Skyfall

User Score
7.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1444 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. May 19, 2013
    6
    skyfall makes a good impression as a James bond movie it has all the qualities of being a good movie you have the picture the lightening the costumes and the fact that it is not memorable.
    the first thing you notice about it is the good music from the start to the end and second thing is the great action car chasing ect.....
    it's basically an entertainment for 2 hours and one of
    skyfall makes a good impression as a James bond movie it has all the qualities of being a good movie you have the picture the lightening the costumes and the fact that it is not memorable.
    the first thing you notice about it is the good music from the start to the end and second thing is the great action car chasing ect.....
    it's basically an entertainment for 2 hours and one of the best in the series.
    however there have to be a negative side which is the advertisement let me guess watches cars and suites and i actually lost tracks of how many times they did this but overall great movie.
    Expand
  2. Nov 29, 2012
    4
    Really disappointed. The first two movies of this rebooted franchise were both excellent. They took place during an understandable time period, with a gritty and realistic Bond who had just been promoted to 007 status. He wasn't chatty, and we didn't care - his steely gaze and quick wit (not to be mistaken for quips - just watch Casino Royale's first scene with Vesper and you'll be ableReally disappointed. The first two movies of this rebooted franchise were both excellent. They took place during an understandable time period, with a gritty and realistic Bond who had just been promoted to 007 status. He wasn't chatty, and we didn't care - his steely gaze and quick wit (not to be mistaken for quips - just watch Casino Royale's first scene with Vesper and you'll be able to tell the difference) told us that he was a man with a past. A past that he had no interest in divulging. We were treated to beautiful women (who were given character and personality), dry martinis, perfectly fitted tuxedos, and a sinister Bilderberg type group of powerful people controlling society from within. Flash ahead to Skyfall - Bond looks a good 15 years older, and is in the middle of a random assignment that leaves no resolution to the plot of the first two films. The first two films started with bone-achingly real foot chases through exotic locales. This one had a motorbike jumping onto a moving train. The villains in the first two movies were a terrorist banker and a philanthropist with sinister goals. This one is your typical mincing crazy person with a funny accent (homophobic, xenophobic, AND quite silly all in one, not that it's the actor's fault.) The first films included several types of women (all very beautiful, this is a Bond movie after all), who had varying relationships with Bond. This one had a young 007 agent whose ineptitude at her job ends with her taking the role of a secretary, and an abused sex slave who is questionably seduced and summarily executed and treated like a piece of trash (the horrific "waste of a good scotch" quip is inexcusable). Honestly, "it's a Bond movie, what did you expect" has no place in this conversation - I expected what I was led to expect from the first two movies of the reboot. A gritty, realistic, badass James Bond. Not someone quipping or using silly gadgets or having rapey scenes with random chicks. I am not an original James Bond fan. I don't care what they did in 1962 - that image of the swinging playboy is no longer relevant to this generation. And this movie tried so hard to be relevant, with it's cheap terrorism plot. And the last 30 minutes, while they had great action sequences taken out of context, made no sense to a larger plot, and awkwardly tried to shove in a very stupid and cliched past to Bond's life. The climactic scene left me feeling nothing, because there had been no foundation laid for any emotion regarding that character. And it dragged quite a bit - there's no reason for an action movie to be more than 2 hours long.

    That being said, it certainly wasn't all bad. After the initial silliness of the motorbike chase, the fight atop the train was excellent. The entire scene in Shanghai was also done very well, and the actress playing Severine did a very good job with what was ultimately a very stupid role. The lighting was quite remarkable in the whole movie, and Javier Bardem did his best to infuse a traditional silly Bond villain with some pathos. The choice to make Q young was nice (even though he was painfully stupid for being such a computer whiz), and if they hadn't hit the theme quite so hard, it would have been nice to compare the old world vs. the new world through James Bond's eyes. And the courtroom scene was very enjoyable and tense, even though it was a bit silly after all the convoluted planning from Bardem. Unfortunately, this film felt out of context with the other two, putting the time frame oddly late and seeming to be either the end of a series or the beginning of a new one. Some huge gaps of logic in the needlessly silly plot make this definitely the worst Bond movie of the three, and independent of the series it was an extremely mediocre action flick.
    Expand
  3. Dec 4, 2012
    4
    Ill be quick and simple!!Critics are easy to buy apparently,biggest letdown of the year....Didnt care for anybody during the whole movie.To much plot holes and the writing was awful with some of the stupidest and anti-climatic quotes ever!!Worse Bond movie in Craig legacy...I rly dont understand the good reviews ,they made me watch the movie twice and found twice as many holes and negativeIll be quick and simple!!Critics are easy to buy apparently,biggest letdown of the year....Didnt care for anybody during the whole movie.To much plot holes and the writing was awful with some of the stupidest and anti-climatic quotes ever!!Worse Bond movie in Craig legacy...I rly dont understand the good reviews ,they made me watch the movie twice and found twice as many holes and negative things about it!!!I know it was Bond anniversary but the movie sucked either way!! Expand
  4. Nov 11, 2012
    4
    rather mundane action movie, not sure why this had so many glowing reviews. I loss attention through most of the action sequences cause they just didnt have that punch to them that casino royale had, which is a far superior film than this was. I miss the ol cheeky bond too, this is just way to serious and it even tries to be a little dark knightish, which it doesnt copy very well either.
  5. Nov 13, 2012
    4
    I love Daniel Craig as Bond, I have enjoyed enormously the last two Bond films he has been in but the latest installment, Skyfall, left me feeling extremely disapointed. I came out of the cinema feeling like this was directed by someone who was trying to hard to make this 'more' than the other Bond films and by doing so has taken away the essence of what makes Bond, Bond. If you areI love Daniel Craig as Bond, I have enjoyed enormously the last two Bond films he has been in but the latest installment, Skyfall, left me feeling extremely disapointed. I came out of the cinema feeling like this was directed by someone who was trying to hard to make this 'more' than the other Bond films and by doing so has taken away the essence of what makes Bond, Bond. If you are looking for an action packed, fun, exciting film then this is seriously going to dissapoint you...have you ever known Bond go and hide...well it happens in this film. More annoyingly than the lack of action is that when we do get it, it is shot in such a way that you have no idea who is who until one of the characters dies.."oh so the other person is Bond then". And to top it off there is a villan who looks like David Walliams in a blonde wig. As soon as i saw the baddy i had this picture in my head and spent the rest of the film wondering if Matt Lucas was going to give a cameo in a red spandex unitard?

    Be careful about the hype of this film, you may come away extremely dissapointed.
    Expand
  6. Feb 6, 2013
    4
    Like many, I am in disbelief at the popularity of Skyfall. I found it simplistic, dull, sloppy and "cheap". Only the first 45 minutes I enjoyed really, and even then I didn't find it a patch on other more modern Bond movies like Casino, Quantum or GoldenEye.

    Clearly many people liked it, but it is most certainly not for me.
  7. Nov 16, 2012
    4
    Hm. Skyfall was not a bad bond movie, but it only came close to being decent one. Overall, the pacing was off - each scene could have benefited from being cut by 10% on average. The only appearance that was way too brief was the Bond girl, who stopped showing up abruptly and early. The story has some horrible holes on the "what computers can do" front, and some hints are being dropped allHm. Skyfall was not a bad bond movie, but it only came close to being decent one. Overall, the pacing was off - each scene could have benefited from being cut by 10% on average. The only appearance that was way too brief was the Bond girl, who stopped showing up abruptly and early. The story has some horrible holes on the "what computers can do" front, and some hints are being dropped all too forcefully (especially at the end). The music wasn't particularly compelling and occasionally didn't fit the action on screen. On the other hand, the main actors did an impeccable job - Craig and Dench are my all-time favorites. In addition, the villain in this movie had actual real character, a really impressive achievement. This could have been a great movie to rival the Casion Royale (my 10/10 standard for awesome and impressive Bond movies), but fell short. Maybe we'll see a recut one day. Expand
  8. Nov 10, 2012
    4
    It's a return to the classic, campy Bond movies. I didn't know that going in, and was disappointed when walking out.

    A bad script sets the movie apart from it's two predecessors. Casino Royale, and Quantum of Solace had such a rich, deep storyline, where characters had intricacies, and separate stories of their own. Skyfall is missing this. I love the classic Bond movies, and think
    It's a return to the classic, campy Bond movies. I didn't know that going in, and was disappointed when walking out.

    A bad script sets the movie apart from it's two predecessors. Casino Royale, and Quantum of Solace had such a rich, deep storyline, where characters had intricacies, and separate stories of their own. Skyfall is missing this.

    I love the classic Bond movies, and think that this movie is very much in line with those. With that said, my reasoning for such a harsh rating is that the previous two movies had taken Bond in such a vibrant direction, and it is so disappointing to see the series regress.
    Expand
  9. Nov 12, 2012
    5
    I have to say I agree with the positive reviews and the negative reviews too. It is a good movie as long as you do not think too much about what you are watching. You also need to ignore all the commercials during the film. You need to disregard the plot devices that are inconsistent writing. Did they say uranium? Never mind you are going to watch this movie anyway just enjoy it and expectI have to say I agree with the positive reviews and the negative reviews too. It is a good movie as long as you do not think too much about what you are watching. You also need to ignore all the commercials during the film. You need to disregard the plot devices that are inconsistent writing. Did they say uranium? Never mind you are going to watch this movie anyway just enjoy it and expect to take a nap for the last half hour of this 2 and a half hour long movie. Expand
  10. Nov 11, 2012
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. How and why did it all go wrong? An unlikely choice for a director, who could've possibly brought some very gritty drama to the age old bond-film-reciepe (opinion based on his previous work):CHECK! 2 writers who wrote the best Bond film (Casino Royale) of the past decade: CHECK! An excellent DP and Sound Designer: CHECK! A good set of actors: CHECK! Then why o why o why? I'll just chart down the obvious and the potential shortcomings of the film:
    1) Bond supposedly dies / consequently not in the best shape / alcohol abuse | an immense playground for the author..not capitalized.
    2) Villain possesses the resources, the schematics and the cunningness to bring Mi6 down along with his one true target (i.e: M)| resorts to attempting assassination of his one true target with a 9mm.
    3) M's betrayal of undercover agents | It was so infuriating that this was not utilized to somehow have an impact on Bond's loyalty.
    4) M is threatened | Bond's Master Plan: hide in a remote house and lure the villain and his plethora of gunmen so that he can take them out, personally. Oh and the house had to be the one where Bond experienced his child hood (most irritatingly irrelevant) trauma; the death of his parents! Other senseless mistakes:
    4) Bond girls were neither sexy nor interesting nor devious nor anything! ( :@ major flaw).
    5) One bombing at the Mi6 headquarters | Mi6 forms an underground dwelling in London...no other bases.
    6) I know someone has deemed it necessary for there to be a prodigious, skinny, **** tech geek in every detective drama these days and this movie was all about removing the age old garbage (pun)...but seriously...THAT GUY...as Q? --__--
    7) TOO MANY CORNY ONE LINERS!! This fact was as infuriating and saddening as it was astonishing. I mean, after the Bourne Legacy..has'nt the crime action genre in Hollywood's cinema, shifted away from the cheesy B-grade film mechanics laid in the 70's? :S

    This was just some of the steam I had to let out after watching this flick today. All in all...I would just say, it had so much potential and it was all wasted.
    Expand
  11. Nov 12, 2012
    5
    Skyfall, as all James Bond films have, this one also is trending around. The film even loved the product prices by 0,07%. However, can the 007 recover from it's horrible video game prequels?___ I will begin with the good stuff. First of all, great Bond character by Daniel Craig. I just wish his story in the film, had not began with a gigantic plot-hole. The camera work is smooth and theSkyfall, as all James Bond films have, this one also is trending around. The film even loved the product prices by 0,07%. However, can the 007 recover from it's horrible video game prequels?___ I will begin with the good stuff. First of all, great Bond character by Daniel Craig. I just wish his story in the film, had not began with a gigantic plot-hole. The camera work is smooth and the action scenes cannot be ignored. Also the humour is still there.___ Now, sadly, the longest part of the review. The bad stuff. The main plot is an unsuccessful depiction of modern communication and it's roll in war on terror. We also have M, who keeps messing up in every James Bond film. The annoying plot-holes and M's ''smart'' decisions aren't even close to the main villain of this year's film. Behold, a walking plot-hole that has just escaped from a mental facility, Raoul Silva! A villain's first appearance is important... as is his two minutes walk towards Bond, that makes you fall asleep. This guy truly can predict anything and I mean ANYTHING. Whatever he touches immediately turns into a plot-hole. Everything he does is by style, that screws up every plan, at the last second. The creators even removed a scene, so they could hide this man's plot-hole skills.___ Overall the film is mediocre. I just wonder what other villains are brewing in the next 007 film and what storyline are we going to experience next, hopefully better than this one. Expand
  12. Jan 24, 2013
    5
    Skyfall is the last movie of the James Bond saga and it was surprising, because after Quantum of Solace was impossible to expect more, although is not better than Casino Royale. The plot is very similar to other films, lots of action, fights and explosions, an unbeatable agent, a cool boss, the beautiful girl and the eccentric villain. This story only provides three interesting things;Skyfall is the last movie of the James Bond saga and it was surprising, because after Quantum of Solace was impossible to expect more, although is not better than Casino Royale. The plot is very similar to other films, lots of action, fights and explosions, an unbeatable agent, a cool boss, the beautiful girl and the eccentric villain. This story only provides three interesting things; first the idea of the old dogs who are pull off the system by the technology and the modern times, which are Bond and M; second the dialogue about the rats that Silva tells 007, which is a metaphor for people who the society does not want; and third the Skyfall theme of Adele. Besides that, the plot is very unoriginal, the intro was not up to the Bond franchise and the look of Javier Bardem was ridiculous. The problem of this picture is that maybe we had enough of Bond and all the fights and explosions cannot fulfill a story. People need more than that these days. Expand
  13. Nov 16, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Overall, Skyfall was enjoyable, visually stunning at times, and Daniel Craig continues to be a top-notch Bond. All of that being said, I was a little let down plot wise. I really, really liked Javier Bardem's character but was constantly disappointed with how the script played out his actions. He's a supposed cyber genius, and his mastermind plot was (at one point) to enter a major courthouse dressed as a cop and shoot it up with a glock and two goons? Also, I loved the idea of his character revealing 5 new agents a week (similar to the Joker's plan in the Dark Knight when he killed someone every day) but this part of the story was dropped completely! By the end, the townhouse "Homealone-esch" showdown really seemed forced to me. I like the idea of disarming Bond and leaving him with only a knife, a pistol, and his creativity but I really didn't understand why they couldn't at least call in for some undercover backup at the farmhouse and overall it just seemed like a pretty sketchy plan considering it was crafted by the head of M16 and one of her best agents...I went into this movie just wanting to enjoy a good Bond flick and ultimately I would say I did but throughout I was scratching my head at some of the plot choice and by the end couldn't help but feel a little letdown. Expand
  14. Nov 9, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Based on reviews, I thought this movie would impress me and knock my socks off; and perhaps I walked in expecting too much, but I walked out thinking, "meh."

    It wasn't a terrible movie, but I don't understand why everyone is saying it's so great.

    There were way too many plot holes that took me out of the movie. The biggest one that ran throughout the movie was, "Why didn't Silva just kidnap M?" At the end of the movie, it turns out his plans was to kill M but also himself. Why did he go through all the effort of the entire movie when he could have just kidnapped M to begin with? He clearly had the knowledge, skills, and resources to do so. His whole reason for doing anything was because he had M (mommy) issues.

    His entire "plan" hinged on Bond wanting to get captured by him and then Bond taking him prisoner. And why would Bond want to be captured in that way anyways? Wouldn't it make more sense to take Severine, give her protective custody and interrogate her? She knew where Silva was and appeared ready and willing to give Bond that knowledge anyways. They could have found the location that way, and then sent in the commandos. The second part of his "plan" was getting captured and then escaping. Why go through all that? Just attack the hearing that he knew M was going to be in anyways, without having to deal with planning an incredibly elaborate escape. Or, back to the big issue, just kidnap her. *side note: it is clearly established that Bond is chasing Silva through rush-hour crowds, yet the train that crashes through the ceiling and almost hits Bond is empty except for the driver. Where did all the people go?*

    And about his escape. The second biggest problem for me. Q, this genius technology guy, plugs in Silva's computer, who has already been acknowledged as a master hacker, straight into MI6's network?!? Seriously?! Wouldn't you try to get what's on the computer without connecting it to a network? Or if you had to connect it to a network, connect it to an isolated one? If guys like Q are in charge of computer stuff at MI6, no wonder they got so easily hacked.

    Skyfall. James Bond had super rich parents. Great. Their death messed him up. Great. He doesn't like talking about it. Great. But that's as far as we go. But fine, let's say we're not going to delve into that. At Skyfall, after M and Kincade escape, why are they using the flashlight? I can get Kincade maybe not thinking of that, but M, who leads a spy organization doesn't think about how a flashlight could give away their position at night?

    Anyways, those are just the big ones that stick out in my head. Those took me out of the movie and made me just wonder, "what the heck are these people doing?!" throughout most of the movie.
    Expand
  15. Nov 11, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. They had four years to write a good (if not brilliant) story but they failed miserably! The "pre-theme song" part was pretty good and promising but then it was disappointments one after another. Right after the theme song, you learn, which was a bit of a shock, that Bond is alive and well (was rescued by a hot unknown woman, had sex with her and decided to report back for duty). What a wasted opportunity for some good "come back" story. But no. He lost his aim (which he magically, all of a suddenly, finds back at some point during the movie) and was somewhat out of shape. But nothing of that will lead to any consequence whatsoever in the story. Essentially zero character development (the bad guy "Silver" (lame name) and the Bond girl -- which lady was the Bond girl anyway? What was her name again? Actually, there is NO Bond girl in this James Bond movie). So uninspired, no flair, no style, no class. No memorable location (Shanghai, Macau, oh sooo original!) No witty retort or remark by Bond, nor interesting dialog between any character of the movie. Oh and the bad guy dies with a knife in the back, presumably thrown by Bond. No fight, no nothing.

    Note to hollywood: we have enough of the evil genius hacker who can control everything and do everything with his computer. It's just a lazy way to avoid explaining anything. He knows where this person is because he hacked into this computer. He controls that house's refrigerator because he hacked into this person's computer. PLEASE STOP THIS NON-SENSE!
    Expand
  16. Nov 9, 2012
    5
    What are movie critics even for these days? This movie was about as good as Prometheus, one decent actor, some nifty special effects, and a total failure of the written word...
  17. Nov 15, 2012
    6
    This movie was way overhyped... and as a result it was a let down. I should let everyone know up front that I'm not a James Bond fan at all, but there were a few that I liked. So from all the review, I figured this movie would be very enjoyable. Unfortunately, the first half was very boring... like most James Bond movies, and the main villain shows up over half way through the film, whichThis movie was way overhyped... and as a result it was a let down. I should let everyone know up front that I'm not a James Bond fan at all, but there were a few that I liked. So from all the review, I figured this movie would be very enjoyable. Unfortunately, the first half was very boring... like most James Bond movies, and the main villain shows up over half way through the film, which at that point it turned interesting. However, the ending didn't really leave me satisfied. You'd think that they could come up with a better way for Bond to dispatch the villain... Oh well... I'm sure all Bond fans will love it, just like they love all Bond movies. But for those of you who aren't fans, you can pass on this one. There are other movies out there that probably deserve viewing first. Expand
  18. Nov 10, 2012
    5
    Unfortunately, not a great Bond film. Too long, too slow, with a plot that's mediocre at best. It seems
    they tried to harkin back to classic Bond films in style, but the fact is a lot of those don't play so well for an audience in 2012. Time to update the classic feel and get with the times.
  19. Nov 11, 2012
    5
    This is precisely the kind of flick that reveals the disconnect that often exists between professional reviewers and we movie goers. What are the reasons for that? Perhaps the principle reason is that, while most patrons simply want to be entertained, reviewers are forever in search of art, of layers of meaning, of reasons to credit the director for innovation or whatever, I went intoThis is precisely the kind of flick that reveals the disconnect that often exists between professional reviewers and we movie goers. What are the reasons for that? Perhaps the principle reason is that, while most patrons simply want to be entertained, reviewers are forever in search of art, of layers of meaning, of reasons to credit the director for innovation or whatever, I went into Skyfall with an open mind, hoping the sterling reviews were on target, It didn't take long for the disappointment to kick in. Daniel Craig is competent, but he lacks the panache that made his predecessors so much more fun. Expand
  20. Nov 13, 2012
    5
    Unsatisfactory and underwhelming. sadasdasdasdsadasdsadasafasfsdafsaasssdgsdsdgaasdfsdafdasfsadfasdfsadfsafasdfasdfasasfafafassadasdfsadsadfdaasfaafas
  21. Nov 10, 2012
    5
    International locations: Check.
    Daniel Craig shirtless: Check.
    Nice looking cars: Check.
    Nice looking ladies: Check.
    Motorcycle chase: Check.
    Bulldozer crushing cars atop a speeding train: Check.
    Originality and inspiration: Still looking.
  22. Nov 9, 2012
    6
    Sympathy for the Devil

    Sam Mendes' James Bond makes the mistake of making the villain more compelling than the hero. Javier Bardem, only introduced a hour into the film, is so convincing as the bad guy, he makes the rest of the film seem very contrived. The film talks modernity through 1950's clipped Oxbridge tones. Dench, Fiennes, Wilshaw - it's Cameron toffs that dominate the screen.
    Sympathy for the Devil

    Sam Mendes' James Bond makes the mistake of making the villain more compelling than the hero. Javier Bardem, only introduced a hour into the film, is so convincing as the bad guy, he makes the rest of the film seem very contrived. The film talks modernity through 1950's clipped Oxbridge tones. Dench, Fiennes, Wilshaw - it's Cameron toffs that dominate the screen. Only the plumber with the 00 prefix sounds 'working class' and he is a Scottish Laird -- even the black Moneypenny seems to have attended at last a Redbrick and Roedean. It starts well enough,with Bond killed by friendly fire. Then, without a word of explanation, he returns. How? A plot to kill M is hatched by deranged former agent Bardem.Trouble is, I found myself cheering him on. Wrong, huh? I preferred the emotional roller coaster of Casino Royale to this - I cared more about Bond and Vesper than Bond and M. Too much jingoism as well. I'd kill M too if I were in the service - heartless ****
    Expand
  23. Nov 25, 2012
    5
    Something didn't seem right with this bond. There were lots of very quiet areas and there weren't those scenes that you say to yourself that is insane. That is what makes bond interesting. It just seemed like a typical action film.
  24. Nov 10, 2012
    6
    I am baffled by the gushing praise for this movie. I like Craig, who is once again a more convincing and human Bond than his predecessors, and the script has its merits. The dialogue is actually interesting and convincing, at many points, rather than just serving as filler between action scenes, as had been the formula in previous Bond films. That said, I thought the action deliveredI am baffled by the gushing praise for this movie. I like Craig, who is once again a more convincing and human Bond than his predecessors, and the script has its merits. The dialogue is actually interesting and convincing, at many points, rather than just serving as filler between action scenes, as had been the formula in previous Bond films. That said, I thought the action delivered nothing new, the villain was well-acted but utterly formulaic, and the film just devolved into predictable mediocrity once it shifted to a hackneyed assault-the-house scene in Scotland. Overall, an underwhelming experience. Expand
  25. Nov 10, 2012
    6
    Firstly, and this isn't a spoiler, but when James Bond and Kincaide are out practicing shooting, didn't Kincaide have two black labrador dogs by his side? You never saw them again - what happened to them? OK, summary - not the best JB movie, but not the worst. It was more like a suspense movie with some action sequences thrown in, with the best one right at the beginning, which wasFirstly, and this isn't a spoiler, but when James Bond and Kincaide are out practicing shooting, didn't Kincaide have two black labrador dogs by his side? You never saw them again - what happened to them? OK, summary - not the best JB movie, but not the worst. It was more like a suspense movie with some action sequences thrown in, with the best one right at the beginning, which was outstanding - like "Taken 2", it seems that the rooftops in Istanbul are irresistible to goodies and baddies chasing each other either on foot or on motorbikes. It was a great scene and a great opening.

    As for the film in general, there was WAY too much talking, way too much focus on M, in fact, it seemed more like a movie about HER with JB as her sidekick. Way too many closeups - we don't need to see their pores or every wrinkle - back up a little please, it didn't add anything to the movie, and if anything detracted from it. It was hard to believe this was a JB movie - I remember the days when it was FUN going to see a JB movie, you were taken out of your world, shown gadgets that were beyond your imagination, people were out to take over the world, and JB was the hero who was never affected by anything, maybe he got a few scrapes and bruises but he never got shot or tortured, he was always after the most beautiful girl in the room, and was, it seemed, invincible. THAT"S the JB I want to see - I don't want to be presented with a movie where they're trying to make him real, make the audience relate to him or understand him or feel sorry for him, or have him age (poorly I might add)0 - I want escapism, I want to know that a forever-youthful or at least non-aging JB will save the world and only have a scratch on his face for all his efforts, after using countless gadgets that we in the real world couldn't even dream of - and I think that these JB movies have lost their way in this regard. There were so many holes in this plot too - how did the villain escape out of that glass enclosure, for example? One minute he's in there, obviously more securely encased than Hannibel Lector in his cage - next thing he's out and free with two dead guards on the ground, and yet we don't know how he escaped. So poorly done. I was so disappointed that the grand finale was simply a gunfight - yes, a helicopter was involved and it was well filmed, but still - just a gun fight? Nothing clever or James Bondish or "MI6" ish at all - just guns and explosives, like any group of baddies in an action film - and throughout the film, the most exciting gadgets that were introduced were a gun that would only fire if JB held it (the handle was palm-print sensitive - but worse than that, it didn't blow up if someone else tried to fire it - all that happened was that it wouldn't work - I mean, how unimaginative is that?) and a small "radio" that gave off JB's location if he pressed a button. Futuristic? Creative? A gadget JB would be proud of? I think not. I must admit that the movie wasn't as bad as I thought it would be (after having read the pretty awful reviews), but as I already wrote, there was far too much talking, far too few action scenes and far too much focus on M. JB seemed to struggle in this, and yeah yeah yeah, blah blah blah about him getting old, but we don't go to JB to see an aging actor or agent struggling to keep up - I'm going for some escapism! Some wild, fun excitement and a glimpse into a secret department that has top of the line weapons and gadgets to use against the forces of evil. I don't want to know that the best they can do is a palm-printed gun that only fires when JB holds it. I mean, come on, can't you do better than that?
    I also must say that if I had seen it in a regular movie theater, I would have given it a 4 out of 10. I saw it in 2D at the Imax, with a massive screen and great sound - so that definitely added to it, which is why I gave it a 6. This was no JB movie to me, it was a suspense movie with some action shots, it didn't even have the same amount of action as a "Bourne Identity" type movie - there was some bad acting, too much talking (in case you missed that, there is a LOT of talking), very little in the way of thrills, too much focus on M, too many closeups, some amazing scenery, and Daniel Craig struggling to make it through. He tried, but I think it was very average. Next week I will have forgotten all about it. Heck, by tomorrow morning I will have forgotten about it. JB deserves better.
    Expand
  26. Dec 22, 2012
    5
    "Skyfall", the latest entry into the long line of 007 thrillers is a disappointment to not only Bond fans but moviegoers in general. Directed by Sam Mendes the film stars Daniel Craig, Judi Dench, Javier Bardem and Naomi Harris in this dark, ill conceived and frankly, but for extraordinary special effects, boring film. To paraphrase Lloyd Benson in his famous admonition of Dan Quayle, "Mr."Skyfall", the latest entry into the long line of 007 thrillers is a disappointment to not only Bond fans but moviegoers in general. Directed by Sam Mendes the film stars Daniel Craig, Judi Dench, Javier Bardem and Naomi Harris in this dark, ill conceived and frankly, but for extraordinary special effects, boring film. To paraphrase Lloyd Benson in his famous admonition of Dan Quayle, "Mr. Craig, I've seen Sean Connery as Bond and you're no Sean Connery". Ian Fleming's concept of a spy with a flair for the playful, humorous and witty engagements as he saves the world from various evils is the thing the writers of this latest film fail to get or understand. The film as a screenplay, is neither plausible in its plot scenes nor is it clever in its execution. The Harry Saltzman/Albert Broccoli formula these two geniuses developed over the years and throughout the history of this epic franchise are lost in this movie and the casting of Mr. Craig still continues to amaze me. As fine an actor as he is, Mr. Craig just doesn't fit the mold that Messrs. Connery, Moore and Brosnahan were able to cast. This is a problem which frequently arises when an actor and the character they portray in sequel after sequel become so embedded in the minds of the audience that to separate one often harms the other. Basil Rathbone will always be the real Sherlock Holmes, George Sanders will always be the real Falcon (even tho his brother, Tom Conway, tried to fill his shoes) and, alas for Mr. Craig and the owners of the franchise, the same fate seems to be befalling them as well. I give the film a 5.0 rating for its special effects and the chance to hear Adele sing the background song. Beyond that it seems that more than the "sky" fell in the ratings for this film. Expand
  27. BKM
    Apr 4, 2013
    6
    I've never been a big fan of the James Bond series, so my review of the film is biased right from the get go. Still I was a bit surprised at what Sam Mendes had to offer up at the helm of the latest entry. Skyfall finds 007 trying to find his place in a modern world where computer hacking is a more powerful tool than disguises and fancy gadgets. More importantly, the film explores theI've never been a big fan of the James Bond series, so my review of the film is biased right from the get go. Still I was a bit surprised at what Sam Mendes had to offer up at the helm of the latest entry. Skyfall finds 007 trying to find his place in a modern world where computer hacking is a more powerful tool than disguises and fancy gadgets. More importantly, the film explores the notion of whether or not the intelligence game has become antiquated and what it has cost those who play it. But in spite of the film's commendable artistic ambitions, it's ultimately too cool and lethargic for its own good. Expand
  28. Nov 12, 2012
    5
    This is not a James Bond movie. There is no intrigue or mystery whatsoever, very minimal globe trotting, no worthwhile woman character, flimsy plot, and really no James Bond - just a grumpy old dude. Halfway through the weakly conceived story the driving subject is largely abandoned to go all emotional with little to no effect. The villain sparks interest but is ultimately pedestrian asThis is not a James Bond movie. There is no intrigue or mystery whatsoever, very minimal globe trotting, no worthwhile woman character, flimsy plot, and really no James Bond - just a grumpy old dude. Halfway through the weakly conceived story the driving subject is largely abandoned to go all emotional with little to no effect. The villain sparks interest but is ultimately pedestrian as his scheme is underdeveloped and ridiculously minor. No, this is not "the best Bond ever," it's merely a failed attempt at using the modern "emotional superhero" template, which sometime works (See The Dark Knight) and sometimes fails miserably (See Superman Returns). Expand
  29. Dec 29, 2012
    6
    It is hard to fault the brilliant direction of Mendes. It is even harder to imagine a better performance than that of Javier Bardem as the villain. But take the opening high adrenaline sequence away and there is little left of a Bond film and more of an artful drama.
  30. Nov 19, 2012
    6
    I have mixed feeling about this film. Overall, I was disappointed and the main reason was that the nothing was developed to make it really interesting. Let's start with the villain. Bardem is a great actor but you need some back ground to make him villainious. They actually did have some of the best scenes in the movie when Bond meets Bardem. However, there is no depth given to how heI have mixed feeling about this film. Overall, I was disappointed and the main reason was that the nothing was developed to make it really interesting. Let's start with the villain. Bardem is a great actor but you need some back ground to make him villainious. They actually did have some of the best scenes in the movie when Bond meets Bardem. However, there is no depth given to how he becomes a villain and little face time with Bond. The same with the new Q. He just shows up. The plot has no depth either. We get little of Bond except in the first scene working on this. The movie really becomes about him protecting M and that really is not that interesting. The final scene reminded me of "Strawdogs" but without the tension or excitement. I had hopes for this series when they got rid of Roger Moore and the supervilian with the hugh fight scene at his hidden lair. However, the improvements are marginal with each new film and that takes several years. I don't know if I can wait for them to put an entire film together that is entertaining. Expand
  31. Nov 28, 2012
    6
    Not as a good as Casino Royal, for sure. This Bond movie felt like several stories mashed together (or several scripts?), and though long, seemed to be missing the real character moments/buildup of stakes. There were a few too many action sequences that probably could've been taken out. Even with that, still a good movie--Craig as Bond really makes up for a lot and Bardem is always greatNot as a good as Casino Royal, for sure. This Bond movie felt like several stories mashed together (or several scripts?), and though long, seemed to be missing the real character moments/buildup of stakes. There were a few too many action sequences that probably could've been taken out. Even with that, still a good movie--Craig as Bond really makes up for a lot and Bardem is always great to watch. Probably worth seeing a matinee for the special effects and cinematography--but it's not a must see. Expand
  32. Dec 20, 2012
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Great action sequences. The first 10-15 minutes was fantastic.
    However...
    The whole basis of this silly movie is that the villain has created an elaborate plot which unfolds over years so he can get captured and taken into MI HQ. why does he want to get taken there? So he can escape and kill M, who is outside HQ. Huh?
    Expand
  33. Nov 22, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Skyfall starts off with a great set piece and carries on a very "Bond" feel right up until the third act. Then everything falls apart. The third act is basically a western and reinforces every negative thing said about Bond during the movie. Daniel Craig as Bond is as good as ever but...

    **SPOILER ALERT***

    ... he loses. This is the first Bond movie where the villain succeeds at everything he set out to do. Bond loses and there are no repercussions, the end. That third act and ending alone make this the worst Bond movie i've ever seen (Moonraker was considered to be good at the time).
    Expand
  34. Feb 15, 2013
    5
    This isn't the worst James Bond movie, but it certainly is NOT the best. As someone who's seen almost all of the Bond movies, I can tell you this movie does not live up to the name. James Bond is a secret agent SECRET as in unknown yet everyone knows who he is. MI6 is the last to know about every detail rather than the first, which is pretty bad for an intelligence agency. And theThis isn't the worst James Bond movie, but it certainly is NOT the best. As someone who's seen almost all of the Bond movies, I can tell you this movie does not live up to the name. James Bond is a secret agent SECRET as in unknown yet everyone knows who he is. MI6 is the last to know about every detail rather than the first, which is pretty bad for an intelligence agency. And the plot of Skyfall is about petty revenge. Rather than being a character who is used to saving the world, James Bond ends up playing a body guard. Yes plots and characters can change from film to film, but they threw out the entire recipe. The film may not have been a bad movie, but it was not a James Bond film. Expand
  35. Sep 24, 2013
    4
    The Mrs. and I sat down last night to watch James Bond’s “Skyfall” and fell asleep after an admittedly hilarious opening of nonsensical improbabilities and physical impossibilities. James Bond a heavy equipment operator on a moving train? Funny stuff! Then I nodded off and woke up in time to hear the requisite “Bond, James Bond.” and then went back to sleep. Turns out (spoiler alert)The Mrs. and I sat down last night to watch James Bond’s “Skyfall” and fell asleep after an admittedly hilarious opening of nonsensical improbabilities and physical impossibilities. James Bond a heavy equipment operator on a moving train? Funny stuff! Then I nodded off and woke up in time to hear the requisite “Bond, James Bond.” and then went back to sleep. Turns out (spoiler alert) that Mr. Bond is capable of defeating an entire platoon of highly trained, special-forces bad guys. Who knew? Of course, being immune to bullet wounds, oxygen deprivation, hypothermia and Newtonian Physics helps, but still… Looked good if you promise not to think or bring even a modicum of life experience to the viewing. Seriously, a must see for Bond fans plenty of early Bond references but for the rest of us, watch the trailer and call it a night. No stars from this old codger because I slept through most of it. Expand
  36. Apr 21, 2013
    4
    Just boring, I slept through some parts of the movie. Bond almost rarely talks, there are events which look so forced to justify the plot's directions (this is the worst in the movie, the way some events take place... omg...), Moneypenny is introduced as a "creative" mark, M is since her inception, an awful character that goes worse, Q is another "creative" decision (creative is let'sJust boring, I slept through some parts of the movie. Bond almost rarely talks, there are events which look so forced to justify the plot's directions (this is the worst in the movie, the way some events take place... omg...), Moneypenny is introduced as a "creative" mark, M is since her inception, an awful character that goes worse, Q is another "creative" decision (creative is let's make it easy for us and make the public believe it's cool and innovation). Lots of cloaked advertising, more nonsense plot decisions, forced again and again, that didn't made any sense. In conclusion: the movie is an action flick which tells you to believe a good Bond movie is what they produce, with explosions, gfx, low intelligence plot, meat for the grinder. I'm glad I didn't fall for the "awesome MUST see" advertising kind of marketing campaign. Neither for the forum shills which almost crucify us if we don't share 10/10 impressions. I really enjoyed the first Craig Bond movie, but watching him and Conan the Barbarian movies just fighting and fighting, is the same... Expand
  37. Nov 19, 2012
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. One of the worst Bond imho. Most of my reasons are:

    Main villains in Bond movies have crazy world crushing plots with machines of massive power and destruction, not a hacker in a room full of servers. QoS for example: controlling a water supply, brilliant! not some hacker scheme, Anonymous is already doing that.

    You don't go blowing up a vintage Bond car for the fun of it. Watch the opening car chase of QoS and tell me it's not awesome. Even the rooftop bike chase was a ripoff of the rooftop running chase from QoS.

    A huge stone house in Ireland doesn't blow up and burn like it's full of gasoline and made of dry timber.

    Javier Bardem should not have been the villain, it should have been a lesser known actor, and his opening rant was far too wordy and childish.

    The new Q was a joke, most of his on screen time was blundering around with his giant screen contributing nothing to Bond's journey.

    So many predictable plot turns and scenes, I almost forgot it was a Bond flick.

    I walked into that theater with such high hopes and walked out shaking my head saying "what were they thinking when they made this".

    Now reading comments on Twitter and the 007 facebook page, people just wearing rose coloured glasses cause it's "Bond" and we're told to like that guy.

    I believe it's a sad turn for the franchise.
    Expand
  38. Dec 6, 2012
    6
    Meh, Casino Royal is better. I like bond movies and I like this one. But this whole Jason Bourne is Bond deal is kinda a downer. Every movie the treatment becomes more Dragon Tattoo than Goldfinger. But I guess that's what people want. It's not awful.
  39. Jan 3, 2013
    4
    tedious and really nothing new to see here except bardem and craigs great performances. action scenes are nothing special and the story drags down to a stop at times. do not believe the hype folks.
  40. Apr 2, 2013
    4
    A few okay action scenes, but mostly a long, boring movie with no real point. I wouldn't recommend it. It might be okay for a few loyal bond fans, but if you aren't a James Bond superfan, you probably won't like it.
  41. Nov 27, 2012
    5
    Another mixed bag Bond film. Plenty of the typical action and tropes throughout, including of course the Bond girls. I love the stripped down version we have of Bond now, and there are a couple of humorous moments to highlight these changes. I enjoyed Bardem's villain for the most part although I do feel like the praise is a little overstated, there were times when he didn't have a lotAnother mixed bag Bond film. Plenty of the typical action and tropes throughout, including of course the Bond girls. I love the stripped down version we have of Bond now, and there are a couple of humorous moments to highlight these changes. I enjoyed Bardem's villain for the most part although I do feel like the praise is a little overstated, there were times when he didn't have a lot going on and others when what he was doing was more than a little confusing. One of the most disappointing things about this movie was Bond's back story, or lack there of. I love a film with a good, dark back story and while I appreciate the effort here in that regard it falls well short of the mark giving us very little actual story in that regard. Overall this Bond falls short of the other Craig films for me, but ranks better than the last few Brosnan films. Expand
  42. Dec 3, 2012
    6
    don't know what movie those people claiming its the best bond yet where watching but it was not skyfall. well Skyfall does have its moments of that Bond felling it tends to go towards what you would expect a action pack CIA movie. rally uses any gadgets and his big one is a gun! really a gun that only shoots if Bond holds it. lame. overall Id give this movie a 6 out of 10. if it did notdon't know what movie those people claiming its the best bond yet where watching but it was not skyfall. well Skyfall does have its moments of that Bond felling it tends to go towards what you would expect a action pack CIA movie. rally uses any gadgets and his big one is a gun! really a gun that only shoots if Bond holds it. lame. overall Id give this movie a 6 out of 10. if it did not have the bond title in it and was ratting it as far as action movies go I would give it an 8. good thing though is I think its the best out of the Craig bonds. Expand
  43. Nov 19, 2012
    4
    Hm, okay, there is something new in this Bond film, vut especially the ending sequence at "Skyfall" was unrealistic and much too similar to an average action movie. The villain seems unmotivated, certain actions are not comprehensible, and then M's dead at the end, which destroys James' invulnerable image ... absolutely a matter of taste!
  44. Nov 12, 2012
    5
    The hype on this Bond is embarrassing. I'm all about a more serious Bond with Sam Mendes at the helm. What I wanted was a clever spy story. What we instead get is a rehashing of great moments from other movies.

    As to not spoil, the list of stolen ideas from better movies include: LIVE AND LET DIE, BATMAN, THE UNTOUCHABLES, and the painfully obvious SILENCE OF THE LAMBS. Now I know
    The hype on this Bond is embarrassing. I'm all about a more serious Bond with Sam Mendes at the helm. What I wanted was a clever spy story. What we instead get is a rehashing of great moments from other movies.

    As to not spoil, the list of stolen ideas from better movies include: LIVE AND LET DIE, BATMAN, THE UNTOUCHABLES, and the painfully obvious SILENCE OF THE LAMBS. Now I know why Sam Mendes has been unable to prosper without Bond. Apparently he's a hack.

    As much as I like the actor who played the villain, he reminded me too closely in appearance and performance of Christopher Walken's disastrous A VIEW TO A KILL villain. Laughing and smirking in a little world the rest of us neither understand or give a crepe about. In this film I didn't care the villain, Bond, or the 'dramatic' event at movies end -- which wasn't set up by professional filmmakers but Comic book fanboys. And the oh so precious introduction of a Bond institution at movie's end was another 'precious' fanboy moment played terribly wrong.

    Where the Bond girl? The same place this script was. Up someone's arrogant myopic behind.
    Expand
  45. Nov 13, 2012
    5
    Good movie, just not a good Bond movie. The main protagonist (Bond) and antagonist (Silva/Bardem) are underwhelming. I want Bond to be a hero, not a drunken bum (who can oddly survive a crazy high fall into a creek) and I want Bond villain to aspire to more than just silly revenge. It is however very well shot. This falls short of Bourne for me.
  46. Nov 14, 2012
    6
    James Bond is back. Again. And to be quite frank I'm over it. 23 movies and we still see Bond doing his archetype Bond things. Oh look he ordered a martini. Hey look he's driving an Aston Martin. Is that a Walther PPK? He gambles. He wins. He gets a typical Bond girl. Car chases, Foot chases. I mean for me it's all just been done before. It was really cool to see Bond reinvented in CasinoJames Bond is back. Again. And to be quite frank I'm over it. 23 movies and we still see Bond doing his archetype Bond things. Oh look he ordered a martini. Hey look he's driving an Aston Martin. Is that a Walther PPK? He gambles. He wins. He gets a typical Bond girl. Car chases, Foot chases. I mean for me it's all just been done before. It was really cool to see Bond reinvented in Casino Royal, but does every movie have to be the same formula? The only thing that set this one apart was the baddy. Javier Bardem practically single handedly saves this film from going into the annals of Bond failures such as Tomorrow Never Dies. Is it worth the watch? Yeah sure. Watch it for the action. But for old school Bond fans, I think I like my movies with a bit more Connery swagger. This one was shaken. Not stirred. Expand
  47. Nov 14, 2012
    6
    I wouldnt say it was the best Bond movie, however it is worth watching. I do hate when the audience is taken advantage of. Let me explain.. opening sequence is seriously flawed, and full of holes (including Bond!) However they writer/directer really made the ending quite obvious, and somewhat predictable. There are many positives however, Javier Bardem was quite good, and very unlikeableI wouldnt say it was the best Bond movie, however it is worth watching. I do hate when the audience is taken advantage of. Let me explain.. opening sequence is seriously flawed, and full of holes (including Bond!) However they writer/directer really made the ending quite obvious, and somewhat predictable. There are many positives however, Javier Bardem was quite good, and very unlikeable (clearly as most villains should be) I was let down however by the pace of the film. Quite long, and at times quiet and boring. Dame Denche is great as usual. Some complain about the re-introduction of the traditional bond elements.. as this was clearly and anniversary film, I think its quite appropriate... however, lets hope that's where it stops. Decent movie all around, but just not great. Expand
  48. Nov 23, 2012
    5
    Bond has been hit by a fallen meteor. Disappointing for a Bond film- strained and very unrealistic plot with another crazed unbelievable villain, But good on-location photography.
  49. Nov 24, 2012
    4
    I really didn't enjoy Skyfall. Some elements were good, but I felt it was too bland. Basically Bourne but with a bit more class. Why must they cut out the cool gadgets / glamour? What drew me to Bond in the first place was the escapism and fantasy elements. This is too real world, too much like a stock standard action film.
  50. Nov 27, 2012
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Anyone who believes this is a good Bond Movie is an Odd Job. And probably likes the musical 'We will Rock You'. Average action to open, silly effete bad guy (let's make him camp!) with lack of ambition and overbite, (didn't they used to want to take over the world?) washed down with a terrible clunky script. Why? - because it borrows so heavily from other films: Hannibal Lecter cage from Silence of the Lambs; shotguns and courduroy jackets and country from Bourne; dead parents from Harry Potter. Ridiculous dialogue: Albert Finney: "I was born ready!" - really! Silly denouement: Bardem arrives with heavies majically out of thin air and M has no security save for Bond who kills a helicopter with a calor gas cannister. No glamour, no charachter arc for sexy women - only M who completely forgets all her training and waves a bad guy in with a white hankie. No bad guy characters introduced around main Bardem charachter (no Odd Job) 'Ext. Skyfall - Night: Lots of bad guys wander down sepia tinted countryside looking for a tosser and his mum and a poacher so they can kill him. They all die in BBQ accident.'

    Stupid and unsophisticated with schlocky ending that betrays Bond cool. His parents grave - and mum named Delacroix - and what -what- what! Stupid moments: Bond chasing Bardem in Z Cars outfit and crashing train pointlessly into underground. This is not a Bond Movie. It's a Blonde movie made by people with a schedule. Skyfall House - that really made me laugh... as if.
    Expand
  51. Nov 30, 2012
    5
    Disappointing. Loved Casino Royale 's realism, but this was like watching a Batman movie with an arch villain and bumbling Secret Service except for Bond.
  52. Dec 14, 2012
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Skyfall had some good bits, but a lot of problems. The "aging Bond" aspect of the film didn't work for me because we all know that Bond is effectively a permanently young and handsome character, thanks to the miracle of casting. Besides, it's been done before (in Never Say Never?). The scale of the movie didn't work for me either -- "Skyfall" is such a grandiose name that it should have been an international scheme, not Bond's dismal childhood manse. And the "revenge on M" motivation fell flat. Bond villains should want to take over the world, get rich, or both. I also disliked the movie's midway morph into Home Alone. How tedious. Finally, I was offended by the homophobia implicit in the depiction of the villain. What will the next Bond film bring us -- a greedy Jew? Expand
  53. Dec 20, 2012
    6
    For all the money they had to make this film they should have done better. Daniel Craig lacks any style or depth and comes across as low IQ which I sure is not the intent. The start is very very good but then it gets lost. the raid on the house is so unreal its sad. sure its entertaining but at that budget - we deserve more.
  54. Dec 24, 2012
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. If I didn't know it was a Bond film I would have enjoyed it more. There was no 'light and shade' as in previous Bond movies. It was all too dark. What happened to the suave sophistication that Bond exudes...always 100% sure of himself. There were no 'tongue in cheek' snippets that always was a sign of a good Bond film. I missed the inventive gadgets that Q would provide. It was though the writers were trying to destroy the franchise by blowing up the Aston Martin and revealing Bonds past. Why destroy the mystique of Bond? I hope they return to the old format. There will always be plenty of Bourne Identities. Sorry 5/10. Expand
  55. Jan 2, 2013
    4
    After watching skyfall I felt like having worked for an enitre day, it just took far too long. It'd be better it'd be shortened by an hour. The acting wasn't bad and stuff. Actually there was nothing which was like really bad but everything also was not good.
  56. Jan 11, 2013
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Some great action scenes are the only distinguishing feature. Otherwise, far too much product placement and a plot which revises GoldenEye with its agent turned villain after harsh treatment by his spymasters (Bardem phones in his performance and counts the cash, and good luck to him). The whole thing could have been rescued for me if Silva had killed M and himself in the chapel, with Bond arriving just in time to witness it. Now that would have been a movie! Expand
  57. Feb 18, 2013
    6
    You have to review the Bond movies within their context. As such, Skyfall is by means not bad one. There is something new and something familiar to keep both old and new fans watching. When you are going to see a any James Bond movie you pretty much know what to expect and Skyfall delivers exactly this.
  58. Jun 1, 2013
    6
    Skyfall is a long, tedious, and extremely boring movie that has little to no emotional impact on the viewer. It didn't linger with me after I watched it because the whole thing just felt like a massive cliche. The only things that saved this movie were the action sequences and the grounds keeper who helped out Bond more than Bond helped himself. Also, he was probably the only likableSkyfall is a long, tedious, and extremely boring movie that has little to no emotional impact on the viewer. It didn't linger with me after I watched it because the whole thing just felt like a massive cliche. The only things that saved this movie were the action sequences and the grounds keeper who helped out Bond more than Bond helped himself. Also, he was probably the only likable person in the whole movie. Seriously, why is Bond the least interesting person in the film? How did the writers even manage to do that in a JAMES BOND movie?They even managed to make Javier Bardem (who was an excellent villain in No Country for Old Men) into a lame attempt at ripping of Joker!
    It may seem like I hate this movie, but I actually thought it was not a terrible movie. It's a solid action flick if you turn your brain off. But, it's nothing more than that. People who say that this is the best Bond ever need to see a proctologist and get their head removed from their own a--.
    Expand
  59. Jul 7, 2013
    4
    All the hype, all the press, all the praise, would suggest this to be the best Bond ever. Part of me would say; that's probably not a far cry from the truth, yet, it's hardly an accolade worth boasting about either.

    Throughout the overdrawn and increasingly sigh worthy decisions made by all the characters in play, it became apparent by the end that Skyfall was at best a bloated,
    All the hype, all the press, all the praise, would suggest this to be the best Bond ever. Part of me would say; that's probably not a far cry from the truth, yet, it's hardly an accolade worth boasting about either.

    Throughout the overdrawn and increasingly sigh worthy decisions made by all the characters in play, it became apparent by the end that Skyfall was at best a bloated, nonsensical bore, straining so hard for glory, that it managed to fool the majority of the audience.

    Javier Bardem, despite his brilliance as Chigurgh in No Country for Old Men, is completely wasted here. And i'm not sure in which way I mean that, as he clearly looked off his rocker for the entirety of the film. Perhaps that was the point, but I would have thought the writers would have used him wisely, rather than spewing out another camp, ridiculous villain. A complete waste of opportunity and talent.

    As for the plot, it struggles along from A to B, as both band and Camp Bond Villain #38 make increasingly unbelievable judgment calls. The finale is perhaps the most laughable standoff I've seen in years. Without any spoiling, Bond, with all his guile and wit, makes the decision to essentially hide in a remote, derelict building.

    Well, there'll never find us here... says Bond.

    It seems it's not just the audience that are all too happy to dance along to the nonsense.
    Expand
  60. Ozy
    Apr 15, 2014
    4
    I liked the fact that it showed the toll bond had accumulated over the years. But I expected him to snap out of his lonely old man state of mind and kick some ass. In all honesty the movie felt like it should have instead been the first 15minutes of another epic bond film.
Metascore
81

Universal acclaim - based on 43 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 36 out of 43
  2. Negative: 0 out of 43
  1. Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    Nov 9, 2012
    60
    Skyfall leaves you wondering whether this incarnation of the character has anywhere left to go. It's the portrait of a spy at the end of his rope by an actor who seems close to his.
  2. Reviewed by: Rene Rodriguez
    Nov 9, 2012
    88
    Mendes' approach to action is classical and elegant - no manic editing and blurry unintelligible images here - but what makes the movie truly special is the attention he gives his actors.
  3. Reviewed by: Mike Scott
    Nov 9, 2012
    60
    The sky is far from falling on the Bond franchise. In fact, it is as good as it has ever been. What's more, Craig is reportedly on board for at least two more outings, so Q had better get to work on those bifocals because 007 is no where near ready for retirement.