or Connect
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › SKYFALL Post-Release
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

SKYFALL Post-Release

post #1 of 1166
Thread Starter 
Some reviews are already popping up with spoilers, so might as well get this thread going.

I don't know too much of the spoilers except one bit which is the gunbarrel appearing at the end instead of the beginning, just like QOS. That is most annoying.
post #2 of 1166

I liked Kim Newman on Facebook, so I know he was at a screening of it a few days ago.

post #3 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post
I don't know too much of the spoilers except one bit which is the gunbarrel appearing at the end instead of the beginning, just like QOS. That is most annoying.

 

 

Goddammit, stop doing this!

post #4 of 1166
Thread Starter 
A very reassuring review by 007 Magazine: http://www.007magazine.co.uk/bond23/skyfall_review.htm

And it's relatively spoiler-free, so it's safe.
post #5 of 1166

Just to be on the safe non-spoiler side, I stop reading a few paragraphs in. However I do like the term serious romp.

post #6 of 1166
Thread Starter 
http://www.metro.us/newyork/entertainment/article/1154701--q-a-with-skyfall-director-sam-mendes
Quote:
James Bond will return, but Sam Mendes probably won't.

"It's been a fantastic experience, but it's been completely exhausting," says Mendes, who adds that he completed work on the film on October 9. "Do I want to do another one? I'm a shadow of my former self. (laughs) No, I don't know. I felt like everything I wanted to do with a Bond movie, I put into this film. So I would have to be convinced that I could do something that I loved and cared about as much if I was to do it again. I think the great risk of repeating oneself is that one doesn't have the great store of ideas that you have when you first tackle a subject."
post #7 of 1166
Quote:
James Bond will return, but Sam Mendes probably won't.

"It's been a fantastic experience, but it's been completely exhausting," says Mendes, who adds that he completed work on the film on October 9. "Do I want to do another one? I'm a shadow of my former self. (laughs) No, I don't know. I felt like everything I wanted to do with a Bond movie, I put into this film. So I would have to be convinced that I could do something that I loved and cared about as much if I was to do it again. I think the great risk of repeating oneself is that one doesn't have the great store of ideas that you have when you first tackle a subject."

 

Interesting.  I get this to an extent, but ultimately, it frustrates me when a director says that.  If it isn't written, how do they have any clue that they have exhausted ideas?  Either way, I don't mind if they move on and find a new director regardless of Mendes' successes.

post #8 of 1166

Well whatever else you can say about Mendes, he's not particularly a guy who repeats himself. It's hardly surprising that he wouldn't want to get sidelined into making sequels to something he already made, especially given that he's not generally an action/thriller guy.

post #9 of 1166

I didn't know where to put this but here goes.  EW just released their Bond edition on the iPad this morning so I ended up getting it and reading the piece.  At the very end of the article, Craig says something really freaking interesting:

 

"Everyone always moans, 'Where's Bond gone?  Where's all the jokes?'"  Craig says.  "Well, give us time!"  As he says this, he picks up an apple and takes a Richard Kiel-size bite out of it.  "I always had a plan in the back of my head that the third movie-if I ever got there-it would be time to take the gloves off and bring the gags back in.  That's why we have the Aston Martin DB5 from Goldfinger and the classic Bond theme in the new one.  That's what people come to see.  So that villain with the cat on his lap, let's bring him back!  Mike Myers took him, and we have to reclaim him."

 

A joke or a slip of the tongue of what they might do with Bond 24?

post #10 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Swoosh View Post

I didn't know where to put this but here goes.  EW just released their Bond edition on the iPad this morning so I ended up getting it and reading the piece.  At the very end of the article, Craig says something really freaking interesting:

 

"Everyone always moans, 'Where's Bond gone?  Where's all the jokes?'"  Craig says.  "Well, give us time!"  As he says this, he picks up an apple and takes a Richard Kiel-size bite out of it.  "I always had a plan in the back of my head that the third movie-if I ever got there-it would be time to take the gloves off and bring the gags back in.  That's why we have the Aston Martin DB5 from Goldfinger and the classic Bond theme in the new one.  That's what people come to see.  So that villain with the cat on his lap, let's bring him back!  Mike Myers took him, and we have to reclaim him."

 

A joke or a slip of the tongue of what they might do with Bond 24?

It sounds like a jab against people constantly bitching about how the franchise should go back to the tone of the originally films. 

post #11 of 1166
Thread Starter 
Been listening to the score by Thomas Newman all week. I think this is my favorite variation of the Severine theme.




Overall, I like the soundtrack so far, but I'm eager to see how it context with the film. With this track I can see this being played for the shower scene, but I could be way off. The soundtrack does not have the tracks in chronological order ("The Bloody Shot" plays way too late in the soundtrack, when it's supposed to be featured on the pre-title sequence), this is probably done so they don't spoil the flick. Well, I hope to arrange them in the proper order very soon.
post #12 of 1166

Spoiler Space...

 

 

I thought it really worked. The things that stopped it being brilliant were the winks at the audience, which just grate, and the way everything de-escalated throughout the film. It starts with an incredible action sequence and very high stakes, and by the end it's degenerated into Home Alone territory. You get a great start, and some good set pieces - I loved the China stuff and the Island stuff - but then it just collapses.

post #13 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by leederick View Post

Spoiler Space...

 

and by the end it's degenerated into Home Alone territory. You get a great start, and some good set pieces - I loved the China stuff and the Island stuff - but then it just collapses.

 

Yeah that was really bizarre, like Bond does Straw Dogs. I think it does kind of fall apart as it goes on, then the final couple of scenes are designed to send you out thinking you saw the greatest thing ever. 

 

Naomie Harris is unbelievable though, and I love the new Q. 

post #14 of 1166
I think y'all are going to have to redo your Knockout thread. It's absolutley fantastic.

It just seems to get the formula right. It's fun and at the same time as serious as a heart attack. It has a brilliant villain (with a pretty grim physical deformity). It has heart and genuine emotional stakes. It has some stunning action (there is a silhouetted fist fight that is stunning.)

But most importantly it's a Bond film. QOS lost that but Skyfall makes up for it. It's the best of both the new modern Bond and the older iterations. The winks are too fun to be grating (no disrespect leederick). At the end the credits begin with "Bond 50" and this really feels like some kind of 007 victory lap. I'm not even a huge Bond fan but it made me seriously consider slapping down money for the box set.

This will be talked about for years as a high point in the series I have no doubt.

Now watch it so we can all talk about it!
Edited by Mike's Pants - 10/27/12 at 4:00am
post #15 of 1166
Quote:
 At the end the credits begin with "Bond 50" and this really feels like some kind of 007 victory lap. I'm not even A huge Bond fan but it made me seriously consider slapping down money for the box set.

Oh boy, don't say that.  I was afraid of this.  Like you, I'm not a huge Bond fan.  I was introduced via the Brosnan films in high school but wasn't over the moon about them.  I liked him more than anything else. But, Craig's portrayal has flipped me more and more towards the franchise.  With the buzz about the film and Bond 50 advertising every where you go, I've been tempted to get that box set.  If I have the same reaction to Skyfall as you and to the end credits, money will be spent ASAP.

post #16 of 1166
Seriously, I'm off to buy a tuxedo right now!
post #17 of 1166

I've literally just returned from watching this. It was very good indeed and I didn't feel the running time at all (which is always a good indicator to me that I've enjoyed a movie). Do I think that it's the best James Bond movie ever? No. Personally, I don't even think that it's the best Daniel Craig Bond movie (I would place Casino Royale marginally higher on the list) but it contained enough of the things that I wanted to see in order to send me away happy. Whilst I do agree that nothing really tops the opening action sequence, I do still love the lower key ending set in a location with more personal ties to Bond. Bardem lived up to the hype and was absolutely fantastic (the final scene where he is literally seething with rage was absolutely terrifying!) and Craig was fantastic too (although there was no doubt that he would be). All of the supporting players are equally wonderful (special praise goes to Naomie Harris) and I'm extremely glad that Ralph Fiennes ends up where he does. Oh and it would be remiss of me not to mention the beautiful cinematography (the silhouette fight mentioned earlier in this thread is a particular highlight) and possibly my favourite Bond title sequence (which goes very well with Adele's title track).

 

I believe it's the fourth best Bond movie and also the second best movie I've seen in the theatre this year (after The Avengers).

post #18 of 1166

Mr. Saxon just wrote a lot of what I was going to write! Just returned from seeing this, liked it a lot, still like Casino Royale better, the cinematography in this one is amazing...

 

But as much as I like Skyfall, I couldn't shake off this nagging feeling throughout that it was cribbing heavily from other films, and it made it feel like bit of a Frankenstein's monster to me. It started with a minor thing: Bond commandeering a construction machine in the opening sequence. Just like Casino Royale. But then we have a villain that's physically deformed around the mouth, clearly psychotic, has a weird smirk or smile on his lips most of the time, and allows himself to be captured as part of a very elaborate plan. I was often getting a serious Joker vibe from Silva -- probably not helped by Mendes' recent praise of Nolan and The Dark Knight. And to stay on Silva and Bardem a bit, the film's running theme is old men trying to cope with and fit in a new age... No Country For Old Men? Heh. And the final confrontation at the Skyfall estate kept bringing me back to the final confrontation in the first Bourne. Also in the countryside with hunting rifles, if I remember correctly.

 

I know nothing's original and everything's inspired by something else... and this stuff usually doesn't annoy me this much, but it almost became too much for me during Skyfall. Which is doubly annoying as I felt the film got so much else right. I love that the villain had a very personal objective. I love that the film in general felt quite personal, digging deeper into both M and Bond as characters. I love how it tied their mother/son relationship into Bond's (and agents in general, it would seem) status as an orphan and put an extra bow on that tie with M's death near Bond's parents grave in the end. I also love that after seeing the movie, the theme song basically describes the final confrontation. And, again, the cinematography is fucking amazing in this film!

post #19 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrknudsen View Post

Mr. Saxon just wrote a lot of what I was going to write! Just returned from seeing this, liked it a lot, still like Casino Royale better, the cinematography in this one is amazing...

 

But as much as I like Skyfall, I couldn't shake off this nagging feeling throughout that it was cripping heavily from other films, and it made it feel like bit of a Frankenstein's monster to me. It started with a minor thing: Bond commandeering a construction machine in the opening sequence. Just like Casino Royale. But then we have a villain that's physically deformed around the mouth, clearly psychotic, has a weird smirk or smile on his lips most of the time, and allows himself to be captured as part of a very elaborate plan. I was often getting a serious Joker vibe from Silva -- probably not helped by Mendes' recent praise of Nolan and The Dark Knight. And to stay on Silva and Bardem a bit, the film's running theme is old men trying to cope with and fit in a new age... No Country For Old Men? Heh. And the final confrontation at the Skyfall estate kept bringing me back to the final confrontation in the first Bourne. Also in the countryside with hunting rifles, if I remember correctly.

 

 

Heh, that's fair. In fact,

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

when I'm trying to convince Mrs Pants to see a film I tell her it's by "the guy who directed Home Alone", it's a tradition.

 
So, of course, when they start kitting out the house she leans in and says, "Oh my God, it's Home Alone for adults!"

 

post #20 of 1166

spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers... spoilers...

 

Honest to god, when M was crushing the lightbulbs I was seriously expecting them to glue the glass to a ladder, or strategically place it in front of a window or at the top of some stairs.

 

 

Quote:
I think it does kind of fall apart as it goes on, then the final couple of scenes are designed to send you out thinking you saw the greatest thing ever. 

 

 

Yeah - I loved pretty much love everything up to Severine getting shot in the head. It kinda falls apart from there.

 

 

Quote:
The winks are too fun to be grating (no disrespect leederick).

 

Maybe I'm just sick of every other film doing this sort of ridiculous nods to the audience. If Naomie Harris had just sat down behind a desk I'd have been okay. Do we really Moneypenny line - wink, wink - do you see what we did audience. I can't stand that sort of fan-bait. Does it add anything? It just takes me out the film. And some of the jokes just undercut the tone, I think we were verging on Roger Moore territory in some places.

 

The cinematography was amazing - it just makes the China sequence. I also thought Berenice Marlohe was incredible, just the way her mask kept on slipping.

post #21 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by leederick View Post

 I also thought Berenice Marlohe was incredible, just the way her mask kept on slipping.

 

This, she did a considerable amount with what is essentially a damsel in distress role.

post #22 of 1166
Quote:

Originally Posted by leederick View Post

 

Maybe I'm just sick of every other film doing this sort of ridiculous nods to the audience. If Naomie Harris had just sat down behind a desk I'd have been okay. Do we really Moneypenny line - wink, wink - do you see what we did audience. I can't stand that sort of fan-bait. Does it add anything? It just takes me out the film. And some of the jokes just undercut the tone, I think we were verging on Roger Moore territory in some places.

 

I feel the same way. While I understand wanting to have all these throwbacks and references -- especially with the whole 50 year anniversary thing -- I felt that Casino Royale did a better job of establishing a new Bond that is his own character. Sure, Skyfall brought more to the table with establishing Bond as a new character in giving us a big peek into his background, but it also kept pulling him back into the old character and that character's setting. It felt kinda weird like that, and that's maybe another thing that made the movie feel slightly disjointed and like a Frankenstein's monster to me. It was trying to have it both ways.

post #23 of 1166

Okay, I'll be the odd man out and say that I actually liked those little nods to the audience and felt that they did add something. There were only around ten to fifteen people in my theatre (I went to the early morning showing) and there was still audible laughter and noises of approval from the audience when the Aston Martin from Goldfinger was introduced or when Moneypenny said her name. James Bond is one of the few franchises which can do things like that and the 50th anniversary is the perfect opportunity for it. I can understand why it might irk some people but, for this Bond fan, I appreciated those winks because they put a smile on my face. I'm looking forward to my father (who essentially introduced me to the Bond movies) watching Skyfall because I know he'll like those moments too.

post #24 of 1166

The difference probably is that I'm more a Craig-as-Bond fan than a Bond fan...

post #25 of 1166

As a "Craig-as-Bond fan rather than a Bond fan" (we'll have to think up a proper name for you people!), how did you find the humor, chrknudsen? Did you think it was "verging on Roger Moore territory" as leederick did?

post #26 of 1166

I didn't mind the humor as much, since it mostly came naturally from the situations. What irked me about the references and throwbacks is probably that they didn't come naturally from the situations nor this take on the character -- they were simply there because that's how it was in the old films. Like the Aston Martin. It's an in-your-face meta reference that takes me out of the narrative a bit by highlighting the fictional nature of it all. Instead of thinking "Bond has an Aston Martin -- I guess he's a collector or something", I'm thinking "oh look, it's that car that the Bond played by another actor X decades ago drove around in". It's probably a bit corny, but a line of dialogue like Bond telling M he inherited the car from his dad or something would have made it easier to swallow for me, since that would be a reason for the car being there. If the movie wasn't trying so hard to create a real and believable Bond character, this probably wouldn't be such an issue for me, but the movie keeps reminding me that this is just some fictional dude that's been played by a bunch of actors.

post #27 of 1166

spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers 

 

I was particularly thinking about the line on the underground - "he must be eager to get home", I think. Tense sequence, great stunt, and then you get this cut-away zoom and a naff gag which totally undermines it. Think there were a couple of other moments too, it just undercuts the tone. I can't see what it adds.

 

I liked the banter with Moneypenny - not sure it was appropriate in the middle of a life or death chase after seeing three dead colleagues and while one was bleeding to death.

 

EDIT: Chrknudsen's explanation about the the references and throwbacks puts what I feel very well. The fourth wall breaking just ruins the illusion the film's trying to create. It's not like it's just Bond, you get the same thing in every other franchise now.

post #28 of 1166

spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers 

 

And what happens with the disk?!?

 

The opening half hour had me expecting all out war on MI6 - large scale exposure and executions, and rifts with NATO allies - the works. But there's a youtube video with 5 names, one guy gets shot off camera. And that's it really... it's just in there to give a story motivation for M being retired and replaced, and resetting everything to the Connery setup. Maybe it was my expectations that were wrong, I liked the rumors that this was a film that took place after the villain's plan had succeeded. But there's a decrypted list of agents that just seems to get forgotten about once Silva's captured - do they even verbally reference that it's been recovered, no copies were made, and the situation is contained? Things contract into an attack on M and the film loses scope.

post #29 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrknudsen View Post

I didn't mind the humor as much, since it mostly came naturally from the situations. What irked me about the references and throwbacks is probably that they didn't come naturally from the situations nor this take on the character -- they were simply there because that's how it was in the old films. Like the Aston Martin. It's an in-your-face meta reference that takes me out of the narrative a bit by highlighting the fictional nature of it all. Instead of thinking "Bond has an Aston Martin -- I guess he's a collector or something", I'm thinking "oh look, it's that car that the Bond played by another actor X decades ago drove around in". It's probably a bit corny, but a line of dialogue like Bond telling M he inherited the car from his dad or something would have made it easier to swallow for me, since that would be a reason for the car being there. If the movie wasn't trying so hard to create a real and believable Bond character, this probably wouldn't be such an issue for me, but the movie keeps reminding me that this is just some fictional dude that's been played by a bunch of actors.

I have not seen the movie, but Bond won the car in Casino Royale.
post #30 of 1166
He did win the Aston Martin, but this is clearly supposed to be the same one from Goldfinger.

It doesn't bother me at all. The franchise has existed for fifty years -- it's allowed to have a bit of fun.
post #31 of 1166

It will be interesting to see everyone's reaction to this. Already the tone of the film seems to be the divisive. Maybe it's just a mileage thing.

The "He's keen" line was the one that got closest to rolling my eyes but the film has just generated too much good will. For me the balance was perfect. 

post #32 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Harford View Post


I have not seen the movie, but Bond won the car in Casino Royale.

 

You're right. I completely forgot about that.

 

This one has the ejector seat and macine guns, though. Is that something Bond added since he won it? Also, M seems to know about the ejector seat, which makes it seem like this is a car that was used by MI6 back in the old days. I guess that just makes it an even better example of this film trying to go someplace new with Bond, but at the same time pulling him back to the old films. Is it a new car or isn't it? It's kinda muddled.

post #33 of 1166

They're different cars. The car from Goldfinger and Skyfall is the DB5. In Casino Royale he wins a DBS V12.

post #34 of 1166

I think he wins the DB5 in Royale. The DBS is just issued to him from MI6, isn't it?

 

http://www.jamesbondlifestyle.com/product/aston-martin-db5

post #35 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrknudsen View Post

 

You're right. I completely forgot about that.

 

This one has the ejector seat and macine guns, though. Is that something Bond added since he won it? Also, M seems to know about the ejector seat, which makes it seem like this is a car that was used by MI6 back in the old days. I guess that just makes it an even better example of this film trying to go someplace new with Bond, but at the same time pulling him back to the old films. Is it a new car or isn't it? It's kinda muddled.

Well, there's been six years between Quantum of Solace and Skyfall so who knows how many adventures Bond's had with it, how many tweaks he's done to it since he won it in Casino Royale.

post #36 of 1166

Yeah you're right actually. Now I have a headache...

post #37 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Swoosh View Post

Well, there's been six years between Quantum of Solace and Skyfall so who knows how many adventures Bond's had with it, how many tweaks he's done to it since he won it in Casino Royale.

 

I like to imagine that he's had no assignments from MI6 and has just spent all his time in the garage pimping his ride...

post #38 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrknudsen View Post

 

I like to imagine that he's had no assignments from MI6 and has just spent all his time in the garage pimping his ride...

Absolutely!

post #39 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike's Pants View Post

Yeah you're right actually. Now I have a headache...

Sorry about that.  Still, it's an obvious call back to the past but in the context of Craig's tenure as Bond, we did see how he got the thing.  And since it's been six years, it's not out of the question he pimped this thing out...just waiting for the right time for it to be needed.

post #40 of 1166

Heh, no worries. Of all the continuities to pick apart the Bond one is the most fun.

 

Spoilers....

 

 

A question for those who've seen it. What did you think of the peak into Bond's past? I thought it was fun seeing that he had his own 'Alfred'.

post #41 of 1166

SPOILERS!!!!

 

Loved it.  Pierce  is still "my" Bond but damn that was a fun ride.  I said the same thing on Facebook but this film did a great job of striking the perfect balance between old and new.  

 

A couple of minor nitpicks.  The car is defiantly supposed to be the one from Royal as he makes a reference to all company cars being tagged (hence using his own).  So all the Goldfinger gadgetry was a bit confusing.  (Although like you guys I like to imagine he pimped it himself.)#

 

And I still hate the new Q.  He is far to much like Moss from the IT crowd for my liking.

 

 

However, Ralph Finnes as the new M is perfect.  

 

This film did a much better job of celebrating Bond than Die Another Day did.

post #42 of 1166
I think Bond just kept the car from Goldfinger. There have been a number of years between Quantum of Solace and this film -- there's no reason to think he hasn't had some variation of all those earlier adventures by this point.
post #43 of 1166
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Shape View Post

I think Bond just kept the car from Goldfinger. There have been a number of years between Quantum of Solace and this film -- there's no reason to think he hasn't had some variation of all those earlier adventures by this point.

That's kinda how I've been thinking it might be. That he had similar adventures during the six years between QOS and SF. Still, with this reboot I think it's safe to say it's the same car he won in CR, then throughout the years had it modified by Q branch.

post #44 of 1166

Now I really want the screenwriters to explain in an interview about that car because I need a definitive answer, damnit.

post #45 of 1166

I suppose the stuff Mendes has been saying about Skyfall ending up where Dr. No begins makes Skyfall a prequel, so the car isn't the car from Goldfinger. The car in Goldfinger is the car from Skyfall! I think Bond needs to end up with a time machine in the next outing for this chronology to make any sense.


Edited by chrknudsen - 10/28/12 at 3:39pm
post #46 of 1166

Fuck it. Put Daniel Craig in X-Men: Days of Futures Past and we'll clear everything up. THE ANSWER WILL BE OURS!


Edited by Mike's Pants - 10/28/12 at 2:20pm
post #47 of 1166

I think if the car didn't play such a part in the climax it wouldn't even bug me, but it's still a nitpick nothing more.

post #48 of 1166
Having the "continuity" run Casino Royale-Quantum of Solace, then Dr. No-thru-Die Another Day, and finally Skyfall makes it work. There are quirks, like Moneypenny, but who cares? There's nothing to say Q in Skyfall is Major Boothroyd. The dude could simply be replacing Cleese's Q.
post #49 of 1166
Thread Starter 

I remember at one point he was going to be called B (for Boothroyd) but somewhere along the line they finally decided just to call him Q.

post #50 of 1166

I'm just waiting for the next film to state that James Bond is from the planet Zeist.  Fuck continuity.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › SKYFALL Post-Release