9 posts tagged “moore”
Today - June 10 - marks the 25th anniversary of when the 1983 James Bond film, "OCTOPUSSY" was released in U.S. movie theaters. This 13th Bond adventure starred Roger Moore, Maud Adams and Louis Jordan. And for me, it is my second favorite Bond movie to star Moore:
"OCTOPUSSY" - Silver Anniversary Photo Gallery
"Best Moment in a BOND Film"
What do you consider to be the best moment in each James Bond film? I had discovered this question on a Bond forum and decided to ask it on my blog. Below is a list of my choices. What are yours?
DR. NO - Professor Dent's death
FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE - Grant reveals SPECTRE's plot to Bond (although I do find it to be a little illogical)
GOLDFINGER - Bond's discovery of Jill Masterson's body
THUNDERBALL - Fiona gets the drop on Bond
YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE - Tiger Tanaka and his ninjas attack Blofeld's volcano
ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE - Bond's escape from Piz Gloria
DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER - Bond/Peter Franks fight in Tiffany's apartment building
LIVE AND LET DIE - Boat chase through the bayou
THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN - Bond and Goodnight have lunch with Scaramanga
THE SPY WHO LOVED ME - Anya discovers that Bond had killed her lover
MOONRAKER - Bond saves Manuela from Jaws
FOR YOUR EYES ONLY - death of Emile Locque
OCTOPUSSY - Bond/Orlov confrontation at East German railyard
A VIEW TO A KILL - Zorin's men attempt to kill Bond on racetrack
THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS - Mujardeen attack on Soviet airbase/Bond confronts Pushkin
LICENSE TO KILL - Fight at Barrelhouse bar
GOLDENEYE - Bond and Natalya escape from General Ourumov
TOMORROW NEVER DIES - Bond/Dr. Kauffman confrontation
THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH - Bond confronts Elektra about possible connection to Renard
DIE ANOTHER DAY - Bond and Jinx raise havoc at Cuban clinic
CASINO ROYALE - Stairwell fight/Torture sequence
“FOR YOUR EYES ONLY” Review
If James Bond fans and critics had judged all of EON Productions’ 1981 movie, ”FOR YOUR EYES ONLY” solely on its pre-credit sequence, the movie probably would have barely made a dime at the box office. Worse, it would have been regarded as the worst movie in the entire Bond franchise. Thankfully, the rest of the movie proved to be far superior to its atrocious opening sequence.
”FOR YOUR EYES ONLY marked the directorial debut of John Glen, previously an assistant director and editor of previous Bond movies. Glen ended up steering the Bond franchise through a record five movies, all released between 1981 and 1989. With screenwriters Richard Maibaum and Michael G. Wilson (say that again?), Glen would take the franchise into a new era that depended less upon gadgets, grandiose villains and their even more outlandish schemes; and more on well-written plots, gritty edge and deep characterizations. And this new direction was certainly obvious in ”FOR YOUR EYES ONLY” . . . well, except for the pre-title sequence. Which has led me to wonder . . . what on earth made Maibaum and Wilson include that atrocious sequence, in the first place? God only knows. The best I can say about the opening sequence, which featured an unnamed and crippled Blofeld was that its theme resonated with the rest of the movie – namely revenge.
Once the movie moved past its odious beginning, it became a sleek and tight thriller in which James Bond must recover the ATAC missile launching system, that disappeared, following the sinking of a British spy ship off the coast of Albania. MI-6 had originally recruited a British marine biologist named Sir Timothy Havelock to locate the missing ship and missile system, but he and his Greek wife ended up being murdered in full view of their daughter, by an assassin named Hector Gonzalez. Bond tracked Gonzalez to an estate in Spain. But before he could question the killer, Sir Timothy’s daughter, Melina murdered Gonzalez out of revenge for her parents’ deaths. Bond eventually learned that Gonzalez had been hired by a free-lance Soviet agent, who had been recruited to also find the ATAC system. In the Soviets’ hands, the ATAC could be used to destroy Western nuclear submarines.
From the exciting chase sequence in the Spanish countryside, to the ski slopes of Cortina and the Greek Islands, Bond and Melina conducted a search for the missing ATAC that led to a bitter rivalry between two Greek smugglers – one who happened to be an independent agent contracted to the KGB. Portrayed by Israeli actor, Topol and British actor, Julian Glover, former friends Milos Columbo and Ari Kristatos drew Bond into a 30-year feud, in which both tried to convince the British agent that the other is the KBG contact. Even worse, Bond had to contend with Melina’s continuing desire for revenge - despite her murder of Hector Gonzalez. In the end, Bond managed to rein in Melina’s vengeful tendencies, learn that Kristatos was the KBG contact and prevent the ATAC from falling into Soviet hands.
Roger Moore had nearly passed over his fifth chance at portraying the fictional British agent. Fortunately, he changed his mind at the last moment and proved that underneath the sophisticated façade and cheeky wit, he possessed the acting chops to star in a serious spy thriller. To this day, many cannot decide whether his best performance was in ”FOR YOUR EYES ONLY” or in 1977’s ”THE SPY WHO LOVED ME”. Personally, I am inclined to believe that ”FYEO” was his finest moment in the Bond franchise. An excellent supporting cast and a first-class script – different from what he had been used to – allowed Moore to meet the challenge of a new kind of Bond and turn in a tough and excellent performance. Even better, he did all of this and still managed to retain something of his sly sense of humor. His finest moments included:
-Bond’s conversation with Melina, after saving her life in Cortina
-Bond’s first meeting with Columbo
-Emile Locque’s death (a controversial scene in the Bond franchise)
-final sequence at the St. Cyril’s monastery.
French actress, Carole Bouquet, who was 23 years old when she filmed ”FOR YOUR EYES ONLY” ably supported Moore as the movie’s leading lady. She skillfully turned in an emotional performance as Melina Havelock, seeking revenge for the murder of her parents. Both Topol and Julian Glover portrayed the two rivaling Greek smuggler, whom Bond has to determine was the KGB contact responsible for the Havelocks’ murder. I must say that both actors gave very subtle performances, making it difficult for the audience to decide who was innocent and who was guilty. And this ambiguity contributed greatly to the movie’s success. In fact, ”FOR YOUR EYES ONLY” seemed to be blessed with an exceptional cast that included Michael Gothard as the quietly callous killer, Emile Locque; Cassandra Harris (at the time, fiancée to future Bond, Pierce Brosnan) as the flirtatious and doomed Countess Lisl; Lynn-Holly Johnson as Kristatos’ ice skating protégée who develops a yen for Bond, Bibi Dahl; Jill Bennett as Bibi’s stoic trainer, Jacoba Brink; and Stefan Kalipha as the cold-blooded Cuban hitman, Hector Gonzalez. Also in the cast was Charles Dance portraying one of Locque’s henchmen, four years before he became well known in the miniseries, ”JEWEL IN THE CROWN”. Dance also portrayed Bond author, Ian Fleming in a rather dull biopic called ”GOLDENEYE”.
But what really made ”FOR YOUR EYES ONLY” for me, was the first-rate story centered on MI-6’s recovery of their secret missile system. Both Maibaum and Wilson, very smartly eschewed the gadget-filled fantasy epics of movies like ”YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE” and ”MOONRAKER” for a slightly gritty spy thriller with twists and double-crosses, reminiscent of classic spy movies from the 1940s and 50s. Instead of using Bond regular John Barry to write the score, EON Productions turned to Bill Conti, who would later write the score to the ”NORTH AND SOUTH” miniseries and direct the music for future Oscar broadcasts, to create a lively score that I found very entertaining. Also included was the movie’s main theme sung by Sheena Easton. The song went on to receive an Academy Award nomination.
Thanks to Conti’s score, John Glen’s tight direction, a serious and tougher Bond portrayed by Moore, a first-rate supporting cast, and a skillful script written by Maibaum and Wilson, ”FOR YOUR EYES ONLY” (sans the crappy pre-credit sequence) turned out to be one of the finest movies in the Bond franchise.
9/10
“MOONRAKER” Review
Well, I just watched “MOONRAKER”. Today, it is considered to be one of the worst Bond movies of all times. It has been accused by fans and critics alike of taking the Bond franchise into a realm of tasteless excess and fantasy. I will not deny there are aspects of “MOONRAKER” that turned me off – including Bond’s final confrontation with the villain aboard the latter’s space station. But after watching it . . . I cannot honestly list “MOONRAKER” as one of my least favorite Bond films, let alone as one of the worst. Trust me, I have seen a lot worst.
Despite some similarities, the movie did not heavily adapt the 1955 novel. The movie kept the same villain – Hugo Drax. And it did involve rockets and space travel. Also, the villain’s intent did involve the destruction of a place – in the novel, the villain wanted to destroy London and in the movie, the human race on Earth. But . . . there were differences. Instead of a British policewoman named Gala Brand, the movie features an American CIA agent/NASA-trained astronaut named Dr. Holly Goodhead.
There were several aspects of “MOONRAKER” that made me want to wince. Now, I did not mind the boat/gondola chase in the Venetian canals, but watching Bond’s gondola turned into a land vehicle . . . yeah, it made me want to wince. Along with a few of Roger Moore’s lines. The fact that Jaws’ villainy (last seen in “THE SPY WHO LOVED ME”) came across as less menacing and more comic in this movie did not help. The double-take pigeon? I had barely noticed it. But the final battle between American astronauts and Drax’s men turned me off considerably. I felt as if I was watching a second-rate version of “STAR WARS” – blasters and all.
But “MOONRAKER” had its virtues. The movie’s production quality seemed to be among the best in the franchise, thanks to director Lewis Gilbert, and cinematographer, Jean Tournier. The movie took the audience from California to Venice, Brazil and finally outer space. Aside from the latter, the film’s photograph captured these setting beautifully. I especially enjoyed John Barry’s score, along with the movie’s theme song written by both Barry and lyricist Hal David, and sung by Shirley Bassey. Aside from a few cliché lines, I found nothing wrong with Roger Moore’s performance. He seemed to be at the top of his game. I was especially impressed by his take on Bond’s reaction to being nearly killed by Drax’s Astronaut Training Centrifuge. Michel Londsdale seemed smooth and villainous as the space-obsessed billionaire Hugo Drax. However, I was a little put off by having to deal with another megalomaniac out to destroy the world in order to rule the survivors. I find such storylines rather tiresome. But the rest of the cast seemed adequate.
I do have a few complaints about four cast members. Lois Chiles was in her early 30s and already a veteran of a few movies (“THE GREAT GATSBY” and “DEATH ON THE NILE” included) by the time she did “MOONRAKER”. As Dr. Holly Goodhead, she managed to physically project the image of a memorable Bond leading lady that happens to be a competent CIA agent and astronaut. But despite her experience, she did come off as slightly wooden. Actually, I could say the same for Corinne Clery as the doomed Corinne and Emily Bolton as the Brazilian agent, Manuela. “MOONRAKER” seemed to be filled with beautiful leading ladies with limited acting skills. I also had a problem with Richard Kiel. As I had stated before, he seemed less menacing and more comic than he did in “THE SPY WHO LOVED ME”. However, I was impressed by Kiel’s acting in one particular scene – when Bond convinces Jaws that Drax plans to exterminate him for his imperfections. Kiel had wonderfully captured Jaws’ confusion and growing realization that he might be betrayed and killed by his employer.
I had started watching “MOONRAKER” with the belief that I was about to experience one of the worst Bond movies in the franchise’s history. As it turned out, I was wrong. I think that Roger Moore had put it best when he said that “MOONRAKER” was not a bad movie . . . until it shifted to outer space and became a second-rate “STAR WARS”, which only occurred during the movie’s last half hour. This unfortunate shift of setting seemed to have influenced many of the franchise’s fans about the movie. Many seemed so focused upon the movie’s last half hour and other flaws that they seemed to have forgotten the movie’s virtues.
Reviews of Four JAMES BOND Movies
Below is a list of reviews of four James Bond films I had recently watched:
”Dr. No”
This 1962 movie marked the cinematic debut of the Bond franchise, created by Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzman (EON Productions). Sean Connery also made his debut in this film as the MI-6 agent, James Bond. Although many critics and fans consider film as one of the more impressive in the franchise, I honestly cannot say that I share their opinion.
”DR. NO”’s story starts with the murder of MI-6 agent Strangeways and his secretary by a trio of assassins in Jamaica. Bond is ordered by his superior, M, to investigate the agent’s death and eventually stumbles upon a plot by SPECTRE agent, Dr. Julius No to disrupt the U.S. space program for the Chinese Republic. The main problem I had with ”DR. NO” is its schizophrenic plot. What began as a mystery thriller ends as a fantasy-style adventure, when Bond (and CIA contact Quarrel) makes his way to Dr. No’s Crab Key Island and disrupts the villain’s plot. Even worse, the movie seemed peppered with stilted dialogue that made me wince.
Even Connery’s performance seemed as uneven as the movie’s story and production style. In many scenes, he seemed to be the epitome of the smooth British agent. And in other scenes – especially with Jack Lord (portraying CIA agent, Felix Leiter) – he came off as gauche and wooden. Much has been made of Ursula Andress’ performance as “Bond Girl No.1” Honey Ryder – especially her famous first appearance as her character emerges upon a beach. Frankly, I could not sense the magic. Nor did I find Andress’ presence in the movie that impressive. Not only was her character irrelevant to the story, she did not really aid Bond’s attempts to defeat Dr. No. I first became a fan of Joseph Wiseman ever since I noticed his sly and subtle performance as a 1960s gangster in the TV series, ”CRIME STORY”. But I was not that impressed by his Dr. Julius No, who simply bored me to tears. I might as well say the same about Anthony Dawson’s performance as SPECTRE agent, Professor Dent. ”DR. NO” can boast first-class performances by Lord as the smooth and dominating Felix Leiter; John Kitzmiller as the exuberant Jamaican CIA contact, Quarrel; and Zena Marshall as Professor Dent’s secretary and SPECTRE agent, Miss Taro.
”DR. NO” can also boast some fine photography of Jamaica (probably among the best) by Ted Moore and a first-rate musical score by Monty Norman (the man who gave us the original “James Bond” theme). But some of the movie’s flaws – namely the uneven script, along with the choppy dialogue and direction – makes ”DR. NO” vastly overrated by other Bond fans critics in my eyes. But what can I expect from a movie that consistently puts me to sleep two-thirds into the story.
”Live and Let Die”
Between 1967 and 1972, EON Productions spent a chaotic five years trying to find one man to settle down portray James Bond following Sean Connery’s decision to retire from the role. Nineteen sixty-eight found Australian model, George Lazenby in the role. But after one movie, the excellent ”ON HER MAJESTY’S SECRET SERVICE”, Lazenby decided that he did not want to continue the role. Connery came back for one last movie - ”DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER”, but did not bother to stick around. Then in 1972, Broccoli and Saltzman hired Roger Moore (famous for the TV series, ”THE SAINT”) to portray the British agent. And Moore went on to play the role for the next 12 years. But he had to start somewhere and he did with 1973’s ”LIVE AND LET DIE”. This was the very first Bond movie I had ever seen. Although I have a great sentimental attachment to it, I do not really consider it to be amongst the finest in the franchise. Nor is it a personal favorite of mine.
Following the murders of three MI-6 agents (in New York, New Orleans and the fictional island of San Monique), Bond is assigned by M to investigate their deaths. His investigations in New York leads him to a Harlem gangster named Mr. Big. But as it turns out, Mr. Big is also San Monique’s foreign minister. Bond eventually learns that Kanaga/Mr. Big plans to use the heroin grown in the San Monique opium fields to flood the current heroin market and gain complete control of the U.S. drug market. He killed the three British agents, because apparently they were in danger of stumbling upon his scheme.
I am going to be frank. As much as I like ”LIVE AND LET DIE”, I have never been impressed by its screenplay, written by Tom Mankiewicz. It never made any sense to me that the British government would be interested in the activities of a diplomat from an island that had obviously been a former French colony, or an American gangster. If the three agents and Bond had been French, I could see them working with CIA agent Felix Leiter on this case. But there you have it. And Bond’s San Monique showdown with Kanaga had always struck me as being rather disappointing. Another aspect of the movie I found disappointing was the leading lady – namely Jane Seymour as Kanaga’s Tarot card seer, Solitaire. I have nothing against Seymour’s performance. She seemed to be her usual competent self. But other than predicting Bond’s arrival in New York and later, at Kanaga’s San Monique estate, and warning Bond about Rosie Carver (via a Tarot card); I found nothing impressive about Solitaire’s role in the story. Especially since she eventually became nothing more than a moaning damsel-in-distress. And Geoffrey Holder as Baron Semedi did not really do much for me, but his ghostly appearance at the end of the movie was memorable.
Fortunately, ”LIVE AN LET DIE” had its virtues. Roger Moore’s long experience with action roles in television (”MAVERICK”, ”THE SAINT”, and ”THE PERSUADERS”) allowed him to segued into the Bond role with great ease. He already seemed very comfortable in the role and without any problems, managed to establish his own style. Unfortunately, very few people appreciated this. And Yaphet Kotto created an impressive villain in an interesting duel role as the smooth and intelligent Kanaga/the bombastic Mr. Big. To this day, Julius Harris’ TeeHee remains one of my favorite Bond henchmen of all time. All I can say was that the man was perfect – humorous, yet very menacing. David Hedison’s friendship with Moore proved to be very effective in his first outing as CIA agent, Felix Leiter. The warmth and easy between Leiter and Bond seemed more apparent than in any other Bond film. And I rather enjoyed Gloria Hendry’s performance as the amusingly clumsy, yet treacherous Rosie Carver. And let us not forget the hilarious and unforgettable Clifton James as the long-suffering Southern lawman, Sheriff J.W. Pepper. James’ peformance was so impressive that the producers brought him back to reprise his role in 1974’s ”THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN”.
Also among ”LIVE AND LET DIE”’s virtues was its smooth direction by Guy Hamilton, which included a rather fun boat chase through the Louisiana bayou, fine performances and the rich atmosphere of New York’s Harlem and New Orleans. Cinematographer Ted Moore did much to contribute to the film’s atmosphere. But it is the movie’s score by George Martin and theme song by Paul McCartnery and Wings that seemed to be the movie’s most impressive virtue - other than Moore, Kotto and James’ performances. Although ”LIVE AND LET DIE”’s story remains unimpressive to me, it still turned out to be a rather entertaining film.
”From Russia With Love”
Have you ever heard the song, ”What a Difference a Day Makes”? Well, the phrase - ”What a difference, a year makes” kept going through my head, while viewing 1963’s ”FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE”. It seemed such a difference from the very inferior ”DR. NO” (and would prove to be quite a difference in my eyes to 1964’s ”GOLDFINGER”. Not only do I consider ”FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE” to be one of the finest Bond films in the franchise, I also view it as Connery’s best. In fact, as with 1965’s ”THUNDERBALL”, his acting was superb in this film. James Bond not only seemed mature, but . . . [gasp] human. All one has to do is examine his interactions with leading lady Daniela Bianchi to notice this. Connery has never been so human as he was in this movie. And sadly, he was never this human again.
Connery was supported by a first-class supporting cast. First of all, there is Daniela Bianchi portraying the Soviet cipher clerk assigned to seduce him, Tatiana Romanova. What started as an assignment for Tania, ended up as full-blown love. Although, Bianchi had her dialogue dubbed by Zena Marshall (”DR. NO”), she did an excellent job in projecting Tania’s wide range of emotions – including her disgust at ex-Soviet turned SPECTRE agent, Rosa Klebb (Lotte Lenya). Speaking of Lenya . . . my goodness, I am speechless! What can I say? The woman was superb! Creepy in her scenes with Bianchi and Walter Gotell, yet fearful in the scenes featuring SPECTRE’s leader, Ernst Stavos Blofeld, she gave one of the best performances by any actor or actress portraying a Bondn villain/villainess. And I must say the same for the highly revered Robert Shaw. Not only did his Donovan Grant turned out to be the template for many Bond henchmen to come (with only ”THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS”’s Andreas Wisniewski coming close), he and Connery provided one of the best dramatic moments and fight sequences in the entire franchise. On Bond’s side, there was Hollywood character actor, Pedro Armendariz, who portrayed Bond’s Turkish contact, Kerim Bey. Sadly, the role of Bey would prove to be Armendariz’s last one. After finishing his scenes, he committed suicide, rather than suffer any longer from cancer. But fortunately for many Bond fans, Kerim Bey would prove to be his greatest and most memorable role. Bernard Lee and Lois Maxwell were competent as usual. And the movie would serve as the debut of Desmond Llewellyn as MI-6’s Quartermaster
”FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE”’s story centered around SPECTRE’s scheme to lure James Bond into stealing a valuable Soviet decoding machine, and unknowingly deliver it into their hands. In the process, Agent 007 is to suffer a disgraceful death, in revenge for the death of Dr. No. The movie not only had the good luck to be based upon one of Ian Fleming’s few well-written novels, the screenwriters Richard Maibaum, and Johanna Harwood did an excellent job of translating it to the screen. Rich with atmosphere and mystery, ”FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE” almost seemed like the perfect spy thriller – a far cry from the schizophrenic and inferior ”DR. NO”. A few changes had been made, but overall they seemed to serve the story very well.
Was ”FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE” perfect? No. I have a few complaints. For example, there is the Bond-Grant confrontation. From a dramatic viewpoint, it gave Connery and Shaw to exercise their acting chops. From a storytelling viewpoint, it made no sense. It just did not make any sense to me that Grant would take his time preparing to kill Bond on the Orient Express, once he got the drop on the British agent. While Grant was busy searching Bond’s jacket and putting on his gloves, I found myself screaming at my TV screen – ”What in the hell are you waiting for? Kill him!” I also found the two action sequences that preceded Bond and Tania’s arrival in Venice a bit too much. I had the feeling that the writers added an extra action sequence in order to fill in the movie’s running time. I could have done with either the helicopter sequence or the Adriatic Sea boat chase. But the addition of both – one after the other – seemed a bit too much. But despite all of this, my positive view of ”FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE” still stands.
”The Man With the Golden Gun”
What can I say about 1974’s ”THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN”? It is not the worst James Bond movie I have ever seen. I can think of at least two or three of which I have a lower opinion. But I do believe that it is the worst Roger Moore film in the franchise. Apparently screenwriter Tom Mankiewicz believed the same. He made the decision to bow out of the writing assignment before the script could be finished. ”THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN”’s plot the Solex Agitator - a device which can harness the power of the sun. Before Bond could investigate the death of scientist who was thought to be in possession of information crucial to the creation of the Solex Agitator, he has to find out why hitman Francisco Scaramanga had sent a golden bullet to him. It turns out that Scaramanga’s long-suffering mistress, Andrea Anders, had sent the bullet to Bond, hoping that he would kill the hitman. Eventually, Bond teams up with MI-6 agents Mary Goodnight and Lieutenant Hip against Francisco Scaramanga - The Man with the Golden Gun and his employer, billionaire Hai Fat. Eventually Scaramanga kills Hai Fat and become the sole possessor of the Solex Agitator. He also kills Andrea and kidnaps Goodnight. Bond tracks Scaramanga to an island of mainland China, where the action finally culminates in a duel between the two men - Bond's Walther PPK against Scaramanga's Golden Gun.
I must admit that the movie’s plot seemed interesting. It certainly did not seem like the disappointment that ”LIVE AND LET DIE” turned out to be. The problem with ”THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN” is that it was so poorly executed . . . especially by director Guy Hamilton. There seemed to be a lack of style or substance in how the movie was directed. Roger Moore’s performance did not help matters. After his impressive debut in his previous movies, many Bond fans made a fuss over the fact that Moore’s Bond seemed nothing like Connery’s Bond. Which led to Moore being forced to an attempt to recapture Connery’s style. And it did not work. He came off as false and almost wooden. Only two scenes saved Moore’s performance from being a complete bust – his encounter with the Macao gunsmith, Lazar (”Speak now or forever hold your piece.”) and the Bond/Scaramanga confrontation during luncheon on the assassin’s island when Bond expresses his dislike of Scaramanga’s suggestion that the British agent is nothing more than a fellow assassin.
Speaking of Scaramanga, EON Productions had the good fortune to cast Christopher Lee (the future Count Dooku and Sarauman) as the movie’s main villain, expert assassin Francisco Scaramanga. The scene that featured Scaramanga's recollection of a pet elephant produced a very poignant performance from Lee. In fact, only Lee and South Korean actor, Soon-Tek-Oh (who portrayed MI-6 agent Lieutenant Hip) seemed to be the only two cast members who gave consistently excellent performances throughout the entire film. I certainly cannot say the same about the other supporting cast members. Herve Villachaise (four years before ”FANTASY ISLAND”) simply annoyed me. Maud Adams seemed to be her wooden self. Britt Ekland, although a good actress, had the bad luck to portray the annoyingly clumsly Mary Goodnight. Bernard Lee seemed a bit over-the-top in his constant annoyance toward Bond and Hip. Desmond Llewellyn as Q was as annoying as M seemed to find him. I do not even recall the quality of Lois Maxwell’s brief performance as Moneypenny.
I must admit that cinematographers Ted Moore and Oswald Morris beautifully captured the exotic allure of Southeast Asia. It seemed a pity that John Barry could not produce a memorable score and that Don Black wrote what I consider to be the second worst Bond theme song (performed by Lulu) in the franchise’s history. Oh well. Nothing is perfect. Unfortunately for ”THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN”, it was far from perfect.
”OCTOPUSSY” Review
While perusing some of the Bond forums, I have noticed that 1983’s ”OCTOPUSSY” is not highly regarded by many fans. Personally, I have always found this hard to understand or accept, considering that the movie has been one of my favorite entries in the Bond franchise for years. But after watching it recently . . . I still do not understand its low standing amongst the fans.
”OCTOPUSSY”’s pre-title sequence is merely a little teaser about Bond’s attempt to sabotage a missile system in the Banana Republic (aka Cuba). It was light, humorous and filled with plenty of solid action. I particularly enjoyed the fact that what started out as failure on Bond’s part after he found himself captured by enemy soldiers, ended up as a success partially through the actions of the enemy, when they attempt to shoot down the Acrostar Mini-Jet he used for a quick escape. Although entertaining, the pre-title sequence has nothing to do with the main story, which involves a power-hungry Soviet general, a mysterious and beautiful smuggler/circus owner and a duplicitous Afghan prince.
Written by George MacDonald Fraser, Richard Maibaum, and Michael G. Wilson, ”OCTOPUSSY” starts out in East Germany with 009 dressed as a clown and being pursued by a knife-wielding villain. The villain turns out to be a pair of twins (Mischska and Grischska) who want something that 009 has – namely a fake Faberge egg called Property of a Lady. One of the twins manages to fatally wound 009 with a knife. But before he can die, the British agent manages to reach the local British embassy and deliver the egg in dramatic fashion. James Bond is assigned to investigate his colleague’s death. The investigation leads to an auction at Christie’s where the real Property of a Lady egg is being sold . . . and Bond’s first meeting with the villainous Kamal Khan, his henchmen Gobinda and the lovely Madga. Bond’s investigations lead him to India, where he makes his acquaintance with Kamal Khan for the second time. He survives several attempts on his life and incarceration at Khan’s Monsoon Palace and eventually meet the mysterious Octopussy, who turns out to be the daughter of a former rogue agent whom Bond had met years ago. Bond’s encounters with Octopussy and Khan provides him with clues that lead back to East Germany and Soviet General Orlov and Khan’s plot to detonate a nuclear bomb on a U.S. Air Force base in West Germany. Fortunately, Bond (with Octopussy’s help) foils Orlov and Khan’s plans.
Roger Moore returned for the sixth time as British agent James Bond. At age 55 during the film’s production, he struck many Bond fans as too old to be portraying the super spy. Personally, I had no problems with Moore’s age around this time. He still looked handsome and healthy enough to star in the action-packed spy thriller. And he portrayed Bond with a world-weariness and style that seemed to befit his age. Even better, he managed to retain some of that gritty toughness that he utilized so effectively in his previous outing, ”FOR YOUR EYES ONLY” . . . and retained his sense of humor at the same. Speaking of that humor, I usually have nothing against Moore’s humorous style (unlike many fans and critics). But I can think of four occasions when I found it a bit too much:
-Chase sequence in Udaipur with street performers
-Bond focusing short circuit camera on Indian operative’s cleavage
-The Tarzan yell during Bond’s escape from Khan’s Monsoon Palace
-Bond using fake crocodile submarine to sneak into Octopussy’s estate
Despite the above extreme silliness listed above, I still found Moore’s performance satisfactory. I enjoyed his sense of humor during his encounters with the West German citizenry, while trying to stop Orlov and Khan’s bomb. And I admired his dramatic skills in scenes featuring the discovery of Vijay’s body and his romantic scene with Octopussy. But I was especially impressed by his acting in the scene that featured Bond’s only encounter with General Orlov.
Maud Adams returned to appear in her second Bond film, this time portraying the leading female character – smuggler/circus owner, Octopussy. I cannot honestly say I would consider Adams to be among the best actresses that appeared in the Bond franchise. The nine years between ”THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN” (in which she portrayed the villain’s doomed mistress) and ”OCTOPUSSY” seemed to have shown no real improvement in her acting skills. But she seemed competent enough to carry the role. And her looks and screen presence certainly helped. The secondary female lead – Kristina Weyborn – portrayed Madga, Octopussy’s right-hand woman and personal liaison to Kamal Khan. Like Adams, Weyborn is a tall Swedish-born beauty with limited acting skills. And like the leading lady, she possessed enough looks and presence to carry her role. Although I do wish that someone had given her more lessons in performing martial arts on screen.
French actor Louis Jordan portrayed Kamal Khan, an exiled Afghan prince who desire for a piece of the Imperial Russian treasure leads him to take part in General Orlov's plot to bomb a U.S. Air Force base and change the political landscape of Western Europe. Khan serves as the liaison between Orlov and Octopussy, who traveling circus/smuggling operation allows the two men to smuggle a nuclear bomb into West Germany. Like Yaphet Kotto and Christopher Lee before him, Jordan seems to be a doppleganger of Moore's James Bond - smooth, suave and very deadly. One scene in particular - Bond and Khan's game of dice at an Udaipur hotel - reflects the mirror image of the two men in a very effective manner. Not only did Jordan perfectly portray Kamal Khan's smooth style and sophistication, he did an excellent job of reflecting the Afghan prince's darker nature - especially his cold-blooded tendency to betray anyone who stood between him and self-preservation. Including Octopussy and his men.
"OCTOPUSSY"'s cast of minor villains include Steven Berkhoff as the bombastic General Orlov, whose desire for completely Communist Europe and a higher position in the Soviet hierarchy sets off the movie's plot. Although I found his scenes with Moore, Jordan and Adams effective and subtle, Berkhoff unfortunately revealed a tendency toward hammy acting in a scene that feature a meeting between the Soviet premier and several generals - including Gogol. And when I mean hammy, I mean . . . ham served with eggs. Indian actor Kabir Bedi portrayed Khan's right-hand man, the silent and intimidating Gobinda. One of the Bond sites, MI-6.UK - http://www.mi6.co.uk/sections/villains/gobinda.php3?t=op&s=op stated the following about the character: "Kamal Khan's faithful bodyguard, big and tough but none too bright.". I do not know if I agree with that assessment. On second thought . . . I don't agree. Gobinda's flaw may have been that he was too devoted and loyal to Khan - after all, he actually obeyed the Afghan prince's order that he climb out of a plane in mid-flight and kill Bond. But less than bright? No, I don't agree. Gobinda struck me as a very observant and intelligent man. And the very handsome Bedi portrayed the henchman with a nice balance of intelligence and menace. In fact, Gobinda happens to be one of my favorite henchmen. Actors David Meyer and Anthony Meyer portray the knife-throwing assassins who killed 009, Mischka and Grischska. They did not say much in the movie, but both did a nice job of projecting competent and menacing killers.
With the death of Bernard Lee in 1980, the character of M did not appear in "FOR YOUR EYES ONLY". The character returned in the form of actor Robert Brown, who began the first of his four movie run as the head of MI-6 in "OCTOPUSSY". Brown portrayed M with authority, but very little imagination. Personally, I think he was simply too young to be portraying an authority figure against Roger Moore, who was six years younger. Not until Timothy Dalton's tenure will Brown show that along with Lee and Judi Dench, he could also be an interesting M. Lois Maxwell returned as Moneypenny in one of the most amusing Bond-Moneypenny scenes in the franchise. The scene involved a 'Miss Penelope Smallbone' and Moore and Maxwell managed to inject a lot of humor and charm into the scene, as befitting two old friends. Desmond Llewellyn had once stated that "LICENSE TO KILL" was his favorite Bond film. Which does not seem surprising, since he had a strong role in it. But he also had a strong role in "OCTOPUSSY" and I could tell that he had enjoyed himself. Especially in the scene that featured his rescue of Madga and some of Octopussy's other followers. It seemed too bad that Q's embellished role in this movie seemed just as unecessary as his embellished role in "LICENSE TO KILL". General Gogol returned in the form of Walter Gotell. And he portrayed the Soviet KGB general with his usual competence. Tennis star, Vijay Amritraj made his screen debut as Indian intelligence agent . . . Vijay. Okay this is not exactly an example of original casting, but what the hell? He did a pretty good job, anyway. And he was rather charming.
"OCTOPUSSY" marked John Glen's second time in the director chair. And like "FOR YOUR EYES", he did an admirable job. I have to give the man kudos for once again, bringing a touch of realistic grit in Moore's portrayal of Bond and in the franchise. Although I do feel that he made a misstep in allowing those silly moments I had earlier mentioned, in the movie. But I do wonder who had included those ridiculous little scenes? Was it Glen? Moore? Or were the screenwriters, Fraser, Maibum and Wilson responsible? If the writers were responsible, it was a misstep on their parts. Otherwise, they created an admirable script. One of the scenes highly criticized by critics was the sight of Bond disguised as a clown to infiltrate the circus where the bomb was located. I never understood this criticsim. Perhaps they disliked the idea of James Bond dressed as a clown. If so, I find their attitude extremely shallow . . . and rather stupid. Also, I wonder why George MacDonald Fraser was included in this project? Was it because he was a British Army veteran who had served in India? Or that he had incorporated his experiences in India in his Harry Flashman novels? I do not know what to admire more - the screenwriters' creation of the villains' objectives and Bond's efforts to stop the bomb, or Glen's direction of those scenes. Perhaps both. I wish I could say that I enjoyed the movie's theme song, "All Time High", which was sung by Rita Coolidge. But in the end, it simply bored me. However, I did enjoy John Barry's lush and exciting score. And I must commend cinematographer, Alan Hume, for the film's photography. His shots of India and the English countryside (serving as East and West Germany) made "OCTOPUSSY" one of the most colorful entries in the Bond franchise.
Despite the low opinion held by many Bond fans, "OCTOPUSSY" remains one of my favorite Bond films. In fact, I consider it to be Moore's second best film (despite a few stupid jokes) and the franchise's sixth best. I give it . . . 8/10.
"THE SPY WHO LOVED ME" Review
THE SPY WHO LOVED ME became EON Productions 10th entry in the Bond franchise in 1977. It also marked Sir Roger Moore’s third turn as British agent, James Bond, Cubby Broccoli’s as sole producer for the first time and Lewis Gilbert’s second time at bat as director of a Bond film. This is the movie that introduced the catchphrase, “Nobody does it better,” and according to many critics and fans, saved the Bond franchise back in the 1970s. Watching THE SPY WHO LOVE ME, I can understand why many would harbor this belief.
Many critics and fans tend to credit or blame Roger Moore for helping to usher in the era of “fantasy” Bond – in other words a Bond movie that basically feels more like a fantasy/science-fiction action movie than a spy thriller. I do not really accept this view, since I believe that 1964’s GOLDFINGER was responsible for this change of style in the Bond franchise. In fact, Connery did two other movies that continued this very element in the movies. Roger Moore merely continued what Connery had begun in movies like LIVE AND LET DIE and THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. The latter, released in 1974, came dangerously close to ruining the Bond franchise – at least in the eyes of many fans and critics. And in a way, I do not blame them for this attitude. Frankly, I consider TMWTGG to be one of the worst Bond films in the franchise and Moore’s worst movie. EON Productions had to wait two to three years to release its next movie, due to the breakup of the Cubby Broccoli/Harry Saltzman partnership. Following this, THE SPY WHO LOVED ME premiered in 1977 and became the most highly regarded Bond film in the 1970s and is considered by some to be Moore’s personal triumph. I do not know if I would consider THE SPY WHO LOVED ME to be Moore’s ultimate triumph. I believe that honor should go to the 1981 movie, FOR YOUR EYES ONLY. However, I do consider it to be his third best film.At first, the plot seemed reminiscent of the one for 1967’S YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE. But instead of American and Soviet space capsules disappearing, British and Soviet submarines vanish. Bond, just recently from a mission in Austria that led to the death of a KGB agent, is assigned to track down the missing Royal Navy submarine via a tracking system that has popped up on the market in Cairo, Egypt. His search not only leads to Soviet agent Anya Amasova (who is investigating the disappearance of a Soviet sub), but to billionaire oceanographer, Karl Stromberg. But what makes TSWLM so interesting is that the Egyptian sequences have a strong exotic atmosphere that lends a touch of mystery to the story; and Bond’s relationship with Amasova turns out to be more than just a case of the British agent having a female on hand for sex in the finale.
Probably the biggest contribution to the success of THE SPY WHO LOVED ME seemed to be the movie’s lead, Roger Moore. Many fans believe that he finally grew into the role of 007 in this movie. After seeing him (as Bond) cold-bloodedly push one of Stromberg’s men of a Cairo roof and shoot Stromberg four times, I can see why. Personally, I felt that he had grown into the role at first bat in LIVE AND LET DIE, but had regressed in an attempt to emulate Connery in THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. But I cannot deny that his performance in THE SPY WHO LOVED ME can not only be considered among his best, but among the best Bond performances in the entire franchise. And he was certainly helped by Barbara Bach’s presence. Although I would not describe the New York born model-turned-actress as a particularly talented actress verbally, but she could be quite versatile through facial expressions, whether expressing jealousy over Bond’s attention to Stromberg’s pilot/assassin, Naomi; amusement over some of Bond’s predicaments or developing attraction toward the handsome British agent. In fact, I can recall at least three scenes in which Moore and Bach interact with each other, beautifully:
1) Their deepening attraction for each other, expressed through smiles after M and Gogol order them to work together;
2) Their discussion regarding their status as enemies turned allies on the train to Sardina;
3) And the piece de résistance – Anya’s discovery that Bond had killed her former lover in Austria
Supporting cast members like Bernard Lee, Lois Maxwell and Desmond Llewellyn ably serve the movie. Shane Rimmer, a Canadian actor who has been working in British films since the late 1950s, ably supports Moore as the somewhat sardonic commander of an American sub. Both Walter Gotell (as KGB General Gogol) and Richard Kiel (as assassin Jaws) make their debuts in the movie. Kiel personally came off as menacing in the movie, in compare to his return in MOONRAKER. German matinee idol, Curt Jurgens became the latest Bond villain, playing a billionaire/oceanographer whose response to the world’s growing corruption and self-destruction is use stolen nuclear submarines to blow up Washington D.C. and Moscow. Actually, Stromberg became the first Bond villain with megalomaniac ambitions to rule the world. All those before him were simply interested in profit. Jurgens is his usual competent self and also had the pleasure of uttering a few bon mots. But . . . I do not exactly find megalomaniacal villains to be interesting.
Despite some of the fantasy/science-fiction elements of THE SPY WHO LOVED ME – the Lotus Esprit, Stromberg and his two lairs – the Liparus Tanker and his lair/lab Atlantis, the movie is an exciting adventure that features great direction by Lewis Gilbert, a first-class battle between Stromberg’s men and the American/British/Soviet naval personnel, exotic locales in Egypt, a self-assured performance by Roger Moore and great screen chemistry and drama between Moore and Barbara Bach. It is easy to see why it is considered the best Bond film from the 1970s.
Great Quotes
Stromberg: "Well gentlemen, now that the moment has come to bid you farewell, I congratulate both you, Doctor, and you, Professor, on your brilliant work in the development of the submarine tracking system. Thanks primarily to you, I am happy to say that the first phase of our operation has met with considerable success. I have instructed my assistant to be paid into your Swiss bank account the sum of ten million dollars each. And that, I think, concludes our business. Before you go however, I very much regret to inform you that a dangerous development has recently been brought to my notice. Someone has been attempting to sell the plans of our tracking project to competing world powers; someone intimately associated with the project."
Bond: "Which bullet has my name on it? The first or the last?"
Amasova: "I have never failed on a mission, Commander!"
Bond: "Then one of us is bound to be gravely disappointed, because neither have I."
Bond: "Oh, thanks for deserting me back there."
Amasova: "Every woman for herself, remember?"
Bond: "Well, you did save my life. Thank you."
Amasova: "We all make mistakes, Mr Bond."
Q: "Now I want to to take good care of this equipment."
Bond: "Have I ever let you down, Q"
Q: "Frequently!"
Bond: "When one is in Egypt, one should delve deeply into its treasures."
Hotel Receptionist: “Hello”
Bond: “Hello.”
Hotel Receptionist: (Staring at Bond with lust) “I have a message for you.”
Bond: “I . . . think you’ve just delivered it.”
Bond: “Which bullet has my name on it? The first or the last?”
Anya: “I have never failed on a mission, Commander. Any mission.”
Bond: “In that case, Major, one of us is bound to end up gravely disappointed, because neither have I.”
Bond: “Oh, by the way, thanks for deserting me back there.”
Anya: “Every woman for herself, remember?”
Bond: “Still, you did save my life.”
Anya: “We all make mistakes, Mr. Bond.”
(The motorcycle henchmen flies off a cliff in a cloud of feathers)
Bond: “All those feathers and he still can't fly!”
Anya: “Commander James Bond, recruited to the British Secret Service from the Royal Navy. License to kill and has done so on numerous occasions. Many lady friends, but married only once. Wife killed . . .”
Bond: (interrupts her) “You've made your point.”
Anya: “You're sensitive Mr.Bond?”
Bond: “About some things.”
Bond: “In our business, Anya, people get killed. You know that. It was either him or me.”
Bond: (Sandor is barely holding onto Bond's necktie while dangling over the roof of a building) “Where's Fekkesh?”
Sandor: “Pyramids!”
(He falls to his death)
Bond: (Straightens his tie) “What a helpful chap.”
Bond: (Anya has just used a Bond car gadget to kill an enemy) “How did you know about that?”
Anya: “I stole the plans to this car two years ago.”
Captain Carter: “What’s the matter, sailor? You’ve never seen a major taking a shower, before?”
(Bond and Anya are discovered making love)
M: “007!”
General Gogol: “Triple X!”
Sir Frederick Gray, Minister of Defence: “Bond! What do you think you're doing?”
Bond: “Keeping the British end up, sir.”
”MOORE AS BOND”
I always found it odd that many Bond fans tend to dismiss Roger Moore's performances as a non-threatening Bond. While watching my CR "Special Features", I recall the "Bond Girls Are Forever" segment in which Jane Seymour was describing her character's relationship with Moore's Bond. From what she and Maud Adams had said, I got the distinct impression that in his own way, Moore's Bond was just as ruthless as the other Bonds.
Unlike his fellow Bond actors, Moore’s ruthlessness did not involve grittiness or overt menace. Judging from Seymour's description of Moore's Bond and my own memories, I suspect that Moore's ruthlessness was a lot more subtle, but equally cold-blooded. I believe that Moore had portrayed Bond as a manipulative and cold-blooded cad, who would use anyone to achieve his goal . . . while smiling in their faces or whispering soft words. And thinking about this made me realize that Moore's portrayal of Bond was more than just tongue-in-cheek humor. He had portrayed a Bond very unique from the others. Perhaps the other Bonds have used or manipulated others (think of Bond's use of Solange in CR), but they have never done it with such style and cold-bloodedness as Moore did.
Moore had first been considered for the role of James Bond back in 1961 or early 1962, about a year before he began his six-year run as another British literary icon . . . Simon Templar aka “The Saint”. He eventually took over the role from Sean Connery in 1972 and his first movie became 1973’s “LIVE AND LET DIE”. Moore would spend the next twelve years portraying the British agent. And during that period, he would gain the reputation of being a lightweight Bond – one who resorted to jokes, light charm and gadget instead of ruthlessness and sheer grit. A reputation – in my opinion – that he has unfairly acquired.
Whereas other actors who have portrayed Bond (Connery, Dalton and Craig, especially) tend to show the agent’s more ruthless side in gritty action sequences and overt violence, Moore’s take on Bond’s ruthless tend to be a little subtler. Now, Moore has shown Bond’s grittier side in movies like ”THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN” and ”FOR YOUR EYES ONLY”. However, it seemed more plausible in the 1981 film, since he did not seem bent upon impersonating Connery like he did in the 1974 film. However, subtlety and caddish behavior seemed to be the hallmark of Moore’s performance. And here are a few examples (if you know of any more, please let me know):
- In ”LIVE AND LET DIE”, he deliberately tricked Solitaire into believing they were destined to be lovers, so that he could have sex with her and manipulate her into revealing all about Kanaga’s operation. One of the low moments in Bond’s career.
- Also in ”LALD”, Bond unceremoniously shoves a shark pellet into Kanaga’s mouth, causing the latter to expand before blowing up. Rather cruel way to kill someone.
- In ”THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN”, he seduces fellow MI-6 agent, Mary Goodnight into spending the night with him. But when Scaramanga’s mistress, Andrea Anders, comes knocking at his door, he forces Goodnight to hide in a nearby closet, while he has sex with Anders. Hmmmm . . .
- Also in ”TMWTGG”, Bond offers a young Thai boy to fix his boat engine for money. When the boy does as he asks, Bond shoves the kid into the water. That was . . . pretty shitty.
- In ”THE SPY WHO LOVED ME”, Bond sets about enjoying the favors of a young woman that was hired to distract him at Fekkish’s home. But when he sees that Sandor is about to kill him, he uses the young woman as a human shied. This is debatable, since there are those who believe that she simply became an accidental target.
- Also in ”TSWLM”, Bond shoves Sandor off a roof, after the latter grudgingly gives him the information that he needs. And later, he shoots an unarmed Karl Stromberg in the chest . . . four times.
- In ”MOONRAKER”, Bond sexually seduces one of Drax’s employees, Corine Dufour, so that she could lead him to Drax’s personal safe for information. This action eventually led to Corine’s death at the jaws of a pair of Dobermans. I can only assume that Bond never realized the consequences of his actions.
- Finally in ”FOR YOUR EYES ONLY”, Bond shoots Emile Loque in the shoulder, forcing the Belgian hitman to swerve to the edge of a cliff. In what is considered to be a very celebrated scene, Bond slowly saunters over and kicks Loque’s car over the cliff.
I tried to think of any real cold-blooded acts on Bond’s part, in Moore’s last two films - ”OCTOPUSSY” and ”A VIEW TO A KILL”, but I am unable to. Perhaps by 1982 or 1983, Moore had slowly become aware of the fact that his Bond was a lot more cold-blooded than he had originally intended. Or perhaps his Bond had matured into a man that realizes that he does not need to resort to cold-blooded and caddish acts to complete his assignment. Who knows?
But I hope that this puts an end to the idea that Roger Moore’s Bond was simply some light and sophisticated man who seemed more concerned with light jokes and beautiful women, and who was incapable of being ruthless. Because from what I have seen from most of Moore’s films, his Bond seemed quite capable of being ruthless. Perhaps he was not as gritty as the likes of Sean Connery, Timothy Dalton or Daniel Craig, but Moore’s Bond could be quite a dangerous and cold-blooded man.
I would also like to wish Sir Roger a happy 80th birthday.
"A VIEW TO A KILL" Review
The year 1985 marked a milestone in the history of the Bond franchise. This was the year in which EON Productions released their latest Bond film, "A VIEW TO A KILL". The movie would turn out to be Roger Moore's last turn as the British agent, James Bond. With this movie, Moore would become the only actor who has portrayed Bond for EON Productions more than any other - seven times. Sean Connery would also portray Bond seven times, but his last effort would not be for EON Productions.
But this review is not about Moore's tenure as James Bond. It is about his last movie - namely "A VIEW TO A KILL". The franchise's 14th installment is not what I would call a remarkable film. But I do not consider it a travesty like many other Bond fans do. On the whole, it struck me as a slight remake of the 1964 film, "GOLDFINGER" in regard to one scene and the villain's objective. In "GOLDFINGER", the villain's objective was to destroy the U.S. gold reserve at Fort Knox with a nuclear bomb in order to drive up the value of his own supply of gold. In "A VIEW TO A KILL", the villain's objective was to destroy the U.S. dominant control of the microchip market by causing a "natural disaster" in Silicon Valley. Both movies also feature scenes in which the villain reveals his scheme to potential "investors". But whereas "GOLDFINGER" created a major plot hole in the latter, "A VIEW TO A KILL" managed to avoid one.
Bond's discovery of a microchip on the body of the dead Agent 003 in Siberia leads to MI-6's investigation of an industrialist named Max Zorin, who now owns the very company that the British government and military have contracts. Bond's investigation leads to his introduction of certain individuals - a former Nazi criminal/scientist named Carl Mortner, an oil geologist named Conley and the movie's leading lady, whose name is Stacy Sutton. In a nutshell, these three characters - especially Sutton - allow Bond to discover Zorin's past as a KGB agent, his betrayal of his bosses, and his plot to destroy Silicon Valley. Michael G. Wilson and Richard Maibaum's screenplay is not very original, considering that it seemed like a vague rehash of "GOLDFINGER". Fortunately for "A VIEW TO A KILL", director John Glen did what he could with Wilson and Maibaum’s screenplay and did a commendable job in avoiding the major mistakes of the 1964 film. Granted, the movie’s portrayal of the San Francisco Police seemed straight out of the Keystone Cops. Nor I did not care for the writers’ attempt to keep Stacy in the story by allowing her character to reveal the details of Zorin’s plot. It seemed to be stretching things a bit. But in the end, I rather liked the story. And I liked Glen’s direction. I believe that he did better with movies like ”FOR YOUR EYES ONLY”, ”OCTOPUSSY” and ”THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS”. But at least I have nothing major to complain about.
The cast’s performance seemed to be pretty solid. The only complaint I have of Roger Moore is that in certain scenes, he looked a little too old and tired to be portraying Bond. Some fans would attribute this to his age (he was 57 when he filmed the movie). But from what I had learned, Moore had been suffering from the flu at the time. However, there were scenes in which he looked like a handsome, middle-aged man. Despite his illness, Moore managed to turn in a good performance that had not been marred by the occasional silly joke, as it had in ”OCTOPUSSY”. Aside from the silly Beach Boys moment, the humor in ”A VIEW TO A KILL” seemed more restrained and tasteful. Ironically, three of Moore’s best moments featured both humor – which featured Bond’s impersonation as a spoiled and demanding playboy and his reunion with KGB agent Pola Ivanova (Fiona Fullerton) - and also drama – his dislike of Zorin apparent, following the murder of Mr. Howe (Daniel Benzali) of the Department of Conservation.
I would never consider Tanya Roberts (”CHARLIE’S ANGELS”/”THAT 70s SHOW” to be a great actress. Hell, I have enough trouble viewing her as a good actress. She was basically solid as Stacy Sutton, the California State geologist whose oil company Zorin wanted to buy. But she did have her moments of wooden acting. Fortunately for Roberts, she can at least claim to be a better actress than either Barbara Bach or Lois Chiles. And despite her acting limitations, she managed to inject a great deal of spirit and moxie into the Stacy character. Oscar winner Christopher Walker, on the other hand, was great. I loved his slightly off-kilter portrayal of the greedy and psychotic Max Zorin – former KBG agent-turned-entrepreneur and industrialist. And considering that Walken was portraying a psychotic, it is a credit to his skills as an actor that he did not ham it up for the screen. He even managed to provide some great moments. But my favorite moment featured Zorin’s reaction to his discovery that Bond’s true identity. And of course there is Grace Jones as Zorin’s equally psychotic henchman, May Day. Perhaps she was not as psychotic, considering she was able to mourn the deaths of her two female assistants (Alison Doody and Papillon Soo Soo). But like Walken, she brought a lot of style and verve to her role without going over the top. And for an exhibitionist like Jones, it was a miracle.
The regular Bond cast seemed to be their solid selves. I especially enjoyed Moore’s last on-screen interaction with Lois Maxwell (Miss Moneypenny). However, I must confess that the movie’s last scene of Q (Desmond Llewelyn) using a remote controlled “rover” to peep into Bond and Stacy’s shower activities at the end of the movie struck me as distasteful. Included among Bond’s allies is Patrick Macnee, portraying Sir Godfrey Tibbett. Tibbett is a gentleman horse breeder who helps MI-6 investigates the mystery of Zorin’s success on the racetrack (microchips imbedded in the horses’ flesh). Macnee (the fourth ”AVENGERS” cast member to appear in a Bond film) gave a very competent and classy performance and seemed to have produced a good screen chemistry with Moore. It seemed a shame that he was only present in the movie’s first half.
Cinematographer Alan Hume did a great job in taking advantage of the elegant settings of Paris, the French countryside and surprisingly, San Francisco. In fact, I believe that ”A VIEW TO A KILL” marked one of those rare times in a Bond movie in which the U.S. locations actually looked tasteful or interesting. I am usually not a fan of Duran Duran, but I must admit that I am a fan of their rendition of the movie’s theme song – ”A View to a Kill” (written by Duran Duran and John Barry). I am not surprised that the song ended up #2 on the U.K. pop charts and #1 in the U.S.
”A VIEW TO A KILL” will never be considered a top favorite of mine. Aside from the cinematography, the theme song by Duran Duran and Christopher Walken’s performance, there is nothing really remarkable about it. Many Bond fans consider it a travesty that Moore had to end his tenure on such a low. I personally do not consider ”A VIEW TO A KILL” as a low note for Moore. In fact, I feel that he was lucky to end his tenure with a good, solid action film in which he had nothing to feel ashamed of.