|
Post by jamtomorrow on Nov 2, 2012 4:59:27 GMT -5
Went to see this last night. I won't post too much at this stage, for fear of inadvertantly spoiling whilst there's many people who haven't seen it. However, despite not being a one for believing the hype, all that stuff about it being the best Bond ever might just be right. It really makes good on the promise of Casino Royal, and allows us to forget the resounding dud that was Quantum of Solace. Casino succeeded by moving away from the territory, dangerously close to self-parody, that Bond had become stuck in, by conjuring up a darker and more grittily realistic world and a portrait of Bond becoming the man he is through emotional damage. Skyfall takes that on by retaining the grim atmosphere, but bringing back some of the more unashamedly Bondian tropes such as the supervillain in an island hideout in new and refreshing ways. Bond here is physically a wreck, coming back from his Reichenbach Falls leave-of-absence unable to put his body through its paces or a round from his Walther PPK through the bullseye, but emotionally he's much more together; he has a renewed self-confidence that reflects the fact that the franchise has found its feet once more. Action and set-pieces are handled impeccably; I've seen bigger on screen, but never better. Javier Bardem is a superb villain: camp, with ridiculous hair, and utterly terrifying at the same time. Judi Dench puts in a massive performance (it's probably not giving anything away to say that Skyfall is as much about M as it is about Bond), and Daniel Craig leaves little opportunity to argue that anyone else is the Best Bond Ever. We also get just a bit of Bond's back story, which is nice. Throughout the movie, there's a subtext that Bond, and men like him, are relics, over the hill in an age where the cyber-warrior's keystroke can cause more damage than an exploding pen ever could. As you might have guessed, the film points to the opposite conclusion, as it does, by implication, about the franchise (without spoiling anything, the film ends with a situation that is clearly meant to cue up an ongoing series of sequels). Can't recommend highly enough, and this one really does need to be seen on the big screen..
|
|
misterd
Frightful Fiend
Posts: 1,220
|
Skyfall
Nov 11, 2012 12:37:48 GMT -5
Post by misterd on Nov 11, 2012 12:37:48 GMT -5
I still think Casino is better, but this is pretty damned close. Some terrific action sequences, beautifully shot, and for several reasons the most personal Bond story they've ever done. I have minor complaints - a lot of this is clearly derivative of Nolan's work on Dark Knight (even the villain, Mr. Silva, has the Joker's talent for absurdly complex schemes), we are still setting up the new Bond universe 3 films in, no connection to the Quantum storyline, and (like The Dark Knight Rises) it feels like we've jumped from Bond at the beginning of his career to his end. And who let Voldemort infiltrate MI6? But in the grand scheme, these are very minor nits to pick.
One point of caution for those expecting the Bond formula. This film ends small. Bond films tend to be about escalation - investigating a theft or murder, ending with a globe altering scheme and a battle royal in an exotic locale. Skyfall does the opposite, pulling in tighter and tighter to a finale that is atypically intimate (though not shy of action). It is not something I would like to see repeated often, but it does provide a nice change of pace.
|
|
yddy
Ghost in the Graveyard
Posts: 568
|
Skyfall
Nov 11, 2012 13:57:38 GMT -5
Post by yddy on Nov 11, 2012 13:57:38 GMT -5
This one was fricken incredible! I really love Casino Royale, but this one came quite close to surpassing its excellence. I was quite surprised at how amazing it was.
|
|
|
Skyfall
Nov 26, 2012 0:29:12 GMT -5
Post by evanseconds on Nov 26, 2012 0:29:12 GMT -5
I loved this film. To be quite honest, I had not seen Casino Royale nor Quantum of Solace at all until just a couple days prior to seeing this one (I don't understand where all the hate for Quantum comes from), but I loved watching Bond films with my father and grandfather as a child (despite only growing up in the 90s).
Craig, Dench, and Bardem were all fantastic. Q was a fun addition, and I thought the big Eve reveal at the end was great (if not sort of expected).
|
|
|
Skyfall
Nov 27, 2012 13:52:11 GMT -5
Post by delbertgrady on Nov 27, 2012 13:52:11 GMT -5
Also liked Skyfall a lot, think it was one of the best dialogue driven Bond films as the conversations between characters were often engaging and sharp. The film had just the right amount of humor to balance the serious aspect. The one minor nitpick I disagree with some of the above posters is the action. The pre-credits sequence is spectacular, however in the middle of the film the action is very short and pretty standard stuff, and the big climax had a great build up but when the action started it was not really exciting/kinetic. Casino Royale certainly was superior in the action department. This is just a minor flaw, definitely recommend Skyfall to anyone who hasn't seen it.
|
|
bigmac
Revolting Revenant
You mean the movie lied!?!?!?
Posts: 1,508
|
Skyfall
Nov 27, 2012 21:53:49 GMT -5
Post by bigmac on Nov 27, 2012 21:53:49 GMT -5
Quite good, but not great, Skyfall has a few plot holes and problems with the middle and third act that bothered me a bit. Be warned, this might get a bit SPOILER-Y at times. The opening action piece was GREAT, as was the first act as Bond is sent on the trail of the bad guy. And all is great, even with the Syfy CGI quality Kamodo dragons. But once Javier Bardem shows up, the film slams to a halt. Bardem gives a great performance, but his introduction is too slow, as if the director was more interested in showcasing the actor, rather than advancing the plot. He just meanders down an uninteresting set, flirts with Bond and revels his mommy issues in a sequence that takes TOO DAMN LONG. Great performance, but this is a freaking Bond film and while such work is fine, the story and the action is what we're waiting for. Anyway, Bond captures the villain, which is all part of the bad guys plan and no one in MI6 is smart enough to figure out that the man who's been one step ahead of them all this time might have planned on being captured? While it's fair to say Bond isn't at the top of his game, as indicated by his performance evaluation, when the bad guy drops a snide little remake about the Q branch, you'd think that make Bond a bit suspicious. Yet he brings the bad guy into MI6 headquarters, acting as stupid as the Avengers after Loki didn't try running away during the Capt/Thor/Iron Man smackdown.
And really, why would you plug a computer genius's laptop into your mainframe, then act all surprised when your system gets hacked? Maybe the new Q was being arrogant, but the script need to give him a reason to fall into that trap, other than sheer stupidity. As for the end, great sequence, but the payoff sitting through the film is little more than Bond being orphaned again and a summation that is little more than a reboot to where the series left off during the Brosnan era. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the film (though it might seem otherwise), but I feel all the hype is rather overblown. It's good, but not the "Best Bond Ever," and Bardem's great performance does not make his character "The Best Bond Villain Ever." It's good, with some great sequences and terrific nods to the earlier films, but don't swallow the hype or it might ruin the film for you.
|
|
|
Skyfall
Nov 28, 2012 7:28:41 GMT -5
Post by kingstownted on Nov 28, 2012 7:28:41 GMT -5
Maybe the new Q was being arrogant, but the script need to give him a reason to fall into that trap, other than sheer stupidity He was just...too young
|
|
bigmac
Revolting Revenant
You mean the movie lied!?!?!?
Posts: 1,508
|
Skyfall
Nov 28, 2012 18:53:31 GMT -5
Post by bigmac on Nov 28, 2012 18:53:31 GMT -5
Maybe the new Q was being arrogant, but the script need to give him a reason to fall into that trap, other than sheer stupidity He was just...too young LOL. I could buy that excuse that if he was Q's assistant, not Q. And perhaps that title means less in the rebooted Bond universe, but it needed to be made clear at some point in the script.
|
|
Jazz
Cellar Dweller
Posts: 15
|
Post by Jazz on Dec 3, 2012 0:56:26 GMT -5
Just caught this a couple nights ago. I haven't been a big fan of the Craig era so far. Don't dislike him as Bond and I do enjoy the grittier action, but this franchise has lost all the things about Bond that used to make it fun. I DO want an exploding pen! That being said, I thought this was the best of the three so far and should have actually been the first one before Casino. Hopefully the next one will have some kind of satellite that vaporizes towns from orbit or submarines swallowing smaller submarines.
|
|
|
Skyfall
Dec 11, 2012 5:07:17 GMT -5
Post by jamtomorrow on Dec 11, 2012 5:07:17 GMT -5
Maybe the new Q was being arrogant, but the script need to give him a reason to fall into that trap, other than sheer stupidity He was just...too young I think the idea behind jnr Q was that in the 60s, the stereotypical tech wizard was the lab-coated boffin, whereas today it's the computer nerd.
|
|