"For Your Eyes Only" Review
JamesBondJunior
Posts: 67MI6 Agent
Just finished rewatching this. Boy, its funny because it hasn't aged well for me. Now I don't really hate this film, but it is the cheesiest of all Bond films. I can only enjoy it for its camp value and incompetent film-making. This is the first Bond movie of the 80s and first to be directed by John Glen, who I think nearly killed the franchise with his stylistic choices (but I do like TLD and love LTK).
THE GOOD
A very inspired musical score, even though it feels like it belongs in another, more exciting movie. The theme song by Sheena Easton is very good. I do like the Q sequence in this. Roger Moore was always great at annoying Q. Painfully corny lines like "Stinging in the rain?" work for some reason here. The gadgets he shows off are very cool until we get to the awkwardly named "Indentigraph". Also, he uses almost none of Q's gadgets here which is nice, but I think that the series hadn't started to suffer from gadgets yet.
Bond, the character, is written as very dry, bored and cynical, while Roger Moore is very charming, grand and slick. This may indeed be his best acting as Bond, but it is not close to being his best film IMO. I do like James Bond offering lots of wisdom on murder and revenge which sort of gives the pre-title scene some relevance. One thing about the 80s/John Glenn Bond films is their sleaziness. From the music to the villains in leisure suits and gold medallions to the bland, aging women who look like they each have cocaine habits. This is a plus in my book, because the age of classy dress and ambitious global threats was really dead for some reason. It gives these little films merit as time capsules. Its also the first film where Bond isn't a smooth-talking, sexual dynamo. He offers very little sexual puns and really just focuses on one girl seriously. I appreciate the change.
THE BAD
Where to begin? First, its full of bad dialogue: "License to kill... or BE KILLED". The returning Blofeld truly embarrasses himself with one of the worst lines of all time "I trust you had a pleasant... FRIGHT!"
Even though this is Moore's best acting, the supporting cast is horrible. The actress who plays Mileena is very pretty, but not extraordinary. She must have been a model primarily because her acting is flat and relies on looking into the camera to let us know she is acting. What saves her performance is the rerecorded voice that adds some emotion to her vapid face. I wish they hadn't added the subplot with the teenager in love with Bond. She's very annoying, looks way older than she's portrayed and only mildly cute. The very forgettable villains are also just as pitiful actors. Its also sad that there is no M as the great Bernard Lee passed away suddenly.
This film is Flemingesque, in that it stays in the realistic world of mild gadgets and spies over supervillains. I know this attracts people, but its more like a bad Fleming novel to me. I know this film is loved as this serious, darker Moore film, but I feel its probably the most cartoonish with Moneypenny having a gadget-like vanity mirror in her office, and G-ddamned hockey assassins! Bond knocking each of them into the goal and scoring points is just BAD slapstick X-( . Particularly lame is the "hilarious" scene where the Margaret Thatcher impersonator talks to a parrot, thinking its James Bond. And that is actually the final scene in the picture! Another big complaint, the "Identigraph" scene is plain awful. I hate scenes like this where an imaginary piece of technology is showcased because they always age badly. Its actually a very real concept but it is handled so badly by the special effects department. This had to have seemed phony even in 1981.
Films like MWTGG, Octopussy and FYEO are fine little filler films you can enjoy on a boring afternoon, but they are what turned the series into a joke for me. In the Austin Powers parodies, they saluted the classic overly-stylized films like Goldfinger and TSWLM and lampooned the corny dialogue, poor humor and overall drabness of the later Moore films. It is unique and important to the James Bond mythos though I'll never understand why its thought of widely as one of its best films. 4.5 out of 10
THE GOOD
A very inspired musical score, even though it feels like it belongs in another, more exciting movie. The theme song by Sheena Easton is very good. I do like the Q sequence in this. Roger Moore was always great at annoying Q. Painfully corny lines like "Stinging in the rain?" work for some reason here. The gadgets he shows off are very cool until we get to the awkwardly named "Indentigraph". Also, he uses almost none of Q's gadgets here which is nice, but I think that the series hadn't started to suffer from gadgets yet.
Bond, the character, is written as very dry, bored and cynical, while Roger Moore is very charming, grand and slick. This may indeed be his best acting as Bond, but it is not close to being his best film IMO. I do like James Bond offering lots of wisdom on murder and revenge which sort of gives the pre-title scene some relevance. One thing about the 80s/John Glenn Bond films is their sleaziness. From the music to the villains in leisure suits and gold medallions to the bland, aging women who look like they each have cocaine habits. This is a plus in my book, because the age of classy dress and ambitious global threats was really dead for some reason. It gives these little films merit as time capsules. Its also the first film where Bond isn't a smooth-talking, sexual dynamo. He offers very little sexual puns and really just focuses on one girl seriously. I appreciate the change.
THE BAD
Where to begin? First, its full of bad dialogue: "License to kill... or BE KILLED". The returning Blofeld truly embarrasses himself with one of the worst lines of all time "I trust you had a pleasant... FRIGHT!"
Even though this is Moore's best acting, the supporting cast is horrible. The actress who plays Mileena is very pretty, but not extraordinary. She must have been a model primarily because her acting is flat and relies on looking into the camera to let us know she is acting. What saves her performance is the rerecorded voice that adds some emotion to her vapid face. I wish they hadn't added the subplot with the teenager in love with Bond. She's very annoying, looks way older than she's portrayed and only mildly cute. The very forgettable villains are also just as pitiful actors. Its also sad that there is no M as the great Bernard Lee passed away suddenly.
This film is Flemingesque, in that it stays in the realistic world of mild gadgets and spies over supervillains. I know this attracts people, but its more like a bad Fleming novel to me. I know this film is loved as this serious, darker Moore film, but I feel its probably the most cartoonish with Moneypenny having a gadget-like vanity mirror in her office, and G-ddamned hockey assassins! Bond knocking each of them into the goal and scoring points is just BAD slapstick X-( . Particularly lame is the "hilarious" scene where the Margaret Thatcher impersonator talks to a parrot, thinking its James Bond. And that is actually the final scene in the picture! Another big complaint, the "Identigraph" scene is plain awful. I hate scenes like this where an imaginary piece of technology is showcased because they always age badly. Its actually a very real concept but it is handled so badly by the special effects department. This had to have seemed phony even in 1981.
Films like MWTGG, Octopussy and FYEO are fine little filler films you can enjoy on a boring afternoon, but they are what turned the series into a joke for me. In the Austin Powers parodies, they saluted the classic overly-stylized films like Goldfinger and TSWLM and lampooned the corny dialogue, poor humor and overall drabness of the later Moore films. It is unique and important to the James Bond mythos though I'll never understand why its thought of widely as one of its best films. 4.5 out of 10
Comments
I thing It has a lot of great elements and like the plot – very spy… who can you trust (Kristaos vs dove) etc… The music score is very kitch today – and I like it…there are so many scenes I like:
Intro – reference to Tracy
Car chase – 2cv
Q – “not a banana”
Skiing element.
Dove vs Kristatos
The list goes on…
I my point of view – the best RM Bond movie…
www.007jamesbond.dk
http://thedangermen.com/
http://apbateman.com
The film is highly rated by those who tend to rate sincerity of attempt and intention over how well executed the final product is, a tendency that also affected many who reviewed NSNA, TLD and imo CR.
And it's a rather serious sombre film leavened by silly slapstick humour that trashes its serious intentions... By ditching Christopher Wood they also threw away a bloke who does a good one-liner.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
The only part of the film that felt like a solid thriller was when they used Risico as the basis of Bond tailing Columbo. If they kept that sort of momentum during the entire film, For Your Eyes Only would have been tops in my book.
I agree totally with your points. In theory, its a great film.
Many criticise the PTS and the final 5 minutes of the film. Granted they are silly, particularly when compared to the more serious tone of the bulk of the film, but they are entertaining in their own right. Similarly being someone with a soft spot for anything 80s I liked the disco-esque score.
Moore also demonstrates the more serious side of his character and actually shows himself to be a professional yet sympathetic agent. The shot of him in the church at the start demonstrates some continuety between to earlier entries.
The action sequences and stuntwork are also relitively well done. The shot of Rick Sylvester falling down a mountain in a pre CGI age continues to impress today. Likewise the kill-haulding scene taken from the LALD is tense, despite the fact that it waters down the injuries suffered by Bond in the corral reef. Bond has to rely on his own wit and experience rather than gadgets.
FYEO is not a perfect film but it is entertaining. The famous car-kicking sequence is dramatic as is the chase leading up to it.
I saw this review of FYEO, which interestingly features it alongside GF. Don't know if Id go that far but its still an enjoyable spy adventure.
http://n007.thegoldeneye.com/film_commentary/bondfilms-three_best.html
"Damn! It's not just Roger Moore who's too old for this sh*t!"
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Then see The Young Victoria, in which he plays--with fake proboscis--the Duke of Wellington.
Hi, MrBainOO7. I can understand why you love this film. I can especially relate to liking its 80s charm. There really aren't too many popular films that capture this strange late 70s/early 80s feel. Very dry, muted yet cheesy. And I agree with you that the action is solid. John Glen seems like a natural at directing action, even tough I think he struggled with the non-action bits. Its not my favorite Moore film after TSWLM, but I think its the best example of why he was a great Bond actor. He really didn't have much to play off of here, but he comes off very well.
http://apbateman.com
Should've been his last
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
http://apbateman.com