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
An enjoyable buddy cop genre film from '74 starring Robert Blake and Elliot Gould. Definitely recommended if you dig the genre. ;-)
Love that film. Peter Hyams debut. Gould and Blake are a terrific double act and it has a great foot chase and a surprising final scene!
Alright i guess, i am not too crazy about him. He gets totally overshadowed by Walker.
I see. Will be looking forward to see Walker's performance, then. Every Hitchcock-villain I've seen, have been great!
I love you, too, Mr. Neeson.
This is strange, I know, but Frank Langella and James Marsden happen to have played in three films together. No big deal, but I thought it would be interesting to see those three films, just for fun.
SUPERMAN RETURNS
A heavily debated film but no matter how much attention I pay to the flaws, it remains a fun film for me. I understand the problems this film has, and all too well, but they don't bother me all that much. I love the John Ottman score too.
ROBOT & FRANK
A heart-warming film with an excellent performance by Langella. Also starring Liv Tyler and Susan Sarandon.
THE BOX
James Marsden and Cameron Diaz star in this intriguing science-fiction suspense film. Langella is pretty creepy in it.
I agree. On the whole the movie wasn't great, and it's sort of forgettable, too. But Hardy was indeed excellent, and it was worth watching for his performance. A fascinating double role.
I hope you didn't mean as criticism the bit I bolded? I mean, it had to be, didn't it? This was surely meant to be the opposite of warm and intimate. Susan's world was cold and distant, and she seemed to regret it being so, but... It was quite a cruel story, pretty much all of it, both the story and the story within the story. I thought it was fascinating, and yes, acting was good, visually it was beautiful, and I loved the score, too.
I'd recommend both, I thought they were both very good and the acting performances were great in both as well. They are very different in tone, though, and it's possible one might like one, but not the other. In any case Tom Ford is clearly a talented filmmaker, with a good eye and he seems to be good with actors. He's not just someone dabbling a bit in the movie business as a vanity project or hobby, and I'd love to see more movies from him.
Oh yes, he is. I've been a fan for over 30 years. He's a lovely chap as well.
I've seen it multiple times as well, but it's been years, so I guess I should re-watch...
The same as above... It's on my another re-watch due list...
Hell, yes.
Personally I thought SLP was miles better than Joy. As were The Three Kings, The Fighter and American Hustle. I was actually disappointed in Joy.
They're both very, very re-watchable (for anyone who likes the in the first place).
Most recently seen in theatre:
and
Very different experiences. I think I pretty much smiled throughout Kedi and afterwards, while Dunkirk was a very tense, and intense, experience. Both were bloody excellent though, and I already want to see them again.
some other stuff seen:
Meek's Cutoff (2010)
The Book Of Eli (2010)
The Company Men (2010)
Sarah's Key (2010)
The Tourist (2010)
The Debt (2010)
Easy A (2010)
Morning Glory (2010)
Unstoppable (2010)
The Awakening (2011)
This Must Be The Place (2011)
The Muppets (2011)
Midnight In Paris (2011)
Limitless (2011)
Salmon Fishing In The Yemen (2012)
The Odd Life Of Timothy Green (2012)
Rust And Bone (2012)
House At The End Of The Street (2012)
Watched out of interest for Jennifer Lawrence, but this just was so bad.
A Late Quartet (2012)
I really liked this, and the cast (Philip Seymour Hoffman, Catherine Keener, Christopher Waken, Imogen Poots, etc.) did a great job.
Shadow Dancer (2012)
A Royal Affair (2012)
Red Lights (2012)
Pioneer (2013)
Side Effects (2013)
Only Lovers Left Alive (2013)
Half Of A Yellow Sun (2013)
Kill The Messenger (2014)
Leviathan (2014)
Lucy (2014)
The Judge (2014)
The Falling (2014)
Madame Bovary (2014)
Inherent Vice (2014)
The November Man (2014)
Into The Woods (2014)
The Giver (2014)
I really like Jeff Bridges, so... but this was bad.
A Girl Walks Home Alone At Night (2014)
An enjoyable re-watch.
Maps To The Stars (2015)
Crimson Peak (2015)
In The Heart Of The Sea (2015)
Entertainment (2015)
Tale Of Tales (2015)
Dark Places (2015)
London Road (2015)
Slow West (2015)
Macbeth (2015)
Woman In Gold (2015)
The Dresser (2015)
An excellently acted drama about acting and theatre. Ian McKellen as the dresser, Anthony Hopkins as the actor, and Emily Watson as the actor's wife.
Far From The Madding Crowd (2015)
A Bigger Splash (2015)
The Danish Girl (2015)
Cinderella (2015)
Demolition (2015)
Suffragette (2015)
Minions (2015)
A Quiet Passion (2016)
Snowden (2016)
I gotta say the Citizenfour documentary was much better and far more exciting than this mediocre Oliver Stone movie.
I've read that online and the earlier film is certainly much more revered. I've yet to pick it up but will definitely get to it soon.
--
PS: Nice list of films you've noted above. I haven't seen most of them but appreciate your bringing them to my attention. I liked The Debt & Easy A.
He played a horrible character and the movie was sort of ambiguous about that - I felt the viewer was still expected to root for him. That certain scene
I liked Debt as well. Easy A not.
I like those 4 Russell movies - before those 4 and the one (so far) after... meh. But opinions vary, obviously. It took me a bit to get into his style, but then I did, and it can work really well when it does - or be just irritating when it doesn't. Though again, when it does or doesn't people don't necessarily agree upon.
I have a lot of sympathy for Amy Adams, though - or even George Clooney for that matter (I'm sure Russell fully deserved to be punched), I don't know how people work with him. (Well I have some idea how Jennifer Lawrence does and how Christian Bale does, but no idea about anyone else. Strategies may vary depending on the person.)
Good to hear you also appreciated the feel of Nocturnal Animals. I asked because it wasn't clear from your review how you meant that particular comment, as mostly it would be meant (and therefore easily interpreted) as negative.
I don't think his character was glorified, or that we were being told to get in his corner. The tone was more grounded, showing the good and bad that people do to reach their own goals or to survive. I also don't mind following a character I don't like or don't agree with, as that creates an interesting experience. I think Brosnan's character was closer to Fleming's concept of Bond than his villains, though, in that his actions at the very least came from a place of good, and he was motivated by values of care and concern and not maliciousness or conniving. An imperfect, but ultimately good man doing bad things, really.
Update! Just finished Strangers on a Train and, as with every Hitchcock film I've seen, it did not disappoint! Not the same quality as Rear Window, but it has the suspense which Hitchcock does so well. Loved the fairground finale. Who'd thought a merry-go-round could be so exciting?
As you mentioned, Walker was the stand out performance of the film. Brilliant piece of acting.
I didn't say or mean the character was glorified, but the approach was too ambiguous and not entirely successful, IMO. I get what that scene was for, but
Glad to know someone agrees. I also felt it was indeed gratuitous, and the character became less because of it. I'm sure we're not alone in that view, either.
@Tuulia, I think the intention of the scene was to be uncomfortable. You certainly aren't supposed to be-or should be-rooting for Brosnan's character as a heroic man of honor there, you should be conflicted or upset at the limits he pushes. He's a dark man in a dark business, and often has to play nasty games to meet his opponents.
One doesn't have to like it or accept it, but the movie is making an effort to show the moral complexity and the battle for dark and light that happens in so many of us, especially Brosnan's spy who has been to hell and back and has lost so much faith in the concept of what he fights for. His ability as a man to harm one but care for another is the human condition, and pretty realistic to me. It's very much a human error to have inconsistent morality, or to have different rules depending on what you are facing in a certain scenario, but it's a bias we all have. Emotion clouds us and makes us act differently when those we love are wrapped up in things, and we get manipulated by that pressure. Brosnan's spy is experiencing that same manipulation, where his professional mind is fighting with his personal side for what to do.
The good acts I was attributing to the character were his attempts to save those he was around, and to curb a viscous system he'd uncovered that brutalized and murdered people with impunity through corruption and unlimited power. He did bad things along the way, as in your example, and I think that's the point. It had to be morally ambiguous, because that's how life is. There's no such thing as a moral absolute, and the movie underscores that by showing the spy teeter on that line between the notions of good and evil that we use to easily classify the complex decision making we do as people to avoid harsh realities and thoughts. Just as Bond stands for king and country, he also must cross lines to get results, and that can often come in the form of emotional manipulation, abuse and deceit. The spy game doesn't play by warm rules, and that's why cold men do the work best, like Brosnan's character in the film.
I appreciated the more grounded and honest take on the spy character, and how the filmmakers refused to make a statement about how good or evil he was, leaving it up to the viewer. They clearly knew that in the real world morality is non-existent in that complex game of spies, and so instead of painting a biased image for the audience or manipulating them, they presented a man doing things that fit both "good" and "bad" decisions to create a human portrayal that was fully intended to feel ambiguous and troubling and contradictory, as we truly are as human beings.
I was reluctant at first to watch a sequel to one of those seminal films from my youth, afraid it might stain the love I have for that first film. But I did it. I finally watched the film today and I had such a good time with it, I can honestly say I'm both relieved and even excited because of it. The acting is superb, the music absolutely great and it's close enough to the original but also new enough to be a great film on its own. Thank you, Danny Boyle.
Boyle's best, and that comes from someone who loves 28 Days Later and Sunshine.
I'm in the same boat as you, though I've understood over the years that the first one is quite the cult film. I'm not even sure I've ever seen footage from either of them, so I'd have just about no clue what to expect.
@DarthDimi, it rarely gets more nerve-wracking and heart-thumping than '28 Days Later.' I rewatched 'Sunshine' a couple of years back and really enjoyed it.
The Belko Experiment
This was an interesting film. It reminded me of Battle Royale in an office setting. I enjoyed myself and would recommend it.
Get Out
I kept putting this one off. It just didn't sound very appealing to me. I'm glad I decided to finally check it out. The last twenty minutes had me on the edge of my seat.