007 Journals: Skyfall

Well this is it. While not my last Bond review it is the last in the line of official EON Bond film reviews. It's been quite a journey through the films and I've received a lot of praise, criticism, agreement, and debate and I've enjoyed every minute of it and I'm actually sad that this is my last (official) Bond review until Spectre later this year. After Skyfall I plan on doing the 1969 Casino Royale but that's more of a bonus. So for now let'a take a look at the most recent Bond film, Skyfall. So by the time this film finally released it had been four years since Quantum of Solace, which didn't live up to Casino Royale but was still a solid film. However Skyfall had a lot riding on it's shoulders. It was their chance to redeem the franchise after the lukewarm response to Quantum, and this was also the first Bond film after MGM's troubles had been sorted out. Luckily things worked out. Skyfall received generally universal praise and made over a billion dollars at the box office, becoming the most successful film in the franchise. Now when this film released all I heard from friends was that it was the best Bond, way better than Casino Royale, and I'm sorry but it's not. Don't get me wrong when I say that. Skyfall is amazing. Casino Royale is just a smidgen better.

So throughout my reviews of the Daniel Craig films I've praised the relationship building between M and Bond, and the theme of trust. Well Skyfall brings that to it's ultimate conclusion and makes it the main focus of this film. The entire plot is put into motion because M doesn't trust Bond to get the job done and ends up almost getting him killed as an assassin is getting away with a hard drive of information that isn't even supposed to exist. This causes Bond to doubt M's judgment and, when Bond finally returns from the dead, everyone questions whether Bond is still suited for the job. It's kind of amazing how much older Craig looks in just the four years between Quantum and Skyfall and I wonder if that is just natural aging or a directorial choice due to the nature of the script and where the Bond franchise was at this time, which is the 50th anniversary. Let me just say, this anniversary film is leaps and bounds better than the last. So Bond takes a little vacation after getting shot and returns when he finds out that Mi6 was attacked and M is the target. Something that has always been well crafted within the Craig films is Bond's sense of duty. Brosnan had that as well but Craig amplifies it and makes it completely believable that everything he does is for King and country. One thing about Bond is that we learn a lot more about his past in this film, which fans of the series are no strangers to. We learn more about him being an orphan, we see the grave stone of his parents, and we actually visit his childhood home Skyfall which is obviously in reference to the title of the movie. By turning the Craig films into character pieces we have built a three film character arc (that looks like it will be continued in Spectre) and honestly with Craig only assigned to the next two films you could see them doing another reboot and having a complete story told within this one actors time in the role. I would be completely fine with this and it would leave us with a solid and complete story line, depending on how well the next two films go.

The thing about Skyfall is that it completes the origin of Bond. We saw his first two missions in the last films and by the end of Skyfall we have Bond going into M's office and receiving a dossier and preparing for a mission. We also are introduced to two characters that are staples of the franchise. Q and Moneypenny. I love these new versions of the characters. Now everyone at this point knows I'm not a huge fan of the gadgetry in a Bond film so you can imagine how much I appreciate the Q scenes in this film. The gun and locator are very believable devices and I love the jokes they make about the exploding pen and how Bond jokes to Sivia about his fancy new gadget, a radio. Silva even returns the quip later in the train tunnel. None of this humor was lost on me. This is also the first film to give us more Moneypenny than ever before, showing us her in the field for the first time and how she finally decides to take a desk job. They establish her relationship very well and make the future flirting seem easy to believe. I always appreciate when they make Moneypenny a capable woman as well, able to stand her ground and defend herself. She's more than just a secretary.Can I also say that I love Ralph Fiennes as the new M. The death of Judi Dench came as a shock to me but they do a good job of seeding Fiennes throughout the film as the heir to the M role. He starts off as kind of a questionable character but becomes well suited to the job and we see the connection he immediately has with Bond. A welcome addition to the role and a fine actor and I can't wait to see how he does in the next film. So somehow the producers manage to slyly stretch out the origin story of Bond through three films and it's a brilliant move and a risk that I wish more of these superhero blockbusters would take. This is a good example of that kind of film making paying off.

Okay so let's talk about the villain. He's the Joker. Everything about his plan and his character just reminds me of Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight. especially in the way his plan completely relies on luck and perfect timing, which is something that kind of bugged me the first time I watched it but was able to accept more this time around. It's less luck based than the Joker was and really could be attributed to years of perfect planning and timing. I think the biggest thing to pick at in his plan is the train crashing through the wall but honestly it's not hard to know a train schedule. It's worth noting that Sam Mendez himself has said he's inspired by Christopher Nolan and loves The Dark Knight so it's easy to see the comparisons. Both villains even have some sort of facial deformation. This one is just a lot creepier. I have to give Silva credit in being the first Bond film to completely succeed in his plan. Now it doesn't exactly go according to his schedule but his overall plan is to kill M and at the end of the movie M is dead. He's even one step ahead of Bond and Mi6 through the whole film until the end. He's the most competent villain and Javier Bardem plays the character so well. Again like Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight he plays a wonderfully insane villain with only murder on the brain and is the stand out performance of the movie. This is also the second time that we have had Bond facing off against another former Mi6 agent. The last time was Goldeneye and honestly Silva does a much better job than Alec did. He comes off as evil as possible just in the one scene where he kills the beautiful Severine, who is actually one of my favorite Bond girls even with her small role. Her subtle performance is so memorable and she has very little screen time yet is one of the Bond girls I remember the most. It helps that Berenice Lim Marlohe is stunning but with what little screen time she has she gives it her all. The same could be said for Bardem who doesn't even appear in the movie until the hour and ten minute mark but he's one of the best Bond villains.

Let's talk about the production for a minute. The cinematography gets a lot of praise and it deserves it all. This movie is shot so beautifully, especially during the scenes in China. The camera work is incredible and they found some of the best shooting locations. The score is maybe the first that I have loved in a Bond film and is the only one I own. The action set pieces are all great, especially the opening scene on the train. My favorite stunt in the movie is easily when Bond grabs onto the elevator and I love it every time I see it. One thing I noticed about this film is how quiet it is. Especially after Quantum which was a series of action scenes strung together with more action, Skyfall is more subtle in it's approach to the action. There's definitely action in this movie, and it's all great, but this time it feels more like a spy film than an action blockbuster. The most explosive action comes from the villain causing terrorist attacks or when they are isolated at the end and it just feels more contained and realistic compared to the many vehicle chases in the Quantum that all ended with lots of destruction and explosions.

Is this movie perfect? Of course not. There is plenty to nitpick but none of that stuff hurts the film in any serious way. The plot relies a little on convenience, the killing of Silva off screen with a knife throw always bugs me (he could have at least just walked up and stabbed him), there's the question of how Bond survives after being under frozen water for so long (but it doesn't seem too cold since the ice is about to break anyway), and the Aston Martin is a little confusing to me. I know he won it in Casino Royale but why does it have machine guns and an ejector seat? Are we to believe that this is the same car from Goldfinger? Did this movie take place after Goldfinger or is this a new continuity as we've been led to believe? I choose to just ignore as "hey it's an anniversary film and maybe he had that stuff installed for fun". Personally my biggest issue with the movie is how it drops the Quantum story but I have hope that Spectre will address this in some way. So I think without question Skyfall is a five out of five. It's just a slightly lower five than Casino Royale.

So that's it, the end of my official 007 Journals. Next I'm going to do the 60's Casino Royale but for all intents and purposes I have now watched and reviewed every James Bond film. Now I wonder what else is next. I had a blast working my way through a franchise and It's something I'd like to do again. There are a few other major film series I've never seen (The Godfather, Rocky, Rambo and more) that I've thought about doing but I'm not sure where to go from here. I've thought about looking back to the Austin Powers films and Johnny English as fun little companion reviews to the 007 franchise and I know there's been requests for Kingsman which I will do as soon as I can see it. If any of these sound appealing to you just sound off and I will be happy to pursue them, in the meantime keep your eyes open for the Casino Royale review and know that it's been a blast reviewing these movies for you. Until next time.