Film Studies

Archive for April 2011

You Only Live Twice Film Review

with one comment

You Only Live Twice is the fifth Bond movie in the long, continuous series and stars Sean Connery as the ever-smooth James Bond.  The film follows James Bond and he travels over Japan, eventually ending up on a small island in search for evidence a mysterious space vessel to prevent the United States and Russia from all out war.  The film includes all of the major components in the ‘bond formula,’ including guns, violence, women, and the ever-charming James Bond.  Although there are many negative reviews of You Only Live Twice, it’s film style compares to other films released in the 60s and the plot can help us explore what makes Bond movies so enjoyable.

As I was watching You Only Live Twice, I couldn’t help compare it to other movies we have viewed in this class that were released during the same time period.  I saw many similarities between You Only Live Twice and North by Northwest, an Alfred Hithcock spy thriller.  First, both characters were very similar.  Both James Bond and Roger Thornhill (North by Northwest) are very similar and since North by Northwest was released before the first bond film, it is clear Albert Broccoli and Harry Saltzman – the producers of the James Bond films, based parts of the bond character off of him.  Another similarity I found is how the storyline was told.  I really enjoyed this aspect of You Only Live Twice, as it seemed each scene we learn a little bit more about the plot.  This increased the suspense of the film and made me pay attention to every little detail.  An example of this in You Only Live Twice is near the beginning when Bond first arrives in Japan.  He first meets Dikko Henderson where we learn a little more about the plot.  We then learn even more about the plot as James Bond meets “Tiger” Tanaka and meets the leaders of Osato Chemicals.  Lastly, You Only Live Twice has similar formal techniques to North by Northwest.  The use of the establishing shot as James Bond travels from mainland Japan to the small island allows the viewer to understand the story even further.

I also tried to gain insight into what makes Bond films so good.  I believe that a strong component of what makes Bond films work is the social impact each movie displays.  The general plot of every bond film is the same, but by major minor changes and incorporating social issues is a major reason Bond films work.  In You Only Live Twice, the obvious social issue is the space race and the increased tension between Russia and the United States.  There were also hints in the movie which covered women’s liberation issues, most notably when “Tiger” says “Rule number two: in Japan, men always come first. Women come second.”  I believe another large component of the Bond films that make the franchise so successful is the Bond character himself.  Much like the movie Shaft, movie-goers look up to James Bond and want to be him.  He has the “it” factor.  Looking at James Bond, we see he wears nice clothes, drives expensive cars, travels the world, and entertains with gorgeous women.  A major part of the success of the Bond films is because he is ‘cool.’  Based on his review of You Only Live Twice, it seems Roger Ebert believes a core component of the bond formula is gadgets.  He feels You Only Live Twice doesn’t utilize the gadgets scenario correctly.  He states “This time it’s a lightweight one-man helicopter that can fire machine-gun bullets, missiles, rockets and flames. So far, so good. But instead of working the helicopter into the plot, the film immediately demonstrates all these goodies.”  The reason I bring this up is that I agree that once James Bond gets into this dorky-looking helicopter and puts on the weird helmet, he doesn’t look ‘cool’ anymore…

Although You Only Live Twice gives us a glimpse into what makes Bond films successful, many reviews believe this film does not have the successful bond formula.  According to a review by Bosley Crowther of the New York Times, You Only Live Twice “is evidently pegged to the notion that nothing succeeds like excess. And because it is shamelessly excessive, it is about a half-hour too long.”  I agree that the beginning of the film had great pace, but once we found out James Bond needed to become ‘Japanese,’ to infiltrate the island, I began losing interest in the film.  Nonetheless, I although the movie was a little lengthy, I enjoyed the overall storyline and felt You Only Live Twice was an entertaining film.

Written by matthewpickle

April 20, 2011 at 2:36 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Hairspray 2.0

with 2 comments

Hairspray is a musical directed by Adam Shankmann and stars Nikki Blomsky as Tracy Turnblad.  The film is set in 1962 Baltimore, Maryland and follows Tracy as she pursues her dreams and rallies against segregation.  The film is based on both the musical and comedy of the same name.  Paul Clinton, in his review on CNN, calls Hairspray “an outrageous stunt and a mesmerizing performance.”  Although this re-make is very similar to the original comedy directed by John Waters, there are still some major differences that influence the ideology and ‘campyness’ of the film.

I tried to compare this re-make of Hairspray with the original and although the general storyline is very similar, there are some major differences between the two films.  The first major difference is this version of Hairspray is a musical instead of a simple comedy.  The original Hairspray, directed by John Waters, focuses simply on dance, while the Hairspray music incorporates musical numbers, which seem to drag the movie at some points.  The second major difference between the two Hairsprays revolves around Tracy Turnblad.  In the original Hairspray, Tracy tried out and made it onto “The Corny Collins Show” pretty easily.  In the modern-day re-make, the storyline is dragged out to include a conflict between Tracy and her parents regarding trying out emphasizing a theme of ‘reaching for the stars.’  The final major difference between the original Hairspray and its re-make is the role of the Television Manager/Velma Von Tussle.  The original Hairspray had a female television manager who supported Corny in integration and a separate character playing the evil Velma Von Tussle.  The re-make combined the characters, making the Velma Von Tussle be both the mother and television manager.  I believe this change helped simplify the conflict.  In the original Hairspray, there were two conflicts.  One conflict was between Tracy and the Von Tussles, and another was between Corny/Tracy and the television station.  The re-make combined these conflicts, simplifying it for the viewers so they can fully understand the story.

After viewing Hairspray, it was difficult to determine whether these changes affected the ideology of the film.  I believe the one difference that clearly influenced the ideology of both films is the change in the Tracy Turnblad storyline.  According to Paul Clinton, the original Hairspray “effortlessly parodied the bourgeois constraints of the time.”  By modifying the storyline of Tracy Turnblad and creating the conflict with her parents, I felt the re-make is not simply a parody, but also tries to convey a message that we can do anything we want.  I’m not quite sure if this change really has a major effect on the films’ ideology, but felt the change was pretty significant.

In his review, Paul Clinton states Hairspray is “bright, campy and wonderfully light, Hairspray us that fun comes in all shapes and sizes.”  There are many examples in the film that emphasize the ‘campyness’ of the film.  The music provides even further exaggeration and the opening scene where Tracy catches a ride to school on top of a garbage truck clearly support the definition of camp.  On the other hand, there are also examples in Hairspray that support the belief it is not campy.  The march led by Motormouth Maybelle (Queen Latifah) and the scene involving Tracy and her father (Christopher Walken) after he is forced to sleep in the joke shop create a serious tone to the movie, making it appear as though it is not as campy as the original Hairspray.

Overall, the re-make of Hairspray was surprisingly entertaining.  Although the original Hairspray and this re-make are very similar, the few changes make it enjoyable to watch even after watching the original.  I felt the changes influenced the ideology and the level of camp in Hairspray.  Nonetheless, the re-make of Hairspray was an enjoyable experience.


Written by matthewpickle

April 14, 2011 at 12:09 am

Posted in Uncategorized