It was a studio mandated ending. Glenn Close fought against it, but test audiences were disappointed that there was no final confrontation. It was the "Madame Butterfly" ending. As Dan had grabbed a knife during one of their encounters, Alex uses that knife to take her own life. The police show up and take Dan away. Beth finds a tape that essentially gives Dan an alibi as Alex says she is going to take her own life. I get that the ending is a little bit of a Slasher Movie trope, but it works for the general audience. :D I like both endings, but from a storytelling perspective, the Madame Butterfly ending is a stronger narrative choice.
This is much my favorite Western. What I like most about it is the way people's back stories can be discerned without being explicitly spelled out. For instance, in the scene where Rans asks Halley to read from a book and she is ashamed that she cannot. Pete and Nora also display shame at her illiteracy. Think how much that tells us. She addresses them by their first names, but they raised her. They were responsible for her education and were unable too fulfill that. Halley herself must have been orphaned as a young girl and Pete and Nora took her in and raised her as their own. We can see all of that just from the downcast looks they give when she is embarrassed. I think that is terrific movie making. One time, Orson Welles was asked who some of his influences had been as a director. He replied, "I'm partial to the old masters. By which I mean John Ford, John Ford, and John Ford."
The 1979 theatrical version was essentially unfinished. If that's what you saw, you saw the worst version of the film. The sfx came in late and there was no time to edit it, so all of it was spliced in. This means that all character development was cut out. The version that was released a couple of years ago is closer to what Wise intended. Which version did you watch?
I watched “The Directors Edition” on Paramount Plus. I also read that this was a very strange development for the movie as well…especially since it was supposed to be a TV series? If that’s true, then that also explains why everyone seems really thin…they were expecting to develop them as new episodes came out. But I’ve heard from most Trekkies that the next one is really good so I’m looking forward to that.
Thank you for bringing this film to our attention. I've known of this film for such a long time but failed to get around to watching it. I guess I felt the subject matter didn't matter because I was too young to appreciate it. But now, at nearly 70 years old I guess it's time I watched it. I liked your comments. Thank you. L/s
Not a bad review for someone who doesn't know Chinese history or culture. I love this film for all it's layers. The more you know, the more interesting it becomes. But given the current state of social politics in the US, I'm surprised you chose now to review it. 🙂 ;-) ::POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD:: The main character is Daiyi: "I am by nature a boy..." (gr**ming warning, here.) Chinese Opera was only performed by men. It took years of pain & suffering to become a great performer. The students are being conditioned to endure times of hardship. Xiaolu and Daiyi endure to become a famous actors. Daiyi is renown for his depiction of the concubine in the classic opera: "Farewell My Concubine." (It's helpful to know the story in the actual opera -- it explains a lot. fyi: it's available on RU-vid.) Xiaolu thinks Daiyi is taking his female role too seriously. Meanwhile, Juxian is a *real* woman who is also a tragic figure. That's why she's in the story. Next time you watch it, pay attention to the sounds in the background -- you'll hear certain sounds used, repeatedly. They have meaning.
There were two reasons I wanted to watch this: it was released on the Criterion Collection recently and Zero is into Asian cinema and I thought this would be a great idea…not realizing he’s seen in a number of times and had no interest seeing it again. I had no idea what the movie was about and, now that you mention U.S. politics, it’s an interesting parallel. And honestly, it will be real interesting watching this again when I get the Criterion 4K and check out the actual play and get more info on the time period. And I will certainly take your thoughts in mind when I see it again.
IMO "The Birds" is OK. It has good performances by Suzanne Pleshette, Rod Taylor and Tippi Henren in that order IMO. It's a shallow picture really but occasional interesting scenes. That's briefly how I see it anyway and I am not really a Hitchcock fan. I have to say however that the scene where the birds start forming behind Tippi Henren when she is smoking is IMO the best scene in the film. It's the suspense starting, the timing, the silence and her suddenly realizing that is masterful for me. It's meant to be surrealistic, surely. It works for me and the scene where Midge finds his former girlfriend dead is very moving. All in all it has its moments.
I said it in the review but I’ll say it again: I’m a Hitchcock fan but I’m also not a horror fan at all. And this was clearly a horror film through and through. I know there are fans of this film who think it’s great but I’m willing to say that it’s likely that I’m not a fan of horror that I don’t enjoy this movie as much as others.
It’s an accurate representation of 1962, its release. People were more civilized then so their mild flirtation and her tracking him down is the innocence of the time. I think Hitchcock’s best films are Psycho and Vertigo. This one was ok. People weren’t scared of other people back then. Tippi wasn’t an actress of much depth for sure though. I like how it started when she got there so your left with no explanation wondering if she somehow brought it about or what. You’re left to come up with your own conclusions. The Birds II: Land’s End was awful making this look better.
Like I said on the review, if that was part of the times I’ll own that so that’s fair. But I guess it’s my general dislike for horror that made this a bad watch for me (since this rates pretty high on Letterboxd and IMDb)
🤣❤ This review is the best! Made my morning! AAaaaahhhhh, birds! Birds! The scenery/town is good, though. You're right. It's a 60+ movie, though, so... 🤷♀️ Yeah.
He didn't shoot him in the back. You need to watch that scene again, although it is my opinion, based on the way Liberty moves when he is shot, that Tom actually missed and it really was Ransom Stoddard who shot Liberty Valance.
You would think with comic book (well, used to at least) and horror movies being so popular and making so much money, making a Constantine movie would be a no brainer.
It's a very entertaining movie, not boring. Was it a bit of camp? Yes, but the overacting and over the top performance of Faye Dunaway carries this movie.
I get why some people do like this movie and I’m willing to bet Dunaway is why. And people I know who recommended this to me also love the campiness and over the top nature of the film. But I guess I’m no fan of camp.
The biggest problem I have with LTK is the motive for Bond to resign is so trite. I know defenders say he was really compelled by Della's death to go rogue but that's vaguely implied. As bad as Die Another Day was, I think Bond's motivation for going rogue made sense and that's being burned and proving his innocence. I would have preferred a mission going wrong, Felix getting injured along the way, and Bond ultimately resigning because the British Government would cut and run. Unfortunately, Bond wasn't given a complex scenario. Despite all that, was the film good? Yeah, it's decent. Sanchez is a decent villain but not engaging, and the action is good. This is basically James Bond done by Cannon Films. So, it's a good action movie but a sub-par Bond movie.
Honestly, one of the things that nagged me after this film is “wait, are Bond and Felix THAT close?” But really, I think both Felix, his wife and Lupe were just used to make Sanchez feel even more despicable and evil…which I have to be honest worked for me. But I can see why this film may not work for someone if they really start to think about the elements that drive the story and not get caught up in the emotion of the film…like someone saying “yo that guy killed Felix? Ooohhh I hate that guy!”
@@IAmTheWizFilmClub I think the film is better in the latter half. However the drawback was, Bond never mentions Della or Felix during his campaign against Sanchez. We only get Bond on the phone with a cheerful Felix mentioning that he has his job back again. Again, the scenario in my mind would have been Bond seeing the larger picture of good vs evil.
Timothy Dalton embodied Ian Fleming’s Bond. Both films were great, especially “License to Kill” part of which was filmed at Coast Guard Sector Key West. (My first duty station). Dalton was great as a villain in “The Rocketeer”, I have all 3 films on Blu-ray and watching them brings me back when I was a kid. 👍
The biggest aggravation of this film for me is Walken as Zorin. I don't feel that he is ever really allowed to do anything beyond going through the motions. I honestly feel that Grace Jones leaves a far better impression. Walken as a Bond villain and he's entirely wasted, a shame.
Agreed. Grace Jones would have been an amazing villain in another film. And for some ungodly reason, they have a great actor like Walken playing a Bond villain and the best they can do is a campy, Goldfinger knock off?
@@IAmTheWizFilmClub Yeah, they wanted this to be Goldfinger of the 1980's but the movie has no sense of story construction. We start with microchips, Horse doping, a mundane investigation into possible corruption in City Hall, and then the extremely goofy villain project of flooding silicon valley. There is no rhyme or reason behind how this story progresses. Also, the scenes in America are shockingly low rent. Bond investigating Stacey Sutton and possible corruption in City Hall is a painful slog and it feels like something out of any generic 80's Private Detective show.
This one could have been much better than it was. What's particularly disappointing is the movie doesn't have a memorable villain or henchperson. Brad Whitaker could have been memorable but he doesn't have much screentime and he isn't given anything to do. Things move along at a good pace but little of it is true memorable. Dalton is the one who ultimately saves this movie. Licence To Kill is even less impressive and it's a shame. I love Dalton, he had the looks and the personality of Fleming's Bond. Unfortunately, he never got the scripts he deserved.
I agree the villains aren’t particularly memorable, but what I liked is that the plot was the most important element where it felt like there were many twists and turns to keep me invested, instead of most where you see who the villain is right away. But I definitely agree the villains could have been a lot better, but I do like Dalton as well and it’s going to suck to know the next one is his last.
From what I’ve seen, Moore’s films either feel like letdowns from Connerys time as Bond or people just take them as action comedy and reevaluate them like that. I prefer Connery to be honest but Moore films to me have a popcorn feel to them where if you want something light and dumb to chill to, it’ll be fine.
Most of the comedy doesn't bother me too much. But Moore had a great cold moment after the train fight, "And that's for 009." Eyebrow used, pure cold Bond.
We are going to mention this in the next episode but when we talk about the bond theme songs, we are rating them mostly on if they fit with the theme of the movie as well as if the song is good or not. I think the song is great but just seems odd as the theme since the romance isn’t all that great. I think when we do our franchise overview after No Time To Die, we will rate our favorites outside of the context of if they fit in the film or not, which this very well may be a top 5 for me.
😂 One wonders how many of these types of oldies you’ve actually seen & if ”9 to 5” and/or ”Tootsie” are amongst them? If so, make a ”contrast & compare” on all three - PLEASE 🙏!
Interesting review...though I was kind of surprised not to hear some mention of one of the most chilling endings of any movie ever made, unless I missed something in the video? I don't think I agree that having nuclear armed bombers flying around close to the Soviet Union...as envisioned in this film or in Dr Strangelove...falls under categorization of a "well trained militia"...it is much more like actually being at war, just without the final consummation of megadeaths. That is the unique insanity of nuclear war and MAD and going beyond the launch on warning hair trigger as we did in the 1960s...it is just too far beyond any kind of regular "training" that is done outside the context of nuclear war. But, that was not a big part of your review and this is not the place to hash that out..I think your review is mostly spot on. I wish more people would see this film...the central theme of losing control of the systems we create is certainly even more pertinent than it was in the 1960s.👍
I didn’t really get into too much detail about the militia part because it would have bogged the review down, but what I meant by it is that it was interesting how training soldiers so well to follow and execute orders was actually the eventual downfall in the film. It almost like we trained them so specifically and finely, our careful and meticulous training was what lead to the disaster happening. Incredibly thought provoking and scary to think about. As for the ending, I try not to spoil endings and especially felt I didn’t want to do it in this film either.
Well, I guess some men love Beethoven and some men love Mozart. Some men love Goldfinger and some men love Thunderball. I am definitely a "Thunderball"(1965) guy! I think in Thunderball James Bond formula is finally ready! Sean Connery at his very best! Fiona Volpe was a perfect bad Bond girl as well as Domino was a perfect good Bond girl! Exotic locations in Bahamas were also great! Maybe 3/3(or 4/4) of the movie was a bit problematic? Too long underwater scenes and changing the speed of the film(Bond vs. Largo fight)...
Exactly. Bond is a film franchise that caters to different tastes of action or spy film lovers. Which is what’s surprising me now about watching all the Bonds week by week…it seems that they cater to different tastes when originally I thought the formula was entirely rigid. There are some parts that are, but there is a lot of wiggle room for tone and other things.
