SKYFALL: FANS' REACTIONS - GUARANTEED SPOILERS

1679111299

Comments

  • Shardlake wrote:
    and judging by the box office haul you are in the minority.

    He is in the minority but the box office isn't great evidence of that. Transformers is always at the top of the box office, people can't know what they think of the film until they go and see it.
  • Posts: 173
    Sandy wrote:
    by the end he's looking great, I would say better than in CR.

    Mmm, I personally wouldn't go that far, though I appreciate your points. We watched CR after SF and the difference was considerable. I am not implying that Craig looks "too old" or anything along those lines, by the way. I think he is still fit for Bond. I agree with my BF that he looks older than his real age and that he looks like he's 50 in this film. It does fit the storyline though.
    Sandy wrote:
    By the way @Regan you say SF didn't debunk your pre-existing top 5 but I remember about a week ago you wrote that you still had a few Bond films you hadn't watched. I don't mean to offend but have you watched them all already?

    No offense taken, Sandy :). And no I haven't watched all the films yet. I still have three Moores and two Connery's to go but I am getting there. I am not sure how this would affect SF's positioning in my rank though. I think SF is a good film and I like it, but doesn't really eclipse the ones I love.

  • Posts: 11,425
    It's always disconcerting being in a minority, especially when there seems to be a huge consensus about something. But looking around it's clear I'm not the only person saying SF is a case of the emperor's new clothes. There are actually a few others on here saying pretty much the same. Perhaps if it hadn't been so hyped I wouldn't be being so down on it, but as it is I've got to call a spade a spade. It's simply not as good as the rave reviews have made out. Even some of those who like it on here are saying it's not a top ranker. I expect there are others on here who were also disappointed but are put off speaking up by the volley of abuse that is targeted at any one who dares argue that SF is not quite all it's made out to be.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Shardlake wrote:
    and judging by the box office haul you are in the minority.

    He is in the minority but the box office isn't great evidence of that. Transformers is always at the top of the box office, people can't know what they think of the film until they go and see it.

    Exactly. And if the box office is to be believed DAD was an excellent Bond movie as well...
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,034
    Getafix wrote:
    It's always disconcerting being in a minority, especially when there seems to be a huge consensus about something. But looking around it's clear I'm not the only person saying SF is a case of the emperor's new clothes. There are actually a few others on here saying pretty much the same. Perhaps if it hadn't been so hyped I wouldn't be being so down on it, but as it is I've got to call a spade a spade. It's simply not as good as the rave reviews have made out. Even some of those who like it on here are saying it's not a top ranker. I expect there are others on here who were also disappointed but are put off speaking up by the volley of abuse that is targeted at any one who dares argue that SF is not quite all it's made out to be.

    What's your official position then, @Getafix? I haven't seen you post anything particularly negative or positive. Did you enjoy it?
  • Posts: 3,279
    Getafix wrote:
    It's always disconcerting being in a minority, especially when there seems to be a huge consensus about something. But looking around it's clear I'm not the only person saying SF is a case of the emperor's new clothes. There are actually a few others on here saying pretty much the same. Perhaps if it hadn't been so hyped I wouldn't be being so down on it, but as it is I've got to call a spade a spade. It's simply not as good as the rave reviews have made out. Even some of those who like it on here are saying it's not a top ranker. I expect there are others on here who were also disappointed but are put off speaking up by the volley of abuse that is targeted at any one who dares argue that SF is not quite all it's made out to be.
    The fact that you think Brozzas 4 films are better than Skyfall clearly shows the kind of taste you have in movies, so it is of no real surprise you didn't like Skyfall at all.

  • Posts: 3,279
    Getafix wrote:
    It's always disconcerting being in a minority, especially when there seems to be a huge consensus about something. But looking around it's clear I'm not the only person saying SF is a case of the emperor's new clothes. There are actually a few others on here saying pretty much the same. Perhaps if it hadn't been so hyped I wouldn't be being so down on it, but as it is I've got to call a spade a spade. It's simply not as good as the rave reviews have made out. Even some of those who like it on here are saying it's not a top ranker. I expect there are others on here who were also disappointed but are put off speaking up by the volley of abuse that is targeted at any one who dares argue that SF is not quite all it's made out to be.

    What's your official position then, @Getafix? I haven't seen you post anything particularly negative or positive. Did you enjoy it?

    No, he hated it, going as far as saying it ranks at the bottom of his list. I think he has lost all credibility on here now.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,034
    Getafix wrote:
    It's always disconcerting being in a minority, especially when there seems to be a huge consensus about something. But looking around it's clear I'm not the only person saying SF is a case of the emperor's new clothes. There are actually a few others on here saying pretty much the same. Perhaps if it hadn't been so hyped I wouldn't be being so down on it, but as it is I've got to call a spade a spade. It's simply not as good as the rave reviews have made out. Even some of those who like it on here are saying it's not a top ranker. I expect there are others on here who were also disappointed but are put off speaking up by the volley of abuse that is targeted at any one who dares argue that SF is not quite all it's made out to be.

    What's your official position then, @Getafix? I haven't seen you post anything particularly negative or positive. Did you enjoy it?

    No, he hated it, going as far as saying it ranks at the bottom of his list. I think he has lost all credibility on here now.

    Ouch, okay. I wasn't expecting that!
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 12,837
    I think he has lost all credibility on here now.

    Not to me he hasn't. I loved SF but he has made some good points about why he didn't like it. I don't agree with him but I don't think everyone has to agree on everything.
    The fact that you think Brozzas 4 films are better than Skyfall clearly shows the kind of taste you have in movies, so it is of no real surprise you didn't like Skyfall at all.

    Well I like GE better than SF but I still really enjoyed it. Getafix hates Brosnan and his films anyway.
  • Posts: 6,601
    He is a brave one, don't you see? He takes it upon him to take the hits for all the many others here, who don't have the guts to speak out. . =D> =D> =D>


    Not to me he hasn't. I loved SF but he has made some good points about why he didn't like it. I don't agree with him but I don't think everyone has to agree on everything.

    I think, its more about the way he started his little debate. Had he been less over the top, people would have accepted his review. He certainly toned it down later on, but that doesn't mean anything, He just backed off a bit in order not to get into any big trouble.
  • Posts: 173
    Getafix wrote:
    It's always disconcerting being in a minority, especially when there seems to be a huge consensus about something. But looking around it's clear I'm not the only person saying SF is a case of the emperor's new clothes. There are actually a few others on here saying pretty much the same. Perhaps if it hadn't been so hyped I wouldn't be being so down on it, but as it is I've got to call a spade a spade. It's simply not as good as the rave reviews have made out. Even some of those who like it on here are saying it's not a top ranker. I expect there are others on here who were also disappointed but are put off speaking up by the volley of abuse that is targeted at any one who dares argue that SF is not quite all it's made out to be.

    In @Getafix's defence, I have witnessed such views on a different Bond forum as well, not just the much maligned The Guardian. So eventhough he is in a minority, he is not alone. In fact several other people use the same tag "underwhelmed".
  • Posts: 6,601
    Regan, I don't think, it was ever a question of there NOT being others.
    See my above post.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,425
    Germanlady wrote:
    He is a brave one, don't you see? He takes it upon him to take the hits for all the many others here, who don't have the guts to speak out. . =D> =D> =D>


    Not to me he hasn't. I loved SF but he has made some good points about why he didn't like it. I don't agree with him but I don't think everyone has to agree on everything.

    I think, its more about the way he started his little debate. Had he been less over the top, people would have accepted his review. He certainly toned it down later on, but that doesn't mean anything, He just backed off a bit in order not to get into any big trouble.

    My initial post was a sign of how massively disappointed I was. I might have toned down my criticisms, but they remain fundamentally the same. And yes, in case you hadn't realised, a lot of people find you and your posts highly aggressive.

    Any way, what is your actual view on the film? Did you like it? A minute ago you were saying that most of my criticisms were valid. Now you're back trying to gouge my eyes out. Tell me, why is it okay for you to be constantly in a rage but if any one else expresses their view forcefully they're mince-meat?

    And as usual I don't actually have any idea what you think as all I ever get from you is this stabbing pain in my shins from that knife cleverly concealed in your shoe...

    What is this 'big trouble' you have in store any way? Are you and Red Grant gonna come over and smash my gaff up?
  • Posts: 11,425
    Getafix wrote:
    It's always disconcerting being in a minority, especially when there seems to be a huge consensus about something. But looking around it's clear I'm not the only person saying SF is a case of the emperor's new clothes. There are actually a few others on here saying pretty much the same. Perhaps if it hadn't been so hyped I wouldn't be being so down on it, but as it is I've got to call a spade a spade. It's simply not as good as the rave reviews have made out. Even some of those who like it on here are saying it's not a top ranker. I expect there are others on here who were also disappointed but are put off speaking up by the volley of abuse that is targeted at any one who dares argue that SF is not quite all it's made out to be.

    What's your official position then, @Getafix? I haven't seen you post anything particularly negative or positive. Did you enjoy it?

    No, he hated it, going as far as saying it ranks at the bottom of his list. I think he has lost all credibility on here now.

    Ouch, okay. I wasn't expecting that!

    I was very, very disappointed. l liked DC in CR and QoS and I thought SF was going to be more narrative and character driven but I don't feel that it delivered. I think it is less than the sum of its parts.
  • Posts: 11,425
    DarthDimi wrote:
    Wow, I'm going to have to delete a lot of posts in this thread. :P

    I don't understand where people are actually supposed to discuss SF as opposed to posting lengthy 'reviews'. Any general SF discussion thread seems to get closed down.
  • Posts: 3,279
    Getafix wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    It's always disconcerting being in a minority, especially when there seems to be a huge consensus about something. But looking around it's clear I'm not the only person saying SF is a case of the emperor's new clothes. There are actually a few others on here saying pretty much the same. Perhaps if it hadn't been so hyped I wouldn't be being so down on it, but as it is I've got to call a spade a spade. It's simply not as good as the rave reviews have made out. Even some of those who like it on here are saying it's not a top ranker. I expect there are others on here who were also disappointed but are put off speaking up by the volley of abuse that is targeted at any one who dares argue that SF is not quite all it's made out to be.

    What's your official position then, @Getafix? I haven't seen you post anything particularly negative or positive. Did you enjoy it?

    No, he hated it, going as far as saying it ranks at the bottom of his list. I think he has lost all credibility on here now.

    Ouch, okay. I wasn't expecting that!

    I was very, very disappointed. l liked DC in CR and QoS and I thought SF was going to be more narrative and character driven but I don't feel that it delivered. I think it is less than the sum of its parts.

    Something tells me you will watch this film again then do a spectacular U turn from hating it, to the film suddenly ranking in your top 3. Your expectations second time round will be considerably lower, so you will suddenly see the film in all its true glory, and fnd the positives that almost everyone else saw first time round.

  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,425
    Getafix wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    It's always disconcerting being in a minority, especially when there seems to be a huge consensus about something. But looking around it's clear I'm not the only person saying SF is a case of the emperor's new clothes. There are actually a few others on here saying pretty much the same. Perhaps if it hadn't been so hyped I wouldn't be being so down on it, but as it is I've got to call a spade a spade. It's simply not as good as the rave reviews have made out. Even some of those who like it on here are saying it's not a top ranker. I expect there are others on here who were also disappointed but are put off speaking up by the volley of abuse that is targeted at any one who dares argue that SF is not quite all it's made out to be.

    What's your official position then, @Getafix? I haven't seen you post anything particularly negative or positive. Did you enjoy it?

    No, he hated it, going as far as saying it ranks at the bottom of his list. I think he has lost all credibility on here now.

    Ouch, okay. I wasn't expecting that!

    I was very, very disappointed. l liked DC in CR and QoS and I thought SF was going to be more narrative and character driven but I don't feel that it delivered. I think it is less than the sum of its parts.

    Something tells me you will watch this film again then do a spectacular U turn from hating it, to the film suddenly ranking in your top 3. Your expectations second time round will be considerably lower, so you will suddenly see the film in all its true glory, and fnd the positives that almost everyone else saw first time round.

    It's possible, but as GL stated in one of her more sober postings, a first impression of a film tends to last. I may well watch SF again and appreciate specific scenes and performances, but I doubt that my overall feeling towards the film will change much.

    Of all the films since Dalton (end of the classic era, IMO), I've only really enjoyed QoS in the cinema. TND I thought was an improvement on GE and good in parts. CR I thought was good but overlong and despite a good performance from DC, not actually all that entertaining. I still feel the same way about all of them now. I rank SF below CR and QoS, and because I feel so let down by it I was saying I might even rank it below Brozza's films. That last bit, I'll grant you, may be going a tad too far.
  • Posts: 3,279
    I find QoS easily the worst of Craig's 3 movies. I'm torn between CR or SF being my favourite no.1 Bond movie.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,189
    I must admit I did not enjoy SF quite as much second time round as I did first time BUT I still saw it was a great film - and certainly saw it as a major improvement on QoS.

    Am probably seeing it again at the end of this week so who knows. Still top 10 (probably even top 5 material) though.
  • Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I must admit I did not enjoy SF quite as much second time round as I did first time BUT I still saw it was a great film - and certainly saw it as a major improvement on QoS.

    Am probably seeing it again at the end of this week so who knows. Still top 10 (probably even top 5 material) though.

    What changed? Just less impact second time around because you knew what was coming or anything specific?
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I must admit I did not enjoy SF quite as much second time round as I did first time BUT I still saw it was a great film - and certainly saw it as a major improvement on QoS.

    Am probably seeing it again at the end of this week so who knows. Still top 10 (probably even top 5 material) though.

    What changed? Just less impact second time around because you knew what was coming or anything specific?

    Well I suppose it was just because I knew what was coming - and I'd only seen it a couple of days before. I wasn't picking away at the plot while I was watching it though.

    The first time I watched it I deliberately avoided the reviews and still loved it. It wasn't a case of "following the crowd"

    I know what its like to be in the minority on here @Getafix but sometimes it seems you look for things to dislike in these new films.

    Incidently I was talking to a work colleague today about SF and he said (and I quote):

    "Never thought I'd say this but he may be better than Connery".
  • Posts: 6,601
    Bain - nothing will ever top the experiene of seeing a film, that can surprise you. Obviously a second viewing takes that away. But I must say, instead of being excited and clinging to my chair, which was fun (and even did that again in some parts), I was more releaxed and copuld allow myself to suck in more details etc. So - additional viewings IMO are different fun.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 6,601
    Getafix wrote:
    It's possible, but as GL stated in one of her more sober postings, .

    I wouldn't go down THAT route, if I were you. Just saying...
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 503
    @Getafix

    I am taking your reviews of Skyfall seriously and am going back to the theater with a pensive mind for my second viewing...

    I was just curious, where abouts in your ranking of 23 Bond films would you place Skyfall at the moment?
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 2,598
    I saw it for a second time on Sunday and while I enjoy the film it wasn't quite as good as I was expecting. While I enjoy movies with plots that favour character movement over complicated plots I would have liked SF to have had a bit more of a story. I said it a week ago too, I was hoping the section involving Bond "enjoying death" and drinking away his melancholy may have lasted a bit longer. A bif of dialogue in these scenes would have been good. The set was great but I didn't really enjoy the casino scene that much even though I loved the fact that a reptile was included in the fight scene. Didn't enjoy the initial dialogue exchange between Bond and Severine. Wish there had have been some dialogue about Bond's parents too whether it came from Bond or Dench in some part of the film. The part when we learn that Eve is Moneypenny at the end is okay. For some reason, maybe because I had had too much to drink before the film, I had remembered the scene differently. Bond saying, "by the way, we haven't been formerly introduced..." was alright. I liked CR better. I'm still not sure where I would rank SF. I would have to see it a few more times.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,551
    Germanlady wrote:
    Bain - nothing will ever top the experiene of seeing a film, that can surprise you. Obviously a second viewing takes that away. But I must say, instead of being excited and clinging to my chair, which was fun (and even did that again in some parts), I was more releaxed and copuld allow myself to suck in more details etc. So - additional viewings IMO are different fun.

    Agreed. A first viewing always sparks an entire set of thoughts and emotions for me, yet I need a second time at least to put things in the right perspective and organize my thoughts. Usually the second viewing, not the first, cements my overall mindset for a film. SF wasn't any different. After the first time I was blown away in a very good sense but my joys and thrills were chaotic. My second viewing of SF helped me to rationalize said joys and thrills. My third viewing was all about the sheer fun of it all with the comfort of my full knowledge of where the film would take me.


  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,551
    Getafix wrote:
    DarthDimi wrote:
    Wow, I'm going to have to delete a lot of posts in this thread. :P

    I don't understand where people are actually supposed to discuss SF as opposed to posting lengthy 'reviews'. Any general SF discussion thread seems to get closed down.

    The problem is that this thread was indeed originally meant for serious reviews without debate and another thread should have been created in the SF section and in which the film could be discussed. However, as it turned out, this thread ended up being used for said discussions and, as a result, any thread created after this one was considered a duplicate thread and thus also closed. Trying to avoid a complicated mess, I therefore created another thread, also in this section, for the 'clean' reviews of SF. That way we can keep this thread alive.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Bond wrote:
    @Getafix

    I am taking your reviews of Skyfall seriously and am going back to the theater with a pensive mind for my second viewing...

    I was just curious, where abouts in your ranking of 23 Bond films would you place Skyfall at the moment?

    I'd like to know whether he puts it above/below TND? @Getafix seems to quite like (is that the right word?) that one.

    For me SF is far superior.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Bond wrote:
    @Getafix

    I am taking your reviews of Skyfall seriously and am going back to the theater with a pensive mind for my second viewing...

    I was just curious, where abouts in your ranking of 23 Bond films would you place Skyfall at the moment?

    I'd like to know whether he puts it above/below TND? @Getafix seems to quite like (is that the right word?) that one.

    For me SF is far superior.

    Right now all I know is that ranks quite low. It is not what I expected to be saying when I went in to see it but there was so much in the story that I found bad that I could not ignore it. The fact that M doesn't trust Bond AGAIN left me wanting her dead right from the start which made the final scenes something of a happy ending for me. I enjoyed TND more, that is true.

    Perhaps it is unfair to do this but if you analyse almost any scene or sequence of events it makes absolutely no sense. The way characters act and behave does not have the ring of truth. I expected so much more. I am surprised it is being so uncritically received on here considering the drubbing QoS got for what was a far more coherent plot.
  • Posts: 6,601
    SHE didn't trust HIM? SHE does, its the other way around at some point, when Silva plants the doubt.
Sign In or Register to comment.