First the Notes: What a season for cinema, right? Fall 2012 is bringing it. We started out really strong with movies like Argo and Looper and now, November has already brought us Wreck It Ralph, Lincoln, The Sexy Vampires and Werewolves Make The Girls All Squealy Movie and, in Mr. Bond's 50th year on screen, Skyfall.
Skyfall Review
Let me talk a little bit about Skyfall (while staying away from too many spoilers). A mini-review if you please. This movie is a mixed bag for me. When I was in middle school, I fell in love with Bond movies; primarily of the Connery variety. I liked the style and swagger and everything that you expected from the early films. But, as I approached college age, I grew tired of them. My tastes changed as I got older. Also, the tone and pace of modern action movies were changing dramatically at the time. More and more I began to find the Bond formula plodding and tedious. I mean, these movies are long and the older I got, the longer they felt. By the time Pierce Brosnan filled the tuxedo (about 15-20 years later than he should have) the pace had been increased somewhat, but the formula was still very stale, the plots seemed corny and the scripts uninspired. (Sorry Goldeneye fans.)So, when the Daniel Craig reinvention occurred with Casino Royale in '06 and the purists started shaking their fists, I was on board in a big way. Casino Royale was gritty and real (before "gritty and real" got ran into the ground) and it moved at relatively blazing speed. That movie brought James Bond into the real world and I think it was the best possible direction the franchise could have gone. How great was it to see James Bourne, er, James Bond seriously kicking arse and taking names instead of doing most of his damage with well-timed quips.
However, people like the quips. A lot of people. They like the quips and the gadgets and the cars and the women and the smarm and all that jazz that made Bond who he was for the previous 45 years. ...Enter Skyfall. Now that the franchise had been reenergized, the studio was apparently looking to marry Craig-Bond fans like myself with all the old-school Bond lovers (who were alienated by the new formula) for maximum money-making potential. Now, don't get me wrong. I like Skyfall. I liked it a lot. Sam Mendes crafted a film tight enough to bounce a quarter on. All the beats and emotions were organic. Nothing felt forced. If i have a primary complaint, it is in a return to decompressed pacing. The movie seemed to drag in parts. Maybe not as slow as Bonds of the past, yet still reminiscent.
 |
| Creepy time with Javier. |
With all that said, my feelings are torn in regards to the intent of the film. I'm kind of amazed that the entire script was built around bringing Bond back to the status quo. Every set piece, every major plot point is designed to get us back to where we started. Going so far as to put him back in a 1960 Aston Martin with an ejector seat button on the stick shift and machine guns in the grill. Both overtly and all the way down to the subtext, the film asks the question over and over, "Was the old way better?" And it presents the answer as a resounding, "Yes." Admittedly, the message does get mixed in a few spots along the way. For example, when Q makes fun of the notion of an exploding pen. Apparently they want Moneypenny, a male M, more philandering, etc, etc, but they aren't ready to bring back jetpacks and laser watches. (And yet there is the conundrum of the Aston Martin machine guns... Like I said, just a couple mixed messages in an otherwise tight film.)
Should you see Skyfall if you haven't already? Absolutely. Do I feel good about the direction of the franchise moving forward? Yes and no. I expect more movies following the Skyfall blueprint that are sure to be entertaining. But, personally, I'll miss the faster pace and intensity of the Jason Bond / James Bourne style of Casino Royale.