[SPOILERS] Skyfall: Post-Viewing Discussion

John Williams, Irvin Kirshner, Gary Kurtz and George Lucas spot the carbon freezing sequence from THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK.

Loomis wrote:

The screenwriters' motto for SKYFALL seems to have been: "Don't worry about explaining anything because we'll just try to convey the idea that Silva can do literally anything on earth with his computer skills, and in any case the fans will fanwank answers to everything anyway."

In that long interview, P&W actually explain that the provided a lot more exposition regarding Silva and how/why he does what he does in the film, but that the material was apparently cut out to streamline the story.

Harmsway wrote:

Loomis wrote:

The screenwriters' motto for SKYFALL seems to have been: "Don't worry about explaining anything because we'll just try to convey the idea that Silva can do literally anything on earth with his computer skills, and in any case the fans will fanwank answers to everything anyway."

In that long interview, P&W actually explain that the provided a lot more exposition regarding Silva and how/why he does what he does in the film, but that the material was apparently cut out to streamline the story.

That makes me wonder if the cuts are the equivalent of taking Robert Shaw's speech about the INDIANAPOLIS out of JAWS.

trevanian wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

Loomis wrote:

The screenwriters' motto for SKYFALL seems to have been: "Don't worry about explaining anything because we'll just try to convey the idea that Silva can do literally anything on earth with his computer skills, and in any case the fans will fanwank answers to everything anyway."

In that long interview, P&W actually explain that the provided a lot more exposition regarding Silva and how/why he does what he does in the film, but that the material was apparently cut out to streamline the story.

That makes me wonder if the cuts are the equivalent of taking Robert Shaw's speech about the INDIANAPOLIS out of JAWS.

Well, we already had Silva's equivalent, about the rats in the barrel.

trevanian wrote:

That makes me wonder if the cuts are the equivalent of taking Robert Shaw's speech about the INDIANAPOLIS out of JAWS.

Probably not. I may have given the wrong impression; P&W were talking about little tidbits of exposition that explained Silva's seeming omniscience throughout the story. "How did Silva know Bond was on the boat?" kinda stuff.

Oh, okay. Cutting bits of connective tissue I can understand.

So now fans are suddenly asking where the badguy gets his rent-a-thugs and money from? And pointless Q scenes and pointless Bond girls are bad now? I thought CR and QOS sucked because those elements were lacking? Doesn't Craig not screw enough women?

And Bond fans are suddenly concerned about plot holes?

Yep, Drax being able to build his space station without anybody thinking to ask why (or even noticing) is apparently fine ... but Silva being able to rustle up some henchmen and a helicopter is, like, SO far-fetched .

Different times, different places.

Triviachamp wrote:

So now fans are suddenly asking where the badguy gets his rent-a-thugs and money from?

Some fans just don't pay attention. Silva is an expert hacker, he can hack into bank accounts...money can finance almost anything...especially where muscle is involved...

I will however question where his personal male escort was...complete with leather thong and exposed buttocks... :face:

Triviachamp wrote:

So now fans are suddenly asking where the badguy gets his rent-a-thugs and money from? And pointless Q scenes and pointless Bond girls are bad now? I thought CR and QOS sucked because those elements were lacking? Doesn't Craig not screw enough women?

And Bond fans are suddenly concerned about plot holes?

Yes, if the Bond film in question is being praised to the skies as a uniquely intelligent, well-crafted and even Oscar-worthy piece of work that shames its predecessors.

Besides, when you have the likes of Sam Mendes and John Logan onboard, and when the film sets out to deal with genuinely engaging characterisation and drama as opposed to just brainless escapism, I think it's legitimate to hold SKYFALL to a higher standard than most Bond outings.

Loomis wrote:

Triviachamp wrote:

So now fans are suddenly asking where the badguy gets his rent-a-thugs and money from? And pointless Q scenes and pointless Bond girls are bad now? I thought CR and QOS sucked because those elements were lacking? Doesn't Craig not screw enough women?

And Bond fans are suddenly concerned about plot holes?

Yes, if the Bond film in question is being praised to the skies as a uniquely intelligent, well-crafted and even Oscar-worthy piece of work that shames its predecessors.

But you're a big fan of CASINO ROYALE and THE DARK KNIGHT, two other highly-praised franchise flicks to which SKYFALL has been constantly compared, and neither of those films withstand this kind of scrutiny. (THE DARK KNIGHT has plot holes so large you could drive a truck through 'em.)

If you ask me, SKYFALL is no masterpiece. It's just a surprisingly strong franchise flick.

I find CASINO ROYALE and THE DARK KNIGHT to be much better films than SKYFALL. I find them more visually interesting (where are the iconic visuals in SKYFALL?), more atmospheric and exciting (with action scenes that trump anything in SKYFALL), and with better performances, scores and so on. I'm therefore more willing to overlook their plot holes.

They also strike me as fresher and more original than SKYFALL, which borrows from both of them. Now, it may well be that I'll warm up to SKYFALL - it is, after all, a Bond film, and there are many things I like about it. I might give it a second viewing next week. But it doesn't seem to reinvent the wheel in the way that CASINO ROYALE and THE DARK KNIGHT did. It doesn't seem as *cough* "important", or as genuinely adventurous and thrilling as CASINO ROYALE or THE DARK KNIGHT (similarly, THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, while I did enjoy it, didn't bowl me over the way its predecessor did, because I felt that I'd basically seen it all before in 2008).

Your observation that SKYFALL is "just a surprisingly strong franchise flick" seems to me about right. The trouble is, many people are hailing it as much more, and I don't think it's worthy of all the hype.

John Logan wrote the second worst Star Trek movie of all time. It is not that high a standard.

Loomis wrote:

Your observation that SKYFALL is "just a surprisingly strong franchise flick" seems to me about right. The trouble is, many people are hailing it as much more, and I don't think it's worthy of all the hype.

Obviously, I'm not in agreement with you on SKYFALL (or THE DARK KNIGHT RISES, for that matter, which is by far my favorite of Nolan Batflicks), but it seems to me to make more sense to focus your criticism on the big things you find missing--that SKYFALL isn't atmospheric, exciting, well-acted, well-scored, etc.--rather than to focus on plot holes that you wouldn't pay much attention to had those other elements been in place.

Anyway, I do hope you find more to like about SKYFALL the second time around. Do you know when you'll be seeing it next?

Harmsway wrote:

Obviously, I'm not in agreement with you on SKYFALL (or THE DARK KNIGHT RISES, for that matter, which is by far my favorite of Nolan Batflicks), but it seems to me to make more sense to focus your criticism on the big things you find missing--that SKYFALL isn't atmospheric, exciting, well-acted, well-scored, etc.--rather than to focus on plot holes that you wouldn't pay much attention to had those other elements been in place.

I do find SKYFALL atmospheric and exciting (to a point, anyway), and it's certainly well-acted and well-scored.

Harmsway wrote:

Anyway, I do hope you find more to like about SKYFALL the second time around. Do you know when you'll be seeing it next?

Maybe next week, otherwise it'll probably be towards the end of the month.

Loomis wrote:

I find CASINO ROYALE and THE DARK KNIGHT to be much better films than SKYFALL. I find them more visually interesting (where are the iconic visuals in SKYFALL?), more atmospheric and exciting (with action scenes that trump anything in SKYFALL), and with better performances, scores and so on. I'm therefore more willing to overlook their plot holes.

You've completely lost me there.

Where are SKYFALL's iconic visuals? Bond falling to his "death", the silhouette fight in the Shanghai skyscraper, the arrival at the Macau casino, the tube train crash, The Fighting Temeraire, the helicopter shots introducing Shanghai, Bond flicking his cuffs while entering the train, Daniel Kleinman's striking title sequence, Bond racing through Whitehall to save M, Silva's single take introduction, Bond's first appearance in the dimly lit corridor (very effective use of shallow depth of field), Silva walking by the Bond family's graves, M's operatic death in the chapel etc.

I could go on, but those are what first came to mind.

By "iconic visuals" I don't mean nice shots but images that will be remembered by general audiences (and not just devoted Bond fans) for many years to come. I don't think there's anything in SKYFALL that qualifies on that score.

I don't know if it's been mentioned or whether it was ages ago, but during the second viewing tonight I found myself searching for the Michael Wilson cameo especially at the enquiry scene (and Embankment Tube scenes)...I imagine I missed the bit where Wilson said he wasn't doing one or some such?

Hilly wrote:

I don't know if it's been mentioned or whether it was ages ago, but during the second viewing tonight I found myself searching for the Michael Wilson cameo especially at the enquiry scene (and Embankment Tube scenes)...I imagine I missed the bit where Wilson said he wasn't doing one or some such?

He can be seen when M is with the coffins, specifically when Tanner arrives from the doorway you can see Wilson behind him.

Python wrote:

Hilly wrote:

I don't know if it's been mentioned or whether it was ages ago, but during the second viewing tonight I found myself searching for the Michael Wilson cameo especially at the enquiry scene (and Embankment Tube scenes)...I imagine I missed the bit where Wilson said he wasn't doing one or some such?

He can be seen when M is with the coffins, specifically when Tanner arrives from the doorway you can see Wilson behind him.

Ah, right. Thanks Python. After I wrote the post I re-read the Wilson interview posted by Sharky and imagined it was a long shot. I'll bear it in mind next time.

Loomis wrote:

By "iconic visuals" I don't mean nice shots but images that will be remembered by general audiences (and not just devoted Bond fans) for many years to come. I don't think there's anything in SKYFALL that qualifies on that score.

It's been out for less than a month. We'll have to wait and see.

I do not find SKYFALL atmospheric and exciting for the most part.
Nor is it particularly well-scored.

Second viewing, and still not disappointed. Even with the woman sat next to me making her own comments.

Bond to Q : "Should I get on the train?"

Annoying woman sat next to Rave : "Yes!"

Well, at least I thought she was talking to the film. Maybe I mistook and her companion wasn't really reaching for popcorn on her lap.....

Pardon me if this has been brought up before, but did anyone recognize John Logan's contribution? The most obvious points being the inclusion of the art museum scene (Logan worked on the Rothko play prior) and the poetry recitation by M. I got the feeling a lot of the humor came from him as well. While not an obvious comparison, I saw some similarities in the story-telling of Rango, which Mr. Logan wrote, and Skyfall--the idea of the protagonist picking himself up after a near sense of defeat. The betrayal theme was clearly evident too as was seen in Gladiator (but then again we've seen this a lot in Bond before). I may be just grasping for straws. But I thought there was definitely a Logan 'polish' if anything to the script. It seemed that both Logan and Mendes, who had theatre backgrounds paired well together, especially in the more dramatic scenes--which were surprisingly convincing in Skyfall (unlike the soap opera melodrama we've seen in past modern Bond films)