60 replies to this topic

[ray t]

let me say this first:

I was in the theatre as a school boy in the summer of 1979 and was thoroughly satisfied when i came out of the building having seen MOONRAKER. It was pure entertainment and in my opinion the LAST true bond EPIC. i mean BIG SCREEN EPIC.

i skipped school on the opening day of FOR YOUR EYES ONLY and i can still say i came away UNDERWHELMED! SIMPLE.

2 decades later l see that there were a couple of silly bits in MR....BUT i'll tell ya...FYEO is one overrated bond movie. Its most redeeming quality is Moore playing a Flemingesque bond on two specific and memorable occasions:

When he kicks Locke's Merc over the cliff edge and, before that, when he walks hand in hand with lisl on the beach at dawn.

But back to why i think FYEO is massively overrated.

that underwhelming pre-credits capped-off by "blofeld's" cheezy delacatesen in stainless steel line.

Carol bouquet looks great (she was a channel model) but her acting isnt a match for the character she portrays. plus her voice over in post production was inadequate.

the underwater close-ups look fake(they were)...it couldnt hold a candle to THUNDERBALL.

the lighting in the casino sceen was sub standard.&.couldnt hold a candle to DN, THUNDERBALL, OHMSS...and later GOLDENEYE and even LTK. the sceen plain looked cheap

the gun fight sceen at the docks looked very CHEAP, forced, and the sound substandard(almost 1960's-ish)

the villian, kristatos, is weak...ie weakly written

rog looks as old as milenas father in some sceens and older than he did in AVTAK. At least he LOOKED like a JAMES BOND in Moonraker. Looks are important primarily for credability reasons. cause when you look like the skater's grand-pa, its hard to believe you can climb the meteora.

Having been used to EPIC asaults on the villians base, one can see why i was underwhelmed by the attack on the meteora...i know that cubby wanted to ground bond into reality...but i had become a bond fan prior to that summer of '81 because of the elments of fantasy, the epic plots, the fantastic sets, the OTT villians...and we didnt get that in this movie....lets just say i'm a lover of the GOLDFINGER THUNDERBALL YOLT OHMSS MOONRAKER GOLDENEYE aproach to things rather than the FRWL (great movie) or LTK approach to bond. and i'll tell ya one thing FYEO aint no FRWL! I'm not suggesting Bond shouldnt be ground into reality....im just saying bond shouldnt be ENTIRELY ground into reality for 2hrs10mins.

Underwhelming assault....UNDERWHELMING and MOST DISSATISFYING end to the main villian...

the henchman is also a cardboard...i guess they wantd to replicate a red grant....but i'll tell ya...STAMPER is way more interesting and
menacing than kriegler. CHA in moonraker had more character, for heavens sake!

at least moonraker had BARRY...the ski chase sequence (a pale imitation to the MINDBLOWING one from OHMSS) was ruined because Conti didnt have the imagination to score it correctly. look at what Barry did with the ski sequence in OHMSS...it was magnificent...a MASTERPIECE...and EPIC! even george martin and marvin hamlisch did a better job than conti....sure the title by S Easton is terrific and the love theme taken from the song are beautiful touches, but the score, although not as s***ty as GOLDENEYE, seems weak and dated...something not true of Moonraker or Octopussy.

What else?...I think ive covered it...but if u gave me more time i could think of moore stuff....

Bottom line: Moonraker was a better experience than FYEO at the theatre then...and it remains so now!!!!!

cheers, ray

[ray t]

and oh....the way that thing the equivalent of the lector...what was it called...o yes, the atac...was smashed in slow mo....that just took the cake...as i said: UNDERWHELMING

i'm finished now

[General Koskov]

Okay, don't flame me for this, but:
The parrot giving the info on St Cyril's wasn't unbelieveable. [sarcasm]Parrots have been know to repeat words.[/sarcasm]

In fact I think it's a neat trick and anyway it's not like Max--the parrot's name--says, 'General Gogol will arrive in a helicopter at precisely three o' clock PM to pick up the Automatic Targeting Attack Control device from the St Cyril's monastery atop [insert mountain name here] where Kristatos, Bibi, and Kreigler are waiting with a number of guards which will try to knock you off the mountain...'

It's sad that the solitary line '(squawk!) ATAC to St Cyril's. ATAC to St Cyril's. (Brrawk!)' riuns this film for so many people.

Of course the 'PM gets the Bird' scene is another matter, but it's funny so...

[Mister Asterix]

What? No mention of the Parrot?

[Xenobia]

I replied to this once, and alas the crash killed it.

I think that FYEO is very important not only to Roger Moore's canon but to the entire Bond canon as a whole because we are presented with some interesting twists on the staple supporting characters and elements.

The buddy role: In Topol's Columbo, we finally have a FOB (friend of Bond) that doesn't simply yes him to death or clean up his messes (ala Felix Leiter). This is a fellow agent, who understands how the world works, much like Bond does, and has just as much of a reason to see Kristatos out of the picture (if not more so) than Bond.
Moreover, Columbo actually particpates in the action, instead of simply moving the plot along (ala Jack Wade). Columbo fights side by side with Bond from the moment of his introduction, right to the end. Hell! Columbo actually winds up with one of the girls at the end. When does that get to happen?

The Villian: Almost always a true actor has played the role of the villian, and Julian Glover is no exception. Kristatos is a fully formed character. Obviously, he is a meglomanic -- he can't be a Bond villian not be one -- but he just doesn't plan his domination through weapons alone. He sponsors people in the Olypmics for God's sake! I thought that was a very original way of showing how egotistical someone is: "The proudest moment of my life will be when she wins a gold medal." Sorry Mr. K., this moment is not about you.

The Girls: We are treated to girls with brains in this movie.
We have an athlete, that while may be a little oversexed, is certainly dedicated to her sport. With the exception of Pussy Galore and maybe Anya, do we have women who have a career and are dedicated to it.
In Melina we have a young woman who acts (in my humble opinion) exactly the way a young person would act when she has just lost her parents. Yes she is a little crazed when Bond first meets her, but she does rise to the occasion.
And I would be remiss if I didn't spend a few words on Countess Lisel. The girlfriend role is usually played by someone very pretty with not much brains. Lisel is an older beauty, with brains, who has an agenda and still manages to have fun. I thought the exchange between Bond and Lisel, once all the cards were on the table, was one of the maturest Bond has ever had. Sure it was about sex, but at least both parties knew where this was going before it happened.

The Ski Chase: Nothing can top the original in OHMSS, that goes without saying. But the stunts involved, especially the very beginning with the Biatholon and the ending with the tobogans were fantastic.

And last, but by no means least:

Moore's performance: We have never seen Bond grow old. We have watched him get older...but not grow old. The closest we came was with Moore in FYEO. This is a Bond mature enough to turn down an eighteen year old nymphet, because that just doesn't do it for him anymore. This is a 007 slow to anger, but when does -- look out! This is a James Bond who knows what the job is, and gets it done, but understands it won't always be fun.
I frankly admit that I need to watch TSWLM to speak of it with some accuracy, but I do not believe Moore can get better than his performance in FYEO. Bond had a depth that came not only from the script, but from the age and experience that Bond's life had given him, and from the age and experience of the actor playing him.

Yes, Moonraker was a responce to Star Wars. There is no sin in wanting to make money. But CB learned from his mistake (if one wishes to call it that), and immediately corrected himself with his next movie. FYEO stands as a cornerstone of the canon for this reason and for one other that simply can not be ignored:

If FYEO was made in the late seventies, Cassandra Harris wouldn't have had a husband to bring with her. And Cubby Brocoli wouldn't have been able to meet that husband and invite him back to Eon to, perhaps, die another day.

-- Xenobia

[Jim]

I think the reason that folks overrate FYEO is because it followed Moonraker, which was ostensibly a "silly" film.

However, Moonraker does lack a talking parrot. Ooh, that gritty thriller FYEO, where the hero's success relies entirely upon some psitticosis ridden gobby budgie. If that parrot had kept its trap shut, we British would be facing our Polaris submarines (since decommissioned) firing at our own cities, apparently.

Although if the ATAC was built in Britian in the early 1980s, it probably wouldn't work.

The parrot is probably the single most inane plot development in any of the films. Hmm, gritty.

And I still haven't worked out why Kristatos is a) spending so much time in Cortina when the horrid typewriter thingie is at the bottom of the Aegean and tries so hard to kill Bond in Cortina when Bond appears to be the only person who knows how to detach the ATAC.

Very odd film

[ray t]

my dear xenobia, i respect your opinion and the eloquence with which you express it...BUT to rebuttle your comments:

1..."buddy role"...Topol's Columbo (from RISICO) is not an original concept in the movies...far from it...it was a blatant attempt to duplicate Marc Ange Draco who also is a businessman with dubious dealings.
and
Topol's columbo is only one in a LONG LINE of "buddies" who fought "side by side" with bond: Karim Bey (starting with the gypsie camp), Tiger Tanaka, Draco himself. Then the girls Anya, Holly Goodhead....all the way down the line with Natalya (who distracts Trevelyan while in the chopper) and ofcourse Wai Lin.

2...Kristatos is a PLAIN VANILLA villian who belongs in your AVERAGE action movie. I watch bond to see BONDIAN villians of immense IMAGINATION, SCOPE and CHARACTER who have a GLOBAL VISION: a dr no, or a goldfinger, or an emelio largo,
a blofeld...even a Janus (nee 006) or an Electra King. Kristatos, my dear xenobia, is bottom of the barrel bond fare...right there with koskov (no offense to TLD fans..a great movie...could have been greater if the villians were more menacing).

3...the girls: My original comment was not critical of the Milena character...just that Carol Bouquet's acting prowess at the time
was in the jill st john neighbourhood albeit a cut higher than the tanya roberts / denise richards neighbourhood. the voice-over/dubbing (IF she was dubbed) in post production didnt help. THINK OF THIS:
nearly 2 decades earlier they had done a SUPERIOR job with dubbing Ursella Andress and Daniela Bianchi.
also
I find it curious/ammusing that you mention the bibi character in the same breath or sentence as Pussy Galore or Anya. bibi is a joke in comparison.
and as far as milena "rising to the occasion", didn't kissy, tracy, anya and holly goodhead all do that as well?

4...As for Rog and lisl, I already tipped my hat to them in my original preamble criticizing FYEO which, nevertheless, remains one of the weakest in the series in terms of production quality. i'm not a HUGE fan of SERIOUS/100 percent REALISTIC bond movies, but of the more "serious" bonds, OHMSS, FRWL and LTK are, in my opinion, better than FYEO in that order.

lastly, Cubby would have seen REMMINGTON STEELE and, as a result, Brosnan's sex appeal and charisma regardless of whether cassandra harris had made FYEO in the late 70's or in 1980/81....

BTW, Moonraker was not a "mistake". in INFLATION-ADJUSTED DOLLARS and a RETURN ON INVESTMENT basis, moonraker is in the top 5 of the bonds. Thunderball and Goldfinger are the top 2. Moonraker on such a basis is well ahead of almost all of the Moore's (except perhaps TSWLM) both daltons and even TND and TWINE.

[Xenobia]

ray t (05 Apr, 2002 03:58 a.m.):
my dear xenobia, i respect your opinion and the eloquence with which you express it...BUT to rebuttle your comments:

But of course, I would expect nothing less! And I do hope that you realize my dear Ray, that my responce is offered with the same respect and admiration for your knowledge of the Bond canon.

[b]1..."buddy role"...Topol's Columbo (from RISICO) is not an original concept in the movies...far from it...it was a blatant attempt to duplicate Marc Ange Draco who also is a businessman with dubious dealings.

I think you will agree that Draco had a little less screen time than Columbo, and with Draco being the leader of the largest syndicate after SPECTRE, Columbo is nowhere in that league of "dubious dealings."

[b]and Topol's columbo is only one in a LONG LINE of "buddies" who fought "side by side" with bond: Karim Bey (starting with the gypsie camp), Tiger Tanaka, Draco himself.

To this I can only say that Karim Bey did not make to the end of FRWL, and again Draco did not have as much screen time as Columbo.

As for Tanaka, I don't quite put him in the buddy category -- as head of Japanese intelligence, he is more a commanding officer than a colleague. But that is a small point that I am sure only I would make.

[b]And the girls Anya, Holly Goodhead....all the way down the line with Natalya (who distracts Trevelyan while in the chopper) and of course Wai Lin.

The key here is they are the women! Bond's relationship with them is radically different from the ones he has with his male friends -- unless you are about to tell me I missed something between Karim and Bond on that train. ;-)

[b]2...Kristatos is a PLAIN VANILLA villian who belongs in your AVERAGE action movie.

I don't know if I would use the words "Plain vanilla" but he certainly not as over the top as some of the other villians...and that is why I appreciated this one more -- for the change of pace.

[b]Kristatos, my dear xenobia, is bottom of the barrel bond fare...right there with koskov (no offense to TLD fans..a great movie...could have been greater if the villians were more menacing).

Fear not my dear friend Ray...the day you hear me say something kind about a movie made Dandy Dalton is the day you know someone has hacked into my screen ID!

[b]3...the girls: My original comment was not critical of the Milena character...just that Carol Bouquet's acting prowess at the time
was in the jill st john neighbourhood albeit a cut higher than the tanya roberts / denise richards neighbourhood.

My acting skills are a cut above the DR neighbourhood, with my hands tied behind my back! But that is for a completely different topic.

[b]the voice-over/dubbing (IF she was dubbed) in post production didnt help.

I am glad you are saying if...because I don't think she was. Nor do I think she should have been dubbed. Her voice is perfect for a child of a English father and Greek mother.

[b]I find it curious/ammusing that you mention the bibi character in the same breath or sentence as Pussy Galore or Anya.

I did so only in the sense of careers...and the fact that Bibi had one. Hands down, in terms of acting....Honor Blackman and Diana Rigg are in a category all to themselves.

[b]bibi is a joke in comparison.

Yes, but she is a joke with a career, as opposed to Teri Hatcher's Paris Carver who is simply a whining joke with no career.

[b]and as far as milena "rising to the occasion", didn't kissy, tracy, anya and holly goodhead all do that as well?

Tracy did, briefly, but then again she didn't appear in many of the action sequences. The same for Kissy.

As for Anya and Holly...yes, I will concede you that...but remember, Anya and Holly are trained spies. Melina was not. That makes a difference in my mind.

[b]4...As for Rog and lisl, I already tipped my hat to them in my original preamble criticizing FYEO

Forgive me then for skimming over something I should have paid attentiont to. And please understand, every chance I get, I do offer some praise to the lady I respectfully refer to as a goddess.

[b]which, nevertheless, remains one of the weakest in the series in terms of production quality. i'm not a HUGE fan of SERIOUS/100 percent REALISTIC bond movies, but of the more "serious" bonds, OHMSS, FRWL and LTK are, in my opinion, better than FYEO in that order.

I will concede that OHMSS is a better movie than FYEO, but I can not say the same about FRWL, for I feel Moore turns in a better performance than Connery, and I haven't seen LTK.

[b]lastly, Cubby would have seen REMMINGTON STEELE

Don't be too sure....RS was not a big hit until Brosnan won and then lost the Bond role. Besides, somehow I don't think RS was Cubby Brocoli's kind of movie.

[b]BTW, Moonraker was not a "mistake".

I should have been clearer in how I use that word. I meant a mistake in the sense that (in my opinion) it is a mistake to try and take what is the consumate movie series and turn it into a sci-fi extravaganza, because the fans might be into that for a year or so.

[b]in INFLATION-ADJUSTED DOLLARS and a RETURN ON INVESTMENT basis, moonraker is in the top 5 of the bonds.

I am aware of that. Moonraker did make money for Brocoli, but you didn't see him make another "James Bond in Outer Space" did you?

Thank you for your amazing responce! I enjoy debates like this.

-- Xenobia

[ray t]

perhaps, my dear xen, i should have married u instead...

[Xenobia]

My dear Ray, what a very kind thing to say. Alas, while I would make a most excellent Bond girl, I would make a most horrible wife!

-- Xenobia

[ray t]

not as horrible as my current one! just kidding!!!

[zencat]

Extremely well said, Xenobia. Especially your take on Moore's performance. Bravo!

[Simon]

A very interesting read...........

[Blofeld's Cat]

.
For Your Eyes Only was a "down-to-earth" correction for the over-the-top and out-there Moonraker.

As a student I really enjoyed The Spy Who Loved Me and loved Moonraker because "it was Bond, it was beyond", but through my teenage eyes I expected even more with For Your Eyes Only.

I was a little disapointed back then, but not now. The Bond series needed this correction otherwise it would have got bigger and bigger, further and further. And therefore more rediculous.

For Your Eyes Only put Bond back on track.

[Xenobia]

zencat (05 Apr, 2002 06:14 a.m.):
Extremely well said, Xenobia. Especially your take on Moore's performance. Bravo!

Thank you Simon for your kind words. And thank you too Zencat. Your compliment means a lot to me given your profession, and your wonderful writing on Octopussy.

As for you Ray -- what movie do we tackle next? :-)

Cheers....Xenobia

[Jim]

Blofeld's Cat (03 Apr, 2002 08:58 a.m.):
For Your Eyes Only was a "down-to-earth" correction for the over-the-top and out-there Moonraker.

For Your Eyes Only put Bond back on track.

I tend to disagree with that view, BeeCee. There's enough dismal stupidity in For Your Eyes Only to make it the equal of Moonraker, Octopussy and A View to a Kill for guilty cretinous thrills and spills.

a) parrot
Q scene in St Cyril's church. Utterly meaningless and only there for the "joke". This is where the rot sets in with Q, using him for a joke scene rather than plot-related in any way.
c) The good people Thatcher. John Wells, especially the direct to camera gawp, is awesome; however, "silly" is what it is.
d) Bibi. Oh, just undermine the Bond character completely, why don't you? "Ice cream". A cute line. Cute? Dr No bain't cute. From Russia with Love is bereft of cuteness. Goldfinger? Nope, little there of cute. Still believing in the character at that point. By this point, grandfatherly? Nah...not a joke, more an insult.
e) The delicatessen in stainless steel. Silly. Horrid. And even more silly and horrid.
f) The comedy music on first espying the 2CV.
g) The unutterably filthy lyrics to that song playing by the swimming pool
h) Still the parrot. Britain's well-being relies on some ill-tempered shrieking old bird. (This is not a Thatcher/Falklands ref.).
i) Geoffrey Keen going "Hmmm" all the way through that rather shrill and bad-tempered scene at the ministry of defence. Silly. Very funny, but silly.
j) James Bond claiming that he's written a lengthy report on Gonzales' death. That's exceedingly stupid.
k) The reference to "Sir Havelock" which is unforgiveable, and more stupid than silly

I tend to the view that it was only with The Living Daylights that the Bond series got back on track. That they blew it all to hell with Licence to Kill emphaises just how good The Living Daylights is, and remains.

[Blofeld's Cat]

Jim (03 Apr, 2002 09:22 a.m.):

Blofeld's Cat (03 Apr, 2002 08:58 a.m.):
For Your Eyes Only was a "down-to-earth" correction for the over-the-top and out-there Moonraker.

For Your Eyes Only put Bond back on track.

I tend to disagree with that view, BeeCee. There's enough dismal stupidity in For Your Eyes Only to make it the equal of Moonraker, Octopussy and A View to a Kill for guilty cretinous thrills and spills.

I fully agree with you, Jim, about all the little silly bits throughout For Your Eyes Only. I was refering to where Bond was heading.

There was The Man with the Golden Gun, then The Spy Who Loved Me, then Moonraker. If the progression of "bigger and better" continued Moonraker would have been like Austin Powers 2 with scenes set on the moon!

[Jim]

Yes, the general drift of the films...I see your point.

Just think, wasn't there a rumour that theywere considering using Halley's Comet in A View to a Kill? That they didn't use this plot is to their credit (-ish, and they need all the credit on offer for A View to a Kill), but that they even thought about it...suggests that whatever lessons could be learned from Moonraker were open to abandonment.

[Jim]

Xenobia (04 Apr, 2002 10:28 p.m.):

Moore's performance: We have never seen Bond grow old.  We have watched him get older...but not grow old.  The closest we came was with Moore in FYEO.  This is a Bond mature enough to turn down an eighteen year old nymphet, because that just doesn't do it for him anymore.  

Bond had a depth that came not only from the script, but from the age and experience that Bond's life had given him, and from the age and experience of the actor playing him.

-- Xenobia

I don't agree; the character of Bibi had nothing to do with a deliberate effort to show an older Bond.

If there was an intention to do so, why are there no such similar characters in Octopussy and A View to a Kill?

I read it as a reaction to inevitable criticism about casting an ageing Roger Moore. If, as was rumoured, Eon had cast Timothy Dalton or Mel Gibson in For Your Eyes Only, the character of Bibi would not have existed, because the age gap would not have been as pronounced, and all she's largely there for is the ice-cream "joke".

And why see Bond age? 12 films in is a bit late to start introducing some form of chronology, surely? Bond is a hard, nasty. slick bastard, not a granddad. No paternal instincts shown, and then suddenly, we get a film where the whole Bond alpha male virility myth is undermined by some child actress and a joke at Roger Moore's expense (which, if it was such a good joke, would have been repeated).

Bibi Dahl has nothing to do with James Bond. It has a lot to do with Roger Moore.

[Victor Zokas]

A lot of the complaint against FYEO seems to be that it is just an imitation of FRWL. Well, if it is at least it made a change from another copy of Goldfinger/YOLT.

I think it makes a reasonably good mix of the humour and more serious side.

[Blofeld's Cat]

Jim (03 Apr, 2002 09:43 a.m.):
Yes, the general drift of the films...I see your point.

Just think, wasn't there a rumour that theywere considering using Halley's Comet in A View to a Kill? That they didn't use this plot is to their credit (-ish, and they need all the credit on offer for A View to a Kill), but that they even thought about it...suggests that whatever lessons could be learned from Moonraker were open to abandonment.

My God, it's Moon Zorin Two!!

[Simon]

But fellas, individual silly bits aside, isn't all of the above what the Bond films are all about? Yes they started with Fleming, but we weren't reading Fleming when he came to be. Yes they started film-wise with semi-serious Connery thrillers, but we only came to those in re-runs and TV slots.

At the end of the day, we are interested in all that is going on, probably, because of the series' enduring nature.

If the feelings for picking holes in the films are that strong, then we would have to question the reason for our interest.

For my part, I agree with all of the 20-20 hindsight reviews, but all of the films were released in a state that was right for the time. We move on, but unfortunately the films are rooted in the era of their creation.

I enjoy the films for what they are and if I require realism, I will watch a Michael Mann film.

[Xenobia]

Jim (06 Apr, 2002 12:00 p.m.):

Xenobia (04 Apr, 2002 10:28 p.m.):

Moore's performance: We have never seen Bond grow old.  We have watched him get older...but not grow old.  The closest we came was with Moore in FYEO.  This is a Bond mature enough to turn down an eighteen year old nymphet, because that just doesn't do it for him anymore.  

Bond had a depth that came not only from the script, but from the age and experience that Bond's life had given him, and from the age and experience of the actor playing him.

-- Xenobia

I don't agree; the character of Bibi had nothing to do with a deliberate effort to show an older Bond.

If there was an intention to do so, why are there no such similar characters in Octopussy and A View to a Kill?

It's a fair question that deserves a fair answer, so here I go:

I think the main problem is continuity. The same screenwriter did not write Octopussy and AVTAK. If they had, perhaps they may have tried to continue with Bond's growth.

That being said, they did in fact, give us a mature Bond in AVTAK who does not jump into bed with the young thing. Remember, Bond falls asleep in a chair next to Stacy at first. Yes, they wind up in bed at the end, but for most of the movie, he behaves.

[b]I read it as a reaction to inevitable criticism about casting an ageing Roger Moore. If, as was rumoured, Eon had cast Timothy Dalton or Mel Gibson in For Your Eyes Only, the character of Bibi would not have existed, because the age gap would not have been as pronounced, and all she's largely there for is the ice-cream "joke".

I think Bibi is there more because of the 3 girls per film rule that used to exist, than just the "Ice Cream" joke. Had TD or MG been cast, Bibi would have been there -- and Bond would have slept with MG's Bond. TD would have just looked at her and sulked -- which he did for most of his movies anyway!

[b]And why see Bond age?

Why not? He's human like the rest of us.

[b]12 films in is a bit late to start introducing some form of chronology, surely?

Au contraire! Supposeately The same Bond that saw Honey Rider on the beach is the same one who is widowed at the end of OHMSS is the same one who played following the bouncing ball on the beach in FYEO is the same one who helped his best friend avenge his wife's death in LTK is the same one who has a thing for women with the Stockholm syndrome in TWINE! Ridiculous? Absolutely! Chronology plays no part in the Bond movies.

What *does* play a part is taking advantage of what the period gives you...and what that period gave to Eon was an older man that could finally begin to have some of the thoughts and feeling of the James Bond that was widowed in the novels YOLT and TMWAGG.

Bond going from old to young again is as easy to swallow as Bond going from Scottish to Australian to English to Welsh to Irish.

[b] Bond is a hard, nasty. slick bastard, not a granddad.

I never said that Moore's was. I just said he was world wise and world weary.

[b]No paternal instincts shown, and then suddenly, we get a film where the whole Bond alpha male virility myth is undermined by some child actress and a joke at Roger Moore's expense (which, if it was such a good joke, would have been repeated).

I think you are exaggerating. Bond winds up with quite a few women in that movie: In the pretitles, Countess Lisel, Melina, probably someone else I am forgetting. Bibi was about the *only* chick he didn't get in that movie.

[b]Bibi Dahl has nothing to do with James Bond. It has a lot to do with Roger Moore.

I'll give you that...and I don't think BD was such a bad thing. I think it was very good for Moore's performance.

Someday Jim we will agree, and it will be a very pretty day indeed!

-- Xenobia

[General Koskov]

Well, Bibi Dahl was a good part. For crying out loud, it's a friggin' joke! HA HA HA, try that each and every time you watch the 'I'll buy you an ice cream instead' line and you'll see it is funny. Yes it's using Moore's age to 'help' it and probably was inspired from that whereas Dalton would have not seemed to 'contrast' Bibi enough.

Of course Dalton managed to keep his hands off Kara until they were in a ferris wheel, so he could have probably pulled this one too. But my point stands: she was the sort of girl you find falling in love with extremely ^_^ older men and Bond is showing that he's not a sex maniac. Like in Goldfinger, Bond never tries to rape Tilly in the woods outside of Auric Enterprises, but no one says, 'Whatssamatterwithim? Go get her, Bond!', because it's a preposterous idea for even James Bond to go after any woman.

[Simon]

This is not meant as a comment to prove under or over rating - indeed it is just an observation that I enjoy the film making process, and the quirky results that pop up every now and again.

At the very end of the Drive in the Country car chase when Bond has thrown the 2CV all over the olive trees, he effects an introduction to Melina in the time honored fashion of "By the way, my name is Bond..James Bond". He also shakes her hand, leaving one hand on the wheel. If you listen to the soundtrack, you will hear that the noise of the car engine is signifying a gear change at the time he is shaking hands.

With both hands otherwise in use, are we underestimating the skill and usefulness of Bond's complete range of appendages?

[Xenobia]

Simon (08 Apr, 2002 11:09 a.m.):
With both hands otherwise in use, are we underestimating the skill and usefulness of Bond's complete range of appendages?

I always thought Bond's appendages were the ultimate Q gadgets -- capable of anything in the right hands.

-- Xenobia

[General Koskov]

^_^ ^_^ ^_^ Lol!

[Adam]

Those of you complaining about the film--here's some advice--GET OVER IT. It's 21 years old--if you don't like it, don't watch it.

[zencat]

whoops

[zencat]

I'm in agreement with the stated topic of this thread, FYEO is my least favorite Roger Moore Bond film and I feel highly overrated by fans who think the only good Bonds are the "realistic" Bonds. I have no such desire for realism in my Bond flicks, especially the Moore films. While I do enjoy the locations and stuntwork in FYEO (some of the best action scenes of the whole series in my opinion), I remember when it came out I thought it was more of a very good "Saint" feature film than a James Bond film.