Now for my favourite Bond main villains. The films series has been blessed by some truly memorable performances by great actors down the years of the main villains from the novels, here are my top 5. This was tough as Le Chiffre, Max Zorin, Karl Stromberg and even Franz Sanchez were all considered too.
5. Alec Trevelyan (Sean Bean, Goldeneye) Ally turned foe, the former 006 betrays Bond and the Mi6 in order to avenge his parents treatment after the war. During the electric opening of Goldeneye Trevelyan fakes his own execution at which point Bond blows up a chemical warfare factory and escapes. It's not until 9 years later that Bond realises the betrayal. Bean is a great casting choice and he fits the role perfectly, as he attempts to destroy London and steal millions of pounds. The best of the modern Bond villains.
4. Rosa Klebb (Lotte Lenya, From Russia With Love) By far the fiercest of the female villains of the series, she serves as one of Blofeld's main member's of SPECTRE. She is extremely cunning and seems to exert a lot of power in the film as she directs the equally brilliant Red Grant to steal a decoding device and kill Bond. Her final confrontation with Bond is also very enjoyable, as it seems very pure and doesn't have to be bogged down by political correctness or smart gimmicks. Even though Rosa Klebb does more for Women's Lib than Halle Berry ever could (Klebb is even a pun on a Russian female liberation movement). 3. Francisco Scaramanga (Christopher Lee, The Man With The Golden Gun) Played by the hammy Christopher Lee, a Bond villain was probably the perfect role for him. Despite this entry being one of the more maligned films' in the series, almost all agree that Lee's Scaramanga is the best thing about it. He's an assassin who charges $1m per kill, and uses the eponymous golden gun to make his kills. He is probably the Bond villain given the biggest backstory in the films, as well as one who establishes possibly the deepest relationship with Bond, as he reveals his abusive upbringing. The dueling personalities and confrontations are the best thing about an otherwise unremarkable film, and the final duel is a good way to end the conflict.
2. Auric Goldfinger (Gert Frobe, Goldfinger)
This was the first of Ian Fleming's villains that Frobe would play on film, the second being Baron Bomburst in the film adaptation of Chitty, Chitty, Bang! Bang!. Again, like Lee, another hammy actor that fits into the villain type role like a glove. Here he plays a notorious gold smuggler, whose grand scheme is to break into Fort Knox and contaminate the US's gold reserves with a nuclear device, thus increasing the value of his own gold haul. He simply has to be on the list, for his great dialogue exchanges between Bond, including the most famous of the franchise "Do you expect me talk?", "No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die.". He also has an army of lesbian personnel who help neutralise Fort Knox's security with nerve-gas. Probably the most charismatic of all the Bond villains.
1. Ernst Stavro Blofeld (Donald Pleasance, You Only Live Twice) Undoubtedly the quintessential Bond villain, and without question the best. Portrayed a number of times, across a substantial proportion of the movies. It is Pleasance who probably gives the most recognisable Blofeld performance (though Telly Savalas is my favourite). He is the head of the main enemy organisation of the Bond series, SPECTRE, which just further justifies Blofeld position as enemy number 1. He also murders James Bond's wife Tracy (On Her Majesty's Secret Service), not to mention trying to kill Bond himself at least a dozen time. The scarred face, grey suit, and white cat are his synonymous trademark, and the thing which has helped formulate similar type villains in other films, books and tv shows over the last 50 years.
I've always enjoyed Ridley Scott's films greatly and he is one director I really admire. For one he is one of the few current directors who is openly apprehensive about the use of CGI in film, and tries to opt for more expensive set design where possible. He tries and achieves this to moderate extent in his new film Prometheus, a film which has been made to illustrate the background to the Alien films, which he had originally started more than 30 years ago.
If you go into this film expecting an Alien movie then you might be disappointed, this film concentrates more on the theological discussion of Man's origins. It opens on the Earth thousands (possibly millions of years) earlier, as we see one of the much alluded to Space Jockey character seemingly self sacrifice himself on the Earth, we then advance to an archaeological dig in the year 2089 where a team discover cave painting in Scotland that seems to share similar features to other paintings across the world. The film then quickly advances for years, as a couple from this team, form a new ensemble of character on the ship Prometheus, where they aim to visit the destination depicted in these paintings. It is here we first meet David (Michael Fassbender) and Vickers (Charlize Theron) who are employees of the Weyland corporation (from the first two Alien movies) as well as the ships crew and scientists, who make up this research expedition. It is also quickly established that Peter Weyland (Guy Pearce) has funded this exhibition after years of his own personal interest in man's origins, but his motives become more malevolent as the film progresses. So by this point of the film the background to both the Alien films and this film is formed.
The rest of the film has similar sequences to the previous films, espescially Scott's own Alien, but the overall feel of the film is that it attempts to be viewed and understood at a higher level. It takes time trying to make the characters and the audience try and piece together the significance of their journey and what they are there to learn. This was the element of the film I really enjoyed, and I thought it did a good job in making it tie in with the original film as well as making a well constructed thesis of mankind's evolution. There is also a lot of ideas that are projected that aren't fully formed and are there for the viewer to think about on their own terms. There are also a few questions still left open by the end of the film, that are probably there in order for a sequel to be required.
The film falls short though in other areas though, apart from Michael Fassbender, who is again sublime in a role as the expedition android, the rest of the cast are at times hit and miss. None more so than Noomi Rapace, whose delivery of lines sometimes comes across as a bit static, this may be due to her having only learnt English in the last few years. She isn't aided by the fact that her character is hard to fully connect with and is not a patch on Sigourney Weaver's Ellen Ripley of the franchise. Charlize Theron looks the part as the corporate ice queen, who is seemingly more interested in her company's interest, than that of the scientific one. She is even at times quite good in the role, but I got the feeling that her character wasn't fully formed by the end of the movie and that something was missing. Other characters seem to be a mismatch of past cliché's from the Sci-fi horror genre and are hardly worth a mention. I will though say that I found Guy Pearce's make-up was a bit distracting in his role as Weyland. Back to Fassbender though who managed to have a great mix of Ian Holm and Lance Henriksen's androids from previous films. This really worked well for a film where you were constantly questioning ideas, as well as seeing changing motives of characters, as Fassbender's motives and ideas were quite opaque throughout the film. There was also a great homage to Peter O'Toole as Lawrence of Arabia, which I also enjoyed.
CGI is something I still struggle with in films, but I did feel for the majority of this film it was used in a non-gratuitous way, and the majority of it was used on the actual computers and interfaces the character's were using. Scott did a good job in trying to blend any other CGI he used with the set pieces he used, and this had the desired effect of not making the film look over the top and too advanced for it's setting. At times I felt Ridley Scott did go a bit too far with some of his idea's about life in 2089, and it was to be bordering on the realms of the absurd. He just about got away with it, but I found some of it a bit questionable. As for the action sequences they're okay, but nothing close to the first two Alien films, and the suspense is equally moderated. But as I've already suggested, this wasn't Ridley Scott's main aim with this film.
The main thing I found hard to accept with the film was it's ending. Scott had the chance to do something a bit different here, and though I agree that ending it this way made one element of the film come together, it still would have worked better if he had been a bit more gutsy with it. Instead he decided to pander a bit to the audience's need for a conventional ending. Ultimately for me it just fell short of being something a bit special, though I still feel it's a good companion piece for the Alien universe. As prequels go though, this could have been a disaster, instead it's a decent effort and worthy of attention and even provokes some stimulating ideas, if a little undercooked.
The Hoax is a film that seems to have already been banished to the realms of late night television. It's based on the true life events of Clifford Irving (Richard Gere) and his associate Richard Suskrind (Alfred Molina) as they conspire to write a fake autobiography of Howard Hughes. They manage to get access to a lot of privy information along the way, as well as information from Hughes' long time employee Noah Dietrich (Eli Wallach). They are able to convince the publisher's MacGraw-Hill of the book's legitimacy, despite only using hand-written forged memo's from the recluse Hughes. There's also a great side story to this whole charade, as this was taking place during the time President Nixon was trying to cover up past dealings with Hughes in the run up to the '72 election and ultimately led to the Watergate affair. The film suggests that Hughes was orchestrating Nixon's paranoia by feeding information to Irving about their relationship, whilst at the same time distancing himself from the publication. This however is a problem with the film, as it seemingly takes to much license at times, and whilst the Nixon element makes for a good story, elements of it seem to be artistic license, other parts of the film are also quite far fetched, espescially describing Irving's personal life and own paranoia.
I think the film was trying to be quite idiosyncratic by making Irving eventually demise into a paranoid wreck, in a similar vein to Nixon and indeed Hughes' own paranoia. For me it worked, but as I say it did feel like it was pure artistic license on Irving's behalf, as he probably didn't become that way. I regard Hughes as one the most enigmatic men of the 20th century and Richard Nixon is possibly one it's most complicated, therefore I found the film quite entertaining. It is strewn with flaws though and even a few plot holes here and there, it's hard deciphering fact from fiction in what's presented. For example it's is stated as fact that Nixon broke into Watergate in order to obtain a copy of the autobiography as he believed it to contain damaging information. Whilst I know Nixon was worried the DNC had incriminating information about him, I'm not convinced this unpublished book was it. I guess it's things like this that make for a better film and the overriding story is good enough to make this watchable.
On a technical aspect the film is well paced and suits the narrative of the story. Richard Gere puts in one of his more impressive performances and Molina is solid, despite his character being portrayed as a bit of light comic relief, which again I found dubious. There was also support from the likes of Marcia Gay Harden and great method actors such as Stanley Tucci and Eli Wallach. As a film it works, and it's a shame that it has been somewhat forgotten, not least of all for Gere. I would probably watch this again at some point in the future, but it's not without it's problems.
Another forgotten film is Anglo-Irish Noir Odd Man Out, which centres on the story of an Irish Nationalist (James Mason) as he spends his last 24 hours on the run in Belfast after a botched heist job. A risqué piece for the time, and as such the IRA connotations are very implicit. In fact the only thing we know is that the heist is in order to fund Mason's group underground activities. Despite the censorship there is enough there for the viewer to read between the lines and have a clear understanding of what's going on. The film is directed by The Third Man's Carol Reed and has all the hallmarks of that classic, with long shadows through the dark streets of Belfast, that could have easily been Orson Welles on the streets of Vienna. Reed is without doubt a director of great ability, as he manages to transform this subverssive tale into an entertaining noir thriller. The streets of Belfast are presented as giant maze, and the intricacy of these roads and alleys add to the atmosphere.
I really enjoy James Mason as an actor, and his performance here is again captivating and he is painted in a very sympathetic light, that I'm surprised it got past the censors. Robert Newton is also part of the cast, and gives his typically thespian performance similar to his role the following year as Bill Sykes in Lean's Oliver Twist. Whereas his performance worked in Oliver Twist, I found him to be a bit too over the top here. Though the rest of the cast was largely unknown to me I thought Fay Compton did a good job as the woman searching for her fugitive love (Mason) through the street of Belfast.
The film is not quite The Third Man level of genius, but is a great precursor to that film, and is a great (if somewhat romanticised) insight into life as a Republican in Northern Ireland in that post-war period. It's another example of how good some of these less celebrated films can be.
Bride of the Monster, was a film directed by the man often lauded as the "Worst Director Ever" Ed Wood. There is even a Tim Burton biopic based on the man and his notoriously bad films, which features segments about this film. Despite the film's awful reputation, I was hoping for something fun and entertaining, rather than just bad. The main problems with it are the quite ridiculous special effects, most notably a killer octopus, that is basically made up of both archive footage of a real octopus and a pathetic octopus prop that looks ludricrous. The acting, whilst at times is bad, isn't as atrocious as I was anticipating, and as such most of the film is easy to follow, along with a straight forward narrative. It was Bela Lugosi's last screen performance, and to be fair to the man, although hammy and over the top, it is the best performance in the film, and shows that the man did have some talent.
I was expecting a bit more on the fun and entertaining side, and overall I don't think it's quite so bad it's good, but it definitely isn't as bad as the reputation that precedes it.
My next film was originally intended to be a Judy Garland project of the famed Irving Berling musical Annie Get Your Gun. Based on the real life of famed sharpshooter Annie Oakley, it had a very similar feel to Calamity Jane, especially in that they both starred Howard Keel, in fact his role in this film was his first film role. He was lucky to stay in the role due to a lot of production problems, not least of all Judy Garland being forced to pull out due to exhaustion, Betty Hutton was cast, even though I find it incredible that Ethel Merman wasn't even considered by MGM to reprise her Broadway role. It was also original assigned to musical legend Busby Berkley to direct, but he quite after Garland withdrew. I had not been familiar with Hutton, and having read a bit about her, it was easy to see why. She suffered a similar career decline to her co-star Keel, but he's decline was relatively tame in career to Betty's who suffered a series of severe mental health issues in the 60's and 70's.
It's a shame as Hutton was obviously talented and her role here proves it. The role is obviously the blueprint as to what Doris Day copied for her signature role as Calamity Jane. Hutton gives a solid performance with her strong voice, good looks and grows into the role well. I think sadly, that retrospects will always compare her to Day, who has more charisma and a better voice in her turn as Calamity. It may have been interesting to see Garland in this role, but I feel Hutton is good, albeit she tends to over do it in places. Keel who was the male lead in both films, gives the first of his stereotypical leading musical man, which would sadly typecast him and stifle his career. I have a lot of time for him though, as his voice is superb, as well as that all important charm that was important for films like these. The chemistry between the two is good also, and again matches that of Keel with Day.
The film is certainly good enough, with a fascinating (and surprisingly quite factual) story and a strong repertoire of songs (which is good as I'm not much of a fan of "There's No Business Like Showbusiness", the musical's most famous tune). It's only natural to compare it Calamity Jane, a film I really enjoy, but this is just as good, possibly better. I may even try to dig up a copy of Annie Oakley's autobiography, as she seems an incredible person with an interesting life.
Below are my five favourite Henchmen and Henchwomen from the Bond films.
5. Red Grant (Robert Shaw, From Russia With Love) From Russia With Love was blessed with two great SPECTRE villains in Rosa Klebb and Donald Grant. The reason why he is such a good henchman, is that he was originally a homicidal maniac, recruited and trained up by SPECTRE with the mission of killing Bond who had previously assassinated Dr. No. Grant really is the benchmark for all future henchman, not only in the Bond films, but also many other action movies. He is shown to be in peak physical condition, and is a quite ruthless and clinical assassin. Played by the brilliant Robert Shaw, he also has the right balance of charisma and guile that make him a formidable enemy and worthy adversary of Bond.
4. Mayday (Grace Jones, A View To A Kill) It was a great piece of casting by the producers in getting the eccentric pop star Grace Jones, to play the unhinged sidekick to Max Zorin (Christopher Walken). She is well built and quite terrifying when dispatching Bond's allies, and therefore quite convincing in the role of Mayday. Her campness certainly works to her advantage in this the last of the Moore movies in the mid-80's. She may have been a disaster had she appeared in the Connery or Craig era. Despite her strengths she is also quite vulnerable as she vies for her bosses attention and affection, and you feel for her her when she's abandoned by Zorin. This leads her to becoming one of the more endearing characters in the series as she turns to James Bond for solace.
3. Oddjob (Harold Sakata, Goldfinger) The first of the Henchmen to come with a gimmick, in the shape of his bowler hat. Sakata is unnerving as the short but stocky sidekick to Goldfinger, and looks like he could beat anyone in a fight. In fact his demise is only down to Bond's quick thinking rather than a physical confrontation. He's also handy with a silencer and is one of the sidekicks that doubles up well as a servant, even in this role he seems perfectly efficient. He is also very quiet, choosing instead to smile wryly, which adds to his menacing and deadly demeanour.
2. Xenia Onatopp (Famke Janssen, Goldeneye) Goldeneye is probably the best film on the female front, with a great ally to Bond in Natalya and a superb enemy in Xenia Onatopp. An employee of the Janus syndicate, he specialist move was seducing targets and then strangling them to death with her thighs. She takes orgasmic pleasure in her killing, not only with her thighs, but seemingly with her gun too. Without doubt the sexiest of the Henchwomen and has great chemistry with Bond, and also has some good dialogue and one-liners in her limited screen time. I did find her character to be similar in style to the character of Naomi (Caroline Munro) in The Spy Who Loved Me, but thankfully Xenia has more screen time.
1. Jaws (Richard Kiel, The Spy Who Loved Me & Moonraker)
The only henchman to return, and in my opinion the best. He seemed to have all the appropriate attributes for being a Bond henchman, including playing both the opposing sides. He's trademark is his metal teeth, that can seemingly bite through anything, and uses them to bite and kill his victims in the jugular. At nearly 7 feet tall, it also gives him a great strength advantage over his targets, as well as the ability to survive almost anything. His status is as Best Henchman is somewhat undermined towards the end of Moonraker, after he begins to reform his character after meeting the equally socially awkward Dolly. Still his previous escapades and his intimidating figure and attributes, make him my favourite Henchman from the film series.
Murphy's War, a low key war film set in South America, kicked off my films in May. It starred Peter O'Toole opposite his then wife Sian Phillips, as well as Philippe Noiret (most famous for his role Cinema Paradiso). It told the story of Murphy (O'Toole) who is the sole survivor of a German U-Boat attack in the South American rivers. He convalesces in a local village, where he is nursed by Sian Phillips' character and begins to plot his vengeance, with the help of local hand Louie (Noiret). Being a low key war film, it's quite slowly paced, but it's still quite an interesting film, if a little uncomplex. The absolute strength of the film is in the performances, especially that of O'Toole who reverts to his native Irish accent for his role. The stubborn determination of the character in the end becomes his own downfall, as his single-mindedness intentions of vengeance lead to a lot of consequential decisions. Noiret and Phillips are also great as they try to convince Murphy that vengeance isn't the answer, as the end of the war approaches. My main problem with the film is that at times I found the dialogue hard to follow due to both O'Toole's and Noiret's strong accents. The slow pacing, whilst not ideal, suits this film. It's unconventional style is what sets it apart from the rest of the war genre. I found it not too dissimilar to Herzog's much lauded Fitzcarraldo, with O'Toole's charisma akin to Klaus Kinski's sense of showmanship, which makes this one a bit of a find.
I continued working my way through the films of Marilyn Monroe by watching River of No Return, in which she starred opposite Robert Mitchum. Set in the Canadian west, it sees Mitchum as a farmer, reunited with his young son after spending time in jail for manslaughter. His son became acquainted with a saloon singer (Monroe) on his journey to his father and Mitchum's character is grateful for her assistance with his son. A few days later the three's path cross once more as Monroe and her fiancee run into trouble rafting near Mitchum's ranch. We learn that her fiance is finding the nearest town to register his claim to a gold mine he won a poker game. It's here where he robs Mitchum of his horse and gun and abandons his wife to claim his fortune. The remaining trio are soon beseiged by natives and are forced into an adventure down the river in order to escape.
Whilst the plot is a little weak, director Otto Preminger manages to make the best of it, with exciting set pieces and shots of the Canadian landscape to make the film more aesthetically pleasant. Mitchum is in typical laconic mode as the man trying to redeem his own misdemeanours, whilst convincing Monroe that her fiancee isn't good enough for her. It's hard not hold some admiration for Mitchum as one of the most interesting, as well as coolest leading men ever to come out of Hollywood. As for Monroe, she at least manages to portray her limited character with a bit of depth, as well as maternal nurturing side that is rarely part of her onscreen persona. It's a film though that has quite a few question mark around it, most notably a scene of passion between the two protagonists in the woods. I imagine the said scene, where Mitchum aggressively forces Monroe to the ground and kisses her, whilst she struggles, would make modern audiences uncomfortable. Bordering on rape, it's possibly one of the few films I've seen from this era that tackles a scene such as this in such a stark manner. It's certainly one that I think should be viewed in the context of both when it was made and the time period the film is set. Aside from this, the film is at least a pleasant viewing and if you enjoy the films of the two leads, I would suggest this is a must see, but it's never really noticeably better than similar contemporary Westerns of this era.
Having watched the film adaptation of John Le Carré's Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy I managed to check out the first film adaptation of his work in The Spy Who Came In From The Cold. It's a film I knew little about and what to expect, though I was aware it involved reappearing characters such as George Smiley and Control from other Le Carré novels. This film followed Alec Leamas (Richard Burton) as a British Cold War Spy who administrates the West Berlin office of the 'Circus', we first see him attempting to greet one of his operatives coming in from the East. As he passes the border, he is shot dead, and we begin to learn that Leamas has lost a lot of his operatives recently. He is then reassigned by the Circus back in London, where he becomes a library assistant and he soon becomes disillusioned and depressed and susceptible to the Russians.
It's hard to say much else about this film without given away too many plot twists and the motivations behind the character, which I feel the viewer has to see first time for themselves. As spy films go this is uncompromising in it's complexities and sombre nature. That's what sets it apart from all other spy films of this era. It's also filmed in Black and White which only adds to the grittiness of the piece. The story is so well written, and despite the complex narrative the films is able to capture the story in an appropriate way as not to confuse the viewer too much. Richard Burton's performance is pretty electric too, Burton thankfully forgoes his Hollywood bravado to give a far more restrained and engaging performance. I was also impressed by Oskar Werner, who I had only previously seen in Truffaut's Jules et Jim, here he plays Burton's counterpart and enemy. I was however a bit disappointed by the casting of Claire Bloom, who despite being a celebrated thespian, is miscast as the left leaning teenager 'Nan'.
For anyone who's seen Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy this film gives a noticeably different angle to George Smiley's character, that many would find intriguing. Though somewhat sidelined for the majority of the film Smiley still has a pivotal role in the plot of the movie, and his actions are open for interpretation by the viewers. The style and pace of the film is also similar to that of last year's hit film, which is obviously relative to Le Carré's own style of narrative. The plot to this however offers more and it's one of those films you have to really concentrate on to fully appreciate, but everything is there for the viewers to dissect, even the writing between the lines. There are still a few things that I question, which what makes the film so stimulating and true to the spy games of the Cold War. This is a film I can't recommend highly enough, and it's surprising how it's become somewhat lost amongst it's fellow spy films.
From one element of the Cold War to another now. I have forever held an interest in the pioneers of space travel and so I was delighted to finally get around to watching The Right Stuff. A film which centres on the collective journey of the "Mercury 7" pioneers and their families, as they embark on America's first phase of the Space Race. It also tells the story of test pilot Chuck Yeager, who despite his own pioneering work on the air field, fails to qualify for the Mercury programme due to his lack of degree qualification. It's a fascinating visual representation of man's journey into speed and the final frontier, as we first see Yeager break the sound barrier, before the Mercury 7 become the first Americans into space. The film also features an impressive cast such as Ed Harris, Scot Glen, Dennis Quaid, Fred Ward, Barbara Hershey, Veronica Cartwright, Harry Shearer, Jeff Goldblum, Lance Henriksen and American thespian Sam Shepard as Yeager.
Like most my knowledge of the men involved with the Mercury space programme only extends as far as the names John Glenn and Alan Shepard, although I was aware of Gus Grissom, due to his fatal demise in the Apollo 1 fire test. So in that sense it was interesting to learn more about the other men involved, and to see the complete contrast in each types of character. Some, like Glenn, lived up to the representation that the contemporary media had provided him with, whilst others came across as slight renegades and playboys, most notably of all Shepard. This led to one of my few problems with the films, in that some of the characters were a bit cartoonish and two dimensional. Not least of all Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson who comes across as a complete hillbilly as he tries to use the programme for his own political gains. (It's interesting to note that there are still those who believe Johnson played some role in Kennedy's assasination.) John Glenn is also presented in a "whiter than white" manner, which I felt may have been influenced due to his own political ambitions at the time of the films release. Though it was quite touching and probably very factual in relation to Glenn's devotion to his wife and family life. The film goes further in trying to relate the emotional distress the Space programme caused those dearest to the pilots and how any semblance of normality was affected by it. This caused the film, at times, to feel a bit too hokey and overbearing.
The real highlights of the film are the scenes which involve the various forms of flights. From the desert test flights to the space orbits footage is both brilliant captured and intertwined with archive footage from the period. It makes the film feel all the more realistic and is at times awe-inspiring. As for the performances, despite the somewhat limited characterisations, Fred Ward is the one who provokes the most interest as the tragic Gus Grissom. Scot Glen also gives a colourful performance as Alan Shepard and Sam Shepard is convincing as a man denied his dream, but left with the hunger and admiration for pioneering travel. There is also an interesting rivalry between Sam Shepard's Yeager and pilot Gordon Cooper (Dennis Quaid), as both vie to be the fastest men in the world. As for the rest it is somewhat standard, but then again it's not that type of film and each are able to invoke affable performances nonetheless.
Whilst the stories Space Race and the German engineers are only partially covered and alluded to, it's a film that I highly recommend for anyone with a modicum of interest in the star wars of the 50's and 60's. Of course to include more back story to the Space Race and how the Germans were utilised after WW2, would mean the film would run at six hours. Not that I would have minded though, as this was a truly fascinating film, surprising for one to come out of Hollywood in the 80's. For my money it's one of the most inspiring films I've ever seen, in spite of the overly sentimental representation of America and their astronauts.
I was a bit apprehensive about Sacha Baron Cohen's The Dictator having seen the trailer, but the reviews had been quite favourable. I should have gone with my gut on this one though, as the film was at best sub-standard. The biggest problem with it, is that it's too hit and miss. I personally find it too easy for anyone espescially a comedian to say or do something offensive in order to get a laugh. Also it doesn't cater for everyone's taste obviously. I found the gags involving genetalia a bit too easy and obvious for a laugh, whilst the equally offensive jokes about abusing 14 year old boys and using a Wii game to massacre the '72 Israeli Olympic team did cater to my sick humour side. Though these jokes garnered nothing more than a chuckle. Equally when Cohen's character masturbates for the first time, he attempts to relate it to some sort of allegory of "The American Dream" with a montage of American icons accompanying it. Again whilst other members of the audience laughed, I felt quite glad that I was above it. This is probably the best way of conveying my gripes with the film and is where my snobbery begins to become exposed. There is no intelligence in this humour, it's all seems like it's trying to shock to the masses, who to me seem a bit too sheltered from lewd humour, judging by the fellow audience at my screening. There were a few glimmers of what I enjoy from comedy, such as misdirections jokes, for instance when Cohen's character is looking for a pseudonym to disguise his identity and he looks at a sign saying "Hazzezi's Burgers" he comes up with the name 'Burger'. There was also another amusing scene in a helicopter, where he talks to his friend in his native tongue about Bin Laden, Porsches and New York City landmarks, which then gets misconstrued by American tourists. Again though most of the funny stuff, seems like 'the best of a bad bunch' and I never had any real belly laughs or found something hysterical. Cohen's previous project Bruno, suffered from the same 'hit and miss' problems, and I'm not sure which out of the two I preferred. One thing is certain though, neither come close to Borat, which for me is one the best characters to come out of British comedy.
This film takes a good fifteen minutes to really get going, and I think it's in part to the introduction of Anna Faris' character, who whilst isn't a barrel of laughs, but does serve as a good straight character for Cohen to play off. Ben Kingsley is obviously a great actor, but I think he gets slightly lost in this one. Here he plays Cohen's not so faithful ally who tries to overthrow Cohen's dictator. Although this is only a minor supporting role intended to give license to Cohen's character as well as give the film some kind of plot, it all feels a bit lacklusture. I think maybe Cohen should return to Ali G for his next film, though I never saw Ali G in da House I understand it wasn't great, so to me he has nothing to lose by doing a new Ali G project. As for The Dictator, I suppose an easy comparison is to Chaplin's The Great Dictator. Whilst Chaplin's film is a little simplistic and naive I think it's a better satire of a dictatorship, it's funnier too. Cohen does attempt to intertwine the ideologies of dictatorship and America's democracy, which is amusing, but isn't something revelatory. I expected a bit more from the Cambridge educated comedian.
How To Steal A Million was a crime caper directed again by one of my favourites William Wyler. This time it saw Hugh Griffiths as a French charlatan who forges and sells famous artworks with the aid of his daughter (Audrey Hepburn). She gains the trust and friendship of Peter O'Toole after she catches him trying to steal these forgeries, and soon they have to work together in order to stop the authorities learning of her father's penchant for forgeries. My expectation wasn't high for this film as it has never been celebrated as one of Hepburn, O'Toole or Wyler's best, but then again when measured against these three great's body of works it was never going to live up to it. It was ultimately a thoroughly enjoyable piece, and I even think I preferred it to Hepburn's iconic Breakfast at Tiffany's. How she is supposed to be the offspring of Hugh Griffith's in this film I'll never know, but she gives one of her synonymous charm offensive performances. Whilst to me she plays the same role in pretty much all the pictures she ever made, it is easy to see why she has become such an icon. Her sweet, vulnerable, yet cheeky persona is easy to fall for, even if it does feel like she's phoning it in at times. As for O'Toole he glides through this picture as if he had written the screenplay himself, but without any air of arrogance, albeit a bit mannered. He has all the best one liners as he seemingly holds all the cards throughout this whole affair. I was also pleased to see Eli Wallach in a supporting role, interestingly in the same year he would make his career defining film The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. I thought he and Charles Boyer (the Golden Age legend) worked well to provide additional comic relief intermittently through the film.
I also enjoyed the actual heist sequence which was quite intricate, yet engaging and believable for the audience. While the film did come off a bit Pink Panther-esque it was still a very fun and charming film that any Hepburn fans would instantly fall in love with. While not the pinnacle of output from O'Toole and Wyler, it's just another example used to showcase each's undeniable talent in the art.
I returned to the Cold War theme by watching The Hunt For Red October. Based on the Tom Clancy, it is adapted for the big screen by Larry Ferguson and directed by the greatest action movie director of the modern age (John McTiernan). It follows a Soviet submarine captain's (Sean Connery) journey to America in the USSR's newest nuclear submersible. What the Americans are trying to figure out is whether he is going to attack or defect.
It is a film produced as a blockbuster and aimed for the masses, so for it may not appease ones with a pedantic obsession with Cold War or possibly Clancy's novel as I understand this to be an emaciated version. What it does achieve though is a tense, gripping account of how these two warring sides are able to communicate with each other in a way where their intentions can be understood. Sean Connery does a good job in making a believable character that may have come off as absurd if incorrectly approached. His counterpart is Alec Baldwin, who has to decipher Red October's intentions as it nears US waters. I find Baldwin nauseating at the best of the times, but at least here he makes Jack Ryan relative and identifiable for the audience. There is also experienced support from the likes of Tim Curry, Scott Glen and Sam Neil (who at times struggles with the Russian accent).
The film is a great taut thriller that relies gripping psychological warfare for it's action. McTiernan does a great job in making this easy to watch, whereas others may have made it too dull. Whilst not the most intellectual film ever, it still manages to offer moments of genuine intrigue and guile. I have never watched the other Jack Ryan movies, but I'd be surprised if they are better than this.
James Whale's adaptation of H.G. Wells' The Invisible Man gave Claude Rains' his star making role. This version is now nearly 80 years old, and I think anyone watching would be surprised at the quality of the special effects. When Rains first reveals himself to be invisible it looks believable and makes you wonder how they achieved such effects. I think this what makes the film as good as it is, as without this it would be instantly forgettable. Sadly the acting isn't up to today's standards and whilst it is watchable, some players appear either stilted or are prone to overact. Rains himself at times fall foul to over doing it, but overall he gives the best performance and is a good choice to portray the mad title character. There is also one of the most annoying characters I've ever witnessed on screen, an Inn lady who overacts to the nth degree when The Invisible Man begins his rampage.
The film's narrative and character development is also affected by the film's short run time in a detrimental way. It feels like there should have been more of a back story to before the protagonist became invisible. At just 75 minutes long though, it is worth your time as you are taken back to a time where movie making was real art form and didn't have to rely on tacky looking, overblown CGI for it's effects.
My next film was a lesson in overacting, with Ronald Coleman playing an actor who becomes so immersed in his role as Othello, that he soon reproduces this role in real life, with fatal consequence. A Double Life was the first Coleman film I had watched, though I had been aware of his other films such as Lost Horizon and Random Harvest, where he would portray the dashing gentlemanly type. Here he takes on a more sinister and twisted role, and to fantastic effect, and would rightly win the Best Actor Oscar for it.
I must admit that when I had first read the films plot, I thought it absurd, and for the first twenty minutes of the films, it feels like it. However, it's through Coleman's work that this ends up not being as ridiculous as it could and probably should be. He perfectly balances his character's real life persona of normality with the conflicted emotions of the Shakespearean character he's portraying. It's interesting that the role was initially intended for Laurence Olivier, but even the great Olivier would have struggled to match Coleman's portrayal. The supporting cast was also impressive, with a large amount previously unknown to me, apart from that of Edmund O'brien and Shelley Winters, in her first credited movie role. Winters is in her typcial vulnerable downtrodden social outcast role that would largely define her movie career, but is still brilliant to watch. Not many actress' would have the guts to take on these unglamorous roles in this period of Hollywood.
The film itself is also quite subverssive as Coleman engages in an illicit relationship with Winters, whilst trying to amend his nuptials with his ex-wife and leading lady played well by Signe Hasso. The film is the brain child of husband and wife team Ruth Gordon (herself a celebrated actress) and Garson Canin. The notion of life imitating art works really well throughout the film as the catalyst that drives Coleman's insanity deeper. It's parallel's with Shakespeare's Othello are interesting and easy for the audience to decipher, which makes the film that bit more gripping to watch. It does at times fall victim to naive moments, that are either a sign of the times when the film was made, or maybe slightly hindered by how explicit the makers could be with certain scenes. It's also directed by the great George Cukor, and is just another entry in a quite extraordinary catalogue of films made by him. Whilst not one of the very best films I've ever seen, it's definitely up there with some of the best film-noirs I've watched (mainly thanks to Coleman), and I thought it was as good as Billy Wilder's Double Indemnity, which I've always found to be over lauded.
Surrogates was a film with a premise that appealed to the Sci-fi fan in me. Sadly it started off by giving out some ridiculous and unfeasible statistics that immediately damaged the credibility of the film. It's claim that 98% of the 'world's' population now had a Surrogate android to run their daily lives was a ridiculous statement on any level. Let alone for a film made in 2009 and set in 2017. Even if it had been the US population, there is absolutely no way that amount of people would be able to afford a surrogate, let alone a company being able to manufacture and distribute 295 million units in just ten years. If I were to be even more pedantic, I imagine the energy costs would be quite vast in running one of these things a minimum of twelve hours a day. The film did try to justify this claim by stating that the use of androids in a commercial and military capacity, resulted in affordable androids for general use, even so it detracted from the movie. There were a few too many of these questions concerning the film's concept that kept distracting me throughout the movie.
Anyway once the movie got going, it featured Bruce Willis as an FBI investigating android, who was trying to find out who and what had behind the murders of a number of these Surrogates, which resulted in the death of their human operator's also. Willis' Pulp Fiction co-star Ving Rhames' appeared as the anti-android messiah, prophesying humanity's downfall through the acceptance of androids. James Cromwell appeared in his all too familiar role of corporate patriach, infact they may have just spliced in footage from i-Robot. It was good however seeing Rosamund Pike, who's kept somewhat of a low profile since her appearance in Die Another Day. The acting is bearable, but it is the same type of characters that we've seen in every 'dystopian' Sci-fi movie.
Despite the problems I had with the film, it was mildly entertaining and isn't as convoluted as my first paragraph may have suggested. It is pretty straightforward and easy to follow, and doesn't require the viewer to over think the plot, maybe just the environment setting of the film. Overall though the film falls far short of making it's mark on the genre and is ultimately forgettable. It has nothing powerful or poignant in the film's message that sets it apart from the majority. An interesting idea, that could have been executed a whole lot better.
This is the toughest list of them all, so to make things easier, only included in the list are the "good" bond girls, and there will be a latter list for the henchwomen. I can't emphasise how hard a top 5 is, although Ekland looked incredible in "that" bikini she couldn't act, Izabelle Scorupco seemed to have everything but she didn't quite make it, Carole Bouquet has everything except personality, Ursula Andress was "THE" original bond girl and Denise Richards erm, well she was hot...
5. Solitaire (Jane Seymour, Live and Let Die)
Jane Seymour just about gets on to the list in her role as "Solitaire". The tarot card reader whose powers lie in her virginity. Of course Bond manipulates her completely in order to get her into bed, which is portrayed on screeen in a completely misogynistic manner. Still she's superbly naive to Moore's double-entendre's and rye lines and she looks beautiful throughout the film. Seymour was one of the few Bond girls to forge a successful post-Bond career, and still maintains her good looks today.
4. Anya Amasova (Barbara Bach, The Spy Who Loved Me)
Mrs. Ringo Starr is possibly the most attractive of all the Bond girls. She was also developed as a character to match Bond, as she plays his KGB counterpart. Despite having one of the better roles of a Bond girls, her acting skills leave much to be desired. Still, it doesn't matter as she wears some of the most provocative outfits of the Bond series. Another who starred opposite Moore, and as such got the brunt of his cheesy one liners and puns, which make her status as a Bond girl all the Moore impressive.
3. Tracy Di Vicenzo (Dame Diana Rigg,On Her Majesty's Secret Service)
The only true Bond girl, in the sense that she married him. It's believable and easy to see why, as she is a strong willed woman, who manages to hold her own and equal Bond in the charm department. Though Tracy isn't the most attractive of the Bond girls, she has intelligence and personality that few of the early Bond girls match. Her fatal and poignant ending is one of the most memorable and admired scenes from the franchise. She's yet another element as to why On Her Majesty's Secret Service is one of the best Bond films.
2. Pussy Galore (Honor Blackman, Goldfinger)
The most famously named Bond girl, and because of it the most recognised. Despite her ridiculous name, she is definetly one of the more interesting Bond girls, as a part of Auric Goldfinger's crew of female pilots. Her sexuality, like her morality, is implicitly questionable to say the least, despite this Bond manages to seduce her in the stables. She is one of the most strong-willed of the Bond girls, as well as being one of the most aesthetically pleasing. It's interesting to note that 8 years earlier Honor Blackman was the star and Sean Connery an extra in the Titanic-based film A Night to Remember. Honor Blackman is now 84, but still looks remarkably good for her age.
1. Vesper Lynd (Eva Green, Casino Royale) For me, I think Vesper Lynd pips, as not only is she a great Bond girl, but her character goes some way in shaping the man Bond would become. Another independant Bond girl, but who comes across as incredibly feminine at the same time. She at times appears emotionally fragile (as too does Bond himself), but is able maintain her composure when it matters most. She also has her own wit and charm, as well as intelligence and guile. She's the first woman Bond falls in love with, and her demise is what shapes the Bond we know and love. Eva Green is one of the most perfectly proportioned women in film today, and therefore is one of the best looking Bond girls. A great acheivment in making a Bond girl, that encompasses all the good that came before her, and a benchmark for those who follow.
The Quiet Man kicked of my movies this month. It's a film that I've always been aware of, having seen that famous kiss between John Wayne and Maureen O'Hara many times growing up watching E.T: The Extra Terrestrial. Despite liking Wayne, I've never been interested to see this film. Again it's directed by one of my favourite directors in John Ford, who did the equally coloquial How Green Was My Valley. The Quiet Man tells the story of an American (Wayne), who returns to the Irish villages he was descended from and falls in love with a local girl (O'Hara). As he tries to court this tempestuous girl, he runs into various conflicts from those trying to stop the union, at which point his shady past begins to catch up with him. The film is has more of a comedic tone, than the dramatic How Green Was My Valley, and I think this is what sadly dates the film. Though there are funny moments, it sometimes comes across as too slapstick at times, and the times without the comedy I found a bit dull. The story is one that maybe has been adapted to film in different versions many times and so the story seemed a bit tired to me. Having said that, I can certainly see why it's one of Ford's and Wayne's more loved works, indeed it's very amusing watching Wayne in this rural Irish setting. My biggest problem, is that I will always compare it to How Green Was My Valley, which I think is a much better, if more sombre film. One day I may revisit The Quiet Man, but whenever I want a slice of Ford's idealistic, quaint take on rural life in the early 20th century, there's only one film I'm going to watch.
Next up I caught Becket, Peter Glenville's biopic, which was based on the Jean Anouilh play. This was a real treat, a film that I had often put off, due to my lack of interest and knowledge in the subject matter. However, Richard Burton as Thomas Becket and Peter O'Toole as King Henry II were simply subliminal in their roles. Their chemistry was electric and their performances only profited from this. It's shocking that these two actors had 15 Best Actor nominations between them, and they haven't won one between them. For me it's O'Toole who really shines, as the unscrupolous King who tries to manipulate his kingdom by manouevering church and state to his advantage. He employs his good friend and current Chancellor, Becket (Burton), as the new Archbishop of Canterbury, it is at this point that Becket allies with God at the expense of his king and former friend. It really is riveting stuff and it's a shame that they don't make regal, theatrical films like these anymore. I can't wait to catch The Lion In Winter now, which also has the brilliant O'Toole reprising his role as King Henry II.
I continued my Marilyn Monroe season by watching As Young As You Feel, it was one of her smaller roles, just before she became an A-Lister. It was a very similar type role to that of her one in Monkey Business, she again plays a company secretary, this time she's the foil to Monty Wooly's character, who has masqueraded as his own company's president in order to settle his own personal injustices. Although directed by Harmon Jones, it very much as the feel of a Hawks' comedy of that time. In a way it is slightly ludicrous that so many people fail to recognise Monty Wooly's disguise as he is so unique, but the film does serve as a fun and amusing slight on big business that still resonates today. It interesting to note that this is based on a story by Paddy Chevsky who later went on to write a more serious toned satire in Network. The screenplay was also written by Lamar Trotti who was involved in classics such as Young Mr. Lincoln, The Ox-bow Incident and Drums Along The Mohawk. There is more wealth of talent Thelma Ritter and Jean Peters (who would later appear alongside Marilyn in Niagra), so in that sense it's an interesting piece to watch in the context of these various different artists. Like the other comedies of the period it's very much more of the same, though I do think it had a bit more bite in it's attack of big business, which was probably quite near the mark for that time. It's a shame it's probably only watched today more as a Monroe piece, which it definetly isn't and it should be regarded on it's own merits.
I also used the month to purchase a copy of The Heiress, which I had long been interested to see. Comprising of a cast including Montgomery Clift, Olivia De Havilland and Ralph Richardson, as well as being directed by one of my all time favourites in William Wyler, this for me seemed like a great, if a little strange marriage of talent. Indeed it was rumoured De Havilland was a little bullied on set by thespian Richardson and method actor Clift, who both deemed her beneath them. I have to say though I was impressed by De Havilland, who I sometimes find too bland, here she played the socially awkward daughter to Richardson, who falls for the young, handsome and charming Clift, who Richardson suspects of "fortune hunting". In terms of character development, the film is enchanting as we see this young naive woman wake up to the cruelty of some (including her father). It is at times heartbreaking watching De Havilland in this movie, and I'd be surprised if she ever put in a performance as worthy as this one. To outdo both Richardson and Clift is no mean feat, but I feel she just about steals the movie here, although I imagine her naivity may be a bit grating for some. Wyler for me proves once again he can tackle any story, to my mind one of the most underrated directors ever. Whilst this does trail off a bit in parts, I still find it a fascinating film that is different to most. I know it's a cliché but they really don't make them like this anymore, a bit of a gamble in terms of casting and production, but it pays off.
The Way We Were was also viewed this month, another Barbara Streisand vehicle, perhaps best remembered for it's Oscar winning song "Memories". It's a coming of age tale that centres on the relationship of a political activist (Streisand) and her fellow college student (Robert Redford). It is in some ways an unconventional romance story, as their love doesn't really blossom until several years after leaving college. Whilst she is a stern and serious Jewish girl, he takes a more laid back approach to life, which puts strain on their relationship. Whilst their love for each other is evident, their differences begin to tear them apart. Whilst it is quite a interesting film, I couldn't help but find myself constantly confused by both the plot and timeline. The character's decisions at times to me seemed questionable, and I had trouble coming to terms with the believability of Streisand's character. Despite this she does produce a very enigmatic performance, unlike her previous roles, but like Funny Girl, I felt there was too much pandering to her performance, which meant that the other actors, including Redford suffered. Redford's performance is interesting in the fact that it's very similar to his next film role in that of The Great Gatsby. Whilst it was emotionally stirring and at times powerful, I couldn't help but feel let down by some of the lacklusture elements of the writing, and questionable motives of the main characters. In the end it's a film worth seeing once, but it is too much of mixed bag to find endearing.
John Sturgess' modern western Bad Day at Black Rock, helped me rediscover my testosterone. It starred Spencer Tracy as a one armed man, who arrives unexpectedly in a desolate town just after the end of the second world war. He is treated with hostility by the locals, who seem apprehensive as to what his intentions in the town are. He soon learns that the town are trying to keep a terrible secret about their recent past. I'm not a massive Sturgess fan, but the film contains a great character study of small town communities, and is possibly one of the first to really bring this to the big screen. In this sense it is almost like a precursor to later films of the 70's such as Straw Dogs and The Wicker Man. It's also a very subversive film and I'd be surprised if any Hollywood films before it had dealt with American civilians hostility towards the Japanese during the war. Indeed it was so subversive that the studio president at the time wasn't going to release the film. Even more suprising in terms of Sturgess is the brevity of this piece, it is half the length of his major films The Great Escape and Ice Station Zebra. Despite this though, the film still contains that broad intensity that drives the character development and conflicts in those films. Another element I enjoyed in this film was the casting of the small town, featuring western stalwarts such as Robert Ryan, Walter Brennan, Ernest Borgnine and Lee Marvin. Interestingly Borgnine and Marvin were on the brink of breaking into stardom themselves just after this movie. Whilst the film as a whole seems very low key, it's broodiness, style and boldness make it different to the majority of other American Westerns.
My next film was another intriguing case study, that took a guise not to dissimilar to a modern day "slasher" movie, albeit with more developed and less one-dimensional characters. Hitchcock's Lifeboat was made at the height of WW2 and starts of aboard a Lifeboat that gradually accumulates passenger's who have survived a U-Boat bombing, the last passenger to board, happens to be that U-boat captain. It was a screenplay written by legendary author John Steinbeck whose social commentary for this project was as equally present as in his previous works. It is also the first film I've seen with the infamous Tallulah Bankhead, along with Hume Cronyn, who is probably more known to modern audience for his roles in Batteries Not Included and Cocoon. The remainder of the cast seemed to comprise of theatrical players, rather than film stars. Nonetheless everyone involved did a telling job in helping evolve their characters, with the limited time available to them. This was also the first of Hitchcock's 'limited setting' films, followed by Rope, Dial M for Murder and Rear Window; and though it carried the same intensity and intrigue as those other movie, it began to fall flat towards the end. The problem with it, was that ultimately (despite what the Hitchcock fans will say) this was a propaganda piece, which led it to become a bit overzealous in painting certain characters in a bad light. Of course you could argue this point both ways, but ultimately, it made some of the characters and plot that bit less believable, and in some way made the ending anti-climatic, which was strange for a Hitchcock film.
Technically, it is one of Hitchcock's most impressive acheivements, conveying a range of character in a confined environment, across a limited space of time. It probably stands up well against other contemporary propaganda pieces, but against Hitchcock's other work, it falls slighlty short. It still serves as an interesting piece regardless of it's political and historical context, and of course for Bankhead uttering her trademark "Dahlings" intermittently throughout the picture.
From the Queen of decadent socials, to the Queen of aloofness with Greta Garbo and her second Hollywood film The Temptress. Like her first one, this too was based on an Ibánez classic, this time pairing her opposite MGM's answer to Valentino in Antonio Moreno. In a vamp role, she would make her own throughout her silents, she plays a character that seemingy destroys all those men who come into contact with her. As soon as Garbo appears on screen her technique is masterful, as she conveys the most powerful emotions a silent actress can display, with the subtlety of movements that make her seem almost natural. Her seductive nature and tones are always conveyed with her sultry longing eye movements, but at the same time the measure is just right, as if not to overact. Her final scene is one of her greatest, and is the only time she would appear in such a manner on film. Not to take anything away from the rest of the cast who all perform amicably (including one Lionel Barrymore). Antonio Moreno is one of Garbo's men who manages to at least compete with her on screen, and though he may not quite have the charm or charisma of a Valentino or Gilbert, he is a good performer. Fred Niblo's direction is also of merit as he captures some impressive shots, including a well constructed tracking shot during a banquet; and makes use of the local Californian landscape. It is certainly a film that would stand up without Garbo's presence.
It's interesting to note that this filming experience was not a pleasent one for Garbo, who's mentor Mauritz Stiller was sacked from it as director. She also received news of her sister's death during filming, and was not given a leave of absence. She maintained that it was her least favourite movie, probably due to these issues. It is suprising to think this is the same girl, that spawned from the large framed, gawky and unrefined teenager from her Swedish P.U.B. commercials just five years earlier. The MGM star-making machines had worked wonders and it was with her performance in this that cemented her place as the studios new icon. This then led Irving Thalberg to pair her with MGM's leading male icon (John Gilbert) in her next film Flesh and the Devil, which subsequently propelled her to unfathomable heights of stardom.
Another Garbo film I caught, was the sole surviving 9 minute footage of her 1928 film The Divine Woman. The film was the only one of Garbo's Hollywood ones thought to be lost, until this segment was found in a Moscow cinema in 1993. It tells of a soldier (Lars Hanson), who before leaving to be posted in the Algiers, has one last rendezvous with the woman he loves (Garbo). From the footage available, it seems that Garbo has taken a conscious leap from the vamp roles she's most assosciated with during the period, and plays a more wholesome girl. The footage ends on a cliffhanger as he worries that she'll find someone else while his gone, at the same time she wants him to stay, but then he'd be branded a deserter. It's a shame that the rest is lost as it is the only time Garbo worked with her fellow native Sjöström and is also her last film of three with Lars Hanson. Plus it seems like she played against type (also according to contemporary reviews), maybe one day we'll know for sure.
I also caught the MGM musical Meet Me in St. Louis, starring Judy Garland and directed by her future husband Vincente Minelli. It opened in glorious Technicolor, but sadly the title track was pretty poor and I was starting to worry for the rest of the picture. The songs did improve, but not to a level where it made me enamoured with the movie. The best thing about the whole thing is without doubt Judy Garland, the movie would be lost without her. Sure, she was probably given the best and most humorous lines, and being the star she looked head and shoulders above her support in terms of beauty. But it really is with the songs that she shines, when other cast members are singing, it fails to hold my attention, but when Garland comes in it sounds great. The best example of this is the famous 'Trolly Song', where the vigour and razmataz of the background cast fail to inspire me, before Garland steps in. As for the plot, it's pretty unappealing to me and I think many modern day audiences would struggle with it's over-simplistic and somewhat whitewash view of life in St. Louis at the turn of the century. Still it ends with Garland's rendition of the timeless 'Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas', which again helped the film. Overall though it's pretty bland and a bit dated, but I will still give A Star is Born a try.
I returned to Garbo by watching her first notable screen role in Gösta BerlingsSaga and her last ever film The Two Faced Woman. Although she wasn't the main star of Gösta BerlingsSaga she had a prominent and plot-centric role as an Italian Countess. The film centred on the title character, played by Lars Hanson (who would go on to join Garbo in Hollywood and two films), his character is a desposed minister who finds solace working as protector of a large country manor house, with other fellow outcasts. 'Saga' really is the apt word to describe the film as it involves a complex, intertwined plot that takes 3 hours to unravel. Despite the run time, the story is really quite interesting, and the plot twists and turns from one point to the next as we follow our hero fall in love with various different women along the way. He soon believes that is him who is a curse to the lives of others, and he seeks some form of solace in his life whether by romance or personal acheivement. As for Garbo, she is still somewhat off that Hollywood look she would acquire 2 years later in Hollywood, but the foundations are definetly there. Her eyes and gesturing still provide that Garbo allure that would become her trademark, and here she is a cuter beauty, being slightly fuller figured as well as playing a role of relative goodness. Directed by her mentor Mauritz Stiller, he offers a lot in technical ability in this film, with some of the scenes simply marvellous. Most notable of these are the fire at the manor house as well as a sleigh ride across a frozen lake. I used to think Swedish cinema started with Ingmar Bergman, but this film certainly proves this not be the case, albeit this possibly marked the end of Sweden's prominence in the field until Bergman. I must say also add that so far I've only seen three Lars Hanson films, but he's always a fascinating watch and this was my favourite of his performances. Though I probably wouldn't watched this film had Garbo not been in it, it was well worth watching and probably a necessity for any film historian. Some silent films can be quite hard to stick with, but I had no such problems here as it was a riveting and somewhat mystical story.
Now to the complete opposite end of Garbo's film career, the one many cited as being the one that caused her demise. Two Faced Woman was written off the back of Garbo's successful transition into comedy with her role in Ninotchka, like that film she was again paired with Melvyn Douglas, although this one was directed by George Cukor (who worked with Garbo on Camille) and not Ernst Lubitsch. It follows Garbo as she pretends to be her own fun-filled twin sister in order to try to win him back. It sounds incredulous and contrived and it pretty much is, that's not to say it's as bad a film as film history portrays it to be. In fairness it has some moments, and Garbo's image is transformed once more, from even that of Ninotchka, two years previous. She comes across almost Claudette Colbert-like and is very cute in this film, as she playfully seduces her lead. I think one of the film's problems is Melvyn Douglas, whilst watching it, I felt Cary Grant would have performed better in the role, I've sinced learned that he was Cukor's first choice. Some criticise Garbo's comedic performance, but I feel she is at the very least competent in this environment and more than competes off her lead, though maybe Contstance Bennett as her love rival is more convincing. Overall, it's not a great film when compared against Garbo's other work, but it's not the disaster legend would have you believe. Indeed it managed to break even at the box-office, I also believe Garbo though dented by the reviews, wished to make further movies, but it never came into fruition for one reason or another. It's a shame that Garbo would sign off her film career with this rather mediocre comedy, but it's still fun and gives us further insight into her capabilities as an actress.
The Mysterious Lady was the fifth Garbo picture I watched this month, with her in one of her more familiar roles as a vamp. She plays a Russian spy who seduces an Austrian officer (Conrad Nagel), in order to procure some important plans, but her mission is compromised as she falls in love with him. It is a pretty standard picture in that aspect, similar to her later film Mata Hari, like The Temptress this is again directed by Fred Niblo, who again produces some decent scenes and set pieces, but doesn't quite have the potency of the final scene of The Temptress. Garbo being her typical screen persona is hardly a negative point of this movie, as no matter how many times you watch her she never loses that allure or mystique. Her leading man Nagel is nothing more than competent, he doesn't have that extra charisma or charm that sets him apart from the rest. It's a decent film, with a couple of scenes that are among Garbo's best, but it's nowhere near career defining. I will be watching my third Fred Niblo film next month, and probably his most famous, regarded as the film he saved from destroying MGM Ben Hur: A Tale of The Christ.
I ended the month watching Mildred Pierce, a melodrama charting a woman's life as she divorce's her husband, who she learns is cheating on her, and tries to become independant in her own right. She establishes herself as a restraunteur through hard graft in order to provide her daughters with the best things in life. I personally found the first twenty minutes of the film difficult to get into, due to the non-linear structure of the opening. However, once the narrative of how we got to the present situation begins, the film starts to take shape. As the film progresses Pierce gains more confidence and business acumen, and attracts the attentions of the man (Zachary Scott) she purchases her first restaurant from. As this romance begins, she is struck by a tragic blow as one of her daughters dies from pneumonia. This makes Mildred strive harder to deliver everything to her one surviving daughter. As time passes, her daughter becomes more spoilt, and begins to resent her mother's livelihood. This brings friction between the two to a head, and the climax to the film is almost mesmerising, as Crawford is forced to face some harsh home truths. The performances are quite powerful, espescially from Joan Crawford and business colleague Eve Arden, who both showcase how powerful women could appear on screen during Hollywood's golden age. This is something that I think has been, to some degree, disregarded in films today; as back then women's assets were highlighted by the different qualities they had to men, whereas I believe today women strive to find equality in having the same qualities as men. Although the film as a whole is melodramatic, it doesn't go overboard and remains relatively grounded for something that had the potential to go too far. Even if some of Crawford's outfits aren't befitting a struggling 1940's housewife. It's a good film that I believe also works as a feminist piece, that manages to neither patronise women or it's audience, though it isn't flawless.
Ally turned foe, the former 006 betrays Bond and the Mi6 in order to avenge his parents treatment after the war. During the electric opening of Goldeneye Trevelyan fakes his own execution at which point Bond blows up a chemical warfare factory and escapes. It's not until 9 years later that Bond realises the betrayal. Bean is a great casting choice and he fits the role perfectly, as he attempts to destroy London and steal millions of pounds. The best of the modern Bond villains.
By far the fiercest of the female villains of the series, she serves as one of Blofeld's main member's of SPECTRE. She is extremely cunning and seems to exert a lot of power in the film as she directs the equally brilliant Red Grant to steal a decoding device and kill Bond. Her final confrontation with Bond is also very enjoyable, as it seems very pure and doesn't have to be bogged down by political correctness or smart gimmicks. Even though Rosa Klebb does more for Women's Lib than Halle Berry ever could (Klebb is even a pun on a Russian female liberation movement).
Played by the hammy Christopher Lee, a Bond villain was probably the perfect role for him. Despite this entry being one of the more maligned films' in the series, almost all agree that Lee's Scaramanga is the best thing about it. He's an assassin who charges $1m per kill, and uses the eponymous golden gun to make his kills. He is probably the Bond villain given the biggest backstory in the films, as well as one who establishes possibly the deepest relationship with Bond, as he reveals his abusive upbringing. The dueling personalities and confrontations are the best thing about an otherwise unremarkable film, and the final duel is a good way to end the conflict.
Undoubtedly the quintessential Bond villain, and without question the best. Portrayed a number of times, across a substantial proportion of the movies. It is Pleasance who probably gives the most recognisable Blofeld performance (though Telly Savalas is my favourite). He is the head of the main enemy organisation of the Bond series, SPECTRE, which just further justifies Blofeld position as enemy number 1. He also murders James Bond's wife Tracy (On Her Majesty's Secret Service), not to mention trying to kill Bond himself at least a dozen time. The scarred face, grey suit, and white cat are his synonymous trademark, and the thing which has helped formulate similar type villains in other films, books and tv shows over the last 50 years.
