User Score
7.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1403 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 23, 2012
    9
    I've been a Bond fan for quite some time, and consider Skyfall to be one of my favorite. Some of the scenes are a little long, but overall it was still scripted well. There was a little less action and gadgets than expected, but it's better than being over the top. I also enjoyed the subtle bits of comedy, which had most of the viewers in the cinema laughing. Definitely the best Bond filmI've been a Bond fan for quite some time, and consider Skyfall to be one of my favorite. Some of the scenes are a little long, but overall it was still scripted well. There was a little less action and gadgets than expected, but it's better than being over the top. I also enjoyed the subtle bits of comedy, which had most of the viewers in the cinema laughing. Definitely the best Bond film Daniel Craig has been cast in so far. Expand
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. Nov 9, 2012
    8
    Nothing short of excellent or, just to tone it down a tad: extremely good. As a non-Bond fan (meaning I never saw any of the previous Bond movies, just because I never really got curious about it), I feel I can recommend this to my fellow casual viewers without the faintest hesitation. I'm sure Bond fans will also find plenty to enjoy about Skyfall, but I can't venture into putting myselfNothing short of excellent or, just to tone it down a tad: extremely good. As a non-Bond fan (meaning I never saw any of the previous Bond movies, just because I never really got curious about it), I feel I can recommend this to my fellow casual viewers without the faintest hesitation. I'm sure Bond fans will also find plenty to enjoy about Skyfall, but I can't venture into putting myself in their shoes, as it wouldn't be quite honest. From a casual viewer's perspective though, let me reiterate: Skyfall is very, very good.

    From the superb credit sequence (coming, as it seems to be a well-established habit by now, after a pretty long opening sequence), with its retro and yet quite modern graphical style, to the not surprising but still quite well orchestrated ending, the movie has more to offer than you'd expect and is potentially well capable of pleasing different kinds of audience.

    To be honest, I didn't have very high expectations about the acting, which instead turned out to be first-class: Craig positively surprised me (now I know he's much more than the sexy, hunky, ladies-pleasing figurine he is also meant to be), and Bardem was just insanely good, as if the role (which may well be the case) was tailored right on him. Dench was also unquestionably an excellent choice, and I could go on praising basically the whole cast without fear of saying anything crazy.

    The story is well constructed; nothing particularly new to the genre, but it does always maintain the right pace, without holes, haste or dragging of any kind. The opening sequence had me hum with undisguised disappointment for quite a while (it's a long one), as it's basically a long, much filmic chase riddled with a plethora of unnecessary explosions and quite ludicrous "in the very nick of time" moments. Not to mention the abuse of "bloody" in the first dialogues ('cause yes, we get it's the smallest things that help create an atmosphere, but insisting too much on some will threaten to break the suspension of disbelief). This all had me strongly hope that wasn't what I went to see.

    Luckily, it wasn't. Not at all. Instead, I was treated with a fine, I'd say even classy, plot served with acumen and that touch of irony that, or at least so I am told, characterises the Bond movies as a series. Even I, as a non-fan, could appreciate a few nods to the long line of Bond gadgets from the older movies, gently touched on all along Skyfall. This never being too much, nor ever too blatant or insisting, and always done with a hint of irony, made a very good impression on me. And the fact that Skyfall doesn't take itself too seriously, though managing to remain "realistic" (or let's say plausible), is in my opinion one of the movie's big strengths.

    A brief mention is also due, I think, to the soundtrack. Though never stellar (and much less effective if listened to off the movie), it manages to convey all it's supposed to in such a motion picture: tension when it's the case, a little distension at the right moments, and an overall sense of adventure, but on the classy and refined side. And the same be said about Adele's title song - again, from a non-fan but rather very casual listener: job very well done.

    If someone had told me I'd be so pleased with a movie choice my girlfriend made (she got to pick it this time), I would've hardly believed it. Turns out she was so right I feel like I owe her something of a public apology. So here it is, and to all other readers I can't but give the banal advice: go see it, you won't regret it. And this is especially true (at least from my perspective) for non-fans, casual viewers, Bond first-timers, and all other conceivable categories falling out of the "Bond fan" tag.
    Expand
  5. Nov 24, 2012
    8
    With a simple but deep plot, back-to basics action and beautiful cinematography, this is probably the best Bond so far. Daniel Craig continues to present a gritty, bruised and human bond, Javier Bardem offers a sinister and intimidating adversary and Judi Dench is on top form calling the shots and making painful decisions. While the audience may have been left wanting more details from theWith a simple but deep plot, back-to basics action and beautiful cinematography, this is probably the best Bond so far. Daniel Craig continues to present a gritty, bruised and human bond, Javier Bardem offers a sinister and intimidating adversary and Judi Dench is on top form calling the shots and making painful decisions. While the audience may have been left wanting more details from the plot and back story, the simplicity allowed the mood and character of the film to come through. Expand
  6. Feb 20, 2013
    7
    Its different, about that there is no doubt. I myself thoroughly enjoyed it. JB movies have always been anchored in the here and now, always tackling current affairs and issue's and in that it doesn't fail. I can understand the people who disliked it and their reasons for disliking it. But in this current iteration of movies starring Daniel Craig, who has grown on me 10 fold afterIts different, about that there is no doubt. I myself thoroughly enjoyed it. JB movies have always been anchored in the here and now, always tackling current affairs and issue's and in that it doesn't fail. I can understand the people who disliked it and their reasons for disliking it. But in this current iteration of movies starring Daniel Craig, who has grown on me 10 fold after watching this, I feel this movie is well placed. Its almost like a new start for the series without giving away any spoilers for those who haven't seen it. The whole film has a real understated and dare I say it 'realistic' sense to it. Sam Mendes is a great director and I for one really like the direction he has taken with this even in comparison to Casino and Quantam. Watch it for yourselves if you haven't seen it. One thing is absolutely for sure...its better than Quantam of solace.!! Expand
  7. 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.
  8. 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
  9. 4DI
    Nov 18, 2012
    9
    Mixes up the bond formula in a good way.
  10. 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 everLeft 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
  11. 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'sThank 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
  12. Dec 3, 2012
    6
    don't know what movie those people claiming its the best bond yet where watching but it was not skyfall. well Skyfall does have its moments of that Bond felling it tends to go towards what you would expect a action pack CIA movie. rally uses any gadgets and his big one is a gun! really a gun that only shoots if Bond holds it. lame. overall Id give this movie a 6 out of 10. if it did notdon't know what movie those people claiming its the best bond yet where watching but it was not skyfall. well Skyfall does have its moments of that Bond felling it tends to go towards what you would expect a action pack CIA movie. rally uses any gadgets and his big one is a gun! really a gun that only shoots if Bond holds it. lame. overall Id give this movie a 6 out of 10. if it did not have the bond title in it and was ratting it as far as action movies go I would give it an 8. good thing though is I think its the best out of the Craig bonds. Expand
  13. Nov 16, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Overall, Skyfall was enjoyable, visually stunning at times, and Daniel Craig continues to be a top-notch Bond. All of that being said, I was a little let down plot wise. I really, really liked Javier Bardem's character but was constantly disappointed with how the script played out his actions. He's a supposed cyber genius, and his mastermind plot was (at one point) to enter a major courthouse dressed as a cop and shoot it up with a glock and two goons? Also, I loved the idea of his character revealing 5 new agents a week (similar to the Joker's plan in the Dark Knight when he killed someone every day) but this part of the story was dropped completely! By the end, the townhouse "Homealone-esch" showdown really seemed forced to me. I like the idea of disarming Bond and leaving him with only a knife, a pistol, and his creativity but I really didn't understand why they couldn't at least call in for some undercover backup at the farmhouse and overall it just seemed like a pretty sketchy plan considering it was crafted by the head of M16 and one of her best agents...I went into this movie just wanting to enjoy a good Bond flick and ultimately I would say I did but throughout I was scratching my head at some of the plot choice and by the end couldn't help but feel a little letdown. Expand
  14. Nov 9, 2012
    8
    007 movies were always solid, that does exactly the same.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. Nov 9, 2012
    9
    A really well done film, with a corny "Home Alone" ending. Had a great mix of classic 'Bond' elements with a modern variation. I particularly enjoyed Q, though the lack of a bond girl was a bit of a let down. Overall, highly recommended but not a perfect 10.
  18. 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
  19. Nov 9, 2012
    8
    It's a nice friend to see with your friends. Pretty nice and thrilling. The only drawback is that it tries a little too hard to be serious. Probably should have stuck with more action.
  20. 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)
    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.
    Expand
  21. 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 shownThere 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
  22. Nov 10, 2012
    4
    It's a return to the classic, campy Bond movies. I didn't know that going in, and was disappointed when walking out.

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

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

    I love the classic Bond movies, and think that this movie is very much in line with those. With that said, my reasoning for such a harsh rating is that the previous two movies had taken Bond in such a vibrant direction, and it is so disappointing to see the series regress.
    Expand
  23. 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.
  24. 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.
  25. Nov 10, 2012
    10
    Best bond film yet. Pays tribute to all of the other ones with a game change in plot and action. Unpredictable, dramatic, fresh, and nostalgic at the same time. Great movie!
  26. Nov 10, 2012
    6
    Firstly, and this isn't a spoiler, but when James Bond and Kincaide are out practicing shooting, didn't Kincaide have two black labrador dogs by his side? You never saw them again - what happened to them? OK, summary - not the best JB movie, but not the worst. It was more like a suspense movie with some action sequences thrown in, with the best one right at the beginning, which wasFirstly, and this isn't a spoiler, but when James Bond and Kincaide are out practicing shooting, didn't Kincaide have two black labrador dogs by his side? You never saw them again - what happened to them? OK, summary - not the best JB movie, but not the worst. It was more like a suspense movie with some action sequences thrown in, with the best one right at the beginning, which was outstanding - like "Taken 2", it seems that the rooftops in Istanbul are irresistible to goodies and baddies chasing each other either on foot or on motorbikes. It was a great scene and a great opening.

    As for the film in general, there was WAY too much talking, way too much focus on M, in fact, it seemed more like a movie about HER with JB as her sidekick. Way too many closeups - we don't need to see their pores or every wrinkle - back up a little please, it didn't add anything to the movie, and if anything detracted from it. It was hard to believe this was a JB movie - I remember the days when it was FUN going to see a JB movie, you were taken out of your world, shown gadgets that were beyond your imagination, people were out to take over the world, and JB was the hero who was never affected by anything, maybe he got a few scrapes and bruises but he never got shot or tortured, he was always after the most beautiful girl in the room, and was, it seemed, invincible. THAT"S the JB I want to see - I don't want to be presented with a movie where they're trying to make him real, make the audience relate to him or understand him or feel sorry for him, or have him age (poorly I might add)0 - I want escapism, I want to know that a forever-youthful or at least non-aging JB will save the world and only have a scratch on his face for all his efforts, after using countless gadgets that we in the real world couldn't even dream of - and I think that these JB movies have lost their way in this regard. There were so many holes in this plot too - how did the villain escape out of that glass enclosure, for example? One minute he's in there, obviously more securely encased than Hannibel Lector in his cage - next thing he's out and free with two dead guards on the ground, and yet we don't know how he escaped. So poorly done. I was so disappointed that the grand finale was simply a gunfight - yes, a helicopter was involved and it was well filmed, but still - just a gun fight? Nothing clever or James Bondish or "MI6" ish at all - just guns and explosives, like any group of baddies in an action film - and throughout the film, the most exciting gadgets that were introduced were a gun that would only fire if JB held it (the handle was palm-print sensitive - but worse than that, it didn't blow up if someone else tried to fire it - all that happened was that it wouldn't work - I mean, how unimaginative is that?) and a small "radio" that gave off JB's location if he pressed a button. Futuristic? Creative? A gadget JB would be proud of? I think not. I must admit that the movie wasn't as bad as I thought it would be (after having read the pretty awful reviews), but as I already wrote, there was far too much talking, far too few action scenes and far too much focus on M. JB seemed to struggle in this, and yeah yeah yeah, blah blah blah about him getting old, but we don't go to JB to see an aging actor or agent struggling to keep up - I'm going for some escapism! Some wild, fun excitement and a glimpse into a secret department that has top of the line weapons and gadgets to use against the forces of evil. I don't want to know that the best they can do is a palm-printed gun that only fires when JB holds it. I mean, come on, can't you do better than that?
    I also must say that if I had seen it in a regular movie theater, I would have given it a 4 out of 10. I saw it in 2D at the Imax, with a massive screen and great sound - so that definitely added to it, which is why I gave it a 6. This was no JB movie to me, it was a suspense movie with some action shots, it didn't even have the same amount of action as a "Bourne Identity" type movie - there was some bad acting, too much talking (in case you missed that, there is a LOT of talking), very little in the way of thrills, too much focus on M, too many closeups, some amazing scenery, and Daniel Craig struggling to make it through. He tried, but I think it was very average. Next week I will have forgotten all about it. Heck, by tomorrow morning I will have forgotten about it. JB deserves better.
    Expand
  27. 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
  28. 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.
  29. Nov 11, 2012
    10
    This was just a simply amazing bond film. Sam Mendes we need you back for the next installment. The writing, cinematography and acting was to perfection.
  30. Nov 11, 2012
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Definitely!, not that expect many people! Slow tempo,usual scenario and not have powerful ending! if wasn't Javier bardem the value of movie would have fallen much more! Expand
  31. 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
  32. 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
  33. 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.
  34. Nov 13, 2012
    7
    Enjoyable but the rest of the film never quite keeps pace with the first 15-20 minutes. It just felt like it was lacking that brutality that Casino Royale had bags of and there were flashes where it seemed Daniel Craig had been taking "Cheese Lessons" from Pierce Brosnan. After leaving the cinema I was satisfied due to the fact that it got better towards the end but it was just too slowEnjoyable but the rest of the film never quite keeps pace with the first 15-20 minutes. It just felt like it was lacking that brutality that Casino Royale had bags of and there were flashes where it seemed Daniel Craig had been taking "Cheese Lessons" from Pierce Brosnan. After leaving the cinema I was satisfied due to the fact that it got better towards the end but it was just too slow for far too long during the middle. I still think Craig is the best Bond there's been and I'm looking forward to the next 2 films. Expand
  35. Nov 12, 2012
    5
    Skyfall, as all James Bond films have, this one also is trending around. The film even loved the product prices by 0,07%. However, can the 007 recover from it's horrible video game prequels?___ I will begin with the good stuff. First of all, great Bond character by Daniel Craig. I just wish his story in the film, had not began with a gigantic plot-hole. The camera work is smooth and theSkyfall, as all James Bond films have, this one also is trending around. The film even loved the product prices by 0,07%. However, can the 007 recover from it's horrible video game prequels?___ I will begin with the good stuff. First of all, great Bond character by Daniel Craig. I just wish his story in the film, had not began with a gigantic plot-hole. The camera work is smooth and the action scenes cannot be ignored. Also the humour is still there.___ Now, sadly, the longest part of the review. The bad stuff. The main plot is an unsuccessful depiction of modern communication and it's roll in war on terror. We also have M, who keeps messing up in every James Bond film. The annoying plot-holes and M's ''smart'' decisions aren't even close to the main villain of this year's film. Behold, a walking plot-hole that has just escaped from a mental facility, Raoul Silva! A villain's first appearance is important... as is his two minutes walk towards Bond, that makes you fall asleep. This guy truly can predict anything and I mean ANYTHING. Whatever he touches immediately turns into a plot-hole. Everything he does is by style, that screws up every plan, at the last second. The creators even removed a scene, so they could hide this man's plot-hole skills.___ Overall the film is mediocre. I just wonder what other villains are brewing in the next 007 film and what storyline are we going to experience next, hopefully better than this one. Expand
  36. Nov 12, 2012
    10
    A wonderful combination of perfect acting on Craig's part, and the great action scenes as well as an engaging plot, not to mention Adele's brilliance in the movie's title song made the whole movie a delight from start to finish.
  37. Nov 13, 2012
    10
    Let's be honest here - nobody watches a Bond film for the story. People watch Bond films for the non-stop action, breathtaking locales, and the eccentric villains. With this in mind, one would think that Skyfall would be a recipe for disaster or, at least, a far cry from previous installations in the series. Well, it turns out that Skyfall is really only the latter, as director Sam MendesLet's be honest here - nobody watches a Bond film for the story. People watch Bond films for the non-stop action, breathtaking locales, and the eccentric villains. With this in mind, one would think that Skyfall would be a recipe for disaster or, at least, a far cry from previous installations in the series. Well, it turns out that Skyfall is really only the latter, as director Sam Mendes plays with the formula to create one of the most satisfying and surprisingly touching films of 2012.
    Almost every component of Skyfall seems to defy the typical Bond canon, which certainly isn't a terrible thing. While Bond later takes a detour in Macau, the entirety of the film is practically set in the British Isles, placing an emphasis on a conflict that primarily takes place in proximity to the MI6 Headquarters. Villain Raoul Silva, played by Javier Bardem, is certainly more eccentric in comparison to the antagonists in Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. Skyfall also seems to ditch the Bond girl archetype this time around, placing James' troubled but close relationship with M in the spotlight. With the addition of all these factors and an inexperienced, young Q, the film almost feels like another reboot of the entire series, even though Casino Royale was only released 6 years ago.
    If one expected Skyfall to be a film that only focused on the action, that man or woman would be quite wrong. The film feels unexpectedly character-driven, and almost every scene seems deliberate and integral to the story. Of course, it certainly doesn't lack on the action department, as each sequence is brilliantly choreographed and equally thrilling to watch. Don't be surprised to chuckle a bit too, as there is a fair share of light banter among the cast. Ultimately, everything about the film feels so wonderfully put together, that it's difficult to criticize any of its minor shortcomings.
    In a way, Skyfall is a story of fate - it's hard to say that the spy life is all perfect, and it's only inevitable that one's past will get in the way of moving on. This becomes quite apparent in the film's final hour which, may I say, feels both satisfying and painful to watch. Perhaps it's because I've grown to love a certain character so much, but watching the climax of the film certainly allowed me to respect the actors/actresses' performances even more.
    There's something about Skyfall that seems different from most Bond films. It certainly isn't because of its rather lengthy run time, or the "Dark Knight-esque" atmosphere that pervades the second third of the film. It's because Skyfall has something that most arguably lack: a heart. Each and every actor and actress in the film give great performances throughout, and with the inclusion of Javier Bardem playing one of the most psychotic and notable antagonists in recent memory, the film immediately feels more distinct and remarkable.
    Could Skyfall possibly be the best Bond film of all time? Quite possibly, yes. Nothing about this film feels lacking and the only complaint that I would make is that some characters could have had a little more time on screen. (Eve and Kincade in particular) This is certainly one film that is worth the price of admission, and it should further cement Craig's reputation as one of the best Bonds in the entire film series.
    Expand
  38. 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
  39. Nov 14, 2012
    6
    I wouldnt say it was the best Bond movie, however it is worth watching. I do hate when the audience is taken advantage of. Let me explain.. opening sequence is seriously flawed, and full of holes (including Bond!) However they writer/directer really made the ending quite obvious, and somewhat predictable. There are many positives however, Javier Bardem was quite good, and very unlikeableI wouldnt say it was the best Bond movie, however it is worth watching. I do hate when the audience is taken advantage of. Let me explain.. opening sequence is seriously flawed, and full of holes (including Bond!) However they writer/directer really made the ending quite obvious, and somewhat predictable. There are many positives however, Javier Bardem was quite good, and very unlikeable (clearly as most villains should be) I was let down however by the pace of the film. Quite long, and at times quiet and boring. Dame Denche is great as usual. Some complain about the re-introduction of the traditional bond elements.. as this was clearly and anniversary film, I think its quite appropriate... however, lets hope that's where it stops. Decent movie all around, but just not great. Expand
  40. Nov 18, 2012
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I went into this movie expecting "the best bond movie yet" and what I got was far from that. The story line is horrid and for most of the story to even take place we have to accept that even though the characters are supposed to be the best and brightest England has to offer, they make some of the worst choices possible. 1.) The British government compiles a list of every nations undercover agents real names, puts said list on a laptop that some how finds it's way to Istanbul. - Really? MI6 is smart enough acquire that information but dumb enough to put it on a laptop and let it get out in the open? 2.) The villain is introduced as a genius computer hacker with some brilliant strategic skills. This might be true in the very beginning but quickly disappears. Rather than just shoot Bond and be rid of him, he blows a hole in the ceiling so that a subway train will coming crashing in and maybe kill Bond. - I thought we were past the days of "let's try to kill him with some crazy method where we don't actually see him die". Because that method works so well.... 3.) Q claims to also be a genius with computers but then he goes and connects the villain's laptop to their network which just so happens to also be running the security system. - Worst part of the movie for me was this moment because the second they connect his laptop you already know it'll have some "virus" that takes everything down in a matter of seconds thus freeing the villain.

    Save yourself the time and money, go see something else.
    Expand
  41. 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
  42. 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 wasWhat 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
  43. Nov 23, 2012
    5
    Bond has been hit by a fallen meteor. Disappointing for a Bond film- strained and very unrealistic plot with another crazed unbelievable villain, But good on-location photography.
  44. Nov 24, 2012
    4
    I really didn't enjoy Skyfall. Some elements were good, but I felt it was too bland. Basically Bourne but with a bit more class. Why must they cut out the cool gadgets / glamour? What drew me to Bond in the first place was the escapism and fantasy elements. This is too real world, too much like a stock standard action film.
  45. Nov 25, 2012
    2
    James Bond films are iconic not just for adventure also for the beautiful bevy of Bond girls that act as sirens to our beloved 007. Skyfall has taken the newest profession of its featured Bond girl in this film to an all time low. The beautiful heroin is actually a victim of human bondage. This practice is repugnant enough, but to show case this exploitation of women as sexy; isJames Bond films are iconic not just for adventure also for the beautiful bevy of Bond girls that act as sirens to our beloved 007. Skyfall has taken the newest profession of its featured Bond girl in this film to an all time low. The beautiful heroin is actually a victim of human bondage. This practice is repugnant enough, but to show case this exploitation of women as sexy; is blatantly disrespectful to all women, especially to those who suffer under these very real and very deplorable living conditions.
    The audience quickly discovers that this damsel in distress; is actually and quite literally the branded property, of the antagonist in Skyfall. The heroic Bond promises the very terrified woman that he will avenge her captors and in the following scene successfully dukes it out with several of the antagonist henchman. In the next scene 007 slips comfortably into the shower with the woman in bondage and proceeds to sleep with her. No woman alive can resist the charming allure of James Bond! This theme has been resonated in every Bond film since it
    Expand
  46. Nov 25, 2012
    7
    I saw Skyfall this afternoon. I'm giving it a "thumbs up" - but I am not nearly as enthused as a lot of other people.

    Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed this film and think it is a decent 007 movie, but honestly, I don't think it stands out from the pack. I had high hopes because I've read a few spoiler-free reviews, and it was getting a lot of praise. "The best Bond movie in years", "The
    I saw Skyfall this afternoon. I'm giving it a "thumbs up" - but I am not nearly as enthused as a lot of other people.

    Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed this film and think it is a decent 007 movie, but honestly, I don't think it stands out from the pack. I had high hopes because I've read a few spoiler-free reviews, and it was getting a lot of praise.
    "The best Bond movie in years", "The best 007 flick since Goldfinger", "Maybe the best Bond ever", etc.

    I dunno. The first half of the movie was pretty good, though I can't say it was anything above the average. The movie concludes with the obligatory "fortress shoot-out", and although there was a bit of a twist here, it was again good but not special.

    Both Daniel Craig and Judy Dench were actually quite good, and breathed some real life into their characters. I think the thing that really let me down was the villainous character played by Javier Bardem. I just don't think the character's motivation for his actions was all that great; he seemed to go to a freaking enormous amount of convoluted effort to try to accomplish what seemed like a very straight-forward and simplistic goal.

    Meh. I liked it but I didn't love it. I give it a 7 out of 10. I honestly think Casino Royale was a better Bond movie.
    Expand
  47. 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 theSkyfall 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
  48. 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 differentThe 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
  49. Nov 27, 2012
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Anyone who believes this is a good Bond Movie is an Odd Job. And probably likes the musical 'We will Rock You'. Average action to open, silly effete bad guy (let's make him camp!) with lack of ambition and overbite, (didn't they used to want to take over the world?) washed down with a terrible clunky script. Why? - because it borrows so heavily from other films: Hannibal Lecter cage from Silence of the Lambs; shotguns and courduroy jackets and country from Bourne; dead parents from Harry Potter. Ridiculous dialogue: Albert Finney: "I was born ready!" - really! Silly denouement: Bardem arrives with heavies majically out of thin air and M has no security save for Bond who kills a helicopter with a calor gas cannister. No glamour, no charachter arc for sexy women - only M who completely forgets all her training and waves a bad guy in with a white hankie. No bad guy characters introduced around main Bardem charachter (no Odd Job) 'Ext. Skyfall - Night: Lots of bad guys wander down sepia tinted countryside looking for a tosser and his mum and a poacher so they can kill him. They all die in BBQ accident.'

    Stupid and unsophisticated with schlocky ending that betrays Bond cool. His parents grave - and mum named Delacroix - and what -what- what! Stupid moments: Bond chasing Bardem in Z Cars outfit and crashing train pointlessly into underground. This is not a Bond Movie. It's a Blonde movie made by people with a schedule. Skyfall House - that really made me laugh... as if.
    Expand
  50. Nov 28, 2012
    9
    Sam Mendes is most renowned for his outstanding work in romantic, dramatic films though in the Christopher Nolan inspired new James Bond sensation
  51. Nov 30, 2012
    5
    Disappointing. Loved Casino Royale 's realism, but this was like watching a Batman movie with an arch villain and bumbling Secret Service except for Bond.
  52. Dec 3, 2012
    0
    Skyfall's greatest failure? Depicting James Bond as both a physical and emotional cripple. I go to see a Bond movie because I want to see Bond kicking ass, while sipping a martini, with bikini-glad girls at his side. I do not go to see a Bond movie to witness a midlife crisis and angst.

    This is the worst Bond movie ever made. Don't believe the hype. The reason this film has the most
    Skyfall's greatest failure? Depicting James Bond as both a physical and emotional cripple. I go to see a Bond movie because I want to see Bond kicking ass, while sipping a martini, with bikini-glad girls at his side. I do not go to see a Bond movie to witness a midlife crisis and angst.

    This is the worst Bond movie ever made. Don't believe the hype. The reason this film has the most hype out of any Bond movie ever released is because it is horrendous and they need to make their money before negative word of mouth sinks it.
    Expand
  53. Dec 2, 2012
    1
    I like most Bond fans was looking forward to this latest installment, but was left bewildered and disappointed. Yes I know that with these type of films one shouldn't analyze too much and just enjoy the escapism from reality. Seriously this film had so many flaws and just plain stupid moments that just belied belief. If your going to go with a new direction when making a Bond movieI like most Bond fans was looking forward to this latest installment, but was left bewildered and disappointed. Yes I know that with these type of films one shouldn't analyze too much and just enjoy the escapism from reality. Seriously this film had so many flaws and just plain stupid moments that just belied belief. If your going to go with a new direction when making a Bond movie wouldn't you make it edgy and different. This was just plain dumb. I sat in Gold Class and couldn't wait for it to be over. What a shame. Expand
  54. Dec 5, 2012
    2
    nitpick of 4th December forgot to give a score. I reckon 2 will have to do..
    Too violent, too loud and too frazzled what with psychobabble being used to 'stiffen' the utter brutality of the anti-hero..
    PS. The 'hero', Craig, was totally devoid of charm and what elegance he possessed was superfluous.
    Broccoli team should retire in toto!!
  55. 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 toI 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
  56. Dec 14, 2012
    10
    Best Bond Movie Ever. It starts off as action pack as a bond movie can and makes sure to hit everything that a must. It's the 3rd act of the movie where is becomes something more and for the 1st time get to see Bond on a human level as we explore just a bit of his past in grand fashion.
  57. Dec 23, 2012
    8
    As a lifelong James Bond enthusiast who has been extremely disappointed with the franchise's latest efforts (with the exception of Casino Royale), I was extremely pleased with this film. It strayed away from the story line of the previous two films and I couldn't have been happier after the mediocrity of Quantum of Solace. This film has all the constituents from the Bond films that haveAs a lifelong James Bond enthusiast who has been extremely disappointed with the franchise's latest efforts (with the exception of Casino Royale), I was extremely pleased with this film. It strayed away from the story line of the previous two films and I couldn't have been happier after the mediocrity of Quantum of Solace. This film has all the constituents from the Bond films that have preceded it. Big explosions, ridiculous stunts that not a single person in the history of humanity can survive, and let's not forget to mention the beautiful women that would make both genders stop and stare. So what does Skyfall have that the other Bond films don Expand
  58. Dec 16, 2012
    2
    I did not care for this movie, which is disappointing because I loved the first Daniel Craig movie. This one however was just cheesy. The plot and situations were implausible, and so predictable. There was absolutely no suspense. I half expected Austin Powers to pop out at some point. To top it off, the movie drags on for 2 1/2 hours

    It was a return to the same tired old villain
    I did not care for this movie, which is disappointing because I loved the first Daniel Craig movie. This one however was just cheesy. The plot and situations were implausible, and so predictable. There was absolutely no suspense. I half expected Austin Powers to pop out at some point. To top it off, the movie drags on for 2 1/2 hours

    It was a return to the same tired old villain format: a mad genius who is unstoppable, who outsmarts MI6 at every turn. And what is Bond's brilliant plan to get one step ahead of him for a change? Why, flee to a remote location in Scotland with no weapons and no support, where he can be outnumbered 20 to 1 and outgunned by the bad guys. But, guess who wins anyway. Bond also regresses in terms of being portrayed as a human being. Here, he seems more like the evil terminator from T2. He behaves purely mechanically, unfeeling, driven by will alone. His lack of human qualities makes it hard to identify with him and root for him. I've watched Casino Royale at least a half dozen times, but nothing in this film would make me feel like ever watching it again.
    Expand
  59. Dec 19, 2012
    10
    I came out of Skyfall excited to tell people about it. A great movie on every level. I loved the nod to past bond history and the modern edge to the plot. My partner went along reluctantly and came out chattering about the best parts. Not to be missed.
  60. Dec 24, 2012
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. If I didn't know it was a Bond film I would have enjoyed it more. There was no 'light and shade' as in previous Bond movies. It was all too dark. What happened to the suave sophistication that Bond exudes...always 100% sure of himself. There were no 'tongue in cheek' snippets that always was a sign of a good Bond film. I missed the inventive gadgets that Q would provide. It was though the writers were trying to destroy the franchise by blowing up the Aston Martin and revealing Bonds past. Why destroy the mystique of Bond? I hope they return to the old format. There will always be plenty of Bourne Identities. Sorry 5/10. Expand
  61. Dec 28, 2012
    9
    One of the best portrayed, and entertaining 007 films I've seen. Skyfall is a two and a half hour long film that's worth watching. An excellent way to bring back earlier characters.
  62. Dec 30, 2012
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I started falling asleep not through lack of sleep and couldn't wait for it too end by the time they were at Skyfall. Nowhere near as good as Casino Royale and only slightly better than that Quantum rubbish. It seems that women like it and men think its a waste. Ridiculous dialogue at times - even for a Bond movie. Scoring 92% at rottentomatoes is proof of a conspiracy. Expand
  63. 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.
  64. 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 toAs 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
  65. Feb 13, 2013
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I like Casino Royale, I like the Bond formula, I hated Quantum of Solace but I thought... surely it can't be worse. I was right, but only just. I'm going to slate this film and for one main reason; what is the point in making a Bond movie if the character isn't even recognisably Bond?
    Instead of a suave sophisticated agent you get a washed out has-been (who can still miraculously perform anything he needs to); instead of him bedding beautiful women he jokes when they die; instead of fighting a supervillain who wants to take over the world he's fighting a complete idiot (see plot-holes); instead of gadgets he gets a tracing chip the size of a toaster and a fingerprint PPK whoop-dee-woo. OK, OK.... Its a new Bond, he's got to be more realistic in a post-Bourne world?? So, they have a plot that's so riddled with holes you can (literally) drive a tube train through it; an enemy that appears to be insanely competent but then completely insane; an unsurvivable fall; an unescapable escape; and a ridiculous ending where Bond, an old man and an old women take on and win against a small army.

    Bond has no charm, the film has no warmth, the characters make no sense, the dialogue is wooden, the love scenes cold, the action heavy handed, and the film betrays the Bond legacy. Why 3/10? Because the cinematography....

    ... is lush. I fully expect the cinematography to win an oscar. Watch it for that, but otherwise this is not even a Bond film and the last in the franchise I'll watch.
    Expand
  66. Feb 20, 2013
    9
    Best Bond-movie of Daniel Craig and maybe even the best Bond-movie since Roger Moore's. I like the "back to the roots" romantic and that the plot plays a lot in Great Britain.
  67. Feb 21, 2013
    0
    Worst Bond movie ever. Hopeless plot, a super hacker cyber terrorist who doesn't possess a computer or computer lab. The Bad Guy is a sad fairy with no menace. The end burning house scene with geriatrics taking out 'assassins' is laughable. Weapon skills throughout are pathetic tech directors need to learn from 'Heat' or 'Shooter'. New Q is terrible, Moneypenny is equally bad. About timeWorst Bond movie ever. Hopeless plot, a super hacker cyber terrorist who doesn't possess a computer or computer lab. The Bad Guy is a sad fairy with no menace. The end burning house scene with geriatrics taking out 'assassins' is laughable. Weapon skills throughout are pathetic tech directors need to learn from 'Heat' or 'Shooter'. New Q is terrible, Moneypenny is equally bad. About time they gave Bond a man's weapon and a waistband holster. Only good points are that the awful Dench (M) gets wasted, new M is the business. Such a let down after Craig's first Bond movies.The scenes are a joke, this supposedly super meticulous bad guy on his way to wipe out MI6 gets on the tube train at the wrong end and has to walk through the carriages people get on the right tube carriage when they go to work! everyday. Expand
  68. Mar 4, 2013
    0
    A ridiculous story, scandalous amounts of product placement, and an ageing and unconvincing Craig make this the worst Bond since Die another Day.

    It all starts off promisingly, with a cool chase scene, and the great opening titles, but the story is so unbelievably silly, so far from the gritty reality we found in casino royale that the film quickly reveals itself as a huge
    A ridiculous story, scandalous amounts of product placement, and an ageing and unconvincing Craig make this the worst Bond since Die another Day.

    It all starts off promisingly, with a cool chase scene, and the great opening titles, but the story is so unbelievably silly, so far from the gritty reality we found in casino royale that the film quickly reveals itself as a huge dissapointment. The product placement in this film is the most blatant I've ever seen at one point, an agent of Mi6, in the middle of a tense scene tracking down Bardem, finds the time to take a swig from a bottle of heineken! Craig looks too thin in the film, and not at all as convincing as in casino royale. That topped with exotic locations like SCOTLAND and bond girls who die after 5 MINUTES make this all a very dull and pointless film.
    Expand
  69. Mar 19, 2013
    10
    Watching skyfall make you realise how much we all love 007. Skyfall is my favourite bond movie the acting is incredible. What more can I say apart from WOW.
  70. Jun 11, 2013
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I've never written a movie review in my life, but this was so horrible that I created a Metacritic account.

    I'm not a James Bond fan, but I know what a James Bond movie is supposed to be like. More importantly, I know when I see a bad movie, and this is a bad movie.

    -The Bond girl had about 10 minutes of screen time.
    -There are a lot of pointless scenes and dialogue.
    -The "too old to be a spy" plot is ineffective.
    -The villain is too cartoony (still love Bourdain, though).
    -The movie tries to mimic the Dark Knight trilogy too much.
    see: http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/11/skyfall-dark-knight/

    And last but not least the movie is too unrealistic. Now, I do understand that action movies are meant to be fun and that you have to let go a little bit to enjoy it. But there are SO many points in the movie that are so implausible that it makes me sick.

    I would like to quote user _MB:
    http://www.metacritic.com/user/MB_?myscore-filter=Movie

    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?

    Concise, truthful, and hilarious!
    Expand
  71. Jun 30, 2013
    9
    Welcome to the 21st century James Bond! Danielle Craig was superb as Bond in Casino Royal, but Quantum of Solace lacked, well everything. So long cold war, hello cyber terrorism. The days of campy exploding pens and laser watches gives way to a villain who is believable and gadgetry/stunts/props that are relatively believable (willful suspension considered). The acting is superb and theWelcome to the 21st century James Bond! Danielle Craig was superb as Bond in Casino Royal, but Quantum of Solace lacked, well everything. So long cold war, hello cyber terrorism. The days of campy exploding pens and laser watches gives way to a villain who is believable and gadgetry/stunts/props that are relatively believable (willful suspension considered). The acting is superb and the cinematography is carefully created. The 50th anniversary gives me hope that the "Hollywood" brain trust is not completely lost in remakes and sequels than really don't need to be made. Expand
  72. Dec 17, 2013
    3
    WORST BOND I HAVE EVER SEEN. Craig is a good actor (see Layer Cake), Casino Royale was good (almost as good as Goldeneye...not the game, though...CLASSIC!), and Quantum was a let-down, comparatively, but compared to Skyfall, as masterpiece. The absurdity of this movie's plot-line is only rivaled by the absurdity of the money invested in it and the degree of claimed positiveWORST BOND I HAVE EVER SEEN. Craig is a good actor (see Layer Cake), Casino Royale was good (almost as good as Goldeneye...not the game, though...CLASSIC!), and Quantum was a let-down, comparatively, but compared to Skyfall, as masterpiece. The absurdity of this movie's plot-line is only rivaled by the absurdity of the money invested in it and the degree of claimed positive reception...It's so bad, I can't even sort out what, specifically to criticize. All I can say to summarize is that the fact that this film received such positive reviews compared to the other contemporary "JB" (James Bond/Jason Bourne) film, Bourne Legacy's relatively poor critical reception speaks volumes about the state of our society...Skyfall was utter rubbish, whilst as good as the Damon Bourne films were, Legacy was, to an objective reviewer, superior to even those, and yet received mixed to poor reviews...what a racket. Here's hoping Barbara Broccoli has the wisdom to recruit Paul Greengrass for Bond XXIV. Wake up S(m)erfs. Expand
  73. Nov 27, 2014
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Wow. This movie was great! The acting was fantastic, the story was good & ran on a steady pace. But above all the characters are like-able & have good motives. You really felt sad when M died, because of how good they developed the character. Skyfall is one of my favourite movies of all time. Expand
  74. Apr 7, 2015
    8
    Skyfall is a movie of Sam Mendes with Daniel Craig, Judi Dench and Javier Bardem.
    You must watch this movie because there is action, it's the twenty third movie of the James Bond saga.
    If you love Daniel Craig you must watch the movie because he is really good in his role of James Bond. The soundtrack is sung by Adèle. For me it's the best James Bond movie, the story is enthralling, I
    Skyfall is a movie of Sam Mendes with Daniel Craig, Judi Dench and Javier Bardem.
    You must watch this movie because there is action, it's the twenty third movie of the James Bond saga.
    If you love Daniel Craig you must watch the movie because he is really good in his role of James Bond.
    The soundtrack is sung by Adèle.
    For me it's the best James Bond movie, the story is enthralling, I think actors are good casted because every actor sticks with the role.
    For the ones who loves Daniel Craig, it's his third film as James Bond after Casino Royal and Quantum of Solace.
    You must watch it because Daniel Craig is a beautiful and a good actor.
    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.