BroadcastChic Excellent, a Must See

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Portia Hilton Blistering performances.

Jerrie It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

dting2010 To me, this has the feel of old school James Bond. It goes back to the days of Connery, full of class and style. By far, one of Craig's best. If amongst his brooding demeanor, he brings a certain vulnerability to the role. It also brings a classy ending to a lifelong movie history relationship.

hrayovac No backup in Scotland. This is M, a rather important person to the government and no protection..and why would Silva choose to attack in such a trap situation? It is because they wanted to drag out Silva's demise in excruciating length. Craig's acting can't turn a Swiss cheese plot into even a solid Havarti. The beginning of the love-hate depravity type in all the Bond villains that would follow. No more simple world domination, now these guys are just weird.

Samiam3 There are three items which make Skyfall worth some credit. First there is the title song. Regardless of whether the lyrics make sense (like all the other bond songs) 'Skyfall' is destined to be a soul classic someday. Second there is Javier Bardem's performance. His bond villain is as deliciously whimsical as he is sinister. Third there is Roger Deakin's cinematography, which compliments all the set pieces with extraordinary light and colour, and subsequent texture.Aside from this, Skyfall is dismissible. The biggest problem is Daniel Craig who plays James Bond with no love. He seems to interpret 007 as a creation of the cold and seclusive espionage world of John le Carré. That wouldn't explain however the way he just shoots back a shot of thousand dollar scotch as if it were a tequila and lime. What happened to your class Mr. Bond?Between the action set pieces, Skyfall is rather ponderous and void of wit or charm. The movie brings in a 'would be' bond girl (with the whole package; lips, legs) only to bump her off a couple scenes later in a way it feels like an attack on the bond girl tradition itself.Skyfall succeeds in dodging most of the gimmicks but fails to capture the highlights of the 007 legacy.

Malcolm Parker OK, the story is no more or less plausible than previous episodes in the series. Perhaps it has a harder edge, with a line of coffins draped in Union Jacks and faux news coverage of summary executions filmed on hand-held cameras mimicking all too familiar real life events. What is unfortunate is that the legacy of this series, injects softness where there should be none and implausibility where mere spectacle is no longer enough. The legacy demands that Bond is portrayed as a heroic figure, but coldly, there is little in this tale that is heroic. The dichotomy for the writers is delivering a convincing narrative about this secret agent, when little that drove the invention of the character and his "glamour" has any meaningful relevance to the job such an agent would need to do in today's world. We've know this for years of course, and the problem is perhaps the biggest challenge to face anyone who wants to continue the succession. There are few films in cinema history that are nicer to look at than this one, but if you want to get the most out of the film, don't bother trying to connect too many of the dots in the story. It's not Shawshank, The Godfather or Lawrence of Arabia, but it is a GOOD James Bond film!