Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)

reviewed by
Brian Takeshita


TOMORROW NEVER DIES
A Film Review by Brian Takeshita
Rating:  **1/2 out of ****

The world is faced with a new threat: The media. Elliot Carver is a media mogul so powerful that he is able to manipulate events so that "Tomorrow", his flagship paper, has first coverage. Carver's latest plot takes the form of provoking a war between China and England by sinking a British warship in the South China Sea and making it look as if the Chinese are responsible. The end goal? Install a puppet government in Beijing which will grant Carver exclusive broadcasting rights in the country for the next 100 years. To combat this threat, we've got the same old hero: James Bond.

For the second time, Pierce Brosnan plays the unflappable operative from Her Majesty's Secret Service, and you can tell he's already comfortable with the role. This is not necessarily a compliment, as Brosnan's minimalistic performance in being the suave secret agent can easily be mistaken for simply running through the motions. It's okay, though. Brosnan seems to have been accepted into the Bond fandom, so he probably won't be saddled with the same fate which befell George Lazenby.

Opposite Brosnan are Michelle Yeoh as Wai Lin, a Chinese agent, and Teri Hatcher as Paris Carver, the villain's wife. Between these two new Bond women, Yeoh wins hands down. Hatcher may be attractive, but her performance in this film is entirely subpar, giving way to the acting and athletic abilities of Yeoh. She has some moves which make Bond look absolutely brutish.

It is often said that the villain makes the Bond film, and TOMORROW NEVER DIES has a great one in Carver, played so wonderfully by Jonathan Pryce. Starting a war to get broadcasting rights. You have to admire such a delicious plan, which is not bent on world domination, but rather opening up a new market. Capitalism, not communism, seems to be the enemy in this one, and Carver seems to revel in the fact that wealth and power can be gained through control of information. Pryce plays the role with relish, chewing scenery whenever the opportunity arises.

One of the things you can depend on about a Bond movie is the action. In this film, the viewer is not disappointed, as we are treated to fights, chases, and unique uses of the BMW 750i. All of the action is well choreographed, and the stunts are first rate. The only problem is that it is all mere eye candy and zero tension. Bond has been through this so many times, you know he's going to be all right. I mean, the man has not only defied death, he's defied AGE.

It seems to me that James Bond movies are often evaluated on a set of criteria separate from the rest of cinema. We consistently ignore the fact that they are formulaic and usually full of ludicrous situations and dialog. While watching the film, we wait for the pre-credits stunt, then the mission briefing and the little banter with Moneypenny, then the visit with Q to get his toys, then the encounter with the villain and the femme fatale, during which he introduces himself as "Bond, James Bond," then his order of a "vodka martini, shaken, not stirred," then his fight with some of the villain's henchmen, then his capture by the villain and subsequent escape, then his return to the villain's hideout to foil the evil plan to take over the world. Did I miss anything? Oh, yes, his fight to the death with the villain's chief thug, which occurs just prior to the villain's island/airplane/space station/ship exploding in a ball of fire.

If this were to occur in a sequel for any other series of films, it would be criticized to no end for its lack of originality. The fact that there have been 17 previous Bond movies, all of which pretty much followed the same formula, says something. It says that Bond has become so much of a cultural icon that all we seem to want is more of him, even if it's more of the same. In fact, I would even go so far as to say that we don't even want to see the formula changed. Remember when they tried to make Bond monogamous in LIVING DAYLIGHTS? It didn't work, because it just wasn't Bond. The problem with the Bond series is, because the formula has been used time and time again to the point where we all know what's going to happen, what used to be exciting is now merely amusing, and each Bond film can only strive to make itself more amusing than the last.

So here we are with TOMORROW NEVER DIES, and the formula is followed once again. Rather than scoff at the repetition, however, we chuckle with recognition at each of the milestones which must be part of the Bond movie. The familiarity is actually very comfortable, and an experience which can actually be shared between generations, as the first Bond film premiered in 1962. What's new about this film is that it's not trying to milk the last vestiges of the dying Soviet legacy for plot. This one fully recognizes that the Cold War is, in fact, finally over, and doesn't try to raise the specter of reawakening communism, as did two out of the last three films. I believe this film deserves applause, just for being a little different.

Review posted December 23, 1997

The review above was posted to the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due to ASCII to HTML conversion.

Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews