I'm really not a James Bond guy. As a result I was probably more annoyed by Skyfall than it deserves. Don't get me wrong, it's reasonably entertaining and has some well executed set pieces. However, since I don't really care about the characters (I've maybe seen three of Connery/Moore/Lazenby films, and found the Brosnan ones to be uniformly tedious) most of the big 'emotional' moments just elicited a 'meh.' Anyway since its easier to be snarky, here's a random list of some problems I had with the film (mild spoilers). None of them are any worse than many other films I do enjoy, but given my aforementioned lack of connection with the characters I ended not dwelling on them more than I would have otherwise:
1) The fundamental problem with the more recent films is that they really want to be more serious action films, but are still constrained by the bond cartoony elements (entendres, bad jokes, gadgets). They obviously cut back on them, and you can tell the filmmakers are a little embarrassed by the inclusion, but this just makes them stick out more. The tonal disconnect really contributes to my issues with the film.
2) On the same point, I think these films need to decide whether they're going to be serious or cartoons. Say what you want about the Mission Impossible films, they at least embrace the cartoon which makes the over the top action, and plot holes, easier to accept.
3) Javier Bardem has been getting a lot of credit for being the one of the best villians ever, and I don't see it. Its not his fault, its just that the character's big hook is that he's so technologically advanced that he can bring down whole governments with the push of a button. But then his big plan at the end just involves busting in with some goons and shooting it up. No special weapons or anything.
4) The dialogue is unsubtle to say the least. People give films like Cloud Atlas a lot of crap for beating you over the head with its theme, but Skyfall is about 20 times worse. Some variation of the line "The old things are sometimes best" is said (or shown) about three hundred times. Yes, we get it. Bond is still relevant.
5) One more for an even 5. It was pointed out on the podcast Doug Loves Movies that the ending of skyfall is really just the climax of Home Alone. That's not untrue.
1) The fundamental problem with the more recent films is that they really want to be more serious action films, but are still constrained by the bond cartoony elements (entendres, bad jokes, gadgets). They obviously cut back on them, and you can tell the filmmakers are a little embarrassed by the inclusion, but this just makes them stick out more. The tonal disconnect really contributes to my issues with the film.
2) On the same point, I think these films need to decide whether they're going to be serious or cartoons. Say what you want about the Mission Impossible films, they at least embrace the cartoon which makes the over the top action, and plot holes, easier to accept.
3) Javier Bardem has been getting a lot of credit for being the one of the best villians ever, and I don't see it. Its not his fault, its just that the character's big hook is that he's so technologically advanced that he can bring down whole governments with the push of a button. But then his big plan at the end just involves busting in with some goons and shooting it up. No special weapons or anything.
4) The dialogue is unsubtle to say the least. People give films like Cloud Atlas a lot of crap for beating you over the head with its theme, but Skyfall is about 20 times worse. Some variation of the line "The old things are sometimes best" is said (or shown) about three hundred times. Yes, we get it. Bond is still relevant.
5) One more for an even 5. It was pointed out on the podcast Doug Loves Movies that the ending of skyfall is really just the climax of Home Alone. That's not untrue.
No comments:
Post a Comment