MovieChat Forums > For Your Eyes Only (1981) Discussion > Most Espionage-Oriented Bond With A Not-...

Most Espionage-Oriented Bond With A Not-So-Villainous Goal...

posted 2 years ago by cyguration (3844)
4 replies | jump to latest

It's weird that this movie starts as a direct sequel to the 1969 Oh Her Majesty's Secret Service, with the not-quite-Blofeld sequence following a visit to Teresa's grave. I'm not sure why they didn't follow that up in Connery's Diamonds Are Forever , The Man With The Golden Gun or even Live And Let Die?

In any case, I thought that Kristatos was a really interesting villain here. His only goal was to sell the A.T.A.C., to the Russians, but didn't really trust them that the deal would go through as planned.

He felt like the most grounded villain out of all of Bond's villains. He was conniving, rich, and duplicitous, but it fit the role of a smuggler and shrewd businessman.

He wasn't trying to do anything ridiculous or over-the-top, and never once clued Bond into his master plans (since he had none, other than selling the device to the Russians).

It's a shame this movie was given to Moore because, the goofy lighthearted stuff fitted Moore's more over-the-top, charismatic wit and British humour, but I felt the more grounded and gritty elements were more akin to the strengths played up by other actors.

In fact, I think this film, For Your Eyes Only, and Casino Royale, both would have benefited from being in Timothy Dalton's wheelhouse, especially Casino Royale, since Dalton was far more suave and bitingly sharp in his portrayal of Bond than Craig. I could see a younger Dalton chewing up the screen in an awesome way with Casino Royale, just as I could definitely see him playing a very on-his-game and quick-witted Bond in For Your Eyes Only.

I think it was Moore's lackadaisical approach to the character that didn't mesh well with the more serious espionage stories like this one. I think Dalton would have pulled it off far more convincingly, especially that absolutely cold-hearted kill of Locque on the cliff-side. A close-up of a stern-looking Dalton after Locque falls to his death would have been enough to sell that scene alone.

[–] Heisenberg (6323) 2 years ago

Agreed on all points.
I am not a fan of Dalton, but he had a style that would have matched this script perfectly. And Moore is out of place here.

Same for CR. Craig sucked in every way, he was good only for the violent bits.
Or for the ignorant moments, which could be removed alltogether as they do not belong to Bond. Dalton is a much better fit for CR. But no poker.

[–] cyguration (3844) 2 years ago

I am not a fan of Dalton, but he had a style that would have matched this script perfectly. And Moore is out of place here.

Haha, what a succinct way of summing it all up. Yes, that's perfectly well said.

It's funny because my feelings about Moore is that I really like him as an actor and I thought he looked the part of Bond, but I didn't feel he made for a very good Bond at all. Charming the ladies? Sure, but he was too stilted and lazy elsewhere.

Dalton, however... I was never a big fan of his Bond films. I'm still not sure how I feel about License to Kill, as I may need to view it for like a fifth or sixth time to better understand what went right/wrong with it.

Like you, I was also never a big fan of Dalton as an actor either, but I better understand what sort of Bond he was trying to play, and he DEFINITELY nailed the kind of persona one would expect from an espionage agent, which would have been PERFECT for the more espionage-oriented Bond outings.

He was cold, just charming enough, very intelligent, and decisive. It's a shame the scripts he landed didn't match the ferocity he injected into the role of his Bond.

[–] FootOfDavros (6734) 2 years ago

I hated Dalton's run as a Bond and I find this film to be the worst of Sir Roger's...

But yes I could definitely see this film being better served by Dalton in the same way that The Living Daylights would have been vastly improved had a younger Sir Roger been available.

[–] cyguration (3844) 2 years ago

The Living Daylights would have been vastly improved had a younger Sir Roger been available.

Come to think of it, yeah... that probably actually would have worked for him.

It's amazing how some of these films seemed to have been made with the wrong actors in mind.