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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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, etcÂ…) 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, etcÂ…) 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 inconspicuousÂ…. 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-agedÂ… whateverÂ…

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
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
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
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
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
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
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
2
blobinaNov 19, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Where to even begin with how awful this movie is??? First, I LOVE action films. I LOVE Bond films. I LOVE Sam Mendes. Does that mean they should all be in one movie together? Um.... no. As a preface, I was really excited by all the hype for this film and waited in line for two hours to redeem my $22 IMAX ticket at the only "real" IMAX theater in NYC to get the very best seat in the house. And what did I get for this dedication? A meandering story line that was derivative, ridiculous, and at least thirty minutes too long (how does this "old guy Bond" that can't even pass a simple fitness test survive being shot with a high-grade weapon and falling several stories into a huge waterfall??); scenes and subplots that barely even made sense (why does Bond meet the Bond girl and determine she is a former child sex trade worker, then suddenly appear like a CREEP in her shower, promise to save her, and then let her die in the next scene commenting callously that her death was a waste of good scotch-- POINTLESS if not creepy); idiotic plot devices (why do people need a flashlight to find a huge building in a field lit up by massive explosions and flames? Ummmm, let's see... to make them easy for the villain to find...??); lame, lame LAAAAAMMMMMEE fight sequences (that Shanghai club scene was so ho-hum after all the build up. Not to mention it contained the ONLY bit of pay off on the supposedly "cool" gun. Why does a Chinese body guard not carry his own gun and how does he not know there is a huge dragon in this pit in the place where he works, nor manage to see it coming?).
The gadgets were boring- an iPod mini is cooler than that radio- and the scenes were overall, way too drawn out.
How, how HOW have we forgotten the primary rule of cinema-- SHOW don't tell???? I don't want to hear a long monologue about a Chinese prison sentence, I want to SEE it. I don't want to watch Bond follow two steps behind, discovering Patrice's trail of dead bodies- I want to see the kills! I want to SEE Javier Bardem's awesome escape from this airtight cell, instead of leaving Q to "suddenly realize" that he must have been planning it all along and somehow magically foresaw all these incredible details blah blah blah. Show me how this crazy cool fingerprint gun works! Give me a tour of your awesome Aston Martin that's so much cooler now than it was in Goldfinger. At least let me see the CGI scorpion TRY to sting Bond.... SOMETHING. And why oh why is the cleaning guy at the little beach bungalow bar watching Wolf Blitzer on CNN conveniently at sunrise...? Are you serious?? That's REALLY the best you can do with a team of three accomplished Hollywood writers? I want to SEE how Bond survived his crazy fall, if he's so old and has a bullet wound. The pacing of this film was slow, WAY to slow for an action film. Bond lost, in my opinion, all his sex appeal- the shower scene was so far from steamy and the shaving scene was loooonnnnngg and went nowhere. There was no build at all to the momentum of this film. Points where the suspense should have been at a high (like in M's hearing) plodded along with the efficiency of a three-toed sloth. Points where Bond could have been a hero (like for example, SAVING the Bond girl to make her three scenes at least kind of pay off) were missing entirely. With all the technology today, you would think they could have come up with some cooler gadgets and taken the time to show us how they work, because the HOW is really the awesome part of action movies anyway.
And why oh WHY did we witness at least ten minutes of film establishing how old and beat up James Bond is these days, and how he can't even pass a fitness test, only for NONE of this information to ever pay off anywhere else in the story??? I'm all for exploring the aging super hero thing, like Batman as a shut in facing foreclosure, but this just seemed like an unresolved, half-explored idea.

Javier Bardem stole the show as always, and actually held my attention with his two very lengthy monologues. In the hands of another actor, this role could have been ridiculous but he brought out the creepy sadism and kept it bubbling just under the surface for the whole film, justifying as best he could WHY (why oh why, Writers??) a man with such "limitless power" might wait fifteen years to kill the woman he hated most, biding his time with stock market manipulation, and why it seems like such a process to kill her when he can apparently blow up MI6 with undetected ease. Judi Dench and Albert Finney were both excellent as always, and truly made up the only emotional core of this film, being the only actors who were able to achieve a measure of compassion or depth.
Daniel Craig was pouty and plasticky as usual and his body language continues to seem put on and unconvinced. Eve Moneypenny had all the vim and vigor of a corporate lawyer and I really wasn't sold on that casting choice. All around- LAME BOND.… Expand
11 of 16 users found this helpful115
All this user's reviews
0
andytimberNov 17, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Once the credits roll, you will have only one question - why did that stupid b*tch not aim for his head and kill Bond for good. For me, he most certainly IS dead.… Expand
6 of 9 users found this helpful63
All this user's reviews
2
MalangatanaNov 14, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Stop calling it the best Bond film ever! (Minor Spoilers)

Regardless of whether you think this film is good this film simply isn't the best Bond film ever. In fact, it's not really even Bond. Yes, Daniel Craig is a great choice for Bond I fully agree. Casino Royal is second only to classics like Goldfinger, and Quantum is not as hopeless as the public at large would have you believe. The elephant in the room with Skyfall is the storytelling. Ian Flemming's series of novels creates a world for Bond that is incredibly rich, detailed and logical. Sure at times, it requires suspension of disbelief, but not in an absolute way like a comic book or sci-fi film forces a viewer to do. The true pearls of the Bond series are the films that are tethered in some way to reality. Skyfall Bond is obviously not original content, but no attempt was made to reconcile the character or story with the original intentions of the author. If you have a deep appreciation of the literary character or a complete knowledge of the film series, you are much less likely to enjoy this movie because the plot does not regard the essence of Bond.

I'm shocked that fewer critics have pointed out Skyfall's SHOCKINGLY lazy and poorly executed storytelling. One example, right from the start that I think conveys what I mean:

The first scene, Bond is shot twice including by a military grade sniper rifle. He falls what appears to be 100 meters straight on his back. HOW DID HE SURVIVE? Why does he only have the 9mm shrapnel/wound with his shirt off? To me a masterpiece, or even a decent movie, simply cannot leave points like that (and literally a dozen other major plot gaps for which 'hacking' is the silver bullet) unresolved. Bond is not invincible, he's actually quite vulnerable in the novels. A Bond vehicle cannot invoke suspension of disbelief so outrageously and then expect me to take it seriously. Casino Royal (and many older films in the series) proved that Bond doesn't need to have superhero powers. They can tell a great story, include quality action and obey some basic principles of reality. A Bond story that enters a world so completely devoid of the governing principles of reality is the ultimate copout and at fundamentally not Bond.

Again, non-Bond fans are entitled to say it's a great movie. But it is really asinine to make statements to the effect of 'Best Bond Ever'. Watch all 23. Read one of the books. People would be outraged if Lord of the Rings didn't respect the vision of Tolkien, so why is it different with Flemming?… Expand
6 of 9 users found this helpful63
All this user's reviews
0
L3st4tDec 23, 2012
Bad just isn't strong enough a word to describe this film. Atrocious is closer. Everything that made the James Bond series has been thrown away, to be replaced by a washed up old man that can not even shoot straight. The film relied on tiredBad just isn't strong enough a word to describe this film. Atrocious is closer. Everything that made the James Bond series has been thrown away, to be replaced by a washed up old man that can not even shoot straight. The film relied on tired throw backs to the classics to try and keep people interested, and convice them that yes this garbage was supposed to be a James Bond movie.

If you have not seen it, don't waste your money.… Expand
4 of 6 users found this helpful42
All this user's reviews
2
deamonhunterNov 25, 2012
I expected a lot more from the movie. The previous movies where great but this has only a very few good moments. It doesn't follow the normal Bond franchise action packed fim. Also the tragic elements have a weird mixture. I would adviseI expected a lot more from the movie. The previous movies where great but this has only a very few good moments. It doesn't follow the normal Bond franchise action packed fim. Also the tragic elements have a weird mixture. I would advise James Bond fans to just skip this movie.… Expand
4 of 6 users found this helpful42
All this user's reviews
0
ItchyNov 25, 2012
Yikes! I actually joined this 'metacritic' forum just so I can ask this question: Did everyone who gave this movie a good review watch the same movie I did? Is something going on here? Bad, bad movie. I dislike wasting my money.Yikes! I actually joined this 'metacritic' forum just so I can ask this question: Did everyone who gave this movie a good review watch the same movie I did? Is something going on here? Bad, bad movie. I dislike wasting my money. Thank goodness I went to a discount theater.… Expand
4 of 6 users found this helpful42
All this user's reviews
0
rob1977777Mar 4, 2013
A ridiculous story, scandalous amounts of product placement, and an ageing and unconvincing Craig make this the worst Bond since Die another Day.

It all starts off promisingly, with a cool chase scene, and the great opening titles, but theA ridiculous story, scandalous amounts of product placement, and an ageing and unconvincing Craig make this the worst Bond since Die another Day.

It all starts off promisingly, with a cool chase scene, and the great opening titles, but the story is so unbelievably silly, so far from the gritty reality we found in casino royale that the film quickly reveals itself as a huge dissapointment. The product placement in this film is the most blatant I've ever seen at one point, an agent of Mi6, in the middle of a tense scene tracking down Bardem, finds the time to take a swig from a bottle of heineken! Craig looks too thin in the film, and not at all as convincing as in casino royale. That topped with exotic locations like SCOTLAND and bond girls who die after 5 MINUTES make this all a very dull and pointless film.… Expand
4 of 6 users found this helpful42
All this user's reviews
2
nitpickDec 5, 2012
nitpick of 4th December forgot to give a score. I reckon 2 will have to do..
Too violent, too loud and too frazzled what with psychobabble being used to 'stiffen' the utter brutality of the anti-hero..
PS. The 'hero', Craig, was totallynitpick of 4th December forgot to give a score. I reckon 2 will have to do..
Too violent, too loud and too frazzled what with psychobabble being used to 'stiffen' the utter brutality of the anti-hero..
PS. The 'hero', Craig, was totally devoid of charm and what elegance he possessed was superfluous.
Broccoli team should retire in toto!!… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
0
lofu_agfyNov 11, 2020
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Numerous Plot holes, contrivances, poor storytelling, character logic&motivation;

1. The stolen agent list macguffin; Made famous in M:I then overused in films&TV shows; CharliesAngels2 etc - halfway through the film they just forgot about it

2. Hacking magic! Hacking can be done well; goldeneye,swordfish,diehard4...Not just an easy contrived plot device. Can we have a proper explanation &the rules&limitations of Silva's hacking ability in this fiction? For all I know Silva can make satellites fall on people.

3. The irony of the 'can Bond operate in an internet world' theme...he failed twice and got M killed...so he can't?

4. How out of place the above theme is; Bond is mature but always current. His a walking encyclopedia (watch the start of any Connery/Moore film). In the last 2 films he was using advanced mobile phone tracking systems...adding hacking does not suddenly make Bond take on the 'modern' age. Are economics or funding civilwars outdated?

There was hacking&computers in 1995's Goldeneye..all of a sudden, NOW, there are no more shadows? Did MI6 stop evolving in the late eighties?

5.They have a meeting to discuss MI6? This was relevant in Batman, a vigilante was trying to inspire people- It was intertwined in the narrative&theme. Skyfall enquiry was just Sam Mendes ripping off Batman

6. Silva's planned capture; Another overused device that was coincidently in Batman. So what did Silva achieve? A conversation with M? When this is revealed shouldn't we look back and have everything make sense? But, NO, I was left wondering why they tried to kill Bond twice in China.

7. Why was a hacker in a cell controlled by a computer? Why is Q so stupid he plugged in the laptop to the building? Why was the trap door on the inside of the first glass door? why was there a trap door? How did Silva evade an armed MI6 guard 20 meters from his cell?

8. Super calculating (hack crazy)Silva's plan at the end was a firefight? With a backup plan of another firefight?

9. So they figured out Silva was dressed as a cop and no-one told anyone? The irony of M defending herself (reading a poem) knowing her own ex agent was about to shoot up the place was lost on critics&writers alike.

10. Could Bond not take a Sim free phone or'radio' &call backup when Silva arrived at the end? Instead they had their Home Alone moment- even Macaulay Culkin eventually called the police

11. Silva is supposed to mirror Bond. But compare Bond's 'betrayal' to Silva being handed over for torture... Some forced connection is made considering they never met before. Silva tells a story of 2rats so we know what we are supposed to think.

12. Bond's betrayal is M ordering Naomi to take a risky shot. Bond later tell's M he heard the order... why didn't he get out the way then? he just kept fighting like an idiot. &did Naomi only have 1 bullet?

13.You can't make Bond survive 2 gun shots and a fall like that. His already an established character. The Punisher&Bourne are special BECAUSE they survive. It can't happen to them again mid film/ mid franchise..

14. Bond follows an assassin&lets him kill innocent people! How is this in his character?! The previous 2 films already rebooted Bond to show WHY he doesn't let innocents die.

15. Naomi is a forced character..appearing randomly to remind us she still exists so we can think it's 'clever' when she becomes Moneypenny. Money penny gets demoted from field agent to secretary?!! not even analyst. If she is that hopeless why is she on the most important mission ever? I think Sam Mendes hates women.

16. Bond doesn't even blink when the girl he just bedded a few hours ago gets shot in cold blood. He identifies Severine as being sex trafficked&abused- He then just jumps in her shower. I had little problem with Bond tricking a woman into bed in live and let die- but the sky-fall scene should land him in the S-offenders list.

17.They traced the shrapnel in Bond's chest to a 'special'bullet that only 3 people use? His a 'ghost'...but we have his full flight manifesto. This is how they advanced the plot? wait a minute....didn't that bad guy shoot up half of turkey..? A contrivance& a plot hole in one plot device, that takes some doing.

18. One minute he can't shoot...10 seconds later he shoots everyone in a 360 arc? so what happened? oh we are just abandoning that theme mid- se..


The script makes no sense, the themes are inappropriate, Bond's character&decision making has been altered &they have confused mature with dinosaur. Die another Day was almost a Bond parody, but this one is simply a mess,&a betrayal of Bond.

Shame on critics too impatient to appreciate QoS for not spoon feeding them everything & praising sky-fall because of poorly scattered themes& metaphors on a plot that makes no sense, just because it makes them feel clever… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
1
MaxieOpossovithNov 10, 2012
If you have insomnia, Skyfall will cure you fast. On the other hand, if you just want to eat popcorn, you had better take a couple tablets of No Doze to last it out. If you don't mind that the Old Bag "M" plays a huge part, that theIf you have insomnia, Skyfall will cure you fast. On the other hand, if you just want to eat popcorn, you had better take a couple tablets of No Doze to last it out. If you don't mind that the Old Bag "M" plays a huge part, that the flat-chested heroine plays a big part, and that the only other woman can't act and looks like a vampire, then this movie is for you.… Expand
11 of 17 users found this helpful116
All this user's reviews
3
banstylejboNov 11, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Skyfall might be the most un-Bond film in the series. There are little to none of the classic Bond tropes (gadgets, girls). in their place the movie is filled with personal issues and M being pushed out. The villain has the most small-potatoes plan of all the Bond villains. Still, the movie didn't entirely lose me until the final act where Bond and M hide out in his family's old Scotland home. At this point the movie took a big turn for the worse. The final act boiling down to a Straw Dogs/Home Alone type home defense scenario that is just boring and completely unoriginal. Setting aside plot holes, of which there are a number, this movie just left me scratching my head. After setting up a mysterious syndicate hiding in the shadows in Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, this movie doesn't even make one mention of what had been built up in the previous two Craig movies. I just don't understand where they were going with this movie other than to just slap something together to introduce new actors in the roles of M, Q, and Moneypenny. The movie is overlong and spends too much time dealing with things that feel more like they came out of a Bourne movie. I had high hopes for this movie, but if Skyfall is the best we can get after 4 years, I think this franchise is going to get stale again pretty fast. Overall the movie isn't unwatchable, it is just not a Bond movie. There are some cool action sequences and Bardem isn't bad as the villain, but he doesn't have much to work with. Skip this one until it hits video.… Expand
7 of 11 users found this helpful74
All this user's reviews
3
haslamNov 20, 2012
What can I say?! Like many, Im a Bond fan...but cannot understand how the 'media' has put this latest Bond movie in the same league as Goldfinger? The introductory action scene was good; the shot to Bond and his presumed death added a twist,What can I say?! Like many, Im a Bond fan...but cannot understand how the 'media' has put this latest Bond movie in the same league as Goldfinger? The introductory action scene was good; the shot to Bond and his presumed death added a twist, but from then on it was flatter than than the cinema cola I was drinking!! What on earth have the directors and producers created?! The story line was so weak it was painful...the Villan was an ex MI6 agent who was 'betrayed' by his Boss (M) and was now plotting on her downfall and death via cybercrime and access to a hardrive (from another MI6 agent) carrying data of all western secret agents...come on!!! Bond is here to settle a personal vendetta of an ex agent and his Boss?! With all that is going on in the world today, is this the best that can be done (even when being politically correct)! The various action scenes-Shanghai & Macau did not have substance. they came and went without a real reason. the Bond girls could not even be called that...their roles where so short. The gadgets and cars were non existant...Daniel Craig was good. He is looking alittle old and ragged, and feel this should be his last film as 007. The whole film was a a mixture of many films (Borne Identity, MI 1, Harry Potter, etc...). Personally I feel Mr Mendes has done a very poor job here, he was hired to do something different with Bond, but ended up making a real mess...Probably the worst Bond film ever made....even Timothy Dalton's two films were better...the 3 marks I give to Daniel Craig, for trying his best, Villain's Camp hairdo, and M's death....Utterly disappointed and disallusioned about the future of the 007............… Expand
7 of 11 users found this helpful74
All this user's reviews
1
David_HNov 12, 2012
The plot was quite dark and the movie seemed to drag on too long. Darkness is ok to an extent but there was very little that was fun or even interesting in the movie; not even many interesting gadgets that previous Bond movies typicallyThe plot was quite dark and the movie seemed to drag on too long. Darkness is ok to an extent but there was very little that was fun or even interesting in the movie; not even many interesting gadgets that previous Bond movies typically include. I like Daniel Craig, but this is clearly the worst of the Craig series of Bond movies. I won't recommend any family or friends go see this movie.… Expand
5 of 8 users found this helpful53
All this user's reviews
1
ScosorNov 14, 2012
Man, they **** it up. The one point I give it is for Roger Deakins, who delivers some gorgeous cinematography (especially in Shanghai). Otherwise, an unbearable, intellectually lazy and ultimately silly endeavor. The reverse Pieta ending, inMan, they **** it up. The one point I give it is for Roger Deakins, who delivers some gorgeous cinematography (especially in Shanghai). Otherwise, an unbearable, intellectually lazy and ultimately silly endeavor. The reverse Pieta ending, in a church no less, sealed the deal: this film is beyond redemption.… Expand
8 of 13 users found this helpful85
All this user's reviews
3
cfscorpioNov 11, 2012
I didn't like this movie. It is little more than a straight action film. Take out the name James Bond and you'll find it hard to see the resemblance to the James Bond series. They took away all the clever gadgets, don't give Bond much time toI didn't like this movie. It is little more than a straight action film. Take out the name James Bond and you'll find it hard to see the resemblance to the James Bond series. They took away all the clever gadgets, don't give Bond much time to be cool or charming, he doesn't really play out as much of a hero and the villain has no motivation or plan other than revenge. This seems to be the direction of the Daniel Craig era of Bond movies and I for one have had enough.… Expand
6 of 10 users found this helpful64
All this user's reviews
3
bosnianNov 12, 2012
Story makes no sense. Enough plot holes and ridiculous moments where you are questioning what where they thinking to fill out any Roger Moore Bond movie. Series that started with amazing Casino Royale keeps going down the hill thanks to overStory makes no sense. Enough plot holes and ridiculous moments where you are questioning what where they thinking to fill out any Roger Moore Bond movie. Series that started with amazing Casino Royale keeps going down the hill thanks to over the top action sequences and no regard for coherent plot. Fails miserably in comparison to MI4.… Expand
6 of 10 users found this helpful64
All this user's reviews
1
valuefilmsNov 12, 2012
I really feel like I wasted my money on this film and the audience, if the grumbles on exit were anything to go by, seem to agree. A silly silly plot, non-threatening villain, no girls or action. I do not think this is a Bond film. I reallyI really feel like I wasted my money on this film and the audience, if the grumbles on exit were anything to go by, seem to agree. A silly silly plot, non-threatening villain, no girls or action. I do not think this is a Bond film. I really cannot see where all the positive hype is coming from. Look at the reviews below and save your money.… Expand
6 of 10 users found this helpful64
All this user's reviews
0
mulderdogDec 8, 2012
WOW and to think I thought Lincoln was a little long and boring.......
the critics high point reviews are an insult to us all...
I'm really trying to think of some positives: Adele, the moto scene (whole movie downhill from there) thatsWOW and to think I thought Lincoln was a little long and boring.......
the critics high point reviews are an insult to us all...
I'm really trying to think of some positives:
Adele, the moto scene (whole movie downhill from there)
thats it. thats all I can think of. oh yeah : it was good looking at times.… Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
2
DustbowlHippieNov 10, 2012
Probably the most boring Bond movie I've seen. Unfortunate, as I came into it with medium-rare expectations. I'd wait for Redbox, at best. See something else on the big screen.
7 of 12 users found this helpful75
All this user's reviews
1
Briancl25Nov 11, 2012
This is by no means the best bond films. Boring story, boring action, boring villian. Nothing about this movie is exciting. Every formulaic and predictable. Too many jokes and references to old Bond references. The writers spent more timeThis is by no means the best bond films. Boring story, boring action, boring villian. Nothing about this movie is exciting. Every formulaic and predictable. Too many jokes and references to old Bond references. The writers spent more time trying to fit those in, then making an intriguing story. Not worth anyone's time unless you like boring, mediocre action films.… Expand
9 of 16 users found this helpful97
All this user's reviews
2
AnnabelleNov 10, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This was such a disappointment after Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. I was so excited to see Javier Bardem as the villain, but all we have is a psychologically damaged former spy who has a poorly dyed hair and eyebrow job and a poor script. Where were Bond's new toys? A new gun and a transmitter hardly qualify. Even the romance was missing. The action was sub par to previous Bond movies. I had read some critics reviews before seeing the show and I was anticipating something great. Far from it. I wonder what movie those folks had seen because this sure was a disappointment. This makes me wonder about the caliber of future Bond movies. If this is the direction the future movies are taking, I guess I will be watching the old shows rather than the new ones from here on in.… Expand
7 of 13 users found this helpful76
All this user's reviews
1
Kevlar1Nov 14, 2012
Sky fell flat on the nose
6 of 12 users found this helpful66
All this user's reviews
0
bewv1080Nov 10, 2012
Unoriginal in literally every way. The story had no surprises whatsoever. Had I been wearing a watch, I would have been checking it after the first 20 minutes. If you're an idiot and are easily impressed by shooting guns and Daniel Craig'sUnoriginal in literally every way. The story had no surprises whatsoever. Had I been wearing a watch, I would have been checking it after the first 20 minutes. If you're an idiot and are easily impressed by shooting guns and Daniel Craig's buff bod, you might enjoy this film, otherwise steer clear and save your money.… Expand
5 of 11 users found this helpful56
All this user's reviews
3
axelkochNov 10, 2012
You have to put feelings in a movie starring Daniel Craig (like in Casino Royale) and Skyfall doesn't do that, just like Quantum Of Solace. Thus, Quantum Of Solace is bad and thus, Skyfall is bad. Skyfall is even worse, actually it's theYou have to put feelings in a movie starring Daniel Craig (like in Casino Royale) and Skyfall doesn't do that, just like Quantum Of Solace. Thus, Quantum Of Solace is bad and thus, Skyfall is bad. Skyfall is even worse, actually it's the worst Bond movie I've ever seen (but okay, I've only seen 7). Except Ben Whishaw, none of the actors is interesting and I was really annoyed by Judi Dench, because I've got to see her so often in this movie. The first scene with villain Javier Bardem is really cool and leaded me to expect the ending to better than the beginning, but in fact Bardem is just another stupid antagonist. When it comes to the final showdown, he is just dumb. The ending was really bad and I don't know how Sam Mendes could film such **** The action is not rememberable, the actors aren't good and the whole movie is at least half an hour too long. I have no clue why critics raved over this movie so much, it didn't entertain me at all. I was very disappointed with Skyfall and I'd suggest you not to spend money on the cinema ticket for this.… Expand
7 of 16 users found this helpful79
All this user's reviews
1
EludiumQ36Aug 25, 2013
Guess we're all not seeing the same film here. Couldn't get past the first freakin' action sequence it was just so ridiculous. I mean plausibility has got to count for something people! Also, Daniel Craig always comes off as a hard,Guess we're all not seeing the same film here. Couldn't get past the first freakin' action sequence it was just so ridiculous. I mean plausibility has got to count for something people! Also, Daniel Craig always comes off as a hard, German-looking villain type; he's not at all the suave, debonair James Bond that's made the franchise popular since the '60s. Dropped this one hard.… Expand
3 of 7 users found this helpful34
All this user's reviews
3
Bo33yDec 22, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Skyfail is all that can be said for the BOND experience in this film. The starting introduction was one of the best James Bond's I had seen. However this buzz quickly faded. The film began like the Matador (Pierce Brosnan) while finishing with a Home Alone ending. Every aspect of the classic James Bond was forgotten this was how they celebrated 50 years of James Bond. This films plot was awful and dire resulting in an invasion at home and HQ. From a double agent hacker, because hacking makes the world go around, and hacking explains the most unimaginable and can fill all the gap holes in very story from here China. The bond girl is Money Penny the assassin, instead of her classic secretarial evaluator role, or a Chinese prostitute who the heartless bond couldn't careless for and dies in 5 minutes, or the granny M. There was absolutely no Bond girl of any substance. There was no gadgets, and the classic Bond car gets blown up. The macho bond, who is intelligent, witty, savvy, and sophisticated gets all the hot girls, plays with all the cool toys, kills all the villains by using the cool moves, while doing his own stunts and looking awesome. No this image wasn't there at all. He is reduced to a drunken mess like in the Matador, the most erotic scene was with a queerish villain, Bond struggles with home invasion and has mommy issues. Q is also some spotty teenager this is why he didn't have any toys. The dynamic 's of the opening Bond song have changed and are replaced by Chinese dragons or some other visual scenery that is totally irrelevant instead of being about the entire film or its punchline. While missing mostly the silhouette of Bond Girls, Bond and Villains even. What a disappointment and a skyfail to JAMES BOND after 50 years. They have changed in through this film into something else the opposite.… Expand
3 of 8 users found this helpful35
All this user's reviews
3
fayezroyalNov 10, 2012
There was nothing James Bond about this movie. Big let down on music, plot, and good use of product displacement. James Bond movies were always 50 years ahead of its time, there was no such technology or cars or anything that was used. TheThere was nothing James Bond about this movie. Big let down on music, plot, and good use of product displacement. James Bond movies were always 50 years ahead of its time, there was no such technology or cars or anything that was used. The plot of ex agent becoming the villan is same as golden eye plot. The bond girl was short lived. The relationship of skyfall in bonds life was not shown in the right way. They basicly could have shot the end scene somewhere else and it would not have mattered at all. They have a new Q. Come on. I couldn't trust him till the end... Lol.. And what the heck where they achieving by successfully locating James on the radar. I get it that he had to be tracked but don't keep telling us viewers that. It gets annoying. There was no super car. Just a jag scene and an old Astin Martin, that did nothing basically. Big let down on cars. Overall I was not impressed a bit.… Expand
13 of 38 users found this helpful1325
All this user's reviews
0
NazguleroFeb 12, 2013
Unbelievable. I have never seen a movie theatre that quiet. You could literally hear people think 'my god, WTF is this It's like the filmmakers thought 'how can we make every dialogue and every scene as bad as possible, and every characterUnbelievable. I have never seen a movie theatre that quiet. You could literally hear people think 'my god, WTF is this It's like the filmmakers thought 'how can we make every dialogue and every scene as bad as possible, and every character as unlikeable as possible ?'.
The nerd at MI6 tops it off.… Expand
5 of 15 users found this helpful510
All this user's reviews
0
Duke_NukemOct 13, 2015
Connery is the ultimate Bond, Moore is the funny Bond, Dalton is the cool Bond, Brosnan is the suave Bond and Craig is... the ugly Bond?

I have no idea why they came up with the ludicrous idea to pick Craig as the new Bond and why theyConnery is the ultimate Bond, Moore is the funny Bond, Dalton is the cool Bond, Brosnan is the suave Bond and Craig is... the ugly Bond?

I have no idea why they came up with the ludicrous idea to pick Craig as the new Bond and why they decided to make Bond movies so dark and boring.

In this movie Craig is coming out of the closet as gay Bond. Javier Bardem wants to kill his rival M, who keeps stalking Bond and following him around on every mission. Bond will be his and his alone...

I was really happy when Judi Dench was finally killed of, that must have been the only positive thing about this otherwise dreadful movie. And I can't wait for the next actor to play the role of James Bond. It can't get any worse than this, can it?… Expand
3 of 11 users found this helpful38
All this user's reviews
0
AquilaNov 11, 2015
Batman meets home alone, thats how you can describe this movie. Don't like Craig except in Casino Royale. He is too cool and doesn't have classic bond charisma.
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
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