Building A Deeper Bond

James Bond turns a corner and a new leaf in Skyfall–arguably one of the best Bond films ever!

ON CONTINUITY

ARTH VADER (AV): I wonder what the prolific Ian Flemming would think of Skyfall, the latest installment in the ongoing saga of the world's most famous super spy, James Bond. Skyfall (Paramount Pictures) is a bold re-imagining of the James Bond continuum. Daniel Craig's flawless characterization of the infamous assassin/spy/agent 007 is quite a detraction from previous characterizations. He is his stoically smug, witty and confident self but Skyfall delivers a different caliber of Bond than even the first two Daniel Craig 007 journeys. Darker, more insidious and even more vulnerable. For me, this makes the new Bond light years more believable and more awesome. Thoughts, Pontificator? 

THE PONTIFICATOR (TP): Well Vader, this film was something of a departure, even a bit from the last two films, but still fits snuggly into the new continuity the recent Bond films have created. Bond has been updated and made more real...and although the rewrite isn’t exactly what Bond has always been, the mythos hasn't suffered a bit.

CASTING, DIRECTING AND ACTING

AV: Casting Craig was a masterstroke of movie-making genius. Daniel's two earlier Bond films, Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace were both solid but for me at least, Skyfall goes somewhere much greater, beyond the scope of mere "next installment". Skyfall is a crowning jewel in a long list of great–and not-so-great–bond stories. The action is paced in such a way that the films tempo is actually a part of the storytelling, Ponty. What's more, the direction was a winning array of close, medium and wide-angle shots, even in the non-action sequences, the films keeps the viewer engaged in the larger tapestry of events. And I just have to say, casting Javier Bardem as the sniveling and uncomfortably sinister Silva makes this one of the more believable Bond experiences to date. 

TP: Daniel Craig is quickly winning the title of the best Bond for me. He’s gritty and takes a serious approach to the role. This difference from the usual suave, cool as ice-water, modus operandi of the past actors is what sets Craig apart from all the rest. Craig makes Bond more human by making him vulnerable while still delivering everything else that audiences have come to associate with Bond. Javier Bardem seems to be born to play Silva, the latest Bond villain. Very few people are destined to be the perfect fit for a Bond villain... so bless Bardem for answering his calling. Naomie Harris may not be as glamorous as Bond women have been in the past, but she is perfect for her role and was a nice surprise for longtime fans of the old films.

SPECIAL EFFECTS

AV: You know, pontificator, I really enjoy movies where the experience so completely rolls the visual effects into the DNA of the movie that I don't even notice them. Such is the case in Skyfall. Iconic scenes like the train crashing through a London street, the Bond estate blown to bits or even a hapless duel in a pit of Komodo dragons are all SF/X shots that the viewer just absorbs as part of the film's experience. Even a harrowing fight sequence on the top of a fast-moving bullet-train is a believable event in a movie that goes to great lengths NOT to make me go "Whoa!" at the visuals and focus on the event at hand. Could this mean our little Hollywood is finally growing up, Ponty? 

TP: You are spot-on here Vader. The special effects were a seamless part of the visual experience and nothing was so over-the-top as to take away from the tone of the film. Even the opening chase scene was pretty straight forward and although thinking back on it, in reality it could probably never happen like that, at the time I was watching... it was real enough that I wasn’t even questioning the crane scene. 

TAKING A DEEPER LOOK

AV: As always, there is a tantalizing array of Bond-girl beauties here Ponty but I have to address another more pressing observation for Skyfall. This movie goes to great lengths to distance itself from the campiness of earlier James Bond flicks. The movie's dialogue even goes so far as to have the new "Q" talk smack about exploding pens and silly devices. I see this as a step toward farming a more believable, more relatable and more sophisticated Bond for future films. Look, no one loves exploding pens, jetpacks and cars that 'become' submarines more than I do, but… well… been there, done that. Often those things become fillers or 'eye candy' meant to distract me from a weak script or completely implausible villains. DNA-recognition sensors in Bond's Walther PPK? Now you're talking! This is a new, re-invented bad-ass bond–just what the doctor ordered. 

TP: I think the most significant aspect of this film is Bond’s vulnerability. He is shot in the line of duty, fails to qualify for active duty later on, and can’t quite compensate for his injuries. I don’t remember the character being this vulnerable since the beginning of Die Another Day. Gone are the gadgets, replaced by an updated Q with superior hacking ability. I thought this was very significant as this was a hefty statement that Bond is now in the 21st century. The Bond of today isn’t the can-do-anything slickster and this is what really makes it work. I thought this film might have gone a little too much in this direction though since certain expectations are now associated with Bond. I think this will change as the new direction is embraced by a new audience.  

ON SEQUELS:

AV: What, are you kidding me? Of course–bring 'em on! We ain't stopping here kids, we have ole Jimmy B right where we want him, cool, hip and delivering a world of hurt to those who would hurt our world. Ten more please! Yes, yes I'll wait… 

TP: I thought I heard somewhere that this was Craig's last film, but fortunately I also read that he has signed on for two more! So rest assured, we will have ample opportunity to discuss the direction of Craig’s ever-evolving Bond. 

RATE IT!

ARTH VADER rates Skyfall: This movie is, without a doubt, the VERY BEST Bond movie I have ever seen. And that says a lot since I have seen a TON of good Bond films. Deliciously intelligent, riddled with scorching hot–and ethnically diverse–"Bond girls" and a deeper, darker premise with a glimpse into the more sinister machinations in the world of 007 and MI6, Skyfall is a delightful action epic that delights and dazzles and well-worth seeing. And this is one fan-boy who can't wait for the Blu-Ray release. 

That said, I gladly encourage no fewer than 9.5 busted blocks to fall from the sky for Skyfall. 

THE PONTIFICATOR rates Skyfall: There have been about 25 Bond films, and Craig’s have been some of the most enjoyable for me. Although this was a great film, it wasn’t the best ever. It was probably the most realistic, but certainly not the most entertaining... and in the end, that’s what it’s really all about. As I look skyward, I only see 7.5 busted blocks falling for this film. 

Skyfall: 8.5 Busted Blocks

A Dredd Ringer for High-Caliber Fun

Stunningly rich visuals and effects in DREDD 3D means guns, violence and a clip-load of exciting street-justice!

ON CONTINUITY

Judgment: Badass!

ARTH VADER (AV): Honestly, this movie caught me COMPLETELY off guard! I had heard this movie was in production about eight (8) months ago but didn't really appreciate what was coming. That might be because complex, dark characters like Judge Dredd, Lady Death and Lobo are highly volatile stories that take balls, brawn and backing to bring to life on the silver screen. This movie was a gritty, fun ride of horrific violence peppered with thoughtful plunges into the Mega-City's corrosive violence. This movie was a far better movie-going experience than Stallone's outing for me, Pontificator. 

THE PONTIFICATOR (TP): Agreed on that Vader. I like Stallone, but there is really no comparison. Judge Dredd has been around for a long time... and there have been a multitude of stories presented. I’m not aware that the events in the film follow a particular storyline, but this film certainly captured the spirit with which I have always seen Dredd presented in print.

CASTING, DIRECTING AND ACTING

AV: With all due respect to Karl Urban, Kate Thrilby and Lena Headey–who delivered stellar performances–I want to wind-sprint straight to the direction here, Ponty! The cinematography in this movie was HOT! Visually over-the-top with ass-kicking camera angles and 3D frame shots that (finally!) take full advantage of the 3D effects. The movie began and ended with high level views of Mega-City lowered the audience into the ugliness of curbside life in this horrific post-apocalyptic cesspool. Fantastic light painting of the sets (lights and shadows) and the sheer depth of PeachTrees tower (the primary location of the film's events) gave me chills and left  feeling fascinated and repulsed by immersing me high into a monolithic super-high-rise. 

Pretty In Black

TP: Noted and agreed Vader... so let me address the acting. I think it was an excellent choice to cast Karl Urban as Dredd. I’ve always thought him a capable character actor and he certainly got into character playing Dredd. Olivia Thirby was a great offset to the grim and serious Dredd as the newby Judge-in-testing, Anderson. I thought Lena Headey (Ma-Ma) could have been more sinister and menacing to show why she was deserving of such fear from her subordinates. However, I found the totality of the performances, by everyone in the film, to be very well done and with the steady and fast paced directing, this movie had a flow that swept me along.

SPECIAL EFFECTS

Squishy.

AV: While there was no Kate Beckinsale, this movie had a lot going for it, especially in the realm of visual effects. The stunning cityscapes, the impressive fire-fights and the over-the-top gore in the movie's SF/X shots made this movie deeply entertaining. The scenes of bodies being tossed over 1km high balconies–and their subsequent impacts after–along with drug-induced perspectives of the victims make this movie a violently fun experience. My favorite scene was of Dredd's bullets tearing through the face of a doped-up baddie as it shreds his face exposing gums jaw and bone as the bullet goes careening into the viewer's temple. A beautifully disturbing masterstroke of 3D cleverness! 

"No, no, not the paint gun of judgment!"

TP: The special effects were absolutely fabulous. This was, without a doubt, the best use of 3D to date. The movie started off in 3D and unlike most films, stayed that way throughout. This was a perfect example of learning and perfecting all of the lessons and technology that has come before. The 3D leapt off the screen and the use of slow motion, so prominently platformed in the Matrix movies, was taken to new heights in both it’s look and use. I’m sure there was CGI in this film...I just don’t now where it was used! Everything looked real, and that’s exactly what’s supposed to happen when the lights go out.

TAKING A DEEPER LOOK

AV: As I alluded to earlier, Judge Dredd is a terrific fantsy/sci-fi property that has a very difficult concept to portray. With punk-era underpinnings in the cultish cool British science rag 2000 AD, Dredd has always been a tough sell to mainstream audiences. The lollipop 1995 version that starred Sly Stallone did introduce the character to mainstream movie goers, but did little to make a lasting imprint. Sadly, for different reasons, this movie will suffer the same fate. Lack of star-power, an unrecognizable story and character and shuffling in during a summer where there has been a ton of terrific sci-fi releases. Over-the-top violence and a laughable first release 17 years earlier my be too much for this movie to overcome to even have passive success at the box office. Too bad, because this movie is a thrill. 

Too bad Dredd's box office performance wasn't this explosive...

TP: I looked for flaws, I really did... and the only ones I saw were in my own personal preference for how I thought a couple of things should have gone. I think when a call comes in from a Judge that they are under attack (especially if it’s the great Dredd calling), more than two Judges should show up and they should not have an ear for anything anyone has to say until they resolve the issue. I found it odd that the other Judges so easily accepted the explanation that there was a malfunction. The other quip is that once they reached the programmer responsible for the building functions, why would they not open the entire building up right then... and allow more help inside? Instead they let him go and continue to pursue Ma-Ma... while leaving the building sealed up. Other than that, this film had plenty of action, humor if you were sick enough to “get it” and even a touch of genuine drama. The “R” rating almost certainly limited the audience willing to see it, but was absolutely necessary to remain a true gem with accurate representation.

ON SEQUELS

"Well, this is awkward..."

AV: Judge Dredd is an ongoing saga of brutal justice served in a brutal society. It allows us to view into what drives men to do what they do–even if they are keepers of the law. When you are given free-reign to act of your own free will, what are the consequences of that life when you are put in highly traumatic situations. Given the intensity and creativity and on-screen presence of this movie, a host of future installments is not only possible, but to this humble fan-boy, would be welcome. The sobering reality though, is that movie–this story–just, ever-so-slightly, misses the mark to be a true a mainstream commodity and that will prove to be the one adversary the powerfully determined Judge Dredd simply can't overcome. However, I plead with the studios, please continue to try! 

TP: I can only hope that this movie generates enough revenue and/or a following to merit another ride. There is so much that can be done in Mega City One... not to mention pursuing the problem of dirty Judges (can you say the Dark Judges?).

RATE IT!

ARTH VADER rates Dredd 3D (2012): Down to it's DNA, Dredd 3D is badass. It's gritty, violent view of a toxic future where fearsome 'street judges' represent the only law is a hugely popular idea that has captured the imagination of fans since 1977. The sobering reality is this movie has no traction with mainstream audiences (grossing just $6.7 million in its first week) and that is a sad fate for such a cool dude. Fun, frightening and thrilling 3D effects, makes Dredd the must-see sleeper hit of the 2012 summer. So I saddle-up on my "Lawmaster" motorbike and ride off into the heart of Mega-City 1 to dispense justice in the form of 8 busted blocks.

THE PONTIFICATOR Rates Dredd 3D (2012): Anyone not seeing this movie should be arrested for obstruction of a great film. Gratuitous violence, awesome special effects and a character that makes Punisher and Batman seem reasonable should be more than enough for any jury. Sentence: eight (8) busted blocks... without the possibility of parol.

DREDD 3D: 8 Busted Blocks

An Amazing Re-Boot

SONY Pictures swings a pretty decent franchise reset with The Amazing Spider-Man

ON CONTINUITY:

ARTH VADER (AV): If anyone had any misgivings about the Spider-Man franchise,  you can breathe a sigh of relief. Especially if this summer's The Amazing Spider-Man is any indication of things to come. Fans and story purists will not be thinking happy thoughts as this movie attempts to spin a wider arc of the life of Peter Parker that includes the mysterious disappearance of his parents. And while The Lizard is a long-time spidey adversary, actually appearing in Spider-Man #6 way back in 1963, he is hardly well known. However, with so many reboots to the Marvel universe in recent years, its no wonder that SONY (note Marvel Studios) runs willy-nilly with the story line. That said, the motivations of Dr. Curt Connors (played by Ryas Ifans) to harness reptilian DNA to re-grow his lost arm is very much in line with the original Lizard's motivations.

THE PONTIFICATOR (TP): Continuity...? What’s that...? That’s what I envision the writers of this film thought as they wrote this film. It doesn’t directly correspond to any iteration from the comics, nor does it continue from the previous silver screen showings. The genetically altered spider is straight from the Ultimate Spider-Man origin (along with the mystery of Peter’s parents), but similarities end there. It looks like The Amazing Spider-Man is starting it’s own continuity, and we’ll be comparing the second film to this one for consistency. 

CASTING, DIRECTING & ACTING:

AV: I am NOT going to be well-liked on my views for this movie's casting, Pontificator. Andrew Garfield is a talented, witty and extremely charismatic guy–and he is definitely NOT Peter Parker. Parker is supposed to a be small, frail, nerdy introvert with a big brain and even bigger insecurities. He is not supposed to be a six-foot cool hipster skater-punk, with awesome hair, a leather jacket and a skateboard, who clearly already has the eye of the hot girl. And while I am waxing opinionated here–Sally Field as Aunt May? Really? Sure Sally is well into her 60's but, still a bit too hot (yes I said it) and worldly to play Peter's frail, white-haired aunt. The rest of the cast more less worked but these two–just not right. But hey, what do I know, I'm just a fan writing a movie review blog. 

TP: I thought the casting was good Vader. I had some reservations with Andrew Garfield, but they were quickly dispelled with his Peter Parker as he brought his own flavor to the role. I was surprised and pleased at the depth he brought to the character. Emma Stone played a good Gwen Stacy, although there wasn’t much range in the script for her character or for Rhys Ifans role as The Lizard, but this isn’t a “Grammy” type of movie. I enjoyed Denis Leary as Captain George Stacy even though Denis Leary is...well...Denis Leary no matter what role he plays. The film kept a great pace as it alternated between heavy bouts of action and drama.

SPECIAL EFFECTS (SFX): 

AV: I will say this movie delivers in this category. I had heard that the majority of Spider-Man shots in the film were effects shots to ensure fluid, seamless consistency  especially during the fight sequences with the Lizard. I am delighted that the technology these days is so sophisticated that our eyes no longer know the difference between live action and CGI shots. As it should be. The sewer battle(s) between Spidey and The Lizard was some of the best I have seen. Also, as an additional bonus this movie did introduce a new shot/camera technique that showed Spidey's web-slinging from his point-of-view. Especially effective in 3D, the web-swinging sequences were breathtaking. 

TP: Simply fantastic. It’s tough to do something new in films and doing old effects in a better way has become the norm...and this film certainly capitalized here. The CGI was done very well with particular kudos to the flawless action sequences. I was especially pleased with the new take on “perspective filming” as I felt what it might be like traveling the city as Spider-Man. This was just another example of how far the technology has come from the very first film. Makes me excited to see what will be showing ten years from now. 

TAKING A DEEPER LOOK: 

AV: So I have already beat this film up on its re-imagined portrayal of Petey Parker and the proposed miscasting of Aunt May, but the movie has many hits and misses. For starters, I personally didn't need to see Uncle Ben's death (again). The spider-bite scene in the lab seemed hurried and unimportant and the notion that 17 year-old (?) Peter Parker was able to solve–or offer-a formulaic equation Dr. Connors spent more than 10 years on was ridiculous to me. The movie never established Peter Parker as a smart science geek. It assumes we know that from previous stories but that was a mistake to me. Still, the film showed a lot of good story pacing, the action scenes were some of the best Spider-Man action scenes ever and world of Spider-Man is now open with a dashing–if not misrepresented–new young, actor. And with a laugh-out-loud appearance by Spider-Man creator Stan Lee, I for one, am hopeful!

TP: I was very critical while watching this film, looking for where I might be let down...and not finding much in the way of subtractions, although I do agree with you Vader about the spider-bite scene. Without question the performance of Garfield carried the film and the action and special effects filled in the rest...which brings me to what was missing. The first Spider-Man was a well rounded film having something for everyone...comedy, drama and action. This film was not. It had ample action and was very top heavy with drama, but I noticed I hardly ever laughed. The comic relief sequences provided by J.Jonah Jameson in the first film was missing... and Garfield’s serious performance didn’t fill this void. Not a very bad thing, it’s just the best films have a complete package in my opinion. Apart from that, I was irritated watching the rescue on the bridge scene because the physics of fire and heat were completely ignored.

ON SEQUELS:

AV: SONY (Pictures) has already revealed that this film is the first in a new Spider-Man trilogy. So sequels, baring any world wars, planet-killing meteors or Zombie apocalypses aside, we should expect future Spider-Man films of this calibre. While not on par with Marvel Studio's quality, this movie is a far sight better than the disastrous Spider-Man 3. The film implied that the serum was meant for an ailing Norman Osborn and the mysterious man in Dr. Connors cell during the teaser at mid-credits is unknown to me. I guessed Mysterio or the Illusive Man but hopefully my partner-in-penmanship will be able to shed some light on this matter. Pontificator? 

TP: Vader, I have no idea who that was. I was even speculating that Connor’s is having a Gaius Baltar moment, talking to his hallucinations. As for a sequel, of course there will be a sequel since the mystery of Peter’s parents needs to be revealed...and Spider-Man will never be just a one picture type of endeavor. I can only hope they continue to explore other rogues in his gallery...but with Oscorp looming in the background, something tells me a reinvented Green Goblin isn’t far behind. 

RATE IT!

ARTH VADER rates The Amazing Spider-Man: While there are a handful of unanswered questions and a host of small, but significant concerns, overall this is a really good movie, folks. Lots of fun, with definite chemistry between Garfield and real-life smooch partner Emma Stone, a host of great effects and obvious set-ups for future installments helps shed some redeeming light on what was an otherwise faltering franchise. Fun, fast-paced and a genuine good time, The Amazing Spider-Man swings into this summer's movie line-up with a solid eight (8) busted blocks. Ponty? 

THE PONTIFICATOR rates The Amazing Spider-Man: A great film, although I’m not sold on it being better overall than the very first...the action was stellar and the characterization of Peter Parker was taken to a new level, swinging in and webbing up eight (8) busted blocks.

The Amazing Spider-Man: 8/10 Busted Blocks