“American Beauty” director Sam Mendes has just done the impossible; he made a better James Bond movie than “Casino Royale.” That one set the bar for Bond movies so high that it shouldn’t have been a surprise “Quantum of Solace” didn’t fare as well, but “Skyfall” gets my vote for being one of the very best in the long running series. It continues with giving us a darker and more edgy 007 as portrayed by the terrific Daniel Craig, and it also brings back some of the things fans felt were missing from the last two films like the gadgets, the gags and (of all people) Q.

“Skyfall” starts off with a bang as we catch up with Bond in Turkey where he is on the trail of a man who has stolen a hard drive containing the identities of undercover agents. While trying to retrieve the drive, Bond is accidentally shot by fellow agent Eve (Naomie Harris) and presumed dead. But this being the beginning of the movie, we know that isn’t the case as we soon see him in retirement getting drunk off his ass and deeply resentful of the situation M (Judi Dench) has put him in. But when MI6 is suddenly destroyed, Bond forces himself to come back to active  duty, and he soon discovers that his and M’s nemesis has a very personal connection to them both.

The movie does take its time to get going which is the only real beef I had with “Skyfall,” but in retrospect it was worth it. Craig’s Bond has never been a superhuman hero but a vulnerable agent with weaknesses he can’t fully hide. As we watch him retrain, Craig shows us that his Bond is deeply troubled and almost bent on self-destruction. It’s his duty to the country of England which manages to keep him relatively sane. This is Craig’s third outing as 007, and I still think he’s the best thing to happen to this series in a long time.

But this time Craig has a little more fun playing Bond as he gets to crack a joke or two. At the same time, he thankfully never lets 007 descend into camp or turn him into a standup comedian with a gun. For the most part his take on the role has been deadly serious, so seeing him loosen up (if only a little) here has its advantages. I don’t think it’s too much to say that Craig should get an Oscar nomination for his work here.

When it comes to my favorite James Bond movies, they are usually the ones where things get very personal for 007 and those around him. When that happens, they become more emotionally involving and exciting for me to watch as there is more at stake than just defeating the bad guy or gal. That is especially the case with “Skyfall” as it delves into the past of its main characters in a way I don’t think any Bond movie has done before. The script by Neal Purvis, Robert Wade and John Logan (“Hugo,” “Coriolanus” and “Gladiator”) places most of its emphasis on relationships, especially on the one between Bond and M. It is that emphasis that makes this film all the more riveting to watch.

Dame Judi Dench, who has played M since Pierce Brosnan first played 007 in “Goldeneye,” benefits here especially as her character is given a more severe complexity than what we have seen previously. Dench has always been superb as M, but ever since Craig came into the series she has been a fireball as she starts out with a powerfully brazen attitude which never ever lets up. But here we see the seams in her controlled nature as the past catches up with her in an especially nasty way. Dench nails every moment she has in “Skyfall” perfectly, and she makes M an especially fascinating character to watch this time around.

“Skyfall” also has the advantage of having not just one but two terrific Bond girls: Naomie Harris and Bérénice Marlohe. Harris, best known for her roles in “28 Days Later” and the “Pirates of the Caribbean” movies, shares a sizzling chemistry and playfulness with Craig especially in the scene where she gives him a very close shave. As for Marlohe, she’s a knockout as she makes her character of Sévérine as enigmatic as she is beautiful. When Bond asks for the name of her employer, that look of utter fear which crosses her face is an unforgettable acting moment as it sets up the grand introduction of the movie’s chief villain.

That chief villain is  Raoul Silva, and he is played by Javier Bardem in such a deliciously evil performance. It should be no surprise that Bardem is so brilliantly unnerving here as this is the same actor who won an Oscar for playing Anton Chigurh in “No Country for Old Men,” but Silva is an especially twisted soul to witness in action. This isn’t a villain bent on world domination but instead on avenging a betrayal which made him what he is today. Bardem actually doesn’t make his first appearance until well into the film, but he has an unforgettable entrance where he tells a story involving rats. The villains in Bond movies always have great stories to tell, and Silva’s proves to be one of the series’ most memorable.

And yes, we do get to see the return of Q to the series as played here by Ben Whishaw (“Cloud Atlas”). Whishaw is splendid in the role as he skillfully underplays the role to where he successfully makes it his own. Unlike the late (and still missed) Desmond Llewellyn, this Q is not quite in a position to admonish Bond on a regular basis. Whishaw however is able to match wits with Craig and hold his own in a way Q has not always been able to do previously, and he is a lot of fun to watch here as a result.

Mendes remains a masterful director, and he manages to balance out the action and the story in “Skyfall” to great effect. I also applaud him for not letting this Bond adventure turn into a clone of a Jason Bourne movie. That proved to be a big problem with “Quantum of Solace” as the shaky cam got to be a bit too much, but Mendes is perfectly aware that while Jason Bourne is Jason Bourne, Bond has been around long enough to where he doesn’t need to copy him. The opening sequence gets the movie off to a thrilling start, and it shows that Mendes has a talent for filming adrenaline pumping action scenes as he does in directing actors to great performances.

The movie also features a terrific score by Thomas Newman and one of the best Bond theme songs in a long time performed by Adele. The song “Skyfall” brings back the classic Bond song sound that singers like Shirley Bassey made famous with “Goldfinger,” and it fits  the movie’s story perfectly. And while I miss David Arnold who has composed the music for the Bond movies since “Tomorrow Never Dies,” Newman’s work here is exceptional as it sounds unlike any score he has done previously. It’s always a thrill to see a composer step outside of their comfort zone to do something a little different.

I don’t think that I have ever seen a James Bond movie I didn’t like, and even the worst of them prove to be very entertaining to watch. But it is such a thrill to see a 007 adventure where all the elements come together in a way that feels so fulfilling. “Skyfall” is not only one of the best Bond movies ever made, but also one of best films of 2012. It took four years to get this 007 adventure to the big screen, but it was well worth the wait.

* * * * out of * * * *

Directed by: Sam Mendes

Written by: Dave Eggers & Vendela Vida

Starring: Maya Rudolph, John Krasinski, Catherine O'Hara, Jeff Daniels, Allison Janney, Jim Gaffigan, Carmen Ejogo, Maggie Gyllenhaal

There are times when the premise of a film seems hopelessly set up. For instance, the plot of this story is that a thirty-something couple, Burt and Verona, have moved to a foreign city to be closer to Burt’s parents when Verona becomes pregnant. However, in Verona’s sixth month, they learn that Burt’s parents have decided to move to Belgium the month before she is due to give birth. With no anchor to their new home, the couple decides to find another place to live.

The idea that a pregnant woman would want to uproot her life and pick a new city at random seems unlikely. It sounds like the kind of thing you only see in a movie. I was only a couple years younger than Burt or Verona when I uprooted my life and moved to a random city where I knew no one and had no ties to anything. Sure I wasn’t pregnant when I did it, but I also didn’t make that kind of move with my college sweetheart supporting me emotionally. In some ways I understand how the couple could get to that point, but in other ways, I still feel unsure of the premise.

Further counting against the film is the fact that there were several conversations that came across like a play. Some of the dialogue felt forced and monologuish. That is not so say that the script did not work. There were moments of eloquence and poignancy that had as much to do with the screenwriters work as the strong performances of Maya Rudolph and John Krasinski. The problem was that there were too many moments of dialogue in the film that didn’t work, and that really took away from the film.

Maya Rudolph was lovely a Verona. At first Verona does not seem like she truly loves Burt, but there is a moment when Verona looks at Burt while visiting her sister, and there is a wonderful glow of contentment in Verona’s face. Maya’s performance is understated, subtle, and moving. Her partner in crime is John Krasinski as Burt. John’s performance is very close to Jim from “The Office,” but with more facial hair and less quips. Still, John stretches a little outside of his usual artistic tricks. Burt is a sweet soul full of positivity and joy. Though things may not always go well for Burt and Verona, their clear bonds of friendship and love seem to radiate off the screen.

The supporting cast has a solid group of familiar faces. The best is Jim Gaffigan who garnered the most laughs out of me despite only being on the screen for about six minutes. Also appearing is Maggie Gyllenhaal as a holier than thou hippy and Allison Janney as an old friend who likes to loudly overshare things. On the whole, I could not find a single problem with the cast. Outside of the writing, if there was any problem with the film it was the direction.

Sam Mendes is an accomplished and wonderful director. However, his style does tend to lend itself to stiff, play-like deliveries at times. As some of the conversations came across more like a monologue than a regular conversation, his style of direction made some of those scenes more obvious to the ear. On the other hand, Mendes really knows how to pull a powerful and quiet performance out of his actors.

Overall, I really enjoyed the movie. Burt and Verona are wonderfully sweet people, and I really enjoyed seeing the portrayal of a more realistic couple on the screen. This couple doesn’t really fight or argue because they understand one another, support one another, and most importantly, they know the right moment to joke with one another. I feel like we don’t see this kind of relationship in films too often, and I rather enjoyed spending a couple hours with them. Other than my issues with some of the dialogue and direction, my only other nitpick was that some of the plot points seemed a little too obvious. Still, for all the good in this film, its lesser moments can be overlooked.

I definitely recommend viewing this on DVD or cable at the least, but if you feel like a night out at the movies, this film is nice bit of light fair. And even if some of the dialogue hurts your ears like it did mine, the costumes, soundtrack, and cast performances should still make it worth your while.

“Once in a lifetime comes a motion picture that makes you feel like falling in love all over again. This is not that movie.”
-Tagline for “War Of The Roses”

“Revolutionary Road” is really a horror movie more than anything else. It is brutally honest in the way it depicts the terrible disintegration of a marriage, the kind that none of us ever want to get trapped in. Those out there who think that gay marriage is a threat to the sanctity of marriage should take a look at this movie, for it is a much more astute examination at what can destroy marriage in general. When the movie starts, we know that we are in for a fateful journey of two people who at first look like they belong together, and we know that they will eventually tear each other apart.

But as tough a movie “Revolutionary Road” is to watch, it is also an utterly brilliant one, and it is further proof that Sam Mendes’ Oscar win for his directorial debut of “American Beauty” was no fluke. There is not one single false note to be found in the movie, and it feels practically flawless in its making. It has great visuals, a great script, and amazing performances from the entire cast. Sam Mendes makes “Revolutionary Road” an experience into the horrors of conformity, the very thing we all try to fight against.

The movie starts with its two main characters, Frank and April (Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet), as they first meet at a party and are instantly attracted to each other from first sight. The movie then moves forward to years later as April is finished up a show she is acting in, and is bowing to a very unenthusiastic response from an indifferent audience. It is clear that their relationship has gotten cold over the years, and the frustrations constantly simmering under the surface of both characters seem to be the only thing left for them to deal with. This leads to April to come up with what she sees as the perfect plan; They can sell their house and car and move to Paris where she can support Frank through secretarial work while he figures out what he really wants to do with his life. They both see it as their great chance to escape the confines of normalcy that has been eating away at their fragile little souls. However, reality threatens to take away from their dream one piece at a time.

This is Sam Mendes’ fourth film as a director, and you can see a common thread through all his movies up this one. Sam seems endlessly fascinated with lives a seemingly standstill, and with characters who hope for something incredible to happen them. They are waiting for that moment where they can change into what they always hoped to be, and to take advantage of what lays ahead of them. In “American Beauty,” it was the characters’ desire to wake up from their dead and dysfunctional lives. In “Road To Perdition,” it was the desire of Tom Hanks’ character to get his son away from the devious life he was leading as a mob enforcer, and to redeem himself in the eyes of his son for all the bad things he has done in the hope that he can find a different path in life from his father. In “Jarhead,” it was the desire of the soldiers to enter a war and fight like men, and to take down their enemies by lethal force.

This comes around full circle in “Revolutionary Road” as it deals with characters eager to escape their suffocatingly conformist suburb to live a life of sheer excitement. But they soon come to find that they are not as special as they thought they were, and the desires of Frank and April seem to work in opposition to one another. The characters are complex in their creation, and we see what fuels their individual needs, desires, fears and anxieties which serve to define them and their actions. It’s almost like Frank and April are like George and Lenny from “Of Mice And Men;” they are two people hoping to get something they can never really have, and they delude themselves into thinking that all is within their grasp and that their dreams will soon become a reality. But reality comes to rear its ugly head at them, and you know that it ain’t gonna pretty.

In a sense, “Revolutionary Road” can be seen as kind of a distant cousin to “American Beauty” in how it details the suffocating environment of suburban living, but they approach it differently. While “American Beauty” dealt with its characters with a dark sense of humor, the environment in “Revolutionary Road” is much more bleak and consuming. In fact, “American Beauty” seems like a delightful walk in the park compared to this one.

The movie takes place in Connecticut in the 1950’s, but the feel of the movie is quite contemporary which shows how frighteningly timeless story is. This is what will make the movie hard for many people to watch as they may end up seeing themselves in these two people; the longing for a more exciting existence, for an escape from the suburban way of living that has drained them almost completely of feeling, and to get another chance to do what they really want to do in life.

Along with cinematographer Roger Deakins (“No Country For Old Men”) and production designer Kristi Zea (“The Silence Of The Lambs”), Mendes perfectly the look and feel of the 1950’s to where you feel like you are right in it and not just watching the movie. Mendes also captures the routine of the life in suburbs, and manages to capture some unforgettable moments like when April takes the garbage out to the front of the driveway, and she sees everyone else has placed theirs out in front as well. In that moment, he captures April’s realization of how she and Frank have bought into the resigned way of living they thought they would somehow avoid. It’s a beautiful movie to look at, but the ugliness of its characters frazzled emotions come through to make this seem anything like a Norman Rockwell portrait.

In addition, Mendes is served very well by his frequent film composing collaborator, Thomas Newman. Newman’s score may sound like many of his others, but he captures the longings of both Frank and April as they tumble through their seemingly mundane existence, and soon end up being driven crazy by it and each other. Throughout all his work, Newman seems to work with music so subtle in how it is performed, and yet so powerful in what it ends up conveying. It’s no accident that Newman also scored Mendes’ “American Beauty” and Todd Field’s “In The Bedroom.” Like Mendes, Newman has a strong feel for life in the suburbs no matter what decade.

But in the end, “Revolutionary Road” is really a tremendous acting showcase more than anything else, and I don’t just mean from the two main actors (we’ll get to them in a minute. I don’t think that I have ever seen a Sam Mendes that has had a single weak performance in it, and this movie is certainly no exception. Among the cast you have the always wonderful Kathy Bates who plays Mrs. Helen Givings, the endlessly talkative real estate agent who sells Frank and April the home they end up living in. The smile on her bright face serves to hide the pain that we see later as we are introduced to her son who has just been released from a mental institution. You also have Dylan Baker as Frank’s co-worker, Jack Ordway, a man who endlessly waxes philosophically over the craziness of our existence. Dylan is always a pleasure to watch no matter what he does. David Harbour and Kathryn Hahn (I thought she was Ana Gasteyer for a moment) are also excellent as the next door neighbors, Shep and Milly Campbell. The excitement that April and Frank have over their plan to go to Paris both enthralls and depresses Shep and Milly, and the way they react to it suggests that April and Frank are not the only ones leading lives of quiet desperation.

But one of the truly standout performances from the supporting cast from this movie comes from Michael Shannon as Helen Giving’s mentally unhinged son, John. In an atmosphere where the truth is felt but never verbalized, John finds himself completely incapable of telling a lie. Essentially, he is a Vulcan like Mr. Spock, but with an overabundance of raw emotion. Through his thoughtlessly cruel remarks to everyone around him, he exposes the seemingly perfect couple and their marriage for the sham that it has become, and you can clearly feel his betrayal by these two people who had promised to escape the lifestyle they found so hopeless. Michael’s performance is astonishing in its uninhibited nature as he becomes the voice of reason in a world so full of lies and with people living a seemingly comfortable life within it. It’s a daring performance that does not pull any punches, and it is deserving of an Oscar nomination.

This of course brings me to the two main actors of the movie, Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet. Their coupling in this movie has been the movie’s endless selling point as it is their first movie together since “Titanic,” still the highest grossing movie of all time at the box office. But this movie is very different from that one. It could almost be seen as a story of what happened to Jack and Rose after the big ship sank, assuming that Jack survived the freezing waters. Both Leo and Kate have an incredible chemistry with each other on the screen, and it almost seems crazy that it took them over 10 years to do another movie together.

Leonardo DiCaprio continues to prove why he is one of the best film actors of his generation. Throughout the movie, he lets us look past the egotistical nature of Frank Wheeler which allows him to seduce a naïve young secretary (Zoe Kazan is wonderful in the role), and to see the pain and fear that threatens to steer him further in a direction he never planned to go in. The relationship he had with his father always seems to be surrounding him in ways that are never fully explained, but we can see how it enforces him in the decisions he ends up making. Frank clearly cannot stand the job he has as a salesman, but he also is equally terrified of leaving it as he feels he may let down his family in one way or another. Leo brilliantly captures the complexity of this character whose needs and desires constantly tangle with each other, and whose anger and frustration with where his life eventually boils over to the only person he can take it out on, his wife. Leo turns in a raw performance where his vulnerabilities are so vivid that you see them in yourself.

But as raw and complex as Leo’s role is in this movie, he is almost blown away by the performance given by Kate Winslet. Along with her work in “The Reader,” this has definitely been the year of Kate Winslet, and Oscar should finally shine down on her for once. You almost think that she was in a Lars Von Trier movie with the pain her character suffers throughout the movie’s 2-hour running time. Whereas Leo’s character of Frank may have been desperate, Kate’s character of April is ten times as desperate. Her desire to escape the boring life she sold herself out to is never ending, and she can never hide the pain from others as to how much she wants to leave this life even while she feels helpless in doing so.

Seriously, Kate is in my humble opinion the actress of 2008, having given brilliant and devastating performances in two singularly great movies in one year. You have to wonder where she gets the energy to do all this emotionally exhausting work, and I can’t think of a braver actress that I have seen in movies this year other than her. The work she did in this film and “The Reader” shows that she accomplish that no other actress can accomplish right now. She has more than earned her place in the ever growing pantheon of great actresses. I’m telling you, she better get the Oscar this year because she sure as hell deserves it!

“Revolutionary Road” is not the most enjoyable of movies to watch, but not all movies are meant to be, and this one is not without its purpose. We empathize with Frank and April in spite of the way they treat each other because we know that all they go through can easily happen to us before we know it. That’s why the movie gets so deeply under your skin; these people will remind you of others around, and it you will see yourself in these characters as well. I myself seem to be leaving a life where I am caught up in making a living and in pursuing the things that make me the happiest. The road is never easy, and you always wish for it to be easier. But in the end, things could be worse as we could end up like April and Frank.

Sam Mendes is one of the best directors working today, and he has created another masterpiece of suburban isolation that stands proudly alongside “American Beauty” and “In The Bedroom” among others. It also shows how the term “civil marriage” can seem like the ultimate oxymoron. It goes back to people saying that love is a four-letter word, or that it is a sentence. Frank and April’s story is a tragic one, and probably not a movie for those just engaged.

Once again, Sam Mendes is a lucky man, dammit.

**** out of ****