MGM – Connor Clarke Film

North by Northwest (Alfred Hitchcock, 1959) Review

Spoiler Warning: This discussion features some important narrative information that could spoil the text for you. It does not necessarily spell out the film’s conclusion, but it does talk about events in detail.

`"That wasn't very sporting, using real bullets."`

North by Northwest, Alfred Hitchcock’s spy-thriller classic is a text with great historical value and one of the many 50s films I’ve been meaning to see. To my surprise, this is far more comical than the other products I have seen of the legendary director. Indeed, it feels rather prototypical of the spy-comedy whilst also managing to feel like the major influence behind the introduction of Britain’s most famous secret agent in Dr. No just three years later.

There is some filmmaking in here that still takes your breath away in the sixty-plus years since its release. I adore the direct overhead shot of Cary Grant’s Roger Thornhill getting a taxi – it’s such a simple thing to show, yet Hitchcock ditches the easy approach and goes for the far more stimulating image he provides us with here. The crop duster sequence is obviously stand-out for the simple fact he manages to make a spectacle without any dialogue or music. He leaves his most fundamental tools alone, and the final product is all the better for it. Furthermore, for a man who shot the majority of his pictures in black-and-white, he has an astounding eye for striking colour and graphic lighting that grips your attention.

Cary Grant is one of the faces of the 50s for a good reason, all the charisma and charm you’d want in your leading man are in abundance here. His witty, biting dialogue is present from the very start and always gets a strong laugh, but he’s serious enough in the action and magnetic enough in the romance to keep it all moving. I don’t care so much for anyone else, but there isn’t necessarily a weak performance in the bunch. It feels like everyone is having fun, though, ceremoniously captured by the film’s ludicrous final cut, which is the result of over two hours of dancing around sex, only to have it censored. The result is the greatest middle finger to the Production Code in Hollywood history.

North by Northwest may be considered by many to be one of the best 50s films, but my range isn’t anywhere near broad enough yet to place it. It’s not a patch on Hitchcock’s Psycho, Vertigo, or Rear Window in my eyes. So, despite thoroughly enjoying big sections of the film, relishing in its intelligent writing and before-its-time quality, I still feel a little let down by its shortcomings. I may return to this once I have a better idea of the seasonings and savouries of 50s cinema. It’s still substantially impressive, though; the Mount Rushmore and crop duster plane sequences are icons of cinema for a reason. Plus, you can never get tired of the Alfred Hitchcock-Saul Bass-Bernard Herrmann-Cary Grant combination.

Check out the soundtrack here:

2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick, 1968) Review

Spoiler Warning: This review features narrative spoilers throughout the text and goes into detail about the ending of the film.

`"Open the pod bay doors, HAL."`

This is probably my third or fourth time seeing 2001: A Space Odyssey. It has been a long time since the last time I saw it but, the mark of a truly remarkable film is to remember every single scene and still being blown away by them. This is exactly the case for 2001: A Space Odyssey. This is one of those films that I don’t think will ever be forgotten or not considered as one of the best ever made.

I’ll start by saying that this has some of the most incredible, inventive filmmaking that I have seen. Every single time I watch this, all I can think is: how was this made in 1968? This looks better than Star Wars does, and I think that has aged incredibly well. There are shots here that would impress me in a current market, optical illusions, practical effects and wonderful splashes of colour – it looks gorgeous from beginning to end. The entire StarGate sequence is as memorable as the countless sequences of slow-moving space shuttles. I understand that a lot of this is spectacle, especially in the context of a 1968 film, but I am still yet to see a space sequence that makes me feel the same as these do.

This also happens to have one of the best edits ever put to film, we all know the one I am talking about, but the extract does overshadow the rest of the editing. I feel like this is the only piece ever talked about, for good reason, but this is so well-paced. It features some of the most expert editing that I have ever witnessed, which is paired phenomenally with Kubrick’s expansive wide frames and futuristic set design. The production design is, again, some of the best of all time. I sound like a broken record but it’s true – this is renowned with valid reason. Everything I have said has been popular opinion for a very long time, and I have nothing else to add to that other than the simple fact that I absolutely agree. This also happens to have one of the most iconic soundtracks of all time with multiple moments being directly parodied a million times over. However, this film uses silence as well as it uses music, that being, pretty much perfectly. The behind-shuttle-doors conversation scene is one of the best in the film, and the final sequence frighteningly tense because of the lack of score.

The film is pretty straightforward until StarGate. This is when it gets pretty bizarre. The opening sequence lacks dialogue, as does the closing. However, in its conclusion, 2001 becomes far more philosophical than it does at any other point. Arthur C. Clarke has said in the past that 2001 fails if you fully understand it. The story demands more unanswered questions left than answered ones. I have my ideas that I have garnered over the years, but I don’t think I truly ever want to know what the ending of this film means, it’s part of the magic in a way. I could point out how parts of the StarGate sequence seem to be imitating conception, the birth of man or how it feels that Dave has ascended beyond humanity because of his contact with the monolith, evolving beyond what we know as existence. But, in the end, it’s speculation, and there are hundreds of other exciting, thoughtful theories out there.

This is why 2001: A Space Odyssey is probably the greatest science fiction film ever made. It is a film that you simply cannot look away from and one that has to be discussed. Whether it be the simple but excellent juxtaposition of humanity’s evolution from violence to elegance, the validity of artificial intelligence or something beyond; it’s so rich and brilliant. This may not be a layered character study, but what it loses in its characters is made up for in every other department in spades. There is also something about making a film regarding humanity without a human to really latch onto that intrigues me, seeing HAL murder three people does not have the effect it would have if a man had done it. This is another wormhole that I will now find myself thinking about in my sleep, and I am sure another will crop up the next time I watch it. This is just one of those that you have to see in your lifetime once.

A timeless classic; Kubrick’s magnum opus.

Check out the soundtrack here:

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

Spoiler Warning: This discussion has very few spoilers: some set up from the first act, a general idea of the narrative at hand.

`"There is no point in living if you can't feel alive."`

The World Is Not Enough learns very little from the previous Bond film and commits nearly all of the same offences. I did not enjoy this one very much; it is somehow even more stupid than every other Bond film.

I suppose I’ll start with what I liked because there isn’t much and I’d like to get it out of the way. Brosnan is not awful here, though it feels like he’s on auto-pilot and is not helped by literally anyone in any scene. M is good again; Dench continues to be the most consistent part of this era. Coltrane gets a nice bit returning to his character from GoldenEye, but it’s small. The ‘plot twist’ that Elektra is the leading villain is sound enough, it’s something new at the very least, but there’s so little character to back it up. That’s genuinely about it, the last kill was a fun idea, but everything leading up to it meant it fell flat.

The action in this one is pretty poor on all accounts which I found really disappointing. No sequence stands out, it all just blends into this late 1990s action genre, nothing feels special or innovative. It looks awful; the special effects suffered a lot here, the camerawork is so flat that I was begging for an angle or something from every shot that came. The costume is not particularly great, which it usually is in Bond and though the locations are alright, even the production design doesn’t stand out.

The dialogue is off entirely, nothing feels natural, and the characters are annoying. I really don’t know what Robert Carlyle is doing here, a really boring performance from a stupidly written character. It’s Moonraker levels of lunacy but playing it dead straight – why? As I say, Elektra and M are alright, and their relationship could have been interesting, but it never gets enough time. Instead, we have to put up with Denise Richards as Christmas Jones. It makes me feel guilty for the things I said about May Day in A View to a Kill. I don’t know how she got the job. Every line delivery is the exact same; I would often sigh when she said something. Sure the script helps nobody here, but it highlights her performance in particular – totally out of her depth and maybe the worst miscasting in a Bond film ever. Bond, once again, has nothing added to his character nor does the film even attempt to explore one of his many traits, so I got sick of even him in the end.

I’d like to forget The World Is Not Enough. It’s one of those Bond films where some stuff makes it watchable, but in the end, you come out remembering the theme song the most. This is below average for action, comedy and near enough everything, a good Bond should have.

Tomorrow Never Dies (Roger Spottiswoode, 1997) Review

`"The distance between insanity and genius is measured only by success."`

Ah, this is the Brosnan Bond that I remember. This started out fairly coherent and had some fun stuff in it, but slowly devolved into an absolute mess; the finale is the worst part of the film.

The opening sequence is actually alright. Again, I started with hope here; I loved GoldenEye. This started high-octane, with Brosnan back at his best. Sure, it wasn’t as sleek or neat as the opening sequence last time, but I was willing to give it a chance. Then, the pretty bad theme song starts, and it all goes downhill.

This has a few good ideas here and there. The motorcycle chase sequence was decent – a nice set piece that kept the odds stacked against the heroes, and I didn’t mind the remote car chase scene either. The really great thing this did was bring the narrative completely away from any real mention of the Cold War. It updates its threat to the power of media, the global influence that one source can have. That’s backed up by a fairly entertaining performance by Pryce, too, the only one on form. Brosnan looks bored by the final act and has absolutely no chemistry with Michelle Yeoh whatsoever. This does nothing to build on the characters and has no relationship that I cared about. M and Q take even more of a back seat here than I would like – maybe because this runs just under two hours which is especially rare with this series.

The biggest problem with this entire film is the screenplay. The plot is simple enough, easy to follow. However, because there are no interesting characters for Bond to interact with, everything after the first act drags. The dialogue is all over the place; none of it sat right with the scenario and wasn’t particularly good wordplay by all accounts. Everything in between the action scenes feels improvised, and badly. There are some poorly aged comments about the Yeoh character – which are made even worse when her character makes the same sound effects in a fight as she does when operating a computer. Like seriously, and they feel added in post too. Then, there’s a joke where suicide is the punchline? Like what? Who wrote that? Stupid.

Tomorrow Never Dies is a pretty bad Bond film. The final act is incoherent at points, with some jarring cuts and the worst of the dialogue. However, there are some redeeming action sequences here and there. If this had a better screenplay that gave us actual characters; this one could have been fun. In the end, it ranks as one of my least favourites.

Die Another Day (Lee Tamahori, 2002) Review

`"Mr. Bond, you can't kill my dreams."`

This is probably the worst Bond film that I have ever seen. I always remember that I hated what I had seen of Die Another Day, but after today I’m not sure I had ever seen it from start to finish before. I actually had to have a break during this viewing.

This is so unwatchable. It was painful to sit through this tripe. I quite literally thought one thing was okay about it. I don’t mind Rosamund Pike; her performance is far more convincing than a lot of other Bond girls, and she some character. However, it is totally ruined by the fact that did the exact same thing, one film ago in The World Is Not Enough. Also, by the time it is revealed, you’ll be so fed up that you’ll wish you weren’t paying attention. It becomes something beyond lazy: dumb and contrived.

I really don’t know what they’re going for here. Did they see the first two Austin Powers films, think they were successful and went out to make that? This would even be a bad Bond parody because it’s so ugly that it’s not even fun to look at. Seriously, the special effects in this film are some of the worst I have seen in a film of this scale. Tamahori is about as subtle with a camera as Connery is about his opinion of women. That being, not very. The action is incoherent at times, with an entire fencing scene of two men wearing the same outfit with helmets on. What is that? Did they not watch it and think, I have no idea what’s going on? The editing is an absolute mess with some of the most jarring cuts and transitions that I have ever seen in a blockbuster film. There’s also inexplicable moments of slo-mo and then footage that has been sped up. I have actually seen student films with smoother editing than this.

The opening scene shows promise; a new angle for Bond to be seen or take a mission on. You may ask, what does the film do with it? Absolutely nothing, throws in a line or two but never bothers to explore what it means or how it affects characters and action. The theme song by Madonna is the worst in the entire series ever. It made me want to cut out my eardrums and is as outdated as she was in 2002. The screenplay is absolute babble with no good comedy and a narrative that is complete nonsense.

The gadgets are dumb – I hate the invisible car and everything that it brought upon this film. It directly leads to the worst car chase in the sequence and is preceded by Bond surfing on a tsunami. This could all be fun, but it’s played totally straight, so none of it is, you’re sat there thinking: ‘I should probably care that Halle Berry is drowning. But I don’t.’ I feel like Tamahori is a big fan of Bond and wanted something from every era because he puts in so much iconography from the series. None of that works, though because they’re separate entities, really – Connery wouldn’t fit in a Roger Moore Bond film. This proves that Brosnan doesn’t fit in any of them.

The last thing to talk about is the characters. This is maybe one of the biggest problems with the film. It is so poor at establishing anyone – we don’t know who is who or what they want. Bond is boring again, and I think Brosnan even looks fed up at this point. I could never take Halle Berry seriously, this is a Catwoman level performance. Her character is underwritten, as is everyone. The whole villain situation is mind-melting. If you’re going to have characters change appearance, it needs to be made clear, and this does not do that. The diamonds in the face look awful; Toby Stephens is not intimidating at all. Why is Michael Madsen here? It all leads to a convoluted mess at the end with a robot suit that seems more complicated than the original launcher and an attempt at a narrative that has no effect, primarily because we don’t know what’s going on. The main reason behind all of this is the screenplay – the dialogue in some scenes proves that. Maybe they’re doing the best they can, or they know this is a dumpster fire and are just there for the paycheck. I vote B, to be honest.

I look back on this, and I truly can’t believe that this is how they marked the 40th anniversary and 20th film of the Bond series. It’s a stain on the franchise. An amateur attempt to put some Matrix in the Bond films, by adding slo-mo, acrobatics, and leather outfits. This is embarrassing. For a franchise that I love so much, it pains me to say that this may be one of the worst action films I have ever seen. I’m glad this was the last of Brosnan if I am honest.

Licence to Kill (John Glen, 1989) Review

`"Effective immediately, your licence to kill is revoked, and I require you to hand over your weapon."`

Licence to Kill builds upon everything The Living Daylights established. It maintains a consistent tone and portrays a more tortured Bond than we had perhaps ever seen to this point. Absolutely terrific, and though not as technically excellent as other Bond ventures; it makes up for it in other places.

The best thing this film decided to do was divert from the typical Bond narrative and offer something totally different. Bringing Bond out of the Cold War and going rogue on a personal vendetta makes the narrative far more enticing. It uses a friendship over many years for some real emotional impact, something the middling to boring Bond films could really have utilised. It makes this film far better than it may otherwise have been.

The replacement is a Scarface clone, but I thought that match up was great. Bond vs Scarface; it just sounds cool. The anti-drug campaign in cinema is nothing new for the late 80s and early 90s, but it’s a relatively simple story that allocates the necessary space for character work. The film is far more violent than any Bond before it, which does feel tonally jarring within the series. However, I think it works well enough for the stand-alone film, fits in well with the darker tone this is clearly trying to take on.

The Bond girls are excellent here, too. Lowell, as Bouvier, can handle herself and Soto, whilst the less progressive of the two at least expresses some emotion and plays a part in the plot. Benicio del Toro makes for a pretty fun henchman, and a larger role for Q led to more fun gadgets and interaction with Bond.

The weakest element is, in fact, Glen behind the camera. The shots are never particularly inspiring and become repetitive and bland – it can mean that some of the action feels the same. That being said, the film is full of it – from the opening sequence to the brilliant finale. Popping a wheelie in a semi-truck through an explosion, just before avoiding a rocket by lifting one side of the vehicle off the floor. It’s actually pretty exciting, despite the rather routine filmmaking on show. The only other problems I have with this one are that it can feel pretty textbook 80s action at times, and the ending feels like a rom-com, which feels pretty out of touch with the rest of the film.

Licence to Kill is one of the stronger Bonds out there. It does everything pretty well (apart from Dalton’s haircut, which looks odd throughout) and is exciting. I wish Dalton had got more of a chance with the role because I think he’s pretty great in it. A shame, but at least we have this to cherish. Great theme song too.

GoldenEye (Martin Campbell, 1995) Review

Spoiler Warning: This discussion contains some spoilers. It could be an entire gag from a comedy or in-depth conversation concerning events in the second act.

`"I think you're a sexist, misogynist dinosaur. A relic of the Cold War, whose boyish charms, though wasted on me, obviously appealed to that young woman I sent out to evaluate you."`

I’ve always said I didn’t like Brosnan as Bond. However, I was clearly wrong in this instance because GoldenEye is one of the best in the entire franchise. Honestly, it was fantastic top to bottom, and I’m actually excited to get onto the next few films now.

I knew from the opening action sequence that this was going to be great. It ranks as one of the best opens to a Bond film because it achieves some vital elements of the character, very quickly. It creates a foundation that he is extremely skilled, funny and is willing to complete his mission by any means necessary. It shows a peek of the action we can expect with a truly fantastic bit of stunt work. It also shows us an important relationship that will come to the centre of the narrative later in the film. It’s efficient storytelling with fantastic action set pieces – exactly what Bond should be. Yes, it is followed by a pretty weak theme song but of all the elements to get somewhat wrong – it is the least important.

Campbell’s direction is wonderful, with only one or two misfires here and there, one example being the rather short but totally pointless spinning of the camera as the characters slide down a satellite, it was a little sickening). Anyway, his slick camera movement and clever framing allow Bond to come across as a great technician in the field. Bean is wonderful as ex-006 come villain in one of the more thought-out villains of the series. It puts them on a similar skill level, equally matched throughout, and it makes for tense and exciting action. Other scenes such as Alan Cumming’s character constantly pressing the pen were really well done and is the clever writing that should be expected in an espionage exploit.

M is particularly fun in this one, it allows for some playful criticism of the series’ more problematic elements and in conjunction, makes M a far more overbearing figure in 007’s career. She gets some great dialogue too, glad to see that role fleshed out some more. Q is still wonderful, too, and gets some more fun gadgets in (this includes maybe the more memorable stuff for me, such as the Omega watches). Simonova as the Bond girl here is one of the weaker elements, but even she gets a few moments to shine. Famke Janssen is absolutely wonderful as the main henchman though, I must say. She helps to bring in some of the campier elements into the film. The name Xenia Onatopp says it all. Seriously though; she has the right amount of sex appeal and sadistic murderer that Bond needs. Her character is everything Grace Jones’ character in A View to a Kill was meant to be and more.

In the end, I found GoldenEye to be a lot of fun. This is one of the better first films from Bond actors, and even despite my previous thoughts on Brosnan, he brings the perfect smile, demeanour and swagger that the role needs. The only thing that doesn’t hold up are some of the more CGI heavy shots, but, even then, it’s still not that bad. This is everything a Bond film should be, a real high for the franchise.

The Living Daylights (John Glen, 1987) Review

Spoiler Warning: This discussion has very few spoilers: some set up from the first act, a general idea of the narrative at hand.

`"Stuff my orders. I only kill professionals."`

The Living Daylights felt pretty fresh after the wave of Roger Moore films; clearly taking on more of an early 60s Bond tone. Dalton is pretty solid in his first appearance; he has fun with it but knows when to turn on the more tortured, disgruntled Bond when needed.

Look, I’ll get the plot out of the way first. It’s far more convoluted than it had to be, the plan of the main villain just has far too many layers. I found myself lost in the final act, with what he was trying to achieve. The first half of the film establishes a really simple but effective narrative. It sort of falls apart in the end.

This is probably Glen’s best directorial outing with clear and precise action, great stunts with nice character flourishes on top. Bond actually seems to take some interest in the Bond girl throughout this rather than a dismissed sexual object. This is perhaps the first time I’ve seen this since OHMSS. The dialogue is much better here, too, with a nice mix of amusing one-liners and actual plot progression.

The Living Daylights was extremely entertaining. The more focused visual style and tone made this feel totally separate from the Moore era, which was certainly necessary after the way that it ended. One of the best Bonds I’ve seen so far, but still not at the height of the original Connery productions.

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

Spoiler Warning: This review features narrative spoilers throughout the text and goes into detail about the ending of the film.

`"You amuse me Mr. Bond."`

Once again, not long after Moore’s last criminal opening, A View to a Kill features another truly awful pre-title sequence. The like 45 seconds of Beach Boys just randomly thrown in feels almost offensive to what Bond is meant to be.

I can see why this was the one that Moore called a day on; he is so old in this it is untrue. He’s nearly 60 and, to his own admission, looks it. He clearly can’t handle the action scenes, and so there are more very very obvious stunt double shots. Even more than that he’s also incredibly stupid in the film. He sits there and makes like 10-word notes on a voice recording, what are you doing James? The guy can rattle off useless expositional information at the nod of a head but can’t remember where a bomb is meant to go off. Infuriating – it makes a character who is of genius intellect feel like a fool.

The plot begins with the villain cornering the horse-racing market (?) and suddenly evolves into the destruction of Silicon Valley by flooding the San Andreas fault (???). God bless Christopher Walken, he deserves a far better Bond film to show off that insane Zorin performance. However, all of his actions are excused for psychopathy which screams lazy writing.

This carries over to every single character in the film – barely a funny joke in there, and the one-liners aren’t really up to par either. A bland Bond girl who does basically nothing. The May Day character is far more intriguing but basically ruined in the final third by one of the worst performances I think I’ve ever seen. There is like one or two shots in the whole film that were fun; like Bond dangling on a rope from a zeppelin careening towards the Golden Gate Bridge. Ridiculous but it’s a start. This occasionally happens throughout and basically saves it from being the worst Bond film on a whole but it’s not good either.

A View to a Kill is a Bond film that I will likely never come back to. I’ll happily listen to the fantastic Duran Duran theme song but ask me to sit through over two hours of mindless screenwriting and boring visuals; I’m going to pass.

Octopussy (John Glen, 1983) Review

Spoiler Warning: This discussion contains some spoilers. It could be an entire gag from a comedy or in-depth conversation concerning events in the second act.

`"Mr. Bond is indeed of a very rare breed; soon to be made extinct."`

After the more muted For Your Eyes Only, I almost expected this to follow the same route. I knew right from the start with a secret agent clown running from circus knife-throwing assassins that this would not be the case.

The film certainly has more fun with the circus element throughout, throwing in ridiculous costume and action set pieces that some of the blander Bond outings have needed so much. If that wasn’t enough, there’s a Tuk Tuk chase, Bond hanging off the side of a plane and train, 007 telling a tiger to sit (and it obeying) and plenty more. They knew Moore was getting beyond actual fight sequences and so throw in props to aid him like sword swallowers and the like to amp up the excitement.

That being said there’s little attempt to hide the stunt doubles throughout some of the more intense action. Octopussy is actually a coherent character in this one, has some prior relationship with Bond and immediately establishes a shared respect – look how easy that was The Man With the Golden Gun. A decent theme song, by the way, but nothing special.

If it weren’t for The Spy Who Loved Me this would be Moore’s best Bond film far and away. However, Octopussy is still insanely fun and features some of the wittier moments in the entire series. Otherwise, this is far too much fun to dislike and doesn’t take it too far; the plot is grounded enough (despite still being stuck in the pesky Cold War era). In fact, the disarming of the bomb in the circus was one of the more tense scenes I’ve seen in a Bond to date.

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31