My wife and I saw "Skyfall" as the "buy 3 get 1 free" on Verizon FiOS. We enjoyed the action but agreed that the plot was too far-fetched, even for a Bond film. In the Connery films Bond barely escapes death after fierce gun and fist fights. In "Skyfall" they don't even nod to reality. After being shot with a high-caliber rifle and falling 300 feet into water (at which speed water = concrete), he emerges to spend several months on some tropical paradise with hot women and cold Martinis. "Argo" succeeds because it puts realistic characters in understandable danger from which they barely escape. "Skyfall" substitutes volume for plot, which never succeeds. "Skyfall" asks us to accept an older, creakier Bond, then says, "Oops!" and makes him do all the old impossible Bond stuff anyway. Dragging-in the old DB5 is pitiable, really; it serves only to remind us of "Goldfinger," a film three times as good as this one. The new "Q" is laughable; who would ever follow this twit into battle?
But for free, "Skyfall" is worth it.
posted on 02/25/2013 11:18:47 AM PST
(washington, dc ..)
the plot was too far-fetched,
Wow, I keep reading about the "plot". After I watched this thing, my reaction was: "It was okay; but, I actually like a little plot in my movies." Lots of action, little purpose.
“We enjoyed the action but agreed that the plot was too far-fetched”
As compared to all of the other Bond movies that were scrupulously realistic? Forgive me, which ones were they?
posted on 02/25/2013 11:59:20 AM PST
(Liberals fool people by walking upright.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson