The action genre is evolving. Some people like the direction taken by recent action movies, and others don't. In the constantly changing world of action movies, James Bond used to be the steadfast rock of Gibraltar: one could always (for conveniently chosen values of always) count on Bond to deliver a uniformly pleasant experience, including — an entrancing credit sequence; a larger than life villain; a fantastic plan to take over the world; awesome gadgets straight out of a science-fiction novel; a gorgeous Bond girl; beautifully photographed exotic locations; and, of course, breathtaking action.
Skyfall's credit sequence is, well, meh. Adele is a great singer, but the visuals are nowhere near the level expected.
The villain is under-meh. If you can call him a villain at all, since he's more in the nature of a killer. Real villains use killers as hired help.
Plan to take over the world? what plan to take over the world?
There are no gadgets to speak of, outside a handgun taken from The Weapon Shops of Isher (fortunately promptly lost and forgotten) and a vintage automobile (proof that the heyday of the British motor industry is well past). And a radio tracker.
Bond girl? there are two characters which sport a faint family resemblance to a Bond girl, like second cousins twice removed, and that's that.
For exotic locations we get very brief glimpses of two south-east Asian cities, or rather one city and one den of perdition. Unless you accept that a misty and brooding Scottish moor is an acceptable substitute for an exotic location in a Bond movie.
Which brings me back to the problem of the underwhelming action. The pre-credits sequence is very good. And that's it. The only other Bond-level sequence lasts for less than 20 seconds and involves an underground train. An empty underground train.
Overall, Skyfall is a decent film. It has a tinge of action, and it illustrates certain uncomfortable areas of the relationship between democracy and secret services. But is it a true Bond movie? I don't think so. Anyway, I'm eager to find out whether this will remain a one-of-a-kind or it will open a period of evolutionary change in the Bond franchise.
Skyfall's credit sequence is, well, meh. Adele is a great singer, but the visuals are nowhere near the level expected.
The villain is under-meh. If you can call him a villain at all, since he's more in the nature of a killer. Real villains use killers as hired help.
Plan to take over the world? what plan to take over the world?
There are no gadgets to speak of, outside a handgun taken from The Weapon Shops of Isher (fortunately promptly lost and forgotten) and a vintage automobile (proof that the heyday of the British motor industry is well past). And a radio tracker.
Bond girl? there are two characters which sport a faint family resemblance to a Bond girl, like second cousins twice removed, and that's that.
For exotic locations we get very brief glimpses of two south-east Asian cities, or rather one city and one den of perdition. Unless you accept that a misty and brooding Scottish moor is an acceptable substitute for an exotic location in a Bond movie.
Which brings me back to the problem of the underwhelming action. The pre-credits sequence is very good. And that's it. The only other Bond-level sequence lasts for less than 20 seconds and involves an underground train. An empty underground train.
Overall, Skyfall is a decent film. It has a tinge of action, and it illustrates certain uncomfortable areas of the relationship between democracy and secret services. But is it a true Bond movie? I don't think so. Anyway, I'm eager to find out whether this will remain a one-of-a-kind or it will open a period of evolutionary change in the Bond franchise.