So... seeing as I thoroughly disliked the first Maleficent film, why did I even bother with the sequel? Well, one, at the time I saw it I was staying at home for two weeks, shielding the world around me from my mild cough and watching a lot of telly (heroic, right?). Two, I had seen the trailer and... actually, it didn't look too bad. Of course, Maleficent wouldn't turn out to be the real Big Bad - that part was clearly meant for Michelle Pfeiffer's icy Queen Ingrith - but there were hints that she would at least be allowed to be wrong. I liked the idea of her being so overprotective of Aurora that she disapproves of Aurora's suitor Prince Philip. For once, that "letting go of a loved one" message that has marred more than one Disney film (and Pixar film) could be put to some good use. The idea that Maleficent, who first became a villain when she cursed Aurora and (in this franchise, nowhere else!) was saved by her love for the girl, would turn villainous again because of that same love for that same girl was pretty neat. Maleficent would learn in the end that Aurora had enough love for both her and Philip, and that could ideally make for a better redemption arc than in the first film. The only thing that had me worried was the introduction of a whole fairy (or "fey") species to which Maleficent belonged. Please, please, not the "alien species standing in for put-upon minority" plot line which I absolutely hate!
Maleficent: Mistress of Evil turned out to be neither as good as I'd hoped it could be, nor as awful as I feared it could also easily be. There's still the glaring problem, made more apparent by the misleading film title, of having a Maleficent who is actually quite nice. This, as I've already ranted about when writing about the first film, is something no-one asked for. People wanted to see more of a fascinating villain - not some misunderstood Moor Queen who isn't very villainous at all except that one time when she, um, cursed a baby. The pompous narrative voice picks up the same "you're all wrong about Maleficent" thread as last time at the start of the film, sounding appalled that Maleficent is, when film two takes place, still regarded as evil, although she herself broke Aurora's curse. Yeah, well... that doesn't make it OK to cast it in the first place, does it? If you're going to rehabilitate a fairy-tale villain (or just about any famous villain of fiction), by all means give him or her relatable motives and show their ability to mend their ways. But don't pretend they never did anything bad to start with. That just doesn't work. Also, the whole "flipping the coin" scenario of making the bad guy the good guy and vice versa adds no nuance to a story - it's still black and white, only the parts have been swapped. King Stephan in Maleficent had little more depth than Maleficent in the animated Sleeping Beauty as a villain, only he was a lot less cool.
Anyway... this being the follow-up, Maleficent's lack of evil-doing is less of a problem than in the first film. We have already internalised that in this particular fictional universe, old Mal is really all right. So when it turns out that the whole jealousy of Philip thing won't be that big a deal, it is disappointing but not too surprising. On the plus side, the "oh, the poor fey are oppressed by the ghastly humans" angle isn't played up either. Instead, there are faults on both sides, and the message is a harmless enough "let's all just get along" one. I have to say this much, I enjoyed watching this film more than the first. With Maleficent we got the standard "poor little misunderstood villain" story, which always makes me think of the old cartoon where the wolf (unsuccessfully) tried to convince a jury that actually Red Riding Hood and her grandmother were trying to kill him. At least, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil isn't that. The question is: what is it?
Part of what makes this film interesting enough to watch once (but probably never again) is that it's a complete mess. The revoltingly cutesy moor critters are still with us from the first film, as are the three fairies who, if still pretty annoying and a far cry from their charming animated counterparts, are a bit more bearable this time. New additions are a baby root (who looks like a hedgehog) and a baby mushroom, both with large doll-like eyes. But mixed in with the kids' stuff are darker fantasy elements, and the mixture is an odd one. There's a huge battle sequence at the end where there's some real bloodshed. Granted, so we don't know most of the victims as more than parts of the human/magical creature collective, but there are some named casualties: one of the three fairies gets turned into a flower by the humans' secret weapon, and that's never undone. Also, high stakes in a fantasy drama usually mean that a bit of effort will be put into the characterisation, so we care who lives and who dies. Not here: the characters are paper thin. Ingrith has a pretty interesting motive, but once she has stated it, nothing is done with it; we don't get Maleficent reacting to it in any way. Aurora and Philip are unfailingly bland. Robert Lindsay's acting talents are completely wasted in the part as Philip's peace-loving dad. Diaval the raven man is pretty sweet, though.
What puzzles me is who this film's intended audience is. Surely, the cutesiness of the CGI, the cheap jokes and the poor characterisation are off-putting to anyone over the age of eight. On the other hand, small children (and maybe even somewhat larger children) could be severely traumatised by scenes such as the one where the moor creatures are locked inside a chapel and have salvos of toxic magic dust fired at them from the chapel organ. So who's supposed to watch this, exactly? The answer may be, sadly, fairy-tale nerds like me who want something to complain about.
torsdag 23 april 2020
lördag 11 april 2020
Ranking the Pierce Brosnan Bond films
It's true I haven't rewatched the old Sean Connery and Roger Moore classics for a while, but I think I can say that Pierce Brosnan is my favourite Bond. I've admitted that I prefer Bond to be suave, and Brosnan has suavity in spades, but he also has more range as an actor than the (admittedly very enjoyable) Moore, and can show signs of crackling veneer when required. His poor Bond has to go through a lot during his four films. He's betrayed by someone he cared for (and thought dead); an ex-girlfriend who actually meant something to him is killed by her own husband; he has his chivalrous streak appealed to and taken advantage of; and finally, he is captured and tortured by the North Koreans - what's more, when he's released the MI5 want nothing to do with him as they're convinced he's squealed when in fact he's been keeping his mouth shut the whole time. By the time we reach The World Is Not Enough (and that's before we even get to the torture in Die Another Day) the strain is starting to show. I think Brosnan's Bond handles all that's thrown at him well, while keeping hold of his essential style whatever happens. It also helps to know that Bond was a part Brosnan really wanted to play - he was disappointed not to get it that time it went to Timothy Dalton because Brosnan was still tied up in his Remington Steele contract. I still don't know why they felt the need to "reboot" the franchise and go with Daniel Craig's craggy hard-man after Brosnan. Bond films haven't been the same since (though I did like Skyfall).
During my two weeks' mini-quarantine I rewatched all Brosnan's Bond films with the exception of The World Is Not Enough, which I'd already rewatched a year or so ago (maybe you can guess why). As a result, I've been able to come up with a highly personal ranking of them, which admittedly has little to do with Brosnan himself and more with how the other characters work for me:
1 Goldeneye The first and the best, it has that special Bond feel which (through no fault of his) was missing from Licence To Kill with Timothy Dalton. The villain twist actually works and gives the villain a half-decent motive for once. Izabella Scorupco is a somewhat shouty but classy Bond girl who manages to be competent without being superwoman. The supporting cast is top notch. We have the late German actor Gottfried John with his expressive countenance as Russian strong man Ourumov - his reaction to Bond crossing a room while taking cover behind a moving shelf filled with canisters of explosive gas is priceless. Famke Janssen is the handsome bad girl Xenia Onatopp who gets off on violence (her own), and then there's Boris, for whom I am prepared to forgive Alan Cumming a lot, including a campy James I in Doctor Who - he truly is invincible. Add to that a triumphant introduction of Judi Dench as the new M and Samatha Bond as Moneypenny, Robbie Coltrane as a fun Russian gangster and one of the best Bond theme songs, sung by none other that Tina Turner. The tank chase dragged a bit for me, though.
2 Die Another Day Most real Bond fans hate this film, and it's probably largely because of its poor reception that the regrettable "reboot" happened. But I think it's a hoot! I've never hankered for Bond films to be realistic. With extravagant ingredients such as an ice palace and a plastic surgeon that can change your ethnicity, you're propelled into a parallel world where it's easier to swallow plot points which would have seemed outrageous in a more realistic setting. Also, I think Toby Stephens does a really good job as the villain Gustav Graves - he plays the part straight, and I appreciate that. Halle Berry doesn't quite work as Bond girl Jinx - why did she kill that doctor, if she is simply an NSA agent? - but she's no disaster, and Rosamund Pike as the icy Miranda Frost is perfect. Yes, the dialogue could be better, the invisible car is a little silly (though it's never really bothered me) and M has to be a perfect fool not to realise who the mole in her organisation is. Nevertheless, this is a hugely enjoyable watch.
3 The World Is Not Enough What, only third place, in spite of Robert Carlyle playing the villain? The problem is, the bad guy in question is an international terrorist with a bullet lodged in his brain which will finally kill him and, as it eats itself in, cuts off his nerves so he doesn't feel pain. I know, ewww. The premise is yucky and even Carlyle has trouble carrying off the bullet-in-brain look. Also, it has to be said, he's not at the top of his villain game in this film, though he does nail a few lines, conveying the pain in "He was a good lover?" and the bitterness in "The world is yours - have fun with it". A waste.
It's still a good film though: Sophie Marceau walks away with it as the, as it turns out, ironically named Elektra. She is very attractive, and boy does she know it - happily, a certain pouting self-regard fits well with the character. Brosnan is convincingly and understandably frazzled, we see quite a lot of M, and Coltrane is back, which is nice. OK, so Denise Richards is not entirely convincing as nuclear scientist Dr Christmas Jones (in mini-shorts), but she's mainly there so that Bond can have someone to get together with at the end, and I did snigger at the Christmas joke.
4 Tomorrow Never Dies It is a truth universally acknowledged that any Bond film in possession of a villain must be in want of the very best talent villain-actordom has to offer - only to then squander it completely. Jonathan Pryce is another favourite actor of mine, and after a somewhat too scenery-chewing introduction he's very watchable as villainous media mogul Elliot Carver. However, even in a Bond context, it's near impossible to suspend disbelief regarding his motives. That Carver abuses his power in some ways - such as featuring stories of Mad Cow Disease so prominently because he is bribed by the French - I could readily believe. But media moguls, even the far from saintly ones, would not dream of starting wars just to boost sales. This is why villains who are military men, spies or criminals work rather better in Bond films - they have already been taught to disregard human life in a smaller context, so the leap is not as big for them when they branch out and threaten large parts of the world population. This is a plot which could have done with the outlandish settings of Die Another Day, but here, they're mostly unglamorous, though I did enjoy the few glimpses of Hamburg. Michelle Yeoh is a gutsy Chinese agent, but it's entirely unconvincing that she and Bond hook up at the end: they have no romantic spark whatsoever.
Also, I must admit, I'm not fond of Bond bedding the villain's girl at the best of times (though it's OK if it's part of the villain's plan). Here, Bond's ex-girlfriend Paris is married to Carver, and the film does its darnedest to convince us that her adultery is entirely forgivable: Carver seems to have a roving eye; he has his sights on Yeoh; plus, he later has his wife murdered without much compunction. Nevertheless, Paris climbing into bed with Bond fairly easily didn't sit well with me. The film has its highlights - Pryce doing his best, an enjoyable cameo from an expert in making murders look like accidents ("torture is more of a hobby") and well-known English character actors popping up in walk-on parts (is that Hugh Bonneville? And Pip Torrens?). Nevertheless, my overall impression of the film was that it was somewhat dull. Not, in this case, what the people wanted.
During my two weeks' mini-quarantine I rewatched all Brosnan's Bond films with the exception of The World Is Not Enough, which I'd already rewatched a year or so ago (maybe you can guess why). As a result, I've been able to come up with a highly personal ranking of them, which admittedly has little to do with Brosnan himself and more with how the other characters work for me:
1 Goldeneye The first and the best, it has that special Bond feel which (through no fault of his) was missing from Licence To Kill with Timothy Dalton. The villain twist actually works and gives the villain a half-decent motive for once. Izabella Scorupco is a somewhat shouty but classy Bond girl who manages to be competent without being superwoman. The supporting cast is top notch. We have the late German actor Gottfried John with his expressive countenance as Russian strong man Ourumov - his reaction to Bond crossing a room while taking cover behind a moving shelf filled with canisters of explosive gas is priceless. Famke Janssen is the handsome bad girl Xenia Onatopp who gets off on violence (her own), and then there's Boris, for whom I am prepared to forgive Alan Cumming a lot, including a campy James I in Doctor Who - he truly is invincible. Add to that a triumphant introduction of Judi Dench as the new M and Samatha Bond as Moneypenny, Robbie Coltrane as a fun Russian gangster and one of the best Bond theme songs, sung by none other that Tina Turner. The tank chase dragged a bit for me, though.
2 Die Another Day Most real Bond fans hate this film, and it's probably largely because of its poor reception that the regrettable "reboot" happened. But I think it's a hoot! I've never hankered for Bond films to be realistic. With extravagant ingredients such as an ice palace and a plastic surgeon that can change your ethnicity, you're propelled into a parallel world where it's easier to swallow plot points which would have seemed outrageous in a more realistic setting. Also, I think Toby Stephens does a really good job as the villain Gustav Graves - he plays the part straight, and I appreciate that. Halle Berry doesn't quite work as Bond girl Jinx - why did she kill that doctor, if she is simply an NSA agent? - but she's no disaster, and Rosamund Pike as the icy Miranda Frost is perfect. Yes, the dialogue could be better, the invisible car is a little silly (though it's never really bothered me) and M has to be a perfect fool not to realise who the mole in her organisation is. Nevertheless, this is a hugely enjoyable watch.
3 The World Is Not Enough What, only third place, in spite of Robert Carlyle playing the villain? The problem is, the bad guy in question is an international terrorist with a bullet lodged in his brain which will finally kill him and, as it eats itself in, cuts off his nerves so he doesn't feel pain. I know, ewww. The premise is yucky and even Carlyle has trouble carrying off the bullet-in-brain look. Also, it has to be said, he's not at the top of his villain game in this film, though he does nail a few lines, conveying the pain in "He was a good lover?" and the bitterness in "The world is yours - have fun with it". A waste.
It's still a good film though: Sophie Marceau walks away with it as the, as it turns out, ironically named Elektra. She is very attractive, and boy does she know it - happily, a certain pouting self-regard fits well with the character. Brosnan is convincingly and understandably frazzled, we see quite a lot of M, and Coltrane is back, which is nice. OK, so Denise Richards is not entirely convincing as nuclear scientist Dr Christmas Jones (in mini-shorts), but she's mainly there so that Bond can have someone to get together with at the end, and I did snigger at the Christmas joke.
4 Tomorrow Never Dies It is a truth universally acknowledged that any Bond film in possession of a villain must be in want of the very best talent villain-actordom has to offer - only to then squander it completely. Jonathan Pryce is another favourite actor of mine, and after a somewhat too scenery-chewing introduction he's very watchable as villainous media mogul Elliot Carver. However, even in a Bond context, it's near impossible to suspend disbelief regarding his motives. That Carver abuses his power in some ways - such as featuring stories of Mad Cow Disease so prominently because he is bribed by the French - I could readily believe. But media moguls, even the far from saintly ones, would not dream of starting wars just to boost sales. This is why villains who are military men, spies or criminals work rather better in Bond films - they have already been taught to disregard human life in a smaller context, so the leap is not as big for them when they branch out and threaten large parts of the world population. This is a plot which could have done with the outlandish settings of Die Another Day, but here, they're mostly unglamorous, though I did enjoy the few glimpses of Hamburg. Michelle Yeoh is a gutsy Chinese agent, but it's entirely unconvincing that she and Bond hook up at the end: they have no romantic spark whatsoever.
Also, I must admit, I'm not fond of Bond bedding the villain's girl at the best of times (though it's OK if it's part of the villain's plan). Here, Bond's ex-girlfriend Paris is married to Carver, and the film does its darnedest to convince us that her adultery is entirely forgivable: Carver seems to have a roving eye; he has his sights on Yeoh; plus, he later has his wife murdered without much compunction. Nevertheless, Paris climbing into bed with Bond fairly easily didn't sit well with me. The film has its highlights - Pryce doing his best, an enjoyable cameo from an expert in making murders look like accidents ("torture is more of a hobby") and well-known English character actors popping up in walk-on parts (is that Hugh Bonneville? And Pip Torrens?). Nevertheless, my overall impression of the film was that it was somewhat dull. Not, in this case, what the people wanted.
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)
