Friday, November 9, 2012

I'm not clear on why Skyfall's getting such rave reviews

The first 90+ minutes are a parade of beautifully framed shots, but are otherwise filled with dull dialog, and silly action bordering on farce.  And it's capped off with a villainous master plan possibly even more ludicrous than the Joker's in The Dark Knight, with a dash of computer hacking that's about as compelling as the Da Vinci virus in Hackers.   (It's so stupid, they don't even try to explain how the villain escapes his cell.)  The new Moneypenny and the other Bond girl are entirely forgettable.  (The Bond girl seems unable to fit her teeth in her mouth.)  And Adele's endlessly repetitive theme does not get better with repeated plays.

On the plus side, the last 30 minutes are solid, Javier Bardem's first scene is outstanding (partly because it's the first moment of genuinely interesting dialog after such a long wait), and again, there are many gorgeous shots that would serve well as desktop wallpapers or screensavers.  Also, one of the goons in the casino was my first karate instructor.  (At least when I was a kid, I think most of the karate instructors in the city were actors.)

Has someone already created a cool poster featuring the Bond family stag?

7 comments:

  1. so not worth booking the babysitter, putting your on your winter gear, driving to town, queuing for tickets, buying tickets and spending money on a huge bucket of popcorn which you can't possibly eat then?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, going to see movies is one of my favorite things to do. Just have lower expectations. (I liked Wreck-It Ralph more.)

      Delete
  2. The thing with Skyfall for me is that it presents a relatable challenge for the first time (getting old and surpassed) and they blend old and new (not just people, old and new mythologies and old and new action movie logic.
    It surely is the best the Bond-fan movie, it stands as a tribute to previous movies and you don't take much of it you don't know previous ones.
    In fact it's the least exaggerated and most beautifully shot Bond movie yet.
    I liked it and it goes to my top 5 Bond movies, but not at 1st place :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probably in my top five, too, since I hated all of the Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan ones. But it's my third favorite with Daniel Craig.

      Delete
  3. SPOILER ALERT!
    I thought it had half a story, a silly villain (it's about revenge), a forgettable song, barely any action, and lots of plot holes, adding up to a meh total. On the plus side, Daniel Kleinman was back doing the main titles (although a bit halloweenish). Am I wrong to think that the gun that only Bond can shoot is something that has been done before? Istanbul and a few scenes in Shanghai, and was that really shot in Macao? Did they have budget problems?
    I can't recommend this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The titles started great with that shot of him being sucked through the sand, but after that I really disliked it.

      And speaking of reused elements, the evil Bond concept was done in Goldeneye.

      Delete
  4. Glad to find I'm not the only one who thinks this movie is grossly over-rated!

    ReplyDelete