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. BKM
    Apr 4, 2013
    6
    I've never been a big fan of the James Bond series, so my review of the film is biased right from the get go. Still I was a bit surprised at what Sam Mendes had to offer up at the helm of the latest entry. Skyfall finds 007 trying to find his place in a modern world where computer hacking is a more powerful tool than disguises and fancy gadgets. More importantly, the film explores theI've never been a big fan of the James Bond series, so my review of the film is biased right from the get go. Still I was a bit surprised at what Sam Mendes had to offer up at the helm of the latest entry. Skyfall finds 007 trying to find his place in a modern world where computer hacking is a more powerful tool than disguises and fancy gadgets. More importantly, the film explores the notion of whether or not the intelligence game has become antiquated and what it has cost those who play it. But in spite of the film's commendable artistic ambitions, it's ultimately too cool and lethargic for its own good. Expand
  2. Dec 29, 2012
    6
    It is hard to fault the brilliant direction of Mendes. It is even harder to imagine a better performance than that of Javier Bardem as the villain. But take the opening high adrenaline sequence away and there is little left of a Bond film and more of an artful drama.
  3. Nov 19, 2012
    6
    I have mixed feeling about this film. Overall, I was disappointed and the main reason was that the nothing was developed to make it really interesting. Let's start with the villain. Bardem is a great actor but you need some back ground to make him villainious. They actually did have some of the best scenes in the movie when Bond meets Bardem. However, there is no depth given to how heI have mixed feeling about this film. Overall, I was disappointed and the main reason was that the nothing was developed to make it really interesting. Let's start with the villain. Bardem is a great actor but you need some back ground to make him villainious. They actually did have some of the best scenes in the movie when Bond meets Bardem. However, there is no depth given to how he becomes a villain and little face time with Bond. The same with the new Q. He just shows up. The plot has no depth either. We get little of Bond except in the first scene working on this. The movie really becomes about him protecting M and that really is not that interesting. The final scene reminded me of "Strawdogs" but without the tension or excitement. I had hopes for this series when they got rid of Roger Moore and the supervilian with the hugh fight scene at his hidden lair. However, the improvements are marginal with each new film and that takes several years. I don't know if I can wait for them to put an entire film together that is entertaining. Expand
  4. Nov 28, 2012
    6
    Not as a good as Casino Royal, for sure. This Bond movie felt like several stories mashed together (or several scripts?), and though long, seemed to be missing the real character moments/buildup of stakes. There were a few too many action sequences that probably could've been taken out. Even with that, still a good movie--Craig as Bond really makes up for a lot and Bardem is always greatNot as a good as Casino Royal, for sure. This Bond movie felt like several stories mashed together (or several scripts?), and though long, seemed to be missing the real character moments/buildup of stakes. There were a few too many action sequences that probably could've been taken out. Even with that, still a good movie--Craig as Bond really makes up for a lot and Bardem is always great to watch. Probably worth seeing a matinee for the special effects and cinematography--but it's not a must see. Expand
  5. Nov 15, 2012
    6
    This movie was way overhyped... and as a result it was a let down. I should let everyone know up front that I'm not a James Bond fan at all, but there were a few that I liked. So from all the review, I figured this movie would be very enjoyable. Unfortunately, the first half was very boring... like most James Bond movies, and the main villain shows up over half way through the film, whichThis movie was way overhyped... and as a result it was a let down. I should let everyone know up front that I'm not a James Bond fan at all, but there were a few that I liked. So from all the review, I figured this movie would be very enjoyable. Unfortunately, the first half was very boring... like most James Bond movies, and the main villain shows up over half way through the film, which at that point it turned interesting. However, the ending didn't really leave me satisfied. You'd think that they could come up with a better way for Bond to dispatch the villain... Oh well... I'm sure all Bond fans will love it, just like they love all Bond movies. But for those of you who aren't fans, you can pass on this one. There are other movies out there that probably deserve viewing first. Expand
  6. Dec 6, 2012
    6
    Meh, Casino Royal is better. I like bond movies and I like this one. But this whole Jason Bourne is Bond deal is kinda a downer. Every movie the treatment becomes more Dragon Tattoo than Goldfinger. But I guess that's what people want. It's not awful.
  7. Nov 9, 2012
    6
    Sympathy for the Devil

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

    Sam Mendes' James Bond makes the mistake of making the villain more compelling than the hero. Javier Bardem, only introduced a hour into the film, is so convincing as the bad guy, he makes the rest of the film seem very contrived. The film talks modernity through 1950's clipped Oxbridge tones. Dench, Fiennes, Wilshaw - it's Cameron toffs that dominate the screen. Only the plumber with the 00 prefix sounds 'working class' and he is a Scottish Laird -- even the black Moneypenny seems to have attended at last a Redbrick and Roedean. It starts well enough,with Bond killed by friendly fire. Then, without a word of explanation, he returns. How? A plot to kill M is hatched by deranged former agent Bardem.Trouble is, I found myself cheering him on. Wrong, huh? I preferred the emotional roller coaster of Casino Royale to this - I cared more about Bond and Vesper than Bond and M. Too much jingoism as well. I'd kill M too if I were in the service - heartless ****
    Expand
  8. Nov 10, 2012
    6
    I am baffled by the gushing praise for this movie. I like Craig, who is once again a more convincing and human Bond than his predecessors, and the script has its merits. The dialogue is actually interesting and convincing, at many points, rather than just serving as filler between action scenes, as had been the formula in previous Bond films. That said, I thought the action deliveredI am baffled by the gushing praise for this movie. I like Craig, who is once again a more convincing and human Bond than his predecessors, and the script has its merits. The dialogue is actually interesting and convincing, at many points, rather than just serving as filler between action scenes, as had been the formula in previous Bond films. That said, I thought the action delivered nothing new, the villain was well-acted but utterly formulaic, and the film just devolved into predictable mediocrity once it shifted to a hackneyed assault-the-house scene in Scotland. Overall, an underwhelming experience. Expand
  9. 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
  10. 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
  11. Nov 14, 2012
    6
    James Bond is back. Again. And to be quite frank I'm over it. 23 movies and we still see Bond doing his archetype Bond things. Oh look he ordered a martini. Hey look he's driving an Aston Martin. Is that a Walther PPK? He gambles. He wins. He gets a typical Bond girl. Car chases, Foot chases. I mean for me it's all just been done before. It was really cool to see Bond reinvented in CasinoJames Bond is back. Again. And to be quite frank I'm over it. 23 movies and we still see Bond doing his archetype Bond things. Oh look he ordered a martini. Hey look he's driving an Aston Martin. Is that a Walther PPK? He gambles. He wins. He gets a typical Bond girl. Car chases, Foot chases. I mean for me it's all just been done before. It was really cool to see Bond reinvented in Casino Royal, but does every movie have to be the same formula? The only thing that set this one apart was the baddy. Javier Bardem practically single handedly saves this film from going into the annals of Bond failures such as Tomorrow Never Dies. Is it worth the watch? Yeah sure. Watch it for the action. But for old school Bond fans, I think I like my movies with a bit more Connery swagger. This one was shaken. Not stirred. Expand
  12. 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
  13. Dec 20, 2012
    6
    For all the money they had to make this film they should have done better. Daniel Craig lacks any style or depth and comes across as low IQ which I sure is not the intent. The start is very very good but then it gets lost. the raid on the house is so unreal its sad. sure its entertaining but at that budget - we deserve more.
  14. Feb 18, 2013
    6
    You have to review the Bond movies within their context. As such, Skyfall is by means not bad one. There is something new and something familiar to keep both old and new fans watching. When you are going to see a any James Bond movie you pretty much know what to expect and Skyfall delivers exactly this.
  15. May 19, 2013
    6
    skyfall makes a good impression as a James bond movie it has all the qualities of being a good movie you have the picture the lightening the costumes and the fact that it is not memorable.
    the first thing you notice about it is the good music from the start to the end and second thing is the great action car chasing ect.....
    it's basically an entertainment for 2 hours and one of
    skyfall makes a good impression as a James bond movie it has all the qualities of being a good movie you have the picture the lightening the costumes and the fact that it is not memorable.
    the first thing you notice about it is the good music from the start to the end and second thing is the great action car chasing ect.....
    it's basically an entertainment for 2 hours and one of the best in the series.
    however there have to be a negative side which is the advertisement let me guess watches cars and suites and i actually lost tracks of how many times they did this but overall great movie.
    Expand
  16. Jun 1, 2013
    6
    Skyfall is a long, tedious, and extremely boring movie that has little to no emotional impact on the viewer. It didn't linger with me after I watched it because the whole thing just felt like a massive cliche. The only things that saved this movie were the action sequences and the grounds keeper who helped out Bond more than Bond helped himself. Also, he was probably the only likableSkyfall is a long, tedious, and extremely boring movie that has little to no emotional impact on the viewer. It didn't linger with me after I watched it because the whole thing just felt like a massive cliche. The only things that saved this movie were the action sequences and the grounds keeper who helped out Bond more than Bond helped himself. Also, he was probably the only likable person in the whole movie. Seriously, why is Bond the least interesting person in the film? How did the writers even manage to do that in a JAMES BOND movie?They even managed to make Javier Bardem (who was an excellent villain in No Country for Old Men) into a lame attempt at ripping of Joker!
    It may seem like I hate this movie, but I actually thought it was not a terrible movie. It's a solid action flick if you turn your brain off. But, it's nothing more than that. People who say that this is the best Bond ever need to see a proctologist and get their head removed from their own a--.
    Expand
  17. Nov 7, 2015
    6
    Well, in 2015 this web-site told me that this movie is 'new or notable' so I decided to write a review. It's not good. There're so many movies about 007 (LOTS) that I'd rather call it cliche than something new. Not good at all.
  18. Feb 16, 2016
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Skyfall gets an above average rating for me.
    It's major positives are the technical direction and the presentation. Director Sam Mendes creates many visually interesting shots in this movie. He is great at creating vibrant backdrops to the scenes like in one fight by a window where a times square style light up billboard creates a soft blue backdrop to the scene, or at the end of the film where they are fighting in the bright glow of a fire. The action in this movie is superb and the choreography feels real and thrilling. However once we get past the admittedly amazing presentation the movie starts to fall apart.
    A major sub-plot of the movie is that Bond is falling apart after years of service and fails all the tests M16 gives to him. However this really doesn't go anywhere as the only time he every shows any weakness is when he misses a shot to hit a glass off of the top of the head of a hostage. Seriously. Both M and the main villain Silva talk about Bond's failings but 007 still effortlessly disposes of any opponent he goes after most of the time. The movie tries to give other characterization too but it comes off as flat and uninteresting and serves to make Bond look worse as a character (which Hint: he didn't really have a character beforehand). Look Bind is a cool secret agent that acts all high and mighty and beats people up and has a license to kill. He is not some complicated character so don't try to halfheartedly make him one.
    Another major character problem is that the main villain Raoul Silva is not an intimidating villain. Whenever I was watching him be on screen it shattered my suspension of disbelief because he just screamed "WE SCREENWRITERS ARE TRYING TO MAKE A COOL VILLAIN BUT DON'T KNOW HOW!" The movie does so many things to make Silva appear intimidating and evil but it comes off as shallow and boring. And also he is the cause of some of the stupidest plot holes this side of being able to blow up AT-ATs with blasters.
    Okay so the plot of the movie doesn't really hold up. In the opening sequence Bond is shot and is presumed dead in a mission but he just appears in a Latin American country later on. This isn't really explained and doesn't make any sense. Like, he was shot in the middle east I think how'd he get to south america? But whatever he comes back to London after MI6 is hacked and their building explodes. Bond goes to track the agent down, kills him, meets his associate who leads him to Silva. Bond captures Silva and brings him back to the MI6's secret underground back-up base. Then the stupidest thing ever happens. It's revealed that Silva's plan was to be captured and then escape. Which is so contrived because it's obvious they';re just copying dark knight and Silva has no reason t want to go to MI6 and then escape. Like,there is no reason to go to the HQ other than it's cool for the plot. Also, the escape plan hinges on the fact that Q will connect silva's computer to the MI6 base's computers. Which is dumb. If you're going through a hacker's computer why would you plug it in to your network? What if he just had a virus that would have wrecked the computers? Anyway Silva escapes through a train maintenance tunnel and Bond catches up but Silva manages to escape because he has a bomb planted that leads a train to fall on top of Bond. Which is stupid! How'd he know that he would be caught up to in that particular place. And if he did it just to put a wall between him anyone behind him, why didn't he blow it directly after he passed the bomb? It's another stupid plot contrivance. Then SIlva manages to invade a government hearing with just 3 guys against dozens of armed guards and tries to kill M. Luckily Bond saves the day and SIlva has to run away. The Bond takes M to his childhood mansion in Scottland. Also they took the crazy machine gun ejector seat car. There they fortify the house with only 2 hunting rifles and some TNT. With this they successfully defend themselves against a dozen of Silva's men with assault rifles. HOW?!?! And why is the groundskeeper their so good at killing trained mercenaries? It's all so CONTRIVED!! I did like it though when the groundskeeper killed a guy and aid "welcome to Scotland." Then a helicopter crashes into the house and, wait. Did i tell you? They had a helicopter with a Gatling gun and couldn't take out two old people and one agent that supposedly failed all the tests. Then Bond kills everyone but Silva, and M runs away with the groundskeeper to an old church that is apparently just 5 minutes away, I guess. Silva comes in and then puts a gun in M's hands and forces it to her head and then puts his head next to M's so that if M pulls the trigger she'll kill them both. WTF?! First off, why did he give M the ability to pull the trigger, secondly why is he suicidal all of a sudden. But then Bond kills him but M dies of a gun wound anyway.

    While Skyfall has great action and presentation the plot is horrible and paces very slowly. 6/10
    Expand
  19. Dec 22, 2012
    5
    "Skyfall", the latest entry into the long line of 007 thrillers is a disappointment to not only Bond fans but moviegoers in general. Directed by Sam Mendes the film stars Daniel Craig, Judi Dench, Javier Bardem and Naomi Harris in this dark, ill conceived and frankly, but for extraordinary special effects, boring film. To paraphrase Lloyd Benson in his famous admonition of Dan Quayle, "Mr."Skyfall", the latest entry into the long line of 007 thrillers is a disappointment to not only Bond fans but moviegoers in general. Directed by Sam Mendes the film stars Daniel Craig, Judi Dench, Javier Bardem and Naomi Harris in this dark, ill conceived and frankly, but for extraordinary special effects, boring film. To paraphrase Lloyd Benson in his famous admonition of Dan Quayle, "Mr. Craig, I've seen Sean Connery as Bond and you're no Sean Connery". Ian Fleming's concept of a spy with a flair for the playful, humorous and witty engagements as he saves the world from various evils is the thing the writers of this latest film fail to get or understand. The film as a screenplay, is neither plausible in its plot scenes nor is it clever in its execution. The Harry Saltzman/Albert Broccoli formula these two geniuses developed over the years and throughout the history of this epic franchise are lost in this movie and the casting of Mr. Craig still continues to amaze me. As fine an actor as he is, Mr. Craig just doesn't fit the mold that Messrs. Connery, Moore and Brosnahan were able to cast. This is a problem which frequently arises when an actor and the character they portray in sequel after sequel become so embedded in the minds of the audience that to separate one often harms the other. Basil Rathbone will always be the real Sherlock Holmes, George Sanders will always be the real Falcon (even tho his brother, Tom Conway, tried to fill his shoes) and, alas for Mr. Craig and the owners of the franchise, the same fate seems to be befalling them as well. I give the film a 5.0 rating for its special effects and the chance to hear Adele sing the background song. Beyond that it seems that more than the "sky" fell in the ratings for this film. Expand
  20. Nov 12, 2012
    5
    This is not a James Bond movie. There is no intrigue or mystery whatsoever, very minimal globe trotting, no worthwhile woman character, flimsy plot, and really no James Bond - just a grumpy old dude. Halfway through the weakly conceived story the driving subject is largely abandoned to go all emotional with little to no effect. The villain sparks interest but is ultimately pedestrian asThis is not a James Bond movie. There is no intrigue or mystery whatsoever, very minimal globe trotting, no worthwhile woman character, flimsy plot, and really no James Bond - just a grumpy old dude. Halfway through the weakly conceived story the driving subject is largely abandoned to go all emotional with little to no effect. The villain sparks interest but is ultimately pedestrian as his scheme is underdeveloped and ridiculously minor. No, this is not "the best Bond ever," it's merely a failed attempt at using the modern "emotional superhero" template, which sometime works (See The Dark Knight) and sometimes fails miserably (See Superman Returns). Expand
  21. Nov 11, 2012
    5
    This is precisely the kind of flick that reveals the disconnect that often exists between professional reviewers and we movie goers. What are the reasons for that? Perhaps the principle reason is that, while most patrons simply want to be entertained, reviewers are forever in search of art, of layers of meaning, of reasons to credit the director for innovation or whatever, I went intoThis is precisely the kind of flick that reveals the disconnect that often exists between professional reviewers and we movie goers. What are the reasons for that? Perhaps the principle reason is that, while most patrons simply want to be entertained, reviewers are forever in search of art, of layers of meaning, of reasons to credit the director for innovation or whatever, I went into Skyfall with an open mind, hoping the sterling reviews were on target, It didn't take long for the disappointment to kick in. Daniel Craig is competent, but he lacks the panache that made his predecessors so much more fun. Expand
  22. Nov 13, 2012
    5
    Unsatisfactory and underwhelming. sadasdasdasdsadasdsadasafasfsdafsaasssdgsdsdgaasdfsdafdasfsadfasdfsadfsafasdfasdfasasfafafassadasdfsadsadfdaasfaafas
  23. Nov 10, 2012
    5
    International locations: Check.
    Daniel Craig shirtless: Check.
    Nice looking cars: Check.
    Nice looking ladies: Check.
    Motorcycle chase: Check.
    Bulldozer crushing cars atop a speeding train: Check.
    Originality and inspiration: Still looking.
  24. Nov 22, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Skyfall starts off with a great set piece and carries on a very "Bond" feel right up until the third act. Then everything falls apart. The third act is basically a western and reinforces every negative thing said about Bond during the movie. Daniel Craig as Bond is as good as ever but...

    **SPOILER ALERT***

    ... he loses. This is the first Bond movie where the villain succeeds at everything he set out to do. Bond loses and there are no repercussions, the end. That third act and ending alone make this the worst Bond movie i've ever seen (Moonraker was considered to be good at the time).
    Expand
  25. Feb 15, 2013
    5
    This isn't the worst James Bond movie, but it certainly is NOT the best. As someone who's seen almost all of the Bond movies, I can tell you this movie does not live up to the name. James Bond is a secret agent SECRET as in unknown yet everyone knows who he is. MI6 is the last to know about every detail rather than the first, which is pretty bad for an intelligence agency. And theThis isn't the worst James Bond movie, but it certainly is NOT the best. As someone who's seen almost all of the Bond movies, I can tell you this movie does not live up to the name. James Bond is a secret agent SECRET as in unknown yet everyone knows who he is. MI6 is the last to know about every detail rather than the first, which is pretty bad for an intelligence agency. And the plot of Skyfall is about petty revenge. Rather than being a character who is used to saving the world, James Bond ends up playing a body guard. Yes plots and characters can change from film to film, but they threw out the entire recipe. The film may not have been a bad movie, but it was not a James Bond film. Expand
  26. Nov 10, 2012
    5
    Unfortunately, not a great Bond film. Too long, too slow, with a plot that's mediocre at best. It seems
    they tried to harkin back to classic Bond films in style, but the fact is a lot of those don't play so well for an audience in 2012. Time to update the classic feel and get with the times.
  27. Jan 24, 2013
    5
    Skyfall is the last movie of the James Bond saga and it was surprising, because after Quantum of Solace was impossible to expect more, although is not better than Casino Royale. The plot is very similar to other films, lots of action, fights and explosions, an unbeatable agent, a cool boss, the beautiful girl and the eccentric villain. This story only provides three interesting things;Skyfall is the last movie of the James Bond saga and it was surprising, because after Quantum of Solace was impossible to expect more, although is not better than Casino Royale. The plot is very similar to other films, lots of action, fights and explosions, an unbeatable agent, a cool boss, the beautiful girl and the eccentric villain. This story only provides three interesting things; first the idea of the old dogs who are pull off the system by the technology and the modern times, which are Bond and M; second the dialogue about the rats that Silva tells 007, which is a metaphor for people who the society does not want; and third the Skyfall theme of Adele. Besides that, the plot is very unoriginal, the intro was not up to the Bond franchise and the look of Javier Bardem was ridiculous. The problem of this picture is that maybe we had enough of Bond and all the fights and explosions cannot fulfill a story. People need more than that these days. Expand
  28. Nov 25, 2012
    5
    Something didn't seem right with this bond. There were lots of very quiet areas and there weren't those scenes that you say to yourself that is insane. That is what makes bond interesting. It just seemed like a typical action film.
  29. Nov 27, 2012
    5
    Another mixed bag Bond film. Plenty of the typical action and tropes throughout, including of course the Bond girls. I love the stripped down version we have of Bond now, and there are a couple of humorous moments to highlight these changes. I enjoyed Bardem's villain for the most part although I do feel like the praise is a little overstated, there were times when he didn't have a lotAnother mixed bag Bond film. Plenty of the typical action and tropes throughout, including of course the Bond girls. I love the stripped down version we have of Bond now, and there are a couple of humorous moments to highlight these changes. I enjoyed Bardem's villain for the most part although I do feel like the praise is a little overstated, there were times when he didn't have a lot going on and others when what he was doing was more than a little confusing. One of the most disappointing things about this movie was Bond's back story, or lack there of. I love a film with a good, dark back story and while I appreciate the effort here in that regard it falls well short of the mark giving us very little actual story in that regard. Overall this Bond falls short of the other Craig films for me, but ranks better than the last few Brosnan films. Expand
  30. Nov 5, 2015
    5
    Casino Royale is my favorite James Bond film. I place From Russia With Love in second place. Just so you know where I'm coming from.

    Skyfall disappointed me. The biggest reason for this is that the bad guy's motivation just didn't make much sense at all. It was the opposite of the motivation in the precise and focused plot of Casino Royale. Then there were the little moments that soured
    Casino Royale is my favorite James Bond film. I place From Russia With Love in second place. Just so you know where I'm coming from.

    Skyfall disappointed me. The biggest reason for this is that the bad guy's motivation just didn't make much sense at all. It was the opposite of the motivation in the precise and focused plot of Casino Royale. Then there were the little moments that soured me on it. Here's a few, without giving spoilers of any significance. Bond is after a bad guy. Just before he attacks the bad guy, the bad guy shoots someone. Bond could have stopped him, but didn't. Bond stands by without a care in the world as the man commits murder. And the moment after that, Bond goes after the guy. It makes no sense. He would have attacked just before. He may not be a saint but Bond as Craig has defined him (until that moment) wouldn't let an innocent person be killed that way. Next thing. Bond tells a woman he's going to rescue her from being a sex slave (forced prostitute) if she helps him with his mission. When he shows up at her place, she's in the shower. She doesn't see him. He gets naked and surprises her in the shower - they presumably have sex. This is a woman he's had exactly one conversation with in a public place. So let's recap that logic. He's going to rescue her from sexual slavery but first he pops in naked for a quickie. Anyone other than me disturbed by that? It's freaking creepy as he!!. This isn't some Bond girl he's flirted with. This is a chronic victim of rape. OK. Next thing. In one scenes he's capture but he brings in the cavalry by virtue of a hidden radio transponder in his jacket transmitting his location. Really? Couldn't he have done this with an iPhone? The radio transponder is one of Q's special gadgets, as if we live in the year 1962. It's ridiculous. And why wasn't he searched when he was captured? It would have been found. So disappointing.
    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.