It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I must admit I prefer the second half of the film with the spectacular Liparus climax being the highlight. In these scenes we get a no nonsense Moore Bond and I just love the bit where he rides the camera to plant the bomb.
This is the film where the slapstick and silliness started to creep in. The scene with the clapped out van in the desert with the 'comical' music is like something out of a carry on film. Then for some unfathomable reason Hamlisch has the Lawrence of Arabia theme play as Bond and Anya walk in the desert. It also was the start of having M and Moneypenny turn up in ridiculous places and circumstances.
Barbara Bach is just drop dead gorgeous in this film and her stiff acting seems to suit the character. Jaws in this is a threatening bad guy before they turned him into a buffoon.
The effects are as usual top notch especially the Lotus sub. Love the miniature work and much prefer it to CGI.
This is Moore's favourite of his films and you can see why.
I felt like a Bond film to celebrate today's big news and so took in a viewing of one of my favourites from the Glen era. It was as good as ever tonight. In particular I always enjoy the brisk pace, the exotic Indian locale, the charismatic villains (probably the most impressive group outside of LALD, GE or FRWL for me), the suspenseful Barry score (which I really like even though the soundtrack is pretty sparse) and the action.
Roger Moore truly is on fire in this film. I wonder if the knowledge of Connery's return in NSNA motivated him to up his game? Whatever the reason, he's really very good here, especially in the serious moments. Every eyebrow raise, staredown of a villain and line delivery is done to perfection and with precision. In fact I'd say that OP makes me happy he stayed on in the 80's despite his advancing years. I can't see any other Bond actor pulling this film off as well as he does. He even throws a bit more effort behind his punches in the fights in this film - the fisticuffs with the yo-yo fighters is especially impressive.
I'm a big fan of all supporting cast members too. In particular, Steven Berkoff's snarling Orlov is a textbook example of controlled ham acting. Louis Jourdan is just great as Afghan prince Kamal Khan, and I think he and Moore play really well off each other. Kristina Wayborn is especially memorable as Magda, and I'm glad she has a reasonable amount of time in his film. Sure, she's not the greatest actress, but her icy demeanour works in the film. Maud isn't bad either, but to be honest I much prefer her in TMWTGG. I don't think the character of Octopussy is well written here, although her chemistry with Rog is undeniable
There are also some quite memorable and distinctly Bondian scenes in this film too. In particular, I'm thinking of the auction (such a great scene), 009's chilling death in a clown suit (it makes Bond's distress while wearing a similar outfit later more poignant), the dinner at Kamal's (so much better than the similar scene in the following year's Indy outing), the ticking bomb countdown (probably one of the most tense in a Bond flick), the Alfa car chase (love the pace of it), the knife throwing twins (I keep getting them mixed up), and the excellent aerial finale (Tom Cruise, eat your heart out).
Of course, there's also some truly silly stuff in this film, which brings it down more than a few notches. The juvenile humour is arguably taken too far, and detracts from the tension, particularly during the Indian street and jungle chases. Some of the characters are there primarily for levity, like tennis player Vijay Amritraj (his intro playing the Bond tune is a fourth wall moment if there ever was one). I understand why the film makers decided to go down this route given Indy's success, but it gives the film more of a classic adventure feel overall rather than a dark thriller flavour (which it could have easily been). as a result, and I'm not sure if that's good or bad.
All I know is I like this film a lot.
When it's good, it's great though, at least imho.
Your entire write-up was a great read, just quoting this because it was especially insightful and accurate I think. Gilbert roots his films in the realities he builds for them, which is the sign of a visually/tonally cohesive director.
I'm at the "stage" in my Bond fandom now where I just straight up believe Moonraker to be a top-half Bond film (not quite top ten, but close) for reasons I've mentioned elsewhere and likely will again once I get to it on my own on-again-off-again marathon. I'm owning it. Nice to see you get some enjoyment from your recent viewing.
I think it's one of maybe 5 Bond films that benefits the most from a big format, big presentation, strong print or restoration or what have you. TB, YOLT, also come to mind.
I agree entirely, particularly 're the humour! I think they already turned Jaws into a buffoon...dropping rock on his foot etc.
TSWLM is generally lauded here...but it's actually my least favourite Moore Bond! I find it drags a lot, and the humour, as you point out , was the start of future silliness! Bach is indeed gorgeous, but her wooden acting is grating. Curt Jurgens is an utter bore as Stromberg (A great name for a villain..wasted!) The set pieces don't really do anything for me and the bomb dismantling scene grinds the film to a halt!
I would much prefer LALD or TMWTGG (the latter has improved viewing with me over the years) or any of the John Glen Bonds!
I just take it for what it is and immerse myself in the fantastical yet grounded universe he expertly creates. Nobody has been able to pull that off as well as he did in my view, either in the Bond universe or in the competitor realm. One of a kind.
Never a bad thing!
@bondjames Absolutely. I think when I was younger I'd see the general consensus among fans and it colored a lot of my viewings. As my tastes have shifted and my knowledge about cinema has expanded over the years, I've just grown to consider it a pretty strong Bond film. It has its appallingly bad choices, moments of humor that don't work, and so forth. It certainly isn't a top-tier 007 movie. But I do think a lot of fans see the sillier aspects of it and immediately dismiss it, or view such honest silliness as a lack of quality, and I think the equation of the two is a mistake.
In terms of pure aesthetic value (image and sound), I think MR is better than TSWLM. Barry's score is one of his best, and Tournier/Gilbert really make sure you see every single penny on-screen. The term, "they don't make 'em like this anymore" applies to MR perhaps more than any other 007, for better and worse.
Anyways, people keep yelling at me to shutup whenever I call MR great so I suppose that's my cue.
It was the last of an era in so many ways too (Bassey, Adam, Lee, 007 theme) prior to a soft reboot of sorts with FYEO. After MR the films became more thriller like perhaps, but to my eyes at least they lost that eccentricity and special feeling which the earlier films seemed to have. That doesn't make the later ones any less good mind you, but just different.
It's definitely a lovely film to look at, but I can't really choose between MR and TSWLM. They are two sides of a coin. I think location-wise I prefer the former entry (I think the Egypt scenes are as good as they come, perhaps rivalled only by Nassau in TB & Istanbul in FRWL for me) but as far as score goes I like them both equally. I think maybe people will like one or the other better depending on which they saw first, given they share so many similarities.
It's very true.
This is a hugely entertaining Bond movie where the massive budget is up there on the screen.
Up until Rio this is a cracking yarn as Bond actually does some detective work to find out what Drax is up to. The scene where Bond discovers the laboratory with the nerve gas is riveting and ultimately unnerving.
Also great is the Centrifuge sequence. Moore has never been in this much peril before and its a brilliantly nailbiting scene with Moore looking seriously worn out in the aftermath. Love the way he pushes Goodhead away as he stumbles back to normal.
There's some good stuff in the Rio scenes but dotted with silliness. The ambulance scene is stupid and did we really need to see Moore dressed up as Clint Eastwood?
The boat chase is technically excellent (those boat explosions are awesome) then more Jaws buffoonery rears its ugly head.
From the moment Bond tangles with the snake the film is just great. Wonderful launch scenes and a spectacular climax on the space station.
The special effects in this really are superb, and stand up to this day. Wonderful sets as well.
Acting is nice all round. Michael Lonsdale is a droll and amusing villain. Lois Chile's is gorgeous and holds her own against Moore. She also looks great in that yellow jumpsuit! Moore is really comfortable in the role in this and his performance in the centrifuge scene is just riveting.
I liked Bernard Lee's final performance in this. His scene with Bond in Venice is a nice bit of camaraderie between the two men.
When watching MR I usually skip the Gondola sequence and the ambulance scene and I find the film flows so much better. There's some good dialogue in the script and it's a fiendish plot from the villain.
Barry's score is pure class and his journey into space music is some of his most beautiful music.
Watching this I realized I love all the Bond films regardless. MR and something like CR are completely different beasts but when it comes down to it they are both Bond films. What a wonderful series of films these are. All different from each other in varying degrees and long may they continue!
Octopussy next
Well written, and you just may have inched me back to watch the film again... Why aren't you doing FYEO? Or did I miss that review?
Watched it a few weeks back which sparked my Moore bondathon. FYEO is my favourite Moore Bond.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who really enjoys the space scenes. That Adam set is something else, and the zero gravity sequence is fantastically done in combination with Barry's choir like score. The globe shootdown scene is also very tense. It's good to see some MR love here.
Thanks, @bondjames
Yes the Globe shoot down scene is super tense and very well done.
The film is the archetypal blockbuster and very professionally made. They really don't make em like that anymore!
Great review! And pretty much mirrors my view of it! I also love the briefing scene in Ms office!
("Oh, THANK you!)
There are so many great scenes in MR. I also love the brief fight in the radar jamming room. Goodhead looks so sexy in the fight scene! Love that annoyed look on her face when Bond rips the wire out from under the panel where she's sitting!
Yeah, Holly shows very little skin in the film. What I really like is that she has great chemistry with Moore and is a stunning looking woman with intelligence. I loved the black jumpsuit she wore in the cable car scene and of course she rocked the yellow astronaut suit.
Lois Chile's is a very good actress and really works well in the film.
Good god you're right, MR is nearly 40 years old!
Which makes the fact that the special effects still being impressive even more of a feat.
Chiles is ok (ish) and yes I agree works well with Moore. I’m not I find her particularly convincing as a trained astronaut or CIA agent.
Yet again this is slick entertainment and an epic Bond adventure. Featuring an alarmingly horrible plan from the villains.
The PTS is just genius, completely unrelated to the film's plot. Amazing stunts in the supercool Acrostar jet and some quality special effects seamlessly integrated into the action.
The film has two really great scenes early on. The auction scene is really well done and Bond's game with Kamal Khan is nicely satisfying. He even gets to utter Drax's line from the MR novel. "Spend the money quickly, Mr Bond..."
Action is mostly excellent yet interspersed with slapstick unfortunately which cheapens the film. The 'Tarzan joke' is excruciatingly embarrassing. The fight scene in Octopussy's residence is well choreographed and edited, best of all is the shoot out around the train and subsequent stunts aboard it. Culminating in that nailbiting chase to get to the airbase for Bond to only just make it in time.
I rather like Octopussy's guards battle and the stunts on the plane really are dangerous looking. No CGI here folks!
Moore is once again reliably excellent in his interpretation of 007. He is really effective in the scene where he confronts Orloff on the train.
Maud Adams looks great but her acting leaves a lot to be desired. Same with Kristina Wayborne who can't act one iota. Although she is stunning in the looks department. I think she is dubbed.
Louis Jordan is very good though and makes a slimey villain.
Add another impressive score from John Barry and assured direction from the reliable John Glen and you've got another hugely entertaining Moore Bond movie. The slapstick isn't welcome but it can't detract from what is a good story and slick script skillfully brought to the screen.
After some truly positive recent viewing experiences of Bond films to date, I decided to take a risk and put myself in harm's way. This is a film I've had a very contentious relationship with since 1999. To say I was underwhelmed upon first viewing would be an understatement. Distraught would be closer to the truth. My friends weren't all that impressed either, and I remember one saying that they kept getting worse and worse (I had seen GE and TND with them too).
Since that sad evening I have revisited the film on numerous occasions in hopes of a better experience, but it was not to be..... at least not until last night. This latest viewing was the best I've ever had of this penultimate Brosnan film. I think what has changed is that I am now finally able to mentally compartmentalize all my oft-stated problems with it (Brosnan's notable overacting, Richards' miscasting, Marceau's overemoting and hamminess towards the end, Dench's unprofessional motherliness, the uselessness of some of the supporting characters (e.g. Gabor, Davidov, Arkoff, and Akakievich) and the cheesiness of the humour and dialogue) and see some of the positives. There's quite a bit to like here.
For one thing, I have to hand it to the film makers (and P&W in their debut) for attempting to subvert expectations. The emotional connection between Bond and Bond 'girl' hadn't been attempted since OHMSS 30 years prior, and we hadn't seen a female Bond main villain in the series before either. Conceptually it was a brave move, after the trite predictability of TND a couple of years prior. Both these elements do work to a degree (more on this below). Arnold's score is unbalanced, with a lot of the 'drumminess' he was infamous for during the Brosnan era, but it's also very good in places - as an example, the soaring majestic cue he delivers during the early part of the ski sequence is up there with the best of Barry imho. The PTS, while overly long, is also reasonably ambitious, and I have learned to appreciate and even enjoy the Thames boat chase sequence (it's very well filmed with sweeping contextual overheard shots), which culminates in Bond's fall from the hot air balloon. From the outset, the film announces to the audience that we will see a more vulnerable Bond in this outing. I used to dislike Garbage's title track immensely at one time, but after some of the tripe we've been foisted with lately I'd say this is actually a decent Bondian sounding effort, even if it's a bit pastiche. They also had a decent setup with Renard as a dangerous terrorist who could feel no pain on account of an MI6 bullet, and the roping in of MI6 on account of poor decisions by M was an interesting touch. The film moves forward at a reasonably rapid clip too, and I can't really fault the pacing. Brosnan and Marceau look good together and have decent chemistry. The garrote sequence towards the end of the film is quite memorable and works because these two compliment one another nicely. So strictly from an overall 'idea' standpoint, I'd say this was a bold move by the film makers and a valiant attempt to shake up the franchise as they closed out the last millennium.
Where I think it fell short was in the execution. Michael Apted failed to make the most of the script and perhaps wasn't the right choice for directorial duties. The action feels very tacked on here (a crime also perpetuated by SP), with many of the sequences post-PTS lacking verve and panache despite probably looking good on paper (the helicopter saw sequence at the caviar factory, the ski chase and the underground nuclear facility shootout for example). In fact, this film shares many similarities with SP imho, and arguably peaking with the PTS is one of them. The other similarities are the tonal imbalances and the unwillingness to 'go all in'. One gets the distinct impression that the film makers tried to have their cake and eat it here, by incorporating some emotional depth and resonance but then also trying to give us a 'fun' Bond film. It's difficult to reconcile these two elements seamlessly in this genre. Perhaps they were still wary after OHMSS's and LTK's relative lack of box office success that too much seriousness without enough levity may not go down too well with audiences. Who knows, but I wish they'd had the courage of their convictions (they finally went all-in emotionally with CR 7 years later and the results speak for themselves).
I think they made some big mistakes on the casting front too. Robert Carlyle is quite disappointing in the pivotal role of Renard. He just seems too 'slight' and unthreatening to be believable as a man capable of turning Marceau's Elektra and causing so much mayhem. I'd go so far as to say he's probably the worst villain in the entire canon. Richards is often seen as a failure, and rightly so.
Perhaps controversially, I think Sophie Marceau also must shoulder some of the blame. Her role in this film is central. In fact, I'd say that the entire film rests on her performance and her ability to adequately convey the complexity of Elektra King, a woman who suffered abuse at the hands of her captor and also seeks revenge for slights by her father and for mistakes by MI6 (and M in particular). Marceau is certainly good in places, but I feel she also overdoes it on more than one occasion. She has a tendency to over-emote (after the avalanche and also during the infamous Baku breakdown) and also to be hammy (as she is towards the end in pure villain mode). She's very easy on the eyes, but think a bit more subtle modulation in delivery could have seriously elevated this crucial role and really helped the film. She's certainly better than fellow countrywoman Seydoux, who also failed (imho) to adequately sell an essential female role, but in this instance I blame Apted, because I think Marceau had it in her to be better. The final similarity to SP for me is the cack-handed manner in which the 'twist' is handled. In this case, it's the fact that Elektra is the author of all the pain, and the revelation is particularly underwhelming.
So all in all this viewing went as well as it could. This is far from my favourite Bond film, but it's no longer bottom of the barrel for me after this go-around. The film which I believe it shares many similarities with (no not that one silly...the last one.) must now occupy that position.
There's some dodgy dialogue but there's so much to like in this movie.