Film Review: Moonraker (007)

James Bond has been to just about every country on the Earth. Now, his struggles take him above and beyond...into outer space

In the aftermath of the blockbuster supergiants, Star Wars and Close Encounters of the Third Kind, sci-fi was becoming huge in the late 70s. For better or for worse, producers decided to rocket this Bond picture into space and capitalize off of the craze. What results is easily the most stupidly excessive film of the lot. This is one long film that includes Bond skydiving, Bond trying out astronaut training machines, Bond going hunting, Bond going to Rio, Bond going to Venice for a big boat chase scene, Bond going to the Amazon jungle for an even bigger boat chase scene, and then after all that, Bond finally reaches space. The space scenes are probably the biggest highlight, as we watch a fleet of space shuttles departing Earth, Bond confronting the bad guy in a massive space station, and inevitably, there's an all-out laser-beam battle everywhere. Those lasers sure are cool. Just about every scene looks larger than life, thanks to all the grand views and exotic locations that serve as a background to the elaborate onslaught of peril and action. They pretty much throw everything at you - the sum of all the parts will seem messy, but if you take it scene-by-scene, it is a genuinely fun and fulfilling experience.

The plot pretty much goes through the motions of every other Bond adventure, simply swapping out secret lairs for a space station. All the usual elements are there - gadgets galore, ladies, class. It's nothing original or deep. It has practically nothing to do with Ian Fleming's original novel (which is actually a decent spy thriller). You just have to watch it for what it is: escapism at its most extreme.

This film uses excellent photography and editing. Roger Moore plays the same old Bond we all know and love (or hate) by now. Lois Chiles plays a rather flat character. Michael Lonsdale is okay to watch as the villain, but his performance is rather robotic in nature. Richard Kiel is awesome. Writing is not too terrible, especially given the material. This production spares no expense on the lavish locations, sets, props, costumes, and special effects. John Barry's music score is not bad, but I am not a fan of Shirley Bassey's theme song.

Moonraker represents the absolute height of excess in a James Bond film - it's so ridiculous, it has to be seen to be believed. I personally value the film the most for just being a nonstop chain of fun scenes, all the way to its far-out climax.

3.5/5 (Experience: Good | Story: Average | Film: Pretty Good)

Film Review: The Spy Who Loved Me (007)

The Spy Who Loved Me was a Bond movie that was just bound to happen. Not only because it's yet another Ian Fleming book that had yet to be adapted, but because this is the one where James Bond has to ally with a Soviet to get stuff done. It's like the 007 variant to The Man from UNCLE. And in the Roger Moore age, it's bound to be larger than life and ridiculous as hell.

This film is probably most memorable for being the one with all the submarines, including a tanker that eats other submarines. It's an elaborate plot by some villain in a secret underwater lair to cause the world powers to blow each other up in nuclear war (yep, this plotline was bound to happen). Bond travels from Egypt to the depths of the sea to investigate. He confronts a huge man with metal teeth - an awesomely invincible henchman named Jaws. There are fights. There are car chases. Inevitably, his adventure requires the use of a car that turns into a submarine (seriously, WTF?). It gradually culminates into a huge, all-out battle in the middle of a supertanker, and a showdown in the secret underwater lair.

Bond adventures don't get more over-the-top than this, although it's not always that thrilling of a picture. The first half of the movie always felt rather dry, long, and stuffy to me. Even with Roger Moore's wit and charms, pacing seems to drag at times. When the big finale hits, it can be rather thrilling, especially with the stakes elevated to such a massive degree. What makes this film more interesting will be the characters. With Bond being paired with his Soviet equivalent - a woman just as skilled and confident as he is - the dynamics become fairly more interesting than normal. Unfortunately, I always felt that Stromburg is the least interesting villain of the series, so the whole thing comes off as dry and forgettable.

Oh yeah, this is also nothing like the original book. Then again, I wasn't a fan of the book. Read Dr. No instead.

This film uses pretty good photography and solid editing. Roger Moore continues to exude charm and wit as James Bond. Barbara Bach is lovely in her role and she plays the part pretty well. Curt Jürgens strikes me as extremely flat and stereotypical as the villain. Richard Kiel is awesome. Writing in this movie is so-so. This production uses good-looking locales. Sets, props, and costumes range from being okay to being rather fake-looking. Marvin Hamlisch's music score features some more disco-type of stuff, which I find gaudy. I am not a fan of Carly Simon's theme song, but most people love it.

The joy of The Spy Who Loved Me is partly in its unique (albeit inevitable) premise and partly in just how over-the-top it is. It's exactly the same kind of stuff that would inspire Austin Powers twenty years later. I don't think it's always that fun of a picture, but it's good fun for all Bond fans.

3.5/5 (Experience: Pretty Good | Story: Average | Film: Pretty Good)

Film Review: The Man With the Golden Gun (007)

James Bond has faced a plethora of iconic villains at this point - Ernst Stavro Blofeld, Auric Goldfinger, Dr. No, Emilio Largo, and more. All of them have matched Bond with their charisma, wits, and ruthlessness. The Man With the Golden Gun does so as well, in addition to matching Bond in skill.

The second film featuring Roger Moore will likely come off as just more of the same to most people - it's another outlandish adventure in which Bond travels abroad, gets chased, faces the bad guy, and gets the girl in the end, as always. I always felt this was one of Moore's funner pictures though - the levity is present, for better or for worse, but the pacing hardly ever drags. There is a great car chase scene in the middle of the movie, with a magnificent stunt in which a car jumps over a river and does an inverted twist in midair (just, ignore the slide whistle they stupidly added in). There are great scenes where Bond confronts leads and outwits his enemies throughout Hong Kong and Thailand. There's a kung-fu fight in the mix, just for the hell of it. It all builds up to a showdown with the titular villain on his own island, which is set up as a deadly funhouse. The whole movie exudes the classic blend of Bond escapism that we all know and love, even if it does seem really light and fluffy.

The plot is probably too convoluted for its own good - it's an elaborate plot in which Bond gets a bullet with his name on it, but it turned out to be a ruse to get him to kill the bad guy, and so on. A senseless subplot involving an outlandish device - the solar agitator - makes it even more senseless. Despite all these contrivances, there is at least one thing that I think makes this film the most redeemable: the villain. Francisco Scaramanga is the perfect foil character to James Bond - both are gentlemen with charm, taste, and charisma. They both womanize and share the same vices. Unlike Bond, however, Scaramanga takes pleasure out of killing, and it molded him into a shadowy reflection of what Bond's own dark side must look like. On these merits, I find the showdown between Bond and Scaramanga to be an epic moment for the series.

This film boasts pretty good photography and editing. Roger Moore continues to keep his tongue in his cheek as James Bond. Christopher Lee is chillingly perfect as Scaramanga, and quite possibly steals the show. Hervé Villechaize plays one of the more memorable henchmen in the series (and it's a part that doesn't seem too far off from his eventual role in Fantasy Island). Maud Adams and Britt Ekland are both lovely and charming to watch as the Bond ladies, although the latter can be a rather irritating twit at times. Cliffton James returns as the buffoonish sheriff from Louisiana - we all wish he didn't. Writing is okay, it gets the job done. This production uses plenty of exquisite, foreign locales. Sets, props, and costumes are pretty lavish and good. John Barry's music score is decent. I don't think Lulu's music score has aged that well, but it sure is catchy.

Most folks have been dismissive of The Man With the Golden Gun, but I love the sense of adventure it has. More importantly, I love the characters - especially the villain, who stands out among the other goons that Roger Moore's Bond has to face. I see it as a decent balance of escapism, action, and levity, and it comes out as my favorite film from Roger Moore's repertoire as Bond.

4/5 (Experience: Very Good | Story: Okay | Film: Pretty Good)

Film Review: Live and Let Die (007)

In James Bond's eighth cinematic adventure, Roger Moore steps in the well-worn shoes of the famous British spy. He goes on an adventure that involves drug trafficking, and oddly enough, voodoo.

The film definitely has action to spare - there are a few car chases, a major boat chase, and a chase scene with a plane on a tarmac. In between these setpieces, Bond faces various sorts of peril, including a pretty cool scene at a crocodile farm. The tone is light, but there is some edge to it as Bond traverses through the streets of Harlem, the bayou of Louisiana, and the superstitious realms of the Caribbean. And, of course, it all ends at a secret lair of some kind... With Roger Moore in the lead this time, Bond becomes a lot less about kicking butt and taking names, and a lot more about the tongue-in-cheek wit and charm - it's not quite as overbearing in this film as it is in others, but it's quite the departure from the 60s era of Bond.

This plot has always been a little hard to grasp to me - the film shows you all the different aspects of the villain's sprawling plot, but does little to tie them together. Bond seems to go from one end of it to the other based on the whims of the script. There's nothing much to the characters - they're as one-dimensional as they can be. The film carries over some aspects of blaxploitation, which was big at the time, but it's hard to tell if it's really a good fit for Bond or not.

This film has good, but hardly great, photography. Editing seemed a little screwy to me at times. Acting is a bizarre thing to judge - you'll either love or hate Roger Moore's version of Bond, but in this first film, there are times when he tries to act good and tough. I enjoyed watching Yaphet Kotto and Julius Harris as the villains. Jane Seymour looks great and plays her part well. Gloria Hendry does the same. Cliffton James plays a cartoonish buffoon of a sheriff, and it's so goofy it's embarrassing. Writing is so-so. This production uses pretty real-looking locales, but the sets, props, and costumes are a bit on the fake side. The music score's okay. Paul McCartney's theme song is one of the classics - unfortunately, I feel it's been played to death after all these years.

There are fun moments in Live and Let Die, but the plot and all the things in it makes for a rather strange brew. Still worth a look for Bond fans.

3.5/5 (Experience: Pretty Good | Story: Average | Film: Pretty Good)

Film Review: Diamonds Are Forever (007)

For the seventh James Bond adventure - and the last EON production featuring Sean Connery - the famous spy goes on one of his wildest and weirdest adventures.

The film starts off briskly, for in the immediate aftermath of OHMSS, we watch Bond mercilessly hunt down his arch-nemesis and take revenge. Presumably. The events of the last film are never explicitly acknowledged, but it firmly re-establishes Bond as an unstoppable man of action. From there on, however, the film remains light and campy in its tone. There is action to be had, including a few car chases and a big gun battle on an oil rig. It seems like Bond is thrust in and out of peril repeatedly. But there's also a lot of goofiness to it - Bond commandeers a moon vehicle in one scene, he fights a pair of acrobats named Bambi and Thumper just for the hell of it, and there's a pair of hitmen who act fruity. There's jokes that aren't that funny, and much like the actual casinos Bond moseys through, the film feels quite tacky and cheap.

The story's not too terrible, but it does venture into outlandish territory. Bond's investigation has a lot of ups and downs, with some deception games involved, but once everything clears up it becomes a race to stop the villain's evil plan. The film is pretty evenly silly throughout, and it doesn't leave that much of an impact in the end.

This film is made with good, but rarely great, photography. Editing is okay. Acting is swell - Sean Connery is still apt as James Bond, even with more tongue-in-cheek humor involved. Jill St. John is quite the looker in this film, but I found her character borderline unlikable. I loved Charles Gray's performance as Blofeld - the sheer villainy and class he exudes is phenomenal, just as it should be. Writing is pretty dumb. Most of this film is set in Vegas, so naturally, a lot of it looks tacky. But all things considering, the locales, sets, props, and costumes get the job done well. Special effects towards the end are terrible. John Barry's music score is really good, and Shirley Bassey's theme song is great.

Diamonds Are Forever is as silly as a Bond film can get (at least until Moonraker came along). Even then, there are things to like and enjoy about it, and it's still good-natured fun for Bond fans.

3.5/5 (Experience: Goofy | Story: Average | Film: Pretty Good)

Film Review: You Only Live Twice (007)

After so many plots unraveled across four classic films, James Bond would finally reach the top and confront the head man of SPECTRE, in You Only Live Twice.

This time, Bond's mission takes him to Japan. It starts off hard and fast, as he fakes his death, and then struggles to escape death in a constant string of confrontations and encounters on foreign soil. When Bond has to infiltrate a secret volcanic lair, he resorts to the ultimate cover: marrying a Japanese girl, while learning ninjutsu and getting facial surgery. It all adds up to a big, explosive battle in the middle of the volcano. As always, there's gadgets (the biggest thing being a small DIY helicopter with loads of weapons) there's ladies, and there's danger galore.

The story follows the original novel just a little bit, but the book will always have the edge because it has one important dramatic angle that the movie misses out on: the theme of revenge. The book was a pretty intense struggle, because it follows immediately after On Her Majesty's Secret Service. If you know what happens in that story, then you know how driven Bond becomes to finding Blofeld and making him pay. Also, Bond actually became a ninja and infiltrated a castle to get his vengeance - how cool is that?

The movie misses out on many of these opportunities, and instead keeps the tone light and fluffy. It takes some pretty ridiculous turns, including a useless subplot involving a rocket that steals other rockets in space. The only thing that makes this feel special is that he fakes death and assume a disguise, but it never reaches a level of significance that affects the plot much. For Bond, it's just business as usual.

This film is made with decent photography. One thing I think it weird though is that most shots, especially during the fight scenes, are taken from really really far away. Editing is okay. Acting is fine for what it is: Sean Connery seems to give a more tongue-in-cheek portrayal of Bond, but his presence is still welcome. Donald Pleasence plays the villain pretty dryly, but his mere presence and look is iconic. I have no complaints with Akiko Wakabayashi's, Mie Hama's, or Tetsuro Tamba's performances. Writing is okay, but most of the jokes fall horribly flat. This production has good-looking locales. Some of the props, costumes, and special effects appear cheap. I was never a fan of Nancy Sinatra's theme song, but the music score is alright.

You Only Live Twice is enjoyable, but also lightweight, silly, and rather shallow. The book is quite a bit better, but even by the standards of the film series, there are better Bond adventures.

3/5 (Experience: Pretty Good | Story: Average | Film: Average)

Film Review: On Her Majesty's Secret Service (007)

Of all the classic Bond films, this one represents the most drastic deviation. It's a darker, more serious adventure that takes the character to more profound levels of peril and tragedy.

Right from the start, the film differentiates itself with its dreary imagery and a hard-hitting fight scene on a beach. Then there's a long, winding series of fights, deception, and intrigue. A good chunk of the film is devoted to a lengthy chase across Switzerland, which includes a ton of skiing, a huge avalanche, and a car chase. It eventually builds up to an all-out battle in the mountains. Then there's the ending, which is the one thing that pushes this whole film above and beyond the normal levels of a Bond adventure. It is a dramatic and profound turn for the character, and it has to be seen to be understood.

The story's generally more of the same: Bond has a mission to find a bad guy, reveal the evil plot, then take him out. He spends most of the time undercover, so the thrills and intrigue are much more grounded. The actual plot that's revealed is as outlandish and weird as they come. What matters the most are the characters: Bond is still the man, but the love interest provides a touching flourish that gives the story more weight.

Most of this film features good photography, but some shots are a bit hectic. Editing is very punchy, to the point where shots become compressed to mere seconds, and it almost appears agitating (though not nearly as bad as most modern movies, like the Bourne series, or Quantum of Solace). For a film from the 60s, it's pretty wild. Acting is quite the mixed bag. I was never a fan of George Lazenby, but the more I watch the film, the more forgiving I am of him - he embodies the voice and swagger of the character well enough. I'm still not a fan of Telly Savalas, whose portrayal of Blofeld feels very odd and foreign to me. I do love Diana Rigg in this film. Writing is okay. This production has good-looking locales. Some of the sets, props, and costumes are a bit gaudy and weird, and most special effects look kinda bad. John Barry's music score is superb - his main theme is so dramatic, it's chilling. Unfortunately, I am not a fan of Louis Armstrong's love theme.

Even though there are odd things to hate about OHMSS, it is a bold film that offers an intriguing direction for Bond, and offers a little more substance to its story that gives the ending a proper punch. For that alone, all Bond fans need to see the film at least once.

4/5 (Experience: Pretty Good | Story: Good | Film: Pretty Good)

Film Review: From Russia With Love (007)

In the midst of the Cold War, it's inevitable that they'd send James Bond on some kind of mission that would pit him against the Soviets. In his second official film, the man goes to even more exotic locations with even bigger stakes, in a spy adventure that would set even more trends for future films to follow.

The film starts off rather dry - a collection of standard scenes where Bond gets his mission and jets to Instanbul. Even then, these scenes are pretty eye-catching, and fans will geek out at seeing Q and the members of SPECTRE for the first time. In the film's last act, however, a bunch of huge twists emerge, and it becomes one thrilling action scene after another. There is a pretty neat train fight, followed by the characters being run down by a helicopter, followed by an explosive boat chase, and just when everybody seems safe, there's one more henchman to fight. It adds up to a complete and satisfying action film.

The story always felt rather random to me throughout the first half, but the second half pulls out some interesting twists that put it in a pretty neat perspective, and helps keep the film in line with others in the series. A few conventions are introduced that will carry over in future films, such as the introduction of gadgets, and having one final fight scene before the credits roll. Overall, the film is a pretty twisty thriller with plenty of action, but it's still well-grounded and satisfying.

This film is crafted with good-looking photography and editing. Sean Connery continues to excel as James Bond. Pedro Armendáriz shows exceptional dedication to his role (he was battling cancer at the time of shooting). Daniela Bianchi and Tatiana Romanova look great in their roles and are quite playful in their roles. Lotte Lenya and Robert Shaw are good villains we love to hate. I think the script could have been more focused, but parts of it are really good. This production uses good, real-looking sets, props, and costumes. John Barry's music score is decent.

From Russia With Love is one of the essential classics in the series, and it deserves to be seen at least once.

4/5 (Entertainment: Pretty Good | Story: Good | Film: Very Good)

Film Review: Dr. No (007)

Not counting the 1954 made-for-TV rendition of Casino Royale, the film adaptation of Dr. No is where the cinematic saga of James Bond truly begins. Chances are that you already know the man, even if you've never seen the movies; Bond's image and swagger have permeated through pop culture for the past five decades, crafting the classic archetype and stereotype of a British special agent (look no further than Austin Powers, Archer, or Kingsman for many fine examples of how far and how long the Bond image has persevered). He is timelessly appealing through his smooth combination of charm, sophistication, and ruthlessness.

Dr. No introduces us to the rough and romantic adventures of Bond. It's nowhere near as action-packed as other movies in the series, but its simplicity as a spy thriller is what makes it elegant. There are just a few fights and chases; when they happen, they are modestly satisfying and thrilling. Most of the film's appeal will be in the smaller details; the way Bond dives into the mystery and sidesteps henchmen at every turn is expert and cool. It gradually builds up to an outlandish climax, in which Bond confronts the titular Dr. No in his secret lair, and has to stop his evil schemes. This becomes the fundamental template for future Bond films, but Dr. No stands out with its fair share of iconic scenes, including Bond's introduction during a game of Baccarat, a certain scene at a beach where Honey Rider makes her appearance, and a memorable dinner scene with the villain.

The story follows after Ian Fleming's novel faithfully, although many parts of the story are changed. The story unfolds pretty neatly, gradually introducing the audience to Bond, the various characters he encounters, and the exotic world he inhabits. The plot has a satisfying structure, filled with just enough thrills and mystery to keep it moving. Even though Bond himself is an alluring character, most of the people in the film are one-dimensional; hardly anything is revealed about their motivations to make them stand out above the definitions of their archetypes. However, they all have a worthy presence and are likable to some degree. The film overall plays out as a fine piece of adventure and escapism, but it's only a small taste of even greater things to come.

The film sports very good photography and editing. Acting is swell; Sean Connery is perfectly charismatic and iconic as James Bond, embodying all the right aspects to make his character shine even to this day. Joseph Wiseman is pretty stiff and robotic as the villain, but for interesting effect. I felt Ursula Andress was somewhat unlikable in her role; she's best seen for her looks. I enjoyed the performances of Jack Lord and most other players. Writing is not too shabby. This production uses very exotic and interesting locales. Sets, props, and costumes are quite old-fashioned, but still very slick. The music score features a lot of really funky calypso music, but Monty Norman's main theme is an instantly recognizable tune that resonates to this day.

Dr. No is one slick thriller. Future Bond films will take the character to even more exciting adventures with even bigger stakes and bolder expressions, but this is the film that started it all, and it deserves a watch at least once.

4/5 (Entertainment: Pretty Good | Story: Good | Film: Very Good)

Film Review: Casino Royale (007) (1967)

Don't be fooled. This is not James Bond. Even with a plot that involves several James Bond imposters, the entire film is not Bond; it is a mere shadow of Bond. You might think that a Bond parody is a good idea, since it's been done before with the deadpan sincerity of Our Man Flint and the all-out wackiness of Austin Powers. By those standards, the effectiveness of the comedy in 1967's Casino Royale is...iffy.

The film is as colorful and goofy as they come. The whole thing reeks of 60s kitsch, complete with psychedelic colors and music. As a mockery of the Bond franchise, the film frequently divulges in emphasizing the sex appeal of the Bond character, often pitting him against an onslaught of various female spies. You can expect a few drug references, some innuendos, and some goofy action scenes. There are secret lairs, casinos, stupid technology and more.

As nice as it all sounds, the film is one hot mess. Partly because very little of it is actually funny. A few lines are funny, a few gags work, but most of the film comes off as obnoxious and lame. What really makes this film daft, unfortunately, is the story. There's a faint semblance to the original novel, but most of the film is slapped together with seemingly-random scenes that don't really congeal into any kind of a storyline. It feels like one long montage of random scenes (or possibly sketches). Even with the sheer star power, very few of the characters carry enough of a presence to stand out. The whole thing comes off as a silly, disjointed, irreverent experience.

This film is made with average photography and pretty wacky editing. Writing is pretty stupid and the acting is cheesy...which is not necessarily bad for this type of comedy, but it hardly helps either. This production uses some very colorful and gaudy-looking sets, props, and costumes. Music is very upbeat and jazzy, for better or for worse.

You'd have to be a real serious fan of 1960s camp to love this silly farce. For me, it's just goofiness without much real comedic weight, much like how Police Academy: Mission to Moscow was. If it's a good spy comedy you want, better stick with Austin Powers.

2/5 (Experience: Poor | Story: Awful | Film: Marginal)

Film Review: Casino Royale (007) (1954)

You may know the man and you may know the story, but have you ever seen the first ever James Bond motion picture? Technically, this hour-long made-for-TV feature is the first time Bond was adapted for a medium outside of the original novels.

Despite that notoriety, this really isn't much to scream about. Maybe it was exciting TV back in 1954, but after the onslaught of bigger and more prolific James Bond pictures, this little feature has not aged well at all. Even on its own merits, the film offers a small smattering of struggles and thrills, but it's all really small-scale, bland, and not that exciting.

This is also a rather lame adaptation of Ian Flemming's book. At its core, the film uses a very simple structure: Bond enters casino, plays off against Le Chiffre, gets tortured, fights his way out, and that's it. In both the novel and 2006 film, there is a lot more to it; both represented a more pronounced introduction (or re-introduction for the '06 film) for the iconic character, it marked the first encounter between Bond and SMERSH, and he has a significant relationship that would give the story more weight and mold him for future stories. None of that carries through in this version. There are many small changes and a lot of huge cuts to the story, which trims this whole affair down to something barebones, shallow, and flimsy. Among the various changes, James Bond is made into an American dude named Jimmy, Felix is renamed to Clarence for some reason, Vesper Lynd is nowhere to be seen, and is replaced by a female Mathis. Worst of all, none of these people have any ounce of presence or charisma. Yeah, at its best is just simple-minded throwaway entertainment; at its worst, it's a mess.

The film naturally doesn't have much of a style to it, given its limitations as a TV production. Filming and editing are straightforward, if not rather bland. Acting is a hit and a miss; Barry Nelson is easily the worst actor to play Bond in the history of Bond, but he does have a few unintentionally funny lines. Peter Lorre, on the other hand, is effective as Le Chiffre. Nobody else really stands out much. This production uses simple sets, props, and costumes. Music adds little to the experience.

If you're a diehard James Bond fan, this feature is worth a look just so you can say you've seen it. Other than that, you're better off sticking with the Eon productions.

2/5 (Entertainment: Poor | Story: Poor | Film: Poor)