Skyfall Musings

Others have said what I have to say about SKYFALL much more articulately, so I'll just put a few thoughts down on paper:

• The Istanbul sequence is the weakest bit of the film. The rest of the film establishes what kind of action Mendes is comfortable with: bursts of violence. He doesn't do so well with this sort of CASINO ROYALE/MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - GHOST PROTOCOL epic set-piece. Which isn't to say it's bad, but just that the good stuff is to be found later in the film.
  
• The much-debated climactic fight at Skyfall was my favorite section of the film by far. Atmospheric, tense, and satisfying. Who would have thought that Bond's childhood would be handled with as much tact as it is here? We don't get any overdone monologue about Bond's childhood trauma, just brief glimpses through Bond's constant evasion of the subject (the psychiatrist, early on, or Bond's "You already know the whole story" remark to M) and Craig's terrific performance. Craig's eyes tell us everything we need to know about Bond's history.
  
• Bardem's Silva is a great baddie. Tragic, scary, and funny. He goes a long way in making the film's emphasis on M work.
  
• Speaking of M, I'm surprised that they got away with what they did here. They took the Oedipal aspects of her relationship with Bond over the past two films and put them front and center, which, going off of CASINO ROYALE and QUANTUM OF SOLACE, would seem to be a move toward complete disaster. But no, it works very, very well.
  
• I'm quite pleased at how the Moneypenny thing comes together. Not a big deal is made of this strand throughout this film (thankfully), but Craig and Harris have real chemistry. Fiennes also makes a splendid M.
  
• Newman's score is lovely. I take back every bad thing I said about it.

More thoughts as they occur to me.

Harmsway wrote:

[*]Speaking of M, I'm surprised that they got away with what they did here. They took the Oedipal aspects of her relationship with Bond over the past two films and put them front and center, which, going off of CASINO ROYALE and QUANTUM OF SOLACE, would seem to be a move toward complete disaster. But no, it works very, very well.

There were a lot of points I was going to make in my thread, but I was frankly too tired and my brain was shutting down. That's more or less a point I would make. Essentially that this film does everything I wouldn't want a Bond film to do, but because it does it so well I loved it. This is the dreaded Babs BAFTA Bond that many of us here, including myself, have decried the idea of because EON has had such a crappy track record of late in trying to take Bond down this road.

Not that I want this road to continue. I want Bond 24 to dig in and be a traditional Bond. I just hope it's as surprising and inventive as this film.

As for the Scotland sequence. I'm not sure if I'd call it my favorite sequence of the film, but I had no complaints about it. One note I'd give is that it never felt forced. Bond crying.... I'm not sure. But overall, there wasn't a forced feeling here.

Also, this film makes me take a dimmer view of CASINO ROYALE.

Okay, one complaint. The 50 year logo at the end. I'd have prefered it go straight from the gunbarrel to the credits. That logo was too... Not sure what word to use, but it didn't fit with the elegant film that had just ended. It's like someone dropping a spot of mustard on a nice suit.

Oh yeah, Finney almost steals the whole show for me.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I want Bond 24 to dig in and be a traditional Bond. I just hope it's as surprising and inventive as this film.

After these three films, they'll be hard-pressed to find another way to shake up the character, so they should certainly go a more traditional route (although perhaps they can find a narrative hook that is a bit unorthodox, even if it still follows the "Bond on a mission" idea; the continuation novels have plenty of good stuff along these lines).

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Okay, one complaint. The 50 year logo at the end. I'd have prefered it go straight from the gunbarrel to the credits. That logo was too... Not sure what word to use, but it didn't fit with the elegant film that had just ended. It's like someone dropping a spot of mustard on a nice suit.

It got applause at my showing. I agree, though, I didn't like it. Honestly, I didn't actually like the gunbarrel itself much. The design was ugly and Craig's pose was awkward.

Yeah, but the so-so gunbarrel was quickly forgotten by me.

As for Bond 24, though it may be too unorthodox I've long wanted to see a Bond film where he falsely defects to a villainous organization. That was my idea for a Bond 23, and with Quantum, but I don't want them back. I just like the idea of Bond infilitrating some network of baddies, and maybe put into a situation where they want to him to do something damaging to the UK as a test of his allegiance.

Sorry, that's off topic.

Back on topic, I like the set up of this five person team of Bond, M, Moneypenny, Q, and Tanner. I like that Bond and Tanner have more to do together this time around. Tanner was a neutered secretary in QOS. Now there is a hint of a mutual respect and possible friendship between him and Bond. More like the books.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Yeah, but the so-so gunbarrel was quickly forgotten by me.

I don't blame you. When the gunbarrel's at the end, it becomes an afterthought. That said, with that particularly opening shot, it wouldn't have worked at the beginning. I understand why it got booted. And that opening shot was pretty nifty, too.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

As for Bond 24, though it may be too unorthodox I've long wanted to see a Bond film where he falsely defects to a villainous organization. That was my idea for a Bond 23, and with Quantum, but I don't want them back. I just like the idea of Bond infilitrating some network of baddies, and maybe put into a situation where they want to him to do something damaging to the UK as a test of his allegiance.

I like that aspect of LICENSE TO KILL, so I'd be happy to see it in play in another Bond film.

Harmsway wrote:

Honestly, I didn't actually like the gunbarrel itself much. The design was ugly and Craig's pose was awkward.

I much preferred it to the QOS design, walk and pose. Really liked the animated light moving across the aperture (reminded me of Binder's YOLT and DAF barrels) and Craig was far more relaxed. Reminded me of Dalton's unused gunbarrel TLD, without the huge jump. The only thing that struck me as awkward was how the image instantly freezes as Bond shoots. Looked a bit glitchy.

Largo's Shark wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

Honestly, I didn't actually like the gunbarrel itself much. The design was ugly and Craig's pose was awkward.

I much preferred it to the QOS design, walk and pose.

The walk is better. The pose might look fine on DVD, but seen up-close on an IMAX screen, it just looks odd.

But what I really disliked was the texture of the gunbarrel. I don't mind if the gunbarrel doesn't look "real", but this one just looked kinda boring and cheap, like a fan mock-up you might find on YouTube.

Harmsway wrote:

But what I really disliked was the texture of the gunbarrel. I don't mind if the gunbarrel doesn't look "real", but this one just looked kinda boring and cheap, like a fan mock-up you might find on YouTube.

Still looks better than QOS.

Largo's Shark wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

But what I really disliked was the texture of the gunbarrel. I don't mind if the gunbarrel doesn't look "real", but this one just looked kinda boring and cheap, like a fan mock-up you might find on YouTube.

Still looks better than QOS.

I like the QOS gunbarrel okay, so I'm gonna disagree with you there.

Harmsway wrote:

Largo's Shark wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

But what I really disliked was the texture of the gunbarrel. I don't mind if the gunbarrel doesn't look "real", but this one just looked kinda boring and cheap, like a fan mock-up you might find on YouTube.

Still looks better than QOS.

I like the QOS gunbarrel okay, so I'm gonna disagree with you there.

I think the darker metal and revolving light gives SF an edge.

Harmsway wrote:

Others have said what I have to say about SKYFALL much more articulately, so I'll just put a few thoughts down on paper:

[list][*]The Istanbul sequence is the weakest bit of the film. The rest of the film establishes what kind of action Mendes is comfortable with: bursts of violence. He doesn't do so well with this sort of CASINO ROYALE/MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - GHOST PROTOCOL epic set-piece. Which isn't to say it's bad, but just that the good stuff is to be found later in the film.

The action in the PTS seems to fit awkwardly alongside the action in the main body of the film. It's almost as jarring as the dogfight/freefall in QUANTUM OF SOLACE, alebit rather more down-to-earth.

There's something rather box-ticking and by-the-numbers about this PTS - it's one of a handful of moments in SKYFALL that seem to exist purely to pander to what viewers are thought to want from a Bond movie, and the resulting halfheartedness shows through. I do like the very first shot, though.

I think because it's the weakest part, it's helps the film's narrative and pacing tremendously. Many Bonds have barnstorming pre-title sequences, yet disappoint in the movie proper (TWINE and DAD come to mind).. It's refreshing to see SKYFALL reverse that, and actually build momentum towards its climax.

I didn't really have a problem with the PTS, though I think it could have had a slightly quicker pace. I actually like that it goes for the "everything but the kitchen sink" approach.

Anyone know the runtime on the PTS?

About 11 minutes I think.

I'm guessing about seven minutes, although I expect it's longer. It went very quickly for me, anyway.

Harmsway wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I want Bond 24 to dig in and be a traditional Bond. I just hope it's as surprising and inventive as this film.

After these three films, they'll be hard-pressed to find another way to shake up the character, so they should certainly go a more traditional route (although perhaps they can find a narrative hook that is a bit unorthodox, even if it still follows the "Bond on a mission" idea; the continuation novels have plenty of good stuff along these lines).

After the success of these three films (with this one looking to the the most critically and commercially successful Bond film in a long time, if not ever), the tradition will become finding ways to be untraditional.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

IAnyone know the runtime on the PTS?

Going by the running-time of the two tracks "Grand Bazaar, Istanbul" and "The Bloody Shot" (they were played back to back without any pause between), it's about 10 minutes or more.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I like the set up of this five person team of Bond, M, Moneypenny, Q, and Tanner. I like that Bond and Tanner have more to do together this time around. Tanner was a neutered secretary in QOS. Now there is a hint of a mutual respect and possible friendship between him and Bond. More like the books.

Yup, I can't even recall if Bond and Tanner interacted in QOS. It's nice to see him do a little more in the offices like the Tanner in the books. I was surprised he was at the end of it too in the classic set up. I just assumed it would play out with Moneypenny then straight to M like always (aside from Michael Kitchen's Tanner in GE and TWINE).

I would agree with your points Harms. Glad to see you liked it.

Python wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

IAnyone know the runtime on the PTS?

Going by the running-time of the two tracks "Grand Bazaar, Istanbul" and "The Bloody Shot" (they were played back to back without any pause between), it's about 10 minutes or more.

A bit more. The tremolo string clusters at the beginning of Grand Bazaar, Istanbul (Bond torn between staying with Ronson and following Patrice) lasted a lot longer in the film, plus there's the bit of silence between Bond's fall and the main titles.

Largo's Shark wrote:

I think because it's the weakest part, it's helps the film's narrative and pacing tremendously. Many Bonds have barnstorming pre-title sequences, yet disappoint in the movie proper (TWINE and DAD come to mind).. It's refreshing to see SKYFALL reverse that, and actually build momentum towards its climax.

True, true. Still, I think it might have benefited from being a bit shorter and more focused, or from sacrificing some of the action for a bit more story.

Harmsway wrote:

Largo's Shark wrote:

I think because it's the weakest part, it's helps the film's narrative and pacing tremendously. Many Bonds have barnstorming pre-title sequences, yet disappoint in the movie proper (TWINE and DAD come to mind).. It's refreshing to see SKYFALL reverse that, and actually build momentum towards its climax.

True, true. Still, I think it might have benefited from being a bit shorter and more focused, or from sacrificing some of the action for a bit more story.

I think a quicker pace is all that was really needed. Maybe they were trying to move away from the type of action we've seen (at it's worst in QOS), but I think they may have overcompensated just a tad.

So disappointed that during the credits this is what played in my head:

Just In J wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I want Bond 24 to dig in and be a traditional Bond. I just hope it's as surprising and inventive as this film.

After these three films, they'll be hard-pressed to find another way to shake up the character, so they should certainly go a more traditional route (although perhaps they can find a narrative hook that is a bit unorthodox, even if it still follows the "Bond on a mission" idea; the continuation novels have plenty of good stuff along these lines).

After the success of these three films (with this one looking to the the most critically and commercially successful Bond film in a long time, if not ever), the tradition will become finding ways to be untraditional.

Unfortunately, this is probably very, very true.

In BOND 24, a villain will storm in MI6, fight Bond, break his back, and drop him in a prison-pit somewhere in the East. Bond will then hang from a rope until his back heals itself, escape the prison (in a rousing sequence showing his determination), and go back to stop the villain's diabolical plan to lay waste to London.

Harmsway wrote:

In BOND 24, a villain will storm in MI6, fight Bond, break his back, and drop him in a prison-pit somewhere in the East. Bond will then hang from a rope until his back heals itself, escape the prison (in a rousing sequence showing his determination), and go back to stop the villain's diabolical plan to lay waste to London.

Don't forget that Bond will also have a great big argument with Fiennes' M and that a large portion of the film will feature our hero gone AWOL/suspended from the British secret service/gone rogue.