Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

James Bond 23 - 'Skyfall'


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 29-10-2012, 11:16
grimtales1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St. Albans, UK, Team Wagner
Posts: 38,532
I think that:
Spoiler
grimtales1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 29-10-2012, 12:22
Legerdemain
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: W. Midlands
Posts: 260
Those female encounters were not in the same league, for me.

You mentioned two 'real' locations. Wow-eee.
So a bit like all the other Bond films till Roger Moore took over then.
Also, don't forget London as a location.

Anyway, the films aren't meant to be a travelogue. The story is what is important, and Skyfall really delivered there.
Legerdemain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 12:26
f_196
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 10,022
Certainly not my best Bond film ever (just a touch too long for comfort), but easily the best Craig one - and the Best film, plot and villain since Goldeneye.

I was irritated that David Arnold wasn't asked back to score the film but Thomas Newman's is absolutely beautiful and energetic at the same time.

I wouldn't say no to a Mendez return.
f_196 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 12:29
D.Page
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 1,501
So a bit like all the other Bond films till Roger Moore took over then.
Also, don't forget London as a location.
Oh, yes. I looked at that London skyline, much of it shot in dreary weather conditions (very apt), and my jaw dropped with the visual spendour (!).

Anyway, the films aren't meant to be a travelogue. The story is what is important, and Skyfall really delivered there.
You can use the 'travelogue' argument, but Bond films have always included a number of stunning locations. Not many in this one, for some reason.
D.Page is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 12:34
D.Page
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 1,501

I may have mis-heard, but I am sure I heard 'M' use the word f*** at one point in her dialogue with Bond, near to the end of the film.

Did anyone else hear it? If so, I find that quite surprising, and not really something which belongs in a Bond film, not even from a Bond villian, let alone 'M'.
D.Page is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 12:37
grimtales1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St. Albans, UK, Team Wagner
Posts: 38,532
I heard it - surprised a bit hearing it from M but its just a word ("I ****ed it up, didnt I?") - delivered off the cuff in the context of a longer speech (very well done).
grimtales1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 12:39
-GONZO-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kent
Posts: 7,757

You can use the 'travelogue' argument, but Bond films have always included a number of stunning locations. Not many in this one, for some reason.
Considering there was a financial crisis at MGM and a new 007 film was seriously in doubt should surely be enough of a reason.
-GONZO- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 12:46
CJClarke
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: The Middle of Nowhere
Posts: 7,265
Neither did I say you were. I referred to people who ONLY like films like The Avengers. I loved The Avengers too, it doesn't mean I don't like much more hard-boiled or action-free films. That was my point.
Ah right, i seem to have misread your other post, in that case i apologise
CJClarke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 17:01
r11co
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: out of this world
Posts: 73
I liked the sly dig at the Brosnan films.
I think I know what you are referring to when you say that, but to be sure where do you reckon that happened?

I personally was liking the references to Die Another Day (Hong Kong, "abandoned tube station for abandoned agents") with regards to the main reason for Silva being the villain. Almost an attempt to redeem that otherwise villified movie.
r11co is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 17:28
glyn9799
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,776
You can use the 'travelogue' argument, but Bond films have always included a number of stunning locations. Not many in this one, for some reason.
I'm guessing it's down to money. We are in a recession after all. I'm sure Skyfall had about $50 million less budget than QoS.

Lack of locations didn't have any effect on my whatsoever. Definately the best Bond film for a long time.
glyn9799 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 17:28
A321
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,679
It was very good. I'm not sure if it was the best Bond film ever though.
A321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 17:29
Saigo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,669
I may have mis-heard, but I am sure I heard 'M' use the word f*** at one point in her dialogue with Bond, near to the end of the film.

Did anyone else hear it? If so, I find that quite surprising, and not really something which belongs in a Bond film, not even from a Bond villian, let alone 'M'.
Thats 'progress' for you.

Also wish Q had said something more nerdy/geeky than "sh*t".
Saigo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 18:06
grimtales1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St. Albans, UK, Team Wagner
Posts: 38,532
It was a bit creepy when Javier Bardem took his teeth out
grimtales1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 18:25
taurus_67
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Lancashire, N. England
Posts: 3,162
I saw this at the weekend and thoroughly enjoyed it from beginning to end. If I have any negative comment at all it would be, maybe, the film is a little long. But, I suppose that can happen when you have a good story; it gets hard to cut bits out.

Best two scenes: the 'back-lit fight' looked just amazing on the big screen. It just won't be anywhere near the same on TV. And, the 'DB5 moment' . It's the big 'five-oh' anniversary so they are allowed sentimental license as far as I'm concerned. The way it was unveiled, M's sarcasm and driving off to THAT tune, it was wonderfully done and , to my peripheral senses at least, something that brought an appreciative reaction from most in the cinema. It's scenes like these that actually make it worth the effort of going out and seeing a film in the cinema with all the bells and whistles.

(oh, and Silva was a great return of a proper OTT psycho Bond villain.)

The ending was a complete shock for me, but again, I thought they storied it really well with the way they finished off the film. I think in some ways it sort of tidies things up. The producers are in a position where they have a choice of what type of Bond film they want to make next. I'd be quite happy to see them continue to 'soften' (if that's the right word) Craig's character with some pastiche from Bond of old.
taurus_67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 18:27
grimtales1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St. Albans, UK, Team Wagner
Posts: 38,532
I loved the bit when Craig tries to use the ejector seat in the DB5 And driving off to THAT theme was just brilliant
grimtales1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 19:33
Stansfield
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 5,275
We (the mrs, kids and I) went to see it last night. Fantastic film. It was being shown on (i think) 5 different screens at Edinburgh Fountain Park's Cineworld and all were sold out. We went for the 15:00 screening but it was sold, as was the 15:45, and 17:00 screenings but we managed to get into the 17:30 screening. A quick check on the way out showed the other screenings for later that night were also sold out. The film must be raking in a fortune.
Over 20 million, for the weekend.

And when I was walking out of the cinema, and passing the queues....I wanted to shout out......

Spoiler

I didn't.
Stansfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 20:13
Johnny Clay
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,812
Saw it Saturday. Packed to the rafters, it was.

Overall, a fairly sterling romp with enough bangs, chases and quips to sate the crowds and ring the tills. Two winners here: Mendes, whose sober, clear-headed approach keeps it all briskly in focus throughout (and budget moaners be damned - it was about time we saw a bit more of Blighty in Bond films). Then, of course, there's Craig, who now makes the more intimate exchanges as enjoyable as his thuggery (which is always good). Surely this is what Fleming had in mind?

But...it's started to get a little self-reverential. The joke about exploding pens, that car etc. Bond is always absurd one way or another, but it largely carries on as if it isn't. We don't want it winking at itself, or at the audience. I'd also question the decision to humanise Bond with back-story and whatnot. It may fulfill certain plot requirements on this occassion, but we risk denting the character's mystique - a large part of his appeal, and something Craig is very good at putting across.

Skyfall will doubtlessly be huge - maybe the biggest Bond ever. But where next? It is more apparent here than in the much-lambasted QoS that you can only re-arrange the old furniture so many ways, and anything truly new is out of the question. But then Bond is a franchise identified by its components as much as its character(s) - and there lies its probably eternal problem. 7/10
Johnny Clay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 20:46
Stansfield
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 5,275

Saw it Saturday. Packed to the rafters, it was.

Overall, a fairly sterling romp with enough bangs, chases and quips to sate the crowds and ring the tills. Two winners here: Mendes, whose sober, clear-headed approach keeps it all briskly in focus throughout (and budget moaners be damned - it was about time we saw a bit more of Blighty in Bond films). Then, of course, there's Craig, who now makes the more intimate exchanges as enjoyable as his thuggery (which is always good). Surely this is what Fleming had in mind?

But...it's started to get a little self-reverential. The joke about exploding pens, that car etc. Bond is always absurd one way or another, but it largely carries on as if it isn't. We don't want it winking at itself, or at the audience. I'd also question the decision to humanise Bond with back-story and whatnot. It may fulfill certain plot requirements on this occassion, but we risk denting the character's mystique - a large part of his appeal, and something Craig is very good at putting across.

Skyfall will doubtlessly be huge - maybe the biggest Bond ever. But where next? It is more apparent here than in the much-lambasted QoS that you can only re-arrange the old furniture so many ways, and anything truly new is out of the question. But then Bond is a franchise identified by its components as much as its character(s) - and there lies its probably eternal problem. 7/10
A 50 year problem......and 23 films.

Back-Story I think, has always been in the Books.....
Stansfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 21:17
Blofeld
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,747
I very much enjoyed Skyfall. I am a big Bond fan* and this one was certainly Daniel Craig's best outing so far. I almost wish the last two didn't happen and this was his first. It certainly feels like this one should have followed Die Another Day, or even The World Is Not Enough.

Spoiler



*My rather weak link to the franchise-My dad worked in the accounting department at Pinewood Studios when For Your Eyes Only was being made and thus he was invited to the premier screening with all the cast etc.
Blofeld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 22:55
grimtales1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St. Albans, UK, Team Wagner
Posts: 38,532
I dont mind if they slowly slot the "traditional" elements in place (Moneypenny, gadgets, Q etc) but I kinda want Craig to keep his hard edge as well and not get too silly.
Also the sexual tension between Bond and Moneypenny was very tangible this time round, bloody hell
grimtales1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 23:31
RebelScum
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 8,912
I dont mind if they slowly slot the "traditional" elements in place (Moneypenny, gadgets, Q etc) but I kinda want Craig to keep his hard edge as well and not get too silly.
I know what you mean. In fact, can't put my finger on exactly why, but the Moneypenny "reveal" scene at the end kinda felt like a step backwards in that respect to me. Maybe it just reminded me of some the Bonds of old, most of which I found cheesy.

Overall I enjoyed it very much though. Head and shoulders above most other Bond movies. Second only to Casino Royale IMO.
RebelScum is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2012, 23:39
Chparmar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: London
Posts: 5,817
Thats 'progress' for you.

Also wish Q had said something more nerdy/geeky than "sh*t".
Yeah, real 'progress'! Standards have really risen.

Too much sex, violence and strong language! It's a disgrace the BBFC waived this as "12A", should have been a stone-wall "15".
Chparmar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-10-2012, 00:21
TheDemiurge
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 984
I must have seen a different film to everyone else. I thought it was utter pants and by far the worst entry in the Bond canon to date.
TheDemiurge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-10-2012, 01:06
yakutz
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,779
Thoroughly enjoyed it. Think it's definitely the best Bond since Goldeneye, possibly going back to the Connery films. Bardem and Whishaw were particularly excellent, I thought.
yakutz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-10-2012, 03:05
FrankJaeger
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 329
I must have seen a different film to everyone else. I thought it was utter pants and by far the worst entry in the Bond canon to date.
FrankJaeger is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:57.