Skyfall - Grading & Discussion

[Gaith]

Arpy wrote:

---

And isn't the bombing on MI6, the attack during the hearing, and M's death (head of British intelligence) just one huge clusterfuck for the UK in the Bond universe? Wouldn't the mood in the nation be a mess?

Not more so than the existence of an international terrorist/business/political called Quantum, which it seems we may never hear about again. (Not that I mind. That whole weak-sauce SPECTRE update was a bad idea to begin with.)

Starkers wrote:

---

Exactly, it's the arrogance of the man who thinks he's the smartest man in the room. It's still a bit daft but that does go part way to explaining it.

Except Silva already has broken through M16's firewalls, when he created the explosion that killed six people. Firewalls that, since Q seems to be the top tech dog around, he probably had a hand in setting up/maintaining.

So here he is, opening his network to a second attack for no reason whatsoever, and there Bond is, too stupid to tell him off for it. Anyone who says that Skyfall makes any more sense than Prometheus, with its scaredy-cat scientist eager to caress a "beautiful" evil snake, is kidding themselves. IMHO.

[MacLeod]

And the latest news is Skyfall has become the most succesful film ever in the UK beating the previous record holder Avatar (without the benefit of higher 3D ticket prices) it could possible top £100m.

[trevanian]

Gaith wrote:

---

Anyone who says that Skyfall makes any more sense than Prometheus, with its scaredy-cat scientist eager to caress a "beautiful" evil snake, is kidding themselves. IMHO.

Truer words probably haven't been spoken online this year. Two massive disappointments for me; PROMETHEUS just being a horribly missed opportunity, SKYFALL passing itself off as smart (much as CASINO ROYALE did, a movie in which the baddies store all their secret contact info on their cellphones, without which Bond wouldn't have gotten anywhere in the movie) but with horrid characterization and idiot plot turns.

[Starkers]

The big difference between Prometheus and Skyfall is that Skyfall's so much fun the plot holes don't seem nearly as annoying. And I'd argue there are fewer of them, Skyfall's twice the film Prometheus is.

[MacLeod]

trevanian wrote:

---

Truer words probably haven't been spoken online this year. Two massive disappointments for me; PROMETHEUS just being a horribly missed opportunity, SKYFALL passing itself off as smart (much as CASINO ROYALE did, a movie in which the baddies store all their secret contact info on their cellphones, without which Bond wouldn't have gotten anywhere in the movie) but with horrid characterization and idiot plot turns.

Erm didn't Silva want to be captured, so he could be brought to London and kill M?

So one could argue that leaving details on a mobile phone was part of that plan to be captured.

But in general films do have plot holes.

[Starkers]

I think the mobile phone stuff related to Casino Royale, I have issues with that as well but I still like the film. I do increasingly think Skyfall is going to end up my favourite of the Craig era (so far) should be going to see it for a third time Monday

[MacLeod]

May not always be true, but in a good film many plot holes will be overlooked, however in a bad film the plot holes just stand out more.

[I am not Spock]

I enjoyed both Skyfall and Prometheus (though I seem to be the only person who liked the latter).

Skyfall was fantastic. The best Bond movie in a very long time. What Craig's movies had been lacking was a charismatic villain. This one delivered.

A+ for me.

[Trekker4747]

What Craig's movies has lacking was pretty much any connection whatsoever to the Bond franchise and tropes. This one had them which made it fun. Q, gadgets, quips, the gun-site (though this time around used as the outro rather than intro) injecting the theme into scenes. That made this movie spades better than the other Craig films.

[Captrek]

MacLeod wrote:

---

Erm didn't Silva want to be captured, so he could be brought to London and kill M?

There are much easier ways he could have got to London. After his escape, he went through a busy public train station on the way to the hearing. He could easily have gotten to London and that train station without such elaborate cloak and dagger. I don't see the logistical benefit to Silva of his capture and escape. I think it was all for show: he wanted to confront M face-to-face and to humiliate MI6 again.

[JarodRussell]

I don't understand why Skyfall is so extremely successful. I mean it's good, but not that good.

[MacLeod]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

What Craig's movies has lacking was pretty much any connection whatsoever to the Bond franchise and tropes. This one had them which made it fun. Q, gadgets, quips, the gun-site (though this time around used as the outro rather than intro) injecting the theme into scenes. That made this movie spades better than the other Craig films.

Well not to mention, Miss Monypenny, the new M's office looking somewhat familiar.

[MacLeod]

JarodRussell wrote:

---

I don't understand why Skyfall is so extremely successful. I mean it's good, but not that good.

I could think of a number of reasons.

1.>Bond is one of the most succesful film franchises.
2.>It's the 50th Anniversary of the film franchise
3.>It's not like there is a huge amount of competition in terms of the major blockbusters.
4.>It's been hea vily advertised.
5.>It's generally received very good/excellent reviews. (which can actually lower peoples view on the film. After all if you go to see a film with rubbish reviews all you can be is suprised if it's better than the reviews, conversly you might be dissapointed with a film that has rave reviews because expectations are higher)

[RoJoHen]

MacLeod wrote:

---

5.>It's generally received very good/excellent reviews. (which can actually lower peoples view on the film. After all if you go to see a film with rubbish reviews all you can be is suprised if it's better than the reviews, conversly you might be dissapointed with a film that has rave reviews because expectations are higher)

I think it's been getting just the right amount of word-of-mouth. It's not "that film sucked, don't see it." It's not "OMG THIS WAS TEH BEST MOVIE EVAR!!!" It's getting more "The new James Bond was pretty good. I think you'd like it." Plus the commercials make it look awesome. I think that combo is making it very attractive to a lot of people.

[The Wormhole]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

What Craig's movies has lacking was pretty much any connection whatsoever to the Bond franchise and tropes. This one had them which made it fun. Q, gadgets, quips, the gun-site (though this time around used as the outro rather than intro) injecting the theme into scenes. That made this movie spades better than the other Craig films.

The gun-site was in the other two movies, in Casino Royale it was actually incorporated into the scene where he beat the guy up in the bathroom just before the credits began. In Quantum of Solace it was right at the end just like Skyfall. But yes, I agree, this felt more Bond like than than those two. Especially Quantum of Solace which simply did not feel like a Bond movie at all.