nan | 楠木

Quantum of Solace, the 22nd Bond film, picks up immediately where Casino Royale left off. Bond is pissed, and wants to get to the bottom of the conspiracy that caused the death of the woman he loved.

This hunt for vengeance provides the emotional strength of the whole film. Daniel Craig’s Bond is driven, at moments hurt inside, but always ferociously determined to hunt down the antagonists. He leaves a bloody trail of destruction behind, and in turn runs the risk of being considered a rogue agent. His strenuous relationship with M (Judi Dench) is a focal point of the film, however it is not one that is developed further beyond the usual serious facial expressions of Judi Dench.

In many ways, Quantum of Solace is an extension of Casino Royale, rather than an independent film. Without the shadow of Vesper Lynd, the female protagonist from the last film, Quantum Of Solace would be devoid of any real emotions. The film’s rollercoaster assembly of furious action scenes keep you occupied, but during the few moments of eerie calm – provided to give you a breather – you would be reminded how little the plot has progressed. There is a plot, but it is not one that is hugely engaging or relevant, were it not for the fact that the conspirators are the same as the last film.

The film seems heavily influenced by a few sources. Casino Royale obviously provides the character and the mood, and this flick is definitely one of the more humorless entries into the 007 canon. There’s homage to the tried and tested 007 formula of exotic locales, and this film, unlike its predecessor where much of the action took place in Monte Carlo, takes Bond on a around the world tour. While its nothing remotely new, it does remind one of the glorious days of the early Bond films and the adventurous, romantic Bond spirit that has charmed audiences for decades. And finally, it wouldn’t be surprising if you mistook the intense action sequences with something from The Bourne Ultimatum, because they do really look alike. Indeed, not only the way the action is presented, but also the structure of the film quite resemble the Bourne formula of continuous tension.

Veteran Bond fans will probably miss traditional elements such as Q’s introduction to gadgets. The film is devoid of over the top fancy stuff, besides a few Sony-Ericsson phones and some Microsoft Surface like multi-touch interfaces. Perhaps the sci-fi element doesn’t exactly fit with the film’s dark tone.

All in all, Quantum of Solace provides a solid viewing experience, but judged independently lacks enough material to keep viewers engaged. It feels like the bridge piece of a trilogy, and the audience is left wanting more meaty content.

7/10

I’ve been lazy lately with my 007 film reviews. I’ve been watching a lot of them, but just haven’t gotten around to sitting down and writing the comments. That does mean the chronological order is sort of broken, with this License to Kill review. Well, whatever.

Read more…

Live and Let Die is Roger Moore’s first attempt at being the most famous secret agent in the world, and it’s not a bad try.

The new Bond makes a delightful entrance, in the most typical Bond scene: in bed with a girl. Moore immediately establishes his presence as the playboy-ish spy, with a scent of sarcasm. From that scene onwards he continues to explore and build his character.

Plotwise, the film is modestly interesting. There is no Blofeld, which is perhaps a relief since that fellow was pretty much at the center of everything for the last few films, at least regarding the villians. In his place is a little Caribbean dictator, who practices voodoo acts in his spare time. Bond’s main duty is to find out what the man is up to. Along the way he runs into a mysterious and attractive fortune teller, played by Jane Seymour (and she does look great in her role). Suffice to say, Bond soon changes his mission objectives to include conquering the girl.

There’s quite a few chases, and some other scenes which were enjoyable to watch, for example 007 getting himself out of a crocodile swamp. I did have an issue with one prolonged boat chase sequence, which must have lasted 15 minutes – it certainly didn’t serve any good purpose and it was way too long. The film decidely takes the approach of being more comical in this action sequence too, with the installation of a laughable southern sheriff who’s handy with one-liners.

All in all, for me this film wasn’t that bad. It was actually quite good considering it was Moore’s first try. Let’s see what happens in the next few flicks.

6/10

Diamonds Are Forever is Connery’s last official appearance as 007 (though there seems to be a later Bond film he starred in that was not produced by Eon). While he’s still very enjoyable to watch, the film itself feels very dry, and perhaps not even as good as the prior On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.

The film opens with Bond eager for revenge against Blofeld, his arch-enemy. He seems to get it, but the audience should know better by now: Blofeld’s greatest strength is not in successfully pulling off world catastrophes, but simply always getting off the hook. Anyway, Bond is sent afterwards to investigate a case of diamond smuggling, and soon catches on that a bigger scheme is at play.

Perhaps it’s because I watched the film in 3 sessions, instead of one, but I found the plot to be dreary. The film busily moves from one location to the next, but there’s not much excitement. Even a temptatious Las Vegas seems to have ran out of gas, and looks just like a rural backwater. The Bond girl is not the most interesting, in quite a while. Charles Gray, in his second appearance in a Bond film (the first being the short-lived Henderson in You Only Live Twice), now plays Blofeld, and his interaction Connery is pretty much the only highlight of the film.

The film is quite funny at times, especially a sequence where Bond invades the set of a moon-landing training for astronauts. And the two sinister killers, Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint, steal the show every time they make an scene.

At the end of the day, though, I felt this was one Connery Bond film that could be skipped. Not the best effort by far.

5/10

There are only two times when British super-spy James Bond fell in love: once, at the very start of his career as 007, as portrayed in the most recent Bond flick Casino Royale; the other, is in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, where Bond goes one step further and even gets married (although he also got married in You Only Live Twice, a somewhat arguable false marriage).
That’s not the only distinction this film boasts. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is also the only film starring George Lazenby as the lead spy, and it’s not surprising why. The film is deeply flawed, except during the last half hour where it partially redeemed itself through some very intense action scenes and a heartbreaking ending.
The first flaw is obviously Lazenby himself. He is not Connery, and I guess he knows that, but I find him caught between imitating Connery and building his own 007. It might have been better had he just stuck to his own understanding of the character, and not jump back and forth. For example, it would be hard to imagine Connery’s Bond thoroughly enjoying a Playboy magazine while doing business; not that he isn’t capable – he certainly is – but that’s not his particular style. While it is arguable whether a Bond who openly acknowledges his taste in girls with little clothes on is fitting or not, it is at least a new version of the spy, and if Lazenby stuck to this style, it would at least be a complete effort. Instead, he goes about saying one-liners that he couldn’t deliver, making us miss Connery all the more.
Then there’s the flaw with the plot. For the better part of the first hour, the plot is quite intent on telling the love story between Bond and Tracy (Diana Rigg in a dignified performance). What Bond wants besides the girl though, is information on the whereabouts of Blofeld. So when he catches wind of Blofeld, the film ignores the girl completely for the next hour, and the love development is left unattended to. It is picked up later on, quite unexpectedly, with the girl appearing out of nowhere (no good explanation given) and rescuing Bond just when he’s about to get his ass kicked. I’m not complaining that the plot doesn’t make sense – they don’t make sense in most Bond flicks – but the plot is thoroughly frustrating due to such above mentioned turns.
And then there was the music. Somehow the production forgot to include a theme song, and replaced in its place a theme music that’s not exactly very good, which is further aggravated due to its excessive reuse throughout the film. I couldn’t help wondering if the whole crew were uninterested in making this film work.
Then again, the film gradually sorts itself out this mess towards the end, as Bond tries to escape from Blofeld’s hideout and a great chase gets underway. The action scenes certainly don’t look as good as they must’ve seemed at the time, but the intensity of the sequences remain. And of course there’s the aforementioned heartbreaking ending, telling us the lesson that Bond is lethal, not only to his foes, but also to his women. It is during this half hour that Dianna Rigg is especially impressive, and I couldn’t help wondering what would have happened had the plot included her in the bulk of its middle act.
On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is a unique Bond film. That doesn’t mean it’s good, but it’s somewhat interesting, and it tells an important part of Bond’s story – how he is the man he is. Sadly, it doesn’t do so quite as well as it should have, which just reminds me all the more how good Casino Royale is.
5/10

Thunderball is the fourth Bond film featuring Sean Connery. Many feel that it was the poorest Bond film starring Connery, but I think it’s still a fine film, perhaps not as groundbreaking as the first 3 films, yet nonetheless royally entertaining.
The reason for that is mainly because of the stunning action. Most of the action in Thunderball takes place underwater, and the action sequences are both original and brilliantly captured on celluloid. Indeed, I think Thunderball is the first Bond film in the series that stands out from other films because of its action. Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing is perhaps debatable (later Bond films often had the tendency of becoming more and more “superficial”), but for this film it works.
The plot follows the successful standard set by Goldfinger, featuring an over the top scheme by SPECTRE to seriously damage the western democracies while getting a boatload of money on the way. SPECTRE plans to do this by using two atomic bombs they successfully stole from a NATO bomber. 007 picks up a scent and eventually tracks down the bombs, just in time, as always.
The usual Bond elements are in place. The villain is menacing enough, though perhaps not as memorable. The Bond girls are fantastic looking. Bond’s gadgets are nice and imaginative. The song and score, while not top notch, more than fulfill their roles. In short, if you’re a fan of 007, you should not miss this film.
8/10

You Only Live Twice is Connery’s fifth outing as Bond, James Bond, and though the film is not a breakthrough compared to previous efforts such as From Russia With Love or Goldfinger, the film is still a solid Bond film, and proves to be surprisingly enjoyable.
First off, there’s the beautiful theme song and score. You Only Live Twice, sang by Nancy Sinatra, is a romantic ballad that sets the tone of the film perfectly. Indeed, as the theme recurs throughout the film, we are reminded what a romantic action film this is: the purpose of the film is not just to stop a world war, but to let us see James Bond exploring exotic locations, encountering exotic adventures (and women, of course) along the way. There are many instances where the music combined with the scene tells us that this film is all about that romantic adventurous spirit, such as the scene when Bond is at the roof of the building at the docks, fighting a dozen foes as he tries to escape. The camera pulls up – it’s a helicopter shot – and the grand music hits in: it’s not suspenseful at all, but just bold and adventurous, romantically so.
Secondly, it’s the wacky gadgets and the plot overall. A SPECTRE vessel that can capture US and USSR spaceships? A jolly Little Nellie that’s a copter which could be carried around in 4 suitcases? A cigarette that’s really a mini-rocket? A Japanese intelligence boss that travels around Tokyo in his private subway? These devices fit the overall spirit of the film so well that we can forget how obviously silly they are, and be content enough to just enjoy the pleasant entertainment they provide.
And let’s not forget Bond, or the Bond girls, this time really cute Asian girls.
Indeed, whatever misgivings we have about the film, they only occur after we regain consciousness from the hypnotic entertainment that is You Only Live Twice. Simply great entertainment, Bond style.
8/10

From Russia With Love, the second Bond film, takes a great leap ahead from the humble beginnings of the most popular spy series set by Dr. No.
In Dr. No, there were only very primitive traces most of the later famous Bond formula. In the second film of the series, that formula is fleshed out in much more color. Bond is issued his first gadget, a sophisticated briefcase which is put to great use later on. The bond girl, played by Daniela Bianchi, can be both innocent and naughty, and is a delight to watch. Bond’s sidekick Kerim Bey, played by Pedro Armendáriz, is another delight, stealing the show with his witty lines and humorous personality that serves as comic relief.
And there are plenty of villains, some genuinely nasty. Donald Shaw is quite frightening as the psychopath killer that outsmarts Bond for most of the film. This is a villain much more compelling than some of the other muscle men to be found in later Bond films.
In terms of plot and action, this film also does a much better job than its predecessor. Though some of the action sequences are inferior by today’s standards, there is some authentic suspense created in the final act on the train. The momentum is gradually built up, and there’s a gruesome showdown between Connery and Shaw. Connery is especially likable because of the finer details of Bond’s character that he crafts and shows.
7/10

After the recent viewing of the latest Bond film, Casino Royale, I was so interested in viewing the earlier Bond films that I did something which was so typical and irrational of me: I went out and bought the complete 20 disc DVD set.
With that, I got down to business of watching the series 1 by 1, in chronological order. Dr. No, therefore, is the first film on the list.
Watching this film, I realized how much the action genre has evolved over the years. By contemporary standards, Dr. No probably can’t even be characterized as an action film (of course you might argue that it’s just an adventure film anyway, but I say action because typically all Bond films unquestionably fall into this genre). There is very little action to speak of, and none raises my adrenaline level at all, thanks to the excellent work done in the last few decades by the likes of Jerry Bruckheimer and good old Arnie, current governor of California. And by today’s standards, certainly most of the film’s action look downright silly and boring. The climax, is especially worth mentioning, as it feels more like an anti-climax rather than a final confrontation between Bond and his arch-enemy, the man of the film’s title.
Still, all the above criticism is not to simply label the film as trash, instead, my point is simply to state how much the action genre has evolved over the years since 1962. And certainly this film deserves credit for that, since it led to the series that eventually helped to shape the look and feel of the modern action film.
And this criticism certainly doesn’t mean that the film is not enjoyable, which it definitely is, albeit the cause of that enjoyment is not the suspense created but the simple pleasure of drowning in nostalgia. We see the elaborate sequence of shots that leads to Connery’s first appearance on screen as 007, accompanied by the now world renowned theme playing moodily in the background. Indeed, this opening appearance certainly got me smiling with satisfaction. Equally deserving praise is the entrance scene of Ursula Andress, the first ever Bond girl (and considered by many still to be the most definitive Bond girl). Dr No, played by Joseph Wiseman, is still one of the best Bond villains ever, though his screen time was unsatisfactorily far too limited.
At the end of the day, the greatest pleasure in watching this film is probably akin to watching your child’s first baby steps. It’s certainly far from perfect, but it’s the opening moments of the world’s favorite secret agent.
6/10