›

Is 'For Your Eyes Only' the most boring James Bond film?

13567…24

Comments

  • Dalton12Dalton12
    Posts: 1,107
    sirseanisbond wrote: »
    For me, TLD is a snorefest! Timmy has a way of putting me to sleep...

    How dare you say this about TLD !

    giphy.gif
  • OHMSS69OHMSS69
    Posts: 2,341
    jobo wrote: »
    What! :-O Hell no! Its one of the best!

    Great action, great locations, great story, Moore's best performance!

    How can anyone knock this great film? Grounded Cold War plot. Gorgeous Bond girl. Lovable allies in Ferrar and Colombo. Fun and breath taking watching Bond scale St Ciril, I find too much good and lovable things in this 1981 film.
  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    The hockey stuff, which I had forgotten about, is pretty forgettable. Otherwise, stand by my comment before.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,266
    I know that Conti's score takes a lot of beating but I'm inclined to call it an underrated masterpiece. That ski chase is not only the most thrilling skiing I've seen since OHMSS, Conti's music makes every second of it a blast! This is one of the epic action sequences in the Bond films, at least for me.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,835
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    That ski chase is not only the most thrilling skiing I've seen since OHMSS
    But, other folks here find it... boring. Are YOU & I allowed to like it?

    ;)
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I know that Conti's score takes a lot of beating but I'm inclined to call it an underrated masterpiece. That ski chase is not only the most thrilling skiing I've seen since OHMSS, Conti's music makes every second of it a blast! This is one of the epic action sequences in the Bond films, at least for me.

    Very much agreed. I have always been a big supporter of Conti's score.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,256
    I like but don't love FYEO. The more serious tone is welcome but it lacks the "Bond grandeur" that some of the others have. As far as Conti's score, different strokes for different folks, for me, it nearly makes the film unwatchable.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,835
    Okay, I've ragged on Conti's score, but it does have its moments. About the only thing I find 'bad' about FYEO, that is, bad enough to actually be distracting, are those phoney optically added bubbles in the dry-hair-in-wind close-ups they shot. ;))
  • jobojobo
    Posts: 7,507
    OHMSS69 wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    What! :-O Hell no! Its one of the best!

    Great action, great locations, great story, Moore's best performance!

    How can anyone knock this great film? Grounded Cold War plot. Gorgeous Bond girl. Lovable allies in Ferrar and Colombo. Fun and breath taking watching Bond scale St Ciril, I find too much good and lovable things in this 1981 film.

    Agreed!
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited November 2014 Posts: 15,723
    I'm pretty sure most Bond movies have boring scenes/sequences, but I wouldn't call any of them downright boring. Even GF, which is one of my least favorite since Connery doesn't do much, has plenty of classic scenes, and of course a classic Barry soundtrack that keeps you wanting more. I have never turned off a Bond movie after starting to watch one. I think the problem some have is what mood you're in. Trick is to try to watch a film you're in the mood in. If you want serious, watch a Dalton or a Craig, you want action, watch a Brosnan, you want humour, watch a Moore. If you stick to the mood you're in, you'll enjoy whatever Bond movie you watch.

    As for FYEO, it's one of my favorite, but I can understand why some may have problems with the pacing, it's not your typical Moore flick. It's quite down to earth.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,835
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    I can understand why some may have problems with the pacing, it's not your typical Moore flick. It's quite down to earth.
    That's a GOOD thing. One great thing the Moore era gave us was variety!
  • OHMSS69OHMSS69
    Posts: 2,341
    When I saw the film back in 1981 it was on a double date. Of the four of us I was the only one who liked the film. My three companions were very critical of it. They all thought MR was better. MR? Better? You friggin kidding me?

    It is well documented how after MR I was swearing off 007, then when I heard that FYEO would be more grounded and realistic, I decdied to check it out. I was not disappointed and found the simple plot and the lack of stupid gadgets to be a welcome relief.

    The ski chases were great and thrilling. Locque reminded me of Red Grant, the way he haunted the film with his donald Sutherland looks.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    I was surprised to learn that the underwater Neptune scenes were not actually filmed underwater, now you're telling me the bubbles are fake as well?!
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    edited November 2014 Posts: 1,731
    If you scrutinize ANY of Moore's Bondfilms enough then I think a case can be made for all of them to contain tepid, boring moments, to be honest.

    For me FYEO is his finest outing as 007, well ahead of the comical adventures of MR and even TSWLM.

    It is the only Roger Moore outing that feels anything like a real Bond film, and despite some weaknesses I think it was blessed with the best story, script and cinematography of locales of any Bondfilm since OHMSS.

    It is so underrated I would actually say it's the 'OHMSS' of the 'modern' 007 era :)
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,234
    I don't find it boring at all. It has its flaws, mainly an inconsistent tone, but the plot is one of the best.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    AceHole wrote: »
    If you scrutinize ANY of Moore's Bondfilms enough then I think a case can be made for all of them to contain tepid, boring moments, to be honest.

    That goes for all the Bond films, not just the Moore era alone. :)>-
  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    But since Moore is the most tepid Bond, inherently there's more tepid moments in his films. DAF is absolutely COnnery's worst Bond film, but even that train wreck is inherently more kinetic and fun than some of the Moore chuckle-and-snooze tests, in my opinion.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    edited November 2014 Posts: 5,080
    In your opinion, Moore's Bond is "tepid". Not a fact.

    I find the Moore films to be the most entertaining, IMO.

    I find Goldfinger, The Living Daylights and You Only Live Twice to have particularly dull stretches (that are much more apparent than other releases).
  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    Yes, that's why I wrote 'in my opinion'.

    They're entertaining, in your opinion.

    They're also the worst-reviewed.

    Critically, it's the worst period in the franchise's history.

    Very underrated is the PTS from DAD, one of the best parts of that film.
  • Matt_HelmMatt_Helm
    Posts: 908
    doubleohdad wrote: »
    Yes, that's why I wrote 'in my opinion'.

    They're entertaining, in your opinion.

    They're also the worst-reviewed.

    Critically, it's the worst period in the franchise's history.

    Very underrated is the PTS from DAD, one of the best parts of that film.

    It might be the worst reviewed ( even though I doubt it) BUT if it wasn't for Moore and his brilliant over the top attitude there wouldn't be Bond movies anymore. It's also worth noting,that to many younger folks he's still the defining Bond. My "brother in laws" girlfriend is 23 and regulary insists that for her and most of her friends even Brosnan is second to him in looks and entertainment value. Also TSWLM and MR PTSes still seem the most mentioned when it comes to great Bond moments. There seems to be something special about a guy, who survives falling out of a plane without a parachute.
  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146

    It might be the worst reviewed ( even though I doubt it) BUT if it wasn't for Moore and his brilliant over the top attitude there wouldn't be Bond movies anymore.


    I certainly can't argue that…on a lot of levels.
  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146


    It might be the worst reviewed ( even though I doubt it)


    Rotten Tomatoes scores:

    LALD 66%

    MWTGG 46%

    SWLM 76%

    MR 62%

    FYEO 73%

    OP 42%

    VTAK 36%



    Brutal. Just BRUTAL.

    Yes, yes, yes, this is where a few of you write in and state that you don't consider film reviews when it comes to Bond films.

    He asked, and I'm responding.
  • Matt_HelmMatt_Helm
    Posts: 908
    doubleohdad wrote: »

    It might be the worst reviewed ( even though I doubt it)


    Rotten Tomatoes scores:

    LALD 66%

    MWTGG 46%

    SWLM 76%

    MR 62%

    FYEO 73%

    OP 42%

    VTAK 36%



    Brutal. Just BRUTAL.

    Yes, yes, yes, this is where a few of you write in and state that you don't consider film reviews when it comes to Bond films.

    He asked, and I'm responding.

    Actually I was thinking about contemporary reviews. Also I have to admit thinking that this whole internet reviewing,twittering and facebooking crowds opinion is worth close to zilch. After all this is the generation that made the likes of Transformers and Twilight blockbusters.
  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    Some of the reviews seem to be contemporary, a good mix.

    The audience review scores are even worse.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    doubleohdad wrote: »
    But since Moore is the most tepid Bond, inherently there's more tepid moments in his films. .

    This is a declarative.
    doubleohdad wrote: »
    DAF is absolutely COnnery's worst Bond film, but even that train wreck is inherently more kinetic and fun than some of the Moore chuckle-and-snooze tests, in my opinion.

    This is when you used your opinion.

    And what was your comment about the PTS of DAD about? I just found that a bit random, buy hey ho.

    Oh, and the mighty reviews are back (something you actually brought up first...again)!

  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    Oh, the PTS of DAD is pretty good, one of the better sequences in a picture that was going along quite well…then just nuked itself in the second act.
  • OHMSS69OHMSS69
    Posts: 2,341
    Bond films are a lot of things but they are not boring. Many films contain slow, and undeniably boring moments (TB, YOLT come to mind).
    While DAF is Connery's worst film, I can find some fun moments in that truckload of horse hockey.
    Moore might have been charming, and laid back but his films were never boring. Cringe worthy (MR especially) with at least a few cringeworthy moments in many of his films but I would never call Moore's films boring. Even TMWTGG has fun moments. (though Rog is a complete dick in the film)
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    doubleohdad wrote: »
    Oh, the PTS of DAD is pretty good, one of the better sequences in a picture that was going along quite well…then just nuked itself in the second act.

    I'm rather indifferent to DAD's PTS. I don't know...it's neither on the level of TSWLM or OP, but nor is it as bad as DAF.

    But I do like the torture scene and how it is incorporated into the titles. Refreshing.
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre
    Posts: 1,548
    Boring film? Hardly. My 2nd favourite Moore film behind Spy. The film contains arguable Moore's finest performance acting-wise in the role ie the killing of Loque which is classic Bond imo ie cold and ruthless.
  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    Pushing the assassin off the cliff is his coolest moment, yes.
Sign In or Register to comment.