80 replies to this topic

[iexpectu2die]

Right now it seems impossible. Tremendous faith from those involved, a woefully (but beautifully) restrained marketing campaign and the promise of 'Bond with a capital B". But what if Skyfall isn't that great? What will it mean for the franchise?

Right now the film is looking absolutely fantastic. I'm as excited for this as I was for Casino Royale, and thankfully far less spoiled. I may even avoid the new upcoming trailer, which I'm told reveals much of the narrative set-up. But doesn't every film look great at this point? I remember my brother turning to me after watching Quantum of Solace's teaser trailer and asking, "Do films tend to be as good as the trailer? Because this looks amazing!"

Sadly, it wasn't. Now I'm no Quantum-hater. I left the cinema determined that it was the best Bond film ever made. With hindsight, it certainly wasn't. Too short, sloppy editing, a muddy plot. And it's common knowledge among critics that Quantum of Solace pales in comparison to the superior Casino Royale. One went to so far as to suggest that Mark Forster had brought the Bond reboot "crashing down to earth". Harsh, I would suggest. The film at least landed on a circus tent, breaking its fall. I mean it was disappointing but no monstrosity.

Time to play devil's advocate. I'm Craig's biggest fan, but let's hypothesise for a moment.

Of course, Bond will never die. 'James Bond Will Return' and all that. But with Daniel Craig? If Skyfall sucks then surely Craig won't be our 'golden boy' for much longer (and I don't just mean his hair). His ratio of good to bad will be 1:2. Yes, it will largely be the producers' and scriptwriters' faults rather than his, but the same was true of Brosnan, who I feel receives a lot of unjust criticism.

Would the series find itself back in a 1989 situation? Or even a 2002? If Skyfall is a critical failure, we'll have to ask ourselves some serious questions about the franchise. Right know I think its ok that we're still riding on the 'Casino Royale' wave. One slightly duff film can't derail that momentum. But can another? Can Bond continue in the same direction after two disappointments? He'll be fine financially, remember Die Another Day was the most successful film yet back then, but even the producers knew things had to change. Will that happen again? Personally, I think the Craig era would get another chance. Casino Royale was superb, and there is clearly so much potential. But what do you think?

And of course, it will probably be brilliant.

Edited by iexpectu2die, 24 July 2012 - 09:39 AM.

[Dustin]

iexpectyou2die, would you mind turning that profile pic of yours? Makes me dizzy looking at it...

No idea what would happen if SF turns out a clunker. The only thing I feel reasonably sure about is, Craig would be on board for BOND 24. Even the harshest critics of QOS often point out how well Craig has done. Craig is currently accepted in the role by a vast majority of the audience and liked for his approach. I suppose whatever happened after SF those going onwards would want to capitalise on this.

If SF was really not what we hope it to be, then it would strongly depend upon in what way if failed. Artistic failure isn't a problem, the series has had many wobbly entries and it didn't hurt at all. Many of these spoilt children are later lauded as 'classic' by their severest critics. People may not change, but opinions are a fickle topic; ask any old fan about that.

As long as the box office is OK nothing else matters a lot. Should that disappoint though...

I guess it could mean a drastically changed business report for what currently calls itself MGM or whatever. Combined with the event horizon for this venture coming a good deal closer to the CEO of that company, roughly into nose-vicinity. It would largely depend upon how much of the expected returns are missing and if it's possible to pin it to either SONY or EON, or both.

But it would definitely not mean the end of days, not by a large stretch. In effect EON covers its bases fairly early and would be a sought-after partner for further Bond productions with or without MGM. It's not very likely they will not be prepared to go with somebody else should the need arise. All the more so if they indeed instigated first steps for BOND 24, if there's any beef to the reports about writers already signed.

Edited by Dustin, 24 July 2012 - 10:58 AM.

[SecretAgentFan]

But what if Skyfall isn't that great? What will it mean for the franchise?

Nothing.

I applaud you for raising the question whether SKYFALL might be as promising as it seems to be or not - but first of all, the quality of a Bond film is highly subjective (as we all should know). And as long as it is doing good business there will be a next Bond film.

Let´s face it: Bond is here to stay. Even if there were a hiatus again he would come back in some other shape or form.

And that´s what we all like about him, isn´t it?

[hoagy]

Hmm...Well, what happened after YOLT, TMWTGG, MR, VTOAK ? After TLD and LTK ? After DAD ? They carried on. Sometimes the player changed, sometimes he did not, but when the player changed it was not because the most recent film was bad or good. The Craig films have been of much higher quality. If the player changes it will be, as we learned from another iconic series, business, not personal.

[201050]

If Skyfall comes up short of expectations, it will most likely be with those of us who post on a 007 nerd board. If I had to venture a guess, I'd say the vast majority of movie patrons probably don't have anywhere near the emotional investment in the franchise that we do. It will do fine out there. Craig and the franchise post-Brosnan are very highly regarded as a much needed refocusing of 007. I don't see that going away any time soon, even if Skyfall doesn't measure up toCasino Royale. To a lot of people, myself included, Quantum wasn't on par with Casino Royale and it didn't hurt anything. Craig & #24 are in no danger.

Edited by 201050, 24 July 2012 - 01:33 PM.

[TCK]

Hmm...Well, what happened after YOLT, TMWTGG, MR, VTOAK ? After TLD and LTK ? After DAD ? They carried on. Sometimes the player changed, sometimes he did not, but when the player changed it was not because the most recent film was bad or good. The Craig films have been of much higher quality. If the player changes it will be, as we learned from another iconic series, business, not personal.

Diamonds are forever, Live and let die and The man with the golden gun almost killed Bond off. 3 years waiting.
Same thing for Die another day. 4 years waiting, and Pierce leaving.
If Skyfall is bad I bet you we'll never see Dan again.

[MattofSteel]

I lived through the epic, disappointing near-tragedy that was Superman Returns. I can handle any film being bad now.

[SecretAgentFan]

Hmm...Well, what happened after YOLT, TMWTGG, MR, VTOAK ? After TLD and LTK ? After DAD ? They carried on. Sometimes the player changed, sometimes he did not, but when the player changed it was not because the most recent film was bad or good. The Craig films have been of much higher quality. If the player changes it will be, as we learned from another iconic series, business, not personal.

Diamonds are forever, Live and let die and The man with the golden gun almost killed Bond off. 3 years waiting.
Same thing for Die another day. 4 years waiting, and Pierce leaving.
If Skyfall is bad I bet you we'll never see Dan again.

Doubt it. And by the way - you´re wrong about those films "killing" Bond off.

[univex]

I lived through the epic, disappointing near-tragedy that was Superman Returns. I can handle any film being bad now.

Not to mention Indy4 and DAD. Those were abismal tragedies as far as I´m concerned. Well, never say never again...

[201050]

And by the way - you´re wrong about those films "killing" Bond off.

Man, that's for sure. In particular, Live And Let Die was very well received and did fantastically at the box office. I'll have to double-check the numbers but I think it made back something along the lines of 20 times its budget. Hardly a damage to the franchise. It was also a sort of refocusing of the character after the comedic tone of Diamonds.

Edited by 201050, 24 July 2012 - 05:14 PM.

[MattofSteel]

I lived through the epic, disappointing near-tragedy that was Superman Returns. I can handle any film being bad now.

Not to mention Indy4 and DAD. Those were abismal tragedies as far as I´m concerned. Well, never say never again...

I'm not nearly as opposed to DAD as most seem to be. It was a film that started with the best - exceptional, I might even say - intentions, and was sidetracked by some downright terrible execution.

Indy 4...yeah, talk about wasted promise. The more I think back on that movie, the more I wonder how I sat through its first showing without leaving the theatre. Rubbish on top of rubbish, with one or two entertaining moments in between.

[Dustin]

What would it take to kill-off the Bond series? Short of global nuclear annihilation or global universal peace I don't think there is a way to kill Bond in the cinema. As long as there is money to be made with films focusing on adventure, thrills and a dose of eroticism - mixed with exoticism, violence and danger - there will be Bond to fill the gap. If previous seasons in development hell couldn't strangle people's interest in this hero, then nothing can; not in the long run.

[Germanlady]

One thing I am very sure of, if 23 failes, DC will drop off. He cares about Bond and won't remain in the role, if he thinks, he is the wrong man.l

[PPK_19]

I lived through the epic, disappointing near-tragedy that was Superman Returns. I can handle any film being bad now.

Superman Returns was amazing. What are you smoking? Yeah it didn't have a big villain and crazy fight scenes, it was more a love-letter to the Donner Superman films of old.

That said i'm loving the look of Man of Steel.

Skyfall won't be bad. It will be the best Bond film ever made.

[Jim]

It'll do fine.

[Miles Miservy]

It's not uncommon for a film to fall short of its hype.

OHMSS was a wonderful film but the timeliness of it, the absense of Sean Connery, the end of the decade and other factors made it the most difficult film to turn a profit.

TMWTGG was another example; riding on the coattails of the success of LALD (along w/problems between Broccoli & Saltzman) forced the producers to tweak TSWLM (which turned out to be Moore's best).

DAD was rife with red flags. Although the film made a huge profit, It was critically attacked as being too campy with a plot too convoluted. So they retooled again.

I think they got it right this time. Daniel Craig, like his predecessors before him, has found his niche and is comfortable in OO7's skin. I think SKYFALL will do quite well. But if it doesn't........ they'll just tweak it again so that it fits in with whatever direction the genre is taking.

[univex]

It'll do fine.

Then I´m sure all will be fine

[DR76]

I may even avoid the new upcoming trailer, which I'm told reveals much of the narrative set-up. But doesn't every film look great at this point? I remember my brother turning to me after watching Quantum of Solace's teaser trailer and asking, "Do films tend to be as good as the trailer? Because this looks amazing!"

Sadly, it wasn't. Now I'm no Quantum-hater. I left the cinema determined that it was the best Bond film ever made. With hindsight, it certainly wasn't. Too short, sloppy editing, a muddy plot.

I found nothing muddy about the plot for "QUANTUM OF SOLACE". I only had problems with the editing in the movie's first half. And it still turned out to be better than 12 other Bond movies I can think of.

As for "SKYFALL", I wasn't that impressed by the trailer. Then again, I can think of a good number of movies that turned out to be better than their trailers.

TMWTGG was another example; riding on the coattails of the success of LALD (along w/problems between Broccoli & Saltzman) forced the producers to tweak TSWLM (which turned out to be Moore's best)

I thought that "FOR YOUR EYES ONLY" was Moore's best.

[MattofSteel]

I lived through the epic, disappointing near-tragedy that was Superman Returns. I can handle any film being bad now.

Superman Returns was amazing. What are you smoking? Yeah it didn't have a big villain and crazy fight scenes, it was more a love-letter to the Donner Superman films of old.

That said i'm loving the look of Man of Steel.

Skyfall won't be bad. It will be the best Bond film ever made.

Oh, let me be clear. SR is a pretty beautiful film. It's rich, epic, and highly emotional. And there is no person on this planet who considers the Donner films a touchstone more than me. Crystal Krypton, Reeve's dual performance, every bar of Williams' music - all definitive IMO. In SR, those resurrected aspects and nostalgic familiarities were wonderful.

But literally everything else about it just left me downright mad.

It's a powerful story that's bleak, depressing, and crushingly disappointing. The 'legacy' storyline with the kid is just downright dumb in concept, and the idea that he'd leave for 5 years and just return even more so. The character work - especially Lois - is terrible. Superman is practically mute. There's nothing about him that's compelling as a character, and the whole tone lacks the fundamental spirit of joy and wonder that made the original Superman films special.

It was supposed to be a comeback story that makes you want to stand up and cheer. A pleasant trip back to an arena of childhood familiarities driven by a fresh, exciting story that feels like a natural extension of the universe instead of a pained, contrived, confusion of it.

Superman Returns isn't a bad film. It's just not a great Superman film. And it is, I can admit, pretty lethargically boring by times. And that's not coming from someone who needs fistfights and explosions to be entertained. The whole "Superman didn't throw one punch!" argument is pointless. He didn't throw one in Superman: The Movie either, and that's the best of the bunch.

If you want to write a slow, character-driven, existential story about Superman...then hey, I'd be right there, willing to watch it. But making him some sort of a perplexingly passive and absent father in a biologically confusing story - 90% of which happens in the past, offscreen - is not the story people want to see. Superman Returns is a mixed bag of a final result, and Exhibit A in the "How Not to Resurrect a Franchise" handbook.

I apologize for the rant. It was something I was highly invested in at the time, and its net result may have left me slightly affected.

[x007AceOfSpades]

As far as box office goes, I'm predicting between $600 - $700 million total.

[Vauxhall]

If SKYFALL is bad... it will still be a box office smash and the franchise will continue to thrive. They've found a winning formula and I don't think a weak instalment would particularly destroy that. Plus we know, at the very least, it's a visually tremendous movie, so we can all enjoy it with the sound off if required.

[x007AceOfSpades]

Not very many people like Quantum Of Solace, and it made money. there's Always going to be an audience for it no matter what. Everything else I was going to write, Vauxhall pretty much beat me to it haha.

[AMC Hornet]

If Skyfall is "bad," that will only be in some people's opinion.

Has any single Bond film been universally panned by everyone?

OHMSS was remembered as a 'flop' or a 'bomb' because it didn't gross as much as YOLT, and iIt didn't gross as much because ----King Sir Sean Connery wasn't in it. Financially and critically it was a success - it just wasn't as popular at the time.

DAD gets booted around by almost everyone but me, but somebody besides me saw it more than once, just to be sure.

I'm not going to worry about whether the film is 'good' (IMCO). For everyone who hates it there will be at least one other who loves it, and as long as they both pay for admission EON will be happy. It's only DVD sales that will be affected (but again, not by me - I'll be adding it to my collection regardless). I'm going to hope that, whether I like it or not, it's successful - guaranteeing B24 in 2014.

Worst-case scenario: Heineken decides not to invest in the next film.

[Mrs Rabbithole]

If Skyfall is bad, I'll just whip out several dozen blu-rays, including the ones which will be released in Oct-Nov...

Although I doubt it will be bad...I'm looking at $75m minimum in places like China....

[tdalton]

I don't think that Skyfall will be a bad movie, but it could turn out to be somewhat disappointing considering the massive expectations that are being placed on it.

[L4YRCAKE]

First I'd like to say that this is an excellent topic, thank you for posting it. My own opinion is that Skyfall will both exceed expectation and we will be at the dawn of a decade or more of classic Bond films that will redefine and push forward both visually and story wise in ways we have always wanted as Bond fans. This series is in the best of hands, and Daniel Craig is the best thing to happen to Bond ever, and that's not to diminish the other people involved in any way, but he is the best steward we could hope for, and a very special actor. I've probably said this many times before but I think there hasn't been an actor like him since Steve McQueen. James Bond is about to become the great action hero of our decade.

The only reason I'm becoming nervous about Skyfall at all is that we seem to be living in an era where some really great trailers have given big hopes to movies that looked to restore certain beloved characters or storylines to their former or deserved glory, only to have the actual movie be a dud when it seemed like all but a sure thing. In particular I'm reacting to Prometheus and The Dark Knight Rises, stinkers both of them from folks who had no good reason to deliver anything but the best (and I'm well aware there are plenty who will disagree about that, and more power to them.).

Here's my theories and reactions to some of the above comments:

a). If Skyfall is terrible I expect Daniel Craig will at least turn in at least one more performance for contractual reasons, and to give it one more college try because he's a professional and it's the professional thing to do unless the producers ask him to step down, which I don't see happening.

. If Skyfall is bad, it will still probably make more money than any other Bond film, my gut just tells me that. If nothing else, the 50th anniversary and the Olympics tie-in will see to that. Bad word of mouth could always temper that, though.

c). If Skyfall is terrible, I expect that the sequel with Craig will be more Bond cliche/style than substance, and probably be his Moonraker or Diamonds Are Forever. I think Craig cares too much about the character and would leave gracefully after that.

d). If Skyfall is terrible, the producers need to have a serious gut check moment, because at this point in time it seems clear that they fully believe they have a good movie on every level on their hands, and had plenty of time to smooth and improve over the issues with Quantum Of Solace, which could've and should've been a great film. And they have a great actor who proved himself in Casino Royale and a great director who apparently seems to know how to do action movies right, from what we've seen in the trailers. If Skyfall is bad the producers can only blame themselves.

Also, a lot of the other above mentioned movies were not only clunkers but more importantly missed opportunities. The premise and action scenes of Superman Returns were (mostly) great and Indy 4 wasn't nearly as bad as everyone says, remove Shia Labouf with a real actor and give the ending the punch it deserved and it's just as good as the other three, and Lucas and Spielberg should've known that. Superman Returns betrayed the character and the costume was all wrong, it looked like an outfit stolen from the Friends tv show, and Superman would've never, ever, ever abandoned a pregnant Lois Lane, whose character was an even bigger milquetoast than Clark Kent, instead of a firebrand reporter and cynic won over by Superman's heroic moral sincerity.

But anyhow, Skyfall is going to be a classic, I think it will reset the bar and be the new Goldfinger. Lucky us.

...um, the smiley face with sunglasses is a typo. Sorry, not sure how I did that...?

[Trevelyan 006]

I'm not too worried about it and I doubt the producers are either. The film will make it's money. It's James Bond's screen return, not to mention this year being the 50th anniversary of the Bond films. Some will dislike it and be disappointed, some won't. The fact is inevitable; just like the series continuing even if the film is a total flop somehow.

IF Skyfall turns out to be less-than-stellar, they'll simply bounce back with something better next time around.

Edited by Trevelyan 006, 25 July 2012 - 03:06 AM.

[jaguar007]

If Skyfall is bad, then a giant meteor will hit the earth and our planet will be knocked out of orbit and zombies will raise and the world will end.


Oh Wait, that is the end of the Mayan calendar.

[Skudor]

I lived through the epic, disappointing near-tragedy that was Superman Returns. I can handle any film being bad now.

Not to mention Indy4 and DAD. Those were abismal tragedies as far as I´m concerned. Well, never say never again...

I'm not nearly as opposed to DAD as most seem to be. It was a film that started with the best - exceptional, I might even say - intentions, and was sidetracked by some downright terrible execution.

Indy 4...yeah, talk about wasted promise. The more I think back on that movie, the more I wonder how I sat through its first showing without leaving the theatre. Rubbish on top of rubbish, with one or two entertaining moments in between.

Reading both of those is food for thought. I didn't suspect DAD would be as bad as it turned out until I actually saw it - the big let downs (invisible car, appalling CGI) weren't apparent in advance (other things, such as Madonna, were - but didn't leave one expecting something this bad).

Indy4 I sort of saw coming to some extent - that jungle chase was featured in the trailer and looked very fake, rumours of UFO angle etc. were all there (plus Lucas's track record with the Star Wars prequels).

DAD actually looked promising - especially the Bond as a prisoner angle. So perhaps a surprisingly rubbish Skyfall is possible.

But it would still make its money back and assuming the next film was 2-3 years later I'd still bet on a Craig return.

[Miles Miservy]

Not very many people like Quantum Of Solace, and it made money. there's Always going to be an audience for it no matter what. Everything else I was going to write, Vauxhall pretty much beat me to it haha.

I still don't get that. Like any other entry in the OO7 franchise, QOS not without it's faults; the biggest being the significant disappointment of Dominic Greene. Of the Bond villains, I'd rate him as nearly the worst of them (he'd probably have to have a throw-down with Kamal Kahn to decide the winner). Madrano, I think, was a more vile, dispicable adversary. Aside from that and given the fact that the film is a first ever "sequel" in the series, I felt it to be quite enjoyable. There was no surprise that nothing from the original short story, other than the title, was used in the script. Like AVTAK, it still made for great cinema.