It's really interesting to listen to someone who has the opposite view as you. I always think your analysis is very good and eloquent (even though I absolutely love this film).
I second this emotion. Looking forward to watching this video as it is cool to hear opposing views. I too love FYEO, but one of the things I love about movies is hearing differing opinions.
This is certainly our biggest disagreement thus far! But it’s great to hear your thoughts on it at-length. For me, this is the Moore entry that best balances escapist fun with some straighter, Fleming-esque plot elements, and I particularly enjoy the sort of outdoorsy, sportsman-ish aspect you touch on that is probably more prevalent here than in any other installment (skiing, scuba diving, mountain climbing). Bond kicking the car over the cliff is my all-time favorite Moore-as-Bond moment, as well. I will absolutely concede that the age and sexual dynamics between Bond and Melina don’t work (I’d argue there are far worse offenders to come in Moore’s tenure, but still!), and a mentorship angle would have been the better way to go. And then if you bulked-up the Countess role a bit, you could still give Bond a more substantial (and visually age-acceptable) character to romance.
My favorite Moore moments are, in no real order, "Hope you enjoyed the show" from SPY, "Did I?" from MOONRAKER, and "All in the wrist" from OCTOPUSSY - a bit of a common vibe between all three! I don't find FYEO very Flemingesque, to be honest. FYEO is lacking in the color one finds in Fleming. Fleming's love of surrealism is almost entirely absent.
I meant Fleming more in terms of the plot strands directly taken from the short stories and the "Cold War tensions" backdrop. You're correct that there's not really any of the extra peculiarities/color that Fleming often played with. As for Moore moments, that MOONRAKER one is certainly up there for me, as well.
I agree with your assessment and have never understood the adulation this movie gets. The villains are bland and the movie itself comes off as a string of action set pieces with little going on in between. The bizarreness and weird atmosphere of previous entries like Golden Gun are missing here, and so is the deft hand of Tom Mankiewicz. This is the first time in the series that Moore appears to old unfortunately. and this would have been a better film with which to introduce a new Bond, which was the reason the visit to Tracy's grave was inserted into the script. The mountain climbing finale is better suited to a Guns of Navarone type of adventure film rather than a Bond movie. I'm not a fan of John Glen's stodgy, workmanlike direction which unfortunately continued throughout the 80s. Issues aside, AVTAK's Zorin and Mayday are better examples of the types of villains Bond needs to be pitted against.
This is my favorite Moore Bond Movie. It had everything. Skiing Bond, underwater Bond. And angry Bond, which he didn't show often. The mountain climbing at the end, it was all just awesome. Plus the music, on another level.
True. FYEO(1981) is certainly a smaller film than TSWLM(1977) and Moonraker(1979). However, I still love it! For me, Roger Moore's last 5 movies(1977, 1979, 1981, 1983, 1985.) are all great! His first 2 movies are weak and weird. But I'm fine with older Moore. He was great in FYEO & OP & AVTAK. He's age didn't bother me at all. ***** Of course, there are some unnecessary details in FYEO. First: too light comic opening and death for Blofeld. By the way. As you know he wasn't officially Blofeld. He was "unknown bald old man in wheelchair", which is crazy! So why show Tracy's grave, if Blofeld wasn't even real??? Bibi was totally unnecessary character and so were many of the lesser henchmen/allies. The film looks almost like a TV movie but it's still better than LTK(1989). Yes, the opening and especially the ending(Margaret Thatcher) is so ridiculous. Because 90% of the movie is pretty serious, which I like!
For Your Eyes Only struggles with making the transition from the over-the-top plots of Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker back to the more grounded, thriller roots of Fleming that really hadn't been seen since OHMSS. It's really in the opener to FYEO that John Glen tries to make this transition by killing Blofeld. I've read that his death was meant as a "F U" to McClory; a statement that the official Bond series doesn't need Blofeld or SPECTRE to continue, and also seen as a way of transitioning from the world domination-obsessed megalomaniac villains to more grounded villains of the 80s and beyond. But the series never fully rids itself of this type of villain. They do with Kristatos, but he's one of the least memorable villains, and it seems John Glen realised this and tried to return some of the attributes of old school Bond villains to the series by pairing Kamal Khan's understated, charming villain with the over-the-top, crazy General Orlov in Octopussy. The series really seems to struggle with its villains in the 80s until Franz Sanchez, who is one of the best, successfully marrying a real-world villain with the Flemings idea that the villain is a dark mirror of Bond. Max Zorin and May Day would have worked better if playing opposite Dalton, as Chris Walken is closer in age to him than Moore, and he has that menace that would work so well opposite Dalton. Zorin's backstory as a Naz1 test tube baby is never explored because it is too dark for a Moore Bond film, but would have been right at home in a Dalton Bond film. Glen was up against it because Moore was beloved but should have been replaced in the early 80s and audiences weren't ready for a gritty Bond at this time. I think it is telling that Glen begins his Bond directing career with FYEO and ends with LTK, as FYEO wants to be more serious that it is, and I feel LTK is always where Glen wanted to take the series from the beginning, but couldn't. This seems to be emphasised by Glen's return to Tracy's death in both FYEO and LTK, to humanise Bond more. FYEO is filled with references to OHMSS, but LTK feels like a sequel to OHMSS in many respects. Instead, of giving us that revenge sequel to OHMSS with Diamonds Are Forever, we get Bond acting out his anger through the similar murder of Della on her wedding day. I've always viewed this scene when Bond discovers her body as something that triggers his own unresolved trauma and causes him to lash out with such vengeance against Sanchez.
Most of your analysis rings true. I always felt the pre-title sequence is awkward and silly. Also the Melina side of the story is set up fine but kind of falls flat. I don’t mind Kristatos as a more subtle villain but there is something missing. My favorite scene is when Bond is scaling the cliff
This one used to be my least favourite Roger Moore Bond film as well, until I gave it a rewatch and had a blast! Honestly, even though The Man With The Golden Gun is my least favourite nowadays, I can still have a fine time with it, which is why the Moore era is my absolute favourite!
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond Then I suggest you rewatch The Man with the Golden Gun, Q, and then tell me how you can say that For Your Eyes Only is the worst Moore Bond film.
Great review. FYEO is good, there are some great stunts like the skiing and rock climbing scenes. And the final showdown with Lock is badass. But if i had to grab a dvd off the shelf for a Sir Roger Moore James Bond fix i would pick TSWLM, Octopussy or AVTAK every time because they are so entertaining and a heap of fun
If you can trash my favorite Moore Bond film and I keep coming back for more, that can only mean two things: a) You produce an excellent and entertaining product, and b) it really doesn't matter because we're all Bond fans, and deep down, we kind of love them all! :) Having said that, I just showed FYEO to a good friend who had never seen it, and he loved it! So THERE!!! ;)
One can see Bond films as a Rorschach test for the personality who is doing the ranking. You bring up some good points that I agree with, like the age difference between Bond and Melina, being an indicator of how Roger Moore was just too old at this point. Lynn, Holly Johnson is only one year younger than Carol Bouquet, yet they play it off that she was a teenager compared to Carol Bouquet playing a seasoned adult. That being said, our tastes differ, I rate this film quite high, especially among the Roger Moore films. It seems to be two types of James Bond fans, ones who embrace camp and others who are turned off by it. I am the latter. Even before I read the Fleming novels, I was very much a fan of the Fleming character as written. Of the reasons why you did not embrace this film, were some the very reasons why I did. I love a good, solid, simple, spy thriller and this film was very much in that vein. I always felt that this was Roger Moore‘s stab at FRWL. Even before I was in fan of James Bond, I was a fan of Roger Moore as The Saint. And it’s very good observation that if this feels like a Saint episode, so now I love it even more.
I'm not picky about the direction things go. A great Bond movie can be gritty or camp - the measure of success always lies in the commitment and conviction behind it. When making a movie, if you're going to make a decision, don't do it in half-measures. And this feels like a movie of all half-measures to me.
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond Fairpoint, they were trying to do a more grounded, spy thriller, but they still had Roger Moore as their star. I for one, found it refreshing that they were trying to do a real spy thriller with Roger Moore.
I think that gag pre-title sequence is far more insulting than Diamonds Are Forever ignoring OHMSS. As for the rest of the film, I don't think this is the worst Moore film. This is a fairly competent thriller but that's all that it is. Roger Moore is good here but I would have preferred Timothy Dalton starting his Bond tenure in this movie.
Ugh, you breaka my heart! LOL 😅 Respectfully I could debate your review point by point on this film. I LOVE For Your Eyes Only! Lol for so many reasons you don't. It's truly what makes being a Bond fan is about. Why we love these films for our own reasons. If you get into debates, I'm IN!
This was the very first James Bond movie I ever watched and I will always have an extreme fondness for this film. Sometimes it's not only the film, but the situation around when you watch a film. That's why so many view points can be different for a single motion picture and that why reviewers are pretty much worthless.
Ryan, you'd like FOR YOUR EYES ONLY better if you saw my fan-edit. The story is tighter, more coherent and more even-toned. The pre-title sequence, most of Bibi, and Margaret Thatcher are cut. The assault on Havelock's yacht is the pre-title sequence ending with the push into Melina's eyes as the song "For Your Eyes Only" starts. After the titles, segue into Bond's walk into the cemetery, and his departure on the helicopter. Then cut to his arrival at the office. It's important to get the first 10 minutes into proper order, the way Richard Maibaum intended, and before Michael G. Wilson changed everything. I've read the scripts. It was better before Wilson decided he was a script doctor. I would add that Wilson had no training or education in writing or filmmaking, he just decided to he was expert by inheritance. After the production wrapped EON watched a rough assembly and decided the film needed more comedy, so Wilson came up with the helicopter opening, much of the Bibi silliness, and luring Melina to the Alps. In my edit you won't even miss these things. Bond on the helicopter watching the priest cross himself is important, but that's all of the helicopter scene that's needed. Why? Because it was a theme that Bond gets spooked -- "before you set out for revenge you must first dig two graves." He thinks he's not going to survive the mission. This makes the action sequences more tense, and the death of the Countess more ominous and unsettling. This underlying subtext did not survive Wilson's rewrite and Glenn's sledgehammer direction.
Disagree. Moore is my favorite Bond and For Your Eyes Only is one of his best. It was in stark contrast to his previous films which took the franchise into the sci-fi realm. But being a more serious Cold War spy movie doesn’t make it lesser. Great characters, great action, and great fun.
As I explain in the video, I agree that it has great action. As for the other two... no. But to each their own! I like Bond as Cold War spy very much (Dalton is my favorite Bond). As far as Bond films in this vein go, I think THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS does the Cold War thriller thing much better than FOR YOUR EYES ONLY does.
Can’t wait to watch this video based on the title, as FYEO, is actually my favorite of the Roger Moore Bonds. But I’m interested in your perspective and will watch it again with that in mind. To be fair, I’m not a huge fan of most of the Moore Bonds, but this one was was my favorite of those.
Woow you really struggle with this one ; ) I'm still not sure why as i love this one. I think the only sad part about this movie is that a stutman died in the bobsleigh scene ; (
I agree that the opening is incredibly weak WRT the lore. But I think the expansion of Bond into the all-around sportsman is probably the best aspect of the film. And Moore's ability to "flip the switch" from light and clownish to cold blooded is at its sharpest here. This is one of my favorites, but you make your case well. Great thing about the series and the character is that there is something for everyone.
This film was the first to be based on a short story and ironically comes across that way. Basically a series of interchangeable vignettes with vanilla characters. The pre title sequence with Blofeld, coupled with Bill Conti’s horribly dated lighthearted music is a terrible affront to all the prior scenes with Blofeld that were scored by John Barry…”jaunty and trivializing” as scored by Conti-completely agree! And I hate the very non-Bond sounding title theme, worse than “Nobody Does it Better”. It also doesn’t help matters that Carole Bouquet’s acting is plain awful. Conti’s music score for the body of the film is rather deplorable as well and places the film in the realm of a tv movie of the week for me.
My biggest gripe is that the production budget feels quite low. The over-budget production of Moonraker is notoriously well known for causing budget cuts for the films after it, and I think it hurts FYEO. For me, this film is #14/25 in my ranking. I enjoy how grounded it is, especially after Moonraker, and before the goofiness of the next two films. I have a lot of trouble enjoying the more comedic Moore films, so FYEO has been one that I really gravitate with. It’s in my top three of his films, behind Live and Let Die and Spy Who Loved Me.
I like movies that take big swings. If you're gonna do something, you might as well *really* go for it. FOR YOUR EYES ONLY just feels like it lacks ambition to me. It's like an entree that lacks seasoning.
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond I totally understand that sentiment. It is a very safe film, but for me, it's sandwiched in between two ones that I just have trouble enjoying. It is certainly the least ambitious Moore outing as Bond.
@@Paul_Whaley I do hope you'll tune in for my OCTOPUSSY video. It's a movie peppered with silly touches, yes, but at its core, I think it has a very intelligent plot rooted in the Ian Fleming ethos.
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond Ryan, I've pretty watched every analysis that you've done so far. I appreciate your take on film, so you can be assured that I'll be tuning in for OCTOPUSSY & AVTAK. OCTOPUSSY is certainly a film that I find myself liking more and more with each repeat viewing, it's just hard for me to enjoy the sillier side of Bond. I do agree that the base plot of a stolen nuke is great, I just get lost with the silliness of some of the Indian sections of the film, not to mention Moore dressed as a clown. I'll be looking forward to the analysis when it goes live!
I, for one, enjoy this film. When I was young, this was my least favorite Moore film, too. I mean, where were the surreal lairs, the cartoonish supervillainy, the fantastic gadgets??? But as I got older, I appreciated it much more, and continue to do so. I think I wrote in a previous post that for me, this film is right up there with "Spy" as one of my favorite Moore Bonds. The thing I like about it is, indeed, the maturation of Moore's Bond, as you mentioned in your video. You do see a bit of a progression from the callous-coolness of his first four films, to a more contemplative Bond in this one. One who is older, weathered by his life's many battles (including the loss of his wife, which is not only represented in the grave visit at the beginning, but is also symbolized within his brief encounter with Countess Lisl). And in some of his interactions with Melina, where he tries to convey how killing numerous people will forever alter one's being. Moore does some of his finest acting here IMO; he gives off "government assassin" vibes in this one. I also feel that in this film, a good portion of Bond's killings (minus Blofeld's) make more of an impact. Yes, it's a Bond movie, but I appreciate seeing a few streaks of substance in this film that I wouldn't get too much in his other films. Is it drab, less-bizarre, too-dressed down? Yes, it is. It's probably the more unique Moore film than the other 6 he'd done, and one thing I enjoy about the Bond series is when it gives the audience a bit of variety. There's still some goofiness, but overall, it's a (dare-I-say-it) gritty little Bond film that leans on suspense, with Bond using his wits and practical weaponry instead of gadgets.
I think the story of this movie would make for a great James Bond video game, with Havelock as a duel playable protagonist with the crossbow as her main weapon.
This is my favorite Roger Moore Bond movie. But I get where you're at being on the outside looking in because I feel Last Crusade is the worst of the first four(Lucas/Speilberg) Indiana Jones movies for some of the same reasons.
I strongly disagree.... The worst Roger Moore's Bond films are The Man With The Golden Gun and Moonraker.... Here is my ranking of all Roger Moore's Bond films: 1. For Your Eyes Only 2. The Spy Who Loved Me 3. Live And Let Die 4. Octopussy 5. A View To A Kill 6. Moonraker 7. The Man With The Golden Gun The best Bond films of all time are GoldenEye, Skyfall and Casino Royale in my opinion.
It is interesting that FYEO was originally intended to follow TSWLM but was delayed due to the decision to cash in on Star Wars fever by making MR next. Would the original 1979 version of FYEO have been the same movie we eventually got in 1981? I think the excess and plot replication of MR heavily influenced the stripped down FYEO. So maybe the aborted 1979 version would have been bigger in scale, but presumably not as wild as MR!
"Eyes" is assuredly an OUTLIER entry among the 7 Roger Moore Bond films, whatever one thinks of it. 🤔📽 Is it the story itself, or is Roger simply miscast for this particular 007 film?!
I definitely feel that some fans like FYEO for being a alot more down to earth after you've just gone to space and beyond and its nice to have some pause before you get something nice and action packed again with OCTOPUSSY. Certanly I feel that way when your doing a marathon in order. Though as a kid i was less looking forward to this movie and loved TMWTGG more because it was more silly, fun and surreal. Since being a teen I actually really appreciate this movie more, same way I did with OHMSS or even The empire strikes back. 1:41 mmmmmm I dont know, I feel YOLT is the first one to do that. Which isn't bad as I like that movie but they were making a hit after a hit so it was kind of coming out as an assembley line. 9:52 yeah very good point, up until DAD they make it as though that all the Bonds post OHMSS are spiritually the same character and your meant to kinda suspend your disbelief with that and go with the flow. 19:40 hahah I actually think they did it well and it doesnt feel dated between Bond and Bebe. But yes I feel they could have done a little bit more with Melina and Bond in terms of coaching her from the events that she suffered. 27:09 I know a lot of people feel something could have done better there. Haha I certanly had to watch this one because of the title of your video. I'll be interested in what you think about AVTAK because.........ooo mate I'am no fan of that movie ;)
I don't think YOLT is "assembly line" at all (but it's my second-favorite Bond movie). We'll be sure to talk about it in-depth when I get to talking about the Connery era!
I have ranked all the Bond films and FYEO comes out as my favorite Moore film. I don't get too deep into the why. I just think of which film I'd rather spend my time watching.
Well everybody knows that that movie was made for Timothy Dalton not for Roger Moore and so was Octopussy and a view to a kill because when you go back and I rewatch those three films recently and they’re more darker and tone and more grittier so it kind of makes you wonder that those three films were made for Timothy not for Roger
Because we all know that Mr. broccoli was trying to get a Timothy Dalton into the franchise, a whole lot more sooner and Timothy Dalton decided to decline because of how the franchise was going to, and he did not like it
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond Is that a facetious remark? If you're actually sincere, you're one of the few people I've ever met who would just come right out and acknowledge liking Moonraker.
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond Moonraker has always been my personal favorite Bond. I think it's the one entry that makes optimal use of the running time(which I tend to find excessive in Bond films). About the time that I would normally be getting tired, they employ the novelty of having Bond blast into orbit, and that gives the final half hour or so a vitality that is sometimes missing. I always respect people who matter-of-factly assert unpopular opinions(although in fairness, liking Moonraker is only controversial in forums like this....in real terms, it was enormously successful.)
Sorry, but I think "For Your Eyes Only: is one of the best of the Moore Bond films. "Moonraker" is the one I do not like. The villain is trying to be Blofeld, but can't quite get there and the plot is trying to cash in on Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica or Buck Rogers. Visually FYEO is one of the best Bond films and the theme song is outstanding.
To each their own - I think Drax is a better villain than most (all?) of the Blofelds, except maybe the version in OHMSS. I also strongly disagree re: the visuals of FYEO - it's a film of somewhat murky browns and greens, with flat shot composition and bland lighting. All of the other Moore films are more attractively lensed (except, perhaps, AVTAK), with richer color and production design.
Sorry, but the worst Roger Moore Bond movie is clearly either A View to a Kill or The Man With the Golden Gun. For Your Eyes Only and The Spy Who Loved Me are his best.
Sorry but FYEO is my absolute favourite Moore era Bond movie! You finally see him in front of Teresa’s (his wife’s) grave, put an end to the endless Blofeld appearances in the saga, and bring the character back to his gritty roots by investigating potentially world threatening technology. A little light hearted at times but the dialogue is very strong imo…
It's really interesting to listen to someone who has the opposite view as you. I always think your analysis is very good and eloquent (even though I absolutely love this film).
Thank you, friend!
I second this emotion. Looking forward to watching this video as it is cool to hear opposing views. I too love FYEO, but one of the things I love about movies is hearing differing opinions.
I love this film too! It’s possibly my absolute favorite of all of Roger Moore’s films!
This is certainly our biggest disagreement thus far! But it’s great to hear your thoughts on it at-length. For me, this is the Moore entry that best balances escapist fun with some straighter, Fleming-esque plot elements, and I particularly enjoy the sort of outdoorsy, sportsman-ish aspect you touch on that is probably more prevalent here than in any other installment (skiing, scuba diving, mountain climbing). Bond kicking the car over the cliff is my all-time favorite Moore-as-Bond moment, as well. I will absolutely concede that the age and sexual dynamics between Bond and Melina don’t work (I’d argue there are far worse offenders to come in Moore’s tenure, but still!), and a mentorship angle would have been the better way to go. And then if you bulked-up the Countess role a bit, you could still give Bond a more substantial (and visually age-acceptable) character to romance.
My favorite Moore moments are, in no real order, "Hope you enjoyed the show" from SPY, "Did I?" from MOONRAKER, and "All in the wrist" from OCTOPUSSY - a bit of a common vibe between all three!
I don't find FYEO very Flemingesque, to be honest. FYEO is lacking in the color one finds in Fleming. Fleming's love of surrealism is almost entirely absent.
I meant Fleming more in terms of the plot strands directly taken from the short stories and the "Cold War tensions" backdrop. You're correct that there's not really any of the extra peculiarities/color that Fleming often played with. As for Moore moments, that MOONRAKER one is certainly up there for me, as well.
How can a guy with glasses say that Four Eyes Only is boring?
With great ease!
I agree with your assessment and have never understood the adulation this movie gets. The villains are bland and the movie itself comes off as a string of action set pieces with little going on in between. The bizarreness and weird atmosphere of previous entries like Golden Gun are missing here, and so is the deft hand of Tom Mankiewicz. This is the first time in the series that Moore appears to old unfortunately. and this would have been a better film with which to introduce a new Bond, which was the reason the visit to Tracy's grave was inserted into the script. The mountain climbing finale is better suited to a Guns of Navarone type of adventure film rather than a Bond movie. I'm not a fan of John Glen's stodgy, workmanlike direction which unfortunately continued throughout the 80s. Issues aside, AVTAK's Zorin and Mayday are better examples of the types of villains Bond needs to be pitted against.
I'm glad I'm not alone.
This is my favorite Moore Bond Movie. It had everything. Skiing Bond, underwater Bond. And angry Bond, which he didn't show often. The mountain climbing at the end, it was all just awesome. Plus the music, on another level.
I appreciate and understand your enthusiasm, even if I don't share it!
True. FYEO(1981) is certainly a smaller film than TSWLM(1977) and Moonraker(1979). However, I still love it! For me, Roger Moore's last 5 movies(1977, 1979, 1981, 1983, 1985.) are all great! His first 2 movies are weak and weird. But I'm fine with older Moore. He was great in FYEO & OP & AVTAK. He's age didn't bother me at all. ***** Of course, there are some unnecessary details in FYEO. First: too light comic opening and death for Blofeld. By the way. As you know he wasn't officially Blofeld. He was "unknown bald old man in wheelchair", which is crazy! So why show Tracy's grave, if Blofeld wasn't even real??? Bibi was totally unnecessary character and so were many of the lesser henchmen/allies. The film looks almost like a TV movie but it's still better than LTK(1989). Yes, the opening and especially the ending(Margaret Thatcher) is so ridiculous. Because 90% of the movie is pretty serious, which I like!
The opening is really, really awkward.
The pre-opening credit portion is really a *break-fourth-wall-middle-fingering* directed at rival Kevin McClory!
For Your Eyes Only struggles with making the transition from the over-the-top plots of Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker back to the more grounded, thriller roots of Fleming that really hadn't been seen since OHMSS. It's really in the opener to FYEO that John Glen tries to make this transition by killing Blofeld. I've read that his death was meant as a "F U" to McClory; a statement that the official Bond series doesn't need Blofeld or SPECTRE to continue, and also seen as a way of transitioning from the world domination-obsessed megalomaniac villains to more grounded villains of the 80s and beyond. But the series never fully rids itself of this type of villain. They do with Kristatos, but he's one of the least memorable villains, and it seems John Glen realised this and tried to return some of the attributes of old school Bond villains to the series by pairing Kamal Khan's understated, charming villain with the over-the-top, crazy General Orlov in Octopussy. The series really seems to struggle with its villains in the 80s until Franz Sanchez, who is one of the best, successfully marrying a real-world villain with the Flemings idea that the villain is a dark mirror of Bond. Max Zorin and May Day would have worked better if playing opposite Dalton, as Chris Walken is closer in age to him than Moore, and he has that menace that would work so well opposite Dalton. Zorin's backstory as a Naz1 test tube baby is never explored because it is too dark for a Moore Bond film, but would have been right at home in a Dalton Bond film. Glen was up against it because Moore was beloved but should have been replaced in the early 80s and audiences weren't ready for a gritty Bond at this time. I think it is telling that Glen begins his Bond directing career with FYEO and ends with LTK, as FYEO wants to be more serious that it is, and I feel LTK is always where Glen wanted to take the series from the beginning, but couldn't. This seems to be emphasised by Glen's return to Tracy's death in both FYEO and LTK, to humanise Bond more. FYEO is filled with references to OHMSS, but LTK feels like a sequel to OHMSS in many respects. Instead, of giving us that revenge sequel to OHMSS with Diamonds Are Forever, we get Bond acting out his anger through the similar murder of Della on her wedding day. I've always viewed this scene when Bond discovers her body as something that triggers his own unresolved trauma and causes him to lash out with such vengeance against Sanchez.
This is thought-provoking.
For your eyes only would have been perfect for Dalton.
It would have been a strong film for him, to be sure!
Most of your analysis rings true. I always felt the pre-title sequence is awkward and silly. Also the Melina side of the story is set up fine but kind of falls flat. I don’t mind Kristatos as a more subtle villain but there is something missing. My favorite scene is when Bond is scaling the cliff
The climbing sequence is admittedly great!
This one used to be my least favourite Roger Moore Bond film as well, until I gave it a rewatch and had a blast! Honestly, even though The Man With The Golden Gun is my least favourite nowadays, I can still have a fine time with it, which is why the Moore era is my absolute favourite!
As Bond fans, we always reserve our right to change our minds about Bond movies!
Funny how younger men are uncomfortable seeing older guys with younger women. Almost as if they are scared of the competition. 🤔
Are you kidding? For Your Eyes Only is nearly universally praised as the BEST Roger Moore Bond movie, along with The Spy Who Loved Me.
I never joke about my work, 007.
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond Then I suggest you rewatch The Man with the Golden Gun, Q, and then tell me how you can say that For Your Eyes Only is the worst Moore Bond film.
Great review. FYEO is good, there are some great stunts like the skiing and rock climbing scenes. And the final showdown with Lock is badass. But if i had to grab a dvd off the shelf for a Sir Roger Moore James Bond fix i would pick TSWLM, Octopussy or AVTAK every time because they are so entertaining and a heap of fun
Thanks! FYEO has some good stuff in the mix, but I like my Moore Bonds to be more colorful.
If you can trash my favorite Moore Bond film and I keep coming back for more, that can only mean two things: a) You produce an excellent and entertaining product, and b) it really doesn't matter because we're all Bond fans, and deep down, we kind of love them all! :) Having said that, I just showed FYEO to a good friend who had never seen it, and he loved it! So THERE!!! ;)
Enjoy FYEO in good health!
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBondYou helped me enjoy Moonraker a bit more, so I can't be too mad at ya!
Ha ha awesome
One can see Bond films as a Rorschach test for the personality who is doing the ranking. You bring up some good points that I agree with, like the age difference between Bond and Melina, being an indicator of how Roger Moore was just too old at this point. Lynn, Holly Johnson is only one year younger than Carol Bouquet, yet they play it off that she was a teenager compared to Carol Bouquet playing a seasoned adult. That being said, our tastes differ, I rate this film quite high, especially among the Roger Moore films. It seems to be two types of James Bond fans, ones who embrace camp and others who are turned off by it. I am the latter. Even before I read the Fleming novels, I was very much a fan of the Fleming character as written. Of the reasons why you did not embrace this film, were some the very reasons why I did. I love a good, solid, simple, spy thriller and this film was very much in that vein. I always felt that this was Roger Moore‘s stab at FRWL. Even before I was in fan of James Bond, I was a fan of Roger Moore as The Saint. And it’s very good observation that if this feels like a Saint episode, so now I love it even more.
I'm not picky about the direction things go. A great Bond movie can be gritty or camp - the measure of success always lies in the commitment and conviction behind it.
When making a movie, if you're going to make a decision, don't do it in half-measures. And this feels like a movie of all half-measures to me.
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond Fairpoint, they were trying to do a more grounded, spy thriller, but they still had Roger Moore as their star. I for one, found it refreshing that they were trying to do a real spy thriller with Roger Moore.
I am of the former, which I why I find the Daniel Craig era to be terminally dull. The man needs plastic surgery to smile...
I think that gag pre-title sequence is far more insulting than Diamonds Are Forever ignoring OHMSS. As for the rest of the film, I don't think this is the worst Moore film. This is a fairly competent thriller but that's all that it is. Roger Moore is good here but I would have preferred Timothy Dalton starting his Bond tenure in this movie.
This would've been a good introduction to Dalton, though I think THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS has a much stronger script.
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond I agree that TLD was the stronger film.
Ugh, you breaka my heart! LOL 😅
Respectfully I could debate your review point by point on this film. I LOVE For Your Eyes Only! Lol for so many reasons you don't. It's truly what makes being a Bond fan is about. Why we love these films for our own reasons. If you get into debates, I'm IN!
It seems as though I broke many hearts with this one.
This was the very first James Bond movie I ever watched and I will always have an extreme fondness for this film. Sometimes it's not only the film, but the situation around when you watch a film. That's why so many view points can be different for a single motion picture and that why reviewers are pretty much worthless.
You never forget your first.
Great video, as always! I don't totally agree with you, but it is always pleasant to hear other people's opinions. Keep them coming!
If you disagree with me, you're in good company (judging by the comments on this video)!
Ryan, you'd like FOR YOUR EYES ONLY better if you saw my fan-edit. The story is tighter, more coherent and more even-toned. The pre-title sequence, most of Bibi, and Margaret Thatcher are cut. The assault on Havelock's yacht is the pre-title sequence ending with the push into Melina's eyes as the song "For Your Eyes Only" starts. After the titles, segue into Bond's walk into the cemetery, and his departure on the helicopter. Then cut to his arrival at the office. It's important to get the first 10 minutes into proper order, the way Richard Maibaum intended, and before Michael G. Wilson changed everything. I've read the scripts. It was better before Wilson decided he was a script doctor. I would add that Wilson had no training or education in writing or filmmaking, he just decided to he was expert by inheritance. After the production wrapped EON watched a rough assembly and decided the film needed more comedy, so Wilson came up with the helicopter opening, much of the Bibi silliness, and luring Melina to the Alps. In my edit you won't even miss these things. Bond on the helicopter watching the priest cross himself is important, but that's all of the helicopter scene that's needed. Why? Because it was a theme that Bond gets spooked -- "before you set out for revenge you must first dig two graves." He thinks he's not going to survive the mission. This makes the action sequences more tense, and the death of the Countess more ominous and unsettling. This underlying subtext did not survive Wilson's rewrite and Glenn's sledgehammer direction.
Disagree. Moore is my favorite Bond and For Your Eyes Only is one of his best.
It was in stark contrast to his previous films which took the franchise into the sci-fi realm. But being a more serious Cold War spy movie doesn’t make it lesser.
Great characters, great action, and great fun.
As I explain in the video, I agree that it has great action. As for the other two... no. But to each their own!
I like Bond as Cold War spy very much (Dalton is my favorite Bond). As far as Bond films in this vein go, I think THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS does the Cold War thriller thing much better than FOR YOUR EYES ONLY does.
Can’t wait to watch this video based on the title, as FYEO, is actually my favorite of the Roger Moore Bonds. But I’m interested in your perspective and will watch it again with that in mind. To be fair, I’m not a huge fan of most of the Moore Bonds, but this one was was my favorite of those.
I like big swings rather than half-measures, and, for me, FYEO is very much a film of half-measures.
Woow you really struggle with this one ; ) I'm still not sure why as i love this one. I think the only sad part about this movie is that a stutman died in the bobsleigh scene ; (
That is indeed a tragedy.
I agree that the opening is incredibly weak WRT the lore. But I think the expansion of Bond into the all-around sportsman is probably the best aspect of the film. And Moore's ability to "flip the switch" from light and clownish to cold blooded is at its sharpest here. This is one of my favorites, but you make your case well. Great thing about the series and the character is that there is something for everyone.
Thank you! I'm not out to rain on anyone's parade. I'm happy for everyone who has a great time with FYEO!
This film was the first to be based on a short story and ironically comes across that way. Basically a series of interchangeable vignettes with vanilla characters. The pre title sequence with Blofeld, coupled with Bill Conti’s horribly dated lighthearted music is a terrible affront to all the prior scenes with Blofeld that were scored by John Barry…”jaunty and trivializing” as scored by Conti-completely agree! And I hate the very non-Bond sounding title theme, worse than “Nobody Does it Better”.
It also doesn’t help matters that Carole Bouquet’s acting is plain awful. Conti’s music score for the body of the film is rather deplorable as well and places the film in the realm of a tv movie of the week for me.
My biggest gripe is that the production budget feels quite low. The over-budget production of Moonraker is notoriously well known for causing budget cuts for the films after it, and I think it hurts FYEO.
For me, this film is #14/25 in my ranking. I enjoy how grounded it is, especially after Moonraker, and before the goofiness of the next two films. I have a lot of trouble enjoying the more comedic Moore films, so FYEO has been one that I really gravitate with. It’s in my top three of his films, behind Live and Let Die and Spy Who Loved Me.
I like movies that take big swings. If you're gonna do something, you might as well *really* go for it.
FOR YOUR EYES ONLY just feels like it lacks ambition to me. It's like an entree that lacks seasoning.
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond I totally understand that sentiment. It is a very safe film, but for me, it's sandwiched in between two ones that I just have trouble enjoying. It is certainly the least ambitious Moore outing as Bond.
@@Paul_Whaley I do hope you'll tune in for my OCTOPUSSY video. It's a movie peppered with silly touches, yes, but at its core, I think it has a very intelligent plot rooted in the Ian Fleming ethos.
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond Ryan, I've pretty watched every analysis that you've done so far. I appreciate your take on film, so you can be assured that I'll be tuning in for OCTOPUSSY & AVTAK.
OCTOPUSSY is certainly a film that I find myself liking more and more with each repeat viewing, it's just hard for me to enjoy the sillier side of Bond. I do agree that the base plot of a stolen nuke is great, I just get lost with the silliness of some of the Indian sections of the film, not to mention Moore dressed as a clown. I'll be looking forward to the analysis when it goes live!
I, for one, enjoy this film. When I was young, this was my least favorite Moore film, too. I mean, where were the surreal lairs, the cartoonish supervillainy, the fantastic gadgets??? But as I got older, I appreciated it much more, and continue to do so. I think I wrote in a previous post that for me, this film is right up there with "Spy" as one of my favorite Moore Bonds.
The thing I like about it is, indeed, the maturation of Moore's Bond, as you mentioned in your video. You do see a bit of a progression from the callous-coolness of his first four films, to a more contemplative Bond in this one. One who is older, weathered by his life's many battles (including the loss of his wife, which is not only represented in the grave visit at the beginning, but is also symbolized within his brief encounter with Countess Lisl). And in some of his interactions with Melina, where he tries to convey how killing numerous people will forever alter one's being. Moore does some of his finest acting here IMO; he gives off "government assassin" vibes in this one. I also feel that in this film, a good portion of Bond's killings (minus Blofeld's) make more of an impact. Yes, it's a Bond movie, but I appreciate seeing a few streaks of substance in this film that I wouldn't get too much in his other films.
Is it drab, less-bizarre, too-dressed down? Yes, it is. It's probably the more unique Moore film than the other 6 he'd done, and one thing I enjoy about the Bond series is when it gives the audience a bit of variety. There's still some goofiness, but overall, it's a (dare-I-say-it) gritty little Bond film that leans on suspense, with Bond using his wits and practical weaponry instead of gadgets.
A fair take. I would say that, for me, the element of suspense mostly feels absent here (unlike in, say, THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS).
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond I do think TLD is the best movie of the 80s Bonds 👍🏾
For me this is in the bottom 7
We are aligned!
Sorry. You made a few good points, but FYEO was the keast campy of Moore's films. Moonraker comes in at 25 of 25 for me.
Why does "campy" automatically mean "bad"?
I think the story of this movie would make for a great James Bond video game, with Havelock as a duel playable protagonist with the crossbow as her main weapon.
I'm all for Bond video games being made from classic Bond movies.
This is my favorite Roger Moore Bond movie. But I get where you're at being on the outside looking in because I feel Last Crusade is the worst of the first four(Lucas/Speilberg) Indiana Jones movies for some of the same reasons.
Last Crusade is a fair comparison point! (I also don't love it that one the way others do.)
I strongly disagree.... The worst Roger Moore's Bond films are The Man With The Golden Gun and Moonraker....
Here is my ranking of all Roger Moore's Bond films:
1. For Your Eyes Only
2. The Spy Who Loved Me
3. Live And Let Die
4. Octopussy
5. A View To A Kill
6. Moonraker
7. The Man With The Golden Gun
The best Bond films of all time are GoldenEye, Skyfall and Casino Royale in my opinion.
It is interesting that FYEO was originally intended to follow TSWLM but was delayed due to the decision to cash in on Star Wars fever by making MR next. Would the original 1979 version of FYEO have been the same movie we eventually got in 1981? I think the excess and plot replication of MR heavily influenced the stripped down FYEO. So maybe the aborted 1979 version would have been bigger in scale, but presumably not as wild as MR!
Yes, it's hard to know what FYEO would've looked like if they'd made it instead of MR!
This has always been my favourite Moore movie and my second favourite Bond film after From Russia With Love
Enjoy it in good health!
"Eyes" is assuredly an OUTLIER entry among the 7 Roger Moore Bond films, whatever one thinks of it.
🤔📽 Is it the story itself, or is Roger simply miscast for this particular 007 film?!
I think it's the story. Roger does well!
I definitely feel that some fans like FYEO for being a alot more down to earth after you've just gone to space and beyond and its nice to have some pause before you get something nice and action packed again with OCTOPUSSY. Certanly I feel that way when your doing a marathon in order.
Though as a kid i was less looking forward to this movie and loved TMWTGG more because it was more silly, fun and surreal. Since being a teen I actually really appreciate this movie more, same way I did with OHMSS or even The empire strikes back.
1:41 mmmmmm I dont know, I feel YOLT is the first one to do that. Which isn't bad as I like that movie but they were making a hit after a hit so it was kind of coming out as an assembley line.
9:52 yeah very good point, up until DAD they make it as though that all the Bonds post OHMSS are spiritually the same character and your meant to kinda suspend your disbelief with that and go with the flow.
19:40 hahah I actually think they did it well and it doesnt feel dated between Bond and Bebe. But yes I feel they could have done a little bit more with Melina and Bond in terms of coaching her from the events that she suffered. 27:09 I know a lot of people feel something could have done better there.
Haha I certanly had to watch this one because of the title of your video. I'll be interested in what you think about AVTAK because.........ooo mate I'am no fan of that movie ;)
I don't think YOLT is "assembly line" at all (but it's my second-favorite Bond movie). We'll be sure to talk about it in-depth when I get to talking about the Connery era!
I have ranked all the Bond films and FYEO comes out as my favorite Moore film. I don't get too deep into the why. I just think of which film I'd rather spend my time watching.
Then I hope you enjoy it in good health!
Well everybody knows that that movie was made for Timothy Dalton not for Roger Moore and so was Octopussy and a view to a kill because when you go back and I rewatch those three films recently and they’re more darker and tone and more grittier so it kind of makes you wonder that those three films were made for Timothy not for Roger
Because we all know that Mr. broccoli was trying to get a Timothy Dalton into the franchise, a whole lot more sooner and Timothy Dalton decided to decline because of how the franchise was going to, and he did not like it
I cant even remember it-and Roger Moore was just a shop window dummy!
The worst Bond film is either A View to a Kill or Quantum of Solace. All the others are watchable. For Your Eyes Only, highly so.
I'm probably in the "Die Another Day is the worst" camp.
If Moonraker didn't exist.
Ah, but Moonraker is great!
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond Is that a facetious remark? If you're actually sincere, you're one of the few people I've ever met who would just come right out and acknowledge liking Moonraker.
@@tgriffin3059 I assure you, I'm sincere. I have a whole video on MOONRAKER!
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond Moonraker has always been my personal favorite Bond. I think it's the one entry that makes optimal use of the running time(which I tend to find excessive in Bond films). About the time that I would normally be getting tired, they employ the novelty of having Bond blast into orbit, and that gives the final half hour or so a vitality that is sometimes missing. I always respect people who matter-of-factly assert unpopular opinions(although in fairness, liking Moonraker is only controversial in forums like this....in real terms, it was enormously successful.)
Moonraker is fucking awesome.
No, it is not!
Ah, but it is.
Sorry, but I think "For Your Eyes Only: is one of the best of the Moore Bond films. "Moonraker" is the one I do not like. The villain is trying to be Blofeld, but can't quite get there and the plot is trying to cash in on Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica or Buck Rogers. Visually FYEO is one of the best Bond films and the theme song is outstanding.
To each their own - I think Drax is a better villain than most (all?) of the Blofelds, except maybe the version in OHMSS.
I also strongly disagree re: the visuals of FYEO - it's a film of somewhat murky browns and greens, with flat shot composition and bland lighting. All of the other Moore films are more attractively lensed (except, perhaps, AVTAK), with richer color and production design.
Sorry, but the worst Roger Moore Bond movie is clearly either A View to a Kill or The Man With the Golden Gun. For Your Eyes Only and The Spy Who Loved Me are his best.
Sorry but FYEO is my absolute favourite Moore era Bond movie! You finally see him in front of Teresa’s (his wife’s) grave, put an end to the endless Blofeld appearances in the saga, and bring the character back to his gritty roots by investigating potentially world threatening technology. A little light hearted at times but the dialogue is very strong imo…
To each their own!
Is in the bottom 7 for me
I'm glad I'm not alone
It's not boring, it is great👍What are you talking ab😠
Well, you can't win 'em all
@@AnalyzeThisMisterBond
That's true 😉
Absolute twaddle !
🤷♂️
Loved Sir Roger Moore. Love For Your Eyes Only.
I adore Sir Rog. For Your Eyes Only? Not so much.