Re Underrated
i’d say by Bond fans; easily Moonraker; it’s a first class film in every regard and yet Bond fans are obsessed with it’s 2 or 3 overly comedic incidents (pigeon, dolly etc) while ignoring similar moments in FYEO (Thatcher/parrot, Bibi etc)
By the general public, it’s OHMSS surely?
I actually enjoyed Moonraker far more on my most recent viewing. I probably grade it more harshly because it follows TSWLM. FYEO does have some strange things in it. It does have a far superior Bond girl though.
And yet it still stands out to us and calls for our attention. There must be something in that alone…
Maybe it is to do with just what Tiin007 pointed out: Live and Let Die stems from a time when films were made a different way, not with a stop watch to balance so many minutes of ‘action A’ against so many minutes of ‘action B’ and ‘dialogue C’.
In a way it’s a rather old fashioned film, owing a lot to the classic serials. It wouldn’t be made this way today, largely because everything tends to be bigger, with more and greater explosions. Mind you, that need not be something bad; it’s just the natural way things in filmmaking developed.
True, although interestingly enough I find all the previous films significantly more watchable than LALD (yes, even DAF). Those final three Hamilton movies are, in my personal opinion, the low point of the series. I think it may be the only instance of three consecutive Bond films that are really subpar (although I have a soft spot for DAF).
That’s funny, I find DAF easily to be the weakest of the 3 and my least favorite Bond movie of the 60s/70s (tho Barry’s score is wonderful); I’m always surprised when people complain about the ‘campiness’/jokiness of the Moore era without acknowledging DAF as being the worst culprit of all.
I’m also in the big fan of LALD camp, it’s easily in my top 10.
This took quite a bit of thought, but probably For Your Eyes Only. It is a brilliant, taught thriller that always seems to be forgotten.There are one or two bits I don’t like (the Thatcher impressionist and the parrot as a plot device spring to mind) but the ski-chase and the mountain climbing are genuinely tense set-pieces that make you worry for Bond’s chances on survival- quite a reds quality in Bond.
So,I watched NSNA last night, after many years of avoidance, it made me appreciate the swagger of Octopussy even more. Never Say Never Again ,I found to be extremely dated … Its costume design, the cinematography, all early eighties BLAND. So whilst Live and let Die is underrated, after watching Connery’s last hurrah , Im beginning to think that Octopussy may be the quintessential Roger Moore Bond movie, in the way Goldfinger is arguably Connery’s … Maybe I was overly tired
I also recently watched NSNA in full after always avoiding it. There is really nothing to distinguish it from anything else. It’s long and boring. I agree that the costumes are incredibly dated. The movie itself is pretty bland with it being a straight remake of Thunderball. Largo and Domino are less interesting. The only thing about it that I like is the theme song. I also don’t buy James Bond, one playing video games, and two, that he would get that good at it after only 3 games.
It does feature some nice gags, Connery is great, and Largo, IMO, is much better than in the original.
I do also like the song, though.
With the Craigmania still going on I would suggest that actually the whole Moore era is severely underrated right now.
You say that but much of SPECTRE’s marketing was a love letter to Live And Let Die.
I do admit Connery gives a far better performance than in either YOLT or DAF. But I much prefer the original Largo.
You refer to the teaser poster, I assume. And the skull in the back of the main poster.
Since Mendes and Craig stated they love LALD I assume they do rate the Moore era, well at least LALD, high enough.
But critics turn up their noses whenever Moore as Bond is mentioned in the last decade, as if he was inferior to Craig. Which, IMO, he definitely was not.
I was yes, the initial teaser poster and the IMAX poster in particular.
True about the critics, It’s a shame as Moore’s era has some fantastic things in it - his villains in particular spring to mind, not a weak one in the bunch, and Moore, despite his own belief, is incredibly versatile making a superb leading man in very different styles of film.
What do the critics know? They though TDKR was a great film. I enjoy the Moore era the most. It is easily the most fun era for James Bond. Critics be damned.
Unrelated, I really wish that Craig had actually worn the outfit from that first teaser in Spectre.
So do they. Look up the designer, theres a whole story to why its not used more.
I looked it up, interesting. Personally, I am not exactly in love with the costume design from Skyfall and Spectre and wouldn’t mind seeing someone with a different vision take over for Bond 25.
I liked the Skyfall stuff and most of SPECTRE’s but, yes, Craig’s other two were more iconic. Lindy Hemming’s work in particular - from the leather jacket to the final scene three piece, it defined Daniel Craig’s James Bond.
I was walking to work and saw a boy wearing a ‘007’ shirt, which took me back. That sense of childlike wonder was best captured in the Moore era. It does open up a whole other debate though, of ‘should Bond be a role model?’ and all that. But underwater cars and crazy stunts are sure entertaining.