CinemaInternational

Almost a decade ago (and I can't believe it's been that long already), I made my way through the first 20 films of the series (I've never seen the most recent 4, although I have heard raves for Casino Royale and Skyfall, both of which I should see sometime). The films I was most impressed by were Goldfinger, You Only Live Twice, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, and The Living Daylights. With such a long running series, many of which had the same basic structure (provocative title sequence with a new song, dastardly supervillain, unusual henchpeople, beautiful women, gadgets, gizmos, destruction of the villain's plans, followed by his death), it was the little quirks that made each film different, and some better than others. In the four I mentioned, each added something different to the plot.... Goldfinger, sheer snazziness, great pace, colorful villains You Only Live Twice, an exotic setting in Japan replete with some surprising twists On Her majesty's Secret Service, the best of all the Bond women in Diana Rigg and the most telling of all the films in the perils and consequences of living a life on the ledge and how happiness can be robbed from you in the blink of an eye. The living Daylights, Timothy Dalton and Maryam D'Abo had the best chemistry of any romantic pairing in the series, and in some ways, I like to feel this is an epilogue to all of them, because its at its warmest and most romantic here. Plus John Barry's last score for the series is a strong one, and the serious treatment of the whole film is a breath of fresh air. Some episodes could have been better then they ended up being. I am reminded of The World is not Enough. That 1999 film has more than its fair share of problems, and yet there were parts of it that worked perfectly: Desmond Llewyn's poignant series farewell, Brosnan gave his best performance of his 4 films, Sophie Marceau was riveting, and the film had some operatic notes of tragedy. Unfortunately, it all ended on a campy and cringeworthy comic note. But even despite that film's other downfalls, there is promise in there. [I could try to rank the Bonds, the villains, the love interests, songs, etc, but I feel that should be another post]

Never Cry Wolf (1983) --- 9/10 Source: VHS Disney changes their look At a time when Disney is turning out only blockbusters, remakes, and sequels, it is sometimes worth a look into the company's past to see projects that didn't fit that package. And, under the Disney banner at least, there is no more unusual title than Never Cry Wolf, the 1983 nature drama. What is perhaps most striking about this film is that it seems to be the complete antithesis of your typical live-action Disney film. it's often quiet, there are no children, the leading man is completely naked for nearly 7 and a half minutes of the film (many shots of his rear and subliminal flashes of his pen!s, including once in closeup, makes for a very odd Disney film and a very, very extreme PG), the ending is moody and tragic, two of the three supporting characters are in deep shades of gray. Oh, and for a company that is most famous for a cartoon mouse, the lead gorges himself on mouse sandwiches and Shish kebabs. (Watch out, Mickey and Minnie!) In essence, while it might be more traditional for another studio, its very off-the-wall for Disney especially with it saying "Walt Disney Pictures" at the beginning of the film. it was one of the final "New Hollywood" films to hit the screen, tying with the simultaneously released Star 80 and The Right Stuff as being the last of the name-director sagas that proliferated so much in the 70s. Although the film has more than its share of sluggish moments, it is made into a must-see by the film's intelligence, Charles Martin Smith's excellent leading performance, the breathtaking cinematography of the northern wilderness, the wolves, and an otherworldly synth score by Mark Isham. It is truly a film that is one of a kind, and certainly one we will never see the likes of again from a major studio.

Did see Shadowlands as well. In some ways, 1993 was one of the last great movie years. So many meaty dramas.

Biblical actually. The Javier Bardem character is supposed to be God. The Jennifer Lawrence is a cross between the concept of Mother Earth and The Blessed Virgin Mary Ed Harris and Michelle Pfeiffer are supposed to represent Adam and Eve The Gleeson brothers (Domhnall and Brian) are meant to be Cain and Abel the whole crazy finale is supposed to represent the apocalypse and the one shocking act is meant to stand in for Holy Communion. This was one film i read the synopsis of, and just from the description alone, I found it to be deeply offensive, mainly stemming from that one act I am not going to mention here

the 80s weren't that kind to many young actresses, and come the early 90s she moved to England (where she remains with her husband, director Simon Curtis... who cast her in a bit part in his 2015 film Woman in Gold). However, she has had a major comeback in recent years thanks to a memorable supporting turn on Downton Abbey (which the film version comes out next week) and it seems that she is being sought out more again. Which is good, as she always delivers good work, and has ever since her debut in Ordinary People.

It was tight between II and VI, but I ultimately went for the latter for one little reason: II was done on a strict budget which unfortunately made it look a bit cheap at some points, which is more that a bit sad because the others looked quite lavish. II does indeed have the best villain (I'd agree with one of the series stars who said that Ricardo Moltaban should have been up for an Oscar) though. VI took me by surprise. Nobody really mentioned what a poignant last voyage it was, nor that the villainous quartet is quite impressive. Emotion-wise and excitement wise, it really hits the heights.

Yes, have seen the Remains of the Day and out of the official academy nominees for 1993 he wiould have been my pick. (in a personal lineup, its close betweeen him and Jeff Bridges in Fearless) Personal lineup for 1987 actor would be: Anthony Hopkins/84 Charing Cross Road*** John Candy/Planes Trains and Automobiles Nicolas Cage/Moonstruck Kevin Kline/Cry Freedom Lou Diamond Phillips/La Bamba

Finished up the original part of the movie series last night. So to rank them: 1. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country 👍👍 2. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn 👍👍 3. Star Trek: The Motion Picture 👍👍 4. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home 👍👍 5. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock 👍 6. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier Borderline between one thumb up or one down

Judgment at Nuremberg Libeled Lady Keeper of the Flame Pat and Mike Guess Who's Coming to Dinner Fury Cass Timberlane State of the Union A Guy Named Joe The Old Man and the Sea

Well he should have been up for 84 Charing Cross Road back in 1987, and a nomination for either The Lion in Winter or The Elephant Man would not have been amiss.

And it looks like he might contend for the win this year, at least from this current vantage point...... (and I kind of hope he does, one directing win for his long career seems paltry;for the life of me , I have never been able to understand why he didn't get enough votes for a directing nod for Taxi Driver in 1976)

One little trivia note. If Hanks gets nominated this year, he becomes one of a very small group that has been nominated in the 80s, 90s, 00s, and 10s (others being Meryl Streep, Denzel Washington, Daniel Day Lewis, Julia Roberts, and Frances McDormand ;Meryl Streep was nominated in the 70s as well.)

Time to bring in Pauline! (Kael that is)

I've been making my way through the original part of the film series, and they are very entertaining and the cast is very endearing.

"let It Be" did make the top 10 that year, but lost out in the tiop 5, and lets face it, two of those films that did make that cut in 1970, Madron, a western with Richard Boothe as a gunslinger and Leslie Caron as a nun, and Pieces of Dreams, the saga of a priest played by Robert Forster breaking his vow of chastity with a romance with Lauren hutton, have been completely forgotten, and weren't even much on the radar at the time. The Beatles should have easily made it in. (As for the other slot, take your pick between the MASH there song or the number from The Aristocats)

The discussion in the Carol Lynley thread involving 60s comic actresses who seemingly just vanished into thin air was the catalyst for this. Just simply name some screen personalities who you never feel received the stardom that they deserved, or the roles, or momentum. Can be past or present, or someone working both now and then.

Just found this list on Letterboxd and decided to share it. Its quite interesting really. It lists films that made the Academy shortlists in tech categories (or short films or foreign film or documentary) over the years, but missed out. None of them were ultimately up for anything (sadly in some cases, for the best in others). The person who composed it has not been able to track down most 80s and 90s titles, but its still a great effort and fascinating... https://letterboxd.com/adamwaldowski/list/films-shortlisted-and-not-nominated-for-an/

I did have to feel a bit for Gene in the one scene where they had him in all of these gaudy outfits. One made him look like David Byrne of the Talking Heads. Another made him look like Roy Rogers, minus Dale Evans and Trigger. But, otherwise, he still had all of his class intact, and even if its unexpected, his one song and dance scene with Olivia Newton-John is lovely. It could have come from one of his MGM musicals in the late 40s/early 50s. Simplicity and great charm intact. Not to mention great dancing.

tracking is difficult in advance. Its a guarantee every Oscar year that at least one film will overperform expectations, while another will crash and burn unexpectedly. That said, with Hollywood the way it is now, the field of potential nominees is much samller, so you can arrange a list like this by studio and map out most of your possible contenders: Netflix The Irishman Marriage Story The Laundromat The Two Popes The King the Last Thing He Wanted Columbia Once Upon a Time in Hollywood Little Women Universal 1917 Us Cats Queen and Slim Warner Bros. Joker The Goldfinch The Good Liar Motherless Brooklyn Just Mercy Focus Features Harriet Downton Abbey Dark Waters Fox Searchlight Jojo Rabbit A Hidden Life Lucy in the Sky A24 The Farewell The Lighthouse Uncut Gems 20th Century Fox Ford Versus Ferrari Ad Astra TriStar A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood Neon Parasite Clemency Sony Pictures Classics Pain and Glory Roadside Attractions Judy Paramount Rocketman Gemini Man Disney Toy Story 4 Amazon The Report the Aeronauts United Artists Booksmart That's pretty much what the lineups will be made of. it's hard to say what will win Picture at this point with the changing face of academy voters. As for acting winners, at this point I would guess: Joaquin Phoenix (Joker), Cynthia Erivo (Harriet), Brad Pitt (Once Upon a Time in Hollywood), Laura Dern (Marriage Story) Although Pitt won before for producing 12 Years a Slave, all four would be first time acting winners. Also, keep an eye on Maggie Smith. If she gets nominated for Downton Abbey, she will shatter a long-held academy record for acting nominations over the longest span of time.

In the top right hand corner of the screen is your username. Click on your username. A little menu comes down. Press Profile (the first option). One of the things at the top of the profile is your username all in caps. To the left is a box where an image would be. In the lower left hand corner of that box is a little symbol. Click on it. it should have a little box pop up. Go with upload photo. Should be a little green box below that saying choose single file. If you have any photos saved on your computer, they will pop up and you can choose which one you want to use. After you select it, crop it as you wish and press confirm.

I haven't read Peyton Place either, but from what I could glean from people's comments, PP was provocative in its day due to much rough language, the incestuous rape theme, premarital intimacy, and it seems in the boook that Selena had an abortion, whereas in the film it was a miscarriage. Also much of the characters were seemingly more mixed-up on the page.

Isn't She Great did get its fair share of bad reviews. i remember Roger Ebert gave it a low grade, and looking at his review, it was pretty low-key for a film he disliked so much. he just felt it was a big miscalculation (he thought that Stockard Channing who had a smaller part in the film should have played Jackie). Other reviewers were blunter:

Fox's movie channel repeats so very often, but its still a good way to pick up on maybe 20-25 Fox films that it otherwise costs a bit to see.

Speaking of pets, dogs always get a strange, kind of sad look in their eye if you bring up the name Sugarpuss O'Shea. (the Barbara Stanwyck character in Ball of Fire) They never fail to look at you.

There have been some other TCM Underground titles that have been mainstream (or were mainstream) as well: After Hours, Blue Velvet, Barbarella, Poltergeist, They Live, Freaks, The Dead Zone, The Hunger, Performance, the Amityville horror, Zardoz, Demon Seed, Dreamscape, Caged, and the forthcoming premiere Making Mr. Right (which I must say sounds intriguing)