then so be it.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited March 2015 Posts: 11,189
    RC7 wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    In terms of the dialogue the main line I have a problem with is "sometimes the old ways are the best".

    Saying it once is fine but twice and each time by a different character seems forced.

    Coupled with the fact you're hit over the head with it at various instances throughout the film. 'It's called a radio'.

    That line to me wasnt too bad. It was more the fact that two completely different characters (who never shared screentime) happened to use an identical phrase.

    I only really noticed it the third time I saw the film in all fairness.

    In TWINE Electra and Renard used the same phrase ("there's no point in living if you can't feel alive"), but at least they had a connection to one another in the story.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited March 2015 Posts: 8,400
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @BeatlesSansEarmuffs, so if we aren't the biggest fans, then we're 'stubborn haters'? I have many issues with the film (and outside the film, such as people who treat SF like a perfect work of art, which it isn't. No movie is.) and even more criticism, but a hater I am not. I just don't love SF like I wanted to. I expected more.

    If my lack of enjoyment of a film that takes itself so seriously, yet also contains so many plot holes, brands me as 'stubborn,' then so be it.

    I never understand this criticism. If you didn' t like skyfall why did you expect more of it?
    3:-O
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @BeatlesSansEarmuffs, so if we aren't the biggest fans, then we're 'stubborn haters'? I have many issues with the film (and outside the film, such as people who treat SF like a perfect work of art, which it isn't. No movie is.) and even more criticism, but a hater I am not. I just don't love SF like I wanted to. I expected more.

    If my lack of enjoyment of a film that takes itself so seriously, yet also contains so many plot holes, brands me as 'stubborn,' then so be it.

    I never understand this criticism. If you didn' t like skyfall why did you expect more of it?
    3:-O

    You enter a film with expectations. That film either meets those expectations, smashes them, or doesn't meet them to varying degrees. Seems pretty simple to me. Let's just say SF has made me temper my expectations for SP, which should mean I can enjoy it for what it's worth. The trajectory I thought we were on is not the one we are.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,423
    After the DAD debacle, I've learnt to lower my expectations of a Bond movie...
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    SF genuinely exceeded my expectations when I first saw it. I remember wanting to see it again ASAP.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,423
    Me too. It's the end sequence. Back in the old office. I was very stoked. Although, when it go to see it for the second time, I was disappointed that I got everything from it the first time. I expected Bond exile to be much longer for example.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,801
    I cried at the end of SF, and it wasn't for M.
    :))
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,400
    RC7 wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @BeatlesSansEarmuffs, so if we aren't the biggest fans, then we're 'stubborn haters'? I have many issues with the film (and outside the film, such as people who treat SF like a perfect work of art, which it isn't. No movie is.) and even more criticism, but a hater I am not. I just don't love SF like I wanted to. I expected more.

    If my lack of enjoyment of a film that takes itself so seriously, yet also contains so many plot holes, brands me as 'stubborn,' then so be it.

    I never understand this criticism. If you didn' t like skyfall why did you expect more of it?
    3:-O

    You enter a film with expectations. That film either meets those expectations, smashes them, or doesn't meet them to varying degrees. Seems pretty simple to me. Let's just say SF has made me temper my expectations for SP, which should mean I can enjoy it for what it's worth. The trajectory I thought we were on is not the one we are.

    I'm just saying, of all the things to criticize skyfall for, I never thought the duration would be one. 2hr 24min felt fine for me.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,400
    I can understand people being disappointed, maybe it's not their cup of tea, but comparing SF to DAD? Really? >-)
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    edited March 2015 Posts: 5,080
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @BeatlesSansEarmuffs, so if we aren't the biggest fans, then we're 'stubborn haters'? I have many issues with the film (and outside the film, such as people who treat SF like a perfect work of art, which it isn't. No movie is.) and even more criticism, but a hater I am not. I just don't love SF like I wanted to. I expected more.

    If my lack of enjoyment of a film that takes itself so seriously, yet also contains so many plot holes, brands me as 'stubborn,' then so be it.

    I never understand this criticism. If you didn' t like skyfall why did you expect more of it?
    3:-O

    You enter a film with expectations. That film either meets those expectations, smashes them, or doesn't meet them to varying degrees. Seems pretty simple to me. Let's just say SF has made me temper my expectations for SP, which should mean I can enjoy it for what it's worth. The trajectory I thought we were on is not the one we are.

    I'm just saying, of all the things to criticize skyfall for, I never thought the duration would be one. 2hr 24min felt fine for me.

    What? That wasn't @RC's point, nor was it @Creasy's.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @BeatlesSansEarmuffs, so if we aren't the biggest fans, then we're 'stubborn haters'? I have many issues with the film (and outside the film, such as people who treat SF like a perfect work of art, which it isn't. No movie is.) and even more criticism, but a hater I am not. I just don't love SF like I wanted to. I expected more.

    If my lack of enjoyment of a film that takes itself so seriously, yet also contains so many plot holes, brands me as 'stubborn,' then so be it.

    I never understand this criticism. If you didn' t like skyfall why did you expect more of it?
    3:-O

    You enter a film with expectations. That film either meets those expectations, smashes them, or doesn't meet them to varying degrees. Seems pretty simple to me. Let's just say SF has made me temper my expectations for SP, which should mean I can enjoy it for what it's
    worth. The trajectory I thought we were on is not the one we are.

    I'm just saying, of all the things to criticize skyfall for, I never thought the duration would be one. 2hr 24min felt fine for me.

    Ah, I didn't see any mention of the duration.

  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    chrisisall wrote: »
    I cried at the end of SF, and it wasn't for M.
    :))

    I was happy that we Fiennes was introduced as the 'classic' M. ;)
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    I can understand people being disappointed, maybe it's not their cup of tea, but comparing SF to DAD? Really? >-)

    Your right. Laughable.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,400
    RC7 wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @BeatlesSansEarmuffs, so if we aren't the biggest fans, then we're 'stubborn haters'? I have many issues with the film (and outside the film, such as people who treat SF like a perfect work of art, which it isn't. No movie is.) and even more criticism, but a hater I am not. I just don't love SF like I wanted to. I expected more.

    If my lack of enjoyment of a film that takes itself so seriously, yet also contains so many plot holes, brands me as 'stubborn,' then so be it.

    I never understand this criticism. If you didn' t like skyfall why did you expect more of it?
    3:-O

    You enter a film with expectations. That film either meets those expectations, smashes them, or doesn't meet them to varying degrees. Seems pretty simple to me. Let's just say SF has made me temper my expectations for SP, which should mean I can enjoy it for what it's
    worth. The trajectory I thought we were on is not the one we are.

    I'm just saying, of all the things to criticize skyfall for, I never thought the duration would be one. 2hr 24min felt fine for me.

    Ah, I didn't see any mention of the duration.

    I responded to creasy, then you respondes to me so I clarified my original statement directed at him, not you.

    He said 'I expected more'. I never understood that criticism for a film. If you don't like it as it is, why would you want more of it?
    3:-O
  • jobojobo
    Posts: 7,507
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @BeatlesSansEarmuffs, so if we aren't the biggest fans, then we're 'stubborn haters'? I have many issues with the film (and outside the film, such as people who treat SF like a perfect work of art, which it isn't. No movie is.) and even more criticism, but a hater I am not. I just don't love SF like I wanted to. I expected more.

    If my lack of enjoyment of a film that takes itself so seriously, yet also contains so many plot holes, brands me as 'stubborn,' then so be it.

    I never understand this criticism. If you didn' t like skyfall why did you expect more of it?
    3:-O

    You enter a film with expectations. That film either meets those expectations, smashes them, or doesn't meet them to varying degrees. Seems pretty simple to me. Let's just say SF has made me temper my expectations for SP, which should mean I can enjoy it for what it's worth. The trajectory I thought we were on is not the one we are.

    I'm just saying, of all the things to criticize skyfall for, I never thought the duration would be one. 2hr 24min felt fine for me.

    What? That wasn't @RC's point, nor was it @Creasy's.


    I suspect he misunderstood the term "wanting more from it"...
  • jobojobo
    edited March 2015 Posts: 7,507
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    I can understand people being disappointed, maybe it's not their cup of tea, but comparing SF to DAD? Really? >-)

    Completely agree. I am as baffled as you! :-O
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Next CR 1967 will be considered better! Ha ha ha.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited March 2015 Posts: 40,976
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @BeatlesSansEarmuffs, so if we aren't the biggest fans, then we're 'stubborn haters'? I have many issues with the film (and outside the film, such as people who treat SF like a perfect work of art, which it isn't. No movie is.) and even more criticism, but a hater I am not. I just don't love SF like I wanted to. I expected more.

    If my lack of enjoyment of a film that takes itself so seriously, yet also contains so many plot holes, brands me as 'stubborn,' then so be it.

    I never understand this criticism. If you didn' t like skyfall why did you expect more of it?
    3:-O

    This literally makes no sense. You know that expectations and hype are BEFORE a final review, correct? Thus, I am hyped about a product, and if that product doesn't deliver, then I am disappointed in it/I don't enjoy it.

    There wasn't a single instance in anything I've stated over these last few pages where I mentioned the running time. Did anyone? That's never an issue with me. I think plenty of us have explained what we meant, there's really no clearer way to describe what we're getting at. It's very simple. I was excited and hyped for the film (based off of the plot, actors, promotional material, all of the interviews and trailers, etc.), the film was released, and the film did not meet my expectations. The end.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    I think you will disappointed with SP then. SF was a £1b profit making product, so they'll try and repeat the tone and form of it.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    jobo wrote: »
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @BeatlesSansEarmuffs, so if we aren't the biggest fans, then we're 'stubborn haters'? I have many issues with the film (and outside the film, such as people who treat SF like a perfect work of art, which it isn't. No movie is.) and even more criticism, but a hater I am not. I just don't love SF like I wanted to. I expected more.

    If my lack of enjoyment of a film that takes itself so seriously, yet also contains so many plot holes, brands me as 'stubborn,' then so be it.

    I never understand this criticism. If you didn' t like skyfall why did you expect more of it?
    3:-O

    You enter a film with expectations. That film either meets those expectations, smashes them, or doesn't meet them to varying degrees. Seems pretty simple to me. Let's just say SF has made me temper my expectations for SP, which should mean I can enjoy it for what it's worth. The trajectory I thought we were on is not the one we are.

    I'm just saying, of all the things to criticize skyfall for, I never thought the duration would be one. 2hr 24min felt fine for me.

    What? That wasn't @RC's point, nor was it @Creasy's.


    I suspect he misunderstood the term "wanting more from it"...

    Right...
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited March 2015 Posts: 40,976
    suavejmf wrote: »
    I think you will disappointed with SP then. SF was a £1b profit making product, so they'll try and repeat the tone and form of it.

    It's why I'm only getting myself excited for the idea of a new Bond film. With Mendes at the helm (and having read quite a few of the leaks), I know what to expect. I won't be going into it like I did SF, so who knows, it could actually surprise me with how "less hyped" I am.
  • RC7RC7
    edited March 2015 Posts: 10,512
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    I think you will disappointed with SP then. SF was a £1b profit making product, so they'll try and repeat the tone and form of it.

    It's why I'm only getting myself excited for the idea of a new Bond film. With Mendes at the helm (and having read quite a few of the leaks), I know what to expect. I won't be going into it like I did SF, so who knows, it could actually surprise me with how "less hyped" I am.

    I think we're on a similar page. (Minus the leaks)
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,400
    RC7 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    I think you will disappointed with SP then. SF was a £1b profit making product, so they'll try and repeat the tone and form of it.

    It's why I'm only getting myself excited for the idea of a new Bond film. With Mendes at the helm (and having read quite a few of the leaks), I know what to expect. I won't be going into it like I did SF, so who knows, it could actually surprise me with how "less hyped" I am.

    I think we're on a similar page. (Minus the leaks)

    Have faith in Mendes.
    3:-O
Sign In or Register to comment.