Foster on Film

With the most iconic comic book characters in their stable and a near stranglehold on pop culture heroes for decades, I’d expect DC comics to have a better success record with film. How hard can it be to take characters everyone loves, and wants to love, and bring them to life on the big screen? Apparently very hard.

DC has had some winners. The modern Superhero film is due to them. They did it right, and it changed film history. But then they did it wrong. And did it wrong again and again and again. For every Superman, there’s a pair of Schumacher Batman films and a Catwoman. When I ranked the X-Men films, I could say that a majority were good. When I ranked the Marvel Cinematic Universe, I could say that all of the films were worth your time and money. With DC…

If the best I can say about a film is that you shouldn’t put in an effort to avoid it, then things are looking pretty dark, and that’s as good a recommendation as I can give to two-thirds of these films. When I put Suicide Squad in the top third, this is not me singing the praises of Deadshot and his crew. It is a condemnation of Superman III and Batman Forever and Jonah Hex and Steel.

But it isn’t all bad, and sometimes you can have some fun with the failures. Come on, with the right crowd and a good deal of alcohol, Catwoman is a hoot.

This is a ranking of Superhero movies, so it doesn’t include other comic book properties like The Losers (which would not rank well) or RED (which would be up near the top). It also doesn’t include the DC Animated films–where DC does much better. I’ve already ranked those here. It does include 37 films, with two of them ranked twice due to different cuts. (Many of the others, including Batman V Superman, Suicide Squad, and Watchmen, have different versions, but while the changes were, in some cases, substantial, they didn’t alter the overall quality enough to warrant separate placement). This ranking has been updated several times.

 

#39: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Some movies deserve a calm, reasoned examination. This isn’t one of those. This isn’t a movie. This is cultural desecration. If you love Superman, you’ll hate it. If you love hope, fun, joy, life, you’ll hate it. If you love old comics, new comics, superheroes, plots, sense, your brain, you’ll hate it. If, however, you are deep into emo-whining, then maybe this film is for you. It shouldn’t be, but maybe.

If you are hoping for anything from this bleak midwinter agony, it is that the dreariness, dullness, poor characterizations, and gaping plot holes are worth suffering through because BvS offers a true vision of life. Keep hoping. There is nothing realistic here. People do not act this way. They do not speak this way. They do not respond this way. Nothing human is on the screen.

Do I hate this film? No. As a film, it isn’t worth hating. As a piece of pop culture, yes, I hate it.
(Full Review)
Continue reading »

It’s Halloween-time, so time to look at horror film scores/theme songs. To keep this apples-to-apples, I’ll only be including original compositions (otherwise this list would include a lot of classical works, and as much as I love Swan Lake, that’s not what I’m looking for today). That means no Tubular Bells, the music that tricked millions into thinking The Exorcist was a good film.

I’m also am avoiding songs with lyrics as that feels like a different list, so no Cry Little Sister from The Lost Boys or Willow’s Song from The Wicker Man (if The Wicker Man is a horror film).

First, a few Honorable mentions. There are some great themes that sound a bit too much like ones that I’ve chosen for my list, so I’ll just give honorable mentions to all of John Carpenter’s work that isn’t on my list, multiple themes by Goblin, and the Re-Animator Theme. I’m also giving honorable mentions to a few songs that don’t quite make it on my list on their own, but really fit their films: The Lullaby from Rosemary’s Baby, and The Omen Theme.

So, to the scores/themes, starting with:

 

#13 The Werewolf of London (Karl Hajos)

The also-ran of early Universal monster films, The Werewolf of London had a distinctive score that adds greatly to the work. Written primarily by Karl Hajos, it also contains cues from Heinz Roemheld’s scores for The Invisible Man and The Black Cat; borrowing was very common for studio music departments for the next twenty years. This music is hard to find and I’m unaware of any official release.

 

#12 Resident Evil (Marco Beltrami & Marilyn Manson)

The basic repeated theme is memorable (I used it as my ring tone for several years) but the addition of Marilyn Manson as co-composer created an unsettling sound that elevated the theme and the movie to something sinister.

Continue reading »

An exceptionally poor “greatest horror of the ’80s” list that made its way around Facebook inspired me to make a correct listing. So here is the list of the best of ’80s cinematic horror. The lowest ten or so are a bit rough but once you hit the halfway point everything is gold.

 

#50. Warlock (1989)

Not much in horror or story, but Julian Sands is outstanding as an escaped warlock from the past and Lori Singer is respectable as the girl whose house he drops into.

 

#49. Critters (1986)

Very uneven, but still the best of the killer hand-puppet films (unless you count Gremlins as a killer hand-puppet film).

 

#48. The Entity (1986)

Thought of as shocking at the time with its story of a woman being repeatedly raped by an invisible entity, it excels in Barbara Hershey’s performance and lags behind with some unnecessary characters and poor pacing.

 

#47. A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

The cleverest of the slasher films suffers from horrible acting and directing, but the supernatural element is fun.

 

#46. Bad Taste (1987)

It’s hard to imagine that this comedy gore-fest was the starting place of Peter Jackson. There’s nothing to think about, but it is D-level fun.

 

#45. Cannibal Holocaust (1980)

I can’t say this film is good or enjoyable, but it is interesting. It is also foul. It’s all blood, decapitation, rape, and pain, with real animal killings tossed in for effect.

 

Continue reading »

So, with the number of bad war films I’ve complained about in the last few days, in honor of Memorial Day, I’ve made a list of must see ones. These are my favorite war films (with the caveats that I’ve stuck with real wars, wars that include guns, and ones where the war is front and center, not a setting for other drama, thus I’m leaving out things like Casablanca, The African Queen, Beau Geste, and The Sea Hawk).

 

#11 The Dirty Dozen (1967)

The first of multiple “fun” war films on this list, The Dirty Dozen is all about shooting the bad guys and gleeful nastiness. Lee Marvin leads a band of mid-level stars in a big shoot-‘em-up that feels like playing army.

Continue reading »

I thought I’d look at the live-action Batmen when Batfleck was new. Now that Ben Affleck is out, I’ve updated this page, and await WB’s newest choice for the role. Oh, there will be another.  While the quality of the character is a major element in the overall quality of his films, it is far from a 1-to-1 relationship. You can have a good Batman in a weak film and the reverse is true. In some cases, other elements—emotion, theme, plot, or just fantastic effects and art direction—have more to do with the quality of the film than Batman himself.

When ranking Batmen, it isn’t just the acting. That has much to do with it, as does the charm of the actor. But it also makes a difference if Batman is frightening when he is supposed to be, funny if he is supposed to be, and complex. The best Batman should be fun to watch in a fight and in a conversation. And he has to fit his world.

A key factor is that Batman doesn’t make sense in our universe. He’s absurd by nature. After The Dark Knight came out I had a fanboy tell me, with utter conviction, that dressing up in a bat suit to fight crime would completely work in our world and makes sense. Ummmm. No. No it doesn’t.

Saying he is absurd is not an insult. Batman bypasses reality. He enters the land of myth. He exists as symbol and metaphor. This works in a comic which by its nature is symbolic. Film can have a harder time as it is often used to approach reality. So somehow, Batman needs to work in this medium, and there are different ways that can be done. A good Batman must explain why he dresses in a bat costume and fights crime. They do not all pull that off.

And I have to judge a person by the company he keeps. Batman surrounds himself with girlfriends, family members, a butler, and sometimes boys that he picks up. He’s not defined by his enemies (though his films might be), but he is, partly, by his friends and allies.

So, starting with #9

 

#9 Robert Lowrey (Batman and Robin—1949)

The second screen adaptation of Batman, this follow-up to the ’43 serial is a very different critter and far more like the comics than the first. This is action and adventure, played straight. Batman is no longer a government agent (Yup, that’s what he was in ’43), but the mysterious crime fighter we all know. There is no connection between the two serials, which seemed like it was for the best as the former could be embarrassing. That said, I found some enjoyment in watching The Batman ’43 while I was only bored with this one.

Lowrey is less charming than his predecessor, making him a less compelling Bruce Wayne, but he is a more imposing Batman. He’s not in the kind of muscle-bound shape expected of post-1980s heroes, but he is powerful-looking enough. His voice is deep and strong which helps in his characterization.

The only positive thing I can say about his costume is that it is a big step up from the ’43 version. It’s still embarrassing. Apparently realizing this, both Batman and Robin tend to stand so that the more ridiculous aspects of their clothing are covered by their capes.

It’s surprising that between the serials Bruce Wayne’s living arrangements have been downgraded. He now lives in a two-story suburban home, and drives a typical sedan. At least ’43 Batman had a convertible. I’m not sure this Wayne could afford to be a crimefighter, though it does make his outfit more understandable; he’s probably sewing it himself.

Batlowrey is simply dull. He’s hardly given a chance to be anything else. There’s no attempt at character development and most of his lines are procedural: “Yes Robin, the Wizard’s men will be there. We should drive down this road.” “Wait here while I find out what’s wrong. The truck is parked around the curve.” It doesn’t leave much opportunity to establish a personality. Does it make sense that he dresses up in a costume to fight crime? Who knows? There isn’t enough personality here to make any definite claim about anything.

 

#8 Robert Pattinson (The Batman—2022)

Pattinson starts at a disadvantage as The Batman is two very different films jammed together. Should he be the odd noir-detective in the dark procedural drama or should he be the immortal superhero of the kid’s action flick? There’s no winning because either choice would make him wrong for half the film. So it is interesting that he went with neither, and went with constantly distracted emo highschooler. It is certainly a choice.

This Batman is quiet, still, and deeply unhappy at all times. He keeps a diary and I suspect the pages we don’t see are filled with his vampire poetry. If his parents hadn’t died, he’d be yelling at them that “You just don’t understand me.” He’s way overdramatic, and Pattinson doesn’t have the voice to pull that off. And when not making off-putting proclamations, he’s muttering. Someone needs to tell him to speak up and enunciate. On the plus side, this Batman can fight, and while those scenes might not be exciting, they are visceral.

He’s also a detective, which is a plus for a character who’s supposed to be the world’s greatest detective; most Batmen don’t do any detecting at all. Unfortunately, he’s a really bad detective.

As for Bruce Wayne, there is no Bruce Wayne. It’s not even that Pattinson’s Wayne is the same as his Batman. There is simply no Wayne at all.

His batsuit is a mixed bag. Compared to the average, it’s pretty good, except for the large clomping boots. His stomping is actually pointed out when a gang hangs around going “huh, wonder what that is.” He needs to get new shoes or all the smarter crooks will just avoid him. But there’s a bigger problem with the suit in that it is out of place in this world. In this gritty, noir universe, some guy wearing little ears just looks silly. And is this Batman crazy enough to wear a rubber bat costume? Well, he’s crazy, but more in the rocking on the floor weeping kind of way. He’s suffering from depression. Sure, he would wear black eye-liner but a Bauhaus T-shirt makes more sense then a silver bat logo.

 

#7 Val Kilmer (Batman Forever—1995)

Joel Schumacher started with Burton’s gothic world, and then just screwed it all up. Sometimes it is hard to tell what is wrong, besides everything, and that includes Batman. Kilmer had a spotty career before becoming the Dark Knight and a disastrous one after. He brings his good looks to the role and little else. Kilmer’s Batman isn’t fully camp, just enough not to be taken seriously while not enough to be any fun. This Batman isn’t deep, isn’t haunted, isn’t meaningful, isn’t silly, and isn’t a bad joke. He isn’t anything. He’s slicker than Keaton’s—more poised. He is in control of himself. And he’s barely noticeable.

He isn’t really Batman. Kilmer could have been playing any generic action character. There are worse things than being bad. There is being nonexistent. Other versions of the character could be considered worse in multiple way, but at least they are memorable. Clooney is not good, but if you think about it, you can remember him. What do you remember of Kilmer? Perhaps only the cheesy line, “It’s the car, right? Chicks dig the car.”

His Bruce Wayne is pretty much the same as his Batman, which is to say, generic. He edges more toward smarmy, which isn’t terrible for Wayne, but is yet another reason not to care about him.

At least he hangs with a reputable Alfred, which he needs since he also hangs with the most annoying Robin. His kinda-sorta-girlfriend has possibilities, but the relationship is so poorly presented that I’m not giving him points for her.

I can’t dislike Batkilmer, as that would require some level of interest.

 

 

#6 Lewis G Wilson (The Batman—1943)

Wilson was the very first Batman in a 1943 serial. For ranking, he isn’t in a fair competition. Cash was not lavished on the production, which is evident in every frame. It’s no surprise that the effects are lacking in those pre-computer times, but they were capable of costume design in 1943. I suspect little money was allocated, giving us the worst batsuit.

The fight choreography was what you’d expect from a ‘40s serial. It would have been nice for a few more bucks to go there as well as to wardrobe, but unlike the outfit, combat is mildly acceptable.

Wilson was stuck in a low budget kid’s propaganda show, that looks silly now and probably didn’t look that much better then. As a war time serial, it is painful racist, proclaiming how good it was that the government had rounded up those “shifty-eyed” Japs that just happened to also be American citizens. Under the circumstances, Wilson could only do so well. But within the limits he was bound by, he’s charming.

This Batman is not a disturbed vigilante, unable to deal with his parents’ death. He’s an agent fighting War-time spies and traitors for Uncle Sam. As Bruce Wayne, he’s a bored playboy who thinks that The Batman is a show off. As The Batman (it is “The Batman,” not “Batman”), he’s brave, noble, and manly, if perhaps lacking the physique we’ve become used to. A few weeks in the gym, or a costume that lifted and compressed would have elevated Wilson. As Bruce Wayne, he looks good, but not so much as Batman.

I give him a point for the cruel way he says “Oh, those are my bats. It is nearing their feeding time.” Too bad the bats are sad shadows and the “Bats cave” (yes, there is an “s”) is a tiny stage. The poor cave gets a bit of a pass since this serial created it, not the comics. Likewise, this is the first appearance of Alfred.

Batwilson’s girlfriend isn’t a detriment. His Robin is surprisingly competent and is never annoying. He beats the Chris O’Donnell version, which I understand is faint praise.

Judged purely by acting and personality, I’d move him up a slot, but there’s no getting around the shoddy nature of the production.

 

#5 George Clooney (Batman & Robin—1997)

Clooney’s Batman finished the transition from the complicated, gothic character Tim Burton had given us to full-on camp. It is a much lesser Batman, but at least it is fully something, even if that something isn’t particularly good. Watching Batman & Robin is like watching the old TV show done with a pile of cash, updated FX, and less artistry. It doesn’t reach the level of fun of the TV show, lacking its wit and understand of the material, nor does Clooney reach the level of that Batman. He’s helped by little. The script is weak, Robin is terrible, the subplot of antagonism between him and Robin make him out as a bit of a jerk, and he’s got the silliest suit of the feature films. I don’t even mind the Bat-nipples, not when there’s the spiky Bat-ears to consider. He does have a good Alfred and I find Alicia Silverstone adorable, so that’s a little help. This is a children’s Batman for a children’s movie.

Clooney managed better as Bruce Wayne, as long as Wayne wasn’t require to be mentally disturbed in any way. This is suave Wayne. Clooney just was Clooney, and since the actor is a suave millionaire, he pulled that off fine. And in this world, Wayne doesn’t need to be nuts, since apparently people run around in strange outfits all the time. I have to assume Bruce’s neighbors get up each day and put on their ferret outfits before going to work.

Joel Schumacher has a lot to answer for.

There’s not much positive I can say. Few people thought this Batman succeeded, including Clooney. But it matters not only how good he is, but how well he succeeded in what he was meant to be. Batclooney was meant to be an empty, uncomplicated, light-weight, kid’s Batman. And that he was.

 

#4 Ben Affleck (The DCEU—2016-2023)

Poor Ben. He didn’t have a chance. It is hard to say what’s right and wrong with his portrayal as it is so inconsistent, due to no fault of his own. Zach Snyder wanted a worn and gritty Batman who might get raped in prison (yeah, he said that). Warner Bros wanted a Batman that would sell tickets. Affleck wanted not to be embarrassed. Well, it looks like no one got what they wanted.

In BvS, Affleck looks the part. As a world-wearied Batman, he nails it. His speech and the pain evident on his face all proclaim this is a Batman who has been beaten down over and over again, but has been giving better than he’s been taking. He also makes no sense as a human and shifts his entire world view in a second. In Justice League, he’s sometimes in the range of what he was in the previous film, but other times he’s a quip machine, and quite often he’s just tired and bored. Affleck worked out to create the Batman body, but by the re-shoots he’d given up and let the suit do the work for him. Affleck was screwed over by the studio and he just gave up, and it shows. As the scripts didn’t know what Batman was supposed to be, the only guy who had a vision (Synder) had a horrible vision, and that “vision” was stripped away in re-shoots and editing, Batfleck isn’t anything. As for his cameo appearances, Affleck is just there for the paycheck.

His Bruce Wayne isn’t substantially different than his Batman. Both are worn out, both seem to lack the people skills to do their jobs, and both are wildly inconsistent between and within pictures.

His fighting skills are a mixed bag as they are so obviously computer enhanced. I like CGI, but mainly if I can’t tell it is CGI. Even with the post production polish, he’s a reasonably exciting Batman to watch in a fight, though there’s no real wow factor.

As a thinking Batman, he falls apart. Batman is the great detective, a genius with gadgets. This Batman is incapable of snooping in a house, is fooled by a psychopath, and really comes up with no workable plan. You can put it down to rage, but that doesn’t make him a better character. It just explains the problem. This may be the dimmest Batman of all time. Intellectually, he’s got nothing.

And then there is the question of him dressing in a bat outfit. Likes Bale’s version, Batfleck has anger issues (sometimes), which explains him going out punching and even branding criminals. But he just isn’t odd enough to have said one day, “Hey, I think little ears on a cowl would be a great idea.”

He gets a point for hanging with a superb Alfred.

 

#3 Christian Bale (The Dark Knight trilogy—2005-2012)

Many choose The Dark Knight as the best Batman film, but Bale rarely ranks so high. The three Nolan films work based on the larger twisting structure and themes more than Batman himself. Bale’s Bruce Wayne is generally considered a good one, but his suited Dark Knight ranks lower. Partly that’s due to his sanity. He’s too in control. But mainly it is his voice, and that flaw falls on Nolan. Instead of the roughness Keaton added when fighting crime, Bale goes for full on cancer-voice. It’s a cross between unintelligible and laughable. And it only got worse in the second film when Nolan decided to tweak it beyond human capability in post production. Kevin Conroy, the voice of the animated Batman, stated that the voice was ridiculous and Bale needed to stop doing it—if anyone should know, it is Conroy. It was a running joke in The Lego Movie, whose Batman would rate very high on my list if I was including animated films.

While Bale’s Wayne ranks higher than his Batman, it is mainly due to the complexity of his character. His lack of warmth makes it hard to ever feel for him, creating a real distance between him and the audience. Again, this is a tendency of Nolan’s. And This Batman is not nearly nuts enough to go around dressing like a bat. He’s got big time anger issues, but those would surface in violence, not violence dressed as a flying mammal.

I rank Batmans/Waynes on their entire personalities, including what they like—that means their relationships count. And Bale’s Wayne has the worst taste in women. If there is one consensus amongst fans, it is that Rachel is terrible. Much of that comes from the primitive acting talents of Katie Holmes (Maggie Gyllenhaal was better when she took over, but better does not mean good; Nolan is notorious for his inability to direct female characters), but whatever the cause, his dating life is not a plus.

No one could question Bale’s commitment. And his physicality is impressive. Plus, when it comes to expressing those anger issues, he’s a genius (perhaps more than is good for him considering his famous rant on the set of Terminator 4). But Bale himself acknowledges that he never quite succeeded, and he prefers Adam West.

 

#2 Adam West (Batman: The Movie -1966)

If you are going to go camp, go all the way. Adam West is the most earnest Batman in the silliest of settings and that makes it all OK. His voice alone elevates him above the also-rans below. He’s a comedy Batman who never acknowledges the joke, but lives it. Not everyone wants a pure, virtuous, noble, unshakeable, always calm, kindly, polite Batman, but if you do, here’s your guy.

Batman is inherently silly. He’s a symbol and has real problems when taken literally. This Batman recognized the absurdity and runs with it. The entire world is a joke—enjoy it.

West looks the part of Batman, both handsome and powerful. No, he doesn’t have the six-pack build, but that has rarely been the sign of physically strong men but of ones who have a trainer who has muscle definition machines. And as both Wayne and Batman, he speaks like a god. His velvet tones gives depth in the middle of the ridiculous. None of the other Batmen can come close and if you are doing direct comparisons, it’s a real problem for the others. This is the iconic voice–everything else is less.

Similarly to the Schumacher-verse, the world of this Batman is one where dressing up like a bat or bird or any kind of cosplay is just normal behavior. He doesn’t have to explain why he dresses as he does. You have to explain why you don’t.

The only problem with this Batman is if you are just against the concept of a funny, joyful, good-time, camp Batman. If that notion upsets you, then no Batman that fits that will be to your liking. But figure, of all the camp Batman you could have, would any other have been better? For what he is, he’s the best.

And I do give him points for his companions. He has a solid Alfred, a perfectly fitting Robin, and even an amusing Aunt. And if you do not like Yvonne Craig as Batgirl, I fear there is no help for you.

 

#1 Michael Keaton (Batman/Batman Returns—1989-1992)

It shouldn’t be a surprise who tops the list. In the great Batmen debates of the last twenty years, Keaton usually comes out first and I can’t imagine that Affleck will change that.

I remember when Keaton was cast. Batman fanboys went nuts. He was wrong in everyway. He was too comic. He was too short. He wasn’t like their fantasy. Well, they were wrong.

Keaton nails the two sides of the character, Bruce Wayne and Batman. His Batman is dangerous, and for the first, and only time, Batman is scary beyond his violence. His is the only Batman that could frighten criminals in a fundamental way, not just because they don’t like getting beaten up. There’s something unhinged about him.

While Batkeaton is treading the line of psychosis, his Bruce Wayne is even better. No reasonable man would choose to dress up like a Bat to fight crime. Bale’s Bat and Batfleck are both emotionally messed up, but primarily they suffer from anger issues. Keaton’s Wayne is more substantially disturbed. Yes, he’s angry, but it is so much more. This is the only Bruce Wayne I can believe would choose to become Batman. I could believe him choosing to wear a mask made of human skin and carry a chainsaw too.

Sometimes the phrase “gritty realism” is brought up around the Bale Batman, but it is always inaccurate. Keaton’s Batman is by far the most realistic. As an actor, he has a talent of being an every man. He’s someone you can imagine seeing at the grocery story. But at the same time, he can embody insanity, a lack of control, and a ruthless dedication. That is Batman.

He does well in the fights and his costume is one of the best, though it shows some mobility problems. He also has a quality Alfred.

I’ve enjoyed several other Batmen, but only Keaton has been a total success. When recently asked if he, like Bale, felt a bit of jealousy at someone else playing the part, he replied that he didn’t, because he was Batman, and was secure in that. Which is why he is Batman.

 

To go with my ranking of all of the Bond films last week, here is my ranking of the Bond villains. Everyone always says that the villain makes the Bond film. I don’t think so. But there is some relationship.

I’m going with main villains, as there are lots and lots of villains. Henches will get their own list, although having the right hench can make for a better main villain. Who counts as the main villain isn’t always clear in a SPECTRE film; I choose Blofeld only when he is the onscreen main bad guy and I also discount midlevel enforcers, like Mr. White. There are a few cases where I just have to go with multiple villains. Since the Blofelds are so different once they fully appear, I’ve counted them as different villains. I am including the three non-Eon productions just for the fun of it. So, let us begin.

*

 

#29 Ernst Stavro Blofeld/Franz Oberhauser (Christoph Waltz) — Spectre

Who is he: Madman leader of SPECTRE and Bond’s brother.
Evil Plot: Gain power by controlling the world’s intelligence gathering ability, revenge himself on Bond, and strip away any meaning and value from the Craig Years.
The Good: Christoph Waltz can be a good actor.
The Bad: To repeat myself from my Bond film rankings, HE’S JAMES BOND’S BROTHER! Really? That’s where they went? OK, the family metaphor can really work with Bond. See Skyfall and GoldenEye. But this isn’t a metaphor. This is just lame. Everything in the last few films has been because Blofeld thought his daddy loved James more than him. AH! He is the worst villain because not only does he drag down one film, he drags down four. He also turns out not to be scary, intense, or weird in a fun way, nor does he display any signs that he could run a criminal network. Everything we’re shown indicates that his organization should never have risen and would certainly fall immediately. But who cares if he is on the blah side because HE’S JAMES BOND’S BROTHER!

*

 

#28 Dr. Noah/Jimmy Bond (Woody Allen) — Casino Royale ‘67

Who is he: Insecure leader of SMERSH and James Bond’s nephew.
Evil Plot: Use a virus to kill all men taller than him and make all women beautiful.
The Good: Ummm… He’s not the worst thing in the film.
The Bad: The worst sin in a comedy: Jimmy Bond isn’t funny.

*

 

#27 Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric) — Quantum of Solace

Who is he: A middle manager for Quantum, an organization that is SPECTRE, but the Eon lawyers hadn’t cleared that name yet.
Evil Plot: Control all the water in Bolivia, because that makes sense…
The Good: He gives off an evil vibe.
The Bad: But he gives off more of an oily vibe. He is also weak physically and in no way a real threat. He’s a henchmen, except he’s the main guy. If you remember him at all, it is just as a vague slime bag. His timid, off-screen death is the final nail.

*

 

#26 Ernst Stavro Blofeld (Telly Savalas) — On Her Majesty’s Secret Service

Who is he: A weirdo with a cat fetish, who doesn’t act all that weird nor fetishy.
Evil Plot: To use his psychedelic, chicken hypnosis on European girls at his fake mountaintop allergy clinic to get them to take crop viruses back home that he can use as part of a blackmail scheme to get everyone to acknowledge his hereditary title. Yeah, it is as dumb as it sounds.
The Good: Telly Savalas can be a good villain.
The Bad: Blofeld is a weirdo with a cat fetish. That’s what he is. You do not play that straight. He is a silly camp character. You try and play down the weird and fetish and you end up with just silly and that’s what we get. Dull and silly because the filmmakers wouldn’t go to the extreme that Blofeld requires (we’ll see it done right higher on the list). Savalas could have done it—see The Dirty Dozen where he’s really creepy—but here he’s bland while still being ridiculous. If you want a serious, scary, reasonable villain, then you do not make him a weirdo with a cat fetish, and you do not bring him anywhere close to a psychedelic, hypno chicken virus heraldry plot.

*

Continue reading »