SKYFALL: FANS' REACTIONS - GUARANTEED SPOILERS

1252628303199

Comments

  • Posts: 1,407
    So after seeing the film again for a 3rd time, I need to bring attention to someone. We've all talked about Dench and Bardem and Craig. But has anyone noticed how great a performance Rory Kinnear gave as Tanner? I mean what a step up from QOS. Reminded me of Tanner from the books. I can see him and Bond playing a game of golf together. Kinnear impressed me
  • But... he hardly did anything.
  • Posts: 1,407
    But... he hardly did anything.

    I think that's a little harsh. Maybe it's because I'm a big fan of the Tanner character from the books but I think Kinnear gave a great performance. Again, he's not a star in this film. Just something I noticed
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 It was this or the priesthood.
    Posts: 28,231
    But... he hardly did anything.

    What, do you expect him to join the fray with Bond? Not likely. And just because a role doesn't demand any physical work doesn't make it a simple performance. The hardest performances are ones where you aren't give anything to do, because the focus will be on you and you alone and you must be able to make the audience become interested in you regardless.
  • I honestly don't see the difference between his performance in SF and QOS. He had more lines but other than that I thought he was the same.

    I think he did well with what he was given but he was given basically nothing, his performance didn't really stand out to me.

    I think Tanner is a fairly boring character and I don't really care about him but Kinnear does seem pretty dedicated to it. He returned for SF after the 4 year break and he's done all the recent video games, so I think he's a fan and he enjoys it.
  • Posts: 6,601
    bondbat007 wrote:
    So after seeing the film again for a 3rd time, I need to bring attention to someone. We've all talked about Dench and Bardem and Craig. But has anyone noticed how great a performance Rory Kinnear gave as Tanner? I mean what a step up from QOS. Reminded me of Tanner from the books. I can see him and Bond playing a game of golf together. Kinnear impressed me

    Actually I have read favourable reviews about him before, so you are not the only one. For me, for the first time, he turned into something like a real character, which he was not in the other two.

  • edited November 2012 Posts: 12,397
    Germanlady wrote:
    which he was not in the other two.

    Two? Was he in Casino Royale?

    Actually was he even in the Brosnan films? Or did we not see him from the 80s up until QOS?
  • Germanlady wrote:
    which he was not in the other two.

    Two? Was he in Casino Royale?

    Actually was he even in the Brosnan films? Or did we not see him from the 80s up until QOS?

    Tanner was not in CR. He was played by a different actor in GE and TWINE.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 It was this or the priesthood.
    Posts: 28,231
    Villiers was the "Tanner" role of CR.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,463
    Germanlady wrote:
    which he was not in the other two.

    Two? Was he in Casino Royale?

    Actually was he even in the Brosnan films? Or did we not see him from the 80s up until QOS?

    Tanner was not in CR. He was played by a different actor in GE and TWINE.

    I liked Michael Kitchen. I thought he was fantastic in GE.
  • RC7 wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    which he was not in the other two.

    Two? Was he in Casino Royale?

    Actually was he even in the Brosnan films? Or did we not see him from the 80s up until QOS?

    Tanner was not in CR. He was played by a different actor in GE and TWINE.

    I liked Michael Kitchen. I thought he was fantastic in GE.

    Agreed. His 'evil queen of numbers' line and subsequent reaction when he realized M was there was well done.
  • Posts: 6,601
    Villiers was the "Tanner" role of CR.

    True. Sorry. A younger geeky guy. I remember him now.

  • This is another gripe of mine. Villiers is a key guy in the book CR, but is some tall lanky fool in the film, towering over M and picked only to contrast with the on the ball Craig. We don't see him again, so another wasted precious Fleming character, just like Mathis. And Tanner has been in two, but I'm not sure why they need pick a brilliant theatre actor like Kinnear for a role where really you just quickly need to make an impression, no character development required.
  • Posts: 11,175
    Just saw it for a third time today. Teriffic film! Easiy top 5 stuff. I felt shivers when Dench was delivering her monologue at the hearing.
  • I enjoyed SKYFALL enormously and, although I remain no fan of Daniel Craig, whose face reminds me of Scooter in The Muppet Show, I have already seen it three times. One thing puzzles me: namely Eve Moneypenny. I cannot get my head around the chronology, whereby Craig's Bond says to Eve that they've never been properly introduced. In SKYFALL, Bond drives his Aston Martin DB5, licence plate BMT 216A, the very same vehicle to which he is introduced for the very first time in GOLDFINGER. But in the film of GOLDFINGER, Bond already knows Miss Moneypenny (played by Lois Maxwell). Even if we ignore the subtle change of skin colour presented by the lovely Naomie Harris in the role of Eve Moneypenny, the episode in SKYFALL is a chronological inexactitude. Maybe I should get out more :( , but such glaring inconsistencies really ought to be ironed out by the scriptwriters and producers before filming of SKYFALL began.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 512
    It's been pointed out, but some on the forum say you should just go with it, it's a nod to the audience and if you're really picky there's nothing to stop Craig having got his new DB5 kitted out by Q branch off screen after QoS or something. It's a different way of reading the film. As for Moneypenny, well that's where we call the film a reboot, there is no chronology with the other series, no GF or anything, it isn't meant to tie in at all.

    Should add that I agree with you, esp on the DB5, but also it's not as crazy as Craig not even finding out her name until the final scene... WTF?
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    It's been pointed out, but some on the forum say you should just go with it, it's a nod to the audience and if you're really picky there's nothing to stop Craig having got his new DB5 kitted out by Q branch off screen after QoS or something. It's a different way of reading the film. As for Moneypenny, well that's where we call the film a reboot, there is no chronology with the other series, no GF or anything, it isn't meant to tie in at all.

    Should add that I agree with you, esp on the DB5, but also it's not as crazy as Craig not even finding out her name until the final scene... WTF?

    You'd be surprised, I've been working with someone for many months and only today did I find everyone else calls her by a nickname I didn't know.
  • eve and bond were on a mission together, i would have thought some background on each other and introductions would be a requisite, we are talking about MI6.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 1
    The film is solid. And it does leave the franchise if not where we left off pre-Craig, and least on familiar footing. The next film could go in any direction and that's a good thing. Hopefully all involved will see what difference a well-honed screenplay can make, and put as much effort into the next one as well, even if it means we don't get a Bond film in 2013, I'd much rather have a very good Bond film than a mediocre one.

    Gun barrel sequence at the end -- didn't bother me. It's the meat in between that counts. There have been quite a few mediocre Bond films with a traditional gun barrel sequence.

    Like the new Q a lot. Couldn't help watching the "laying a false trail" scene thinking this is how Jack Bauer's day would have gone if he had competent leadership in CTU!

    The CGI scenes didn't bother me. The helicopter did look strange, but I couldn't place my finger on why. All in all audiences have been spoiled. CGI will no more take me out of a movie than a model shot or a dummy falling out of a plane if it's in there to serve the story. The komodo dragon's. It wasn't bad CGI and it wasn't CGI just for the sake of having it. I don't know how else could you do that scene as the beasts are untrainable last time I checked. CGI creatures that exist in the real world have never been completely believable, and other than not having the scene, I don't know how else they'd have achieved it.

    The pluses for me were seeing well-choreographed stunt sequences filmed in a way that I could appreciate the work these brilliant people put into it. [This one a primary flaw of QoS].

    The score was adequate, but I did appreciate the inclusion of the Bond theme more than once. It really is a great theme, and a sorely missed when it's not there.

    All in All 5 out of 5. Money well spent and worth a second and third viewing.
  • Just seen Skyfall for a second time some 3 weeks 5 days after original viewing, I still have some issues with it, especially the inclusion of the DB5 in Goldfinger configuration, but I enjoyed it more on second viewing, I think it's a grower. I think the first time I saw it I was expecting a lot, maybe too much as a Bond fan of well over 40 Years, I was more chilled this time so accepted it more for what it is.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 34,970
    Agentprovo wrote:
    Just seen Skyfall for a second time some 3 weeks 5 days after original viewing, I still have some issues with it, especially the inclusion of the DB5 in Goldfinger configuration, but I enjoyed it more on second viewing, I think it's a grower. I think the first time I saw it I was expecting a lot, maybe too much as a Bond fan of well over 40 Years, I was more chilled this time so accepted it more for what it is.

    While I've only been a fan for about 15 years, I agree with what you said in the latter half of your comment: after four years - and being such a different outing than Craig's last Bond film - I expected a lot, amped myself up too much (which I said I wouldn't do), and left the theater feeling indifferent. I enjoyed it much more the second time when I picked out what I loved and took it for what it delivered.
  • tqbtqb
    Posts: 1,019
    Although a certain someone in this thread may have caused a bunch of arguments, I do agree with him on one point. I too was expecting a "Casino Royale 2.0" and got Skyfall which is very different, so in that regard I was disappointed. However, SF is still a really good movie, and as Agentprovo has said, a grower. We'll see where they go with the franchise next.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited November 2012 Posts: 11,090
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Just saw it for a third time today. Teriffic film! Easiy top 5 stuff. I felt shivers when Dench was delivering her monologue at the hearing.

    Agreed. Her recitation of the poem juxtaposed with Bond running, heroically determined to get to the hearing was brilliant and for me tops the Tosca shootout.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,090
    Agentprovo wrote:
    Just seen Skyfall for a second time some 3 weeks 5 days after original viewing, I still have some issues with it, especially the inclusion of the DB5 in Goldfinger configuration, but I enjoyed it more on second viewing, I think it's a grower. I think the first time I saw it I was expecting a lot, maybe too much as a Bond fan of well over 40 Years, I was more chilled this time so accepted it more for what it is.

    I get that people have issues with the DB5 but really is it that bad? I kind of stopped caring about Superfluous stuff like that the moment Dench was brought back for CR (which was less of an issue than the kitted out DB5) amongst fans, which is why such criticisms I respect but in no way agree with at all. Hell, Bobd didn't get the DB5 until GF but he wins it at a card game in CR? Honestly, people need to relax and take tge time to understand that the time line and continuity of the Bond movies is messed up and it's something your supposed to just go with. In the Crsig era it's been numerous years that sets the events of CR/QoS apart from SF, it's more than logical that the car would have been kitted out within that time. Also, most importantly, the kitted out DB5 was included as a treat for the fans, which seems to have gone largely unappreciated. I just thank God that Mendes decided to destroy the damn car because all this moaning about it is quite ridiculous to me. Now the series can start a new with a different car(s).
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 3,037
    [Moved review to the other review thread]
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 19,746
    At this point I would like to remind our members that the following thread allows for lengthy reviews of SF to be published in a clean fashion and without random replies from others. Anyone who feels like they have the talent to write a very decent review, please head over there. ;-) Thank you!

    http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/4494/skyfall-2012#Item_2
  • Posts: 116
    I didn't see a general review thread so I'm just gonna post this.

    I haven't been around here for at least a year because I didn't want to be spoiled for this movie. What I knew going in was the two trailers and the title. That is all.

    I have to share my excitement and deep satisfaction with other Bond fans.

    When I was 12 years old I read my first Ian Fleming novel, "The Man With The Golden Gun". Naturally, I was shocked by the content of the book. But when I put it down I thought, "Why aren't the movies like this?" Over the years the Bond movies have flirted with the idea of putting Fleming's Bond on the screen, just as written. There were stand-outs like HMSS, TLD, LTK and CR, but I always felt that there was some vital element missing that kept even the best of the films from truly capturing Fleming's Bond. Today I finally saw "my" Bond on screen: a human being who happens to be a skilled agent, a man (not a superhero) with an interesting personality who you end up rooting for.

    They've finally done it. "Skyfall" is a character-driven espionage mystery adventure, written for adults, with an actual flesh and blood human being at the center of it. I know there are some fans of the movie franchise who don't like these types of Bond films, and I know there are many on these boards who probably hated this movie. For me, I finally saw the Bond movie I would have made. I'm so glad they dropped the whole "killer instinct" thing: this Bond is intelligent, experienced, that's where his strengths as an agent are, a Thinking Bond. I love how Skyfall is rooted in classic British espionage fiction, I was frequently reminded of Fleming, Le Carre, and John Gardner.

    I panicked a little early on: big action sequence (cool, but how is that new?), then pouty Bond drinking and sexing it up. Fortunately that was just the lead-up to the actual film. It's like they got the "James Bond Movie" out of the way in the first 20 minutes and then simply made a gripping spy thriller with Fleming's Bond at the heart of it. Maybe that is what they did! I don't know. But I had a good vibe sitting through the opening credits: for the first time, I believe, they work as a short film, exploring the psychology of Bond, laying out the symbols and subtext of the film, it reminded me so much of the surreal psychological sequences from Hitchcock movies. Visually this easily the best looking of the series, with images that are more than simply polished, they have psychological depth, these are modern images, not just flash, they work as images do in films by directors like Hitchcock, Scorsese, Coppola etc.

    I can't go into detail, having only seen the movie once. But I was 100% pleased. The last 10 minutes are simply the best in the entire series. What really excited me was where it leaves off. With past Bonds, age became an issue because they still had Bond diving out of rockets and seducing 20 year old girls. With this version of Bond, M, Q, and Moneypenny, they could easily do two or three more. There's nothing absurd about this Bond. Give him a good script, a gripping story, and a first class director, and age becomes a non-issue.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 19,746
    In order to avoid confusion with the more formal review thread, I moved this one to the Skyfall section.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    I thoroughly enjoyed reading your review @MrSpy. My favourite sentence is
    MrSpy wrote:
    "Skyfall" is a character-driven espionage mystery adventure, written for adults, with an actual flesh and blood human being at the center of it.

    I wish I had written it!

  • Posts: 6,601
    Sandy wrote:
    I thoroughly enjoyed reading your review @MrSpy. My favourite sentence is
    MrSpy wrote:
    "Skyfall" is a character-driven espionage mystery adventure, written for adults, with an actual flesh and blood human being at the center of it.

    I wish I had written it!

    I suppose, this is how pretty much people see and enjoy tis film. I have read many views, where people stated, they were not necessarely Bond fans, but enoyed this film.
Sign In or Register to comment.