A Skyfalling Bond! Watch out !!! Someone help him!...CRASH !!!

Rating: 4/10 (3 November 2012)

The amount of appreciation and adulation that this movie is gaining all over the media is phenomenal. Even the pre-release review of the film was exceptionally good.
This can actually backfire on the film because people would step in theaters with equally high expectations and it better live up to it.
I was one of the spectators going in with huge expectations after a poor show in 'QoS'. I sat through first half of the film thinking that something would happen soon and change the course and the pace of the film but soon after the second half also got over and we vacated the theater. I was shocked (not disappointed) at what I just saw.
Let's come straight the point – it's not a Bond movie. Why - for the absence of the most obvious and synonymous elements associated to a Bond film.
There are no gadgets. OK fine you don't make them anymore, but I am sorry we still want those exploding pens. He introduced a young Q, but this new lad rubbishes away the gadgets mockingly. I am sure when he was introduced in the film, people thought he has gotten some really nice and cool stuff in his hat. But all he pulls out is a radio transmitter? Sorry! We are here to see James Bond and not John McClane. Even Nolan didn't dare change any elements with respect to the gadgets when doing a complete refresh of the Batman franchise. So how did Sam assume on his own that we do not want gadgets anymore in a Bond film. That's over confidence on his part.
There is no Bond girl. Surprised? Why am I saying this is because the 'supposed' bond girl in the film shares screen space for no more than 10 minutes, has no characterization, no substance and falls for a mere shot of whiskey. Lame? Sam, did you ever get a chance to see Halle Berry, Michelle Yeoh, Eva Green in previous films? Money Penny, I am sorry does not qualify as a bond girl.
Then comes one of the most important aspects of a 007 film - the villain. To be honest I found this one very unimpressive. This one can easily mix with guys who play evil in films like Speed, Die Hard and so many. Yea OK, he was realistic in his 'aspirations' but for a 007 villain we want a Gustav Grave or Hugo Drax or Elliot Carver as a minimum. An awe worthy henchman could have been a nice addition here but sadly none exists. Remember Jaws, Stamper and Xao? In all the earlier movies, plot solely revolved around the 'aspiration' of the bad guy and have been benchmarks in their own terms. Many a times they have been weird but yes always unique and very thoughtful. There is always an element of suspense which is finally revealed towards the later stages of the movie on what the bad guy intends to do. Sadly here it's just revenge.
Action sequences again, lack the spirit, energy, creativity expected out of a Bond film. Opening sequence which is being talked about a lot is actually not so exciting after all. I beg your pardon but what's the fun in crushing Beetles just to move your earth mover a feet ahead? Not required. The climax I would say has been conceptualized as a grown up 'Home Alone'. Yeah it's shot well, you see a lot of silhouette in the dark and some nice colors emanating from the fire created in the backdrop but so what? It lacks the punch, the energy and the thrill! So wasted.
After the movie ended, I for a while almost believed that so much media adulation is probably the last resort towards saving a skyfalling film.The media has been bought over for this one!
We don't want the bond to age beyond his gadgets, cars, flamboyance and exuberance. I think Fleming will give me a nod here. Movie making is all about creativity but creativity should not infuse a change that takes away the persona of the character from how it was conceived. Why bond is what he is, is because of how he was earlier and how we grew up watching him. For all the kids in this generation this Bond is no more different than any other action film character.
So the people who pick up the next franchise should be careful because we are writing the fall of Fleming's character in times to come.