The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

Never liked Roger Moore as Bond. All I could think about was I was watching The Saint with lots of beautiful women, gadgets galore and comic book villians. IMO that formula cheapened the Bond franchaise.

None of those things were endemic to, or even began with, the Moore films.

[trevanian]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

None of those things were endemic to, or even began with, the Moore films.

The execution on some of those aspects made it seem more formulaic and less just a matter of format, equaling for me a less compelling and often infuriating viewing.

I dislike MR and SPY almost equally (Meddings and Adam are the saving graces on SPY, and again on MR with Barry), but MR really crosses the uncrossable Bond line with the gadget he uses to escape the blastoff chamber, which we never even know about beforehand. That is a megacheat of the first order, but I guess anybody looking for screenwriting lessons would know better than to go to MR for them.

[KrisTheMan]

Originally Posted by trevanian

The execution on some of those aspects made it seem more formulaic and less just a matter of format, equaling for me a less compelling and often infuriating viewing.

I dislike MR and SPY almost equally (Meddings and Adam are the saving graces on SPY, and again on MR with Barry), but MR really crosses the uncrossable Bond line with the gadget he uses to escape the blastoff chamber, which we never even know about beforehand. That is a megacheat of the first order, but I guess anybody looking for screenwriting lessons would know better than to go to MR for them.

But the Bond movies have always featured gadgets and variable features without previous introduction from Q. I'm just curious, did you also take a strong dislike to Bond's escape in Goldeneye when he used a laser in his watch to cut through the floor panel of Trevelyn's train?

[trevanian]

Originally Posted by KrisTheMan

But the Bond movies have always featured gadgets and variable features without previous introduction from Q. I'm just curious, did you also take a strong dislike to Bond's escape in Goldeneye when he used a laser in his watch to cut through the floor panel of Trevelyn's train?

It's funny you mention that, yeah, that is absolutely another one, though I guess you could rationalize it is Connery's watch from NSNA.

There's a way to do this where you don't have to show what's in there, like the Lotus in SPY, because you just KNOW it is loaded. But when you have somebody who has presumably been searched and disarmed, you're pulling it literally out of your butt, which is the MR case.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by trevanian

There's a way to do this where you don't have to show what's in there, like the Lotus in SPY, because you just KNOW it is loaded. But when you have somebody who has presumably been searched and disarmed, you're pulling it literally out of your butt, which is the MR case.

Maybe that’s the problem, you’ve clearly been watching a different version of Moonraker than I’ve been.

[trevanian]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

Maybe that’s the problem, you’ve clearly been watching a different version of Moonraker than I’ve been.

I try not to watch it at all, except the parts showcasing the work of Adam, Meddings and Barry. I haven't been able to watch it straight through since the laserdisc era, and only twice before that.

[KrisTheMan]

Originally Posted by trevanian

It's funny you mention that, yeah, that is absolutely another one, though I guess you could rationalize it is Connery's watch from NSNA.

There's a way to do this where you don't have to show what's in there, like the Lotus in SPY, because you just KNOW it is loaded. But when you have somebody who has presumably been searched and disarmed, you're pulling it literally out of your butt, which is the MR case.

Sure, but that's also the point of Bond's gadgets in field. They're concealed into everyday objects and devices to fool his enemies. This happened in The World Is Not Enough when Bond escaped captivity in the bank office using his eyeglasses to detonate a flash grenade concealed in his gun, even after be was searched and disarmed. To some enemies, a cigar is just a cigar, as they say. Bond's ability to surprise his enemies, and even the audience, using gadgets has always been consistent with his character and the movies.

[trevanian]

Originally Posted by KrisTheMan

Sure, but that's also the point of Bond's gadgets in field. They're concealed into everyday objects and devices to fool his enemies. This happened in The World Is Not Enough when Bond escaped captivity in the bank office using his eyeglasses to detonate a flash grenade concealed in his gun, even after be was searched and disarmed. To some enemies, a cigar is just a cigar, as they say. Bond's ability to surprise his enemies, and even the audience, using gadgets has always been consistent with his character and the movies.

I guess we're seeing this from different directions. In a PTS, you're doing a shorthand movie, so leaving setup for payoff out of it is practically a given (though as I recall (perhaps faultily), there's enough fiddling with glasses to tip that they are something unique.)

Even in a little amateur movie, you know to setup and payoff the big things, especially down the line (and the MR escape is pretty far in.) Shoot, I wrote a script for a second Bond parody film back in early 79, before MOONRAKER even came out, called MoonRiver, and I set up Bond having articulated sleeve fans that popped out of the wrists of his coats that were designed to keep agent hands from sweating. By having that piece of stupidity up front, I was able to pay it off by using it in a different way later, when Bond was getting thrown out of a plane, but then deploys the sleeve fans like wings to soar away like Superman. (this WAS a parody film.)

Somebody wrote an essay about Bond films and how they have a contract between makers and audience, almost ritualized (this was WAY before the Craig era, so I'm talking old-school Bond now.) Part of that is the way they set things up so audiences are practically grinning with anticipation for when they get deployed. MR is for me the definitive example of the makers ignoring that, and thus alienating the audience or distancing them (or going by this thread, that happening with only a fraction of them.)

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

The trouble with Diamonds are Forever is that they had to spend so much on Connery's salary that the rest of the film suffers. It looks cheap and scaled down and not in a good way like For Your Eyes Only. That and Connery just looks bored. Moonraker has more going for it. The luxurious sets. Moore is on fire. The John Barry score. Hugo Drax is iconic. Jaws! Moonraker is a shitload of fun in all the ways that Diamonds are Forever is a chore to get through.

Jill St. John is fire though. Pure fire.

You're not wrong with what you say about Diamonds Are Forever, but with things like its early 70s Vegas setting and the car chase with that big red Mustang I still prefer it to Moonraker.

Originally Posted by DR Herbert West

Moonraker > The Craig films

Moonraker > The Brosnan films.

Originally Posted by trevanian

Somebody wrote an essay about Bond films and how they have a contract between makers and audience, almost ritualized (this was WAY before the Craig era, so I'm talking old-school Bond now.) Part of that is the way they set things up so audiences are practically grinning with anticipation for when they get deployed. MR is for me the definitive example of the makers ignoring that, and thus alienating the audience or distancing them (or going by this thread, that happening with only a fraction of them.)

You're missing the point entirely. Nobody is saying it isn't a cheat. It IS a cheat. But Moonraker didn't start that. Live and Let Die also has a scene where his watch turns into a buzzsaw, which nobody was informed about beforehand. And if you are to dismiss the pre-title sequences, you still have to take into account things like pulling suction cups out of his ass (figuratively speaking of course) in YOLT.

Those over-the-top cartoonish elements were in Bond long before Moore took over. The Bond films were never meant to be serious spy thrillers, they were tongue-in-cheek pulp which is why things like The Spy Who Came in From the Cold were touted as being an more realistic alternative to Bond.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

Really? JAWS!

How does this comment of yours in any refute my statement that "None of those things were endemic to, or even began with, the Moore films."?

Originally Posted by trevanian

but MR really crosses the uncrossable Bond line with the gadget he uses to escape the blastoff chamber, which we never even know about beforehand. That is a megacheat of the first order, but I guess anybody looking for screenwriting lessons would know better than to go to MR for them.

Sort of like how in Thunderball the Aston Martin can all of a sudden shoot jets of water with the strength of a firehose?

Or how about in You Only Live Twice when Bond magically has full commando gear including suction cups underneath his clothing allowing him to sneak into the volcano?

Don't let your constant denigrating of the Moore era films make you forget that all of that sort of crap was in the Connery era films too.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

How does this comment of yours in any refute my statement that "None of those things were endemic to, or even began with, the Moore films."?

Dr. No: Dr. Julius No
From Russia With Love: Rosa Klebb
Goldfinger: Auric Goldfinger
Thunderball: Emilio Largo & Ernst Stavro Blofeld
You Only Live Twice: Ernst Stavro Blofeld (a.k.a. Dr. Guntram Shatterhand)
Diamonds Are Forever:Jack Spang & Seraffimo Spang

Real people with real names. No monikers or nicknames. The next two Moore films follow this with a change:

Live and Let Die: Mr. Big (Buonaparte Ignace Gallia) - notice a moniker
The Man with the Golden Gun: Francisco (Paco) "Pistols" Scaramanga - moniker
The Spy Who Loved Me: Sol "Horror" Horowitz and "Sluggsy" Morant & Jaws - monikers
Moonraker: Sir Hugo Drax & Jaws

Sort of like how in Thunderball the Aston Martin can all of a sudden shoot jets of water with the strength of a firehose?

Q upgraded the Aston Martin DB5 used in Goldfinger. Duh.

Or how about in You Only Live Twice when Bond magically has full commando gear including suction cups underneath his clothing allowing him to sneak into the volcano?

No different from him wearing a dry suit, traveling underwater then taking off the dry suit with his tuxedo underneath. 100% plausible.

Don't let your constant denigrating of the Moore era films make you forget that all of that sort of crap was in the Connery era films too.

The Moore films took them "over the top". A car that converts to a submarine

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

The Moore films took them "over the top". A car that converts to a submarine

One of the Connery movies literally had him disguised as a Japanese man.

[AKORIS]

if people are going to start debating about realism in Bond movies.... then it's time to stop while we're behind....

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by AKORIS

if people are going to start debating about realism in Bond movies.... then it's time to stop while we're behind....

The point is - when does plausible become impossible

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

One of the Connery movies literally had him disguised as a Japanese man.

LOL - I thought that was well presented. Definitely believable.

BTW the only convertible Toyota 2000 GT appears in You Only Live Twice. The cars are coupe only. Connery was too tall to fit in one so they modiified it as a convertible. But once again his height presented a problem - his head was above the windshield so the lowered the seat some to make it just right.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

Dr. No: Dr. Julius No
From Russia With Love: Rosa Klebb
Goldfinger: Auric Goldfinger
Thunderball: Emilio Largo & Ernst Stavro Blofeld
You Only Live Twice: Ernst Stavro Blofeld (a.k.a. Dr. Guntram Shatterhand)
Diamonds Are Forever:Jack Spang & Seraffimo Spang

Real people with real names. No monikers or nicknames. The next two Moore films follow this with a change:

Live and Let Die: Mr. Big (Buonaparte Ignace Gallia) - notice a moniker
The Man with the Golden Gun: Francisco (Paco) "Pistols" Scaramanga - moniker
The Spy Who Loved Me: Sol "Horror" Horowitz and "Sluggsy" Morant & Jaws - monikers
Moonraker: Sir Hugo Drax & Jaws

I don't know what names have to do with it. But is "Oddjob" a real name? Red Grant and Tiger Tanaka sure sound like nicknames to me.

The point was about cartoonish characters. Only someone being deliberately ignorant would think that a man with metal arms that can crush solid objects is not on the same level as a man with metal teeth that can bite through solid objects.

Furthermore, half of the names you provided on this list aren't even used in the films - there are no characters named Sol "Horror" Horowitz and "Sluggsy" Morant in the The Spy Who Loved Me, for example. Those were the characters in the original novel who were the basis for Jaws and Sandor.

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

No different from him wearing a dry suit, traveling underwater then taking off the dry suit with his tuxedo underneath. 100% plausible.

Thank you for reinforcing my point.

But that's not the argument that Trevanian was making. He was saying that Bond using a detonator inside his watch was a cheat because the audience is not made aware that he has this gadget available to him, not that it wasn't a plausible gadget. The audience is not made aware beforehand in YOLT that Bond is equipped with suction cups, or that in Diamonds Are Forever he has a gadget that can crush the fingers of anyone trying to search him for a gun.

All of these cartoonish elements were not an invention of the Moore films, they were present right from the beginning.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

I don't know what names have to do with it. But is "Oddjob" a real name? Red Grant and Tiger Tanaka sure sound like nicknames to me.

His name was Donald "Red" Grant - from Russia where Red means communism. Tiger Tanaka was not a villian.

The point was about cartoonish characters. Only someone being deliberately ignorant would think that a man with metal arms that can crush solid objects is not on the same level as a man with metal teeth that can bite through solid objects.

Oops! No metal arms - only metal hands. Surprised you missed that one.

But that's not the argument that Trevanian was making. He was saying that Bond using a detonator inside his watch was a cheat because the audience is not made aware that he has this gadget available to him, not that it wasn't a plausible gadget. The audience is not made aware beforehand in YOLT that Bond is equipped with suction cups, or that in Diamonds Are Forever he has a gadget that can crush the fingers of anyone trying to search him for a gun.

Guess you don't know what . . . suspension of disbelief means. It is prevelant throughout Hollywood movies. Always has been, always will be.

All of these cartoonish elements were not an invention of the Moore films, they were present right from the beginning.

Like I said - the Moore films put everything over the top. The game of one upmanship.

We agree to disagree.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

Guess you don't know what . . . suspension of disbelief means. It is prevelant throughout Hollywood movies. Always has been, always will be.

I'm sorry, were you meaning to direct this comment at yourself?

You were the one who was complaining about how implausible The Spy Who Loved Me and other Moore-era Bond films are.

[trevanian]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

How does this comment of yours in any refute my statement that "None of those things were endemic to, or even began with, the Moore films."?



Sort of like how in Thunderball the Aston Martin can all of a sudden shoot jets of water with the strength of a firehose?

Or how about in You Only Live Twice when Bond magically has full commando gear including suction cups underneath his clothing allowing him to sneak into the volcano?

Don't let your constant denigrating of the Moore era films make you forget that all of that sort of crap was in the Connery era films too.

The TB gag is a joke, not a major plot point. As to YOLT, I assume he probably has a hair dryer in his secret ninja commando gear too, since he seems to be his normal self after hitting the water. They're both immensely stupid.

but the MR thing is a total damn cheat, and all of the regular Bond crew ought to be ashamed of themselves. Note that Maibaum wasn't involved with this one at all (or SPY either, unless it was very very early on, like when SPECTRE was going to be run by young terrorists.)

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

None of those things were endemic to, or even began with, the Moore films.

Really? JAWS!