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
Criticism isn't hate, that's how I would take their notes on my favorite. Time to grow up
You're suddenly saying that's me? It's not my fault forum discussions can take months or years. Get over it if you think it's me because I couldn't care less bud. If you can't take criticism of skyfall you need to stay out of this thread I think. If it's unhealthy for you.
Not understanding the hostility?
And no I wasn’t talking about you. I was talking about the relatively new member who comes on here blasting Skyfall— which has been going on for weeks now, with them saying the same thing over and over. And I finally responded, with my point being:
They’re not going to change anyone’s mind about SF if the people they’re trying to get through to already consider it a top tier Bond film.
That’s it.
I’m honestly not understanding your hostility, so I’ll leave it at that.
This wasn’t about criticism of a film.
Indeed. If we're all Bond fans, then we should be allowed to like what we like within the franchise. I am no fan of MR, but I recognize that people love it for its camp and silliness. I love DAF for the exact same reasons but never had that reaction to MR; it has never worked for me. But that doesn't mean it doesn't work for others--so be it. Variety is the spice of life.
People have a right to adore DAD or TMWTGG or whatever 007 picture they so choose; we can all argue the weaknesses of any of these films (and each, like any film, have flaws of one kind or another (whether top tier Bond, or not)).
However, when one loves a film, they likely already know all the weaknesses and plot holes and mistakes, but they don’t care. That’s why art is subjective. Trust me, I know this firsthand as I love NTTD and have heard the disbelief by some fans on here; I’ve heard all the criticism and I see them myself. But I don’t care. It hit me harder than a Mike Tyson punch, and that’s all that matters.
Aye, well put.
I have no interest in dominating or controlling how others feel about anything. Just offering my two cents like everybody else.
The thread asks whether SF is the beat Bond. Not for me but so for you. Fair enough. I do take on board what you say, even if I disagree.
Sorry for causing any offence.
It is, yep. Johnny Foreigner. We opened our hearts to him and he went too far and compromised her maj's government, the fiendish fiend.
Wonder how much QoS' shady triumvirate of Guy Haines, the special branch goon from TWINE who gets TSWLM'd and Mitchell inspired a no-Brits bad guy, and then the obvious awkwardness with Silva insisted on insipid Tory types like Denbigh afterward.
I probably should put more thought into losing weight, getting a haircut and sorting it out with the wife, but, well real life just gets in the way, doesn't it?
I just saw one poster seemingly not content hearing why others may like a film, they also put down others and I just chimed in.
Thanks for the message @j_w_pepper , you’re one of the all time good people on here, but really, I’m not upset, didn’t mean to be controversial and just thought a poster is a bit of a rude dude (he went so far as to say Mum was making things up, 😂. So I chimed in that you can’t control what other people like. That’s it).
I'll give this thread a serve for a bit.
Quite honestly, and again, I need to reiterate: I’ve been off the site for a while and when I came on I saw your criticisms about SF. And noticed the repetitive nature of the posts. To be frank I thought at first, you must be trolling, but it’s obvious that you really can’t stand the film for its contrivances.
I stepped in to ask you if you’d feel offended if someone told you, over and over, if your favourite Bond picture was flawed and suggested that you should perhaps let people like what they like.
I mean, having a conversation about the films, criticizing them, breaking them open and dissecting them is what we do; I just thought that seems to be all you were willing to discuss: the mistakes of Skyfall. And then you remarked that a poster had made up details to, I suppose, serve his feelings about the film.
My posts weren’t meant to stir up any controversy. And they certainly weren’t initiated out of anger or being upset.
As I said earlier, I’ll leave it at that.
@peter, thanks for the exceptionally kind words, and I hope to keep deserving them.
Yeah, his plan only works because everyone else behaves in uncharacteristically foolish ways. It's one of the most annoying tropes in modern movies.
His plan is based on:
-assuming Bond will arrive on his island to capture him instead of kill him (which he could have done after he killed Severine- what did MI6 even want him alive for?)
-assuming he'll be placed in the particular prison which was built over a network of tunnels that'll allow him to easily escape
-assuming Q will connect the laptop to MI6's network, and at exactly the same time that M is at her hearing
-assuming that M will not be evacuated by an army of security guys the moment she gets word that the terrorist who hates her has escaped
It's just too much. And it was all done so he could simply walk in on the hearing to shoot her, anyway. Since apparently he's stealthy/resourceful enough to fly around Britain in a stolen helicopter with an army of goons, why not just lie low until the hearing, sneak into Britain, and then shoot her? It has the benefit of being completely unexpected and not relying on a hundred little things that have to go to right beforehand.
His plan isn't at all reliant on how people behave. It is capable of being adjusted based on how people behave.
1. Silva expected to get captured. But the "how" was always going to be an unknown.
2. Silva can program any escape from any place ahead of time. Just create the algorithm and let the computer do its thing.
3. See #2. The plan will shift based on what people do. If Q plugs it earlier or later or the next day, that will create a chain reaction of different responses based on the computer and AI.
4. He didn't assume that. He got lucky. Once he arrived at the courthouse, he was out of moves. It was just him, M, and his gun. And he choked. That's the beauty of it: Silva is a genius behind a keyboard, a complete dolt out in the field.