James Bond: Skyfall

[angelstorm]

I didn't particularly like it to be honest - to me it seemed like a lot of the "bad guy's" plot had already been done in "The Dark Knight" . . .

[emilierovillain@gmail.com]

I can't wait to see it, is the Imax worth it?

[raj101]

yes, good for location shots and the stunts.

its good enough for a Bond movie, not a great movie of any genre but a rollickin ride plus a saggy middle with only sparing moments of tight script, characterisation or plot direction. That seems to be the going rate with a lot of releases these days anyway. This is certainly no Con Air, and its a full league below MI4 last New Year. One aspect of the dumbing down is that of course they REBOOTED the franchise, which was a genius move at the time, but stinks of anachronism now..if this is supposed to be 'younger' bond, then this weakens the references to the past Bond (M talking about flashy devices, for instance, which should be in the future). Minor point, which doesnt really matter if you just accept that its a loose reboot.

As well you might ask, 'Why?' many times over, after seeing the movie. Better to stick with 'Why not'. One should know by now not to engage the brain when watching a Bond movie anyway. Its not Bourne! Nor Bauer. Its not even Christopher Chance. Its Bond. And now hes Brute Bond, even less intelligent than before.

But is this the first time Bond fails his mission? Or does he fail?

Was Connery supposed to be cameoing in this movie? They sorely missed that opportunity.


Still, 8/10, good action flick, ignore the dumbness.

[kaholic]

excellent film, better than expected, more realistic than previous Bond's especially without exploding pens or laser armed Omega watches, I like the home made explosives using shotgun shells , 5 out of 5!

[Snowwhite]

finally was able to watch this and though it was brilliant, the action, the fighting everything was great. though i felt they could have put in a few more flashy cars and more cool gadgets but otherwise very good

8/10

[mohsin1066]

It was a decent effort but still nor Bond enough for me. They really need to take advantage of the fact that this is a fictional movie and they have their entire imagination at their disposal. Wasnt worth p*ying for. wished watched it in a preview!!

[lesilie]

fingers crossed, a must see one..

[Jayman]

Finally watched this evening - was afraid this was going to be the first 007 flick I'd miss seeing in the theatres.

Overall, I loved it! Chronological inconsistencies aside and especially the relocation of the beloved gunbarrel sequence (which I understand was originally meant to be at the start, but looked ridiculous back-to-back with the first scene), there were spectacular action sequences aplenty, many iconic moments and I'm happy to say that Mr. Craig is finally finding his feet somewhere between the sheer seriousness of Timothy Dalton and the charming wit of Sean Connery. It might still not be as much fun as the best of the 007 flicks, but at least the Q branch is back and the entertainment factor as high as ever.

Can't wait for the next chapter.

PS. Theatre No. 6 at The O2 had at least 20 light-bulbs burning throughout the movie. I enquired during Adele's solo whether the ushers could adjust this and was given a demonstration as to how the theatre light-switch worked (FYI - it's located on the wall at the entrance of the theatre). Alas, they could not help me nor another viewer who asked them the very same question about an hour into the movie - I know this because they gave him the exact same demo as me. Apparently 20 blazing light-bulbs is the minimum allowed for that particular screen. The funny thing is they told me that many people in the past had complained about the theatre being too dark. Yes, you read that right. In this crazy, topsy-turvy world of ours, the laws of science and video projection seem to be mutually exclusive. Needless to say I was livid.

From this moment on, theatre No. 6 is officially a no-go-zone for me, and should be for you as well if ambience is of prime importance.

[raj101]

mm they refer also to James getting too old for the job in this movie, so yes hes not supposed to be strictly a young bond anymore at all - chronology has been ignored blatantly, so Craig's stint is gradually becoming a blatant reboot with nods to the old movies.

I guess its the only way they could go if they didnt want to be shackled to chronological chains of the past. Everything changes eventually, Bonds no different I suppose.

[SocialFlutterBy]

Went to see this at the weekend and i was not overly impressed by it, as an action movie it's fine it's entertaining enough but it just did not feel like i was watching a Bond Movie, entertaining but not a Classic scraping in at a 6/10 for me x