To be honest Sir Miles, the scene of Bond and Q jousting in the National Gallery was one of the stupidest in the film. It's one thing to have a lengthy fencing dual in the Reform Club in DAD, but to have Bond and Q get on horseback and then charge at each other with long staffs in a tourist hotspot like that, with classic paintings only yards away, just beggars belief. Couldn't they just patch up their differences by going for a drink instead?
Daniel Craig's third outing as 007 is easily the most sumptuous, sleek, and visually impressive film in the series
With respect, I think this is a bit of an overstatement, as it seems to discount the past 50 years of Bond cinematography.
I have been a fan of Deakins for a number of years, so I may be biased. I think he's one of the best living film photographers, and I was thrilled to hear he would be shooting SF. I would agree that that other Bond films have more iconic, perhaps superior cinematography in specific instances. Certain scenes in FRWL, GF, and OHMSS take my breath away like nothing in SF. However, I think that the overall consistency and balance of SF's color and shadows is pretty unprecedented for a Bond film.
It's all right. It's quite all right, really. She's having a rest. We'll be going on soon. There's no hurry, you see. We have all the time in the world.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,946Chief of Staff
Well, Connery would disagree with you on that. Connery’s said himself that Schwarzenegger delivers one-liners well. I can’t find any online links to him saying this, but I recall reading it in a magazine somewhere; and someone else on this thread mentioned the same thing.
I’m sure a link to it can be found, but I’ve tried all the obvious search terms with no luck.
Hmmm, I recall Connery saying he thought the best Bond villain was Cubby.
What a w@nker.
I hope that last remark wasn’t addressed towards me; otherwise I will have to report you. You’ve already been chastised once in the past for insulting me.
If you have nothing intelligent to say in response to any of my posts, I suggest you stop responding. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder about something—perhaps you consider yourself an expert on Bond films and don’t like other peoples’ views on them.
I think you have got the wrong end of the stick there....minigeff's last remark was about Connery, not you....why would you think it was about you ? ?:)
And his response was a valid point....and one that Connery has said....
-- Moneypenny. Forget that Naomie Harris is insanely attractive (IMO anyway) or that her appearance in Hong Kong doesn’t really make sense. The payoff is sooooo worth it. In hindsight it was as obvious as the sky, but when Bond walked into the office with the coat rack and there she was behind the desk, I got chills. “Holy crap, that’s Moneypenny” I thought, and sure enough she confirmed it a second later. The whole theater cheered. Most of all, I love that they addressed one of the great Bondology topics of all time, namely whether Bond and Moneypenny had ever had a dalliance.
-- The title sequence and song. For me, best titles since Moonraker. The song vaguely reminds me of that film also. This is the vocal range that Adele should sing everything in, rather than the screeching of “Someone Like You”.
-- The film is too long. Not a killer of a problem, but the lengthy battles in London and Scotland should both have been shortened.
-- Severine was a disappointment. Her screen time is far too limited to give her impact, which was fine for someone like Paris Carver whose backstory provided some emotional heft. Instead, Severine seemed to be inserted into the story to give it another beautiful woman and an easy Obligatory Sacrificial Lamb. Berenice Marlohe can’t act, either.
Not picking a fight, just pointing out some disagreements.
I don't think they did address whether Moneypenny and Bond slept with each other, to me it was not clear, but I don't think they did.
I thought the title sequence was boring and unimaginitive.
Didn't feel the movie was too long at all.
Our biggest disagreement, I thought Severine was magical, she was mesmerizing in the bar scene in Shaghai. Best Bond girl in a long time.
Hmmm, I recall Connery saying he thought the best Bond villain was Cubby.
What a w@nker.
I hope that last remark wasn’t addressed towards me; otherwise I will have to report you. You’ve already been chastised once in the past for insulting me.
If you have nothing intelligent to say in response to any of my posts, I suggest you stop responding. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder about something—perhaps you consider yourself an expert on Bond films and don’t like other peoples’ views on them.
I think you have got the wrong end of the stick there....minigeff's last remark was about Connery, not you....why would you think it was about you ? ?:)
And his response was a valid point....and one that Connery has said....
I hope you’re right. But it's hard to tell who it’s aimed at, it coming after a quote from me and the reference to Connery. Throughout this thread, minigeff has been ridiculing some of my posts, and I assumed this was just another instance of that.
I’m not familiar with Connery saying that about Broccoli, but it sounds like a joke to me. I don’t think Connery was seriously suggesting that a producer of the films (who wasn’t an actor) should play the part of a Bond villain (if that’s what the quote is supposed to be alluding to). It was probably a throwaway line to some journalist who was asking stupid questions.
I finally got around to seeing Skyfall today. Overall I liked the film; its easily the best during the Craig era but quite honestly I don't think it warrants all the excessive fawning it has received as the storyline is in many ways a hodgepodge of characters and situations from Bond's 50 years. As to some random thoughts:
I found the PTS to be boring and tedious with a really horrible sense of pacing. To my eyes it consisted of several uninteresting bits (a boring car chase, a boring motorbike chase, a boring train sequence) strung together with interspersed bits of dialog. Eve also gets the dubious award of worst field agent ever.
The titles were typically competent; I miss Binder's surreal nudes but Kleinmann has a knack for using imagery from the film in interesting ways; if you know what to look for, the title sequence pretty much summarizes the whole movie.
The title song by Adele was one of the best in a long, long, long time and easily surpasses the uneven You Know My Name or the fingers on chalkboard horror that was Quantum of Solace.
Bardem's Silva is an interesting character but I hesitate to equate him with the great Bond villains because he is so tragic and damaged. Given his motivation, its very easy to see his side of the argument and he comes across as insane rather than evil like Goldfinger or Drax. Take Alec Trevaylian, add in a pinch of Electra King, a dash of betrayal and pathos and you end up with Silva.
As mentioned previously, Eve is an amusing character but its easy to see why she decides field work is not for her; still, she manages to bring some humor to the proceedings and is actually capable of eliciting some measure of chemistry with Craig (no small feat).
Severine is the utter description of the woefully underused, two dimensional sacrificial lamb; more than once I was struck by how similar her situation, backstory and final fate seemed to match that of Andrea from TMWTGG.
Ralph Fiennes' Mallory was easily the best and most interesting of the new characters and I really liked how he is used and the spot he finally ends up inhabiting. The script does a nice job of gradually peeling back his layers and turning him from an apparent bureaucrat to an honorable and upstanding person.
Ben Whishaw does the most with his time as the new Q though when it comes to characters, the barely old enough to shave computer whiz kid who doesn't know as much as he thinks he does has become as cliche as the mustache twirling villain and I found the presence of such a character in a Bond movie a little off-putting. The gear he gives Bond is also uninspired and I didn't care for or agree with his exploding pen line.
Judi Dench's M has always been problematic during the Craig movies for me and she is particularly so here, exhibiting poor judgment again and again and generally appearing helpless and out of place. Her explanation of who Silva was and what she did to him was particularly cold (as was her disregard for Bronson at the start of the film) Quite honestly, I felt zero empathy or emotion for her at the end and only found myself thinking her final fate was long overdue.
As for the man at the center of it all, Craig has always been a tough sell for me as Bond but at least he finally seems at ease with the role and even manages to successfully deliver the quips and enjoy himself with his leading ladies. Despite the serious goings on, he takes himself a little less seriously this time around and manages to pause every now and then and even give the occasional virtual wink at the camera. He does a great job with his expressions during the fight with the thugs at the casino in Macau and I liked his complete lack of nostalgia towards his childhood home and reaction at what was done to his Aston Martin (both very Bond-like). Well done and Bravo. Welcome to the fold Dan; keep up the good work and continue to work towards making me a believer.
Visually, the film is beautiful to look at and has some of the best cinematography of the series. In particular the scenes in Shanghai, Macau and Silva's island were all striking. I found the cinematography for much of the film to evoke a strong feeling of stereoscopy and depth into the screen. I know the purists will wince at this, but Roger Deakins' placement of objects in the foreground and the manner in which characters seem to often walk towards the screen makes Skyfall prime material for a high-end 3D post-conversion and I'd love to see the filmmakers try something like that as a little bonus for the inevitable home release (at the very least, I'll be curious to see how my TV's 2D>3D converter handles the movie).
The story of Skyfall while hardly original ultimately works for me because it pushes us further and further away from Paul Haggis' wretched deconstruction and self analysis that plauged Craig's first two films. For all the the peeks into Bond's background and the occasional dip into questioning his relevance, Bond himself stays the course and doesn't constantly need to get drunk or have someone constantly remind him that he isn't as smart as he thinks he is. By the end of the film, Sam Mendes has managed to get all the pieces back where they belong on the board: we have a Moneypenny (and we get why she should never be on the field), we have Q (who will hopefully realize that a few gadgets aren't a bad thing and that you can't solve all of the world's ills with a keyboard) and we have a far more recognizable M who doesn't have to mother his agents to death. Even the offices look comfortingly familiar, right down to the double doors.
Looking forward, I hope we get a story where the stakes are a bit higher; an ongoing problem with the Craig films for me has been that the villains goals are always so modest. I also hope we get a more proper villain who commits acts of evil because he (or she) is evil and not out of some misguided sense of revenge. Lastly, lets keep our fingers crossed that the filmmakers don't feel the need to reset things again anytime soon.
Hmmm, I recall Connery saying he thought the best Bond villain was Cubby.
What a w@nker.
I hope that last remark wasn’t addressed towards me; otherwise I will have to report you. You’ve already been chastised once in the past for insulting me.
If you have nothing intelligent to say in response to any of my posts, I suggest you stop responding. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder about something—perhaps you consider yourself an expert on Bond films and don’t like other peoples’ views on them.
I think you have got the wrong end of the stick there....minigeff's last remark was about Connery, not you....why would you think it was about you ? ?:)
And his response was a valid point....and one that Connery has said....
As an outsider regarding this, I'd definitely say that I think Osris has definitely got the wrong end of the stick regarding minigeff's comment. To me he's most certainly referring to Connery - I thought that when I first saw the post & I still believe that having re-read it.
The James Bond series has been called a lot of things, but never prestigious. From b-movie to blockbuster, from superannuated retrospective to experimental rebirth, the series has gone through an array of incarnations. Skyfall is the first Bond film to surface in high-art territory, which is a mixed blessing. Oscar-winning director Sam Mendes teamed up with renowned cinematographer Roger Deakins and screenwriter John Logan to make a Bond film that would please crowds and critics alike.
While not as revolutionary as Casino Royale, Daniel Craig's third outing as 007 is easily the most sumptuous, sleek, and visually impressive film in the series. It is also the darkest. For all its action, Skyfall focuses largely on a freudian deconstruction of its three major characters, Bond, M, and Raoul Silva. Silva, played by oscar-winning Spanish actor Javier Bardem, is an ex-MI6 agent with a psychotic, son-like obsession with M, who abandoned him to Chinese authorities years earlier. Though his role was clearly influenced by Heath Ledger's Joker from 2008's The Dark Knight, Bardem gives Silva a unique breed of pathological, feminine bravado.
The film also features two beautiful and dynamic bond girls. The first is Eve, an incompetant but charming MI6 agent played by Naomi Harris. The second is Sévérine, a mesmerising femme-fetale whose role, played by French-Khmer actress Bérénice Lim Marlohe, is alluring, mysterious, and far too brief. Judy Dench, however, takes the spotlight in her last and finest performance as M, the fledgling head of MI6.
In the last act, Bond and M retreat to the Scottish moores to trap Silva at his own insidious and vengeful game. These last scenes are visually spectacular, reaching an almost mythological fiber. Director Mendes fuses the desolate setting with a rising dread that climaxes in a gothic, Straw Dogs-esque finale. The film's action scenes are excellent, particularly during the title-sequence in Istambul, which includes a train-top foot chase that rivals the best action sequences in the series. Adele's title song and the sequence that accompanies it is the series' best since Tina Turner's Goldeneye.
At times, Deakin's oscar-worthy cinematography distracts from the plot. The shots are so clean, so vibrant, so dazzling, that one forgets to follow what characters are saying or the progression of the narrative. Occasional plot-holes are patched up with slick pacing and iconic imagery. Still, the film manages to balance old with new, character with extravagance, darkness with humor, and violence with tenderness. Though it suffers from plot-holes and a sumptuous style that is sometimes too striking for its own good, Skyfall is well-written, takes creative risks, and is supported by rounded, dynamic characters.
Really enjoyed reading this review. Nicely written & sums up a lot of my own thinking -{
It's all right. It's quite all right, really. She's having a rest. We'll be going on soon. There's no hurry, you see. We have all the time in the world.
Sadly my first impressions of 'Skyfall' are not positive. Oddly enough for a franchise which has seen space travel, Grace Jones forcing herself on Roger Moore, and virgins telling the future with tarot cards, 'Skyfall' is the Bond movie which I had the hardest time suspending my disbelief. It's tone may be serious but I couldn't take it seriously. I found it smug, reactionary, and more than a little dull. Sam Mendes is massively overrated. He's a magpie who steals things from more gifted filmmakers. Every film he has made is like a poorer version of somebody else's work but for some reason he ends up getting more acclaim than the people he's imitating. It sticks in my throat that this impostor is being credited with doing better work than Guy Hamilton, or Peter Hunt. Don't even get me started on his other films. Also women get a raw deal in 'Skyfall.' Eve = incompetent, M = negligent, uncaring mother, Severine = victim, all end up being put in their place which for two of them means ending up dead. I'll watch it again at some point but while there are worse James Bond films there isn't one I've disliked more.
Dame Judy Dench had been brilliant as M and it was very sad to see her leave the series,
She will be a hard act to follow Ralph Fienns will have his work cut out.
As an outsider regarding this, I'd definitely say that I think Osris has definitely got the wrong end of the stick regarding minigeff's comment. To me he's most certainly referring to Connery - I thought that when I first saw the post & I still believe that having re-read it.
I'll give his comment the benefit of the doubt, then.
found the PTS to be boring and tedious with a really horrible sense of pacing. To my eyes it consisted of several uninteresting bits (a boring car chase, a boring motorbike chase, a boring train sequence) strung together with interspersed bits of dialog.
The only original touch to it was the use of that crane/tractor thingy that was used to stop the train from uncoupling.
It sticks in my throat that this impostor is being credited with doing better work than Guy Hamilton, or Peter Hunt
I wonder why Hamilton and Hunt were jettisoned by the producers. They were great directors, and Hamilton was the classic “Bond director”—if anyone should have been kept it was him.
I hope that last remark wasn’t addressed towards me; otherwise I will have to report you. You’ve already been chastised once in the past for insulting me.
If you have nothing intelligent to say in response to any of my posts, I suggest you stop responding. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder about something—perhaps you consider yourself an expert on Bond films and don’t like other peoples’ views on them.
I think you have got the wrong end of the stick there....minigeff's last remark was about Connery, not you....why would you think it was about you ? ?:)
And his response was a valid point....and one that Connery has said....
I hope you’re right. But it's hard to tell who it’s aimed at, it coming after a quote from me and the reference to Connery. Throughout this thread, minigeff has been ridiculing some of my posts, and I assumed this was just another instance of that.
I’m not familiar with Connery saying that about Broccoli, but it sounds like a joke to me. I don’t think Connery was seriously suggesting that a producer of the films (who wasn’t an actor) should play the part of a Bond villain (if that’s what the quote is supposed to be alluding to). It was probably a throwaway line to some journalist who was asking stupid questions.
Yes, the 'w@nker' was aimed at Connery.
Connery said the comment about Cubby during a talk show interview, I think it's in the 'Everything or Nothing' documentary.
At the time, Connery had fallen out big time with Cubby over money. This was also said at a time where Cubby wasn't well and not strong enough to make a public defence to Connery's thoughts and opinions.
So, for attacking a gravely ill kind generous guy who made Connery the household name he is today, Connery is in my book as a w@nker.
Luckily, Connery and Cubby did make up before Cubby passed away, but I can't help but think that the very public attack and a poorly guy was way below the belt.
And don't panic Osris, if I intend to call you a w@nker I'll make it nice a clear for ya, though I can't see any reason why I'd need to, you bring quite a bit of discussion and debate to the forum, and dare I say entertainment, which is what a forum should be all about.
MG -{
Ps, I love this interview, shows the true caring side of the haggis munching rug wearing tossbag;
I wonder why Hamilton and Hunt were jettisoned by the producers.
Hamilton was preparing to direct "Superman" at the time TSWLM was being set up, though tax reasons ultimately prevented his doing so, and was unavailable.
Dame Judy Dench had been brilliant as M and it was very sad to see her leave the series,
She will be a hard act to follow Ralph Fienns will have his work cut out.
I have no doubt Ralph Fiennes will make a fine M, Given his status as an actor, I think it's likely that the prominence of M in the films will remain as high as it was during the tenure of Judi Dench.
Moore Not Less 4371 posts (2002 - 2007) Moore Than (2012 - 2016)
I think you have got the wrong end of the stick there....minigeff's last remark was about Connery, not you....why would you think it was about you ? ?:)
And his response was a valid point....and one that Connery has said....
I hope you’re right. But it's hard to tell who it’s aimed at, it coming after a quote from me and the reference to Connery. Throughout this thread, minigeff has been ridiculing some of my posts, and I assumed this was just another instance of that.
I’m not familiar with Connery saying that about Broccoli, but it sounds like a joke to me. I don’t think Connery was seriously suggesting that a producer of the films (who wasn’t an actor) should play the part of a Bond villain (if that’s what the quote is supposed to be alluding to). It was probably a throwaway line to some journalist who was asking stupid questions.
Yes, the 'w@nker' was aimed at Connery.
Connery said the comment about Cubby during a talk show interview, I think it's in the 'Everything or Nothing' documentary.
At the time, Connery had fallen out big time with Cubby over money. This was also said at a time where Cubby wasn't well and not strong enough to make a public defence to Connery's thoughts and opinions.
So, for attacking a gravely ill kind generous guy who made Connery the household name he is today, Connery is in my book as a w@nker.
Luckily, Connery and Cubby did make up before Cubby passed away, but I can't help but think that the very public attack and a poorly guy was way below the belt.
And don't panic Osris, if I intend to call you a w@nker I'll make it nice a clear for ya, though I can't see any reason why I'd need to, you bring quite a bit of discussion and debate to the forum, and dare I say entertainment, which is what a forum should be all about.
MG -{
Ps, I love this interview, shows the true caring side of the haggis munching rug wearing tossbag;
From what we've heard/seen/read, Connery does indeed seem like a bit of a toss-pot. But the biggest tosser of all, IMO, seems to be Kevin McClory. The guy wasted his entire life trying to sue and screw the bond team over. Maybe with reason (we don't truly know), but he spent his entire life doing it, until the day he died. Now that is the ultimate bond villain.
That interview is highly edited to make it look like he's saying something that he isn't. I'd love to see the whole thing to see what was actually said.
1- On Her Majesty's Secret Service 2- Casino Royale 3- Licence To Kill 4- Goldeneye 5- From Russia With Love
That interview is highly edited to make it look like he's saying something that he isn't. I'd love to see the whole thing to see what was actually said.
There has been a fair amount of negative comments about the cyber (computer hacking n stuff) portion of the film. Critics must realize it has to be quick and easily taken in by the audience in general. All in all it was not that bad! I should know I teach cyber espionage.
Easy there, pal! My bad if I didn't make this clear, but I was being tongue-in-cheek with my remark about Connery. I don't really believe he's dumb. Not having read the quote about his admiration of Schwarzenegger's delivery, I can only assume he was joking. Arnold's one-liners sound amateurish at best. If Connery's remark was serious, I don't question his intelligence, but I certainly question his taste!
Connery is my favorite Bond, but I never said he was the smartest!
On the contrary, I think Connery is intelligent and shrewd. Besides, I would think it reasonable to assume that as someone who knows how to deliver a line he would be able to recognise effective line delivery in others.
There has been a fair amount of negative comments about the cyber (computer hacking n stuff) portion of the film. Critics must realize it has to be quick and easily taken in by the audience in general. All in all it was not that bad! I should know I teach cyber espionage.
Comments
I agree.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Just for the record, I really enjoyed the Bond and Q joust, far fetched as the setting may have been.
I have been a fan of Deakins for a number of years, so I may be biased. I think he's one of the best living film photographers, and I was thrilled to hear he would be shooting SF. I would agree that that other Bond films have more iconic, perhaps superior cinematography in specific instances. Certain scenes in FRWL, GF, and OHMSS take my breath away like nothing in SF. However, I think that the overall consistency and balance of SF's color and shadows is pretty unprecedented for a Bond film.
Yeah....okay...thanks for pointing that out to me ?:)
I think you have got the wrong end of the stick there....minigeff's last remark was about Connery, not you....why would you think it was about you ? ?:)
And his response was a valid point....and one that Connery has said....
Not picking a fight, just pointing out some disagreements.
I don't think they did address whether Moneypenny and Bond slept with each other, to me it was not clear, but I don't think they did.
I thought the title sequence was boring and unimaginitive.
Didn't feel the movie was too long at all.
Our biggest disagreement, I thought Severine was magical, she was mesmerizing in the bar scene in Shaghai. Best Bond girl in a long time.
I hope you’re right. But it's hard to tell who it’s aimed at, it coming after a quote from me and the reference to Connery. Throughout this thread, minigeff has been ridiculing some of my posts, and I assumed this was just another instance of that.
I’m not familiar with Connery saying that about Broccoli, but it sounds like a joke to me. I don’t think Connery was seriously suggesting that a producer of the films (who wasn’t an actor) should play the part of a Bond villain (if that’s what the quote is supposed to be alluding to). It was probably a throwaway line to some journalist who was asking stupid questions.
I found the PTS to be boring and tedious with a really horrible sense of pacing. To my eyes it consisted of several uninteresting bits (a boring car chase, a boring motorbike chase, a boring train sequence) strung together with interspersed bits of dialog. Eve also gets the dubious award of worst field agent ever.
The titles were typically competent; I miss Binder's surreal nudes but Kleinmann has a knack for using imagery from the film in interesting ways; if you know what to look for, the title sequence pretty much summarizes the whole movie.
The title song by Adele was one of the best in a long, long, long time and easily surpasses the uneven You Know My Name or the fingers on chalkboard horror that was Quantum of Solace.
Bardem's Silva is an interesting character but I hesitate to equate him with the great Bond villains because he is so tragic and damaged. Given his motivation, its very easy to see his side of the argument and he comes across as insane rather than evil like Goldfinger or Drax. Take Alec Trevaylian, add in a pinch of Electra King, a dash of betrayal and pathos and you end up with Silva.
As mentioned previously, Eve is an amusing character but its easy to see why she decides field work is not for her; still, she manages to bring some humor to the proceedings and is actually capable of eliciting some measure of chemistry with Craig (no small feat).
Severine is the utter description of the woefully underused, two dimensional sacrificial lamb; more than once I was struck by how similar her situation, backstory and final fate seemed to match that of Andrea from TMWTGG.
Ralph Fiennes' Mallory was easily the best and most interesting of the new characters and I really liked how he is used and the spot he finally ends up inhabiting. The script does a nice job of gradually peeling back his layers and turning him from an apparent bureaucrat to an honorable and upstanding person.
Ben Whishaw does the most with his time as the new Q though when it comes to characters, the barely old enough to shave computer whiz kid who doesn't know as much as he thinks he does has become as cliche as the mustache twirling villain and I found the presence of such a character in a Bond movie a little off-putting. The gear he gives Bond is also uninspired and I didn't care for or agree with his exploding pen line.
Judi Dench's M has always been problematic during the Craig movies for me and she is particularly so here, exhibiting poor judgment again and again and generally appearing helpless and out of place. Her explanation of who Silva was and what she did to him was particularly cold (as was her disregard for Bronson at the start of the film) Quite honestly, I felt zero empathy or emotion for her at the end and only found myself thinking her final fate was long overdue.
As for the man at the center of it all, Craig has always been a tough sell for me as Bond but at least he finally seems at ease with the role and even manages to successfully deliver the quips and enjoy himself with his leading ladies. Despite the serious goings on, he takes himself a little less seriously this time around and manages to pause every now and then and even give the occasional virtual wink at the camera. He does a great job with his expressions during the fight with the thugs at the casino in Macau and I liked his complete lack of nostalgia towards his childhood home and reaction at what was done to his Aston Martin (both very Bond-like). Well done and Bravo. Welcome to the fold Dan; keep up the good work and continue to work towards making me a believer.
Visually, the film is beautiful to look at and has some of the best cinematography of the series. In particular the scenes in Shanghai, Macau and Silva's island were all striking. I found the cinematography for much of the film to evoke a strong feeling of stereoscopy and depth into the screen. I know the purists will wince at this, but Roger Deakins' placement of objects in the foreground and the manner in which characters seem to often walk towards the screen makes Skyfall prime material for a high-end 3D post-conversion and I'd love to see the filmmakers try something like that as a little bonus for the inevitable home release (at the very least, I'll be curious to see how my TV's 2D>3D converter handles the movie).
The story of Skyfall while hardly original ultimately works for me because it pushes us further and further away from Paul Haggis' wretched deconstruction and self analysis that plauged Craig's first two films. For all the the peeks into Bond's background and the occasional dip into questioning his relevance, Bond himself stays the course and doesn't constantly need to get drunk or have someone constantly remind him that he isn't as smart as he thinks he is. By the end of the film, Sam Mendes has managed to get all the pieces back where they belong on the board: we have a Moneypenny (and we get why she should never be on the field), we have Q (who will hopefully realize that a few gadgets aren't a bad thing and that you can't solve all of the world's ills with a keyboard) and we have a far more recognizable M who doesn't have to mother his agents to death. Even the offices look comfortingly familiar, right down to the double doors.
Looking forward, I hope we get a story where the stakes are a bit higher; an ongoing problem with the Craig films for me has been that the villains goals are always so modest. I also hope we get a more proper villain who commits acts of evil because he (or she) is evil and not out of some misguided sense of revenge. Lastly, lets keep our fingers crossed that the filmmakers don't feel the need to reset things again anytime soon.
As an outsider regarding this, I'd definitely say that I think Osris has definitely got the wrong end of the stick regarding minigeff's comment. To me he's most certainly referring to Connery - I thought that when I first saw the post & I still believe that having re-read it.
Really enjoyed reading this review. Nicely written & sums up a lot of my own thinking -{
She will be a hard act to follow Ralph Fienns will have his work cut out.
I'll give his comment the benefit of the doubt, then.
So true.
Thank God.
The only original touch to it was the use of that crane/tractor thingy that was used to stop the train from uncoupling.
I wonder why Hamilton and Hunt were jettisoned by the producers. They were great directors, and Hamilton was the classic “Bond director”—if anyone should have been kept it was him.
Yes, the 'w@nker' was aimed at Connery.
Connery said the comment about Cubby during a talk show interview, I think it's in the 'Everything or Nothing' documentary.
At the time, Connery had fallen out big time with Cubby over money. This was also said at a time where Cubby wasn't well and not strong enough to make a public defence to Connery's thoughts and opinions.
So, for attacking a gravely ill kind generous guy who made Connery the household name he is today, Connery is in my book as a w@nker.
Luckily, Connery and Cubby did make up before Cubby passed away, but I can't help but think that the very public attack and a poorly guy was way below the belt.
And don't panic Osris, if I intend to call you a w@nker I'll make it nice a clear for ya, though I can't see any reason why I'd need to, you bring quite a bit of discussion and debate to the forum, and dare I say entertainment, which is what a forum should be all about.
MG -{
Ps, I love this interview, shows the true caring side of the haggis munching rug wearing tossbag;
http://youtu.be/Jank-3gXSD0
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
Hamilton was preparing to direct "Superman" at the time TSWLM was being set up, though tax reasons ultimately prevented his doing so, and was unavailable.
I have no doubt Ralph Fiennes will make a fine M, Given his status as an actor, I think it's likely that the prominence of M in the films will remain as high as it was during the tenure of Judi Dench.
From what we've heard/seen/read, Connery does indeed seem like a bit of a toss-pot. But the biggest tosser of all, IMO, seems to be Kevin McClory. The guy wasted his entire life trying to sue and screw the bond team over. Maybe with reason (we don't truly know), but he spent his entire life doing it, until the day he died. Now that is the ultimate bond villain.
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
I'm glad to hear it.
That interview is highly edited to make it look like he's saying something that he isn't. I'd love to see the whole thing to see what was actually said.
My bad mr Connery.
Still a w@nker though.
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
Here is an article relating to this subject.
Just how inaccurate were the hacking scenes in Skyfall?
http://io9.com/5960384/just-how-inaccurate-were-the-hacking-scenes-in-skyfall?utm_source=io9.com&utm_medium=recirculation&utm_campaign=recirculation
That's good to hear.