Roger Moore Sucked In "For Your Eyes Only."

[Golgo-13]

Look how jolly the man is. I just can't buy him as a serious Bond. Not because it goes against the image he created in the role, but because he wasn't that good of an actor. He's boring when he's not being funny.

Many consider For Your Eyes Only to be one of the best in the series. It was the first serious installment since On Her Majesty's Secret Service in 1969. It was the first to be based on Ian Fleming's short stories and is rather faithful too. So, I can understand why people love it so much, but Moore ruins it for me. He's just too...stiff. He brings no emotion to the role, no anger, no energy. Nothing. He's just there. He's only good when he can be funny (like when he captures Blofeld in the pre-title sequence) or when he's romancing the Bond girls.

This is a film that would have been great for Timothy Dalton. Perhaps even better than The Living Daylights.

Blasphemy!

 

[marvelrobbins]

For Your Eyes Only IS one of Roger Moore's best Bond films.My favorate
Bonds are Sean Connery and Pierce Brosnon.However Diamonds are Forever
Is perhapes the worst Bond film.They totally ruined Blofeld by giving him hair
and making him english.I will admit Die Another Day Is not one of the best
bond films but It always bugs me that the producers who approved of things
like the Invisible car are not blamed but Brosnon Is.I have problems with
the Danial Craig films but that Is really the fault of the producers(Unnecssary reboot,keeping Judi Dench as M,copying the Bourne Films)

 

[ChickenScratch]

Nobody said anything about comedic. There are endless levels of how serious something can be.
The Bond movies are not the novels. The movies, atleast pre-Craig, have an element of self-aware amusement that can't quite be described as tongue-in-cheek but is there nonetheless. The worst Bond movies overplay this (Diamonds are Forever) and the best ones play beautifully on the fact that they are ridiculously idealised version of reality with an impossibly perfect hero at the centre of a male fantasy.
Take Goldfinger. In no way is it a comedy, but if anyone could watch it and think it was supposed to be a po-faced serious thriller then...well, they don't get it. James Bond movies are essentially an in-joke. The audience knows how ridiculous it all is, but it's so enjoyable we just go with it.

It's great that you can see the tongue in cheek nature of the movies because really, most people don't. Many people think that how Bond is presented on screen is as the character is written. But then there are Superman fans who learned everything about the character from Smallville or the movies right. The movies are what they are, I'm not a fan of them. In fact I've only seen QOS once, and that was in the theater, the DVD sits on the shelf unopened, I have it because I'm a Bond completest.

 

[Panthro]

I generally rank "For Your Eyes Only" as being one of the better entries in the Roger Moore era. My three primary complaints with this particular film -

1) The horny ice scater played by Lynn-Holly Johnson (or is it Holly-Lynn Johnson?) was more annoying than funny, and she seemed out of place with the overall tone with the film.

2) By this point Roger Moore was clearly too old to be playing Bond (and he's 3 years older than Connery mind you). Just look at him in his scenes with Carole Bouquet, he's clearly old enough to be her father (and looks old enough to be the ice skater's grandfather).

3) The death of Blofeld, with Blofeld begging for his life, wasn't a very inspiring end for arguably the most famous Bond villain. And we all know Blofeld was at his best when he was played by Telly Savalas in "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" (we can only imagine how different the Bond films of the 70s-early 80s might have been if George Lazenby hadn't been such an idiot).

I would have liked for FYEO to have started the Timothy Dalton era of Bond, but I still enjoy the film as it is. My favorite action scene in the film is probably the ski chase.

 

[Timstuff]

I can't say I've ever particularly cared for any of Roger Moore's Bond films. Sean Connery was much more rugged, Dalton was more snarky, Brosnan was more charming, and all of them have been more athletic than Moore. The fact that he's been in like 14 bond movies is probably why I was turned off to the series for so long.

 

[Catman]

Take Goldfinger. In no way is it a comedy, but if anyone could watch it and think it was supposed to be a po-faced serious thriller then...well, they don't get it.

Goldfinger is ALMOST like a kids movie. The ending involves the villain breaking into Fort Knox in one of the most cartoon-ish ways possible. If anyone takes that movie seriously I want to know what they're smoking. However, what seperates Goldfinger from some of the goofier installments like Diamonds Are Forever (which you hate) is that the humor (and fantasy) is balanced with serious undertones. This movie is more about Bond redeeming himself as an agent than Goldfinger breaking into Fort Knox.

 

[Kurosawa]

It's great that you can see the tongue in cheek nature of the movies because really, most people don't. Many people think that how Bond is presented on screen is as the character is written. But then there are Superman fans who learned everything about the character from Smallville or the movies right. The movies are what they are, I'm not a fan of them. In fact I've only seen QOS once, and that was in the theater, the DVD sits on the shelf unopened, I have it because I'm a Bond completest.

Not only do a lot of Superman fans only know what they've learned from the movies, many of the actual writers are the same way.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

3) The death of Blofeld, with Blofeld begging for his life, wasn't a very inspiring end for arguably the most famous Bond villain. And we all know Blofeld was at his best when he was played by Telly Savalas in "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" (we can only imagine how different the Bond films of the 70s-early 80s might have been if George Lazenby hadn't been such an idiot).
.

Although I am not disagreeing with you per se, that particular scene isn't exactly what you think it is. It's not intended to be the final climactic encounter with 007's greatest enemy. It's Cubby Broccoli dispensing with the character, making a joke out of him, and saying that the James Bond series no longer needs him. All without actually stating that the character is Blofeld.

Why? Because Kevin McClory, who was at that time working on his own, rival Bond series, had the rights to the character of Blofeld. And Blofeld would have been the central villain in McClory's remake of Thunderball, Warhead. So For Your Eyes Only was saying, "Fine, take Blofeld, we can get by without him. But we're going to make him a laughing stock before you get your hands on him."

Warhead eventually evolved into Never Say Never Again. Which was lame. But the original Warhead ideas were amazing. It was not remotely Fleming's Bond, but Warhead would have been, 'Star Wars underwater.'

 

[Timstuff]

Not only do a lot of Superman fans only know what they've learned from the movies, many of the actual writers are the same way.

We're looking at YOU, Bryan Singer!

 

[Vengeance]

Man I love Moore, might not of fit the perfect Bond from the books but I loved him nonetheless especially as a kid, nowadays though he's probably my second or third favourite after Craig & Brosnan.

 

[ChickenScratch]

Yes, I was using Superman as an example of people thinking they know a character but not at all knowing him. It's happened many other times and it is going to keep happening. Tarzan, Sherlock Holmes and Conan are other prime examples.

For those of you who are interested, a really great book is The Battle For Bond, it's all about Thunderball, Never Say Never Again, the court wranglings and power struggle behind the scenes of the book and two movies. Really shocking some of it. http://www.amazon.com/Battle-Bond-Genesis-Cinemas-Greatest/dp/0953192636

 

[Panthro]

Although I am not disagreeing with you per se, that particular scene isn't exactly what you think it is. It's not intended to be the final climactic encounter with 007's greatest enemy. It's Cubby Broccoli dispensing with the character, making a joke out of him, and saying that the James Bond series no longer needs him. All without actually stating that the character is Blofeld.

Why? Because Kevin McClory, who was at that time working on his own, rival Bond series, had the rights to the character of Blofeld. And Blofeld would have been the central villain in McClory's remake of Thunderball, Warhead. So For Your Eyes Only was saying, "Fine, take Blofeld, we can get by without him. But we're going to make him a laughing stock before you get your hands on him."

Warhead eventually evolved into Never Say Never Again. Which was lame. But the original Warhead ideas were amazing. It was not remotely Fleming's Bond, but Warhead would have been, 'Star Wars underwater.'

Yeah I heard about that. Sad, really. The idea death of Blofeld should have been Bond cornering him, Blofeld surrendering to his fate with a dignified "You win, Mr. Bond" And then Bond puts the gun to Blofeld's head, hisses "For Tracy" and then BANG.

 

[ChickenScratch]

Fleming handled his death quite well in YOLT, Bond got the revenge he deserved in a pretty hands on and brutal way.

 

[Panthro]

Fleming handled his death quite well in YOLT, Bond got the revenge he deserved in a pretty hands on and brutal way.

I should really get around to reading that as well as OHMSS some day.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Oh but you're wrong. He WAS the best. Best villains. Best gadgets. Best women.


It's hard to follow a legend like Connery but he did and saved the franchise. Hell he even had to go up against Connery the same summer with Octopussy VS Never Say Never Again.

I love Moore and The Man With The Golden Gun is the best. View to a Kill not far behind. Oh and there's always Live and Let Die. Love Solitaire.


Anywho... I'm rambling. Moore rulez! And not enough people know how badass his universe was.

To be honest, Roger Moore was the

I think Bond if a generational thing. I prefer the Brosnan bonds. Even then they all bore the piss out of me.

Except GoldenEye. But Nintendo helped cultivate my love that movie.

Are you kidding me? Goldeneye is the best of Brosnan's films and to me one of the best Bond films that up there with Connery's (mostly because it felt like Sean Connery's films). It revitalized the series and made people take notice again.

Disagree. Moore was not the best Bond. Not even in the top three, IMO.

I agree with that.

1. Sean Connery
2. Pierce Brosnan
3. Daniel Craig (though I want to see him play a completely competent Bond)
4. Timothy Dalton







5. Roger Moore
6. George Lazenby

I liked 1 or 2 of Moore's films, but Dalton remains #1 for me.

I liked Timothy Dalton. His bond films will are always underrated.

It's silly how people just go by common misconceptions.

After From Russia With Love, Connery did not play the Bond role any more seriously than Moore ever did. And the campiest Bond movie is not one of Rogers, it's Diamonds are Forever, which is a centimeter away from being a full on comedy.

As for puns and one-liners, Connery has plenty of them and he himself used to come up with a lot of them. And atleast Roger Moore never sleepwalked through any of his movies as Connery did in YOLT and DAF.

The fact is, there really is little difference between the way Connery, Lazenby and Moore played the role. Connery just naturally has more authority and masculinity. But if you think any of them played 007 completely seriously, then you don't understand the Bond movies.

I agree about DAF being incredibly campy but I disagree that Connery didn't take Goldfinger or Thunderball seriously. His performances are great there. He started going downhill You only Live Twice.

Nobody said anything about comedic. There are endless levels of how serious something can be.

The Bond movies are not the novels. The movies, atleast pre-Craig, have an element of self-aware amusement that can't quite be described as tongue-in-cheek but is there nonetheless. The worst Bond movies overplay this (Diamonds are Forever) and the best ones play beautifully on the fact that they are ridiculously idealised version of reality with an impossibly perfect hero at the centre of a male fantasy.

Take Goldfinger. In no way is it a comedy, but if anyone could watch it and think it was supposed to be a po-faced serious thriller then...well, they don't get it. James Bond movies are essentially an in-joke. The audience knows how ridiculous it all is, but it's so enjoyable we just go with it.

Well said. The Bond films and the Bond novel are completely different. You have people who want Bond films to be closer to the novels, but if the novels never existed would some people still praise Casino Royale as the best film. Critics probably still would but I would imagine that more Bond fans will be disappointed, and this is coming from someone who puts Casino Royale in his top 5 Bond films.

I can't say I've ever particularly cared for any of Roger Moore's Bond films. Sean Connery was much more rugged, Dalton was more snarky, Brosnan was more charming, and all of them have been more athletic than Moore. The fact that he's been in like 14 bond movies is probably why I was turned off to the series for so long.

I'm not fond of Roger Moore though I did like Live and Let Die and The Spy Who Loved Me for what it was. When I ignore that its a Bond film. I find myself liking those movies more but those films are not very good when compared to other Bond films.

I still believe Dalton's films are way better than any of Roger Moore's films.

 

[Catman]

The Man with the Golden Gun was a cheese fest, too.

I finished re-watching The Man with the Golden Gun today and it isn't as much of cheese-fest as I recalled. The beginning, possibly written by Richard Maibaum, is classic Bond. Roger Moore, shockingly, is quite ruthless in his search for Scaramanga. Bond beating up Maud Adams' character is one of the more messed up scenes in the series. Moore should have played Bond this way in For Your Eyes Only. Then, when Bond shows up at that martial arts school is when the film starts to get silly and Tom Mankewicz's script starts to show up. And, Moore gets in Funny Bond mode. From then on the movie gets progressively campier and campier till it ends with Bond battling Scaramanga in a funhouse. It kinda reminds me of Die Another Day. People tend to also label that movie as a camp fest, but it actually takes a while to get there. The film begins with Bond being captured, becoming a prisoner, and being tortured for a number of months. There's nothing campy about that. And then it slowly gets sillier till we're left with invisible cars and Madonna.

 

[marvelrobbins]

I like your style.Early on Roger Moore was quite ruthless In The Man with
the golden gun.Die Another Day had poential till they got to the Ice palace.
Everyone talks about The Invisible Car but the Idea of Korean man being
turned Into White man Is pure Sci fi that few comment on.A big problem was the producers were trying to make Halle Berry equal with Bond.A huge
mistake.With Roger Moore untill the Spy Who Loved me they never really figured out how to do a exciting film tailored to his strengths.The Man with
the Golden Gun Is the weakest Moore bond overall although they are decent bits for him.Connery and Brosnon are my favorate Bond.Despite what some
say I liked Connery In You Only Live Twice.Never Say Never again IS better than Diamonds are forever,The Man with Golden Gun,and the dalton films.
Dalton had the problem of playing Bond when the producers were turning Bond PC.Even he said he thought not having humor was a mistake.If Craig does play Bond again I hope producers let him play Bond and no more of copying the Jason Bourne films.

 

[Sawyer]

We're looking at YOU, Bryan Singer!

In Singer's defense.... Routh looks to be enjoying it.

 

[Peyton Westlake]

I dont think Moore had the machismo or the masculinity or the look to pull off being Bond. For me, his acting didnt help at all either. He didnt look intimidating...just the opposite.

 

[HR-PUFF&STUFF]

i just watched dr no and connery just had the right balance of humor for the movie. but it never got in the way of the story as it did with moores movies, his quips took you right out of the movie, connery didnt.

 

[Octoberist]

Roger Moore was the type of Bond who punch a guy, make a joke, and then wink at the camera.

 

[HR-PUFF&STUFF]

one of the best quips was connery in goldfinger i think, when he knocks the guy into the tub and as he grabs for bonds gun he knocks the heater into the tub killing the guy, he says "shocking" just the why he does it works.

 

[Vengeance]

Roger Moore was the type of Bond who punch a guy, make a joke, and then wink at the camera.

sign me up for more of this please I love this type or the Craig type, nothing in between though lol

 

[The Joker]

one of the best quips was connery in goldfinger i think, when he knocks the guy into the tub and as he grabs for bonds gun he knocks the heater into the tub killing the guy, he says "shocking" just the why he does it works.

That's the type of quipping that worked. Connery did it in moderation, too.

 

[Golgo-13]

It's Roger Moore's cheeky wit that makes me still love his turn as Bond, even to this day. Calling women "darling"; his naughty inneudo, etc as dated as alot of it is, is really funny to watch now. It's just good 'ol fashion notsalgia, that's not to be taken TOO seriously.