"Did i overcomplicate the plot ?" - Skyfall Appreciation & Discussion

18911131443

Comments

  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    Gettler wrote: »
    Did anyone think 'Skyfall' meant something else before they saw the film?

    I thought it was the baddies codename for some evil plan like 'operation Grandslam' or something.

    Bit underwhelmed when it's revealed it was the name of Bond's childhood abode!

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Gettler wrote: »
    Did anyone think 'Skyfall' meant something else before they saw the film?

    I thought it was the baddies codename for some evil plan like 'operation Grandslam' or something.

    Bit underwhelmed when it's revealed it was the name of Bond's childhood abode!

    That's okay, Bond wasn't enthused about it either.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    Gettler wrote: »
    Did anyone think 'Skyfall' meant something else before they saw the film?

    I thought it was the baddies codename for some evil plan like 'operation Grandslam' or something.

    Bit underwhelmed when it's revealed it was the name of Bond's childhood abode!

    That's okay, Bond wasn't enthused about it either.

    Do love that scene. "M."....."Bitch."
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    I appreciate Skyfall.
    The scene on the Dead Island, beginning when Silva takes Bond outside and "Boum !" is playing, up until "Latest thing from Q Branch, called a 'radio'" to me is like it's own entire little Bond film, and one of my favourite sequences in the franchise.
    I know I've made basically this same post repeatedly before but it remains true and want to make sure the new people know it too ;)
  • edited October 2016 Posts: 4,602
    Yes, agree. And that tone/type of humour continues thoughout the movie. It fits in well as Bond is fed up much of the time and, also, it is the default humour of the Brits so we relate to it very well plus its dialogue based so fits in with more hushed tone of SF. In fact, is there any visual humour in SF at all?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    patb wrote: »
    Yes, agree. And that tone/type of humour continues thoughout the movie. It fits in well as Bond is fed up much of the time and, also, it is the default humour of the Brits so we relate to it very well plus its dialogue based so fits in with more hushed tone of SF. In fact, is there any visual humour in SF at all?

    The way Q is dressed in the National Gallery immediately springs to mind, as does the shooting scene with Bond and Kincade.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited October 2016 Posts: 28,694
    Gettler wrote: »
    Did anyone think 'Skyfall' meant something else before they saw the film?

    I thought it was the baddies codename for some evil plan like 'operation Grandslam' or something.

    Bit underwhelmed when it's revealed it was the name of Bond's childhood abode!

    That's okay, Bond wasn't enthused about it either.

    Do love that scene. "M."....."Bitch."

    And, "I always hated this place."
    patb wrote: »
    Yes, agree. And that tone/type of humour continues thoughout the movie. It fits in well as Bond is fed up much of the time and, also, it is the default humour of the Brits so we relate to it very well plus its dialogue based so fits in with more hushed tone of SF. In fact, is there any visual humour in SF at all?

    Obviously these won't make everyone laugh, but I enjoy (to name but a few):

    Bond collapsing after all the MI6 staff leave who are evaluating his strength. It's a rare moment from Bond where he lets the audience see just how hard he's trying to act on top of things, while his grip is slipping. I find it both amusing and striking, a perfect testament to how devoted and dutiful he is.

    I love the image of Bond racing to the tube and leaping on it, as the civilians of London look on.

    The look of anger Bond gives when Silva blows up the DB5.

    The look of disgust Silva gives Bond after 007 stabs him with a knife, after which he falls limp on the floor.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Gettler wrote: »
    Did anyone think 'Skyfall' meant something else before they saw the film?

    My guess was a crashing satellite.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,588
    Skyfall will always have a special place in my heart. The experience of seeing it for the first time was incredibly grand and had a massive effect on me. It could have been the air, but I was genuinely blown away by it given how long it took to get here and with it being the golden anniversary. I remember exiting the theatre with an incredible sense of relief and satisfaction knowing that EON truly failed to disappoint my sky-high expectations on any level. It currently fights with Casino Royale to retain first spot in my ranking.
  • DCisaredDCisared Liverpool
    Posts: 1,329
    jake24 wrote: »
    Skyfall will always have a special place in my heart. The experience of seeing it for the first time was incredibly grand and had a massive effect on me. It could have been the air, but I was genuinely blown away by it given how long it took to get here and with it being the golden anniversary. I remember exiting the theatre with an incredible sense of relief and satisfaction knowing that EON truly failed to disappoint my sky-high expectations on any level. It currently fights with Casino Royale to retain first spot in my ranking.

    Pretty much this. I'm so nostalgic for it. I've never left a cinema feeling better than I did after SF and I love it more and more each time I stick it on.
  • Posts: 4,602
    SF is a very different type of Bond movie. If you like it, you really like it. I dont know many Bond fans who rank it in the middle, its a Marmite Bond movie (I love Marmite)
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    patb wrote: »
    SF is a very different type of Bond movie. If you like it, you really like it. I dont know many Bond fans who rank it in the middle, its a Marmite Bond movie (I love Marmite)

    I've noticed that as well. It's either top 10 or bottom 5 for people, it seems.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    There was a point after seeing it 3 times theatrically that I thought SF my favourite DC film but watching CR not long after I realised it was still my favourite of the era and my 2nd favourite of the series.

    That being said I stand in Skyfall's corner everytime, I love it flaws and all. I can see it is a divider in the fanbase.

    Some people really do hate it, I'm not sure I dislike SP as much as SF is by some, my disappointment of SP derides from it was such a missed opportunity.

    Initially I thought this of QOS and still do to some degree but SP far spectacularly fumbled the ball in my view.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    edited October 2016 Posts: 732
    I just love the movie but it was not an instant classic to me like CR was - but I guess it had to do with my high hopes and expectations.

    When I went to see CR I was pretty much against all of it: Craig, his german dubbing voice, the general idea of totally rebooting the franchise. Yes, I was disappointed by DAD - while I liked (and still like) the first half, the second half of the film was just sh**. And then came the b/w intro, the titles, the Madagascar scenes ... and I was in awe. It just blew me away - all of it. LeChiffre, Vesper, Mathis, Felix ... so well cast, such a wonderful script, an awesome soundtrack. I left the cinema and it was an instant classic for me.

    Then QoS came and I *hated* (and still hate) the insanely fast cut action sequences. The car chase brought me in an angry mood, the first scene with M, Mr. White and so on calmed me down - but during the Selena fight I realized they were really going to make me angry with this movie and this is why I left the cinema with a mixed feeling: I liked (and still like) the story (even many rate it too thin) and the pure rage that Bond feels and expresses, I like Camille, the return (and death) of Mathis (strong scene!), love the plane fight and so on. But I had (and have) mixed feelings about the movie - just and only because of the (insane) editing. The rest I liked then and still today. But it was (and is) not on par with CR.

    Then we had to wait 4 years - and my only thinking was: Please let them have abandoned the editing style of QoS and return to CR-like editing or similar. I should have been expecting some kind of art-house Bond since Mendes became the director but all I really cared about was the editing (since it ruined the previous movie for me that much). And I was not let down at all: I just love the PTS - it was so great, so well done. And then there were the cufflinks :-) Very small thing but I realized: Yeah, great to have things like that back. I loved (and love) the visual style, appreciated the new Q a lot, cheered Bardem's entry and was really excited during the showdown. It all worked very well for me.

    When I left the cinema I was not sure what to think at first. I did not realize until I guess the first viewing in my home cinema that not CR but SF changed my reception of James Bond forever. Putting aside the world of espionage I realized, I can totally relate to the underlying themes and motifs. When Bond is "enjoying death", I totally "get" it, when he questions himself, does not allow Tanner to see that he can not keep up with the training anymore, when M assigns him the job to hunt down Patrice and he actually knows he is not ready but does it ... because he just "has to" - I just get it. SF is the movie when Daniel Craig became "my" Bond, the Bond of "my" time so to speak. While CR still has the better script and best action sequences I have seen to this date in any Bond movie, and while GF and TB will forever remain my TOP 1 and 2 it was and is SF that changed it all for me. And I like the humourlevel it has - it's there but not at all over the top. I think it suits Craig and the way he portrays Bond just right.

    OT: After SF
    Then came SPECTRE: I don't need that much of an underlying "message" (like SF) in any movie to come now - but I definitely appreciate to see some background information about Bond (which is why I like the Oberhauser information - without the unnecessary foster brother thing) like in the novels, find the out-of-office connection to Moneypenny great (loved realizing he was a bit jealous because of her obviously having a man in her bed), great to see Bond's appartement. I appreciate Bond's more serious relationships to women (Vesper, Camille and Madeleine) - while it's good to see he still has his "time off" with Fields and so on.

    Based on this experience comes my wishlist for Bond 25 (based on the novels OHMSS and MR): I want him to meet the woman he wants to marry - but first give her more depth as in SP so the ineviteable loss of her has some believeable meaning (for Bond and the audience). Make something out of the fact that Madeleine is White's daughter and make a connection there. Limit locations but explore them a lot - adding a more-explored remote site. Bring back Felix, Q, Moneypenny. Let Bond meet another woman (either based on or even named Gala Brand ... or bring back Camille?) who is there for him after he loses Madeleine - during the action and make the ending match the book (MR). Make believeable connections to Bond's past (that's where the Camille idea came from) - but not forced and use it as a as a story-driving element. Let Bond interact with local supporters (Mary Goodnight as in the book LALD?). Maybe some underwater action. Mix it with humour - but the kind of humour that feels true to Craig (SP was too much in some areas - some worked great). Try to achieve action sequences as hard as in CR (and QoS) but also some that let us see a big fight.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    Definitely in my top ten Bond films and between this and SP it's hard to judge.

    I love the whole first part of the film up to Silva's island. Its an intriguing story, Bond being 'dead' is well done and the dialogue sparkles in so many good scenes.

    The writing in the film then suffers as we are led to believe Silva was captured on purpose in a re-run of the plot from TDK. Apparently knowing he was going to be put in an odd glass prison (ala Hannibal Lecter) and that Q was going to plug his laptop into the MI6 mainframe at the exact moment he expected for him to escape. Then also knowing the exact moment Bond would catch up to him and where to plant an explosive to bring a tube train down on Bond's head!

    Its lazy scripting and for me damages the credibility of the film to have such glaring inconsistencies.

    The film picks up again after the shootout at the tribunal. Great to see the DB5 make another appearance (and for them to drive down New Cross high street near where I was born!) and I really love all the scenes in Scotland, even if the whole plan seems pretty dumb and results in M's demise....!

    Great performances from Craig, Dench and Fiennes and I rather liked Naomie Harris in the film.

    I don't think Bardem fulfilled the potential he had to be a real threatening Bond villain. He was dangerous and scary in No Country For Old Men. In this he's quite camp and although insane, offers little threat.

    So overall a flawed Bond film, but still better than any of Brosnan's or Moore's output, all due respect to them.
  • Posts: 6,827
    Dont forget the fact that Patrice was WAITING in his car outside for Bond and Moneypenny to chase him in the pts!! Always got on my nerves that!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I know a lot of people who dislike it say that SF is a chore to get through, that it's not an easy film to watch and that it's overly melodramatic.

    I don't understand any of these criticisms. It's a 'go-to' Bond spectacle film for me. Supremely well crafted, beautifully shot, & exceptionally well acted with some cracking one on one dialogue & character scenes.

    In my view it's a credit to the entire team & represents the best of the Bond ethos, reimagined for the times we live in. The ending is such an uplifting moment, because the film itself suggested a restoration of relevancy and a resurrection.

    Cracking film.
  • HellerHeller London
    Posts: 29
    bondjames wrote: »
    I know a lot of people who dislike it say that SF is a chore to get through, that it's not an easy film to watch and that it's overly melodramatic.

    I don't understand any of these criticisms. It's a 'go-to' Bond spectacle film for me. Supremely well crafted, beautifully shot, & exceptionally well acted with some cracking one on one dialogue & character scenes.

    In my view it's a credit to the entire team & represents the best of the Bond ethos, reimagined for the times we live in. The ending is such an uplifting moment, because the film itself suggested a restoration of relevancy and a resurrection.

    Cracking film.

    Well said that man. So happy I got to experience it on the big screen.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Dont forget the fact that Patrice was WAITING in his car outside for Bond and Moneypenny to chase him in the pts!! Always got on my nerves that!

    Yeah, there is a lot of 'eh?' moments in the film unfortunately....
  • Posts: 19,339
    But a hell of a lot of wow moments....
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    barryt007 wrote: »
    But a hell of a lot of wow moments....

    Those too....
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    Then also knowing the exact moment Bond would catch up to him and where to plant an explosive to bring a tube train down on Bond's head!
    For what it's worth, I never thought that Silva had intended for Bond to catch up with him that quickly. If so, then why didn't he have his lackeys (with guns) rendezvous with him at that location just in case? The bomb was going to be detonated regardless, to create a distraction. Bond just happened to be in that exact spot when it went off. Which is quite a coincidence, granted. But at least it's a little less ludicrous.
  • Posts: 19,339
    pachazo wrote: »
    Then also knowing the exact moment Bond would catch up to him and where to plant an explosive to bring a tube train down on Bond's head!
    For what it's worth, I never thought that Silva had intended for Bond to catch up with him that quickly. If so, then why didn't he have his lackeys (with guns) rendezvous with him at that location just in case? The bomb was going to be detonated regardless, to create a distraction. Bond just happened to be in that exact spot when it went off. Which is quite a coincidence, granted. But at least it's a little less ludicrous.

    That's how i see it @pachazo...

  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    pachazo wrote: »
    Then also knowing the exact moment Bond would catch up to him and where to plant an explosive to bring a tube train down on Bond's head!
    For what it's worth, I never thought that Silva had intended for Bond to catch up with him that quickly. If so, then why didn't he have his lackeys (with guns) rendezvous with him at that location just in case? The bomb was going to be detonated regardless, to create a distraction. Bond just happened to be in that exact spot when it went off. Which is quite a coincidence, granted. But at least it's a little less ludicrous.

    A little less, granted. But it's still my least favourite scene in the film.

    The other thing is while Silva is gloating halfway up the ladder why doesn't Bond shoot him then?!!!
  • Posts: 19,339
    pachazo wrote: »
    Then also knowing the exact moment Bond would catch up to him and where to plant an explosive to bring a tube train down on Bond's head!
    For what it's worth, I never thought that Silva had intended for Bond to catch up with him that quickly. If so, then why didn't he have his lackeys (with guns) rendezvous with him at that location just in case? The bomb was going to be detonated regardless, to create a distraction. Bond just happened to be in that exact spot when it went off. Which is quite a coincidence, granted. But at least it's a little less ludicrous.

    A little less, granted. But it's still my least favourite scene in the film.

    The other thing is while Silva is gloating halfway up the ladder why doesn't Bond shoot him then?!!!

    It cant be worse than Bond falling,not even tensed up,off the bridge in the PTS and living ?

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    edited October 2016 Posts: 45,489
    If this thread is about appreciation, please don t attend my funeral, folks.
  • Posts: 19,339
    haha it is TF,but objectivity is allowed ;)

  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    barryt007 wrote: »
    pachazo wrote: »
    Then also knowing the exact moment Bond would catch up to him and where to plant an explosive to bring a tube train down on Bond's head!
    For what it's worth, I never thought that Silva had intended for Bond to catch up with him that quickly. If so, then why didn't he have his lackeys (with guns) rendezvous with him at that location just in case? The bomb was going to be detonated regardless, to create a distraction. Bond just happened to be in that exact spot when it went off. Which is quite a coincidence, granted. But at least it's a little less ludicrous.

    A little less, granted. But it's still my least favourite scene in the film.

    The other thing is while Silva is gloating halfway up the ladder why doesn't Bond shoot him then?!!!

    It cant be worse than Bond falling,not even tensed up,off the bridge in the PTS and living ?

    Surely the fact that he wasn't tensed up saved his life..?
  • edited October 2016 Posts: 19,339
    barryt007 wrote: »
    pachazo wrote: »
    Then also knowing the exact moment Bond would catch up to him and where to plant an explosive to bring a tube train down on Bond's head!
    For what it's worth, I never thought that Silva had intended for Bond to catch up with him that quickly. If so, then why didn't he have his lackeys (with guns) rendezvous with him at that location just in case? The bomb was going to be detonated regardless, to create a distraction. Bond just happened to be in that exact spot when it went off. Which is quite a coincidence, granted. But at least it's a little less ludicrous.

    A little less, granted. But it's still my least favourite scene in the film.

    The other thing is while Silva is gloating halfway up the ladder why doesn't Bond shoot him then?!!!

    It cant be worse than Bond falling,not even tensed up,off the bridge in the PTS and living ?

    Surely the fact that he wasn't tensed up saved his life..?

    At that speed and height and the way he entered the water his spine would have snapped,but we digress,and even though i created this thread (among tonnes of others) it is a Bond film and as TF said,an appreciation thread...

  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    Hey, I appreciate it (It's in my top 10 Bond films) as you can see in my honest assessment of the film at 9.26 this morning.

    I like the film a lot but I can also point out it's minuses to balance my assessment.
Sign In or Register to comment.