Skyfall improving like a fine wine

edited February 2013 in Skyfall Posts: 1,314
Must say after an initial sense of anticlimax having seen it at the pictures, Skyfall is quickly rising up my list of best Bonds after watching on DVD.

There are so many classic scenes, characters and the slower, more mature pace of the film helps the non traditional formula.

There are a few plot holes that could have been solved with one line if dialogue, namely the whereabouts of the hard drive, bonds responsibility for M's death, and Silvas bomb underground, but overall it's getting better and better.

Like OHMSS
«134

Comments

  • Posts: 7,653
    Chateau Pis du Chat??
  • Ha ha!

    Well, second time round you're watching less intently so the plot holes don't matter or you feel less cheated.

    And in terms of bumps or highlights, well, SF has a great many. From a storyboard pov it would work well, in terms - oh this happens, then this - you can imagine it holding up well in the pre-production stage. Just, the nitty gritty of the narrative doesn't hold up imo.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I think to a certain extent this is accurate. I've seen it several times now and, while there are some dodgy, gimicky moments (did they really need to use the "sometimes the old ways are the best" line not once but twice?) the film is still great after several viewings.

    I'm always amazed by Deakins cinematography (IMO the shot of them driving through the moor's in the Aston accompanied by Newman's score is one of the finest moments in the history of the Bond films).

    The scene in the church at the end is incredible. Craig really is superb as he's cradling a dying M and you really feel he's lost someone he loved.
  • I have also revised my opinion of SF recently. I wasn't impressed at all the first time I saw it, probably because I was expecting it to be something it wasn't.
    It still doesn't fit with what I would call a 'bond' movie but nevertheless it is a great stand-alone Bond.
    The introductions of Q an Monneypenny were IMO ridiculous but I like the idea of Fiennes as M.
    SF still wouldnt make my top 10, CR is still a better Bond, but yes it is 'improving like a fine wine'
    Nice analogy
    =D>
  • Posts: 229
    Ha ha!

    Well, second time round you're watching less intently so the plot holes don't matter or you feel less cheated.

    And in terms of bumps or highlights, well, SF has a great many. From a storyboard pov it would work well, in terms - oh this happens, then this - you can imagine it holding up well in the pre-production stage. Just, the nitty gritty of the narrative doesn't hold up imo.
    Anyway, which Bond movie (or movie at large) doesn't have at least one plot hole ?
  • Agreed, but the lighter Bond films (imo from Dr No onwards until Dalton's tenure) charm you into making allowances, they're almost flirty, but don't flaunt their daftness, any plot holes work within the framework of the movie.

    SF: starts grim. Bond leaves a fellow agent to die. Okay. But then it gets silly (Bond jumping onto a moving train by crashing the bike into the wall so he gets catapulted over... yeah, right). So I can't go with it, it seems in bad taste.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    But then it gets silly (Bond jumping onto a moving train by crashing the bike into the wall so he gets catapulted over...
    Like YOU never did that.
  • I think it's the opposite for me.

    When I first saw it I thought "wow that was fantastic! Top 5 for sure!" But then I had the chance to think about the movie more and I noticed some plot holes, which were more obvious to me when I saw it the 2nd and 3rd times.

    Still top 10, just not as good as I first thought. But then I do that quite a bit, I get over excited about a Bond film just because it's the new one. The only Bond films I've seen at the cinema that I really didn't like from the start are DAD and QOS.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    But then I had the chance to think about the movie more and I noticed some plot holes, which were more obvious to me when I saw it the 2nd and 3rd times.
    Another thing Wrath Of Khan & Skyfall share. But what you delicately refer to as 'plot holes' I call blatantly stupid lazy writing.
    What? In movies where they kill off a main character they think that's ALL you'll walk away remembering?? The tone of SF was way too serious for its content IMO.
  • Posts: 11,189
    chrisisall wrote:
    But then it gets silly (Bond jumping onto a moving train by crashing the bike into the wall so he gets catapulted over...
    Like YOU never did that.

    I could see Fleming's Bond doing that. Fleming would just write a long bit of text about how Bond quickly worked the Physics out and prepared himself to be thrown forward.

  • chrisisall wrote:
    But then I had re obvious to me when I saw it the 2nd and 3rd times.
    Another thing Wrath Of Khan & Skyfall share. But what you delicately refer to as 'plot holes' I call blatantly stupid lazy writing.
    What? In movies where they kill off a main character they think tthe chance to think about the movie more and I noticed some plot holes, which were mohat's ALL you'll walk away remembering?? The tone of SF was way too serious for its content IMO.

    Completely agree. Like I've said before, the plot wouldn't be such a huge deal to me if SF didn't take itself so seriously. If it was just a popcorn blockbuster I'd go along with it, but it wants to be this adult Bond thriller that's taken seriously, so when I take it seriously and examine the story it falls apart a bit.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    But then it gets silly (Bond jumping onto a moving train by crashing the bike into the wall so he gets catapulted over... yeah, right). So I can't go with it, it seems in bad taste.

    Really? Such OTT stunts are a staple and expected in almost every Bond film and even then, that stunt is one of the tamer stunts in the series.

  • Again, yes and yes again - IF it's a lighthearted romp like The Spy Who Loved Me or DAF. But SF pitches itself as a different genre. It would be out of place in the first four Bond movies for sure, actually it would seem daft to me in just about any of them. It's not OTT even, just stupid. Why not just pull up to bridge and jump off? Perhaps Moore should have gone thru the windscreen and propelled himself off Pont Neuf in AVTAK?

    But Craig's Bond is indestructible.
  • Posts: 1,497
    I agree that SF gets better with time, where as CR has become Bargain Basement Table Wine.
  • That French wine £4.25 from Tesco aint bad you know.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    JBFan626 wrote:
    I agree that SF gets better with time, where as CR has become Bargain Basement Table Wine.

    You find CR to be a falling star now?
  • Perhaps Moore should have gone thru the windscreen and propelled himself off Pont Neuf
    .

    Still laughing as i write this !!!
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Again, yes and yes again - IF it's a lighthearted romp like The Spy Who Loved Me or DAF. But SF pitches itself as a different genre. It would be out of place in the first four Bond movies for sure, actually it would seem daft to me in just about any of them. It's not OTT even, just stupid. Why not just pull up to bridge and jump off? Perhaps Moore should have gone thru the windscreen and propelled himself off Pont Neuf in AVTAK?

    But Craig's Bond is indestructible.

    I disagree. Firstly, the first 4? Have you forgotten the ridiculous jetpack scene in TB ;-) Also, to be fair, they don't largely make Bond movies like they used to (the first 4) but they're trying, God bless 'em.
    I don't see SF pitching itself as a different genre. Like the other Craig Bond movies, all it's doing is taking the movies in a more serious direction but that doesn't mean the omission of OTT or silly stunts. As I recall, even with the stunt, Bond just about managed to land on the train. Had he pulled up and jumped off, he would have lost the train completely. However, I agree with you that it may have been better had he pulled up, got off and jumped from the bridge but it's clearly more dramatic, OTT and spectacular with the way they did it.

  • edited February 2013 Posts: 1,497
    chrisisall wrote:
    JBFan626 wrote:
    I agree that SF gets better with time, where as CR has become Bargain Basement Table Wine.

    You find CR to be a falling star now?

    Yes, it feels overly long now especially the last half. The pacing also feels exhausting: the film opens strong with the PTS to set the tone, followed by the Parkour Chase, but then follows with the airport action sequence. We get all this heavy duty action all early on in the film, then the movie slows down to the card game and then moves into the romance, but then it's still not over, we still have the sinking house. It's tiring for me to watch. I've also been one not convinced of Craig and Green's chemistry. Le Chiffre does not do much for me as a villain, just gives a few good villainous stares in the card game. The Sony product placement though, really gets worse with time as does the 'look' of the Poker game, especially with the dealer and his poker vest. I stand firm in my belief that they should have stuck with baccarat as was written, rather than going with the Poker championship trend. To me it looks like a couple of average joes at a Vegas table. DC has a confidence at times, but still mumbles a lot of his lines, and appears really akward in the dinner scene with Vesper. Those are just a few thoughts off the top of my head. In SF, DC seems to really own the role, the pacing was smooth, there was a nice balance of action and dialogue and the product placement was done more tastefully.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Perhaps Moore should have gone thru the windscreen and propelled himself off Pont Neuf
    .

    Still laughing as i write this !!!

    Hate to piss on your chips boys but the windscreen had already been smashed off along with the roof. I take your point though.

    In theory it's a good stunt - the train is getting away from Bond so he has to launch himself - but is utterly nonsensical as from his position on the bridge I have serious doubts as to whether he could see the back of the train to judge he was going to miss it. A simple shot of Bond on the other side of the bridge realising the last carriage had gone might have solved this but IMO the it was poorly communicated to the audience.

    As for JBFan626s criticisms of CR, although I don't really agree with a lot of them, I can see his point. I've seen SF 5 times now and every time it just whistles by whereas CR does have the odd lull here and there.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Perhaps Moore should have gone thru the windscreen and propelled himself off Pont Neuf
    .

    Still laughing as i write this !!!

    Hate to piss on your chips boys but the windscreen had already been smashed off along with the roof. I take your point though.

    In theory it's a good stunt - the train is getting away from Bond so he has to launch himself - but is utterly nonsensical as from his position on the bridge I have serious doubts as to whether he could see the back of the train to judge he was going to miss it. A simple shot of Bond on the other side of the bridge realising the last carriage had gone might have solved this but IMO the it was poorly communicated to the audience.

    As for JBFan626s criticisms of CR, although I don't really agree with a lot of them, I can see his point. I've seen SF 5 times now and every time it just whistles by whereas CR does have the odd lull here and there.

    Good to see other people agreeing with me that CR drags at times.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Sandy wrote:
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Perhaps Moore should have gone thru the windscreen and propelled himself off Pont Neuf
    .

    Still laughing as i write this !!!

    Hate to piss on your chips boys but the windscreen had already been smashed off along with the roof. I take your point though.

    In theory it's a good stunt - the train is getting away from Bond so he has to launch himself - but is utterly nonsensical as from his position on the bridge I have serious doubts as to whether he could see the back of the train to judge he was going to miss it. A simple shot of Bond on the other side of the bridge realising the last carriage had gone might have solved this but IMO the it was poorly communicated to the audience.

    As for JBFan626s criticisms of CR, although I don't really agree with a lot of them, I can see his point. I've seen SF 5 times now and every time it just whistles by whereas CR does have the odd lull here and there.

    Good to see other people agreeing with me that CR drags at times.

    Don't put words in my mouth young lady!!

    A lull is not the same as dragging. It is a pause in the action to let the story breath. See QOS for the reason these pauses are good - just relentless and barely a sniff of any story.

    But I think where CR is 'nicely paced' (although rather unbalanced in its action heavy first half) and QOS is just too fast SF nails it perfectly.
  • Posts: 2,341
    I will have to purchase my blue ray copy and watch it again. I saw it twice in the theater last fall and am looking forward to another viewing and adding it to my Bond collection.
  • Posts: 194
    OHMSS69 wrote:
    I will have to purchase my blue ray copy and watch it again. I saw it twice in the theater last fall and am looking forward to another viewing and adding it to my Bond collection.

    I've still only seen it once on opening night. I'm watching all them in order to work into Skyfall. I was trying to time it so I finished the say I got Skyfall in the mail. Needless to say I botched that idea.
  • I've seen it four times now and did it get better with each subsequent viewing ? Not really, it merely helped to get a better understanding of things. It's not the best Bond release ever, but for sure a top five entry now and while Bardem was a bit hit and miss, an improvement on some of the adversaries of recent years, or the franchise as a whole

    I don't like CGI in Bond but the effects do work well and the ending in Scotland is quite spectacular but a poor overall climax with Silva, M and Bond at the chapel. I could view it another 50 times, but it won't get better. I just see it as a good Bond adventure and definite improvement on what came directly before and Kleinman gives his best work yet, and even the theme song is good, although no fan of the singer

    It was a good enough and fitting release for the 50th year anniversary
  • I like how M stares off into nothing after the bloody shot.
    Bond and M stare off into uncertainty into the Scottish myst solemny.
    Then Bond stares off into the unknown future accepting M's death. It's a Sam Mendes kind of thing where the audience is part of the afterthough processing, kinda like the Yusef apartment acene from QOS.
  • I liked it fine when I first saw it, beginning to appreciate it and more more with each viewing. Still think CR is a better overall movie, but SF probably around 7/8 for me in my rankings.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    bondboy007 wrote:
    I liked it fine when I first saw it, beginning to appreciate it and more more with each viewing. Still think CR is a better overall movie

    My sentiments exactly.
  • DrNoDrNo North Hollywood, California, USA
    Posts: 81
    I really loved it when I saw it. When I brought it home, I was a bit tempered.

    Funny enough, I was bored by QoS first time around, but the more I think about and watch it, the more I like it.

    The first time I saw CR I though the same thing, about how excellent and gritty it started off, only to quickly devolve into a crazily unbelievable parkour chase. But I like it now.
  • PierceuhhhPierceuhhh Banned
    Posts: 104
    Line a fine wine Skyfall only get better with age.
Sign In or Register to comment.