Have you seen Skyfall?

[Conegamer]

Jay520 said:

Conegamer said:

But your argument is nonsensical. This film was meant to be about the simplicity of Bond, rather than having hundreds of tacky one-use gadgets. And I liked that; it was more the thinking-man's Bond anyway, rather than just go in, shoot bad guys, use gadgets and get the girl. Which is fine, but this film should not be criticised for being now. Also, M was made to feel bad throughout the whole film; that was the point. To make her realise that she's only brought the organization down by being unable to let go of the classics and embrace the modern world. So that made sense.

A thinking-man's Bond? In what way? The action played out just like older ones, he went in and killed them with ease, except this time, the action was ten times worse. If they wanted to try something new, they could have at least made the action good.

That was the point. The film was much more mythodical and played out like a game of cat-and-mouse with Silva, as opposed to just a massive shoot-out. It also showed that Bond and MI6, as well as others, aren't invinsible and are prone to errors. It was not supposed to be action-packed, but more suspense-driven so when something does happen it leaves an impact. This is why the scenes towards to end of the film in the house were so good; because you knew they were vulnerable. That happened rarely in past films, which was OK, but the film should not be criticised for doing something new. It has been 50 years; after all.

I'm not sure what advertising was like in the US, but this was made very clear early on over here. This was not your traditional Bond film. It was one which demonstrated the frailties of the characters and how easily things can be brought down; as well as the transition from old to new. I liked that.