or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Skyfall
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Skyfall - Page 12

post #331 of 426
Guys, there's room to discuss the technical aspects of a movie as well as the storyline, but some of the posts here are far beyond any rational definition of relevant.

Please try to stay focused.
post #332 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Lang View Post

Guys, there's room to discuss the technical aspects of a movie as well as the storyline, but some of the posts here are far beyond any rational definition of relevant.

Please try to stay focused.
OK, fair enough.

If I misunderstand your post, please correct me....
THIS forum allows for the discussion of "the technical aspects of a movie as well as the storyline?"
If so, are all of the mods aware of this?
post #333 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

OK, fair enough.

If I misunderstand your post, please correct me....
THIS forum allows for the discussion of "the technical aspects of a movie as well as the storyline?"
If so, are all of the mods aware of this?
Officially, I believe this forum is for strictly technical discussion.. transfers, sound mixes, color, encoding, etc.

They do allow film discussion as long as it's civil. It's when it turns into a flame war that the mods step in to slap us around a bit, a la Prometheus. With something like Skyfall, I don't think there's too much risk of it, because most people's opinions on this one are more or less the same (Me, I think it's fantastic, my copy should here tomorrow), and not as polarizing as some other films can be.
post #334 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

OK, fair enough.

If I misunderstand your post, please correct me....
THIS forum allows for the discussion of "the technical aspects of a movie as well as the storyline?"
If so, are all of the mods aware of this?
There appears no vagueness or ambiguity to what was stated at the top of the page, at least for me. This is a forum for software, meaning broad heading, the inclusive definition of what brings us here, namely, the movie (in the blu-ray format). Comment on "movie oriented" issues, and/or "technical" aspects if you like -- both valid, allowable topic areas.

Now let us just endeavor to stay civil and on track, and we are golden.
post #335 of 426
Watched it last night very impressed with Pq and Aq. Great film too.
post #336 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emaych View Post

T
Now let us just endeavor to stay civil and on track, and we are golden.
Yeah...that...
post #337 of 426

Originally Posted by oink View Post

F...that...

 

FIFY

post #338 of 426

death of another thread lol, hope everyone's happy now.

 

anyone have anything critical to add to the actual bluray discussion?

(before it fades into obscurity ala prometheus)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*crickets*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*crickets*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*crickets*

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh yeah, Great Movie!, high quality transfer blah blah blah tongue.gif

 

Seriously though, I would like to add that I thoroughly enjoyed the first action sequences.

The motion and camera angles were spot on and the pace was spectacular, worthy of a Bond opening chase.

( I also Hate VW Beetles so this made it even more enjoyable for me.)

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

 

 

Not sure the sky was the correct shade of grey though, what color is the sky in your world? lol

..............hope that's technical enough for the thread purists

post #339 of 426
Finally watched this yesterday and it was better than I remembered at the theatrical release. PQ is stellar and AQ is very good! Not much that I can say that many others haven't already but it's interesting to me that two of the better movies, IMO, released in 2012 both involve an "aging" hero. Skyfall and Dark Knight Rises. I'm only bringing it up to make myself feel good because it's apparently cool to get old. biggrin.gif
post #340 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamian View Post

Originally Posted by oink go_quote.gif

FIFY
Ever the curmudgeon....tongue.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by PioManiac View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)



Now that I look at that again...since when are autos put on train cars like that?
I don't think I have ever seen it done like that before.eek.gif


Quote:
Originally Posted by Closet Geek View Post

it's apparently cool to get old. biggrin.gif
If this was true, all of those cute girls in their 20s would be jumping my bones every time I leave the house.....biggrin.gif
post #341 of 426
FWIW, this has been a fun thread to follow! biggrin.gif

Go Daniel Craig as Bond! cool.gif
post #342 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Closet Geek View Post

Finally watched this yesterday and it was better than I remembered at the theatrical release. PQ is stellar and AQ is very good! Not much that I can say that many others haven't already but it's interesting to me that two of the better movies, IMO, released in 2012 both involve an "aging" hero. Skyfall and Dark Knight Rises. I'm only bringing it up to make myself feel good because it's apparently cool to get old. biggrin.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Ever the curmudgeon....tongue.gif
Now that I look at that again...since when are autos put on train cars like that?
I don't think I have ever seen it done like that before.eek.gif
If this was true, all of those cute girls in their 20s would be jumping my bones every time I leave the house.....biggrin.gif

Now I feel old, Craig will be 45 next week, Bale is only 40!?!?....Kids!
...I'll be the big 5-0h this April. 0_o
post #343 of 426
Ok, I saw this on Saturday at a friend's house, and I did think it sounded and looked nice. I do have problems with this version of Bond, namely:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Bond has ceased to be a hero who accomplishes his mission. The producers have gone out of their way to show how flawed he is. To quote from another post:

"Every scene in SKYFALL is constructed to show Bond fail in what he attempts to do. He fails to recover the list, he fails to avoid being shot off the train, he fails catch Silva, he fails to prevent the assault on the tribunal, he fails to recover the hard drive in Shanghai, he fails to hold onto the opposition slipping through his fingers, he fails to save Severine, he fails to protect M."

Why the big desire to show him as a failure? If the explanation is "well, you see, Craig's Bond is still learning how to be the 007 we all know and love", that's contradicted by all the stuff showing how broken down, burned out, and old he is (including showing the gray stubble of his beard). If the explanation is that failure is more "dimensional", more "modern", I don't buy that either. Why does the choice have to be limited to Bond as a failure-prone antihero and Bond as a smirking Superman? The Bond of the Fleming novels always succeeded (the early Connery films were the closest representation), but he was hardly "perfect". In Moonraker, he doesn't get the girl. In From Russia with Love, he's poisoned and spends months recuperating in agony. After the death of his wife in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, he descends into alcoholism before pulling out of it. After losing his memory in You Only Live Twice, he's brainwashed by the Russians in The Man with the Golden Gun and attempts to assassinate M. Through it all, however, he was very much a hero. This Bond isn't. I don't like that. Also, I saw the post saying that M was made a woman because of a real life situation, but that doesn't excuse making the character an almost literal mommy figure for Bond. That just mangles the character way too much.
post #344 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Ok, I saw this on Saturday at a friend's house, and I did think it sounded and looked nice. I do have problems with this version of Bond, namely:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Bond has ceased to be a hero who accomplishes his mission. The producers have gone out of their way to show how flawed he is. To quote from another post:

"Every scene in SKYFALL is constructed to show Bond fail in what he attempts to do. He fails to recover the list, he fails to avoid being shot off the train, he fails catch Silva, he fails to prevent the assault on the tribunal, he fails to recover the hard drive in Shanghai, he fails to hold onto the opposition slipping through his fingers, he fails to save Severine, he fails to protect M."

Why the big desire to show him as a failure? If the explanation is "well, you see, Craig's Bond is still learning how to be the 007 we all know and love", that's contradicted by all the stuff showing how broken down, burned out, and old he is (including showing the gray stubble of his beard). If the explanation is that failure is more "dimensional", more "modern", I don't buy that either. Why does the choice have to be limited to Bond as a failure-prone antihero and Bond as a smirking Superman? The Bond of the Fleming novels always succeeded (the early Connery films were the closest representation), but he was hardly "perfect". In Moonraker, he doesn't get the girl. In From Russia with Love, he's poisoned and spends months recuperating in agony. After the death of his wife in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, he descends into alcoholism before pulling out of it. After losing his memory in You Only Live Twice, he's brainwashed by the Russians in The Man with the Golden Gun and attempts to assassinate M. Through it all, however, he was very much a hero. This Bond isn't. I don't like that. Also, I saw the post saying that M was made a woman because of a real life situation, but that doesn't excuse making the character an almost literal mommy figure for Bond. That just mangles the character way too much.

Spoilers ahead!

I understand where you're coming from, but for me It's impossible to take the film at such face value. There's so much being said between the lines IMO. In Skyfall, Bond as a character represents the aging Bond franchise. Silva on the other hand represents the current trend of filmmaking (i.e. done in a computer). M is in a sense the studio system. Bond cannot compete in this new world. And by failing at nearly every turn, it forces the franchise to look back and have a metaphorical "rebirth". In this case they go back to Bonds childhood home in Scotland. The first Bond played by Connery was Scottish, and that's the sole reason Fleming eventually gave the character Scottish origins. Both the character and the franchise are going back to square 1.

On top of that, they drove there in the classic Aston Martin. One could look at this as a simple nod to the franchise. But I see it as something more. Goldinger became the template for future Bond films. You could argue that the franchise was never the same after it's enormous success. The Aston Martin instantly became part of pulp culture and will forever be connected with Bonds style. The franchise went back to square 1 riding the same iconic symbol that initially helped skyrocket them forward.

I won't go on much more as I'm sure you can find the rest of the themes within the film and interpreted them as one sees fit. I'll just say that I haven't been this pleased with Bond film in a very long time. Or this pleased with a film in general. I found the story and themes beautifully fitting for the franchises 50th anniversary. And just as a movie in general, I thought it was expertly crafted. I rarely go the theaters anymore, but I happily went twice for Skyfall. And I can't wait to pick up the BD.
Edited by InspectorToschi - 2/22/13 at 4:04pm
post #345 of 426
^^^ Brilliant observations Inspector,
eloquently presented and I agree 100%

There's hope for this thread yet.

The new Bond is absolutely refreshing with a healthy dose of realism and the perfect balance of ties to the historical to keep it grounded.


Watching again tonight!
post #346 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Ok, I saw this on Saturday at a friend's house, and I did think it sounded and looked nice. I do have problems with this version of Bond, namely:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Bond has ceased to be a hero who accomplishes his mission. The producers have gone out of their way to show how flawed he is. To quote from another post:

"Every scene in SKYFALL is constructed to show Bond fail in what he attempts to do. He fails to recover the list, he fails to avoid being shot off the train, he fails catch Silva, he fails to prevent the assault on the tribunal, he fails to recover the hard drive in Shanghai, he fails to hold onto the opposition slipping through his fingers, he fails to save Severine, he fails to protect M."

Why the big desire to show him as a failure? If the explanation is "well, you see, Craig's Bond is still learning how to be the 007 we all know and love", that's contradicted by all the stuff showing how broken down, burned out, and old he is (including showing the gray stubble of his beard). If the explanation is that failure is more "dimensional", more "modern", I don't buy that either. Why does the choice have to be limited to Bond as a failure-prone antihero and Bond as a smirking Superman? The Bond of the Fleming novels always succeeded (the early Connery films were the closest representation), but he was hardly "perfect". In Moonraker, he doesn't get the girl. In From Russia with Love, he's poisoned and spends months recuperating in agony. After the death of his wife in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, he descends into alcoholism before pulling out of it. After losing his memory in You Only Live Twice, he's brainwashed by the Russians in The Man with the Golden Gun and attempts to assassinate M. Through it all, however, he was very much a hero. This Bond isn't. I don't like that. Also, I saw the post saying that M was made a woman because of a real life situation, but that doesn't excuse making the character an almost literal mommy figure for Bond. That just mangles the character way too much.
+1 I have all the books and love them all. Some great observations.
post #347 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by InspectorToschi View Post

Spoilers ahead!

I understand where you're coming from, but for me It's impossible to take the film at such face value. There's so much being said between the lines IMO. In Skyfall, Bond as a character represents the aging Bond franchise. Silva on the other hand represents the current trend of filmmaking (i.e. done in a computer). M is in a sense the studio system. Bond cannot compete in this new world. And by failing at nearly every turn, it forces the franchise to look back and have a metaphorical "rebirth". In this case they go back to Bonds childhood home in Scotland. The first Bond played by Connery was Scottish, and that's the sole reason Fleming eventually gave the character Scottish origins. Both the character and the franchise are going back to square 1.
Sorry, but viewing the film as some kind of commentary on film making instead of a story about a certain secret agent is a concept I just don't buy.
post #348 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Sorry, but viewing the film as some kind of commentary on film making instead of a story about a certain secret agent is a concept I just don't buy.
I don't quite agree with InspectorToschi's take on it, but I thought the Bond franchise metaphor was rather obvious.
I found it kinda obnoxiously self-congratulatory though...
post #349 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

I don't quite agree with InspectorToschi's take on it, but I thought the Bond franchise metaphor was rather obvious.
I found it kinda obnoxiously self-congratulatory though...
Even if it was some self-congratulatory means of rebooting the franchise, was it really necessary to show Bond as such a flawed, failed shell of a man who hates his ancestral home and cries over "mommy" to do that? I don't think so.
post #350 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by InspectorToschi View Post

Spoilers ahead!

The first Bond played by Connery was Scottish, and that's the sole reason Fleming eventually gave the character Scottish origins.
I have no clue what this means. Please explain.
post #351 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by PioManiac View Post

death of another thread lol, hope everyone's happy now.

anyone have anything critical to add to the actual bluray discussion?
(before it fades into obscurity ala prometheus)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PioManiac View Post

There's hope for this thread yet.
Let it go, already. You can't honestly say you didn't know you were derailing the thread with off-topic nonsense when you first started bragging about (and posting pictures of) the cars you own (rolleyes.gif) so why act all butt-hurt that the admin stepped in and told you to knock it off?


And this has nothing in common with the Prometheus thread. That thread was closed because people were discussing the film (gasp! the nerve!,) as opposed to here, where people were discussing (and posting pics and youtube videos of) cars they owned or wished they owned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InspectorToschi View Post

Spoilers ahead!
Spoiler tags work the same way as quotes do - it's really simple.

[ spoiler]Stuff you want to remain hidden. [ /spoiler]

Just remove the extra space between the bracket and the word spoiler (or /spoiler) and it's done.
post #352 of 426
post #353 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond 007 View Post

I have no clue what this means. Please explain.

Maybe I worded it poorly. Bond as a character in the books was not always Scottish. But Connery, who obviously played Bond, was. So the story goes that because of the massive success of the film series, Fleming gave Bond a Scottish origin in a later book as an homage (Or whatever you want to call it) to Connery for doing such a great job. Who knows how completely true that is, though. But you get my point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Sorry, but viewing the film as some kind of commentary on film making instead of a story about a certain secret agent is a concept I just don't buy.

Well, just because you don't buy it, doesn't mean it's not there. I think one has to be a little naive not to see the obvious self reflecting Skyfall does on the franchise. And my quickly written analysis is simply one interpretation of it.
Edited by InspectorToschi - 2/22/13 at 8:40pm
post #354 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taranteacher View Post


Go Daniel Craig as Bond! cool.gif

I agree he's my favourite Bond.
post #355 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by InspectorToschi View Post


Well, just because you don't buy it, doesn't mean it's not there. I think one has to be a little naive not to see the obvious self reflecting Skyfall does on the franchise. And my quickly written analysis is simply one interpretation of it.
To clarify: I'm saying that I don't think a movie that's supposed to be about a well known fictional British secret service agent engaged in fantastic escapades is the proper vehicle for a commentary about the movie industry. Find some other means of making the point.
post #356 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post

I agree he's my favourite Bond.
I agree....his no nonsense badassery is great.wink.gif
post #357 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

To clarify: I'm saying that I don't think a movie that's supposed to be about a well known fictional British secret service agent engaged in fantastic escapades is the proper vehicle for a commentary about the movie industry.

Agree to disagree. I see commentary where you do not. No one is right or wrong here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Find some other means of making the point.

Why? Because you disagree with mine? I enjoy dissecting the themes within a movie when they're there. And Skyfall has many, especially within the context of it's franchise.
post #358 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

To clarify: I'm saying that I don't think a movie that's supposed to be about a well known fictional British secret service agent engaged in fantastic escapades is the proper vehicle for a commentary about the movie industry. Find some other means of making the point.

Well it was only Inspector's take on it. He made a very interesting observation about the franchise's "rebirth" and going back to the sources, the "Bond's sources". As for the movie industry comparison, it's just a metaphor *he* made, not a point that Sam Mendes wanted to make with his movie so... It simply illustrates the aging franchise. By blending Bond the character with newer, younger, different elements, you end up with a refreshed Bond. There's a new dynamic now with Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
the new M, the new Q, and Moneypenny, and Bond stiil prevails because Bond adapts himself to these changes.

This franchise is unique (50 years old and still alive!), so to keep it relevant the filmmakers constantly have to adapt it to the current times, which is why I found inspector's movie industry metaphor quite fitting. One thing for sure when the credits started rolling the first time I saw it, I thought damn, I want to see the next one - now! smile.gif
post #359 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post


One thing for sure when the credits started rolling the first time I saw it, I thought damn, I want to see the next one - now! smile.gif

Same
post #360 of 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

I agree....his no nonsense badassery is great.wink.gif

I agree with both you and Franin!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Skyfall