They were very young. Virtually their first film. Both play great parts and both show early promise, but neither had superstar status enough back then to over-act n get away with it.
It's like watching Russell Crowe in that Australian skinhead film. Or a fresh-faced James Coburn in a Randolph Scott 50s western. They had something special even working with scraps.
One might give a nod to THE SPY WHO CAME IN FROM THE COLD. Of course, it belongs to another genre. One might even say that it created a genre: the downbeat, realistic, anti-Bond espionage story. But when Burton goes to ground in London to establish his cred as a potential defector, the surroundings and personalities are right out of the kitchen sink toolbox.
My Spring Break vacation begins today, so I'll be watching SPY this week.
One might give a nod to THE SPY WHO CAME IN FROM THE COLD. Of course, it belongs to another genre. One might even say that it created a genre: the downbeat, realistic, anti-Bond espionage story. But when Burton goes to ground in London to establish his cred as a potential defector, the surroundings and personalities are right out of the kitchen sink toolbox.
My Spring Break vacation begins today, so I'll be watching SPY this week.
The Spy Who Came in from the Cold is a superb film. I’ve seen it many times and never get tired of revisiting it. Yet, when I first saw it in 1965 I didn’t think much of it at all. I put that down to my then juvenile mindset when I probably thought a spy film meant action scenes.
... The Spy Who Came in from the Cold is a superb film. I’ve seen it many times and never get tired of revisiting it. Yet, when I first saw it in 1965 I didn’t think much of it at all. I put that down to my then juvenile mindset when I probably thought a spy film meant action scenes.
I've watched it three or four times (similarly, read the source novel at least three times) and agree it is a good film, very downbeat anti-Bond and the story has some complexity. As a stand-alone film one of the plot issues I have doesn't matter but I do find the character of Mundt to be a problem if you know the first novel Call for the Dead
I've watched it three or four times (similarly, read the source novel at least three times) and agree it is a good film, very downbeat anti-Bond and the story has some complexity. As a stand-alone film one of the plot issues I have doesn't matter but I do find the character of Mundt to be a problem if you know the first novel Call for the Dead
Other than A View to a Kill, has there ever been a film you would rate a 10 out of 10?
... Other than A View to a Kill, has there ever been a film you would rate a 10 out of 10?
Hey, Jim, I think you must be confusing me with someone else. On my last viewing of Roger Moore's final JB007 outing (Oct 21) I rated it 6 out of 10 ... far from the best (most entertaining), certainly not the worst (least entertaining).
As for my highest rated films, I've posted such lists before, but rather than search, I'll name:
Thunderball (1965), OHMSS (1969) and Dances with Wolves (1990) (extended version) as top. Whether each and all rate 10 ... perhaps 10- ... it's hard to say as I haven't watched any of these three in the last 8 years. I still consider the Kevin Costner masterpiece my favourite film but due to its (extended) length it's not one for casual viewing. Mitch
