Change Your Image
greatandimproving
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againThis list is as unbiased as it gets. I was not subject to any influence whatsoever beyond the voice in my head. If you came down to Earth from Mars, poured yourself a vodka martini (shaken, not stirred) and kicked back to binge all of 007's adventures from Dr. No to No Time to Die, I'm sure you'd rank them like this too...
And should that ever happen, please call me. Because you'll need a Bond friend like I do. Trust me- nobody else understands the wonderment of Q's gadgets, Aston Martin DB5s, iceberg submarines and the like. They don't get it and they never will. Just call me. :)
Reviews
On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969)
Whole greater than the sum of the parts (#6)
The best way to go into On Her Majesty's Secret Service is with low expectations and an open mind. "Since Sean Connery's AWOL and it's George Lazenby's only 007 feature, it must have been a mess... right? Right?!" No, not right. Not at all right. This film is FUN and has plenty of highlights whether you're a Lazenby fan or not.
For starters, it's the first Bond script that's actually tight and moves at a natural pace. The screenplay by Richard Maibaum (with dialogue help from Simon Raven) is coherent and just flowwws. We're enjoying the ride; we're not suffering whiplash, wondering what just happened or begging for it to end. It balances action, character development, humor and classic Bond technical jargon- and it does so with aplomb.
Some very cool locations, too. From London to Lisbon to Bern, we're given a distinct if incomplete taste of Europe. But the 'peak' comes when our hero ventures into the Swiss Alps and we're blessed with breathtaking photography from Michael Reed (his only Bond as DP) and Peter Hunt (his only Bond as Director). These two clearly came equipped with new ideas to leave their mark on the series, and we're the direct beneficiaries of their vision. The film is worth seeing if only for the fact that it looks good...
But it also *sounds good. While it lacks an eponymously-titled vocal like 'Goldfinger' or 'Thunderball,' it truly doesn't need one. The score stands on its own with a versatile and catchy melody, led by an arrangement of horns, euphonium and synthesizer that are reflective of that era and fit well with the (at times mind-bending) nature of the plot. What's more, the de facto lead tune is We Have All the Time in the World, performed by Louis Armstrong and written specifically for the film by long-time Bond collaborators John Barry and Hal David. The title isn't just a cliche either. It reinforces the countless images of clocks, dials, watches and other timepieces sprinkled throughout the film to build suspense- even if we don't always know what we're 'waiting' for. I'm telling you, they spent a lot of time and energy on this production and it can reach you on multiple levels. It's a full sensory experience.
As for Lazenby, I thought he was an excellent choice because he's NOT Connery. His presence isn't as imposing and doesn't try to be. He allows his supporting cast to carve out their own niches, which is useful given how much emphasis is placed on the storyline with Tracy (the Bond girl du jour). In a sense, Chef Lazenby leaves space in the proverbial kitchen for other cooks to contribute, and they improve the menu together.
On Her Majesty's Secret Service is also a Christmas movie! So next time you're dragged into that ol' debate about the best holiday film and everyone else opts for a Charlie Brown, John McClane or Kevin McCallister title, you can knock their socks off with the ultimate name: Bond, James Bond.
My favorite line comes at the end of the pre-credits sequence when Lazenby turns to the camera and quips: "This never happened to the other feller." It's a masterful touch that puts the audience at ease with the elephant in the room while also revealing an openness to tweaking the formula- which it proceeds to do for the next two hours. Another notable line is when Bond says "I love you." I won't give away when or why that comes. But you don't hear him say it again until No Time to Die over 50 years later. Feel free to impress your friends with that little nugget of trivia. :)
Final score: 85/100. A few dry spells and runs a bit long (10 mins longer than any release to that point) but more than makes up for it in other areas. Crafty, creative and memorable. I have it ranked 6th of 27.
---
*** I watched the entire Bond series in chronological order and ranked them without consulting any reviews (the 25 EON Productions films + original Casino Royale + Never Say Never Again). The goal was to judge them as objectively as possible. It was all for fun. The full list can be found at my page! ***
The Act of Killing (2012)
Tough movie to rate
The Indonesian coup of the mid-1960s is an important story to know if only because the effects continue to be seen today. I keep going back and forth on Oppenheimer & Cynn's The Act of Killing, tho. It's a tough watch and not the kind you'd necessarily 'enjoy'. I don't mean just the disturbing nature of the content either (i.e., genocide). I found the film's length (167-min director's cut), absence of a narrator and complete reliance on subtitles made it awfully easy to get distracted. In the end it's a three-hour study of the psychology of mass murderers, take it or leave it.
At the same time its value is rooted in that same stylistic choice. By letting the characters indict themselves- as opposed to telling viewers how to feel about what they did- the directors take a highly original approach, one I'd say is effective *because it's highly original. It allows audiences to look past Indonesia and judge its story on universal truths that speak to societies everywhere.
I'd even take it a bit further. At first I didn't appreciate the limited political context provided for outsiders like myself. But then I realized I might've been missing the point. The killers never defined their targets beyond "communists"- even for them there wasn't much additional context provided. The label took on a life of its own to mean whatever suited their evolving personal agendas at the time. So what might have begun as an "anti-communist' crusade quickly spiralled into an excuse for serving their insatiable thirst for power. I think we can all relate to that danger today- no matter who we are, where we live, or indeed how we vote.
The Zone of Interest (2023)
You won't forget this one
This film took a new angle to documenting a period that had been milked dry by Hollywood, to the point where the public had almost become desensitized to the horrors of WWII. For that reason, I found its minimalism landed well with me. It never tried to say or show too much- for what's left to be said? What's left to be shown? It simply sought to put the viewer in the moment- to *feel it. I certainly did.
The ambient sound was terrific, if haunting. I don't know whether there was truly that sort of perpetual "hum" coursing through the community neighboring Auschwitz- let alone whether it sounded like that- but to me it all came across as thoroughly authentic. If I had to take issue with anything, it would just be a few scenes with a Polish girl hiding food for camp prisoners overnight. I thought the soundscapes for those were somewhat disorienting and could have been tightened up for maximum impact.
Otherwise the film was on point. In this age of bloated 140-minute epics, I appreciated how it said everything it needed to say in just 105. It didn't mince words but it didn't need words; you lived it as much as you watched it. The more I enjoyed its realism, the more I didn't want it to feel so real, which led to an internal disagreement I rarely experience at the movies. I'm glad creative projects like this are still being supported.
Diamonds Are Forever (1971)
Worst Bond film (#27)
Diamonds are Forever sits alone at the bottom for me. Best part might have been the theme song carried majestically by Shirley Bassey, her first since the superb Goldfinger. Straight downhill from there, tho. Had Connery not 'chosen' to leave after this film I'm sure he would have been fired anyway.
Judging strictly from this performance he had no interest whatsoever in playing 007 anymore. Imagine James Bond going through the motions as an annoyed middle-aged man, whose thought bubble at almost any time can be written as "Pfft!" That's what we have here. No fun. The film ages poorly too. If you didn't think Connery's Bond was enough of a misogynist already, just wait until he puts any doubt to rest by smacking a lady, drowning two others, and verbalizing his chauvinism outright in one of the few scenes where he displays any emotion at all- not surprisingly, anger: "You stup!d twitch! You put the real one back in there!"
Final score = 42/100. Even that feels too high, tbh, but a car chase along the Vegas Strip deserves credit for being historically unique, if not competently staged. Otherwise it has a lame plot, including a storyline around plastic surgery that is abandoned halfway through when the writers realize it's a dead end; a puzzling new version of Blofeld by the same actor (Charles Gray) who had played Dikko in You Only Live Twice, the Connery film immediately preceding this one- which does more to confuse than compel; a truly disposable Bond girl, whose "chemistry" with the leading man can at once be described as basic -and- acidic; action sequences that come few and far between amid long dry stretches that even Vegas' Mojave Desert can't replicate; and a listless Connery who's pounding on the exit door to open. So let me do him a favor and let him out here. Diamonds are forever but bombs are better forgotten. 27th of 27.
-
***I watched the entire Bond series (the 25 EON Productions films, the original Casino Royale and Never Say Never Again) in chronological order and ranked them without consulting any reviews. The goal was to judge them free from external bias. It was all for fun. The full list can be found at my page! ***
Dream Scenario (2023)
Painful, hilarious and beautiful
What an amazing little film. Ultra-relatable. Everyone has a bit of (or a lot of) "Paul Matthews" in them. Had me cringing and laughing in a way I'd never heard myself cringe and laugh before lol. Honestly couldn't stop at times! Nic Cage deserves immense kudos for this role because I can't imagine anyone else pulling it off. He found that perfect medium where you felt bad for Paul, but also didn't mind giggling at him. It's a priceless niche.
Loved the zebra theme that the writers worked into the script. Zebras are striped because they want to merge in with the herd and not stand out to the lions. All Paul ever wanted to be was a zebra... only to find the herd were all lions.
One thing I might wish were different was the way the film ended. Didn't reach full impact with me but that could just be a matter of taste. I might appreciate it more the next time I watch. Otherwise it was incredibly well written and left me with endless food for thought. I don't think any viewer could help but connect with Paul's.. ummm.... lived experience. ;)
Breslin and Hamill: Deadline Artists (2018)
Outstanding
Thoroughly enjoyed this. Inspired me to read their books, which I found just as funny, articulate and thought-provoking.
Love how the film had them recite their own passages like spoken word poetry. Brilliant way to convey the music and magic domiciled in their writing.
That they covered (and were often present for) so many seismic events is remarkable. From the assassinations of Malcolm X, JFK and RFK, to the Vietnam war and the Son of Sam (who corresponded directly with Jimmy), to the subway vigilante, AIDS epidemic, Central Park 5, 9/11... the list goes on and on. Forget about being journalists or reporters; these two were bona fide historians.
I just thought the film captured their essence very well. As if that weren't enough, there are a plethora of celeb insights on their work to hold your attention, including from Jackie O, Shirley MacLaine, Colin Quinn, Spike Lee, Bob Costas, Robert De Niro, etc. You really can't overstate Pete Hamill and Jimmy Breslin's impact on life on New York, and on the craft of journalism more broadly. I'm glad this doc was made and I think you'll enjoy it too.
===
"Hamill would give you the poetry of New York. He had sweep and majesty. It was like walking into a French novel."
"He knew about worlds I didn't know about, and made me feel like I understood them." Hamill on Breslin
(What was it like to be on Nixon's enemies list?) "Oh it was an honor! There were a lot of good people on that list." - Hamill
"I realized early that bad news was great, even if it involved me. I protected myself by writing about it." - Breslin.
The Tetris Murders (2022)
A bit clunky- like a Tetris square
What this series really comes down to is the disconnect between the federal and local investigative authorities. Having "Tetris" in the name is somewhat misleading. Beyond investigators trying to put the puzzle together like a Tetris game, the case has very little to do with that at all.
If anything, I wish they'd spent more time on why the Russian mob would have killed Vladimir and his family. A theory was suggested a few times, but it wasn't explicitly laid out until the very end. And even then it seemed thrown together on a whim imo.
I honestly think the police knew more than they let on throughout the series. During the episodes Sandra surprises them individually with some of the info she's learned, which feels like we're finally getting somewhere. But when they meet later as a group, she "surprises" them with much of the same info again and they pretend like they've never seen it before lol. So you can never tell what's sincere versus what's being staged for dramatic effect. In that sense, if you want to enjoy Ep 3 you'd better hope you forgot what happened in Ep 2 because you might just be seeing some old re-packaged as new.
Another frustrating element was how the script focuses on whether the Feds already had a file open on Vladimir at the time of his murder in 1998. Debate on whether they did or they didn't is a point of focus that spans the entire length of the series. Now I'm no detective lol but in Ep 2 they flash on-screen the FBI's response to her Freedom of Information request, where it says in the Subject line: "Pokhilko, Vladimir 1994-1999." Just from those *dates- if not from the seat of my couch lol- you see the Feds candidly admitting they were on him for four years before he died, and then for another year afterwards (possibly until the evidence was destroyed?). Yet the filmmakers continue to act dumbfounded as to how the FBI/DOJ could have been so responsive to his death in 1998, how the District Court took just two days to issue a subpoena, etc. Yes they were watching him! They told you they were watching him! Can we stop acting like they're hiding it?! It's little gaffes like that that lead you to think the series was produced more for our entertainment than to get actual answers to questions.
For that matter, if you were to ask me why it was deemed a murder-suicide, my answer would be similarly boring: that's just how cases like this are handled. This was a Russian family in the United States (presumably not American citizens yet) who got murdered by Russian hitmen. To what end should American time money and energy be used in an investigation, right? If you look at it that way it makes a lot more sense. Not that it's not dirty or controversial but authorities were looking for any excuse to close the book on it as soon as possible. Because despite the fact it happened on American soil, it wasn't technically an American problem.
And again, it's not like I'm Sherlock Holmes here. I think the police understood that as well. The drama was just sort of manufactured in order to produce a documentary. Fake true crime, if you will. Which is fine. I enjoyed parts of it too. But I wonder if it's not a microcosm of our relationship with media today, and how we're watching a lot of make-believe investigations. Even if they're done with good intentions, sometimes it seems they're conducted more to conceal the truth than to uncover it; more to obfuscate than to educate.
They Called Him Mostly Harmless (2024)
Had its moments
The internet sleuthing dimension got in the way of a really compelling story imo. I don't mind that they talked about the search and the communities cultivated online (emphasis on "cult"). But I wish the producers didn't focus so much on those elements. A nice tight one-hour doc about a man whose isolation led him permanently into the wilderness- and whose identity was only discovered through new technology, crowdfunding and the will of strangers- would have been solid. Instead, too much time was spent on the strangers. The more "serious" it got the more I laughed, and the film lost its punch in the process.
I still think it's worth watching, tho. I won't jump on the hate bandwagon lol. For one, I had never heard anything about his story before and it left me with plenty of food for thought. While this man did something very few (if any) of us would ever do, his life was still surprisingly relatable. How much of that has to do with what you know about him, and how much of it has to do with what you don't?
I thought the quote the producers found from Adams' book was a gem, and really captured the central theme of the project: "Let the past hold on to itself and let the present move forward into the future." Such a pointed reminder for everyone involved: be it those of us watching at home; characters who participated *from home; and maybe most notably "Mr. Harmless" himself, who could never find his way home at all.
True Detective: Night Country: Part 6 (2024)
Doesn't satisfy
Full disclosure: I'd never seen any of the previous seasons of True Detective. This was the first. I also don't feel either way about Jodie Foster. Which is to say I didn't consciously go with a bias. I could judge Night Country on its own merits.
The music was dynamite. I'm not a massive Billie Eilish fan but her theme song was fantastic, and I think they used at least one more of her hits. Such a haunting voice that was perfect for this setting. The rest of the soundtrack was really subdued and well executed. I also liked the themes of the plot. I'm a big progressive and I think the more attention paid to indigenous rights and environmental protection the better. I give the producers serious kudos for mainstreaming these timely topics.
Unfortunately there's a lot that I didn't like. For starters, I would say the season is far more enjoyable to binge than it is to watch with a full week between episodes, because it includes a lot of arthouse nuance that can render even important details easy to forget. By the time next week rolls around you're like, "Who Is this guy again? Why is he there? Or is he just there for the sake of being there- like everyone else?" Couple that with how the unbroken night is its own character and you don't even get proper visuals to jog your memory. It's a grind.
I would go so far as to say it might have worked better as a podcast. Most of the scenes were filmed on a soundstage, and the effort to hide that fact by immersing the shots in total darkness wears you out as a viewer. At least I thought so. If it had been strictly an auditory experience I figure the story might have been easier to follow, if not appreciate.
At the same time I think the root cause of these misfires was that the writing was abstract, so it might have fared even worse as a pod. The plot dimensions were not always established clearly, the characters even less so. Peter was a glassy-eyed jock who had the same energy whether at a party or at death's door. The actress who played Evangeline was held in a strait jacket until the script demanded she do something equally out of character and out of nowhere. Danvers had slightly more consistent bounce, but even with her we witness a personal drama erupt in a way that's more shocking than it is touching, and only reminds us that the writing is a far cry from... say, the Catcher in the Rye. ;)
As for the story, it was a mystery for the sake of a mystery and you needed to survive five episodes to make sense of it. I guess that was the point but, again, it gets tiring. So I wonder if it might have worked better as a movie... Is that the right question?
Who cares what the right question is lol. They chose this and it didn't work for me.
The Truth About Jim (2024)
Far better than expected
Never thought I'd make it through all four episodes but I did. Compelling content with sharp hooks to keep viewers engaged.
At first I was surprised they had so much footage of Jim given that the action largely took place pre-cell phones/pre-cameras being ubiquitous in society. I later realized it wasn't that they had ample footage, but that they were using and re-using the same shots and clips in creative ways- backed by different tones, sequences and music- so that they never felt recycled. Speaks to the production value of the series that such repetitive usage of the same pictures and home videos never derailed the pacing or came across as cheap.
In terms of the story, I found the most fascinating character to be Sierra's grandmother (Jim's third/last wife). I wonder if she didn't have more intel she could have shared but was holding it back out of loyalty to her late husband. I mean I'm just speculating- maybe she just wasn't a big talker. But I'm curious how such a beast could manage to hide so many dark secrets from his partner over multiple decades, when he seemed like such an opportunistic abuser (if not borderline psychotic) with most everyone else. She was a contradiction in that way, by being both a passionate supporter of the investigation while also keeping herself at arm's length from it (perhaps to honor her vows- even in death?). It presents another debate that the series didn't cover head-on: what do you 'owe' your husband who's 15 years gone if you learn he was 100x more monstrous than you had ever known while he was alive? Seems like quite a dilemma. I doubt if she's even answered that question for herself yet.
Enjoyed the series. Much respect to the entire family but particularly Melissa and Jaime Mordecai for bravely facing their biological father's past. Even if it was the "right" thing to do, it couldn't have been easy for them. Hope they can all find some peace now as a broader functional unit- together. Their saga crystallized a key point for me: that while it's important to love and support your family in general, it's also ok to prioritize those who *truly care about you in practice.