New ‘Skyfall’ Trailers Reveal Threat Facing James Bond & MI6 [Updated]

Published 1 year ago by , Updated August 8th, 2012 at 10:41 am,

 

[UPDATE: We've added the U.S. Skyfall trailer! Scroll down to see more of Bond in action]

At Comic-Con 2012 we got new updates on the upcoming 23rd James Bond movie, which is entitled Skyfall. Daniel Craig is back as 007, this time under the direction of Oscar-winning director Sam Mendes and a supporting cast that includes returning players like Judi Dench as Bond’s boss, “M,” and new additions like Naomie Harris (28 Days Later), Ralph Fiennes, and Javier Bardem (No Country for Old Men) as the new villain plaguing MI6.

The Skyfall trailer and synopsis have already established that this film will deal with some threat from M’s past that comes back to haunt her and Bond – but a new trailer that debuted at the Comic-Con 2012 “IMAX Remix” event has revealed what the nature of that threat will be. Read on if you want to know – but be warned, it could be considered a MINOR SPOILER:

As reported by Total Film, who was on hand for the event:

It turns out that M was responsible for a data drive containing the identities and current locations of every British Intelligence Agent currently operating in the field. Quite a sensitive bit of kit then, and not something you’d want falling into the wrong hands. Except that’s exactly what happens…

Naturally, when the classified information gets out, MI6 agents start dropping like flies – presumably resulting in this particularly somber moment, as glimpsed in the Skyfall trailer:

 New Skyfall Trailers Reveal Threat Facing James Bond & MI6 [Updated]

Moreover, this plot development also lends credit to an earlier rumor, which pointed to a sequence in Skyfall where carnage caused by Bardem’s assassin character is literally brought to James Bond’s doorstep. It would stand to reason that the personal information on Bond that was on M’s data drive would give 007′s foes everything they would need to infiltrate his life. However, in the Skyfall trailer’s sweetest moment (in my humble opinion), Bond reminds us that he’s no one’s easy target, when he delivers the line, “Some men are coming to kill us, but we’re going to kill them first.”

SIDE NOTE: this compromised agent story is also the same basic premise of Brian De Palma’s first Mission: Impossible film. Take that how you will.

The rest of the new IMAX trailer was said to contain some visually spectacular sequences, including that train sequence we heard about way back when as the film was going into production. Head over to Total Film  to learn more. And check back here soon – we’ll post the new trailer when it debuts online.

Update: Check out the “domestic” Skyfall trailer:

Skyfall will be in theaters on November 9, 2012.

Source: Total Film

TAGS: james bond, skyfall

95 Comments

Post a Comment

  1. I like Craig as an actor but not as Bond but I am trying to keep an open mind on this.
    The story does look excellent and one proper outcome should be replacing “M”
    which would suit me fine as Judi Dench in the role never worked for me.

    • He’s been bond for two movies already… If you aren’t yet convinced… I do not think you will be. He won me over at Casino Royale

      • I think you are right. I probably won’t be convinced.
        I don’t blame Craig though who as I said I do like.

        • His Casino Royale Bond has been one of my favorites. Of course Connery IS the original and Pierce was THE Bond growing, I still really Craig in the role for making Bond feel more human. Its unfortunate that QoS was in production during the Writers strike.

        • I too like Craig but not as Bond, he impressed in Casino Royale, but QOS was a disaster and the writers strike can’t be entirely to blame.

          • Incorrect. Pre-production of QoS began during CR and the script was only finished 2 hours before 2008 WGA strike. Even though they desperately wanted a re-write and to delay production,they could not because too many wheels were in motion. The quality of QoS is completely the fault of the 2008 WGA strike.

            • Both DrSamBeckett and Ignur Rant are correct here, the original release date for ‘QoS’ was May 2008 – a ridiculously short eighteen months after ‘CR’ – and work on the script began in summer 2006, but original director Roger Michell left the project because he felt it was an unrealistic schedule. When Marc Forster replaced Michell in June 2007, he dumped the original script that had been worked on for the previous year and started a new one from scratch, with only six months to go before production was to commence, but that ended up being only four months because the WGA strike in November 2007 stopped any further script-writing in it’s tracks… the biggest irony is they ended up pushing the release of ‘QoS’ to November 2008, exactly what Michell wanted to begin with.

              So you see, the REAL problem began with an insane release date that simply could not have been met with a film that was the best it could be, was compounded by Forster’s decision to scrap the original Purvis/Wade script draft, and finally was kneecapped by the writer’s strike leaving them with only the bare bones of a script just before production was to begin.

              Had the release date for ‘QoS’ always been November 2008 from it’s inception, Roger Michell probably would have stayed as director, the Purvis/Wade script would have been kept, Paul Haggis would have had nearly six whole months to get it ready before the strike kicked in, there would haven been plenty of time to prep the movie, production would likely have begun that November just as the strike kicked in… and we probably would have got a much better, not to mention a more developed and satisfying Bond movie than what we eventually got, in saying that though, ‘QoS’ has really grown on me since my first viewing, not nearly as good as ‘CR’ but very far from a terrible or bad movie, pretty darn good but not necessarily great.

              • I also agree, Quantum Of Solace has its big problems, but the action scenes are kinda spectacular and worth the price of admission, i.e. the car chase at the beginning, Bond chasing down Mitchell, the silent gun battle at the opera, the antique plane versus jet chase, etc. QoS is a letdown for sure, but the scene where Bond destroys the assassin in the hotel room with his bare hands alone is better than anything that ever Brosnan did.

                That’s the first that I’d heard that Forster threw out the original script and started over when he became director, why in the world did he do that?? And is there a copy of the original script floating around one can read? Were there substantial changes between it and the script they ended up going with…?

                • Craig has said recently that there virtually wasn’t even a script really, and that they were making a lot of it up as they went along.

                  • Even Craig admitted it wasn’t very good. And that’s rare.

                  • Sorry L4yercake dude, hit the wrong reply to answer your question, my reply to the above is five posts down…

                • “but the scene where Bond destroys the assassin in the hotel room with his bare hands alone is better than anything that ever Brosnan did”

                  Hmmmm. Brosnan wasn’t a brawler. And I hated that scene, never has Bond been portrayed as that stupid. that scene exists for one reason, it was designed to be like a Bourne fight.

                  “the antique plane versus jet chase”

                  Might have been good if not absolutely horrendous editing and the dreadful CGI sequence that followed it, that didn’t fit the film at all.

                  “the silent gun battle at the opera”

                  I’ll give you that, fantastic part but one of few. it felt out of place because it was so good. Like something from another film.

                  Forster is clearly a terrible director, and judging from World War Z, possibly he has a habit of changing scripts and such. I too wonder what the original shooting script was like. According to Craig it was missing a third act.

                  • No, Brosnan wasn’t a brawler but Bond is and that’s the point.

                    • Is Bond a brawler? He’s a fighter sure, but I don’t think Fleming ever intended for him to beat a man to death without getting the information needed.

                  • DSB

                    You completely missed the point of the assassin fight scene. The point is Bond is that “stupid” at that point. He is increasinlgy reckless throughought the movie because he lost Vesper. He is human, despite his “armor” as Vesper likes to call it.

                  • Agreed. Of the whole movie the main parts that stayed with me were the sometimes great visuals, and the opera scene. The rest were just wasted potential. The car chase at the start looked like a bad recording of a great chase.

                    And it’s a pity because I think the bigger Quantum story had a lot of potential – but they didn’t take full advantage of it back then.

                    And ‘missing a third act’ sounds about right. The climax wasn’t very… ‘climactic’ for a Bond movie, and given how Casino Royale both started and ended with a bang, it’s no wonder QoS felt underwhelming.

                • Apparently, according to Forster himself, the Purvis/Wade script he read “wasn’t the film I wanted to make”, so he dumped it wholesale and started anew with himself, Paul Haggis, Daniel Craig, and producer Michael G Wilson sitting in a room for two weeks hammering out a story outline.

                  I haven’t yet seen or know anyone/where that has the abandoned Purvis/Wade draft in their possession, and I couldn’t tell you a thing about how different it was from the final movie script, no-one connected to the project has ever elaborated further on it, to my knowledge…

                • QoS is def a solid companion piece to CR.

                  • In your opinion.

            • 2 years they worked on it and that was the best they could up with? Ha ha come on. The writers strike stopped them being able to refine it but it was clearly a dog of story from inception.

              • How is taking revenge a ‘dog of a story’? Seems pretty simple to me and astonishing that they screwed it up.

                • Because that’s all they had. And like you say how did they screw up such a simple story?

                  Revenge is easy, been done countless times, and that was what they ended up with? Something very wrong there.

              • They didn’t work on the the final shooting script (if that’s what you mean) for two years; Neal Purvis and Robert Wade started their first draft in July 2006, handed it in April 2007, Paul Haggis began his polish a month later in May, but that script was dumped in June when Forster came on board, and they started a new script from scratch, but that was abruptly curtailed in early November 2007 when the WGA strike kicked in, so the script you referred to was only four months in writing… although Forster and Daniel Craig performed re-writes themselves as they are not WGA members, and Josh Zetumer did further polishing on the script in spring 2008 once the strike ended.

              • DSB

                Did you read what was posted? The script worked on for 2 years was from a different writing team that came aboard when Foster replaced Mitchell.

                • I’m starting to have a vague recollection that I did in fact read an early treatment of the first script, and there actually were some kinda terrible ideas, like that Vesper and Bond had a child or something which he discovers after the fact…? Throwing out the first script may have been a better choice than it sounds.

                  I’ll try to track down where I’d read about that tho’…

                  • I think that whole child idea was conceived (!) by Paul Haggis, if I remember correctly, he was shooting around for ideas and that was one of them, don’t know if it was part of the original Purvis/Wade script though, but I could be wrong.

                    Either way, the film turned out fine to me, could have been about five or six minutes longer, with some more character beats throughout and the original filmed ending where Bond finally plugs Mr White, but I’m not complaining, it worked for me, and was indeed a thoroughly decent companion piece to the magnificent ‘Casino Royale’…

                • A different writing team? What it wasn’t Purvis and Wade who have worked on the films for the past decade? Fairly certain that it was.

                  • Did Bond catch up with Mr. White? I thought Mr. White killed another high up gov’t official and it went from there? I think the real tragedy of Qos is that the whole Mr. White/Quantum intrigue died with a whimper rather than the climax it was hinting towards, otherwise in many ways it’s a solid action movie, it’s just so overshadowed by Casino Royale.

                    I think that’s part of the mystery of Skyfall, at least for me, is whether Ralph Fiennes is playing a character that was supposed to have a bit part in QoS and then was killed off, but they rewrote Skyfall as a standalone instead of being a third act and broadened Fiennes into someone more… important.

                    I should add here that I personally think Fiennes is playing an as yet unnamed villain in this one. ;)

                    • The deleted and filmed original ending to ‘QoS’ had Bond catch up with Guy Haines (whose bodyguard Bond threw off the opera roof), and either tries to interrogate or apprehend him for interrogation by MI6, but in doing so, Bond also shoots Mr White in the process, with the image of Bond holding the gun cutting to the ‘gun barrel’ motif that ends the film now…

                      Although I haven’t read much more about the scene, Marc Forster said it only runs just over a minute in length and was supposed to be a lead-in to potentially continue the storyline into the next film, but they thought it better to give the next director that choice themselves, so it was cut. A pity really, I would rather it have been played a little different in nature – Bond and MI6 arresting the leaders of the organisation – and kept in the final cut, it would have given ‘QoS’ a more satisfying and more conclusive
                      end… whilst leaving the door ajar should they wish to continue that storyline in future (which they should not, it’s done, move along)…

                    • “The deleted and filmed original ending to ‘QoS’ had Bond catch up with Guy Haines (whose bodyguard Bond threw off the opera roof), and either tries to interrogate or apprehend him for interrogation by MI6, but in doing so, Bond also shoots Mr White in the process, with the image of Bond holding the gun cutting to the ‘gun barrel’ motif that ends the film now…”

                      Im still hoping Skyfall ties up Quantum even if only subtly.I really would like to see Quantum become SPECTRE.

                  • Yes, but (for the third time) their original script was ditched by Marc Forster, it’s THAT new script that became the eventual movie…

                    • When I said “for the third time” above, I meant that DrSamBeckett has made me state the same thing THREE times here, not that Purvis and Wade had their Bond scripts dumped three times, just thought I’d clarify that, carry on everyone…

                    • That tends to happen alot when people only want to hear/see what they want.

                    • I have a hunch that they’re ditching the Quantum storyline for the real thing this time around. I also think (less sure) that Albert Finney may replace Judi Dench as M.

                      Folks who think R. Fiennes will be the new ‘M’ replacement are barking up the wrong tree.

                    • Judi Dench has had a remarkable run as M.
                      Unfortunate that they are ditching Quantum all together. I would like for it to be a shadow in Skyfall and come back full force in Bomd 24.

      • eddie estoy a de acuerdo contigo, (Craig) de verdad se gano el personaje es un bond mas humano y violento, me gustaaa

    • Nah, Craig’s fine. The script just needs to add a few moments where he is a true suave ladies man and a slick badass mofo. This one seems like it’s doing it right with the shower kiss and the collar fixing.

      All Craig has needed thus far is a script that paid attention to details like that.

  2. Golem, James golem

  3. Any idea if the James Bond Theme was used in this trailer? It’s been inexplicably absent since Casino Royale (including Quantum of Solace trailers), and I’m interested to see if that was one of the “classic Bond elements” Craig and Mendes have said to be returning to the series.

    Any idea, also, when the trailer will be released? I read that it will be before Dark Knight Rises, but that would surprise me considering they’re released by different production companies.

    • Hmmm, if you count the number of coffins in the photo there’s eight. So that could be mean all of the Double O’s ( 1-6,8-9), except for Bond, are dead. I hope they don’t suspect Bond just because he survived. Maybe the rumours are true, and Finnes is replacing Dench. Bond had said to his understanding Double O’s had a very short lifespan, I doubt he ever dreamed it would be due to his boss’s incompetence. Also, for future reference let’s remember in Mission Impossible the NOC list was never leaked, so this makes for an entirely different story. I’m looking forward to this film more and more.

      • I thought that they deliberately faked Bond’s death, after the list was leaked they killed the other 00′s and made it seem that Bond was dead too so he could go after Silva.

    • The theme not being used has annoyed me, because it was used QOS trailers but was absent from the film apart from the gun barrel sequence at the end.
      I hope the theme will feature a bit more prominently in Skyfall.

      • You can actually hear the theme. I only heard it when I turned it up loud.

        • I heard it too. The overall tone of the movie is very good and a nice throwback to the early Bond films which I prefer. I like Craig as Bond because I feel like he could actually beat somebody up. After Tomorrow Never Dies, I thought Pierce’s and Moore’s Bond should have died 1000 times and never understood how they could beat somebody up.

          Also recently read that GoldenEye was written for Timothy Dalton and for the darker tone he was taking Bond in before the whole 6 year issue.

          • I’m not so sure it was, Dalton bowed out of coming back long before Brosnan came on board. In fact Dalton left because he was sick of waiting for them to come up with a script.

            • It’s just what I read online at IMDB. Of course not everything you read you online is true.

    • Listen carefully in the climax of the trailer. The themes there.

  4. Poor Javier… This will typecast him for a decade!

  5. I’m not sure about the idea of M being incompetent. I know a lot of people can’t wait to see the back of Judi Dench, but i have to say I’ve liked her very much in the role. And if this is her exit, I hope it’s not as a disgraced incompetent…or that she gets murdered. She deserves a better exit than that.

    • Agreed, I’ve thought all along that she was great. I just rewatched Goldeneye, in which she was introduced, and it re-confirmed my opinion of her. I’ll be sorry to see her go – if she IS leaving…

    • Listen to the trailer again, I don’t think it was a simple case of incompetence at all. She says “It was judgement call” Which doesn’t sound like she just misplaced it. Maybe there are larger factors at work.

      But Dench is said to be giving up acting as her eyesight is failing terribly, and maybe, it is time for a new M. Although I doubt it will be Fiennes, I still think he’s a villain. Probably responsible for the whole thing.

  6. Hmmm, this doesn’t sound so good.
    Why would M be responsible for a drive with such compromising info?
    I hope they give a good explanation in he film…

    • “Why would M be responsible for a drive with such compromising info?”

      Because she’s the head of MI6?

  7. this sounds awful. The Bond film makers have lost it.

  8. Cr-egg should be replaced already with Cavill or Jackman. He is yesterday’s news and horrific as Bond.

    • Nahhhh, replace him with Michael Fassbender. I’m reading ‘The Man with the red tattoo’ and picturing him as Bond, and I’ve got to say it feels really believable. He’s the right age, has the right look, and is a great actor. Don’t get me wrong, I like Craig as Bond but I don’t think any actor should play Bond more than 3 films in a row.

      • “but I don’t think any actor should play Bond more than 3 films in a row”

        Not sure I agree with that but I think Craig’s time should come to end now or maybe with one more film, Fassbender is a good choice however, I worry that his Bond might be similar to Craig’s in some ways and less like the character the films have created.
        Idris Elba or Tom Hardy would both make good Bonds.

    • If you’re talking about Hugh Jackman, you must be crazy.. I don’t see him as Bond. I can’t think of the actors name but he’s well known in Britian and he appeared in two Bond films. He’s black too, he was in the first Resident Evil film and in Punisher: War Zone, also a guest on a episode of Doctor Who. Peice Bronson himself said the actor would make a good Bond. If people kept an opened mind it might work. But James said Micheal Fassbender would go good too

      • Daniel Craig has been offered a contract to do five more Bonds after this one, maybe more. Better get used to him, unless Skyfall bombs, which is highly unlikely.

        • That was nothing but a rumour. If he does five more films, he’ll be far too old by the time the 3,4th comes around.

          • Maybe – but by the end of his tenure, Moore was FAR too old and they let him stumble through them. Hopefully the Broccoli’s have learned from that mistake…

            • And what’s too old for Bond? Why does he need to be constantly in his 20′s? Roger Moore was too old, sure, but he was also never physical enough for the role to begin with. I’m fairly certain that in ten years Daniel Craig will still be in fierce shape.

          • Michael G. Wilson saying it is a lot more than just a rumor, although yes, you are correct in the sense that Craig has not officially signed on for 5 more yet. They’ll wait until Skyfall turns out to be everything they hope it’s going to be. And DC saying he’ll quit Bond when they drag him kicking and screaming from the role, well, I know which way I’d bet on anyone else playing Bond for at least the next decade.

      • Hugh Jackman was offered the role before Daniel Craig. So was Clive Owen and Henry Cavill. Craig wasn’t even their top 3 choice.

        • Wow…I’d have a hard time seeing Jackman do Bond. I’d keep seeing that ridiculous Wolverine hair.

          • The casting list was 1) Daniel Craig 2) Cavil (who was in his very early 20′s) 3) Goran Visnejic (spelling?) 4) Julian McMahon, who actually blew his shot by doing a photo shoot during casting as Bond. A leaked memo from Babs said Owen was too ugly and normal, Jackman was too gay, and Ewan Mcgreggor was too small. Just for clarification. Only actor to turn down an offer was Eric Bana.

            • “Jackman was too gay”…
              LOL!

              Thanks for this list. I had a hard time believing it was actually offered to Jackman. Bana might’ve been interesting.
              …source?

              • Pretty sure Bana et al. were never offered the role, the only two seriously considered actors were Henry Cavill and Daniel Craig, and Cavill was too young and Craig won them over with his performance in Layercake.

            • You’re right about Goran Visnejic, he was very nearly cast.

              But Owen was offered the role and turned it down, he wanted to only do 2 films and wanted a percentage of the profits.

  9. Cant wait til November.

  10. Hard to argue with that, looks pretty good

  11. woooow i´ve got goosebumps from the trailer. the first meeting between q and bond was cool and the villain looks for me like the best from the trilogy, bardiem looks evil and badass with his blond hairs and a little bit prosthetic make up on his eye-part.

  12. “this compromised agent story is also the same basic premise of Brian De Palma’s first Mission: Impossible film. Take that how you will”

    I’ll take it like this. It has no relevance or bearing at all. It is a detail shared by two films, are we criticising every film that has a plot detail in common now? If so, then we will have to start adding it on almost every action and spy thriller from the past fifty years. There are only 7 basic plots as it is, how many plots can there be for spy films?

    • I’m kind of torn. Because part of me agrees with you, in the sense that this movie will likely be different enough in the details and execution to where it won’t really matter that the premise is similar.

      At the same time, it’s a very similar premise.

      Actually as I typed that, I thought a little more and see more differences.

      As far as I remember M:I revolved around the NOC list, but no one ever got it. The whole movie was about stealing it and selling it (and all the intrigue and double crosses). But I don’t believe we actually see the effects of the NOC list being distributed.

      And that is basically where the new James Bond seems to start: the list of agents in terrorist organizations has been lost, and now everyone dies but two. And one of them is Bond, and the other is very upset and wants to take out his vengeance on the empire.

      So it borrows from the idea that there is a list of secret agents, but other than that it seems to go in a completely different direction.

      • Exactly. In MI it was all about recovering the Noc list before Phelps could sell it to Max, in Skyfall the agents names have been revealed on YouTube and people are clearly killed as a result. So in that reagard it is a similar premise but with with vastly different consequences.

    • In Skyfall I’m taking it more as the product of a moral/ethical dilemma, based on how M describes the result as a ‘judgement call’ of hers – and since early descriptions of the film talked a lot about the focus on M, I’m pretty optimistic that this won’t just be a ‘lost MacGuffin’ that the good guys have to scramble to find before the bad guys.

      It also helps that the IMF from the MI films are kinda silly and pretty incompetent, so I usually see the plots as contrivances meant to create a story.

  13. Huh. There are two trailers, almost identical just cut together differently. Although there are some small differences and scenes.

  14. Hugh Jackman? Pass on that idea

    • ignore that, this was to someone else.. human error

  15. The iMAX exclusive trailer is cut much better than this version. Shows much of the same things but with more suspense and less reveal.

    • I completely agree with that.

  16. I know the theme is in there but I really don’t like it. Please bring back the Bond theme with some kick! I want a blasting orchestral theme again.

    The rest of the film looks good though.

    • Completely agree. The music sounds tinny and awful. It needs more bass and horns.

  17. looks pretty sweet to me. I really enjoy Craig as Bond but it looks like I’m the only one

    • Nope, you’re not. I think he’s great, too. Casino Royale was a huge step forward for the Bond franchise – hell, I even liked Q.O.S. I always HATED Moore, thought Brosnan was OK.

      I think this film looks fantastic and I’m really looking forward to it.

      • I love Craig as Bond. Ever since I saw him in “Layer Cake” I wanted him to be Bond. The funny thing is Daniel Craig doesn’t look like a bond. Brosnan looked the most like Bond (IMO), but he was a little too soft and the movies gradually let him down.

        I wouldn’t mind seeing a black Bond next. Not for novelty value or to appease any kind of equal rights thing. But because we have some fantastic black British actors out there at the moment. I’ve always thought of the name “James Bond” to have been a name that was handed to all 007′s. I know it’s not, but that’s how I’ve always looked at it.

        • Idris Elba for example, he wants to do it. The fans want him. The fact that he’s black has become totally irrelevant, it should always be the best actor for the job.

          • I’d like to see Chiwetel Ejiofor in the role.

            • This might seem odd but I find him somewhat effeminate. Not saying no though.

  18. no – yeti- you are not the only one. he is a cool bond.

  19. I like that Craig’s playing a character in these and not just being a pretty boy like too many of the other Bonds. He seems to have taken his cue from the books, Steve McQueen from The Thomas Crown Affair, and a touch of Connery for good measure.

  20. That was sickk

  21. This looks visually beautiful. I have high hopes for this movie and I doubt it will disappoint.

  22. I didn’t think I would like Craig as Bond either, but the torture scene in the first flick sold me. Let me back track, the opening chase scene sold me. The torture part gave me a man crush and made me want to bite off bat heads or some caveman sh…!
    More Assassin than spy. I can dig that.

    The trailer..the trailer.. train scene where he jumps in and smooths out his suit.. F.. yah!
    Walther PPK/S isn’t really a .9mil. It’s a .380 ACP.. but I’m not going to harp on that.
    Can’t wait to check this out.

  23. Going to be fun. Eagerly waiting.

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

Be Social, Follow Us!!