Skyfall (possible spoilers)

I thought that scene looked very, very cool and the use of colours and lighting to be clever and inspired; and I'm clearly not alone in this opinion.

But could you clearly make out what was happening?

I wasn't trying to say that it was not artistic at all, I was trying to say that the artistic aspect of it was detrimental to the action. I don't want to try to interpret a scene within a movie (i.e. trying to figure out what is going on), especially a Bond movie, I want to see it. I want to see what is happening and not being able to see the action is, in my opinion, bad cinematography in this genre of film.

I'll go edit my post.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Bear in mind it was a while ago I saw it, but the only impression I recall was an appreciation for the interesting stylistic choice in that scene, and not one of confusion.

Fair enough. I did have one of confusion. I couldn't tell which person was which and I had to try to figure it out from the silhouette of the hair styles (at least after the rifle was no longer in play) and couldn't tell at all if the punches and such were being successful or not every time. It was a bit disconcerting. On the other hand, the scene before that where he grabbed the elevator, IMO, was impressive, cool, and unexpected. It was then followed by a scene of him letting an assassination happen followed by a fight scene that was hard to follow. And no doubt, I'm letting my bias for this film style color my opinion. I've had a problem with the shaky, or hard to see, or zoom in too much, type of filming in action films for over a decade. It almost automatically kicks me out of a movie where I might miss the stylistic choice, merely because I'm mildly annoyed at the time.

I suspect that this is part of the focus of different people. As an example, years ago, I was visiting my old college campus with my wife and two friends who I had met in college and who had subsequently gotten married. As we were walking along, a drunk driver made multiple attempts to crash his car through a locked gate, broke through it, and then turned his car around and sped away. Of the four people there, I got the license number and was only vaguely aware that it was a man in a light blue car with dark hair. Another person looked carefully at the man's face, another the make, model, and color of the car, and the final person had focused on the color and style of shirt on the man. When the police arrived, we had a very good detailed description of the entire incident because each person had focused on different aspects of what we had each just seen. Different things were important to different people. The police rounded the guy up in about 10 minutes (they got his address from the license number and he had just headed straight home after doing that). While they were still talking to us, another officer radioed in that they had the man in custody. Too bad more crime cannot be solved that fast.

I think that in order to make a scene more pleasing and consistent to more people, filmmakers should create scenes that allow each person to focus on that aspect of the situation that is important to them. To this day, I sometimes while watching a film, try to catch sight of a license plate for example. If the car has a different license plate later in the film (like the Glenn Close example of four different outfits in the same courtroom on the same day), it startles me out of my immersion.

So what was important in that scene to you was probably different than what was important in that scene to me. You were having fun while I was not.
 

If the car has a different license plate later in the film (like the Glenn Close example of four different outfits in the same courtroom on the same day), it startles me out of my immersion.
Ha! I hadn't known of that one. What movie was it? Jagged Edge is the first courtroom movie that springs to mind with Glenn Close.

I tend not to be aware of stuff like that - but every once in a while, usually when the movie isn't otherwise keeping my brain occupied as it should, I notice something and then it does tend to bother me and draw me even further out of the movie.
 


I thought it looked fantastic. It was indeed partly on my mind in talking about editing, etc. - but it also wasn't adding to the excitement/action quotient of the movie at all because it was impossible to follow the action and see who was winning or even scoring any points. It was a little out of place for a traditional Bond movie, which this wasn't so much.

If a bit more grim and edgy and with fights more confusing and shocking makes the new Bond films less like classic Bond films (and we should probably consider which "classic" era we're talking about because the Connery era Bond could be pretty stone cold), then I'm all for it.
 

If a bit more grim and edgy and with fights more confusing and shocking makes the new Bond films less like classic Bond films (and we should probably consider which "classic" era we're talking about because the Connery era Bond could be pretty stone cold), then I'm all for it.

It's not about grim, edgy, or shocking at all.

It's about viewable.
 


Remove ads

Top