The Trouble City Forums
SKYFALL Post-Release - Printable Version

+- The Trouble City Forums (http://citizens.trouble.city)
+-- Forum: Specific Cinema (http://citizens.trouble.city/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Films in Release or On Video (http://citizens.trouble.city/forumdisplay.php?fid=78)
+--- Thread: SKYFALL Post-Release (/showthread.php?tid=145354)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35


- ericblair - 11-26-2012

AGlad that it worked for most people, but I'm in the minority here - I thought this was a shocking betrayal of the Bond character. Most everything has been covered elsewhere, but:

The digger on the train at the beginning. Knew trouble was brewing when there was obvious webbing/padding on the digger arm to aid the stunt man's progress. Uh, so he'll be climbing along the arm yeah?

The handling of Severin's demise - covered in depth by others, but the Bond character always held fast to a romantic ideal. The handling here made Bond not a tragic hero, but a scumbag. Likewise the infamous shower scene.

Bond waiting for the sharp shooter to kill his target before acting. No. The casual cruelty of the character is defined by the recipients of that cruelty deserving it. "You've had your six" is a great example of this. There was nothing in the film to indicate the target of the sharpshooter deserved what he got. Bond just didn't care.

Hanging on the bottom of the elevator. Cheesy CGI, you've got a bad arm. Check where the lift stops and take the next one?

The IT/hacking aspects of the plot. Reminded me of "24" at it's most technically absurd.

I see nothing wrong with a metasexual Bond villain, and many of the past villains have - more subtly - suggested sexual variety. But Bardem conveys no physical menace to anyone who's ever been in a scrap. He is in no way a suitable foil for the convincingly hard Craig. He's as convincingly hard as Kurt from "Glee."

Others have highlighted it exhaustively, but the whole "Skyfall" homestead thing - exhaustively, tediously derivative of Nolan's Dark Knight.

Mama M, and Bond weeping at her demise. I'm calling bullshit. Bond is cold and hard, vulnerable to women whose beauty causes him to lower his defenses and reveal a moral underside. He is not looking for surrogate parents, and if he is haunted by his past, then it is private - not something he would openly display. And he used to hate his bosses, and they him, tolerating him because he ultimately always gets the job done.

Which brings me to my fundamental complaint: Bond fails in his mission. Bond is the man who, somehow, never fails. He always has one more trick up his sleeve. In "Skyfall" he fails, and the result is not daring or revolutionary, it's just pathetic.

So, yeah, didn't like it. And I even like "View To A Kill!" Deakins shoots a pretty picture, but Mendes can't do action - I missed Vic Armstrong's input here. Like I said, I'm glad everyone else - bar me and Fleed - is getting something out of this but I think in time it will be seen as one of the failures of the franchise.


- laurenortega - 11-26-2012

Quote:
And I even like "View To A Kill!"

Quote:
but I think in time it will be seen as one of the failures of the franchise.

James Bond people are worse than Batman people.




- laurenortega - 11-26-2012

Also I could not GIVE a lesser shit if this movie "betrays" Bond's character somehow. Fleming's Bond thought all lesbians needed a good dicking, so I'm not exactly teary eyed when somebody takes Bond in a different direction.




- mr. stockslivevan - 11-26-2012

A[quote name="EricBlair" url="/community/t/145354/skyfall-post-release/900#post_3429665"]I missed Vic Armstrong's input here. [/quote]
Vic Armstrong was the worst action director for Bond, most of his input consisting of generic machine gun porn that turned Bond into Chow Yun Fat. I'm glad he did not progress beyond the Brosnan era.

Quote:Which brings me to my fundamental complaint: Bond fails in his mission. Bond is the man who, somehow, never fails. He always has one more trick up his sleeve. In "Skyfall" he fails, and the result is not daring or revolutionary, it's just pathetic.
Except, he DID win. He threw a knife at Silva's back, killing him. The whole point of residing at his home was to take Silva on his own terms and kill him "some men are coming to kill us, we're gonna kill them first". M agreed to be the bait, she may have died but she died for a reason and helped Bond succeed in taking down a dangerous terrorist.


- ericblair - 11-26-2012

ALauren - I'm a Batman guy too!

Stocks - On Vic Armstrong, I missed that basic proficiency with shooting action with Mendes' film (A fruit cart?! Really?!). Even "Die Another Day" has competently filmed action like the opening hovercraft chase - in my opinion, "Skyfall" does not. Directing action is a skill that a lot of the mainstream guys take for granted and assume is easy. It ain't.

Not knocking anyone's opinion here, but I wanted to introduce some alternate viewpoints to what has been a remarkably (IMO) positive thread. I've been a Bond fan for thirty years, and I'm glad you guys all loved it - but for me, it was as big a disappointment as "Prometheus."


- mr. stockslivevan - 11-26-2012

AI agree that many would take second unit for granted and that was why I was fearful Armstrong was going to become a regular for EON. Thankfully that wasn't the case and I was happy Witt and Baird returned after the mess in QOS. Complain about the fruit carts, but I'm glad the hi tech stuff has been done away with and made the sequences more grounded and it especially helps that they have better scripts giving more context to those sequences than stupid stuff like:

*Bond punches a smoker*
"Filthy habit!"
*Machine guns everyone, and a bunch of shit blows up*


- ericblair - 11-26-2012

AYeah, that exchange was wince-inducing - not least because Brosnan (like Bond!) is a fellow smoker : ) Reminds me of "The things we do for frequent flyer mileage!"

Also, I kind of see Lauren's point about the need to do something differently (although the sexual politics of the Fleming era, whilst the polar opposite of PC, do introduce a certain historical perspective into kink that's kind of interesting). But I thought "Casino Royale" was that something different - a compromised, emasculated Bond reborn as something more complicated by the end of that film. I think that film's reading of Bond is richer and more complicated than "Skyfall"s.


- dr harford - 11-26-2012

A[quote name="Mr. Stockslivevan" url="/community/t/145354/skyfall-post-release/950#post_3429692"]I agree that many would take second unit for granted and that was why I was fearful Armstrong was going to become a regular for EON. Thankfully that wasn't the case and I was happy Witt and Baird returned after the mess in QOS. Complain about the fruit carts, but I'm glad the hi tech stuff has been done away with and made the sequences more grounded and it especially helps that they have better scripts giving more context to those sequences than stupid stuff like:
*Bond punches a smoker*
"Filthy habit!"
*Machine guns everyone, and a bunch of shit blows up*[/quote]

I actually think the opening of TND is one of the best in the series. "White Rook to White Knight, get the hell out of there!"

"What the hell is he doing?" "His JOB!"

In the context of the ticking clock and potential nuclear devastation, Bond's full throttle assault is heroic and bad ass.

I do wish we had Bond as a smoker though. I suggested a way to have him smoke in a future film in the Best of Bond thread.


- mr. stockslivevan - 11-26-2012

AI do like the visual motif of Bond being observed by HQ, reflecting on the theme of mass media exploding in the 90s. I just find the action stuff a real bore.


- doc phibes - 11-26-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Harford View Post
I do wish we had Bond as a smoker though. I suggested a way to have him smoke in a future film in the Best of Bond thread.

With the amount of running Craig does?  Ridiculous.  You can't have both these days and have an audience take you seriously.  Physical intensity in action scenes is a Craig Bond staple now.  And I'll take the running over the smoking for an action hero.  Luckily for Bond fans, he still drinks and fucks to a level that would make Mr Hyde jealous.




- avian - 11-26-2012

A[quote name="EricBlair" url="/community/t/145354/skyfall-post-release/900#post_3429684"]Lauren - I'm a Batman guy too!
Stocks - On Vic Armstrong, I missed that basic proficiency with shooting action with Mendes' film (A fruit cart?! Really?!). Even "Die Another Day" has competently filmed action like the opening hovercraft chase - in my opinion, "Skyfall" does not. Directing action is a skill that a lot of the mainstream guys take for granted and assume is easy. It ain't.
Not knocking anyone's opinion here, but I wanted to introduce some alternate viewpoints to what has been a remarkably (IMO) positive thread. I've been a Bond fan for thirty years, and I'm glad you guys all loved it - but for me, it was as big a disappointment as "Prometheus."[/quote]

Sir, if Eva Green propositioned me, took me to her hotel suite, undressed, and turned out to have a penis, it would not be as disappointing as Prometheus.

[quote name="Doc Phibes" url="/community/t/145354/skyfall-post-release/950#post_3429746"]
With the amount of running Craig does?  Ridiculous.  You can't have both these days and have an audience take you seriously.  Physical intensity in action scenes is a Craig Bond staple now.  And I'll take the running over the smoking for an action hero.  Luckily for Bond fans, he still drinks and fucks to a level that would make Mr Hyde jealous.[/quote]

So... action heroing in a business suit and dress shoes is fine, but smoking is the deal-breaker? Okay...


- doc phibes - 11-27-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by avian View Post


Sir, if Eva Green propositioned me, took me to her hotel suite, undressed, and turned out to have a penis, it would not be as disappointing as Prometheus.

So... action heroing in a business suit and dress shoes is fine, but smoking is the deal-breaker? Okay...

Tailoring, sir.

This one's for all the Tweeting kids who fancy themselves film historians:






- dr harford - 11-27-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Phibes View Post

With the amount of running Craig does?  Ridiculous.  You can't have both these days and have an audience take you seriously.  Physical intensity in action scenes is a Craig Bond staple now.  And I'll take the running over the smoking for an action hero.  Luckily for Bond fans, he still drinks and fucks to a level that would make Mr Hyde jealous.

In the later Fleming novels, it's mentioned that Bond has cut back to one pack a day, down from his usual 70-90 cigarettes a day. In the Benson continuation novels, Bond is said to be down to 3-5 cigarettes a day which he smokes purely for pleasure.

Craig himself smokes on occasion, and Craig is the one doing all that running, so I don't think it's a stretch that his Bond could light up too.

I don't myself smoke at all regularly, but sometimes I will have the occasional cigarette just for the satisfaction of it, like how the night the DNC ended this summer after my long week of work, I bummed a smoke off someone and thoroughly enjoyed myself. Supposedly just living in LA is the equivalent of smoking two cigarettes a day with their smog, so smoking a handful of cigarettes a year isn't going to lead to a marked degradation of physical fitness. As far as Bond, ideally I'd like to see Craig light up in the afterglow of his latest conquest, but I think that's unlikely due to the MPAA's obsession with tobacco. Honestly I was just thrilled to see Severine smoke in Skyfall, but I won't hold my breath for Craig to do the same. However, if he were to, this was my suggestion for how it could work in the context of a future Bond film:

Quote:
Craig smokes “when he feels like it”, and so should Bond. How to make this fit the new Bond and a PG13 universe: Bond is undercover and we see him smoking briefly, while he observes a target. This way the producers have plausible deniability. Is Bond smoking because Bond smokes? Or because he was in disguise and trying to blend in?



- slim - 11-27-2012

Well, without smoking, you do give up a major stand-by of the spy trade-- offering or asking someone for a light. Especially in countries where a lot of people still smoke like chimneys.




- kartaron - 11-27-2012

Daniel craig is by far the best bond, I love the frantic, stoic, high wire act bond that he portrays.  As for the film, I am surpirised at how weak t is and the praise it is receiving.

The cold open is kind of dull until bond gets his own vehicle. I figure its meant to reinforce just how she shouldnt be a field agent but its distracting. M nannying over the whole thing makes it worse. In retrospect It would make more sense for Bond to tell M to shut it, dump Moneypenny in the back seat and finish the fight himself. the best gag in the opener was spoiled in the commercials... its too bad. that minute or two setting it up is wasted as I knew it was coming. The shooting was handled well except that she could have taken another 2 shots at least. At this point you have to question M for putting her in the field at all.

Adele's song is good, and the credits are fine.

The recovery and return are fine, I think more could have been done with his time away but thats nitpicking. I loved the testing, carving out the shrapnel, etc.

Whats supposed to be going on with him in the glass building? He fumbles around looking awkward and unsure just long enough to let his prey shoot a random person and nearly turn the tables on Bond.  What is up with bond at this point? Is he frustrated? Angry? Tired? Sad... The struggle hes having in fights (when in every other circumstance he would have just put them down in 2 strikes) should be making for more intense fights and some recognition of that in his face.

The chinese casino scene was awful. This film needed a real physical threat. Javier is a ghost and everyone else is a punching bag or fodder for komodo dragons. Moneypenny is useless, Severine deserves someone who cares and Bond doesnt feel threatened in any way.

The way the boat scene plays out Im starting to wonder if the writers decided dialog is too much a chore and they cant figure out how to develop their character's motivations so they just play it out in silence. Bond in one action puts severine in more danger and takes away his power to do anything about it ... for no reason. Then .25 seconds after she is dead he kills them all anyway. Bardem's speech on the island is good but he has to be the most distracted single minded villains ever... Is there a reason bond doesnt put a bullet in him when he has the chance? He should be pissed enough to do it.

By the way, Bardem wanting to be caught is obvious. He wanted to confront M obviously. I was annoyed the entire time he was captured because it was so obvious. The Worm/Virus hacking was poorly conceived and executed, and very very lazy. The whole idea of moving to that place and ignoring network security would be gross incompetence. The only reason were on her side in the hearing is she is M and we want to root for her and we want to see where this goes. Objectively she failed to even keep the place running right. Then again she is up against Bardem's supernatural ability to predict the future, know everything, and remote mind control secret agents.  So lets summarize the evil plan. Bardem wants to terrorize and kill M. To do this he steals the operatives list so Bond will find the thief (after being shot and nearly dying) and goes to the casino, beats his wife so she will lead Bond to him (who he kills not to punish her, but to piss off Bond). Then he need Bond to kill 5 armed guards (but not him)  despite being unarmed, and hope they take him to the new secret prison. All to confront M.  Then he breaks out by predicting all the electronic security and disabling it for the second time in the film. He is able to predict where Bond will be standing and when (to throw a subway train at him) and the moment he will exit the manhole (to be picked up by a henchman). Best of all, even though the hearings werent announced when the plan started, his plan is designed to gain freedom in time for and access to that hearing with the intent of assassinating M. (The Joker in TDK is impressed, Danny Ocean is jealous) Suddenly though, he is fallible and doesnt bring enough men or firepower to the table. At the same time Bond, who couldnt his the broad side of a barn minutes before is now pegging head shots and centering on fire extinguishers at 50 ft.

Suddenly Q has his number, Bond is wise to the game and M understands the threat, so off we go to Bonds house where we will hold off a siege MI6 and Parliament couldnt. Ok, and I love the idea. But Alfred's sudden appearance I think ruins what should just be Bond, M and the horde.  And everything that made Bardem a (supernatural) threat in the first two acts, is gone by the Third act header.  The idea of hime being a passable 00 is absurd as he poses no physical threat to anyone in the film except his battered wife. By the way I love that Bond ditches the official M car because its trackable, only to have Q make the same trail. to the same place.

Bardem, Craig and Dench as actors are all this film really had going for it. Thats a lot really. Fine movies have been made with less. But the plot, and dialog were bad. The action was passable but not superior, and the overall directing was weak.

Where was Jeffrey Wright?




- dr harford - 11-27-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by kartaron View Post

Where was Jeffrey Wright?

Leiter is not Bond's sidekick. He doesn't have to turn up in every film. He's an ally who Bond from time to time relies upon.




- carnotaur3 - 11-27-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by kartaron View Post

By the way I love that Bond ditches the official M car because its trackable, only to have Q make the same trail. to the same place.

It's logical to have Q make a trail that lags to buy Bond and M time.




- kartaron - 11-27-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 View Post

It's logical to have Q make a trail that lags to buy Bond and M time.

Yeah, its also a great excuse to pull out the old bond gadget car. The payoff is worth the thumb twiddling.




- kartaron - 11-27-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Harford View Post

Leiter is not Bond's sidekick. He doesn't have to turn up in every film. He's an ally who Bond from time to time relies upon.

I like the character and actor.. and I missed him being there.




- dr harford - 11-27-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by kartaron View Post

I like the character and actor.. and I missed him being there.


I like him too, but I like that he doesn't have to be there for every movie even more.




- MrSaxon - 11-27-2012

We need..... FELIX LEITER: THE MOVIE!

You could have a cameo by Craig's Bond who turns up and tell him "Move your arse, Leiter!"




- avian - 11-27-2012

A[quote name="MrSaxon" url="/community/t/145354/skyfall-post-release/950#post_3430084"]We need..... FELIX LEITER: THE MOVIE!

You could have a cameo by Craig's Bond who turns up and tell him "Move your arse, Leiter!"
[/quote]

Only if the villain is a vindictive Gregg Beam.

[IMG ALT=""]http://www.chud.com/community/content/type/61/id/146037/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]


- slim - 11-28-2012

Pretty sure this hasn't been posted here yet-- Empire's long-form interview with Purvis and Wade on SKYFALL:

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=35726

Some interesting writers'-intent (not that that counts for much) tidbits about literary influences-- from both Fleming and others, the death and replacement of M, whether Kincaid was written with Connery in mind, and what's up with the Goldfinger DB5, among other things.

They also take pains to (diplomatically) disavow QOS and certain elements of DAD, which amused me some.

One thing that surprised me: Wade came up with "Skyfall" as the name of the Bond family homestead first, and the movie title came out of that. I'd been assuming it was the reverse.




- doc phibes - 11-28-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slim View Post

Pretty sure this hasn't been posted here yet-- Empire's long-form interview with Purvis and Wade on SKYFALL:

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=35726

They also take pains to (diplomatically) disavow QOS and certain elements of DAD, which amused me some.

That part of the interview interested me a great deal.  They say they handed in a finished and ready script for QoS, the studio turned it over to Haggis, he tossed out much of their script, but never got to finish the draft constructed from P&W bits.

I would love to get my hands on the Purvis & Wade draft.  Any chance in Hell of that happening?




- mr. stockslivevan - 11-28-2012

AIt will hit the internet someday, maybe in a couple of years. I have the original draft of GoldenEye by Michael France written when Dalton was still on board and in a lot of ways I prefer that one over the final version. Really fascinating what was kept and what changed.

Definitely would like to see the original draft for Bond 22. I'm especially interested in what Die Another Day was supposed to be like before Tamahori stepped in and started asking for crazy shit like invisible cars and giant laser beams. Purvis & Wade were great when it came to constructing ideas for films and it's too bad they often get a bad rap for decisions others made, and that everyone praises Haggis assuming all the good stuff was his (I know the pop psychology dialogue is definitely his "You're not going to let me in there, you've got your armor back on" "I have no armor left").


- slim - 11-28-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Phibes View Post 

I would love to get my hands on the Purvis & Wade draft.  Any chance in Hell of that happening?

Not much of one, would be my guess. I'd love to see it myself.

This is something that boggles me about the film trade, though-- on the one hand, we're told (by Daniel Craig, not least of all) that QOS was a mess partly due to the writers' strike-- and on the other that there may have been a completed script that they possibly could have shot, before it ever reached Paul Haggis for rewrites.

Were they obligated to use Haggis's writing contributions, once he was contracted? And how much of the final result was the input of the director, Forster? We'll likely never know.

Another thing I found interesting in that interview was that the studio had an archivist collect all the drafts for CASINO ROYALE-- and that there were over a hundred of them. It seems incredible, but I don't doubt it for a second.




- mr. stockslivevan - 11-28-2012

AIt was ultimately Forster that rejected the Purvis & Wade draft and wanted to have the studio get Haggis.


- navidson - 11-29-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricBlair View Post

Glad that it worked for most people, but I'm in the minority here - I thought this was a shocking betrayal of the Bond character. Most everything has been covered elsewhere, but:
The digger on the train at the beginning. Knew trouble was brewing when there was obvious webbing/padding on the digger arm to aid the stunt man's progress. Uh, so he'll be climbing along the arm yeah?

I was a little disappointed by it. Seemed like a Daniel Craig version of a film in the Brosnan run....if that makes any sense. The first 2 Craig films were doing different things, and QOS kind of botched it, and then we have this one that is like a reboot within a reboot.




- mrbananagrabber - 12-01-2012

I finally saw a movie you guys! In a theater and everything!

Skyfall was gorgeous. Definitely the best looking bond. Probably my favorite of the Craig bond movies.

However two things bugged, One, the callous and mercurial regard for life has been covered.

Second, and this is probably just me, I HATED Judy Dench's M in this one, and was waiting the entire movie for her to get killed. Happened too late for me. The character was wrong at every turn, was directly responsible for dozens (hundreds?) of deaths, a and was a sanctimonious git the whole movie. Its like she was playing Dick Cheney, with less range.  On that point, maybe Dench's health prevented her from emoting?  Her range was pretty poor:one expression, no waiting.

None of this would have been a problem if she hadn't been the fulcrum of the movie.

Otherwise, really liked it.

Oh and did the caretaker's line about Bond going into the tunnel a boy, and coming out a man, mean he discovered how to masturbate? I think that's the only way to interpret that line.




- jacknifejohnny - 12-01-2012

I'm going to keep this brief. It's not a bad movie at all, but it's liberal use of certain themes and hell, even plot points from The Dark Knight were really distracting to me. Also, the entire time I was watching the film, and appreciating the beauty of it, the character work, and so on, there's a side of me that kept wondering: Do I really need to see Bond analyzed? His position in the world questioned?

I had this thought long before seeing Skyfall, just about long surviving pop culture characters like Bond, Batman, and so on, and why they keep carrying on. There's this school of thought that a lot of the characters created in times of strife are the ones that really capture the public imagination and are adaptable enough that they can move through changing fashions and so on. They survive. Bond is post-war Britain / Cold War, Batman is post-depression / WW2, etc. I thought of Bond, as people started claiming that Bourne was this new threat and that Bond was antiquated, that as long as the world is what it is, as long as there are governments, and threats, and secrets, 007 will fucking always have a job. So I suppose Skyfall is, to a certain degree, an answer to the "is Bond antiquated?" question, and what I've still not settled on is my own question: did I really need to sit through a whole movie about that?




- dan benenson - 12-01-2012

AI don't know, you just made a whole post about it, seems like a sort of interesting topic. I'm not saying every Bond film needs to be about stuff like this, but when the franchise is 50 years and nearly two dozen films old it's probably good if from time to time one of those films is about more than guns, girls, cars, and explosions.

But SKYFALL also has all those things.


- jacknifejohnny - 12-01-2012

That's the very thing: It wasn't that interesting to me. Do I think Bond needs more than guns, girls, cars, and explosions? (don't insult me, by the way) Yes. I do. Do I feel Skyfall's delivery of the other is entirely satisfactory? No. I don't. As I mentioned, I don't even think it's a bad film, and I really enjoyed a good bit of it, but my strongest memory of the film is the British Bulldog thing. I guess I was kind of glad that I paid enough attention in history class to understand the Churchill connection, and I often times wished that the rest of the film was as playfully subtle.




- cylon baby - 12-02-2012

Well, last Summer there were riots all over the UK, and then this year they had a successful Olympics, so I think some soul searching about the UK's place in the world, and the character of the Brits who made/make it great, are well in order, and great themes for a Bond film. And this film had a lot of action. Not as much as Moonraker, I grant you. But you can watch the DVD of Moonraker (and I love that film by the way).




- sumeragi - 12-04-2012

I just saw this tonight- a friend of mine who is a huge Bond fan was in the hospital recently and I was waiting for her to get out so we could go see it together. She liked it, but I found it quite the slog. To me there was never a sense of building tension. Like, for example, the fact that Silva has a disk with the identities of a kajillion NATO agents- after he releases a few names on youtube, it's never touched on again. Does MI6 ever retrieve the information? Do they get it back when they get Silva? I'm honestly asking because it seems to me that the movie jumps tracks from that plotline to making it all about M.

(And plus, 'the bad guy has a list of all our agents and their code names'? They used that same MacGuffin in the first Mission Impossible movie and a dozen other spy flicks. Who keeps compiling these damn lists and why do they keep falling into the bad guys hands?)

Sorry if this has already been brought up and run into the ground back on page 13, I just don't have strong enough feelings about this movie to read through a 20 page thread on it.




- cylon baby - 12-05-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumeragi View Post

I just saw this tonight- a friend of mine who is a huge Bond fan was in the hospital recently and I was waiting for her to get out so we could go see it together. She liked it, but I found it quite the slog. To me there was never a sense of building tension. Like, for example, the fact that Silva has a disk with the identities of a kajillion NATO agents- after he releases a few names on youtube, it's never touched on again. Does MI6 ever retrieve the information? Do they get it back when they get Silva? I'm honestly asking because it seems to me that the movie jumps tracks from that plotline to making it all about M.

(And plus, 'the bad guy has a list of all our agents and their code names'? They used that same MacGuffin in the first Mission Impossible movie and a dozen other spy flicks. Who keeps compiling these damn lists and why do they keep falling into the bad guys hands?)

Sorry if this has already been brought up and run into the ground back on page 13, I just don't have strong enough feelings about this movie to read through a 20 page thread on it.

And most importantly, why don't they just yank all their agents out of the field once they know they've been compromised? It (barely) works in Skyfall because M is too stubborn to do it: she'd rather gamble on Bond being able to retrieve the info and eliminate the Bad Guy. And the Bad Guy knows M enough to make that character flaw part of his plan.