Movie review - "Quantum of Solace" (2009) **** (re-viewing - warning: spoilers)

I really like this movie, cannot understand the hate other than it depicts the Americans as unscrupulous baddies, Felix Leiter aside.

It has terrific action - a duel with two planes, a chase on foot - and is beautifully shot, full of stunning images - the final Zabriskie Point like building. The script is full of great lines and has memorable characters and moments - Olga Kurylenko's avenging agent, Giancarlo Giannini's world weary former agent, the death of Gemma Arterton is an enjoyable Goldfinger homage.

Mathieu Amalric is an excellent villain, smart and sadistic - when he fights Bond it's like a vicious cat (he's not as strong but he might hurt him), who eats an apple when meeting officers to show his contempt.

There are moving moments like the death of Giannini - the action slows for this and admittedly the editing does feel a bit frantic and choppy at times. I liked the plan to corner the world's water supply and the locations (Bolivia) and that Bond clearly loves his creature comforts.  I did laugh at the concept of Canadian Intelligence, but I loved how Bond didn't get with the girl at the end, that wouldn't have felt right.

Oh and it doesn't go for to long too.

It's an excellent Bond entry.

Book review - "Some Kind of Hero: The Remarkable HIstory of the James Bond Films" by Matthew Field and Ajay Chowhudry

Exhaustive, near definitive account of the making of the famous series, written with passion and enthusiasm but also scholarship. I admit I knew a lot of the first half, but I'm a die hard fan - I know less about the Dalton period onwards, and this illuminated that.

The most striking comment for me was something by Michael Wilson, who said that other producers may have done a better job but plenty of others also would have done a much worse job - and that for me is part of the secret why the series has lasted so long. It's been run by a family business who never made too many mistakes - they always pulled things back on track.

The series has stumbled several times - George Lazenby (who I love but also recognise could have hurt the series), the fights between Broccoli and Saltzman, the constant executive turn over, the bankruptcy of Saltzman, creative misfires, the changing world). But they always manage to pull it back... they find a Roger Moore, or a Pierce Brosnan in the 90s, or after Man with the Golden Gun pull out The Spy Who Loved Me, after Die Another Day do Casino Royale.  When Pierce demands $25 million they change bonds. They don't go with James Brolin or James Gavin. They remain true to Bond.

Screenwriters come and go. They and hired then replaced then brought back again. They don't pick the latest hot director but someone who will fit. They keep costs down. They try to keep up to date but don't slavishly follow trends. They promoted from within.

Some films prove to have been particularly tricky - Die Another Day, Never Say Never Again. Dalton was fired at the behest of the US studio, not of his own accord. Brosnan asked for too much money and was fired.

Exhausting, exhaustive, but very good.

Movie review - "Going Clear: Scientology and the Prison of Belief" (2015) *****

Engrossing film about Scientology from Alex Gibney, who made that excellent film about Enron. It has some awesome footage: the mysterious L Ron Hubbard chatting away to camera, ditto the just-as-mysterious David Miscaviage. There's inhouse Scientology videos including their own attempt at an anthem, footage from conventions, home movie footage of adventures on the boats with L Ron. There's also hidden camera stuff of Scientology thugs trying to shake down people.

There's also some great "talking heads" - Paul Haggis would be the best known, but there's also some former top level Scientology people (one an Aussie whose accent can still be heard). It also discusses the role of Tom Cruise and John Travolta in the Church.

My two cents on this topic: Scientology is no sillier than any other religion, and should never be banned, it just needs to be subject to the rule of law. Like other religions it is susceptible to exploitation from particularly controlling/charismatic people, which seems to be what is happening with Miscaviage. Like many other businesses they keep their competitive edge via exclusionary business practices, suppressing criticism, use of ground troops and relentless effort.

It's a classy documentary with some excellent photography. Miscavige would make a great Bond villain - a Sejanus or Philip the Arab who managed to hang on to his power. Fascinating stuff.

Movie review - “The Next Three Days” (2010) **

I wanted to like this more than I did. It sounded so promising – Paul Haggis, Russell Crowe, an intriguing set up (mild academic tries to bust wife out of prison) – but all along I kept thinking… “it just doesn’t work for me”. And it obviously didn’t for a large audience. Why? Okay first off I think the idea of busting your wife out of prison isn’t one of those all-time archetypal great ideas, like rescuing your daughter from kidnappers (Taken), or getting revenge on bullies. 

Maybe it would have worked if it had been about busting your daughter out of prison, or a man with nothing else to live for (i.e. a really dull job, no ties). But Russell’s got a young kid, parents, a good job – not to mention a hot single mother who clearly wants to go for him. Why risk all that? Even if Elizabeth Banks is very good in her part. Maybe they should have had her on death row or something.

Also the movie veers from Crowe’s character being incompetent (making locks that don’t work, getting knocked on the head) to very competent (eg killing meth dealers). I think it would have been better if he’d just been competent – but then I guess that’s not the film they were making.

There are some odd script choices too – like setting up an opposition police man at the beginning but then introducing another one. A lack of humor. Underdeveloped characters – like the single mother who strikes up a bond with Crowe. Frustrating.

Movie review – “Million Dollar Baby” (2005) ****

Three cheers for the Hollywood press for mostly keeping the last act of this film a secret. It packs a real wallop – none too soon, to be honest, because I found the first 90 minutes a bit of a drag, a bit too much crusty Clint and feisty Swank. Most of Clint’s films go on too long and this is no exception; the film also would have benefited from a better actor than Clint in the lead. But Swank is fine (a very convincing boxer) as is Morgan Freeman and the actors who play Swank’s dreadful family. Achingly beautiful final moments.

Movie review - "Crash" (2006) ****1/2

There's a joke a black comedian once told about walking along the street with his black friend and a white couple cross the road to avoid them, and the punchline is "we were so insulted, we went ahead and robbed them". I was reminded of that when watching this powerful tale, about race and other things in LA. Excellently done, it's the sort of film you get the impression they tried to make with Magnolia but didn't quite get to. It's also reminiscent of La Ronde without the sex - we see how person A interacts with B then B with C and so on. It's not so much a plea for tolerance as for politeness - most of the horrible things happen because people lose their temper and yell, causing misunderstandings. Several moments in particular are outstanding - one moment involving a little girl made me gasp, another sequence involving a person trapped in a car is heart-pounding. Excellent acting (Sandra Bullock is frighteningly believable; Ryan Phillippe is again better than you'd think but again not so good as to not make you wish a better actor had played the part). Does William Goldman consider Haggis deciding not to kill the girl an example of "Hollywood horse-sh*t"? Probably.