Tuesday, November 6, 2012


SF: For these new Bond films I use Casino Royal as my benchmark (9/10) and sadly the last outing Quantum of Solace was horrific (2/10). So this didn't have to do much to redeem Bond for me. It starts with all the action you'd expect, ticking boxes all round. A few nods to previous films, Bond sleeps with two women in two days, out comes the Aston Martin. This should have been great...but I got very bored and too many things annoyed me. ***SPOILER*** The tube crash - urgh. Then Q being dumb enough to network the villain's computer. The worst part was seeing Bond's childhood home and the film turns into some sort of stand off. The very point of this character is we don't know anything about his past and we like it that way! I fear next they'll do some sort of teen origin story. Or worse some sort of prequel about his father. On the whole this had plenty of potential and some fun scenes but I don't think I would watch it again. 6/10

50 Eggs: For my money this is absolutely as good as everyone is saying (SF not included!). Right from the off you know you're getting the usual Bond action, but with added gravitas. This is definitely a more character driven entry than we're used to, and the pay-off is that there is a sense of jeopardy that isn't normally present in these films. Whilst watching the film I was formulating the criticism that it's not what I'd call 'sustainable Bond', because there are too many revelations and structure changes. But by the end I was happy to see that Sam Mendes had brought the series full-circle and ready to kick-on to the next installment.  Casino Royale is still my favourite, but this is a close second. 9/10

DonkeyB: It's better than Batman, but it certainly reminded me in lots of ways of the best bits of the Christopher Nolan trilogy. Bardem is a superb Bond villain. It speaks to the quality of the film that I don't remember who Bond slept with, it's incidental to the plot...what will stick with me for absolutely ages are some of the images from the film. This is the second three reviews film in a week which looks spectacular. Roger Deakins must be up for awards for the cinematography. Here's how good I thought it was; I have been seriously thinking about going to see it again ever since I saw it the first time and I almost certainly will before it leaves the cinema. 9.5/10
Just go see it.

Overall: 8.17 /10

No comments: