Skyfall

Daniel Craig is easily the best James Bond, ever.

I know saying that is going to irk many longtime fans who insist that no one can top Sean Connery. Well, I mean no disrespect to the man who originated the role, or any of the other actors who've played 007 (Pierce Brosnan will always have a place for me as the Bond I grew up with). And I admit I haven’t seen every single one of the twenty-odd films featuring the character. Nevertheless, I stand by my statement.

Bond movies were always entertaining before, but let’s be honest: they were a little ridiculous. The plots were very outlandish, and some of the action scenes stretched even the typical suspension of disbelief you need for an action movie. Also, there was arguably always a comedic undertone, as Bond never seemed to break a sweat or even seem surprised by any of his experiences (not to mention all those Q gadgets, which were laughable fantasy).

With 2006’s Casino Royale, the series did away with most of that, dropping Bond into the real world of the 21^st Century. The cartoonish bad guys were replaced with harder villains whose evil intentions were right out of the news, and Craig brought a much needed edge and cunning that made the character so much more compelling. The suave demeanor and cold wit people expect from Bond are still there, but he actually seems like a real secret agent now, as opposed to a smooth playboy who just happens to defeat an evil genius while on an exotic vacation.

So, I reiterate: Daniel Craig is the best Bond, ever. And Skyfall might be the best Bond film I’ve ever seen.

The movie begins with an amazing chase through Turkey involving motorcycles and a train (one of several great action sequences), which ends with Bond apparently dead (not really, of course), and a hard drive listing double agents in terrorist organizations stolen. Soon, whoever obtained the list starts toying with MI6 head M (Judi Dench) by releasing the names online, resulting in the agents being executed by the groups in which they operate. As M faces an inquiry on her leadership, Bond sets out to find whoever stole the list.

Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace (which had one continuing story stretched across two movies) didn’t follow the standard Bond formula, as they were reestablishing the character’s origins to start fresh. This time around, Craig is firmly in place as Bond, owning the role whether he’s in the heat of battle, dropping a one-liner, or getting the ladies. But he's a much more real Bond than anyone who came before him. He bleeds, he doesn’t just walk away unscathed from a fight, and he has human feeling.

Really, this could be a metaphor for the whole movie: It’s a Bond movie through and through, with all the familiar trappings (as well as some references to movies past), and yet different from any one we’ve seen. It’s darker, and much more character-driven, building as much dramatic tension between the action scenes as during them.

The last third of the movie even departs completely from the formula and takes the story in a direction the series has never seen, as we learn a little about Bond’s past, as well as his relationship with Dench’s M. It doesn’t reveal anything too specific, leaving Bond’s secretive mystique intact (and leaving open possibilities for sequels), but it speaks volumes about how the character became the man he is. What was evident from early in Casino Royale is made very obvious in Skyfall: Craig’s 007 is no campy caricature, but a strong, fully developed character, more in line with creator Ian Fleming’s original vision than some previous portrayals.

And he’s not the only character who gets a meatier part. Dench, who’s played M since the Pierce Brosnan movies, advances from simply a dignified voice of authority to a vital supporting role. More than just his boss, she comes off almost like a matriarchal figure to Bond, as their relationship is revealed as more than mere loyalty and professional respect, and yet remains at arm’s length because of the nature of their work. Other Oscar-level talent in supporting roles includes Ralph Fiennes and Albert Finney. As the new Q, Ben Whishaw is an appropriately nerdy techno geek, but he gets to play a more active part in the action than just a scene or two of comic relief (the filmmakers wisely reworked the character instead of trying to replace the late Desmond Llewelyn, which would have been a futile task). And (MINOR SPOILER!) even Moneypenny (Naomie Harris) gets an upgrade, becoming 007’s equal and ally in the field, not just the secretary he flirts with. The way the movie takes longtime characters and turns them into major, important supporting roles is comparable to what Christopher Nolan’s Batman movies did for previously minor characters like Alfred and Commissioner Gordon.

As antagonist Raoul Silva, a cyber-terrorist and figure from M’s past, Javier Bardem makes the typical Bond villain monologue entrance, but the parallels to all the previous villains stop there. Unlike all the colorful megalomaniacal baddies over years, his goals are personal and vengeful, and he pursues them with the same brutal intensity and path of destruction he showed in No Country for Old Men. He’s easily one of 007’s most formidable foes, and one of the few who could really take him in a fight. If there’s anything to be desired, it’s that the character’s backstory sounds quite interesting, but the film only offers up small snippets. Then again, such a story could be good material for a sequel (or even a spinoff).

Speaking of sequels, the picture is just begging for them. Not only does it hint at plot points that could make for intriguing future storylines, but it puts in place and revamps the last few pieces of the Bond mythos that were missing from the first two Craig films, obviously priming the audience for more. More films of this caliber is an excellent prospect (and Craig is signed on for at least two more movies, which is encouraging). But overlooking the sequel potential, as it stands on its own, Skyfall is one fantastic movie.

Capsule Review: "Obama Wins"

South Park is now two-for-two in predicting Presidential Elections for Barack Obama, though if tonight’s episode is any indication, Trey Parker and Matt Stone may want an asterisk next to this year.

The episode had child Hell-raiser Cartman stealing ballots from swing states in order to rig yesterday’s election for Obama, as part of a twisted conspiracy involving the Chinese Military trying to wrest control of Star Wars from new owner Disney (it gets complicated, but luckily Morgan Freeman shows up to explain things in his patented warm voice). Also, it throws in some references to past episodes, like the psychotic businessman Mickey Mouse and a jab at Mitt Romney that suggests Stone and Parker aren’t fans of him, either (and had me dying laughing).

This one’s appeal is for more seasoned viewers, as much of the humor comes from past references and the surreal, complex storyline that longtime fans will appreciate. But the real strong point is its subtle but valid political satire.

Does the storyline seemingly validate Republican claims of voter fraud, or does it make a statement about alleged GOP ballot tampering by turning the tables and having Obama be the one stealing the election? You can decide based on your political views, but the episode also asks, would the average citizen even notice or care if a candidate became President by subverting the vote? Or, would they make a bigger deal out of less important things (say, the recent news surrounding Star Wars) than what goes on with their government?

After all the political noise that we’ve had to deal with this year, leave it to a potty-mouthed cartoon to show some unfortunate truths about our attitude toward politics. This was a strong cap on what has been a solid half-season overall. 

**I'll be back next season with more South Park reviews!**

Capsule Review: "A Scause for Applause"

Last night’s South Park was one of those moments where the program’s brilliance really shines. The episode had everything that’s great about the show: surreal humor, gleefully offensive potshots at sacred cows, and biting satire that puts things in perspective.

It starts with all the characters lining up to get their yellow bracelets removed after the person behind them is revealed as a fraud. Think it’s because of a certain cyclist in the news lately? WRONG! I won’t say who and ruin the surprise, but it’s someone who’s even more deified than any athlete. Lead character Stan also becomes the face of his own cause, complete with its own wristband, before falling from grace and turning into an arrogant pariah himself.

Amazingly, the episode managed to hit all the points of the controversy surrounding Lance Armstrong without even mentioning him, and skewered the very idea of cause wristbands (parts of it would have been relevant years ago). It depicts the makers of these bracelets as hucksters only out to make a buck off public sympathy, and the celebrities who endorse them as empty egotists who care more about promoting themselves than any issues. But there are also jabs at us, the public, for just buying these wristbands for the fad without actually doing (or even knowing) anything about the causes they seemingly represent (one telling scene shows Cartman wearing so many bracelets that he forgets what he supposedly supports).

The episode kept things quirky and funny by implementing references to Dr. Seuss. But the biggest laughs came from the sheer blasphemous shock value in seeing a certain religious figure sink lower and lower. A sobering (and hilarious) reminder, perhaps, that even those we most revere can be full of it.

Capsule Review: "A Nightmare on Facetime"

Remember the old episode “The Simpsons Already Did It”? Well, tonight’s South Park did another thing Fox’s yellow family already did by spoofing Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining. But this time, Comedy Central’s vulgar cartoon actually did it better than The Simpsons.

The Overlook Hotel is replaced with a video store (remember those?), which Stan’s father Randy buys in a compulsive attempt to run his own business. But the results are much the same as what happened to Jack Nicholson, as the barren emptiness of the obsolete store, coupled with the ghosts of old patrons, drive Randy insane on Halloween night. The almost scene-for-scene parody of Kubrick’s film is spot-on, and the episode hammers the idea that physical movies are obsolete home with a subplot involving the “Redbox Killers,” who rob stores for the cash inside of the Redbox machines (which is a miniscule amount of loose change).

The laughs keep coming in this one, which is a nice rebound from last week. But there’s also a twinge of sad nostalgia for the bygone days of renting movies at the local video store, even though admittedly, the show is right about streaming being cheaper and easier.

The episode also integrates some more recent pop culture, including the four main boys dressing up as The Avengers for Halloween (which makes for some very funny gags) and the iPad (hence, the title). And the way the show incorporates the current “Gangnam Style” craze is quite clever; I bet there will be at least a handful of diehard fans who show up at Halloween parties as “Gangnam-stein” this year.

Paranormal Activity 4

If horror movies get a bad rap (and I would argue that the genre gets less respect than others), one of the reasons could be the genre’s tendency to produce so many sequels, many of them subpar. Whenever a horror film is a hit, the studio will rush out another entry seemingly every year until the franchise no longer brings in the dough. This is not a new trend: it goes from recent movies like Saw, to the slasher films of the 1980s, all the way back to the old Hammer Horror films of the late 1950s and 60s. You could even argue that this started with the classic Universal Monster movies eight decades ago.

Paranormal Activity is the perfect series for making sequels because it has a process that's easy to repeat year after year. Since it consists of supposedly found footage, all you have to do is film on a handheld camera with none of the typical movie production values. Throw in some randomly moving objects, loud noises, and fleeting shapes in the shadows, and you have a movie. Not necessarily a good or scary movie, but a cheap, economical one that will probably turn a profit on its first weekend.

Now the series is on its fourth movie in as many years, released a few weeks before Halloween. I never caught on to the Paranormal Activity phenomenon when it started, so 4 is my first foray into the series. And after sitting through it, I don’t think I’m going to go back and watch the rest of them.

By now, the series’ gimmick is well known: the viewer is supposedly watching real footage of people being tormented by supernatural forces, found some time after the fact (the series wasn’t the first to use this technique). This time, the said footage follows a normal suburban family, who take in neighbor boy Robbie (Brady Allen) when his mother Katie (Katie Featherston, who’s appeared in all four movies) is in the hospital. During Robbie’s stay, he acts rather strangely, and spooky things start happening in the house, which makes teenage daughter Alex (Kathryn Newton) suspect there’s a demonic force at work. There are apparently connections to the previous films, with a prologue establishing as much, but I wouldn’t know.

If they wanted us to believe what's onscreen is actually real, they should at least have the actors act like normal people. Instead, they play out every cliché of characters in a bad horror movie. There’s the awful dialogue, the almost lackadaisical reaction to supernatural happenings (in one scene, a kid is more excited than scared when his Big Wheel starts riding by itself), and all the typical mistakes like going off into a dark room alone. The only difference is that this time they’re holding the camera.

This doesn’t exactly doom the film, as a bad horror movie can be entertaining if it’s so ridiculous it’s funny. But what kills the experience is the simple fact that it's not scary, or even that comical in its attempts to be scary; it’s actually quite boring. Much of the meat of the picture consists of long shots of empty rooms at night, as we wait for something, anything, to be caught on camera. This goes from creating tension the first time, to slow and excruciating by the third or fourth time.

To be fair, when something does appear suddenly onscreen, yes, it does make you jump. There are several parts that at least give you a jolt to prevent you from falling asleep completely. But these are no scarier than someone jumping out of a closet in a Halloween mask, or playing this for the first time. They're also pretty few and far between among the endless shots of an empty house, and some of them are more comical than scary. All of it builds to a finale that's less frightening than just confusing (again, this could be a result of me not seeing the first three movies, but it doesn’t seem like it explains anything).

For those who want to get the experience of being startled by someone jumping out and yelling “Boo” over and over again for 90 minutes, Paranormal Activity 4 might suit you, though there are plenty of other movies that do it better and more often. For a truly terrifying cinematic experience, there are many, many better films out there.