James Bond Blu-Ray Roundup (1962 - 1989)

Overview:
The James Bond films have been released many times over the years in many different formats.  A quick rundown includes Beta and VHS, CED, laserdisc, DVD and finally Blu-Ray.  My first Bond video purchase was a used Beta tape of GOLDFINGER in 1984.  In the early 1990's MGM/UA Home Video began releasing the films in letterboxed versions on laserdisc and I collected most of these.  I also purchased the three Bond films released on the Criterion laserdisc label in 1991 (DR. NO, FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE and GOLDFINGER).  There were a number of remasters that occurred afterwards, notably a line of THX-certified laserdiscs, and I picked up the occasional title that interested me. In 1995 and 1996 MGM/UA released deluxe editions of GOLDFINGER and THUNDERBALL respectively.  The first DVD editions were released in 1998, but I never got any of them until the 2006 'ultimate' editions.

Lowry Digital began work on digitally restoring the first 22 James Bond films in 2004.  A certain number got the full 4K (4000 scan lines) treatment from the original negatives, while the rest were done from existing elements.  For more information on this, check out DVD Savant's excellent article on it here.  The films given 4K transfers and restorations all boast superior clarity, detail and color values.  The Bond films were released on DVD in the UK in 2006, and then in the US in 2007.  All featured new special features, greatly improved image quality, and nice packaging with liner notes.

In 2010 MGM started releasing the Bond films on Blu-Ray.  There were across the board improvements in sound and video quality simply by being released in high definition.   The Blu-Ray's also offered definite improvements over the DVD versions in that the all SD content was redone for HD.  Significantly, the documentaries were redone using HD stills and clips (where appropriate).  Some color-timing issues for the DVD's were also addressed on Blu-Ray, such as the opening of ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE being tinted the wrong color.  The 2010 Blu-Rays omitted the liner notes that came with the DVD’s.

They got roughly halfway through releasing the films before the project was halted due to the sale of the company.  It wasn't until 2013 that the remaining films were released on Blu-Ray.  None of the documentaries for the films were redone for HD for these new Blu-Rays.  More significantly, not all of the special feautures from the DVD's were included--including the text-less title sequences.

This is not intended to be an all-encompassing history of the films.  It is merely a place to put down some of my thoughts on the films.  I plan to review ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE separately, so that movie is omitted here.

To read about THUNDERBALL click here.
To read about MOONRAKER click here.

DR. NO

Directed by Terrence Young.  Written by Richard Maibaum, Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather
Starring Sean Connery, Ursula Andress, Joseph Wiseman, Jack Lord, Anthony Dawson
1962, 110 minutes, Color, Rated PG, 1.66:1

Commentary:
It's easy to underestimate the brilliance of DR. NO all these years later, but brilliant it is.  The Bond movies got bigger through the years--more action, more sex, more everything--but it all started here and for the most part the movie has held up very well.  Bond is a badass in this movie, more so than in any other Bond film.  He kills Dent with the nonchalance of a pro yet remains a sympathetic and likeable character. In fact, aside from war movies where enemy soldiers are shot/knifed from behind, I'm hard-pressed to think of another instance that predates DR. NO where the hero kills someone in such a coldblooded fashion.  This was part of the film's impact--heroes didn't do things like that.

The film isn't perfect, but what it may occasionally lack in polish it more than makes up with style.  It is hard to believe that DR. NO was a low budget film when you take in the sets and location work in Jamaica. Connery did not yet know how to play Bond, and the character is at his most thuggish in this film.  Note how he twists the arm of the photographer girl, then tosses her aside when he's gotten what he's wanted.  This is not a problem, however, since Connery's charisma more than offsets these aspects.  What is missing most from his performance is the sense of playfulness that would inform his performance in the next four Bond films.

Ursula Andress is, of course, a great visual asset to the film.  Her voice was dubbed by a voice actress but it doesn't matter.  She conveys the character well enough in her expressions and body language.  The supporting cast varies between being okay--Jack Lord as Felix Leiter--and very good--this was the film that introduced M and Moneypenny after all, and Lois Maxwell and Bernard Lee are perfect in their small roles.  Joseph Wiseman as Dr. No effectively sets the mold for all future Bond villains.

Blu-Ray release year: 2010
4K restoration?: Yes
Textless title sequence?:Yes
HD Documentaries?: Yes

One of the original Blu-Ray releases. One gets the impression that the makers of these high definition transfers spent the most time on the early films.  DR. NO looks absolutely stunning on Blu-Ray.  Detail is off the charts and colors pop off the screen.  Seeing the film in this manner greatly ups the fun factor.

Stuff to Like:

• Great sets by Ken Adam, especially considering the budget.  Very smart filmmaking to maximize their effectiveness.
• It is undeniably cool to see Connery strut on the screen to the "James Bond Theme".
• What is still striking all these years later is the violence, which was NOT the norm in films at the time.  Too bad the violence was somewhat censored--Dent's killing originally had more shots.
• James Bond is something of a cad in the books.  Somehow Connery pulls off the behavior while remaining sympathetic.
• Ursula Andress in that bikini.
• Great location work in Jamaica.
• The maze sequence.
• Mystery elements of the story are well played.
• Bond sings!
• No gadgets.

Stuff to Dislike:

• Bond is hardly likeable in this film.  This was okay for one film but if he hadn't become more likeable in FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE the series may not have taken off.

FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE

Directed by Terrence Young.  Written by Richard Maibaum, Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather
Starring Sean Connery, Daniela Bianchi, Lotte Lenya, Pedro Armendariz, Robert Shaw
1963, 115 minutes, Color, Rated PG, 1.66:1

Commentary:
Bond purists will frequently cite FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE as the best Bond film, and from a purely technical level, I have a hard time arguing with that.    Other Bond films may be more fun, but this film has the best plot by a wide margin.  I'm not talking about set pieces, I mean overall story construction.  It tells a cohesive, logical story that builds with an organic energy that simply does not happen in any of the other Bond films.  The fight between Bond and Grant on the train is frequently mentioned as one of the great cinematic fight scenes--and I think it is--but when discussed all one hears mention of if intensity, editing and lighting.  True, all of these things are sublime in the scene, but that's missing the point.  It's effective because the story took the time to set it up.  We had seen Grant throughout the entire film patiently waiting for this moment and the audience waited with him with tension slowly building and building.  The fight scene works so well because it's releasing that tension.

Connery is fabulous in this film.  More confident in the role than he was in DR. NO, the typical Bond humor really started to manifest itself in FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE.  The supporting cast is uniformly excellent, with the lovely Daniela Bianchi a compelling Bond girl even though her entire performance was dubbed by another actress.  Robert Shaw is simply outstanding in the role of Grant--scary and imposing precisely because he is based entirely in reality.  No flying hats of death here, thank you very much.

Blu-Ray release year: 2010
4K restoration?: Yes
Textless title sequence?: Yes
HD Documentaries?: Yes

One of the original Blu-Ray releases. One gets the impression that the makers of these high definition transfers spent the most time on the early films.  Like DR. NO, FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE looks absolutely stunning on Blu-Ray.  Detail is off the charts and colors pop off the screen.  Seeing the film in this manner greatly ups the fun factor.

Stuff to Like:

• I love the lascivious looks Bond displays during the girl fight.
• Robert Shaw is genuinely frightening.
• No gadgets per se, just realistic field equipment.
• Q makes his first appearance.
• Great locations--they really add to the flavor or the film.  Unlike, say, how the locations add absolutely nothing to a film like OCTOPUSSY.
• The first train ride in a Bond film occurs in this film.
• Small in scope, but still works wonderfully precisely because everything is working together.
• Blofeld's first appearance, albeit he would remain unnamed until YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE.
• Bond does nothing outrageous in this film.  He is purely a spy in this movie and does normal spy stuff like surveillance, legwork, etc.  Every Bond film that has tried to go "back to the basics" (FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE, THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS) have all tried to emulate this film.

Stuff to Dislike:

• I got nothing.

GOLDFINGER

Directed by Guy Hamilton.  Written by Richard Maibaum and Paul Dehn.
Starring Sean Connery, Honor Blackman, Gert Frobe, Shirley Eaton, Tania Mallet
1964, 110 minutes, Color, Rated PG, 1.66:1

Commentary:

In many ways, GOLDFINGER is the prototypical Bond film.  It has an interesting villain with grand plans, a big scope, great locations, humor, sex and plenty of action.  But to be honest  I just don't like it much.  I get that it is a "good" movie and started the Bond craze of the 60's, but for my tastes I have always found it to be less stylish and blunter than the first two Bond films.  Connery gives his best performance as Bond, true, and there are scattered scenes that are truly outstanding--Bond on the table with the laser, Bond discovering the golden girl, the end fight with Oddjob--but there is a flatness of style evident that always turns me off.  Truth be told, I feel this way about all of the Bond films that take place in the U.S.  It is probably not a coincidence that Guy Hamilton directed almost all of these.  I realize this is an American response--I'd rather see the Bond films set in other countries.  This foreign pizazz is part of what I respond to in the Bond films...which is probably exactly what people in other countries think of the films set in the US.

Still, I am cognizant that my objections are relatively petty.  The film is widely heralded as one of the best, and for good reason.  It's a compact story with clear plotlines and even clearer characters.  The theme song is great, the larger budget shows on the screen with great cinematography, locations, and sets.  Connery has fully settled into the role and handles the humorous aspects of the character very nicely.  The increased sex and action make it more objectively "fun" to watch than the first two films.  It does far more right than it does wrong and justifiably became a worldwide box office hit.

It's just not my favorite.

Blu-Ray release year: 2010
4K restoration?: Yes
Textless title sequence?:Yes
HD Documentaries?: Yes

One of the original Blu-Ray releases. GOLDFINGER looks and sounds great on Blu-Ray. It does not look quite as good as either DR. NO or FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, however.

Stuff to like:

• Bond and the laser.
• Fight with Oddjob at the end is one of the series high points.
• Shirley Eaton looks great in her underwear and wearing gold paint.
• Connery was probably the most invested in the role for the film.  Gone are all of the rough edges from the previous two films--here he is is machismo personified with a playful sense of humor. In fact, Connery was never more playful than in this film.
• Gert Frobe is a great villain, even though he as dubbed by a voice actor.  Or is he a great villain BECAUSE he was dubbed?
• Grant, Oddjob, Jaws--that order.  These are the greatest Bond villains.
• The gadgets in this film are borderline ridiculous, but they are sure fun (like the Astin Martin).
• The golf game.  I love that so much time is devoted to it.
• Good location work, though the studio-bound inserts with the actors is a drag.
• Great sets by Ken Adam--the Fort Knox is a standout, but Goldfinger's meeting room is also great.
• Well plotted.
• Love the machine gun-toting old lady guard.
• Goldfinger being sucked out of the tiny window--makes no sense but sure is fun.
• Car crushing gag is great.

Stuff to dislike:

• Honor Blackman does nothing for me in this film.  That isn't to say she isn't good, just that she isn't my type.
• The organized crime leaders are caricatures right out of the BATMAN TV show.
• The big con by the good guys at the end is pretty silly when you stop to analyze it.
• Connery's hairpiece is obvious.  Thankfully in THUNDERBALL it was toned down a few notches.
• For all of the great looking scenes in this film--and there are quite a few--the film too often is reduced to zoom shots and basic coverage.  
• Bond "flipping" Pussy Galore is, viewed all these years, pretty misogynistic. 

Read about THUNDERBALL here.

YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE

Directed by Lewis Gilbert.  Written by Roald Dahl.
Starring Sean Connery,Akiko Wakabayashi, Mie Hama, Donald Pleasance, Charles Gray
1967, 117 minutes, Color, Rated PG, Panavision 2.35:1

Commentary:
YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE has an even bigger scope than THUNDERBALL, involving spacecraft being stolen in orbit and a plan to trick the U.S. and Russia into attacking each other,  but I don't like it much.  Written by Roald Dahl and directed by Lewis Gilbert,  the majority of the action scenes are surprisingly tired and while the film moves along nicely from one set piece to another briskly, much of what we witness does not pack much of a punch.  Whereas Connery was probably at his peak physical condition in 1964-65 when he made parts of THUNDERBALL, by 1966-1967 he was slightly overweight and bored and I think it shows on the screen.  He still gives a good performance, and there are admittedly some great moments such as the fight in the office building and the ending, which is full of explosions.   But the stuff in between...not so good.

So what's my main beef with the movie?  It boils down to the plot device of having Bond pose as a Japanese person.  The makeup is not convincing and especially his wig is not convincing.  I find myself cringing every time I try and watch this part of the movie.  TWICE also suffers from some extremely bad blue screen work, which is disappointing as the film features some better than decent outer space effects.  To be fair, THUNDERBALL likewise had some dodgy blue screen work but in that case it was only limited to the ending. Throw in some so-so Bond girls and you have a pretty lackluster affair.

I imagine if I had seen this new at the appropriate age I would feel differently about it, but I didn't so it compares poorly with other Bond films unfairly or not.  In many ways this does not feel like a Bond film to me.  What's worse is that You Only Live Twice was always my favorite Bond novel.  To say the film is nothing like the book is an understatement.

I suppose I should add at this point that I feel that THE SPY WHO LOVED ME is one of my absolute favorite Bond films.  The fact that SPY has more or less the same plot as this film is not lost on me.

Blu-Ray release year: 2013
4K restoration?: Yes
Textless title sequence?: No
HD Documentaries?: No

This was one of the Bond films to get a full 4000K Lowry restoration and it looks pretty good all around.  Some sequences that featured wrong color timing on the previous DVD edition have been corrected here.  However, like ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE and DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER the colors overall are muted and the contrast level seems too high.  The 5.1 sound is good.

Stuff to Like:

• The volcano set.  Built at a reported cost of one millions dollars, it is by far the most impressive thing in the movie.
• The fight in the office building.  Bond using the couch is great.
• Japanese scenery.  The location does give this movie a certain something something.
• The space special effects scenes are well done given the time period.
• The fight and chase at docks is effective.

Stuff to dislike:

• Awful bluescreen work.  There is blue fringing on just about every bluescreen shot.
• Connery's Japanese disguise is horrible.
• Donald Pleasance is not a good Bond villain.  That it was the first full onscreen performance of Blofeld is doubly disappointing.  Pleasance was not supposed to play the part, but the actor originally hired was fired shortly after filming began and Pleasance was thrown into the role with no preparation.  It shows.
• Connery generally gives a good performance, but at times seems bored.
• Boring car chase.
• Boring helicopter battle.
• Bond doesn't seem to affected by his wife's death.

DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER

Directed by Guy Hamilton.  Written by Richard Maibaum and Tom Mankiewicz.
Starring Sean Connery, Jill St. John, Charles Gray, Putter Smith, Bruce Glover, Jimmy Dean
1971, 120 minutes, Color, Rated PG, Panavision 2.35:1

Commentary:
The 1970's were not exactly kind to the Bond series, or at least the first half of the 1970's.  DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER (1971) was a strategic retreat to light comedy after the seriousness of ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE (1969).  Whereas that movie had a good story, good performances* and surprisingly realistic love story, DIAMONDS sole saving graces are Sean Connery and John Barry's music, which is amongst his best.  I've never cared for the movie, finding the humor borderline offensive**.  Plus, the story truly goes nowhere.  It culminates in a boring fight on an oil rig that goes on far too long.  True, there are some humorous aspects to the film but it's all rather pointless.  Connery said goodbye to the role again after this movie, and indeed never made another Eon Productions film though he did return to the role for 1983's NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN.

Interestingly enough, the original plan was to have John Gavin be the new Bond. He was screen tested and even hired, but the head of MGM offered Connery a lot of money and a guaranteed three picture deal.  Connery took the money for a charity he was setting up and never looked back.  To his credit, you can't tell that he was only doing this for a paycheck.  Sure he's a little paunchy but he gives a good performance in this movie.

DIAMOND marked the return of director Guy Hamilton to the series, who brought his distinctive lack of style to the proceedings.  I find that Hamilton's films lack the sense of scope that directors like Terrence Young and Lewis Gilbert brought to the films.  This film's director of cinematography was Ted Moore, and while be brought nothing particularly impressive to the 70's Bond films he did (this, LIVE AND LET DIE and THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN) his work on the 60's Bond films is exemplary.  So I think the lack of style and scope comes down to Hamilton, his American sense of humor, and his simply not caring that much about the visual side of things.

The original Ian Fleming book is about diamond smuggling, but the film diverges wildly from the original plot.  Blofeld, for instance, is not in the novel.

Blu-Ray release year: 2013
4K restoration?: Yes
Textless title sequence?: No
HD Documentaries?: No

The Blu-Ray looks and sounds great.  Given that this was from a 4000K restoration, the image on the Blu-Ray is a bit puzzling.  The contrast level appears too high, and shadow detail appears to be affected. Also, color levels appear to be much lower than the other Bond films.   Sampling the disc right after LIVE AND LET DIE, for instance, makes DIAMONDS look like a black and white film.

Stuff to Like:

• Connery gives a relaxed, confident performance.
• Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint make for an interesting, original pair of villains.
• Plot moves along nicely--it is not a boring film.
• Plenty O'Toole is mighty fine on the eyes.  (Lana Wood)
• The fight with the women in the pool is good.

Stuff to Dislike:

• Charles Gray is not a very formidable Blofeld.  He acts more like a SIMPSONS version of a Bond villain in this movie.
• The climax on the oil rig is boring.
•  Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint are gay stereotypes...aside from the killer aspect, I mean.
• There is a surfeit of stupid jokes, i.e. "Alimentary, Dr. Leiter..."  
• Car chases are strictly by-the-numbers. 

* I know Lazenby's success at portraying Bond in ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE is a subject of dispute among fans, but I think he's great in it.

** To my intelligence, I mean.

LIVE AND LET DIE

Directed by Guy Hamilton.  Written by Tom Mankiewicz.
Starring Roger Moore, Yaphet Kotto, Jane Seymour, David Hedison
1973, 121 minutes, Color, Rated PG, 1.66:1

Commentary:
With Connery out of the picture for good the Bond producers enlisted Roger Moore for 1973's LIVE AND LET DIE.  The movie was successful enough that Moore would go on to make a total of 7 Bond movies.  His first movie is perhaps the most dated of all of the Bond movies, seeing as it was designed to cash in on the 'Blackpoitation' craze of the early 1970's.  Aside from its being incredibly dated (and not in the good way), I don't think it's a very good movie.  Moore is largely ineffective in the role (though he would certainly get better), the 'twist' with the villain is not much of a surprise, and this movie continued the stupid humor that started with DIAMONDS.  Plus, it is the second Bond film in a row to be situated in the United States, the third to be directed by Guy Hamilton, and the second to feature the writing touches of Tom Mankiewicz.  All three of these things make for lackluster Bond films, in my opinion.  Plus, Roger Moore should not take his shirt off on camera.  Ever.  It doesn't work for him.

LIVE AND LET DIES does some things well. Jane Seymour is extremely fetching as the main Bond girl, and remains the sole reason I ever want to watch the movie.  The boat chase is decent as well. Yaphet Kotto is mostly wasted as the villain.

Blu-Ray release year: 2010
4K restoration?: Yes
Textless title sequence?:Yes
HD Documentaries?: Yes

Colors and clarity are strong. The original mono soundtrack has been remixed and reconfigured for 5.1 and generally sounds good, though not too much is happening in the rear channels.

Stuff To Like:

• Jane Seymour is a great Bond girl.
• Title song is pretty good.
• Boat chase is well done. 
• While Yaphet Kotto is not used terribly well, he brings a certain intensity to the Bond villain. 
• Baron Samedi is an interesting villain.

Stuff to Dislike:

• Blackpoitation elements are dated and very out of place in a Bond film.
• The big twist involving Mr. Big is obvious.
• Sheriff Popper is probably some sort of low point for the Bond series.
• Roger Moore clearly doesn't know how to play the role.  He vacillates between British priss and make-believe tough guy.
• Tee Hee's claw hand is poorly done.
• Given the somewhat interesting villain, the scope of the film is curiously small.

THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN

Directed by Guy Hamilton.  Written by Richard Maibaum and Tom Manciewicz.
Starring Roger Moore, Christopher Lee, Britt Eckland, Maud Adams, Herve Villechaize
1974, 125 minutes, Color, Rated PG, 1.66:1

Commentary:
THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN (1974) is an improvement over LIVE AND LET DIE, but it is a small movie.  Parts of Scaramanga's island lair are impressive yet other parts, like the fun-house, look like they came out of a TV movie.  Christopher Lee is good in his role as the villain but one can't help but think he could have been better used.  Moore is a little better as Bond, but is still unconvincing when he acts tough.  What lingers in the mind after it is done is the fabulous slanted Queen Mary set, and Britt Ekland in a bikini.  Roger Moore again reminds why he should not take his shirt off.  If in the right mood I can enjoy the location work of MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN.

This film features what looks to be some impressive sets on Scaramanga's island, but the film never shows them off to good effect.  The Queen Mary sets, on the other hand, are used very well.

Blu-Ray release year: 2010
4K restoration?: Yes
Textless title sequence?: Yes
HD Documentaries?: Yes

Stuff to Like:

• Britt Eckland looks good in a bikini.
• Queen Mary Set is a hoot.
• Christopher Lee is always a welcome presence.
• Twisting car jump is impressive.

Stuff to Dislike:

• Twisting car jump is somewhat ruined by the obnoxious sound effect plastered over it (toy whistle?).
• Christopher Lee doesn't really have much to do.
• Sigh.  Sheriff Popper.
• Even with the large sets the film frequently looks like a television film.
• There is an organized crime hit man at the start of the film that literally could not be more stereotypical.
• Again, small scope.

THE SPY WHO LOVED ME

Directed by Lewis Gilbert.  Written by Christopher Wood and Richard Maibaum.
Starring Roger Moore, Barbara Bach, Curd Jurgens, Richard Kiel, Caroline Munro
1977, 125 minutes, Color, Rated PG, Panavision 2.35:1

Commentary:
THE SPY WHO LOVED ME is a quantum leap forward, both stylistically and in scope over the previous three Bond films.  DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER, LIVE AND LET DIE and THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN were all 'small' movies, with limited locations and small-minded villains, but SPY features a return of a villain looking to destroy the world for their own gain.  Granted, SPY bears more than a passing resemblance to YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, but that's never bothered me for several reasons.  First, I saw SPY first, and second I don't much like TWICE.

SPY features gorgeous women, good special effects, an impressive scope, great set pieces (some featuring what was at the time the largest soundstage in the world), and a wry sense of humor.  I've always thought highly of the film.  The miniature work by Derek Meddings is especially impressive.  The music score by Marvin Hamlish is a bit of a letdown, but not because it is inherently bad.  It's just different from John Barry's style.

The original novel was the only one where Ian Fleming did not want the plot used for a film.  He had experimented a bit with the book, writing it completely from the point of view of the heroine.  It's not a bad read at all, but it is decidedly a lesser book.  The movie used the title and literally nothing else.

Blu-Ray release year: 2013
4K restoration?: Er, I don't know.  Probably not.
Textless title sequence?: No
HD Documentaries?: No

THE SPY WHO LOVED ME was the only film that looked less than fabulous when released on DVD in 2006.  Or, to be more accurate half of it looked less than fabulous.  The other half looked pretty good.  I've never read what the issue was, but for better or worse the first half of the film was plagued with excessive edge enhancement.  It was initially announced to be in the last batch of 2010 Blu-Ray's, but was pulled from release and LICENCE TO KILL was issued instead.   This is supposition on my part, but this is what I think happened:  A 2K restoration was done in 2004-2005 by Lowry but either it was done improperly or the source elements used were deficient.  At some point post-2010, SPY was treated to a new 2K transfer.  This new transfer is MUCH better than the DVD and looks very accurate.  Meaning, it features good detail and a fair amount of grain--or put more succinctly, it looks like film.  The 5.1 sound mix is good, though it doesn't pop like later entries in the series.

Stuff to Like:

• Is Barbara Bach the best Bond girl ever?  Why yes, yes she is.
• The scope of this film is HUGE, covering multiple countries, large sets, metal-mouthed villains, and a plot to take over the world.  Great stuff.
• Whereas the previous two Moore Bond films never got the right mix of humor and action, SPY achieves a near-perfect mix.  Moore also seems much more comfortable.
• The sets by Ken Adam are truly outstanding.
• The opening ski stunt is still impressive.
• Probably the most stylish Bond film since THUNDERBALL.
• Roger Moore finally seems to have a grasp on how to play the role, and he is fabulous.
• Jaws is a GREAT villain.
• Stromberg is also a pretty good villain.
• Special effects are elaborate and well handled.  The sinking observatory is handled particularly well.
• "Nobody Does It Better" is a great title song, and the title sequence is among Maurice Binder's best.

Stuff To Dislike:

•  Marvin Hamlish's music is not the best, title song notwithstanding.

Read about MOONRAKER here.

FOR YOR EYES ONLY

Directed by John Glen.  Written by Richard Maibaum and Michael G. Wilson.
Starring Roger Moore, Carole Bouquet, Topol, Lynn-Holly Johnson, Julian Glover, Cassandra Harris
1981, 127 minutes, Color, Rated PG, Panavision 2.35:1

Commentary:
FOR YOU EYES ONLY was positioned as a return to seriousness after the extravagance of MOONRAKER.  That said, I enjoy MOONRAKER more than FOR YOUR EYES ONLY.   I do like the more serious tone of EYES and feel it has some creative and energetic actions scenes.   The female lead in EYES is great, bringing a believability to her performance that is effective.  However, there are a couple of things I most definitely do not like about the film. First, I'm not a fan of the music but will concede that this is not a fatal flaw. Second, for being a "serious" Bond film it still has some of the goofy humor that plagued all of Moore's Bond films. Because the film is trying to be more serious, as time goes on the goofy parts bother me more and more. It's really two types of Bond films--one serious, the other a lighthearted romp--and the different aspects don't mesh well together. Is there really anything in MOONRAKER that is sillier than the pre-credit sequence in this film? Well, okay maybe, but the point is that if viewed objectively there is a fair amount of goofy humor in EYES that is jarring against the more serious aspects.

It also has a weird plot construction that builds to an ending that has virtually no dramatic impact.  I get that they were trying to make Bond more realistic after the excesses of MOONRAKER but they only somewhat succeeded.  Clearly, EYES has the most intricate and realistic spy plot of any Bond film since FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE (1963), but for every scene of decent plot development there is a contrasting scene of over the top stunt work--the car chase, the ski chase, the mountain climbing--or gadgetry--the face recognition computer, the underwater sub.  These differing aspects, MOONRAKER-style action and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE-style plotting, simply don't go together well.

That said, there is a lot to enjoy in the action scenes.  New director John Glen started as an editor and second unit director on the Bond films and specialized in action scenes.  The ski chase in EYES is a re-do of the ski chase in ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE (1969)--which Glen worked on.  The difference is where Glen puts the camera.  In the earlier film much of the action was shown using actors and rear projection.  In EYES he puts the camera right in the middle of things--the point of view shots MAKE the bobsled sequence.  Watching EYES again recently, I noticed that Glen does things like this throughout the film.

Blu-Ray release year: 2010
4000K restoration?: No
Textless title sequence?:Yes
HD Documentaries?: Yes

At first glance, FOR YOUR EYES ONLY doesn't look much better than the DVD.  However, detail and colors are definitely improved.  The sound mix is reasonably aggressive for a film from 1981.  Presumably, it was souped up for the initial DVD release.

Stuff To Like:

• Great action scenes.  Obvious stunt work aside, the scenes benefit enormously from good POV camera work.
• One of the best Bond girls.
• Elaborate miniature special effects.
• Good supporting role and actors.
• Moore is again convincing when acting tough.  He had to be talked into kicking the car off the cliff, but the scene stands as one of the best in the whole series.

Stuff to Dislike:

• Moore is really starting too look to old for the role.  The scenes with Lynn-Holly Johnson throwing herself at him are somewhat wince-inducing.
• Goofy sense of humor doesn't mesh well with the more serious aspects.
• The underwater fight seems like it belongs in a different movie.
• In the end, it's a rather small movie about typical spy stuff.  That in itself is not a bad thing, but the over the top action scenes seem to set up a big action finale.  When that doesn't happen one can't help but be a little disappointed.

OCTOPUSSY

Directed by John Glen.  Written by George MacDonald Fraser, Richard Maibaum and Michael G. Wilson.
Starring Roger Moore, Maud Adams, Louis Jourdan
1983, 131 minutes, Color, Rated PG, Panavision 2.35:1

Commentary:
OCTOPUSSY is an odd movie.  Continuing the trend of real plotting that started with FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, it tells an involved and reasonably complicated story that involves smuggling, nuclear bombs and Russian plots to begin World War III.  Technically it's well-made but overall not very compelling until the last third, at which point it becomes considerably more entertaining.  Roger Moore definitely started to look too old in this movie and while it is occasionally distracting, he still delivers a very physical performance.

Stylistically, the film is interesting--being only John Glen's second time directing a Bond feature it still has the refreshing roughness both in action and construction that also was on display in FOR YOUR EYES ONLY (1981).   There are a couple of 'you are there' point of view shots that invigorate some of the stunts. With one excpetion, the Glen Bond films would grow increasingly more fanciful and comic book-like and bland, and this is probably where it started to tip the scale.  There is a reasonably tense chase through an Indian jungle that is undercut by the addition of a Tarzan yell when Bond swings on a vine.  This presaged the use of "California Girls" in VIEW TO A KILL.

OCTOPUSSY ultimately builds to a genuinely rousing finale, and this largely wipes away the memory of the bland film that preceded it.  Part of the problem is the script, which introduces a rogue Russian General intent on having a war, a French villain and a woman smuggler who may or may not be on Bond's side.  The problem is that the Russian aspect of the story is shoehorned into the otherwise busy smuggling story.  It doesn't quite make sense that there would be a nuclear threat at the end of the story at hand, but it admittedly works in the moment.  The other issue with the Russian general is that he is portrayed as a stereotypical buffoon by the actor (Steven Berkoff).

This leads to the film's biggest problem, which is casting.  Louis Jourdan is simply not effective as a Bond villain.  A drinking game could probably be made based on the number of times he arches his eyebrows for effect.  Maud Adams, while attractive and decent enough as an actress, simply doesn't pull off the charisma needed in the role.

Blu-Ray release year: 2013
4000K restoration?: No
Textless title sequence?: No
HD Documentaries?: No

Stuff To Like:

• Well rounded plot.
• Interesting locations.
• Train stuff is pretty exciting.

Stuff to Dislike:

• Moore is too old for the role.  
• Goofy sense of humor doesn't mesh well with the more serious aspects.  
• The Tarzan yell.
• Poor casting.  Louis Jordan is far too bland a villain. 
• Penelope Smallbone?
• Indian actors are not used well.

A VIEW TO A KILL

Directed by John Glen.  Written by Richard Maibaum and Michael G. Wilson.
Starring Roger Moore, Christopher Walken, Grace Jones, Patrick Macnee, Tanya Roberts
1985, 131 minutes, Color, Rated PG, Panavision 2.35:1

Commentary:
VIEW TO A KILL is clearly the worst of the Bond films, at least in my eyes.  To be fair it does a decent job of setting the story up and developing it, but the jokiness that had always been a hallmark of the Moore Bond films is a lot harder to take here.  Perhaps this is because everyone involved in the films at this point had done it all before.  Perhaps it is because Moore's advanced age was finally too hard to mask, yet they still have him playing the role like a mischievous schoolboy.

You can sense that the filmmakers understood this on some level and tried to come up with some new ideas that the kids would like.  They signify this in the pre-credit sequence when Bond uses the skid of a snowmobile to "surf" down a hill to the tune of "California Girl" by The Beach Boys.  It is indeed surprising, but more for the oddness rather than its effectiveness.  The casting of Christopher Walken and Grace Jones as the villains are also notable for a Bond film.  On paper, this sounds like an interesting idea, but very little is done with either one of them.  Jones comes off better than Walken, whose idiosyncratic delivery undermines much of his dialogue.  Jones at least has a character arc, which is more than anyone else can say about their roles. Walken is just goofy.

Tanya Roberts comes into the story a bit later than most Bond women, and this probably best for the film because she is absolutely awful.  The script does her no favors but Roberts is never convincing in anything she says.   At one point Bond sneaks into her house and she confronts him with a shotgun, and initially we think she is going to be a plucky Southern girl who can stand up for herself.  When moments later the bad guys show up, she immediately hands the gun to Bond and adopts the mannerisms that she will repeat incessantly until the film's end, mainly yelling "James!  Help me!"  She wins the prize for being the most obnoxious character ever in a Bond film.

What the film does well are action scenes.  John Glen knows where to put the camera and how to edit action so the action scenes are never less than competent, but overall the film is bland.  There are occasional smatterings of grandness in the proceedings but generally the film is flat.   Ultimately, most of the John Glen-directed Bond films are bland, without the sense of scope and style that made THE SPY WHO LOVED ME (1977) and MOONRAKER (1979) so enjoyable.   A VIEW TO A KILL is not an exception.  Indeed, it looks and feels in many ways like a television movie, lacking the scope of the best (or even middling) Bond films.

Blu-Ray release year: 2013
4000K restoration?: No
Textless title sequence?: No
HD Documentaries?: No

Stuff To Like:

• It's always great to see Patrick Macnee, and the scenes he shares with Roger Moore are truly humorous.
•  Some of the action scenes work well.
• Grace Jones is actually pretty good in this.

Stuff to Dislike:

• Tanya Roberts.
• Christopher Walken.
• Roger Moore is replaced with a stunt double anytime he does anything more than walk across a room.  Granted, this had been going on for years but for some reason it is much more noticeable in this film.

THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS

Directed by John Glen.  Written by Richard Maibaum and Michael G. Wilson.
Starring Timothy Dalton, Maryam d'Abo, Jeroen Krabbe, Joe Don Baker
1987, 130 minutes, Color, Rated PG, Panavision 2.35:1

Commentary:
Roger Moore made seven Bond films, the most of any actor (so far).   He was already in his 40's when he started, so by the time of VIEW TO KILL he was pushing 60.  He probably should have walked away from the role after FOR YOUR EYES only, and there press reports after EYES and OCTOPUSSY that he was walking away and that a new search for Bond was underway.  However, he kept being brought back partly because the producers couldn't find a suitable replacement, partly because Moore enjoyed the role so much, and partly because the movies kept making money. 

After VIEW, however, Moore did walk away and the producers went looking for a new Bond.  They ultimately set their sights on 33-year-old Pierce Brosnan who was primarily known for his television role in Remington Steele.  That show was cancelled but when Brosnan became a news item as the new Bond, NBC brought the show back and kept Brosnan to his contract.  The producers then moved on to the classically trained Timothy Dalton, who at 40 years of age was older than Brosnan but quite a bit younger than Moore.  Brosnan was understandably upset over how things worked out, but things would ultimately work out in his favor.

Seen in hindsight and at a distance, the at-the-time slightly disappointing THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS is, in fact, an almost-great Bond film.  The filmmakers tried to make a well-plotted, adult film and largely succeeded.  Timothy Dalton, taking over the reigns from Roger Moore, is very good in this--good enough that I usually want to re-watch LICENSE TO KILL after seeing it, which is saying something.  He brings an earnestness to the role that was lacking in the later Moore films.  This brings a different energy to scenes, especially in the action scenes.  We see Dalton performing many of his own stunts on screen, and this adds realism to some of the set pieces.  Also, when Dalton pulls a gun on someone you believe beyond a shadow of the doubt that he could kill someone. 

The script was originally written with Roger Moore in mind, and the light-hearted bits are decidedly at odds with the rest of it.  Still, there are deleted scenes on the DVD and Blu-ray that take the humor way beyond the point of believability.  So, points to the filmmakers for dropping these bits.  If they had dropped 7-10 minutes of the rest of the sillier stuff (perhaps the cello case skiing scene, as one example) they would have had a much more consistent and satisfying movie. Still, the action scenes are generally handled very well.

This is clearly the most well rounded Bond film that John Glen ever made, at least from a cinematic storytelling sense.  It has style, scope well-handled action scenes, and good performances. The major stumbling block the film has in with Joe Don Baker's character, who is a bumbling oaf and never registers as a serious threat.  Baker would return for several of Brosnan's Bond films and would be much better utilized there.

In the end, DAYLIGHTS grossed about the same amount of money as VIEW, at least in the U.S., so it was successful enough to continue the series.

Stuff To Like:

• Timothy Dalton gives a really good performance.
• Maryam d'Abo's is very good in her role, which is also well written.
• Plane action scenes at the end are well handled.
• Bond only has one romantic partner in this film, and whether it was due to trying to tone down his promiscuous nature in the era of AIDS or not, it works for the story.

Stuff to Dislike:

• I wish d'Abo's character wasn't lied to for so long in the film.  
• Somewhat loses steam at the end.
• Joe Don Baker's character doesn't belong in the movie.

LICENCE TO KILL

Directed by John Glen.  Written by Michael G. Wilson and Richard Maibaum.
Starring Timothy Dalton, Carey Lowell, Robert Davi, Taliso Soto, Anthony Zerbe, David Hedison, Benicio Del Toro, Wayne Newton
1989, 133 minutes, Color, Rated PG, Panavision 2.35:1

Commentary:
LICENCE TO KILL was billed as a return to toughness for the franchise but it is ultimately undermined by inappropriate comic touches and an overall flatness of style.  It does feature a credible villain in Robert Davi as drug lord Sanchez, and a reasonably complex plot but is never as gripping as it wants to be.  Part of the problem is the use of American actors known primarily for their television roles, such as Anthony Zerbe, David Hedison and Priscilla Barnes.  Hedison especially kills it for me--it just doesn't compute that he and Bond are friends, and the subplot with him getting married is just embarrassing.  It keeps the level of drama firmly at the television level and that just isn't right.  Taliso Soto is also particularly bad but is an uncommon beauty which somewhat makes up for it.

I come back to this one every couple of years thinking I'm going to like it more, but I never do. LICENSE TO KILL could have been a Guy Hamilton picture, and that isn't good. The truck chase at the end is admittedly well done, but the majority of the film features coverage, not artistry.

This was the first Bond film not to be based in any way on an Ian Fleming source story or novel.  It's good that the filmmakers tried to do something different but the missteps outweigh the good things.  The plot is constructed around Bond's vendetta against a bad guy who did harm to his friend Felix Leiter--he is grievously injured (by alligator) and his wife killed.  Leiter was working on bringing Sanchez down, you see.  The entirety of Bond and Leiter's relationship falls flat because we have never seen Bond and Leiter be such close friends--they are already best buds when the film opens.  Sure, they've been business associates on a couple of cases, but close personal friends?  Granted the pair are reasonably close in the original books, but for dramatic purposes it all feels forced and unmotivated.   The history just isn't there and without it the film can never take off.  We see Bond go through the motions but we never connect emotionally with why he is doing so.  This leaves the film somewhat hollow at the core.  You may question my quibbling with a lack of emotional center for a Bond film, but this is what the filmmakers were trying for--a more human Bond.  I get it, but it just didn't work in this film.

Additionally, the filmmakers tried a different approach to the action scenes.  Rather than spread big set pieces throughout the film, they saved them for the end.  This approach works well for the most part as the end is undeniably well done.  If we had any emotional investment it would have been killer, but as it is it's merely good.

LICENCE TO KILL pretty much tanked at the box office when released, making only $35 million in the US, which was down about $20 from DAYLIGHTS.

Blu-Ray release year: 2010
4000K restoration?:No
Textless title sequence?:Yes
HD Documentaries?: Yes

Stuff To Like:

• Timothy Dalton gives a good performance.  Too bad the script lets him down.
• Robert Davi is one of the more interesting Bond villains, if decidedly lower-rent than say, a Dr. No or Goldfinger.
• Carey Lowell is good in this.
• The ending is one sustained action scene and it works well.
• Location work is decent.

Stuff to Dislike:

• David Hedison is easily 25 years too old for this role.
• Priscilla Barnes should not be in a Bond film.
• Wayne Newton doesn't help things at all.
• The visual style is flat and uninteresting--it almost looks like a TV movie.
• Taliso Soto is borderline embarrassing in this film.
• Maggot farm is unconvincing.
• Anthony Zerbe's exploding head is out of place in a Bond film.
• No chemistry to speak of between Lowell and Dalton.  Their first coupling especially is hard to take.