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 always interpret it as once you have killed someone your life will never be the same, and in some cases Will haunt you to an early grave.
So in effect you will have killed a part if yourself, if that makes sense.
I think FYEO is more consistent (no Tarzan yell present) and AVTAK has a better henchman/woman in May Day (sorry, but Gobinda feels generic). And I think Moore looks better in AVTAK than Octopussy! Oh and the climax on top of the Golden Gate wins it for me.
-Cultured
-Sophisticated
-Doesn't care how many people die just as long as he achieves his goal
"Still the cowboy Mr McClane"
"You have...a nasty habit...of surviving"
The main difference to Gruber is that he never actually kills anyone personally.
Also who could forget. "GET BOND!" ;)
*gives an apprehensive look*
It's not as enjoyable as Moonraker or Live and Let Die, but far better than TSWLM and AVTAK. Maybe 1983 was a favorite year from a personal viewpoint that I hold it in higher regard than I really should, but make no mistake about it, there's plenty to get involved in and despite often playing the fool, Moore does well and shows almost early Connery-esque qualities at times, such as the interrogation of Orlov about the bomb device. The 3rd best pre titles sequence (behind TWINE and Moonraker respectively) and you never really get bored. Maud Adams is so much more tolerable than her Andrea Anders character from Golden Gun, and the timeless Louis Jourdan gives a memorable performance
Even Steven Berkoff has an opportunity to snarl up the screen, getting into character before his Victor Maitland appearance in BHC the following year and there's good support from other names including Llewelyn's Q, who has a bit more to do that year than his previous appearances. The Rita theme song is OK, but the fine pre credits sequence that comes directly before it, more than componsates for a lack of a real theme intro
Is it Moore's best ? No
Is it Moore's most perfect Bond movie ? Probably not
Does it entertain ? Absolutely
Technically speaking, OP is a tonal mess, which is mostly due to Glen's direction, but it's that tonal mess that allows OP to succeed as something inherently unique - something that's light and dark, fun and suspenseful.
The characters are good for the most part. A good performance from Bond, a nice suave villain in Kamal Khan, and two great Bond girls in Magda and Octopussy.
Wow, and some of the most breathtaking action and thrills of the entire series! A great PTS with some great mid-air manoeuvres, the best fight in Roger Moore's tenure (yoyo fight), an amazing chase and fight on the train, a blood-pumping race to defuse the bomb, and of course the finale on the back of an aeroplane! WOW! This film is great.
Of course it has flaws. Orlov is awkwardly overacted, Gobinda is a bit plain, India and Germany are both caricatured, it runs too long, and of course there is one joke too many. But these flaws are minor given how much the film succeeds. Moore's second-best for sure.
EDIT: 33 years on and the biggest criticism and usually the sole reason casual fans hate the film remains "I don't like the Tarzan swing." Would be interesting to see how high they would see it if there was no swing.
;)
TSWLM is more serious overall, and much larger in scale. It perfectly captures one element of Bond that Moore did better than all of them, namely, larger than life.
OP on the other hand is much more intimate, in that Glen way, but again perfectly captures tonally the other kind of film that Moore did superbly, namely the humorous yet suspenseful Bond film.
OP is bursting with charisma from the opening scene all the way to the end. It never lets up in this regard. Everyone and everything just 'pops' on the screen. Sure it's a little OTT and camp in places, but that's what gives it its unique charm. The action as noted is absolutely first class, the pacing is incredible for its time, and Moore is definitely in top form in his penultimate Bond, going all out to show the stubborn Connery holdouts that he is the successor they should have embraced from the start.
OP is a class act. In many ways it reminds me of GE, which is another perennial favourite Bond film of mine, and which also perfectly balances and straddles humour/suspense.
Indeed. Kananga explosion vs slide whistle vs Jaws in love vs Tarzan swing vs Beach Boys, oh dear. And people complain about the winking fish in LTK...
One of the main pluses is Jourdan's performance. He's not a megalomaniac or threatening like Sanchez or Jaws but he steals all the scenes he's in and gets some of the best lines in the franchise.
It's not a perfect film at all, but there's really nothing I really dislike about OP....maybe the pacing about 1/3 in when he arrives at the Monsoon Palace after getting kidnapped
?
But the thread title is "Why Octopussy is Roger's most perfect Bond movie". How the other movies could be made better won't change anything
Probably because he doesn't think they are.
I would prefer it if the Bond movies avoid those clunky sight gags, but if they are on screen for 5 seconds it's hard to write off the whole movie over it.
OP has a suave and charismatic villain and a great Bond vs villain face off (the double sixes moment is a stand out cool 007 moment), whilst in TSWLM Stromberg is totally dull. He often literally just sits there. Drax is something of a re-run of Stromberg yet the great understated performance by Michael Lonsdale and the classic one liners he gets shows how this villain should be done. Plus Jaws is already entering the realm of being an over the top cartoon long before Moonraker. He is iconic but I'd rather have Oddjob or Red Grant.
Yeah Khan was a great villain and the backgammon scene is a standout certainly.
Honestly, I thought Stromberg was a good villain. His introduction at Atlantis with his killing of the traitor via the elevator trap and also the detonation of the helicopter was brilliantly menacing. He doesn't do much later, but he is appropriately low-key. Drax was also a good villain, but not one of the best I'd say, somewhere between all his contrived attempts at killing Bond he is hard to take seriously.
Oddjob remains the best henchman in my book.
@ForYourEyesOnly
True all Bond movies have pros and cons. What matters is how much weighting we give them in our own personal rankings. For example, the direction of Glen's films aren't as grand as the Gilbert films, but personally all things considered I like the 80's decade more.
And for some people any mention of Lazenby is enough to sink OHMSS to bottom place without thought to the movies strengths