Skyfall (November 9, 2012)

[Oreth]

Spoiler: show

It may have been discussed some pages back but i couldnt be bothered clicking through all the spoiler tags but can someone answer this for me because im kind of confused.

I was always under the impression that James Bond was never their real name just a code name that 007 carried with it. In context to all the other films it doesnt make sense to me are they all supposed to be the same character over one mans lifetime? Surely they are supposed to be different 007 agents? If so is it that they just give the 007 job to people actually named James Bond?

From above i dont see why they decided to put in his parents graves etc.

Other than that it was a great film and what the series needed. Although leaving out some classic stuff like the gadgets and what not... Not even an exploding pen but he could have given him a cool watch that did cool shit i guess.

[Bweigelt]

Spoiler: show

It may have been discussed some pages back but i couldnt be bothered clicking through all the spoiler tags but can someone answer this for me because im kind of confused.

I was always under the impression that James Bond was never their real name just a code name that 007 carried with it. In context to all the other films it doesnt make sense to me are they all supposed to be the same character over one mans lifetime? Surely they are supposed to be different 007 agents? If so is it that they just give the 007 job to people actually named James Bond?

From above i dont see why they decided to put in his parents graves etc.

Other than that it was a great film and what the series needed. Although leaving out some classic stuff like the gadgets and what not... Not even an exploding pen but he could have given him a cool watch that did cool shit i guess.

Spoiler: show

They are all the same character. The movies don't have a continuous timeline though. From Casino Royale on they have taken place in a completely separate timeline.

[Oreth]

Spoiler: show

They are all the same character. The movies don't have a continuous timeline though. From Casino Royale on they have taken place in a completely separate timeline.

Spoiler: show

I mean from Pierce Brosnan to Daniel Craig and all the other actors who have played the character as well its all part of one big storyline spread over one agents life?

[Ratatapa]

What i like about this move is that Bond doesn't seem 'Invincible' like in the others

If you remember other movies he's always straight up focused and everything , while in this movie he seems affected Mentaly (based on the preview cuz i didnt saw the movie yet)

[Souj]

Spoiler: show

I mean from Pierce Brosnan to Daniel Craig and all the other actors who have played the character as well its all part of one big storyline spread over one agents life?

No. Almost all of the Bond movies, even ones with the same actors in them, they are completely unrelated and unconnected in anyway, canonically or not. Of course, one big exception is Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.

[kuronosan]

The relationships are canon. The stories are not.

[Niiro]

While it's true that the bond films are not canonical in any meaningful way to say that they're completely unconnected isn't really true.

There's recurring characters obviously but the different iterations of M and Q are acknowledged with each change in actor as being new characters succeeding their predecessors (unlike Bond who is always the same person).

The Craig films are the only ones so far in which there is direct storyline continuity. It reflects the way Bond was written in Fleming's original novels which were a continuous storyline.

[Oreth]

Spoiler: show

Yea but the part in this film where it shows his actual past (cant recall another bond film doing the same) ala his parents gravestones shows his real name was James Bond...

So is MI6 recruiting spys only by the name of James Bond... Or just a coincidence in this case? Iv been under the impression that all the different bonds have been different people and just retired and then there is a new 007 when one actor stops doing the role... Thats why iv always had the impression that James Bond still wasnt their real name

[Insanecyclone]

Spoiler: show

This Bond is a new timeline though. The original timeline, past movies before craig, I see them as just taking the name James Bond. Different 007 over the years.

[Niiro]

It's not meant to be a cover identity and a code name that changes hands, in the "continuity" of the films he's always the same person but for obvious reasons inexplicably ageless. How similarly he's portrayed between actors, films, and eras is obviously going to fluctuate but they're all meant to be the same person.

He's just the same character persisting throughout time, regardless of when the film takes place he's always a seasoned agent in his mid-late 30s with the same personality and history (orphan at a young age, naval background, etc).

[ronin sparthos]

No. Almost all of the Bond movies, even ones with the same actors in them, they are completely unrelated and unconnected in anyway, canonically or not. Of course, one big exception is Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.

On her Majesty's Secret Service and Diamonds are Forever share a continuing story iirc.

[Oreth]

It's not meant to be a cover identity and a code name that changes hands, in the "continuity" of the films he's always the same person but for obvious reasons inexplicably ageless. How similarly he's portrayed between actors, films, and eras is obviously going to fluctuate but they're all meant to be the same person.

He's just the same character persisting throughout time, regardless of when the film takes place he's always a seasoned agent in his mid-late 30s with the same personality and history (orphan at a young age, naval background, etc).

Spoiler: show

With that in mind then we could easily see the next bond if its not a continuation that M could be back alive just playing M again? Because if so thats where it gets confusing... Not that i think they would for that very reason but theoretically the next installment could quite easily have a character back playing M and it could be Judi Dench if she wasnt finished or is it just him as a character never changes but the people around him can and do?

?

[ronin sparthos]

Spoiler: show

As stated before, the point of these Craig movies is to show us Bond going from a green, rookie agent to the world-famous super-spy we've come to know before the reboot within its own universe. Casino shows Bond falling in love and subsequently being betrayed, Quantum further exposes him to the duplicity of the job through Mathis and Vesper and in Skyfall we see him address his past and shake through his uncertainties as an agent to become a more seasoned person.

The death of Judi Dench allows for a male M to slip into the job and Moneypenny gets a bit of backstory leading to her position as secretary which both reference the old Bond movies but do not lend themselves to a linear Bond timeline.

[Sunrider]

Spoiler: show

With that in mind then we could easily see the next bond if its not a continuation that M could be back alive just playing M again? Because if so thats where it gets confusing... Not that i think they would for that very reason but theoretically the next installment could quite easily have a character back playing M and it could be Judi Dench if she wasnt finished or is it just him as a character never changes but the people around him can and do?

?

If you watch previous Bond movies, you see while the character of Bond remains the same, the supporting characters around him are interchangeable.

Goldeneye saw Judi Dench become the new M, replacing the male M from the previous movies and in the storyline, the change was noted. John Cleese became the new Q in Die Another Day, and again, characters in the story noted the different Q.

HOWEVER!

From Dr. No to Die Another Day, Moneypenny has, like Bond, also been portrayed by different performers. Unlike Q and M, though, the story has recognized her as being the same character regardless of changes. So what you find is that its pretty much whatever tickles the filmmakers' fancies.

Spoiler: show

Judi Dench's M was a cold corpse at the end of Skyfall--they closed the chapter on that one. If Dench were to return as M, it would likely be as part of another reboot.

[Niiro]

Spoiler: show

With that in mind then we could easily see the next bond if its not a continuation that M could be back alive just playing M again? Because if so thats where it gets confusing... Not that i think they would for that very reason but theoretically the next installment could quite easily have a character back playing M and it could be Judi Dench if she wasnt finished or is it just him as a character never changes but the people around him can and do?

?

That's the distinction about the Craig films, since the reboot they do have a continuous canon (like Fleming's original novels).

[Juben]

I really enjoyed Skyfall can't wait to see it a second time. Music score was very very well timed and placed. I enjoyed the villain had a very unique aura about him definitely a memorable villain. I enjoyed the db5 and getting to hear its beautiful start up sound. Some good one liners the movie flowed and for a two hour + movie i kind of wanted to see more and i would of stayed anyway definitely can't wait to see it a second time like i said before.

[Salodin]

Music was amazing in this movie.

[Jamison]

Just saw this and I agree, it's one of the best of all the films.

A small gripe, and I'm just curious if anyone else noticed the same thing, but it seemed like henchmen were far more expendable than is usually the case. It seemed like group after group were simply left to slaughter. It got to the point why I couldn't imagine why anyone would continue to work for Silva, a feeling I never got from another film. The overall disregard for human life, not just with the henchmen but also with *****, seemed a bit out of character.

Spoiler: show

Sévérine

[Rulke]

Wife and I saw it this morning. Felt a little long but overall a great movie. Not sure if I like this new continuity on the Bond universe or not but I'm not a huge Bond fan so no biggie

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Wife and I saw it this morning. Felt a little long but overall a great movie. Not sure if I like this new continuity on the Bond universe or not but I'm not a huge Bond fan so no biggie

It's not really new continuity. They brought it back full circle, now it's like it was before Goldeneye.