Another almost-obsolete format, DVDs – like CDs – are cheaper than ever in charity shops. One pound or 50p for two hours of entertainment represents amazing value for money. Here are my brief reviews of some of the films I saw...
Cowboys & Aliens (2011)
Inspired fusion of sci-fi and western. Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford are the cowboys battling the mysterious aliens who have stolen their people and who want their gold. Daniel Craig is the sole survivor of an abduction and cannot remember any of what happened to him, but he wears one of the aliens’ bracelets, which acts as a superweapon he can use against them. Olivia Wilde plays the blue-eyed girl assisting him and turns out to be not quite what she seems.
The brilliance of the film comes from the fact that it plays it straight. There are no knowing smirks and winks. No self-conscious irony. It’s a proper western in which the enemy just happens to be from another world.
There’s plenty of character development, with a father/son theme running across several relationships. Clichés were avoided and scenes that could have turned corny were sufficiently humanised to work well. I suspected it would “go rubbish” at various points – when the aliens started running around, when the big battle began – but refreshingly it stayed original and watchable to the end.
Surprisingly the film wasn’t a commercial success. Too intelligent? Too unusual? It’s a shame – especially when tripe such as Independence Day (1996) does so well.
Diamonds Are Forever (1971)
Sean Connery’s sixth and final James Bond film (not including 1983’s unofficial Never Say Never Again) is one of the weirdest in the series. The tone is completely different – an uneasy blend of comedy and drama that often falls flat.
On the plus side, Charles Gray is excellent as the icy, ruthless Blofeld. And there’s a dramatic Las Vegas car chase that features the classic “car on its side down an alleyway” sequence. I liked the plot element about a cassette of marching tunes that needs to be switched with a lookalike cassette containing the control codes for a satellite threatening to obliterate cities from space.
On the downside, the daft henchmen Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd are neither funny nor sinister and their scenes invariably jar with the rest of the film. And Jill St. John isn’t especially appealing as Tiffany Case.
The second half is stronger (from about the time Bond steals a moon buggy), but it’s unusually low on thrills. Even Bond almost being cremated alive doesn’t quite work because of the way the scene is edited.
I expect I will be singing the Shirley Bassey theme tune to myself for at least a week.
Thunderball (1965)
Sean Connery is James Bond for the fourth time.
SPECTRE steal a military jet and hide it underwater, then retrieve its two nuclear missiles and threaten to blow up Miami.
There are daft things in this film, but it’s still gripping. On the ludicrous front, there’s the fact that Bond is booked into the same health farm as a SPECTRE agent. It’s never explained, so you have to assume it’s just an astonishing coincidence. Then there’s the scene in which Bond escapes with a jet pack, conveniently stashed on a roof. Why did he use it on this one occasion but never before and never after?
I liked Domino (Claudine Auger) and the villain Largo (Adolfo Celi), and the acting was generally above-par.
The lengthy underwater fight scene was surprisingly brutal.
As usual, Bond’s asides when killing people are those of a psychopath.
(In 1983, Connery starred in a remake of Thunderball titled Never Say Never Again. This isn't considered an official part of the franchise.)
Dr. No (1962)
First James Bond film. All of the tropes are established:
• “Bond. James Bond.”
• Flirting with Miss Moneypenny
• “Shaken not stirred.”
• Women throwing themselves at him
• Car chases
• Exotic locations
• Mindless henchmen
• Odd, disfigured villain dwelling in lavish base
But there’s also an appealingly low-key quality. No helicopter explosions or dazzling special effects here. And the first half works well as a sort of detective story: an MI6 agent is killed and Sean Connery has to find out why.
The film gets stranger from the moment Ursula Andress emerges from the sea to collect shells. Suddenly it turns into more of an adventure story.
Parts of it are unintentionally comic – see the “dragon” (a tank with a blowtorch) and the nuclear decontamination showers – but overall it’s lively and entertaining enough to keep you hooked.
Road to Perdition (2002)
Crime thriller set in 1931. Tom Hanks plays a mobster out to kill the man (Daniel Craig) who murdered his wife and youngest son. Paul Newman is the father and don who places Mafia loyalties before all else.
Told from the perspective of the mobster’s elder son (played sensitively by Tyler Hoechlin), the film examines both the boy’s relationship with his father and also his immersion into a world of gangland corruption and cold-blooded killing.
Sam Mendes’ direction is a little too stylised – there’s lots of “enigmatic” rain – but the storytelling is nevertheless powerful.
Jude Law is a little unconvincing as the murderous photographer. The character isn’t developed enough to explain why he has a thing about dead bodies. Maybe it makes more sense in the graphic novel from which this is derived.
“Cuddly” Tom Hanks isn’t quite right as Michael Sullivan, but the film cleverly has it both ways: he’s a heartless killer who truly loves his family and therefore comes across as a reasonably nice guy.
These points aside, it’s fairly atmospheric and engrossing.
Told from the perspective of the mobster’s elder son (played sensitively by Tyler Hoechlin), the film examines both the boy’s relationship with his father and also his immersion into a world of gangland corruption and cold-blooded killing.
Sam Mendes’ direction is a little too stylised – there’s lots of “enigmatic” rain – but the storytelling is nevertheless powerful.
Jude Law is a little unconvincing as the murderous photographer. The character isn’t developed enough to explain why he has a thing about dead bodies. Maybe it makes more sense in the graphic novel from which this is derived.
“Cuddly” Tom Hanks isn’t quite right as Michael Sullivan, but the film cleverly has it both ways: he’s a heartless killer who truly loves his family and therefore comes across as a reasonably nice guy.
These points aside, it’s fairly atmospheric and engrossing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)