ReBONDing: The Moore Years, Pt. 4
Reevaluating The Roger Moore Era (1973 - 1985)
When we last left James Bond, he was having a difficult time defining his own genre. Will he fair better now because I may be little more biased with these final two films? (These last two are my favorites.) Will they be able to outrun (or even out-ski) the horrible disco and moog-synthesized music that plagued the remaining non-John Barry scored films?
Let's find out!
THE SPY WHO LOVED ME (1977)
Directed by Lewis Gilbert
Written by Christopher Wood, Richard Maibaum
Ian Fleming (title only)
Running Time: 2 hours, 5 minutes
Original Verdict:
A return to form... for the most part. The music is definitely showing it's disco era and the one-liners keep coming but the story is solid.
Rating: 4 out of 5.
THE REEVALUATION
With The Spy Who Loved Me, I finally have the sense that Roger Moore is completely comfortable in the shoes of his James Bond. It feels like this is his film. It also hasn't been heavily influenced by other genres of the decade. However, the problem I now run into now is that while I consider this film to be the superior fraternal twin of Moonraker, it's really just the obvious "middle child" of director Lewis Gilbert's Bond film offspring. His first-born was You Only Live Twice, delivered to us a decade earlier.
The Cold Open: After two lackluster pre-credit sequences, we're finally treated to one that actual features James Bond. This efficiently edited opening follows the disappearance of a British nuclear submarine, the activation of top secret agents within the KGB and MI6, along with Bond fending off an ambush, killing a few of his attackers and then skiing of a cliff to escape. The union jack parachute carries Bond (and us) right into Carly Simon's classic song, "Nobody Does It Better," furthermore setting the standard for every other cold open in a Bond film that followed and cementing Roger Moore as the Bond of a new generation.
The Story: Megalomaniac and Ocean enthusiast Karl Stromberg wants to create a master race [insert dramatic pause here] ...under the sea. So, he commissions the creation of a submarine tracking device, utilizes it to steal said nuclear submarines and then creates havoc by attempting destroy all the land dwellers as if he were Aquaman.
The Heavy: It's Richard Kiel in Jaws: The Early Years. In this film, he isn't a cartoonish punchline like he was in Moonraker, he doesn't fall in love, nor does his character turn good at the end. While they may have removed the teeth from all of his kill scenes here (bad pun, I know) -- because this is a PG movie people and kids will be watching -- it's still rather effective. Why do I feel this way? Because it creeped me out when I was a kid. While looking back at it now Jaws seems a bit silly, he is still one of my favorite henchman of the entire franchise. Kiel successfully balances his tightrope performance between terror and humor, treating his character with a modicum of respect.
The Girls: There's a plethora of glossy-eyed (almost drunk-looking) babes sprinkled throughout The Spy Who Loved Me. Leading the pack is Barbara Bach. Her seemingly catatonic performance as Anya Amasova leaves a lot to desired (along with her not-so-subtle KGB code name, Triple X). She's wooden, feels a bit out of place, and rarely feels up to the challenge. Thankfully they clothe her in low-cut dresses to help hide this fact. Be that as it may, Bach's character did provide the film with a fresh twist that had not been done in the previous nine films: making Anya James Bond's equal (something that would not be touched on again for another twenty years).
The Gadgets: A ski-pole gun, a ticker tape watch, the wetbike (an early version of the jet ski) and the absolutely badass Lotus Esprit submarine car... which is still my favorite car in the entire franchise (followed very closely by the Aston Martin featured in The Living Daylights).
What Doesn't Work? The faint carbon-copy plot line. Lewis Gelbert is big on spectacle, but he is unable to make up for it with originality nor the ability to direct a decent action sequence. Two nuclear warheads detonated over the ocean yet... there are no repercussions. Feels like a bit of an oversight on the part of the filmmakers. Lastly, the music has an embarrassing disco feel and is honestly too much of its own time, yet somehow Marvin Hamlisch received an Oscar nomination for his film score. (John Barry scored 12 Bond films. How many Oscar nominations did he receive for those films? Zero.) While the music has cringe-worthy moments, it could be worse (and trust me, it will get worse).
I still consider The Spy Who Loved Me as Roger Moore's best Bond film. It's not my personal favorite, but it's definitely his best outing. While many of its the plot points would be regurgitated just two years later as well as heavily influenced by the now popular science fiction genre in Moonraker (thanks a lot, Star Wars!), The Spy Who Loved Me is firing on all cylinders and it successfully executes all of the essential key components needed for a great bond adventure. It was capable of breaking free from other influences that plagued Moore's first two films, and it gave us the first Roger Moore classic, regardless of its faults.
Reevaluation Score: 4 out of 5.
FOR YOUR EYES ONLY (1981)
Directed by John Glen
Written by Richard Maibaum, Michael G. Wilson
Ian Fleming (stories)
Running Time: 2 hours,7 minutes
Original Verdict:
The last decent Roger Moore film. This film also still displays the ever present disco era music but you also come to the realization that as much as Bond is a sex fiend, he's not a pervert. Melina Havelock (Carole Bouquet) also deserves an honorable mention just missing my Top 5 Bond Girls list. Rating: 4 out of 5.
For Your Eyes Only has always been my favorite Roger Moore outing. It was my first James Bond film. The ABC Sunday Night Movie was a common staple in my house (my parents didn't have to worry about foul language, sexual content or violence, which were all edited out) so the most accurate first-time viewing of this movie for me was pretty close to what you see below:
THE REEVALUATION
It's happened now three times so far within the franchise - the rubber band snap back into reality. The producers keep pushing the boundaries of spectacle and outright silliness in the Bond movies until it goes a bit too far and then they conduct a course correction for their next film. The first time this occurred was between You Only Live Twice and On Her Majesty's Secret Service. One is excessive and one is economical. One stars Sean Connery, one does not. The third time this happened was when the franchise shifted between Bonds again. Pierce Brosnan's ridiculous Die Another Day and Daniel Craig's brilliant Casino Royale. There's a stark contrast between these films.
The second time this happened was right in the middle of Roger Moore's tenure. We jumped from one of the most ridiculous plots ever conceived in a James Bond film -- Moonraker -- to the simpler and gritty For Your Eyes Only. I guess the producers wanted to bring Bond "back to earth" and they did so successfully.
The Cold Open: After Bond pays respects to his deceased wife, he is urgently airlifted out of the cemetery by headquarters... or that's what were supposed to think. Instead it's a trap set by the never-actually-named-due-a-to-potential-law-suit Blofeld-esque character, who plans to kill Bond with a remote-controlled helicopter. It's also the second time within the Roger Moore era that were given reference to Tracy Bond (the first time was in The Spy Who Loved Me), and given Moore's age in this film, it's almost believable. The pre-credit sequence is fun, albeit a tad silly, but one I've always enjoyed watching, even to this day.
The Story: Bond is sent after the code-breaking machine called the ATAC (Automatic Targeting Attack Communicator) -- a MacGuffin if there ever was one -- which was lost when the British spy boat the St. Georges is sunk in the Ionian Sea. He's been assigned to retrieve it before it gets into the hands of the Soviets. The plot is reminiscent of From Russia With Love, but it also pulls story elements from Fleming's short stories as well as the novels Live and Let Die and Goldfinger. The story is solid, not too involved, links all of its plot points together without confusing or frustrating the audience.
The Villain: Julian Glover plays the ally-turned-villain Kristatos. He's a Greek smuggler who is willing to sell secrets (or machines that decode secrets) to the KGB for cold hard cash. I think Glover's performance goes unnoticed by most, but it's one of my favorites. He does a great job of comforting the audience into feeling safe before he's revealed later on to be the villain. (Glover would then go on to play the same character-type eight years later in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.)
The Heavy: Not since Live and Let Die have we been treated to multiple henchmen: Locque and Erich Kriegler. Locque is a Belgian enforcer-for-hire who eventually makes the costly mistake of getting tangled up with James Bond before meeting his end. Erich Kriegler -- the blond-haired brute -- is the second (not the first, but also not the last) incarnation of the Red Grant character from From Russia With Love. Both henchman play their parts perfectly with the right level of threat and malevolence in an attempts to deter James Bond from his mission.
The Girls: The gorgeous Carole Bouquet portrays the vengeance-driven Melina Havelock. She's soft-spoken but shows that she's more than capable of handling herself, especially when wielding that crossbow. Even though her performance is subdued, it's authentic and never feels forced or dull. I'm going to completely ignore the barely-legal Bibi Dahl character here, since her uncomfortable sexual advances towards Bond makes everyone feel dirty. All of her scenes are completely unnecessary, feeling as if they were jammed into the script if only to imply that even James Bond has standards.
The Gadgets: This is pretty much a gadget-free film (if you don't count the facial-recognition computer in Q's lab). The exploding Lotus at the beginning of the film -- an over-the-top anti-theft device -- was a conscience effort made on the side of the filmmakers to let the audience know that James Bond would have to use his wits instead of Q's fancy gadgets to get out of the inevitable onslaught of sticky situations one gets in when one is a British Secret Agent.
What Doesn't Work? If I rubbed a magic lamp and a genie were to appear in front of me and it said, "Your wish is my command," I would gladly reply with, "Please replace Bill Conti's score from For Your Eyes Only with something written by John Barry." (Seriously, I would waste my wish just like that!) Listening to this score, especially at certain times, will garner a response within me like this. Yes, it's that bad, and it's the worst thing about this entire film. The score ages poorly, and unlike other adventure films released the same year, it will never feel timeless.
For Your Eyes Only clearly demonstrates John Glen's skill behind the camera. He was a logical choice to take the reigns here and proves to be a much more competent action director than his predecessor. Glen, who also cut his directorial teeth on this film, executes several well-choreographed action set-pieces while reeling back on most of the cheese ball humor. Speaking of the humor, there's very little tongue-in-cheek represented here. Moore's one-liners seem more appropriate, they don't overstay their welcome, and they perfectly diffuse the tension.
As I sat down to watch the last Roger Moore film of this series, I was a little hesitant. I feared that this final viewing might bring to light something I might have overlooked in the past. Each of his films I had watched before this one hadn't drastically changed my overall opinion of his Bond catalog. Thankfully, that was not the case. In my most honest and humble opinion, For Your Eyes Only is Roger Moore's finest hour. It's his best performance as James Bond.
Reevaluation Score: 4.5 out of 5.
In retrospect, Roger Moore's films were very unbalanced as a whole. Some were just within reach of brilliance; others completely failed or at best limped to the finish line upon reexamination. Some may feel that Roger Moore was the problem with the Roger Moore era of films. Not necessarily so (although he is one of the worst onscreen kissers I have ever seen). He played the character the way he felt was necessary, and for the most part it worked for his films, even if it sometimes cheapened the series as a whole.
Moore should not be held solely responsible for the direction the series went. That should be on the part of the producers. When you keep going back to the same creative well (Richard Maibaum) time and again, eventually you're either going to run out of ideas or you're going to start pilfering through unused scenes, rehashed dialog, mixed with a healthy dose of regurgitated plot points, all cobbled together with the same structure. Eventually the finished "product" has so many similarities with previous films, it's almost embarrassing.
Thankfully, depending on which Roger Moore film I put in to watch now, the overwhelming sense of nostalgia greatly impedes my critical eye, and I can usually just unplug my brain and just have fun with it.
James Bond will return... with the guy whose name no one can ever remember.
When we last left James Bond, he was having a difficult time defining his own genre. Will he fair better now because I may be little more biased with these final two films? (These last two are my favorites.) Will they be able to outrun (or even out-ski) the horrible disco and moog-synthesized music that plagued the remaining non-John Barry scored films?
Let's find out!
THE SPY WHO LOVED ME (1977)
Directed by Lewis Gilbert
Written by Christopher Wood, Richard Maibaum
Ian Fleming (title only)
Running Time: 2 hours, 5 minutes
Original Verdict:
A return to form... for the most part. The music is definitely showing it's disco era and the one-liners keep coming but the story is solid.
Rating: 4 out of 5.
THE REEVALUATION
With The Spy Who Loved Me, I finally have the sense that Roger Moore is completely comfortable in the shoes of his James Bond. It feels like this is his film. It also hasn't been heavily influenced by other genres of the decade. However, the problem I now run into now is that while I consider this film to be the superior fraternal twin of Moonraker, it's really just the obvious "middle child" of director Lewis Gilbert's Bond film offspring. His first-born was You Only Live Twice, delivered to us a decade earlier.
The Cold Open: After two lackluster pre-credit sequences, we're finally treated to one that actual features James Bond. This efficiently edited opening follows the disappearance of a British nuclear submarine, the activation of top secret agents within the KGB and MI6, along with Bond fending off an ambush, killing a few of his attackers and then skiing of a cliff to escape. The union jack parachute carries Bond (and us) right into Carly Simon's classic song, "Nobody Does It Better," furthermore setting the standard for every other cold open in a Bond film that followed and cementing Roger Moore as the Bond of a new generation.
The Story: Megalomaniac and Ocean enthusiast Karl Stromberg wants to create a master race [insert dramatic pause here] ...under the sea. So, he commissions the creation of a submarine tracking device, utilizes it to steal said nuclear submarines and then creates havoc by attempting destroy all the land dwellers as if he were Aquaman.
- Here's A Piece Of Trivia You May Not Know: The title of this movie is the only thing that bares any resemblance to the original novel. Seriously. When Ian Fleming sold the rights to Eon Productions, they only had rights to use the title, but nothing else. Fleming's tenth Bond novel was a serious departure from his original story and writing style that it was panned by critics and fans a like. He hated this book so much that a request was made on his behalf that no reprints or paperback versions ever be published, which the publisher honored... at least until his death.
The Heavy: It's Richard Kiel in Jaws: The Early Years. In this film, he isn't a cartoonish punchline like he was in Moonraker, he doesn't fall in love, nor does his character turn good at the end. While they may have removed the teeth from all of his kill scenes here (bad pun, I know) -- because this is a PG movie people and kids will be watching -- it's still rather effective. Why do I feel this way? Because it creeped me out when I was a kid. While looking back at it now Jaws seems a bit silly, he is still one of my favorite henchman of the entire franchise. Kiel successfully balances his tightrope performance between terror and humor, treating his character with a modicum of respect.
The Girls: There's a plethora of glossy-eyed (almost drunk-looking) babes sprinkled throughout The Spy Who Loved Me. Leading the pack is Barbara Bach. Her seemingly catatonic performance as Anya Amasova leaves a lot to desired (along with her not-so-subtle KGB code name, Triple X). She's wooden, feels a bit out of place, and rarely feels up to the challenge. Thankfully they clothe her in low-cut dresses to help hide this fact. Be that as it may, Bach's character did provide the film with a fresh twist that had not been done in the previous nine films: making Anya James Bond's equal (something that would not be touched on again for another twenty years).
The Gadgets: A ski-pole gun, a ticker tape watch, the wetbike (an early version of the jet ski) and the absolutely badass Lotus Esprit submarine car... which is still my favorite car in the entire franchise (followed very closely by the Aston Martin featured in The Living Daylights).
What Doesn't Work? The faint carbon-copy plot line. Lewis Gelbert is big on spectacle, but he is unable to make up for it with originality nor the ability to direct a decent action sequence. Two nuclear warheads detonated over the ocean yet... there are no repercussions. Feels like a bit of an oversight on the part of the filmmakers. Lastly, the music has an embarrassing disco feel and is honestly too much of its own time, yet somehow Marvin Hamlisch received an Oscar nomination for his film score. (John Barry scored 12 Bond films. How many Oscar nominations did he receive for those films? Zero.) While the music has cringe-worthy moments, it could be worse (and trust me, it will get worse).
I still consider The Spy Who Loved Me as Roger Moore's best Bond film. It's not my personal favorite, but it's definitely his best outing. While many of its the plot points would be regurgitated just two years later as well as heavily influenced by the now popular science fiction genre in Moonraker (thanks a lot, Star Wars!), The Spy Who Loved Me is firing on all cylinders and it successfully executes all of the essential key components needed for a great bond adventure. It was capable of breaking free from other influences that plagued Moore's first two films, and it gave us the first Roger Moore classic, regardless of its faults.
Reevaluation Score: 4 out of 5.
FOR YOUR EYES ONLY (1981)
Directed by John Glen
Written by Richard Maibaum, Michael G. Wilson
Ian Fleming (stories)
Running Time: 2 hours,7 minutes
Original Verdict:
The last decent Roger Moore film. This film also still displays the ever present disco era music but you also come to the realization that as much as Bond is a sex fiend, he's not a pervert. Melina Havelock (Carole Bouquet) also deserves an honorable mention just missing my Top 5 Bond Girls list. Rating: 4 out of 5.
For Your Eyes Only has always been my favorite Roger Moore outing. It was my first James Bond film. The ABC Sunday Night Movie was a common staple in my house (my parents didn't have to worry about foul language, sexual content or violence, which were all edited out) so the most accurate first-time viewing of this movie for me was pretty close to what you see below:
THE REEVALUATION
It's happened now three times so far within the franchise - the rubber band snap back into reality. The producers keep pushing the boundaries of spectacle and outright silliness in the Bond movies until it goes a bit too far and then they conduct a course correction for their next film. The first time this occurred was between You Only Live Twice and On Her Majesty's Secret Service. One is excessive and one is economical. One stars Sean Connery, one does not. The third time this happened was when the franchise shifted between Bonds again. Pierce Brosnan's ridiculous Die Another Day and Daniel Craig's brilliant Casino Royale. There's a stark contrast between these films.
The second time this happened was right in the middle of Roger Moore's tenure. We jumped from one of the most ridiculous plots ever conceived in a James Bond film -- Moonraker -- to the simpler and gritty For Your Eyes Only. I guess the producers wanted to bring Bond "back to earth" and they did so successfully.
The Cold Open: After Bond pays respects to his deceased wife, he is urgently airlifted out of the cemetery by headquarters... or that's what were supposed to think. Instead it's a trap set by the never-actually-named-due-a-to-potential-law-suit Blofeld-esque character, who plans to kill Bond with a remote-controlled helicopter. It's also the second time within the Roger Moore era that were given reference to Tracy Bond (the first time was in The Spy Who Loved Me), and given Moore's age in this film, it's almost believable. The pre-credit sequence is fun, albeit a tad silly, but one I've always enjoyed watching, even to this day.
The Story: Bond is sent after the code-breaking machine called the ATAC (Automatic Targeting Attack Communicator) -- a MacGuffin if there ever was one -- which was lost when the British spy boat the St. Georges is sunk in the Ionian Sea. He's been assigned to retrieve it before it gets into the hands of the Soviets. The plot is reminiscent of From Russia With Love, but it also pulls story elements from Fleming's short stories as well as the novels Live and Let Die and Goldfinger. The story is solid, not too involved, links all of its plot points together without confusing or frustrating the audience.
The Villain: Julian Glover plays the ally-turned-villain Kristatos. He's a Greek smuggler who is willing to sell secrets (or machines that decode secrets) to the KGB for cold hard cash. I think Glover's performance goes unnoticed by most, but it's one of my favorites. He does a great job of comforting the audience into feeling safe before he's revealed later on to be the villain. (Glover would then go on to play the same character-type eight years later in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.)
 |
| The above image represents my favorite Roger Moore James Bond scene. He's judge, jury and executioner, and while Moore at first protested, he finally gave in and gave us fans one of his best moments as 007. |
The Heavy: Not since Live and Let Die have we been treated to multiple henchmen: Locque and Erich Kriegler. Locque is a Belgian enforcer-for-hire who eventually makes the costly mistake of getting tangled up with James Bond before meeting his end. Erich Kriegler -- the blond-haired brute -- is the second (not the first, but also not the last) incarnation of the Red Grant character from From Russia With Love. Both henchman play their parts perfectly with the right level of threat and malevolence in an attempts to deter James Bond from his mission.
The Girls: The gorgeous Carole Bouquet portrays the vengeance-driven Melina Havelock. She's soft-spoken but shows that she's more than capable of handling herself, especially when wielding that crossbow. Even though her performance is subdued, it's authentic and never feels forced or dull. I'm going to completely ignore the barely-legal Bibi Dahl character here, since her uncomfortable sexual advances towards Bond makes everyone feel dirty. All of her scenes are completely unnecessary, feeling as if they were jammed into the script if only to imply that even James Bond has standards.
The Gadgets: This is pretty much a gadget-free film (if you don't count the facial-recognition computer in Q's lab). The exploding Lotus at the beginning of the film -- an over-the-top anti-theft device -- was a conscience effort made on the side of the filmmakers to let the audience know that James Bond would have to use his wits instead of Q's fancy gadgets to get out of the inevitable onslaught of sticky situations one gets in when one is a British Secret Agent.
What Doesn't Work? If I rubbed a magic lamp and a genie were to appear in front of me and it said, "Your wish is my command," I would gladly reply with, "Please replace Bill Conti's score from For Your Eyes Only with something written by John Barry." (Seriously, I would waste my wish just like that!) Listening to this score, especially at certain times, will garner a response within me like this. Yes, it's that bad, and it's the worst thing about this entire film. The score ages poorly, and unlike other adventure films released the same year, it will never feel timeless.
For Your Eyes Only clearly demonstrates John Glen's skill behind the camera. He was a logical choice to take the reigns here and proves to be a much more competent action director than his predecessor. Glen, who also cut his directorial teeth on this film, executes several well-choreographed action set-pieces while reeling back on most of the cheese ball humor. Speaking of the humor, there's very little tongue-in-cheek represented here. Moore's one-liners seem more appropriate, they don't overstay their welcome, and they perfectly diffuse the tension.
As I sat down to watch the last Roger Moore film of this series, I was a little hesitant. I feared that this final viewing might bring to light something I might have overlooked in the past. Each of his films I had watched before this one hadn't drastically changed my overall opinion of his Bond catalog. Thankfully, that was not the case. In my most honest and humble opinion, For Your Eyes Only is Roger Moore's finest hour. It's his best performance as James Bond.
Reevaluation Score: 4.5 out of 5.
In retrospect, Roger Moore's films were very unbalanced as a whole. Some were just within reach of brilliance; others completely failed or at best limped to the finish line upon reexamination. Some may feel that Roger Moore was the problem with the Roger Moore era of films. Not necessarily so (although he is one of the worst onscreen kissers I have ever seen). He played the character the way he felt was necessary, and for the most part it worked for his films, even if it sometimes cheapened the series as a whole.
Moore should not be held solely responsible for the direction the series went. That should be on the part of the producers. When you keep going back to the same creative well (Richard Maibaum) time and again, eventually you're either going to run out of ideas or you're going to start pilfering through unused scenes, rehashed dialog, mixed with a healthy dose of regurgitated plot points, all cobbled together with the same structure. Eventually the finished "product" has so many similarities with previous films, it's almost embarrassing.
Thankfully, depending on which Roger Moore film I put in to watch now, the overwhelming sense of nostalgia greatly impedes my critical eye, and I can usually just unplug my brain and just have fun with it.
James Bond will return... with the guy whose name no one can ever remember.
Comments
Post a Comment