Skyfall (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message


Empire Admin -> Skyfall (13/10/2012 11:57:18 AM)

Post your comments on this article




rich -> RE: "You expect me to talk?" "No Mr Craig, I expect you to deliver!" (13/10/2012 1:34:04 PM)

Looking forward to it, though it has no bearing on Kim's review as he gave the last one 4/5 as well....




jackcarter -> RE: "You expect me to talk?" "No Mr Craig, I expect you to deliver!" (13/10/2012 6:16:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallen Giant

Well I was really really really hoping for our first 5star Bond since Connery but I'd settle for four maybe five stars for the next one now they've got the character back on track. Haven't seen it yet so maybe in my opinion it will be 5 star. Though I'm haut glad to finally get the review! Been waiting anxiously for it for sooo long! Now just for the actual movie... Maybe Flemming would've needed a stiff drink after this entry.


after searching through im alittle shocked that only 2 Bonds got 5 stars

other ones id have thought were in with a chance - FRWL, OHMSS, TSWLM, CR

For the record:
5 (GF/YOLT)
4 (DN/FRWL/OHMSS/LATD/TSWLM/GE/TND/CR/QOS/CR67!!)
3 (TB/DAF/TMWTGG/OCT/TLD/TWINE/DAD/NSNA)
2 (MR/FYEO/AVTAK/LTK)

the 4s are all good except maybe the ones i mentioned couldve been 5?, with QoS as 3 and CR67 only 2.
the 3s - maybe DAF / DAD couldve switched with MR / LTK (plus AVTAK as walken should automatically make it a 3)




vad3r -> RE: Brilliant (13/10/2012 7:11:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Excited to see where this thread is in a days time!


The same is said for every big movie released every year.




manwihtheplan -> RE: Brilliant (13/10/2012 10:07:29 PM)

Rumour has it the gun barrel is at the end of the film. Oh dear, some fans won't like that!





OPEN YOUR EYES -> RE: Brilliant (13/10/2012 10:11:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Excited to see where this thread is in a days time!


Me too [:D], even though I have little to no interest in Bond/Skyfall.




MonsterCat -> RE: Brilliant (14/10/2012 12:51:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Excited to see where this thread is in a days time!


Mods, remember this when considering turning this heartless cad to the green side.

Your pain is his pleasure.




Deviation -> RE: Brilliant (14/10/2012 4:47:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

Rumour has it the gun barrel is at the end of the film. Oh dear, some fans won't like that!




OH NO WHATEVER SHALL WE DO




matty_b -> RE: Brilliant (14/10/2012 10:10:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

Rumour has it the gun barrel is at the end of the film. Oh dear, some fans won't like that!




Good, I'm glad they won't. Anything that annoys whining little runts like that gets the thumbs up from me.




MonsterCat -> RE: Skyfall (14/10/2012 1:14:06 PM)

Speaking as someone who isn't exactly a hardcore Bond fan but likes the films well enough, the absence of Bond in the gun barrel does not have any bearing on the overall quality of the film. It was a just a cute little thing really doesn't really mean shit in the grand scheme. I mean, consider this before you angrily bash at your keyboard and voice you're pleasure on a message board about this egregious omission: what does the film lose from losing the gun barrel? Absolutely nothing is the correct answer. Zilch, zero, nada, nothing.

I also understand that there are a few people out there who are still not sold on Daniel Craig's tough, no-nonsense Bond. Well, those people are more than entitled to not like him. But I will say in his defence that his Bond is more appropriate to a post 9/11 world. Sticking to the Connery-esque quips and the Roger Moore-esque comedic eye-brow cocking just simply wouldn't cut it in this day and age. The character of Bond needs to mature and progress to keep the franchise from becoming stagnant. And I think Eon realized this and took the franchise in the direction that it needed to go. They stumbled with the awful Quantum of Solace, but those good intentions are still there.

Personally speaking, I'm going to wait until I peep the film until passing judgement on it, but I hope it goes back to being just as entertaining as Casino Royale.

I will also note that Craig is doing wonderful things with Bond. He's giving the character a complexity that was never really there with Moore and Brosnan, while still retaining that fantasy figure vibe. For me, he's the best Bond yet.




Rgirvan44 -> RE: the one to watch (14/10/2012 1:43:57 PM)

Going to watch A View to A Kill later - can't wait to see what a classy James Bond is like!




OPEN YOUR EYES -> RE: the one to watch (14/10/2012 1:49:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

quote:

I also understand that there are a few people out there who are still not sold on Daniel Craig's tough, no-nonsense Bond. Well, those people are more than entitled to not like him. But I will say in his defence that his Bond is more appropriate to a post 9/11 world. Sticking to the Connery-esque quips and the Roger Moore-esque comedic eye-brow cocking just simply wouldn't cut it in this day and age. The character of Bond needs to mature and progress to keep the franchise from becoming stagnant. And I think Eon realized this and took the franchise in the direction that it needed to go. They stumbled with the awful Quantum of Solace, but those good intentions are still there.


Craig is too blunt* and lacks panache. I don't think he looks the part but putting the appearance to one side, he's fundamentally too blunt to pull off the sophisticated side of James Bond's personality. He'd be cool as 008 but not 007. I accept most people don't share my opinion but I doubt most people care about the gun barrel being at the end of the two recent Bond films. True Bond fans are a dying breed and need to saved and put in zoos so we can be poked at by annoying kids on their summer holidays.

*Ian Fleming described James Bond as a blunt instrument of the state but Craig has little to counter-balance that.


He has a sophisticated side?




MonsterCat -> RE: the one to watch (14/10/2012 6:30:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Going to watch A View to A Kill later - can't wait to see what a wheezy, sex pest James Bond is like!





Cool Breeze -> RE: the one to watch (14/10/2012 8:18:12 PM)

Hi everyone.




Rgirvan44 -> RE: the one to watch (14/10/2012 8:39:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

Hi everyone.


Hullo - are you looking forward to the motion picture, Skyfall?




Hood_Man -> RE: the one to watch (15/10/2012 6:09:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

Hi everyone.

http://goo.gl/5pF8j

I'm looking forward to this, I hated Quantum of Solace but this looks like an improvement.




MonsterCat -> RE: Skyfall (15/10/2012 12:51:49 PM)

He's a troll. Don't take the bait. : )




Mr Mitchell -> RE: Skyfall (15/10/2012 1:13:06 PM)

I've been looking forward to Skyfall, however, I am hoping it's a lot better then the last one.




londonnut -> RE: Skyfall (15/10/2012 1:18:31 PM)

Caught it on Friday night at Sony's already infamous ‘World First’ screening at Odeon Leicester Square and I think it really is as good as the reviews are saying. Empire's review is pretty perfunctory - not much excitement in the reading - and with no real negatives flagged why doesn't it get the full five stars?! Not saying it def. should but I think it's worth that extra star. What follows is spoiler free; not going to reveal anything here that's not already in trailers/reviews (except maybe a few clues!)

The most important thing to say about ‘Skyfall’ is it’s a classic reinvention of the series that only this franchise can get away with. It’s like 'Casino Royale' and 'Quantum of Solace' never happened but that's not necessarily a good or a bad thing; it’s just a very good stand-alone Bond film that once again pushes the series forward (even more so than 'Casino Royale').
I found the message a little heavy-handed at times but the story can be summed up by this question; in the age of cyber-warfare is Bond - as a field agent - still relevant? Very smartly, the film-makers seem to be encouraging us to ask this of both Bond the character and the film franchise itself; we see him fail at the start, get ‘killed’ and subsequently struggle to recover. Of course we learn the answer is an emphatic yes; only Bond can save the day with his experience, ingenuity, muscle and style and the last scene couldn’t shout any louder that this franchise has a way to run. It’s in ramming the ‘YES’ home that this film is so fun, stylish, compelling and smart.

A few random stand-out thoughts…

• Gadgets: Ironically for the film that re-introduces us to Q, the just-for-thrills gadgets are gone (Q’s first scene has one of the best lines about them “not really being our thing anymore”). But of course - this being the 50th Anniversary - they’re not really gone; one makes a scene-stealing return (cue massive cheer at screening) which sets-up a brilliant scene between M and Bond and another great line you should discover for yourself. The gadgets that are there are amusingly simple and effective. Going further than even Casino Royale did in ‘stripping back’ the nonsense but still ‘celebrating’ and paying tribute is where ‘Skyfall’ excels.

• Characterisation is where Sam Mendes really comes into play; Q manages to have more depth in what can only be around 10mins of screen time than across the entire series so far. M has more to do (her character here reminded me of Helen Mirren’s towards the end of ‘Prime Suspect’) and is right at the centre of the action – Judi Dench finally gets to show off. Even new characters like Eve (questioning whether she’s cut out for work in “the field”) and Severine (simply terrified) have genuine depth. Have to quickly say I wanted to see more of Severine, she’s so intriguing and well played but she simply serves her purpose and is gone. Characters – new and old - actually feel as though they have real stories. Bond himself gets more of a back-story (though some will prob hate that). Albert Finney’s turn is genius and acting from all top-notch (though Helen McCrory slightly overplays her bit).

• Script; brilliant script full of humour, wit, style and charm. Fantastic one liners and snappy dialogue throughout. It’s a modern story but nostalgic for the Bond that’s gone before. A ‘poem scene’ (yes really) is genuinely moving and is the heart of the piece – difficult to think what other ‘action’ film (or Director) could get a scene like this away; very clever.

• This really is the best-looking film I’ve seen this year, the cinematography is stunning; from an ingeniously illuminated fight scene in Shanghai to a chase thru the burning Scottish highlands - what’s on screen is simply beautiful and often breath-taking.

Final thing; keep a close eye on the animated opening credits for clues while Adele’s doing her thing - it led me to guess a few things along the way without spoiling the enjoyment.






OPEN YOUR EYES -> RE: Skyfall (15/10/2012 4:23:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr Mitchell

I've been looking forward to Skyfall, however, I am hoping it's a lot better then the last one.


I thought yesterdays one was pretty good.[8|]




cerebusboy -> RE: the one to watch (15/10/2012 6:42:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan
True Bond fans are a dying breed and need to saved and put in zoos so we can be poked at by annoying kids on their summer holidays.

*Ian Fleming described James Bond as a blunt instrument of the state but Craig has little to counter-balance that.


the idea of 'true' fans is silly at the best of times, but especially so when it comes to Bond; are people who like movie Bond but who haven't read the books not 'real' fans?
Are there parts in CR and QoS where Bond's more sophisticated side could/should have been shown? (not having a go - genuinely curious, am assuming you mean more than a taste for Red Stripe and a disdain for hair oil!)




cerebusboy -> RE: Skyfall (15/10/2012 6:44:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr Mitchell

I've been looking forward to Skyfall, however, I am hoping it's a lot better then the last one.


Yeah, it was funny when Craig revealed that, due to the writer's strike, he had to have a go with QoS's script - and, by his own admission, he's not much of a writer! But Skyfall - as can be evidenced in its running time alone - does look like it's doing something much bigger and grander than QoS's sparse, workmanlike CR sequel.




Darth Marenghi -> RE: (15/10/2012 7:19:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheRagna

From reading the review, I cant understand why it wasn't given 5 stars.


Kim's answered this one on Twitter - "the asterisks reflect the consensus of the editorial team - I influence them, but don't decide them."




cerebusboy -> RE: RE: (19/10/2012 2:04:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Darth Marenghi


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheRagna

From reading the review, I cant understand why it wasn't given 5 stars.


Kim's answered this one on Twitter - "the asterisks reflect the consensus of the editorial team - I influence them, but don't decide them."



Yes, but surely Skyfall is better than Attack of the Clones? [;)]

I see Bleeding Cool are calling Skyfall the best Bond ever! I've also read multiple reviews that have invoked Nolan, which to me (isn't it about time Bond had a Joker-style worthy adversary) is very much a good thing.




Private Hudson -> RE: RE: (21/10/2012 3:31:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Darth Marenghi


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheRagna

From reading the review, I cant understand why it wasn't given 5 stars.


Kim's answered this one on Twitter - "the asterisks reflect the consensus of the editorial team - I influence them, but don't decide them."



Yes, but surely Skyfall is better than Attack of the Clones? [;)]

I see Bleeding Cool are calling Skyfall the best Bond ever! I've also read multiple reviews that have invoked Nolan, which to me (isn't it about time Bond had a Joker-style worthy adversary) is very much a good thing.



I think you will find one Ernst Stavro Blofeld to be among the greatest cinematic villains of all time.

And remember, the reason Bond became so successful was due to the way he evolved into the cinematic Bond and not the Bond of the books. I believe if the producers had been faithful to the books Bond would not be still going.

It is good that they can go back to the books and add or adapt elements, but I prefer the cinematic Bond: Bond the smart arse who (largely thanks to Q branch) saves the world from nuclear Armageddon and gets the girl.




cerebusboy -> RE: RE: (21/10/2012 10:51:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson



I think you will find one Ernst Stavro Blofeld to be among the greatest cinematic villains of all time.



Indeed, and was last in a Bond film 30 years ago, suggesting that, as I said, it is indeed "about time" that Bond had a better class of villain.

Good point about Bond evolving from the books.




cerebusboy -> RE: Ummmph! (21/10/2012 10:54:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: giggity


quote:

ORIGINAL: jace007

I wonder if Chris Nolan had directed Skyfall, whether Empire would've awarded him 5 stars? Because as we know, Nolan can never be wrong in Empire's eyes, can he? Still, in Sam Mendes I fully trust (and at least his DP isn't a douchebag!)


I'm sure in your head you think when you write stuff like this you sound like some sort of whistleblower on Empire's 'corruption' and ill dealings.

You don't. You sound like a moronic prick.


The ironic thing also is that Empire is hardly alone in liking Nolan films - so the 'corruption' alleged by Nolan-bashers must presumably involve a vast, world-wide conspiracy of all major film reviewers! Nolan must be a member of the Illuminati or something [;)]




cerebusboy -> RE: Ummmph! (21/10/2012 10:57:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jace007

I wonder if Chris Nolan had directed Skyfall, whether Empire would've awarded him 5 stars? Because as we know, Nolan can never be wrong in Empire's eyes, can he? Still, in Sam Mendes I fully trust (and at least his DP isn't a douchebag!)



Pfister expressing an opinion about Avegers' cinematography does not make him a douchebag. For all we know, Mendes' DP doesn't like the Avengers either!





Private Hudson -> RE: RE: (21/10/2012 10:23:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson



I think you will find one Ernst Stavro Blofeld to be among the greatest cinematic villains of all time.



Indeed, and was last in a Bond film 30 years ago, suggesting that, as I said, it is indeed "about time" that Bond had a better class of villain.

Good point about Bond evolving from the books.


The Fleming Bond which all the pretentious tw@ts love to quote is actually pretty dull. I have read quite a few of the books and the films beat them all hands down... a rare case of the film being better than the book.

The Bond we know and love is the cinematic Bond.

***MILD SPOILERS***








BTW I have heard rumours that the gunbarrel is again at the end. If this is to what are they doing? Trying to piss everyone off?

Leave alone.




manwihtheplan -> RE: Brilliant (23/10/2012 12:19:43 AM)

Clip of Bond and Q meeting (for the first time?):

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/BatFreak/news/?a=69073

Few things I noticed:

A) The dialogue seemed a bit contrived and not that natural-sounding.

B) Craig has aged a quite a bit since the last Bond film. Time for Q to give him a Botox gun. "Just fire it into your cheeks, 007, for instant facial rejuvenation."

C) Skyfall will be marginally better than Dredd 3D although Dredd 3D has that great "THREE DEEE!!!!" sound you make when you fall down a water slide. "Wheeee, I'm falling and I'm watching Dredd 3Deeeeeeeeeee!" You can't do that with Skyfall.





Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.046875