Skyfall

User Score
7.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1624 Ratings

User score distribution:

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream 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

User Reviews

  1. Nov 21, 2012
    0
    "SkyFail" (This movie is so bad it inspired me to post a review)

    To be honest I expected a reboot similar to the batman franchise. It turned out to be a major letdown, due to a complete cliche plot, bland acting and blatant incompetence of the characters pasted together with the only redeeming feature: thrilling action scenes. Please remember to turn your brain off before watching this,
    "SkyFail" (This movie is so bad it inspired me to post a review)

    To be honest I expected a reboot similar to the batman franchise. It turned out to be a major letdown, due to a complete cliche plot, bland acting and blatant incompetence of the characters pasted together with the only redeeming feature: thrilling action scenes. Please remember to turn your brain off before watching this, if you do this movie might even be worth your money.
    Expand
  2. Nov 10, 2012
    3
    This review contains spoilers. 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.
    Collapse
  3. Nov 13, 2012
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. First of all, whoever is simply upvoting positive reviews and downvoting negative ones, you are not helping constructive film criticism. This movie is bad, and there are reasons for that:

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

    The only redeeming things I can think of this movie are a decent opening and Kincade, the old guy at Skyfall. He is the ONLY character in this movie with any heart that I cared about and enjoyed watching. He alone earns the one point I would be willing to award to this film. Good riddance to the featured M.
    Expand
  4. Nov 9, 2012
    0
    I'm genuinely surprised this movie is getting such rave reviews, I thought it was awful. It tries so hard to be dark and serious, but to me it came across as completely shallow. I never felt empathy for Bond in this movie, and I don't get how I was supposed to when he never shows any emotion or attachment to anything the whole movie. That would have been OK if it was just about him being aI'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
  5. Nov 9, 2012
    1
    It was G-d awful!
    Consistent blatant product placement.
    The shout outs to the past bond films were nostalgic but seemed forced for cheap thrills. The CGI in the first scene was TERRIBLE and was clear that it was computer generated. Q wasn't fantastic but not terrible either. Fiennes was a nice casting choice though. Naomie Harris was poorly cast. I just don't think it was the role for
    It was G-d awful!
    Consistent blatant product placement.
    The shout outs to the past bond films were nostalgic but seemed forced for cheap thrills. The CGI in the first scene was TERRIBLE and was clear that it was computer generated.
    Q wasn't fantastic but not terrible either. Fiennes was a nice casting choice though. Naomie Harris was poorly cast. I just don't think it was the role for her.
    Who scored the movie? Terrible pacing in music at the wrong time. I don't know what people are seeing in this film. The script was choppy and unfinished. I can't criticize it more without spoiling the film. This is a travesty for the 50th anniversary.
    Oh and Javier Bardem's performance was WAY over the top and not as menacing as he could have been.

    There are some good fight scenes and some good scenes in general but its just terrible all over at the end of the day.
    Expand
  6. Nov 9, 2012
    0
    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
  7. 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
  8. 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.
  9. Nov 9, 2012
    0
    Let the Skyfall, take your money, waste your time. Let's face it all, this film is the worst James Bond movie has ever been made. This film does not even feels like a JB movie. At least there is a little bit JB feel in Quantum of Solace. Skyfall's intro is not amazing like old JB films. The story is so ridiculous that they tried to fill it with James you are too old thingy. Seriously,Let the Skyfall, take your money, waste your time. Let's face it all, this film is the worst James Bond movie has ever been made. This film does not even feels like a JB movie. At least there is a little bit JB feel in Quantum of Solace. Skyfall's intro is not amazing like old JB films. The story is so ridiculous that they tried to fill it with James you are too old thingy. Seriously, James Bond cannot shoot an object properly because he is too old. Actually, the story has fatal flaws which I am not going to mention them. Bond girl has nothing to do with story, plus bad acting skills. Bond acts creepy to the situations. With Naomie Harris helping JB feels like watching an Ocean's Eleven film. The new Q keeps failing in every situation. Some elements are stolen from The Dark Knight Rises in a creepier way. There are CGI's and they seem very cheap. The music is inappropriate with the scenes. Why did they change the old composer?. I really liked David Arnold, I still listen to his old JB soundtracks. And what about the director? His first action movie, right? The camera is so close to Daniel Craig in every scene. Let the audience see the beautiful places like Shanghai, Istanbul. The director shows the Omega watch in an action scene. What kind of advertisement is this?. There is a scene Bond looking to his phone doing nothing. Finally, the final fight between Bond and the villian is not that thrilling. If you like to watch a cheap action movie, lower your expectations and watch it. The series had a formula but the producers keep insisting of not doing it. So, I'm done with the series. Expand
  10. Apr 28, 2013
    3
    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
  11. 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
  12. Dec 4, 2012
    3
    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 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 byOK, 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
  13. 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
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. Feb 26, 2013
    3
    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 will return' and that is rather a depressing notion.
  17. Jun 3, 2013
    2
    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 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
    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 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
  18. 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
  19. Nov 15, 2013
    2
    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 of his boat. Chronic boozer, doper, and complainer. Only assigned minor missions like if some disgruntled ex-employee leaked some names, then that wouldWow. 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
  20. Nov 18, 2012
    1
    Casino Royal was a very good movie. Craig became a new Bond, a rougher Bond, a more "realistic Bond. All this is swept away in Skyfall and replaced by a dull, boring, regrettable image of a Bond character that is put together with traces of Startrek and Batman movies.
    This is one of the worst Bond movies ever made (in comparison Casino Royal was one of the best).
    Sam Mendes provided
    Casino Royal was a very good movie. Craig became a new Bond, a rougher Bond, a more "realistic Bond. All this is swept away in Skyfall and replaced by a dull, boring, regrettable image of a Bond character that is put together with traces of Startrek and Batman movies.
    This is one of the worst Bond movies ever made (in comparison Casino Royal was one of the best).
    Sam Mendes provided cheap script work....what can I say....bad, bad, bad.
    Expand
  21. Nov 23, 2012
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. My god, where do I start.

    1) This isn't a Bond movie
    2) Story is more boring than my grandma, and she's been dead for 15 years
    3) Errors, errors, so many errors. I usually wouldn't even care for these in a Bond movie, but this is just too much to bear
    4) There is no plot whatsoever
    5) Unlikable M - I hoped she died halfway during the movie. At least she did die in the end, for which I'll give a 1 for this movie instead of a 0
    6) I was waiting until something would actually happen, then suddenly there were the ending credits.
    7) How the hell did this horrible 'movie' get so many positive reviews and high marks?!
    8) Etcetera, etcetera
    Expand
  22. Mar 3, 2014
    0
    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 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,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 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
  23. 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
  24. 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
  25. Jan 8, 2013
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Very disappointing. I expect my filmed entertainment to at least try to have some credibility. Skyfall has a series of wonderful action pieces held together by the most flimsy plot imaginable. Totally ruined for me by the silly computer graphics, schoolboy 'Q', and complete nonsense of a villain who spends millions (and razes an island?) just to 'get back at M'? A villain who can forecast years ahead exactly when an underground train is going to be on top of his bomb? Londoners can't forecast where trains are going to be in 10 minutes!

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

    Sorry- no credibility at all and the wonderful opening simply did not make up for the awful plot.
    Expand
  26. 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.
  27. Nov 12, 2014
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Let's do a recap of Bond's missions.

    Bond promised to save hot Asian bond girl. Failed.
    Bond promised to save M. Failed.
    Bond try to protect the identity of all agents. Failed.

    Super spy Bond decides the best way to protect M is to "go off the grid", yet he leaves a trail of "breadcrumbs" to lead the bad guys to a ...... dump! and you're sitting there wondering, what is this magical Skyfall place that he's leading her to? Must be a bomb silo or underground super bunker or something? No. It's a dump and there's no ammunition. WHY???
    Why in the world would M be dragged around like an inept old lady who lost her marbles? Worst of all, dragged into a dump with no reinforcements and no guns.

    Illogical plot.
    and then... of course, she dies. Why is it so surprising? I mean they chose the WORST possible hideout and lead all the enemies to them?!

    What has Bond accomplished? Nothing. He failed his damn mission! He got M killed cuz he basically abducted her to this unprotected wasteland to be hunted like an animal.
    Expand
  28. 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
  29. 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
  30. MB_
    Nov 25, 2012
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Why didn't the badguy just kill Q at home or when he exploded her headquarters? Why didn't Bond ask for a doctor to remove the fragments rather than using a knife and his left hand? Why didn't the bad guy just kill bond, what did he want him for? Why didn't they just hide in the tunnel as the bad guy didn't know it existed? Why did the priest hole lead to no where? Why did Bond walk over the ice when everyone else went around? Where did the ice henchman appear from? Why did Q plug the bad guy's PC into the network rather than an isolated PC? Why did they lock the badguy in a glass room which is locked electronically rather than just use a padlock? When did Bond set off the radio beacon on the island and why didn't the electronics mastermind badguy not have him checked? When did the badguy put the explosives on the roof of the chamber letting the train through, wouldn't he have used his time better, running away? Why didn't they just withdraw all the at risk agents? Why didn't bond shoot him at any point, he'd be tortured for months by the Chinese why would he talk to them? Why was there more screen time dedicated to Judi Dench than for Daniel Craig? Why did bond's face change from Brosnan to Craig yet M's is still Dench? Why would you cut up a perfectly good opening action scene to an old woman moaning in an office ever 30 seconds? Can I get a refund? Expand
Metascore
81

Universal acclaim - based on 49 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 42 out of 49
  2. Negative: 0 out of 49
  1. Reviewed by: Roger Moore
    Nov 5, 2015
    88
    Skyfall is far and away the best, and the most British of the Daniel Craig-James Bond movies.
  2. Reviewed by: Robbie Collin
    Nov 5, 2015
    80
    Mendes...lets the quieter moments breathe.... But Mendes is rather good at being loud, too, and his nine times Oscar-nominated cinematographer Roger Deakins makes the wildly ambitious action sequences the most beautiful in Bond’s 50-year career.
  3. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    Nov 5, 2015
    70
    While trading on viewers’ familiarity with the series’ venerable fetishes (a cheer rises at the sight of Bond’s old Aston Martin and the sound of Monty Norman’s guitar theme from Dr. No), Skyfall has the life, grandeur and gravity of a satisfying, stand-alone entertainment.