Review of Octopussy

Octopussy (1983)
6/10
FLAWED, BUT ULTIMATELY ENTERTAINING ROGER MOORE ERA FLUFF
17 November 2004
All in all, Octopussy is a slightly above average movie. If I were Roger Ebert, my thumb would be up--but just barely. I like Roger Moore because of his sense of humor and the elegant confidence in which he carries himself in the Bond role, but he lacks the edginess of the slightly better Sean Connery. I like the ladies in the film, especially Maud Adams, who plays the title character. As fair as villains go, Louis Jourdan as Kamal Khan is below average. He is urbane (like Bond), but lacks the menace to be among the best Bond villains. Baddies like Goldfinger, Dr. No, and Blofeld were great because you really felt that menace. But other than one scene in he eats the eyeball of a sheep, he is too ordinary. The best Bond villains are scary whackjobs bent on world domination.

The scenes in India are very good, with a real sense of the exotic. I especially liked the scenes with Bond and Q (the slapstick routine actually works here). The scenes in Germany are a mixed bag. There is some genuine tension when Bond tries to defuse the bomb, but did the folks at Eon really need Roger Moore to dress up as a clown when he does it? Sometimes, he one-liners and sight gags need to be put away, especially in the end of the films.

Still, Octopussy is a decent film, and the stunt work at the very begging (Bond inside a plane) and the very end (Bond OUTSIDE a plane), are good moments indeed. Octopussy is still better than most of the brainless action pictures of the last five years or so.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed