RE: Skyfall

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

RE: Skyfall

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Skyfall

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Skyfall - 27/10/2012 7:17:12 PM

garjobo

Posts: 7
Joined: 27/10/2012

Devation...whats this about bloody spoilers..the film is now out...if your stuipt enough to read forum reports about it..expect to come across the odd spoiler!! besides..i chose my words carefully and best I could.

I am STUNNED that peeps on here ( assuming over the age of 12 ) liken this movie to Hitchcock...that apart from a little pacing was off it was still stunning....like Fleming wrote the book etc....d'jesus spare me!!!

Please SOMEONE ANYONE tell me...how you get away with the idea of that final act ( not giving away 'spoilers' i cant go into details - again !!! yawn ) but Aston Martin references aside...and HomeAlone comparisions ( which are very accurate..and actually..think about..for a spy thriller...you cant get much more of a putdown that comparing the final! to Homealone!!!!!!! )..would Fleming be proud of that!!! SPOILERS -M isnt safe - Bond protects M by taking her to a completly unprotected part of the country where MI6 cant help them and leaves breadcrumbs for the baddie to follow them...what the heck!!!! Mallory then rewards Bond for ...major spoiler...you know what... Yet earlier Mallory was telling Bond to call it a day...Bond basically lets Silva get what he wanted and Bond is back in service, pat on back, end of film.

To all these peeps who rate this movie..What are you rating exactly...the neon light sequence...you know that part when this professional ass. shoots in the lobby the copper..in full view of..well anyone....and then what..SPOILERS.. Bond does a Diamonds are forever stunt on the lift...on the GLASS LIFT...surely..he'd save himself a lot of bother just watching from the outside where the GLASS lift stopped!!! duh! and a very short fight then occurs...and then...back to the endless chit-chat...with a Bond girl who ALLOWS herself to be killed essentially..because thats EXACTLY what happens.

The villain was hardly used, the tube stuff was crowed in just like Bond usually does, aka TWINE with the ski sequence...Usually you can see the money spent on a Bond film. Even ViewtoaKill you saw where the money was spent...on this one...i didnt..on the credit sequence and the big final. All inbetween were endless chitchats which dragged and dragged.

As for audience reaction which previous poster mentioned...i can only report on what 'my audience' saw and felt...snoring, walking out and 'this is bloody boring'. Never before in a cinema have i heard these reactions. Once the marketing has done its just and left to word of mouth...i wonder..just how quick it will slip the charts..and all these 5 stars reviews will become 3 stars once its shown on dvd and the telly...bring on the next Bond.

< Message edited by garjobo -- 27/10/2012 7:23:08 PM >

(in reply to earnest)

Post #: 121

RE: Skyfall - 27/10/2012 7:27:49 PM

Hood_Man

Posts: 11272
Joined: 30/9/2005

Although I enjoyed the film garjobo, I have to admit that I also immediately thought of Home Alone

(in reply to garjobo)

Post #: 122

RE: Skyfall - 27/10/2012 8:05:01 PM

Deviation

Posts: 26908
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: garjobo

Devation...whats this about bloody spoilers..the film is now out...if your stuipt enough to read forum reports about it..expect to come across the odd spoiler!! besides..i chose my words carefully and best I could.

That still means you put a spoiler tag for courtesy's sake. Discussions may still feature people who just want to see other people's opinions.

quote:

I am STUNNED that peeps on here ( assuming over the age of 12 ) liken this movie to Hitchcock...that apart from a little pacing was off it was still stunning....like Fleming wrote the book etc....d'jesus spare me!!!

Does this make any sense? Oh and the Shanghai bit is total Hitch.

quote:

Please SOMEONE ANYONE tell me...how you get away with the idea of that final act ( not giving away 'spoilers' i cant go into details - again !!! yawn ) but Aston Martin references aside...and HomeAlone comparisions ( which are very accurate..and actually..think about..for a spy thriller...you cant get much more of a putdown that comparing the final! to Homealone!!!!!!! )..would Fleming be proud of that!!! SPOILERS -M isnt safe - Bond protects M by taking her to a completly unprotected part of the country where MI6 cant help them and leaves breadcrumbs for the baddie to follow them...what the heck!!!! Mallory then rewards Bond for ...major spoiler...you know what... Yet earlier Mallory was telling Bond to call it a day...Bond basically lets Silva get what he wanted and Bond is back in service, pat on back, end of film.

You're such a joy. Though the Home Alone bit made me laugh, kinda true too. And I loved it.

Also, nobody gives a shit what Fleming would thing, that man wrote a plot where Bond turns a lesbian straight, so I don't care.

A- M wasn't meant to be safe, she was meant to be bait to get Silva. M, being what she is, agrees. Silva was always getting the first hand in the film, now it's Bond turn to lay a trap.
B- MI6 ALREADY COULDN'T HELP. THEY HAD HIM IN A PRISON. HE EVADED, ALMOST GOT TO HER. MI6 were an incredibly technological organization and that means Silva could have easily got to her using MI6. Did you forget the initial explotion? Did you forget him getting round even Q and creating a security code that was also a hacking device? Did you forget him running away? Or his entire opening about how he could basically hack the planet with a slight touch? Technology was a menace and Silva's toy. Anything showing MI6 backing would have immediately led him there before they were prepared.
C- HE. REWARDS. BOND. BECAUSE. HE. KILLED. SILVA. AND. SILVA. WAS. A. MASSIVE MENACE. M. DEAD. OR. NOT (which by that point she was becoming irrelevant, not just two breaches in MI6 security, but three with Silva running away). STILL. MEANS. DEAD. SILVA. DUDE. WHO. CAN. HACK. THE. ANYTHING. ON THE. PLANET FOR MONEY

Does it make total sense? No, but that's Bond for you.

quote:

To all these peeps who rate this movie..What are you rating exactly...the neon light sequence...you know that part when this professional ass. shoots in the lobby the copper..in full view of..well anyone....and then what..SPOILERS.. Bond does a Diamonds are forever stunt on the lift...on the GLASS LIFT...surely..he'd save himself a lot of bother just watching from the outside where the GLASS lift stopped!!! duh! and a very short fight then occurs...and then...back to the endless chit-chat...with a Bond girl who ALLOWS herself to be killed essentially..because thats EXACTLY what happens.

Yeah, so what? The place was empty and he didn't exist in any database. Oh and you mean Bond repeating a certain bit seen in a previous film? In a 50th Anniversary Bond? OH NO WHATEVER SHALL WE DO

Oh and we're rating the entertainment value, the plot with M, Craig feeling far more comfy, the action sequences, the soundtrack, the credits, MANY THINGS

quote:

The villain was hardly used, the tube stuff was crowed in just like Bond usually does, aka TWINE with the ski sequence...Usually you can see the money spent on a Bond film. Even ViewtoaKill you saw where the money was spent...on this one...i didnt..on the credit sequence and the big final. All inbetween were endless chitchats which dragged and dragged.

Oh and it was spent well here, you can see it on the technological bits, the locations and the more big set-pecies. Btw, I'm sorry it didn't have more explosions.

quote:

As for audience reaction which previous poster mentioned...i can only report on what 'my audience' saw and felt...snoring, walking out and 'this is bloody boring'. Never before in a cinema have i heard these reactions. Once the marketing has done its just and left to word of mouth...i wonder..just how quick it will slip the charts..and all these 5 stars reviews will become 3 stars once its shown on dvd and the telly...bring on the next Bond.

Which for all I know you could have made up. I could report my audience reactions (quite positive) with the most damning comment being "It was ok". Do you know what they mean, nothing? Audiences flocked to see Moonraker, A View to a Kill, Die Another Day, Diamonds are Forever, Thunderball (the most succesful Bond ever), some of them loved them, of most of these films range from slightly mediocre to outright terrible (DAD had recieved positive audience reactions when first released).

Fuck, British audiences loved Mamma Mia.

< Message edited by Deviation -- 27/10/2012 8:08:38 PM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to garjobo)

Post #: 123

RE: Skyfall - 27/10/2012 8:34:11 PM

musht

Posts: 1131
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

Although I enjoyed the film garjobo, I have to admit that I also immediately thought of Home Alone

Yeh, me too, on both counts

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

(in reply to Hood_Man)

Post #: 124

RE: Great stuff - 27/10/2012 9:00:18 PM

garjobo

Posts: 7
Joined: 27/10/2012

Devation assuming your age is around 12 so appologies for 'speaking down' to you.

I suppose i'll bite re some of the comments your attempted to raise.

For a start how very dare you to suggest I would lie to make a point aka audience reaction. I suspect you would however dont tar me with the same brush. I speak as I find. The audience couldnt wait for it to be over. Before the gunbarrel sequence finished the majority of the audience were on there feet ( not clapping ) but running for the exit ( another mistake using that gunbarrel at the end..i mean..come on now 3 Bonds in ..and ONLY NOW Craig IS Bond!!! come on!!!!!! ) . Reinvention of this Bond is wearing very thin now...TWINE - Bond hurt his shoulder, M was locked up, DAD, Bond was stripped back , unshaven, Casino Bond only utters those immortal words at end of movie -Now HE IS Bond...but nope..drag it out another movie..QOS...NOW - HE IS Bond...Nope! not good enough..strip him back again, reuse past ideas, shoulder, beard..NOW HE IS Bond...oops..he's lost his motor...next movie..gets a new motor..NOW he is Bond...yawn...

The fact you toss Fleming to one side ( i actually was picking up a point another reviewer raised regarding Fleming ) speaks volumnes to your attuide to what Bond actually is. And by the by, I am WELL AWARE of how successful past Bonds were and how some Bond films aka OHMSS and LicencetoKill ( which incidentially received applause at all the showings I went to see ) are overlooked. Bond falls into a handful of camps - from classic thriller, OTT action adventure..Sykfall fails to fall into the Russia/OHMSS camp ...but crucially..and my main beef is...due to all these 5 star reviews audiences are being duped into believing this is the best BOND EVER or up there with Goldfinger and Spy etc...hence..taking there kids along not expecting but KNOWING this is a belter of a movie. 2hrs in I suspect most are regretting the decision to purchase the ticket, to buy into Bond. Hence, my point, that this film will hurt the franchise more than any other.

IT DIDNT DELIVER ON ITS PROMISE. IT ISNT A BOND MOVIE. ITS A SAM MENDAS MOVIE.

You failed to get my point regarding ( Spoiler ) elevator shot. I am MORE than happy in revelling in past Bond...i loved the little nod to Live/Die regarding using the 'dragon's back to escape etc etc What I was getting at was the dreadful script. Using the glass elevator...the neon..ooooh look..pretty pretty colours...aint seen that since...hummm 1982 Bladerunner..what year is it now!! ..a GLASS elevator / building thus meaning Bond didnt have to hang from underneath it. He could just watch and see where it stopped..STYLE OVER SUBSTANCE. Also, the entire totally overrated sequence ( although highly welcome at the time due to the barage of 'talking bits' up till then..and sadly a quick fistie-cuff later we got more endless waffle ) was reduced to a simple, very brief fist fight. All fur and no knickers as the expression goes. GIVE US SOME BANG FOR OUR BUCK. We dont want close up arthouse shots we want some action. We dont want poems read during a shootout ( reminded me of the 'silent' more more impressive shoot out in QofSolace in the theatre..which if memory serves actually did a fantastic nod towards the Roge' Moore 'Wheres Pekish' moment - falling from the rooftop. A better reference than ANYTHING we got in Skyfall to Bond past.

Fine fine give us some arty stuff, make it look good..but christ sakes give us action as well and not make us wait for it.

Sorry chum - couldnt see any cash spent on screen..even the credit title sequence was poor..started ok..but then total cop out rehashing same imagery..close up of Bonds eye twice..gravestones...boring....shame as the song did the job. Oh..and how did Bond survive being shot twice, and falling from a greater height than Chris Walken ever didn in ViewtoKill? and then down a waterfall...never really mentioned how he..lived through that one!!! still..thats Bond for you..oh..spoiler for the above!!

I actually couldnt believe how cheap the film looked...i mean even the final - in a church just like we have up the road...give me a few fireworks and some moody lighting..and your looking at the next bond director..oh and for the record..in regards to Flemings turning a lesbian straight - ive been known to turn a few around myself! ( ok thats my one lie! )

You mentioned DAD etc had good reviews upon release..yes..yes Bond movies generally do...not like this one mind..but then, as mentioned, this one appeals to the upper classes you see ..the types who go in for closeup shots of paintings in galleries... and quite rightly once a movie is out and about and goes onto dvd etc...the stars start to drop off...DAD rightly/wrongly now cited as being one of the worst...personally 'surfing tidal wave aside' still rate it above average myself....and heck it was a damn sight more believable than spoiler ( AGAIN ) Bond killing M ..which essentially was what happened...taking her to that remote site with no backup...I note you AND others FAIL to address what has to be the single worst moment in a BOND movie EVER..that 3rd act..the entire 3rd act. I enjoyed it...but it didnt make sense, and was basically from a totally different..much better mind..movie.

When the dust settles i strongly suspect this film will really drop from being cited as best ever to ..what were they thinking. Trouble is...the reviews are in and clearly this is the way the series is going....for a few more at least till audiences dwindle once again and..all change afterall Craig is already looking worn - still ok - cool - and played this part excellently and really did remind me very much of Steve McQueen crossed with Sid James look...come on its a good look!! - but another movie in..a little more like James than McQueen perhaps..like I say...time to then lighten the mood up..bring back the Spys and Moons for the next generation..

< Message edited by garjobo -- 27/10/2012 9:19:00 PM >

Post #: 125

RE: Great stuff - 27/10/2012 9:35:03 PM

Deviation

Posts: 26908
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: garjobo

For a start how very dare you to suggest I would lie to make a point aka audience reaction. I suspect you would however dont tar me with the same brush. I speak as I find. The audience couldnt wait for it to be over. Before the gunbarrel sequence finished the majority of the audience were on there feet ( not clapping ) but running for the exit ( another mistake using that gunbarrel at the end..i mean..come on now 3 Bonds in ..and ONLY NOW Craig IS Bond!!! come on!!!!!! ) . Reinvention of this Bond is wearing very thin now...TWINE - Bond hurt his shoulder, M was locked up, DAD, Bond was stripped back , unshaven, Casino Bond only utters those immortal words at end of movie -Now his is Bond...but nope..drag it out another movie..QOS...NOW - he is Bond...Nope! not good enough..strip him back again, reuse past ideas, shoulder, beard..NOW he is Bond...oops..he's lost his motor...next movie..gets a new motor..NOW he is Bond...yawn...

Because your point on audience reaction cannot really be proved, especially since the reaction has been positive right now. It goes the same for my comments on my audience reaction.

The point on the reinvention on Bond has some validity in terms that is has been used forever now, but the gunbarrel at the end is a moot point. For all I gathered it's more a stylistic way to end a film in this Craig era than OMG HE'S BOND now and the complains about it are silly to say the least. Bond 24 could prove me wrong though.

quote:

The fact you toss Fleming to one side ( i actually was picking up a point another reviewer raised regarding Fleming ) speaks volumnes to your attuide to what Bond actually is. And by the by, I am WELL AWARE of how successful past Bonds were and how some Bond films aka OHMSS and LicencetoKill ( which incidentially received applause at all the showings I went to see ) are overlooked. Bond falls into a handful of camps - from classic thriller, OTT action adventure..Sykfall fails to fall into the Russia/OHMSS camp ...but crucially..and my main beef is...due to all these 5 star reviews etc Audiences are being duped into believing this is the best BOND EVER or up there with Goldfinger and Spy etc...hence..taking there kids along not expecting but KNOWING this is a belter of a movie. 2hrs in I suspect most are regretting the decision to purchase the ticket, to buy into Bond. Hence, my point, that this film will hurt the franchise more than any other. IT DOESNT DELIVER ON ITS PROMISE. IT ISNT A BOND MOVIE. ITS A SAM MENDAS MOVIE.

Other then you mentioned Fleming directly for your point. And while OHMSS is a fave Bond of mine, I find Licence to Kill's middle act an insane drag. It's one of the lower rated Bond after all. Oh and LTK wasn't really Bondish either, it's more akin to a Miami Vice episode and it wears it's 80s up to its sleeves, but I can see why this is closer to that than other Bonds, and has very little to do with FRWL. Oh and I do think this is one of best Bond films, better than Spy who Loved Me and the best since Living Daylights, so call me responsible being duped or duping people in it. Oh and this whole "It's not Bond, it's something else" is also tiresome, I've been hearing it from Casino Royale and it's beyond boring now. Oh and it is a Bond movie, all from its komodo dragon pit to its flamboyant villian.

quote:

You failed to get my point regarding ( Spoiler ) elevator shot. I am MORE than happy in revelling in past Bond...i loved the little nod to Live/Die regarding using the 'dragon's back to escape etc etc What I was getting at was the dreadful script. Using the glass elevator...the neon..ooooh look..pretty pretty colours...aint seen that since...hummm 1982 Bladerunner..what year is it now!! ..a GLASS elevator thus meaning Bond didnt have to hang from underneath it. Also, the entire totally overrated sequence ( although highly welcome at the time due to the barage of 'talking bits' up till then..and sadly a quick fistie-cuff later we got more endless waffle ) was reduced to a simple, very brief fist fight. All fur and no knickers as the expression goes. GIVE US SOME BANG FOR OUR
BOOK. We dont want close up arthouse shots we want some action. We dont want poems read during a shootout ( reminded me of the 'silent' more more impressive shoot out in QofSolace in the theatre..which if memory serves actually did a fantastic nod towards the Roge' Moore 'Wheres Pekish' moment - falling from the rooftop. A better reference than ANYTHING we got in Skyfall to Bond past.

That must be some scene I've never seen Blade Runner, cause other than being neon it bears little similarity, the slow tension is more Hitch. Oh and it's cute you want Bang yet love LTK, a film which drags for about 50 minutes. Or OHMSS, which has very little action in the middle act. Oh, and the scene has stunning athmosphere and the fistie cuff was a great way to end it.

Oh and if you have a beef with that bit with the glass elevator, I don't even know how you survived watching the first 20 films.

quote:

Fine fine give us some arty stuff, make it look good..but christ sakes give us action as well and not make us wait for it.

I WANT EXPLOSION NOW DAMN IT BANG BANG BANG I don't care about building up a scene which is what all the better Bonds did.

Seriously, how did you even see OHMSS, LTK (the one that left the franchise without a Bond film for 6 1/2 years) or even Goldeneye with this approach? Those were even worse than this. I mean, I understand you might find it dull like I did with LTK or Goldeneye, but chitter-chatter that's not really something new in a Bond, it's all of FRWL.

Also, arty and arthouse mean jackshit or not what you think they mean. Stop using them.

quote:

Sorry chum - couldnt see any cash spent on screen..even the credit title sequence was poor..started ok..but then total cop out rehashing same imagery..close up of Bonds eye twice..gravestones...boring....shame as the song did the job. Oh..and how did Bond survive being shot twice, and falling from a greater height than Chris Walken ever didn in ViewtoKill? and then down a waterfall...never really mentioned how he..lived through that one!!! still..thats Bond for you..oh..spoiler for the above!!

You mean a Bond film rehashes imagery in the credit sequence and has a rather big improbable stunt? OH NO because that hasn't been done before AND BOND NEVER DOES THAT

quote:

I actually couldnt believe how cheap the film looked...i mean even the final - in a church just like we have up the road...give me a few fireworks and some moody lighting..and your looking at the next bond director..oh and for the record..in regards to Flemings turning a lesbian straight - ive been known to turn a few around myself!

I refuse to believe you've actually seen a cheap film if you say that, cause a cheap film wouldn't feature most of the things here. This film cost about the same amount of Casino Royale (a film that looked even less spectacular than this) and probably less considering this doesn't count any sort of inflation.

Oh and Pussy Galore was a lesbian, made clear to be one in the books and given hints in the film, having Bond turn her straight is more than a bit worrying, it's also genuinely stupid.

quote:

You mentioned DAD etc had good reviews upon release..yes..yes Bond movies generally do...not like this one mind..but then, as mentioned, this one appeals to the upper classes you see ..the types who go in for closeup shots of paintings in galleries... and quite rightly once a movie is out and about and goes onto dvd etc...the stars start to drop off...DAD rightly/wrongly now cited as being one of the worst...personally 'surfing tidal wave aside' still rate it above average myself....and heck it was a damn sight more believable than spoiler ( AGAIN ) Bond killing M ..which essentially was what happened...taking her to that remote site with no backup...I note you AND others FAIL to address what has to be the single worst moment in a BOND movie EVER..that 3rd act..the entire 3rd act. I enjoyed it...but it didnt make sense, and was basically from a totally different..much better mind..movie.

OH MY GOD

Did you actually check what I typed? TWICE. You have to do a thing even everyone's grandma knows, YOU HAD TO HIGHLIGHT THE BIT UNDER SPOILERS. You find it there, explained. It's not perfect, they could have found a way to get weaponry without Silva noticing (possibly, Silva is incredibly ingenious) but it's not that nonsensical.

I honestly believe you're trolling with that upper classes comment and the bit afterwards makes no sense.

Oh and that surfing bit in DAD was even daft for the series, other than it looks absolutely terrible as well, oh and it didn't have just positive reviews (I remember 5 stars from some mags), some of the audiences were also positive with it.

quote:

When the dust settles i strongly suspect this film will really drop from being cited as best ever to ..what were they thinking. Trouble is...the reviews are in and clearly this is the way the series is going....for a few more at least till audiences dwindle once again and..all change.

Or remain accliamed like Casino Royale. None of us know this. I mean hype was high for Quantum of Solace, didn't prevent some people from disliking it.

< Message edited by Deviation -- 27/10/2012 10:56:22 PM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to garjobo)

Post #: 126

RE: Great stuff - 27/10/2012 10:36:27 PM

OPEN YOUR EYES

Posts: 3465
Joined: 5/2/2012
From: Living on Lynch's quiff

This better out-do the Dark Knight and Prometheus review threads.
Got some dynamite in here already.

_____________________________

?eeffoc emos ekil uoy dluow

(in reply to Deviation)

Post #: 127

RE: Great stuff - 27/10/2012 10:54:41 PM

Deviation

Posts: 26908
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

I actually have a satellite prepared. It's powered by diamonds.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to OPEN YOUR EYES)

Post #: 128

RE: Skyfall - 27/10/2012 11:46:22 PM

earnest

Posts: 14
Joined: 4/11/2010

Oh SPARE ME some peeps really get their knickers in a twist on these things. Just for the record if spare me read the review i said skyfall looked as good as a David Lean movie but as slow in parts as one. Hitchcock at his best film looks great and paced well.And yes it did feel like a fleming book.It is the best since Dr no which is (my personal favourite).

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 129

RE: Skyfall - 28/10/2012 1:13:25 AM

garjobo

Posts: 7
Joined: 27/10/2012

I...underestimated you Mr..Mr Deviation...you are a most intriguing adversary...but I feel this film is not worthy of much debate. I feel so strongly that this is such a mess of a movie I am going to pull out of the handbags at dawn scenerio and let you and your kind waffle on.

Suffice it to say, you have a real beef regarding LicencetoKill or rather..tokilt as Knight and her pips would say! personally..although far removed from the 'classic' Bond of olde I do feel it underated and seriously compared to this utter total tripe of a movie, Skyfall, it stands head and shoulders above it.

You addressed various comments I raised...and i ..surprise surprise disagree with them all..however again this movie is not worthy of much thought as clearly the writers couldnt be f***'n arsed to hand in a decent script so why should i waste my time with it. Let the producers etc carry on making 2nd..no..3rd rate spy 'thrillers' 2 steps behind the average action movie. Bond was King back in the 60's and 70's...they lost their foothold in the 80s's and have played catchup ever since..this film changes nothing other than pandering to the 'arthouse' critics.

Clearly seeing The Car, the Eject Button et al again makes you ejactulate Mr Deviation - as a Bond fan its' hard ( no pun intended ) not to get excited as such a rare thing seen in an Bond movie...and I MUST stress here...there are moments in this Mandas movie which are great...nice to see...long time coming...but all in all a GOOD movie it does not make.

Despite your sesection of my previous post I must stress that NOT ONCE..not once prey tell have you justifed the pathetic 3rd act / the actual plot ( 3 writers/ 4 years in the making ) ...the diabolical and shambolic nature of the entire movie...instead you like to misquote/interject various comment I have made and basically have a dig at licencetokilt. Peoples memories are short...time papers over many things..but it was 4 yrs for Spy to come out late 70's...you HAVE to compare it with the movies around that time...the sheer inventiveness, the action, the humor, the stuntwork..the sheer boldness and beauty of the script...it ..was...ahead of it's time...you just cant compare like for like...Skyfall fails..it fails on virtually every single level....nothing works...it's an actors movie...a performance movie...it..is..not..a Bond movie.

TIME will be the judge. Again, with a saddened heart I must write..this film disappoints and im certain..100% certain the majority of those paying customers who bare witness to this mess of a 'arthouse' ( term used correctly ) movie will feel very shortchanged.

I would happily sit through that 3rd act again..and by gum intend to watch the entire movie ( without medication ) again whilst it is on the big screen...but its a massive failure. My major complaint was..the 5star reviews, the fantastic notices it has been getting..by jove...as a Bond fan it made me happy to read..imagine..just imagine...a Spywholovedme for MY generation ( my first Bond being Moonraker )...my disappointment is so so very real im gutted that I loathe the movie the way I do. I long for the classic moments, the car chase...any pennies spent via the Henniken bugdet was clearly on the opening credits......Octopussy was more inventive, more exciting, more FUN...Thunderball too had a terrifici opening sequence...its..called..having a budget..and working out how best to spend it.

Test screenings commented on it's length and the amount of 'talking bits'...whats the bloody point of test screening if 'they' dont LISTEN to them...and EDIT the movie. It..COULD of been SO MUCH BETTER...throw in a few more exciting scenes early on...the 'classic Bond' seems likely NEVER to happen.

(in reply to earnest)

Post #: 130

RE: Skyfall - 28/10/2012 3:38:52 AM

Deviation

Posts: 26908
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

Suffice it to say, you have a real beef regarding LicencetoKill or rather..tokilt as Knight and her pips would say! personally..although far removed from the 'classic' Bond of olde I do feel it underated and seriously compared to this utter total tripe of a movie, Skyfall, it stands head and shoulders above it.

I can't even see it starting with Skyfall, I even much prefer QoS over it. I love Dalton, I loved the tone in the first 40 minutes and the chase at the end, the rest is poor. It featured a drag far worse than anything else, a plot that at the end resembles Miami Vice, a Bond girl who becomes an incessant nag and Robert Davi's stale villian. And I wanted to like it, I love Living Daylights, this was a poor way to end Dalton's fantastic Bond. Skyfall is Goldeneye compared to LTK.

quote:

You addressed various comments I raised...and i ..surprise surprise disagree with them all..however again this movie is not worthy of much thought as clearly the writers couldnt be f***'n arsed to hand in a decent script so why should i waste my time with it. Let the producers etc carry on making 2nd..no..3rd rate spy 'thrillers' 2 steps behind the average action movie. Bond was King back in the 60's and 70's...they lost their foothold in the 80s's and have played catchup ever since..this film changes nothing other than pandering to the 'arthouse' critics.

I see words but I see no substance nor meaning. Skyfall is no less arthouse (a word I'm sure you don't have the singlest idea of what it means and implies) then OHMSS, TLD or CR. You should stop mentioning that word and make yourself look stupid, especially when accliam for Skyfall has come from all areas.

Oh and Bond was also king in the 90s. He was also shit.

quote:

Clearly seeing The Car, the Eject Button et al again makes you ejactulate Mr Deviation - as a Bond fan its' hard ( no pun intended ) not to get excited as such a rare thing seen in an Bond movie...and I MUST stress here...there are moments in this Mandas movie which are great...nice to see...long time coming...but all in all a GOOD movie it does not make.

Who the hell is Mandas? Oh and it did not make me ejaculate, Berenice Marlohe did, it made me giggle because it was a funny piece of banter between Bond and M. If that was as much to make me excited by the film than DAD would be my fave Bond film ever. It's the opposite.

quote:

Despite your sesection of my previous post I must stress that NOT ONCE..not once prey tell have you justifed the pathetic 3rd act / the actual plot ( 3 writers/ 4 years in the making ) ...the diabolical and shambolic nature of the entire movie...instead you like to misquote/interject various comment I have made and basically have a dig at licencetokilt. Peoples memories are short...time papers over many things..but it was 4 yrs for Spy to come out late 70's...you HAVE to compare it with the movies around that time...the sheer inventiveness, the action, the humor, the stuntwork..the sheer boldness and beauty of the script...it ..was...ahead of it's time...you just cant compare like for like...Skyfall fails..it fails on virtually every single level....nothing works...it's an actors movie...a performance movie...it..is..not..a Bond movie.

Whoah, you have not, for a single moment, countered anything of what I said, didn't even just come close to it, explain your position better, show why the bits I said are wrong and you disagree, all you did was say more words to repeat the same thing. Oh and where did I misquote you? How did I misquote? Did you not mention LTK? A film which is even more slow and pondering than Skyfall is and went "Get on with it"?

Also, why is not a Bond film? Actually what makes a Bond film? Bond has constantly evolved all the time and is a mirror of the time it was in. Skyfall is pretty much a post-millenia Bond with the stylings of Nolan, keeping some of the style, signature, outlandish nature of the series (ie, the fight in the pit, the destructive chases through exotic cities and most importantly, a villian that is closer to vintage Bond than anything in LTK). What is even an actor's or performance movie? Did you even read what you typed?

quote:

TIME will be the judge. Again, with a saddened heart I must write..this film disappoints and im certain..100% certain the majority of those paying customers who bare witness to this mess of a 'arthouse' ( term used correctly ) movie will feel very shortchanged.

No, you did not use the term correctly, you couldn't be fucking wronger even if you applied it to Stephen Sommers. You literally have no idea what it means. Oh and reception is still positive right now. Also, don't bet on it either.

quote:

I would happily sit through that 3rd act again..and by gum intend to watch the entire movie ( without medication ) again whilst it is on the big screen...but its a massive failure. My major complaint was..the 5star reviews, the fantastic notices it has been getting..by jove...as a Bond fan it made me happy to read..imagine..just imagine...a Spywholovedme for MY generation ( my first Bond being Moonraker )...my disappointment is so so very real im gutted that I loathe the movie the way I do. I long for the classic moments, the car chase...any pennies spent via the Henniken bugdet was clearly on the opening credits......Octopussy was more inventive, more exciting, more FUN...Thunderball too had a terrifici opening sequence...its..called..having a budget..and working out how best to spend it.

Oh I get it, OH NO BOND ISN'T LIKE MOORE ANYMORE I WANT THE GADGETS Wait, the bloody awful Octopussy? That Octopussy? or the damned immensely stupid Moonraker? And the budget for Thunderball went mostly for the underwater sequences, they were terrible. You mean like the car chase? Did you come in 20 minutes late into the film or something?

The Spy Who Loved Me is very much a product of its era. Made today it would look more than a bit daft, like following Jason Bourne with Mission Impossible 4.

quote:

Test screenings commented on it's length and the amount of 'talking bits'...whats the bloody point of test screening if 'they' dont LISTEN to them...and EDIT the movie. It..COULD of been SO MUCH BETTER...throw in a few more exciting scenes early on...the 'classic Bond' seems likely NEVER to happen.

Test screenings also were responsible for the change of ending in I am Legend and if they were listened to, we'd have butchered versions of Blue Velvet and Twelve Monkeys. They can fuck off. Also, about the talky bits, YOU. LIKE. LICENCE TO KILL. AND. OHMSS. Films which are about as long as Skyfall and have even more talky bits. One thing is not liking what being said, which is fair, another thing is blaming it for HAVING talky bits when you like films in the series with even. more. talky. bits.

< Message edited by Deviation -- 28/10/2012 3:40:04 AM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to garjobo)

Post #: 131

RE: Skyfall - 28/10/2012 4:04:40 AM

garjobo

Posts: 7
Joined: 27/10/2012

Cheers big man for the reply appreciated. You have a lot of time on your hands then again your a Bond fanatic! it seems so obviously you would.

I respectivly disagree with every single word you have uttered..and your disection of Licence to Kil(t) is totally without warrent..its far from my favourite but sod it makes this Skyfall pompous nonesense a damn sight more palatable.

Im NOT getting into a handbags at dawn scenerio with you..sorry chum(p)...im just not.

End of the day this movie bored me to tears...and a great deal of other people. You, along with others have been conned into thinking this is the best thing since sliced bread. It is not. The plot is thinner than toliet paper but heyoh..you go salavate over it as much as you want...the movie is now worthy of further comment and neither are you.
.

< Message edited by garjobo -- 28/10/2012 8:50:38 AM >

(in reply to Deviation)

Post #: 132

RE: More Bland than Bond - 28/10/2012 10:45:45 AM

Gazz

Posts: 874
Joined: 30/9/2005

Writing up a proper review but these are my initial thoughts after two viewings of the film:

Big in action and yet, as the runtime progresses, Skyfall feels a smaller and more personal affair than typical of the series, placing character development and story firmly before the next big Bond set-piece. Due to this steady build of character and tension I found the entirety of the final act goose-bump inducing despite it's action being rather grounded (and beautifully realised).

Javier Bardem is a treat in the role of Silva, a villain able to challenge Bond on a level few have before (especially in regards to his sexual advances). His monologue on the nature of trapped rats was a particular highlight and a stunning introduction. Skyfall perhaps lags a touch in the moments prior to Silva's introduction but this is an incredibly minor quibble in regards to what could be the most intelligently made Bond film so far.

Oh and Roger Deakin's really knocks this out of the park. The look of Skyfall is like no other Bond film and truly a character of its own. Take a bow, man!

Best Daniel Craig film of the bunch and although I'd rather let it settle first, Skyfall does feel like a contender to be my new favourite. This is a tough act to follow in my opinion.

Post #: 133

RE: Repeat Viewing Required - 28/10/2012 12:07:05 PM

manwihtheplan

Posts: 100
Joined: 11/9/2012

quote:

I'm still not sure about Daniel Craig as Bond. He has great intensity but I always picture his Bond as being more of a soldier than an officer and that he lacks any suaveness or debonair(ness) that the previous Bonds have had.

Here's the world's best kept secret about classically handsome actors (such as the five previous Bond actors)....

They tend to have a lot more charisma and refinement.

Amazing, huh! And guess what, when you hire an average looking bloke as Bond you get less charisma and refinement.

Wow, what an amazing discovery. I know, it's up there with E=MC2 and the mystery of losing socks in the washing machine!

< Message edited by manwihtheplan -- 28/10/2012 12:10:01 PM >

Post #: 134

RE: Repeat Viewing Required - 28/10/2012 12:22:35 PM

Deviation

Posts: 26908
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

quote:

I'm still not sure about Daniel Craig as Bond. He has great intensity but I always picture his Bond as being more of a soldier than an officer and that he lacks any suaveness or debonair(ness) that the previous Bonds have had.

Here's the world's best kept secret about classically handsome actors (such as the five previous Bond actors)....

They tend to have a lot more charisma and refinement.

Amazing, huh! And guess what, when you hire an average looking bloke as Bond you get less charisma and refinement.

Wow, what an amazing discovery. I know, it's up there with E=MC2 and the mystery of losing socks in the washing machine!

Craig does have charisma and refinement, not as much as the previous ones because he has to juggle it well with the harsh tone of the first two and shows it best here. It's not because he's less handsome (by handsome, the best would be Lazenby but we wouldn't call him the best in charisma) but more because of the tone of his films, that will probably change with Skyfall onwards now that the series will thankfully start taking a more lighthearted approach.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to manwihtheplan)

Post #: 135

RE: Repeat Viewing Required - 28/10/2012 12:48:17 PM

musht

Posts: 1131
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

quote:

I'm still not sure about Daniel Craig as Bond. He has great intensity but I always picture his Bond as being more of a soldier than an officer and that he lacks any suaveness or debonair(ness) that the previous Bonds have had.

Here's the world's best kept secret about classically handsome actors (such as the five previous Bond actors)....

They tend to have a lot more charisma and refinement.

Amazing, huh! And guess what, when you hire an average looking bloke as Bond you get less charisma and refinement.

Wow, what an amazing discovery. I know, it's up there with E=MC2 and the mystery of losing socks in the washing machine!

Craig does have charisma and refinement, not as much as the previous ones because he has to juggle it well with the harsh tone of the first two and shows it best here. It's not because he's less handsome (by handsome, the best would be Lazenby but we wouldn't call him the best in charisma) but more because of the tone of his films, that will probably change with Skyfall onwards now that the series will thankfully start taking a more lighthearted approach.

I would think Moore was surely the least attractive and he had buckets of charisma, possibly too much

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

(in reply to Deviation)

Post #: 136

RE: Skyfall - 28/10/2012 1:31:55 PM

Filmfan 2

Posts: 972
Joined: 30/9/2005

*****SPOILERS*****

I saw this yesterday to a packed cinema (I imagine this will probably have one of the best opening weekend figures for a film in the UK this year; almost every showing at the cineworld here in Edinburgh, at least, has been a sell-out).

Whilst there is lots to enjoy about Skyfall, personally speaking, I think it's still just pipped at the post by Casino Royale as my favourite of the Craig-era Bond movies. Skyfall, if nothing else, is truly the most beautful of the Bond films to look at, and Roger Deakins should be congratulated for making Bond look so spectacular. Standout sequences are the silhouetted skyscraper fight (beautifully measured slow push-in), and the Glencoe finale. That last sequence looked wonderful from start to finish, but the part where the only illumination comes from a glowing firebal as all is cloaked under darkest night is quite remarkable.

It's great that there is so much emphasis on character and the story as well, and not just a relentess moving from one action set-piece to the next. However this also a bit of a weakness for the film.

Whilst character comes to the fore and helps to drive the machinations of the plot forward, at times it tends to suck some of the momentum out of the film. Bardem's wordy, cerebral villian makes a nice counterpoint to the physicality of Bond (and highlights a theme of the film - the old way of doing things versus the new world order), but his scenes of exposition are probably amongst the slowest of the movie, and whilst this is not inherintly a bad thing, I did find them to drag a little. Indeed, I think this film would have benefitted tremendously by having 20mins culled from the running time, as I did feel that pacing was something of an issue. Also, the Bond girl who made a remarkably brief appearance in the story, needn't have made an appearance at all for all the importance she played. She was a disappointingly scant cypher who seemed to exist only to get Bond in front of his adversary. I agree with Mark Kermode about the quip Bond makes at her death - it seemeed quite out of place with the new 'etiquette' of the Bond films, a needless throwback to the one-liners of the old films, and strangely callous, given that we are led to believe that he cares for her somewhat.

This is a very well put together movie which is definitely worthy of high praise, but it falls just short of the five star mark for me. There's a pacing issue that robs the film of momentum at times and a few glaring plot holes (though, held up to the cold light of day, most movies are riddled with them) that just stop this from being, for me at least, the triuph it's being mafe out to be in some quarters of the press. Chris Tookey, for example, wants all involved to get Oscars, but I think the only Oscar worthy participant in the making of Skyfall is Roger Deakins and perhaps Adele, for putting together one of the best Bond themes fot many a year.

4/5.

< Message edited by Filmfan 2 -- 28/10/2012 1:34:17 PM >

_____________________________

I am not drinkin' any fuckin' Merlot!

"All I wanted me was a piece of cornbread, you motherfuckers!"

Defender of all things Batman Begins

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 137

RE: Skyfall - 28/10/2012 2:40:01 PM

Darth Marenghi

Posts: 2948
Joined: 10/10/2010
From: Manchester

*****SPOILERS***** *****SPOILERS***** *****SPOILERS*****

quote:

ORIGINAL: Filmfan 2

*****SPOILERS*****

She was a disappointingly scant cypher who seemed to exist only to get Bond in front of his adversary. I agree with Mark Kermode about the quip Bond makes at her death - it seemeed quite out of place with the new 'etiquette' of the Bond films, a needless throwback to the one-liners of the old films, and strangely callous, given that we are led to believe that he cares for her somewhat.

I thought so too at the time, but after the film I came to the conclusion that Bond must be putting on a callous front as the villain obviously wants him to feel anguish at the woman's death. I'd have like it to be partly addressed in their final confrontation at the end, I think.

_____________________________

Invisible Text for SPOILERS: "color=#F1F1F1" Spoiler text "/color" , then change the quotation marks to square brackets.

(in reply to Filmfan 2)

Post #: 138

RE: Skyfall - 28/10/2012 4:47:32 PM

dolfinack

Posts: 73
Joined: 20/7/2011
From: Belfast

I thought the first two thirds were excellent apart from the gaping plot holes (which I can probably ignore due to the quality of the cinematography).

But the end sequence....... I just cringed at how un-bond it was. I know lots of people have made references to how it descends into that film with the little kid, and I have to admit this thought plagued me as I sat watching. It kind of spoiled it for me. Overall though, it was a pretty decent flick and I'll gladly watch it again.

That said, bring back the gadgets!!!!

_____________________________

"I'm as human as the next man"

"Dad! I WAS the next man!"

(in reply to Darth Marenghi)

Post #: 139

RE: Skyfall - 28/10/2012 4:52:45 PM

OPEN YOUR EYES

Posts: 3465
Joined: 5/2/2012
From: Living on Lynch's quiff

quote:

ORIGINAL: dolfinack

I thought the first two thirds were excellent apart from the gaping plot holes (which I can probably ignore due to the quality of the cinematography).

But the end sequence....... I just cringed at how un-bond it was. I know lots of people have made references to how it descends into that film with the little kid, and I have to admit this thought plagued me as I sat watching. It kind of spoiled it for me. Overall though, it was a pretty decent flick and I'll gladly watch it again.

That said, bring back the gadgets!!!!

E.T ?

_____________________________

?eeffoc emos ekil uoy dluow

(in reply to dolfinack)

Post #: 140

RE: Skyfall - 28/10/2012 5:10:02 PM

dolfinack

Posts: 73
Joined: 20/7/2011
From: Belfast

Hehe you'd know the kiddies film it if you'd seen Skyfall.

ET / Bond would be interesting though. Maybe Nolan can make it and we can all sit around staring in admiration at his every breath. Vom.

_____________________________

"I'm as human as the next man"

"Dad! I WAS the next man!"

(in reply to OPEN YOUR EYES)

Post #: 141

RE: Skyfall - 28/10/2012 5:12:24 PM

Hood_Man

Posts: 11272
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: OPEN YOUR EYES

quote:

ORIGINAL: dolfinack

I thought the first two thirds were excellent apart from the gaping plot holes (which I can probably ignore due to the quality of the cinematography).

But the end sequence....... I just cringed at how un-bond it was. I know lots of people have made references to how it descends into that film with the little kid, and I have to admit this thought plagued me as I sat watching. It kind of spoiled it for me. Overall though, it was a pretty decent flick and I'll gladly watch it again.

That said, bring back the gadgets!!!!

E.T ?

http://goo.gl/zI8Mf

(in reply to OPEN YOUR EYES)

Post #: 142

RE: Skyfall - 28/10/2012 5:21:01 PM

OPEN YOUR EYES

Posts: 3465
Joined: 5/2/2012
From: Living on Lynch's quiff

It descends into Home Alone?
This aint making sense

_____________________________

?eeffoc emos ekil uoy dluow

(in reply to Hood_Man)

Post #: 143

RE: A SINCERE 007 NOD! This One Has Heart! - 28/10/2012 6:47:05 PM

Private Hudson

Posts: 1720
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: GALLYMOO

A great BOND movie - incorporates classic nods as well as some new tricks...It puts Pierce Brosnan's run into the shade. This one has Heart!

Never seen GoldenEye?

For my money GoldenEye beats SkyFall hands down.

Plus it wasn't too long ago people said Brosnan was "easily the best Bond since Connery" now it is Craig.

I have tried hard to like Daniel Craig, and I did like Casino Royale. I thought it was superb. However with QoS and now SkyFall there is an actual counter argument to suggest Daniel Craig may be the worst Bond ever.

It is not really his fault. I believe he is miscast. He lacks the charisma and the humour of Bond which was always present even way back in Dr No "Are you looking for shells?" "No. I'm just looking."

I think Craig is actually a bit hammy and wooden.

He just can't make a witty comment that makes me laugh and 007 is entertainment.

Bond is escapism, fantasy. It is not reality.

Time to ditch the Bourne and Batman influences and start bringing in a bit of style, wit and humour.

The only bit that was 'Bondian' (if that is a word) is the bit when he adjusts his cuff links aboard the train in Turkey.

So come on give Daniel Craig a fair chance Eon, and give us 2 movies about Quantum that allow him to have some proper fun.

_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

Post #: 144

RE: not quite as amazing as you're hoping - 28/10/2012 6:48:45 PM

Private Hudson

Posts: 1720
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

Well, you're not a mod so you don't get to tell people what people what they can and can not post. Also, this part of the forum is partly meant for posting reviews, most of which are well written.

It is simply my opinion.

I want debate and opinion as much as anyone, but it makes me laugh when someone writes a review as if it is going to appear in Empire (and it is not just on this thread).

But I suppose they are only about 15 right enough.

You are a moron. That's my last post on the subject.

Why lower yourself to personal insults?

Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them 'a moron'.

I find that pretty offensive actually.

From you, earlier in this thread -

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson

The Fleming Bond which all the pretentious tw@ts love to quote

Yes, was that personalised at one person?

No.

My point about the Fleming Bond is valid. Fleming's Bond would never have lasted 50 years. The cinematic Bond was a different creature right from the start.

_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

(in reply to matty_b)

Post #: 145

RE: Gun Barrel Barney.... - 28/10/2012 6:54:57 PM

Private Hudson

Posts: 1720
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

I think it would have been absolutely awful if Connery had taken that role. Awful.

Agreed. And I don't think that was meant for Connery.

"Welcome to Scotland" is just a joke. It was also along the lines of what dear old Smeato said in an interview after beating up a would be car bomber at Glasgow Airport (he actually said something like "This is Glasgow" in an interview afterwards)

_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

(in reply to matty_b)

Post #: 146

RE: Skyfall - 28/10/2012 6:57:07 PM

Filmfan 2

Posts: 972
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darth Marenghi

*****SPOILERS***** *****SPOILERS***** *****SPOILERS*****

quote:

ORIGINAL: Filmfan 2

*****SPOILERS*****

She was a disappointingly scant cypher who seemed to exist only to get Bond in front of his adversary. I agree with Mark Kermode about the quip Bond makes at her death - it seemeed quite out of place with the new 'etiquette' of the Bond films, a needless throwback to the one-liners of the old films, and strangely callous, given that we are led to believe that he cares for her somewhat.

I thought so too at the time, but after the film I came to the conclusion that Bond must be putting on a callous front as the villain obviously wants him to feel anguish at the woman's death. I'd have like it to be partly addressed in their final confrontation at the end, I think.

Yes a referencing of her might have been nice. Who knows, maybe there's material sitting on the cutting room floor that might have made for a more satisfactory ending to that particular thread of the story. Still, the abbrasiveness does seem little out of step, though I concede that your reasoning does help it a bit contextually.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dolfinack

That said, bring back the gadgets!!!!

God, no thank you! I fear that inevitably leads down the invisible car route again.

_____________________________

I am not drinkin' any fuckin' Merlot!

"All I wanted me was a piece of cornbread, you motherfuckers!"

Defender of all things Batman Begins

(in reply to Darth Marenghi)

Post #: 147

RE: not quite as amazing as you're hoping - 28/10/2012 6:57:58 PM

Private Hudson

Posts: 1720
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanchia

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

Well, you're not a mod so you don't get to tell people what people what they can and can not post. Also, this part of the forum is partly meant for posting reviews, most of which are well written.

It is simply my opinion.

I want debate and opinion as much as anyone, but it makes me laugh when someone writes a review as if it is going to appear in Empire (and it is not just on this thread).

But I suppose they are only about 15 right enough.

I haven't been involved but, sorry, that is an astoundingly arrogant comment.

No sense of humour?

Has the world really gone so PC these days? No wonder 007 is played by Daniel Craig. Sean Connery would have been arrested for 'Man Talk'!

_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

(in reply to sanchia)

Post #: 148

RE: Skyfall - 28/10/2012 7:02:20 PM

Private Hudson

Posts: 1720
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Filmfan 2

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darth Marenghi

*****SPOILERS***** *****SPOILERS***** *****SPOILERS*****

quote:

ORIGINAL: Filmfan 2

*****SPOILERS*****

She was a disappointingly scant cypher who seemed to exist only to get Bond in front of his adversary. I agree with Mark Kermode about the quip Bond makes at her death - it seemeed quite out of place with the new 'etiquette' of the Bond films, a needless throwback to the one-liners of the old films, and strangely callous, given that we are led to believe that he cares for her somewhat.

I thought so too at the time, but after the film I came to the conclusion that Bond must be putting on a callous front as the villain obviously wants him to feel anguish at the woman's death. I'd have like it to be partly addressed in their final confrontation at the end, I think.

Yes a referencing of her might have been nice. Who knows, maybe there's material sitting on the cutting room floor that might have made for a more satisfactory ending to that particular thread of the story. Still, the abbrasiveness does seem little out of step, though I concede that your reasoning does help it a bit contextually.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dolfinack

That said, bring back the gadgets!!!!

God, no thank you! I fear that inevitably leads down the invisible car route again.

At the time I did think the invisible car was OTT. But the US military are actually experimenting with adaptive camouflage so perhaps in 20 years time it won't be so silly.

Bond without the gadgets becomes just another spy. The gadgets along with the wit, the girls, the exotic locales, and the meglomaniac villain are Bond's USP.

I agree that now and again we need something fresh (like For Your Eyes Only and Licence to Kill) but we also need our You Only Live Twices, The Spy Who Loved Mes and our GoldenEyes to keep the audience happy and indeed encourage the target audience the 12-15 year old boy who will grow up watching Bond and then pass on to his family.

Bond should be family entertainment as he is a heroic character and indeed should always be up there with the likes of Indiana Jones when the all time great movie heroes are mentioned.

_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

(in reply to Filmfan 2)

Post #: 149

RE: A SINCERE 007 NOD! This One Has Heart! - 28/10/2012 7:06:58 PM

Deviation

Posts: 26908
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson
Never seen GoldenEye?

I did, one night before Skyfall.

quote:

For my money GoldenEye beats SkyFall hands down.

I disagree, mostly because after the opening credits and Sean Bean's re-appearance, the film goes to a grinding, unexciting halt and features the worst special effects in the entire franchise, they look worse than the ones in Moonraker (if not YOLT) and as bad as DAD.

quote:

Plus it wasn't too long ago people said Brosnan was "easily the best Bond since Connery" now it is Craig.

It's nonsense anyways, Dalton rules all.

quote:

I have tried hard to like Daniel Craig, and I did like Casino Royale. I thought it was superb. However with QoS and now SkyFall there is an actual counter argument to suggest Daniel Craig may be the worst Bond ever.

No, he's far away. To be the worst you have to make Bond do a Tarzan yell and dress him up as a clown. Or worse of all, deal with the death of his wife in the previous films the same way he'd deal a dude who jumped in line.

quote:

It is not really his fault. I believe he is miscast. He lacks the charisma and the humour of Bond which was always present even way back in Dr No "Are you looking for shells?" "No. I'm just looking."

Or the films are really not using the charisma and humor of Bond. Dalton didn't have much humor to work with either, and Bond in the first half of TLD is very manipulative.

quote:

I think Craig is actually a bit hammy and wooden.

He just can't make a witty comment that makes me laugh and 007 is entertainment.

I thought he did, but that has to do with he is given (many of Moore's and Brosnabn's lines are an embarassment) and he's not being given much. I swear, it took me till FYEO to start loving Moore, with TSWLM he was good, but not great yet.

quote:

Bond is escapism, fantasy. It is not reality.

Bond is still escapism, tougher than others but still escapism. Stop dealing with this as if it is Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy mixed with Bycicle Thieves. It's a Bond that has come out of this age and fashions seen these days.

quote:

Time to ditch the Bourne and Batman influences and start bringing in a bit of style, wit and humour.

Bourne and Batman are still influences and in Skyfall, the influences from those were the most OTT, ie like a certain jailbreak.

quote:

The only bit that was 'Bondian' (if that is a word) is the bit when he adjusts his cuff links aboard the train in Turkey.

We also had the locations looking at their most exquisite, A PIT OF KOMODO DRAGONS THAT EAT PEOPLE, very destructive chases and the most flamboyant villian since....possibly ever.

The whole Bondian thing is a bit nonsense. There's practically not much tonal similarity between OHMSS, Live and Let Die, Moonraker or Licence to Kill, but they have direct signatures to be Bond. Skyfall is as Bondian as those.

< Message edited by Deviation -- 28/10/2012 7:23:27 PM >

_____________________________