55 replies to this topic

[LadySylvia]

[Zorin Industries]

quote]


I concur, it's a bit silly in places. I certainly think it is one of the more demeaning of the Bond movies, to women that is.

How is it demeaning to women? It has the most rounded, believable female lead in probably any Bond film (apart from maybe CASINO ROYALE and TOMORROW NEVER DIES). I don't see how a successful businesswoman in her early forties is a bad character. Yes, the eye candy quota elsewhere is there - but any of the Bond films are hardly innocent of peppering a few poolside beauties into the mix.

Both the female leads are really strong characters who - for once - look completely at home with James Bond 007 as played by Roger Moore at that stage in his life. Maud Adams is the most elegant, beautiful Bond Girl going (well, Moore thinks so). She lends the film great dignity, as does Kristina Wayborn.

I rate OCTOPUSSY as my second favourite Bond film. Okay, there are many reasons why - one being it was the first one I ever saw (and at the cinema). But it is a superbly plotted Bond film. One of the best for plot intricacies. Caper films are notoriously hard to write, but Maibaum, Fraser and Wilson pull it off admirably.

It is also one of the few Bond films to address the colonial status of England and the gentrified world that 007 moves in. It really captures the Englishness of the character instead of the Brosnan years that saw 007 become a sort of mid-Atlantic Catherine Zeta Jones hybrid of nationalities.

The score is beautiful, the song is classic (and should have had Karen Carpenter singing it, had she not died), the pace is maintained and the villain's plot makes complete non-underground bunker sense.

[mrsbonds_ppk]

I love Octopussy. Fun Movie. Prince Kamel Khan is a top-choice villian. The chemistry between Roger and Maud is great.

Movie: (I don't remember what I gave it previously...) 9/10
Moore's Performance: 9/10

[DLibrasnow]

quote]


I concur, it's a bit silly in places. I certainly think it is one of the more demeaning of the Bond movies, to women that is.

How is it demeaning to women?

You don't think Bond on the video camera zomming in and out on a woman's bust is demeaning?

[Zorin Industries]

quote]


I concur, it's a bit silly in places. I certainly think it is one of the more demeaning of the Bond movies, to women that is.

How is it demeaning to women?

You don't think Bond on the video camera zomming in and out on a woman's bust is demeaning?

No, of course it isn't. It's comedy. Yes, it's a puerile gag that doesn't have all that much of a place in a Bond film, but no offence is intended. And if anything, the joke works against Bond, not the girl in question. He gets told off for his behaviour and she gets a winning smile in.

OCTOPUSSY is no more demeaning to women (in the most literal sense of the word) than EVA GREEN's quip about Craig's "perfectly formed " could be be-littling men.

Anyway, it's James Bond. It's entertainment.

I say this with a slight tongue-in-cheek, but I find characters such as PAM BOUVIER and ELEKTRA KING more demeaning than anything in OCTOPUSSY. They are written and performed with a masculinised notion of 'equality' and power that leaves both characters part of some schoolboy take on feminism that is neither helpful, progressive or all that realistic. At least OCTOPUSSY the character has her own business and workforce (and not one that is fuelled by men).

[BoogieBond]

Just rewatched this and its....OK
The first 30 minutes are really good for me. They get some adaptions of the novels in, I guess the property of a lady short story, some of the background from the Octopussy short story with Major Dexter Smythe and one of my favourite bits, which adapts Bonds card duel with Drax in Moonraker. The Backgammon duel. Bond knows Khan is cheating, so he uses his dice to "out-cheat" him. "Spend the money quickly" is also great.
The stunts are up to the normal standard, some really good ones, and special effects.

The Plot isn't bad, and Rog has some good moments, especially the oft cited confrontation with Orlov. (I also like the "No more problems" on knowing Vijay is dead). As mentioned Bond's chemistry with Octopussy is great. The suspense with the bomb building up in the circus is well handled as well.
But, I do think Rog should have called it quits after FYEO. Rog always looked young for his age IMO, but 55 was stretching it a bit. But its still Roger, and he still looks reasonably fit etc.. But with the competition of NSNA, EON were taking no chances.
Overall, it is mid range for me. The formula feels well established, just taking very few chances outside the formula. The comedic elements are OK(But not great), save for some of OTT elements, the tarzan yelp etc... I do like the line "No mam, I am with the economy tour" when escaping Khans lair, it is a classic Rog line. And the "You'd better put this back yourself" to the sword swallower, raised a chuckle.
Middle of the road. Roger has 4 films I like better, Sean has 4 films I like better. But still entertaining enough.

Edited by BoogieBond, 22 April 2008 - 07:27 AM.

[Mr. Osato]

In 1983 -- not exactly history's most glamorous period -- "Octopussy" was pretty much the event of the Summer. Was Roger Moore too old? Perhaps.. Was the action a little brittle? Sure... But you've got the original team, a great Bond, and for the time -- the mid-80's!?!? It holds up very well indeed. The pre-title sequence today - sets the bar very, very high...

Octopussy is a solid 8 in the Bond series.

[DaveBond21]

Yes, I must say that the PTS is one of my favourites of the whole series, and the last one to be unconnected to the plot, until, arguably, Casino Royale.

[hilly]

The word that springs to mind when I watch Octopussy is FUN. Its one of the last genuine FUN Bond films. Subsequent films, for me anyway, have been good for differing reasons (with the exception of the rather painful AVTAK....and the downright agonising DAD) as they have explored a darker, more emotive and realistic Bond. This is all very well, and I do not wish to denigrate these films as they have kept Bond with us for another 20+ years. EON have quite rightly changed direction and tried new ideas and this has worked wonderfully well. However I would put Octopussy, along with Goldfinger, Diamonds Are Forever and The Spy Who Loved Me in the category of "sheer unadulterated, leave your brain at the box office and enjoy the ride ENTERTAINMENT"

Despite its lightweight reputation, the stunt work is outstanding, the scope is huge and some of the performances are wonderful.I always forget how good Louis Jourdan actually is. He and Steven Berkoff contrast wonderfully. Kabir Bedi is a great henchman as are the knife throwing twins.There are some wonderfully dark moments, such as 009 being chased by the twins and Vijay being killed which would not be out of place in some of the latter day Bonds. The circus scene is a bold move, but the tension, music and the acting (some of Rogers best Bond work here, I reckon) carry it off. Roger looks great and seemed to age alarmingly between here and AVTAK. Sure, some of the female performances are a little below par, and there are the odd moments of humour that are more suited to Benny Hill, but, as a product of its time, I think Octopussy is great.

[john.steed]

Thinking about Octopussy reminds me that it is 25 years since 1983 and the Battle of the Bonds. Ahhh!
To my mind, 1983 brought two solid, if not spectacular, Bond films. Parts of the film I particularly like include the auction scene taken from Property of a Lady and the battle on the airplane at the end. I also liked the tone of this film: like that of FYEO, significantly more serious than Moonraker but not gritty like LTK.

[dodge]

"No more problems" was the gem stowed in a deflated souffle. I love the scene and Rog's delivery as much as I dislike nearly everything else about the film. I'm bugged most by the puerile title and the eponymous heroine. It's too silly for words, too winking and too leering. And generally I can't in a positive way to films, even Bond films, when I'm clutching at my gut and groaning at the dodoness and the faint reek of kaka. Sorry, I'm a Moore fan but this one for me is closer in spirit to the Marx Brothers than to MooreBond at his best.

[dee-bee-five]

It's too silly for words, too winking and too leering.

That's the problem with young people today. They fail to realise that one can never have enough silliness, winking or leering. Personally, I love Octopussy. It is pure, unadulterated fun. And, to my mind, there is nothing wrong with that.

As for the movie being demeaning to women, what po-faced, politically correct tommyrot.

[danielcraigisjamesbond007]

My review of Octopussy:
WOW! Originally, I LOATHED Octopussy. That being said, after several reviewings, I've come to enjoy Octopussy a lot! Here's why:
1) Roger Moore: Although he certainly looks a lot older, his age didn't creep me out as much as it did in AVTAK But he certainly handled himself well for this film. I mean, his stunts are pretty freaking cool!
2) Maud Adams: I'm so glad that they didn't go younger for the titular role of the main Bond girl. Plus, Adams proves that she has the ability to handle her character (after all she was in TMWTGG).
3) The action scenes: WOW!!! The producers certainly put a lot more action into the film this time around. That opening sequence with the Acrostar mini jet? FANTASTIC!!! I love the line at the end of that scene where Moore pulls up to the gas station and says "Fill 'er up, please." Classic stuff. The "hunt" of Bond was very tense (except for the God awful Tarzan yelling (Horrible)). I especially liked the last scene with the airplane! To this day, I still can't believe that someone was actually hanging on the the outside of an airplane! That's amazing!!! The car chase through the streets of India was fun to watch to. (I watched the Behind the scenes documentary where Director John Glenn talks about how a man drove between the cars, completely oblivious to the whole fight scene!) I would have thought that that would have been written in!!
While it succeeds in some areas, it falters in others. For instance, the whole clown idea was, IMO, kind of silly. Dressing Bond up in that makeup sort of took away from the tension. But, aside from that and the tarzan yell, I can't think of anything else that was bad.
Overall, this film is pretty underrated. It has great action scenes, and dialogue between characters. Believable, while still considered a "fun" movie.
8/10

[chrisno1]

In 2008 I watched all the Bond movies and wrote a series of reviews for another site. The aim was to watch them in order in the run up to the premiere of QOS. I succeeded and the reviews were well received.
However, subsequently, I have re-read my reviews and re-watched a number of the movies (the BFI had a whole 007 season earlier this year and I saw quite a few on the big screen again!).
This is my updated review for Octopussy.

OCTOPUSSY
REVISED REVIEW 15/1/10

Octopussy is based very loosely on two of Ian Fleming’s short stories. They are buried inside the film and are hardly relevant, which is frustrating after the previous episode’s attempt to return Bond to his literal roots. Instead the titular character is a wealthy international smuggler who runs her all female operations from an island palace in Udaipur. It’s an excellent premise, but the writers do not make enough of it and instead we are presented with a confusing story about fake Faberge eggs, circuses and atomic bombs.

The teaser is some inconsequential fun involving an acroset jet and a Cuban heat seeking missile and the story proper begins well, with two knife wielding twins killing a British agent, who, disguised as a clown, has stolen one of the jewelled eggs. Photographed at twilight this scene has a sinister feel, recalling the atmosphere in the teaser for From Russia With Love. Sadly this is as good as Octopussy gets.

There is so much wrong with this film. It has an incomprehensible plot, numerous ineffective villains and dumb henchmen, a tired looking Roger Moore, muddy photography, no tension, and no less than three drawn out and sluggish finales. Director John Glen, his editors and writers seem out of their depth, unable to concise the action, they just aim for something bigger and longer. No one seems to have realised what a shoddy product they’re making. Nobody much seems to care at the box office, but it’s a poor artistic return for such a healthy investment. If there are redeeming features, and I struggle to find them, all claims to quality are quickly dispelled by two recurring faults: the humour and the misogyny.

Screen writer George MacDonald Fraser was responsible for the Flashman novels and a series of tongue in cheek swashbuckling movies in the ‘70s. He’s good at what he does, but his style doesn’t suit James Bond. He has prime billing and I recognise his hand in the cumbersome situations, laced with too many asides, too many jibes and too many visual jokes. Most of these occur during the action sequences and reduce 007 to nothing more than a stooge for props and one liners. If Bond has to impersonate ghosts, circus clowns and Tarzan to escape the bad guys, he’s really losing his touch.

And it isn’t just Bond. M and Q are given a series of quips to administer, as is Moneypenny and her new assistant, inappropriately called Miss Smallbone. Vijay Amritraj’s sole purpose is to have the fun poked at his tennis career. In fact the depiction of the Indians is particularly poor. Not only are the secret service men in Udaipur under used – Q steps into their shoes, for no sensible reason other than Desmond Llewellyn’s superior comic timing – but they are stereotypes: having won half a million rupees at backgammon, Bond chortles, “That’ll keep you in curry for a month.” There is a chase scene during which Bond passes through an unlikely market place, utilising the assorted sword swallowers, fakirs, nail beds and hot coals. None of it amuses. Equally, Q’s lab is full of daft tricks based on some 18th Century view of the sub-continent. As Moore’s incessant mocking tone and hapless mugging went on, I became increasingly uncomfortable.

He isn’t alone in the face pulling stakes. Louis Jourdan and Stephen Berkoff are a dreadful pair of the baddies. Berkoff in particular over-acts from his very first sentence. Madness takes all forms, but this Russian should have been locked up long before he got a seat at the Prosidium Council. Jourdan simply can’t act and his face is set in stone throughout the film. Neither actor convinces when required to be remotely serious. Admittedly, that doesn’t happen very often.

The female leads are equally bad. Maud Adams returns to the fold as Octopussy, an older Bond girl for sure, but this seems more to remind us that Bond isn’t a young man any more. His seduction of her is crude and unlikely. The other woman is Kristina Wayborn and the writers never decide whose side she’s on, so the poor girl sits around looking stony faced and spurning Bond’s uncharismatic advances. When they finally copulate she’s so obvious even Roger Moore looks faintly embarrassed.

It’s baffling that these two central female characters do so little, as they inhabit potentially pivotal roles, and the idea of a female cult that’s also doubling as a smuggling organisation isn’t without its cinematic possibilities. What grates even more is the treatment of women in general.

The film’s very first scene has two huge Cuban officers cast salivating looks at a beautiful woman, who wears little more than a few strips of cloth and high heels. She turns out to be Bond’s aide in Cuba and later she uses her charms to similarly distract some soldiers and help Bond escape. This is just a foretaste of the flesh to come as we are confronted with so many legs, tums, bums and breasts it actually becomes a distraction. I could not count how many times Bond walks into a bar, a restaurant or a hotel and casts admiring glances at half naked women. This lecherous conduct is not endearing.

Even the stately Q, who initially berates Bond for his “adolescent antics,” leans towards the lascivious when he drops into battle in a hot air balloon, saving a band of buxom acrobats and receiving a host of hugs and kisses for his troubles. Happily received I’m sure, but a feeble jest at his expense.

Indeed Octopussy overall is a feeble enterprise, poorly conceived and badly executed. Even the exotic Indian cityscapes and a fairly worthwhile fight on top of a train can’t save this one. James Bond wasn’t supposed to be a comedian. Later audiences would have Austin Powers, but if Bond was going to blatantly send himself up, the least the producers could have done was let him do it with some dignity.

RATING 2 from 10.

[Zorin Industries]

Did we see a different film? (!)

[SecretAgentFan]

I just finished watching "Octopussy" again - and I must say I had it as a much more serious picture in mind. Instead, it is rather goofy and played for laughs almost the whole time. Which works IMO - I had a very fun time. But my favorite scene remains Bond in the Clown Costume yelling to the General: "There´s a bomb in that case!" and nobody believes him. The tension which is established when the bomb is introduced is handled expertly IMO.

Granted, the Indian stereotypes are extreme - yet, they might only seem so offensive in today´s climate of political correctness. Nobody speaks about the German stereotypes in that film - although they abound as well. But they are all in good fun. Just as Moore´s juvenile humor which is in full display in this film.

Somehow I had remembered "Octopussy" as serious minded as "For your eyes only" - but in fact, it is probably the silliest Moore Bond. Yes, even "Moonraker" has a more serious and at times sinister air to it despit being over the top. In contrast "A view to a kill" is much more of a classic spy story (apart from the pre-title-sequence).

But chrisno1, I´m sorry - I think the film is photographed very nicely and edited with precision and tightness. Moore does look older, I think, than in AVTAK and a bit tired. Yet, he doesn´t act tired. Maud Adams doesn´t get as much to do as Kristina Wayborn, that´s true. But at least she gets to tell us the Fleming backstory. Louis Jordan is not really menacing, I agree, and some of his line readings, especially when he says the word "Octopussy" do sound unintentionally hilarious to me.

But - this is Bond as pure fun. Not a tense spy story in the sense of early Connery or Dalton or Craig.

All in all - I would give "Octopussy" a solid 6,5 out of 10.

[elizabeth]

i gave it an 8. i loved the location (india), i loved the plot, and bond as a clown was pretty ing hilarious.

[O.H.M.S.S.]

How do you rate an enjoyable Bond film as Octopussy 2 out of 10?

[chrisno1]

How do you rate an enjoyable Bond film as Octopussy 2 out of 10?

See paragraphs 3 - 8 of my review above...

Interesting to get such a backlash. I really don't see that many good points. I agree when I saw it as a 13 yr old, it seemed quite attractive and fun, but even on second viewing (TV premiere 1986) it was laboured and dull. The humour is self conciously slapstick and there is very little tension, two of the baddies even begin to act as if they are in a comedy skit. Ugggh, I just can't bear it. Sorry guys.

[O.H.M.S.S.]

How do you rate an enjoyable Bond film as Octopussy 2 out of 10?

See paragraphs 3 - 8 of my review above...

Interesting to get such a backlash. I really don't see that many good points. I agree when I saw it as a 13 yr old, it seemed quite attractive and fun, but even on second viewing (TV premiere 1986) it was laboured and dull. The humour is self conciously slapstick and there is very little tension, two of the baddies even begin to act as if they are in a comedy skit. Ugggh, I just can't bear it. Sorry guys.

I like Louis Jourdan and Steven Berkoff, especially the latter one would be in my top 10 Bond villains.

[Genuine Felix Leiter]

Here's my thing. When I think to myself about the possibility of watching Octopussy on DVD or when its broadcast on television, I think to myself no chance. The thought of watching it is very off putting, yet when I sit down and watching it, it wins me over, it's one of the biggest mysteries in life if you ask me. Roger Moore is clearly getting a bit long in the tooth at this point, the film as whole wants to have is cake and eat it, having gritty Cold War elements on the one hand, and in the other the fairy tale nonsense of an prince smuggling Faberge eggs with the help of a cult of beautiful women, not to mention the inclusion of some pretty strange humourous touches and jokes (Bond using a camera to zero in on the cleaveage of Q's assistant, the Tarzan yell, and Bond in a gorrila suit), yet it manages to pull of the coup of having Bond in clown make up and suit defusing a nuclear weapon and managing to be gripping as hell, the culmination of a terrific sequence of prolonged suspense as Bond tries to get to the Army base with every obstacle in his way trying to stop his objective. I for the life of me cannot understand it, but whilst this is a film I should have a multitude of problems with, and actually come to think of it, I do, I can't help but love it. It's charming, it is funny in places, it's got Steven Berkoff playing a Russian nut job, a role he would effectively do again in Rambo:First Blood Part II, and a wonderfully charming Louis Jourdan, whilst Maud Adams is beautiful, feisty and makes a great Bond girl, one of the few in this part of the Roger Moore era to be around Roger's age. Add to that some great bursts of airbourne action in the PTS and climax and what we have is a Bond film that has all the elements of a disaster, but which manages the miracle of actually being really good.

[Andy Bond]

Not the most memorable but a decent film, with an interesting plot, a good villain in Kamal Khan and some nice locations. Some of the action sequences, particularly the one on the train were great too. It does get a little campy at times, with things like the Tarzan yell but I can forgive a few moments like that. 7/10.

Edited by Andy Bond, 27 February 2012 - 09:35 PM.

[AStupidPoliceman]

For me, Octopussy is near the very bottom of the Bond pile. It's sandwiched between two films that I find to be considerably "Moore" enjoyable. FYEO and AVTAK are neither Moore's nor the series' best films, but they might seem so after viewing Octopussy.

The film, overall, feels like a circus. Yes, yes, the circus is centrally important, but even before that's introduced the film is loaded with ridiculous lines and scenes. The chase through the market and fight scene where Roger borrows a sword are just rubbish. The fight scenes lack grit or realism as most of them incorporate a harem of women fighting alongside Moore. Looks more like a TV show for children and not the story of a goverment agent.The villians are...nearly too many, and none too memorable. Octopussy and Kahn pose no menace, Orlov keeps babbling about how he won't throw away a strategic advantage, and Gobinda (the only one with any credibility) gets thwacked with an antenna and falls off a plane. Lame. I'd say Mischka and Grischka are the most imposing figures in the film. I'm not sure why Maud Adams was chosen again, but I wasn't impressed with her in TMWTGG and using her again (after some plastic surgery, I think) seems unnecessary.

The lines Roger was given were neither funny nor cool. Just silly most of the time. As I stated in my review of TMWTGG, feeling invested in the characters' success is paramount for me in creating a believable and worthwhile story. When watching Octopussy, I just cannot get behind any of the characters. Their betrayals, deaths, and successes are just devices used to fill time. The praise I can afford this film would be limited to certain lines and certain shots: not even entire scenes, much less portions of the film. Watching Gobinda crush dice was cool, and Bond asking him if he'd like to come in for a nightcap was funny. Beyond that, I struggle.

3/10, and that's probably being generous.

Edited by AStupidPoliceman, 10 April 2012 - 04:58 PM.

[Pussfeller]

Octopussy is not the least enjoyable Bond film. It's not the most boring or the most annoying or the most cringe-inducing. It's not without its charms, and it doesn't leave a bad taste in my mouth. But of all the Bond films, from Dr No to Quantum of Solace, it's the one I regard as the shoddiest at its core. As a story, it is the most poorly told.

In Bond films, all structure and cohesion flow from the villain. Without a strong villain, there is no conflict, without which there is no narrative and no reason for watching. And Octopussy has no villain. You might think it does, but you've been misinformed. Orlov, Kamal Khan, and Octopussy are all minor antagonists, but their energies are so diffuse and feeble that they mostly cancel each other out, and they tend to be completely overshadowed by their henchmen. Without a real villain, the film has no center of gravity and no sense of direction. Instead of a coherent central conflict there are a bunch of irrelevant little squabbles trickling in various directions, and eventually Bond kills and/or has sex with everyone and it's over.

If we judge the films as narratives, Octopussy is simply the worst episode ever. By contrast, AVTAK, for all its drab vanilla mediocrity, has a far more competent and coherent narrative. (Thanks to the centrality of Max Zorin.) Just about every Bond film manages to achieve this basic level of dramatic competence. Only Octopussy falls short, and I still don't understand why the filmmakers committed such elementary errors. They could have made a great Bond film if they had just followed the basic dramatic template that they themselves had set.

That's not to say the film is without merit or not worth watching. It contains enough gratuitous weirdness, winning performances, memorable dialogue, amusing trivia, and energetic set pieces to bluff the viewer into accepting it as a piece of entertainment. It's just that all those details don't add up to anything. It's a sort of a Bond head-cheese, a boneless, amorphous collection of Bondian ingredients suspended in a void.

3/10

[glidrose]

Pussfeller and AStupidPoliceman...

But you are SO WRONG!

Octopussy has one of the most ingenious plots ever to grace a Bond film. Good villains too. Pussfeller's comments about weak, diffuse villains is more properly directed at FYEO or TLD.

As much as I like AVTAK and believe it's the series' most underrated entry, I'm not sure I'd ever call AVTAK's plot "competent and coherent narrative". Although for poor story-telling, nothing beats FYEO.

[AMC Hornet]

Love it: Audacious plot, Jourdan & Berkoff, all-girl circus, Vijay, market chase, Tarzan yell, "sit!" frantic chase through Germany, clown suit, three climaxes & all.

Pure Bond entertainment. Better than Moonraker, almost as good as TSWLM. Wouldn't see the likes of it again until TLD and DAD.

I'd better go change into my fire-retardant jammies before I read any more responses...