› ›

Is Skyfall losing its gloss and appeal ?

1…535455565759»

Comments

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,551
    chrisisall wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    H'ooh boy.
    As in, "I agree" or "You're full of it"?

    I would never presume to say "you're full of it" but I definitely don't agree. And not because I figure myself to be "excellent" or anything.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,800
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    H'ooh boy.
    As in, "I agree" or "You're full of it"?

    I would never presume to say "you're full of it" but I definitely don't agree. And not because I figure myself to be "excellent" or anything.
    The grand machine make cogs of us all, replaceable units of the workforce. Computers say that. CEO's buy it. The economy suffers for it. By not investing in excellence, the corporate world is directly investing in mediocrity, stupidly assuming that software designed by the lowest bidder (more mediocrity) will be a cheaper replacement for competent humans.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    @TripAces and to whom it may concern.

    For all the sometimes heated arguments "we" have over Skyfall I want to tell you I admire your passion and love for that movie.

    I feel the same about Goldeneye and would defend it to my grave.

    I will admit that I was so heavily disappointed in Skyfall after seeing it at the cinema that I have quite a grudge against the writer's and the director.
    Q acting like an imbecile, the flashlight incident and M's demise were enough to almost ruin the movie for me. I couldn't believe M got such an unworthy exit.

    It still nags me and I believe those things should have been handled differently.

    I often criticise people for disliking DAD because of the CGI scenes. But I realise that's not really different than me criticising Skyfall for the things I mentioned which are not really such a big part of the movie. They are a part of the story though, so I think that weighs a bit more than bad CGI.
    But I can see the motivation now for people disliking certain Bond movies because of "minor" things.
    Such things can make one prejudiced.

    I promise you I will re-watch Skyfall shortly and set aside my prejudice and judge it anew and hopefully more objectively. That doesn't mean I will rank it higher after re-watching it but maybe it will happen.

    There are already some things in Skyfall which I absolutely find great. I can't repeat it enough how truly fantastic the cinematography is. I'm still cross Deakins didn't get the Oscar for it. The many homages to other Bond movies are simply the best.
    The last scene in the old-fashioned Moneypenny and M office is a real treat and a stroke of genius.
    Ralph Finnes being M is a dream come true.

    I won't change my mind about QOS though, never! :)) That one is just wrong.

    @BondJasonBond006

    They're not heated. They're fun.

    As for the flashlight, I'd argue that this wasn't M's fault. Kincade was holding the flashlight...and he didn't start using it until after the helicopter explosion. For all he knew, everyone just died. Regardless, Kincade reminds me of some of the other simpleton/dimwitted characters in previous Bonds. Tiffany Case. Goodnight. Pepper. Him calling M "Emma" is priceless...because neither she nor Bond bothers to correct him. And the look of senile shock, when he sees Silva in the chapel gets me laughing every time, too.

  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    They were pretty heated immediately after SF came out.
Sign In or Register to comment.