One of the most balanced Bond films in years.

Rating: 8/10 (9 November 2012)

Skyfall was conceptually the greatest Bond film ever made. Let me explain.
Every idea for the film's development into classic Bond was perfect. We were given Q, with a more realistic and modern incarnation of Q Labs. There were many complaints about the lack of gadgets, and the writers clearly knew this would be the case, so they give is clever throwbacks like the ejector's seat in the old Aston Martin and Q's quip about the exploding pen. I have a feeling we'll be seeing many more clever AND realistic gadgets in the future of the franchise with Wishaw's fantastic portrayal of the Quartermaster himself. We were given an amazing actor, Ralph Fiennes, to replace the always brilliant Judi Dench as M. A tearful moment for fans of her perfect portrayal of the character. We were given an Oscar-worthy performance by Bardem as Silva. Bardem was given, arguably, the most difficult character to play in any Bond film to date. Silva is an absolute mess of psychological instability, and Bardem's ability to slip between crazy, depressed, vengeful, betrayed, and apathy was a masterful piece of acting. His monologue was, bar none, the greatest villain monologue in any Bond film as of the present. And we're given Moneypenny. A good performance by Harris, and a fantastic relationship development between Bond and Moneypenny. She "kills" Bond, for God's sake, and the witty innuendo-ridden banter begins.
To address the comparisons to the Batman franchise:
Yes. It is true. It's difficult not to notice some of the influence from The Dark Knight. Silva gets captured, but it was all part of his plan. There is tension about the death of Bond's parents. And Silva's character seems to have gone to the side of "do whatever I want to do, chaos is profoundly revealing." This is very much a Joker-esque type of mentality. I do not believe, however, as some quacks have seemed to try to note, that Q is some kind of "Robin" character. There is absolutely no evidence, other than his youth, that this is the case or was the intention.
To address the flow/story arc:
Admittedly, the first half-hour seems to move very quickly, and we're never entirely aware of how Bond managed to come back from getting shot in the shoulder, falling headlong into a river, sinking, flowing down the river and plummeting off of a waterfall, and being pulled out by an unidentified pair of hands during the musical segment at the beginning of the film. It's not terribly difficult to imagine that he was pulled out and aided, so much as his survival of the amount of violent, jarring tumbling around that his body had taken in the process. But hey, it's Bond, right? So it does seem to jump from point to point a bit too quickly at the beginning.
The plot was a bit more simplified from previous Craig films, especially the mind-bending acrobatics that was the plot of Quantum of Solace. Basically, MI6 loses the hard drive containing the location of every 00 agent embedded into terrorist organizations around the world, Bond gets shot accidentally, presumed dead, isn't dead. Silva attacks MI6 out of vengeance because M left him to be tortured in a foreign country after he was made. Bond finds out it's Silva, makes chase. Everything is part of Silva's plan, so Bond leaves the realm of Silva's planning by taking M to his childhood home. Silva makes chase, climactic scene at the house Bond grew up in, bad guys die, M escapes house and goes to nearby sanctuary. Silva makes chase, Bond makes chase, climactic scene in the church, MI6 is re-established with a new M, a new Moneypenny, and Q Labs. Bond is back and ready for classic Bond.
Overall:
A fitting film in the franchise, massively enjoyable even at it's length, and a clear step in the right direction.