Showing posts with label John Glen. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Glen. Show all posts

March 17, 2013

Movie Night: Octopussy.


Review #360: Octopussy.

Cast
Roger Moore (James Bond), Maud Adams (Octopussy), Louis Jourdan (Kamal Khan), Steven Berkoff (General Orlov), Kabir Bedi (Gobinda), Kristina Wayborn (Magda), Vijay Amritraj (Vijay), David Meyer (Mischka), Anthony Meyer (Grischka), Desmond Llewelyn (Q), Robert Brown (M), Geoffrey Keen (Fredrick Gray), Walter Gotell (General Gogol), Douglas Wilmer (Jim Fanning), and Lois Maxwell (Miss Moneypenny) Directed by John Glen (#281 - The Living Daylights, #290 - Licence to Kill, #296 - A View to a Kill, #358 - For Your Eyes Only)

Review
This was the 13th James Bond film, and Roger Moore's 6th overall. This is the last review of Roger Moore as James Bond, and his era (of 12 years) had its good films (The Spy Who Loved Me, For Your Eyes Only), its strangeness (Live and Let Die, Moonraker, A View to a Kill), and... well...(The Man with the Golden Gun)...yeah. But is this any good? Well...Let's get to the point. Moore does a fine job as usual, nothing really to pick at for acting per say. Maud Adams is our lady in the Bond franchise...again. She was in TMWTGG, a secondary leading lady, now she is the main lead. And she is okay, not really a great leading lady, but take her acting for what it's worth. Jourdan plays our...villain. He's kinda forgettable and his henchmen is sadly forgettable. The only memorable guy with a weapon is...the guy with a saw yo-yo. Seriously. Llewelyn gets a slightly bigger role and he is enjoyable, like usual. Robert Brown as the new M is alright, not as well as Bernard Lee, but still alright. He would be M for the next three films. The rest of the cast (Keen, Gotell, and Maxwell) do good as always. Of course the film seems like a good film, and it does have its moments, but it all bogs down due to a flaw: the plot. Maybe it's just me, but I really wonder what the plot was about exactly, something about smuggling, or about...Bond briefly as a clown? Yeah, it's a bit weird. Is it odd? Yes. Does it have moments of watchability? Sure. Is it that bad? Not really. It is alright, but take it for what's it worth.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

March 16, 2013

Movie Night: For Your Eyes Only.


Review #358: For Your Eyes Only.

Cast
Roger Moore (James Bond), Carole Bouquet (Melina Havelock), Julian Glover (Aristotle Kristatos), Chaim Topol (Milos Columbo), Lynn-Holly Johnson (Bibi Dahl), Michael Gothard (Emile Locque), Cassandra Harris (Lisl von Schlaf), John Wyman (Erich Kriegler), Desmond Llewelyn (Q), Jill Bennett (Jacoba Brink), Jack Hedley (Timothy Havelock), Lois Maxwell (Miss Moneypenny), Geoffrey Keen (Fredrick Gray), James Villiers (Bill Tanner), John Moreno (Luigi Ferrara), Walter Gotell (General Gogol), and Robert Rietti (Blofeld) Directed by John Glen (#281 - The Living Daylights, #290 - Licence to Kill, and #296 - A View to a Kill)

Review
This is the 12th Bond film and the fifth with Roger Moore. While Moonraker was indeed a success, the next film intended to be more serious, more down to earth. Does it work is the main question. And...it sort of works. Moore even at 52 still does a pretty good job. He still has his quips and an odd charm that only Moore can pull off as Bond. The leading lady is Carole Bouquet, and she does an alright job, not great but not bad. Then there's our villain, played by Julian Glover. I do admire the approach the writers went with for the character (which I won't spoil), but overall he isn't really villainous enough. I feel he doesn't really steal the show or even try to eliminate Bond like some would do (which is likely the point, considering some of the previous adversaries Bond has faced - Jaws being an easy example). Even dropping him into a pool of sharks would be better than "dragging him" in the water. Glover's scheme is not entirely bad though. The rest of the cast is alright, Chaim Topol (last seen in #215 - Flash Gordon) is good, and cast regulars like Desmond Llewelyn and Lois Maxwell do their usual best. It might be useful to note that Bernard Lee (and M) are absent from this film, but that is due to Lee dying before this film went into production, and M was left absent out of respect. The film doesn't exactly sputter, it kinda chugs and chugs a bit slowly to the finish line, where something is missing, it feels like it needed something unknown to make this a bit better, though it still is a fine experience; obviously this is an improvement over Moonraker. It has its moments (such as the scene at the beginning with Blofeld which sadly is better than the Blofeld in Diamonds Are Forever), and director John Glen shows why he would direct the next four films of the franchise, he has good action scenes and it works when it needs to. Take it for when it works.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

February 9, 2013

Movie Night Redux: Licence to Kill.

Redux Review #290: Licence to Kill.

Cast
Timothy Dalton (James Bond), Carey Lowell (Pam Bouvier), Robert Davi (Franz Sanchez), Talisa Soto (Lupe Lamora), Anthony Zerbe (Milton Krest), Frank McRae (Sharkey), Everett McGill (Ed Killifer), Wayne Newton (Professor Joe Butcher), Benicio del Toro (Dario), Anthony Starke (Truman-Lodge), Pedro Armendáriz, Jr. (President Hector Lopez), Desmond Llewelyn (Q), David Hedison (Felix Leiter), Priscilla Barnes (Della Churchill), Robert Brown (M), and Caroline Bliss (Miss Moneypenny) Directed by John Glen (#281 - The Living Daylights)

Review
PART ONE: A Little History
I first reviewed this film back on November 23, 2012, having already reviewed The Living Daylights, Dalton's other Bond film. Was it good? It sure was memorable, and that was one of the main reason I decided to watch again more than two months later. I said a good deal of statements in my original review, such as this: "Honestly, the title Licence to Kill emphasizes the darker, edgier attempt at Bond. But another question is does that work? Yes...and no.", "The story is more back in reality, more then the last one, and even more then in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, which is admirable", "The violence is more prevalent, and it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. It's a give and take kind of thing.", "Dalton is more improved here, more darker and yet still interesting" "While it isn't a great Bond film, it is still one of the stronger Bond films" Nevertheless, the film would be the last for six years, due to legal wrangling, with Dalton leaving during the hiatus. But does this rewatch help the film?

PART TWO: The Actors
Timothy Dalton once said this of the Bond films before him: "I think Roger was fine as Bond, but the films had become too much techno-pop and had lost track of their sense of story. I mean, every film seemed to have a villain who had to rule or destroy the world. If you want to believe in the fantasy on screen, then you have to believe in the characters and use them as a stepping-stone to lead you into this fantasy world. That's a demand I made, and Albert Broccoli agreed with me." Dalton was right, and it shows in his performance as James Bond, especially in this film. He read the books to try to more like the actual novel version of Bond, and I do like his efforts here. He is especially convincing in the action sequences, and he even did some of the stunts for this film. He sets his mark on the franchise, in a good way. Carey Lowell is our leading lady, and she is excellent. She manages to level with Bond and not being some lady to be rescued, which is a good thing, especially in this age. Then there's our villain, played none other by Robert Davi. He is a gem of a villain, and while he is evil, he manages to be memorable and very suave somehow. He works well with Dalton, which is a good thing. Talisa Soto is our other leading lady, and she is relatively okay. She has less to do than Lowell, but she does manages to work out well. But the actors I remember from this are David Hedison and Desmond Llewelyn. Hedison had already played Leiter in Live and Let Die, so he naturally has some experience than the other Leiters before him. He does convey the character more than just an ally of Bond. Llewelyn works here more than most of the films because his role is expanded a bit, which means more of Q, which is always fun. Zerbe and Newton aren't as great,but they manage to have enough skill to be passable. Robert Brown does a good job, reminding me of Bernard Lee's M, which is a good thing. McRae and del Toro are memorable in their own ways. The actors do a fine job overall.

PART THREE: Conclusion
John Glen directs his fifth and final Bond film, which he did from 1981 to 1989, the most by any director (the films being For Your Eyes Only, Octopussy, A View to a Kill, and The Living Daylights). He had a style that conveyed action and an attempt to change Bond to fit the 80s. Previously, Glen was the editor for three previous films, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker. The action works well, especially in the truck sequence, which manages to be triumphant in its approach. It is double edged sword on Bond film on whether you like brutal Bond films without as much silliness or slightly silly Bond films with more of a lighthearted tone. The former works mostly and the latter works most of the time. But oh well. It's a shame that this is the last Dalton film as Bond, but at least he comes out on top. The story works for what it's worth, Dalton is excellent, the villain is good and the leading ladies work well enough. Take it for what it's worth.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.


November 29, 2012

Movie Night: A View to a Kill.


Review #296: A View to a Kill.

Cast
Roger Moore (James Bond), Christopher Walken (Max Zorin), Tanya Roberts (Stacey Sutton), Grace Jones (May Day), Patrick Macnee (Godfrey Tibbett), Patrick Bauchau (Scarpine), David Yip (Chuck Lee), Willoughby Gray (Carl Mortner), Fiona Fullerton (Pola Ivanova), Manning Redwood (Bob Conley), Alison Doody (Jenny Flex), Robert Brown (M), Desmond Llewelyn (Q), Lois Maxwell (Miss Moneypenny), and Geoffrey Keen (Fredrick Gray) Directed by John Glen (#281 - The Living Daylights and #290 - Licence to Kill)

Review
A View to a Kill was the 7th and final Bond film for Roger Moore, who had been Bond for 12 years, the longest tenure of them all. But is this any good? Well, if this is meant to be Moore's last one, it definitely shows. This is one of those films where it has some good things, but is then bogged by flaws among flaws. I'll start with the villains first for example. Grace Jones is good, giving the aura of delightful villainy, reminding me (slightly) of Jaws from The Spy Who Loved Me. But I find a slight problem with this, and it is not her that's the problem, it's the simple act of turning her good. Why does the (secondary) villain have to turn good? Is it meant to be symbolic? My answer would probably the same one the writer thought: Why not? But oh well. And then there's Christopher Walken. First off, I find him very good in some parts, and yet baffling in others. He does give off the look of a deranged yet smart villain and yet sometimes it looks like he's going to burst out in laughter. He's a fun villain, even if he doesn't get much of a fight with Bond. Tanya Roberts (the leading lady) is...okay. Though she does have some range of attempting to act, the dialogue sometimes just ranges to only "James!" "Save me!" I know it sounds off of me to say it, but it is better for the leading lady to do more then just scream, though at least Roberts is better then Britt Eckland (Mary Goodnight) in The Man with the Golden Gun. And then there's Roger Moore, in his swansong. I'll let this quote that he said of him in the film sum it up: "I was only about four hundred years too old for the part." Actually, he is good enough here, not horrible, but not as good as he was in The Spy Who Loved Me. The action is alright, with some good locations used, but the film is hampered by a mediocre first half. While the film has some good points, it is hampered severely at times, and it under uses the actors. And yet? I find it to be not the worst Bond film. Granted, it's not good, but it isn't the worst. Countdown to 300 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4...

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

November 5, 2012

Movie Night: The Living Daylights.


Review #281: The Living Daylights.

Cast
Timothy Dalton (James Bond), Maryam d'Abo (Kara Milovy), Jeroen Krabbé (Georgi Koskov), Joe Don Baker (Brad Whitaker), John Rhys-Davies (Leonid Pushkin), Art Malik (Kamran Shah), Andreas Wisniewski (Necros), Thomas Wheatley (Saunders), Robert Brown (M), Desmond Llewelyn (Q), Geoffrey Keen (Frederick Gray), and Caroline Bliss (Miss Moneypenny) Directed by John Glen.

Review
This is the fourth and final film review of Bond films (that were intended for posting yesterday). I've moved from the era of Connery to the short thought of  Lazenby to Connery again to Timothy Dalton (sorry for skipping Roger Moore, but that will be rectified in the future), so how is this one? This was released 25 years ago (it's been 50 years since Dr. No so in a way its the middle ground anniversary., and this just happens to be the 15th film in the franchise). After A View to A Kill, a new actor would be hired, Timothy Dalton (originally was offered the role for On Her Majesty's Secret Service). How is Dalton? He's...Middle ground. He is definitely an improvement over Lazenby, but I don't exactly think he beats Connery here. Dalton is allright, but I feel something doesn't click as well as what happened with Brosnan. The plot is allright, but I barely recognized the villian in the film as well I did with Dr. No/Grant/Blofeld. The supporting cast is allright, and the action works well. While this isn't a great film, it is at least a well film at gives the franchise good solid footing.

Overall, I give it 007 out of 10 stars.