Skyfall (2012)

Title: Skyfall (2012)

Director: Sam Mendez

Cast: Daniel Craig, Javier Bardem, Judi Dench, Ralph Fiennes, Naomie Harris

Review:

Through the decades, various directors have taken a stab at directing a Bond film. Usually directors  chosen to direct a Bond film are not what you’d call “popular” or well known directors. Usually they are directors who have made a successful action film at some point and so they are given the opportunity to take Bond for a spin, but it’s not like we’ve seen a Bond film directed by Steven Spielberg or Peter Jackson.  Most Bond directors can almost be labeled as anonymous in the industry; they’ve done a successful film or two, but they aren’t house hold names. It seems that with this new cycle of Bond films, producers are attempting to change that; Skyfall was directed by Sam Mendes, the director behind such amazing films as American Beauty (1999), and Revolutionary Road (2008), two films that have nothing to do with action or espionage, yet are extremely well written, acted and directed. He was also the director behind Road to Perdition (2002), a gangster film that was also heavy on the drama. So I think it’s great that for Skyfall we get a director with a solid background on drama, taking that into consideration, what did Mr. Mendes bring to the world of Bond?   

On this Bond film, Bond has to protect ‘M’ from an old foe who wants to exact revenge on her and all of MI-6. Problem is that Bond has taken something of a sabbatical and is simply enjoying the life, hanging out at the beach, getting drunk, partying. He is taking advantage of the fact that the folks at MI-6 think he is dead. But when M’s life is suddenly in peril, Bond decides to step out of the shadow life he’s been living to protect M; considering how out of shape he is in, can Bond still be Bond? Is Bond as indestructible as he’s always been?

One of the elements that I’ve enjoyed the most about the new Bond films is that Bond isn’t the indestructible super spy he’s been in previous films. Unbelievable as it may seem, Bond’s only gotten shot in two of his films and Skyfall is one of them; so we can deduce that Skyfall aims to make Bond a more vulnerable character. On these last three bond films Casino Royale (2006), Quantum of Solace (2008) and now Skyfall, Bond has been portrayed as a hero with an element of mortality to him, he makes mistakes, he gets beaten to a pulp by villains, in fact, on Skyfall he is practically falling apart, no longer able to pass the physical test that MI-6 gives to its operatives. But I like that about this new Bond, it makes him a bit more real and therefore, more interesting. On this one we get a partied out Bond who’s having a hard time readjusting to the secret agent lifestyle.  Daniel Craig does a great rendition of Bond; dare I say that he has proven himself to be one of the best and most credible Bonds ever? Well, yes, I do dare say it, because that’s exactly what he’s become. When I compare Craig’s Bond with the old ones, the old ones feel like cartoon versions of Bond, while this new one feels so much more credible and serious. He doesn’t have that smirk on his face so much, he’s not about the classic one liners. He comes off as a Bond with lots of inner turmoil. 

  

Actually, you will notice that this film makes fun of the way the old movies were, for example, when ‘Q’  gives Bond his new weapons, Bond asks “is that it? A gun and a radio?” and Q answers “What did you expect; pens with lasers shooting out of them? We don’t do that sort of thing anymore” making an obvious statement at how much more realistic these next batch of Bond films will be. To be honest I welcome this more realistic rendition of Bond…for now. Chances are that at some point Bond will revert to that jokey version of himself at some point? Who knows, all I know is that right now, I like this super serious version. Daniel Craig does a fantastic job on this one. The filmmakers behind Skyfall have not only humanized Bond more, they’ve also made this film decidedly less technological. By that I mean, Bond doesn’t have all these unbelievable gadgets like exploding toothpaste or cars that turn invisible. On this there’s less unbelievable gadgets; things are made more difficult for Bond this time around. In fact, the car Bond gets on this one is a Silver 1965 Aston Martin DB5, no doubt it looks stylish and slick, but it’s very retro, not cutting edge. It does shoot missiles out of it though, so we still get that. But in many ways, this stylish yet old car represents Daniel Craig’s Bond, he’s growing old, yet he’s still got it, he can still kick ass. 

And what is Bond without a good villain and a good cast of characters to populate his world? For years now we’ve had the same actress play ‘M’ the motherly brains behind MI-6, I speak of course of the awesome Judi Dench. But it’s time for her to move on, and I found it interesting how they’ve structured a whole Bond film around M’s retirement. It gives the filmmakers a chance to show the mother/son relationship that M and Bond have always had. Bond’s an orphan, so he sees M as his mother and she sees him as her son. The dynamics that stem from that relationship offer us some of the most heartfelt moments on this Bond film, this is something rare in a Bond film; heartfelt moments. But we do get those, because thanks to the involvement of director Sam Mendes, this film has an emphasis on drama and characterization. This Bond film isn’t about saving the world, this is a more personal film, with a villain who has a more personal agenda in mind. It’s a different type of Bond film in that sense. We get a mad man, but his vendetta is personal. Javier Bardem eats up the screen whenever he’s on proving once again that he is one of the best actors of his generation.  I mean, I loved how this film has such an amazing cast, we even get Ralph Fiennes playing the new ‘M’. So expect a Bond film whose emphasis isn’t so much in action, but more in characterization, good performances and a well developed story. It might not be the most action packed of the Bond films, but it’s brilliantly acted, you might find yourself more invested in the characters with this film. But fear not action lovers, the film does have some spectacular action scenes, the opening of the film for example is a good twenty minutes of nonstop action. 

It’s no surprise that Skyfall has turned out to be one of the most successful of all Bond films. It’s a well made film, with an amazing cast. Sam Mendes has made a Bond film that pays its respects to everything that came before it, while shaking things up and establishing a whole slew of new characters for future films.  Sam Mendes also infused this film with a great visual flare, there are lots of colors, beautiful locations and vistas, the images conjured up are simply beautiful. Aesthetically speaking, this is one good looking Bond film. The opening credit sequence with Adele singing her bond song, awesome visuals! That opening montage was one of my favorite things about the film. It’s like we get the elements that make a traditional Bond film (gadgets, bond girls, sex, martinis, cars and bullets) but with enough new stuff to keep us on our toes. Skyfall redefines Bond movies for years to come; it shakes the status quo of things, nothing is the same after this one, for this and many other reasons, it’s a special Bond film, highly recommend checking it out in theaters.

Rating:  5 out of 5

Nine (2009)

Title: Nine (2009)

Director: Rob Marshall

Cast: Daniel Day Lewis, Penelope Cruz, Nicole Kidman, Fergi, Marion Cotillard, Judi Dench, Kate Hudson, Sophia Loren

Review:

Legendary Italian director Federico Fellini’s 8 ½ is a film about filmmaking. It tells the story of a film director who is struggling with the fact that he has producers breathing down his neck, waiting for him to produce his next film. Problem is that Guido never really knows exactly what film he wants to make. He is struggling between the idea of making the film he wants to make, and making a commercial film that will make money for the producers. In between all the madness that accompanies making a film, Guido Anselmi also struggles with all the women in his life. His wife, his mistresses, his lovers and the complications that accompany them. The film was Fellini’s semi-autobiographical explorations of what it meant be him. Juggling so many responsibilities at the same time, juggling so many women. In the end, Fellini comes to the conclusion that life is just one big circus and that we all form part of it.

The one, the only 8 1/2

NINE, the new film by the director of Chicago and Memoirs of a Geisha (Rob Marshall) is essentially a remake of Fellini’s 8 ½. It’s also a film about a director struggling to make his next picture. The directors name is also Guido, only this time his name is Guido Contini, not Anselmi. And basically, NINE goes step by step through the most important moments seen in 8 ½, but in the form of a musical. NINE is also based on a broadway show of the same name. So NINE is really a film based on a broadway show that was based on a film. And same as it happens with a copy of a copy of a copy…NINE feels a bit lifeless and distant when compared to what is considered by many to be Fellini’s best film.

What this film does basically is, aside from adding a musical number for each female we encounter in Guido’s life, is update the ideas that Fellini presented us with in his films. You see, Fellini was a very macho kind of guy, he was the center of the universe in his films. The character of Guido Anselmi in 8 ½ has always been seen as a mirror image of who Fellini was, the character represents his creator. Guido Anselmi (as played by one Marcello Mastroiani) has always been seen by more then one movie buff as Fellini’s alter ego. The obvious reference to himself is of course that the films main character is a film director. In 8 ½, Guido is famous, everybody needs his opinion, everybody needs to interview him, talk to him, and everything needs his approval first. Same with his women, they all desire him, they all want to be with him, and they all need him. And, Fellini had no problem with depicting Guido as a womanizer, who worships women but hates the responsability of marriage. Fellini always chose these beautiful sexy bombshells for his films. In the films, Guido loves women for their femininity, their natural beauty, their sensuality.

All through out the course of his career, Fellini worshiped the beauty in women. He always chose the most beautiful women on the planet for his films! This is to be expected since directors give great importance to the way things look. Beauty, and the aesthetic side of things are important to a film director. But while Fellini worshipped beautiful women, in Fellini’s films men are unfaithful, they despise married life or commitment, they love to have fun, and not be tied down. Fellini's male characters never want to live married life, they see it as boring. Fellini’s men were always free spirits with no emotional attachments. Free to go and come as they please. This is a theme that can also be seen in Fellini's I Vitelloni for example, where young guys are struggling with the idea of getting married and becoming parents. What NINE does is, it says, “this is wrong, women cannot be treated as sex objects, they need to be loved for who they are, not for their physical beauty alone”. This can be seen in more then one scene on NINE, but the one I noticed most prominently was the one with Nicole Kidman, playing the role that Anita Eckberg played in La Dolce Vita. That of Sylvia, the bombshell actress who Guido whisks away to that magical iconic fountain in Italy. In La Dolce Vita, that scene has Guido falling deftly in love with Sylvia, wooing her, saying beautiful things about her, making her feel like a goddess because she is simply so stunningly beautiful. On this film, Nicole Kidman says “I’m not that woman” and walks away from Guido. Leaving him alone. As if Nicole Kidman’s character was saying “We know we are beautiful and all, but nobody loves a chauvinist pig!”

This film has elements from many of Fellini’s films. It’s not just a remake of 8 ½, this film also has scenes taken from La Dolce Vita, Amarcord and even Nights in Cabiria. It’s like Rob Marshall took some of the most Iconic moments from many of Fellini’s films and updated them with new songs, strung them together and called it a movie. Problem is that the film feels like a series of sketches or musical numbers, and not a movie. I mean, yeah, there’s that main storyline, but the film unfortunately takes no time in fleshing out its female characters and instead rushes its way to the next musical number. It’s like "Hi; I’m the new girl we are going to be talking about…and this is my song!" And that’s it. I really didn’t like that about the film. I mean, the musical numbers are fine, the songs are sometimes catchy (loved that Cinema Italiano song) but as a whole, the film doesn’t feel together.

It certainly does lack something. I think it needed to flesh out its female characters more since in essence, they are as much a center of the film as is Guido. I never felt like I knew these women walking before us. They are simply to be admired for their beauty. In many ways, this film contradicts itself. In one way its saying “love women for who they are not what they look like” but then it presents us with shallow empty female characters whom we never get to really know, so what’s left? Simply to admire their beauty and their song and dance. It certainly is a plus to have so many beautiful actresses on one film. But they are paraded around like trophies instead of tangible characters with life. With the possible exception of Marion Cotillard who actually made an effort to act, the rest of the female performances felt more like quick phoned in cameos then anything else, specially Kate Hudsons sequence. I loved the song she portrays, but shes in and out of the movie in the blink of an eye and your not even sure she was really even needed in the film except to add that song to the film. Even Daniel Day Lewis, who normally wows me with his performances was kind of dry here. In my opinion, they needed an actor who was a tad more dashing then Daniel Day Lewis. Rob Marshall’s original choice of Javier Bardem would have worked better, but he backed down due to exhaustion. Heck, even Antonio Bandera’s would have worked better.

This is not the worst film ever made, but the problem for me with it was that it’s coming from such great inspirational material, that the result should have somehow been better elaborated. Even the art direction was lack luster at times. Most of the songs take place in a stage, not a location, not a cool set, but a stage. I was expecting something grand for the big fountain sequence with Nicole Kidman, something that at least lived up to the memory of that awesome sequence in La Dolce Vita, but what we get is this silly looking little fountain. Nothing that came even remotely close to the great work of art we saw on Fellini’s film.

So why is this movie tanking at the box office? Well, my main hypothesis is that Fellini is a well known director amongst movie buffs and critics, but he isn’t a house hold name. He isn’t somebody that everyone knows about, and for that matter, neither is his film 8 ½. An awesome film, but a film that not everyone will be able to watch from start to finish. Fellini fans are a knowledgeable bunch; they aren’t your regular everyday movie goers. Problem is that NINE was made for the regular everyday movie goer, and these are the people who will enjoy this movie the least! This movie will be enjoyed by fans of Fellini, and that’s it. Nobody else will understand why the film takes place in Italy, why it takes place during the 60s or what films are being referenced, they will simply be disappointed and lost, which is what I’m thinking is happening right now with the abysmal Box Office Performance this film is having. Even with all its stars, it was not able to pull audiences in.

Rating: 3 ½ out of 5