MovieChat Forums > Skyfall (2012) Discussion > the Home Alone end is so silly

the Home Alone end is so silly

posted 4 years ago by bozo_500 (13387)
11 replies | jump to latest

I just caught the end of SF the other night when it showed for perhaps the 1,000th time on itv2 and it reminded me how WTF the ending was

going back to his deserted home to face Silva (why?). No guns hardly (why would it be so difficult for Bond and M to get weapons?), John McClane Judi Dench, the sad old 'sorry we couldn't get Sean Connery but heres Albert Finney from the Bourne films' caretaker, 'sometimes the old ways are best' - a knife to a helicopter gunship fight?, Bond being all ridiculously macho, Bardem going all Joker, Bond crying (James Bond doesn't cry)

[–] millsey72 (10939) 4 years ago

The ending had nothing to do with Home Alone. There were no kids in the Skyfall ending plus there were no comedic moments

[–] Ace_Spade (9658) 4 years ago

Thank you. Booby-trapping a house was not invented by, nor is it intrinsically an imitation of, Kevin McAlister.

[–] FFNogoodnik (778) 4 years ago

Yes but it is so connected to "Home Alone" that when people are asked "what is that movie where the protagonist booby traps the house?" how many people are going to say "The Collector"?

It is like people criticizing Quantum of Solace for "being more like a Bourne movie". The Bourne films did not invent shaky cam but when people think of that method a LOT of them will think of the Bourne films.

[–] Ace_Spade (9658) 4 years ago

Right, but if the answer was, "Home Alone," and the first person said, "Oh, no, this wasn't a kid's movie, this was an adult film," and then described more details, the person asked might then go, "Oh, yeah, that's The Collector."

Quantum wasn't trying to be a Bourne movie for the shaky-cam alone, although that contributed to that feeling. There were other elements to that movie (lack of humour, lack of traditional Bond lines or tropes, the water/oil plotline, etc.) that made Quantum feel like it was alien to the rest of the Bond franchise. An aggregate of style elements, plot points, characterizations, etc., is what made Quantum of Solace get criticized.

If there were other elements to Skyfall's climax that connected it to Home Alone, sure. But he didn't use film clips and cutouts of sports figures to fool Silva into thinking he had a small army in the house. Nothing was played for laughs. Albert Finney was an old guy helping him out, sure, but he had a shotgun, not a shovel.

[–] Ace_Spade (9658) 4 years ago

The ending ruled. From the classic arrangement on the Bond theme, the classic cars, the assertion of the theme that the old ways don't just die, Bond being able to escape his past and move forward - it was a worthy, fulfilling, and thrill-ride of a climax.

[–] bozo_500 (13387) 4 years ago

The complete opposite to my reaction.😄 but that's ok

[–] Ace_Spade (9658) 4 years ago

I think I can answer a few of those questions:

Back to the childhood home for practical and thematic reasons. Practically-speaking, it's ground that Bond is familiar with and where he is comfortable. All throughout the film, he has fought Silva on Silva's terms. For the psychological boost, the "home turf advantage" element, he chose the Skyfall estate. It also would throw Silva off, who has bested Bond in tech, in London - all over, in fact - so now Bond is in an old mansion? Couldn't be easier, right? The guard is down.

Thematically, he goes home because Bond and M are confronting the past and trying to escape their past demons to move forward. It also brings out that theme of "Old v. New" that plays out the whole movie. The question since reel-one of Skyfall (in the viewers' heads) is, "Is Bond too old? Shouldn't he just leave everything to the younger, hipper spies like Q?" We see him physically fail, we see him bested by tech and Silva...can he get out of that rut and prove that experience, wisdom, and being old is not the detriment others think it is? Plus, we want to see him escape his past demons haunting him.

They left quickly, so maybe they didn't have time to stockpile weapons. They probably should have grabbed a couple carbines, though. Still, for the nasty, dirty, up-close fighting they planned, booby traps and shotguns were fine.

I was kinda glad it was Finney. Connery would have made it weird. It would have been like Lazenby breaking the fourth wall.

M being awesome? Don't mind it.

Bond being macho? Don't mind it.

Bond crying? Don't mind it. (Also, can he be too macho, yet also cry?) This doesn't ruin the character for me. He's always been a human who can bleed, cry, and die. He just doesn't let most people see him do any of those things. (Never let them see you bleed...one of the all-time great Q moments...)

Knife to a helicopter fight works in an action movie. Don't mind it.

I'm not sure what you mean by "going all Joker"...?

[–] drrclavan (667) 4 years ago

The Bond franchise went full retard when barbara cauliflower took over and hired daniel "no Bond" craig to play what once was a great character.

[–] xhonzi (133) 4 years ago

There are guns here.
Oh there aren't guns here?
There were 30 years ago, so I just assumed...
No I didn't bring any other guns.

There are micro machines here... At least... There were 30 years ago.

[–] bozo_500 (13387) 4 years ago

we need guns lots of gu..theres no guns? i thought thered be guns.. oh..er well in that case we've just got a PPK with a spare 6 shot magazine and a double barrel shotgun with some extra shells.. oh and a knife

[–] xhonzi (133) 4 years ago

Most Bond films end with Bond succeeding against impossible odds. Most of these impossible odds are not the direct result of Bond's bad decisions (deciding to not bring guns to a gun fight).