SKYFALL: Is this the best Bond film?

14950515254

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 17,902
    mtm wrote: »
    Not much point in saying 'let's be honest' before one's opinion as if it's fact.

    I was referring to the lack of rationality (coherence is perhaps a better word for it) behind Silva's character, not a pronouncement on the film's overall quality (average).

    Everything he does is completely explained by his character motivations. Let's be honest.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 14,369
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Not much point in saying 'let's be honest' before one's opinion as if it's fact.

    I was referring to the lack of rationality (coherence is perhaps a better word for it) behind Silva's character, not a pronouncement on the film's overall quality (average).

    Everything he does is completely explained by his character motivations. Let's be honest.
    Silva himself is a Chatty Cathy on his own motivations. And they are rational based on his experience.

  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    Posts: 221
    TripAces wrote: »

    OK, there are complex models for things like traffic, chess and Go. But even 13 years post-film, there's no model for human behaviour, simply because a computer is only as good as the data it gets. Silva would have had to mentally sketch out at least each facet of the plan (and any potential others) to train the computer to react appropriately.

    And the data-collecting he'd need would rival some intelligence services (and would probable require quantum computing)! He'd need to consider that maybe one of the coppers had a new baby, didn't get enough sleep and missed the text message. Or maybe one's not where's supposed to be because he was feeling sick and was in the toilet.

    I think the whole escape bit is a "plot hole" (that's not really the proper phrasing) but it doesn't really matter in the context of the viewing experience. Remove that bit and no one who dislikes Skyfall is going to like or vice versa.

    But what you just described is indeed a computer programmed response to human behavior. As soon as your car makes a turn, the GPS recalculates. Social media algorithms do the same thing: tracks your movement, makes decisions on what you should see next. Same thing here. The job isn't that complex. Silva just needs the program to make corresponding moves based on time/place of capture, imprisonment, and access of computer. Is it a stretch? Sure. But within the world of Bond, not really.

    BTW: check out the series DEVS, created and directed by Alex Garland.

    It's a solid shame mi6 didn't realise all these technological super advances. They'd be able to not compose lists of nato agents or have indoor explosives connected to wifi.

    Let's be honest. There is no rationality behind Silva, his plan is batshit crazy and ill thought out by the screenwriters. Skyfall is just style over any discernible substance.


    It is. They were "behind the times" or simply not as advanced in working these systems. That's a main theme, Q points this out in the museum and Silva points it out to Bond when he's strapped to the chair. It's not the first time the Bond villain has outsmarted entire intelligence communities, right? That said, his "plan" makes sense. Yes, he is indeed crazy but not crazy enough to not realize that killing M with an explosion or sniper fire is unsatisfying. So it makes sense that he wants to make it personal and that at the same time, he wants to publicly humiliate her and MI6.

    There's being 'behind the times' and there is being utterly effing stupid. No amount of plot allusions can substantiate stupidity, especially amongst established characters.
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    Posts: 221
    mtm wrote: »
    Good thing he's good at using computers then! :)

    There's good at using computers and there's doing magic with computers. No IT skill will help me levitate.
    TripAces wrote: »
    Comparing the agent list to the Lektor is comparing apples and oranges. The Lektor is more important in regards to the plot of FRWL than the agent list is in SF. To focus and scrutinize the “realism” of the agent list is pretty much missing the point of the story SF is telling. The agent list is even rendered irrelevant midway through the film once Silva gets captured. Maybe in an older Bond film capturing Silva alive would have been the actual ending of the film, but in a movie like SF it’s only the second act.

    SF is more concerned with interpersonal conflicts than most other Bond films. Having the climax set in a remote location symbolically represents how the conflict between M and Silva has nothing to do with the rest of the world. Bond even sums it up: “Some men are coming to kill us, we’re gonna kill them first.” Nothing else is at stake. Indeed that’s how it works out, even though M ultimately died she got to live to see her affairs resolved with Bond’s help.

    Yes that's fair, but the comparison was made earlier
    TripAces wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    slide_99 wrote: »
    Silva is sold as this master villain, a ubiquitous menace so powerful he can hack into MI6 and make it blow itself up. Yet, his supposed masterplan is so full of holes and dependent on a series of random events occurring in sequence.\

    Yeah, his plan only works because everyone else behaves in uncharacteristically foolish ways. It's one of the most annoying tropes in modern movies.

    His plan is based on:
    -assuming Bond will arrive on his island to capture him instead of kill him (which he could have done after he killed Severine- what did MI6 even want him alive for?)
    -assuming he'll be placed in the particular prison which was built over a network of tunnels that'll allow him to easily escape
    -assuming Q will connect the laptop to MI6's network, and at exactly the same time that M is at her hearing
    -assuming that M will not be evacuated by an army of security guys the moment she gets word that the terrorist who hates her has escaped

    It's just too much. And it was all done so he could simply walk in on the hearing to shoot her, anyway. Since apparently he's stealthy/resourceful enough to fly around Britain in a stolen helicopter with an army of goons, why not just lie low until the hearing, sneak into Britain, and then shoot her? It has the benefit of being completely unexpected and not relying on a hundred little things that have to go to right beforehand.

    His plan isn't at all reliant on how people behave. It is capable of being adjusted based on how people behave.

    1. Silva expected to get captured. But the "how" was always going to be an unknown.
    2. Silva can program any escape from any place ahead of time. Just create the algorithm and let the computer do its thing.
    3. See #2. The plan will shift based on what people do. If Q plugs it earlier or later or the next day, that will create a chain reaction of different responses based on the computer and AI.
    4. He didn't assume that. He got lucky. Once he arrived at the courthouse, he was out of moves. It was just him, M, and his gun. And he choked. That's the beauty of it: Silva is a genius behind a keyboard, a complete dolt out in the field.

    Much as i like Skyfall, the whole escape/subway sequence i like the least. There's a hell of a lot of assumptions there! And i know it's for dramatic effect, but Silva's 'Hannibal Lecter' middle of the room cell is pretty ludicrous even for a Bond film..

    Once we're out of the subway, things improve immensely..

    Not really. It's like computer chess. If you make a move, the computer will make a corresponding move based on millions of calculations done in a split second. Add to that the ability of the computer to send/deliver robo messages and texts. So whatever happens with Silva's escape and where he is and when, the computer will know how to respond. The men who give him the uniform? Probably contacted just minutes before hand. The subway explosion? Likely had several bombs placed in the vicinity by "guns for hire" just days ahead of time. It's all a little preposterous, for sure, but also not outside the realm of possibility.

    This a human though, not a computer. No human has that level of preparation and planning.

    But it IS a computer: they can indeed make those calculations and adjustments. Even in 2012, we were venturing into a world of AI. If you use GPS system, it will route you in real time: it makes the decisions for you. Same with whatever Silva wanted to program. The whole monologue on the island tells us everything. Again, the wonderful irony of SF is that Silva is an idiot "in the field" when operating on his instincts...and yet that is the very method by which he insists on killing M.

    OK, there are complex models for things like traffic, chess and Go. But even 13 years post-film, there's no model for human behaviour, simply because a computer is only as good as the data it gets. Silva would have had to mentally sketch out at least each facet of the plan (and any potential others) to train the computer to react appropriately.

    And the data-collecting he'd need would rival some intelligence services (and would probable require quantum computing)! He'd need to consider that maybe one of the coppers had a new baby, didn't get enough sleep and missed the text message. Or maybe one's not where's supposed to be because he was feeling sick and was in the toilet.

    I think the whole escape bit is a "plot hole" (that's not really the proper phrasing) but it doesn't really matter in the context of the viewing experience. Remove that bit and no one who dislikes Skyfall is going to like or vice versa.

    The worst aspect of Silva's hype is just how incredibly useless he is after the reveal. Great opening speech but nothing else.
  • Posts: 5,109
    He also smells… and has a funny nose. Useless villain.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited May 4 Posts: 4,662
    TripAces wrote: »

    OK, there are complex models for things like traffic, chess and Go. But even 13 years post-film, there's no model for human behaviour, simply because a computer is only as good as the data it gets. Silva would have had to mentally sketch out at least each facet of the plan (and any potential others) to train the computer to react appropriately.

    And the data-collecting he'd need would rival some intelligence services (and would probable require quantum computing)! He'd need to consider that maybe one of the coppers had a new baby, didn't get enough sleep and missed the text message. Or maybe one's not where's supposed to be because he was feeling sick and was in the toilet.

    I think the whole escape bit is a "plot hole" (that's not really the proper phrasing) but it doesn't really matter in the context of the viewing experience. Remove that bit and no one who dislikes Skyfall is going to like or vice versa.

    But what you just described is indeed a computer programmed response to human behavior. As soon as your car makes a turn, the GPS recalculates. Social media algorithms do the same thing: tracks your movement, makes decisions on what you should see next. Same thing here. The job isn't that complex. Silva just needs the program to make corresponding moves based on time/place of capture, imprisonment, and access of computer. Is it a stretch? Sure. But within the world of Bond, not really.

    BTW: check out the series DEVS, created and directed by Alex Garland.

    It's a solid shame mi6 didn't realise all these technological super advances. They'd be able to not compose lists of nato agents or have indoor explosives connected to wifi.

    Let's be honest. There is no rationality behind Silva, his plan is batshit crazy and ill thought out by the screenwriters. Skyfall is just style over any discernible substance.


    It is. They were "behind the times" or simply not as advanced in working these systems. That's a main theme, Q points this out in the museum and Silva points it out to Bond when he's strapped to the chair. It's not the first time the Bond villain has outsmarted entire intelligence communities, right? That said, his "plan" makes sense. Yes, he is indeed crazy but not crazy enough to not realize that killing M with an explosion or sniper fire is unsatisfying. So it makes sense that he wants to make it personal and that at the same time, he wants to publicly humiliate her and MI6.

    There's being 'behind the times' and there is being utterly effing stupid. No amount of plot allusions can substantiate stupidity, especially amongst established characters.

    I think of those in 2005/2006 (geniuses in looking at the numbers and using technology) who saw the housing market crash before it happened, when here in the U.S, the government insisted that the economy was rock solid. There is always a blind spot, especially when it comes to government agencies. Or in the early 2000s when MP3s were on the rise, and not even people like Richard Branson saw it. The entire music industry crashed.

    Silva was exploiting a paradigm shift. And much of SF really deals with those shifts.
  • Posts: 2,513
    There is a lot to unpack here in this thread. Skyfall has grown on me quite a bit (even making it into my Top 10 films of the series) - simply put there are just other Bond films that I prefer to Skyfall - but I’m not about to argue against the merits of the film. It’s the most “crowd pleasing” of Craig’s run and despite it falling short of Casino Royale imho, I find it MILES ahead of its predecessor and the following two films.

    I can’t say for certain what the “best” Bond film is - my favorite of the series probably wouldn’t qualify as “the best” but if I had my arms twisted I’d probably have to give the award to From Russia With Love - it’s intricately plotted, it’s not too gritty but still has one foot in the door of the fantastical elements Dr. No introduced, the cast is phenomenal and Connery himself is in top form giving one of his best performances as Bond.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited May 4 Posts: 4,662
    There is a lot to unpack here in this thread. Skyfall has grown on me quite a bit (even making it into my Top 10 films of the series) - simply put there are just other Bond films that I prefer to Skyfall - but I’m not about to argue against the merits of the film. It’s the most “crowd pleasing” of Craig’s run and despite it falling short of Casino Royale imho, I find it MILES ahead of its predecessor and the following two films.

    I can’t say for certain what the “best” Bond film is - my favorite of the series probably wouldn’t qualify as “the best” but if I had my arms twisted I’d probably have to give the award to From Russia With Love - it’s intricately plotted, it’s not too gritty but still has one foot in the door of the fantastical elements Dr. No introduced, the cast is phenomenal and Connery himself is in top form giving one of his best performances as Bond.

    None of us can. It's all subjective. Since this is a "Skyfall is Best" thread, the arguments will tilt that way.

    SF, TB, GF, CR, and (yes) FRWL are my rock solid top 5, A+, gold standard Bond films. Each has its own set of problems: plot, character, technical. No film is perfect.
  • Posts: 2,513
    TripAces wrote: »
    There is a lot to unpack here in this thread. Skyfall has grown on me quite a bit (even making it into my Top 10 films of the series) - simply put there are just other Bond films that I prefer to Skyfall - but I’m not about to argue against the merits of the film. It’s the most “crowd pleasing” of Craig’s run and despite it falling short of Casino Royale imho, I find it MILES ahead of its predecessor and the following two films.

    I can’t say for certain what the “best” Bond film is - my favorite of the series probably wouldn’t qualify as “the best” but if I had my arms twisted I’d probably have to give the award to From Russia With Love - it’s intricately plotted, it’s not too gritty but still has one foot in the door of the fantastical elements Dr. No introduced, the cast is phenomenal and Connery himself is in top form giving one of his best performances as Bond.

    None of us can. It's all subjective. Since this is a "Skyfall is Best" thread, the arguments will tilt that way.

    SF, TB, GF, CR, and (yes) FRWL are my rock solid top 5, A+, gold standard Bond films. Each has its own set of problems: plot, character, technical. No film is perfect.

    Oh yeah - my top five isn’t perfect either but by all means they encapsulate what I love about the series so well.

    It’ll be interesting to see the dialog surrounding Skyfall as we approach its 15th anniversary - it seems its detractors get louder and louder as time goes on.
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    Posts: 221
    TripAces wrote: »
    There is a lot to unpack here in this thread. Skyfall has grown on me quite a bit (even making it into my Top 10 films of the series) - simply put there are just other Bond films that I prefer to Skyfall - but I’m not about to argue against the merits of the film. It’s the most “crowd pleasing” of Craig’s run and despite it falling short of Casino Royale imho, I find it MILES ahead of its predecessor and the following two films.

    I can’t say for certain what the “best” Bond film is - my favorite of the series probably wouldn’t qualify as “the best” but if I had my arms twisted I’d probably have to give the award to From Russia With Love - it’s intricately plotted, it’s not too gritty but still has one foot in the door of the fantastical elements Dr. No introduced, the cast is phenomenal and Connery himself is in top form giving one of his best performances as Bond.

    None of us can. It's all subjective. Since this is a "Skyfall is Best" thread, the arguments will tilt that way.

    SF, TB, GF, CR, and (yes) FRWL are my rock solid top 5, A+, gold standard Bond films. Each has its own set of problems: plot, character, technical. No film is perfect.

    Oh yeah - my top five isn’t perfect either but by all means they encapsulate what I love about the series so well.

    It’ll be interesting to see the dialog surrounding Skyfall as we approach its 15th anniversary - it seems its detractors get louder and louder as time goes on.

    I think the fact is was so critically lauded is the reason for vehement detractors. We just don't want the series to veer off into a Skyfall inspired template.

    Bond ought to be much much better than this.
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    Posts: 221
    TripAces wrote: »
    There is a lot to unpack here in this thread. Skyfall has grown on me quite a bit (even making it into my Top 10 films of the series) - simply put there are just other Bond films that I prefer to Skyfall - but I’m not about to argue against the merits of the film. It’s the most “crowd pleasing” of Craig’s run and despite it falling short of Casino Royale imho, I find it MILES ahead of its predecessor and the following two films.

    I can’t say for certain what the “best” Bond film is - my favorite of the series probably wouldn’t qualify as “the best” but if I had my arms twisted I’d probably have to give the award to From Russia With Love - it’s intricately plotted, it’s not too gritty but still has one foot in the door of the fantastical elements Dr. No introduced, the cast is phenomenal and Connery himself is in top form giving one of his best performances as Bond.

    None of us can. It's all subjective. Since this is a "Skyfall is Best" thread, the arguments will tilt that way.

    SF, TB, GF, CR, and (yes) FRWL are my rock solid top 5, A+, gold standard Bond films. Each has its own set of problems: plot, character, technical. No film is perfect.

    Have to say, I disagree with your takes on sf but found your top five list really interesting. Some range.
  • edited May 4 Posts: 701
    The film does get better in my mind as years go on, however there are still two big peeves I have with it:

    - I would've liked the film to have a set piece on the level of the Istanbul opening halfway through... the casino scene and Silva's island scene didn't really scratch that itch for me, as far as thrills go. The casino obviously looked beautiful and had really good atmosphere of course.

    - The CG special effects takes me out on more than one occasion. Some of the shots at Silva's island, that helicopter that shows up above them, the komodo dragons, to name a few.

    Still, I would say it is a top 5 Bond for me.

    The thing is, with such unimpeachable cinematography (maybe the best of that year even?), those VFX details just feel more noticeable.
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    Posts: 221
    The thing is, with such unimpeachable cinematography (maybe the best of that year even?), those VFX details just feel more noticeable.

    Aye, style over substance.

    Looks good but is intrinsically hollow.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited May 4 Posts: 4,662
    The film does get better in my mind as years go on, however there are still two big peeves I have with it:

    - I would've liked the film to have a set piece on the level of the Istanbul opening halfway through... the casino scene and Silva's island scene didn't really scratch that itch for me, as far as thrills go. The casino obviously looked beautiful and had really good atmosphere of course.

    - The CG special effects takes me out on more than one occasion. Some of the shots at Silva's island, that helicopter that shows up above them, the komodo dragons, to name a few.

    Still, I would say it is a top 5 Bond for me.

    The thing is, with such unimpeachable cinematography (maybe the best of that year even?), those VFX details just feel more noticeable.

    Those are fair criticisms. I am not a big fan of the Istanbul PTS. It has some cliched moments in it, and a bad line from Moneypenny. It was also a little stuffed with product placement. They made this all seem natural, but when bunched together it was forced. And the chase went on a little long for my liking.

    I didn't like that Severine was an after thought. I want to believe that Bond was genuinely concerned for her*.

    The action in the final act got a little tiring, as well. But Silva's look of exasperation (when Bond and the henchman fall into the lake) is a payoff.


    * I am not a believer in the "Bond is a Misogynist" criticism. There are many instances of Bond showing care and concern for the women he encounters, especially if they are victims of the spy game. His responses to both Jill and Tilly Masterson are a perfect example. He was concerned for Plenty's safety in DAF. He is pissed over what happened to Fields in QoS.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,224
    TripAces wrote: »
    SF, TB, GF, CR, and (yes) FRWL are my rock solid top 5, A+, gold standard Bond films. Each has its own set of problems: plot, character, technical. No film is perfect.

    Replace TB (which I find relatively meh) with NTTD, and you have my own top five, though not necessarily in the order you mentioned (rather, not really at all, but this is about nuances). But they are the combined zenith of the Bond movie franchise.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,662
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    SF, TB, GF, CR, and (yes) FRWL are my rock solid top 5, A+, gold standard Bond films. Each has its own set of problems: plot, character, technical. No film is perfect.

    Replace TB (which I find relatively meh) with NTTD, and you have my own top five, though not necessarily in the order you mentioned (rather, not really at all, but this is about nuances). But they are the combined zenith of the Bond movie franchise.

    Indeed, I am one of the few who holds TB in such high regard.
  • edited 12:16am Posts: 5,109
    TripAces wrote: »
    There is a lot to unpack here in this thread. Skyfall has grown on me quite a bit (even making it into my Top 10 films of the series) - simply put there are just other Bond films that I prefer to Skyfall - but I’m not about to argue against the merits of the film. It’s the most “crowd pleasing” of Craig’s run and despite it falling short of Casino Royale imho, I find it MILES ahead of its predecessor and the following two films.

    I can’t say for certain what the “best” Bond film is - my favorite of the series probably wouldn’t qualify as “the best” but if I had my arms twisted I’d probably have to give the award to From Russia With Love - it’s intricately plotted, it’s not too gritty but still has one foot in the door of the fantastical elements Dr. No introduced, the cast is phenomenal and Connery himself is in top form giving one of his best performances as Bond.

    None of us can. It's all subjective. Since this is a "Skyfall is Best" thread, the arguments will tilt that way.

    SF, TB, GF, CR, and (yes) FRWL are my rock solid top 5, A+, gold standard Bond films. Each has its own set of problems: plot, character, technical. No film is perfect.

    Oh yeah - my top five isn’t perfect either but by all means they encapsulate what I love about the series so well.

    It’ll be interesting to see the dialog surrounding Skyfall as we approach its 15th anniversary - it seems its detractors get louder and louder as time goes on.

    Oh yeah, every Bond film is someone’s favourite (or in this case in their top 5).

    I think SF will have much the same sort of lifespan as any other popular Bond movie. Amongst general audiences it’ll continue to be popular on the whole. Fans will write long messages and rip it apart in the short term (whether they love it or not), especially in the years after the Craig era. Likely it’ll be followed by many retrospectively praising it, especially if it was one of their first Bond films. Articles or think-pieces will be written about its politics or social leanings, some critical, and some more sympathetic about the film. But whatever way I can’t see it suddenly becoming a ‘bad film’ or outright forgotten because some fans are vocal on their internet about their criticisms and don’t like the fact that this Bond film is praised.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 17,902
    Yes I think deciding to attack it specifically because it is well-regarded is an odd move.
  • Posts: 1,889

    TripAces wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    SF, TB, GF, CR, and (yes) FRWL are my rock solid top 5, A+, gold standard Bond films. Each has its own set of problems: plot, character, technical. No film is perfect.

    Replace TB (which I find relatively meh) with NTTD, and you have my own top five, though not necessarily in the order you mentioned (rather, not really at all, but this is about nuances). But they are the combined zenith of the Bond movie franchise.

    Indeed, I am one of the few who holds TB in such high regard.

    You're not alone. TB is better than 95% of the Bond films, in my opinion.
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    Posts: 221
    mtm wrote: »
    Yes I think deciding to attack it specifically because it is well-regarded is an odd move.

    It usually is, but it certainly invigorates the conversation.
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    edited 8:34am Posts: 221
    007HallY wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »

    I think SF will have much the same sort of lifespan as any other popular Bond movie. Amongst general audiences it’ll continue to be popular on the whole. .

    If this is so, it'll be spoken about in laudable terms until its template doesn't do it anymore, then it'll be resuscitated whenever its replacement runs out of juice.

    This isn't a phenomenon new to Skyfall. It's The Goldfinger Effect.

    Furthermore, all the Bond movies split opinion and analysis. Too many cooks, and such. You yourself have held it is all 'subjective'. Skyfall isn't special in this regard, either.
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    Posts: 221
    If this is so, it'll be spoken about in laudable terms until its template doesn't do it anymore, then it'll be resuscitated whenever its replacement runs out of juice.

    This isn't a phenomenon new to Skyfall. It's The Goldfinger Effect.

    Furthermore, all the Bond movies split opinion and analysis. Too many cooks, and such. You yourself have held it is all 'subjective'. Skyfall isn't special in this regard, either.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 17,902
    You need to edit the post: make sure there’s an equal number of quote brackets.
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    Posts: 221
    Aye. Not sure what happened there.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,590
    mtm wrote: »
    Yes I think deciding to attack it specifically because it is well-regarded is an odd move.

    That’s the funny thing about popular films is that they attract fans as well as detractors. There’s always gonna be that sourpuss that comes in at the party and says “I can’t understand why this is so popular” while crossing their arms as everyone continues to dance and have fun.
  • edited 4:47pm Posts: 5,109
    I suppose it's to be expected. I can somewhat relate. I'm sure I've had the same attitude even to certain Bond films in the past. Ultimately as well, I think as fans writing on a forum we do have to understand we're in a bit of a bubble with how a film is perceived, at least to some extent. I mean, for all the complaining about this film here (as well as praise and genuine admiration for it) there's a reason it seems to be highly rated. Many people I know enjoy it, even if they don't really like Bond films. It must have done something right as a movie. I'd say the same about any successful movie -Bond or otherwise - I have subjective criticisms about.
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    edited 5:37pm Posts: 221
    mtm wrote: »
    Yes I think deciding to attack it specifically because it is well-regarded is an odd move.

    That’s the funny thing about popular films is that they attract fans as well as detractors. There’s always gonna be that sourpuss that comes in at the party and says “I can’t understand why this is so popular” while crossing their arms as everyone continues to dance and have fun.

    All films get plaudits and detractions. Some at the same time.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,590
    There’s a distinct difference between a popular well regarded film like SKYFALL and something like THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. You’ll never hear anyone claim that the former is underrated, just as you’ll never hear anyone claim the latter is overrated.
  • edited 6:12pm Posts: 5,109
    The only official Bond film I can think of that’s gone down in estimation for viewers is TB… even then I think at the time its financial success was generally accepted to be part of Bondmania and it wasn’t necessarily seen as better than GF all round. And it’s certainly not a bad or ill regarded film. NSNA I think has definitely taken a hit in terms of reputation from its initial success, and I wouldn’t even say that’s a bad film for all its flaws. All the other EON Bond films have their defenders.

    SF I think will be fine in that sense.
  • Posts: 1,889
    There’s a distinct difference between a popular well regarded film like SKYFALL and something like THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. You’ll never hear anyone claim that the former is underrated, just as you’ll never hear anyone claim the latter is overrated.

    To be fair, I'd never thought TMWTGG was not liked before. I always believed Scaramanga was considered one of the best villains in the series.
Sign In or Register to comment.