Skyfall

So...I did a search and couldn't find a thread on this (I was shocked).

Anyone seen it yet?

I just saw it and was surprised that I liked it considering how hyped it's been. Craig is still not my preferred Bond, which makes some of the raves a little hard to take at times, but he's excellent here just the same. Great cast too, and the visuals are terrific. It's a real step up from Quantum of Solace, and at least as good as Casino Royale.

 

Judi Dench's M has a good send off, I'll miss her, and although he's good there is something unnerving about Voldemort replacing her. Also liked the new Moneypenny and Q, and hope that we'll get back to Quantum or even Specter because the big bad here another rogue agent like in Goldeneye so if the heroes created a monster like him then I'd like to see more of the monsters they made him to fight in the first place.

EDIT: Mods, if there's a glitch, I'm sorry, because even doing a search now I cannot find any threads just on Skyfall even though I created this thread.

I did a search and couldn't find anything either. Which seems strange, but I guess it happens. Some things slip through here without discussion.

I loved the movie! I have yet to see Quantum of Solace. I bought the blu ray cheap. I had heard so-so things but I'll give it a go. There was some really gorgeous cinematography on display here. The scenes in Shanghai and the climactic scene springs to mind. It just felt very classy. I really appreciated how, for the 50th anniversary, they reveled in the past (a bit) before clearly setting things up for the future.

 

I agree that Dench's M was given a great send off, though I was sad to see her go as well. That being said, Ralph Fiennes was set up well for his new role too. The new Q was great as well. Loved the bit with the gun and the radio.

Overall, I think the movie really gave the franchise the boost it needed for the future.

I've seen it and I liked it a lot; however...

 

... has Bond's nationality always been Scottish? I've seen most of the movies and I always thought of him as an English gentleman, but it is clear that there's a point of pressure there when it is interviewed by that shrink doing the word association when asked "Country" & "Skyfall".
Also, when M wrote his obituary, he entitled him as a "Captain". I always thought that he was "Commander"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhanen

I've seen it and I liked it a lot; however...

---

Hmmm... I pretty sure it said Commander, actually. That's what I remember it saying, anyway.

 

As for him being Scottish, I don't think that's been stated (I don't think we knew much of anything about him, really) but I think it's an interesting idea of his background being Scottish, and them taking him and molding him into an "English gentleman." I think that might be part of showing how completely he was molded by the government to be an agent.

I think Flemming made Bond Scottish after Sean Connery began playing the part. I'm pretty sure I've seen that before. Also I too read Commander when that detail came up.

 

More than ever before I wonder if we are going to repeat any previous adventures like stuff with Spectre (which arguably was the closest the franchise ever got to a continuing story arc). This movie very much ends with the familiar set up seen in previous Bond movies, placing the events of the last three at the beginning of his career. I'm not sure its worth rehashing anything in a post-cold war world, but I'd love to see the same team try their hand at Blofeld and Tracy Draco/Bond from OHMSS.

Wow, what can I say about this movie? It was down right amazing!!! It is not only now my fourth favorite Bond movie (knocking Thunderball to #5), but it is also the best movie of 2012 hands down. Avengers was incredible, but the events, character development, and action scenes are even better. It's story keeps you guessing on what is going to happen and Bardem's character is by far the best villain of the series since Sanchez in Licence to Kill. Every scene with Q was full of brilliant dialog and the final bits of the movie are as unforgettable as those found in On Her Majesty's Secret Service. There are multiple homages to the previous movies and it was truly worthy of being the movie for its 50th anniversary. Not to mention it was well worth the four year wait from Quantum.

 

BTW, who found it awesome that Voldemort is now in charge of MI6? I knew the name of the character sounded familiar and kept thinking about it during the movie when it hit me that that was M's name in the books.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhanen

I've seen it and I liked it a lot; however...

---

That's not a spoiler. Ian Fleming made Bond have Scottish descent in the book "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" to account for Connery being casted as Bond and he liked the way he played the character in Dr No. In fact, they touch upon that in the movie too, which is funny considering Lazenby played the role of Bond who was not Scottish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JonWes

I did a search and couldn't find anything either. Which seems strange, but I guess it happens. Some things slip through here without discussion.

I loved the movie! I have yet to see Quantum of Solace. I bought the blu ray cheap. I had heard so-so things but I'll give it a go. There was some really gorgeous cinematography on display here. The scenes in Shanghai and the climactic scene springs to mind. It just felt very classy. I really appreciated how, for the 50th anniversary, they reveled in the past (a bit) before clearly setting things up for the future.

---

Oh my god, the cinematography was amazing in both those scenes. In fact, the sniper fight in Shanghai is probably my favorite part of the movie.

As for Quantum, it is a great movie, but you have to really watch it around the time you watch CR because it is more of a continuation than another Bond movie. Plus, the first half hour of the movie is a little rough to sit through because of how much action they threw into it. Once the plot gets moving, it gets good.

Oh yeah, I also like how the villains seem to be named off of colors. Mr White, Dominic Greene, and now Silver.

I loved Casino Royale. It was the Batman Begins of Bond movies. It breathed new life into the franchise, while not alienating the fans of the classic Bond. Quantum of Solace severely dropped the ball with the forgettable sequel and sort of erased all momentum the first one had.

Skyfall is the best of the trilogy and is exactly what is needed to keep making Bond films in the future. Both James Bond and M are facing the idea of being obsolete. M16 is under attack and 007's loyalty to M is all that is left to save it.

Much like Casino Royale, this takes a completely fresh tone to the franchise with the look and feel of the film, however it also bridges the gap between these new Bond films and the classic elements of the originals. Q is introduced, along with his gadgets. James Bond is back to womanizing and seducing beautiful women as part getting the job done along with the classic cars. It's a great mix of old school vs new school.

The cast is fantastic. Craig is a great grizzled Bond. Judi Dench is amazing as M. Javier Bardem is a very fun, creepy, and charismatic villain, very different than his Antoine Chigur. And Ralph Fienners is a great addition to the cast. We only get a taste of Q, but I look forward to him in the future films.

Great movie, go see it. I'm not sure Bond purists will love it, it is purposely different at times, but I just enjoyed the movie as a stand alone film.

I disagree. The Craig Bond series is clearly in a new universe. Judi Dench and Felix alone prove this. Remember, Bond never met Felix before Dr No in the old series, but if this universe was in that world, he would have known Felix. Plus, Dench's M cannot be M in both Bond's beginning career and then late into it.

Also there's the Cold War being over in Craig's series. You just can't reconcile that with the old ones.

Does Silva mean "silver"? That's very interesting because

 

It suggests he may have been associated with Quantum. The movie kind of brushed over the suspicious detail that Silva's cyanide capsule failed to kill him. I think there could have been more there if they are inclined to reference these details again in another movie, which doesn't usually happen I know but...hmmm.

Really enjoyed the movie. Now I'm glad I didn't sell my 1:18 Joyride DB5. A new James Bond in gray suit custom figure is on the way!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gbagok

Also there's the Cold War being over in Craig's series. You just can't reconcile that with the old ones.

Does Silva mean "silver"? That's very interesting because

---

Actually, I thought he was called Silver the entire time during the movie. I did not realize it was Silva until you just said something.

Really dug this, but I think you have to sort of 'abandon all hope' of reconciling a continuity with the first 20 movies. (Unless you were to say that Skyfall follows Die Another Day, and that Casino Royale/Quantum of Solace come before Dr. No, but that's just a way to get a headache...you'd have to say that Judi Dench was M, then left, then came back.) I don't think it matters, ultimately - but I loved this movie, and it really felt like a proper Bond movie, with a great villain, and a real sense of character.

Few things really bugged me, but overall I really enjoyed it. Why would someone stop, carefully step on thin ice, and continue to run on it when the land is 15 feet beside him???? :sklol:

I'm not sure if you guys are responding to me with the talk of continuity, but if you are, I simply meant bridges the gap with the elements and references of the old films, not the continuity.

I look at the Daniel Craig films as a reboot universe. What has gone before didn't happen in this storyline. That's not to say that that I just forget about all the other 007 films, I just reconcile them differently in my head.

I really liked Skyfall. I thought it was incredibly well done. The visual direction of the movie was very well done - particularly Shanghai and Scotland. The contrast between the two locales really lends itself nicely to the emotion of where Bond is mentally at that point in the film.

Javier Bardem has got to be one of the all time great Bond villains. In typical Bardem fashion, he was creepy as hell. But he was believable - not over the top like Moonraker's Hugo Drax, or any of the Brosnan villains. Bardem's Silva was believable and plausible - grounding the film closer to reality than most pre-Craig Bond films get.

I love Ralph Fiennes' character.

 

I figured out where that was going as soon as he made his appearance in the film as he and M sat and discussed her future. While I love Dench's M, I'm curious to see where Fiennes will take his role as M in future Bond films.

Q was OK - I don't mind him being a young guy.

 

I loved all the easter egg references to the older Bond flicks. From using the Komodo Dragon's back, a la Live and let Die to using the DB5, to Q's mention of exploding pens - all great stuff. It kept what is otherwise a very dark film fun.

I love how personal this movie gets. No global terror networks, no rogue nations, no Communists to overthrow - but just a very personal (and stand alone) story. I thought they really evolved Bond's character in this one.

 

I really want to know what happened to Bond's parents. I know that Bond and Vesper cover some of this on the train in Casino Royale, that he's an orphan and he wears his suit well, but has such disdain for it. But what's the backstory there. How did they die? Surely he had some sort of relationship with them (meaning he wasn't an infant). They must have been well off to have an estate.

I would like to see Quantum revisited at some point in the future. Isn't Quantum the new SPECTRE anyway?

I thought the score was well done too. Dark and moody with a few uplifting pieces here and there. David Arnold had done a fantastic job on Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, but the Skyfall score has a really nice feel to it.

Overall - I think I may have a new favorite bond movie. My favorite has been Goldfinger - for quite some time. I need to watch Skyfall a few dozen times to see if it really holds up.

I believe the Bonds fell of a mountain, didn't they? But I think it was just an accident, not anything particularly sinister?:skconf:

Yeah, for somereason I always thought it was a mountain climbing or skiing accident that took the lives of Bond's parents.

Call me a dinosaur (go ahead; do it), but there is only one James Bond and his name is Sean Connery.

http://galeri.uludagsozluk.com/47/se...nery_50976.jpg

I really liked this movie. At 2.5 hours, it went by very fast and was a huge improvement over Quantum of Solace, which I hated.

In some respects, it's The Dark Knight of Bond movies. Judi Dench and Javier Bardem are terrific in it. I even liked Albert Finney, but then again I like almost anything that Albert Finney is in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heeeere's Olesker!

Call me a dinosaur (go ahead; do it), but there is only one James Bond and his name is Sean Connery.

http://galeri.uludagsozluk.com/47/se...nery_50976.jpg

---

Oh, you are right. Connery is the best Bond, but, IMHO, there has not been a bad Bond. They all have their positives. You have the good looking athletic Bond, Connery and Lazenby, the gentlemen Bond, Moore and Brosnan, and the rough and rugged Bond, Dalton and Craig. All are aspects of Ian Fleming's OO7.

Skyfall was one of the better Bond films dealing with M, which there haven't been many. I just hope that Craig stays with the franchise. I liked Q, even though I do prefer the chemistry the original Q had with the other Bonds. He made himself useful beyond just hooking him up with an exploding pen. :hmwink:

I hear Craig is excellent. I'm looking forward to seeing this with my son.

QUOTE=Piccolo Daimaoh;3156118]Oh, you are right. Connery is the best Bond, but, IMHO, there has not been a bad Bond. They all have their positives. You have the good looking athletic Bond, Connery and Lazenby, the gentlemen Bond, Moore and Brosnan, and the rough and rugged Bond, Dalton and Craig. All are aspects of Ian Fleming's OO7.

Skyfall was one of the better Bond films dealing with M, which there haven't been many. I just hope that Craig stays with the franchise. I liked Q, even though I do prefer the chemistry the original Q had with the other Bonds. He made himself useful beyond just hooking him up with an exploding pen. :hmwink:[/QUOTE]

Craig is excellent, and that's from a fan who thinks he looks more like an Eastern European villain/thug more than a Bond. His gravitas is terrific and he sells both the intensity and the vulnerability just like he did with Casino Royale--something we really don't see much of in previous Bonds (I don't think Lanzenby pulled it off, and Dalton fumbled it in License to Kill). As I liked Never Say Never Again and am not against remaking any of the older adventures, I'm not against them retelling OHMSS with Craig, although I don't know how it wouldn't just repeat CR and QoS with the addition of Blofeld (I'm rooting for Michael Emerson to play him).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Piccolo Daimaoh

Skyfall was one of the better Bond films dealing with M, which there haven't been many. I just hope that Craig stays with the franchise. I liked Q, even though I do prefer the chemistry the original Q had with the other Bonds. He made himself useful beyond just hooking him up with an exploding pen. :hmwink:

---

I don't think that chemistry would have worked as well with Craig's Bond though. I mean I tend to agree there hasn't been a bad Bond, and I think Roger Moore in particular has become horribly underrated, but for the most part that "Oh grow up, double-O Seven" kind of quibble would have seemed strange directed at Craig. Actually I think the irony of the new Q saying that once might be amusing, but otherwise I like that his new supporting cast in place. You just know Q is going to end up on a plane now that we know he's afraid of flying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gbagok

Craig is excellent, and that's from a fan who thinks he looks more like an Eastern European villain/thug more than a Bond. His gravitas is terrific and he sells both the intensity and the vulnerability just like he did with Casino Royale--something we really don't see much of in previous Bonds (I don't think Lanzenby pulled it off, and Dalton fumbled it in License to Kill). As I liked Never Say Never Again and am not against remaking any of the older adventures, I'm not against them retelling OHMSS with Craig, although I don't know how it wouldn't just repeat CR and QoS with the addition of Blofeld (I'm rooting for Michael Emerson to play him).


I don't think that chemistry would have worked as well with Craig's Bond though. I mean I tend to agree there hasn't been a bad Bond, and I think Roger Moore in particular has become horribly underrated, but for the most part that "Oh grow up, double-O Seven" kind of quibble would have seemed strange directed at Craig. Actually I think the irony of the new Q saying that once might be amusing, but otherwise I like that his new supporting cast in place. You just know Q is going to end up on a plane now that we know he's afraid of flying.

---

I think that is a very, very bad idea. The difference between that and say Never Say Never Again is that it starred Sean Connery and was a remake of Thunderball which also starred Sean Connery. Yes this is a new beginning for Bond with Craig but this isn't a window to re-make already great Bond films. Why don't we just re-make Dr. No with Craig or The Spy Who Loved Me? Plus, chances are, it would not be as good as the original Lazenby OHMSS. Even though it was not Connery OHMSS was made still in the Golden Era of Bond. It had Diana Rigg which is considered by some as maybe the best Bond girl ever; it had the very first Bondonian ski-chase and one of the most memorable Bond scores of all-time. Most importantly, Bond doesn't win in the end. It stands out from all of the other Bond films. I love Craig too but he is James Bond now and that's all he is. Plus it's unfair to Daniel Craig if we start having him star in Bond re-makes not new Bond material. I think it makes more sense to have Craig star in Bond films that were written with Craig in mind. If that includes Ernst Stavro Blofeld then so be it but I think Craig should have new adventures battling SMERSH or SPECTRE. That's just how I see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Piccolo Daimaoh

Yes this is a new beginning for Bond with Craig but this isn't a window to re-make already great Bond films.

---

I agree and disagree. Remaking all the great Bond movies verbatim isn't what I meant. Obviously you can't just rehash them, we have those movies already plus it's simply a different world with a new political landscape. But at the same time, Craig's Bond is starting over, and that IS a window to retell the important milestones such as the loss of Mrs. Bond--just as many would want to remake or adapt the encounter at Reichenbach Falls if you're making a series about Sherlock Holmes's career (surprise, surprise, both BBC and Guy Ritchie got it out of the way in their second installments). And my biggest complaint about OHMSS is still that Lazneby doesn't work. The movie needed an established Bond. In the end it just looked like Bond loved and lost so badly because Lazenby wasn't Connery. Craig would make that part work if indeed that's how they played it now. It is also IMO the only specific story point from previous Bond efforts that I feel deserves to even be reinterpreted, but I feel strongly it should not just be filed away as old stuff.

 

A more legitimate obstacle in my view is that they have already shown Craig's Bond lose Vesper and now M, so he's kind of been through the death of someone important at the end of a movie twice now. That makes it harder to feel unique. It could just be "Craig is the Bond who couldn't keep the heroines alive".

Like I said, I wouldn't want to just see a repeat of CR and QoS, which is kind of the Craig run's version of OHMSS and Diamonds Are Forever as far as the revenge plot goes. And without that, I don't know if it could be done or is even worth doing. I'm open to the attempt is all I'm saying and justifying here.

RE Blofeld, I'd love to see him back, although I have no idea what a new post-Dr. Evil version of him should be like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gbagok

I agree and disagree. Remaking all the great Bond movies verbatim isn't what I meant. Obviously you can't just rehash them, we have those movies already plus it's simply a different world with a new political landscape. But at the same time, Craig's Bond is starting over, and that IS a window to retell the important milestones such as the loss of Mrs. Bond--just as many would want to remake or adapt the encounter at Reichenbach Falls if you're making a series about Sherlock Holmes's career (surprise, surprise, both BBC and Guy Ritchie got it out of the way in their second installments). And my biggest complaint about OHMSS is still that Lazneby doesn't work. The movie needed an established Bond. In the end it just looked like Bond loved and lost so badly because Lazenby wasn't Connery. Craig would make that part work if indeed that's how they played it now. It is also IMO the only specific story point from previous Bond efforts that I feel deserves to even be reinterpreted, but I feel strongly it should not just be filed away as old stuff.

---

Well I guess it's the POV then were I will disagree. I believe that even though these stories take place earlier in his career that this is still a continuation of the series started with Sean Connery not a restart. With that in mind re-doing a classic like OHMSS would not make sense. If you believe that this is a reboot then I could definitely see them remaking some some of the earlier Bonds. Maybe a third Thunderball?

I beg in the name of Albert Broccoli and Harry Saltzman please do not touch OHMSS. It is a special Bond film, IMO. As Lazenby only played Bond once it really makes sense as he was the only Bond to really lose in the end. It doesn't reflect on any other Bond film besides For Your Eyes Only and partially in the beginning of Diamonds Are Forever. I'd hate if they remade it with Craig the same way if they remade Goldfinger with Craig. Dr. Who can only meet the Daleks for the first time once no matter how much we love the current Doctor.