The Falcon’s Brother (1942)

2012 #71
Stanley Logan | 60 mins | TV | 4:3 | USA / English | PG*

The Falcon's BrotherThe Falcon may’ve done it in the third entry in RKO’s Saint-a-like film series, but now it was time for Tom Conway to take over — as the series’ star, that is.

Leaving my contrived and slightly embarrassing introductions aside, Conway gets a pretty good introduction to what will soon be his franchise. Though we begin with George Sanders still the lead, learning that his brother has been murdered on a ship arriving in New York — only to find out the body isn’t his brother after all — there’s a speedy and smooth transition to Conway being in charge.

Quite why they felt the need to execute such a neat transition, when previously films of this calibre had been happy to just re-cast (see: the Saint), I don’t know, but it works in its favour. Behind the scenes, Sanders had grown tired of B-movie leads, but presumably the series was successful enough at this point that RKO didn’t want to abandon it — especially as they were in the process of losing the Saint. In a piece of too-perfect casting, Conway is his real-life brother. On-screen and in-story, the passing of the baton is so smoothly done you barely even notice it happening, and it gives Conway an unencumbered chance to establish himself… though he’s basically the same character. Whether he’ll have the same gurning lack of success with the dames remains to be seen, however.

Brotherly loveAside from housekeeping, the film offers one of the series’ better plots, a proper detective mystery that doesn’t lead where you’d expect it to for once. That said, I didn’t like the ending so much, especially the way it abruptly dispatches our former hero followed by the gang carrying on with barely a care. The Mysterious Threatening Voice On The Phone is interesting though — will we be seeing a recurring enemy; a Moriarty or Blofeld for the new Falcon? Time shall tell…

Apart from the dual leads, Don Barclay’s Lefty is basically a re-cast Goldy — he even has the same police-bating catchphrase. Why Allen Jenkins left/was got rid of, I don’t know, but that’s the kind of thing that happens in movies of this scale I suppose. A quick flick through IMDb reveals the Goldy will return later, but Jenkins won’t, which is a minor shame. Broadly similarly, making Jane Randolph’s female lead, Marcia Brooks, a journalist also smacks of why-isn’t-it-just-the-one-from-the-last-film-ness. She’ll be back in the next film and then gone again, perhaps continuing the almost-tradition the films are establishing for a girl relay? (I should really stop theorising mid-flow; but then, we are wont to see connections where there are none.)

The bumbling cops are also present and correct, not that I care for them. Their “because I’m the boss” shtick is one of the elements that makes the Falcon films feel more formulaic than the Saint ones, The Shadow?in spite of all the other factors (changing sources of adaptation; changing leads) that should make them feel wildly varied. And the Falcon’s butler, Jerry, is Asian again, after being caucasian in the last two films. Played this time by Keye Luke, rather than being some nasty stereotype he has a nice bit using stereotypes to the characters’ advantage. It’s one of the series’ better comic inventions.

Re-casting your lead can be a major stumbling block for a series, or lead it to even greater success. Normally it’s done abruptly, but the Falcon takes a more transitionary route… and, perhaps surprisingly, it pays off with a mostly fun adventure. And with Conway now in charge, perhaps the series can shake off the lingering Saint on its shoulder.

3 out of 5

* As with the vast majority of the Falcon series, The Falcon’s Brother hasn’t been passed by the BBFC since its original release. Nonetheless, it’s available on DVD, rated PG. ^

Love and Other Impossible Pursuits (2009)

aka The Other Woman

2012 #76
Don Roos | 98 mins* | Blu-ray | 2.35:1* | USA / English | 15 / R

Love and Other Impossible PursuitsIt’s funny what movies sometimes pique your interest. I saw a trailer for relationship drama Love and Other Impossible Pursuits (or, as it was retitled in America, The Other Woman) on some completely unrelated US Blu-ray earlier this year (I forget which film it was, but the only connection was the disc’s distribution company) and wondered why I’d never heard of it before — after all, it looked like a Worthy Drama, starring Oscar Winner Natalie Portman and Lisa Kudrow From Friends. Turns out it was shot in 2009 but not released until 2011, when it was slated by critics (a measly 39% on Rotten Tomatoes), flopped at the US box office (it opened at an unimaginably painful 67th place (who knew there were that many films out at once?), grossing just $25,423 total), and went straight to DVD in the UK. Ouch.

So, me being me, the double-whammy combination of “that looks like it might be quite good” and “wow, that’s meant to be terrible” put it straight at the top of my rental queue.

Emilia (Portman) is the titular Other Woman, but rather than the film telling the well-trod story of an affair, that part’s long over before the film begins — she’s living with Manhattan lawyer Jack (Scott Cohen, the magnificent Wolf in underrated miniseries The 10th Kingdom), trying to build a relationship with his son William (Charlie Tahan), who’s more attached to his mother (Kudrow). Colouring everything is the fact that, some time shortly before the film begins, Emilia and Jack had a baby who died.

The Other WomanAs I was brought to the film by its trailer, it pays to say it’s actually very different. The advert hides the baby’s death but hints at it, as if it’s a Big Reveal they clumsily didn’t want to give away. But no, it’s brought up within the first five or so minutes and actually drives a lot of the film. The emphasised “other woman” facet is present, though in a slightly different way to normal: this is how such relationships continue as a long-term status quo, rather than the immediate impact of an affair.

Or a version of that, anyway, because the presentation is a bit melodramatic. Melodrama can be fine; good, even — but it’s a style, arguably a genre; a heightened one, and that runs counter to realism. This is a film that shoots for realism and slides into melodrama, and that’s not good. There are powerful ideas for scenes, but most are badly handled. Portman and Kudrow are quality actresses who deliver some good bits, but also some that go OTT. Especially from the latter, who’s not given enough screen time to move far beyond a caricature of the vengeful ex-wife.

The single worst bit comes 13 minutes in: an extended flashback, the film’s only one (which, structurally, makes it stick out like a sore thumb), in which we see the affair I said they were doing so well not covering. Emilia and Jack fall in love. Why? Because the plot tells them to. It’s also the nadir of another irritant, the film’s sappy plinky-plonky music.

An impossible pursuitI can imagine that flashback working within the shape of a novel, where structure works differently. Indeed, I got the impression the book is probably very novelistic; maybe a character study, even. Those are two things that don’t always transfer well to film. I don’t think it’s about Being The Other Woman, despite the US title; nor do I think it’s about Being The Stepmother; nor is it about Losing A Baby. Those things are all in there, certainly, but rather than any of them be The Story, they’re elements in the exploration of the character of Emilia. I’m not sure that works for a movie; not for this one at any rate.

Not a complete disaster, but nowhere near a success. This score is perhaps a tad harsh, but any more would’ve been generous.

2 out of 5

* Two quick notes about the UK Blu-ray. Firstly, according to IMDb, the film ran 119 minutes at the Toronto International Film Festival, but was cut to 102 by the US release. The UK BD is the shorter cut at PAL speed. Secondly, the original aspect ratio was apparently 1.85:1, but the BD has been cropped (or widened) to 2.35:1. Not sure I’ve ever seen that before, but there you have it. ^

Iron Sky (2012)

2012 #95
Timo Vuorensola | 89 mins | streaming | 2.35:1 | Finland, Germany & Australia / English & German | 15 / R

Iron SkyPeriod sci-fi comedy/action/adventure Iron Sky is the 21st century answer to Snakes on a Plane: the worldwide internet geek community got hold of the idea/trailer for a film about Nazis on the moon coming back to Earth, and somehow pushed the concept into being via crowdfunding and a general sense of “doesn’t that sound cool?” Then, again like Snakes on a Plane, no one seemed to actually like it.

Well, I’m going to be a bit of a dissenting voice, because I thought Iron Sky was quite fun. It’s by no means perfect, with some clunky dialogue, weak acting, blatant virtual sets, thuddingly obvious satire, and so on (for more crushing criticism, see the ghost of 82’s review)… but, equally, it’s a low-budget SF comedy — you have to admire some of its ambition.

If you take the rotten dialogue and variable performances to be part of the intentional humour (and, in some cases, I think it is), then they’re less objectionable. The CGI is no worse than we’ve seen in some major productions down the years (for various reasons it brought to mind Sky Captain). Its attacks on a Palin-esque US President are remarkably untimely now she seems to have been ignored even in her own country, but at least it does place the US and their foreign policy attitudes in its sights — the advantage of it being a foreign production, because I’m sure if it was US-made Iron loversthey’d be the gung-ho spotless heroes defeating that Natzees for a second time.

Throw in a moderately witty spoof of the Downfall-based Hitler YouTube meme, and moderately audacious elements like the Nazis turning a black astronaut white as part of their new attitude to racial purity, and you have a film that is moderately successful on its own terms.

It’s brain-in-neutral entertainment, certainly, but there are worse examples of that. Snakes on a Plane, for instance. And if you really need convincing, just imagine how Michael Bay would’ve treated this concept: exactly the same, but without the awareness of it all being silly.

3 out of 5

The Hunger Games (2012)

aka The Hunger Games: The Unseen Version

2012 #75
Gary Ross | 143 mins | Blu-ray | 2.40:1 | USA / English | 15 / PG-13

The Hunger GamesSeen by some as a Battle Royale rip-off and by others as no more than the new Twilight, The Hunger Games is different enough from its Japanese forebear and immeasurably better than that detestable cross-media abstinence-fest. Buoyed by edgy direction (much criticised but actually very solid), a well-realised science-fiction/fantasy world, and an engaging lead character (portrayed by a multi-Oscar-nominated star, no less), it transcends its young adult roots and rip-off reputation to become an engrossing action/adventure with political undertones. It seems the latter will be brought out more in three forthcoming sequels, which may make for an even richer parable.

4 out of 5

The Hunger Games merited an honourable mention on my list of The Best Films I Saw For the First Time in 2012, which can be read in full here.

In the interests of completing my backlog of 2012 reviews, I decided to post some ‘drabble reviews’ of a few films. In the future I may update with something longer, but if I don’t, at least there’s something here for posterity.

For those unfamiliar with the concept, a drabble is a complete piece of writing exactly 100 words long.

Yes, “science-fiction/fantasy” is one word.

Birth (2004)

In the interests of completing my backlog of 2012 reviews, I decided to post some ‘drabble reviews’ of a few films. In the future I may update with something longer, but if I don’t, at least there’s something here for posterity.

For those unfamiliar with the concept, a drabble is a complete piece of writing exactly 100 words long.

2012 #87
Jonathan Glazer | 93 mins | TV | 1.85:1 | USA & Germany / English | 15 / R

BirthControversial supernatural mystery drama. Nicole Kidman’s rationalist husband dies suddenly; years later, as she gets engaged to another man, a boy arrives claiming to be her husband reincarnated. More realistic art house drama about grief and insecurity than thrill-giving occult mystery, it nonetheless keeps you guessing as Kidman is slowly convinced by the boy’s tale, while family relationships collapse around her. Full of quiet understated performances, Kidman is particularly captivating and, as the boy, Cameron Bright is mesmerisingly unreadable. Poorly received, with some notable exceptions, Birth is a fascinating film that won’t appeal to everyone, but deserves the right audience.

4 out of 5

The Plank (1967)

2012 #97
Eric Sykes | 51 mins | TV | 1.66:1 | UK / English | U

The PlankA near-silent slapstick comedy starring Tommy Cooper and Eric Sykes, I’d never heard of The Plank until MovieMail highlighted it in a recent catalogue — I swear they gave it a fairly thorough write-up and called it a “must see” (or words to that effect), but I can’t find it now… Weird. (Incidentally, if you don’t get the MovieMail catalogue, you really should — it’s the best free film magazine I know, and probably bests a fair few purchasable ones too.) Anyway, after remembering MovieMail said it was a must see (even if they didn’t), Channel 5 helpfully put it on late one night over Christmas. So I watched it.

The film opens with the credits being sung to the viewer — a surreal touch that indicates the kind of experience you’re in for. The humour, as noted, is primarily of a slapstick variety, much of it unsurprisingly revolving around the titular slab of wood. Some of it is very amusing, but it really only works for people who like that kind of humour. That might sound self evident, but I mean I can’t see this as a film that will convert anybody. At times it coasts a little too; perhaps too much for such a short running time.

A right pair of plankersThere’s actually a surprising amount of dialogue, considering I’ve seen it several times cited as being a silent comedy. The vast majority is inconsequential and there’s no significant humour there, which does render it an almost pointless inclusion — why not go the whole hog and make it dialogue-free? But then, this isn’t The Artist, so why not have chatter?

Also worthy of note are the supporting roles, featuring numerous comedy stars, many with names still recognised today: Roy Castle, Jimmy Tarbuck, Hattie Jacques, Bill Oddie… Can’t say I spotted them all in the film, but they must be there somewhere.

Some people seem to adore The Plank, and I’m glad for them that it’s made its way to DVD. It’s certainly a left-field kind of movie, very ’60s, and while I only really enjoyed it in parts, it’s the kind of thing I appreciate having seen. Well done, MovieMail.

3 out of 5

Avengers Assemble (2012)

aka The Avengers / Marvel’s The Avengers / Marvel Avengers Assemble / Marvel’s Avengers Assemble

2012 #78
Joss Whedon | 143 mins | Blu-ray | 1.78:1 | USA / English | 12 / PG-13

Avengers Assemble

I don’t think it’s a perfect movie. I don’t even think it’s a great movie. I think it’s a great time.

So says Joss Whedon, writer/director/creator of the generation-defining Buffy the Vampire Slayer, its spin-off Angel, the inimitable Firefly, its incredible movie send-off Serenity, the ground-breaking Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog, and, y’know, Dollhouse (which I’ve not seen). In short, I love the work of Mr Whedon. And, more relevantly, he’s also the writer/director of the film that represented the culmination of Marvel’s uber-successful Phase One cinematic experiment: the disappointing Avengers Assemble.

Yeah, I said “disappointing”.

Let’s tackle the big looming issue head-on: hype. Something can only be disappointing if you’re expecting something of it, and the big screen adaptation of Marvel’s long-running superhero team-up comic The Avengers certainly had more than its fair share of that. Built with subtle (and not so subtle) snippets of information through five preceding Marvel Studios films, this crossover had been teased for years, and it was a radically new method of franchise-building to boot. Mix in that most of these films and characters were very popular, and the fan-pleasing appointment of Mr Whedon, and you had a recipe for hype. In spite of this potentially damaging level of expectation, critics largely loved it, and audiences too (though there were dissenting voices — genre magazine SFX only awarded it 3.5 stars), and it outpaced everyone’s expectations to become the third highest grossing film of all time (it took more than Iron Man, Thor and Captain America combined).

Captain Iron and America ManComing to it for the first time on Blu-ray, then, there’s an even bigger level of expectation attached. Iron Man had much the same problem five years ago, and I felt that had been overrated too. I don’t think either are bad films — I very much enjoyed Iron Man, and I enjoyed The Avengers, albeit more intermittently — but I don’t think either are as good as mass opinion holds.

The problem here is bringing together so many different characters from so many different films. If anyone can do it it’s Whedon, master of the ensemble cast in just about every one of his previous projects, but even he produces a leaden first act in which we’re re-introduced to everyone and they’re gradually brought together. This is the film’s worst segment — it’s a slow 20 to 30 minutes during which pieces are shuffled into place for what follows.

Even when it picks up, the plot’s scaffolding is on show: bits feel engineered merely to set up certain one-on-one face offs (Whedon makes sure nearly every hero has such a scene with Loki, for instance), or even to keep certain characters out of the way until the plot requires them again. People talk of the fantastic dialogue, but I found the odd good line in a sea of functional chatter. Maybe it plays better in a packed cinema. The action sequences are a similar affair, though they manage to have their cake and eat it with hero-on-hero duels at first meeting before united-heroes-vs-baddies later on. However, there are some bits that played well in the trailers which, in the film, feel like they were parachuted in to play well in the trailers. As the (excellent) Honest Trailer points out, however, one key mid-film sequence is all about the exciting event of… Iron Man repairing a ship. Woo.

This ship.

Despite the relatively moderate success of the non-Iron Man previous Marvel films, this largely draws its story from their sources. Boring old Captain America is the de facto lead, though of course Tony Stark steals the scene from him on numerous occasions — those worried the film would be seen as Iron Man and His Super-Friends weren’t wholly wrong (indeed, that’s virtually how the Radio Times describe it in their 22-word summary).

But, even more so, Whedon’s chosen villain and plot make this pretty much Thor 2. The evil so bad it has to bring all the heroes together is Loki, last seen falling to his doom at the end of Thor (well, if you watch the post-credits scenes he was doing something else, but as far as Thor’s concerned, he’s gone). His motivation, only passingly mentioned (so much so that some missed it and claim he’s destroying Earth “just because”), is born out of the events of Thor; as is world-shattering MacGuffin the Tesseract (again, it was first mentioned inHammer Time Thor’s post-credits scenelet); plus numerous events from that film are mentioned and discussed, I’d say more so than any of the other four preceding films (scenes that would have more specifically related to the events of Captain America were cut for time and pace — yes, believe it or not, some stuff was left out).

I don’t know how the film plays for total newbies — there must have been some in the audience, considering how much more the film made than its predecessors — but I think that in many respects you need to have seen all the previous films. You certainly need to know who Iron Man is and who Tony Stark is; the allusions to Steve Rogers’ past, and so why his character is the way he is, are all there; and, as discussed, Thor has the most bearing on the plot. Perhaps you could follow it without having seen any of them, but I’m willing to bet you’d be very aware you were missing backstory.

Looking ahead for a moment to Marvel’s forthcoming Phase Two (a series of sequels and one new film leading up to The Avengers 2), they’ve talked about keeping the individual characters’ movies standalone, so that each works as its own series. I can see how Iron Man 3 will be just fine (though even that will be building off his psychological reaction to the events of Avengers’ climax), as would a (second) Hulk reboot (besides, it doesn’t need to continue at all if it’s a reboot). Heck, even Cap might get away with it — having deleted the “coping with the modern world” stuff here, why not use it in Cap 2? And we can tell from the title that the main plot will derive from events in Cap 1. But The Avengers completely blusters on from the end of Thor, Puny Godmeaning Thor 2 is going to have to begin somewhere after what happened here, with very specific ramifications for its characters. Maybe they’ve got some damnably clever way around that. I doubt they think it matters any more anyway — who hasn’t seen The Avengers? And in the future, well, it’s up to the viewer to piece together which order all the disparate sequels and spin-offs go in.

And on matters of “screw later viewers!”… Technically I should probably subtitle this The Blu-ray Cut or something, for two reasons. 1) The Shwarma Scene, a short post-credits scenelette that was included on Marvel’s The Avengers but wasn’t ready in time for Marvel Avengers Assemble’s week-earlier theatrical release. It’s back now. 2) The Spear Tip, which there’s every chance you’ve heard about: fans complaining it’s gone missing on the DVD/BD; the BBFC investigating if Disney breached the Video Recordings Act; then discovering it was (sort of) their own fault for (sort of) not spotting the change; Disney saying it was never even there in cinemas (which the BBFC disagree with)… Sadly, the end result was Disney had done nothing illegal. It might’ve been nice if they’d been forced to do a recall and repress, because then they’d have had no excuse to not include the director’s commentary (missing from the UK release because it was recorded late and some idiot thought hitting an earlier date was preferable to including all the special features), but I don’t imagine that was ever really likely to happen.

I haven't discussed Maria Hill either, but here's a pretty pictureAnd the glaringly obvious thing I haven’t discussed is the title. Firstly, as you can see from all my akas at the top, no one can quite agree on what it’s meant to be. Secondly, there’s the highly contentious UK renaming. Did it need it? Patronised-feeling film and comic fans say “no”; but those aware of general public perception say that, either anecdotally or through research, normal Brits did report confusion with the classic ’60s spy series (and, presumably, the lamentable ’90s movie). Funnily enough, I think the new title actually works better in context. “What do we do now?” calls Agent Coulson. “Avengers Assemble,” comes the title card’s response. Well, it kinda works. And even then, what does it matter, really? Those people who went as far as importing a foreign DVD or Blu-ray just for the original title card need to get some perspective in their life. (If you did it for Whedon’s commentary, however, I completely understand. I saved money and pirated it (the commentary, not the whole film), which feels morally pleasing.)

I realise I’ve spent much of this review discussing the pre-release hype, what this means for the future of the franchise, and how they ballsed up the home entertainment release. That those are the elements most concerning me perhaps says something about my reaction to the film. And I haven’t even mentioned the distracting way the heroes all talk to each other without earpieces during the final battle, or Jeremy Renner’s comments about his disappointment at the treatment of Hawkeye (he has every right to be peeved), or the predictable inevitably over who gets killed off (of course someone gets killed off, that’s one of Whedon’s trademarks), or the resultant outcry from some parts of fandom, or even bits that were quite good.

You'll like him more when he's angryAmusingly, one of the few bits even those in implacable love with the film sometimes criticise is Banner’s “I’m always angry” moment, which I thought was an awesome perspective on the character. It’s not just convenience either — it was put it in for a specific reason. I’ve lost the quote, but it’s something to do with how Whedon always feels somewhat angry at various things. I could identify.

Avengers Assemble left me with a bitter taste in my mouth. After all the hype and excitement, I just didn’t enjoy it that much. I tried, but it seemed slow to get anywhere, the dialogue didn’t zing as promised, some of the story seemed perfunctory and lacking requisite grandeur, there were little niggles like the earpieces… Perhaps it will fare better on repeat viewings, because there’s certainly entertainment contained within, and I’ll be divorced from such insurmountably high levels of expectation. But until then… disappointing.

4 out of 5

Avengers Assemble premieres on Sky Movies today at 4pm and 8pm, continuing for the next fortnight.

It merited an honourable mention on my list of The Best Films I Saw For the First Time in 2012, which can be read in full here.

Everything or Nothing (2012)

2013 #14
Stevan Riley | 98 mins | download (HD) | 1.78:1 | UK / English | 12

Everything or NothingTo mark the 50th anniversary of the James Bond film series last year, the producers commissioned this special documentary looking back at the entire phenomenon. If you missed it when it was shown exclusively at Odeon cinemas (in the UK; it was on TV in the US), it’s been out on DVD for a few weeks (in the UK; nothing in the US) and comes to Sky Movies Premiere from tomorrow (at 12:15pm and 10:30pm; continues twice a day thereafter). It’s sometimes called Everything or Nothing: The Untold Story of 007, not that you’ll see that title on screen or on the DVD cover; and not that it’s very accurate, actually, because many (perhaps all) of these stories have been told before. But I’ll come to that.

Overall, experienced documentary-maker Stevan Riley has put together an engaging work. Eschewing intrusive, dogmatic voiceover narration, Riley instead tells the story through interviews (both new talking-head pieces and archive-drawn audio), illustrative clips, behind-the-scenes photos and film snippets, and music. The latter elements are taken almost exclusively from the Bond franchise itself — one of the film’s early contentions is that the Bond novels were a mixture of autobiography and fantasy for creator Ian Fleming, so (as Riley has said in interviews) clips from the films seemed an appropriate way to cover his back story.

Saltzman, Fleming, CubbyAlthough ostensibly a history of the film series, Riley begins the story with Fleming’s wartime career and the birth of the Bond novels, then covers early attempts to get Bond on screen. Depth here means it actually takes quite a while to get to the entry of ‘Cubby’ Broccoli and Harry Saltzman, the producers who finally brought Bond to the big screen in the still-running series this documentary is meant to be about! Some have accused the film of being “the producers’ story”, as if that were a bad thing. It’s a behind-the-scenes tale, and with only a handful of people steering the series during its lifetime, naturally the throughline falls to them. Besides, cataloguing the changing roster of leading men is a story that’s readily and widely available, what with the on-screen action being (as it were) the ‘public face’ of the series.

With just over an hour-and-a-half to cover 60 years of history, the film’s biggest problem is length. There’s little time for nuance, instead offering a whistle-stop overview of the main events, highlighting key aspects here and there. Inevitably a lot of important things get short shrift — there’s hardly any detail on the birth of the iconic title sequences, for instance, or the series’ distinctive musical style. It’s both a blessing and a curse that detailed featurettes on elements such as these can be found on the series’ DVD and Blu-ray releases. A blessing, because the casual fan wishing to know more can look there for the detail they seek; a curse, because many fans will already have seen all of those featurettes (and they are numerous, including at least one dedicated thirty-minute-plus making-of per film) and find little new in Riley’s effort.

But there was never going to be time in a single feature to cover that much fine detail, so we must allow Riley some leeway. It’s also not his fault that Sean Connery refused to be interviewed, or that other key players are no longer with us and so can only be represented by occasionally familiar archive interviews, Cross Conneryplus second-hand recollections (sometimes, third-hand) of friends and relations. This is, perhaps, most keenly felt in the film’s discussion of Kevin McClory, the man who claimed he had some rights to make competing Bond films (Broccoli and Saltzman brought him in to the fold to make Thunderball, which he did own rights to and so being where his claims stemmed from; he was the man who later made Never Say Never Again, and continued to fight for filmmaking rights up until his death). Here he’s very much painted as the villain, not only as a constant thorn in the side of the series’ guardian-angel producers, but also it all but says he conned Fleming, and quite heavily implies the first Thunderball court cases contributed significantly (or even wholly) to Fleming’s death. Is that true? It might be. McClory isn’t here to defend himself, but then his friends and relatives who do pop up don’t seem to try too hard to justify him either.

The one section I would call a major disappointment is the coverage given to the Brosnan era. Dalton and Craig are equally brushed past, but the key tenants — why Dalton’s films floundered and how Craig, despite initial doubts, led a glorious rebirth — are covered. There’s surely much more to say about Brosnan, however. DVD was emerging as a dominant format around the time his Bond incumbency happened, meaning the special features on his films were put together as the movies came out. That’s great for on-the-ground as-it-happened making-of material, but naturally offers zero retrospective opinion, something all the previous films’ discs benefit from. Unfortunately, the Brosnan section here does little to redress the balance. You get the feeling there’s an awful lot going unsaid, particularly about Die Another Day and the way Brosnan was unceremoniously dropped in its wake. The fact the former leading man can’t even remember which way round Tomorrow Never Dies and The World is Not Enough happened suggests something too… but I’m not sure what, because it’s never explored.

Happier timesAs a dyed-in-the-wool Bond fan, I was left wanting a bit more from Everything or Nothing; especially as someone who grew up during the Brosnan era, I feel there’s more to be told about that time. But for newer or casual fans, or those seeking a nostalgia-tinged flick through the highs (and the odd low) of the most enduring series in film history, it succeeds admirably. It’s just a shame they didn’t include it in the Bond 50 Blu-ray set — it would’ve been most welcome on the otherwise-pathetic bonus disc. But that’s a quibble for another day.

4 out of 5

Everything or Nothing comes to Sky Movies Premiere from tomorrow, Friday 15th February, and plays twice daily until Thursday 21st February.

Thor (2011)

2012 #37
Kenneth Branagh | 115 mins | Blu-ray | 2.35:1 | USA / English | 12 / PG-13

ThorDirector Kenneth Branagh brings all his Shakespearean know-how to one of the most innately successful of Marvel’s recent superhero movies. Perhaps lacking the mass appeal of Iron Man (specifically, of Downey Jr), Branagh spins a yarn of gods and mortals, humility and responsibility, without stinting on action or humour.

In the title role, Chris Hemsworth is an instant star; as his evil brother, Tom Hiddleston also seems to be commencing a considerable career. Too much building to The Avengers is its only major flaw. I had no interest in Thor before; now I’m desperate to read some of the comics.

4 out of 5

Marvel Avengers Assemble, aka Marvel’s The Avengers, comes to Sky Movies Premiere from Friday 15th February at 4pm.

In the interests of completing my backlog of 2012 reviews, I decided to post some ‘drabble reviews’ of the stuff I watched longest ago. In the future I may update with something longer, but if I don’t, at least there’s something here for posterity.

For those unfamiliar with the concept, a drabble is a complete piece of writing exactly 100 words long.

My reviews of the other Marvel Phase One movies can be found at the following links: Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2, and Captain America: The First Avenger; plus, the first two Marvel One-Shot shorts.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)

2012 #2
David Yates | 130 mins | Blu-ray | 2.40:1 | UK & USA / English | 12 / PG-13

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2After a decade on screen, the fantasy series comes to an action-packed conclusion. Adapting the final novel’s second half, it’s mostly finale, to both the seventh tale and entire series. The climactic Battle of Hogwarts takes up much of the film. A glut of combat and cameos, most surviving characters return. Many get their moment to shine, with particular gratification from Matthew Lewis’ Neville, Julie Walters’ Mrs Weasley, and Maggie Smith’s Professor McGonagall. Not flawless, with major deaths off screen and a Potter / Voldemort showdown less stirring than the novel’s, but exciting and grand enough for a fitting send-off.

4 out of 5

See also my overview of the Harry Potter films of David Yates.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 merited an honourable mention on my list of The Best Films I Saw For the First Time in 2012, which can be read in full here.

In the interests of completing my backlog of 2012 reviews, I decided to post some ‘drabble reviews’ of the stuff I watched longest ago. In the future I may update with something longer, but if I don’t, at least there’s something here for posterity.

For those unfamiliar with the concept, a drabble is a complete piece of writing exactly 100 words long.