50 years of James Bond in film. Can you
believe it? And the character's been around even longer, with the
novels of Ian Fleming being the genesis. He's an institution these
days, and will continue to be so.
So what better way for Bond to
celebrate five decades of entertaining us through film than with the
latest, and possibly most introspective Bond film, Skyfall.
After a botched information recovery
attempt leaves him for dead, Bond (Daniel Craig) lives his life the
way he wants to. But when MI6 is attacked, he returns to active duty
in order to find the person responsible.
Wow, that may be the shortest synopsis
I've ever written for a movie. But then, I think you know what to
expect with a Bond film when going in.
…
Or do you?
When James Bond was rebooted back in
2006, the seeds were planted for a new Bond to grow. While still
maintaining the traits of Bonds past, the films themselves have gone
down a more... well, “realistic” tone for lack of a better word.
That's not to say there isn't a sense of realism, but with Bond,
escapism is also heavily prevalent.
Skyfall still has that escapism factor,
but it also has a personal touch, as this film is not just an
exploration of what makes Bond such an endearing concept throughout
the years, but what made Bond in the first place (well, not entirely,
but there is a lot of psychology on display).
We get to learn a little more of Bond's
past, his upbringing, his home life. Not too much to kill off the
mystique, but not so little so that you feel it's a dead-end. In fact
(small spoiler here), most of the third act of the film takes place
at Bond's home. Called Skyfall. Yep, that's where our title comes
from.
Really, the big question of the film
is: are men like Bond still relevant in this day and age or are they
relics of days gone by?
Well, if the box office is any
indication, Bond is still very much relevant, and he'll always be
welcome. And in my opinion, he is indeed always welcome, especially
if films like this are being offered up.
From an action standpoint, it's a
treat. It's less about Bond looking like an absolute badass with a
gun while shooting mooks, and more like actual survival, particularly
in the third act, when it's three against a large group, including
the main villain.
But some of the earlier scenes are
solid too, in particular Bond tangling with a sniper, his fist fight
on top of a train at the beginning, and the absolutely amazing shot
of a train crashing down beneath the tracks.
Acting-wise, everyone's a top choice,
but if I have to hand out awards for this film's performances, the
clear winners are Judi Dench as M, and Javier Bardem as Raoul Silva.
That's not to say that Daniel Craig has
slipped as Bond. If anything, he's getting better, and he was already
great to start with. Now he's become a much more stoic Bond, who can
show emotion but is an expert at hiding his true feelings. Even when
he comes close to anger, his face never changes. He could easily win
every staring contest ever.
However, this is just as much M's movie
as it is Bond's. The villain is after her personally, and even her
own government is challenging her, but she never backs down and is
always ready for a fight (even if it's with a snarky remark). It's
more apparent in this film than in any other how much of a mother
figure she is to Bond, and the fact that the two of them end up
fighting Silva pretty much on their own (well, there's this awesome
supporting character called Kincaid too) gives the two of them enough
screentime to let the audience know how far they've come together.
Speaking of Silva (spoilers abound)...
hoo boy, he's quite a different villain. Most Bond villains, their
motivation is money or power. Silva, he has both, but that's not what
he wants. He wants vengeance. Vengeance on a country that betrayed
him when he worked for MI6, largely directed at M, who he sees as a
mother figure too.
Its this viewpoint that actually makes
him rather sympathetic. At the end, when he confronts M when she's
virtually all alone, he breaks down with tears after seeing her in
her current condition. He's like a little boy who wants approval from
his mother and despite trying to kill her himself, he can't bear to
see her in pain. He even wants her to kill the both of them, one shot
to the head. I also like the symbolism of his death: Bond throws a
knife into his back. Now, this time it's a literal backstabbing.
Actually, this movie has quite a bit of symbolism, especially with Bond's answer in regards to a question about his hobbies: "Resurrection". Indeed, this does feel like a resurrection for the franchise itself, much like Casino Royale, especially after the mixed reaction of Quantum Of Solace (also a terrific film, in my opinion).
It's rare to see a Bond villain you
feel kind of sorry for, regardless of their terrible deeds, and
Javier makes him a memorable villain, ranking up there with
Trevelyan, Bolfeld and Goldfinger for classic Bond villain status.
Throw in some solid support, with
reintroduced Bond characters like Moneypenny (Naomie Harris, not a
spoiler, even with how the film ends. Cute, by the way, and please
note my sarcasm. We knew she was Moneypenny before the film began,
and the way you hid it makes no sense. New fans won't know who
Moneypenny is, old fans wondered why you bothered keeping it a
secret. Consider this my big gripe with the movie, though Naomie and
Daniel work well together) and Q (Ben Winshaw, who I've never heard
of, but I approve of his Q and hope he returns) and you have a film
well worth your time. 4/5
(One last note: Adele's theme song? Oh,
just so amazing! It's easily one of THE best Bond films, with its
sombre tone, and determined lyrics. Combined with the opening
sequence, it's a thing of beauty, and is probably the best credits
sequence I've seen in a film this year since The Girl With The Dragon
Tattoo).
Well, seven more to go now. This is the
end... aaaaand, now the song is stuck in my head again. As it should
be.
No comments:
Post a Comment