quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

I am not paying to see Skyfall at the cinema in protest at the removal of the gun barrel from the start of the films.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

I am not paying to see Skyfall at the cinema in protest at the removal of the gun barrel from the start of the films.

This is quite possibly the saddest thing I've seen on the boards so far.

Even sadder than my dick size.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Happy Shrapnel

Who's James Bond ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harry Tuttle

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

I am not paying to see Skyfall at the cinema in protest at the removal of the gun barrel from the start of the films.

This is quite possibly the saddest thing I've seen on the boards so far.

Even sadder than my dick size.

It's one of the funniest things I've seen.

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

I would plough my way through MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

I desire MonsterCat to go down on me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harry Tuttle

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

I am not paying to see Skyfall at the cinema in protest at the removal of the gun barrel from the start of the films.

This is quite possibly the saddest thing I've seen on the boards so far.

Even sadder than my dick size.

It's one of the funniest things I've seen.

Monster Cat's dick?

What I don't understand is if someone is refusing to see the film, why the fuck are they banging on about it endlessly on a message board?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hobbitonlass

The way I read it was that he wasn't paying to see the film

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Happy Shrapnel

Who's James Bond ?

He's the one who's all like: "Yeah, baby, yeah!"

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hobbitonlass

The way I read it was that he wasn't paying to see the film

quote:

ORIGINAL: jonson

Not only that, but....

SPOILER

...the gun barrel sequence IS at the beginning of the film

END SPOILER

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49 (via Gizoogle)

Gentleman, please - could our crazy-ass asses leave dis thread ta gangstas wantin ta say shit bout a funky-ass bad film?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scruffybobby

You know what? I was actually a little bit disappointed that the gunbarrel wasn't at the start of Skyfall.I made my peace with that within about 30 seconds and just got on with enjoying the movie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Magneto

How can the makers of Bond win with some of the pan chokers on here?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper

I'm really baffled by some of the criticism of Skyfall. For me, it really is one of the best Bond films ever made. It's managed to retain the more grounded real world feel of Craig's previous outings whilst reintroducing the more classic Bond elements in a way that feels realistic and modern, rather than the cheesy and formulaic way the Brosnan films started to go. My only real issue with the film was it's score, which never really felt like a bond film, never had that orchestral feel that helped keep the Bond feel in Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. I don't hate Thomas Newman's score, it's really good, but it feels odd for a Bond film, in the same way Eric Serra's or Michael Kamen's scores felt at odds with their respective films. Having said that, when Newman does bring the more traditional Bond musical cues it really does work. I just wanted more original themes that felt orchestral. A very minor criticism. I thought all the principal players were solid, I thought the action was directed well, although it felt like it needed maybe one more action beat somewhere (perhaps after SIlva's escape and before Bond and M go to Skyfall?). I cant really find much to fault, it's great.

Some of the usual Bond fan complaints that are being wheeled out (gun barrel placement, Craig's appearence etc) are largely pointless, as they dont really offer any critique of the film, and the film is most certainly 'Bond'. Craig nails the smarm and charm in a number of scenes, he gets the quips, we get a disfigured maniac madman with an island hideout, the tricked out Aston, fights in dragon pits, Moneypenny and Q. It has every 'Bond' element, only it treats them with a level of realism and seriousness that was never really around in the Moore and Brosnan era's. It's all the better for it. And still people complain Craig acts and looks like 'a larbourer'...... I'm not even sure what that fucking means. Simple fact is this, I dont know any woman that wouldn't happily come home every night from work to a man looking like Danial Craig in his Bond shape. Seriously, he's as suave and handsome as any previous Bond ever. There are a few shots of him as Bond (particularly as he stands by the Aston prior to the arrival at Skyfall) where he looks ace. I would kill to look as cool as he does! Those suits... c'mon?! Seriously, women love Craig as Bond. A quick poll of women in my immediate vicinity right now confirms this... every single one confirmed they prefer Craig as Bond than any other, based purely on looks and appearance. I also dont get the complaints that Craig's Bond has been on too many personal outings. Are you fucking kidding? Casino Royale was clearly Bond on a standard Bond mission, stop Le Chiffre financing and banking terrorism. Quantum of Solace was again a pretty straightforward Bond mission to stop a Bond villain, stop Greene's plan to instigate a military dictatorship that gave Quantum power and control over the regions water supplies. There is a difference between the mission's being personal and giving Bond something personal to invest in within each mission. Skyfall is the first that essentially does away with the traditional Bond mission to replace it with the personal stakes. And lets face it, this is hardly something new for the franchise. These criticisms dont have any real weight in my opinion. DOnt like the film by all means, but at least dont like it with some genuine reason for criticism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation

OHMSS?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper

I'm really baffled by some of the criticism of Skyfall. For me, it really is one of the best Bond films ever made. It's managed to retain the more grounded real world feel of Craig's previous outings whilst reintroducing the more classic Bond elements in a way that feels realistic and modern, rather than the cheesy and formulaic way the Brosnan films started to go. My only real issue with the film was it's score, which never really felt like a bond film, never had that orchestral feel that helped keep the Bond feel in Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. I don't hate Thomas Newman's score, it's really good, but it feels odd for a Bond film, in the same way Eric Serra's or Michael Kamen's scores felt at odds with their respective films. Having said that, when Newman does bring the more traditional Bond musical cues it really does work. I just wanted more original themes that felt orchestral. A very minor criticism. I thought all the principal players were solid, I thought the action was directed well, although it felt like it needed maybe one more action beat somewhere (perhaps after SIlva's escape and before Bond and M go to Skyfall?). I cant really find much to fault, it's great.

Some of the usual Bond fan complaints that are being wheeled out (gun barrel placement, Craig's appearence etc) are largely pointless, as they dont really offer any critique of the film, and the film is most certainly 'Bond'. Craig nails the smarm and charm in a number of scenes, he gets the quips, we get a disfigured maniac madman with an island hideout, the tricked out Aston, fights in dragon pits, Moneypenny and Q. It has every 'Bond' element, only it treats them with a level of realism and seriousness that was never really around in the Moore and Brosnan era's. It's all the better for it. And still people complain Craig acts and looks like 'a larbourer'...... I'm not even sure what that fucking means. Simple fact is this, I dont know any woman that wouldn't happily come home every night from work to a man looking like Danial Craig in his Bond shape. Seriously, he's as suave and handsome as any previous Bond ever. There are a few shots of him as Bond (particularly as he stands by the Aston prior to the arrival at Skyfall) where he looks ace. I would kill to look as cool as he does! Those suits... c'mon?! Seriously, women love Craig as Bond. A quick poll of women in my immediate vicinity right now confirms this... every single one confirmed they prefer Craig as Bond than any other, based purely on looks and appearance. I also dont get the complaints that Craig's Bond has been on too many personal outings. Are you fucking kidding? Casino Royale was clearly Bond on a standard Bond mission, stop Le Chiffre financing and banking terrorism. Quantum of Solace was again a pretty straightforward Bond mission to stop a Bond villain, stop Greene's plan to instigate a military dictatorship that gave Quantum power and control over the regions water supplies. There is a difference between the mission's being personal and giving Bond something personal to invest in within each mission. Skyfall is the first that essentially does away with the traditional Bond mission to replace it with the personal stakes. And lets face it, this is hardly something new for the franchise. These criticisms dont have any real weight in my opinion. DOnt like the film by all means, but at least dont like it with some genuine reason for criticism.

Not seen License To Kill?

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper
I also dont get the complaints that Craig's Bond has been on too many personal outings. Are you fucking kidding? Casino Royale was clearly Bond on a standard Bond mission, stop Le Chiffre financing and banking terrorism. Quantum of Solace was again a pretty straightforward Bond mission to stop a Bond villain, stop Greene's plan to instigate a military dictatorship that gave Quantum power and control over the regions water supplies. There is a difference between the mission's being personal and giving Bond something personal to invest in within each mission. Skyfall is the first that essentially does away with the traditional Bond mission to replace it with the personal stakes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

And by the way... the gun barrel sequence? Hasn't always been at the start of the movies. It was at the end in Dr. No, for instance. And seeing as how reminding people of the 60's was the clear intention with this movie, it's entirely justified to have it in the end in this one, too. Either way, it still baffles me why there are people who seem to be judging the entire movie on whether that few seconds was placed at the beginning or end.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FoximusPrime

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

And by the way... the gun barrel sequence? Hasn't always been at the start of the movies. It was at the end in Dr. No, for instance. And seeing as how reminding people of the 60's was the clear intention with this movie, it's entirely justified to have it in the end in this one, too. Either way, it still baffles me why there are people who seem to be judging the entire movie on whether that few seconds was placed at the beginning or end.

AND it wasn't even Connery was it? Are there any fans still bitching about that and demanding a new edit with a digitally inserted Connery?

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

Even Skyfall wasn't exactly Bond on a personal revenge mission. That was Silva's mission. The only thing that made it personal for Bond was that M was the target... other than that, it was the traditional Bond vs. disfigured villain story.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski


In QOS, absolutely everything about the main plot involves going after the baddie. M THINKS Bond has lost it over Vesper's death and wants revenge, but right through the film he does all that Bond always does, but screwed up inside as he tries to deal with what happened immediately before this film kicks off. His inner turmoils define the 'angry, frenzied, brutal' tone of the film, but he could have taken revenge on Vesper's ex for using her to set her up to set him up, but he DOESN''T. The theme of revenge is in the film, Olga's character is on a revenge mission, Bond feels like revenging, maybe his actions and the violence express his desire for revenge but he doesn't take revenge, His job is his Quantum of Solace. Some people hate it because they are confused by its feel, I think. But it's a Bond film that feels different, because BOND feels different inside. Gutted and empty. And for people who feel the characterisation is off, watch the close of CR immediately before watching QOS and it's very obvious, the characterisation of angry betrayed Bond brutally disaptching the baddies he comes across is already in place. Angry, betrayed, and finally distraught at not only failing to save Vesper, but her death being his fault, because the only reason the building sank is he shot out the floating foundation. That Bond, an hour later, is the QOS Bond. There's no other way to approach the film and get the best from it

quote:

ORIGINAL: Happy Shrapnel

Right, here is my view on why the gun barrel is at the end and then I'm never going to mention it again......



SPOILERS !!!!!!!





Craig's Bond is and always has been a different animal to all the others.
We knew this from the very start of Casino Royale when he first earned his 00 status, these films were made as a deliberate trilogy, as a journey to show how Bond developed into the agent we know him as.

So with Skyfall and the death of M, the new Bond emerges...............


Monneypenny, a new wood paneled office, a big leather desk, a new male M sat behind it, dressed in a navy pinstriped suit, picture of the Queen on the wall, dossier tossed on the desk marked ' Top Secret '
' Right Bond, we have work to do '

Hell, even M's door is leather cushioned........look familar ?

And then........Bang in comes the gun barrel logo and the imortal words
'James Bond will be back'

Its just perfect.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darth Marenghi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Quentin Black

I have to disagree. He's certainly amongst the ranks of great film villains.

To start with he is well designed. Like many great villains he's a distorted reflection of the protagonist that shines a light on the ethics and morals that the protagonists hold so dear. Similarly, like many great villains he doesn't need much screen time or detail. He's both threatening and interesting because of the suggestions the film makes and nuanced performances. The mystery created by not laying things out just reinforces this.

To elaborate:

Before we've even met him the film shows us that he is both intelligent and dangerous. A man that can create chaos and destruction without being present. A man that causes a seemingly hardened woman to quiver with fear (hats off to Bérénice Marlohe for selling this so well).

In the reveal he walks slowly to the camera while talking in metaphors about the human condition. As well as being intelligent and in control, he's very strange and very disconcerting. He refers to M as their "mommy" and toys with the conventions of sexuality, using it like a weapon. His self-assured showmanship is an extension of his madness.

He is also clearly Bond's superior. An agent that matches Bond's physical abilities but recognizes the power that technology affords him. While Bond is used to the days of exploding pens, this is a man who can cripple a country with a laptop. The limits that Silva pushes Bond to are psychological. Knowing that his body and mind are no longer fit enough for service and that M lied to him, Bond is forced to question his mother figure, his purpose and his ability to do the job. When Silva makes Bond shoot the glass of the top of Severine's head it is not to test his marksmanship but to punish him psychologically. Bond could have saved her were he not a broken shell of his former self and he knows it. It is a match of wits and although Bond plays it cool throughout, Silva knows exactly what buttons to push.

Even when captured Silva is clearly dangerous. He always seems to be in control, like it is all part of the plan. When M feels like she has to explain herself to Bond you know Silva has gotten under her skin. We then find out that it was all part of the plan and Bond realizes that the only chance of beating him is by turning the table on Silva and stop playing the game by his rules (which leads to an excellent reversal of the Bond infiltrating the villain's fortress tradition).

In the end Silva's weakness is also thing that fuels him. The only time he isn't in control is when M is in the picture. Bardem's performance when Silva takes out his mouth piece to reveal his hidden deformity, sells the pain he has gone through because of M's actions. Nothing will take away the physical and psychological damage that has been inflicted on him and part of him realizes that. In the third act, his obsession with M blindsides him and he falls into Bond's trap. The closer he gets to achieving his goal the more careless he gets and in the end he breaks down. He's a monster that just wants to be released from his pain.

Silva is is well designed, well executed and extremely well acted. Maybe I read too much into it but for me he is a villain that is reminiscent of Heath Ledger's Joker, Anthony Hopkin's Hannibal Lecter, Gary Oldman's Stansfield, Sean Bean's Alec Trevelyan and even the shark from Jaws. That's not bad company to be keeping.

Excellent post, QB - I'm surprised given your start date that you've not posted much before but some more of this kind of analysis would be very welcome around here.