I could watch that movie over and over again and still love it!
True, TSWLM is a masterpiece. But so is AVTAK in my eyes.
The floors that people identify with AVTAK (moore's age, lead bond girl) don't really seem valid reasons to hate the movie to be honest. They are small flaws that wouldn't ruin a great movie. Moore's age is something he cannot help. And ask for the Bond girl, many other Bond films also suffer that flaw (including TSWLM to be controversial!)
Any other reasons to hate AVTAK (such as the california girls bit that lasts a second) are unforgivable reasons to hate an entire movie, especially when they are equally cringeworthy moments in all of the other bond films. AVTAK in my eyes is simply unfairly picked on.
Many 'non-bond fans' (that still enjoy watching bond now and then) consider AVTAK as one of the best!
I could watch that movie over and over again and still love it!
True, TSWLM is a masterpiece. But so is AVTAK in my eyes.
The floors that people identify with AVTAK (moore's age, lead bond girl) don't really seem valid reasons to hate the movie to be honest. They are small flaws that wouldn't ruin a great movie. Moore's age is something he cannot help. And ask for the Bond girl, many other Bond films also suffer that flaw (including TSWLM to be controversial!)
Any other reasons to hate AVTAK (such as the california girls bit that lasts a second) are unforgivable reasons to hate an entire movie, especially when they are equally cringeworthy moments in all of the other bond films. AVTAK in my eyes is simply unfairly picked on.
Many 'non-bond fans' (that still enjoy watching bond now and then) consider AVTAK as one of the best!
I would have to disagree with you here. AVTAK is, by any standard I can think of, one of the worst Bond films ever. I believe you are correct when you say that while the flaws you point out are flaws, they do not destroy the film. They are simply the icing on the cake.
The primary problem with AVTAK, typical of any bad movie, is an awful script. The plot is not original at all; substitute Silicon Valley for Fort Knox, and microchips for gold bullion, and this movie is Goldfiner. In other words, there is nothing about this movie's story I have not seen before. There are no surprises or attempts at creativity. The same could be said of the Title Sequence; it re-uses shots from The Spy Who Loved Me and just adds some laser beams and snow coats. The films characters are as weak as their story line, as is the cast that is chosen to implement it. Though, if you can watch this film and not want to turn off the DVD player when Tanya Roberts screams "James!" for the umpteenth time, you are a stronger person than I.
The action is bad across the board in my view, and there is nothing really lush or exciting about the film. Then when you consider all of the additional flaws you mention, on top of my general displeasure with Sir Roger's take on the 007 character, I simply could never rank this higher than second to last (TMWTGG gives this a run for its money).
I could watch that movie over and over again and still love it!
True, TSWLM is a masterpiece. But so is AVTAK in my eyes.
The floors that people identify with AVTAK (moore's age, lead bond girl) don't really seem valid reasons to hate the movie to be honest. They are small flaws that wouldn't ruin a great movie. Moore's age is something he cannot help. And ask for the Bond girl, many other Bond films also suffer that flaw (including TSWLM to be controversial!)
Any other reasons to hate AVTAK (such as the california girls bit that lasts a second) are unforgivable reasons to hate an entire movie, especially when they are equally cringeworthy moments in all of the other bond films. AVTAK in my eyes is simply unfairly picked on.
Many 'non-bond fans' (that still enjoy watching bond now and then) consider AVTAK as one of the best!
I would have to disagree with you here. AVTAK is, by any standard I can think of, one of the worst Bond films ever. I believe you are correct when you say that while the flaws you point out are flaws, they do not destroy the film. They are simply the icing on the cake.
The primary problem with AVTAK, typical of any bad movie, is an awful script. The plot is not original at all; substitute Silicon Valley for Fort Knox, and microchips for gold bullion, and this movie is Goldfiner. In other words, there is nothing about this movie's story I have not seen before. There are no surprises or attempts at creativity. The same could be said of the Title Sequence; it re-uses shots from The Spy Who Loved Me and just adds some laser beams and snow coats. The films characters are as weak as their story line, as is the cast that is chosen to implement it. Though, if you can watch this film and not want to turn off the DVD player when Tanya Roberts screams "James!" for the umpteenth time, you are a stronger person than I.
The action is bad across the board in my view, and there is nothing really lush or exciting about the film. Then when you consider all of the additional flaws you mention, on top of my general displeasure with Sir Roger's take on the 007 character, I simply could never rank this higher than second to last (TMWTGG gives this a run for its money).
You may be right about the script, but the criticism of the plot being too similar to Goldfinger (even though it is) wouldn't ruin the film for me, simply because many other Bond films have stories similar to each other.
Take MR. It's just TSWLM in space. Also TSWLM and MR have similarities to YOLT. TWINE is like GF and AVTAK for story. And DAD echoes the storyline of DAF. There's probably many more. I admit AVTAK's story is somewhat unoriginal, but so are many, many other Bond films.
I also disagree about when you said the film's cast wasn't strong. Christopher Walken is one of the greatest actors to date, and his portrayal of Zorin was brilliant. Grace Jones is also a high-profile actress.
And I also disagree with you saying that the action wasn't great. The golden gate bridge fight is a truly classic Bond moment and one of the most memorable moments in Bond history IMO. And what's lush and exciting about the film? This film boasts some of the best locations for me. The golden gate bridge, the eiffel tower, (2 great landmarks), and zorin's mine.
I try to avoid AVTAK topics like I'd avoid a leper colony, but I just have to disagree with Jarvio about the locations and action. Sure, you can say that the Golden Gate bridge and the Eiffel Tower are great locales, but they're both poorly used in the film. The bridge sequence is marred by the dreadful back-screen projection work that runs rampant in this film (Gasp! James Bond may fall two feet on to a soundstage mat and bruise his pinkie!), and we get to watch a yellow-wigged Zorin dummy go flopping to his "death." The Eiffel Tower sequence might have been exciting if I hadn't felt like I'd seen it all before in Superman II--plus, again, there's the shoddy backscreen work and that asinine chase that follows May Day's jump, complete with the looks-nothing-at-all-like-Roger-Moore stunt driver in the cut-along-the-dotted-lines breakaway car, and yet another damned dummy that drops through a canopy on to a wedding cake. As for the mine. . .I think Cubby must have found the budget getting a bit tight so he lifted an unused set from Temple of Doom. Too bad he also didn't borrow Spielberg's cinematographer, who at least knew how to light a cave set so it looks like a cave and not a fiberglass Disneyland ride.
Sorry, I just think AVTAK has the shoddiest production values in the series--for all the money that was spent on the film there's little of it up on the screen to enjoy. Feh. I'm in a rotten mood now. See why I don't like to respond to these topics?
Peruses Jarvio's favourite's list, lights up a cigar...
Now obviously Jarvio has GF at no 16 because he thinks it's a rip-off of AVTAK! He also hates TB, as that's even further down his list... two movies that together defined the best of Bond for a generation of fans.
I take it Jarvio that you're a Roger Moore fan, going by your top 5? Octopussy is right up there too, with FYEO, so it seems the creaky part of Moore's era has a fan...
And yet surprisingly, with that in mind, the grim Licence to Kill is next in line! Something of a surprise. Connery's films then get a look in later on, in the late top 10.
I guess we're looking at someone who came to Bond in the early 1980s, was about nine at the time? And prefers the light-hearted, great set pieces and standout henchmen of the more excessive films.
I try to avoid AVTAK topics like I'd avoid a leper colony, but I just have to disagree with Jarvio about the locations and action. Sure, you can say that the Golden Gate bridge and the Eiffel Tower are great locales, but they're both poorly used in the film. The bridge sequence is marred by the dreadful back-screen projection work that runs rampant in this film (Gasp! James Bond may fall two feet on to a soundstage mat and bruise his pinkie!), and we get to watch a yellow-wigged Zorin dummy go flopping to his "death." The Eiffel Tower sequence might have been exciting if I hadn't felt like I'd seen it all before in Superman II--plus, again, there's the shoddy backscreen work and that asinine chase that follows May Day's jump, complete with the looks-nothing-at-all-like-Roger-Moore stunt driver in the cut-along-the-dotted-lines breakaway car, and yet another damned dummy that drops through a canopy on to a wedding cake. As for the mine. . .I think Cubby must have found the budget getting a bit tight so he lifted an unused set from Temple of Doom. Too bad he also didn't borrow Spielberg's cinematographer, who at least knew how to light a cave set so it looks like a cave and not a fiberglass Disneyland ride.
Sorry, I just think AVTAK has the shoddiest production values in the series--for all the money that was spent on the film there's little of it up on the screen to enjoy. Feh. I'm in a rotten mood now. See why I don't like to respond to these topics?
I must agree with all of this. AVTAK is my least favorite film for a reason. As HB says the locations are woefully underused and the production values are shoddy. I can become immersed in the feel of the locations in every other Bond film but this seems impossible with AVTAK. There's just no spark or vibrant feeling. The production designer makes one yearn for the days of Ken Adams. I'd also agree that the action is the worst of any of the films, and I think this is partly due to the fault of the actors (it's hard to take any action scene seriously in the film when it looks like Moore should have retired from MI6 years ago). But the general feel I get from the film that none of the others have is simply..... boredom. Moore is past his prime and can't carry the film, none of the other people involved seem to really care that much and Christopher Walken is wasted as Zorin, the plot seems uninspired as if the writers lacked any ideas and simply didn't care what they were writing, and the whole film seems shoddily pieced together.
Not to pile it on, but I think A View to a Kill is a terrible movie-it's badly written and it's badly acted and it wastes some wonderful actors,most notably the great Patrick Macnee and Lois Maxwell(!).It also wastes Sir Roger, who deserved a much better movie to bow out with.Walken phones in his performance("Hee, hee, I'm CRAZY!!!!"),and although quite beautiful, Tanya Roberts cannot act.
Overall, AVTAK really resembles the many imitations of the James Bond films that were made in the early to mid 1960s.These all boasted a few recognizable actors in the lead roles,some colorful locales(generally Italy, Spain and Germany),plenty of beautiful women and a an absolutely nonsensical plot.
The control of the faultlines in the San Francisco Bay area is a subplot more suited to a James Coburn Flint movie than a James Bond film(as is Blofeld's secret hideout in that supposedly "dormant" volcano in You Only Live Twice).Ultimately this is a silly story--Eon did so much better in most of their previous films-aside from Diamonds Are Forever which is nearly as unfortunate as AVTAK.Screenwriter Richard Maibaum acknowledged on more than one occasion that AVTAK was one of his lesser works.
There's really only one scene in this movie that I will admit to liking,and it's the small sequence with Sir Roger and Fiona Fullerton, as 007 crosses paths with a beautiful Soviet agent(initially intended to be Anya Amasova from TSWLM).The entire tone is different, because in this particular instance these two characters are behaving like responsible adults.Even their dialogue is more intelligent(at least when compared to what's found in the rest of AVTAK ).This brief moment plays like an excerpt taken from a superior James Bond movie that was accidentally shoehorned into a much lesser film.How sad this sequence so short and that so much of the remaining film is inexcuseable drivel...
Of course,all of this is only one man's opinion-I realise that some of our members just loveAVTAK, but for the life of me,I cannot understand why they do.
Well I like AVTAK. Lovely Chantilly location, good banter between Moore and Macnee, a lively villain AND memorable henchwoman, doesn't try and fail to be a serious, credible thriller, it's slick and unpretentious. Smooth, silky action scenes in the pts and Paris chase, chilling demise in car wash. Goes a bit silly in Frisco I admit but the poor photography gave it a real thriller look to me rather than your OP travelogue type thing which bogs it all down. Oh, and a punchy song by Duran Duran and the last John Barry score I like, okay, it's only a rerun of OHMSS theme but I personally prefer it to that of TLD.
Comments
I could watch that movie over and over again and still love it!
True, TSWLM is a masterpiece. But so is AVTAK in my eyes.
The floors that people identify with AVTAK (moore's age, lead bond girl) don't really seem valid reasons to hate the movie to be honest. They are small flaws that wouldn't ruin a great movie. Moore's age is something he cannot help. And ask for the Bond girl, many other Bond films also suffer that flaw (including TSWLM to be controversial!)
Any other reasons to hate AVTAK (such as the california girls bit that lasts a second) are unforgivable reasons to hate an entire movie, especially when they are equally cringeworthy moments in all of the other bond films. AVTAK in my eyes is simply unfairly picked on.
Many 'non-bond fans' (that still enjoy watching bond now and then) consider AVTAK as one of the best!
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
I would have to disagree with you here. AVTAK is, by any standard I can think of, one of the worst Bond films ever. I believe you are correct when you say that while the flaws you point out are flaws, they do not destroy the film. They are simply the icing on the cake.
The primary problem with AVTAK, typical of any bad movie, is an awful script. The plot is not original at all; substitute Silicon Valley for Fort Knox, and microchips for gold bullion, and this movie is Goldfiner. In other words, there is nothing about this movie's story I have not seen before. There are no surprises or attempts at creativity. The same could be said of the Title Sequence; it re-uses shots from The Spy Who Loved Me and just adds some laser beams and snow coats. The films characters are as weak as their story line, as is the cast that is chosen to implement it. Though, if you can watch this film and not want to turn off the DVD player when Tanya Roberts screams "James!" for the umpteenth time, you are a stronger person than I.
The action is bad across the board in my view, and there is nothing really lush or exciting about the film. Then when you consider all of the additional flaws you mention, on top of my general displeasure with Sir Roger's take on the 007 character, I simply could never rank this higher than second to last (TMWTGG gives this a run for its money).
You may be right about the script, but the criticism of the plot being too similar to Goldfinger (even though it is) wouldn't ruin the film for me, simply because many other Bond films have stories similar to each other.
Take MR. It's just TSWLM in space. Also TSWLM and MR have similarities to YOLT. TWINE is like GF and AVTAK for story. And DAD echoes the storyline of DAF. There's probably many more. I admit AVTAK's story is somewhat unoriginal, but so are many, many other Bond films.
I also disagree about when you said the film's cast wasn't strong. Christopher Walken is one of the greatest actors to date, and his portrayal of Zorin was brilliant. Grace Jones is also a high-profile actress.
And I also disagree with you saying that the action wasn't great. The golden gate bridge fight is a truly classic Bond moment and one of the most memorable moments in Bond history IMO. And what's lush and exciting about the film? This film boasts some of the best locations for me. The golden gate bridge, the eiffel tower, (2 great landmarks), and zorin's mine.
Just my opinion of course.
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
Sorry, I just think AVTAK has the shoddiest production values in the series--for all the money that was spent on the film there's little of it up on the screen to enjoy. Feh. I'm in a rotten mood now. See why I don't like to respond to these topics?
Now obviously Jarvio has GF at no 16 because he thinks it's a rip-off of AVTAK!
I take it Jarvio that you're a Roger Moore fan, going by your top 5? Octopussy is right up there too, with FYEO, so it seems the creaky part of Moore's era has a fan...
And yet surprisingly, with that in mind, the grim Licence to Kill is next in line!
I guess we're looking at someone who came to Bond in the early 1980s, was about nine at the time? And prefers the light-hearted, great set pieces and standout henchmen of the more excessive films.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I must agree with all of this. AVTAK is my least favorite film for a reason. As HB says the locations are woefully underused and the production values are shoddy. I can become immersed in the feel of the locations in every other Bond film but this seems impossible with AVTAK. There's just no spark or vibrant feeling. The production designer makes one yearn for the days of Ken Adams. I'd also agree that the action is the worst of any of the films, and I think this is partly due to the fault of the actors (it's hard to take any action scene seriously in the film when it looks like Moore should have retired from MI6 years ago). But the general feel I get from the film that none of the others have is simply..... boredom. Moore is past his prime and can't carry the film, none of the other people involved seem to really care that much and Christopher Walken is wasted as Zorin, the plot seems uninspired as if the writers lacked any ideas and simply didn't care what they were writing, and the whole film seems shoddily pieced together.
Overall, AVTAK really resembles the many imitations of the James Bond films that were made in the early to mid 1960s.These all boasted a few recognizable actors in the lead roles,some colorful locales(generally Italy, Spain and Germany),plenty of beautiful women and a an absolutely nonsensical plot.
The control of the faultlines in the San Francisco Bay area is a subplot more suited to a James Coburn Flint movie than a James Bond film(as is Blofeld's secret hideout in that supposedly "dormant" volcano in You Only Live Twice).Ultimately this is a silly story--Eon did so much better in most of their previous films-aside from Diamonds Are Forever which is nearly as unfortunate as AVTAK.Screenwriter Richard Maibaum acknowledged on more than one occasion that AVTAK was one of his lesser works.
There's really only one scene in this movie that I will admit to liking,and it's the small sequence with Sir Roger and Fiona Fullerton, as 007 crosses paths with a beautiful Soviet agent(initially intended to be Anya Amasova from TSWLM).The entire tone is different, because in this particular instance these two characters are behaving like responsible adults.Even their dialogue is more intelligent(at least when compared to what's found in the rest of AVTAK ).This brief moment plays like an excerpt taken from a superior James Bond movie that was accidentally shoehorned into a much lesser film.How sad this sequence so short and that so much of the remaining film is inexcuseable drivel...
Of course,all of this is only one man's opinion-I realise that some of our members just love AVTAK, but for the life of me,I cannot understand why they do.
Roger Moore 1927-2017