The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[Spirit Zero]

Halloween: 25 Years of Terror (2006)

Everything you ever wanted to know about the classic horror franchise, but were afraid to ask? errmm...well kinda. Back in 1978 a young John Carpenter directed and scored a horror slasher named after a yearly Christian celebration. This movie would star a young Jamie Lee Curtis in her movie debut and the British stalwart Donald Pleasence. As I'm sure everyone knows, the basis of the simple story surrounded the bogeyman named Michael Myers who comes back to his hometown of Haddonfield (after 15 years in a psychiatric hospital) to stalk and kill Laurie Strode. Thus began the massive horror slasher franchise of Halloween, or maybe as it should be known as, the franchise of Michael Myers.

This documentary goes back and delves into every movie of the franchise from 1978 up to 2002 with 'Halloween: Resurrection'. The two reboots directed by Rob Zombie are not covered here simply because they came along in 2007 and 2009, after this doc was made. The whole thing is narrated by franchise actress P.J. Soles, but unfortunately she tries way too hard with this simple task trying to make it come across like some kind of real crime/cop programme. Not really sure if she was trying to be scary or not but its kinda lame.

Anyway as you would expect each movie is looked into one by one with the original classic getting much more attention than the others, this simply being its the best of the bunch. Naturally this entails interviews with important people like John Carpenter and Debra Hill, both of whom offer the usual tit bits you've probably read about or seen before elsewhere. Nothing wrong with that of course but even for me not being a Halloween fanboy, none of it really amazed me. What I did find more interesting were the interview and convention snippets featuring Moustapha Akkad, a Syrian producer who virtually came outta nowhere to help with the original movie. To me this was all new information, I had never heard of the man before (not being a fanboy), and he is quite frank and honest about mistakes being made with the series. But still, most of what you get is cut from other older interviews, panel discussions or conventions, there is nothing fresh here.

What is cool are the numerous interview snippets/convention snippets/behind the scenes snippets from almost all the cast, from the first film right through to 'Halloween Resurrection'. This includes all the actors who have played Myers which is neat. You also have all the other main stars plus all the smaller roles, people who died early on, the slasher fodder, the cameos, the extras, people who are generally unimportant, but hey its great to see them. Funny how they all see themselves as big stars when really...they're not, had to chuckle. There are also various pop up bits from the die hard fans at conventions, of no real importance but there you go. Strangely enough, or unsurprisingly, this documentary obviously wasn't big enough for Jamie Lee Curtis to bother with as she doesn't really crop up much. Of course being an iconic horror franchise there are also small contributions from other big names such as Clive Barker (sounding rather ill or is that normal for him?), Rob Zombie, Edgar Wright etc...But again I must reiterate, much of what you get here are cut from other interviews, there is very little in this doc that appears to have been specially made.

Everyone of course knows that after the first movie the franchise went down hill, no one ever intended there to be sequels. Thusly most of the content for those sequels isn't overly thrilling. Its like, yeah we know 'Halloween III' wasn't a hit, they tried something new and it flopped, but had it been a stand alone movie without the Halloween brand name, it might have been a different story. The actual horror tale in the movie was quite good. Then six years later Myers was brought back in to spark the franchises resurgence in 'Halloween 4'. Blood and gore levels went up due to the 80's factor, the rushed out 'Halloween 5', the loyalty of Donald Pleasence, the return of Curtis and the eventual drop into modern cyber based shite with people like Busta Rhymes.

The things that grabbed me were, the problems of Myers mask in 'Halloween: H20' which was pretty amusing. But even this I think I recall hearing about when the movie came out, so again nothing new. The fact the mask they used was basically crap and had to CGI a mask into the movie because they couldn't reshoot, and boy was it obvious. The massive reshoots and alternate cuts for 'Halloween 6' was new to me, that got me interested in seeing the film again. The original 'Halloween' house in California is still standing and is now a landmark, as is the surrounding area where tours are conducted showing off certain locations where the original was shot. The mention of a Myers vs Pinhead movie is brought up which peaked my interest plus the odd stories of crew members not getting on, how they shot nude scenes for 'Halloween II' and the way Myers and Loomis are compared to Moby-Dick and Captain Ahab or Dracula and Van Helsing, or Frankenstein and his monstrous creation. I never thought of it that way yet it makes perfect sense.

The run time is just short of a regular movie so this did feel slightly underwhelming truth be told. As said, much of this isn't new material, I'm not entirely sure which bits, if any, are actually new for the doc so don't get too over excited. I get the impression that if you're a fanboy of the franchise then most of this (if not all) will possibly be old hat. Certainly reasonably interesting for me, but not stunned by it, I've seen better docs I think, and better constructed ones too, this felt lowkey. I think a 'reboot' with more content on the originals (after the 78 original), including the newer Rob Zombie versions should be done.

6.5/10

[MethodsWorld]

The Town (2010, Ben Affleck)

Really enjoyed this movie all the way through. I watched the extended cut instead of starting off with the theatrical version. Even though the film was about 2 and a half hours long I felt like the time flew by.

Ben Affleck was very good in his role and really delivered a solid performance. Jeremy Renner would have stolen the show but he was only in the movie for maybe 20-30 mins which was mostly him in the background. Renner played the badass, piece of shit role perfectly. Really wish we could have gotten more of him.

The best part of this movie was the level of intelligence displayed by the law enforcement and the criminals. The cops/FBI outsmarted the criminals and vice versa. Great job not making these supposed "professional criminals" look like morons. A solid performance by Jon Hamm also really helped things come together.

Overall, I think there were many ways that they could have turned this film into a great film, but it only ended up being a good film. Can't wait to watch more Ben Affleck directed films to see how he progresses as a filmmaker.

7/10

[Astro Zombie]

It's been over a week since I've watched a movie, so what better way to start things up again than with a hefty dose of meth-I mean, Mad Max: Fury Road.

This movie is a goddamn symphony of destruction. When the earth starts to rumble, and world powers fall, a'warring from the heavens, a peaceful man stands tall. And that man's name is Max. I don't know if that makes any sense but it's not every day you get to quote Megadeth. This movie has no business being as good as it is. It's a sequel to a long dormant franchise, but not only did George Miller reinvigorate it, he created something that kicks the ass of pretty much any other movie this year. It's bold and in-your-face, and just as thrilling the third time as it was the first.

One thing it does beautifully is using action as storytelling. It never lets up for one second (well, maybe briefly), it's essentially a two hour car chase, but Miller paces it so you're never lost and feeds you information when necessary. The action really does speak louder than words, and the action is so f**king insane you can't help but be in awe. The fact that a lot of it was done practically only enhances this. It's telling that the Blu-ray has a quote saying "the best action movie ever made", and I can't really dispute that claim. Some action movies might have a better story, or better characters, blah blah blah. As far as pure action goes, Mad Max: Fury Road stands as one of the all-time greats.

And I can't stress this enough, every villain needs to have their own traveling band from now on. It just makes things cooler.

5/5

Review

[LuckyDragon]

Mad Max: Fury Road (2015, George Miller)



crystal meth/5

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by LuckyDragon

Mad Max: Fury Road (2015, George Miller)



crystal meth/5

[KilloWertz]

If that review was posted sooner, maybe Warner could have used it in commercials for the Blu-ray release.

[Diesel]

Just finished up Quantum of Solace. I still contend that it is an okay movie (3.5/5) with some really strong elements that just doesn't add up to a great whole. Watching it as the last act of Casino Royale makes it more enjoyable however. Will be watching Skyfall next week to finish my Bond refresh for Spectre in November.

[Al_The_Strange]

Thanks for reminding me to resume that Bond marathon I started in...March?

I left off with Thunderball and never reviewed it. So here's a review five months late:

After seeing James Bond in action in three big, iconic missions, Thunderball blasts to the scene with the promise of more action, more gadgets, more ladies, bigger stakes, more exotic locations, and so much more!

At this point, the Bond formula had been established firmly enough so that Thunderball only has to follow a template full of established tropes and cliches. Many folks will say that it makes this one of the duller movies. I personally always thought it was a blast though. Among the highlights, this film follows Bond on a colorful journey to Nassau, where he has to constantly outthink and outwit the opposition. There's a lot of deceptive mindgames at work, followed by some chasing and some fighting, before a massive all-out battle underwater. It's a long film, but it is consistently thrilling and it has a satisfying payoff. Best of all, the film remains iconic thanks to the classic elements at play: Bond's classic charm, a classic villain we love to hate, and an overall sense of class.

The story's pretty simple, generally not much different than a lot of modern action movies revolving around stolen nuclear weapons (like Broken Arrow, The Rock, Mission Impossible, you name it). It follows Ian Flemming's novel practically word for word (which is unsurprising, since it was based on a screenplay to begin with). What makes it so fun is that it's twisty and complex, but not impossible to follow. Each new scene offers something that's either thrilling or alluring. The characters are as endearing as ever.

Caught in epic widescreen photography, this film boasts plenty of bright and colorful scenery. Most of it looks great, especially with some steady and well-choreographed underwater photography. Some scenes, especially during the parade scene, are a bit rough around the edges. Editing can be nutty, as some dialogue has been cut, dubbed, and recut for various versions. Scenes usually transit well regardless. Acting is great: Sean Connery is still the man, and I always enjoyed the performances of Adolfo Celi, the lovely Claudine Auger, and the lovely Licuana Paluzzi. Writing is okay - the plot unravels well, and the dialogue is usually good, but some of the jokes can be a little goofy. This production uses great-looking locales, and lots of fine-looking sets, props, and costumes. John Barry's music score is as good as ever, and Tom Jones' theme song is hip.

To me, Thunderball is one of the most perfect Bond adventures. It has all the right signature elements we know and love, but with tons of thrills and action. It is a long adventure that might strain the patience of many viewers, but I think it's classy, sexy, exciting stuff.

4.5/5 (Experience: Perfect | Story: Good | Film: Very Good)

Recommendation: Rental.

The Blu-Ray for this looks colorful and clean. It is sharp, but film grain and fine detail is not necessarily the big standout. Sound quality is pretty weird - some scenes are really loud, other scenes too soft.

PQ: 4/5, AQ: 3/5

[Al_The_Strange]

You Only Live Twice

Seen today. That's how big the gap in my "marathon" was.

After so many plots unraveled across four classic films, James Bond would finally reach the top and confront the head man of SPECTRE, in You Only Live Twice.

This time, Bond's mission takes him to Japan. It starts off hard and fast, as he fakes his death, and then struggles to escape death in a constant string of confrontations and encounters on foreign soil. When Bond has to infiltrate a secret volcanic lair, he resorts to the ultimate cover: marrying a Japanese girl, while learning ninjutsu and getting facial surgery. It all adds up to a big, explosive battle in the middle of the volcano. As always, there's gadgets (the biggest thing being a small DIY helicopter with loads of weapons) there's ladies, and there's danger galore.

The story follows the original novel to a point, but the book will always have the edge because it has one important dramatic angle that the movie misses out on: the theme of revenge. The book was a pretty intense struggle, because it follows immediately after On Her Majesty's Secret Service. If you know what happens in that story, then you know how driven Bond becomes to finding Blofeld and making him pay. Also, Bond actually became a ninja and infiltrated a castle to get his vengeance - how cool is that?

The movie misses out on these opportunities, and instead keeps the tone light and fluffy. It takes some pretty ridiculous turns, including a useless subplot involving a rocket that steals other rockets in space. The only thing that makes this feel special is that he fakes death and assume a disguise, but it never reaches a level of significance that affects the plot much. For Bond, it's just business as usual.

This film is made with decent photography. One thing I think it weird though is that most shots, especially during the fight scenes, are taken from really really far away. Editing is okay. Acting is fine for what it is: Sean Connery seems to give a more tongue-in-cheek portrayal of Bond, but his presence is still welcome. Donald Pleasence plays the villain pretty dryly, but his mere presence and look is iconic. I have no complaints with Akiko Wakabayashi's, Mie Hama's, or Tetsuro Tamba's performances. Writing is okay, but most of the jokes fall horribly flat (and some lines Bond gives comes off as bigoted). This production has good-looking locales. Some of the props, costumes, and special effects appear cheap. I was never a fan of Nancy Sinatra's theme song, but the music score is alright.

You Only Live Twice is enjoyable, but also lightweight, silly, and rather shallow. The book is quite a bit better, but even by the standards of the film series, there are better Bond adventures.

3/5 (Experience: Pretty Good | Story: Average | Film: Average) decreased from 3.5/5

Recommendation: Rental.

This Blu-Ray looks pretty sharp and good, but colors are rather bland. Sound quality is alright.

PQ: 4/5, AQ: 4/5

[Al_The_Strange]

On Her Majesty's Secret Service

Of all the classic Bond films, this one represents the most drastic deviation. It's a darker, more serious adventure that takes the character to more profound levels of peril and tragedy.

Right from the start, the film differentiates itself with its dreary imagery and a hard-hitting fight scene on a beach. Then there's a long, winding series of fights, deception, and intrigue. A good chunk of the film is devoted to a lengthy chase across Switzerland, which includes a ton of skiing, a huge avalanche, and a car chase. It eventually builds up to an all-out battle in the mountains. Then there's the ending, which is the one thing that pushes this whole film above and beyond the normal levels of a Bond adventure. It is a dramatic and profound turn for the character, and it has to be seen to be understood.

The story's generally more of the same: Bond has a mission to find a bad guy, reveal the evil plot, then take him out. He spends most of the time undercover, so the thrills and intrigue are much more grounded. The actual plot that's revealed is as outlandish and weird as they come. What matters the most are the characters: Bond is still the man, but the love interest provides a touching flourish that gives the story more weight.

Most of this film features good photography, but some shots are a bit hectic. Editing is very punchy, to the point where shots become compressed to mere seconds, and it almost appears agitating (though not nearly as bad as most modern movies, like the Bourne series, or Quantum of Solace). For a film from the 60s, it's pretty wild. Acting is quite the mixed bag. I was never a fan of George Lazenby, but the more I watch the film, the more forgiving I am of him - he embodies the voice and swagger of the character well enough. I'm still not a fan of Telly Savalas, whose portrayal of Blofeld feels very odd and foreign to me. I do love Diana Rigg in this film. Writing is okay. This production has good-looking locales. Some of the sets, props, and costumes are a bit gaudy and weird, and most special effects look kinda bad. John Barry's music score is superb - his main theme is so dramatic, it's chilling. Unfortunately, I am not a fan of Louis Armstrong's love theme.

Even though there are odd things to hate about OHMSS, it is a bold film that offers an intriguing direction for Bond, and offers a little more substance to its story that gives the ending a proper punch. For that alone, all Bond fans need to see the film at least once.

4/5 (Experience: Pretty Good | Story: Good | Film: Pretty Good)

Recommendation: Worth seeing at least once.

This Blu-Ray has some soft-looking spots, but sharpness and detail is pretty good. Colors and contrast seem a little bright or washed out, but it's not too unbearable. Sound quality is alright.

PQ: 4/5, AQ: 4/5

[Al_The_Strange]

Man From UNCLE

Even though this is a Cold War thriller, this is not a movie you'd want to see for action. Sure, there's a couple of big chase scenes and some shooting in the middle, but most of this film is all about the characters. On one side, you have the suave, skilled, confident American thief who struck a deal to work for the CIA. On the other side, you have the strong, blunt, rigid Russian superspy who suffers from some anger management issues. Put the two together on a mission, and the sheer chemistry really makes the sparks fly.

What the film lacks in actual action or setpieces, it makes up for tremendously in the characters. All of the film's fun is in watching the sharp banter between the two polar-opposite male leads. The dialogue alone is often witty, amusing, and shows great color and personality. Best of all, it's brought to life vividly by the actors, who offer top-notch performances. To say nothing of the female leads, who offer even more dynamism to the plot.

Fortunately, the plot is pretty interesting and solid too. The actual mission the characters go on carries over a lot of familiar tropes and elements you might see in other spy movies - dense conspiracies, elaborate games of deception, megalomaniacs, torture, etc. The characters are very well-developed and their volatile relationships keep the pace rolling for the whole runtime. Unfortunately, all the color seems to get sucked out in the last big chase, before the endgame rolls out. The last few scenes tie together some pieces of the plot that you'll never even notice throughout the picture, before its reaches a strangely short ending. It's more of a punchline than a climax.

One more thing that makes this movie shine will be its production and style. Filming looks fantastic, and it is edited in a fairly flashy way. There is a ton of really great, hip music throughout. If it was any flashier, it would feel like a Tarantino picture. Performances are awesome by the whole cast: Henry Cavill and Armie Hammer are both great in their roles, and they play off of each other very aptly. Alicia Vikander is just as fun to watch. Elizabeth Debicki is especially entrancing to watch - her performance is like the antithesis to Audrey Hepburn (same sense of fashion and everything), and it's all the more effective that way. This production uses very good, real-looking sets, props, and costumes.

I have no idea how good of an adaptation this movie is to the original TV show, but I love it for its style, its playful tone, and its characters. If that appeals to you, then the film is certainly recommended. If it's action you crave, better go watch Mission Impossible instead.

4/5 (Experience: Good | Story: Good | Film: Very Good)

Recommendation: Rental at the least.

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Man From UNCLE

[Show spoiler]Even though this is a Cold War thriller, this is not a movie you'd want to see for action. Sure, there's a couple of big chase scenes and some shooting in the middle, but most of this film is all about the characters. On one side, you have the suave, skilled, confident American thief who struck a deal to work for the CIA. On the other side, you have the strong, blunt, rigid Russian superspy who suffers from some anger management issues. Put the two together on a mission, and the sheer chemistry really makes the sparks fly.

What the film lacks in actual action or setpieces, it makes up for tremendously in the characters. All of the film's fun is in watching the sharp banter between the two polar-opposite male leads. The dialogue alone is often witty, amusing, and shows great color and personality. Best of all, it's brought to life vividly by the actors, who offer top-notch performances. To say nothing of the female leads, who offer even more dynamism to the plot.

Fortunately, the plot is pretty interesting and solid too. The actual mission the characters go on carries over a lot of familiar tropes and elements you might see in other spy movies - dense conspiracies, elaborate games of deception, megalomaniacs, torture, etc. The characters are very well-developed and their volatile relationships keep the pace rolling for the whole runtime. Unfortunately, all the color seems to get sucked out in the last big chase, before the endgame rolls out. The last few scenes tie together some pieces of the plot that you'll never even notice throughout the picture, before its reaches a strangely short ending. It's more of a punchline than a climax.

One more thing that makes this movie shine will be its production and style. Filming looks fantastic, and it is edited in a fairly flashy way. There is a ton of really great, hip music throughout. If it was any flashier, it would feel like a Tarantino picture. Performances are awesome by the whole cast: Henry Cavill and Armie Hammer are both great in their roles, and they play off of each other very aptly. Alicia Vikander is just as fun to watch. Elizabeth Debicki is especially entrancing to watch - her performance is like the antithesis to Audrey Hepburn (same sense of fashion and everything), and it's all the more effective that way. This production uses very good, real-looking sets, props, and costumes.

I have no idea how good of an adaptation this movie is to the original TV show, but I love it for its style, its playful tone, and its characters. If that appeals to you, then the film is certainly recommended. If it's action you crave, better go watch Mission Impossible instead.

4/5 (Experience: Good | Story: Good | Film: Very Good)

Recommendation: Rental at the least.

Thought you would enjoy this one. Quite an enjoyable time

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Thought you would enjoy this one. Quite an enjoyable time

Between this, MI:RN, and Kingsmen, it's been a bloody awesome year for spy movies. Can't wait for SPECTRE already.

[Diesel]

I have really high hopes for Spectre

It looks amazing. I did not follow the development much at all. Saw the trailer, loved it and blacked out everything else.



On a viewing note, I am going to catch Captive tomorrow morning...was going to watch Everest but didn't realize it was IMAX only this week

[Al_The_Strange]

Diamonds Are Forever

For the seventh James Bond adventure - and the last EON production featuring Sean Connery - the famous spy goes on one of his wildest and weirdest adventures.

The film starts off briskly, for in the immediate aftermath of OHMSS, we watch Bond mercilessly hunt down his arch-nemesis and take revenge. Presumably. The events of the last film are never explicitly acknowledged, but it firmly re-establishes Bond as an unstoppable man of action. From there on, however, the film remains light and campy in its tone. There is action to be had, including a few car chases and a big gun battle on an oil rig. It seems like Bond is thrust in and out of peril repeatedly. But there's also a lot of goofiness to it - Bond commandeers a moon vehicle in one scene, he fights a pair of acrobats named Bambi and Thumper just for the hell of it, and there's a pair of hitmen who act fruity. There's jokes that aren't that funny, and much like the actual casinos Bond moseys through, the film feels quite tacky and cheap.

The story's not too terrible, but it does venture into outlandish territory. Bond's investigation has a lot of ups and downs, with some deception games involved, but once everything clears up it becomes a race to stop the villain's evil plan. The film is pretty evenly silly throughout, and it doesn't leave that much of an impact in the end.

This film is made with good, but rarely great, photography. Editing is okay. Acting is swell - Sean Connery is still apt as James Bond, even with more tongue-in-cheek humor involved. Jill St. John is quite the looker in this film, but I found her character borderline unlikable. I loved Charles Gray's performance as Blofeld - the sheer villainy and class he exudes is phenomenal, just as it should be. Writing is pretty dumb. Most of this film is set in Vegas, so naturally, a lot of it looks tacky. But all things considering, the locales, sets, props, and costumes get the job done well. Special effects towards the end are terrible. John Barry's music score is really good, and Shirley Bassey's theme song is great.

Diamonds Are Forever is as silly as a Bond film can get (at least until Moonraker came along). Even then, there are things to like and enjoy about it, and it's still good-natured fun for Bond fans.

3.5/5 (Experience: Goofy | Story: Average | Film: Pretty Good)

Recommendation: Rental.

[Al_The_Strange]

Live and Let Die

In James Bond's eighth cinematic adventure, Roger Moore steps in the well-worn shoes of the famous British spy. He goes on an adventure that involves drug trafficking, and oddly enough, voodoo.

The film definitely has action to spare - there are a few car chases, a major boat chase, and a chase scene with a plane on a tarmac. In between these setpieces, Bond faces various sorts of peril, including a pretty cool scene at a crocodile farm. The tone is light, but there is some edge to it as Bond traverses through the streets of Harlem, the bayou of Louisiana, and the superstitious realms of the Caribbean. And, of course, it all ends at a secret lair of some kind... With Roger Moore in the lead this time, Bond becomes a lot less about kicking butt and taking names, and a lot more about the tongue-in-cheek wit and charm - it's not quite as overbearing in this film as it is in others, but it's quite the departure from the 60s era of Bond.

This plot has always been a little hard to grasp to me - the film shows you all the different aspects of the villain's sprawling plot, but does little to tie them together. Bond seems to go from one end of it to the other based on the whims of the script. There's nothing much to the characters - they're as one-dimensional as they can be. The film carries over some aspects of blaxploitation, which was big at the time, but it's hard to tell if it's really a good fit for Bond or not.

This film has good, but hardly great, photography. Editing seemed a little screwy to me at times. Acting is a bizarre thing to judge - you'll either love or hate Roger Moore's version of Bond, but in this first film, there are times when he tries to act good and tough. I enjoyed watching Yaphet Kotto and Julius Harris as the villains. Jane Seymour looks great and plays her part well. Gloria Hendry does the same. Cliffton James plays a cartoonish buffoon of a sheriff, and it's so goofy it's embarrassing. Writing is so-so. This production uses pretty real-looking locales, but the sets, props, and costumes are a bit on the fake side. The music score's okay. Paul McCartney's theme song is one of the classics - unfortunately, I feel it's been played to death after all these years.

There are fun moments in Live and Let Die, but the plot and all the things in it makes for a rather strange brew. Still worth a look for Bond fans.

3.5/5 (Experience: Pretty Good | Story: Average | Film: Pretty Good)

Recommendation: Rental.

[Al_The_Strange]

The Man With the Golden Gun

James Bond has faced a plethora of iconic villains at this point - Ernst Stavro Blofeld, Auric Goldfinger, Dr. No, Emilio Largo, and more. All of them have matched Bond with their charisma, wits, and ruthlessness. The Man With the Golden Gun does so as well, in addition to matching Bond in skill.

The second film featuring Roger Moore will likely come off as just more of the same to most people - it's another outlandish adventure in which Bond travels abroad, gets chased, faces the bad guy, and gets the girl in the end, as always. I always felt this was one of Moore's funner pictures though - the levity is present, for better or for worse, but the pacing hardly ever drags. There is a great car chase scene in the middle of the movie, with a magnificent stunt in which a car jumps over a river and does an inverted twist in midair (just, ignore the slide whistle they stupidly added in). There are great scenes where Bond confronts leads and outwits his enemies throughout Hong Kong and Thailand. There's a kung-fu fight in the mix, just for the hell of it. It all builds up to a showdown with the titular villain on his own island, which is set up as a deadly funhouse. The whole movie exudes the classic blend of Bond escapism that we all know and love, even if it does seem really light and fluffy.

The plot is probably too convoluted for its own good - it's an elaborate plot in which Bond gets a bullet with his name on it, but it turned out to be a ruse to get him to kill the bad guy, and so on. A senseless subplot involving an outlandish device - the solar agitator - makes it even more senseless. Despite all these contrivances, there is at least one thing that I think makes this film the most redeemable: the villain. Francisco Scaramanga is the perfect foil character to James Bond - both are gentlemen with charm, taste, and charisma. They both womanize and share the same vices. Unlike Bond, however, Scaramanga takes pleasure out of killing, and it molded him into a shadowy reflection of what Bond's own dark side must look like. On these merits, I find the showdown between Bond and Scaramanga to be an epic moment for the series.

This film boasts pretty good photography and editing. Roger Moore continues to keep his tongue in his cheek as James Bond. Christopher Lee is chillingly perfect as Scaramanga, and quite possibly steals the show. Hervé Villechaize plays one of the more memorable henchmen in the series (and it's a part that doesn't seem too far off from his eventual role in Fantasy Island). Maud Adams and Britt Ekland are both lovely and charming to watch as the Bond ladies. Cliffton James returns as the buffoonish sheriff from Louisiana - we all wish he didn't. Writing is okay, it gets the job done. This production uses plenty of exquisite, foreign locales. Sets, props, and costumes are pretty lavish and good. John Barry's music score is decent. I don't think Lulu's music score has aged that well, but it sure is catchy.

Most folks have been dismissive of The Man With the Golden Gun, but I love the sense of adventure it has. More importantly, I love the characters, especially the villain, who stands out among the other goons that Roger Moore's Bond has to face. I see it as a decent balance of escapism, action, and levity, and it comes out as my favorite film from Roger Moore's repertoire as Bond.

4/5 (Experience: Very Good | Story: Pretty Good | Film: Good)

Recommendation: Rental.

[Al_The_Strange]

The Spy Who Loved Me

The Spy Who Loved Me was a Bond movie that was just bound to happen. Not only because it's yet another Ian Fleming book that had yet to be adapted, but because this is the one where James Bond has to ally with a Soviet to get stuff done. It's like the 007 variant to The Man from UNCLE. And in the Roger Moore age, it's bound to be larger than life and ridiculous as hell.

This film is probably most memorable for being the one with all the submarines, including a submarine that eats other submarines (making it...subarminception?). It's an elaborate plot by some villain in a secret underwater lair to cause the world powers to blow each other up in nuclear war (yep, this plotline was bound to happen). Bond travels from Egypt to the depths of the sea to investigate. He confronts a huge man with metal teeth - an awesomely invincible henchman named Jaws. There are fights. There are car chases. Inevitably, his adventure requires the use of a car that turns into a submarine (seriously, WTF?). It gradually culminates into a huge, all-out battle in the middle of a supertanker, and a showdown in the secret underwater lair.

Bond adventures don't get more over-the-top than this, although it's not always that thrilling of a picture. The first half of the movie always felt rather dry, long, and stuffy to me. Even with Roger Moore's wit and charms, pacing seems to lag at times. When the big finale hits, it can be rather thrilling, especially with the stakes elevated to such a massive degree. What makes this film more interesting will be the characters. With Bond being paired with his Soviet equivalent - a woman just as skilled and confident as he is - the dynamics become fairly more interesting than normal. Unfortunately, I always felt that Stromburg is the least interesting villain of the series, so the whole thing comes off as dry and forgettable.

Oh yeah, this is also nothing like the original book. Then again, I thought the book sucked anyway. Read Dr. No instead.

This film uses pretty good photography and solid editing. Roger Moore continues to exude charm and wit as James Bond. Barbara Bach is lovely in her role and she plays the part pretty well. Curt Jürgens strikes me as extremely flat and stereotypical as the villain. Richard Kiel is awesome. Writing in this movie is so-so. This production uses good-looking locales. Sets, props, and costumes range from being okay to being rather fake-looking. Marvin Hamlisch's music score features some more disco-type of stuff, which I find gaudy. I also hate Carly Simon's theme song - I think it's as sappy as they come.

The joy of The Spy Who Loved Me is partly in its unique (albeit inevitable) premise and partly in just how over-the-top it is. It's exactly the same kind of stuff that would inspire Austin Powers twenty years later. I don't think it's always that fun of a picture, but it's good fun for all Bond fans.

3.5/5 (Experience: Pretty Good | Story: Average | Film: Pretty Good)

Recommendation: Rental.

[Al_The_Strange]

Moonraker

James Bond has been to just about every country on the Earth. Now, his struggles take him above and beyond...into outer space. Sh*t just got real.

In the aftermath of the blockbuster supergiants, Star Wars and Close Encounters of the Third Kind, sci-fi was becoming huge in the late 70s. For better or for worse, producers decided to rocket this Bond picture into space and capitalize off of the craze. What results is easily the most stupidly excessive film of the lot. This is one long film that includes Bond skydiving, Bond trying out astronaut training machines, Bond going hunting, Bond going to Rio, Bond going to Venice for a big boat chase scene, Bond going to the Amazon jungle for an even bigger boat chase scene, and then after all that, Bond finally reaches space. The space scenes are probably the biggest highlight, as we watch a fleet of space shuttles departing Earth, Bond confronting the bad guy in a massive space station, and inevitably, there's an all-out laser-beam battle everywhere. Those lasers sure are cool. Just about every scene looks larger than life, thanks to all the grand views and exotic locations that serve as a background to the elaborate onslaught of peril and action. They pretty much throw everything at you - the sum of all the parts will seem messy, but if you take it scene-by-scene, it is a genuinely fun and fulfilling experience.

The plot pretty much goes through the motions of every other Bond adventure, simply swapping out secret lairs for a space station. All the usual elements are there - gadgets galore, ladies, class. It's nothing original or deep. It has practically nothing to do with Ian Fleming's original novel (which is actually a decent spy thriller). You just have to watch it for what it is: escapism at its most extreme.

This film uses excellent photography and editing. Roger Moore plays the same old Bond we all know and love (or hate) by now. Lois Chiles plays a rather flat character. Michael Lonsdale is okay to watch as the villain, but his performance is rather robotic in nature. Richard Kiel is awesome. Writing is not too terrible, especially given the material. This production spares no expense on the lavish locations, sets, props, costumes, and special effects. John Barry's music score is not bad, but Shirley Bassey's theme song is so slow, it could put me to sleep.

Moonraker represents the absolute height of excess in a James Bond film - it's so ridiculous, it has to be seen to be believed. I personally value the film the most for just being a nonstop chain of fun scenes, all the way to its far-out climax.

The only thing that can top this is...Machete Kills Again in Space!

3.5/5 (Experience: Good | Story: Average | Film: Pretty Good)

Recommendation: Rental.

[Astro Zombie]

So I think I liked it

I think I went into this with the wrong mindset, I was expecting a semi-serious cannibal horror film and instead I got some absurd, darkly comic splatter film that wasn't even remotely scary. I should have realized this sooner seeing as it was directed by Eli Roth.

It's all over the place in terms of tone, Roth attempts some sort of social commentary but I don't really know what he was going for, the "comedy" ranges from somewhat funny to WTF, and there's little in the way of scares. And despite the hype behind the gore, it climaxes a little early with the first kill, making everything that comes after seem almost tame. Also, I'm pissed that they build up one of the characters as an irredeemable piece of shit, leaving you wanting them to get their comeuppance, and then...nothing. Don't leave me unsatisfied like that.

The gore effects are awesome, and mostly practical, which is great. Some CGI was used for non-gore stuff, which was less impressive. The movie also has a really cheap look to it, despite some good cinematography. I guess it was to add to the "grindhouse" feel of the whole thing. Speaking of adding the grindhouse feel, the acting and dialogue are quite bad, sometimes painfully so. The first act is about as hard to sit through as the third, but it's not because of the gore. Dear god.

You know, the more I describe it, the more it sounds like some bizarre low-budget 80s grindhouse flick.

...I think I might have liked it a little more than I let on.

3.5/5

Review