Skyfall
Columbia Pictures | Release Date: November 9, 2012
7.7
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 1939 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
1,546
Mixed:
244
Negative:
149
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
5
analogkid280Nov 12, 2012
I have to say I agree with the positive reviews and the negative reviews too. It is a good movie as long as you do not think too much about what you are watching. You also need to ignore all the commercials during the film. You need toI have to say I agree with the positive reviews and the negative reviews too. It is a good movie as long as you do not think too much about what you are watching. You also need to ignore all the commercials during the film. You need to disregard the plot devices that are inconsistent writing. Did they say uranium? Never mind you are going to watch this movie anyway just enjoy it and expect to take a nap for the last half hour of this 2 and a half hour long movie.… Expand
15 of 26 users found this helpful1511
All this user's reviews
8
AaronKallnerNov 9, 2012
I thought Skyfall was the best of the Daniel Craig movies. Javier Bardem was a great villain,as always. The plot was very good. great chases and fighting. Although I love Sean Connery more, Skyfall made me a big Daniel Craig fan now too.
19 of 34 users found this helpful1915
All this user's reviews
0
ReviewerMetaNov 21, 2012
"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"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
17 of 31 users found this helpful1714
All this user's reviews
5
mrbofusNov 9, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Based on reviews, I thought this movie would impress me and knock my socks off; and perhaps I walked in expecting too much, but I walked out thinking, "meh."

It wasn't a terrible movie, but I don't understand why everyone is saying it's so great.

There were way too many plot holes that took me out of the movie. The biggest one that ran throughout the movie was, "Why didn't Silva just kidnap M?" At the end of the movie, it turns out his plans was to kill M but also himself. Why did he go through all the effort of the entire movie when he could have just kidnapped M to begin with? He clearly had the knowledge, skills, and resources to do so. His whole reason for doing anything was because he had M (mommy) issues.

His entire "plan" hinged on Bond wanting to get captured by him and then Bond taking him prisoner. And why would Bond want to be captured in that way anyways? Wouldn't it make more sense to take Severine, give her protective custody and interrogate her? She knew where Silva was and appeared ready and willing to give Bond that knowledge anyways. They could have found the location that way, and then sent in the commandos. The second part of his "plan" was getting captured and then escaping. Why go through all that? Just attack the hearing that he knew M was going to be in anyways, without having to deal with planning an incredibly elaborate escape. Or, back to the big issue, just kidnap her. *side note: it is clearly established that Bond is chasing Silva through rush-hour crowds, yet the train that crashes through the ceiling and almost hits Bond is empty except for the driver. Where did all the people go?*

And about his escape. The second biggest problem for me. Q, this genius technology guy, plugs in Silva's computer, who has already been acknowledged as a master hacker, straight into MI6's network?!? Seriously?! Wouldn't you try to get what's on the computer without connecting it to a network? Or if you had to connect it to a network, connect it to an isolated one? If guys like Q are in charge of computer stuff at MI6, no wonder they got so easily hacked.

Skyfall. James Bond had super rich parents. Great. Their death messed him up. Great. He doesn't like talking about it. Great. But that's as far as we go. But fine, let's say we're not going to delve into that. At Skyfall, after M and Kincade escape, why are they using the flashlight? I can get Kincade maybe not thinking of that, but M, who leads a spy organization doesn't think about how a flashlight could give away their position at night?

Anyways, those are just the big ones that stick out in my head. Those took me out of the movie and made me just wonder, "what the heck are these people doing?!" throughout most of the movie.… Expand
15 of 28 users found this helpful1513
All this user's reviews
3
DillioNov 10, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. 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.… Expand
21 of 41 users found this helpful2120
All this user's reviews
9
dharmaNov 9, 2012
James Bond films were never really considered as great films. They are good escapist fares, but never considered as something more than that. On some occasions, such as 'On Her Majesty Secret Service' or 'Casino Royale', the Bond films roseJames Bond films were never really considered as great films. They are good escapist fares, but never considered as something more than that. On some occasions, such as 'On Her Majesty Secret Service' or 'Casino Royale', the Bond films rose to become something more, but they are far and between. Until now. Skyfall may be one of the best Bond film of all time, and may be the best film of 2012. It's a character piece that deconstructs who Bond really is and his relationship with those surrounding him, in particular with 'M'. The cinematography is top notch, the plot sublime and Sam Mendes delivers. But at the heart of Skyfall is the performances of its actors. Craig finally becomes the best Bond since Connery, imbuing great depth to this character. Judi Dench finally does her best turn yet, while Bardem delivers an over the top performance as Silva, one of Bond's most memorable villain. Again, I can't say enough of this, one of the finest film of 2012, and the best Bond film of all time. Don't miss it.… Expand
20 of 40 users found this helpful2020
All this user's reviews
0
monkeylionNov 10, 2012
Worst Bond movie I've ever seen, boring, dumb, predictable, it sucks big time. Save yourselve some time and money dont watch it. Oh yes it is that bad
15 of 30 users found this helpful1515
All this user's reviews
1
napstrpsxNov 13, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. First of all, whoever is simply upvoting positive reviews and downvoting negative ones, you are not helping constructive film criticism. This movie is bad, and there are reasons for that:

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

The only redeeming things I can think of this movie are a decent opening and Kincade, the old guy at Skyfall. He is the ONLY character in this movie with any heart that I cared about and enjoyed watching. He alone earns the one point I would be willing to award to this film. Good riddance to the featured M.… Expand
24 of 51 users found this helpful2427
All this user's reviews
10
HadrianusNov 11, 2012
Director,screenplay,actors,sound=awesome.Good election to choose ADELE for the song.I think that it will be nominated to the Academy Award:
-Best Original Song
-Best Cinematography -Best Actor -Best Supporting Actor -Best SupportingDirector,screenplay,actors,sound=awesome.Good election to choose ADELE for the song.I think that it will be nominated to the Academy Award:
-Best Original Song
-Best Cinematography
-Best Actor
-Best Supporting Actor
-Best Supporting Actress
-Best Sound Mixing
-Best Sound Editing
I see you in the Academy Awards.… Expand
17 of 37 users found this helpful1720
All this user's reviews
0
DemoraseNov 9, 2012
I'm genuinely surprised this movie is getting such rave reviews, I thought it was awful. It tries so hard to be dark and serious, but to me it came across as completely shallow. I never felt empathy for Bond in this movie, and I don't get howI'm genuinely surprised this movie is getting such rave reviews, I thought it was awful. It tries so hard to be dark and serious, but to me it came across as completely shallow. I never felt empathy for Bond in this movie, and I don't get how I was supposed to when he never shows any emotion or attachment to anything the whole movie. That would have been OK if it was just about him being a badass but here they spend huge chunks of the movie where you're supposed to buy that he's "vulnerable" and "complex". But it kinda doesn't work when the guy is practically invincible and nothing ever affects him, in fact I would have been ok if they did a twist where they tell you Bond was actually a robot all along, that's how wooden the character was. So yeah, the psychology aspect just didn't do it for me, and not helping matters there was only one really memorable action scene and it's in the opening sequence (the intro was amazing I'll give the movie that) : it was basically a borefest for two hours after the intro. You could argue it's the second "best" JB movie based on the cinematography alone because it's true the movie is beautifully shot, but then again it doesn't matter when you don't care about anything that's going on. That wasn't the case in Casino Royale where I genuinely cared about the character, because they showed you he was human and not just a cold robot.… Expand
22 of 56 users found this helpful2234
All this user's reviews
1
Nami87Nov 9, 2012
It was G-d awful!
Consistent blatant product placement.
The shout outs to the past bond films were nostalgic but seemed forced for cheap thrills. The CGI in the first scene was TERRIBLE and was clear that it was computer generated. QIt 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
22 of 59 users found this helpful2237
All this user's reviews
0
sanjaytrivediNov 9, 2012
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 actionA 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
17 of 46 users found this helpful1729
All this user's reviews
1
martaayNov 9, 2012
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 aLeft 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
17 of 49 users found this helpful1732
All this user's reviews
1
josephdavid810Nov 9, 2012
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 143If 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.… Expand
17 of 51 users found this helpful1734
All this user's reviews
0
existenceNov 9, 2012
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.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
27 of 84 users found this helpful2757
All this user's reviews
5
NimzabaatNov 22, 2012
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
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
4
mrmonsterApr 2, 2013
A few okay action scenes, but mostly a long, boring movie with no real point. I wouldn't recommend it. It might be okay for a few loyal bond fans, but if you aren't a James Bond superfan, you probably won't like it.
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
5
NikolayGNov 5, 2015
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 makeCasino 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
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
4
TECfilmsNov 19, 2012
Hm, okay, there is something new in this Bond film, vut especially the ending sequence at "Skyfall" was unrealistic and much too similar to an average action movie. The villain seems unmotivated, certain actions are not comprehensible, andHm, okay, there is something new in this Bond film, vut especially the ending sequence at "Skyfall" was unrealistic and much too similar to an average action movie. The villain seems unmotivated, certain actions are not comprehensible, and then M's dead at the end, which destroys James' invulnerable image ... absolutely a matter of taste!… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
5
screenplayhouseNov 12, 2012
The hype on this Bond is embarrassing. I'm all about a more serious Bond with Sam Mendes at the helm. What I wanted was a clever spy story. What we instead get is a rehashing of great moments from other movies.

As to not spoil, the listThe hype on this Bond is embarrassing. I'm all about a more serious Bond with Sam Mendes at the helm. What I wanted was a clever spy story. What we instead get is a rehashing of great moments from other movies.

As to not spoil, the list of stolen ideas from better movies include: LIVE AND LET DIE, BATMAN, THE UNTOUCHABLES, and the painfully obvious SILENCE OF THE LAMBS. Now I know why Sam Mendes has been unable to prosper without Bond. Apparently he's a hack.

As much as I like the actor who played the villain, he reminded me too closely in appearance and performance of Christopher Walken's disastrous A VIEW TO A KILL villain. Laughing and smirking in a little world the rest of us neither understand or give a crepe about. In this film I didn't care the villain, Bond, or the 'dramatic' event at movies end -- which wasn't set up by professional filmmakers but Comic book fanboys. And the oh so precious introduction of a Bond institution at movie's end was another 'precious' fanboy moment played terribly wrong.

Where the Bond girl? The same place this script was. Up someone's arrogant myopic behind.… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
5
caldepenNov 13, 2012
Good movie, just not a good Bond movie. The main protagonist (Bond) and antagonist (Silva/Bardem) are underwhelming. I want Bond to be a hero, not a drunken bum (who can oddly survive a crazy high fall into a creek) and I want Bond villain toGood movie, just not a good Bond movie. The main protagonist (Bond) and antagonist (Silva/Bardem) are underwhelming. I want Bond to be a hero, not a drunken bum (who can oddly survive a crazy high fall into a creek) and I want Bond villain to aspire to more than just silly revenge. It is however very well shot. This falls short of Bourne for me.… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
5
sky_has_fallenNov 23, 2012
Bond has been hit by a fallen meteor. Disappointing for a Bond film- strained and very unrealistic plot with another crazed unbelievable villain, But good on-location photography.
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
4
MrHenleyNov 24, 2012
I really didn't enjoy Skyfall. Some elements were good, but I felt it was too bland. Basically Bourne but with a bit more class. Why must they cut out the cool gadgets / glamour? What drew me to Bond in the first place was the escapism andI really didn't enjoy Skyfall. Some elements were good, but I felt it was too bland. Basically Bourne but with a bit more class. Why must they cut out the cool gadgets / glamour? What drew me to Bond in the first place was the escapism and fantasy elements. This is too real world, too much like a stock standard action film.… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
2
coreylikefeldmaNov 25, 2012
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. TheJames 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
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
4
dickreesNov 27, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Anyone who believes this is a good Bond Movie is an Odd Job. And probably likes the musical 'We will Rock You'. Average action to open, silly effete bad guy (let's make him camp!) with lack of ambition and overbite, (didn't they used to want to take over the world?) washed down with a terrible clunky script. Why? - because it borrows so heavily from other films: Hannibal Lecter cage from Silence of the Lambs; shotguns and courduroy jackets and country from Bourne; dead parents from Harry Potter. Ridiculous dialogue: Albert Finney: "I was born ready!" - really! Silly denouement: Bardem arrives with heavies majically out of thin air and M has no security save for Bond who kills a helicopter with a calor gas cannister. No glamour, no charachter arc for sexy women - only M who completely forgets all her training and waves a bad guy in with a white hankie. No bad guy characters introduced around main Bardem charachter (no Odd Job) 'Ext. Skyfall - Night: Lots of bad guys wander down sepia tinted countryside looking for a tosser and his mum and a poacher so they can kill him. They all die in BBQ accident.'

Stupid and unsophisticated with schlocky ending that betrays Bond cool. His parents grave - and mum named Delacroix - and what -what- what! Stupid moments: Bond chasing Bardem in Z Cars outfit and crashing train pointlessly into underground. This is not a Bond Movie. It's a Blonde movie made by people with a schedule. Skyfall House - that really made me laugh... as if.… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
5
mansellNov 30, 2012
Disappointing. Loved Casino Royale 's realism, but this was like watching a Batman movie with an arch villain and bumbling Secret Service except for Bond.
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
3
ultralight47Dec 4, 2012
OK, he's shot in the chest, he falls a distance that is deadly, he goes over what could be Niagara Falls, and then 20 minutes later he's lying next to a woman in bed. No explanation given; some guys just don't die. I understand that withOK, he's shot in the chest, he falls a distance that is deadly, he goes over what could be Niagara Falls, and then 20 minutes later he's lying next to a woman in bed. No explanation given; some guys just don't die. I understand that with James Bond films belief must be suspended and situations are presented that don't make sense in the real world (like our defenseless hero is surrounded by armed opponents who follow the golden rule that they cannoct respond towards our hero until it is "their turn"), so I am somewhat predisposed not to like this type of film. But what is really wrong with this film is that the script is dumbed down to a fifth grade level and I may be too kind in this assessment. Really? People at this level of achievement talk with such a low grade -intelligence quotient?… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
4
joie2Dec 14, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Skyfall had some good bits, but a lot of problems. The "aging Bond" aspect of the film didn't work for me because we all know that Bond is effectively a permanently young and handsome character, thanks to the miracle of casting. Besides, it's been done before (in Never Say Never?). The scale of the movie didn't work for me either -- "Skyfall" is such a grandiose name that it should have been an international scheme, not Bond's dismal childhood manse. And the "revenge on M" motivation fell flat. Bond villains should want to take over the world, get rich, or both. I also disliked the movie's midway morph into Home Alone. How tedious. Finally, I was offended by the homophobia implicit in the depiction of the villain. What will the next Bond film bring us -- a greedy Jew?… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
2
chaz12Dec 16, 2012
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 halfI 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
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
4
KnackeringhamDec 24, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. If I didn't know it was a Bond film I would have enjoyed it more. There was no 'light and shade' as in previous Bond movies. It was all too dark. What happened to the suave sophistication that Bond exudes...always 100% sure of himself. There were no 'tongue in cheek' snippets that always was a sign of a good Bond film. I missed the inventive gadgets that Q would provide. It was though the writers were trying to destroy the franchise by blowing up the Aston Martin and revealing Bonds past. Why destroy the mystique of Bond? I hope they return to the old format. There will always be plenty of Bourne Identities. Sorry 5/10.… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
2
tooktheredpillDec 30, 2012
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
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
4
mvh888Jan 2, 2013
After watching skyfall I felt like having worked for an enitre day, it just took far too long. It'd be better it'd be shortened by an hour. The acting wasn't bad and stuff. Actually there was nothing which was like really bad but everythingAfter watching skyfall I felt like having worked for an enitre day, it just took far too long. It'd be better it'd be shortened by an hour. The acting wasn't bad and stuff. Actually there was nothing which was like really bad but everything also was not good.… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
5
madeleineJan 11, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Some great action scenes are the only distinguishing feature. Otherwise, far too much product placement and a plot which revises GoldenEye with its agent turned villain after harsh treatment by his spymasters (Bardem phones in his performance and counts the cash, and good luck to him). The whole thing could have been rescued for me if Silva had killed M and himself in the chapel, with Bond arriving just in time to witness it. Now that would have been a movie!… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
3
dansky3Feb 13, 2013
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
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
6
Mr_MuumiFeb 18, 2013
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 youYou 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.… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
5
NathonasDec 6, 2015
The film starts out with a lot of promise but quickly goes downhill once the villain is introduced. The end sequence in particular makes zero sense and feels completely out of place.
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
3
LaGuertaFeb 26, 2013
The progress made in bringing the franchise into the modern age is spectacularly undone. By the end of this film, you find yourself staring at the start of every early Bond film. While this could have been a superb way to wrap up 'Bond willThe progress made in bringing the franchise into the modern age is spectacularly undone. By the end of this film, you find yourself staring at the start of every early Bond film. While this could have been a superb way to wrap up 'Bond will return' and that is rather a depressing notion.… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
2
phiznakJun 11, 2013
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
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
2
calhouniteNov 15, 2013
Wow. So they took my script after all. Only it wasn't a 007 movie. It was a 777 movie. The guy's name is Bomb not Bond. Bomb can't shoot. If he were on a lifeboat and aimed a flair at the sky he'd put a hole right smack dab in the middle ofWow. So they took my script after all. Only it wasn't a 007 movie. It was a 777 movie. The guy's name is Bomb not Bond. Bomb can't shoot. If he were on a lifeboat and aimed a flair at the sky he'd put a hole right smack dab in the middle of his boat. Chronic boozer, doper, and complainer. Only assigned minor missions like if some disgruntled ex-employee leaked some names, then that would go to Bomb. Nothing world-threatening. That's reserved for the doulbe 0's like Bond. Goes around with a grim look on his face like if he were about to be cremated or spliced in half, that's something to be concerned about. Actually thinks HE'S more important than his mission, and takes an unauthorized vacation to pout about it after finding out he's not.

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

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

This is not a Bond.

This is a Bomb.… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
4
OzyApr 15, 2014
I liked the fact that it showed the toll bond had accumulated over the years. But I expected him to snap out of his lonely old man state of mind and kick some ass. In all honesty the movie felt like it should have instead been the firstI liked the fact that it showed the toll bond had accumulated over the years. But I expected him to snap out of his lonely old man state of mind and kick some ass. In all honesty the movie felt like it should have instead been the first 15minutes of another epic bond film.… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
5
BHBarryDec 22, 2012
"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,"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
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
nutterjrDec 29, 2012
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 filmIt 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.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
JamesLNov 19, 2012
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 toI 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
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
podunk411Nov 28, 2012
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 actionNot 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
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
5
LightlySaltedFeb 15, 2013
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 yetThis 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
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
TyranianApr 11, 2019
Okay Bond film with strong visuals and action but lame villain and new Q is not great.
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
kirkkhDec 6, 2012
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'sMeh, 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.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
1
CharlieBrown8Jun 14, 2020
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Watching "Skyfall" again last night I’m left with the same horrible taste in my mouth like first time around, stemming from the disgusting scene in which the Chinese sex slave Bond girl is murdered by the villain while Bond callously quips "what a waste of good scotch". Despite being awfully bad storytelling in itself (Bonds kills all the goons and captures the villain within 30 seconds after the murder, meaning he could have easily prevented it), how is such a scene a thing in the 21st century, and why wasn't that already a bigger controversy in 2012? It might be somewhat amusing re-watching Sean Connery dragging a masseuse against her protest into the shower as an (albeit still painful) artefact of his time. But how are we allowing a supposedly modern Bond be imagined the way Skyfall does? This scene singlehandedly ruined the movie for me. I give a point for the great visuals, but that’s it.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
5
seancriswellNov 27, 2012
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.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 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
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
goldfox17Dec 3, 2012
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 usesdon'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
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
Rob_ApplesNov 14, 2012
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. HeJames 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
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
GregRobinson800Nov 14, 2012
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/directerI 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
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
FrankCassioDec 20, 2012
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 theFor 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.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
GamingGuru365Jun 1, 2013
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 thisSkyfall 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
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
1
dyshpoMar 23, 2015
Every sequence in film is borrow from past bond films. Q is an incompetent twink . Home Alone homage towards the end. Some reason Q is dumb. I did not know Bond was in the Nolan-verse did Chris Nolan direct this and Sam Mendez just takeEvery sequence in film is borrow from past bond films. Q is an incompetent twink . Home Alone homage towards the end. Some reason Q is dumb. I did not know Bond was in the Nolan-verse did Chris Nolan direct this and Sam Mendez just take credit . Awkward how they imply M and Bond have a romantic relationship. Q is stupid . Joker was not needed in a Bond spy thriller.

And finally the reference that male spies would have to seduce other men during some missions same for women is true I really liked that the finally did something different.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
3
CameraBounceGodAug 12, 2018
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. i find it hard to watch the entire thing as the climax is boring as hell and cheap seeming. I do like however the fact that Bardems character doesn't like taking orders from old women which i can relate to big time. I feel like they should have somehow shown bond contemplating living a normal life before coming back.The poetry scene is embarrassing and retarded. I like the way they beefed up the Q character but it seems as though they failed to follow up on it. The adele song is pretty bad ofcourse. the name Money Penny is so stupid that bringing back the character and name only with a black face is almost racist the way they were obviously trying so hard to not be racist. the idea of the fight in the casino is just preposterous seeing how they wanted him to come along for the boat ride. a good thing they did was to show how Ms choice for money penny to take the shot is clearly a thing that has caught up to her from the past and she catches flak. s problem is that i feel like Bardem's character would have way more henchmen and what the hell ever happened to having a crazy lead henchmen like odd job and jaws? one last thing is that it makes little sense that you would try to hit someone with a train by derailing it. also the scorpion bar scene would have just been cooler without the scorpion..… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
TheKanatorFeb 16, 2016
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
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
BradleyJordanAug 2, 2018
Good action film and entertaining. Some of the action scenes were a bit over the top. More character development would have added some depth to this movie.
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
4
zNeverSleepingDec 28, 2019
É um bom filme para a "sessão da tarde".

Se você está procurando algo pra se entreter e apenas isso, talvez funcione. Mas ao ser um pouco mais exigente, já começa a notar coisas que comprometem e muito a obra. Primeiro ponto são osÉ um bom filme para a "sessão da tarde".

Se você está procurando algo pra se entreter e apenas isso, talvez funcione. Mas ao ser um pouco mais exigente, já começa a notar coisas que comprometem e muito a obra. Primeiro ponto são os personagens. O filme tem uma mania incrível de superestimá-los, forçando diálogos "inteligentes" e tampouco naturais, quando o mesmo a frente mostra as trapalhadas das arrogância do mesmo, o problema é que isso não me pareceu de proposito. Outro ponto que me incomodou foi a personalidade do Bond. Aqui o roteirista não parece se preocupar com a modernização - natural, diga-se de passagem; do personagem, que transmite um ar de homem com "H maiúsculo", sendo favorável a moda antiga, desde fazer a barba com a navalha ou sou um ignorante quanto o poder da tecnologia - mesmo que ela tenha sido retratada pelo personagem "Q", que apenas é inteligente quando o roteiro quer. E mesmo que se esforcem muito para passar a personalidade do Bond ao publico, não funciona, pois simplesmente é falado e não mostrado - trazendo mais uma vez um ar de artificialidade.
Fora o fato de que é impossível salvar o mundo se você não transou com ao menos duas mulheres no mesmo filme. É insano o fato de que quase toda mulher quer pegar ele. Esse filme mais parece um anime de tarado japonês do que de um filme de ação.
A mulher que lidera os 00 é super arrogante e cheia de si e suas decisões, mas o filme não se aprofunda nisso, fazendo com que esse elemento não valha nada. O vilão, como sempre, é um pedaço de saco que serve para o protagonista bater. Suas convicções são incompreensíveis e mais uma vez o personagem só é inteligente quando o roteirista quer. A atuação não convence muito, e eu nem se quer acho que o ator teria background de personagem suficiente pra isso. Como pontos positivos, temos a fotografia - sempre concisa, a trilha sonora original sendo uma das melhores do gênero, efeitos especiais.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
4
JamesCannonNov 11, 2012
rather mundane action movie, not sure why this had so many glowing reviews. I loss attention through most of the action sequences cause they just didnt have that punch to them that casino royale had, which is a far superior film than thisrather mundane action movie, not sure why this had so many glowing reviews. I loss attention through most of the action sequences cause they just didnt have that punch to them that casino royale had, which is a far superior film than this was. I miss the ol cheeky bond too, this is just way to serious and it even tries to be a little dark knightish, which it doesnt copy very well either.… Expand
6 of 7 users found this helpful61
All this user's reviews
1
bazkieNov 23, 2012
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
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews
0
LeonidasRexMar 3, 2014
This is one of the worst Bonds movies ever. The villain is a joke, a blond effeminate computer genius with no motivation beyond petty revenge. The "old people are sexy too" theme is just as boring here as it was in the fourth Indiana JonesThis is one of the worst Bonds movies ever. The villain is a joke, a blond effeminate computer genius with no motivation beyond petty revenge. The "old people are sexy too" theme is just as boring here as it was in the fourth Indiana Jones movie. The dozens of plot holes gape so wide that they swallow the entire movie. They could have put the explosions, chases, and fights in any order, and the story would make just as much sense.… Expand
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews
0
dr40213Nov 26, 2012
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 thatSkyfall 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
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews
0
SrhinoDec 13, 2012
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 heI 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
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews
1
FeeneeJan 8, 2013
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
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews
0
atheistrepublicJan 13, 2013
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 charactersMy 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.… Expand
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews
0
AshmoviesNov 12, 2014
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
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews
1
coxmail10Nov 18, 2012
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 ofCasino 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
8 of 10 users found this helpful82
All this user's reviews
1
MB_Nov 25, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Why didn't the badguy just kill Q at home or when he exploded her headquarters? Why didn't Bond ask for a doctor to remove the fragments rather than using a knife and his left hand? Why didn't the bad guy just kill bond, what did he want him for? Why didn't they just hide in the tunnel as the bad guy didn't know it existed? Why did the priest hole lead to no where? Why did Bond walk over the ice when everyone else went around? Where did the ice henchman appear from? Why did Q plug the bad guy's PC into the network rather than an isolated PC? Why did they lock the badguy in a glass room which is locked electronically rather than just use a padlock? When did Bond set off the radio beacon on the island and why didn't the electronics mastermind badguy not have him checked? When did the badguy put the explosives on the roof of the chamber letting the train through, wouldn't he have used his time better, running away? Why didn't they just withdraw all the at risk agents? Why didn't bond shoot him at any point, he'd be tortured for months by the Chinese why would he talk to them? Why was there more screen time dedicated to Judi Dench than for Daniel Craig? Why did bond's face change from Brosnan to Craig yet M's is still Dench? Why would you cut up a perfectly good opening action scene to an old woman moaning in an office ever 30 seconds? Can I get a refund?… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
3
evanrmNov 29, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The worst of the Daniel Craig James Bond films. The treadbare plot seems designed so specifically to kill off Judi Dench's character that I wonder if she wanted out. It could have been interesting, but it wasn't. Javier Bardem's flamboyant gay super-genius-criminal-mastermind was decidedly unrealistic in every way. The parts in all the trailers where James Bond gets shot? He comes back 5 minutes later after apparently living in some Caribbean paradise for three weeks and has lost all his skills. But don't worry, it doesn't make any difference at all. He still kills all the baddies (despite not being able to shoot accurately) and manages to hold on to an elevator that ascends a high-rise building (despite failing all his physical exams). In fact, ALL the best bits from the trailers have zero relevance to the film. The word association clip? Zero relevance. Bond's "death"? Zero relevance. "Skyfall"? Zero relevance. This sort of shoddy writing makes you wonder how easy it is to get a job in Hollywood, because clearly no skill is required. The production is obviously very expensive, and the pace slow. This wouldn't be a bad thing if it wasn't a crap film. Alas. But it doesn't end there. The name of the film: Skyfall? Sounds interesting, huh? It has absolutely nothing to do with the plot of the film (the final location is a property named "Skyfall" that apparently Bond's parents owned) which is functionally pointless other than being a cool film name. Traditionally, James Bond films have had outlandish plots: that's part of the franchise. Moonraker had a evil genius stealing satellites; Casino Royale pinned the fate of the free world on a game of Texan Hold 'em poker; GoldenEye had a space laser. Skyfall has an insipid title track by Adele, a lame villain, and a lifeless, dull plot. This was supposed to be the 50th anniversary. What an insult.… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
3
DarkNovaNov 18, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I went into this movie expecting "the best bond movie yet" and what I got was far from that. The story line is horrid and for most of the story to even take place we have to accept that even though the characters are supposed to be the best and brightest England has to offer, they make some of the worst choices possible. 1.) The British government compiles a list of every nations undercover agents real names, puts said list on a laptop that some how finds it's way to Istanbul. - Really? MI6 is smart enough acquire that information but dumb enough to put it on a laptop and let it get out in the open? 2.) The villain is introduced as a genius computer hacker with some brilliant strategic skills. This might be true in the very beginning but quickly disappears. Rather than just shoot Bond and be rid of him, he blows a hole in the ceiling so that a subway train will coming crashing in and maybe kill Bond. - I thought we were past the days of "let's try to kill him with some crazy method where we don't actually see him die". Because that method works so well.... 3.) Q claims to also be a genius with computers but then he goes and connects the villain's laptop to their network which just so happens to also be running the security system. - Worst part of the movie for me was this moment because the second they connect his laptop you already know it'll have some "virus" that takes everything down in a matter of seconds thus freeing the villain.

Save yourself the time and money, go see something else.… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
0
Sim_MatDec 3, 2012
Skyfall's greatest failure? Depicting James Bond as both a physical and emotional cripple. I go to see a Bond movie because I want to see Bond kicking ass, while sipping a martini, with bikini-glad girls at his side. I do not go to see a BondSkyfall's greatest failure? Depicting James Bond as both a physical and emotional cripple. I go to see a Bond movie because I want to see Bond kicking ass, while sipping a martini, with bikini-glad girls at his side. I do not go to see a Bond movie to witness a midlife crisis and angst.

This is the worst Bond movie ever made. Don't believe the hype. The reason this film has the most hype out of any Bond movie ever released is because it is horrendous and they need to make their money before negative word of mouth sinks it.… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
1
Turfguy61Dec 2, 2012
I like most Bond fans was looking forward to this latest installment, but was left bewildered and disappointed. Yes I know that with these type of films one shouldn't analyze too much and just enjoy the escapism from reality. Seriously thisI like most Bond fans was looking forward to this latest installment, but was left bewildered and disappointed. Yes I know that with these type of films one shouldn't analyze too much and just enjoy the escapism from reality. Seriously this film had so many flaws and just plain stupid moments that just belied belief. If your going to go with a new direction when making a Bond movie wouldn't you make it edgy and different. This was just plain dumb. I sat in Gold Class and couldn't wait for it to be over. What a shame.… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
0
oldbritDec 13, 2012
What a disappointment . I loved the last two Bonds but this was very poor .Found myself looking at my watch in the cinema wishing it would end . I was tempted to leave when we got to the HOME ALONE parody at the end . Stupid villains justWhat a disappointment . I loved the last two Bonds but this was very poor .Found myself looking at my watch in the cinema wishing it would end . I was tempted to leave when we got to the HOME ALONE parody at the end . Stupid villains just kept on coming despite 90% casualties ,meanwhile Mand a dreadful Albert Finney decided to use a torch on the not very dark moores so the villains could easily find them . Perhaps the most puzzling aspect was the assassination in Shanghai .The bad guys had their victim in a room at the top of a building .Do they shoot him ,strangle him or knife him . No ; they get a world class assassin to go up the next building ,drill through armoured glass and then kill him with a sniper rifle .leaving them yo dispose of the body . On top of this rediculous scenario ,they paid him a huge amount of money . the film ambled along in this fashion interminably . PLEASE DONT GIVE MENDES ANOTHER GO .… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
0
patterFeb 21, 2013
Worst Bond movie ever. Hopeless plot, a super hacker cyber terrorist who doesn't possess a computer or computer lab. The Bad Guy is a sad fairy with no menace. The end burning house scene with geriatrics taking out 'assassins' is laughable.Worst Bond movie ever. Hopeless plot, a super hacker cyber terrorist who doesn't possess a computer or computer lab. The Bad Guy is a sad fairy with no menace. The end burning house scene with geriatrics taking out 'assassins' is laughable. Weapon skills throughout are pathetic tech directors need to learn from 'Heat' or 'Shooter'. New Q is terrible, Moneypenny is equally bad. About time they gave Bond a man's weapon and a waistband holster. Only good points are that the awful Dench (M) gets wasted, new M is the business. Such a let down after Craig's first Bond movies.The scenes are a joke, this supposedly super meticulous bad guy on his way to wipe out MI6 gets on the tube train at the wrong end and has to walk through the carriages people get on the right tube carriage when they go to work! everyday.… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
3
BillzHereJul 22, 2014
This Bond movie is probably one of worst I've seen to be quite honest. I don't have much of problem with the actors as they get the job done; it's more so with the movie itself. I had no clue what was happening throughout the entire movie,This Bond movie is probably one of worst I've seen to be quite honest. I don't have much of problem with the actors as they get the job done; it's more so with the movie itself. I had no clue what was happening throughout the entire movie, and I wasn't going to watch it a second time to try and understand what the hell happened. This movie's villain is probably one of the lamest I've seen in a bond film, shameful and weak is what it is. Comparing this movie to it's predecessor, Casino Royale, is like comparing a brass brick to a golden brick. This movie without a doubt is bad, from it's sheer boring feel, to it's nonsensical story. Watch any other Bond film.… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
2
dierregiJun 3, 2013
Stripped down of all the Bond usual decorations (girls, chases, gadgets, exotic locations, etc…) Skyfall has a very simple plot: a disgruntled ex-employee wants to take revenge on the employer who dumped him. Unfortunately, and proving onceStripped down of all the Bond usual decorations (girls, chases, gadgets, exotic locations, etc…) Skyfall has a very simple plot: a disgruntled ex-employee wants to take revenge on the employer who dumped him. Unfortunately, and proving once more that Bond films are just appearance over substance, this logic premise falls down the drain at every twist and turn.

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

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

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

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

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

Die-hard Bond fans will love it anyway. They love them all, even if it is always the same story, re-told with small variations: Bond is invincible and irresistible to women and he always saves the world, thanks to a few gadgets, his Martinis and his beloved car. No need to invent anything new.… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
0
freed2077Jun 28, 2013
I hate the story that antagonist's goal is to kill a woman. Do all those things just to kill a woman.
I hate the last scene, battle at house scene. Always antagonist loose easily, protagonist wins.
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
4
chibistevoJul 7, 2013
All the hype, all the press, all the praise, would suggest this to be the best Bond ever. Part of me would say; that's probably not a far cry from the truth, yet, it's hardly an accolade worth boasting about either.

Throughout theAll the hype, all the press, all the praise, would suggest this to be the best Bond ever. Part of me would say; that's probably not a far cry from the truth, yet, it's hardly an accolade worth boasting about either.

Throughout the overdrawn and increasingly sigh worthy decisions made by all the characters in play, it became apparent by the end that Skyfall was at best a bloated, nonsensical bore, straining so hard for glory, that it managed to fool the majority of the audience.

Javier Bardem, despite his brilliance as Chigurgh in No Country for Old Men, is completely wasted here. And i'm not sure in which way I mean that, as he clearly looked off his rocker for the entirety of the film. Perhaps that was the point, but I would have thought the writers would have used him wisely, rather than spewing out another camp, ridiculous villain. A complete waste of opportunity and talent.

As for the plot, it struggles along from A to B, as both band and Camp Bond Villain #38 make increasingly unbelievable judgment calls. The finale is perhaps the most laughable standoff I've seen in years. Without any spoiling, Bond, with all his guile and wit, makes the decision to essentially hide in a remote, derelict building.

Well, there'll never find us here... says Bond.

It seems it's not just the audience that are all too happy to dance along to the nonsense.… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
2
InverseCriticOct 4, 2013
I don't want to give it a 2 but it's just in the end my score. Believe it or not, I haven't watched many Bond movies. They just haven't worked for me somehow. They're supposed to have gadgets, a destroy the world in a way plot, humour, andI don't want to give it a 2 but it's just in the end my score. Believe it or not, I haven't watched many Bond movies. They just haven't worked for me somehow. They're supposed to have gadgets, a destroy the world in a way plot, humour, and most of all, action. Most of the action scenes were less than a minute and took a while for the next one to come. Bond has no weapons, and I know that's the point this time, but it just didn't work. And the cast has pretty much no chemistry or any sign of having life outside work. The action scenes at the end were nice, though.… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
3
7macawDec 3, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. CGI is good, as is typical in modern movies. However, it is also typical for _Bond_ movies to have an epic evil guy. Nuke a major city, disrupt the global economy that is the kind of plan we all come to expect from the Bond's antagonist. But in this movie the bad guy is just a disgruntled former employee on steroids.

What's worse, he did have all the necessary ingredients: a personal island with some satellite communication equipment, an army of well-armed devotees... And what does he do? He just tries to get personal revenge against his former boss by running around with a pistol. That's so... non-epic!… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
3
RasheedNinjaFeb 19, 2015
I was hoping this movie, because it's a James Bond film, would be very interesting, clever, and cool. On the other hand, Me and my friend found this movie terribly boring. In fact, so boring that I was desperately trying not to fall asleep inI was hoping this movie, because it's a James Bond film, would be very interesting, clever, and cool. On the other hand, Me and my friend found this movie terribly boring. In fact, so boring that I was desperately trying not to fall asleep in the theatre and crying in my mind for some action scenes to fill in that empty spot of pleasure. However, all the action lasted for only around 1-2 minutes. It's different when you have company and you watch an tenious film when you were expecting some decent action scenes with a great storyline.

Also, this character for James Bond just doesn't cut it for me! He's like this strange emo guy that doesn't fit the classy James Bond role, who in my opinion is a gentleman, clever, mysterious, a bit of a prevent, but still pretty dope if you know what I mean. Daniel doesn't fit any of these traits! Sorry, Skyfall is nothing to me! Other people may like it but for me no!

The only parts of the movie I'd enjoyed was the introduction with Adele singing Skyfall and the "gay" scene. 3.5/10… Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
4
shineonsunfishNov 29, 2012
Really disappointed. The first two movies of this rebooted franchise were both excellent. They took place during an understandable time period, with a gritty and realistic Bond who had just been promoted to 007 status. He wasn't chatty,Really disappointed. The first two movies of this rebooted franchise were both excellent. They took place during an understandable time period, with a gritty and realistic Bond who had just been promoted to 007 status. He wasn't chatty, and we didn't care - his steely gaze and quick wit (not to be mistaken for quips - just watch Casino Royale's first scene with Vesper and you'll be able to tell the difference) told us that he was a man with a past. A past that he had no interest in divulging. We were treated to beautiful women (who were given character and personality), dry martinis, perfectly fitted tuxedos, and a sinister Bilderberg type group of powerful people controlling society from within. Flash ahead to Skyfall - Bond looks a good 15 years older, and is in the middle of a random assignment that leaves no resolution to the plot of the first two films. The first two films started with bone-achingly real foot chases through exotic locales. This one had a motorbike jumping onto a moving train. The villains in the first two movies were a terrorist banker and a philanthropist with sinister goals. This one is your typical mincing crazy person with a funny accent (homophobic, xenophobic, AND quite silly all in one, not that it's the actor's fault.) The first films included several types of women (all very beautiful, this is a Bond movie after all), who had varying relationships with Bond. This one had a young 007 agent whose ineptitude at her job ends with her taking the role of a secretary, and an abused sex slave who is questionably seduced and summarily executed and treated like a piece of trash (the horrific "waste of a good scotch" quip is inexcusable). Honestly, "it's a Bond movie, what did you expect" has no place in this conversation - I expected what I was led to expect from the first two movies of the reboot. A gritty, realistic, badass James Bond. Not someone quipping or using silly gadgets or having rapey scenes with random chicks. I am not an original James Bond fan. I don't care what they did in 1962 - that image of the swinging playboy is no longer relevant to this generation. And this movie tried so hard to be relevant, with it's cheap terrorism plot. And the last 30 minutes, while they had great action sequences taken out of context, made no sense to a larger plot, and awkwardly tried to shove in a very stupid and cliched past to Bond's life. The climactic scene left me feeling nothing, because there had been no foundation laid for any emotion regarding that character. And it dragged quite a bit - there's no reason for an action movie to be more than 2 hours long.

That being said, it certainly wasn't all bad. After the initial silliness of the motorbike chase, the fight atop the train was excellent. The entire scene in Shanghai was also done very well, and the actress playing Severine did a very good job with what was ultimately a very stupid role. The lighting was quite remarkable in the whole movie, and Javier Bardem did his best to infuse a traditional silly Bond villain with some pathos. The choice to make Q young was nice (even though he was painfully stupid for being such a computer whiz), and if they hadn't hit the theme quite so hard, it would have been nice to compare the old world vs. the new world through James Bond's eyes. And the courtroom scene was very enjoyable and tense, even though it was a bit silly after all the convoluted planning from Bardem. Unfortunately, this film felt out of context with the other two, putting the time frame oddly late and seeming to be either the end of a series or the beginning of a new one. Some huge gaps of logic in the needlessly silly plot make this definitely the worst Bond movie of the three, and independent of the series it was an extremely mediocre action flick.… Expand
12 of 16 users found this helpful124
All this user's reviews
2
scottmdNov 27, 2012
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 happenedThe 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
9 of 12 users found this helpful93
All this user's reviews
4
franco214Nov 13, 2012
I love Daniel Craig as Bond, I have enjoyed enormously the last two Bond films he has been in but the latest installment, Skyfall, left me feeling extremely disapointed. I came out of the cinema feeling like this was directed by someone whoI love Daniel Craig as Bond, I have enjoyed enormously the last two Bond films he has been in but the latest installment, Skyfall, left me feeling extremely disapointed. I came out of the cinema feeling like this was directed by someone who was trying to hard to make this 'more' than the other Bond films and by doing so has taken away the essence of what makes Bond, Bond. If you are looking for an action packed, fun, exciting film then this is seriously going to dissapoint you...have you ever known Bond go and hide...well it happens in this film. More annoyingly than the lack of action is that when we do get it, it is shot in such a way that you have no idea who is who until one of the characters dies.."oh so the other person is Bond then". And to top it off there is a villan who looks like David Walliams in a blonde wig. As soon as i saw the baddy i had this picture in my head and spent the rest of the film wondering if Matt Lucas was going to give a cameo in a red spandex unitard?

Be careful about the hype of this film, you may come away extremely dissapointed.… Expand
6 of 8 users found this helpful62
All this user's reviews
2
StealthgearSep 27, 2013
Skyfall has no heart. The actors seem like robots with flat performances. Nobody smiles much and its not funny or entertaining.
Bad color work. Every scene looks like a photoshop filter. Every scene is bathed in an oompa loompa orange glow.Skyfall has no heart. The actors seem like robots with flat performances. Nobody smiles much and its not funny or entertaining.
Bad color work. Every scene looks like a photoshop filter. Every scene is bathed in an oompa loompa orange glow.
The characters, plot, and dialogue are quite simply boring due lack of complexity and mystery.
The music isn't quite exciting enough, but it matches the slow pacing.
Politically tiresome. Having M and Bond on poor terms, then a bad relationship with the agency AND his other field agent was quite lame.
The movie is Lord of the Rings long (almost 3 hours) without any of the epic scale and depth. Its so slow its hard to follow.
You don't see the villain until halfway through the movie. This never works in any movie, just like Superman Returns. There should be some back and forth between the villain and good guy in the beginning.

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

They should have called it Downfall. While Casino Royale was only OK, the series has been worse and worse. The truth is that Daniel Craig and the production team that did this aren't suave and inventive enough to make a good bond movie. The last people to come up with a good Bond story was EA's Everything or Nothing video game. Don't watch Skyfall.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
3
VidsRuleNov 25, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It takes 3/4 of the show to establish the main villian. That's fine. He's a mastermind, and it seems like he has some big plans. They have established the evil genius now let's move towards the soon to be world eding plan. Nope. We get a few seconds of his plan and the rest of the movie is him simply trying to kill bond and M. That's it. He follows them around trying to kill them. And to top it off, there is no genius revealed. That's it: Guy tries to kill a couple people. In the end (I checked spoilers don't forget), the bad guy dies by Bond simply throwing a knife into his back. Think about this, I don't care what the knife represents, it is simply thrown into the back of the bad guy and threat removed. There will never be another bond movie as bad as this.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
4
nmaxw63Dec 20, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Great action sequences. The first 10-15 minutes was fantastic.
However...
The whole basis of this silly movie is that the villain has created an elaborate plot which unfolds over years so he can get captured and taken into MI HQ. why does he want to get taken there? So he can escape and kill M, who is outside HQ. Huh?… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
3
OverworlderMar 3, 2013
This movie deserves 2 points for the opening chase and another point for the few beautiful shots of Istanbul and Shanghai. The rest is entirely forgettable, generic action-movie nonsense. From the title alone I half-expected some big,This movie deserves 2 points for the opening chase and another point for the few beautiful shots of Istanbul and Shanghai. The rest is entirely forgettable, generic action-movie nonsense. From the title alone I half-expected some big, properly nefarious conspiracy, perhaps involving planes or space. But no, the villain is utterly uninteresting and only motivated by petty revenge. Bond himself inspires no empathy whatsoever, and displays zero emotion, charm or wit. The pacing is terrible, with some pointless scenes dragging on to the point where I started checking the clock. The plot is full of holes big enough to drive a train through. And of course there are no gadgets to speak of. Because the new Bond is all 'dark' and 'gritty' and 'real' while still managing to be a wooden puppet buffeted by meaningless explosions and fantastical computer hackery.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
4
RenzomaloSep 24, 2013
The Mrs. and I sat down last night to watch James Bond’s “Skyfall” and fell asleep after an admittedly hilarious opening of nonsensical improbabilities and physical impossibilities. James Bond a heavy equipment operator on a moving train?The Mrs. and I sat down last night to watch James Bond’s “Skyfall” and fell asleep after an admittedly hilarious opening of nonsensical improbabilities and physical impossibilities. James Bond a heavy equipment operator on a moving train? Funny stuff! Then I nodded off and woke up in time to hear the requisite “Bond, James Bond.” and then went back to sleep. Turns out (spoiler alert) that Mr. Bond is capable of defeating an entire platoon of highly trained, special-forces bad guys. Who knew? Of course, being immune to bullet wounds, oxygen deprivation, hypothermia and Newtonian Physics helps, but still… Looked good if you promise not to think or bring even a modicum of life experience to the viewing. Seriously, a must see for Bond fans plenty of early Bond references but for the rest of us, watch the trailer and call it a night. No stars from this old codger because I slept through most of it.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
4
jamesensorApr 21, 2013
Just boring, I slept through some parts of the movie. Bond almost rarely talks, there are events which look so forced to justify the plot's directions (this is the worst in the movie, the way some events take place... omg...), Moneypenny isJust boring, I slept through some parts of the movie. Bond almost rarely talks, there are events which look so forced to justify the plot's directions (this is the worst in the movie, the way some events take place... omg...), Moneypenny is introduced as a "creative" mark, M is since her inception, an awful character that goes worse, Q is another "creative" decision (creative is let's make it easy for us and make the public believe it's cool and innovation). Lots of cloaked advertising, more nonsense plot decisions, forced again and again, that didn't made any sense. In conclusion: the movie is an action flick which tells you to believe a good Bond movie is what they produce, with explosions, gfx, low intelligence plot, meat for the grinder. I'm glad I didn't fall for the "awesome MUST see" advertising kind of marketing campaign. Neither for the forum shills which almost crucify us if we don't share 10/10 impressions. I really enjoyed the first Craig Bond movie, but watching him and Conan the Barbarian movies just fighting and fighting, is the same...… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
5
NedRyerson1Jan 24, 2013
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, fightsSkyfall 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
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
4
clasher101Jan 3, 2013
tedious and really nothing new to see here except bardem and craigs great performances. action scenes are nothing special and the story drags down to a stop at times. do not believe the hype folks.
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
5
csw12Nov 25, 2012
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.
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
3
tooplanxApr 28, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Pretty distasteful misogyny (more than simple sleeping with women- he pretends that he cares for an abused sex slave and promises to rescue her, then takes advantage of her vulnerability to have sex with her, then when he's got what he wants from her he lets her die without showing any kind of remorse or compassion).

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

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

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

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

However, if you like to watch movies because you like moving images and the occasional explosion, you'll probably love it.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
5
DoctorFoxhoundNov 16, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Overall, Skyfall was enjoyable, visually stunning at times, and Daniel Craig continues to be a top-notch Bond. All of that being said, I was a little let down plot wise. I really, really liked Javier Bardem's character but was constantly disappointed with how the script played out his actions. He's a supposed cyber genius, and his mastermind plot was (at one point) to enter a major courthouse dressed as a cop and shoot it up with a glock and two goons? Also, I loved the idea of his character revealing 5 new agents a week (similar to the Joker's plan in the Dark Knight when he killed someone every day) but this part of the story was dropped completely! By the end, the townhouse "Homealone-esch" showdown really seemed forced to me. I like the idea of disarming Bond and leaving him with only a knife, a pistol, and his creativity but I really didn't understand why they couldn't at least call in for some undercover backup at the farmhouse and overall it just seemed like a pretty sketchy plan considering it was crafted by the head of M16 and one of her best agents...I went into this movie just wanting to enjoy a good Bond flick and ultimately I would say I did but throughout I was scratching my head at some of the plot choice and by the end couldn't help but feel a little letdown.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
6
ExKingMay 19, 2013
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 goodskyfall 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
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
3
youiweaDec 17, 2013
WORST BOND I HAVE EVER SEEN. Craig is a good actor (see Layer Cake), Casino Royale was good (almost as good as Goldeneye...not the game, though...CLASSIC!), and Quantum was a let-down, comparatively, but compared to Skyfall, as masterpiece.WORST BOND I HAVE EVER SEEN. Craig is a good actor (see Layer Cake), Casino Royale was good (almost as good as Goldeneye...not the game, though...CLASSIC!), and Quantum was a let-down, comparatively, but compared to Skyfall, as masterpiece. The absurdity of this movie's plot-line is only rivaled by the absurdity of the money invested in it and the degree of claimed positive reception...It's so bad, I can't even sort out what, specifically to criticize. All I can say to summarize is that the fact that this film received such positive reviews compared to the other contemporary "JB" (James Bond/Jason Bourne) film, Bourne Legacy's relatively poor critical reception speaks volumes about the state of our society...Skyfall was utter rubbish, whilst as good as the Damon Bourne films were, Legacy was, to an objective reviewer, superior to even those, and yet received mixed to poor reviews...what a racket. Here's hoping Barbara Broccoli has the wisdom to recruit Paul Greengrass for Bond XXIV. Wake up S(m)erfs.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
3
alm5609Nov 11, 2012
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
8 of 11 users found this helpful83
All this user's reviews
2
PhorosisNov 14, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. In a word, disappointing. Javier Bardem's character had the potential to be one of the most memorable villains in the franchise. After his introduction you really felt this was going to get good. Smart, charismatic, and the resources to take over the world. Instead we get this creepy guy's confusing witch hunt to kill M (? Why not just blow her up??). Just bizarre that we are expected to root for characters like Bond and M, when we literally have no reason to. He's a dick and she's a **** The hot bond girl featured in all the commercials has like a 10 minute spot. Where is the evil Bond girl? As people here have already stated, if this wasn't a Bond movie it would be alright. I could buy the betrayal, revenge plot but as a Bond movie it was missing almost every ingredient. Finally, my ears are still bleeding from that awful intro song.… Expand
5 of 7 users found this helpful52
All this user's reviews
prev
Page:
More From This Movie

81 Critic Reviews

7.7 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 81 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple
2 77 Project Hail Mary
3 75 Send Help
4 73 Hoppers
5 72 The Sheep Detectives
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL