I thought Clive Owen would have made a good Bond when it was first touted. I never thought much of Craig, although he was good in Layercake
Skyfall
- Thread starter Solius
- Start date
I've seen Drive, I've even defended it on this forum from some who thing its crap as its a good little film, however to suggest that - on the basis of that or any other performance from him to date - you can suddenly transplant Gosling(who is a very good up and coming actor) into the role of bond is an idiotic statement if you don't mind my say so.
Those saying Bale as a potential Bond somewhere down the line....Only if he decides to speak like a normal human being again 
Gosling - umm, No.
Gosling - umm, No.
I wouldn't choose Bale, for me he has too much baggage from his other iconic roles. Every other scene I would be thinking of Pat Bateman or Bruce Wayne
Meg Ryan gets my vote as she has a "Ryan" in her name.
She was also top notch in When Harry Met Sally.
She was also top notch in When Harry Met Sally.
No, I meant Chris Isaac, you know 'Wicked Game'?
Craig is scouse.
Well it's going to be 4-5 years, maybe more till they have to decide.
Crap movie, great soundtrack.
That's Chris Isaak then?
I guess my "Scouse bond" comment wasn't as obviously tongue in cheek as I thought it was. I should've posted a lolzy
Maybe it's just me, but I always think a Brit should play Bond, which ought to rule out Farrell (Irish) and Fassbender (Irish and German).
As was said, Brosnan is Irish. I think British Isles is passable. Fassbender can definitely pass as British, he has done in a few of his films. I'm sure Farrell could too, he pulled off playing a yank well enough, he could probably do a British accent just as comfortably.
Really enjoyed it. A film where you can sit back and just enjoy, not too draining but with the inclusion of Bardem as the villain there was a bit of intrigue/substance which added to the story.
Bond girls however were very disappointing, both in looks and the delivery of some of those lines were atrocious.
Bond girls however were very disappointing, both in looks and the delivery of some of those lines were atrocious.
They should get away from the 'he must be British' thing. I agree that he should sound British, but any good American actor could pull that off.
I haven't seen much of Clive Owen, but isn't he lacking a bit of 'swagger' to play Bond?
Edit: This is my first post-palindromic post.
I haven't seen much of Clive Owen, but isn't he lacking a bit of 'swagger' to play Bond?
Edit: This is my first post-palindromic post.
Tom Hardy.
I quite enjoyed it but the plot was nonsensical/rushed.
Craig is probably my favourite Bond though.
Craig is probably my favourite Bond though.
Great movie. Really enjoyed it. But why does the bad guy not just shoot when he has the chance? 
Great movie. Really enjoyed it. But why does the bad guy not just shoot when he has the chance?
Because the film would be a lot shorter and they wouldn't be able to make more?Great movie. Really enjoyed it. But why does the bad guy not just shoot when he has the chance?
Saw this yesterday, have to say I felt very let down as I wanted it to be better after hearing stories of 'the best Bond ever'. A few of my gripes:
No where near a Casino Royale, ok as an action flick if not taken too seriously, certainly not worth the hype.
Bardem was pretty much the Joker, Bond's car with its associated gadgets was never explained, he just opened a garage and there it was (I thought it was the one from Casino Royale at first),
As well as never explaining or hinting to Bardems back story it's also never explained how they managed to steal the list of Mi6 agent names in the first place, it was like we came in half way through the story…
The ending was rubbish, why did he take M to the house and put her in danger? Why not take her up the road to a random village then go back to the house - only he would have known where she was, they could still have left their breadcrumb trail for Bardem to Wayne manor...
The acting of the support cast was really bad, in particular Moneypenny, as soon as I heard that she was Moneypenny my heart sank as I realised that she would most likely be making another appearance.
I think a twist at the end with M killing herself (she was dying anyway) and Bardem would have been better; but after a better goose chase where Bond is ultimately beaten (by his own arrogance), Bardem was meant to be his equal yet also had intelligence far beyond that of Q, therefore it's not unrealistic for the bad guy to actually have won, what was unrealistic was the way he was beaten; a bit of a deus ex machina going on.
As well as never explaining or hinting to Bardems back story it's also never explained how they managed to steal the list of Mi6 agent names in the first place, it was like we came in half way through the story…
The ending was rubbish, why did he take M to the house and put her in danger? Why not take her up the road to a random village then go back to the house - only he would have known where she was, they could still have left their breadcrumb trail for Bardem to Wayne manor...
The acting of the support cast was really bad, in particular Moneypenny, as soon as I heard that she was Moneypenny my heart sank as I realised that she would most likely be making another appearance.
I think a twist at the end with M killing herself (she was dying anyway) and Bardem would have been better; but after a better goose chase where Bond is ultimately beaten (by his own arrogance), Bardem was meant to be his equal yet also had intelligence far beyond that of Q, therefore it's not unrealistic for the bad guy to actually have won, what was unrealistic was the way he was beaten; a bit of a deus ex machina going on.
No where near a Casino Royale, ok as an action flick if not taken too seriously, certainly not worth the hype.
It's no Godfather that's for sure.
I didn't really get the point of
Bond and two OAP's taking on Bardem and his goons all by themselves. I realise they wanted to lead him there by going off the grid, but once they got him there all they had to do was make a phone call and have the cavalry arrive. They took all of five minutes to come in with helicopters on some remote Chinese island earlier in the movie.
I pointed this out too earlier in this thread. Seemed a bit of a mistake to be honest, almost to feed Bonds inflated ego perhaps?
The villian brought down communications didn't he? Or not brought down but had them completely monitored, so if they had invited the SAS to come and kill instantly, he wouldn't have come out. It was meant to show how good Bond is and in that respect I think it was a really good action sequence against the odds.
This forum is obsessed with picking every little fault in a film 
I understand that there were some flaws here and there in it, but the end bit of your post would indicate that Casino Royale was a flawless masterpiece when it wasn't and there were plenty of little plotholes if you analyse it closely like people are doing with this.
Some people just seem incapable of enjoying the film and have to nitpick over every little thing. Do some of you actually enjoy movies at all?
There was only one member of the supporting cast who was a bit dodgy. The rest: Bardem, Fiennes, Finney and Dench were all very good, while the other Bond girl was fine too. To say the supporting cast was bad when you've only mentioned one is really a nitpick too. What was wrong with the rest out of interest?
Yeah it made for a good action sequence, but you had to put all logical questions to the back of your mind. Q had in fact given him that radio signal thing which he used earlier in the movie that he could have easily used once Bardem and his guys were in the thick of the action.
They wouldn't have needed the radio transmitter as Q and the Heineken drinking M right-hand man knew exactly where they were going. If Bond had of wanted backup, he could've just told Q to send in the cavalry when he sent him a text or something. But the whole point was that it had to be an intimate showdown between the two men, it made sense from a story point of view. Also, other than for the scenario, you can explain it from Bond's point of view:
- he's always had a bit of a crazy streak in him, and probably wanted to deal with this alone;
- M mentioned she was sorry that so many people were dying because of her, so it made sense for them to not implicate anymore people that would become 'collateral damage'.
- he's always had a bit of a crazy streak in him, and probably wanted to deal with this alone;
- M mentioned she was sorry that so many people were dying because of her, so it made sense for them to not implicate anymore people that would become 'collateral damage'.
I quite enjoyed the film, not as much action as I was expecting though. I also liked
the transition of M. We know the new M stands for Mallory
Saw the movie today. Good film, Bardem was excellent, however disappointed by the ending. It turned into Home Alone and there never really was a showdown between Bond and Silva. Though in a way it was refreshing to see a main character die not at the hands the main villain but by one of his henchmen.
The beginning was good, I liked the idea of more vulnerable Bond, someone who is human, after all.
But the last hour of the movie was a waste, imho. The quality Bond movies always tend to have that 'wow' effect on me, they're just a class above your average Hollywood action flick, it's the combination of atmosphere, great action sequences, beautiful exotic women and a quality dialogue.
Casino Royale had all that. Quantum had its moments, but wasn't as good. Skyfall had early promise, but ultimately didn't deliver on any level. I've just waited for that 'wow' moment and it never arrived. Mendes should have concentrated on making a Bond movie, not another Sam Mendes film.
But the last hour of the movie was a waste, imho. The quality Bond movies always tend to have that 'wow' effect on me, they're just a class above your average Hollywood action flick, it's the combination of atmosphere, great action sequences, beautiful exotic women and a quality dialogue.
Casino Royale had all that. Quantum had its moments, but wasn't as good. Skyfall had early promise, but ultimately didn't deliver on any level. I've just waited for that 'wow' moment and it never arrived. Mendes should have concentrated on making a Bond movie, not another Sam Mendes film.
12 minutes into the movie and I'm annoyed.
Even for a Bond film it was ridiculous that he survived that. The way he fell off the train is how people commit suicide without failing. Limp head first. At least have him land flat or something. No way any neck would survive that.
But he's 007!
Like previously stated. It's movie law - if you fall into a deep body of water - regardless of how far the fall, you will survive.
It is, and will always be, the way.
It is, and will always be, the way.
Very average film.
Unless you're the bad guy.
What's out! In a story that's 150 years old and where a 100 people die I mention someone dying!!
I watched Les Miserable yesterday and that's how Crowe died (granted he hit a bit of concrete as well)
Pretty much.
What I found particularly great about the survival of the fall into water was that Max Zorin in A View To A Kill died instantly when he fell off the Golden Gate Bridge. One rule for James...
I have no desire to see les mis, but I'd be really pissed off if I did and you posted that, maybe edit your post saying what you are spoiling?
thats not all
check this out - quite funny
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FWfg__wKSY
you are forgetting that not only does he get shot off a train and falls hundreds of feet into a river but in the next scene when you are wondering what has befallen Bond you see him in bed with a woman!!
check this out - quite funny
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FWfg__wKSY