108 replies to this topic

[AgentPB]

I really like this movie! It's in my top 5 and i can't say why. I know it's long and sometimes slow moving but for me thats just more time i get to spend with bond! I would change: California Girls, and the fight where the two henchmen give up! Roger looked good for his age and could still be Bond. Not today of course but for his last film he looked fine.

[Safari Suit]

"Just a bit from her meeting with her agent:
Well, Tanya, I've got word. The lead part in the new Bond film's yours. Unfortunately, they've decided not to recast so you'll be opposite Roger Moore. He's had a face lift but he looks a bit of a fossil still. I guess it's going to be really difficult fancing him. Apparently he runs like an incontinent 70 year old. Oh, and his face HAS gone ginger. Only people who'll fancy him are old broads who grew up watching the Saint. Appeal to the kids, zero. Might be difficult with the chemistry, eh. Not float your boat, the old man? How you gonna play it, then? Oh, and you've got a shower scene to end the movie."

Well that still must have been more appealing than "The Dungeon and The Sorceress", or whatever other garbage she was being offered.

And I must admit, personally I have no problem with "California Girls". Silly, yes, unnecessary too, but not really a major source of irritation. Certainly Gidea Park's finest hour.

[belvedere]

The problem with this movie is that is was so close to being great, yet - it misfired.

Roger Moore was clearly long in the tooth, and I feel that they had up the humor quotient to make it a Moore movie. Yes, I groaned during California Girls. But, so what, it's fun.

Tanya Roberts was hideously bad. Put simply, she was the worst of all Bond Girls. By a lot. And I am including Denise Richards in this list. How many times did she shriek, "Oh, James!" I would have been tempted to let her die in the fire in the elevator shaft just to shut her up!

Grace Jones was ridiculous, and a worthless character. She was not attractive, yet not ugly; she had no charisma, and delivered lines like wet cardboard. The love scene between her and Moore was so unrealistic, I felt like the cameras cut away in a fast manner to demonstrate that they weren'y buying it, either.

The San Francisco scenes are all well done; the Paris chase scene is excellent; the horses on steroids subplot is very well done (although in the end, pointless); Patrick MacNee is not wasted; the movie has its moments. Christopher Walken excellent as Zorin.

But AVTAK folds under the weight of lead actors who can't save the film.

[Gothamite]

I liked AVTAK and I don't find Tanya Roberts that annoying at all. The person who bothers me the most in this film is Grace Jones. That lovescene has to be the most disturbing love scene in the series.

I didn't think Roger looked too old, and in scenes like the jacuzzi scene, I thought he was fine. The only scene where I really thought he was just a dirty old man, was the iceberg-sub scene with that twenty-something year old.

Christopher Walken's villain is pure gold and the lines he has in this film are probably part of the reason why his voice is imitated so often.

I honestly thought this was a fun, light-hearted Bond movie, that didn't have anything particularly offensive (like laser guns or really annoying puns), the only reason so many people slate it is that it just didn't have anything mindblowing and Moore was obviously too old.

[moorebond82]

I like this film but there are several things that stand out more then others for me.

1.The Renault Taxi-I actually like this chase scene despite the horrible job they did with not even trying to pretend it was roger.

2.Zorins Blimp-In my opinion the coolest villain vehicle ever.

3.The Golden Gate Bridge Fight-How cool is that?

4.May Day-Believe it or not back then i'd hook up with Grace Jones!

[007th Heaven]

1) Roger Moore should have stepped down from the role by that time. Is that his real hair or a plastic mold?
2) Hated the title of this movie.
3) Tanya Roberts is an unconvincing Bond girl and is guilty of poor acting throughout the film.
4) The "big" fire truck chase scene was not very exciting.
5) Bond slept with the villain MayDay...yea right.
6) The scene were Bond drives half an automobile was pretty silly.
7) The last ten minutes with the blimp and the Golden Gate Bridge were too over the top and a big letdown for me.

[Dr. Kananga]

I liked all of it except I feel bad for Tibbit(was that his name?) because all he seemingly wanted was an answer to his question.

[Andrew]

Grandpa Bond & Grandma Moneypenny
Tanya Roberts
80's cheese

That pretty much sums up my thoughts.

[Moore Not Less]

There are a couple of things that stand out for me. Roger Moore's age was not taken into account when it came to the script. Yes, he was 57 years old, but Maibaum & Wilson's script helped to make him look even older. Roger signed up almost a year in advance of AVTAK, unlike FYEO & OP where he signed up almost at the last moment.

The other thing that stands out is the Paris car chase sequence. It is spoiled (through bad direction and editing) because it's painfully obvious to see at times that it is not Roger at the wheel of the car.

[DamnCoffee]

I find it hard to not like any of the Roger Moore films but still AVTAK while many consider it the worst bond film ever i quite enjoy it.The only thing i have to say negative about the film is why oh why did Roger have to have that plastic surgery? He looks horrible.

Roger, Plastic Surgery? this is new to me

[Zorin Industries]

if you did not like it?

I liked the movie. But, as big a Roger Moore fan as I am, I have to admit that Roger looked too old to play Bond at that time. He was 57 but, for whatever reason, looked as if he had been ill. He certainly looked as if he aged much more than 4 years since FYEO. I have felt that Roger looked better and younger in The Quest, a movie he did 11 years after AVTAK.

If someone else had played Bond in AVTAK, along with a more appealing actress playing May Day, the movie would have been very good, even with Tanya Roberts in it. Any thoughts or comments?

Very little needs changing with A VIEW TO A KILL. I fail to understand how some fans rate it so poorly alongside such Bond-by-numbers fare as THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH. And if you can suggest a better actress to play May Day then do it. Denise Richards perhaps? A VIEW TO A KILL has a cool, contemporary drive very few Bond films manage to achieve. Brosnan came close with TOMORROW NEVER DIES, but couldn't have been further from that in most of his other entries.

[cvheady007]

There really isn't a whole lot positive about AVTAK...it's a pretty awful movie. In all honesty, there are some funny parts, Walken is entertaining, and Moore isn't that bad, but the movie overall is not recommended.

4 out of 10.

[Zorin Industries]

There really isn't a whole lot positive about AVTAK...it's a pretty awful movie. In all honesty, there are some funny parts, Walken is entertaining, and Moore isn't that bad, but the movie overall is not recommended.

4 out of 10.

Could you explain why you think it so bad though? And "Roger Moore looks too old" is not a valid response. It's a lazy one far too many people throw at A VIEW TO A KILL. I don't imagine Pierce Brosnan would have pulled off a seventh Bond film at 59 so deftly. Even Connery looks nearly past it aged 41 in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER.

A VIEW TO A KILL is one of the least dated Bond films in the series.

[DaveBond21]

I watched it again the other day. It's OK, but Moore was too old at this point - I also didn't like the way he winced when he fired his gun on the Eiffel Tower!

However, I can't see Timothy Dalton in this movie, so Moore was the right man at the time.

Shame he couldn't have had a better swansong movie.

[Piz Gloria 1969]

Here's something for you AVTAK fans :



LMFAO !!!!

[Hitokiri]

The "Roger is old" point I believe is valid, but it's been said enough. I've been thinking of reasons that I rank this very low in the series, and I must say that the reason that stands out like a sore thumb to me is that there seems to be a real lack of energy or motivation. The hook and ladder chase was not exciting and the finale on the Golden Gate Bridge was more lethargic than Connery in DAF. Many times, I felt like I was watching an unbearably long episode of MacGyver. It all felt cheap to me. And yes, there's plenty of 80's cheese in this one (Duran Duran theme song, robot dog, Silicon Valley, etc).

I will say that Christopher Walken as Zorin was excellent. And Moore at least tries to salvage through the material handed to him.

[MarkA]

Come on. It was a sad and tired film in every sense of the word, and not just Roger Moore's. The beginning was like a pensioners day at the races, everyone was so old. I have never been a great fan of the John Glen Bond's (apart from FYEO). I think they have dated alarmingly. Despite the fact he said he tried to toughen things up since Moonraker all his films have silly juvenile moments. I'm sorry when you compare this film to Casino Royale I think we have come a long way back in the right direction. Plus we have a Bond who believes in the part. Roger Moore never did, and that is the fundamental reason for me his films never worked.

[dodge]

The "Roger is old" point I believe is valid, but it's been said enough. I've been thinking of reasons that I rank this very low in the series, and I must say that the reason that stands out like a sore thumb to me is that there seems to be a real lack of energy or motivation. The hook and ladder chase was not exciting and the finale on the Golden Gate Bridge was more lethargic than Connery in DAF. Many times, I felt like I was watching an unbearably long episode of MacGyver. It all felt cheap to me. And yes, there's plenty of 80's cheese in this one (Duran Duran theme song, robot dog, Silicon Valley, etc).

I will say that Christopher Walken as Zorin was excellent. And Moore at least tries to salvage through the material handed to him.

You've just summed up most of what I would've said. Though Roger's age was showing, I was really able to 'buy' him as a mature but still-fit spy. Part of the trouble for me was that the film should have had a Bond-maturing theme to go with it. And an older but lovely/brainy romantic partner. Rog was past playing the role of the rugged stuff muffin.

The film might have survived the over-wrought performance of Tanya Roberts. Foxy if hare-brained. But nothing could survive the freakishness of Grace Jones. And the very idea of her sacrificing herself at the end of the film to atone for her sins and save Bond insulted all previous traces of intelligence in the script.

All of this aside, John Glen--never a topnotch Bond director--was also past his prime here. Even a competent director could have done far better with the blimp scene, the mansion fight, the firetruck chase the fight atop the Golden Gate Bridge. In the film these weren't even phoned in--they were faxed.

[Zorin Industries]

The "Roger is old" point I believe is valid, but it's been said enough. I've been thinking of reasons that I rank this very low in the series, and I must say that the reason that stands out like a sore thumb to me is that there seems to be a real lack of energy or motivation. The hook and ladder chase was not exciting and the finale on the Golden Gate Bridge was more lethargic than Connery in DAF. Many times, I felt like I was watching an unbearably long episode of MacGyver. It all felt cheap to me. And yes, there's plenty of 80's cheese in this one (Duran Duran theme song, robot dog, Silicon Valley, etc).

I will say that Christopher Walken as Zorin was excellent. And Moore at least tries to salvage through the material handed to him.

You've just summed up most of what I would've said. Though Roger's age was showing, I was really able to 'buy' him as a mature but still-fit spy. Part of the trouble for me was that the film should have had a Bond-maturing theme to go with it. And an older but lovely/brainy romantic partner. Rog was past playing the role of the rugged stuff muffin.

The film might have survived the over-wrought performance of Tanya Roberts. Foxy if hare-brained. But nothing could survive the freakishness of Grace Jones. And the very idea of her sacrificing herself at the end of the film to atone for her sins and save Bond insulted all previous traces of intelligence in the script.

All of this aside, John Glen--never a topnotch Bond director--was also past his prime here. Even a competent director could have done far better with the blimp scene, the mansion fight, the firetruck chase the fight atop the Golden Gate Bridge. In the film these weren't even phoned in--they were faxed.

I can't believe fair-minded fans think turgid Bond-By-Numbers titles such as GOLDENEYE and THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH are better than A VIEW TO A KILL.

[DamnCoffee]

for one thing, the song did not suit the tone of the movie, Duran Duran's verion was upbeat and i cannot imagine that song been played while a 57 year old man is getting cramps while climbing up the golden gate bridge.

[Zorin Industries]

for one thing, the song did not suit the tone of the movie, Duran Duran's verion was upbeat and i cannot imagine that song been played while a 57 year old man is getting cramps while climbing up the golden gate bridge.

I think the pop synth, tonally charged title track WAS suited to a film that was all about technology, society chic, Parisian design, sharp suits and Zorin's ultra cool slip-ons! Moore looked better than Connery did in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER and he was a portly, toupee'd 41 year old - but technically roughly the same age as Brosnan was on his debut.

[Safari Suit]

Plus we have a Bond who believes in the part. Roger Moore never did, and that is the fundamental reason for me his films never worked.

No. Yes to the first sentence, no to the second.

[Zorin Industries]

Plus we have a Bond who believes in the part. Roger Moore never did, and that is the fundamental reason for me his films never worked.

No. Yes to the first sentence, no to the second.

Of course Moore believed in the part. If he didn't, the mass audience wouldn't have let him return seven times.

[dodge]

The "Roger is old" point I believe is valid, but it's been said enough. I've been thinking of reasons that I rank this very low in the series, and I must say that the reason that stands out like a sore thumb to me is that there seems to be a real lack of energy or motivation. The hook and ladder chase was not exciting and the finale on the Golden Gate Bridge was more lethargic than Connery in DAF. Many times, I felt like I was watching an unbearably long episode of MacGyver. It all felt cheap to me. And yes, there's plenty of 80's cheese in this one (Duran Duran theme song, robot dog, Silicon Valley, etc).

I will say that Christopher Walken as Zorin was excellent. And Moore at least tries to salvage through the material handed to him.

You've just summed up most of what I would've said. Though Roger's age was showing, I was really able to 'buy' him as a mature but still-fit spy. Part of the trouble for me was that the film should have had a Bond-maturing theme to go with it. And an older but lovely/brainy romantic partner. Rog was past playing the role of the rugged stuff muffin.

The film might have survived the over-wrought performance of Tanya Roberts. Foxy if hare-brained. But nothing could survive the freakishness of Grace Jones. And the very idea of her sacrificing herself at the end of the film to atone for her sins and save Bond insulted all previous traces of intelligence in the script.

All of this aside, John Glen--never a topnotch Bond director--was also past his prime here. Even a competent director could have done far better with the blimp scene, the mansion fight, the firetruck chase the fight atop the Golden Gate Bridge. In the film these weren't even phoned in--they were faxed.

I can't believe fair-minded fans think turgid Bond-By-Numbers titles such as GOLDENEYE and THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH are better than A VIEW TO A KILL.

Let me try to answer in a friendly spirit without arguing. I'll limit my remarks to GE, since my estimation of Brozza has slipped and I don't care that much for TWINE. I still place GE among my favorite Bonds. I won't even mention the music, since I know when we're at odds on that subject.
What I like:
1)Smashing PTS--most agree on the bungee jump, but I loved it all, including the over-the-top over-the-cliff free fall to the plane.
2)Brilliant cinematography and elegant dark new look: A new night landscape with blacks and shadows, sparkling lights.
3)Compelling villains: Onatopp and Trevalyan, an intriguing mixture of the outrageous and the very real.
4)Mindblowing action sequences: Remember Bond's frantic run on the high steel catwalk? His fight with Trevalyan? The younger Martin Campbell was certainly finding his legs here--and he would've whipped the action scenes in AVATAK to a feverish pitch.
5) Strong supporting actors: Robbie Coltrane did a very fine job. So did that Russian general(?).
6) Intriguing side angle: the new Russian mob was something fairly new back then.

I didn't care for some things: the female lead or Boris. Mixed reaction to Brozza himself. The tank scene was a yawner.

But I found enough to admire there to bring me back for repeat viewings. And I do wish AVATAK had had the benefit of a top-drawer director...and the absence of Miss Jones.

[dee-bee-five]

The "Roger is old" point I believe is valid, but it's been said enough. I've been thinking of reasons that I rank this very low in the series, and I must say that the reason that stands out like a sore thumb to me is that there seems to be a real lack of energy or motivation. The hook and ladder chase was not exciting and the finale on the Golden Gate Bridge was more lethargic than Connery in DAF. Many times, I felt like I was watching an unbearably long episode of MacGyver. It all felt cheap to me. And yes, there's plenty of 80's cheese in this one (Duran Duran theme song, robot dog, Silicon Valley, etc).

I will say that Christopher Walken as Zorin was excellent. And Moore at least tries to salvage through the material handed to him.

You've just summed up most of what I would've said. Though Roger's age was showing, I was really able to 'buy' him as a mature but still-fit spy. Part of the trouble for me was that the film should have had a Bond-maturing theme to go with it. And an older but lovely/brainy romantic partner. Rog was past playing the role of the rugged stuff muffin.

The film might have survived the over-wrought performance of Tanya Roberts. Foxy if hare-brained. But nothing could survive the freakishness of Grace Jones. And the very idea of her sacrificing herself at the end of the film to atone for her sins and save Bond insulted all previous traces of intelligence in the script.

All of this aside, John Glen--never a topnotch Bond director--was also past his prime here. Even a competent director could have done far better with the blimp scene, the mansion fight, the firetruck chase the fight atop the Golden Gate Bridge. In the film these weren't even phoned in--they were faxed.

I can't believe fair-minded fans think turgid Bond-By-Numbers titles such as GOLDENEYE and THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH are better than A VIEW TO A KILL.

I like to think I'm fair-minded and I have to say that I believe TWINE (one of the most underrated Bonds in my book) and GE are far better than AVTAK. It's not that I don't like AVTAK; it's Bond, after all. But I feel that it's tired, slightly weary and a letdown after the fun of Octopussy. There are some nice touches, of course, and Rog's age didn't really bother me. But it was a bit of a colourless swansong for me.

[Qwerty]

Was interesting for me to find out Roger Moore's least favourite of his seven Bond films is A View to a Kill (which is a result of its more violent content, apparently). I'd always known which was his favourite, but not which one he liked least.

[DaveBond21]

Interesting fact, Qwerty.


Also, we should bear in mind that John Glen went on to direct LTK, which is a very different movie to AVTAK.

[Turn]

Was interesting for me to find out Roger Moore's least favourite of his seven Bond films is A View to a Kill (which is a result of its more violent content, apparently). I'd always known which was his favourite, but not which one he liked least.

I've read his favorite is TSWLM.

[MarkA]

I'm sorry Zorin, Roger Moore himself has said he never took the Bond part seriously. So I cannot take his performance seriously. To me he always had this incredible patronising nature about his performance. Also despite their faults both Goldeneye and TWINE are far better made films than AVTAK. Both made by directors who have credible track records. John Glen since leaving Bond has done virtually nothing.

[Safari Suit]

I'm sorry Zorin, Roger Moore himself has said he never took the Bond part seriously. So I cannot take his performance seriously. To me he always had this incredible patronising nature about his performance. Also despite their faults both Goldeneye and TWINE are far better made films than AVTAK. Both made by directors who have credible track records. John Glen since leaving Bond has done virtually nothing.

This means that you didn't like the way he played the character, not that he didn't "believe" in Bond. We all have our preferences, which is how it should be, but I don't think we could ever honestly say that any of the actors didn't "believe" in what they were doing, except maybe Connery in his last two (official) films, and I wouldn't really agree with that either.

Edited by Safari Suit, 12 January 2007 - 11:11 AM.