Released (US): June 10, 1983
Genre: Action/Adventure
Length: 131 Min.
Director: John Glen
Writers:
       George MacDonald Fraser
       Richard Maibaum
       Michael G. Wilson
Major Cast Members:
       Roger Moore - James Bond
       Maud Adams - Octopussy
       Louis Jordan - Kamal Khan
       Kabir Bedi - Gobinda
       Steven Berkoff - General Orlov
Awards:
       Golden Screen Award (Germany)
       Golden Reel Award - Best Sound Editing for a Foreign Feature (Sound Effects)
Budget: $35,000,000
Box Office: $187,500,000

Plot Overview:In what started as an attempt to stop a jewel smuggling ring, James Bond tracks Kamal Khan to India. However, things become interesting when the Russian General Orlov becomes involved with the plot. Bond meets up with the beautiful Octopussy, the head of an international circus troup, to find out more. Eventually, Bond tracks down Orlov and discovers his real plan to detonate a nuclear device in a US Air Force base in Germany, using one of Octopussy’s circus’ as a cover. Bond must now track down the bomb and convince the base general to halt the circus before the bomb goes off.

Did you know?: Maud Adams, who played the part of Octopussy, appeared in a previous James Bond film. She was killed off in The Man with the Golden Gun, made in 1974.

Review: The Bond series is in some sort of rut. Ever since Sean Connery departed for good (after Diamonds are Forever), the series has struggled greatly to get back above the average level. In the latest installment (Roger Moore’s sixth as 007), the series certainly escapes this rut, just not in the way they were hoping to.

What ultimately doomed this one was that this has to be one of, if not the, poorest Roger Moore showing so far. The charm was lost, the one-liners were sub-par, and the overall portrayal of James Bond in this one is just downright disappointing. It feels like the series needs a change of scenery, like the product is starting to become stale. That was one thing that Sean Connery did well, he never got old. Moore, on the other hand, is beginning to become redundant and over used. It feels like we have seen this same act before. Of course we have, but the goal is to make the audience believe that they haven’t.

The rest of the cast was below average as well. The best villain, General Orlov (Steven Berkoff) has the smallest role amongst the three primary villains, and that is too bad, considering that he is the best of the three. Gobinda (Kabir Bedi) feels like a Jaws wannabe, and it doesn’t work. Kamal Khan seems too business like and stuck up to be anywhere near a plot to destroy a military base, and he just doesn’t come across as a villain you would see in a Bond movie. He would fit the role of a pompous businessman, which doesn’t really make for exciting viewing in the context of Bond feature.

What saves the cast from pure mediocrity is Maud Adams as the sensuous Octopussy. One of the better Bond girls yet, Adams puts on a great performance. She is sly enough to be involved in a jewel smuggling ring, but her standards are high enough to want to halt any loss of innocent life. Adams fits the role, and it shows, as she is the lone bright spot in the cast.

Overall, the script followed the same sort of format that the cast did; primarily sluggish and mediocre with a bright spot or two. For the most part, the film drags, and it is difficult for the viewer to remain engaged and interested in the movie. The action scenes are, in general, slightly ridiculous and unrealistic. Slightly actually might be too kind, as James Bond is able to box a plane up in a small horse trailer, was able to fight Gobinda and win outside of a plane 35,000 feet up, etc. The ending was not satisfying at all, with the main villain dying not because of a blow from Bond, but because he wasn’t able to control a plane. In fact, I cannot remember fully the ending because of how uninteresting it was.

There was a fairly interesting car chase about midway through this film, but it is difficult to recall another moment or sequence in Octopussy where the action and suspense even came close to gripping you. This is one of the few movies that I have seen where I found myself checking the time left on the movie, wondering when it was going to end.

A huge step backwards for the Bond franchise, Octopussy loses any ground that it the Roger Moore era had gained in other episodes of the Bond film. Largely disappointing, Octopussy can wallow with the likes of Live and Let Die as one of the worst Bond episodes put together.

Final Grade: D+ (at least Live and Let Die had a good theme song…)

Other Reviews:
DVDTown: “…more than a bit silly compared to its immediate predecessor.”

Reel Views: “There’s a fine line between wit and absurdity, and this particular movie too often falls on the wrong side.”

DVD Verdict: “Though not Roger Moore or the franchise’s best installment (try For Your Eyes Only as Moore’s prime), Octopussy still delivers energy, action, and a feast for the eyes.”

Filmcritic.com: “…Octopussy isn’t just embarassing to say out loud, it’s also a nearly outright-dud for the Bond franchise….For completists only.”

Movie Vault: “Rita Coolidge sings the theme song “All Time High” in this action-driven exotic adventure of 007 that does live up to the song title.”

EFilm Critic: ”With too little action, the majority of which is dull anyway, it falls back into routine and bad habits throughout. It also has the misfortune to be silly AND boring, which is something no Bond should ever be.”

TVGuide: “The only real excitement generated by Octopussy was whether it would beat Never Say Never Again, a rival Bond production starring Sean Connery, to the theaters in the summer of 1983.”

Watch (allow time to buffer):

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

Released (US): June 26, 1981
Genre: Action/Adventure
Length: 127 Min.
Director: John Glen
Writer:Richard Maibaum & Michael G. Wilson
Major Cast Members:
       Roger Moore - James Bond
       Carole Bouquet - Melina Havelock
       Julian Glover - Aristotle Kristatos
       Topol - Milos Columbo
       Lynn Holly Johnson - Bibi Dahl
Awards:
       ASCAP Award - Most Performed Feature Film Standards (Bill Conti)
       Golden Screen Award (Germany)
Budget: $28,000,000
Box Office: $195,300,000

Plot Overview: After a quick run in with an old friend, Bond is sent to recover the lost ATAC system, a computer that controls the entire English nuclear submarine fleet. If it were to fall into the wrong hands, the entire British Polaris fleet could be used to attack its own cities. In order to get it back, Bond must travel to the bottom of the ocean and find the St. George’s (the ship that was carrying it). Unfortunately, Bond will have competition from Aristotle Kristatos, a Greek working for the Russians. With the help of Melina Havelock and Milos Columbo, Bond must get the ATAC back before the Russians can get their hands on it.

Did you know?:The title song, “For Your Eyes Only,” by Sheena Easton, was ranked #8 in the UK and #4 in the US on the charts. It was also nominated for an Oscar.

Review: Roger Moore is back again for the twelfth installment of the Bond series, and, while he is better than past duds such as Moonraker and Live and Let Die, Moore still fails to deliver the goods that were abound in the Connery films. Of the Moore films, this one is better than some, but doesn’t quite reach the pinnacle, otherwise known as The Spy Who Loved Me.

To start, this was not one of the stronger casts that the makers of the Bond franchise has ever assembled. Moore (as usual) is solid, but is too light-hearted and comical to be considered a true James Bond character. He has some decent moments of humor in this one, but they somehow lack the same zing compared to the one-liners so masterfully delivered by Sean Connery.

Additionally, the Bond girls were weak here. Bibi Dahl (played by Lynn Holly Johnson) was a typical dumb blonde. A young woman training to become an Olympic figure skater, her young, flirty personality doesn’t work well with Bond. Her flirting scene in the hotel room is awkward at best, and she seems like an empty shell of a character that serves little purpose. Melina Havelock (Carole Bouquet) is better, however, and saves this episode from having the worst Bond Girls in the franchise (up to this point). She is attractive and self-reliant, which is something that all Bond Girls should have, and something that Bibi is greatly lacking.

The criminals are solid in this movie, headlined by the Greek villain Aristotle Kristatos (Julian Glover). It is refreshing to have realistic bad guys return, as the Russians have hired Kristatos to go after the lost British ATAC device, a computer that can control the entire British submarine fleet. Kristatos is not the best Bond villain by any means, but he is deceiving (he nearly fools Bond into going after the wrong guy) and efficiant at his job, nearly accomplishing the Russian objectuve.

The plot is realistic as well, something that seems to be lacking in some of the more recent Bond adventures (Moonraker comes to mind). However, there are still some exciting moments to be had, such as the early car chase and the underwater fight scene towards the end of the movie. Just goes to show that you don’t need an outlandish, ridiculous plot to create excitement. Overall, the script was solid that paced itself well, but there were some holes, however, and the movie didn’t always keep up to speed.

For Your Eyes Only is a decent addition to the Bond movie series. Isn’t the best, but it is certainly not the worst by any means. Better Bond Girls and some slight plot tweaking was all that was really needed to raise this movie’s status a notch or two. Unfortunately, that didn’t happen.

Final Grade: B-

Other Reviews:
DVDTown: “Most of the outlandish silliness of a few other Bond issues is mercifully absent, replaced by a greater emphasis on believable thrills.”

Reel Views: “In the final analysis, For Your Eyes Only is a solid adventure, although it could have been better….By the end of the ’80s, Bond would be viewed as something of a relic, but at least the decade opened with an enjoyable outing.”

DVD Verdict: “Perhaps the best entry in the Roger Moore era, For Your Eyes Only returns to a tougher, grittier Bond who saves the day but this time with very limited gadgets and some of the most amazing stunt sequences ever packed into a single movie.”

Filmcritic.com: “As unlikely an adventure as James Bond has ever taken, For Your Eyes Only is one of the better Roger Moore vehicles, thanks to a script that overflows with exotic locales and extreme adventures for our hero to undertake.”

Movie Vault: “The action sequences are entertaining, and sadly are the only good points.”

EFilm Critic: “…its rightful place as one of the best Bonds ever. After all it’s the best Sean Connery Bond that Sean Connnery never made.”

TVGuide: “The success of this picture (perhaps Moore’s best in the Bond series) can be attributed to the marvelous direction of Glen, who had previously worked as a second-unit director on earlier Bond movies.”

Watch (allow time to buffer):

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

Released (US): June 29, 1979
Genre: Action/Adventure
Length: 126 Min.
Director: Lewis Gilbert
Writer: Christopher Wood
Major Cast Members:
       Roger Moore - James Bond
       Lois Chiles - Dr. Holly Goodhead 
       Michael Lonsdale - Hugo Drax
       Richard Kiel - Jaws
       Bernard Lee - M
Awards:
       Golden Screen Award (Germany)
Budget: $34,000,000
Box Office: $210,300,000

Plot Overview:For the first time ever, James Bond goes into space. After a man named Hugo Drax hijacks a spaceship, 007 is sent to investigate. Bond eventually uncovers a plot to commit global genocide and to breed a new super race of humans. The center of operation is a space station, and that is where Bond must go to stop the evil plot.

Did you know?:Moonraker was Bernard Lee’s (M) final Bond film. The actor died during the pre-production of the following film For Your Eyes Only.

Review:After a surprisingly good performance in The Spy Who Loved Me, Roger Moore, and the Bond series, tumbled back down in a surprisingly poor production of the eleventh Bond film, Moonraker. There was potential, with Bond making his first venture into space, but it was never fulfilled. Moonraker certainly does not rank among the better Bond films.

Roger Moore was, again, solid in his fourth Bond film, but that’s all, solid. He didn’t improve on his last outing as 007, and he is still not approaching the Sean Connery level. Even though he is better than his first two attempts as the British spy, the viewer cannot look at Moore as Bond and not smirk a little. Moore is simply to light and humorous to be James Bond. The hardcutting tough guy attitude prevalent in all of Connery’s films are missing, therefor diluting the moments that are supposed to be witty and humorous.

The rest of the cast was a slight step down from The Spy Who Loved Me as well. Lois Chiles (Dr. Holly Goodhead) isn’t a great Bond Girl. Hugo Drax (Michael Lonsdale) is a decent villain, but he doesn’t seem to have a personality. He is like a stiff, expressionless man with evil intentions. It is difficult to recall any moments where Drax let out an evil laugh, tempted Bond, or showed any significant variation from his standard blank, cold demeanor. Jaws (Richard Kiel) returned which is nice.

As far as the plot goes, Moonraker left something to be desired. There weren’t many moments of truly exciting action or suspense, which caused the movie to drag a bit. Like some past editions of the Bond franchise, there was an unbelievable (in the classic sense of the term) fight towards the end, where astronauts from both sides got into a laser fight outside of a space station that couldn’t be picked up on radar. It was too out there, even for a Bond film.

Another issue has to do with character development. Towards the end of the film, Bond is able to convince Jaws that Hugo Drax will eventually turn on him and kill him, thereby causing Jaws to immediately switch sides and fight with Bond. It almost seems like the two, in a matter of moments, have gone from hated enemies to great friends fighting alongside one another. First off, if the writers were going to do this, they should have spread the change out over time. There is no way the total ideology Jaws would have changed so quickly. Bond had, after all, tried to kill him many times. Secondly, it is almost disappointing when this happens. An epic battle between the two would have been much better. Bond and Jaws suddenly becoming friends is almost anticlimactic and does nothing for the movie.

As a whole, Moonraker was a disappointment. The potential was there, but it wasn’t fulfilled at all. Moonraker could have built on the better than expected The Spy Who Loved Me, but it didn’t, and the Bond series fell flat on its face.

Final Grade: C

Other Reviews:
DVDTown: “…one of the best of Moore’s Bond flicks, complemented by its exotic locales and outer-space motif.”

Reel Views: “As Roger Moore’s fourth Bond outing, and the eleventh film in the series, Moonraker is a satisfying followup to The Spy Who Loved Me.”

DVD Verdict: “Though not one of the best Bond films, Moonraker remains pleasing movie fare…”

Filmcritic.com: “Most rational observers agree that Moonraker is without a doubt the most absurd James Bond movie — definitely of the Roger Moore era and possibly of all time. And it’s exactly that ridiculousness that makes it so enjoyable.”

EFilm Critic: “Too cartoonish for it’s own good, the best you can say about is that it’s never boring. It is however frequently smug, silly and stupid.”

TVGuide: “…007 is less satisfying floating around in space than when his feet are more or less firmly planted on the ground.”

Watch (allow time to buffer):

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

Released (US): August 3, 1977
Genre: Action/Adventure
Length: 125 Min.
Director: Lewis Gilbert
Writer: Christopher Wood & Richard Maibaum
Major Cast Members:
       Roger Moore - James Bond
       Barbara Bach - Major Anya Amasova
       Curd Jürgens - Karl Stromberg
       Richard Kiel - Jaws
       Bernard Lee - M
Awards:
       ASCAP Award - Most Performed Feature Film Standards
       Golden Screen Award (Germany)
Budget: $14,000,000
Box Office: $185,400,000

Plot Overview: Several nuclear submarines disappeared and James Bond, along with Russian secret agent Major Anya Amasova, is sent to find them. Frequent encounters with villain Karl Stromberg and his henchman Jaws almost trip the two up, but they persevere. However, can they stop the nuclear subs in time before they destroy New York and Moscow? Bond must escape captivity and rescue Anya before it’s all over.

Did you know?: The Spy Who Loved Me is the only one of the Bond films to be produced in the same order as the book series. The tenth movie is also the tenth novel.

Review: Roger Moore returns for a third stint as James Bond 007, and, as always, third time’s a charm. The Spy Who Loved Me is the best of Moore’s first three Bond flicks. This still doesn’t mean that Moore has reached Connery level, but it at least indicates that the Bond series is not totally lost after a couple sub-par installations of the Bond series.

Thankfully, the world is threatened once again in a Bond movie. Specifically New York and Moscow, but that’s better than having personal revenge vendettas against Bond or a heroin dealer threatening to flood the market with drugs. Nuclear subs with an evil mastermind seems much more fitting for a Bond flick.

As far as the rest of the plot, it was definitely the best since the beginning of the Moore era. Enough action to keep it interesting, and the action scenes were good. The climactic ending on the ship was particularly well done. While not the most gripping or suspensful movie ever made, there was some tension throughout the movie that made it exciting. Jaws vs. Bond was great and prevalent throughout the movie, it almost seemed like Jaws was the real enemy at some points.

Absent from the previous film, some of the exciting stunts were back as well. Additionally, some of the funky gadgets started to insert themselves into the plotline. Most notably were the jet ski in a bag and the underwater car. They are without a doubt cool, and, although they are certainly more prevalent than some of the more recent Bond movies, they are not absorbing and controlling of the plot.

As far as the cast is concerned, this was probably the strongest of the first three Moore films. Moore himself was solid this time around. He still seems a little looser and more comical than Connery, but he was able to control that slightly better in The Spy Who Loved Me. He is improving a little with each film, and one can only hope that this trend continues in his coming films.

The supporting cast, featuring Barbara Bach as Major Anya Amasova and Curd Jürgens as Karl Stromberg, was strong as well. Bach was one of the better Bond Girls to date. She looked good, was strong, and could hold her own. Compared to Mary Goodnight in The Man With the Golden Gun, Major Anya is terrific. She just seems like the prototypical Bond Girl. Stromberg was a good villain, as his plot to destroy major cities was solid and he appeared to be a genuine villain. Not as good as Scaramanga, but still a solid overall contributor to the movie.

While not the best Bond movie, it is definitely a step forward when compared to the other Bond films featuring Roger Moore. Hopefully, Moore improves on the solid performance.

Final Grade: B

Other Reviews:
DVDTown: “…pulled Roger Moore from the shadow of his predecessor and established him as a bone fide Bond who had not yet fallen into self-parody.”

DVD Verdict: “What the movie does do, is move quickly with a great deal of style and panache. It contains all the action, wit, beautiful women, high quality special effects and exotic locations audiences have come to expect for almost 40 years. Along with For Your Eyes Only, The Spy Who Loved Me is Roger Moore’s best work as 007 and as such belongs on any serious action fan’s movie shelf.”

Filmcritic.com: “James Bond had his 10th outing in this epic affair, which ushered in the new era of Bond as not just over the top but rather way, way, way over it.”

Movie Vault: “The Roger Moore Bond series reached its pinnacle with The Spy Who Loved Me.”

EFilm Critic: “It may not be as gritty as From Russia With Love or as grand as Goldfinger but The Spy Who Loved Me remains the definitive Moore Bond. Cocky, big and thrilling (oo-er!), Bond was back on firm ground and having the timeof his life.”

TVGuide: “As the Bond series moved deeper into the 1970s, the emphasis moved away from the inventive scripts that made the best Sean Connery films fine examples of the spy genre and toward the kind of feats of daring and visual spectacle that abound in The Spy Who Loved Me.”

Watch (allow time to buffer):

Part 1
Part 2

Released (US): August 3, 1994
Genre: Action/Adventure; Mystery
Length: 141 Min.
Director: Phillip Noyce
Writer:Donald Stewart, Steven Zaillian, & John Milius
Major Cast Members:
       Harrison Ford - Jack Ryan
       Willem Dafoe - John Clark
       Joaquim de Almeida - Col. Felix Cortez
       Henry Czerny - Robert Ritter
       Harris Yulin - James Cutter
Awards:
       ASCAP Award - Top Box Office Film
       Blockbuster Entertainment Awards:
               Favorite Actor - Action, On Video (Harrison Ford)
               Favorite Actor - Action, Theatrical (Harrison Ford)
Budget: $65,000,000
Box Office: $215,887,717

Plot Overview: Based on the Tom Clancy novel of the same name, Clear and Present Danger sees the return of Jack Ryan for another round. When he is appointed to CIA Deputy Director, he doesn’t have any time to get acclimated. Several of the President’s close friends are murdered on their yacht by what appears to be a Colombian drug cartel. Ryan is sent down to Colombia to investigate immediately, but he is unaware that people within his own government are already waging an illegal war in the country with a small, secret task force. When communication between the task force and their commander goes down, the ugly truth starts to come out and Ryan must risk his job, and his life, to rescue the abandoned soldiers and expose the ugly truth.

Did you know?: The scene when Jack Ryan and his caravan are attacked in the back alleyway is actually used in US military training videos. JAG, the TV show, also used the scene in one of their episodes.

Review: Going into the viewing of Clear and Present Danger, expectations ran very high. It was my first film based on a Tom Clancy novel, so I wasn’t sure exactly to expect. But the concept is right up my ally, an action/adventure mystery with military complications. While it didn’t live up to my high expectations, it was still a good movie that provided a couple of hours of entertainment.

Part of the reason expectations were high was because of the presence of Harrison Ford, one of my favorite actors. He didn’t disappoint, with a great performance. As Jack Ryan, Ford gave a compelling performance that was believable. It was nice because Ford seemed human, as he appeared nervous and jittery early on when he is first promoted to CIA Deputy Director. Sometimes, actors can come off as invincible, which can alienate the viewer. However, when speaking with the President early on, Ford appears humble, but, as the film progresses, he becomes more confident, and, at the end, is strong and defiant of the President when he knows that the President is wrong. He is nervous at the beginning (like any normal person would be), but is strong when he has to be.

The rest of the cast was strong as well. Willem Dafoe was solid in his role as John Clark, and Joaquim de Almeida is a great bad guy. They fit their roles well. However, the best guy on the cast (other than Ford, but he comes pretty close) is Henry Czerny (he played Robert Ritter). Reflecting on the film, there was one scene where Ritter gave a piercing stare to James Cutter (played by Harris Yulin) that was awesome. Czerny was excellent in his role, and, with almost anybody else, Ritter would have been weaker and less riveting than he was.

A very good cast is hampered slightly by the plotline. There was a climactic ending and an ubelievable scene in the middle that has since become an American film classic (when Ryan’s caravan is trapped and assaulted in the back alleyway in Colombia), but, other than that, the film runs a little sluggish. It’s not bad per say, but the rest of the film doesn’t quite keep up with the aforementioned parts. Even during the military scenes, the suspense isn’t there. This film is bouyed by the tremendous ending and middle scene (talking about the alleyway again), and it drags the rest of the film along with it.

This is a must see for the average movie viewer, if nothing to see the infamous scene that is now featured in military training videos (the alleyway). While Clear and Present Danger did not quite reach my lofty expectations, it was still a good flick that should be seen at least once by everyone.

Final Grade: B

Other Reviews:
DVDTown: “…(the movie) features the kinds of clichés, routine explosions, and not-so-intriguing conspiracies that make discerning viewers yawn.”

Reel Views: “With all the hype attendant to it, however, this particular Jack Ryan adventure is somewhat disappointing. Beneath its posturing as a “techno-thriller”, Clear and Present Danger is really little more than a high-class blast-and-bang festival.”

DVD Verdict: “A solid, widely appealing and intelligent thriller…It may not break new ground or expand your horizons, but it does sustain your interest as it entertains you. Many films can’t say that!”

Filmcritic.com: “Danger is just an overblown attempt to latch onto already-waning “Just Say No” sentiment in the U.S. (It was released in 1994). No dice.”

EFilm Critic: “In the end, it’s far from a bad film, and it has its share of highlights, but it still leaves a lot to be desired. Based on the material it was based on, it would’ve been much better.”

TVGuide: “The third screen treatment of Tom Clancy’s best-selling Jack Ryan series is a sharp improvement over The Hust for Red October and Patriot Games. It’s a formula film with a typically dubious political message, but the storytelling is livelier and more engaging than previous adaptations of Clancy’s turgid techno-thrillers.”

Watch (allow time to buffer):

Part 1
Part 2

Released (US): December 20, 1974
Genre: Action/Adventure
Length: 125 Min.
Director: Guy Hamilton
Writer:Richard Maibaum & Tom Mankiewicz
Major Cast Members:
       Roger Moore - James Bond
       Christopher Lee - Francisco Scaramanga
       Britt Ekland - Mary Goodnight
       Hervé Villechaize - Nick Nack
       Richard Loo - Hai Fat
Awards:
       Golden Screen Award (Germany)
Budget: $7,000,000
Box Office: $97,600,000

Plot Overview:After a golden bullet is sent to M with ‘007′ etched into it, Bond is pulled off his current case until the matter can be resolved. Naturally, James Bond wants to find the culprit himself, and departs to try and solve the mystery himself. With the ‘help’ of Mary Goodnight, Bond comes into contact with the worlds’ most expensive assassin, Francisco Scaramanga, a man who carries a golden gun that uses the same golden bullets. Bond is lured onto Scaramanga’s secret island, and must fight to save his life, and Mrs. Goodnight’s.

Did you know?:Christopher Lee, who plays Scaramanga in the film, is the cousin of the author Ian Flemming, the man who penned the James Bond novels. Lee was also originally going to get the role as Dr. No in the first Bond movie.

Review:Back for seconds, Roger Moore improved as James Bond 007 in comparison to his debut in Live and Let Die. Still, The Man With the Golden Gun is sub-par when compared with the 007 entries Goldfinger, Thunderball, and On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.

As stated before, Roger Moore improved in his second stint as James Bond. Still,  Moore does not have the same charisma and charm that Sean Connery possessed. Instead, Moore offers a more lighthearted Bond that doesn’t seem quite as serious. Unfortunately, this is not always good when an actor is playing the role of 007. While Connery does certainly have his lighter moments and zippy one liners, Moore can’t seem to turn that mode off. When he is face to face with the villain, it still seems like he is talking with Moneypenny or Q back in England.

The rest of the cast is solid, but not spectacular. Mary Goodnight (played by Britt Ekland) is attractive, but she doesn’t seem like a great Bond Girl. A good Bond Girl is attractive, but can also be resourceful and effective when on a mission with Bond. Goodnight seems almost ditzy and cumbersome. She almost gets Bond killed, gets herself captured, and overall just comes off as the typical blonde you hear about in jokes. She is pretty much all look and little substance.

That being said, Francisco Scaramanga (played by Christopher Lee) is an excellent villain, one of the best so far. He’s evil, deceitful, and easy to dislike, but, at the same time, is smooth and charismatic just like Bond. The perfect villain. His sidekick, Nick Nack (played by Hervé Villechaize), isn’t bad either.

As far as the plot goes, The Man With the Golden Gun is much improved after Live and Let Die. Where the latter seemed very un-Bond and felt like it belonged in an Indiana Jones movie, this one feels much more natural. Flashy action, exquisite location, etc. It was all there, all the ingredients to make a solid Bond film. Still, one flaw is that the plot revolves around the villain wanting to simply kill Bond. These movies are definitely better when the whole world is at risk and then Bond comes in and saves the world. There is the small device that could solve the world energy crisis, but that is more of a convenience than an item that endangers the worlds’ well being.

All in all, an improvement over Moore’s first attempt at the 007 franchise, but it still falls short of the good Sean Connery films. One can only hope that the Bond series will pull itself out of this rut and reestablish itself…

Final Grade: B-

Other Reviews:
Reel Views: “It’s about as far from Ian Fleming’s vision of the superspy as the filmed interpretations have ever gotten, but for those who expect light, totally-unbelievable escapism, this movie does its part.”

Filmcritic.com: “…The Man with the Golden Gun, which ranks as one of James Bond’s more absurd outings, involving a maniacal genius (Lee) who’s assassinating folks and has Bond next on his list.”

Movie Vault: “Sadly, nothing about The Man With the Golden Gun is memorable, save for Lee’s commanding performance, Ekland’s bikini-clad adventure, and Villechaize’s diminutive-oriented material.”

EFilm Critic: “One thing a Bond film should never be criticised for however, is being boring. And that’s the cardinal sin that The Man With the Golden Gun commits.”

TVGuide: “Screenwriters Maibaum and Mankiewicz attempted to downplay the gadgetry this time around, but their attempts at adding more humor hinder plot development. The film’s pace lags until the climactic finale.”

Watch (allow time to buffer):

Part 1
Part 2

Released (US): June 27, 1973
Genre: Action/Adventure
Length: 121 Min.
Director: Guy Hamilton
Writer:Tom Mankiewicz
Major Cast Members:
       Roger Moore - James Bond
       Yaphet Kotto - Kananga/Mr. Big
       Jane Seymour - Solitaire
       David Hedison - Felix Leiter
       Roy Stewart - Quarrel Jr.
Awards:
       Evening Standard British Film Award - Best Film
       Golden Screen Award (Germany)
Budget: $7,000,000
Box Office: $161,800,000

Plot Overview: In his inaugural Bond film, Roger Moore steps in as 007, replacing Sean Connery. Along with Connery, SPECTRE departs to make room for a fresh, new criminal. When several British agents pass away, James Bond is sent to get to the bottom of the situation. His discovery leads him to a tiny island in the Caribbean, where he confronts Dr. Kananga (otherwise known as Mr. Big) and Tee Hee, Kananga’s assistant. While being chased by Kananga’s henchmen, Bond must uncover the sinister plot and put a stop to it, while saving his most recent love from the claws of the enemy.

Did you know?: Sean Connery was offered the humongous (by the standards of 1973) salary of $5.5 million to come back for another Bond entry, but Connery turned the offer down.

Review: In Live and Let Die, the eighth installment of the James Bond franchise, Roger Moore replaces Sean Connery as 007. Nobody can match the original James Bond, but you can always try. While better than the one-timer George Lazenby, Roger Moore in his inaugural Bond movie does not dazzle either.

One flaw with this installment is the overall quality of the acting. It seems as if, whenever Connery departs, the performance of the cast seems to take a noticeable dip. Just a testament to just how good Connery is in the role of James Bond.

Throughout the movie, it seems a little over dramatized, like the actors are trying too hard to be classy, witty, smooth, etc. Felix Leiter (Hedison) comes to mind, as well as some of Bonds’ one liners. It just doesn’t seem natural like the witty and cool lines Connery made back when he was in his prime. It feels wrong. Moore, while solid, doesn’t feel like Bond. Hopefully, he hones his skills and becomes more appropriate for the role in his later additions, but, in this one, he seems misplaced.

Otherwise, the cast seems to be pretty good. Solitaire (Seymour) is a little disappointing, but her looks make up for that. Tee Hee (played by Julian W. Harris) is a good bad guy with the claw as a hand. Also, I liked Quarrel Jr. (Stewart) and Kananga (Kotto). Still, with a comparatively weak James Bond, the movie has a weak standing.

The plot was sub-par as well. The spiritual theme that pops up several times throughout the movie seems very un-James Bond. It would fit well with an Indiana Jones movie or something, but not here. Another gripe is one of the locations. The island in the Caribbean is fine, but Bond making his way to Harlem seems out of place. Not a huge issue, but, like some other parts of this film, it seems awkward. Additionally, some of James Bonds’ escapes are a little ridiculous (running across live crocodiles is one of them) and the ending was a little anticlimactic and it seemed like the makers ran out of money or time so they quickly slapped something together.

Oher issues include the fact that there is some racism involved with the film, but, when put in context with the time period when this movie was made, it is not too surprising. Also, the humor that is sprinkled throughout the film (provided mostly from the goofy Sherriff JW Pepper - played by Clifton James) is too ‘dumb’ and goofy for a Bond film. Previous movies had a certain amount of class and professionalism with their hints of humor, this just seems outright stupid - like it belongs in a Will Ferrell movie.

Overall, a very sub-par Bond film. One saving grace would be the very nice opening song (Live and Let Die) recorded by Paul and Linda McCartney. Actually, the entire score was pretty good in this flick. Unfortunately, it is not nearly enough to save this film, and I would rank this as the worst Bond film that I have seen to date. Bond fanatics should see it (mostly just to say that they have watched every one), but I wouldn’t scramble to see this one otherwise.

Final Grade: C-

Other Reviews:
DVDTown: “Live and Let Die marked Roger Moore’s inauspicious screen debut as 007. He had big shoes to fill with Connery gone, and this first of his long series of Bond associations proved less than promising.”

Reel Views: “Watching Live and Let Die isn’t a complete waste of time, but there’s no overriding reason why anyone should go out of their way to see it unless they’re a die-hard Bond fan or are curious about Roger Moore’s first turn in the role.”

DVD Verdict: “Roger Moore’s introduction to the Bond franchise, Live and Let Die does not have quite the same high-stakes blockbuster feel as some of the other entries in the franchise and lacks a strong sense of the high-living Bond style.”

Filmcritic.com: “…the early-’70s pop culture exudes throughout this flick. It’s certainly a unique entry into the Bond oeuvre…”

Movie Vault: “Shaken and slightly stirred, Live and Let Die is not Moore’s best License to Kill. It drags at times yet it showcases, as homage of sorts, the best of blaxploitation culture going up against Bond, James Bond.”

EFilm Critic: “..Bond w.as back and thanks to Moore’s assured performance he was going to be back for a while. But again thanks to Moore and the direction that his films took, Bond was never going to the same again.”

TVGuide: “Less macho than Sean Connery’s Bond, Moore’s fastidiously dressed 007 survives by his wits and injects more humor into the proceedings.”

Watch (allow time to buffer):

Full Movie

Released (US): December 17, 1971
Genre: Action/Adventure
Length: 120 Min.
Director: Guy Hamilton
Writer:Richard Maibaum & Tom Mankiewicz
Major Cast Members:
       Sean Connery - James Bond
       Jill St. John - Tiffany Case
       Charles Gray - Ernst Stavro Blofeld
       Jimmy Dean - Willard White
       Norman Burton - Felix Leiter
Awards:
       Golden Screen Award (Germany)
Budget: $7,200,000
Box Office: $116,000,000 (worldwide)

Plot Overview:Sean Connery returns to the James Bond series for one final go around, and is skeptical of his assignment to track down a diamond smuggling ring. After a little digging, however, Bond uncovers a more devious plot to gain world control. With this discovery, Bond comes face to face once again with his arch nemesis, Ernst Stavro Blofeld. With the help of Felix Leiter and the American CIA, Bond must get to the bottom of Blofeld’s latest plot and stop it before the situation gets out of hand.

Did you know?: Originally, American actor John Gavin was supposed to play the role of Bond until Sean Connery jumped back in at the last moment.

Review:Mercifully, George Lazenby stepped down as his role as James Bond after a sub-per performance in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, allowing Sean Connery to step back into the role for one final go around. Despite the fact that Connery is noticeably older in this one (nine years will do that to you), he returns the Bond character to its former glory.

Like many of its predecessors, the acting is again very good in this film. Connery as Bond was much better than the performance that Lazenby gave in the previous Bond installment, although it is evident that Connery doesn’t have the same zip that he had at the beginning of his career in Dr. No and Thunderball. Unlike other recent Blofeld’s, Charles Gray actually gives the perception of a criminal mastermind. Where Telly Savalas (On Her Majesty’s Secret Service) and Donald Pleasance (You Only Live Twice) fall short, Gray succeeds. He is villainous and nasty, characteristics that seem lacking in other Blofeld’s of the past. It’s a shame that they didn’t find him earlier.

Acting is good throughout, as Jill St. John as Tiffany Chase and Norman Burton as Felix Leiter are both good as well.

As far as the plot goes, it is a little out there, but not as much as You Only Live Twice. Despite this, the plot runs nicely and there is enough action and suspense throughout to keep the viewer hooked. It’s not overdone though, as there are plenty of light hearted moments throughout this film as well. Thankfully, the oppressive presence of fancy gadgets seem to take a back seat throughout the film, with Q only making an appearance to help Bond change his voice slightly to fool Blofeld. Very well done.

Overall, a very solid Bond flick. I would recommend this one to most everybody, but particularly to those who are into the spy genre. Thanks to the return of Connery, this is a well acted, well written movie that should not be missed.

Final Grade: B

Other Reviews:
DVD Town: “…a bit sillier than most Bond adventures but probably not as bad as it could have been.”

Reel Views: “The ending, while high on pyrotechnics, is low on tension, bringing Connery’s era to a rather dissatisfying conclusion. The actor deserved to go out on a higher note, but his tenure as Bond provided enough moments of quality entertainment to eclipse Diamonds Are Forever’s final whimper.”

DVD Verdict: “A good middle of the road entry in the franchise, Diamonds Are Forever strays farther from the serious thriller mold of many of its compatriots but thankfully stops short of self-parody.”

Filmcritic.com: “It’s fun at times but overall one of the most hopelessly dated 007 flicks ever.”

EFilm Critic: “Sean Connery’s performance sums up what is one of the worst Bond films - drab and lifeless.”

TVGuide: “Next door to glass, but aided by the return of Connery (George Lazenby had undertaken the role of Bond in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service) teamed with Jill St. John, instead of the usual parade of faceless Bond girls.”

Watch (allow time to buffer):

Part 1
Part 2

Released (US): December 18, 1969
Genre: Action/Adventure
Length: 140 Min.
Director: Peter R. Hunt
Writer:Richard Maibaum
Major Cast Members:
       George Lazenby - James Bond
       Diana Rigg - Tracy Di Vicenzo
       Telly Savalas - Ernst Stavro Blofeld
       Ilse Steppat - Irma Bunt
       Gabriele Ferzetti - Marc Ange Draco
Awards:
       None
Budget: $7,000,000
Box Office: $87,400,000

Plot Overview:The sixth episode of the James Bond franchise sees a new actor step in to replace the departed Sean Connery: George Lazenby. Ernst Stavro Blofeld and SPECTRE return again, this time threatening to use biological warfare to get what he wants. Bond also meets up with a girl named Tracy Di Vicenzo, and the heat picks up between the two. However, Bond must first take on Blofeld, and to do that, he must go undercover. Bond faces Blofeld in Switzerland, but is his disguise enough to fool Blofeld?

Did you know?:Of all the 007 movies, this one follows Ian Flemmings’ original novel the closest. This caused problems with the continuation of the series. If you pay attention, you will notice that neither Blofeld or Bond recognize each other when they meet, despite the fact that they met in the preceding film, You Only Live Twice.

Review:Right off the bat, something is different about On Her Majesty’s Secret Service than all the other Bond films. It doesn’t take long to figure out - Sean Connery has been replaced by George Lazenby as James Bond! Unfortunately, this move did not turn out for the better, and that was a common theme throughout the movie, the acting was sub-par compared to other previous Bond movies.

Unlike Connery, Lazenby does not resemble Bond at all. The classy, witty, tough spy that we all have grown to love in Sean Connery disappears in George Lazenby. Now, Lazenby did not do a bad job in the role as Bond, but Connery is so far superior that it is difficult not to notice the drop off. It is easiest to say it this way: Sean Connery isJames Bond, George Lazenby is not.

Another issue with the acting/casting in this movie was the villain, Ernst Stavro Blofeld. Played by Telly Savalas in this one, Blofeld does not seem like a villain. He is almost too nice and sincere. Savalas does not portray himself as a villain well, and it detracts from the film a bit. Unlike some past bad guys (Adolfo Celi as Largo in Thunderball comes to mind as a good one), the viewer does not feel intimidated or nervous when the villain enters the scene. Savalas is too nice, and it shows.

Fortunately, not all is lost. Thanks to some excellent writing, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service actually turns out to be a rather good movie. This was a little odd, because, in the past, Bond movies were boosted by superior acting, not because of the scripts.

While maybe a tad bit long at 2 hours 20 minutes, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is well paced, suspenseful, and features plenty of action without the excessive gadgetry. The skiing scene was great, and the fight scene at the end was well done, but not excessive, such as the ones in Thunderball and You Only Live Twice. Lazenby does well in these action scenes, probably the highlight of his performance. Richard Maibaum did well in this effort, and it saved the movie from the somewhat disappointing acting performances.

A must see for all fans of the classic spy thriller, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service offers good suspense, action, and a well thought-out plot. Unfortunately, the casting (particularly for Bond and Blofeld) hold this movie back from being amongst the best Bond features. Still, a worthwhile watch nonetheless.

Final Grade: B+

Other Reviews:
DVD Town: “If you can look past Mr. Lazenby in the title role…the story line, action, and supporting cast of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service are well above average.”

Reel Views: “Even featuring an inferior 007, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is a landmark change-of-pace, and an exhilarating and affecting piece of entertainment.”

Filmcritic.com: “George Lazenby took Bond’s reins from Sean Connery in this sixth 007 outing, an unfairly oft-maligned film that, while distinctively different than the rest of the series, is still quite fun to watch.”

EFilm Critic: “…anyone who truly knows Bond will tell you that On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is actually one of the best ever.”

TVGuide: “…On Her Majesty’s Secret Service benefited from an extremely well-written script that finally revealed a bit more of Bond’s character. Lazenby, however, had no previous acting experience, and his lackadaisical performance limits the whole production, yet it still manages to remain one of the more entertaining Bond films.”

Watch (allow time to buffer):

Part 1
Part 2

Released (US): June 13, 1967
Genre: Action/Adventure
Length: 117 Min.
Director: Lewis Gilbert
Writer: Roald Dahl
Major Cast Members:
       Sean Connery - James Bond
       Akiko Wakabayashi - Aki
       Tetsuro Tamba - Tiger Tanaka
       Donald Pleasance - Ernst Stavro Blofeld
       Mie Hama - Kissy Suzuki
Awards:
       Golden Screen Award (Germany)
Budget: $9,500,000
Box Office: $111,600,000

Plot Overview: In an effort to cause World War III, SPECTRE returns yet again with their most daring plot yet. Several US and Russian space crafts disappear, and the two countries almost go to war. James Bond tracks the suspicious activity to an island near Japan. Bond and his allies must now infiltrate the island and stop SPECTRE before they cause a nuclear war.

Did you know?: Unlike most Bond movies, You Only Live Twice has very little in common with Ian Flemming’s version in the novel. Other than several of the Japanese characters, the two stories are radically different.

Review: Thus far in my viewing of the Bond films I have greatly enjoyed the first four (for the most part). Because of this, I was greatly looking forward to the fifth installment of the series, You Only Live Twice. Unfortunately, I came out of this viewing experience somewhat let down. It is still a decent flick, but it does not live up to its predecessors, particularly Goldfinger and Thunderball.

Let us first get the obligatory statement out of the way: Connery was great. It seems almost unnecessary to say this in every review. That just comes to show us just how good Connery really is. Other Bond’s don’t have the same charisma that Connery does. What is nice is that Connery brings a human side to the character. There are times where you can tell that he is sweating. Not terrified, mind you, but nervous. This is great because the viewer doesn’t feel alienated from the main character, something that is important.

That is what the movie has in common with the others. Unfortunately, most of the rest of the film doesn’t.

–SPOILERS– 

Most people realize that these Bond films are out there in the sense that the likelihood of the plot line actually materializing in real life is slim to none. However, the plot for this movie (which differs greatly from the novel by Ian Flemming) is just a little too ridiculous. The fact that SPECTRE goes out to space, captures American and Russian spacecrafts and then brings them back to Earth and into a volcano is just unbelievable. In the other Bond films, there is at least a sense of this could potentially happen given the correct circumstances, but not this one.

–END SPOILERS–

Another problem was that the movie seemed a bit choppy. There were times when scenes would switch over and it would seem almost random and uncoordinated. It didn’t flow incredibly well, something that the previous Bond movies seemed to do a much better job of.

Another complaint is that the score was very unmemorable. This is actually an issue with most of the Bond films up until now, and the reason I forget to write about them is because they are so bland. Up until now, the movie itself was able to compensate for that, but not this time.

While still worth a view (mostly because of Connery), You Only Live Twice is, without a doubt, the most dissapointing of the early Bond movies.

Final Grade: C+

Other Reviews:
DVDTown: “This is the one that some connoisseurs consider a high point in the series and others think is a miss. I favor the latter view.”

Reel Views: “Unfortunately, this is also among the weakest of the early Bond films, although Connery is in peak form.”

Filmcritic.com: “Tons of fun, really, and Donald Pleasence as Blofeld is inimitable.”

Movie Vault: “There is little substance beyond the action sequences.”

EFilm Critic: “It’s got some of the best action sequences, the best Bond in his last great outing and the best villain.”

TVGuide: “Limited by a Bond formula that demanded, among other things, that 007 be involved with at least three women, screenwriter Roald Dahl produced a contrived scenario that prevents You Only Live Twice from ever really taking off.”

Watch (allow time to buffer):

Full Movie

Released (US): December 29, 1965
Genre: Action/Adventure
Length: 130 Min.
Director: Terence Young
Writer: Richard Maibaum, and John Hopkins
Major Cast Members:
       Sean Connery - James Bond
       Claudine Auger - Dominique ‘Domino’ Derval
       Adolfo Celi - Emilio Largo (SPECTRE #2)
       Luciana Paluzzi - Fiona Volpe
       Rik Van Nutter - Felix Leiter
Awards:
       Academy Award - Best Effects, Special Visual Effects
       Laurel Award - Best Action Drama
       Laurel Award - Best Action Performance (Sean Connery)
Budget: $5,600,000
Box Office: $141,200,000 (worldwide)

Plot Overview: In an effort to scam the US and Great Britain out of 1,000,000 pounds in diamonds, SPECTRE returns in the fourth installment of the James Bond series by stealing two nuclear warheads from a NATO plane and threatens to bomb a major city in one of the two countries. Everything revolves around the island of Jamaica, as James Bond, along with CIA agent Felix Leiter, attempt to secure the bombs and avoid disaster.

Did you know?: Thunderball was originally going to be called James Bond: Secret Agent and be the first 007 movie made. However, for some unknown reason, tehe film was never finished and Dr. No took its place.

Review: SPECTRE returns for the fourth installment of the Bond series, and this time, they are hatching the biggest plan of all. Coincidentally, this is, without a doubt, the flashiest movie of the first four Bond movies, with some fancy gadgets and a ridiculous action scene or two.

This is starting to become standard, but, once again, the acting was very good in Thunderball. Connery was classic Bond, Claudine Auger was stunning in her role as Domino, and Adolfo Celi (as Largo) was probably the best villain yet. His perfect white hair and eyepatch fit in perfectly with his part, and plays his part to near perfection.

The script is very good as well. Plenty of action and suspense, and the movie itself has some character development as well. Unfortunately, there are some points in the film that bog the rest of it down.

First off, we start to see the gadgets becoming more and more initrcate, fancy, and out there. Bonds’ rocket pack at the beginning of the film, for example. Another far-fetched gadget isn’t Bonds’, but the villains’ boat actually splits in two at one point (not because of a bomb, just because it can). While not nearly as out there as some of the gadgets in the more modern films, they are definitely beginning to evolve from simplistic, efficient tools, to being somewhat ridiculous. Also, the underwater fight scene at the end of the film is way out there. Exciting? Sure, but the viewer can’t help but look at it and almost laugh because of how far-fetched it is. It is a shame, really, because the rest of the movie is excellent and this outlandish sequence kinda ruins it.

However, do not let that ten minute sequence keep you away from this otherwise great movie. With great acting, exciting plot line, cool fight scenes, and beautiful Bond Girls, Thunderball is a must see.

Final Grade: B+

Other Reviews:
DVDTown: “If it doesn’t live up to its illustrious predecessors…well, it still has Connery, and that’s a plus in anybody’s book.”

Reel Views: “Thunderball is classic 007 — not the best picture in the long-running series, to be sure, but a more-than-worthwhile diversion for the action-loving escapist in us all.”

DVDVerdict: “A must for any fan of the James Bond series!”

Filmcritic.com: “It’s too long and doesn’t make any sense at times, but it’s a real jaw-dropper (especially for 1965).”

EFilm Critic: “…Thunderball smells of three things: franchise, formula and staleness.”

TVGuide: “With Thunderball, the wildly popular Bond series started to slip, substituting gadgets and gimmicks for story and character development.”

Watch (allow time to buffer):

Part 1
Part 2

Released (US): January 9, 1965
Genre: Action/Adventure
Length: 110 Min.
Director: Guy Hamilton
Writer: Richard Maibaum & Paul Dehn
Major Cast Members:
       Sean Connery - James Bond
       Honor Blackman - Pussy Galore
       Gert Fröbe - Auric Goldfinger
       Harold Sakata - Oddjob
       Bernard Lee - M
Awards:
       Academy Award - Best Effects, Sound Effects
       Golden Laurel - Best Action Drama
       Golden Laurel - Best Action Performance (Sean Connery)
Budget: $3,000,000
Box Office: $124,900,000

Plot Overview: When he finds one of his ‘girls’ dead in a hotel room, James Bond is sent to investigate Auric Goldfinger. His investigation leads him to the discovery of operation Grand Slam, which calls for Goldfinger to attack Fort Knox. In order to save the world economy, Bond will need all of his skills and saavy to prevent Goldfinger from achieving his goal.

Did you know?: Despite the setting being in the US, Connery never entered the country. All of his scenes shot ‘in America’ were actually filmed at Pinewood Studios in London.

Review: Noticing a trend? I have a goal to see all of the Bond movies before I move on to other films, so get ready for a heavy dosage of 007. Now, onto the third installment, Goldfinger.

What can I say? When you have three characters named Goldfinger, Oddjob, and Pussy Galore all in the same movie, how can it possibly be bad? Throw in a little Bond and some hot Bond girls and you have yourself one heckuva cast.

Goldfinger offers a lot of what the previous two movies already had: good acting. Once again, Connery is excellent in his role as 007, Goldfinger (played by Fröbe) and Oddjob (played by Harold Sakata) are superb as the villains, and the rest of the crew lives up to the expectations.

While we are on the subject of the crew, let me just say that Goldfinger has the best Bond Girls of the first three movies. Pussy Galore (Honor Blackman), Jill Masterson (Shirley Eaton), and Tilly Masterson (Tania Mallet) are all stunning (too bad two of them have to die). Once again, it seems like the third time is the charm!

As far as the plot is concerned, this is definitely the best of the first three installments of the Bond series. There is suspense, good action, and the plotline is interesting and well written. Goldfinger is the first time that Bond gets to use some real gadgets, starting with the Aston Martin DB5 he gets to use in this film. While many other of the episodes in this long running series feature gadgets as well, they are oftentimes slightly ridiculous and can actually take over the entire film. These simple, yet cool accessories available to Bond in Goldfinger serve only to be the silver lining while Bond still does a majority of the work.

In the end, this is quintessential Bond. Not only a must see for the Bond fanatic, but a must see for any movie lover in general. Goldfinger has it all, and is not to be missed by anyone.

Final Grade: A-

Other Reviews:
DVDTown: “These Bond capers were the prototypes and set the gold standard for dozens of fantasy thrillers that followed.”

Reel Views: “… history has shown Goldfinger to be among the series’ most enduring entries.”

DVD Verdict: “An absolutely classic Bond film, Goldfinger still holds its own against modern big-budget, special effects blockbusters…”

Filmcritic.com: “The iconic James Bond movie, this third entry into the franchise is rightly heralded for offering the perfect blend of action, adventure, gunplay, fisticuffs, gadgetry (that Aston Martin!), romance, derring-do, and just about everything else.”

Movie Vault: “As Shirley Bassey sings in the title song, “He’s the man, the man with the Midas touch.” Not just of Goldfinger, but also of Bond, James Bond.”

EFilm Critic: “Goldfinger is probably the film that cemented Bond’s status with a gold stamp. A few years down the line, the theme song of another Bond film was ‘Nobody Does It Better’. How true, and he was never done better than in Goldfinger.”

TVGuide: “Probably the best of the gadget-filled 007 extravaganzas, GOLDFINGER represents the consolidation of the wildly profitable Bond formula.”

Watch (allow time to buffer):

Full Movie

Released (US): May 27, 1964
Genre: Action/Adventure
Length: 110 Min.
Director: Terence Young
Writer: Richard Maibaum
Major Cast Members:
       Sean Connery - James Bond
       Daniela Bianchi - Tatiana Romanova
       Pedro Armendáriz - Ali Kerim Bey
       Lotte Lenya - Rosa Klebb
       Bernard Lee - M
Awards:
       None
Budget: $2,000,000
Box Office: $78,900,000 (worldwide)

Plot Overview: In this second installment of the James Bond series, Bond is sent to Istanbul to get a cypher machine (referred to as a Lektor in the film) from a Russian agent. However, the Russian government has no knowledge of such a deal, as it is all an elaborate set up by SPECTRE, trying to get revenge on Bond for killing their agent Dr. No (from the movie, Dr. No). Using his simple gadgets and some guts, Bond needs to sniff out the trap and save himself.

Did you know?: Sean Connery was almost killed in this movie, as the helicopter crew in the movie flew much to close to him during the scene.

Review: Sean Connery is back for another round of the Bond series in From Russia With Love, where he co-stars with Daniela Bianchi (Tatiana) to create a solid spy movie.

Like Dr. No, Connery is again the quintessential Bond. Smooth, cunning, and tough, Connery impressed yet again with another good performance. For the most part, the acting was well done across the board. Bianchi did a good job in her role as Tatiana Romanova, and Lotte Lenya (played Rosa Klebb) was solid as well. She looked and sounded evil, which is always good in your villains.

Unfortunately, the script and plot were n