Talk Movies To Me

Category archive

Reviews - page 2

Reviews of movies (new and old), DVDs, and anything else.

Scottish, Not Stirred: The Definitive Ranking of the Sean Connery Bond Films

in Reviews by

The character of James Bond is known by many faces. Some faces have become more memorable than others, while others are much more forgettable. There’s no question that when it comes to Sir Sean Connery, he is one of the more popular, if not the most popular actor to ever portray 007. It’s safe to say that he successfully laid the foundation for which the franchise is built, which has carried on for more than 50 years. While the franchise is forever indebted to Connery, that is not to say that all of his movies bear the same level of quality. None of them are terrible and all are worth your time for their own reasons. Ranking them in a particular order, however, helped me to see why some of his movies worked more than others. After watching all of his movies in the span of 2 weeks, here is my definitive ranking of every Connery Bond movie.

7. Diamonds Are Forever (1971)

Starting at dead last, Bond finds himself going undercover to investigate a diamond smuggling operation, leading him back to Las Vegas where Blofeld is planning to use the diamonds to power one of the world’s most powerful weapons. I knew after the first act of this movie that I was sitting through my least favorite of the bunch, which surprised me being that Guy Hamilton, who brought us Goldfinger, directed this feature. For one, the opening scene is weak and unmemorable. Two henchman named Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd carry a majority of the villainous screen time unfortunately. They work more as a bad comedic duo with terrible acting chops than a serious threat to Bond and those who cross paths with them. Whatever they went for, it just didn’t work for me. Tiffany Case, played by Jill St. John, played her role well and I never knew whether she was siding with Bond, Blofeld, or was in it for herself, which at least makes for an interesting Bond woman. The special effects were worse here than any of the other Connery movies. Apparently, the movie’s budget was rather small and effects were cut back due to Connery’s high salary demand, and it shows. The story does tend to pick up the pace and intrigue in the second and third act with some good elements to work with. But unfortunately, it falls below the others due to its poor execution and tonal mess. If anything, avoid this one when you’re trying to sell someone on Connery as Bond. You will fail miserably.

6. You Only Live Twice (1967)

Coming in at my second least favorite, Bond fakes his death to throw off his enemies and investigates the hijacking of an American space ship, leading him to team up with the Japanese Secret Service and go undercover as a ninja. Bond discovers that he must prevent Blofeld from starting an all-out nuclear war before it’s too late. This one was tough to place next in line because there really is a lot to like here. The opening is pretty solid; it sets up a nice sense of intrigue as to what will happen after we watch Bond supposedly get shot and killed. The helicopter battle sequence is something to behold and is very well done. Where this one falls short for me is the entire ninja sequence. It really drags and slows down the movie, not to mention the fact that Connery attempts to pass himself off as a Japanese man with a disguise that ends up looking outright ridiculous. The Bond women are also pretty weak here. I say women because there really isn’t a single woman character that we could follow throughout the entire movie. The one Bond woman that Connery ends up with in the end, Kissy Suzuki, is one that we don’t even meet until we approach the third act, leaving no time to give her a real personality or any reason for us to care about her character. Overall, there is plenty to have fun with here. The end sequence is an all-out battle in a volcano, and the other action sequences hold up and are well executed. It just isn’t up to snuff when it comes to everything I expect out of a Bond movie.

5. Never Say Never Again (1983)

Now I know what you’re thinking, this Connery film is not technically considered “canon” when it comes to the franchise, but I chose to include this one anyway because it’s still a Bond movie, and it’s still Connery. This movie was born out of the result of a legal battle for the rights to make Ian Fleming’s Thunderball into a feature film. Kevin McClory was a producer for Thunderball (1965), who worked out a deal where the rights to make the movie would revert back to him after 10 years. Well, 1975 rolled around and he wanted to make his own version of the movie. After a brief legal dispute with Eon Productions and much discussion with Connery to help write the script and return to play the character, McClory finally got what he wanted, and I’m sure glad he did.

Bond comes out of semi-retirement to investigate two American nuclear warheads stolen by a S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Agent, and must find out the targets before it is too late. I enjoyed this particular outing for Connery much more than I expected. The fact that Connery was approaching 53 at the time of filming and the fact that this was some sort of remake of a prior film placed my expectations at a low level. What makes this film work so well is how it recognizes Connery’s age and addresses it appropriately. It doesn’t try to pretend that he’s the same Bond we knew and loved in the 60s. While obviously older and more tired, he is still vibrant and effectively carries out every action sequence he’s in. The story uses Connery’s age as a good excuse to change some of the plot points from the original film, which also worked to its advantage because we don’t end up seeing a mere rehashing of the original story. The Bond women have a strong presence here as well. Barbara Carrera plays Fatima, an effective sidekick to Largo, the main villain of the film. So much of her character reminds me of Xenia Onatopp from Goldeneye — she’s ruthless and seductive. A young Kim Basinger plays Domino Petachi, who also plays her part really well and has solid chemistry with Connery. The special effects and action sequences are excellently crafted and look great. This is the first time we see Bond in a car chase that involves him riding a motorcycle and it’s easily the best action set piece in the movie. Unfortunately, even though the rights to the movie were granted to McClory, the use of the theme song was not. This is among the flaws I have with the movie, along with the strongest argument as to why it shouldn’t be considered canon. It made me realize just how important the Bond theme is when it comes to the heart and soul of a Bond film. But I will say that the theme song for this movie is among my favorite of Connery’s movies. Nevertheless, it’s easy to tell that a lot of care went into the production and McClory wasn’t in it for the money. This has a nice balance of action, comedy, and seriousness that gives me what I expect from a Bond movie. Connery isn’t pulling any punches either, making his last appearance as Bond a memorable one. I never thought I’d like this movie as much as I did. I guess it just goes to show that I should never say never, again.

4. Thunderball (1965)

With a similar plot to its remake, this movie finds Bond traveling to the Bahamas to recover two nuclear warheads that have been stolen by S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Agent Emilio Largo, and uncovers an international extortion scheme. This is probably the biggest and most action-packed of the Connery films. From the jet pack in the cold open, to the all-out underwater harpoon battle in the end, there is little room for a dull moment here. Largo, played by Adolfo Celi, is one of my favorite villains of the Connery movies and has a nice back and forth with Bond. His right hand woman Fiona Volpe, played by Luciana Paluzzi is also excellent, and brings a nice presence of beauty and ruthlessness to the film. Dominique Derval “Domino”, played by Claudine Auger, has one of the most satisfying character arcs of a Bond woman in the franchise. She has a personal vendetta against Largo for killing her brother and it is nice to see her to be the one to exact her revenge. The gadgets are there, the action is heavy, and Connery is deep into the character at this point making it a very enjoyable and re-watchable experience. Plus, what’s a Bond movie without a good poker scene? Don’t sleep on Thunderball.

3. Dr. No (1962)

Next in line is the movie that started it all. This one finds Bond being sent to Jamaica to investigate the disappearance of a colleague at an MI6 outpost, leading him to discover an attempt by S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Agent, Dr. No, to disrupt the American space program. This is perhaps the most unique film in the franchise. Here we see more of a detective at work than a secret agent. We follow Bond scanning a crime scene and interviewing possible suspects, further unraveling the mystery as to who’s responsible for the missing agent. There’s no Q here to present and hand out useful gadgets, and no action set-pieces – things that we regularly expect to see when we sit down to watch any Bond movie in the franchise. But here, the absence of these things work to its benefit because it allows us to build on the “bare bones” version of Bond, so to speak. By stripping the flashy things away, we come to gain a certain kind of respect for Bond and his skill set. I think it’s important to see that he can be just as smart and resourceful without the extra help from Q Branch and the fun gadgets that he would use down the road. The pacing really moves along smoothly despite the fact that we don’t have high-tension action scenes. Honey Ryder, played by Ursula Andress, sets a solid precedent for what we expect out of a Bond woman – beauty with a sense of toughness and independence, but obviously not immune to Bond’s charm. The only real down side to her is that fact that her dialogue is poorly dubbed and can be distracting at times. Dr. No is a decent villain who works more behind the scenes throughout the movie until the third act. Not my favorite, but memorable nonetheless. If anything else, this movie will be remembered forever because it contains the greatest “the name’s Bond, James Bond” moment in the entire franchise. I like to think that this scene alone inspired everyone involved to keep making Bond movies. It’s just that good. Despite this not being my favorite of Connery’s outings, I can’t think of a better movie to introduce James Bond to the world on the big screen.

2. Goldfinger (1964)

This fan favorite follows Bond investigating a gold magnate and smuggler named Auric Goldfinger, leading him to uncover an evil plot to contaminate the U.S. gold reserve at Fort Knox. I think it’s safe to say that most Bond fans consider this to be the best of them all. In fact, after the first two acts of this movie, I was well on my way to agree with that very sentiment. This one is refreshing because it’s one of the few Bond movies where the villain is transparent and has just as much of a presence as Bond does. There’s no secret villainous figure pulling the strings behind the scenes here. We are able to get to know his character and spend time with him as he and Bond constantly go at it throughout the movie. Not to mention Oddjob, played by Harold Sakata, who is one of the most memorable henchmen of the franchise. He and Goldfinger work great together as an evil duo and is tough to top. This also has the greatest cold open of the Connery movies, as well as one of the best of the franchise. I love the idea of following up with Bond at the tail end of a mission completely unrelated to the rest of the plot. It’s a great action sequence and establishes the fact that Bond is always up to something. The iconic Aston Martin also makes its first appearance here. As difficult as it was to drop this to the number two slot, it came down to Pussy Galore, played by Honor Blackman, and her critical involvement in the plot that played the biggest role in this decision. While she’s a great Bond woman and has a really strong presence, I couldn’t help ignore the fact that she turned so easily on Goldfinger without a clear motive. Throughout the entire movie she is loyal to Goldfinger and stands ready to participate in the attack on Fort Knox. But for some reason she gives a tour of Goldfinger’s compound and ends up getting seduced by Bond in a barn. This is what changed her mind to thwart the operation? It feels inconsistent with her character and we get no explanation as to why she suddenly decided to turn on Goldfinger other than the fact that she slept with Bond. Any sort of hint as to a motive would’ve been useful and much more believable. It comes off as too convenient because had she not helped out Bond, hundreds of people die and Goldfinger gets his way. Bond would have had no other way to gain the upper hand. It would’ve made sense had Bond found out that Goldfinger killed or betrayed someone she was close to and used that against him. But regardless of this one flaw, this truly is one of the most memorable and iconic Bond movies of all time. It solidifies so much of what I have come to know and love about Bond and the franchise as a whole. Not too difficult to see why this one is a common fan favorite.

1. From Russia With Love (1963)

Coming in at number one, Bond willingly falls into an assassination plot orchestrated by the Russians in order to retrieve a Soviet encryption device that was stolen by S.P.E.C.T.R.E. This one builds perfectly off of Dr No. and provides for a unique and effective plot. I’m always more interested in plots that don’t involve some sort of international threat. Here, S.P.E.C.T.R.E. initiates a revenge plot against Bond personally to avenge Dr. No’s death from the previous film, which provides for solid continuity and real consequences for Bond’s actions. Already I’m more interested because Bond is the target and is at risk throughout the entire film. Usually Bond has to insert himself into the middle of evil plots to become threatened. But here, it’s personal. Don Grant “Red”, played by Robert Shaw, plays Bond’s opposite equal and provides a real challenge to Bond. We are introduced to Q for the first time and see some gadgets put to use as well. Tatiana Romanova, played by the stunning Daniela Bianchi, is a Russian ploy to get Bond right where the Russians want him and slowly has to decide up until the last scene of the movie whether she’s in it for her country or for Bond. I love how this movie doesn’t take the franchise in a completely different direction. It builds really well off of what worked about Dr. No and doesn’t feel the need to invest in multiple action set pieces. It focuses more on the characters and intrigue of the plot rather than the big and flashy action sequences. The entire train scene is a great sequence and provides for probably the best scene in the movie. Rosa Klebb, played by Lotte Lenya, plays Red’s and Tatiana’s superior and deserves high praise. She carries such a great threatening presence and is likely my favorite female Bond villain. This movie just doesn’t have any flaws. All of the characters are fleshed out to the extent they need to be and there’s no over-reliance on gadgets and action. Connery is clearly zeroed in on the role and makes for my favorite of the Connery movies, as well as one of my favorite in the franchise. Just remember to never order red wine with fish!

Aster’s Follow-Up Feature ‘Midsommar’ Shines A Light On Horror

in Reviews by

Ari Aster set a high bar for himself with the release of the instant classic, Hereditary in August of 2018. That film, in my estimation, may be the best horror movie ever made. With Aster setting himself up to go nowhere but down, Midsommar establishes once again that, despite his nascent status in the film world, he is no amateur when it comes to crafting an alluring horror story that keeps you glued to the screen.

William Jackson Harper, Will Poulter, Florence Pugh, Jack Reynor

Midsommar stars Florence Pugh and Jack Reynor as Dani and Christian, a young couple whose relationship is on the rocks. Their limits are pushed to the test after Dani discovers her sister has committed suicide, killing their parents as well in the process. Looking to get away from the bleak situation at home, Dani decides to tag along with Christian and his friends on a trip to rural Sweden to experience a mid-summer festival. What begins as a somewhat normal trip with friends quickly devolves into a bizarre, violent, drug-induced nightmare.

Aster makes it immediately apparent that he wants to set this apart from Hereditary, as well as your typical horror experience, by writing a majority of the story in broad daylight. He decides to use the light to his advantage by putting the terrors on full display instead of hiding them in the shadows. The cinematography is beautiful and makes it difficult to take my eyes off even the most disturbing sequences. This film also has more comedy in it than Hereditary. One of the graduate students in particular provides most of the comedic moments and brings much-needed relief amidst the uneasy tone. While there is a pretty straightforward story on the surface about Dani coming to terms with her relationship with Christian, there is so much more to gain here from multiple viewings.

What I love about this movie is how the horror aspects are embedded thematically. I am impressed by how the themes were explored through the characters, particularly Dani. It’s clear that Dani is struggling to find any kind of support system in her life and spends the movie trying to properly grieve and cope with her situation. With the recent deaths of her parents and sister, Dani logically looks to her long-time boyfriend for support, but immediately sees that he is becoming more and more distant, physically and emotionally. Her increasing vulnerability allows the mid-summer community to slowly take over Christian’s role as a shoulder for her to cry on despite their bizarre nature of practices and rituals. Dani ultimately represents the idea and fear that if we don’t have a support system of our own when life hits us with tragedy, then something is bound to fulfill that role for us, no matter how radical or absurd that support system might be, and that’s scary.

Another theme I appreciate is that something may only appear to be horrifying and disturbing merely because of the point of view that has been molded from our own life experience. Dani and her friends are horrified by some of the community’s practices, particularly one involving ritual suicides, that provides for easily one of the most upsetting scenes in the movie. But the film reminds us that, much like the characters, we are strangers to this community who has been practicing these rituals for hundreds of years. Once we discover the reasoning behind some of their practices it lends us a different perspective, making us question the somewhat ominous nature of the community itself. It forced me to reconcile with what is actually evil and immoral as opposed to what might just be mere culture shock. It’s fascinating and disturbing all at once.

Florence Pugh’s performance cannot go unmentioned here. I don’t know what it is about Aster but he is able to get every last ounce out of his lead actresses. Toni Collette gave easily the best performance last year and Florence Pugh definitely deserves to be in the running for this year. She is asked to carry so much weight here and accesses a full range of emotions in order to pull it off. Aster knows how to pick em’ and I’m sure the Academy will come around at some point and we’ll eventually see one of his actors receive the Oscar love they deserve. Collette not even getting nominated last year is a crime I will not soon forgive.

Aster once again makes it clear that he’s in not in the horror business to provide cheap thrills and make a quick buck. He is thoughtful in his execution and storytelling that requires you to think about the film long after it’s over. He successfully demonstrates that he isn’t confined to the typical horror techniques of using darkness and shadows to his advantage, but can be just as effective by leaving everything out in the open. Midsommar is one of the best horror films of the decade and is easily one of the best films of the year. I hope this isn’t the last we see of Aster in the horror genre, but I do hope to see his talent play out in other genres as well. If you’re looking for a horror movie that gives you less fright than Hereditary but just as much to wrestle with and feel uneasy about, then this one deserves to be on your list.

‘Candyman’ is Eerie, Bold, and Worth Your Time

in Reviews by

Admit it. You did it as a kid: you looked in the mirror, turned off the lights, and attempted to summon Bloody Mary by chanting her name X amount of times, or some variation of this. How these urban legends spread from town to town throughout the ages is a subject for another time. And while we might look back on those childish rituals as somewhat goofy and hokey, there was a hint of fear in the form of “what if?” as a child. What if Bloody Mary did appear? What would we do? 1992’s Candyman imagines a frightening and violent world where similar events do in fact occur. 

Virginia Madsen plays UIC graduate student Helen Lyle. She is studying urban legends and monster myths and Candyman is the subject of her research. According to the film, he is a supernatural being who terrorizes a housing complex on the North side of Chicago. He lures people with candy and has a bloody hook for a hand. He also has a strange association with bees and some of the more frightening sequences revolve around this association.

Helen, along with her partner Bernie have a theory that myths like this never pan out, and that they have a rational explanation. As they investigate the latest incident of a Candyman-related murder, they have an increasingly difficult time explaining it away. As the film goes on, we’re not quite sure where it’s headed: is there an actual human being masquerading as a folktale? Or is he an actual boogeyman, existing on the fear of humans? The film explores the idea of belief in the supernatural in a surprisingly refreshing way. What role does belief play in urban legends? In scary stories? In our imaginations? These myths and legends stem from real fears. Fears that lurk in our parks, our schools, our bathrooms, or in this case, broken down apartment buildings in Chicago.

Jordan Peele has written a “spiritual sequel” to the film, which is set to be released in June 2020. He has been trusted to not gloss over the racial issues found in the original. And yes, Todd Taylor is returning to reprise his role as the titular Candyman. But make sure you see this so when your friends ask about the new one, you can say, “Well, in the original…”

I mostly enjoyed this film. It has a certain sense of “indie-horror” that I think works to its benefit. It also is more of a slow burn than I had anticipated. I think this screenplay with a larger budget, huge stars and studio influence would be quite different. But because the story and the names attached weren’t huge at the time, they had to be a bit more economical with what they had. If you’re in the mood for a slower (but still gory) horror film, I’d recommend it. Its brooding atmosphere will surely unsettle viewers as they discover it this Halloween.

Soderbergh’s First Netflix Film Soars Above Most Offerings

in Reviews by

Erick Scott, the #1 draft pick in the NBA sits across from his agent, Ray. The NBA is in the middle of a lockout, resulting in no salary for the rookie-to-be. Erick (Melvin Gregg) has taken out a loan to get by while the owners and players work things out. Ray (Andre Holland) is lecturing him on the idiocy of this loan, talking about financial discipline and personal responsibility. If there is no money for Erick, there is no money for Ray, as evidenced by the decline of his company credit card at this fancy New York restaurant. This leads Ray to devising a plan to explore the labor politics of the National Basketball Association.

Ray goes from restaurants to offices to gyms to a sauna in order to get the wheels turning in his master plan. I could explain his plan here and it wouldn’t be a terrible spoiler, but it would spoil the fun of watching the narrative unravel in this sleek, 90-minute drama. Ray is determined. He meets with one of his bosses (Zachary Quinto), the commissioner of the NBA (Kyle MacLachlan), the rep for the players association (Sonja Sohn), and a player-turned-youth-coach (Bill Duke). There are real interviews with actual NBA stars laced throughout the film. Karl-Anthony Towns, Reggie Jackson, and Donovan Mitchell offer their insights into the NBA lifestyle as a young player. The focus of this “sports” movie is not on the game of basketball itself, but the “game above the game.”

Positioned between contracts, TV deals, endorsements, and players rights, the screenplay (written by Moonlight’s scribe Tarell Alvin McCraney) navigates the fast-paced sophistication of the money side of the NBA flawlessly. It’s sharp; the dialogue is quick and loaded, so you best not be scrolling through your phone while watching this one. The plot develops quickly, yet doesn’t reveal everything up front, allowing for the viewers to speculate until all is made clear.  Holland is perfect for the role as Ray, the dogged and determined sports agent who more-or-less looks to cause an earthquake in the sports world.

It’s easy to see what was attractive about this project to Steven Soderbergh (besides working with his The Knick colleague, Andre Holland): it’s a story about independence; about autonomy of the individual and seeking to alter, disrupt, or break from current systems. Whether it’s a marriage, a government, or the NBA, Soderbergh’s characters crave independence, and they have unconventional methods of claiming it. That’s not to say they’re always successful or whether they are right or wrong, Soderbergh is here to provoke thought and contemplation. This is largely due to the aforementioned screenplay. The audience is not bashed over the head zealous overtones, rather the ideas of race, class, labor, and idealism are there just enough to be clear and present, allowing the audience to digest it on their terms.

High Flying Bird was shot on an iPhone, which shouldn’t be as mind-blowing as it is considering this is Soderbergh’s second film shot on an iPhone. But I am in awe with what Soderbergh is able to accomplish. This has got to be inspiring to filmmakers of any age at any stage in their career.

In an uncanny way, the plot at the center of “High Flying Bird” mirrors Netflix’s own path to what it has become. Why does it have to play by the rules? Why can’t it carve out its own fortune (i.e. original programming)? “High Flying Bird” is not only of the best films from Netflix’s original programming, but one of the best films of the year.

Soderbergh’s Debut Showcases His Singular Talent

in Reviews by

There are a lot of points one could hit while reviewing Steven Soderbergh’s debut film. There’s the fact that a 26-year old Soderbergh wrote the screenplay in 8 days on a legal pad while driving across the country.  We could talk about how it won the audience award at Sundance, the Palme d’Or at Cannes, how it grossed over $36 million on its budget of $1.8 million, or how just 17 year after its release it was added to the United States Library of Congress’ National Film Registry. The film garnered Soderbergh his first Academy Award nomination and launched his diverse and prolific career. So let’s look back at the film that made the man, sex, lies, and videotape.

John and Ann (Peter Gallagher and Andie MacDowell) live in the muggy south–Baton Rouge to be more specific. They’re married but no longer have sex, which Ann is more or less okay with. Little does she know that John is having an affair with Ann’s sister. Ann’s naive world view is challenged when Graham (James Spader), a college friend of John’s, shows up. He is friendly, but has an aura of intelligence and mystery that gives reason for caution as well as intrigue.

Ann learns that Graham is impotent. As a way to exert power, or experience of semblance of connection, Graham records women talking about their sex lives. His hobby becomes an immediate interest to everyone who learns about it, often spurring change. The film explores Graham’s impact on John, Ann, and anyone else he comes in contact with. Spader’s performance is immaculate. He plays Graham with such precision that it’s hard to think of any other way he could have been portrayed. And this is made easier by MacDowell and Gallagher’s performance. It’s easy to imagine this film as a play for serious, heavy-hitting actors. Soderbergh cast these actors at the right time in their careers; they were familiar faces, but not enough to be distracting.

The plot sounds too simple: mysterious character arrives into a small town, upending the lives of everyone he becomes involved with. Conversation is the driving force here. The anecdotes, the irony, the subtle jabs–somehow Soderbergh hooks the audience with somewhat minute conversations that really help the audience understand the characters. Every word, gesture, and moment of silence is carefully placed. It’s the kind of thing that only a cohesive and trusting relationship between actors and director can provide. It’s also something only a confident filmmaker could pull off.  The film has a narrative, yes. But perhaps more so, it’s a series of interactions woven together.

Secrets, deception, pasts, and futures are all present in this smart and smooth talkie. It’s a film that will reward revisits as viewers pick up on the nuances beneath the surface. Whether you are talking about the impact of this film or what actually happens in the film, it’s bound to ignite some conversation.

When the Berlin Wall fell in April of ‘89, East Germans crossed over to West Germany and saw that movie theatres were playing an American film titled sex, lies, and videotape. I can only imagination their reaction when they realized it was not some sort of sex thriller, but instead were met with a heady, smart, crisp film with an incredible screenplay.

1 2 3 4 9
Go to Top