No.
Longer answer: define "terrible."
It has a tone that isn't exactly on par with Yer Average Bond Film's tone, Bond does stuff he wouldn't normally do, he's not played by The Sean Connery, and the villain's plot is bonkers. But enough about OHMSS. Or Skyfall.
Moonraker is, if nothing else, hugely entertaining. I'm certainly not going to claim that it's one of the best Bond Films ever made: it's clear that the three locations were stitched together out of a desire to visit those locations rather than because anything there was unique to the plot, "Holly Goodhead" is the worst/best-worst Bond Girl name in history, Jaws' return was ill-advised, etc.
Perhaps it's the blatant Star Wars cash-in. Perhaps it's the commingling of a horrific scheme with an over-the-top execution of that scheme. Perhaps it's the lack of resemblance to the Fleming novel (a pity - Captain America 2 is a more faithful adaptation, and check out the praise that film got).
Whatever the reason, Moonraker gets a lot of ire. You weirdos. The score is fantastic, the visuals are astounding, and it's a testament to the screen presence of Roger Moore that he never looks swamped by the amusing and outlandish things that happen around him. Moonraker is great entertainment (admittedly, sometimes unintentionally, but so what?) You need a certain mindset to appreciate it, yes, but that's also true of OHMSS.
No comments:
Post a Comment