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
Exactly , couldn't have said it better myself. Finally somebody on here who I actually agree with.
HopiMike is right, skyfall was full of cheap gimmicks and was a typical cliched action movie with no substance at all.
I don't want to flame on anybody who enjoyed the movie, by all means you have every god given right to enjoy it. But it amazes me how nobody on here hardly mentions the drastic change of Daniel Craig's portrayal of Bond from QoS to SF. What happened to the serious, hardened Bond from CR and QoS. The half-monk half-hitman that strangled a man in a bathroom stall with blood everywhere on his hands?
In skyfall we have a joke-quiping Bond every 10 minutes. A Bond who fixes his cuff-links while in the midst of running after a hitman? I mean seriously who thought of that scene? like seriously how campy can it get? The movie just completely fell apart once Silva was introduced.
Silva may have been one of the biggest letdowns of the whole movie. I was expecting Jarvier Bardem to play a gritty villain that was physical, strong and equal to Bond. but in a negative manner. Instead what we got was a flamboyant bi-sexual sissy that wore Retro 1970 suits with a blonde wig on. What a joke! I'm sorry but this is the year 2013, not 1967. I want a realistic villain, like Le Chiffre. Not a cliched throwback attempt trying to mimic past bond villains.
That was amazing though! Casino Royale and that DID have gags they were just intelligent that's all :)
Of course it was a gag, it deliberately went against the cliche and was intended to suprise but tickle the audience at the same time. I remember it got a big laugh in BOTH screenings I attended.
Just like the DB5 "gag" was intended to suprise the audience.
You sound like @Dressed_to_Kill
Yeah it's his 6th account. I wouldn't give him the satisfaction of talking to him. Feel free to take the piss out of him in conversations with other members though ;)
Will do ;)
Perhaps the hype is carrying it for now. I have no idea how it will look in 5 or 10 or 20 years time. I could hasten guesses but the thing is I am in disbelief that anyone likes it even now, so I would think my guesses would be wrong.
It makes more sense when you view it as a 50 year anniversary rebirth which explains all the references and cliches, but they were still sloppy and tedious. Just a bit concerned what the next film will be like after this.
Hell SF was pretty much a Connery style bond movie
There is nothing like a new acclaimed film to get disagreeable fans spouting about cheesy sub standard entries being much better. Only a Bond fan would argue OP is now better yes a cliche ridden effort with an over hill Bond, the film is utter junk save the score.
I don't think I've ever been as excited for a film as much as i was for Skyfall, apart from Quantum of solace, Casino Royale , Die another Day and Jurassic Park III , Age and childhood dictate that. Most of those films left me feeling joyous whilst one left me feeling deflated and to me Skyfall was a mixture of both of those.
Things i liked :-bd
The opening shot in the corridor was superb, it felt very bond and was very original, Bond was back!. I loved how the tension built up and up with bond wanting to save Ronson and 'M' ordering him to leave the dying agent for dead, so he could get after the missing data.
My highlights from the bike chase were the "you know what's at stake here, we cant afford to lose that list" ,"yes mam" exchange. The moment Patrice has to change direction because of the van and the shot of bond approaching in pursuit, the shot of the bikes shooting out from the top of the staircase, the little snippet of bond theme we hear on the rooftops and Bond riding into the bridge to fire himself onto the train in typical bond lunacy.
If i didn't already know i was watching a bond movie the train sequence sure confirmed it for me. i actually found my self smiling to my self and getting a bit emotional as bond is in the digger going over the beetles, 4 years is a long wait and bond was back times 2!. The jump into the carriage and cuff adjustment were also terrific even if i had seen that hundreds of times and the "just changing carriages" quip was a nice addition that suggested this 3rd film may be leaning away from the darker tones of Craigs first two outings. The train top fight sequence was good and the tension built again even thou i knew bond was about to come to a 'dead end' as such. I really felt the tension in MI6 when eve said "agent down".
I really enjoyed the title sequence i think mostly because i love Adeles song. my favorite parts were the Chinese dragons, the burning 007 target effergies and bond walking slowly with ppk in hand and him shooting his reflection many times, it was all slightly cheesy but most definitely bond.
likewise the exchange between 'M' and Mallory and i enjoyed m being told to retire and her telling Mallory to basically "piss off".
Bond 'enjoying death' was a real highlight for me, the drinking game with the scorpion was brilliant and my gripe with this was that we never saw him enjoying death enough.
Bond returning and breaking into M's home was even better done than in 'CR' and was a nice little homage. I like that a homage like that either intentional or unintentional is one us bond fans will notice but the general 'movie fan' might not. The end of this scene certainly got a laugh out of me and most of the cinema i was in. It was brilliantly acted as-well .
The journey to new digs was a little gem as-well , bond and tanner snaking through the caverns i think just looks so good , and the addition of the the terrific track and dialogue made this scene stand out for me on first viewing and its something i looked forward too excitedly on further viewings.
THAT'S ONLY THE START OF MY REVIEW BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS WORTH POSTING AS IT HAS BEEN SAT IN THE POST COMMENT BOX FOR ABOUT 2 MONTHS NOW LOL
Exactly, couldn't have said it better myself.
Both are in my top 10, but I think SF might take it because of the stupid bits during the India section of OP.
OP has much more going for it than just the score. The cold war stuff is really good and the finale is tense, there's some great action, great lines, a menacing henchman, a brilliant Bond girl, and Moore might've been pushing it a bit age wise but he still had some great lines, you'd have to be a bit of a miserable bugger not to enjoy Rog in this film.
But OP has a better score, a better Q, a better plot, arguably a better girl, a better henchman (Patrice was boring), better gunbarrel, funnier one liners, etc. SF is probably overall the better film but I think it's a closer contest than you make out.
I also thought the references to past films were subtle and tasteful. The Fields reference to Jill Masterson in QOS was fare worse IMO.
I felt like Daniel Craig's portrayal of Bond was excellent in SF up until he arrived at Silva's island. The one liners became so repetitive and awkward. Daniel Craig is at his best when playing the role seriously, in SF he was obviously told to mimic past Bond actors and it showed, but for all the wrong reasons. I hope before Daniel Craig leaves the role we see another CR style performance.
Well, there were not many to begin with in SF; the beginning scene merely shows him in bed with beer in hand, as if he's just blowing off some steam. All through out his run, DC has had this problem. Not that he is terrible, it's just that he's not very smooth; more agressive as if he has to get it over with: like the Solange scene, or the Fields scene (he looked very akward in that moment kissing her back)
In SF, take the shower scene, DC comes up from behind her - not very smoothly: emphasis on Bond comes up to her, with her back to him; the whole moment is a bit agressive--not a bad scene, but Bond's of past have managed the love scenes better. With Roger Moore, there would be some suggestive line, cue with some romantic strings music, Bond would move in slowly and confidently and the woman would fall to his charms. It's more about Bond's confidence and the way he handles the situation.
Sorry to quote an older post, just missed a couple of things!
Firstly - I'm glad to find somebody on here who agrees with me too! And am glad to finally provide you with a similar opinion as I can see you are somewhat outnumbered!
Weird thing is I think many people did dislike Skyfall (they're reasonably common on IMDb, Rotten Tomatoes and so on as well as this thread) but maybe they just don't want to stick around on the forums as much.
The only way I can make sense of Skyfall is a sloppy attempt to celebrate the 50 year anniversary that will give way to more standard films in future. Hopefully :)
I think some interviews suggest that they had something like this in mind even after QoS, but the recession probably just led to fewer foreign locations.
I too miss the old DC Bond from CR and QoS, but he said in 2008 that QoS would probably be the last film with that style.
Ultimately, a lot of this is simply personal preference. I didn't like the morbid feeling of the opening credits/song for example, but I realize that is subjective and many people probably really liked it.
My personal opinion of SF is very negative (I'll still give it a rewatch anyway) but if (most of) these long series teach us anything, it's that they can change dramatically in only about 5 years. So if we don't like one version of it, give it 5 years and it'll aaaall be different!
So perhaps we should try not to fret! Casino Royale and QoS will always exist, after all ^^
Hm, probably all true. However wouldn't you agree that the writing of Brosnan's films was much worse than his acting or portrayal of the character? I mean GoldenEye I thought struck an almost optimal balance between fun and realistic and proved Brosnan could make an amazing Bond. In Tomorrow Never Dies it was the storyline that bored me, not Brosnan, and in DAD it was the bizarre concepts like the ice hotel or whatever and the invisible car that bored me, not Brosnan.
I think it was all simply due to the 90's being full of the overuse of relatively poor CG as it was the dawn of that technology. I don't think any actor was to blame.
Well, other people write the script, direct, edit, do music. So lines, music, and also length and amount of love scenes are not for the actor to decide, really, are they?
We see the whole thing completely differently, I think. I'll try and explain my POW.
The sex in the "enjoying death" phase looked passionate enough to me, and as for Bond looking the way he did after it on bed was surely exactly the way he was supposed to look: his life at that point lacked meaning and purpose, he was miserable and kind of lost. If he had looked content and smiley and connected to the other person it would have been all wrong. You can't even compare that (or much else) to what Roger Moore's Bond was doing, his universe was so different.
To me Bond seemed to be enjoying himself with Solange, but his main interest was not her, but his job - which is as it should be, IMO. He got useful information, and so, when he had to choose between her and getting on with his job, he chose to use the information and go do this job. He'd be crap at his work if his priorities were the opposite. So, again, I think the scene was done as required by the script and the story.
How is the SF shower scene aggressive? What's wrong with him walking to a woman from behind? He moves slowly, takes first contact slowly and tenderly, isn't aggressive in any way, doesn't frighten her or force her - basically he makes sure she's happy for him to be there.
Besides, as for aggressiveness with women in general, well, Daniel's Bond hasn't been slapping women (on ass or face), or using physical force to get up close and personal with them (thank goodness), unlike Sean's or indeed Roger's Bonds occasionally did (a major turn off).
I'm not sure what you'd want Mr Craig to do. He's not Roger Moore, and personally I wouldn't want him to be, either.
In short... I disagree about the awkwardness. I don't see any lack of confidence that you seem to - on the contrary he seems very confident with women - he hasn't needed to trick them into having sex with him using cards, for instance ;) nor does he need to physically overpower them. I'd say that is confident and smooth. :P
Although I don't agree, I can understand where you are coming from and appreciate your point of view. I think we all just have to realise that you can't please everyone. I remember a lot of clamour from a lot of fans especially after Quantum of Solace for a return to some more "staple" Bond elements in the films, the complaint was that the films were becoming too serious and too far away from what many, possibly even most, considered to be a "Bond movie". Many fans wanted to see things like Moneypenny and Q return, some more one liners etc. I'm not saying this was right or wrong by the way, just that this was how it was! I think the way Skyfall was written and done was a response to this. I even remember Daniel Craig having to answer questions from interviewers asking about the lack of things like the one liners, gadgets, Moneypenny etc and his response was always along the lines of "don't worry, we'll be bringing these sort of things back into the next film (Skyfall)". My point is if they had ignored the wishes of these people and carried on in the same vein as the first 2 films, there would have been just as many people if not more critiscising the lack of these "Bond elements".
Another thing to consider as to the change in Craig's Bond from the first 2 films is the fact that Skyfall does not follow on from the first 2, we are led to believe that quite a bit of time has passed since QoS, and so it is fair to assume Bond has developed. Take the pre title sequence for instance, this is now a Bond at the top of his game, been doing the job for years and naturally like most people who do a job they like and become very good at it, is now more confident, comfortable and almost cocky in what he is doing, hence the quips like "just changing carriages" and the cuff check.
Personally I loved Skyfall and (sorry, this is going to sound like bragging but it's honestly just to make a point!) having attended the royal premiere and new york premiere (where the audience generally wasn't your "casual movie goer") I can say from the audience reaction that the vast majority LOVED the villain, the one liners, the tributes to past Bond movies and the film in general.
I would agree that there were one or two many one liners (I thought the "I got into some deep water" line near the end felt a bit forced and out of place), but on the whole most were brilliantly delivered and flowed with the scene. As for the cuff check, I'm going to make no apologies for LOVING it!!
if you ever want to see a great Brosnan flick, check out 'Seraphim Falls.' A very underrated movie that shows just how great Brosnan's acting chops really are.
hm, cool thanks for the recommendation!
I actually as you may have spotted ordered GoldenEye (and Dr. No) when I cancelled my Skyfall pre-order, so I can't wait to see it again! I love that film!
I am kind of wondering what films I should watch instead of Bond if it turns out that it doesn't return to a favorable artistic approach (for me personally) any time soon.