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
That's probably why I love it, then. I take it Brosnan's tie straightening underwater in TWINE is pure cringe for you, ehh? You know I love it!
Agreed, though, the way Mendes' action sequences come across, it all feels very scripted and overly tight. I've never been able to put my finger on it, but I don't care for it.
So there is more than just action, there is drama and tension . (but MP tagging along providing commentary is also annoying)
PS could have cut out the motorbike chase (inc CGI) and have Bond jump from the Land Rover onto the back of the train
@Shardlake I think too many fans misinterpreted M's conclusions, here. Plus, it's important to remember who's doing the talking: an inexperienced agent who says he can do more in his pajamas than an agent in the field. He's not exactly a trustworthy source when it comes to espionage.
That said, M's line was this: "Bond, this isn't an escape, this was years in the planning. He wanted us to capture him; he wanted us to access his computer. It was all planned. Blowing up HQ, knowing the emergency protocols, knowing we'd retreat down here."
I never bought in to the idea that all of what occurred was planned years in advance. And I'm not sure Q meant it that way, either. That's because years prior, Silva had no idea if/when there would be an inquiry on M's mishandling of the list. He couldn't have. And he couldn't have known Bond would experience a "resurrection" and hunt him down. Nobody could know all of that.
Instead, Q is getting at the general sense of the plan. Yes, to blow up HQ and drive MI6 underground, to plan an "escape" of some sort. The bigger question is WHY go through all of that elaborate, Tom Sawyer-like planning? If we took Q at his word, then Silva did all of that, in order to shoot M at an inquiry that he never knew would happen. That's nonsense.
As I took it, Silva big plan, years in the making, was humiliation. That was always his goal. Killing M wouldn't be worth it if he couldn't humiliate her, MI6, and England in the process. Hence the stealing of the list-that was about humiliation, not because Silva needed or cared about it. In fact, he likely didn't even need Patrice to steal it; he could have retrieved it via a hack. But the particulars of the rest of the plan were not put into motion until the inquiry was scheduled. So, yes blowing up HQ was planned, and planned to get MI6 to retreat, but only as a means of humiliation and control. Yes, he wanted MI6 to hack his computer, but only as a means of humiliation ("Not such a clever boy"). Yes, he wanted to escape, but only as a means of humiliation.
Then there's another fascinating part to this: the fact that I am (or any audience member is) left wondering what Silva knew or didn't know, planned or didn't plan, is precisely his aim. It's why SF and Silva are brilliant. Once you establish that Silva can do anything with a "point and a click," you get paranoid...as Q is upon the hack. His "he had it all planned speech" is also a moment of paranoid outburst. In this sense, Silva is all knowing, all mighty. Of course, we know he isn't, but the characters don't know that.
I don't view SF as having a "plot hole." I view Silva's "plan" as being as the motor that drives the film's deeper themes.
BUT the bomb on the underground (on that line) would have required planning and this tends to stick out (plus it adds nothing to the plot) so it should have been cut IMHO
That part, too, made sense: he didn't have that bomb there for Bond. He had it there as a diversion to get to the inquiry. And it was a rather simplistic explosive device. That Bond was there to see it was all the better, for Silva.
- had a great villain
- awesome atmosphere
- great visuals
- did something new in the series
- had an awesome title track
- great titles
- good action
- good dialogue
- a story to tell
- great Bondgirl (Severine)
- great new Q
- good new Moneypenny
Spectre
- had a terrible villain
- no chemistry between the leads
- the worst title song
- worst title sequence
- boring action scenes
- great pts
- good Q scenes
- great recurring character (Mr.White)
- great visuals
- abysmal third act
That is why Skyfall was and is a great entry to the series (to me) and SP is not - the story was awful and the third act an insult. Many good things (visuals, actor‘s performances except Waltz, Q scenes, Mr. White, PTS) wasted on a movie that did not stand up to the resources it had.
It realised recently that the free-running scene (which feels like a PTS) in CR, and the SF and SP PTSs all have Bond fiddling with an earpiece. It's so annoying. I think it's one of my major gripes with the Craig era. That sense that that he's always being guided/monitored by HQ.
As with so many scenes in SF the tube bomb just leaves me non-plussed and asking asking 'what, why, how'? The film is way too long and padded out with unnecessary and tedious stuff that just weighs it down.
There's no point asking the question really. You either go with the flow or you don't I guess. For me the film just doesn't work on a narrative/plot level, which leaves me detached and uninterested. I appreciate it has some nice scenes, and I even like the themes it seeks to address but have always found the execution poor. The screenplay is creaky as hell.
SF is where I start to lose interest in Craig's Bond as well. This incarnation doesn't appeal to me. SP is just an extension of the same as far as I'm concerned.
Having said that, it's a better film than any of the Brosnan era entries, although I still rank it personally very low, as it simply doesn't entertain me.
I just prefer SP (marginally) as the plot seems to be (slightly) more coherent, and taken scene by scene I much prefer what SP has to offer (including the visuals).
Plus Dench's M was annoying the hell out of me well before SF, so a whole film centred on her wasn't what I was looking for.
I don't think he was bothered about escaping the enquiry,as at the end of the film,he just wanted to kill himself and M.
Putting aside the PTS, I totally agree that the best part is up to where the helicopters arrive over the island. If it had maintained that standard all the way through it would have been a much better movie. It falls apart in London for me and becomes generic, meandering and uninteresting, with a BBC Sunday afternoon cop show vibe (I'd much rather watch Line of Duty though).
The denouement at Skyfall leaves me cold for some reason. I don't know why, as I love the idea, but just cringe at the way its staged. Totally lacking in tension and drama for some reason. I didn't personally make the Home Alone connection but may be there's something in that. The whole third act feels like a foreshadowing of Mendes' explosion fetish, which was given free rein in SP. He needs to learn that big flashes on screen don't make for interesting action - at least not since about 1987.
I remember hoping it would capture some of Hitchcock's 39 Steps suspense with the Highland setting but it falls well short.
Really nice idea though.
As they left the prison cell scene, Tanner could have messed up "You're due at the enquiry in 30 mins" , Silva, turned away, pretends not to hear but we see a raised eyebow.
The tube explosion is cut.
And that leaves us with Silva escaping the cell due to the virus and making the most of the moment re his new intel on the enquiry. They could also show Silva killing a policeman (adds to his cold blooded nature and how quick witted he was) to gain the uniform/gun/police car/access to further intel via police radio. There was an air of "Silence of the Lambs" about the prison scene and showing him being really clever/resourceful during the escape (as with Lector) could have made him more mennacing IMHO
As it is, its really unclear as to how planned or unplanned his escape was and it doesn't help the film.
Exactly.
Had Q not looked at the computer until later that evening, Silva would have been SOL in killing M at the inquiry. That's the only bothersome part. But it's also worth noting that Silva already hacked into the system: he had all of Bond's fitness reports. So he didn't actually need the hookup to the laptop to escape. So it's likely that a remote hack was a plan B, but that's pure speculation on my part.
It's usually just a device for covering up lame/lazy plotting. that's definitely the case in SF.
Most of the plot utilizes generic hacking or empty McGuffins to move the story along. I don't care for it. I know one is meant to suspend disbelief with this series, but SF seems to take itself too seriously for me to do as such, so I'm always disappointed in sequences like Bond somehow surviving two gunshots and a fall, or Silva's entire escape.
+1
It wants to have it's cake and eat it in that respect. I've said it before but a lot of the concept and ideas I like. But scene for scene I don't really enjoy much of the film at all.
I didn't care about analyzing plot holes when it came out. I still don't. None of it bugs me enough to pick at it. It is a Bond film. 100% coherency, logic, and plausibility do not apply. I love Craig's Bond and his films have given us a grittier, different take on Bond - that was so necessary, so needed. Very right for its time.
I wish Pierce had one more film before CR, though. I do. I also love Brosnan as Bond, with GE and TND two favorites. TWINE and DAD not so much. I am not schizophrenic ... I have no problem enjoying all the actors who have portrayed Bond (except Laz; never bought him as Bond for one moment, and that did ruin the otherwise fine film for me).
So yes, I think Skyfall is a cut above average Bond film indeed. I want Deakins back (I doubt he would ever be interested, though). I'm very muc looking forward to Bond25.
The naysayers about Skyfall have always surprised me with their vitriol. It was a global smash hit for several reasons and when it first came out plenty on here were very happy with this film. Opinions do change over time for some, but mine won't.
I accept that SF is considered a big deal and is typically regarded as one of the favorites by fans and general audiences alike, but it's not for me. Six years on, I don't ever see my opinion of it changing, either.
Bring back Deakins though, I'm all for that - he makes any shot look like a painting.
.
Obviously not much of music fan hey?
I don't fall over Adele's song but compared to that winey pastiche it's a masterpiece.
Nothing wrong with that, I know I'm in a tiny minority feeling that way. But yes, I'd be surprised to see anyone who didn't want Deakins to return, he elevates every image and moment.
I do still love it and maybe I've paid too much attention to those picking at it and that I noticed it more the last time.
I'll see when I watch it again, it's in my top 5 and my 2nd favourite Craig, I always enjoy the heck out of it and it gets my blood pumping, the bad is very little and the good is loads for me.
How anyone could say SPECTRE is better is beyond me, it might be the same director but when he started on SP he must of got out the wrong side of the bed because it's likely it was approached with a totally different mentality.
When he said that alarm bells should have rang, he'd already said he thought he only had one good Bond film in him and was reported to want to leave the project when RF nixed his and Logan's Mallory is a SPECTRE mole plot.
Is it any wonder DC wasn't getting on with him on set, also DC was so enthusiastic for SF and was positively beaming when he did the publicity, look how he started the SP publicity trail with the infamous slash wrist quote.
Wouldn't mind betting he was quite frustrated and probably knew at that point that this film wasn't going to be received like SF was.
In all fairness, I don’t think the DNC would view hacking as so 1995. ;-)