# James Bond: Skyfall



## Immortal (May 6, 2012)

I was shocked to see there was no thread on this. Outside of the three comic book movies and Prometheus this is probably the film I'm most excited for. 



			
				IMBD said:
			
		

> Bond's loyalty to M is tested as her past comes back to haunt her. As MI6 comes under attack, 007 must track down and destroy the threat, no matter how personal the cost.



The 23rd Bond movie comes out this November. No trailer yet, but there have been a couple of nice screen shots and IGN said the first 10 minutes looked really good. 

I enjoyed Casino Royal a ton, but Quantum of Solice left much to be desired. I think Craig is a really good Bond though.

What's the excitement level of this flick?


----------



## masamune1 (May 6, 2012)

I was shocked that you made a thread of this when there was no trailer.

Got me excited for nothin'.

_QoS_ was good; it just felt like _Casino Royale_ 1.5, like an extension rather than a sequel.


----------



## dream (May 6, 2012)

I'm moderately intrigued, will need to see a trailer first.


----------



## Detective (May 6, 2012)

Immortal said:


> What's the excitement level of this flick?



Off the charts, man. I've been a Bond fan since I was a little kid, seen all the films at least 5-6 minimum, and am waiting for Ultimate Bond 50th Anniversary Blu-Ray collection(all 22 films in one set + extras). It's gonna be $200, but at the rate of about $10 per film, that seems like a decent price.

Skyfall's gonna be a beast of a film. Hopefully it comes near or tops Casino Royale. Quantum of Solace was a fluke in the grand scheme of things, mostly because of the direction choice. Sam Mendes will correct that mistake this November.

BTW, I think there is already a thread for this film. I believe masamune1 created it a while back, but it had a generic Bond 23 title or something along those lines. 

*P.S:* Is anyone noticing that the search function is really screwed up right now? And you can't even search users by the threads they created.


----------



## Immortal (May 6, 2012)

Lmao. My apologies masamune 

And yea, I went back a couple pages to see if there was one, but I was searching for Skyfall, my bad.


----------



## Sennin of Hardwork (May 6, 2012)

I think I'll be seeing this one.


----------



## dream (May 6, 2012)

> P.S: Is anyone noticing that the search function is really screwed up right now? And you can't even search users by the threads they created.



It probably will be fixed on Monday or so says Mbxx.


----------



## masamune1 (May 6, 2012)

Detective said:


> Off the charts, man. I've been a Bond fan since I was a little kid, seen all the films at least 5-6 minimum, and am waiting for Ultimate Bond 50th Anniversary Blu-Ray collection(all 22 films in one set + extras). It's gonna be $200, but at the rate of about $10 per film, that seems like a decent price.



5-6 minimum?

Pff. And you call yourself a fan.




> BTW, I think there is already a thread for this film. I believe masamune1 created it a while back, but it had a generic Bond 23 title or something along those lines.



....

I did?

Well, I do tend to stay onnatop of things.



> *P.S:* Is anyone noticing that the search function is really screwed up right now? And you can't even search users by the threads they created.



Screwed up right now?

Its been screwed up on and off, or maybe always, since before I signed up to these forums. I haven't know a time it _hasn't_ been screwed up.

Pff. And you call yourself "detective".


----------



## Bart (May 6, 2012)

Given that _Casino Royle's_ one of the favourite films, watching this is a given; still think the title of the thread should have just been _'Skyfall'_ though :WOW


----------



## Detective (May 6, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> 5-6 minimum?
> 
> Pff. And you call yourself a fan.



I have seen some more than others, the 5-6 is OHMSS, as the film that I have seen the least out of all the others.




> Screwed up right now?
> 
> Its been screwed up on and off, or maybe always, since before I signed up to these forums. I haven't know a time it _hasn't_ been screwed up.
> 
> Pff. And you call yourself "detective".



I've never really had a problem with the overall search function on the forums until recently, because there were other ways to work around it, like the thread search by username option, until that recently went to hell with the following error:



> connection to 10.0.0.3: 3312 failed (errno=113, msg=No route to host)



The other way around it is to use my memory and correlate a search for specific threads via Google, with "Narutoforums:" + the topic as the base. However some things, like the generic Bond thread you have forgotten that you made, may not be able to be recovered because it looks like it got wiped. The current oldest Bond thread aside from Immortal's is the one made by this guy:


----------



## ~Gesy~ (May 6, 2012)

Yeah I was planning to make a thread on this when a trailer is released, not much you can discuss otherwise


----------



## masamune1 (May 6, 2012)

Detective said:


> I have seen some more than others, the 5-6 is OHMSS, as the film that I have seen the least out of all the others.



I don't know what film I've seen least, but I've seen it more than 5-6 times.

_OHMSS_ - some would say thats the _best_ Bond film, and you've only seen it 5-6 times? For shame, for shame sir.


----------



## PlacidSanity (May 6, 2012)

Really looking forward to the film.  It's going to be very interesting to see Javier Bardem playing a part in this upcoming film.


----------



## James Bond (May 6, 2012)

I think it's safe to say I'll be seeing this.


----------



## Detective (May 6, 2012)

BTW, does anyone else love Shirley Bassey's lovely rejected rendition of the title theme for Quantum of Solace?










​
So damn smooth. This is as just as good as KD Lang's Surrender. Especially when you consider what they picked over that.


----------



## Velocity (May 6, 2012)

I dunno. Ever since the reboot, it's been difficult. The new James Bond just isn't suave or sophisticated, nor does he use cheesy gadgets or hook up with a different woman every film. So it's a bit difficult to get hyped. I'll eventually get used to the new style, but I still miss the old one.

If I really wanted a high octane adrenaline rush about a spy dude, I'd watch Mission Impossible. Tom Cruise has swagger. :ho


----------



## dream (May 6, 2012)

I do miss the old Bond but this new Bond is more to my tastes and do note that this is supposed to be him when he is young.  I'm sure that he will become more sophisticated...probably. :33


----------



## Velocity (May 6, 2012)

Eternal Goob said:


> I do miss the old Bond but this new Bond is more to my tastes and do note that this is supposed to be him when he is young.  I'm sure that he will become more sophisticated...probably. :33



Daniel Craig couldn't pull it off. He's better suited to playing Bourned instead of Bond.


----------



## masamune1 (May 6, 2012)

Velocity said:


> I dunno. Ever since the reboot, it's been difficult. The new James Bond just isn't suave or sophisticated, nor does he use cheesy gadgets or hook up with a different woman every film. So it's a bit difficult to get hyped. I'll eventually get used to the new style, but I still miss the old one.
> 
> If I really wanted a high octane adrenaline rush about a spy dude, I'd watch Mission Impossible. Tom Cruise has swagger. :ho



In _Casino Royale_ he identified an Aston Martin and its make on sight and had won it in a card game by the end of the day. And banging the owners wife shortly after that (taking her home in his car to boot).

In _QoS_ he was taken to stay at a 3-star hotel- he took one look around, walked out, and booked himself and the girl he was with into a 5-star (so yeah, different woman every film right there).

And lots of old Bond flicks had hardly any gadgets, less than this one. _Dr No_, the first one, saw him with nothing but his new Walther PPK; _OHMSS_ had Q showing off some radioactive lint and Bond logging around a safecracking machine that took a crane to move; even Roger Moore had nothing in _The Man With The Golden Gun._

Not that he doesn't have any; its just that, in this modern world, so many people have gadgets that they are harder to notice- in _Casino_ his car is a _doctor_ for petes sake.

I seriously don't get these complaints. The new films have a lot more of the old formula than a lot of people seem to notice.


----------



## dream (May 6, 2012)

Velocity said:


> Daniel Craig couldn't pull it off. He's better suited to playing Bourned instead of Bond.



We will have to see I suppose.  He should be better, in this regard, in Skyfall.


----------



## Palpatine (May 6, 2012)

Finally some news about this movie. 

Looking forward to it.


----------



## -Dargor- (May 6, 2012)

I'm honestly surprised that they're still making these.

Should take a couple years off imo.


----------



## dream (May 7, 2012)

It's been a while since we last had a Bond movie, 2008 was the last one I believe.


----------



## Nightblade (May 7, 2012)

this is probably going to be as good as Quantum of Solace. 


or not.


----------



## Parallax (May 7, 2012)

not like that would be hard QoS sucked the big one


----------



## Rukia (May 7, 2012)

This movie has a legit chance of being the best movie ever made.


----------



## dream (May 7, 2012)

That seems a bit too optimistic, Rukia.


----------



## Rukia (May 7, 2012)

My optimism typically serves me pretty well.  Besides, there are definitely plenty of pessimists around here.  It's my role to be positive.


----------



## First Tsurugi (May 7, 2012)

I don't really know what to expect. Casino Royale was amazing but Quantum of Solace was really weak.

Guess I'll just hope for the best.



-Dargor- said:


> I'm honestly surprised that they're still making these.
> 
> Should take a couple years off imo.



They did, it's been nearly four years since the most recent one.


----------



## masamune1 (May 7, 2012)

Why, oh, why, do people dislike _QoS_ so much?


----------



## Parallax (May 7, 2012)

because it's oh so so bad?


----------



## Kuya (May 7, 2012)

I'm a huge James Bond fan and I like Craig's rugged version of Bond. I'll be seeing this opening weekend regardless of whatever the plot is or who is the supporting cast.


----------



## Rukia (May 7, 2012)

Everyone should see this opening weekend.  Its going to be a terrific movie.


----------



## Bart (May 21, 2012)

Someone should make it official and post the trailer in this thread ;D


----------



## The World (May 21, 2012)

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uLrwfjih1w[/YOUTUBE]


Looks interesting, but that's about it.

I wasn't blown away by this trailer, not one bit.


----------



## dream (May 21, 2012)

Now I'm officially hyped.


----------



## Velocity (May 21, 2012)

Nice to see they know how to park trains.


----------



## MajorThor (May 21, 2012)

New Bond movie? I'll see it, but it's not on my priority list.


----------



## dream (May 21, 2012)

Velocity said:


> Nice to see they know how to park trains.



It requires tremendous skill.


----------



## MajorThor (May 21, 2012)

Bahahaha, hilarious.


----------



## Ae (May 21, 2012)

It been 4 years, cant wait.


----------



## Arya Stark (May 22, 2012)

So I heard the filming is over because they left Istanbul the previous day?

I'm really curious how this will turn out. I hope they're not using stereotypes for Turkey


----------



## MajorThor (May 22, 2012)

There's been so many Bond movies out there, that you just can't get SUPER Excited anymore.


----------



## tari101190 (May 22, 2012)

MajorThor said:


> There's been so many Bond movies out there, that you just can't get SUPER Excited anymore.


I'm Super excited.

Casino Royale was brilliant and I trust in Sam Mendes based on American Beauty.

Hopefully he'll see what wwas great about Casino Royale, and add to it with his own style.


----------



## MajorThor (May 22, 2012)

I loved Royale as well; however, it did feel like an other Bond movie.


----------



## dream (May 22, 2012)

Moon~ said:


> I hope they're not using stereotypes for Turkey



I think that they won't use stereotypes for Turkey or at least keep it to a minimum. :byakuya


----------



## MajorThor (May 22, 2012)

Stereotypes are what makes this country great!


----------



## Arya Stark (May 22, 2012)

Eternal Goob said:


> I think that they won't use stereotypes for Turkey or at least keep it to a minimum. :byakuya



I hope so, they filmed in the middle of _Istanbul_ for God's sake! 



MajorThor said:


> Stereotypes are what makes this country great!



Well, I don't like when they confuse her with Arabia.


----------



## MajorThor (May 22, 2012)

Don't worry Moonbuddy, no one's gonna be doing that. :-D


----------



## Detective (May 22, 2012)

MajorThor said:


> Don't worry Moonbuddy, no one's gonna be doing that. :-D



Did you know that as of May 20th, 2012, Saudi Arabia has banned the use of the English language and the Gregorian calendar within their country? 

:ho


----------



## MajorThor (May 23, 2012)

WAT?!?!!?!??!?!!!? Fucking savages.


----------



## Roman (May 23, 2012)

And here I was thinking they'd actually stopped making Bond movies. Can't say I'm too excited about it, and the trailer doesn't help me either.


----------



## MajorThor (May 23, 2012)

A bond movie is a bond movie now IMO.


----------



## hitokugutsu (May 24, 2012)

Casino Royale is by far the best movie 

And Daniel Craig >>>

The next persons who claims Sean Connery was better is most likely 50+ and keeps on whining how everything was better in the old days


----------



## MajorThor (May 24, 2012)

Connery was better. U mad?


----------



## PlacidSanity (May 24, 2012)

Lol, well aside from seeing Craig's Bond, I'm also interested to see how Bardem does his character for this film.


----------



## MajorThor (May 24, 2012)

Who's Bardem?


----------



## James Bond (May 24, 2012)

hitokugutsu said:


> Casino Royale is by far the best movie
> 
> And Daniel Craig >>>
> 
> The next persons who claims Sean Connery was better is most likely 50+ and keeps on whining how everything was better in the old days



Retarded to compare Craig with Connery, Daniel Craig plays a more savage style of Bond compared to the swavy style of Bond Connery played.


----------



## MajorThor (May 24, 2012)

Which Bond are you, James?


----------



## James Bond (May 24, 2012)

Isnt it obvious?


----------



## PlacidSanity (May 24, 2012)

MajorThor said:


> Who's Bardem?



Javier Bardem.  He was the placid face hitman on No Country for Old Men.


----------



## MajorThor (May 24, 2012)

OH right on, I remember. :-D One of DDLewis' best performances too!


----------



## Bart (May 25, 2012)

Funny ...


----------



## Hatifnatten (May 25, 2012)

Cannot possibly be any more not interested.


----------



## MajorThor (May 25, 2012)

I know that feel Hatty.


----------



## Samavarti (May 25, 2012)

I just saw this is going to be directed by Sam Mendes, he is a good director, so i'm interested in see what he will do.


----------



## MajorThor (May 25, 2012)

What else has Mendes done, Sama?


----------



## dream (May 25, 2012)

Skyfall 

2009 Away We Go

Revolutionary Road

Jarhead

Road to Perdition

American Beauty

Company (TV movie)

Cabaret


----------



## Detective (Jul 27, 2012)

For your eyes only, NF...


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Jul 27, 2012)

Looks better than QOS, hoping it's as good as CR or better.


----------



## James Bond (Jul 27, 2012)




----------



## Rukia (Jul 27, 2012)

We need the 1080.


----------



## Detective (Jul 28, 2012)

[YOUTUBE]YFNv5nDYMsU[/YOUTUBE]

The little tug at the cuff @ 0:26 is truly amazing. Shaken, But Not Stirred.


----------



## dream (Jul 28, 2012)

Detective said:


> The little tug at the cuff @ 0:26 is truly amazing.



I wish that I was that awesome.


----------



## ghstwrld (Jul 31, 2012)




----------



## αshɘs (Jul 31, 2012)

Finally, Bardem shows up. Not sure about that hair color though.


----------



## Hatifnatten (Jul 31, 2012)

A graph of my interest to the Bond movies:

|
|
|
|
|
|
|*--------------------------------------------------*
|____________________________________________


----------



## hitokugutsu (Jul 31, 2012)

Trailer shows a lot of action. Looks more QoS then CR sofar

Daniel Craig still best Bond tho


----------



## Magoichi (Aug 1, 2012)

Noticed the cheeky mend to his cufflink after jumping on the train. Classic Bond.


----------



## Whip Whirlwind (Aug 1, 2012)

So what do you guys think about Q so far? I like the idea of making him younger, since it'd be tough for an older Q to stack up to Desmond Llewelyn. I'm looking forward to seeing more of him and Craig interacting.


----------



## Jeff (Aug 2, 2012)




----------



## Whip Whirlwind (Aug 2, 2012)

Jeff said:


> Another surprise; I feel the same.  Maybe less of the typical Q-attitude we have grown to love over the last few decades and more enthusiasm and less practicality with the gadgets?  They don't seem to be going over the top with all the shit Bond carries as of late.



I think he's going to be the tech/intel guy as well as the gadget guy. But yeah, definitely a good idea to get away from the mother hen (when it comes to his work, not bond's life ha) characterization that Damon pretty much perfected.


----------



## masamune1 (Aug 2, 2012)

I wish / hope that Q has some slightly more "out-there" gadgets than just the gun, if not in this film then in future ones.

If only because the signature gun was done already in _Licence to Kill._ And frankly, its not terribly handy.


----------



## Jeff (Aug 2, 2012)

As long as they don't go invisible again with an...invisible helicopter or something.

I hope they bring back the testers doing something crazy with one of the gadgets and the new Q goes "we're working on it" or something to that extent.  An admission that he might be wrong about a few of the gadgets and then Craig gives him that "" look


----------



## Detective (Aug 4, 2012)

*Spoiler*: __ 





He is in a glass box full of emotions that threaten the safety of the free world if he's let out.


----------



## Jay. (Aug 4, 2012)

Holy fuck.


Gonna be good


----------



## Nimander (Aug 4, 2012)

Craig makes a fucking good Bond.  Less polished than his later Bond incarnations acted by the likes of Connery and Brosnan.  For some reason I've always thought this made him seem more "realistic" to me as a secret agent.

Anyway, this comes out the month of my birthday.  So it'll definitely be on my list of movies to watch when that time rolls around.


----------



## Detective (Oct 5, 2012)

Dat Theme. Can't wait for the visuals.

Come at me, SMERSH Agents!


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Oct 5, 2012)

Two weeks ago I finally finished watching all the bond films and Im very stoked for skyfall.

This is what I wrote about the series 

Yep their isnt a doubt in my mind Pierce Brosnan is my favorite Bond so far, going to watch Die Another Day now, then I move on to the Bourne Legacy Films
Kudos Brosnan, all 4 of your films as bond have kept me very entertained , I loved them all, you kept up the quality, now time to switch timelines, moving on to the Reboot Casino Royale here I come!
You know the thing I liked the best about the Brosnan Bond movies is , the mannerisms and the nuance within his acting as Bond. It really gave him a suave feeling different from the calculating personality that was represented by Connery and the smooth acting that Roger Moore had where he gave off the feeling of a deadly and ditzy spy. 

The villains and the other characters in his 4 movies are very well fleshed out too, in their characterization , its very interesting to watch them, the writing is also very well done with the plots, so it always kept me involved. The action scenes in those movie were very hyper-kinetic.

It feels much different from the reboot with Daniel Craig, as he is rather intense, Craig feels like a return to the calculating Bond that Connery represented, the air around him feels very deadly, he seems to be someone who wastes little time when its time to kill. But he works off the duality well when he is warm with women. It works for the aura of mystery in trying to get into Bond's head and his frame of mind.
So I watched Quantum of Solace last night and I can say I was thoroughly entertained. Ive really enjoyed what the team has done with the Bond reboot. The writing tone is different, Bond in this setting feels like a person who is learning, and who is evolving in his thought and in his emotions. I like this kind of James Bond alot he feels more personable to me. The writing in regards to the plot is
different as well, in the past James Bonds the movies were like singular events that were all loosely connected to a bigger picture , in these Bond films, they are directly connected, and it picks up where the other leaves off in a snap. I really like that so I will be eagerly anticipating the release of Skyfall. I still like Brosnan Bond the best though because the writing style for his character didnt really change at all for those 20 movies but he maneuvered the character to be more interesting to me through his skill in acting and that made those movies even more enjoyable for me.


----------



## Uncle Acid (Oct 5, 2012)

Pierce Brosnan is your favourite? Wat!? Really? First time I have seen someone have him as a favourite. I think GoldenEye is a good flick, but Tomorrow Never Dies, The World Is Not Enough and ESPECIALLY Die Another Day are the three worst Bond-flicks imo. Die Another Day is just... I can't find any words bad and negative enough to explain how bad this one is.

But I am very much looking forward to the new one. I really like Daniel Craig as James Bond too. They've made him more human, in lack of a better description, and I like that a lot. Probably my second favourite James Bond just behind Sean Connery, and Casino Royale is top 5 for me.


----------



## masamune1 (Oct 5, 2012)

I've seen plenty of people list Brosnan as their favourite.

And all those films are good (DaD is pretty weak, but still has a few decent moments, if pretty much a parody of itself).


----------



## Jay. (Oct 5, 2012)

adele's song is shit compared to the work of alicia keys and the dude from royal.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Oct 5, 2012)

I pretty much described it perfectly on why he feels more human to you.
I dont understand why you didnt like them but I enjoyed those 4 movies alot. XD


----------



## Uncle Acid (Oct 5, 2012)

*Spoiler*: __ 



[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPFBPxFDFB8[/YOUTUBE]




Seriously, that's just too much for me to handle. I can not deal with it.

I also think the homages in the movie came off really poor. Especially THE Halle Berry scene when she comes up of the water in that bikini. Looks so crap. Not sure if it is because I don't find her attractive at all, or because the scene in itself if shite. Didn't work IMO.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Oct 5, 2012)

... I dont know about you but I saw it all digitally restored in HD :

I think I understand where your coming from with you issues and you know, getting a helicopter to work midflight,however I watch Resident Evil movies, I can take things at a higher level of suspension of disbelief XD. But still man I just loved the characterization and Brosnans acting vibe.

Writings different for Bond's Character in the reboot so I treat it differently, like a separate entity
Superr stoked for 007 legends too


----------



## Rukia (Oct 5, 2012)

Agree with detective.  The new Skyfall theme is pretty great.


----------



## Detective (Oct 6, 2012)

Rukia said:


> Agree with detective.  The new Skyfall theme is pretty great.















So good, I'm posting it twice. Much better lyrics than Another Way To Die. Although I did like the beat instrumental in that one.

Adele killed it. Bond fan in me is happy.

As a legend once said.

Fucshing Greatsh Songsht, Trebek.


----------



## Detective (Oct 6, 2012)

Jay. said:


> adele's song is shit compared to the work of alicia keys and the dude from royal.



[YOUTUBE]TOoPjeh_vkE[/YOUTUBE]



*P.S:* I agree on the Chris Cornell "You Know My Name" aspect. Until Skyfall proves otherwise, it had the best cohesion between the track and the visual opening. CR is ranked as best Craig bond adaption until further notice.


----------



## dream (Oct 6, 2012)

Not really a fan of Adele's songs but I rather enjoyed this.

November 9th can't come any sooner.


----------



## Zhen Chan (Oct 6, 2012)




----------



## Ash (Oct 9, 2012)

Omg Adele 

It's a HUGE improvement over that shit Alicia Keys theme in QoS. That's one of the reasons I hated that movie.


----------



## Uncle Acid (Oct 9, 2012)

One of the reasons you hated a QoS was because of a theme song? Tell me, do you also hate movies if they got bad posters? Or bad trailers? Or shitty fans?
Would you dislike your favourite movie if you didn't like the theme song too?


----------



## Ash (Oct 9, 2012)

Yes.

You seem to be taking this personally.


----------



## Uncle Acid (Oct 9, 2012)

Why would I take it personal? I'm not the biggest fan of Quantum of Solace either. Just thought it was a beyond retarded reason for not liking a movie. That's all.


----------



## Furious George (Oct 9, 2012)

Not listening to the theme until I hear it play in the movie.  

I'm sure its great though. I'm not in love with all of her music but Adele is clearly one of the best in the biz right now.


----------



## Ash (Oct 9, 2012)

Uncle Acid said:


> Why would I take it personal? I'm not the biggest fan of Quantum of Solace either. Just thought it was a beyond retarded reason for not liking a movie. That's all.



I disliked QoS for many reasons. As I said, the theme is *one* of the reasons I didn't like that movie. Multiple bad aspects = possibly not gonna like.


----------



## Detective (Oct 9, 2012)

Furious George said:


> Not listening to the theme until I hear it play in the movie.
> 
> I'm sure its great though. I'm not in love with all of her music but Adele is clearly one of the best in the biz right now.



Here is a tempting 3 word preview my angry prime ape friend:

Bitch.Slayed.It


----------



## Rukia (Oct 9, 2012)

I think Goldeneye has the best opening so far.  But this is a contender.


----------



## GaaraoftheDesert1 (Oct 9, 2012)

When the hell ...did Adele become so hot...


----------



## dream (Oct 9, 2012)

GaaraoftheDesert1 said:


> When the hell ...did Adele become so hot...



When the moon turned blue...oh wait.


----------



## Furious George (Oct 10, 2012)

Detective said:


> Here is a tempting 3 word preview my angry prime ape friend:
> 
> Bitch.Slayed.It







Rukia said:


> I think Goldeneye has the best opening so far.  But this is a contender.



_*"You'll never know how I watched you
From the shadows as a child
You'll never know how it feels
To get so close and be denied"*_ 

Some of my favorite lyrics in all of music period. 

That being said I would probably put Thunderball by Tom Jones as the best opening I've heard. 

And am I the only one that absolutely loved You Know My Name?


----------



## Zhen Chan (Oct 10, 2012)

GaaraoftheDesert1 said:


> When the hell ...did Adele become so hot...



Shes always been hot

I would swung those big ass thigh of hers in the sky and munch that rug till  she made the glass crack


----------



## Detective (Oct 10, 2012)

Furious George said:


> And am I the only one that absolutely loved You Know My Name?



Of course not. I still remember that magical night in November 2006 when I first saw Casino Royale on opening night. And DAT INTRO with DAT THEME played. I was a life long Bond fan since I was a kid, but I fell in love all over again with that opening.

Amazing Modern Bond Theme.


----------



## Furious George (Oct 10, 2012)

Detective said:


> Of course not. I still remember that magical night in November 2006 when I first saw Casino Royale on opening night. And DAT INTRO with DAT THEME played. *I was a life long Bond fan since I was a kid, but I fell in love all over again with that opening.*
> 
> Amazing Modern Bond Theme.



Had a similar experience. 

"You needn't worry. The second is-" 
*silenced shot* 
"Yes. Considerably."



I'm sorry, but I have no hope of Skyfall being a better movie then Casino Royale. It'd better be superior to QoS, but being better than CR is asking far too much.


----------



## Detective (Oct 10, 2012)

Furious George said:


> I'm sorry, but I have no hope of Skyfall being a better movie then Casino Royale. It'd better be superior to QoS, but being better than CR is asking far too much.



It really is, but I have more faith in Sam Mendes than I had in Marc Forster. Also, as a Bond fan, I must hope that the next film is greater than the last.

But no one will ever replace Eva Green as Vesper as my favourite Bond Girl of all time.

She was timeless. And I totally understood why Bond became a cold womanizing beast after her death.

She was like the Ultimate Wife Material.

Smart. Sexy. Beautiful in the Classical Meaning. Playful. Compassionate and Bond's Equal in every aspect.

Craig's delivery of "The Bitch Is Dead" was magnificent because of how you knew he didn't even mean it at all, but at the same time, he didn't know what else to say because she took everything that he wanted to give her in life when she chose to die for her sin against him.

Amazing.

:33

*P.S:* This track was so under rated as well. Criminally short.


----------



## Violent-nin (Oct 15, 2012)

Rukia said:


> I think Goldeneye has the best opening so far.  But this is a contender.



Damn fucking skippy!

<3 GoldenEye, favorite Bond movie by far.


----------



## Rukia (Oct 15, 2012)

Casino Royale was fucking awesome.  It's as good as any Bond film I have ever seen.

I have no doubts about Skyfall.  If we are going to nitpick though.  I will admit that it has the worst Bond girls in a while.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Oct 15, 2012)

Worst bond girls were in the last Rodger Moor movie, wait no second to last... dunno.


----------



## Detective (Oct 15, 2012)

Rukia said:


> Casino Royale was fucking awesome.  It's as good as any Bond film I have ever seen.
> 
> I have no doubts about Skyfall.  If we are going to nitpick though.  I will admit that it has the worst Bond girls in a while.



It's all about Bond now. The girls will progressively escalate later. 

However:

Eva Green as Vesper >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All.

Come at me!


----------



## Uncle Acid (Oct 15, 2012)

Ursula Andress as Honey Ryder is by far the best Bond girl. She's superior to everyone else. Eva Green as Vesper is the second best one.

Can't wait for the 25th to come.


----------



## dream (Oct 15, 2012)

Detective said:


> Eva Green as Vesper >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All.
> 
> Come at me!



Can't disagree with this statement at all.  Hopefully we will see a better Bond girl in the future.


----------



## Rukia (Oct 16, 2012)

Detective said:


> It's all about Bond now. The girls will progressively escalate later.
> 
> However:
> 
> ...


Not gonna argue bro.  That scene in the bathroom before the poker match.


----------



## Dr.Douchebag (Oct 16, 2012)

Adele's song is not bad but isn't that good, still prefer you know my name, awesome soundtrack to an awesome movie


----------



## synthax (Oct 18, 2012)

Sam Mendes Says He Was "Not At All" Interested In Bond At First, Took Direct Inspiration From Nolan's 'Dark Knight' Films



"In terms of what [Nolan] achieved, specifically ‘The Dark Knight,’ the second movie, what it achieved, which is something exceptional. It was a game changer for everybody." 

"We’re now in an industry where movies are very small or very big and there’s almost nothing in the middle. And it would be a tragedy if all the serious movies were very small and all the popcorn movies were very big and have nothing to say. And what Nolan proved was that you can make a huge movie that is thrilling and entertaining and has a lot to say about the world we live in, even if, in the case with ‘The Dark Knight,’ it’s not even set in our world. If felt like a movie that was about our world post-9/11 and played on our fears and discussed our fears and why they existed and I thought that was incredibly brave and interesting. That did help give me the confidence to take this movie in directions that, without ‘The Dark Knight,’ might not have been possible. Because also, people go, ‘Wow, that’s pretty dark,’ but then you can point to ‘Dark Knight’ and go ‘Look at that – that’s a darker movie, and it took in a gazillion dollars!’ That’s very helpful. There’s also that thing – it’s clearly possible to make a dark movie that people want to see."


----------



## Rukia (Oct 18, 2012)

I have seriously watched the trailers like 100 times each.


----------



## dream (Oct 18, 2012)

I don't think that I could watch Skyfall's trailers more than ten or fifteen times.  Now Avatar's trailers were ones that I could watch over and over again.


----------



## Liverbird (Oct 19, 2012)

Relevant
[YOUTUBE]RDiZOnzajNU[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## dream (Oct 19, 2012)

That's pretty damn awesome.


----------



## Liverbird (Oct 20, 2012)

I don't know about you, but I'd love to see a gag reel of the people that either failed or just said "nah, fuck that".


----------



## Liverbird (Oct 20, 2012)

Skyfall IMAX Exclusive Poster


----------



## Rukia (Oct 20, 2012)

I would have started singing Adele's Skyfall and would have failed the challenge.


----------



## Bart (Oct 20, 2012)

Despite all the raving reviews, I really do hope this surpasses what made Casino really special in my mind, as that film was beyond brilliant :WOW


----------



## Vault (Oct 20, 2012)

This should have been in London too  I would have participated


----------



## Rukia (Oct 20, 2012)

Forgot this one was so good.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnzgdBAKyJo[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Oct 20, 2012)

My fav out of the three movie songs and one of my fav James Bond movie songs.


----------



## Detective (Oct 21, 2012)




----------



## Dr.Douchebag (Oct 21, 2012)

Gotta say I thought skyfall was ok at first but its really grown on me , props to adele

Supremacy is awesome too, nice work detective


----------



## Hatifnatten (Oct 21, 2012)

I'm more interested in watching how paint dries on the growing grass.


----------



## Detective (Oct 21, 2012)

Hatifnatten said:


> I'm more interested in watching how paint dries on the growing grass.



Your interest in Bleach is completely irrelevant to the subject of James Bond in this thread, friend.

In other news, a lot of people have been comparing Bardem's Raoul Silva to a Joker-esque character for Bond. Too bad he will meet a bad end by the film's climax.

[YOUTUBE]KXKHnkYVY_s[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Liverbird (Oct 21, 2012)

Detective said:


> Your interest in Bleach is completely irrelevant to the subject of James Bond in this thread, friend.
> 
> In other news, a lot of people have been comparing Bardem's Raoul Silva to a Joker-esque character for Bond. Too bad he will meet a bad end by the film's climax.
> 
> ...



Wow, I'm not sure how I've missed that.. kudos for sharing mate.

I'm already loving the Raoul dude, looks like an amazing villain and yes his personality seems to have similarities with the Joker which makes it really exciting since all of the antagonists in the series before are evil serious.


----------



## dream (Oct 21, 2012)




----------



## Lulu (Oct 22, 2012)

I finally find fans of james bond. *happy much* :-D


----------



## Lulu (Oct 22, 2012)

I have watched every bond movie ever made. Just have not read the books. I dont think its fair alot of people say daniel craig bond has no swag or stuff. He is portraying bond as a young less polished and less experienced spy and hell yeah he nailed the portrayal in casino royale.
I have also watched the skyfall trailers over and over and over. I even have the commercials of heineken relating to the movie.lol


----------



## Liverbird (Oct 22, 2012)

biggestluey said:


> I have watched every bond movie ever made. Just have not read the books. *I dont think its fair alot of people say daniel craig bond has no swag or stuff.* He is portraying bond as a young less polished and less experienced spy and hell yeah he nailed the portrayal in casino royale.
> I have also watched the skyfall trailers over and over and over. I even have the commercials of heineken relating to the movie.lol



Daniel is amazing as Bond, he sure was doubted and disliked before the movie was out.. but CR proved everyone wrong and I'm certain most people like him now.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Oct 22, 2012)

biggestluey said:


> I have watched every bond movie ever made. Just have not read the books. I dont think its fair alot of people say daniel craig bond has no swag or stuff. He is portraying bond as a young less polished and less experienced spy and hell yeah he nailed the portrayal in casino royale.
> I have also watched the skyfall trailers over and over and over. I even have the commercials of heineken relating to the movie.lol


Less polished? Psh please go read what I wrote in this thread.

It has a much more interesting depth to it once you dive into it.


----------



## Lulu (Oct 22, 2012)

St NightRazr said:


> Less polished? Psh please go read what I wrote in this thread.
> 
> It has a much more interesting depth to it once you dive into it.



i dont have any idea what you are saying. Are agreeing with my post or are you disagreeing with something i said?


----------



## Megaharrison (Oct 22, 2012)

Craig's portrayal of Bond is necessary. The later Pierce Brosnan Bond depictions were more or less campy 1960's-esque Batman (and this isn't really his fault, it was an intentional direction by the producers). He took Bond back to his roots and made him grittier, which is what audiences want these days (see: success of the Nolan Batman trilogy). Plus the guy actually looks like he can kick ass.

I loved Casino Royale, hated Quantum. I am hearing great things of Skyfall though and Silvia is being called a great bond villain. So here's hoping


----------



## Liverbird (Oct 22, 2012)

In my opinion Daniel Craig's Bond's strongest and most noticeable characteristics are his ego and stubbornness, it differs from previous Bonds.. and I love that.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Oct 22, 2012)

How the hell can you hate quantam of solace?
It was awesome. So much growth.


----------



## Lulu (Oct 22, 2012)

I will take QoS and DaD anytime anyday over the timothy dalton bond movies(my least favorites). 
Speaking of opening theme songs,my best in the franchise are:
1.goldeneye 
2.bloodstone


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Oct 26, 2012)

Adele is fucking amazing, that opening fits Bond perfectly. It could open any Bond film from Dr. No until Quantum and you wouldn't sense anything is amiss. 

Really looking forward to Skyfall as Quantum was such a letdown after Royale. Looks like they pulled out all the stops to get a real pro in charge this time (Mendes).


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Oct 26, 2012)

^ I still dont understand how people were let down with Quantum.

Seriously lol. I really like that Supremacy song hope they use it in the film


----------



## Jay. (Oct 26, 2012)

Daniel is the most coldblooded bond.

Hence, perfect bond for modern society.


Daniel haters live in the past. I admit that quantrum solace had too much bourne elements and was not the classic bond movie. Especially since Daniel fucked himself up many times, without the suit up super swag of connery and brosnan. Nor the charming arrogant smile like Moore.

He was just a killer not the british, elegant spy that always manages to look neat after fucking things up.



But I guess the move makers where going back to basics in Skyfall.

I can already see Daniel Craig swagging things up in this one just like the classic Bond.

But in a more badass and modern way.


I love Daniel Craig and I want to smell his penis.




Also he's fucking some mad braods again in this one.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Oct 26, 2012)

RESPECT MAH BROTHA^


----------



## Liverbird (Oct 26, 2012)

St NightRazr said:


> ^ I still dont understand how people were let down with Quantum.



Mainly because they were expecting way too much


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Oct 26, 2012)

It was a great balance of setting to story telling, character development, fleshing out the overall plot and Bond himself with the action in place. Whats not to like?


----------



## Liverbird (Oct 26, 2012)

IMO it didn't have anything really special to specify QoS from the other JB movies, nothing to make it unique.

But it was decent.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Oct 26, 2012)

I liked it because it was setting a different tone and precedent with the future Bond films diverging it from the past Bonds.


----------



## Dr.Douchebag (Oct 26, 2012)

Just saw this movie

fucking awesome 

Javier Bardem,Judi Dench and Craig were all great and it had some really nice humor and a really nice story 

Adele's skyfall intro is also epic 

Berenice Marlohe was so hot this movie


----------



## masamune1 (Oct 26, 2012)

Just saw this movie too.


----------



## Liverbird (Oct 26, 2012)

I need to wait another week to go see it, and I have a feeling like it's going to be the longest week of my life. 

And please don't forget to put spoilers under spoiler tags considering this movies is fresh.


----------



## masamune1 (Oct 26, 2012)

*Spoiler*: __ 



To be honest, I was a _little_ let down by this movie. It had the style and feel of an epic Bond movie, but the villain's plot was a bit pedestrian. True, he is willing to kill hundreds of people and cause several international incidents to achieve his aim; but at the end of the day, he simply wants to kill M (after dragging her name through the mud), which is a little petty for a Bond villain, especially one who puts this amount of effort into a plan. In addition, some parts of his plan would make the Joker go "Oh, come on! Like you could plan for that!"

I dunno, I just....was expecting a bit more. Maybe someone could have hired Silva (without necessarily changing his backstory) as part of a much bigger plan, or revenge was a distraction to his _true_ goal. All that would be much more...Bondian. Plus, his secret lair was wasted- he has an _entire abandoned city_ and is kicked out and nabbed mere minutes after Bond shows up. A whole climactic battle could have been done there. Not to mention his death was a little lame. 

But....apart from that, I don't have a lot of complaints. Javier Bardem was really, really good and a very menacing Bond villain, and the acting all round was top-notch. The action was good- no classic moments, but lots of big explosions and gunfights and other great Bondian stuff, plus a few mythology gags that don't seem too out of place (looking at you, _DaD_). And you learn about Bond's past (well, unless you are a fan who already knows it, and a couple of minor details seem to have been invented for the movie, but still- nice to see it for the 50th anniversary).

Music, cinematography, script, drama- all thoroughly enjoyable. A couple of sets and scenes were a bit of a let down (apart from Silva's lair, Shangai seemed to be in it for the sake of it), but others made up for it (London and Glencoe were milked for all they were worth, and I liked the Macau bit- and on that point, I can't be the only one to have been reminded of _Inception_ with that scene (and Silva's lair, for that matter), though Mendes does more with it. Silva could have used some more memorable henchmen or resources too.

But overall? Yeah- I think I want to see it again. There are a few places it could have been improved, but in the end its a strong, enjoyable movie. Role on the next one. Would probably give it something like a 9/10.


----------



## masamune1 (Oct 26, 2012)

*Spoiler*: __ 



Oh, and signature guns exist in movies so that you can lose them. Most pointless gadget ever, especially since _Licence to Kill used it already._


----------



## Deimos (Oct 26, 2012)

Didn't really like it... I got bored several times.


----------



## Fran (Oct 26, 2012)

great movie

accidentally got pregnant watching daniel craig, fuck


----------



## tashtin (Oct 27, 2012)

Was dissapointed, only because everyone was hailing it as "the best bond ever" - its far from the best but it is a great bond film nonetheless. 

The plot was great, the cinematography was great. The floating casino is orgasmic nicely contrasted with the dilapidated island. Bardem/Craig/Dench were also great.

A great movie all round.


----------



## Hatifnatten (Oct 27, 2012)

Was boring as hell. At least I didn't have to pay.


----------



## masamune1 (Oct 27, 2012)

tashtin said:


> Was dissapointed, only because everyone was hailing it as "the best bond ever" - its far from the best but it is a great bond film nonetheless.
> 
> The plot was great, the cinematography was great. The floating casino is orgasmic nicely contrasted with the dilapidated island. Bardem/Craig/Dench were also great.
> 
> A great movie all round.



I think the plot was the weakest part of the whole film.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Oct 27, 2012)

People watch Bond films expecting it not to have boring parts?


----------



## PoinT_BlanK (Oct 27, 2012)

Only disappointed with the villain's goal, I expected more. It was all so butter and bread.

And the CGI lizards, there was no need for them.

Performances were on point though.


----------



## tashtin (Oct 28, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> I think the plot was the weakest part of the whole film.



To each their own but why did you think it was weak? Granted, it was in essence quite basic and not as grandiose as (bond) plots go but it served its purpose. It accentuated the betrayal felt by silva and the lengths he would go and it also cemented M's importance and highlighted the role she played in both their lives.



PoinT_BlanK said:


> the CGI lizards, there was no need for them



They were totally needed mate, without them the film would have been left hollow.

The lizards are a throwback to the golden age of bond films an homage to OTT methods of killing from shark tanks to steel teeth to decapitating bowler hats to testicle bisecting lasers. Do you even know what's cool anymore?


----------



## PoinT_BlanK (Oct 28, 2012)

yeah, I guess I never liked over the top stuff..didn't like the way they looked either..but I hear what you're saying..


----------



## masamune1 (Oct 28, 2012)

tashtin said:


> To each their own but why did you think it was weak? Granted, it was in essence quite basic and not as grandiose as (bond) plots go but it served its purpose. It accentuated the betrayal felt by silva and the lengths he would go and it also cemented M's importance and highlighted the role she played in both their lives.



The basic-ness is part of it- Bond villains have had basic goals before, but there is always something bigger going on in the background. Like, they have a secondary objective, or they have been hired by or are selling to somebody else. 

I know it seems cliche` to expect Ralph Fiennes to be playing a villain, but the film could have been so much better if he was, if he had hired Silva for some sinister end (even if Silva retained his own motives). He could have been a member of Quantum or something- they had potential. And it would have made the end of the film _totally_ different even if everything else happened exactly as it did, and set up future storylines beautifully. _Something_ like that would have been better.

But no; the _real_ problem is how ridiculously convoluted Silva's plan was. 


*Spoiler*: __ 



He steals a data thingy containing the names of every undercover NATO agent in the world; waits three months, then breaks into M's office while she is away, hacks into it using her computer, blows up MI6 (forcing them to move to a secondary location- thanks to protocol, Silva knows what said location is, and mapped it better than MI6 did, then starts taunting M by releasing the names of the agents weekly. He has humiliated her and put her job at risk in the worst possible way- by killing her people and making sure everyone holds her repsonsible for it.

Fair enough. But now thinks start to go awry.

The _next_ part of his plan is to kill some random person in Shanghai, with his sniper murdering his way to the top of a building and shooting the victim in the next one. Which is fine- except that said victim is _surrounded_ by people who work for Silva already (who take away his body). Why did he need to go to such lengths? Presumably, he just staged the whole thing so that MI6 would know that his assassin was going to be there, and he was hoping that Bond would track him down and get the lead to Macau and, from there, to Silva himself. Convoluted, and based a lot on chance, but serves its purpose. Though I've only realised just now that that is what that guy was probably killed for, as the film doesn't drop us any other hints.

But then the real problems sink in. First, he lets Bond capture him- so his plan relies on the assumption that Bond won't kill him instead (not to mention that he'll escape and have backup). Next, he gets taken to the new MI6 location- so his plan relies on MI6 following protocol by moving there rather than somewhere else (which they might do, given there systems have been hacked and obviously by a traitor of some sort) and on Silva being taken there rather than a third location (and, seemingly, being taken to that exact room rather than another one). And he needs Q-Branch to hack into his computer (he seems to know roughly when they will succeed in doing this, somehow) to trigger the virus that opens up every door in the building, allowing him to escape (they could have failed; they could have caught onto his trick; they could have waited in case there was a trick; they could have tried to hack into it from somewhere else his cell might not have been linked to their system; etc).

_Then,_ he is going to escape to the underground, have his goons disguised as policemen pass him the same disguise; he _crashes a train_ as a distraction (he uses a radio transmitter to cause this, so the bomb must have been planted ages ago); he'll break into the commitee that M will be attending (timing Bond capturing him with the event, and his escape, to the hour it seems), and he'll shoot M dead in public.

He fails.

And he does all that just to shoot her.

And he can break into her office, steal her top-secret files, blow up her building, know _exactly_ when and where she'll be at any given moment, play her and Bond and Q and MI6 in general like violins and know exactly how they will react right down to the timing of when they will do given things...and he has to go to such _nsane_ lengths just to get an opportunity to shoot her? And thats ignoring how easily _Bond_ breaks into her house in _two_ different movies including this one- the house where she lives alone. She is probably weeks at best away from forcibly being retired (which he could know from hacking into her computer, and those of govt. ministers or other MI6 people, or just following the flippin' news), so if he waited just a little bit longer she'll be even more vulnerable than she already is too.....

If he can do all of the above, then simply shooting her- or, even kidnapping her and torturing her to death or something-, should be a freakin' walk in the park. But he has to come up with this insanely complex plan that in the end doesn't even pay off.

Oh, and after that he decides just to throw a bunch of armed goons at her- and waits until he finds out the first wave have been killed to tell his men that "by the way, I'm the only one allowed to kill her" (pretty sure she was already shot by this point too). He's not very good at thinking this through.

Its obvious that they were just trying to imitate the Joker here, but they fail to realise that in TDK, the Joker had bigger goals, _multiple_ goals, limited resources (by comparison at least), and his plan wouldn't have fallen apart if somebody smurdered him (might have even _succeeded_ if that happened). Nor did he spend _years_ (as Q said Silva did) concuting his plans, let alone his plans to kill individual people. And despite appearances, the Joker didn't rely on absolutely everything going off without a hitch, and made a lot up as he went along.

Basically, if all Silva wanted to do was kill her, then there was no need to be so absoultely crazy about it. Especially since he didn't seem to care so much about messing with Bond (who for all he knew was dead),not even just to piss M off, yet so much of his plan rests on stringing Bond along.




Yeah, I know the plots of Bond movies don't always make sense, but they usually don't make sense for totally different reasons. This is the first Bond film I can think of where the problem is the villains reach greatly exceeds his goal, rather than the other way around, and he _still_ has trouble hitting it anyway.

Not saying I didn't enjoy the movie-far from it. But the plot was definitely the weakest element.


> The lizards are a throwback to the golden age of bond films an homage to OTT methods of killing from shark tanks to steel teeth to decapitating bowler hats to testicle bisecting lasers. Do you even know what's cool anymore?



Well, a proper throwback would be if the dragons were there just so people could be fed to them.

Which is another thing- Silva has one of the coolest secret lairs of any villain in the series- and it lasts for three scenes. Nothing is done with it. What a waste of an awesome location.

But I digress.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Oct 28, 2012)

Oh yeah I totally get that.


----------



## Hibino (Oct 29, 2012)

I was entertained  I don't get why people are analyzing the hell out of it, I mean it's a Bond movie..


----------



## Lulu (Oct 29, 2012)

M...did she really...you know...die?


----------



## Jay. (Oct 29, 2012)

I wan tto watch this movie.

I'm a huge bond fan but my gf is not.


She didn't watch royale and solace



Is Skyfall's plot connected to the first two movies or is there no problem with watching this one?


----------



## masamune1 (Oct 29, 2012)

Jay. said:


> Is Skyfall's plot connected to the first two movies or is there no problem with watching this one?



Its pretty stand-alone, as far as plot is concerned.


----------



## tashtin (Oct 29, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> But the plot was definitely the weakest element.




*Spoiler*: __ 



The crux of your post seems to be that silvas plan was far too complicated if the primary objective was merely to shoot her - though i do agree on some level, that wouldn't necessarily detract anything from the overarching plot.

Silva had the means,  certainly had the intellect (coupled with his obsession with M) capable enough to manipulate cause and effect to cater to his plot and to have a plan for every eventuality - it wouldn't take a great stretch of the imagination to assume that's exactly what he did but that could be down to individual interpretation... That's how I saw it anyway.

I never got the impression silva wanted to outright kill M. I think he saw M as a mother figure right up to the point he died. He wanted to humiliate her by publicising her incompetence; show her how loyal he was and what it cost him but above all prove his worth, his value and how much better he was than everyone else - especially bond her new favourite. Everything he did (IMO) was in some way to impress her from hacking the most secure computer in Britain to escaping from right under her nose.

As for his connection with bond; the rat analogy summed it up for me, they are the last two, the ones she picked, the old fave and the new. It all comes back to M and his obsession with her and his jealousy towards bond. A timeframe (the lack of it) distorts the perspective of how the film plays out. Certainly silva wouldn't know bond was alive but the minute he resurfaced he would have known. Bond served his purpose of bringing silva to M after which he was no longer a part of his plan.

This is all conjecture on my part and just how I interpreted the film. I do agree about the "reach greater than goal" statement. Silva had the potential to be much more and his showy plan/resources was not needed for what turned out to be a rather personal goal.






masamune1 said:


> Well, a proper throwback would be if the dragons were there just so people could be fed to them.



It would have been but I don't think cinema goers would buy that gimmick anymore. It was more a subtle wink at the audience.



> Which is another thing- Silva has one of the coolest secret lairs of any villain in the series- and it lasts for three scenes. Nothing is done with it. What a waste of an awesome location.



It was a wasted location but I don't see what could have been done with it that wouldn't take away from silvas personal goal/ agenda. Silva wasn't your typical Bond villain I guess...


----------



## masamune1 (Oct 29, 2012)

tashtin said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 



His plan was to humiliate her and then, after letting himself be captured, break into the commitee meeting and shoot her dead- she is only alive because he missed, because he didn't count on Mallory, and because Bond showed up. Not to mention the stuff at the end of the movie.

So he did indeed plan on outright killing her, and in a fairly mundane way too, with just a gunshot. Its possible that he thought the spectacle of killing the head of MI6 in the middle of a public inquiry would make it less mundane, but that implies he somehow orchestrated the inquiry in the first place, except that Bond was already on his way to Shanghai before the inquiry was called.

I don't think he knew that Bond had resurfaced and even if he did, that leads to another problem in that Bond was the one who gave MI6 their lead to Shanghai, and he only did that thanks to pieces of shrapnel from a bullet that there is no way Silva could have known he still possessed. He probably only looked up Bond _after_ Bond appeared in Shanghai- and I retract my earlier statement about the Shanghai hit being staged for MI6's benefit as a breadcrumb trail for that reason, which means we have no idea why Silva wanted that guy dead or why he went to such silly lengths to kill him.

Hmmm....I think, either Silva (wrongly) assumed that MI6 knew the identity of his assassin from the intro, and thus sent him to Shanghai on a pointless hit  to flag MI6's radar (getting lucky that Bond had an unlikely clue); or, and more likely, getting caught was just a back-up plan and he originally was plotting to just hop on an airplane to London, but got everything else set up "just in case", in which case we still don't know why that guy in Shanghai was killed (but I suppose that doesn't really matter; loose end, but not a plothole).

Either way, I don't think he particular knew or cared if it was 007 or 001-6, 8 or 9 that came after him; Bond probably just caught his attention when he looked him up and wondered why M sent a guy who failed his exam and was in piss-poor shape to hunt him down. 







> It would have been but I don't think cinema goers would buy that gimmick anymore. It was more a subtle wink at the audience.



Reality is unrealistic, I guess. 

I don't think it was down to people not buying it; they probably just thought "we're going to have komodo dragons; where can we put them in?"




> It was a wasted location but I don't see what could have been done with it that wouldn't take away from silvas personal goal/ agenda. Silva wasn't your typical Bond villain I guess...



Well, there were probably ways around it (like, he had more men and put up more of a fight or, he retreated there and Bond returned to assassinate him). Though I think that just highlights that he should either have had a bigger motive (or even just an additional one), or have bigger players behind him. He's not the first Bond villain to be driven by revenge (he's quite reminiscent of 006, for a start; also reminds me of Renard and Elektra King), but he's the first to, you know, lack a certain _je nes c'est qua_ about going about it.


----------



## Alice (Oct 31, 2012)

Mostly enjoyed it. Definitely better than "Solace", not quite of par with "Royale". Overall it was a little more pretentious than I expected, considering that it had quite a few "in limbo" moments. 

Craig looked like shit though.

On a sidenote, I really liked opening song. It was a nice oldschool touch after that nonsense Madonna dished out.


----------



## Delta Shell (Oct 31, 2012)

Boring movie, no decent action scenes imo.

CGI Komodo Dragons and FAKE COMPUTER HACKING LIKE THIS MOVIE WAS MADE IN 1997.

Javier Bardem's haircut is inversely proportional to his acting ability,


----------



## Spirit King (Oct 31, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> The basic-ness is part of it- Bond villains have had basic goals before, but there is always something bigger going on in the background. Like, they have a secondary objective, or they have been hired by or are selling to somebody else.
> 
> I know it seems cliche` to expect Ralph Fiennes to be playing a villain, but the film could have been so much better if he was, if he had hired Silva for some sinister end (even if Silva retained his own motives). He could have been a member of Quantum or something- they had potential. And it would have made the end of the film _totally_ different even if everything else happened exactly as it did, and set up future storylines beautifully. _Something_ like that would have been better.
> 
> ...



TBF your kinda completely missing the point. The film did go to great lengths to show he didn't simply want M dead (this was pretty obvious when it stated he made sure to plant the bomb when she wasn't there and she could see it), he was threatrically inclined, he wanted a grand finale and didn't care about his life.

Basically he didn't just want to kill her he wanted to make her life a living hell while reminding her of all the crap she's done over the years. That's why he went through all that crap. He destroyed her reputation wanted to meet her face to face and make his murder of her as publically reported as physically possible. He made a lot of risks and assumptions because ultimatly he didn't care for his whether he succeeded or not he would have died anyway.



Delta Shell said:


> Boring movie, no decent action scenes imo.
> 
> CGI Komodo Dragons and FAKE COMPUTER HACKING LIKE THIS MOVIE WAS MADE IN 1997.
> 
> Javier Bardem's haircut is inversely proportional to his acting ability,



TBF there's barely any movies that correctly portrays computer hacking, just like a defibilator isn't actually used to shock a heart that's stopped beating into beating again. TV and movies state an obscene amount of crap, either you'll end up nit-picking everything or move on. Just be thankful they weren't doing two person keyboard counter-hacking.

Anyway my main issue with the movie is the ending, the guy is one of few bond villains that could competantly take bond in tactical warfare, he dies by a knife in the back. They should have at leats let him die in straight duel with bond, would have been moe climatic that way.


----------



## Lulu (Nov 1, 2012)

Every bond game,movie daniel 'awesome' craig has been above 7.8/10 to me. And this movie is very good. Am sorry some of you had your expectation's sky high for sky fall,but mine was high and it did not disappoint.


----------



## TylerDurden (Nov 1, 2012)

SKYFALL - 9/10

God, that was great...it was less action-packed (there weren't a lot of shaky-cam, close quarter melee combat shots like there was in Casino Royale but that loss was made up by the sheer emotional impact which was certainly more affecting than that of Casino Royale (which felt a wee bit emotionless for me, especially given the revelation of the true nature of the character "Eva" in the movie) as well as its sheer superiority in terms cinematography (the battle in the shanghai building was superbly executed and shot, those lights broo....). I also liked how Bond was kinda reborn in the movie (i was initially disappointed , but he got back only 5-10 minutes after being presumed dead, but the third act laid his past bare..which was a good thing), as well as the twist at the end which caught me off-guard...(i'm sure everyone was, but i should have known given Ralph Fiennes's character's first letter in its name...)

all in all, a powerful entry of the series, The Dark Knight Rises is still the movie of the year (i'm not staging war against Nolan cynics, just blurting out my true opinion) but this is the bond anybody could ever hope for, and yes, arguably better than Casino Royale...


----------



## TylerDurden (Nov 1, 2012)

Spirit King said:


> Anyway my main issue with the movie is the ending, the guy is one of few bond villains that could competantly take bond in tactical warfare, he dies by a knife in the back. They should have at leats let him die in straight duel with bond, would have been moe climatic that way.



yeah, when Silva personally pointed out Bond's poor performance in the MI6 skill test and when he revealed he was an ex-agent MI6 agent (and a very good one at that), i thought they would have a battle (or a stand-off of some sort) just to symbolize that Bond had gotten back in shape or perhaps Bond could cement the fact that he was the best agent in existence...

Javier Bardem's performance was so fuckin' good that i'm disgruntled his character appeared in a Bond Movie (i mean a bond villain is supposed to be defeated, no matter what)..it kinda reminded me of Kumogawa (a character from Medaka Box [a comic book])


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 1, 2012)

Spirit King said:


> TBF your kinda completely missing the point. The film did go to great lengths to show he didn't simply want M dead (this was pretty obvious when it stated he made sure to plant the bomb when she wasn't there and she could see it), he was threatrically inclined, he wanted a grand finale and didn't care about his life.
> 
> Basically he didn't just want to kill her he wanted to make her life a living hell while reminding her of all the crap she's done over the years. That's why he went through all that crap. He destroyed her reputation wanted to meet her face to face and make his murder of her as publically reported as physically possible. He made a lot of risks and assumptions because ultimatly he didn't care for his whether he succeeded or not he would have died anyway.




*Spoiler*: __ 



Eh, no. He actually tried to shoot her. Twice. First time he missed, second time he couldn't go through with it and tried to get her to shoot through both their heads. Not to mention he told his goons not to kill her (because he wanted to be one to do it) only _after_ the first wave had shot the crap out of the house. 

I'm talking about _after_ that living hell stuff. _After_ he planted the bomb in MI6. Getting captured and disguising himself as a policeman and crashing a train and all that stuff was all so that he could break into that commitee and shoot her dead- and he failed. And yeah, he cares about not dying, at least insofar as not dying before he kills her and that she knows who was screwing with her (and he always had the option of "not dying" if he chose). If he was simply shot earlier in the movie, or if certain characters reacted differently than he predicted, then his plan would have fallen apart and M would have been broken, but not beaten.

If all he wanted to do was humiliate her then he shouldn't have done half the things he did in the movie, though if that stuff was done just so he could kill her he should have come up with a simpler plan that was more likely to succeed (which, in the end, he did, but only after his _main_ plan had been defeated)


----------



## tashtin (Nov 1, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*Spoiler*: __ 





Are you sure about this? I'll need to watch it again cos I can't remember. It seemed to me that Malory grabbed M at which point silva shot him - I don't recall him pushing M out the way (I could be wrong).



> Not to mention the stuff at the end of the movie.



What happened at the end of the movie provides the strongest evidence of silvas indecision/ uncertainty in regards to M, even when he has a chance to shoot her in cold blood - he is unable to; encapsulating his frame of mind.



> but that implies he somehow orchestrated the inquiry in the first place,



Perhaps he did. Perhaps he timed the leak of the spies knowing an inquiry would follow. Silvas reach (though never fully touched on) may very well extend beyond mi5/6... (All conjecture on my part)



> I retract my earlier statement about the Shanghai hit being staged for MI6's benefit as a breadcrumb trail



To manipulate mi6; That is the only logical reason for that entire act. To use an assassin that used specialised bullets  (1/3 in the world), for said assassin to spray bullets all over the marketplace and killing an agent with the same gun only to need bond to identify him was a bit of a cop out.






> lack a certain je nes c'est qua about going about it



That would be greatly underselling silva as a villain, mate. He had the ability, the means, nigh perfect plan executed brilliantly and an entire security/ intelligence agency wrapped around his finger... The only thing that lacked the wow factor was his end goal which like you said fell well beneath his talents.


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 1, 2012)

*Spoiler*: __ 





tashtin said:


> Are you sure about this? I'll need to watch it again cos I can't remember. It seemed to me that Malory grabbed M at which point silva shot him - I don't recall him pushing M out the way (I could be wrong).



From what I remember, Silva came in and started shooting, and Mallory shot back trying to save M, and got shot for it.

And he got upset when Bond shot the fire extinguishers, thus allowing M to escape. Plus, you know, if he _wasn't_  trying to kill M (while firing bullets in her direction), what exactly was he trying to accomplish in that scene?



> What happened at the end of the movie provides the strongest evidence of silvas indecision/ uncertainty in regards to M, even when he has a chance to shoot her in cold blood - he is unable to; encapsulating his frame of mind.



He had also tried to kill her multiple times throughout the film, or otherwise put her in grave mortal danger.

What happened at the end is due to the circumstances being different. Firstly, he had tried to kill her several times before and got nothing for it but a bunch of dead henchmen and wasted bullets, so he was pretty stressed out by the whole thing; and secondly, this was the first time he had a chance to kill her when it was (more or less) just him and her alone.

But that doesn't mean he hadn't been trying to kill he before; it just means that this was the first time he had the chance to kill her in that particular fashion, and under that much emotional distress. His frame of mind _at that particular moment_ was different from his frame of mind in the rest of the movie, even if it hints that, had he achieved his objective, he would have been unhappy about it.



> Perhaps he did. Perhaps he timed the leak of the spies knowing an inquiry would follow. Silvas reach (though never fully touched on) may very well extend beyond mi5/6... (All conjecture on my part)



The problem is that, firstly, he could not have known for definite that it _would_ lead to an inquiry; and secondly, that he could not know for certain the timing of said inquiry. And if his plan all along was to trick MI6 into capturing him at that particular moment (rather than, him being captured being Plan B or something)...that is far too perfectly orchestrated, especially since nobody on the inquiry or in charge of setting it up seems to be in league with him.

That, and arranging an inquiry in order to kill M in public is not really necessary, at least not when considering the ridiculous lengths he took to get there, and all the things that could have went wrong with it. 



> To manipulate mi6; That is the only logical reason for that entire act. To use an assassin that used specialised bullets  (1/3 in the world), for said assassin to spray bullets all over the marketplace and killing an agent with the same gun only to need bond to identify him was a bit of a cop out.



Well, they didnt't use any of the bullets recovered from the marketplace or the dead agent.

So, the plan required:

a) That Silva knew Bond was still alive.

b) That Bond would return to MI6.

c) That the assassin would shoot Bond with one of those bullets.

d) That Bond would survive being shot by one of those bullets.

e) That Bond would still have fragments of those bullets, and would choose to keep them over the three months of his death, knowing somehow that the bullet was not a normal bullet.

f) That Silva sent that assassin to Shanghai because he knew that Bond had come back from the dead, had the bullet fragments in his possession,  and would hand them over to MI6 who would manage to identify them- even though he had sent the assassin to Shanghai already.

Its possible that Bond being shot was not part of the plan and Silva was just taking advantage of that, but that only eliminates C).

The way this scheme makes the most sense is- the Shanghai assassination was unrelated to Silva's plot, Silva planned _for being_ captured but not _to be_ captured, and Silva had no idea Bond was still alive or, until meeting him, thought of him as anyone other than just another Double-0 agent. 

Or, he planned on getting caught, but did not know how MI6 would achieve it. Either way, his plan was convoluted for such a simple goal- if he could successfully predict both M's and MI6's moves with such precision throughout the movie, then he could have come up with a better plan to get M alone and / or kill her, if thats what he really wanted, in addtion to embarassing her on the global stage. 



> That would be greatly underselling silva as a villain, mate. He had the ability, the means, nigh perfect plan executed brilliantly and an entire security/ intelligence agency wrapped around his finger... The only thing that lacked the wow factor was his end goal which like you said fell well beneath his talents.



Thats not underselling it- thats what I said.

Except for the "nigh-perfect plan executed brillianty" bit.


----------



## Lulu (Nov 1, 2012)

Yes. Now that skyfall is here,what of the game 007 LEGENDS promised us?


----------



## tashtin (Nov 2, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*Spoiler*: __ 





Nah, I'm pretty certain Mallory got shot once he made a grab for M. Iirc - silva comes in > shoots the police/ guards > confronts M > Mallory makes a grab for M > silva shoots Mallory who falls taking M down with him > bond hits the scene fires a few shots > kicks a gun towards Mallory...

Again, my memory is vague but I'm confident about that chain of events; I'm seeing it again today (Friday) so I can clear up any issues.



> And he got upset when Bond shot the fire extinguishers, thus allowing M to escape. Plus, you know, if he _wasn't_  trying to kill M (while firing bullets in her direction), what exactly was he trying to accomplish in that scene?



He was upset that she was getting away but I don't think he fired a single shot towards/ at her. He was aiming for the police/Mallory/bond/moneypenny. I'm lost as to what he was trying to accomplish beyond confronting M. 



> He had also tried to kill her multiple times throughout the film, or otherwise put her in grave mortal danger.



I don't think she was in any real danger (not from him at least) the only two instances where she was in any danger was the courtroom scene and at the skyfall mansion. More so in the latter than former



> bunch of dead henchmen and wasted bullets, so he was pretty stressed out by the whole thing



I don't think that would effect him in the slightest. He was cold blooded, demonstrated by his quote "when something no longer serves its purpose - I cast it away"



> and secondly, this was the first time he had a chance to kill her when it was (more or less) just him and her alone.



Exactly, and he was unable to kill her outright. Silva is quite conflicted he has major mother/abandonment issues and if M simply said "sorry" I think it would have played out quite differently.



> But that doesn't mean he hadn't been trying to kill he before; it just means that this was the first time he had the chance to kill her in that particular fashion, and under that much emotional distress. His frame of mind _at that particular moment_ was different from his frame of mind in the rest of the movie, even if it hints that, had he achieved his objective, he would have been unhappy about it.



I'd agree with this. M dead was perhaps the conclusion that silva desired I just don't agree that he wanted to outright kill her in cold blood. A simple apology or acknowledging that she was wrong to hand silva to the Chinese would have sated him considerably. I think there was a moment when she says "regret is unprofessional" to which silva replies "of course, no remorse"



> The problem is that, firstly, he could not have known for definite that it _would_ lead to an inquiry;



I just assumed it was government protocol for an inquiry to be held after a monumental "cock-up" I think she was asked to appear before the pm when the files were stolen < not sure about this.




> and secondly, that he could not know for certain the timing


yeah, the timing of the inquiry kinda blows the theory



> That, and arranging an inquiry in order to kill M in public is not really necessary



Perhaps the inquiry was never part of the plan... Possibly the criteria of his plan was Public Ridicule, threaten/ target/ compromise "safe haven", get caught confront M, escape and confront M final time.





> Well, they didnt't use any of the bullets recovered from the marketplace or the dead agent.



I agree with you. They had humorous methods to ID the assasin, means which would have been logical it was just a cop out that they needed bond to get the ball rolling.




> The way this scheme makes the most sense is- the Shanghai assassination was unrelated to Silva's plot, Silva planned _for being_ captured but not _to be_ captured,



?? Kinda flew over my head.



> and Silva had no idea Bond was still alive or, until meeting him, thought of him as anyone other than just another Double-0 agent.



I'm certain silva knew who bond was and his connection to M. There is something he says that indicates as much though I can't recall what it was...



> Thats not underselling it- thats what I said.



Ah, my bad


----------



## Liverbird (Nov 3, 2012)

God this was good.. top 3 bond movies in my view. I looved every second of Silva!


----------



## Delta Shell (Nov 4, 2012)

The end of this movie was Home Alone. I expected Silva to be beaten by a paint tin balanced on top of the door.


----------



## Liverbird (Nov 4, 2012)

Delta Shell said:


> *The end of this movie was Home Alone*. I expected Silva to be beaten by a paint tin balanced on top of the door.



Hahaha, couldn't agree more!


----------



## SageMaster (Nov 4, 2012)

I really enjoyed this movie. Great acting and cinematography for a Bond film, and I loved how they finally were able to correctly mix the classic Bond elements to the post 9/11 world.

I liked the meta aspects of the plot. Bond being unfit for the mission and yet doing it is a commentary of how even after 50 years, Bond is still going strong. Nobody does it better.


----------



## Anarch (Nov 4, 2012)

I enjoyed Skyfall immensely. A few plot holes here and there but you expect that in an action flick. Judi Dench and Javier Bardiem were brilliant.

Inspite of the presence of the two other ladies I'm actually of the opinion that Judi Dench was the "bondgirl" in this movie. Her relationship with 007 and Silva was very intriguing.

Loved the old man in the end. " I was ready before you were born , son !" 

Can't say that I'm very familiar with Fleming's books but I was surprised to find out that Bond is his real name.Being an MI6 super spy you would think he wouldn't use his real name.


----------



## hitokugutsu (Nov 4, 2012)

This Bond movie is overrated. Critics are actually calling it the best Bond yet 

Dont get me wrong, I enjoyed it, and it was better then QoS, but definitely not CR level. Like some posters already pointed out it relied waaaay to much on plot elements and overcomplicated plan from Silva to get to M
I get the part that he wanted her humiliated first before he kills her. But even after he does that, the method in killing M is just beyond retartded (fake crumb trail for Bond in Shanghai, expected to be captured, expected to be locked right there and Q hacking him and then the subway crash, which of course coincidentally is exactly where Bond catches up with him )

No, to many plot elements that dont fit. 

But the acting was good. Javier was outstanding. Craig too. Bond girls tough sucked big time, especially Harris. And when I saw that Harris mentioned "not being suited for fieldwork" all MoneyPenny alarms were already ringing in my head. Especially since we got a new Q (decent performance though)

Overall if I'd rank the movies:

Casino Royale: 9.5/10
Quantum of Solace: 7.5/10
Skyfall: 8.5/10

As a sidenote: one of the finest Bond themesongs ever


----------



## Darth (Nov 6, 2012)

Thought that they tried to sell Craig's "Age and Old Fashion'ness" too much in the film. Also, lack of Q gadgets disappointed. 

Still good overall though.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Nov 7, 2012)

Got my tickets for tomorrow.


----------



## Suzuku (Nov 7, 2012)

Man I really have to see this movie everyone is saying it's the shit. I've never really seen a Bond film before, only bits of various films, so would it be good to start with or should I watch previous films to appreciate how good it is?


----------



## wibisana (Nov 8, 2012)

Just watched it minutes ago

can I ask thing in here about the story

but it will be spoiler for people who haven't watched it


----------



## Anarch (Nov 8, 2012)

^ Use a spoiler tag


----------



## wibisana (Nov 8, 2012)

OK 
here

*Spoiler*: __ 




so this movie is a side quest?
I mean what ever happened to The Organization? the Tierra Project?
Mr White.... etc.
I was Hoping that Organization show up and make "war"
instead I found Silva, former member MI6 who stole MI6 hard-drive
or he is the Organization?
but i dont find it quite fit if his Organization is "The Organization"

*or it got off-screened  


*


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 9, 2012)

tashtin said:
			
		

> ?? Kinda flew over my head.



It would make more sense if Silva being captured was a back-up plan, and Bond trailing his assassin to Shanghai was not part of the plan or any kind of  breadcrumb trail (and whoever was murdered had nothing to do with the movie's main plot; it was just part of another evil scheme Silva had running). Silva's _real_ plan was to just hop on a plane to London- the plan he carries out in the movie was Plan B, set up in the event he was captured, which of course he was.

Is what I meant. Though the film never implies that that is the case.





wibisana said:


> OK
> here
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...



Silva has nothing to do with Mr White or Quantum.

Though the plot would have made a lot more sense if he did.

We might see them in some future movie (_Goldfinger_ was the 3rd Bond movie, and the only Connery one that did not deal with SPECTRE, so maybe they are doing something like that again), though Daniel Craig has said Quantum is "done".


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Nov 9, 2012)

I saw it and I think I have one of those longer than four hour boners they warn you about on TV.


----------



## Pain In The Ass (Nov 9, 2012)

It was a nice movie, some nice action and Craig proving he is really a good fit for Bond. But still liked Casino Royale more.


----------



## Cheeky (Nov 9, 2012)

I really liked Silva, he was probably my favourite part of the film.


I was worried he would just be a blonde version of Anton Chigurh, but I was pleasantly surprised by his personality and likeability.


----------



## Megaharrison (Nov 9, 2012)

Saw it and found it my favorite Craig bond film. The villains plan was a bit non-grandiose yes but the guy from Casino Royale was basically laundering money.


----------



## The Big G (Nov 10, 2012)

Jaiver Bardam was nuts...give this man another Oscar


Also James Bond isn't really a Bond....he's a Baratheon!


----------



## Jena (Nov 10, 2012)

This movie was AMAZING
AMAZING
GAH


----------



## Jay. (Nov 10, 2012)

Why did I just came  out in America? 

watched this like 10 days ago


Still think it was a pretty good movie but it kinda dissapointed me for some reason



I guess Casino Royale will be the best Craig Movie forever


The build up in this movie was perfect, the suspense....perfect.


But they fucked up the climax and it shouldn't have ended in that sillly skyfall farm.


I missed the typical bond shit. Cars and bitches.


Bond girl died too early as well.

Also bond was out of character



=/


----------



## Liverbird (Nov 10, 2012)

The Big G said:


> Jaiver Bardam was nuts...give this man another Oscar
> 
> 
> Also James Bond isn't really a Bond....he's a Baratheon!



I approve


----------



## SaskeKun (Nov 10, 2012)

I've just come back from the movies. Skyfall was awesome in my opinion


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 10, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> Saw it and found it my favorite Craig bond film. The villains plan was a bit non-grandiose yes but the guy from Casino Royale was basically laundering money.



My main problem with Silva's plan was that it was too convoluted, not that it was mundane.

Though, Le Chiffre wasn't just laundering money; he was using his client's laundered money and terrorism to cheat the stock market and make himself a fortune. Plus, he had big players behind him who _did_ have grandiose goals.


----------



## Parallax (Nov 10, 2012)

yeah behind him, but they weren't the focus.  When you cut it down he really was just laundering and making money :|


----------



## Lulu (Nov 10, 2012)

Laundering money is very very evil...if it was not very very evil,no bond villain would do it.lol


----------



## Cheeky (Nov 10, 2012)

Sean Connery needs to play the next Bond villian before he dies of old age and whisky.


But has Bond ever had a female antagonist before?


----------



## Lulu (Nov 10, 2012)

Laundering money is very very evil...if it was not very very evil,no bond villain would do it.lol


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 10, 2012)

Parallax said:


> yeah behind him, but they weren't the focus.  When you cut it down he really was just laundering and making money :|



They weren't the focus, but they were the _real_ villains of the story. Le Chiffre was only important because of what he knew about them, and the story continued after he had died. Silva would have been better if they or someone like them were backing him up, had hired him for the plot.

Also, in the end, Quantum won, since they made off with the money. Points for that.



Youcheekylittle said:


> Sean Connery needs to play the next Bond villian before he dies of old age and whisky.
> 
> 
> But has Bond ever had a female antagonist before?



Sean Connery has pretty much retired from acting.

And yes, if you count _The World Is Not Enough._


----------



## Cheeky (Nov 10, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> Sean Connery has pretty much retired from acting.





Yeah, but... c'mon. It's not impossible, don't you like the sound of it?


----------



## Violent-nin (Nov 11, 2012)

It was good but nothing amazing. Had my issues with the movie but overall it was fine.


----------



## The Big G (Nov 11, 2012)

You why it was awesome?

Scorpion Shots and Komodo Dragons


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Nov 11, 2012)

Jay. said:


> Why did I just came  out in America?
> 
> watched this like 10 days ago



Next time you get a video game six months late don't ask us.


----------



## The Weeknd (Nov 12, 2012)

It was all fine and dandy.

One huge plot hole...

How the hell did he survive getting shot at and falling into a waterfall and thus being unconscious while he is deep into the lake/river?


----------



## Jena (Nov 12, 2012)

TittyNipple said:


> It was all fine and dandy.
> 
> One huge plot hole...
> 
> How the hell did he survive getting shot at and falling into a waterfall and thus being unconscious while he is deep into the lake/river?



Because he's James Bond.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Nov 12, 2012)

TittyNipple said:


> It was all fine and dandy.
> 
> One huge plot hole...
> 
> How the hell did he survive getting shot at and falling into a waterfall and thus being unconscious while he is deep into the lake/river?


That really wasn't as super far fetched as you might think, he probably came to or floated up on the shore before he could drown.


----------



## Rukia (Nov 12, 2012)

TittyNipple said:


> How the hell did he survive getting shot at and falling into a waterfall and thus being unconscious while he is deep into the lake/river?


A giant hand pulled him out of the water.


----------



## Əyin (Nov 13, 2012)

Just watched the movie, it's nice to see Q (albeit the actor is too young to play Q) back after he's missing in Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.


----------



## heavy_rasengan (Nov 13, 2012)

I watched it on Saturday and I thought it was pretty bad. Not as bad as Quantum but still pretty bad. I can't comprehend how it got a 91 percent approval on Rotten Tomatoes. 

Story:


*Spoiler*: __ 



Honestly, the plot line was horrid. I mean, there was absolutely no intricacies, no twists and no surprises. It was as linear as it can get. Moreover, unoriginal. 

Here is the plot;

A past agent/employee has a vendetta against another agent/employer. The former tries to go after the latter. Bond has to save her. 

I also think it was a poor decision to put so much focus on M throughout the movie. She is so boring, I dreaded the scenes that she was in.




Villain;


*Spoiler*: __ 



This is getting redundant now. We've seen it in Dark Knight, we've seen it in Avengers, hell, we've seen it in breaking bad. So many movies try to incorporate that "psychotic and crazy villain that can't stop laughing" as their trump card. While others might find his character fascinating, I found it boring and stupid just because its been done so many damn times. Its not like he put a new twist to it or anything either, its the same old shit.


----------



## wibisana (Nov 13, 2012)

Jena said:


> Because he's James Bond.



because lady of Lake save him

who wouldn't get banged by Bond???


----------



## heavy_rasengan (Nov 13, 2012)

Oh yeah, Skyfall being the name of some old ranch was also pathetic. Here I was thinking there would be some epic fight between him and a villain while they were falling from the sky or some shit like that but no; Skyfall is an old shitty deserted ranch.


----------



## Fierce (Nov 15, 2012)

Saw this last Saturday, meant to post in here. Movie is absolutely phenomenal. If it weren't for The Avengers, this would be the movie of the year. Though I imagine The Hobbit part 1 will throw its name in the hat before all is said and done. Adele intro was awesome, imo.


----------



## Bender (Nov 17, 2012)

Fucking awesome

9.5/10 

Best 007 yet.

Also happy anniversary 007 film series.


----------



## Suzuku (Nov 17, 2012)

Just watched it. Really good movie; I see what people meant by the movie felt like a Bond parody. There were a lot of great homages to the old movies and I also really like what they did at the end of the movie, sort of bringing the series full circle for the 50th anniversary. And the cinematography was simply stunning, especially the scene in that Shanghai building, shit was breath taking.

9/10 - Great action movie, which by itself wouldn't get it a 9 but the homages and smart references to older films throughout the movie really boosts it to a 9 for me


----------



## Bender (Nov 17, 2012)

Even though villie is a dick


*Spoiler*: __ 



For killing M




Anyone else aside me give the man kudos for being one of the most brilliant villains in 007 history?

Like the director intended I had a lot of flashbacks of Heath Ledger's Joker. 

Also in the beginning of the film

The whole


*Spoiler*: __ 



Friendly-fire thing




Reminded me of how I used to accidentally do some friendly-firing on COD.


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 18, 2012)

Bender said:


> Even though villie is a dick
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...



I thought he was one of the dumbest villains in 007 history.

But to each their own.


----------



## Bender (Nov 18, 2012)

@Masamune1

How was he dumb? 


*Spoiler*: __ 



Much of his plans worked


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 18, 2012)

Bender said:


> @Masamune1
> 
> How was he dumb?
> 
> ...



You sure about that?


----------



## Bender (Nov 18, 2012)

@Masamune1


*Spoiler*: __ 



His whole goal was to embarrass M, kill himself and her




Pretty sure they succeeded in their plans.


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 18, 2012)

Bender said:


> @Masamune1
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 



His goal was to embarass M and kill her. The suicide thing only crossed his mind after his first attempt to kill her (in London, disguised as a policeman) failed, he lost every single one of his men to James Bond and Albert Finney, his helicopter was destroyed, he was in the middle of nowhere and at the end of his tether, and he found that in such a state of emotional distress he still couldn't kill her. 

Also, he told his men that _he_ had to be the one to kill her- 10 minutes after a mook in the first wave he sent shot her in the stomach. And then he got a knife in the back before she died. He did not think that through.

So, basically, Plan A failed, and Plan B was a disastrous pyrrhic victory that wiped out his entire organization and did not go at all like he wanted it to. And if you take his goal to be that he personally had to kill M or it didn't count, then Plan B demoted to a near-total failure with a silver lining.

And thats not getting into how ridiculously convoluted and unnecessary most of his scheme was, and on how much it depended on chance and luck and other factors that should by rights be outside his control, since we are supposed to believe that pretty much everything that happened in the movie was part of his intricate master plan.


----------



## Bender (Nov 18, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 



Silva's response to getting knife in the back was more annoyance than it was anger. He was aware he was going to die but he wanted to see her die first. Regardless of it all she also joined him in the afterlife as a result of a bullet grazing. The convolution of his plan was mostly mocking Bond due to him not knowing what he was dealing with. 

By that I mean the hit in Shanghai by one of Silva's men which was in his victory no matter what Bond did. Especially since the assassination target was surrounded by his men. I doubt he cared that his organization had suffered defeat. Killing M was all he wanted and he got it. However, whether she killed them both or died of her wound he won. The only hint of a breakdown we get was Bond destroying his own home which showed that M and her escort had switched locations.

I mean shit he's a former MI6 agent. How wouldn't he be able to calculate her moves being as knowledgeable as he is.


----------



## Jay. (Nov 18, 2012)

heavy_rasengan said:


> Oh yeah, Skyfall being the name of some old ranch was also pathetic. Here I was thinking there would be some epic fight between him and a villain while they were falling from the sky or some shit like that but no; Skyfall is an old shitty deserted ranch.



Kinda feel you on that one.


Thought skyfall was originally related to the opening of the movie when he fell in the river.

Thought the movie would focus more on that.

They kinda did, metaphorically. The fall of james bond.

Mid life crisis and shit.



But yeah more explaination on the fall from the bridge and how he survived would have been more killer.



Also disliked the ranch.


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 18, 2012)

Bender said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> Silva's response to getting knife in the back was more annoyance than it was anger. He was aware he was going to die but he wanted to see her die first. Regardless of it all she also joined him in the afterlife as a result of a bullet grazing. The convolution of his plan was mostly mocking Bond due to him not knowing what he was dealing with




*Spoiler*: __ 




He had tried to shoot her several times in the movie and failed. When he finally had her cornered, he tried to shoot her again but couldn't bring himself to do it, so he tried to get her to kill them both. Dying was _never_ part of his plan- it was just that by that point in the movie he had just been driven so far up the wall that he just couldn't go on living anymore. 

He also didn't want anyone else to kill her but himself, and was annoyed that she had been fatally wounded by one of his men (even though he failed to tell said man "do not shoot her"). 

My point had nothing to do with the knife in the back. It doesn't matter if it made him annoyed or angry. The point was that it was just one more thing that kept getting in the way of his scheme.

He didn't care about Bond. He spent half the movie thinking he was dead (if he knew about him at all), and just used him to get close to M. Other than a half-hearted "hy do you fight" speech he didn't give a rats ass about 007. 

The convolution of his plan wasn't to mock Bond- it was to make his goal look a lot harder than it actually was. His goal was to kill M, and he engineered a ridculously complicated scheme (involving setting impossible breadcrumb trails, getting taken alive rather than being killed, escaping, crashing trains, and M being in a certain place at a certain time that he couldn't have known about) that depends on too many things outside of his control to achieve it, even though Bond had shown that breaking into M's house and getting her alone was a piece of cake, and Sila himself had been able to predict her moves flawlessly before. He could have achieved his objective with _far_ less hassle than he did.

And that plan failed. So he ended up just getting a bunch of armed men to attack a house in the middle of Scotland. And he still never quite got what he wanted and ended up dying (with all of his men) before M did, and not on the terms he wanted.






> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> By that I mean the hit in Shanghai by one of Silva's men which was in his victory no matter what Bond did. Especially since the assassination target was surrounded by his men. I doubt he cared that his organization had suffered defeat. Killing M was all he wanted and he got it. However, whether she killed them both or died of her wound he won. The only hint of a breakdown we get was Bond destroying his own home which showed that M and her escort had switched locations.




*Spoiler*: __ 



The assassination part was just as silly and he couldn't have planned for Bond to be there, or if he did it must have been a different plan from the one Bond himseld actually followed. But I was talking about the rest of the movie, not just that part.

I doubt he cared either. But he clearly didn't plan to lose them either. He didn't even plan on dying until after Bond and co. had killed them all and nearly foiled his scheme _again._ So that is a score against him and his brilliant plannning skills. 

And he didn't count her dying from her wound as a victory- he was visibly upset by it, even though it was entirely his fault. And he died before she did, and he didn't even know for sure if Bond might not rescue her. He didn't succeed because of his plan (his second one)- he succeeded _in spite_  of it.






> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> I mean shit he's a former MI6 agent. How wouldn't he be able to calculate her moves being as knowledgeable as he is.




*Spoiler*: __ 



The problem isn't that he can calculate her movements. The problem is that he is calculating the movements of everyone else in the movie, absolutely perfectly, even though they are picking up on clues and hints that he couldn't possibly have placed (eg. the bullet in Bond's shoulder) or depends on them acting like idiots half the time (eg. leaving him alone with one inept guard, or having the locks to his cell and every door in the building electronically linked to the same hackable computer system). 

I can buy him predicting M's movements no problem, but that raised another issue- since he can do that so easily, then what is his excuse for not just kidnapping her from her house or something  just as easy over the three month span the movie is set? His plan did nothing but make his objective harder to achieve.


----------



## Bender (Nov 18, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 




Dude....If dying was never part of his plan he wouldn't have given her the gun and had her try and kill them both. He thought of M as a mother bro. Which is why he was so heartbroken by being betrayed.  


Also how was he making his plan look harder than it actually was? Did you miss the part when he arrived at Scotland, Bond's house he was blasting music "Apocalypse Now" by Poor Man. That was pretty much mocking Bond and showing that he was coming for them. Also the breadcrumbs were set by MI6 along with James, Q and M.  It was made pretty clear that his skills as an MI6 agent hadn't failed seeing as how he successfully infiltrated the hearing where M was. Him missing her when he shot was pretty much Plot induced stupidity. And him dressing as policeman to blend in with public was clever.

Bond could have died at any time early in the flick when he came into contact with that dude in Shanghai. Remember his skills had dulled after the friendly fire incident.







> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 



That's a baseless assumption saying he couldn't have predicted that Bond was there. He was an MI6 agent remember? Also he had managed to hack into their intelligence and told Bond of how his assessment was. If he could do that the idea of him predicting Bond would be in Shanghai isn't farfetched at all. 

If you get a chance go back and watch the movie his face hardly had a speck of "pissed off" that Bond had knifed him in the back and killed him. He was hoping to see her kill him and her first before he died.

He was more pissed by the mansion explosion than he was being killed. Him being killed was an exasperated grunt not some "Shit, you bastard how dare you kill me!" 







> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 



He's a cyberterrorist dude. He had the list of the agents in the beginning and as said before he's a former MI6 agent. He also hacked into China's database. IF you're capably of doing that why is predicting MI6's moves so much more difficult?

The clue, the shrapnel in Bond's shoulder  he could calculate them tracing since the agent who had did it was still alive and could relay the message to Silva. The computer they would obviously analyze, I don't see MI6 being keen enough to destroy Silva's computer and not count on it sending them a virus.

Also dude were you listening to what I saying before? His goal was to *EMBARRASS* M, not outright kill her. 

Over the course of the film she was being pressured to retire (the possible loss of 007-not saying he planned that), facing an inquiry from government, losing several agents, and heavily mocked by Silva on the internet.

Silva took his time and it paid off. If he was all that desperate to kill her, I'm pretty sure he would be with James under the ice lake and not ahead in the church with a gun to M's head. 

A central theme of the film "The new surpassing the old and goodbye to the old and hello to the new." Like the throwaway "shout-out" to old Bond films with James expectations of what Q said an "exploding pen" being out of style for their agency. Whereas James and Q neglect the old ways  Silva prospers on the usage of old tactics (Radio scene), improvising on viruses and youtube videos of targeting other agents as punishment for leaving him to die.


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 18, 2012)

Bender said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 



He explicitly tries to shoot her at several points in the movie. He only tries to get her to kill the two of them at the very end, after all other attempts had failed and he was an exhausted emotional wreck, and found that nowthat he finally had her at his mercy he couldn't go through with it. And she was already mortally wounded by somebody else.

It wasn't part of his plan. He simply changed the plan at the last minute. And as it happens, Bond took that opportunity to kill him.






> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> Also how was he making his plan look harder than it actually was? Did you miss the part when he arrived at Scotland, Bond's house he was blasting music "Apocalypse Now" by Poor Man. That was pretty much mocking Bond and showing that he was coming for them. Also the breadcrumbs were set by MI6 along with James, Q and M.  It was made pretty clear that his skills as an MI6 agent hadn't failed seeing as how he successfully infiltrated the hearing where M was. Him missing her when he shot was pretty much Plot induced stupidity. And him dressing as policeman to blend in with public was clever.




*Spoiler*: __ 



It was clever, except that the film makes clear that he had already set that plan up before the hearing had actually been called, so its actually more like prescience. It also required him to be in a particular cell in a particular building and for MI6 to be stupid with its security system (since the building has a feature that allows someone to open every door in the building, including the door to the cell where the dangerous madman is kept), and said feature is hackable), for Q Branch to not try and hack into the computer of one of the best cyber-terrorists in the world with something hooked up to their own IntraNet (or just, you know, try and hack into it at another location), for MI6 to leave more men outside his prison, for his prison to be in a part of the building where he could escape to the underground, for a bomb to be planted at a certain point in the underground where Bond catches up to him, for Bond or someone else to not simply have shot him earlier in the movie, to know that Bond had called for backup....it goes on. He planned for far too much.

The breadcrumb trail made no sense because the crumb MI6 had was fragments of a bullet lodged in Bond's shoulder, which Silva could not have known Bond still had- he had no reason to even assume Bond was still alive. If Bond didn't have that bullet- and if he handed it to MI6 earlier or later- then MI6 would not have trailed that assassin to Shanghai and Bond would not have been able to track down Silva. The premise of the plot is that Silva _counted_ on MI6 tracing that assassin- when really, it was dumb luck that they found him. They had no idea who his assassin was until Bond ID'ed him.

The whole Scotland thing was not part of his plan at all. If his plan had worked like it was supposed to then M would have died before Bond could take her there. Also, it turns out that mocking James Bond and letting him know you are coming? Tends to get you and your little private army killed. 

If all he wanted to was humiliate and kill M, he didn't need to leave a breadcrumb trail or lure MI6 to his hideout and let himself be captured at all. He could have nabbed M at her house. Or tormented her longer and got her after she was fired. Everything from Shanghai to the hearing is part of a convulted plan years in the making, and not only does it fail, it was totally unnecessary. There are far easier ways to kill M, and he probably could have gotten her alone as well. 






> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> Bond could have died at any time early in the flick when he came into contact with that dude in Shanghai. Remember his skills had dulled after the friendly fire incident.




*Spoiler*: __ 



The fact that Bond could have died at any time is yet another flaw in Silva's master plan. If Bond had died in Shanghai, MI6 would have lost their lead and Silva would not have been captured like he planned to be.






> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> That's a baseless assumption saying he couldn't have predicted that Bond was there. He was an MI6 agent remember? Also he had managed to hack into their intelligence and told Bond of how his assessment was. If he could do that the idea of him predicting Bond would be in Shanghai isn't farfetched at all.




*Spoiler*: __ 



Him predicting Bond would be in Shanghai is not farfectched. Him predicted Bond would be in Shanghai before Bond himself knew it is what is farfetched, but that is what the movie expects us to believe. 

The plot is that Silva sent the assassin to Shanghai because he knew that MI6 would flag him as an associate of the cyber-terrorist they are trying to track down, and from there send Bond (or another agent- if he knew he would send Bond, then he would somehow have to know that Bond was still alive) to Shanghai after him, and be led directly to Silva himself. From there, Silva would let himself be captured and be taken to MI6's backup HQ (which he knows inside-out from advance planning, because he knew that once he bombed MI6 protocol said they should set up shop there), and then escape with the help of a virus he planted on his computer which will open the door to his cell once Q Branch hacks it, and from there make his way through the London Underground, pick up a police uniform from his mooks as a disguise, find M and kill her at the public hearing, and arrange a train crash at a particular point if necessary as a distraction.

Except, apart from anything else, MI6 had no idea who that assassin was until Bond ID'ed him, and even that was only possible because of a bullet fragment in his shoulder that he hadn't bothered to have surgically removed in the three months since being shot there, said bullet being a unique signature of that assassin. And Bond only ID'ed him at the 11th hour, and if he did so any later the Shanghai thing might have been missed. And if the whole Shanghai hit was staged for Bond's benefit (or more likely, the benefit of whatever Double-0 agent M sent), well then that was a big waste of time. It was dumb luck that they were able to track that assassin to Shanghai at the time.

Maybe Silva just gave MI6 too much credit about how much they knew about that assassin (which is reasonable, I suppose- the assassin had shot up a marketplace and a bunch of other agents- you'd think that would leave an orgy of evidence), but even apart from that, far too much of his plan relies on everyone acting in a particular manner- and often a very stupid manner, like putting more men outside his door-, and in predicting things that he couldn't possibly have known about in the years in which he had supposedly been planning this (like M getting a public hearing, and for said hearing to be on the exact same day he was captured and escaped). And for a goal as simple as killing M, he didn't need to go through any of that. His plan would have been a lot simpler and went a lot smoother if he hadn't let himself be captured at all.

He isn't plotting world domination- he is trying to murder a single woman. A woman who lives alone, whose house can be broken into rather easily for the head of British Intelligence, and whose movements he can accurately predict down to at least the hour. His plan was needlessly complicated, and it failed, so he had to resort on getting a bunch of guys and going to Scotland to just shoot her. And even then, he got himself and all of them killed because he seriously underestimated the guy protecting her, despite said guy foiling him the first time. And he didn't even get to kill her himself, because he didn't tell his minions that he and only he was allowed to kill her until after he sent a dozen of them to do just that, and one did. 




(next post)


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 18, 2012)

(cont.)



> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 



He was pissed off about the knife in the back because it meant that Bond killed him before he could kill M (or before he could get her to kill the two of them).  

The point is that he didn't plan for it to happen. Just like he didn't plan for all his men to get killed, or for his helicopter to be destroyed, or to be forced to drive up to Scotland in the first place. None of it was according to plan. Doesn't matter if he didn't care about his own life or theirs- what matters is that his scheme was turning out to be a hell of a lot harder to pull off than he envisioned, that his initial scheme failed, and that due to being knifed in the back he didn't even get to see his plan come to fruition (in a way totally different to what he planned). 

He was annoyed by the knife, he was annoyed by the manison exploding, he was annoyed at being chased out of the hearing...he just a very annoyed man, because after the second act his plan was not going very well at all.








> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> He's a cyberterrorist dude. He had the list of the agents in the beginning and as said before he's a former MI6 agent. He also hacked into China's database. IF you're capably of doing that why is predicting MI6's moves so much more difficult?




*Spoiler*: __ 



Because predicting their movements to such a degree is significantly harder. Being a former MI6 agent is a poor hand wave because no MI6 agent in the entire series has ever displayed this level of omniscience.

Though, some of the stuff he does with hacking (not the above examples though) is pretty much impossible, but that follows under Hollywood Hacking. Stealing top-secret data from British Intelligence or hacking into a Chinese database? Buddy, that stuff happens _all the time._






> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> The clue, the shrapnel in Bond's shoulder  he could calculate them tracing since the agent who had did it was still alive and could relay the message to Silva. The computer they would obviously analyze, I don't see MI6 being keen enough to destroy Silva's computer and not count on it sending them a virus.




*Spoiler*: __ 



He did not know that _Bond_ was still alive. And even if he did, he could not know that Bond still had the bullet shrapnel in his shoulder (rather than, you know, see a doctor about removing it- like any sensible person), or like Bond would probably normally do). And both of those are irrelevant if Bond doesn't share that shrapnel with MI6, which he only did after he had failed his retest and was in danger of not being rehired. Assuming he remembered the guys face. And assuming that the guy remembered that he had shot Bond in the shoulder and bothered to tell Silva that rather irrelevant piece of information (he shot a lot of people that day, and as far as he knew Bond was dead). Plus, really, MI6 is crap if they needed Bond's bullet fragment, given that the assassin had shot dozens of people that day including five other agents (whose bodies MI6 recovered). 

As for the computer, why the hell would they _not_ assume that a dangerous cyber-terrorist would not have viruses on his computer to attack whoever is trying to hack into it, or at least erase sensistive information? Even regular criminals and terrorists have basic security measures like that, but world class hackers and cyber-terrorists _always_ have stuff like that. 

In point of fact, if I recall correctly, Q Branch _did_ expect viruses on his computer and were on the lookout for them. The problem was that they knew they were there, and knew that Silva was a hacker who was so good he could use a computer to blow up their building (wouldn't work in real life, by the way, but that I'll let slide since its a movie), but they _still_ chose to hook his computer up to their top-secret computer network, and for some reason had the bright idea of putting in a programme that lets you unlock every door in the building including the cage where the madman is kept.

I don't expect them to destroy the computer. I expect them to be a lot more careful trying to break into it, by keeping it well away from the entire private intra-network of the international spy agency they work for. And to not have a programme that lets you open every door in the building through it. Even if they didn't want to take it to another location (which they could have done- its not implausible that they didn't, but there was a good chance that they might and if they had, Silva's plan would not have worked), they could have just _not_ hooked it up to the network, or just waited a bit until they were more sure it was safe. Or even just made sure Silva was better guarded. 

Quite simply, they did not treat him with the respect a man as obviously dangerous as Silva deserved, and they paid for it. But Silva counted on them acting exactly they way they did (recklessly), and had they acted any differently, he would still be locked up. If his cell was so much as in a different room (with no access to the underground), or if he had been better protected, or if Q-Branch had been more careful with his computer, or if they put a non-electronic lock on his door, or if Bond didn't miss before he crashed the train....none of his plan would have worked. 






> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> Also dude were you listening to what I saying before? His goal was to *EMBARRASS* M, not outright kill her.




*Spoiler*: __ 



Er, no. You actually said he wanted to kill her.

Right here





> His whole goal was to embarrass M, kill himself *and her*



And here, in *this very post.*



> *Him missing her when he shot* was pretty much Plot induced stupidity. And him dressing as policeman to blend in with public was clever.









> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 



His plan was to humiliate her and then murder her at that hearing. 

Thats why he was shooting at her. And thats why he put a gun to her head at the end (before deciding it would be better if she shot the two of them). And thats why he told his men "nobody shoots her but ME"). And thats why he chased her to Scotland in the first place. 

Why else do you think he went to that hearing in the first place? Do you think he arranged his own capture, escape, a train crash and disguised himself as a policeman and just fire random shots into the room, kill some people and then _pretend_ to be frustrated when Bond shoots the fire extinguishers and M escapes? (somehow timing to coincide with M being summoned to a hearing just a day before, but _after_ Bond went to Shanghai and _after_ he spent years setting the plot of the movie up-also, he was lucky she didn't leave when she heard he had escaped, as she was advised to and nearly did, and I think the meeting was wrapping up when he arrived so he was lucky to catch her).

No, wait, I forgot- you already said he was trying to shoot her



> *Him missing her when he shot was pretty much Plot induced stupidity.* And him dressing as policeman to blend in with public was clever.



So, you know he was trying to kill her, but are trying to say that you said that he wasn't. Which you didn't.

So, unless you think the entire second act was part of an elaborate international scheme to shoot her in the arm, I think we are done here.

He planned on humiliating her- it worked. He tried to kill her- he failed. She fled to Scotland and he tried to kill her again- he got all his men killed, found out one of them had fatally wounded her (against his wishes) and discovered that after all the stress of his plans being foiled in spectacular fashion by 007, he wasn't able to pull the trigger even when he had her at his mercy. So he tried to get her to kill them both.

And then Bond killed him first. The end. His plan did not go at all according to plan, and he ended up changing it at the last minute anyway from "I KILL YOU" to "WE DIE TOGETHER"). And he died before that could happen. 

Yeesh. Is that so hard to understand?


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 18, 2012)

Goodnight, everyone.


----------



## Doom85 (Nov 18, 2012)

Personally, I didn't have any issue with the orphanage being the site of the final battle, I thought it was intense, certainly more suspenseful than CR or QoS's climaxes (which were good, just not as intense). Also, the Skyfall song arguably foreshadowed what it really meant: "Skyfall is where we start"

The idea that the movie's title would come from an actual battle falling from the sky sounds ridiculous IMHO. Not to mention we knew since the trailer that the name Skyfall had some sort of impact on Bond from hearing it so obviously it couldn't refer to just the act of falling from the sky.


----------



## Bender (Nov 18, 2012)

Eh I blundered in presenting the evidence to you. My bad. Still doesn't change the fact, that that's what the antagonist wanted.



> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 



He aimed to get her killed by her doing both of them in since he would have the been the one who had his gun's trigger pulled and kill them.







> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 



Not prescience. There's another word for it, think...contingency. That's the word. As an agent you need to think up multiple eventualities in the likelyhood that you're captured the target moves or such. Also as said before he's an MI6 agent the film made it blatantly clear that Silva is what Bond would be like if he let the incident of the friendly-fire get him to the point he'd betray M  and hunt her down.

So what, Silva let Bond know he was coming? His private army was much more prepared and skilled than James gave them credit for. They succeeded in stalling him and Silva had the time necessary to get to M while James was swimming under the frozen lake.







> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that Bond could have died at any time is yet another flaw in Silva's master plan. If Bond had died in Shanghai, MI6 would have lost their lead and Silva would not have been captured like he planned to be.




*Spoiler*: __ 



Wrong. Bond left for Shanghai immediately after the assessment test and Silva had been hacking MI6's database throughout the film. He could have looked through the records for the assessment and found his skills had dulled. However, Bond beat the Shanghai sniper by virtue of hand-to-hand combat not aiming skills. They're two totally different animals.






> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I know you're trying and what naw but dude kinda clean up your responses. Kinda hard to string together things when reading through it.

Also as I referenced in the above quote:


*Spoiler*: __ 



The film made it blatantly clear that James is the antithesis to Silva. What he might have become if he didn't forgive M for her blunders


----------



## heavy_rasengan (Nov 18, 2012)

Doom85 said:


> Personally, I didn't have any issue with the orphanage being the site of the final battle, I thought it was intense, certainly more suspenseful than CR or QoS's climaxes (which were good, just not as intense). Also, the Skyfall song arguably foreshadowed what it really meant: "Skyfall is where we start"
> 
> The idea that the movie's title would come from an actual battle falling from the sky sounds ridiculous IMHO. Not to mention we knew since the trailer that the name Skyfall had some sort of impact on Bond from hearing it so obviously it couldn't refer to just the act of falling from the sky.



Intense? How many 1000 times have we seen this shit before? This movie was all recycled. Hero hides in some deserted/ remote house with a couple friends. Villains comes with an army. Gun battle with hero winning/escaping. I didn't find it intense at all. In fact when it happened, I was like; "oh this again....".

I was also annoyed about how predictably stupid it was. I mean, the end reduced the villain to some stupid brute. Seriously, coming in waves? First he sends a dozen guys to get killed the he comes himself after in a helicopter with another dozen guys lol?

Again, there was no new substance. All the action was seen before in all the other bond movies. I don't know how people are praising the "cinematography", please show me how it was superior to the other ones. Rehashed and recycled.


----------



## Bender (Nov 18, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> (cont.)
> 
> 
> 
> ...





*Spoiler*: __ 



Dude look at the film again. That's all I can say. The reaction to the knife in the back is a far-cry from the level of emotion showed when the mansion exploded. Also I'm pretty sure Silva would count on his men being killed seeing as how James did it effortlessly when he was on the island with Silva (when he killed Serverine). 

His initial plot to kill M in the hearing and manor exploding were his anger moments. The death scene was nothing but annoyance.






> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 



Dude it's not omniscience. It's just cleverness. If you're able to hack into a nations database it's kinda chagrining for you to say it's impossible to do it to a secret agency. Also Silva is Bond's predecessor so of course it's likely of him to have more skill in hacking through things and tactics.







> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> *He did not know that Bond was still alive. And even if he did, he could not know that Bond still had the bullet shrapnel in his shoulder (rather than, you know, see a doctor about removing it- like any sensible person), or like Bond would probably normally do). And both of those are irrelevant if Bond doesn't share that shrapnel with MI6, which he only did after he had failed his retest and was in danger of not being rehired. Assuming he remembered the guys face.* And assuming that the guy remembered that he had shot Bond in the shoulder and bothered to tell Silva that rather irrelevant piece of information (he shot a lot of people that day, and as far as he knew Bond was dead). Plus, really, MI6 is crap if they needed Bond's bullet fragment, given that the assassin had shot dozens of people that day including five other agents (whose bodies MI6 recovered).




*Spoiler*: __ 




Bond's skill had dulled and after hacking the British intelligence's database for Bond's assessment he could conclude that Bond was still shellshocked from the prologue encounter. Also seriously your over-exaggerated criticism is misdirected at the movie's logic rather than understanding the central theme of the film. It was about changing of the guard. Yeah the agency was slacking and that was one of the reasons for the evaluation by the government as well.






> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Look at my above response:


*Spoiler*: __ 



The film key theme was changing of the guard. New faces and such were needed. MI6 was losing its touch.






> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 




MI6 treated Silva the same way they treated James- as a broken man because he had before been a prisoner or another country and thought his skilled had dulled. In one fell swoop Bond took his men down and captured him.







> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 





Silva shot her at the meeting because she had been humiliated enough. People had extended an offer for her to retire, and most of her agents were being killed off by his forces, and there was the hearing.

Silva was an fretful, sobbing child at the end when he saw her mortally wounded. He didn't get to be the one to pull the trigger to end her life so he decided they both die together.







> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 



By the time of the hearing- Silva had finished playing and her inquiry was the breaking of the ice for her reputation. He wanted to put an end to her life already.









> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How am I not understanding? You aren't dude. Look at the themes, look at the time-interval between events.


*Spoiler*: __ 



He wanted her dead. To hell with how it happened. The whole sobbing child crap in the chapel was him being under the stress and how she is like a mother-figure and him seeing her on the ropes. Silva having her kill them both was a sadistic mental torture show. Regardless of how she died. She died. That was his goal and he won.


----------



## Tekkenman11 (Nov 20, 2012)

I love how the "haters" are desperately trying to make this film look like shit when it's been praised by almost everyone who's seen it, die-hard Bond fans and newcomers alike.

Sorry, but you guys lost this one. While you cry in your sleep I'll be waiting for the next two Daniel Craig Bond films 

Sucks to suck.


----------



## Wan (Nov 26, 2012)

The movie was fine, quite enjoyable.  All the plot holes and the preposterous nature of Silva's plot when you look at it closely drag it down though.

The biggest facepalm moment for me was when


*Spoiler*: __ 



Q compromised the entire MI6 system by hooking up a potentially infected hard drive to it.  No, just...no.  This is information security 101, folks.  If you've got a potentially infected device, you connect it to an isolated system, not your main system with all your critical operations on it. For a supposedly smart kid (and I did like the character and the actor) that was really, really dumb.  And it seemed like Silva was counting on that happening, which was stupid in itself and only worked because Q was dumb enough to let it.


----------



## Tony Lou (Nov 29, 2012)

I haven't seen any James Bond movies prior to Daniel Craig's role, so I wonder if any of the previous actors were as good.

I like the fact that his version of the character seems very down to earth. 

There isn't much focus on showing how cool and handsome he is. Bond is just a guy wanting to get the job done.

Just... when I look at these guys, that's all I can imagine. Flashy and cocky. 



Craig probably was the first to break that clich?.


----------



## Wan (Nov 29, 2012)

Although Craig's Bond is still quite the womanizer.  He got laid at least twice, possibly three times, in Skyfall (they don't let us know for certain if he slept with Moneypenny)


----------



## Tony Lou (Nov 29, 2012)

The prowess with women is always present. But that doesn't contradict the qualities I appreciate in this version.


----------



## Lulu (Nov 29, 2012)

Tekkenman11 said:


> I love how the "haters" are desperately trying to make this film look like shit when it's been praised by almost everyone who's seen it, die-hard Bond fans and newcomers alike.
> 
> Sorry, but you guys lost this one. While you cry in your sleep I'll be waiting for the next two Daniel Craig Bond films
> 
> Sucks to suck.



well you know what they say, haters gonna hate, potatoes gonna potate. Its common knowledge that alot of sad people are on nf and hate on almost anything and everything. I just watched the movie and it is overall a good movie. Has more positives than negative. I still luv every bond entertainment product with daniel craig. Especially the video game bloodstone


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 29, 2012)

Luiz said:


> I haven't seen any James Bond movies prior to Daniel Craig's role, so I wonder if any of the previous actors were as good.
> 
> I like the fact that his version of the character seems very down to earth.
> 
> ...



No, he wasn't.


----------



## Tony Lou (Nov 29, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> No, he wasn't.



Aside from Craig, which actor played bond as a more humble, down to earth person?

The one on the far right looks particularly douchy.


----------



## masamune1 (Nov 29, 2012)

You mean Sean Connery?

Him and Timothy Dalton played the grittiest Bond, and Daniel Craig I guess. 

That said, it isn't just the actor, its the film they are in. Roger Moore is generally regarded as the silliest Bond (and has said his own acting range in these movies was usually limited to raising his eyebrows), but some of his movies were quite down-to-earth and in his first two movies he is every bit the asshole Craig was (maybe more). 

James Bond is always humble- he just hides it behind a facade of snobbish arsehole.


----------



## Wuzzman (Nov 29, 2012)

masamune1 vs bender

masamune1 wins.

It was clear that the plan all along was to kill her in the public hearing. By the time the shoot out in scotland started our villain was in full mental breakdown. Culminating to his decision to say fuck it and die with the woman he wasted his entire empire to destroy.


----------



## Tony Lou (Nov 29, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> You mean Sean Connery?
> 
> Him and Timothy Dalton played the grittiest Bond, and Daniel Craig I guess.
> 
> ...



I'm obviously not familiar with the franchise the way some of you are, but James Bond's character and his image always seemed to scream"Mr. Perfect".

That's why I asked if the previous actors also played him as someone more human.

So thanks for clarifying.


----------



## Finaltubr (Dec 2, 2012)

Bond being Naruto, I just shutter to think about it


----------



## Furious George (Dec 13, 2012)

This movie was terrific. I can't fathom the hate.


----------



## Lulu (Dec 13, 2012)

Furious George said:


> This movie was terrific. I can't fathom the hate.



no one can fathom the hate.


----------



## Velocity (Dec 15, 2012)

If you ask me, Silva is easily one of the most memorable and one of the best damn villains in *any* James Bond movie. He was just fantastic, always doing stuff you'd never expect him to do. Roger Moore was right, I think - Daniel Craig is probably the best Bond so far and, for me, Javier Bardem created possibly the best villain so far.

I'm not saying that Skyfall is my favourite, nor am I saying it's the best, but as far as the protagonist and the antagonist go I don't think I can think of any James Bond film I prefer over Skyfall.


----------



## masamune1 (Dec 15, 2012)

What makes you think he was the best villain?


----------



## Velocity (Dec 15, 2012)

masamune1 said:


> What makes you think he was the best villain?



His unpredictability.


*Spoiler*: __ 



I don't mean "oh look I got myself caught and hacked into your network because you were stupid enough to plug my computer in with an ethernet cable", I mean "I just shot S?v?rine in the face and was totally hitting on James Bond five minutes ago".

He was just incredible. It almost didn't matter that it took forever for him to finally show up, 'cause he totally stole the scene whenever he was in it. He even died in a more badass way than I can ever remember a Bond villain dying (he didn't scream in outrage or fear, he just seemed annoyed or maybe disappointed). That moment where he took out his face plate thing was harrowing, too... His description of how M completely screwed him over, how even the cyanide pill didn't kill him...

Plus he had style and he didn't make stupid mistakes. Any other villain would have sent a dozen lackeys and one guy that's bigger than the rest after Bond and would have been surprised that they didn't succeed - Silva sends half a dozen in after Bond, casually throws a few grenades in himself _then_ sends a helicopter to blow the place up.




He was just an excellent villain and certainly my favourite to date. Bardem really knows how to command a scene and I'd love for him to get Best Supporting Actor at the Oscars for his role in the film. He deserves it so much.


----------



## Dr.Douchebag (Dec 15, 2012)

I agree with velocity , I think he just brought this very real terror to him that other bond villains with their super advanced gadgetry and grand schemes just didn't seem to bring.

However I think his role as Anton Chigurgh was far more disturbing than his with silva, like his silva , anton was unpredictable as well because he always calm and rarely changed his demeanor. It wasn't so much fear he inspired as this very uncomfortable ,anxiety ridden atmosphere which made anton such a great villain. 

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYoNJ4Sv2fU[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Liverbird (Dec 15, 2012)

silva was nothing like chigurgh, silva wasn't meant to be disturbing.. but they both are two of the greatest villains.



masamune1 said:


> What makes you think he was the best villain?



i loved his humour, attitude, personality and appearance.. and the unpredictability as velocity said


----------



## masamune1 (Dec 15, 2012)

Velocity said:


> His unpredictability.
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...




*Spoiler*: __ 



He made plenty of stupid mistakes. His plan was to humiliate M and then eventually kill her- and he engineered an incredibly pointless and convoluted scheme to achieve that. His scheme also rested far too much on factors outside his control, like the ability of MI6 to track him down (which, in the end, they managed by dumb luck), and on them not putting a bullet in his head or putting him in a better or even just different jail. Amongst many other things. Bare in mind that Bond has twice managed to break into M's house with zero problem too, so its not like he _needed_ to go to extreme lengths to kill or capture the head of MI6.

And before anyone says it (again)- no, he didn't plan on killing both himself and her from the beginning. His plan was to embarass and then murder her- the murder / suicide was only after he repeatedly tried and failed and only got every single man in his employ killed for his efforts (which, also, is something he tried to avoid). 

And who sends a sniper to murder his way to the top of a building to murder someone in the building opposite- when said victim is already _surrounded_ by your own men? What was the point of that?

And all those lackeys died just as easily as in every other movie. In fact everyone he sent died. And after sending half a dozen lackeys and the helicopter (pretty sure that came first- the grenades came after the helicopter), after the house is royally shot up and his men have tried countless times to shoot M- _then_ he tells them "by the way, don't kill M". Not smart. Especially since one of them _did._

Also, I give him a million points for having one of the best villainous lairs in the history of the series- an entire abandoned island city all to himself. And dock them all because it shows uo for about three scenes and is never scene again. Wasted. Utterly wasted.

As for his death- come on. It was just a knife in the back. Bond villains should die spectacular deaths whenever possible. They scream because they are bein sucked out of an airplane or set on fire, or have every bone in their body broken and then have a satellite dish dropped on their face; they don't not-scream because they are exhausted and suicidal and at the end of their tether.

And Christopher Walken died laughing, so that trumps dying annoyed.

Gotta say, overall- I found him a little dissapointing. Didn't find him especially unpredictable either- nothing he did surprised me. It just let me down. Not a _terrible_ villain and the performance was enjoyable- but ultimately? He let me down.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Dec 24, 2012)

I actually agree with velocity. 

Lol most of us agree with you on some level but differentiate on others


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Dec 24, 2012)

Darth said:


> Thought that they tried to sell Craig's "Age and Old Fashion'ness" too much in the film. Also, lack of Q gadgets disappointed.
> 
> Still good overall though.



Yeah I think that was a setup for something not quite sure what.

Was slightly disappointed with the climax and the lack of sub-plot, thought M would die differently. The first change in scenes was very jarring and out of place in the beginning(after his death).

I wasn't really enjoying it till Shanghai besides the things that Bond said that made me laugh , that was an excellent fight on the rooftop in Shanghai


----------



## heavy_rasengan (Dec 24, 2012)

Furious George said:


> This movie was terrific. I can't fathom the hate.



I can't fathom the love for this mediocre movie. Pray tell what was so amazing about it. It was all the same old shit. Run around in some market, run around on the street and then run around in the subway to find the villain. And oh yeah, the "go to prison on purpose" is getting redundant and stupid, it was done in Dark Knight and Avengers, we don't need it done again. The villain was also a failed ripoff off the Joker. These guys really need to take notes from the Bourne series.....

and the story was incredibly one dimensional. Ex-employee has vendetta against employer, ex-employee tries to kill employer and Bond has to stop him...really?


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Dec 24, 2012)

Enjoyed it more than the second movie. It was a fun watch atleast, far from the best bond film but I liked it.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Dec 24, 2012)

Dark Knight was a crappy bullshit movie.

Its only saving grace is Cat woman. And the end was sorta nice. 

But christopher nolan completely failed that one.

When a movie gets that overhyped a shitload of people get shot.


----------



## Jena (Dec 24, 2012)

heavy_rasengan said:


> and the story *was incredibly one dimensiona*l. Ex-employee has vendetta against employer, ex-employee tries to kill employer and Bond has to stop him...really?



Have you seen any other Bond movies? Their appeal isn't exactly fantastic writing and unique plots.


----------



## Sanity Check (Dec 24, 2012)

I didn't like how they tried to romanticize M's cold hearted and bureaucratically unredeeming personality.  As if to justify the concept of politicians and high ranking military personnel selling out their own soldiers and citizens to bring about a "greater good".  It shouldn't be morally nor ethically acceptable to consciously treat human life as if it were a currency of barter that should be traded.  Unacceptable & disgusting.

Other than that good movie.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Dec 25, 2012)

Someone needs a reality check^


----------



## masamune1 (Dec 25, 2012)

Jena said:


> Have you seen any other Bond movies? Their appeal isn't exactly fantastic writing and unique plots.



The other Bond movie plots only seem cliched because Bond invented so many plots that so many action movies reused and made cliche.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Dec 25, 2012)

^ Damn straight


----------



## Sanity Check (Dec 25, 2012)

St NightRazr said:


> Someone needs a reality check^



Maybe you're the one in need of a reality bullet.

There have been both good and bad ppl in positions of authority throughout history.

Its not necessitated that cynicism or acceptance of low standards is a given.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Dec 25, 2012)

No but their current system doesnt really function without that in place. You need to look at things from the perspective that exists with in the reality and the decisions these people have to make. They have to give up some of their character to do these kinds of jobs. You can judge all you like but that is the situation they are in. 

As for low standards and cynicism that hardly applies to me whatsoever  because I have none of those. Dont confuse me with a peasant.

They way you expressed your discontentmakes you look like an arrogant prick by the way.

You dont have to condone their poor behavior, but  it will help you far more if you analyze and appear neutral.


----------



## Sanity Check (Dec 25, 2012)

St NightRazr said:


> No but their current system doesnt really function without that in place. You need to look at things from the perspective that exists with in the reality and the decisions these people have to make. They have to give up some of their character to do these kinds of jobs. You can judge all you like but that is the situation they are in.
> 
> As for low standards and cynicism that hardly applies to me whatsoever  because I have none of those. Dont confuse me with a peasant.
> 
> ...




Giving up character or making sacrifices doesn't imply treating those under you as worthless slaves or selling them out for small gain.

M deliberately handed the life of her own agent to the enemy.  In the military and intelligence work people might understand that they're expendable at times and may lose their lives in the call of duty.

That doesn't mean it should be acceptable for them to be sold out or betrayed by their own military/government/etc or treated as if they were worthless pawns.

Put it this way.  If it is cool for M to trade Silva's life for some perceived gain.  Then its cool for the united states government to trade the lives of 4,000 civilians if it gives them an excuse to wage war in the middle east and serves some perceived cause.

That type of mentality and precedent should never be accepted or justified.

You want to rethink your life as you're claiming its completely acceptable.


----------



## masamune1 (Dec 25, 2012)

Well, to be fair to M, Silva _was_ hacking into Chinese military intelligence behind her back. And he probably showed some other signs of being a rogue agent up to that point, given how murderous and unstable he is.

Also, I don't think the film is saying that M was _right_ to sell Silva out, and she does seem to regret it at least a bit. The morality of her decision is left a bit ambiguous, even if Bond thinks she made the right (or at least a forgivable) choice.

Its just that, even if he has a genuine greviance, Silva is _way_ overreacting by getting other agents killed and blowing stuff up,and just to get back at her, not to mention all that criminal and terrorist stuff he gets up to off-screen just for profit and shitz and giggles.


----------



## St. YatōKiri_Kilgharrah (Dec 25, 2012)

Lol no Im not claiming anything is acceptable. Read it properly lol.

M's a complete bitch we know this. But the shitty way these people operate is what they signed up for.  

M should have really expected what people would do when you treat them in a certain fashion. She cant just bitch out over the decisions she made. Which she doesnt.


----------



## Kek (Dec 27, 2012)

They weren't kidding when they said this was the Best Bond Ever. 0_0


----------

