Skyfall: Is a Cold War relic still relevant today?

This installment of Bond asks if 007 and his era of spy craft are still relevant.  This leads into the theme, which is pretty in your face throughout the film, which is have the times past 007 and M?  It's the class of old school verses the new.  This theme seems appropriate in the fiftieth year of the Bond franchise.  Bond was created in the post-World War II, Cold War era.  It seems fair to ask how this Cold War invention play in today's digital terror era.

This theme plays itself most visible in the first scenes with Bond's new Q, which is the first Q of the Daniel Craig era.  Q in this film looks like he's straight out of college, as does the new Moneypenny by the way.  Bond meets Q in an art gallery as he stares at a painting of a old warship being brought in to be scraped, as I said the theme is pretty in your face.  Q gives Bond his gadgets for the mission, which are a gun and a radio distress signal.  Bond looks at Q and asks if that's it.  Q follows with a quip about not having any exploding pens.  Gadgets have been part of the lure of the Bond films I have seen.  You always ask what were the gadgets, who was the girl, who was the villian, and who sang the opening song (in this case Adele).  This is a very conscious departure from past films to emphasize the  conservative way Bond is being cast in this film.  They are basically sending him into the field with a gun, radio, and a good luck.  Of course, they didn't go completely old school as the gun will only fire if it reads Bond's fingerprints.

This movie just as much about Bond as it is M.  Both have story lines which questioning their usefulness at their advanced age and antiquated ways.  This actually increases the drama as you question if either of them will be around in a next film.  It had a very Dark Knight Rises feel to it.  As in that movie, Bond fails (and falls) on an early mission and is assumed dead, but in contrast to Bale's jail-hole dwelling Batman, Bond is living comfortably on a beach drinking his life away.  Bond returns to action after a terrorist attack on MI6.  His skills and mental state, however remain suspect, just as Batman's did throughout Dark Knight Rises.  M's ability and decision making choices are immediately questioned as she must choose whether to order a shot which could hit Bond or take out a target with sensitive information in the opening scenes.

The villain in this film is played by Javier Bardem who is a former MI6 agent, which M had sold out to the Chinese.  His mission is to destroy M, much the same way she destroyed him.  Bardem, who plays Silva, is reminiscent of Dark Knight's Joker and Dark Knight Rises' Bane, in that they have a grand plan and seem to be a step ahead of everyone.  You should skip ahead to the last two paragraphs if you don't want spoilers.


Other similarities include how Silva allows himself to be captured to compromise the new bunker MI6 and escape into London, much like the Joker in Dark Knight.  Silva has a Chinese island which was abandoned after he claimed there was a chemical leak, much like Bane is able to control an island in Dark Knight Rises.  Silva, in the end, is a little confusing to me.  Was his goal destroying the entire intelligence agency or just M?  It seems like he could have done either with a lot less grand planning.  It almost seems as though he planned the whole getting caught part to escape into London to kill M.  A plane ticket and hiding out in M's house, which Bond is always able to do, seems a lot easier.  Well, then maybe he got caught to trying to take down MI6 again, but he already did that once and there is no further story line about this motivation after Silva escapes into London.  In the end, he just seems obsessed with killing M, who is like a mom to both Bond and Silva.  This  doesn't seem like it would be that difficult with everything else he's accomplished.  But then again maybe I'm analyzing someone who isn't the most stable of people

That being said, the drama over Judy Dench's future role in the series is gripping.  The action scenes are wonderfully ridiculous.  Bond, M, and Bond's groundkeeper Kincaid preparing his boyhood home has a bit of a Home Alone/Saving Private Ryan feel as they prepare to defend against a much greater numbers.

The visuals in the film are pretty stunning and I'm not just talking about the scenery from Turkey to China to London.  The film expertly uses light and takes shots off glass and mirrors to show reflections.  The best scene is the assassination scene on the upper levels of a Shanghai skyscraper which shows glass, outside advertising, and obscured views.  There are also many other scenes at Bond's childhood home which wonderfully use of light through bullet holes and fog (in different scenes).

In someways its almost as if the film is asking us to believe that Bond is still relevant and he is.  Bond is still very alive in all of his gentlemanly brutish, British swagger.  He's classic and this movie shows how a tuxedo, a martini, and an Aston Martin never go out of style.  

Turning the House Upside Down: Bears vs. Seahawks

Flipping the House

During the Lovie Smith era, you can look at the Bears team as a house.  The defense is the foundation and the offense is the house that sits on top.  No matter how much the offense changed above ground (Shea/Turner/Martz/Tice, Orton/Grossman/Griese/Cutler, Jones/Benson/Forte), the base below (Urlacher/Briggs/Tillman) stayed the same.  No matter how  the offense looked,  we have always relied on the defense below to support the team to at least play .500 ball.  This game flipped the equation with the house holding up the foundation.   

Last week, I ended by saying, "Cutler can look in control throughout games, but I still doubt whether he has that elite quarterback ability to will his team to win in the last few minutes of a game."

I've always considered Cutler the key to the Bears becoming an elite team.  Sure the Bears can win games against inferior opponents, but can they win a close playoff game in Lambeau?  My gut told me that in a close game with Cutler needing to run a two-minute drill, the Bears would end up somewhere around midfield and end the game on a 4th down incompletion.  Cutler, at least for a week, proved me wrong.  In the last 24 seconds of the game, he and Brandon Marshall willed this team towards a victory.      

But they lost.  The Bears vaunted defense allowed a rookie quarterback to run all over them (literally) on them in two consecutive drives totaling 177 yards and 2 TDs when the game mattered most.  We've seen the defense falter before.  We've seen them give up play after play in soft prevent defense which allow opposing offenses to perilously march down the field.  However, I can't remember the last time the Bears defense seemingly fell apart so badly (a 97 yard drive, followed by a 12-play 80 yard drive) and it was the offense came to the rescue (temporarily).  For one week at least, it was the defense cracking and the offense providing the clutch plays.

Finding a Match

This was probably the most evenly matched team the Bears have played this year.  Most of the other teams, seemed superior (Green Bay, 49ers, Texans) or inferior (Titans, Jaguars, St. Louis).  The Seahawks seemed in that Goldilocks zone, which possibly informs where the Bears will eventually end up.  One good takeaway (only on fumble this week) from this game was that the Bears outplayed the Seahawks for most of this game.  They just couldn't reflect it on the scoreboard.  I remember midway in the 2nd quarter thinking, "Wow, the Bears are complete owning the game right now, yet the score is only 7-0."  Then when Seattle went in to half up 10-7, I remember thinking that the Bears won about 75% of that half, but lost the 25% which produced scoring.  In the 2nd half, its seemed like both teams played to a draw until Russell Wilson just decided to run free.  Cutler's and Marshall's heroics turned out to be a small respite, until Seattle methodically drove down the field in their first drive in overtime.  On a final note, while the game ended in a loss, this was easily the most exciting game this season.  For the first time this season, my hands were actually clammy as I listened to the last minutes of the fourth quarter and overtime.      

Vikings v. Bears: Back to normalcy and the necessity of Jay Cutler

Back to Normal

After two weeks of misery, the Bears seemed to get back to this season's norm; beating up lesser teams with overwhelming defense and efficient offense.  The Bears look like a completely different team against lesser teams.  The line between these two classes of Bears opponents seems to be the Viking, Lion, and Cowboy line.  Minnesota, Detroit, and Dallas are on the edge of the playoff picture looking in.  Against solid playoff teams like Green Bay, Houston, and San Francisco the Bears have looked very suspect.

The victory against the Vikings had all the markings of a quality 2012 Bears victory:  

1. Turnovers - 2 fumbles and 1 interception - Check
2. Dominating defense - 10 points allowed, with 3 coming after a Forte fumble - Check
3. Effective running game - 113 yards - Check
4. Time of Possession - 37:30 to 22:30 - Check
5. Efficient Offense - 3 TDs on 296 yards and 11-19 on 3rd downs  - Check 
6. Quality Special Teams - Blocked Field Goal, Fake Field Goal, Podlesh 43 yard Avg - Check
1. Although the Vikings also blocked a field goal.  

With a strong 1st half, the Bears were able to put this one on cruise control in the 2nd half.  While the Vikings game back a little, the Bears defense held its own and offense was able to lull this one into the victory column.  

Cutler and the Bears  - Confidence, Belief, and Doubt  

After an embarrassing loss last week, the Bears looked like different team.  No longer were they the team getting physically dominated, they were the team stopping the ball carrier short of the marker and getting two physical touchdowns near the goal line.  This play embodies what I am talking about.     http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000100069/Cutler-penalized-for-unsportsmanlike-conduct

It was stupid for Cutler to toss the ball at the defender after the game, but it was nice to see some swagger.  That's who Jay Cutler is, he's a jerk, but he's our jerk for better or worse.  The team needs  Jay Cutler and it's not necessarily because of his play.  The team attacks the game on both sides of the ball with so much more confidence when Jay is on the field.  The Bears have the feeling that with Cutler they have the potential to succeed in any situation, whereas Jason Campbell hasn't earned that yet. 

The Bears trust Cutler to get the job done.  It doesn't matter what his stats are, as Cutler only threw for 188 yards,  he scrambles when the pocket is closing, he finds the opens receivers, and he chucks its to Brandon Marshall through triple coverage somehow.  I still don't think of Cutler as a leader, because of the way he yells down to teammates and treats his coaches, but the team performs better when he is on  the field because they believe.  

In a way, I view Cutler as I view the Bears, both have enough potential to succeed, but I have doubts whether or not they will succeed.  This team can be Super Bowl contenders, in the same way that Jay Cutler has the tools to become an elite quarterback.  The Bears have shown they can systematically dominate lesser opponents, yet look weak against playoff opponents.  Cutler can look in control throughout games, but I still doubt whether he has that elite quarterback ability to will his team to win in the last few minutes of a game.  So while I have confidence in Jay and the Bears to win games, I'm doubtful they have the ability to win the big game.  

Degrees of Destruction: Bears v. 49ers

Now we know what the Titans felt like two weeks ago.  If there are degrees of defeat, this is probably next to worst.  While watching the last excruciating quarter of the Bears/49ers game, I came up with five factors with which to judge humiliating losses; general ineffectiveness, unforced errors, embarrassing plays, point differential, and physicality.  On a scale of ten, the Bears probably score near ten in most of these categories, but save a little face on point differential and unforced errors.  

General ineffectiveness is what we saw in the first quarter; a defense which looked helpless against a quarterback in his first start and an offense which couldn't muster 20 yards in the first half.  General ineffectiveness is playing without too many mistake, but just not being equal to the team on the other side of the field.  It was mystifying to see Colin Kaepernick pick apart the Bears defense.  It was more concerning when Kendall Hunter and Frank Gore began to find creases in the defense for big yards. But the offense didn't give the defense anytime to sit on the bench as a majority of the Bears drives ended up with negative yardage.  The Bears score a solid ten here.  I'm reminded of the Patriots/Bears game two years ago in a snowy Soldier Field for a good example of good butt kicking when the Patriots scored to close the half to make the score 33-0.             

Unforced errors is where the Bears could have looked worse.  Unforced mistakes are careless turnovers and pre/post penalties.  There were only 6 penalties and there weren't any false starts that I can remember; however, the Bears did call a couple timeouts when they couldn't get the right personnel on the field.  The worst unforced mistake was at the end of the game when JT Thomas jumped across the line denying the Bears the chance to at least attempt a touchdown return or morale's sake.  It was the final insult.  An example of this kind of loss is Charles Tillman's personal foul penalty overtime against Tampa Bay in 2008 which gave the Bucs a first down on third down and helped themI'll give them a four here.  

Embarrassing plays is where the Bears should have scored a fifteen on a ten point scale.  These are plays that make professionals look like amateurs.  I thought it was embarrassing in the second quarter when a Bears drive consisted of: Forte tackled for no gain by unblocked defender, Forte tackled for no gain by unblocked defender, then Forte tackled for no gain on the saddest looking screen play I've ever seen.  I didn't know what would await me in the 2nd half.  Devin Hester returned a punt for minus nine officially, but it looked like minus twenty.  J'Marcus Webb and Gabe Carimi getting pushed into Jason Campbell multiple times.  On one play Webb look like he was guarding Aldon Smith's shadow as he moved outside but Smith went inside.  Carimi didn't fare much better getting bull rushed too many times to count.  On his worst play, he gave up the sack and was still falling backwards for about ten yards as Campbell was getting annihilated.  The absolute worst play was the safety which we had to agonizingly watch over and over as it was reviewed.  First of all, the pocket absolutely collapsed and Campbell had no chance.  It turned to ridiculous (and no the the Devin Hester-type) when the ball squirted out and landed at Chilo Rachal's feet.  Rachal looked like he didn't know what he found as he momentarily stared at it.  He picked it up, lumbered forward, and guess it was ruled he forward passed it.  Whatever it was it was a mess, he gave the ball some type of forward movement.  The refs had a hard time classifying what had just happened.  The Bears earn a most definite ten in this category defined which can be defined by the infamous Bears/Giants game a couple years ago when many of the same linemen gave up 9 sacks in one half.  That game established and defined for a national audience the poor reputation the Bears O-Line has had ever since.        

Point differential is a category that while bad could have been a lot worse.  I remember at half thinking they are lucky to be down twenty to nothing right now.  Point differential is pretty self explanatory, any time a team runs up the score.  We'll again compare it to the Patriots game from a couple years ago or the 45-10 loss at the hands of a Carson Palmer led Bengals team in 2009.    Yes, a 32 to 7 loss is bad, but it could have been a lot worse.  The final point total wasn't has humiliating as the game.  Eight out of ten here.

Physicality is a category I would not have considered until watching the Bears destruction by the 49ers.  The 49ers just physically beat up on the Bears all game on both sides of the field.  Whether it was the Smiths bull rushing over the offensive line or Bowman and Willis thrashing down Forte or Bush, it was reminiscent of some Lions games of the past couple years.  The Bears defense was not exempt either as there were a number of broken tackles and huge clear out blocks in the run game.  Eight out of ten here as well.

So if you add it up that's 40 out of 50 for my ranking of next to worst, although right now I'm hard to imagine what a 50 out of 50 would look like.  

Review: Looper

Going into Looper I had just heard incredible things and I was excited see what was dubbed as a "smart action film".  Unfortunately, this caused me to watch the film too analytically, instead of merely sitting back and enjoying this film.  As I was watching this film, I constantly was asking myself, "Am I enjoying this ... I think so."  I spent the whole movie asking the question, I'm not sure what I actually thought about it at the end.

I did enjoy it, until I tried to explain the plot and the movie seemed completely ridiculous.  If you explain this film to someone who hasn't even seen the trailers, its easy to get completely lost.  Let me try.  You see it involves people called Loopers, who kill people sent back in time.  The mob in the future sends a person they want dead, back in time and Loopers shoot them.  Can everyone go back in time? No, time travel was outlawed so only the most powerful mobs can do it.   Why can't the mob kill someone in the future?   Because its hard to get rid of a body in the future.   You're saying its easier to time travel in the future than to kill someone.  Yes?  So anyways Loopers are called Loopers because their service is over after they kill their future self and then they have 30 years to enjoy their life until the mob sends them back in time so  they can be killed by their younger self and their Loop is closed.  (Confusion).  Basically, Bruce Willis gets sent back and Gordon-Levitt, who plays the same character 30 years apart, fails to kill Willis and the story continues.  Oh and then there is this plot about telekinesis, the Rainmaker, a little boy, killing children, post-apocalyptic society, and all the normal time travel issues any time travel movie will have.  Yes, this movie has a lot going on.  Even still, if you can ignore the plot holes and accept the basic framework of the setting, you can enjoy the film, that is if you can get past a modified Joseph Gordon-Levitt-to-look-like-Bruce Willis face.  (I never really did.)

After thinking about this film (and you will think about this film, which is a major plus for me for any film even if I decide i didn't like the film), I believe Looper is well made and has some great performances by Gordon-Levitt and Emily Blunt.  I couldn't believe Blunt transformed herself from a proper British woman to a blonde gun tote'n American farmer-mother.  I liked how the characters react to their situation and how they adapt to time travel and its consequences.  The characters are complex and there are few one note characters in the film.  Each has his or her own flaws, strengths, and desires.  There is no evil or good clearly established by the film, but just damaged people with selfish or sacrificing motives.  Its up to the viewer to judge these characters.  The game of chess between Willis and Gordon-Levitt is also fascinating to watch.  The Willis/Gordon-Levitt character literally can talk to his younger self to give him advice and its interesting which one of them makes the final move in the film.  In a way this film is all about consequences, because the characters are very conscious of the effect their actions will have on the future.      

I would not recommend this film if you get stuck on plot holes, inconsistencies, and logic.  But if you able to get past it, you can enjoy a film which intertwines a web of competing characters with competing interests trying to find the best future for themselves.  Looper lets the viewer decide the relative morality of each of these wonderfully complex characters.   

Far too late to do any good: NBC new show roundup

I thought I'd start a new section reviewing TV shows and movies, but since I don't see them until they are about to expire on Hulu, they are really out of date.  That being said, this year I decided to try out a few new NBC shows, mostly because they expire first on my Hulu.  It's pretty much how I determine most of what I watch.  Anyway, I figured I would test drive Go On, The New Normal, and Revolution.  My expectations going into each series were pretty low.  I expected to see Go On as another failed post-Friends cast member series, which didn't look very appealing at all, the New Normal, as a Modern Family knock off, which it probably is, and Revolution as another attempt to recreate Lost magic.
    

Go On

Go On actually is a strange mix, in my mind, of Community and sentimentality.  The group element is apparent with Matthew Perry playing the Joel McHale role of too cool for the group, but sees he might be a leader, but finally sees that he needs the group as much as anyone else.  However, Go On has the twist of this being a support group and Matthew Perry's character is trying to overcome the death of his wife.  I'm not sure if the mix works well.  There are many interesting characters in the support group as well as John Cho (Harold and Kumar) and Allison Miler (Terra Nova) who make up Perry's work unit.  Most of these characters seem like one note quirks, but it seems that there will be more layers added in future episodes.  Like I said before, I'm not sure the mix of comedy and sentimentality works like it did in shows like Scrubs.  The episodes so far seem very formulaic, Perry does something that everyone in the group likes, everything goes horribly wrong, Perry is apologetic with Laura Benati's character (Group therapist) fixing what she told Perry would go wrong, and finally Perry does something inspirational and good for someone in the group. Not that I don't appreciate formula but the first two episodes seemed too similar for me.  Anyway,  I've seen three episodes so far and I'm not sure if I'll continue.  It's loaded in my Hulu queue, but I'll probably let it expire.

The New Normal

This show was the show I was most reluctant to see because I'm not a big Modern Family fan and I heard that this was a knockoff.  After watching, I thought that this series might have the best chance of surviving.  Contrary Go On, this show has a better mix sentimentality and comedy.  The show is driven on Justin Bartha and Andrew Rannells' characters anxiety about become fathers.  These anxieties, at least to me, seems sincere.  Their experience through the pregnancy of their surrogate mother forms a solid storyline for the show. Their support of Georgia King's character, who is carrying their child, forms the emotional center of the show.  The comedy comes from these characters interactions with King's intolerant grandmother played by Ellen Barkin, King's daughter played by Bebe Wood who also provides sweetness and comedy, and  NeNe Leakes, as Andrew Rannells' assistant.  She plays against Rannells inattentiveness and Barkin's racist, homophobic attitude.  That being said, much of the comedy is based on making fun of stereotypes and many of the characters themselves are bordering on stereotypes themselves.  I'm not sure if I'll continue watching, but of the three new series I've seen, this had the most solid base with a good storyline.   

Revolution

I've only seen two episodes of Revolution, but I'm sure to be disappointed.  Revolution is another Lost-style show with a concept, nobody has power and doesn't know why it went out, and a lot of mysteries,  does somebody know how to turn the power on?  I can tell this show is designed to suck you in with mystery after mystery, in which you are continually seeking answers.  I actually like shows with a concept, I thought Terra Nova could have eventually made it even if the first 3/4s of the series weren't great, but I don't know if any storyline in Revolution really holds my interest.  I'm interested vaguely interested to see how they explain the power, but I'm not sure Tracy Spiridakos' journey to find her brother, which is driving the plot right now is a sufficient engine for this vehicle.  Giancarlo Esposito is excellent, but nothing else really stands out.  I can see certain plot lines already developing for better or worse and I'm tempted to cut myself off before I get sucked into too many weak episodes by last minute cliff hangers.    

Bears v. Titans

It was nice to get a easy win before things get tough in the next few weeks with the 7-1 Texans and the 6-2 49ers.  I'm not sure what you can say after a defensive/special teams performance like that.  Other than dominating and wow.

Defense

This was Charles Tillman's game with a team leading 9 tackles to go along with a ridiculous 4 forced fumbles.  Brian Urlacher still showed he could make headlines with 7 tackles, 1 forced fumble, and 1 interception for a touchdown.  But back to Tillman, I'm not sure how you force 4 fumbles in a game, but these were all legit forced fumbles and not some accidental elbow.  It definitely is the most dominant performance by a defensive back and maybe a defender I have ever seen.  When he got the last one in the fourth quarter, it was like this is getting ridiculous.  Anyway, Tillman probably just punched his ticket back to the Pro Bowl this year.

Special Teams 

Special Teams played well and scored the game's first points on a blocked punt by Sherrick McManis and recovered for a touchdown by Corey Wootton.  Hester set up the next touchdown, by almost bringing it back to the 8 yard line for a nice Matt Forte touchdown.  By the way, that TD was great with the whole team pushing Matt Forte across the line.  You can see the video below.  Back to special team, Robbie Gould also had a solid 3 for 3 day, not that it was needed.

Offense

That leaves the only unit that perhaps needs more polish.  As seen in the video above, the offensive line looks pretty good when moving forward, but gets in trouble when moving backwards, pass protecting. Cutler was sacked 3 times and there was a safety called on a J'Marcus Webb penalty in the endzone.  The offense did look good in the run averaging 4.4 yards per carry, which includes a few Jason Campbell kneel downs.  (By the way, I guess Lovie instituted the mercy rule after the 10 minute mark of the fourth quarter by having Armando Allen run the ball every single time, even on the Titans 10 yard line on fourth down.)  On passing plays, the pocket always seemed to close early on Cutler.  Whereas early in the season, Cutler may have been holding the ball for too long, it was apparent in this game that the pocket constantly constricting.  Cutler and Marshall did connect on three pretty impressive pass touchdowns to put this game into cruise control.  Watching these connections only shows hints at the potential the Bears have to put together a pretty decent offensive unit with threats on the ground and through the air.

Final Thoughts

Well the time is now.  With the Texans and Niners coming up in the next two weeks, we'll find out what this Bears team is all about.  Since the beginning of this season, we knew time was running out and the window was closing on this aging defense.  While it hasn't shown on the field too much, we can all assume that these defenders if not this year than in the near future are going to be past their primes.  These next two weeks will tell us what we can expect against two of the league's best.

I honestly believe this team has the talent to win a Super Bowl.  While in past seasons, I thought the Bears could get lucky and go on a hot streak, like the Giants did last year, I believe team has the talent to be true Super Bowl contender.  If they play up to it, is a different question.  Unfortunately, I'll miss all if not most of the game next week, so I'll have to wait to watch the Niners game.