rate the last movie you saw

[Paul MacLean]

I can't accept the argument that Dalton "rescued" the series since TLD did not duplicate the box office peak we saw with "Octopussy" a few years earlier and we all know how much LTK tanked at the box office is the US.

The Dalton films may have grossed less than Moore's, but artistically speaking, I feel Dalton did indeed "rescue" the 007 movies.

I like the Moore films and they can be a lot of fun...but they strayed into the realm of sheer stupidity at times. I know that Bond adventures are fanciful to begin with, but some of the cartoon-like moments in the Moore movies -- the gondala driving through the city square, Jaws and his girlfriend, Dr, Katenga blowing-up like a balloon -- were ridiculous, preposterous gags that seemed more at home in the 1967 Casino Royale. They didn't ruin the films for me, but some of those moments still make me cringe.

Also, with the exception of FYEO, the Moore films are, to me, "Bond lite". I remain adamant that real Bond films must have a hard edge to some degree -- even when dealing with fanciful notions like private planes gassing everyone in Fort Knox, or Blofeld dispatching teenage girls to poison the world.

I'll still take Moonraker and Man With The Golden Gun over LTK any day of the week.

I like Moonraker a lot, but rate MWTGG the second-worst 007 film ever (Goldeneye being the worst). Some of the "Moore-isms" did hang over TLD, but Dalton's darker portrayal of 007 was refreshing to me, and believable as a man who kills for a living, drinks straight vodka and lives on the edge.

I can understand if LTK is too dark and caustic for some, but at least its tone is consistent, which I can't say is true for most of the Moore films (or Diamonds Are Forever either, which is when the era of goofy "Bond lite" really began).

[Eric Paddon]

I'm thinking back to my recollections of how the Fleming "purists" who wrote all the Bond movie books I remember devouring before Dalton made his debut were just going through all kinds of palpitations when Dalton debuted. Thinking back to how they were also the biggest boosters of Kevin McClory and NSNA simply because *that* was "anti-Moore" (even though NSNA is clearly on all levels an inferior movie to "Octopussy" as is Connery's performance compared to Moore that year IMO) also weighed heavily in my mind at the time I will admit. There was something of a "thank God the Moore era is over" quality that I will admit I found off-putting at the time. And their enthusiasm for LTK as the greatest Bond movie ever seemingly also kind of drove that home for me. It's more of a sense of how I read the climate back then. (These authors were so anti-Moore that one of them went even so far as to imply that the idiotic "delicatessen in stainless steel" line in the FYEO teaser was Moore's idea!)

I've always felt that Moore's lighter approach was needed for that point in time, especially as an antidote to the endless parade of cynical, dark spy movies of the 70s where the good guys were always being revealed as the bad guys etc. At least when you went to a Bond movie you weren't going to be subjected to Three Days of The Condor style stuff. Sure, the silliness in the scripts got out of hand but I tend to see it more as a reflection of the times with hindsight. "Octopussy" I think ended up providing the best blend overall (FYEO suffers from a poor score and also an unappealing leading lady IMO).

Ironically, I liked "Goldeneye" a lot save for its awful score. To me, it represented a step back in the right direction after LTK.

[Paul MacLean]

The Rocketeer

I probably wouldn't have bought this on DVD; my copy is one of many "hand-me-downs" I got during one of my annual visits to Andy's, when he was cleaning out the attic (thanks again Andy)!

I had forgotten how terrific this movie is. It is perhaps not quite a "great" picture, but it is outstanding summer popcorn fare, and tons of fun, with a charismatic hero, a beautiful love interest, great villains, gangsters, espionage intrigue, action and thrills -- what more do you want?

Bill Campbell shines as the reluctant hero, an ordinary guy thrust into extraordinary circumstances, with whom the viewer easily identifies. Timothy Dalton gives one of the greatest performances of his career as the villain Neville Sinclair, who is obviously modeled on Errol Flynn (both Flynn's suave actor persona, as well as the rumors that he was a Nazi spy). Dalton deliciously plays it to the hilt, with a smarmy, slippery elegance. Yet Campbell is so strong in the lead, that he never is upstaged by the villain (something you couldn't say about The Rocketeer's box office rival that summer, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves). And on top of that you have Paul Sorvino as the film's other villain (though one who proves not so dastardly as we're initially led to expect).

Gorgeous photography, art direction and use of locations evoke a nostalgic picture of pre-war Los Angeles and the once-rural San Fernando Valley (and its expanses of hilly citrus groves, sadly now long-gone), while Frank Lloyd Wright's "Ennis Brown" house effectively serves as Neville Sinclair's art deco domicile. Action scenes are for the most part terrific...though a bit clunky and slow at times (like the nightclub sequence). The evil henchman's make-up is also over-the-top and (like something out of Dick Tracy!) and sticks-out like a sore thumb in what is otherwise a fairly realistic movie (at least visually). James Horner's score is fantastic, and one of his most inspired, bursting with with thrilling action cues and gorgeous, soaring themes.

Despite its 1991 release date, to me The Rocketeer was really one of the last "1980s" adventure films, and is a summation of everything that made those 80s escapist flicks so satisfying -- wholesome protagonists, terrific effects work and action sequences, and great scoring (how I miss great scores ).

[AndyDursin]

Great review Paul! (and you're welcome, too!)

One of my fondest movie-going memories was seeing this film up in Toronto with my parents -- in a big, old, gorgeous theater that had a balcony but was also refitted for THX sound. An amazing experience, made even more enjoyable by the multiple kids who kept tripping on the top step -- from the same birthday party -- with a large popcorn that went flying each time. Can't remember the name of the theater, or even if it's still in existence today, but it was spectacular.

I love this movie too. Jennifer Connelly looking gorgeous, soft and curvy; Horner with one of his greatest scores; and the movie with a great throwback spirit, like you said, to that era, including Errol Flynn and company. Dalton and Sorvino were terrific, and Sorvino's rousing final line got a big round of applause as memory serves.

No, they don't make them like this anymore...sadly.

BTW that Dick Tracy-esque make-up was a homage to Rondo Hatton, a real-life '40s heavy --

[Jedbu]

THE ROCKETEER was the film that re-opened the El Capitan Theater in Hollywood, after Disney gave it a multi-million dollar make-over, including a new marquee, a theater organ and one of the most gorgeous proscenium curtains I have ever seen. I went opening weekend and discovered that the balcony actually had the best sound-the theater is not that deep and the rake of the balcony actually is better when the theater is full (which it was that day and for when BEAUTY AND THE BEAST opened later that year) yet the sound was a bit muffled if you sat on the ground floor under the balcony.

As for the film, I thought Campbell, Connolly (Zo-wie!), Arkin, Dalton and Sorvino were terrific, with my personal favorite being Kerry O'Quinn as Howard Hughes. They really got the look of the characters from the comics and the graphic novels just right, and I have often wondered how the real Bettie Page felt about those comics and Connolly's astounding resemblance to her in the film. Horner's score is one of his finest, from that period just before he became THE go-to composer for everything. Lastly, the poster that advertised the film is one of the greatest ever designed-Art Deco to the nth degree with a gorgeous color palette and yet simple with just the image of the Rocketeer. One of the most collectable movie posters of the last 30 years.

[Monterey Jack]

"The Rocke-who...?"



Boy-oh-boy, to discover peak-era Connelly at the age of seventeen in the summer of '91...

And the movie is a'ight, too.

[Monterey Jack]

Hey, remember when summer superhero movies were as much FUN as The Rocketeer?

[sprocket]

I have to share the love for Rocketeer - and Jennifer.

If I remember correctly, it didn't do very well on release, even though I went to see it a couple of times in the cinema. It was playing in the newly renovated Imperial Theater here in Montreal, where all the prestige blockbuster pictures went (Star Trek: the Wrath of Khan, Young Sherlock Holmes, The Untouchables, etc.)

It's a shame that this theater isn't used very much anymore (I think it is only open for festivals now). Besides, the sound system would blow out my ears these days ... can't go to Mad Max:Fury Road because of that, either.

[BobaMike]

Lastly, the poster that advertised the film is one of the greatest ever designed-Art Deco to the nth degree with a gorgeous color palette and yet simple with just the image of the Rocketeer. One of the most collectable movie posters of the last 30 years.

I agree! Love the poster- have an original hanging up behind our couch in the tv room!

The movie is great too- one of my favorite Horner scores (looking forward to the intrada expanded one that will happen eventually, and Jennifer Connelly= yowza.

[Monterey Jack]

I've got to show The Rocketeer to my sixteen-year-old nephew one of these days...maybe telling him it's "from the director of Captain America!" will entice him...or I could just show him that Connelly gif.

[AndyDursin]

AVENGERS AGE OF ULTRON
6/10

At some point during the carnage of THE AVENGERS: AGE OF ULTRON, Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) quips “none of this makes any sense.” Indeed, Joss Whedon’s sure-fire box-office behemoth doesn’t need to make any sense, because the film pushes enough buttons to satisfy most 8-year-olds and comic book fans, but does so in such a workmanlike, uninspired fashion that it’s hard to imagine most audiences holding the same affection for the sequel as they did its predecessor.

“Ultron” finds Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr. again, albeit without acknowledging the ending of “Iron Man 3") playing Frankenstein as his dream of building an artificial intelligence to guard the planet backfires spectacularly, the result being the creation of a robot (voiced by James Spader) who decides the safest solution for Earth is exterminating humanity altogether. Iron Man’s brash decision making sends the Avengers off on a globe-trotting adventure to stop Ultron before it’s too late, meeting – in the process – the Maximoffs, a pair of super-powered twins in Quicksilver (Aaron-Taylor Johnson) and the Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen), both of whom want revenge for the death of their parents, who perished in a blitz where Stark’s military weapons were utilized.

Marked by the blandest, most washed-out cinematography I’ve ever seen in a film of this type, “Age of Ultron” was written and directed by Whedon, repeating his chores from the original, though this picture feels as if it was assembled by a committee: a quip here, a lengthy dialogue exposition there, an occasional action sequence, a scene designed to give one of the team “something to do,” a visit to an international locale (to better goose the foreign grosses), then an interminable finale populated with repetitive fisticuffs and special effects.

The problem here is how by-the-numbers “Age of Ultron” is – the whole enterprise has a shocking lack of dramatic stakes, with various actors (like Downey and Hemsworth) filling out the remainder of their contractual duties and even Whedon doing a surprisingly poor job cultivating the film’s story. The creation of Ultron happens faster than Boris Karloff getting on-screen in James Whale’s 1931 classic, while the Maximoff twins – mutants who aren’t branded mutants here because of their shared film ownership with Fox and the “X-Men” gang – never become an interesting presence in Whedon’s simplistic plot. An attempt at developing a romance between Scarlet Johansson’s Black Widow and Mark Ruffalo’s David Banner feels totally forced, and a sojourn to the heartland seems to exist solely to give Hawkeye a reason for being (on the plus side, it’s always nice to see Linda Cardellini again).

There’s action here, of course, but also plenty of scenes with the team talking about what to do and where to go next – dialogue that seems to either set-up future sequels (like Thor’s next movie) or veer dangerously close to being a “very special episode” of Marvel’s unremarkable “Agents of SHIELD.” The performances do what they can with the one-dimensional material, but ultimately none rise above the fray, and the concluding send-off for a couple of heroes whose time has come to an end (or, more specifically, contractual obligations of said actors) is unfathomably perfunctory (literally along the lines of "hey, our contracts are up, see you later guys!").

In the end, what we have here is yet another comic book movie that’s going to rake in millions, if not billions – but is more evidence that these characters are better served by their own, separate cinematic adventures, and not by a picture that comes off as clinical but cold, soulless and disappointing.

[Jedbu]

UNBROKEN: 7.5/10

Really well done historical/war epic by Angelina Jolie, adapted from Laura Hillenbrand's huge bestseller about Louis Zamporini, who ran in the 1936 Olympics, survived for over 40 days in an open raft after his plane crash landed into the Pacific and then managed to live through the ordeal as a POW in Japan after he and his other surviving crew member were rescued by the Japanese. Jack O'Connell was incredible as Louis, with a fascinating performance by Takamasa Ishihara as the camp commander who-though he tries with a sadistic focus-cannot break Zamporini's will to survive.

Not a great film-it is solid filmmaking and Jolie knows how to direct actors and stage scenes yet it is overlong and has more than its share of expected "WWII POW survival" scenes-but it is compelling with a central character that you do find yourself rooting for and really like by the time his travails begin.

[sprocket]

Jedbu, if you can, try seeing The Railway Man ,which is a British film about a Japanese prisoner of war.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2058107/

It had a brief run in the States in April 2014 and quickly disappeared. I'd be curious to know what you think of it and how Unbroken compares.

[Monterey Jack]

1941 (1979): 4.5/10

Oooooggggg....the only time I've ever seen Steven Spielberg's notorious "comedy" before was on a pan & scan TV broadcast about a month before Jurassic Park came out, and sitting down to give the extended director's cut a view on the new Blu-Ray (sparkling transfer, BTW, doing full justice to William Fraker's soft-focus cinematography) made me realize it'll probably be another 22 years before I watch this again. The movie isn't awful, exactly -- it's energetic to a fault, it's fun to pick out countless Familiar Faces dotting the cast, John Williams' insanely rousing score keeps the movie's bloated 146-minute running time moving right along, and it has cute young Nancy Allen in her De Palma prime -- but the movie commits the most cardinal sin any cinematic comedy can by simply being Not Funny. Spielberg seems to think it's hysterical to have people screaming directly into the camera while getting thrown through windows and tanks roll through paint factories, and the end result is more exhausting than amusing. I'm not generally a fan of "giant" comedies anyways...Spielberg is clearly trying to make his It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World, but all too often he mistakes random chaos for any sort of structured A-B-C escalation of gags that should build on each other but more often as not just fizzle out. I liked the big jitterbug dance number in the middle, the miniature effects are top-notch and there are sporadic laughs to be had, but overall it just Isn't Funny, like a Three Stooges short expanded to mind-numbing feature length. As far as poorly-received, wildly-overproduced big budget comedies go, Howard The Duck at least had the benefit of being compellingly weird (to say nothing of Lea Thompson in her panties ), and Tim Burton's Mars Attacks! generates a head of solid laughs once the bubble-headed Martians finally land and start irradiating the dull human cast, but 1941 is a great example that some filmmakers can be brilliant at adding comic grace notes to their adventure movies and thrillers, but strike out when they try to earn deliberate laughs at feature length (De Palma is also noteworthy in this regard...his suspense films are often blackly funny in spots, but his straight-out comedies are pretty dreadful). I laughed longer and harder at numerous moments in Raiders Of The Lost Ark than anything in 1941, which is a "weak chuckle" factory at best.

[AndyDursin]

X-MEN DAYS OF FUTURE PAST
8/10

I am really late in thoroughly assessing this, as it came out at a difficult time with Theo just being home and lots going on last year. Not to mention it was released last fall on video during that black hole when Fox wasn't sending out online review copies to most outlets.

Suffice to say, I really enjoyed it, and felt this didn't suffer from the same ailments that plagued AVENGERS 2 -- namely, the film was confident in telling a story without having to delegate specific scenes and dialogue lines to the vast array of characters in the movie. More over, the action scenes weren't overly bombastic (again, a problem in Age of Ultron) and there was "just enough" of that to get by. The focus was on character and story as it should have been.

I did find it curious Singer pared down the mutant roster from First Class -- even killing off several off-camera -- but in focusing on the smaller group of McAvoy/Fassbender/Lawrence/Hoult, the movie didn't have that problem ULTRON did in
seemingly "mapping out" who appeared in specific scenes, how many lines of dialogue each of them had, etc. In fact, I can't imagine where Rogue's scenes would've fit -- so it'll be interesting to see what that "alternate cut" is like when it's released in July.

I liked the kid who played Quicksilver a great deal, certainly more than Taylor-Johnson. Here again, Singer did a good job utilizing the character in a few specific scenes, whereas Whedon had only one purpose in mind using him in Ultron.

The only drawback, for me, was -- shockingly -- Hugh Jackman. I thought Downey and Hemsworth both looked a little bored in ULTRON and Jackman gave that same, "contractual obligation" type of performance here. He looked positively disengaged, quite unlike Wolverine's previous appearances, and particularly given his fine performance in THE WOLVERINE itself. Maybe because the character is mostly an observer to the action, Jackman he wasn't that interested -- either way, I thought it was a detached, almost lifeless turn in a movie that, otherwise, ranks with the best comic book flicks in the modern cycle.