I think its the best of the Daniel Craig Bond movies by far. To those that compained that its too slow, well I think have been watching too many Tom Cruise action movies. B0nd fils have traditionally been ll about dynamics and contrast, two things that are sadly missing n many modern action films. Skyfall was stylish again, and a Bond film should be stylish. The scene in the office block at night was genius. Fantastic pacing, music and cinematography. Naomie Harris is excellent casting and she played it just right. And Javier Bardem, well, hes just the man isnt he? It lost its way here and there, and the explosion at MI6 HQ looked like it was made by a teenaager using After Effects for the first time, but overall great film. I'd see it again. But probably not again and again like some Bond films.
lol. I actually had this discussion with my friend, and it's entirely possible that Bond over the course of his career, may have had to moonlight as gay for the sake of some infiltration missions.
Actually the movie had a number of bad special effects. The scorpion, the lizaards, the bike chase scene at the start on the rooftops that looked obviously green screened, the part where the helicopters come to pick Bond up from Silva's island. It was very noticeable to me, especially in comparison to Casino Royale where I remember no distinct uses of CGI.
Skyfall was the "return to innocence" version of the bond series. Wonder what they will come up with next
In breaking news, Skyfall beat TDKR at the box office, first Bond film to break $1 billion at the box office. I never would have believed that Bond would beat TDKR.
There was a number of gay spies in MI5/6 in real life. So much so, that the KGB could terrify them by threatening to "out" them, even without an ounce of evidence. Its part of a not uncommon English private school thing - secret gay tendencies, never admitting it to anyone. However, I think it would be a shame to rewrite the Bond character as having a gay persona. Or as a woman (as has actually been suggested). My view is that a script can have space for many characters, so why change what JB himself has always been?
I'm looking fwd to seeing Skyfall. I was looking fwd to seeing Quantum -esp because Olga Kurylenko is my favourite ever actress... However, I understand the scriptwriters union went on strike when the film was half written. The plot certainly did fizzle out IMO, unfortunately.
It was a well-done, action-packed, exciting movie, and I'm sure it will breathe new life into the Bond franchise, but there are things about it that bothered me a lot. First of all, it made James Bond seem much too human. He was originally created as a male fantasy, the perfect man that every guy wanted to be, living the perfect life that every guy wanted to live. He always knew exactly what to do and say in every situation, always had the latest toys, and always drove 180 miles an hour. But now, in Skyfall, we see him struggling with middle age, dealing with health issues, worrying about professional obsolescence, and not getting much sex at all. That's very realistic, but is it fun? What does this tell us about current society? If we expect even our imaginary fantasy heroes to struggle greatly and often fail, just how depressed are we? I realize they most likely have Bond sleeping around a lot less in an effort to please more female moviegoers, but come on! He is James fucking Bond! He should get a free pass. Besides, he should be able to use a condom perfectly every single time. He should be doing some seriously kinky shit with the very hottest porn stars, and at least getting a few spontaneous blowjobs from young female coworkers. Isn't that the life most guys still dream about? Craig has a good body for the Bond role, but not the right face. I'll never be able to get beyond the Barack Obama ears. I'll take the old Bond movies over the newer ones.
Hi Karen, Haven't seen you around much lately. Liked your take on what Bond should be. He was written by a WWII veteran and came to movies in the '60s with the baby boomers, so maybe that is a core audience who are all in their 60s now, like me and can relate to the ravages of age. When I was young, Bond was the young man's fantasy and I was really into the Sean Connery movies. Somehow I got away from the fantasy (maybe the '70s hippie thing put me on the other side of James Bond). So I haven't seen this movie. Just lost interest in the franchise over the years.
I understand. I've skipped several of the newer ones. Back in the eighties, everybody I knew always went to see them the first week they were in local theaters.
I didn't think that much of it. I remember when Bond movies were about trying to stop villains from destroying the world. Now it's about some guy getting revenge on M because she stole his parking space of some stupid sh*t. Bond movies used to end with some huge set constructed in a sound stage with hundreds of extras, explosions and lots of action. Now all we get is a deserted farmhouse in the Scottish highlands and a run of the mill shoot out. Sure they're well made movies but they seem more like Bourne rehashes rather than James Bond movies.
