Movie Number 83: FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE (Dir: Terence Young, 1963).

Movie number 83: FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE (Dir: Terence Young, 1963).

Sean Connery returns as Ian Fleming’s James Bond 007 in this second movie in the series, From Russia with Love. Produced, once again, by ‘Cubby’ Broccoli and Harry Saltzman’s Eon Productions.

Here some double agent dupery sees Bond smuggling a Soviet Lektor decrypting device from East to West via the Orient Express. Pulling the strings are terrorist organisation SPECTRE, seeking to avenge the death of an agent who Bond bumped off previously.

Dr No director Terence Young returns to deliver another tight, action packed yet well paced thriller. I will admit the misogynistic tone of From Russia with Love leaves a bad taste. The sight of Bond slapping a woman about, even if she is a Russian agent, fills me with unease. That aspect aside, the movie ranks as one of the series’ best.

Many latter staples of the series are introduced here. SPECTRE head honcho Blofeld makes his first appearance, as does gadget man Q, a role Desmond Llewelyn would be associated with until his death in 1999. From Russia with Love also introduced the pre-title sequence and Lionel Bart provided the first Bond theme. Heard as an instrumental against the nudie ladies silhouette titles (another first - although here she is a belly dancer, nudieness would follow in later movies), Matt Monro’s beautiful vocal version is heard first over a transistor radio and later in the end credits.

Connery is fantastic; equal parts flirty and fighty, cool yet sophisticated. A quality supporting cast sees regulars Bernard Lee and Lois Maxwell return as M and Miss Moneypenny respectively; an amiable Pedro Armendáriz as Bond’s Istanbul M16 ally; Robert Shaw makes an impressive baddie and Daniela Bianchi gets to look lovely in a series of nighties as ambiguous Bond girl Tatiana. Best of all is the fabulous Lotte Lenya as SPECTRE agent and possessor of lethal footwear Rosa Klebb.

In my opinion the early Bond movies were never bettered. From Russia with Love, in particular, holds up as one of the series’ best and has stood the test of time as an exciting action adventure in its own right.

If you enjoyed this review check out my previous review of Dr No. A longer, more in-depth version of this review appears on my blog jinglebonesmovietime.blogspot.com

James Bond will return in my review of Goldfinger...

LADY AND THE TRAMP II: SCAMP’S ADVENTURE (Dir: Darrell Rooney, 2001).

46 years after Walt Disney’s original Lady and the Tramp (Clyde Geronimi, Wilfred Jackson & Hamilton Luske, 1955) comes this belated straight-to-video sequel.

Lady and Tramp’s only son Scamp rebels at life on a leash, runs away from home and hooks up with a gang of tough junkyard dogs. Clashing with gang leader Buster and falling for fetching young pup Angel, Scamp eventually must choose between his family or freedom.

Produced by Walt Disney Television Animation (lately DisneyToon Studios) on a much smaller budget than a Walt Disney Animation Studios feature, resulting in a markedly less polished production than that of its sister studio. The character animation is flat and cartoony, replacing the original movie’s studied realism. The backgrounds, likewise, lack the depth and detail of the first movie, while a homage to Lady and the Tramp’s famous spaghetti sequence and a train dodge scenario lifted from The Aristocats (Wolfgang Reitherman, 1970) are a reminder of how superior those movies are.

Among the cast you may recognise the familiar voices of Disney’s own little mermaid Ariel Jodi Benson as Lady and Hollywood legend Mickey Rooney as Scamp’s pal Sparky. While certainly perfunctory, none of the voice actors make much of an impression. Some serviceable but forgettable songs punctuate the soundtrack, none coming close to Peggy Lee and Sonny Burke’s majestic originals. Here lies the problem with Lady and the Tramp II; it is simply weaker than the first movie in all departments.

In truth, there are worse movies than Lady and the Tramp II. There are probably even worse Disney straight-to-videos sequels. But I honestly do not understand why you would watch this film instead of the masterful original. Lady and the Tramp endures as one of Walt Disney’s greatest animated features. Sadly, this cannot be said about its sequel; a pale imitation of the original and a soulless, artless exercise in exploitation.

A review of the original Lady and the Tramp and a longer, more in-depth review of Lady and the Tramp II can be found on my blog JINGLE BONES MOVIE TIME! Link below.

THE LEFTOVERS (Dir: Paul Schneider, 1986).

If there is a more 1980's way to open your movie than with Howard Jones' New Song, than I do not know what it is. I am also unsure as to who this lightweight comedy will resonate with, other than 1980's kids.

The Leftovers stars singer turned actor John Denver as Max Sinclair, director of The Middleburg Orphanage and surrogate father to the ragtag bunch of kids who live there. Cindy Williams is the live in help. Together they fend off plans to redevelop the home by underhanded means, while the kids do all they can to keep from being adopted.

Originally aired on television as part of ABC's The Disney Sunday Movie weekly series in November 1986. It's not hard to imagine that a decade earlier The Leftovers would have been released to cinemas, with Dean Jones and Sandy Duncan as possible leads. It is old fashioned, inoffensive but not without charm.

It may be a generational thing, but I did enjoy this movie. It is nothing spectacular but the leads are likeable and while the plot has a few too many contrivances and conveniences for its own good, most of its laughs are genuine.

However, it is low-key in the extreme and although I had seen this movie at around the age of 12 or 13, only one scene stuck in my head and that was the opening, probably because my tweenage self was a big fan of Howard Jones!

I am sure I enjoyed The Leftovers as a kid because I lapped up anything Disney. Revisiting it as an adult I am aware that it is no classic, even by 80's Disney TV movie standards. But it is an entertaining 90 odd minutes; if you are in the mood for some gentle 1980's nostalgia you might find it hits the spot. Just don't expect to remember much about it afterwards!

Visit my blog jinglebonesmovietime.blogspot.com for more reviews of vintage Disney movies!

A STUDY IN TERROR (Dir: James Hill, 1965).

Fact and fiction collide as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s literary detective Sherlock Holmes pits his wits against infamous serial killer Jack the Ripper.

A mysterious medical kit with a distinct crest sets Holmes on the case of the notorious killer and of the prominent aristocratic family he suspects are involved. Taking in the back alleys of 1888 Victorian London and mixing with the lowlifes there in.

A Study in Terror presents us with a highly sanitised version of 1880s Whitechapel; the Ripper’s victims all beautiful with their 1960s coiffures. The movie does, on the surface, appear to be a bit of a romp and was misleadingly advertised as a Batman-esq spoof by US distributor Columbia Pictures. In actual fact the movie is, at times, a pretty grizzly affair.

Screenwriters Derek Ford and Donald Ford have crafted a tense, twisty thriller with moments of horror and plenty of jumps. Director James Hill’s innovative use of point-of-view shots give the murders an extra viscerality while keeping the identity of the killer a mystery. The movie does have a somewhat misogynistic tone, which is perhaps inevitable considering its subject.

John Neville has just the right austerity as Holmes while Donald Houston is an amiably bluff Watson. A fantastic supporting cast includes Brit acting legends Anthony Quayle, Robert Morley and Judi Dench. Best of all is Barbara Windsor as Ripper victim Annie Chapman. Slightly stepping outside of her Carry On... persona, she gives us an all too rare glimpse of her acting ability beyond the giggly, busty blonde stereotype.

With its misogyny and grim use of fictionalised real life murders, you can safely wave goodbye to good taste. Yet, in spite of my misgivings over content, I thoroughly enjoyed A Study in Terror. What, on the surface, threatens to be an exploitative, sensationalist shocker is actually a well produced thriller with a fine cast. Recommended especially to Holmes aficionados and fans of 1960s British cinema.

Visit my blog jinglebonesmovietime.blogspot.com for more classic movie reviews!

BLACK ARROW (Dir: John Hough, 1985).

Made for The Disney Channel, Black Arrow is a swashbuckling adventure based upon the novel by Robert Louis Stevenson.

Set during the War of the Roses, corrupt Yorkist landowner Sir Daniel (Oliver Reed) is robbed by black clad vigilante Black Arrow (Stephan Chase). Seeking revenge, he sends his young nephew Richard (Benedict Taylor) on his trail. Sir Daniel is set to acquire more land with his marriage to the reluctant Lancastrian Lady Joanna (Georgia Slowe). Joanna does a runner, forms an alliance with Richard and together they determine to avenge Sir Daniel's wrongdoings.

Disney's third adaptation of a Stevenson novel, following Treasure Island (Byron Haskin, 1950) and Kidnapped (Robert Stevenson, 1960), Black Arrow was what would now be labelled a Disney Channel Original Movie. Back in 1985, The Disney Channel had a remit to provide family entertainment, not just sitcoms for tweenagers. Its new content, like that of the Disney Studio’s past was designed to appeal to a broader demographic than that of the Channel today. While Black Arrow would seem out of place on today’s Disney Channel, it is exactly the kind of movie of which company founder Walt Disney would have approved.

Having previously worked for Disney on the excellent Escape to Witch Mountain (1975), the talented John Hough was engaged to direct. To Black Arrow, Hough brings a somewhat more cinematic vision than one would usually expect from a TV Movie. The quality production only belying its TV origins through the prevalent use of close ups and mid shots.

The impressive cast of acting heavyweights Oliver Reed, Fernando Rey and Donald Pleasence also lend the film an air of prestige.

The film is not entirely flawless. Admittedly, there are a few unlikely plot contrivances and one of two moments which stretch credibility. While Benedict Taylor cuts far too modern a figure; strolling around the 15th Century like the 5th member of EuroVision popsters Bucks Fizz!

Overall though, Black Arrow is pretty solid entertainment. Old fashioned it may be but it does make me yearn for a time when The Disney Channel catered to more than just tweenage audiences.

Check out my blog jinglebonesmovietime.blogspot.com for more reviews of vintage Disney classics!

THE LITTLE MERMAID: ARIEL’S BEGINNING (Dir: Peggy Holmes, 2008).

The third and to date final movie of Disney’s animated Little Mermaid franchise. As its title would suggest Ariel’s Beginning is a prequel to the original The Little Mermaid (Ron Clements & John Musker, 1989).

Following the death of his wife Queen Athena, King Triton bans all music from Atlantica. Ariel and pals set about showing him the error of his ways and returning music and happiness to the kingdom. Yes, the plot really is that silly.

The Little Mermaid: Ariel’s Beginning was to be the last of Disney's animated made for video sequels, a line of movies that began 14 years earlier with Aladdin follow-up The Return of Jafar (Toby Shelton, Tad Stones & Alan Zaslove, 1994). Yet while these movies brought in the big bucks, their lower quality animation and storytelling had a detrimental effect on the public perception of Disney animation, possibly contributing to the disappointing box office returns of the studio’s product in the early 2000s.

Considering its made for video origins, Ariel’s Beginning is a visually pleasing film. Unfortunately the quality does not to extend to the storytelling which is decidedly puerile and aimed squarely at the youngest of mermaid obsessives. The movie also suffers, as do many prequels, from the fact that we know the story’s outcome before it has begun.

Returning as the voice of Ariel is Jodi Benson. While her performance is undoubtedly the movie’s highlight it is a shame that no-one thought to write her any decent new songs. The movie as a whole suffers from an overall lack of original tunes, ironic considering its subject. Sadly, the few that are included are instantly forgettable.

With its impressive visuals and its abysmal storytelling The Little Mermaid: Ariel’s Beginning showcases the best and worst of DisneyToon Studios output simultaneously. I personally found it a chore to watch. The most undemanding of very young mermaid fans may disagree.

A longer version of this review is available to read on my blog jinglebonesmovietime.blogspot.com