Skyfall

[cinemabon]

Tut, tut, Tab. You're sounding like a snob!

[tabuno]

Webster's New World Dictionary has formerly defined snob to mean a person of no wealth or social rank which aptly describe me, as the layperson writing about this movie which unfortunately attempts to be something that apparently it isn't.

[Chris Knipp]

Not really true. A snob is defined as a person who believes himself superior to others in any one of a great variety of ways, social, economics, intellectual, moral, athletic, educational, fashion, wine. The list is large, if not endless. Someone of wealth and social rank can very well be a snob. Maybe cinemabon is implying you are a Bond movie snob or a blockbuster snob. I would say your choosing to condemn SKYFALL after five minutes is an example not so much of snobism as of overly abrupt judgment (which can, of course, arise from various kinds of snobism, however). Despite the validity of the metaphor "It is not necessary to eat all of an egg to know that it is bad," I feel compelled to watch all of a movie, no matter how bad, before I rate it.

The classic little American book on this subject (there are others of course) is Russell Lynes' entertaining SNOBS from 1950. He declares at the outset that social snobs (which was what people originally thought of when they used the word) had gone underground "except for professionals such as headwaiters and metropolitan hotel room clerks."

[tabuno]

I suffered through the entire movie before I made my opinion of the movie as I indicated already before in my post, thus my opinion of the first five minutes of the movie the second time around was an even more careful consideration of the movie having the benefit of having had a careful examination of the movie. It seems presumptuous to call a person a snob, a person who took the time to experience the entire movie and then attempted to experience some of the movie more carefully again. That's more than I can say most people do.

I always find it curious when I have specific examples of why a movie is flawed that in many cases the response isn't about trying to explain why my examples are suspect but instead are based on some flaw in the individual. By avoiding a direct response to specific examples, makes me believe that the other person can't find a reasonable response to defend their own opinion so it's just about name bashing the credibility of the person the messenger so to speak as if that would somehow would make my examples suspect which I don't think they do. This is the lazy method of criticism. My examples stand alone even without me.

[tabuno]

Saw Quantum of Solace last night, my second viewing of this movie. Quite surprised at how much better the movie appeared to me this time around and how it connected to Casino Royale, a connection that was quite effective, more so that most movies that have had sequels. I'm curious how people compare Quantum of Solace with Skyfall.

[Chris Knipp]

Sorry, tabuno, my mistake. I didn't realize your review of the first five minutes was made after already previously watching the entire movie. Now I see your heading was "COULDN'T MAKE IT PAST FIVE MINUTES OF A SECOND LOOK." Careless of me not to notice that.

I'm also sorry if you think I am criticizing your methods -- or you -- rather than responding to your criticisms. But I find your approach strange here.

I often find it hard to watch a movie -- any movie, no matter how much I like it -- a second time. So what does that prove? Another day, you might be able to sit through all of it, with pleasure. Isn't that possible?

[Johann]

SKYFALL is a Fine Bond film.
Sam Mendes is a Master in his own right.
This movie is worth a watch.

[cinemabon]

Watching this film on blu-ray with my 55 inch 1080p screen and 6.1 surround sound renews my faith that as far as the Bond franchise goes, this one takes the cake, to use the British vernacular. It is also easy to see why dear Roger Deakins, taken out of retirement by director Sam Mendes, was nominated for so many awards for his photography – crisp, clean, sharp, beautifully lit, moving without jerkiness, and so artfully done. I find it flabbergasting that he never took home the golden statuette. Whereas Thomas Newman is able to pick up the Bond baton and wave in some of the best musical cues since John Barry stood before a studio orchestra. Kudos also to set designer Dennis Gassner who, like Ken Adams, knocked me over with his Macao sets and the villain’s island – entirely shot in the studio!

Poor Daniel Craig is beginning to show his age (unfortunately) and everyone reminds him of it by constantly wishing him luck, to which he non-verbally replies with his flair for subtle facial disdain. Despite the continued references to Bond’s and to M’s age (which in 1080p is very clear), the dialogue (thanks to Purvis, Wade, and Logan) has that 007 wit we’ve come to expect from this long running series that in my mind has seldom grown stale:

“Age is no guarantee of efficiency,” a very young Q says.

“And youth is no guarantee of innovation,” Bond shoots back.

As to action, the stunt coordinators were working overtime on this one, giving us plenty to grip the edges of our seats (although at some point the explosions, the car chases, the impossible leaps across ridiculous gaps become maudlin after a while). I’m enjoying my DVD version of “Skyfall” and even watched the new original documentary, “Everything or Nothing: the untold story...” showing on Netflix this month about the origins of Bond in the mind of Ian Fleming. I’m not ashamed to admit I’m a consummate Bond fan and will likely remain so. As Judi Dench so eloquently stated that the whole purpose behind the spy agencies is to keep us safe from those who lurk in the shadows (and a reason to continue the 007 series to boot!).

“We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven; that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.”

Alfred Lord Tennyson from the poem, "Ulysses"

[Chris Knipp]

"As to action, the stunt coordinators were working overtime on this one, giving us plenty to grip the edges of our seats (although at some point the explosions, the car chases, the impossible leaps across ridiculous gaps become maudlin after a while)."

Your praise is strengthened by this ounce of reserve. Despite tabuno's losing patience after five minutes, I think I'd enjoy watching SKYFALL again -- except maybe for the last part: the battle at the end is too long and draqwn out as I remember it. It's a Bond movie with many good things in it, though I'll stand by my opinion that it didn't need to try so hard. Deakins: definitely a good one. Drawn out of retirement, you say? But is that really true? I see he's actually a year younger (63) than Ed Lachman (64), another good cinematographer I've become aware of through meeting him at Lincoln Center screenings. Both Lachman and Deakins have been continually busy in recent years.

I particularly liked the island lair and didn't know it was all done in the studio. I see that's true, an actual place entirely recreated at the Pinewood Studios as mentioned here. This is more fully described on Yahoo's UK movies site. I would give that an award. Despite missing the old, more elegant, more lighthearted Bond, I would agree with Johan that SKYFALL is a fine Bone film, and deserves a watch.

[cinemabon]

Deakins had retired and agreed to shoot "Skyfall." With the success of this film, he has signed on for two more additional projects. I guess he isn't retired any longer.

The island lair was shot in a studio with the exterior shot at Pinewood (sets built for the film) and the rest drawn in CGI - pretty cool, huh?

[Chris Knipp]

its based on a real place, though. Apparently the CGI adds that look. I liked it.