My favorite review of Moonraker
Firemass
AlaskaPosts: 1,910MI6 Agent
On the back of my Moonraker DVD there is a quote from Vincent Canby (NY Times) "The unimaginable most satisfactorily imagined."
Indeed a very interesting quote to ponder. This morning I was browsing the Rotten Tomatoes reviews and managed to locate Vincent's complete review of the film. I was pleased to see that the above quote was in the context of comparing Moonraker to Georges Méliès innovate, anything is possible type of filmmaking.
Here is the review, and I highlighted my favorite sections in Bold.
http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=EE05E7DF1731E36EBC4151DFB0668382669EDE&partner=Rotten%2520Tomatoes
At a time when everything is being either inflated or devalued it's comforting to know that at least one commodity maintains its hard currency. That's James Bond, who, by all rights, should be an antique, as emblematic of the sixties as the Beatles and flower power, but who goes blithely on as if time has had a stop.
Moonraker, which opens today at the Rivoli and other theaters, is the eleventh in the remarkable series that began in 1963 with Dr. No and it's one of the most buoyant Bond films of all. It looks as if it cost an unconscionable amount of money to make, though it has nothing on its mind except dizzying entertainment, which is not something to dismiss quickly in such a dreary, disappointing movie season.
What's it about? That's a silly question, though I suppose one might answer that it's about sleight of hands—those of all the people who worked on it. They include the indefatigable producer, Albert R. Broccoli (also known as Cubby); Lewis Gilbert, who directed it; Christopher Wood, who wrote the screenplay; Ken Adam, the production designer; and all of those far from little people who are responsible for the extraordinary tricks that persuade us to suspend our disbelief.
Moonraker, like all of the better Bond pictures, returns us to a kind of filmmaking that I most closely associate with the fifteen-part serials of my youth. Our astonishment depends on the ingenuity by which the writers and directors disentangle Bond from the impossible situations into which he seems to fall every seven minutes.
Moonraker begins with one of the funniest and most dangerous (as well as most beautifully photographed and edited) sequences Bond has ever faced. He's booted out of an airplane without a parachute and must do mortal combat, during a swooping, soaring free fall, with an adversary who, luckily, does have a parachute. There are also a high-speed chase through Venetian canals (with one gondola a disguised Hovercraft), another chase on the Amazon, a fight on the roof of the funicular that goes to the top of Rio's Sugar Loaf mountain, and a final confrontation in space that is as handsome as anything in Star Wars.
What's it about? It's about movie-making of the kind Georges Méliès pioneered in films like Voyage to the Moon (1902) and Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea (1907). It's the unimaginable most satisfactorily imagined.
Almost everyone connected with the movie is in top form, even Mr. Moore, who has a tendency to facetiousness when left to his own devices. Here he's as ageless, resourceful, and graceful as the character he inhabits. Mr. Lonsdale is sometimes uncomfortably wooden and square, but then he's not supposed to be a barrel of laughs. Lois Chiles is lovely as Bond's Central Intelligence Agency vis-à-vis, who's just one of the sexually tireless Bond's conquests. Richard Kiel reappears as Bond's thug-enemy, the gigantic Jaws, who, you may be happy to learn, undergoes the kind of character transformation that means he'll probably turn up in yet another Bond film. Bernard Lee and Lois Maxwell, as, respectively, M and Miss Moneypenny, also are on hand.
Welcome back to old friends.
Indeed a very interesting quote to ponder. This morning I was browsing the Rotten Tomatoes reviews and managed to locate Vincent's complete review of the film. I was pleased to see that the above quote was in the context of comparing Moonraker to Georges Méliès innovate, anything is possible type of filmmaking.
Here is the review, and I highlighted my favorite sections in Bold.
http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=EE05E7DF1731E36EBC4151DFB0668382669EDE&partner=Rotten%2520Tomatoes
At a time when everything is being either inflated or devalued it's comforting to know that at least one commodity maintains its hard currency. That's James Bond, who, by all rights, should be an antique, as emblematic of the sixties as the Beatles and flower power, but who goes blithely on as if time has had a stop.
Moonraker, which opens today at the Rivoli and other theaters, is the eleventh in the remarkable series that began in 1963 with Dr. No and it's one of the most buoyant Bond films of all. It looks as if it cost an unconscionable amount of money to make, though it has nothing on its mind except dizzying entertainment, which is not something to dismiss quickly in such a dreary, disappointing movie season.
What's it about? That's a silly question, though I suppose one might answer that it's about sleight of hands—those of all the people who worked on it. They include the indefatigable producer, Albert R. Broccoli (also known as Cubby); Lewis Gilbert, who directed it; Christopher Wood, who wrote the screenplay; Ken Adam, the production designer; and all of those far from little people who are responsible for the extraordinary tricks that persuade us to suspend our disbelief.
Moonraker, like all of the better Bond pictures, returns us to a kind of filmmaking that I most closely associate with the fifteen-part serials of my youth. Our astonishment depends on the ingenuity by which the writers and directors disentangle Bond from the impossible situations into which he seems to fall every seven minutes.
Moonraker begins with one of the funniest and most dangerous (as well as most beautifully photographed and edited) sequences Bond has ever faced. He's booted out of an airplane without a parachute and must do mortal combat, during a swooping, soaring free fall, with an adversary who, luckily, does have a parachute. There are also a high-speed chase through Venetian canals (with one gondola a disguised Hovercraft), another chase on the Amazon, a fight on the roof of the funicular that goes to the top of Rio's Sugar Loaf mountain, and a final confrontation in space that is as handsome as anything in Star Wars.
What's it about? It's about movie-making of the kind Georges Méliès pioneered in films like Voyage to the Moon (1902) and Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea (1907). It's the unimaginable most satisfactorily imagined.
Almost everyone connected with the movie is in top form, even Mr. Moore, who has a tendency to facetiousness when left to his own devices. Here he's as ageless, resourceful, and graceful as the character he inhabits. Mr. Lonsdale is sometimes uncomfortably wooden and square, but then he's not supposed to be a barrel of laughs. Lois Chiles is lovely as Bond's Central Intelligence Agency vis-à-vis, who's just one of the sexually tireless Bond's conquests. Richard Kiel reappears as Bond's thug-enemy, the gigantic Jaws, who, you may be happy to learn, undergoes the kind of character transformation that means he'll probably turn up in yet another Bond film. Bernard Lee and Lois Maxwell, as, respectively, M and Miss Moneypenny, also are on hand.
Welcome back to old friends.
My current 10 favorite:
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
Comments
down my list of Bond films. Still watch it from time to time, the photography
Is outstanding, fantastic sets and music, but sadly just too many little silly
visual jokes, that keep popping up to spoil it.
as Roger Moore's YOLT.
YOLT is to Terminator as Moonraker is to Terminator 2.
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
1. Moonraker helped make Bond immensely popular once again.
2. Moonraker cost a LOT of money to make and it shows on screen.
3. Moonraker features the veteran Bond cast, crew and artists in TOP form.
Like I've said before: you can chose to dislike Moonraker for whatever personal reason, but it's still one of the best, most impressive, skillfully crafted Bond films.
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
It's nothing personal. While I agree that MR looks great, I just don't think it's a very good Bond film. In fact, I agree with the following assessment put forth by Raymond Benson in The James Bond Bedside Companion:
"The film contains the most absurd and ridiculous slapstick humor of all of the films, and the character of James Bond functions merely as a focal point for a series of outlandish set-pieces. And even the set-pieces are recycled from previous films."
That sums up perfectly the reasons MR ranks low on my list of Bond films. I don't believe it's the worst Bond film, but in my opinion it's far from the best. And one thing we've all learned around here, my friend, is that when it comes to Bond films nothing is "non-debatable"!
This amazon reviewer sums it up pretty well:
"Raymond Benson is so much in love with the literary James Bond, that when he gets to the "James Bond Movies" section of the book, all he does is whine and bellyache at every instance where the movie isn't exactly like the book. It gets quite aggravating when you're reading about your favorite movies and the author keeps saying "Another problem with the movie, is that it's different from the book in that it......" over and over and over again. You can just imagine how thrilled (sarcasm intended) the author is by the time he gets to the Roger Moore movies. I lost track of how many times, while talking about the 70s movies, where the author says "there is an attempt at humor here, which clearly has no place in a James Bond movie...." Well, sorry Mr. Benson, but there are plenty of people who enjoy humor in the James Bond movies. Sadly, what these Bond "purists" fail to realize, is that if the the producers stuck with the "original formula" of the Fleming novels for screen adaptations, the series would have never survived the decade of the 1960s, let alone as long as 2012 and beyond."
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
True that. I'm glad we can still be friends. B-)
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
Without Fleming, there would have been no James Bond at all.
Look, what this reviewer says may be correct. The series may not have had the longevity it has if it wasn't for the producers messing around with the formula. But as the Dalton and Craig eras prove, there are ways to modernise the character without changing the tone of James Bond completely. (BBC's Sherlock series is another example of how to re-imagine and modernise a popular character tastefully without straying too much from the original source material)
Bond novels are very adult adventures. They are not for everyone, nor were they ever meant to be. I don't think the producers should be looking to box office takings as a measure of success, nor strive to achieve the highest box office takings without consideration of the original source material. The way I see it, aside from Live and Let Die, there are hardly any Bond films from the 1970s that resembles Fleming's work.
Part of the problem I have with Moonraker the film, as a purist, is that the original source material was Fleming's best work. It was a masterpiece of thriller writing. The film was anything but. I would like to see the film remade - this time, properly, the way Fleming had intended.
Great find! Can't wait to set aside an hour this week to watch this -{
In fact in some parts beyond the limit.
Fun. Although I do feel slightly ashamed and have to watch a more
Realistic Bond.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
+1!!!!!!!
We'll all be holding it up as a masterpiece.
Yep! Right after we vote for J.W. Pepper as the most compelling character ever to appear in a Bond film!
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Absolutely disagree..Moonraker is...a Masterpiece of avante-garde geniusness. -{ -{ -{
Except this one!