one word reviews of Movies and TV

Showing posts with label James Bond. Show all posts
Showing posts with label James Bond. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 18, 2015

Spectre

Spectre: Pacing
...Mr. Bond...Pacing
2015Thriller/Action2h 30m

Pick up Spectre! The Greatest Hits of Bond only for the low price of $9.99

A cryptic message from the past leads James Bond (Daniel Craig) to Mexico City and Rome, where he meets the beautiful widow (Monica Bellucci) of an infamous criminal. After infiltrating a secret meeting, 007 uncovers the existence of the sinister organization SPECTRE. Needing the help of the daughter of an old nemesis, he embarks on a mission to find her. As Bond ventures toward the heart of SPECTRE, he discovers a chilling connection between himself and the enemy (Christoph Waltz) he seeks.

Spectre is the Bond film of Bond films. Spectre, its meaning should be the process of breaking down 23 films and taking the DNA of those and injecting it into 1 film. Or look at it like this, Spectre is The Greatest Hits of Bond for $9.99

Is that a bad thing? Nope but you must break it down like this

007 Fans | Movie Fans

For us who spend that money every time a new medium is released with a Bond film we buy it. Doesn't matter if it is the same copy that was released 2 years ago, we will throw money down to buy it. Seriously I have like 4 different DVD Sets of the same films. Sure you will get a feature here and there but sometimes they will release the same copy just in a new case. I own the 50th collection, then it was release in the white box, so you know I had to get that one. And yes its the same thing just a different box. Yes I'm a idiot but Bond makes me... me. So I do and that's that. 

So as a Bond fan going in to Spectre I didn't care if it sucked or was the greatest, it was Bond and that is all that matters. Spectre is the Bond film for the fans. Call backs everywhere gave me a smile. And the fact I could see Bond have a fight in a train, Bond in the snow, Bond having a 007 like car chase with gadgets, Bond wearing a white tux gave the kid in me a tear of happiness. This film is 2 hrs and a half, hey I would of like 4 hrs in a half because Bond is a drug that I must have again and again. It's odd because I think all Bond fans would say we wanted more even thought we were already given a lot... And that is the problem with this film.

Spectre is the big hit of a powerful drug, when it should of been just a taste.

When we cross over to the Movie Fans we're given a slew of problems and the answer to why we as Bond fans need more!

Why? Because its 10 pounds of shit in a 5 pound bag. Movie writing 101 you have what is called, "Dramatic Structure". Dramatic Structure dates back to Aristotle, so yeah this isn't a new thing.
With Dramatic Structure you have

Exposition, Rising Action, Climax, Falling Action and Denouement.

Spectre takes these five parts and throws them out the window. Why? Okay lets make it simple then.

Beginning, Middle and End (Climax)

Nope. Spectre threw it out again...shit...

When your watching a film and the climax comes, the climax shouldn't lead to another climax. What happens then is you begin to pit the two together, which in Spectre's case made the first climax (the best one) follow the films final climax (the weak one) a nasty taste in the viewers mouth. End the film on the one and only climax! Do not end the film on a weak note. It leaves the audience wanting more and with a 2 hr and a half film, you should already have plenty.

But for movie fans, there was too much in this film. Skyfall had a lot less and that makes the film more enjoyable. Again Spectre isn't bad, its really good. But you can't take the process of writing and throw it out the window. Skyfall is 7 mins shorter, yet Spectre feels more like a whole extra half an hour, this is because of its horrible pacing. Pacing is key in movie making, here it looks to be just a afterthought.

Again the Bond fan in me wants to make it clear, it is a fun and enjoyable movie. Craig gives his best Bond yet and that was the big thing that stood out for me, Craig perfected his Bond with Spectre and I need to see him do it one more time in a good paced film. It was great to see Craig bring back the dark comedy that has been missing recently. Léa Seydoux was a great Bond Girl (I know we aren't allowed to say that anymore but hey I'm a ass, that I already knew). The one thing that did it for me was how she didn't want to be apart of this killing world. She wanted to leave and does, even though that becomes a setup anyone could see a million miles away. Her character could of been used better, but a recurring theme with Spectre is her character is not flushed out completely. Christoph Waltz is amazing on screen with every project he does. He is a great villain and my only two issue would be 

1) Not used enough 2) They should of hidden him more when it came to the photos and trailers, especially those TV spots I kept seeing, and I don't even watch TV. The surprise wasn't there and it should of been. 

Again the writers did not flush out the characters.

The film looked great. It had a dark look that I just loved. The opening is Craig's best and yes the barrel was put back in the beginning, I wanted to jump when I saw it there, was so happy.
The opening is stunning. That opening shot is beautiful with a few phantom cuts the flow of the opening is spectacular.

The song is okay. Its a good song but it needs more power, its too soft and it has no kick. For a big action opening that leads to a soft song falls kinda flat. The octopus wrapping around women was awesome. Loved the titles and enjoyed seeing past Bond characters popping up.

There is this nice use of Q and M coming out in the field that I really liked. I think Fiennes' M is shaping up nicely.

Monica Bellucci ooh la la!

The plot with surveillance I didn't care for nor did I with Mr. Hinx's weapon I guess I can say, the thing on the fingers, yeah... I didn't like that nor did I care for his exit.

Spectre is a good Bond film. With so much in there, with such a long run time it seems to be missing things that it shouldn't. And it does this thing with the villain I feel comes off kinda pointless. Trying not to spoiled anything but somethings are best unknown and left in the dark. With the ending things are left kinda opened. The viewer has no conclusion because so much is left over for a sequel it feels like. Then at the same time the whole film feels like 2 films in 1. It's a odd taste that is left in your mouth after the film. On one hand its good on the other the question of why? hangs over some choices the writers made. 

The film should of been broken up into 2

I guess all said and done this film had too many cooks in the kitchen. Spectre is a bloated film with extremely under used characters. But hey Im happy I got to live another day to see another Bond and that's all that really matters to me. But we are at a professional level of movie making. Sam Medes and crew are on a $300 million dollar film here and should be a bit more professional especially 23 films in already.

Robert Wade, Neal Purvis Please Leave Bond.

Wanted
What I wanted when I saw the trailer was a bigger threat towards Bond. I wanted Bond scared. The Double 0 program is hanging on a thread. I thought Bond would connect with other 00's and work on this threat. That's my big issue with what was missing, no real threat. They tried but it came off weak, Bond doing it alone, again, come on people. We have a villain that should be the biggest threat and yet Dominic Greene came off more of a threat. A lot of misses with this one which will make Spectre the most controversial movie of 2015.

Thursday, October 15, 2015

The Simplistic Reviews Podcast (Ep. 56) October 2015

FOR MATURE AUDIENCES


To celebrate this creepy time of year, why not hang with the creepy movie aficionados in the biz.  On this Halloween edition of the Simplistic Reviews Podcast, the boys talk candy...fall TV premieres...Ronda Rousey's Roadhouse and Hayden Christensen.

This episode is filled to the brim with tricks and treats.  Grab your machete, your knife glove, and put on your inside out William Shatner mask and enjoy!


NOTES
Jennifer Lawrence's Hunger Games C-word poster
Sam Smith Writing On the Wall
Ellen Pompeo criticizes Daniel Craig

MUSIC
Created A Monster by B.o.B. 
Murder Was The Case By Snoop Dogg
Bonfire By Childish Gambino
Saw Theme By Charles Clouser
Halloween Theme By John Carpenter

 Check us out on FacebookTwitterYouTubeLetterboxd, and Pinterest

Monday, April 8, 2013

The Simplistic Reviews March Madness Bracket of Good and Evil Final Four Results: GOOD


JAMES BOND (1) WINNER

BUFFY SUMMERS (2)

There has been a litany of butt kicking babes Bond has had to befall.  Buffy's name can now be added to the list.  Right in between Xenia Onatopp and May Day.  May Day.   James Bond slept with Grace Jones.  Fact. (SHIVER)

Thursday, April 4, 2013

The Simplistic Reviews March Madness Bracket of Good and Evil Elite 8 Results: FILM GOOD

JAMES BOND (1) WINNER
JOHN McCLANE (3)
Let's do this one by the numbers;
1.  They both use guns.
2.  They both hate women.
3.  They both try to uphold justice, in their own way of course.

What sets these two apart is that one wears a tuxedo while the other a bloody, dirty, smell tank-top.  While I applaud John's taste in fashion, there are two things that are forever; Diamonds, and stylish, black tuxedos.  There are rules for police men, but as for Bond, the only rule resides in the bullets he puts through McClane's chest.  Happy Trails John.....

Sunday, March 31, 2013

The Simplistic Reviews March Madness Bracket of Good and Evil Sweet 16 Results: FILM GOOD

JAMES BOND (1) WINNER
JACK SPARROW (13)










As Jack's Disney female family member could attest, every Cinderella story must come to an end.  The battle of the Brits comes down to the battle of the wits. And Commander Bond has more than enough to spare to out duel ol' Jackie.  James puts Sparrow to rest...in Dead Man's Chest.

JOHN McCLANE (3) WINNER
SARAH CONNER (10)










Sarah Conner is a warrior through circumstance.  You go ahead and have a cybernetic organism from the future come back to kill you and see if you wouldn't join the NRA.  But at the end of the day she wasn't really a successful warrior.  She may have attempted a daring escape from the funny house, but she was eventually captured.  She may have tracked down and shot Dr. Dyson but she couldn't kill him.  She may have blasted a few holes in Robert Patrick but Arnold still had to save her.  McClane's record versus bad guys waaay out of his league is astounding.  And I won't even go into his compunction for killing.  Besides, if there is anyone harder to kill than a T-1000 it would be John McClane.  Its not called Die Easy folks.  

Thursday, March 28, 2013

The Simplistic Reviews March Madness Bracket of Good and Evil Round Two Results: FILM GOOD

JAMES BOND (1) WINNER
BATMAN (8)










A superhero versus a super spy   In this gladiatorial matchup it comes down to one thing.  One rule.  A rule that Batman won't break but one that Bond breaks five times before he finishes his morning martini.  A license to kill separates Bond from Bruce...just barely.

SARAH CONNER (10) WINNER
INDIANA JONES (2)










There is no fate but what we make.  Well, it seems Sarah Conner's fate may be to win this tournament.  She pulls a major upset of our favorite fedora wearing archeologist.  Man, seems Indy can't catch a break since Crystal Skull.

CAPTAIN JAMES T. KIRK (6)
JOHN McCLANE (3) WINNER 










I wish Seth Green and the people over at Robot Chicken would do a bit where McClane sneaks aboard The Enterprise and takes out members of the crew one by one.  You'd of course have Kirk as Hans, Spock as Karl, and Bones as Ellis. "Kirk, babe.  Put the phaser down this is radio not television."

HAN SOLO (5)
CAPTAIN JACK SPARROW (13) WINNER
Jack's victory over Han, a character he is basically based off of by the way, singularly personifies what Disney did to the Star Wars franchise.  An out of the blue attack and take over.  If you only knew the power of the mouse side.  

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

The Simplistic Reviews March Madness Bracket of Good and Evil Round One Results: FILM GOOD

JAMES BOND (1) WINNER
TOXIC AVENGER (16)


One is a mutated, tutu-wearing, former gym janitor, the other is a secret agent that probably has had sex with a lot of girls who wear a tutu for a living.  New Jersey's own, Toxic Avenger, may have the moves with the mop, but it all comes down to James Bond's Golden Gun, and he wasn't firing blanks this time.  Bond delivers "From Russia, With Love" a victory for jolly ole' England.

INDIANA JONES (2) WINNER
TONY STARK (15) 










Tony may be a genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist.  However, Indy is an archeologist, professor, pilot, equestrian adventurer, WWII secret agent, playboy, oh...and survived the Ark Of The Convenant and drank water from THE HOLY F%*KING GRAIL.  Even Stark would have to give it up for that one.

JOHN McCLANE (3) WINNER
FOXY BROWN (14)










John McClane has always had tough luck with women.  He either divorces them or kills them.  This one he kills.

ELLEN RIPLEY (4)
CAPTAIN JACK SPARROW (13) WINNER











This goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway; Jack Sparrow knows how to charm a lady.  Even if that lady has faced Xenomorphs, androids, and criminal rapists in an intergalactic penal colony.  Savvy?  Ellen Ripley appears so.  However, before she can unload her pulse cannon, the crafty captain boards her ship, shivers her timbers, and hoists his main sail (innuendo).  I'm sure Ripley would welcome a facehugger after a night with Captain Jack Sparrow, who upsets one of the heavy hitters in this bracket.

HAN SOLO (5) WINNER
HIT-GIRL (12)











Han shot first...nuff said. 

CAPTAIN JAMES T. KIRK (6) WINNER
BEATRIX KIDDO (11)











Beatrix Kiddo may be a world class assassin , but she has always been a sucker for charismatic older men.  And they don't get any more charismatic than James T. Kirk.  Suffice to say Kirk gives The Bride the night of her life before setting his phaser to kill.

MAXIMUS DECIMUS MERIDIUS (7)
SARAH CONNOR (10) WINNER











It was that time of the month...You know what I mean guys...you know.

BATMAN (8) WINNER
JASON BOURNE (9)











Batman has dealt with his share of criminals, killers, and psychotics.  But I can't say he's dealt with an ex-CIA agent with a bad case of amnesia, a chip on his shoulder, and the ability to kill someone with a pencil or a book.  The Dark Knight had to pull out all of the tricks from his utility belt to deal with Jason Bourne, who got in a few early shots.  However, he was ultimately dealt a mortal wound courtesy of a Batarang.  He might not be Deadshot, but Bourne was merely a shot away from dispatching Gotham's protector in this hotly contested battle.

Monday, March 18, 2013

The Simplistic Reviews March Madness Bracket of Good and Evil


*Update 3-20-2013*

Good day all, just an update to this little, I guess you can call it a contest now.  On Friday we will be starting the draw for the Simplistic Reviews March Madness Bracket of Good and Evil.  To try and make things as random as possible we will be using Random.org to decide who moves on in the bracket.  To make things even more "random" we will be making the draw for each match-up, FIVE TIMES, so the best of five will win the match-up.  All brackets will lock on March 23nd, 2013 at 6:00 pm EST.

The first round will run from 3-23-2013 to 3-26-2013. 
The second round will run from 3-26-2013 to 3-28-2013.  
The Sweet 16 will run from 3-29-2013-3-30-2013.  
The Elite 8, 3-31-2013.  
The Final Four, 4-01-2013
The Championship on 04-07-2013

Remember if you participate by filling out a bracket and send them to simplisticreviewsblogspot@gmail.com
you could win a beer from Matt's Private Stash ( the list will be named later based on turn out).

Original Post, March 18th, 2013

Since we LOVE to be cliched and trite here at Simplistic Reviews, we only felt it appropriate to jump on the bandwagon, whore ourselves out, and create a list of characters from TV and Film (sorry, no cartoons on this one) that we'd like to think are the most vile and evil, as well as the most heroic and dedicated to truth, justice, and sometimes, but mostly not, the American way.

Oh by the way, it's also NCAA Tournament Time....no big deal.  But what better way to co-opt a time honored tradition like treating athletes like indentured servants and flying out to Las Vegas, doing a lot of coke, and gambling away your daughter's college fund, than creating OUR version of the NCAA tournament with, what else, make believe people from the movie screen and TV box;  presenting, The 1st Annual Simplistic Reviews March Madness Bracket of Good and Evil, (copyright pending).

For the next few weeks, we will be breaking down the bracket, click HERE for a downloadable version, and pitting characters together in a fight to the "death" to see who will prevail.  Will the goodness of good defeat the badness of bad?  Will a Cinderella story like The Toxic Avenger mop up the competition (see, what I did there) or will Jack Bauer shoot enough people in the head on his way to save President David Palmer......from purchasing bad auto insurance.

Send us your picks, comments, inquiries, hate mail, and general gripes and we will take them under consideration, and by consideration I mean burning them in effigy, so to make things easier for us, send a glamor shot of yourself.  But in all honesty, print out the bracket below, or save paper and just copy it, open it in a program on either a PC or Mac and have a ball.

Print or view the bracket, HERE

Sunday, December 9, 2012

The Simplistic Reviews Podcast: November 2012


Welcome all to the inaugural Simplistic Reviews Podcast.  This is something that we had been planning for a while, and we finally got it done.  This edition we talk James Bond, namely, his newest adventure "Skyfall," and remember some of his greatest villains and which James Bond theme song speaks to us.  Not in that creepy way that your uncle used to when he was drunk during Thanksgiving.

We also talk TV, where DJ explains why "Arrow" is his newest guilty pleasure, Justin talks about balls dropping, and why Jewish people aren't allowed to watch "Mad Men," while Matt asks "Why is AMC so stupid!"

We also wonder "What is it about Ghost Dad that gets our motors revving?" And "What was Morgan Freeman really doing during his voice over sessions on "March of the Penguins?"

All this and more on The Simplistic Reviews Podcast for November 2012.

Click on the link below to download the podcast and enjoy folks!
FOR MATURE AUDIENCES ONLY.

 Click HERE to listen to podcast
Check us out on Facebook, Twitter, and Pinterest

Friday, November 30, 2012

Double-ovember, For Your Eyes Only

For Your Eyes Only: Roger
127min, Action, 1981


Twelfth Bond film

Villain: Aristotle Kristatos, Blofeld 

Bond Girl(s): Melina Havelock,
Countess Lisl von Schlaf,
Bibi Dahl


I've always said that there really hasn't been a bad Bond film. Nope they're all good. Sure we have a few weak ones, but over 50 years that's pretty damn unbelievable.

Roger is a fun Bond to watch. But he did seem to get old for the part, to the point I believe they should of started over. For Your Eyes Only should of been the last for him. Because I honestly think this is one of his strongest films and I believe you should always go out when your on top. To give you an idea, after this was Octopussy (1983) and then A View to a Kill (1985) (his final). So yeah should of left on FYEO, but hey it is what it is so...

Intro: Don't care for that intro. Could of been better, really so much better. Blofeld killed Bond's wife, should of been a better revenge intro...Thou the song is pretty good. In fact its so good it still plays on the radio to this day!

The first half of For Your Eyes Only is a bit weak but the last half is Roger at his top. Roger is everything but a serious Bond, but here he gets there a little bit. It is his Bond's most serious and I like that.

The film has some thrilling scenes in it. The two big ones are the Ski Chase and Cliff Climbing sequence. Before this was Moonraker, which is what it is. It was a big film with big special effects. For Your Eyes Only went back to the realistic approach and that felt refreshing.

I picked Roger as my word because when I watch this film he's the one that really pulls everything together. This is do to the some what serious approach we get from Roger's Bond and I like that. Also when you look at that poster the first thing you notice is Roger, right? Yeah that would be a little sarcasm.

All in all Rogers best film.


Just a side note: Two actors that appear in this film are on HBO's Game of Thrones, that's pretty neat I think!...Or not, man I'm a loser!

Double-ovember, Dr. No

Dr. No: Historic
110min/Action/1962

First Bond Appearance

Villain: Dr. Julius No

Bond Girl(s): Honey Ryder
Sylvia Trench
Miss Taro
So here it is, the film that started a strong 50 year film franchise. Without this film who knows where the state of movies would be these days. This film is historic and its a damn good film.

Why is this film historic? Well the film had every odd against it and its amazing it even got made. Even if you might not like it, you would have to admit it is historic.



Dr. No is a fantastic film, might not be my number one but it is up there.  The story is good, again not the greatest nor the weakest. The films villain is Dr. Julius No (Is that a badass name or what?) His look and accent for me hit every note one could hope for. He sets the bar very high right out of the gate. To make a film is difficult on so many levels to begin with, but to make a film a classic is something wonderful. Production is second to none (Thanks Ken Adam). Music is great and Terence Young creates a wonderful formula.

There are a hand full of classic scenes, one of course is Honey Ryder's out of the water shot. You know it if you have seen the film or not, that's how classic it is. It really boggles my mind how they came up with so many classic introduction scenes in this film. From the first introduction of  these characters to the viewer is simply amazing. But the best is Bond's. The way this is shot is perfect. Here we have one of the most historic characters of all time and they shoot it 100% perfect. First you hear of "some guy" named James Bond and you don't see him. We are at a casino and all you see first of him is his hands. Then his back. Then his hands again, this time tossing the cards as he kicks ass at the table. He asks the lady's name then she asks his name. Now you see his face for the first time as he says,

"Bond, James Bond"

Cue the music as he lights up a cigarette...

and so it begins!
   

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

Double-ovember: Casino Royale (Matt's Take)

Casino Royale - Classy

If it wasn't for my co-reviewer, DJ Valentine, I might not have posted another Bond review for the rest of the month.  As I briefly touched on in my "Skyfall" review, I'm not the biggest James Bond fan.  Not saying he hasn't gotten into some great adventures in exotic locales, with sexy Bond Girls, but the spy-espionage-adventure genre isn't one of my favorites.  But when you get the perfect storm of directing, writing, and acting, that's something that I can appreciate and enjoy, and calling "Casino Royale" classy would be an understatement.

First, all the people calling for Daniel Craig to call it quits when it comes to Bond; quiet, please.  Unless you just woke up yesterday Craig had shown his acting chops before playing the newly-promoted 00 Agent. Please check out "Layer Cake" and you will see what I mean.  He had charm, charisma, and was still a dick to women, all common traits of our favorite secret agent.

Second, Martin Campbell knows how to shoot action scenes.  "Goldeneye" is my favorite Bond film from the modern era.* It had great action in which you can easily suspend disbelief, a very likable Bond, and interesting villains.  Plus, the movie moves swiftly and exposition didn't weigh it down too heavily.

Last, and most importantly, the writing.  Cheesy writing will put anyone in a tift, but if it's done correctly with the right actors doing the talking, it can be easily forgivable.  Paul Haggis, from "Crash" fame, does wonderfully as the third wheel of the screenplay which includes Neal Purvis and Robert Wade (the screenwriting duo from "Goldeneye" to "Skyfall").  You can tell who wrote the best dialogue in this film.

All this praise and I've forgotten to say anything about "Casino Royale."  Don't get this Bond re-boot confused with the 1960s "Casino Royale" there is nothing really in common outside of the name and the fact that there are about five different James Bonds, oh, and Orson Welles, but I digress.  The film follows a younger, sprier, more naive Bond, who is out to stop a network of terrorists and their mysterious accountant, Le Chiffre, played by Mads Mikkelsen (in my opinion he should have used his real name in the film, it sounds a lot more bad ass then Le Chiffre).  Unlike "Skyfall," "Casino Royale" gives me what I want in an action movie.  Sure, there are some scenes in the movie that are over the top, but I never really thought anything was too out of bounds, even the incredible free-running opening action set piece that takes place in Madagascar didn't make me suspend too much disbelief.  There are your typical double-crosses, moments of danger for Bond and his fellow Bond Girl Vesper Lynd, played by Eva Green, and globe-trotting from Miami, Montenegro, and everywhere in-between.  The supporting cast is strong with Judi Dench and Giancarlo Giannini leading the way, but I would liked to have seen a little more Jeffrey Wright, even though he does take a larger role in "Quantum of Solace," the continuation to "Royale."

The stripped down style of this new Bond is welcome respite from the over-the-top Pierce Brosnan films (namely "The World is Not Enough" and "Die Another Day") and there are rarely any moments that I would take away from "Casino Royale." It brings the class back to the 007 Universe where its short on the one-liners and long on the witty dialogue.  You could argue that this Bond hasn't developed his signature one-liners yet, and I can't say I really missed them (I am partial to "No more foreplay" however).

Bottom line, I think the reason I like "Royale" so much is the fact that it doesn't feel like a Bond film, just a great action movie with stunning set pieces in a world where Batman might reside.  It's dark, gritty, brooding, and did I mention classy as hell.  There was no need to make it artsy and harken back to the Bond days of yore.  Sure you get the Aston Martin, but no fetishizing a car and playing a sprawling soundtrack as it leaves a garage.....cough....cough....Skyfall.  Stick to the basics; hot women, action that doesn't make me roll my eyes (too much) and a good story with some dialogue I can sink my teeth into.  You get all this and more with "Casino Royale."

Fun Fact:  Mikkelsen, who will be playing a young Dr. Hannibal Lecter for NBC in 2013, had Giannini in his pocket in "Royale."  Oddly enough, Giannini was one of Lecter's victims in 2001's "Hannibal."

*I count the Modern Bond era from 1995-Current.    

Copyright © Simplistic Reviews