Skyfall (2012) Review

The name´s Bond, James Bond. Celebrating 50 years since Dr No, we get the 23^rd Bond film, titled Skyfall. Early reviews were quick to name this one of the best, if the best, in the entire franchise. Brought to us by Oscar-winning director Sam Mendes, we do get Daniel Craig´s best outing as Bond and for once the incredible hype from the critics, might actually be correct. While I am not going to call this the best Bond film ever, I will say that it is very good. I am still not a huge fan of Craig as bond, but he is not as stone-faced as in his previous two films, but I still don’t get quite the Bond feel. Not going to spoil too much plot, but the premise of the film starts off with Bond (this is in the trailer and in the first 10 minutes so I don’t consider it a spoiler, but if you want to stay completely oblivious, skip this section) being killed, or at least so they thought. He survives and “enjoys death”, but decides to come back to MI6 after an attack on its headquarter. The mastermind behind it all is quickly revealed to be a man named Silva, played by Anton… umm Javier Bardem.

I talked a little about Craig earlier, like I said I´m not a huge fan of him as Bond, but he is a bit better here. He is a good actor of course, my problem has always been how gritty and serious he is, but he seemed to actually have some fun this time around. Javier Bardem, is also a great actor and we know he can be a terrifying villain (not to mention his hair) and of course he is great here, however I disagree on calling him the best ever. My problem with him was that he at times felt a bit silly, because his character is so borderline between absolutely crazy in a creepy way, and silly. Sadly I felt he did at times cross the line to silly in a couple scenes. However for the most part he is creepy and unsettling to watch, and he felt like a standout compared to most Bond villains, with more interesting motivations. It is also worth to mention that he has one of the greatest villain reveals ever in a film. The first shot we get of him is a great static shot of him slowly walking towards camera, performing a very well written monologue, while Roger Deakins does wonder with camera focus.

Speaking of Roger Deakins, what a great job he does here (as allways). Skyfall looks beautiful and he just nails the use of focus and lighting in every scene.

The film starts off with a very typical Bond opening scene in Istanbul, however it is very exciting and like every action scene in the film, there is a lot at stake. There aren’t all that many action scenes in the film, however they are carefully chosen to all have great relevance in the plot. My only gripe with the action is that the though there is little CGI, the CGI and green screen felt like it should have been more polished on a big budget film like this. Sam Mendes, who has never directed an action film before, does a great job of keeping the action sophisticated. There´s been comparisons to Nolan´s Dark Knight Trilogy, and while some people say this is absurd I can see what Mendes meant when he himself said The Dark Knight was an inspiration. The way the action builds tension and music is used throughout the film as well as the pacing, all have similarities to The Dark Knight, however I don’t think in anyway Nolan can be given credit for this film, however the influence is there it times. It is pretty funny when you think about considering how Nolan himself is very influenced by the Bond Franchise.

What really makes this stand out as a Bond film however is its writing. For the first time ever in a Bond film, I see great character development and good depth for Bond and that really gave us something different and it actually made me really invest in the film. Never before have I felt such a connection to the story and it felt like so much was at stake. It is rare that films actually explore Bond, but this did, but not to the point that we lost the feeling of Bond being this almost mythical character. That is not to say the writing is perfect, we still do have plot holes and such and the suspension of disbelief all over the place, but it wouldn’t be a Bond film without it.

So is this the greatest bond film ever? Well my personal favourite is still Goldeneye, but I think we need to wait until Daniel Craig is done as Bond and look back at this film before we can really say how this stands beside the other classics. Nonetheless, this is a great action film with great story and character and exceptional directing and camerawork and the best Bond of the Craig generation so far.

4.5/5

Moonrise Kingdom (2012) Review

This is the sort of film that in most cases either; works perfectly or just don’t work at all. Luckily this works perfectly. From Wes Anderson (no relation to Paul Thomas Anderson or Paul W. Anderson) we get a wonderful tale of young love and the adventurous spirit of youth. The film takes place on a small fictional island in the US during the sixties, where two young teenagers decide to run away together, causing a mess as people are looking for them. The island is populated by a great cast of quirky character, in a pretty quirky world. The film often feels like it is seen from a child´s imaginative and adventurous perspective and so while the world never feels real, we can all relate to growing up in this world.

There is always a risk with having child actors in major roles, however both leads pull of their role very well and they have a chemistry which is so incredibly reminiscent how it is in real life at that age. However they do seem to be a bit more troubled then most young teenagers and we uncover some dark spots for the character, but again the actors pull it off. It´s impressive how Anderson manages to give these kids a certain amount of complexion, while still keeping their innocence. The adult cast is also great. Edward Norton gives one of my favourite performances by him ever, as the odd tidy and slightly neurotic leader of the boy scouts. This is also probably one of my favourite Bruce Willis performance as the cop, who was actually one of the less quirky characters, but became pretty likable. What really ground all these great, but incredibly odd characters, in reality is that all of them have a sense of melancholia. Many of these people are sad and only, which even further enhances the feeling of freedom the runaway kids get when they are out in the free. The characters all have seemingly boring, procedural lives and never really look happy, whilst those who break from their habit do suddenly start to look happier.

 

The story in itself, might not be very original, two young teenager rebelling against their society, trying to break free from the rules of their superiors and releasing their lust for adventure. However the way the story is told, feel satisfyingly original. The colour palette of this greenish-yellowish-brown, works very well and really make us even more think of this as almost a surreal fairly-tale. Everything from set-design to costume design, to small details in performances or even just ones hand-writing, help make this feel like a real place despite all its quirkiness. Anderson is very consistent in his directing and so while some people will argue this is style over substance, I never felt that way and I never felt he was showing off. From the great opening shot to the puzzling final shot, every shot is equally stylish, equally beautiful and equally painted. There is not any point in the movie where Anderson thought he could really impress people with a certain shot, but instead every single one impress equally and so it is easy to get lost in the world.

Being both funny and heart-warming, this is a film everyone can relate to. I can´t imagine a film that better portray our adventurousness, confusing and the feeling of being an outsider, but finding ways to escape from that reality and still be happy about our life. Most people experience all of these feelings as a kid or young teen and we relive those feelings through this film. In all its quirkiness, this is easily one of the best films of the year, one that I will be coming back to year after year and be able to relive how I felt in my childhood.

5/5

Iron Man 3 Trailer!

The first trailer for Iron Man 3 has finally hit the net, giving us some glimpses of new suits, villains (not quite sure if there is one or two) and storyline. I really like the first shot of the trailer with Iron Man lying crashed in the snow, I think that looks like a nice visual and quite different from what we have come to expect. I also like that you can tell that all the things that have been happening to him in the Avengers and previous Iron Man films affected him. I did however find it distracting how obvious it was that Starks monologue was cut together out of context and didn’t make all that much sense. We get a few glimpses of Guy Pearce’s character, but not enough to get an idea of what kind of character he is, but he seems a bit evil. Then we get a shot an a speech from the films main villain “Mandarin”, played by none other then Ben Kingsly. To be honest I am not totally convinced about him, especially when he says he views himself as a “Teacher” as opposed to a “terrorist”… and yeah that did kind of make me cringe and face-palm at the same time. Other then that he sounds and looks like a pretty good villain. The moment that bothered me the most in the trailer, was how Tony´s house was destroyed, it looked awful. It might just be the CGI that is not completely finished, but the way it crumbled just looked like way too much and incredibly cheesy. The trailer does however display a great tone that I hope carries into the film, as long as they still have some humour from Tony Stark. All in all I´m not really sure what to think, it seems to try a bit too hard to be epic which could easily turn into a cheese-fest, but hopefully it keeps the fine line between cheesy and epic. Iron Man 3 is directed by Shane Black and is out on the 3^rd of May, 2013      

Miller´s Crossing (1990) Review

I have been a fan of the Coens ever since I first saw The Big Lebowski, but until now I had never seen Millers Crossing. Miller´s Crossing is a prohibition era gangster drama starring Gabriel Byrne and John Tuturro. It tells the story of Tom Reagan who is the advisor of Irish crime boss Leo, but as tensions start to rise between Leo and another rising crime boss, Tom find his loyalty being divided. It is noticeably more serious then most of the Coens films, though not as darkly serious as No Country For Old Men, as it still contain some dark humour and Coenisms. The film is also somewhat of an homage to 40s gangster noir, yet bringing new life into the genre.

The film is very much a character study and the characters are very strong. Our main character played by Byrne is a very interesting character, one who is immensely calm during all times, you as the movie goes along I feel we see he is very vulnerable, but he just hides it behind his image as a gangster. Yet he really isn’t that much of a gangster, as he has never killed anybody and tries to solve conflict in ways that don’t involve killing each other. He is a bit of an outsider in this way as he really feels like a guy who is quite clever and knows how to manipulate people rather then threaten them. When watching the film I was very uncertain of his motives and it really justified everything he did and the more you reflect upon the film, the more you understand why he did what he did. He is also much more grounded in reality then most characters, as most other characters are classic Coen caricatures, which still work really well in the film. However in the character we get more sides of, we see that these caricatures are really just facades. The powerful crime boss Leo who controls the city, is very much a ruthless crime boss in everyway, except then you see he has this sensitive side, where he truly cares and worries for his friends. It is nice to see a crime boss that still has some kind of emotional core to him. The best character in the film however is Bernie played by John Tuturro. It is a very small role, but it is incredibly important for the story and it is such a good role. Tuturro plays it so well, giving us a multi-layered character that only appears a few times, but twisting the story and giving us new sides of Tom. The most Coen-y character is probably Johnny Caspar, Leo’s enemy, but he too works well and though not having as much depth as other characters, he has his place in the film.   

 

It is really worth noting Barry Sonnenfield´s camerawork on the film, as it is just so perfect. Every shot is set up so beautifully and feels like it helps expand the story and characters. The real stars here of course are the brothers, the Coen Brothers that is. They direct the film pretty flawlessly. The film is very well paced, though some people might find it a bit slow. However they spread everything out the right way, give the right scenes humour, character development or just excitement. As you would expect from a Coen picture, it is very moody and at times very darkly comical. Like I mentioned earlier it is not a comical as most of their other work, but it still has some well-placed humour here and there. The script is also excellent with all character having purpose, all scenes being useful and of course, great dialogue. Some people think the plot is muddled and I can see what they mean, but I disagree, while the story takes a while to get into, it is pretty clear by the end.

There is pretty much nothing negative I can think of with the film, it is one of the Coens best films (and that is saying a lot). It is very a very stylized film, but it never falls in the trap of style over substance, because it has got a lot of substance. It is not for everyone though as it is slow and got fairly complex characters, but if you want to do the effort of getting into the movie, it will be worth it.

4.5/5