SKYFALL vs. CASINO ROYALE on Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic & IMDB [update 23.8.2016, with QOS & SP]

edited August 2016 in Skyfall Posts: 11,119
Time to compare guys. 'Casino Royale' and 'Skyfall' have very similar ratings now on Rotten Tomatoes now. It is quite hard to say IMO that 'Casino Royale' is better than 'Skyfall'. Let's see the situation as of Monday December 4th 2012:

CASINO ROYALE:
Tomatometer:
95% out of 100%
7.8 out of 10.0 ----> Average rating
220
> Reviews counted
208
> Rated Fresh
012
> Rated Rotten
Audience:
87% liked it
3.9 out of 5.0 ----> Average rating
602,204
> Number of user ratings counted

SKYFALL
Tomatometer:
92% out of 100%
8.2 out of 10.0 ----> Average rating
276
> Reviews counted
253
> Rated Fresh
023
> Rated Rotten
Audience:
88% liked it
4.2 out of 5.0 ----> Average rating
115,437
> Number of user ratings counted


Also interesting are the ratings on Metacritic as of December 4th 2012. Really makes it harder to say which of these two is better no?:

CASINO ROYALE
Metascore:
81 out of 100, based on 38 critics
37 ----> Positive reviews
01 ----> Mixed reviews
00 ----> Negative reviews
User Score:
7.9, based on 656 ratings
551 ----> Positive
025 ----> Mixed
080 ----> Negative

SKYFALL
Metascore:
81 out of 100, based on 43 critics
36 ----> Positive reviews
07 ----> Mixed reviews
00 ----> Negative reviews
User Score:
7.6, based on 629 ratings
517 ----> Positive
042 ----> Mixed
070 ----> Negative


And lastly, the ratings on IMDB:

CASINO ROYALE
7.9 out of 10.0 from 272,760 users

SKYFALL:
8.1 out of 10.0 from 148,288 users


Conclusion: It is damnnn hard to say IMO which of these excellent (!!) Bond films is better :O !!
«134

Comments

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,198
    Conclusion: It is damnnn hard to say IMO which of these excellent (!!) Bond films is better :O !!

    Do you need ratings to determine this? Surely you know in your own mind which you think is better?
  • RC7 wrote:
    Conclusion: It is damnnn hard to say IMO which of these excellent (!!) Bond films is better :O !!

    Do you need ratings to determine this? Surely you know in your own mind which you think is better?

    No. I think it's not that black and white as you portray here. I think 'Skyfall' and 'Casino Royale' are equally good....just in different ways. Certain aspects in SF are slightly better than in CR. And the other way around.

    Moreover, as the boxoffice topic is quite popular for us Bond geeks......this topic doesn't mind either ;-).
  • Posts: 5,747
    RC7 wrote:
    Conclusion: It is damnnn hard to say IMO which of these excellent (!!) Bond films is better :O !!

    Do you need ratings to determine this? Surely you know in your own mind which you think is better?

    Not when you look at things objectively, which no one on here seems to care to do.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,198
    RC7 wrote:
    Conclusion: It is damnnn hard to say IMO which of these excellent (!!) Bond films is better :O !!

    Do you need ratings to determine this? Surely you know in your own mind which you think is better?

    No. I think it's not that black and white as you portray here.

    Sorry, what am I portraying as black and white? I was suggesting that all the numbers don't mean a thing in the world. You could have 100% of 100,000 people saying something was better than something else but if you don't think it is then it doesn't really matter.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,198
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    Conclusion: It is damnnn hard to say IMO which of these excellent (!!) Bond films is better :O !!

    Do you need ratings to determine this? Surely you know in your own mind which you think is better?

    Not when you look at things objectively, which no one on here seems to care to do.

    I and a few others have dissected SF objectively from the perspective of film critique. That never takes into consideration ratings and figures though. It concerns the dynamics of film, not random people clicking a button. I'm sure there are many likes on Facebook that don't give an accurate reflection of what they were intended to.
  • I guess I watched Casino Royale so much on DVD in the year 2007 that the Crane fight people are still hyping about doesn't have as big an impact on me anymore. I actually enjoyed Skyfall significantly more because I really got the feeling that this truly was the same character played by Connery, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan etc.
    I guess once the general public has the idea that something is the pinnacle, they can't let go of it.
    I'll argue that Skyfall is the superior film, I looked through RT in the lead up and post-release, most of the negative reviews were absolute BS. A bit like what happened with TDKR where it was so hotly anticipated and initially well received that some critics felt it would raise their profile to give it a negative review.
  • Tobester95 wrote:
    I guess I watched Casino Royale so much on DVD in the year 2007 that the Crane fight people are still hyping about doesn't have as big an impact on me anymore. I actually enjoyed Skyfall significantly more because I really got the feeling that this truly was the same character played by Connery, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan etc.
    I guess once the general public has the idea that something is the pinnacle, they can't let go of it.
    I'll argue that Skyfall is the superior film, I looked through RT in the lead up and post-release, most of the negative reviews were absolute BS. A bit like what happened with TDKR where it was so hotly anticipated and initially well received that some critics felt it would raise their profile to give it a negative review.

    So you say 'SF' is better than 'CR'? I just can not choose....to be honest..
  • RC7RC7
    edited December 2012 Posts: 10,198
    Tobester95 wrote:
    A bit like what happened with TDKR where it was so hotly anticipated and initially well received that some critics felt it would raise their profile to give it a negative review.

    I think this is a pretty naive assumption. Perhaps it might be that some people don't feel it reaches the same level as Begins or TDK, or in SF's case, CR. It takes a lot to not be drawn in by the hype so I commend someone who has the knackers to lay down a reasonable argument for why they didn't feel a film lived up to expectations under pressure from an angry mob of fanboys. I'm not talking trolls, I'm talking critics who can determine and explain exactly why they didn't like it.

    Personally, I found TDKR particularly enjoyable, my girlfriend (who watched it for the first time on Blu-Ray the other evening) claimed she was disappointed and preferred the previous two. Now, she hasn't bothered to do a complete critique but her overwhelming feeling is that it is simply not as good. A good critic could probably explain to her why that is and if she could be bothered to watch it again she'd be able to determine why that is, objectively.

    Oh and curiously, she didn't think SF was as good as CR.
  • RC7 wrote:
    Tobester95 wrote:
    Oh and curiously, she didn't think SF was as good as CR.

    Clearly, you need a new girlfriend. :-P

    It's a joke, folks! Relax! :D
  • RC7RC7
    edited December 2012 Posts: 10,198
    RC7 wrote:
    Tobester95 wrote:
    Oh and curiously, she didn't think SF was as good as CR.

    Clearly, you need a new girlfriend. :-P

    It's a joke, folks! Relax! :D


    She's a Director so I do hold her opinions in decent regard ;)

    She thinks Meheux's Cinematography was better, as was the balance of character and plot. She also claimed that while she thought the calibre of acting was better (or more mature) the convoluted nature of Silva's plan dehumanised him in a way that didn't happen with Le Chiffre. She also didn't like the fact that they appeared to be using (as she called it) the age old - 'baffle the audience with computer lingo to cover up the cracks' trick. When he escaped the chamber her immediate reaction was, 'where are the guards' and several other comments to that effect. She made a good comparison to the Joker actually, suggesting that his motivations and old-fashioned M.O. should have been in essence how Silva operated but because of the overarching theme of 'new vs. old' felt like they had to shoe-horn in the cyber-terrorist background to accomodate his far fetched plan.

    These were her main issues.
  • Posts: 161
    Honestly both are classic's and lets be honest no one taught we'd get Classic Bond films again that matched Connery's best . I think we should be grateful that we have two great films in the canon and non Bond fans seem to have taken to them as well as stand alone films. They are my top 2 Bond films and i find it hard to chose which is best.
  • RC7 wrote:
    She's a Director so I do hold her opinions in decent regard ;)

    She thinks Meheux's Cinematography was better, as was the balance of character and plot. She also claimed that while she thought the calibre of acting was better (or more mature) the convoluted nature of Silva's plan dehumanised him in a way that didn't happen with Le Chiffre. She also didn't like the fact that they appeared to be using (as she called it) the age old - 'baffle the audience with computer lingo to cover up the cracks' trick. When he escaped the chamber her immediate reaction was, 'where are the guards' and several other comments to that effect. She made a good comparison to the Joker actually, suggesting that his motivations and old-fashioned M.O. should have been in essence how Silva operated but because of the overarching theme of 'new vs. old' felt like they had to shoe-horn in the cyber-terrorist background to accomodate his far fetched plan.

    These were her main issues.
    About the only one I'd firmly disagree with her about is her thoughts about Silva being dehumanized. Indeed, part of the reason I so enjoyed him and consider him the best of the Bond villains is because I found him in many, many ways quite easy to relate to and empathize with. While he needed to go, I actually felt a little bad for him when it happened.

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,198
    RC7 wrote:
    She's a Director so I do hold her opinions in decent regard ;)

    She thinks Meheux's Cinematography was better, as was the balance of character and plot. She also claimed that while she thought the calibre of acting was better (or more mature) the convoluted nature of Silva's plan dehumanised him in a way that didn't happen with Le Chiffre. She also didn't like the fact that they appeared to be using (as she called it) the age old - 'baffle the audience with computer lingo to cover up the cracks' trick. When he escaped the chamber her immediate reaction was, 'where are the guards' and several other comments to that effect. She made a good comparison to the Joker actually, suggesting that his motivations and old-fashioned M.O. should have been in essence how Silva operated but because of the overarching theme of 'new vs. old' felt like they had to shoe-horn in the cyber-terrorist background to accomodate his far fetched plan.

    These were her main issues.
    About the only one I'd firmly disagree with her about is her thoughts about Silva being dehumanized. Indeed, part of the reason I so enjoyed him and consider him the best of the Bond villains is because I found him in many, many ways quite easy to relate to and empathize with. While he needed to go, I actually felt a little bad for him when it happened.

    Me too actually, I was kind of rooting for him. She reckoned that the whole hacker thing was at odds with who he really seemed to be. That said, she thought Bardem turned in a great performance.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 803
    RC7 wrote:
    Me too actually, I was kind of rooting for him. She reckoned that the whole hacker thing was at odds with who he really seemed to be. That said, she thought Bardem turned in a great performance.
    Hackers aren't supposed to have that much personality? Don't know as I'd agree with that, either. What's a hacker supposed to be like? Anyway, Silva was a spy who hacked, not a hacker who spied.

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,198
    RC7 wrote:
    Me too actually, I was kind of rooting for him. She reckoned that the whole hacker thing was at odds with who he really seemed to be. That said, she thought Bardem turned in a great performance.
    Hackers aren't supposed to have that much personality? Don't know as I'd agree with that, either. What's a hacker supposed to be like? Anyway, Silva was a spy who hacked, not a hacker who spied.

    I don't think it was anything to do with personality, more character traits. She said he came across as a sort of Dandy who claimed he'd stripped the 'superfluous' things from his life. She said that in her mind these kind of people are the type to read books, not hack borderline unhackable government departments.
  • RC7 wrote:
    I don't think it was anything to do with personality, more character traits. She said he came across as a sort of Dandy who claimed he'd stripped the 'superfluous' things from his life. She said that in her mind these kind of people are the type to read books, not hack borderline unhackable government departments.
    Perceptions are interesting things!

  • Posts: 10,853
    RC7 wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    She's a Director so I do hold her opinions in decent regard ;)

    She thinks Meheux's Cinematography was better, as was the balance of character and plot. She also claimed that while she thought the calibre of acting was better (or more mature) the convoluted nature of Silva's plan dehumanised him in a way that didn't happen with Le Chiffre. She also didn't like the fact that they appeared to be using (as she called it) the age old - 'baffle the audience with computer lingo to cover up the cracks' trick. When he escaped the chamber her immediate reaction was, 'where are the guards' and several other comments to that effect. She made a good comparison to the Joker actually, suggesting that his motivations and old-fashioned M.O. should have been in essence how Silva operated but because of the overarching theme of 'new vs. old' felt like they had to shoe-horn in the cyber-terrorist background to accomodate his far fetched plan.

    These were her main issues.
    About the only one I'd firmly disagree with her about is her thoughts about Silva being dehumanized. Indeed, part of the reason I so enjoyed him and consider him the best of the Bond villains is because I found him in many, many ways quite easy to relate to and empathize with. While he needed to go, I actually felt a little bad for him when it happened.

    Me too actually, I was kind of rooting for him. She reckoned that the whole hacker thing was at odds with who he really seemed to be. That said, she thought Bardem turned in a great performance.

    One of my problems with it as well. For some reason I have a visceral hatred of plotlines that include hacking. It just screems lazy screenwriting to me, unless it's explored in a genuinely interesting way, which it patently isn't in SF. As you GF says, it's an old paper over the cracks trick that you expect in churn-'em out TV series.
  • Getafix wrote:
    One of my problems with it as well. For some reason I have a visceral hatred of plotlines that include hacking. It just screams lazy screenwriting to me, unless it's explored in a genuinely interesting way, which it patently isn't in SF. As you GF says, it's an old paper over the cracks trick that you expect in churn-'em out TV series.
    Does it scream lazy as much as not writing out the words girl friend? :P

    Individual tastes vary of course, but as a viewer, I don't need to know more than hacking is being done. Watching someone behind a keyboard plugging away isn't something I could take for too long.

  • Another comparison guys. 'Casino Royale' and 'Skyfall' still have very similar ratings now on Rotten Tomatoes. It is quite hard to say IMO that 'Casino Royale' is better than 'Skyfall'. Let's see the situation as of Monday February 17th 2013:

    CASINO ROYALE:
    Tomatometer:
    95% out of 100%
    7.8 out of 10.0 ----> Average rating
    220
    > Reviews counted
    208
    > Rated Fresh
    012
    > Rated Rotten
    Audience:
    87% liked it
    3.9 out of 5.0 ----> Average rating
    602,204
    > Number of user ratings counted

    SKYFALL
    Tomatometer:
    92% out of 100%
    8.2 out of 10.0 ----> Average rating
    288
    > Reviews counted
    265
    > Rated Fresh
    023
    > Rated Rotten
    Audience:
    88% liked it
    4.2 out of 5.0 ----> Average rating
    123,594
    > Number of user ratings counted


    Also interesting are the ratings on Metacritic as of December 4th 2012. Really makes it harder to say which of these two is better no?:

    CASINO ROYALE
    Metascore:
    81 out of 100, based on 38 critics
    37 ----> Positive reviews
    01 ----> Mixed reviews
    00 ----> Negative reviews
    User Score:
    7.9, based on 682 ratings
    573 ----> Positive
    027 ----> Mixed
    082 ----> Negative

    SKYFALL
    Metascore:
    81 out of 100, based on 43 critics
    36 ----> Positive reviews
    07 ----> Mixed reviews
    00 ----> Negative reviews
    User Score:
    7.5, based on 939 ratings
    767 ----> Positive
    074 ----> Mixed
    098 ----> Negative


    And lastly, the ratings on IMDB:

    CASINO ROYALE
    7.9 out of 10.0 from 286,538 users

    SKYFALL:
    7.9 out of 10.0 from 237,451 users


    Conclusion: It still is damnnn hard to say IMO which of these excellent (!!) Bond films is better :O !!
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 It was this or the priesthood.
    Posts: 28,232
    It doesn't matter which is better. Both are brilliant with amazing casts, directors, dialogue, cinematography and a golden Bond performance. I don't see why we can't love them both equally. Fleming knows I do.
  • Posts: 1,358
    Both films are becoming increasingly like The Living Daylights and Licence to Kill for me. In both cases, I can never decide which one I like more and if I watch Licence to Kill recently then I decide I like that more UNTIL I watch The Living Daylights again.

    So in conclusion, this is a VERY good thing
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 It was this or the priesthood.
    Posts: 28,232
    bondbat007 wrote:
    Both films are becoming increasingly like The Living Daylights and Licence to Kill for me. In both cases, I can never decide which one I like more and if I watch Licence to Kill recently then I decide I like that more UNTIL I watch The Living Daylights again.

    So in conclusion, this is a VERY good thing

    That's where I am at too.
  • I couldn't find anything else to talk about or get involved with, but whatever movie critics may say, it's how you the viewer sees it, is what's important. Why go along with others perceptions when you can make your own judgments ?

    This is easy enough, in that Royale simply is a better release than Skyfall, in fact they're both better than QOS, but Craig's 2006 debut is his best so far, although there is still yet more to come from the actor. Someone said these are the best days for Bond since Connery, and I can see where you're coming from, but Sean wasn't seen in some truly absurd situations or sequences such as the Waterfall nonsense and shot off a moving train for example. Add to that the free running sequence in Madagascar. Craig is a very good Bond and the best without doubt since Dalton, but sometimes it all gets a bit ridiculous or far fetched, and maybe that's a pity, with such a serious Bond as Craig himself. You could kind of accept it with a humor-esque Bond such as a present day Roger Moore type actor, but the silly and absurd sequences and action bits just don't go well with Craig's Bond I'm afraid. May be in the minority but that's how I view it. Both releases, despite all the superlatives, aren't in fact an end to end enthrallment or non-stop thrill ride, as they do shallow out here and there and the viewer can lose interest during some of the more mundane moments, but for the most part, both are great releases, and The World Is Not Enough aside, are probably the best James Bond adventures seen since the 1980s with Dalton. But Casino Royale is the better all round release here
  • Posts: 2,469
    bondbat007 wrote:
    Both films are becoming increasingly like The Living Daylights and Licence to Kill for me. In both cases, I can never decide which one I like more and if I watch Licence to Kill recently then I decide I like that more UNTIL I watch The Living Daylights again.

    So in conclusion, this is a VERY good thing

    That's where I am at too.

    Same here. Two extremely evenly matched dyads. And all four films are well within my top ten.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited August 2013 Posts: 3,478
    Still love Casino but Skyfall knocked it off the no. 2 spot for me, I'm hoping that Bond 24 will do the same to SF or even OHMSS from, my no. 1 spot, I can hope can't I?
  • Posts: 2,469
    You've got OHMSS at No. 1, too, eh? I've got GE at No. 2, then SF at No. 3, LTK at No. 4, CR at No. 5 and TLD at No. 6...I think.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 1,068
    No doubt an unpopular opinion with many and I realise this should be in the controversial opinions thread but surely it must be CR over SF as Bond is pretty much a failure in SF.

    However well it's all appears slickly dressed up with a portrayal of Bond having deep angst about revisiting his buried troubled past and the whole reboot concept, in Skyfall he was hopeless really in everything he attempted after the midpoint of the film. In the process of failing in his mission to protect M, with the old hierlooms of the Bond stately pile and the DB5 being trashed for effect, there's not even a mention in the plot of that vital list of undercover agents names that may or may not still be in jeopardy which is what the whole film kicked off all edgy and tense about in the first place. If Silva was half the clever mastermind it seems he's set out to be, wouldn't he have the names disclosure unraveling automatically without his direct intervention whilst he was out busy killing off M anyhow no matter how clever Q thinks he is?

    Under logical scrutiny, rattling all the way up North in a geriatric antique on the assumption there would be some kind of decent opportunity for a good old pistols at dawn showdown on Bond's terms is frankly ludicrous. Silva wasn't too worried about blowing sh!t up or shooting anyone in his way at the Ministerial hearing earlier so he's hardly likely to be stopped that easily by Bond with M in tow, even if the gun cabinets had still been full!? For it to descend into the homemade Home Alone antics seems so amateur - where's the Bond of the previous 20 odd films usually out busy saving the whole of the world and mankind as we know it?

    I don't expect such radically extreme RM levels like TSWLM or MR but still Casino Royale is by far the more balanced and watertight of the two films with similar levels of characterisation and action. OK, for me CR's only real flaw was Bond's end recuperation, which just seems too dragged out and unnecessary.

    Don't get me wrong, I like SF, I'm just saying it's not the 10 out of 10 best ever, critically lauded Bond film we've ever seen.

    Whatever is said about GL - OHMSS is the most rounded compelling of them all anyway!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited August 2013 Posts: 32,440
    @andmcit, the list went from something that was driving the characters - something Bond desperately needed to retrieve - and once he finally accomplished that, there was no more worry about it, and his main mission was saving M. By the time Silva has been locked up, they haven't even begun to look into the list, and as soon as Q starts to access Silva's computer/files, all hell breaks loose, Silva escapes, and the main mission for Bond, Q, and Tanner is to rescue M and try to stop Silva.

    So, it could be seen that later on, they somehow find a backup of the list - or none at all, and Silva just didn't decide/think to create one - or that the list was just part of Silva's plan: he didn't care about leaking the names, it was just another way for him to draw M out and get him closer to his master plan: killing her. He could continue to leak five names every week until someone finally found him and got him to M.

    I agree with you, though: I really do like SF, but it just isn't the best film for me. CR takes the cake in Craig's list of films thus far.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 1,068
    @Creasy47, totally happy to accept the list was a only a ruse by Silva to drag M's career down to it's knees and be brought into doubt triggering the Ministerial Hearing that Silva was planning to use as a means of staging his own version of some kind of public execution. This idea is reinforced by the JD's discussion with Mallory about her retiring.

    My real problem is Bond's ineptitude in his foresight to plan something as 'important' as M's safety and to guard her properly from the clear threat Silva posed. Yes, Bond ultimately expertly lobbed the knife that dispatched Silva but he was asking for all the sh!t the previous half hour brought him and M.

    In the cinema, I was certain the chink of the knife was the trigger being pulled on herself by M into an empty chamber which brought up the rather interesting idea about M's thinking as she knew she was dying and deciding to end it with Silva. Re-watching it actually took a bit off the end set piece for me actually.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 32,440
    @andmcit, I like the thought of Bond and M not wanting to pull anyone else into what was going on, and M didn't want anyone else being killed for her, but it still bothers me that they didn't want anything: no weapons drop, no proper intel, not even a tucked away sniper team to help. They just go to Skyfall in hopes that the weapons are still going to be there. Nobody had to be killed for M if they had at least met up with someone and got a bag of firearms.
Sign In or Register to comment.