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
Your breadcrumbs-theory sounds plausible.
The harddrive is not even mentioned in the last 80 minutes of the movie. And we don't know exactly what happened to it. Another proof of lazy scriptwriting.
Besides being a tribute to Judy Dench, SF is all about M - an aging professional woman past her prime and a metaphorical mother to two opposing sons. One is good, the other is bad.
Let me just cut this short by saying that I'm glad that we would likely not have M take centerpiece again.
The points you make are indeed fair, @Zekidk and I get where you're coming from. It just so happens that Skyfall is my favorite Bond film, so you can understand why I don't see things the way you do. But hey, if Skyfall isn't for you, then so be it.
And you do like CR, so that's at least something we can agree on. :D
I knew all along that the story wasn't about the harddrive. That it was about M and Silva's vendetta. Still I think you can't have plot pieces like that left hanging, IMO. Like you said - the audience is led to believe that the drive is the "main thing", so why disregard it completely in the 2nd and 3rd act without even mentioning it once?
But really - stuff like that doesn't bother me as much, as some of the other things I pointed out in my review elsewhere.
Jumping on a train and asking to be let in like Norman Wisdom. comedy wrestling with CGI lizards. a 70's gameshow host for a bad guy, very adult.
Overall an excellent action film and surprisingly a good Bond film.
What I liked; I really enjoyed the overall ‘atmosphere’ of the film. There was a jaded brilliance from the visual greys and blacks that dominated the British scenes to Bond's physical breakdown.
Performances were very good all round. Fiennes was excellent and I really enjoyed Harris (was not expecting that). Craig was very good (look I will never be a fan of his Bond purely on the visual factor but I am not a fan of Moore’s Bond and he was a handsome man) I really enjoyed his portrayal though I feel his Bond will always be a bit dour and hurt. I thoroughly enjoyed the scenes in China.
Finally Dench’s M is no more. That is welcome.
What I didn’t like; I have primarily two, one minor and one not quite so. Firstly, and this gripe can be applied to many Bond films and movies in general, the older I get the less tolerant I am of films whose plot relies on what I call the Domino Effect.
Essentially plot point P cannot take place unless plot point C follows B follows A etc. These linear plot films have to make sense and in the case of Skyfall it does not. So Siva wanted to be caught by MI5? This important plot point, in relation to Skyfall, relied on Bond, firstly, removing the shrapnel from his shoulder, then finding the casino chip in the case (by the way why did Bond let the assassin kill the chap viewing the picture?) and finally the lovely Marlohe falling for him and bringing him to Silva.
What if these points did not take place? What would poor Silva do? However this is a film and the Domino Effect is used in many films.
The second gripe is harder to ignore. I have never been a fan of the reboot Bond idea. I have always felt it was a sop to ‘popular’ trends in films (Bourne and Batman) and that it was a borderline two-fingers to Bond’s visual history. Yet a reboot is a reboot, a clean slate. You should stick to your guns. What went before does not exist! Yet in Skyfall we have several nods to Bonds visual antecedents from Q’s quip that we do not deal in exploding pens and of course the Goldfinger Austin Martin.
I am a contrarian in that these probably added to my enjoyment of Skyfall but as I said a reboot is a reboot. They should not be there. The reboot Bond is like a rebellious teenager who finally realises that maybe his parents were right after all.
What I am saying, badly, is why did we have to have the reboot? Could we not have had Skyfall straight after Die Another Day. It would have made more sense and added to, at least, my enjoyment.
Overall I enjoyed Skyfall and I don’t mind Craig as Bond anymore (though I am a fickle man).
P.s I was brought to Skyfall under due arrest by my brother.
P.P.S Silva really did have a legitimate case against M. She traded this 'brilliant agent' simply because he became reckless! Harsh very harsh.
Rocky did it well too!
I honestly don't get the TDKR comparisons. The only similarity is Bond and Batman are away for a bit then return. That's where the similarites end. TDKR was more about Batman returning, SF was about Bond trying to stay get back to the top of his game after he returned.
Joker: playful villain with a disfigured mouth, who disguises as a cop and plans to get caught
Silva: playful villain with a disfigured mouth, who disguises as a cop and plans to get caught
Batman: Bruce Wayne has a fatherly figure who helped raise him in his home manor after his parents died.
SF: They introduce us to a fatherly figure who helped raise Bond in his home manor after his parents died.
Sorry, I didn't mean to besmirch Rocky, I love those movies (except for IV).
One ting I would criticize in SF is the recent British style of having rooms full of flatscreens and flat keypads and a character who taps keypads and stares at flat screens. Very anticeptic. It would be great if our new Q, while completely up to date and tech-savvy, is a pack rat. Once the regular headquarters are restored, we see that he has walls of floor-to-ceiling Victorian file cabinets with those rolling ladders but he knows where everything is; he can find a piece to fix or rig up absolutely anything, and his solutions are sometimes low-tech. Deaver's Q was a little like that but I would push it as something visual, and you'd have the contrast between the polished exterior and the exteriorization of what's going on under the surface in his mind; and the contrast between the "cold" control room and the "warm" workshop. Just a thought.
Your Q idea sounds cool, I'd like to see that.
Thanks!
Not to get off topic but yeah, "Rocky" is an absolute classic, a perfect film, IMO. But some of the sequels were darned good.
I think the chase on the tube is my favourite action sequence up there with the keelhauling in FVYEO and the cargo net fight in TLD.
I really enjoyed the little details
- the shot of Skyfall Lodge as night falls and the sound of the curlew carries across the night.
- The female minister going beyond her brief and carpeting M. Then having to be pulled back into line by Malory.
- Mallory catching Q and Tanner setting up a trail for Silva to follow ro Scotland.
- The fighting Tameraire. One of my favourite paintings.
- The music as the boat approaches Silvas island
Lots of nice touches. Well done John Logan.
Better than the average Bond's but not the greatest.
Definitely will wear out the B-Ray the day I get it though, so look forward to a detailed review then.
In an earlier scene, he cracked, "Oh, you've still got that bloody/ugly thing" or something like that when meeting her pre-explosion. So I think she signed it to him long before Skyfall, it seemed like a running joke between the two.
Also, she jokes about Bond giving her interior decorating tips in the past, so I think the running joke idea is probably correct.
So pretty...
As for TDKR I enjoyed it but I have my issues with it though I found SF quite a bit more satisfying and although it has holes I don't see some of the glaring ones already discussed that Rises has. A friend of mine who is a huge comic book fan says that it it has been discussed quite a bit in the community that Nolan's Batman is in fact Nolan's Bond and that as some have already said he's Batman in name only compared to the source material.
Though just like Bourne people are forgetting something both this and the Bat franchise are riffing on Bond and in fact Nolan's been cribbing from 007 since 2005 for his franchise. So for Mendes to take notes from Chris's series is fine. I still recognise Bond in the film and don't think it's Batman at all, yes Silva has obviously has borrowed from Ledger's Joker.
I think the biggest problem with allot of people is the attempt to look at Bond's past something that neither Fleming or the films have really attempted and the ending of this films could look like a bit Bruce Wayne.
Although I don't think you can portray Bond like Connery, Moore or Brosnan played him in this day and age audiences (not fans) look for something with more depth and Nolan's treatment of the Bat films has hugely influenced that.
That being said at the end of Skyfall we now have
I don't expect them not wrestle with the psychological aspect of the character, Logan strikes me of someone who'll want to bring some of the Fleming and the cinematic into his take. Not having P&W there in any capacity not even a bare bones treatment and Logan starting from scratch is going to make this the most interesting entry in years in the case of anticipating what he'll deliver.
I can already hear the calls of bring back P&W with those who don't like what they see not unlike those who bitched about Arnold and then didn't like Newman's score and wanted Dave back (you know who you are).
The harddrive is the catalyst of the story but NOT the focus of it. The focus is the relationship between M, Silvia and Bond - but we need something dramatic to instigate events.
As I've said before it's called a Mcguffin.
Silvia and the joker are quite different. Silvia is serious but with a noticeable dose of camp blended in. Ledger's joker is straight up twisted and I don't recall ANY member of the audience laughing (at least much) when he was onscreen. I don't remember anyone laughing at Ledger due to( intentional) mugging at the camera either.
One similarity however is the way they are filmed in certain shots. The shot of Silvia walking away from the house fire arguably echo's Nolans joker. That's really where the similarities end.
Probably got the name wrong. Grrr!!!!
First suggestion for Bond girl's name in Bond24 is yours ;)
The younger members of this Forum might have been spared this odious experience. It was a seemingly Bottomless Pit of Annoying.
And now? When new Wachowski Brothers films disappear almost as soon as they appear, and no one even mentions the Matrix anymore? It's just a slightly embarrassing memory.
Now we have Christ Nolan and the Sacred Perfect Never-To-Be Questioned "Dark Knight Trilogy". Ugh.
Wanna know what Batman was like before Denny O'Neil started importing elements from Bond? Watch the Adam West series. Seriously. Apart from the first three years or so, Batman was a colorful, fun, smiling superhero who palled around with Superman, Wonder Woman, and yes, with Batgirl and Robin. Even if Mendes admires the Nolan movies and thinks they somehow raised the bar, he doesn't have to take anything from Batman - he only has to take back what it borrowed from Bond.
@Grant can you add the review in the actual Review thread ( if you haven't already)
Honestly, one of the things I loved the most about the film was the cinematography. It was on an epic scale (I hate that word but it's the only one that seems to fit). It had atmosphere, and was so well accompanied by the score. The score and the cinematography lent the film a mood that I haven't been so engrossed in for a long time, if ever. I felt emotionally invested in the film just through the look and sound of it.
Craig was excellent. Really captured the sophistication and brutality of Bond, the contradiction that I think is at the core of the character. Very Fleming-esque. Harris I was a little disappointed with, particularly at the start of the film. Though she definitely grew on me as the film went on, I felt that she was a little stilted. Dench was terrific as usual, while I am sad that her M is done I am looking forward to a fresh start with Fiennes.
The smaller parts were all very well done; Fiennes was excellent, Finney was very enjoyable, Whishaw was particularly good in the first meeting between Q and Bond, and even Helen McCrory was very good in her limited role.
Berenice Marlohe really gets my praise though. Severely limited screen time and yet what she does with it is truly impressive. I genuinely felt for her character, she had a vulnerability about her alongside her polished exterior. Scenes like her waiting with two champagne glasses, or her having scotch balanced on her head while waiting for death; Marlohe lent them depth; almost a dignity. In my opinion, she gave the best performance of the film, flashy yet reserved, steely yet vulnerable. Nuanced. Plus she's incredibly beautiful.
Which leads to my biggest criticism of the film, that her character was so criminally underused. Completely understand timing issues, whether her scenes were necessary to the overall plot, whether characterisation of her role in Silva's operation would've undermined audience sympathy for her; but I really enjoyed her performance and would've loved to have seen more. But I suppose it might be a good thing, her limited time on screen makes me value the little that we saw all the more.
9/10. Loved it, not just as a Bond fan but also as a fan of cinema.
Brilliant.