I’ve been a massive James Bond fan since I was ten years
old. It was at this ripe young age that I saw my first Bond flick – 1997's Tomorrow Never Dies. I went to see
it with my older cousins, my uncle, and my grandpa. I felt like one of the big
kids and the movie only helped cement that notion. Seeing a Bond film is like
an obligatory rite of passage into manhood and it was a trial I was more than
happy to partake in. The unique adrenaline rush of gadgets, shootouts, and babes that only 007 can provide was
something I’d never experienced before. I was beyond sold and my affection for
the character only grew over the years as I discovered the brilliance of Sean
Connery’s character-defining performance, the goofiness of Roger Moore’s
mixed-quality entries, as well as the brief, but effective outings of George
Lazenby (The awkward, nerdy Bond) and Timothy Dalton (The underrated,
straight-faced Bond). Pierce Brosnan may have ended up with the short end of
the stick with some overwhelmingly weak entries (With the exception of his
spectacular debut GoldenEye), but he
perfectly captured the spirit of Bond, combining the best bits of each of the
previous carnations and combining it with his own unique charm. Brosnan’s
performance played as a bit of a ‘Best of Bond’ but that’s not damning him
with faint praise. He was spectacular in the role and, unfortunately, outshone by the awfulness of
the particular entries he starred in, flicks like his final, pathetic adventure Die Another Day - A movie so ridiculously packed to the brim with terrible CG and the poor acting chops of Halle Berry, that the prospect of another Bond film seemed more painful than welcome. When invisible cars
outrunning giant sun lasers on a frozen lake come into play, it's probably best to throw in the towel and start fresh and that’s exactly how Bond’s
producers felt. They knew they had to get back to the gritty, grounded roots of
everyone’s favorite super spy. Enter Daniel Craig and Casino Royale.
With director Martin Campbell at the helm (No stranger to
Bond with GoldenEye firmly under his
belt), Casino Royale was exactly what
the Bond franchise needed. It felt like the first entry of the series to truly
understand what makes Bond tick. It was a bit grittier and a bit darker, yes,
but that classic Bond charm was still there and the action sequences were more
thrilling than they had been in years. Perhaps most importantly of all – And
why do I even say perhaps? Of course this is why this new incarnation was so
successful – Casino Royale made Bond
feel real and human in a way that the series had never seen previously. For the
first time, Bond wasn’t simply an impervious hero, dashing and dodging through
every car chase and shootout and bedding every possible babe, emerging
completely unscathed with every hair perfectly in place. He was a man of flesh
and blood in way over his head, capable of error and even getting his heart
broken. Suddenly, not only did we feel thrilled by the proceedings unfolding on
the screen, but we actually cared about their outcome due to our affection for the characters involved, which is something I would never
have imagined from James Bond. This is due, in no small part, to an absolutely
stunning performance from Daniel Craig. The only Bond he can really be compared
to is Connery’s – Coldly calculating as a killer and yet charming and suave as
only Agent 007 can be. He was easily the best Bond since Connery and, with the
aid of a spectacular script behind him, he and director Campbell elevated Bond
to a whole new level of high-quality entertainment.
Then came Quantum of
Solace – 2008’s much-anticipated follow-up. Highly disappointing in the
wake of Casino Royale’s utter
brilliance, the 22nd Bond entry, directed by indie-fare helmer Marc
Forster, was nothing more than a superfluous epilogue that served no other
purpose than to…well, honestly, I’m not quite sure what purpose it served.
Forster clearly lacked the chops to make a competent action film and the result
was a jarbled, choppy mess with action sequences so choppy and poorly
shot/edited that the effect of watching them was not too dissimilar from
staring straight into a strobe light turned up to full blast. His apparent lack
of interest in the character/legacy of Bond didn’t help much either and, as a
result, Quantum felt like a huge step backwards for the character and the quality of the series. It wasn't that it was necessarily the worst Bond film (That credit goes to the rather dreadful A View to a Kill), but it just felt terribly 'blah' and indifferent with not a single moment standing out that would qualify it as a Bond picture.
Enter the seemingly endless legal battles, which threatened
to put a final nail in the coffin of Mr. Bond for good. MGM’s looming
bankruptcy seemed to make it almost certain that we might not see another Bond flick
for a very long time and, even more disappointingly, that Craig might not get
another chance to recapture the brilliance of his first entry. But, thank the
maker, the darkness has passed and James Bond’s 23rd cinematic
adventure Skyfall is set for release
on November 9. During the turmoil of the MGM fiasco, many rumors were being
tossed about the mill regarding who would be helming the latest picture, the
most exciting of which was that Sam Mendes, the brilliant man behind American Beauty, Road to Perdition, and,
more recently, Revolutionary Road,
had been circling the project and having discussions with Craig about possible
directions the character should take. Once Skyfall
officially began moving forward with production, it seemed inevitable that
Mendes would be attached to direct and, thankfully, this was exactly the case.
With all that time off after Quantum,
there was plenty of time to brainstorm and plan for the long-awaited follow-up
to ensure that the same mistakes were not repeated.
The news kept getting better and better from there. Ralph
Fiennes and Javier Bardem were attached to the project and, perhaps the most
spectacular news of all was the announcement that Roger Deakins would be
serving as the film’s Director of Photography. Deakins, a veteran DP for the majority
of the Coen Brothers’ best films, is arguably the greatest working cinematographer
of this day and age. His inclusion in Mendes’ crew only ensures that Skyfall will easily be the most
impeccably shot film of the whole series. And now that the first trailer has
finally arrived after months and months of teasing production stills, it’s
clear that this is exactly the case. Skyfall
looks badass in every conceivable way and their are shots here that will take your breath away. The Hong Kong footage is particularly jaw-dropping. The imagery is so stunning that, during my initial run-through of the
trailer, I was so overwhelmed by what I was seeing that I
immediately needed to re-watch it order to get a better idea of the trailer's actual content and any hints as to what the plot of the film was. Naturally, the teaser
is as mysterious as the film’s title. It shows just enough to be satisfying,
while still not revealing anything about what the film is actually about. It’s
exactly what a teaser trailer should be and it is just plain fantastic.
With all the talk of introducing classic characters such as
Q and Moneypenny to the proceedings in addition to Craig’s mentioning that they
are reinjecting a sense of fun into the series that was sorely missing in the
last outing, Skyfall looks to be
shaping up as what could very well be the Goldfinger
of the ‘new’ Bond series. I, for one, couldn’t be happier and November 9 can’t
possibly get here soon enough.
Watch the trailer below and feel free to comment!!!!...you know, if you want and stuff.
Watch the trailer below and feel free to comment!!!!...you know, if you want and stuff.
This Blog is DUMB!!!!! I know blogs, Iz a blog ASS!
ReplyDeleteAHHHHHHH
Please kiss me.
hey, wait a second....
Delete