The Craig Reconstruction: Skyfall (Part Four)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ม.ค. 2018
- My look at Skyfall concludes with Part 4
Part 1 - • The Craig Reconstructi...
Part 2 - • The Craig Reconstructi...
Part 3 - • The Craig Reconstructi...
All my missing Bond projects that I've done that have been removed from TH-cam are available to watch on my website:
haphazardstuff.com/james-bond...
#jamesbond #skyfall - บันเทิง
I accidentally said in Mr Plinkett's voice: PAAAART FOOOOOOOUUUUR
SPECTRE is the most disappointing thing since my son's court appointed laywer Larry Gruber
James Bond?? More like James Bored
They missed a trick with Kincade's 2 black labradors. If you ever want to show the villain in a bad light, have them kill a dog. Works every time.
This film was a masterpiece and had the best villain out of the whole Daniel Craig era 🔥🙌🏾
Disagreed. The villain had mommy issues. Oh let's kill M because she left me to die wahhh wahh. Raul was an agent and knew the rules of being expendable.
@@e-musickvance3581 he did, he even used cyanide to kill himself, but instead of killing him, it scarred him both physically and psychologically. Add to that the fact that he was tortured for hell knows how long. No amount of code or beliefs are going to justify all that for a guy who went through this much.
In terms of the continuity stuff, I think the trouble lies in Spectre trying to tie everything up neatly. If you ignore Spectre you can just enjoy each film taking or leaving whatever it wants from the existing stories. Loose continuity helps each film be a good standalone watch.
With SPECTRE the best I can come up with is that Mr. White and Blofeld were only, at best, indirectly connected with Silva's crew (like weapon shipments and underworld contacts, etc).
From what I understand in the book Bond was kind of a car enthusiast, which might explain if this was meant to be a different DB5 and I like to think his reaction when he heard the car explode after Silva destroyed was Bond being a bit pissed that his car blew up.
But where did the Casino Royale DB5 go and why the hell does this one have gadgets? It's a major shark jump continuity wise.
First I watched Skyfall, I forgot that Bond already had DB5, so it didn't bother me back then. When I rewatched his movies back to back, I was also got confused with this. The only logical explanation I could muster, is that Dimitros installed these gadgets. We don't know him. May be it was his hobby, right?
@@jossricketts4452 I always assumed that after Casino Royale bond had the DB5 shipped back to london and put into storage, where Q branch converted it to left hand drive and installed the gadgets. It wouldn't be too much of a stretch for Bond's character, as in Casino Royale the novel Bond had a Bentley 4.5 Litre which he had maintained in storage during the second world war.
Voldemort didn't mind Bond failing to protect M, because it's all part of his plan to take over the muggle world. Bond's new Top Secret mission was to kill Harry Potter.
No. Mallory has appreciated Bond's value after brining Silva in the first time and his subsequent actions and decision making after Silva's break out. Mallory has forgiven Bond and trusts him after the hearing shoot out. M's death was always a significant possibility. The last scene is where both men anoint each other in their roles: Mallory confirms that Bond will continue as 007 and Bond pays respects to the new M.
Apparently Eon has been asking Lazenby to make cameo appearances too. I was at a dinner party with him a few years ago and I remember him saying something about the producers asking him to reappear every now and then.
I think you've slightly misread that scene from _Spectre_ . Q actually ends up doing a lot for Bond over the course of these two films so clearly they have a kind of friendship. In that context I can easily see him repairing a car at Bond's request.
I think they could have easily rectified the whole DB5 issues with some quick little dialog before the big reveal. Something like...
M: Where did you get this old tea kettle anyway?
Bond: Won it in the Bahamas. I had Q's predecessor install a few optional extras.
M: It's not very comfortable, is it?
*flips lid on gear lever*
Bond: Are you gonna complain the whole way?
On the topic of Skyfall: here's a great analysis someone made th-cam.com/video/ujRcUFt4rDY/w-d-xo.html
He mentions the idea that Skyfall is structured as a trip back in time. This includes visual cues: The movie begins with a rooftop chase resembling the one from Quantum, we see the scorpions from Die Another Day's intro at the Cabana, Mi6 exploding like in The World is Not Enough, the palm print gun from LTK, the reptile hopping from Live and Let Die, and several others. And of course it ends with the Aston Martin DB5 and an old man who's clearly a Sean Connery stand in. Then the old M office, with Mallory looking like Bernard Lee.
With this in mind it makes sense that the gunbarrel would be at the very end. Dr. No begins with the credits of Broccoli and Saltzman, before the first gunbarrel. Skyfall ends with the gunbarrel, which is followed by the credits.
ThePandanaman very interesting theories.
There are nitpicks and there are Nitpicks...this is the latter.
Nice reference
HaphazardStuff I love your Bond videos. I really enjoyed this analysis of Skyfall and I'm looking forward to what you do next with Spectre. Keep up the great work! Also, I'm happy that you're a fan of Dalton, especially License to Kill.
In Scotland we'd call that kind of dog ornament a wally dug.
Been a bond fan for ages , but I thank you for presenting a new and enlightening prospective of the bond characterisation
Dear HaphazardStuff: LOVE, LOVE, LOVE your videos, especially on the Bond series. And, yes, I agree with you wholeheartedly: (a) Ditch the DB5! UGH! Enough already! It makes no sense to keep bringing it back. (And question: If the DB5 in "Skyfall" is the Connery/Bond car, why was it stored with the bullets still loaded in the machine guns?) and (b) Bring back the big finale of two armies going at each other. As you point out, the last battle between good guys and bad guys was in 1987 (1987!!!) "Living Daylights." Even then, it wasn't Bond leading the charge against the bad guys. Bond doesn't even participate...he's too busy trying to get away in the airplane. HaphazardStuff - Keep doing what you're doing.
I find your Bond series very informative, in-depth, insightful and enjoyable. Thank you. I forward to SPECTRE. The crap show that was.
Tbh I feel like the world is not enough has more in common with skyfall then goldeneye
Red Letter Media and HaphazardStuff (James Bond Series mostly) - I haven't got time for anything else.
I know what you mean, but if you like those check out MauLer's review of 'The Last Jedi'. Very promising channel.
IRONMANAustralia, YES. People need to spread the word about that review.
IRONMANAustralia - I've seen that review and it's one of the cringiest things I've ever seen. The guy is full of himself. He doesn't understand things like "opened for interpretation" and "suspension of disbelief". Plus - almost 90% of his arguments are ether misinterpretations, or simply wrong. Also, he's talking about TLJ not as film, but as STAR WARS media. It's not a review. It's a 5 hour rant made by some asshole.
You don't have to love TLJ to understand my point. You just have to understand what can or cannot be considered as criticism
James Fleming: Film isn't just art, it's a craft and language. Thus it can be judged OBJECTIVELY. Notice how in this comment thread how a desperate TLJ defender like James Fleming just flails around and can't refute ANYTHING from Mauler's review. It's hilarious. TLJ sucks OBJECTIVELY, James Fleming. You'll just have to deal with it.
You always have some solid points on how the plots of several Bond films could have been better & you nailed it with the Skyfall shootout. The stand-off was meant as a testament to the "old ways", but it does come across a bit flat. Having reinforcements would have indeed made more sense & would have been a nice nod to earlier Bond installments where a massive stand-off took place. But the additional idea of Silva misdirecting the incoming team, would lead to the same flat feeling for me at least. Regardless Skyfall is one of the best Bond films made. By the way, did you like the oneliner: "Put it all on red, it's the circle of life."? It was my favorite one in the movie.
I liked Spectre. It is a total cop-out, I fully agree. After seeing Skyfall, a classic Bond style film, I had also hoped for a standard Bond mission for the next installment. But like many Bond installments before it, it followed current standards. Some for the worst, like making Craig's outings one contnuity, YUK! Yet Spectre also felt like classic Bond, made with the same cinematic quality as Skyfall. I even liked the Blofeld twist, as cliche as it was, just by the way it was brought cinematically. The film is overlong however, like most of Craig's outings. The added London scene wasn't necessary, but it provided 2 useful moments; Blofeld blowing up the old MI6 building (I thought it was a rather clever recton)& Bond deciding not to kill Blofeld. It showed he was seemingly able to live a normal life with Madeleine.
The next installment is predictable & I at first dreaded the idea. I realized however, we might get a qualitative, spiritual successor to On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Fingers crossed.
23:58-24:38 plus we already got a Bond prequel in the Young Bond books, which already do a great job at expanding his history at least the Bond of Fleming's books.
I liked those books when I was younger, but in retrospect they kind of stretch plausibility for me with Bond having all those adventures as a teenager. I think a series focusing on Bond's time as a Commando in WW2 would be fascinating though.
Just watched all of The Craig Reconstruction. Good stuff. Looking forward to your take on Spectre.
Also r.e. sending help to Bond at Skyfall. Silva is pretty much in all of the MI6 network so anything they arrange, he would see and simply stay away. Would have helped if say, Mallory, explicitly said that and said 'he's on his own'. Hope he's ready'. etc....
Small nitpick here: the hunting rifle of Bond's father is not a shotgun. It's a Anderson Wheeler 500 NE Double Rifle that is firing solid bullets in the .375 to .600 caliber range. Holding his dad's rifle again did in fact restore Bond's shooting ability.
Ah ok. I knew someone out there would know exactly what type of gun that was.
HaphazardStuff there's actual a whole website devoted to correctly identifying guns that appear in movies. It's called the Internet Movie Firearms Database. It's done quite thorough work on the Bond series. Even pointing out the the Walther Bond carries in DR. NO wasn't a PPK.
So far Silva has been the only main villian that Criag has killed. C is killed by M Blofeld is spared Dominic Green is killed by Quantum off screen and Le Cherif is killed by some goons.
Connery kills all his villains save Blofeld who escapes and Largo who is killed by Dominio both times. Dalton kills all of his as dose Brosnan and Moore.
Moore doesn't kill Kristatos and Dalton doesn't kill Koskov.
I thoroughly enjoyed this series, and your editing. Yeah it wasn't a perfect movie, but it was good nonetheless. An underrated channel you have!
Once again, very good stuff and worth the wait. Even though I am a long time Bond fine, you keep giving me new insights to the series. I however have to gripe with something. I think you really could tighten the videos. In a video essay it is great to be thorough and funny, but I would claim the product should have strong forward momentum in order to keep the viewer interest strong all the way through. In one area where quicker pace would be appreciated is in the points when you try to drive home a point. Yes Aston Martin stuff problems are fun to chew on, but it doesn't warrant over 14 minutes of coverage.
But like I said, very good stuff. Will re watch at least twice more and it will probably be a mainstay as a background noise.
Great videos. 42:20 - 'M' is based on the real life 'C' which is always used for the head of MI6. 'C' comes from the surname of Mansfield George Smith-Cumming the first director of the SIS way back and became a tradition . 'C' is always signed in green ink. Across the Thames the head of M15 is sometimes referred to as 'K' after a guy called Kerr but it's a less common practice for the less esoteric domestic intelligence service.
Really great review. I Just subscribed.
In the words of Connery ‘you’ve shurpashed yourshelf this time.’ ;) I sound like I’m crawling up your backside in all my comments but so much hard work goes into these videos and it definitely pays off as they are so entertaining. It can be so easy for a project this long to be intimidating to watch but it’s a tribute to how engaging they are and is such a treat for Bond geeks to watch. Excited to hear your thoughts on Spectre. But the ending of your videos always get me eagerly awaiting the next one.
I salute you Haphazardstuff. :)
Thanks so much for the kind words David! Glad to hear these projects are being enjoyed. And, I gotta salute you right back. I know you're a very longtime viewer of my 'stuff' - thank you! :o)
Haha yeah I remember watching these when they were 1 minute reviews of each film.
Btw I have been doing some James Bond tours in London and have learned that M’s name ‘Olivia Mansfield’ is a nod to the original head of the real life Mi6 ‘Mansfield Cumming’ He was known by his initial ‘C’ and every head of Mi6 since then has been referred to as ‘C’ since then even if that isn’t there initial. So I’m assuming the same goes for M in the Bond series. Just thought that might be of interest. :)
David West C for Control according to John Le Carre
Same here. Mind you I don’t always agree with Hap, I do applaud his videos, they are entertaining, interesting, informative and very amusing. Along with Oliver Harper (with whom I also don’t always agree with) Hap has the best retrospective’s and evaluation videos online. Please keep up the great work.
Hmm very interesting. BTW what are the three most popular spots on a London Bond tour?
Do you prefer Casino Royale or Skyfall?
26:41 Although it was awesome playing a Bond game with Connery himself, hearing old Connery from a young version of himself was polarising. Awesome but polarising.
Another thing I never understood was why did they adapt From Russia with Love (out of all films) into a game instead of Goldfinger or Thunderball, or creating a new Bond mission set in the 60s? Wasted opportunity right there.
Not the most action packed movie but plenty of interesting scenarios, characters, and vibrant settings.
At least they added plenty of stuff from the Connery era to the game to spice things up. I just loved that jetpack!
Totally agree. From Russia With Love, for me, is Connery’s best Bond film, but to adapt a Connery Bond film to a game, Goldfinger or Thunderball will be a better blueprint.
I really didn't mind the Goldfinger era DB5 showing up in the movie, as you stated Skyfall seems to take place quite a few years and missions after the previous two films, so there's no reason as to why Bond couldn't have asked Q-Branch to 'pimp' his ride for him, or maybe he did it himself?
The Bond movies have always played quite fast and loose with continuity, you really just have to suspend your belief and accept what is when it come to these films. Also, although the Craig Bond movies are a reboot and a new timeline, they're still very much connected to the previous films in terms of aesthetic, music, structure, characters, it isn't a Nolan Batman kind of reboot, this is still THE James Bond franchise. Who's to say Craig's Bond didn't embark on his own version of the Goldfinger mission between films?
Fantastic review sir ! Thank you🤣
Nothing added up in this film, & people just don't seem to get where I'm coming from. At least now I know I'm not alone. Craigs Bonds are ALL like this. They try to confuse the audience but the film just becomes a confusing mess instead. This film is never going to get repeated viewings from me, that's for sure. It was DUMB enough the first time round. And I got sick of the Judy Dench show in the end.
Re: M, The original head of modern MI-6 in the time of Fleming was Stuart Menzies. From that point forward the "Head" of MI-6" became "M" as an honorific. In Casino listen carefully to what Bond ACTUALLY says. Basically he's pointing out the coincidence of her last name AND the title; not one dictates the other. In any event, if previous Bond actor cycles increasingly trended toward greater and greater special effects, grandiose plots etc. The Craig cycle has seemingly trapped itself into an ever tightening circle of the character itself, as opposed to the character vs. "X". And yes. I agree, the whole DB5 inclusion is ludicrous "fan service"; closely akin to the "StarWars" franchise crutch of dragging out the Millenium Falcon. At least StarTrek does'nt mind blowing up the Enterprize; he!!, it's practically a feature at this point. Great work.
I always thought that the car was the one from casino royale and just asked Q or someone else to install all of this stuff.
But then Spectre happened
No, it s too late - after watching so much of your channel - I can't turn back now
Can you redo the older Movies, with 1 hour reviews. Before Piece Brosnan, they are all short and mostly bunched together as a single video.
I would really like to, it's just a matter of finding the time
The DB5 is the James Bond car, and I for one like its inclusion in the film. All this speculation over how the car got the gadgets is way OTT. I mean this is a film series that already had an invisible car, sure it was a bad and tasteless idea, but if we are meant to allow that, than surely we can allow the fact that Bond strong armed the previous Q administration into sprucing up his DB5.
If you want an example of a perfectly paced Bond film then Skyfall is the example. With the exception of a few narrative hiccups and a casting decision I hate, then first two acts are Bond at his best. Where the film starts to sag is when Bond and M reach Scotland. The set pieces are great and narratively it goes along the right direction, but the pacing stills. I find ironic that the character moments in this film are so great and we finally get round to the action packed finale and it starts to sag, for me in any case.
Skyfall was to Craig what Goldeneye was to Brosnan, a fun filled film that tried to take back the series to its traditional roots, but also giving it a nice update in style and relevance.
As for your opinion that Moneypenny is a code name, I hope it is. Naomie Harris is awful, she is beautiful, but that’s it, she plays Moneypenny as an annoying pest, her voice is annoying, her so called chemistry with Craig is annoying and her expressions are cringing.
13:30 I would've given Brosnan one of the three BMWs he drove as the Vanquish was the only other Aston he drove besides the DB5. Not sure which BMW though as they each only appeared in one film. The Z3 only had two scenes in GoldenEye and didn't really do anything before Bond traded it for Jack Wade's plane. There's the 750iL from Tomorrow Never Dies with the remote control cell phone. And was the only one of the three BMWs that wasn't a convertible. And finally the Z8 in The World is Not Enough, which got a bit of action before it was sliced in two.
The kid in the old B&W commercial with the transforming gun is Kurt Russell
you talk for 15 minutes about the damn DB5. You are way overthinking it.
1.) It is the Casino car, but Q branch installed gadgets between films.
2.) Just because Q branch works on it doesn't make it a company car. If you are on holiday you are going to want gadgets in your personal car.
3.) Even the Casino Car is the Goldfinger car (It has the same license plate). They are going for ambiguity [both the same car and not the same car], the same way Dalton/Brosnand Bond was technically the same Bond as Connery/Lazenby/Moore's Bond in continuity - but also not really.
4.) It is complete fan service, but it was the 50th anniversary. C'mon. I'll admit it shouldn't pop back up in Spectre.
Your #3 is patently false. The DB5 in CR has a North American-style license plate with an entirely different number... not any of the possibilities from the Goldfinger revolving number plates.
The DB5 in CR was just meant to be a DB5, not the GF/TB/GE/TND DB5... the Skyfall (but also Spectre/NTTD) DB5 is very clearly supposed to be the old one. The revolving number plates are the one blatantly obvious element of the DB5 that disappeared post-TB... but as you said, it's all fan service for the 50th anyway.
@@emmittmorgans8076 The Skyfall car has the same plate from Goldfinger. Maybe the CR car got the GF plate when he shipped it to the UK.
I don't think Q would bother with the revolving plates anymore because its bound to be the only DB5 within 1000 miles. It was kinda dumb to begin with, i think they just did it for the toy.
On the subject of the character of M, I believe you mispronounced Robert Browns name by instead calling him Lou Brown.
Oops, my mistake
@5:47 can someone tell me the name of the track he's playing in the bg?
Very interesting your opinion on the DB5 how can he have this car as it’s a reboot know there doing it again in NTTD as bond is driving the AM from the living daylights
To be honest, I've only seen 'Skyfall' once (on DVD about a year after the cinema release). I've only seen Craig's first 3 Bond films once each and I haven't seen 'Spectre' yet. 'Skyfall' is well made, but I found it not that emotionally involving, nor that well constructed a story. The trailer featured suggestions of a more well realised story. It's a sophisticated film for a Bond movie and it is among the top 10 Bond films without any doubt at all, but......it didn't really engage me and I didn't feel it had that much re-watchability.
Despite being in disagree with you for most of the "Brosnan age", I respect your opinion and really liked your videos. I can't wait to see your review of Spectre.. Which is for me one of the worst Bond ever...
Even worse than die another day?
Great content as always. You don't need the music underneath your narration. You voice alone is engaging enough.
It is sometimes the bast ways are the old ways, it shows that old is not a bad thing, it ties all the films together!
Can you do a spectre review?
The most annoying thing about Skyfall is that it carries itself with such prestige and yet the second half of the film is just as illogical as most other 007 movies. It’s the second best of Craig’s but it’s a country mile behind Casino Royale.
I think the next Bond should get a Bentley like in the novels. Also, I think the first two films tried to make the DBS Craig's signature car before they threw the DB5 back at us.
Who cares if the DB5 doesn't make sense in the "continuity" of the series.
Continuity in the 007 series is fucked anyway, the series is incredibly fast and loose with any continuity, to the point where it actively hates it.
As you said, enjoy it for what it is meant to be.
IMHO, Skyfall was not much of a Craig Bond movie. They had a lot of loose ends which needed to be followed up upon from CR and QoS. That DB5 from Goldfinger was really rubbing it in too much on the fanboy side.
I agree that DB5 is way too much used in current 007-movies. Aston Martin is the right car brand for Bond but please use the modern models! What comes to removing the steering wheel from left to right, Tommi Mäkinen built Subaru Impreza rally cars that originally had steering wheel on the right side when they were imported from Japan and then removed the steering wheel to the left side since we have right side traffic here in Finland and he said that it wasn't a big deal.
Isn't there a fortified bunker somewhere with guards and 00 agents M should be sent to?
SolarDragon007 it would probably still be technology based an easily hack able for Silvia. And he would’ve known it’s location anyways considering he was a former operative
I don't think it would be crazy for:
a. MI6 to go to the extra expense to trick out some of Bond's personal possessions - especially him being a top agent. Would they prefer to let someone so valuable just drive around on holiday in a normal car unable to adequately defend himself? He is in constant danger of capture or assassination after all. I mean, what if M just up and lost a hard drive with a list of agent's names on it or something?
b. It's not crazy to suggest that Q would trick out some of Bond's personal assets either, (at personal or professional request). As someone with military experience I've seen funds, men, and equipment being used for "personal" purposes in an appropriate, questionable, and totally inappropriate way. You even see that in the private sector. Hell, we saw it a few movies back with Q building a "fishing boat" for himself.
Not unrealistic at all. I mean if President Trump wanted to change the desk in the oval office with something he personally preferred they wouldn't trick it out with a big red nuclear button, and one of those voice activated mechanisms that opens the trapdoor for the Rancor pit or whatever? How much MI6 crap does M have at her house? Whether that's a house they gave her or one she personally owns, you know it's going to have security devices and weapons up the wazoo. She'd have Q around there installing all kinds of things, and probably ask him to fix the toaster while he was there, (and he'd do it without batting an eye).
c. What would MI6 do with an old spy car that has machine guns in it? Three options:
1. Destroy it.
2. Take out all the gadgets and sell it.
3. Allow someone with appropriate security clearance and licence to kill to take personal possession of it.
The last one doesn't sound that crazy to me.
I know the above points don't really fit the conflicting facts with the Craig movies, but I just wanted to say as individual objections I disagree they sound unrealistic.
I'd like to simply imagine that the origin of the car for the Bond movies is that he won it in a poker game, (just the way we see in Casino Royale), and then he asked Q to trick it out, and as it wasn't totally inappropriate or unheard of for MI6 to augment their agent's personal homes, cars, clothing, so he did so, (or maybe MI6 even offered/suggested/insisted).
If you make artistic allowances, it's not that hard to imagine the timeline is kinda alternate universe Berenstain screwy, where Casino Royale kinda-sorta retrospectively shows how the Connery-era Bond won the car in a poker game, had it augmented with gadgets of that era, then kept it as a personal possession since - even after it became obsolete, (even though you see Casino Royale in a modern setting).
Then if you just imagine that Bond sometimes drove it on the weekends. Maybe over the years M, and Q were increasingly on his case to use another car, upgrade it, or not drive it at all, but he loved the car, and he's Jame's-motherfucking-Bond so they couldn't stop him from doing it. Like Starfleet wouldn't want Captain Kirk climbing mountains without 24th Century safety equipment, but he's like idgaf I'm Captain Kirk bitches! Indeed a IRL example of this is how Virgin, (the company), always felt about Richard Branson taking hot-air balloon trips, and generally taking risks, etc. The guy isn't going to just totally curtail his lifestyle just because it makes the suits nervous.
So to continue ... since even the old care still offered him some level of protection, MI6 let it slide. Q would even repair, reload, maintain, the 60's era technology, so it wouldn't be unusual to see it in his workshop even now. After all, it's not like Bond could take a car like that to the local Jiffy Lube for a tune up.
So anyway, then Craig gets it 'out of mothballs' in Skyfall because he needs old-school tech to defeat his high-tech enemy. Just what the doctor ordered.
Again, I know that doesn't fit all the details in the Craig-era movies, and as you point out it would have been better to have less of them, but looking at it that way it's not so bad - and conflicting details would be necessary to do the simultaneously past and present Casino Royale origin for the car. But it's not that hard to just mentally put the Casino Royale movie before Connery, or indeed imagine Connery in the role for that movie. At the very least that particular scene could easily exist in a Connery movie. Casinos are pretty timeless, so it's not like he was playing some holographic 'World Domination' video game to win it or something, (who ever heard of such an absurd thing anyway?)
The ending should have been Bond regaining his steady aim and shooting Silva between the eyes as he held M hostage. They set his shaky hand up earlier in the film and this would have been a sign of his resurgence back into full power at the climax of the movie. There was really no reason to have M die rather than just retiring and riding out into the sunset like Q.
They could have set that up earlier in the film, too.. like when Bond comes back and is in her apartment and they share a tender moment where she admits she thought about quitting after he fell. And then, when Bond saves her at the end she's all like 'I'm getting too old for this shit' and the audience laughs and stuff.
Yeah, that woulda been a better ending. Unfortunately we're stuck with a movie where Bond doesn't save the day and fails at just about everything and throws a random knife into a bad guy's back in a really unsatisfactory and meaningless way.
When is The Punisher review coming?
I guess Bond won the DB5 from Casino, took it with him to England and let Q/whoever else was responsable for all the equipment modify it.
I always came to think after the events in casino, that formed bond into the man he is now, he got stuck in the memories of the mission.
He started drinking the Wodka Matini more regurlarly, wore fancy tuxedos, this only counts for quantum he became cold and unattached and regurlarly used a 9 mm Walter Pistol.
Because of Vespas Death he couldn´t move on and even after being able to move on, the events in he mission still dictate his personality.
That´s why bond still uses the DB5 from Casino in Sky Fall, as a reminder of that time.
only one problem it is a RIGHT HAND DRIVE
NOT A LEFT HAND DRIVE
I don't care how he got the DB5. It's awesome.
6:49 Cooter... heh.
I don't associate Daniel Craig with the DB5 either. I'd rather they stay away from using the DB5 and the PPK, since they are part of Sean Connery's world.
I love Skyfall honestly. I feel that it really would've served as a great end for Craig's Bond's misery and past haunting him. That finally he can move on. And then Spectre happened. Other than that, Skyfall does a lot of things right. It's not perfect, but the hiccups are very minor. Kind of like Goldfinger's hiccups and TSWLM's hiccups.
When Spectre?
On the death of M......I thought Dench did a terrific job in her role, although I found 'Goldeneye' a bit 'hammer it over our heads that the new M is a woman'. From 'Tomorrow Never Dies' on I thought Dench found a great footing to play the role. Maybe it's the fact that she had been in so many Bond films, but I felt nothing during her death scene, beyond respecting how well the scene is acted. Maybe it's also due to the film's style and feel. I never felt drawn into the story in the way I had with 'O.H.M.S.S.'.
Sending a team up to the manor may make more logical sense, but it would make the movie soooo much worse.
DO SPECTRE
Silva disliked it.
He had it fitted with cool gadgets perhaps. Bit silly really
The first of your videos that I was skipping a lot. Why did you spend over 20 minutes on a girl who appears in a movie for like 5 minutes and means nothing to Bond, and don't waste another 15 minutes on the fact that Bond is driving DB5. That was just a snorefest
Oh and jetpack is in the boot
Hap, you are you such a nitpick but Iove your Bond movie review vids.
It's pronounced Crayg. Noy Cregg.
Aaaah its craig (pronounced Cray-g) not CREG!!!! Aaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh.
Otherwise great ✌
DB5 is in it
It's awesome
It's Practical (with today's technology)
It finally fired a shot since goldfinger
Deal with it
It's a tired old car that looks old, because it IS old. It does nothing & adds nothing new. Not everyone has been so easily indoctrinated with Macho Fast Car Bullshit. I bet you watch football & Play Fifa too! Yeh man! I'm WELL'ARD!
There is no reason at all that this DB5 should have the gadgets.
KINDLE It's one of the most iconic and beloved things to have ever appeared in a Bond film. Putting it in the 50th anniversary movie meant a lot to fans. I'm sure you have things you geek out over yourself. There's no need to start insulting people for being a fan of something. All it does is make you look like a condescending, high minded prick. And dismissing sports and fast cars as "macho bullshit" won't make anyone think you are particularly smart or sophisticated either. Just a word of advice.
Dr. Robert Elliot, I think it would have been a lot cooler if we didn't see it just two movies earlier though.
I consider that more to be a fault with Casino Royale, though. It's always felt out of place to me considering how that film was all about Bond becoming Bond. Having him acquire it so early in his career makes it seem a lot less special.
Skyfall was a brilliant film but c'mon guys let's be honest it just didn't feel like a Bond film. It felt more like Jason Bourne than the James Bond we know and love. Also it's quite obvious that the producers used 1995's GoldenEye as the template for Skyfall.
I hope the producers go back to the style of the crazy gadgets, world domination plots and over the top villains when Daniel Craig leaves the role. Kingsman: The Secret Service proved that a Roger Moore Bond film still works in the 21st century so there's no excuse. Also I hope they stop making Bond films as dark and gritty. I also don't think anyone gives a shit about Bond's past. So hopefully the next actor has just standard missions with no back story crap.
Ivan Ivez to be honest this movie feels more world is not enough then goldeneye and how can you say this isn't a bond film skyfall is the most bond film Craig has done quantum of solace and casino royale are more Bourne then bond
Yes it's a Bond film but just on paper. As said earlier it just didn't feel like a Bond film especially the 3rd act. They strayed away from the formula too much. Also I don't think Skyfall was the most Bond film Craig has ever done. It's Spectre in my opinion plus it even began with the gunbarrel sequence. Spectre had the traditional Bond formula which has been missing since 2002. So yeah Spectre is the only true Bond film in the Daniel Craig era.
I should say sky fall is the most bond film Craig has done that people like nobody liked spectre because it was too much of a bond movie sky fall was the perfect balance of old school with something new added to it you can't just expect them to do the same thing over and over we've had like 25 bond films they have to keep it fresh lol
That's why I feel most people liked Skyfall so much cos it didn't feel like a Bond film and felt more like a generic action film. So with the case of Spectre it bought back the formula and got mixed reviews. Sadly it's clear sign that some people are tired of the Bond formula. That's why the producers decide to stray away from the formula to an extent that the Bond films these days don't feel like the James Bond we know and love. They feel more like Bourne than Bond which is a fact.
you say that like it's a bad thing it's been around 50 years bond has always tried to change the formula on her majesty secret service is the most unique bond ever and it came out like 40 years ago license to kill casino Royale changing the formula isn't a bad thing it should be welcomed who wants to watch the same movie over and over that's generic
why can't we just have a classic Bond without a contemporary feel to it? I want to see Bond NOT falling into the feels for the pump and dump bimbos--remember Honey Rider? I don't want to see Bond Girls that are 'Bond's equal' or who are complex. I want bikini bimbos who need to be saved. I want Moneypenny to be a secretary who is infatuated with Bond, and for the love of God, I want M to be a man who sits behind his desk like a spider spinning up the strands of the missions for his 00 agents. As for a villain I want to see a man with world domination aspirations that involves the Russians, the Iranians and maybe the radar installations in Northern Australia, and in Tahiti. Is that too much to ask?
Wil Adams
Probably, that architecture is out of date. In the world of today, you can’t justify ALL the female characters being below Bond.