Previous Debate: Based on what we know, will SkyFall be any good?

There's a poll along similar lines elsewhere, but this debate section needs a kickstart.


So, based on what we know so far, how do you see SkyFall turning out?

M wrote:

There's a poll along similar lines elsewhere, but this debate section needs a kickstart.


So, based on what we know so far, how do you see SkyFall turning out?

I think it would be hard for it not to be an improvement on QOS, but I feel the inclusion of TWINE in the poll is more of an insult that a favorable comparison. I love TWINE and think it's the best, most complete Brosnan film. Skyfall should be so lucky as to remind people of TWINE.

My guess is that the film will be "average". It's hard to make a horrible Bond movie. Even the worst of the lot (LICENSE REVOKED) still has some value, and are usually better than the other films Hollywood puts out. But I think ultimately it will be considered an average Craig film because it's more than likely going to emulate a lot about QOS that was wrong. I believe Barbara thinks the problems with QOS were lackluster plot and too much action in an overly edited amount of time. She may be partly right, but I think an even bigger problem isn't the "lackluster plot" but the overall sense of direction Babs is taking the series in, or the stories that she's choosing to have the writers tell. Bond drinking from his sippee cup while talking about his childhood with M (like she's some sort of psychologist) is just WRONG people. It's WRONG!!

I voted "An improvement on Quantum Of Solace ". Of course, this may just be wishful thinking on my part.

I picked great because:

I love QOS, but an improvement... I can't be sure.
As the best Craig film, again, I'm not sure. I'm guessing it will be better than CR.
One of the best in the series is a bit too hopeful. It'll have to beat DN, FRWL, TB, FYEO, GE, TND, TWINE, OHMSS, TLD and QOS for me, so...
Another TWINE would be fantastic, IMHO.
So I settled with great, because I'm sure it will be at least that.

FieldsMan wrote:

I picked great because:

I love QOS, but an improvement... I can't be sure.
As the best Craig film, again, I'm not sure. I'm guessing it will be better than CR.
One of the best in the series is a bit too hopeful. It'll have to beat DN, FRWL, TB, FYEO, GE, TND, TWINE, OHMSS, TLD and QOS for me, so...
Another TWINE would be fantastic, IMHO.
So I settled with great, because I'm sure it will be at least that.

I think part of my problem with QOS (and I have many) is that it's meant as a very direct sequel to CR and in that respect I don't think the two films go well together. QOS feels to different from CR to be a true companion piece. The film would have been better served being a stand-alone adventure, or at least letting Martin Campbell direct both films at once and then release them 6 months or a year apart, or at least let Martin take a shot at following up CR with QOS...or maybe just waiting till the writer's strike was over.

After QoS there should be improvement otherwise I fail to see the value of a fourth Craig outing.

Clicked on "Another The World Is Not Enough". Even though that film was terrible, I spared SkyFall the same tag only on the basis of it having a vastly superior leading man who can act. But seeing the photos we've been "treated" to thus far fills me with complete and utter dread.

People around here have very short memories, it would seem. What was the main thing wrong with TWINE? Terrible handling of the M character, terrible attempts at the "emotional". What let CR down? Terrible attempts at the "emotional". What do so many people around here hate in the recent films? The over-exposure of M, and the constantly awful attempts at drama, emotion and politics. And what common bond do all of these ailments share? The writers and the producers, who have proven time and again that they can't do this drama and emotion stuff. Yet we're willing to condone having these f*ckers let loose on something as "personal" and "emotional" as Bond's parents? FFS.

And look at M on that bridge, it screams TWINE, not to mention this era's penchant for the "sensational" and "personal" being used to wallpaper over crap, uninteresting and suspenseless plots. An attack on MI6, and M again being made to look completely stupid just to give HRH Dame Judi Dench some fuller exposure. If something bad is going down, why the f*** is she out of the car, exposed in broad daylight, attention-hogging as usual by moaning at the police? It's the same kind of thoughtless stupidity that went into the writing of that masterpiece "Get me out there" scene (and all that followed it) in TWINE, which again seems to be happening here, M being shoved right into the centre of the plot. People around here hate that stuff, yet it seems we're getting more of it than ever in this film. She's out there screaming on a bridge, she wakes up somewhere in Scotland in Bond's car. She's seen out exposed with somebody else by the villain. In short, she's f*cking everywhere again when she should be safe behind a desk. And the desk photo? God, she looks about 100 years old. Enough already. Anyone who still buys this wretchedly-written joke as the head of MI6 needs their head looking at.... as does Daniel Craig, whose appearance in this film is pretty dire, and this coming from someone who isn't usually arsed about such stuff and even campaigned for Bond to have a beard.

This whole thing looks like it's gonna play out like one of those "serious" but ultimately unconvincing and stupid one-off crime dramas that the Beeb churn out. And again, letting P&W have a crack at Bond's parents? Seriously, watch the last few films again and try telling me with a straight face that you're looking forward to this. At best, you'll leave the cinema a happy bunny having had your explosions, but three months later when the DVD hits the shelves you'll be on here tearing it apart for all the crimes I've highlighted.

And why? Because everything people complained about prior to the release of the photos and callsheets is actually in those photos and callsheets in spades. Even if I trusted everyone involved in this film (which, with the obvious exceptions, I by and large actually do), there's no excusing allowing these two writers to go "emotional", "personal" and "Dench" again.

Be honest, we all know exactly where this film is at, and what it's intentions are.

Lazenby. wrote:

The writers and the producers, who have proven time and again that they can't do this drama and emotion stuff. Yet we're willing to condone having these f*ckers let loose on something as "personal" and "emotional" as Bond's parents? FFS.

That's really the crux of it. As long as Purvis & Wade are still there, it's hard to not be wary of a Bond film that attempts to be deep n' meaningful.

Overall, I'm hoping for the best but expecting the worst. The villains are well cast and I look forward to hearing Newman's work. That's about all I can place in the positive box at this point. It looks, so far, to be a continuation of the TWINE-QOS kind of Bond film. The lead looks like a common street chav. Bond's grandma has too much screentime. It almost looks like an episode of The Bill.

It's early days, anyway. We don't even have a teaser poster or trailer.

Time for a fan-trailer with the theme music from The Bill slapped over it.