So you’ve finally watched Pulp Fiction…What do you do next?

My take on Pulp Fiction as part of my contribution to Cinema Shame

Cinema Shame

My Cinema shame for February is a serious one indeed. Whenever in discussions with my film loving friends there can never be a moment that Pulp Fiction is not mentioned. There is not a conversation that can happen without having the greatest film of all time according to some be brought up. Genius. Masterpiece. Magnum Opus. These are just some of the words used to describe Quentin Tarantino’s Oscar winning 1994 film.

Now that I have finally seen it, am I officially on the bandwagon? My answer is no. Now before I am crucified, let me say that I did not dislike the movie at all. I just did not love it with all my heart and soul as so many others have.

I have finally seen all of Tarrantino’s work. And I am a fan. However when it comes to overall enjoyability, Pulp Fiction is lower on the list…

View original post 139 more words

Advertisements

The Weekly Bond Countdown: #3 – Casino Royale (2006)

One of my top 5 Bond films ever!

Confessions From A Geek Mind

casino_royale_xlg While watching the Everything or Nothing documentary, Barbara Broccoli recalled an important conversation she had with her father, Cubby. He said, “Whenever you have a problem – go back to Fleming.  Go back to the books.”

This was the basis for how Casino Royale came to be.

Casino Royale was the necessary reboot of Bond and the only way Casino Royale could be fully realised on screen.  Die Another Day disappointed not only critics but also Bond fans alike.  But getting Casino Royale off the ground was not going to be easy, and it stems right back to when the book was first published in 1953.

Ian Fleming always wanted Bond to be adapted for the movies.  Unfortunately the studios could only see Bond as a TV series.  Frustrated, Fleming sold the rights to Casino Royale cheaply which later prevented Broccoli and Saltzman from making it the first Bond feature…

View original post 1,475 more words

“Marvel One Shot: Agent Carter” (2013) Review

From Vic’s Movie Den. Review of Agent Carter. Starring the beautiful Hayley Atwell

VIC'S MOVIE DEN

NEs4RrDyoHuyws_1_2

What’s it About?

Frustrated at being marginalized at work, Peggy Carter goes on an unauthorized solo field mission.

“Marvel One Shot: Agent Carter”

Directed by Louis D’Esposito

By Vic

Roughly a year after Captain America is supposedly lost in action, Agent Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell of “The Duchess” ) is re-assigned to a field office in New York City, where her talents are obviously squandered. She goes through her work days as more of an office girl and “go for grunt” than the capable and solid agent she was a year prior. Along with her mundane duties (she even has to answer phones), Carter deals with an all male entourage of loud, obnoxious and chauvinistic goons who do not respect her or use her for her talents.

This is especially true of her superior,  Agent Flynn (Bradley Whitford of “The Cabin in the Woods”), who is a total douche bag…

View original post 439 more words

Bond Evolution Part 2

20140208-160057.jpg

Alrighty then. Time to finish this up. The conclusion of the Bond evolution. Rhymes not intended.

I last left off with Pierce Brosnan. I always felt that he would be the natural evolution of Timothy Dalton because he would be what happens when Dalton and Craig finally become comfortable in his own skin. I would say this is Bond at his physical peak. With that said let’s fast forward say 10-15 years where we see Bond become Sean Connery.

The Connery Bond is an interesting character. Possessing traits of humor like Moore, Refined like Brosnan and with some of the brutality of Dalton and Craig. Therefore I think that Connery is Bond after maybe 20 years on the job and things may have gotten a little boring. Sometimes when trying to get the job done you see that sort of impatience that Craig exhibited. Most particularly in From Russia with Love when he slaps Tatiana Romanova on the Orient Express. It is with Connery that we perhaps see a middle age Bond that still has all his skills but perhaps is a tad annoyed with the fact that he has gotten older. Because of this he is prone to moments where he may overcompensate to prove his worthiness to himself.

Now we come to George Lazenby who sadly only got 1 chance to portray Bond, but was fortunate to be the one to portray Bond at his emotional peak and depths. One thing I always notice about Lazenby is how happy he looks as Bond. Which actually makes him perfect for what the role would have him go through.

When Bond meets Tracy he has met someone who basically is his equal. Parts daring and reckless. Free and nonchalant. I would say these feelings stirred up some youthfulness in Bond and that’s what we see when Lazenby plays him. I don’t think we could have seen the same emotional reactions from Connery. Tracy’s death I think combined with his memories of losing Vesper Lynd as well, bring Bond back to world of an agent. And we would never see the emotional Bond again. At least not yet on screen.

A few more years pass and we reach the Roger Moore era. I feel this is the best logical conclusion for Bond as Moore plays him as a man who knows he is reaching the end, but embraces every second of it. A View to a Kill shows this the best. I mean when you’re a man who has lived the life he has, I would want to top it off as well by taking to bed Tanya Roberts and Grace Jones in the same movie. There are moments when young brutal Bond come into play. One scene in particular from For Your Eyes Only which is my favorite moment for Roger Moore, when he kicks the car with Locque off the cliff. “You left this with Ferrara I believe.” A moment where he gets in touch with his younger self again. Another moment is the “Forever hold your piece” scene in The Man with the Golden Gun. Almost sociopathic in a sense. Moore’s Bond is the most fun. Like that one friend who no matter where you are has you on some crazy adventure. Such as Sheriff J.W. Pepper learned.

Thus conclude my timeline of 007. I had a lot of fun with this and I hope others do it to. As a reminder here is my timeline again

Craig—>Dalton—>Brosnan—>Connery—>Lazenby—>Moore

Dr. No: Ahoy Mr. Bond! Ahoy Mr. Bond! by ctaydus

An example of Shame…which also is my favorite 007 movie

Cinema Shame

Image

Unfortunately I misjudged you, you are just a stupid police man…whose luck has run out.

Before I start this article, I just want to reiterate that I’ve never seen a James Bond film before tonight. My experience with the character of James Bond consists of parodies, video games, and popular culture. So tonight my proverbial Bond virginity has been taken. I watched the 1962 premiere of the Bond character, Dr. No. 

This film did meet many of the expectations that I had about the man with the license to kill: beautiful women, dangerous villains, and witty humor (my favorite being when Bond asks Dr. No if interfering with the American space program was adequate compensation for having no hands). I have to say that I was a little let down by the film. I expected the flash and the pizzazz, that I think has become synonymous with the more modern…

View original post 217 more words

Bond Evolution Part 1

20140208-112723.jpg

I don’t know if this has been done already but if it has I have never seen it. So I was watching Licence to Kill on tv and while watching Bond set up the ill-fated Milton Crest, I had quite an epiphany. I was going to figure out the evolution of James Bond as a human being. How did his traits and personality develop? What’s the chronology of his career as an agent? Now due to the fact that each movie takes place in the present day of whenever it came out I can’t make the movies themselves fit in a timeline but I can fit the actors in this timeline. Hopefully it makes sense to fans as I focus on the development of 007.

To begin we have to have only one assumption of both character and film: Casino Royale is the true beginning. And that it is a character prequel rather than reboot.

Daniel Craig’s Bond begins Casino Royale as a blunt instrument. Even though he has his 2 kills to give him 00-Status. As M tells him his ego is part of the equation and needs to remove it. He is unrefined, in a ways uncomfortable and reckless in his actions. By the time he gets to Skyfall, he has fully come into his role as the agent M expected him to be.

This brings us to Timothy Dalton. I always considered Dalton to be the precursor to Craig in his no nonsense style. Here we see Bond a bit more refined yet still gruff. He also appears to have no regard for authority which I would attribute to the death of M in Skyfall. We see the makings of a better agent but still areas to work on. Years of service bring us to…

Pierce Brosnan

With a little help from a fellow Bond fan on Twitter I was able to incorporate Brosnan into the mix. I actually had the formula work without him I just forgot. But he is official so I have to include him. It was brought to my attention that Goldeneye was originally planned for Timothy Dalton so it would be logical that Brosnan is the next step evolution wise. Gone is the anger and dissatisfaction with his superiors that Dalton carried. I see Brosnan’s Bond as someone who has become self-aware of his capabilities, but perhaps no longer carries the arrogance that preceded him in Casino Royale. I always felt that Brosnan was the most refined Bond in terms of social interactions. He always knew what to wear, what to drink, how to schmooze with the people.

They portrayal of Bond by Pierce Brosnan brings to close the effective early years of Bond’s career. In Part 2 I will discuss what happens to Bond over the years to bring us to the seasoned agent in Sean Connery, George Lazenby and Roger Moore.

Stay tuned….