Cosmic Calendar Girls (4 Stars)

It was with great sadness that I heard about the death of August Ames yesterday. She hanged herself on December 5th, four days ago, but the story wasn't made public at first. Now it's been reported on dozens of web sites. Most of the articles call her a "porn star", which is all that most people need to know to judge who she is. Porn stars enjoy a low esteem in the general public, especially female porn stars. Since the advent of high speed Internet it's become common to watch pornography, but people still look down on the actors and actresses who provide the entertainment they enjoy. What people forget is that there's a lot more to the porn stars, or adult entertainers, as they prefer to call themselves. They might be married, own pets, be well educated or active in their communities. They might be sensitive and afraid. Every one of them is a unique human being. They're just people who have chosen a certain career, supposedly one of the most difficult careers.

I wanted to write a tribute to August yesterday. I couldn't bring myself to do it. I read all of the online articles I could find. I read the final tweets on her Twitter account. I wanted to write a summary, adding my own thoughts. I couldn't do it. It hurt too much.

So today I took the logical step of watching one of her films to remember her in the privacy of my own home. I own three films she stars in on DVD: "Cosmic Calendar Girls", "High Heel Homicide" and "Model for Murder". Most of August Ames' films were hardcore pornography, but she also made a small number of softcore pornography films, which are more to my taste. As far as I remembered, out of the three films "Cosmic Calendar Girls" is the film in which she plays the biggest part, so that's the film I chose. I may watch the other two soon.

August Ames plays Ilya, a calendar model from Galaxia in the seventh star system of Orion. This is Ilya's normal appearance. For unknown reasons last year's calendar sold badly. I wonder why. Maybe the Galaxian feminists have been staging protests against women being objectified?

The publishing company wants to try something new. Ilya has dressed up as an Earth girl to make the calendar look more exotic.

What do you think? They might be on to a winning idea. If it doesn't succeed they could always try making a calendar with kittens and puppies next year. But let's give Ilya a chance first.

August Ames is stunning, even as a blonde. I would buy her calendar. The Galaxians hire Earth's top photographer to take pictures of her in the natural surroundings of Earth. Unfortunately, there are problems that prevent the photoshoot taking place. Ilya falls into the temptations of Earth. She drinks too much alcohol, which makes it impossible to maintain her Earth girl appearance. She starts to revert to her Galaxian look.

Now let's talk about the circumstances that led up to August's death.

It all began with a battle on Twitter. When I looked at August's account yesterday morning there were a large number of tweets. When I checked again today most were gone. Maybe Twitter removed them. Maybe the tweeters themselves felt ashamed of what they'd written and removed their own tweets. I hope the latter is the case. It's possible that there were even more messages that had already been removed before I checked yesterday. I don't know.

On December 3rd August Ames posted that she had refused to perform a sex scene with a man on the grounds that he regularly performed gay pornography. Her anger wasn't directed at the man, the porn star Bruce Beckham. She was angry with her agent for signing her up for this film, because she had clearly stated that she didn't want to perform with gay men or crossover men. ("Crossover" is the insider term for straight men who perform homosexual acts in films).

The first attack came from Bruce Beckham himself, who called her homophobic and uneducated. August defended herself by saying that she wasn't homophobic, because she's bisexual and feels strongly attracted to women. She added that many female porn stars refuse to perform sex scenes with men who are gay or crossover. For August the refusal to have sex with Bruce had nothing to do with homophobia, she was merely exercising her right to decide who she wanted to have sex with. Allegations were raised that the health checks in the gay porn industry aren't as stringent as in the mainstream porn industry, but this has been denied by others. I'm no expert on the subject, so I shan't comment further. What I can say is that for two days people were arguing about the subject. The claims of homophobia continued, while August's friends jumped in to defend her. Then she killed herself.

It's a clear case of cyberbullying. There's no doubt about it. Obviously, a stronger person wouldn't have reacted that way. August was a sensitive person, and the insults hurt her. She had already admitted to suffering from depression on occasions. But that's the way it is with any type of bullying, whether it's on the Internet or in the school playground. It's always the weak people who are the targets of the bullies. It's no fun attacking strong people. When I first entered grammar school there were bullies who picked on me. It didn't last long. They gave up when they realised that I didn't care.

However weak August may have been before her suicide, it was the bullies who pushed her over the edge. They're responsible for her death. They killed her.

This evening I've noticed that the discussions are still continuing. Bruce Beckham himself initially claimed to be guiltless in her suicide, but in his later tweets he expressed remorse. Unfortunately his friends are undoing his feelings of guilt by telling him it's not his fault. There's nothing wrong with feeling guilt. Guilt is therapeutic. If you tell yourself you did wrong you're less likely to make the same mistake in the future.

There's a small irony in the film "Cosmic Calendar Girls". At the end of the film August Ames begs the photographer to have sex with her, but he refuses, because he knows what she really looks like. She seeks solace by having a threesome with two other women. Homophobic? No way! She has sex with women after being refused by a straight man.

I'll end this review by posting a small photoset of August Ames, fully clothed. This should help those who didn't know her before now to appreciate her. Out of respect, I'm only posting photos in which she's fully clothed. If you want to see more explicit photos or videos of her there's a website called Google which will point you in the right direction.

The copyright holder for these photos is the Canadian film studio Twisty's. I hope they will allow me to use these images to honour August Ames in her death.

August Ames
August 23, 1994 – December 5, 2017

Monster (5 Stars)

"I'm not a bad person! I'm a real good person!"

When I reviewed "My Friend Dahmer" in September this year I was challenged by a friend who said it was wrong to make a film about a serial killer, because he shouldn't be glorified. I insisted that the film in no way glorified him, but she refused to watch it herself to form an opinion. Earlier this month I was involved in an online discussion about "The Killing of John Lennon", a biopic about Mark Chapman, and similar arguments were brought. Most of the people in the discussion said that it was wrong to make a film about a bad man who had killed their hero.

In both cases I defended the films. A murder or a series of murders can't be seen in a vacuum. There are millions of people on the Earth, but very few killers and even less serial killers. What makes a person that way? How can I prevent my children from turning into serial killers? Describing a person's thoughts and motives in a film doesn't mean that the director is saying he was right to do what he did.

The film "Monster" is about the much publicised case of Aileen Wuornos, a woman who was sentenced to death in 1992 after killing seven men. She was given six death sentences, but she appealed against one of the sentences on the grounds that the killing was in self-defence. The appeal was refused because it was pointless; even if she'd been found innocent of one murder, she would still have been guilty of the other five murders. She was executed in 2002.

Charlize Theron puts on puts on a stunning performance as Aileen Wuornos, for which she deservedly won an Oscar as Best Actress. Roger Ebert called "Monster" the film of the year. The excellent screenplay by the director Patty Jenkins (who also directed "Wonder Woman") gives a fascinating insight into her mind. Was she a good person who was pushed over the edge, or a clinical psychopath who couldn't have ended up any other way? Patty Jenkins leaves the decision up to the viewer. Aileen grew up as a naive young person looking for love. As a child she was repeatedly sexually abused by friends and family members. When she was 14 she became a prostitute, because it was the only thing she was good at.

In 1986 Aileen met and fell in love with Tyria Moore, whose name is changed to Selby Wall in the film. Love usually saves a person, but in this case it had the opposite effect. Selby was unemployed, so Aileen needed to earn more money to support two people. Prostitution was no longer enough. Aileen could make more money by robbing and killing her customers. Though not stated in the film, it could also be that after becoming a lesbian she found sex with men too revolting to continue her work as a prostitute.

The film is honest in its portrayal of Aileen Wuornos. When we see her killing for the first time in self-defence the viewer is cheering her on, saying that he deserved to die. Then we see her killing her other customers who aren't so bad, they're just lonely men willing to pay for sex. Finally we see her killing a man who doesn't even want sex from her, he only wants to help her. The initial sympathy which we had for her slowly ebbs away.

My film ratings are often erratic, but I have one small rule that I adhere to. Any film that makes me cry gets five stars. It's a deeply emotional film. I could feel Aileen Wuornos' madness. That made me cry.

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

Spectre (4 Stars)

This is the fourth film in the New Bond series. Like the previous film, "Skyfall", it's directed by Sam Mendes, but it has a completely different feel to it. It's a darker, more depressing film. This is intensified by the cinematography, which uses dull colours, even in daytime scenes. I'm glad that I've watched the Daniel Craig Bond films (almost) back to back, four films in six days. That's the only way to notice subtle changes in style.

Why is "Spectre" darker than the previous films? It's the arrival of Bond's nemesis Blofeld, whose full name is Ernst Stavro Blofeld. He introduces himself as the man who has been making Bond suffer for years; at least for the last four films. We can expect him to continue making Bond suffer for years to come. Does this mean we can expect more dark, depressing Bond films? I hope so. We had 40 years of camp James Bond films, especially in the Roger Moore years, so it's time to try something new.

Blofeld is played by Christoph Waltz. In an interview after the film's release he said that he wasn't satisfied with his performance. It's the mark of a great actor -- or a great anything else -- that he's the biggest critic of his own work. I felt that he played the part admirably, but he must see minor faults that aren't apparent to me. It depends on what he's trying to achieve. Is he attempting to model himself on any one of the past incarnations of Blofeld? In the Classic Bond films he was played by five different actors. For me Donald Pleasance is the version of Blofeld that I most fondly remember. Telly Savalas was so different that he seemed like a different person.

Donald Pleasance was a superbly evil version of Blofeld. Telly Savalas ran around too much, which made him seem comical. Christoph Waltz is somehow creepy as every bad guy that he plays, and that fits the role of Blofeld. I assume that he'll try to be closer to his vision of the role in the next Bond film. When I see him again I'll better understand what he's trying to achieve.

"Spectre" adds something to the character of Blofeld that wasn't in the Classic Bond films or the Ian Fleming novels. Bond and Blofeld are brothers! By adoption, at least. After the death of Bond's family he was adopted by Blofeld's father. At the time Blofeld used his birth name, Franz Oberhauser. He despised his adopted brother so much, feeling jealous of the attention his father gave him, so he killed his father, faked his own death and changed his name. Blofeld is his mother's maiden name, but his new Christian names are random.

There's a subtle irony that my friends missed when I went to watch "Spectre" with them in the cinema two years ago. In the Austin Powers films Dr. Evil, pictured above, is a parody of Blofeld. In the third film, "Goldmember", he reveals that he's really Austin Powers' lost brother. Now "Spectre" has copied this idea from "Goldmember". James Bond influenced Austin Powers, and now Austin Powers is influencing James Bond. I wonder if this crossed the minds of the screenwriters when they were writing the script.

Could Daniel Craig and Christoph Waltz be brothers? Even though the relationship is only by adoption there are certain similarities. Judge for yourself.

Where did the film take me on my virtual holiday today? London, as always, followed by Mexico, Morocco, Italy and Austria. Who needs to fly to other countries when he has a Blu-ray player?

You can skip the rest of this post if you don't speak German. Here's a newspaper report about the death of Blofeld's father. It contains a few errors and examples of poor style that could have been avoided by letting Christoph Waltz, a native Austrian, take a quick look at it. "Tal" and "gebracht" are two separate words that shouldn't have been combined. The word separation is faulty throughout. Probably the text was typed using an English version of MS Word, and the English language word separation algorithm was used. A German would never separate "Obduktionsbericht" as "Obduktionsberi-cht". Also, it's not usual to call the body of a dead person a "Körper". The word "Leiche" would be used. That's sloppy.

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

Aus dem Nichts (5 Stars)

Family. Justice. The Sea.

This is Germany's selection for the Best Foreign Language film in the 2018 Academy Awards. Diane Kruger won the award for Best Actress at the 2017 Cannes Film festival. The title means "Out of nowhere", but for some inconceivable reason it's called "In the Fade" in English. What's that supposed to mean? It's an emotionally intense film. In the cinema this evening the audience was so silent that you could have heard a pin drop.

Diane Kruger plays Katja, a young German woman who has married Nuri Sekerci, a Kurdish man in Hamburg who owns an office that works supporting immigrants, giving tax and legal advice, translation work and even selling discounted plane tickets to Turkey. One evening a Neo-Nazi couple plants a nail bomb outside the office, killing Nuri and his son.

If I stopped my review there you would think you know what the film's about: Nazis, immigration, racism, politics, etc. You would be wrong. Those subjects, however important they are, are just the background for a psychological drama about the fight for survival of a woman whose whole life has been ripped from under her feet. The film isn't about the victims of the attack, and it only indirectly concerns the perpetrators of the attack. It's all about Katja.

After a shaky beginning, Katja had a perfect life. She met Nuri when he was a drug dealer selling hashish. They fell in love, but before things could progress he was arrested and spent four years in prison. That was the kick that Nuri needed to turn his life around. While in prison he did a degree in Economics, and after being released he went straight. His father gave him the start capital for his business, and he was able to provide a good life for Katja and their six-year-old son Rocco.

Then Nuri and Rocco are killed. Katja survives, but she's the real victim.

A woman in a position like that needs help. But what happens?

Katja's parents blame her for marrying a bad man, a foreigner and an ex-convict.

Nuri's parents blame Katja for their son's death.

The police investigations concentrate on Nuri's criminal past. They don't believe that he could have bought such a large house as a legal adviser for immigrants, so they assume he was selling drugs on the side.

Katja's life spirals out of control. She turns to hard drugs, which she had never used before. She attempts suicide. The only thing that gives her hope is the arrest of the couple who planted the bomb.

But after a long trial there's not enough evidence to convict them.

I enjoy films that portray strong women. I like films that don't show women as weak creatures who have to rely on men to do everything that they need. However, I understand that this can be alienating for women viewers. "That woman on the screen is so confident. She can do everything she wants, but I'm nothing like her". That's the downside of films about strong women. But that's not what we have in this film. Katja is a weak woman. She's someone that the average woman on the street can relate to. A catastrophe comes, and she's knocked flat on her back. That's no shame. What woman wouldn't be emotionally wrecked if her husband and son were murdered? Katja looks to others for help and doesn't get it. She wants to give up. That's still fully understandable. But then, when all seems lost, she pulls herself together and finds strength in herself that she didn't think she had.

I recommend this film to every woman everywhere. Men might like it as well.

Skyfall (5 Stars)

Until today this was the only James Bond film that I had never seen. My friends already told me before I went to see "Spectre" in 2015 that "Skyfall" was the best Bond film ever. Then I read that "Skyfall" was the biggest box office success of all the Bond films, the seventh most successful film of all time, but even that didn't tempt me to catch up with it.

Now I've finally seen it for myself. It's an amazing film, especially in contrast to the relatively weak "Quantum of Solace". Maybe it's because of the arrival of a new director, Sam Mendes? I don't know. Whatever the reason is, "Skyfall" stands out as a classic. At the moment of writing this I'm still trying to think if there's any justification for giving it less than five stars.

Q and Moneypenny are back, after I complained about their absence in the last two films. However, they're completely different characters, even if they share the same names. In the Classic Bond films Q was an inventor who supplied James Bond with the most adventurous and infeasible gadgets. The new Q only gives Bond a gun and a radio. When Bond looks disappointed, Q's reply is "Were you expecting an exploding pen? We don't really go in for that any more".

James Bond makes remarks about Q's youth. The actor Ben Whishaw was actually 31 when the film was made, but it's true, he hardly looks a day over 20. Rather than being a seasoned old man like Desmond Llewelyn he's MI6's whizz kid.

In the Classic Bond films Miss Moneypenny's first name was never stated. She worked as M's secretary. It was an often repeated joke that she had a crush on Bond, and he flirted with her on every visit, but whatever promises Bond might have made to take her on a date never came to fruition. Miss Moneypenny always looked plain, in comparison to the sexy girls that he bedded in each film. Please don't accuse me of judging women by their looks, I'm just telling you how Bond judged women. If Miss Moneypenny had worn a short skirt and thigh high boots Bond would have wanted her.

In "Skyfall" we're told that her first name is Eve, which isn't much of a deviation from Classic Bond, but just look at her! When I first heard that Naomie Harris had been cast as Miss Moneypenny I shook my head and said "No, no, no. She's much too beautiful to be Miss Moneypenny". James Bond wouldn't have ignored her for 50 years if she'd looked so hot, even without the thigh high boots. That's what I thought in 2012, and it was one of the many reasons I didn't go to the cinema to watch "Skyfall". I think differently now. She's not the same Moneypenny, she's a new character with the same name. She can't just type, she's a field agent who is an expert sniper. She says in the film that she's applied for a desk job as M's secretary, though I find that a bit difficult to believe. Field agent to secretary seems too big a descent.

There's one small detail in the film which I consider significant. James Bond's Aston Martin is fetched out of storage, only to be destroyed a few scenes later. Sam Mendes wanted to emphasise that the old Bond is gone and a new Bond has stepped into his shoes.

In my review of "Tracks" last month I explained that I don't need to go on holiday, because films take me around the world. The best way to enjoy an instant cinematic holiday is to watch a James Bond film. All of his films jump from one country to another. "Casino Royale" took me to London, Italy, the Bahamas and Montenegro. "Quantum of Solace" took me to London, Italy, Austria and Bolivia (although the Bolivian scenes were actually shot in Chile). Today I used "Skyfall" to visit London yet again, followed by Istanbul, Shanghai and finally the most beautiful country on Earth: Scotland! Skyfall is the name of the Bond family estate in the Western Highlands. This estate is fictional, but the location is Glen Etive, a few miles south of Glencoe. The area between Fort William and Glencoe is the most attractive part of Scotland. Some people prefer Skye, and I admit that Skye is beautiful, but I contend that the people who prefer Skye have never spent time walking through the mountains and valleys of Glencoe. I have visited the area many times.

Here are a few screenshots from the film to show what I mean.

I could have posted 50 screenshots from the film, but these pictures should be enough to show what the Scottish scenery is like. Glen Etive is a wonderful place to visit, but a difficult place to live. It's a long walk to the next supermarket.

But now I've finally decided. Five stars is the rating the film deserves.

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

Justice League (2 Stars)

I almost didn't go to see this film. I waited until its last week in the cinema. In the end curiosity got the better of me. I didn't expect it to be good, but it was even worse than I expected.

It's obvious what DC is trying to do. They saw the success that Marvel was having with its interlinked Marvel Comics Universe (MCU) films, so they thought they could do the same. First films about individual heroes, then a team film. An idea doesn't have to be original to work well, but DC doesn't have directors or producers of sufficient calibre to repeat Marvel's success. DC rushed into the team film too fast. Only Batman and Wonder Woman had appeared in individual films already. (I don't include Superman, because he was dead before the film started). The Flash TV series could have been used to build up to the team film, but DC messed it up by having a different actor play the Flash, alienating the audience. Green Arrow could have been added to the team after the preparation of the Arrow TV series, but they made yet another blunder by omitting him.

The film was a mess from beginning to end. The big baddie, Steppenwolf, was hardly introduced to the audience. In the Marvel films the villains are well rounded characters, often with an emotional depth that they don't have in the comics. Steppenwolf is just a bland, two-dimensional character that we don't care about.

"Justice League" tries to add a human element by showing a Russian family, but fails completely. The family is so far removed from the action that whenever they're shown they're just annoyances and we want them out of the way so the story can continue.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Marvel makes the best films and DC makes the best TV series. DC should give up making films. There might be rare peaks of brilliance like "Wonder Woman", but on the whole the films are embarrassing. I'm already dreading the next Justice League film.

Quantum of Solace (3½ Stars)

This is the second film in the New Bond series. It starts off with a plot device never used in Classic Bond: the story continues directly from the previous film. At the end of "Casino Royale" James Bond captured Mr. White. At the beginning of "Quantum of Solace" James Bond still has Mr. White tied up in the boot of his car. We don't see that straight away. The film begins with Bond in a car chase. It's not explained who the people are that are chasing him, but it's possible that they're associates of Mr. White trying to free him. I say "possible", because they're attacking Bond so aggressively that they could easily have killed Mr. White.

I enjoy car chases. They're part of the James Bond culture. Almost all of the Classic Bond films had a car chase. In the Roger Moore years the car chases became increasingly exaggerated. However, I don't like the car chase in "Quantum of Solace". It's the cinematography that bothers me. The camera is too close to the cars, so it's difficult to see what's happening. The cameraman would only have to back up three or four feet to show the car in the context of the road.

The "continuation" aspect is constant throughout this film. There are repeated references to Vesper Lynd, Bond's girlfriend who was killed in the last film. That never happened in Classic Bond. However close Bond was to a woman, emotionally or sexually, after the final credits she disappeared and was never mentioned again. Bond might not have done one-night stands, but he certainly did one-film stands.

While not necessarily a bad film, I find that "Quantum of Solace" lacks the freshness of "Casino Royale". It's also been two films in a row with no Moneypenny and no Q. That has to be put right in the third film!

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

Doctor Strange (5 Stars)

Since moving to Germany I've acquired a lot of new readers. I've been handing my card to people I meet, and judging by the boost in readers based in Germany (according to Google's statistics) my marketing strategy has been successful. There's something that might not be obvious to my new readers. This isn't a film review site, it's a film diary. That's a subtle but significant difference. It means that if I watch a film five time I'll write about it five times. You might ask what happens if I run out of things to say. Do I repeat myself? Not usually. I just add a few random thoughts, such as telling you what the weather was like when I watched the film. My "reviews" aren't always informative, but I hope they're always entertaining.

So what's the weather like today? It's snowing.

That's my card. Cute, isn't it? I designed it myself. The only thing I don't like is that the dancing logo isn't quite centred, it's slightly to the left of centre. When I reprint the card I'll correct the error, but at the moment I still have a few hundred copies in a box, so I'll have to use them first.

Since this blog is a diary, it's as much for me as it is for other people. Usually I remember a film after watching it, even though I watch hundreds of films every year, but sometimes there are exceptions. This is most apparent with this years's Fantasy Film Festival. It was only three months ago, but last week I realised that I couldn't remember some of the films, so I went back and read my reviews. I can clearly remember the best films and the worst films, but after watching four films a day my memory of the average films is hazy. I wish I'd had time to write more detailed reviews.

One film that I didn't and never could forget is "Doctor Strange", which I saw in the cinema last year. For me this is the new direction of Marvel films. Benedict Cumberbatch was perfect in the title role. After initial resistance I could even accept Tilda Swinton as the Ancient One, however weird it is to cast a white woman as an oriental man. At least she's dead now, so she won't be appearing in the next Doctor Strange films.

Mads Mikkelsen, always a wonderful actor, plays the part of the arch-villain Kaecilius in the film. There's a character in the comics with this name, but I don't think it's the same person. In the comics Kaecilius is a minor character without much mystic power, but in the film he's a powerful enemy. That's a problem with the Marvel films. So often a character is thrown in, and it's impossible to know whether he's an old character from the comics or someone completely new.

I enjoy the film very much, especially the Inception-ish cityscapes, but there's one criticism I have to make. It was too early to feature a battle between Doctor Strange and Dormammu. In the comics Dormammu is Doctor Strange's greatest enemy, so Marvel should have built up to him over a few films; first weaker enemies, and then finally a big showdown with Dormammu in the third or fourth film. After that Umar could step in as the main opponent. The trouble is that the Marvel film producers are too impatient. I blame Kevin Feige. There are hundreds of issues of the comics of each superhero to draw on, but the Marvel films want to do it all at once to keep the comic fanboys happy. It doesn't work with me. I'd rather progress slowly though the storylines.

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

Casino Royale [2006 version] (4 Stars)

This is a remake of the 1967 film which was also called "Casino Royale". I strongly disagree with people who say that remakes are always inferior to the original versions of films. In this case the remake is better, because it keeps closer to Ian Fleming's novel. The novel portrays James Bond as a young agent who has only recently been promoted to Double-O status. The 1967 version shows Bond as an elderly man who has retired from active service, but returns to go on a mission that nobody else can do.

From 1962 to 2002 22 films were made about James Bond, starring six different actors as Bond. It's often claimed that only 20 films were made, because two of the films are considered unofficial and non-canon. One of the unofficial films was "Never say never again" (1983), while the other was "Casino Royale" (1967). "Never say never again" was a remake of "Thunderball" (1965), while the original version of "Casino Royale" was intended as a prequel to the official films, taking place long before "Dr. No" (1962). It's suggested that the elderly James Bond is the father of the new James Bond, which would mean that Sean Connery played James Bond Jr!

For the sake of simplicity, let's stick to the 20 official James Bond, all made by Eon Productions in London, in which five different actors play James Bond. Despite the different ages and appearances, it's always the same character. That's easy to accept, with just a little suspension of disbelief. What's more difficult to believe is the timescale. Each James Bond film is set "in the present", so, for instance, "Dr. No" takes place in 1962 and "Die another day" takes place in 2006. Each film takes place using the current technology, so things like mobile phones appear in the later films. This stretches out the timeline of the man called James Bond. It would have been easier to set all the films in the 1960's, but I can understand that Eon Productions wants to sell more cinema tickets by keeping the films up to date.

Now things have changed. In 2006 "Casino Royale" was made, followed by another three James Bond films so far. Daniel Craig has become the new actor to portray Bond. This isn't just a remake of the 1967 film, it's a reboot of the James Bond franchise. The story of James Bond is being told again from the beginning, which wasn't clear to me immediately. I didn't realise the franchise had been rebooted until I saw the fourth film, "Spectre", in 2015. I was so used to Bond regenerating every ten years that I didn't realise it was a new franchise until I saw the re-appearance of Ernst Stavro Blofeld. Now everything is clear. The old stories will be retold, rewritten and repackaged for the 21st Century.

I call the first 20 films "Classic Bond" and the films since 2006 "New Bond". I haven't heard anyone else making this distinction, but I believe it's appropriate.

The link between Classic Bond and New Bond is Judi Dench in the role of M, the head of MI6. When she first appeared in "GoldenEye" (1995) it was a critical change for James Bond. He had always been a misogynist, treating women as playthings, so it was a shock for him to have a woman appointed as his boss. In the New Bond films it isn't an issue. He might still be a callous playboy, but he's modern enough to accept that women can be in charge.

James Bond always had a rebellious attitude, but in "Casino Royale" it's pushed to the extreme; too far, in my opinion. A secret agent should do what his boss tells him. Instead of that we see that M is only aware of what he's doing when she reads about it in the newspaper. He means well, he wants to save the world, but he's incapable of following orders. When MI6 puts a tracer in his arm it's not just to track him while he's on a mission, it's so that they know what he's doing when he disappears on his own initiative.

"Casino Royale" might have been made with a budget of $150 million, but evidently the producer didn't have enough money left to write a good newspaper article. The last paragraph is a repeat of the second paragraph. That's sloppy. I would have written the extra paragraph for $100. Please get in contact with me when the next James Bond film is made.

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

The Hole (2001 film) (4 Stars)

Some films stick in my mind vividly after I watch them. For instance, "The Hole". When I picked it up to watch it again I was sure I'd watched it two or three months ago, but I checked my blog and found it was 16 months ago. I can remember it as clearly as if it were yesterday.

This is a gripping psychological horror story. Four rich kids from an expensive private school spend three days in a World War Two bomb shelter. Two boys, two girls. Two weeks later Liz, one of the girls, walks back to the school, exhausted and in a bad physical state, covered in dirt and her clothes torn. The other three children are found dead in the bunker. A police psychiatrist interviews her and she explains what happened. The story doesn't make sense. A week is missing. Liz is obviously traumatised and has forgotten what happened. The only solution is to take her back to the bunker in an attempt to jog her memory.

One of the reasons that I remember this film so clearly is the performance of Keira Knightley as Liz's best friend Frankie. She isn't one of my favourite actresses, but in this film I have to stare at her in amazement. In this role she's one of the sexiest young women I've ever seen.

What makes a woman sexy to me? Is it her legs or her breasts? Ask me again. Is it her eyes or her hair colour? No. There might be some physical attributes that I like more than others, but it isn't a woman's outward appearance that excites me. So, is it a woman's intelligence? You're getting closer, but that's still not the right answer.

What thrills me about a woman is self-confidence. I like a woman who's determined and fearless. I like a woman who has her eyes on her goal and doesn't consider failure an option. Whether it's sport or business or anything else, I find a woman who is confident in her abilities extremely sexy.

Confidence is  something that Keira Knightley shows as Frankie, Liz's best friend, in "The Hole". She wants to talk to her friend Jeff, who's in the shower room after playing sport; in a school like this I assume it was Rugby. She could have waited outside the boys' locker room for him to get dressed. Instead of that she walks in, not being put off when she's surrounded by naked boys. She doesn't stop to ask questions like "What if they attack me?" She's the Alpha student in the school, and the boys are the Betas. Her self-confidence scares them. They scatter in all directions when they see her, grabbing their towels to cover themselves. She isn't embarrassed by them, they're embarrassed by her. When she finally confronts Jeff none of the other boys are in sight. They're hiding.

That's sexy.