James Bond 23 - 'Skyfall'

1202123252648

Comments

  • enna_genna_g Posts: 2,035
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I loved it. I gave up on Bond about halfway through Roger Moore era where it just got cheesier and cheesier and nothing like the Bond in the books. I never watched Pierce Brosnan as Bond but decied to give Daniel Craig as Bond a go and have been hooked again.

    I think he is a terrific as Bond, much more like the book's character. Ruthless and cold blooded without all the silly supposedly comedic one liners.

    I would rate this film as excellent. I read Giles Conran (shame on you for giving away the ending) and I would say that Bond is not just misogynistic - he would kill anyone man or woman to achieve his goal. He cannot allow himself to have feelings - he did that in Casino Royale and it does not help if you need a clear head. The villain is great a camp psycopath - he actually made me shiver. I loved Q and Judi Dench as usual was superb.

    I also loved the nods to previous Bonds after all it has been 50 years. Really looking forward to the next Bond film now.
  • NorfolkBoy1NorfolkBoy1 Posts: 4,109
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    To be fair Giles Goren's piece was posted as having major spoilers, I can't understand why you'd go round the internet reading stuff about Skyfall without having actually seen the film.
  • SemieroticSemierotic Posts: 11,131
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    How anyone could think this was on the same level as Quantum of Solace I'll never know.

    It was absolutely the right Bond film at the right time. It looked great and scenes we allowed to breathe without feeling the need to rush to yet another action sequence. Bond was damaged enough to be compelling without going overboard into dourness.

    Casio Royale wasa good start, this was a good continuance. QoS was a hiccup best forgotten.
  • SemieroticSemierotic Posts: 11,131
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    enna_g wrote: »
    I loved it. I gave up on Bond about halfway through Roger Moore era where it just got cheesier and cheesier and nothing like the Bond in the books. I never watched Pierce Brosnan as Bond but decied to give Daniel Craig as Bond a go and have been hooked again.

    Watch Goldeneye. One of the best of the series and was directed by the same guy who did Casino Royale.
  • NorfolkBoy1NorfolkBoy1 Posts: 4,109
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    A lot of the criticism of QoS never quite takes into account the WGA writers' strike of 2007-08, which led to a script being submitted in a rush to beat the picket line and then filming going ahead without, initially, any writers on set to do any necessary re-writes. It was not a great Bond film, but there is good reason for that.
  • Virgil TracyVirgil Tracy Posts: 26,805
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    a couple of things I did approve of were :

    great camerawork/directing in action scenes , we could see what was happening , none of that crap Bourne style shaky-cam .

    the music , I'm glad they used Thomas Newman , Arnold was becoming a bit too cliche , too much parodying John Barry's work .
  • SemieroticSemierotic Posts: 11,131
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    A lot of the criticism of QoS never quite takes into account the WGA writers' strike of 2007-08, which led to a script being submitted in a rush to beat the picket line and then filming going ahead without, initially, any writers on set to do any necessary re-writes. It was not a great Bond film, but there is good reason for that.

    Yes, the writers' strike screwed the movie. It was weird because they hired an art house director who ended up making the most action heavy film of the series.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,772
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    As a casual thought, I'd be interested in seeing if there is a difference of opinion over Skyfall between those who are bigger Roger Moore fans than Sean Connery and vice versa.
  • designer84designer84 Posts: 12,087
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I've never really been interested in James Bond. I've only really seen bits and pieces.They never really appealed to me. I thought they were cheesy... However I LOVED Casino Royale and Daniel Craig's Bond. I though QoS was ok but I really loved Skyfall when I saw it this weekend with my bf. We both got a bit teary at one point in the film. Really superb film. I liked how M had more screen time and involvement. Javier was quite creepy as the villain. I'd definitely see this again
  • gasheadgashead Posts: 13,807
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Semierotic wrote: »
    Yes, the writers' strike screwed the movie. It was weird because they hired an art house director who ended up making the most action heavy film of the series.
    Are you saying you think the script for Skyfall is less ridiculous than QoS?
    Skyfall has a villian that can, seemingly, control any computer system or network in the world, and yet, in the grandest traditions of Bond, he goes to quite extraordinary - not to mention preposterously convoluted - lengths to kill the object of his hate, rather than simply putting a bullet through their heads.
    They don't even have the excuse of a writers strike this time !
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,772
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    gashead wrote: »
    Skyfall has a villian that can, seemingly, control any computer system or network in the world, and yet, in the grandest traditions of Bond, he goes to quite extraordinary - not to mention preposterously convoluted - lengths to kill the object of his hate, rather than simply putting a bullet through their heads.
    They don't even have the excuse of a writers strike this time !


    Like no one has EVER done that in a Bond film before.... :rolleyes:
  • CD93CD93 Posts: 13,939
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Ataraxia wrote: »
    Anyone have an idea if the DVD will be released in time for Chrimbo, or is that way too soon?
    Obviously there's been no official word of this yet, but Amazon Germany is listing Skyfall for release on disc from 1st March 2013. That's a Friday, but for a massive release such as this, that's entirely feasible.

    Seemed relevant.
  • gasheadgashead Posts: 13,807
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Like no one has EVER done that in a Bond film before.... :rolleyes:
    Well, duh, that's the point. I'm questioning how anyone can criticise QoS for it's awful plot when it's essentially the same as every other Bond film, up to and including the curent one.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,772
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    gashead wrote: »
    Well, duh, that's the point. I'm questioning how anyone can criticise QoS for it's awful plot when it's essentially the same as every other Bond film, up to and including the curent one.

    The post you quoted, and the post his post quotes doesn't mention the plot at all.....
  • SemieroticSemierotic Posts: 11,131
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    gashead wrote: »
    Are you saying you think the script for Skyfall is less ridiculous than QoS?
    Skyfall has a villian that can, seemingly, control any computer system or network in the world, and yet, in the grandest traditions of Bond, he goes to quite extraordinary - not to mention preposterously convoluted - lengths to kill the object of his hate, rather than simply putting a bullet through their heads.
    They don't even have the excuse of a writers strike this time !

    I'm not sure what your point is. However out-there Skyfall is, it's far less convoluted and trivial than QoS's script.
  • gasheadgashead Posts: 13,807
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The post you quoted, and the post his post quotes doesn't mention the plot at all.....
    Ok, subsituite the word 'plot' for 'script'. I assumed most people considered them different words for the same thing.
  • gasheadgashead Posts: 13,807
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Semierotic wrote: »
    I'm not sure what your point is. However out-there Skyfall is, it's far less convoluted and trivial than QoS's script.
    The thread moved onto the quality (or lack thereof) of QoS's script, and how it was affected by the writers strike. I was opining that Skyfall's script is hardly any more believable, even without a strike. The script has never been a Bond film's strongest point.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,772
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    gashead wrote: »
    I assumed most people considered them different words for the same thing.

    Considering they aren't the same thing, this would be a bad assumption to make!
  • Virgil TracyVirgil Tracy Posts: 26,805
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    In defence of QoS I think the plot twist of the villain's scheme being that he was stealing water rather than oil quite smart , whereas computer hacking - ohh , enough with the computer hacking already !!
  • gasheadgashead Posts: 13,807
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Considering they aren't the same thing, this would be a bad assumption to make!
    Well, it's going OT a bit, but how would you define 'the script' as different to 'the plot'? The script drives everything that happens in a film. How the script is interpretted is down to the director, but he's still filming the script as written.
  • SemieroticSemierotic Posts: 11,131
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    gashead wrote: »
    The thread moved onto the quality (or lack thereof) of QoS's script, and how it was affected by the writers strike. I was opining that Skyfall's script is hardly any more believable, even without a strike. The script has never been a Bond film's strongest point.

    Actually compared to most Bond films I found Skyfall's story refreshingly focused. The bad guy had a simple but satisfying revenge motivation which threatened MI6 and Bond had to stop him. Even the supposed backstory of Bond himself remained appropriately subdued.

    It's not really about what's believable but how well it's presented. That's a given with this franchise, and Skyfall understood that.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,772
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    gashead wrote: »
    Well, it's going OT a bit, but how would you define 'the script' as different to 'the plot'? The script drives everything that happens in a film. How the script is interpretted is down to the director, but he's still filming the script as written.

    simplistically.

    The script includes the plot.
    The plot is part of the script.

    The are not the same thing.
  • gasheadgashead Posts: 13,807
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Semierotic wrote: »
    Actually compared to most Bond films I found Skyfall's story refreshingly focused. The bad guy had a simple but satisfying revenge motivation which threatened MI6 and Bond had to stop him. Even the supposed backstory of Bond himself remained appropriately subdued.

    It's not really about what's believable but how well it's presented. That's a given with this franchise, and Skyfall understood that.
    It's difficult to discuss without putting ugly spolier blocks all over the place, but I thought it was too simple a motivation,
    way out of all proportion to the person it supposedly turned him into and his chosen method of revenge. Isn't being cut lose by MI6 if it serves the greater security of the nation an inherent risk for an agent, and one you'd think they'd accept? Seemed odd he took it so personally.
    I know, this is hardly an original concept for a Bond film, but I think I prefer huge, grandiose schemes to at least have a huge, grandiose motive behind them.
  • BKMBKM Posts: 6,912
    Forum Member
    gashead wrote: »
    It's difficult to discuss without putting ugly spolier blocks all over the place, but I thought it was too simple a motivation....I know, this is hardly an original concept for a Bond film, but I think I prefer huge, grandiose schemes to at least have a huge, grandiose motive behind them.
    I saw SkyFall at the weekend and, while I enjoyed it, I would agree with this. I too thought that the villians motivations were just too, well, ordinary lets say, for a Bond movie!

    The Quantum organization of the last two movies had been building into something really good (power, influence and members at the very highest levels) untill, seemingly, shelved again!
  • grimtales1grimtales1 Posts: 46,685
    Forum Member
    In defence of QoS I think the plot twist of the villain's scheme being that he was stealing water rather than oil quite smart , whereas computer hacking - ohh , enough with the computer hacking already !!

    I agree with you, it was a shame he didnt seem that threatening, but it was clever the CIA thought he'd struck oil which led them up a blind alley.
Sign In or Register to comment.