[quote=“scherpschutter, post:298, topic:544”]Probably, but the Cold War period from which he emerged, was a serious thing, a real-life threat so to speak
Fleming thought his Bond was a realistic character and the first movies were taken more serious than most people tend to think these days. [/quote]
But the early Bond films changed the evil thread from the Russians to the terror organisation Spectre. Just as Fleming did in his later novels.
At least in From Russia with Love the Russian cold war baddies of the novel were changed to the Spectre fantasy baddies.
Later on the in the 70s, with the cold war still a part of reality, the Bond films became comparatively Russian friendly. But not enough to get them a release in good ol’ East Germany.
[quote=“Phil H, post:294, topic:544”]And so we come to the end of the Roger Moore Bond era with A View to a Kill.
I have to say the whole family was kind of glad to get this one behind us and everyone is looking forward to having a different face in the role on our next visit to the franchise. I always liked Moore as The Saint and was never convinced by him as 007 but he had his moments over the 12 years or so that he had the part. By this time though he was way too old for the role and was out of place in both the action and romantic scenes. This one was an improvement over Octopussy but that really isn’t saying too much. Worth watching for Christopher Walken though who always makes me smile.[/quote]
For me the weakest Bond outing. The one Roger should really have spared himself.
Octopussy is much better, despite some stupid ideas. Octopussy is good Bond entertainment and maybe the best Roger Bond of his last 4 (and also including the lame Connery comeback), in which the whole show showed too much signs of self-repeating routine.
[quote=“Stanton, post:301, topic:544”]But the early Bond films changed the evil thread from the Russians to the terror organisation Spectre. Just as Fleming did in his later novels.
At least in From Russia with Love the Russian cold war baddies of the novel were changed to the Spectre fantasy baddies.
Later on the in the 70s, with the cold war still a part of reality, the Bond films became comparatively Russian friendly. But not enough to get them a release in good ol’ East Germany.[/quote]
That’s true, but Blofeld and the other villains often use the Cold War to play the super powers off against each other
The atomic bomb had given a new meaning to the idea of the ‘mad scientist’; in the fifties, those mad scientists usually tried to protect a creature from another world that was a threat to mankind (in the name of science, the real enemy was already science, not the alien). The Atomic Bomb turned the mad scientist into a man who could literally destroy the world with the help of a device (a bomb or other thing), a sort of “Hitler - “that man mad man” with a bomb”.
[quote=“Stanton, post:302, topic:544”]For me the weakest Bond outing. The one Roger should really have spared himself.
Octopussy is much better, despite some stupid ideas. Octopussy is good Bond entertainment and maybe the best Roger Bond of his last 4 (and also including the lame Connery comeback), in which the whole show showed too much signs of self-repeating routine.[/quote]
The general consensus in our house was that it wasn’t much cop but that Christopher Walken helped lift it above the worst of the Moore Bonds which we are unanimous in believing to be Moonraker and Octopussy. I’m working on turning the family into film geeks so have had them rate the Bonds seen to date and surprisingly (to me anyway) Man With the Golden Gun was voted top Moore Bond. Mine was For Your Eyes Only but I was outvoted. Damn these democratic principles!
Yes, Walken is very good. Too bad he is wasn’t in one of the top Bonds.
And I liked Grace Jones also, while Tanya Roberts is probably the least remarkable Bond Girl of all.
So nobody voted for The Spy Who loved Me and Live and Let Die (which are easily and by far the best Roger Bonds in which most things are roger)? Quite a problematic family.
Spy Who Loved Me was the second rated Moore effort followed by For Your Eyes Only and then Live and Let Die. I got them to rate all of the films we’d watched so far (14) and scored them in descending order, then added all scores and created a final result from the aggregate scores. You’d have been proud of me Stan.
Veering from the official franchise, the family and I viewed Never Say Never Again tonight and I have to say that, despite a couple of flaws, it was far better than many other Bonds we have watched. Certainly leaves most, if not all, the Moore Bonds for dead. Great totty, Connery on form and a good balance of action and ironic humour. My main criticism would be that it is probably about 15-20 minutes too long but, apart from that, a first class effort and one the official franchise producers could have learned a lot from. Clearly didn’t enjoy the same budget level of the Broccoli and Saltzman films but apart from some obviously inferior sets and stunt possibilities it really didn’t lose anything by it.
Good fun.
You are right about the soundtrack. Lacks the punch of the regular Bonds. But the villains were fine I thought. Klaus Maria Brandauer was a good 80s version of Largo (his line which goes something like “Let’s make some money” fits that greedy decade perfectly) and Barbara Carrera plays an excellent sadistic, lustful amazon killer. Sexy and deadly. What more could you want. ;D
Best moment: the last moment(s) of Barbara
Kim Basinger is also worth more than just one look, but they had not yet discovered that she could act, so she’s purely window dressing
Fine film, a bit sluggish and overlong, but so are most Bonds in my opinion
They’re the cinematographic equivalent of easy listening, relaxed, easy to enjoy
Not Top 007, but a good runner up
For one thing, the movie made clear, once and for all, that Connery had to look for another acting job
He does fine, but it’s a bit ridiculous to have all women look around in awe when a 53-year old man passes. In this particular case it was, like the toupee maybe, an example of self-irony, but you can’t play this card forever
[quote=“scherpschutter, post:311, topic:544”]Not Top 007, but a good runner up
For one thing, the movie made clear, once and for all, that Connery had to look for another acting job
He does fine, but it’s a bit ridiculous to have all women look around in awe when a 53-year old man passes. In this particular case it was, like the toupee maybe, an example of self-irony, but you can’t play this card forever[/quote]
A fair point. But the female contingent of my house (that is to say everyone except me) were all agreed that Connery had aged better than Moore and there was none of the embarrassed squirming during his love scenes that we had here when Roger was in a clinch.
On a separate note, I couldn’t help but notice that by 1983 there had also been a fashion shift in the desirability of male body hair. In the early Bonds Connery has a noticeably hairy back and shoulders. By this film it had clearly been waxed away. Maybe nicer for the girls but I couldn’t help but wince with the thought of having it ripped off. Ouch! :o
Just checked the budget (on Wikipedia anyway, who knows how accurate that is) and it would appear this film actually had a bigger budget than its 'official contemporaries. $36 million as opposed to $28-$30 million for the each of the three Moore Bonds between 1981 and 1985. I must say, this surprises me. Maybe they paid the actors better than Cubby did. :-\
I think it were the actors, the film itself (sets etc.) doesn’t look that expensive
Connery was well-paid, I suppose, Barbara and Kim were hot in more than one sense, and Brandauer was considered to be one of Europe’s top actors, and there’s a cameo for Atkinson.
We are onto the Timothy Daltons now in our family journey through the Bond franchise with The Living Daylights being tonight’s film.
I’ve heard many say they didn’t like Dalton in the role but I must say that coming after Roger Moore’s overlong tenure he was a welcome fresh face and the film as a whole was a much better mix. Back to basics seems to have been the plan with Dalton sticking closer to the Fleming / Connery mould and this pays dividends in my book. Some great stunts and action sequences, not many comic quips and some nice locations equals a good Bond movie for me, although the Bond Girl was a bit mousey for my tastes.
Highlight of the film though is clearly the terrific ‘hanging the back of the plane’ sequence which warrants repeated viewings on its own. I don’t know what those stunt men were paid but it wasn’t nearly enough. Fantastic stuff and puts all of today’s faked up CGI shit to shame.
For me TLD still feels too much like a Bond movie written for Moore. There are too many of the silly Moore era dialogues where I always saw Moore in my mind while Dalton was on the screen.
Nevertheless Dalton gave a fine performance, but it was his next Bond which brought the Bond films back in shape.
[quote=“Stanton, post:317, topic:544”]For me TLD still feels too much like a Bond movie written for Moore. There are too many of the silly Moore era dialogues where I always saw Moore in my mind while Dalton was on the screen.
Nevertheless Dalton gave a fine performance, but it was his next Bond which brought the Bond films back in shape.[/quote]
Thought for a moment you wanted to talk about a new designer drug, TLD, the LSD for the PC generation.
But yes, it’s a half-hearted film, some parts don’t really work and Jeroen Krabbé and Joe Don Baker are too much fun to be menacing. But that action scene described by Phil is a classic, and I like the title and that line: You scared the living daylights outta him! Nice thing was, that the expression became instantly popular, I heard sports commentaters and journalists referring to it repeatedly, saying that people were beating the living daylights out of each other on Wimbledon, on Anfield, or late at night, in the streets of Soho. I might have used it more than once in those days too.
Dalton is not yet perfect, but he’s getting there. The next one is my favourite Bond, mean and lean, with real dirty villains and Dalton as a fanatic Bond Bastard.
I liked Dalton as Bond, but I wasn’t very keen on the film. The script was too weak and it’s rather strange seeing the Mujahideen portrayed as good guys :o. But as Phil said, the climax is fantastic.
. Think I was born one 
.