Showing posts with label ricky jay. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ricky jay. Show all posts

Thursday, January 25, 2024

"THE ILLUSIONIST" (2006) Review

 













"THE ILLUSIONIST" (2006) Review

Neil Burger wrote and directed this loose adaptation of Steven Millhauser's story called "Eisenheim the Illusionist". This story about a magician in turn-of-the-century Vienna starred Edward Norton, Jessica Biel, Paul Giamatti and Rufus Sewell.

The movie’s plot focused upon the romance that had first formed between the magician Eisenheim (Norton) and his childhood friend, the socially superior Sophie, Duchess von Teschen (Biel) – a romance that ends up threatening the political plans of Crown Prince Leopold of Austria-Hungary (Sewell) and Chief Inspector Uhl’s position with the Vienna police and his role as the Crown Prince’s henchman. "THE ILLUSIONIST" began in the middle of the story – with Chief Inspector Uhl revealing Eisenheim ‘s background and childhood friendship with Sophie. The movie continued with the events that led to the Crown Prince’s interest in the magician – Eisenheim’s arrival in Vienna, his reunion with Sophie during a performance and a special performance by the magician for the Crown Prince and his entourage, in which Eisenheim embarrasses the prince for a brief moment.

Sophie appears at Eisenheim’s quarters to warn him about his actions at the royal palace. The two end up declaring their feelings for one another by making love. After Sophie reveals Crown Prince’s Leopold’s reasons for proposing marriage – he needs her Hungarian family connections to build a power base strong enough to usurp his father from the Imperial throne – both come to the conclusion that Leopold would never let her go. Even if they decide to make a run for it, the prince would hunt them down and kill them. Realizing this, Eisenheim decides to unfold plans that would allow Sophie to escape from Leopold’s clutches and guarantee the couple’s future safety and happiness.

I have never read Millhauser’s story about Eisenheim. But I must admit that I became enamored of Burger’s cinematic adaptation since the first time I saw it. The story possessed many elements that made it entertaining and unique for me. One, it had plenty of romance, due to the romance between Eisenheim and Sophie; along with the love triangle between the two and Crown Prince Leopold. It had intrigue from the plot centered around the Crown Prince’s efforts to rid Eisenheim as a rival for not only Sophie’s affections, but those of the Austrian people. It had mystery thanks to Eisenheim’s mind-blowing magic, Chief Inspector Uhl’s attempts to expose it, and the tragic events that dominate the film’s latter half. And Crown Prince Leopold’s plans to dethrone his father, along with his competition with Eisenheim for the Viennese public’s affections gave the movie a political tone. It simply had everything and Burger managed to combine it all with a superb script.

The cast of "THE ILLUSIONIST" contributed to the movie’s superior quality, as well. Edward Norton was superb as the magician Eisenheim. Despite being the movie’s main character, he did a great job in conveying the character’s many personality facets – including his love for Sophie (which makes this role one of Norton’s most romantic), and his contempt toward both Crown Prince Leopold and Chief Inspector Ulh Even more importantly, Norton managed to convey some of these emotional aspects of Eisenheim’s personality, while retaining the man’s enigmatic nature. Jessica Biel literally glowed as Sophie, Duchess von Teschen. Frankly, I believe the character might be one of her best roles. Biel had portrayed Sophie more than just an elegant and charming woman from the Austro-Hungarian ruling class. She revealed Sophie’s inner sadness from her earlier disrupted relationship with Eisenheim and fear of facing a lifetime with the odious Crown Prince. Speaking of which . . . kudos to Rufus Sewell for portraying one of the most complex screen villains in recent years. Sewell’s Leopold was not simply a one-note villain who sneered at everyone he deemed inferior to himself. The actor portrayed the prince as an ambitious and emotional man who desired respect and even love from the public and those close to him. Yet, despite this desire, he seemed incapable of returning such feelings to others, especially Sophie, due to his arrogance and vindictive nature. But if you had asked me which performance in "THE ILLUSIONIST" really impressed me, I would have to say Paul Giamatti as Chief Inspector Walter Uhl. Giamatti either had the bad or good luck – it depends upon one’s point of view – to portray the most complex character in the movie. This is a man torn between his curiosity over Einheim’s talent as a magician, his ambition to be more than just a policeman, and his sense of justice and outrage toward the tragic event revealed in the second half. Giamatti’s Chief Inspector Ulh is a man literally torn apart over toward whom he should direct his loyalty. And the actor did a superb job in portraying every nuance in the character. In my opinion, he managed to dominate the film without being its main star.

I really do not have much to say about the film’s production values. Granted, production designer Ondrej Nekvasil; along with costume designer Ngila Dickson, and art directors Stefan Kovacik and Vlasta Svoboda, did an admirable job of re-creating turn-of-the-century Vienna on the screen. And yet . . . aside from Dickson’s elegant costumes, I found the movie’s Viennese setting to be slightly colorless. Almost empty. The setting lacked the sharp colors of that particular period shown in other movies like 1969’s "THE ASSASSINATION BUREAU, LTD" and 1976’s "THE SEVEN PERCENT SOLUTION".

Despite my complaint against the film’s slightly colorless production designs, I have to give kudos to Neil Burger for writing a rich adaptation of Millhauser’s story. He also did an excellent job of conveying his vision of the story through his direction of the crew and a cast of talented actors that included Norton, Biel, Sewell and Giamatti. "THE ILLUSIONST" is a beautiful and mysterious love story filled with magic and political intrigue. After nearly eighteen years, I still find it enjoyable to watch.





Saturday, May 1, 2021

"TOMORROW NEVER DIES" (1997) Review

 






"TOMORROW NEVER DIES" (1997) Review

I wish I could say that my opinion of the movie has improved over the years . . . but I would be lying. Mind you, TOMORROW NEVER DIES did have some highlights, but unfortunately, it possessed more negative traits than positive ones. I think it would be best if I list both the good and the bad about this movie:


Positive

*Michelle Yeoh

*Bond’s romantic scene with Danish linguist was rather sexy

*Foreign locations – Hamburg and Thailand (as Vietnam) never looked lovelier

*Bond and Wai-Lin’s escape from Caver building in Vietnam - great stunt
*Motorcycle chase – well done

*Pierce Brosnan – seemed natural . . . when he was acting in scenes with Yeoh

*Vincent Shirerpelli as Dr. Hamburg – oddly enough, I had rather liked him. He was a lot more interesting than Mr. Stamper. And his death was even more interesting, as well.

*Mr. Gupta – seemed like a pretty sharp and cool guy.



Negative

*Pierce Brosnan – his angsty scenes with Teri Hatcher seemed stiff and unnatural. And his voice tend to sound odd, when he's giving the impression of supressing his emotions. Why did the director, Roger Spottiswode, have him shooting machine guns two at a time during the final confrontation on Carver’s boat? He looked like a walking action movie cliché.

*Jonathan Pryce – one of the most overbearing and annoying villains in the Bond franchise. Only Sophie Marceau in the latter half of THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH surpassed him.

*Plot – Is it just me or is the plot of this Bond movie seemed like an extended rip-off of a LOIS AND CLARK episode from its first season? Perhaps learning of Teri Hatcher’s casting must have given the screenwriters the idea.

*Moneypenny’s Little Sexual Joke – why is it that nearly every sentence directed by Moneypenny to Bond sounded like some kind of sly sexual joke? It got very annoying.

*Bond and Q’s Meeting in Hamburg – All Q was doing was handing over a car to Bond, and the director turned it into a hammy production number. What a bore and a waste of time!

*Mr. Stamper – a second-rate version of Red Grant. Where are Robert Shaw or Andreas Wisnewski when you need them?

*Car Chase Inside Hamburg Parking Structure - Bond uses a remote control . . . ah, never mind! The whole scene was a bore. Even worse, it happened after the marvelous Bond/Kaufman scene. What a waste of my time.

*Final Confrontation on Carver’s boat – Despite all of the gunfire exchanged and the other action, I found it to be too long . . . and boring.

*Wade – I did not need to see him again. Joe Don Baker was wasted in this film.

*Bond’s Cover as a Banker – I am beginning to suspect that Bond makes a lousy undercover agent. By opening his mouth and hinting at Carver’s boat, he ended up exposing himself. What an idiot!

*Teri Hatcher – She was wasted in this film. And she and Brosnan do not do emotional angst together, very well.


Also, TOMORROW NEVER DIES did managed to produce a few favorite lines of mine:

Favorite Lines

“Believe me, Mr. Bond. I can shoot you from Stugartt and still create the proper effect.” – Dr. Kaufman to Bond

BOND: “You were pretty good with that hook.”
WAI-LIN: “That’s from growing up in a rough neighborhood. You were pretty good on the bike.”
BOND: “Well, that comes from not growing up at all.”

“No more absurd than starting a war for ratings.” – Bond to Carver

KAUFMAN: "Wait! I am just a professional doing a job!"
BOND: "So am I." (Then kills Kaufman)

Despite some of its virtues, TOMORROW NEVER DIES is not a favorite movie of mine. In fact, it is my least favorite Brosnan movie. It is more or less a generic burdened by an unoriginal plot and one of the hammiest villains in the franchise's history.




Monday, July 29, 2019

"TOMORROW NEVER DIES" (1997) Photo Gallery

tnd5

Below are images from the 1997 James Bond film, "TOMORROW NEVER DIES". Directed by Roger Spottiswoode, the movie starred Pierce Brosnan as James Bond aka 007: 



"TOMORROW NEVER DIES" (1997) Photo Gallery

1118full-tomorrow-never-dies-screenshot (1)


1118full-tomorrow-never-dies-screenshot


13359-23786


film__13681-tomorrow-never-dies--hi_res-75fe8514


1118full-tomorrow-never-dies-screenshot


Hamburg-Charcoal-Suit


j8OVjW5


julian-fellowes-tnd


kinopoisk.ru-Tomorrow-Never-Dies-883432


kinopoisk.ru-Tomorrow-Never-Dies-883434


kinopoisk.ru-Tomorrow-Never-Dies-883446


kinopoisk.ru-Tomorrow-Never-Dies-2036425


kinopoisk.ru-Tomorrow-Never-Dies-2449048


missmoneypenny-samanthabond


FotosArtC1399


MV5BMTk5NTYxMTE5M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNzMxNDY3NA@@._V1_


pryce5


tommorow-never-does


Tomorrow Never Dies (2)


tomorrow never dies 07


Tomorrow Never Dies


Tomorrow-Never-Dies-car-600x249


Tomorrow-Never-Dies-DI

Thursday, June 24, 2010

"'FLASHFORWARD': A Potential Nipped in the Bud"




”’FLASHFORWARD’: A Potential Nipped in the Bud”

Ever since ABC cancelled one of its freshman series, the science-fiction drama called ”FLASHFORWARD”, many television critics and fans have expressed the belief that the series failed to garner enough viewers due to its less than stellar writing. Now . . . I have stated that many have expressed this belief, but there were a good number of viewers who believe that the network should have given the series a chance to grow over the years. I happen to be one of those who agree with the latter.

Based upon the 1999 novel written by Robert J. Sawyer, ”FLASHFORWARD” revolved around the lives of several people after a mysterious event caused nearly everyone on the planet to simultaneously lose consciousness for two minutes and seventeen seconds on October 6, 2009. During this "blackout” people saw what appeared to be visions of their lives on April 29, 2010 - a global "flashforward”. Created by Brannon Braga and David S. Goyer, the series starred Joseph Fiennes, John Cho, Courtney B. Vance, Christine Woods, Jack Davenport, Sonia Walger and Dominic Monaghan.

When the series first aired in late September, it became an immediate ratings hit and stayed that way during its first ten (10) episodes. Then ABC made the decision to put the series on hiatus for three-and-a-half months. Why? I have no idea. But after the series resumed its run in mid-March 2010, its ratings tanked. In fact, the ratings remained low until it was finally cancelled by ABC some two-and-a-half months later. Does this story sound familiar? Why, yes it does. The very same fate nearly befell the CBS science-fiction/post-apocalypse series, ”JERICHO”. Thanks to a campaign by fans to save the series, ”JERICHO” was given a second season – which amounted to seven episodes that aired in a new time slot. Namely Tuesday nights at 10:00 PM. No amount of fan campaign could convince ABC to give ”FLASHFORWARD” a chance. But there are a good number of fans who are angry at how the network handled the series.

Yet, those critics and fans who did not criticize ABC’s handling of the series have claimed that ”FLASHFORWARD” was a failure that was destined for cancellation. Many of these critics and viewers claimed that the series failed to live up to the same quality as another ABC series, namely the pop culture hit, ”LOST”. Personally, I have a problem with this assessment of “FLASH FORWARD”. One, it was only in its first season. Its story had just begun. To expect it to be perfect right off the bat struck me as ridiculous. Now, I realize that both “LOST” and the NBC series, “HEROES”, managed to immediately dazzle U.S. viewers and critics with highly regarded series premieres and well written first seasons. But a closer look would reveal that after their remarkable first seasons, the storytelling qualities of both ”LOST” and ”HEROES” managed to do nothing but decline following their first seasons. And I believe that this was a major mistake for both shows. Both tried to maintain the momentum of their dazzling debuts . . . and failed. At least as I am concerned. Mind you, ”LOST” managed to occasionally deliver some exceptional episodes and story arcs over the years. But it was never delivered a consistently top-notched season after Season One. As for ”HEROES”, it simply went down the drain following its first season. How it managed to stay on the air for another three seasons simply amazed me.

Ever since the dazzling debuts of “LOST” and “HEROES”; television network executives have expected and demanded that other multi-seasonal series with a science-fiction/fantasy background repeat their initial success. I believe that this was a mistake. Some of the best science-fiction/fantasy television series I have seen have started out with a less than dazzling or even mediocre season debut. Good examples of this are “BABYLON 5″, “JERICHO” and “BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER”. Both ”BABYLON 5” and ”BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER” were given chances to fulfill their potential. Just as ”JERICHO” was developing into a well-written series, CBS permanently pulled its plug . . . aborting its chances of fulfilling any potential.

As I had stated earlier, “FLASH FORWARD” also started with a less than dazzling first season. I might as well be frank. It was not perfect. But I do believe that it had great potential to grow into a well written sagal. If the series had aired in the previous decade, I suspect that might have been given the chance to develop into something remarkable. It certainly had potential. But, we are stuck in the ”LOST” era of television broadcasting. Today’s television network executives do not seem to have the patience or willingness to give a series a chance to grow. They want and demand instant success. And unless they are willing to change their modis operandi, future science-fiction/fantasy television series with levels of qualities similar to “BABYLON 5″ and “BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER” threaten to become a thing of the past, never to be shown on television again. I certainly did not see that level of quality writing in shows like “LOST” or “HEROES”, despite their longevity on the air.

Sunday, February 7, 2010

"HEARTBREAKERS" (2001) Review



Here is my review of the 2001 comedy, "HEARTBREAKERS", about a mother-daughter pair who happened to be grifters:


”HEARTBREAKERS” (2001) Review

Directed by David Mirkin, ”HEARTBREAKERS” is a romantic comedy caper about an elaborate con set up by a mother-daughter team to swindle wealthy men out of their money, and what happens during their "last" con together. This 2001 comedy starred Sigourney Weaver and Jennifer Love-Hewitt as the mother-daughter pair, along with Gene Hackman and Ray Liotta as their wealthy marks.

The movie begins with Max and Page Connors (Weaver and Love-Hewitt) conning an auto-body shop owner and small time crook named Dean Cumanno (Liotta). The con, which is implied has been done a number of times before on other men, involves Max marrying Dean, passing out on their wedding night to avoid consummating the marriage, and then Page (posing as Dean's secretary) luring Dean into a compromising position to justify Max's immediate divorce and hefty settlement. Following the success of this con, Page decides that she wants her half of their money before going solo. Max relents, but the two learn from an I.R.S. agent (Anne Bancroft) that that they owe the government a considerable sum on top of the rest of their savings, which have already been seized. Page reluctantly agrees to work together with Max on one last con in Palm Beach (which would result in enough money to pay off the I.R.S. and set Page up to work on her own). For their target, they choose widower William B. Tensy (Gene Hackman), a tobacco millionaire and chain smoker who is addicted to his own product. Complicating matters is beachfront bartender named Jack Withrowe (Jason Lee), whom Page meets without her mother's knowledge, while attempting to go after another target on her own.

Robert Dunn, Paul Guay and Stephen Mazur; who wrote the screenplay for ”HEARTBREAKERS”, were also responsible for movies like ”THE LITTLE RASCALS” and ”LIAR, LIAR”. But quite frankly, those two movies were chopped liver as far as I am concerned in compare to ”HEARTBREAKERS”. The movie’s story struck me as sly, witty and absolutely hilarious. Page’s romance with Jack; along with Max and Dean’s love stories were romantic and at the same time, sharp and unsentimental. Max’s attempts to seduce William Tensy, while impersonating a Russian expatriate featured some of the most hilarious moments in the movie – especially a particularly biting sequence that featured the Connors’ dealings with Tensy’s hard-nosed and grasping maid, portrayed by Nora Dunn. Between Tensy’s smoking and pallor and Max’s ordeal in being forced to consume steak tartare, this movie has put me off smoking and raw beef for all eternity. And if the Connors’ misadventures with Tensy were not bad enough, emotions jump a few notches when Dean arrives in Palm Beach in search of Max. It seems that he was really in love with her . . . and she has admitted to having feelings for him. Much to Page’s disgust.

It is not simply the script for ”HEARTBREAKERS” that had me in stitches. Weaver and Love Hewitt lead a first-rate cast that was just as funny as the script. Weaver (deservedly) earned a Golden Satellite Awards nomination as the elegant and quick-thinking Max. However, Love Hewitt matched her in screen presence and comedic skills as the equally intelligent, yet brusque Page. For once Ray Liotta’s intensity came into comedic use as Max’s faux husband, auto shop owner Dean Cummano whose love for the grafter/mother refuses to die, despite his discovery that Max and Page had conned him. Anne Bancroft gave a sly performance as Barbara aka Gloria Vogel, the I.R.S. agent who turned out to be Max’s mentor . . . and the woman who had stolen Max and Page’s bank funds. And of course, there was Gene Hackman, who played the chain smoking William Tensy. I loved his portrayal of the self-absorbed and caustic tobacco magnate. I could tell that he was truly enjoying himself. The only hiccup in this first-rate cast turned out to be Jason Lee. He played Jack Withrowe, the bartender who turned out to be owner of a beachfront bar and minor millionaire. Actually, the problem was not Lee’s performance. It was the writers’ portrayal of him. Quite frankly, Jack was a rather dull boy – a character unworthy of the talented and usually funny Lee. Not even the so-called one-liners they fed the character could not overcome his dullness.

”HEARTBREAKERS” turned out to be another example of a caper film featuring grifters that I find enjoyable. It had a first-rate plot, hilarious and complex characters (with the exception of Lee’s character), delicious scenery featuring Palm Beach and Southern California (standing in as Palm Beach) and a catchy score written by John Debney and Emmanuel Kiriakou. Director David Mirkin was given all of this – some at the last moment – and created comedy magic with it.

Monday, December 14, 2009

"THE ILLUSIONIST" (2006) Photo Gallery



Below is a gallery of photos from the 2006 movie, "THE ILLUSIONIST". Based upon Steven Millhauser's story "Eisenheim the Illusionist" and Directed by Neil Burger, the movie starred Edward Norton, Paul Giamatti, Jessica Biel and Rufus Sewell:


"THE ILLUSIONIST" (2006) Photo Gallery