41 replies to this topic

[MHazard]

I was at home the other morning when the Spike Channel started running LALD. I hadn't seen the movie in a long time and figured I would just watch the pre-title sequences, which I couldn't remember. I wanted to see how the new Roger Moore Bond was introduced. The initial PTS showed three assasinations, one of which was in the UN and improbable, one was a jazz funeral and sort of cool and one was during a voodoo ceremony also sort of cool.

Then we cut to the new James Bond, Roger Moore. Is he sabotaging a heroin factory? Is he fighting a Spectre assasin? Is he faking his own death? No, he is in bed with a woman Italian agent. He is interrupted, early in the morning by M, who is ringing his doorbell. Ms. Moneypenny accompanies M. The drama of the scene is Bond trying to sneak out (with Moneypenny's help) the woman agent without M learning that she is there (she's apparantly missing). During the scene Bond prissily makes M a cup of espresso from a fancy machine and with great flourish. When the partially clad woman gets out of Bond's flat, we cut to the LALD theme song and titles.

I couldn't believe that this was how the producers and Guy Hamilton sought to set the tone for the new Bond. It's all there in this one scene. Going for comedy (and not very funny comedy at that) instead of drama. Improbably having M and his secretary going to Bond's flat. The head of the secret service is not going to go early in the morning with his secretary to summon an agent-compare this with DN, where Bond is summoned at the LeCircle gambling club. The cliche of Bond being fussy with the espresso. You can see everything that's wrong with the Roger Moore movies foreshadowed in this very first scene.

Now, I have been and am highly critical of Roger Moore's take on Bond. But after watching this I concluded that neither Sean Connery or Daniel Craig could have made anything out of this scene that wasn't stupid. So, perhaps I have been a little harsh on Roger Moore, whose crime may simply be making a bad situation worse.

[Jim]

During the scene Bond prissily makes M a cup of espresso from a fancy machine and with great flourish. When the partially clad woman gets out of Bond's flat, we cut to the LALD theme song and titles.

Eh? Did the television channel recut it to have the song after that scene?

No wonder you didn't enjoy it.

[Fiona Volpe lover]

I think that the producers had already established the jokey tone they wanted the series to have in the 70s with Diamonds Are Forever, which is basically a Moore film starring Connery. And Moore just fits in with the style of the films perfectly.

[00Twelve]

Personally, Rog's "Not married by any chance, are you?" is one of my favorite situational quips in the series.

And M visiting Bond's flat is surely less fantastical than his setting up a perfect wood-grain representation of his normal office on a [!]in YOLT, for heaven's sake.

Just me, MHaz. I've grown to like LALD as a film much more over time. It doesn't hold a candle to the book, but it might be emerging as my fave of Rog's.

[DamnCoffee]

I am also a massive fan of Live and Let Die, my second favorite Moore film with out a doubt. Plus I like his introduction aswell, more realistic than faking ones death and Bunjee jumping off the hoover dam.

[HildebrandRarity]

When the partially clad woman gets out of Bond's flat, we cut to the LALD theme song and titles.

I couldn't believe that this was how the producers and Guy Hamilton sought to set the tone for the new Bond. It's all there in this one scene. Going for comedy (and not very funny comedy at that) instead of drama.

I could have sworn they cut to the main titles as soon as Bains was killed in the Carribean...and that they cut to the surreal 'Bond to New York/Tarrot Card' cue after the Italian girl scene which, I recall, came AFTER the titles.

Anyway, the only thing that bugs me about LALD is that they didn't film it in wide screen and the aspect ratio 'cheapens' it for me...otherwise I think the pre-titles were ok. Song, though, is an absolute killer.

[ChrissBond007]

Before I saw Live and Let Die i've always thought that The Man with the Golden Gun was the first Moore Bondfilm, I think that would be a better introduction, before we see Moore as Bond we see wax sculpture of him.

But I like Moore's first scene in LALD, but it isn't a good introduction indeed.

[DamnCoffee]

Before I saw Live and Let Die i've always thought that The Man with the Golden Gun was the first Moore Bondfilm, I think that would be a better introduction, before we see Moore as Bond we see wax sculpture of him.

But I like Moore's first scene in LALD, but it isn't a good introduction indeed.

*Goes to DVD Collection and switches Live and Let Die and The Man with the Golden Gun round*

[Mister E]

Yeah it was lousy intro in general. Frankly, the only ones I ever liked was Connery's and Lazenby's.

[Righty007]

Live and Let Die is the best Moore Bond film, IMO. I love it!

[Mister E]

Live and Let Die is the best Moore Bond film, IMO. I love it!

I think it's okay, I feel SPY and OCTOPUSSY are Moore's best.

[DamnCoffee]

Live and Let Die is the best Moore Bond film, IMO. I love it!

Yes it is a rather cool movie isn't it?

[HildebrandRarity]

Live and Let Die is the best Moore Bond film, IMO. I love it!

I think it's okay, I feel SPY and OCTOPUSSY are Moore's best.

I like Moonraker. It's the most violent and has the best pre-titles with the freefall!

[Judo chop]

I'll deal with you, later, MHaz. Right now I've got to get back to work!

[solace]

Roger's my least favourite bond by quite a way but this is I think his best. The whole take on Bond was though the Producers/writers doing so I dont blame Roger as DAF was in the same clown about style.

Does anyone know why the films went down the comedy/action track? I was three at the time of Lald so I cant remember if this was a movie trend or whatever.
I'd be interested in anyones feelings on this one.

[Mister E]

Roger's my least favourite bond by quite a way but this is I think his best. The whole take on Bond was though the Producers/writers doing so I dont blame Roger as DAF was in the same clown about style.

Does anyone know why the films went down the comedy/action track? I was three at the time of Lald so I cant remember if this was a movie trend or whatever.
I'd be interested in anyones feelings on this one.

Because the spy craze was over by the time DAF came out. The producers thought camp was the way to go.

Edited by Mister E, 21 August 2008 - 08:24 PM.

[Mr. Blofeld]

I'm in love with the score for this movie; it sets an incredibly cool tone for Roger that establishes the man and his Bond.

[BoogieBond]

Based on the first couple of early scenes MHazard, yes, I agree with you the PTS could have been made more exciting. I think the mixture of a bit of plot and a bit of Action(with Bond) like TSWLM and MR would have been better.
However I am rather fond of the first scene after the Titles. Granted, they could have introduced Moore in a cooler way, but they didn't , and didn't need to in the end, cos audiences at that time liked it anyway.
I quite like M saying "Is that all it does" about the coffee machine, and when Bond is explaining his watch will deflect a bullet, M commenting that he is "Tempted to try out the theory right now" is classical gruff M.
What came after those scenes though is what makes LALD one of my favourite of Moores, it is on the lighter side, but there is enough menace in the villains, and the Voodoo element to keep things a little darker. It is definitely darker in tone , for me, that DAF. We even have Roger putting poor Rosie in a situation, where eventually she gets killed by the scarecrows. Also, I like the atmosphere of the film. Just my two cents though.

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

The pre-titles sequence left a lot to think about during the main titles (which is accompanied by one of the best Bond songs ever recorded!) This sets up a very different introduction to a new Bond, but different is not necessarily bad. I think it is moderate yet satisfying to see Bond in normal surroundings, something which we hadn't seen since Dr. No. The fact that Moore's Bond is introduced at home makes no difference to how his Bond should be judged. In fact he went on to do some great things and some not-so-great things) with the Bond franchise. Live And Let Die is my favourite Roger Moore Bond film. It has superb settings (Harlem is a lot more dark and dreary compared to other locations where everything was rose-coloured), and some great action sequences. The boat chase in particular was pure genius, certainly the best boat chase of the series, so far! (Will Quantum top it?) I think it's unfair to highlight this particular introduction as bad. It's purely different, and refreshingly different at that. It is also unfair to claim that Moore went on to do worse things in the films. For Your Eyes Only was a spectacle for me, one of his later films, so Live And Let Die was hardly the catalyst for a string of bad films. If you really want to blame someone for the use of "comedy", then blame Guy Hamilton, surely the worst director to make a Bond film, until Lee Tamahori in 2002.

Edited by Conlazmoodalbrocra, 21 August 2008 - 09:18 PM.

[DaveBond21]

Before I saw Live and Let Die i've always thought that The Man with the Golden Gun was the first Moore Bondfilm, I think that would be a better introduction, before we see Moore as Bond we see wax sculpture of him.

If that had been the first Moore Bond movie, the audience could be forgiven for thinking the producers had decided to kill Moore's Bond immediately, and that, following the titles, Connery was coming back.





To answer MHazard's point. I think they had a choice - introduce Roger as the new Bond with a bang or show that things are just the same, Bond is still Bond, and that there is a plot afoot to kill British agents. They simply went with the latter. It was business as usual.

[RJJB]

Not introducing Bond or having any depiction of him ( I threw that in for the people who would pounce on me because Bond was not in the PTS in FRWL) in the PTS is seriously wrong. By introducing the the Kanaga activities first, the producers have reduced the importance of the Bond character. Yes, it sets up the story, but the most important element of the movie is supposed to be James Bond.

And sorry, but the first glimpse of Moore, fast asleep is not a very exciting way of introducing both the character and the new actor to the audience. But at least we get to share in the excitement as Moore makes cappuccino. Oooh, be still my heart.Then we are treated to the juvenile scene of a hald naked woman trying to sneak out. If I had wanted to see some asinine teen sex comedy, I would have done so. Bond's relationship with women is supposed to be adult in nature, not this nudge-nudge-wink-wink kind of Roger Moore garbage.

I saw this movie the first day it opened in Chicago. I sat through it twice. Even then, when I thought I liked it, I remember being very disappointed in a few things in addition to what I mentioned above.

Moore in Harlem: when he goes into the Filet of Soul, he slips the waiter money, asking for information. That is far too dandy for my tastes. No threat, just a pretty boy in the wrong part of the city. If he's supposed to have an earned a license to kill, it sure doesn't seem like it here.

Side characters: The introduction of side characters such as Mrs. Bell, the Chicken Farmer and of course the ridiculous Sheriff Pepper places too much emphasis on peripheral people, whose sole purpose in the movie is low level comedy. The comedy is so broad that it is not indicative of anything worthwhile. And let's add the great scenes of the speedboats landing in a swimming pool and ruining a wedding (complete with the bride wailing...) More garbage.

The final fight with Kanaga has to be without argument, the single worst scene in a Bond movie. I groaned at this big time, first time I saw it. First, we have the magic wristwatch that can become a buzzsaw. And how are we suppposed to know it can do this? Producing some heretofore unrevealed weapon is something that happens in 1960s Batman comic books. And yes, I acknowledge that the same thing was done in YOLT, when Bond magically had the safe-cracking device in Osato's office and the suction cups to scale the walls of the SPECTRE volcano, even though he had no idea he would have needed either. But the buzzsaw watch was only the beginning of the ridiculousness.

It's Kanaga's death that truly ruined this movie. No human body is going to inflate the way he did. No human body would float to the ceiling. No human body would explode, leaving no trace of blood and guts. The only thing that was lacking in the scene were the Roadrunner and Wile E.Coyote in the background. Pure cartoon antics and pure garbage.

I take exception that the spirit of the times required Bond to become lighter in tone. Just take a look at some of the memorable movies of the time and you will see that audiences can and did appreciate serious movies. The Godfather, Chinatown, Network, All the President's Men. There were certainly movies with a lighter tone, but they were produced in a manner that did not betray their original intent. I think the true downward spiral started with YOLT with its emphasis on over the top action sequences. DAF added the silliness and the Moore era compounded the problem again and again until the James Bond series was completely removed for it original roots. The producers sold out the audience for the sake of making money. They offered a second rate actor who was never believable as a threat or the type of man for whom women would swoon. They dumbed down the scripts with juvenile sex jokes ("No sense going off half-cocked) and made the Bond character a farce. Action sequences became so obligatory to the movie, that they were thrown in as part of the checklist for the movie. Innovation was thrown out the window for the compfort of follwoing an outline. The Moore era represents not just bad Bond movies, but bad movies in general.

When you think about it, I guess the first glimpse of Moore is right on the movie.
A snoozing Bond, indicative of the overwhelming boredom that overtook the series.
Roger Moore is the poster boy for everything wrong with the series.

[Mr. Blofeld]

That's why I always start the Moore leg of my Bond movie marathons with FYEO, TSWLM, then LALD; it gives me the best of Roger, then the first of Roger.

[Pierce - Daniel]

I truly enjoy the movie alot. It's understated, it could have nee lavish like OHMSS or YOLt, but was instead very low key like FRWL and DN, relying more on the energy the film created itself.
It's undeniable that the young Roger Moore was ultimate leading man and he is truly great in the film. I do hate his intro though. He needed a big blowout, he didn't even appear in the pre title! But havibg said that, by having that scene it just sort of works kinds, from that moment on you don't question he's James Bond, so when he arrives at the airport it could be that he has been playing Bond for years. That was the ease and class of Moore, a feat not repeated yet in my eyes. But, wasn't Craig's entry a little soft compared to the others, he is just sitting in an office talking to some old guy about making M unhappy.

[sharpshooter]

more realistic than faking ones death and Bunjee jumping off the hoover dam.

He didn't jump off the Hoover Dam. Stunt man Wayne Michaels jumped off the Verzasca Hydro-Electric Dam in Switzerland. Not unrealistic at all, spectacular if anything.

[Safari Suit]

Not introducing Bond or having any depiction of him ( I threw that in for the people who would pounce on me because Bond was not in the PTS in FRWL) in the PTS is seriously wrong. By introducing the the Kanaga activities first, the producers have reduced the importance of the Bond character. Yes, it sets up the story, but the most important element of the movie is supposed to be James Bond.

And sorry, but the first glimpse of Moore, fast asleep is not a very exciting way of introducing both the character and the new actor to the audience. But at least we get to share in the excitement as Moore makes cappuccino. Oooh, be still my heart.Then we are treated to the juvenile scene of a hald naked woman trying to sneak out. If I had wanted to see some asinine teen sex comedy, I would have done so. Bond's relationship with women is supposed to be adult in nature, not this nudge-nudge-wink-wink kind of Roger Moore garbage.

I saw this movie the first day it opened in Chicago. I sat through it twice. Even then, when I thought I liked it, I remember being very disappointed in a few things in addition to what I mentioned above.

Moore in Harlem: when he goes into the Filet of Soul, he slips the waiter money, asking for information. That is far too dandy for my tastes. No threat, just a pretty boy in the wrong part of the city. If he's supposed to have an earned a license to kill, it sure doesn't seem like it here.

Side characters: The introduction of side characters such as Mrs. Bell, the Chicken Farmer and of course the ridiculous Sheriff Pepper places too much emphasis on peripheral people, whose sole purpose in the movie is low level comedy. The comedy is so broad that it is not indicative of anything worthwhile. And let's add the great scenes of the speedboats landing in a swimming pool and ruining a wedding (complete with the bride wailing...) More garbage.

The final fight with Kanaga has to be without argument, the single worst scene in a Bond movie. I groaned at this big time, first time I saw it. First, we have the magic wristwatch that can become a buzzsaw. And how are we suppposed to know it can do this? Producing some heretofore unrevealed weapon is something that happens in 1960s Batman comic books. And yes, I acknowledge that the same thing was done in YOLT, when Bond magically had the safe-cracking device in Osato's office and the suction cups to scale the walls of the SPECTRE volcano, even though he had no idea he would have needed either. But the buzzsaw watch was only the beginning of the ridiculousness.

It's Kanaga's death that truly ruined this movie. No human body is going to inflate the way he did. No human body would float to the ceiling. No human body would explode, leaving no trace of blood and guts. The only thing that was lacking in the scene were the Roadrunner and Wile E.Coyote in the background. Pure cartoon antics and pure garbage.

I take exception that the spirit of the times required Bond to become lighter in tone. Just take a look at some of the memorable movies of the time and you will see that audiences can and did appreciate serious movies. The Godfather, Chinatown, Network, All the President's Men. There were certainly movies with a lighter tone, but they were produced in a manner that did not betray their original intent. I think the true downward spiral started with YOLT with its emphasis on over the top action sequences. DAF added the silliness and the Moore era compounded the problem again and again until the James Bond series was completely removed for it original roots. The producers sold out the audience for the sake of making money. They offered a second rate actor who was never believable as a threat or the type of man for whom women would swoon. They dumbed down the scripts with juvenile sex jokes ("No sense going off half-cocked) and made the Bond character a farce. Action sequences became so obligatory to the movie, that they were thrown in as part of the checklist for the movie. Innovation was thrown out the window for the compfort of follwoing an outline. The Moore era represents not just bad Bond movies, but bad movies in general.

When you think about it, I guess the first glimpse of Moore is right on the movie.
A snoozing Bond, indicative of the overwhelming boredom that overtook the series.
Roger Moore is the poster boy for everything wrong with the series.

I don't want to be rude but, do you have to fulfill a quota for how many times you have to make these same points?

That said, I do agree with you that the common defence of "fitting the times", can be easily questioned upon examination.

[baerrtt]

I've never understood the criticisms of the LALD PTS ('no Bond' etc). It is a mysterious and imaginative link to the film's overall plot and for those reasons alone is in my top 5 pre-title sequences.

As for how they introduce Moore's Bond it's quite fitting imo. The more humourous, playboyish and in his own way very human incarnation yet is first seen in bed with a woman at home until M calls. Of all the Bonds it's always been easier to see Moore's Bond at home than the others (I don't really know why but I find that to be the case).

[DamnCoffee]

more realistic than faking ones death and Bunjee jumping off the hoover dam.

He didn't jump off the Hoover Dam. Stunt man Wayne Michaels jumped off the Verzasca Hydro-Electric Dam in Switzerland. Not unrealistic at all, spectacular if anything.

I wasn't saying it was unrealistic, I was just saying men could possibly relate to sleeping with woman more that jumping of the hoover damn!

[sharpshooter]

more realistic than faking ones death and Bunjee jumping off the hoover dam.

He didn't jump off the Hoover Dam. Stunt man Wayne Michaels jumped off the Verzasca Hydro-Electric Dam in Switzerland. Not unrealistic at all, spectacular if anything.

I wasn't saying it was unrealistic, I was just saying men could possibly relate to sleeping with woman more that jumping of the hoover damn!

I don't see anywhere else where you say that. And, you did bring realism into the equation, you labelled both the death faking and the bunjee jump. Oh, and you're still refering to it as the Hoover Dam?!

[DamnCoffee]

Sorry, I beg your pardon...

I wasn't saying it was unrealistic, I was just saying men could possibly relate to sleeping with women more that jumping of the Verzasca Hydro-Electric Dam.

[sharpshooter]

Sorry, I beg your pardon...

I wasn't saying it was unrealistic, I was just saying men could possibly relate to sleeping with women more that jumping of the Verzasca Hydro-Electric Dam.

Alright, you've added the 'men could possibly relate to sleeping with women more' bit after not doing it in the original post. The original post indicated an issue with realism. With all your original vision and correct facts out there, I'm willing to accept this revised edition.