For Your Eyes Only - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

For Your Eyes Only Reviews

Page 1 of 88
½ June 24, 2017
A half-baked attempt to get back to realistic spy thrillers. While the plot is more down to Earth than the last couple of Bond adventures, it retains too much of the cartoon style of the Moore era to work as a serious movie, yet it's not as fun as the more extravagant films; it's inability to fully commit to being one thing means it doesn't quite work as either. In accordance with this being a mixed bag of a movie there's some good ideas, such as one Bond girl, and some bad, such as the other, but nothing totally great or utterly terrible. The result is one of the more middle-of-the-road Bond entries.
June 19, 2017
Excellent stunts and super underwater sequences.
June 15, 2017
For Your Eyes Only wrangles a terrific plot, and has lots of fun and dazzling action scenes throughout.
½ June 13, 2017
James Bond 007 is at it again. This time he's trying to figure out who is the bad guy. One of my favorite Bond films because of the action scenes. Drags in many area's though. But most of these movies do. Good but not great.
June 12, 2017
The villain is not that great and the film is nothing special but I can really enjoy watching this movie.
June 3, 2017
Personally, how Moore's era of James Bond should've ended. It begins with a bang with 007 going up against a man who resembles Blofeld, finally giving Bond much needed vengeance after a 12-year wait. It's a start that makes you wonder if he could outwit Blofeld in what once was the final matchup betwixt the two for 34 years.

Besides that awesome moment, the cast features impressive performances from Julian Glover and Topol, who pose as rivals to each other, along with a somewhat unique relationship with Bond and Melina Havelock, and two impressive Bond escape chases; one involving a small Citroen 2CV, the other in Italy's snow. There's a reason why this movie, along with The Spy Who Loved Me, are considered Moore's best outings as 007.
May 28, 2017
...this next one was better since I saw it first...and that would have been the best Moore outing...but...
May 28, 2017
Third and final favorite film from the late Roger Moore during his time as James Bond and although it doesn't reach the height of The Spy Who Loved Me or isn't as memorable or iconic as Live and Let Die this is still my second favorite from Moore. Tonally it balances the humor of the lighter entries in the Bond series while taking the serious elements from my favorite Moore entry. Moore is joined by another strong female lead in the form of Carole Bouquet who is as deadly as she is intelligent and good looking. The stunt work and action is by far the best part of this film and that is despite the film being generally a lot more grounded and less bombastic. The pre-credit sequence, the 2CV car chase, the ski chase (which involves Bond being chased down a bobsled run on skies by a motorbike) and the shootout at a warehouse are all utterly fantastic. The score and theme song are once again brilliant, the rest of the cast is decent (apart from Lynn-Holly Johnson who is ear achingly bad) and the plot is engrossing enough despite not having the usual grandiose villain.
½ May 23, 2017
With director John Glen at the helm, For Your Eyes Only brings Bond back down to earth, grounds and seasons him in a spy thriller where characters bleed and tense situations are not escapeable by a nifty gadget from Q branch. Granted, Desmond Llewellyn's Q does return but only to demonstrate Identigraph technology to help Bond locate the killer of a marine biologist who was assisting the secret service. His daughter Melina Havelock played by French actress Carole Bouquet is on a mission to avenge her parents' murder with a deadly crossbow and a not so efficient means of transport. Due to their mutual interests, Bond and Melina cross paths to hunt down those responsible and this is a rare Bond film where the central villain is not killed off at the end. The story is grounded in reality and although some of the stunts are over the top, it never gives in to the gimickry of previous films. If anything, it is like a nephew of 'From Russia With Love'. Infact Topol's Columbo is a character closer in spirit to Kerim Bey who was an ally of Bond and also something of a mentor. Roger Glover as Christatos has the kind of slivery, understated menace that even has Bond fooled until a raid on his opium-stocked warehouse with Columbo convinces him otherwise. Roger Moore plays it surprisingly straight in this film affecting a deadpan parlance with the occasional eyebrow manouvre or witty riposte. Despite the actor's age (53 by the release of this film), he is now a more mature, distinguished Bond who has seen a thing or two. Moore rues in the DVD commentary that he "missed the humour terribly" which explains why he donned the circus clown make-up for his return in Octopussy. For Your Eyes Only must have surprised a lot of people who had written off Bond. It's a slick, character-driven adventure and one of Roger's best.
April 26, 2017
The British information gathering vessel St Georges, which holds the Automatic Targeting Attack Communicator (ATAC), the system used by the Ministry of Defence to communicate with and co-ordinate the Royal Navy's fleet of Polaris submarines, is sunk after accidentally trawling an old naval mine in the Ionian Sea. MI6 agent James Bond (Roger Moore) is ordered by the Minister of Defence, Sir Frederick Gray and MI6 Chief of Staff, Bill Tanner, to retrieve the ATAC before the Soviets, as the transmitter could order attacks by the submarines' Polaris ballistic missiles. The head of the KGB, General Gogol, has also learned of the fate of the St Georges and already notified his contact in Greece. A marine archaeologist, Sir Timothy Havelock, who had been asked by the British to secretly locate the St Georges, is murdered with his wife by a Cuban hitman, Hector Gonzales. Bond goes to Spain to find out who hired Gonzales. While spying on Gonzales' villa, Bond is captured by his men, but manages to escape as Gonzales is killed by an arrow. Outside, he finds the assassin was Melina Havelock (Carole Bouquet), the daughter of Sir Timothy, and the two escape. With the help of Q, Bond identifies the man he saw paying off Gonzales as Emile Leopold Locque (Michael Gothard), and then goes to Locque's possible base in Cortina, Italy. There Bond meets his contact, Luigi Ferrara, and a well-connected Greek businessman and intelligence informant, Aris Kristatos (Julian Glover), who tells Bond that Locque is employed by Milos Columbo (Chaim Topol), known as "the Dove" in the Greek underworld, Kristatos' former resistance partner during the Second World War...

Derek Malcolm in The Guardian disliked the film, saying it was "too long ... and pretty boring between the stunts", although he admitted that the stunts were of a high quality. According to Malcolm, Bond "inhabits a fantasy-land of more or less bloodless violence, groinless sex and naivety masked as superior sophistication", with Moore playing him as if in a "nicely lubricated daze". Although Malcolm tipped the film for international box office success, he observed that he "can't quite see why the series has lasted so long and so strong in people's affections." Writing in The Observer, Philip French commented that "not for the first time the pre-credits sequence is the best thing about the film." French was dismissive of Moore's Bond, saying that Bond was "impersonated by Moore" and referred to Moore's advancing years. Ian Christie, writing in the Daily Express, said that it was not "much of a plot, but it has a touch of credibility which is a welcome change from some of its predecessors." Overall, Christie thought, For Your Eyes Only was "one of the better Bonds, with a nice balance between humour and excitement and the usual bevy of beautiful girls." Christie's colleague in the Sunday Express, Richard Barkley praised the film, saying that For Your Eyes Only "is one of the most exciting yet". Barkley describes Moore's Bond as having an "accustomed debonair calm and quiet authority". All told, Barkley thought "this Bond movie is smashing entertainment." David Robinson, writing in The Times bemoaned the fact that the "dramatic bits between the set pieces don't count for much." Like other critics at the time his praise was more directed towards the stunt crews; they were "better than ever in this one." The film critic for the magazine Time Out was brief and pithy: "no plot and poor dialogue, and Moore really is old enough to be the uncle of those girls." For the US press, Gary Arnold in The Washington Post thought the film was "undeniably easy on the eyes", and further added "maybe too easy to prevent the mind from wandering and the lids from drooping." Arnold was also critical of the large set pieces, calling them "more ponderous than sensational" and that there was "no equivalent of the classic action highlights that can be recalled readily from "From Russia, With Love" or "You Only Live Twice" or "The Spy Who Loved Me" or "Moonraker." This is a Bond waiting for something inspired to push it over the top." The New York Times critic Vincent Canby said that "For Your Eyes Only is not the best of the series by a long shot" although he does say that the film is "slick entertainment" with a tone that is "consistently comic even when the material is not." Jack Kroll in Newsweek dismissed the film, saying it was "an anthology of action episodes held together by the thinnest of plot lines", although he does concede that these set pieces are "terrific in their exhilaratingly absurd energy." For Time magazine, Richard Corliss concentrated on the stunts, saying the team "have devised some splendid optional features for For Your Eyes Only" whilst also commenting on Roger Moore, saying that his "mannequin good looks and waxed-fruit insouciance" show him to be "the best-oiled cog in this perpetual motion machine." Jay Scott of The Globe and Mail included it on his list of the year's worst films, calling it "repellant" and "ambitiously bad".

The previous Bond film, "Moonraker" (1979), was a huge financial success but fans and critics complained that the series had become too focused on wild gadgets, outlandish plots, over-the-top villains and screwball comedy. As a result, producers decided to return to a more realistic storyline in 'For Your Eyes Only', using previous Bond films "From Russia with Love" (1963) and "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" (1969) as models. Therefore, this film contains many story elements similar to those films; the ATAC is similar to the Lektor, Kriegler is similar to Grant, Columbo is similar to Kerim Bey and the winter sports sequences are similar to those in On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969). The film saved United Artists from financial ruin. At the time of the film's release, the studio was still reeling from Michael Cimino's Heaven's Gate (1980), a notorious $40,000,000 bomb that was about to force UA to file bankruptcy. When this film took in a worldwide gross of $194,900,000, the studio was saved and afterwards turned its focus toward blockbusters and less on personal films. I have looked upon "For Your Eyes Only" as one of Mooreīs better Bond movies for a long time, but when re-seeing it in 2017 it feels scattered, has no real plot, poor dialogue, not the best opening sequence, dated, stand-in infested and so so in general to be honest. This was Roger Moore's fifth outing as James Bond, but at that point he had managed to give us both good ones and less good ones in the series. The storyline of revenge and a cold war pole position is nothing new within the franchise and these days I truly dislike the Moore/Bond movies with this quite ridiculous humour attached to it which used to be more of a twinkle in the eye sort of humour during the Connery/Bond era. It just donīt fit for the character and universe if you ask me. As a kid you looked upon it differently, but I canīt see past it today. Moore looks old as many reviews states, Carole Bouquet is stunning but wooden, Julian Glover ok as Kristatos while I think Chaim Topol as Columbo is the best part within the character gallery. We get to see some nice locations in "For Your Eyes Only" for sure, but when the script is a bit here and a bit there it doesnīt help to make the movie better. Always loved Sheena Easton and her theme song and it still holds up today. "For Your Eyes Only" has a bit too many flaws and I can only give it a 3 in my grading.
April 18, 2017
This is a great action movie This is the 12th James Bound movie. The first 11 are good movies. This is better. The 13th James Bound movie Octopussy is better
April 9, 2017
The twelfth Bond film, first of five in a row directed by John Glen (Octopussy/A View to a Kill/The Living Daylights/License to Kill). A return to a more realistic spy thriller, "For Your Eyes Only" is one of the best Bond films of them all.

A British spy trawler, sinks in Albanian waters with the top-secret ATAC (Automated Targeting Attack Communicator), a device used to transmit orders to nuclear subs. The Soviets are also trying to recover the ATAC, and it's a race to get to the wreck first. Bond's travels take him from Spain, to Cortina d'Ampezzo in Northern Italy, to the waters off of Albania, and then Greece. Along the way he must battle Aris Kristatos (Julian Glover), with the help of Melina Havelock (Carole Bouquet) and smuggler Milos Columbo (Topol).

Great acting all the way around, with Glover and Topol giving really good performances. It also has some of the best underwater camera work since "Thunderball" in 1965. Plus, another one of the best theme songs by Sheena Easton.
February 25, 2017
for me one of his better Bond outings
January 28, 2017
Moore's Bond feels too old and too tired to be effective in this installment of the long running franchise. For Your Eyes Only is a sluggish and forgettable spy adventure.
½ January 4, 2017
140111: 12th Bond Film. I wasn't that impressed with the opening scene featuring a diving helicopter that sounded like a plane but otherwise, this film was entertaining enough. What's with James Bond and skiing by the way? No more please. Does Melina (Carole Bouquet) have a moustache shadow or is that just me. Lynn-Holly Johnson as Bibi is one of this film's highlights. Ending with humour is becoming a trend.
½ December 12, 2016
For Your Eyes Only has a good opening number, fine score and it looks good, but the action is dull, the characters and plot are uninspired and the film is one of the most tedious and forgettable Bond flicks so far.
½ November 29, 2016
There's something oddly forgettable about this movie, which is strange considering that it contains some of the best imaginative action sequences of the series and is a lot less silly than some of the other Bond movies. Is it partly due to an average main villain, or Bill Conti's peculiar ill-fitting score? John Barry is sorely missed here. Could it perhaps be that there are so many sets and locations that the film lacks visual focus? The funny thing is that this is in fact a great movie...just not the crowd pleaser that some of the other more memorable ones are.
November 25, 2016
Kind of tame, but engaging, action packed story, and as always very funny thanks to Roger Moore.
½ November 21, 2016
Another nail in the coffin for the Roger Moore bonds. This is a slight return to form after the outlandish Moonraker but stripping away the camp is part of the problem. I like the grittier bonds but Moore's performance is often vacant Of actual emotion; he either looks pissed off or horny.
½ November 20, 2016
Agent 007 is assigned to retrieve the valuable ATAC transmitter form a sunken British spy vessel before it falls into enemy hands. Another entertaining entry, with some particularly impressive stuntwork on the ski slopes of St Moritz. Sheena Easton song is passable while Margaret Thatcher finish is amusing.
Page 1 of 88