Spectre

There are few things I like more than going to the movies. I love it, pretty much regardless of the quality of said movie. So when it's from my favorite franchise with one of my all-time favorite characters...yeah, I'm on-board. Even when reviews are decidedly mixed like they were here, I was GEARED UP and ready to go for the latest James Bond flick, 2015's Spectre.

After a mission in Mexico City goes successfully if slightly awry, MI6 agent James Bond (Daniel Craig) returns to London and gets an earful from his new boss, 'M' (Ralph Fiennes). He's put on a sort of suspension while things are figured out, things 007 isn't telling M. It hasn't been too long since the Skyfall incident although MI6 is part of a new merger that could completely shake up -- if not destroy the 00 program (the license to kill agents) the entire organization, especially Bond. Trouble or not though, Bond has his objective. Not long after the death of a superior, he received a clue in the mail telling him what to do next. That mission? Pursue a man (who he found in Mexico City) and go to his funeral. From there, he'll figure it out. Now, it's all up to Bond to see where the clues lead. This time, the clues and evidence appear to lead to a sinister organization that is far larger, far more powerful than anything Bond, M or MI6 could have thought of.

This latest Bond installment -- the 24th in the series, 24! -- was in a bit of a lose-lose situation if you ask me. Director Sam Mendes returns to helm 'Spectre' with Craig and much of the cast returning from Skyfall. The issue? Skyfall was an all-timer, one of the great Bond movies and one of my personal Top 5. How do you follow up franchise perfection? The reviews have been pretty mixed, and it's fair to say 'Spectre' isn't a great Bond film. What is it then? Pretty damn good. The criticisms I've read are fair -- the movie's length, the writing, the lack of action -- but none of it is a deal-breaker. I seemed to have liked it more than many reviewers, but I came to a realization as I watched. I think it's better than okay, but for the sake of a quick-hitting review, even an okay Bond movie is still better than most action movies out there.

Ah, Bond, how I missed you. As high as the bar was set with the franchise's previous entry, 'Spectre' is still pretty good, Mendes, Craig and Co. showing a comfort level with the iconic character that seems to get more comfortable with each passing movie. Bond is globe-trotting (as expected) so we get some great location shoots in Mexico City, London, Rome, Austria, and Tangiers. Composer Thomas Newman's score is solid, especially in the second half, with the big sweeping touches in the BIG moments, but also the quieter moments. There is a style and glamour and impressive scale to these movies -- especially since Craig took over as 007 -- that is necessary, perfect consistent throughout the movies, no matter the story or cast or reviews. That's what I love so much about these movies.

So that Daniel Craig fella....man, he's good at bringing James Bond to life. It's been cool to see Craig do his thing as the iconic British agent, making him more than a ladies man, a one-liner spewing killer, a smartass with no actual humanity. Craig makes him a human being, and 'Spectre' again dives into Bond's personal life, especially his childhood. It's little moments where we see Bond as he really is, in a conversation with the Bond girl (more later), in a surprisingly funny conversation with a mouse in a hotel room. We see a man who is very good at his horrifically dangerous job. Death awaits on any given day at any given moment. Craig is smooth and suave, able to deliver a one-liner as necessary, but as he's shown in the other films, there's a menacing edge, an intimidation factor to his Bond. Most importantly though, he's human.

Who else to look for? Bond movies don't disappoint in the cast department so there's no worry here. Christoph Waltz looks to be having a ball as the villain and thankfully it's more underplayed than usual, a little more subtle. His Oberhauser is dripping with intensity. Wish he'd been around more actually! I thought Lea Seydoux was excellent as Madeleine, the beautiful Bond girl who thankfully is no damsel in distress. Pretty and brains, can't go wrong! Along with the always reliable Fiennes as the new M, also look for Naomie Harris (Moneypenny), Ben Whishaw (Q) and Rory Kinnear (Tanner) as our familiar faces at the ever-changing MI6. I loved that Whishaw's Q is given a lot to do, especially some great in-the-field scenes with Bond. Good humor, solid chemistry between the bookish Q and the tough agent. Also look for Dave Bautista as Hinx, a brutal Spectre enforcer (an excellent, imposing part), Monica Belluci, and Andrew Scott as C, a new high-ranking official in the British intelligence community.

This next observation seems rather divisive among fans and reviewers. The Craig Bond movies have been connected, parts of one story impacting the next. Most of the previous entries were stand-alones, some characters popping up from time-to-time but no connecting story. 'Spectre' continues to delve into that angle, both Bond's past (Jesper Christensen's Mr. White makes an appearance) but also a criminal organization that's pulling powerful strings all over the world. There's some twists with Waltz's Oberhauser that I thought was pretty cool, and I'd think many fellow Bond nerds would appreciate but I'm seeing otherwise as I read message boards and reviews. The twist going back to Bond's teenager years was unnecessary, that much I can admit. I'm a diehard 007 franchise fan, and I'm curious where things will go going forward with future entries.

The biggest complaint I've read is the story, a modern world where old-fashioned MI6 and its 00 (License to Kill) agents are dinosaurs, a thing of the past. Sound familiar? It was dealt with in spectacular fashion in Skyfall. It is repetitive (if appropriate in technology-heavy 2015) and not developed rather well. We're watching the Bond movie so...you don't really need to convince us. I would have liked more Bond's background, more Bond and Madeleine, whatever, because the story itself is interesting. We just don't need to be hit over the head with the message. On the cool side, 'Spectre' is full of little moments, nice little nods to previous Bond movies from Goldfinger and From Russia With Love to The Man with the Golden Gun and many others. For the most part, they're subtle, but Bond fans will get a kick out of them for sure. I especially did.

What else? I could ramble for days about a new Bond movie so let's keep it focused! Ah, the action, a staple of the franchise. The cold open is brilliant, Bond chasing an assassin through Mexico City during a Day of the Dead festival. The payoff in a careening helicopter is an absolute doozy, a real whopper. 'Spectre' isn't an action-heavy story and is a bit of a slow-go through the first hour or so. Things pick up about the halfway point with the second half finding a groove. High points include a brutal fight between Bond and Bautista's Hinx, a stylish car chase through Rome (Newman's score is excellent here) between Bond and Hinx, and a mountaintop showdown up and down a mountain with Bond in pursuit of Madeleine...while flying a plane. Yeah, pretty cool. The finale is nothing huge but a more personal action sequence, a cool capper to all these espionage shenanigans.

It ain't perfect, but it's still pretty good. The opening credits are very cool, but Sam Smith's song is unfortunately completely forgettable. As for Craig, it's not a lock, but I'm pretty sure (book it, go to Vegas!) he'll be back for a fifth and most likely final venture as everyone's favorite secret agent. If he doesn't, the ending is a fitting one, a nod to one of the more infamous endings in the franchise -- if you ask me at least, I could be overanalyzing. As for me, I'm a sucker for a good Bond movie, even if it isn't great. That gun barrel opening, the familiar musical theme, those notes kick in and I get a chill up my back. It isn't as good as Skyfall or Casino Royale, but it is a solid, definitely above average James Bond movie that struggles to deal with some flaws.

That said...it's JAMES BOND. Go see it!

Spectre (2015): ***/****

Dr. No

In 1952, British author Ian Fleming introduced the world to a character that would become one of the most famous, instantly recognizable characters in literature-film-pop culture history. That name....Bond, James Bond. Fleming would write 14 007 novels, starting with 1952's Casino Royale, but it took 10 years for the British super spy to make it to the big screen. It was worth the wait, and one of the most successful franchises in film history was born. It all started with 1962's Dr. No.

A station chief and his new secretary working for British intelligence in Jamaica has gone missing without a trace, leaving London scrambling to figure out what happened. The station chief, Strangways, had been investigating possible interference with American missiles but all his files have been stolen as well. In steps another agent, James Bond (Sean Connery), dispatched to Jamaica to investigate. He's quickly stone-walled wherever he goes, finally receiving some help from a CIA agent, Felix Leiter (Jack Lord), and a local fisherman, Quarrel (John Kitzmiller), who had worked with Strangways. What little evidence Bond can find -- among several attempts to kill him -- is an isolated, mysterious cove, Crab Key, owned by the equally mysterious, Dr. No., who no one knows much about. What's waiting out there? And is Dr. No behind these wayward American rockets? Maybe only Bond can find out.

All successful franchises have to start somewhere, right? This is an excellent jumping off point for my all-time favorite franchise. Producers debated over which Fleming novel to use as the first film, finally settling here on Dr. No. It immediately resonated with fans, propelling Connery to stardom basically instantaneously. It isn't one of the best 007 movies, but it's pretty damn good. You see all the groundwork being laid out for what was to come from the one-liners to the diabolical villains, the girls to the gadgets, the exotic locations and effortless style. And of course, that main theme, maybe the most famous movie theme of all-time. An excellent starting off point. Listen HERE to the theme but shame on you if you haven't heard it by now. No Bond song here, just Monty Norman and John Barry's perfect theme to play over the stylish 1960's credits.

When he was cast to play 007 himself, James Bond, Connery was a young actor who'd worked regularly in films and television but was far from a star. That kinda sorta changed with this film. Just a bit. This is a rare example of perfect casting. Connery was born to play Bond. It's the style, charisma, confidence, it all flows so effortlessly. Maybe not physically, but Connery brings Fleming's Bond to life as well as anyone with Daniel Craig knocking on the door in that department. He's a killer, brutally efficient with his license to kill, but he's also smooth and suave, an impeccably dressed ladies man. Connery finds a rhythm immediately with the character. There's no sense of an actor feeling out what works and what doesn't work. He just knows what he wants to do and goes for it. There were better Connery/Bond entries -- From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, Thunderball -- but Connery is and always will be 007. The maiden voyage with an iconic character, and the young Scottish actor hits a home run with ease.

The rest of the cast lacks huge star power, but that ends up being a positive. It's cool to see Lord in a pre-Hawaii Five-O part and he's got some good chemistry with Connery, as does Kitzmiller in their scenes together. But what about those Bond villains and Bond girls?!? The franchise is off to a good start with Joseph Wiseman as Dr. No and maybe the most iconic Bond girl of all-time, Ursula Andress, as Honey Ryder. Who hasn't seen the famous shot of her in a white bikini coming out of the water? She actually isn't introduced until the hour-mark, but her appearance is definitely an idea of things to come. The same for Wiseman's Dr. No, and he's not introduced until there is less than 25 minutes left in the movie! He's intelligent, foreboding and gets the franchise started off right. Now, if he had just killed Bond on the spot rather than let him waste away in a cell....oh, the possibilities.

Also look for Bernard Lee as M and Lois Maxwell as Moneypenny, introduced in the early goings. Anthony Dawson plays a potential lead for Bond once he arrives in Jamaica while Zena Marshall and Eunice Gayson play two more Bond girls.

I think what's most alarming about this first James Bond movie is how calm it is. It is self-assured and confident, hitting a groove pretty quick, but it barely resembles what the franchise would become (for good and bad). This is more of a detective story than a secret agent story. It isn't necessarily low-key because of all the chases, Bond girl-seducing, perfectly-timed one-liners and all, but it's certainly in that territory. Director Terence Young simply isn't trying too hard -- that would come later in the franchise -- in introducing 007. It's a good intro and not a great one, but it is an excellent film just the same. The next venture, From Russia With Love two years later, is a true classic and one of the series' best.

Dr. No. (1962): ***/****

Skyfall

The beauty and downfall of a successful film series is a razor-thin difference. How do you keep fans interested without showing the same movie over and over again? Now 50 years since the James Bond franchise started with 1962’s Dr. No, 007 himself has gone through funks of sorts. The producers and writers always seem to have a knack for bringing him back in high gear. So after the disappointing Quantum of Solace, Bond comes back with a vengeance in 2012’s Skyfall.

Working a mission in Turkey, MI6 agent James Bond (Daniel Craig) is in pursuit of a man who holds a stolen hard drive with the identities of every MI6 currently working deep within terrorist organizations. In pursuit with the threat the man could get away, Bond is accidentally shot by a fellow agent when M (Judi Dench) fears the hard drive will get out in the open. Feared dead, Bond disappears, only reappearing months later when MI6 Headquarters is attacked in a terrorist bombing. The culprit? A former MI6 agent and brilliant mind with technology and computers, Silva (Javier Bardem). The former agent is looking for revenge, and his sights are set on M herself. Severely wounded in Turkey and wasting away via pills and booze, Bond has his work cut out for him if he hopes to stop Silva from releasing the list of MI6 agents on an international level.

Like any Bond movie, that plot synopsis is about as concise as I think I’m going to get it. Moral of the story? It’s a gem. After the average but mostly disappointing Quantum of Solace, the Bond franchise gets back to basics for its 50th anniversary and 23rd film overall. For starters, they found the right man for the job directing, Sam Mendes of American Beauty, Revolutionary Road, Jarhead, Road to Perdition and many other non-Bond like movies. He brings a different eye to the franchise. The script from a trio of writers as well is about as good as it gets, but more on that later. As a visual medium, ‘Skyfall’ is a stunner, not just a great-looking Bond movie, but a great-looking movie in general. Credit there goes to Roger Deakins, director of photography. Also worth mentioning, composer Thomas Newman’s score, nothing flashy, but it’s different enough to be interesting. Of course, having the James Bond theme from Monty Norman never hurt any score….EVER. So again, it’s the little things that we might not always think of, but the behind-the-camera angle works perfectly.

I have long said Sean Connery is the best James Bond of the six actors who have portrayed him with Craig (his legacy still to be decided) in close second. After Skyfall, that opinion has changed. I think it’s a push. As I mentioned in the Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace reviews, Craig is able to make James Bond, 007 himself, a real-life, 3-D human being. He’s not some indestructible hired killer without emotion or feeling. Following the thrilling pre-credit sequence where Bond is shot, we see James at his lowest. When he comes back to MI6, we see an agent who has lost some of his edge, his hard-earned ability gone. Now, he must fight his way back to some sort of 007 normalcy. The story develops, and we see more of his character as Bond gets some development, including the first-ever (that I can think) revelation about his childhood. No real spoilers here, but the final 30-45 minutes delves into the myth of the Bond character like no others have even tried. I can’t wait to see where the character goes next.

This next statement is nothing new. Countless other reviews have made the point, but it’s key. It’s 2012. There is no Cold War, no enemy Russians hell-bent on destroying the free world. Worldwide, international villains are harder to identify. So what is MI6 supposed to do? It’s not Russkies vs. Brits anymore. These villains are different. M, her actions, and MI6 come under fire in ‘Skyfall.’ What’s the point of them even being around? Does a modern world need individual agents patrolling the world in the shadows (as M so simply and eloquently puts it)? Bond fans can now answer in unison…YES. So in that sense, Mendes, Craig and Co. get back to basics. In a world unlike anything we’ve seen before, maybe we need agents like Bond more than ever. That’s where I think Skyfall is special. Much of that extraneous “stuff” (for lack of a better word) is stripped away. This is Bond at his simplest. A highly-trained agent with a gun and a radio transmitter, nothing else. No gadgets, no gimmicks. The best part? Nothing else is needed.

So let’s dive in. Mendes assembled one impressive cast to work with here. Craig as mentioned is basically perfect as the very-human Bond. Judi Dench is given her most fleshed-out part as M, MI6 head of agents who must now defend every single one of her actions. Not surprisingly, Dench does not disappoint with more screentime. Already previously identified as one of the great villains of all-time from No Country for Old Men, Bardem is a breath of fresh air in the Bond villain department. His Silva quickly moves into the top 3 or 4 Bond villains. It’s not a stereotypical bad guy part though. We learn more about his back story, more about who he is and what drives him. Also making Bond aficionados happy, Ben Whishaw is cast as Q, Bond’s quartermaster, supplying him with everything he needs. Ralph Fiennes plays Gareth Mallory, a government higher-up associated with MI6 and working to help M. Naomie Harris plays Eve, another agent working with Bond while Berenice Marlohe is memorable in an underused part as Severigne, a link to Silva. Rory Kinnear is solid too as Tanner, M's assistant who works with Bond to get back his edge.

With a story focused on character development and a great visual appeal, fans need not worry. The action is incredible. The pre-credit sequence chase via foot-motorcycle-train gets things going at a lightning pace. Adele’s theme song – Skyfall, listen HERE – is a winner too. What works about the action is that it flows so well and effortlessly with the story. Bond fights a rival assassin in Shanghai in a back-lit skyscraper in a sequence that seems almost art-house in style. I don’t want to give too much away in terms of the action, but I’ll leave it at this. It works. It just does. It is stylish without being flashy, and thankfully leaves that hyper-active editing behind with Quantum. We can see the action, and that makes all the difference. The best is the end, a showdown with Bond, M, and Kincaid (Albert Finney, a scene-stealer as a man from Bond’s past) shooting it out western-style at an isolated Scottish manor house with Silva’s small army of machine gun-wielding henchmen.

In making Skyfall, I think the producers/creators made a wise decision. They didn’t try and change a successful franchise. They take what works and build off it. In that way, it comes across as a quasi-homage to the best Bond movies while still carving out its own identity. We see Bond’s original Aston Martin (ejector seat included), we learn more about Bond, and in the end, we have a final scene with two key points and sort-of twists. Again, no real details here. Enjoy and discover the movie for yourself. The point though is simple. While advancing the series, franchise and character, they’re sticking to what works. There is a simple perfection when these movies work well (Goldfinger, From Russia With Love, Casino Royale, Goldeneye, The Spy Who Loved Me), and Skyfall gets it done on a huge scale. A great movie, and another great Bond story. I can’t wait to see where 007 heads next. Check out the trailer below.

Skyfall (2012): ****/****

Quantum of Solace

After the ridiculously successful franchise reboot in 2006, Casino Royale, loyal James Bond fans wanted to know where the series would go next. 'Casino' was everything a Bond film should be, and it seemed to re-energize the franchise. The follow-up? That's 2008's Quantum of Solace which I revisited recently for the first time since seeing it in theaters.

In the aftermath of the fall-out at Casino Royale, James Bond (Daniel Craig) is trying to get Mr. White (Jesper Christensen) to safety for interrogation. White has ties to a completely clandestine organization that has ties in everything internationally; business, government, even MI6. With some help from an agent in deep cover, White escapes, but Bond is on his trail. The vengeful 007 follows the clues to Haiti where he finds Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), a supposedly up-right citizen with ties to a charity focused on saving the planet. With help from Camille (Olga Kurylenko), a woman who wants to kill Greene, Bond discovers Greene's ulterior motives, but time is running out.

First off, I loved Casino Royale. It quickly went Top 3 Bond movies ever for me so I was naturally psyched to go see this follow-up. I came away....disappointed. Having rewatched the movie, I still can't quite put my finger on it as to why. It's entertaining throughout. Daniel Craig shows again what perfect casting he was. It's action-packed, it has that dark humor that the best Bond films had, and it isn't based in an out of this world environment where super-villains are trying to take over the world. So what happens? For one thing, at 106-minutes, it feels short. The ending is somewhat disappointing, but even that isn't it. Let's think about this.

Where 'Casino' had some epically impressive action sequences, 'Quantum' ratchets up that formula. Unfortunately, it isn't always for the better. And here's where I think the issue is. 'Quantum' tries too hard to be a Jason Bourne movie, not a James Bond movie. The action is cut so ridiculously quick with hyper-active shaky cam that it becomes almost indecipherable to watch. The opening car chase through the Italian mountains should be a gem, but it's almost impossible to keep up with everything. Not all the action is that bad -- most of it is very good, would have been great if we actually saw it -- including a chase in/around Palio di Siena as Bond guns for a double agent. Some encounters are quick (a hand-to-hand fight with an assassin) and brutally effective while others are on a larger scale (Bond flying an ancient plane through narrow canyons). It's weird to say this with a Bond film, but there may be too much action. I know. Sacrilege, right?

What isn't in question though is the continuing and developing character of James Bond. I don't know who didn't think Craig wasn't a great choice for 007 after seeing Casino Royale, but 'Quantum' should put those doubts to rest. This isn't a cardboard cut-out of a secret agent. This is a flesh and blood individual, in this case a highly trained, brutally effective killing machine gunning for revenge. Like an exposed nerve, Bond wants revenge and answers for Vesper's death (from 'CR'). He's fed up with the proper way of doing things, and does things his way instead. Craig makes Bond a real-life person, and that's huge. I liked the movies, but did you ever get that sense from the Roger Moore entries? Me either. Also, and always a bonus, Craig is a beastly presence on-screen, handling much of his own stunts. Badass much?

His supporting cast again is very solid for the most part. Kurylenko isn't your typical Bond girl, and like Vesper, she's given a hard, tough edge to her. She can handle her own as well, not a damsel in distress. Amalric's Green is an average villain, smart and manipulative but not a presence enough to be a threat to Bond while Joaquin Cosio is General Medrano, Greene's South American dupe. Judi Dench is a scene-stealer -- as always -- as M, Bond's MI6 supervisor, and Giancarlo Giannini is given too small a returning part as Mathis, the possibly treacherous agent who may have double-crossed Bond in Casino Royale. Gemma Arterton plays Strawberry Fields, a consulate agent who meets Bond. Also in a small part is Jeffrey Wright as Leiter, Bond's CIA counterpart, a criminally underused part.

Through the negative, there are some impressive positives. We're talking great positives. There are times where 'Quantum' is a frighteningly effective art-house secret agent film. Director Marc Foster shoots on-location in Italy, Haiti, Chili, Mexico, Austria and England. Some scenes are hard to top. Bond follows Greene to an elegant outdoor theater where members of Greene's organization are meeting in secret. The fall-out? A silent scene with the opera music playing over Bond's shootout escape is a gem. Later, Bond and Camille -- in their black suit and little black dress -- descending out of the desert is surreal, aided by David Arnold's score. The finale at a hotel in the desert is almost apocalyptic, making up for a lack of scale with a bizarre, other-worldly feel.

So where does this one fall? Not great, not awful, but slightly above average. What it gets right is a home run. All I can figure with the negatives is that it isn't a Bond film in the traditional sense. It tries to be what the secret agent movie has become following the immense success of the Jason Bourne movies. Worth watching, but not a classic. Bring on Skyfall!


Quantum of Solace <---trailer 1="1" br="br">

Casino Royale (2006)

Ah, here we are, just days out from the release of the newest James Bond flick, Skyfall. Why don't we take a trip in the way back machine to 2006 when the incredibly successful franchise was being rebooted. A casting choice that concerned fans was chief among the issues when 2006's Casino Royale hit theaters. Ask most Bond fans -- including this one -- but those concerns were ill-founded.

Fresh off receiving his '00' status (license to kill), MI6 agent James Bond (Daniel Craig) is pursuing a bomb-builder in Madagascar and stumbles upon clues to an international terrorist financier, Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen). The infamous financier is up to something, and Bond manages to stop his plan, but it causes another. Le Chiffre is now in the hole over $100 million to various terrorists he handles money for. Desperate and seeking his money, Le Chiffre organizes a high stakes poker game at Casino Royale in Montenegro. The biggest problem standing in his way? Bond, who with a $10 million buy-in from the government -- and treasury agent Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) -- has a seat at the table. Win? Eliminate Le Chiffre's business. Lose? Then, MI6 and England will have directly funded terrorism.

By 2002, the Pierce Brosnan James Bond movies had all been played out, closing with the atrociously bad Die Another Day. Even with the progressively bad Brosnan efforts (no fault of the actor, just the scripts), fans still objected to the casting of Craig in the iconic role of James Bond, 007 himself. It's understandable. Everyone has their favorites, even their perception of who/what Bond is. What was the end result in this 2006 reboot from director Martin Campbell (who also directed the Brosnan venture Goldeneye)? A throwback but modern effort, encapsulating all the style and action that fans have come to expect while also breathing fresh life into the franchise. Big picture? It's one of the best Bond films, and easily in my top 5 overall.

Throw aside the gorgeous locales, beautiful women, cool gadgets and ridiculous action, the success of 'Royale' is simple. It's Daniel Craig as Bond. Yes, all those other things are there, but this is James Bond as author Ian Fleming originally intended and wrote about. At the character's heart, Bond is a hired killer; a brutally effective, even obsessed killer. He's cold, sinister and has little sense of humor. Thankfully, Craig doesn't go that deep. He takes the best of the previous Bonds -- Connery's toughness, a toned down humor of Roger Moore, and the general suaveness of Brosnan -- but manages to spin it into his own character. Handling much of his own stunts, Craig is incredibly believable in the part and makes a fictional character more believable. He doesn't feel like a cliched stereotype. Instead, he's a secret agent, sometimes willing himself to survive the hellish world he's working in.

On top of the perfect 007 casting though, 'Royale' does all the little things right. The first is that style that these films always deliver on. The locations have us bouncing around from Venice to the Czech Republic, Lake Como to the Bahamas like globetrotters. The look of the film is a stunner as we follow Bond's exploits. Chris Cornell provides the theme, You Know My Name (listen HERE), and composer David Arnold's score is a gem, playing on the familiar Bond theme with a mix of action-packed music and quieter, romantic moments. From behind the camera though, Campbell most importantly gets it right. This isn't just an action movie. Yes, there are boatloads of action (more on that later), but there's also an interesting, twisting story, quieter moments between Bond and Vesper that feel authentic, and that incredibly dark humor that rides along with the story. Like I've said before, it's the little things that make a good movie a great movie.

Now to be fair, yes, all those other things are very important to a Bond movie. But let's be honest. Bond is a secret agent, and that means A-C-T-I-O-N! 'Royale' is a great movie, but it's also a great action movie on a whole other level. The opening sequence has Bond pursuing a bomb-maker (Parkour/free runner Sebastien Foucan) through a construction site; Bond's physicality vs. Foucan's effortless movements. Watch it HERE. That scene is an essential one in showing how Craig's Bond will stop at nothing to accomplish a mission. Another highlight has Bond chasing down a hired gun trying to take out the largest airliner ever built in a ridiculously cool back and forth chase on an airport tarmac. The other action sequences are on the small scale, hand-to-hand combat, more personal fights that are effective in that smaller scale. All together though, they're a gem. In a weird way, the poker scenes are like action sequences; packed with tension and adrenaline.

And how about the rest of that cast? Green is not your typical Bond girl, but in that sense, she's perfect. Her Vesper is similar in character to Bond, making them an ideal pair as they basically hate each other for much of the film. Mikkelssen too is an atypical Bond villain; not one bent on destroying the world, just staying alive and getting his money back. However you cut it, Green and Mikkelsen are ideal casting choices. Giancarlo Giannini is a scene-stealer as Mathis, Bond's ally in Montenegro. Judi Dench returns as M, Bond's veteran MI6 superior, and doesn't disappoint while Jeffrey Wright is a new and welcome addition as Felix Leiter, Bond's CIA counterpart. In the Bond eye candy department, look for Italian beauty Caterina Murino in a small but key part.

I'm a diehard James Bond fan, but I am able to judge the flicks for what they are -- some classics, other good to great, and a few just plain bad. But this 2006 film -- the 21st in the official franchise -- is about as close to a perfect Bond film as you can get. It has everything going for it, and the capper is the final line, a perfect end to the film if there ever was.

Casino Royale <----trailer (2006): ****/****

You Only Live Twice

With any of the actors who have played James Bond during their careers, there has been ups and downs, even with the best and coolest 007 around, Sean Connery. He starts off sprinting out of the gates with Dr. No, From Russia With Love, Goldfinger and Thunderball, four of my favorite Bond movies. Then there's 1967's You Only Live Twice, still a good, solid Bond movie, just not on the same level as his other entries.

While in orbit around Earth, an American space shuttle suddenly disappears, swallowed up by another large spacecraft. Just weeks after, a Russian space shuttle suffers the same fate, and both world powers seem on the brink of a nuclear war. In hopes of investigating the disappearances without being hunted down, MI6 agent James Bond (Connery) fakes his own death and goes to work. The last reports of the "abducting" spacecraft were somewhere near Japan so Bond heads there to investigate. The only problem? The spacecraft genuinely seem to have disappeared. There is little to no trace of them, but everything manages to find points to Spectre's involvement. With another American spacecraft launch fast approaching, time is running out for 007.

As a huge fan of movies, James Bond films are like westerns for me. I'm going to find something to like even in the bad ones. A bad Bond movie is still a Bond movie, and therefore better than many spy/espionage flicks. From director Lewis Gilbert, this is one of those middle of the road entries, not a classic and not a complete bomb, just somewhere in between. The franchise visits Japan for the first time, and the locations don't disappoint. Nancy Sinatra's theme -- listen HERE to 'You Only Live Twice' -- is one of the better Bond songs, and was sampled years later by Robbie Williams in Millenium. John Barry's score is as spot-on perfect as always. Even that impossible to duplicate 1960s style is there so what's missing? A franchise for the first time leaning toward a caricature of itself.

Of his six official Bond films and one unofficial (Never Say Never Again), I've always thought this was Connery's weakest effort. He had already stated he wouldn't be back for another film, and the same energy isn't there, both in his performance and the movie on a whole. It's not entirely his fault to be fair. The story has Bond "becoming" Japanese, going through several plastic surgery-like procedures and learning how to be a ninja in two or three days. It's one of the bigger stretches the Bond franchise has taken, and that's saying something. He isn't aided by some of the weaker Bond girls in any of the movies including Aki (Akiko Wakabayashi), a Japanese agent working at his side, Kissy (Mie Hama), his fake wife turned fellow agent, and Helga (Karin Dor), a Spectre assassin.     

Filling out the cast are some oppositely pretty cool performances that help balance out the weaknesses. Japanese actor Tetsuro Tamba plays Tiger Tanaka, Bond's Japanese counterpart who works with him in the investigation. Where some fans had an objection to a black Felix Leiter in Casino Royale, think of this one; an Asian Felix Leiter equivalent. Cool performance, an agent with ninja skills. Donald Pleasence makes a short but effective performance as Ernst Blofeld, the head of Spectre dead-set on taking over the world after the U.S. and Russia destroy themselves. Teru Shimada plays Mr. Osato, a business owner who's a front for Spectre's activities. Before playing Blofeld two films later in Diamonds Are Forever, Charles Gray makes a quick appearance as Henderson, a source Bond uses. And what would a 007 movie be without M (Bernard Lee), Miss Moneypenny (Lois Maxwell) and Q (Desmond Llewelyn)?

What does make 'Twice' memorable is the action, shot on a grand scale that few other Bond films can rival. The most obvious is the finale, Bond, Tiger, Kissy and a small army of ninja agents descending into a Spectre fortress hidden away in a dead volcano. Production designer Ken Adams designed and built a gigantic set that is a sight to behold. The finale is appropriately epic -- making up for some of the lower parts earlier -- as ninjas battle Spectre henchmen. How could that not be cool? An earlier aerial sequence is just as impressive, Bond in a mini-helicopter dueling with four full-size and heavily armed helicopters with some amazing aerial footage. Watch it HERE. There's also a car chase with a memorable payoff featuring the disposal of the nameless baddies, and in the originality department, Gilbert shoots an action chase on foot by helicopter, Bond running and fighting from Spectre henchmen on the top of a wharf warehouse.

Through it all, the problem is that is becomes a caricature of it all. 'Twice' provided much of the ammo for all the Austin Powers spoofs, and produced one of the great Simpsons episodes of all-time in You Only Move Twice featuring super-villain Hank Scorpio. Over the top is a valid description. It's still good, just not as good as the other more classic Connery-Bond pairings.

You Only Live Twice <---trailer (1967): ** 1/2 /****

Goldeneye

By 1995, the James Bond franchise was at a bit of an impasse.  Timothy Dalton had made two 007 flicks, the last one coming in 1989.  Both were solid movies, but audiences didn't necessarily fall in love with the tough, icy cold portrayal that Dalton brought to the franchise. So with six years since the last movie, the franchise turned to a new star, a British actor known mostly up to that point in his career for his starring role in Remington Steele, Pierce Brosnan.

Making his debut as the infamous MI6 agent with a license to kill, Brosnan helped reinvigorate the franchise with 1995's Goldeneye. He only made four movies, ending with one of the worst Bond movies ever in 2002's Die Another Day, and his second and third entries are not the best entries either. It has to do at least a little with no more Ian Fleming novels to base stories off of, but there were other problems, few of them having to do with Brosnan's actual performance. But for starters, Goldeneye is one of the best that has actually gotten more popular over the years thanks to a Nintendo 64 game and more recently, a Nintendo Wii version with Daniel Craig digitally inserted where Brosnan would have been. So, Pierce, welcome to the franchise.

Working a mission with fellow 00 agent, Alec '006' Trevelyan (Sean Bean) at a secret weapons facility deep in Russia, MI6 agent James Bond (Brosnan) barely survives when Russian troops discover his presence in the facility. He struggles knowing Alec was killed in the process, but moves on, and nine years later continues his work. A new mission pops up when a new prototype for a high-powered offensive helicopter is stolen. Bond begins to think it's related to a mysterious Russian arms dealer named Janus who no one ever has actually met. When a Russian radar station is knocked out by a satellite firing an EMP pulse, Bond investigates, trying to find one of the two survivors, a computer technician named Natalya (Izabella Scorupco). But as clues start to mount, Bond begins to wonder. Is his supposedly dead partner Alec somehow involved in this scheme?

Besides the obvious transition from Dalton to Brosnan, Goldeneye is also noteworthy because it's the first Bond movie to be released since the Soviet Union collapsed. The evil Commie Russians were always a prime enemy for Bond to battle. So in a lot of ways, this is a transitional 007 flick. Director Martin Campbell (who would return for Craig's first movie, Casino Royale) brings the right energy to the franchise. There's action, but not too much. It's over the top, but never cartoonish or comic book stylized. There is humor and one-liners, but they're never over-done. Goldeneye is not only a good James Bond movie, but just a good movie overall. Brosnan's later entries struggled to stay in that middle ground, instead bouncing around too much into humor and ridiculous, even stupid, action.

Sean Connery is and always will be the best James Bond. Daniel Craig certainly has the potential to be second best, and of course depending on who you ask, any Bond fan is going to have a personal favorite. Brosnan is an interesting mix because he's a solid mix of all of those previous Bond actors while still putting his own spin on the character. He's smooth and stylish but can be equally cold. He's calmly efficient in his workings, but he is also troubled by his past failures. Much the way Connery did, Brosnan delivers his lines impeccably. James Bond one-liners have a tendency to sound forced and awkward if not handled just the right way, but Brosnan has a way of throwing them off the cuff that feels natural. As the series went forward, Brosnan as Bond was the least of the franchise's troubles. He was never in question, just the movies he starred in.

Just about any good James Bond movie has any number of reasons why it is successful. For me, one of Goldeneye's biggest selling points is the cast in support of Brosnan.  Sean Bean is one of the best and most underrated actors around at playing that villain you can't help but like a little bit. He's charming but with that hint of evil waiting to reveal itself. Scorupco isn't the best Bond girl, but she does have a good chemistry with Brosnan if nothing else. Famke Jannsen is one of the all-time best Bond girls as Xenia, Trevelyan's hench-woman, a killer who literally squeezes her victims to death with her thighs, getting some sort of sexual release in the process. Judi Dench is a great addition as M, head of MI6, Joe Don Baker plays Jack Wade, Bond's CIA counter, Robbie Coltrane is Valentin, a former KGB agent, Gottfried John is the treacherous Russian general, Orumov, Alan Cumming is conniving computer hacker Boris, Tcheky Karyo is Mishkin, Russia's defense minister, and of course, Desmond Llewelyn is Q, Bond's supplier of any and all needed gadgets.

Looking at the storyline this is an interesting addition to the Bond movies. The pre-credit sequence actually has something to do with the rest of the movie, and of all those sequences it is one of the best. But after Tina Turner's Bond song (listen HERE), the action goes by the wayside for most of an hour. Campbell doesn't rush the proceedings, giving Brosnan some room to breathe as Bond, laying out all the characters and situation. He does not disappoint then when the action does come around. A chase through a Russian facility followed by a tank chase through St. Petersburg is nicely executed as is a small-scale showdown with Trevelyan and Xenia on a Russian missile train. The finale at the necessary secret base as Trevelyan tries to rob the Bank of London through Boris' hacking is a great set piece, something you have come to expect from a Bond movie.

Partially because I love the N64 game so much, I probably give the actual movie a higher rating than I might if I was just judging purely on the movie alone. But it is still one of the best James Bond movies, and a fitting intro to Pierce Brosnan as 007.  Not quite a reboot like Casino Royale was, Goldeneye is by far the best Brosnan entry, and one any Bond fan should enjoy.

Goldeneye <---trailer (1995): *** 1/2 /**** 

Casino Royale (1966)

After a four-year gap since Pierce Brosnan's final James Bond movie, MI6 agent 007 returned in a big way in 2006 with Daniel Craig taking over the part of the secret agent.  It was a huge success and served as an excellent reboot for the franchise, quickly climbing into my top 5 all-time Bond flicks.  Why did it work? Like most of the best movies from the franchise, it stuck close to the Ian Fleming source novel that had not been made previously...in a serious fashion at least.  That's where 1966's awful Casino Royale jumps in.

By 1966, star Sean Connery had already completed four 007 movies and had turned James Bond into one of the world's biggest stars.  It was so popular that spoofs started popping up like James Coburn as Derek Flint and Dean Martin as Matt Helm among others.  I get it, strike when the iron is hot, but in a saturated market of spy and espionage movies -- serious and spoof -- don't you want to at least turn out a quality product?  With six different directors shooting different portions of the movie, this was like How the West Was Won: 007 Style.  Besides an occasional laugh here and there, the only redeeming quality is an out-of-this world (if wasted) cast, but more on that later.

All over the world, American, British, Russian, and French agents are turning up dead and their agencies don't have the slightest clue or evidence as to who's pulling off the jobs.  The agency heads turn to retired MI6 agent, Sir James Bond (David Niven), to root out the problem. Bond is a legend in the espionage business, but his best days are behind him, and he questions what has happened to the field he worked so well in, carving out a name and reputation for himself.  He concocts a crazy plan to smoke out whoever is behind the murders; using his name, agents all over the world (Peter Sellers, Ursula Andress, Daliah Lavi, Joanna Pettet, Woody Allen, Terence Cooper) will see if working as bait draws the mastermind out of his lair. The plan might be too good though because SMERSH and mastermind Le Chiffre (Orson Welles) send agents to kill the original and still best James Bond around.

Now anyone familiar with Casino Royale -- Fleming's novel or the Craig movie -- knows that the plot described there is nothing like the book or the movie.  Bond's effort to detain Le Chiffre at the baccarat table is handled in a scene that takes about 10 minutes, not an entire movie.  Using other spy spoofs as an example, there is clearly potential here.  A character as ripe for the picking as James Bond is hard to mess up in the humor department, but this movie is a mess.  For all the subtle, perfectly delivered lines that pepper the script, there's huge scenes of excess of physical and slapstick humor that even Mel Brooks must have shaken his head at.  The finale is the worst of all with one of the 14 directors obviously not knowing where to cut things off.

Let's start with the crazy amount of talent involved here behind the camera, including John Huston (also playing M in one scene) and Robert Parrish among four other less notable names.  The writing too includes Sellers, Billy Wilder, and Joseph Heller.  How did this much talent put together such an awful movie? On top of the cast listed above, there's also parts for Deborah Kerr, William Holden, Jean-Paul Belmondo, Peter O'Toole (on-screen for about 6 seconds), Charles Boyer, George Raft, Jacqueline Bisset, and Barbara Bouchet. What's worse is that the cast appears to be having a blast making the picture.  It's just that much worse that what they're working with is beneath all of their talent.  Bit parts and extended cameos for almost all of these names limit actual on-screen time, but just in terms of name power, this movie is impressive.

The only star that I thought was legitimately good was David Niven as retired 007, Sir James Bond, enjoying his retirement in an isolated English country villa only to be thrust back into the world of espionage.  Because it is an older Bond, Niven has some fun with the part, poking fun at Connery's portrayal especially.  He gets some good laughs from his constant curiosity of how all secret agents have become sex fiends, leaving lonely, beautiful women in every city all over the Earth.  He shakes his head at all the changes he sees in the life of a spy only to embrace them once he's back into it.  A professional plain and simple, Niven makes the most of the material, rising above it to deliver a worthwhile performance.

So this movie was bad, downright awful at times, okay? I am scraping the bottom of the barrel here looking for something to write about.  Most of the movie was just so stupid and dumb I can't even complain.  It's so bad it is surreal at times.  So what can I recommend? If nothing else with this overabundance of characters, the script calls for a long list of beautiful actresses who are required to wear slinky outfits and do little else.  Kerr, Lavi, Pettet, Andress, and Bouchet are all half-naked for about 90% of the movie, and that's all I've got.  So stupidly bad, this movie has to be seen to be believed.

Casino Royale <---trailer (1966): */****

Thunderball

Catching up with all the Roger Moore and Timothy Dalton James Bond movies I'd never seen straight through over the years, I watched each and every one last year, reviewing many of them here.  Some were good, one or two classic Bond, and the others pretty bad.  I came to like Moore and Dalton as 007, and I've always been a fan of Pierce Brosnan and more recently Daniel Craig.  But no matter how many more Bond movies there are to be made, Sean Connery will and always will be the best James Bond around, including one of his best entries and one of my favorites, 1965's Thunderball.

This would be Connery's fourth movie in the franchise and also the first one after the hugely successful and still very popular Goldfinger, regarded by many as the best movie in the entire franchise.  So right away, the stakes are raised.  Director Terence Young does not disappoint here with that perfect mix of action and humor, exotic locations, gorgeous Bond girls, and crazy gadgets.  It is an underrated Connery Bond movie, often lost in the shadow of Goldfinger, but it is a strong example of what the Bond movies were before Moore came along and turned it into a more cartoonish series.  It is certainly better than the next two Connery entries and remains one of my favorites.

A NATO plane transporting two nuclear bombs has gone off the radar and disappeared, and it's not long before SPECTRE has delivered an ultimatum to the world; deliver $280 million dollars in a week or both bombs will be detonated, one in an American city, the other in Europe.  MI6 calls in all their 00 agents to investigate with James Bond (Connery) sent to scenic Nassau in the Bahamas.  He's following a hunch that the sister of the pilot of the missing plane may know something.  The girl's name is Domino (Claudine Auger), the mistress of a mysteriously rich man, Emilio Largo (Adolfo Celi), who owns a luxurious seaside villa where the missing bombs may have been hidden.  But with time running out, can Bond find the bombs' location and save thousands of lives in the process?

Besides the obvious positive of Connery playing Bond, the earliest entries into the Bond franchise -- mainly the 1960s movies -- are just better movies overall.  They have that great retro feel to them, giving a window into a past decade that just can't be duplicated.  Of course, the Nassau locations don't hurt in the least too.  If a plan to take over the world can be feasible, these earlier movies buy into that.  The Connery movies are serious without taking themselves too seriously. There is that humor throughout with some great one-liners, but never too many of them.  Add in John Barry's phenomenal Bond theme and an all-around great soundtrack (genuinely one of the series' best) with Tom Jones' title song (listen HERE) and you've got a winner all around.

With any series where multiple actors have played the same role, you're going to get varying opinions on who was the best.  A majority seems to agree that Connery was the best Bond, myself included.  If possible, you could take bits and pieces from Lazenby, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan and Craig to make the perfect Bond.  On his own, Connery does a fine job.  He's tough as hell, able to fight his way out of any situation he gets himself into.  He's funny, able to throw one-liners whenever needed like 'I think he got the point' after killing a henchman with a harpoon.  And because he is the original ladies man, Connery is smooth with the ladies.  By Thunderball, he's got the character down to an art and knows what works and doesn't work.  And through all the craziness Bond movies offer, that lead has to be good, and Connery's the best.

For his supporting cast, it's one of the more underrated ones.  The SPECTRE villains were always great, and Celi's Largo certainly qualifies.  Unlike later Bond villains, he's not a lunatic, just a mastermind able to coordinate highly-involved plans with split second timing.  As for the Bond girls, Thunderball has quite the trio, starting with Auger as the very sexy Domino (she should just wear the black and white bikini at all times) and continuing with another Italian beauty Luciana Paluzzi as Fiona Volpe, a curvy SPECTRE assassin, and Martine Beswick as Paula, Bond's Nassau assistant.  And what would a 007 movie be without the support staff including Bernard Lee as M, Lois Maxwell as Moneypenny, Desmond Llewelyn as Q, and Rik Van Nutter as Felix Leiter, CIA agent and Bond accomplice. A typically solid supporting cast for James Bond.

Where Goldfinger started the trend of the slam-bang finish, Thunderball kicks the door wide open with its finale, an extended underwater sequence as Largo's henchmen fend off the attacks from American/MI6 agents, harpoons, knives and weapons galore available.  Watch the whole thing HERE if interested. There is some great stuntwork on display in the underwater battle, and it provides one of the better endings for a Bond movie.  Not quite Goldfinger overall, but Thunderball is still one of the best.

Thunderball <---trailer (1965): ****/****     

Netflix review #24: License to Kill

It's official, I've seen every James Bond movie from Dr. No to Quantum of Solace. I haven't watched the Pierce Brosnan entries straight through since their initial release so I won't rank them all just yet, but with 1989's License to Kill now checked off, I've seen 'em all.

What set the two Timothy Dalton Bond movies apart from the rest was that they weren't content to go with the status quo. The Moore movies started off strong but got too jokey, too satirical by the end of the run. The Living Daylights righted the ship with a great action/spy movie, and LtK expands on the James Bond character. Several posts at IMDB talk about LtK as a sort of spiritual sequel to On Her Majesty's Secret Service, and it's hard to disagree with.

Bond is on the vengeance trail here, going up against a drug dealer, not Ernst Blofeld trying to ransom off the world. On the way to old CIA buddy Felix Leiter's wedding, Bond joins Leiter (David Hedison) in an effort with the DEA to scoop up infamous drug kingpin Franz Sanchez (Robert Davi) who comes into jurisdiction for a quick snatch and grab job. Watch it here if curious. But when Sanchez is caught, he offers $2 million to anyone who can help him escape. Of course, there's a treacherous agent in the midst who helps Sanchez escape. The drug dealer begins his own path of revenge, maiming Leiter and killing his new wife.

Looking to avenge his friend and wife, Bond resigns from MI6 when he's told to take no part in the case against Sanchez. With no limits on his actions, Bond can move freely and act as viciously as the men he's chasing. It's good to see Bond go out on his own here instead of being tied down by MI6's rules and regulations. To a certan point we've seen similar stories in other movies, like Quantum of Solace, but this is the first time he's completely on his own although Q (Desmond Llewelyn) does show up and offer his support with a few gadgets. It's always great to see Q, especially here where he's allowed out of his lab.

On the vengeance trail, Bond tries to infiltrate Sanchez's inner circle, pitting the dealer against his most loyal men. It's as he gets closer to him that Bond discovers a bigger plan at work, a system of organizing the drug cartels from the east and west. They've developed a new way of transporting heroin, a system that makes the drug impossible to detect. It does provide for a great closing sequence with four oil tankers transporting the heroin racing down a mountain road, Bond doing his best to slow them down.

As Sanchez, Davi is a good if not great villain. He's not a maniacal hothead, instead a businessman with a plan to make millions. Sanchez insists on loyalty from his men and pays well to get it so when Bond shows up saying his men are looking to betray him the obvious problems arise. As for his henchmen, they're some of the best. Always a reliable bad guy/sidekick, Don Stroud is Heller, a mysterious American with a past in the armed forces, and a young Benicio Del Toro makes a frightening appearance as Dario, an ex-contra who does Sanchez's dirty work. Del Toro is only in a handful of scenes, but with some crazy eyes and his maniacal laughing makes the most of his smaller part.

On to the Bond girls, one good, one not so good. A pre-Law and Order Carrie Lowell plays Pam Bouvier, a former Army pilot who worked as one of Leiter's informants. Somewhat wooden in the part, Lowell is good in the part because she's not the helpless Bond girl who constantly needs 007 to save her. She's tough, able to handle herself, although when it comes down to it, she's got the hots for Bond. As for the not so good, Talisa Soto plays Lupe, Sanchez's girlfriend who wants out. Does she look good? Of course. Does her character serve a purpose? Not really. Others in the supporting cast include Anthony Zerbe and for the must-have odd casting in a Bond movie, Wayne Newton.

Unfortunately for the Bond series, this was the last movie in the bunch for six years until 1995's Goldeneye with Pierce Brosnan taking over the title role. LtK wasn't received that well in the U.S. at the box office, but I enjoyed it as much for a change of pace as anything. I went into the two Timothy Dalton movies with somewhat low expectations, but I can say now I think he's one of the better Bonds behind Connery and Craig.

License to Kill, <----trailer (1989): ***/****

The Living Daylights

Fans of James Bond seem to be pretty mixed when it comes to feelings about the Roger Moore era. I was surprised as anyone, but I ended up liking most of the Moore Bonds. They're not classics other than The Spy Who Loved Me, but they're very entertaining if at times too campy. I moved on this week to the brief two-film Timothy Dalton stint as everyone's favorite 00 agent with 1987's The Living Daylights.

Just like the movies, I'm working my way through Ian Fleming's Bond books and short stories. And with just one movie, I can say Dalton is closest of all the Bond actors to what Fleming originally intended with the character. Lost amidst all the cool gadgets, gorgeous women and beautiful locations is that James Bond is a cold character, an agent who will stop at nothing to get the job done no matter who or what gets in his way. All the actors, Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Brosnan and most recently Craig, put their own spin on 007. But Dalton in his first movie gets Bond back to his roots, an efficient, effective spy who can be ruthless in his methods at times.

The Living Daylights across the board tries to get back to the basics. There's no arch-villain trying to take over the world here with some harebrained scheme to ransom off the Earth with nuclear bombs. Instead, Bond is helping a Russian general, Koskov (Jeroen Krabbe) defect or so it seems at first. The KGB kidnaps the General only after he reveals a Russian plan to start knocking off MI6's agents. But it all seems too easy and the only trail leads to a Russian cello player, Kara Milovy (Maryam d'Abo). Bond begins to unravel a plan that includes diamonds, opium smuggling, a multimillion arms deal, and even the Mujahideen, the Afghan freedom fighters.

After some initial confusion with backstabs and double-crosses, TLD finds it's groove really quickly. With a new actor in the lead role, the opening pre-credit sequence is always interesting to see. This is one of the best as three MI6 agents go through a training exercise in Gibraltar. We don't know which one is Bond until a fourth agent appears and starts killing the others. Check it out here courtesy of what else? Youtube. Without the general overdone jokey feel of some of the Moore movies, TLD gets to focus on what most Bond fans want to see, the action and story. The last 40 minutes is basically one long extended sequence with a raging battle on an airstrip as the Mujahideen, Russian soldiers, and Bond duke it out for a plane filled with bags of raw opium and a bomb.

Here's the finale of the plane fight as Bond fights with henchmen Necros (Andreas Wisniewski) at the back end of a cargo plane. It's got some of the best stuntwork I've yet to see in the Bond series. I can't say enough about the action in general. Directing his fourth movie from the series, John Glen clearly knows what he's doing by now with this the best by far of the quartet.

Behind Dalton, the supporting cast might lack some of the name recognition of the other movies, but it's a more than solid group. d'Abo is cute as the Bond girl here, but it's not a particularly memorable Bond girl. Joining Krabbe and Wisniewski in the villain department, Joe Don Baker gets to ham it up as Brad Whittaker, an ex-West Point cadet booted for cheating now making money as a worldwide arms dealer. Fans of the Brosnan movies should recognize him several years before he played CIA agent Jack Wade. John Rhys-Davies has a brief part as Pushkin, a Russian general being played by all sides. It's not much, but Rhys-Davies is the type of actor who gives a movie credibility just by being there. Then there's Art Malik as Kamran Shah, a Mujahideen fighter teaming up with Bond. In the years since 9/11, it's still odd to see the Afghan resistance portrayed the way they are, especially knowing how history developed and changed as the Afghans went from allies to enemies.

Going in I wasn't sure what to expect from the Dalton opener because I usually heard negative reviews, but I got wrapped up in The Living Daylights right away. I love how Dalton leaves his own mark on Bond, not settling for a rehashed version of Connery or Moore, and it's a Bond movie at least remotely based in reality. Here's the trailer and the title song by A-Ha, not one of the best themes but not bad either. Composer John Barry doesn't disappoint either, turning in another memorable score with all the recognizable music with some new twists.

A View to a Kill

Well,l it took me awhile as I rationed out the post-Connery James Bond movies, but with A View to a Kill I've now watched all the Bond movies through the Roger Moore years. I'll write a post ranking just the Moore entries in the next couple of weeks hopefully, but here goes with AVTAK.

Reading critics' reviews and the message boards at IMDB, always good for a laugh, I was caught off guard by how much hate this movie has gotten since its release. It's in that middle ground of Bond movies, not great/classic like Goldfinger but not horrible like Moonraker or Die Another Day, it's average but still entertaining. The complaints are all over the place on this one, some I couldn't help but notice while watching the movie. Here's just a few; Roger Moore at 57 is too old for the part, partially agree, Grace Jones is one of the worst Bond girls/henchmen in the series (agreed), Tanya Roberts is annoying (yeah, but did you look at her?), and the general feel of the movie is too jokey.

The Moore Bond movies wasted no time setting a different tone than the Connery ones. Sometimes they did go for the joke instead of just making a good movie. In 'A View' there's a couple examples. In the bland already seen this pre-credit sequence, Bond escapes Russian ski troops, improvising a piece of shrapnel as a snowboard. Cue a 'California Girls' cover which is too much and distracts from the impressive stuntwork. They couldn't just leave well enough alone.

In his 7th outing, Moore is probably too old for the part, but he knows the character pretty well by now so it's not distracting. Maybe he didn't do his own stunts, which does provide some very obvious back projection shots, but all the Bond actors at some point used stunt men. That's part of the fun. Does anyone really think Moore, even in his early 40s would have completed the firetruck chase through San Francisco hanging off the ladder? I lean toward 'no' on that. What is a problem with the character and not specifically Moore is that the wit and one-liners have almost completely been done away with. As much as I enjoyed the movie, it's those omissions that generally feel like this is any number of 80s action movies and not a James Bond adventure.

The diabolical plan here is a timely one as Christopher Walken's Max Zorin tries to destroy Sillicon Valley with a man-made earthquake. With Silicon Valley out of the way, Zorin Industry can monopolize the world's microchip production, making billions of dollars. Walken is the best thing about the movie. He's the perfect actor for the part of a Bond villain, a quirky actor already, his Zorin is the result of Nazi steroid testing on pregnant women. The only side effect? The babies grow up into psychotics. It's a great part for Walken, and hops right into my top 5 all-time Bond villains.

Unfortunately, the supporting cast leaves much to be desired. Grace Jones is downright scary as May Day, Zorin's trainer/bodyguard/hired killer/girlfriend. The character reminded me of Famke Janssen in Goldeneye, but Janssen had some femininity to her, a lot of it come to think of it. Jones looks like a muscular dude and really doesn't bring much to the character. Tanya Roberts, while quite the looker, was not the best actress around. It looks like Denise Richards studied this part before her role in The World Is Not Enough.

Some other positives include one of the better themes after a couple of forgettable songs, this time around with Duran Duran handling the duty. The song as is is a good one, but it's even better as an instrumental with John Barry contributing one of his best scores. Good action here too, including a Parisian car chase that ends with an unnecessary joke with the car, a good shootout in an abandoned mine, and the finale on the Golden Gate Bridge.

So like I said, not a classic and not a dud. A View to A Kill is somewhere in between, an average to above average Bond movie. Of course, if you ask me, an average Bond movie is better than most action/adventure movies. Next up? I'm looking at you Timothy Dalton.

Netflix review #19: Never Say Never Again

It's the red-headed stepchild of the Bond series that no one's quite sure what to make of. But it's got Sean Connery back in the role that he made famous so it's got to be worth mentioning, right? That movie is 1983's Never Say Never Again, an unofficial entry into the James Bond series released the same year as Octopussy.

Making his 7th appearance as OO7, Connery is back after a 12-year absence since Diamonds Are Forever. Roger Moore had capably filled in his shoes for six movies already, but for whatever reason, Connery returned to the role. If you're thinking you've let some new, original Bond story slip by you, don't get excited. 'Never' follows the same storyline as Thunderball, one of my personal top 5 Bond movies. There's differences from the original, it's not a scene-for-scene remake, but I wouldn't recommend watching them back to back.

That was one of my issues with the remake. If Connery's coming back as James Bond, why would you remake one of his movies? And one that didn't need to be remade at that. Maybe the creators and producers were going for the comfort food factor, audiences liked the original and they'll like this one because we tell them to. If it was a stand alone movie with no original to compare it to, it would get higher marks, but unfortunately it isn't nearly as good as Thunderball.

The movie starts with a good opening sequence (with Bond theme inserted) as Bond tries to rescue a kidnapped princess from a heavily-guarded South American compound. The OO's have been deactivated, but now M (Edward Fox) is forced to bring them back into action. Two nuclear warheads have been stolen by SPECTRE, and NATO is given one week to pay up or have two key locations wiped off the face of the Earth. Clues lead Bond to a man named Largo (Klaus Maria Brandauer) where he begins his globe-trotting adventures that take him to the Bahamas, the French Riviera, and North Africa.

Connery slides back into the part nicely although he does look a little too old for the part, much like Moore did in his later efforts. But even then, I'm nitpicking, it's always fun to see the best Bond around back in action. As good as the others are, Moore, Daniel Craig, Pierce Brosnan, Timothy Dalton and George Lazenby, Connery will always be the best. In the rivals department, Barbara Carrera plays Latima Flush, a SPECTRE killer who revels in her job. Maybe a little crazy, she loves nothing more than finishing off her kill.

Brandauer as Largo is more back to the villains of the Connery movies. No supervillains here, just some royally bad dudes working for SPECTRE looking to cause mayhem and chaos around the world. Max von Sydow even has a small part as Ernest Blofeld, but it's only a scene or two. Depending on whether you count 'Never' as an official Bond movie, Kim Basinger is right at the top as one of the hottest Bond girls. Made in 1983, this movie gets away with more in the way of nudity than the 60s movies did. We're not talking gratuitous nude shots every scene, but Basinger spends most of the movie in short/sheer/see-through outfits. No complaints of course, just pointing it out.

I could stop there with the cast, but there's some other parts worth mentioning. Q is played by Alec McCowen and puts a different spin on Bond's gadget master, and Fox breathes some life into M. For a trivia question, it's Bernie Casey and not Geofrey Wright that played the first black Felix Leiter. And in one odd choice of casting, Rowan Atkinson, later Mr. Bean, plays an embassy officer working with Bond.

Where Thunderball is remembered for some great action scenes, especially the underwater finale with spear guns, the remake falls short. One no-holds barred fistfight is a good one, seen here, as a recuperating Bond takes on a much bigger, stronger SPECTRE killer. A chase late in the movie as Bond runs from Latima and her henchmen has some cool stunts s well including a fiery end. But overall, something's missing. Parts are too tongue in cheek while others just fall flat. And it does hurt when the James Bond theme can't be used. It's easily one of the most recognizable things about the series.

The DVD is somewhat overpriced at almost $15, but it's a good package. Widescreen presentation looks clean all the way through, but the only special feature is a short trailer. An average and unofficial Bond movie worth seeing for Connery's return and Kim Basinger, I'd say rent Never Say Never Again before buying it.

Never Say Never Again (1983): ** 1/2 /****

Octopussy

I can't help but think that Ian Fleming giggled when he thought of the title "Octopussy" for his final Bond novel. I'd like to think the creators got a chuckle out of the name too when the movie was made. All I know is that anytime it's mentioned around guys, old and young, it gets a laugh. We're lucky then that 1983's Octopussy is a really strong entry into the Bond story.

One of Bonds' fellow agents, 009, has been murdered in East Berlin but not before leaving a clue at the British Embassy; a perfectly made faberge egg but it's a duplicate. MI6 thinks duplicates are being made and auctioned off in order to fund a terrorist attack. Following the trail of one of the buyers, Bond discovers a smuggling ring that leads to bigger things. The woman at the head of the smugglers, Octopussy, may not be completely evil but it looks like she's being played by a partner and a rogue Russian general. It's only at the last minute that Bond figures out their plan, blow up a nuclear bomb on an American Air Force base in Germany and in the world-wide chaos that follows, the Russian army sweeps across Europe.

After the god-awful Moonraker, the Bond series was back on the track with 1981's For Your Eyes Only and then this 1983 entry. I try not to compare the Bond movies, especially right after I watch one, but I can't help it. Behind The Spy Who Loved Me, this is easily the 2nd best Roger Moore Bond movie. I'm appreciating Moore a little more with each movie. A lot of Bond fans don't approve of him or even dislike him, but I started to like his movies more when I realized 'hey, this guy isn't Sean Connery.' He puts a completely different spin on the character, and by Octo, his 6th of 7, he knows the character in and out.

One of the reasons this gets a high ranking for me is that it's somewhat based in reality. The villains intend to steal millions and take over the world, but their plan at least makes sense. No huge space lasers or anything of the sort. In her second Bond movie but as a different character, the gorgeous Maud Adams is older than your typical Bond girl as Octopussy, but that's what is interesting about the character. It stretched the imagination too much that a 40-some Moore could so easily seduce so many women half his age. Adams and Moore are a more likely pair. The character Octopussy is a bad guy of sorts, but she's in that middle ground. Not evil but not good either. She is a smuggler after all.

Other villains include Kamal Khan (Louis Jourdan), a smuggler always looking for an easy buck, and General Orlov (Steven Berkoff), a power hungry Russian general who wants the Soviets to show off their power and not negotiate with NATO. Khan is the real villain here with his lead henchman, Gobinda (Kabir Bedi). More than a little wooden, Kristina Wayborn plays Magda, a woman seemingly working for all sides. And what would a Bond film be without some quirky casting of a villain or henchmen like Jaws or Oddjob? Here we get two knife-wielding acrobatic twins, played by David and Tony Meyers.

One of the keys to a good Bond movie is the pre-credit action sequence. It doesn't have to be great, but it surely can derail the movie. Octopussy's goes right into my top 5, check it out here. The action across the board is top-notch here, including a car chase through the crowded streets of Delhi and the crazy finale as Bond jumps on-board a small plane before it takes off. It's such a cool stunt with the plane clearly flying several thousand feet up that you won't even care that it's a stuntman. Props to that stunt man. Of course, I can't find any video for it so I'll say just go see it.

Like the other good Moore entries, this one doesn't try too hard to be an action movie or a tongue-in cheek spoof with a ton of forced humor. Entertaining from start to finish with Moore at the top of his game at the head of a great cast of Bond girls, villains, and henchmen. Definitely check Octopussy out, and yes, I am giggling like a little boy as I type that. Here's the trailer.

Moonraker

So after watching four Roger Moore Bond movies, I’ve come to a conclusion. I’ve really come to like Moore as 007. He’s no Connery, but he brings a different edge to the character. My conclusion though is this; Moore is a good Bond, his movies aren’t. This comes after I finished watching Moonraker, identified as one of the worst in the series, so take whatever I write with a grain of salt.

Going into the Bond movie, you know what you’re getting. You’ll see lots of action, great one-liners, beautiful girls, crazy super villains, and beautiful locations. The series isn’t about taking on issues or solving the world’s problems. But even knowing that, Moonraker pushes the limits of credibility. The villain hopes to wipe out the world’s population and with a group of “perfect” candidates will repopulate the Earth. Where are these people waiting while the rest of the world is being slaughtered you might ask? In a space city in outer space that Earth’s radar can’t spot.

The plot builds to the showdown on this space city with astronauts shooting lasers at each other. It’s like the end of Thunderball with the underwater shootout with spear guns, except you know, not cool. Made in 1979, Moonraker was most likely trying to capitalize on the Star Wars craze, but it just doesn’t work. The special effects look cheesey no matter how you cut it.

As for the other problems, there are a few biggies with the casting. Bond villains are usually roles that actors have a lot of fun with, think of Telly Savalas, Robert Shaw, Christopher Lee among several others. But Michael Lonsdale as multibillionaire Drax is as bland as they come. The character has no personality as he speaks in monotone throughout. You never know his motivation, and he’s not that evil so you’re never that scared of him or what he’s capable of. The other problem is with the Bond girl. These roles are often just eye candy, but Lois Chiles as Holly Goodhead leaves very little of a memorable impression. I have a feeling they thought of the clever last name and stopped there when dealing with the character.

There’s always something to recommend with Bond movies so I can say Moore is solid here, throwing one-liners left and right while dispatching henchmen. Richard Kiel returns from The Spy Who Loved Me as Jaws, the gigantic killer who provides a worthy adversary for 007. Also, the action is good, including two boat chases, one in Venetian channels in Italy. These Moore Bond movies really seem to love a good boat chase. The other is an exciting fight on air-trams in Rio de Janiero, seen here.

Those minor positives aside, this one was bad almost from start to finish. By the last 45 minutes, I found myself fast-forwarding and even during the climactic action scenes. It wasn’t as bad as Die Another Day, but it was close. I definitely will be steering clear of this one in my future Bond viewings. I can always go play "Aztec" in N64's Goldeneye if I feel the need.