Robert Shaw Festival Part 4"From Russia With Love"

I'm quite excited to write about this film for many reasons. First of all, I am a Bond fan, dyed in the wool, 100%, even enjoying Moonraker. I saw my first 007 film in 1967 or 68. It was a double feature with Thunderball, and my memory tells me I saw it second. I started reading the books then as well. I know we had them in a cupboard in the house we lived in in East L.A., and we moved out of that house in 1969, so I was reading them by age ten or eleven. For most of my life, From Russia with Love has been my favorite Bond film and book. While it is still my favorite of the original Fleming novels, as the years have passed, I grew to appreciate the audacity of the film making in Goldfinger, so From Russia with Love slid down to number 2. Of course that is number two out of twenty-three so still pretty good.

One of the major things that this film has going for it is the character of Donald "Red" Grant, played by our featured star this week, Robert Shaw. Shaw was in his mid thirties when he played this role, at the peak of his physical condition, and he had a face of granite, that mirrored the character perfectly. Casting can make a movie work so well sometimes, that it is a wonder to me that it is not Awarded at the Oscars on a regular basis. Whoever made this decision made the movie work twice as well as it would have otherwise. The character dominates the movie from the opening pre-title set up, to the last moment he is on screen. In fact his character dispatches Bond in the first minute and fifty-three seconds of the film. Those of you who know the film know what I am talking about.

What is especially impressive of Shaw's performance, is that he has no lines for the first hour and a half of the movie. In fact, there are really only three scenes that he speaks in. All of which have been set up well by the script and the director, but the anticipation of the confrontation owes a substantial amount to the actor. He refers to himself at one point as Bond's guardian angel. His character has hovered in the background for most of the film, a grim Spectre , looking over 007's shoulder and waiting for his chance to strike while denying anyone else the same opportunity. The lack of a smile, the silent stalking and the tough exterior leave us waiting for the confrontation that we know must ultimately come.

Shaw plays it cool from the beginning of the film, even though his character is supposed to be a homicidal maniac. He is kept on a tight leash but all the time we can see that he is itching to take Bond down. His eyes narrow to a squint when he first spots Bond at the airport and joins in the spy v. spy game they play in Istanbul. When he breaks the rules of the game by killing a Russian surveillance man,there is only a slight hint of satisfaction on his face as he knows that Bond and his ally Kerim Bey will be blamed. One of the most tense scenes right before he and Bond meet occurs as Grant haunts Bond on the Orient Express. When James gets off the train in Belgrade to contact his local support, Grant is right over his shoulder, still on the train, often seen only as a reflection in the glass, like a true ghost waiting to wreak havoc. He keeps his cool as we see him displace the real agent Nash, the only indicator of the violence is the way he slips on his gloves as he leads the unwitting Nash to the water-closet.

Once he makes contact with Bond, Shaw uses his voice and plays the proper Englishman for as long as necessary. The despairingly used phrase "Old Man", is the one way he can needle Bond before he can give up his cover. Shaw makes it sound condescending but not so deliberately that it would tip Bond off. When confronted red handed for drugging Tania, Grant /Shaw uses the right tone to convey that it is all part of the plan and that Bond can relax. That soothing tone works just long enough for James to drop his guard and then Grant attacks. Once he is in control of the situation, you can begin to see the monster that was there all the time. The cold blooded look returns and it is accompanied by a hostile twinkle in the eye that should be bone chilling. Still Bond toughs it out, all he needs is a chance to even the odds and he will be OK.

Once the fight starts, you know that it is seriously going to do some damage to your psyche. These are not cowboy punches thrown at arms length. There is wrestling, and karate, and blows to the solar plexus, that we know Grant can take from earlier. Bond needs to kick and grab and throw his opponent to have any kind of a chance. Ultimately we see that Shaw's character has his favorite weapon at hand, a garote that emerges from his watch and he nearly gets Bond around the neck. It is a single hand caught between the garote and his neck that gives James a chance to access his own back up, a throwing knife secreted in the briefcase provided by Q Branch. Bond gets a chance to reverse the noose and suddenly Grant is caught in his own device, learning first hand the destiny he has brought to so many others.

So, simply put, Shaw's performance enhances this film and makes the final confrontation the true climax of the picture. There is a helicopter chase, a boat chase, explosions and poisoned tipped shoes that all come after this, but none of them seem like a real threat because Bond has already taken out the toughest opponent imaginable. I think Tania Romanov was the second most beautiful Bond girl after Solitaire, and I think the briefcase is the second greatest gadget Bond ever got from Q, after the Aston-Martin with ejector seat. So my second favorite Bond has my second favorite gadget and second favorite Bond girl, but it also has the greatest of opponents in Bond's 22 movies so far. That is why this film deserves to be in the Robert Shaw Film festival.

Both Sean Connery and Robert Shaw will Return in,

Robin and Marion

Robert Shaw Festival Part Three Swashbuckler

Kirkham A Movie A Day: Swashbuckler 1976 A Movie A Day Day 60

The above link will give you a connection to my comments from last Summer's blog entry on Swashbuckler. I felt awful last night and did not make the movie but you can get some insight from Amanda here:

http://hollywoodconsumer.blogspot.com/2011/06/swashbuckler.html

I have my comments on "From Russia With Love Coming Soon.

Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King Extended Edition

Before you read a bit of this post, I would request, no I Demand, that you watch the above clip.




OK, Now you are properly prepared for a discussion of this the final chapter in one of the great movie series ever. The Lord of the Rings has been viewed as one of the great pieces of literature created in the last one hundred years. It took decades to figure out how to make a movie out of it and it took courage to commit the financial resources necessary to make it. The decision to go for broke and make them three movies, serves the film series very well and does carry on the structure of the books in large part. There are a few thing shifted from one book to another movie but by and large it all worked out. The inspiring speech you saw above could have been the words of encouragement that Peter Jackson used to the studio, or the producers used to their director, actors and technicians. This movie was a massive undertaking and I can easily imagine people losing heart at any given moment and needing to be inspired. Also, this speech could be a inspiration for a number of political movements and you can tailor it to your own leanings and get pumped up.

I was pumped to be seeing this on the big screen again. Two weeks ago we started on a Tuesday with Fellowship, last Tuesday it was Two Towers and then last night it was Return of the King. All those people standing in line to see Transformers don't realize what they were missing on the other side of the door. I am a little miffed because I had stepped out , half an hour before the movie was scheduled to begin, and they played the Peter Jackson Introduction. It was a pleasure to hear him both of the other times and we got some good stories. I missed it and was steaming for the first thirty seconds of the movie because they did not fix this by replaying it at the start. Anyone who was not there a half hour early missed one of the special treats of these Fathom Events. However, by the time Deagol comes up with the ring from the bottom of the river, I forgot all of that and was transported into Middle Earth for all the dramatic climax of the series.

There are so many incredibly emotional scenes in the movie, it is hard to list them. Pippin's melancholic song for Denthonr, Theoden's decision to come to Gondor's aid, Sam's determined defiance of Shelob as she hovers over Frodo, are all emotional button points. I choke up as the signal fires reach from mountain peak to mountain peak, and Gondor's plea to her traditional ally is sent. Gandalf's reassuring description of death as the next path, makes Pippen say, "That doesn't sound so bad", and indeed it doesn't; I hope whoever puts my funeral together can dig up this segment of dialogue to reassure my loved ones when I am gone. The most resonant line for me is Eowyn's declaration to the Witch King that she is no man, as she dispatches him to the oblivion we want all of the Nazgul to go to. The extended edition adds a character that really was needed to the story, The Mouth of Sauron. The visualization of this character was creepy to a fault, and the sly lies and emotional manipulation make Aragorn's speech even more relevant. The swish of Aragorn's sword is one of the cheers that filled the auditorium frequently over the course of the four hour plus version of the movie.

I know the film has been criticized and parodied because of the multiple endings over the last half hour but I know all of us want it to go on. We care about the characters and we shared their travails for 12 hours of movie. It is hard to say good-bye. Fortunately, we have "The Hobbit" to look forward to in a couple of years. I don't know who they have cast as the voice of Smaug, but whoever takes on the role will have a hard act to follow with Richard Boone's voice work in the animated version from the seventies. This was a pretty satisfying opportunity to look back on films that made a impression on me ten years ago and did the same on the big screen again.

JAWS: Memories From Martha's Vineyard

Happy Birthday to our youngest daughter Amanda. This is on it's way to you, if it is not here by Thursday, consider this a gift card. Love Mom and Dad

Robert Shaw Film Festival Day Two The Deep 1977

I did a posting on The Deep a year ago. You can find that commentary here:

Kirkham A Movie A Day: The Deep (1977) - A Movie A Day Day 59

We watched it tonight as part two of our Robert Shaw Festival. This is his reprise of the Quint character from Jaws, but as I watched it I realized that is a gross mis-characterization. There are several parallels but the truth is, this character is distinct and has greater diversity of emotions than I had originally thought. Shaw uses more of his original accent and that deadly calm demeanor is combined with a more natural personality than quint had. Romer Treece is a figure of respect for his accomplishments, but it is also clear he is a serious man with some romantic tendencies, he is actually pretty sentimental over the young couple he is working with.

I liked the relationship he developed with his hulking friend Kevin, and the paternalistic tone he took with the character played by Eli Wallach. I'm glad Wallach got a special Oscar last year, he deserved it, but it is funny to think he outlived Shaw by so long. If you look at the two in this film, Shaw is fairly young and vigorous. He has a dashing older man's charm and a physique that suggests he can handle himself. Wallach looked old an enfeebled in 1977, yet he is still working today in his nineties. This is again a reminder of what we lost when Shaw died at age 51. He only made two more films after this.

Robert Shaw Film Fesitval Day One

Last night we happened upon a great urban thriller from 1974, The Taking of Pelham 123. Amanda had just blogged about her love of Robert Shaw in "Jaws", and I had suggested we do a film festival. She had already planned out some films to lead us up to the traditional July 4th screening of the greatest adventure movie ever made, so when she saw "The Taking of Pelham 123" was starting in ten minutes, she said, "Let's Do It."

I guess it was not a summer release and that's why it wasn't in the blog last summer. I know I saw this film at the old Alhambra Twin, in the big theater. It is a very solid, gritty, New York film of it's time. The premise is basic; tough, ruthless men take over a subway car and hold it for ransom. They have a very strict time schedule and they plan on killing a hostage a minute if their demands are not met. as usual, I don't want anyone to get any spoilers from me, so I will say little more in the way of plot. The remake with Denzel Washington and John Travolta a couple of years ago was acceptable, but it does not hold a candle to the orginal in the tension that builds up.

In the original there are some political elements about New York City, but the are not essential to the plot. The remake focuses more on the politics of the transit system and the New York Mayor. This is the movie that seems to have inspired Quentin Taratino when naming his characters in "Reservoir Dogs", each of the four gunmen having a specific color for a code name; Mr. Blue, Mr. Green etc. They also come equipped with the automatic weapon of choice for early seventies fare, what is revered to in the slang as a "grease gun".

You really get a feel for the city in this movie, it is crowded, and uncomfortable, but it is also familiar and a lot more community oriented than you might be lead to believe by the stereotypes of New Yorkers. At least when it comes to the passengers that was true. The transit authorities have two or three characters that fit the stereotype precisely. Take this line for instance, Correll: "Screw the goddamn passengers! What the hell did they expect for their lousy 35 cents - to live forever?" This is where you get some clever tough dialog and gallows humor. Walter Matthau is first billed and does his usual terrific job.

Robert Shaw is covered in a heavy coat, hat and fake mustache, for 95% of the film. He exudes steely eyed menace. Travolta used playful smart guy remarks and bluster to make the character contemorarey and tattoos to create a sinister persona. Shaw does it with an even handed demeanor, he never really raises his voice but the timing and tone tell you he is not someone to be trifled with. His Mr. Blue is in control of the passengers, the hostage takers and the negotiator. In other films he can have a twinkle in his eye or a smile on his face to make a point. His narrowed eyes and soft voice are scary as hell after a mid story shootout. Listen to him talk to the conductor and your blood will run cold.

Cars 2

Pixar has been the most consistently good film studio for the past 16 years. They invented the computer animated movie, but they did so with so much care in story and character, that although they make movies for kids, the movies never felt like they catered down to kids. Adults have recognized the maturity of stories found in the three Toy Story films, Up, Wall-e and a half dozen others. "Cars" was the 2006 installment in the summer movie field that Pixar has always dominated, artistically if not always financially. It is Amanda's favorite Pixar film (mine being "The Incredible s"). As a salute to nostalgia and the original Route 66, "Cars" was a warm piece of comfort food easily digested and easily repeatable. I have read many on-line comments that suggest that it was the weakest of the Pixar films. To me, that is like saying it was a home run that simply cleared the fence, rather than one which ended up in the upper decks or out of the park. I never had reason to complain. No one however, can be perfect for all of their career, if they are planning on staying in the game for an extended period of time. "Cars 2" brings to a close that long home run streak started back in 1995.

This movie is disappointing to us because of our love of the original movie. The vistas of Arizona and New Mexico are replaced with gorgeous versions of Tokyo and The Italian Riviera. The artistry of the animators and the talent of the cinematographer is not any less than the original. There are some fabulously designed graphics in the movie. The race sequences are edited together very effectively and create short bursts of energy in the movie. Unfortunately, the failings of "Cars 2" come in the one area that has always been a strength for Pixar, storytelling.

The first misstep was in conception, "Cars 2" is a conventional Spy Action movie. It's premise sounds like a Jackie Chan film, but not one of the great Hong Kong Jackie Chan films, rather more like one of the flaccid Hollywood films that try to use Chan's talent in a cookie cutter mainstream film (think "The Tuxedo" or "The Spy Next Door"). Lightning McQueen and Toe Mater, get caught up in international intrigue and Mater is mistaken for a top American secret agent. Mater's native mannerisms and frequent mistakes are viewed as brilliant cover by a pair of British agents trying to crack a conspiracy to torpedo a new energy source. Larry the Cable guy can be entertaining in some limited doses, but he is actually the star of the movie, not Owen Wilson's Lightning McQueen. Larry as Mater is no Cary Grant. His dumb act is so real that anyone thinking he was merely acting would have to say he is the greatest actor in the world.

The opening section sets up the spy stuff pretty well with a nifty take on James Bond being done by Michael Caine as Finn McMissile. The problem is that almost nothing that follows really requires the car races that the movie is set up around. The races are peripheral to the spy plot, and most of that action takes place away from the track. There are some funny pieces in the sequence where Mater crosses paths with the real American agent in a Japanese bathroom. And at the spy headquarters, there are some clever visual jokes with the disguises that Mater will have to use to get to the hidden power behind the plot. Nothing in the plot makes any sense however. I won't provide a spoiler, but the whole reason for the deception by the real villain, and the plot to discredit a new energy source is simply counter-intuitive. I could follow any Bond film, all the Mission Impossible movies and The Usual Suspects, and still make some sense out of what was going on. In this movie, I could not do that. The motive is confusing and the execution of the conspiracy defeats it's own purpose.

Also, this is an entertainment, that is really directed at kids, and the political message in it seems heavy handed and hypocritical coming from all those gearheads at Pixar who created these characters in the first place. The original "Cars" lost the Academy Award to the movie "Happy Feet" back in 2007. That movie turned from being a charming children's story about dancing penguins into a loathsome screed about global warming. Maybe John Lassiter felt the sting of that loss too greatly and decided to insert his own sucker punch into the same series. I don't mind a movie having important themes, but they ought to fit in with the tone and characters that the movie is about in the first place.

Returning to my baseball analogy earlier, this film is not a strikeout. It basically is a ground rule double that wastes the talents of some pretty good voice actors. Caine should have more to do with the story after the set up of the plot. Eddie Izzard is cast in a manner that immediately gives away a key plot point. Finally, the greatest of injustices, Bruce Campbell, is given only two brief scenes in which to strut his iridescent comic persona. If you had left Lightning off at the race course and let Mater go with the American agent played by Campbell, you would have a comic team that might be worth following. The music was solid but not peppy and infectious like the first movie. The loss of George Carlin and Paul Newman since the first movie, also means that some real high wattage voice talent is missing from this edition. "Cars 2" was fine for an afternoon if you have little kids, but it plays like a weak Disney sequel rather than an new essential entry into the Pixar Cannon.