Ejector seat button! HA. Though wait: that means this is the Aston Martin from Goldfinger, not the one he won in Casino Royale. Which is the one that Q gave to Sean Connery, which hasn’t happened. Or has it? So where does Skyfall fit in the timeline? Are Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace set before Dr No, and now Skyfall’s after Die Another Day? QUESTIONS.
Ah, Skyfall’s a house. I wonder if they came up with the Bondian title and then tried to find a way to shove it into the film.
Clever! Thanks for your great review.
As for me, I saw it at midnight, I thought it was a powerful movie, great plot.. The fact that he wanted them to find out... But I'll have to see it again.
A lot of newspapwer sort of said that it wasn't as engagning, that the bad guy wasn't scary enough, that you weren't truly scared for Bond.
If you can't trust a Swiss banker, what's the world come to?
While I don't agree that Skyfall is the best Bond film, nor even the best Daniel Craig Bond (that honor still goes to Casino Royale), it's a very good Bond film and certainly in the top ten.
The film's strengths are the superb acting, Roger Deakins' cinematography, Tom Ford's excellent attire, and Sam Mendes' generally effective direction.
Weaknesses include a script that seems a pastiche of Goldeneye, The Dark Knight and Straw Dogs, music that is for the most part forgettable, and an uneven momentum that has the film laboring in parts and rushing in others, such as some action sequences that seemed a little flat. This also appears to be the third time we've had a "we're starting over" Bond film with Craig. It's getting as bad as all those Star Trek episodes where the Vulcan or robot learns the value of being a human being only to start over again the next episode.
The in-jokes, such as the Aston Martin, more or less worked for me, though as people have posted, the continuity requires a bit of ret-conning to fit into this new timeline. Better jokes came out of the situations and characters, and, of course, the great Albert Finney and Judi Dench had the funniest lines.
Craig is definitely owning the role and seems ready to accept that humor, even grim-faced, plays an important part, though I found it interesting that aging kept being bandied about as a thematic element when Craig is hardly older than many of the actors were when they took over the role. He has a more rugged look than most of the previous Bond actors, of course, but the filmmakers also didn't seem interested in doing more Hollywood tricks to conceal it, and rather than look tough and weathered in a manly way, he looked tired in a lot of scenes. That's owing in part to the story, of course, which is squarely aimed at 20-somethings who see themselves as the new age and 40-somethings who worry that they are fading fast.
Javier Bardem's Raoul Silva could have used a bit more screen time and machinations, as in many ways he was just a re-tread of the Joker, and the way that Severine was dispatched seemed too quick and jaded -- in particular, Craig delivery of Bond's line about Scotch was more callous than it needed to be, especially since apparently he could have done more to save her since the cavalry arrived just moments later. The scene lacked the tension and remorse it should have, as Bond is supposed to be cool, not cold. Silva also didn't seem to have the menace in that scene he should have.
Ben Whishaw is fine as a Gen-Y Q . . .predictable, but fine, and Ralph Fiennes will make a great M, though I will miss Judi Dench. I'm neither here nor there yet about Moneypenny, though I find it interesting that at the same time they make no bones about the mutual attraction, the filmmakers still fall on creating an interracial relationship frought with problems, seeming at once both progressive in its racial politics that there is a possibility and regressive that it will never be fully realized. I understand that Bond has never had an issue with race in this regard, but I'm reflecting more on the fodder that this casting might cause.
I wasn't disappointed by Skyfall, but I was expecting more. It's miles ahead of any of the Brosnan Bonds but after four years of waiting, I'd hoped for an even stronger entry . . . the hype that it's the best Bond film of all time will continue, and this movie will make huge profits. I'm glad because there will be more. I also think the film will grow on me the more times I watch it.
Weaknesses include a script that seems a pastiche of Goldeneye, The Dark Knight and Straw Dogs
And, IMHO, "The World Is Not Enough"- similarities include the whole plot hinging on M's actions before the film even starts, the villain (who regards M as a mother figure) seeking revenge on M through MI6 and attacking their building thus forcing M & co to retreat to a temporary HQ, making sexual advances on 007 while he's tied to a chair...
Finally saw Skyfall today. I deliberately avoided reading any other AJB reviews before I saw it, so I have no idea if any of you share my feelings about the movie. I need some time to mull it over before I give my full opinion, but a few initial thoughts:
- it was a very good Bond film, but not the best ever (or even the best Craig Bond - I thought Casino Royale was better)
- great performances by all, especially Craig, Dench and Bardem
- loved the Austin Martin DB5
- the young Q worked for me
- Albert Finney was wasted - could have done without his character
- the ending dragged on too long (except the scene at the very end setting up future Bond films - that really made me smile!)
These are some of my first impressions. I'll give a fuller review later.
Weaknesses include a script that seems a pastiche of Goldeneye, The Dark Knight and Straw Dogs
And, IMHO, "The World Is Not Enough"- similarities include the whole plot hinging on M's actions before the film even starts, the villain (who regards M as a mother figure) seeking revenge on M through MI6 and attacking their building thus forcing M & co to retreat to a temporary HQ, making sexual advances on 007 while he's tied to a chair...
Absolutely -- should have included that on the list.
I too was avoiding AJB until I could see the movie. Now that I have, I have to say I'm a bit underwhelmed. I'm afraid I'm becoming a grumpy old man and I'll never be happy.
The story was great, but as an action movie, it was only mediocre. After the PTS, I felt the film was too bogged down in the whole cat and mouse game. I never felt any real tension and grew weary of the political confrontations. I kept thinking that this was the type of Bond story that Len Deighton would write.
Was hanging on hoping for a signature Bond event, the kind of thing you'd only see in 007 film, the incredible stunts, the clever action scenes, the inimitable Bond moments, but they never came to pass. Yeah there was a fistfight, a gunfight, and even a Bond getting a lift from a CGI komodo dragon, but they all fell flat to me.
I certainly give the filmmakers kudos for style and visual grandeur, but I never felt I saw enough of Bond doing more than wandering from hallway to hallway.
I like the story, especially the peek into Bond's childhood...loved the homages to previous films like the DB5, exploding pen, and the traditional M office.
And I'm getting really tired of these endings...I'm starting to feel cheated. With CR's "Bond, James Bond", QOS's "I never left" and now SF's "Let's get to work" coupled with the gunbarrels being stuck at the end, I feel like I'm being prepped for a Bond movie just in time for the ending credits to roll. And then when I show up for the next Bond movie, I feel like I'm watching an extend PTS for a movie two years down the road. Arrgh!
Oh well...in short, definitely worth seeing. But I don't see myself dashing back to the theaters for another viewing. I'll wait for the DVD.
I didn't expect Skyfall to live up to Casino, but I feel it surpassed it. I'll keep this short. Yes, there were some forced quips. The story and ending didn't leave you wondering about anyone's intentions like Casino. They even explained things a little more in the plot.
But this movie gives us a very complete Bond. Loved how it brought us back to Bond's roots. So cleverly done. And the cinematography was magnificent.
I finally saw Skyfall today and I really liked it. Comparing it to the other Craig Bond movies I would say it was not as good as CR but better than QOS by a long shot. Craig's bond still lacks a little of the panache that I look for in a Bond movie. I am glad to see the producers gradually reintroducing more of the classic bond elements into the film. I hope they keep them coming. I will definitely be heading back to the cinema to see it again, this time at an Imax theater.
"A blunt instrument wielded by a Government department. Hard, ruthless, sardonic, fatalistic. He likes gambling, golf, fast motor cars. All his movements are relaxed and economical". Ian Fleming
I am a die hard traditionalist. I am the easiest person to please, yet also the easiest person to piss off.
Thus Skyfall, like Quantum and Casino before it, made me want to stand up and leave from the very first second. You all know why. Instead of getting me in the mood, instead satisfying my desire to sit down consume a classic bond movie, it goes ahead and throws tradition out the door as fast as it possibly can.
Bond is bigger than Sam Mendes, when he is dead, Bond will still be saving the world. So Sam goes and makes a Sam Mendes movie with Bond elements, instead of a Bond movie with Sam Mendes elements. But i'm being to harsh on Sam, its not his fault that Martin Campell and Marc Forester slashed the hearts of traditionalist before him. They left the door wide open, he just decided not to shut it.
I want to love these movies, I want to so badly. I love the more Flemming-esque Bond that Daniel Craig portrays. But you know who else I love even more than Ian Flemming? Cubby Broccoli. The movies themselves have taken on a life of their own. Even when we ran out of books and Flemming titles long ago, the movies kept going, feeding us the same formula that we know we are paying to see.
But the traditionalist inside me cringes when the formula doesn't match up. Coke came out with New Coke, remember how well that went? What makes Skyfall push me over the edge is that it was falsely advertised as a more classic bond film. That they explicitly told me that they would serve me a classic bond film, and sucker punched me at the very start. The only difference between Skyfall and Coke, is that Coke Classic contains what it advertises.
I am a die hard traditionalist. I am the easiest person to please, yet also the easiest person to piss off.
Thus Skyfall, like Quantum and Casino before it, made me want to stand up and leave from the very first second. You all know why. Instead of getting me in the mood, instead satisfying my desire to sit down consume a classic bond movie, it goes ahead and throws tradition out the door as fast as it possibly can.
Bond is bigger than Sam Mendes, when he is dead, Bond will still be saving the world. So Sam goes and makes a Sam Mendes movie with Bond elements, instead of a Bond movie with Sam Mendes elements. But i'm being to harsh on Sam, its not his fault that Martin Campell and Marc Forester slashed the hearts of traditionalist before him. They left the door wide open, he just decided not to shut it.
I want to love these movies, I want to so badly. I love the more Flemming-esque Bond that Daniel Craig portrays. But you know who else I love even more than Ian Flemming? Cubby Broccoli. The movies themselves have taken on a life of their own. Even when we ran out of books and Flemming titles long ago, the movies kept going, feeding us the same formula that we know we are paying to see.
But the traditionalist inside me cringes when the formula doesn't match up. Coke came out with New Coke, remember how well that went? What makes Skyfall push me over the edge is that it was falsely advertised as a more classic bond film. That they explicitly told me that they would serve me a classic bond film, and sucker punched me at the very start. The only difference between Skyfall and Coke, is that Coke Classic contains what it advertises.
I do hope you stick around Luck and Fate. Traditionalists are a thin on the ground of late. Expect to be roundy critisied
the reboot is very much "Well it's called the future, Get used to it " Many love it, and those of us who Love the old
elements of Bond are basicially told that we are "Out of touch" with the new age and that The old films wouldn't work
today. So on with the" Jason Bourne Lite " version of Bond.
Although with Skyfall I think they did try and Blend some of the old with the new, and It worked for me, (Not brilliantly)
But leaving it open to get back to a more traditional Film the next time out.
( I'm sure by now Bond is Bond, and we don't needanymore life learning lessons ).
I tend to agree with 00-Agent :
it was not as good as CR but better than QOS by a long shot.
So I feel Better than I have for a long time with the direction of the New series of Bond films. I think in years to come
Skyfall will be seen as a transition movie, back to a more traditional but still contemporary Film.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
and the way that Severine was dispatched seemed too quick and jaded -- in particular, Craig delivery of Bond's line about Scotch was more callous than it needed to be, especially since apparently he could have done more to save her since the cavalry arrived just moments later. The scene lacked the tension and remorse it should have, as Bond is supposed to be cool, not cold
I can see how you think this, but to me I thought he sounded like he was trying to put a brave face on the situation… trying to show Silva that he wasn’t shocked by her death.
Skyfall will be seen as a transition movie, back to a more traditional but still contemporary Film.
Hopefully, but I think the producers have got the “experimenting” bug now, and we will see more mini-reboots within each film. I don’t think we will ever get back to Bond as we knew him in the pre-Brosnan era.
At least Bond 24 will have M's old office back, which gives me some hope that some traditional Bond elements might yet be salvaged in this ongoing “experiment”.
and the way that Severine was dispatched seemed too quick and jaded -- in particular, Craig delivery of Bond's line about Scotch was more callous than it needed to be, especially since apparently he could have done more to save her since the cavalry arrived just moments later. The scene lacked the tension and remorse it should have, as Bond is supposed to be cool, not cold
I can see how you think this, but to me I thought he sounded like he was trying to put a brave face on the situation… trying to show Silva that he wasn’t shocked by her death.
Yeah I think that is correct, Silva pretty much was belittling him for being a mess and practically weak etc
and the way that Severine was dispatched seemed too quick and jaded -- in particular, Craig delivery of Bond's line about Scotch was more callous than it needed to be, especially since apparently he could have done more to save her since the cavalry arrived just moments later. The scene lacked the tension and remorse it should have, as Bond is supposed to be cool, not cold
osris wrote :
I can see how you think this, but to me I thought he sounded like he was trying to put a brave face on the situation… trying to show Silva that he wasn’t shocked by her death.
I agree I've re-watched this scene recently and think Bond was puting on a show for Silva.
( Bond couldn't be THAT Cold, even given some of his recent exploits )
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
I have been off this site for almost a year, trying to avoid spoilers. Also managed to avoid the trailers, thank goodness as the longer one damn near told the whole story. Learned my lesson with Casino Royale!
Got lucky saw the film in IMAX with only half a dozen other folks, almost a private screening.
I thought Napoleon Plural was dead on with his review, though after reading some of the praise - prehaps I have softened my own negative feelings. I am shocked that no one has mentioned that this movie was so darn dark - not in theme - but too much of it was literally filmed too dark. That's just not right for a Bond film, okay for "Road to Perdition". Had a heck of a time seeing what was going on.
Pre-title sequence, long but good. Liked Eve, but can live without "Moneypenny". New Q, could do without him too, but better than I expected.
Tiny radio and PPK/S with derma sense grip, stupid, unecessary. DB5 with ejector seat, "You must be joking..."
Bottom line seems to be the end of the movie is the best part, we now have Bond back to where he started 50 years ago. Doesn't seem to me much of an accomplishment for four years of waiting.
A friend of mine had the Film totally spoiled for him
( he'd asked for no info until he'd seen it )
when having a drink a Girl just Blurted out the end
of the film.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
I was lucky not to have the film spoiled, so other than the "it's Bond's best" hype had no real idea of the plot.
PS:
Like some others I forgot Albert Finney was in the film, until he showed up. Took awhile to recognise him as I still think of him as Tom Jones or Poriot. Thank goodness they didn't give the Kincaid role to "Big Tam", of course he wouldn't have done it - but in that alternate universe where such things can happen .. it would have been horrible.
I have been thinking since I watched the film; now that M and Moneypenny have returned - does this mean that at some stage in the DC re-boot universe, Bond will meet and marry Contessa Teresa (again)?! How many of you think that would be a good idea in the next film? DC has got the skills to pull it off.
Looking at the film again, I've noticed when Bond drives away
from his Lock-up in the Aston. He dosen't Lock the door.
Leaving all his stuff to be stolen ,sold at markets around London
Or ending up on Ebay. )
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
With Bond being declared Dead and his flat sold, His belongings
put into storage. We have to asume his house keeper May doesn't
exist in this Bond universe or M would of said something.
Although I do love the bit of banter between M and Bond at
her Home. I found it interesting when M says something about you know the rules of the game. Made me think of the
theme to CR "You know my Name "
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Granted I've only had one viewing, but this movie was only good for me, not great.
The movie just didn't really feel that much like a Bond movie. M not being the unquestioned authority throughout just didn't sit right for me. They somehow managed to use the Bond theme in a seemingly clunky and tacked on manner that didn't really fit with the rhythm of the movie. Far too many of the "homages" felt more like put downs and/or felt tacked on. If the main characters in this movie weren't named M or James Bond, I'd have said this was a serious action spy movie that was making fun of Bond and not paying tribute to Bond.
Also one major annoyance that just kept getting bigger is: are we really supposed to believe that Silva planned EVERYTHING? If so, that easily makes the list of the most unbelievable plot points ever in a Bond movie.
Ultimately it was the actors who made this movie compelling. To that end, this movie could have really used far more Severine. Downright captivating every moment she was on screen.
Also considering Mallory is supervising M at the beginning, isn't the ending a demotion for him?
Granted I've only had one viewing, but this movie was only good for me, not great.
The movie just didn't really feel that much like a Bond movie. M not being the unquestioned authority throughout just didn't sit right for me. They somehow managed to use the Bond theme in a seemingly clunky and tacked on manner that didn't really fit with the rhythm of the movie. Far too many of the "homages" felt more like put downs and/or felt tacked on. If the main characters in this movie weren't named M or James Bond, I'd have said this was a serious action spy movie that was making fun of Bond and not paying tribute to Bond.
Also one major annoyance that just kept getting bigger is: are we really supposed to believe that Silva planned EVERYTHING? If so, that easily makes the list of the most unbelievable plot points ever in a Bond movie.
Ultimately it was the actors who made this movie compelling. To that end, this movie could have really used far more Severine. Downright captivating every moment she was on screen.
Also considering Mallory is supervising M at the beginning, isn't the ending a demotion for him?
I think your assessment of the film is completely accurate. This movie was good, actually really good, but not quite great. Casino Royale is still going to be tops in my list of Craig's Bond films.
Looking at the film again, I've noticed when Bond drives away
from his Lock-up in the Aston. He dosen't Lock the door.
Leaving all his stuff to be stolen ,sold at markets around London
Or ending up on Ebay. )
Would YOU steal from James Bond? )
I think you have just exposed the plot of Bond 24 - 007 goes on a personal mission to get his stuff back. Bond films have drawn inspiration from N by NW, Shaft, Enter the Dragon, Star Wars, Bourne etc. Next time - Taken ;-)
I excused it with:
1. With a bunch of killers after you putting in the miles is more important.
2. When Silva's men got there it would save them breaking down the door.
3. An MI6 crew would arrive soon to pick up the car and secure the area.
I received a home made Birthday Card today. The front picture was a screen grab of the tube train plunging towards the camera. On the front it says "NOT IN SERVICE"
That would explain it being empty.
A bit unusual to move surplus stock in the rush hour, but I suppose it could have developed a fault.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,749Chief of Staff
I received a home made Birthday Card today. The front picture was a screen grab of the tube train plunging towards the camera. On the front it says "NOT IN SERVICE"
That would explain it being empty.
A bit unusual to move surplus stock in the rush hour, but I suppose it could have developed a fault.
Or perhaps Silva arranged for it to be moved via his computer..?..he seems more than capable of doing much more than that with one
Silva is unbeatable on xBox live.
So moving a train wouldn't be a problem.
The only thing I do find odd, Is Today with suicide Bombers It was a
bit lax of Bond to allow Silva the time to Move his hand to the Transmitter
In the first Place.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
I have been thinking since I watched the film; now that M and Moneypenny have returned - does this mean that at some stage in the DC re-boot universe, Bond will meet and marry Contessa Teresa (again)?! How many of you think that would be a good idea in the next film? DC has got the skills to pull it off.
Could it also mean that all the Bond films pre-Craig woud be remade?
Also one major annoyance that just kept getting bigger is: are we really supposed to believe that Silva planned EVERYTHING? If so, that easily makes the list of the most unbelievable plot points ever in a Bond movie.
Very good point.
How he planned his escape and the delivery of the police uniform to himself in the London Underground, from a glass prison cell with no radio communication to his cohorts is beyond me.
Also, how did he know the exact place to plant, well in advance, the explosive that blew the train up? How did he know Bond would follow him down that tunnel for it to need to happen? Totally ludicrous.
Comments
Clever! Thanks for your great review.
As for me, I saw it at midnight, I thought it was a powerful movie, great plot.. The fact that he wanted them to find out... But I'll have to see it again.
A lot of newspapwer sort of said that it wasn't as engagning, that the bad guy wasn't scary enough, that you weren't truly scared for Bond.
The film's strengths are the superb acting, Roger Deakins' cinematography, Tom Ford's excellent attire, and Sam Mendes' generally effective direction.
Weaknesses include a script that seems a pastiche of Goldeneye, The Dark Knight and Straw Dogs, music that is for the most part forgettable, and an uneven momentum that has the film laboring in parts and rushing in others, such as some action sequences that seemed a little flat. This also appears to be the third time we've had a "we're starting over" Bond film with Craig. It's getting as bad as all those Star Trek episodes where the Vulcan or robot learns the value of being a human being only to start over again the next episode.
The in-jokes, such as the Aston Martin, more or less worked for me, though as people have posted, the continuity requires a bit of ret-conning to fit into this new timeline. Better jokes came out of the situations and characters, and, of course, the great Albert Finney and Judi Dench had the funniest lines.
Craig is definitely owning the role and seems ready to accept that humor, even grim-faced, plays an important part, though I found it interesting that aging kept being bandied about as a thematic element when Craig is hardly older than many of the actors were when they took over the role. He has a more rugged look than most of the previous Bond actors, of course, but the filmmakers also didn't seem interested in doing more Hollywood tricks to conceal it, and rather than look tough and weathered in a manly way, he looked tired in a lot of scenes. That's owing in part to the story, of course, which is squarely aimed at 20-somethings who see themselves as the new age and 40-somethings who worry that they are fading fast.
Javier Bardem's Raoul Silva could have used a bit more screen time and machinations, as in many ways he was just a re-tread of the Joker, and the way that Severine was dispatched seemed too quick and jaded -- in particular, Craig delivery of Bond's line about Scotch was more callous than it needed to be, especially since apparently he could have done more to save her since the cavalry arrived just moments later. The scene lacked the tension and remorse it should have, as Bond is supposed to be cool, not cold. Silva also didn't seem to have the menace in that scene he should have.
Ben Whishaw is fine as a Gen-Y Q . . .predictable, but fine, and Ralph Fiennes will make a great M, though I will miss Judi Dench. I'm neither here nor there yet about Moneypenny, though I find it interesting that at the same time they make no bones about the mutual attraction, the filmmakers still fall on creating an interracial relationship frought with problems, seeming at once both progressive in its racial politics that there is a possibility and regressive that it will never be fully realized. I understand that Bond has never had an issue with race in this regard, but I'm reflecting more on the fodder that this casting might cause.
I wasn't disappointed by Skyfall, but I was expecting more. It's miles ahead of any of the Brosnan Bonds but after four years of waiting, I'd hoped for an even stronger entry . . . the hype that it's the best Bond film of all time will continue, and this movie will make huge profits. I'm glad because there will be more. I also think the film will grow on me the more times I watch it.
And, IMHO, "The World Is Not Enough"- similarities include the whole plot hinging on M's actions before the film even starts, the villain (who regards M as a mother figure) seeking revenge on M through MI6 and attacking their building thus forcing M & co to retreat to a temporary HQ, making sexual advances on 007 while he's tied to a chair...
- it was a very good Bond film, but not the best ever (or even the best Craig Bond - I thought Casino Royale was better)
- great performances by all, especially Craig, Dench and Bardem
- loved the Austin Martin DB5
- the young Q worked for me
- Albert Finney was wasted - could have done without his character
- the ending dragged on too long (except the scene at the very end setting up future Bond films - that really made me smile!)
These are some of my first impressions. I'll give a fuller review later.
The story was great, but as an action movie, it was only mediocre. After the PTS, I felt the film was too bogged down in the whole cat and mouse game. I never felt any real tension and grew weary of the political confrontations. I kept thinking that this was the type of Bond story that Len Deighton would write.
Was hanging on hoping for a signature Bond event, the kind of thing you'd only see in 007 film, the incredible stunts, the clever action scenes, the inimitable Bond moments, but they never came to pass. Yeah there was a fistfight, a gunfight, and even a Bond getting a lift from a CGI komodo dragon, but they all fell flat to me.
I certainly give the filmmakers kudos for style and visual grandeur, but I never felt I saw enough of Bond doing more than wandering from hallway to hallway.
I like the story, especially the peek into Bond's childhood...loved the homages to previous films like the DB5, exploding pen, and the traditional M office.
And I'm getting really tired of these endings...I'm starting to feel cheated. With CR's "Bond, James Bond", QOS's "I never left" and now SF's "Let's get to work" coupled with the gunbarrels being stuck at the end, I feel like I'm being prepped for a Bond movie just in time for the ending credits to roll. And then when I show up for the next Bond movie, I feel like I'm watching an extend PTS for a movie two years down the road. Arrgh!
Oh well...in short, definitely worth seeing. But I don't see myself dashing back to the theaters for another viewing. I'll wait for the DVD.
But this movie gives us a very complete Bond. Loved how it brought us back to Bond's roots. So cleverly done. And the cinematography was magnificent.
Thus Skyfall, like Quantum and Casino before it, made me want to stand up and leave from the very first second. You all know why. Instead of getting me in the mood, instead satisfying my desire to sit down consume a classic bond movie, it goes ahead and throws tradition out the door as fast as it possibly can.
Bond is bigger than Sam Mendes, when he is dead, Bond will still be saving the world. So Sam goes and makes a Sam Mendes movie with Bond elements, instead of a Bond movie with Sam Mendes elements. But i'm being to harsh on Sam, its not his fault that Martin Campell and Marc Forester slashed the hearts of traditionalist before him. They left the door wide open, he just decided not to shut it.
I want to love these movies, I want to so badly. I love the more Flemming-esque Bond that Daniel Craig portrays. But you know who else I love even more than Ian Flemming? Cubby Broccoli. The movies themselves have taken on a life of their own. Even when we ran out of books and Flemming titles long ago, the movies kept going, feeding us the same formula that we know we are paying to see.
But the traditionalist inside me cringes when the formula doesn't match up. Coke came out with New Coke, remember how well that went? What makes Skyfall push me over the edge is that it was falsely advertised as a more classic bond film. That they explicitly told me that they would serve me a classic bond film, and sucker punched me at the very start. The only difference between Skyfall and Coke, is that Coke Classic contains what it advertises.
I do hope you stick around Luck and Fate. Traditionalists are a thin on the ground of late. Expect to be roundy critisied
the reboot is very much "Well it's called the future, Get used to it " Many love it, and those of us who Love the old
elements of Bond are basicially told that we are "Out of touch" with the new age and that The old films wouldn't work
today. So on with the" Jason Bourne Lite " version of Bond.
Although with Skyfall I think they did try and Blend some of the old with the new, and It worked for me, (Not brilliantly)
But leaving it open to get back to a more traditional Film the next time out.
( I'm sure by now Bond is Bond, and we don't needanymore life learning lessons ).
I tend to agree with 00-Agent : So I feel Better than I have for a long time with the direction of the New series of Bond films. I think in years to come
Skyfall will be seen as a transition movie, back to a more traditional but still contemporary Film.
I can see how you think this, but to me I thought he sounded like he was trying to put a brave face on the situation… trying to show Silva that he wasn’t shocked by her death.
Hopefully, but I think the producers have got the “experimenting” bug now, and we will see more mini-reboots within each film. I don’t think we will ever get back to Bond as we knew him in the pre-Brosnan era.
At least Bond 24 will have M's old office back, which gives me some hope that some traditional Bond elements might yet be salvaged in this ongoing “experiment”.
Yeah I think that is correct, Silva pretty much was belittling him for being a mess and practically weak etc
osris wrote :
I agree I've re-watched this scene recently and think Bond was puting on a show for Silva.
( Bond couldn't be THAT Cold, even given some of his recent exploits )
Got lucky saw the film in IMAX with only half a dozen other folks, almost a private screening.
I thought Napoleon Plural was dead on with his review, though after reading some of the praise - prehaps I have softened my own negative feelings. I am shocked that no one has mentioned that this movie was so darn dark - not in theme - but too much of it was literally filmed too dark. That's just not right for a Bond film, okay for "Road to Perdition". Had a heck of a time seeing what was going on.
Pre-title sequence, long but good. Liked Eve, but can live without "Moneypenny". New Q, could do without him too, but better than I expected.
Tiny radio and PPK/S with derma sense grip, stupid, unecessary. DB5 with ejector seat, "You must be joking..."
Bottom line seems to be the end of the movie is the best part, we now have Bond back to where he started 50 years ago. Doesn't seem to me much of an accomplishment for four years of waiting.
Bond’s Beretta
The Handguns of Ian Fleming's James Bond
( he'd asked for no info until he'd seen it )
when having a drink a Girl just Blurted out the end
of the film.
PS:
Like some others I forgot Albert Finney was in the film, until he showed up. Took awhile to recognise him as I still think of him as Tom Jones or Poriot. Thank goodness they didn't give the Kincaid role to "Big Tam", of course he wouldn't have done it - but in that alternate universe where such things can happen .. it would have been horrible.
Bond’s Beretta
The Handguns of Ian Fleming's James Bond
from his Lock-up in the Aston. He dosen't Lock the door.
Leaving all his stuff to be stolen ,sold at markets around London
Or ending up on Ebay.
put into storage. We have to asume his house keeper May doesn't
exist in this Bond universe or M would of said something.
Although I do love the bit of banter between M and Bond at
her Home. I found it interesting when M says something about
you know the rules of the game. Made me think of the
theme to CR "You know my Name "
Granted I've only had one viewing, but this movie was only good for me, not great.
The movie just didn't really feel that much like a Bond movie. M not being the unquestioned authority throughout just didn't sit right for me. They somehow managed to use the Bond theme in a seemingly clunky and tacked on manner that didn't really fit with the rhythm of the movie. Far too many of the "homages" felt more like put downs and/or felt tacked on. If the main characters in this movie weren't named M or James Bond, I'd have said this was a serious action spy movie that was making fun of Bond and not paying tribute to Bond.
Also one major annoyance that just kept getting bigger is: are we really supposed to believe that Silva planned EVERYTHING? If so, that easily makes the list of the most unbelievable plot points ever in a Bond movie.
Ultimately it was the actors who made this movie compelling. To that end, this movie could have really used far more Severine. Downright captivating every moment she was on screen.
Also considering Mallory is supervising M at the beginning, isn't the ending a demotion for him?
I think your assessment of the film is completely accurate. This movie was good, actually really good, but not quite great. Casino Royale is still going to be tops in my list of Craig's Bond films.
Would YOU steal from James Bond?
I think you have just exposed the plot of Bond 24 - 007 goes on a personal mission to get his stuff back. Bond films have drawn inspiration from N by NW, Shaft, Enter the Dragon, Star Wars, Bourne etc. Next time - Taken ;-)
I excused it with:
1. With a bunch of killers after you putting in the miles is more important.
2. When Silva's men got there it would save them breaking down the door.
3. An MI6 crew would arrive soon to pick up the car and secure the area.
4. Let's just look at that DB5.
I received a home made Birthday Card today. The front picture was a screen grab of the tube train plunging towards the camera. On the front it says "NOT IN SERVICE"
That would explain it being empty.
A bit unusual to move surplus stock in the rush hour, but I suppose it could have developed a fault.
Or perhaps Silva arranged for it to be moved via his computer..?..he seems more than capable of doing much more than that with one
So moving a train wouldn't be a problem.
The only thing I do find odd, Is Today with suicide Bombers It was a
bit lax of Bond to allow Silva the time to Move his hand to the Transmitter
In the first Place.
Could it also mean that all the Bond films pre-Craig woud be remade?
Very good point.
How he planned his escape and the delivery of the police uniform to himself in the London Underground, from a glass prison cell with no radio communication to his cohorts is beyond me.
Also, how did he know the exact place to plant, well in advance, the explosive that blew the train up? How did he know Bond would follow him down that tunnel for it to need to happen? Totally ludicrous.
Lol