Finally, a James Bond movie worthy of praise, and lots of it.  What Daniel Craig may have lacked in Casino Royale, he has more than made up for in Quantum of Solace.  He’s given the 007 character a new persona: one that is far more powerful than Pierce Brosnan could have delivered.

I must admit, however, the Brosnan was probably my favourite Bond before Quantum of Solace.  He brought a certain level of sophistication and style to the character, and that was very important.  Until now.  From start to finish, Quantum of Solace is packed with fast-paced, aggressive action that truly delivers an unforgettable cinematic experience.  The action, the toughness that this Craig version of James Bond emanates is so powerful, that it renders the women and gadgets of the Brosnan era irrelevant.

And that, truly is the status given to both women and gadgets in this movie.  Dealing with the current topic of corruption and keeping the planet eco-friendly, women no more take a center stage in the works of 007. The movie is focused more, on some level, on the politics, and on other, really on what the work of a spy like assassin really is.  Daniel Craig, in this case, executes it to perfection.

I’m not here to give away the plot, so I won’t discuss the details of the film.  However, I must say that Quantum of Solace does not disappoint.  In many years, this is one movie which not only delivers on a story-line, but proves to be a hard earned action movie delivering the entertainment you would expect from the likes of MI-6, that is, James Bond.  Well worth watching in the Cinema, this movie will certainly change the Pierce Brosnan persona of James Bond.

Worth mentioning here, that even though the title song had an okay beat, it was the most disappointing part of the film.

 Loading …

I just came back from the cinema, and I wasn’t disappointed. I haven’t been too impressed with the film industry lately, but with The Bank Job, they’ve got it right.

This movie has what every movie should offer: entertainment, story, decent acting, and more entertainment. You would think that the fact that it is based on a true story might make it less interesting. You don’t really get bored at any point during the movie, and Jason Statham and Saffron Burrows both give a good performance, which is further backed up by Richard Lintern.

Now, for those of you who have not yet seen the movie, spoiler alert! I’m going to reveal a bit of the movie to ask the one question that I have.

Here goes: so basically a psycho black guy called Michael X has photos of a certain Royal Princess indulging in some sexual activity in the Caribbean. This guy is responsible for importing drugs into the UK, probably running some brothels, and other crimes. The government or intelligence (MI5 or MI6) cannot prosecute him or take action against him because he threatens to make the photos public.

However, they know of the exact location of the photographs: a locker 118 in the Lloyds Bank on Baker Street. A bank robbery is set up up with some rather amateur robbers, the lockers broken into, and a bunch of things stolen from the bank. Other high profile criminals also have items that have been stolen, and they get involved to recover their own items. The stolen items also contain photos of various British MPs engaging in kinky sexual activity at a brothel in London.

Eventually, MI5 gets the photos, corrupt cops are arrested and prosecuted, and MPs have to resign. It became a big mess because MI5/MI6 hired a group of amateurs to rob the bank, so it all looked like the intelligence or the government had nothing to do with it. They eventually catch the black Michael X fellow once they have the photos. The whole idea here was that when the photos are taken away, it doesn’t seem like the government has any involvement in it, because any of it could pose a threat to the reputation of the Royal Family.

Now, the movie was great as it is: fantastic entertainment. Maybe this is too 21st century, but won’t you agree, that if 2 guys wearing black suits walked into the bank, approached the manager, flashed their badges, and said they need to get into a certain locker, and the information has to be kept secret or the manager becomes a victim, break into the locker, and simulateneously go arrest Michael X. Now they have the photos and they have Michael X, and the whole thing is hush hush. Isn’t that how intelligence is supposed to operate anyway?

I know there are laws and regulations and procedures etc. etc. But I don’t think the MIs in the UK or the CIA in the US typically operate within the law. After all, their being above the law is the whole point. Nonetheless, you could argue that they have had other copies of the photographs that they could have exposed if Michael X was busted like that. Well, that could have happened the way he eventually gets busted in the movie too, and of course, eventually it all leaked, but was hushed with a D-Notice apparently. And now we have a movie on it.

What do you think? Wouldn’t the modern day methods have saved them a lot of hassle, although, I must confess, in that case we would not have had an entertaining movie.

Tell me what you think. Vote & Comment!

 Loading …

Rambo 4, was, without a doubt, one of the best action flicks in a long time. It comes packed with explosions, gunshots, violence, and sense of realism on multiple levels. The film has, however, not done too well in the United States. It has done OK internationally, but it has not received the response that it should have.

Sylvester Stallone shines once again in the heroic / historic role of Rambo, this time in Thailand, to take a group of missionaries from Colorado who’ve come to Thailand into war torn Burma. Later, he has to lead a group of mercenaries (ex British Army, and watch out for the Bald Irish fella) to rescue these missionaries. The move is great, although the violence and action is not for the faint hearted. You haven’t seen bodies being torn to pieces with a bomb before; you will see that here.

This movie is good not only because it is Rambo and its action packed. Stallone looks good without a doubt. For being 62, he may have a double chin and all going on, but he still comfortably pulls off the role of Rambo, and does it quite fashionably. But its not just Stallone’s performance or the action packed fun that makes this film worth watching.

Stallone, being the creator and director, has focused on a topic that in 2007 received some attention in the world media. Burma, which has basically been a country with a civil war and military rule since the 60s, has seen oppression of its people and destruction of its history by its own military. As it stands, no country in the world has attempted to help Burma out or suppress its army, primarily because Burma doesn’t have much that concerns or anything to offer to the world. Burma isn’t Pakistan posing an extremist threat to the world, nor is it North Korea posing a suicidal threat to the United States, with the result that no really gives a hoot about what goes on there.

Well, apparently Stallone does. I’m not sure how extreme the depiction of Burma in Rambo 4 was; it is, nonetheless, probably based in part on the situation there, and respect to him for that. Stallone shines in this movie not only because of his acting and portrayal of Rambo that we’re used to, but because of the idea and message he tries to give to his audience. I don’t know how many people will look at it that way, because I’m sure many of the viewers were turned off by the excessive violence. However, I think the film was done well; not only was it entertaining, but it carried some good value and a hint of the eye opening truth of how really pathetic the world is. I recommend that if you’re over 18, and you can stand some violent footage, watch the movie. It’s worth watching, if not for the entertainment value, for humanitarian reasons.

Bravo, Sylvester Stallone.

If you watched this movie, please tell me and other readers what you thought of it:

 Loading …