The Single-Minded Movie Blog

Texas Killing Fields (2011)

2012-01-20T01:47:00.001+01:00

I'm gonna do this quick, this film doesn't deserve better. Don't be fooled by the solid cast or the great visuals, this is an utter piece of shit. Either the script was completely useless, or someone screwed this up in the editing.

The story is excruciatingly badly written. The film moves from one scene to the next, seemingly unaware of any kind of narrative continuity or logic, resulting a disjointed, almost rambling storytelling. Even on a scene by scene basis this makes absolutely no sense. Characters change behavior, from moment to moment, and it often feels like large chunks of the film is simply missing.

This is nothing short of a spectacular show of inept, almost retarded filmmaking. How retarded, you ask? Well, just watch for the GIGANTIC shadows cast by the camera crew barely a minute into the film.

Avoid at all cost.

The 20 Best Movies I Saw In 2011

2012-01-15T15:23:00.002+01:00

Following up on The 20 Worst Movies I Saw In 2011, here's a list of the best films I saw last year. Some great experiences along the way, but it still seems like 2011 wasn't quite as good as 2010.

20. Rare Exports

I loved this alternative take on Santa Claus. Never mind that the film is Finnish, I can see this becoming a regular December film for me.

19. The Warrior's Way

This silly combination of Asian swordplay and western, set in America, with American actors, but a Korean lead who rarely speaks, shouldn't really work, but it did anyway. The film looks gorgeous, and the story is a classic tale of redemption, and how to kill a man with a herring.

18. Machete

When Robert Rodriguez brings his A-game he's a force to be reckoned with. A good old-fashioned B-movie with loads of style, a killer cast, and a sorely needed lead role for Danny Trejo. Machete don't text, but he sure as hell entertains.

17. Fright Night (2011)

One of the biggest surprises of the year. I fully expected to hate everything about this film, but for some reason it all kind of worked beautifully. Go figure.

16. Holy Flying Circus

This TV movie is about the problems the Monty Python group encountered during the release of Life of Brian in 1979. Half of the actors portraying the group don't really work, but the other half are perfect. This film captures the style of the show (Michael Palin's wife is played by a man), while giving us a glimpse of the real issues behind the silliness.

15. Faster

Another one of those B-movies that aren't afraid to embrace its B-movie nature. A perfect revenge film, with some surprisingly effective performances, and a stunning look.

14. The Rite

Exorcisms still freak me out. Combine this with a story about a guy who doubts religion, and you've got a really interesting take on demon possessions. Nothing beats The Exorcist (1973), obviously, but you can still make a good film in this genre, without trying to top that masterpiece. Plus, Anthony Hopkins hasn't been this good since Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992).

13. Drive Angry

No, I don't want to hear anything. This kick ass film did it for me on every level, and I'm not going to apologize. Bloody action, a severely f***able Amber Heard, cool as a cucumber William Fichtner, and Nicolas Cage hasn't looked this committed since Face/Off (1997).

12. Gasland

Director Josh Fox's deeply personal take on the environmental problems caused by fracking - the process that extracts natural gas from the ground. Very moody and very engaging. This is not just a good documentary. It's simply a good film.

11. Stool Pigeon

An intense and heartbreaking Hong Kong thriller that reminds me of all the great Asian films I saw in the '90s. Only reason it isn't higher up on the list is the rather slow start.

10. Page Eight

An very slight thriller about an intelligence officer who is thrust into a moral dilemma, following a report that puts the government in a very uncomfortable position. A pleasantly subdued performance by Bill Nighy, with solid support from Rachel Weisz, Michael Gambon, and Ralph Fiennes.

9. Apollo 18

A found-footage film about the failed Apollo 18 mission that discovers something bad on the moon. I was on the edge of my seat throughout the whole film, and I loved the visual style, which cleverly matches footage from the real lunar missions.

8. Trolljegeren

This Norwegian faux-documentary about a troll hunter had just the right mix of humor and scares. I found it quite irresistible.

7. The Last Exorcism

This tight little horror movie took the faux-documentary style and give it a little twist. Plus, anything with demons freak me the hell out! Haven't seen lead actor Patrick Fabian since 1999. Hope to see more of him in the future.

6. I Saw the Devil

A bitter, but highly effective Korean revenge film, so tough and driven that you can't help but feel ashamed that you love it so much. Actors Lee Byung-Hun and Choi Min-Sik are ferocious in the two lead roles, and director Kim Jee-Woon is one of the most dependable Korean helmers.

5. TRON: Legacy

Much to my surprise I found this followup to the classic science fiction fiasco TRON (1982) to be quite amazing. Beautiful designs, a story with real pathos, and one of the best scores of the year. The only flaw: The young CGI version of Jeff Bridges.

4. Source Code

One of the truly original films from 2011, a sci-fi version of Groundhog Day (1993) and a great followup to Moon (2009) from director Duncan Jones.

3. Margin Call

This tight little thriller had a simple premise, a stellar cast, and a perfect mood. Director J.C. Chandor is a name we need to keep an eye on, while star Zachary Quinto proves he can play something else than serial killers and aliens.

2. Kung Fu Panda 2

This is one irresistible panda. The sequel was less funny than the original, but more touching. The visual style, however, is breathtakingly beautiful.

1. Super 8

This film oozes nostalgia and love for movies. JJ Abrams managed to make a Spielberg film in 2011. Good thing, because Spielberg himself can't make that kind of film any more.

FINAL THOUGHTS

That's it. Now we've got to make it through the Oscars and we'll be all done with 2011.

The 20 Worst Movies I Saw In 2011

2012-01-14T14:25:00.001+01:00

Last year I published my Top and Bottom lists on this very blog, and I found it quite useful to have them available online at any time, so why not repeat the success? No need to overcomplicate things, so here's my list of the 20 most awful films I saw last year....

20. Sucker Punch

The trailer looked gorgeous, Zach Snyder's other films were so cool, but he should not be writing scripts himself, he's just not smart enough. This was a long, boring, misguided film, about as much fun as watching someone else play a video game.

19. Cowboys and Aliens

Unforgivably dull and utterly predictable. We may not have seen cowboys and aliens together in a film before, but every character, every scene, every plot point was familiar.

18. The Silent House

This Spanish one-shot movie might have worked, but the story is just too simple and the ending is preposterous.

Read the full review here.

17. Sharktopus

You don't expect too much going into a film like this, but it's okay to at least expect to be entertained on a B-movie level. This film does have its moments, but it just doesn't quite come together in the end. It's too average.

16. Priest

On some level the core concept had some validity, I guess, but there are just so many wrong choices and missed opportunities here. It feels as if the film was put together by a committee. And stop casting Cam Gigandet will you?

15. Season of the Witch

I love a silly Nicolas Cage movie as much as the next guy, but this period-possession film was just to damn sloppy for its own good.

14. Green Lantern

The character is silly, the story is nonsense, and Ryan Reynolds buzzing around with a CGI body is just not my idea of fun. I'm baffled that this charming actor failed to bring any kind of heart to this story.

13. Red Riding Hood

Should have been sexy, hip, and cool. That's why they hired the Twilight director. Instead this was badly written, unintentionally funny and looked cheap. Worst Gary Oldman performance since The Fifth Element (1997).

12. Burlesque

Christian Aguilera sings? Cher sings? That should work on some level, right? Well, it didn't. And STOP casting Cam Gigandet!

11. Dirch

This Danish biopic about the beloved Danish entertainer Dirch Passer only worked if you knew everything about him going in. It fails to capture the mood and look of the time period, and star Nikolaj Lie Kaas is just not as good as he should be. And the script was a mumbling checklist of famous Passer events.

10. Thor

Director Kenneth Branagh brings nothing to this noisy mess. The story is ludicrous and the film is a freak show of bad costumes and mediocre CGI. As for Natalie Portman? Stop looking so beautiful. No, I mean it! At this point it's becoming a major distraction.

9. True Grit

I don't really like the Coen brothers, save for a few of their earlier films, but this unnecessary remake is even worse than No Country for Old Men (2007). Jeff Bridges might as well be speaking Klingon, and the ending makes me hate everything even more.

8. I Love You Phillip Morris

I've lost everything for Jim Carrey since I found out he's one of those anti-vaccination lunatics, who really should be put down, before they kill too many people with their nonsense, but I saw this film before I found that out, and I still hated it and his performance. A disgusting, charmless film.

7. Into Eternity

Ostensibly a documentary about the dangers of nuclear waste. The film covers many interesting angles, but the message is muddled, and the cinematic style is so manipulative that it actually hurts the film. If the director lies so much with his images, how much does he lie with his words?

6. Paul

This should have been a slam-dunk. Two Roswell geeks meet an actual alien. Hilarity ensues. Unfortunately Simon Pegg and Nick Frost forgot to include ANYTHING funny or original in the film.

5. Adèle and the Secret of the Mummy

Is there anything more annoying or useless than French humor? This obnoxious film wants to be a bit Indiana Jones like, but it's just too damn French. Story is a mess, and hot french babe Louise Bourgoin in the lead is utterly devoid of charm. Luc Besson can't make movies any more.

4. Tree of Life

This is a bit of a cheat, because this really isn't a film, it's a poem. A rambling story about life and death, or something. I don't really care. This is not what I want from a film, period.

3. Smukke Mennesker

Obnoxious and untalented painter, turned film-critic, turned director Mikkel Munk Falsk sucked enough a** to get a chance to direct this unintelligent ripoff of Happiness (1998). No word on whether the 12 people who saw the film thinks he succeeded, but in my opinion this is the kind of film that should ban you from the film-business for all eternity.

2. Red State

Director Kevin Smith thinks he made a clever religious-horror-thriller. He didn't. He made an incompetent, rambling, boring, ugly, stupid piece of sh*t that solidifies our suspicion: Smith can't write anymore. And can't really direct either. Second year in a row he makes the Bottom 3 list.

1. Your Highness

When the credits rolled on this piece of sh*t I knew I had seen the worst film of the year, and a solid candidate for the worst film ever made. This is the brainchild of Danny McBride, who can't act, can't write, and isn't funny. Why he has a career is as baffling as anything. Why would anyone make a film like this, unless they were mentally handicapped?

FINAL THOUGHTS

That's it, my Bottom 20 list for 2010. Stay tuned for the Top 20 list.

How To Be a Pretentious Film Geek on Facebook

2012-01-11T19:47:00.000+01:00

INT. FRENCH CAFE - AFTERNOON

Spend any amount of time discussing movies on the interwebs - Facebook in particular - you'll notice a certain pattern emerging, especially when you're dealing with self-important film geeks. For someone like myself, who actually enjoy movies and love Hollywood escapism, it can be a little difficult to keep up, so with help from a few friends I've put together this guide.

Follow these simple rules, and you too can pretend to be a pretentious film geek on Facebook.

CUT TO:

The first rule

Only post about "important" and obscure film. We all need to kick back with a good Steven Segal film every now and then, just to stay sane, but be careful not to mention that kind of film on Facebook.

The tantalizing title rule

When mentioning non-English films - meaning more or less all the time - be sure to use the original title. Pick the most obscure if there's more than one.

The knowingly namedrop rule

Always describe a film as "director-name's "title" (year)". This will make the film sound more important. It makes it sound as if you subscribe to the auteur theory (that sounds French, which is good), and gives the impression that you know the director and his work, I mean, you KNOW him.

The less-than-obvious link rule

Always provide a link when you post about a film, but never just use the IMDb link. Find a poster, preferably a French one. Or link to a subtitled YouTube video.

The critical critique rule

Say bad things about good films, say good things about obscure film, say obscure things about bad films.

The ferocious frequency rule

People notice when you post something. They don't notice when you don't post something, so compress a few days of film watching and post them all on the same day, with two hour intervals, to make it appears as if you have a very important film marathon.

Make sure no automatic Xbox achievements are posted on your wall in the interim.

The always have alternatives rule

Cover the fact that you haven't been watching movies, because Discovery is running an American Chopper marathon by posting links to obscure bootleg soundtracks and claim you're "dreaming yourself away to Venice in the 15th century".

The overzealous sentence rule

Use many words. Like so: "The themes are quite nihilistic, in a post-modern, cathartic sense. The overt anthropomorphism notwithstanding." No I don't know what that means either, but no one will challenge you if you make your posts complicated enough.

Use phrases like , "mise-en-scène", "Cinéma vérité", "enfant terrible" and "je ne sais quoi." Anything French really. Also throw in terms like: "Narrative structure", "neo-realism", "new wave", or "pre-Code." Talk about themes as often as possible.

Don't just write "I'm watching Die Hard for the 20th time." Instead, make it seem as if the fact that you're watching this film is the single most important event happening in the world right now. For example: "I'm watching incarcerated director John McTiernan's brilliantly subversive ode to modern action movies Le Die Hard (1988) for the umpteenth time, while pondering if things had turned out differently had a stockbroker really thrown himself out of that window."

The short rule

Or go for the minimalistic approach.

"Dramatic. Introspective. Trains. Cooking." (This obviously refers to Under Siege 2).

The top 10 films rule

These are the top pretentious titles you must mention at some point:

Blow-Up (1966)
Boudu Saved from Drowning (1932)
The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie (1972)
I am Cuba (1964)
Jules and Jim (1962)
M (1931)
Man with a Movie Camera (1929)
Nanook of the North (1922)
The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928)
That Obscure Object of Desire (1977)

I use the English titles here, which obviously you must never do.

The top 10 directors rule

Basically, as long as you claim to watch anything by these guys, you'll be fine. Got nuts, you can't go wrong (except if you confuse John Cassavetes with his son Nick).

Michelangelo Antonioni
Ingmar Bergman
John Cassavetes
Sergei Eisenstein
Rainer Werner Fassbinder
Federico Fellini
Jean-Luc Godard
Akira Kurosawa
Yasujirō Ozu
Jean Renoir

Also...

Anything Swedish from before 1980 is fine, as well as anything silent (No, not Mel Brooks' Silent Movie).

Avoid anything popular, like Star Wars, Batman movies, Spielberg movies, any box-office hit, or Citizen Kane (it's just too damn popular).

And finally...

Whenever possible mention your own unseen art-film project.

CUT TO:

FINAL THOUGHTS

Being a pretentious film geek on Facebook is hard work. Never just sit back and enjoy a film, there's no time for that. Always find an angle in what you're watching. And remember: If you're having fun, you're not doing it right.

Whisper of the Heart (1995)

2012-01-03T00:11:00.001+01:00

We start 2012 with another Studio Ghibli release. Whisper of The Heart, directed by Yoshifumi Kondo, is one of the second tier films - meaning that it's not from the master Hayao Miyazaki himself, but still up to his standards in every way.

This is the completely ordinary story about a completely ordinary young girl, Shizuku Tsukishima, who lives in a crammed apartment with her parents and her older sister. It's the story about how she falls in love, struggles in school, thinks about her future, and dreams big dreams. It begins when Shizuku spots a reoccurring name in all the books she borrows from the library. Of course she can't help but dream up a perfect guy to go with that check-out history, but she's constantly distracted by a local boy, who always seems to catch her at the most inconvenient moments.

The life of a teenager may look utterly simple, even pointless at times, especially when viewed from the vantage point of experience and age. But we all know there's nothing simple about it, when you're in it. Shizuku's world seems to overwhelm her with possibilities on a daily basis, and Whisper of The Heart aims for nothing more than to capture that sensation.

That means it's full of the kind of problems a teenage girl would have, from the mundane (getting chores done, fighting with her big sister), to the all-too familiar (embarrassing episodes in class), the lyrical (the mystery boy, her attempts to be a writer) and even the magical, with a few almost surreal flights of fancy. The film is never condescending. However small Shizuku's problems may seem in the larger scheme of things, they fill her life up, and the film treats them with sincerity and respect.

THE BLURAY

This high-def release from StudioCanal in England is quite stunning to look at, and of course features original Japanese dialogue, with English subtitles. The extras consist of storyboards, some background artwork, trailers and TV spots. There's a 30 minute montage called "4 masterpieces of Naohisa Inoue", plus an 8 minute featurette about the English voice actors. Cute, but not relevant, since the original language is obviously the way to go.

The story and the film is rooted in reality on almost every level, even the animation style is suitably straightforward. I'm tempted to call it simple, but anyone who has ever put pen to paper, knows there's nothing simple about drawing anything that just looks real. At times an almost magical realism bubbles to the surface, particularly in a sequence, where Shizuku pursues a cat, who appears to ride the train by itself. The only real departure from reality is during a few elaborate dream sequences, when the story Shizuku is trying to write comes to life. I saw some images from these scenes, before I had seen the film and couldn't quite make them fit into the plot. They make Whisper of The Heart look similar to some of the more famous Miyazaki films, which is a bit misleading.

Whisper of The Heart is deceptively uncomplicated at times. It delivers its simple, beautiful story with a bare minimum of bells and whistles, and perhaps this is why it's so utterly irresistible.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to StudioCanal and Edith Chappey for making this review possible.

We Showed Class. And We Were Contenders.

2011-12-31T04:00:00.001+01:00

So here we go, the last blog of the year. Last December 31st I posted a New Year scene from a film, and I like the idea of simply reminding ourselves of a touching scene on this, the last day of the year, and so I found another one of those scenes. Yes, this one will make me cry, under the right circumstances.

I've already made many plans for next year. I'm gonna try to get a few more actual articles on the blog. There's been too many Top 10 lists and plain reviews this year, but we'll see how it goes.

Anyway, without further ado....

CUT TO:

A scene from Dirty Dancing (1987)

Johnny is alone in his room, the record player is playing a gentle song. There's a knock on the door. It's Baby.

Baby: Can I come in?

He let's her in without saying a word, then he notices how messy his room is.

Johnny: I got a-- I guess it's not a great room. You probably got a great room.

Baby: No this-- It's a great room!

Johnny moves over to turn off the record player.

Baby: No, leave it on.

He does.

Baby: I'm sorry about the way my father treated you.

Johnny: No. Your father was great. He was great. The way he took care of Penny, it was--

Baby: Yes, but I mean the way he was with you. It's really me it has to do with. Johnny, I came here because my father--

Johnny: No, the way he saved her-- I mean, I could never do anything like that. That was something. I mean, the reason people treat me like I'm nothing is because I am nothing.

Baby: That's not true! You, you're everything!

Johnny: You don't understand the way it is. I mean, for somebody like me. Last month I'm eating Jujubes to keep alive. This month, women are stuffing diamonds in my pockets. I'm balancing on shit as quick as that I can be down there again.

Baby: No, it's not the way it is! It doesn't have to be that way!

Johnny: I've never known anybody like you. You look at the world, you think you can make it better. Somebody's lost, you find them. Somebody's bleeding--

Baby: Yeah, I go get my daddy. That's really brave, like you said.

Johnny: That took a lot of guts to go to him! You are not scared of anything!

Baby: Me? I'm scared of EVERYTHING! I'm scared of what I saw. I'm scared of what I did, of who I am. And most of all I'm scared of walking out of this room and never feeling the rest of my whole life... the way I feel when I'm with you!

They stare quietly at each other for a while. In the background the song ends, and a new one starts playing. It's "Cry to Me", by Solomon Burke.

Baby: Dance with me.

He does.

DISSOLVE TO:

FINAL THOUGHTS

That's it. 2011, we bid you farewell.

I wish a happy New Year to anyone reading this! Remember: Stay safe, stay beautiful, and I'll see you on the flip-side.

FADE OUT.

CREDITS.

Don't Forget To Love, part 24 of 24

2011-12-24T13:15:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Seven (1995)

Twenty-four days ago we embarked on a careless mission of consumerism. We hate it, but we can't help ourselves. No one asked us if we wanted to do it this time around, but like lemmings we did what we always do. We were powerless. Victims of fate and tradition. It's the same every year, and so here we are, three and a half week later, and it's the 24th of December, yet again. Christmas day. Unavoidably so.

You see the link to our movie of the day, don't you?

It's hard for me to put into words how much I love Seven. No wait, it's not! I love it with the white-hot intensity of a thousand suns. It's the best movie ever made. Why? An absolutely fascinating story, both erudite and trashy, as elegant as it is raw and gritty. Absolutely stunning visuals - one of the most beautiful movies ever shot. I could go on for hours, but it's Christmas, so I'm not going to.

Seven is simply a masterpiece. I wouldn't change a frame.

Never ever, ever forget to love it. And have a merry Christmas.

Don't Forget To Love, part 23 of 24

2011-12-23T14:11:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Beautiful Girls (1996)

Willie, a less than successful piano player, returns to his home town, to visit family and old friends. He's at a crossroad in his life. He's about to get married, and by all accounts he's got a great life, but he can't help but ponder how nothing really panned out the way he wanted. Compared to everyone else, though, he's an astronaut.

This Ted Demme movie is an absolute delight of tender nostalgia and melancholia. Timothy Hutton's Willie is our entry point, but this is really an ensemble drama full of well-observed little characters, played with absolute conviction by a great group of familiar actors. Everyone gets their moment, and no one steals the show.

Still, my favorite scenes are the ones between Hutton and Natalie Portman. She plays the 11 year old girl who lives next door to him, wise beyond her years, and the two of them have a connection. So sweet. A real heartbreaker. In fact, this whole film is just heartbreaking.

Never forget to love it.

Don't Forget To Love, part 22 of 24

2011-12-22T16:46:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Natural City (2003)

With only a few days until Christmas now, it's time for us to take stock and remember all the important things. The good moments in life, however small. Let's do that with this fantastic Korean science fiction action movie.

We're somewhere in the future, in a dark hopeless world, where cyborgs have become an integral part of society. We follow an elite soldier, "R" (played by Yu Ji-Tae of Old Boy fame). The love of his life, an android named Ria, will expire and die in 78 hours, and she's already falling apart. Meanwhile a renegade combat cyborg has his own sinister plan...

Ostensibly a ripoff of Blade Runner - both visually and thematically - this film nonetheless succeeds where Ridley Scott's influential masterpiece fails, on the emotional level. The story is kind of heartbreaking, and in that respect (if nowhere else) a lot more satisfying than watching Harrison Ford not act.

(You can read a longer review here, if you have nothing better to do.)

Never forget to love it.

Don't Forget To Love, part 21 of 24

2011-12-21T21:22:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Robin of Sherwood (1984-1986)

To me, this is the real Robin Hood! Forget the Disney version, forget the Costner thing, this is it! I remember cozying up in front of the TV watching Robin of Sherwood when I was a kid. One of the few exceptions to the "no TV during dinner"-rule.

I guess this is kind of corny by today's standards, but that's just part of the charm. The tempo is fairly mellow, and they get a lot less done in a 50+ minute episode, than a modern show will manage in a 42 minute episode, but I don't care. A perfect Robin (Michael Praed), the best Marion ever (Judi Trott), and a charming band of merry men (including a baby-faced Ray Winstone) keep me entertained. Also, the inclusion of black magic, forest spirits, and other supernatural elements keeps the show fresh and interesting. Robin is not just a nice guy. His fate is tied to the Sherwood forrest in a way I haven't seen in any other version.

Fans of the series are in for a real treat, as the show has received the royal treatment on Bluray. The original 16mm film elements have been restored to their former glory, and even though the result still pales compared to modern HD material, it's safe to say that the show has never looked better - Even back when it was brand new.

The series is available from Network in England in two box sets. The first box covers series one and two, featuring Michael Praed as Robin of Loxley, while the third and final season gets its own box. They each run 13 episodes. The special features include audio commentaries, documentaries - with the restored film-clips added - original scrips, outtakes and hundreds of stills. This is hands down THE best treatment of an older TV shows I have ever laid eyes on. Magnificent.

Never forget to love it.

Don't Forget To Love, part 20 of 24

2011-12-20T20:46:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

The Killer (1989)

This John Woo movie is one of a handful of titles that paved the way for Asian action cinema to be accepted by western movie geeks. Chow Yun-Fat plays the hitman who accidentally blinds a nightclub singer, and feels duty bound to step into her life and help her out. On top of this he must take on a local gangster, hellbent on revenge, with dramatic bloody consequences.

The Killer is a stunning example of the power inherit in the heroic bloodshed genre. The blood-soaked acrobatic gun-play here is matched only by the over-sentimentality of the love story. It simply doesn't get any more schmaltzy than this.

I saw Hard-Boiled (1992) before I saw this, so I was well prepared for John Woo's outstanding action sequences, but I wasn't ready for the tragic, melancholic mood of The Killer. It sounds a little wrong to say this, in light of the body count, but Hard-Boiled was fun, it was a ride. There is nothing amusing about The Killer. This is one gunfight where you'll need more than an unending supply of ammo. You need Kleenex as well.

Never forget to love it.

Don't Forget To Love, part 19 of 24

2011-12-19T14:28:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Young Sherlock Holmes (1985)

Shameless self-promotion time! A few months ago I recorded an unofficial audio commentary for Young Sherlock Holmes with my fellow podcaster Dennis Rosenfeld.

The movie is from 1985. It's produced by Steven Spielberg. It features visual effects by Industrial Light and Magic. In other words, this is perfect example of a '80s movie - by now you'll have noticed that I have a certain affinity for those. The movie is also a great example of a high-concept story: How did Sherlock Holmes and Watson meet? How did they become friends? And what was their first case?

The beautiful snow-covered London setting will instantly transport you to a different time, and you'll have no trouble buying the two charming leads (Nicholas Rowe and Alan Cox), as the younger versions of the popular characters. Director Barry Levinson interjects a wonderful sense of energy into the proceedings, too bad he never did anything quite as adventurous again.

Never forget to love it. It's elementary, really.

PS: Download the commentary track on this page.

Don't Forget To Love, part 18 of 24

2011-12-18T12:17:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

The Replacement Killers (1998)

It's a little strange, but when all the great Hong Kong action directors came to Hollywood, they seemed to lose the signature style that made them special in the first place. John Woo came close to replicating his style with Face/Off (1997), but the one director who truly captured the Hong Kong style and put it in an American film, was Antoine Fuqua, a music video director no one ever heard of.

The Replacement Killers was Hong Kong superstar Chow Yun-Fat's first English film, and even though he struggles with the language, he is still very eloquent when he lets his twin guns do the talking.

What really makes the film work is the unusual decision to pair Chow with Mira Sorvino. She was no action star, but she slips so easily into the part you would think she had never done anything else. The emotional core this duo brings to the film is stronger than it has any right to be, considered that this is a fairly pedestrian revenge story, barely 90 minutes long.

There are so many fantastic moments in this film, so many perfect shots, such a great mood, and the "She Makes Me Wanna Die"-montage still gives me goosebumps

Never forget to love it.

Don't Forget To Love, part 17 of 24

2011-12-17T11:45:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Nikita (1990)

Luc Besson is another one of those directors we've just lost. I mean, he just stopped making good movies, but in his early days he was a force to be reckoned with, and Nikita might be his best movie.

There are two parts to this film's success. The first one is the character of Nikita, possibly the most iconic female assassin ever put on film. She starts off as a screaming mad dope fiend, then she's broken down to a frail little bird, and finally - of course because of love - she's reborn as complete human being. Mad probs to Anne Parillaud for her unflinching portrayal of the titular character.

The second part of the equation is Luc Besson's flawless filmmaking. I absolutely adore the look of his earlier films, he could really shoot an action scene back then, and name another filmmaker who can use wide-angle shots this effectively. He lost his filmmaking abilities after Léon (1994), but it was great while it lasted.

Nikita is a modern masterpiece. Nothing less. And the ending still makes me cry. Yeah, I said it.

Never forget to love it.

Don't Forget To Love, part 16 of 24

2011-12-16T14:31:00.001+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Under Pressure: Making The Abyss (1993)

The Abyss (1989) is one of my favorite movies, but I am well aware that many people don't share this admiration, and I will also freely admit that the final sequence of the film is dangerously close to being unintentionally funny. Be that as it may, The Abyss is still a fascinating production, and any film geek should know about the making of the film. This is where Under Pressure comes in.

Under Pressure is not a full feature length documentary, meant to have a life of its own, it only plays 60 minutes and was always intended merely as bonus feature to accompany the actual film on DVD, Laserdisc, VHS or whatever format is in style.

The documentary shows exactly how difficult it is to make a big, complicated, tech heavy Hollywood film. It makes no attempt to gloss over any of the production problems, the escalating budget, or the fact that director James Cameron isn't exactly what you would call "a people person". His ruthless dedication is frightening, but it's hard not to marvel at his passion, precision and attention to detail. Love or hate The Abyss, but never forget to appreciate the astonishing amount of work that goes into a film like that.

If you only ever watch one special feature, watch this one. Or the uncut footage of Pam Anderson semi-nude on a swing from Barb Wire.

Don't Forget To Love, part 15 of 24

2011-12-15T17:20:00.001+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Lifeforce (1985)

You have to wonder about every single decision that went into the making of this film. Who found the novel The Space Vampires and thought "Gee, this'll make a swell film that everyone will love, let's spend a fortune on it"? Who thought it was a good idea to hire the guy who directed The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974), but was apparently usurped by Spielberg on Poltergeist? Who hired Mathilda May to walk around and pretend she was an alien trapped in a human body? A naked human body, mind you!

Well, whoever made these decisions.... I BOW TO YOU!

Lifeforce is a fantastic film! Part space movie, part alien invasion movie, part zombie movie! All madness, all nonsense, all good! It's full of fantastic '80s visual effects, grotesque special makeup effects, and to top it all off we get long lingering shots of Mathilda May's perfect nude body! Did I mention the epic score by Henry Mancini? This must be what heaven is like (you know, sans the lifeforce-sucking-part).

Lifeforce is a preposterous film on every level. And I love everything about it.

Never forget to love it.

PS: If you don't already know this film, and my mad ranting has somehow convinced you to check it out, be sure to watch the extended version, which runs 116 minutes.

Don't Forget To Love, part 14 of 24

2011-12-14T14:31:00.001+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Goodfellas (1990)

Ray Liotta plays the lead in this epic story about the rise and fall of real-life gangster Henry Hill. As much as I love The Godfather (and I do love it), I must admit that it glorifies the gangster world in many ways. Goodfellas does the same thing initially, but slowly the story shifts. It becomes dark and nasty, and it gets its hands dirty on a completely different level. When all is said and done the gangster world is suddenly not as alluring any more.

Some people claim Martin Scorsese is the greatest living director. It's hard to agree with that unless you ignore two-thirds of his filmography. Having said that, this is a masterpiece. A perfect film on every level.

I always point to this, as a film to watch if you want to learn how to make movies. It's got it all: Drama, humor, romance, action. Explosions of raw violence, mixed with gorgeous montages, set to period song. The rhythm of the music, the camera moves, and the sound creates a unique flow, unmatched by any other film. It never ceases to amaze me how some filmmakers fumble their way through a film, when there's a perfect instruction manual is available in Goodfellas. All you've got to do is watch and learn. You can't be a serious filmmaker unless you know it by heart. It's that simple.

Never forget to love it. I'm not asking.

Don't Forget To Love, part 13 of 24

2011-12-13T15:46:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Groundhog Day (1993)

Karma. It's a bitch. For Phil Connors more than for most people. Bill Murray plays the utterly unpleasant weatherman who must relive the worst day of his life over and over again, until he gets it right.

This movie is in tight competition with Ghostbusters for being the best thing Harold Ramis and Bill Murray have ever been involved in. The film derives most of its humor from Murray's perfect dry delivery of his pompous lines ("ALL the long distance lines are down? What about the satellites? Is it snowing in space?"), and those signature repetitious scenes, but what makes this one of the best comedies ever written is the deeper story. The story about redemption, self-sacrifice, and - to put it less eloquently - the story about not being a jerk. Oh, and finding true love as well.

Watch it, re-watch it, and watch it again. Laugh until you puke, but never forget the phrase "it's funny, 'cause it's true". It was never applied more appropriate to anything than to this film. Bing!

Never forget to love it. Again and again.

Don't Forget To Love, part 12 of 24

2011-12-12T13:23:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988)

The idea itself is inspired: Cartoons are shot just like regular films, and the cartoon "actors" live among us. They have their own laws of physics, and even their own town. Add to that one of the most charming animated characters ever conceived: Roger Rabbit, a crazy, frantic, infuriating, lovable creature - and admittedly a hotchpotch of familiar cartoon characteristics. Wrap the whole thing in a gorgeous, nostalgic '30s setting and a dime novel detective story. That's how you make a movie!

Who Framed Roger Rabbit is an unstoppable, impressive, hectic ride. An explosion of creative filmmaking! Kathleen Kennedy, Frank Marshall, and Steven Spielberg produced, and managed to secure the rights to several classic characters from various studios. Industrial Light & Magic provided the brilliant visual effects, and director Robert Zemeckis reached the zenith of his career.

Incidentally, don't forget the three Roger Rabbit shorts, released theatrically with other Disney films: Tummy Trouble (1989) (with Honey, I Shrunk the Kids), Roller Coaster Rabbit (1990) (with Dick Tracy), and Trail Mix-Up (1993) (with A Far Off Place). These are available with the feature film on DVD.

I was sad that they never made a sequel back in the day, but now I hope they never will. Who Framed Roger Rabbit is a unique film, it deserves to stay that way.

Never forget to love it.

Don't Forget To Love, part 11 of 24

2011-12-11T13:00:00.001+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

C.R.A.S.H. (1984)

I apologize to non-Danish readers for this, but it's time for some serious childhood nostalgia. Back in 1984 Danish TV launched a weird series for kids. It was created by Carsten Overskov, and told the story of the boy Birger, who discovers that his room can fly. All the way into space! He immediately ends up in the middle of an intergalactic crisis. A mad genius wants to take control over the universe, and he's got an evil plan that involves a black hole.

This show had it all: Space ships, robot soldiers, a space station on the edge of a black hole, a girl with humongous boobs, and more visual effects than in any other Danish TV production before or since.

Back then I was already a huge Star Wars fan, but I had also begun to take an interest in how visual effects were made, so I watched with bated breath as the 1 hour behind the scenes documentary carefully explained how they created the show. I went to an exhibition of the actual models used for the show, and I was building my own versions of the space destroyers out of LEGOs. Good times.

This show probably won't impress new viewers, but I don't care. Back then it BLEW MY MIND. I don't think I ever quite recovered.

Never forget to love it, assuming you knew it in the first place.

PS: The show can (for the time being) be watched online at dr.dk.

Don't Forget To Love, part 10 of 24

2011-12-10T12:39:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

The Tom and Jerry Shorts

I'm not a cartoon aficionado by any stretch of the imagination, but I love the old animated shorts, like Looney Tunes or Merrie Melodies. I've noticed something, though: Every Christmas I seem to bring out my Tom and Jerry DVDs.

I've got plenty of other classic cartoons in my library, but I just can't watch more than a couple of Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck shorts, before I want to smother myself with a pillow, I'm indifferent to Donald Duck, and Road Runner is just too damn repetitive, which I guess is part of the joke.

Tom and Jerry, on the other hand, I can watch nonstop. Every short, one after the other, without break. Maybe it's because they rarely talk, or maybe they're just more varied? Whatever the reason, these characters are gold and every Christmas, like clockwork, I give my DVDs a spin. You should too, so you never forget to love them.

PS: It sort of goes without saying, but we're talking about the Hanna-Barbera shorts, none of the other ones count. The images below are from one of these, Sleepy-Time Tom from 1951.

Don't Forget To Love, part 9 of 24

2011-12-09T19:40:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Deep Rising (1998)

The location may be posh - a brand new cruise ship on its maiden voyage - but throw in a group of up-to-no-good bandits, plus a deadly underwater creature, and this perfect example of a modern B-movie begins to take shape. Treat Williams is perfection as the reluctant hero, while Famke Janssen is deliciously foxy as an unsuccessful thief, and their in-the-heat-of-battle-romance is irresistible.

Director Stephen Sommers keeps a relentless pace going throughout the film, so you don't have time to think about how utterly ludicrous the whole idea is, and before you know it the film culminates in an awesome cliffhanger ending, which some people still don't get is a joke.

Even though the creature is created through computer animation, special makeup effect guru Rob Bottin was brought in to design the thing, a fantastically gross abomination, responsible for the film's most memorable moments

"Full scream ahead" the poster announces. That's true, but you'll be screaming with joy. So do that, and never forget to love it.

Don't Forget To Love, part 8 of 24

2011-12-08T21:43:00.001+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Epidemic (1987)

Before Lars von Trier lost his ability to make films, he made three of the best Danish films ever made: Element of Crime, Epidemic, and Europe, known as The Europe Trilogy. Epidemic is the only comedy among them.

It deals with two writers - the actual writers Trier and Niels Vørsel - who must come up with a script for a film in a few days. They chose to tell a story about a deadly epidemic, which we see clips from during the film, while - unbeknownst to them - a real epidemic breaks out in the real world.

This is a new level of metafilm. It's almost incomprehensible unless you're a film nerd and know a little about screenwriting, but if you do it's funny as hell. I've showed this film to friends, and while I was rolling around on the floor reduced to tears from laughing, they were watching the screen with a completely bewildered expression on their faces. Which just makes me love it even more.

This is an utterly unique film, in every sense of the word. For that reason alone, you should never forget to love it.

Don't Forget To Love, part 7 of 24

2011-12-07T14:46:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Third Watch (1999-2005)

Cop shows and medical dramas are a dime a dozen. There are literally hundreds of TV-shows about the brave souls who try to keep our streets safe and our bodies in one piece. These series come in all shapes and sizes and many of them are very good. In spite of this Third Watch felt different and special. It wasn't just the fact that it covered both police, firefighters and paramedics. Right from the raw title sequence, featuring "Keep Hope Alive" by The Crystal Method, you got the clear sense that this was a show that wouldn't pull its punches.

Through a wide variety of stories, combining all three divisions, Third Watch was never afraid to expose its characters as deeply flawed human beings, unforgivably so at times. We could never be sure they would all make it home alive at the end of the day, the series killed of enough regulars along the way to make us afraid, every time a beloved character stepped fearlessly into another life and death situation.

Highest praise must go to the actors, especially Kim Raver, as the divorced paramedic Kim, who was both fragile and bulletproof. Bobby Cannavale starred as her partner Bobby, whose untimely departure provided the single most heartbreaking moment of the series. Skipp Sudduth played the jaded officer Sullivan. His season 3 and 4 storyline featured Roy Scheider as a Russian mobster - his best work of the last 15 years of his career. Jason Wiles' breakthrough was in Beverly Hills 90210, but you wouldn't know that from watching his portrayal of the headstrong Officer Bosco, who could only be tamed by his older partner Faith, played by Molly Price. I could go on.

Strong characters, strong stories, beautifully shot. Not to be missed.

Never forget to love it.

Don't Forget To Love, part 6 of 24

2011-12-06T10:02:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Home for the Holidays (1995)

Holly Hunter plays the woman who returns home for thanksgiving with the family, a yearly ritual loathed by everyone involved. So why keep doing it? It's tradition, it's family, and because we have to.

"I'm giving thanks that we don't have to go through this for another year. Except we do, because those bastards went and put Christmas right in the middle, just to punish us."

This is a christmas film for me. Yes, I know, technically it takes place during thanksgiving, but the trials and tribulations of this particular family will be familiar to anyone, regardless of the holiday. We've all been at one of those family gatherings full of stories you've heard a thousand times before, plus some new ones you wish you hadn't heard.

This film brilliantly captures a family who has been through this ritual many times before, and seems to have reached a breaking point. It mixes tragedy and comedy to create a perfect experience, which is both funny as hell, and surprisingly poignant, sometimes in the same sentence. Quite a feat. It's tragic and heartbreaking, weird and wonderful, with more truth in one scene than you can find in all the holy books in the whole world.

Never forget to love it. At a distance. The family, I mean.

Don't Forget To Love, part 5 of 24

2011-12-05T09:34:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

The X Files: Fight the Future (1998)

The second, third and fourth season of The X-Files gave us some of the most outstanding TV ever produced. By the fifth season, though, the series was losing its steam. The carefully constructed mythology story started to crumble, and became increasingly silly. This feature film was supposed to change that and revitalize the show. It didn't. Instead it became the absolute high point of the whole franchise.

The small-screen story was beautifully expanded to fill the big screen, and my favorite of the series directors, Rob Bowman, took the helm and created a convincing, fast-paced conspiracy-action-thriller, with some spectacular set-pieces. The bombing of the FBI building is still a stunning sequence even by today's standards.

I wish they had just kept the show on the big screen from then on, with a new feature film ever other year. Instead, The X-Files fizzled out culminating in a spectacularly underwhelming second feature film. Too bad.

Cherish the past. Enjoy the present. Fight the future. And never forget to love The X-Files.

Don't Forget To Love, part 4 of 24

2011-12-04T12:17:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992)

We've all got mad love for Francis Ford Coppola, how could we not, when this is the guy who directed The Godfather, The Conversation, The Godfather Part II, and Apocalypse Now in the same freakin' decade? After these masterpieces something started to go wrong, he seemed to lose his way, until Dracula came along.

Coppola wanted to go old school with this film. Everything was shot on sets, and he vehemently refused to use any modern special effect techniques, so everything was done with models, mirrors and camera tricks. He even employed an ancient hand-cranked camera for a sequence!

This is a film from a man who has nothing left to prove, who merely wanted to create a good old-fashioned film, with passion and power, filling every frame to the brim with nostalgia and love for the movies. It's a sight to behold, and even the worst miscasting in history - Keanu Reeves - can't ruin this perfect little gem for me.

Never forget to love it.

Don't Forget To Love, part 3 of 24

2011-12-03T02:22:00.000+01:00

Welcome to the Single-Minded Movie Blog advent calendar. Between the 1st and the 24th of December every day will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Stakeout (1987)

This actually came out the same year as Lethal Weapon. That was back when John Badham made real movies, when Richard Dreyfuss could still play the lead, and Madeleine Stowe still had her own lips. The combination of hardcore action movie and buddy comedy - that made Lethal Weapon such a hit - works its magic here too.

The banter between Dreyfuss and Emilio Estevez, the pranks between the stakeout night shift and the day shift, plus a few outright slapstick moments, is combined with a sweet and gentle love story between Dreyfuss and Stowe. Meanwhile the ex-boyfriend, a genuinely menacing Aidan Quinn, moves ever closer, representing a real, undeniable threat.

It's not Shakespeare or Strindberg, but make no mistake, it takes skill to create a film that can do all these things, without turning into a mess. Oh, and there's a scene where Madeleine Stowe steps out of the shower naked.

Never forget to love it.

Don't Forget To Love, part 2 of 24

2011-12-02T09:18:00.000+01:00

Welcome to The Single-Minded Movie Blog Advent Calendar. Every day between the 1st and the 24th of December will bring you a short post about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love.

Crime Story (1986-1988)

Before Michael Mann was a big huge director of big huge movies, with an increasing number of big huge failures behind him, he was primarily a TV guy. Most people will probably cite Miami Vice, as his claim to fame, but I'll go with this classic crime series which lasted only two season.

Crime Story is to gangster dramas on TV, what The Godfather is to gangster dramas on the silver screen. It's raw, even cynical at times, with a flawless period style. And the fate of some of these characters will break your heart.

It's been a while since I caught up with it, but the complete series has been released on DVD, and I'll give a spin soon. You should too, if for no other reason than to listen to the awesome theme again.

Never forget to love it.

Don't Forget To Love, part 1 of 24

2011-12-01T22:00:00.000+01:00

Recently fellow blogger Mr. Gaga of Gaga The Movies revealed that he was considering doing an advent calendar for his blog. That inspired me to do one as well. My take on the idea is to bring you a short post every day between the 1st and the 24th of December, reminding you about a film or a TV-show you shouldn't forget to love. It's that simple. So without further ado, here is the first...

Lethal Weapon (1987)

What better way to start the show than by remembering this classic '80s movie? By the fourth film the franchise had deteriorated into silly slapstick, but the original movie is relentless and uncompromising.

Featuring a razor-sharp script from Shane Black, and topnotch direction from Richard Donner, this is as good as it gets when it comes to a serious action movie. Mel Gibson's portrayal of Martin Briggs is the best work he's ever done. And Danny Glover is there too.

Oh, and it's even a christmas film!

Never forget to love it.

Dear Academy,

2011-11-12T14:34:00.000+01:00

I'm glad to see that you're listening.

Now, fix the other things we talked about.

All the best

- David

The Outsiders (1983)

2011-11-07T11:09:00.000+01:00

REVIEW

I will try to be brief this time. Yes, I know, contain your amazement if you can. The thing is, this is the first time I've seen The Outsiders. I feel like I haven't earned the right to fully appreciate it yet. I also feel terrible that it didn't enter my film vocabulary sooner. Especially considering who directed it, and who stars in it, but there we are.

The Outsiders takes place in the '60s, in a small town somewhere in America. We follow the Greasers - the guys from the wrong side of the track. Leather jackets. Torn jeans. Hair shaped to within an inch of its life by overzealous application of hair product. Their enemies? The Socs (as in the first part of the word "social"). Those are the kids from the right side of the tracks, and don't they know it. One fateful night a young Greaser accidentally kills one of the Socs, trying to defend his buddy. This is the drop. There will be a rumble. And it won't be pretty.

There's more to the story than this, obviously, but if you're familiar with the film or the book it was based on, you know that already, and if you're not, you should approach it knowing as little as I did.

The overall feel of the story will be familiar to most, at least parts of it. Think Romeo & Juliet, without the lovebirds. Think Grease, sans the singing, the humor and the doe-eyed leads. You will also know every single face in the little group of Greasers. Every single one of these actors went on to bigger and better things. Some of them didn't get that far. Some of them went too far, but you will know them.

There's C. Thomas Howell from Red Dawn and The Hitcher. Ralph Macchio, The Karate Kid himself. Matt Dillon, who never really found a proper place in film history, but who curiously pops up in Beautiful Girls, playing a part that could have been his The Outsiders character 10 years later. There's Rob Lowe, from the Brat Pack, who took a lot of wrong turns and a few right ones, and ended up in The West Wing. Patrick Swayze of Dirty Dancing fame, who left us too soon. His rumble against cancer ended less well than the one against the Socs. We wont forget Emilio Estevez, whose legendary turns in legendary movies The Breakfast Club and St. Elmo's Fire are truly the stuff of legends. And last, but not least, Tom Cruise shows his face in a few scenes, complete with baby fat in his cheeks. He would next make Risky Business, and the rest is history. I also need to mention one of the Socs: The girl named Cherry, played by an impossibly young and adorable Diane Lane. There's nothing more to say about her. No words could do her justice.

It boggles the mind to look at these talents and think that they were once in the same movie. Imagine stepping onto the set of this movie, looking up and finding these hungry faces, waiting to challenge anything you say!

I'll admit, some of the performances are rough. Sometimes too rough. But they're not rough, like a reality star trying to capitalize on undeserved fame, or a singer taking "the next natural step" into a movie career. They are rough, because these actors are unpolished diamonds. They are young, hungry, and one-hundred percent honest. That's what the fame-whores of today will never understand. You just can't fake this kind of honesty. The camera simply reveals too much. It will look deep into your heart and reveal the color of your soul. Unfortunately too many people these days have gone color-blind, incapable of spotting the fakes.

Francis Ford Coppola directed this film after the nightmare that was Apocalypse Now and the utter failure that was One from the Heart. I hope he truly treasures the making of this film. The Outsiders is a giant piece from the cherry pie of nostalgia. It so perfectly captures the period that only the familiar faces - and a bit of math - prevents you from thinking this was actually shot in the '60s. It makes me long for a time I haven't even experienced!

If I was really cheeky I might say: It makes me an offer I can't possibly refuse.

BLURAY

The quality of the transfer on this Blu-ray from Studio Canal in England is stunning. The images are perfect, the colors are brilliant. This simply looks like a new film. The almost flawless images lead me to believe that some Digital Noise Reduction has been employed, simply because there's not a grain in sight anywhere. Maybe that's something some people will complain about, but how can I complain, when the movie looks THIS good? I could not imagine a better way to see The Outsiders for the first time.

The Blu-ray features the full director's cut version of the film, adding some 22 minutes to the original theatrical version. I can't report intelligently on the differences, since the extended cut is the only one I've been exposed to.

I need to watch this film a few more times, before I dig into the extras, but let me just quickly sum them up: Two audio commentaries - one with Coppola, one with the cast - a 26 minute making of program, plus several small items, including: A news segment, cast members reading the original novel, deleted scenes and something about the casting. The high point here will undoubtedly be the audio commentaries, but this is still a very nice package.

FINAL THOUGHTS

I absolutely treasure a limited selection of Francis Ford Coppola's films. You really do have to word any appreciation for this maverick director as carefully as that. Coppola is not an easy director to be a fan of. For every Godfather, there's a Peggy Sue Got Married, and for every Apocalypse Now there's a Jack.

The Outsiders reminds us why we must love him anyway, despite his countless flaws.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to StudioCanal and Edith Chappey for making this review possible.

The Conversation (1974)

2011-10-31T09:59:00.001+01:00

INTRODUCTION

Squeezed in between the two powerhouse Godfather films The Conversation can easily be overlooked, when one considers the career of Francis Ford Coppola. That's a shame, but not that surprising.

The Conversation is a film devoid of high profile scandals, and uncharacteristically timid in its visual approach. It doesn't have the grandeur of the Corleone family, or the madness of the Vietnam war to overload our senses. Instead, this is a quiet film that blends in with the wallpaper. It's Coppola's most intimate film, and perhaps his most personal as well?

STORY

The story deals with a surveillance specialist, Harry Caul (Gene Hackman), who has recently completed an assignment, where he was asked to record a conversation between a young couple who seems to be having an affair. As he is about to deliver the tapes to his client, he begins to suspect foul play. He refuses to hand over the recordings. The tapes are dangerous, he's warned. Someone may get hurt. This is not the first time Harry's recordings have put people in danger, but he won't make the same mistake again.

What will his client do to get the tapes? Can he trust his co-worker? Is he being followed?Already overcautious to a fault, Harry soon descents into full-blown paranoia. When you can't trust anybody, how can you even trust yourself?

REVIEW

The opening scene of The Conversation is famous. It deals with the actual recording of the titular conversation, in a wonderful, unruly, documentary style montage. The soundtrack switches back and forth between the various microphones recording the event, and the broken pieces of the dialogue is mixed with loud incidental music. We strain to decipher the meaning of the dialogue, based on limited information. It's frustrating, in a very satisfying way (does that make sense?) and you shouldn't be surprised if you catch yourself leaning towards the screen to hear better. It's fascinating to watch Harry Caul go back to the tapes later in the film in an attempt to uncover the truth, but what is the truth? How will we know, when the meaning of the conversation changes every time we hear it?

A lot of people in the information delivery business these days should watch this film and take notes. Interpretation of information is an interesting and increasingly relevant discussion to have. It seems to me that the more information we get, the less effective we become at processing it.

The first 10 minutes of The Conversation represents a lost art. A way of making movies that no one seems capable of doing these days, or maybe no one dares. The scene feels like random documentary footage. No one explains to us what it all means, no one takes our hand and says "this is how you're supposed to feel". We know nothing, we assume everything, and we won't know for sure until the very end of the film.

The real center centerpiece of the film, though, is Gene Hackman.

The character of Harry Caul is far removed from Hackman's other famous screen personas, be it Little Bill, Jimmy Doyle, or even Lex Luthor. None of these characters ever became one with the wallpaper, but Harry does, and Hackman plays the part so differently than the take-charge guys we've come to know him as.

Harry is cold and distant - emotionally unavailable, as the phrase goes. He's unapproachable, unlovable, untrusting. He seems to hunger for personal connection, and yet the character is so eager to be isolated that he even tries to escape from the camera. At one point he leaves a shot, and the camera follows him, when it becomes clear that he's not returning to the frame, but then Harry leaves again, when the camera once again finds him.

The conflicted nature of Harry's being is where I suspect we'll find the link to Francis Ford Coppola's personal life. The film was written in 1966, well before Coppola became a household name. It was released in 1974, before The Godfather, part 2 cemented his career, and earned him no less than three Academy Awards.

However, when one considers the raging talent on the verge of breakdown that we see in the behind the scenes footage from Apocalypse Now (1979), it seems clear to me that Coppola was always, to some extent, a man driven by fear. The fear of failure, fear of having his work taken away and bastardized, fear of losing those around him. We know how important family is to Coppola. It doesn't seem unreasonable to think that Harry is the result of Coppola meditating on his own demons, by giving the character all of his own flaws, and none of his success.

I haven't heard Coppola's own thoughts on this, and I prefer to make up my own mind, before I let Coppola offer his version. When it comes to talking about Coppola's films, no one does it better than Coppola himself. His audio commentaries for the two Godfather films (what third?) are legendary, as is the feature length documentary Hearts of Darkness (1991), detailing his struggle to create Apocalypse Now, which brings us to this new Blu-ray release.

BLURAY

So finally The Conversation makes its Blu-ray debut. Good call people. StudioCanal in England is responsible for this Blu-Ray/DVD combo release.

The problem with this film, indeed with most films more than 5 years old, is that they were not made for the kind of high-def sets most of us have today. Adding to that is the fact that many films of the '70s embraced a rough, dirty, gritty look. This means that The Conversation is a very grainy Blu-ray. The opening Paramount logo and the first shot looks HORRIBLE, but don't worry. This is often the case with older films. As we get further into the film it takes on a pleasant, if somewhat inconsistent, look. It's still grainy, and it still looks rough, but that's the intention, and if you don't like that, stick to CGI animated films and you'll be fine.

I did notice a few shots, when the image seemed slightly soft, suggesting a bit of digital noise reduction, I also noticed "fixed grain" a couple of times, where a sort of "net of grain" sticks to the image when the camera moves. Don't get me wrong, you're not going to find a better version of this film out there, but don't watch this right after a super clean, high def, modern film, it won't hold up to that comparison.

As I mentioned earlier, I deliberately avoided watching any of the special features before I wrote this review. The main features among the extras are the two audio commentaries - one with Coppola, the other with Walter Murch. I can't wait to delve into these, maybe they'll earn a separate post! A vintage featurette "Close-Up on The Conversation" is included, as well as screen tests, a few interviews and other tidbits. A very nice package.

I can't stress this enough: If you want to learn how to make films, or just learn to appreciate films better, you need to sit down and listen to an audio commentary by Francis Ford Coppola.

FINAL THOUGHTS

Few films capture paranoia the way The Conversation does. Watching Harry Caul's life fall apart is devastating. Coppola is unrelenting as he slowly dismantles this already broken man right before our eyes, leading up to a heartbreaking, gruesome ending.

This is an unromantic, endlessly cynical film, devoid of any illusions of redemption. Like its central character it often feels distant and cold. It's a film that should be approached cautiously, with knowledge of its place in time and in film history, and with a minimum of appreciation for the technical aspects.

The Conversation is not easy to watch, but whoever said that a masterpiece should be?

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to StudioCanal and Olivia Jarvis for making this review possible.

Terra Nova: Genesis, Part 1 & 2 (2011)

2011-10-09T11:24:00.001+02:00

The Earth is dying. Mankind is slowly being smothered in our own filth. The only hope is a new amazing discovery. A time-portal into the past. 85 million years into the past, to be more precise. Here mankind has found a new paradise and established a colony that will enable us to start over. This brand new world is not entirely without problems, though. Dinosaurs, for example. Actual giant, hungry, bad-ass dinosaurs.

Well, that's sound pretty cool, doesn't it? Unfortunately that description hardly covers the awfulness that is Terra Nova, the new TV-series from Fox, which can best be described as a Lifetime movie, meets Jurassic Park, by way of a cheap SyFy knockoff of Avatar.

The single worst aspect of this show is the writing. Almost all problems stem from the fact that the writing is beyond lazy. Let's start with our lead characters, The Shannon family.

The family (mom, dad and three kids) live in a crummy apartment, and apparently you're only supposed to have two kids, but they have three, so when the "population control" soldiers arrive, the family hides the youngest daughter behind a secret panel in the wall.

The soldiers enter the apartment and IMMEDIATELY begin to violently trash the place (no time to properly establish a conflict here, we've got places to be!) and they find the kid almost IMMEDIATELY, because she begins to cry. Why, I can't believe that plan didn't work!

Then the dad punches the soldiers, because he gets REALLY mad. Cut. Now it's two years later and the father is in prison. Cut. Then the wife gets an offer to join the next team to Terra Nova. Despite having languished for years in prison, the father and the mother immediately come up with an escape plan, without discussing anything. Cut. The father sneaks out of prison. Nobody notices this. In fact, nobody notices him at any point during his elaborate and completely implausible escape, but when he walks down a random maintenance corridor a few meters from his goal - the time portal where his family awaits - an eagle-eyed security guy spots him. "Wait, who is that "suspicious character" in random corridor? He must be stopped!"

So the "clever" plan fails and what does the dad do? He runs. That's right, he just runs past the WORST security team EVER and jumps into the time-portal, and just like that the whole family is together again in Terra Nova. Did I mention part of the "clever" plan was transporting the youngest daughter in a backpack through security?

Oh, but we're not done yet.

After a brief "gosh you shouldn't have done that"-talk with the camp leader - Stephen Lang repeating his character from Avatar - everyone seems to forget that they're dealing with an escaped convict, who cheated his way to Terra Nova. Everything seems okay and the family gets a nice, big, new house. Ah, but the family unit is not in perfect harmony yet. Of course we need that so-obvious-it-hurts conflict between father and son, who - in another case of idiotic, simplistic storytelling - blames the father for trying to save his sister, and for taking two whole years to break out of maximum security prison. And speaking of family problems, you will find it hard not to vomit as everyone gathers in silent awe and watch the father reconnect with his youngest daughter, by pretending not to know her name. Cue the music and the Hallmark card filter. By the way, if my parents had pretended not to know my name when I was a kid it would have freaked the hell out of me.

In the lead role as the dad Jason O'Mara has about the same charisma as a dead tree trunk. In fact, I often mistook him for one, and that carefully designed stubble isn't fooling anybody. The mother (Christine Adams) is beautiful, but she's cast so young she could pass for the oldest daughter as well. The kids are bland Disney Channel rejects, incapable of a single believable expression. These people aren't acting. They're pretending to act.

Half an hour into the show all we've done is establish the lackluster family and the basic premise. We don't really know what the hell is going on yet. This seems to have surprised the writers, because all of a sudden they give us a scene where one character explains how Terra Nova was established to another character, who really should have all that information already. They also quickly explain that this is an alternate timeline, so they're not destroying the future by going into the past. Say what? Don't bother, it doesn't make any sense, and the series can't be bothered to explain any further (at least not yet).

The science isn't the only thing that doesn't make any sense here. If this world is so dangerous, why are the fences crap? The colony apparently provides every new family with a shiny, brand new condo, but they can't build a decent fence? And why would these people arm themselves with guns that have NO effect on the dinosaurs, the very creatures they're trying to protect themselves from? (Well, actually that one is easy: This is once again due to lazy writing, you see, several sequences in this episode rely on a confrontation between dinos and humans, and if the humans can just kill the dinos, the scenes are over too quickly).

Terra Nova is a compendium of unrealistic behavior, overly simple solutions to hastily established problems, trivial dialogue and obnoxious, flat characters. If only the writers had a single original idea. We've seen this type of Utopia story a million times before. It never really works. Add to that some utterly unconvincing, bargain basement CGI, some laughable bad guys, and a few painfully obvious setups for upcoming mysteries. The only real mystery here is how this script avoided the trashcan. Even the costume design sucks. These characters dress like completely ordinary folks in 2011. No sign of the fact that we're 200 years into the future, or - when we reach Terra Nova - that most of these people have lived in an isolated, fairly rough place, with limited resources. They look like they've just stepped out of a catalogue.

The opening episode of Terra Nova is a charmless, soulless and utterly unimpressive piece of work. No, I tell a lie... Terra Nova actually makes me long for the banalities of Avatar. That IS kind of impressive.

Quatermass and the Pit (1967)

2011-10-02T16:44:00.000+02:00

THE STORY

It starts as a rather innocent excavation of a subway tunnel in London. Some humanoid skeletons are found, and next to them a metallic object. Perhaps it's an old unexploded bomb? The diggers take no chances and call in the military.

Colonel Breen (Julian Glover) arrives to take charge, and with him a curious professor by the name of Quatermass (Andrew Keir). His speciality is not the trivial human conflicts of Earth, his interests lie beyond this planet, on the moon, in space, and beyond.

When the metallic object is fully uncovered one thing becomes clear: This is not a bomb. It's a spaceship. Suddenly professor Quatermass finds himself far more useful than anyone had anticipated.

REVIEW

The first thing you should know about this film is that there are several other movies and a few TV serials carrying the Quatermass moniker. The second thing you should know is that this is effectively a standalone story, so no prior knowledge of the franchise is required...

Any movie that opens with the uncovering of a mysterious, possibly alien, object has my vote. However, this is not a $250 million CGI Hollywood production, so don't expect trips to the dark side of the moon and a planet wide alien invasion force. This is a relatively cheap British B-movie and most of it takes place in the same location, or rather set - that almost convincing excavation site. I don't mind that. If the story is interesting enough, cardboard sets and stuff hanging in strings are okay. And the core story IS interesting. A mysterious spaceship and weird artifacts! I was glued to the screen during those early discussion, when the scientists were desperately trying to make sense of it all, and then of course there's that bone-chilling moment when the ship opens... Ah! I've said too much already!

I also appreciated the final act of the movie, where all hell breaks loose and the story opens up to include the entire city. There's panic in the streets, and the future of the entire human race is on the line!

Oddly enough, while I was unbothered by some of the B-movie antics, I couldn't help but notice how casually every character treats these events, from a safety and security point of view.

When the humanlike skulls are first brought forward, the lead expert violently hacks away at the (obviously ordinary) clay that covers it, without any fear that he'll damage the precious find (I'm reminded of that less than scientific fossil uncovering at the beginning of Jurassic Park). The men who examine the spaceship wear gloves AFTER they realize it gives them cold burns, when they touch it, and no one wears masks or any other kind of protective gear. Highly irregular. And I haven't even gotten to security yet! Anybody could just walk into the dig site without being checked. At some point a reporter asks when he can get in, he's told he'll have to wait until the morning, but he could literally walk straight into the place, if the solitary guard was momentarily distracted.

In spite of all this, I still enjoyed the hell out of this movie! It was silly, it had some problems, but it was fun! I'm reading 2001: A Space Odyssey and 2010: Odyssey Two by Arthur C. Clark at the moment, and frankly the cheesy B-level story here was a bit of a relief, compared to Clark's fascinating, but cold, scientific storytelling.

BLURAY

Prior to watching this film I checked out a recent release of the first two feature films The Quatermass Xperiment (1955) and Quatermass 2 (1957). They were produced more than 10 years earlier and to the best of my knowledge on an even lower budget. They were in horrible condition, so it was with some reservation that I popped this Bluray into the player.

Luckily Quatermass and the Pit (1967) fared much better than the others. With striking bright colors the quality of the image is already far better than I had hoped. There's quite a bit of grain present, but the image still felt sharp, despite the obvious shortcomings of the source material. One must consider the age of the a film, and taking that into account I don't think we'll ever get a better version than this.

The extras consist mostly of interviews. Everyone from Julian Glover to Joe Dante gets a chance to weigh in on the film, and the combined running time is close to 2 hours! This may seem a little dull - just talking heads interviews - but there are some very interesting stories to tell here. Also included is a 24 minute "World of Hammer" documentary and some trailers. Overall a very nice package.

FINAL THOUGHTS

I'm glad I finally had a chance to check out this classic film. I'm always interested in discovering unseen science fiction movies - new or old - because this is a criminally undersupplied genre. Anyone who feels the same way can safely check out Quatermass and the Pit. You need to get past the shoddy set, the cheesy dialogue and most of the other B-movie elements. If you can do that, this trip into the pit with professor Quatermass is a perfect way to spend a lazy Sunday afternoon.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to StudioCanal and Edith Chappey for making this review possible.

Top 10 Star Wars Changes Lucas SHOULD Have Done

2011-09-25T18:12:00.000+02:00

INT. IMPERIAL OUTPOST - NIGHT

Finally it happened. George Lucas decided to release his beloved Star Wars trilogy (and those three other films) on Bluray. Of course these are the heavily manipulated special editions, and there's no sign that the original versions will be released, despite complaints from a very vocal fan-base.

The fact that Lucas keeps changing these films (every incarnation has been tampered with), and deny the existence of the original versions, is monumentally stupid, but we'll save that for another blog.

Obviously the first order of business should have been to get rid of all the alterations and get back to the original version, but failing that why hasn't Lucas gone all the way?

There's a bunch of things he could have changed, which actually would have improved the films, instead of those silly or annoying changes he did do (I mean, is there anyone out there who seriously had trouble with Anakin Skywalker's eyebrows?! And if so... kill yourself!)

Anyway, here are my suggestions for things Lucas SHOULD have changed, but didn't.

WIPE TO:

THE LIST

1) The droids and Obi Wan don't recognize each other

When Luke meets up with Obi Wan in Star Wars, the old Jedi shows no sign of recognizing R2-D2 and C-3PO, nor do they recognize him. However, several decades earlier they were running around together and saved the galaxy.

I'm not sure if this is the biggest hole in the story, but it's certainly the most infuriating. The only reason we got into this mess, is because Lucas insisted that the droids were included in the prequel trilogy, despite the fact that it doesn't make any sense. Up to this point no one had assumed that Anakin built C-3PO, so there was no reason to include the robot in the story, and judging by the beating the average Astro droid gets, there's no reason to assume an R2 unit would be in service for more than 30 years, so he shouldn't be there either. If Lucas had bothered re-watch the original trilogy just once, before he wrote the prequels, he would have realized this inconsistency.

Solution: This one is tricky, yet simple. The problem could be solved by deleting the three prequels.

2) The fat Jabba dancer

Look, I like big women as much as the next guy, but this is overdoing it. Besides, the way Jabba drools over Leia, it's reasonable to assume that he likes his woman small and perky. So who IS this woman? Is she someone's drunk aunt? Somebody should have lured her over to the trapdoor and pushed the button.

Solution: Do like the Jedi, and use your powers for good. Just paint her out with CGI.

3) Garbage mattes

With all the technical tinkering Lucas has subjected these films to, it seems odd that he hasn't gotten rid of the so-called "garbage mattes".

To the uninitiated, garbage mattes are a defect of doing blue screen work in the old photochemical effect days. The use of this process can, under certain conditions, result in an almost transparent "box" around some elements. This is almost gone in the new high def versions, but I want it completely gone. Once you notice these boxes, you'll be distracted and pulled out of the films every time you watch them.

Solution: CGI.

4) Other technical flaws

Lucas loves fixing little details, so why didn't he fix some of the additional technical glitches? Take for example the cockpit shots as shuttle Tyderium approaches Endor: The background is visible through the actors. Or what about the weird painted exhaust from Boba Fett's jet-pack? Or all the shots where large doors open really fast, and there's a noticeable jerk in the image? These things can be really distracting, why not get rid of them?

Solution: More CGI.

5) Han Solo can't do math

"I owe you one!" Han Solo claims after Luke has saved him from Jabba, but this is technically not true. Remember how Solo saved Luke from Vader in Star Wars? And then he saved him from freezing to death on Hoth in Empire Strikes Back? In Empire Solo even says: "That's two you owe me, Junior."

So for the slow ones: 2 minus 1 is 1. Even in Star Wars.

Solution: A simple audio-fix. Like they did in Blade Runner, when they needed to get the number of replicants right. Wait a second... Harrison Ford appeared in that movie too! Maybe HE's the one who can't do math!

6) The Three Wise Men help the rebels

A little known fact: After the Three Wise Men had delivered all that gold, frankincense, and myrrh, they traveled to the fourth moon of Yavin to monitor the rebel assault on the Death Star. Bet you never read that part of the story did ya? Seriously, who are these old guys? Wouldn't it make more sense to get some younger, more alert folks in the support staff? I'm just saying.

Solution: Re-cut. Use footage of completely hairless random dudes from THX-1138 and insert them with CGI.

7) The well-endowed nose

I hate to be a stickler for small details, but then again nothing about THIS guy is small. Every time I've seen this movie with an audience, everyone snickers, and it always pulls me out of the film. Can we please get rid of that nose, so we can all focus on the serious issues? Escaping the stormtroopers, saving the galaxy and all that. Damn, would you look at that thing!

Solution: CGI. Who wouldn't want that credit? "CGI schlong nose removal"!

8) The continuity errors

All movies have continuity errors. It's simply unavoidable. I won't bore you with the details, just look up the IMDb goof pages, there are hundreds of mistakes in each film. But why, in the midst of all his tinkering, didn't Lucas fix a few of those? No-no, instead he got his CGI guys to paint some new rocks into a shot, thus creating NEW continuity errors!

Solution: Fire up those computers and get to work. Again.

9) Get Chewie a medal

One of the greatest injustices in the galaxy! Poor Chewbacca! He's been Han Solo's faithful companion from the word go, he's put in the time, he's paid his dues, doesn't he deserve some recognition as well? I think so. Look at him standing there during the final ceremony in Star Wars, completely medal-less. Outrageous.

Solution: Bit of the old CGI should clear that right up.

10) Luke's hair

Most people will probably want to get rid of Leia's giant headphone-hair in Star Wars, but honestly that never bothered me all that much. What does bother me is Luke's 70's haircut in all three movies. Even when he becomes a commander or general (or what the hell he is), he's still sticking with the stupid haircut. Don't they have ANY standards in the rebel army? No wonder they have to cheat to win.

Solution: Massive re-shoots. Everything must be redone. No amount of CGI tinkering can save this one.

WIPE TO:

FINAL THOUGHTS

I trust the less-than-serious nature of this blog post is obvious. It sprung from a genuine frustration with Lucas and the way he treats the Star Wars fans. I doubt he will ever listen to the fans and bring back the original versions of the films, and that saddens me. A fellow blogger suggested that the Academy took back all the Oscars the Star Wars movies won - 10 in total. The reason being that the work they won for no longer exists! So naturally it would be completely justifiable to ask for Lucas and his crew to return the statuettes.

Maybe we should do that. Maybe then Lucas would think twice about tampering with our movies. Yes, I said OUR movies. Star Wars belongs to us, the fans. George Lucas just works here.

WIPE TO BLACK

Manhunter (1986)

2011-09-19T17:46:00.003+02:00

THE STORY

A serial killer nicknamed The Tooth Fairy is targeting families and the police have nothing. They know he kills at full moon, and with the next full moon only three weeks away, lead investigator Jack Crawford reaches out to criminal profiler Will Graham, who's currently on leave, licking his wounds after a particular nasty run-in with another serial killer, Dr. Hannibal Lecktor.

Graham must leave his family behind and once again risk his sanity, by reconnecting with the part of his brain that enables him to think like a psychopathic killer. He must think like the killer, so he can catch the killer, and he must do it fast. The full moon is approaching and time is running out.

REVIEW

A tortured cop lured back for one last job is hardly an original concept, and if that was all Manhunter was, we wouldn't still be talking about it today. Needless to say, this movie is so much more than it's pulp novel tagline would suggest.

These days police procedurals are a dime a dozen. Detectives who think like killers show up on TV on a daily basis, and the whole concept now seems gimmicky and fake, but back in the day, in 1986, this must have seemed like a fresh idea.

Manhunter opens with shaky video footage, shot by the killer as he enters the house of his latest target. He moves into the family bedroom. He waits as the wife slowly wakes up. She looks at him, and the clip ends. There's no question about the tone from this point on.

Manhunter is fascinating, because it combines the traditional methodical police investigation with Graham's obsessive approach to profiling, and while these two elements clash and fuel each other's fire, there's the constant reminder of Graham's family hovering in the background. They're not just pawns to be moved into place in the third act, caught between killer and cop in the final showdown, their happiness is on the line even if the killer never gets near them. They're a constant weakness for Graham, but they're his armor as well. The one thing that truly separates him from the man he's chasing.

The stakes couldn't be any higher.

The driving force behind Manhunter is, of course, writer/director Michael Mann. Once upon a time he made great films. Heat (1995) and The Insider (1999) are among my favorites, not just because they are good stories and technically well-done, what I love about these films is the way Mann creates mood.

Remember the scene in Heat, where Al Pacino chases down Robert De Niro in a helicopter, just before their famous diner-scene? Or that scene in The Insider, when they drive to the courthouse, so that Russell Crowe can get his testimony on the record? Mann is (or rather, was) a master at creating this type of sequence, where the visuals, the music and the underlying theme blend together in a visually dense, emotional exhausting knot. There are more than a few scenes in Manhunter that demonstrate the same cinematic dexterity.

While there are lives at stake in Heat's search for justice, and interesting ethical questions buried in the politics of The Insider, Manhunter allows Mann to focus on a much more simple, raw premise: Catch the killer, before you lose your mind.

As an instrument in this endeavor The Tooth Fairy is a truly frightening creation. A tortured man, struggling with his own identity, caught in a mental whirlpool, which threatens to tear him apart. He's a monster, but he's a human as well, and his actions sometimes make us question whether he really is beyond salvation. In the garden variety cop thriller, we know that the killer and the cop will end up facing each other in the final reel, and we also know which one of them will prevail. Manhunter makes us doubt all the signature elements of the genre. We can't be sure that the cop will maintain his sanity until the end, we don't know if the police will find the one piece of evidence that will lead them straight to the killer, but most importantly, we can't be sure how far gone the killer is. That shred of humanity he shows, however small in the contest of his previous transgressions, makes us doubt, if only for a second, but that adds an interesting and unusual layer to the story and the character.

So let's turn our attention to the elephant in the room... The Silence of the Lambs (1991).

Manhunter is based on the novel Red Dragon, published in 1981, while the The Silence of the Lambs novel was published in 1988. Both were written by Thomas Harris. Seeing how Manhunter was received upon it's initial release (very poorly), it probably surprised even the most optimistic souls when the movie version of The Silence of the Lambs became a runaway hit, and made it all the way to Oscar glory and pop culture immortality.

In many respects Silence is the better of the two films, but it's also the most accessible. That fact alone will award it penalty points from many film-connoisseurs, and I must admit that even though I hold Silence in the highest regard, it's not entirely without flaws. Many of them admittedly enhanced by the countless inferior sequels and prequels.

The most interesting point of deviation is Brian Cox's take on the serial killer Hannibal Lecktor, which makes Anthony Hopkins' version look like a party clown. Cox is, of course, also assisted by superior production design. When we meet him he's dressed in hospital whites, trapped behind white bars in a white prison cell. It's a sharp contrast to the rather silly dungeon set where Hopkins spends most of his time. In Lecktor's shiny white universe there are no shadows to hide in, and the former psychiatrist's penetrating stare is inescapable.

Adding to this dichotomy is the somewhat contrived Beauty and The Beast pairing at the heart of Silence, playing up the sexual tension, at the expense of the intellectual battle. In Manhunter the meeting between cop and killer is purely an intellectual exercise, a mind-game, and frankly more appropriate given the nature of the crisis the detective is trying to avoid.

We're comparing apples to oranges at this point, but it's also tempting to judge William Petersen's Will Graham against Jodie Foster's Clarice Starling, though this hardly makes for any useful conclusions, since they're different characters in different stories. Let's just say, I know who I would pick if I was in charge of a serial killer case.

One can't help but wonder how it would have played out if The Silence of The Lambs had been tackled by the team behind Manhunter, or what if Manhunter had been shot in the same style and with the same cast as The Silence of the Lambs?

What if indeed.

BLURAY

Manhunter is released in a Blu-ray/DVD combo by StudioCanal in England.

First of all, there are two versions of the film included here. The Theatrical Cut and the Director's Cut. Don't mess around with this too much. The two versions are almost identical, however, while the Director's Cut includes a few extra tidbits, it also removes several good moments and ruins the ending by altering the penultimate scene.

As for the image quality, it's certainly not reference quality, but I was pleasantly surprised. The film holds up well, especially considering the many dark scenes. A little more film grain would have been nice, but I won't complain, I remember how awful this looked on VHS. I'll take this ANY day! By the way, the image quality of the Director's Cut is clearly inferior to the Theatrical Cut, another reason to chose this version.

The disc also features a running audio commentary from the director, but I didn't have a chance to check this out.

We also get an Inside Manhunter featurette (17:24), which gives a very brief, but interesting look behind the camera. Equally interesting is the Manhunter Look featurette (10:12), an all too brief interview with cinematographer Dante Spinotti. Fascinating stuff, I could listen to him for hours!

FINAL THOUGHTS

Manhunter is so distinctly a product of the 80's that it's not even funny. You need not look further than the color-scheme or the soundtrack to reach that conclusion. In that sense it's badly dated. Everything else about this film is still fresh and raw. There's a sense of danger here so thick you'll need a chainsaw to cut it, but at the same time it's an intellectually stimulating story. At the end of the day Manhunter is an unmissable companion-piece to The Silence of the Lambs, and here's why:

When Lector calls Starling at the end of The Silence of the Lambs and asks her if the lambs have stopped screaming, we know the answer is yes. Yes, because of Lector. If a similar call had been placed to Graham at the end of Manhunter, the answer the answer would also be yes. Yes, in spite of Lecktor.

Therein lies the difference, and the reason both films are still relevant.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to StudioCanal and Edith Chappey for making this review possible.

The Art of the (Unofficial) Audio Commentary

2011-09-11T14:43:00.003+02:00

I appologize in advance for the inside baseball nature of this post, but what can I say, this has been on my mind lately.

INT. YE OLDE RADIO STUDIO - AFTERNOON - TEA TIME

As regular readers will know I do a weekly podcast with my special friend Mr. Dennis Rosenfeld (no, not "special" like that). Recently we recorded our third unofficial audio commentary (in English obviously).

(Don't know what an audio commentary is? Check this out)

There's a whole subculture of geeks recording similar tracks and I've begun to listen to them, to get a better idea about what's out there. I quickly discovered that it's quite a mixed bag.

I've listened to official audio commentaries since I got my first LaserDisc player in the early 90's, so I know what constitutes a good commentary track. I also know that an audio commentary is a perfect delivery system for information about a film.

Having listened to other unofficial commentary tracks, it dawned on me that most of the commentators don't realize what an awesome medium they're dealing with.

To help those unfortunate soul, and to guide myself in my upcoming adventures into the world of commentaries, I've compiled this list of guidelines, when recording an unofficial audio commentary.

CUT TO:

THE LIST

1) Is a commentary the right thing for you?

Be sure that the information you want to share is even suited for a commentary.

If you plan to talk for hours about the nature of humankind, only occasionally referring to the characters on the screen, then perhaps you should record a podcast with your thoughts instead.

2) Know why you're doing THIS commentary.

Don't just record a commentary for the hell of it. Don't just do it because it's your favorite film, or the film you hate the most. Make sure you actually have something to say. I have favorite films I wouldn't dream of recording a commentary for, because I wouldn't know what to say.

Also, check out what's already our there. Perhaps the world doesn't need yet another audio commentary where a few geeks trash The Phantom Menace? I'm just saying.

3) Do your research.

A commentary track is about delivering information. Whether you're focused on technical details, trivia, personal observations, analysis, or a little bit of everything, research is the key. It's okay to speculate about themes and characters. It's not okay to speculate about facts.

Also, avoid simply describing what happens on the screen (but keep in mind that it's okay to set up certain details, because people will often hear the track separately from the film).

4) Have fun with your friends.

... Just don't record it and call it an audio commentary.

There's nothing worse than those tracks where a few friends sit down with beers and watch a movie. They share inside jokes, talk about what happened last week, a YouTube video they saw, and perhaps they do funny voices or mock the dialogue.

Ask yourself, who would listen to this and why? Even if - by some miracle - you actually find an audience who likes to listen to your nonsense, why limit yourself to the commentary format? Hit record, open the floodgates, publish as a podcast, and be done with it. Don't crowd the unofficial commentary scene.

5) Know your audience and make sure they know you.

Start by introducing yourself properly (give your full name). You can't assume the listener has heard anything you've done before, or know who you are, so tell them. Quickly and efficiently in a way that won't bother those who already know you.

Your audience is here because they want to hear you talk about a certain film. "Film" is the keyword in that sentence. They don't care what you think, unless you explain yourself with decent arguments, and they certainly won't care what you had for breakfast, or what color of socks you're wearing.

6) Sound is important.

An audio commentary is an audio medium. After all, it's right there in the phrase. Be sure you have a good sound quality. Make sure all the commentators speak into the mike, and don't compress the audio file so much that the audio quality suffers.

Commentators in different locations can use Skype to connect with each other, but then they must each record their own voice, to avoid that inferior Skype call quality. Unless Spielberg calls you up to participate avoid Skype quality calls at ALL cost.

Also, regarding the number of hosts... Go for two, or three at the most. One commentator is boring and a larger group is confusing. Your goal is clarity, both regarding the sound quality and content.

7) Don't try to be funny.

Know that you're not funny.

If you were really funny you would be a comedian and you would have no time for this commentary nonsense. If you want to be a comedian, go to an open mike night and practice. Don't record an audio commentary.

I'm not saying you shouldn't have fun and try to entertain your audience, but we're here to listen to you talk about a movie. Period. And as I mentioned earlier, remember that you're not funny anyway.

8) Respect the film.

This is even more important if you hate it.

Anybody can sit down and make fun of a film. Simply recording such a conversation is pathetic and stupid. It's okay to do a commentary for a film you don't like, but then your job is to explain WHY you don't like it, and possibly offer suggestions that could improve the film.

CUT TO:

FINAL THOUGHTS

Well, these are my personal recommendations, based on my personal preferences. As I begin my preparation for the fourth audio commentary from Double D's Definitive DVD Podcast I leave you with this thought:

If a listener is ready to spend 2 hours in your company, have the common decency to make sure they don't waste their time.

FADE OUT.

Retro Love

2011-08-28T23:41:00.000+02:00

If it's not too much trouble, I'd like to ask whoever's in charge to bring back a few things...

1) The Movies from the Eighties

2) The Women from the Fifties

3) And my untroubled mind, from when I was 3.

Thank you.

Licence to Kill (1989)

2011-08-13T11:26:00.001+02:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

We get our second James Bond film with Timothy Dalton in the lead role. It starts off on a light note, when Bond and his usual compadre Feliz Leiter, on their way to Felix's wedding, must suddenly run off and bring down notorious drug lord Franz Sanchez (a perfectly cast Robert Davi). They succeed, but the plan backfires when Sanchez subsequently escapes, and manages to maim Leiter and kill his new bride.

Bond is desperate for revenge and begins his own investigation, but his boss M will have none of this. He revokes 007's licence to kill and orders him home. Bond refuses and instead he runs. He escapes the clutches of MI6, stopping short of kicking M's ass along the way. Now he's on unfamiliar territory, a rogue agent, without orders, driven by a bitter desire for blood.

In fact, Bond is so busy plotting his revenge that he doesn't even have time to flirt with Moneypenny! He does find the time to nail two ladies, both of which play an important part in the story. Bond also gets a helping hand from Q, who - for the first time in the series - tries his hand at being a proper field agent.

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

Drug lord Franz Sanchez, though he doesn't so much want to control the world, as just sell it some dope. To be more precise, he's got plans to strike a deal with several drug dealers around to world, to create an all-powerful syndicate.

Sanchez commands a bunch of nasty henchmen, one of them being a baby-faced Benicio Del Toro, snarling like a madman. On the roster we also find Anthony Zerbe (The Omega Man, The Matrix Reloaded) as one of Sanchez's less than reliable partners, and Twin Peaks' Everett McGill as corrupt cop.

REVIEW

License to Kill is generally considered a failure, and often blamed for the 6 year sabbatical that would follow in the James Bond series, but that's a bit unfair. The movie didn't do that bad, and several other factors contributed to the delay of the next entry of the franchise. With that in mind I didn't catch this film until a few years ago, and I approached it quite cautiously - largely because of this bad rep. I needn't have worried. License to Kill is a stone cold, uncompromising, take no prisoners, kick-ass, action movie.

There's a part of me that wishes this was the first Bond movie ever. What better way to know a man, than to know him at the lowest point in his life, when he's driven to the edge, when everything he believes is on the line? Of course that wouldn't work, we need the previous films to put Bond's current situation into perspective, but it's a tantalizing thought-experiment.

One thing is for sure: The charming Bond we all know - and supposedly love - is all but gone. Instead we get a grim, driven Bond, who has little time for clever remarks or even his usual Martini. At one point, when Bond tries to infiltrate the criminal organization, Sanchez asks him if he's a "problem solver". The usually unaffected Brit responds with fire in his eyes and a look that means more to us than the drug lord. "More of a problem eliminator," he replies, leaving us to wonder whether Bond's thirst for revenge will get the better of him.

In keeping with Bond's ruthless determination, the film is also fairly brutal, and often quite graphic. In one of the early scenes Bond's CIA friend Leiter is fed to a shark! And he's not the only one on the menu. In fact, several bad guys meet some extremely violent deaths along the way.

It could be argued that this uncharacteristic behaviour alienated Bond to some viewers, and perhaps that's part of the truth, but I'm much more concerned with the Americanization of the franchise. Bond never actually sets foot in Great Britain in this movie. He goes off the grid, leaving behind many of the distinctly British aspects that make Bond who he is. He chases a Latino drug lord, something we associate with countless American movies and TV-shows. Even though we get the signature Casino scene and a few classic Bond gadgets, I can't help but feel that this story is more Miami Vice than Her Majesty's Secret Service.

Even so, the movie features some very impressive action set-pieces. At one point we literally go from the depth of the ocean to the skies in a single action sequence, when Bond must escape some underwater shenanigans by hooking on to a sea plane, which is about to take off. He proceeds to water ski behind it, and eventually makes his way on to the plane in mid-flight!

Then, of course, there's the final act of the film, an equally exhilarating action sequence, involving several gigantic trucks racing down narrow dirt roads, explosions going off left and right, Stinger missiles flying everywhere! A breathtaking roller coaster ride that brings the film to a brutal, but very satisfying conclusion.

And so we bid farewell to Timothy Dalton's take on James Bond. I can honestly say he's my favorite Bond actor so far. In all fairness some credit must go to the writers, who have managed to wrestle Bond from the clutches of mediocre slapstick comedy and ancient playboy behavior, and turn him into a lean, mean killing machine. The kind of man who not only deserves a license to kill, but who also knows how to use it.

The calender would read 1995 before Bond returned to the silver screen once again, and by then he would look an awful lot like that Remington Steele guy.

The Living Daylights (1987)

2011-08-10T18:01:00.000+02:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

James Bond is called in to assist shady Russian general Georgi Koskov in his defection to the West. The general claims to have valuable information for British intelligence, but he barely gets to safe ground, before he's kidnapped, presumably by some angry Russians. MI6 believes that another Russian general, Pushkin, is involved, but Bond suspects otherwise, so instead he follows his only lead: A beautiful cello player, who assisted Koskov with his initial escape. Soon the plot thickens, when it turns out that a less than reliable arms dealer, Brad Whitaker, is also involved.

Of course Bond flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, but also finds the time to nail the aforementioned cello player and a random brunette on a boat. This is also the movie where Bond heads to Afghanistan and strikes a deal with the local rebels, the Mujahideen. We also get another stellar title song, this time from Norwegian band A-ha.

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

No one! Although one of the bad guys briefly mentions a war between the Americans and the Russians, nobody seems all that concerned about it.

The arms dealer Whitaker is a jackass who just wants to make a lot of money, and General Koskov appears to be an opportunist, who just wants to live the good life, and doesn't really care who pays for it. The most scary character here is actually the tall, blond henchman, played by Andreas Wisniewski from Die Hard.

REVIEW

Another Bond movie, another Bond actor... Since Roger Moore was more or less a pile of dust by the end of the previous film, the producers went looking for a younger, better Bond. They found Timothy Dalton - a good, solid choice. Of course Dalton looks the part, but he also seems determined and lethal in a way Connery and Moore never were. And then there's the fact that he doesn't need a wheelchair to get around. It's win-win on all counts.

The fifteenth 007 adventure starts off with a familiar idea: A training mission. This one goes horribly wrong though, but gives Dalton a chance to show off his action-muscles even before the opening titles. There's a great chase sequence, where Bond is hanging on to a burning truck with explosives, and we haven't even been properly introduced yet!

The central plot is always the big issue with these films. Most of the previous entries are just pure nonsense, the Roger Moore efforts more so than the others. The Living Daylight takes a step back and gives us a slightly traditional, but rather pleasing defection story, with plenty of double-crossing along the way to keep us entertained. It might seem slightly contrived at times, but once you realize that it's not really important who all the other characters are working for, as long as Bond is still on our side, you'll be okay.

Thankfully the humor has been dialed way back, almost to zero, and that simple fact makes the film better on every level. The slapstick action scenes from Moore are almost gone, and Connery's sloppy investigations are but a faint memory. So even if we get a silly snow-bound car chase, where Bond eventually is forced to make his escape using a cello case as a sled, the film still feels grounded in reality. Well, at least compared to the rest of the franchise.

If I have to raise a concern with the film, it's the lack of a proper villain. John Rhys-Davies is cool and scary as Pushkin, but the two other bad guys - Jeroen Krabbé's Koskov and Joe Don Baker's Whitaker - are both buffoons and never really seem like proper threats. On the plus side their plan seems realistic and does not actually involve world domination. When we get down to basics, they just want to get rich in a jiffy.

This eventually leads us to a solid final act, where Bond and the cello player interrupt a massive Opium deal, with the assistance of an Afghan resistance fighter (played by go-to Arab Art Malik). The film should have gone out on a high note and ended after this, but tags on an unconvincing final showdown with one of the bad guys, which is a shame.

The Living Daylights is perhaps a bit too conventional at times, but it's definitely a step in the right direction. The change of pace from the Moore films is unmeasurable and it's such a relief. 007 once again acts like an agent who actually needs that licence to kill. Gosh, can you imagine what would happen if he lost it?

Top 10 Favorite Animated Films

2011-07-28T21:07:00.000+02:00

INT. INK & PAINT CLUB - NIGHT

I don't remember why I suddenly felt the need to do this list, but regardless, film geeks should have lists of this kind ready in every genre, in case they're challenged by regular people to name their favorite whatever-film.

So without further ado, here is the - bound to be controversial - list of my favorite animated feature films.

CUT TO:

THE TOP 10 LIST

1) Madagascar (2005)

Not just my favorite animated film, but one of my ALL TIME favorite films! I love everything about this. The sweet story, the funny characters, the goofy humor, and all the downright nutty ideas. Oh, and there's no singing in it (Except for that one song, but that doesn't count). The outstanding voice-work ties everything together, and let's not forget the penguins. 'Cause penguins are cool.

2) Kung Fu Panda (2008)

I love Kung Fu Panda a little bit more every day. The beautiful, gorgeous designs. The sweet, simple story. It features a panda, and pandas are cool. It features a fat underachiever whom I have no trouble identifying with, and on top of that it's got kung fu. Perfection.

Who would have thought the combination of the sloppy Jack Black and the Oscar-winning Dustin Hoffman would work so well? In fact, it doesn't get much better than this.

3) Ice Age (2002)

This was the first time I saw a computer animated film, and forgot it was computer animated. I literally forgot it. That should tell you all you need to know about the humor and the sweet, engaging story. Then there's John Leguizamo's Sid the Sloth, one of my favorite animated characters ever. He looks funny, acts funny, and sounds even funnier. And let's not forget that there's freakin' snow everywhere. You know how much I love snow.

Just one last detail: Stick to the original and ignore the sequels. They all suck.

4) Despicable Me (2010)

Let me be completely honest about it: This film makes me cry. Every time I get to the end I tear up. Very few animated films can do this, I'll tell you. Before we get that far, however, we get a story that flips the whole universe upside down, forces us to root for a super-villain who wants to steal the moon, while hoping he changes his ways and becomes a better person! Also, because it was produced in France, the animation style is different than most American films, which is nice.

5) Lilo & Stitch (2002)

I saw this movie the first time with two friends at my local cinema. Then this line came up: "His destructive programming is taking effect. He will be irresistibly drawn to large cities, where he will back up sewers, reverse street signs, and steal everyone's left shoe."

And then we laughed. For about 20 minutes. Much to the amazement of everyone else in the theater. From that point on the film could do no wrong. And I haven't even gotten to the part where this is the sweetest, most gentle and charming thing since sliced bread.

6) How to Train Your Dragon (2010)

I was on the fence about this film when I first saw the trailer. I wasn't even going to watch it at first, but then I gave it a chance. In about two seconds it won me over. Beautiful cinematography, great score, fantastic voice-work. The story is simple, but original - it almost feels like a classic. The setting is unusual - nobody makes viking movies any more - the animation doesn't intrude or call unnecessary attention to itself, and the humor is pleasantly subdued.

7) Wonderful Days (2003)

Stories about mankind on the brink of extinction always gets my attention, this one even more so because it's Korean and because it's an animated film for grown ups. It's got a very original story and an inventive style.

Wonderful Days combines CGI animation with good old fashioned models, and hand-drawn animation. The effect is stunning. The film looks absolutely gorgeous, but what's even more important: It packs an emotional punch as well. It's profound and often downright poetic.

8) Up (2009)

It starts off as a heartfelt tale of how life can slip through your fingers, without you knowing it, but ends up as a wild adventure which also tells you it's never too late to grab life by the horns and take it for a ride.

The first 10 minutes of Up redefines what an animated film can do. It really shouldn't work on any level... A cranky old man and a fat Asian kid in the two leads. A story that covers everything from death, to dreams and talking dogs. That's more than most live-action film manage to do.

9) Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within (2001)

I know everybody hates this. I know the animation has its feet solidly planted in the deep mud of the uncanny valley. I know the story is a bunch of new age, crystal-gripping nonsense about spirits and fluffy things. I don't care. I love the style of this film. I love the pace. I love the music. I love how seriously it takes itself. And I love the fact that the entire fate of the world seems to be on the line in every single scene.

10) Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001)

I'm not a big Disney fan. I think it's because of the singing and the formulaic nature of most of their films. Perhaps that's why Atlantis works for me. There's no singing and no fluffy sidekick animals. What we get instead is a classic Jules Verne action/adventure, with a completely un-Disney-like design, so cool that I don't even wish they had done it as a live-action film.

Plus, the nerd gets the girl, which is the way every good story should end.

CUT TO:

Runners-Up

The always quotable Open Season (2006) almost made the list, as did Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs (2009) - I just love the crazy humor. Robin Williams single-handedly elevated Aladdin (1992) to something unique. WALL·E (2008) blew me away. The Prince of Egypt (1998) gave us the kind of epic story Hollywood doesn't make any more (and I even love the songs). The tiny The Secret of Kells (2009), with its challenging story and low-tech animation, really surprised me. The Emperor's New Groove (2000) is just funny as hell. The Great Mouse Detective (1986) made me wonder why they never did a sequel, and then there's Titan A.E. (2000), which sort of drops the ball at the end, but until that point it's both beautiful and interesting. As for the Norwegian Kurt blir grusom (2008)... Well, it's just perfect for truckers, need I say more?

CUT TO:

FINAL THOUGHTS

I'm sure some people will tear their own heads off, complaining about all the classic Disney films I've ignored. The reason is simple, they bore me. And where are all the classic Animé films? Well, I have watched some of them, but to be honest they rarely stay with me.

There you have it. This is my list and if you have a problem with it, make your own list, then we can talk.

FADE OUT.

Top 10 Films I Refuse to See

2011-06-22T21:14:00.003+02:00

INT. DEATH STAR - AFTERNOON

I'm a film geek, I fully admit this. I watch a fair amount of movies, in fact, there are very few movies I don't watch - of a certain quality that is.

Still, there are a few movies I just can't bring myself to watch. It's not like "oh, I don't really care about that movie." No, what I'm talking about are movies I've made a conscious decision about not watching. If they're on TV I'll change the channel. If someone gives me the DVD I'll throw it out.

This is my top 10 of movies that repel me so much I refuse to see them. "But You can't judge a movie you haven't seen yet!" I hear you protest. I can't? Well, watch this...

FLASH CUT:

THE TOP 10 LIST

1) The Color Purple (1985)

I love Steven Spielberg, almost more than life itself. However, I'm not prepared to watch this pitiful plea for an Oscar. I don't care about these people and their tough lives, I just don't. Plus, no offence, shouldn't this have been directed by a black guy? Kind of like the way it was appropriate that a Jew tackled the Schindler's List film, know what I mean? And with both Whoopi Goldberg and Oprah Winfrey in the cast, this is almost as bad as it gets. The only thing that could make it worse, is Ashton Kutcher.

2) Ken Park (2002)

Some filmmakers just disgust you. Their sheer existence makes you want to shower. Harmony Korine is one of those guys. Now, I've never seen any of his films and I don't really care if they're good. I don't want to watch the kind of stories he tells. Period. The same way I don't want to watch kiddie p0rn, paint drying or football. Now, I know I don't have to watch these films, this is my prerogative, but it would really make me happy if we could make sure Mr. Korine doesn't even make them. Can we do that?

3) Rushmore (1998)

Another one of my most loathed directors is Wes Anderson. Every movie he makes looks stupid. Stupid stories, stupid characters, stupid costumes, stupid actors with stupid faces. Rushmore may have been a "cult favorite" (whatever the hell that means), but I detest the idea of this film. I can't even get past the poster! I get mad, just looking at it. I really hope Wes Anderson decides that figure skating is really where his true talents lie.

4) The Polar Express (2004)

Of course every stupid Mo-Cap movie should be on this list, but unfortunately I've already seen several of them. They ALL look freaky, but The Polar Express (2004) looks more freaky than the rest. If I had seen this as a kid it would have scared me more than Den store Bastian (LINK: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struwwelpeter).

Plus, what's the story here? A train travels to a destination... And that's it? That not a story, it's barely an idea! It's not even a tagline! What's next?! The Ball (a story about a ball, lying on an empty playground), or what about The Parked Car (go on, guess what that's about!)? Jeezus effing Christ! And how much did this "masterpiece" cost? $165 million!

5) Shrek the Third (2007)

I did see Shrek. Hated it. Stupid, bad, and utterly unfunny. And the animation style is so bloody awful! So why did I see Shrek 2, you ask? No idea! I just know it was worse. So that's it! I'm not going to watch the third or fourth entry, or any of the numerous spin-offs we'll undoubtedly get. Or the TV show. Or the reboot. Enough is enough. Die lame Shrek, die.

6) A Good Year (2006)

I just can't wrap my head around this film. Ridley Scott did freakin' Alien (1979) and Blade Runner (1982)! Forgetting the fact that his last good film was Black Rain (1989), how does a man who made those movies decide to do A Good Year (2006)? And what about Russell Crowe? This guy had talent once, just watch films like The Insider (1999), L.A. Confidential (1997), and even The Quick and the Dead (1995) (no, I'm not counting Gladiator (2000), because it sucks). He was cool once. And then he did a wine film! This is every shade of wrong.

7) Meet the Parents (2000)

Now, I'm rather picky about my comedies. I need zany comedy! I need films full of absurd ideas - but I need cleverness as well. Like Monty Python!

This stupid, crass, utterly unfunny piece of trash is one of the most successful modern comedies, which is why I've included it here. In all fairness I could have included any number of modern comedies, like: Hitch (2005), There's Something About Mary (1998), any spoof movie, and most Adam Sandler movies. They just aren't funny. At all. Stop making them, idiots!

8) 2 Fast 2 Furious (2003)

I did see the first The Fast and the Furious film. That was enough. I come across my share of bad and incompetent films, but I can't remember the last time I felt as offended by a movie's lack of intelligence, as I did during FF1. I vowed never to see another stinking entry in this horrible franchise. And if you know how much I like Michelle Rodriguez and Jordana Brewster, you'll know just how serious that is.

There's also that stupid title, which have forced me to refer to every subsequent movie in a similar fashion... You know, 3 Fast 3 Furious, 4 Fast 4 Furious... Stupid!

9) Cars (2006)

I haven't exactly appreciated the earlier Pixar films. They're alright, I guess, they just bore me. Cars falls into a completely separate category for me. I loathe it. Talking cars aren't funny! If a car talks, it better look like freaking K.I.T.T., and if it doesn't I'd prefer if it just shut the hell up! Besides, any movie where the lead character "finds the true meaning of friendship and family" should be burned, or buried in a deep hole and covered with wombat pooh.

10) The Simpsons Movie (2007)

I loathe The Simpsons. I want to jump into the screen and strangle every damn character on that show, and yes I realize they are animated. They're all so damn stupid, but our "hero" Homer is the most stupid of them all. I don't get why people think this is funny, you can see every joke coming a mile away. Every stupid Homer reaction is so predictable. So no, I'm not gonna watch the feature film, and honestly I feel like punching anyone who likes it.

DISSOLVE TO:

FINAL THOUGHTS

I hate when people say, "You have to try everything once!" Really? You think so? Then jump out in front of a bus! Go on! Try it once, I dare you! Or how about this classic bit of parenting, "How will you know you don't like it, unless you eat it?" Here's the thing... I knew that pile of green sludge my parents served me would taste horrible, I really didn't have to try it!

Same thing goes for movies.

They make so many movies each year, I don't have time to watch them all, so I have to pick and chose. I reserve the right to judge and reject movies based on little or no information. We judge things on sight every damn day, why should movies be any different?

These are the films that have been judged by me. And there is no appeal.

CUT TO BLACK.

The Silent House and The Art of the One-Shot Movie

2011-06-14T21:18:00.000+02:00

THE STORY

A young woman, Laura, and her father prepare to spend a few days in a rundown house, to fix it up for a friend. What begins as a cosy little weekend project quickly turns deadly, when they realize that someone or something is hiding in the house. When her father is brutally attacked Laura must gather all her mental strength to survive until dawn...

REVIEW

Such is the simple setup behind the horror movie The Silent House aka La casa muda (2010), a film notable because of a specific thing: It was filmed in one single uninterrupted shot. Allegedly anyway, but we'll get back to that.

Once I wrote a spec script for a film that was going to take place in real time, a story that could have been done as a One-Shot movie. The first thing you realize, if you have ever attempted something similar, is how many boring and insignificant things you do on a regular day, even a busy, jam-packed day. Something as simple as transportation, from one place to another, will regularly kill any kind of momentum in such a story, because in a One-Shot or real time movie, you're not allowed to skip anything. That's a real challenge, and one that The Silent House is struggling to overcome.

If Laura hears a strange sound and decides to investigate we have to follow her all the way through the entire house. From one room, up the stairs, and into another room. Is she going to move fast and race towards her goal? No, of course not... She's going to move as slowly and quietly as possible, and because the camera is forced to document her every move faithfully, the movie grinds to a halt. Unfortunately ninety percent of the film consists of scene where Laura hears a strange sound and investigates the origin. I might have been able to forgive this, had the film presented a single original horror movie concept. It doesn't. It's a very traditional horror story. Pretty much everything you think is going to happen, will happen. All the tired horror cliches are present and accounted for.

Problem: There's a killer (or whatever) in the house. Solution: Laura just has to leave. Unbelievable additional complication: Suddenly Laura can't get out of the house! Really? Keep in mind this is a completely ordinary house, with ordinary doors. The windows are boarded up, sure, but it should be relatively simple to get out, if you really wanted to. Also, don't get me started on those 8 million times, when Laura is threatened by something and she moves TOWARDS it, rather than simply hide and wait for dawn.

Okay, I admit it, the film does work every now and then. There are some creepy moments, but they never last very long, because we always end up in another one of those boring "search"-scenes.

Unfortunately I can't really get into the worst part of this movie, the ending, because I don't want to spoil anything, but the wheels really come off in the last 20 minutes. It's one of those endings that just ruins the film as a whole, even the few moments I actually enjoyed earlier.

From a technical perspective I find The Silent House interesting, and I appreciate the effort, but the whole One-Shot concept is just a gimmick. In the end it wasn't enough to distract me from the fact that the story doesn't hold up and that the film is only moderately entertaining.

THE ART OF THE ONE-SHOT MOVIE

The One-Shot movie, or even sometimes the One-Shot sequence, is often merely a stunt. When it's done right it can give a wonderful sense of authenticity to a film or scene (take for example the uninterrupted sequences in Children of Men), but often it distracts more than it helps.

Before the advent of video cameras and digital recording any one-shot movie had to be faked. You simply can't fit 90 minutes of raw film into a camera, so you would shoot the film in 10 minute long clips and hide the cuts from the viewers. One of the early examples was Alfred Hitchcock's Rope (1948), although, strictly speaking it's not a true One-Shot movie.

The film is comprised of 10 shots, and only every other cut is actually hidden, so the film appears to be made up of 5 shots, each running somewhere between 20 and 10 minutes. Since the film only takes place during a dinner party in an apartment, Hitchcock pretty much gets away with it, but there's no denying that the technique can be very a restrictive experience for an inventive filmmaker.

A better use of this technique can be found in the movie Running Time (1997), starring Bruce Campbell. The film deals with a recently paroled man, who joins a heist literally seconds after he steps out of prison. It runs for 70 minutes, and although it appears to take place in one single shot, the film actually has 30 cuts. Admittedly some of these can be spotted rather easily, but most of them are fairly invisible.

This brings us to the true One-Shot movies.

When video cameras and digital recording arrived filmmakers were no longer limited by how much film could physically fit into the camera. That meant that you could, in theory, shoot an entire movie in one long uninterrupted shot. A number of films have played around with this but the most impressive is the Russian art film Russian Ark (2002).

The story is an almost wordless journey through 300 years of Russian history. The location is the Hermitage Museum in Saint Petersburg. The film consists of one single 96 minute long SteadyCam shot. Thousands of actors, live orchestras, and a giant ballroom sequence. It'll take your breath away, I promise. The behind the scenes story is almost more impressive than the final result.

Another equally mind-boggling experiment, albeit with a slightly less impressive result, was conducted on Danish TV. Four directors collaborated on the movie D-Day (2000), which was shot on New Year's Eve, December 31st, 1999, and transmitted the next day. Each story was presented as a single uninterrupted 70 minute shot, and seeing as the movie took place in the middle of the Copenhagen New Year celebration, there was only one chance to get this right.

Four different channels carried each of the four stories. Another channel showed the feed to the control room, where the four directors were working, yet another channel showed all four stories in a 4-way spilt-screen, and finally a channel showed a live edited version of the film. The idea was that the viewers could navigate through these seven options and cut their own movie. The stories weren't that good, but the experiment was very interesting.

I should also point out that Mike Figgis did a One-Shot movie called Timecode (2000), but I can't go into details, since I haven't seen it.

I did see the Colombian thriller PVC-1 (2007) - another interesting, but ultimately unsuccessful attempt at doing a One-Shot movie. Based on a true story, the movie deals with a blackmail incident, where a family was attacked and the mother was fitted with an explosive collar, set to go off a few hours later, unless the family managed to pay the ransom of 15 million pesos.

Much like in The Silent House, the primary problem is boredom, due to several long sequences where nothing happens. In this case there's a 10 minute (or so) transportation sequence, where the characters travel from one place to another to get help. PVC-1 just can't get out of the problems inherent in the One-Shot concept, but it's still worth seeing, because it's unquestionable that the film was really shot in one continues take.

This brings us back around to The Silent House, and the controversy regarding it's One-Shot status. Several people online point out the "impossibility" of the concept and claim that's the only proof needed to determine that the film is faked. As demonstrated by this post that argument is hardly worth discussing, and if you're still in doubt, watch Russian Ark, and then get back to me. However, the complaint is still valid.

There's no question that most of The Silent House was shot in very long takes, but there are several moments in the film, where a quick pan of the camera could potentially hide a cut, or when the all the lights suddenly go out and leave us in total darkness - a good place to hide a cut or a reset. The director, Gustavo Hernández, maintains that the film was shot in a single shot, as does all the press material, but since the film isn't really that effective, it's not difficult to imagine that the film makers would hold on to that selling point.

The Silent House could definitely have been shot in a single shot, but after seeing the film I have this lingering doubt I just can't shake. I'm not really sure what it would take to convince me...

FINAL THOUGHTS

The One-Shot movie is a nice idea on paper, but it rarely works in real life. It's definitely a case of style over substance, and truthfully it's never as effective as the film makers think.

If directors need to flex their style-muscles, I much prefer they simply go for the One-Shot sequence, which can be used quite effectively. There are some truly magnificent One-Shot sequences throughout film history... but we'll save those for another blog.

CUT. PRINT. MOVE ON.

Top 10 Most Disgusting Dishes by Two Fat Ladies

2011-06-05T16:50:00.001+02:00

INT. KITCHEN - DINNER TIME

So it's like freakin' hot, and I can't seem to gather my thoughts regarding the blog I was going to write. So instead you'll get one of those in-between blogs, vaguely film related, but not really.

Here's the thing: I love cooking shows on TV. I'm not really into cooking myself, I just like to watch other people cook. There's a ton of different shows, some sophisticated, some simple, and a few that aren't like anything else.

One of these shows is Two Fat Ladies.

It features two very large British women - Clarissa Dickson Wright and Jennifer Paterson - who travel around in England on their old school bike and make old school food. When I say old school I mean the kind of dishes your grandparents would know. Nothing overly fancy, nothing too healthy. Rustic food in other words, food for men (and women) who work hard in the fields.

Because these two charming ladies aren't too preoccupied with what's good, or modern, or fancy, they make some of the most disgusting dishes you can imagine. I'm sure they taste very nice, but they sure look nasty.

Now, I recently watched the entire 24 episode run of the series again, and this time I made a list of the most disgusting dishes. Since I don't know anything about food I can't really comment on the dishes, so you'll have to make do with the pictures.

Then again, pictures speak a thousand words, don't they...?

CUT TO:

THE TOP 10 LIST

1) Gigot of monkfish rosemarin with anchovies (1.01)

2) Jugged kippers (2.05)

3) Devilled kidneys (2.05)

4) Portuguese fish stew (4.01)

5) Pheasant and pickled walnut terrine (1.05)

6) Devils on horseback (2.01)

7) Shooter's sandwich (1.06)

8) Robert May's salmon (2.02)

9) Asturian bean and sausage soup (3.03)

10) Stuffed baked codfish with a tomato sauce (4.04)

CUT TO:

FINAL THOUGHTS

And there you have it. I'll get back to my tricky blog now, while I eat a dry peace of bread. Suddenly I'm not all that hungry. It's still freakin' hot, though. Maybe I should watch a cool film?

The Halfway House (1944)

2011-05-29T20:37:00.003+02:00

INTRODUCTION

It was a dark and stormy night... That's how a classic scary story is supposed to start, or at the very least it should open in a graveyard. In The Halfway House it's sunny most of the time, though it's still a ghost story. Also, it doesn't take place in a graveyard, but in a cosy little Welsh inn. Actually it's not even really a scary movie. Puzzled? Not a problem, but hold that thought...

THE STORY

It's 1943 and the world is at war. A random group of travellers converge on the idyllic Welsh countryside, to stay at a picturesque inn.

An elderly couple, struggling with the loss of their son. A young couple nearing a crossroad in their lives. A terminally ill conductor, with only three months to live. A couple on the verge of divorce, with a teenage daughter, hellbent on bringing them back together. A recently released prisoner, and finally a nefarious black market dealer.

They're met by the proprietor Mr. Rhys and his lovely daughter, Gwyneth, who both seem strangely aloof, as if they're not really there. Soon the travellers realize something is wrong. Why are all newspapers a year old? Why is there no sign of the terrible fire that destroyed the inn a while back? Why doesn't Mr. Rhys have a reflection?

Find your room in a hurry and get your bags unpacked. You don't want to miss this.

REVIEW

It's such a fuzzy, pleasant feeling to catch up with films from the 40's or 50's. There's just something about them, a kind of - I don't know - calm confidence? They're often patient in a way modern films aren't. They're not constantly trying to please the audience at the expense of characters and story. The Halfway House is one such film.

Though billed as a thriller or ghost story, the film initially plays out like a classic disaster movie. First we're introduced to each individual character and their unique set of problems. Then all the characters are transported to the inn, they're introduced to one another, and by then we're halfway through the film. After this, rather than developing as a mystery - the kind Agatha Christie might have written - the film turns into a series of therapy sessions, where each character's problems are brought to life, with the mysterious Mr. Rhys carefully applying the right kind of pressure to push each person in the right direction.

Surprisingly, the movie makes no attempt to hide the fact that it's a ghost story. This is revealed as soon as the first travellers arrive at the inn, and underlined by Mervyn Johns' otherworldly portrayal of the innkeeper. So the object for the viewer is not to guess "if" something strange is happening here, but rather "why". Why have we ended up in this ghost story? Why these characters? Meanwhile the big question of "what in poo-perfect hell is really going on here?" is left to simmer away on the back-burner.

This unusual approach extends to the stylistic agenda, another point where this film is distinctly different from other ghost stories. Most of it takes place during the day, in bright sunshine. There's an absence of dark and ominous music, and the film even throws in a weird slapstick moment or two, just to mess with us. Even during the climactic séance the film refuses to surrender to classic horror-movie clichés, it sticks to its guns and keeps its sunny disposition. That's because at the end of the day, the focus here is on the characters, the darkness in their lives, and the journey they must take.

All this adds up and makes The Halfway House an entertaining 90 minutes, nothing like what I expected, but enjoyable nonetheless.

THE DVD

Optimum in England is responsible for this release.

There's no bells and whistles on this disc, no extra features, no subtitles or anything, just the film. Which is fine. I could have used some subtitles in one or two scenes when all the characters were speaking, but otherwise the dialogue is clear and easy to understand.

The picture quality is also fine. Most of the film looks quite spiffy, but every now and then the film includes a damaged shot, or a scratched sequence. That's unavoidable for such old source material, luckily it never distracts from the viewing experience.

FINAL THOUGHTS

The Halfway House never gets scary or flashy. It's simply not that kind of a movie. The first act requires a bit of patience, and it's not quite the dark and sinister high concept story the setup would have you believe. Rather, this is an intriguing little puzzle of a film, and well worth checking out.

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Optimum Releasing and Edith Chappey for making this review possible.

The Worst Films I've Ever Seen

2011-05-21T20:20:00.002+02:00

EXT. PSYCHLO - DAWN

Recently the company I work for sent out a list of 20 films that could qualify as "the worst film ever". Just a fun little list to remind people of some of the awful films that are out there.

This is the list (the films were listed in alphabetical order):

Adrenalin: Fear the Rush, Attack of the Crab Monsters, Batman & Robin, Battlefield Earth, Cannibal Women in the Avocado Jungle of Death, The Chronicles of Riddick, Death Race 2000, The Happening, Hercules in New York, Lesbian Vampire Killers, Plan 9 from Outer Space, Return of the Killer Tomatoes, Sharktopus, Showgirls, Strippers vs. Zombies, Surf Nazis Must Die, Teeth, Troll 2, A Viking Saga, and Zombie Strippers!

Naturally this brought the Internet trolls out of the woodwork. They do love any opportunity to defecate in public, don't they? And while I don't mind taking the time every now and then trying to knock some sense into their tiny little heads, I found it a little hard to defend the list above, because it wasn't completely my own. It was sort of a mishmash of different ideas and different people's contributions. So, I figured I should try to put together my own list. A list I can get behind 100% and defend to the death, if need be.

FLASH CUT:

HOW TO PUT THE LIST TOGETHER

A very important factor, when choosing candidates to a list like this, is "expectations". I see many crappy movies each year, but the ones that disappoint me the most are the ones I have a certain amount of expectations towards. That's why you won't find any of those b-horror movies or films with zombies and strippers on this list. Also, I don't watch all that many of those films, and the ones I do watch often seem to know they're bad. So they get a pass.

I've also ignored boring and uninspired films. 85% of the movies Hollywood makes are boring and uninspired. That alone is not enough to make it onto the list.

This may sound a bit obvious, but of course you won't find any films here I haven't seen. This includes: The Room, Plan 9 from Outer Space, The Adventures of Pluto Nash and Catwoman, to mention but a few. Some of these have had the pleasure of my DVD player, but if I turned them off after 20 minutes, they don't qualify. You can only rate films you've actually seen all the way to the end. Makes sense doesn't it?

And finally I want to point out that the list will automatically skew towards newer movies. Many of those old bad movies are simply forgotten. They're not shown on TV and they're not out on DVD... so there.

Anyway, without further ado, here's my list the worst films I've ever seen.

CUT TO:

TOP 10 ALL-TIME WORST MOVIES I'VE SEEN

1) A Viking Saga (2008)

This looks like a home-video, shot by a few friends in a backyard, and if that was how the film had been presented to me, I would have given it a pass, but no. This was presented as a serious feature film and it was released on DVD with a serious feature film price.

This is so bad you won't believe anyone actually took this project seriously, but they did! The director thought he was making a modern masterpiece! Honest, he did! What he really made was the modern equivalent of an Ed Wood movie, except worse. And less charming.

2) The Happening (2008)

M. Night Shyamalan was a one trick pony, we know this now. What we didn't know until this movie was that he actually can't direct. Sure, we suspected it with The Village, but this one confirmed it.

It's quite fascinating to watch this movie, because every aspect of it is broken. The story, the mood, the casting, the look. Literally every single choice Shyamalan made, while directing this film, is wrong. Why would anyone in their right mind give him the opportunity to make another film? Mr. Night, please end this now and jump out in front of a bus. You'll be better off, we'll be better off, the whole world will be a better place. Thank you.

3) Adrenalin: Fear the Rush (1996)

Albert Pyun has made a career out of doing cheaply shot, pseudo-science-fiction films, with bad actors and little or no story. Which is why it's such a surprise that he was actually capable of making a movie so ridiculously bad it makes all his other films seem like Academy Award material.

Most of this film takes place in dark caves and consists of shots where people are moving slowly forward, while searching for a mutant or something. Nothing happens, there's barely any dialogue, they just search through for something. For close to 90 minutes.

4) Scary Movie (2000)

This is what happens when you take a hit movie (Scream), re-shoot the script word for word, and then make the entire cast act out the scenes badly. I find all of those spoof movies highly offensive and completely unfunny, but this one actually copies scenes straight from the original film. Aren't there laws against that?

Watch the old Airplane! movies or The Naked Gun. That's how you make a spoof film. This is just dreadful, stupid, and a waste of time. Can we do a retroactive abortion on the whole Wayans-family, please?

5) Batman & Robin (1997)

Oh dear. We thought Batman Forever was as bad as it was ever going to get in the batcave. We couldn't have been more wrong. Whatever little mojo or glimmer of a unique, albeit revolting, style that was present in Joel Schumacher's previous Batman film is now gone from this film. How could anyone ever think that anything in this movie was a good idea? This is a question science will ponder until the end of Man.

I'm not even kidding here, I truly believe that those responsible for producing, writing and directing a film like this should be put in jail. And then banned from making movies for at least 50 years. And then maybe shot, just in the leg or something.

6) Wild Wild West (1999)

I think this is the film that made me hate Will Smith. He is so unbelievably smug and obnoxious here. Surprisingly, considering the budget, the film looks like crap. I mean, every single design in this movie is bad, but worst of all... This was supposed to be a comedy, and yet it's the most painfully unfunny thing you will ever see.

This is one of those films where you'll find yourself constantly screaming at the screen WHAT THE HELL WERE YOU THINKING?! It's unfathomable how Barry Sonnenfeld could make a film as bad as this. It should disqualify him permanently from making another movie. Plain and simple. In fact everyone who was involved in this project should be crushed by a giant mechanical spider. THAT I would watch!

7) Jonah Hex (2010)

It's almost not fair to include this film, since it barely qualifies as a film. I mean that literally. If you exclude the intro and the end credits, the main story runs for 68 minutes.

The director was fired from the project, new scenes were shot, stuff was moved around and re-cut, and it shows. It really baffles me, I mean, did the producer think we wouldn't notice? Did they think we wouldn't mind the completely incomprehensible plot? The total lack of suspense? The toothless bad guy? Or that every scene is either exposition or explosions? Did they really think they could sneak this movie past us? Here's a hint to all you idiot producers: You can't fool us like that, how dumb do you think we are? There's a limit, you know?

What's that? Avatar, you say? Damn...

8) King Kong (2005)

I've watched this film four times by now. That's crazy, you say, but I know why I keep watching it. It's because I think to myself: "There's no way this film is THAT bad". Well, it is. Peter Jackson's version of King Kong is a laughable mess. An overblown, slow, repetitious mess. It feels like a rough assembly. You know, the first version of a film, before a skilled editor begins to shape and condense the film.

Jackson loves the original King Kong SO much that he's completely incapable of looking objectively at the monstrosity he created. The success of Lord of the Rings meant that nobody could say no to him. Just look at the running time... 187 minutes, in the SHORT version! The 1933 version runs about 100 minutes. Enough said?

9) Battlefield Earth (2000)

So Scientology... We can all agree those guys are a bunch of morons and need to jump off a cliff, right? Good! Having said that I'm not going to hold it against the film that it's based on a novel by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard or that he thinks it all happened in real life, or something. That doesn't matter. If the story holds up and the film works, who cares where it came from, right?

Yeah, so here's the thing... It doesn't work. The story itself is profoundly stupid, and the film is so unbelievably ill-conceived it's almost funny. Just take the fact that the entire film is shot "dutched". Meaning that every shot in the film is at an odd angle. Every. Single. Shot. For no reason what so ever. You gotta admire the utter commitment of director Roger Christian and star John Travolta, and you have to marvel at the stupidity of anyone who put money into this project.

10) Van Helsing (2004)

I just can't figure out what went wrong for Stephen Sommers. He started so strong with Deep Rising and The Mummy (we're not counting those earlier films), but then it all went wrong with The Mummy Returns, an overblown, noisy, mess of a movie, with some of the worst CGI effects in a major Hollywood production ever. Then came Van Helsing, which was worse IN EVERY WAY! How is that possible? How can anyone look at The Mummy Returns and think "Well, clearly we need more sh*t in every scene, quicker cuts, a more ludicrous plot and we need to spend a lot more money. And what about those CGI effects? Can we possibly get them to look just a little bit worse?"

I can see how this would look good on print, but when the first footage began to roll in somebody should have hit the brakes, and then Sommers.

FADE TO:

DISHONORABLE MENTIONS

Here are some more titles I considered, in no particular order:

Spider-Man 3 (2007)
Star Wars: The Phantom Menace (1999)
Soldier (1998)
The Spirit (2008)
Southland Tales (2006)
Ultraviolet (2006)
AVPR: Aliens vs Predator - Requiem (2007)
88 Minutes (2008)
Striptease (1996)
The Waterboy (1998)
Strange Wilderness (2008)
Couples Retreat (2009)

CUT TO:

FINAL THOUGHTS

This is the first time I've made an all-time worst movies list, so I reserve the right to update and adjust it somewhere down the line, just so you know.

So that's it, I guess. This is my list, and if you've got a problem with it, make your own damn list, and then we'll talk.

FADE TO BLACK.

A View to a Kill (1985)

2011-04-28T18:57:00.002+02:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

A new type of microchip has fallen into the wrong hands. Bond is sent to Paris to investigate shady industrialist Max Zorin, who's not only connected to this case, but also to some less than honest shenanigans at the horse races.

Of course Bond flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, he nails every broad with a pulse, including a handful of blondes, but more interestingly, Bond has his first gay experience... with Grace Jones. I don't think this is what they meant when they said "keep the British end up".

There's a chase through the Eiffel tower, a showdown with an airship at the Golden Gate bridge, and we finally get a freakin' decent title song with Duran Duran's "A View to a Kill"... Come on everybody: "Daaaaaaaance into the fire! That fatal kiss is all we neeeeeeed...!"

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

A blond Christopher Walken! He plays Max Zorin, who wants to control the entire world's production of microchips, and as part of his plan he wants to destroy Silicon Valley. He also cheats at horse racing. This one is diabolical.

Zorin's got a few interesting henchmen on his payroll, but the scariest one by far is Grace Jones. Shudder.

REVIEW

"Daaaaaaaance into the fire!" Sorry, had to do that one more time. Alright enough singing, let's get started on our final Bond adventure with Roger Moore.

A View to a Kill seems like a fairly simple, solid setup, but unsurprisingly Bond finds a way to muck it up again. Rather than conducting an investigation focused on the problem at hand - the microchips - Bond chooses to pose as a posh Brit (there's a stretch) and take a closer look at Zorin's passion for horse-racing. I say guvna, there must be something fishy going on here! Yes Bond, this horse-race thing definitely warrants every bit of your attention! Does anybody have 006 on speed-dial, so we can get the real case rolling?

The biggest problem with this film is that it's so underwhelming. The pre-credit sequence is another snowbound adventure, where Bond must escape while skiing, and it feels like we've done this 8 million times before! As for the insane bad guy who wants to corner a certain market, and does this by destroying the competition's supply... Isn't that more or less the plot of Goldfinger?

I guess I could see the movie working on some levels, if the filmmakers had put any kind of effort into the project. The Eiffel tower chase is sort of fun, but it's too brief. The following car chase is a rare inventive action set-piece, where Bond's car is destroyed piece by piece, but that sequence is also too brief. I could even see the whole "destroying the chips"-plan working, but why make it so cumbersome and complicated? In the final showdown Bond is trying to stop a bomb that will blow a hole in an old mine, which will release some water, which will cause an earthquake, which will destroy Silicon Valley and all the microchip companies, so Zorin can take over the market. Phew.

Keep it simple: Bomb will destroy Silicon Valley. Period. That's all you need. Come up with a clever way to place the bomb, give Bond an interesting mission to destroy it, raise the stakes by putting people we care about in harms way. Then it might have worked.

At least we finally get a really interesting actor playing the bad guy. Unfortunately Christopher Walken chews up the scenery like there's no tomorrow. Maybe he was just too young back then, if they had hired him today he would have walked away with the entire movie, before Roger Moore had time to put down his tea cup. Solid support from Patrick Macnee (of The Avengers fame) and Patrick Bauchau (from The Pretender and Panic Room) keeps the movie interesting, though. Even Alison Doody (that's the girl from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade) shows up for a few scenes, and if you blink you'll miss a brief glimpse of a young Dolph Lundgren.

The best moment of A View to a Kill, though, comes in the final showdown, and features a young woman who's so blond the bad guy actually manages to sneak up on her and capture her... IN A FREAKIN' AIRSHIP! That must be the biggest laugh of the franchise so far. Not sure it was supposed to be.

And so we close the book on Roger Moore. I can't say I'll miss him. With him James Bond went from being an incompetent charmeur, to being an incompetent buffoon, and at 58 even Roger Moore knew he was getting too old for this sh*t. Too bad the producers didn't. Time to take a break from 007 now, but when we return to the series we'll be asking the REAL James Bond to stand up, please.

My Neighbours The Yamadas (1999)

2011-04-25T12:30:00.000+02:00

THE STORY

This is the story about the life of the Yamada family. The father Takashi, who works too hard, the mother Matsuko, who is often distracted, the typical teenage son Nonoko, his little sister Noboru, and the grumpy grandmother Shige. We follow them on their way through life, through the good times and the bad, the ups and the downs, and everything in-between.

REVIEW

My Neighbours the Yamadas is not a film you should seek out, if you’re looking for something in the vein of classic Studio Ghibli masterpieces, such as Princess Mononoke (1997) or Spirited Away (2001). Literally every single aspect of this film is different from those landmark films. I’m going to say that again... Every single aspect is different.

There are two major issues at play here.

First of all there’s the style of the animation. To call it simplistic would almost be an understatement. What we’re dealing with here lies somewhere between stick figures and children's drawings. Apparently the story was originally a series of simple comic strips, and that shows. Many scenes play out with the characters surrounded by white space, while a few lines illustrate the room around them. The more complicated locations are often filled out by using sound, with peripheral characters as grey shapes that barely move. Then there’s the restrained color palette, resembling watercolors, rather than traditional colorful animation.

On an artistic level I can definitely appreciate this style, but at the same time I often found it distracting, because the animation never makes any effort to look the least bit real, while we’re expected to view the characters as real people, and the situations they go through as real life. That’s an unsolvable equation.

The second big issue is the story. There isn’t any. Well, perhaps that’s not fair. What I mean is that this is merely a series of disconnected vignettes or sketches. There’s no overall plot, just a collection of situations, divided into random chapters, with nondescript headlines. The situations primarily deal with the traditional family fights we’re all familiar with, and most of them are grounded in reality, but the film embarks on a few selected flights of fancy as well. Some scenes are funny, some are merely goofy. There are some sweet, gentle observations, side by side with bigger issues. In one scene the parents fight about house work, in the next the son races to pick up the phone, when his little sister announces that there’s a girl on the line, while his mother and grandmother attempt to listen in. That sort of stuff, but then suddenly we get a scene like the one where the grandmother puts on a hard-hat and picks up a bat to go out and yell at the local motorcycle gang!

Does the film succeed? Absolutely! It perfectly captures the bittersweet nature of family life, and it does so in a decidedly unique style. Did I enjoy the film? No, not really. The animation style put me off, and the lack of a coherent story made the film hard to sit through. Despite a few good chuckles and a handful of awwws, this was a very episodic and uneven experience for me.

FINAL THOUGHTS

My Neighbours the Yamadas was not my cup of tea, but I can definitely see how some viewers could appreciate the simple style of the animation, which removes all bells and whistles, to focus squarely on the characters and the story.

If nothing else, there’s a certain comfort in knowing that your family is as crazy as all the other families out there. Including the animated ones.

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Optimum Releasing and Edith Chappey for making this review possible.

Never Say Never Again (1983)

2011-04-23T12:24:00.000+02:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

Bond looks different. Again. And yet familiar. The story seems familiar too. Something about the sinister SPECTRE organisation high-jacking two nuclear warheads, intent on blowing up the world, so they can rule over the rubble. Or something.

Of course Bond also flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, who looks different, and he nails every broad with a pulse, including a blond therapist, a feisty henchwoman, a voluptuous beach babe, and Kim Bassinger in her prime.

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

SPECTRE. Wow, so they're back... It's like deja vu all over again.

Max von Sydow plays Blofeld, in three shots. There must be a ton of material on the cutting-room floor, because it doesn't make any sense. We don't even get to see his reaction to the final showdown. He just disappears from the story! Actually the most prominent bad guy is Largo, aka. No. 1, played by Klaus Maria Brandauer, a sexually frustrated millionaire with inferiority issues, and a couple of nukes. Now that's scary!

There also a nasty henchwoman, called Fatima Blush. Yes, I also read that as bush, when I read it fast.

REVIEW

Right off the bat this Bond movies feels odd. There's no classic Bond bulls-eye intro, no Maurice Bender credit sequence, we do get an unbelievably bad theme song, so it's not like we're on completely foreign ground.

Shoehorned in between Roger Moore's two final Bond films, the existence of this irregular 007 adventure deserves a brief explanation. This is a so-called unofficial movie, meaning that it's not part of the official James Bond cannon. It exists only because of legal issues regarding Thunderball, resulting in producer Kevin McClory securing the legal rights to the Thunderball story, and all characters that appear in it, meaning that he could potentially remake that movie until the end of time, without fear of prosecution from the "real" Bond producers. McClory should have gotten the rights to a different story, because Thunderball didn't really work the first time around, and since everything about this film is inferior to the original, we're not exactly on to a winner.

Since this is not an official Bond, naturally they couldn't get Roger Moore for the lead, so instead they went back to Sean Connery, and asked him to reprise the role he abandoned with much glee 12 years ago. God knows how much they payed him to do this, but he doesn't look nearly as tired, as he did in his previous Bond film, though he does look considerable older. At 53 he just can't pass for a spiffy super secret agent any more, assuming he ever really could. Connery's return to the role is not helped by the fact that the plot starts off with an attack on some sort of bad guy stronghold where Bond is killed. Luckily this turns out to be a training mission, but it's not really a confidence inspiring opening, by any stretch of the imagination.

After this follows an unbelievable stupid scene where a preposterously unfair M, played by Edward Fox, orders Bond to a hippie health spa, because his eating habits are bad. Really? This is how you want to establish your cool secret agent? By having a guy tell him off, for eating too much red meat...? Are you serious? Moments later Bond loses the last bit of street cred, when he's reduced to smuggle caviar and pate into the spa, in a hidden compartment in his suitcase, and eat it in secrecy in his room. Come on people!

Never Say Never Again is dead on arrival. It takes forever to get going, and when it finally does it's quite unimpressive. The film plays out without a single memorable scene. There are no big set-pieces, no cool action scenes, not a single clever line, and all the characters are forgettable. The story plods along, painfully slow and disjointed (so was the original, you'll recall), resulting in an uninspired, dull, mumbling film that should never have been made.

Ironically, the only thing that could have saved Never Say Never Again, was if somebody had just said "never!"

Octopussy (1983)

2011-04-21T12:58:00.000+02:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

James Bond must discover the truth behind the death of 009, and so he's off to investigate - wait for it - a Faberge egg. That's an expensive, very gay, gold egg to you and me. Bond must go to India to follow a guy who bought the egg at an auction. Nothing less than our way of life is at stake here. Honestly.

Of course Bond also flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, who's looking so uncomfortable at this point that they've hired a young assistant for her, so Bond can flirt with her too. Naturally Bond nails every broad with a pulse, including a high class blond bimbo, and the exotic titular brunette. And in what can only be classified as Roger Moore's finest hour, Bond sneaks into a secret palace in a crocodile mini-submarine. Yes, a sub that looks like a crocodile.

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

Well, let's see. The biggest bad guy would have to be the absurd Russian general, who wants to blow up a nuclear device, thinking that will make the West cut down on their military forces, which would enable him to conquer Europe in a week with a dozen tanks. Or something.

Then there's the evil Prince Kamal Khan, who wants to get his hands on the previously mentioned egg. Oh, and kill Bond too. There's an evil henchman with a turban. And another evil henchman with a yo-yo saw blade thingy.

REVIEW

If the juvenile title isn't a big enough giveaway, the plot sure is. Bond has reached the nadir of his decrepit existence, and I'm confident it can't possibly get any worse. I mean, he's chasing a freakin' egg! AN EGG! What the hell is wrong with you people? You've got a super-cool agent, the world is your stage, you've got guns and gadgets, all the babes you could possibly want, and yet you decide to tell a story about a freakin' egg! Unfortunately that's not even half of it, because every single aspect of this film is broken. Everything is stupid.

I've talked about Bond's inadequate agent skills before, but this time he's captured even before the opening credit sequences. He's caught red-handed planting a bomb. The guy can't even plant a freakin' bomb. Of course he escapes, and then how does he make his getaway? By using a small plane hidden behind a fake horse-ass in a fake trailer, I sh*t you not! And then what happens? He RUNS OUT OF FUEL! All this, mind you, is still in the pre-credit sequence.

The thing is, the plot of a good action movie can actually be pretty bad, as long as the action is good. Unsurprisingly the action is beyond pathetic in Octopussy. Everything is played for laughs, too bad nothing is funny. Take the big market fight. Bond faces off against a couple of bad guys at your classic chaotic Middle Eastern market. He steals the blade from a sword swallowing conjurer to take care of one adversary, he throws another on top of a bed of nails, he tip-toes inelegantly over a bunch hot coals, and so on. Every confrontation is funny gimmick, every moment a clever little visual pun, it's exhausting. Later, during another unimpressive chase scene Bond swings through a jungle, and for some reason a retarded sound guy thought it was funny to add Tarzan's classic "scream" from the old movies to the soundtrack... I literally punched myself in the face.

But the coup de grâce to this fiasco is the big showdown. Now, let me be clear about this: Unless you're doing a circus film, you should never have a showdown that takes place in a circus. The showdown in Octopussy should be about stopping a nuclear device from killing hundreds of people and starting a war, but instead Bond stumbles around in a circus arena doing pratfalls, while DRESSED AS A CLOWN. It's unbelievable.

Did I mention that Octopussy is the name of a mysterious woman, who's the leader of a cult of circus women on a secret island? And that after Bond's circus debut all the cult girls band together and use their circus tricks to catch the bad guy, at which point Bond arrives in a hot air balloon to save the day?

Did I mention that Bond also dresses up as a gorilla at one point?

Laputa Castle in the Sky (1986)

2011-04-20T10:10:00.001+02:00

INTRODUCTION

Laputa: Castle in the Sky is the first feature from Japanese animation powerhouse Studio Ghibli, and the third feature from its master Hayao Miyazaki, and if you have no idea who or what I’m talking about, rest assured that this is a good place to start.

The story is set in a kind of alternate reality. Alternate, but not that farfetched. It’s a place where Jules Verne would feel at home. A place where man rules the sky, much more so than we do even today, but at the same time it’s a place where technology can co-exist with a magical sense of adventure.

STORY

Young Pazu lives in a picturesque mountain town and works in the local coal mine. One day an unconscious girl floats down from the sky and lands, literally, in his arms. The girl, Sheeta, is being chased by a number of nefarious people. A group of pirates, the military, and some shady government suits. But why? It's all got something to do with the blue crystal she carries on a chain around her neck, the same crystal that appeared to make her almost weightless when she fell from the sky.

Pazu brings Sheeta to his shack and the two of them quickly connect. Alas, there’s no rest for the wicked, or the profoundly innocent for that matter, and soon bad guys show up at Pazu’s doorstep to get their hands on Sheeta, and more importantly, the crystal. And so our heroes run, and the adventure can begin.

What follows is a perilous chase at breakneck speed, which takes the young couple across the mountains, through the mines, and most importantly into the air. Meanwhile we learn about the legendary flying castle of Laputa, and we learn that Sheeta may know more than she’s letting on.

REVIEW

There’s something kind of comforting about this movie’s combination of wide-eyed innocence and a darker, deeper motif. It’s a juxtaposition mirrored in one of the memorable images from the film: As we watch a giant battle airship emerge from the clouds we’re filled with a sense of wonder and awe, but moments later the fascination gives way to a disturbing question: What could this deadly machine be used for?

The reason I find this comforting is that it reminds me that a film can be more than one note. These days, mostly for marketing purposes I guess, it seems like every film gets a simple label - but you can’t put a simple label on Laputa, because it’s more than just one thing.

There’s the magical adventure, the search for the titular castle, which takes us to the skies on a wild ride, but there’s also the dark mystery behind Laputa, the sinister government plot, and the questionable characters that take part in both. There’s the action aspect, full of elaborate chases and battle scenes. Next to that, though, there’s the subtle and tender relationship between our two young heroes - something we can almost call love.

As the story progresses we continually switch between opposites, in a very satisfying way. One moment we get scenes like the one aboard the pirate ship, when Pazu and Sheeta find themselves the unlikely partners of that shady bunch, and Pazu is put on lookout duty in the crows nest. Of course Sheeta sneaks up and joins him, and as they cuddle up together under a warm jacket, they share their hopes and fears for the future, while all the stone cold pirates listen in on the intercom with misty eyes.

We also get truly chilling scenes, like the one where the shady government agents have captured Sheeta, and she’s shown the remains of a wrecked robot that fell from the sky, the clue that told the government Laputa might be real. The robot looks like the ones we know from the old Fleischer Superman cartoons (mirrored as well in Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (2004)), and we get the feeling that any moment the giant metal creature could wake up and tear everyone to pieces.

Slowly the mystery expands and the true scope of the story is revealed. When we finally arrive at Laputa - I'm sure that's not a spoiler - the place looks breathtakingly beautiful, and yet sad. The theme about the dangers of over-reliance on technology, or perhaps that technology will inevitably destroy us all, creeps into the story, and once again the Jules Verne inspiration becomes clear. Remember Captain Nemo’s musings on the maturity of Man and his inability to handle the sophisticated power-source that pushes Nautilus effortlessly through the water?

Despite several story lines and a sometimes complicated backstory, the film very rarely has to resort to cumbersome exposition, the images often speak for themselves, and despite the heavy themes, the film itself seems light on its feet.

Needless to say the animation is gorgeous. Every time I get my hands on one of these old school hand-animated films I'm amazed at the artistry on display. I watch with bated breath as a metal monster claws its way to freedom through a sea of hand drawn fire, or when a flying fortress is blown into a billion pieces, which falls to the ground, each meticulously guided by a true artist with nothing but pencil and patience. But the quiet moments deserve some recognition as well. Whenever we’re flying, across the vast beautiful sky or through billowing clouds, I’m in awe. THIS is what animation was created for - to make the mundane magical, to bring fantasy to life. I hope this type of old school animated movies never go the way of the cave paintings. Computer animation can be a wonderful thing, poetic and beautiful even, but hand drawn animation can do something truly unique.

BLURAY

Laputa: Castle in the Sky is released in a Blu-ray/DVD combo by Optimum Releasing in England.

The disc features both the original Japanese audio, with English subtitles, and an English dubbed track. Of course you should always go with the original track, but sometimes the dubbed track can be useful when you watch a film the first time. Yes, I know, purists will probably consider it blasphemy, but I’ve had experience with this. I couldn’t get through more than 20 minutes of Satoshi Kon’s Paprika (2006), the first time I saw it. The story was too complicated and the visuals too dense. When I gave it another shot, I chose the English track, and suddenly it was much easier for me to take it all in. When I go back to the film, I’ll definitely use the Japanese track, but I needed the English dub to get all the way through the first the time.

The disc also features some storyboards, promotions videos and some interviews. It’s quite brief, but I found the 3-4 minute clips of Miyazaki explaining his inspirations for the story to be just what I needed.

As for the image... Well, I have to say, this Blu-ray looks absolutely stunning! The images are clean, with great colors, but they didn’t seem to be digitally manipulated to obscure all the organic flaws of classic animation, they were all right there, in crystal clear high-def. Admittedly animation is a very forgiving genre, when it comes to Blu-ray or DVD, but for a hand drawn film from 1986 this seems perfect to me.

I do hope Optimum gets around to releasing Spirited Away (2001) and Princess Mononoke (1997) on Blu-ray soon. I'd sure love to revisit them.

FINAL THOUGHTS

Laputa: Castle in the Sky is a lot more accessible than other Ghibli films I’ve seen, like Spirited Away or Howl’s Moving Castle (2004). It feels more classic in nature, and less weird. I'm not sure today's overstimulated kids can sit still long enough to make it through this film, but they should.

Laputa: Castle in the Sky is a beautiful film, both in terms of its images and its spirit. You can’t say that about many films these days.

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Optimum Releasing and Edith Chappey for making this review possible.

The Easter Marathon 2011

2011-04-18T18:10:00.001+02:00

Easter is coming up and that means it's time for another film marathon. Did you forget what the film marathons are all about? Read the intro to the last Easter Marathon.

As always, we're going to watch four films, but I'm doing something a little different this time around. In this marathon you'll get to chose between two films in four categories.

Without further ado, here are the movies...

CUT TO:

FILM #1: The Creature Feature

Beetlejuice (1988) vs. Dragonheart (1996)

We open the marathon with a bit of fun.

Beetlejuice deals with a recently dead couple and their attempt to discourage anyone from moving into their old house, by haunting it and hiring the "people exorcist" Beetle Juice.

This was the film Tim Burton did just before he hit the jackpot with Batman in 1989. It features a perfectly loony mix of typically weird Burton designs and ideas, plus his ongoing fascination with death. Burton had not yet embraced the goth look that would define his later projects, consequently this film is more colorful and more fun than many of his other works, and it's full of wonderful, odd old school effects, which just add to the quirky feeling.

Dragonheart is bit more classic. Even though it's located smack in the middle of the CGI revolution of the '90s, it feels almost '80s-like in story and mood. You could easily imagine this film being done in the middle of that decade, when there was a resurgence in the fantasy genre, or perhaps it could have been done by Disney in the '60s? After all, the story of a dragonslayer who strikes up a friendship with the last remaining dragon, to fight an evil king, is the stuff of fairytales, so it would be a perfect fit with the Mouse House.

Of course, back then they wouldn't have been able to do justice to the spectacular creature at the heart (pun!) of the story, and it really is spectacular! Coupled with Sean Connery's husky voice the dragon is easily the most fascinating aspect of the film.

FILM #2: The Monster Hour

The Monster Squad (1987) vs. Fright Night (1985)

The next choice is between two 80's movies, aimed at the, let's say, "younger crowd".

The Monster Squad would be a great double bill with The Goonies (1985), because it's got the same sense of adventure. A bunch of kids discover that Dracula is "alive" and well, and has brought back a bunch of classic monsters, so he can take over the world. Naturally they must stop him!

You can't go wrong with a clever script, co-written by wünder-screenwriter Shane Black. Add to that the sheer joy of watching the old Universal monsters stumble around in an urban setting. They really don't make movies like this anymore, both in terms of mood, story, style and size. It's great fun, and a little bit scary.

Fright Night is slightly more scary. It's got a wonderfully simple premise - "what if a vampire moved in next door to you?" - which makes for a great, paranoid, but slightly goofy urban horror story. It's not entirely without bite, though. There are a few dicey moments, when young Charley must watch both his mother, girlfriend and best friend fall prey to the beast next door!

The film also features some fantastic monster effects, the kind that could only be done in the 80's. Watch it before the upcoming remake will force you to refer to this as "the original".

FILM #3: The Hunter with a Heart

The Killer (1989) vs. Blade Runner (1982)

Time to get a bit moody, with two lonely assassins.

John Woo's seminal The Killer is a wonderfully operatic take on the classic "killer with a conscience"-story. Chow Yun Fat plays the titular hero, who accidentally blinds a lounge singer during a job, but wows to help her get back on her feet, and get her some essential eye surgery.

The heroic bloodshed genre, made famous by the late 80's and early 90's films of Hong Kong, has never been more perfectly realized than here. Every frame is brimming with style and every scene has a strong emotional core. Hollywood's modern action movies could learn a lot from this.

Blade Runner is equally seminal in its own right.

A visually stunning take on the future where a disillusioned detective, played by a deliberately uncharismatic Harrison Ford, must track down and kill four "synthetic humans".

At its heart this is just a simple detective story - some would call it pedestrian - but it's elevated to new levels by director Ridley Scott's dense and realistic depiction of a decrepit Earth of the future, full of uncannily familiar elements, all of which seems to be a flashing warning of things to come.

FILM #4: The Madman Murderer

The Shining (1980) vs. The Silence of the Lambs (1991)

Time to get chilly and more than a little freaked out, as we end the night with a choice between two truly classic films.

A family moves into a remote hotel, to take care of it during the winter. Dad goes nuts, then gets homicidal. It's a family film, then. Stanley Kubrick's The Shining may not stick very close to the Stephen King novel, but who cares? Kubrick sure didn't, and in the process he created a very unusual horror movie, which still works today. Few things are more frightening than Jack Nicholson's off the rails performance, and that ending will leave you chilled to the bone.

Modern filmmakers working in the horror genre these days are incapable of creating the kind of slow, deliberate descent into madness we're witnesses to in The Shining, they are too busy cutting. They should sit down, watch this movie, and learn.

By comparison The Silence of the Lambs is perhaps a bit more mainstream than The Shining, but it's no less frightening. A spiffy young Jodie Foster hunts serial killer Buffalo Bill and gets assistance from incarcerated psychiatrist and serial killer Hannibal Lecter.

With all the C.S.I. and Criminals Minds shows on TV these days, the hunt for serial killers has become a bit stale, luckily The Silence of the Lambs draws its mojo from the scenes between the innocent young girl and the shrewd, cannibalistic older man. They are still as electric today, as the first time we saw them.

CUT TO:

FINAL THOUGHTS

So there you have it folks. Pick one film in each category, watch them during a single day, and report back with your results. It really is that simple.

As for me, I think I'll pick Dragonheart, Fright Night, The Killer, and The Shining to watch. It's going to be epic. I can't wait!

FADE OUT.

For Your Eyes Only (1981)

2011-04-16T17:40:00.000+02:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

A British spy ship sinks off the coast of Greece, carrying with it an ATAC transmitter. This device is used to send launch-codes to submarines and such. If it should fall into the wrong hands, the result could be catastrophic. Bond is dispatched to discover who killed the man responsible for the recovery of the device.

Of course Bond flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, but nails surprisingly few broads during the course of this film. Only one! He even turns down a perky, blond skater, barely 20 years old! What the hell is wrong with him?!

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

Nobody! All we get is some random Greek smuggler who wants to sell the ATAC to the Russians. There's a boatload of thugs, though, including a silent, but deadly, blond dude, and Charles Dance shows up too!

REVIEW

Ah yes, the Bond we know and hate is back. If story is king, then Bond resides in a republic. An extremely important coding device has been lost, does Bond attempt to find it? No, he's on a mission to find the guy, who hired the guy, who killed the guy, who was going to locate the device. No, you read that right. And while he's off on this tangent, the device is lying in the wreck of a ship, free for anyone to find. Please. To top off this insult to agents everywhere, Bond seems more like he's on a cosy vacation than on a mission. He's strolling around in Greece, tasting the local cuisine, talking casually with a few contacts.

The film also wastes a dumbfounding amount of time on a completely superfluous subplot, featuring the ice-skater Bibi. As much as I enjoy watching this perky little thing rub herself up against Bond, this part of the story is utterly useless, and in an already slow and aimless film, it's positively painful.

The pre-credit sequence is also useless. Bond is kidnapped by Blofeld, who we almost forgot was still running free out there. He's in a wheelchair and laughs maniacally all the time, but we never see his face. Unfortunately for him Bond takes control of a helicopter, picks up Blofeld and drops him into an industrial chimney. Done. I was almost flabbergasted. Clearly the producers knew they had a loose end in Blofeld, they didn't want to deal with him anymore, so he's killed off in this ridiculous, unceremonious manner.

In terms of action and drama this film is roadkill. First of all, Bond travels to a ski resort. Really? That's a new one. Of course this means we get the inevitable ski chase. Haven't we done that a million times already? Later in the film we get an impressive climbing sequence. Impressive, because it's so excruciating slow, and unbelievably incompetent. Turns out, Bond can't climb either. If you thought Bond was out of place in Harlem, you should see him hanging on to a cliff-side for dear life, with the death-grip of a condemned man.

The single good action scene in this dull fare is the exploration of the sunken ship. I don't understand why the whole film wasn't built around this element. Bond and a hot chick enter the wreckage. They're attacked! There are sharks in the water! We get a short, but great fight scene, between two mini-subs, The Abyss-style! It's pretty cool, and they clearly build the whole set in a tank, and they have the subs and everything. Why not make this element - Bond physically getting his hands on the illusive device - the centerpiece of the story?

I always enjoy reviewing films from the 80's, because it's so easy to determine how good they are, by comparing them to landmark films of the decade: Try this on for size: For Your Eyes Only was released 1 year after The Empire Strikes Back, same year as Raiders of the Lost Ark, and one year before Blade Runner. Why does it look like it's 30 years older?

Maybe it's because of scenes like the one where Bond learns an important clue from - wait for it - a parrot. Yes, an actual parrot. That's not even the worst part. The worst part is the scene where Margaret Thatcher is having a conversation with said parrot, believing it to be James Bond. Yes, you read that right too.

Moonraker (1979)

2011-04-15T18:40:00.000+02:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

Bond goes to outer space! When a space shuttle on route for England is hijacked in mid-air Bond is sent to California to investigate Drax Industries, the manufacturer of the spaceship. Of course Bond flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, but not as much as usual. He does nail every broad with a pulse, including NASA Scientist Dr. Goodhead, a gorgeous brunette pilot, who works for Drax, and a Brazilian chick.

In the final act Bond heads off into space.

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

Hugo Drax, who basically wants to create a Noah's Ark in space, full of really hot people, and kill off the rest of the Earth's population. His vicious attitude, and his disdain for all things British, makes him really creepy. He's got a creepy sword-wielding Asian henchman on his payroll, and he hires Jaws, the creepy giant with the metal teeth from the prevous film, to take out Bond.

REVIEW

From the spectacular opening scene - the space shuttle hijacking - Moonraker moves at a brisk and refreshing pace. Bond is thrown out of a plane without a parachute even before the opening credits roll! The globetrotting investigation takes Bond to the waterways of Venice, the carnival of Rio, the waterfalls of the Amazon, and yes, eventually into outer space. In a rare case of lucidity the investigation actually stays on target throughout the film, using that "finding a clue and following it"-technique we talked about in previous reviews. Perhaps that's why the silly antics don't bother me as much here, as in earlier films, and trust me the silly antics are REALLY silly here.

The gondola chase through Venice must be the worst offender here. Bond is almost killed by a henchman who pops out of a coffin in a funeral procession! When he realizes his life is threatened he turns the gondola into a speed boat at the push of a button, and later the boat drives UP ON LAND! Naturally Her Majesty's Secret Service has a land-going-speedboat-gondola ready in Venice, should an agent ever need one. Right! And it doesn't matter how many ladies Bond has nailed, he can't possibly look cool in such a machine. Bond loses all the street cred he saved up earlier in the film, when he is almost killed in a big a centrifuge thingy. The kind they train astronauts in. That's a pretty cool scene, by the way, we can actually see Roger Moore's face distorted by G-force!

I don't think I've mentioned this in any of the other reviews, but can I just point out how appallingly bad the rear projection shots are in the Bond movies? Every time we get a big action sequence, where the whole thing is obviously done by stuntmen 20 years younger than Bond, there's one or two quick glimpses of the actual Bond actor pretending to be a part of the scene, shot in a studio in front of a screen showing an incredibly shaky shot from the stunt sequence. It's almost laughable how unconvincing this is, and yet there's at least one sequence like this in every Bond. Are these shots fooling anybody? Where they EVER fooling anybody?

The success of Star Wars forced the producers to think outside the box, so that's the reason the last half hour takes place in outer space. I don't actually mind this sequence. We get space shuttles, a space station, zero gravity scenes, it's all very impressive. Inevitably the giant space battle between two teams of astronauts with freakin' laser guns seems a bit forced, but luckily the visual effects throughout this sequence are surprisingly well done.

If The Man with the Golden Gun is commonly referred to as Moore's most disappointing film, Moonraker is usually laughed off a the most embarrassing and ill conceived attempt to stay current. I will say this: There's a distinct possibility that original 007 creator Ian Flemming was spinning in his grave, when this film was revealed to the world.

Yes, Moonraker is a completely silly film, but I must admit I absolutely love it. Chalk it up to my fascination with Star Wars, if you must, but if it was up to me Bond can (and should) go into outer space any time he wants. As long as he stays out of Harlem, I'm fine with it.

The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)

2011-04-12T12:14:00.000+02:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

A British and a Russian submarine disappear without a trace. The worst part is: They were carrying nuclear missiles. James Bond is dispatched to investigate how the subs' tracking systems were compromised. Meanwhile his Russian counterpart, the gorgeous and deadly Major Anya Amasova aka Agent Triple X, has received a similar mission. Though they initially work against each other, eventually the two agents must pool their resources to discover the culprit.

Of course Bond flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, he nails every broad with a pulse, including a gorgeous conniving blond, an Egyptian chick, plus the aforementioned major. To add drama to the mix Bond also nails the major's lover in the pre-credit sequence, though in an entirely different meaning of the word.

This is the film that features the coolest gadget Bond ever possessed. The sexy white Lotus, which can turn into a submarine at the push of a button.

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

Sinister industrialist Karl Stromberg, who wants to cause a nuclear war, so we'll all be forced to live under water. Easy for him to say, he's safely hidden away in his spider-looking submersible headquarters. Did I mention he's also got a tank with a shark in it?

This movie also marks the first appearance of the henchman Jaws. He's the giant with the metal teeth.

REVIEW

The first act of The Spy Who Loved Me is rather shaky. The usual clumsy Bond investigation we're used to. Badly written, badly staged, just bad. There's a scene were Bond and the major sneak into the back of a bad guy's van. While they're waiting for the car to reach its destination they sit casually and talk in completely normal voices! Weren't they supposed to be hiding? Isn't the bad guy sitting 6 feet away, within earshot? It doesn't help the film that the credit sequences at this point have become almost laughable. Naked ladies prancing around are hard to mess up, but credit designer Maurice Binder manages to do so. Some of these images are beyond Austin Powers absurd.

There's also too much humor in the first part of the movie. Here's the thing about humor in an action movie: It's very tricky to get right. If done wrong it can seriously undercut the action-scenes, so you no longer fear for the character's lives. Plus, this type of humor is rarely all that funny to begin with, because we're not dealing with a real comedy.

When the major and Bond are forced to join up the plot slowly begins to make sense. They finally find themselves face to face with the bad guy, and they learn about his preposterous plan, and we get a clear idea about the scope of the story. This confirms my point that Bond is far better suited for these types of international crises, where the stakes are really high, because even though Stromberg's plan is rather childish, we get the sense that he most definitely will succeed, and that it will be VERY bad for all of us, if Bond can't stop him.

The Spy Who Loved Me feels like a big movie, and it looks big too. Stromberg's HQ is just massive. When seen from the outside we're treated to some very impressive model shots, while the inside of the craft must have been one of the biggest sets constructed at the time. Even the action-scenes work in this film, especially a rather inventive car chase, where Bond and the major are being chased by every motorized transportation know to man.

Roger Moore has stepped up his game this time around, he looks way more serious, and it's clear that Bond understands the gravity of the situation. Don't get me wrong, he's still got time to flirt, but he doesn't seem quite as distracted as he was during past missions. The scene where he must dismantle a nuclear missile while a tight deadline is looming is a showstopper. Moore's third outing in the 007 universe is not only watchable, but one of the best entries of the series so far, even though it takes a while before it really gets going. The film eventually finds its footing, and a solid one at that. The action sequences are cool, the story works, and for the first time we can take James Bond seriously as a secret agent.

A funny moment occurs at the end of the credits: "James Bond will return in For Your Eyes Only", it says. Actually, no. Star Wars was released the same year as this movie, so the Bond producers had to cash in on the moviegoers' fascination with space. 007's next adventure would take him to the stars.

The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)

2011-04-10T12:46:00.000+02:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

James Bond learns that notoriously secretive, $1 million per hit assassin Scaramanga (played by Christopher Lee) has got a bullet with his name on it. Instead of simply waiting, Bond heads out into the world to find Scaramanga first. The chase takes him to China and Macao, and also involves a new energy saving technology. Of course Bond flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, but he nails almost no broads in this film, he's just too busy, even though cute little blond agent Goodnight (Britt Ekland) practically throws herself at him.

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

Oh dear. No one is looking for world domination. Well, there's some talk about cheap energy, but no bad guy stroking a cat, no satellites with lasers, nothing. Just one guy who wants to kill another. That's fairly disappointing. In fact, the most sinister person here is Scaramanga's manservant, the midget, Nick Nack.

REVIEW

Generally considered one of the worst Bond movies, this is still far better than the previous film, and most of the Connery ones. Unfortunately that doesn't say much. The central plot certainly has merit, and could have worked if it had been done right.

What we needed was a stone cold face-off between two men at the height of their craft. The film should have been a series of increasingly intense duels, culminating in the ultimate mano-a-mano battle. That would have been a great film. But we get none of that here, instead we get a fumbling, bumbling story, where Bond's previous case, involving a new energy source, is suddenly linked to the assassin who, it turns out, had no idea about the threat against Bond, because he didn't send it! Scaramanga wasn't looking for Bond at all!

One could argue that the film fumbles the ball in the very first minute with the pre-credit introduction of Scaramanga. You see, one of his identifying marks is a third nipple. So of course we need a shot of a shirtless Christopher Lee with three nipples. There are few things less scary than the sight of a guy with three nipples, just saying. Next up we get to see how Scaramanga keeps sharp between jobs. Rather than a cool obstacle course that could push him to the max, physically, Scaramanga has created a ludicrous fun-house with mirrors and puppets, where he can lure other assassins in, confuse them, and kill them with ease. That's just dumb!

The rest of the film is hit and miss in terms of what works and what doesn't. Moore looks a little younger and a little less creepy than in the previous film, but once again demonstrates how inept he is in a close quarter fight. This guy is a trained agent? Really? One step forward, one step back.

The Secret Service's headquarters in the East is located in a half-sunken ship. The wreck is leaning to one side, but the interior has been modified to compensate for this, a really original and inspired piece of production design. Unfortunately the film also contains two incredibly unoriginal and uninspired action-scenes: A long boring fight at a karate school and another boat chase, virtually identical to the one in the previous film. One step forward, three steps back. And here's the real kicker. The utterly stupid redneck cop from the previous film is on vacation in China, and joins Bond in a car chase. Make it stop!

James Bond again comes off like a talentless playboy hack, a guy you wouldn't trust with a potato gun, much less matters of national security. In this film he even drops his freakin' gun at THE most crucial moment, and to make matters worse he doesn't even have the best gadget. That honor goes to Scaramanga, who can turn his car into an airplane!

We also learn a shocking, unpleasant truth about Bond. Turns out that 007 can't even hot-wire a car. What a prissy Brit.

Live and Let Die (1973)

2011-04-09T11:42:00.000+02:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

James Bond looks different. Again.

The deaths of three agents put Bond on the trail of a nasty, heroin dealing, leader of a small Caribbean island. So he heads to Harlem, New York and New Orleans to investigate. Of course Bond also flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, he nails every broad with a pulse, including his first black woman, played by Gloria Hendry, a fresh-faced Jane Seymour, and an adorable tiny Italian thing.

There's a speed boat chase, Bond has a magnetic watch that can deflect bullets (which is not possible, according to Mythbusters), and we get the first title song that's actually any good.

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

Pimp-looking drug baron Kananga who thinks that giving away a lot of free heroin will somehow put everyone else out of business, allowing him to take over the entire North-American market. He's assisted by a smiling pimp-looking henchman with an iron claw, several regular pimp-looking henchmen, and the entire population of Harlem. In fact every black pimp-looking person in sight seems to work for him.

REVIEW

So Roger Moore takes over the iconic role of James Bond. How do we feel about that? We hate it.

Moore was 46 when the film came out, and he looks it. He's clearly seen better days, and it's more than a little creepy when he jumps into bed with one young beauty after another. The problem isn't all the things the filmmakers have done to make Moore different than Connery - and they've done quite a few - the problem is all the things that make him seem like a butler, rather than a secret agent. God, he just looks so damn British!

A man's got to know his limitations, so when this stiff Brit stumbles into Harlem and - wait for it - doesn't blend in, he can't be surprised! He just can't. It makes him seem like an idiot. Bond is so far out of his element here that he couldn't look more ridiculous, even if he tried. Of course the bad guys immediately catch him! Why wouldn't they? He's the only white guy in a ten block radius! Unsurprisingly Bond is once again nearly killed several times, and once again only escapes due to sheer luck. Why didn't they change THAT part of the story?

Then there's the plot. Heroin dealing in America is hardly a job for Her Majesty's Secret Service. They justify it by including the deaths of a few British agents, but it just doesn't sit right. On top of that we're dealing with Voodoo, and superstitious nonsense like Tarot cards, which is just not worthy of Bond. Don't get me wrong, Voodoo can be extremely scary, but the way they treat it here, just makes it seem like a joke. Oh, look what the simple-minded black folks believe in, isn't that cute?

Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but the film in general just seems extremely racist to me. It could just be the fact that every black person in sight dresses like a pimp, and they are ALL involved in drug-dealing.

In the later years inventive action-sequences, with a touch of humor, became a staple of the Bond franchise. That seems to start here. At one point Bond attempts to escape a bunch of pimp-looking henchmen by stealing a small plane, but of course he doesn't just fly away, oh no! He drives around the airport, disabling the cars one by one. The sequence could have worked if the simple solution wasn't so obvious... Get the hell out of Dodge, you're on a freakin' plane, genius! Later we get a speed boat chase. That might have worked too, but for some reason we leave Bond during this chase, to follow a bunch of clumsy, racist, redneck cops, as they struggle to catch up with the boats. An odd choice, and a scene more fitting for Cannonball Run. The sequence is also too long, it just becomes boring by the end.

When the biggest drama in a cool action movie with a secret agent is a moment when our hero is almost bitten by a very small snake, you're in trouble. If the course charted by this film is anything to go by, the continued adventures of James Bond, by way of Roger Moore, will be a world of hurt. For the viewers that is.

James Bond Marathon II: The Moore Years

2011-04-08T20:01:00.005+02:00

I know what you're thinking. You're thinking, "Gee whiz, I sure wish there were more films about James Bond, because the first seven were so freakin', flippin' good. I just want to keep going!"

Well, you're in luck. I now present to you: "James Bond Marathon II: The Moore Years".

This marathon will feature the seven James Bond films starring Roger Moore, but it will also include Sean Connery's unofficial return to the role, in 1983's Never Say Never Again. Yes, I know, purists don't consider it part of the real Bond series, but I couldn't care less.

The movies we'll be watching are:

Live and Let Die (1973)
The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)
The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)
Moonraker (1979)
For Your Eyes Only (1981)
Octopussy (1983)
Never Say Never Again (1983)
A View to a Kill (1985)

First review will go online tomorrow and then there'll be a new one every other day or so. There's nothing Moore to say (sorry), so in the words of the great man, whose films we are about to devour...

"The headless chicken can only know where he's been. He can't see where he's going."

Diamonds Are Forever (1971)

2011-03-10T20:04:00.001+01:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

James Bond kills Blofeld in the opening sequence, but we all know he's not really dead. After this, Bond investigates a diamond smuggling ring.

Of course Bond flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, he nails every broad with a pulse, including Tiffany Case, a feisty redhead with big breasts, and the equally well-endowed Plenty O'Toole. Actually, he doesn't get to nail that last one, because she's thrown out of a window. Bond also makes out with himself in public.

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

...Yawn! Blofeld again. Turns out he's the one behind the diamond smuggling, using a secluded millionaire and his casino as a front. Meanwhile two cartoonish henchmen, Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint, run around and kill everybody. Not sure they want world domination, though. Not really sure who they're working for, actually.

REVIEW

Oh dear... Where to begin on this one?

Diamonds Are Forever is an awful film, in every sense of the word. A stupid, boring, inelegant mess. Sure, Sean Connery is back - despite quitting the series after film number 5 - but he looks old and tired.

The story sends James Bond out on the sort of mission the guys from Mission: Impossible have been dealing with for 5 years. More efficiently, I might add. Bond, who presumably is one of the most skilled secret agents, should not be chasing a mere diamond smuggler. A fact he even mentions himself! Of course, the plot eventually turns out to involve Blofeld and world domination, but they don't know that up front. And the link between Blofeld and the diamonds is just pathetic, and makes little sense.

The problems of this film becomes very clear, when we're introduced to two ridiculous bad guys early in the film, who insists on saying each other's names in EVERY sentence. They look like a pair of mismatched comedians from a Saturday morning TV show for kids. Even Blofeld is reduced to a clown. At one point he dresses up like an old lady, with lipstick and everything, to evade capture. Appalling. The stupid behavior of the characters is matched by the overall acting quality, which reaches almost offensive levels, but I guess that goes well together with the cartoonish plot that sees Bond run around like Benny Hill, with action scenes straight out of Cannonball Run.

Let me just give one example of this: At one point Bond stumbles through a research facility and comes across a moon set, where astronauts seem to practice working on the moon. Why they would do this on what appears to be a completely ordinary cardboard set, with no similarities to actual moon conditions, is beyond me. When the astronauts see Bond they begin to chase him while moving in slow-motion, as if they were on the moon, while the regular guards chase him at normal speed. Why? Why, why, why?

The stupidity continues when Bond is once again almost killed by an array of random people. A diamond smuggler, a guard, and a few others. Plus he's beaten to a pulp by TWO GIRLS!

Bond has always been incompetent, but I never expected to see him looking like he just wants to be put out of his misery. Alas, although this is Sean Connery's last official 007 movie, he would return to the role 12 years later, but we'll cross that bridge when we get to it.

Diamonds Are Forever is, without a doubt, the weakest Bond film so far. It's so inept that I almost suspect the producers were actively trying to kill off the franchise. Where that leaves the next 14 years of Bond featuring Roger Moore, by comparison, I'm not sure.

On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969)

2011-03-08T19:04:00.000+01:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

James Bond looks different! George Lazenby takes over the iconic role from Sean Connery, and makes it his own.

Bond has been chasing Blofeld for two years, with no luck, but a new clue sends him to a secluded ski resort in Switzerland, where Blofeld is hiding, while preparing his next plan to take over the world. Bond flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, but doesn't nail every broad with a pulse! Instead, he falls in love with feisty countess Tracy Di Vicenzo, played by Diana Rigg, and he quits Her Majesty's Secret Service (well, not really). He also wears a dress, and insists on being called "Hilly".

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

...Blofeld, who wants to pioneer the use of advanced chemical weapons, by having some hypnotized hot chicks spread nasty diseases, and then blackmail the superpowers for the cure, or something. There's also a curious, nasty henchwoman, called Irma Bunt. She's a beast that one.

REVIEW

Director Peter Hunt has put together an excellent Bond movie, against all odds. It's not an easy task he's got, after all. First of all he's got a new Bond - which is "bad" enough. And second, Bond does something in this film he's never done before: He becomes human.

On Her Majesty's Secret Service is a slick and inventive spy movie. It's got quite a few solid action set-pieces: A ski chase, a car chase that ends up on a stock car racetrack, and a bobsled chase! Bond's hand-to-hand fighting scenes reaches a new level, and the film closes with an impressive helicopter attack on Blofeld's stronghold.

What really sets this film apart, though, is the strange emotional core of the story. Bond almost stumbles over the woman Tracey. He saves her, with no ulterior motives. He even woos her, also without ulterior motives. He meets with her father, they discuss their future and settling down! Bond falls in love, he becomes vulnerable, and because of this the stakes are higher than ever before.

You can argue that Lazenby is nowhere near as good as Connery, he does seem a bit aloof at times, but he has an advantage because he gets to do the things Connery never did. Oddly enough, the solid love story setup is parked on the sidelines, while Bond goes on a mission.

35 minutes into the film Bond gets a lead on Blofeld's whereabouts and he travels to the aforementioned ski resort, under the guise of being a genealogy researcher. He immediately puts on a dress (okay, it's a traditional Scottish kilt), and proceeds to seduced the other visitors. They are all hot, young girls, who are being trained to carry out Blofeld's chemical terror plan!

Sidebar: Does anybody wonder why Bond and Blofeld don't even recognise each other when they meet in this film, despite meeting face to face in the last film? Now, I know both characters have been recast, but still...

Anyway, all the scenes at the resort are just plain weird. They seem totally disconnected from the rest of the film, almost goofy. Like somebody taped over the middle part of the film with an especially strange Twilight Zone episode! This sequence ends as abruptly as it began, with the return of Tracey and the serious plot. I must admit I found the whole thing quite entertaining, but it's still weird!

The film redeems itself with some cool action sequences in the final act, and on top of that we get that absolutely brutal ending, but the filmmakers really owe us an On Her Majesty's Secret Service II. Alas, Lazenby would be gone by the next film, and the events of this film are never mentioned.

This will be sacrilegious to some, but I definitely prefer Lazenby and this film over Connery and his lackluster efforts.

You Only Live Twice (1967)

2011-03-04T15:41:00.000+01:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

An American spaceship is captured by another unidentified spaceship. The Americans thinks the Russians are to blame, the Russians prepare for American retaliation, but the British Secret Service believes the mysterious craft originated from Japan, and thus James Bond is sent to the Land of the Rising Sun to prevent World War III.

Bond gets to play with the mini-helicopter Little Nellie, he's trained as a ninja, at one point he's dressed up to look like a Japanese fisherman, and he dies (again) in the pre-credit sequence. Of course Bond flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, he nails every broad with a pulse, including an innocent Japanese island girl, a feisty redhead who works for the bad guys and a few other assorted Asian girls.

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

...SPECTRE. Again. No. 1 is back, and so is his cat, but this time we actually get to see his face, and we even learn his name. Shudder! We also get some serious opposition from some very cool Japanese henchmen! Hai!

REVIEW

From the very early moments of You Only Live Twice the mood seems distinctly different from the previous films. A hijacking in space, resulting in an international conflict. The danger of war in the air. Bond is dispatched on an uncharacteristically clear mission, backed by solid intel. There's a definite feeling of modern espionage here. Is this really a Bond film? Even the investigation itself seems much more coherent this time around - Bond follows a lead, it leads to a clue, the clue is examined and a new lead is produced. Wow, almost like a real investigation!

It's also worth noting that we're at the same level of information as Bond, at least for the first hour. That works far better than when we have all the facts and are just waiting for Bond to stumble over them. Even when we learn who's behind the whole plot ahead of Bond, he's already voiced his theories - which of course are correct - so we know he's on the right track. It's a lot easier to root for him that way!

Naturally the film still gets distracted every now and then, it's not completely free of those unnecessary detours. It seems strange, for example, to make the effort of faking Bond's death, only to have him walk around moments later with no disguise, but at least it makes for a colorful opening, even if it steals a lot of screen-time. Later the film grinds to a halt at the most crucial moment to show us Bond's transformation into a Japanese fisherman (there's ninja training and heavy makeup involved). Still, things could be worse.

Bond also seems a little less smug here, which suits him well. Sean Connery plays down the character's natural charm, and I'm wondering if this is a conscious choice, or a sign that he's getting fed up with 007. Either way, and especially in light of the international crisis at the heart of the story, it seems quite fitting for this film.

Overall this adventure just feels bigger. We've got a big important plot, we finally get to meet the ultimate bad guy face to face, we're in a (truly) foreign country, with gorgeous vistas and exotic locations, even the sets are bigger. There's a cool areal action scene with several helicopters, and the final action set-piece is more impressive than anything we've seen before.

All in all, You Only Live Twice is a good place to start if you want to check out some of the earlier Bond films. It's the first one I can actually recommend.

Thunderball (1965)

2011-03-03T23:21:00.000+01:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

Once again James Bond is called into action when the world is threatened by the evil geniuses from SPECTRE. This time the organisation has acquired two nuclear bombs and issued an ultimatum to NATO: Pay £100 million, or else... Muhahahah (I added the last part).

Bond heads to the Bahamas following a hunch, and inadvertently stumbles over the whole plot. In the pre-credit sequence Bond uses a jet pack to escape, and there's a whole lot of underwater shenanigans along the way. Of course Bond flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, he nails every broad with a pulse, including his physiotherapist, innocent, scuba diving, island girl Domino, and evil henchwoman Fiona Volpe. Though, he takes no pleasure in that last one, he'll have you know.

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

SPECTRE agent Emilio Largo aka. No. 2, who's in charge of the whole operation. He's assisted by a hot redhead with giant breasts, a guy who has undergone plastic surgery to replace an important NATO person, and a bunch of more or less capable henchmen.

REVIEW

Even from the opening sequence it's obvious that somebody turned up the volume on the James Bond universe. If nothing else, this film moves at a brisk pace, and it's certainly never boring, but it's not too coherent either.

The story sounds simple, "Bond must find stolen nukes", but for some reason Thunderball is kind of a mess. There's too much running around aimlessly, checking up on hunches. The story is too elaborate and very disjointed, many things are kept secret, either from us, or the characters. And speaking of characters, there are also too many and they are often badly introduced.

I must once again direct your attention to Austin Powers. In those films there's a character called Basil Exposition. Guess what he does... That's right, he provides exposition. He pops up every now and then with new information for our hero, while reminding us what the next course of action should be. We kind of need that in Thunderball. Here's why that doesn't happen: OUR HERO HAS NO CLUE WHAT'S GOING ON! Bond follows all the right clues - we know this, because WE know what's going on - but he's got NO idea what he doing! He just follows his hunches and relies on blind luck once again, as he stumbles over one important piece of information after another. Even 1,5 hours into the film, he still doesn't know what's going on! Bond needs a clear mission - a specific goal. Let's be honest, he's not the guy you send out to do some subtle "checking up on things". You send him out when you want someone killed or screwed. That's what he does.

And apropos that... Yeah, I get it, Bond is a nice looking man, but he's not THAT nice looking, and when he opens his mouth he's often a bit of a douche. So why would women drop their pants at the first sight of him? Especially considering how unpleasantly he often behaves. This time he blackmails a women to have sex with him, so she can keep her job, and he jumps on the nasty evil henchwoman without flinching, moments after discovering a close friend has been killed. You could argue that Bond's womanizing ways are merely a product of their time, but unless women didn't develop self-respect before the '70s, I don't buy it at all.

At least the film does alright for itself in terms of action sequences. There's a lot of underwater stuff, and the centerpiece of the plot - stealing the nukes underwater - is quite well done. There's also a big underwater action showdown towards the end - a fight between two teams of scuba divers. If you know how difficult underwater shooting is, you can appreciate it for that fact, but honestly it's quite impossible to tell what's going on. Some orange guys are fighting some black guys, or something, but it looks really good!

Alright, I'm about ready for some serious bad guys now, because this whole SPECTRE thing is not working for me. An evil leader, who calls everybody by a number, and has a button so he can easily get rid of incompetent henchmen, while stroking a cat...? That's Austin Powers bad guy Doctor Evil! You can't go back from that. I know Austin Powers came 30 years AFTER this film, but that series has retroactively destroyed any chance that this James Bond villain could ever be taken seriously.

Before we wrap this up, let's check how Bond embarrasses himself this time around. Well, in this movie Bond is almost killed by a massage machine that looks like some kind of ancient self-pleasuring device. Rather unflattering. You know, between Bond's incompetence and his womanizing, I'm starting to root for the bad guys. That can't be good.

Goldfinger (1964)

2011-03-01T13:17:00.000+01:00

IT'S THE ONE WHERE

James Bond is dispatched to investigate Auric Goldfinger, suspected of smuggling gold. To assist him on his quest he gets a brand new Aston Martin, and we get the first proper Q scene. The car is outfitted with tracking device, anti-pursuit capabilities and an ejection-seat. Of course Bond flirts with Moneypenny, the secretary, he nails every broad with a pulse, including the feisty pilot Pussy Galore, and the innocent Jill Masterson, who pays for that bit of fun, by being suffocated in gold paint (which is not actually possible, according to Mythbusters).

THE SECRET PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD AWARD GOES TO...

...Goldfinger, of course. Not only does he have a clever plan to win world domination, he actually almost succeeds. He's assisted, in no small amount, by his Korean henchman Oddjob, who can throw a hat really hard (also, not possible, according to Mythbusters).

Pssst... Do you know how we can tell Goldfinger is really bad? He cheats when he plays gin! The humanity... The humanity...

REVIEW

Now we're getting somewhere. This is by no means a clear-cut winner, but Goldfinger is far less embarrassing than the previous two 007 films. Bond is ready for action even before the opening credits roll. He jumps out of the water in scuba gear (with a duck on his head, but never mind that), plants some explosives, removes the diving gear to reveal an impeccable suit, and almost gets laid. All this before the film has even begun. Of course, he's also nearly killed twice within the first 5 minutes, but it wouldn't really be Bond if he was all careful, right? Even though he's reckless, he's far less stupid in this movie than in the earlier entries. It continues to amaze me how much he relies on luck, rather than his (presumably) extensive training, but I guess that's the charm of the whole concept.

Story is still a major issue, although by the end, we're clearly on the right track. However, the first act is still a bit rough. We're introduced to Goldfinger in two elaborate sequence: In the first Bond catches him cheating during his card game, and in the second Goldfinger and Bond play a round of golf, where they both cheat. That's the first half hour. Neither of these scenes lead anywhere, we learn nothing particularly interesting (nothing that isn't repeated later anyway), and the pace is off the charts slow. Luckily the central plot, meaning Goldfinger's plan, which involves compromising the entire US gold supply, is actually quite clever. As soon as that kicks into gear the film becomes interesting. We get some cool action scene, a few clever plot twists, and some genuinely interesting characters, who actually pose a threat or a challenge to Bond.

We could have done without the "unnecessarily slow cutting device" Bond is exposed to, or the rather clumsy exposition scene where Goldfinger explains his entire plan in great detail to a bunch of people, only to kill them off minutes later, but to be fair these are minor bumps in the road, barely noticeable when we're going at full speed. The entire end sequence is certainly on par with the best of the best from the '60s! There's a big fight between two groups of soldiers, cross-cut with a small fight between Bond and Oddjob, while the counter of an armed nuclear device provides an inescapable and rather effective deadline.

Goldfinger was a rather enjoyable revisit, but like I mentioned, it's not without it's flaws. Story is one thing, but I do think the worst crime this movie commits, is the scene where Bond cheats a guard by pretending to ride down an elevator behind his prison cell door. You know who also does the elevator thing? Austin Powers. At least he got laid with that trick.

Oh, and one last thing... Pussy Galore? Really? Really!? Can we please put an end to these juvenile female character names?