User Score
7.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1255 Ratings

User score distribution:

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. Nov 9, 2012
    0
    Let the Skyfall, take your money, waste your time. Let's face it all, this film is the worst James Bond movie has ever been made. This film does not even feels like a JB movie. At least there is a little bit JB feel in Quantum of Solace. Skyfall's intro is not amazing like old JB films. The story is so ridiculous that they tried to fill it with James you are too old thingy. Seriously, James Bond cannot shoot an object properly because he is too old. Actually, the story has fatal flaws which I am not going to mention them. Bond girl has nothing to do with story, plus bad acting skills. Bond acts creepy to the situations. With Naomie Harris helping JB feels like watching an Ocean's Eleven film. The new Q keeps failing in every situation. Some elements are stolen from The Dark Knight Rises in a creepier way. There are CGI's and they seem very cheap. The music is inappropriate with the scenes. Why did they change the old composer?. I really liked David Arnold, I still listen to his old JB soundtracks. And what about the director? His first action movie, right? The camera is so close to Daniel Craig in every scene. Let the audience see the beautiful places like Shanghai, Istanbul. The director shows the Omega watch in an action scene. What kind of advertisement is this?. There is a scene Bond looking to his phone doing nothing. Finally, the final fight between Bond and the villian is not that thrilling. If you like to watch a cheap action movie, lower your expectations and watch it. The series had a formula but the producers keep insisting of not doing it. So, I'm done with the series. Expand
  2. Nov 13, 2012
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. First of all, whoever is simply upvoting positive reviews and downvoting negative ones, you are not helping constructive film criticism. This movie is bad, and there are reasons for that:

    1) Bond never gives us a reason to like him as a person, yet we're expected to cheer for him. He's smug and dull. (half of the jokes in the movie didn't get any reaction whatsoever from the theatre I was in) Despite the long run time there is little to no interpersonal character development.
    2) The movie is paced poorly, almost unbearably slow at times. Even long-time Bond fans I was with admitted that they couldn't understand why some scenes went on for as long as they did or why they were even in the film at all.
    3) I'm sorry, but the Bond 'death' scenes are too ridiculous! I couldn't get over it and it's why I have to mark this review as having spoilers to include this point. If you get shot w/ a sniper rifle in the chest and plummet lifelessly underwater, you won't live! How can we take the movie seriously after that? And then you have Bond wrestling w/ a guy in icy water and is completely nonchalant underwater after killing him. Does Bond have superhuman traits that would make any comic book character jealous?

    The only redeeming things I can think of this movie are a decent opening and Kincade, the old guy at Skyfall. He is the ONLY character in this movie with any heart that I cared about and enjoyed watching. He alone earns the one point I would be willing to award to this film. Good riddance to the featured M.
    Expand
  3. Nov 9, 2012
    9
    James Bond films were never really considered as great films. They are good escapist fares, but never considered as something more than that. On some occasions, such as 'On Her Majesty Secret Service' or 'Casino Royale', the Bond films rose to become something more, but they are far and between. Until now. Skyfall may be one of the best Bond film of all time, and may be the best film of 2012. It's a character piece that deconstructs who Bond really is and his relationship with those surrounding him, in particular with 'M'. The cinematography is top notch, the plot sublime and Sam Mendes delivers. But at the heart of Skyfall is the performances of its actors. Craig finally becomes the best Bond since Connery, imbuing great depth to this character. Judi Dench finally does her best turn yet, while Bardem delivers an over the top performance as Silva, one of Bond's most memorable villain. Again, I can't say enough of this, one of the finest film of 2012, and the best Bond film of all time. Don't miss it. Expand
  4. Nov 9, 2012
    8
    I thought Skyfall was the best of the Daniel Craig movies. Javier Bardem was a great villain,as always. The plot was very good. great chases and fighting. Although I love Sean Connery more, Skyfall made me a big Daniel Craig fan now too.
  5. Nov 9, 2012
    1
    It was G-d awful!
    Consistent blatant product placement.
    The shout outs to the past bond films were nostalgic but seemed forced for cheap thrills. The CGI in the first scene was TERRIBLE and was clear that it was computer generated.
    Q wasn't fantastic but not terrible either. Fiennes was a nice casting choice though. Naomie Harris was poorly cast. I just don't think it was the role for
    her.
    Who scored the movie? Terrible pacing in music at the wrong time. I don't know what people are seeing in this film. The script was choppy and unfinished. I can't criticize it more without spoiling the film. This is a travesty for the 50th anniversary.
    Oh and Javier Bardem's performance was WAY over the top and not as menacing as he could have been.

    There are some good fight scenes and some good scenes in general but its just terrible all over at the end of the day.
    Expand
  6. Nov 9, 2012
    0
    I'm genuinely surprised this movie is getting such rave reviews, I thought it was awful. It tries so hard to be dark and serious, but to me it came across as completely shallow. I never felt empathy for Bond in this movie, and I don't get how I was supposed to when he never shows any emotion or attachment to anything the whole movie. That would have been OK if it was just about him being a badass but here they spend huge chunks of the movie where you're supposed to buy that he's "vulnerable" and "complex". But it kinda doesn't work when the guy is practically invincible and nothing ever affects him, in fact I would have been ok if they did a twist where they tell you Bond was actually a robot all along, that's how wooden the character was. So yeah, the psychology aspect just didn't do it for me, and not helping matters there was only one really memorable action scene and it's in the opening sequence (the intro was amazing I'll give the movie that) : it was basically a borefest for two hours after the intro. You could argue it's the second "best" JB movie based on the cinematography alone because it's true the movie is beautifully shot, but then again it doesn't matter when you don't care about anything that's going on. That wasn't the case in Casino Royale where I genuinely cared about the character, because they showed you he was human and not just a cold robot. Expand
  7. Nov 10, 2012
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Bad movie. Hollywood must have some very efficient PR agencies which obviously now spam IMDB & metacritic way ahead of a movies release. Shortly before the movie came out in the US it already had 10000+ reviews on IMDB.

    Story: 2 out of 10 - (Spoilers): Bond dies - Bond does not die - Bond is back - lot of brainless action - plot does not make sense at all. The "evil" guy is a former MI6 agent, who was betrayed and exchanged against six agents by M to the Chinese. Now he wants M dead and how does he show her what she did was wrong? He acquires a list of NATO agents working undercover and unfolds their identity (5 at a time, to make it even more mischievous) on a YouTube channel (nice product placement btw.). As if that does not make enough sense he now blows up M's office 15 years after he freed himself out of the Chinese prison and makes sure M is not in it (adds to the suspense). To spice up life besides blowing up things and hacking M's computer he manipulates the stock market and hacks into satellites. Makes sense? Yes? No! But now his evil plans for world dom... ehhm... no actually just killing M (which seems to pretty easy for this superbrainiac) will finally come true, so he gets himself arrested by the MI6 and is locked up in a airtight cell in MI6 new secret HQ somewhere below London. But of course he has already calculated all the steps MI6 will take and now from within his supersecure cell he executes his super evil plan to ESCAPE from the cell! He escapes (this is not being shown, as escaping from a airtight cell is just too easy for this guy and too hard for the ingenious director to execute) and runs through the tunnel with James Bond nearly shooting him (he has precalculated the flight of the bullets too and also exactly the location where Bond is standing as NOW he blows up a hole in the underground of London where surprise surprise a metro is just flying through and nearly missing Bond (he calculated this also, so he could have some more fun with his favourite actor / counterpart). After escaping the underground he walks straight into the parliament (precalculated too) where a trial against the somewhat evil M is being conducted. Now he thinks it is time to kill M for real, but now his calculations went wrong and Bond saves M from being shot by Mr. Evil himself. Because obviously Bond and M now cannot trust anybody besides each other anymore they drive to Scotland and to Bonds former parents house. This of course is still being inhabited by the former servant, who despites being 60+ years old still seems to be quite keen facing Mr. Evil and his minions just armed with some shotguns and some self constructed MacGywer style bombs. Of course Mr. Evil comes in the second wave after blood thirsty Bond now has killed over 15 of his minions in the first assault wave and after a long battle chases M (the new number 1 of the Bond movie) to a chapel nearby. Now finally the 100 minute benchmark is reached - Mr. Evil gets killed - M dies - Bond almost crys and dear old servant looks shocked. Movie over - done. A masterpiece? Nope. The ingredients are mainly senseless shooting - "cool" looking explosions - dark meaningless places and a story lacks any sense at all. Not to say Bond movies ever where super logical or anything, but this movie is just a complete mess. It lacks humor, a coherent story, the evil guy sucks, the Bond girls appear like 5 seconds and then they disappear if lucky or just get plain shot, Bond shows his "dark" side - taking painkillers excessively and drinking, Q hands Bond two **** things and tries to be funny about it, the locations have no charm or character, not a single character gets explained. Main thing nowadays though seems to be kill count needs to be high, actors need not to act but rather look "cool" when killing people and story needs to be not existent to not overbear the viewer.

    Optics 4 out of 10 - Intro is cool, rest way too dark and superficial.

    Actors 3 out of 10 - no actor strikes out, especially the evil guy sucks, but that is all based on the story.
    Expand
  8. Nov 9, 2012
    0
    A total disgrace to the Bond franchise. I can't recall the last time I was this disappointed by a movie. Skyfall has none of the elements that Bond fans like myself have come to expect: 1. Out of the world stunts and grand action sequences, especially the opening set 2. Cool gadgets 3. A smooth, suave agent 4. A villain hell bent on destroying the world (or large parts of it)

    Instead, we see a sentimental, introspective Bond who sheds tears (guys, I am serious) fighting against an effeminate villain with a personal vendatta, has no cool gadgets, and mediocre stunts.

    Three years since the last movie and this rubbish is what the clowns at MGM/Columbia give us? I want my money back.
    Collapse
  9. Nov 9, 2012
    1
    Left the cinema massively disappointed - I've always enjoyed the bond films, until Qos - in my mind this couldn't possibly be any worse... it actually manages to be far worse than qos, to the point I was bored watching it, coupled with a terrible plot with holes everywhere, rubbish villain, about 10 minutes of screen time for the bond girl this goes down for me as the worst bond I've ever seen, sorry! I'm aware there is a bit of a marmite reaction going on with this film, and some of the best bond film ever reviews appear to be fake so please beware before setting expectations too high like I did Expand
  10. Nov 9, 2012
    1
    If this what James Bond has come to, then I would stick to Kung Fu Panda. This is worse than a B-grade action movie. Skyfall could have been accepted as a decent action movie if it hadn't been branded as a James Bond flick. For the full 143 minutes, I never saw Bond; all I saw was an aging and grumpy Craig.
  11. Nov 21, 2012
    0
    "SkyFail" (This movie is so bad it inspired me to post a review)

    To be honest I expected a reboot similar to the batman franchise. It turned out to be a major letdown, due to a complete cliche plot, bland acting and blatant incompetence of the characters pasted together with the only redeeming feature: thrilling action scenes. Please remember to turn your brain off before watching this,
    if you do this movie might even be worth your money. Expand
  12. Nov 9, 2012
    8
    $10 to see this $200M movie? Count me in. A super fun long opening action sequence. Gorgeous tailored clothing. Beautiful cinematography. Attractive people. A sensible character backstory and motivation. High tech. Low tech. Retro tech. About 50 amazing set pieces.

    And James Bond fixing his cuff length after jumping from a crane onto a moving train.
  13. 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 expect to take a nap for the last half hour of this 2 and a half hour long movie. Expand
  14. Nov 15, 2012
    0
    What the **** did i just watch???? I' was looking forward to watching 'the Best Bond movie yet!' well **** me, i bought into the b.s. hype and critic reviews again. Silly me. This is the worst James Bond movie ever made...It just sucks the soul out of the franchise...my mind has been blown by how bad this movie was....and this movie has been receiving so much praise since release?! seriously what the **** is wrong with people nowadays??? Is it really hard to think for yourself???. This movie set the nail in the coffin for me...I'm certain now that movie companies really believe people are dumb as hell and they can make the crappiest movie ever but as long as they advertise it as the best thing since slice bread, it will sell. Everything nowadays is so hyped up, you almost are always consistently disappointed with the final product yet people are so brainwashed and ashamed they bought into it, they can't admit they've just been duped :( **** is ****ing sad...i mean just admit the movie was **** and spare the rest of us. At least there's still some people out there who can see past the b.s. thank ****ing god...anyways this is just another reminder why I haven't been watching movies lately. I'll stick to my videogames thank you very much. Expand
  15. Nov 11, 2012
    10
    Director,screenplay,actors,sound=awesome.Good election to choose ADELE for the song.I think that it will be nominated to the Academy Award:
    -Best Original Song
    -Best Cinematography
    -Best Actor
    -Best Supporting Actor
    -Best Supporting Actress
    -Best Sound Mixing
    -Best Sound Editing
    I see you in the Academy Awards.
  16. Nov 10, 2012
    0
    Worst Bond movie I've ever seen, boring, dumb, predictable, it sucks big time. Save yourselve some time and money dont watch it. Oh yes it is that bad
  17. 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
  18. Nov 10, 2012
    3
    There was nothing James Bond about this movie. Big let down on music, plot, and good use of product displacement. James Bond movies were always 50 years ahead of its time, there was no such technology or cars or anything that was used. The plot of ex agent becoming the villan is same as golden eye plot. The bond girl was short lived. The relationship of skyfall in bonds life was not shown in the right way. They basicly could have shot the end scene somewhere else and it would not have mattered at all. They have a new Q. Come on. I couldn't trust him till the end... Lol.. And what the heck where they achieving by successfully locating James on the radar. I get it that he had to be tracked but don't keep telling us viewers that. It gets annoying. There was no super car. Just a jag scene and an old Astin Martin, that did nothing basically. Big let down on cars. Overall I was not impressed a bit. Expand
  19. 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
  20. 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 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
  21. Nov 9, 2012
    10
    After boring Quantum of Solace, I expect that new film about agent 007 will be with more interesting story and more gripping situations. Finally, we get excellent film with "clever" plot, good casting and unexpected ending. Waiting the continuation.
  22. Nov 9, 2012
    7
    Bond simply can't avoid falling back to old cliches if the script doesn't offer smarter opportunities, and the story is rather simple overall. But the cinematography is great, the action breathtaking, the acting fabulous and Javier Bardem gives one of the more original (and personal) villains of any Bond movie. Not as good as "Casino Royal", but one of his better films.
  23. 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...
  24. Nov 19, 2012
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Where to even begin with how awful this movie is??? First, I LOVE action films. I LOVE Bond films. I LOVE Sam Mendes. Does that mean they should all be in one movie together? Um.... no. As a preface, I was really excited by all the hype for this film and waited in line for two hours to redeem my $22 IMAX ticket at the only "real" IMAX theater in NYC to get the very best seat in the house. And what did I get for this dedication? A meandering story line that was derivative, ridiculous, and at least thirty minutes too long (how does this "old guy Bond" that can't even pass a simple fitness test survive being shot with a high-grade weapon and falling several stories into a huge waterfall??); scenes and subplots that barely even made sense (why does Bond meet the Bond girl and determine she is a former child sex trade worker, then suddenly appear like a CREEP in her shower, promise to save her, and then let her die in the next scene commenting callously that her death was a waste of good scotch-- POINTLESS if not creepy); idiotic plot devices (why do people need a flashlight to find a huge building in a field lit up by massive explosions and flames? Ummmm, let's see... to make them easy for the villain to find...??); lame, lame LAAAAAMMMMMEE fight sequences (that Shanghai club scene was so ho-hum after all the build up. Not to mention it contained the ONLY bit of pay off on the supposedly "cool" gun. Why does a Chinese body guard not carry his own gun and how does he not know there is a huge dragon in this pit in the place where he works, nor manage to see it coming?).
    The gadgets were boring- an iPod mini is cooler than that radio- and the scenes were overall, way too drawn out.
    How, how HOW have we forgotten the primary rule of cinema-- SHOW don't tell???? I don't want to hear a long monologue about a Chinese prison sentence, I want to SEE it. I don't want to watch Bond follow two steps behind, discovering Patrice's trail of dead bodies- I want to see the kills! I want to SEE Javier Bardem's awesome escape from this airtight cell, instead of leaving Q to "suddenly realize" that he must have been planning it all along and somehow magically foresaw all these incredible details blah blah blah. Show me how this crazy cool fingerprint gun works! Give me a tour of your awesome Aston Martin that's so much cooler now than it was in Goldfinger. At least let me see the CGI scorpion TRY to sting Bond.... SOMETHING. And why oh why is the cleaning guy at the little beach bungalow bar watching Wolf Blitzer on CNN conveniently at sunrise...? Are you serious?? That's REALLY the best you can do with a team of three accomplished Hollywood writers? I want to SEE how Bond survived his crazy fall, if he's so old and has a bullet wound. The pacing of this film was slow, WAY to slow for an action film. Bond lost, in my opinion, all his sex appeal- the shower scene was so far from steamy and the shaving scene was loooonnnnngg and went nowhere. There was no build at all to the momentum of this film. Points where the suspense should have been at a high (like in M's hearing) plodded along with the efficiency of a three-toed sloth. Points where Bond could have been a hero (like for example, SAVING the Bond girl to make her three scenes at least kind of pay off) were missing entirely. With all the technology today, you would think they could have come up with some cooler gadgets and taken the time to show us how they work, because the HOW is really the awesome part of action movies anyway.
    And why oh WHY did we witness at least ten minutes of film establishing how old and beat up James Bond is these days, and how he can't even pass a fitness test, only for NONE of this information to ever pay off anywhere else in the story??? I'm all for exploring the aging super hero thing, like Batman as a shut in facing foreclosure, but this just seemed like an unresolved, half-explored idea.

    Javier Bardem stole the show as always, and actually held my attention with his two very lengthy monologues. In the hands of another actor, this role could have been ridiculous but he brought out the creepy sadism and kept it bubbling just under the surface for the whole film, justifying as best he could WHY (why oh why, Writers??) a man with such "limitless power" might wait fifteen years to kill the woman he hated most, biding his time with stock market manipulation, and why it seems like such a process to kill her when he can apparently blow up MI6 with undetected ease. Judi Dench and Albert Finney were both excellent as always, and truly made up the only emotional core of this film, being the only actors who were able to achieve a measure of compassion or depth.
    Daniel Craig was pouty and plasticky as usual and his body language continues to seem put on and unconvinced. Eve Moneypenny had all the vim and vigor of a corporate lawyer and I really wasn't sold on that casting choice. All around- LAME BOND.
    Expand
  25. Dec 23, 2012
    9
    Even if "Skyfall" lacking the classic Bond energy is a minor imperfection, it is a blemish on an action film masterpiece that is a fast-paced, emotionally charged and iconic thriller that defines itself proudly as not only one of the best action films ever, but one of the best Bond films ever - and this is appropriate, seeing that Daniel Craig is the (second) best Bond ever.
  26. Nov 10, 2012
    1
    If you have insomnia, Skyfall will cure you fast. On the other hand, if you just want to eat popcorn, you had better take a couple tablets of No Doze to last it out. If you don't mind that the Old Bag "M" plays a huge part, that the flat-chested heroine plays a big part, and that the only other woman can't act and looks like a vampire, then this movie is for you.
  27. Nov 17, 2012
    3
    This movie, like Heineken beer, leaves a bad taste in one's mouth. Skyfall's version of Bond is so cold and lacking in charm that he will likely inspire your contempt rather than your sympathy. Javier Bardem is nowhere near as scary as he was in No Country for Old Men, but that's not his fault- the part is just poorly written. Gone are the witty one liners so famously associated with the series. I can recall laughing twice during the entirety of this film. Bond movies need to have a good sense of humor, which you won't find here. On the romantic front, things are equally grim: there is no chemistry between Craig and his legion of shallow female sidekicks. This is partly because the script sucks, but it's also because Daniel Craig is just downright ugly, pardon the crassness. He is not easy on the eyes. I'm glad this is his last Bond movie, to be honest. I think Michael Fassbender could play the kind of Bond this series needs in order to get back on track. I found myself feeling quite bored for the majority of the movie. Strange that such an explosive action movie would be so devoid of intrigue and suspense. I'll give it a three for the gorgeous title sequence and Roger Deakins' photography. Expand
  28. Nov 11, 2012
    1
    This is by no means the best bond films. Boring story, boring action, boring villian. Nothing about this movie is exciting. Every formulaic and predictable. Too many jokes and references to old Bond references. The writers spent more time trying to fit those in, then making an intriguing story. Not worth anyone's time unless you like boring, mediocre action films.
  29. Nov 27, 2012
    2
    The first movie was nothing short of genius. Witty, interesting, gritty and thrilling. The second, while cryptic, still managed to bring together another very good film, providing valuable insight into the character of 007. So what happened to the third? It seems to have crossed over the fine line separating true grit from trite "I got there just in time" scenarios. So what was different this time? Directors come and go with every film but the key difference here was in the writing. Garbage in, garbage out. There was one different writer in this film compared with the first two movies. Please bring back Paul Haggis (Crash, Million Dollar Baby) on the nex one. He was sorely missed this time around. Expand
  30. Nov 14, 2012
    1
    Man, they **** it up. The one point I give it is for Roger Deakins, who delivers some gorgeous cinematography (especially in Shanghai). Otherwise, an unbearable, intellectually lazy and ultimately silly endeavor. The reverse Pieta ending, in a church no less, sealed the deal: this film is beyond redemption.
  31. 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 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
  32. Nov 10, 2012
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. let me start off by saying I love james bond so much!!! I think craig is great in casino and quantum of solace. But this movie was so bad here is why.

    the villain was about as scary as an employee of a mac store.

    the new Q looks like an indie rocker groupie bond doesn't have his new dbs Austin martin.

    bond has a very weird shower scene he just shows up in there naked with out saying anything.

    then the french bond girl has 4 lines then dies by a bet with whiskey and one shot

    a large kamoto dragon saves bonds life by eatting a large Asian man

    for 5 mins bond stares at London then for 10 mins he stares and walks around Scotland with nothing going on.

    they play home alone in a old mansion for about 30 min built in the middle of no where. I mean they put shotgun shots under the floor boards and little grenades in the light fixtures. I was expecting to see 5 gallon paint cans hit people in the face. This is was the biggest let down in the theaters I've ever had. Don't believe the hype. The best thing I can say is I used free tickets to see this!!! SAVE YOUR MONEY!!!!!!!!!!
    Expand
  33. 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
  34. 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
    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
  35. Nov 11, 2012
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Not the WORST James Bond but definitely not a good one. The writers really missed the mark on this one. James Bond's apparent death at the beginning of the film was not woven deep enough into the story. The missing MI6 agent roster really had no impact on the plot. The villains character was so irrational and illogical even for a James Bond movie. Now, I have to say I like Daniel Craig. He won me over when I saw Casino Royal and it proves he's better than this. If you pay close attention, the director has bond awkwardly standing and "taking in the view" while remaining all tough. He literally just stand there like an emotionless statue for the greater part of the film. LET THE MAN ACT! Create more interesting dialog! Allow a script to have reasonable action sequences! I like the updated: cold, hard, ruthless, willing to do anything to get the job done James Bond, but come on! It has to be a little dynamic. As an audience we need some way to "bond" with the character. You can tell they attempted to do this by trying to fill in a lot James Bond's past but ultimately failed (unneeded for plot). I didn't really feel like we needed to be introduced to James Bond's dead family, nor did we need to see his family's mansion from which he uses "Home Alone" tactics to repel the world worst assault force led by the worlds corniest bad guy. James Bond does need to be "re-vamped" but it needs to be done in the writing/directing department. It's a shame that after 4 years this is the best product they could produce. Heck, I'm even considering writing a James Bond screenplay after seeing how far off the mark these guys are. OH! I gave it a "3" because "M" is fiiiinnnnnnalllllllyyyyy getting replaced and the fact that this movie wasn't "Tomorrow Never Dies" which deserves a "0" in everyones book and should NEVER be shown to a public audience. Thanks for taking the time to read my ranting. Expand
  36. Nov 20, 2012
    3
    What can I say?! Like many, Im a Bond fan...but cannot understand how the 'media' has put this latest Bond movie in the same league as Goldfinger? The introductory action scene was good; the shot to Bond and his presumed death added a twist, but from then on it was flatter than than the cinema cola I was drinking!! What on earth have the directors and producers created?! The story line was so weak it was painful...the Villan was an ex MI6 agent who was 'betrayed' by his Boss (M) and was now plotting on her downfall and death via cybercrime and access to a hardrive (from another MI6 agent) carrying data of all western secret agents...come on!!! Bond is here to settle a personal vendetta of an ex agent and his Boss?! With all that is going on in the world today, is this the best that can be done (even when being politically correct)! The various action scenes-Shanghai & Macau did not have substance. they came and went without a real reason. the Bond girls could not even be called that...their roles where so short. The gadgets and cars were non existant...Daniel Craig was good. He is looking alittle old and ragged, and feel this should be his last film as 007. The whole film was a a mixture of many films (Borne Identity, MI 1, Harry Potter, etc...). Personally I feel Mr Mendes has done a very poor job here, he was hired to do something different with Bond, but ended up making a real mess...Probably the worst Bond film ever made....even Timothy Dalton's two films were better...the 3 marks I give to Daniel Craig, for trying his best, Villain's Camp hairdo, and M's death....Utterly disappointed and disallusioned about the future of the 007............ Expand
  37. Nov 18, 2012
    1
    Casino Royal was a very good movie. Craig became a new Bond, a rougher Bond, a more "realistic Bond. All this is swept away in Skyfall and replaced by a dull, boring, regrettable image of a Bond character that is put together with traces of Startrek and Batman movies.
    This is one of the worst Bond movies ever made (in comparison Casino Royal was one of the best).
    Sam Mendes provided
    cheap script work....what can I say....bad, bad, bad. Expand
  38. Nov 26, 2012
    9
    Skyfall is my favorite Bond film thus far. I never was a big fan of the older Bond movies, but have thoroughly enjoyed the Bronson and Craig iterations. I like the direction the Daniel Craig ones have taken as far as leaving the cheesy gadgets behind in favor of a more rugged, physical Bond. I was a bit nervous with the way Skyfall started as there were several different actions/reactions that pulled me out of the action sequence. However, as it calmed down and started to introduce the main villain I was reassured. Javier Bardem was the highlight of Skyfall and I consider him to be the best Bond villain to date. His menacing, cerebral nature was more scary and intimidating than any other Bond villain plotting to rule the world. Despite having the knowledge and technology to wreck huge havoc on the world, Bardem's plan is more local and revenge driven (a much more interesting approach). Learning more about Bond's past was nice but nothing earth-shattering since it came off as the already done Bruce Wayne type of story. However, it was all executed convincingly and Daniel Craig does a great job as a broken but still very deadly Bond. Like the movies underlining story of "This Old Dog still has Bite", Skyfall proves that the 23rd Bond movie can still pack a punch and bring something new and entertaining to the table. In a sense, I wish this would be the last Bond movie since it was so fitting for a conclusion, but we all know there will be more and lets just hope they'll be as good as this one was. 9/10 Expand
  39. Nov 10, 2012
    9
    An amazing Bond film that harkens back to the old days with a genius supervillian, witty one liners, several girls, and some intense action sequences. The script was extremely well written and made due with less in a great way with excellent pacing and an engaging story. The action was much more subdued taking up less screen time than in previous films but this was something I was actually hoping for as it was more meaningful when it took place. Not having been a huge fan of Craig's previous Bond interpretations/scripts I really enjoyed his performance and am looking forward to his next one. Overall definitely a more dramatic movie and highly recommend. Expand
  40. Nov 9, 2012
    10
    Skyfall is the best of the Daniel Craig movies. The plot was awesome. Sam did an awesome job with this bond film. Daniel Craig is the best bond Since Sean Connery in my opinion Craig is the best Bond.
  41. Nov 10, 2012
    3
    You have to put feelings in a movie starring Daniel Craig (like in Casino Royale) and Skyfall doesn't do that, just like Quantum Of Solace. Thus, Quantum Of Solace is bad and thus, Skyfall is bad. Skyfall is even worse, actually it's the worst Bond movie I've ever seen (but okay, I've only seen 7). Except Ben Whishaw, none of the actors is interesting and I was really annoyed by Judi Dench, because I've got to see her so often in this movie. The first scene with villain Javier Bardem is really cool and leaded me to expect the ending to better than the beginning, but in fact Bardem is just another stupid antagonist. When it comes to the final showdown, he is just dumb. The ending was really bad and I don't know how Sam Mendes could film such **** The action is not rememberable, the actors aren't good and the whole movie is at least half an hour too long. I have no clue why critics raved over this movie so much, it didn't entertain me at all. I was very disappointed with Skyfall and I'd suggest you not to spend money on the cinema ticket for this. Expand
  42. Nov 9, 2012
    10
    Sam Mendes achieved the perfect balance between the realism in Casino Royale and the classic Bond elements. 007 fans will have a great time appreciating the subtle references to other films (unlike the ones in Quantum of Solace which were thrown right at your face). Once more, Daniel Craig is amazing as the most badass James Bond to date along with Timothy Dalton. This time he does a great job on portraying a weak and more vulnerable Bond that has lost his touch and is tired of life. Judi Dench at this point can act as M in her sleep, but this time we see a more human side of 007's boss as she tries to keep cool in the most chaotic circumstances. The relationship between Bond and M is explored as never before. Javier Bardem will certainly be remembered as Silva: one of the best villains in Bond history with his threatening and enjoyable presence. Ralph Fiennes is great as usual, this time posing as the one who comes to put Bond and M in their places. Also, the music by Thomas Newman and the cinematography by Roger Deakins are top notch. The only flaws I found in Skyfall are that even though Ben Whishaw's portrayal is cool, Q is more like Anna Grimsdottir from the Splinter Cell games than Q (the gadgets are deeply missed in the Daniel Craig films) and the Bond girls do a good job but they aren't as important as in other films. Skyfall has one of the best stories in the 007 series without ever forgetting watching James Bond has to be exciting. Expand
  43. Nov 9, 2012
    10
    As a kid all I watched were Bond movies. Sean Connery was my favorite out of all of them. Casino Royale came out and Daniel Craig was so interesting to watch. He was gritty and different than the other's. I'm happy to say that I liked Skyfall even better than Casino Royale. In fact it may be my favorite Bond film yet. Why? Well because Daniel Craig has proved that he is a brilliant bond. He in fact is one of my favorites. May even be my favorite. In Skyfall his performance is so top notch and well done. The plot is interesting and deeper than other Bond films. One must think about the plot over a day or so. At first it doesn't seem to deep, but than it hits you the next day how deep it actually was. The action scenes are choreographed to perfection. The locations are breath taking. The visuals are stunning. Javier Bardem is masterful in this film. I could not help but smile whenever he talked. His dialogue was so evil and twisted. His character was the most colorful of the film, and also the of the most colorful and rememberable villains in the Bond films. Bardem is flawless through out the whole film. Sam Mendes directed Skyfall with up most skill. He adds new elements to Bond, but is sure not to forget about keeping some classic Bond elements in the mix. I am very impressed with Skyfall. In fact I can't wait to see what's next for Bond. I would hope that Craig would return, because I have become so attached to his Bond. Excellent work by the cast and crew. This film is the best movie I have seen so far this year! I hope it gets Oscar attention. It certainly deserves it! Expand
  44. Nov 10, 2012
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This was such a disappointment after Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. I was so excited to see Javier Bardem as the villain, but all we have is a psychologically damaged former spy who has a poorly dyed hair and eyebrow job and a poor script. Where were Bond's new toys? A new gun and a transmitter hardly qualify. Even the romance was missing. The action was sub par to previous Bond movies. I had read some critics reviews before seeing the show and I was anticipating something great. Far from it. I wonder what movie those folks had seen because this sure was a disappointment. This makes me wonder about the caliber of future Bond movies. If this is the direction the future movies are taking, I guess I will be watching the old shows rather than the new ones from here on in. Expand
  45. Nov 10, 2012
    2
    Probably the most boring Bond movie I've seen. Unfortunate, as I came into it with medium-rare expectations. I'd wait for Redbox, at best. See something else on the big screen.
  46. Nov 11, 2012
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Skyfall might be the most un-Bond film in the series. There are little to none of the classic Bond tropes (gadgets, girls). in their place the movie is filled with personal issues and M being pushed out. The villain has the most small-potatoes plan of all the Bond villains. Still, the movie didn't entirely lose me until the final act where Bond and M hide out in his family's old Scotland home. At this point the movie took a big turn for the worse. The final act boiling down to a Straw Dogs/Home Alone type home defense scenario that is just boring and completely unoriginal. Setting aside plot holes, of which there are a number, this movie just left me scratching my head. After setting up a mysterious syndicate hiding in the shadows in Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, this movie doesn't even make one mention of what had been built up in the previous two Craig movies. I just don't understand where they were going with this movie other than to just slap something together to introduce new actors in the roles of M, Q, and Moneypenny. The movie is overlong and spends too much time dealing with things that feel more like they came out of a Bourne movie. I had high hopes for this movie, but if Skyfall is the best we can get after 4 years, I think this franchise is going to get stale again pretty fast. Overall the movie isn't unwatchable, it is just not a Bond movie. There are some cool action sequences and Bardem isn't bad as the villain, but he doesn't have much to work with. Skip this one until it hits video. Expand
  47. Nov 17, 2012
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Once the credits roll, you will have only one question - why did that stupid b*tch not aim for his head and kill Bond for good. For me, he most certainly IS dead. Expand
  48. Nov 11, 2012
    3
    I didn't like this movie. It is little more than a straight action film. Take out the name James Bond and you'll find it hard to see the resemblance to the James Bond series. They took away all the clever gadgets, don't give Bond much time to be cool or charming, he doesn't really play out as much of a hero and the villain has no motivation or plan other than revenge. This seems to be the direction of the Daniel Craig era of Bond movies and I for one have had enough. Expand
  49. 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.
  50. Nov 12, 2012
    3
    Story makes no sense. Enough plot holes and ridiculous moments where you are questioning what where they thinking to fill out any Roger Moore Bond movie. Series that started with amazing Casino Royale keeps going down the hill thanks to over the top action sequences and no regard for coherent plot. Fails miserably in comparison to MI4.
  51. Nov 10, 2012
    9
    In 2006 we were pleasantly impressed by ,,Casino Royale'' and thought that was the best Bond movie. 2 years late, when ,,Quantum of Solace'' made its debut on big screen we stuck at our first opinion and began to think that 007 may be exhausted. Well, ,,Skyfall'' proves just the opposite as it resurrects an 50 years old spy. More focused on a personal dispute than a global threat, ,,Skyfall'' comes forward with his characters, but it didn't forget to bring a thrilling action and a great script. Injured in appearance, but strong, determined, lucid and phlegmatic in the same time, Bond must prove his loyalty to duty. For the first time his attributes expand from being an agent as he's pulled in a personal conflict. Away from love or personal interest, he must become unselfish in making use of his attributes. Apart from Bond there's a second great item for ,,Skyfall'' and that's Javier Bardem's villain. Raoul Silva represent more than a simple villain, he's a powerful symbol, an opposite Bond, charming the viewer with his moral-psychological attitudes as well as interpretation. We witness the greatest villain in Bond movies, a sociopath, driven by personal vendetta with nothing to stop him. Silva is the cause of all intrigues, but his role becomes even more interesting with subjectivity because he's not seen only as a terrorist but as an individualist. The action of ,,Skyfall'' is already useless when you have such great character, but still, it comes to perfectly complete this ensemble with great, thrilling action, well-written script and solid story. Maybe because it's ,,guilty'' of quite some realism this story becomes even more exciting. From crowdy city into the nature, from normal conflict to personal one, the script takes credit for being made to interpret the moral and psychological action. The technicals are quite impressive to, the movie is exciting to watch, the soundtrack is just as it's supposed to be, and the frames let you enjoy Bond, action and atmosphere as well. We witness some great stunts as well as beautiful filmed frames, made especially to enjoy the audience. In conclusion ,,Skyfall'' meets the standard set by ,,Casino Royale'' and I can say it overtakes him. Now the normal questions that comes into my mind: is there any potential left for Bond or it reaches its peak? The answer is: there's still potential left in 007 and peaks can grow higher. If they continue being so great for the next movies, Bond will become the best spy with no chance to be brought down in any possible future, but he's already there... Expand
  52. Nov 9, 2012
    9
    Skyfall, the new James Bond film, is one of the best in the Bond series. Skyfall takes the Bond character to another level, it really develops him. If in "Cassino Royale" and "Quantum of Solace" Daniel Craig was a good Bond, in Skyfall, he is Bond. The action scenes are awesome, the dialogues are great, but what really stands out is Javier Bardem as the villain, he is one of the best Bond villains ever. It´s a bit overly long, but apart from that this film is great! Expand
  53. Nov 10, 2012
    7
    Look I'm NLT the biggest James Bond fan in the world, but I don't know why this film is getting praised. The first half is slow and dare I say almost somewhat boring, and the motivations of some characters are left unexplained. Also, and this may be me griping, but if Bond wasn't superhuman or a bad guy could hit a target, the movie would be over in 10 minutes. Still entertaining and an improvement over Quantum, though. Expand
  54. Nov 9, 2012
    8
    Anche gli agenti speciali invecchiano. Diventano sacrificabili e si lasciano andare agli ozî di Turchia, godendosi la morte tra sesso forsennato e bevute monumentali (spesso di Heineken, il cui product placement ha contribuito parecchio al finanziamento del film). Così, quando il senso del dovere e i legami personali li richiamano in servizio, la condizione fisica e psicologica lascia un po Expand
  55. Nov 12, 2012
    9
    This movie was a very great movie it was full action and the tragic ending waked my emetions up but i cant give it a 10 because if this was your first 007 movie its difficult to understand it.
  56. Nov 11, 2012
    9
    As Skyfall drives down the road that is its ever winding plot, there are many decisions to be made. Shall we go right, or left? To use to word in its non-directional fashion, Skyfall goes right. Mendes and the producers are smart enough to see temptations leading to formula and an overdrawn linear plot, and they steer clear of any such cliche. Skyfall is an intelligent, well-paced action thriller that restores our faith in films of its genre. Expand
  57. Nov 14, 2012
    1
    Sky fell flat on the nose
  58. Nov 10, 2012
    0
    Unoriginal in literally every way. The story had no surprises whatsoever. Had I been wearing a watch, I would have been checking it after the first 20 minutes. If you're an idiot and are easily impressed by shooting guns and Daniel Craig's buff bod, you might enjoy this film, otherwise steer clear and save your money.
  59. Nov 12, 2012
    1
    I really feel like I wasted my money on this film and the audience, if the grumbles on exit were anything to go by, seem to agree. A silly silly plot, non-threatening villain, no girls or action. I do not think this is a Bond film. I really cannot see where all the positive hype is coming from. Look at the reviews below and save your money.
  60. 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 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
  61. Nov 14, 2012
    9
    I don't care if I sound like a broken record when I say this: Skyfall really is the "Dark Knight" of the James Bond film franchise. You don't need to be a bond fan to enjoy this one. The action is comprehensible and exciting. The acting is great all around, with Daniel Craig and Javier Bardem always threatening to steal the show. Casino Royale was great, but Skyfall may just be better.
  62. Nov 14, 2012
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Stop calling it the best Bond film ever! (Minor Spoilers)

    Regardless of whether you think this film is good this film simply isn't the best Bond film ever. In fact, it's not really even Bond. Yes, Daniel Craig is a great choice for Bond I fully agree. Casino Royal is second only to classics like Goldfinger, and Quantum is not as hopeless as the public at large would have you believe. The elephant in the room with Skyfall is the storytelling. Ian Flemming's series of novels creates a world for Bond that is incredibly rich, detailed and logical. Sure at times, it requires suspension of disbelief, but not in an absolute way like a comic book or sci-fi film forces a viewer to do. The true pearls of the Bond series are the films that are tethered in some way to reality. Skyfall Bond is obviously not original content, but no attempt was made to reconcile the character or story with the original intentions of the author. If you have a deep appreciation of the literary character or a complete knowledge of the film series, you are much less likely to enjoy this movie because the plot does not regard the essence of Bond.

    I'm shocked that fewer critics have pointed out Skyfall's SHOCKINGLY lazy and poorly executed storytelling. One example, right from the start that I think conveys what I mean:

    The first scene, Bond is shot twice including by a military grade sniper rifle. He falls what appears to be 100 meters straight on his back. HOW DID HE SURVIVE? Why does he only have the 9mm shrapnel/wound with his shirt off? To me a masterpiece, or even a decent movie, simply cannot leave points like that (and literally a dozen other major plot gaps for which 'hacking' is the silver bullet) unresolved. Bond is not invincible, he's actually quite vulnerable in the novels. A Bond vehicle cannot invoke suspension of disbelief so outrageously and then expect me to take it seriously. Casino Royal (and many older films in the series) proved that Bond doesn't need to have superhero powers. They can tell a great story, include quality action and obey some basic principles of reality. A Bond story that enters a world so completely devoid of the governing principles of reality is the ultimate copout and at fundamentally not Bond.

    Again, non-Bond fans are entitled to say it's a great movie. But it is really asinine to make statements to the effect of 'Best Bond Ever'. Watch all 23. Read one of the books. People would be outraged if Lord of the Rings didn't respect the vision of Tolkien, so why is it different with Flemming?
    Expand
  63. Nov 12, 2012
    1
    The plot was quite dark and the movie seemed to drag on too long. Darkness is ok to an extent but there was very little that was fun or even interesting in the movie; not even many interesting gadgets that previous Bond movies typically include. I like Daniel Craig, but this is clearly the worst of the Craig series of Bond movies. I won't recommend any family or friends go see this movie.
  64. 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, 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
  65. Nov 23, 2012
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. My god, where do I start.

    1) This isn't a Bond movie
    2) Story is more boring than my grandma, and she's been dead for 15 years
    3) Errors, errors, so many errors. I usually wouldn't even care for these in a Bond movie, but this is just too much to bear
    4) There is no plot whatsoever
    5) Unlikable M - I hoped she died halfway during the movie. At least she did die in the end, for which I'll give a 1 for this movie instead of a 0
    6) I was waiting until something would actually happen, then suddenly there were the ending credits.
    7) How the hell did this horrible 'movie' get so many positive reviews and high marks?!
    8) Etcetera, etcetera
    Expand
  66. Jan 22, 2013
    9
    The latest entry to the long-running James Bond series has perhaps hit a high note for the series as a whole, which is fitting, considering it was made for the 50th anniversary of the franchise. Pretty much everything feels right about this movie, the acting is superb from all involved, but I think Javier Bardem's turn as the ever famous Bond villain, in this film Silva, steals the show magnificently: he's just the right amount creepy and eerie as he is camp, liking him to Heath Ledger's Joker is perhaps some of the best praise I can give him (shame he does not have an Oscar nomination, although he does have a BAFTA nomination). The film starts in a very exciting fight and chase scene, but the rest of the film is not as high octane as the opening scene, which is good as it really lets you get to see the characters properly. While most of the old Bond films have him going to exotic places to get the bad guy, Skyfall spends most of its run time in England, and the end of the film in Scotland, again, perfect for the 50th anniversary thing they had going, the scenes outside of England are just as good as ever, particularly the scenes in Shanghai, containing some of the best cinematography I have ever seen. This is not found only in Shanghai, for one of the film's crowning glories is how beautifully shot it really is. On the 50th anniversary topic, several nods are made to what happened in the older films: a lot of these, sadly, went over my head, as I have not seen many Bond films at all. It does deal with the timeline as well as it could, showing an old institution, which is changing with the times, but sticking to its roots was a fine indication of where the series is headed in the future. Exciting, beautiful, tense and disturbing can all be used to describe Skyfall, whose only problem in my book is that the final showdown was a little lackluster in places compared to the rest of the film, helped only by Silva's creepy arrival. The best Bond film? Perhaps. 92/100. Expand
  67. 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 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
  68. 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.
  69. 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 negative things about it!!!I know it was Bond anniversary but the movie sucked either way!! Expand
  70. Nov 14, 2012
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. In a word, disappointing. Javier Bardem's character had the potential to be one of the most memorable villains in the franchise. After his introduction you really felt this was going to get good. Smart, charismatic, and the resources to take over the world. Instead we get this creepy guy's confusing witch hunt to kill M (? Why not just blow her up??). Just bizarre that we are expected to root for characters like Bond and M, when we literally have no reason to. He's a dick and she's a **** The hot bond girl featured in all the commercials has like a 10 minute spot. Where is the evil Bond girl? As people here have already stated, if this wasn't a Bond movie it would be alright. I could buy the betrayal, revenge plot but as a Bond movie it was missing almost every ingredient. Finally, my ears are still bleeding from that awful intro song. Expand
  71. Nov 10, 2012
    10
    Skyfall eclipses Quantum of Solace, and redeems the franchise under Craig as Bond. From the opening featuring Adele to the Finale, I recommend this to anyone who likes films: whether they be suave, bad-ass, or generally a good movie. Mendes directs this film with such style and prowess that it feels like simply an incredible film from the beginning. The witt with Q, to Javier Bardem, whom it seems is evil because of how incredibly he portrays his roles. I went to this to see Bond, but I came out seeing a great story about Bond, M, and Silva, whom I believe is one of the best villains in the Bond series ever. I was a massive fan of Casino Royale, which I truly thought was the best bond film since Dr. No, but I wholeheartedly that, in story-telling and style, Skyfall eclipsed Craig's first outing as Bond, but Casino Royale will always be one of my favorite movies. A nod to Mendes, who carried the Suave torch to another feat of greatness, with hopefully several more to come with one of the best bond's ever. Expand
  72. Nov 9, 2012
    9
    Thank God I can finally give my review, I watched this two weeks ago in UK and I still stand by my comment, this is the best Bond ever. I finds this due to the amazing characterisation giving us the some classic and brand new Bond characters that we care about and want to see more of. Between these great characters there is also great chemistry, old and new. What is possibly the movie's greatest characteristic is the amazing cinematography, especially in the Shanghai scene which looks absolutely gorgeous and very memorable. Finally it contains some of the best scenes of all time in my opinion, one involving a certain classic Bond car. In the end Skyfall is a very funny, action packed and extremely memorable and enjoyable movie that is also emotionally involving with a more personal story line. Bond is Back and it looks like he is here to stay. Expand
  73. 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.
  74. Nov 11, 2012
    10
    This seems to be a love it or hate it movie, with intelligent people loving it and unintelligent people hating it. Skyfall was the best movie experience I've had all year. It was infinitely better than QoS and it restored my faith in the franchise. Craig is set for a further two Bond movies and personally I can't wait.
  75. Nov 12, 2012
    7
    After watching Skyfall, I couldn't really make up my mind... It was quite a good movie and I enjoyed R. Fiennes & J. Bardem's performances. But wasn't it a bit far fetched to show a Bond going downhill before all the other adventures are supposed to happen?? And honestly, the last stand in the parents' countryside house! That wasn't really something new, wasn't it? I feel that there's a real complacency from some directors regarding their scenario. PLEASE : don't make so many movies and WORK on them a bit longer! Nobody said that because it is an action movie you have to botch the story... Expand
  76. Nov 26, 2012
    0
    Skyfall was horrible; They made Javier Bardem which was a total bad ass in "No Country for Old Men" a homosexual and when he put the moves on James Bond (Daniel Craig) Bond said " who hasn't said I haven't done this before?" implying that Bond is bisexual!!!! They totally killed Bond as he was in "Casino Royale" when Craig reinvented Bond as a cut throat. Now he is reverting back to the old Bond that says cheesy lines in a totally predictable brainless story. How lame!!!!! My score for this movie would be a negative, I loved Daniel Craig as Bond in Casino Royale,but Quantum of Solace was a joke,and Skyfall killed Bond Expand
  77. Dec 13, 2012
    0
    I have no idea how Roger Ebert gave this film a perfect score. Perhaps he and Daniel Craig buy their Metamucil at the same store. The plot of this film is absolutely atrocious. A rogue MI6 operative that can impose any diabolical plan he desires using the almighty power of the internet? James Bond was portrayed as a washed up old man, more fit to be sitting on a bar stool singing along to Bruce Springsteen's "Glory Days" then saving the world. The only hope for the Bond series is the fact that this movie was unrecognizable as a James Bond film and is easily forgotten. Expand
  78. Jan 8, 2013
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Very disappointing. I expect my filmed entertainment to at least try to have some credibility. Skyfall has a series of wonderful action pieces held together by the most flimsy plot imaginable. Totally ruined for me by the silly computer graphics, schoolboy 'Q', and complete nonsense of a villain who spends millions (and razes an island?) just to 'get back at M'? A villain who can forecast years ahead exactly when an underground train is going to be on top of his bomb? Londoners can't forecast where trains are going to be in 10 minutes!

    Blowing up a major building in London by computer? Bond scurrying off to Scotland via a route that only the villain can work out? Bond's old retainer still hanging around the family home whilst it is sold and falls apart around him?

    Sorry- no credibility at all and the wonderful opening simply did not make up for the awful plot.
    Expand
  79. Jan 13, 2013
    0
    My wife loves JB films and shootem ups with chase scenes. Even she rates this film a zero. March of the Penguins has more character and plot development than Skyfall. I could really feel for the penguins; I have no feelings for the characters in Skyfall.
  80. Jan 15, 2013
    10
    As a huge Bond-fan, especially of the last three, I thought this was by far the best ever. The amazing pictures, the fantastic bad guy and the great new additions to the cast, the entertaining story and above all the fabulous Daniel Craig who nails his role even better then in the previous 2 parts. And, girls, Daniel Craig is just hot! With just a towel around his hips it's difficult to focus on the movie so I went to see this movie for three times in the cinema now and still I could see it again. Expand
  81. Nov 9, 2012
    9
    Skyfall is another incredible movie for 2012. After Batman, this is probably my favorite movie this year. The action scenes are incredible, the villain is incredible, the music is incredible and best of all the story, this time, is much better developed. After the overly complicated story of Quantum of Solace, Skyfall simplifies things for the better flourishing its elegance and style to maximum heights. Daniel Craig once again does an incredible job as Bond, performing extraordinary in all of the different levels of emotions that this film's Bond demands. Javier Bardem as Silva also makes for a funny and very memorable villain. Overall Skyfall takes some interesting routes that were never expected or done in other 007 movies, and so, ultimately ends up being a very enjoyable and a fresh ride. With Casino Royale and this, Craig's Bond is growing into being the best ever. Expand
  82. Nov 11, 2012
    9
    This was definitely one of my favourite bond movies it gives a very interesting story that keeps the audiences attention. there was alot more character development especially between Bond and M and i would definitely reccomend this movie especially to bond fans.
  83. 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 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
  84. Nov 11, 2012
    9
    Admittedly, I've only watched a few Peirce Bronson Bond films as a young child and then Daniel Craig's additions to the franchise, so I am not exactly a scholar of the Bond films but I do enjoy them. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. The acting was superb and Javier Bardeem had me smiling a few times. The villain he plays is just insane and he does such a great job portraying that villain in such a way that you kind of forget that the thing's he's doing are a bit unrealistic. Overall a great movie. Expand
  85. Nov 13, 2012
    7
    Although this isn't a great film, it is certainly better than the "Quantum of Solace" bore-fest. It starts out with the ubiquitous car/motorcycle chase we've seen in a thousand movies, then has the two people fighting on top of a moving train we've seen in a thousand more movies. In fact, there is nothing really that original in the entire movie. Even the casino scene has a pit with a Gila Monster in it that will remind you of a Star Wars movie. I would rate the movie a "5", but Javier Bardem is SO good as the bad guy he immediately elevates the movie with his presence. He is quickly becoming a favorite actor of mine. The movie never bored me because it is so action packed, so I have to give it a pass. I saw it in IMAX and this is one of the loudest movies I have seen in awhile. So far the Daniel Craig Bond movies have been missing the humor of the older Bond films, instead focusing on action and drama. They come across as a "superhero" movie instead of an espionage thriller to me. Expand
  86. Nov 10, 2012
    9
    I can see why it may have negative comments. Granted it wasn't the roller coaster of the old style, but we know that the Daniel Craig ones aren't in the same mold. What we do know is that the new clutch of movies are a little harder, a little grittier and indeed actually show Bond to have a personality. All this aside it is very clear that they are intending to move the series back in the direction of the older movies .....not just to keep the old fans happy but also to bring back classic elements that made Bond so quirky in the first place . Bringing Money-penny and Q back into it are a clear indication that the new movies will meet the old ones somewhere in the middle. In regards to the script , it was well paced , but the old house scene was a little too long and drawn out. The movie also concentrated a lot on M's character and whether the Agency her and Bond worked for is a necessity anymore. I'm not used to the political side of Bond but I think it was necessary in order to set the next movie in place without any unanswered questions and loose ends. Overall tho, very good. Not the best Bond ( Goldeneye is the best for me ) but certainly a great effort with a contemporary feel, yet still holding onto and promising more classic action of the old era. Expand
  87. Nov 14, 2012
    8
    an easy review. If you like Bond films, then you will like this one. If not, then likewise probably not. Its a fun, engaging and suspense-filled romp, not to be taken too seriously. the really nice thing is that DC finally does bond properly - cold blooded womanising 60's style Connery-bond. Huzzah. that's what we watch it for. It also shows its easy to make a bond film - forget subtext - just et some hotties, a really good baddie and a decent bond, weave in some fights and a bit of politically enfused drama and bosh. 8/10 easy peasy. Well don eall round, probably almost up there with Goldeneye, and the "classics". Expand
  88. Nov 13, 2012
    5
    Unsatisfactory and underwhelming. sadasdasdasdsadasdsadasafasfsdafsaasssdgsdsdgaasdfsdafdasfsadfasdfsadfsafasdfasdfasasfafafassadasdfsadsadfdaasfaafas
  89. Nov 10, 2012
    9
    Skyfall is wonderful, is visually lovely and the sound is brilliant. Javier Bardem gives one of his best performances and should get his 4 oscar nomination. I think acceptance among those who saw it was unanimous and it shows that this film is a success.
  90. Feb 12, 2013
    0
    Unbelievable. I have never seen a movie theatre that quiet. You could literally hear people think 'my god, WTF is this It's like the filmmakers thought 'how can we make every dialogue and every scene as bad as possible, and every character as unlikeable as possible ?'.
    The nerd at MI6 tops it off.
  91. Nov 10, 2012
    9
    I think when it comes to bond movies you think action suspense and cool gadgets. This movie had me glued and walked out happy. I'm not a huge bond fan but the guy from no country for old men the bad guy I forget his name. He was amazing in this movie.
  92. MB_
    Nov 25, 2012
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Why didn't the badguy just kill Q at home or when he exploded her headquarters? Why didn't Bond ask for a doctor to remove the fragments rather than using a knife and his left hand? Why didn't the bad guy just kill bond, what did he want him for? Why didn't they just hide in the tunnel as the bad guy didn't know it existed? Why did the priest hole lead to no where? Why did Bond walk over the ice when everyone else went around? Where did the ice henchman appear from? Why did Q plug the bad guy's PC into the network rather than an isolated PC? Why did they lock the badguy in a glass room which is locked electronically rather than just use a padlock? When did Bond set off the radio beacon on the island and why didn't the electronics mastermind badguy not have him checked? When did the badguy put the explosives on the roof of the chamber letting the train through, wouldn't he have used his time better, running away? Why didn't they just withdraw all the at risk agents? Why didn't bond shoot him at any point, he'd be tortured for months by the Chinese why would he talk to them? Why was there more screen time dedicated to Judi Dench than for Daniel Craig? Why did bond's face change from Brosnan to Craig yet M's is still Dench? Why would you cut up a perfectly good opening action scene to an old woman moaning in an office ever 30 seconds? Can I get a refund? Expand
  93. Nov 29, 2012
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The worst of the Daniel Craig James Bond films. The treadbare plot seems designed so specifically to kill off Judi Dench's character that I wonder if she wanted out. It could have been interesting, but it wasn't. Javier Bardem's flamboyant gay super-genius-criminal-mastermind was decidedly unrealistic in every way. The parts in all the trailers where James Bond gets shot? He comes back 5 minutes later after apparently living in some Caribbean paradise for three weeks and has lost all his skills. But don't worry, it doesn't make any difference at all. He still kills all the baddies (despite not being able to shoot accurately) and manages to hold on to an elevator that ascends a high-rise building (despite failing all his physical exams). In fact, ALL the best bits from the trailers have zero relevance to the film. The word association clip? Zero relevance. Bond's "death"? Zero relevance. "Skyfall"? Zero relevance. This sort of shoddy writing makes you wonder how easy it is to get a job in Hollywood, because clearly no skill is required. The production is obviously very expensive, and the pace slow. This wouldn't be a bad thing if it wasn't a crap film. Alas. But it doesn't end there. The name of the film: Skyfall? Sounds interesting, huh? It has absolutely nothing to do with the plot of the film (the final location is a property named "Skyfall" that apparently Bond's parents owned) which is functionally pointless other than being a cool film name. Traditionally, James Bond films have had outlandish plots: that's part of the franchise. Moonraker had a evil genius stealing satellites; Casino Royale pinned the fate of the free world on a game of Texan Hold 'em poker; GoldenEye had a space laser. Skyfall has an insipid title track by Adele, a lame villain, and a lifeless, dull plot. This was supposed to be the 50th anniversary. What an insult. Expand
  94. Nov 9, 2012
    10
    Possibly the best bond movie ever - and I have seen all the other ones. It is good exactly because it is nothing like the other ones. This movie feels more like a Die Hard (part 1) than a Bond flick. Believable storyline, forward looking and modern script and awesome direction. Daniel Craig has totally redeemed himself on this one. I always looked at him as too gruff to suit the Bond character, but this role demanded exactly that rough exterior and could not have been done by anyone else (with the possible exception of Sean Connery)

    If I tried (really hard) to find fault with it, all I could say is, its rather long! But an all around awesome movie ...
    Expand
  95. Dec 8, 2012
    0
    WOW and to think I thought Lincoln was a little long and boring.......
    the critics high point reviews are an insult to us all...
    I'm really trying to think of some positives:
    Adele, the moto scene (whole movie downhill from there)
    thats it. thats all I can think of. oh yeah : it was good looking at times.
  96. Nov 9, 2012
    10
    This film is a rare action masterpiece
  97. Nov 10, 2012
    8
    Awesome Bond movie, arguably the best of the Craig Bond films. The story is really involving, the actors all give fine performance and Sam Mendes' direction is perfect. Skyfall outbeats Casino Royale and I wonder if Bond 24 will be better than Skyfall though I doubt it.
  98. Nov 19, 2012
    10
    The greatest Bond film ever, Skyfall is modern but at the same time a throwback to the old films. Javier Bardem excels in creating a brilliant villain as Raoul Silva, while Daniel Craig is amazing again as James Bond. The final third in my opinion shines, with a brilliant twist at the end to cap it off. All in all, not only has Sam Mendes succeeded in making a brilliant Bond film, he has smashed all expectations I had for this film. There is only one phrase I can say to describe this film. Simply Bond. James Bond. Here's to another 50 years! Expand
  99. Nov 10, 2012
    7
    I was so prepared to be blown away by this Bond movie and I am truly saddened to anknowledge its failure to live up to standard. From the very outset of the movie where it is clear that it will be nothing like its predecessors, Bond manages to underdeliver. At every turn throughout the movie I was expecting it to open up and become the high dollar escapist fare we are used to, with quick chases and explosions, great music and women. All of which were lacking in this film. Going back to basics is fine and dandy, but in this day and age when technology is everpresent and more powerful than ever, to take away the minor pleasure of Bonds futuristic spy technology is almost more than I can take. I mean is the movie not about the power of technology and its capability in our ever changing world. As I said earlier, I wanted to love this movie so much and watched it the night of its release, only to be dissapointed in the end. Everyone should make their own opinion and never take someone's word, but you should arrive knowing that this is a different Bond experience and therefore you should appreciate it differently.

    I on the other hand found it impossible to enjoy. Farwell Bond, I hope you find your way before next time.
    Expand
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.