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
I think SF is similar to TDKR in that it's a great film with a fairly weak story. SF's acting, cinematography, etc, was brilliant. But the story was packed with plot holes. Same with TDKR.
Pretty good films but if you stop and think about Silva's stupidly complex plan (detailed in the article I posted) or Bane's pointless and idiotic plan ("I will cause a revolution in Gotham by threatening to destroy the city with a nuclear bomb, which I will do anyway in a month, all so my hot girlfriend can get revenge on Batman for killing her dad") then the stories sort of fall apart.
So if Skyfall said "DON'T TAKE ME SERIOUSLY, PLEASE!" before the film began you wouldn't have an issue with it? Don't see much logic in that, to be fair.
It's a Bond film, so it is obvious that you are going for an escapist ride and nothing close to reality. It's expected of you to suspend your disbelief when you purchase your ticket.
SF isn't trying to be a cheesey blockbuster like MR. It's trying to be this adult thriller. It takes the story seriously and therefore thingslike plot holes are more of an issue.
Of course there's no such thing as a realistic Bond movie but there's being OTT and then there's having plot holes.
EG- There's a difference between Stromberg having an underwater base and Silva relying on Bond capturing him via tracking down Patrice from bullets in his shoulders then getting a briefcase full of money which leads him to Severine and finally to Silva's island.
Why would anyone think Silva planned it like that? :-O
Maybe he didn't plan it like that deliberately but he wants Bond to capture him. He doesn't leave any clues or anything. So I'm not sure how he thought Bond would find him unless he somehow foresaw Bond tracking Patrice using bullet fragments, etc.
See, the plot doesn't explain this. This is a plot hole. But like @chrisisall said, it shows that the movie is strong since it manages to be a good film and to make you enjoy it despite the plot having holes.
But, umm, can we go small on the next one? A FYEO or TLD kind of flick? After the financial success of SF I somehow doubt it though. Like the SUX in Robocop, BIG is better!
;)
Of course he didn't plan it like that, no maybes about that. :) He was clever, but hardly psychic. Things went the way they went, not because they were planned to go exactly like that - he just adapted like clever people do. Bond might have died several times over before he got anywhere near Silva, so there's no reason to assume that Silva's plan relied specifically on Bond, never mind on those rare, traceable fragments in him. Surely for some months Silva assumed like everyone else that Bond was dead anyway, and so he must have had something else planned, probably with some variations depending on how things developed. That would actually make sense. But there was no need to go into that, was there? (Well, I see no reason for that, anyway.) Bond survived and then the events developed with him in it, and therefore in Silva's plans.
I have rationalized many nonsensical Star Trek Time-travel episodes I love in the same way! Not goofing on you, seriously, when we love stuff, we FIND a way to make it make sense.
This is true. Even I must admit that I let my fandom blind me often. :\">
It's all good.
Like TB or TLD.
:)) ^:)^ :P
I don't understand how this is a plot hole. At no point in the film does Silva, or anyone else, state that the plan was for Bond to find him. Silva was prepared if he was captured by *any* agent, not just Bond. He was pleased by his interaction with Bond because of their similarities, but I think he would have played it that way no matter who came after him...
Oh, and I went :)) at the plot interpretation that thelivingroyale outlined above, since it made no sense to me whatsoever to assume that Silva would have planned it like that - since he obviously couldn't have. To put it another way: it also seems people FIND a way to NOT make it make sense. ;)
Well, that's what I was trying to say as well. Bond was supposed to be dead anyway, so of course Silva had to be prepared for whoever came after him.
;)
The best thing to assume here is that he had some sort of plan but then found out Bond had found Patrice and thought he'd see if he could track him down himself, to see if he was as good as Silva. But since I have to assume things and make up a theory myself to explain it, I think that counts as a plot hole.
Saying that though I'm not sure why Silva went to the trouble of getting himself captured anyway. He could've just snuck into the country (I'm sure a man like him could've got himself a fake passport) and then gone to the hearing, he obviously knew when it was. Then I could argue with myself and say it was to upload the virus to MI6 but I can't remember him gaining much from that other than it opening his cell.
Hmmm, yeah maybe he wanted to talk to her before he died. That would explain it although surely he could've gone about it differently.
Could he not have made just done his speech at the courthouse before he started shooting the place up, instead of getting himself captured just to speak to M?
Exactly.
I'm not saying that I would've liked the film better if Silva had followed my much better plan, in fact it probably would've been a pretty crap film.
I think I was wrong though and plot holes might be the wrong way of describing it. It's not plot holes, it's just sloppy script writing. It's very entertaining but Silva's plan is, like you said, all too convinient.
Like I said, great film, meh plot.
Just imagine a great plot, meh film... Now that would be really frustrating. :P
Haha, yeah that would be worse. That's how I class FYEO, I really like the story but the film as a whole is just average to me.
It's definitely one of Moore's best though.
I think probably the biggest twist, or surprise, to most people would have been M's death at the end, although Severine's death genuinely shocked me too - I really didn't expect that. The rest of the story is linear as you said - then again, I don't know many Bond films that aren't.
The only really big shocks or twists I can think of in the franchise are Tracey's death, Vesper's betrayal, and M's death.
No I didn't expect Severine's death either. The problem with it was that she was pretty superfluous. Her death didn't shape the plot in any way. Neither did M's as it was so late on. I agree on the old films, but I thought they were supposed to be raising the bar with the Craig movies. In hindsight, I think the abundance of 'fantastic script' comments, were actually just people thinking M's death = good script.
But I predicted M's death before I saw the movie. I knew that's what the "big hook" would be.