The brief two-film Timothy Dalton era in the 007 franchise begins with 1987’s The Living Daylights. It was an interesting road to get to the casting of Dalton in the role. With Roger Moore correctly assessing that he was too old to continue playing Bond after a 12 year run, producers first were keen to hire Sam Neill (of Jurassic Park fame) to take over the part. This was nixed when the main boss, producer Cubby Broccoli, vetoed the idea. The Bond makers then moved to a highly touted TV actor, Pierce Brosnan from “Remington Steele”, who was coming to the end of his contract with NBC. When producers moved to hire Brosnan, NBC decided they weren’t done with “Remington Steele” yet and re-upped his contract, making him unavailable as Bond.

This left Mr. Dalton, who producers had their eye on since he was considered for 1969’s On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. Dalton at the time (correctly) deemed himself too young for the role. Eighteen years later, the circumstances were right and Dalton became the fourth actor to play 007.

Wee see right away that a decision was made to change the tone of the Bond franchise from the Roger Moore entries. This Bond is more down-to-earth, far less comedic, and grittier.

The opening sequence is quite entertaining, with the “00” agents on a training mission that turns all too real and leads to the death of some fellow agents. It gets the film off to a fine start and introduces us to Dalton as 007 for the very first time.

For the title track, A-ha (of “Take On Me” fame) do the honors, sticking with a more pop-oriented theme started in the last feature with Duran Duran’s great “A View to a Kill”. This song is not nearly as catchy, but it’s OK.

The plot involves Bond helping a KGB defector, General Georgi Koskov (Jeroen Krabbe), who actually turns out to be the film’s main villain. Koskov’s girlfriend, Kara Milovy (Maryam d’Abo), also ends up getting double crossed by him and turns into Bond’s main love interest. Aiding Koskov in his dastardly plans is Whitaker, a nutty American arms dealer played well by Joe Don Baker. The story eventually turns to Afghanistan, where Bond teams with the Mujahideen to battle the Soviets baddies. Obviously, The Living Daylights is very much of a movie of its time. We do not see Congressman Charlie Wilson help out Bond at any point, it should be noted.

Because this a basic reboot of the franchise, we have a new actress playing Miss Moneypenny, Caroline Bliss. This ends the run of Lois Maxwell, who played M’s secretary in every previous 007 film. Bliss is not on screen long enough to make any real impression. Robert Brown returns as M and Desmond Llewelyn is, of course, back as Q. This time, he hooks James up wit a nifty little gadget that blows stuff up based on 007’s whistle commands.

While a lot of new faces exist in the picture, it’s Bond veterans behind the scenes, with screenwriters Richard Maibaum and Michael G. Wilson back, John Barry doing his typically marvelous work as composer, and John Glen returning for his fourth directing job in a row. There’s another welcome return: the Aston Martin, the most iconic 007 vehicle by far. The tricked out car is featured in an exciting car chase sequence.

With his extensive background in shooting second unit for previous Bond features before taking over as director, John Glen excels most in populating his entries with extremely well-choreographed action scenes. The Living Daylights is no exception and there’s plenty of them. The climactic sequence with Bond battling villains on an airplane is a prime example of Glen’s mastery at action.

Neither Krabbe as the main villain or d’Abo as the main Bond girl will be remembered as among the most memorable in the series, but both do a good job in their roles. John Rhys-Davies, who you may know from the Indiana Jones and Lord of the Rings franchises,  does a nice job as the head of the KGB who is a 007 ally.

It is definitely worthy of note that The Living Daylights is the final film to be scored by John Barry, whose contributions to the music of Bond are incomparable. He would contribute to the scores  twelve of the first fourteen films and compose and write many of the famous themes we know today, from “Goldfinger” to “Diamonds Are Forever” to “A View to a Kill”.

All in all, The Living Daylights is a solid entry in the series. It’s certainly not great and it’s a little overlong, a fairly common occurrence in Bond world. More than anything, the return of a more grounded and serious Bond is a welcome sight. The tone of the film actually feels closer to the Daniel Craig pictures than anything that came before it.

This brings us, lastly, to Timothy Dalton. So… how is he? In my opinion, he certainly doesn’t possess the dynamic screen presence of Connery nor the comedic timing abilities as Moore. Simply put, he’s adequate. Unlike George Lazenby, Dalton is a classically trained actor and he’s got acting chops. However, he doesn’t bring a notable identity to the role.

The good news is that The Living Daylights is a satisfactory enough film that it doesn’t matter much. Audiences would agree, propelling it to great box office numbers at nearly $200 million worldwide. It earned $51 million in the United States, just barely outgrossing its predecessor, View to a Kill. 

I saw The Living Daylights as a kid and hadn’t seen it since and was quite pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed it. It is by no means a Bond classic, but it’s pretty darn good and gets the brief Dalton tenure off to a nice start.

Here are the facts:

Film: The Living Daylights

U.S. Release Date: July 31, 1987

Director: John Glen

Screenplay: Richard Maibaum and Michael G. Wilson

Bond: Timothy Dalton

Main Bond Villain: General Georgi Koskov (Jeroen Krabbe)

Main Bond Girl: Kara Milovy (Maryam d’Abo)

Theme Song: “The Living Daylights” – performed by A-ha

Budget: $40 million

Worldwide Box Office: $191.2 million

My James Bond blog series will return in “The 007 Files: Licence to Kill”

Roger Moore’s tenure as James Bond, spanning seven films and twelve years, comes to an end with 1985’s A View to a Kill. His time as 007 has divided series aficionados for years as the movies took an undeniable turn for the silly and cartoonish at times. As I explained in my posting for the first Moore feature, 1973’s Live and Let Die, Moore was the first Bond I really knew. I viewed more of his 007 flicks as a child than the Connery ones.

Upon revisiting all his films as Bond, I would say that they run from the truly great (The Spy Who Loved Me) to the solid (For Your Eyes Only) to guilty pleasure fun (Octopussy) to the mediocre (Live and Let Die, The Man with the Golden Gun) to the pretty bad (Moonraker).

A View to a Kill falls towards the bottom of the Moore entries. It’s better than Moonraker and on par with his first two, Live and Let Die and Golden Gun. There are definitely some positive aspects to the picture, but a lot left to be desired, too.

In the opening sequence, we get 007 on the slopes (again), which felt a little tired.

The title credit sequence perks things up considerably with one of my very favorite Bond theme songs, Duran Duran’s terrific title track. This song was a huge hit and deviates from the typical ballad to a great pop song. The track also has the distinction of the only Bond theme I’ve ever seen performed live!

The film does offer us some memorable villains, but more because of the actors who play them. Christopher Walken is Max Zorin, a psychotic microchip tycoon with plans to destroy Silicon Valley and take over the entire market. Walken was already an Oscar winner (for 1978’s The Deer Hunter) when he took on this role and getting him must have been quite a get for the Bond producers. Like many of you, I suspect, I find Walken to be great in just about everything and his performance is predictably solid. Singer/model/generally strange individual Grace Jones plays Mayday, Zorin’s henchwoman. She has some good moments as well. Zorin also has a tricked-out blimp, too!

Speaking of villains, check out this clip from the film. Notice the Russian henchman standing in the background for this brief scene who has zero lines? It’s Dolph Lundgren, who only six months later would enter film history as Ivan Drago in Rocky IV!

While the villains provide some positive elements, I cannot say the same for our Bond girl this time around. Geologist Stacey Sutton, played in a weak performance by Tanya Roberts, is one of the more forgettable Bond gals we have seen.

It’s the plot to destroy Silicon Valley that becomes the main plot narrative, but we have to sit through a slow and protracted first half to get there. The only saving grace in the first hour is some nice interplay between Moore and Patrick Macnee as Bond’s ally who must pose as 007’s servant. Macnee is best known for starring in the popular British series “The Avengers”. There’s also a neat little sequence at the Eiffel Tower.

For the most part, however, A View to a Kill‘s first act is dull. There are improvements in the second act as we see more of Walken, which helps. His character is written as a true wack job and he seems to take real joy in his work, including wiping out most of his crew in the climax. We also get a decent chase sequence with Bond commandeering a fire truck and being chased by police through the streets of San Francisco. The final climax taking place in a mine shaft and the Golden Gate Bridge has its moments as well.

Still, most of A View to a Kill feels like Bond on autopilot. Getting off on the wrong foot with an unremarkable first half, the second half is considerably better. Yet there’s still not much here to improve of what we’ve seen in other 007 flicks. The action scenes are well-done like they always are, but nothing truly separates them.

And there’s also the small matter of Moore. In later interviews, Moore would admit that he probably shouldn’t have done the picture and that he was getting too old for the role. He was right in retrospect. At 57 years of age when the picture was released, he was simply (in the words of Lethal Weapon‘s Roger Murtaugh) “getting too old for this shit”. Mr. Moore may have been better off leaving after Octopussy, which I believe would have been on a high-note (even though many would disagree with that).

Keeping with that theme, Lois Maxwell would make her final appearance as Miss Moneypenny, having appeared in all 007 films up to that point.

So how do I regard Roger Moore as Bond? Well, clearly a mixed bag. The quality of his films varied considerably. His strengths always lied in humor and his fine ability at one-liners. He knew he’d never be have the mix of charm and danger that Connery possessed. Moore knew he’d have to make the role his own and that he did. By doing so, he carried the franchise for twelve years with box office success. View was a financial success, even though it didn’t match the numbers of predecessor Octopussy. 

Yes, he’s no Connery, but this beloved series simply wouldn’t have continued without the considerable contributions of Moore. And as I’ve mentioned, we got one bonafide classic out of him, The Spy Who Loved Me.

Unfortunately, strong villain aside, Moore doesn’t go out on a strong note with A View to a Kill. With his realization that it was time to hang up the tuxedo, the Bond producers wouldn’t wait long to introduce us to a new Bond just two years later. And that, my friends, is where we’ll pick up in the next post.

Here are the facts:

Film: A View to a Kill

U.S. Release Date: May 24, 1985

Director: John Glen

Screenplay: Michael G. Wilson and Richard Maibaum

Bond: Roger Moore

Main Bond Villain: Max Zorin (Christopher Walken)

Main Bond Girl: Stacey Sutton (Tanya Roberts)

Theme Song: “A View to a Kill” – performed by Duran Duran

Budget: $30 million

Worldwide Box Office: $152.4 million

My James Bond blog series will return in “The 007 Files: The Living Daylights”

I found Octopussy to be the one of the intriguing entries in the Bond franchise for an interesting reason. It features a great number of the problems that I’ve had with certain Roger Moore 007 pictures. It tends to copy and, at least, heavily “borrow from” hot trends of the time. It tends to rely on silliness and overly comedic situations.

However, a strange occurrence took place upon my viewing of it. Despite its flaws, the fact is: Octopussy is just a tremendously fun picture. A lot of it doesn’t necessarily feel like a Bond movie, but I found that not bothering me so much. Why? Mostly because the action sequences, done under the sturdy direction of John Glen, are just terrific. And this Bond entry, probably more than any other, is mostly wall-to-wall action set pieces that are amazingly handled.

The film opens with one of those exciting sequences with Bond flying his jet, literally, out a horse’s ass. A fake horse’s ass, mind you. Like other Moore features, the opening sequence doesn’t have much to do the plot, but it’s good stuff.

For the theme song, we have “All Time High”, performed by Rita Coolidge. It’s a solid enough ballad. The track is probably most well known to you right now as the song Mark Wahlberg sings to Mila Kunis to win back her affection in this past summer’s comedy hit Ted. Strangely enough, the opening title sequence with the song is the only one so far that I couldn’t find on YouTube, but here’s the track:

The plot doesn’t really matter in a Bond movie like this one and granted, it’s a silly one. Bond’s colleague 009 is killed (wearing a clown disguise) while carrying an expensive (or possibly fake) Faberge egg. Told ya. 007 is put on the case and this leads him to a variety of villains. The main one is Kamal Khan, a Middle Eastern prince. A lot of the plot, at least for a while, deals with this Faberge artifact and I was left wondering: really? That’s what this movie is about? Alas, Khan is also in bed with the Soviets, who have a more dastardly plan that involves setting off a nuclear bomb. Much more Bond like!

Our main Bond girl is the title character, Octopussy, played Maud Adams. Interestingly, Adams also appeared in The Man With the Golden Gun as a completely different character. Her part here is of a jewel smuggler who happens to live at a palace only populated with beautiful women who are trained to be in a circus she runs as a side business.

I know. I know. While you’re reading this, you’re probably thinking this sounds like the stupidest James Bond film ever. And if you concentrate only on the plot – well, there’s a lot left to be desired.

However, the story line in many a 007 flick is not all that important. This is a prime example. Here’s what I found important:

1) There is a totally awesome sequence where Khan and his army of henchmen hunt 007 down in the jungle. In this sequence, Bond not only has to deal with these ruthless human baddies, but also tigers, snakes, elephants, leeches, spiders, and alligators.

2) There is the best train action sequence since From Russia with Love.

3) The main female character is both a fairly interesting character and has great chemistry with Roger Moore. She’s not portrayed as an airhead and seems smarter than most of the other characters. These are compliments I cannot pay to many other Bond women, especially those in the Moore films. And Maud Adams’ performance is solid.

4) While not one of the great 007 villains, Louis Jourdan’s performance as Khan is a good one. Here’s a good scene between him and Bond playing backgammon and wagering on that all-important Faberge egg.

5) The way the action sequences are shot and choreographed represent some of the best work of the series.

Is this film overly silly? Oh yes. We get treated to the sight of 007 in a gorilla suit and made up as a clown. We get more over-the-top villains than we can count, including Steven Berkoff (who played the main baddie in Beverly Hills Cop) hamming it up as Soviet general.

Yes it’s ridiculous, but did it bother me as much as it did in other 007 films like Diamonds Are Forever, The Man with the Golden Gun, or Moonraker? No. Octopussy may not always feel like a Bond film. In fact, the first half especially is closer in tone to a film that came out two years prior in 1981: Steven Spielberg’s Raiders of the Lost Ark. 

The fact that Octopussy is set in India that helps contribute to this. It’s not just that, however. The tone of the picture feels more like a Saturday afternoon serial. I suspect the producers were going for that Indiana Jones vibe here after seeing its massive success, just as they did with Moonraker, which was released two years after Star Wars. Call this Indiana James or Raiders of the Lost Faberge Egg. 

Call it whatever you want, but I was surprised by how much I liked it, especially considering its mediocre reputation. Like most of the other 007 flicks, it had been years and years since I’d seen Octopussy. I remember loving it as a kid. There are many who disagree in principle with a Bond movie being this over-the-top and I understand. I prefer a darker Bond, too. To me, this is the one “silly” Bond movie though that seems to get it right, at least on its own terms. The reason is simple: the action is so well-handled and exciting that you don’t really give a damn how silly it is.

Octopussy would post solid box office numbers, earning slightly under $200 million worldwide, close to the numbers of its predecessor For Your Eyes Only. Domestically, it would outshine that movie with a U.S. gross of $67 million, compared to $54 million for Eyes Only.

If you choose to accept Octopussy for what it is and just go along for the ride, it is a worthwhile entry in the 007 franchise.

As a side note, the year 1983 is a significant one in 007’s history in that there were two competing Bond films. Octopussy would be the official picture that came from the Bond camp, but Sean Connery would reprise his portrayal of 007 in Never Say Never Again. That film was produced by a different company after a protracted legal battle over rights to the story allowed it. The Connery adventure would do well at the box office, but would not match the numbers of Octopussy, much to the delight of the Bond team. Never Say Never Again is not considered part of the official 007 cannon and therefore will not be included in “The 007 Files”. In fact, it’s even hard to get a copy of the DVD at anything approaching a worthwhile price. If and when I do purchase it, expect a separate blog entry in the future.

Here are the facts:

Film: Octopussy

U.S. Release Date: June 10, 1983

Director: John Glen

Screenplay: George MacDonald Fraser, Michael G. Wilson, and Richard Maibaum

Bond: Roger Moore

Main Bond Villain: Kamal Khan (Louis Jourdan)

Main Bond Girl: Octopussy (Maud Adams)

Theme Song: “All Time High” – performed by Rita Coolidge

Budget: $27.5 million

Worldwide Box Office: $187.5 million

My James Bond blog series will return in “The 007 Files: A View to a Kill”

After the mostly unfortunate experience of re-watching Moonraker, I couldn’t get the Blu Ray disc for its followup, 1981’s For Your Eyes Only, in the player fast enough. I was trying to erase my memories of James Bond fighting a Star Wars-style laser gun battle in space as quickly as possible.

The 007 producers, despite the financial success of Moonraker, decided to go in a different direction with this film: back to basics. Decrease the silliness. Make it more serious than the previous Moore entries. Considering its predecessor, it was time to bring Bond back down to earth, literally and figuratively.

For Your Eyes Only gets off to a rather interesting start in the pre-title credit sequence, hearkening back to the Bond pictures of old. We begin with 007 visiting the grave of his wife Tracy from On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. Other than a very brief mention of her in The Spy Who Loved Me, this is the first time her character is acknowledged since her death that took place 12 years earlier in Bond world. This leads right into an action sequence where Bond has one last battle with Blofeld, the famous villain who served as 007’s arch nemesis in several earlier pictures. Due to legal issues involving using Blofeld’s likeness that would take far too long to explain, we actually never see Blofeld’s face in the scene and the character is never called Blofeld. However, there’s no doubt it’s Blofeld. I mean… the fluffy white kitty is on his lap and everything! There’s been other Bond films where the pre-credit sequence has nothing to do with the rest of the film, but this one really doesn’t and it does feel a little out of place. Still, it’s refreshing to see the producers establishing a continuum that we don’t often see in the franchise.

Moving on to the title credits, the song “For Your Eyes Only” is sung by Sheena Easton. It’s a pretty solid ballad and the title credits are notable because Easton actually appears in them singing the song. This is the first (and I believe only) time this occurred. This probably happened because the film was released in 1981. MTV debuted in 1981 as well so music videos were the hot thing around at the moment. Easton would go on to play Sonny Crockett’s wife in an episode arc of “Miami Vice” and have some of her songs produced by Prince. Why mention this? No real reason really. I’m just a huge fan of Prince and “Miami Vice”.

The plot involves Bond investigating the sinking of a British spy boat. A marine archaeologist and his wife who were contracted by the Brits to find the sunken boat are murdered in front of their daughter, Melina (Caroline Bouquet), who serves as the main Bond girl this time around. Her part is a little more integral to the story than lots of Bond babes because her mission to track the bad guys is much more personal than 007’s.

The bad guy turns out to be Aristotle Kristatos, who works for the KGB and is initially presented an ally to Bond before we find out otherwise. The villain is played by Julian Glover in a solid performance, even if the character isn’t particularly memorable.

Of course, we get a number of action scenes that are handled well. This is the first time in the 007 director’s chair for John Glen, who served as 2nd unit director on three previous Bond pictures. 2nd unit director essentially means he shot a lot of the action sequences and that experience shows here. There’s great underwater action footage. At a couple points, Bond and Melina nearly meet their demise by sharks. And yet again, none of these sharks have giant laser beams attached to their frickin heads.

Of particular note is the climax in the beautiful mountains of Greece, which is very well-directed and exciting. We also get yet another ski chase scene, but this one’s damn good and involves motorbikes and bobsleds too!

Director Glen would go on to direct five Bond movies in a row, which means every 80s 007 flick. This makes Glen the man who’s directed the most films in the franchise.

One of Bond’s allies in For Your Eyes Only is Columbo, played in a winning performance by Topol, who you may know as Tevye from Fiddler on the Roof. The secondary Bond girl is Bibi, an ice skating prodigy being sponsored by the villain. Played by Lynn-Holly Johnson, her character serves no real purpose in the story and she could have been cut out completely and that probably would’ve been better. The other Bond girl here represents an interesting bit of Bond history. Actress Cassandra Harris plays Columbo’s mistress, who ends up sleeping with 007, naturally. At the time of filming, Harris was married to an up-and-coming actor by the name of… Pierce Brosnan, who I’m confident you’ll read a lot about in later blog posts. Sadly, Harris would pass away in 1991 due to complications from cancer.

To show that this Bond was going back to basics, 007 even kills a character in cold blood by kicking his car as its falling down a cliff. It’s a little startling at first because this doesn’t really match Roger Moore’s characterization of the super spy. We believe it when Connery did it, as he did in Dr. No. Apparently, Moore had to be coaxed into this scene by the writers and producers. It worked for me, even though Moore will never be as menacing as Connery. At least he knew it.

For Your Eyes Only does contain some overly silly elements that are par for the course with the Moore films. Quite a few of them, however, are unintentional and more a product of the early 80s time frame. There’s “Q” showing 007 the “3D Identigraph”, high-tech technology using 3D effects for facial recognition of a suspect. When you watch the scene, it’s basically just Bond explaining what the dude generally looks like (hair color, style of glasses) and all of a sudden… we’ve got him!! The absence of composer John Barry is missed, too. Bill Conti is the composer here. For most of the film, he does an adequate job. However, there is a scene on the ski slopes where the synth-driven and ever-so-eighties sounding instrumentals sound like they’d comfortably belong in one of that era’s raunchy sex comedies. Not exactly the lush sounds we’re used to from Barry, but oh well.

The film would fall a little short of Moonraker‘s box office performance, but it still made a killing at the box office, earning nearly $200 million worldwide. In the U.S., it earned $54 million, placing it eighth for that year’s releases.

For Your Eyes Only is not in the very upper echelon of 007 pictures, but I found it quite entertaining and the change of pace worked for me, especially after the horribly silly levels that Moonraker took us to. Watching it, I kind of wished the producers had used this approach to the Moore flicks. Seeing the Roger Moore entries switch back and forth in tone contributes to a kind-of box of chocolates like mentality the producers seemed to have during this time period. The exception, of course, is the terrific Spy Who Loved Me from four years earlier. This picture isn’t on that level, but it’s a step above the other features in Moore’s tenure for sure.

Here are the facts:

Film: For Your Eyes Only

U.S. Release Date: June 26, 1981

Director: John Glen

Screenplay: Michael G. Wilson and Richard Maibaum

Bond: Roger Moore

Main Bond Villain: Aristotle Kristatos (Julian Glover)

Main Bond Girl: Melina Havelock (Caroline Bouquet)

Theme Song: “For Your Eyes Only” – performed by Sheena Easton

Budget: $28 million

Worldwide Box Office: $195.3 million

1979’s Moonraker opens with an exciting scene of Bond and Jaws (the henchman returning from The Spy Who Loved Me) battling it out after jumping from an airplane.

The theme song is Shirley Bassey’s third of the franchise. It’s a good one, though not quite to the level of her previous two, “Goldfinger” and “Diamonds Are Forever”.

Ken Adam, the franchise’s renowned production designer, does an absolutely terrific job with the sets here. He’s the star of this movie, as far as I’m concerned.

There’s the pretty cool sight of James Bond hang gliding over a waterfall. And Rio De Janiero looks beautiful in the few minutes we spend there.

There are the positive aspects of Moonraker and maybe I should just leave it that, except for the pesky fact that just about everything else in the film sucks. I love the James Bond franchise, in case you haven’t figured that out. And I don’t want to write this post, but I have to be honest so here goes:

Moonraker is a travesty on a number of levels. Interestingly, the film was not supposed to be the 007 movie being released in 1979. At the end of its predecessor, The Spy Who Loved Me, we were told: “James Bond Will Return in For Your Eyes Only.” That’s what filmgoers saw in the end credits of Spy in the summer of 1977. Want to know something else audiences saw in the summer of 1977? A little film called Star Wars. 

And that, my friends, prompted Bond producers to change their minds and quickly make Moonraker the next 007 adventure. After the release of Star Wars (and also Close Encounters of the Third Kind) in 1977, science fiction was the most popular thing around… along with disco and Burt Reynolds.

So not only did MGM go with the Ian Fleming novel with sci-fi elements, they decided to open up the bank for Moonraker. Its predecessor, Spy Who Loved Me, had been the biggest budgeted 007 so far at $14 million. The budget for Moonraker would be set at $34 million. No question that the huge financial success of Spy contributed to the budget raise, but the producers knew Bond + space likely = $.

And they were right. Moonraker grossed over $200 million dollars worldwide, making it the biggest Bond so far financially. It made $70M in the U.S., placing it 10th for that year domestically. The fact is, science fiction was so trendy at that time that combining 007 with it was a winning combo, at least financially.

I suppose I’ll touch on the plot… briefly. Space shuttles get stolen. The man behind it is the manufacturer of the shuttles, Hugo Drax. He has a plan to use those shuttles to repopulate the Earth in space with only beautiful people he takes with him. This, of course, involves wiping out the planet and creating that master race in space. It’s a far-fetched and silly plot, even by Bond standards.

Speaking of the villain Drax, he’s the worst Bond baddie we’ve seen so far. Played by Michael Lonsdale with no real energy, the guy’s really just a bore. The less said the better because you’re going to forget his character anyway.

Then, we’re mistreated to one of the worst Bond girls so far. She does have a memorable name, Holly Goodhead. That’s the only memorable thing about her character or Lois Chiles’ listless performance as her.

Oh, it gets worse. Bond in spaghetti Western gear. Jaws, a solid character in Spy Who Loved Me, getting way overused. He even turns good guy in the end because he falls in love with a girl and realizes Drax will probably kill him. Lame.

All that said, what I disliked most about Moonraker is the final half hour when Bond and Goodhead are shot out of Earth in a shuttle and engage in a space war, complete with laser guns. Darth Vader does not enter the movie to fight them, but he might as well. The final battle scenes show the filmmakers really desperate to capture George Lucas-type magic on the screen. And they don’t.

This is supposed to be a James Bond movie. I can handle the Roger Moore entries becoming much more comical and silly (it happened first with Sean Connery in Diamonds Are Forever, by the way). What I had a hard time accepting is the Bond franchise completely capitulating to another franchise. In the last act of Moonraker, we don’t feel like we’re watching a 007 movie. We feel like we’re watching a bad Star Wars rip-off. One with great sets, of course (to give another Ken Adam shout-out). But, still bad.

We saw glimpses of this in Roger Moore’s first two features, with the influence of blaxpoitation in Live and Let Die and kung fu in The Man With the Golden Gun. Not to this extent, though. Moore’s third 007 movie, The Spy Who Loved Me, is terrific. It’s one of the greatest Bonds and I suspect it’ll register highly (very highly) on my favorite 007 flicks when I release my list after this blog series is complete. So, the fact that this was the follow-up adds to the letdown. Even the director of Spy, Lewis Gilbert, directed this too!

Moonraker, besides obviously trying (and succeeding) to cash in on Star Wars craze, makes references to 2001: A Space Odyssey and Close Encounters of the Third Kind. These joking references remind us that those were great sci-fi movies. Moonraker is neither a good sci-fi or James Bond movie. The joke is clearly on us.

Here are the facts:

Film: Moonraker

U.S. Release Date: June 29, 1979

Director: Lewis Gilbert

Screenplay: Christopher Wood

Bond: Roger Moore

Main Bond Villain: Hugo Drax (Michael Lonsdale)

Main Bond Girl: Holly Goodhead (Lois Chiles)

Theme Song: “Moonraker” – performed by Shirley Bassey

Budget: $34 million

Worldwide Box Office: $210.3 million

***On a somber note, actor Bernard Lee who portrayed the character of M in the first eleven Bond pictures, from Dr. No to Moonraker, passed away in early 1981 at age 73. Moonraker would mark Lee’s final appearance in the series.

My James Bond blog series will return in “The 007 Files: For Your Eyes Only”

007 fans would experience the biggest lull so far in between Bond pictures at two and a half years between The Man with the Golden Gun and the tenth film, 1977’s The Spy Who Loved Me. As the old adage says, good things come to those who wait.

The Spy Who Loved Me is easily the best Bond movie since Connery’s heyday. The excitement starts right away in the pre-title credit sequence, with Bond performing an awesome ski stunt complete with the British flag parachute.

We then move immediately to one of the greatest Bond theme songs, “Nobody Does It Better”, by Carly Simon.

And this one actually has a cool plot no less, unlike Roger Moore’s first two entries in the series. The main villain, Stromberg (in a fine performance from Curt Jurgens) intends to use two nuclear weapons to destroy the world. The twist this time around? He doesn’t want ransom. Stromberg is a madman who wants to start the world over with an underwater civilization. His main henchman is Jaws (7’4″ actor Richard Kiel) who is the best secondary villain since Oddjob in Goldfinger. 

Then there’s the Bond girl Anya. She’s a Soviet spy who can hold her own with Bond. The writers (veteran Richard Maibaum and first-timer Christopher Wood) give 007 the best female counterpart since at least Diana Rigg in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. Barbara Bach is solid in the role. The character of Anya also provides a dynamic never seen before in the series. It turns out Bond killed Anya’s lover in that cool opening ski scene. Anya vows to kill Bond after they complete their mission. This adds another new twist in Bond world and it’s a great development in the screenplay.

Again, it’s very necessary to focus on the production design of Ken Adam. Stromberg has an underwater hideout called Atlantis. Simply put, it’s really sweet looking. And the interiors of Atlantis and all the other sets prove once again that Adam is the best in the business and such an important figure in 007 history.

Of course, that scene shows that Stromberg likes to use sharks to off his victims, but once again, they do not have giant laser beams attached to their frickin heads.

Besides the wonderful looking Atlantis and submarine sequences, the early part of the film set in Cairo is gorgeously shot and they put that locale to perfect use. We even get a cool scene at the pyramids. And this great scene where 007 tries to find out the whereabouts of a key contact. It never goes quite as planned.

Piling on, we get a now-classic Bond car in The Spy Who Loved Me: The Lotus Esprit which turns into a freaking submarine! We discover this in a kick-ass action sequence.

The great usual Bond composer John Barry was unavailable this time around so the late Marvin Hamlisch was brought in to replace. He does a first-rate job, even though we do get a bit of disco mixed in occasionally. It’s a little disconcerting at first, but hey it was 1977! That’s the year Saturday Night Fever came out and there’s a couple of moments in Spy Who Loved Me where I thought the Bee Gees might start harmonizing over the soundtrack.

The budgets of 1965’s Thunderball and 1967’s You Only Live Twice were in the $9 million range, before the next three (Diamonds Are Forever, Live and Let Die, Man with the Golden Gun) all were around $7 million. The Spy Who Loved Me was the most expensive Bond by quite a margin at $14 million. We see it on the screen. The action sequences are top notch as always. It looks like the most expensive Bond flick so far. Lewis Gilbert returns to direct his second 007 feature, ten years after You Only Live Twice. 

If you’ve noticed I haven’t complained in this post… you’re right. The fact is that The Spy Who Loved Me clicks on all cylinders. I found it to be most compatible to Thunderball for a couple of reasons. First, the underwater elements, but more than anything else it’s just a hell of a good time and a wildly fun popcorn movie.

The last element of my highly complimentary ramblings: it’s Roger Moore’s finest performance as Bond we’ve seen so far. Moore would say in later interviews that Spy is his favorite Bond movie and he seems to relish having a good script, something that can’t really be said for his two original go-rounds.

Moviegoers really liked it as well. It grossed $185 million worldwide, nearly double the amount its predecessor, Golden Gun, made. Earning $46 million in the United States, it was the 10th highest grossing picture that year.

The Spy Who Loved Me is a triumph. I highly suspect it will rank right up there with some of the early Connery entries when I do my rankings upon this blog series concluding.

Here are the facts:

Film: The Spy Who Loved Me

U.S. Release Date: July 13, 1977

Director: Lewis Gilbert

Screenplay: Christopher Wood and Richard Maibaum

Bond: Roger Moore

Main Bond Villain: Karl Stromberg (Curt Jurgens)

Main Bond Girl: Anya Amasova (Barbara Bach)

Theme Song: “Nobody Does It Better” – performed by Carly Simon

Budget: $14 million

Worldwide Box Office: $185.4 million

My James Bond blog series will return in “The 007 Files: Moonraker”

In The Man with the Golden Gun, Roger Moore’s second appearance as 007, we get a real mixed bag of a movie. It contains some solid elements but also a lot of weak stuff, from a poorly written Bond girl to a truly dull and nearly non-existent plot.

Moore’s first outing Live and Let Die certainly had some issues, too. It did have a classic Bond theme from Paul McCartney and Wings, though. This film’s theme song by Lulu? It’s pretty bad and definitely the worst Bond theme so far.

Let’s start positive. The villain character of Scaramanga is well-regarded among Bond fans. I give most of that credit to Christopher Lee, a fine actor who brings a lot to the character. He’s a world-famous assassin who happens to have his own island that happens to be a disguised solar power plant . Scaramanga’s plan is to sell the plant to the highest bidder or let the oil barons buy it so they don’t have competition. Or something like that. The plot is not the movie’s strong point. Not that specific story elements are ever extremely important in a 007 picture, but I’ve been struck how thinly plotted both Moore entries have been so far.

Oh, Scaramanga also kills his victims with a cool looking golden gun, in case you were wondering where the title came from.

And he also has a midget sidekick named Nick Nack (Herve Villechaize) who provides some memorable moments. The villain also has an elaborate funhouse set up on his island, which he and Nick Nack use to trap people who Scaramanga intends on killing. The funhouse element likely stems from Scaramanga’s past, where he was raised by a traveling circus ringmaster. As he explains to 007 at one point in the picture, his interest in becoming an assassin originated from an abusive animal trainer when he was a kid. You see, the mean ol animal trainer hurt an elephant that Scaramanga had made friends with, so Scaramanga killed him. Oh, and Scaramanga also has three nipples for some reason. Moving on…

The film’s main Bond girl is Mary Goodnight, played by the gorgeous Britt Ekland. Her character represents the low end of the spectrum for Bond girls. The writers (007 vets Richard Maibaum and Tom Mankiewicz) repeat the same mistake they made in Diamonds Are Forever. Goodnight is played as a total ditz. It’s even worse here because we’re supposed to believe this girl is a secret agent. Call it personal preference, but I’d much rather the Bond girl be someone who’s got some intelligence and adds a little to the story, like in the Connery pictures. Here, it’s as if Chrissy from “Three’s Company” somehow managed to become a spy.

In the role of Scaramanga’s mistress who ends up assisting Bond (in a couple of ways), actress Maud Adams is better and she has a cool demise. Adams would actually later appear as the main Bond girl in Octopussy nine years later. We’ll get there soon.

And then there’s the inexplicable return of the Sheriff J.W. Pepper character from Live and Let Die. Apparently, audiences must have responded positively to the redneck Louisiana sheriff, portrayed by Clifton James. Not sure why. When Bond discovers the hick lawman is vacationing in Bangkok (really?), 007’s reaction is: “Oh no!”. So was mine.

There’s also a few karate related sequences that were clearly put in to capitalize on the kung fu craze that was happening in the early 70s, due to Bruce Lee and others. While these scenes are mildly entertaining, I couldn’t help but think of how Live and Let Die also borrowed from the popular at the time blaxpoitation genre. The early Bond films set the trends that filmmakers in the action genre would follow. The first two Moore features seem to often be following whatever trend was hot at the moment.

The Man With the Golden Gun does make good use of its beautiful island location in the last half hour. In fact, the last act of the film is quite entertaining because Lee gets a chance to shine more than a lot of other Bond villains. Also, the funhouse showdown between Bond and Scaramanga is fun.

However, other than one nifty car stunt and a few other moments here and there, the first three-fourths of Golden Gun is forgettable and by-the-numbers.

Audiences, to an extent, seemed to agree. The picture’s worldwide gross was just under $100 million. In America, it earned $21 million, giving it the distinction of being the lowest grossing 007 picture so far and placing it 19th on the year’s list of moneymakers. With a $7 million dollar budget, don’t get me wrong: it made tons of money. Nevertheless, considering that its two predecessors, Diamonds Are Forever made $116 million and Live and Let Die made $161 million (in just the year before, no less), Golden Gun‘s numbers were subpar.

This would be director Guy Hamilton’s fourth and final go round as a 007 director. He started with a classic, Goldfinger. His other three entries – Diamonds Are Forever, Live and Let Die, and this… not so classic.

Bottom line: for me, the final half hour almost made me forget the first hour and a half that I sat through. There’s a lot I didn’t like in Golden Gun, but like all Bond flicks, it’s watchable. How’s that for a sterling recommendation?

Here are the facts:

Film: The Man With the Golden Gun

U.S. Release Date: December 18, 1974

Director: Guy Hamilton

Screenplay: Richard Maibaum and Tom Mankiewicz

Bond: Roger Moore

Main Villain: Francisco Scaramanga (Christopher Lee)

Main Bond Girl: Mary Goodnight (Britt Ekland)

Theme Song: “The Man With the Golden Gun” – performed by Lulu

Budget: $7 million

Worldwide Box Office: $97.6 million

My James Bond blog series will return in “The 007 Files: The Spy Who Loved Me”

Live and Let Die, released in 1973, began a new 12 year era in the James Bond franchise with the casting of Roger Moore as 007. Sean Connery made it clear during the filming of 1971’s Diamonds Are Forever that this was a one film return, so the producers turned to Moore, an actor they’d had on their minds for a while.

Unlike Connery, Moore was far from an unknown when he landed the Bond role. From 1962-70, he gained worldwide fame in the television series “The Saint”. And unlike George Lazenby, producers seemed aware that the casting of Moore would necessitate a number of changes in the franchise. By Moore’s own admission, he did not bring quite the tough guy persona that Mr. Connery delivered. This would be a softer Bond. And a sillier Bond. Moore’s main strength was the gift of very good comic timing and he is certainly convincing with classic 007 quips and one-liners.

It is definitely Moore’s casting, though, that has divided 007 fans for years. My history with Moore is simple: he’s the James Bond I grew up watching the most. It wasn’t really until later that I discovered the wonder of Connery. And truthfully, the often comedy oriented style of the Moore pictures probably translates better to kids. It’s not until you get a little older that the Connery pics can be truly appreciated. At least that’s my story.

Upon receiving the Bond Blu Ray set, I was and am most curious to rediscover what I now feel about the Moore movies. It’s been a while and we start with Live and Let Die. I’ve already surprised myself once with On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. It had been years and years since I’d viewed it. Frankly, my recollection of it seemed to coincide with what a lot of Bond fans now feel about it: that it’s one of the greatest 007 adventures. Upon viewing it a few days ago, I discovered that I didn’t really feel that way. I have a feeling Majesty will fall somewhere in the middle of the pack when I finally rank them.

I have fond memories of watching Roger Moore as 007 as a child. But would they translate as an adult? So far, with Live and Let Die – the answer is a mixed bag. First, let’s get the obvious item out of the way. The theme song to the film, performed by Paul McCartney and Wings, is undoubtedly one of the greatest Bond themes ever. When regular Bond scorer John Barry was unavailable for the film, longtime Beatles producer George Martin took over the reins. And so we have a Bond theme by an ex-Beatle. Ironic, considering Sean Connery’s well-known line in Goldfinger: “That’s as bad as listening to the Beatles without earmuffs!”. Guess the new Bond was a little more hip.

Live and Let Die also contains some very memorable sequences, most notably an extended boat chase that is really terrific. Before that, we have a great sequence from 007 must deal with some nasty alligators. I remember loving these scenes as a kid and I still do.

We also have a truly beautiful Bond girl this time around, Solitaire, played by Jane Seymour. She’s a tarot card reader who also happens to be a virgin, until very shortly after meeting Mr. Bond, naturally. She’s certainly a major improvement over the Tiffany Case character in Diamonds Are Forever.

However, not all is well with Live and Let Die and there are some major issues. Much like in Diamonds, we get one character – loudmouth Louisiana Sheriff J.W. Pepper that seems to have wandered in from a different movie. A really dumb movie. Surprisingly, at least to me, this annoying character would prove popular and make a return appearance in the next 007 feature. Go figure.

And then there’s the matter of the plot. What Live and Let Die is most known for nowadays is the influence of the blaxpoitation genre on the film. Very popular in the early 70s, screenwriter Tom Mankiewicz chose to make the villains African-American and set the film in New Orleans and the Caribbean. Also, New York City in the early part of movie, where James Bond chases a “pimp mobile” (the script’s words, not mine). Watching the film today, trying to mesh blaxpoitation and 007 is an often uncomfortable mix. Lots of the African-American characters in the picture are pretty badly drawn stereotypes. While you come to expect that in blaxpoitation flicks, it’s a little disconcerting to see here. And frankly, it seems kind of unnecessary.

The influence of that genre leads to a rather unexciting plot. Instead of world domination, Bond is basically just trying to stop heroin dealers here. The main villain is Dr. Kananga, the dictator of a small country in the Caribbean who plans to give away two tons of heroin to put his competitors out of business. Then, of course, he gets lots of people hooked and can charge whatever he wants. Little different than nuclear annihilation, eh? Kananga is played Yaphet Kotto, who gives a solid performance even if the character isn’t too memorable.

Not that everything is totally different. Kananga does have an underground lair (with, as always, fantastic production design). He even nearly kills Bond and Solitaire at the end with his sharks… but Bond has time to outwit him due to the unnecessarily slow-moving dipping mechanism. This leads to a final encounter between Bond and Kananga that’s pretty darn memorable and cool. And utterly ridiculous, but that’s OK.

There is another quibble: Where’s Q??? In the history of Bond, from the second feature in 1963 to the third Brosnan feature in 1999 (Llewelyn passed away that year), Live and Let Die is the only 007 film that Desmond Llewelyn does not appear in. Apparently, he was shooting something else, but would’ve been let out in order to shoot his part in this. Producers decided to drop the character from Live and Let Die. They wouldn’t make that mistake again.

Producers had to be worried about how audiences would respond to the new James Bond, especially after the negative reaction to Lazenby. Things would be different this time, however. Live and Let Die was a hit, earning over $160 million worldwide. Clearly, crowds were much more accepting of Moore in the iconic role. In the U.S., it made $35 million – a decent number but less than the majority of the Connery films. It placed eighth on the list of 1973’s earners.

Director Guy Hamilton takes his third turn behind the camera here. For that third entry, it’s safe this one ain’t his best so far (Goldfinger) and ain’t his worst (Diamonds Are Forever).

There are some big problems I had with Live and Let Die including a dull plot and silly characters. Quite a bit of it, though, is just a hell of a lot of fun with some truly inspired action sequences. It’s a mixed bag, but it’s certainly an improvement over Diamonds Are Forever.

Here are the facts:

Film: Live and Let Die

U.S. Release Date: June 27, 1973

Director: Guy Hamilton

Screenplay: Tom Mankiewicz

Bond: Roger Moore

Main Villain: Dr. Kananga (Yaphet Kotto)

Main Bond Girl: Solitaire (Jane Seymour)

Theme Song: “Live and Let Die” – performed by Paul McCartney and Wings

Budget: $7 million

Worldwide Box Office: $161.8 million

My James Bond blog series will return in “The 007 Files: The Man with the Golden Gun”

At the close of all my “007 Files” blog posts, which will conclude whenever Skyfall is released on Blu Ray, I will reveal my list of Bond films in order of preference. This will likely not be an easy task, but I can tell you one thing so far without a doubt in my mind: 1971’s Diamonds Are Forever is the seventh picture of the franchise and it is unquestionably the worst of all I’ve watched so far. It simply pales in comparison to the six that came before it.

After it was decided that George Lazenby would not be invited back for a second engagement as 007, Bond producers Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzman thought it was time to find a new Bond. American actor John Gavin, most known for playing Janet Leigh’s lover in Psycho, was actually signed to a contract to play 007. However, United Artists had a different idea. They wanted Sean Connery back. Big time. And they were willing to pay an (at the time) astronomical sum of $1.25 million to get him. Connery obliged and Diamonds Are Forever marks Connery’s last time as 007 in an official capacity. He would return 12 years later in the role in Never Say Never Again, which is not considered an official film in the Bond cannon. That picture will not get a write-up in “The 007 Files”, though I’ll likely blog about it at a later time.

Critical and audience reaction to George Lazenby was tepid, so I’m sure it was a very welcome announcement that Connery would return. Added to that: Diamonds Are Forever basically brings back the Goldfinger team – director Guy Hamilton and screenwriter Richard Maibaum. The film is co-written by Bond first-timer Tom Mankiewicz. Even Shirley Bassey, who sang the classic “Goldfinger”, returns for this film’s theme song. It’s a good one.

The conventional wisdom among some Bond aficionados is that the franchise took a turn for the silly when Roger Moore took over the role, two years after this movie. I would respectfully challenge them to watch Diamonds Are Forever again. This is the movie where the 007 franchise practically turns to self parody. It’s often not a pretty sight.

The examples are many: the main Bond girl Tiffany Case (Jill St. John) is portrayed a total airhead. While earlier Bond girls have often been integral in helping 007, the character of Tiffany is just a dumb girl who seems to mess up anything she touches. She’s the most badly written Bond gal so far and St. John’s performance is, frankly, annoying. Blofeld is the main villain again and while Charles Gray’s performance is decent, it doesn’t match the impression that Donald Pleasance and Telly Savalas left in the previous two pictures. We also are subjected to the very unfortunate of Blofeld in drag. Not pleasant.

None of that matches even more unpleasant elements in the film. First, the ridiculous characters of Bambi and Thumper, two gymnast bodyguard villains. They have a fight scene with Bond that is notable for one thing… the absolutely atrocious acting of the women playing the girls. Watch for yourself if you don’t believe me.

And then there’s the characters of Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd, played by Bruce Glover and Putter Smith. They are Blofeld henchman who happen to be a gay couple. I’m not sure how un-PC the way the film portrays them went over in 1971, but there’s no escaping it: these characters are just awfully written. The actors do a terrible job. The only function of their roles seems to be an excuse for homophobic stereotypes to be portrayed on screen. I read of a Bond poll that listed their two characters as the worst villains in 007 history. That is not a surprise.

As for the plot, it’s about Blofeld’s dastardly plan to use diamonds as a method to build a giant frickin laser and hold the world hostage for ransom. That old chestnut. There are moments to enjoy: a truly well-done car chase sequence through downtown Las Vegas is a clear highlight.

The pre-title credit sequence is solid as well, as Bond beats up baddies to find out where Blofeld is at. It’s mostly downhill from there.

The majority of the picture is set in Las Vegas, but the filmmakers don’t seem to take full advantage of what seems like a dream location for 007. Other than the car chase scene, Diamonds Are Forever actually looks more drab than previous Bond entries. On the other hand, the production design of Ken Adam is, as always, impeccable. The picture did manage to do robust numbers at the box office, no doubt due to Connery’s return. It earned $43 million in the U.S., placing it third on 1971’s top grossers.

Connery is always rock solid, but he certainly isn’t given the type of high quality material we’ve come to expect for him. Diamonds Are Forever is a major disappointment. It’s hard for me to not recommend a Bond movie to friends. If you’re a fan of the franchise, I would say to see them all. However, if you’re one of the rare people in the world who have yet to see a 007 flick, I’d probably name a lot of other 007 adventures to view before this one. The film is definitely the first of the series, so far, that I found a lot more to complain about than praise. For a swan song in the official 007 series, Connery deserved better. A lot better.

Here are the facts:

Film: Diamonds Are Forever

U.S. Release Date: December 14, 1971

Director: Guy Hamilton

Screenplay: Richard Maibaum and Tom Mankiewicz

Bond: Sean Connery

Main Villain: Ernst Stavro Blofeld (Charles Gray)

Main Bond Girl: Tiffany Case (Jill St. John)

Theme Song: “Diamonds Are Forever” – performed by Shirley Bassey

Budget: $7.2 million

Worldwide Box Office: $116 million

My James Bond blog series will return in “The 007 Files: Live and Let Die”

1969’s On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (which shall be known as OHMSS) in this blog post is by far one of the most intriguing entries in the 007 series for a host of reasons.

The most obvious is that, for the first time, someone other than Sean Connery plays the super spy. George Lazenby is perhaps the most famous movie trivia answer of all time. He got the unfortunate assignment of replacing a legend. It would be his only portrayal of 007. During the filming of You Only Live Twice, Connery announced his decision to step down from the role.

OHMSS is also notable for its lack of gadgetry. Longtime Bond editor but first-time Bond director Peter Hunt purposely chose to stick closer to the Ian Fleming novels for this outing than previous entries. The film’s budget is $7 million, a hefty budget for the time but less than the budget of its two predecessors, Thunderball and You Only Live Twice. 

Another major departure: 007 really falls in love with Bond girl this time around. The character of Countess Tracy di Vicenzo is played by Diana Rigg, already a well-known at the time due to the TV series “The Avengers”. Rigg give us one of the best Bond girls in the franchise’s history. Uncharacteristic to Bond from the other features, he falls hard for her. So much so that she becomes Mrs. James Bond at the end (!). Of course, this turns out to be an even shorter marriage than Kim Kardashian’s.

The picture opens with Bond saving Tracy’s life as she attempts suicide. This begins a bond (pun intended) between them. Soon, 007 learns that Tracy’s father is a wealthy criminal who may be able to lead Bond to his arch nemesis, Blofeld. He continues to romance Tracy because of that, but as mentioned, Bond’s usually cold heart turns all gooey for her.

Bond is eventually tasked with going undercover as a genealogist in order to meet with Blofeld. This all takes place in the Swiss Alps at an allergy research clinic for beautiful young women. Sound bizarre? Oh, it is. It really, really is. So is Lazenby’s acting as the undercover genealogist. So is a scene that shows the young women eating the food they were once allergic to. Of course, it’s not really an allergy research clinic. Blofeld is brainwashing the women for a later biological attack that SPECTRE has been planning.

If that last paragraph didn’t prove it, let me just state OHMSS is often just a strange movie. That’s not necessarily a bad thing for the film, but the sequences at the clinic simply go on far too long (the picture itself feels bloated at 140 minutes). This stretch provides little action and Lazenby’s performance just isn’t strong enough to keep it moving.

Once this protracted section of the film closes, OHMSS really does pick up quite nicely, with an exciting ski, car, and bobsled chase. There’s also an extremely impressive snow avalanche sequence.

You have to credit the producers for trying something different with OHMSS. Particularly, the dynamic of Bond falling in love turns out to work very well. The dissolution, so to speak, of his marriage gives the franchise its first and only truly downbeat ending.

When the movie was released, it did not perform up to expectations. Part of it had to be the audience’s disappointment with Connery’s exit. Worldwide, it grossed just about half of what You Only Live Twice did. In the U.S., same story. You Only… gross: $43 million. OHMSS: $22 million. That placed it only 10th for 1969’s biggest releases.

Then a strange happened as the years went by. OHMSS began to have the reputation of one of the finest 007 entries in the franchise. Some critics have gone as far to say it is the best. Simply put, this is not an assessment I concur with. The final half hour of the picture is near great. Telly Savalas (best known as TV’s Kojak) is solid in his turn as the evil Blofeld. And it does have one of the very best Bond girls.

However, there are problems, most especially with the movie’s pacing. The plot, too, is often just plain weird. And also, we simply cannot ignore the fact that George Lazenby doesn’t make much of an impression as 007. I don’t want to criticize him too much because probably no one could properly fill Connery’s shoes. Still, Lazenby is mostly just bland. When he delivers his one-liners, they suffer badly in comparison to his predecessor, who had impeccable comic timing.

The theme song this time around hearkens back to the first two 007 films in that it’s instrumental, from longtime Bond composer John Barry. As usual, Barry’s score throughout the film is lush and memorable.

In closing, OHMSS has the curious distinction of probably being an underrated Bond flick when it was released, due to the tepid audience response in 1969. Since then, it’s become a rather overrated movie. Don’t get me wrong – if you’re a Bond fan, it’s a must-see. However, I don’t believe it reaches the level of any of the Connery pictures that came before it.

Here are the facts:

Film: On Her Majesty’s Secret Service

U.S. Release Date: December 18, 1969

Director: Peter Hunt

Screenplay: Richard Maibaum

Bond: George Lazenby

Main Villain: Ernst Stavro Blofeld (Telly Savalas)

Main Bond Girl: Tracy di Vicenzo (Diana Rigg)

Theme Song: “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service” – composed by John Barry

Budget: $7 million

Worldwide Box Office: $64.6 million

My James Bond blog series will return with “The 007 Files: Diamonds Are Forever”