Dock-Ock Reviews

Foul Play (1978)

Ready to take a chance?

[9/10 · 24 July 2003]

I love Foul Play because as it is a brilliant little Comedy Mystery Adventure that uses every availible elemnts to make itself work. The casting is spot on. As the female lead we have the never sexier bubblier or cookier Goldie Hawn as our heroine. There is just something about Hawn that we are able to project ourselves into her bumbling predicaments. Hawn is at a carrer high ponit with this film wich is one of her finest. There is also Chevy Chase as the dorky inevitable love interest who works so fantastic with Hawn and the two make a fantastic double act. On the support front there is also the ever green ever reliable and loveable Burgess Meredith, fresh from success with Rocky under his belt, and Brian Denehey who shows up as a kind of Cheif Wiggum from the Simpsons Police officer.

The best of the support players is Dudley Moore. Moore plays Stanley Tibbetts, an accident sittuation prone English Orchestra conducter living in San Francisco. Dudley's chemistry with Goldie is so rich that he very nearly acts Goldie off the screen. The movies funniest moments involve Dudley as sex mad Stanley. The first being were Goldie asks him to take her home. Mistaking this as a once in a life time call for a one night stand, Stanley dances around in his under wear to the strains of the BeeGees Staying Alive, sex toys at the ready and blow up dolls in mid flight and Porno films in mid climax - all while Goldie isn't watching. You can imagine her shock and horror when she turns around! Goldie later encounters Dudley at a massage parlour, much to his anxiety. This role is very typical of the confidence in Dudley Moore at the time (1978), and he is as every bit as good in this small part as he was in the likes of 10 and Arthur and very worthy of his Golden Globe for best newcomer.

Foul Play is an affectionate send up of Murder mysteries and crime capers and as an adventure comedy movie it has every thing. Car chases, albino eyed villains, intrigue a great musical score and lavish direction from writer director Colin Higgins.

A Must see 10/10

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1978)

Vintage Dudley

[6/10 · 24 July 2003]

The Hound of the Baskervilles is never realises its comedy potential as a vehicle for Dudley Moore and Peter Cook. However, it is an hillarious little piece in the Carry On mode, and that is its blessing and its curse. When its bad its awful, but it still has the ability to milk one or two belly laughs. Fans of Sherlock Holmes and Arthur Conan Doyle will probably love it because it both sends up Doyles Holmes and Watson and is an affectionate tribute to their worlds. Were the movie falls flat is that the too many ideas are rather lacklusterly handled by Andy Warhol veteren Paul Morrissey. You rather wish the film had been directed by a heavy weight like Richard Lester or Blake Edwards or Cook and Moore themselves. At times the movie doesn't know whether it wants to be Monty Python smart or Carry On Corny, and so alot of the ideas that worked brilliantly on Cook and Moores Behind/Beyond the Fringe Days and Not Only But Also dont work here. What is fairly noticeable about this film is the growing talent and enthusiasm of Dudley Moore as a screen prescence. He has at this point broke free the comedy chains enforced by Peter Cooks talent and his confidence dances off the screen. His silent movie/Chaplin/Laurel and Hardy/Keaton tribute usical score is wondeful too. He is genuinely hillarious with his over the top welsh accent as Watson and cripplingly funny playing Holmes's mother. In all honesty it is Dudley who makes the film work. Dudley holds his own against British comedy greats such as Kenneth Williams(brilliant in the film), Terry-Thomas and Spike Milligan. Peter Cook is quite good as Sherlock Holmes, certainly looks the part and given the chance would have made a very good Holmes in a better movie. But it's Dudleys film, he is the one who makes it work, and things where abi=out to get very interesting for him over the next decade.

Dr. Strange (1978 TV Movie)

The Geatest Superhero TV Series never made?

[7/10 · 10 July 2003]

Dr.Strange carries forward the legacy initiated by Kenneth Johnson on The Incredible Hulk Television Series and Pilot Movies. It takes a serious approach to the superhero genre, and reconstructs it for television. So with Dr.Strange, Writer/Director Philip De Guerre dispenses with alot of the important elements that made Stan Lee's/Steve Ditko's original Strange Tales Dr.Strange comic book stories so unique and exciting for a whole generation of readers, and comes up with a fresh approach for the times {1970's} and the climate {Network Television}. What is so amazing is that it works on almost every level.

Gone from the TV version of Dr Stephen Strange, is the arrogant, haunted persona so familiar with readers of Marvel comics. In its place is a man with a destiny to encompass the mystic arts. Perhaps a forerunner to the Highlander Movies, TV series and cartoons? What we have is a sincere, likeable sweet lead character akin more to Bill Bixby's performance of Dr David Banner. Strange is superbly played and realised by Peter Hooten. Hootens performance is refreshing with what was the norm on TV at the time. Hooten is ably backed up by the sinister Jessica Walter as Morgan Le Fay, and the evergreen John Mills as Thomas Lindmer {replacing the character of the Great One from the Marvel series}. Lindmer is a character reminiscent to Sean Connery's Ramirez in the aforementioned Highlander movies. Hooten and Mills share some genuine screen chemistry together and this movie serves as a fascinating glimpse as to what could have been had a series been commisioned.

The transfer from comics to TV is quite well realised despite the obvious limits of a TV budget. The production design, especially of those of the nightmare realms and Lindmers Castle are very efficient as is the near perfect realisation of Dr. Stranges costume from the comics pages {i actually prefer the TV Movie version}. On the down side the plot is a little cumbersome and slow burning. There doesn't seem to be too much movement, and the plot isn't too involving. It would perhaps have been a better idea to have incorporated more elements from the comics into a pliot movie of Strange's exploits.I think a good example of how fantasy can work on TV is Bill Bixby's The Magician TV series and pilot movie. Also, the special effects at times do look cheesy.Despite this, Wes Craven's A Nightmare on Elm Street seems to have incorporated alot of this movies elements into its screenplay, IE, people being haunted, killed or possesed from within a dream state, and a saviour entering that realm.

Having watched the movie again recently, it was nice to see the innocence in the movie. I can see how the occult theme may have been offensive at the time. But with the spot on performances, tight direction and nicely toned humour,{watch out for a neat cameo by Magician Larry Anderson at the end of the film} watching the film again only serves to re-emphersise my opinion that Dr.Strange was the greatest superhero TV Series NEVER made.

54 (1998)

Knock on Wood

[8/10 · 26 February 2003]

54 is a great movie for nostalgia pundits such as myself. It is an affectionately made journey through the looking glass to back to the late 70's and early 80's. It has a great soundtrack and enjoyable performances by Ryan Philippe, Selma Hyack and the like. Of course the man who steals the show is Mike Myers who is hillarious as Steve Rubell. The Script centres alot of the attention on Myers and Rubell, because he is quite simply the most interesting of the ensemble characters in the movie. I dont know too much about Rubell but Myers manages to make him a likeable character despite being nothing short of a bastard. Where the movie lets it's self down is that there is practically no style to the direction or even the script, so we dont see anything we havent seen before. Philippe's opening narration goes for a Goodfella's style feel, while the movie tries mercifully to drag it's self out of the shadow of Boogie Nights. Director Mark Christopher seems to be trying to hold back the feeling of excess instead of succumbing to what is natural. This is a pity because the movie could have benefited alot more from doing just that. Overall though, as it stands 54 is an enjoyable, watchable -Grade Mike Myers showcase with some great tracks {Knock on Wood for one} and some solid performances.

The Kenny Everett Video Show (1978–1981)

PLEASE! Do Not Adjust Your Sets;

[18 June 2002]

Will this post make it to the internet by 2035?!

The Kenny Everett Video Show, lays down the blueprints for the zany comics later and more influential Television show, but in its own right is as funny, innovative and as welcome as anything Cuddly Ken had ever created on the airwaves or the tube. Although Everett had flirted with the medium before, most notably on TV Sketch Series like The Kenny Everett Explosion, Making Whoopee and Ev, it was only by 1978, that the technological advances of Television had found its way up to his unique level. This may sound a little too strong, but in all honesty, Everett was to Radio what the Beatles were to British music. Suddenly in 1978 it was easy for Everett to transfer the wonderous miracles he was capable of making from sound to vision. And armed with top comedy writers Barry Cryer and Ray Cameron he was able to express himself as a Grade A Comedian with a series of hilarious sketches acting as fillers to the Music acts wich ranged from the likes of Freddie Mercury, Rod Stewart, Kate Bush and Elvis Costello to David Essex and Bill Wyman. The almost campy dance act Hot Gossip provided an erotically charged yet eye candy backdrop, because as this was early days in Ev's comedy cavalcade, the shows format was really just that of a DJ's music half hour with funny links in between acts. The impact of the series was so strong from the public, and the viewing figures so great that Everett was blasted in to Superstardom, and the outcome of wich was the later and better Television Series.

The Video Show is packed with wonderfully innovative visuals wich may look crude or cheap by todays standards were truly groundbreaking in the late 1970's early 1980's. All the laughter comes from the crews behind the cameras as studio audiences were not being used for an Everett show as yet. The best and funniest characters were the giant handed gospel minister Brother Lee Love, the greaser biker Sid Snot, who Freddie Mercury jump on in one sketch and the animated space looney Captain Kremmen, who was a cartoon character voiced by Everett who also voiced the Captains Busty sidekick Carla. The Kremmen adventures added to the pop culture look of the show and were animated by Cosgrove Hall Animation production who later released the Animated Captain Kremmen The Movie wich starred Everett.

The Video Show is pure fun and shouldn't be overlooked. Although, it does seem as though Kenny was saving the best for The Kenny Everett Television Show, which i have also reviewed. No honestly ,i have. Seriously. Youve Gotta believe me. Go and have a look for yourself. I'll wait here while your gone.

I here you brothers.

Starman (1984)

As Perfect a Movie You Will See.

[10/10 · 26 April 2002]

In my opinion, this movie represents a point in Hollywood history where all the best possible elements came together to make a classic film. Starman is not only one of the best movies of the 1980's but it holds its own against any other classic movie from the corridoors of Time in Movieland.

Iam not as such a fan of John Carpenter, but i will admit that he has a talent, and with talent must come the ability to control this. With Starman he does just that. He avoids any moves of vanity on his own behalf, wich he so often fell into in the past, and finds a style that is moving warm and even beautiful. It is worthy of note that this is a rare example of Carpenter having no involvement in the producing, Writing or Musical duties, so what he brings to the table is perhaps what the script might of been missing, and what makes Starman The Movie so great. At the core ofthe movie is the excellent overall story and well developed characters presented to us by the writers Bruce A Evans and Raynold Gideon. This is well in tune with the leisurely and even Alien direction from Caprenter wich moves at such a heavenly place its like picturesque music without sound. Carpenter does express his shock tactics and trick photography he employed on classics like Halloween, The Fog and The Thing, and even though Starman isn't a horror movie, these tactics seem more suitable to this Sci-Fi/Romance.

The two vital components in making Starman work are Jeff Bridges and Karen Allen. As Starman Bridges is so convincing in an almost retarded role that when you see the images of the life the Alien has assumed, Scot Hayden [Bridges]It is easy to believe that these are two different actors. Bridges gets to grips with the Alien he is playing but plays it so gentle and mesmeric that when the love affair between Starman and Jenny Hayden [Karen Allen] blossoms, you are at once cheering it on. Karen Allen is the real revelation to the film, she is us watching Starman's progression through his human life, and is just as amazed and in awe of what she see's as we are. Bridges and Allen make a very believable screen couple as both Scot and Jenny Hayden and Starman and Jenny Hayden, and it is beautiful to watch them on screen together.

The one slightly disapointing aspect of the movie is that it falls into a conventional and predictable trap of Romance movies at it's Climax when Starman has to leave. O.K., so this is the whole point of the movie's kinetics, but it seems to resemble too much, Spielbergs E.T. The Extra Terestrial. This is not to compare it too much to that film, because a piece of Starman stays behind in this movie [See for yourself], and i might annoy some people by saying that Starman is more profesionally and gracefully made than Spielbergs 1982 classic.

All the elemnts work,from the special effects, to the make up and costume, and even the point of the movie being a road film, because you are so engaged by the developement between the Starman and Jenny Hayden Characters. And other than that minor quibble, I can't find anything else to fault with this movie. It is well made and acted, boast a fine Jack Nitzche musical score and is beautifully photographed by Donald M Morgan.

A Highly Recommended winner........................................................................ 10/10

Chaplin (1992)

Solid Gold Biopic

[9/10 · 24 April 2002]

Chaplin works on many levels, because on the one hand it packs an entertaining epic in to two hours and thirty minutes, but doesn't fail to keep up your interest and comes over as being very enjoyable. Perhaps the problem is that, Chaplins life might not be the most suitable for a MOVIE,purely because his life was so eventful, and might have translated itself better as a TV Mini Series, but for getting the best out of what screen time available and still coming up with some very credible work, you must hand it over to Richard Attenborough and everyone at Carolco. For starters, the movie is simply beautiful to look at. The production design by Stuart Craig [these days of Harry Potter fame] is well tuned with the simply fantastic Cinematography by Sven Nykvist, and this is why the movie works so well, because at the more tedious intermissions the movie has to offer [and there are only a few], the movie is still interesting and prestine to watch. Just as good are Ellen Mirojnick and John Mollo's costumes designs, in fact, Chaplin offers a production so rich that at once i forgot that this was a period film, and felt transported back to the various different time zones the movie had to offer, and this is a good sign of a genius at work. Richard Attenborough did similar wonders with his Ghandi [1982], in my opinion he does it far more interestingly here. The real revelation of the movie is Robert Downey JR as Chaplin. I remember reading in a book entitled The Chaplin Encyclopedia, that hearts sank when an American assumed the role. Well, i cant really understand the kinetics behind this seeing that Chaplin spent 85% of his life away from England and was more of a worldwide Icon than a British spearhead, plus the fact that Americans ARE Good Actors, and Downey JR is one of the very finest. Charlie Chaplin himself was a couple of years before my time, but Downey JR is so fantastic, so realistic in the role that i didn't for one minute doubt the genius of the REAL Chaplin and in fact only became a fan of the little tramp after seeing this Biopic, as though the missing pieces of Chaplins life had come together to complete the jigsaw. Downey JR carries the movie, it is hard to imagine anyone else in the role, he is the right build, height and of simmilar looks and even nails the accent down. He even does The Little Tramp so covincingly that i think that Chaplin himself would have been forced to admit how good he is. This could prove to be Downey JR's best work on screen, but i hope like many other of his admirers that things do go right for him,and he gets on the right track and he is good to himself in future. On a side note i definitely think that Robert was worthy of the Academy Award for best actor for this, but the BAFTA is more than Justified. Hopefully his role in the adaption of Denis Potter's The Singing Detective will be good enough for him to be recognised by the Academy. The only down side to the characterisation awarded to Robert Downey JR in the title role is that the other characters pale in significance. Admitedly it is nice to see the famous faces such as Kevin Kline as Douglas Fairbanks, Diane Lane, Penelope Anne Miller and the Late great John Thaw in a heart rendering cameo as Chaplins great influence Fred Karno. But their characters are so limited that the come a cross as essential but perhaps slightly surplus. More impressive and important are the likes of Dan Ackroyd in an hillarious cameo as Mack Sennet, and the interstingly cast Geraldine Chaplin as her own grandmother Hanna. The fact that Hannah Caplin was mentally ill and the effects it had on Charlie Chaplin are nicely hinted at but in large glossed over. Anthony Hopkins is, it must be said, wasted as the fictional George Hayden. It is however reassuring to see Hopkins, and he himself 15 or so years earlier might have made a good Chaplin himself. Paul Rhys, too is kept in the dark, wich is unfortunate because the character he plays, Chaplins brother sid, was quite a big cog in the Chaplin works [see Modern Times-joke]. The nicest other part is that of Hetty Kelly/Oona Chaplin, Chaplins first and last loves, played by Moira Kelly. Kelly's presence adds a nice touch of grace and gentleness to the movie. Perhaps the real failing of the movie is, like this review, it tries to pack to much in, and like i said this would have been better done as a TV Mini series, or even two movies. These minor quibbles asides, Chaplin boasts an enjoyably epic screenplay by Diana Hawkins, William Boyd, Bryan Forbes and the Legendary William Goldman, based on David Robinsons Chaplin-His Life and Art and My Autobiography by Chaplin Himself. The movie is tightly directed and edited, includes nice trick photography and is very professionaly and well acted, particularly y Robert Downey JR but everyone ivolved does well, no matter the merits of the characterisations. It also has one of the most beautiful, moving musical scores by John Barry, perhaps his best, sadly over looked of scores. If you havent seen the movie, i hope this review helps whet your appetite, because it is a very worthwhile worth seeing movie..........

All Creatures Great and Small (1978–1990)

Wise and Wonderful

[24 April 2002]

All Creatures Great and Small, is one of those rare, timeless and charming BBC Productions that never seems to age and which can still be enjoyed all these years after its production finished. I think the key for this is the belief that the producers, writers and directors installed into the series to make it real. The charm comes from the fact that it is set a long time ago, in a more gentle and picturesque time when life was easy as could be imagined, before the ravages of World War II left its scars upon the nation. This is a brighter, happier time.The Vetenary work place is of no particular interest to me, but I think that because of the setting of the 1930's it makes everything seem all the more like a fantasy. The other major reason for its success is that it has an absolute solid gold cast in the trio of principles leads. Christopher Timothy as lead Vet James Herriot is basically a good person who loves his job, but who is kind and tries his best with people to be of good nature. He is excellently portrayed by the under-rated Timothy. Second to the success of the series is Robert Hardy as Sigfried Farnon. Hardy is one of the finest television presences, and as the senior Farnon delivers his lines with alot of believable conviction and commands the screen, his character is of the old guard, an even older time when people were strict and strong. You never once doubt that Hardy is a Vet. Completing the trio is the ever suffering Tristan Farnon, perhaps the series most beloved character. Tristan provides the light relief for the series, and is constantly on the bitter end of Sigfrieds wrath. Again the character is excellently played by The Fifth Doctor Who Peter Davison, who exudes public school boyish charms here.He dithers and bumbles his way throughout the series, while at the core being an essential and perhaps strong character, he means well but never quite gets it. Davison is one of Britains finest character actors, again under-rated but looking now as if he will hit the big time after the success of At Home With the Braithwaites. All Creatures Great and Small also has the benefit of some of the finest writers and directors having worked on the show, such as Terence Dudley and Peter Moffet, as well as the multi talanted and consistant head writer Johnny Byrne. It is beautiful to look at from its period setting to the Yorkshire scenery. Defenitley on of the BBC's finest series, and one that shouldn't be overlooked. A fantastic production.

The Shadow (1994)

Boo!

[5/10 · 27 March 2002]

There seems to have been a rare thing of getting all the elements to work on Superhero movies in the 1990's. You would think that with a skilled and stylish director in Russel Mulcahy and Handsome screen prescence and strong lead in Alec Baldwin, that The Shadow would be a classic of the genre. In fact it is hard to see just why The Shadow fails. But fails it does, and in spectacular fashion. It seemed to me that Universal Pictures viewed the success of the first two Batman movies and ploughed all the strength and time needed in to making The Shadow into the next big franchise. That was before i got to see the film. The Shadow is a rushed, lukewarm 100 or so minutes and this can only be seen as a real shame. What could have turned out to be an exercise in the darkness of the skills of Frank Miller or Tod McFarlane,and an all round enjoyable and exciting adventure, comes over as rather juvenile and pathetic. Really a movie with the demands of The Shadow, the constraints of a 1930's settings and all the trappings that the styles and characteristics befalls this,needs something groundbreaking and fresh to offer the audience, and it is here The Shadow really fails. It comes over as dull and boring and resembles the worst moments from the Indiana Jones movies and the first two Batman movies. Russel Mulcahy is actually a good choice to direct this kind of period adventure,because he proved with Highlander [1986] he could take several time periods and blend them in together with a feel for a mid 1980's audience, while supporting flashy and interesting visuals. Mulcahy does quite a good job here, and actually milks the best from the script, wich is the real let down. David Koepps screenplay is waifer thin and doesn't require much from the actors, and you get the impression that the radio serials from the 1930's-1940's had more atmosphere to them. You can only wish and pray that Koepp's screenplay for this years Spider-Man is a billion lightyears better. Carrying the movie is Alec Baldwin as The Shadow. Baldwin is an excellent choice for a superhero and would have made a good Superman or Batman. He looks the part but cant do much for the script. Just as good is future Magneto in Bryan Singers X-men [2000]and Gandalf in Lord of the Rings [2001],Ian McKellan, who strangles the best with what little material he is given. Tim Curry over acts as the second fiddle villain to John Lone [Who is plain embarissing]. Curry would have been much better as the central heavy. Also disopointing is Penelope Anne Miller, who comes across as Kim Bassinger on a bad day. Despite all this The Shadow is worth watching and is an O.K. bit of fun. Bob Ringwoods costumes are once again sumptious, and beautiful and perhaps the real star of the show. The special effects for the time and the budget of the movie are mind bogglingly excellent, and there are one or two good action set pieces, but this is conter balanced by bad performances, naff dialogue and stupid ideas. And Jerry Goldsmith's musical themes are once again on the mark, inspired by Danny Elfman yes, but with good cause because The Shadow is really, in all honesty, a rather cold carbon copy of Batman [1989].

Red Sonja (1985)

All style and no substance

[5/10 · 26 March 2002]

I am quite fond of this movie, because, like Conan The Barbarian and Conan The Destroyer, it was one of a handfull of Schwarzenegger movies i used to watch when i was was growing up. Like both the Conan Movies, and later films like Masters of the Universe [1987], it has just about the right blend of adventure and fantasy, not to mention the odd racy sword play action, but iam afraid that Red Sonja is a classic example of all style and no substance, and unfortunately, as i watch it now as an adult, iam forced to admit that it doesn't bear to well with repeated viewings, let alone close scruitiny. The main problem is the direction. Richard Fliescher's direction is usually reasonable, and at the very least watchable, but as the director of Red Sonja, he has on his hands one of the worst and most embarrising leading ladies ever in Brigitte Nielsen, who cant have been the easiest person to work with. You would think that with Fleischer's experience he would have at least have been able to get something good from Nielsen onto the screen, he fails. Wich raises the question, why was Nielsen chosen in the first place. Maybe Sylvester Stallone's star power led her to it, maybe she managed to get round the producers herself. Either way she is the major flaw, and the final nail in the coffin of a little, but well meaning Adventure fantasy movie. Richard Fleisher, who streched things a little in Conan The Destroyer, comes up with even worse scenarios here, such as Sonja's Sister dying, cue "She's dead" from Kalidor [Ah-Nold]. Some action set pieces, such as the young prince being roasted by thugs, or Sonja's and Kalidor's exhaustion after a fake duel, are plain embara ssing. Equally baffling is the casting choice of Sandhal Bergman, Conan's dommed lover in Conan The Barbarian, to play the villainess here. Bergman is a strong actor, and a beautiful prescence but can't come to grips with the demands of a screen heavy. Maybe it is that i cant see her as anything other than a hero, Bergman, though would have made a far stronger Red Sonja than Brigitte Nielsen did. You would be forgiven for expecting too much from the screenplay by future Poirot writer Clive Exton and Octopussy [1983] scribe George MacDonald Fraser. The sad thing about the script is that ther is actually a good story hidden away beneath the tragedy of Red Sonja, and you get the impression that it was written in either a rush or chopped and changed in pre-production. On a better note the costumes and sets by Donello Doneti, a Dino De Laurentiis regular, are beautiful, with the most impressive being the red gartments worn by Kalidor, Sonja's armour [well filled by Nielsen it has to be said] The Swords and Weapons, and on the set stakes the impressive torch lit palaces and watery grave of sankes at the movies climax. Ennio Morricone's score is quite impressive too. Perhaps not in the league of the mighty and thunderous Basil Poledouris Conan scores wich would have enhanced Red Sonja immensly, but quite good in their own right. In the end though, there is only one thing that makes Red Sonja work and his name is Arnold Schwarzenegger. Arnold manages to bring a light of touch and humour to the role of Kalidor,in what little material he is given, an obvious Conan clone, and is once again impressive in the action scenes and sword play, and does well to carry Nielsen through the movie. It is a pitty that De Laurentiis didn't just comision another Conan movie instead, the legacy of wich is that John Milius is returning to direct King Conan : Crown of Iron, with Scwarzenegger and The Matrix Maestro's Andy and Larry Wachowski. Red Sonja though is in another world and rating that both old and new Conan movies and can only be seen as a fairly enjoyable and at times exciting waste of time.

Diamonds Are Forever (1971)

This Christmas its Diamonds. Because Diamonds are Forever

[10/10 · 11 December 2001]

With Diamonds are Forever as its starting point, the Bond series takes its first steps towards a revolution. Although Cubby Broccoli had yet to introduce the style , technique and humour that the Bond movies employed to define the 70's Action/Adventure movies,didn't untill The Spy Who Loved me [1977], the blueprints to all the greatest 70's Bond movies are very evident and apparent with Diamonds are Forever. From the very start of the fantastic pre-credits sequence in wich Bond hunts down Blofeld, presumably to avenge his wifes death [On Her Majesty's Secret Service, 1969], the claim is made that this is going to be lighter and more fun than anything on a Bond movie since Goldfinger [1964]. This is thanks to three important factors, Guy Hamilton who directed Goldfinger is back to direct his first Bond movie since the 1964 classic. With him Hamilton brings along alot of comic book orientated ideas and a wondefuly imaginative and humourous writer in Tom Manciewicz. Manciewicz is youthful and more American in his ways of writing and this gives Diamonds a fresh and polished feel to characters and action sequences. Sadly the script for Diamonds is one of the less involving and suspenseful of the series but no less enjoyable. The third factor in Diamonds success is the return of Sean Connery. Relaxed and re-energised after his hiatus from On Her Majesty's Secret Service, Connery looks to be enjoying himself, and this seems to be an inspiration to the rest of the cast and the overall look of the movie. In truth, Diamonds Are Forever is one of the most enjoyable and original of the entire Bond series.

It would have been nice perhaps that in the wake of On Her Majesty's Secret Service, George Lazenby and OHMSS's Director Peter Hunt had returned to do a follow up revenge story in wich Bond avenges Tersa [Diana Rigg] who was shot in the final moments of OHMSS. Sadly this wasn't to be. In its place we have the next best thing. Connery is back, the action is more fast and lighter, the sets are bigger and the characters are larger than life. Central to the success of the well written characters is the way in wich they are played, and Diamonds comes up with a killer cast. Charles Gray who was fantastic as a support in You Only Live Twice turns on the charm as a very subdued and eerie Blofeld. Perhaps working against Gray is the fact that the ghost of Telly Savalas, the best of the Blofelds echoes through the movie. Gray however is very comanding and humourous in the movie and it is refreshing to see a different look and style to the character. Equally impressive is Jill St John as Tiffany Case. St John comes over like Lucy from Charles Schultz Peanuts cartoons and in most movies this would seem out of place but gives Diamonds the humourous edge it needs. As efficient as St John is Lana Wood as Plenty O Toole. Wood is beautiful for the part and has a very apealing charm. Manciewicz provides Connery with one of the all time great Bond one-liners in conversation with Wood "Hi Im Plenty, Plenty O Toole" exclaims wood "After your father Perhaps" inquires Connery. Were as most Bonds give us one hench men, Diamonds gives us two, and homesexual ones at that. Mr Wint and Mr Kidd as portrayed by Bruce Glover and Putter Smith respectively are two of the most original creations of the action movie genre. The come across as some sort of Stoned Laurel and Hardy and again add to the humour and are vicious and nasty creations underneath the fun. Finally there is Jimmy Dean the Country music superstar who turns up here as the Howard Hughes clone Willard Whyte. Dean seems at first out of place in a Bond movie but eventually grows upon you as the humour escelates. Like most Bond movies there is at least one performance that doesn't work : Norman Burton as Felix Leiter. Burton has none of the style and charm Rick Van Nutter had in the role or the appeal that David Hedison would go on to have in future Bond movies. Burton is with out a doubt the worst of all the Leiters.

Add to all this the wondeful backdrop of Las Vegas. Vegas contains one of the most flashy glamorous settings for a Bond movie, and it is easy to believe what is going on there. Ken Adams sets are again a joy to marvel at, particularly Blofelds fortress at the movies climax and individual creations like the Moonbuggy, an ugly creation intentionally so. Guy Hamilton gets the direction right with the action sequences, and Connery once again in control of things throws himself enthusiastically into the role of Bond, more humour from Connery than we have ever seen before, and the action sequences once agin pack the punch. Diamonds however contains quite a few mistakes wich at times is distracting, the one obvious mistake is the sequence in the car chase in Vegas wich see's Bond and Plenty in a red sports car through a narrow alley, in order to fit in the car tilts to one side on its left wheels and an insert shot shows it tilting to its right side. Anyone who has ever tried that knows it is impossible! Mistakes come and go but with the pace so energetic you hardly notice. To support the energetic pace is John Barry's whirling and absorbing themes, a few notches down from them of OHMSS, But still efficient and mesmerising, and there is the traditional theme song, another classic sung with amazing skill by Shirley Bassey {Goldfinger].

Diamonds are Forever isn't all plain sailing. The plot of the movie is quite difficult at first to get stuck into, and as the characters a quite fresh and original it is difficult to appreciate them at first but they grow on you with time. The script as with You Only Live Twice has Bond struggling to grasp a space weapon from the hands of Blofeld, wich seems like an old song sung over. Thanks to Tom Manciewicz's fresh and enjoyable screenplay nothing seems tired, and Guy Hamilton milks everything he can from Comic Book/Pop Art humour and action. Manciewicz would later employ as simmilar writing style into Live and Let Die [1973] Superman:The Movie [1978] and Superman II [1980], but it is with Diamonds that he learned his trade. It is quite sad to see Sean Connery in his last official and EON Bond movie. But at least he went out with a bang and not a whimper. Over the years he BECAME Jmaes Bond and if it wasn't for the likes of Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan the series may have ended with him. Connery is fantastic in Diamonds are Forever, wich is a very enjoyable and well made movie, and a great start for Bond in the 1970's.

You know what they say Sean, Never Say Never Again.

A View to a Kill (1985)

Dance into the Fire.

[10/10 · 26 November 2001]

With A View To a Kill, the cutain falls on one of the greatest era's in action/adventure movies, as we, EON and the rest of the world bid a fond farewell to Roger Moore's James Bond. And what an exit Moore makes, put simply A View to a Kill is on of the most exciting, stylish, well written and under-rated Bond movies of all time.

The basic feel of the movie is pure electric. The series is on a role after the rousing successes that were For Your Eyes Only and Octopussy. Both these movies had represented a maturing point in the series and the shot in the arm of suspense,action and excitement that was needed. This trend is continued to the full with A View To A Kill, and in his goodbye performance Roger Moore manages to remarkably combine all the best elements of his previous Bond movies, and comes up with a perfect way to leave behind Bond and Her Majestys Secret Service.

Cubby Broccoli could hardly have awarded Roger a better acolade in wich to leave the series, than to give him the opportunity to act alongside one of America's all time best character/villain actors : Christopher Walken. Walken as Zorin is the best villain in the series since Christopher Lee's Scaramanga in The Man with The Golden Gun. Walken brings a refreshing air of realism and menace combined to put him amngst the great villains of the series. Equally impressive is Grace Jones as MayDay. Jones is the epitomy of a she-hulk and is the very fore of mid 80-s femenism.She strangely manages to be beautiful and frightening in the same breath, and looks fantastic in the action and love making sequences were she lets Bond know who's on top! Then there is Patrick MacNee as Tibbet. Tibbet is a fun character and when posing as Bonds servent early on in the movie Moore takes every opportunity to ad-lib, ordering and bossing MacNee about. In truth it is very amusing to see John Steed carrying Simon Templer's Bags around. It is a petty that MacNee's character is Killed because other Bond movies would have benefited from Macnee's presence. Less succesfull on the character fronts are David Yip, whos character drifts into the movie, seemingly to make the numbers up and is then killed, and of course Tanya Roberts as Stacey Sutton. Sutton makes Brit Ecklands Goodnight look impressive. Roberts looks good, nd the part is well written , so perhaps it is a case of miscasting. Luckily, the beautiful Fiona Fullerton, who may have been a more impressive Stacey Sutton turns up as the tantalisingly sexy Pola Evanova.

The action set pieces like in every Bond movie fire and work on all cilendars. There is a wonderfull pre-credits Ski-Chase battle set in a picturesque arctic glacier. The excitement begins in Parris were BJ Worth doubled for grace Jones and parachuted off the Eiffel Tower, and this is imediately followed by a fantastic car chase through the Parrisian locals. This later shifts to a simmilar scene in San Francisco, wich has bon Escape a burning elavator shaft and end up driving a Fire Engine dangling from one] at full speed through the city. And finally to the Golden Gate bridge via Air Balloon were Bond and Zorin battle to death. Here Walken displays all the depth of his character, giving a knowing giggle before plummiting to his death, as though he apreciates the joke is on him.

A View to a Kill represents one of the finest scripts in the series, the battle for monopoly over the microchip market. Even if the climax borrows slightly from Superman the Movies flooding of St Andres Fault, or in this case Sillicon Valley. All the elements work. John Barry's Score is his best since On Her Majesty's Secret Service, and the title song by Duran Duran is one of the most energetic and exciting of the series and has quickly becom a standard. In all this is a most satisfying Bond movie. An adequate exit for Roger Moore and one that has stood the test of time well. Thanks Roger and goodbye.

On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969)

This never happened to the other Fella

[10/10 · 2 October 2001]

Let me give it to you straight, On Her Majesty's Secret Service is an absolute, 100% triumph. All the elements work well, firstly there is Peter Hunt's direction. Hunt should have been handed the Directors reins on a Bond movie long before this. He adds action and excitement and blends this in the most stilted and calm manor. In truth On Her Majesty's Secret Service is a return to the less Gadget and Comic Book laden world of the likes of Goldfinger and You Only Live Twice, and echoes the Flemmingesque thriller world of Dr No and From Russia With Love. Those who dont like the first two additions to the Bond series dont flinch, On Her Majesty's Secret Service has a strenghth and style beaming with enegy and excitement twinned with realism. never seen in a Bond Film before or since.

This will always be remembered as George Lazenby's go at Bond. It is also remenbered as the one Bond that flopped at the box office. Well, on a budget of $9million and with worldwide grosses of $80million, hopefully the notion of disapointment will disapeer. There is also the fact that the Video and DVD versions of the movie consistently outsell all other Bond Titles worldwide. George Lazenby is an absolute revelation as Bond. I had my doubts but was still interested to see how he did. Lazenby rivals Connery in the Romantic and Action scenes and does pretty well with the dramatic scenes. In truth he is the most under-rated Bond. He makes a very believable Flemmingesque Playboy. He looks good in a tuxedo, on ski's, with women, in punch ups. Lazenby is helped by a strong support cast. Diana Rigg is beautifull and very believable as the Contessa, Tracy, with whom our James falls in love with, and eventually marries. Rigg displays a full range of acting and beauty to make her the most memorable of Bond Girls, and for one, wich i dont mean to sopil, inparticular. Telly Savalas is a very creepy, chilling and enjoyable Blofeld. It could be said that he is the most memorable of Blofeld's. He is obviously having the time of his life with the part and it is a pitty he didn't play the character in future outings. There is also the return of M, Q in a rather quiet outing this time, and a Moneypenny, heart broken at the notion Bond could marry anybody other than herself.

Now, if you add to all the above some of the finest action set pieces in motion picture history you have an idea of the scale of this epic. The Alpine sets, and Skiing and Bobsled chases really bring out the purest sense of adventure. On Her Majesty's Secret Service is the most memorable Bond Movie from my Childhood. I remember watching this one Christmas eve with my Grandparents, and their house looked very much like Blofelds Alpine Fortress [Without the Ladies, alas]. The movie has really thrilling ski chases, you really do believe a man can ski, and once more think you are skiing with him.This is very much THE Christmas Bond movie. It is also soaked with some delightful christmas themes by the master John Barry, composing perhaps his best Bond theme. We Have All the Time in the world, sung by Louis Armstrong is a beautifuly moving song, made all the more so by Tracy's fate at the end of the movie. There is also Barry's rousing On Her Majesty's Secret Service Theme, unlike anything ever heared in cinema's or movies before.

But it is the realism between the characters and the story that helps make On Her Majesty's Secret Service work. By far the most under-rated of the Bond movies, and a strong contender for the Best Bond Movie of all time. This is the greatest. Bond movies should try to be to be like this in future. Go and see it for yourself, dont listen to the the negative reviews. You have all the time in the world.

Being There (1979)

Everything will be O.K. in the Garden

[10/10 · 1 October 2001]

Being There is a wonderful gentle comedy. It is one of the few comedies in which nothing outrageously funny happens, but you laugh all the way through. The same can be said for Chance the Gardner, or Chauncey Gardiner as he comes to be preferred. If there is ever a case of the worst snubbing of Academy Awards for any actor then it is for Peter Sellers in Being There. Awards have been given for performances with less vitality, and Sellers gentle interpretation of the central character lay the blueprints for the likes of Dustin Hoffman in Rainman, or Tom Hanks in Forrest Gump. Both these actors won Oscars and Sellers was snubbed. His performance is less exaggerated than both Hoffmans or Hanks's but no less enjoyable, and for what is quite a restrained character for Sellers usual belly laugh characters, i was on the edge my seat throughout.

The fact that nothing is really revealed about Chances background lends a touch of the mysterious to the character, there is something that is just a fraction untouchable about the character, and Sellers performance. I for one am convinced that Chance is actually Timeless, perhaps even not of this world, much like Stan Laurel, whom Sellers performance echoes. Whoever Chance is, Sellers really can walk on water. Shirley McClaine is fantastic as the boozy wife of Melvyn Douglas. McClaine brings a sense that even though hers and Sellers characters are a million light years away in intelligance, in spirit they are soul mates. Melvyn Douglas's performance is heart breaking, and well worth the Academy Award he won for the role. Hal Ashby handles the direction with a stilted calmness, but the movie comes across as being somewhere between a Laurel and Hardy movie and Its A Wonderful Life. In truth, watching Being There is similar to seeing a firework display going off through thick snow.

What really lets the movie down is the inclusion of out-takes played over the end credits. These are a nasty way of seeing Chance come to life and almost dispel your memory of Chance. If it was another Actor other than Sellers in the role it would have killed the character for sure.

Getting There is half the fun. Being there is ALL of it.

You Only Live Twice (1967)

Welcome to Japan Mr Bond

[9/10 · 26 September 2001]

You Only Live Twice is pure Comic Book entertaiment. James Bond is very much the superhero character he was in Goldfinger, and every scene is like a panel in a Comic Book and filled with entertaining excitement. In truth, it is though the feel and style that was vibrant throughout Goldfinger [1964] leapfrogged the dull Thunderball [1965] and found it's way to Japan. Twice is a beautiful looking and sounding addition to the Bond movies, and one is glad Sean Connery didn't really resign from the role of Bond and did indeed Live Twice.

By jettisoning most of Ian Flemmings original story You Only Live Twice, in wich an amnesiac Bond Hunts down Blofeld in Japanese castles, Broccoli and Saltzman have ridden themselves of the same problem evident in Thunderball : Slow Movement, Uninterested Audiences. Thunderball may have been a success, but this was probably due to the Bondmania wich raged through the mid sixties like a giant inferno. Luckily for the fans of the eye popping spectacles the Bond series is famous for, You Only Live Twice contains no such problems of dreary moments of boardom. In its place we have a Space Age actioneer written by childrens author Roald Dahl, and an entertaining and swift director in Lewis Gilbert, who seems more suited to Bond than any director yet.

It has been said before, but the real star of the show is Ken Adams sets. His wondefull Volcano set wich Blofeld uses is one of the most memorable in Cinema history. Add to this the Japanese sets, the Submarines [M's Offices], Tanaka's Lair, and the real sense of Japanese authenticy. Adam deserves an Oscar for this movie alone. For his total contributions to Bond and other movies, there is no Award yet created.

Donald Pleasence makes a very creepy Blofeld. He is perhaps the ultimate Blofeld. His scenes with the other cast members show the complete acting skills of a fine actor. Twice also contains one of Desmonde Lywellyn's funniest performances as Q,and one of Q's finest creations, the Little Nellie Helicopter. Little Nellie is every Bond fans dreams, personally i think it would be lovely to soar above rural England in Nellie, let alone Japan! Some guys have all the luck! Twice also has one of John Barry's most beautiful themes,and songs sung by Nancie Sinatra.

The only real let down this time is Sean Connery. He makes any Bond film look good, but this time doesn't look as though he is enjoying himself all that much. This is a petty bacause Twice itself is a very impressive and enjoyable Bond movie, with some of the best sets, Action sequences and Acting in the entire series.

Thunderball (1965)

L007K UP, LOO7K DOWN, L007K OUT; This Bond Movie comes down to earth with a dull Bang.

[6/10 · 26 September 2001]

Thunderball for me is a dreary Bond film. It is almost as if Goldfinger was a massive party were everything went right and you over indulged, and Thunderball is the morning after hangover. For me, it strays to close into the same slow moving teritory as Dr No [1962] and From Russia With Love [1963]. This could be due to the fact that the fun loving fast moving Director Guy Hamilton [Goldfinger] was replaced by Terence Young, who directed the first two segments to the Bond Cinematic Exploits. Perhaps it is a turning point. Sean Connery is the real saving grace. His performance echoe's his own performance in the aforementioned Goldfinger, but the whole feel of the film is caught in a time warp.

Granted, everything that should be in a Bond movie is here. There is the fantastic action set pieces, such as Bond in the pre credits sequence, pulling on the Jet Pack and flying off [Pure Comic Book]. There is a memorable and catchy song sung by Tom Jones, wich isn't as good as the previous Title song by Shirley Bassey, but no less well performed. The Main Titles by Maurice Binder look garrish though, resplendant in greens and blues, but with beautiful sillouhettes to catch. John Barry's music is another high point of the film, his themes again being beautiful and moving. In truth Thunderball has many excellent moments, so why in my opinion doens't it work?

It is because it is too slow. Terence Young may have shaped the whole look of the Bond films for years to come, but with scenes were the action should be rousing he fails. He is good with character interplay such as Bond with Largo [Connery and Adolpho Celi], but scenes wich should be tension filled, such as Bond in the Shark infested Swimming Pool just dont hit the mark. However, Sean Connery proves again what a great Bond he is, and his presence can save many scenes any many more films.

Adolpho Celi is quite good as Largo, but you cant get the memory of Gert Frobe as Goldfinger out your mind. Perhaps that is another problem, Goldfinger is too fresh in memory for any other film to ahve much of an impact. Claudine Auger and Luciana Paluzzi make lovely looking female leads. And Q's gadgets are again very usefull and wondefull additions to the movie, my favourite being the under water camera. The script too could be really, really exciting, with Largo and SPECTRE holding the world to ransom with Nuclear Hardware [one wishes Guy Hamilton had been given this to direct] But the direction and acting is too slow, and this makes it uninteresting.

A missed oportunity if there ever was one.

Goldfinger (1964)

The Midas Touch : Pure Gold

[9/10 · 24 September 2001]

Goldfinger is one of the most enjoyable, boys own/comic book style adventure movies ever to be made. It has a fantastic script by Paul Diehn and Richard Maibaum, excellent Direction from Guy Hamilton, Fantastic acting by the three leads [Sean Connery, Honour Blackman and Gert Frobe] and some of the most inspired action set pieces to appear on the big screen. In Bond terms it also has a fine score by John Barry, one of the most instantly recognisable Title songs sung by Shirley Bassey, the beautifull Golden Girl, Shirley Eaton and Bonds most Famous henchman : Oddjob, Harold Sakata.

By now you probably realise iam a fan. Well. as it goes i find it almost impossible to watch the first two Connery Bonds, because i was brought up on a diet of 70's and 80's escapism, with fun, humour action and thrills in every scene. Well, i didn't have to look much further than Goldfinger than that.

The Opening pre Credits sequence sets the scene. Any film in wich its lead actor can strip away a wet suit to reveal a Tuxedo, is obviously having fun with itself. Or to be presise, Guy Hamilton is having fun. With the help of Broccoli, Saltzman, Maibaum and Ken Adam, Guy Hamilton set the blue prints for action movies for, perhaps forever. Sean Connery is very much the Superhero in this outing, and that is after all as we like him. He is having the time of his life with this movie and it shows, this is perhaps his bset performance as Bond. There is also Honour Blackman, very much a role model for Action Heroines for years to come as Pussy Galore. Galores lesbian undertones are toned down from the way they were in the book, but she is sexy and full to bursting with womens Lib. Gert Frobe is fantastic as Goldfinger, very chilling ."No Mr Bond i expect you to Die" has gone down in cinematic history and it is atestament to the man who dubbed Frobe!

The real star of the show is Ken Adam. His sets are fantastic. I have never seen Fort Knox, and i dont want to because i have seen it in Goldfinger. Adam is a genius, as are Peter and Michael Lamont who helped him out with the sets. Add to all this the Aston Martin with Ejector Seat and Revolving Licence Plate and more, A Hawaian henchman who throws his blade laced Bowler hat, a girl killed by suffication due to being painted Gold, and THAT Lazer between the legs. What you have got is pure unadulterated Comic Book fun. Even if you dont like Comic Books, you will love Goldfinger.

From Russia with Love (1963)

Classy but Dull

[8/10 · 24 September 2001]

From Russia With Love is an improvement on Dr No, in the fact that more fun is had with this movie, and the feel of it is more Bondian than the predescessor. But am i alone in finding it awfully Dull in places?

True, the action scenes are fantastic. There is the boat chase, with Sean Connery looking a little like Tony Curtis doing Cary Grant in Some Like it Hot. then there is Bond being chased by an helicopter looking strangely like Grant himself in North By North West. The gadgets are up to scratch,with the cashier case being one of the finest Bond Gadgets of all time [especially since it was the first but not because of. The case emits deadly talcum powder, bullets and stun gas and a dagger that proves very usefull to Bond later on in the film. As for Q, well the least said about Desmonde Lywellyn's debut the better, because he represents more a Carry On straight man than the good old Q we know.

The cast is up to the mark. Sean Connery is hitting his stride as Bond. His performance in FRWL is perhaps the best of his tenure, he is more the Flemming Playboy this time around than the cold Blooded Killer of Dr No. He carries the film [again]. Robert Shaw makes a very eerie henchman. He looks surpirsingly like Dolph Lundgren as Ivan Drago in Rocky IV, and his final train battle [one of Cinema's greatest] is an absolute knockout. My personal favourite is Pedro Armandariz as Kerim Bay. He is a warm, bubbly character and what a sad loss he was to future Bond movie's.

So overall the Music, Title Song sung by Mat Munroe, the excellent pre-credits sequence where Bond is killed, or is he? Action and Acting, help to make this a more Bondian movie than Doctor No. But the script in places leaves alot to be desired. It is far better to watch an exciting Bond movie than a Dramatic one. Luckily for Bond fans, fun was just around the corner..............................................

Dr. No (1962)

A Rather Bland Start

[6/10 · 21 September 2001]

For the Bond Addicts who have grew up on a diet of high octain and explosive Bond Movies that glittered like meteors across the screen throughout the 1970's and 1980's Dr No WILL come as something of a shock. It has little of the charm, style or wit that would come to make later entries in the series such classics. Iam speaking of course with a reverse point of view. Reviewing Dr No as a film in its own right it isn't all that a bad film, although not as good as some have said. It is impossible not to compare it to other Bond movies, and so that is were my opinion comes from.

For starters, the openng Gun Barrel sequence is surprisingly good. As is the monty Norman themes. Then the opening title sequence has none of the sexuality of Maurice Binder's later Gems. Once the "Three Blind Mice" song is played, you know this movie has dated.

Sean Connery however is the real saving grace of the film. He towers above everyone else in the cast, showing good signs for the future. His Bond in this movie is more colder and animalistic than in future outings. The script by Joseph Manciewicz and Richard Maibaum has dated terribly. This is because in future, Bond Movies would come to revelutionise the whole action movie genre, and set the standards. The standards in Dr No, are probably based on glamorising Ealing Crime or Crime B-Movies from the 1950's. This looks very odd in a Bond Film to say the least. Also, the tension between M and Bond isn't as potent here, Bernard Lee does well, but he comes over as more lovable in future films. Plus there is no Q!!! Wich equals no gadgets and therefore no fun! In all these things mix together and Dr No is perhaps the most boring Bond movie.

On the plus side, Joseph Wiseman makes a very creepy Dr No. He is the very essence of Comic Book Villainary. He looks like he has just wondered in from a James Whale movie, with his metal hands and blank expression. There is also Ursulla Andress to look at. Whilst not the most stunning Bond girl she certainly is very beautiful indeed, and handles the role of Honey Rider well. Her voice is dubbed!

Overall then, Terence Young handles the direction well, and the film flows along at a nice pace. But the feeling is that this is the bottom of an enormous tower of fun wich the Bond films would regenerate into in future. As a starting post though Dr No is quite good.

Doctor Who (1996 TV Movie)

He was back. And it was About Time.

[8/10 · 14 September 2001]

For fans of Doctor Who, Doctor Who The Movie was one of the greatest experiences in 33 years. This is a show that is LOVED in England, It is a ratings winner, It needs to be made, It has made more money for the BBC than any programme in their history, and the BBC still frustrate fans and refuse to make it.

Thank god for Philip Segal. He is the Genius [not that one is needed] who had the bright idea that more episodes of Doctor Who could be made. It doesn't matter that the programme was going to be an American flavoured take on the beloved characters. The important thing is that the good Doctor would be back on the box. Mr Segal in my opinion was right.

The casting of Paul McGann as The Doctor was the most inspired thing about this TV Movie. McGann brings a sense of the Mysterious to the role without ever really trying too hard. Sylvester McCoy tried REALLY hard during his time as the Doctor without much success. One look at Tom Baker and you believed he WAS an Alien. The same is true for Paul McGann. He is the most worthy successor to Baker since Sir Tom relinquished the Tardis Keys in 1981. The interesting thing is that both Baker/McGann rein from the great city of Liverpool.

The designs of the TARDIS, Plus the costumes and Special effects, all hit the mark and help make this look like a $40million movie. The man who very nearly steals the show is Eric Roberts as The Master.After years of the droll and predictable Anthony Ainley in the role, Segal found an Actor worthy of Roger Delgado. Yee Jee tso is quite good as Chang Lee. He resembles the same portrayal that Mathew Waterhouse gave as Adric [1980-82]. And then there is Daphne Asbrook as Grace. She is clumsy and Daphy as her name sounds. She is also surprisingly strong as the female lead. And she kisses the Doctor. Who cares [no pun]? There is absolutely no sexual tension in The Doctor/Grace relationship. If there was i could understand the controversy.

What really lets the TVMovie down is Mathew Jacobs script. It evokes the best memories of Doctor Who from childhood whilst simultaneously adding some awful plot holes. The main loop of course is the atrocious climax in wich the Doctor goes back in time [Superman The Movie style] to stop The Master. If it was that simple why didn't he do that in 500 odd episodes of the television series?

Overall though, excellent Theme Music [John Debney, Brilliant Hartnell style costumes for the Doctor, a Good TARDIS set, nEAT sfx and up to the standard acting. Add to that teriffic bike chases and invisible snakes and the problems are ironed out. All in all this would have acted as a very enjoyable Pilot movie to a smilarly enjoyable series. Its a pity. Lets hope that the TARDIS materialises in Hollywood or back on the BBC some time soon.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979)

Who Needs Star Wars?

[10/10 · 12 September 2001]

Star Trek The Motion Picture is one of the all time greatest Sci-Fi Adventure movies. I make no apologies, this is the film that introduced me Captain Kirk, Spock and Co. Whilst not a Trekie as such, I am more of a Casual Star Trek fan. Such is the impact of this film that even had I not been, I think I would have enjoyed this as a movie in its own right. Perhaps the only thing working against the movie is that it doesn't manage to generate the fun of the original series. Instead it lays the blueprints for Star Trek-The Next Generation, and the next 20 odd years or so of Trek Episodes.

Robert Wise's Direction is Epic to say the least. Wise is not the most obvious name you would ascociate with a Star Trek movie, but he and Star Trek fit like a glove. He does for Star Trek what Richard Donner did for Superman the previous year. He has taken material that from the outset would only appeal to fans, yet he makes it acceptable for a general audience as well. And Star Tek The Motion Picture has many elements for the casual Viewer/Trek fan to feast their eyes on.

There is the Solid Cast. William Shatner is for Star Trek what Christopher Reeve was for Superman, and Sean Connery was for Bond. He is the ultimate Captain of the Enterprise, and this shows. It took an excellent actor like Patrick Stewart to lay the ghost of Kirk to rest. Shatner carries the weight of the movie on his shoulders, and does so well. Leonard Nimoy as Spock evokes similar echoes of the kind of performances he gave on the T.V. Shows. Yet with age Nimoy looks more the alien and somehow his performance seems all the more real, like a good wine, with age. Once Spock comes aboard the Enterprise you know its going to be fun all the way. There are also the familiar faces of James Doohan,George Takai, Deforest Kelly and Walter Koening. Then there is the wonderfully designed Sets, of the Enterprise etc, which perfectly compliment the excellent special effects By John Dykstra. In truth Star Trek The Motion Picture was eye candy before the word was even invented. And also, there is Jerry Goldsmiths beautifull score wich blends the T.V series themes with a new energetic score for the 80's.

In truth, for the casual viewer the plot may be alittle strained. Basiacally the Enterprise engages in a sluggish battle with a malignent force field headed earthwards. Who could be responsible. [The Klingons?] But even if the script doesn't appeal, with everything else on offer, you should be satisfied enough.

Not Only... But Also (1965–1970)

Not Only Dudley Moore but Also Peter Cook

[10 September 2001]

Not only But Also is a turning point in British Comedy. It can be said and believed that it was The Goons who started Satire in Britain and made popular the way we laugh at things. Well it WAS The Goons there at the begining. But they merely planted the Seeds, and what grew was the bastard child that became Pete and Dud. And with them came Not Only But Also. You may be a fan of Dudley Moore's solo excursions in Hollywood [10,Arthur, Micki+Maude] and detest Peter Cook because of the dire solo work he done in later life . On the other hand you may be greatly irritated by Dudley Moore,hating his solo excursions into Hollywood and be a fan of the genius and wit, and father of Alternative Comedy, Peter Cook and love his stuff [Derek and Clive, Peter Cook and Co, The Secret Policemans Ball]. Whatever camp you happen to be in Not Only But Also is worth a look. There are things in here that were never seen before, nor can be done as funnily again. My personal favourites include, The Alan A'Dale Sketch, Pete and Dud in the Pub, Pete and Dud in the Zoo, The Leaping Nuns sketch, The Glid of Gloob and of course Superthunderstingcar, an hillarious mock on the over hyped work of Geery Anderson. Also watch out for the likes of John Lennon, Peter Sellers et all making fleeting appearances. One more thing, if you watched this and was offended by ANYTHING, do NOT, i repeat NOT, watch under any circumstances ANY tapes or videos of two individuals known as DEREK and Clive. Who remarkably look rather similar to Pete and Dud. Doubt they are any relation though. Thank you!

Micki + Maude (1984)

Hillarious!!!! Rom-Com at it's very best!

[10/10 · 10 September 2001]

Micki+Maude is one of the most satisfying comedies to come out of Hollywood in the 1980's. It is perhaps Blake Edward's last great film, it is also the film in wich Dudley Moore solidified his position as a like-able Romantic Light Comedian worthy of greats like Cary Grant and Jack Lemon. The plot in itself works thanks to a knockout idea, Dudley Moore + 2 wives = Bigamy x Pregnancy. Any theme like that alone would be funny. Handled by one of the all time great American directors, Blake Edwards and starring Cuddly Dudley, it soars. Amy Irving as Micki, and Anne Reinking as Maude are both very enjoyable and frothy charcters, essential to a romantic comedy. One imagines that if he wanted to Edwards could have made this a straight sequel to his hit 10, with Dud reprising his role as George Webber, with Julie Andrews as Micki and Bo Derk as Maude. But Amy Irving and Anne Reinking do just nicely. Michael Le Grand's themes and songs are nice, and the film amounts to a funny and fitting climax. Edwards employs in the fianl scenes lots of Laurel and Hardy imagery and Dud handles this well. Edwards should be proud because not only has he emulated the greatest work of Stan and Ollie with this film, he has created something that in turn will influence generations of Comedy directors. Why on earth this didn't win any Academy Awards i dont know. I can think of an Actor and a Director who thoroughly deserve them.

Supergirl (1984)

Comic Book Romantic Comedy Fantasy

[7/10 · 7 September 2001]

Supergirl is a wonderfully constructed movie. The castings of Helen Slater as Supergirl, Academy Award Winner Faye Dunaway as Selina, Peter O Toole, Peter Cooke, Marc McClure et all, is inspired. The Direction by Jeannot Swarzc is bouncy and bubbly and adds to the fun. The Special effects are th e best seen in any Alexander/Ilya Salkind produce movie [and perhaps the best in any fantasy movie full stop]. Alan Humes photography is simply stunning and Jerry Goldsmiths Themes are superb. The problem lies as with most Salkind produced movies [And most blockbusters made by big studios today]with the script. David Odell's Wizard of Oz style Rom-com is awful. Odell employs the most stupid of themes for a movie of this kind by making it alove story, and worse still is characters [Linda Lee Ethan and Selina] are poorly written and un-interesting. David and Leslie Newman showed with their work on Superman The Movie and Superman III, how this sort of ting should be handled.

In favour of the movie, Helen Slater is very good and very attractive as the heroine. She is alittle more comfortable as the dorothy like Kara than Superman alike Supergirl. Faye Dunaway is suitable as the evilish Selina, and Peter O Toole impresses as Zaltar. Others like Peter Cooke and Brenda Vacaro are hillarious, but Maureen Teefy as Lucy and Hart Brochner as Ethan are awful.

Overall thought, the sets, special effects, music and performances win through. This is an enjoyable movie but no Superman II or Superman III. And this is apety because it could easily have been just that.

Conan the Destroyer (1984)

Conan The Comic Book Flavoured Destroyer

[7/10 · 23 August 2001]

This film is more lighter in tone than John Milius' classic, Conan The Barbarian. Probably due to a more lightweight director, Richard Fliescher coming on board, and more importantly a script by Marvel Comics writers Roy Thomas and Gerry Conway. However, the mix is more enjoyable this time around, not as interesting or impessive than its predescessor, but more fun. Arnold never looked more mightier than here, looking like the true Marvel Comics equivelent of the hero, rather than Milius' or Robert Howards version. The script is pretty dull, it has to be said, owing from the likes of Steve Reeves Hercules movies and the classics of Ray Harrihausen. But there is still Arnold, the wonderfull sets, the powerful Basil Poledouris theme, and a cast of Grace Jones, Sarah Douglas, Tracey Walter, Mako, Wilt Chamberlain and Olivier D'Abo, who some how manage to make this resemble an episode of the 60's Batman T.V Series than a piece of Robert Howard soaked fantasy.The fighting scenes a re good and there is a fantastic scene in wich Conan is trapped in a cave of mirrors terrorised by Red-Hooded monsters. The only way to kill them? To smash the mirrors of course. Pure Marvel Comics fantasy.