To continue this morning's Faulks-bashing...
"I
found the last film pretty distasteful. One [of the Bond girls]
couldn't act and the other had been previously exploited as a sex
worker. And Bond walks into the shower and makes love to her. Casino
Royale was much better," he told an audience at India's Jaipur
Literature Festival.
He disliked the aggressive promotion and
merchandising for the film and said critics had shown a "fantastic
degree of collusion" with the film's publicists to avoid spoiling its
main shock - the death of M, played by Dame Judi Dench.
http://www.telegraph...lm-Skyfall.html
The question - to me at least - would rather be, can somebody who presented his own effort in the continuation business with much fanfare aboard a zodiac in the company of a photo model and a platoon of extras in full camo-fetish gear really claim any scrap of expertise when it comes to distastefulness and aggressive promotion? And the answer, unfortunately, must be: yes, such a person must be considered a pundit.
Another example of the highly dangerous nature blunt objects represent for the residents of glasshouses...
That said I fail to understand how one arrives at the opinion Severine's past - always provided she really was a sex slave, it's not confirmed and we do not learn more about her life before she came to Silva; it's even possible the tattoo is a decoy - would prevent her entirely from enjoying sexual pleasure? Why should Bond not want to make love to her and why should the two of them not enjoy the time? Over my head really.
Can't
agree. Part of the buildup was, of course, done by the marketing
department, but even after throwing all of that out the window,
Severine's mere presence in the film is a means to try to display Silva
as this despicable individual. We get enough buildup to that with his
destroying of MI6, the outing of all of the NATO agents, his direct
threats towards M, and all of that before we even get to Severine.
That's just one more thing to throw on top of the already despicable
characterization of Silva (although he's still not the most despicable
character in the film), by almost saying to the audience, "in case you
didn't think he was really evil, look what he's done to this person as
well". It would have come off much better had they actually treated
Severine like a real person instead of just throwing her away to show
how big a bastard both Bond and Silva could be.
But the difference with Silva shooting Severine is, this murder we see him do himself, crucial for our judgement of his character. It's one of the main motifs of SKYFALL, the damage you can cause with a simple mouseklick (Q, Silva) in contrast to the damage you have to unleash yourself (Bond, again Silva) and the deeds you commit by proxy (M, Silva, Q) compared to the people who pull the trigger for you (Bond, Moneypenny, Silva). Silva shooting Severine is the first evil thing we see him do with our own eyes. Were it not for this scene I think I'd root for Silva the whole film to the end. Everything else, captured agents, bomb attacks, abandoned island and whatnot, all that's really done or set up by a faceless adversary. When Silva finally turns up it's still possible he isn't the driving force behind these acts, or not the only force. Only when we see him casually killing the girl it's a done deal he's the obvious antagonist.
The whole
Severine character simply feels like lip service to an issue that they
should have touched on in CASINO ROYALE. You're right, it's a chilling
scene, but for the wrong reason. All Severine's death serves to
accomplish is to show that there really isn't a character worth
"rooting" for in SKYFALL. M monumentally blows her chances at becoming
the object of sympathy in the film, and Silva loses by default
(obviously), and then we're left with Bond who shows himself to be
almost as despicable as Silva in the way that he uses Severine. I'd say
that it's really more disgusting than chilling, and while it is
something that harkens back to the novels in some way, it should have
been offset with something that shows Bond's feelings towards killing in
cold blood. Yes, he didn't pull the trigger, but he's just as much
responsible for Severine's death as Silva is.
I see
Severine more as them harkening back to the damsels in distress type
characters that we see from time to time in the series. They present
Severine, at least in appearance, as a femme fatale, but she really
isn't one. They've already done the post-Vesper Bond girl to show
Bond's new MO with women when they had Fields in QUANTUM OF SOLACE, so
there really wasn't a need to further emphasize the point that Bond, in
his post-Vesper world, simply uses women for whatever and then they're
on their own.
I don't think it's fair to call Bond merely using Severine. She is a means to come one step closer to his target, yes. But Bond couldn't foresee she'd be killed right after she served her purpose. It's Silva's game, not his. And Severine is obviously a vital part of Silva's outfit, crucial in his dealings in Macau and Shanghai. There is no reason for Bond to suspect she is in any more danger than he himself. Silva shooting her is entirely irrational and akin to Goldfinger shooting Pussy Galore.
Fact is, Severine had no more place in the storyline. Her part was done and there was no reason to keep her. I'm actually much more happy with the plot as is than I would be if she'd be kept for convention's sake and would clutter up the whole London-Scotland finale (and complicate everything with her feelings, as Fleming would say...). At the core of it Severine is the dance 'performer' (read: dancing prostitute) from the novel TMWTGG. While that girl survived - though with a decent scare - she too had no more impact on the story. I definitely prefer Severine over that character and wouldn't have thought such a twist was possible in a contemporary Bond film script.
Also I can't say I agree with the notion no character in SKYFALL was worth rooting for. To the contrary, I find every one of them worth our attention and consideration. They are fallible, credible humans - though the warts-per-visible-square-inch ratio is manipulated a bit in favour of the younger cast. M (for me the real villain) made her career on the back of Silva and betrayed him. But you see her conscience isn't exactly a peaceful one. She expected her deeds to haunt her, and when they finally do she isn't surprised. When Silva gatecrashes the hearing M actually capitulates, it's Bond who saves her while she might have been more happy if the thing was just over there and then. By that time she knows what she's done and accepts the repercussions.
Silva we've talked about before. He's a former star agent, resourceful and dedicated like Bond, though on a different field of expertise. He pays the ultimate price and discovers not only there's life-after-life, but also life-after-love, which is what makes him so dangerous. Bond in a similar situation? What would he do?
Bond finally is disillusioned. At the start of the plot, not the end. He makes a concious decision to come back, to return to his duty in spite of the fact his authority figure has shown weakness. Over the story of SKYFALL Bond sees his superior with all her flaws and mistakes she made, yet he doesn't let her down. He's grown into a more mature and responsible agent, far beyond cheap jingoism as represented by the dog. I find this a surprisingly sophisticated and satisfying plot for a work of light entertainment.