Category Archives: Judi Dench

Tomorrow Never Dies-1997

Tomorrow Never Dies-1997

Director Roger Spottiswoode

Starring Pierce Brosnan, Michelle Yeoh, Jonathan Pryce

Scott’s Review #1,394

Reviewed August 28, 2023

Grade: B

Pierce Brosnan made four appearances as the legendary film character, James Bond. While he gets a marginal thumbs up as a whole and is not my favorite Bond he has the ‘look’ and suave charisma.

This works in his favor and makes him purely believable with every ridiculous one-liner or flat dialogue.

Tomorrow Never Dies (1997) is the second chapter in the Brosnan book and is only marginally superior to GoldenEye made two years earlier in 1995. All bets are that the two subsequent Bond films starring Brosnan nosedive quickly.

All good Bond films must contain specific qualities like a good villain, a sexy yet strong ‘Bond girl’, dazzling stunts and chase scenes, a memorable theme song, and more than one exotic locale.

It’s just what the blueprint is and must never be broken.

Therefore, Tomorrow Never Dies feels more like the producers, and director, Roger Spottiswoode, and writer, Bruce Feirstein sought a check box checking off exercise rather than creating anything brilliant or memorable.

I deem this film rather ordinary. Not bad but not superior either falling middle of the road when compared to other Bond franchise films.

Media mogul Elliot Carver, played completely over the top by actor Jonathan Pryce wants his news empire to reach every country on the globe, but the Chinese government will not allow him to broadcast there.

Carver then decides to use his media empire to wreak war between the Western world and China. Thankfully, James Bond (Brosnan) is on the job and travels to China to stop him with the help of Chinese secret agent Wai Lin (Michelle Yeoh).

Anyone who knows a Bond film knows that the plot is secondary to the aforementioned necessary characteristics. The story either got too complicated as the film progressed or I lost interest because at some point all I recollect was a news media tycoon wanting to start World War III over television ratings.

Yeoh is an exceptional ‘Bond girl’ though the dose of progressivism, diversity, and female empowerment she brings to the table makes the term beneath her. Her charisma, and martial arts chops, make her a kick-ass rival though she naturally ends up head over heels for Bond.

Still, the lengthy scenes between Yeoh and Brosnan do contain strong chemistry as they decimate the bad guys and save the world together.

I expected a bit more from Teri Hatcher’s character of Paris Carver, a former girlfriend of Bond who is now Carver’s trophy wife. The setup was superior and the love triangle could have gone further than killing off her character after just a couple of scenes.

As great as an actor as Pryce is it’s tough to believe he’s the same actor who made films like Two Popes (2019) and The Wife (2017) so good. He turns Elliot into a caricature dead set on controlling the world proving that an actor can’t always bring a mediocre script to life.

Tomorrow Never Dies brings the viewers to lavish locations like Bangkok, China, Hamburg, Germany, and in and around London. The tone has a definitively Asian feel which works like You Only Live Twice did in 1967.

Finally, the title theme song and opening performed by Sheryl Crow is abysmal but oddly sounds much better in the version that plays over the ending credits.

I marginally recommend Tomorrow Never Dies (1997) mostly for those in the Brosnan camp which I am aware there are many.  Its best quality lies in the level of equality between Bond and the main female character Wai Lin which is another proof of how relevant the franchise remains.

J. Edgar-2011

J. Edgar-2011

Director Clint Eastwood

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Armie Hammer, Naomi Watts

Scott’s Review #1,099

Reviewed January 12, 2021

Grade: A

When director Clint Eastwood and actor Leonardo DiCaprio align, exceptional things can happen. This is evidenced by J. Edgar (2011), a compelling and well-constructed drama with a biographical and character-driven focus.

One gets inside the head and psyche of the title character, J. Edgar Hoover, the head of the Federal Bureau of Investigations, with DiCaprio playing him flawlessly.

The film is left-of-center, surprising for the mainstream director, though his film-making style is familiar. Eastwood does what he does best by constructing a slick and “Hollywood” experience.

There are not daring camera angles or unique uses of light that Stanley Kubrick might use.  He creates a steady affair that will appeal to the American heartland, getting butts to the movie theater on his name alone.

The film opens in 1919 when a young Hoover (DiCaprio) is tasked with purging radicals from the United States and obtaining their secrets, something he’d carry with him for decades. He meets a new Secretary, Helen Gandy (Naomi Watts), whom he makes an awkward pass and an even more awkward marriage proposal.

She refuses, and they become professional and personal allies.

The story then plods along with historical stops through the decades like the Lindbergh baby kidnapping, Martin Luther King Jr., and Richard Nixon.

Hoover is always involved in these escapades.

Hoover, who served as the head of the bureau from 1924 until he died in 1972, was a powerful and ruthless man.

Eastwood carefully dissects him, professionally and personally. He never married, lived with his mother, traveled, and enjoyed dinners with one man who in death, bequeathed his estate.

You do the math.

He was a gay man when one couldn’t be an openly gay man. Thus, he is conflicted, and Eastwood does a great job of showing the demons he wrestles with.

The relationship between Hoover and lawyer, Clyde Tolson (Armie Hammer) is my favorite part of J. Edgar because it’s interesting and humanistic.

DiCaprio and Hammer give outstanding performances with flawless chemistry and charisma.

When Hoover professes his love for Tolson and quickly recants his statement then professes love for an actress, we view his turmoil. He loves Tolson but cannot bear to accept it even though it would free him from his chains.

Despite the tender nature of the sequence above or that his mother was a traditional, no-nonsense, shrew, Hoover is not portrayed as a hero. He was a complicated and damaged man and Eastwood hits this point home.

He blackmailed Martin Luther King Jr., kept sexual secrets on several Hollywood stars, and participated in various abuses of power.

The film does admit that the director also instituted fingerprinting and forensic measures that reduced crime.

Those who desire a straightforward lesson in history may be slightly perturbed by the focus on Hoover’s personal life. Eastwood could have easily made Hoover’s career the only facet of the production-enough material that exists for this.

Instead, we get to see the inner workings of the man. Kudos for this.

Dustin Lance Black, who wrote Milk (2008), a portrait of a gay man, is back at the helm serving as a screenwriter. But the two films are not modeled after one another. They are very different animals.

While Milk celebrates a man refusing to deny who he and others are, demanding their just civil rights, J. Edgar provides the narrative of a man fleeing from who he is.

Offering a rich and complex biography of a tortured man, the audience is exposed to a person wrestling with inner turmoil. Hoover was a famous man, but the film could easily represent those thousands of men who could not bring themselves to accept who they were.

The largest praise goes to DiCaprio who makes us sympathize, pity, and admire the complexities of his character.

J. Edgar (2011) hits a grand slam.

Notes on a Scandal-2006

Notes on a Scandal-2006

Director Richard Eyre

Starring Judi Dench, Cate Blanchett

Scott’s Review #793

Reviewed July 23, 2018

Grade: A

A British drama centering on the world of teachers, illicit affairs, and sexuality, Notes on a Scandal (2006) is a superlative effort with thrills and drama galore.

Featuring heavyweights like Judi Dench and Cate Blanchett there is no way this film could be a dud based on the acting alone. The chemistry between the women and the carefully crafted thrills created by director, Richard Eyre, make the film a compelling joy to view- perhaps multiple times for additional entertainment.

The story is told mainly from the perspective of Barbara Covett (Dench), a rigid and bored schoolteacher nearing retirement at a comprehensive school in London, where she teaches.

Barbara is a spinster and a closeted lesbian, constantly writing in her journal for comfort- this is the main narrative of the story and is tremendously effective.

When a young and attractive art teacher, Sheba Hart (Blanchett), arrives on the scene, Barbara fancies her and is determined to get closer. After Sheba begins an illicit affair with a male student, Barbara discovers the shenanigans and uses the situation to her advantage.

The scandal results in both women’s careers being at risk as well as Sheba’s troubled home life coming to fruition.

Notes on a Scandal is a good, solid, psychological thriller/drama with enough twists and turns to compel the viewer. The film is not very long- at one hour and thirty-two minutes, there is hardly time for lagging.

The best achievements, however, are with the superior acting of the two leads. With other lesser talents, this film might have suffered from too much melodrama and not enough meat. With great acting chops, Dench and Blanchett do not let this happen and instead treat the audience to a riveting affair.

As fantastic as Blanchett is, Dench’s Barbara is the standout and takes center stage throughout the film.

Interestingly, despite both actresses being leads, Dench received an Oscar nomination for Best Actress, while Blanchett went supporting. But there is no question that both actresses deserved the praises they reaped- and then some.

Dench turns in such a delicious performance that she makes the film arguably the reason to watch it. Wearing no makeup and dressed as conservatively as imaginable, an icy stare or thoughtful gaze will run shivers up and down the viewer’s spine.

As conflict and drama unfold, Barbara proves she is nobody to be messed with. Still, the character has an underlying vulnerable quality, simply yearning for affection and love from another woman. One wonders if she has ever really had the love she deserves.

Dench is brilliant at revealing all of Barbara’s underlying nuances.

The film poses an interesting moral question that will leave some viewers undoubtedly not a fan of Sheba’s. The fact that she lusts after an underage male, Steven Connolly (Andrew Simpson), and has relations with him, while having a husband and handicapped child at home may be too much for some.

Surely, the character will not be championed by many, but I found Sheba complex and difficult to grasp. This complexity is to the filmmaker’s credit and allows for a more layered character study of both Sheba and Barbara- neither is cut and dry.

An interesting aside of the film is what if the genders of the roles were reversed? Would the film have the same effect if Sheba were a male character and Steven was a teenage girl? What if Barbara were a straight woman? What if Barbara was a gay male character?

These other possibilities left me wondering as I watched the film. Wisely, I think director Eyre got things just right.

Notes on a Scandal (2006) is a film that reminds me of a British version of Fatal Attraction (1987) meets Single White Female (1992).

The story holds elements of each and was adapted from a 2003 novel of the same name. With frightfully good performances by both Dench and Blanchett, this film is a memorable thriller not to be missed.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Judi Dench, Best Supporting Actress-Cate Blanchett, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Original Score

GoldenEye-1995

GoldenEye-1995

Director Martin Campbell

Starring Pierce Brosnan, Sean Bean, Izabella Scorupco

Scott’s Review #717

Reviewed January 19, 2018

Grade: B

By 1995, after a record six years between films, the James Bond franchise re-emerged energetically with Pierce Brosnan assuming the role of the MI6 agent-, and breathing some fresh life into the character.

The charming and suave Irish actor gave a new direction to the role last played by Timothy Dalton-an an actor who gave Bond more of a brooding quality. The resulting GoldenEye offers mixed results, though the casting is a vast improvement over its predecessor.

GoldenEye sees other monumental roles recast- that of Judi Dench as M and Samantha Bond as Miss Moneypenny.

The film has a slick look, and a compelling story, but at times is tough to follow, and overall- despite containing all the elements- something seems missing.

Or maybe I just prefer the other Bonds more? Still, the offering is far from a bad watch.

GoldenEye kicks off with, in hindsight, a major clue to the story as Bond  (Brosnan) and fellow 00 agents, Alec Trevelyan (Sean Bean), infiltrate a Soviet facility in northern Russia in 1986, searching for chemical weapons.

Alec is tragically killed by sinister Soviet General Ourumov and Bond mourns the loss of his friend.

The action resumes in present times (1995) as, now in gorgeous Monte Carlo, Bond follows the beautiful and sadistic Xenia Onatopp, a  crime syndicate member known for crushing men with her thighs. Xenia and Ourumov travel to Siberia where they destroy a bunker holding GoldenEye satellites and kill everyone except the computer programmer, Boris (Alan Cumming), and the lone survivor, Natalya  (Izabella Scorupco).

In a clever twist, it is revealed that Alec has betrayed British Intelligence and is himself leading the crime syndicate.

In one of the quietest, and best scenes, Bond and M have an interesting exchange in her office as M (a woman) calls Bond out on his arrogance and chauvinism, and states that it is a new day.

Dench adds a ton of female modernism into the role (about time in 1995) as Bond now reports to a woman. The scene is important as it leads the two characters to achieve mutual respect and arguably parlays the franchise into a new, more female-empowering direction.

A great positive to GoldenEye is the setting, which I think does wonders for the film as a whole- the bitter, blustery, Siberian set gives a soothing feeling, especially while watching the film during the ravages of winter, snug with a warm blanket and heaters.

Regardless, the sets are realistic, never cheesy, and loaded with atmosphere- so the film itself looks wonderful.

Issues abound with the frenetic pacing of the film- at times I found myself losing track of the action or the sequence of events.

Understandably, as in many Bond films, events circle the globe and, surely London, Russia, and Monte Carlo are great locations, but especially within the film’s final climax, I suffered from sensory overload.

Furthermore, Brosnan is not one of my favorite Bonds. Sure, he has the charisma, the looks, and the charm to pull off the role, but something about him does not measure up to Sean Connery, Roger Moore, George Lazenby, or Daniel Craig- certainly he supersedes Timothy Dalton.

Don’t get me wrong- I do not despise him as Bond, but nothing stands him out against the others either.

The villains in GoldenEye are perfectly adequate if not spectacular. Sean Bean gives Alec a sly, aww shucks appeal and defines good-looking, but his motivations for switching sides are not very exciting- something about Nazis in World War II, the Cossacks, and revenge are quickly mentioned, but it doesn’t much matter.

General  Ourumov is effective- with his sinister look, he is the perfect Bond villain. Xenia is little more than a cartoon character (with the name to boot) and her gimmick quickly wears thin.

Finally, Cummings as the programmer is played only for laughs, and his final chant of “I am invincible!” as he freezes into solid ice is mildly humorous.

The title theme song, “GoldenEye”, performed by Tina Turner is forgettable at best and one of the most lackluster in the illustrious musical catalog.

GoldenEye has many of the standard Bond elements within its frames and is a decent entry in the franchise. With the debut of a new Bond, the film has a fresh and very modern and technical feel to it that, along with a fantastic setting, overlooks some flaws in the storytelling.

Filled with bombast and a crowd-pleasing method, GoldenEye (1995) is hardly the best Bond film, but not the worst.

A Room with a View-1986

A Room with a View-1986

Director James Ivory

Starring Helena Bonham Carter, Julian Sands

Scott’s Review #695

Reviewed November 3, 2017

Grade: B+

A Room with a View (1986) is one of four major films to be based on famed British author E.M. Forster’s novels- Howards End (1992) and A Passage to India (1986), and Maurice (1987) being the other three.

The foursome contains common elements such as the vast English countryside and class distinctions, leading to heartaches and passion.

In the case of A Room with a View, the film traverses from artistic Florence, Italy to a cozy village in England.

The film is a period drama mixed with lots of authentic, unforced, good humor and at its core is a solid romantic drama, though if compared with the aforementioned other films, is not quite on par, though is still an entertaining watch- given the dismal year of cinema circa 1986.

The film was considered one of the best releases that particular year and was awarded a handful of Oscar nominations- winning Costume Design, Adapted Screenplay, and Art Direction.

Cultured and oftentimes brooding, Lucy Honeychurch (Helena Bonham Carter), goes on holiday to Florence with her rigid and conventional older cousin Charlotte (Maggie Smith), who also serves as her chaperone.

While enjoying the artistry of the European city, Lucy meets and falls madly in love with free-spirited George Emerson (Julian Sands), who is also visiting Florence with his easy-going father, Mr. Emerson (Denholm Elliott).

The men seem oblivious to Lucy’s (and Charlotte’s) Victorian-era upbringing, which attracts Lucy and appalls Charlotte.

Months later, the would-be lovers reunite in England and spend time averting obstacles thwarting their love, while admitting to themselves that their love is blossoming.

As Lucy has become engaged to snobbish Cecil Vyse (Daniel Day-Lewis), a sophisticate deemed suitable by her family to marry Lucy, the pair lacks the romantic connection that she shares with George.

Day-Lewis, on the cusp of becoming a breakout star and brilliant talent, gives Cecil a somewhat comical, yet endearing persona, that makes him the main foil, but also breathes sympathy into the character. This is especially evident during the Lucy/Cecil break-up scene.

The standout performance in A Room with a View is the comic brilliance of Smith as the manipulative and witty, Charlotte Bartlett, and this is evident throughout.

Smith injects vigor and comic wit into her character, as Charlotte seemingly makes one blunder after the other in the self-deprecating way she manages to use to her advantage to humorously manipulate other characters into doing things her way.

A risqué and quite hysterical all-male frontal nudity scene occurs mid-way through the film and, while not advancing the plot in any way, steals the entire film in its homoerotic and free-spirited way.

As the Reverend, young George, and Lucy’s energetic brother, Freddy, walk along a beautiful path, they decide to skinny dip in a pond where they horseplay and wrestle with each other completely in the buff.

As they chase each other around the pond, grab each other, and lightly smack bottoms, one cannot help but wonder if this scene set the tone for 1987’s gay-themed period piece based on another E.M. Forster novel, called Maurice.

A coincidence? I think not. As the trio of rascals come upon the properly dressed girls on the path, hilarity takes over the scene.

The art direction and costumes are of major excellence to A Room with a View as the film “looks” like a 1910 period rather than seeming like it is 1986 with the actors donning early twentieth-century styles.

Every scene is a treat from this perspective as we wonder who will wear what attire in the next scene.

As with the other aforementioned E.M. Forster films, class distinctions, and expectations are a major element in A Room with a View and make Lucy and George all the more likable as a couple.

Still, from an overall standpoint, there is something slightly amiss in the story department.

I did not find Helena Bonham Carter, an actor I like, overall very compelling as Lucy, and I think this leads to the story being slightly less than it might have with another in the role.

We may root for Lucy and George, but if the pair do not wind up together it is more of a pity rather than a travesty.

To summarize A Room with a View, the story is good, not great, and other key components to the film are much better than the central love story of Lucy and George but are therefore secondary to the main action.

Given a Charlotte romance, the film’s best character, that would have catapulted this film to the exceptional grade. Imagine the possibilities.

Or more of the two Miss Alan’s and their gossipy nature, or even a story to the rugged nude horseplay among men.

Many of the aspects that could have made A Room with a View (1986) great, were too often on the sidelines.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-James Ivory, Best Supporting Actor-Denholm Elliott, Best Supporting Actress-Maggie Smith, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium (won), Best Art Direction (won), Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design (won)

Skyfall-2012

Skyfall-2012

Director Sam Mendes

Starring Daniel Craig, Javier Bardem, Judi Dench

Scott’s Review #136

70243459

Reviewed July 26, 2014

Grade: B+

Skyfall is the latest (and twenty-third) installment in the decades-long running James Bond franchise (1962’s Dr. No was the first one) and this one receives major kudos from me.

When one looks back upon all of the Bond films, they have had to adjust to keep up with the times and Skyfall does this very successfully.

In addition, Skyfall brings a good, old-fashioned, compelling story to the table.

An attack on MI6 is initiated by a former agent, Raoul Silva, beautifully portrayed by Javier Bardem, who has a personal vendetta against M, played by Judi Dench.

Bardem gives a complex, powerful representation of the villain and is not overly cartoonish.

He appears crazy!

James Bond, of course, must come to the rescue and save the day.

The story finally gives M. a chance to shine as the main plot revolves around her. The relationship between M. and Raoul is interesting and layered with history, which makes for a compelling story.

Standard with Bond films, exotic locales are used. This time we get Shanghai, London, Scotland, and Macau.

James Bond’s past is also explored- He grew up in Scotland. The Bond family estate is a major backdrop for the action.

The reintroduction of two famous Bond characters- Moneypenny and Q is like a breath of fresh air added to the franchise, although I was not crazy about the casting choice of Q.

Also, one minor flaw with this film is there is no clear “Bond girl” to root for.

Skyfall (2012) provides a successful return to its Bond roots and will hopefully allow the Bond franchise to continue for many films to come.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Original Score, Best Original Song-“Skyfall” (won), Best Sound Editing (won), Best Sound Mixing, Best Cinematography

Philomena-2013

Philomena-2013

Director Stephen Frears

Starring Judi Dench, Steve Coogan

Scott’s Review #50

70293789

Reviewed June 20, 2014

Grade: A-

I am thrilled to see anything starring Judi Dench (although don’t get me started on my disdain of Shakespeare in Love from 1998).

I could listen to her read the phone book as she has that voice that soothes and makes one content.

Philomena (2013) is thankfully a starring role for Ms. Dench after supporting turns in the James Bond films as M.

She plays a woman in search of her son who was taken from her by the Catholic Church fifty years ago.

I respect a film that challenges an institution, especially if it is based on a true story.

In addition to her wonderful performance, the film is quite layered with a few twists and turns thrown in.

Dench’s self-titled character begins an adventure, along with an author talking into championing her cause, to find the whereabouts of her child.

It raises important questions about faith, religion, and the Catholic Church.

It will leave you pondering after the credits roll.

The main draw is Judi Dench who is so simplistic yet effective in her performances.

Well done.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Actress-Judi Dench, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Original Score