Bond 23 a go. I am titillated.

What with MGM's financial woes over the last year or so, the prospects for their two biggest properties (The James Bond series and The Hobbit) were looking bleak.

When plans were put into motion for the follow-up to 2008's Quantum of Solace, Daniel Craig was set to return as the titular hero and Sam Mendes (American Beauty, Road to Perdition) was set to direct. As MGM essentially collapsed into bankruptcy, all plans for the next Bond installment came to a screeching halt.


Well, finally some good news. http://www.latinoreview.com/news/-bond-23-goes-full-steam-ahead-scheduled-to-be-out-november-of-2012-11894

Mendes and Craig are still on board and we can expect Bond's return in 2012.

In honor of this wonderful news, I've put together a countdown of my favorite Bond films.

10. "The World Is Not Enough" (1999)



While often decried for Denise Richards' slightly less-than-believable turn as a nuclear physicist named Christmas Jones (a name that is just a set up for a closing sex-joke from Bond), Pierce Brosnan's third outing as Bond sported the only exciting boat chase in cinema history. If that doesn't deserve some action-movie kudos I don't know what does.

9. "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" (1969)



George Lazenby gets a bum rap as far as I'm concerned. Often laughed off as the worst Bond, Lazenby is the only actor in the franchise who never reprized the Bond role. From where I sit, the poor guy just never got a fair shake. He had a number of factors working against him, not the least of which was his status as the first actor to replace the iconic Sean Connery in the role. It's a shame, because the late sixties grooviness of "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" and Lazenby's more nuanced, feeling take on the character is surprisingly enjoyable to watch.


8. "The Spy Who Loved Me" (1977)



Easily the strongest of Roger Moore's seven performances as Bond. Who can forget the awesome opening ski chase? If you have forgotten, it's the one where Bond skis off a cliff. The soundtrack stops. He freefalls in eerie silence. Then out comes the union jack parachute and the iconic Bond theme music. Brilliant I say!

7. "The Living Daylights" (1987)



After more than a decade of Moore's tounge-in-cheek antics, he was replaced by Timothy Dalton in "The Living Daylights." Dalton restored the hard-edged determination of the character from Ian Fleming's novels to great success in his debut.


6. "You Only Live Twice" (1967)



Though Connery's later films didn't quite have the same spark as his earlier run, "You Only Live Twice" remains one of those wonderful time capsules that gives us an idea of what was cool in the 60s. Oh, and the refrain from the Nancy Sinatra theme song is one of the most recognizable in popular music.


5. "Dr. No" (1962)



The first film in the series, "Dr. No" introduced moviegoers to a then-unknown Sean Connery and propelled James Bond from popular paperback hero to cultural icon.

4. "From Russia With Love" (1963)



The second installment in the Bond canon was perhaps its most sophisticated. Few gadgets or gimmicks, a complex plot and a subdued pace keep it from being remembered as an era-defining popcorn flick like some of the other entries in the series. It his, however, one of the finest examples of the spy genre ever committed to celluloid.

3. "Goldeneye" (1995)



Pierce Brosnan's debut marked the first Bond adventure to take place after the fall of the Berlin wall. Many wondered if Bond would be relevant in the post Cold-war, politically correct 1990's. The filmmakers addressed these problems beautifully with the introduction of Judi Dench as M and one of the greatest chase scenes ever filmed tearing through a post-soviet St. Petersburg. After all, why chase someone in a car when you can drive a tank?


2. "Casino Royale" (2006)



After the nauseatingly over-the-top "Die Another Day," Bond was due for a makeover. A steely Daniel Craig replaced the aging Pierce Brosnan and superflous gadgets and CGI were replaced with a compelling plot and well-written characters. This Bond updated the character for the twenty-first century as well as reverting to the rawness of Ian Fleming's original conception of Bond from the novels.


1. "Goldfinger" (1964)




Perhaps the most remembered incarnation of James Bond, Connery's third outing touts the majority of the franchises best-remembered images: The smart-looking, grey, three-piece suit. The silver, gadget-filled Aston Martin DB5, and, of course, the girl covered in gold.

We'll never get to call him "Shirley" again....

Yesterday saw the death of hollywood icon Leslie Nielsen. He passed away from complications related to pneumonia at the age of 84.



Most in my generation will remember him for his turns in classic absurdest parodies like "The Naked Gun" and "Airplane." In these films (and other lesser ones in more recent years), Nielsen utilized his distinguished looks and dead-serious delivery of ridiculous dialogue to create an immortal comic persona.

"Surely you can't be serious."

"I am serious...and don't call me Shirley."


Before his comic turns in the 70s and 80s, Nielsen typically played leading men. One of his first leading roles was 1956's "Forbidden Planet," a science fiction epic. This performance led to a string of strong-jawed hero roles as well as parts in romantic comedies.

As his chiseled good looks gave way to a more fatherly animus, Nielsen satirized his own former persona, parlaying the transition into comedy heavyweight.


He will be missed.

One superhero too many?

Honestly I feel like the comic book abs are more believable. Damn you Ryan Reynolds.

The trailer for the upcoming adaptation of DC comics' "Green Lantern" franchise (now 70 years old) sports Ryan Reynolds giving a quick ab-flash (for the ladies), piloting some experimental jets, giving some pseudo-deep voiceover, bantering with a wooden Blake Lively, battling with a ridiculously bald Peter Sarsgaard, and grappling with some seriously shoddy CGI.

The trailer can be viewed here.

I loved superheroes as a kid. I still love them to some extent. Since the success of the first X-Men film in 2000, comic book franchises have dominated Hollywood to mixed results. Films like The Dark Knight, Iron Man, and the first batches of X-Men and Spider Man sequels showed that there was indeed some depth and gravitas to be found in those serial illustrated sagas.

Unfortunately, the majority of comic book adaptations have been mediocre at best (The Incredible Hulk) and downright offensive at worst (The Fantastic Four anyone?). I'll reserve judgement on this newest foray into the D.C. universe until I see it in theatres, but based on the trailer, I'll be heading into the local Megaplex with low expectations. That might actually work in the movies favor.

Just as a P.S., the credits of Green Lantern do score some points for the following components:

A) Director Martin Campbell, who helmed 1995's "Goldeneye" and 2006's "Casino Royale," two of the best James Bond films in the canon, as well as that wonderful 1997 homage to the swashbucklers of the 1930s, "The Mask of Zorro."

B) Ryan Reynolds. While it is yet to be seen whether he is a truly talented actor, I do find him to be incredibly likable. He has the makings of a movie star and is well on his way to acheiving that status.

C) Peter Sarsgaard. While he may look incredibly silly with that swollen, pink, CGI noggin in the trailer, the man has a great track record with his turns in films like "Garden State" and "Jarhead." He brings some definite indie cred to this iffy production.

Oh, those Coens

I won't lie to you, I'm getting all kinds of fan-boy giddy in anticipation of the Coens' remake of True Grit. For those who are unfamiliar, 1969's True Grit (based on the 1968 novel) was something of a swan song for the era of John Wayne westerns. Sure, he'd star in a few more until his death in 1979, but True Grit was something of a final bow for that classic, slow-talking lug who'd been refining his iconic persona since his first acting gig in 1926.










The '69 adaptation of "Grit" was also significant as it earned Wayne his first Best Actor Oscar. In retrospect, this was probably more of a life-achievement award honoring Wayne for his long and storied career. In my humble opinion, John Wayne's performance in True Grit is perfectly fine, but it doesn't come close to the heights he reached in 1956's The Searchers.  Upon accepting the gold statue, Wayne famously remarked: "If I had known this, I would've put that patch on thirty-five years earlier!"

Anyway, come December we will see if The Coen Brothers are up to the task of one-upping John Wayne. I'm optimistic, considering they cast the "can-do-no-wrong" Jeff Bridges in the role formerly occupied by Wayne. Take a look at the trailer.







Matt Damon with a moustache. Righteous.

Considering the tone of the original film was relatively light, it'll be interesting to see how the Coens' seemingly darker adaptation will compare. Bridges seems like the only man alive who could fill John Wayne's rather sizeable shoes. But more than anything, I hope that this film holds up just for the sake of reviving the western, a genre sorely overlooked in the last decade. Here's hoping.

Revisiting Adaptation.

Charlie Kaufman is nothing if not an original. Love them or hate them, his screenplays have made their way into the cult consciousness(Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Being John Malkovich) . Whether his weirdness is brilliance or just, well, weirdness, is up to the audience I suppose. The Spike Jonze-directed Adaptation is perhaps the definition of self-indulgence. Faced with the task of adapting Susan Orlean's non-fiction book, "The Orchid Thief," Kaufman found himself with a case of profound writer's block. So naturally, he wrote a screenplay about his writer's block, inserting himself into the story (along with a fictional twin brother) along with a fictionalized version of Orlean played by Meryl Streep.

First off, I just love that somehow Jonze and Kaufman were able to get this movie made. It takes balls for a screenwriter to write a screenplay about screenwriting and confront its difficulties by inserting a real-life book and person into a story about the lack of story that exists in the source material while commenting on the contrived gimmicks screenwriters use to get attention while having your film climax in all of those gimmicks and cliches.

Does that summation make sense?

I recently re-watched Adaptation for the first time since seeing it five years ago. On my first viewing, I was unsure of how to respond. I was unfamiliar with Kaufman and Jonze for the most part, so the abrupt tonal changes and multiple layers of reflexivity threw me off. Upon watching it again, i was struck by how magnificently this seemingly impossible idea was pulled off. Kaufman confronts all of his own neuroses by bearing them for his audience through Nicholas Cage's performance. Yet the film never feels to self-congratulatory. It's about the difficulties of storytelling, and the messiness of the story told within that premise is kind of the whole wonderfully self-deprecating bent of this insane movie. In short, it blew my mind.

Eastwood's Softer Side

The man. The Legend. Clint Eastwood. At 80 years old, he's become an institution. With 65 acting credits and 35 in the director's chair, and a Gorillaz song named after him, I think it's safe to say his legacy in hollywood is intact.

Which makes his seemingly endless energy for filmmaking all the more impressive. His latest, Hereafter, stars Matt Damon as a psychic with the blues. Oh, and he talks to dead people. I'm pretty sure Jason Bourne could do that to. I mean, hell, that guy can do anything.

"Scotty doesn't know."

 

 

 

 

 

For some reason I can't embed the trailer but you can watch it here.

It's strange to see Eastwood tackling the supernatural. I can't recall any Eastwood-directed title until this one that didn't take place in a pretty gritty reality. Based on the trailer it looks like we're gonna be dealing with an oscar-bait tearjerker. You know, like The Good, The Bad and The Ugly but with more crying and hugging.

The Final Finding on Fincher's Facebook Film

A couple weeks back I posted on my mixed feelings about the premise behind David Fincher's "The Social Network." While i was intrigued, I was skeptical as to whether Fincher, masterful as he is, could draw much drama from the story of Facebook and its dorky creator.

I finally saw the film, and for the life of me, I'm still not sure if I was right to be apprehensive. On one level, my fears were justified. On another level though, "The Social Network" is a magnificent film.

Basically, I'm still where I was a couple of weeks ago.

When it comes to the language of film, few can rival Fincher. His biopic on Mark Zuckerberg is beautifully shot and well-told. The performances are all top-notch, particularly Jesse Eisenberg's dork-douche hybrid interpretation of Zuckerberg.

While the screenplay is highly fictionalized, most of the major points match the public record. Zuckerberg is painted as a driven, sometimes arrogant but always brilliant entrepreneur. Supporting players Andrew Garfield and Justin Timberlake are worthy foils, and the combination of performances and efficient rhythm make "The Social Network" an engaging if not riveting experience.

I say engaging rather than riveting as confirmation of what I'd originally suspected about the film when i first heard about it several months ago. The flaw at the core of this film is a subjective one: I'm just not all that interested in the creator of Facebook and his story. What can you do?