Skyfall Discussion (spoilers allowed)

[bjmdds]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/ ... es-Skyfall

[FormerBondFan]

Totally agreed! Moonraker is just great escapist fun. Roger Moore handles the humorous situations in such a calm and cool way, that he makes it all look almost normal.

The humor in O is rather silly.

I personally don't find the humour in Octopussy to be any more sillier than Moonraker. And as Kristatos mentioned, a little editing can easily make it a more reasonably straight Bond thriller.

Other than the jungle scene with the Tarzan yell, I'm not too sure as to what other humorous moments you found to be more silly than the ones in Moonraker. But again, if you find some of Moore's shenanigans to be rather bizarre, then that's fine, I can't argue with your opinion. Even though I don't mind Moore's campy humour, I can still understand why some people may not be into it.

Moore's Bond are what they are, and I enjoy them.

[stockslivevan]

When they logged into his computer it overtook the MI6 computer and nothing was found except Q cursing, S--T, S--T,S--T, S--T, 4 times. What was the point of debasing the language in a Bond film to vulgarity by the way? F--K by Dench, S--T by Q, why?

Cursing in Bond films isn't new. 40 years ago Live and Let Die in fact subtly slipped in an F-bomb with J.W. Pepper "what the fu-"*VRROOM*. Then there's Mrs. Bell's "holy s**t".

Then you have Connery calling Tiffany Case "bitch".

[English Agent]

When they logged into his computer it overtook the MI6 computer and nothing was found except Q cursing, S--T, S--T,S--T, S--T, 4 times. What was the point of debasing the language in a Bond film to vulgarity by the way? F--K by Dench, S--T by Q, why?

Cursing in Bond films isn't new. 40 years ago Live and Let Die in fact subtly slipped in an F-bomb with J.W. Pepper "what the fu-"*VRROOM*. Then there's Mrs. Bell's "holy s**t".

Then you have Connery calling Tiffany Case "bitch".

Tim Dalton....said 'piss off' and 'watch the birdie you Bas***d'....in LTK

[carl stromberg]

When they logged into his computer it overtook the MI6 computer and nothing was found except Q cursing, S--T, S--T,S--T, S--T, 4 times. What was the point of debasing the language in a Bond film to vulgarity by the way? F--K by Dench, S--T by Q, why?

Cursing in Bond films isn't new. 40 years ago Live and Let Die in fact subtly slipped in an F-bomb with J.W. Pepper "what the fu-"*VRROOM*. Then there's Mrs. Bell's "holy s**t".

Then you have Connery calling Tiffany Case "bitch".

Tim Dalton....said 'piss off' and 'watch the birdie you Bas***d'....in LTK

Sir Roger told a snake to hiss off which is nearly a swear word.

[The Saint 007]

In A View To A Kill, there's a deleted scene where Stacey gets fired by Mr. Howe, and she's really upset. So when Roger is trying to comfort her, he says something like "Well, life is short. I mean, f**k him. Who needs him?"

Now I know that doesn't officially count for the use of strong language in a Bond film, since it's only a deleted scene, and Roger was obviously fooling around. But nevertheless, I still found it kind of funny, and even a bit surprising as well.

[The Saint 007]

Totally agreed! Moonraker is just great escapist fun. Roger Moore handles the humorous situations in such a calm and cool way, that he makes it all look almost normal.

The humor in O is rather silly.

I personally don't find the humour in Octopussy to be any more sillier than Moonraker. And as Kristatos mentioned, a little editing can easily make it a more reasonably straight Bond thriller.

Other than the jungle scene with the Tarzan yell, I'm not too sure as to what other humorous moments you found to be more silly than the ones in Moonraker. But again, if you find some of Moore's shenanigans to be rather bizarre, then that's fine, I can't argue with your opinion. Even though I don't mind Moore's campy humour, I can still understand why some people may not be into it.

Moore's Bond are what they are, and I enjoy them.

Well, I'm glad to hear you still enjoy Moore's Bond films despite some of the silliness, FormerBondFan.

[FormerBondFan]

Totally agreed! Moonraker is just great escapist fun. Roger Moore handles the humorous situations in such a calm and cool way, that he makes it all look almost normal.

The humor in O is rather silly.

I personally don't find the humour in Octopussy to be any more sillier than Moonraker. And as Kristatos mentioned, a little editing can easily make it a more reasonably straight Bond thriller.

Other than the jungle scene with the Tarzan yell, I'm not too sure as to what other humorous moments you found to be more silly than the ones in Moonraker. But again, if you find some of Moore's shenanigans to be rather bizarre, then that's fine, I can't argue with your opinion. Even though I don't mind Moore's campy humour, I can still understand why some people may not be into it.

Moore's Bond are what they are, and I enjoy them.

Well, I'm glad to hear you still enjoy Moore's Bond films despite some of the silliness, FormerBondFan.

The silliness does fit Moore. After all, he did intend to differentiate from Sean's portrayal and The Saint role.

I can't see Pierce doing all of those campiness. Yes, he does have some of Moore's qualities, but he did not overdo them. I don't consider him light-heart by any means. The way I see him is that he's an individual who's trying to adapt into the post-Cold War world where it's less violent. Even though he's less violent than Tim's Bond, but that's just the outer shell. In the inside....it's a different story as he's still has the killer-side he obtained as a "relic of the Cold War". Also, there's a sensitivity side added Pierce's Bond as shown in TND and especially TWINE. In a way, Pierce is either a sensitive Bond or a silent killer Bond.

[007]

I don't really like any of Craig's films but this was actually the most boring one to sit through. At least QoS had the grace to be twenty minutes long. The last third of the film is tedious. Didn't understand Bond letting Sévérine die and then suddenly regaining his sharpshooting skills about five seconds later. I don't know why the early reviews were so gushing. It must be because we haven't had a Bond film for a long time. There were a lot of silly moments and jokes too. If Brosnan had made this film in 1999 the Craig fanboys would still be picking it apart. And the actress playing Moneypenny was TERRIBLE. Really bad casting.

[bjmdds]

Horrific casting double 0........horrific.......the film was a snoozefest.

[carl stromberg]

Welcome gklein

gklein wrote

Daniel Craig is a great actor. However... Half the fun of a Bond movie used to be simply watching Bond be Bond. Unfortunately, this is not so with Craig's emo Bond. In one scene with Q, when Bond is asked what he sees in an artistic picture, the uncultured, emo Craig-Bond offers in put-out fashion "a bloody big ship". The more fun Bonds of the past would have come back with something completely unexpected that showed wit AND greater observation skills - perhaps noting the picture was a fake because of some detail. And he would have done it with a bit of wink. Similarly, during the word association game, Bond d**n near howls and hisses. Craig would make a better villain than a Bond.

I agree. It's so tedious spending 3 hours with Craig as "Bond".

[The Saint 007]

I agree, FormerBondFan, that humour really worked well for Moore. The series was going in the humorous direction by the later Connery films, and Moore simply carried on with it. Which is probably why I find going from the Connery era to the Moore era to be the easiest/smoothest transition.

Brosnan can be pretty good with humour, but like you said, he doesn't go as far as Moore. Some people say Brosnan is sort of a balance between Connery and Moore, while adding some more emotion, and adapting to the post-Cold War world. Here's a nice review of GoldenEye which discusses all of that:

[Captain Arthurs]

Many have said Skyfall is a strange film. It's strangeness can be seen as positive or a negative. I see it as a negative but those fans of the the new type of Bond films see it as a positive thing.

I'm not such a big fan of Craig because he lacks the looks, height and charm to be Bond. He looks awful in the film and plays Bond like Grant Mitchell ("all I see is a big ship duuuhhh did you spill my pint......") with his mumbling voice which is upper class one minute and cockney the next. He tries his best but he does not have the skills to play Bond.

I though Skyfall was rather flat and slow, with lots of scenes in the dark. There is not much action with lots of scenes of Dench and Craig and others talking gobbydeegook in the dark or in a field. It seems like a low budget British gangster film or a British TV drama. The end is utterly tedious.

Again we have a strange take on the Bond character. He is now an aged agent after being a rookie Bond a few years before. This is an alternate universe separate from the novels and the pre-Craig Bond film series. A new Bond character has been invented. He has a new backstory and owns a Scottish house (or did own as it was sold because they thought he was dead) with a housekeeper played by the legend Albert Finney who turns in a very strange performance. I know that Eon are trying to put a new modern twist on Bond but I do not recognise the character from the series of Fleming post war adventure novels and the colourful films of the likes of Moore and Connery. Skyfall is just like some modern mediocre spy thriller that has the James Bond brand attached to it.

It was good to see Moneypenny back although she is played by a rather bland actress who has a series of tedious scenes worth Craig - many in the dark. And of course the producers could not resist shoehorning in another crappy made up backstory for a character: ooohhh my names "Eve Moneypenny". Although she did get to shoot Daniel Craig's Bond which has always been an ambition of mine.

Thank god Dench's M is gone boring me to death with her inflated role and boring scenes with Craig over the past 3 films.

Q was not too bad although he should be played by an older actor. When he was talking to Bond in the art gallery he looked more like Bond because he looked fairly normal in contrast to Craig whom looked like a ogre.

It's a shame there are not Bond girls or henchmen anymore. The girl in it was not in for long and Craig let thingybob in the blonde wig kill her before doing a Steven Seagal and killing all the guards and calling the army in.

At least there were a few jokes from Craig and it seems the old M-Q-Moneypenny Bond template may be back in place. But any future film will be hampered by Craig and the obsession with making experimental Bond films.

Casino Royale was a competent adaption the novel. I did not like it but it seems to be well regarded still by those who enjoyed it. But I think Skyfall is such an awful film and after the excitement has subsided I think it will be seen as a poor Bond film in years to come.

[bjmdds]

I agree with the good Captain. SK-AWFUL will not be looked at with such endearment by the minions in the future. It is an awful Bond impersonator that still does not know which direction it is headed in but with Mendes back he will finish the destruction of the iconic character himself once and for all........and then.......resurrection with Cavil?

[FormerBondFan]

It is an awful Bond impersonator that still does not know which direction it is headed in but with Mendes back he will finish the destruction of the iconic character himself once and for all........and then.......resurrection with Cavil?

Resurrection with Cavill? Forget that. Skyfall had made history so the services from freaks & weirdos will be required when DC retires and NO EXCEPTIONS!!!!!!!!!!

[bjmdds]

IF Cavill is the chosen one, FBF will not accept him as a correction to the egregious mistake by Eon and then the weirdos and freaks avatars can be replaced, but that is 6 years away?

[FormerBondFan]

IF Cavill is the chosen one, FBF will not accept him as a correction to the egregious mistake by Eon and then the weirdos and freaks avatars can be replaced, but that is 6 years away?

Once history is made within the DC era, then there's no point of supporting the series anymore. What's left is sending the freaks and NO EXCEPTIONS. The freaks & weirdos are here to stay...........PERMANENTLY.

Sean Connery 1962 - 1967, 1971, 1983
George Lazenby 1969
Roger Moore 1973 - 1985
Timothy Dalton 1987 - 1989
Pierce Brosnan 1995 - 2002
Daniel Craig 2006 - 2016
Marilyn Manson (or some other freak) 2018 - Onwards

[Omega]

Many have said Skyfall is a strange film. It's strangeness can be seen as positive or a negative. I see it as a negative but those fans of the the new type of Bond films see it as a positive thing.

I'm not such a big fan of Craig because he lacks the looks, height and charm to be Bond. He looks awful in the film and plays Bond like Grant Mitchell ("all I see is a big ship duuuhhh did you spill my pint......") with his mumbling voice which is upper class one minute and cockney the next. He tries his best but he does not have the skills to play Bond.

I though Skyfall was rather flat and slow, with lots of scenes in the dark. There is not much action with lots of scenes of Dench and Craig and others talking gobbydeegook in the dark or in a field. It seems like a low budget British gangster film or a British TV drama. The end is utterly tedious.

Again we have a strange take on the Bond character. He is now an aged agent after being a rookie Bond a few years before. This is an alternate universe separate from the novels and the pre-Craig Bond film series. A new Bond character has been invented. He has a new backstory and owns a Scottish house (or did own as it was sold because they thought he was dead) with a housekeeper played by the legend Albert Finney who turns in a very strange performance. I know that Eon are trying to put a new modern twist on Bond but I do not recognise the character from the series of Fleming post war adventure novels and the colourful films of the likes of Moore and Connery. Skyfall is just like some modern mediocre spy thriller that has the James Bond brand attached to it.

It was good to see Moneypenny back although she is played by a rather bland actress who has a series of tedious scenes worth Craig - many in the dark. And of course the producers could not resist shoehorning in another crappy made up backstory for a character: ooohhh my names "Eve Moneypenny". Although she did get to shoot Daniel Craig's Bond which has always been an ambition of mine.

Thank god Dench's M is gone boring me to death with her inflated role and boring scenes with Craig over the past 3 films.

Q was not too bad although he should be played by an older actor. When he was talking to Bond in the art gallery he looked more like Bond because he looked fairly normal in contrast to Craig whom looked like a ogre.

It's a shame there are not Bond girls or henchmen anymore. The girl in it was not in for long and Craig let thingybob in the blonde wig kill her before doing a Steven Seagal and killing all the guards and calling the army in.

At least there were a few jokes from Craig and it seems the old M-Q-Moneypenny Bond template may be back in place. But any future film will be hampered by Craig and the obsession with making experimental Bond films.

Casino Royale was a competent adaption the novel. I did not like it but it seems to be well regarded still by those who enjoyed it. But I think Skyfall is such an awful film and after the excitement has subsided I think it will be seen as a poor Bond film in years to come.

Good review Captain Arthurs IMO this is another one where the hype out weighs the merit, but it seems to sell well guess it don't matter what they do if the audience will to accept the idea of Bond being a gorilla in suit too small for him, then Connery was the biggest fake of them all. He lies when he said Bond, James Bond because the Bond was intended to be a henchman to M's super villain. I like Dalton and Brosnan and those guys could do the action and black tie keeping the movies distinctly Bondy. Craig's movie you can check off all the outside Bond action movie check boxes. now that they perverted Bond origins will they admit its not the book Bond its the movie Bond?

[bjmdds]

It's over. Cr-egg sunk the ship, right FBF? George Steele as the next Bond?

[FormerBondFan]

It's over. Cr-egg sunk the ship, right FBF? George Steele as the next Bond?

Now you're talking.