There is plenty to like about "Skyfall," the latest of three James Bond films starring Daniel Craig. It has just about everything that a fan of this long-running series of spy movies could want out of it: well-choreographed action sequences, snappy one-liners, a good sense of humor about itself without condescending into self-parody, and a memorable villain
even if he is unforgettable for possibly the wrong reasons. But I had an unusual reaction to the movie. I enjoyed it as a whole, but the things that I liked best were the cinematography and the misc en scene: two attributes that can be primarily credited to director of photography Roger Deakins.
Deakins is one of the most unsung geniuses floating around Hollywood for the past thirty-some years. I don't know how much cinematographers get paid, but I hope this guy is getting rich. When a film producer hires this man to light up his sets, the audience is bound to be impressed. His work in "Skyfall" is no exception and demonstrates Deakins' willingness to experiment from film to film. Usually, in movies like "The Shawshank Redemption," "Fargo," and "The Assassination of Jesse James," Deakins flourishes the camera lens with colors. He does the same here, but this time has an especially fun time playing around with shadows. The film's two best action scenes (one set in a Shanghai skyscraper, the other in a remote English field with a mansion burning in the background) applies both of these to the hilt. I particularly liked the shots with Daniel Craig, as 007, running across a frozen pond with the inferno blazing behind him. Craig is silhouetted, and the orange strobes of the fire cast brilliantly against the ice. Lighting is not as easy as many make it out to be, and Deakins' work here is jaw-dropping in its beauty. Another sequence, more psychological-focused than action-driven, set in a Chinese bar with Komodo dragons kept in a pit beneath the customers, is also pretty to behold.
Cinematography is a key element, but it cannot necessarily make or break a movie. Thankfully, Deakins was put onboard a good project that would have done well even without his genius. This new Bond film is considerably wittier and more exuberant than the last one, "Quantum of Solace," in which Craig's performance was about the only saving grace. Craig is still his usual self: physically fit, commanding in his presence, and uncannily suitable for the role. He still is, as far as I'm concerned, the best Bond since Sean Connery. Sadly, we don't get much of a Bond girl this time (in fact, Judi Dench, as "M," spends more two-shots with Craig than Naomie Harris, Berenice Marlohe, or an unnamed character early in the movie, all of whom are the romantic interests). Craig has a steamy scene (literally) with one of them, but there's not much chemistry or interest between them. Bond does get sexually approached by the (male, mind you) villain of the picture. Javier Bardem's performance, and the scene where he plays homoerotic mind games with Bond while he's tied up (stroking bullet wounds on his chest) is something that would have never gotten by in the old days. As for the big scheme that puts the third act in full-speed, it's the typical mastermind plot. Nothing new, but then again, sometimes the familiarity is the whole idea. What's more shocking than the scheme is Bardem's comically over-the-top performance. He's more funny than he is charming or intimidating. Just how much of the humor was intentional and how much was inadvertent (the last part of the climax comes to mind), I cannot say, but Bardem, though hamming it up, is not boring for a second.
My only big reservation about "Skyfall" concerns the dramatic parts of its third act, in which it explores James Bond's past. Some movie characters, like Indiana Jones or James Bond, really are best with their histories left unexplored. Let's face it: just how much do we care how James Bond became James Bond as opposed to seeing him seduce women, driving motorcycles off bridges, and fighting bad guys on the brim of a skyscraper? I also would have preferred to hear more of the classic James Bond theme. The music by Thomas Neuman is good, especially a suspense cue that reminds me of the late Jerry Goldsmith, but I can still remember the old classics when John Barry's guitars and trumpets would start strumming whenever Sean Connery would so much as walk into a room or step out of a car.
My few quibbles aside, this is a solid November release. And it does reaffirm the old theory put forth by film scholars generations ago that sometimes the formula is exactly what you want. After all, if James Bond did not do what he does here, we would probably be asking for a refund. And one final note about Roger Deakins. I'm sure he will get his tenth Academy Award nomination for this movie. Would it be too much to ask that he gets to take home the gold this time? I confess I haven't seen every 2012 release so far, but none has left images in my mind as long as "Skyfall."
Deakins is one of the most unsung geniuses floating around Hollywood for the past thirty-some years. I don't know how much cinematographers get paid, but I hope this guy is getting rich. When a film producer hires this man to light up his sets, the audience is bound to be impressed. His work in "Skyfall" is no exception and demonstrates Deakins' willingness to experiment from film to film. Usually, in movies like "The Shawshank Redemption," "Fargo," and "The Assassination of Jesse James," Deakins flourishes the camera lens with colors. He does the same here, but this time has an especially fun time playing around with shadows. The film's two best action scenes (one set in a Shanghai skyscraper, the other in a remote English field with a mansion burning in the background) applies both of these to the hilt. I particularly liked the shots with Daniel Craig, as 007, running across a frozen pond with the inferno blazing behind him. Craig is silhouetted, and the orange strobes of the fire cast brilliantly against the ice. Lighting is not as easy as many make it out to be, and Deakins' work here is jaw-dropping in its beauty. Another sequence, more psychological-focused than action-driven, set in a Chinese bar with Komodo dragons kept in a pit beneath the customers, is also pretty to behold.
Cinematography is a key element, but it cannot necessarily make or break a movie. Thankfully, Deakins was put onboard a good project that would have done well even without his genius. This new Bond film is considerably wittier and more exuberant than the last one, "Quantum of Solace," in which Craig's performance was about the only saving grace. Craig is still his usual self: physically fit, commanding in his presence, and uncannily suitable for the role. He still is, as far as I'm concerned, the best Bond since Sean Connery. Sadly, we don't get much of a Bond girl this time (in fact, Judi Dench, as "M," spends more two-shots with Craig than Naomie Harris, Berenice Marlohe, or an unnamed character early in the movie, all of whom are the romantic interests). Craig has a steamy scene (literally) with one of them, but there's not much chemistry or interest between them. Bond does get sexually approached by the (male, mind you) villain of the picture. Javier Bardem's performance, and the scene where he plays homoerotic mind games with Bond while he's tied up (stroking bullet wounds on his chest) is something that would have never gotten by in the old days. As for the big scheme that puts the third act in full-speed, it's the typical mastermind plot. Nothing new, but then again, sometimes the familiarity is the whole idea. What's more shocking than the scheme is Bardem's comically over-the-top performance. He's more funny than he is charming or intimidating. Just how much of the humor was intentional and how much was inadvertent (the last part of the climax comes to mind), I cannot say, but Bardem, though hamming it up, is not boring for a second.
My only big reservation about "Skyfall" concerns the dramatic parts of its third act, in which it explores James Bond's past. Some movie characters, like Indiana Jones or James Bond, really are best with their histories left unexplored. Let's face it: just how much do we care how James Bond became James Bond as opposed to seeing him seduce women, driving motorcycles off bridges, and fighting bad guys on the brim of a skyscraper? I also would have preferred to hear more of the classic James Bond theme. The music by Thomas Neuman is good, especially a suspense cue that reminds me of the late Jerry Goldsmith, but I can still remember the old classics when John Barry's guitars and trumpets would start strumming whenever Sean Connery would so much as walk into a room or step out of a car.
My few quibbles aside, this is a solid November release. And it does reaffirm the old theory put forth by film scholars generations ago that sometimes the formula is exactly what you want. After all, if James Bond did not do what he does here, we would probably be asking for a refund. And one final note about Roger Deakins. I'm sure he will get his tenth Academy Award nomination for this movie. Would it be too much to ask that he gets to take home the gold this time? I confess I haven't seen every 2012 release so far, but none has left images in my mind as long as "Skyfall."