Showing posts with label Jay Maronde. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jay Maronde. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 24, 2016

2016 Oscar Preview (JM)

Today I received this out of the blue from my friend and collaborator Jay Maronde.  Let me just say I disagree with him about Best Actor, as well as a few other choices, but I'm not going to put up my own picks.  I am not a member of the Academy either, and I don't receive copies of all of these movies in the mail and watch them as my job.  Jay and I used to write for our school newspaper, and get to go to screenings for free, but that ride ended.  As such, I cannot pick which is the "best" because I usually just pick the one I saw, so I can convince myself that I have very good taste.  However I wouldn't predict that Brooklyn or Bridge of Spies will win Best Picture.  Every year my dad holds an Oscar contest and always ends up winning because he just copies what everyone else is saying, making some kind of scientific deduction based on crowd-sourced predictions.  Frankly I don't think anyone has any business making predictions unless they've seen all of the movies in the category, and I cannot say that is the case for me in a single category.  There are many movies that came out this year that I still want to see, and eventually I'll get around to them.  I saw what I wanted to see in the theater, for the most part.  Still I appreciate Jay's thoughts, so here they are. -JK 

2016 Oscar Preview

This Sunday is Hollywood’s biggest night, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences Awards Night, or as most call it, the Oscars. These beloved awards are the biggest prize of the awards season and as such, I’m hereby making my predictions for the winners. For the record, I’m not a member of the Academy (although as a lifelong lover of movies, I would love to be) so I have no knowledge of what the actual winners will be, you’ll just have to watch this Sunday to find out.

MUSIC (ORIGINAL SCORE)::   Star Wars: The Force Awakens   --- Without a doubt John Williams wins again. The man is good, very good, maybe the best ever, and he’s got a wall of Oscars to prove it. I’ll be completely stunned if Star Wars wins anything besides this, or if John Williams doesn’t win.

MUSIC (ORIGINAL SONG) :: “Writing’s On The Wall,” Spectre  -- The only Oscar that this year’s James Bond film is nominated for is an esay win. TO be honest, I didn’t like the song that much, but the song got a lot of buzz and I don’t think that any of the songs that it's against have any chance.

PRODUCTION DESIGN:: Mad Max: Fury Road  -- While I expect stiff competition from The Martian  and The Revenant, Mad Max still comes out on top. The movie imagined a whole other world unlike anything Hollywood has ever seen and the outrageous cars iced the cake.

VISUAL EFFECTS: The Revenant – very very tough competition in the category. I personally believe that Ex Machina deserves the Oscar, but I’m pretty sure that the academy voters will be so impressed by Leo being mauled by a bear that this film walks away with the prize.

WRITING (ADAPTED SCREENPLAY) :: Brooklyn --- Again a tough category but this this film received great reviews and wide acclaim despite not being tremendously successful at the box office. The Academy voters will want to recognize it somehow, even though it has no chance at winning the big awards.

WRITING (ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY)  :: Straight Outta Compton ---  Let me be clear. I think Ex Machina should win this prize; again the story is engaging and compelling. However, the controversy surrounding these Oscars leads me to believe that this film will win. For what it’s worth, the writers should turn their statue over to Ice Cube and thank him for making the history engaged by this film and for having in advance written/ lived  all the best lines in the film.

MAKEUP AND HAIRSTYLING:  Mad Max : Fury Road  -- again a tough pick, but I think that Mad Max edges out The Revenant in the voting.

FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM:  Son of Saul --- there has been a great deal of buzz about this film.

SOUND EDITING: The Revenant.

SOUND MIXING::  The Revenant – As with the sound editing award I think that MAD MAX or Star Wars might have a chance, but in the end The Revenant  takes them both.

FILM EDITING: The Revenant. --  Again, bear rape is just too much for the voters to ignore.

DOCUMENTARY (FEATURE) :: Cartel Land – Don’t hold me to this pick, as the Nina Simone bio-pic What Happened, Miss Simone?  could easily take the prize, but my money is on Cartel Land

COSTUME DESIGN: Cinderella --- all the way. Mad Max  and The Revenant are both very strong contenders for this prize, but I think that the beautiful classic takes the award in what amounts to a huge upset.

CINEMATOGRAPHY: Mad Max: Fury Road --- While I would give the award to The Hateful 8, and many in the Academy would vote for The Revenant, I suspect that those two films split the vote and leave the groundbreaking  Mad Max the winner again.

+++++++ THE BIG PRIZES++++++++

ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE:  Jennifer Jason Leigh, The Hateful Eight.  The grit. The blood. The attitude. The brutal vulgarity. I wouldn’t necessarily call her performance ground breaking, but not since Mike Tyson needed a sparring partner has anyone taken such a beating.

ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE: Christian Bale, The Big Short  -- The Academy Loves Bale, and so do I. I’d give Tom Hardy a 1 out of 10 chance, but don’t think he can muster the support to beat an old favorite.

ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE::::  Jennifer Lawrence, Joy   -- I want so badly for Charlize Theron to win for her role in MAD MAX. The vision of a female fantasy movie hero has inspired so many young women. However, she’s not nominated, and everyone loves J.LAW. I will note that I wouldn’t be completely surprised if Saoirse Ronan, from Brooklyn, pulls off the miracle and goes home with the statue.

ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE:: Matt Damon, The Martian.  Again, let me be clear: 1st, I didn’t like The Martian  that much, it was long and dragged, and it was basically Matt Damon’s sci fi version of CASTAWAY.  2nd I really, really, really, want Leo to win, The bear rape was intense and he’s certainly deserving. BUT all politics aside, the Academy loves to vote for someone who suffered a physical change for their art and Damon’s weight loss is terrifyingly impressive. There was a lot of acclaim for Bryan Cranston’s work on Trumbo, but even riding the Breaking Bad wave I don’t think he has any chance against the emaciated Damon.

DIRECTING:: The Revenant -- Alejandro González Iñárritu – This category, besides being notoriously tough to predict, features a slew of great directors; My vote goes to Iñárritu, he’s extremely popular and the film was very good.

BEST PICTURE: The Revenant – This was probably the hardest choice amongst the whole article. All of this year’s nominees were great in their own way but again I feel Iñárritu comes out with the biggest win, in admittedly a very close race. I also wouldn’t be terribly surprised if Mad Max or The Martian pull off the night's biggest upset.







Wednesday, December 31, 2014

The Interview - Dir. Evan Goldberg and Seth Rogen (2014)

Yesterday, I received this review from my counterpart and collaborator.  Some of the same points were brought up in my review, but the fact that two of us independently came to the same conclusions renders the additional opinion valuable.  Plus, Jay's classic bombast is always worth a few minutes of your time.


               Riddle me this ladies and gentlemen, how does one make a simple silly stoner movie into the biggest hit of the holiday season? The answer: quite simply, Honey-dick the whole world into an international incident.  The beauty and genius of The Interview is that the people behind it have, with the utmost cleverness, produced a meta-opus of life imitating art imitating life, and have done it with textbook perfect writing and structure, along with a delightful cast.
                First off let’s address this controversy. Rogen had to know from the beginning that any film he made vaguely involving the DPRK was sure to draw the ire of Kim Jong Un, (hereafter referred to as #KJU) So while it may seem unlikely, all the heinous things from the movie—the starvation, the not having a butthole, all the other odd facts that seemed crazy—are completely true. North Korea is a fucked up place, and the truth is always far stranger than fiction. To be completely honest I don’t know at all really what #KJU was upset about. The movie is extremely generous with the character of #KJU. He’s quite likeable, seems almost misunderstood, and at one point, Franco’s character even refuses to kill him. To this extent I feel Rogen’s last line in the film is almost a wink at how fucked up a situation this was. One of the greatest aspects of this whole movie was the fact that Rogen honey-dicked #KJU into giving this movie press that money couldn’t buy. (For an explanation of what honey-dicking is, one should view the movie.)
                Putting controversy aside and viewing this movie for what it is, it even gets better. First off let’s address the other elephant in the room. This is a movie, not a film, don’t make the mistake for a fleeting second that a FRANCO/ROGEN joint was going to be a high art film bound for black tie screenings and touching emotional reviews. This is a MOVIE, a classic Hollywood good time, there are tanks and helicopters and tigers and good laughs, and SPOILER ALERT, the Bad Guy loses.  But beyond that, the writing was excellent: everything is foreshadowed, everything—to the point of brilliance. The special effects weren’t out of control, but they were Michael Bay quality, and the sound direction was exquisite.
                The acting wasn’t bad, either. Rogen and Franco are both very believable in their albeit highly silly roles, and their on screen chemistry gets better with every movie. Randall Park who plays #KJU is great; he’s funny, likeable, and the perfect foil to Franco. The big surprise to me is that the sexy CIA agent Lacey WASN’T Zooey Deschanel. Now I understand that Zooey Deschanel has become a “look,” but the gorgeous Lizzy Caplan could be her twin. Everyone’s acting was as stellar as possible for a slapstick dick joke stoner comedy, it was honestly everything that a red-blooded, white, popcorn- eating, blue-Icee-drinking, American movie going public wants.

                Controversy or not THE INTERVIEW delivers. It’s well written, completely tactless and rude, but will leave you laughing.  It does run a bit long at 112 minutes, but you don’t feel like it needs to end just because you’re afraid you might lose your bladder if there is one more really funny joke. Franco and Rogen make a very specific type of film for a very specific type of audience, as long as you don’t go in expecting the next Schindler’s List you’ll have a great time. And don’t ask me about the puppy, but I give him a thumbs up too.

Saturday, May 4, 2013

Die Hard 5: A Good Day to Die Hard - Dir. John Moore (The Die Hard Project #5 - JM)


Die Hard 5: A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)
Dir: John Moore

Die Hard takes a Walk
by
Jay Maronde

                Die Hard 5: A  Good Day to Die Hard is a movie that takes a walk, and I don’t mean that because for the first time John McClane leaves America for his adventure—I mean it in the context of the pitcher who beans the batter and says, “take your base.” Very sadly, this movie is atrocious (like worse than all the bad reviews of the previous four installments combined). Don’t get me wrong, I love DIE HARD, John McClane, and action movies, and by all means there are a ton of outstanding action sequences, but otherwise this movie is complete and utter capitalistic Hollywood garbage. The longer you watch this movie, the more it becomes apparent that the producers were pulling out all the stops for the action scenes, and if they had put 1/10 of the time, energy, and money into producing a movie that contained something of a plot and slightly better writing, this review would read very differently.  But as it stands this is trash, remarkable trash.
                Let’s start with Bruce. He’s awesome and more “die hardish” than ever. But he’s working with nothing for a script.  Every single thing he does is the obvious silly Hollywood plot choice. And sadly, much like an older Roger Moore playing James Bond, his age does detract from the movie. Also, instead of this movie being a buddy film, it’s more of a father/son team up. Which brings us to the new star of the Die Hard series: Jai Courtney playing John “Jack” McClane, Jr. Personally I don’t feel as though Courtney was that poor of a casting  choice, but he’s certainly not even half as good as Shia LaBeouf as Indiana Jones’ son. Further, his role in the film (which I won’t give away) is completely ridiculous: it’s merely a way to put Willis in Russia. Also while on the topic of actors I would like to acknowledge Mary Elizabeth Winsted reprising her wonderful performance from DH4 as Lucy McClane (John’s daughter and Jack’s sister).  Miss Winsted was outstanding and was more than decent in her cameo performance in this film.  However, she looks so much different from the last film that I honestly had no idea it was her until the credits rolled and spent a big part of the experience troubled by this. The rest of the actors are decent character actors playing stereotypical Russian gangsters and again they seem to be doing as much as they can with the poor-to-bad script that they are working with.
Not to let the director off the hook: at no point during this entire film do you feel like Moore had any creative control or self-expression.  To be honest, a decently well programmed robot could have probably churned out more original garbage.
                I’m so sad to have to give the latest installment in one of my favorite series a poor review, but on the brighter side of things the movie made more than 3 times its budget from ticket revenues, so for a film which was intentionally just Hollywood capitalistic trash, I suppose it achieved its goals remarkably well.

Thursday, April 4, 2013

Roger Ebert - 1942 - 2013


Obituaries do not make for popular posts but they only appear on Flying Houses when the person in question has played an indispensable role in the development of the state of the art presented herein.
In terms of the methodology of Flying Houses, there is no more influential person than Roger Ebert.  He changed the medium of the review, and I have always endeavored to live up to the very high standard that he set.

He didn't create the medium, but he certainly deserves to be placed in the top ten most important people in the history of cinema.  Back in the 1990's before Gene Siskel died too young, people would make fun of Ebert because he was fat.  Then later on, he lost his ability to eat, and speak with a human voice, and people championed him as the survivor par excellence.  Lately, as I saw Richard Roeper post more reviews on www.rogerebert.com, I started to fear that Ebert was not writing as many reviews because his condition had worsened.  I am sad that I will not know whether he agreed with Roeper or not on A Good Day to Die Hard.

Before I delve into this obituary, I want to highlight two things.  First, a question that was asked by a reader many years ago, and was printed in the 1996 Film Companion that Ebert released:

"Q: Help me settle something.  If Writer A and Writer B both wrote their opinions on a film--both with diligence and pride in their work--what difference in the two pieces would identify Writer A as a Film Critic and Writer B as someone just offering an opinion?  Take the weekly feature you see in some papers, where kids review films.  At what point do they cross the line, and can be called a Critics as opposed to reviewers?  Is there some sort of certification program, like taking the Sally Struthers correspondence course in gun repair? (Andy Ihnatko, Westwood, MA)

A: This is a fascinating question, not unrelated to, "at what point do we know Swift doesn't really intend for the starving Irish to eat their babies?"  The noncritic Reviewer will often betray himself by these mistakes:
(1) Pretense of objectivity;
(2) reluctance to introduce extraneous knowledge;
(3) predictions of which audiences will or will not enjoy the film;
(4) bashfulness about writing in the first person;
(5) distancing self from actual experience of viewing the film;
(6) an overwritten first paragraph.  The genuine Critic will write in such a way as to acknowledge that he had a subjective personal experience which he wants to share with you, and which reminded him of other films or other subjects.  He will wear his knowledge lightly and never presume to speak for other than himself." (920)
***
Ebert wrote for the common film-goer.  He did not write in a high-handed style, and he did not believe in an objective standard of film criticism.  And it makes sense.  Sometimes we can tell when there is bad acting.  That is a given.  A fair portion of the population has some experience in acting.  Sometimes we can tell when there is bad writing, too.  But it is not often that we walk out of a movie and say, "Man, that cinematography was so bad!" Ebert might remark upon the cinematography, if it was good, and he might have remarked about the superiority of the letterbox format over pan-and-scan, but otherwise his writing was addressed at the average moviegoer.  And he responded to them.  Second thing I wanted to mention:

When I was 17, I went to Old Orchard Mall in Skokie, IL and attempted to buy a ticket for the film Requiem for a Dream.  I was not allowed in.  I argued for a bit with the people in charge there, but I lamented my plight in an e-mail to Roger Ebert.  In his review of that film, he wrote that the film's NC-17 rating was unfortunate, because it was specifically the type of film that teenagers should see, because it showed how horrible drug addiction could get.  I wrote that this was just so unfair, man.  And he wrote back, "I know, I know.  Damn."
***
Two sentences.  They didn't change my life, but they made me realize that Roger Ebert was a very special type of celebrity: he was "one of us."

Every critic (whether it be film, theater, music, or literature) should study the work of Roger Ebert.  I never took a Cinema Studies course at NYU.  Maybe they do assign some his reviews, but my presumption is that they do not.  But they should.  I have often debated with my colleague (my "Siskel," if you will) Jay Maronde about the difference between a "film" and a "movie."  Ebert understood he could give four star reviews to either (his four-star reviews include Less Than Zero, Dick Tracy, Drugstore Cowboy, Lethal Weapon, Return of the Jedi, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, What's Eating Gilbert Grape?, Superman, Superman II, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and L.A. Story).

I am deeply saddened by his passing and just wanted to state that the work of this blog is my attempt at carrying out his mandate on how to be a Critic, rather than a Reviewer.

Monday, April 1, 2013

Happy 5th [April Fool's Day] Birthday to Flying Houses

Today is April Fool's Day and also the birthday of Flying Houses.  We turned 5 today.

It is always a good time to consider our achievements over the past year.  Consider this my MD&A.

First of all, we cracked 30,000 all time page views.

Second, we cracked 2,000 monthly page views in March 2013, demolishing the previous month's record by nearly 700.  This may or may not have been a "pop" instituted by Jeffrey Toobin's "retweet" of my review of The Oath.

Among the highlights of the past year, The Bond Project remains most prominent.  More than 25 posts were made on this topic.  Flying Houses will be making our 250th Post very soon and we expect it to be a special one.  But we would not be at this point if not for the hard work of Jay Maronde, who has proven himself to be an expert on James Bond.  With the Die Hard Project currently in progress, I cannot thank Jay enough for his contributions.

I also want to thank Emily Dufton for her excellent review of IQ84 by Haruki Murakami.  This was one of the finest pieces of literary journalism/criticism that I have read in recent years, and I am deeply honored that I was able to present it here.

I also want to thank our most recent contributor, J. Alexander Gibson for his review of The Defining Decade, and not just because I post it in the waning days (16 left to go) of my twenties: I feel that these types of books (non-fiction or sociological theory) are potentially the most rewarding ones to review because real life experience, as opposed to the trait of being "well-read," colors the interpretation of a text in more "useful" or "tangible" ways.

I want to thank the BLS Advocate for allowing me to write my column and also post those columns (in their un-edited form) on this blog.  Those comprise an additional 22 posts or so, and again, without those we would not be knocking on the door of 250.

My hope is that by April 1, 2014, I will be gainfully employed, and will have cracked 300 posts and 75,000 page views.  Those may be ambitious projections, but I believe they are within reach.

Apart from those reviews already linked to above, here are what I consider to be the "greatest hits" of April 1, 2012 - April 1, 2013:

#1: NIED #9: Not in Love (Legally)  (posted 4/4/12) - This is a column about people seeking their spouses in law school.  Notable because some anonymous commenter on BLS Advocate just wrote, "you poor, poor thing," after reading it. (I tend to wonder whether that comment was a legitimate expression of sympathy or a passive-aggressive jab.)

#2: The Crying of Lot 49 by Thomas Pynchon (posted 5/13/12) - This was the first book I was able to review by Thomas Pynchon, and it was an excellent read.  Highly recommended, though it does not quite make the list of the "best books reviewed on Flying Houses list" (which you may find in my Profile).

#3: Discourse on Method by Rene Descartes (posted 6/1/12) - Understandably not the most popular post, but an original one as reviews on Flying Houses of philosophical texts hold the potential for enormous intellectual rewards.

#4: The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller (posted 6/27/12) - Important because (a) it is named one of the "best books reviewed on Flying Houses" and (b) it is the first of many reviews of graphic novels that were undertaken over this past year.

#5: Big Sur by Jack Kerouac (posted 8/20/12) - Important because it is one of the last works of literature reviewed before the beginning of my 3L year, which brought great changes.  An entertaining review, and a book worth reading if one is interested at all in Kerouac.

#6: Skyfall (JK); Skyfall (JM) (posted 12/3/12) - Dueling Reviews of the newest Bond, our film criticism at its height.

#7: The Brethren by Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong (posted 12/15/12) - Maybe I didn't do so well in my classes because I was so wrapped up in this book.  Notable as good "background reading" on certain cases in First Amendment law, provided at the end of the review.   Also notable for making the "best books" list.

#8: Superman: Red Son by Mark Millar (posted 1/1/13) - Notable for being such an outstanding work of art in the graphic novel medium.  A personal favorite from the year and an entrant on the "best books" list.

#9:  My Bloody Valentine - m b v (posted 2/16/13) - The album that took 22 years to release created a ton of music journalism--this was my little drop in the bucket.

#10: Die Hard with a Vengeance (JM) (posted 3/20/13) - This movie is an underrated classic and deserves to be seen by more members of the general public.  I include it as #10 as a way to sign off this post, as we are still meandering in the territory of the Die Hard Project and will soon complete it.

Thanks to all of our readers and thanks especially to those that have left comments.  You have helped to make this blog a success.  It may not be the greatest way for me to make money, but I feel that a substantial public interest has been served, and I will continue to do my best in providing excellent content for years to come.

Monday, February 25, 2013

Die Hard 2: Die Harder - Dir. Renny Harlin (The Die Hard Project #2 - JM)


Die Hard 2: Die Harder (1990)
Dir: Renny Harlin

The Blueprint for a Successful Sequel
By Jay Maronde

                Before one can begin a review of Die Hard 2: Die Harder, the question must be posed: what really makes a Great Action Movie?
Now if your answer to that question is that you need to see some “all-new,” “next-level” kind of stuff, then this is not the Die Hard for you—as yes, this is essentially the same movie as the original Die Hard, except in an airport. The production staff of this movie seemed to have realized this glaring flaw, and as such, went “all out” in other ways to produce a fun movie.  
Now, if you define a Great Action Movie as a movie with great characters, great action, and a spectacular ending, then DH2 will be a great time.
                First things first, Bruce Willis returns to reprise his role as the Everyman Cop Hero Caught in the Wrong Place, but trying to save his wife (now no longer estranged)  from terrorists on Christmas Eve. This time the terrorists (who for the only time in the franchise are really terrorists, not just thieves) have seized Dulles Airport while John McClane’s wife is airborne waiting to land.
It is perhaps worth noting that the worldwide popularity of John McClane played no small role in the very quick production of this sequel.  Furthermore, Bruce Willis’s portrayal of John McClane was so popular with audiences that he was encouraged to do more ad-libbing “anywhere he wanted.” To that end, John McClane comes off as grittier, angrier, and more determined than ever—and it works charmingly: Willis, without a doubt, ensures his place in movie history with this fantastic performance. But it takes more than just a great hero to make a great movie.
                Also necessary for a Great Action Movie is a really evil, sick, weird, villain with a fucked-up plan: in this case, to save a thinly-veiled Manuel Noriega caricature from extradition to the US. This evil villain (while possibly the weakest in the series) is played quite well by William Sadler as the traitor Colonel Stuart.  As the movie opens, we find Stuart doing Tai Chi naked in a hotel room and that is just the beginning of his sick-twisted-ness.  This early highlighting of his horrid personality was conceived by director Harlin as an early way to let the audience know that they were experiencing a special kind of villain. But in a shocking twist, it turns out he’s not the only bad guy we find in the movie. Again (as with the original Die Hard), the federal government sends help that isn’t really much help at all. As much as I like Sadler, he is easily outshone by his deviant co-villain, played by John Amos.
                Also of note in this movie are John’s unlikely allies at the airport in the form of its Chief of Police and Head of Airport Operations, played respectively by Dennis Franz (then-hot on the success of “NYPD Blue”) and later U.S. Presidential Candidate Fred Dalton Thompson. Franz is great as an overwhelmed cop who wants nothing less than some hero cop like John McClane bringing trouble to his airport. Thompson, as would be indicated by his run for President, is always great in any role where he is the boss.   
                Now all these great actors doing the best acting in the world wouldn’t be impressive for an action movie at all if the movie didn’t have any action, and DH2 never for a moment lacks on action. John McClane is in the middle of gun fights, snowmobile chases, and all-out-brawls, and Harlin does everything he can to keep all of this action extremely interesting and the movie flows remarkably quickly while keeping the viewer on the edge of their seat the entire time. Harlin, however, saves the best action for the very, very end of the movie.
DH2 easily has one of the best endings of all the Die Hards, and may even boast the greatest action movie ending of all time. While the villains aren’t necessarily beaten or shot to death by McClane, his method of eliminating them is more than outrageous and serves to make for this spectacular ending. John McClane not only blows up a whole plane full of escaping terrorist scum, but in the process singlehandedly re-opens the airport, allowing for his wife’s fuel-depleted plane to make an emergency landing. Audiences always love a loud, crazy and yet “everything turns out great in the end” ending, but the manner in which McClane brings down the plane along with his classic “yippie –ky-yay-motherfucker” is pure Hollywood genius.
                Die Hard 2 may not be the best of all of the Die Hards, but without a doubt it is an enormously entertaining movie. The fact that the movie is in a lot of ways a complete rehash of the original Die Hard is more than made up for by the movie’s excellent pacing, great cast, and off-the-charts action.

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Die Hard - Dir. John McTiernan (The Die Hard Project #1 - JM)

Today we commence The Die Hard Project.  Better late than never....

Die Hard (1988)
Dir: John McTiernan
The Detective Turned Super Cop
by Jay Maronde
               
                In the summer of 1988, a Christmas movie was released. This movie, staring a then-upcoming actor named Bruce Willis would later be described as the standard to which all other action movies must be compared, and with this director John McTiernan gave birth to a franchise of movies so epic that that fifth in the series is due to be released this week, 25 years later! Of course, this movie is the original Die Hard, and as we moviegoers eagerly await the release of this year’s Die Hard 5: A Good Day to Die Hard, the fine staff at Flying Houses have decided to give you a little recap in case you may have missed or forgotten anything in the past 25 years.
                Die Hard was adapted from a novel titled Nothing Lasts Forever written by Roderick Thorpe. Mr. Thorpe had previously written a little book called The Detective, which was so popular that it had been made into a 1968 movie starring none other than “old blue eyes” himself, Frank Sinatra.  After the success of The Detective, Mr. Thorpe wrote a sequel with full intentions of it being made into a movie. Praise was lavished on this book from many venues and eventually Twentieth Century Fox agreed to begin production. As he was contractually obligated, Sinatra was given the right of first refusal to play the lead role.  He refused, and from here began one of the most extensive searches for a lead male actor in Hollywood history. When I say extensive I truly mean it, as the role of John McClane was offered to a laundry list of the best male actors in a generation before Bruce Willis finally accepted the role. This list included Arnold Schwarzenegger, Nick Nolte, Richard Dean Anderson, Don Johnson, Sly Stallone, Burt Reynolds, Richard Gere, Mel Gibson, Harrison Ford, Tom Berenger, Robert Deniro, and Charles Bronson.
When Bruce Willis was finally convinced to take the role it was in no small part due to Rupert Murdoch’s personal offer of five million dollars. With a lead actor signed, a director was needed, and after being approached numerous times John McTiernan eventually agreed with the stipulation that he be allowed to “lighten the edges” of a script which he had already twice refused claiming that it was “a real nasty piece of work.”
                John McTiernan then began, scene-by-scene, to assemble what we have already described as the pinnacle of the entire action movie genre. First and foremost, the original script called for terrorists who were really terrorists, and McTiernan immediately turned them into thieves masquerading as terrorists so that “the audience could enjoy them stealing a boatload of money.” Further, the original “Detective” was more of a super cop, and McTiernan had this idea that the role should be more of an “everyman.” As such he felt Willis was perfect for the role and with some more minor tweaks to the original story, the Die Hard we all know and love came about. McTiernan’s vision was not small though, and as such a massive moviemaking process was undertaken, it was greatly due to this big comprehensive vision that Die Hard is such a great movie.
Besides his script work in order to make the movie lighter and more fun McTiernan also demanded the highest caliber of music from his sound designer Michael Kamen. The idea to use Beethoven as the theme music for most of the movie was McTiernan’s, and initially Kamen staunchly refused, saying that he would gladly butcher the entire catalogue of Wagner or Schubert for the movie, but the thought of using lovely Ludwig Van was too much for him to stomach. To counter this, McTiernan explained to him that he wanted the movie to feel inspired by the Ultra Violence of Director Stanley Kubrick’s A Clockwork Orange, and Kamen, being a Kubrick fan himself, eventually consented.
This however wasn’t McTiernan’s only slick move to make Die Hard the fantastic film that it is: he also decided that he needed a real life office tower to shoot the exteriors of Nakatomi Tower. Being that not too many buildings of that size are unoccupied and or available for almost complete demolition, he came up with an interesting solution: he would use 20th Century Fox’s brand new 90% completed office tower (and of course Fox charged themselves rent on their own building). They also required the production team to import from Italy enough marble to retile all the plazas and stairs outside the building.
                Besides a great set, great action, and a great hero, any good action movie needs one final thing to really reach the other plateaus that the Die Hard films have reached: a resoundingly evil villain.  To fill this role the producers and director gave a British stage actor (of very high repute) his first role on the silver screen. At the time the directors and producers were sure he would be good, but Alan Rickman was so good in the role of Hans Gruber, that over two decades later he’s still the man to call when you need a really evil villain. Rickman is exquisite, and McTiernan’s particular high intensity directorial style was essential in achieving this wonderful performance from a film novice. The clearest example of this delightful collaboration comes later in the movie when McClane meets Hans. In the original script there was never a meeting between these two lead characters and the producers had lamented this extensively. One day during rehearsals McTiernan discovered that Rickman was quite talented at faking an American accent and as such the scene was born. The part of this scene that really highlights both of their genius is while Hans is speaking quite convincingly with a Midwestern American accent, McClane offers him a cigarette, and while non smokers may have never picked up on this subtle detail, Hans smokes like a European. This subtle nuance—along with many others—added a level of detail to the movie that is a big part of the reason why it stands out. As I’ve mentioned before, it’s quite apparent that McTiernan went scene-by-scene to make this movie as utterly fantastic as it is.
                While I could go on and on about how delightful this movie is, it would be completely remiss not to mention the outstanding co-stars. Bonnie Bedelia is fantastic as John McClane’s estranged wife—beautiful, but not someone that an Everyman couldn’t attain. Reginald Vel Johnson as the first cop on the scene and John’s radio ally on the outside was perfectly cast, especially considering that at that time he was already America’s favorite police officer from being one of the stars (opposite one Steve Urkel) from television’s Family Matters.
                John McTiernan had a tremendous vision for Die Hard that was so well executed that it has become the seminal action movie. By really demanding the best from all his actors and production staff he made a movie which has not only stood the test of time, but 25 years later still has America clamoring for more. 

Monday, February 11, 2013

The Bond Project: The End? (Part Two)

I know, I know.  It seems as if we cannot stop the Bond Mania.  I believe this will be the 30th post on Flying Houses dedicated to James Bond.  I am sure there are other sites on the internet that have more Bond memorabilia, but this will be the last one (seriously--The Bond Project is officially over as of this post unless I decide to watch Bonds 1-20 + Never Say Never Again and replicate what my colleague Mr. Maronde has endeavored to provide--and I do not think I have the patience for that).  Also, this is the last day I can publish this post in good faith because Skyfall will be released on DVD and Blu-ray tomorrow.  Happy Valentine's Day.  


A Bond Project Wrap Up: Part Deux
by Jay Maronde

This is it. My last Bond article for a minute (Until Bond #24--JK). It’s probably best this way. Most women don’t want to hear too much about James Bond while at the bar, and thinking about James Bond all day leaves one quite prone to telling women at the bar all about Bond.  But after ranking all the films, it seemed to me that there were still some things left unsaid—ratings to be made, pithy comments I never got to commentate—so here dear readers is a long list of Bond Bests including the best cars, Bond girls, henchmen, and villains.
Let’s start with the cars because some of the choices are a little bit obvious.

TOP 5 Bond Movie Cars

1.       The Silver Birch 1963 Aston Martin DB5
No vehicle has ever been more iconic or more fully aligned in the world’s understanding of a character. The car has been in numerous films and plays a huge role in Skyfall.
2.       The Aston Martin “Vanish”
 
Die Another Day wasn’t that great of a film, and everyone hated this car but I think it’s super awesome for Bond to be driving an invisible car. Aston Actually designed and produced this car strictly for the film and while in real life you cannot purchase an invisible car, you can however purchase a V12 Vanquish and get your 007 dreams on.

3.       The Lotus Espirit S1
 
From The Spy Who Loved Me. I’m not necessarily a large fan of the film or of seeing James Bond outside of an Aston, but a car that turns into a submarine is clearly so James Bond that it hurts.

4.      The BMW 750iL
       
From Tomorrow Never Dies. James Bond has a smart phone that not only starts his luxury car but can also completely control the machine.  Oh and by the way, Bond has this smart phone over a decade before the release of the iPhone.

5.       M’s Jaguar XJ Ultimate Long Wheel Base

“Just get out of the way! Don’t you know the car!?!” M’s car is a standout. A real touring saloon that Bond steals with M inside.  Just imagine being able to power around London in one of Britain’s finest luxury cars with police lights to avoid all the traffic troubles!

Honorable Mention: The BMW R1200 Motorcycle

From Tomorrow Never Dies. As an avid motorcyclist I would like to consider myself somewhat knowledgeable of the various types of motorbikes, and the BMW R1200 had long been a favorite even before Bond put one through all of its courses while handcuffed to Wai-Lin. The R1200-C model inspired by the film was even better.

TOP 5 Bond Henchmen
1.)    Jaws

Always Jaws. He’s the only henchmen to reprise his role. He’s so famous it hurts and Richard Kiel still does appearances for the James Bond franchise.
2.)    Dario

From Licence to Kill and played magically by Oscar winner Benicio Del Toro. I would suggest watching this whole movie just to catch the glimpses of early genius at being so creepy. Truly, if Jaws wasn’t Jaws, Dario would easily be #1.
3.)    Oddjob

 The classic hat throwing monster mute dude might even be more famous than the villain for which his featured film is named (Goldfinger). The actor Harold Sakata paid a high physical toll to film his death scene as he was really electrocuted.
4.)    Nick Nack

Herve Villechaize is remarkable, fun sized, and hilarious. He is the only redeeming factor in what could be one of the worst Bond Films: The Man with the Golden Gun.
5.)    Xenia Onatopp
The only lady to make this list will actually appear in this article twice as what’s really better than a lady henchman who kills via fornication?

Honorable Mention:   The two weirdos from Diamonds are Forever.

Credited as Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd and played by Bruce Glover and Putter Smith, these two hand-holding murderers are funny as all get out and eliminated in a lovely manner by Bond, but not before the very end of the film.

TOP 5 Bond Villains

#1: Silva


Skyfall’s epic villain is played masterfully by the remarkable Javier Bardem. To be honest, Silva is without a doubt the surprise of Skyfall. A real twisted warped evil villain, so weird and evil on so many levels that he easily tops our #2 on this list.

 #2: Max Zorin

The genetically engineered villain from A View to a Kill, played as only could be done by Academy Award winner Christopher Walken. It’s really hard to top Walken when it comes to the “creepy factor,” and had Bardem been anything less than stupendous, Walken would easily be #1

#3: Auric Goldfinger

“Ha ha ha, no Mr. Bond, I expect you to die.” One of the earliest villains in the canon could easily be the best. Mega rich and super weird, Goldfinger not only operates on numerous continents, but also has a plan to rob Fort Knox.

#4 Telly Savalas

Savalas is easily the best Blofeld amongst the several actors to play the part—creepy, scheming, and definitely trying to ruin the entire world. While Blofeld appears numerous times throughout the James Bond canon, Savalas easily does the best job.

#5: Hugo Drax

Evil, Hitler-esque, and eugenically-minded, this super villain from Moonraker not only intends to destroy the whole world, but plans on repopulating it with his sort of people. Oh yeah, and he steals the space shuttle and builds an international space station several decades before the real ISS.

Honorable Mention: Gustav Graves and Colonel Moon


Two villains in one from Die Another Day. Granted, both of these actors are supposed to be playing the same deranged North Korean bent on world domination, but without both of their wonderful performances this already rough movie completely falls on its face.

TOP 10 Bond Girls
        Well, now that we’ve come to the very end and to the part that everyone has been waiting for, I must be honest and admit that ranking these 10 women might have been even harder than ranking the films themselves, as there are soooo many beautiful women in the world of Bond. I’m sure I will upset a lot of people with this list, but IDGAF, this is my article and my opinion.

#1: Agent Caruso

The busty Italian agent that Bond has hidden in his closet at the opening of Live and Let Die. Played magically by the horror film classic Madeline Smith, and reportedly working through being massively anxious due to Roger Moore’s insanely jealous real life wife being on set during filming, Miss Smith is amazing. Her busty physique has provided her with mountains of work throughout the years, but her doe eyes, plush pouty lips, come hither attitude, and bad Italian accent are absolutely perfect to compliment the debonair Moore. Further, Bond should totally be involved with a real life sex symbol, not just a very pretty actress.

#2: Honey Ryder

The original Bond girl herself, played by the super famous Ursula Andress comes in a very close second—such a close second that if I preferred blondes she could easily be first. 

#3: Vesper Lynd

Played by the radiant Eva Greene, Vesper Lynd is the only woman who Bond ever loved. Casino Royale’s main female lead is gorgeous, and I know more than a few women who dream of being her.

#4: The Countessa Tracy  Di Vincenzo 

Played  by one of the biggest stars of the day Dame Diana Rigg, the only woman who Bond ever marries is gorgeous, and while her performance against George Lazenby leaves just a little to be desired, this co-star of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service certainly gets the job done.

#5: Xenia Onatopp

The villainess who literally screws people to death is the only person to appear on multiple lists in this article. This remarkable lady henchman from Goldeneye was a little known actress but major model and sex symbol before this film, and Famke Jannsen has since gone on to remarkable silver screen greatness as the X-(wo)Man Jean Grey and numerous other roles.

#6: Dr. Christmas Jones

Denise Richards being a James Bond girl and then later marrying Charlie Sheen easily serves to prove how much that guy is “winning.” Her role in The World is Not Enough  was almost written for her Playmate of the month self and her name leads to one of the best puns in the canon when at the end of film Bond says: “I thought Christmas only comes once a year”

#7: NSA Agent Jinx

Played by the stunning Halle Berry, to not include Jinx (Bond’s American spy counterpart in Die Another Day) would be utterly remiss. I almost wish I could put her higher but Jinx trying to be the American Bond only serves to highlight how super awesome Bond really is.

#8: Domino

The kept woman from ThunderBall. Miss Claudine Auger was Miss France before attaining this role. Her beauty is still remarkable all these years later and her chemistry with Connery is beyond reproach.

#9: Maud Adams

BUT NOT FROM OCTOPUSSY. It sounds completely crazy but Adams can’t have the award for the movie named after her character. To be honest, she was too old in that film and she only made Roger Moore look older. However, a few years before that, she starred as Scaramonga’s girlfriend in The Man with the Golden Gun, and while I utterly loathe Moore’s treatment of her during the film, her beauty shines through so much that she easily makes this list.

#10: Strawberry Fields

We never learn the real first name of Gemma Arterton’s character in Quantum of Solace until the film’s final credits, but the actress is absolutely perfect as a foil towards Daniel Craig’s Bond. Her death scene is as fine of an homage to the James Bond Canon as has ever been dreamed.

Honorable Mention: Carey Lowell

As CIA pilot Pam Bouvier from Licence to Kill. I just love Carey Lowell. 

Thursday, January 24, 2013

The Bond Project: The End?


The Bond Project Wrap-Up

by Jay Maronde

                Well Dearest readers, as we’ve come to the end of a very long road, I would personally like to offer my extreme thanks to the entire Broccoli Family and the EON productions team, and also to the original spymaster himself Ian Fleming, for without this cadre of genii  none of this could have ever been possible. I, however, would most of all like to thank my fantastic editor Mr. Jack Knorps because again without his tremendous encouragement and editing none of this could also be possible.  Now having considered all this, my tremendous, gracious, and wonderfully understanding editor Mr. Knorps has asked me to write this wrap up. To wit: how could I refuse such a wonderfully respectful request from such a dear friend?
              Now, I initially thought that this wrap up would be much easier as we had earlier discussed a formal interview sort of context. During the course of our interviews it quickly became apparent that the big question most of all would be a ranking, a full and complete ranking of all the films. This is extremely difficult for me, like asking a parent to choose their favorite out of 23 children, and then rank the rest, so there was simply no way I could complete this task just off the top of my head. I assured my dear editor that I would sleep on this scenario and do my best to rank them. 

              I also want to note that my initial idea for this article was more of a “best of” type compilation, so please continue to read even after you reach the final end of the ranking because I think some of my favorite gems may come later on, but without further ado…

                If you read my reviews it was probably most apparent that this was my favorite. Director Marc Forster set out with a very specific goal of making a tight, hard-hitting action film that was “like a bullet.” Forster’s vision for this shorter, hard-hitting Bond is perfect for what is the only direct sequel in the entire franchise. Further, his allusions to other great films (including the demise of the lovely Strawberry Fields) comprise some of the finest filmmaking  in the entire Canon. (Less charitable review here)

#2  Skyfall
                Bond 23, the movie whose formerly impending release inspired this entire series of reviews, was more than worth the wait. The actors are fabulous. Dench and Bardem are the biggest snubs of this season’s awards shows' nominations. If the film were only slightly shorter I would have probably made it #1--it's really a personal preference (and a strong one) that I feel all films should be short so as to force the director to really tell his story concisely. But Skyfall is nonetheless amazing, I saw it in the theaters numerous times, and I will probably wait in line to purchase the Blu-Ray on release day. It was the first Bond to be filmed in large format, and if you still have the chance I would highly suggest viewing it in IMAX as it’s totally worth the extra cost. Bond simply cannot ever be big enough, and Skyfall Is a huge film that such an epic Canon deserves. (Slightly less charitable review here)

                I know, I know, I know, “How could I put all three Daniel Craig Bonds right at the top of the list?” No, I'm not just obsessed with the newest things.  Daniel Craig’s portrayal of Bond is beyond reproach! He is fantastic, and in this film during a discussion with M, Bond asks, “So you want me to be half monk, half hitman?” For me this statement is at the crux of why Daniel Craig is so fantastic in this role: he’s so fucking cold I want to offer him a cup of tea.  Like geez--warm up a just little bit!  He's so cold and so perfect that it makes you ask yourself: what you would be like if you killed people every day for your job?  I feel like Craig asks himself this question every morning before filming Bond. This film could have easily been number one on the list except for the fact that if you are to watch it without watching Quantum immediately afterwards you are left feeling almost a little empty inside.  (Equally charitable review here)

                The man with the Midas touch! This could easily be Sean Connery’s finest Bond.  It’s the first time we see the DB5.  It has Oddjob and Pussy Galore. It has Jill Masterson covered in gold in a scene which was so iconic that it’s been referenced by other films in the series. The Shirley Bassey theme is delightful and unforgettable, and I think what really makes me choose this of all the Connery Bonds is that he seems so comfortable in the role, he’s smacking asses and really playing the role as a classic cad, in way that all other Bond’s up till Daniel Craig have tried to emulate.

                Classic early Bond. Watching this film you can easily realize why the franchise has become so successful. Connery is young and lithe, and the scenery and sets are fantastical in a way that the franchise is still seeking to emulate.

                The Tom Jones epic theme song is outstanding--it's honestly the first thing that comes to my mind when I think of this movie--but a close second is that this is the only Bond film ever to be completely remade. The remake, NeverSay Never Again, could be the worst thing ever to happen to the James Bond franchise and if I were forced to include that tripe in my evaluation it would easily be the very last film on this list, as the essentially-bribed-Sean Connery was sooooo old in the remake that the Health Clinic should have been a convalescent's home*. The original film was very good though, and for the time the special effects were beyond reproach: the underwater sequences are still a blueprint for those making underwater films.


#7 Dr No
                The original Bond. Sean Connery & Ursula Andress. Nuff said.

                This could be the most under-appreciated Bond, and as such I wanted to rank it highly. The movie suffers from one glaring flaw: it was the very end of the Roger Moore era, and Moore is beyond geriatric.  Not even all the best plastic surgeons in the world could make him look any younger. That being said, Christopher Walken not only is fantastic but completely redeems all of the film's other flaws.  He’s so perfect, and he's so evil in a way that only Walken could be. Further, the sets and locations are remarkable and very memorable.

#9  Moonraker
                Again, I hate to rank the Roger Moore Films so highly, but the fact that the producers brought Jaws back, coupled with the outstanding scenery, sets and plot (Bond & Jaws save the world while in outerspace) really does it for me. Also many many people I know always say Moonraker is their favorite, as it in some ways is one of the more "approachable" Bonds.

                The sets, scenery, and characters are exquisite. Plenty O’Toole is a super classic Bond girl name. The reason I put it here is Connery was a little bit past his prime and the “camp” value is a little too high for me.

                I like Connery, I really do, But the only notable parts of this film are Ken Adam’s ridiculously amazing volcano set, and Bond’s Adventures one the mini chopper “Little Nellie.” The Volcano makes up for a lot though, and without a doubt a critical entry in the Canon.

                Telly Savalas is downright fantastic and easily the best of the Blofelds. Everyone hates George Lazenby, but I personally think he's great as Bond: his athleticism, youth, and enthusiasm shine through.  The problematic and singular reason why this very important film ranks so low on my list is Diana Rigg’s distaste for Lazenby.  It is so palpable throughout the whole film that it's almost like someone wrote “I was promised Sean Connery” across her face.

                Pierce Brosnan’s first entry into the World of Bond was a fantastic restart for the series. He was my initial Bond, and GoldenEye was the first Bond I ever saw. The women of the film are utterly perfect in their roles, the plot was ahead of its time as Republican presidential candidates were still discussing EMP’s during this past election cycle. And while I don’t necessarily like Bond in a BMW, the use of the Z3 is still considered the world’s most successful cross promotion ever.

                Blaxploitation Bond!  Everyone loves Jane Seymour but me; I just don’t feel as though she's dynamic enough to be a Bond Girl. However, as much as I hate Moore I feel this movie is critically important to history as it’s a very British take on the entire Blaxploitation genre and provides an important historical perspective from an outside viewpoint.

                I really liked this movie, and if Brosnan been able to take the role, it would have been much higher on this list. Again, Moore’s aged-ness is completely distracting. Q has an amazing role, and the India scenes are wonderful. And let’s be honest, Bond diffuses a nuclear bomb in the middle of a circus while wearing a clown suit.

                I like this film, I even like Timmy Dalton (a great deal actually).  I like the plot, I like the girl (she always brings back very strong feelings of the epic Daniela Bianchi in From Russia with Love), but unfortunately, the villains are like some sort of bad joke, and not even all the great “sledding in a Stradivarius Cello case” scenes can make up for villains that can barely even make you laugh.

                I feel like the initial Jaws film should have been a little higher on this list, but I completely loathe the plot and the Bond girl. Roger Moore is hard pressed to get any love from me.

                I wish I could rank this movie higher on the list as Carey Lowell is easily one of my favorite actresses ever, and the opening scene where Bond sky-hooks Sanchez’s plane is epic to the point that Christopher Nolan borrowed it for his new Batman trilogy. Benicio Del Toro alone makes the film worth watching, but the concept of having Bond quit, (almost exclusively so Bond can pursue a villain the British would have no jurisdiction over) is too contrived for me.

                I really like this film also. I really wish I could put it higher on this list. Brosnan makes it look way too easy, Denise Richards (while a gorgeous Bond girl) is a horrible actress, and a villain who is not dead even with a bullet in his brain, but is a complete sucker for love,  is just too much for me to swallow.
                AKA BUY ANOTHER DAY. Everyone hates the Vanish, but I think for Bond to have an invisible car is cool. My problems are essentially that we have already seen the space laser plot, that there is too much early CG looking very bad, and the rampant cross promotion really detracts from the film. I’m also told the Korean being spoken is atrocious.

                I  hated this movie. I Loathe Roger Moore. I don’t think that this film makes much sense at all.
                You Only Live Twice part 2.
                I hated this film. A lot. I really, really, really, hate the way Roger Moore beats up women to increase his macho factor in this movie.  The only redemption is Hervé Villechaize.
___________________________________________________________________________
*I have idea what Mr. Maronde is getting at by this statement but I felt the need to include it.  -JK