› ›

A place for disappointed skyfall viewers

1…1112141617…24

Comments

  • DRESSED_TO_KILLDRESSED_TO_KILL Suspended
    Posts: 260
    Sure creasy, I enjoyed the beginning of the film, I really enjoyed bond hunting down patrice in Shanghai, I loved when he hung onto the elevator, I really enjoyed seeing bond do pullups, I always wanted a bond outing to showcase bonds fitness regimen, and that was enjoyable for me to see. I enjoyed the very beginning when bond sees the dying MI6 agent but decides not to help him due to Ms decision. I enjoyed seeing Bond live a desolated and lonely life on the beach. I liked seeing bond let go alittle and drink shots. Basically I enjoyed the movie up until when bond reaches silvas island. Basically when silva was introduced the movie went to hell in my opinion and became to unrealistic , corny, and boring.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited November 2012 Posts: 13,350
    Zekidk wrote:
    Creasy47 wrote:
    @Zekidk, do you think that's how 'Bond 24' will be? We have Q, Moneypenny, and a new M now. I think Bond is at his peak in the Craig world - I don't see a large amount of character development coming from him again
    That's what I said in 2006 after CR. And in 2008.

    But we didn't have M, Q and Moneypenny then. This time I'm willing to wait and see what happens.
  • AgentprovoAgentprovo
    edited November 2012 Posts: 86
    DRESSED_TO_KILL wrote:
    Sure creasy, I enjoyed the beginning of the film, I really enjoyed bond hunting down patrice in Shanghai, I loved when he hung onto the elevator, I really enjoyed seeing bond do pullups, I always wanted a bond outing to showcase bonds fitness regimen, and that was enjoyable for me to see. I enjoyed the very beginning when bond sees the dying MI6 agent but decides not to help him due to Ms decision. I enjoyed seeing Bond live a desolated and lonely life on the beach. I liked seeing bond let go alittle and drink shots. Basically I enjoyed the movie up until when bond reaches silvas island. Basically when silva was introduced the movie went to hell in my opinion and became to unrealistic , corny, and boring.

    I think you have a point, on reflection I thought that it started to go downhill when Silva started with soudo homoerotic overtones it just seemed too staged, almost for dramatic effect, however to be a tad hypocritical, I really enjoyed the bit with the running through the streets to the hearing with Judi Dench quoting Ulysses, it was dramatic but very poignant, thoughtful even, then after the gun fight at the OK courtroom, it just went wrong in so many ways, the pyrotechnics at the lodge were quite good but they're just elements that do not make a whole, I even liked the ending from the roof scene on as it gave me some hope for improvement.

  • ZekidkZekidk
    Posts: 3,169
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Zekidk wrote:
    Creasy47 wrote:
    @Zekidk, do you think that's how 'Bond 24' will be? We have Q, Moneypenny, and a new M now. I think Bond is at his peak in the Craig world - I don't see a large amount of character development coming from him again
    That's what I said in 2006 after CR. And in 2008.

    But we didn't have M, Q and Moneypenny then. This time I'm willing to wait and see what happens.
    Huh? M was in both CR and QoS. But I was referring to the character development of Bond only.

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,492
    @DRESSED_TO_KILL, fair enough. I do think there are quite a few people who share the same view point as you: they thought the film went downhill when it reached Silva's island. My main complaint(s) with that scene:

    Silva's dialogue (the way it was said) was different than the trailers. I know this happens from time to time, but I was so used to how it sounded in the trailers that I felt it was rushed when he said the whole "Mommy was very bad." line.

    Also, Severine was severely underused. She was in all of the marketing, she spent some quality time in other promotional features and trailers, yet if you blink, you missed her, it seems.
  • DRESSED_TO_KILLDRESSED_TO_KILL Suspended
    Posts: 260
    Yes Definitely Creasy, I agree. Severine was very under-used. It's quite a shame because I enjoyed her character and background story.

    Does anybody else feel like Severines death scene was very fast sloppfully done?, I was thinking to myself "is she dead? did silva shoot the cup of Scotch off her head successfully or did he kill her?" then out of nowhere bond is making a joke about a waste of Scotch while we see a dead severine for about 6 seconds. The scene feels totally out of place and awkward. I cant believe she had such a small role, with all the interviews she had, and all the marketing she did for skyfall I was expecting a major role for Severine, I really thought she would be in most of the film.and die a more tragic , heartfelt death rather than the quickly rushed target practice scene we had forced down our throats, or should I say forced on our eyes...
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,492
    DRESSED_TO_KILL wrote:
    Yes Definitely Creasy, I agree. Severine was very under-used. It's quite a shame because I enjoyed her character and background story.

    Does anybody else feel like Severines death scene was very fast sloppfully done?, I was thinking to myself "is she dead? did silva shoot the cup of Scotch off her head successfully or did he kill her?" then out of nowhere bond is making a joke about a waste of Scotch while we see a dead severine for about 6 seconds. The scene feels totally out of place and awkward. I cant believe she had such a small role, with all the interviews she had, and all the marketing she did for skyfall I was expecting a major role for Severine, I really thought she would be in most of the film.and die a more tragic , heartfelt death rather than the quickly rushed target practice scene we had forced down our throats, or should I say forced on our eyes...

    I also sympathized with her heavily after Bond pegs her life story at the bar in the Macau casino. He gives her some TLC, and boom, she's down. I think they just wanted to show how truly insane and spontaneous Silva is.
  • DRESSED_TO_KILLDRESSED_TO_KILL Suspended
    Posts: 260
    Am I the only one who felt the ending battle at Bonds house was just way too long, boring and just did not feel like a bond movie? Too me it was just like any other generic action finale. Nothing about the ending finale felt original or of any quality.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited November 2012 Posts: 16,333
    DRESSED_TO_KILL wrote:
    Am I the only one who felt the ending battle at Bonds house was just way too long, boring and just did not feel like a bond movie? Too me it was just like any other generic action finale. Nothing about the ending finale felt original or of any quality.

    I was hoping for a brutal fight between him and Silva, but I thought it was cool how it was going from day to night in real time.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,492
    @Murdock, that was the one thing that upset me. I initially complained that nothing came of the finale, but then I factored in Bond taking out all of the henchmen previous to Silva's entry, and I realized I enjoyed it a lot more on the second viewing. I do wish Bond had taken out the helicopter with some gunfire perhaps, and really wish Bond and Silva duked it out in a nice hand-to-hand fight.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    Creasy47 wrote:
    @Murdock, that was the one thing that upset me. I initially complained that nothing came of the finale, but then I factored in Bond taking out all of the henchmen previous to Silva's entry, and I realized I enjoyed it a lot more on the second viewing. I do wish Bond had taken out the helicopter with some gunfire perhaps, and really wish Bond and Silva duked it out in a nice hand-to-hand fight.

    Besides there not being a fight I didn't see any problems with the climax, It reminded me alot of the climax of Live Wire with Pierce Brosnan rather than Home Alone as some people point out.
    In the climax of live wire, Brosnan rigged a stove to explode on some baddies and made a light switch activated nail launching cannon. It's a neat little climax to an interesting pre GoldenEye Brosnan flick. :)
  • DRESSED_TO_KILLDRESSED_TO_KILL Suspended
    Posts: 260
    Ive never seen live wire ..Was it any good? and what would you rate it in terms of realism?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited November 2012 Posts: 16,333
    DRESSED_TO_KILL wrote:
    Ive never seen live wire ..Was it any good? and what would you rate it in terms of realism?

    Well It's been a very long time since I've seen it. It's pretty much a B movie It's not really like a Bondesque film. I'd say rent it and give it a watch. All I can remember is that is has the Bad guy from Time Cop in it and the ending sort of, But it's more practical than Skyfall's ending although they are similar.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited November 2012 Posts: 13,350
    Zekidk wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Zekidk wrote:
    Creasy47 wrote:
    @Zekidk, do you think that's how 'Bond 24' will be? We have Q, Moneypenny, and a new M now. I think Bond is at his peak in the Craig world - I don't see a large amount of character development coming from him again
    That's what I said in 2006 after CR. And in 2008.

    But we didn't have M, Q and Moneypenny then. This time I'm willing to wait and see what happens.
    Huh? M was in both CR and QoS. But I was referring to the character development of Bond only.

    I meant the new MI6, set up. The new M, Q and Moneypenny. We didn't have that before so a 'classic' film is more likely in future than it was in 2006 or 2008.

    As for character development for Bond, where can they go? Logan must have something up his sleeve and planned for this two film arc.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Who said anything about Skyfall and Bond 24 having an arc?
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited November 2012 Posts: 13,350
    I meant the next two films. The two film arc of Bond 24 and Bond 25. Sorry, thought that was obvious.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,492
    @Murdock, I've seen that movie - very interesting B-rated material.

    @Samuel001, didn't Craig disprove the 'Bond 24' and 'Bond 25' arc? Or was that just a rumor?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    Creasy47 wrote:
    @Murdock, I've seen that movie - very interesting B-rated material.

    @Samuel001, didn't Craig disprove the 'Bond 24' and 'Bond 25' arc? Or was that just a rumor?

    I think Craig said he didn't want to do Back to Back Bond movies.

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I wonder if Quantum will resurface. If they do a Quantum story in 24 or 25 they have the other film to do another stand alone film.
  • DRESSED_TO_KILLDRESSED_TO_KILL Suspended
    edited November 2012 Posts: 260
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    I wonder if Quantum will resurface. If they do a Quantum story in 24 or 25 they have the other film to do another stand alone film.

    this seems most plausible to happen and the smartest thing to do IMO. it would make more sense to make B24 involving QUANTUM than it would be for 25 to involve them. It just seems too far stretched in time if they appear in 25.
  • BondBugBondBug
    Posts: 158
    The point of this thread is to do what?

    Okay, Skyfall has flaws, plot holes, borrowed ideas, incredible coincidences, and a few nonsensical scenes and character actions.

    It is fantasy. It is entertainment. Suspend belief. Accept the flaws. Lighten up. Just enjoy each moment in the context of what it is - a James Bond movie.

    There will never be a perfect James Bond film. That is the nature of Bond. It is impossible to make a Bond flick that isn't lacking in many elements. This movie is better because of its flaws.



  • BondBugBondBug
    Posts: 158

    JimThompson45 wrote:
    Personally, I would have found such an attempt at explanation sort of being talked down too. I was pleased with the way they used the device to get things going, and was fine with it becoming less important as the movie moved on.

    Exactly. Bond got the man and his team that had the hard-drive and were using it in revenge against M. So what more needs to be explained?
  • BondBugBondBug
    Posts: 158
    Getafix wrote:
    I've been trudging through some old case notes and dredged up some nuggets from the past, such as this little gem from March 2011:
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <blockquote><a href="/index.php?p=/discussion/comment/2645#Comment_2645">Quoting BAIN123</a>: To tell the truth I miss the more refined secret agent, the one who - despite his troubles - gets on with his job and doesn't need to be babysat by M every step of the way.
    <br>
    </blockquote>

    A point well made, sir. To be honest, I think this is where some of the Bourne - and other - influences may come well into play. Audiences seem to appreciate the rougher version nowadays and so Bond's adopted the trend for now. I assume there's some space for the gentleman Bond now, especially since the earlier days of 007 might be considered over with the ending of QoS suggesting as much. Besides that though, Bond was pampered in a way by M, somewhat reducing the roughness but then in a way I can't fully appreciate. Other than making the gentleman resurface, I'd also want Bond much less closely controlled by M. Brief him on the mission and we'll handle it from there. Bond can go about his business and we know he'll do the right thing. All those 'red tape' conflicts really don't add anything to the game.

    I have to say that I basically agree with what Darth and Bain were saying then and still feel the same way now, perhaps even more so. I personally found DC's Bond easier to like and care about in CR and QoS than SF. I get the sense that DC's entire tenure is going to be a psyschological journey of discovery, a la Bourne. To my mind SF was one long, yawn inducing and weakly plotted red tape conflict, overshadowed entirely by 'M'ummy. The centre of gravity with the DC era seems to be moving ever closer to Whitehall and away from any actual work that Bond might presumably have to do. You feel the weight of bureaucratic MI6 bearing down on Bond ever more oppressively. Perhaps this is what makes SF so 'Fleming'? As Mendes said in an interview, he knew that the central character of SF was M right from the start, which never gave us much hope of getting our old Bond back. Still, there's always next time... again.

    I agree with what you are saying, but IMO to keep the franchise going, we need Bond films that go in different directions. Putting Bond in the field saving the world from a megalomaniac can't be repeated in every movie. This film has elements that we would never see in "the old Bond." To me, it is about time M was at the center. Like you, I hope the old Bond returns next time.
  • 00Beast00Beast
    Posts: 4,762
    I understand what people seem to be barking about in regards to the climax at SkyFall Lodge. It isn't the most epic of locations for a grand finale, for sure. Awards for this would go to finales like the SPECTRE volcano lair, Scaramanga's Island, Atlantis, St. Cyril's, The Golden Gate Bridge, the Afghanistan airbase, Janus jungle base in Cuba, Carver's Stealth Boat, Renard's submarine, and the Perla de las Dunas hotel. The SkyFall Lodge does well in terms of the final battle, but is by no means an incredibly epic location for the big finale we always look forward to. I was not disappointed with it, just more surprised that the usual finale I always look for wasn't as "BIG" in location as usual. However, it works for the movie, and certainly doesn't let up in suspense or explosiveness, so I was pleased! I can, however, see people's gripes about it.
  • BondBugBondBug
    Posts: 158
    SJK91 wrote:
    Master_Dahark wrote:
    After one viewing, I am definitely a fan. I am seeing it Saturday with my dad this time and will try to have a more objective opinion, since I could just still be excited.

    I do admit though- ever since someone pointed out that in the PTS Eve should have absolutely taken another shot after accidentally hitting Bond, it's been bugging me....

    Hopefully I won't find many more annoyances on my second viewing.
    She definitely should have taken another shot, but maybe this was one of the hints that...
    Eve was not cut out for field work. Her nerves and emotions got the best of her.


    By the time she had recovered from the shock that Bond had been hit the train entered a tunnel.
  • BondBugBondBug
    edited November 2012 Posts: 158

    Getafix wrote:
    KlausHergesheimer wrote:
    Zekidk wrote:
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    Zekidk wrote:
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    DoctorKaufmann wrote:
    So lighten up, gentlemen, after all it is only a movie meant to entertain people and give them 145 minutes of fun...

    I think the argument here is though, that since SF isn't really just fun and it wants to be taken seriously, it needs more logic and less plot holes.

    I liked the film myself but I think it's still a fair argument.

    Skyfall was the most lighthearted of all the Craig films yet, and obviously meant to be more fun.
    Yeah, it was quite "funny and lightheated" for some I guess, that Bond hits rock bottom, and that the main Bond girl plus his boss dies.

    I'm not calling Skyfall Pee Wee's Playhouse, I am just saying that the funny moments added up are far more lighthearted and cheeky than we have seen in the past where not as many quips were said.
    SF had more funny lighthearted moments than in any of the 22 other Bond films? You really have to come up with some examples here, since I didn't laugh once.

    I'm so glad that you brought that up @Zekidk. I've been reading a lot about the humor of Skyfall on here, but none of it really worked, at least for the audiences I've been with. I've seen it four times so far in Imax with packed crowds and none of the jokes worked with them and there were hardly any laughs at all, which I found disappointing. There were times that I wanted to laugh, but I had to hold it back because the audience was just silent.

    When I asked one of my friends I brought to the movie what he thought of Skyfall, the first thing he said was that you could tell they tried to be funny but it just didn't work and that all those lines were so cheesy. These are all American audiences by the way, so maybe the humor works better for European audiences. I really don't have an explaination.

    I've been one of those callimg for a bit more lighthearted tone so I have to say that I welcome the attempt at least to inject a bit of humour. However, while I did chuckle along in a couple of scenes, I don't think there was anything to stand up to the cutting dry wit of the Maibaum scripts. And like your audience, the one that I was in didn't laugh once throughout, not even at Silva. The audience were in fact completely subdued throughout, in a packed cinema.

    Have to say that an audience can have a big influence on how you experience a film and if the vibe is flat the film is I suppose going to seem a bit flat. However, I am the kind of person who laughs out loud if I find something funny and that wasn't hapening with SF.

    I agree. I miss the wit of the Roger Moore Bonds.

    They say that the latest Bonds are more serious, so they don't want the silliness. I agree, about taking out the ridiculous, but they should leave in the wit.

    But even with the humor there can be opportunities to create real tension. Look at Bond's race to deactivate the Bomb in Octopussy. Where was that kind of tension in Skyfall? So I disagree with those who argue that storytelling is somehow more effective or more real without humor.
  • 00Beast00Beast
    Posts: 4,762
    BondBug wrote:
    SJK91 wrote:
    Master_Dahark wrote:
    After one viewing, I am definitely a fan. I am seeing it Saturday with my dad this time and will try to have a more objective opinion, since I could just still be excited.

    I do admit though- ever since someone pointed out that in the PTS Eve should have absolutely taken another shot after accidentally hitting Bond, it's been bugging me....

    Hopefully I won't find many more annoyances on my second viewing.
    She definitely should have taken another shot, but maybe this was one of the hints that...
    Eve was not cut out for field work. Her nerves and emotions got the best of her.


    By the time she had recovered from the shock that Bond had been hit the train entered a tunnel.

    @Master_Dahark: No need to be objective! Just go with that good ol' Bond Hype! Hahaha!
  • BondBugBondBug
    Posts: 158
    jetsetwilly wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    I think, its a fact, that there are fans, who could have gone on the same ole ways forever and I don't mean this offensive. But they have to realize, that this would have been the death of the franchise.
    If they had continued down the Moore path (Tarzan yells, double-taking pigeons), or the Brozza path (invisible cars and laser battles) the franchise would have died through ridicule.

    Thankfully the producers had the foresight to reboot the formula, both with Dalton and Craig, when things went a little too silly. I just hope that path laid out by Skyfall continues.

    Could not agree more about the silliness. But let's have more witty dialogue and more humorous characters.

  • BondBugBondBug
    Posts: 158
    00Beast wrote:
    BondBug wrote:
    SJK91 wrote:
    Master_Dahark wrote:
    After one viewing, I am definitely a fan. I am seeing it Saturday with my dad this time and will try to have a more objective opinion, since I could just still be excited.

    I do admit though- ever since someone pointed out that in the PTS Eve should have absolutely taken another shot after accidentally hitting Bond, it's been bugging me....

    Hopefully I won't find many more annoyances on my second viewing.
    She definitely should have taken another shot, but maybe this was one of the hints that...
    Eve was not cut out for field work. Her nerves and emotions got the best of her.


    By the time she had recovered from the shock that Bond had been hit the train entered a tunnel.

    @Master_Dahark: No need to be objective! Just go with that good ol' Bond Hype! Hahaha!

    I'm just telling as I saw it.

    I have a number of issues with Skyfall, but that isn't one of them.
  • BondBugBondBug
    Posts: 158
    Getafix wrote:
    @acoppola, thanks for your considered response. I do increasingly feel like I must have seen a different film. I am not averse to a good script, proper character development etc and yet these are precisely the qualities that I felt were abjectly lacking from SF. I am certainly holding SF to a higher standard than previous Bonds, but that is because I believe Mendes wanted this film to be judged on multiple levels - as pure entertainment but also as serious film-making. To me it fails because it falls between those two stools. Films like the original Bourne trilogy and Tinker Tailor manage to be intelligent and entertaining. I just don't see that in SF at all. However, since I am obviously part of a small minority I concede that it's my loss.

    You have every right to feel that way and express that. I started to feel a disappointment at the start, I was like "this isn't the Sam Mendes Bond movie I was expecting," but I had waited four years for this and decided to just put all the niggles aside, suspend belief, overlook plot holes, not dwell on what it lacks, but go with the ride and enjoy it for what it is. I let my negative feelings to QOS ruin that experience and wasn't going to do that again.

This discussion has been closed.