Skyfall

Skyfall

*Rubbish ** Ok *** Good **** Excellent ***** Unmissable

Skyfall****

Not got time to read the review?

Then it's all in a nutshell below;

Verdict

Great cinematic entertainment, making up for some disappointing year of blockbusters this year!

Biggest Pros

Bond is back, winks and nods to the past films, plus two fantastic finales.

Biggest Cons

After a good opening, a slow first hour and a silly strange timeline of convience that makes absolutely no sense.

Oh yeah and massive weird man eating lizards?....Yes very Ian Fleming.

Outcome

Bond franchise has found his feet again and Skyfall is a great contribution to the fifty year history.

Skyfall

Review

Bond… James Bond t back in his 5oth year in the latest outing Skyfall! A lovely simplistic title after the horrendous Quantum of Solace (Title and film for that matter…)

We begin as Bond is trying to recover a missing hard drive that reveals the identity of Spys across the world. This does provide one of the most unintentionally hilarious moments in the film where M asks Bond if his sure the Hard drive isn't in the room. Bond then conducts a throuher search by simply lifting up the laptap looking underneath and repprting back Yes.

Well it’s fair to say the mission dosn't go well, the hard drive is lost in hands of terrorists with Bond is shot and left for dead by one of his own. 

 

The opening sequence is defiantly the best out Craig’s three films a real high stakes, high octane packed opening , plus Adele’s chart  topping Skyfall soundtrack works really well in Credit sequence visuals that drops the hint future Bond films might be in 3D (With Skyfall being the first IMAX outing).

  

The coming months aren’t brilliant for MI6 “M” reprimanded for her role in the missing hard drive is forced into oncoming retirement, the press are condemning MI6’s role in the modern world and Bond is still missing.

When MI6 comes under attack, a disgruntled Bond can longer sit on the bench and comes out of hiding to join in the fight.

After the opening Bond goes on the usual travels starting with London and moving to across the globe to find the mastermind behind the attacks.

However here’s when for the first hour we have the usual refinements Bond routine;

a)      Shags women,

b)      Dons the tux,

c)      Travels the globe,

d)      Battles huge man eating lizards… well maybe not the last one.

 I felt it kind of dragged out a little more than it should have done and I became a touch bored. The main reason for this is that we have no visible villain to occupy ourselves with and it takes good an hour for him to arrive. Having said that same trick applied itself in Dr. No and worked quite well, however it wasn’t pulled off here with same effect.

However when our mysterious grand villain finally arrives, the film now really gets going with pace… and once the pace starts it never lets up keeping, you going all the way to the end credits.

The villain in question is played by the excellent Javier Bardem who completely relishes his part in the film and Bond History giving a wonderfully theatrical yet very personal performance as bitter twisted terrorist. This makes up a hell of allot for the bland previous villain from Quantum of Solace “Dominic Greene”, a very plain villain that even the actor that played him (Talented French actor Mathieu Amalric) had concerns about. He asked the director whether he could have a scar or something to make him stand out. The director declined saying you only need your eyes… well it’s fair to say he was wrong.

But it’s equally fair to say with Skyfall they treat the villain to a surprise disfigurement that is one of the creepiest in Bond history but intelligently enough this hasn’t just been written in for spectacle it is very much emotionally linked to the plot showcasing a cruel reality.

The greatest success of this film was the opposite of the Bond’s last outing which simply was that it wasn’t a Bond film.

 It was too concerned with fitting into the modern market which consisted of becoming more Bourne than Bond and in return lost;

A)    It’s identity,

B)     It’s trademarks,

C)    It’s class.

In all fairness it was not a Bond Film and why be something your not, or try not to be something only your franchise can do? It was an absurd move frankly.

A)    No Q,

B)     No gadgets,

C)    No Moneypenny,

D)    No decent villain,

E)     No decent plot… Come on stealing water??

F)     No famous Bond introduction line.

When Daniel Craig was asked about the point Bond never introduced himself with that famous line in Quantum of Solace, he defended it and saying that the character has to earn the right to say it. It’s in fairness Daniel it’s not a degree it’s his name.      

Its obvious lessons have been learnt, because when I say Bond is back, Bond truly is and are so are Bond films. They bring back what was missing and reinforce their Bond legacy and become proud of it once more.

They do now also fit into the modern world more by making it also part of the plot and showcase the skills Bond and the franchise have. They do make changes, but everything is in per portion. For example they increase the plot/emotions making this at times a really character driven story, but don’t forgot it still a Bond film and match it with explosions and the usual refinements.   

The biggest weakness with the script and the “Bond World” is this very strange timeline they have installed within the franchise since Casino Royale (2006). This was when the producers acquired the rights to Bond’s first official adventure (Casino Royale) and they decided they would reboot the franchise from scratch matching the story. This meaning they would take Bond back to the start of career showing the transition from being a normal spy to the graduation to “00” status.

This however is achieved in a five minute pre title sequence then the rest is Bond as normal, so was it really a huge reboot? All the producers said this was the reason Pierce Brosnan was sacked as Bond as he would be too old and subsequently all other Bond cast where given the boot, John Cleese’s Q, Samantha Bond’s Moneypenny, etc…

However they retained Judi Dench as M.

When Martin Campbell was asked about this he said that made absolutely no sense in terms of the new “Timeline” but they just thought she best person for the job. That’s the problem with the brave move of introducing the timeline factor is that it isn’t an all or nothing transition or it’s a move of convenience.

They retain whatever is convenient and bin the rest. There’s no attempt to hide plot holes in fact they draw more in every second of running time that passes and in fact don’t seem bothered in the slightest.

For instance they now bring reference to past events that Bond has never meant to have had, such as the bomb pen from Goldeneye or the gadgets from Goldfinger’s DB5. It makes no senses. So help me out writers is this Bond’s 3rd mission or is his 23rd?

 

Or maybe I got it wrong and what they’re trying to say is Bond’s past is his future which is now his present unless he goes back to the future which will be his past set in the present…? Ahh of course now I get it, yes very clever touch.

Throughout Skyfall they deal with personal and public issues that to me put this Bond film ahead of others. They look at the way terrorism has evolved and where MI6 and the “00”s fit in to this new world of technological advancement.

An argument which is defended by M is a touching moment of poetry where she explains that today the enemy is born and lives in the shadows and that is where we must fight it, with people that know where and how.

The film in my opinion takes a change from the normal routine of the Bond writing (Most probably due to the assistance of a third new writer) as here things are shaken up and the last hour is just a joy. Containing not just one finale but two, with the second demonstrating a pivotal lesson that Blockbusters don’t always have to have a grand stranding spectacle if anything by the lowering the spectacle they raise the stakes and provide one of the most personal Bond Climaxes brought about in it’s fifty years.    

One thing is for sure what Goldfinger was to Connery, Skyfall will be to Craig. This is the peak of his Bond career. They end the film almost rebooted all over again with now going into the whole 1960’s MI6 Bond feel, not sure how they take on from there. 

That is the nature of the only concern at this point which is where do they go from here? Are we going to have another Casino Royale / Skyfall or are we now due another Quantum of Solace?

Wherever they are going they are heading there very confidently so good luck to them and I say this in all sincerity… keep up the good work!... Because we will all be disappointed if you don’t….