53 replies to this topic

[The Krynoid man]

Many have suggested that during the third act the film turns into Home Alone.
I disagree, I think it has more in common with another classic film, Straw Dogs.
Think about it, three people held up in a house in the middle of the countryside, benign besieged by a group trying to kill one of the people inside the house.
They even use home made traps.
I kept expecting Bond to say "Jesus, I killed them all".
But what do you think?

[Major Tallon]

This is my thought as well.  I acknowledge that Mendes, in the commentary, made a reference to "Home Alone," but I've always thought that "Straw Dogs" was more appropriate.  "Straw Dogs" was made many years ago, which is probably why more people didn't think of the similarity.

[Janus Assassin]

I've always hated that Home Alone reference. I can understand where people come from.But seriously, how else are you going to be able to stop a small army with nothing else but a hunting rifle, a PPK and some dynamite. 

[Vauxhall]

Quite a few reviews made the STRAW DOGS comparison. Almost certainly not a direct homage, but I can see where they're coming from.

[dtuba]

I'm certain that Home Alone didn't invent that plot point. They probably nicked it from Buster Keaton or someone in the silent film era. There truly is nothing new under the sun.  

[SecretAgentFan]

I thought that part of the film was probably the weakest.  Still, I liked the reversal of the usual Bond finale: this time the villain and his army attack Bond.

 

But I would not mind having a traditional finale with Bond leading an attack on the villain´s lair next time.  

 

When did we have that the last time?  

 

Not during the Craig era.  

Even the Brosnan years didn´t offer this and preferred to have Bond assisted by the Bond girl (sorry, woman!) or going at it alone.

The Dalton films?  LTK: no.  TLD: Well, Bond attacking the air base, but this time with the Afghanian rebels.

Moore? AVTAK: going at it alone with Stacey. OP: well, assisted by Q and Octopussy´s amazons. FYEO: assisted by Colombo and his thugs. 

 

So, it was MOONRAKER, right?  Time to do it again, I would say.

[S K Y F A L L]

I like where your heads at SecretAgentFan but I think they should probably save that for Bond 25 along with Bond getting the girl, giving Craig a nice send off if it is indeed his last film.

[Guy Haines]

I don't think a film script should be twisted so that a big set piece battle involving Bond and lots of extras in combat outfits can take place just so it can take place. That said, I think the next Bond film, or a future film after that, ought to involve Bond in a "race against time" scenario to prevent some global catastrophe - whether it's a Thunderball-style ransom demand plot, or a story which pitches countries against each other to the point of all out war. And a "pitched battle" scene of the kind we really haven't had in Bond for decades would fit into that kind of storyline rather well - as we know from films like GF, TB, YOLT, OHMSS, TSWLM and so on. But it would have to be the logical climax of the story - not just thrown in for extra added action and explosions.

 

One problem with such scenes though, is they can make Bond himself seem like a "bit player", and a passive one at that. An example - the Fort Knox battle in GF. Who stops Fort Knox from being turned into a pile of radioactive rubbish? Certainly not 007 He can overcome Oddjobb, but cannot defuse the bomb - which makes for a tense ending, but doesn't show Bond at his most resourceful. (Bond must have taken lessons in defusing atom bombs afterwards, because he had no trouble in disarming a Polaris missile warhead in TSWLM - even the US Navy personnel were impressed at that!  )

[seawolfnyy]

I don't really see the need for another large scale battle with mercenaries and commandos. I actually liked the one in The Living Daylights because it saw Bond participating in an already active battle: the mujahideen against the soviets. The Moonraker battle is just plain dumb. There's no way anyone would be able to mount an assault on a space station from scratch in 45 minutes. I actually liked both Skyfall's and even Quantum of Solace's ending. They both felt more real and more like espionage tales than giant action set pieces (even though they were). Just please, no more gigantic space battles.

[thecasinoroyale]

I actually enjoyed the ending the more I saw it, and I appreciated the realism of the situation whilst having that destructive Bond flavour with the helicopter and Aston Martin surprise!

 

'Home Alone' it may ring a bell about someone defending their home using the element of surprise, but it's not exactly dragging on for long to be compared to it, a few minutes if that before Silva arrives.

 

Well choreographed and set out, with a soundtrack that provides just as much atmosphere as the characters and location themselves.

[Iceskater101]

That's interesting that they would use a "home alone" reference in the last part of the scene. I mean I never really thought about it that way. I loved the attack at the house. I love how M got involved and was helping to make the dynamite sticks to put in the floor boards and in the lights of the house.

[thecasinoroyale]

And what I appreciate more is that M was killed by a nobody, a wild bit of fire that caught her at the wrong time, rather than some grand, overly dramatic injury sustained from Silva or something.

 

The realism of a blink and you'll miss it moment, slowly reducing this once powerful, proud lady to a steady, painful end. It's heart-breaking, but plays her in a more heroic and brave light to the finale.

[Zen Razor]

I don't think it has anything to do with Home Alone why do people always bring lame excuses to bring down well successful films. Just because Skyfall had something similar to it doesn't mean they got it from there. If a chase scene plays out does that mean I got it from another film? No it's just what seems most reasonable at the time. If someone gets kidnapped why do people assume I would be copying from the film Taken? There are plenty of films that have script things that have already been done so why should it be an issue in Skyfall?

[SecretAgentFan]

Well, Sam Mendes did bring it up on the DVD commentary - but it´s all in the spirit of a knowing smile.

 

We all know it´s basically a "Straw Dogs" rip off.

[RMc2]

I don't think it has anything to do with Home Alone why do people always bring lame excuses to bring down well successful films. Just because Skyfall had something similar to it doesn't mean they got it from there. If a chase scene plays out does that mean I got it from another film? No it's just what seems most reasonable at the time. If someone gets kidnapped why do people assume I would be copying from the film Taken? There are plenty of films that have script things that have already been done so why should it be an issue in Skyfall?

 

If people are making the Home Alone comparisons to legitimately criticise SkyFall - rather than playfully tease it, as SAF points out - they aren't saying Mendes and co. were inspired by Home Alone. They're saying the filmmakers weren't mindful enough to realise what they're doing is similar to another famous example; in which case, we should be cautious when praising them.

[SecretAgentFan]

Then again, it´s hard if not impossible to find ideas that have not been done before.

 

Personally, I welcomed the idea of turning around the element of Bond and his army attacking the bad guy - having the bad guy with an army attack Bond was, actually, an original idea. Kudos to that.

 

I also liked Bond´s situation: having only a few weapons and two seniors at his side.  There´s no way around it: they had to find ways to use what they had.  Like Kevin.

 

So, in the end one has to decide what one prefers: to use the original idea (and suffer the logical consequences) or to try anything to escape the comparison with other films.

 

I praise EON for doing the original idea.  Comparisons arise no matter what. 

[Zen Razor]

I understand but I mean I doubt these guy's do it on purpose. A lot of people used that as an excuse to downgrade Skyfall along with "Plotholes" and what not. I seriously hear people say Skyfall is the worst Bond film or it's a terrible film. It's not easy to suggest these guys are saying to tease it but I think more to criticize. I'm sure Sam Mendes didn't think of Home Alone at the time.

[tdalton]

I'm sure that Mendes wasn't thinking of Home Alone either when he and the writers were crafting the ending to Skyfall, but at the same time it's fair to acknowledge the similarity.  It's hardly one of the major problems of the film, though.  Far from it, in fact.  The so-called "plotholes" are much more serious problems with the film, as the entire plot hinges on impossible coincidences that, for some of us, take us out of the film momentarily. 

[SecretAgentFan]

It did not take me out of the film, I must say - but after subsequent viewings I do think these coincidences could have been avoided.

 

So much for the idea that a longer time for writing a script makes it better.  IMO, the problem of "Skyfall"´s script is that they had too much time to tinker with it, probably having a solid first draft spoiled by too many cooks in the kitchen who wanted to keep this and that and add something else, trying to make it all fit.

 

In the end, I do like the film very much and can watch it without thinking too much about the coincidences.  But I suspect they were not there in the first draft.

[RMc2]

Yes, the Home Alone-style ending isn't a plot hole and doesn't bother me at all; in fact, I like it for the reasons you've said.

 

So much for the idea that a longer time for writing a script makes it better.  IMO, the problem of "Skyfall"´s script is that they had too much time to tinker with it, probably having a solid first draft spoiled by too many cooks in the kitchen who wanted to keep this and that and add something else, trying to make it all fit.

 

Yeah, all that talk of "we've had so much longer to work on the script" and "we've got a really, really good script" ended up being little more than hype. Especially when you hear that some of the best lines and scenes - like Silva's rat speech - were created by the actors during rehearsals and production, and therefore would have happened anyway.

 

I'm still hurt by Mendes changing the Aston Martin from CR's car to the GF car. I know they used it really well in the film, but I loved the Craig films' continuity until that point... and that is a plot hole.

[Turn]

I don't know about plot hole as it doesn't directly affect anything directly in what happens. Had it blown up Silva or a piece of shrapnel from it caught M and caused her demise then maybe, but it's more a convenient excuse at the expense of continuity.

 

The series continuity is all over the place anyway so I gave up on it a long time ago and just take it the best I can.

 

Just don't mention that code name nonsense.

[tdalton]

I don't think that anyone has suggested that the "Home Alone" aspect of the film is a plothole.  The complaint about "plotholes" was that, if I'm interpreting the complaint correctly, that those of us who don't like Skyfall simply claim that there are "plotholes" in the film that don't actually exist just as a means to criticize the film.  This couldn't be further from the truth, however, as Skyfall is rife with plotholes.  The "Home Alone" segment, though, isn't one of them.  

[Zen Razor]

Many films back than the storylines were quite messed up and Bond was one of them. Movies were just made over and over without worrying about tie in, That's why there is so many plotholes but it doesn't affect the film at the slightest bit. Suppose we take the reboot into consideration there still isn't enough information to fill those gaps. We just have to enjoy the films as how they are. Hopefully in the couple of years ahead we can get some things clarified certainly Bond's relation with Blofeld and his past villians are still canon it just has to be organized.

[SecretAgentFan]

If I may say something about the term "plothole".  It is not an information gap but refers to improbable developments within a story.  A "pothole" within the structure of the plot, so to speak.

 

Many critics cry "PLOTHOLE", however, because they did not take the time to think about the particular story and why certain events were left out.  It has become extremely fashionable by many people to cry "PLOTHOLE" just to make fun of something which they, um, did not understand.

 

One definite plothole in SKYFALL, IMO, really cannot be sufficiently explained: Silva causes the explosion which derails the tube wagons at exactly the right moment when he could not anticipate Bond would otherwise capture him.

 

Damn, thinking about this I just got an explanation.  What about this: Silva always wanted to derail a tube wagon, just to cause chaos in the wake of his escape.  And Bond just got in the way - in the exact moment.  Lucky turn for Silva.

 

 

Okay, but what about his many helpers who get him the police officer uniform in the exact moment when he escapes from his underground prison?  - Wait, he might have had them running around as backup because he wanted to get imprisoned just to make Mi6 feel superior and then escape anyway to shoot M at the hearing - because in that moment so many officials are looking at her and maybe he even planned to shoot some of the British politicians as well.  Crafty fella, this Silva.

 

Right, and how does Bond survive being shot and falling from the bridge?  Hey, Moneypenny is not that good a shot, it only tore into his shoulder AND he is a good swimmer (hence the swimming pool scene, right?).  Also, he is the hero of this story.

 

But why don´t Bond and M call for backup at "Skyfall"?  Pretty stupid to think they can take on Silva´s army?  And the new M, the new Q and Tanner know about this and... decide to let it play out?  Well, M does say that she does not want any other innocent people die because of her mistakes. But, people... this is the Mi6, for Pete´s sake! They are in the business of risking their lives.  Or is it a problem with British intelligence acting on Scottish ground?

 

I obviously strive to explain anything away, to have our man´s back.  Please, try me! 

[Turn]

I think I have it: all those things and more occurred so we could continue discussing these things here and on other forums and boards for years to come.

 

That will send us scrambling to buy copies of the Blu-rays and DVDs and then upgrade to the next version or the super ultra ultimate version that has the deleted scene showing Silva and his people talking about the timing in his boardroom as Bond and Severine are sailing to his island.

 

And it will make us yearn for Bond 24 more even if John Logan isn't talking.

 

How did we ever get through those days before the Internet when you had to wait for a new issue of Starlog or a fan club newsletter for any news?

[Zen Razor]

Well those certain plotholes are the ones that people usually refer to. First thing is remember this is a movie not every film suppose to explain everything it takes too much time to answer all these questions. Why are people talking about the realism in the films this movie was influenced from Dark Knight, Why didn't people question Joker when he got out of the jail? Silva is a smart guy for a reason. He is capable of doing things that not even we would understand these are not some ordinary people. It could have been possible for Silva to plan it from the start and let himself get caught and just wasted time talking with M until he felt he wanted to get out. Or it could have been possible that the Train was just icing on the cake and that was a coincidence. Bond certainly is a good swimmer they don't need to show everything that is unnecessary. Every film is filled with plotholes but that's not by any means a good idea to lower the standards to a film. Bond didn't call for backup because he wanted to be under the radar. Bond outsmarted Silva and Bond certainly is a over-confident individual he rather do things on his own terms. 

[RMc2]

The only plot hole that I was aware of people moaning about was Silva's plan in general. Personally, I think his plan works out perfectly and is well plotted.

[tdalton]

The only plot hole that I was aware of people moaning about was Silva's plan in general. Personally, I think his plan works out perfectly and is well plotted.

 

After watching it again last night, the plot holes aren't as egregious as they're sometimes made out to be, but one very critical flaw remains.  Silva's entire plan rests on Q's incompetence.  If Q doesn't plug Silva's computer into the MI6 network, Silva continues to rot in his cell.  Add to that if Silva really planned for Bond to catch him, then why does he try to have him killed in Maccau?   

[SecretAgentFan]

Maybe he only wants to test him?  And to make sure it does not look to obvious that he wants to be caught?

[tdalton]

Maybe he only wants to test him?  And to make sure it does not look to obvious that he wants to be caught?

 

Perhaps, but Patrice and his other henchmen (the ones in Maccau) give him a good run for his money.  If it weren't for the fact that Bond is the only one that can fire his pistol (as well as Moneypenny's good timing before the other one can shoot Bond at point-blank range) Bond doesn't make it to Silva's island.