11/10/2012

Skyfall (2012)

- James Bond is out of form

The new James Bond movie tries to establish the next era and still respect the essence of the series. I have to admit I have never been a huge Bond fan even though I appreciate the charming quality and goofiness that was present in the days of Sean Connery and also Roger Moore. I never cared about Brosnan though and "Skyfall" was my first encounter with Daniel Craig. But while I am perfectly happy with Bond's new personification there were no other innovations to be found.

When you think of James Bond you will probably associate a lot of exciting action and chases, a cool agent constantly throwing around one-liners and creepy villains trying to enforce their evil plans. You will get this more or less in this picture too. The problem: the action is too familiar, the jokes aren't significant or funny enough and the villain is not memorable.

The first sequence of the film is the fastest and feels like an obligatory concession to an audience that has no patience to wait for an action climax. Bond is chasing a criminal who has stolen a hard disc containing top-secret information about MI6 agents' identities. Since one vehicle is not enough these days the hot pursuit is taken first by car, then by motorcylce and then shows the two running and fighting on the roof of a train. Realism is not a crucial factor, of course but originality always is and I was reminded of how bored I get watching scenes like this. We have seen this a thousand times in the last 20 or 30 years.
After this disenchanting opening we meet a tired and rusty Bond who is drawn to alcoholism but still in for some cool appearances and cold killings. Daniel Craig is doing a very good job delivering all his lines in the same bold manner that he goes for his enemies. He is not the gentleman but a rather rude and cynical coeval with an "i dont give a damn"-kind of attitude, that I really enjoy. But he is merely left alone and not able to stem the overlong 143 minutes of the movie on his own. He is not even given any gadgets this time besides one pistol that only he can fire and a transmitter.

As out dated as this may seem is also the plot. After the list is stolen everyone at MI6 is in total panic. But it turns out that this list is not all that important as the bad guys are soon attacking MI6 headquaters and actually are behind chief commander M (Judi Dench). Bond naturally stands in for her protection. What the motivation for this plan is, is explained with a backstory confronting the characters with their past even to Bond's own childhood. But it isn't going very deep and the emphasis is on the action. The final showdown that at one point refers to "Apocalypse Now" is the evidence. The relations between the characters fall short even though some of the hints were quite promising and could have been explored further.

But there is still hope for improvement, isn't it? A Bond movie is always defined by its villain, so people commonly argue. This time he is played by Javier Bardem whose brillantly creepy performance as Anton Chigurh in the Coens "No Country for Old Men" made him a perfect candidate. Despite a similarly weird haircut and temper, however, he is not really threatening or convincing. Firstly he has too little screentime to really unleash his evil nature. Secondly he is presented overly dramatic with one scene resembling once again a Hannibal Lector type of treatment. And finally the story is just so incredibly unremarkable that there is no chance for him to play out all his cards.

In the end it was an surprisingly boring film even though it is certainly very well crafted (but so it should considering the budget). The only thing I found quite appealing was some of the cinematography by the great Roger Deakins who is probably best known for his work with the Coen Brothers. But it says a lot about the film if all I care about is this technical aspect.

I can't really say that this film is a total failure as it supposedly offers almost everything you can expect from a Bond movie these days. It will certainly please mainstream audiences. I don't quite understand why the critics were so overwhelmed by it though. Maybe I am just not affected by this kind of action/espionage type of stories (anymore). But I think that the Bond-feeling is somehow missing - just like any kind of surprises. Skyfall rather feels like an ordinary action picture with an exhausted hero in search of something to make him live up to his name. But this agent is not able to find out about the secret of his former incarnations. At the beginning of the film 007 is tested by his agency to proof that he is (still) ready  for combat. His skills have turned rusty. He apparantly isn't at the top of his game anymore but M approves anyway. I would not have given him the pass.

Keine Kommentare:

Kommentar veröffentlichen