• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

Film Skyfall

how many stars?


  • Total voters
    18

L2R

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Apr 19, 2001
Messages
43,528
skyfall+quad.jpg


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1074638/

why don't we have a skyfall thread?

sam mendes's take on bond. i caught it last night, and found it to be an interesting turn for the franchise. gone is the pretty but now so very cliche parkour nonsense, and what we got left is pretty gritty, sobering gun work. it's a far more personal story too, both for bond himself and the intelligence agency, bordering mission impossible in its self doubt/criticism.

interesting villain too. bardem plays him superbly. he's just got a weird resource/motivation imbalance which sits uneasily with me.

it was really very entertaining, but it'll take me some time to digest it for a rating. it wasn't a reboot but it sure as hell felt like one.
 
I saw it a couple of weeks ago, and while it's undoubtably the best of Craig's films and there's even the argument that he is now the best Bond... there's still something missing for me. I thought the opening sequence was absolutely outstanding, but the movie seemed have shot it's wad with the initial chase - none of the other action scenes lived up to it for me.

Also, as a fanboy of the entire series, there's a couple of things, that are starting to grate - the overlapping of characters (ie Judi Dench playing M in Brosnans movies) the inclusion of the old Aston (does that mean Goldfinger existed in this universe and it was Craig driving it?), and I'm sorry, I'd like more gadgets - I'm not talking Die Another Day silliness, just a couple of interesting weapons using believable technology would do - this is Bond, not Bourne. I know, that characters have overlapped over the entire series, with M & Q etc but post Nolan' Batman films, I would much rather have seen a proper, from the start reboot - it seemed to hint at this in Casino Royale, but then on that front it's been a bit half arsed for me, which is a shame as the movies have been very well made otherwise. I don't think any of the 3 theme songs have been anything special either.

I sound like I'm being down on the movie - I'm not, I enjoyed it and would give it 7 out of 10, but when I compare them to the Bourne Trilogy, I'd give them, 9, 9 and 10 respectively, and I'm struggling to criticise them much beyond the camerawork. These new Bonds seem to be part copying them, part throwing nods to the older films, and don't have a strong enough identity as a result. The Connery/Moore films copied no-one!
 
I like it a lot. I think the new direction needs to be refined some though.
 
Definitely the best Bond movie I've seen in a while. I liked the gritty, personal nature of this one and thought it was overdue for a Bond film like this to sort of rejuvenate the series and bring it a new perspective for old and new fans alike. The lack of gadgetry and heavy use of guns/weaponry was spot on for this plot. It humanized the characters much more than before with this idea.
 
^your insights are entirely out of sight
 
I've heard good things about this movie even from non-Bond fans (like me!). Some of the cinematography stills I've scene have been pretty amazing (also motherfucking Javier Bardem), so I'm actually pretty excited to see this.
 
^I think you'll enjoy yourself, especially if you've seen the previous two (for the pleasant contrast, if nothing else) and maybe a couple of the old ones.
 
i really enjoyed it -- this one was about the job moreso than the man, and i appreciated that. also the throwbacky. i liked the throwbacky. and holy shit some of the cinematography. that scene in shanghai with the jellyfish? also, the casino. wowzers.
 
Roger Craig is no James Bond. He is barely five feet tall, and he injects a ponderous gravitas into every scene. Where is the flippancy and aloofness so characteristic of Connery and Moore? I rate him below Lazenby!
 
Who is Roger Craig? Does Daniel Craig's brother have a role in the movie?
 
This film was too long, and bored me to tears. I kept looking at my watch, waiting for the end. The only saving grace was Javier Bardem who made me laugh out loud several times.

And why the fuck did we end up at Bond's family home? What was the point?

Don't like Daniel Craig as Bond. Never did. He looks like a psychotic footballer. Or an elf with nice clothing.
 
Don't like Daniel Craig as Bond. Never did. He looks like a psychotic footballer. Or an elf with nice clothing.

I can never understand it when people say such disparaging things about Craig. But then, I'm not British (and therefore not a member of British culture), so I don't suppose I'm particularly well-qualified to comment.
 
I saw it.

This was one of the best reviewed movies of the year. WTF. The storyline was simplistic as fuck and there was basically no character development. Like WTF was Moneypenny even doing, other than at the beginning it seemed like she'd just show up and talk to Bond for no reason, with no plot development consequences. And all the location changes, they aren't even explained.

Either critics are slacking, or on the studio payrolls, or I just don't "get" action as a genre.

(Well, to be fair, it's most likely the latter, I've never understood action movies and it seems pretty common for them to have no story or character development so I guess by the standards of the genre it was OK).
 
I can never understand it when people say such disparaging things about Craig. But then, I'm not British (and therefore not a member of British culture), so I don't suppose I'm particularly well-qualified to comment.

me neither. do we not all remember how terrible die another day was? and then how amazing casino royale was? Daniel Craig is a boss as shit Bond.
 
This was one of the best reviewed movies of the year. WTF. The storyline was simplistic as fuck and there was basically no character development. Like WTF was Moneypenny even doing, other than at the beginning it seemed like she'd just show up and talk to Bond for no reason, with no plot development consequences. And all the location changes, they aren't even explained.

I don't know, man. I was pretty shitfaced when I saw the movie, but even in a state of tremendous cerebral impairment, I thought the plot was pretty linear (almost completely straightforward, actually, which is especially marked in a film that purports to be about espionage, or at least an amusing caricature thereof).

All or most of the scene transitions were fully explained, and those few that weren't were either following in the well-established, long-cherished tradition of the whole Bond series (e.g., M says, "Go to "[insert exotic locale]," cut to Bond in said locale) or were too obvious to merit explanation ([insert Bond villain] says, "I will now take you to my layer," at which point Bond is transported by shady means to said layer).

there was basically no character development

Well, one character dies, but then comes back slightly transformed (for the worse), one dies offscreen, but then comes back as a cartoonish supervillain, one dies and...just dies, Ralph Fiennes' character assumes the role of the third dead person, and we get to know everyone a little bit better along the way, for whatever that's worth in an action picture.
So no, not really.
 
Top