Skyfall (2012)

3/5

Skyfall, the 23rd Bond film since its creation 50 years ago, is certainly the most beautiful Bond film I've ever seen. And it's a prototypical Bond movie in many ways--filled with dry wit, exotic locales, and evil villains--but it's set in the new "hero as human" era of superhero movies that started with The Dark Knight. I'm certainly not an expert in the franchise, but my experience has always been of James Bond as a suave, debonair, practically invincible spy. Ever since the refresh with Casino Royale, we've seen him tortured and shot and just about beaten to death. This new bastardization of Bond is of an action hero who relies on brute force instead of gadgets, luck instead of planning. The 007 franchise has turned into a predictable summer blockbuster with a little star power and name recognition thrown in, but it's lost what made it special.

On top of all that, the movie itself is pretty mediocre, even with Sam Mendes at the helm. I will give it credit for having phenomenal cinematography (thanks to the incomparable Roger Deakins) and set pieces. But Mendes did not do enough to make it special again. Q and his gadgets came back, but in the most piddling, imbecilic way possible. The pacing suffered from an extra 30 minutes of explosions tacked on at the end. The plot is absolutely laughable. Granted, the plots have always been laughable, but that was part of their charm. Now they're preposterous in a realistic world instead of a dream world, which makes the inconsistencies and plot holes all the more embarrassing.

This is a plea to the producers: Stop this nonsense. Bond is not an action series; it's a spy series. Stop turning it into every other movie and bring it back to its roots. Update it without destroying it. Bond is more than what we're seeing here.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1074638/

28 Days Later (2002)

3/5

Danny Boyle's 28 Days Later effectively merges the zombie horror movie with the post-apocalyptic survival movie. There are scenes that make you jump and feel sick. But there are also scenes that make you think and allow for thoughtful discussion afterwards. While I think there are movies that tackle both issues better and with more sophistication, this is still a successful endeavor. And it is refreshing to see director Danny Boyle consistently changing the types of projects he takes on with ease, from Trainspotting and Millions to Sunshine and 28 Days Later.

Technically, the movie is a bit mixed. While the cinematography is striking (nearly every shot is set up to be visually appealing), there are little to no establishing shots. For me, it hurt the movie--it couldn't sustain tension as I never knew how close the zombies were. This is also tied in with the editing, which was too rapid-fire for me to tell what was going on. It worked much better in this movie, though, than more traditional action movies like Batman Begins. Despite these problems, the movie used a novel, extremely effective visual style, mixing digital video with Super 8 and 35mm film. Several parts were shot at really high shutter speed, which turned normally blurry movement into crisp but choppy movement. It gives the zombies a disturbing and disorienting quality. And it makes rain look amazing. In my opinion, this style was the most successful and memorable part of the movie.

My biggest complaint is that that movie introduces a cagey scientific explanation for the zombie epidemic: a virus. The problem is that it hints at reality and plausibility, but doesn't come close to satisfying the intellectual curiosity it invited. I don't buy a virus taking over a human in 20 seconds, or jumping species without any mutation time, or degrading mental capacities to inhuman instincts. I am fine with a zombie movie that leaves the mystery of the "zombie" alone, but if it provides an explanation, it better be able to stand up to reasonable scrutiny. Otherwise it just seems incomplete, like a good idea that they didn't bother thinking all the way through. Still, the movie is pretty awesome for a variety of reasons, so I wouldn't dismiss it or tell you not to watch it. It's not hard to recommend, as long as you know what you're getting into.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0289043/