Rami Ungar The Writer

British theatrical poster for “Skyfall”. Looks kind of…nostalgic, doesn’t it?

BOND IS BACK!

And he’s better than ever, showing that in an age of enemies without countries and cyberterrorists with no faces, Bond can still kick ass and take prisoner. Daniel Craig returns as Bond, but this time the serious spy comes with quips and self-referential humor. After faking dead for a while after a failed mission, Bond returns to England to defend M and MI6 when the latter comes under attack by Javier Bardem’s Silva, who apparently has a history with M (a really weird history). A tight plot spanning the globe from Istanbul to London to Hong Kong and Macau and finally a climax in the Scottish Moors that would’ve made Emily Bronte say “My word!”, Skyfall shows that the Bond era is not dead, but coming back with full force.

Craig is in his element aa s slightly older, unshaved, tired 007, who still will go to great lengths to help his country and his boss. We also get to see an entirely new side to Bond, one that’s not England’s killing machine or what every man wants to be, but a more human side only briefly glimpsed in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service and Casino Royale. Javier Bardem fulfills his villain role by being creepy. He’s also possibly bisexual, definitely Oedipal, and you don’t want to see him without his dentures in, but above all, he’s just creepy, especially as he goes about trying to kill (or possibly be reunited with and forgiven by) M. Speaking of which, Judi Dench is still one of my favorite Ms, a cold, calculating leader who, underneath it all, really cares for the agents she employs. You will not believe what happens at the end of the movie with her character.

In addition, there are some newcomers that definitely deserve mention. For starters, Naomi Harris as Eve, who will definitely be making some appearances throughout the movie and will appear in later films as–you guessed it–Moneypenny. Saw that one coming, didn’t we? Ben Whinshaw takes the role of the Q character, redefining the role as the young computer genius who prefers the power of a computer over the agents of the field, but seems to like Bond well enough. He’s also filled with some self-referential humor, especially when we see him make a quip about exploding pens. And Ralph Fiennes, formerly known as both the Red Dragon and Lord Voldemort, gets a very important role in MI6, one that brings Bond back to its early days (that’s a hint, if you don’t get his role yet). And Albert Finney plays Kincade, the gruff Scottish gameskeeper of Bond’s boyhood home. Although he’s not a secret agent, we can see where Bond picked up his shooting and joking skills.

The plot, like any Bond film, went all over the place, but it was much better than anything I saw in Quantum of Solace. To say the least, I’m looking forward to what happens in the next couple of films, especially if director Sam Mendes comes back, because he obviously can present a strange, sprawling storyline without boring or confusing Bond fans. In addition, Thomas Newman’s soundtrack is simply excellent, working in the old Bond theme with new music that reminds one of The Dark Knight Rises. Overall, this is one of the best Bond films I’ve ever seen.

For managing the old Bond of espionage, womanizing, and awesome storylines with the new Bond of shadowy organizations, cyberterrorism, and showing that old dogs can learn new tricks, I give Skyfall a 4.8 out of 5. Well done, Mr. Craig, Mr. Mendes. Well done.

Oh, and before I forget, my friend Michael Geletka and I went in costume to see this movie, I as James Blond, he as Dr. Geletka. It was great. We should have our own film.

Rami Ungar and Michael Geletka as James Blond and Dr. Geletka in the new movie “No Country for Bad Hair”, out this March. Rated PG-13 for violence, sexuality, innuendo, and 80s hair.

AFTER KISS THE GIRLS, EVERYBODY FORGOT HOW TO MAKE A GOOD ALEX CROSS FILM!
That’s my opinion, anyway. I watched the film, and it was not the movie I’d been looking forward to seeing. Let me start with the liberties taken with the movie:

First, there were some liberties I could deal with: the kids being preteens when their mother is shot instead of being babies like in the book; a plot not based on anything James Patterson wrote; and even that James Sullivan aka the Butcher aka Picasso, was so changed from the book to the movie he was an entirely different character. However, there were others I couldn’t: like first, the location of the movie is Detroit instead of Washington DC. No offense to Detroit, but part of the fun of the books is that when the plot takes place in DC, you’ve got politicians, government agencies, and so much sleaze you need a raincoat on a sunny day just to avoid it all. There’s not enough of that in Detroit. Second, Alex Cross’s partner is not the humongous, African-American, tough-but-sweet John “Two-John” Sampson but by a fast-talking white guy named Tommy Kane. Seriously, what’s wrong with two black cops working together, huh? It just seems wrong not to feature Alex’s partner-of-choice from the books. And finally, what’s with Alex going rogue cop? He doesn’t do that in the books until Kill Alex Cross, and only in the hopes of saving the President’s kids! I was seriously upset by how the filmmakers made the noble Dragonslayer of the books into an easily-corruptible man for a movie!

However, there were some good points, I do admit. For instance, Tyler Perry is not what I imagined Alex Cross to be (I see Alex more like Denzel Washington in my head, with a less prominent forehead), but he does a good job playing the character. Just needs a better screenwriter. And Cicely Tyson, while not looking like my conception of Nana Mama, does a very good impression of her, being strict but sweet. And Matthew Fox as Picasso, now that was a piece of work. Very nice psychopath, I’m impressed.

All told, I give this film a 2.8 out of 5. Let’s hope that when the sequel they’re making, Double Cross, comes out, they do a better job. After all, Double Cross is a great book, but there are so many ways the filmmakers could mess it up in the making it, especially with all the liberties they’ll have to take with it!

And speaking of sequels, the new Alex Cross book, Merry Christmas Alex Cross, is due out next month. I’m looking forward to it, though I hope it’s not a disappointment like this movie, or like the new book’s predecessor, Kill Alex Cross; now that was a disappointment!

THE FOLLOWING REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS. PLEASE BE AWARE YOU MAY NOT WANT TO SEE THE MOVIE AFTER READING THIS POST.

Before I start, I just want to say one thing: I loved Taken. I loved Liam Neeson in that movie (he’s great in every movie I’ve seen him in, but he’s especially amazing here), I thought the story was amazing, the action was fresh and awesome, and the movie helped inspire my serial killer Snake.

So I feel a little sad that I have to write this review, and a little disappointed that the makers of Taken 2 couldn’t top Taken. In fact, they did several things that just sapped the excitement from the film and made it boring. For instance, the opening of the movie would’ve looked more at home in a sci-fi film about a conspiracy than the sequel of a thriller involving lots of shooting and killing. And then when they show the funeral, they make it explicitly clear that it’s an Islamic funeral while the antagonist vows revenge for his fallen friends. Seriously, I get that Albania’s mostly Muslim, but could you wait until after the funeral to discuss your evil plans? Or did you want the racist freaks out there to nod and say, “That’s just what Muslims do at funerals”?

Second, the action just seemed a little too…familiar. Even if Liam Neeson gets captured and beaten a little, it’s all the same, shoot people up in a foreign place, take them all by surprise, end up with very few wounds by the end of the film. And what was with the end of that bad guy? Honestly, you just kill him after offering to let him go. Makes no sense to me; I would’ve done it differently.

Unfortunately, this movie’s doing well at the box office, so perhaps some people disagree with me. However, I’m calling it as I see it, and I see this film as a 1.4 out of 5. Yes, that low! Hopefully when I see Alex Cross next week, they’ll be able to do a better job of doing a thriller than the makers of Taken 2, even if they’re not including the character of John Sampson in the former.