Author: Marc Sanders

DIRTY HARRY

By Marc S. Sanders

The very first R rated film I ever saw was Dirty Harry. I was probably 7 or 8 when my brother introduced me to it, and it eventually led to my first R rated film to see in the theatres, Sudden Impact, the fourth film in the series.

The original installment had such an influence on me, and it remains as one of my favorite films. I did not necessarily understand at the time the complex, albeit simplistic summary, of the law and the barriers Harry Callahan breaks to get the bad guy. I was more impressed with the 44 Magnum he carried and sociopathic behavior of the serial killer, Scorpio.

All these years later, followed by numerous viewings, and I’m just grateful director Don Siegel’s film was actually made. Had it been considered today for a treatment, it would have never come to light. The film is too candid and frank in its liberties of racist undertones and the underworld of a seedy San Francisco during the 1970s. Harry just didn’t care about the sensitivity of any demographic. He also just didn’t care about what was at stake to capture a hardened, dangerous, apathetic killer. Arguably, and only in the fictional world of film, audiences were probably grateful for that. Cut the bullshit. We all know who the guilty party is. Let’s get him off the streets, regardless of what is mandated to avoid any further loss of life. At least through the first 4 of the 5 Dirty Harry films that has been the common theme. (I’m especially fond of Magnum Force for challenging Harry’s own code of law enforcement. There are great debates to think about in that film.)

Dirty Harry is a deliberately ugly film. Siegel shows the worst of people at times, including Harry. Yet, there are sick people on the streets like actor Andy Robinson’s Scorpio killer that treat murder, mayhem and extortion as a twisted game of insane pleasure. Robinson was perfect in this role, a precursor I thought for Heath Ledger’s Joker many years later. Only a guy like Dirty Harry Callahan is right to nab a guy like this.

The film offers great moral questioning on the rights of men whether they are clearly the culprit or not. Miranda and several amendments are appropriately referenced and questioned. Is it ever appropriate to exercise brute force on a suspect? Can a near impossible scenario justify any actions of that measure? “Well then the law’s crazy,” Harry says. Even by today’s standards you can’t help but wonder if Harry is right.

What would be Harry’s opinion of today’s ongoing theme of domestic abuse among NFL athletes? Fair trials, and innocent until proven guilty are necessary but (at least this is how I feel) the circumstances of these stories make it abundantly clear that the guy did it. He beat his girlfriend into oblivion. The evidence is so much easier to uncover these days. It’s easy for me to say this from the comfort of my own home and not on a jury box. What would Harry think? He always knew to see beyond the bullshit. Heck, if I ever got a chance to interview the guy, all he’d probably tell me is get out of here. He’s got work to do. Harry Callahan was never up for sharing anyway.

DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER

By Marc S. Sanders

Director Guy Hamilton (Goldfinger) returns to helm Sean Connery’s final portrayal of 007 in the EON Productions series with Diamonds Are Forever. Unfortunately, this film doesn’t even come close to measuring up to Hamilton’s prior effort.

Little regard is offered to the shocking ending of the prior installment, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. A quick opening has Bond tossing Blofeld (head of SPECTRE, here played gleefully by Charles Grey) into a lava pit. Following Shirley Bassey’s pretty good theme song, 007 is assigned to acquire diamonds that are getting smuggled from the mines of South Africa and intercepted by a beautiful American red head named Tiffany Case (Jill St. John, who is pretty fun in the role). Only problem is that nearly every person the diamonds pass through ends up dead by the homosexual henchmen Mr. Kidd & Mr. Wendt. Considering the sexual tête-à-tête the Bond films became known for by the 7th film, Hamilton and company play up these guys like a weird joke in their inflection with one another, and even the fact that they hold hands at times. The music resorts to a mischievous note on the saxophone. In 1971, this might have held for a good laugh. In the PC era, it really doesn’t feel appropriate to imply these assassins are disturbing simply because they’re gay.

Eventually, the pursuit of said diamonds moves to Las Vegas where some silly Smokey & The Bandit (which was not even close to being released yet) humor occurs. Bond pilots a moon buggy through the Nevada desert while cars that are chasing him fall apart and flip over against the sandy terrain. More silly car chases happen in the heart of Vegas. The sheriff and his men are turned into Keystone Cops. It’s a little too much slapstick actually.

Still, why the need for the diamonds and what does a mysterious, unseen, wealthy man named Willard Whyte (Jimmy Dean) have to do with it?

Bond films work best when the villains work. There’s not much given from a powerhouse villain here like there was in Goldfinger. The necessary shootout ending occurs on an oil tanker this time, and Bond is hardly threatened or under much duress. Thus, killing any kind of suspense.

Connery is fine but you can also tell his commitment is hardly in the role. He’s working just enough for a paycheck-reportedly collecting a record million dollars to return to the role one more time.

By the time the film ends, you feel ready for a drastic change in the franchise. The ‘60s camp is over with. Disco seventies is here. So you wish that 007 can make a smooth transition to the changing cultural times. We would have to wait and see what producers Harry Saltzman & Albert Broccoli could do next to reinvigorate the franchise.

ON HER MAJESTY’S SECRET SERVICE

By Marc S. Sanders

Director Peter Hunt was awarded the opportunity to take the James Bond franchise in a double curve ball direction with 1969’s On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. For the first time in the Eon Productions series, helmed by Harry Saltzman & Albert Brocolli, the role of Bond is recast with George Lazenby. Plus-what’s this? 007 falls in love????

Lazenby is serviceable in the role, seeming to have a taller and more slender appearance than his predecessor (Sean Connery), and not a huge departure in looks. Still his tongue in cheek pun delivery is no match for the original Bond.

OHMSS is a bit hit and miss. The fight scenes look great as the film starts off with Bond fending off a couple of thugs on the beach and a later downhill ski chase is exhilarating and well edited. Telly Savalas also works as a different kind of Blofeld (replacing Donald Pleasence as the cat loving villain). I just wonder why the long middle act was so cheesy, almost like a bad episode of “Batman” or “Star Trek.” The swinging ’60s might have been coming to a close but James Bond was not ready to put it behind him.

After the first third of the story establishes a love story between Bond and Tracy (Diana Rigg as the daughter of Draco, a competing criminal mastermind of Blofeld & SPECTRE), the super spy is off to Piz Gloria, a lodge located on the highest snowy mountain of Switzerland.

Bond goes undercover as a genealogist (I really don’t know why) while looking not the least bit macho in a ruffled shirt with a kilt and knee high socks adorned with red bows. It’s hard to accept James Bond in this image. I couldn’t imagine Connery adopting this get up.

At the lodge Bond uncovers a stupid plot orchestrated by Blofeld where he’s brainwashing a group of swinging girls to, I think, poison the world populace with makeup kits, or maybe bomb the population. I’m not sure exactly.

Eventually, and thankfully, Bond makes an escape in a well shot ski scene while being pursued by Blofeld and his men. It’s a fun sequence.

This film takes some odd turns. Per the prior entry, “You Only Live Twice,” Bond and Blofeld come face to face. Here, it is as if they never met before. Why the neglect for what’s already been established?

It’s also a bit curious to see Bond fall in love and (SPOILER ALERT) marry Tracy, especially when the franchise is breaking in a new actor for audiences to get used to. Were they thinking new actor means new kind of Bond?

No question OHMSS stands out from the rest of the franchise for the change in casting but also the odd story turns it takes. Not to mention, it has the most somber ending of all Bond films.

It’s worth a look even if it is not the best in the series.

I’ll be interested to see what Lazenby does in future films with the role…oh wait…. Nevermind.

NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD

By Marc S. Sanders

There’s no question that George A. Romero’s 1968 classic Night Of The Living Dead is a pioneering film in horror and suspense. Without it, we don’t get The Walking Dead or World War Z or Pride & Prejudice & Zombies or endless shoot em up gore filled video games that turn our minds to mush.

Romero’s film is not a favorite of mine but I can’t deny its importance or the merits that got the film into the National Film Registry.

A young couple approach a grave to pay respect and leave flowers. In the background is a man walking oddly who then unleashes a terrorizing pursuit of them. One of them manages to get away and eventually take refuge with others in a nearby isolated house.

The leader of this group known as Ben, manages to board up every door and window. Fortunately, the television works and newscasts inform us of a government response to an epidemic of mass killings from “flesh eating ghouls” otherwise known as the dead coming back to life. The word “zombie” is never used in this film (though I do recall a dame calling The Three Stooges zombies in one of their classic shorts). Debates then arise as to whether these survivors make a run for it, stay put or hide in the basement.

Romero really could care less about any of his characters. He cares most about his new invention of monster; not a vampire or a mummy or even a creature from the black lagoon. The most developing dimension he offers is to go from showing one ghoul to showing 50 ghouls all at once with the barriers of the house coming apart and the attempts at escape unexpectedly coming undone.

He also doesn’t much care for explaining the science of this horror. Sure the ghouls eat flesh but did you know what else they do? They pick up rocks to break windows and stab their prey with gardening tools. Go figure!

It all works, especially with the government news footage set against a Washington DC backdrop. Look! The Capital! Put an actor in a military uniform, carrying a briefcase and have him get in and out of a black sedan, and now you’re convinced this is some serious shit you’re dealing with here.

I imagine it especially worked more effectively in 1968 amid the fears of a nuclear apocalypse and presidential assassinations, along with men in space and on the moon covered by monotone news reports. Then again, maybe this was just drive in movie escapism spoof from all that serious stuff. If Romero had the unlimited funds, he might have coaxed Walter Cronkite to headline the intermittent news stories and updates. Cronkite would have advised us best on how to dispatch an undead marauder. “A single shot to the head is what the General advises,” Cronkite would have emphasized.

For film aficionados and students, Night Of The Living Dead is necessary material to cover. Much of fear and suspense is simply covered by crowding a caption with people in dirty, loose fitting clothes (monster makeup was too expensive for Romero’s budget). Since it’s a black and white film, go with chocolate sauce for blood like Hitchcock did, and have your monster chomp on a turkey leg. Yup! The audience will buy that is an elbow or a knee, perhaps.

Night Of The Living Dead is also a significant piece for its main protagonist, Ben, played by Duane Jones, one of the first African American heroes to lead a film. Race is never acknowledged here which is hard to believe amid the prominent racial tensions of the sixties. Yet here is a character (albeit two dimensional like everyone else in the film) that audiences of the time accepted without any consideration for his appearance despite being the only black character in the film. The zombie plague seems to have only affected the white populace of Pennsylvania. It’s refreshing to see Jones carry through with the role. He takes it all seriously, and you pay attention to his commitment even if he’s just hammering a nail into a board.

The other surprise to me is that I’d never heard a mention of the ending to this film. It comes out of nowhere and is certainly never implied and yet your jaw drops. You’re either gonna die laughing at it, or maybe you’ll think it’s tragic, or maybe you’ll hate it. One thing for sure it reminds me again that Romero loves his flesh eating ghouls much more than he ever cared for his heroes.

YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE

By Marc S. Sanders

James Bond is murdered in a murphy bed!!!!

Thereafter, he ventures off to Japan to uncover who is capturing American & Russian spacecraft in an effort to pit the two countries in a global war. 007 already has his suspicions. Could it be SPECTRE?

In Sean Connery’s 5th outing as the super spy, Roald Dahl (yes, the same guy who wrote James & The Giant Peach and Charlie & The Chocolate Factory) pens the script for You Only Live Twice, a story that finally reveals the architect in charge of the terrorist organization. His name is Ernst Stavro Blofeld. Donald Pleasence appears as the man with the white cat, long before he chased after slasher Michael Myers every October 31st. “Austin Powers” films have taken all of the shock & awe away from this Blofeld. You can’t help but see Dr. Evil when Pleasence appears.

Still, there is so much to be impressed with. Producers Harry Salzman & Albert Brocolli throw all the money into this film with a hidden fortress beneath a giant volcano, plus gorgeous footage of the Orient, as well as in simulated outer space and underwater, for the secret agent’s funeral.

The first two thirds are fast paced storytelling as Bond encounters one informant or enemy after another. He even gets into a great brawl with the grandfather of Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson. A large sofa makes a great battering weapon.

Regrettably, the movie languishes very unnecessarily into a silly subplot where Bond has to disguise himself as a Japanese man (Mickey Rooney may have looked better in Breakfast At Tiffany’s), learn how to be a ninja in four days (ummmmm…why????), and get married to a Japanese woman (again…..why?????). This apparently is all necessary to raid the hidden volcano fortress. Yeah. It’s ridiculous and you can almost see how ridiculous Connery thinks this is. One of Dahl’s everlasting gobstoppers might have been more useful.

Fortunately, the film redeems itself very well in its ending with an explosive battle between ninjas and henchmen. Bond serves the biggest henchman to some quick eating piranhas. That’s pretty fun.

You Only Live Twice is a gigantic production of grand indulgence largely thanks to the success of 007’s four prior large screen adventures. It’s got big moments, cool gadgets like “Little Nellie” and some unexpected surprises too.

It’s good entertainment.

THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY

By Marc S. Sanders

Sergio Leone closes out his Dollars trilogy with the epic The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly, respectfully portrayed by screen legend Clint Eastwood, tough as nails Lee Van Cleef and one of the great scene stealers, Eli Wallach.

It’s clear from the start that Leone had at least triple the budget he had when he made A Fistful Of Dollars. This installment offers broad landscapes, gutted out old west towns, locomotives, and an infinite amount of extras to capture an extraordinary Civil War battle over a bridge.

For the three main characters, the Macguffin is $200,000 buried in a grave, yet each one knows a different piece of information relative to its location.

Eastwood’s quiet temperament takes a back seat to Wallach’s boorish ugly bandit and the film stays on a fast pace trajectory because of it. Wallach is given great moments whether he’s hanging by a noose or taking a bath (“If you’re gonna shoot, shoot. Don’t talk.”) It is one of the all time great roles.

While Van Cleef was a huge attraction in a For A Few Dollars More, he surprisingly isn’t given much material here. That’s okay though. He makes the most of what he’s given and again he plays the man in black as cold and calculating. I’d like to uncover more films with Van Cleef. Such an interesting guy with as great a voice as say James Earl Jones or Morgan Freeman. Fortunately for him the Dollars films revived his career following a bout with alcoholism.

Eastwood just does his thing, and it’s great entertainment to see him in a standoff followed by a twirl of his pistol back in his holster. He just has such a presence. The legend he’s become was truly recognized with The Man With No Name.

Leone recruits Ennio Morricone to compose what has become one of the most recognized scores in film history. The whistle harmonica that pursues the three players is as familiar as Monty Norman’s James Bond Theme or John Williams Jaws opening. Morricone is fortunately still working and he is partnering up with Quentin Tarantino again (first time with The Hateful Eight) on his upcoming film Once Upon A Time In Hollywood. It makes sense really. The Good, The Bad & The Ugly is one Tarantino’s favorite films.

Leone made a gorgeous looking film. It’s any wonder that his resume consists of only 9 films altogether.

Sergio Leone was an inspiring master filmmaker and it’s easy to recognize elements of his films that appear to have inspired some of the greatest box office hits of present day. Funny, but whenever I see Eastwood blow an outlaw away with no questions asked, what comes to mind is Han Solo taking out Greedo in an off the map, lawless cantina. Those that know me, know what a high compliment that is for Leone’s efforts.

FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE

By Marc S. Sanders

The bloody landscape of the Wild West continued in Sergio Leone’s second chapter of his Dollars trilogy. For A Few Dollars More improves upon the first installment, A Fistful Of Dollars. The plot is cleaner and joining Clint Eastwood’s Man With No Name is a very cool fellow bounty hunter dressed in black. Lee Van Cleef plays Colonel Mortimer, a former soldier armed with an array of weapons.

Mortimer and the Man form an uneasy alliance in order to track down the vicious Indio and his gang. The prize $10,000 for just Indio; a whole lot more for the entire gang.

Leone reminds audiences of the techniques he used in the first film. Yet he makes the tension grander with cut away close ups at his gunslingers’ eyes before a quick draw. A great middle moment occurs with a bank robbery. Leone strategically uses sharp edits on Eastwood, Van Cleef, Indio’s gang, the exteriors of the bank and the precious vault inside. Accompanied with Ennio Morricone’s whistler ballads, Leone continues his back and forth close ups of all involved in the scene only he speeds up the edits to build more tension and suspense. Finally, the scene is blown wide open with a moment I never expected. Great fun.

Eastwood does not invent anything new here. His costume is even the same as before. That’s the legendary image and that’s fine by me. Van Cleef is especially good. A real scene stealer with his crackling voice that tells of a past where his Mortimer character protected his boundaries by being the sharpshooter that he is.

Watching this for the first time only tells me that action films today work too hard throwing everything at you. Films today often don’t give enough about the character or the heroes. You don’t see what makes them tick. You don’t see a raw talent to the character. In this film, it is quick draw gunslinging. Look for a great scene where The Man and Mortimer meet for the first time in a quick draw duel of wits at night in the center of town. When you see how good they are with a six shooter, you believe it all.

Today, a hero’s talent is inherited by something gone awry normally. Leone leaves the mystery open as to how guys like Mortimer and The Man With No Name acquired their abilities. Why waste time on character background? Let’s just see what these cowboys can do.

A FISTFUL OF DOLLARS

By Marc S. Sanders

Sergio Leone’s A Fistful Of Dollars is a pioneering classic. It set the standard for the spaghetti western. It made Clint Eastwood a household name and it set a trend for tension filled violence in cinema often imitated by directors like Robert Rodriguez (Desperado) and Quentin Tarantino (Kill Bill, Django Unchained), as well as even Clint Eastwood (Dirty Harry, High Plains Drifter, Unforgiven, Magnum Force) who regarded Leone as well as director Don Siegel as his inspirations and teachers in filmmaking.

The set up is simple. A desolate town plagued by two warring factions is met by the antihero, only known as The Man With No Name (Eastwood). The Man plays the best interests of the Mexican Rojas family against the Baxter family. In the midst of it all, he continues to collect bounties from both sides.

Leone seems to have invented trademark shots that have become routine staples in films like the protagonist appearing from behind a cloud of smoke, the zoom in camera during a quick draw duel, the surprise survival against the odds, and even the memorable one liner (“Get three coffins ready”…”My mistake. Four.”).

It’s exciting entertainment and it paved the way for a different kind of western. The good guy no longer rides a horse named Trigger while dressed in white. Here he welcomes the violence because he knows he’s the only who can eliminate the threat of bloodshed.

Eastwood’s character is a man of few words to keep the viewer curious. Where does he come from? Who is he? How long has he been traveling? It’s one of the all time great movie characters that leads threads hanging and inspired future favorites like Dirty Harry, Rambo, Wolverine, Neil McCauley (Michael Mann’s Heat played by Robert DeNiro), Batman and even Boba Fett, as well as some early Han Solo.

The first of the trailblazing Dollars trilogy still holds up despite the dubbed in English of most of the players. They might be hard to understand at times. Yet the craftsmanship of Sergio Leone makes sure all the elements are easy to follow with seamless control of the camera.

A great Western.

THUNDERBALL

By Marc S. Sanders

Director Terence Young returns to direct the most auspicious James Bond adventure yet, Thunderball from 1965.

SPECTRE’s Number 2 officer, Largo (Adolfo Celi) captures a British jet carrying two nuclear bombs, and demands England pay 100 million pounds or he will destroy a location in Europe and the United States. Bond is on the mission heading to Nassau, Bahamas to stop Largo (complete with evil voiceover and eyepatch), and recover the plane with the bombs.

The crystal blue sea of the islands allow for a huge undertaking of underwater footage complete with sharks and fight scenes with fists, knives and spear guns. It remains dazzling how well the footage is. Bond (Sean Connery, actually underwater) is there, easily disarming countless SPECTRE agents.

A great centerpiece scene occurs when Bond gets trapped in Largo’s swimming pool with a thug and three sharks to contend with. All this while Largo covers the surface of the pool with a steel sheet. The moment seems inescapable, and Young shoots a memorably suspenseful action piece.

Connery maintains that smooth, suave composure that audiences became accustomed to in his three prior outings, even if his hairpiece is noticeable and his girth is a little wider. On the beach, Bond takes out a bad guy with a spear to the chest and utters the line “I think he got the point.” It’s perfect delivery for 007.

The girl this time around is Domino (Claudine Auger). She is not the most memorable. A beautiful redhead who is not given much to do, even with Bond.

While the underwater camera work is marvelous, Thunderball is not ranked near the best in the series. It feels a little long even when the action scenes are occurring.

Still, Bond continues to hold up as does the curiosity of SPECTRE. Just who is the man with the white cat? We’ll just have to wait and see I guess.

FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE

By Marc S. Sanders

Terence Young returns to direct the second installment in the James Bond franchise, From Russia With Love.

Sean Connery is back as 007 and he is assigned to escort the beautiful Russian Tatiana Romonava with the Lektor, a secret Soviet computer.

Tatiana (Daniela Bianchi, one of the most beautifully charming Bond girls) claims to be wanting to defect, but she is under duress from the terrorist organization SPECTRE to trap Bond (revenge for the demise of Dr. No) and cause a conflict between England and Russia.

Ian Fleming’s story is deeply rooted in the Cold War climate of the mid 1960s. It only makes sense that SPECTRE, with leadership from the mysterious Blofeld, would become a formidable opponent to Bond. Moments like the Cuban Missile Crisis and other events of the time were on everyone’s mind. I imagine it was easy to relate to in this film.

The story primarily takes place in one of Fleming’s most favorite known locales, Istanbul, Turkey. Young has great shots within enormous cathedrals and museums and even underground in 16th century tunnels, as well as outdoors on the ferry. It’s a fascinating, scenic tour.

Connery is at his best here. He looks great in his fitted suits, letting the suave and dry humor of Bond come naturally. 007 even disapproves of one ordering red wine with fish. Yet he’s also a great player, as his chemistry with gadgets like his quick assemble sniper rifle and trick briefcase (complete with explosives, gold coins, and dagger) really works well. A great fight scene aboard a train against Red Grant (Robert Shaw, in a great toughie role, nowhere recognizable compared to his later portrayal as the shark fisherman Quint in Jaws) is brutal and bare knuckled; well choreographed within the close quarters of a small train compartment.

Another killer comes in the form of Rosa Kleb (the miserly Lotte Lenya) with the shoe knife that’ll kill you in 12 seconds. She’s a lot of fun.

From Russia With Love is the most unusual of the Connery/Moore films. There’s no giant fortress for a villain, or global domination plot that is speechified to Bond over dinner.

The film is more like a Hitchcock interpretation as a pursuit is the driving force. People turn up dead just feet away from Bond and he doesn’t confront or acknowledge the villains himself. He knows they are there, but he doesn’t pick them out of the crowd. Young’s film relies on the suspense that Hitchcock introduced time and again as in North By Northwest, for example. A great scene pits Bond against an aggressive helicopter dropping grenades.

The gadgety playfully exists however, as does Bond’s chauvinism for great puns and tongue in cheek material.

The future of the franchise was looking even more promising here thanks to Connery and EON productions upping the stakes in action and more forthright innuendo.

Bond was going to be here to stay for quite a long time.