I had half a mind to go and see Quantum of Solace this weekend. The problem is that I am still not convinced by actor Daniel Craig playing the part of James Bond. It gets down to the perennial "Who is your favorite Bond?" question again. I am not saying that Daniel Craig doesn't give a good performance as Bond, I just think he misses some of the qualities that made some of the other lead actors in the role so much better.

Now some people like to argue about the character as portrayed by Ian Fleming in the original books. I have actually read a couple of the original books and my opinion is that the films are so far removed from the books of the same name as to be largely irrelevant to this argument. My own favorite Bond, along with most other people, was Sean Connery. The sardonic humour which was the hallmark of the Connery version of Bond was certainly not in the book and, being the first, he was always going to set the benchmark.

Everyone hated George Lazenby's performance, mainly I think because he wasn't Connery. I saw OHMS again on TV sometime later after the film came out and I thought it was actually not a bad Bond film overall. I think Lazenby's main problem was that he just didn't look right for the part - not enough distinctive character.

Then came Roger Moore of course. I didn't think he was too bad in the role. 'Diamonds Are Forever' is one of my favorite Bond movies, and 'Live and Let Die' wasn't too bad either. But the franchise was losing its way by then and Moore's replacement, Tim Dalton was a disaster - too dandified with no sense of toughness at all.

Thus, when Pierce Brosnon came in after something of a hiatus in the Bond story, there was much anticipation. I have to say that I thought Brosnon gave a sterling performance as Bond. The thing I liked most about Brosnon was that he bought an element of ruthlessness not previously displayed by the previous actors, including Connery. I thought it made the character much more believable (if that is the right word). Definitely the best casting since Connery in my opinion.

The common theme with all the Bonds has been that he has been played as a debonnair character - one who like his Martinis "shaken, not stirred". Bond as played by Craig has the quintessential Englishness of Bond but without Bond's sophistication. Craig's character is that of a working class tough and that, to me, may be the big problem with casting Craig in the role. I wasn't convinced by his performance in Casino Royale - its not that it was particularly a bad performance, its just that it just wasn't 'Bond'. I'm still of two minds whether I will see Quantum of Solace - the reviews don't seem particularly encouraging. If Pierce Brosnon was in it I think I would definitely go to see it - I'm still not entirely sure why they wanted to replace him in the first place.

Labels: actor, Daniel Craig, George Lazenby, James Bond, Pierce Brosnan, Quantum of Solace, Roder Moore, Sean Connery, Tim Dalton

With Christmas looming large, what perfect timing for Paramount to release a centennial celebration DVD of that all time classic, 'Sunset Boulevard'. Although a DVD of Sunset Boulevard was released in 2002 as a single disc edition, with the 100th year of Paramount coming up this new, two-disc version is packed with additional commentaries and features about the film. A full and excellent review of the collection by Jeremy Thomas, who gives it an "Amazing" 9.5 rating, can be seen at http://www.411mania.com/movies/dvd_reviews/90069/Sunset-Boulevard-(Centennial-Collection)-DVD-Review.htm

The original film, made in 1950 and directed by Billy Wilder, is one of Hollywood's all-time noir classics. I first saw the film in my early teens, part of a series of classic Hollywood films shown on TV in Britain at the time and I was completely bowled-over by it, as we say in Britain. Gloria Swanson gave a spellbinding performance as Norma Desmond, a former star of silent films who has been pushed aside and forgotten because her voice wasn't suitable for the 'talkies' that followed. Her foil in the story is Joe Gillis, a down-at-heal screenwriter trying to escape his debtors, played by that enduring Hollywood actor, William Holden. As Thomas rightly states, Holden is an "actor who gives a memorable performance against the larger-than-life role as Desmond ... a more low-key performance and, while not quite etched within the public consciousness like Swanson's, has still provided a role to be scrutinized and studied by actors for decades."

The new DVD collection, with improved video and sound over the 2002 version, has an abundance of added features including a commentary by Sunset Boulevard's author, Ed Sikov; A 23 minute feature on the production as discussed with director Billy Wilder; The score of Sunset Boulevard; The story of Paramount; a Hollywood location map; the original theatrical trailer and much much more - a total of 17 additional features, all of which are fully described in Thomas' review. All in all, this is a must have for any fan of the great Hollywood films, and for fans of those truly memorable great acting performances. I certainly know what I will be asking Santa for this Christmas!

Labels: DVD, Gloria Swanson, Paramount, Sunset Boulevard, William Holden

I was sorry to her that Joaquin Phoenix is giving up acting. In a somewhat strange interview with Extra, the reporter wasn't exactly sure whether he was joking or not - very quickly becoming obvious that he was not! (see the interview above). Apparently, he has been involved in making music videos for some time and, having learned to play guitar for his role as Johnny Cash in his hit film 'Walk the Line', he has decided to concentrate exclusively on his music career. He has recently been working on a film called "Two Lovers" with Gwyneth Paltrow and this has been confirmed by his publicist as his last film.

Funnily enough I finally got to see him in Walk the Line on TV a couple of weekends ago and I can quite see why he was nominated for an Oscar for that performance. Then again, I don't think I have ever seen him in a film where he didn't give a sterling performance. I first saw him in the Nicole Kidman film 'To Die For', playing a somewhat dim and star-struck teenager, lured into killing the Kidman character's unwanted husband - an excellent performance in itself.

Phoenix's other famous and Oscar-nominated performance was as the cruel and ruthless Roman Emperor, Commodus, in Ridley Scott's excellent 2000 historical masterpiece, 'Gladiator'. I can only imagine that his musical career will be just as successful as his acting career and I for one will miss him - that is of course if a) he isn't just playing some sort of prank after all, or b) the music thing doesn't go quite according to plan and he comes back to acting 'cos he needs the money! But, giving the benefit of the doubt, for now at least, he is certainly one of the most talented actors of the 1990s. At least for the hardened Joaquin Phoenix fans there is one more imminent chance to see him action on the silver screen. 'Two Lovers' is due for release on February 13th, 2009.

Labels: actor, Joaquin Phoenix, performance

I know this is somewhat harkening back to an earlier topic - top ten acting lists - but this is a good one - Top Ten Acting Performances by Athletes. I love this one - it is from a poll done by ESPN's 'Page 2' and the link to the original survey is at the end of this piece. Now just to warn you that I am not exactly renown as the greatest sports fan in the world so if I fail to give due deference to your favorite on-field star it is probably because I have never heard of them - for example, I know that Dan Marino was obviously some sort of sports athlete and later a commentator, but I only know this because he appears in some of those Nutrasystem weight loss adverts on TV - okay, so you now you get my level of sports knowledge!

This is Page 2's top ten pick - although the popular vote went somewhat differently:

Labels: athletes, Blazzing Saddles, Karras, Marino, Mongo, Schwarenegger, The Rock, top 10, Uecker

Now, tell me if this is just me or not, but there seems already to be a lot of speculating as to which actors and actresses might be up for an Oscar nomination this year and I am wondering if it might all be somewhat premature? It has the sort of feeling, to me at least, of going into a store in October and seeing Christmas decorations on sale! Before Halloween even!! Should there not be some sort of law against this? I know there is something of a preamble leading up to the Oscars but, surely, to begin the speculation at this early date is ridiculous.

The actual Oscar presentations are not held until the end of February (Sun 22nd, 2009), although the official screen credits forms are due in by December 1st, nomination ballots go out December 26th, and nominations polls close by 5pm on January 12th, 2009. So, my suggestion is that a law is introduced whereby stores are not allowed to sell Christmas stuff, and neither can pundits speculate about who is going to win an Oscar - until AFTER Halloween!

Just to illustrate how ridiculous such speculation is, the 'hot' topic of conversation currently is over Kate Winslet and whether she is likely to get nominated for either of her two latest films 'The Reader' and/or 'Revolutionary Road'. Nobody would deny that Kate Winslet isn't of sufficient calibre to win an Oscar but neither of these films are actually due for release until mid and late December! How speculative can you get?

Now far be it from me to deprive any Oscar-speculation fans out there just because I don't get it. So if you just can't wait until after Halloween to see why Kate Winslet and various other actors and actresses are attracting Oscar-winning interest, then it seems that the guy to go to is Scott Feinberg - described by both Variety and OscarCentral as 'first among pundits'. The following link to his latest piece on the 08 Oscar campaign - "Big Questions Emerge ...", should be enough to sate the most ardent of Academy Award speculators amongst us. Enjoy!
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/files/2008/10/big-questions-b.html

Labels: Academy Awards, actors, actress, Kate Winslet, Oscars, Scott Feinberg

Let me say from the outset, reviewing the performance of an actor or actress in a film that I haven't seen is not something I usually like to do, but going to see 'W' is just not something I can really stomach until the real thing is just a distant nightmare from the past. That said, Josh Brolin, who plays our 'glorious' leader, is by all accounts, tremendous in the role.

Now, Brolin wasn't someone who I knew anything about as an actor until this and, me being someone who is terrible with names anyway, it hadn't actually clicked with me exactly who James Brolin was. He was, of course, the hunter who became the hunted in that recent brilliant Cohen Brothers film 'No Country For Old Men'. If this blog was about directing I could wax lyrical about that film for several pages but, suffice it to say, Brolin was excellent in that film as well. He was also in the Rodreguez half of the Rodriguez/Tarantino Grindhouse double feature -'Planet Terror', again which I had seen and hadn't realised it was him.

In a great article for boxoffice.com about the film, Brolin apparently initially turned down the Bush role, "figuring anyone who wants to get a dose of the president could just turn on CNN.
The actor said he potentially had more to lose than he might gain by starring in a chancy film such as "W.," with all its expectations and preconceptions". [Can I suggest MSNBC rather than CNN - you'll learn a lot more]. That would certainly be my worry if I was him. I'm sure most actors would feel the same way. But he was prepared to take the risk and it may well pay off.

As I can't bring myself to see the performance myself I will leave you with a quote from someone who has - David Poland of The Hot Blog -
"Brolin should be nominated for the Oscar. We'll see whether the crowd around Best Actor is too big for him to crack, but it is a letter-perfect performance that looks much, much easier than most critics and audiences, I think, will understand. ... The question of the film is, 'Why?' "

Indeed. You can read the whole boxoffice.com article at:
http://boxoffice.com/reviews/2008/10/controversial-has-been-the-wat.php

Labels: 'W', actor, actors, George W Bush, Josh Brolin, performance

Only recently turned 20, Michael Cera has become one of the hottest 'teen' actors in movies following the $100 million grossing successes of the hit films 'Juno' and 'Superbad'. His appeal in his roles as the likeably shy and awkward teenager is obvious when you see him perform and would be readily identifiable to millions of teens across America.

However, Cera certainly does not crave the celebrity Hollywood lifestyle. In an interview by AP for CNN.com [http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/10/06/film.michael.cera.ap/?iref=hpmostpop], Cera makes it clear that he is far more interested in steady, enjoyable work than in stardom and commercial success. "I like being on the set and that's what's important to me about being an actor. Things change and come and go, and whatever happens happens. As long as I like it and I'm working with people I like, I'll be happy."

Cera acting career first got going in commercials, quickly followed by TV parts in Canada and then Hollywood, eventually landing a part in the critically acclaimed comedy series 'Arrested Development'. His new film, 'Nick and Nora's Infinite Playlist' opened this Friday and reprises the 'Superbad' concept of the story taking place over one long night. "The one-night idea, I think it's something that people like", he is quoted as saying in the article. "Whenever people go to a party or something, they're kind of hoping it will be a memorable night," Cera said. "It's a cool idea. Those nights are great when things just keep happening and leading to other things. It just feels like you're living."

Labels: actor, Juno, Michael Cera, movies, Nick and Nora, performance, Superbad