Definitely my favorite James Bond entry, as 007 must retrieve a device that can control nuclear weapons before it falls into the wrong (Soviet) hands. Moore cruises through, the action is excellent, and the film moves along briskly.
(PG)- Physical violence, gun violence, mild gore, some profanity, brief female nudity, sexual references, some adult situations.

A British spy trawler is sunk in the Aegean Sea. Oceanographer Jack Hedley ("Havelock") is tasked with trying to find the ship before a vital piece of tracking hardware falls into enemy hands. Things don't go to plan though, and once the wreck has been located a brutal murder ensues and Roger Moore ("007"), aided by the daughter of the murdered scientist (Carole Bouquet), has to try and track down the stolen kit before it falls into the hands of the Soviets. The adventure elements of this are pretty good as are the gadgets, but the casting isn't up to much. Aside from the star, there is little skill on offer as Topol, an oddly cast Julian Glover as baddie "Kristatos" and the thoroughly peevish ice-skating protegé Lynn-Holly Johnson ("Bibi") all struggle to keep this sluggish plot rumbling along until a really rather half-baked ending. It's got some fine cinematography of Greece and the set-piece action scenes work well enough, but I'm afraid this outing for "Mr. Bond" is not one of his better ones in my book.

This is an epic Bond film.
007 is sent to beat Russia to find an important device that sank in the ocean. It's important to the security of the British people.
There is non stop action, beautiful women, beautiful scenery, exotic locales, wit, gadgets, everything that makes Bond movies special and entertaining.
Over the top? Well, all Bond movies are over the top, which is why the ones that pretend not to be over the top look sillier than the ones that don't make the pretense.
In Carole Boquet as Melina, we have the most beautiful of all the Bond females, with perhaps the exception of Bach in The Spy Who Loved Me.
Melina also helps to make this as great a movie as it is. I rate it as the second best 007 film ever made, just behind "The Spy Who Loved Me".
And that's great company.

This and the Spy Who Loved me were Roger Moore's top 2 of his own Bond films... and I can see that.
It's not as over-the-top as Moonraker (which is one of the worst Bond movies ever made), it's not as silly as some of his other outings, although, if you are a Moore fan that hasn't seen this yet, fear not, it still has the Silly Bond moments that are his trope.
It's actually just... solid. For Your Eyes Only is the Roger Moore film that could have been a solid, stand alone movie, removed from the 007 franchise, that still stood up on it's own.
It's a bit darker than the others, it's a bit more realistic, it's a bit more story driven... and yet it maintains the Moore Era silliness that people come to expect out of his films, but with an actual story feel to it.
The Spy Who Loved Me is Moore's magnum opus in the 007 franchise, but For Your Eyes Only comes pretty close to dethroning it.
Even as an unapologetic Connery Bond fan, this is one of the best in the franchise.

Bibi vs. Melina
Agent 007 (Roger Moore) seeks to apprehend a lost British encryption device in order to prevent the Soviets from acquiring it as events switch from the Ionian Sea to a villa in Spain to wintery actions in Northern Italy to a Greek Island to Albania to an abandoned mountaintop monastery (Meteora, Greece).
Whilst “For Your Eyes Only” (1981) tones down the excesses of the previous film “Moonraker” (1979), it still contains the requisite Bond staples & absurdities and is another strong installment in Moore’s 7-film stint (1973-1985). There are high society pool parties, mountainside car chases, ski thrills, ice skating, underwater intrigue and an exciting cliff-climbing close.
Of course, there are the usual beautiful women, this time headed by grief-stricken brunette Melina (Carole Bouquet) with bubbly teen figure skater Bibi (Lynn-Holly Johnson) in second. Although some find winsome Lynn-Holly annoying as curvy Bibi, she’s a highlight of the film and one of the best ‘Bond girls’ in the franchise IMHO. Plus her naïve, spirited disposition works as a necessary counterpoint to Melina’s comatose solemnity. James’ line to Bibi is priceless: “Well, you get your clothes on and I'll buy you an ice cream.” Johnson, incidentally was 21-22 during shooting while her character was around 16-17.
The film runs 2 hours, 7 minutes.
GRADE: A-

A nicely crafted war film.
I wasn't overly invested in what was happening onscreen, but that doesn't take away from the fact that I still found 'Flags of Our Fathers' to be a very good and a very interesting story from the Battle of Iwo Jima.
It's a fascinating tale that it tells, which is definitely its strongest feature. As a whole I was very interested in it, individually I don't think it's as strong but as a collective it comes out nicely. Ryan Phillippe, Jesse Bradford and Adam Beach are the pick of the performers, though there are a load of familiar faces elsewhere - including Paul Walker, John Slattery and Jamie Bell.
Super intrigued to check out 'Letters from Iwo Jima', which Clint Eastwood & Co. released two months after this to serve as a companion piece. Hopefully that's as good as this.

Arnie is ex-cop "Jericho" who runs an high end private security company. When an attempt is made on the life of one of his clients, he pursues a man throughout the city before being given a portentous warning by the would be assassin that the son of Satan is soon to be born. Now even he isn't going to but that, but as more mysterious happenings occur, he finds himself trying to keep "Christine" (Robin Tunney) safe from some henchmen, and from the Church - as she is sought by the big "D" himself (Gabriel Byrne). The plot is pretty flawed from start to finish. One would assume that however strong and resilient "Jericho might be, the fact that his foe could cause people to spontaneously combust at will would have but paid to any resistance fairly early on. Nope - he keeps coming back to fight another day - and after a while, that just becomes a little bit dull and leads to an ending that is as flat as it is predictable. I suppose I ought never to have expected much jeopardy, and neither the acting nor the dialogue really do much to elevate this from a very average outing for Schwarzenegger that offers us plenty of action but totally underplays the more demonic aspects of the plot that ought to have made this just a bit darker and more interesting. It is also way too long, and though well enough made, just left me feeling that I'd seen this all before, just in a different guise.

One of my favorite Arnold movies. A lot of crazy demonic people. Lots of action and a great storyline.

**_Solid action/horror with Arnie_**
The devil (Gabriel Byrne) comes to New York City to impregnate a chosen female (Robin Tunney) during the last hour of the second millennium to bring about the end of the world. The hope of humanity falls on an atheist ex-cop, Jericho Cane (Arnold Schwarzeneggar), and his partner (Kevin Pollak). Rod Steiger is also on hand as a no-nonsense Catholic priest.
"End of Days" (1999) is a comic book action flick with horror/fantasy elements. It's not meant to be an accurate depiction of biblical eschatology. As such, it's useless to pick it apart on those grounds; just go with it and enjoy the ride. That said, there are some real-life subtexts and accurate biblical aspects. For instance, disillusionment due to the unjust death of a loved one (or any number of other tragedies) happens all the time.
The movie is R-rated not just for the violence and cussing, but because the filmmakers try to convey the devil's filthy lawlessness, like a threesome with a mother & daughter in a brief dream sequence (which may be "reality," but it's hard to tell). Byrne has fun with the role of Satan.
As a holiday action blockbuster with Schwarzenegger "End of Days" delivers the requisite thrills where there's a massive explosion about every 12 minutes. These types of movies only work if the story and the characters pull you into their world and the film accomplishes this just enough.
It's no where near as good as the first two Terminator flicks, but it's close to being on par with the third one. Of course, "End of Days" is its own animal due to the apocalyptic, religious subject matter. On that note, the palette the filmmakers use is fittingly dark. The entire film takes place at night, mostly in the urban labyrinths of Gotham with additional sequences in Gothic churches, shadowy subterranean rooms and eerie woods.
The film runs 2 hours, 1 minute, and was shot in New York City and the Los Angeles area.
GRADE: B/B-

Faith Or A Glock 9 Millimetre?
End Of Days is directed by Peter Hyams and written by Andrew W. Marlowe. It stars Arnold Schwarzenegger, Gabriel Byrne, Robin Tunney, Kevin Pollak, Rod Steiger, Udo Kier & CCH Pounder.
It's the end of the Millennium and as 1999 draws to a close Satan (in human form played by Gabriel Byrne) is in town and looking for his bride. That bride is Christine York (Tunney), who 20 years earlier on her birthday had been chosen by Satanists to be the one for the spawning of the anti-Christ. Enter retired cop Jericho Cane (Schwarzenegger), a suicidal security expert whose family were murdered, and who after being hired to protect an every day business man finds himself in a battle with evil itself. It's not just the fate of poor Christine that's now in his hands, but that of mankind too.
Arnold versus The Devil, you couldn't make it up could you? Well actually "they" did, but hey, what's wrong with pitting modern cinema's action super star against man's ultimate enemy? The answer is nothing wrong with it at all; as long as the expectation level is set at brain left at the door for some mindless popcorn fun. Which when one sees the premise on offer is all one can surely expect to see. Surely? Budgeted at $100 million by Universal Studios, of which $25 million went on the Austrian Oak's salary, End Of Days, contrary to some beliefs, made over double that when all sales were factored in. However, it was still a poor return for such a big block-buster and Universal were most disappointed in the returns. As was Schwarzenegger himself, who was hoping to launch a big movie come back after a run of sub standard movies had seen his stock fall. Throw in the Razzie nominations for Schwarzenegger, Byrne (who was also up for Stigmata) and Hyams, and it doesn't make particularly inspiring reading.
It's all very ridiculous, the film not the statistics, but End Of Days is a whole bunch of explosive, bonkers, action based fun. The flaws are many, not least that the plot is actually an adventurous reworking of T2: Judgement Day (Arnie playing it on safe territory one feels). While giving the big man some character depth was never going to be a good move considering his-ahem-range. Yet the film finds him on particularly good muscular form, machine gunning, shooting rockets and facing off against Byrne's (having a great time and playing it as it should be played) snarly, sarcastic Old Nick adversary. Tunney (wolf whistle that body) bats the eyes and screams as befitting the role, Pollak deserves better but runs with it in his usual dry dulcet way, while the wonderful Miriam Margolyes gets to kick Arnie's butt! Yes it's that kind of movie folks.
With dashes of grue and explosions aplenty it was never about trying to win awards. If ever a film does exactly what it says on the tin then this is it. Arnie V Satan, it is what it is, relax and enjoy. 7/10

I'll probably be crucified especially given my username and how many love this film, but I found this to be insufferable, borderline pretentious aimless drama (which I generally don't mind, see Lost in Translation, which briefly had a scene from this film) featuring a repugnant main character. Worse, it's nearly 3 hours long. I get what Fellini was going for within the first 35-minutes so I had to sit through the remainder 2+ hours. I kind of really hated this with the only positive thing to say it was shot well and great locations but this is one I will never revisit. **1.5/5**

I get it.
But, much like my feelings towards 8½ and its 130 minute exploration of the artistic anxieties clawing at an enormously successful, world-renowned filmmaker: _I just don't care._

Any film thats starts with "Joan of Arc was not Noah's wife" has got to be worth a look! "Ted" (Keanu Reeves) and best mate "Bill" (Alex Winter) have the knowledge at school - who uses "audacious" even now? They are, however, completely unfocused and like any other teenage boys, distracted by just about anything but schoolwork. Faced with flunking their history project though, they have to get their acts together else their band "Wyld Stallyns" (probably a real porn name in California) might be their only hope of a job, or of avoiding military academy! Luckily, they encounter "Rufus" (George Carlin) and his amazing "Tardis"-esque phone box that they discover they can now use to travel through time and actually meet the great and the good from the past - anywhere in the world. Can they manage to convince some of these people to come to 1980s San Dimas and help them present a real story of time? This is good fun, this. There is a great deal of fraternal chemistry between Reeves and a particularly engaging Winter. The escapades are enjoyably episodic in nature, peppered with just enough history and humour to stop the overall effect becoming puerile. The two lads genuinely engage with the audience as their kindly nature and curiosity proves just a little contagious. Of course, they face obstacles - some with a samurai sword, some with a flashing blue light - and no, there isn't a great deal of jeopardy with the plot - but I really quiet enjoyed this well paced, written and delivered characterful fantasy adventure.

Another one of those movies I first watched a few years after it came out, and just watched again this week. It is still very funny to me in many places during their adventure. Their reaction to stuff that happens is hilarious sometimes, and just the speech patterns they use is witty. Little things like referring to Joan of Arc as Miss of Arc, for example. Remiscent of the valley girl language in Clueless, not so much what happens Is funny as it is how they respond to it. It is an amusing fun ride.
There were a couple of minor letdowns for me this time, ones I don’t recall whether a I felt them the first time I watched it. I thought the fun of the action scaled back when they left Bill and Ted and followed Napoleon around back in San Demas. It just seemed to let the air out of the fun a bit. And the report, which is the reason for the adventure, was okay, but could have been funnier. It almost seemed like a letdown after the main action getting there.
But it is all harmless fun and I wouldn’t discourage anyone from watching it for a laugh or three.

When an operation to thwart a dangerous attack in Paris costs them one of their number, "Team America" boss "Spottswoode" decides to recruit pretty boy actor "Gary" to take up the slack. The team broadly welcome him and after a bit of soul searching, he decides to accept the challenge and put his acting skills to better use against Islamic terrorists. Thing is, though, who is it that's pulling the strings? Well as their investigations deepen, they discover a cunning plot from North Korea to use the ultra-liberal "Film Actors Guild" as a conduit to world decimation. As satires go, this is one of the better attempts by an American to take a look at the achievements (or not) of his own country. The "Thunderbirds" meets "Man from U.N.C.L.E." style of puppetry works really quite entertainingly as the story delivers brutality, sex, destruction and humanity in quite a sarcastically effective fashion. The script doesn't miss and hit the wall when it comes to assessing those who like to "help" but cause more destruction with their interference the any terrorist could ever hope to, and the whole thing manages to ridicule the more zealous and stereotypical notions of statehood and dogma quite potently. It has "007" elements to the storyline too, and by it's comical vituperation of US attitudes to the rest of the world - Cairo is depicted as a ramshackle collection of adobe houses, Britain is continually referred to as England and Paris, well there's not much left of that after they've received their dose of "assistance" - it does raise quite a few smiles. It's subtly scathing and the puppetry is creatively delivered for a good watch that hasn't dated anywhere near as much as it should have.

Might have the only genuinely funny "bodily-fluid gag" ever put to screen. Which really speaks to _Team America_ overall, and even to the entire career of Matt Stone and Trey Parker. The only thing it is more than idiotic, is genius.
_Final rating:★★★½ - I really liked it. Would strongly recommend you give it your time._

The nightmare that started it all. Made us all scared to go to to sleep. My favorite horror series next to Friday the 13th. Love this movie.

Freddy's Revenge deserves redemption. If you don't expect a film about Freddy, you can appreciate this sequel for what it is, instead of begrudging it for what it isn't. The argument for a gay reading--the idea that Freddy is symbolic of the protagonist's repressed homosexual desires--isn't entirely convincing but even without it, the movie's a lot better than many credit it. This is a Nightmare on Elm Street story that uses the creature to explore what it feels like to grow up. It's confusing and scary and transformational. Tonal shifts and plot mistakes only contribute to the overall intent.

Possession is nine-tenths of the law.
A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy's Revenge is the runt of the Elm Street litter. It was unfortunate to be the sequel to a landmark horror film, a film that birthed one of the ultimate horror icons whilst having at its core a terrifying premise. A premise that was superbly executed by all involved in the first film. Part 2 bravely tried to advance the bogeyman story to another level, to one of possession, which in hindsight was a mistake.
There's also the mixed tonal flow and confused intents that hamper the pic. Whilst the young members of the cast are too blank to garner the required amount of sympathy to get us to care about their plight, especially lead lad Mark Patton as Jesse Walsh. However, there is still a lot to like here, some striking imagery grabs the attention and it is not without some unnerving scares.
The debates about what metaphors the makers were going for still exist, and that homo-erotic sheen is never going to go away, but even though it's an average Elm Street movie, it's not as dreadful as it was first painted. 5/10

Ella Enchanted is a whimsical fairy tale that manages to stand out, even if it doesn’t quite reach perfection. The first act does a great job introducing the characters, setting up the plot, and establishing the unique charm of this world. The second act keeps a solid pace, building on the adventure and humor, and it all leads to a satisfying climax in the final act. While the cinematography and editing aren't flawless, they don’t detract from the experience either, they're just there, doing their job without standing out.
What really sets this movie apart is its message about consent, autonomy, and freedom. These themes hit differently today than they did in 2004. Sure, the whimsical elements might feel over-the-top or gimmicky at times, but they also give the movie a unique personality. It’s a fun watch that knows exactly what it’s trying to say and follows through on that. For a film directed by Tommy O'Haver, who doesn’t have a big name or portfolio, it’s a respectable effort

Easily in the top 10. Probably the best mystery thriller I've ever.

Morgan Freeman is psycho-detective "Cross" who has retreated from his work after an operation went awry, killing his wife. Shortly after, the daughter of a senator (Michael Moriarty) is kidnapped by one of her teachers, and when he calls "Cross" to lure him back into the business the game is afoot. Aided by one of the girl's now disgraced Secret Service agents "Flannigan" (Monica Potter) the two have to piece together a puzzle that will track down and rescue the girl. The snag with this thriller is that it is all just bit too straightforward - there are no real problems with that puzzle as the pair solidly proceed. There is precious little jeopardy, and the characters are all just too sterile - it's just lacking in anything that gives it a sense of peril before an ending that really does have you saying "Hmmm...". Freeman certainly has a charm to him, but that's simply not enough to ignite this by-the-numbers effort from a director who couldn't, or couldn't be bothered, to make this more interesting and challenging to watch. Television fodder, I'm afraid - and not likely fodder you will recall next week.

_**Good, but farfetched with an eye-rolling ‘big reveal’**_
D.C. forensic psychologist Alex Cross (Morgan Freeman) investigates when a senator’s daughter is kidnapped from a private school by a man obsessed with the infamous Lindbergh abduction (Michael Wincott). A secret service agent at the school assists him on the case (Monica Potter).
“Along Came a Spider” (2001) is an improbable detective thriller like its predecessor “Kiss the Girls” (1997) except that it doesn’t rip-off “Silence of the Lambs” (1991) or “Se7en” (1995). Both were based on the books by James Patterson.
The opening is great with a thrilling dam sequence. The ensuing story of the kidnapping & investigation is compelling but, like the first film, a plot wrench is thrown into the works that muddles everything. I can roll with that, but not the absurd ‘big reveal’ at the end, which comes off as a wannabe “Fooled ya” by the writers. They might’ve fooled me, but they also ruined the movie with the eye-rolling twist.
Like “Kiss the Girls,” “Along Came a Spider” is worthwhile if you like proficient detective thrillers and the cast, but be prepared for a wildly unrealistic tale.
The film runs 1 hour, 44 minutes, and was shot in the Vancouver area, British Columbia, and Owings Mills/Baltimore, Maryland (the train sequence), with establishing shots of Washington DC.
GRADE: C

**Absurd situations that can't just be ignored**
Somnia features an intriguing beginning because of an interesting plot,
enjoyable locations and likable characters, then everything will start
to fall apart. There are too many nonsense moments, you will disagree
with almost all of the actions taken by our protagonists, and the
events taking place will be far from realistic.
Be aware of the genre, don't expect this movie to be much of a horror,
don't expect this movie to be much of a fantasy neither ... it's a mix
that I didn't personally enjoy. Special effects are well made at least.
Cutting it short: the main issue is the writing and the ridiculous
situations. I don't want to make any spoiler but hopefully you will
understand my concerns when I mention the words "careless people".
P.S. Jacob Tremblay, the kid, is great.
_(4 stars out of 10)_

Good premise, good design. Bad lead performance, bad... amount... of dropped plot points? That was less concise than it sounded in my head. What I'm trying to say is that for every positive _Before I Wake_ has on offer, there is an equal and opposite negative to bring it back down again.
_Final rating:★★½ - Had a lot that appealed to me, didn’t quite work as a whole._

**It all begins with the butterflies!**
People think it is a horror, but it was a fantasy-horror. According to the director, it is a supernatural theme. You may ask what's the big deal, but if you watch the film you will get, particularly the conclusion twist. It was a decent film with a good cast. It marks the return of the wonder boy Jacob Tremblay, after a tremendous performance debut from the Oscar nominated film 'Room'. Once again, he was brilliant, but due to the different theme, it might not be recognisation on a big scale. The main narration was led by Kate Bosworth, really worth mentioning her role as she was excellent like never before in the lead.
When a young couple lose their son, they adopt an eight year old boy, Cody. It's a new start for them, as well as for the boy, but after a few days later they come to know the boy has some kind of supernatural power. So they begin to use him for their own gain and neglect him on the other ground. But it won't stay long that way, as one day a dreadful event happens, followed many similar. The remaining narration is to tell us how they're going to fix it, but the real question is, is it possible to solve.
It's a better film than what the rating states. But the issue was it is kind of improvised version of 'Oculus'. And it is not too scary or the too soft narration, but the kind of ending it had, it should have been targeted the families and children with more leaning on the fantasy stuffs. I think the horror concept brought in just to attract the adult crowds. Overall, it can be watched by everyone and that excludes little kids. For me the ending part made me consider it a good film. Because I believe everyone had such misunderstanding, growing up at that stage of the life, so did I.
7/10

OK, I'll be honest, I wasn't expecting much and, after seeing the spots on talk shows, I was expecting something far raunchier and with far less sentimentality and heart.
The good news is that I was wrong. My expectations were subverted... and not in the Johnson The Last Jedi, we are going to subvert expectations by not making a genre film kind of way... but in the wow, this has a little more depth than expected kind of way.
No, no, no, no, no... don't let that ruin it for you. Trust me, if it was a really deep film, I'd be giving it 1 star out of 10 for false advertisement reasons alone.
It was still sufficiently raunchy, low brow, and vulgar enough to entertain as advertised. It was as advertised.
But, it also had a cuter more innocent story that went along with the sleazy hysterical humor. A story that is actually kind of moving given what you are watching. A story that is actually very moving given how it was advertised... given the genre that it was in... given the highly offensive humor that MOST of us absolutely love.
And whomever edited it, had their head on their shoulders. Watching the cut scenes alone are enough to show you how Good Boys could have gone wrong, by running too long with jokes that weren't as funny, had the deleted scenes been left in.

It's not very good, and it is very derivative but man, I guess I'm just a sucker for jokes about drug use? For whatever reason I pretty consistently find it genuinely funny. Probably says more about me than it does about _Good Boys_, but whatever, it's fine.
_Final rating:★★½ - Had a lot that appealed to me, didn’t quite work as a whole._

Everything old is new again.
Three naive six-graders are on a quest to get to their first kissing party, but get detoured along the way. Sound familiar? That's because it's the same plot as "Superbad" only with younger kids. From having to score drugs to selling a sex doll, these kids get into all kinds of ridiculous hijinks that provide only a mild laugh now and again.
My main problem here is the rehash. Why? "Superbad" is a far superior movie, probably because of the knowledge the characters bring to the table. These kids know next to nothing about the world, a fact that's played up to a maximum extent time and again. By the end of the movie, I was ready to throw my hands up in the air saying "Alright! I get it already." And the characters don't really develop to a significant extent. They remain just as naive at the end of the movie as they were at the beginning.
As a result, we wind up not just with a rehash of "Superbad" but a rather stagnant one at that. It can be cute at times, but overall we learn nothing along with the characters and our lives are not richer for having seen this movie. It's a cute diversion, but nothing else. Take it for what it is, or don't. My recommendation is that if you have anything else to see, you're probably better off seeing that instead.

Most of the comedies that I love have an element of emotional weight, and ‘Good Boys’ is no exception. The film has some really bittersweet conversations about losing friendships and growing up that are sure to hit home for a lot of people. It helps push the film to the next level, and was something I really adored.
- Chris dos Santos
Read Chris' full article...
https://www.maketheswitch.com.au/article/review-good-boys-more-than-just-a-young-superbad