Scott D. Parker
(I was going to have a nice, long take on "Skyfall," the newest James Bond movie mainly as a different outlook to Jay's fantastic post of Thursday, but I have run out of time. On the whole, I agree with many of his points, but, like many comic book superheroes, Bond is ageless and just rolls with the decades. I like that, but I also like the idea of a beginning, middle, and end. For that, truly, we'll need a Bond version of "The Dark Knight Returns." Instead, I'll give you my shorter take (taken from an email to a friend) on the film. Then, so y'all don't feel short changed, I'm posting my October 2010 review of the Bond novel, Devil May Care, by Sebastian Faulks. I've left the text of the review as is.)
I really enjoyed the film. It took from Brosnan's The World is Not Enough (trying to kill M; explosion in MI6) and Goldeneye (former spy turned bad guy), but, THANKFULLY, didn't have a plan for world domination. Just a simple murder. I half expected M to get captured and tortured (a la Colonel Sun, the first non-Fleming book written pre-John Gardner). I loved the in jokes (we don't use exploding pens (Goldeneye); the Goldfinger car), and the obvious imagery of the Asten Marten being blown to bits. Loved the new flinty repartee with the new Q.
Taken as a whole, I think this trilogy of films establishes a new "origin" story for the 21st Century Bond. At beginning of CR, nothing is like every other former Bond film. And Craig, over 3 movies, gets to get back to where all pre-Craig films start/stop (the martini, the introduction, the quips). So, with SF, you end with Bond, coming into the office, chit-chatting w/Moneypenny, going through the padded door, and talking to M for his next case (BTW, saw "Mallory-as-M" a mile away). And, in the closing of the film, we finally get Craig through the gun barrel + music, and the credits roll comes complete with "James Bond Will Return." And, with that, we are on our way to the next 50 years, having come full circle. In fact, and I'll need to watch all 3 Craig films to make sure, I think Craig/Bond was actually lighter/funnier in this one than Craig has ever been. Note the scene when the henchman, in the komodo dragon pit, picks up Bond's gun. Bond actually smiles and says "Good luck with that."
There were lots of homages to other films in this movie. Well, homages as *I* took them. Bond, M, and "Alfred" prepping for an assault = Saving Private Ryan; bad guys walking down the road to the Bond manor = Witness; numerous The Dark Knight ones; Silva's island = Russian junk yard from Goldeneye; more that I can't remember but noticed them while watching.
Oh, and another thing: Taking a cue from Nolan's Batman (most obvious), Mendes has a lot of shots of Craig just standing there, in relief to the background, staring into space and guarding the realm. With Craig's size, it works. Don't think it would have worked with any of the others. And the fight w/the neon sign in the background, making the fight just silhouette, was great. I very much enjoyed the visuals of that scene.
Devil May Care
To celebrate what would have been Ian Fleming's 100th birthday, the estate commissioned literary novelist Sebastian Faulks to write the "thirteenth" novel that Fleming he never wrote. (For those keeping score, there are fourteen Bond titles published under Fleming's name. Two of them, For Your Eyes Only and Octopus-y were story collections. Thus, Fleming only wrote twelve novels, the last one being 1965's posthumous book, The Man with the Golden Gun.) By choosing this course of action, Devil May Care eliminates some forty years worth of novels written about James Bond by other authors. You could think of it as the literary equivalent of a reboot, just as the movie version of "Casino Royale" was to the films.
Faulks, born in 1953, the same year the first Bond book, Casino Royale, was published (coincidence?) is better known as a literary writer. I haven't read any of his books so I can't comment on his own style. However, other reviewers have commented on Faulks-as-Fleming is pretty dead-on. I've read the first five Bond books (check out CommanderBond.net for the true novel order) and I can tell that Faulks did a good job at emulating the style of the late author.
*In the opening sentence, I said that this Bond is different. He is only different if you've never read any of the Fleming novels. The Bond of the books and the Bond of the movies are different creatures. Heck, the movie Bonds themselves are different creatures. Differences can be good. Let me put it this way: the movie "Casino Royale" knocked my socks off it was so good. This book is better than half the films--easily--but not as good as, say, the movie or novel From Russia With Love.
Like most Bond films, Devil May Care starts off with a "pre-credit" sequence. Here, an Algerian drug dealer in France gets his tongue ripped out with pliers. Cue Theme Song. Next, we see Bond at the end of a three-month sabbatical after his encounter with Scaramanga in The Man with the Golden Gun. (Again, judging by the movie version, my first question was "Really?" Perhaps the book is better. Couldn't possibly be worse.) Bond stays on Barbados and learns tennis, travels in France, and ends up in Rome. One day at an outside café, he sees a man with a large left hand wearing a white glove. Odd, thinks Bond, I think that chap is up to no good. (That's foreshadowing, by the way) With two weeks remaining on his sabbatical, he has a decision to make: return to the field or be benched behind a desk for the rest of his career. A lovely woman catches his eye and, after having dinner with the married woman, declines her invitation to go up to her room. Yes, I said declines. Yes, this is a James Bond book. It's okay. Just keep reading.
For Bond, that refusal of a sexual encounter is proof that he's lost the edge. Well, until he gets a cable from M ordering him to report back to London. Here is where Faulks demonstrates that he's read all of Fleming's material. And it's part of the book's charm. If you have never read the Fleming novels, you are missing a lot about the fictional Bond. When Bond returns to London, Faulks takes you to Bond's house and you get to see his housemaid--and she ain't one of the tall, slim, scantily clad ones either. In the novels, the second book, Moonraker, shows you Bond's house and his habits for the first time. Faulks lovingly throws in snippets of details that the die-hards will already know and new readers--perhaps those who only know Bond from the films--will find appealing. Faulks has Bond remember past adversaries throughout the book and this plays like a greatest hits.
M dispatches Bond to investigate Julian Gorner, a pharmaceutical magnate suspected of importing heroin into the West. And, lo and behold, if Gorner isn't the man with the large left hand that Bond just happened to see in France one day. (I'll be honest: I rolled my eyes on that one. Too coincidental and unnecessary.) Bond lands in France and is met by Scarlett Papava who just so happens to be the same lady Bond refused to sleep with back in Rome (roll eyes again). This time, she's being her real self and wants Bond's help to rescue her sister from the clutches of Gorner.
Every Bond story has to have the inevitable battle of wills between Bond and his adversary. Think golf with Goldfinger, shooting geese with Drax, or that horrid video game in "Never Say Never Again." This time, it's tennis (eye roll again because that's just exactly what Bond took up in Barbados during his sabbatical. Good thing, huh?) I think you can guess who wins. Which brings up a question: in almost all these films with the egomaniacal villain who think that they are so superior to Bond, why do they always feel the need to cheat?
I'll admit that the eye rolling stopped here. Once Bond makes his way to Iran (a first for Bond), the scope of a typical Bond story rolls along very quickly. He meets up with Darius Alizadeh, MI6's man in Tehran. He's a great character and as staunch an ally as Darko Kerim Bey in From Russia With Love. And you get a real sense of what Bond likes to eat, something that is usually skipped over in the films. Soon, Bond discovers the Caspian Sea Monster (as told by a man not unlike Quarrel from "Dr. No" who thinks the tank in that film is a dragon) and Gorner's plan to bring Britain to its knees (like in "Goldeneye" and "Die Another Day") in a manner not unlike Elliot Carver in "Tomorrow Never Dies." Got all that?
One thing that surprised me was the climax. It wasn't at the end; it occurred about three-fourths of the way into the book. But, like "The Spy Who Loved Me," the #1 Henchman returns and, well, you could have guessed that. And if you're wondering if Bond and Scarlett end up together...come on! It's a James Bond story. What do you think?
You get past the opening, slower sections and the book picks up a head of steam that barrels it way to the end. I listened to the book and the reader, Tristan Layton, does a fine job. He even nails the stereotypical Texas accent of Felix Leiter (bet you didn't know Felix was a Texan if you just watched the movies).
I certainly enjoyed the book and look forward to reading others as they are released. I'm up to Book 6 in the novels, Dr. No, and, after reading Devil May Care, I might tackle the rest of the Fleming books soon. I always hesitate to plow through novels by authors who are dead because there are a finite number of books to be read and I want to savor them. But if the Fleming estate continues to commission books as enjoyable as this one, we'll all have our constant fix of James Bond for years to come.
I enjoyed Jay's points and yours. Mine in a nutshell: the short stories are where 007 rocks for me. Film? Daniel Craig is the best. His three films renewed the agent to the film going public. No easy feat. And the ending to Skyfall may go down as the very best ever.
Post a Comment