Moonraker- Why the hate?

002002
edited December 2011 in General Discussion Posts: 581
honestly i think Moonraker is one of the best bond films i dont understand all the hate
it has the most visually striking of the roger films, it has Jaws, Roger Moore at his finest, a bond girl that wasnt eye candy and John Barry's epic score and Shirley Basseys final and great theme song

so what if it has too much ott humour id rather have that than the Daniel Craig humourless "so abysmal that i would rather stick broken glass up my bottom and sit in a tub of tabasco sauce" Qantum of Solace
«13456711

Comments

  • Posts: 562
    002 wrote:
    ... it has Jaws, Roger Moore...

    There are two problems right off the bat. Throw in double-taking pigeons, Dolly, a performance from Lonsdale slightly more compelling than watching paint dry, and Space Marines, and you have a mess. A mess scored beautifully by Barry.

  • edited December 2011 Posts: 4,738
    I still say that scene when Jaws meets Dolly would have been way better if she screamed and ran away when he smiled! They could have even kept in the lovey-dovey music but threw in one of those 'record skip' sound effects!
    Now that would have been legitimately funny-- instead of 'so bad it becomes funny'
  • WillardWhyteWillardWhyte Mother Base
    Posts: 713
    Agent005 wrote:
    002 wrote:
    ... it has Jaws, Roger Moore...

    There are two problems right off the bat. Throw in double-taking pigeons, Dolly, a performance from Lonsdale slightly more compelling than watching paint dry, and Space Marines, and you have a mess. A mess scored beautifully by Barry.

    true words right there. That sums it up
  • haserothaserot has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season.
    Posts: 4,193
    it's just full of too much silly nonsense, too much even for a Roger Moore Bond...

    it's storyarch is essentially a rehash of TSWLM... not to mention the plausibility of the plot and it's climactic ending are too much, even for a Bond film - not in the same yard as DAD, but definitely on the same street...

    plus i never liked Drax's explanation for hijacking back his own shuttle - he needed it because one of his other ones developed a problem during production... okay... THEN BUILD ANOTHER ONE!.. why steal it back, and alert MI6 who will no doubt send their best agent to investigate.. all of that could've been avoided had he simply just built another one - not to mention, when first meeting Bond, he already starts to have him assaulted.. FOR NO REASON YET!!.. i could see if Bond had discovered something against Drax, but he had just arrived, and hadn't had time to formulate who would be a suspect yet... and again, because of his stupid actions, Drax made himself suspect #1..... he's easily the most careless villain in the entire franchise.... usually villains don't want Bond to figure out what they are doing - it seems Drax was all too eager to let the cat out of the bag.... what an idiot.

    yeah, it does have Jaws - except they turned him into a colossal joke...

    none of it's action scenes can be taken seriously - meaning that usually after a big action battle or sequence, there is usually some dumb joke that robs any tension built up.... more often than not, it was with Jaws...

    Michael Lonsdale could put you to sleep faster than NASCAR and a glass of warm milk...

    A Leading lady - who might not have been A typical eye candy.. but who came across as a strong man hating muff diver, and one who did very little to actually make me like her.. actually, had she died in the film - i think it would've been better off.... more likability and charisma was shown by the girl who got eaten by dogs (in her brief screen time) than "our leading lady"
  • edited December 2011 Posts: 348
    Agent005 wrote:
    a performance from Lonsdale slightly more compelling than watching paint dry,

    What utter bollocks. Lonsdale gives of the most menacing performance in any Bond flick (not to mention with some of the cleverest lines), and manage to inject every exchange with dry Gallic wit. Unlike Kurt Jurgens, he looks like he's having fun. Lonsdale manages to bring conviction and gravitas to a role that is essentially Space Hitler.

    And not forgetting the incredibly sexy Corrine Dufour, Moore's most convenient turn, Jean Tournier's sublime cinematography (easily outdoing Claude Renoir's work for THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, or virtually anything since), John Barry's celestial score, Ken Adam's prophetic sets (the "Mondrian Room" is one giant iPhone), some amazing stuntwork, Derek Medding's out-of-this-world model work (still holds up better than any CGI I've seen in the last 2 and a half decade), and Christopher Wood's incredibly sharp (and off the wall) screenplay.

    Sure it's a flawed, and one or two moments make me cringe (i.e. The Magnificent Seven shtick or Dolly meets Jaws), but then what Bond films aren't?

    And to everyone else: grow a sense of humour please. Stop taking Bond so damn seriously. It's not Brecht, it's not The Bard, and ain't Beckett either.

    MOONRAKER is pure swashbuckling, Boy's Own, old fashioned entertainment. Nothing more, nothing less.
  • haserothaserot has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season.
    edited December 2011 Posts: 4,193
    Shark wrote:
    And not forgetting the incredibly sexy Corrine Dufour, Moore's most convenient turn, Jean Tournier's sublime cinematography (easily outdoing Claude Renoir's work for THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, or virtually anything since), John Barry's celestial score, Ken Adam's prophetic sets (the "Mondrian Room" is one giant iPhone), some amazing stuntwork, Derek Medding's out-of-this-world model work (still holds up better than any CGI I've seen in the last 2 and a half decade), and Christopher Wood's incredibly sharp (and off the wall) screenplay.

    how do any of those help a severely flawed story, with enough plot holes that you could fly one of those Moonrakers through it.... it's a good laugh for sure - but there is a difference between laughing at, and laughing with... and every time i see this movie, I can't help but to laugh at it's shear absurdity - not along with it's juvenile attempts... it's a film that tries a little too hard to be funny, when it shouldn't... so in the end, all you get is a sad tired old clown that begs you to laugh at the same joke he's told for the 20th straight time..

    Moonraker was considered to be one of Fleming's best Bond novels - what they turned it into for the big screen was a Star Wars cash in, laser light show for kiddies with the humor of a tired standup comedy routine that constantly tries to pass itself off as ingenious..... why didn't just go and urinate on Fleming's grave after completing this mess.

  • Moore was the current Bond when I was a kid and first started watching the Bond films on TV - however, I got started with a double header of GF and DAF and thought that Connery was the guy I wanted to be when I grew up.

    Whenever I saw a Moore film on TV I just couldn't get into it - largely because Moore seemed like an imposter pretending to be Bond (he wasn't as cool, or manly, or had as much presence as Connery). But also I would have to turn the films off after watching say 20 minutes or so because I found them embarassingly juvenile - and this is when I was 13!

    I've not watched MR (or TMWTGG or AVTAK) but I've seen bits and pieces of it and my initial reaction as a kid still stands. I may watch it one day but I'm certainly in no rush to see it.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    edited December 2011 Posts: 7,086
    All valid points regarding double-taking pigeons, Magnificent Seven, Jaws in love etc. However, what balances all this out are the awesome sets (shuttle exhaust chamber is my fave), locations which weren't wasted (except for Cali), multitude of gadgets, pretty women and so on. I believe the main reason people hate Moonraker is the fact they have so many other Bond films to compare it to (most of which are more serious and realistic)- not because it's a crap movie on its own. Besides, over-the-top, tongue-in-cheek editions to the Bond franchise are needed for variety and to keep the franchise from going stale. Without pure escapism adventures like MR and DAD, FYEO and CR wouldn't seem as mature as they are.
  • more science fiction.....never want to see this ever again please it is so unrealistic and someone who think MR is better than CR and QOS is so dead wrong......
  • I think of Moonraker as the DAD of the Moore era. It's the movie where the desire for spectacle overcame everything else. In both cases, the next film was a serious return to Bond's roots which holds up well.
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 2,331
    002 wrote:
    honestly i think Moonraker is one of the best bond films i dont understand all the hate
    it has the most visually striking of the roger films, it has Jaws, Roger Moore at his finest, a bond girl that wasnt eye candy and John Barry's epic score and Shirley Basseys final and great theme song

    so what if it has too much ott humour id rather have that than the Daniel Craig humourless "so abysmal that i would rather stick broken glass up my bottom and sit in a tub of tabasco sauce" Qantum of Solace

    I agree. I've always loved MR and find it the most underrated by Bond fans if not the general public. The comedic and outer space elements have never bothered me. It's a light, fast moving film that never pretends to be anything more than a fun "summer movie" escape for viewers who just wish to relax for a couple of hours. It's my favorite Moore film and my favorite of the Bond films that aren't faithful to their titular Fleming sources.
  • Posts: 612
    I find the first half of the movie great, but once Bond hits the jungle, things get a bit wonky. The movie goes consistently downhill, starting with the epic jump out of the airplane, and ending with the dreadful 'silent' laser battle in space. It just doesn't make sense.

    And Jaws had no part in this movie. I feel like his character in MR made his character in TSWLM less scary (upon re-watching).
  • I think Jaws should not show up at all pretty useless.....and I think the first half was very strong until going into space...how can someone learn to drive a spacecraft that fast? and the stupid laser weapons?
  • Posts: 6,801
    Always loved MR and always will do. The people who like it are wrong for their own immature reasons. :))
  • haserothaserot has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season.
    edited December 2011 Posts: 4,193
    I think Jaws should not show up at all pretty useless.....and I think the first half was very strong until going into space...how can someone learn to drive a spacecraft that fast? and the stupid laser weapons?
    going to space is where the film jumped the shark for me.... up until that point, the film was still rather dumb - but it was tolerable... once they went space bound, that was all she wrote for me.... everything after that was just looney tunes...

    plus after Jaws helps Bond and Goodhead escape in their shuttle, Bond's line of "Don't worry, they'll be safe - it's only a 100 miles to earth." ... he could not have sounded anymore nonchalant about them possibly falling back into the earth's atmosphere, possibly burning alive during reentry, and then becoming nothing more than a smoking crater in the earth once they finally "land"...... so whats the alternative if he didn't mean that?... then they just spin around in space for the rest of their lives, sucking up remaining oxygen left in what will become their space tomb, until they eventually suffocate and die....... such lousy dialog.....

    and remember, this before any word about the 2 being rescued by the US space mariners is made aware..



  • Posts: 2,072
    At clip of a double-taking pigeoen which lasts about one second and a silly space battle are not enough for me to disqualify Moonraker.

    IMO, it has the best score of all the Roger Moore-movies, the most memorable and wellwritten villain, fantastic use of locations, and Roger Moore in his absolute prime.
  • haserothaserot has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season.
    Posts: 4,193
    i dont disagree about the score.. it's one of Barry's best, and the locations are beautiful.... but i personally feel Moore's performances were better in both TSWLM and FYEO
  • Posts: 612
    haserot wrote:
    i dont disagree about the score.. it's one of Barry's best, and the locations are beautiful.... but i personally feel Moore's performances were better in both TSWLM and FYEO

    TSWLM is definitely my top Moore movie. As for Barry's music, OHMSS can't be beaten. MR did have decent stunts, though.

  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    edited December 2011 Posts: 7,086
    TSWLM is definitely my top Moore movie.

    I totally agree with this comment- it really is @FromCanadaWithLove's top Moore movie. :D ;) Likewise, TSWLM is also my favourite Moore movie. Then FYEO, closely followed by LALD and MR coming in at 3rd place for a tie. OP close 4th, TMWTGG a bit behind at 5th place, with AVTAK in the distance, barely finishing the race. But it still gets cheers from the crowd. =D>
  • Posts: 1,859
    ^ Agreed

    Anyway I'm Surprised @DaltonCraig HASN'T popped up and given us how MR is better CR
  • Posts: 2,341
    The movie sucked 99% of the time. The PTS was great but why did they end it with an over the top joke? Jaws flapping his wings and landing on a circus tent? What a crock.
    The villian Chang was very menacing and good but after he was killed off, the movie continued the downward spiral. All the slapstick was way too much.
    Holly Goodhead and Hugo Draz were the most boring girl and villian ever to show up in a Bond movie. Graves was awful but at least he wasn't as boring as Drax. Tanya Roberts was a pretty bad Bond girl as was Denise Richards but at least they were pleasing to the eye. Lois Chiles brought nothing except bad dialogue. That final line rivals Jinx's final line as total horseshytt.
    Unlike the previous film TSWLM that movie seemed to have a good balance of the humor and action. Also Jaws was more menacing his first time around and the plot was stronger. All the outer space and lasers firing and the battle on the space station was just so disgusting.
    This is one movie I have never watched again. At least I can partially stomach DAF but Moonraker is just plain old bad. It resembles a bad Matt helm movie.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    edited December 2011 Posts: 7,086
    @OHMSS69 So, you're saying we can search your DVD player thoroughly, but there's still no sign of Moonraker? ;)
  • Posts: 2,072
    haserot wrote:
    i dont disagree about the score.. it's one of Barry's best, and the locations are beautiful.... but i personally feel Moore's performances were better in both TSWLM and FYEO

    Well... certainly top notch acting from Moore here (4.25>):
  • Posts: 6,801
    OHMSS69 wrote:
    The movie sucked 99% of the time. The PTS was great but why did they end it with an over the top joke? Jaws flapping his wings and landing on a circus tent? What a crock.
    The villian Chang was very menacing and good but after he was killed off, the movie continued the downward spiral. All the slapstick was way too much.
    Holly Goodhead and Hugo Draz were the most boring girl and villian ever to show up in a Bond movie. Graves was awful but at least he wasn't as boring as Drax. Tanya Roberts was a pretty bad Bond girl as was Denise Richards but at least they were pleasing to the eye. Lois Chiles brought nothing except bad dialogue. That final line rivals Jinx's final line as total horseshytt.
    Unlike the previous film TSWLM that movie seemed to have a good balance of the humor and action. Also Jaws was more menacing his first time around and the plot was stronger. All the outer space and lasers firing and the battle on the space station was just so disgusting.
    This is one movie I have never watched again. At least I can partially stomach DAF but Moonraker is just plain old bad. It resembles a bad Matt helm movie.

    So how do you really feel about the movie? ;)

    By the way I think you are wrong. It is one of the better RM vehicles, has its plotproblems as have most 007 movies. Was an excellent choice of EON to make this film when they did because it fitted well commercialy at those times. The movie had its darker moments with the dead of Corinne Dufour and those folks in the lab with immiadetely after the visit of 007 with superiours and a flippant Drax. Who was perhaps the best baddie of the RM series imho. The music was beautifull and haunting, the last time we got the 007 theme =(( (too bad we don't get that quality these days with the "better" 007 movies :)) ).
    The movie really has great speed and spends little time with navelgazing. It is one big fun spectacle in the style only James Bond could deliver and many have tried to do the same and failed miserably. And Roger Moore just is Saintly and brilliant. Don't like him? tough on you...........
  • Posts: 278
    Moonraker's a film that most people either love or hate.
    Traditionalists who love Connery and now Craig hate it, others don't.
    Pesonally, when I'm asked which Bond film I'd like to see at the cinema again I always choose Moonraker, not because its my favourite (far from it as that would be the 60's Bonds), but in my opinion its a stunning looking film. Its also the first one I saw in the old Odeon cinemas (stalls/circle) without my parents.
    Every penny spent is up there on the screen, France, Venice, Rio (ok space too, but we can't have it all).
    Ken Adams beautiful sets.
    Derek Meddings (as already mentioned) stunning models.
    Add a great score by John Barry and its pure cinematic gold.

    Now compare it to Goldeneye (also a film I really like) when there are a lot of scenes that are either bad models or Leavesden backlot and don't even get me started on the soundtrack.
  • Posts: 1,052
    Not my favrouite Roger Moore outing but does have some of the most iconic moments of the series such as the PTS and fight on the cable car, fight in the glass shop and the of course "attempting re-entry". Yea it's all nonsense and it went as far out as it possibly could but isn't that what makes the series interesting and fresh, some films are a more serious spy story and some are outlandish fun.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited December 2011 Posts: 12,190
    Yes, MR deserves an 20/10 score. It is a magnificient film. A definitive top 3 Bond film for me. Roger Moore is in his absolute prime, the best Bond performance in the entire franchise. A bunch of incredibly sexy girls, a very menacing, cool and memorable villain and henchmen, a lot of fantastic, memorable and entertaining humour. A very quotable Bond film. Top notch soundtrack, cinematography, locations, and out-of-this-world sets. All in all one of the true masterpiece of the cinematic history. One of the only Bond movie I'd bring to film class, alongside DAF and TMWTGG.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe S.A.R.A.H.
    edited December 2011 Posts: 9,968
    Why the hate? Possibly because it's pants, and a bottom 5 Bond film (for me). It's not good, even by Moore's low standards. But I have to quote this...
    002 wrote:
    so what if it has too much ott humour id rather have that than the Daniel Craig humourless "so abysmal that i would rather stick broken glass up my bottom and sit in a tub of tabasco sauce" Qantum of Solace

    We all get our jollies, one way or another. ;)
  • the sad thing is the waste of the mega budget we wont see a bond on this scale again,this is the worst laugh at bond film.
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 2,331
    Zekidk wrote:
    At clip of a double-taking pigeoen which lasts about one second and a silly space battle are not enough for me to disqualify Moonraker.

    IMO, it has the best score of all the Roger Moore-movies, the most memorable and wellwritten villain, fantastic use of locations, and Roger Moore in his absolute prime.
    SaintMark wrote:
    By the way I think you are wrong. It is one of the better RM vehicles, has its plotproblems as have most 007 movies. Was an excellent choice of EON to make this film when they did because it fitted well commercialy at those times. The movie had its darker moments with the dead of Corinne Dufour and those folks in the lab with immiadetely after the visit of 007 with superiours and a flippant Drax. Who was perhaps the best baddie of the RM series imho. The music was beautifull and haunting, the last time we got the 007 theme =(( (too bad we don't get that quality these days with the "better" 007 movies :)) ).
    The movie really has great speed and spends little time with navelgazing. It is one big fun spectacle in the style only James Bond could deliver and many have tried to do the same and failed miserably. And Roger Moore just is Saintly and brilliant. Don't like him? tough on you...........

    dchantry wrote:
    Moonraker's a film that most people either love or hate.
    Traditionalists who love Connery and now Craig hate it, others don't.
    Pesonally, when I'm asked which Bond film I'd like to see at the cinema again I always choose Moonraker, not because its my favourite (far from it as that would be the 60's Bonds), but in my opinion its a stunning looking film. Its also the first one I saw in the old Odeon cinemas (stalls/circle) without my parents.
    Every penny spent is up there on the screen, France, Venice, Rio (ok space too, but we can't have it all).
    Ken Adams beautiful sets.
    Derek Meddings (as already mentioned) stunning models.
    Add a great score by John Barry and its pure cinematic gold.

    Now compare it to Goldeneye (also a film I really like) when there are a lot of scenes that are either bad models or Leavesden backlot and don't even get me started on the soundtrack.
    Yes, MR deserves an 20/10 score. It is a magnificient film. A definitive top 3 Bond film for me. Roger Moore is in his absolute prime, the best Bond performance in the entire franchise. A bunch of incredibly sexy girls, a very menacing, cool and memorable villain and henchmen, a lot of fantastic, memorable and entertaining humour. A very quotable Bond film. Top notch soundtrack, cinematography, locations, and out-of-this-world sets. All in all one of the true masterpiece of the cinematic history. One of the only Bond movie I'd bring to film class, alongside DAF and TMWTGG.

    Yes! All of these posts are like music to my ears. Moore took the comfort and confidence he obtained under Lewis Gilbert's direction in TSWLM and improved upon it even more superconfidence in MR. It's Moore's TB and I mean that as a compliment. Holly's the best female agent in the series by far and Drax is one of the greatest megalomaniac supervillains. The film is probably the best looking film made post-YOLT. Gilbert had a knack for picking the best DPs for his films. I also like how unlike some Bond films, Bond meets the two most important supporting characters(the leading lady and the villain) early on in the story and they're involved for the majority of the film.

Sign In or Register to comment.