Change Your Image
m_ruch-1
Reviews
Casino Royale (2006)
Interesting Concept
My comment may spoil this movie for some, who mistakenly believe that this is a continuation of Pierce Brosnan's 007, as portrayed by a new actor. Don't think so, folks. Read on, if you want to learn the "truth" behind this new Bond adventure.
This film is not a prequel to the 007 movies of the past, it is a total reinvention of 007. The plot of this movie assumes that Daniel Craig is the first and only person to ever portray Bond on film. The time, therefore, is post 9/11, and current day. Judi Dench, as "M" is in charge because there has never been any one else in charge. Q Branch has not yet been established,thus Bond cannot receive any of his "trademark" gadgets. How could he get gadgets if the gadget branch has not been established yet? James Bond is not the polished 007 that we have become familiar with from the portrayals of other actors through the past 40 years. This film starts from scratch! Ground zero! Day one! There never was a Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, or even Pierce Brosnan.
This is the story of how James Bond became 007, in 2006, as seen through the eyes and actions of Daniel Craig. If you go into this movie basing your perceptions of 007 on the actors who have played him in the past, and compare those portrayals to the "new guy", then you are missing the entire point of the film! I don't want to give anything away, but if you listen carefully to the music, you will discover, by the end of the film, that each time Bond goes into action, you hear a little more of the familiar "James Bond" theme, intertwined into the music that is accompanying Bond's action scenes. At the end of the movie, when the theme is fully realized, you look at your buddy sitting next to you and it suddenly becomes clear to you. You've just watched the man, known as James Bond, make the change from a regular field agent, to a double-0 agent! This transformation into the suave sophisticated agent doesn't happen overnight. On the screen it takes more than 2 hours! You don't just become a double-0 overnight, with offhand quips, gadgets galore, and a favorite beverage. It takes time to develop all the quirks and idiosyncrasies of the character that other actors have portrayed in his fully developed form. Never before have we seen this character develop like he does in this film.
Go back and see the movie again, and forget everything you ever knew about 007. I'm certain that you'll come away with a new perspective not only of Daniel Craig, but of the overall film. It was a bold move on the part of the producers, but I salute them for not doing what they've done before. This is NOT a continuation of Pierce Brosnan's James Bond as played by a different actor. This is James Bond! And he becomes 007 right before your eyes!
The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause (2006)
Better than 2, but not quite up to the original...
Tim Allen and Michael Lembeck (director) have done it again! If you liked the original, and the first sequel, then number 3 will not disappoint. Of course, if I was one of the decision making executives at Disney, I would end the franchise here and consider myself lucky that the company has turned out three successful Christmas Classics. Of course, I'm not a Disney executive, but I hope they take my advice anyway.
All of the cast members from number 2 are back with the exception of David Kromholtz (as Bernard, the head elf). Kromholtz was probably tied up with his show Numbers, but his presence is missed. Spencer Breslin as Curtis, has grown into his role (and gotten a deeper voice in the 4 years since part 2), but he just doesn't have the same screen presence as Kromholtz.
The film moves along at a quick pace, and Martin Short steals every scene that he's in as the devilish Jack Frost, who learns a valuable lesson about himself by the end of the movie. Eric Lloyd is underused as Scott Calvin's son, but Judge Reinhold and Wendy Crewson are delightful once again in their original roles.
I'm not going to ruin any plot twists in the film, but there is an interesting homage to "It's a Wonderful Life", that provides a revealing look at a parallel reality that could have occurred if events had not transpired as they do in the first film.
I'll close by saying that this is a fun family film, and definitely one that the kids will enjoy. It helps if you've seen the other two films, but even that isn't necessary for enjoyment of this outing. I found it more entertaining than the second film, but doesn't quite have the heart-warming impact of the original. When this comes out on DVD (and you know it will), it will definitely be a movie worth adding to your collection, especially if you own the other two titles in this series.
Tom Sawyer (1973)
Hurrah for the DVD! What a way to relive this film!
Adrian Everett's dreams have been answered!! MGM/UA has released this title and Huck Finn (in which child actor Jeff East reprises his role as the title character) on DVD. My only complaint, and it is a minor one, is that MGM opted not to release the film on DVD in the widescreen format. The title and end credit sequences are in widescreen, while the remainder of the film is "modified to fit your screen". Much as I prefer widescreen films presented in their original aspect ratio, Tom Sawyer does not lose anything by being "panned and scanned". If anything, the full screen presentation enhances the performances of the child actors, allowing them to fill the screen with their winning personalities. Johnny Whitaker as Tom, and Jeff East as his rag-tag friend Huck, really light up the screen in every scene they are in, but it is Jodie Foster, as Becky Thatcher, who steals Tom's and the audience's hearts.
Most of the musical score is forgettable, but overall, the Sherman brothers have once again done an admirable job. Several of the songs, such as "Free-bootin" and "Gratifaction" will stick in your head. But it is, "River Song", as performed by Charlie Pride, that will bring a tear to your eye as you think about lost childhood. "...a boy is gonna grow to be a man, be a man. Only once in his life is he free. Only one golden time in his life is he free."
I highly recommend this film, and this DVD to anyone who is a Tom Sawyer fan. All of the storytelling elements of the earlier David O'Selznick production are here, and with the exception of the music, the two films are very similar. While it is the child actors that really sell this film, I cannot overlook the memorable performance of Kunu Hank (apparently in his only film role) as Injun Joe.
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005)
Scrumdiddlyumptious!
I admit that I went to the theater with apprehension, having grown up with the Gene Wilder version of Roald Dahl's wonderful story, but I was soon transported into a fantastic film that exceeded almost every expectation. If you are a fan of the book (meaning that you have read the book more than once), you owe it to yourself to see this cinematic version. They say "don't judge a book by it's cover", well I say, don't judge a film by it's leading actor, or previous versions that you may have seen of the same story. Johnny Depp is no Gene Wilder, but then this is not Gene Wilder's film. Johnny Depp is Willy Wonka, and that is all that really matters.
There is a subtle sub-plot that was invented for the film which I found a little disturbing, but even with this addition the film was still very enjoyable. I'm not going to give anything away, but suffice it to say that the added material only goes to enforce the morality story that is the main thrust of the original book.
The last Tim Burton/Johnny Depp film that I saw was "Edward Scissorhands" and I must say that I was more than a little worried about Tim Burton's handling of this joyous material. Again, I was overly worried for no reason! The colors are bright, the characters are played to perfection by the young cast, and Johnny Depp gives a stellar performance as the mysterious, slightly screwy candy man.
"Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" was a great film for the 60's, but there were limitations to the technology of the day. For a technologically fantastic film that more closely follows the source (albeit with one glaring, disturbing plot addition), I would highly, and exuberantly (is that a word), recommend this film!