362 replies to this topic

[Loomis]

It's possible to be underwhelmed by SKYFALL yet love Craig as Bond.

Personally, I consider Craig to be just about the best Bond ever (well, maybe after Connery). I think his filmography is something of a mixed bag, though.

To my mind, the Craig era has given us one superb and practically flawless film (CASINO ROYALE), one poor film (QUANTUM OF SOLACE) and one film that has some very fine moments but a number of major weaknesses (SKYFALL).

I hope that BOND 24 will bring some changes (chiefly a lot less of the laboured drama that the series has served up of late) but I'm certainly in no hurry to see a new actor as Bond. I hope that Craig will play 007 for at least a couple more films.

[QOS4EVER]

sadly I am sure we are going to still get a dose of heavy drama in the next

[x007AceOfSpades]

sadly I am sure we are going to still get a dose of heavy drama in the next

Way too early to start making assumptions.

[QOS4EVER]

 

sadly I am sure we are going to still get a dose of heavy drama in the next

Way too early to start making assumptions.

 
Don't you think so ?

[x007AceOfSpades]

Do I think the next film will have a heavy dose of drama? Can't say, there is no plot synopsis, trailer, casting, crew etc. Skyfall worked and it obviously shows with critics and audiences alike. Oh and it shows at the box office too. Why go back to Brosnan style of films with Action sequences every 10-15 minutes and mediocre plots?

[QOS4EVER]

 

Do I think the next film will have a heavy dose of drama? Can't say, there is no plot synopsis, trailer, casting, crew etc. Skyfall worked and it obviously shows with critics and audiences alike. Oh and it shows at the box office too. Why go back to Brosnan style of films with Action sequences every 10-15 minutes and mediocre plots?

 

though we disagree on the 'audiences alike' bit
You said it yourself,
its obvious they will stick to heavy drama.

[graric]

 

Do I think the next film will have a heavy dose of drama? Can't say, there is no plot synopsis, trailer, casting, crew etc. Skyfall worked and it obviously shows with critics and audiences alike. Oh and it shows at the box office too. Why go back to Brosnan style of films with Action sequences every 10-15 minutes and mediocre plots?

 

Well they are up to Craig's 4th film, maybe they'll think its time for his Bond to have a 'Thunderball', 'Moonraker', 'Die Another Day' type film! (World domination, lots of gadgets and some very cheesy one-liners!)

But I agree that we cannot make any real guesses about the style of film we'll be getting until we at least know who the director is! (Although with John Logan writing the film we can assume he'll try to bring some more Fleming into the story in some form and, although highly unlikely, there is a very remote chance he will try and bring Blofeld back going by interviews where he talked about Bond round the screen-writing phase for Skyfall.)

[x007AceOfSpades]

The film wasn't hindered on "Heavy drama". You can argue that Skyfall does contain more drama in most recent Bond films, but you certainly cannot classify it as a drama film. It balances out Drama, action, and suspense perfectly.

Who knows, they may return to a short running time and mindless action sequences like Craig's QOS for Bond 24, or they may do something entirely different. We don't know. It's just too early to tell. i would love for Bond 24 to be Craig's Thunderball, that would truly be awesome to me!

[Dustin]

I've still only seen SKYFALL once, I simply had no time for further viewings at the theatre or ordering the film on DVD. I initially liked SKYFALL quite a lot and still see none of its shortcomings as crucial. I can suspend my disbelief pretty good, and the better parts of SKYFALL to me seem to justify a few odd glitches.

That said I suspect that I might like SKYFALL more if it had been Craig's last Bond film. That's nothing to do with Craig's age, that isn't my problem. But to me SKYFALL has that particular air of closure that I would have preferred for that last assignment for 007. I suppose to me it may have come a few years too early.

Edited by Dustin, 08 March 2013 - 05:19 PM.

[QOS4EVER]

 

The film wasn't hindered on "Heavy drama". You can argue that Skyfall does contain more drama in most recent Bond films, but you certainly cannot classify it as a drama film. It balances out Drama, action, and suspense perfectly.

Who knows, they may return to a short running time and mindless action sequences like Craig's QOS for Bond 24, or they may do something entirely different. We don't know. It's just too early to tell. i would love for Bond 24 to be Craig's Thunderball, that would truly be awesome to me!

 

It is hindered on drama more so than usual apt to classify it as a drama film.
I would want them to keep the running time for Bond 24 similar to Casino Royale or Skyfall. But THAT is to early to tell,
I am sure they will stick to Drama, all I want is for them to increase the intensity of the action ,something not as dull as Skyfall


I am curious what elements of thunderball would you like to see incorporated in to Bond 24

[zencat]

Having watched Skyfall now 4 times (yes, only 4), I can't understand how any Bond fan wouldn't LOVE this movie. I just think it's a miracle. It's seem to embody the best of the films and the best of the books, and then goes to an even higher place. And I'm the guy who likes light, even silly Bond movies like Moonraker and Octopussy. But Skyfall...Skyfall...it somehow satisfies me on every level.

[QOS4EVER]

 

That said I suspect that I might like SKYFALL more if it had been Craig's last Bond film. That's nothing to do with Craig's age, that isn't my problem. But to me SKYFALL has that particular air of closure that I would have preferred for that last assignment for 007. I suppose to me it may have come a few years too early.

 

Yes, You're right with it would have suited better as a finale to the Craig series,

[Major Tallon]

 

Having watched Skyfall now 4 times (yes, only 4), I can't understand how any Bond fan wouldn't LOVE this movie. I just think it's a miracle. It's seem to embody the best of the films and the best of the books, and then goes to an even higher place. And I'm the guy who likes light, even silly Bond movies like Moonraker and Octopussy. But Skyfall...Skyfall...it somehow satisfies me on every level.

 
Me, too.

For the life of me, I can't understand how "Skyfall" can conceivably be considered "heavy drama." There are dramatic elements, to be sure, but nobody will find Tube trains crashing through tunnel roofs in Dostoyevsky. I'm also astonished that, almost eight years after he was cast, Craig is still being criticized for not looking enough like Bond. He's worn the mantle in three films over that period. The producers say he's Bond, the crews and directors say he's Bond (Sam Mendes introduced him on stage at the World Premiere as Ian Fleming's James Bond), the critics say he's Bond, and a huge segment of the cinemagoing public says he's Bond. You want to know what Bond looks like? Like Daniel Craig.

[007jamesbond]

I would say SF is the same category as Dr.No FRWL Goldfinger, and Thunderball there is both that drama feel as well as action an mixed of both which makes it classic and very ian fleming like...no one have problem with the early Connery films that have drama especially FRWL? but SF do?

[x007AceOfSpades]

 

The film wasn't hindered on "Heavy drama". You can argue that Skyfall does contain more drama in most recent Bond films, but you certainly cannot classify it as a drama film. It balances out Drama, action, and suspense perfectly.

Who knows, they may return to a short running time and mindless action sequences like Craig's QOS for Bond 24, or they may do something entirely different. We don't know. It's just too early to tell. i would love for Bond 24 to be Craig's Thunderball, that would truly be awesome to me!

 

It is hindered on drama more so than usual apt to classify it as a drama film.
I would want them to keep the running time for Bond 24 similar to Casino Royale or Skyfall. But THAT is to early to tell,
I am sure they will stick to Drama, all I want is for them to increase the intensity of the action ,something not as dull as Skyfall


I am curious what elements of thunderball would you like to see incorporated in to Bond 24

No it isn't. How many drama-heavy films have you seen that have a climatic shootout at the end and various action pieces throughout? It isn't a drama film, yes it contains more than previous films, but it certainly isn't a drama film, not by a longshot. Just because it has certain dramatic feels to it, you cant label it a drama. That's like labeling 'Funny People' a drama, because of it's drama under-tone when it's clearly a comedy. Skyfall had some of the best action sequences of Craig's tenure. A great Istanbul opening to the finale in Scotland. Certainly better than the short assault on the Eco Hotel in QOS, let alone all of the action scenes in QOS.

[DavidJones]

I think Skyfall was so well-received by people because it was a very simple plot presented in a serious way (very few action scenes, a grim tone, unexciting, minimalist gadgets, even a poetry recitation!). Thus, people were pleased with themselves for enjoying something which they perceived to be intellectual, or at least something a little more middle-brow, like Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy or The Girl With the Dragon's Tattoo, even though Skyfall really wasn't (plot holes galore, thin plot, Silva's easy-to-understand motive for revenge, underused villain, bucket loads of factors pilfered from The Dark Knight, a shoot 'em up house-bound finale already seen in Witness, Safe House, Firewall, Shooter, Patriot Games etc). They understood Skyfall. It wasn't unashamedly, traditionally escapist fun like, say, Octopussy or Goldeneye, which could be perceived as a 'guilty pleasure'.   

Edited by DavidJones, 08 March 2013 - 09:15 PM.

[MarkA]

Having watched Skyfall now 4 times (yes, only 4), I can't understand how any Bond fan wouldn't LOVE this movie. I just think it's a miracle. It's seem to embody the best of the films and the best of the books, and then goes to an even higher place. And I'm the guy who likes light, even silly Bond movies like Moonraker and Octopussy. But Skyfall...Skyfall...it somehow satisfies me on every level.

Do you know what Zencat this is the first time I totally agree with you. I too find it unfathomable why Bond fans do not like this film. But I think I will stay out of this from now on. I like this film so much that I actually find the naysayers quite depressing.

[DamnCoffee]

I don't want to jump on to the 'The newest one is the best one' bandwagon, which I was guilty of with all Bond films post 97 when I first saw them. Seriously though, Skyfall is. Fantastic action, characters, direction, cinematography, editing. This really is the new Goldfinger. Bond is fully, 100% back on form. 

[tdalton]

I think Skyfall was so well-received by people because it was a very simple plot presented in a serious way (very few action scenes, a grim tone, unexciting, minimalist gadgets, even a poetry recitation!). Thus, people were pleased with themselves for enjoying something which they perceived to be intellectual, or at least something a little more middle-brow, like Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy or The Girl With the Dragon's Tattoo, even though Skyfall really wasn't (plot holes galore, thin plot, Silva's easy-to-understand motive for revenge, underused villain, bucket loads of factors pilfered from The Dark Knight, a shoot 'em up house-bound finale already seen in Witness, Safe House, Firewall, Shooter, Patriot Games etc). They understood Skyfall. It wasn't unashamedly, traditionally escapist fun like, say, Octopussy or Goldeneye, which could be perceived as a 'guilty pleasure'.   

 

Very much agreed.

 

I will say that I think they're on the right track with Skyfall in terms of it being the kind of film that EON needs to be making.  The problem, I think, is that they assembled a terrific team behind the camera to do work on what is a script that is not worthy of the talents of those working on it.  I've been a defender of Purvis and Wade for a while prior to Skyfall, but with this film it really seems as though they really only recycle two storylines with their original films.  The story for Skyfall is built on a lot of elements that we've seen before in other films, as mentioned above, as well as P&W's first Bond effort, The World is not Enough. 

 

I think with a much stronger foundation the next time around, from a screenwriter in Logan who should be up to the task, EON could have the chance to continue pushing forward with quality Bond films that can also be great films in their own rite.  Hopefully, now that they've gotten a taste of what it's like to be in the discussion for major awards, they can deliver a film that is worthy of a few trips to the stage on Oscar night. 

[007jamesbond]

 

The film wasn't hindered on "Heavy drama". You can argue that Skyfall does contain more drama in most recent Bond films, but you certainly cannot classify it as a drama film. It balances out Drama, action, and suspense perfectly.

Who knows, they may return to a short running time and mindless action sequences like Craig's QOS for Bond 24, or they may do something entirely different. We don't know. It's just too early to tell. i would love for Bond 24 to be Craig's Thunderball, that would truly be awesome to me!

 

It is hindered on drama more so than usual apt to classify it as a drama film.
I would want them to keep the running time for Bond 24 similar to Casino Royale or Skyfall. But THAT is to early to tell,
I am sure they will stick to Drama, all I want is for them to increase the intensity of the action ,something not as dull as Skyfall


I am curious what elements of thunderball would you like to see incorporated in to Bond 24

No it isn't. How many drama-heavy films have you seen that have a climatic shootout at the end and various action pieces throughout? It isn't a drama film, yes it contains more than previous films, but it certainly isn't a drama film, not by a longshot. Just because it has certain dramatic feels to it, you cant label it a drama. That's like labeling 'Funny People' a drama, because of it's drama under-tone when it's clearly a comedy. Skyfall had some of the best action sequences of Craig's tenure. A great Istanbul opening to the finale in Scotland. Certainly better than the short assault on the Eco Hotel in QOS, let alone all of the action scenes in QOS.

 

forget about arguing with him........will never accept Skyfall as a good movie oh well no point a small 1% minority that should reconsider Skyfall as a superior movie to QOS 

[x007AceOfSpades]

I don't want to jump on to the 'The newest one is the best one' bandwagon, which I was guilty of with all Bond films post 97 when I first saw them. Seriously though, Skyfall is. Fantastic action, characters, direction, cinematography, editing. This really is the new Goldfinger. Bond is fully, 100% back on form. 

 

Skyfall most certainly was a return to form from QOS, I agree with the statement of 'The newest one is the best one' haha, I'm guilty too. There's some things that I wish could be improved on, but other than that, the film is fantastic!

[QOS4EVER]

 

The film wasn't hindered on "Heavy drama". You can argue that Skyfall does contain more drama in most recent Bond films, but you certainly cannot classify it as a drama film. It balances out Drama, action, and suspense perfectly.

Who knows, they may return to a short running time and mindless action sequences like Craig's QOS for Bond 24, or they may do something entirely different. We don't know. It's just too early to tell. i would love for Bond 24 to be Craig's Thunderball, that would truly be awesome to me!

 

It is hindered on drama more so than usual apt to classify it as a drama film.
I would want them to keep the running time for Bond 24 similar to Casino Royale or Skyfall. But THAT is to early to tell,
I am sure they will stick to Drama, all I want is for them to increase the intensity of the action ,something not as dull as Skyfall


I am curious what elements of thunderball would you like to see incorporated in to Bond 24

No it isn't. How many drama-heavy films have you seen that have a climatic shootout at the end and various action pieces throughout? It isn't a drama film, yes it contains more than previous films, but it certainly isn't a drama film, not by a longshot. Just because it has certain dramatic feels to it, you cant label it a drama. That's like labeling 'Funny People' a drama, because of it's drama under-tone when it's clearly a comedy. Skyfall had some of the best action sequences of Craig's tenure. A great Istanbul opening to the finale in Scotland. Certainly better than the short assault on the Eco Hotel in QOS, let alone all of the action scenes in QOS.

Let me give you an example over here, One of my all time favourite movies The Godfather series. In Godfather 3 a helicopter comes and destroys building where a meeting is held by the heads of the families. So by your definition Godfather series are  action movies .

Edited by QOS4EVER, 09 March 2013 - 07:35 AM.

[x007AceOfSpades]

 

 

The film wasn't hindered on "Heavy drama". You can argue that Skyfall does contain more drama in most recent Bond films, but you certainly cannot classify it as a drama film. It balances out Drama, action, and suspense perfectly.

Who knows, they may return to a short running time and mindless action sequences like Craig's QOS for Bond 24, or they may do something entirely different. We don't know. It's just too early to tell. i would love for Bond 24 to be Craig's Thunderball, that would truly be awesome to me!

 

It is hindered on drama more so than usual apt to classify it as a drama film.
I would want them to keep the running time for Bond 24 similar to Casino Royale or Skyfall. But THAT is to early to tell,
I am sure they will stick to Drama, all I want is for them to increase the intensity of the action ,something not as dull as Skyfall


I am curious what elements of thunderball would you like to see incorporated in to Bond 24

No it isn't. How many drama-heavy films have you seen that have a climatic shootout at the end and various action pieces throughout? It isn't a drama film, yes it contains more than previous films, but it certainly isn't a drama film, not by a longshot. Just because it has certain dramatic feels to it, you cant label it a drama. That's like labeling 'Funny People' a drama, because of it's drama under-tone when it's clearly a comedy. Skyfall had some of the best action sequences of Craig's tenure. A great Istanbul opening to the finale in Scotland. Certainly better than the short assault on the Eco Hotel in QOS, let alone all of the action scenes in QOS.

Let me give you an example over here, One of my all time favourite movies The Godfather series. In Godfather 3 a helicopter comes and destroys building where a meeting is held by the heads of the families. So by your definition Godfather series are  action movies .

 

I wouldn't call that a scene of action, let alone classify the film as an action film because of one sequence in a 170 minute film. It's merely a scene of suspense as a bunch of wise-guys are getting killed off by another character used to advance the story plot and the drama, not for entertainment purpose (as is the case with most action films/sequences). The Godfather trilogy is a crime film series, not an action film series. Does the 'Baptism By Fire' scene make the first film an action film?

[QOS4EVER]

forget about arguing with him........will never accept Skyfall as a good movie oh well no point a small 1% minority that should reconsider Skyfall as a superior movie to QOS 

 

Woah ,

wasn't this what you said earlier ,On the Bond 24 director thread

 

 

 

Marc Forster .....Anyone? .......

I'd prefer them not to bother with a film at all, quite frankly.

 

why would we want him back.......I like QOEver hate Skyfall and love QOS wrong choice and worst than Sam Mendes

I have to point out what Shark said

 

 

Skyfall is true Fleming Bond movie= don't like it=not a real fleming fan ! 

 

007jamesbond. Giving Skyfall fans a bad name since 2013.

 

 

You see your statements are irrational , you look at 'taking sides'. You don't realise its not about that . Its for what it has delivered ,We as fans deserve the best , in the old days movie would have been delivered and it didn't matter what critics say ...its about going to the theatre with family and friends and having a good time with it. The main thing was the fans enjoyed it and sadly today the voice of the critics over powers  that of the fans  .I have to agree to some extent of what Shark said

now who told you that only 1% of fans  didn't like Skyfall, because of what you see in CBN ?  If you go to the other popular Bond sites you would think that everyone is dying to have Christopher Nolan as the director but over here it is the opposite no one wants him, you have to realise that in different places opinion varies. Now as far as Skyfall is concerned go to places with a much much larger amount of traffic coming in like IMDB , Yahoo ,Metacritic and rottentomato forums and the other Bond sites you will see that Skyfall has a very very strong divided opinion and in the some of the sites I mentioned People disliked Skyfall more than the ones who liked it.  

[QOS4EVER]

I wouldn't call that a scene of action, let alone classify the film as an action film because of one sequence in a 170 minute film. It's merely a scene of suspense as a bunch of wise-guys are getting killed off by another character used to advance the story plot and the drama, not for entertainment purpose (as is the case with most action films/sequences). The Godfather trilogy is a crime film series, not an action film series. Does the 'Baptism By Fire' scene make the first film an action film?

 

That's exactly my point !

Just because there are action scenes like how we've seen in Godfather 1,2 or 3 its not enough to classify it as an action movie as the drama over powers the action.

That's exactly the case in Skyfall . The drama over powers action. I don't really mind if we get a drama movie but what is more important movie is the effectiveness of the action , you see Campbell did the same the movie was mainly focused on the Bond-Vesper dynamic but as soon as the action hit, he delivered in spades! Something which Mendes didn't do.

 

You might not care about action, that's absolutely fine.

Or you may prefer a more heavier dramatic approach, that's still fine. But credit is due where credit is deserved. Forster has triumphed action and its unjust to say its not so . That would be like me saying Quantum Of Solace delivered a better more engaging dramatic experience  it would be wrong and unjust for me to say so and check over any other site people have mentioned that Skyfall is lacking as far as action is concerned .

[x007AceOfSpades]

I wouldn't call that a scene of action, let alone classify the film as an action film because of one sequence in a 170 minute film. It's merely a scene of suspense as a bunch of wise-guys are getting killed off by another character used to advance the story plot and the drama, not for entertainment purpose (as is the case with most action films/sequences). The Godfather trilogy is a crime film series, not an action film series. Does the 'Baptism By Fire' scene make the first film an action film?

 

That's exactly my point !

Just because there are action scenes like how we've seen in Godfather 1,2 or 3 its not enough to classify it as an action movie as the drama over powers the action.

That's exactly the case in Skyfall . The drama over powers action. I don't really mind if we get a drama movie but what is more important movie is the effectiveness of the action , you see Campbell did the same the movie was mainly focused on the Bond-Vesper dynamic but as soon as the action hit, he delivered in spades! Something which Mendes didn't do.

 

You might not care about action, that's absolutely fine.

Or you may prefer a more heavier dramatic approach, that's still fine. But credit is due where credit is deserved. Forster has triumphed action and its unjust to say its not so . That would be like me saying Quantum Of Solace delivered a better more engaging dramatic experience  it would be wrong and unjust for me to say so and check over any other site people have mentioned that Skyfall is lacking as far as action is concerned .

 

Again, you are wrong. Skyfall is a spy/action film. The film PERFECTLY balances drama and action. It's not 50/40, 60/40, 90/10. It's 50/50 split even. It's one of the things many of my friends who have seen the film (who aren't quite the fan I am when it comes to Bond) loved, it wasn't trying to be a drama film or an action, just a great film period with both film elements perfectly well balanced. If you think Campbell delivered (which in a sense he did) with the sinking house finale compared to the 20-30 minute Skyfall lodge shootout that Mendes delivered, then you must have been watching the wrong film or something. The pre-title sequence was edge of your seat action and the longest of the Craig era, and certainly better than the Car chase in QOS. But all the drama and the action afterwards built up to the epic finale at Skyfall Lodge and it didn't disappoint.

I never said I didn't care about action, what I am saying is that the films are progressing and advancing and so are the plots. It's no longer needed to be hindered on the heavy action of the Brosnan Era films. Craig's films are smart, emotional, and intense. (you can apply this to the other era's too, of course ) I liked the direction of Skyfall with the perfect equal balance of drama and action, something Casino Royale had, to an extent, but wasn't really executed to a "T", and something Quantum Of Solace certainly didn't have. I don't hate or despise Quantum Of Solace. I always say this: As an action film, it's good. As a Bond film, it's disappointing. That's my final opinion on it, compared to when the film first came out and I was majorly disappointed with the direction of the film and the way it was handled. The problem for me is the way he handled the action. The running time was too short (I know, the WGA strike), but Having no prior experience on action films, Forster approached them as an amateur and it explains the short and poor effort of those scenes.

 

That's my final opinion on the two, and certainly more than my two cents.

[Guy Haines]

forget about arguing with him........will never accept Skyfall as a good movie oh well no point a small 1% minority that should reconsider Skyfall as a superior movie to QOS 

 

Woah ,

wasn't this what you said earlier ,On the Bond 24 director thread

 

> 

 

 

Marc Forster .....Anyone? .......

I'd prefer them not to bother with a film at all, quite frankly.

 

why would we want him back.......I like QOEver hate Skyfall and love QOS wrong choice and worst than Sam Mendes

I have to point out what Shark said

 

 

Skyfall is true Fleming Bond movie= don't like it=not a real fleming fan ! 

 

007jamesbond. Giving Skyfall fans a bad name since 2013.

 

 

You see your statements are irrational , you look at 'taking sides'. You don't realise its not about that . Its for what it has delivered ,We as fans deserve the best , in the old days movie would have been delivered and it didn't matter what critics say ...its about going to the theatre with family and friends and having a good time with it. The main thing was the fans enjoyed it and sadly today the voice of the critics over powers  that of the fans  .I have to agree to some extent of what Shark said

now who told you that only 1% of fans  didn't like Skyfall, because of what you see in CBN ?  If you go to the other popular Bond sites you would think that everyone is dying to have Christopher Nolan as the director but over here it is the opposite no one wants him, you have to realise that in different places opinion varies. Now as far as Skyfall is concerned go to places with a much much larger amount of traffic coming in like IMDB , Yahoo ,Metacritic and rottentomato forums and the other Bond sites you will see that Skyfall has a very very strong divided opinion and in the some of the sites I mentioned People disliked Skyfall more than the ones who liked it.  

 

I can't agree that "the voice of the critics overpowers that of the fans". Or the paying public, for that matter. If so "art house" or "kitchen sink" dramas would dominate the cinemas - we'd be flocking to see them just because the film critics think they are brilliant. What they approve of as opposed to what the public flocks to see coincides infrequently. Skyfall is a rare example of Bond as a critical and commercial success.

 

I wouldn't like the idea of Bond movies being made "for Bond fans only".  Not because I'm bothered about the critics, but because most cinema goers aren't members of the Bond fan base. The days when Bond was the only action series in town have long gone. The public can go and see other films besides Bond.  A Bond film which goes through the motions and pushes all the buttons for the fan base would do well, but would it draw in the numbers that CR or SF did - or the much maligned QoS, for that matter?

 

The critics power is overstated. It's the cinema goers who turned all three Craig Bond films into commercial successes, and most of them aren't die hard Bond fans. 

[tdalton]

 Skyfall is a spy/action film.

 

Very much agreed.  It's not a straight-up drama film, that's for sure.  It has dramatic elements, but it's also got several action scenes (PTS, fight vs. Patrice, casino fight, footchase through the London underground, courthouse shootout, and Skyfall).

 

I do disagree, however, to a point on the idea that Campbell didn't deliver with the sinking house finale of Casino Royale.  The scene's failings, as far as I'm concerned, fall mostly on the shoulders of the writers.  It's a scene that was completely inappropriate for the story and should have been taken completely out of the script.  I think the scene as it's filmed is a solid action scene, with some good fighting by Craig and the stuntmen, but it's so inappropriate in terms of the narrative that it ends up coming off worse than it actually is. 

[Dustin]

The critics power is overstated. It's the cinema goers who turned all three Craig Bond films into commercial successes, and most of them aren't die hard Bond fans.

Quite. Though I think most cinema goers who find themselves in a Bond film and enjoying it would consider themselves Bond fans without the usual folklore that goes with it, having seen all films, read all books and so forth. They are casual about the matter, can enjoy different entries for different reasons and don't subscribe to any kind of ideology about it. That is the majority of the audience, those who earned SKYFALL north of a billion box office. These viewers are also where the future of the series lies.

[Hockey Mask]

QOS4EVER: "Now as far as Skyfall is concerned go to places with a much much larger amount of traffic coming in like IMDB , Yahoo ,Metacritic and rottentomato forums and the other Bond sites you will see that Skyfall has a very very strong divided opinion and if the some of the sites I mentioned People disliked Skyfall more than the ones who liked it"

Imdb = 7.9/10 from 261,279 users, meta score 81/100
Yahoo movies = 4.5 do 5 stars from 1678 ratings
Metacritic = 81/100 critics, 7.4/10 users
Rotten Tomatoes = 92% fresh of 289 critics, 88% liked of 123,594 users