Skyfall (may contain spoilers but not in OP!)

2»

Comments

  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,463
    Mr Goo wrote:
    When I first heard that they were making the film I could not think who they would ever get to fill the characters shoes.

    I've not read the books but from reading up on the character I'd have thought Liam Neeson would be about right.
  • mr_goo
    mr_goo Posts: 3,770
    Pross wrote:
    Mr Goo wrote:
    When I first heard that they were making the film I could not think who they would ever get to fill the characters shoes.

    I've not read the books but from reading up on the character I'd have thought Liam Neeson would be about right.

    Possible. At least a better choice than Cruise.
    Always be yourself, unless you can be Aaron Rodgers....Then always be Aaron Rodgers.
  • MrChuck
    MrChuck Posts: 1,663
    Pross wrote:
    MrChuck wrote:
    It was alright. I wasn't blown away by the opening scene, and it seemed to be veering back towards the gadgets/big villain's lair stuff of the pre-Daniel Craig ones. I reckon they should steer away from that and back towards Casino Royale.

    Some bits very good though, liked the part in Scotland, very atmospheric.

    Gadgets? They pretty much made the point themselves that there were virtually no gadgets, the Scotland scene is like an adult home alone due to lack of technology!

    The palmprint-coded gun? The machine guns that have somehow been installed in the Aston Martin? Actually that grated more because I just didn't think it fit with the MI5* the rest of the film seemed to portray.

    *Or whichever one it is! :wink:
  • daviesee
    daviesee Posts: 6,386
    MrChuck wrote:
    The palmprint-coded gun? The machine guns that have somehow been installed in the Aston Martin? Actually that grated more because I just didn't think it fit with the MI5* the rest of the film seemed to portray.

    *Or whichever one it is! :wink:
    You've never seen Goldfinger then?
    That car was a sledgehammer nod to the past.
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • MattC59
    MattC59 Posts: 5,408
    Just got back from the cinema........ F*cking loved it, grinned all the way through !
    :D:D:D
    Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved
  • nweststeyn
    nweststeyn Posts: 1,574
    Love it. Only film I've ever been to see twice.

    The only 'gadget' in the film was the palmprint gun thingy... The others - aston-cannons and ejector seat - were references to old-school bond.

    Javier Bardem is great and his hair is perfectly odd/creepy.
  • FoldingJoe
    FoldingJoe Posts: 1,327
    Also saw this last night.

    Liked the film, but think I preferred Casino Royale.

    BTW - when did M get wounded?
    Little boy to Obama: "My Dad says that you read all our emails"
    Obama to little boy: "He's not your real Dad"

    Kona Honky Tonk for sale: http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40090&t=13000807
  • nweststeyn
    nweststeyn Posts: 1,574
    Shot by the guy in the house. Bond says 'are you hurt?' and she replies 'only my pride, I never was a good shot' but she was hit.
  • garryc
    garryc Posts: 203
    Saw it at the weekend. It was OK, I wasn't really that impressed. The baddie was just overplayed and got irritating very quickly. The glass prison cell was just stupid, if they'd just chained him to the wall he'd probably still be there.

    Lots of it were just stupid, it is a bond movie I guess, but these days there are good TV series that cover the same ground (Spooks etc). I just think that it should have offered a bit more bang for the buck if I'm gonna fork out for cinema tickets.
  • jefflad
    jefflad Posts: 315
    Disapointed in the film, think they should leave this type of movie to the Bourne people who have it off to a tee.

    Liked the nods to the past especially the last few scenes but after the 1st two Craig movies I expected and hoped for better... as some band in the 90's shouted 'don't believe the hype'
  • MrChuck
    MrChuck Posts: 1,663
    daviesee wrote:
    MrChuck wrote:
    The palmprint-coded gun? The machine guns that have somehow been installed in the Aston Martin? Actually that grated more because I just didn't think it fit with the MI5* the rest of the film seemed to portray.

    *Or whichever one it is! :wink:
    You've never seen Goldfinger then?
    That car was a sledgehammer nod to the past.

    Yeah, I got that, but IMO just having the Aston in the first place and introducing it the way they did in Casino Royale was enough. Since the 'reboot' it's been gadget free and sticking them in now didn't fit for me.
  • daviesee
    daviesee Posts: 6,386
    MrChuck wrote:
    Yeah, I got that, but IMO just having the Aston in the first place and introducing it the way they did in Casino Royale was enough. Since the 'reboot' it's been gadget free and sticking them in now didn't fit for me.
    I think some people are taking it too seriously. It is a Bond film and by default not to be taken seriously.
    And the previous two had gadgets, and major plot flaws, including Casino Royale.
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • anj132
    anj132 Posts: 299
    A few things annoyed me about it...

    The handgun that only works for JB but has a green LED on it. Why does JB need a light tell him he is using that gun? Lights up his face whilst trying to hide in the shadows - yeah really stealthy. Principle, whilst nothing new, was fine just the stupid LED. I think it's say a bit about the target audience of the film :( "Oh the red LED is on so the baddie can't use it - ah yes because that gun can only be used by JB"

    But the main plot of the film, that the bad dude is trying to kill M and he masterminds this all by getting JB to capture him but when he is captured, JB was surrounded by 6 or so evil henchmen, manages to take them all out and doesn't kill the bad dude. So this bad dude knew that his evil henchmen wouldn't kill JB despite being injured and odds stacked against him and wouldn't kill him and take him as a hostage. Really?

    I'm sure there are lots of holes but when not taken too seriously (being a JB film) then it's not too bad. I suppose.
  • daviesee
    daviesee Posts: 6,386
    anj132 wrote:
    A few things annoyed me ....
    But the main plot of the film, that the bad dude is trying to kill M and he masterminds this all by getting JB to capture him but when he is captured, JB was surrounded by 6 or so evil henchmen, manages to take them all out and doesn't kill the bad dude. So this bad dude knew that his evil henchmen wouldn't kill JB despite being injured and odds stacked against him and wouldn't kill him and take him as a hostage. Really?

    I'm sure there are lots of holes but when not taken too seriously (being a JB film) then it's not too bad. I suppose.
    Pretty much a main scene of all Bond movies.
    Silly and you pretty much have to accept it or not.
    From Goldfinger:-
    "Do you expect me to talk?"
    "No Mr. Bond. I expect you to die"
    So why not simply put a bullet in his head while he is tied down?

    That's just the way Bond films are. Go with it or reject it.
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • kentphil
    kentphil Posts: 479
    Skyfall is a very different Bond film to any other I've seen. Perhaps thats why the glaring holes in the plot stand out more than in other Bond films. James had so many opportunities to kill the baddie but didn't.

    Why was the underground train that crashed empty of people? Why were there only adults in the Underground scenes? no young people/children to be seen.

    What was on Q's mug that he was drinking from? I couldn't make it out.

    Overall a great film, but unlike any other bond.
    1998 Kona Cindercone in singlespeed commute spec
    2013 Cannondale Caadx 1x10
    2004 Giant TCR
  • eede
    eede Posts: 58
    At the end I though I was watching Home Alone 3. It only needed tacks on the stairs.
    Friend of Herne Hill Velodrome: http://www.hernehillvelodrome.com/friends/
  • alihisgreat
    alihisgreat Posts: 3,872
    I'm slightly obsessed with the theme song by Adele.. its right up there with the best bond songs..

    .. although she's no Shirley Bassey!
  • jefflad
    jefflad Posts: 315
    eede wrote:
    At the end I though I was watching Home Alone 3. It only needed tacks on the stairs.

    Brilliant... :D
  • mfin
    mfin Posts: 6,729
    KentPhil wrote:

    What was on Q's mug that he was drinking from? I couldn't make it out.

    I vaguely remember it was a Scrabble mug.
  • kleinstroker
    kleinstroker Posts: 2,133
    kleinstroker wrote:
    Can I just say....

    I'm in it!!!!

    well I maybe in it.. I was an extra in one scene. :D

    Not in it!! Great movie though, looks like my movie breakthrough appearance ended up on the cutting room floor. Best bond I've seen in a very long time
  • Cleat Eastwood
    Cleat Eastwood Posts: 7,508
    Pretty poor - it was like they used all the money on the opening chase sequence and had to do with rainy scotland. Highlight for me was the henchman guys name on the credits - Tank Dong :D
    The dissenter is every human being at those moments of his life when he resigns
    momentarily from the herd and thinks for himself.
  • verylonglegs
    verylonglegs Posts: 4,023
    Cleat Eastwood wrote:
    Pretty poor - it was like they used all the money on the opening chase sequence and had to do with rainy scotland.

    Can never tell when you are being serious these days Cleat, you are aware this is pretty much exactly what happened after MGM went bust and Sony stepped in to help out? It's why it's been 4yrs since QoS rather than 2-3 as things were sorted out. Lack of finance meant the usual array of exotic locations were beyond reach iirc.
  • Tom Butcher
    Tom Butcher Posts: 3,830
    Saw it tonight with the family - wasn't a dog but wasn't great either. First Bond film I've seen since The Spy Who Loved Me so I can only compare it to Connery, Moore and the other guy who did the one film (On Her Majs Secret Service I think) and for me Daniel Craig doesn't have the charisma of the first two - especially Connery. If it had had more of a plot I'd have enjoyed it more - kids loved it though - I told them if they liked that they would be blown away by the Ipcress File - they didn't believe me.
    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.
  • team47b
    team47b Posts: 6,425
    Totally unrealistic! M gets out of the passenger side of a car on a well known bridge in that London and the communter on the bike that's about to go up the inside of this car, stops, wouldn't happen :D
    my isetta is a 300cc bike
  • heavymental
    heavymental Posts: 2,091
    Some lovely settings I thought. The scene driving the Aston Scotland were beautiful.
  • Tom Butcher
    Tom Butcher Posts: 3,830
    I thought the Aston was the best bit of it - having had one of the Dinky toys with the ejector seat and all the other stuff when I was a kid it was a nice touch. In fact I liked the connections they made with the old films.
    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.
  • BeaconRuth
    BeaconRuth Posts: 2,086
    I enjoyed it but it's probably the first Bond film I've seen since Moonraker. :oops:

    Not sure I like the idea of Bond having a traumatic childhood and getting all bolshy/alcoholic about M allowing him to be shot and given up for dead. I'm sure all previous Bonds would have swaggered back in looking cool and there wouldn't have been any suggestion that Bond questioned his duty about leaving his colleague (Ronson?) dying. Also thought it was a bit light on seduction scenes - the whole thing only had one implied seduction (in the shower). I'm sure he should have ended up in bed with that female colleague at the end - they were milking her stunning looks all the way through the film.

    I did like the theme about ageing (which I suppose went with the 50th anniversary). A new Q who looks like he's still pubescent to go along with M threatened-with-retirement and Bond being past his best......... all good stuff. How is Bond going to carry on for another 50 years, though, now that they've showed his vulnerability to ageing?

    But I do find it hilarious that so many posters seem to find parts of the plot improbable. :lol::lol::lol:

    Ruth
    http://www.rutheyles.co.uk/
  • mfin
    mfin Posts: 6,729
    Cleat Eastwood wrote:
    Pretty poor - it was like they used all the money on the opening chase sequence and had to do with rainy scotland. Highlight for me was the henchman guys name on the credits - Tank Dong :D

    The house was in Surrey though wasn't it? Built and destroyed there and cgi'd to appear in Scotland... plenty of budget there all round Id reckon!
  • mfin
    mfin Posts: 6,729
    BeaconRuth wrote:
    I did like the theme about ageing (which I suppose went with the 50th anniversary). A new Q who looks like he's still pubescent to go along with M threatened-with-retirement and Bond being past his best......... all good stuff. How is Bond going to carry on for another 50 years, though, now that they've showed his vulnerability to ageing?

    Just change the Bond, new directors etc... think that chap who played Luther in the tv series is supposed to rumoured to be the next Bond. DC has only got one or 2 left unless he changes his mind and gets offered more films and money.
  • natrix
    natrix Posts: 1,111
    mfin wrote:
    The house was in Surrey though wasn't it?

    Yes, just down the road from me. FWIW I thought that the film was great, just don't take it too seriously. :D:D
    ~~~~~~Sustrans - Join the Movement~~~~~~

Categories