Rocky (1976)

Rocky is the film that launched Sylvester Stallone’s career. It sees Rocky Balboa picked to take on Apollo Creed in a title match in what looks like a David vs Goliath encounter. The film builds up to this match with the clear sights of Balboa being a lowly fighter who spends large chunks of the movie trying to woo Talia Shire’s Adrian. The climax of the movie sees the fight last far longer than anyone had expected and its only due to a split decision that Apollo Creed wins but despite not winning the title its something far more than that that, he wins the respect of the public and with that his love. Now that might have been a bit sarcastic towards the end there but despite my cynicscm I must say that I actually found this film to be quite enjoyable. However I did have to stick the subtitles on because Stallone at his best is mainly understandable but Burgess Meredith was even worse.

Stallone is quite good as Rocky Balboa. His does come across as someone who is a good boxer but doesn’t look like he’s ever going to get beyond that and its only due to a lucky opportunity that he becomes something bigger. Talia Shire goes on quite the development throughout the film, at the beginning she looks quite shy with massive glasses and a woolly hat and by the end of the film she is quite the glam figure despite this I thought that Shire was very good and becomes at times the most coherent person in the film. As the antagonist, Carl Weathers is quite good as Apollo Creed. He is the cock-sure boxer who feels like he is doing Balboa a favour by sharing the same ring with him and is soundly embarrassed when Rocky doesn’t give in quickly.

Rocky is an enjoyable adventure that doesn’t try and do the stupid by having Balboa win the title but manages to beat people’s expectations. I haven’t seen all the Rocky films but I suspect that this is probably the strongest one because it didnt have anything to compete against and expectations were low but it has good performances and a perfectly good script.

Blood Diamond (2006)

Blood Diamond is a film that has a moral message behind it which is something that would normally put me off. Leonardo Di Caprio plays a guy who is involved in the business of Conflict diamonds meanwhile a guy called Soloman Vandy whose life is ripped apart when a family is torn apart by a rebel army who end up taking Soloman’s son and train him to be a child soldier. The film then moves towards getting Soloman reunited with his family and get his son. The film has a rather harrowing start where a village is attacked and there is a shot of someone having their hand cut off. The harrowness of the start does get toned down but its always in the air of the scene.

Leonardo Di Caprio is someone that has become a very good actor. I remember seeing him in Romeo and Juliet and Titanic and being amazed and how the person who appears in those films becomes the same Leonardo Di Caprio that we see in this and The Aviator. His accent is quite good but does become ropey when he’s shouting. Djimon Hounsou is truly stunning as its effectively his story who goes through all the emotions and it’s a show stealing performance. David Harewood (currently in Homeland) is fantastic as the fantasticly named Captain Poison. He’s a totally loathsome person who is sadly what I suspect a captain in this part of the world is like. His death his done partly out of shot but its due to Hounsou’s face that make it a great exit.
The film’s not perfect. Jennifer Connelly is pretty poor as Maddy Bowen. The character is a journalist that comes across as neither interesting or annoying. Just someone that has been put in there to provide a love interest but doesn’t even do that. I thought that whenever she was on it ruined the story. Another thing I don’t like are the moral lectures that the film goes on about how conflict diamonds have entered the shops and whilst I understand that this is wrong and think that anyone who knowingly uses them is a dreadful person, the fact I know this means that I don’t need the story explained to me like I’m stupid.
Blood Diamond is a film that should be watched but not if your squeamish. There are some genuinely impressive moments and its directed with a certain amount of style but I felt that the lecture could have been removed and it wouldn’t have made the film any less important.

 

Citizen Kane (1941)

Citizen Kane is regarded as one of the greatest movies of all time. The 1941 film sees Orson Wells playing Charles Foster Kane who is a Rupert Murdoch like figure who in the very first shot utters the word Rosebud and dies. The film then tells his story from the early years when his mother and father sell him and that puts him on the road to being a business magnet. The film strives to find out what or who Rosebud is. The film goes through many stages of Kane’s life and the thing that regularly turns up is just how empty Kane’s life is despite having pretty much all the money and posessions that a man could want.

Despite the story having a particulary linear pace there were some nice directing moments which were even more impressive when you stop to think that it was done in the early 1940’s and its hard not to be impressed with a lot of the shots. Unfortunatley apart from Wells, the performances make this film very hard to sit through in one sitting. It was like the mention and start of the Rosebud plot was meant to be put in the background to be forgotten and something to takes the audience’s attention whilst the movie goes along but they forgot to put something so there is an awful lot of people sitting in chairs in big rooms not really doing a lot.

The thing that is something that didn’t quite make sense was when the butler claimed to know that Kane’s last word was Rosebud. There is a possibility that he could have been out of shot but to be honest it was a bit odd. The answer as to what Rosebud was did catch me by surprise. I wasn’t expecting a person but it seemed quite obvious when it was revealed but the movie had been going for so long that I had forgotten that early scene when Kane was a boy.

Citizen Kane isn’t the greatest movie of all time but its not terrible. I do think that this is an example of hype getting out of control and a film not living up to the hype. It was actually a flop at the box office taking just over $200,000 of its $686,033 budget but it seems that over the years it has gained its reputation and there must be something that other people  see but to be honest its all style and no substance.

Skyfall (2012)

The 23^rd James Bond film has some stuff that it needs to do to eradicate the last one. The problems with Quantum of Solace was firstly it was a rubbish title that never got referred to during the entire film. Secondly the theme tune was rubbish, Jack Black and Alicia Keys might be talented musicians on their own but together managed to make something that was marginally better than Madonna’s Die Another Day. Thirdly the plot was baffling and despite a recent watch of the 2008 offering, I still didn’t understand it and no one has been able to tell me what its all about. So I hoped that Skyfall would be able to put the franchise back on track.

The theme tune is very good. I heard it when it was first released I was impressed with it and thought that it was infinitly more impressive when you see it with the titles. It seems to be quite harking back to the Shirley Bassey themes or other 1960’s Bond themes. I would say out of the last three themes its probably the best. The plot is much better than QOS because in Skyfall they are trying to find a list of underground NATO agents that has been stolen and the list is being uploaded onto the internet. The first half has some impressive scenes and it’s the second half which I really enjoyed. It’s when the film starts to step back to the classic era where the old Aston Martin appears and the action moves to Bond’s home in Scotland. It’s where the final action part happens and I’m reminded of Transformers 3 where the main action sequence lasted for a whole hour and dragged for what felt like a lifetime. In this it was actioned packed and moved along at breakneck speed. There was a brief moment which seemed to have come out of a Home Alone movie but the under siege theme that ran through the latter stages of this part helped make it feel like a Bond film.

Daniel Craig puts in another great Bond performance though he does seem to be looking like he is getting on a bit (currently 44). Brosnan was 49 when he did Die Another Day in 2002 so Craig doesn’t have many years left before he will get replaced. Craig does get to do a bit more humorous dialogue than he normally would get to do but he is a very good Bond and whether he is better than Connery is up for debate but on this performance its easy to argue. Javier Bardem is a very good Bond baddie. I don’t think he’s the best one ever but I certainly think that his performance switches between standard and psychotic. The moment where he pulls his top set of teeth out and you see the grimness that is there was a particular highlight. Berenice Marlohe is the brief Bond girl that appears for about 10 minutes before she meets a rather surprising ending. I thought that she didn’t really offer much in the way of a Bond Girl but that would be my only gripe with the film. Judi Dench puts in her best performance. Her involvement has increased since she debuted in Goldeneye and since Craig took over her involvement has got quite more noticeable. It’s great that they managed to include Q into the films after John Cleese’s R was apparently surpluss to requirements in the Casino Royale reboot. Ben Whilshire isn’t Desmond Llewelyn but he is still good as the new Q and I did like the mention of the exploding pen from Goldeney and he says “We don’t do that anymore” and then “If you could bring it back…” was a nice nod to Llewelyn’s Q. It was quite a surprise that they actually killed of Judi Dench’s M. I had heard rumours that this would happen and that Naomie Harris may be Miss Moneypenny and that Ralph Fiennes’ character would be the new M but I thought that she would get to have a walking off into the sunset type ending.

The product placement has been something that has gotten a lot of press. Heineken is the biggest name that seemed to have been attached but actually I hardly noticed it. Both Bond and Tanner cover up the big label and it’s the very fine writing at the top is all that you notice. For me the biggest product placement came from the digger in the pre-title sequence and the rolex watch shot in the next shot. Apart from that the product placement was pretty light or at least as noticeable as it is in other films.

Skyfall is a brilliant Bond film that wasn’t quite what most people would expect but I think that it was trying to lay the groundwork for future Bond films. Sam Mendes has done a very good job with making a 143 minute film seem like it was half that time.

Paranormal Activity 4 (2012)

The fourth paranormal film is the worst of the four so far and I didn't think it would get any worst than the third. It takes place some five years after the events of the second film. We follow the family and we are meant to believe that a blonde kid is the weird one who becomes friends with Wyatt. It's soon revealed that Katie lives across this frankly but what makes it just plain baffling is that Wyatt turns out to be Hunter. So let's get this straight that Katie puts Hunter up for adoption. Adopts a kid and grooms the kid she put up for adoption. How did this get through a script meeting? Why did no one put out this stupid plot hole at any point during pre-production?
 
There were some good moments. The first time when the blonde kid appears in the treehouse was good as was when Katie stood up from the coach. In the screening that I was in when Katie snaps the guys neck some woman behind me said "they did that in the second film" and that's the thing about this film is that they seem to be going through the things they did in the previous films. There was a bit where Wyatt is on a tricycle riding through the kitchen when you think 'ok you've seen the shining, well done'. Also there is the bit where the fridge door opens and you expect something to appear and nothing does which is disappointing. Also a reference is made that the mom and dad aren't getting on and its forgotten and they keep referring to people meeting at katie's house but nothing is made of it until the end where the light shows a group of people in the garden which is from the third film and there is a moment where Katie is running towards the camera and her face goes funny which indicates that they have also seen grave encounters.
 
So in a nutshell, paranormal activity four is rubbish and the worst film of the year so far. It's a lazy film making that doesnt hide the fact that it only exists because the money says it has to. This will no doubt tale hundreds of millions of dollars and it seems like they made this just to see how take people's money. There were people in the screening trying to make everyone else jump and those attempts were more creative and effective than this film.
 
On a final note. It cost me eight pounds to see this rubbish and I jumped twice. That's four quid a jump which simply isn't good enough. Also there is a thing at the end after the credits roll which takes place somewhere and it happens in some shop where the guy holding the camera is walking round, gets found by a weird woman and then leaves the shop.This is meant to leave the door open for a fifth installement but to be honest its going to have to pick up its game to wash away the disappointment of this film.

Rating - 4/10

Octopussy (1983)

Octopussy is the thirteenth bond film and is the sixth one to feature Roger Moor e as James Bond. It was a relief that For Your Eyes Only was a return to form because Moonraker had been such a comical film and For Your Eyes Only was more like older Bond. Sadly it seems like the franchise has taken a step back in Octopussy. First of all let’s address the title, if it weren’t a Bond film you would say it was an Austin Powers movie. The theme song is also something that is important in a bond film and here it’s not as impressive as the last one. The plot itself isn’t as interesting because For Your Eyes Only had a plot and also an underlying tone about revenge whereas in Octopussy the film centres on Bond following a Russian general who is stealing jewels and relics from his own government and is trying to effectively start a new war.

Roger Moore seems to be liking going back to being the ladies man bond as opposed to the 100% series one that we had in the last film. It wasn’t his best performance. It was good to have a lot more Desmond Llewelyn in this movie than we have for quite some time. Q is a very enjoyable character that doesn’t get enough screen time and this seemed to be put right. Robert Brown does well as the new M. It was always going to be hard to replace to replace Bernard Lee as he was so believable in the role but Brown does a good job. Steven Berkoff is the main baddie as General Orlov and I must be honest but I didn’t find him 100% believable. He was good but it just didn’t work for me. As the titled Octopussy, I thought that Maud Adams was a good ‘Bond Girl’ she was someone who seemed to be shrouded in mystery and it was only when it was clear that she was being cheated that she really stood up to the action.

The decision to move the story to India was quite a good one as the story as it meant we got some really nice location footage. It seemed to be quite a contract to move the story from India to East Germany but it did seem to flow quite well.  When the story moved to Germany it seemed to step up a gear and I found the story more enjoyable which is surprising when we have Roger Moore dressed up as a clown trying to convince some American about the impending bomb exploding.

Octopussy isn’t the terrible film that I remember. It’s not as good as For Your Eyes Only but there is a lot to like about this film and I think that it does a perfectly decent job in the franchise.

For Your Eyes Only (1981)

For Your Eyes Only is a return to form of some sorts after the space romp that was Moonraker. It was seen as an attempt to avoid going to far down the slapstick route that it would have inevitably done and become an Austin Powers movie 20 years early. This is the twelth bond movie and the fifth featuring Roger Moore as James Bond and it starts off with a rather curious pre-title sequence because there is a lovely nod to On Her Majesty’s Secret Service where Bond attends the grave of his wife who got killed at the end of that film. It then moves into a weird but very impressive helicopter action piece which sees Blofeld return to the franchise after his last appearance in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service back in 1969. It’s a weird scene because we don’t actually get to see Blofeld’s face and instead get a rather camp voice for the bald guy in a wheelchair. It ends with a rather effective way of killing off the character but its curious why they didn’t try and make a movie around it and not finish him off in such a quick and careless way. As Bond theme’s go, this was a very good one by Sheena Easton which considering its an 80’s track still holds up better than even the Alicia Keys and Jack White’s collaboration from just four years ago.

he plot sees 007 try and retrieve ATAC which has been stolen after the ship it was on was sunk. The film has a theme of revenge as the Bond girl for this movie (Melina Havelock) is out for revenge after her mother and father where murdered. As Bond Girls go she is the least annoying for quite sometime. I wouldn’t say she the perfect Bond girl but she serves a purpose. The story has some impressive sequences which take place in snow (in particular in a slalom) and also on the side of a cliff which I thought was especially well done. Julian Glover is superb in this film and has a real knack for playing totally unlikeable characters such as Walter Donovan in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade and here he plays Aristotle Kristatos who starts off as the protagonist but then becomes the actual villain. I must say he was more convincing as the baddie than the goodie. Roger Moore gives I think his best performance since The Man With The Golden Gun as this is a far more tamed version of 007 than we have seen for some time. Certainly without any of the humour from Moonraker, Moore is able to show a more serious side to the character than we have seen for a while.
The end of the film is rather odd. After the day has been saved and Bond has got the girl there is a scene where someone playing Margaret Thatcher is talking to Bond. I know this was made in 1981 when she was still relatively popular but I just thought that it was one of those instances where reality and fiction mix when they really shouldn’t. It doesn’t add anything and just comes across as a bit indulgent and silly. However For Your Eyes Only is a perfectly decent Bond film with some good chase scenes, a Bond girl that has a purpose for being there and a plot that worked rather well. It was odd that it was the first Bond film that Bernard Lee was in this film but obviously since he died before it was made it was clear he wasn’t going to be in it but I liked how they didn’t rush to replace him and instead wrote him out cleanly and effectively.