FILM: Skyfall

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It used to be so simple in the old days, every 2 years you had a Bond film, every film made according to a specific formula.

The film could be good or bad, but that didn't have anything to do with the formula, but just how they executed it. You always knew going in what to expect.

Those days are gone. After some careful experimenting in the Brosnan era, the series cut of most of the fat when Daniel Craig took over as Bond.

The formula still exists, and is acknowledged and honoured, but parts of it are only used when it benefits the film.

After the luke-warm reception of Quantum of Solace I expected the producers to play it safe and do something a little bit more traditional. Instead they deviated more then ever!

What they did do was fix what was wrong with QoS. The cinematography and editing hampered the film, which contained many action scenes, but none of them as memorable as the ones in Casino Royale.

The cinematographer this time is Roger Deakins, who knows that shaking a camera about is a bad way to get your audience to know what's going on.

The editor is once again Stuart Baird, who knows how many shots per second the human brain can absorb.

The director is Sam Mendes, an unusual choice for an action film, but such choices have worked out in the past. (Michael Apted did TWINE, an underrated Bond film IMO)

The film starts of with a stupendous chase, first through Istanbul, then on top and though a train. This elaborate sequence is impressively mounted.

At the end of it....Bond dies. Shot....in a way by M

Since Casino Royale the writers have been building an actual relationship between the characters of 007 and M, and it pays of here. This is Judi Dench last hurray in the role, and she's fantastic.

After the initial action scene we see Bond, not actually dead but recovering, shell shocked, embittered, and enjoying empty sex and too much booze. He returns to MI6 because he must, but is resentful. For the first time ever 007 has a 3 days beard for a considerable part of the movie. Daniel Craig looks worn out here, wounded.

Finally he shaves, or gets shaved, but on a black tuxedo and once again becomes Bond. Since Sean Connery no actor has emparted so much machismo into the role as Craig. He simply IS James Bond, through and through.

He also finally made it an actors role. (an Aussie model or man with a twitchy left eye could have played this)

The villain appears very late in this film. And is introduced in an impressive long shot were Javier Bardem moves ever closer to the camera while talking. The initial encounter is...shall we say unusual. 007 has been tortured by the male villains, but never never has an attempt of seduction been made. (both Craig and Bardem play this beautifully)

Bardem's villian is a vile monster, once again not bent on world domination, but on revenge. Aspects reminded me of Ricardo Montalban's immortal role of Khan.

Up to this point the film has followed a fairly standard Bond outline. stunts and action scenes, exotic locations (Turkey, China, Macau).

The film then returns to England, and stays there. And to a large extent abandons much of the Bond formula.

Silva (Bardem escapes custody and goes after the person he blames for the wrongs in his life. M.

In am impressive display of suspense it actually feel;s like M is going to be killed. Dench's delivery of the Tenyson poem seemed like the perfect way to go out on.

She and Bond escape and 007 decides to go back to basics, this involves taking an ancient Aston Martin DB5 (with ejector seat and machine guns....it's the actual Goldfinger car!!!!) and go to Skyfall. Bonds ancestral home.

Devoid of technology they await Bardem, while booby trapping the place and sawing of some shotguns. (Albert Finney is there as Bonds gamekeeper for some reason. It's weird seeing Finney shoot people)

The final action scene takes place in the moist and dreary highlands, but it's very impressive. Bond's house is shot at, blown up, blown up really good and then a helicopter flies into it.

The final showdown takes place in an old chapel......

Mendes directs this with competence and gusto. The film looks GREAT. It's one of the best looking Bond films ever. Full of depth and texture.

The cast is good all the way through. From Craig and Dench to Fiennes, who after being killed as Voldemort last year needed a new iconic British franchise to latch on too. Bardem is weird and terrifying. There are two Bond girls. Naomi Harris is feisty and seductive as Eve. And Bérénice Marlohe is both sexy and disturbing as Séveriné. Ben Whishaw as Q is nothing like Desmond LLewelyn and that a good thing. He creates his own energy.

Thomas Newman had never really done an action based score in his life, but he doesn well with Skyfall. His approuch is very similar in style to David Arnolds. SAn infusion of orchestral and synthetic. With a strong percussive drive in the action scenes. He has some fun with the Bond theme. But for the two extended renditions of it he reuses the "My Name Is Bond...James Bond" arragement that Arnold did for Casino Royale.

This is a strong Bond film, AND a strong film in it's own right. The producers seem no longer willing to let Bond be a one dimensional character, but one that thinks and feels and works through stuff. Actions now have consequences in the Bond Universe.

It's a completly unique Bond film in many ways.

**** out of ****

[Jay 37,363]

Thomas Newman, not David Newman

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Fixed

[Melange 446]

Damn it old man, turn that f***ing torch off. Don't wave it around in an - "Okaaay, now let's compromise our cunning reformation era tunnel escape by telegraphically using a bright white torch beam very un-covertly only a few hundred metres away from where the nasty fella is still hunting for us like Khan Noonien Singh in his - 'Nooo, you can't get away. From hell's heart, I spit my last breath at theeeee' moment.

[crocodile 8,012]

Damn it old man, turn that f***ing torch off. Don't wave it around in an - "Okaaay, now let's compromise our cunning reformation era tunnel escape by telegraphically using a bright white torch beam very un-covertly only a few hundred metres away from where the nasty fella is still hunting for us like Khan Noonien Singh in his - 'Nooo, you can't get away. From hell's heart, I spit my last breath at theeeee' moment.

That actually bothered me.

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

They need a light to know were to go. Remember the frozen lake?

[Melange 446]

That actually bothered me.

Use of the torch? Or my recommendation that they didn't use it?

They need a light to know were to go. Remember the frozen lake?

Ah, but considering the man had been there for decades and was a keen shooter, I would think he'd know every inch of those highlands around the house like the back of his hand, without the need for a torch (also taking into account that the glow of the fire was illuminating the area). Having said that, he was of a different generation where men shone torch beams so that delicate ladys (even ones in charge of merciless international assasins) can avoid muddying their feet, so I can forgive him. On the way home after the film, my friend and I agreed that it was another example in film where there 'has' to be an error so that the story can continue. If they'd kept their heads down, they would have gotten away scot free (see what I did there?) without being noticed, and the rest would have panned out quite differently.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Anyway....

[Melange 446]

Anyway....

Agreed. "Enough of this Gay Banter" ~ John Cleese in the '

' sketch.

[gkgyver 1,645]

The film then returns to England, and stays there. And to a large extent abandons much of the Bond formula.

Stefan - or anyone - could you please explain what the hell that means? I heard that phrase SO often, and nobody ever explained WTF it means when the film "leaves the Bond formula".

IMO there is no difference at all, except that the location for the finale is smaller, so we have a church instead of a monastery or a tanker.

If "leaving the formula" means tossing a memorable death for the villain (like in Skyfall) or not writing a good payoff line (like in Skyfall) or Bond not having something (excuse the term) bangable (the soft version) in the end (like in Skyfall), then I'm not sure "leaving the formula" is such a great idea all the time.

The introduction of Severine was excellently pulled off, just to kill her instantly? Come on! That's like killing Natalya right there in the interrogation cell five minutes after she met Bond in GoldenEye. Or having Melina killed in Cortina in FYEO.

Just not a very clever move.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

You just answered your own question.

[gkgyver 1,645]

If you mean Bond not ending up in a girl's arms, then yes, that is obvious.

But you said that once the film returns to England, it abandons the formula, and I would like to know why it did. IMO not having a memorable death isn't abandoning the formula, it's just lame.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Name me anything plot wise in the last part of the film that we have seen before in a Bond film?

That's why I say it abandoned the formula.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Just saw it again. And it's power remains undiminished.

It's easier to focus on the details on a second viewing.

In the previous two films Bond and M slowly developed a relationship akin to that of a disappointed Mother and a disobedient son. In this film that really pays off. Craig and Dench really feed of each other very well.

Bardem is even more disturbing second time round. His character is (probably) bi-sexual and he does bring a "gay" extravagance to the role, but refuses to let that descent into camp. And it helps to make his villain seem more unpredictable and eerie.

Bond movies never really used to be "actors" movies, but they certainly have become that. Bérénice Marlohe for instance looks rather stunning as Séveriné. But her performance is laden with fear, which makes her brief role more then just a woman for Bond to have sex with.

Also this movie needs to get an Oscar nomination at least for the camerawork. It just looks so gorgeous.

[Incanus 5,714]

Although Séveriné's role was relatively short and Bondish in its style, the way it was played was rather effective as the woman was most of all there to emphasize the evil and menace of the unseen villain of the film and Bérénice Marlohe played her part very well with that subtle yet palpable fear and hatred in the same character. Her surprisingly quick death was also cruel but again powerful in portraying the underlying madness and ruthlessness of Bardem's character.

[publicist 4,643]

The introduction of Severine was excellently pulled off, just to kill her instantly? Come on! That's like killing Natalya right there in the interrogation cell five minutes after she met Bond in GoldenEye. Or having Melina killed in Cortina in FYEO.

Just not a very clever move.

It's a movie, not a waxwork enshrining your memories of old pictures.

[crocodile 8,012]

Severine character is indeed one of the most memorable aspects of the film.

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Love the callous way 007 responds to her death. Ultimately, she's a means to an end for him.

Daniel Craig's James Bond is in no way a hero. And in the film he ultimately fails. M dies.....

Note of criticism, the subway plot probably doesn't hold up to close scrutiny. Silva planned the MI6 bombing and getting captured and his his escape, but if his plot was to kill M, how could he have known she would be at the inquiry at the exact same time that Q would try to break his encryption codes which allowed him to escape in the first place?

Silva could have simply flown to England and busted in on the inquiry guns blazing. He didn't need to be captured for that.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

True. But the rest of the plan is a bit of a stretch.

It doesn't ruin the film in any way though. Most Bond films have impractical plots.

[crocodile 8,012]

Heck, most big films have impractical plots.

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Seeing it for the fourth time!