SKYFALL. -HOW DO YOU SEE IT NOW?

Eric_007Eric_007 Mobile
in Skyfall Posts: 26
Morning Fellow Agents

Whats the last thing you remember of Skyfall ,what did you think of it when you first saw it? It was November right around the 21st my birthday and i'd been so excited to watch it. Why? because i wanted to see continuity. I'd been addicted to the Adrenaline Rushed ,Fire stuffed,emotional darkness of Quantum of Solace so going into Skyfall thats what i expected and i got something totally different. I got a More Experienced , Polished and Flashy James Bond. First Question that came to mind was is this a Sequel ? Does it take place years after Quantum of Solace or Is this a Big reboot? and walking out of the theater my initial feeling was ehhhh it wasn't all that. But now that i look back in retrospect and After Spectre tied it all together i finally saw what everybody was looking at. Craigs Bond is all about progress and we always get to see a different part of his career we've seen the birth of it and with Skyfall we get to see him become the Bond of old with Money Penny , His first time meeting Q and the loss of his mother figure M. Some will Argue that Craigs Bond keeps rebooting and never gets started....that my friends is a lie. Craig Bond already started but people never see the bigger picture. Every Craig Bond Film is A significant event and they're not just random Missions with a one end villain as Moores era was like Brosnans was respectively. These particular missions were Major and Skyfall was no exception. Bond has lost Vesper he buried that hate and forgave her in Quantum as she was a Victim and now six years later he faces a bigger challenge when the world around him changes and he has to reinvent himself in order do what he has to do. The conflict originates way back in 1986 through 1997 way before M met Bond and Bond was still in the Military. Hacking beyond his brief he was given up to M and now years later this Evil has arose. Skyfall is a Grand scope the widens Craigs world to larger than life personalities and bigger than death consequences as he makes transition from new school rookie bond to old school James Bond. All the way down to the last few words he says to M as tanner leaves the Room. This man is the real 007. Thoughts??? lets hear it.
«1345

Comments

  • Posts: 222
    I see it as the most recent Bond movie to have been released.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    edited March 2018 Posts: 1,454
    M16_Cart wrote: »
    I see it as the most recent Bond movie to have been released.

    Seconded. And standalone.
  • DragonpolDragonpol "Killers be serial, Copperfield material."
    Posts: 13,067
    I thought that Spectre was the most recent, no?
  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    edited March 2018 Posts: 2,001
    The key is the words "I see it as"?
  • BirdlesonBirdleson San Jose, CAModerator
    Posts: 27,057
    I'm hip.
  • Posts: 691
    Then: Great direction, cinematography, villain. But something was missing that kept it from being a complete experience.

    Now: Pretty much the same. Vastly overrated.
  • DragonpolDragonpol "Killers be serial, Copperfield material."
    Posts: 13,067
    w2bond wrote: »
    The key is the words "I see it as"?

    Yes, it's all subjective. That said, I see it as one of the best Bond films, second only to OHMSS.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 656
    Still a very beautiful, stylish Bond movie. Great acting, very good villain. Welcome addition to the series. It was a welcome, new kind of Bond story that one can fully embrace even if not from Britain. „Welcome to Scotland“ - just great.

    Basically my rating of the movie hasn‘t changed (other than QoS which I appreciate more and more with each year that passes)
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Hamburg, near the Atlantic Hotel
    Posts: 4,745
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    w2bond wrote: »
    The key is the words "I see it as"?

    Yes, it's all subjective. That said, I see it as one of the best Bond films, second only to OHMSS.

    Exchange OHMSS for FRWL, and I fully concur (though OHMSS wouldn't be that far behind either).
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 3,177
    It is now solidly planted as #1 in my rankings.
  • 00Agent00Agent #InCaryWeTrust
    Posts: 4,472
    It's my number #2, has pretty much stayed there since i saw it the first time.
  • BirdlesonBirdleson San Jose, CAModerator
    Posts: 27,057
    It has swung between 8 (peak) and 11 (original, and current, placement) since my first viewing.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 32,440
    I've warmed to aspects of the film since 2012 and do appreciate it more than I did with my first few viewings, but as a whole, it hasn't fluctuated or drastically changed at all for me. Will likely remain at #23 for the foreseeable future.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    It has always been a top ten film for me since its release. I think I currently have it at 8 or 9 and it's been as high as 6. I prefer watching it to the more revered CR and think it's more balanced throughout its runtime. The earlier film suffers terribly for me in the overwrought 3rd act imho.
  • edited March 2018 Posts: 11,611
    Liked the visuals back then, and hoped it (the story and the soundtrack most of all) would grow on me after watching it again. Have failed completely to do so - falling further down on the ranking for each time I put it on, and is well outside the top ten for me. And don't get me started on SP…
  • NicNacNicNac Moderator
    Posts: 6,814
    For me it's the only one of Craig's three long films that doesn't outstay its welcome.

    CR is a beautiful film, well crafted, exciting and Craig is a revelation. But I still can't shake off the feeling that the last 20 minutes felt tacked on.

    SP didn't need to be so long. They could've shaved 15 minutes off it quite easily and made it a tighter film. It isn't the epic Mendes thought it would be.

    SF flowed better in my eyes, and it still remains endlessly watchable.

    It will be the GF of the 21st Century Bonds, the jewel in the crown of the modern Bond films. Whether people agree or not (and plenty don't agree with GF's untouchable reputation either) it will have that standing.
  • Posts: 3,823
    The flow of SF is one of it's strengths and adds to it's rewatch factor. hard to become a classic Bond without the rewatch factor. It also is well paced IMHO and you dont realise that over 2 hours has gone by the time we get to "with pleasure".

    Plus the balance of humour (dry, sarcastic ) with sadness is well done. Some great dialogue and supporting characters. MP is the weak point I think, just poor casting. But it's not a deal breaker.

    The whole thing just comes together very well (as long as you dont think too much), its pure, patriotic escapism and the box office showed that that's what punters like.
  • BirdlesonBirdleson San Jose, CAModerator
    edited March 2018 Posts: 27,057
    NicNac wrote: »
    For me it's the only one of Craig's three long films that doesn't outstay its welcome.

    CR is a beautiful film, well crafted, exciting and Craig is a revelation. But I still can't shake off the feeling that the last 20 minutes felt tacked on.

    SP didn't need to be so long. They could've shaved 15 minutes off it quite easily and made it a tighter film. It isn't the epic Mendes thought it would be.

    SF flowed better in my eyes, and it still remains endlessly watchable.

    It will be the GF of the 21st Century Bonds, the jewel in the crown of the modern Bond films. Whether people agree or not (and plenty don't agree with GF's untouchable reputation either) it will have that standing.

    Hardly untouchable around here, I tell you, I get grief about it all of the time; it's still my #1.

    Yes, GF, TSWLM, GE and SF will always be beloved by the general public, and will be the marks that EON will come back to. They were all insanely popular, accessible to new fans, yet steeped in the legend, and they were all essentially fun movies at their core. Each distilled what was best about it's particular era into one film (in terms of mass appeal).
  • BirdlesonBirdleson San Jose, CAModerator
    edited March 2018 Posts: 27,057
    Mulling it over, contrarily, most hardcore fans would replace those with FRWL, OHMSS, TLD and CR as a definitive representation (my iconic picks would take from both lists).
  • Posts: 7,188
    I prefer yo not watch SF as there are far bette rand more fun 007 movies I do enjoy. I do hope that Boyle does give Craig the swansong that EON denied Brosnan.
  • Posts: 2,209
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Mulling it over, contrarily, most hardcore fans would replace those with FRWL, OHMSS, TLD and CR as a definitive representation (my iconic picks would take from both lists).

    That would certainly be me anyway.
    I find TSWLM, GE and SF over praised and not top ten material.
    The exception is GF. Deserves it's reputation as one of the best!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Yes, GF, TSWLM, GE and SF will always be beloved by the general public, and will be the marks that EON will come back to.
    Yes. I agree that these are probably the defining and iconic entries as far as the general public is concerned.
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Mulling it over, contrarily, most hardcore fans would replace those with FRWL, OHMSS, TLD and CR as a definitive representation (my iconic picks would take from both lists).
    I agree with these as well, as far as the faithful are concerned.

    I too have a mix from both lists. Probably TSWLM, GE, SF from the first and FRWL, OHMSS and CR from the second.
  • BirdlesonBirdleson San Jose, CAModerator
    Posts: 27,057
    Awhile back on the "Originals" thread we had a long debate as to which are the classic, or iconic Bond films. I'm going to go back and try to find our consensus. No one was 100% happy (I wanted to include LALD, Beatles didn't want to include YOLT, etc), but we did it.
  • Posts: 2,073
    I see it as vastly overrated movie, that is part The World Is Not Enough and rip-off of a way better spy flick ; 1996's Mission Impossible. ( and Home Alone)
  • BirdlesonBirdleson San Jose, CAModerator
    Posts: 27,057
    Here are the final results (from page 202 of this thread: https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/3341/sirhenryleechachings-for-original-fans-your-introduction-to-bond-share-your-personal-bond-story/p202 ) as posted by @BeatlesSansEarmuffs .


    Okay, so it's been awhile since I was volunteered to tabulate the results of our "Classic" nominations, and I've been a bit tardy in posting the results. My apologies to all for any inaccuracies. I'm THINKING that the following qualify as "Originals" per SirHenry's definition, if my impression is incorrect, please let me know and I'll try to adjust the results without letting my poor little head explode: @4EverBonded, @OHMSS69, @Birdleson, @vzok, and Yours Truly, @BeatlesSansEarmuffs. @chrisisall, where are YOUR nominations???

    The input from @CommanderRoss' friends resulted in some of the less loved films receiving nominations. As far as I'm concerned, that's a very good thing! Even if it did make the computations a little more complicated...


    That stated, here are the results as best I can figure:
    DN: 5 Originals, 19 Total
    FRWL: 5 Originals, 19 total
    GF: 5 Originals, 19 total
    TB: 4 Originals, 12 total
    YOLT: 1 Original, 12 total
    OHMSS: 4 Originals, 18 total
    DAF: 1 total
    LALD: 2 Originals, 8 total
    TMWTGG: 2 total
    TSWLM: 3 Originals, 13 total
    MR: 2 total
    OP: 4 total
    FYEO: 3 Originals, 8 totals
    AVTAK: 1 total
    TLD: 2 Originals, 4 total
    LTK: 1 Original, 6 total
    GE: 5 Originals, 15 total
    TND: 1 total
    TWINE & DAD: No nominations.
    CR: 5 Originals, 19 total
    QoS: 2 total
    SF: 3 Originals, 11 total
    SP: 2 total

    Anybody who wants to pitch for one criterion or another for evaluating the results is welcome to do so. I'll just state for the record that the films who received A TOTAL OF 10 OR MORE NOMINATIONS were:

    DN: 19, FRWL: 19, GF: 19, CR: 19, OHMSS: 18, GE: 15, TSWLM, 13, TB: 12, YOLT: 12, SF: 11. That's 10 films receiving nominations from more than half of the respondents (counting @CR's friends as one unit.) I'm willing to let these 10 stand as our list of Classic Bond films. Any dissenters? Can I get a vodka martini over here?


    Really, though it isn't one of my favorites, TLD deserves to be up there, it's stature continues to grow. And I still say that LALD had enough cultural impact (and it stands out over time) to be included.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya “We are thrilled to delay B25”
    Posts: 2,539
    The visuals are amazing in skyfall but the story will always make it one of the lesser bond films for me. It’s just so poorly put together and I don’t like how it’s all about bond being played out, only in his 3rd film in the new rebooted timeline. I also don’t care for the overuse of cgi. Though this film has been steadily getting better for me.
  • Posts: 7,188
    For me the movie has one major flaw whether 007 did participate in the action M would die, so his involvement should have been the main reason for his dismissal.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Pizza Broslard
    Posts: 3,518
    I used to have a problem with Skyfall's plot weaknesses, but with the passage of time I've become more lenient in that respect (not unlike with other Bond films), in favor of just appreciating the concepts and ideas embedded in said plot-- cyberterrorism, the cold-hearted relationship between a spy and his country, not to mention the procedural, investigative feel intrinsic to the espionage genre. However, I still think Craig comes across as disinterested and not passionate and charismatic enough in the role of Bond, unlike in his other three films. Also, the film feels slow for much of its early half; there isn't enough intrigue or momentum to its story until Macau and Sévérine. Compare it with Thunderball, another slow paced entry, yet one in which the intrigue builds much more intensely, even in those early Shrublands scenes.

    Skyfall is probably my least favorite Bond film.
  • Posts: 9,280
    It’s one of the best Bond films. Wasn’t quite as dark and gritty as CR/QOS but not nearly as goofy and tired as SP. It looked amazing, had a great villain, good music (yes I said it; it’s a good soundtrack. SP is the bad one in comparison as it’s a copycat), great locations, and a very good Bond performance. It honors the legacy of the franchise while being its own thing at the same time. Its successor simply relied on old things without feeling fresh. I loved SF when it first released and I still love it now.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 32,440
    mattjoes wrote: »
    I used to have a problem with Skyfall's plot weaknesses, but with the passage of time I've become more lenient in that respect (not unlike with other Bond films), in favor of just appreciating the concepts and ideas embedded in said plot-- cyberterrorism, the cold-hearted relationship between a spy and his country, not to mention the procedural, investigative feel intrinsic to the espionage genre. However, I still think Craig comes across as disinterested and not passionate and charismatic enough in the role of Bond, unlike in his other three films. Also, the film feels slow for much of its early half; there isn't enough intrigue or momentum to its story until Macau and Sévérine. Compare it with Thunderball, another slow paced entry, yet one in which the intrigue builds much more intensely, even in those early Shrublands scenes.

    Skyfall is probably my least favorite Bond film.

    Now see, I don't have this issue with him in SF, he himself is great, but it's exactly how I feel about his take in SP. He just seems so terribly disinterested and unhappy to be there.
Sign In or Register to comment.