Skyfall: A Different type of Bond.

Rating: 8/10 (26 October 2012)

This is a first impression review from a lifelong Bond fan just back from an early morning screening in London.
"Skyfall" is the Bond that nearly didn't happen, so that it's here at all makes it welcome. It's quite long, but it never drags or bores in the way that perhaps "Casino Royale" did. Like "Quantum of Solace" it actually feels like a Bondfilm despite its many flaws, and invites multiple viewings.
It's much publicised budget limitations show, with most of the film shot in the centre of London (fun for Londoners like me who see many familiar spots become Bond backdrops) including 007s first foray into our famous "Tube" train network, and a finale in Scotland. Turkey(popular location for modest actioners – see "Taken 2") and Singapore/Macau make fleeting appearances, though it's hard to say if Craig actually ever went there, since it's just postcard vistas followed by obvious studio sets.
The film promised to strip Bond to the emotional core, something that has been boasted since "Casino Royale", but frankly we learn as much here about Bond's tragic childhood as we did about Peter Parker in this summer's "Amazing Spiderman" (ie almost nothing) He is supposed to see "M" as a surrogate mother, but it's something that must be read since it's never actually implied in any way. Romance and the "Bond girls" get relegated to a level that makes "Quantum" look like "Twilight", and will worry those who see Eros getting squeezed out of the Bond world altogether! In the case of Naomie Harris, this lack of sex makes sense with the final reveal, but a romantic interlude is briefly shared with Severine, though Berenice Marlohe looks and acts very much like Talisa Soto's Lupe in "Licence to Kill", a character whose arc she shares and who may be one of the many nods to Bond's legacy scattered throughout.
Unlike recent Bond outings, who have featured less than memorable adversaries, this one baited us with a strong villain in the shape of the legendary Javier Bardem, who cleverly subverts his Latino hunk image playing a flouncy camp gay baddie. Unfortunately his character is never developed, and has actually very little screen time, which disappoints. He spars verbally with Bond, but despite being of similar age and physique, there is no hand to hand combat between the two. He doesn't really care about 007 anyway, it's "M" he's after. That is his only motivation (he is a cyber-terrorist, but he makes out it's just a hobby and nothing special) and all for a hazy, poorly explained back story during the 1997 Hong Kong handover. In fact he seems to be an amalgam of the villains in the 2 McG "Charlie's Angels" films, a cyber whizz kid who engineers an incredibly complex web of events just to get at an intelligence boss who once betrayed him in morally dubious circumstances and a former top operative who went rogue after capture and torture soured their souls. Whether this is accidental or deliberate only the screenwriters can know? He also has hideous scarring which a prosthetic hides, easily removable for a "look what you did to me!" moment, then forgotten about.
The action is fun, but oddly unoriginal. Again the "car chase" occurs in the pre-credits sequence, then we get a dirt-bike chase through a crowded 3rd world marketplace and a fight atop a moving train, two things we've seen many times before. We also have a brief fight that's filmed in silhouette, which looks sillier than it sounds. There's a foot-chase-manhunt on the underground, again something that's been in dozens of films (interrupted by a train falling through the roof, something that looks cool in the trailer but means nothing in the film) and a final battle in Bond's ancestral Scottish home which is clearly inspired by the final cottage fight of "Straw Dogs" (except that was more violent and exciting!) It's all watchable, but oddly familiar and unoriginal, something 007 action should never be!
The score by Mendes regular Thomas Newman is OK, but sounds like a bad impersonation of regular David Arnold, and is not up to the usual 007 music standard. The title sequence accompanying Adele's deliberately Bassey-esque song is lovely, teasing us with images, locales and elements of the film we are about to watch. The cinematography by Roger Deakins is also very good, and makes a modest film look glamorous and lush.
Elements from previous Bonds are scattered throughout in a way similar to 40th anniversary "Die Another Day", including the classic Aston Martin from "Goldfinger". It also has the least ambitious Villain ever, least exotic locales, least sex, and furthermore the script tries to hide the fact that under the accolades and backslapping, 007 actually achieves precisely nothing in this story!
The overall theme seems to be "Bond is still as relevant today as he was 50 years ago", and it is constantly hammered home with little subtlety throughout, with an "analogue Vs. digital" set up similar to this summer's "Battleship". The film ends with the traditional 007 set up restored, albeit with some changes. There's a condescending "Q", a flirty Miss Moneypenny at her desk (guess who she was during the rest of the movie?) and a Bernard Lee style "M" in a drawing room office handing Bond secret mission files. In other words, we've reconstructed Bond, now we're going back to the beginning again because tradition is what it's all about! Quite how much of this will make into the next Bond when there ISN'T a 50th anniversary to celebrate remains to be seen?
But it's a Bond, and it's here, and its good and fun, so let's celebrate that at least!