For Your Eyes Only

The humor is taken to its limit here, but it's a shame that Roger Moore is clearly aging... After all, he was approaching sixty, although he was only 54 when he filmed For Your Eyes Only. You can really see how Moneypenny has aged. Lois Maxwell had also been playing her role since the first film, Dr. No, in 1962. And she lasted throughout Moore's saga. Although the film doesn't lack humor, it certainly also doesn't lack action and interesting locations either. The opening with Blofeld is not a bad entrée at all. Ski scenes in Bond films are always worth it. This film is no exception. The excellent underwater shots only underscore the fact that great care was taken to impress the audience, and it succeeded. (03/08/2014)

I was less satisfied with the writing and Roger Moore this time, although the writers did manage to pack diving, mountaineering, and a wide range of winter sports into one film. That’s all very well but Moore's Bond is supposed to be a witty Bond and if you forget that, it will affect the final result. (08/03/2016)

My dear Moore, you wanted to be an action hero after all at your age? Well, why not? There is a script for it, the plot returns to the ground (literally) after the crazy Moonraker, even deeply into Fleming's history and is played again using simple cards. No super apocalyptic inventions, no super gadgets and super villains, but good old KGB, an erratic underworld and one lost British machine. And he's trying to do it like 007, so a few strange mafia subjects... It's obvious that it's the 1980s. Especially the introduction of the film is as if it fell out of some fallen American detective story so typical of that decade, a terrible casio pop is playing, and the already very breathless Bond Moore is trying to prove that he still has what it takes. Does he? Without the sarcastic catchphrases that the script closed off for him? No way. He even needs a double for running up the stairs, the charm is gone, and his characteristic machismo is replaced by and old man's sex appeal. Fortunately, there is a second half where both the sound and the main character are put back in order, and a surprisingly serious and thrilling plot unfolds for a Moore film with perhaps the best ending a Bond has ever had the pleasure of acting in (the phone call with the Prime Minister). For Your Eyes Only is a wooden spy film that, unlike From Russia with Love, lacks the unifying charisma of the main actor and prepares a few hot moments of nausea for those of us sick of 80s pop culture, but in the end it's good fun with fairly decent action directing by John Glen. Certainly better than Moonraker's galactic trip, but Moore was still the best when he wasn't taken seriously. (11/08/2004)

007__#12__On the one hand, great action scenes (the car chase in the olive groves, the ski and motorbike chase, Bond being tied up and dragged by a boat), on the other hand, Roger Moore is already ageing considerably, it's very obvious. His movements are quite breathless, I didn't believe the climber for a moment, and I didn't trust his sex appeal at all (Bibi's "I could eat you up alive!" really sounded like the scream of a gerontophile). The main villain wasn't great, but it has to be said that this Bond film wasn't boring. And the theme song is beautiful. Three and a half stars. (10/01/2005)

Serious, restrained, and down-to-earth, perhaps an attempt to return to the roots, but unsuccessful. Roger Moore is too wooden and uninteresting to play the same game as Sean Connery. The villains are boring and clumsy, the Bond girl is dull and unattractive. Maybe only the finale at the Meteora monasteries was nice, as well as the solidly shot and sound-designed action scenes rich in explosions and overall destruction. Well, it better be for a budget of 28 million dollars! (05/11/2014)