Wednesday, October 31, 2012

The Shining (Stanley Kubrick, 1980) Review

Yeah, I lied. In my review of Skyfall, I said that my next review will be a new film I saw last month...and then I noticed that it was Halloween. Halloween! While this film isn't that scary (well I guess that depends who you are) but that doesn't stop me from watching this every Halloween (except last year since my family wanted to watch Sleepy Hollow...maybe later) so...HERE'S JOHNNY!......let's just review this...

Over the winter, Jack Torrance (Jack Nicholson), his wife Wendy (Shelley Duvall) and their son Danny (Danny Lloyd) are assigned to be caretakers of the Overlook Hotel which is away from civilisation (so I fail to see why people would go there...). Danny begins to have visions of the hotels past as a result of his telepathic gift known as The Shining. Jack, while working on his writing, begins to fall into insanity as a result of the isolated environment and of the previous people in the hotel. When Jack meets with the ghosts of the hotel, he finally snaps and tries to kill his family. Now Danny must use The Shining in order to save his mother and get out of the hotel alive.

This is one of Jack Nicholson's best roles and one of Stanley Kubrick's best films. Jack Nicholson became iconic for this film (that image at the top alone is one of the most famous movie shots of all time) and his line "Here's Johnny" is one of the most famous lines ever. So, yeah, this is a very famous and popular film...for good reason. It plays with your mind and has such an ambigous nature, you can come up with loads of different outcomes or scenarios. Was the film in Jack's mind? Is Jack a reincarnated person from the hotel? Is Danny delirious? WHO KNOWS? It's left un-addressed and works very well.

In term of the horror, for a first time watcher, it's pretty scary. If you haven't watched this, don't look it up online. Watch it from start to finish so that everything is a surprise! There are some great moments that will have you on the edge of your seat! Jack's spiral into insanity is well done and makes for some great character development. I've seen it too many times for it to scare me but there are still bits that send shivers down my spine. I guess this film will live on for a while (hell, it's still great 32 years later!).

The Shining is truly a classic! Jack Nicholson is fantastic and the writing is great. There is some iconic things here that will go down in movie history...well...HAS gone down in movie history. If you haven't seen this film, you might as well watch it this Halloween. It's pretty scary and is exactly what I would want to see in a Halloween film...well...a contemporary one (no monsters here, in the conventional sense). HAPPY HALLOWEEN! MWAHAHAHAHAAAAA! (sorry). Okay, next time is that film I promised, okay? 2nd of November.

A great film for Halloween. Jack Nicholson is great and the writing and directing is fantastic. Do yourself a favour and watch it this year!

Monday, October 29, 2012

Skyfall (Sam Mendes, 2012) Review

Well it's finally time to review the newest Bond film! After battling it's way through development hell, it finally get's to see the light of day! This marks the first Bond film I've ever seen in the cinema and, no, this is not a continuation of Quantum of Solace. This is a separate story and that's the way it SHOULD be! Well, with that terrible introduction out the way (sorry...), let's get right down to it: Skyfall! YEAH!

When a hard drive containing the identity of every NATO undercover agent is stolen, Bond (Daniel Craig) and his field assistant Eve (Naomi Harris) are in pursuit of the thief but lose him after Bond is shot by Eve under orders of M (Judi Dench). The world believes Bond to be dead but when the MI6 building is blown up, Bond returns to duty in order to deal with the amazing computer hacker Raoul Silva (Javier Bardem) who wants revenge on M for what she did to him. Now Bond's loyalty to M is tested as a result of Silva's mind games. In a subplot, M is forced to retire under orders of Gareth Mallory (Ralph Fiennes).

Daniel Craig has now officially cemented himself as James Bond. CONGRATULATIONS! Shut up Craig haters, go watch this one. It's also good to see Bond face a contemporary villain like Silva (who might be my new favourite Bond villain) who is insane as hell. Zorin from A View to a Kill is the type of crazy that is subtle and is unpredictable but Silva...geez...this guy is something else. I hear that Sam Mendes took inspiration from Heath Ledger's Joker from The Dark Knight and it only adds to the amazing...ment of this film. I was sceptical of Naomi Harris in this film but I'm glad I was wrong. She is one of my favourite Bond girls! Also, the new Q (Ben Whishaw) is a welcome addition to the Bond franchise.

This was the most thrilling Bond film I have ever seen. The suspense of what was going to happen was killing me...AND I LOVE IT! The whole third act is incredible! I was shaking at the awe inspiring action and the fantastic climax that the film came to...and I was not disappointed! I had a wish list of what I wanted to see and everything was there! It was great to see M get on the front lines (the closest she got was in The World Is Not Enough) and also letting Tanner (Rory Kinnear) make an impact for once and not just a waste of space. He now has a sort of 'Agent Coulson' role....I like him. Everything is incredible and surpasses previous ones!

Skyfall was exactly what I wanted in a Bond film. Sorry Goldeneye, looks like you have new competition! Skyfall is the new definitive Bond film that its successors will have to live up to! Let's give Bond a PROPER Oscar for once. Best actor? script? director? It has everything in this film. Comedy, action, romance and even some major tear jerker moments. Emotion is the best way to make your film great and it worked here. Hell, it worked for Men In Black III! Well, that's every Bond film FINALLY reviewed. It took a while but we did it! Join me next time and we can get back to my proper schedule and to kick it off is a film that I saw a while ago but missed because of these Bond films...

A incredible film that blew my mind. A great villain, top notch action, an amazing plot and...just everything! The new definitive Bond film and the perfect way to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Bond!


Thursday, October 25, 2012

Quantum of Solace (Marc Forster, 2008) Review

And here we have the only direct sequel in the Bond franchise. It was a bold step but there was much of the story left to resolve. So the darker, more action orientated take on Bond that Daniel Craig managed to pull off surprisingly well. Does a new idea in the Bond world work or not? Let's find out!

When we last left Bond (Daniel Craig), he had been betrayed by Vesper who died in the process. Now Bond wants revenge on a organisation called Quantum. Bond finds that Quantum is linked with a man named Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric) who wishes to take over a part of Bolivia so that some clients of his can use it for themselves. Bond teams up with Camille (Olga Kurylenko) to try and take down Greene and Quantum since the CIA have chosen to ignore this. M (Judi Dench) is unsure if she can trust a revenge fuelled Bond but only time will tell if he will succeed.

I feel that this was much more action driven. There was lots of action last time, that's for sure, but there were lots of moments otherwise. All I remember specifically is action. The opening car chase, the chase later on, the finale etcetera...and while that's good and all, that was only part of what makes Bond so good. The Bond girls (which are alright), the villain (not very memorable), the cars (this one has a very nice one) and the gadgets (...non existent this time, I'm afraid). Still, Craig is good as Bond and the action is pretty I love me some revenge plots (Licence to Kill for example).

I feel all the REALLY good stuff went into Casino Royale. Sure, Quantum of Solace is good but it's not AS good as Casino Royale. Olga Kurylenko is very good but was it just me or did the other Bond girl, Strawberry Fields (Gemma Arterton), die in a rip off of Goldfinger? How do you rip off yourself?! Dominic Greene is okay, I guess. Once again, they missed out on a classic Bond finale. While Bond DID fight Greene, he didn't finish him well. At least they tried.

Quantum of Solace is a decent sequel to one of the best Bond films. The action is good, Daniel Craig is still a great Bond and it finishes off what Casino Royale started. It's not as good as Casino Royale but it's good enough. Anyway, join me on my next review of one of my most aniticipated films of the year: Skyfall (when it crumbles, we will stand taaaaall and face it all!)

A good sequel to Casino Royale. It continues some of the great things from that film but misses just a few aspects that made the previous one so good.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Casino Royale (Martin Campbell, 2006) Review

Well, that's enough of Pierce Brosnan I think. It's time for a new Bond! How about Daniel Craig? No? WELL TOO BAD! Right off the bat I noticed something wrong...this is a prequel. I don't accept it as one and will therefore not approach this review thinking it's one. This is a continuation...YES IT IS! Anyway, let's see how well a new Bond works in this next film!

James Bond (Daniel Craig) is sent to investigate a criminal banker named Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen). Le Chiffre is trying to win back his money in a poker game in Montenegro and M (Judi Dench) sends Bond and Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) to win the game and prevent Le Chiffre from winning. Le Chiffre has some dangerous connections so if Bond and Vesper, they could wind up dead. It's a dangerous game that Bond has got himself into.

I was very sceptical of Craig playing Bond but he actually pulled it off very well. Clearly he was inspired by Timothy Dalton as his films have a more action orientated approach to things. Despite his, the best scenes in this film are actually the poker game scenes that frame the story. The whole story centres around it and everything else that happens is in between games. I love the structued narrative of this film. It's great! Vesper is also one of the best Bond girls yet and Le Chiffre is very threatening. There is a lot of good things in this one.

The action is some of the best in the series, which is what you expect from a more recent film. The early scene where Bond chases that guy on the cranes is great! I felt a bit copped out though that there wasn't an epic finale fight with the villain that previous Bond films have done. They were always by favourite scenes. For that, it misses out on being the best. Goldeneye's finale was arguably the best scene in the film so it's sad that Casino Royale did not have it. Also, where are Q and Moneypenny. Don't give me the whole 'it's a prequel' crap. Why is M a woman then since it's implied she's the first female M in the MI6 in Goldeneye. Also in Skyfall, Q says he's Bond's 'new' quartermaster...anway, I'm not letting that sour this film.

Casino Royale is the best Bond film since Goldeneye. Daniel Craig is a good choice for a modern Bond, the action is top notch, the new characters are really good and this film really is one of the best. I was very sceptical but it's good to be wrong sometimes. The ending is great, by the way and it's one of the only Bond films which carries on (Diamonds are Forever carries on from On Her Majesty's Secret Service...sort of).

A fantastic Bond film. The action is amazing, the new Bond is awesome and everything just comes together as!

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Die Another Day (Lee Tamahori, 2002) Review

Okay, now Brosnan has done more than Dalton and Lazenby combined! Plus, this marks the 20th James Bond film. So you expect that they put all their effort into making this the best Bond film ever. They make references to the origin of Bond, classic scenes are recreated and even gadgets from previous films are seen. Does this make the film a good one or does it just come off as a cheap gimmick? Let's find out!

On a mission in North Korea, James Bond (Pierce Brosnan) kills the diamond mogul Colonel Moon (Will Yun Lee) and is apprehended by Koreans and tortured. Many years later, Bond is traded for a Korean named Zao (Rick Yune) who, during Bond's mission, ended up with diamonds being studded into his face. Bond winds up in another mission which leads him to millionare Gustav Graves (Toby Stephens) and another MI6 agent, Miranda Frost (Rosamund Pike). Bond teams up with Agent Jinx (Halle Berry) in order to expose Graves' laser beam cannon in space and discover Graves' dark secret. Bond must also find out who betrayed him and got him arrested back in Korea.

While I feel this film is a tad bit over-hated (is that a word?), this is definetly not a plus one to my patented (probably) Constroversal Bond review counter. I agree that this is very much a weak film but it's by no means that worst. What's wrong with it? The first thing is that Halle Berry does not fit in to the Bond world. Jinx is pretty rubbish and if you want to see a good competent Bond girl, go watch Licence to Kill. There is also too much plot. They'res at least three things going on at once. Bond films should have a simplistic plot and the whole 'stop Graves from world domination' thing is all this one needed...although Graves' secret is a nice twist.

Speaking of Graves, he's a pretty cool villain but is a bit too science fictiony for a Bond film. Don't get me wrong, Bond films are anything but realistic, but this is a man who can change his entire body and has a not-so-good Iron Man suit knock off...that can't fly. I do like the fight between him and Bond at the end though...but then again I always do! Miranda Frost is an okay character but doesn't really make an impression...except fencing...

Die Another Day is a weak addition to the Bond series. It seems that the Brosnan films just get worse as they go along. Thank God he stopped here or who knows how bad things could have gotten. It is cool to see John Cleese official take the role as Q but he's not in it for long. Shame really. Things got out of hand in this one and it didn't end well. Not the worst but nowhere near the best.

A good enough Bond film. Things got pretty farfetched hear and some of the characters are a bit crap.

Monday, October 22, 2012

The World Is Not Enough (Michael Apted, 1999) Review

Clearly Pierce Brosnan is doing something right. He's done more Bond films than Timothy Dalton and George Lazenby so clearly he's popular. I agree. He's my favourite Bond and deserves to do more. However, he started off too good! Goldeneye was his first and is the best one! How is supposed to top it! Maybe he has with this one...only one way to find out!

When an oil baron is killed when visiting the MI6, Bond (Pierce Brosnan) is sent to protect the oil baron's daughter Electra King (Sophie Marceau). A new foe called Renard (Robert Carlyle), a man with a bullet in his head which has destroyed his senses, plans to blow up a pipeline under orders of a secret villain. Bond gets assistance from Dr. Christmas Jones (Denise Richards) and must stop Renard from destroying Europe. When M (Judi Dench) goes missing, Bond grows supicious of Electra and things start to unravel.

This is the first film in which we see M on the front lines. Before this, M had always just been the person behind a desk so it's good to see why she is the head of the MI6. Renard has a very interesting concept and is one of the forgotten Bond characters. Something quite sad about this film is that it's the last one in which Desmond Llewelyn plays Q as he died after the release of this film. It also sets up R (John Cleese) who will act as his's Basil Fawlty working in the MI6...and I love it!

That's not to say it has it's problems. The plot has a few twists and, while they are good, it isn't exactly the best we've seen. Also, all the effort seemed to go into the opening scene. Don't get me wrong, it's incredible and one of the best scenes in the series but after that, everything else doesn't compare. Christmas Jones (by the way, what kind of name is Christmas?) is pretty useless. They only made her a doctor so that she would seem smart, which she is, but isn't very active in terms of story. She was really only needed for one scene. Electra King is good though.

The World is Not Enough is a good film but doesn't reach the heights that previous films have reached. Goldeneye has set itself as the best so I didn't expect any other ones to beat it. Some people may be turned off by this one since it doesn't seem like a classic Bond film but it's enjoyable. People often overlook it so I would say that you should check it out.

A decent addition to the Brosnan films. There are some good characters introduced and the opening scene is one of the best film scenes ever.

Sunday, October 21, 2012

Tomorrow Never Dies (Roger Spottiswoode, 1997) Review

I remember saying in my review for Licence to Kill that I wouldn't want to see another overly violent Bond film (just to remind you, it was very violent) but along comes Tomorrow Never Dies which proves to be pretty violent too. Sure, it's not as violent as Licence to Kill but it's close. Well, Goldeneye was so amazing, let's see if Pierce Brosnan can do another great film!

James Bond (Pierce Brosnan) is sent to investigate the media tycoon, Elliot Carver (Jonathan Pryce),who wants to complete his media empire but in order to achieve this, he must achieve broadcasting rights in China. Bond teams up with a Chinese agent called Wai Lin (Michelle Yeoh) in order to stop Carver's plans which would inevitably lead to World War III! Bond, Wai Lin and Jack Wade (Joe Don Baker), Bond's help from America must now stop Carver and avenge Carver's wife Paris (Teri Hatcher).

This is the second most violent Bond film. People falling into printing presses, someone being killed by a sea drill and someone getting their foot clamped and left to be blown up...yeah, it gets pretty violent yet not that bloody...okay once. The plot is quite an interesting one as it sort of parody of business tycoons, specifically ones in the media. Eliot Carver is an interesting villain and Jonathan Pyrce is a good choice to play him. As before, Pierce Brosnan is a great Bond.

Normally each film has 2 Bond girls but I would say that this one only has 1. Paris Carver is only in it for about a quarter of the film leaving Wai Lin as the main Bond girl. It's weird and sort of breaks Bond tradition. Also the plot is a bit weak. It doesn't really hold up compared to previous Bond films (such as Goldeneye and Licence to Kill).

Tomorrow Never Dies is a good entry to the Bond film series and it's a shame that it came right after Goldeneye since I still stand by my statement that that was the best Bond film. It's often over looked because of that and it's a shame because it is an enjoyable movie. Check it out if you haven't, you should enjoy it.

A solid entry the Bond franchise that seems to carry on some great things that Goldeneye introduced.

Saturday, October 20, 2012

Goldeneye (Martin Campbell, 1995) Review

Well that's enough of Timothy Dalton, wouldn't you say? I think his last one didn't do very well...for obvious reasons. It was time for a change and we got a brand new Bond...and a new M...and a new Moneypenny. Clearly they were trying to aim for the classic Bond style. A powerful theme (provided by Tina Turner), a classic villain and a suave Bond. So, was the change good? Let's find out!

007 James Bond (Pierce Brosnan) and 006 Alec Trevelyan (Sean Bean) are sent on a mission in Russia that sees General Ourumov (Gottfried John) execute Trevelyan as Bond blows up his base. Several years later, a man named Janus recruits Ourumov, a sexy assassin named Xenia Onnatopp (Famke Janssen) who has an interesting way of killing people and Boris Grishenko (Alan Cumming), the elite hacker. Bond must stop Janus' Goldeneye satellite from gaining access to millions of pounds. Now Bond must stop Janus (whose identity will blow his mind) with the help of a computer hacker, Natalya Simonova (Izabella Scorupco).

I think I'll just say: This is the best Bond film yet! This one is incredible! A cinematic treat (except I didn't see it in the cinema...). The opening is fantastic, the characters a great, the new cast are some of the best in the series and leads up to one hell of a finale. I know I say this a lot but Janus is one of the best Bond villains. Pierce Brosnan is my favourite Bond actor to date, so to sum up...I love this film.

You know it's a good film when the only complaint I can make are continuity cock ups. Seriously, that's the only problem. It's such as great film and is hands down the best Bond film...short paragraph...I'm sorry but this is such a great film.

Goldeneye is the best Bond film ever! The plot is fantastic, the characters are great, the action is top notch (the tank scene alone is fantastic) and everything else is just great! If you watch one Bond film today, make it this one. You will not be disappointed.

The best Bond film yet! Everything is excellent and is the true pinnacle of the series.

Friday, October 19, 2012

License to Kill (John Glen, 1989) Review

If you're squeamish...I suggest you look away...things are going to get very violent. Apparently people wanted to forget the previous Bond films due to how comedically stupid so they decided to make things a lot darker. The Living Daylights was a clear indication of this and is one of my favourites but what about the follow up to it? Well, does the darker image of Bond work twice? Let's find out!

After capturing drug selling tycoon Franz Sanchez (Robert Davi), James Bond (Timothy Dalton) attends the wedding of his good friend Felix Leiter (David Hedison) who we've seen working with Bond since Dr. No. The celebration is short lived when Sanchez breaks out of prison, has his henchman Dario (Benicio Del Toro) kill Felix's wife and feeds Felix to a shark. Bond wants revenge on Sanchez but his vendetta could jeopardise his role as an MI6 he quits. M (Robert Brown) takes away Bond's licence to kill and seeks out Dario with the help of Pam Bouvier (Carey Lowell).

My God is this film violent! If ever you wanted to see someone's head explode from explosive decompression, someone fall into a cocaine grinder, someone lose their leg to a shark or someone be set on fire and blown up. Yeah, it gets pretty bloody. It's one of two Bond films to be rated 15 (the other being Goldeneye).This is one of the only films where Bond doesn't have that many one-liners because of how horrifying everything is! Honestly, it works...but only as a one time thing. If I see another Bond film like this, it probably won't be that great (Tomorrow Never Dies came very close).

Pam Bouvier is one of my favorite Bond girls. She's even more competent than Bond is. She is easily one of the best Bond girls (GASP!)...Lupe is alright, I guess. Robert Davi is excellent as the villain, Sanchez. He is brutal as hell and doesn't give second chances. You feel like he can strike at any second even when he's just sitting a room...he has a creepy presence. He reminds me of Handsome Jack from Borderlands 2...sorry, I've been playing it a lot and had to put it in somewhere...

Licence to Kill is a very interesting addition to the franchise since it takes a WAY more dark tone on the Bond kill. Sanchez is one of best villains because of his omniscient presence and even Dario is a sinister character, despite not being in it that much. Yes, this is incredibly violent almost of a Saw level but it's fine....for now.

An incredibly violent version of the classic spy, this one has a great villain, well written characters and one of the best plots.

Thursday, October 18, 2012

The Living Daylights (John Glen, 1987) Review

Another decade, another Bond. It seems every Bond is affiliated with a certain decade. Connery and Lazenby in the 60s, Moore in the 70s and now Timothy Dalton steps in for the 80s. I think we've had enough of the comedic style of Bond films, am I right? Let's see a much darker Bond film that's closer to the books...yeah, did you forget these films were based on books...I, does the darker tone work? Let's find out.

James Bond (Timothy Dalton) has been contracted to protect a Russian general, Koskov (Jeroen Krabbé) from anyone that tries to get to him. When one of Koskov's allies tries to murder him, Bond goes to Afghanistan to see what happened. While there, he encounters an arms dealer named Brad Whittaker (Joe Don Baker). After teaming up with a violinist named Kara Milovy (Maryam d'Abo), Bond must defeat Whittaker and find out what is really going on.

The action in this one is top notch, some of the best is the series. From the epic plane fight with henchman Necros (Andreas Wisniewski) to come excellent horse fights (is that a thing?), the action featured is truly incredible. Also, something I should have really mentioned before, the music is great too! It's one of three Bond films that I have the soundtrack for (the others being A View to a Kill and Goldeneye). The theme is one of the best ones and the background music is great!

Timothy Dalton is one of my favourite Bonds. He's much more accurate to the books but sadly lacks the tuxedo. There are only a few times he actually wears it but he focuses on action and a darker tone so I can't really complain. Joe Don Baker is a rather interesting choice for a Bond villain but he actually managed to pull it off well. Being obsessed with guns helps, I suppose. As for Kara. She's alright. She doesn't really do that much...

The Living Daylights is another one of my favourites. Timothy Dalton is a good choice for Bond, the action is great, the music is superb and it all comes together nicely. It's often a forgotten Bond film but you will enjoy it...probably. Right, so Dalton only did 2 Bond films. The next one? better cover your kids's going to get pretty violent.

Another one of my favourites. Dalton is good as Bond, the action is great and is just another great Bond film.

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

A View to a Kill (John Glen, 1985) Review

*DING* Controversal Bond review number 4! Here it is: 'From a View to a Kill'! What? What do you mean they changed the title? It said at the end of Octopussy "Bond will return in 'From a View to a Kill'! Fine then. This is actually considered one of the worst Bond films ever. Yes, Roger Moore was 57 when he did this film and that is WAY too old to be Bond but does that really make this film any worse? Let's find out!

While out on a mission, Bond (Roger Moore) finds a computer chip that can withstand a nuclear EMP Pulse. The chip was made by Zorin Industries, headed by Max Zorin (Christopher Walken). While Zorin may seem like an innocent businessman, he is far from it. Zorin plans to set off an earthquake along the San Andreas fault that will wipe out Silicon Valley, thus making his Silicon more valuable. He sends his henchwoman, May Day (Grace Jones), to deal with Bond, who has teamed up with Stacy Sutton (Tanya Roberts) in order to stop the earthquake from happening.

Here we go: I LOVE THIS FILM! This is actually one of my favourite Bond films. The reason? Christopher Walken steals the show. Max Zorin is one of the greatest adviseries Bond has ever faced. The fact that he's insane and a genetic experiment makes for a very interesting character and one hell of a bad guy. Sure, his plan is the same as Goldfingers but I considering that Goldfinger wasn't anything special (ZING!), I'll let it pass...for now. May Day is actually a terrifying character. Grace Jones is a weird person anyway so making her act weird is just asking for weird...ness. Another good thing is the action. From Bond and Stacy escaping a burning building to the climatic battle on the Golden Gate Bridge (which I love!), the action is a thrill to watch.

It's not all good though. Roger Moore was far too old for this. A View to a Kill should have been given to the next should Octopussy. Also Stacey Sutton, while useful (shocking for a Bond girl), just comes off as annoying. Not the worst Bond girl but nowhere near the best. This film also has one of the worst moments in Bond history: the Beach Boys is played over a sking scene...WHAT WERE THEY THINKING!? Also, I feel that there wasn't enough Q in this one...but that's just me.

A View to a Kill is easily one of my favourites (maybe even my number one favourite...drawn with another one). Christopher Walken is truly fantastic, the action is great (especially that climax), the plot, while recyled, is actually quite good and Grace Jones works surpisingly well. Most people pass this film as they feel that Moore is too old but look past that and you'll see a great Bond film.

One of my favourites. The villain is great, the action is great and the whole thing is great...more or less...

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Octopussy (John Glen, 1983) Review

Oh this is gonna be a fun one! Remember the Bond film where he dressed like a clown? *sigh* Is it possible to type sarcasticly? I just did...or at least attempted to. We've seen Bond in an array of places such under the sea, on snowy mountains and even in let's see him visit a circus...oh good God. Am I wrong, is this really a bad one? Let's find out!

When 003 is found killed, he was in possession of a rare faberge egg which is bought in an auction by a man named Kamal Khan (Louis Jourdan). Khan meets up with a Russian General, Orlov (Steven Berkoff), and Bond begins to grow suspisious. Turns out that Khan and Orlov plan to blow up a nuclear device in an America Air Force Base. In order to stop Khan and Orlov, Bond teams up with Octopussy (Maud Adams) and her circus group as she has connections with Khan. It's a race against time to stop the two villains and prevent World War III...again.
From what I said at the beginning, you're probably thinking that this is going to be a bad one. No, not at all. Sure, the idea sounds stupid and, while there are some bad moments (Bond as clown...this is the same character that we saw as Daniel Craig...), it's not as bad as previous entries to the series such as Moonraker or Diamonds Are Forever. There is also a use of the Tarzan battle cry when Bond swings from a vine...a non-diegetic sound clip. That is unacceptable. I also fail to mention the character of M in the Bond films and I bring him up now since this is the first time the actor changed. Bernard Lee was M since Dr. No but this is the first one in which Robert Brown plays the role...he's not as good.

It's not all bad though. There are some fantastic action scenes in this one. The tremedous start sees Bond managing to pilot a small plane through closing doors. It looks incredible and the fact that it's all real makes it even better. There are also scenes set on a train which sees Bond utilising stealth and his fighting skills...I love these scenes but there's one train scene from another film that's better...but we haven't reviewed it yet. Octopussy herself is a pretty good character. One of the better Bond girls.

Octopussy is actually not as bad as I make it out to seem. Sure, there are some very stupid moments but that sort of has become the theme of Roger Moore's Bond films. They're more comedic so I guess I can let it slide this time. It's one of the better Roger Moore Bond films but there's still one left. What's that? Moore was 57 in the next film? Oh good god...

One of the more exciting Bond films. There are some great things here but the bad things REALLY pull it down.

Sunday, October 14, 2012

For You Eyes Only (John Glen, 1981) Review

If James Bond films were crisp flavours, this one would defiantly be ready salted...and by that I mean bland and plain. Doesn't mean it's bad (ready salted is one of my favourite flavours), it just means that it's not that interesting and its pretty boring. Well, that certainly set up my opinion of this film didn't it! To be honest, this is the true follow-up to The Spy Who Loved Me (Moonraker was a distraction from this...maybe because space was more interesting). Without furter ado (adieu? SERIOUSLY SOMEONE! HELP ME HERE!), let's take a look.

The film begins with Bond (Roger Moore) visiting the grave of his wife, Tracey (who you might remember from On Her Majesty's Secret Service) until Blofeld (back to his 'head off-screen' ways) intervenes  Bond manages to get the upper hand and finally finish him off once and for all. Meanwhile, a communication device is lost when a British spy ship is sunk. Bond is sent to recover the device but must get it before the Russians do. He teams up with Melina Havelock (Carole Bouquet), whose parents were murdered, and Milos Colombo (Topol). Another man, Aristotle Kristatos (Julian Glover), accuses Colombo of having links with the Russians while Colombo accuses Kristatos of the same. Bond must retrieve the device and find the traitor he's working with.

The opening scene is everything Diamonds Are Forever should have been: revenge against Blofeld (and don't give me this crap that it isn't Blofeld as so many people try to tell us...he's bald, in a chair, wants to kill Bond and has a's Blofeld). Anyway, let's focus on the film. Julian Glover is a good idea for a Bond villain (WHOOPS Spoilers...) and is actually pretty brutal. Sadly, he is sort of swamped by other great villains. He is an underrated villain. Melina is one of the more competent Bond girls but comes up a bit...bland. They're's nothing really unique about here. Colombo is a great character though...he's awesome.

One thing to address, Bibi Dahl (Lynn-Holly Johnson) is a TERRIBLE character! My God, is she annoying. I'm pretty sure she's the only girl Bond's met that he didn't want in bed...damn. The plot is also pretty basic and it's at this point (or, more accurately, Moonraker is) that the plots seem to repeat each other as this is a weird mix of Thunderball and On Her Majesty's Secret Service...also this is one of the only Bond films with continuity thanks to the opening. I respect that.

For Your Eyes Only is a pretty basic and bland Bond film but has lots of good things in it such as the villain and the opening. Also the theme song is great. I love it! While the plot seems recycled (I might be wrong about that though) and there are some pretty annoying characters, the action is fantastic and has one very satisfying ending. This is a much forgotten Bond film that is much better than Moonraker.

While it may seem a bit bland, it features some great action and some very good characters...and some bad...

Saturday, October 13, 2012

Moonraker (Lewis Gilbert, 1979) Review

Hey, remember at the end of The Spy Who Loved Me that it said  "Bond will return in For Your Eyes Only"? They lied. Moonraker was the next Bond film to see release. Why the change? Well, after Star Wars dominated the box office, they felt that they could beat it with a new Bond film...IN SPACE! Was it a good decision? Let's find out!

When a spaceship is hi-jacked in outer space (like in You Only Live Twice), Bond (Roger Moore) is sent to investigate the company that create said spaceship, Drax Industries. Bond discovers that the villain this time is the owner of Drax Industries, Hugo Drax (Michael Lonsdale), who wishes to destroy Earth and relocate the greatest human minds elsewhere. Bond teams up with Holly Goodhead (Lois Chiles) in order to stop Drax from destroying the Earth and fighting off his henchman, Jaws (Richard Keil)...yeah, he's back!

Yes, Jaws is back and even has his own sub-story...he finds love! Isn't that...cute? Either way, the indestructible Jaws is as good as he was last time and his fight with Bond is one of the best fights in the series. I keep complaining that there are some forgettable Bond girls, this is no different. The only bit I remember is anti-gravity sex...which is awesome. Drax is only a good villain because of that fact he's affiliated with space...again, which is awesome.

It all sounds good right? WRONG! This film is stupid, even stupider than previous ones! Case in point: the gondola scene. Basically, Bond rides around in a gondola with wheels. That itself is stupid but the fact that they edited a pigeon to do a double take when seeing Bond. Wow, that is hands down the stupidest thing in the entire series. Also, Bond in space doesn't work. There was no reason for it and just comes off as a stupid gimmick.

Moonraker had guts to go up against Star Wars but the idea was stupid, some scenes were VERY stupid and some of the characters don't hold up against previous or upcoming ones. Really, they should have just gone straight to For Your Eyes Only and missed this one out entirely or saved it for later (I think this would have made a good Pierce Brosnan film...just look at Nightfire). This is easily one of Roger Moore's worst ones.

A silly idea that is met with some very stupid scenes and characters. It's nice to see Jaws back though.

Friday, October 12, 2012

The Spy Who Loved Me (Lewis Gilbert, 1977) Review

This is easily one of the best. Interesting way to start a review but it's true! Live and Let Die was ok and The Man with the Golden Gun, while underrated, is no where near the best so it was high time that Roger Moore played Bond in a film that reaches the heights of previous great...ones. Why do I praise this one so much? Let's find out!

While out on patrol, a Royal Navy Polaris submarine holding sixteen nuclear warheads suddenly disappears without a trace! James Bond (Roger Moore) is joined by KGB spy Major Anya Amasova (Barbara Bach) as they go up against the water obsessed villain, Karl Stromberg (Curd Jürgens). Bond and Anya must find the submarine, stop Stromberg from causing nuclear war and survive against Stromberg's henchman Jaws (Richard Kiel) before it's too late.

First things first: Jaws. He is easily one of the best henchmen in film history. Sure, Oddjob's cool but Jaws trumps him by a mile. His iconic metal teeth define 'iconic' (what?) as even people who don't know Bond probably know about Jaws...He's great! Anya is also one of the best Bond girls in the series. Stromberg is a bit bland but is still a good villain...not great but not bad.

This film also has one of the best cars in Bond history. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that cars make up the Bond series. This one features a Locus that becomes a submarine when it hits the water. It is brilliant. Any problems? Yeah. Stromberg isn't anything special. They should have used Blofeld instead. I also feel that it's a bit of a boring plot. You Only Live Twice had a similar plot and it was probably Blofeld is better...

The Spy Who Loved Me is better than other Roger Moore Bond films and other films in the series. Jaws is a great character, the Locus is a fantastic car and Anya is one of the best Bond girls. This is probably Roger Moore's best Bond film since it's not overly stupid like the other ones. Personally I prefer darker Bond films to the more comedic ones.

One of Roger Moore's bests! Introduces some great things such as Jaws and is one of the best Bond films in general.

Why is that relevent? This is why:


Thursday, October 11, 2012

The Man with the Golden Gun (Guy Hamilton, 1974) Review

*DING* Controversial Bond review number 3! This is considered one of the worst Bond films of all time. I mentioned in my last review that the Bond series began to get pretty damn silly when Roger Moore took the reigns as Bond and this is considered the stupidest of them all. Did you notice I increased the 'Controversial Bond review counter (trademark Opinionated Movie-Goer 2012)' by one...that means I have a different opinion than the norm. Why? Let's find out!

A master assassin by the name of Scaramanga (Christopher Lee) possesses a unique golden gun which, when match with his expert skill, allows him to take out anyone in a single bullet. He has his eyes on his next target: James Bond (Roger Moore). Bond is called into service in order to investigate the death of a scientist linked with a solar panel experiment which Scaramanga has hijacked. Bond's new girl is Mary Goodnight (Britt Ekland), a Secret Services staffer.

I actually like this film. Yeah. This may shock some people considering that this is considered the worst but, nope, I do actually like this film. I think that Christopher Lee as Scaramanga is a great addition to the Bond rogues gallery and the eponymous golden gun is fantastic and one of the best things in the Bond franchise. Roger Moore brings back his suave yet comical charm that, yes, is very stupid in this film but by this point, I've come to accept the more comedic take on the franchise. This film also has one of the greatest stunts in film history: the 360 flip in a car. It is incredible!

There are problems though. Goodnight is a pretty incompetent and gets in more trouble than it's worth. It's forgiveable as there are much worse Bond girls. Another annoying person is Nick Nack, Scaramanga's henchman played by Hervé Villechaize...he is very annoying. Watch it and you'll see why in the first couple of minutes. They also brought back J. W. Pepper (Clifton James) from Live and Let Die. Apparently he was popular...okay then...

The Man with the Golden Gun really doesn't deserve the hate that it gets. I do enjoy this film and was one of the most suspenseful Bond films (especially that climax!). Trust me, this film isn't as bad as everyone says it is. I would recommend you check it out if you like Bond films...the Roger Moore ones (it's weird going from Casino Royale to this one, I can assure you).

A misunderstood film. While it isn't the best, it definitely doesn't deserve the hate it gets.

Wednesday, October 10, 2012

Live and Let Die (Guy Hamilton, 1973) Review

Hey look! A different Bond! WAIT! COME BACK! Now I know that last time they changed the Bond actor it was met with...mixed reviews (but I liked it...) so I would imagine that this one would be met awith the same was not. Roger Moore...what do I think of him? Let's find out!

Down in New Orleans, several of MI6's agents is killed in a very uncoventional manner (and one of the best Bond moments ever) so It was a good idea to send another there...clever. James Bond (Roger Moore) is sent to New Orleans in order to investigate these murders. He meets up with Felix Leiter (David Hedison) and learns about a man called Mr. Big (Yaphet Kotto) who  actually a gang leader named Dr. Kananga. Kananga wants Bond dead and sends his henchmen Teehee (Julius Harris), a man with a metal claw for a hand, and Baron Samedi (Geoffrey Holder), the god of death. Bond manages to convince Kananga's fortune teller Solitaire (Jane Seymour) to help him stop Kananga and his henchmen.

Roger Moore is a pretty good Bond. There, I said it. He is one of the most suave Bonds ever (and is actually from England...yeah) but the biggest problem is that, just like Diamonds are Forever, is that the tone is different from the previous films. It's much cheesier and more comedic. It's not as bad as Diamond are Forever. Why? Because Roger Moore creates his own style as Bond that he sticks with...doesn't mean it's not stupid though...

This film contains an iconic character. Ok, before I say who it is, I do understand I say iconic a lot. This is referring to things that people instantly associate with the Bond franchise. Baron Samedi is one...I used to play as him a lot in the Goldeneye game...Boris was better though but more on that later. Kanaga is an alright villain...he was okay...everyone prefers Baron Samedi anyway. Jane Seymour makes her film debut (at least according to the opening credits) and she's pretty good. Not that memorable but still good.

Live and Let Die is a good way to introduce a new Bond but feels a Samedi is a cool addition to the franchise but isn't in it that much. Overall, it's an okay film. not the best yet not the worst. I do,  however, love the theme. EVERYONE DOES! Roger Moore's more comedic take would last quite a while but this is where it was just getting it's roots.

An okay start to Moore's Bond career. It's a bit stupid but some good stuff makes up for it.

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Diamonds Are Forever (Guy Hamilton, 1971) Review

Oh dear...oh dear oh dear. Is this is a popular film? So...this this another controversial Bond review? Fine. *DING* Controversial Bond review number 2! You'd think that, considering this is one of the most recognisable themes of all time, that this would be a good one. I thought it would be too. After all, Sean Connery is back! Isn't that awesome? ......let's take a look, shall we?

After what happened at the end of On Her Majesty's Secret Service, James Bond (Sean Connery) wants revenge on Blofeld (Charles Gray) once and for all (trust me, after what Blofeld did, I would be pissed)! Blofeld has fled to Las Vegas where Bond tries to track him down. He is apprehended by Blofeld's henchmen Mr Wint and Mr Kidd (Bruce Glover and Putter Smith) and finds his next Bond girl (it's a theme), Tiffany Case (Jill St. John). Blofeld has undergone plastic surgery in order to escape from a vengeful Bond.

They shouldn't have brought back Sean Connery. George Lazenby had taken over the role so why bring Connery back? He looks bored as heck in this film and I can't really blame him. Connery isn't the worst thing here though as Blofeld is just as bad. Charles Gray is not Blofeld and I will NEVER accept him as such. Donald Pleasence was the definitive Blofeld. It's not that Charles Gray is a bad actor, it's just that he doesn't fit the role. He wears drag at one point for God's sake...HE WEARS DRAG!!! His henchmen are also pretty terrible and some of the worst ones yet. 'Nuff said.

It doesn't stop there. Tiffany is probably the worst Bond girl...ever. She is just terrible. She's useless, stupid and not a good fighter at all. Bond girls should be cunning...she is not. There are some VERY stupid moments in this film. Why the hell is Bond driving a space rover around a desert? Why is Bond throwing Blofeld's submarine around (with him in it) like a ragdoll (with a crane)? It just comes off as stupid. Sure, the upcoming films would be stupid but this came right after one of the most serious Bond films and ends up

Diamond Are Forever is hands down the worst Bond film. The actors are off, the chracters are stupid and everything else is stupid. It's just a stupid, stupid movie! If you want a good Bond film, go watch On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Connery, you shouldn't have come back. You soured your Bond career. You Only Live Twice was a great way to finish! Aw well, this is this last one so I guess it's over then...

This is the worst Bond film. Everything is stupid and just doesn't seem right.

Monday, October 8, 2012

On Her Majesty's Secret Service (Peter R. Hunt, 1969) Review

Who the hell is that? Where's Sean Connery?! THIS ISN'T JAMES BOND?! Calm down, calm down. That is a new actor called George Lazenby who has replaced Sean Connery as the famous spy. "Oh, so this is a reboot then?" it's not. This is very much a sequel and, ironically, one of the only Bond films to carry continuity. How does a new Bond work? Let's find out.

When James Bond (George Lazenby) helps save a woman called Tracy (Diana Rigg) from some henchman and must use her in order to get to Draco (Gabriele Ferzetti), her father. With those two under his belt, he proceeds to track down Blofeld (Telly Savalas) one more time. This takes Bond out to a snow covered retreat where Blofeld lives with his henchwoman Irma Bunt (Ilse Steppat) and lots of beautiful women. Bond has to now uncover Blofeld's new plot and protect Tracy from him.

A new Bond...might as well talk about that. Even though this is his only appearance as Bond, George Lazenby is great! I was sceptical (this was the second last Bond film I ever saw) but was pleasantly surprised. He's the only Bond not from Great Britain but perfectly portrays the iconic spy. Telly Savalas, while not as good as Donald Pleasence, is a decent Blofeld...not the best but not the worst.

This is one of the darkest Bond films. Why? The ending is incredibly heart breaking. One of the saddest moments in a Bond film. Also one goon falls into a snow me, there was a lot of blood. This was a break away from the typical Bond formula people were used to. It could be a reboot yet it continues on from You Only Live Twice. Nowadays we're used to a different Bond so it isn't a problem if you go back and watch it.

On Her Majesty's Secret Service is one of the better Bond films. The change in tone, the new Bond, the great locations and some great action scenes makes for a, er, great Bond film. George Lazenby, you were cut off from the Bond series way too early. You should have stayed and done the next one! What was the next one again? ...oh no....OOOHHH NOOOO!!!!

A good change of pace from normal Bond films. The change in actor also helps make this one of the greats.

Sunday, October 7, 2012

You Only Live Twice (Lewis Gilbert, 1967) Review

This is definitely a turning point in the franchise. If the image wasn't enough indication, this was in fact the first time we ever saw Blofeld's face. Trust me, back then this way a big deal. Blofeld had been plaguing Bond's missions from behind the scenes for years and it was finally time for their first confrontation. How did it go down? Let's find out.

When a US space ship is taken by what is thought to be a Russian ship, World War 3 could happen any second. Bond (Sean Connery) must travel to Japan in order to investigative the spaceship...which landed in Japan. He has to infiltrate a secret base hidden inside a hollowed out volcano while disguised as a Japanese man (which...looks...nothing like a Japanese man). Inside the volacno, Bond comes face to face with his arch enemy, Ernst Stavro Blofeld (Donald Pleasence) for the first time. Now Bond has to stop World War 3 from starting.

Donald Pleasence is fantastic as Blofeld. He is the definitive one. The look, his attitude and his base are all iconic. He works well opposite Connery's suave last appearance as Bond (er...sort of) and is how I envision Blofeld (and they had to go ruin it in two films'll see). After Goldfinger, this is the most iconic. Characters that parody Blofeld (such as Dr. Evil from Austin Powers) are taking their inspiration from this interpretation of the character. Even his base is iconic enough to be parodied (who wouldn't want a base in a hollow volcano?).

This film features on of Q's (Desmond Llewelyn) greatest gadgets: 'Little Nellie'. We now get to see Bond fly his very own gyrocopter! The scene itself is great! I still think that the best may be ether the jetpack (from Thunderball) or any of the ones from Goldeneye. There are still problems though, the biggest one being how far fetched it is. I cannot except that they expect (what did I just say) us to accept that Bond is supposed to disguise himself as Japanese man. It's just plain stupid. This was also the first one that really showed off Bond's incompetence (he gets knocked out al the time!).

You Only Live Twice is a pretty good Bond film and is clearly the turning point of the franchise. The next era of Bond took after this one and it manages to mix tones well (there's dark moments and light moments). This is one of the better Bond films in the franchise and I would recommend it to anyone that considers themselves action fans...or...whatever genre this is (crime?).

A good blend of dark and light moments and is the turning point of the franchise.

Saturday, October 6, 2012

Thunderball (Terence Young, 1965) Review

Here it is, folks. The first 'bad' Bond film. I use '' because it's bad in terms of Bond films. They have they're own little area in the film industy and are in a world of their own. This means know what, let me just get this out of the way. To sum up: this film is underwhelming. Why? Let's find out!

James Bond (Sean Connery) is back for his fourth mission (and makes one hell of an entrance) when a new villain, Emilio Largo (Adolfo Celi), steals two warheads under the orders of the organisation, SPECTRE. The world is now in jeopardy and Bond teams up with Domino (Claudine Auger), the new sexy Bond girl (trust me, it's a theme). Bond must now travel to the Bahamas to confront Largo on his boat which leads to some excellent underwater scenes (yeah, that's not part of the plot but who cares?).

Getting this out of the way right now, this film is really, really boring. I can barley remember much of this film but I will say that the stuff I can remember was good. This included some pretty well recorded under water scenes, the jetpack (which is only in one scene, I might at) and...that's it. That's all that's memorable about this film. I not saying those are bad (the jetpack is one of the best gadgets in the series) but if that's all that really stood out, then I think there's something wrong...

I might as well mention some of the good things then. As I already mentioned, there are some great underwater scenes featured in this film. Bond films generally have a main setting (snow, air etc) and this one is based in the water. It was pretty innovative and works on paper but sadly, these sequences are slow and look...okay.

Thunderball is the first Bond film that I could label as 'bad'. It's slow, boring and forgettable. Largo is one of the worst Bond villains (and Activision expect us to pay for him as DLC for Goldeneye Reloaded?) and I can barely remember Domino. All in all, this one is not the best Bond film (far from it) but it has it's Tom Jones did the that's cool...

A bland, forgettable film. There are some good things here but just winds up being...a bit crap.

Friday, October 5, 2012

Goldfinger (Guy Hamilton, 1964) Review

Controversal Bond review number 1 (watch that number shoot up in this coming month)! That's right, I have a much different opinion of this film than everyone else. Goldfinger is considered by many to be the definitive Bond film and is the only one featured in the book 1001 Film to see before you die. I beg to differ. I'm going to show you a much different opinion of this supposed 'Best Bond ever'. LET'S DO THIS THING!

For the first time ever, Bond (Sean Connery) must face an indepented villain not funded by Blofeld (should have really mentioned that last time): Auric Goldfinger (Gert Fröbe). Goldfinger wants to eradicate the gold supply stored deep in Fort Knox so that gold will be more limited and therefore increase the value of the gold he currently has. Bond must stop Goldfinger and his henchman Oddjob (Harold Sakata) and try to win over Goldfinger's sexy pilot Pussy Galore (Honor Blackman).

When it comes to parodies, THIS is the one everyone seems to pick on. The Simpsons episode 'You Only Move Twice' had a character loosly based on classic Bond villians (played by Albert Brooks) and even captured Bond in the iconic laser trap. Hell, even Toy Story 2 had Mr. Potato Head throw his hat in the same way Oddjob does. Actually, that right there might be why it's so loved: it's the most iconic. Oddjob's deadly hat is memorable and so is the laser trap that is probably the closest Bond has come to death. Also, Pussy Galore (and her somewhat controversal name) would go down as one of the most iconic Bond girls.

Right, you've heard enough praise, time for the deconstruction. When a film starts with Bond wearing a seagull on his head as a disguse, I think you lose all credibilty. Goldfinger is quite a one dimensional villain ("I'm doing it for the money" is basically his aim) and is easily outmatched by upcoming villains. Oddjob is great, I'll leave him alone but the other people Bond encounters aren't anything special. The Masterson sisters seem irellevent as they are quickly replaced with Pussy Galore (who can come off as bland) and Q's gadgets...I can't even remember.

Goldfinger is in no way a bad film, it's just an incredibly overrated one. Yes, things such as Oddjob and the gold paint suffication are great but the rest is so bland and forgettable that it just doesn't hold up to previous ones. I actually think it looks worse than From Russia With Love. Well, how much hate do you predict I'll get? At any rate, I think the next Bond film is Thunderba-......Oh god...

A overrated film. There are some great things here but sadly falls short of the expectancy after From Russia With Love.

Thursday, October 4, 2012

From Russia With Love (Terence Young, 1963) Review

After the success of Dr. No, it would be no surprise that people wanted to see more of James Bond! However, you may notice that the films ebgan to go in a seperate order to that of the books. This is because of the budget. The studio picked Dr. No first as it would require the smallest budget (there's much less action in that one than the other ones) but this time they were going all out! Let's take a look.

With Dr. No defeated, James Bond (Sean Connery) is laying low but has to be called back by the MI6 in order to deal with a brand new threat, Ernst Stavro Blofeld (???). The catch? Well, Blofeld doing his own dirty work and sends people after him. Bond must retrieve a stolen encrytor device that the Russians took and must defeat Rosa Klebb (Lotte Lenya) and her henchman Red Grant (Robert Shaw) with the help of Tatiana Romanova (Daniela Bianchi).

This are definetly upgraded in this film. For one, the setting is much better. Jamacia basically amounted to a couple of beaches while the new setting of Russia looks great. It really brings out the world of James Bond and would set the bar for locations yet to be visted by the spy. The villians are also great in this one. Blofeld needs no introduction and the fact you never see his face really adds to the powerful figure that he is...and I like his cat. Rosa Klebb doesn't look so threatening but relys on weaponry instead such as a posion tipped blade in her boot. Lastly, theres Red Grant who will go down as one of the best James Bond henchman (but the best is yet to might know who it is. Here's a clue: look up Robert Shaw's most famous role in 1975).

The action is top notch! There are some classic and memorable scenes featured here such as the murder on the Orient Express (no, seriously) and the climactic boat chase that features lots of fire and explisions. Bond himself is better than he was the last time. It's this point that Sean Connery cements himself as the icon of Bond (What? You though it was Goldfinger that did that?). This film also introduces Desmond Llewelyn as Q (called Major Boothroyd in this one) but isn't as good as Q would later be. This is simply his establishing role.

From Russia With Love is a great improvement on Dr. No and is the film that introduces many Bond cliches such as Q, a theme tune, Blofeld and the more developed character of Bond. Dr. No may have started the series but From Russia With Love is really were it became clear that this would be a tremendous franchise. Get ready, because the next film is probabaly the most famous and is the preffered one...I may beg to differ.

Improves everthing about the first film and then some. Everything about Bond stemmed from this film.

Wednesday, October 3, 2012

Dr. No (Terence Young, 1962) Review

Here it is folks, the very first James Bond film! No, those fake Casino Royales don't count, okay?! This is the first James Bond, don't argue! Sean Connery made his debut as the first Bond (like I said...THE FIRST) and is easily one of the most recognisable Bonds...hell, this is one of the most recognisable films in the franchise... probably because it was the first one...anyway, let's take a look!

Enter MI6 agent James Bond (Sean Connery), codename: 007. Bond is sent to Jamaica in order to investigate recent murders in the area. Bond meets up with his college from CIA, Felix Leiter (Jack Lord), who provides Bond with the information he requires in order to solve the mystery of these deaths. Bond finds himself on a remote island where he encounters Honey Ryder (Ursula Andress). They team up in order to defeat Bond's first big threat: Dr. No (Joesph Wiseman).

Give this film some respect since it started the phenomenal James Bond franchise. Despite this, it's aged surprisingly well. I don't mean it's the best looking film ever but for 1962, it's still great fun to watch. Sean Connery makes a good introduction as James Bond in one of the best scenes in the series and is clearly a start to a great career as one f the most iconic characters of all time. Dr. No is a great villain to begin with but actually isn't very engaging since they is nothing developed about him.

Yes, there are problems. The film actually has some boring moments and is overshadowed by the other Bond films. The non-existent. This is the only Bond film that doesn't have it's own theme and therefore simply uses the main Bond theme (which is still pretty epic). The special effects are actually surprisingly good...though limited. This was before CGI dominated and therefore everything had to be done properly and definitely gets an A for effort.

Dr. No is exactly what I wanted from the beginning of Bond. For an adaptation, it changed a lot from the book but I feel that's a great idea! It gives people a reason to read the book AND watch the film. If you consider yourself a film fan, you have to see this film. It's where it all began!

A good enough start to the great franchise. Sean Connery is good as Bond but everyone else is quite basic.

Monday, October 1, 2012

Ghostbusters 2 (Ivan Reitman, 1989) Review

Well, I reviewed the first Ghostbusters film so it only makes sense to review the second. Now, some of you probably didn't even know that there was a Ghostbusters 2 but there is! I gave the first film an almost perfect score but this is a sequel to a classic film so you can probably predict how good this film is...I'M IMPLYING THAT YOU PROBABLY THINK IT'S BAD! Whether or not you think that or not, let's take a look.

After the defeat of Gozer, The Ghostbusters have gone their separate ways but are met with lawsuits and their company is made redundant. Peter Vankman's (Bill Murray) friend Dana Barrett (Sigourney Weaver) experiences more paranormal encounters surrounding her baby. The Ghostbusters come out of retirement and discover that a river of endoplasmic slime is running under the city. Meanwhile, a museum owner called Dr. Janosz Poha (Peter MacNicol) discovers a painting of Vigo (Wilhelm von Homburg), the new villain, and uses his powers to try and revive himself.

I dunno, but something is missing here...the characters are here, the actors are here but they're is something wrong with this film. I think it's because it wasn't needed. The first film was so great that it didn't really need  a sequel. I also think the plot isn't as good. The introduction of the Ghostbusters in the first film was good and I just feel that this film shouldn't exist. It isn't's just...not needed.

Peter MacNicol is an interesting addition to the Ghostbusters cast. You may know him as the voice of The Mad Hatter in Batman: Arkham City. I have seen him do some weird roles in films and this is no different. He is one of the most memorable things in the film...the other being the dancing toaster. You realise something is wrong when one of the most memorable things in your film is a dancing toaster...That's the biggest problem, it's a film that you will forget. Sure, you can say 'I've seen Ghostbusters 2' but I doubt I could specify a scene...

Ghostbusters 2 is a good sequel but sadly falls short of the originals success and goodness. Sure, the original actors are still there and yes, there are still great, but the film isn't very memorable. I already mentioned the dancing toaster being one of of the most memorable things. I would recommend that you watch the first one though. It's far better. Well, the big reviews are coming. Oh, didn't mentioned? Starting from Wednesday to October 27th, I will review EVERY SINGLE JAMES BOND FILM....INCLUDING SKYFALL! See you then!

A good attempt at trying to make a sequel but sadly doesn't work entirely. It's good for what it is but was unneeded.

Also, can I say?
10,000 Pageviews!!!
Thank you to all those you helped make this happen!