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
Second time I saw the film I realised it was a Bond film for the 21st century. CR was great but the last 20 minutes fell a little flat. SF didn't, and with a pitch perfect cast it simply oozed class.
You must be joking? *looks at painting of the poll*
Two people actually ranked QOS first, Skyfall second and CR last?? Whoa.
Agreed. It's a crazy world.
:-S
Second: Yes I stand by the fact that Bardems villain is weak, I'm not saying his performance was weak but the premise of his villain made him weak, you could see his point of view which made you sympathies with him and that's not what you want, we should want to hate, despise the villain so that Bond can go and bring him to justice.
Lastly to cap it all when it got to Scotland it turned into an A-Team film with M playing the part of Mr T making light socket bombs..come on its just stupid. All of this took me out of the Bond world and annoyed me, that didn't happen to me with Royal I stayed in right up to leaving the cinema.
As I've said they should of killed off M right at the start and made that a bit of a side plot for Bardems villain, his plot could of revolved more around Berenices story whom I might say was so under used, her scene with Craig in the casino was magnificent the sex trade could of taken Bond to a really dark place.
For me Skyfall became a great Bond film right at the end when Fiennes became M and Harris as Moneypenny, I just sat back and thought normal service has started. Craigs performance in this is his best so far and it didn't feel like it was over 2 hours long.
I'll still get the DVD when it comes out and cant wait for Bond 24.
In the run up to release lots of talk about 'more humor' and I guess there was that - but some was bordering on Roger Moore cheesy and not the sort of humor Daniel Craig does best. I like the subtle stuff like not caring about if his drink is shaken or stirred in CR and the cool reaction stuff like when he kicks the bike from under the bad guy in QoS "Well I missed...."
Finally, not so sure about the return of the DB5 - it got a big reaction in the Cinema, but surely a more modern Aston would have been better? Also, the Bond girl in this was basically Judy Dench/M and to be honest I prefer the bond girls to be a bit younger (although I suppose she was younger than the previous Bond 'girl' QE 2nd!)
I came out of the Cinema feeling a bit down and for one main reason.... Daniel Craig and I are about a month apart in age. When I watched CR he was like this 'young Bond' energetic and arrogant. In this movie just 6 years later he is struggling to pass his medical and in the scene with the new Q (and others) there is a definite vibe of being 'over the hill' and a bit past it - made me feel very OLD!!!
Welcome, by the way!
Edit: 1000 posts!
monday), I can safely say it's second only to Casino Royale. Of the Craig films that is.
What struck me was how much SF reminded me of the Gardner novels. In addition
CR was obviously strongly connected to the Fleming novel and in part so was SF.
I don't suppose anyone else realise that the gun barrel sequence might have a
permanent future at the end of the Craig Bond films? Perhaps the producers want the
viewers to get a sense of these and future Bond films to be a separate chapter in the
franchise rather than to have the GB opening the story and thus having limited room
for creativity, what with fan expectations and having to follow the Bond formula too
closely. Might be a fresh way to go about things :-)
That comparison with the A team makes no sense imho. How it took you out of the Bond world is something I don't understand either, it's just what Bond does. And it was never specified that M is only there to give Bond's orders.
The new M started out as someone who did more than just that too.
Thank you, MrBond - I missed that.
Still think it could have been handled better, for example, cutting to a fed-up driver taking the empty tube train back to base (something like the tanker driver from LTK). IMHO the tube crash from Die Hard 3 (1995!) is more effective and considering the 29mill in product placement that contributed to SFs budget do they need to scrimp on CGI?
And again, that product placement is nothing new. Ask Connery & Moore.
You don't see how what is such a big deal? I've already stated that I don't know why it didn't feel like a Bond film to me. With respect to classic characters, you brought them up, not me.
I did not say "x was a bit crap" or "y should have been used" - I said I didn't understand why IN MY HEAD it didn't feel like a Bond film.
That's purely a gut reaction on first viewing. It's a reaction that I imagine will change over time. So I have not made a "big deal" out of anything - other than my own, nonsensical reaction.
You don't see how what is such a big deal? I've already stated that I don't know why it didn't feel like a Bond film to me. With respect to classic characters, you brought them up, not me.
I did not say "x was a bit crap" or "y should have been used" - I said I didn't understand why IN MY HEAD it didn't feel like a Bond film.
That's purely a gut reaction on first viewing. It's a reaction that I imagine will change over time. So I have not made a "big deal" out of anything - other than my own, nonsensical reaction.
Yes, I did like it! I can't say I loved it, but it was a very well made film.
I think in a way this felt more like a revenge film (or Die Hard or something like that) than a Bond movie. On the other hand I can't deny it has all the elements I was hoping for.
I guess part of the "problem" was also that I just knew too much (the ending, the characters, the scenes, the score, an outline of the story...). And I didn't even follow the Clapperboard thread, how could this happen? Damn you, forums! *shakes fist*
For now I'm ranking it as equal to CR, lets see where I stand after I watch it in its full IMAX glory!
1. SKYFALL
CASINO ROYALE
3. QUANTUM OF SOLACE#
Overall:
1. SKYFALL/CASINO ROYALE (no second rank)
3. GOLDFINGER
4. THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS
5. GOLDENYES
But still... The gunbarrel... Yeah it is good at the end but better at the beginning.. But still a very very good film... I don't care that much about the GB
I take your point about M..Perhaps If Fiennes had played M from the start I might of liked it. Fiennes is in a different league to Dench and will be fab in the future..sorry to go on about Dench but shes gone now so thats that
For me SF completed the reboot an set up a whole new team with a new 'M', Moneypenny and Q. On first viewing I think SF would replace TLD in my top 5, but would like to see it again (when the DVD is released) to make up my mind.