Guest Markgway Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Connery hated EON. He felt they screwed him over financially so he was more than happy to attempt a 'fuck you' with McClory and co. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member TibetanWhiteCrane Posted October 17, 2012 Member Share Posted October 17, 2012 Really? I didn't know that. But either way, he couldn't have been happy with the final product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Markgway Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 From the BBFC: "SKYFALL contains a single use of strong language, which is uttered when a character states they have "f**ked up". The use is resigned rather than aggressive and is not directed at another person. There is also some moderate and mild bad language, including uses of 'bitch', 'bloody', 'buggered', 'shit', 'hell', 'damned', 'Christ' and 'God'." Sounds utterly gratuitous to me. Wouldn't "I screwed up" have done just as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member TibetanWhiteCrane Posted October 19, 2012 Member Share Posted October 19, 2012 How is bitch, bloody, hell, damned, christ and god bad language? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Killer Meteor Posted October 19, 2012 Member Share Posted October 19, 2012 All those words have appeared in previous Bond films. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member TibetanWhiteCrane Posted October 19, 2012 Member Share Posted October 19, 2012 Yeah, im not sure about Buggered (and honestly, who's offended by that?) and I think it's a first time for Shit too, not 100% sure though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Markgway Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 The BBFC class those are mild/moderate bad language, which is fine, because you can have those at 'PG'. What irks me is the gratuitous 'fuck'. 'Ooh, this film must be for adults because someone says 'fuck'.' That's a child's POV and these 'one use of...' you see in almost every '12' that comes along is cyncially designed to appease older children and nothing to do with script necessity. If it were deemed important there would no doubt be 30 or 40 uses. To me adding swearing senslessly is no better than censoring it (i.e. Die Hard 4). A world in which a 007 movie has an f-word and a Die Hard movie doesn't is a strange world indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member massa_yoda Posted October 20, 2012 Member Share Posted October 20, 2012 Yeah, im not sure about Buggered (and honestly, who's offended by that?) and I think it's a first time for Shit too, not 100% sure though. There was a 'Holy shit' in Live and Let Die when Bond is driving a plane through closing doors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member TibetanWhiteCrane Posted October 20, 2012 Member Share Posted October 20, 2012 Fully vocalized? Must go back and check. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Markgway Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 Yeah, there's a 'holy shit' in LALD - the old woman in the plane Bond commandeers says it. But that's nothing. 'Shit' is mild. Only 'fuck' (and its variants) is considered strong. J.W. Pepper says "what the f--" as the speedboat crosses, but they had enough sense to mute it. Partial or mouthed strong language isn't allowed at 'PG' in the UK anymore so if submitted fresh the film would be a '12'. Diamonds Are Forever was the first Bond to use mild bad language (as opposed to very mild stuff like 'hell' and 'damn'); "you dirty bastard" is said by the Vegas cop and there's a 'bitch' said by Bond to Tiffany on the rig. Only recently has 'bitch' become 'moderate'; I guess the PC board are now more sensitive to misogynist language. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Reel Power Stunts Posted October 21, 2012 Member Share Posted October 21, 2012 If "Skyfall" has gratuitous things in it, which slightly mar a good film, it would be things like product placement. We know WHY they have Bond (and later another MI6 chap) drinking Heineken, but were the moments always suitable? Likewise, one closeup of Bond's wrist & hand in the opening action scene lingers just a tad too long - no doubt to show off his timepiece! The use of the F word seemed to pass unnoticed by the audience I just saw it with. It seemed in keeping with the scene and the drama. We hear liberal use of the word in post-watershed TV in Britain, so I think a sophisticated audience wouldn't care or notice if Judy Dench's M used it in believable circumstances. If anything it was an earlier use of "shit" which seemed a bit jarring. I doubt the Bond producers included the word in order to gain a higher category from the BBFC. The film has action/violence in keeping with a 12A. It doesn't linger on the violence or it's effects, but is cold blooded nonetheless. If anything, the fact that an F or C word can easily earn a higher rating shows how out of keeping with the times the BBFC is. They may say the parents they consult are concerned about bad language, but have they listened to playground banter recently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Markgway Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 If "Skyfall" has gratuitous things in it, which slightly mar a good film, it would be things like product placement. Worse than the 'my watch is Omega' scene from Casino Royale? We hear liberal use of the word in post-watershed TV in Britain, so I think a sophisticated audience wouldn't care or notice if Judy Dench's M used it in believable circumstances. Post-watershed TV is supposed to be for adults. I doubt the Bond producers included the word in order to gain a higher category from the BBFC. No, I'm sure they did it to appear cool to easily impressed teenagers who don't want to see the same films as their younger siblings. They may say the parents they consult are concerned about bad language, but have they listened to playground banter recently? I'd say that there's a huge gulf in what kids say when their parents aren't around to what parents would want them to hear in their presence. Of course kids swear but does that mean adults should approve of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Reel Power Stunts Posted October 22, 2012 Member Share Posted October 22, 2012 Worse than the 'my watch is Omega' scene from Casino Royale? Not at all. But Volkswagen got a mention which I felt was a bit like, "OK, time to sell some cars". Post-watershed TV is supposed to be for adults. Yes, but in this day and age younger folks do watch post watershed programs, and listen to music with explicit lyrics etc No, I'm sure they did it to appear cool to easily impressed teenagers who don't want to see the same films as their younger siblings. You may of course be right, but I am not so sure. It certainly didn't seem cynically inserted into the film to me. Agree to disagree? I'd say that there's a huge gulf in what kids say when their parents aren't around to what parents would want them to hear in their presence. Of course kids swear but does that mean adults should approve of it? In many families, yes. In many other families - probably not the kind who write letters of complaint to the BBFC - they couldn't give an F what their little ones say or hear! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Markgway Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 In many other families - probably not the kind who write letters of complaint to the BBFC - they couldn't give an F what their little ones say or hear! Which is kinda sad isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Karlos Posted November 1, 2012 Moderator Share Posted November 1, 2012 Caught this last night and it's a bit of a mixed bag, I thought. I won't go into it too deeply as it doesn't get a US release for another week or so, but I will say that, whilst I enjoyed much of it, it felt like a step back from CR and QoS and fell between the more serious take of those two films and some of the campier elements of eariler entries. Maybe I was just expecting too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Markgway Posted November 1, 2012 Share Posted November 1, 2012 Maybe I was just expecting too much. The hype has been ridiculous. I thought the film was quite good. Best Bond? No. But I'll check out the Blu Ray next spring for a second look with some perspective. Might be able to offer a fairer assessment then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Karlos Posted November 1, 2012 Moderator Share Posted November 1, 2012 The hype has been ridiculous. I thought the film was quite good. Best Bond? No. But I'll check out the Blu Ray next spring for a second look with some perspective. Might be able to offer a fairer assessment then. I agree 100%. The hype was over the top to an astonishing degree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member massa_yoda Posted November 10, 2012 Member Share Posted November 10, 2012 I thought Skyfall was amazing. Sam Mendes really put QoS director Marc Forster to shame (and i liked QoS). Mendes shoots long takes for the dialogue AND the action scenes. There is one fight scene that is all one take with no edits. Bond and the henchman are both in the dark, so you can't see them, but you can see the fight just fine. The longer takes during the dialogue scenes allows the actors room to, well, act. And Craig really brings it here.. And even though this isn't a direct sequel the way QoS was to CR, Bond continues to grow as a character and they set the stage brilliantly for future films. The homages are great too. Basically, see it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member KyFi Posted November 10, 2012 Member Share Posted November 10, 2012 Absolutely loved it! My favorite Bond since Goldeneye, and in my top 5 of the franchise. This just didn't hit any wrong notes for me, and felt like a very fresh take on things, while still retaining the stuff I'd want to see in a Bond picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member KyFi Posted November 10, 2012 Member Share Posted November 10, 2012 Mendes shoots long takes for the dialogue AND the action scenes. There is one fight scene that is all one take with no edits. Bond and the henchman are both in the dark, so you can't see them, but you can see the fight just fine. The longer takes during the dialogue scenes allows the actors room to, well, act. And Craig really brings it here.. Strongly agree with all that---love to see films moving away from that crappy super-quick-cuts editing style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Markgway Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Actually I thought that the hand-to-hand combat in SKYFALL was below par and less impressive than the fights in previous Bond movies. The skyscraper shadow fight was deliberately staged and could've been performed by any stunt double (was Daniel Craig even there?). I'm not a huge fan of the rapid edit style, but it works in QOS, the most underrated of 007 movies. To me this intense fight is better than any of the ones in Skyfall: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Karlos Posted November 10, 2012 Moderator Share Posted November 10, 2012 I really like QoS - sure, there's some nasty shakycam in there (especially during the opening car chase) and feels very Bourne-like at times but it's a lean, mean epilogue to CR, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member KyFi Posted November 11, 2012 Member Share Posted November 11, 2012 I had a friend (whose opinion on film I respect a lot and usually share) who saw QOS and told me that the editing of the action scenes ruined the movie for him. Because of that, I didn't see it---until I recently caught the opening on TV. I thought "I'll give it a try--maybe it's not that bad". Watching that car chase scene was almost physically painful for me, and I really had no idea what was going on, and I changed the channel. So, I still haven't seen the whole movie. I have a really strong aversion to that shaky-cam/rapid editing---hated The Expendables, and it puts me off enough that I can't enjoy the film even if the other aspects are good. I just liked so much about Skyfall---Moneypenny and Mallory were great characters, I thought, and that final showdown at the family estate just seemed really fresh to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member OpiumKungFuCracker Posted November 11, 2012 Member Share Posted November 11, 2012 Damn, I really want to see this but I'm too lazy to get out of the house... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member massa_yoda Posted November 11, 2012 Member Share Posted November 11, 2012 To me this intense fight is better than any of the ones in Skyfall: That IS a good fight, Markgway. But I like the Skyfall shadow fight better. Granted, both techniques, bad lighting and choppy editing, are designed to hide the stunt doubles (and usually in the latter case, lazy fight choreo). However, I will take the shadow fight because you get to see the whole thing. I don't expect Daniel Craig to pull off a huge one-shot fight like this, so it didn't bother or distract me that I couldn't see his face (also I loved the lighting that was behind/around them during the whole scene, it just looked really cool). Just give me fast, fluid choreo that I can see and I'll be happy. So, I still haven't seen the whole movie. You should still watch it. If anything, for the continuity of this new Bond series. It's a good movie, just not always great at shooting action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.