Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

Disappointment with Skyfall


362 replies to this topic

Poll: Now that the dust has settled....

This is a public poll. Other members will be able to see which options you chose

...what I thought on first seeing Skyfall

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.

...what I now think

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.

Overall I'd say that my opinion of it...

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.

Considering its critical and commercial success

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 from kevin with love

from kevin with love

    Cadet

  • Crew
  • 11 posts

Posted 28 February 2013 - 09:53 PM

Would like some views on skyfall and the not very realistic slogan "best ever bond film"

To me i thought skyfall was not that great,compared to faster action scenes and faster dialogue of daniel craig in the previous 2 films,i found daniels dialogue very laboured and slow compared to the other 2 and also a few scenes where very and slow and dare i say "predictable" compared with the faster paced scenes of the previous 2 films,


Edited by Jim, 18 March 2013 - 03:48 PM.


#2 larrythefatcat

larrythefatcat

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 327 posts
  • Location:Bark twice if you're in Milwaukee!

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:02 PM

I really enjoy/enjoyed 'Skyfall', but I don't understand why so many people think it's the best...

 

On the other hand, I feel that it was very well-paced, well-filmed and had the "perfect" amount of references to past films... I'm SOO glad it didn't get anywhere close to going down the 'Die Another Day' road of "HEY, LOOK AT THESE PROPS!!!!  REMEMBER WHEN THEY WERE IN THOSE OTHER MOVIES!?"

 

I also thought it felt slightly shorter than 'Quantum of Solace', even though it's 37 minutes longer.



#3 x007AceOfSpades

x007AceOfSpades

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4369 posts
  • Location:Sunny Southern California

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:11 PM

"Best Bond Film Ever"? No, but it's certainly a great one, though. Easily in my Top Ten Bond Films. 'Skyfall' is a flawless film in my opinion, good dialogue, very well acted, beautifully shot, fantastically directed, greatly scored, and edited wonderfully. The action scenes were well done, way better than QOS action scenes and just as good as the action in CR.



#4 iexpectu2die

iexpectu2die

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 646 posts

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:06 PM

To me it's no better than Casino Royale. At all.



#5 007jamesbond

007jamesbond

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1371 posts
  • Location:Vancouver

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:07 PM

it the best Bond ever! CLASSIC AND NO PARODY! sick of the hate ! 

 

Sorry but Dr.No, from Russia with love, and Goldfinger were not fast, it was slow which makes it great than fast pace movie and all action 


Edited by 007jamesbond, 28 February 2013 - 11:09 PM.


#6 Turn

Turn

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6837 posts
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:23 PM

it the best Bond ever! CLASSIC AND NO PARODY! sick of the hate ! 

 

Sorry but Dr.No, from Russia with love, and Goldfinger were not fast, it was slow which makes it great than fast pace movie and all action 

Disappointment and hate aren't the same things. This isn't a haters thread from what I've read of it.



#7 The Shark

The Shark

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4650 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:00 AM

Would like some views on skyfall and the not very realistic slogan "best ever bond film"

To me i thought skyfall was not that great,compared to faster action scenes and faster dialogue of daniel craig in the previous 2 films,i found daniels dialogue very laboured and slow compared to the other 2 and also a few scenes where very predictable and slow and dare i say "predictable" compared with the faster paced scenes of the previous 2 films,

 

I'd agree that the action and dialogue was slower than in the previous two films, more deliberate, but I didn't see that in a negative light. Because of that breathing space, there's more nuance and subtleties in the performances and set-pieces. Smaller brush strokes - more attention to detail. More adult too.

 

I prefer that. Reminds me of the older Hunt, Maibaum, Hamilton, and Young films.



#8 solace

solace

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 284 posts
  • Location:North of England

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:08 AM

It was a much more real film in the sense it has further developed Mr bond from indestructible superman to an actual person with feelings and everything by golly. The character we saw the end of Ohmss  cradling his wifes lifeless body, tears running down his face had returned



#9 Vauxhall

Vauxhall

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 10744 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:15 AM


To me it's no better than Casino Royale. At all.

I'd agree with that, but, then again, those are also currently my favourite two Bond films!

#10 S K Y F A L L

S K Y F A L L

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6889 posts
  • Location:CANADA

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:23 AM

I was a little disappointed, this was the first film I followed so closely during production and it didn't live up to the hype I built up. I really look forward to Bond 24 though.



#11 Hockey Mask

Hockey Mask

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1027 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:29 AM

I was a little disappointed, this was the first film I followed so closely during production and it didn't live up to the hype I built up. I really look forward to Bond 24 though.


You haven't learned your lesson yet have you? ;)

#12 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:39 AM

To me it's no better than Casino Royale. At all.

 

Agreed.  It isn't.  It's not as good as about half of the films in the series, either.  

 

With that said, it's not a bad film, but it also doesn't reach the heights that it's often claimed to have reached either.  It has some nice elements (the death of M, the locations, Mallory, good action in Maccau), but for all the things it gets right, it falls flat in other areas.


Edited by tdalton, 01 March 2013 - 12:42 AM.


#13 The Shark

The Shark

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4650 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:56 AM



To me it's no better than Casino Royale. At all.

 

I'd say it is, by a fair margin. Better performed and more interesting characters, more intelligent direction, more compelling score, wittier script etc.



#14 007jamesbond

007jamesbond

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1371 posts
  • Location:Vancouver

Posted 01 March 2013 - 01:29 AM

it not a fair to compare CR and Skyfall, CR is based on a novel and SF is a original idea, they are completely different from each other.........compare SF to the other non-fleming titles is the better choice and CR to the other Fleming titles 



#15 graric

graric

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 172 posts

Posted 01 March 2013 - 03:24 AM

it not a fair to compare CR and Skyfall, CR is based on a novel and SF is a original idea, they are completely different from each other.........compare SF to the other non-fleming titles is the better choice and CR to the other Fleming titles 


CR is hardly the most faithful adaptation of the novel, rather it is a successful translation of a novel set in the 1950's into a contemporary setting (much like the BBC's Sherlock.) And simply stating SF is an original idea is very dismissive of all the Fleming elements that are found throughout the film (it may not be directly adapting any Fleming novel, but it adapts several elements from You Only Live Twice and Man With The Golden Gun that help to enhance the overall film.)

In anycase I prefer SF to CR, it may not be directly based off a Fleming novel, but it is beautifully shot, has stronger acting, empasis on the 'greyness' of characters over simple 'black and white, hero and villains' and manages to bring back some of the old troupes we love while making them fit in Craig's Bond Universe.



#16 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 01 March 2013 - 03:37 AM

I don't understand at all how it could be unfair to compare Casino Royale and Skyfall.  The idea that it can't be done because one is supposedly an adaptation of a Fleming novel and the other isn't is not a reason why they shouldn't be compared.  First and foremost, Casino Royale is not a particularly good adaptation of the novel.  It includes the three main set pieces, but that's about it.  Skyfall at least manages to, as graric stated above, adapt some of the ideas and elements found in Fleming's You Only Live Twice  and The Man With the Golden Gun into the film (that, combined with them taking quite a bit of "inspiration" from The World Is Not Enough, it's difficult to really call Skyfall a totally original idea) and do so quite well, even if they are thematically not appropriate for the third film of a "rebooted" series.



#17 seawolfnyy

seawolfnyy

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4763 posts
  • Location:La Rioja

Posted 01 March 2013 - 06:10 AM

Do I think Skyfall is the best in the series? No. Is it up there? Yes. My biggest disappointment with Skyfall is the lack of big set pieces. They only really bookend the film with the train fight and the showdown at Skyfall. In between though, there is a decided lack of the big action sequences Bond is known for. Now, I wouldn't necessarily say it's a bad thing. Skyfall comes off as more of a classic espionage tale than a big budget action film (even though that's what it is). Skyfall fits in more with the FRWLs and OHMSSs of the world than the GEs or TBs. That said, I rank it #5 on the list behind The Spy Who Loved Me, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, Casino Royale and From Russia With Love. Overall, I find Skyfall to be a great addition to the franchise and a film worthy of the 50th anniversary. Now if only we had a video game in 2012....



#18 SecretAgentFan

SecretAgentFan

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 01 March 2013 - 07:24 AM

I must say the action was one of the elements that made SKYFALL for me so appealing.

 

I hate those overlong hand-to-hand combats in which protagonists beat each other endlessly without feeling any pain, like computer game figures.

 

The action in SKYFALL was short and to the point, just like the action in previous Bond films. I think that adds tremendously to the success of action films.



#19 Guy Haines

Guy Haines

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3075 posts
  • Location:"Special envoy" no more. As of 7/5/15 elected to office somewhere in Nottinghamshire, England.

Posted 01 March 2013 - 07:53 AM

Disappointment is a result of what one expected. As I was expecting a film similar in tone to Daniel Craig's first film, I wasn't disappointed. SF is a top tier Bond film, one of the best in the series in my view. It isn't perfect, but then one can find flaws in any Bond film. But it is well acted and directed, has a few nods in the direction of previous films, mostly subtle ones, and does reference Fleming's books - YOLT and TMWTGG in particular.

 

As I said, it's about expectations.Those who have disliked the reboot of the series and the harder approach of the Craig years were never going to like SF. And there's the complaint that by exploring the characters more rather than presenting non stop action it is somehow "not a Bond film" - as if a film which starts with an inventive car/bike/train chase and has an explosive ending lacks action!  What is wrong with a Bond film which has at its centre the relationship between Bond and M and a villain who emerged because of M's ruthlessness? Nothing, I think.

 

What I liked about SF also was that, like the first few movies, it had moments in the film which allowed the audience to catch breath - ones that weren't part of some cinematic roller-coaster ride, but were important to the story. An example from the 1960s is the golf game in Goldfinger. Few complained at the time that Bond was wasting time hitting a golf ball when he should be chasing spies, cars and women on screen, because it was part of the story. But it's hard to imagine such a scene in more recent Bonds. Skyfall was a throw back to that era, in that respect.



#20 QOS4EVER

QOS4EVER

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 368 posts
  • Location:Hotel in the middle of the Bolivian Desert

Posted 01 March 2013 - 08:10 AM

As I said, it's about expectations.Those who have disliked the reboot of the series and the harder approach of the Craig years were never going to like SF.

 

I love the reboot and the dark, gritty, young, violent take they started of with , but I just loathed Skyfall  .

Even the original poster is the same he explicitly mentioned that he felt it was not on par with the previous 2 which he liked .

 

I just hate the sudden turn around in style, 50 decades of a successful action franchise is now reduced to a housewives drama movie. I wouldn't mind if they took a breather from the 'Quantum' storyline and made something more in line with the Connery movies  or the Brosnan movies or any other Bond for that matter , But they had to pick drama and the other small nods were just to fill in checkboxes. Not 'Bond' at all if you ask me .



#21 x007AceOfSpades

x007AceOfSpades

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4369 posts
  • Location:Sunny Southern California

Posted 01 March 2013 - 08:15 AM

As I said, it's about expectations.Those who have disliked the reboot of the series and the harder approach of the Craig years were never going to like SF.

 

I love the reboot and the dark, gritty, young, violent take they started of with , but I just loathed Skyfall  .

Even the original poster is the same he explicitly mentioned that he felt it was not on par with the previous 2 which he liked .

 

I just hate the sudden turn around in style, 50 decades of a successful action franchise is now reduced to a housewives drama movie. I wouldn't mind if they took a breather from the 'Quantum' storyline and made something more in line with the Connery movies  or the Brosnan movies or any other Bond for that matter , But they had to pick drama and the other small nods were just to fill in checkboxes. Not 'Bond' at all if you ask me .

 

I don't see any "housewives drama" in the film at all...

 

It was a pure Bond film, it wasn't trying to be one like Quantum Of Solace was.



#22 QOS4EVER

QOS4EVER

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 368 posts
  • Location:Hotel in the middle of the Bolivian Desert

Posted 01 March 2013 - 08:19 AM

The action in SKYFALL was short and to the point,

 

Can't say I agree with you over there, The train scene was too long and was one of the or the longest PTS we've had . And even the shootout at Skyfall lodge Unecessarily long . Good action is one which makes you wince with pain with the sheer intensity of which Skyfall was very far from



#23 x007AceOfSpades

x007AceOfSpades

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4369 posts
  • Location:Sunny Southern California

Posted 01 March 2013 - 08:23 AM

I agree with SecretAgentFan

 

The train scene was well paced and directed, the PTS wasn't as long as compared to the PTS for TWINE which i believe was close to 20 minutes. The Lodge Shootout was well done because the action didn't seem to bore, it kept going, a job well done with the editing, direction, and pacing.

 

Of course, In the end, it's all a matter of preferences and opinions :)



#24 QOS4EVER

QOS4EVER

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 368 posts
  • Location:Hotel in the middle of the Bolivian Desert

Posted 01 March 2013 - 08:26 AM

 

As I said, it's about expectations.Those who have disliked the reboot of the series and the harder approach of the Craig years were never going to like SF.

 

I love the reboot and the dark, gritty, young, violent take they started of with , but I just loathed Skyfall  .

Even the original poster is the same he explicitly mentioned that he felt it was not on par with the previous 2 which he liked .

 

I just hate the sudden turn around in style, 50 decades of a successful action franchise is now reduced to a housewives drama movie. I wouldn't mind if they took a breather from the 'Quantum' storyline and made something more in line with the Connery movies  or the Brosnan movies or any other Bond for that matter , But they had to pick drama and the other small nods were just to fill in checkboxes. Not 'Bond' at all if you ask me .

 

I don't see any "housewives drama" in the film at all...

Every other Bond movie focused on the glamour and  suave of 007 and his megalomaniac villain with set piece action .The whole core of Skyfall was drama where they show him old and out of his prime which is very unBond.



#25 RMc2

RMc2

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 01 March 2013 - 08:28 AM

The pacing really annoyed me.

 

From a technical standpoint, it was incredibly well paced, with a very steady progress through the plot.

 

However, in terms of momentum, I found SF somewhat lacking because it took so damn long to do everything. Apart from the PTS, which I loved, the scenes drag as Mendes obsesses over the pauses between actors' lines. Sometimes this is important, like when Severine talks to Bond about Silva in the casino, but overall I get tired and end up counting the seconds between lines. It adds a good 5 minutes or so onto the running time. 

 

I wonder if some people don't notice the length because SIlva's only in it for an hour? It really picks up when he comes on screen, and feels like a whole new story. The first few times watching it, the forty minutes between the titles and Silva's entrance dragged for me so much,

 

Other niggles: Moneypenny's AWKWARD reveal. Eve and Bond's AWKWARD chemistry. Eve and Bond's AWKWARD one-liners. Thomas Newman's alternatingly brilliant/bland score.

 

This isn't a flaw so much as a failure on my part: what does Bond's Circle of Life one-liner mean? I still don't get it.



#26 QOS4EVER

QOS4EVER

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 368 posts
  • Location:Hotel in the middle of the Bolivian Desert

Posted 01 March 2013 - 08:29 AM

the action didn't seem to bore, it kept going

Of course, In the end, it's all a matter of preferences and opinions :)

I found it very lack lusture.  but oh well..

like you said ,a matter of opinion .



#27 Guy Haines

Guy Haines

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3075 posts
  • Location:"Special envoy" no more. As of 7/5/15 elected to office somewhere in Nottinghamshire, England.

Posted 01 March 2013 - 09:37 AM

 

 

As I said, it's about expectations.Those who have disliked the reboot of the series and the harder approach of the Craig years were never going to like SF.

 

I love the reboot and the dark, gritty, young, violent take they started of with , but I just loathed Skyfall  .

Even the original poster is the same he explicitly mentioned that he felt it was not on par with the previous 2 which he liked .

 

I just hate the sudden turn around in style, 50 decades of a successful action franchise is now reduced to a housewives drama movie. I wouldn't mind if they took a breather from the 'Quantum' storyline and made something more in line with the Connery movies  or the Brosnan movies or any other Bond for that matter , But they had to pick drama and the other small nods were just to fill in checkboxes. Not 'Bond' at all if you ask me .

 

I don't see any "housewives drama" in the film at all...

Every other Bond movie focused on the glamour and  suave of 007 and his megalomaniac villain with set piece action .The whole core of Skyfall was drama where they show him old and out of his prime which is very unBond.

And Bond was shown as out of his prime, out of it, courting suspension from duty and dismissal from the service in.........the novel You Only Live Twice by Ian Fleming. The original author wasn't afraid to show Bond in a less than flattering light on occasion, and for some of the time this happened in Skyfall. Indeed, there were more than a few nods to the "played out" Bond of the novel YOLT in the film SF.



#28 sharpshooter

sharpshooter

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8996 posts

Posted 01 March 2013 - 10:33 AM

Would like some views on skyfall and the not very realistic slogan "best ever bond film"

To me i thought skyfall was not that great,compared to faster action scenes and faster dialogue of daniel craig in the previous 2 films,i found daniels dialogue very laboured and slow compared to the other 2 and also a few scenes where very predictable and slow and dare i say "predictable" compared with the faster paced scenes of the previous 2 films,

 

I'd agree that the action and dialogue was slower than in the previous two films, more deliberate, but I didn't see that in a negative light. Because of that breathing space, there's more nuance and subtleties in the performances and set-pieces. Smaller brush strokes - more attention to detail. More adult too.

 

I prefer that. Reminds me of the older Hunt, Maibaum, Hamilton, and Young films.

 

Agreed, I liked that too. The conversation with Severine at the casino, for example. It’s like a living publicity still. The smoke slowly puffing on her cigarette, her looking at Bond, etc. Her about to leave and Bond holding her arm, extending the dialogue further. It was a nice, slow burn which kept providing colour. It's not rushed. 

 

Best Bond ever attached to any film in the franchise is going to draw debate. It’s never going to be a universal agreement with these sort of statements. 



#29 Major Tallon

Major Tallon

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2107 posts
  • Location:Mid-USA

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:09 PM

Guy Haines, I'm with you all the way.



#30 007jamesbond

007jamesbond

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1371 posts
  • Location:Vancouver

Posted 01 March 2013 - 06:57 PM

 

 

 

As I said, it's about expectations.Those who have disliked the reboot of the series and the harder approach of the Craig years were never going to like SF.

 

I love the reboot and the dark, gritty, young, violent take they started of with , but I just loathed Skyfall  .

Even the original poster is the same he explicitly mentioned that he felt it was not on par with the previous 2 which he liked .

 

I just hate the sudden turn around in style, 50 decades of a successful action franchise is now reduced to a housewives drama movie. I wouldn't mind if they took a breather from the 'Quantum' storyline and made something more in line with the Connery movies  or the Brosnan movies or any other Bond for that matter , But they had to pick drama and the other small nods were just to fill in checkboxes. Not 'Bond' at all if you ask me .

 

I don't see any "housewives drama" in the film at all...

Every other Bond movie focused on the glamour and  suave of 007 and his megalomaniac villain with set piece action .The whole core of Skyfall was drama where they show him old and out of his prime which is very unBond.

And Bond was shown as out of his prime, out of it, courting suspension from duty and dismissal from the service in.........the novel You Only Live Twice by Ian Fleming. The original author wasn't afraid to show Bond in a less than flattering light on occasion, and for some of the time this happened in Skyfall. Indeed, there were more than a few nods to the "played out" Bond of the novel YOLT in the film SF.

 

I agree there is certainly nothing wrong with that........Don't know why people have problem with using Fleming element in this Skyfall it very BOND unlike the Moore or Bronsan which is NOT BOnd at all........Skyfall use real Fleming material so it has to more Bond