It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
This film is, of course, a masterpiece. It's the best western film I've ever seen (I'll stop short of saying it's the best western ever made because I'm not familiar enough with what else the genre), and probably worthy of a place in the 100 greatest film ever made. There's just so much to enjoy. From a production stand point, this film is truly something to behold. The acting, editing, score, cinematography are all 1st grade, especially during the epic climax.
My one major gripe about the film is that it is simply too long.
I watch older films quite often, so I'm used too watching long films that are very slow and methodical when compared with modern cinema. But The Good The Bad And The Ugly has an extremely simple plot. Three outlaws search for some gold. Is there are reason why this film should have to be 3 hours long? I have looked online and apart from Ebert who said "its probably half an hour too long " I can find no one who thinks like I do that this film is way too long.
For those who haven't seen the film, it follows a kind of modular approach to storytelling. The characters are established In the first half an hour, they learn of the golds existence, and then from then on we move from one insular sequence to next until its time too discover the gold.
My problem is that these little vignettes could be rearranged in any order and have the exact same outcome. There is little in the way of character development, all the characters are western film stereotypes. They do try to give the film some emotional depth with a few scenes, including one where Tuco finds long lost brother and we learn a bit about how he became a bandit. The problem is that these scenes pass by and are forgotten. They offer little more than a brief insight in the character, and don't impact the story in any meaningful way.
In my eyes, The Good The Bad And The Ugly is a very self-indulgent film. It's not difficult for me too see my Tarantino calls this his favourite film. His latest film, also a western, also 3 hours, would have been far better under 2 hours.
Went on to watch disaster movie San Andreas. Quite like the odd disaster movie and this was ok.
And then there were none 1945 is one of my all time favourite movies, the Oliver Reed version is arguably the second best version.
Batman Bad Blood This is the third movie in the Batman/Damian Wayne arc. Its probably the weakest of the three films though has some great moments and the animation is fantastic as always. My eyes welled up in one moment, which rarely happens with most movies. A must for fans of the Bat.
Poltergeist - the original one, that little girl still freaks me out like the first time I saw it at the cinematic release. A great little horror flic.
Having read the Alan Moore graphic novel, I can see why both author and fans of the novel are quite displeased with the film adaptation. However, I personally don't have a problem with the film being its own thing, turning the original anarchy versus fascism conflict into Bush era liberal propaganda. The film script is a compromised effort, diluting the dense story of the novel just enough so that it can work on film. But I seriously doubt that keeping the source material completely intact would have resulted in anything but a complicated and tough filmwatching experience. Fans of Moore's Watchmen were upset that the film WATCHMEN was a beat-for-beat adaptation of the novel; the same fans of Moore's V For Vendetta were also upset that V FOR VENDETTA had put its own spin on the story. In the end, we're dealing with two different media and even then, the film is still a reasonably faithful adaptation of the source novel.
Technically, V FOR VENDETTA is impressive to say the least. Photography, editing, score... are all brilliant. The acting is spot-on with particular praise for Hugo Weaving, John Hurt, Stephen Rea and Stephen Fry. Natalie Portman does very well too, except that her forced accent sadly betrays her lack of English descent.
Whether this is Alan Moore's take on the subject matter or not, V FOR VENDETTA never fails to inspire and even frighten me. I'm asked to make a choice between a peaceful and relatively quiet life but cemented in exceptionally restrictive and largely inhumane rules, and almost unconditional freedom, achieved through anarchy with a hint of terrorism. Films that make me think about such things, deserve praise. I'm a fan of V FOR VENDETTA, both the book and the film.
Six criminals, who are unknown to each other, are hired by a crime boss, Joe Cabot (Lawerence Tierney) to stage a diamond robbery. Right at the outset, they are given aliases, colour coded Mr White, Mr Pink and so on, with Cabot and his son Nice Guy Eddie (Chris Penn) only knowing their real names. Pretty sure that hiring some capable cons that the robbery will go ahead without a hitch. However when the Police are right outside as the gang exit the building this is put paid to. Panic ensues and in the course of trying to evade the police two of the gang are shot dead as well as a number of civillians and cops. Two of the remaining members of the gang Mr White (Harvey Keitel) and Mr Orange (Tim Roth) evade capture and death and head to the rendezvous point a warehouse, though Orange has been shot in the stomach, not soon after Mr Pink (Steve Buscemi) turns up and suggests to White that there must be a rat amongst the group due to the police presence as soon as they left the jewellers.
Not many directors have entered onto the stage with such an electrifing debut, if any film maker defined the 1990's it was Quentin Tarantino. A testimony to his influence as he only actually released three films in the decade but the shockwave that this film and it's follow up Pulp Fiction sent out informed any number of films that followed. Infact some pretty pale immitations arrived in it's wake. Guy Ritchie's well received but ultimately vastly overrated debut Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels owes both films more than a debt. Tarantino never a director shy of stealing from other works and stealing is the right word because he doesn't borrow he outright robs ideas and then fashions them in his own image. Ringo Lam's 1987 film City On Fire and obvious reference point and Joseph Seargeant's terrific 70's thriller The Taking of Pelham 123 is clearly where the colour coded element was nicked from. One critic intoned mediocre artists borrow whereas great artists steal and make better.
Tarantino changed the face of the crime film in the space of two films. As someone who witnessed this on the cinema screen back January 1993 when it was released in the UK (twice infact) I was litterally blown away by the visceral power and the quick fire foul mouthed dialogue. Tarantino was like a profanity poet, using swearing like an art form. To think how much film and televison dialogue as been infomed by his style, the heigtened reality of criminals talking about music, television and films in their day to day interactions. Tarantino nails his stall out from the get go as the now instantly quotable opening sequence which the director himself as in the minor role of Mr Brown is discussing rather explicitly what Madonna's "Like A Virgin" is about. Today this kind of writing is rife in pop culture, the likes of the hugely influential British comedy TV series Spaced ( Tarantino a self confessed fan) and then it's U.S benefactor The Big Bang Theory are littered with the characters quoting dialogue from the world of entertainment. It would not be over estimating to say although it could be argued better directors have come along since, none of them have been quite and distinctive and influnetial as Tarantino.
Tarantino's clearly knows the areas to take influence from, Martin Scorcesse showed how adept he was at using pop music to soundtrack his films, nowhere else had that been obvious in his 1989 gangster masterpiece Goodfellas. Using the fictional radio station K Billy's Super Sound of the 70's with the disembodied dead pan voice of comedian Steven Wright introducing the tracks, the station even gets referenced by the gang during the film. Though Tarantino having a habit to use songs not so well known songs and then elevate them to another level. Take for instance the opening credits of the film after the prologue. The director accompanies the sequence with the then little known "Little Green Bag" by the George Baker Selection, a scene that is a homage in it's own right to Kubricks's Clockwork Orange, the group exiting the diner to head off to the job at hand, Tarantino hits the slow motion button and a little known song instantly becomes a classic. The scene has more than an echo of Alex and the Droogs walking in slow motion to the strains of Rossini's overture to la gazza ladra (the thieving magpie). The director than continue to mine his record collection, Harry Nilsson, Bedlam and Sandy Rogers amongst the soundtrack. Athough Stealer's Wheels more famous "Stuck In The Middle of You" would never sound the same again after Mr Blonde's (Michael Madsen) infamous torture sequence, a moment that caused fiffteen people to walk out when it was screened at Sitges film festival, which included Wes Craven and horror make up supremo Rick Baker. Baker later told Tarantino to take the walkout as a "compliment" and explained that he found the violence unnerving because of its heightened sense of realism. The film would be dogged with controversy, particularly in the UK, it didn't receive a VHS home release until 1995. The BBFC has initially refused it a certificate as films need to be seperately reclassified for home consumption. The film is undoubtedly violent, although unlike some of the directors later work this has realistic sense of consequence.
As the directors career has progressed he has got himself a reputation for resurrecting actors careers. Harvey Keitel had almost disappeared into obscurity despite including a number of Scorcesse classics on his C.V. Mr White offered the veteran performer a peach of a role and one that would bring him to a whole new audience. His character serves as the heart of the film and while a sociopath one with a code, which makes his realisation at the end of the film that more powerful. Michael Madsen's Mr Blonde in comparisson is a stone cold psychopath and his key moment as mentioned in the previous paragraph is chilling. Tim Roth more well known in his native Britain spends most of the film lying down bleeding although just like White and Blonde earlier gets more to do when his back story is revealed. Tarantino himself takes a minor role of Mr Brown, Eddie Bunker also appears briefly as Mr Blue. Bunker a reformed convict who had gone onto be an acclaimed crime novelist and screenwriter in his own right.
Steve Buscemi, while never leading man material has since carved out an impressive character acting career, having gone on to direct a number of features as well as be a prolific televison director including some of the most memorable Soprano's episodes as well as appearing as Tony Soprano's cousin in Season 5 of the series. Most recently seen headlining acclaimed HBO series Boardwalk Empire. Practically unknown at the time, his Mr Pink is an undoubted highlight of the film, a real slime ball, from the moment we see him trying to avoid contributing to his share of the tip in the prologue, showing no sympathy for the waitresses plight. Not bothered to look bad amongst his colleagues who rightly chastise him for it. Buscemi makes sure that the audience isn't likely to sympathise with him but he does emerge the most professional of the group and appears the only one with his eye on the prize, hence he is the one who bothers to make sure he has the diamonds they were there to swipe in the first place.
It could be said that Tarantino makes no secret of where this is going, the film plays out for the most in the warehouse which on closer inspection is revealed as a slaughter house. There is also a hearse parked in the foreground. The director has never been one for subtlety throughout his career, everyone is undoubtedly heading in one direction.
Reservoir Dogs remains one of the directors best films, my personal preference would be for his third and under appreciated entry Jackie Brown as my favourite but his debut wouldn't be far behind. Also the short running time is rarity as after this Tarantino would favour a more leisurely pace and epic length going forward. Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown would be nearly an hour longer. Reservoir Dog more economic length could be attributed to it's $1.2 Million budget irregardless of this Tarantino packs plenty in and with the exception of Jackie Brown invests the film with heart and soul. Pulp Fiction for all it's ambition and memorable set pieces is somewhat of a cold fish, lot of style and clearly wanting to impress it's quite superficial with not much below the surface. It's predecessor in comparrison has a beating heart and it's ending is bleak and hits home, none of the directors other films would end with such a sobering denouncement.
Still as effective and shocking as it was 24 years ago, Reservoir Dogs remains a potent mixture of scintilating dialogue and palpable suspense with all round excellent performances. The film announced a distinctive and exciting talent and love him or hate him, the world of film would be a much duller place without Quentin Tarantino around.
* * * * * / * * * * *
Brilliant review sir! I am with you on every point!
The movie is astounding, and I still can't believe it was ever made as a major production.
The authoritarian lapdogs of this world must hold this as their singularly most hated film of this Century.
This movie moves me to actual tears more than once. I own the DVD AND the Blu Ray (double-dipping was a seeming necessity) of this neo-classic anti-corporate & secular view of the effect of mass control of opinion through media manipulation.
I've always been a fan of this Ridley Scott film. I was pumped for it in the year of its release, and loved it when I first saw it. It was also one of the first films I saw on my 55" (I realize that's small these days folks, but give me a break) HDTV, and was the film I used to set and balance my at the time newly purchased Home Theatre System, so it always has a special place in my heart.
I loved it as much this time as I always do. From that eerie but visually splendorous scene by the massive waterfall where the 'Engineer' drinks a poisonous liquid and falls to his death, to the incredibly designed interiors of the spaceship Prometheus, to the wonderful digital effects, it all impressed like it always does. Those special effects in particular are stunning.
The score, by regular Scott collaborator Marc Streitenfeld, is also highly enjoyable, suitably chilling, and yet orchestral.
Without giving too much away for those who've not seen it yet, this is a loose prequel of sorts to 1979's Alien. Archaeologists Elizabeth Shaw (played by Noomi Rapace) and Charlie Holloway discover maps in rocks from various unconnected ancient cultures which suggest a possible master alien race which may have been the forerunners of humans.
They persuade Peter Weyland (played by an unrecognizable Guy Pearce), of Weyland Corporation (a predecessor corp to Weyland-Yutani from Alien) to fund an expedition to follow the map to a distant planet.
The archaeologists are accompanied most notably by mission head Meredith Vickers (played by Charlize Theron), an android David (played by Michael Fassbender), captain Janek (played by Idris Elba) and a team of scientists.
Needless to say, once they land on the planet in front of an inorganic object, things begin to go slightly wrong (to say the least), lives are lost, and everyone begins a fight for survival.
The performances are excellent overall. I particularly like Fassbender, Theron & Elba in this. Rapace not so much, and wish they had cast someone else for her pivotal role.
The film is quite tense, and keeps the viewer's attention throughout. If you like this genre, you may enjoy this one. I can't wait for the sequel, called Alien Covenant, which will further explore the origins of the Alien species.
Recommended.
Not a bad film overall but I was left feeling a bit unsatisfied. The story was good but not that original and the action, while realistic, was underwhelming. I don't get why it was rated so high on RT but to each their own I guess.
I just had to see something as similar as possible to Batman V Superman.
It did wonders. Now I appreciate BvS a lot more. Compared to it, Avengers is a silly lovey-dovey affair.
Don't get me wrong, I like The Avengers 2012, Joss Wheadon is a hero of mine.
I just feel the time has come for dark, brutal, uninhibited comic book adaptions.
Snyder tried it with Watchmen and failed at the BO. It was ahead of its time obviously.
But Superman DOES NOT KILL. Even bad guys.
Superman would die before allowing an innocent to be killed.
Screw with the character & watch the BO dim.
Lesson?
Make us hopeful in superhero movies, not depressed.
:D
Could not agree with you more, in time I think BvS will be appreciated, at this point I think BvS is being judged with higher expectations of any movie I can remember. Personally I appreciate what the film makers have done, BvS is awesome IMO.
Have you even read the origianal comics from the 30s and 40s? He kills bad guys right and left. So does Batman.
The witch hunt on comics during the 50s by Washington moralists changed the character of many...er...characters.
Really? What was the specific reason? Possibly the outbreak of war?
But the mainstream audience doesn't know about it probably. They think Batman's rule to not kill is set in stone.
:D
I think it was a decision by the publisher, fearing young readers could be negatively influenced.
I've never had a huge issue with Batman killing when necessary in comics, and I agreed with what Superman did at the end of Man of Steel (it's not like he took it lightly)
As long as The Punisher never stops killing I'll be happy though. I have to admit, I was initially scared when Disney took the rights to Marvel. I had nightmares of ol' Frank Castle running around with Nerf guns, lol
:-O
Olga Kurylenko channels some serious Milla Jovovich (not that I am complaining), and though he's 51, James Purefoy still looks like a lost Bond opportunity (even though, here, he is playing a nasty piece of work). It's a shame that with the two solid leads, it's a standard thriller, with not much to offer.