nathaniel-04908 Reviews

Goldfinger (1964)

A mixed bag that I'm somewhat surprised is as loved as it is.

[5/10 · 11 August 2020]

In 1964 the third James Bond film Goldfinger was released. Goldfinger is directed by Guy Hamilton and based off of a book of the same name by Ian Fleming. It was a smashing success at the time and is still considered to be among the best Bond films. This is not without reason, for the is a lot to love in Goldfinger, but the worst of the franchise is on display right along with the best of it. Easily the best part of Goldfinger is the titular villain. I consider him to be the quintessential Bond foe. Smothering people with gold paint, a dramatic lair with an industrial laser, menacing speeches, and an excellent plan, what's not to love? Even his lead henchman Oddjob is memorable and fun. It's not all perfect though, there are a lot of things that don't make sense. Partway through the film he calls a bunch of people to his lair, tells them his entire plan (with Bond snooping of course), and then asks them if they want in. All except for one agree. The one outlier is promptly dispatched of, but he gasses the others as well. This begs the question: if he just wanted them dead, why lay out his plan to them? Of course, the real reason is so that Bond can overhear, but it's frustrating to watch. And why would he have the one woman who he knows singlehandedly foiled his entire plan fly his getaway plane unsupervised? Goldfinger is also Q's film debut, and they really go all out with the awesome gadgetry. Hidden trackers and similar items are used to great effect, and any scene with the Aston Martin in it is bound to be awesome. In many ways, this film is as responsible as Dr. No for the James Bond we know and love today. Where Goldfinger fails the most is in its main supporting character, Pussy Galore. It frankly baffles me that she is known as one of the best Bond girls, because for as weak as their characters often are, Goldfinger is probably the only real example of actual sexism. For the first time in a Bond film that a lady doesn't want to sleep with him, he quite literally forces himself on her, and as a result she is so charmed by him that she switches sides, stops Goldfinger's entire plan, and then hooks up with Bond. Whereas in other Bond films the female characters are just poorly written, in this one it's downright disgusting. While I think that the accusations of sexism in the Bond films are often unfair, in this particular film it is incredibly egregious. Goldfinger is, to me, the most disappointing Bond film. It has one of the best villains with one of the best plots, and many of the action scenes are top notch. It is one of the most memorable Bond films, and there is so much to love, but there is equally as much to hate. The story is relatively easy to poke holes in, and the sexism is nearly unbearable. Goldfinger is a mixed bag if I've ever seen one.

From Russia with Love (1963)

A sequel that's better than the original by a long shot.

[8/10 · 11 August 2020]

From Russia with Love is a 1963 film directed by Terence Young, based off of a novel of the same name by Ian Fleming. It is the sequel to Dr. No, and the second film in the iconic James Bond franchise. It follows Bond as he finds himself unknowingly involved in a plot by the sinister organization known as Spectre to pit England against Russia at the height of the Cold War, as well as an attempt to steal a Russian decoding device. From Russia with Love is a great film, and a sequel that is far better than its predecessor. From Russia with Love is very different than many of the Bond films, I believe in a very good way. It is far less dramatic, and while still very stylized it is not nearly as theatrical. While still somewhat fantastical, it is a far more down to earth story, and while the villain is the single best example of an overdramatic foe, within this film he is treated as a hidden menace pulling the strings, and not as a final boss fight. Part of what I love about the film is how unaware Bond is of Spectre's involvement. I'm a sucker for a hidden villain playing both sides. The female lead in this film, Tatiana Romanova, is also a massive step in the right direction for the series. She is a well-rounded character in her own right, who plays nearly as important of a role in the story as Bond himself, and who sees massive growth by the end of the film. It does bother me somewhat that even as she realizes she's being used by Spectre, she fails to realize that Bond is also simply using her. Their entire dynamic is somewhat creepy, and it would have been a better film if they hadn't gotten together in the end, but I suppose that's just too much to ask for in a Bond film. From Russia with Love is a far more plot focused film than its predecessor and puts a larger emphasis on the secret in secret agent. This is a film that manages to work very well outside of the world of the Bond films and is an admirable work even if you view it through the same lens as any other spy thriller.

Dr. No (1962)

A great start for the franchise

[7/10 · 11 August 2020]

Dr. No is a 1962 film directed by Terence Young and based off of Ian Fleming's novel of the same name. It is the first film to feature James Bond, the world's most famous secret agent. This alone has earned it a spot in history as the start of one of the longest running and most significant film franchises ever made. At the time of my writing this, there are 25 films spanning 58 years, with a 26th to be released in three months. For this reason, Dr. No will always hold a special place in the hearts of many fans, from many generations. As a latecomer to the series, I do not share this nostalgia, but the film still holds up very well. Watching it today, one of the most notable things about Dr. No is the overabundance of tropes. It checks every box you would come to expect from a James Bond film, and come to resent from their many copycats. Nonetheless, it is a film that is absolutely oozing with style. Sean Connery pulls of the lead roll with seemingly effortless sophistication and charisma, and I would give him a large part of the credit for this film's success, and by extension the success of the franchise. The story that Dr. No tells is simple and straightforward, but I generally feel that this works in its favor. We are thrown right into the action, and we are shown with great efficiency and effectiveness exactly the type of character that Bond is. This is not a film that wastes your time. The first 80 minutes of Dr. No are everything you want from a Bond film, but near the end I sadly feel that it falters somewhat. Though it still far from terrible and retains every ounce of the style that makes this film so great, the storytelling in the final act is simply not as good. I do feel that a lot of this may be due to it not necessarily aging the best. Dr. No is an incredibly clichéd villain, and although it should certainly be noted that this film is largely responsible for most of the tropes it presents, it can still feel somewhat tiresome. Dr. No is a ridiculously overdramatic villain, and between his private island and his robotic hands he fits the mold for a 'Bond villain' perfectly. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but when it comes to the final act a villain that is supposed to be very menacing and incredibly intelligent ends up coming across as incompetent. This leads to an ending that feels quite abrupt, and even a little anticlimactic. The Bond franchise is also notorious for its 'Bond girls,' female leads who are usually throwaway characters, included entirely for sex appeal. Dr. No is no exception. The character of Honey Ryder in this film has no real bearing on the story, and everything could have played out in exactly the same way without her inclusion. Bond always has, and always will be a womanizer, a character trait with which I have no problem, but this often comes at the expense of the female leads. For this reason, I am glad that, while certainly very present, these aspects of Bond's character are less extreme than they are in some of the later films. Honey Ryder is an unfortunately irrelevant character, but she is also a very small one. The film doesn't spend too much time on these parts of the story. Dr. No is not the best Bond film, but it is the first, and for that it deserves recognition. It does an excellent job of establishing Bond's character, and it is gripping from start to finish. If you want to watch a Bond movie, then Dr. No will give you everything you expect to see, and very little else. It is far from a masterpiece, but it established all of the tropes you expect to see from a Bond film, good and bad, and that at the very least is laudable.

Ocean's Eleven (2001)

Decent heist film with an excellent cast.

[8/10 · 11 August 2020]

A remake of 1960's Ocean's 11, Ocean's Eleven is a 2001 heist film directed by Steven Soderbergh. It follows Danny Ocean (George Clooney) as he assembles a crew of 10 others likeminded crooks and hatches a plan to steal upwards of 150 million dollars from three Las Vegas casinos. Ocean's Eleven is a film that works almost exclusively due to its excellent cast. It is filled with Hollywood A-listers, and it pays off. With a cast boasting a combined four Academy Award wins for acting and 13 nominations, the film is always fun to watch. For as great of an ensemble as the movie presents, the characters are unfortunately weak, nonetheless. The cast makes it a fun time, but any real emotional impact is lost by a lack of any justification other than greed for the heist. As the film reaches its end, I find myself wondering if I really want our crew to succeed, and the film's script does nothing to support or expand on such moral questions in any way. Ultimately this leaves us with a group of characters that are just barely likeable, but only due to the charisma of the talented cast, not the quality of the script. Setting aside the questionable morality of the characters, Ocean's Eleven is still endlessly entertaining. It is paced quite well, and the setup/planning portion of the film is interesting enough that it never feels like it is dragging on as you wait for the heist to begin. As for the heist itself, the planning and execution are brilliant, and although it does often feel too convoluted to be believable, there are too many real examples of heists done in the same vein as this one for me to criticize the believability too much. There is a lot to like in Ocean's Eleven, and if you're looking for a good time you can't go wrong. The whole movie comes together quite nicely, and you'll certainly never be bored. That having been said, the story that it tells is quite a shallow one, and never resonates in any deeper way. If all you're looking for is a little bit of escapism, you can't go wrong with Ocean's Eleven

Interstellar (2014)

Instant classic

[10/10 · 11 August 2020]

By his ninth film, director Christopher Nolan had already secured his position in the cultural limelight with excellent films and significant blockbusters such as The Dark Knight trilogy, Inception, and more. Following these massive hits there must have been high expectations for his 2014 sci-fi epic Interstellar, and not only did Nolan not disappoint, but he knocked it out of the park. For a director with such an astonishing career it is hard to pick a favorite, but for me Interstellar would have to take the cake.

Interstellar is a rare film that excels on every level. It is not difficult to compare it to Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, for Interstellar achieves a similar sort of awe and wonder in its use of groundbreaking visual effects, genius scoring, and epic scale. However, I dare say that Interstellar is a better film than even 2001. For as stunning of a spectacle as Interstellar presents, it is overshadowed by its masterful storytelling. This is a film with very real stakes, stakes that never feel manufactured, and are always at the forefront of the story. There is a very real sense of urgency, an urgency that is brought off of the screen by everyone involved.

It is hard not to be moved by Interstellar, because it is a film that doesn't go where you expect it to go. There are no guarantees, and that makes the struggles of the characters all the more real. It's easy to become involved in our character's mission, because even though the story is massive in scope, it is also intertwined with our protagonists in a very personal way.

It is safe to say that the more you put into Interstellar, the more you will get out of it. It is a surprisingly grounded and very emotional story that is complex, but always logically sound, confusing at times, but never incoherent. It will be a great experience no matter how you watch it, but I have to recommend that you give it your utmost attention. Interstellar is an excellent example of a modern film that will go down as one of the greats.