And Then This Happened... Outlaw of Gor

It is good to be king. You can wear whatever you want. Command all your minions. Demand absolute obedience from your subjects. And of course you get to make proclamations. But sometimes wearing whatever you want while making the proclamations can turn out to be a bad thing.

Case in point in the example below.

But still, this moment from Outlaw of Gor gives us the perfect opportunity for caption fun. So we can't be all that mad at King Goofy here.

And then this happened...

Outlaw of Gor (1989) – MST3K Review

Summary

Poor Professor Cabot (Urbano Barberini). He misses his girlfriend Telena (Rebecca Ferratti) in the mystical land of Gor. Last time he crossed dimensions, he became a hero, but these days he’s hanging out in bars with his super annoying friend Watney Smith (Russel Savadier). 

Suddenly they are both sucked back into Gor and find themselves mixed in a conspiracy between the lovely Queen Lara (Donna Denton) and the scheming high priest Xenos (Jack Palance). Its going to take wits, sword swinging and magic to survive. Well that and the Midget Hup (Nigel Chipps). That's his name folks. Prepare yourself for endless scenes of wandering in a desert, endless scenes of people saying "Cabot" over and over again, and endless scenes of people wearing next to nothing and flailing about with fake weapons. Will Cabot remain the Outlaw of Gor or will he clear his name and get the girl?

Movie Review

"I really like your hat Mr. Palance."

The 1980’s proved to be a pretty rich time for low budget fantasy films. Conan the Barbarian started this whole trend off and we entered the Barbarian Age of fantasy movies. And if you loved your fantasy films with a bit of skin and lot of dumb dialogue, than this was the decade for you. This film (also going by the names Gor II and Outlaw of Gor) is a sequel to Gor. These were loosely based off a series of sword and planet adventures started in the late 60’s by John Norman. These types of stories were modeled off of the John Carter series by Edgar Rice Burrows, but with a bit more sex and torture.

"Is that where the tree topper went."

This movie has more in common with Ator the Flying Eagle and Cave Dwellers then either of the Conan films. It was produced by Golan Globas, the subject of the film Electric Boogaloo: The Wild, Untold Story of Cannon Films. So you kind of know what you are getting into. Not only is the budget on the low side, but the film is poorly written and put together. Some attempt was made to make the kingdom and castles look a little interesting. Having never seen the first Gor film, I’m guessing some of these sets and costumes were carried over. Sometimes they look very silly, but hey that’s part of the fun.

Mike begs the movie to stop showing off Hup's butt.

One side effect of the costuming is the fact that a lot of skin is shown. And I mean a lot. Cleavage and long legs abound. For the ladies watching, they get multiple shots of men running around in short tunics and tight little briefs. I lost count of the number of shots of men splayed out and women bending over. Director John "Bud" Carlos knew exactly what kind of movie he was making, and Outlaw is certainly competing with Barbarian Queen in the skin department. Outlaw is a little less misogynistic, but not by much.

Cabot is confident. Hup? Not so much.

Much like Deathstalker and the Warriors from Hell the fight scenes are all pretty lousy. Most of the battlers look inspired by spastic chipmunks on a sugar high. No one comes close to hitting anyone else with any weapon. People jump around, I think to show how skilled they are, but I suspected they were suffering from seizures. The funny thing is the film is packed with battle scene. The most memorable is a female gladiatorial battle between princess Telena and two amazons who chewed all the scenery before entering the fray. The big finale battle scene in Outlaw is so stilted and random that you can’t help but laugh. This movie could have used rapid editing to hide the fact that these actors can’t fight.

Picked up the bloody dagger, now why don't you
tromp around in the blood and leave well defined
footprints while you're at it.

The story is simple. Our hero goes back to Gor, gets framed for murder and must expose the plot. But the movie continues to botch things. Not one single character  in Outlaw has any motivation or exhibits rational behavior. One minute Watney is Cabot’s best bud, the next he’s a traitorous bastard. One minute Queen Lara is all chummy with Xenos the next minute she hates him. Talk about mood swings! Cabot never proves he’s innocent really, he just stumbles around, beats people up, and gets beaten up. Eventually Watney reveals the truth, but only because he’s about to be killed. What about the dwarf or Midget Hup as he is called in the credits? Well I have no idea who he is, or why he’s in the movie other than comic relief and showing his butt off.

Even in these early scenes you want to smash Watley
in the face... hard.

Then there is the acting. Yeah it stinks on toast. Barberini isn't bad as Cabot. I'm guessing he was hired more for his physique as opposed to acting skills. But if Miles O'Keefe works as Ator, than I guess Barberini is fine as Cabot. Savadier is really good at being annoying as Watley. He's supposed to be smarmy which he gets right, and funny which he isn't really. He also manages to look oily in just about every scene he's in. Then there is Mr. Chipps as Midget Hup. He doesn't do much else other than follow Cabot around and act as a mascot of sorts in the film. Not going to fault Chipps for his performance, there just isn't much in the script for him to do.

Oh she looks normal (maybe a little vampy) now
but just wait... just wait.

But two performances in Outlaw are worth mentioning. Donna Denton as Queen Lara is hilarious. She chews the scenery vamping it up one minute and shouting imperiously the next. Not a drop of subtlety to be found, but you get the feeling she’s having a good time. One scene in particular where she’s yelling at Xenos she almost blows her line and it’s even funnier. Then there’s Jack Palance in full “I’m doing it for the money folks” mode. He wears some of the stupidest hats I’ve seen in a fantasy or sci-fi film. He can barely muster the energy to act with other characters. His wheezy delivery is just plain hilarious in this film. I guess he just wasn't as motivated as he was as Voltan in Hawk the Slayer. It’s a long way to City Slickers Jack – hang in there.

The music was borrowed from numerous sources, but I actually recognized a few pieces from the 1983 version of Hercules with Lou Ferrigno. IMDB has the composer listed as Pino Donaggio who is still composing work for Italian films. Honestly, his lush score may be the best part of the movie.

All told, Outlaw is a mess. It makes less sense than an Ator movie and has more skin than one too. I’m not sure who the target audience was, but I do know that the audience ended up being Mike and the bots.

Episode Review

"Try tossing me and I'll gut you Cabot."

I love when the crew tackles bad 80’s fantasy and they don’t disappoint here. Everything from the acting, to the costumes, to Jack Palance gets mocked for some really big laughs. Things start off with the bang as Watney won’t stop saying Cabot’s name. He literally says “Cabot” about thirty times in first ten minutes of the film. When he finally stops, the people of Gor are so happy to see Cabot they take up the chant. You literally spend the first 30 minutes of the movie listening to people say “Cabot!” “Cabot?” Cabot.” Cabot!” and so on. Mike and the bots join in at first, but soon grow tired of it, and then angry at it. The results are hilarious.

Jack’s “performance” gets imitated and improved with added lines and comments on the wardrobe. My favorite is when he’s in a chase scene, except Jack isn’t running at all. Crow says in an very good imitation “Jack’s not being paid enough to run.”

This fight scene is something else... not in a good way.

Some of the best riffing in Outlaw comes at the expense of the numerous shots of people’s hindquarters, cleavage and crotches. I have to hand it the writers for coming up with so many euphemisms for body parts and then working them into jokes. Its hilarious stuff, but it actually makes this one of the least family friendly episodes of the show. The movie has some serious sexual overtones in it (you know for this type of movie) and our boys just riff along with them to. When a particularly phallic pillar appears in the foreground with the queen in the background Tom says as the queen, “Oh I wish someone would invent the battery.” Yeah, I was a bit surprised.

All in all it’s a pretty good time, lot of laughs, but a few slow spots here and there. Cabot and the dwarf spend a lot of the middle section wandering around the bland desert and the castle intrigue is really badly written and executed. It doesn’t give them too much to work with and makes things flag a bit. As annoying as Watney is, he was a great source of jokes. When he disappears about halfway through the film, you end up missing the stupid slimy jerky.

"Its a tubular, boobular joy for each girl and boy!"

The host segments aren’t bad. Thing start off silly when Mike and the bots are roughhousing aboard the satellite. Its all fun until Tom Servo gets hurt. The intro segment has the mad scientist showing off their time machine. It’s pretty goofy. Then Mike and the bots become Fabio, with the instant Fabio kits. Remember him? The first break has Mike going over his acting career in an album. It’s an odd segment. The next is a hilarious song number as Crow, Tom and Mike sing in old 20’s style about Tubular Boobular Joy. This is one of the best songs of the Comedy Central years. The next segment has the boys reviewing Jack’s autobiography called Palance on Palance, which includes a whole chapter on Tango and Cash. The movie ends and the boys show the Mads how many crotch shots there were in the movie – yeah it’s a long montage. The show ends with the Mads dancing. Kinda odd really.

"Freedom!!!!... oh wrong movie."

All told, this is a pretty funny episode. I enjoy it, but not as much as Cave Dwellers or Deathstalker and the Warriors from Hell. The flagging in the middle and the couple of weak host segments keep it from the top notch, but I can easily recommend it for anyone who gets a kick out of the 80’s low budget fantasy film.

I give Outlaw four buffalo shots out of five.

And now I present the Madness of Queen Lara.

She's working up the crazy eyes. Don't look directly at them!

"Get out of my sight, you disgusting woooormmmm."

I think the voices in her head won't stop singing
"Let it Go" from Frozen.

One of her many dramatic arm gestures and yelling.
Did I mention she's a bit over the top... just a smidge.

Why won't anyone listen to the bellowing crazy woman
in the throne? Because her hat isn't goofy enough.
(seriously her performance makes the movie)

This episode is available on the Mystery Science Theater 3000: Volume XXX.

Movie Musings: The Strange Journey of the Star Trek Films - Part 1

Part One - The Original Series Cast

"So a Klingon, a Romulan and a Vulcan walk into
a bar..."

It is hard to argue Star Trek's legacy within pop culture. It’s characters and universe have endured almost as long as James Bond.  Every time I think we can count the franchise as down and out, along comes a new incarnation to bring it back to whole new group of fans yearning to explore strange new worlds.

One of the interesting things about the franchise is that its longevity is due in large part to the success of the feature films that were released starting in 1979 with StarTrek: The Motion Picture. While the television series is where the franchise started, if the films were not as successful as they were, Star Trek would be a fondly remembered relic of the 1960s.  In addition, we can see how Paramount, the studio that owns Star Trek, feels about the series depending on how they approach the films.

I think Decker wants his chair back.

In this two part blog, I’ll take a look at the ways the films were impacted by and impacted the franchise, and why they are important to its legacy. I won’t be going into too much detail on my thoughts on the films, but I will discuss critical reception (and perception of that reception) and how that affected the films.

The original series ended in 1969 after three seasons. While it was popular among science fiction fans, it never really exploded in popularity during its run. Instead Star Trek got syndicated and that is where the fanbase really started to grow. During the 1970s it was hard to avoid a rerun of Star Trek and even growing up in the 1980s, it felt like the series was always around.

Wait! There was a cat girl in Star Trek the Animated
Series! Sign me up!

An animated series followed in 1973 and 1974 that expanded the voyages a little bit, and allowed the writers to take the series in directions that would have been impossible with live action.  All this exposure of Star Trek in the 70s inspired Paramount to look into creating a new series of adventures with the same crew for Phase II. Production started and then a little movie called Star Wars erupted onto the screens, and suddenly Paramount shifted gears to turn Star Trek into a film franchise.

The increased the budget to a whopping 35 million dollars (of 1970s money). They pulled in acclaimed director Robert Wise and got their marketing into high gear. This was the turning point. If Star Trek: The Motion Picture was a failure, than the franchise was dead.

The moons of Vulcan are affecting her mind!

Critical and general response was average. But the combined fanbase of the 60s and 70s had been thirsting for new Star Trek adventures, and they went back to the theaters over and over again to see the film. For all it’s faults The Motion Picture has a huge visual scope, impressive visual effects and a wonderful soundtrack by Jerry Goldsmith. Seeing it in the theater is a real experience (one I actually had the pleasure of revisiting in 2012). There was also a frenzy of interest in space adventures because of Star Wars, so I bet a lot of little kids dragged their parents to see the film. In the end, the Motion Picture was a financial success.

Paramount felt confident in continuing the series as a film franchise, and moved forward producing Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. But they reduced the budget to a little over 11 million, and asked director Nicholas Meyer to make sure there was more action in the film (a criticsm of the previous film they wanted to avoid). Meyere delivered a film that is more visceral, goes back to the roots of the original series, and cranks up the action with some excellent visual effects and high stakes. The Wrath of Khan was an immediate hit, with excellent critical response and fan approval. It also did very well on VHS, a new medium that studios were just beginning to explore in 1982.

"Is that a giant worm in your hand, or are you just
happy to see me?"

So Paramount kept the same focus when it came to The Search for Spock in 1984. Once again the budget was increased to 17 million. But the focus on characters and the quest to bring Spock back to life helped pull viewers in the theaters to find out how it was all going to shake out. Director Leonard Nimoy obviously knew the series inside and out, and crafted a solid follow up to the previous movie. The film got average critical response and most people enjoyed it well enough. But the film had a dark undertone that surprised many viewers.

Do you think he's using colorful metaphors here?

Gears were shifted in the storytelling for the next film, Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. Nimoy was back at the helm and the budget was given a bit of a boost (to 25 million) for some really impressive visual effects by Industrial Light and Magic. But the script involving time travel, saving the whales, and the crew interacting with the denizens of San Francisco circa 1986 was a blast. It was a fun movie with plenty of laughs and adventure all mixed together. Critical response was full of praise. But it was the success of the film with a wider audience that gave Paramount a view of what a successful Star Trek franchise could be. This was the most financial successful Star Trek film until the reboot in 2009.

In 1987, Star Trek: The Next Generation arrived on television screens. It was a new cast, new starship, hell it was a new century! Paramount understood that in order for the franchise to continue it would need to evolve. To do this, they needed to inject it with new blood creatively. Obviously the film franchise was still profitable, but a new television series could create new fans and lead to a new series of films.

It is like that Depeche Mode song, reach out and touch
face.

1989 brought the first good season of The Next Generation after its rocky start over the first two seasons. Meanwhile Paramount attempted to strike gold in the theaters again with William Shatner directing Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. Unfortunately the film was plagued with production issues, and arguments over the direction and tone of the script. Shatner wanted to go darker and more intense. Paramount wanted to keep it light and fun. The end result was a film that was critical and financial failure. Fans disliked the film for a whole host of reasons and rumor is that even Gene Roddenberry felt the film was not part of the official cannon. The movie also had the unfortunate release during one of the most crowded years in movie history. Batman, Ghostbusters 2, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade and Back to the Future Part 2 were all battling for seats in the multiplexes. Someone had to lose and Star Trek “won” that honor. While it did eventually recoup it's 28 million dollar budget, no one was really pleased with the final film.

"No, it's not Tribbles. The joke only works if
the Klingon asks the bartender first."

This did set off alarms at Paramount. They wondered if the aging cast was losing their audience appeal. But they also learned some lessons. Budget cutting your special effects heavy films is not a good option. So they turned back to Nicholas Meyer who did so well with The Wrath of Khan to helm Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. In a cunning bit of synergy, the plot for the film directly impacted events in The Next Generation episodes Unification with Nimoy making a special appareance as Spock in the two-part adventure. Meyer brought back high stakes, tension and excitement to the series. The plot was inspired by world events, and with the increased budget (to 30 million) the movie looked great. Meyer’s script balances humor and tension better than the previous film did. Even with all that, the movie was also declared the final voyage of the full cast from The Original Series. All those elements stirred together made The Undiscovered Country a critical and financial success in 1991.  It was a win for Paramount and the franchise. But everyone knew it was time to switch gears.

In part two of this post, I take a look at the trails and Tribble-ations of the films featuring the case of The Next Generation and Beyond...

"Just imagine it. We are all animated, and there's
a cat girl in a red uniform! That is my vision."

Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure (1989)

Introduction:

When I revisted this film recently, I was struck by one thing – there is no way it could be green lit by any major studio in this day and age. If you read my summary below, and realize that the only “star” is a comedian who has about five minutes of screen time, and a concept so dumb it just can’t possibly work. It is not a sure bet at all. Hell, it wasn’t a sure bet in 1988 either, but it got made and we now have some the best catchphrases of the 1980s.

Summary:

Bill (Alex Winter) and Ted (Keanu Reeves) are in a most heinous situation. They are about to fail their high school history class, and if that happens they fail school! Ted will be shipped off to military school and Bill will most likely end up hanging out with Spicoli from Fast Times at Ridgemont High. Before that can happen a telephone booth (remember those) from the future arrives carrying George Carlin. No, it really does.

Carlin plays Rufus a man who has seen the most excellent future that Bill and Ted create – but only if they stay together to form their band Wyld Stallyns. To ensure they are kept together, they must pass the history class. To do that Rufus gives them the telephone booth/time machine to travel into the past. Bill And Ted go along with this and are soon meeting Napoleon, Billy the Kid, Socrates, Genghis Khan and Joan of Arc! Of course shenanigans ensue and you end up with historical figures running around the San Dimas mall, Napoleon on a waterslide and Abraham Lincoln telling everyone to “Be excellent to each other.” Prepare yourself for a real blast from the past (and the 1980s) with Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure.

Good Points:

• Embraces the silliness of the concept and keeps things fun
• Winter and Reeves are a great comic duo
• Snappy writing leads to some very quotable lines

Bad Points:

• Looking for a serious examination of time travel – uh, go watch Primer instead
• Looking for historical accuracy – uh, go watch the History chann… wait that won’t work either
• This movie is as dumb as its protagonists 

Overall:

But you could argue that fact. Much like Bill and Ted themselves, the movie is actually a bit smarter than it lets on. Some of the humor is silly, but there are also some solid satirical jabs at 80s society. But the thing that works is the spirit of fun and comedic chemistry of the leads. These guys are likable goofballs who get a lucky break but actually grow up a little because of it. For me, this is one of the classic comedies (and adventures) of the 1980s. Well worth seeing or revisiting.

Scores (out of 5)

Visuals: 4

Sound: 3

Acting: 4

Script: 4

Music: 4

Direction: 4

Entertainment: 5

Total:  4

Curious about a full review, sent me an email and I’ll make additional thoughts to this review.

Licence to Kill (1989)

Introduction:

With Timothy Dalton firmly in the role of James Bond, the screenwriters knew what kind of stories they could work on. The Living Daylights had returned the thrills back to the franchise, and Dalton was obviously up for something a little darker. So inspired by some action movies of the day, the crew took a chance with a story that was a little out of the normal frame for a James Bond flick. How did the gamble work out?

Summary:

British secret agent James Bond (Timothy Dalton) is trying to get his old pal Felix Leiter (David Hedison) to the church on time for his wedding to the lovely Della (Priscilla Barnes). But things don’t go as planned when they take a quick detour to catch the international drug lord Franz Sanchez (Robert Davi). After nabbing the baddie and tying the knot, Felix is ready for a nice honeymoon.

That’s when Sanchez escapes, kills Della and horribly maims Felix. The authorities in the US have their hands tied. Sanchez is untouchable in his base of operations in Isthmus City. But Bond is angry and is determined to avenge the Leiters. M (Robert Brown) tries to rein him in, but nothing doing. Bond joins forces with the lovely Pam Bouvier (Carey Lowell) and Q (Desmond Llewelyn) to bring Sanchez down. But does Bond have a hope in hell with his Licence to Kill revoked and an army standing between him and the target?

Good Points:

• Dalton is excellent in a script tailored to his strengths
• Davi makes a great villain
• The truck chase is one of the best in the entire franchise

Bad Points:

• May stray too far from traditional Bond stories and tone for some
• The lack of obvious humor will leave some viewers cold
• That title song is one of the least impressive of the bunch

Overall:

I enjoy this film every time revisit it. No it isn’t like any of the other Bond films in the original continuity, but it is that unique feel and tone that makes it a great watch. The action scenes are solid, the thrills are genuine, and the acting between Dalton and Davi crackles. Ends the 1980s Bond flicks on a high note.

Scores (out of 5)

Visuals: 4

Sound: 4

Acting: 4

Script: 4

Music: 3

Direction: 3

Entertainment: 5

Total:  4

In Depth Review

Licence revoked? Really M, is that the best you can do?

For the longest time, this was one of the most controversial of the James Bond films. You found some folks who loved it and other who hated it. Perhaps loathed even more than The Man With the Golden Gun or A View to a Kill, Licence to Kill was often called the film that nearly sunk the James Bond franchise. Most people point to the huge six year gap between this film and Goldeneye as proof, but in the end, I just think they want to dump on a film that doesn’t deserve it’s poor reputation.

Licence to Kill is a top-notch thriller with some great action and solid acting by the leads. It’s got its flaws, and it never quite reaches the pinnacle of the Bond series. However, it was a excellent attempt to take James Bond into a new direction, something that wouldn’t happen until 2006 with Casino Royale.

One of several impressive stunt sequences in the film.

Like all the Bond films directed by John Glen, Licence to Kill goes for a realistic look, perhaps even more so than the previous film. It feels a bit more like For Your Eyes Only with very few gadgets being utilized (even though the film features Q in his largest role ever). The location shooting occurs in and around the United States, with key scenes occurring in the Florida Keyes, Mexico City (standing in for the fictional Isthmus City) and additional shooting in and around Mexico. The sets, while impressive at times, lack that flashy grandeur that most folks associate with Bond. But the finale scenes that occur around the religious compound and then on the winding highway leading away from it create some of the most spectacular location shooting of the Bond films of the 1980s.

Of key importance are the action scenes. Glen brought a real sense of explosive action to the James Bond flicks, and he doesn’t skimp in this film. The pre-credit sequence that involves a mid-air hijack is a real hoot. Then there’s Bond’s daring escape from the ship, the Wavecrest, which has him underwater, and then skiing behind a plane without any water-skis. But the winner is the incredible truck chase sequence. Sure, it feels a bit like a nod to Raiders of the Lost Ark, but it manages to do some very unique things with the tanker trucks, and pulls off some stunts that I have never seen duplicated before or since. It leads to a wonderful finale that pits Bond against Sanchez, literally mano a mano.

To keep up with the top-notch action scenes you need some top quality sound. You get it with plenty of booming explosions and ricocheting bullets. There’s also quite a bit of underwater action in the film, which causes its own set of sound challenges. Lots of use of silence, bubbles and splashing keep us tied to the thrills.

And featuring Wayne Newton. Yes. Wayne. Newton.

With the exit of John Barry from the musical side of the James Bond franchise, the producers were on the look out to alter the musical make up of the series a bit. Since the film was very much inspired by the current crop of late 80s action flicks, they turned to the man who created the scores for two of the most popular films of the genre. Michael Kamen had scored both Lethal Weapon and Die Hard. He took his action sound, one that is functional and exciting, and combined it with Monty Norman’s James Bond theme. He added a Spanish guitar to add color (and playing the Bond theme a number of times). He also created a lovely piano love theme for the character of Pam. The final result is a musical score that works fine in the film, but doesn’t really stand out, or grab your attention like Barry did or Arnold would in the 1990s films.

Gladys Knight performs the title song for Licence to Kill. It has a very late 80s adult contemporary feel to it. It’s an interesting choice, one that pulls away from the poppy sounds of Duran Duran and a-Ha. But the song is too leisurely and sedate to really work with the film. I’m surprised they didn’t go for a more Latin sounding tune to match the locale of the film. For the end title theme, Patty LaBelle sings, “if You Asked Me to”. It is a decent enough song, but one that would be made famous by Celine Dion a few years later. Kamen was brought in late on the film, so he had no input on the sound of either of the tunes. But he had worked (and would work) with pop and rock artists on projects, so it wouldn’t have been new territory for him. It’s a shame we didn’t get to hear what he could have come up with.

Bond and weddings just never work out.

For me the movie works because of the excellent work by Dalton and Davi. Both men have interesting characters to explore. Both men get some great scenes together. And both men change as the movie progresses. Prior to the Daniel Craig era, Licence to Kill was the only Bond film to really explore who James Bond was (although a fair argument could be made for Dr. No or On Her Majesty’sSecret Service). One of my favorite moments from Dalton is when Della tells James that he needs to settle down with a nice girl. Dalton allows a painful memory shoot across his eyes for a couple seconds and then offers a thin smile. After Bond leaves, Felix explains that Bond was married once, a long time ago. It’s a great bit of subtle acting by Dalton, and it shows one end of the range he takes the character through.

The script allows us to see many sides to Bond. Obviously the first scenes show him at ease with his friends, and enjoying the wedding. But once Sanchez escapes and unleashes his vengeance, we see a side of the character we’d never seen before. James Bond loses control. The rage, frustration and boiling anger are simmering just below the surface for the first half of the film. Dalton is actually pretty intimidating in these scenes, and it makes perfect sense that M revokes his Licence to Kill. It isn’t until Bond sees the impact of his relentless and thoughtless pursuit that he is able to channel that anger. Suddenly the cool professional is back, and Bond is back in control (for the most part). He’s still very angry, but Dalton shows that the reins are clearly back on and the focus is on getting to and destroying Sanchez.

Sanchez is so confident that he confronts Bond in a
pink shirt.

Davi plays the flip side to Bond. He’s a man in complete control at all times. He is confident with his money, power and loyalty of his team. Even his capture is treated as nothing more than a temporary distraction. But as Bond begins to undermine the team, and cause Sanchez to question the loyalty of his crew, the cracks start to show. Davi plays it all perfectly, supremely confidant as the movie opens. But like Bond, he can run hot, and as his rage begins to take hold, Davi allows the cold fury show. By the end of the film, Sanchez’ world is literally in flames, he can’t trust anyone and Bond is moving closer and closer for kill. Davi never goes over the top, but his desperation is played in his eyes and in his carriage. The confidence is gone, but in its place is the ruthlessness of a cornered animal.

"But James I have no idea what the point of my
character is?"

The rest of the cast does a solid job. The two ladies in the film offer a mixed bag of sorts. Talisa Soto’s performance used to really annoy me. Lupe is essentially Sanchez’s woman. Of course she meets Bond, falls for him, and then helps him out a few times. Soto seems a bit too naïve or dim at times. Her falling for James seems to come out of nowhere. But watching the film this time, I think it may be more of an editing issue. I think a few scenes were cut developing her character a bit more, and it makes her performance look off. Carey Lowell has the more interesting part. She’s tough, she’s lovely and she can take care of herself. Her attraction to Bond is obvious and their relationship works a lot better. She ties with my favorite Bond girl from the 1980s (between her and Melina Havelock from For Your Eyes Only).

Q and Pam doubt the veracity of your claim.

Licence to Kill gives us the final hurrah for two of the London cast members. This is the last time Robert Brown would tackle M. He was always a bit non-descript in the role for my tastes, but he never hurt the films. Then there’s Caroline Bliss as Moneypenny. Bliss has a short scene and doesn’t make much of an impression. Q on the other hand gets quite a bit of screen time, when he arrives with gadgets in hand and ready to help. He has come great interplay with Bond and Bouvier and brings a bit of lightness to the darker portions of the film.

One of the main complaints I see about this film is that it does not feel like a James Bond film. I can understand why some viewers feel this way. It was obviously inspired more by Lethal Weapon, Die Hard and Miami Vice than any of the traditional spy films. One of the main elements of those series is that the main hero is not infallible. I think that is one of the reasons some folks just don’t like this movie. James Bond makes mistakes, gets beaten up and actually ends up dirty and bloody by the end. But that is the point of the story, to show that Bond cannot loose his cool if he is to succeed in his work. Dalton’s performance helps underline this element of the script.

The truck chase if filled with exciting and impressive
stunt work.

One thing I think that folks also miss is that even though Q has a larger role in the film, gadgets do not save the day. In fact, most of the gadgets end up hindering Bond or being useless. The final third of Licence to Kill actually has Bond unarmed and without his gadgets. Instead he relies on his wits, his natural charm, and his friends to help take down Sanchez. He keeps pushing Sanchez's buttons until the man get sloppy and starts making mistakes. The final confrontation occurs between an unarmed and bloody James Bond, and an enraged Sanchez wielding a machete. It’s a deconstruction of the James Bond myth in many ways.

In 1989 folks weren’t ready for that. A lot of Bond fans still lamented that Pierce Brosnan didn’t’ get the role. The shadow of Roger Moore’s lighter approach to the character loomed large over the franchise. And while the script was intriguing, it was too bloated with other elements that weren’t needed. Removing the subplot with the Chinese agents, the cover operation using the religious cult and even the character of Lupe could have brought the running time down on this movie, and turned it into a lean mean ass kicking machine. Instead, the film drags a bit in places and feels like it is spinning its wheels.

Pam revokes Newton's licence to sing.

On top of all that the film ran into some production problems including a name change. Originally this film was title Licence Revoked, but there was fear that the title would confuse some American audience members. The switch in title forced the marketing team to have to come up with new material on the fly and the film ended up with one of the worst marketing campaigns in a year jam packed with huge movies including: Batman, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Back to the Future: Part 2 and Star Trek V.

It’s a shame really, because the movie ended up being one of the worst performing Bond films, and it really didn’t deserve that title. Dalton was often blamed for the poor performance of the film, and folks seemed quick to dismiss his two films once Goldeneye hit.

Timothy Dalton had a rough time with "true" Bond fans.
But time has shown his films were some of the best.

Licence to Kill finally got some more respect around the release of Die Another Day. By this time the poor scripts of the Brosnan era were taking their toll, and people were looking at the older films. Suddenly Dalton’s films seemed like a breath of fresh air, and Licence to Kill in particular seemed to be something unique and entertaining in the franchise. It’s not hard to see its impact on the Daniel Craig era, especially in elements of both Quantum of Solace and Skyfall. So I say, if you haven’t seen the film in a while, revisit it, and see how Dalton’s performance really holds up, and how a dangerous thrilling James Bond adventure can be just as entertaining as a light, over the top romp with a megalomaniac.