What a difference twenty years makes.
The Living Daylights was made in 1987 and while it doesn’t have the best of Bond villains, I think it is a solid film in the franchise. I’ve already defended Timothy Dalton as Bond so I won’t bother to do that again.
Watching the film now, what I’m struck by is the depiction of the Mujahideen as heroes and freedom fighters.
I’m not making any value judgements on whether or not that is right. Rather, I’m thinking that to a post 9/11 audience, that depiction might not make any sense. I can think of a few reasons why.
If there is one thing that I really enjoy about the availability of cheap DVDs, it is the ability to pick up an old film I’ve never heard of for just a couple of bucks. Most are horrible, grainy copies of movies that are in the public domain but they aren’t on Netflix so how else am I supposed to watch them?
Aside: Why aren’t they on Netflix? They are in the public domain!!!!
The Kennel Murder Case is just such a movie. I was browsing the shelves at half price books and there it was for a measly $2.00.
Now Half Price Books has a lot of cheap old movies for sale. I don’t buy every one of them. Hell, I hardly buy any of them.
But this one had William Powell in it and I have a hard time saying no to a $2.00 movie starring William Powell.
I’ve written a ton about the gay marriage amendment because I’m really pissed off we are even voting on such a thing. When it comes to the Voter ID amendment, I’ve been relatively silent.
I have pretty strong feelings about it but the marriage amendment has been far more important to me because I think it is a fight we have an outside chance to win. Voter ID is probably going to happen. I’m not happy about it but I don’t think I can sway anyone who doesn’t understand the implications of the Voter ID amendment to change their vote.
See, the problem I have with is a seemingly little thing that I believe to be more important than any other talking point. I don’t think we should be putting obstacles in the way of voting.
It had been a long time since I’d watched this particular Jackie Chan epic.
So long, in fact, that I spent at least 3/4 of the film thinking that I was watching Rumble in the Bronx.
As you may have guessed, it had also been a pretty long time since I’d seen Rumble in the Bronx.
The challenge I have with In the Bedroom has nothing to do with the film itself. The movie is excellent, though emotionally draining. It is anchored with fantastic performances by Tom Wilkinson, Sissy Spacek and Marisa Tomei. When it was released, it was even considered a front runner for Best Picture.
What I’m trying to say is that it’s a serious movie – and a very good one. Therin lies the problem.
Because, you see, every time I see the name of the movie, all I do is think of The Village People.
New content by/with me over at www.vilificationtennis.com!
I have a new Movie Dick article about Battleship.
Also, there’s a new Vilification Tennis Podcast up! It has Molly Glover and Jade Cook and Salsa Sterling and me. It also has Matt Allex and Nick Glover, even though they were supposed to keep their mouths shut. We also debuted our new feature: Molly Hopes you get Dick Cancer with fabulous bumpers by The Dregs.
This morning, I have the completed show image for “The Complete Works of William Shatner (abridged)!” This one features Windy Bowlsby as Kirk, Duck Washington as TJ Hooker and Tim Uren as the Priceline Negotiator!
I think that the rainbow effect gives it sort of a psychedelic “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds” feel – which is appropriate for Shatner. Also it looks a little bit like an unseen alien force speaking to them from above.
Hey kids! I just started producing a new podcast for Vilification Tennis!
I’m pretty pleased with how it turned out. As our first podcast, there are definitely kinks to work out but the overall result is very promising. I’m looking forward to producing the next one.
Keep in mind, Vilification Tennis is a show that focuses on offensive and insult humor and the podcast is the same. If that is not your kind of humor, don’t listen.
What is the difference between movies like Hot Fuzz and Young Frankenstein and the Scary Movie franchise? Aside from the fact that ten years from now, those two films will still be funny and the Scary Movie films still won’t?
I mean, the Scary Movie films come from what I would consider to be a great pedigree of screwball comedies like Airplane, Hot Shots and Top Secret. Yet they are – and I’m sorry if you like those movies – absolutely horrible. They fail at satire, they fail at comedy, they fail at titilation. Their only success is that they can be made so cheaply that they make money in spite of themselves.
The reason I own Home Fries has nothing to do with how much I enjoy the film. The first time I watched it, I enjoyed it a lot. Subsequent viewings have not been so kind.
One thing about the film does hold up and it’s the reason I keep it around. I own this film because of Catherine O’Hara.