Favorite Films Set in the 1940s

The-1940s

Below is a list of my favorite movies (so far) that are set in the 1940s:

FAVORITE FILMS SET IN THE 1940s

1-Inglourious Basterds-a

1. “Inglourious Basterds” (2009) – Quentin Tarantino wrote and directed this Oscar nominated alternate history tale about two simultaneous plots to assassinate the Nazi High Command at a film premiere in German-occupied Paris. The movie starred Brad Pitt, Melanie Laurent and Oscar winner Christoph Waltz.

2-Captain America the First Avenger

2. “Captain America: The First Avenger” (2011) – Chris Evans made his first appearance in this exciting Marvel Cinematic Universe installment as the World War II comic book hero, Steve Rogers aka Captain America, who battles the Nazi-origin terrorist organization, HYDRA. Joe Johnston directed.

kinopoisk.ru-Devil-in-a-Blue-Dress-1807368

3. “Devil in a Blue Dress” (1995) – Denzel Washington starred in this excellent adaptation of Walter Mosley’s 1990 novel about a laid off factory worker who becomes a private detective, after he is hired to find a missing woman with connection to a local politician in post-World War II Los Angeles. Directed by Carl Franklin, the movie co-starred Don Cheadle, Jennifer Beals and Tom Siezmore.

3-Bedknobs and Broomsticks

4. “Bedknobs and Broomsticks” (1971) – Angela Landsbury and David Tomilinson starred in this excellent Disney adaptation of Mary Norton’s series of children’s stories about three English children, evacuated to the countryside during the Blitz, who are taken in by a woman studying to become a witch in order to help the Allies fight the Nazis. Robert Stevenson directed.

4-The Public Eye

5. “The Public Eye” (1992) – Joe Pesci starred in this interesting neo-noir tale about a New York City photojournalist (shuttlebug) who stumbles across an illegal gas rationing scandal involving the mob, a Federal government official during the early years of World War II. Barbara Hershey and Stanley Tucci co-starred.

5-A Murder Is Announced

6. “A Murder Is Announced” (1985) – Joan Hickson starred in this 1985 adaptation of Agatha Christie’s 1950 novel about Miss Jane Marple’s investigation of a series of murders in an English village that began with a newspaper notice advertising a “murder party”. Directed by David Giles, the movie co-starred John Castle.

6-Hope and Glory

7. “Hope and Glory” (1987) – John Boorman wrote and directed this fictionalized account of his childhood during the early years of World War II in England. Sarah Miles, David Hayman and Sebastian Rice-Edwards starred.

7-The Godfather

8. “The Godfather” (1972) – Francis Ford Coppola co-wrote and directed this Oscar winning adaptation of Mario Puzo’s 1969 novel about the fictional leaders of a crime family in post-World War II New York City. Oscar winner Marlon Brando and Oscar nominee Al Pacino starred.

8-Valkyrie

9. “Valkyrie” (2008) – Bryan Singer directed this acclaimed account of the plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler in July 1944. Tom Cruise, Bill Nighy and Tom Wilkinson starred.

9-The Black Dahlia

10. “The Black Dahlia” (2006) – Brian DePalma directed this entertaining adaptation of James Ellroy’s 1987 novel about the investigation of the infamous Black Dahlia case in 1947 Los Angeles. Josh Harnett, Scarlett Johansson, Aaron Eckhart and Hilary Swank starred.

10-Stalag 17

Honorable Mention: “Stalag 17” (1953) – Billy Wilder directed and co-wrote this well done adaptation of the 1951 Broadway play about a group of U.S. airmen in a prisoner-of-war camp in Germany, who begin to suspect that one of them might be an informant for the Nazis. Oscar winner William Holden starred.

“CASINO ROYALE” (2006) Review

“CASINO ROYALE” (2006) Review

Before watching my DVD copy of 2006’s ”CASINO ROYALE” for the umpteenth time, I had assumed that my initial enthusiasm toward the 21st James Bond thriller would dim with time. After all, I had been viewing my copies of the previous 20 Bond films over the past five months. I felt certain that I would have enough of the fictional British Secret Service agent. Needless to say, my assumptions proved to be wrong. I managed to enjoy ”CASINO ROYALE” more than ever. It has become firmly entrenched as my second favorite Bond movie of all time, following 1969’s ”ON HER MAJESTY’S SECRET SERVICE”

Performances

From the black-and-white opening shot of MI-6 Section Chief Dryden arriving at his office in Prague to a snappily dressed Bond standing menacingly over his wounded prey, ”CASINO ROYALE” rose the Bond franchise to a new level that I hope would remain for years to come. Barbara Broccoli had certainly known what she was doing when she suggested that EON Productions cast British independent actor, Daniel Craig, as the new James Bond. I believe that his gritty performance contributed greatly to the movie’s success and a change in the franchise’s style. From the beginning, Craig proved that he could portray James Bond just as ruthless as any other 00 agent, despite his new promotion. This sixth Bond also seemed to possess a more complex personality than his predecessors – an emotional and angry man who hides his feelings and ego behind a cold façade.

An egotistical James Bond is nothing new to the franchise. Each actor has managed to convey his own take on Bond’s fragile ego. In Craig’s case, his Bond is a man who lost his parents at a young age – eleven to be exact. Because of this tragedy, he was raised by his paternal aunt and became the protégé of a wealthy aristocrat who introduced him to a more exclusive lifestyle. This included four years at Oxford where he had to endure the slight snubs of fellow students from a higher class. Even Vesper Lynd, the Treasury agent with whom he would eventually fall in love, not only managed to guess this aspect of Bond’s background, she also detected that the manner in which he wore his suit hinted that deep down, he harbored contempt . . . and possibly resentment of his aristocratic classmates. This anger and resentment toward the more privileged seemed very apparent in a scene in which a German guest at the Bahamian resort he was staying had mistaken him for a valet. Although Bond took the opportunity to use this case of mistaken identity to create a distraction in order to break into the hotel’s security office, the manner in which he crashed the German’s Land Rover and tossed the keys aside told me that perhaps he felt some kind of resentment toward the man’s arrogant assumption about him. And yet . . . Craig managed to convey this mixture of professional opportunism and resentment in a very subtle manner.

Subtlety seemed to be the hallmark of Craig’s performance. For a man who returned a gritty and emotional element to the James Bond character, he did so in a manner that seemed to hint very little effort. An excellent example would be a scene in Venice in which Bond discovers for the first time that Vesper may have betrayed him. The scene began with Bond looking out at the Venetian scene from his hotel balcony, wearing a rather happy and satisfied expression. Within a space of a minute or two his happy expression transformed into confusion upon receiving a telephone call from M . . . and eventually, anger and a sense of betrayal after M had informed him that Vesper had failed to deposit the Casino Royale winnings into the Treasury’s account. All of this within a space of one minute or less. I felt so impressed by this brief performance that I had to rewind the scene just to watch it again.

Another aspect of Bond’s character that Craig had conveyed so well, was this belief that he could rise above his messy human emotions and any kind of romantic attachments to be the ”blunt instrument” that he believed M required of him. In the end, the enigmatic Vesper Lynd proved him wrong. Being the consummate actor, Craig had no problems capturing the wide range of emotions experienced by Bond during the entire story – whether those emotions dealt with his work, and his relationships and interactions with Vesper, M and other characters. To this day, I am still annoyed that the Academy Awards members were too snobbish to nominate Craig as Best Actor for his performance in this movie. So what if James Bond was nothing more than a pop culture character? If Al Pacino could receive a nomination for portraying a comic book character (Big Boy Caprice) in the 1990 film ”DICK TRACY”, I see no reason why Craig could have received a nomination for what I feel was the best performance by any actor who has ever portrayed James Bond.

From what I have read in old press releases, it took EON Productions quite a while to find the right leading actress to portray Treasury agent, Vesper Lynd. In fact, the French/Swedish actress, Eva Green, did not join the cast until after the film’s production had began. The wait seemed worth the effort. Green seemed to have perfectly embodied the sharp-tongued, reserved, and very enigmatic Vesper Lynd. Thanks to her performance, it was easy to see how someone like Vesper managed to have such an impact upon Bond’s life . . . and his heart. Like many other Bond fans, I had always viewed Diana Rigg of ”OHMSS” as the ultimate Bond leading lady. Not anymore. After viewing Green’s performance in”CASINO ROYALE”, I just might reconsider this opinion. Tracy Di Vicenzo struck me as a woman who had spent a privileged, yet lonely existence, capped by an unhappy marriage that ended in tragedy. Vesper, on the other hand, struck me as slightly more complex. Like Bond, she must have spent many years as an orphan with a chip on her shoulder.

Whereas Bond’s resentment seemed to have originated from his social origins, Vesper’s resentment came from her intelligence being disregarded, due to her gender. Although more reserved than the British agent, Bond may have guessed correctly that she had to struggle to overcome the negative opinions of others, while resenting them at the same time. And like Bond, she took great pains to project a nonchalant façade. When Vesper finally stopped fighting her feelings regarding Bond, Green had the double task of portraying a lovelorn woman harboring a dark secret from the man she loved. Not only did Green managed to achieve this goal, she captured the many nuances of what I believe has turned out to be the most complex Bond female character in the franchise’s history.

Portrayed by Danish actor Mads Mikelsen, the villain Le Chiffre might not be as ”unique” as many Bond fans perceive him to be. Le Chiffre was not the first Bond villain to be portrayed as a subtle individual. He was not the first villain whose objective did not include either world domination or worldwide extortion of the super powers. He was not the first villain to answer to a higher authority. Nor was he the first villain to be killed by someone other than Bond. So what made Le Chiffre unique? The blood that came from his left eye’s tear duct? His penchant for poker and mathematics? Or the fact that he seemed to share Bond’s own ruthlessness, impatience and arrogance? Or was it simply Mikelsen’s superb performance that allowed Le Chiffre to be villainous and yet, very human?

In the end, I realized that what Mikelsen’s Le Chiffre unique to me was his very human persona. The Danish actor had portrayed Le Chiffre with an icy exterior that made him believable as a talented poker player. But he also expressed human traits such as boldness and arrogance – traits that eventually got the best of him. In fact, those very traits had led to a major terrorist scheme funded by his clients’ money. The scheme’s failure – thanks to Bond – eventually landed Le Chiffre in hot with his clients . . . and his employers.

Not only did ”CASINO ROYALE” seemed blessed by its three very talented leads, it had the good fortune to possess a first-class supporting cast. Leading the pack was Academy Award winner, Dame Judi Dench as “M”, Bond’s MI-6 superior. It seemed rather odd for the producers to allow Dame Judi to continue the role of “M”, considering that Craig’s tenure is supposed to be a trip back to Bond’s early years as a “00” agent. The producers felt the same, but they simply did not have the heart to find someone to replace the dynamic dame. Quite frankly, I am glad they kept her. During the Brosnan Era, Dench’s “M” had been the ”Evil Queen of Numbers”, a former government accountant/intelligence analyst bent upon proving to Whitehall and other colleagues that she possessed the “balls” to lead MI-6. In ”CASINO ROYALE”, Dench’s “M” proved to be a different kettle of fish. With Daniel Craig as Bond, Dench became an experienced spymaster forced to guide the newly promoted Bond into becoming the great “00” agent she obviously feel he has the potential to be. Instead of the cool and analytical boss she had been with Brosnan, Dench’s M seemed slightly warmer and more maternal toward the agent. And for the first time, I found myself actually liking Dench as the head of MI-6.

Jeffrey Wright became the seventh actor to portray CIA agent Felix Leiter in the series of Bond movies produced by EON Productions. Like Jack Lord in ”DR. NO” (1962) and David Hedison in ”LIVE AND LET DIE” (1973) and ”LICENSE TO KILL” (1989), Wright’s Leiter is portrayed as a fellow intelligence colleague, instead of a slightly less intelligent lackey providing backup and information for Bond. Actually, Wright seemed just as cool as Lord . . . and as witty as Hedison. In”CASINO ROYALE”, Leiter is another player who takes part in Le Chiffre’s poker tournament in Montenegro. Although not as accomplished as Bond or Le Chiffre at poker, Leiter managed to remain in the tournament until the second night. And he also prevented Bond from committing a major error and provided much needed cash to defeat Le Chiffre. I especially enjoyed his little comment regarding Le Chiffre’s impatience toward those players ordering Bond’s favorite Vodka Martini. It seemed a shame that Wright was only featured in the film’s Montenegro sequences. But when I think about it, I could not see how Leiter’s presence would be needed in the rest of the story.

What can anyone say about Italian actor Giancarlo Giannini? I must be honest. I had not been much of a fan of his before”CASINO ROYALE”. In fact, I had only seen him in three productions – the 1985 miniseries ”SINS” (starring Joan Collins and Bond alumni Timothy Dalton) and the 1995 Keanu Reeves movie, ”A WALK IN THE CLOUDS” and the 2004 Denzel Washington movie, ”MAN ON FIRE”. I found his acting slightly over-the-top in the first two movies and barely noticed him in the third. But in ”CASINO ROYALE”, it was not hard to miss him. Not at all. And I am being very complimentary. Giannini portrayed MI-6 agent, Rene Mathis as a charming, witty, intelligent and very clever man. Most importantly, he seemed to have a sly sense of humor that I found absolutely delicious. I loved the sly way in which he had flirted with Vesper. And I loved his probing of Bond’s feelings for the accountant and the way he seemed to enjoy making trouble for Le Chiffre’s men. I may not have been a fan of Giannini in the past, but I am now.

The more I think about ”CASINO ROYALE”, the more I am amazed over the talented cast that Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson managed to gather. For example, the movie has Simon Abkarian and Caterina Murino portrayed the unhappily married couple – terrorist middleman Alex Dimitrios and his wife Solange. Despite their brief screen time, both Abkarian and Murino managed to convincingly portray a wealthy couple whose marriage had seen better days, long ago. Abkarian portrayed Dimitrios as a slightly charming, yet intelligent man incapable of expressing love for his wife or reigning in his arrogance. The combination of this lack of affection and arrogance seemed prominent during his poker match with Bond at the One & Only Ocean Club gaming room. This arrogance seemed even more prominent in his confrontation with Le Chiffre, in which he refused to take the blame for Mollaka’s death in Madagascar. But it was Caterina Murino’s performance as Dimitrios’ wife, Solange, that really impressed me. Her pained reaction to Dimitrios’ cold indifference made it easy to understand why she had eventually turned to Bond for a little romance. Many critics and fans either tend to dismiss Solange as another Bond sexpot or ignore her altogether. I, on the other hand, found Murino’s performance to be earthy, intelligent and yet poignant. And although Solange had turned to Bond for a little solace, she is intelligent to realize that her husband is a man who cannot be trusted. Even more interesting, she quickly pinpointed Bond as a man who becomes involved in married women in order to avoid emotional entanglements.

Despite being a minor villain that only appeared near the movie’s beginning and halfway into the film, the Ugandan warlord and high-ranking member of the Lord’s Resistance Army, Steven Obanno, ended up providing a major impact upon Bond and Vesper’s relationship . . . and Le Chiffre’s desire to win the poker tournament. Ivory Coast actor Isaach De Bankolé portrayed Obanno – as a ruthless and intelligent man whom anyone with good sense would not cross. Something that Le Chiffre managed to do. During his brief screen time, De Bankolé managed to convey an intimidating presence. I also have to give kudos to him, Craig and director Martin Campbell for providing one of the most brutal and memorable fights in the franchise’s history.

Another villainous character appeared in the form of Danish actor Jesper Christensen. He portrayed Mr. White, the mysterious middleman of a terrorist organization that operates as a sort of asset management of terrorism. Like De Bankolé, Christensen only appeared in a few scenes. Yet, he also managed to convey both danger and intelligence. And when he walked away with the money won at Casino Royale, while Bond grieved over Vesper’s dead body in Venice, the audience is left with the sense that for the second time in the franchise’s history (the first time occurred in ”ON HER MAJESTY’S SECRET SERVICE’s final scene), the bad guy had won. Until the final scene.

Last but not least, there was Sebastien Foucan. Co-founder of the a new sport/art form called Parkour, Foucan portrayed a freelance bomb maker named Mollaka who had attracted the attention of MI-6. I will discuss the foot chase that dominated Foucan’s scenes later. But I do want to point out that ”CASINO ROYALE” marked Foucan’s debut as an actor. He barely had much to say. In fact, he did not speak a word. But not only did Foucan display his remarkable skills in Parkour, he also managed to effectively convey his character’s fear, anger and desperation while trying to elude the relentless Bond. It looks as if those brief acting lessons he had acquired from Daniel Craig actually worked.

Plot

There are only two James Bond films within the entire franchise that do not begin in the following manner – gun barrel opening followed by the pre-title sequence. Those two films happen to be 1962’s ”DR. NO” and ”CASINO ROYALE””DR. NO” had began with a gun barrel sequence, followed by the opening titles and the story. Although ”CASINO ROYALE”consisted of both the gun barrel and the pre-title sequences, the movie began with the pre-title sequence, shot in bleak black-and-white. In the pre-title sequence, reminiscent of a film noir movie, the audience learn how James Bond earned his ”Double-0” license. Even more unusual, Bond’s killing of his first target (shown in flashback) segued into the very unusual gun barrel segment in which the agent picked up a fallen gun, whirled around and fired a shot. Already, the filmmakers have informed the audience that ”CASINO ROYALE” will prove to be a unique experience.

The real story began during a rainy sequence in Uganda, where the main villain and the two supporting villains are introduced – the banker Le Chiffre, the mysterious Mr. White and the warlord Steven Obanno. The meeting between Le Chiffre and Obanno had been arranged by Mr. White for the warlord needs a banker to launder his money. As much as I had liked ”LICENSE TO KILL”, one of my complaints was that the main villain had too many henchmen. Although”CASINO ROYALE” possessed one main villain, it also consisted of numerous supporting ones. But unlike the 1989 film, not all of ”CASINO ROYALE”’s villains were henchmen – which happened to be the case for both Obanno and White. In reality, Mr. White seemed to be at the head of the totem pole for villains opposing Bond in this film. Yet, Le Chiffre’s actions – using the money of clients like Obanno to participate in a stock scheme – turned out to be the story’s driving force. The moment Le Chiffre contacted his broker, he became the story’s main villain.

The movie shifted to another part of Africa – namely Madagascar. There, the newly promoted Bond and another MI-6 operative named Carter are observing a suspected bombmaker named Mollaka. Following Carter’s blundering revelation of their cover, what followed turned out to be one of the most exciting chase sequences in the franchise’s history. I can only think of four other chase scenes that I also hold in high regard – the two ski chases in “ON HER MAJESTY’S SECRET SERVICE” and “FOR YOUR EYES ONLY”(1981) respectively, the boat chase through the Louisiana swamps in “LIVE AND LET DIE”, and the Ho Chi Minh City motocycle/helicopter chase in “TOMORROW NEVER DIES”(1997). Needless to say, the Madgascar foot chase ended with Bond’s invasion of a local embassy and Mollaka’s death. Unfortunately, the following scene turned out to be what I believe to be the movie’s weakest moment. The scene featured Le Chiffre watching a CNN news report about Mollaka’s death that identified the bombmaker’s killer as an “unidentified MI-6 agent”. Now I found this baffling. How on earth did CNN know that Bond was an MI-6 agent? Aside from Carter, he did not speak to a single soul during the entire Madagascar sequence.

The news report ended up getting M (head of MI-6) in trouble with the Ministry of Defense . . . and Bond in trouble with M. I have always found it odd that certain fans considered Bond’s break-in of M’s flat improbable, yet rarely complained about the CNN report. It was the latter that had struck me as improbable. M’s laptop obviously possessed a feature that enabled Bond to track Mollaka’s last cell text message. And considering M’s unwillingness to listen to him, it seemed unsurprising that Bond was willing to break into her flat. Bond and M’s eventual confrontation inside her flat revealed for the first time the dynamic chemistry between Daniel Craig and Dame Judi Dench. Quite frankly, I have not seen such a fascinating Bond-M relationship since the Timothy Dalton-Robert Brown collaboration in the late 1980s . . . or the George Lazenby-Bernard Lee duo.

After Bond ended up being ordered to take a vacation by an angry M to take a vacation, the scene shifted to the Bahamas. Bond’s arrival by seaplane gave the fans a chance to see how charasmatic a screen actor Craig can be. From the moment Bond had disembarked from that seaplane to the moment when he deliberately wrecked that German tourist’s Land Rover, Craig permanently put his own stamp on the Bond character. At least in my eyes. I can only assume that I do not have to mention Craig’s now famous emergence from the sea, wearing only powder-blue swim trunks. Allegedly, this is the scene that allowed Craig to win the hearts of many female. Yes, the man looked good enough to eat. But I had already been won over by him before I saw his “wet look”.

The Bahamas sequence also featured Bond’s interactions with Alex and Solange Dimitrios, and his sexy almost one-night stand with Solange. It also led to the Miami Airport, where the agent managed to foil Le Chiffre’s plot to bomb a new airline in order to boost his profits. As much as I found Bond’s encounter with another bombmaker named Carlos exciting, it is probably my least favorite action sequence in the film. What can I say? The dark setting, combined with screeching cars, incoming planes, gas spills and explosions . . . it all seemed too much. In fact, this scene came dangerously close to resembling one of those famous, over-the-top Michael Bay action sequences. But the sequence did provide one gem of a scene . . . the smug smile on Bond’s face as he watched Carlos explode from a bomb the latter had created.

Bond returned to the Bahamas, where he discovered that Solange Dimitrios had been tortured and killed by Le Chiffre’s people. M also met him there to give him his new assignment – participation in a poker tournament sponsored by Le Chiffre. Thanks to Bond’s actions in Miami, Le Chiffre needed to raise money in order pay back his clients and prevent his bosses from eliminating him – permanently. M ordered Bond to beat Le Chiffre and draw the latter into MI-6’s clutches for information. This minor scene gave moviegoers another opportunity to enjoy the Craig/Dench dynamics.

But the chemistry between Craig and Dench seemed minor in compare to the actor’s chemistry with the young actress who became his leading lady. I see no need to wax lyrical over Daniel Craig and Eva Green’s performances for the second time. However, I do believe that the scene featuring Bond’s first meeting with Vesper Lynd aboard a train bound for Montenegro just might be the best “Bond Meets the Leading Lady” scene in the franchise’s history. From the moment those two met, I sensed the chemistry that sizzled between them. The sparkling dialogue included in the scene certainly solidified their dynamics. The snarky banter that began on the train, continued right up to the moment when Vesper made it clear to Bond that she did not want to share a hotel elevator with him. I must admit that Paul Haggis (let’s be honest – I rather doubt that Purvis and Wade had made any real impact on the dialogue or it would be God awful) really did himself proud with the Bond-Vesper dialogue.

Aside from sharp wit, Bond and Vesper share another personality trait – both seemed to possess this desire to be in control. Bond’s need for control had already been expressed by his actions against Mollaka in Madagascar. I must be honest . . . I found Bond’s killing of the bombmaker to be a bit unecessary. He could have easily waited for the other man to leave the embassy in order to complete Le Chiffre’s assignment. No wonder M had been pissed. But discovering that Vesper may have also been controlling came as quite a surprise. I am, of course, referring to the humorous scene in which Bond and Vesper presented clothes for the other to wear. Bond wanted Vesper to wear an evening gown that would enhance Vesper’s sex appeal and distract his competition. Vesper wanted Bond to wear an evening jacket that she believed would make him look like a man who could afford to lose $15 million. Both attempted to assert their will upon the other. And both succeeded.

The story eventually focused upon the movie’s centerpiece – namely the poker tournament at the Casino Royale in Montenegro. There have been a few dark comments about this particular sequence. Some fans and critics criticized the poker scenes for being boring and too slow. Others have criticized the scenes for its “inaccurate” portrayal of Texas Hold ‘Em Poker. Honestly, I could not care less about the movie’s accurate portrayal of the game, especially since my knowledge of the game barely existed. And some complained that poker seemed pedestrian in compared to the baccarat used in the 1953 novel. Very few Bond fans know this, but Ian Fleming rarely played poker because he found it too intimidating for his taste. Personally, I believe that poker works better on film than baccarat. Thanks to the script and Campbell’s direction, this long sequence managed to flow smoothly. Purvis, Wade and Haggis also punctuated the poker scenes with minor incidents that included Steven Obanno’s appearance in Montenegro, Bond’s early loss of the 10 million given to him by HM Treasury, Felix Leiter’s financial rescue, Valenska’s attempt to poison Bond and the latter’s eventual victory. In fact, the entire Montenegro sequence is my favorite in the entire movie.

Due to Bond’s victory in the poker tournament, Le Chiffre found himself in a pickle. He no longer possessed the money to pay back his clients. Which meant that his life became expendable to his employers. Since Le Chiffre had no intention of running to the British or Americans as an informant, he decided upon the next best course of action. He interrupted Bond and Vesper’s celebration supper and kidnapped the latter. He did this to force Bond to hand over the password to the account holding the tournament’s winnings. Le Chiffe’s actions led to two famous scenes in the movie – Bond’s crash of the company’s Aston-Martin (which set a world’s record for seven turns of the car) and his torture at the hands of Le Chiffre.

One of the famous scenes in the 1953 Fleming novel featured Le Chiffre’s torture of Bond. In the novel, Le Chiffre stripped Bond naked and sat him on a chair with an open seat. Then he proceeded to beat Bond’s testicles with a carpet beater. Many of the novel’s fans had wondered if the film’s producers would do the torture scene justice, let alone include it. Needless to say, it was included in the film. Le Chiffre torture of Bond nearly followed the literary version . . . with one difference. Le Chiffre used a knotted rope, not a carpet beater. I must congratulate Craig and Mikelsen for their excellent performances; and Campbell for his marvelous direction of what turned out to be a taunt, humorous and painful scene of a Bond moment that I believe will be remembered for years to come.

The torture scene ended with on a rare note – not only in the literary version, but in the cinematic, as well. In the movie, the villain was killed at least a half hour before the movie’s end. After Le Chiffre failed to convince Bond to hand over the latter’s code to the account holding the poker winnings, he met his end at the hands of the enigmatic Mr. White. When I first saw “CASINO ROYALE”, I found it odd that the terrorist would allow Bond . . . and Vesper to survive. Before the movie ended, I would soon learn why.

Certain fans and critics have complained that Bond and Vesper’s romance seemed frustratingly short – especially for two characters that were obviously in love. I had countered numerous times that their romance had actually began on the train to Montenegro. The sequence that followed Le Chiffre’s death merely portrayed the culmination of their romance by allowing the couple to finally express their feelings. This sequence also featured two scenes in which Bond declared his love for Vesper. The first scene occured at the nursing home where Bond recuperated from his torture. When Vesper finally expressed how she felt about him, he responded with a joke that fell flat. He then finally expressed his own true feelings with the “I’m yours” speech. In a later scene set on a beach, Bond finally said the words – “I love you” to Vesper.

The movie shifted to Venice, the scene of two previous Bond movies – “FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE”(1963) and“MOONRAKER”(1979). In “FRWL”, Venice proved to be the climax of the entire film. In “MR”, the mystery surrounding villain Hugo Drax deepened in Venice. But the city proved to be a lot more for Bond in “CASINO ROYALE”. It was here that Bond learned that Vesper had betrayed him by stealing the funds for the organization behind Le Chiffre. This sequence provided great action that included Bond’s shoot-out with Gettler and the rest of Mr. White’s henchman, the sinking of a Venetian palazzo, and Vesper’s tragic yet slightly creepy death by drowning. The latter also emphasized Bond’s tragic relationship with Vesper. It also proved how the city turned out to provide a great emotional impact for the agent. I still cannot stop thinking about the scene that featured Mr. White observing Bond’s grief over Vesper’s dead body. The scene continues to send chills down my sign. It almost seemed like a metaphor of how the terrorist organization overshadowed Bond and Vesper’s relationship.

Looking slightly betrayed, Bond later learned the truth behind Vesper’s betrayal from M. Apparently, Vesper had a French-Algerian boyfriend who was kidnapped and held for ransom by the organization behind Le Chiffre and Mr White. Bond learned that she agreed to deliver the ransom money (his winnings) only if they would consent to leave Bond alive as well as her boyfriend. Vesper also left a message on his cell phone, giving him Mr. White’s name and telephone number. The look on the agent’s face upon learning this information seemed sad . . . and very confused.

But “CASINO ROYALE” had one last scene to unfold. Mr. White, secured in the knowledge that he finally managed to get his hands on the funds won by Bond in Montenegro, arrived at a palatial estate near Lake Como. He received a phone call from a voice asking for a moment to talk. And when Mr. White demanded to know the name of his caller, he received a shot in the leg. The movie finally ended with Mr. White crawling toward the villa and a very iconic-looking British agent, who coolly identified himself with the famous line – “The name’s Bond, James Bond.”

Miscellaneous

There are a lot more reasons why “CASINO ROYALE” immediately became one of my favorite Bond movies of all time. More than what I had already described. One reason happened to be the performances, of course. The movie was not only blessed with a first-rate supporting cast, it had a strong and charasmatic leading man and woman in both Daniel Craig and Eva Green. And although Martin Campbell is not known for being a memorable director, “CASINO ROYALE” joined the ranks of his best directorial efforts. I would go as far to say that the movie might so far, be the pinnacle of his career.

When I first saw the movie, I really did not think much of the movie’s theme song – “You Know My Name”, sung by Chris Cornell. I heard the first notes, judged it overbearing and continued to ignore the rest of the song. Upon my second and third viewings, I realized that “You Know My Name” was a lot better than I had imagined. Yet, it will probably never be considered a classic Bond song.

What made “CASINO ROYALE” such a great movie for me was the complex and emotional story adapted for the screen by Neal Purvis, Robert Wade and Paul Haggis. The trio did a first-rate job of adapting Fleming’s novella. They also managed to effectively fill out the story, making it palatable as a full-length Bond movie – something that could not have been done with the novella alone. But what I had truly loved about “CASINO ROYALE” were the moments . . . the little moments that made it more than just a typical Bond movie with action, girls and gadgets. Those moments – whether they were the different expressions on Bond’s face, minor words and conversations, gestures made by the movie’s many characters – made it magical for me. It made the movie human and far more interesting that any typical Bond action movie.

”INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS” (2009) Review

 

inglourious-basterds

Below is my review of ”INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS”, the latest movie written and directed by Quentin Tarantion:

 

”INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS” (2009) Review

I have rather mixed feelings about director Quentin Tarantino’s work. I have not seen all of the movies that he has directed. And of the movies that I have seen, I can name only two or three I would consider favorites of mine. One of those favorites happened to be his latest – ”INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS”, a World War II comedy-melodrama (I do not know how else to describe the movie) about two attempts to assassinate Nazi leader Adolph Hitler during a movie premiere in occupied Paris.

Thinking about ”INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS”, it occurred to me that its premise struck a familiar note. It bears a strong resemblance to last year’s ”VALKYRIE”, a thriller about the last attempt to kill Hitler by a group of high-ranking German Army officers. But unlike Bryan Singer’s movie, ”INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS” featured two separate plots to kill Hitler that ended with a particular twist.

In order to present a detailed account of these two accounts, Tarantino divided his story into five chapters. The first chapter introduced Colonel Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz), a notorious S.S. officer known for hunting and finding refugee Jews in Austria and occupied France. He appears at a French dairy farm in search of a missing Jewish family named Dreyfus. After threatening to punish the dairy farmer (Denis Menochet) hiding the family, Landa manages to have them all killed, except for the 18-19 year-old Shosanna Dreyfus (Mélanie Laurent), who escapes due to Landa lacking bullets in his revolver. Chapter Two opens in early 1944 and introduces U.S. Army Lieutenant Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt), a Tennessee hillbilly, who has recruited a group of Jewish-American soldiers to kill and mutilate as many Nazi soldiers they can get their hands on behind enemy lines in occupied France. By the time they have recruited Hugo Stiglitz (Til Schweiger), a former German soldier set to be punished for killing 13 S.S. soldiers, the “Basterds” have created a reputation as butchers by the German high command.

Shosanna returns to the story in Chapter Three, as the owner of a Parisian movie theater. Her theater is chosen to host the premiere of ”A Nation’s Pride , one of Joseph Goebbels’ (Sylvester Groth) propaganda films about the exploits of a German war hero named Fredrick Zoller (Daniel Brühl) . . . after Zoller meets and becomes attracted to Shosanna. The theater owner realizes that the movie premiere is the perfect place for her to get revenge for the deaths of her family and she plots with her lover and projectionist, Marcel (Jacky Ido) to burn down the theater with the moviegoers locked inside. In Chapter Four, British intelligence learns about the premiere from one of their agents – popular German actress Bridget von Hammersmark (Diane Kruger) and her plans to have the German high command assassinated. They send one of their operatives to France – German speaking Lieutenant Archie Hicox (Michael Fassbender) – to meet up with the Basterds and von Hammersmark and go along with her assassination plans. Unfortunately, the meeting goes awry due to an encounter with some German soldiers and a Gestapo officer named Dieter Hellstrom (August Diehl). Raines and von Hammersmark are forced to make some changes in their assassination plot. Chapter Five featured the movie’s finale as Shosanna’s movie theater, where the two plots to kill Hitler and the Nazi high command weave in a series of revelations, betrayals, death and sacrifice and end with a surprising plot twist.

”INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS”, like some of Tarantino’s films, turned out to be a prime example of how several unconnected subplots merge into one major plot or goal. In the case of this particular movie, the goal to assassinate Hitler and the Nazi high command. I have noticed that in movies like ”PULP FICTION” and ”JACKIE BROWN”, Tarantino likes to use nonlinear storylines. This does not seemed to be the case in ”INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS”. In fact, he carefully introduced the characters and the story in a straight, linear fashion in Chapters One to Four. Once the finale unfolded in Chapter Five, Tarantino pulled the rug from under moviegoers with several surprising plot twists that left me reeling. And by the time the last scene ended, only two major characters and a supporting character were left standing. Another aspect about ”INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS” that I found enjoyable was its mixture of humor, drama, suspense and action. Well, most of the action featured massive shootings, a major fire, stabbings, strangulation and mutilation. And the ironic thing is that the percentage of action featured in the film was minor in compare to the number of scenes dominated by dialogue. This should not be surprising, considering that many of Tarantino’s films seemed to feature more dialogue than action. Aside from one or two scenes, this did not bother me at all. I think it had something to do with the fact that I found many of the characters in ”INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS” fascinating.

If there is one thing you can count on a Quentin Tarantino film, it is bound to feature a cast of some interesting characters and performances. I suspect that Lieutenant Aldo Raine will go down as one of my favorite characters portrayed by Brad Pitt. The movie never explained Raine’s dislike and hostility toward the Nazis. But his recruitment speech to his “Basterds” made it clear that he disliked them . . . intensely. He even makes sure that his men know that he expects each of them to take at least 100 Nazi scalps. And he literally means scalps. Also, Pitt did an excellent job of expressing not only Raine’s dislike of the Nazis, but also his ruthlessness, sadism and ornery streak. And as long as I remember this movie, I will always relish Pitt’s Tennessee accent and the way he says ”Nat-sees”. Another performance I will certainly remember is Christoph Waltz’s superb performance as the soft-spoken, yet sinister Waffen-SS-turned-SD officer Colonel Hans Landa. The Nazi officer, known for successfully hunting down refugee Jews, is clearly the movie’s main antagonist, yet watching Waltz portray this guy is a joy to behold. He does not resort to the usual clichés about Nazi characters. Instead, his Landa is a polite, humorous and yet, sadistic man who enjoys putting his victims through psychological torture. His interrogations of the French dairy farmer Perrier LaPadite, Shosanna and even Raine are prime examples of this. Only with Raine, I think he may have met his match. It is not surprising that Waltz received the Best Actor Award at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival, along with a Best Supporting Actor Award for both the Golden Globes and the Academy Awards.

However, Pitt and Waltz are not the only ones who provided some memorable performances. I really enjoyed Mélanie Laurent’s performance as the intense and vengeful Shosanna Dreyfus. Not many critics seemed impressed by her performance, but then Shosanna is not exactly what one would call an in-your-face role. I could also say the same about Diane Kruger’s role as the German-born film star, Bridget von Hammersmark. Her role as the anti-Nazi spy for the British is not as colorful as some of the other roles in the film, but it is certainly more complex and interesting than her performances in the ”NATIONAL TREASURE” movies and ”TROY”. I heard a rumor that Kruger had fought for the role of von Hammersmark. Judging from the way she seemed to relish in her role that seem very obvious. Another low key, yet complex performance came from Daniel Brühl as the war hero-turned film actor Fredrick Zoller. He did an excellent job in conveying a genuine attraction to Shosanna, along with his frustration over her cold attitude toward him. He also seemed embarrassed and slightly ashamed of his heroics that led to the deaths of many American soldiers in Italy. Yet, he loves the celebrity that he has managed to acquire as due to his “war heroics”. I was also impressed by Michael Fassbender as the British intelligence officer, Lieutenant Archie Hicox, who was selected to assist von Hammersmark and the Basterds in the plot to kill Hitler. I enjoyed Fassbender’s sharp performance as the British officer as a suave “George Saunders” type, whose command of the German language is perfect, but not his knowledge of German regional accents. And Til Schweiger was perfect as Hugo Stiglitz, the psychotic German soldier whose dislike of the Nazi regime led him to murder 13 Gestapo officers before joining Raine’s group of “Basterds”. He was hilarious, yet frightening in the Chapter Four sequence that featured von Hammersmark’s rendezvous with his fellow Basterd Corporal Wilhelm Wicki (Gedeon Burkhard ) and Hicox. Schweiger’s struggle to keep his temper and murderous impulses in check during their encounter with Major Hellstrom was fascinating to watch. Apparently actor-writer-producer Eli Roth does not have a great reputation as an actor. Even I could see that he was no great shakes as an actor. Yet, the role of the violent and obnoxious Staff Sergeant Donny “The Bear Jew” Donowitz seemed to fit him like a glove. Roth did a pretty good job in conveying Donowitz’s funny, yet psychotic nature.

Before one would assume that I consider ”INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS” as an example of cinematic perfection, I must admit there were a few aspects of the film that troubled me. There were moments when the pacing seemed a bit too slow for me. I thought that Tarantino had lingered on the conversation between Colonel Landa and Perrier LaPadite longer than necessary. I suspect that this scene was merely a showcase for Landa’s talents as an investigator and his penchant for psychological sadism. Unfortunately, I found myself longing for it to end before it actually did. Another scene that seemed to stretch longer than necessary featured Bridget von Hammersmark’s meeting with Hicox and two of the Basterds inside a tavern in Chapter Four. The scene began with the actress engaged in a guessing game with German soldiers celebrating the birth of one of their colleagues’ son. In fact, the actress is forced to play this same game with Major Hellstrom, Hicox and the Basterds when the Gestapo officer insists upon remaining at their table. Now, I realize that the presence of the German soldiers played a major role in Chapter Four. But honestly . . . I found the game a bore and thought it dragged the scene.

My last quibble centered around Lieutenant Raine’s men – the “Basterds”. Aside from Hugo Stiglitz and Donny Donowitz, we never really got a chance to really know the Basterds. Most of them were given brief spotlights, but not enough to really satisfy me. After all, the movie is named after their group. Of the other “Basterds” – Wilhelm Wicki, Smithson Utivich, Omar Ulmer, Gerold Hirschberg, Andy Kagan, Michael Zimmerman, and Simon Sakowitz – at least three of them were given brief spotlights. And Tarantino never revealed what happened to the rest of them. I also understand that Tarantino had attempted to recruit Oscar-winning composer Ennio Morricone to create the movie’s score. The composer rejected the offer, due to the film’s sped-up production schedule. Instead, Tarantino utilized some of Morricone’s tracks from previous films into the movie’s soundtrack. I only hope that Tarantino did this with the composer’s permission.

As for the technical aspects of ”INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS”, I believe that Tarantino did a solid job in consolidating the cinematography, production designs, costume designs, and special effects to create a first-rate movie. But I must admit that I found myself especially impressed by Tarantino’s own script that featured a straight, linear story that concluded in a very surprising manner. I was also very impressed by the visual effects supervised by Gregory D. Liegey and Viktor Muller . . . especially during the final sequence that featured the movie premiere.

I might as well say it . . . I really enjoyed ”INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS. It is one of the very few movies I have really enjoyed in 2009.  It made the list for my ten favorite movies for that year.  It also featured an excellent story with some surprising twists and a superb international cast led by Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz and Mélanie Laurent. And considering my mixed views on Tarantino’s body of work that has to be saying something. Hell, I have already seen it at least five or six times by now.