After a British spy ship is sunk, its top secret encryption device used to launch Polaris missile is found to be missing. If it has fallen into enemy hands the results could be catastrophic. So 007 is sent to investigate and his snooping leads him to Greece.
With Moonraker tipping the Bond balance into absurdity and critical derision, the knee-jerk reaction was to reel in the comedy and Flash-Harry hi-tech gumbo, for a leaner, more realistic form of 007 adventure. Sadly, the series was still encumbered with Roger Moore’s portly incarnation, an actor who never found a way of playing the famous role other than with droll insincerity. The film, stylishly wired in places, still ranks as one of the most forgettable Bonds on record.
The all-new moody feel kicks in from the very beginning where we find Bond visiting the grave of his dead wife. The winking is out, in comes edge. When 007 arrives in a cloudy Greece, he hooks up with Carole Boquet’s beautiful avenging angel. It transpires, Bond’s target, elusively known as “Contact” could well be the man who killed her parents. Personal vengeance is a striking theme for this franchise, but it doesn’t sit well. As the film labours to generate plot and character, only vaguely keeping tabs with the chirpy traditions, you start to wish it would cut loose and give an excruciating quip.
Moore just looks confused. He obviously wants to do his thing then hit the bar for cocktails, but John Glen is nagging him to add a roughness to the slick exterior. Equally, it just doesn’t fit. The news is clear, there’s only so far you can push a Bond before it breaks. These films are rigid and inflexible. And when it finally does relent to partake in standard Bondian thrills, it’s like a relief. A silly car chase with Bond piloting a clapped-out 2CV is hilarious, and a terrifying cliff approach to a monastery (for the underwhelming conclusion) hints toward the glamorous sweep of location so sorely lacking. And Boquet does make a brittle, intelligent Bond girl for once, which could be why no one remembers her either.
One of Roger's..and not his best one either...
Reviewed by Ian Nathan
|A back to basics Bond.|
Most certainly a strong Roger 'Bond' in a style reminiscent of the Connery 'Bonds.' Having just gone through the entire Bluray box set, this was a very, very welcome return to form following Moonraker, which was really quite dreadful in my opinion. ... More
Posted by napchier at 16:35, 17 January 2013 | Report This Post
| Bond Travesty|
You know your in trouble when from the opening set-piece a rubbish Blofeld bossman( in an obvious ill-fitting rubber bald hairpiece) is being dispatched down a chimney. Roger Moore was looking old and past it; the action was Benny Hillesque with speeded up stunt work. I could go on endlessly, but I'm half way through watching the bleeder as I type this, and cannot stand it anymore. An hour of my life I will never get back. It's going off NOW!!
Utter bollocks then. The extra star is for t... More
Posted by rwillis122 at 16:57, 23 March 2009 | Report This Post
Moonraker: Tipping the balance into absurdity, maybe. Critical derision, not quite. Many reviewers of the day quoted Moonraker as a 'fun, summer extravaganza', and 'you might as well stuff yourself silly now'.
The action in FYEO is extremely tame, and the score for the Citreon CV chase and ski chase in particular are terrible. Bond deserved better films in the 80s- virtually all the films released up until '89 seem old-fashioned, which considering this was post-Star Wars and betwixt-Indiana J... More
Posted by bedraggledfox at 16:58, 11 February 2009 | Report This Post
| RE: For Your Eyes Only|
My review from lywoodbitchslap.comp;
casual film punter about 'For Your Eyes Only' and the response will probably be "Er, which one was that?" "The one in Greece" "Right. With George Lazen-what's his face?" "No, with Roger Moore" "Er, pass?". A great shame that 'For Your Eyes Only' has slipped from everyone's memory as it's one of the best and Roger Moore's finest two hours as Bond./b]
After a dizzying bout of helicopter flying and apparently finishing Blofeld off, we have the drippy... More
Posted by matty_b at 08:30, 14 June 2008 | Report This Post
| RE: For Your Eyes Only|
After the excesses of "The Spy Who Loved Me" and "Moonraker", everything gets reeled back to basics for what is probably Moore's best Bond movie. It tells an interesting tale of double-crosses as various parties vie to obtain a valuable decoding device, Moore seems more invested in his role and has a feisty female sidekick this time around. There are some miscalculations - Bill Conti's awful disco score, and an ill-advised Margaret Thatcher parody at the end - but generally this is sterling... More
Posted by RJNeb2 at 12:28, 20 May 2008 | Report This Post
|For Your Eyes Only|
This film was a great improvement for Bond espacially after the appalling Moonraker. For once this Bond film was low tech, and this one reminded me of From Russia With Love, FRWL is better though. That caused a problem for this film though, Moore wasen't quite used to it. This film tried to have a more serious Bond, which it suceded with but Moore looks uncomfortable in the role, for the first time. A good thing about this film is that it has a good solid plot, which with some of the Moore Bond ... More
Posted by Bond at 16:02, 12 May 2007 | Report This Post
|Moore's best (For Me, That Is)|
After the awful Moonraker and right before Moore turned into 00Geriatric, Rog tried his hand at a serious Bond. FYEO doesn't bother with ridiculous gadgets and non-stop oneliners, but instead relies on the classic From Russia With Love Formula: there's no monstrous villain's lair, no fun henchman, but a serious sense of threat, relatively simple décor and a keen eye for atmosphere. Which is all the better for it, as it thus really stands out from the mostly utterly mediocre Moore era.
Posted by Manfrendshensindshen at 02:30, 04 February 2007 | Report This Post