Columbia Pictures | Release Date: November 9, 2012
7.7
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 1671 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
1,316
Mixed:
213
Negative:
142
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
3
axelkochNov 10, 2012
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 theYou 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
5 of 14 users found this helpful59
All this user's reviews
1
EludiumQ36Aug 25, 2013
Guess we're all not seeing the same film here. Couldn't get past the first freakin' action sequence it was just so ridiculous. I mean plausibility has got to count for something people! Also, Daniel Craig always comes off as a hard,Guess we're all not seeing the same film here. Couldn't get past the first freakin' action sequence it was just so ridiculous. I mean plausibility has got to count for something people! Also, Daniel Craig always comes off as a hard, German-looking villain type; he's not at all the suave, debonair James Bond that's made the franchise popular since the '60s. Dropped this one hard. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
0
NazguleroFeb 12, 2013
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 characterUnbelievable. 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.
Expand
3 of 13 users found this helpful310
All this user's reviews
2
dierregiJun 3, 2013
Stripped down of all the Bond usual decorations (girls, chases, gadgets, exotic locations, etc…) Skyfall has a very simple plot: a disgruntled ex-employee wants to take revenge on the employer who dumped him. Unfortunately, and proving onceStripped down of all the Bond usual decorations (girls, chases, gadgets, exotic locations, etc…) Skyfall has a very simple plot: a disgruntled ex-employee wants to take revenge on the employer who dumped him. Unfortunately, and proving once more that Bond films are just appearance over substance, this logic premise falls down the drain at every twist and turn.

So as not to attract attention to his plan, the villain steals a top secret list and makes it public. That is definitely the best way to be inconspicuous…. But what the villain wants is simply to be captured and taken into custody, close to his intended victim. Such victim is a frail old lady who presumably can be dispatched very easily, just by taking a trip to London and ambushing her at her house.

However, it turns out that killing the lady is a lot more difficult than it seems and even placing a bomb inside the HQ of the secret service is not up to the task although it spreads serious doubts about the professionalism of MI6.

Added randomly to the mix are bits and pieces from countless other successful movies: Mission: Impossible (the stolen list, which is forgotten half way into the movie), Blade Runner (the stunning Shanghai night scape), Inception (the Oriental casino), and The Silence of the Lamb (Hannibal's glass cage) etc...The result is a boring, overlong mess that does not make much sense.

The villain, played by an embarrassing Bardem wearing a blonde wig, is hardly scary at all. He acts like a rejected child who wants to attract the attention of his mummy. Bond is weary and demotivated (and so are we, at this stage). He beds a couple of gorgeous women in a couple of bizarre scenes, both superfluous. He is out of shape, but he manages to kill almost single-handedly a dozen baddies assaulting his home. One of the field agents is actually a secretary. Ralph Fiennes looks fat, bold and very middle-aged… whatever…

Throughout the movie I started thinking that even Quantum of Solace was better than Skyfall and that leads to the final questions: what about the delirious reviews about this being "the best Bond ever?" Were the official reviewers bribed to glorify the 50th Bond anniversary? What did they drink (or smoke) before writing their reviews? Did they watch the same Skyfall movie I watched or perhaps a special edition just for them?

Die-hard Bond fans will love it anyway. They love them all, even if it is always the same story, re-told with small variations: Bond is invincible and irresistible to women and he always saves the world, thanks to a few gadgets, his Martinis and his beloved car. No need to invent anything new.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
1
dyshpoMar 23, 2015
Every sequence in film is borrow from past bond films. Q is an incompetent twink . Home Alone homage towards the end. Some reason Q is dumb. I did not know Bond was in the Nolan-verse did Chris Nolan direct this and Sam Mendez just takeEvery sequence in film is borrow from past bond films. Q is an incompetent twink . Home Alone homage towards the end. Some reason Q is dumb. I did not know Bond was in the Nolan-verse did Chris Nolan direct this and Sam Mendez just take credit . Awkward how they imply M and Bond have a romantic relationship. Q is stupid . Joker was not needed in a Bond spy thriller.

And finally the reference that male spies would have to seduce other men during some missions same for women is true I really liked that the finally did something different.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
LaGuertaFeb 26, 2013
The progress made in bringing the franchise into the modern age is spectacularly undone. By the end of this film, you find yourself staring at the start of every early Bond film. While this could have been a superb way to wrap up 'Bond willThe progress made in bringing the franchise into the modern age is spectacularly undone. By the end of this film, you find yourself staring at the start of every early Bond film. While this could have been a superb way to wrap up 'Bond will return' and that is rather a depressing notion. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
1
David_HNov 12, 2012
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 typicallyThe 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. Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
0
wesker2012Nov 15, 2012
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 theWhat 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. Collapse
13 of 26 users found this helpful1313
All this user's reviews
0
DemoraseNov 9, 2012
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 howI'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
20 of 53 users found this helpful2033
All this user's reviews
0
Duke_NukemOct 13, 2015
Connery is the ultimate Bond, Moore is the funny Bond, Dalton is the cool Bond, Brosnan is the suave Bond and Craig is... the ugly Bond?

I have no idea why they came up with the ludicrous idea to pick Craig as the new Bond and why they
Connery is the ultimate Bond, Moore is the funny Bond, Dalton is the cool Bond, Brosnan is the suave Bond and Craig is... the ugly Bond?

I have no idea why they came up with the ludicrous idea to pick Craig as the new Bond and why they decided to make Bond movies so dark and boring.

In this movie Craig is coming out of the closet as gay Bond. Javier Bardem wants to kill his rival M, who keeps stalking Bond and following him around on every mission. Bond will be his and his alone...

I was really happy when Judi Dench was finally killed of, that must have been the only positive thing about this otherwise dreadful movie. And I can't wait for the next actor to play the role of James Bond. It can't get any worse than this, can it?
Expand
1 of 9 users found this helpful18
All this user's reviews
3
VidsRuleNov 25, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It takes 3/4 of the show to establish the main villian. That's fine. He's a mastermind, and it seems like he has some big plans. They have established the evil genius now let's move towards the soon to be world eding plan. Nope. We get a few seconds of his plan and the rest of the movie is him simply trying to kill bond and M. That's it. He follows them around trying to kill them. And to top it off, there is no genius revealed. That's it: Guy tries to kill a couple people. In the end (I checked spoilers don't forget), the bad guy dies by Bond simply throwing a knife into his back. Think about this, I don't care what the knife represents, it is simply thrown into the back of the bad guy and threat removed. There will never be another bond movie as bad as this. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
3
gimmedatsammichNov 17, 2012
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 wasThis 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
7 of 11 users found this helpful74
All this user's reviews
3
Bo33yDec 22, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Skyfail is all that can be said for the BOND experience in this film. The starting introduction was one of the best James Bond's I had seen. However this buzz quickly faded. The film began like the Matador (Pierce Brosnan) while finishing with a Home Alone ending. Every aspect of the classic James Bond was forgotten this was how they celebrated 50 years of James Bond. This films plot was awful and dire resulting in an invasion at home and HQ. From a double agent hacker, because hacking makes the world go around, and hacking explains the most unimaginable and can fill all the gap holes in very story from here China. The bond girl is Money Penny the assassin, instead of her classic secretarial evaluator role, or a Chinese prostitute who the heartless bond couldn't careless for and dies in 5 minutes, or the granny M. There was absolutely no Bond girl of any substance. There was no gadgets, and the classic Bond car gets blown up. The macho bond, who is intelligent, witty, savvy, and sophisticated gets all the hot girls, plays with all the cool toys, kills all the villains by using the cool moves, while doing his own stunts and looking awesome. No this image wasn't there at all. He is reduced to a drunken mess like in the Matador, the most erotic scene was with a queerish villain, Bond struggles with home invasion and has mommy issues. Q is also some spotty teenager this is why he didn't have any toys. The dynamic 's of the opening Bond song have changed and are replaced by Chinese dragons or some other visual scenery that is totally irrelevant instead of being about the entire film or its punchline. While missing mostly the silhouette of Bond Girls, Bond and Villains even. What a disappointment and a skyfail to JAMES BOND after 50 years. They have changed in through this film into something else the opposite. Expand
1 of 6 users found this helpful15
All this user's reviews
2
InverseCriticOct 4, 2013
I don't want to give it a 2 but it's just in the end my score. Believe it or not, I haven't watched many Bond movies. They just haven't worked for me somehow. They're supposed to have gadgets, a destroy the world in a way plot, humour, andI don't want to give it a 2 but it's just in the end my score. Believe it or not, I haven't watched many Bond movies. They just haven't worked for me somehow. They're supposed to have gadgets, a destroy the world in a way plot, humour, and most of all, action. Most of the action scenes were less than a minute and took a while for the next one to come. Bond has no weapons, and I know that's the point this time, but it just didn't work. And the cast has pretty much no chemistry or any sign of having life outside work. The action scenes at the end were nice, though. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
2
calhouniteNov 15, 2013
Wow. So they took my script after all. Only it wasn't a 007 movie. It was a 777 movie. The guy's name is Bomb not Bond. Bomb can't shoot. If he were on a lifeboat and aimed a flair at the sky he'd put a hole right smack dab in the middle ofWow. So they took my script after all. Only it wasn't a 007 movie. It was a 777 movie. The guy's name is Bomb not Bond. Bomb can't shoot. If he were on a lifeboat and aimed a flair at the sky he'd put a hole right smack dab in the middle of his boat. Chronic boozer, doper, and complainer. Only assigned minor missions like if some disgruntled ex-employee leaked some names, then that would go to Bomb. Nothing world-threatening. That's reserved for the doulbe 0's like Bond. Goes around with a grim look on his face like if he were about to be cremated or spliced in half, that's something to be concerned about. Actually thinks HE'S more important than his mission, and takes an unauthorized vacation to pout about it after finding out he's not.

A mistake hire. When given the choice between going to prison for being a combination peeping tom raincoat exposer or joining the service, took the service. Reason he got the option was a former foster kid of the Bosslady's just like the ex-employee he was chasing.

Changed the ending tho. After finding out he got the Bosslady killed my script had both his Volks and his ars parked on the grars. And a policy change NO MORE HIRING RELATIVES.

This is not a Bond.

This is a Bomb.
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
3
evanrmNov 29, 2012
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
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
2
deamonhunterNov 25, 2012
I expected a lot more from the movie. The previous movies where great but this has only a very few good moments. It doesn't follow the normal Bond franchise action packed fim. Also the tragic elements have a weird mixture. I would adviseI expected a lot more from the movie. The previous movies where great but this has only a very few good moments. It doesn't follow the normal Bond franchise action packed fim. Also the tragic elements have a weird mixture. I would advise James Bond fans to just skip this movie. Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
3
bosnianNov 12, 2012
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 overStory 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. Expand
4 of 8 users found this helpful44
All this user's reviews
2
StealthgearSep 27, 2013
Skyfall has no heart. The actors seem like robots with flat performances. Nobody smiles much and its not funny or entertaining.
Bad color work. Every scene looks like a photoshop filter. Every scene is bathed in an oompa loompa orange glow.
Skyfall has no heart. The actors seem like robots with flat performances. Nobody smiles much and its not funny or entertaining.
Bad color work. Every scene looks like a photoshop filter. Every scene is bathed in an oompa loompa orange glow.
The characters, plot, and dialogue are quite simply boring due lack of complexity and mystery.
The music isn't quite exciting enough, but it matches the slow pacing.
Politically tiresome. Having M and Bond on poor terms, then a bad relationship with the agency AND his other field agent was quite lame.
The movie is Lord of the Rings long (almost 3 hours) without any of the epic scale and depth. Its so slow its hard to follow.
You don't see the villain until halfway through the movie. This never works in any movie, just like Superman Returns. There should be some back and forth between the villain and good guy in the beginning.

On the plus side there is a few cool vehicle scenes, but nothing I'd spend money only to see.

They should have called it Downfall. While Casino Royale was only OK, the series has been worse and worse. The truth is that Daniel Craig and the production team that did this aren't suave and inventive enough to make a good bond movie. The last people to come up with a good Bond story was EA's Everything or Nothing video game. Don't watch Skyfall.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
3
ultralight47Dec 4, 2012
OK, he's shot in the chest, he falls a distance that is deadly, he goes over what could be Niagara Falls, and then 20 minutes later he's lying next to a woman in bed. No explanation given; some guys just don't die. I understand that withOK, he's shot in the chest, he falls a distance that is deadly, he goes over what could be Niagara Falls, and then 20 minutes later he's lying next to a woman in bed. No explanation given; some guys just don't die. I understand that with James Bond films belief must be suspended and situations are presented that don't make sense in the real world (like our defenseless hero is surrounded by armed opponents who follow the golden rule that they cannoct respond towards our hero until it is "their turn"), so I am somewhat predisposed not to like this type of film. But what is really wrong with this film is that the script is dumbed down to a fifth grade level and I may be too kind in this assessment. Really? People at this level of achievement talk with such a low grade -intelligence quotient? Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
3
OverworlderMar 3, 2013
This movie deserves 2 points for the opening chase and another point for the few beautiful shots of Istanbul and Shanghai. The rest is entirely forgettable, generic action-movie nonsense. From the title alone I half-expected some big,This movie deserves 2 points for the opening chase and another point for the few beautiful shots of Istanbul and Shanghai. The rest is entirely forgettable, generic action-movie nonsense. From the title alone I half-expected some big, properly nefarious conspiracy, perhaps involving planes or space. But no, the villain is utterly uninteresting and only motivated by petty revenge. Bond himself inspires no empathy whatsoever, and displays zero emotion, charm or wit. The pacing is terrible, with some pointless scenes dragging on to the point where I started checking the clock. The plot is full of holes big enough to drive a train through. And of course there are no gadgets to speak of. Because the new Bond is all 'dark' and 'gritty' and 'real' while still managing to be a wooden puppet buffeted by meaningless explosions and fantastical computer hackery. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
1
MB_Nov 25, 2012
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
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
1
Briancl25Nov 11, 2012
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 timeThis 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. Expand
7 of 14 users found this helpful77
All this user's reviews
0
mulderdogDec 8, 2012
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
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.
Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
1
ScosorNov 14, 2012
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, inMan, 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. Expand
6 of 11 users found this helpful65
All this user's reviews
0
andytimberNov 17, 2012
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
4 of 7 users found this helpful43
All this user's reviews
1
napstrpsxNov 13, 2012
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
22 of 48 users found this helpful2226
All this user's reviews
0
LeonidasRexMar 3, 2014
This is one of the worst Bonds movies ever. The villain is a joke, a blond effeminate computer genius with no motivation beyond petty revenge. The "old people are sexy too" theme is just as boring here as it was in the fourth Indiana JonesThis is one of the worst Bonds movies ever. The villain is a joke, a blond effeminate computer genius with no motivation beyond petty revenge. The "old people are sexy too" theme is just as boring here as it was in the fourth Indiana Jones movie. The dozens of plot holes gape so wide that they swallow the entire movie. They could have put the explosions, chases, and fights in any order, and the story would make just as much sense. Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
1
Nami87Nov 9, 2012
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
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
20 of 56 users found this helpful2036
All this user's reviews
3
tooplanxApr 28, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Pretty distasteful misogyny (more than simple sleeping with women- he pretends that he cares for an abused sex slave and promises to rescue her, then takes advantage of her vulnerability to have sex with her, then when he's got what he wants from her he lets her die without showing any kind of remorse or compassion).

Beyond this, the plot is boring and totally nonsensical. It is so full of plot holes, loose ends, and inconsistencies that mean you just don't care what happens and spend most of the time just thinking "Why is this happening? What's the point of this? How did he manage that? Why is he there?" etc.

Non of the main characters are likeable, in fact, I kind of feel that the 'bad guy', Silva, was actually the good guy really. You can understand and sympathise with his motives, where as Bond and M are just a-holes.

The action sequences aren't even very good. There's no tension to them, and because you don't care about any of the characters or what happens in the 'story' they just become meaningless set pieces.

To top it off, the script is quite bland, with cliches and occasional pseudo-deep phrases thrown in to annoy you. There is next to no witty dialogue or truly interesting conversations.

However, if you like to watch movies because you like moving images and the occasional explosion, you'll probably love it.
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews