Monday, November 14, 2016

#1 Skyfall

This is truly the pinnacle of Bond films. Although perhaps not the best opening action sequence overall, it succeeds in introducing the tone of the film-- one that fits perfectly with the narrative. It also introduces Naomie Harris who is a welcome addition to this revamped cast. And maybe the animation sequence doesn't tell the best story, but it's so clever, and when matched with Adele's titular song, it is definitely the best theme.

Early on Daniel Craig briefly sports a scruffy look. He doesn't come close to passing the physical. The psychological examination is clever. All of this and more builds on the approach Sam Mendes beautifully takes this film. And it's all backed behind a stellar cast. Ben Whishaw plays one of my favorite (if not favorite actually) characters in the young and arrogant techno Q, and of course adding Ralph Fiennes into the mix is awesome. This also marks the best narrative given to Judi Dench as the aging M (although give Judi Dench credit because she looks great for however many decades old she is).

If you didn't know it was coming, I had to save Javier Bardem for last. He is a powerhouse actor who became familiar to American audiences with his villainous turn in No Country for Old Men (I'd describe his character as the combination of Joker and Two Face from The Dark Knight). Also shout out to his starring role in Alejandro Inarritu's foreign film Biutiful. And if you need any more evidence of his quality acting, look no further than his malignant and sophisticated role in this film. His introduction and monologue is memorable, his actions are remorseless, and unlike Christoph Waltz's antagonist in the sequel, the execution of his plan is smart and scary. Easily the best villain of this series.

Something I haven't really discussed much from the other films but that is so vital to the success of this film is the cinematography. The film lost out to Life of Pi at the Oscars, but the shots of Shanghai-- in particular the silent action scene in the skyscraper is one of my favorites of any film-- are such a gorgeous combination of colors bursting from the dark surroundings (hmm, even a bit like the tone of the film).

This movie is the perfect blend of old and new Bond. Throw on top a great character-driven story, and not only is this my favorite film of Daniel Craig's series, it's my favorite Bond film (admittedly, I need to re-watch many of the classics, especially with Sean Connery). And not only is it my favorite Bond film, it's just a tremendous film on its own. Multiple scenes always pop out as memorable, and the climax is simply fantastic. Even if you haven't seen Casino Royale, or any Bond film for that matter, I can't stress enough that to anybody and everybody I give a high recommendation to go watch Skyfall.

Sunday, November 13, 2016

#2 Casino Royale

I love love love the opening to Casino Royale. It's a perfect blend of infusing classic Bond while showing the world hey, this is the new direction we plan on taking this series. Admittedly, Daniel Craig is an unconventional look, but his charm will win you over. The parkour of the action sequence is really fun to watch (and Johnny English Reborn basically spoofs it and it's hilarious), but it's the opening scene that puts this as the best intro. The theme is a good song, not great, but fits well; the animation is clever and works well, and that's what puts "You Know my Name" as the 2nd best theme.

It doesn't matter who you are, if you prefer blondes over brunettes, or whatever it may be. Eva Green is the best Bond Girl in the Craig franchise. She brings the wit to match the man in the tux at every step. I'm a fan of Mads Mikkelsen, and he would be the best villain if it weren't for the #1 pick. Judi Dench is a solid choice, and she actually is reprising her role as M from the previous series. Jeffrey Wright also brings quality to the film, so I believe we've settled that the cast works well.

As far as story is concerned, there is a lot of good and a little bad. If you have establishing shots of well-known areas, putting title cards to tell you where the characters are currently at is cheap and dubs down the audience; this is something this film avoids even if it's brought into Quantum of Solace solely to make sure that sequel was a disappointment. The point is that you'll almost always see me praise subtlety. That really isn't the case here. I'd probably recommend subtitles actually for this film because details are sometimes given in low voices that's hard to pick up. The plot moves to a new action scene, or the characters suddenly display new motivations; and if you aren't paying attention to everything going on, chances are there will be something confusing. In fact, this was probably around my third viewing of the film and I picked up on new ideas while still being in the dark about others-- there are movies like Inception and The Prestige that work these details and foreshadowing effectively (both obviously Christopher Nolan films), but it's more of an annoyance here. And as we're on the topic of story, the writing and dialogue gets half-credit. The movie is way too choppy, but there are still some great quips:
Bond: Vodka-martini
Bartender: Shaken or stirred?
Bond: Do I look like I give a damn?
And my favorite:
Vesper (Eva Green): Am I going to have a problem with you, Bond?
Bond: No, don't worry. You're not my type.
Vesper: Smart?
Bond: Single.

On a final note for the story, I'm a sucker for well-constructed scenes like the development of the poker hands, and the torture scene is one of the best in any film. The confusion I've been referring to is mainly in the last 30 minutes. I'll say no more than that, but it's kind of hard to put a finger on what the goal was or what went wrong. These closing scenes aren't bad-- the climax is an awesome set-- but I don't believe it works to the degree the movie hopes for. Overall, the cast is all solid, but it's not the film's fault that the #1 pick has a better ensemble; what really brings the film down to the 2 slot is some choppy scenes and a confused plot. And if those are the critiques I have to give it, that should tell you that this really is a good film. It gets my recommendation, and if you're somebody who hasn't seen a Daniel Craig James Bond film, there's no better place to start than here. Tomorrow, you'll hear my reasoning on why one of the sequels surpasses this film, and you are free to disagree with my reasoning.

Saturday, November 12, 2016

#3 Spectre

Sam Mendes returned as director for the fourth installment of the Daniel Craig James Bond series. With everything from questions of how long Craig would be doing this to what a huge budget the film had, there's lots to discuss.

Arguably the best place to start, lets talk about the beginning. Production values are imminent from the opening shots. Although there is hardly a cut or a word for the first five minutes, there isn't really anything special that happens. And this ends up taking a toll when the run-time is just under 2 and 1/2 hours. There's some cool helicopter stunts (with some disbelief of reality put aside), but I still consider this action sequence only the third best. And then you also have to talk about Sam Smith's "Writing's on the Wall." His voice is fantastic and the relevance of the animation in accordance with the story is appreciated, but there's some lacking quality that doesn't seem to fit in with a 007 film. And the animation overall didn't strike me as impressive, so I still rank this theme as third best as well.

Spectre attempts to tie in the previous films into this plot. I guess there's points for effort, but it doesn't really have a huge emotional connection to pull it off. And there were multiple instances where a scene could've been tidied up or even cut entirely. But no. This movie just had to make it to 2 1/2 hours. It's just really long and a little draining.

I think I was still fine with the film up until a snowy mountain sequence where Bond ends up driving like this cargo plane. And as problems arise, the sequence goes into the most Pierce Brosnan-esque style of action-- so over-the-top that it's just like c'mon man.

Lea Seydoux adds a nice touch, and Monica Bellucci certainly adds a bit of a surprising element for Bond Girls. Really have no issue there. And then fans of Sherlock will recognize Andrew Scott in the film. Having gained attention as Moriarty, I was intrigued to see him step into a different role... That didn't happen. Pretty sure the producers told him to act almost exactly as Moriarty had. The result is nothing surprising, which is a disappointment and also a little frustrating.

But lets talk about what had the most potential overall for the film: Christoph Waltz. After having Javier Bardem kill it as the villain in the previous film, I think Waltz is an excellent choice to bring new elements. But this is easily the worst aspect of any Daniel Craig Bond film. Which pains me so much to say because there's a good deal of build-up. His introduction has great camerawork and lighting, and it creates a mystical veil around the organization and his role behind it. And this lasts for lets say 8 minutes. Then the movie basically forgets about it for a good hour. He's brought back, and it could still be very interesting despite a drop in fanfare. But what was supposed to be a tense, high-production action set-piece is set back with a surprisingly boring backstory for the villain filled with ideas that say "This is the bad guy and he's bad and he does bad things because he's bad" and unbelievably predictable action. And I guess they make it appear he's dead, but everyone knows that's not the case--even if the run-time is padded already. The climax reminds me of Mission Impossible Rogue Nation if that climax was also filled with cliches. And what I mean by that comparison is that Rogue Nation kind of has their climax setup like a heist, and you don't really feel any tension because you feel like it all is part of the good guys' plans. Spectre is similar to this, and the ignorance and stupidity that leads to the demise of the villain makes me think that the writers just couldn't think of any other logical possibility for a death.

Spectre isn't all bad, like the returns of Ben Whishaw as Q and Ralph Fiennes as M were very welcome, but it's a very flawed film that certainly had potential. If anything, it makes me want Craig to return one last time for an awesome sendoff. As for the two films I ranked higher, I believe there are some differing opinions on which is better, but after re-watching both, the choice is clear to me.

Friday, November 11, 2016

#4 Quantum of Solace

Today is considered to be James Bond's birthday! So to celebrate we're going to rank all 4 Daniel Craig 007 films.

If you haven't guessed by the title, the sequel to Casino Royale ranks last. And honestly, it's not even close. To understand this film, think of it as a trigger-happy Bourne film. And I mean that in one of the worst ways possible. The editing is atrocious. The film takes a Matrix Reloaded approach and stacks action on action; however, it's not even as successful as that film. The opening action sequence has one decent moment, but anyone able to follow the rapid edits deserves an award. What such rapid editing tends to correlate with is weak content to begin with. Some well thought out long shots could've worked effectively, but the truth is that there just isn't anything special about the action set-pieces besides perhaps locale. And don't even mention the parachute opening 10 feet above the ground. You can't walk away from that without an injury.

Although I can appreciate some of what Jack White accomplished with "Another Way to Die," Alicia Keys only takes away from the song-- making it and the corresponding animation the worst theme as well. The Bond Girls are the worst as well. Let's see, what other worsts does it have... Oh yeah! The villain is so uninteresting. And it's so obvious during the climax that there's no way he could even put up a fight against Bond.

Despite going for the darker, remorseless tone, I actually felt that Daniel Craig brought some of his greatest charm in this film. Even though there really isn't any cool dialogue to accompany him, I feel that after already having one round as the famous Brit, Craig was tailored in his approach to the character, and it's one of the aspects that pays off for the film.

But enough praise. The film has annoying characters, and even when trying to fit elements from the previous film, the plot is so basic and not memorable in any way. But when you have an action flick, almost all can be forgiven with quality action. And the film just falls flat. Not only is this the worst Craig Bond film, it just isn't a quality picture. It's a misstep, and that probably contributed to the gap between this film and the next one.

Tomorrow, starting with #3, the other Bond films are certainly entertaining to differing degrees. There's a lot to compare and a lot to talk about. And just as a little something to think about, the producers considered George Clooney to be the new Bond, but he smartly declined due to him obviously not being British (a couple years after this he even starred in The American). As always, comments and suggestions are appreciated and encouraged. Feel free to agree or disagree with this list, and tell me how you would rank them. Signing out for tonight, the name's Gill. Jacob Gill.