Opening: SKYFALL Reaches High, Yet Stumbles

Associate Editor, Features; Rotterdam, The Netherlands (@ardvark23)
to Vote
Opening: SKYFALL Reaches High, Yet Stumbles

Some two weeks after opening in much of the civilised world (i.e. Europe), Skyfall will finally be unleashed in North America tomorrow, Friday, November 9. Advance word -- including a review by our European Editor, Brian Clark -- has been very strong indeed. Does the film deserve such plaudits?

About a year ago I wrote an article, asking you people what you were anticipating for 2012. Up came the usual suspects: Prometheus, The Dark Knight Rises, The Hobbit, and... the new Bond film by Sam Mendes. Wait, what?

Yes, the new Bond was eagerly anticipated, by me as well. I was rather late in getting on the Daniel Craig bandwagon, only catching up to Casino Royale when it appeared on Blu-ray, prior to watching Quantum of Solace. But the new films had a big impact on me, and to my own surprise they rekindled all my love for the franchise once more. The new start with Bond as 00-rookie, the new grittier realistic universe, the continuity between the two films, the uncommon focus on decent acting... I loved the new Bonds, and especially Daniel Craig's take on the character. So to have the third one directed by the guy who did American Beauty and Road to Perdition? Oh HELL yes!

So I avidly read Brian's review last week, delighted to hear about what worked and dreading any bad news. Thankfully, all seemed to be fine. Quoting Brian:

"...for all the spectacular action set-pieces in the film - and there are some real jaw-droppers - perhaps the most impressive stunt that Mendes pulls off is the tonal tightrope the film walks. It keeps the harder-edged, conflicted character that Craig introduced five years ago without sacrificing the sense of fun and even nostalgia that makes the classic films so compulsively watchable. Yes, it is dark, serious, thrilling and surprisingly character-driven. At the same time, it's grimly funny, sexy, nostalgic and, on occasion, ridiculous."

Score! Color me stoked. That was exactly the story I hoped to hear. But then Brian also had this to say:

"There are a few baffling jumps in the plot, which I normally wouldn't mention in a review of a Bond movie, except that the movie is so assured most of the time that they are difficult to ignore."

And herein lies the understatement of the year. Skyfall is not a bad Bond film, or even a bad film in general (different measures apply for Bond). It's the longest Bond and most of its running time is spent on character development. The cinematography is gorgeous and may even pick up an Oscar in a few months. Daniel Craig, Javier Bardem and Dame Judi Dench are excellent and every scene with two or three of them in it shines.

skyfall-ext1.jpgBut, and pardon the analogy, this is the Prometheus of the Bond franchise. Remember that film being lambasted for characters doing inexplicably stupid things just to get to the next kill? A guy who just explains how to use the best compass in existence and then gets lost because he fails to use it? The biologist who, upon FINALLY encountering an alien corpse, decides he's no longer needed? Well, you'll see that here too. And it's bad to the point of being insulting. People will act in a completely illogical way just when the film has spent plenty of time setting them up as capable.

And James himself, if you look closely at his actions... I do not mind him being damaged, frail, wounded, old, beaten, drunk, scarred, doubting himself. I do not mind him starting a plan and failing to execute it properly. I do not mind him being wrong, or not good enough. That stuff is all actually pretty cool and fits in this Bond's universe.

But I do fucking mind him being dumb. And unfortunately in Skyfall he sometimes is very dumb indeed.

I'm not going to go into story details or spoiling stuff for people just yet. As Brian wrote, with most Bond films you go in for that special atmosphere, the action, the glamour, so you take the bumps in stride. But this film specifically invites you to care, to believe... and then it spits in your face story-wise, several times over. Enough so to derail the film for me and getting me angry in the end.

Plot inconsistencies or dumb behavior are par for the course in earlier Bond films, where indeed you wanted to get at the next big set-piece as quickly as possible. But despite Brian's strong recommendation concerning several jaw-dropping spectacular action set-pieces, to me the action scenes are not particularly memorable. Skyfall starts strong with a truly excellent pre-opening-credit-sequence but in the entire remainder of the film there isn't a single setpiece, stunt or fight which matches it. The thrills that are there are all due to anticipation and tension-building, not so much the pay-off. This is not just true for the third act, it calls attention to itself through the entire film. That it reaches its 143rd minute without boring the audience to death is entirely due to its characters.

In itself there is certainly nothing wrong with that but it basically turns Skyfall into a thriller, not an action movie. And in a thriller, especially one which sells itself as an intelligently, thoroughly crafted one as Skyfall does, weird lapses in logic hurt a lot more than in an action flick. If you possess a chip in your brain which keeps a tally on cause-and-effect, do yourself a favor and switch it off when watching this film or you will be left wondering why Bond isn't in jail during the epilogue. It's not quite as bad as Spielberg's godawful The Lost World (where every single casualty in the film is directly attributable to the heroes) but it comes close.

So do I hate the film? Well... no. Neither did I hate Prometheus for that matter (although several people have told me I'm far too forgiving in general).

And I love how Skyfall builds a bridge between the James Bond origin story of the past two films on one side, and the serial super-agent films we've been enjoying for decades on the other side. I love the small character touches throughout the film, how Skyfall incorporates stuff from Bond's private life hinted at in the Ian Fleming novels but (so far) carefully kept out of the films. And I do hope Daniel Craig will return for another one.

But please... if you go watch Skyfall this weekend, keep your expectations in check. That's always good advice, but doubly so for this film. Don't expect the action to blow you away, because it won't.

to Vote
Screen Anarchy logo
Do you feel this content is inappropriate or infringes upon your rights? Click here to report it, or see our DMCA policy.
Sam MendesNeal PurvisRobert WadeJohn LoganDaniel CraigJudi DenchJavier BardemRalph FiennesActionAdventureThriller

More from Around the Web

More about Skyfall

cuttermaranNovember 8, 2012 1:33 PM

Completely agreed about everything in your review. How could you read my mind?????

Antho42November 8, 2012 2:19 PM

The problem with Prometheus is not that it is dumb, the problem is that it is both dumb and "self-serious." For a lot of people, that is a bad combination.
James Bond can get away with some dumb, character actions because it is frankly not tacking the "meaning of life/universe." It just wants to be fun, popcorn spectacle.

Ard VijnNovember 8, 2012 2:56 PM

With all other James Bond films you'd be right. But in this one, dumb people actually do damage to the film.

Ard VijnNovember 8, 2012 2:59 PM

I had grave reservations already by the time the finale happened, but when that one guy USES HIS FLASHLIGHT to point the way to the SECRET HIDING PLACE in a DARK VALLEY with all EVIL DUDES WATCHING... something broke in me.

John SzczerbaNovember 9, 2012 2:46 AM

the rotten tomatoes score is 93% from 183 critic reviews. it's one of the highest scoring movies of 2012. i think i'll go with the law of averages over one reviewer's opinion and a few posters that agreed. i like this site, but not the film snobbery.

Todd BrownNovember 9, 2012 9:46 AM

What you call snobbery we call acknowledging a diversity of opinions. We've already run one GLOWING review of the film, and Ard felt differently about it. Different people have different tastes ...

Ard VijnNovember 9, 2012 3:28 PM


In over ten years of writing reviews this is the first time I've been called a snob! Good for you Sir for being first.

And I even LIKED the film, can you believe it? It's just that I also have some grave misgivings with it.

Michael LangNovember 9, 2012 7:39 PM

If your so damned smart, go make your own movie and see how it turns out. Critics are useless.

Dick MagnumNovember 9, 2012 8:07 PM

oh cool, the old "if you dont like eating literal turds why dont you go open up a five-star restaurant" defense

good christ you're an idiot

Ard VijnNovember 9, 2012 8:54 PM

Well, at least I made him read.

JimNovember 10, 2012 6:36 AM

I agree with the snobbery bit. But sometimes I like reading twitch reviews that I completely disagree with. It is interesting to hear a minority opinion.

Mr. CavinNovember 11, 2012 7:55 PM

Hm. If you want to hear snobbery, I'll give you all the geopolitical reasons why a movie that glamorizes rogue government agents using terror tactics to save their own hides by subduing the villains they've created is both childish and deplorable (and not just a little sickening in a wish-fulfillment way, coming from England). Or maybe I'll bring up dancey action setpieces that somehow waste their Broadway potential because they are presented in narrative-destroying eyeline-juggling montage clearly intended to be cut cleanly from the native environment for some Heineken commercials or music videos. I could even wax academic about how just about every show has jumped the shark by the time the writers throw up their hands and churn out a "this time it's personal" script (there are already a few examples from this very franchise).

But nothing in Ard's review was really snobbery, was it (sorry Ard)? It was someone coming up with reasons why he didn't unreservedly love something. I thought he was pretty nice about it, actually. He liked this movie a lot better than I did. I felt like it needed a whole lot more everyman plebeian fantasy--more suave, more sex, more action--and a lot less plodding and torturous aggrandizing mythology. Is that snobby?

Hiroaki JohnsonNovember 12, 2012 9:08 AM

I'd mostly agree with this review.

I thought the fight in front of the LED signage was the action highlight, and while Bardem makes a good entrance and puts forth a compelling argument for his revenge (topped off with the jaw) they sort of waste him for the remainder of the movie. I also personally didn't appreciate the cheesey one liners that made their way in.

Not terrible by any means, I kind of found it disappointing considering the pedigree of talent.