Skyfall – very dull Bond

I admit I’m not the biggest Bond fan, but I can take the films for what they are, two hours of a glamorised world to escape to. I rarely return to a Bond film but for the most part I find the formula a bit predictable but always colourful fun. I was sceptical when Sam Mendes was signed on to direct the latest outing, as apart from American Beauty (which despite its Oscar success quickly became forgotten) his career has been a disappointment. Was this a genuine desire from MGM to add a bit more depth to Bond? Or a way of attracting attention to a project that desperately needed to make huge money for their bankrupt studio? Whatever the answer Skyfall has left me disappointed, and the classy Bond veil is starting to slip and we are seeing its true form of a Starbucks style franchise desperately trying to sell products.

After what (correct me if I’m wrong) was an exceptionally long amount of advertisements (I counted 25 minutes) by today’s cinema standards, Bond eventually starts off awkwardly enough in Turkey, with a chase over rooftops on motorbikes and onto JCBs on trains, as Bond tries to recover a stolen MI6 hard drive from a bad guy in a suit. After a hitch Bond ends up shot by his own colleague, and presumed dead. We know better though, and join Bond as he drinks heavily and lazes by the beach. He’s tempted back to his old life when MI6 headquarters are bombed, putting his good friend M (Judi Dench) under a lot of scrutiny from the minister. Behind the attack is Silva (Javier Bardem) and ex agent with a chip on his shoulder for M, intent on hunting her down at whatever costs.

This is the dullest Bond I can remember. Dialogue is basic, the plot never surprising, and the action underwhelming. Daniel Craig is a great actor, and whereas Casino Royale suited his hard edge perfectly, Skyfall feels like it was written with Connery or Brosnan in mind, with several cheap gags and no real emotion to the character. The ruthlessness that has become the staple of Craigs Bond is absent. The story is as basic as it comes and despite the genuine creepiness Bardem brings to Silva, his motivation for wanting revenge on M is never fully realised. Bardem is a fantastic actor and in his first scene makes a great entry but after this the talent is wasted. It is refreshing to see this Bond film choose London and Scotland for its locations instead of the usual Caribbean islands and French Riveira, but when the finale comes in a Home Alone style booby-trapped highlands estate I found myself wishing for a blue sky to distract from the predictable and dull action.

A huge disappointment, but one that will make MGM lots of money anyway so the Bond formula is unlikely to change. This is a franchise that attracts some great talent like Craig and Bardem but wastes them all on a bad choice of director and a dull storyline.

2 out of 5

Beasts of the Southern Wild – colourful and interesting but lacking any real story

Set in a fictional isolated offshore community during the onslaught of a devastating storm, Beasts of the Southern Wild has a large canvas on which to tell its tale. It paints a picture of an interesting habitat with colourful characters but never fully places them into any kind of a plot. We get the story of a girl growing up as her father grows ill but the rest of the colourful world is left as a backdrop and never given the story it deserves. Fortunately for Beasts the two lead actors, both inexperienced, give phenomenal performances and keep the story from sinking (excuse the pun).

Six year old Hushpuppy (Quvenzhané Wallis) lives in the ‘Bathtub’, an isolated community in Louisiana surrounded by water where chickens walk on bars, alcohol is consumed in mass amounts, and every day is a holiday according to Wink (Dwight Henry), Hushpuppys energetic and unpredictable father. The community make boats from barrels and eat seafood aplenty, but when a violent storm comes most of the locals decide to evacuate, leaving Hushpuppy, Wink, a bar full of drunks, and a few animals left to desperately cling to the area they love so much.

Told from the perspective of Hushpuppy, the film gives us a childlike wonder view of the world she inhabits. Constantly holding animals to her ear to hear their heartbeats, Wallis taps into the wonder of Hushpuppy. She runs around with energy, yells at her father with fierceness, and scowls at anything life sends to bring her down. Director Zeitlins success with Beasts has a lot to owe to Wallis, her performance really is the backbone of the film. Equally as good in the supporting role of her father Wink, Henry (a real life baker) gives an excellent performance. Our understanding of him develops as Hushpuppys comes to grasp what her father’s really trying to do. The scenes between the two are fantastic with an unpredictable energy and unspoken understanding between the two. Hopefully another director can utilise their personalities as well as Zeitlin has.

Where the film fails is in the very few times it tries to inject some story into proceedings. It doesn’t happen enough and when it does it feels rushed and never fully developed. There’s a good film here that threads the line between Where the Wild Things Are and The Tree of Life but bar the father daughter scenes the story never compels, and when the two aren’t sharing the screen the film suffers.

A visual treat with a unique setting that excels in acting. The story might not be as involving as it thinks it is but luckily the performances are truly exceptional and worth a watch for alone.

3 out of 5

What Richard Did – a successful film in most ways

Inspired by true events and directed by the most promising Irish director of recent times, Lenny Abrahamson (Adam & Paul, Garage), What Richard Did has plenty of emotion in its faint but compelling story and powerful themes to explore. It does this well but unfortunately a desire to inject stylistic elements into the films flow disrupts what could have been an extremely powerful film. This is the work of a talented man who lets himself get a bit too adventurous and indulges for a bit too long. It’s still an extremely skilful piece of cinema but not as involving as it really deserves to be.

Richard (Jack Reynor) is a typical upper-class Irish teenager, spending his days playing rugby, drinking with the lads, and chasing women. Although not perfect he’s a decent enough guy and popular in his community. Richard pursues his genuine interest in Lara (Roisin Murphy), despite the fact she’s initially going out with team mate Conor (Sam Harris). The two start to see each other but Conor is still in their circle of friends, leading to an incident involving alcohol and jealousy with Richard taking a violent event too far. After an unexpected turn Richard finds himself dealing with guilt from an event he never intended.

Jack Reynor gives a fantastic performance as Richard much thanks to Abrahamsons direction and observation of all nuances, no matter how small. In the early scenes particularly he builds up a rapport with the audience through scenes that I can only assume included much improvisation to extract their genuineness. Richards father Peter played by Danish actor Lars Mikkelsen is another strong performance and the scenes with him and Richard are the films best. The strain on their relationship portrayed achingly as the event changes the fathers’ perception of his son.

The first half of the film flows nicely but things start to fall apart after the catalyst of the plot happens. I understand that at this point Richard is confused but often we don’t get to fully take in the moments that are critical to his story. For instance the morning after when news has broken of the event and Richard meets his friends in a car park to discuss the matter Abrahamson gives us a montage of moments, cutting between the conversation and shots of Richard laying around sulking. I wanted to be at that conversation, immersed in the friends panic, but instead I was constantly shifted from one scene to another. This pattern continues for most of the second half of the film and towards the end I no longer felt any involvement with the characters.

For all its flaws it still shows Abrahamsons strength as a director. As we all know by now nobody is either good or bad, things are much more complicated than that, and Abrahamson never shies away from portraying this in Richard. Guilt, bravery and knowing the consequences doesn’t always mix well, and Abrahamson shows us that even nice guys can be cowards if there’s enough to lose from it. It’s the brutal truth that Abrahamson is interested in portraying and he must be commended for that.

Beautifully shot and well-acted, but unfortunately not as powerful and involving as it should have been. Abrahamson can do better, and he will. Keep an eye on this man.

3 out of 5