Review: Skyfall (dir. Sam Mendes)

Story: A mission in Istanbul ends in failure, with Bond (Daniel Craig) pressumed dead and a harddisk with vital data missing. At home, ‘M’ (Judi Dench) is under attacks from government officials and an old foe from her past. But when Bond reappears to save the day, he may no longer be the lethal weapon he once was.

The 23^rd official James Bond film came with high expectations, and some dread. After all, it was the film that would celebrate fifty years of James Bond (Dr. No, the first film, was released 1962). It starred an actor who many consider the best James Bond since Sean Connery, and was directed by award winning director Sam Mendes (American Beauty, Revolutionary Road). The dread was that the Bond series would not be able to return to the level of Casino Royale (2006) after the unfortunate Quantum of Solace (2008). And was a high profile ‘serious’ director the right person to direct an action adventure? Would the weight of history drag Bond down or would it give him wings?

Fair is fair, it is quite a relief that Skyfall is a really good James Bond film. It is more than that. It is a really good film. However, it is not as good as some English reviewers would have us believe. In their common, patriottically inspired enthusiasm – in which each new Bond is greeted as wither the best or the worst ever – they hailed Skyfall as the highlight of the franchise’s history. I sincerely doubt this. Skyfall is good, but I doubt whether it is up there with Goldfinger and Casino Royale.

Let su start with the really good things then. First there is an impressive cast, filling a series of iconic roles. Craig is excellent as Bond. I am amongst those who rate him higher than Connery, especially considering the demands of the role in the serious reboot that the series got with Casino Royale. Equally brilliant, and finally in a substantial role, is Judi Dench as M. Javier Bardem’s Silva is one of the scariest but also one of the most believable villains Bond has ever faced. And as if that were not enough, supporting roles are filled with enthusiasm and energy by the likes of Ralph Fiennes, Ben Whishaw and Albert Finney. Bérénice Marlohe and Noamie Harris are interesting Bond girls.

As important as a good cast is a good script. And Skyfall’s plot is serious and grown-up, but also straightforward and founded in a ‘real’ modern world. As GoldenEye (1995) once tried to be, it is a thoughtful meditation on the role of Bond in a digital, post-Cold War world. The film also looks gorgeous, courtesy of cinematographer Roger Deakins. Perhaps a little too gorgeous, as some of the more aesthetic shots hint at the artificiality of Bond’s universe.

Which brings me to my main point of critique. Skyfall’s weakest part is exactly its history. It tries, too much to my taste, to honor the past. Thereby it does not only highlight its artificiality, but it also makes the film predictable, especially in the second half. A number of, what appear to be, red herrings are set up in the plot. And then you don’t expect everything to work out exactly as you’d expect things to work out. It is one thing to bring back the Aston Martin, it is quite another thing to use it the way the film does (see how I try not to give too much away here?). The same is true for a number of ‘unexpected’ character developments.

But hey, what does it say about Skyfall that those are my main points of concern? Only that the rest of the film is really, really good.

Final verdict: Not just a return to form, for Bond, but a return to format as well. An excellent episode that finishes the job Casino Royale started: to set up a new Bond in a new universe. If only it had the balls to let go a little more of the past.

Let the Skyfall!

Allright, I’m ready for it. Skyfall. The new Bond film. The 23^rd “official” appearance of Ian Fleming’s 007 on the big screen. Released exactly 50 years after the first one, Dr. No. The third film with Daniel Craig as Bond. And the seventh one with Judi Dench as his boss, M. The latter is quite important this time around, as the plot of Skyfall will see big bad guy Silva (Javier Bardem with atrocious teeth and hair) launch a full scale attack on MI6 and M personally. You will read more about the film after I see it on Wednesday, but I can say this much: my expectations are very high. The first teaser trailer blew me away:

A very ‘unBondesque’ affair indeed. The second trailer was considerably more conventional, but not less exciting:

Skyfall comes with the most lauded and praised cast and crew ever, so much is for sure. Next to Craig, Dench (10 Bafta wins and six Oscar nominations) and Bardem (Oscar win for No Country for Old Men), Ralph Fiennes (1 Bafta win and 2 Oscar nominations) will appear. Director Sam Mendes won an Oscar for American Beauty, cinematographer Roger Deakins was nominated eight (!) times, and composer Thomas Newman seven times. Indeed, never where there more golden statues at a Bond set.

Finally, Skyfall has received considerable praise accross the channel, where it opened last week. Words have even been spoken about it being ‘the best Bond ever’. Who knows. Just some quotes from leading reviewers:

 

“All you could want from a 21^st century Bond.” (Empire)

“The 007 adventure we’ve been waiting for.” (TotalFilm)

“Thie 23^rd canonical Bond picture is possibly the best.” (Philip French, The Observer)

 

And there is of course Adele, belting out that theme tune as if she were Shirley Bassey. A tune that just won’t get out of my head. Indeed, bring it on, let the Sky Fall!

Review: Skyfall trailer

Last week the full trailer for Skyfall came online. What do we think?

First of all, it is not by a long shot as intriguing as that very first teaser, which was a work of art in my book. But that does not mean that this is bad, or that it makes me expect less from the film.

As you may recall, Skyfall is being directed by Academy Award winning director Sam Mendes (American Beauty, Jarhead, Revolutionary Road). This is a clear new direction taken by producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilso. In the past, the director was ‘just for hire’ on Bond films, and if there were ‘authors’  to the series at all than the producers filled that role. Skyfall seems a typical Mendes film, with strong visual images (also courtesy of cinematographer Roger Deakins) and troubled protagonists. Furthermore, Mendes brought his own composer Thomas Newman with him, replacing Bond regular David Arnold.

The action looks stunning. The plot substantial and the threat real. The big question is how especially British audiences will react to what seems to be a terrorist attack on the London Underground.

Javier Bardem is an old-fashioned Bond viollain with an accent and a bad hair day. However, remembering his Anton Chigurh (No Country for Old Men) he is also properly scary. Ben Whishaw looks good as a new, young ‘Q’. The girls are beautiful, but not much more than that it seems. There is no place for a Vesper Lynd in Skyfall.

If there is a big female role at all, it must be Judi Dench’s M, whose former mistakes cost MI6 dearly now. The question on everyone’s minds is whether Dench will survive the film, with Ralph Fiennes lined up as government official Gareth Mallory.

We will have to wait for November 1st to find out. Until then,w e’ll have to make do with the new trailer and this stunning teaser:

Thursday Movie News Flash Update Blog-message

Things that we’ve learned this week:

Ralph Fiennes might be ‘N’

Iron Man fights Ghandi

 

 

 

 

 

Hunger Games director not to return for sequel

Batman’s baddies speak up

And Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to save the Terminator

Romeo and ms Monroe – the My Week With Marilyn review

First of all: what a wonderful joy is this film. What a pleasure to watch it. You’d be inclined to say that this is a wonderful film the likes of which they don’t make anymore. Except that this film actually just has been made. A film that breathes old-fashioned Hollywood cinema, much like other recent and forthcoming films like The Artist and The Woman in Black. Films crucially and ironically, that are not American.

This is a lovely, formulaic love story that echoes Romeo and Juliet and The Prince and the Pauper, and the film of which it shows the making-of, The Prince and the Showgirl (1957). With the little twist that this film is about the romance between a princess and a third assistant director. Marilyn Monroe (Michelle Williams), at the height of her fame, comes to England to make a film with Sir Laurence Olivier (Kenneth Branagh). He, the famous Thespian, wants to become a movie star. She, the movie star, wants to be a serious actress. But the two clash hard, due to Monroe’s eccentricity and drug addiction and Olivier’s discipline and ambition. Caught in the crossfire between them is the young British third assistant director, Colin Clark (Eddie Redmayne), on whose memoirs this film is based. Colin thanks his job to Olivier’s wife Vivien Leigh, but falls for the charms of Monroe.

My Week With Marilyn is a serious film, but with a light touch. It is filled with British star actors in small supporting roles: Judi Dench, Emma Watson, Derek Jacobi, Toby Jones, Dominic Cooper and Dougray Scott all turn up. But this is without a doubt Wililams’ and Branagh’s film. Both were, logically, nominated for Oscars for their roles. Williams, like Meryl Streep as the older Lady Thatcher in The Iron Lady, manages to go beyond impression or impersonation, and really inhabits Monroe and channels the tragedy of her short life. The casting of Branagh is brilliantly conceived. He is the only actor who comes close to Olivier in evoking Shakespearianism. And to have Olivier, as played by Branagh, quote the doomed Prospero from The Tempest, during the making of a film in which Olivier tries to reinvigorate and reinvent himself, is of a stunning intertextual complexity. Or it is just a little joke. The academic in me prays for the former.

Meanwhile England looks gorgeously green. The soundtrack leads and follows the action on-screen closely and the 99 minutes of movie-goodness flash by. The direction, by experienced television director Simon Curtis, is efficient and appropriately glamour less: there is plenty of glamour already on-screen with the presence of all these famous actors playing famous actors in beautiful period costumes.

This is a film that deserves all the praise showered upon it, and probably more. A film worth seeing in the cinema. Go quickly, before it disappears from the big screen.

Standard Biopic, Unfortunately – the J. Edgar review

It is hard to make a good biopic. Mostly because, usually, a person’s life, the events in it and the order in which they happen don’t correspond well to the conventional structure of a fiction film. So filmmakers have to rearrange, squeeze and fit in and sometimes come up with all kinds of artificial devices in order to have a proper three-arc structure with two clear plot points and a satisfying climax.

The most common device used by filmmakers to make the story fit the structure is the flashback, possibly with voice-over. This gives the filmmaker the chance to tell two parts of a life’s story intercut rather than straightforward. Preferably this is a flashback in which an old person remembers his or her youth. Effective, but a bit boring. Another device is the writing down of memoirs. This is the device Clint Eastwood chose for J. Edgar, his biopic of legendary FBI founder and director J. Edgar Hoover. Also effective, and slightly less corny than the flashback.

Leonardo diCaprio plays Hoover, both in his prime and in his old age. Many have commented on the make-up and prosthetics of the old version of the character, deeming them unconvincing. I disagree. Hoover was completely recognizable, and I had never the idea that I was watching the actor diCaprio. What I found more distracting was the high-pitched voice with a drawl of a Southern accent. It may be a realistic impersonation ofHoover, but not pleasant to listen to.

DiCaprio does a good job, although this is not a performance of the same quality as the ones he gave in Catch Me If you Can, Shutter Island or Inception. Judi Dench is enjoyably creepy as Hoover’s overbearing mother, although the suggested causal relationship between Hoover’s alleged sexual orientation and his relation with his mother is an anachronistic example of ‘momism’ and can be experienced as quite insulting to homosexual people. The stand out performance of the film however is by Armie Hammer, the actor who had is breakthrough in David Fincher’s The Social Network. There he played two twin brothers, here he plays the old and the young version of Clyde Tolson,Hoover’s closest friend and ally and, some say, his lover. And he is very, very good. Unfortunately Naomi Watts is somewhat underused as Helen Gandy,Hoover’s lifelong secretary. That is a pity because when she is allowed to act, she shines.

It is so hard to do a good biopic. J. Edgar is another example of films that just want to squeeze in too much. Much like Oliver Stone’s Nixon and Alexander, or the fictional biopic The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. Much more successful examples are Walk the Line, which focused on the early part of Johnny Cash’ career, and Eastwood’s own Invictus (2009). That last film is to me a key example of a good biopic. In that film Eastwood dids not tell the whole story of Nelson Mandela’s life, but chose to capture one period, the Rugby World Cup of 1995, in order to let all the important parts of the man’s character and history come to the surface.

J. Edgar, unfortunately, is nothing like Invictus. It is too long, and in the end a bit boring. And it uses too many of the clichés of the biopic genre. Clint Eastwood obviously played it safe after the disappointing responses to last year’s Hereafter. I, however, would rather see him experimenting more, and would take for granted the inevitable occasional miss.

Skyfall – Update

A few weeks ago the title and cast of the new James Bond film were announced. Daniel Craig will star again, this time in Skyfall. Ther cast members confirmed were Javier Bardem, Judi Dench, Ralph Fiennes and Ben Whishaw. The latter’s role was still a mystery though. By now, filming has started, and once in a while a picture of a clapperboard finds it way online. Also, some other things are now known about Skyfall:

1: It will be better than Quantum of Solace. That’s what everybody is hoping, but Daniel Craig is also promising it. In an interview with Empire he said that QoS was such a mess because the infamous Hollywood writiers’ strike of 2007-2008 started when there was hardly a script. Since movies as big as these don’t sinmply get shelved or put on hold unless it is absolutely necessary, the script was worked out – during filming – by director Marc Foster and Craig himself. No wonder that it feels lacking in story, and was more or less just an action-packed extension to Casino Royale. Quantum of Solace was never intended to be that much of a sequel, and Skyfall will not be a sequel (or threequel) either. It will be stand alone film, and not the end of a ‘trilogy’.

2: Q will be back. And he will be played by Ben Whishaw. This is quite a surprise. First of all because the ‘Bond-new-style’ of Casino Royale and QoS did not seem in need for any gadgets. Second because Ben Whishaw is kinda… young. At least in comparison to the iconic late Desmond Llewelyn and John Cleese, who played Q’s successor R in two films. But young Whishaw is a good actor, best known from Perfume. “Now pay attention, 007, for this is not an ordinary Eau de Cologne…” What could Q hide in a perfume? Feel free to let your imagination go wild and respond to this blog.

3: Roger Deakins is the cinematographer. If that name does not ring a bell; he is the genius behind the looks of so many Coen brothers films: True Grit, Fargo, No Country for Old Men. Deakins worked with director Sam Mendes before, on the also-gorgeous-looking Jarhead. So Skyfall will at least look good!

4: Talk about looking good. To make up for the rampant sexism of early Bond films, in which Sean Connery and Roger Moore treated woman as mere objects, Daniel Craig will please the men-loving audience by taking his shirt of once more. Or, if it is up to producer Barbara Broccoli, he won’t be wearing any shirt at all.

The name is Fall, Skyfall

The movie formerly known as Bond 23 has a title. And that title is Skyfall. This has been announced at a press conference inLondon yesterday by director Sam Mendes.

What a minute. Sam Mendes? He of American Beauty and Revolutionary Road directing a traditional action flick? Yes. Sam Mendes. When this was announced it sparked rumors that Bond 23 would be low on action and heavy on dialogue and character. But Mendes denied these rumors at the press conference by saying that Skyfall will have “all the elements of a classic Bond movie including, to quell any rumors, a lot of action”. Good.

So whadawethink, titlewise? Skyfall? Well, it does not have the mysterious quality of The Man With the Golden Gun or From Russia With Love, but it does beat such garbly nonsense as Tomorrow Never Dies and Die Another Day. And one-word-titles have turned out to be good films in the past: Goldfinger, Goldeneye. Although there are also, oops, Moonraker and Octopussy. Skyfall is not a title with any connection to the Ian Fleming universe. The name is otherwise known as that of a Transformer (though not one from the Bay-films) and as the title of several fantasy novels. What is a Skyfall then? Perhaps a plan, or a machine, or a weapon… You can place your bets now.

The script is written by regular Bond writers Neal Purvis and Robert Wade and guest writer John Logan (Gladiator, Rango, the upcoming Scorsese film Hugo). Mendes and producer Barbara Broccoli would not reveal much about the plot except for this little blurp:

“Bond’s loyalty to M is tested to the full as her past comes back to haunt her. As MI6 comes under attack, 007 must track down and destroy the threat, no matter how personal the cost.”

Okay. That sounds exciting enough. But what about Quantum; the mysterious organization from the last two movies? Mendes says that Skyfall is its own story and does not feature Quantum. I find that disappointing. Surely, Quantum of Solace was massively flawed, but I had invested interest in the SPECTRE like secret conspiracy and its mysterious leader Mr. White (Jesper Christensen). I want to see Mr. White getting sucked into a jet engine or ripped to pieces by a giant underwater drill. As I said, a bit of a disappointing move.

Talking casting: Daniel Craig will return as Bond, thank God, he is definitely good enough to do a considerable number of films as 007. Judi Dench will be ‘M’ again, which is also reassuring. New names are (take a deep breath): Ralph Fiennes AND Javier Bardem as bad guys (Bond teaming up against Voldemort and Anton Chigurh, wow!), Naomie Harris and Bérénice Marlohe as Bond girls, Albert Finney (The Bourne Ultimatum) as a government official and Ben Whishaw (Perfume, The Tempest) as an unnamed character.

Filming will take place in London, Istanbul, Shanghai and Scotland. Skyfall is planned to premiere on October 26 2012 in the UK, and one week later in the US and The Netherlands. That is all so far. Apart from this nice piece of traditional Bond artwork:

Watch the Trailer – Skip the Film?

Because no-one has ever, at all, since the beginning of cinema, thought of adapting Jane Eyre for the big screen… From first time feature director Cary Fukunaga is yet another take about the girl with the history and the crush on the older gentleman with a terrible secret:

Dir. Cary Fukunaga. Starring: Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender & Judi Dench.

Dutch release date: September 22

Because it’s been quite a while since we’ve seen a vampire movie, so it doesn’t matter that this one is not even an original flick.

Dir. Craig Gillespie. Starring: Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell & David Tennant

Dutch release date: September 29

Because it has been ages since Woody Allen made a film, and we’re all looking forward to a bunch of clichés about “The City of Light”

Dir. Woody Allen. Starring: Owen Wilson, Rachel McAdams, Michael Sheen & Carla Bruni

Dutch release date: September 15