Post a Comment On: Horrorthon

[Image]
From AICN, “FOR YOUR EYES ONLY is fairly lean in terms of the ambition of the main villain and the sort of set pieces that are staged, and John Glen proves once again that he’s one of the best Bond directors in terms of actually building and shooting action sequences, even if he did make some rotten Bond films overall. I think it’s his background as an editor and a second-unit director that served him so well in putting the action on film. He was like David Ellis for his day. I doubt anyone had his name on a list when looking for a director for KRAMER VS KRAMER, but IRON EAGLE III? Hell, yeah. I think my favorite action scene here is the ski chase, but I also really like the scene with Bond and Melina (the stunning Carole Bouquet) tied together and dragged through shark-infested waters. It’s thrilling, and it still works.
The film builds to a non-climax, and Julian Glover (INDIANA JONES & THE LAST CRUSADE, THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK) is one of the least memorable Bond villains in the entire series. Aristotle Kristatos never emerges as a figure of menace because he’s never really defined as a character at all. His main henchman gets all the good bits, and even he’s sort of a stiff as played by Michael Gothard (THE DEVILS, THE THREE MUSKETEERS). These movies are only as good as the threat that Bond faces, and this one fails utterly on that front.
Can I also add that one of the weirdest moments in any Bond films takes place towards the end of this film? For about three minutes, the James Bond series turns into LITTLE BRITAIN as we cut to 10 Dowling Street and get to see Mrs. Thatcher and “Dennis” at home. She’s on the phone with a parrot who she thinks is James Bond, flirting and offering him the nation’s thanks, and her husband hovers at the edge of frame, smiling nervously directly into the camera, in very exaggerated make-up like a British Alfred E. Neuman. I find the moment endlessly bizarre, and I’m not really sure who to blame. The writers? The director? The producers? Whose idea do you think that was, and when they look back at it now, do they think it holds up as the biting social satire it was so obviously intended to be? Or does it just strike them as fucking weird? Which it is.
I will say that that Lowry Digital clean-up and the 4K scan make a difference looking at this print. It looks like brand-new. I can’t wait to dig further into the box with some of the films that I like more than this one, but even here, I’m really glad I picked this up finally, and I’m pleased to add this to the shelf.”