Because it’s not just a Bond film. It’s actually about something other than tropes and ticking boxes. I often hear the mantra, “Folk only love it because it ties in with the N64 game.” It’s a decent proposition for an argument but misses the point – the game is also amazing yet they don’t depend on each other.
Goldeneye (1995) is so well crafted, so correctly paced, so … frankly strange. The Eric Serra score is implausible yet it somehow works. Perhaps the gargantuan gap (world events) between 1989 and 1995 was for the best, because this picture at times even becomes about that End of History theme. And the villain is the only one you can take seriously in the entire cannon of Bonds. Everything 006 does seems plausible and he brings out the best in 007.
The official narrative is that Get Shorty (1995) fits into the vanguard of that John Travolta mid-’90s comeback which lasted all the way until Battlefield Earth (2000). I’ve never seen the latter but hear it’s atrocious; it’s on my list.
Get Shorty is wildly entertaining, if not especially revelatory about its subject matter, nor does it offer anything new. It’s an exercise in style and the merits of characterisation, amusing without being particularly laugh-out-loud funny. Most of the fun derives from watching Chili Palmer charm his way into the movie business and outwit everyone else. He doesn’t really know what he’s doing but appears to. There’s a lot to be said for that.
And Gene Hackman, once again, is superb. He really wasn’t (he’s apparently retired now) afraid to play the ‘loser type’ despite being your definition of the macho male. It’s almost uncomfortable witnessing his antics here, especially his attempts to play the hard man to Dennis Farina’s Miami mobster.
And this is disturbing – back in the olden days when you took photos to Boots to be developed there will have been someone like Seymour “Sy” Parrish (Williams’ protagonist) inspecting your every shot, vicariously living his (it’s usually a creepy bloke) life through yours. I read a story years ago about some wee creep phoning the cops because he spotted a cannabis plant in the backdrop of a photo. How dignified.
Robin Williams is the business. We all knew he was hilarious yet his ‘serious roles’ really do demonstrate that he was an actor of the highest calibre, though comedy is acting too. He was in Christopher Nolan’s Insomnia (2002) in the same year and he’s creepy as fuck in that as well. It was a creepy year.
You standard old-fashioned wartime thriller which acts as a serviceable but inferior companion piece to The Day of the Jackal (1973), you’re aware of the outcome but the suspense is in getting there. Unfortunately, the exposition in this one is intriguing enough but by the halfway point it’s a snore. And then Larry Hagman appears as an inexperienced American colonel and it descends into silly comedy which I suspect today wouldn’t survive a pre-production script cull; we all know assassination attempts are no laughing matter.
Thank the heavens for Donald Sutherland. This is another case of Donald Sutherland being hired because only he can play a Donald Sutherland type. He’s fabulously nuts in everything and his career appears to be a personal mission in walking off with the movie. His supporting roles always suppose a spin-off picture with him at the fore. He even made the stinker that is Virus (1999) almost bearable.
Even when I was watching it I was consumed with 100% hatred.
Why does it exist? Like, what? I was lost for words at times. A near scene-for-scene, shot-for-shot remake of a movie that set a new benchmark for cinema. Psycho (1960) isn’t about horror; it’s an exercise in film syntax and narrative. The shower scene is a joke. I find the whole thing totally hilarious. It’s the most ‘self-aware’ film of all time.
This Gus Van Sant bloke doesn’t get it. I cannot stand his films – they are weak, preachy, stylistically anonymous – and I don’t wish to see one of his hideous endeavours ever again. I had a wee look at some of the contemporary reviews and this one had me howling: ‘Literary critic Camille Paglia commented that the only reason to watch it was “to see Anne Heche being assassinated”.’
She is just terrible. I mind she came out as a lesbian or something and then years later said she didn’t get roles because she ‘came out’ as a lesbian.
No one cares about your private life, pal. You just CAN’T ACT!
I can barely remember even seeing this before but I’m sure I would have remembered how great it is … so I suppose I hadn’t seen it before.
What a hoot! It’s a pastiche of cheese so well put together it transcends cheese and elevates itself way into the spheres above cheese. It’s what one deems a self-aware movie – it knows exactly what it is and that’s the foundation. The visuals and set design could have been absolute gash but for some reason they are not. The cartoon-like quality to them serves to amplify the admittedly silly story, but that’s what it’s all about. Not many films today have a sense of ‘world’ about them, as in a universe onscreen in which the environment and the backdrop actually means something and has a relationship, and vice-versa, with the characters. This is how fantasy should be done.
It has the psychedelic feel of a Pink Floyd music video, and for almost the entire duration I thought it was Roger Waters and chums on soundtrack duties. It turned out to be Queen. I don’t like Queen at all. But I liked them here. And Mike Hodges directed this cracker and Get Carter (1970)? I did not know this.
I was in my relative infancy when this shitstorm happened and I still struggle putting it together in 2021. In essence, a lot of greedy folk got very greedy and fucked the whole economic foundations of the world, and governments in almost every country – mostly your alleged left-wing or centre parties trying to get big business on their sides – let it happen.
The setting is clearly Lehman Brothers but I think it’s a bit too kind on them as there are folk in this, boardroom members, with consciences, albeit they still tow the line. It’s riveting drama, a movie with such tense exchanges they are gripping even if you don’t understand what the characters are referring to. You’d need a glossary at times if it weren’t for the Zachary Quinto character who thankfully acts as a conduit to the financial layman amongst us.
There are few histrionics, mainly just rational, coldly logical decisions based on the almighty $ and it’s chilling. You get the scene with the cleaner in the lift oblivious to how the blokes in the foreground are about to crash the system and somewhere down the line she is going to get shafted, i.e., end up paying for it, yet she did her job. It’s never polemical in the Oliver Stone sense, and it isn’t a stylistically razzmatazz event. And it’s Kevin Spacey’s last great film role. He is pure Spacey here and I’m not going to get into the legal stuff because I … will, like all filmgoers, never know the facts. But it’s a shame he departed.
Trying to relate this to a reality I can understand: this Irishman living in the States and his rant for the ages.
A truly ghastly, thoroughly horrible movie that I finally put myself through. I’d heard ominous things about it but figured it couldnt be that bad. Oh my, it’s fucking dire, an absolute train wreck of a film. Let me try and explain why in the shortest time possible: it’s shite. It consists entirely of schematic conversations without a modicum of interest or anything to do with the plot even on a metaphorical level. It takes itself way too seriously to the extent that even the occasional splatter of violence comes across as desperately pretentious.
Nothing in it made any sense and yet with every scene I could smell the smugness on display; I got the feeling that the cast thought they were in a peak Tarantino. So boring, so without merit, so painful to watch. Give me those actors and a mere £200,000 and I will make you a better film.
A few folk I know have said something along the lines of, “Oh, it’s Cormac McCarthy.” I have no idea who he is (I don’t read much fiction) but I can assure you that in the screenwriting realm he is on this display a talentless fellow who probably lives in a log cabin just for the existential kudos. And what in the hell happened to Ridley Scott? He seems to be dedicating himself to garbage these days. Someone needs to write him a decent script.
I hated this movie so much. It’s the worst I’ve seen in a LONG TIME.
This film is pretty much unique in its mastery of tone, a sense that you really don’t know whether it’s a drama or a comedy or where it’s going – it’s almost two or three genres in one and it’s informative to read the director’s quote about how they managed to achieve this no small feat: ‘With Grosse Pointe Blank I shot three movies simultaneously. We shot the script as written, we shot a mildly understated version, and we shot a completely over-the-top version, which usually was what was used.’
There’s a sweeping theme here of trying to recapture something that was never really there in the first place, the most thoughtful treatment of nostalgia ever to feature in what is ostensibly a comedy with gunfights. Only a peak John Cusack – the only ’80s geek to graduate to the postmodern – could carry it off. And as High School reunions go, ‘Mirror in the Bathroom’ should accompany each event:
A flawless movie. Even Dan Aykroyd is great in it and I generally cannot stand the lad.