62 replies to this topic

[Johnboy007]

6/10.

I used to like this film a lot when I was younger, but the appeal has worn off now. Carole Bouquet is an average Bond girl in most respects. Bibi is probably the most creepy girl that's ever appeared... why is a teenage girl in love with a man in his 50's (without evidence of being a megamillionaire)? Bill Conti's score is pretty good despite being so dated. Roger Moore is teetering on the edge of believability as a spy. Julian Glover and Topol are about the only thing that keeps me watching it now. Finding the ATAC is an interesting touch and gives the film some urgency. Yet for all of the talk about how "realistic" this one is, why is James Bond finding out critical information from a parrot?

[Safari Suit]

It's a solid film, but it kind of lacks an identity and there aren't many stand out moments. It's not a film I often feel compelled to watch.

[HH007]

I find it to be a remarkably dull Bond film. I think they should have retired Roger after MOONRAKER.

[DaveBond21]

I love FYEO, and probably watch it the most often, along with Casino Royale at the moment.

I love the locations. Even though some of this is shot in the snow, in Cortina, Italy, this is a summer Bond movie with beautiful Spanish & Greek locations. It also has the most down-to-earth plot since FRWL (my joint favourite with this one).

Melina is a beautiful Bond girl who can certainly look after herself, with the aid of her crossbow, and Topol is a wonderful ally in the vein of Kerim Bey.

Great action scenes - the PTS (goodbye to Blofeld, complete with neckbrace, yes, this is the perfect sequel to OHMSS), the Spain car chase, the keelhauling sequence, ski town motorbikes and ski chase, underwater battle with armored henchman, Albanian warehouse attack, kicking Locque's car off a cliff and the final cliff climb & battle at St Cyril's in Meteora, Greece.

Wonderful stuff!

[Major Tallon]

I'm with DaveBond21. Bravo, FYEO!

[ChrissBond007]

9.5/10

My favourite Roger Moore Bondfilm, I love it! Moore is really at his best, this time with lesser jokes (altrough I'm a fan of Roger as his jokes). The story is great, after TSWLM and Moonraker it's more realistic and probably better, it has much action scenes like the car chase, ski chase, underwater scenes and of course at the moutains in Meteora. And all in one film! And I also love the locations!

Strong acting, great story, much action and beautiful locations makes it one of my favs and definitely in my top 5. Very underrated, in my opinion.

[Simon]

I love the locations. Even though some of this is shot in the snow, in Cortina, Italy, this is a summer Bond movie with beautiful Spanish & Greek locations.

I don't think it was filmed in Spain.

The Spanish chase scenes were filmed in Corfu.

http://www.imdb.com/...82398/locations

[Cruiserweight]

Three words:Max...the...parrot

Bravo!

[agentjamesbond007]

For Your Eyes Only was a very good Bond movie in Moore's era. Nicely done in my opinion

[DaveBond21]

I think it's visuals are under-rated as it's an extremely good-looking Bond movie. John Glen is often criticised but I think he did a great job here.

[00Twelve]

Just watched this again yesterday.

I've gotta say, there's not really much difference in tone from the previous two outings (maybe plenty of others know this, but it really only became clear to me this time). I used to think FYEO was one of the Flemingesque juggernauts that utterly refuted the excesses of the seventies, but that's really not the case at all.

Sure, the story itself has a lot of basis in the short stories, but much of the action scenes feel right at home beside those of the previous two movies. Campy Citroen, dude with wine, spiny umbrella, hockey assassins, Thatcher & Max, the goofy fun's all there. And that's largely okay by me.

I have to revise my former thoughts on Glen's best effort and say that this movie held his most creative camerawork. The action scenes pop here in a way I don't think they do in the next four outings. The angles were the least static of Glen's outings. The editing is arguably the tightest.

The only issue I have with the creative work in this movie has to do with the pacing. It just felt rather eternal this time around. There are a LOT of locations and setpieces here! I was ready to be done after the warehouse raid & death of Locque, but I realized I still had an ATAC retrieval, a sub fight, a keelhaul, a confession booth, a monastery climb, and a forehead-slapping parrot/Thatcher scene all ahead of me. Whew.

Unfortunately it has slipped in my ratings. I just can't justify its former high place when I see that last scene. I do give more props to Glen though, for his direction of all 1,149 scenes. Too bad it didn't really go uphill from here.

Still an enjoyable movie, but a decidedly middle-of-the-road outing.

[Harmsway]

FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, in my mind, is one of the worst Bond outings. Drab and uninteresting on practically every level.

[[dark]]

FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, in my mind, is one of the worst Bond outings. Drab and uninteresting on practically every level.

I'd be inclined to agree. For my money, only the keelhauling sequence (and maybe the rock-climbing scene) gives us something memorable. Otherwise, it's so very average. It's a shame - Moore's serious interpretation of Bond was actually rather good.

[Harmsway]

It's a shame - Moore's serious interpretation of Bond was actually rather good.

Given the material he was working with, sure. I'd also suggest that Bond's wardrobe is the worst in FOR YOUR EYES ONLY that it's ever been... Bond has never looked so much like a grandpa.

[Mr_Wint]

If people don't complain about the parrot they complain about the wardrobe. But I guess it is just natural. That a workman-director like John Glen is responsible for one of the greatest Bondfilms ever made must kill one or two theories out there.

[tim partridge]

It's a shame - Moore's serious interpretation of Bond was actually rather good.

Given the material he was working with, sure. I'd also suggest that Bond's wardrobe is the worst in FOR YOUR EYES ONLY that it's ever been... Bond has never looked so much like a grandpa.

1995-2006 was the nadir of Bond costuming. Brosnan frequently looked like a sales manager attending a conference, his Brioni suits were so tacky looking. Some of those casual shirt and trouser combos too (think the bike chase from TND or the TWINE sub attire) looked like a mid life crisis initiated, Matalan discount make-over. Moore never looked that old (or bad).

Edited by tim partridge, 28 March 2009 - 01:10 AM.

[Royal Dalton]

Not to mention his buckled shoes...

[Harmsway]

That a workman-director like John Glen is responsible for one of the greatest Bondfilms ever made must kill one or two theories out there.

It's not impossible for a workmanlike director to turn in a great film. Happens on occasion. But FOR YOUR EYES ONLY ain't that flick. It's dull. Even the better parts, like Topol as a supporting character, aren't that exciting.

Moore never looked that old (or bad).

He sure did. While I'm no fan of Brosnan's bland/tacky attire, Moore's grandpa-esque look in FOR YOUR EYES ONLY is much, much worse, if you ask me. It's astonishingly bad.

And I notice you include CASINO ROYALE in the mix of bad Bond costuming too, which I can't agree with; Craig's look in CASINO ROYALE is quite cool and stylish, whether it's Brioni or not.

[00Twelve]

It's a shame - Moore's serious interpretation of Bond was actually rather good.

Given the material he was working with, sure. I'd also suggest that Bond's wardrobe is the worst in FOR YOUR EYES ONLY that it's ever been... Bond has never looked so much like a grandpa.

The Members Only look he was sporting in AVTAK makes me beg to differ.

[tim partridge]

Moore never looked that old (or bad).

He sure did. While I'm no fan of Brosnan's bland/tacky attire, Moore's grandpa-esque look in FOR YOUR EYES ONLY is much, much worse, if you ask me. It's astonishingly bad.

And I notice you include CASINO ROYALE in the mix of bad Bond costuming too, which I can't agree with; Craig's look in CASINO ROYALE is quite cool and stylish, whether it's Brioni or not.

I like his blue trunks but it ends there.

[DaveBond21]

It's great to see how high this rates in the poll. Nice work everyone!

I recently went to a party where a few casual Bond fans said they loved it too, so there is a lot of love for this one at the moment.

[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 For Your Eyes Only.

FOR YOUR EYES ONLY
REVISED REVIEW 14/1/10

After the space bound high-jinx of Moonraker there wasn’t anywhere else for James Bond to go but down. He does so with a crashing thump. For Your Eyes Only is the toughest Bond film for quite some time. No superficial heroics here; just good old fashioned blood and thunder – in abundance.

For Your Eyes Only is based on two short stories from an eponymous collection of five. The first and title story, involves an avenging daughter who obstructs Bond in his assassination mission. This is swiftly dealt with in the earliest portion of the film, but the revenge theme lingers over the movie. After some excitement in the Italian Alps, the second story, Risico, is followed closely, then expanded to the film’s conclusion, as Bond pits his wits against two Greek smugglers, one of whom is a KGB spy.

The return of Ian Fleming’s influence to the Bond series is most welcome and for that we have to thank Richard Maibaum, who wrote almost every Bond script in the 1960s. He contributed to others, but this, in tandem with Michael G. Wilson, is his first full outing since On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. The change from Moonraker is evident: there is a thoughtful, coherent plot and, while the action is gutsy, it never overwhelms the story.

The film displays many of the touches associated with the most literal adaptations. We have a casino scene in not too ostentatious surroundings, a gun battle in an opium warehouse, a chase along a deserted beach, secret messages marked on mirrors, hidden tape recorders in table decorations, a cheerful larger than life male compadre, we wallow a little in the local culture and Bond gets cut up rough during a keel hauling scene, lifted directly from Live And Let Die, and excellently replicated here. Bond dishes it out too, killing one adversary by viciously toppling his car over a cliff face.

The writers provide us with three thoroughbred Fleming characters, who all have background and motives. It is disappointing the actors neglect to put full flesh on their bones. Julian Glover’s Kristatos doesn’t convince as a bad guy or an underworld king pin; he lacks authority and can’t even control his teenage skating protégé. Colombo is a poor man’s Kerim Bey and although Topol does the best he can, the role is no more than an amusing vigorous cameo.

Carole Bouquet gets the roughest ride as Melina. Fleming’s heroine was called Judy and he describes her as having a beautiful wild face with soft obedient eyes. Bouquet unfortunately has neither of these. A romance develops between her and Bond, but it’s so unlikely the audience needs to be prompted by a troika driver, who mutters “Amore, amore.” Bouquet shares three key scenes with Roger Moore and there are clear parallels being drawn between Bond and Tracy, his dead wife, and Melina and her dead parents. But while Roger Moore has a lot of dialogue and comes across as sympathetic albeit realistic, Bouquet is saddled with a motive based on Greek mythology. It’s a pity as Moore once again shows a deft touch for pathos.

The rest of the cast is fairly inconsequential. Cassandra Harris plays Colombo’s mistress Lisl and, while an attractive dalliance, she adds nothing to the plot. There is a KGB agent who (yet again!) resembles Robert Shaw’s Grant and a bespectacled killer who remains curiously silent. The actors John Wyman and Michael Gothard don’t try too hard as their roles are spurious at best.

But I feel most sorry for Lynn Holly Johnson who plays the afore-mentioned skating star, Bibi, and is handed trite dialogue and an intolerable role as a lolita-ish seductress. It’s clear this was designed as a comedic interlude, but Bond’s denial of this potential bed-mate is perplexing. It isn’t funny and it draws attention to Roger Moore’s age. Bibi does score points for being the most brazen of Bond’s suitors: “The porter will do anything for me” she trills, and of Kristatos she says “He still thinks I’m a virgin,” while patting the pillow beside her in a manner not unfamiliar to James Bond. Later she is just annoying. It would have been easier for Bond to take her to bed; generally his first conquest gets killed in the next reel.

Luckily most of the one liners aren’t quite so mawkish and don’t detract too much from the real business in hand which is very exciting as Bond searches the Aegean Sea for a gizmo called ATAC. Director John Glen handles the various goings on well. He doesn’t have much of an eye for detail, but he’s strong where it counts and doesn’t dwell too long over any scene or shot.

The action generally is well edited, boosting our perception of the dangers unfolding before us. The helicopter teaser is silly, but the stuntmen keep us perched on our seats by hanging perilously above the Thames dockyards. It also lays to rest the man with the white cat – he’s not named, but we all know he’s Blofeld. Bond deals with this crisis by his own hands and continues to avoid technology through the whole film, his only gadget being an excessively burglar proofed car. There is another great ski chase and Bill Conti’s zippy music score is at its best when 007 is pursued by a motorcycle down a bob-run. There are some underwater heroics and a final heart in the mouth climb up a sheer mountain face to a monastery hide out. The last of these still makes me feel vertigous and Rick Sylvester again deserves plaudits for his stunt work.

Perhaps disappointingly for such a tenacious film, slapstick takes over at the end and we have a quite ridiculous scene involving the Prime Minister and a parrot. It was hilarious at the time, if a trifle school boyish; now it appears out of context and a little embarrassing. I don’t let it detract from my overall enjoyment of For Your Eyes Only, but it is a foretaste of things to come.

RATING 7 from 10

[SecretAgentFan]

Of all the films on my re-watch films, this one did not change my opinion at all.

The ski chase, the Moore-kicks-off-the-car-scene, the LALD-drag-behind-the-boat-sequence and the mountain-climbing sequence are excellent and really full of suspense. Moore is great as a visibly aging but very serious Bond. The villain twist is nice.

What I don´t like: Bouquet is beautiful but acts rather sedated; Bibi... what the hell does this character do here?; the slapstick kills the edge of the PTS (stainless delicatessen? still don´t get that), the stock ending with the authorities being ashamed or in this case fooled dulls the good ending of the climax ("that´s detente").

Basically, and this is what I often get from the Glen-directed films, the action sequences are so much better handled than the character scenes.

Astoundingly - for a film directed by a former editor -, for my taste, FYEO has huge problems with the pacing. It seems unnecessarily slow at times and would have benefited from cutting at least 15 minutes out. The whole underwater sequence with Bond and Melina finding the ATAC goes on too long. And why are they attacked when the plan obviously was to let them bring the ATAC on board?

So, in my mind, FYEO - while a welcome return to a straight spy thriller - does not really work and therefore gets only a middling evaluation from me.

But I love the title song...

5,5 out of 10.

[chrisno1]

Of all the films on my re-watch films, this one did not change my opinion at all.

The ski chase, the Moore-kicks-off-the-car-scene, the LALD-drag-behind-the-boat-sequence and the mountain-climbing sequence are excellent and really full of suspense. Moore is great as a visibly aging but very serious Bond. The villain twist is nice.

What I don´t like: Bouquet is beautiful but acts rather sedated; Bibi... what the hell does this character do here?; the slapstick kills the edge of the PTS (stainless delicatessen? still don´t get that), the stock ending with the authorities being ashamed or in this case fooled dulls the good ending of the climax ("that´s detente").

Basically, and this is what I often get from the Glen-directed films, the action sequences are so much better handled than the character scenes.

Astoundingly - for a film directed by a former editor -, for my taste, FYEO has huge problems with the pacing. It seems unnecessarily slow at times and would have benefited from cutting at least 15 minutes out. The whole underwater sequence with Bond and Melina finding the ATAC goes on too long. And why are they attacked when the plan obviously was to let them bring the ATAC on board?

So, in my mind, FYEO - while a welcome return to a straight spy thriller - does not really work and therefore gets only a middling evaluation from me.

But I love the title song...

5,5 out of 10.

I am in full agreement about John Glenn and characters, he gets worse as he goes on....
Disagree about the pace. Generally, I think it's excellent. The scene you highlight makes sense because Kristatos doesn't know Bond & Melina have found the location of the ATAC, he's still searching for it himself.
The scenes which could hit the cutting room floor are
1. the dull preamble at the casino; this does nothing except introduce Lisl, which isn't required anyway. After the "argument" with Colombo, she could just as easily drop her gloves next to Bond's table. Also there is no need to show Melina at the end of this sequence, especially as a later scene explaining her presence there was already cut.
2. the scene where Bond & Melina discuss revenge. This could have been done in Cortina; Melina seems well connected and could easily have followed Bond there.
3. the Q scene re: St Cyrill's. Bond should have just asked Colombo in the first place.
4. yes, that terrible parrott sketch at the end. Melina diving naked into the Aegean sea is quite enough...
These scenes would have shaved only about 6 -7 mins from the run time, but they would certainly tighten up the flow.

[SecretAgentFan]

I can see what you mean.

By the way, I enjoy your reviews very much.

I think re-watching the films is very rewarding and it can also open one´s eyes as to how one perceives films. How important the current state of mind is, personal experiences, personal development and so on. In the end, the evaluation of a film is just subjective.

I´m looking forward to re-watch THUNDERBALL again, a film that I did not really care for particularly.

And then I have the four Brosnans left - which I liked. But maybe I won´t like them so much in retrospect?

[Attempting Re-entry]

Yes, it is interesting to re-watch the movies.

It occurred to me this evening as I re-watched FYEO that it must've been some time indeed since I had last seen it; I had absolutely no recollection of Charles Dance being in this movie, for example.

Equally, for a film so praised as "Flemingesque" here and elsewhere, I found the movie absolutely hilarious, and (presumably) unintentionally so. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed this, but I spent quite a bit of time laughing. Some of Roger's outfits...and that pørno soundtrack...the idea of a teenager instantly and without explanation wanting in Roger's pants....so funny.

[PrinceKamalKhan]

Just watched this again yesterday.

I've gotta say, there's not really much difference in tone from the previous two outings (maybe plenty of others know this, but it really only became clear to me this time). I used to think FYEO was one of the Flemingesque juggernauts that utterly refuted the excesses of the seventies, but that's really not the case at all.

Sure, the story itself has a lot of basis in the short stories, but much of the action scenes feel right at home beside those of the previous two movies. Campy Citroen, dude with wine, spiny umbrella, hockey assassins, Thatcher & Max, the goofy fun's all there. And that's largely okay by me.

Exactly. FYEO fits very well with the "action comedy" approach of the other films of the 1971-1985 era of Bond. A return to an OHMSS-type Flemingesque approach didn't completely return until the underrated Dalton films(both of which I rank far higher than FYEO) and even then there was some leftover Moore-era comedic aspects to both of them.

Still an enjoyable movie, but a decidedly middle-of-the-road outing.

Probably the best way to describe it. Rename the character from Bond to Simon Templar and I'd consider it the best episode of The Saint ever filmed. When watching FYEO I half-expect an animated halo to appear over Moore's head and Leslie Charteris' theme music to start.

So, in my mind, FYEO - while a welcome return to a straight spy thriller - does not really work and therefore gets only a middling evaluation from me.

But I love the title song...

5,5 out of 10.

Indeed a middling entry. I might give it a 6 but I'll need to rewatch it in its entirety again. Hardly in the same league as On Her Majesty’s Secret Service or Casino Royale as it's often praised as though.

1. the dull preamble at the casino; this does nothing except introduce Lisl, which isn't required anyway. After the "argument" with Colombo, she could just as easily drop her gloves next to Bond's table. Also there is no need to show Melina at the end of this sequence, especially as a later scene explaining her presence there was already cut.

Really? Why was Melina at the casino and what did her scene entail?

Yes, it is interesting to re-watch the movies.

It occurred to me this evening as I re-watched FYEO that it must've been some time indeed since I had last seen it; I had absolutely no recollection of Charles Dance being in this movie, for example.

Equally, for a film so praised as "Flemingesque" here and elsewhere, I found the movie absolutely hilarious, and (presumably) unintentionally so. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed this, but I spent quite a bit of time laughing. Some of Roger's outfits...and that pørno soundtrack...the idea of a teenager instantly and without explanation wanting in Roger's pants....so funny.

Indeed. As I rewatched the Cortina sequence last night, the whole bit with Bibi's instant crush on 53-year old Bond seemed like it was really pushing it. Ranks alongside Bond's going into space or J.W. Pepper's purchasing an AMC vehicle in Thailand for absurdity. Of course, the romantic aspects of Bond/Melina's relationship weren't that much more plausible. In reality, Carole Bouquet is only 1 year older than Lynn-Holly Johnson. Of the 3 Bond girls in FYEO, only Cassandra Harris' Lisl comes off as a believable match for Moore.

[Attempting Re-entry]

The identigraph sequence was really funny as well...all in all, though, I did enjoy watching this one last night and will no doubt return to it sooner rather than later. Love these movies!

[PrinceKamalKhan]

The identigraph sequence was really funny as well...all in all, though, I did enjoy watching this one last night and will no doubt return to it sooner rather than later. Love these movies!

"A nose, not a banana Q." Yep. Definitely a lot of humor in FYEO. I remember talking with someone who said it would make a great double feature with The Blues Brothers. He meant that as a praise of FYEO.

[Mr_Wint]

I'll need to rewatch it in its entirety again.

True.