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

SKYFALL Post-Release - Page 16

post #751 of 1198

Okay, I've seen Skyfall a second time, and I enjoyed it much more.  As I stated earlier Bond films have to sit with me a while before I can truly say whether or not I like them.  One question that was clearly answered upon second viewing (and with a bit of help from a VERY sharp-eyed forum member) was the one about Bond "letting" the Shanghai assassination happen.  Shortly before he arrives, M specifically orders Bond to find out who the assassin is working for, THEN kill him.  Not the other way around.  Also, Bond is not yet in the room with the assassin when the trigger is pulled.  There is still glass separating them.  Bond could not have prevented the victim being shot without shooting the assassin.  

 

The Aston Martin...well, Bond says "the problem with company cars is they have trackers."  This is a bit of a stretch, but he may be referring to the black government cars MI6 and other government types are using, not necessarily Q-Branch cars.  "Company cars" meaning "government cars."  Again, a stretch.  But possible.  Also, it could be the Aston is a holdover from Q-Branch's early days, before sophisticated tracking devices, and Bond simply got hold of one.  He knows all kinds of stuff, including what "M" really stands for and how to break into her apartment.  Maybe he's got some old Q-Branch stuff in storage...knew how to get it, and is hiding it for his own use.  Also, if his family heirlooms were almost all sold after his apparent death, chances are he lost the Aston he won in Casino Royale.  

 

When watching Casino Royale the other night, I noticed Bond seems to know not only the make but also the exact year model of Dimitrios' car...maybe Bond loves classic cars, especially Astons.  Maybe he's working on a collection.  
 

Main titles mean a hell of a lot more once you've seen the movie.  Song, too.  Nice thematic development.  

 

The score, which I thought was odd in some places upon first viewing (hearing), is really growing on me.  I still think David Arnold's last two scores were masterpieces (especially Quantum of Solace--he was practically channeling John Barry during certain sequences in that one), but Newman offers some great moments.  

 

I'm really digging Ralph Fiennes as M.  I'm SO GLAD things will be back to normal for next time.  Male M.  Moneypenny.  Q.  The cushy, old English office.  Welcome back, old friends.  

 

Enough of Bond Begins.  We've done it.  Went one film to far, maybe, but it worked!  Great.  Let's move on.  It's time to save the world.  

post #752 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBar View Post

I'm starting to feel wrong for seeing this thing five times already.

I didn't think it would be upon first seeing it, but this film is VERY re-watchable.

 

Those on the fence, like I was, ought to give Skyfall another go.  It's a very different Bond film, it's not perfect, and it confronts you with some real head-scratchers, but what works REALLY works.  It may not wind up in your top 3 or top 5, but it's one of the better entries.  

post #753 of 1198
Thread Starter 
Once again, Skyfall is NOT part of the Bond Begins story in CR/QOS.
post #754 of 1198

One other thing.  I believe it is Q who states Silva (I swore they were saying Sliver in the theatre. You know, Bond, Silver, Moneypenny...I had a theme going there) had been "planning this for years" and "wanted to be captured/wanted to be (t)here."  Okay, in general terms, this all could be true.  He's a hacker, and planned to hack MI6, and planned to confront and kill M.  Needed to do something to get her attention (or perhaps just wanted to do something to get her attention).  Did it.  Didn't necessarily know she'd be sending 007 after him, that 007 would find him in the exact way he was found, etc.  The broad plan could still be true...we don't need to make it match every little detail.  004 could have been assigned.  008 could have gone after him.*  Silva could have been captured on a boat or something.  The broad plan didn't have to follow everything down to the most minute detail.  He wants to mess with M, get into MI6 and corrupt their computer systems, confront M, and kill her.  Silva could have accomplished that in different ways.  We are just presented with one possibility in the movie.  

 

Also, you can plan something for a long time, and then decide it's time to go through with it...even if conditions aren't perfect.  Silva saw an opening with Bond.  Chose to act.  

 

He's got brains, money, equipment, and henchmen.  He can turn a lemon into lemonade if he wants.  Wouldn't be that difficult for someone like him.  

 

*Note to producers:  It's time to feature this guy.  Or time to come out and admit there is no 008 and M has just been using him as a boogeyman to spur 007 into action.  

post #755 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post

Once again, Skyfall is NOT part of the Bond Begins story in CR/QOS.

Thematically, I disagree.  In this film, we see the origins of (male) M and Moneypenny, and the reasons they don't operate in a high-tech headquarters.  Also, the film touches on Bond's past, we actualy see his "Alfred" and his childhood estate, and Bond is "orphaned" all over again.  He again has to prove himself and state for the record that he's ready to do his job.  A new status quo is reached by the end of Skyfall.  

 

The next film will (hopefully?) be a more traditional Bond film with all these fantastic new faces in the traditional Bond supporting roles.  Ralph Fiennes IS M.  So stoked!

post #756 of 1198
Thread Starter 
The reason I don't see it being a Bond Begins storyline is because from beginning to end Bond is already a professional 00 veteran who has grown a lot since CR/QOS. In reality it's more about Bond getting his groove back after a mission gone wrong and the ending is an indication of Bond having regained it. The ending isn't a statement about Bond now being Bond (like CR/QOS did) but there's also the Classic Bond elements back in place after being absent in the last two.
post #757 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBar View Post

I'm starting to feel wrong for seeing this thing five times already.

 

You're Daniel Craig's mom. Admit it.

post #758 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil View Post

Can't speak for everyone but MY Bond has never been some paragon of virtue. He's a paid killer, after all, not a vigilante superhero. I know we're used to seeing him mope around for whole movies after someone pretty dies lately, but I'll refer you to the conversation he has with M over Solange's murdered body in CASINO ROYALE.

 

Or this one...

 

"Murder?"

"EMPLOYMENT"

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PBar View Post

I'm starting to feel wrong for seeing this thing five times already.

 

While I don't have time to see it that many and there's too many other interesting films coming out soon, I will admit that I might give it a third go if the opportunity presents itself.

post #759 of 1198

I have a question, and I'm sorry if this has been brought up before.  What happened to Silva's other henchman?  After Skyfall goes kers-plodey, and the chopper goes down, we see Silva pick himself up off the ground, where he is clearly joined by presumably his last two surviving cronies.  One of them goes for an extended late night swim, and we never see or hear from the other one at all.  For all intents and purposes, he disappears.  Where did he go?

post #760 of 1198

He's the one that gets the running neck snap love from James, isn't he?

post #761 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlenomad View Post

One other thing.  I believe it is Q who states Silva (I swore they were saying Sliver in the theatre. You know, Bond, Silver, Moneypenny...I had a theme going there) had been "planning this for years" and "wanted to be captured/wanted to be (t)here."  Okay, in general terms, this all could be true.  He's a hacker, and planned to hack MI6, and planned to confront and kill M.  Needed to do something to get her attention (or perhaps just wanted to do something to get her attention).  Did it.  Didn't necessarily know she'd be sending 007 after him, that 007 would find him in the exact way he was found, etc.  The broad plan could still be true...we don't need to make it match every little detail.  004 could have been assigned.  008 could have gone after him.*  Silva could have been captured on a boat or something.  The broad plan didn't have to follow everything down to the most minute detail.  He wants to mess with M, get into MI6 and corrupt their computer systems, confront M, and kill her.  Silva could have accomplished that in different ways.  We are just presented with one possibility in the movie.  

Also, you can plan something for a long time, and then decide it's time to go through with it...even if conditions aren't perfect.  Silva saw an opening with Bond.  Chose to act.  

He's got brains, money, equipment, and henchmen.  He can turn a lemon into lemonade if he wants.  Wouldn't be that difficult for someone like him.  

*Note to producers:  It's time to feature this guy.  Or time to come out and admit there is no 008 and M has just been using him as a boogeyman to spur 007 into action.  

Bingo
post #762 of 1198

 

 

We need a Title Sequence Knockout, just so I can watch this trippy shit dominate it.

 

 


Edit to Add:

 

Mendes wanted the gun barrel at the beginning, but it didn't work there.  A well reasoned explanation.

 

http://www.empireonline.com/News/story.asp?nid=35699


Edited by Doc Phibes - 11/14/12 at 8:27am
post #763 of 1198

I don't buy it. He didn't realize his opening shot looked too much like the gun barrel until he got to the editing room? Bullshit.
 

post #764 of 1198

Me either. The way the music sting comes up as Bond steps into view-- I assumed that opening shot was consciously aping the gun barrel. That's not a shot you would plan if you "always wanted" the gun barrel at the front of the picture. 

post #765 of 1198

Actually, I thought the opening shot was kinda aping the final shot of the Casino Royale opening where we see a silhouette of Craig walking slowly into a close-up.

 

That... mixed with AI with the out-of-focus silhouette making Bond look alien.

post #766 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil View Post

I don't buy it. He didn't realize his opening shot looked too much like the gun barrel until he got to the editing room? Bullshit.
 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slim View Post

Me either. The way the music sting comes up as Bond steps into view-- I assumed that opening shot was consciously aping the gun barrel. That's not a shot you would plan if you "always wanted" the gun barrel at the front of the picture. 

 

I have to agree with both of you here. The twenty-two previous directors managed to avoid compromising the gun barrel sequence with their opening shot and, as a self-confessed Bond fan, Mendes knew what to expect.

 

I want that sequence back at the start of the next movie.

post #767 of 1198

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

Actually, I thought the opening shot was kinda aping the final shot of the Casino Royale opening where we see a silhouette of Craig walking slowly into a close-up.

 

That... mixed with AI with the out-of-focus silhouette making Bond look alien.

 

No, it's a Slender Man reference.

post #768 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Benenson View Post


Bingo

I'd love for M to threaten to assign a different 00 to the next mission. It's a feature of the books, and a key part of Bond's character. The second he slips or starts to slow down, he knows his replacement is waiting in the wings.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Phibes View Post

 

 

We need a Title Sequence Knockout, just so I can watch this trippy shit dominate it.

 

 


Edit to Add:

 

Mendes wanted the gun barrel at the beginning, but it didn't work there.  A well reasoned explanation.

 

http://www.empireonline.com/News/story.asp?nid=35699

Skyfall's titles are some of the best in the series, but I'm still not sure if they're Kleinman's best. The man is the Maurice Binder for a new age.

 

I just wish we could  get non silhouetted nudity back. Binder is frequently said to have used silhouettes to hide nudity, but the fact is that many of his title sequences feature women who are only minimally "hidden".

 

I am fine now with the gun barrel at the end. I think it needs to be at the end from this point forward. They had a chance to move it to the beginning with Skyfall and chose not to. Bond is no longer "beginning", he's begun, and the gun barrel is where it is. Let's hope it is there to stay.

post #769 of 1198

Just popping in to say that the sequence where Bond is tracking the sniper inside of the office building, with the glass walls reflecting the neon signage, completely blew me away with how amazing it looked. Maybe I'm just a filthy pleb who doesn't understand cinematography, and I definitely don't have to the vocabulary to describe what I find so engaging about it, but I thought it deserved a mention.

post #770 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.L. View Post

Just popping in to say that the sequence where Bond is tracking the sniper inside of the office building, with the glass walls reflecting the neon signage, completely blew me away with how amazing it looked. Maybe I'm just a filthy pleb who doesn't understand cinematography, and I definitely don't have to the vocabulary to describe what I find so engaging about it, but I thought it deserved a mention.


I thought it was very clever how the reflections were used to generate tension. Usually people are hiding in shadow. The whole film is constructed of action beats we may have seen before in other places, but presented in ways that make them seem fresh and vital.

post #771 of 1198
Thread Starter 
The whole neon/glass room felt like something out of a Hitchcock film. SKYFALL really feels old school in that regard, more thriller than action which is what Bond should be. A Bond film targeted for adults instead of teens, and look how that's paying off.
post #772 of 1198

I was definitely getting Rear Window vibes during that scene.

 

When that credits sequence popped up in the film I knew I was in for a great movie. It just fucking clicked! I was smiling so wide in the theater.

post #773 of 1198
Thread Starter 
Quote:


I hope EON learns after CR and SF to never replace Daniel Kleinman, no matter what director insists on bringing his own crew. Kleinman has done such an excellent job with SF. I think he went a bit too absurd with TND, TWINE and DAD mostly because the women did those silly moves he had them perform, I forget what that style was called but it was tacky. Still, I admired how he would incorporate visual elements as motifs of the films' theme and plot. It's very relieving to have Kleinman back, especially after MK12's title sequence for QOS being a whole lot of nothing.
post #774 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Harford View Post


I thought it was very clever how the reflections were used to generate tension. Usually people are hiding in shadow. The whole film is constructed of action beats we may have seen before in other places, but presented in ways that make them seem fresh and vital.


Arguably my favorite scene in the film. No dialoge at all during the Shanghai sequence, and the cinematography is just gorgeous. Deakins really was having a ball.

post #775 of 1198

Definitely one of the best looking Bond films ever.  Deakins is a God of a Cinematographer.  Pure and simple.   Loved this movie and definitely seeing it again.

 

Bardem is such a powerhouse.  I noticed how he stayed in character as he's chucking grenades into the house.  He did this little twist with his wrist.  So subtle - so brilliant. And his death scene - awesome.  He was just soooo annoyed and pissed.  Also noticed how Ralph Fiennes is starting to resemble Peter Cushing; especially in profile. And Ben Whishaw as Q?  Brilliant.  So many brilliant moments.  

 

This movie is a fucking joy to watch.  

post #776 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Harford View Post

I am fine now with the gun barrel at the end. I think it needs to be at the end from this point forward. They had a chance to move it to the beginning with Skyfall and chose not to. Bond is no longer "beginning", he's begun, and the gun barrel is where it is. Let's hope it is there to stay.

 

I feel like Artax drowning in the swamp of sadness reading this. Out of everyone on these boards, I figured you and Mr. Stockslivevan would be with me on fighting for it to return to the beginning (as you both seem to be the biggest Bond fans), Doc. Don't let me down! 

post #777 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Harford View Post

I'd love for M to threaten to assign a different 00 to the next mission. It's a feature of the books, and a key part of Bond's character. The second he slips or starts to slow down, he knows his replacement is waiting in the wings.

 

Ah yes, the still unseen 008 (William Timothy)!

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post

 

I feel like Artax drowning in the swamp of sadness reading this. Out of everyone on these boards, I figured you and Mr. Stockslivevan would be with me on fighting for it to return to the beginning (as you both seem to be the biggest Bond fans), Doc. Don't let me down! 

 

I would prefer it return to the beginning as well.

post #778 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post

I hope EON learns after CR and SF to never replace Daniel Kleinman, no matter what director insists on bringing his own crew. Kleinman has done such an excellent job with SF. I think he went a bit too absurd with TND, TWINE and DAD mostly because the women did those silly moves he had them perform, I forget what that style was called but it was tacky. Still, I admired how he would incorporate visual elements as motifs of the films' theme and plot. It's very relieving to have Kleinman back, especially after MK12's title sequence for QOS being a whole lot of nothing.

Just noticed that after Bond goes down the plug hole and the bleeding targets appear there's a naked drowned woman who looks an awful lot like Vesper. Nice touch.
post #779 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by S.D. Bob Plissken View Post

 

Ah yes, the still unseen 008 (William Timothy)!

 

 

I would prefer it return to the beginning as well.

 

Oops. I missed out the guy who has been diligently writing up Bond articles for the main site in my list of big Bond fans. Apologies Bob!

post #780 of 1198

None necessary, good sir.

post #781 of 1198

So, I'm a bit amazed that I loved this so much. A James Bond movie, one of my favorites of the years? Directed by Sam Mendes??? Whaaaaaaaaaat?

At times, I worried Skyfall was trying to do too much at once; a simultaneous regression and progression, a 50th anniversary homage tour and a defense of the franchise, of its very existence as a movie (put into a-touch-too literal context during M's inquisition sequence, but how fun was it waiting for Bardem to show up behind her, ready to blow her away?). 

The most amazing thing about Skyfall is how it manages to do all of this in a wonderful self-aware style without climbing up its own ass or ribbing you too hard in the elbows. I love how weak Bond is in this and I was 100% more invested in the character at the very suggestion that he wasn't up for handling all the action. I've heard a few people complain about the old, grizzled Bond sits in direct contrast with the fresh, new Bond we were being set up for in Craig's last two outings. To that I say, who cares? It's very much besides the point. The old, outdated Bond speaks more to the series, and to England, and to the type of work Bond is doing than anything else. But having him weakened makes him so much more human, which allows you to invest in him so much more. He's still an unstoppable super-spy (dropping through a frozen lake in the middle of a Scotland night and not even a touch of the shakes, eh Bond?) but at least when he's struggling to hang on to a Shanghai elevator for a thousand floors, it allows for a touch more suspense. I loved how silent that sequence was in general. And I loved how it was shot.

And that's the other thing. This movie is gorgeous. The Scotland stuff is especially beautiful, particularly when Skyfall is set ablaze against the sky in the background. 

I just loved how the movie pulls Bond (and the franchise) apart piece by piece only to reestablish itself in the end, firmly. The most satisfying, comforting feeling imaginable from a Bond movie, which is strange, because although I like the series, I"m not a fanatic like some of you guys. But it is comforting to know that JAMES BOND WILL RETURN (love that we got that right away after the gun barrel finale). 

post #782 of 1198

Glad you enjoyed it, man!

 

Despite all of the great things in this movie, the scene I think about most is Bond running through the traffic whilst M reads Tennyson's Ulysses. It worked much better than any loud, exciting rock music could have done. Then again, I'm an English Lit grad...

post #783 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post

 

Despite all of the great things in this movie, the scene I think about most is Bond running through the traffic whilst M reads Tennyson's Ulysses. It worked much better than any loud, exciting rock music could have done. Then again, I'm an English Lit grad...

 

Eh, I could have done without that bit. It felt too cribbed from Chris Nolan. I liked SKYFALL best when it deviated from the Nolan playbook Mendes was clearly referencing. 

post #784 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastian OB View Post

 

Eh, I could have done without that bit. It felt too cribbed from Chris Nolan. I liked SKYFALL best when it deviated from the Nolan playbook Mendes was clearly referencing. 

 

Pah. I sentence you to six years of T.S Elliot, sir!

post #785 of 1198

I meant more the editing style in which it was delivered. Elliot is a fine writer. Didn't he write one of the expanded universe STAR WARS novels?

post #786 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastian OB View Post

I meant more the editing style in which it was delivered. Elliot is a fine writer. Didn't he write one of the expanded universe STAR WARS novels?

You're absolutely right. He co-wrote the awesome STAR WARS novel "Ghosts Of The Wasteland" with some dude called Charles Dickens, I think.

post #787 of 1198

Probably my favorite Bond (low bar, as I'm with Lauren in finding most of the series dumb as toast).  Just fucking gorgeous throughout, and great stuff from Craig, Bardem and Dench.  I was a tiny bit put off by how the movie was simultaneously an "old Bond gets his groove back" picture and a "Bond Begins" story.  Silva just shooting his way into the hearing did feel a little pedestrian, and the references and elbow-nudging were not to my taste (could've done without the DB5 entirely, much less the completely misplaced ejector seat call out), but it would have been worth it for the Hong Kong sequence alone.  It didn't leave me hungry for more, though, as having enjoyed the Craig films more for how they eschewed the formula, the promise of returning to it was less than tantalizing.  

post #788 of 1198

It's interesting how many people still see this movie as part of the Bond Begins storyline featured in Craig's previous two entries. If anything, I'd say Skyfall was more MI6 Begins, as Craig's Bond is quite clearly fully formed at the beginning of the movie. I think Mr S put it right earlier in the thread where he declared it a Bond Getting His Groove Back movie.  

post #789 of 1198

I think too much is being made about this being another "Bond Begins". CASINO ROYALE was "Bond Begins", this is just putting a few of the old familiar elements in place because, why not? I don't think having a Moneypenny in the new Bondverse means "now he's Bond!" or that suddenly we're going to have invisible cars and space lasers. I feel like they're putting things back in with the intent of having an organic use for them, rather than just for the sake of formula. 

post #790 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastian OB View Post

Elliot is a fine writer. Didn't he write one of the expanded universe STAR WARS novels?

Only the best ones.

post #791 of 1198

It's both Bond Begins and Gets His Groove Back.  It's weird that Bond is essentially facing retirement while MI6 is in these nascent stages, and both end the movie looking forward...to the status quo from 40 years ago?  It's to Mendes and co.'s credit the extent to which this actually works, but it's a strange beast in that it feels in many ways like a thoroughly modern prequel to a series of movies set in the 60s.

 

Putting Moneypenney back in isn't the half of it.  There's also establishing a new Q, a new M, the classic-style headquarters and really tonally off winking stuff with the Aston Martin (compared to the nicely oblique "shaken, not stirred" moment).

post #792 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post

 

Putting Moneypenney back in isn't the half of it.  There's also establishing a new Q, a new M, the classic-style headquarters and really tonally off winking stuff with the Aston Martin (compared to the nicely oblique "shaken, not stirred" moment).

 

I'll be really surprised if we see the classic style HQ or the Aston Martin (it did get destroyed, after all) in the next film. I think those were tips of the hat for the sake of Bond's 50th, nothing more. 

post #793 of 1198

All of Craig's movies seem to change the general decor of MI6 (though I don't think we see it in Casino Royale).  In Quantum, the place looked like an Apple Store or something.

post #794 of 1198
Thread Starter 
As I said, the Bond Begins thing doesn't apply because Bond throughout this film is already a professional veteran 00 agent. He has grown up a lot since the last adventure we saw him in, no longer being overly impulsive, arrogant and making dumb mistakes. If this were a continuation of Bond Begins he would have smashed his way through the glass doors after Patrice half cocked. Craig finally plays a fully formed 007 here. As others said, it's just all the other elements finally being introduced, transitioning from the Vauxhall Cross era to the familiar Regents Park setting.
post #795 of 1198

Right, so much of it is about settling back into the familiar.  I'm not talking about Bond's character, but the overall feel of the film.

 

Whether it's for the 50th or whatever, there's something off about a movie that is so much about looking backward (both through emphasis on Bond's increasing decrepitude and the toll of his/M's actions over time, and broad winks to the series' history) that it feels weird to end on the note of "that's everything in place!  Next Mission!"

post #796 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post

Right, so much of it is about settling back into the familiar.  I'm not talking about Bond's character, but the overall feel of the film.

 

Whether it's for the 50th or whatever, there's something off about a movie that is so much about looking backward (both through emphasis on Bond's increasing decrepitude and the toll of his/M's actions over time, and broad winks to the series' history) that it feels weird to end on the note of "that's everything in place!  Next Mission!"

 

Fair point, but at the same time I think the movie ends in a way that honors that entire "looking backwards" approach. When the film ends, it has actually traveled backwards and left us in a familiar place with Bond, one where it can comfortably stop gazing at Bond's inner workings as a character and as a man and get us back to the delights of the older Bond films. For me, the acknowledgment of the 50th anniversary coupled with the "James Bond will return" quote suggests that we're now going to get back to the womanizing, exploding pen-wielding Bond, which I'm totally happy with (even though I liked seeing the Craig deconstruction of the character).

post #797 of 1198
Thread Starter 
Probably, on a more modern note. But it would be fun to see a Craig film more jovial and for once not play with the "this time it's personal, again" mantra that has been done three straight films in a row (five if you count Brosnan's latter two entries). There's nothing wrong with returning to the formula if you have the right filmmakers behind it. Hopefully, EON doesn't cock that up.
post #798 of 1198

I can't see Craig as jovial... particularly as he's getting older.  I think the films can strike a balance with jovial while holding onto Craig's sensibility.  Have the wry/sly stuff pop up here and there, but not take over the performance.

post #799 of 1198
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

I can't see Craig as jovial... particularly as he's getting older.  I think the films can strike a balance with jovial while holding onto Craig's sensibility.  Have the wry/sly stuff pop up here and there, but not take over the performance.

Wasn't talking about Craig, I mean a more jovial film. A lighthearted entry for Craig. He can still play Bond fairly the same as he did in SF, without the drunk/disillusioned/pill popping parts.
post #800 of 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by agracru View Post

 

Fair point, but at the same time I think the movie ends in a way that honors that entire "looking backwards" approach. When the film ends, it has actually traveled backwards and left us in a familiar place with Bond, one where it can comfortably stop gazing at Bond's inner workings as a character and as a man and get us back to the delights of the older Bond films. For me, the acknowledgment of the 50th anniversary coupled with the "James Bond will return" quote suggests that we're now going to get back to the womanizing, exploding pen-wielding Bond, which I'm totally happy with (even though I liked seeing the Craig deconstruction of the character).

 

And again, it seems strange to go back to that version of Bond, when Skyfall puts so much emphasis on Bond as over-the-hill.  It feels like a regression.

 

I don't want to seem like I'm harping on this, because my point is that the movie actually navigates this weird territory fairly deftly.  And my view is also colored by having no real affection for the classic formula.

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