<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.5" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: For Your Eyes Only</title>
	<link>http://rentmovie.com/for-your-eyes-only-movie-review.html</link>
	<description>Rent Movie Review Reviews Movies Online</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 04:05:45 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Vitaly Gorbachevsky</title>
		<link>http://rentmovie.com/for-your-eyes-only-movie-review.html#comment-9486</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:20:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rentmovie.com/for-your-eyes-only-movie-review.html#comment-9486</guid>
					<description>After the stupid MOONRAKER producers designed to make a serious and a smart movie. And finaly they managed to do it. They used all their arsenal: casting The Blondies, who brought the best cridibility and comercial cloud in 1981, Carole Bouqet - charming and beautiful, new great title sequence casting gorgeus Sheena Easton. By the way, Sheena Easton looked much better than Carole Bouqet. Film is full of the dramatic situations, such as: woman was killed with a bagy-car, Bond pushed Mercedes, which stopped at brink, into the gap with his leg.
 The weakest point is the villain and Carole Bouqet. As for me they should have cast Sheena Easton instead of her.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After the stupid MOONRAKER producers designed to make a serious and a smart movie. And finaly they managed to do it. They used all their arsenal: casting The Blondies, who brought the best cridibility and comercial cloud in 1981, Carole Bouqet - charming and beautiful, new great title sequence casting gorgeus Sheena Easton. By the way, Sheena Easton looked much better than Carole Bouqet. Film is full of the dramatic situations, such as: woman was killed with a bagy-car, Bond pushed Mercedes, which stopped at brink, into the gap with his leg.<br />
 The weakest point is the villain and Carole Bouqet. As for me they should have cast Sheena Easton instead of her.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Steve Forsyth "sforsythnoe"</title>
		<link>http://rentmovie.com/for-your-eyes-only-movie-review.html#comment-68</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Dec 2006 22:45:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rentmovie.com/for-your-eyes-only-movie-review.html#comment-68</guid>
					<description>Between the overblown action spectacles of THE SPY WHO LOVED ME and MOONRAKER, and the overblown stupidty of OCTOPUSSY and VIEW TO A KILL, Roger Moore had the good fortune to be involved in this gem of a Bond movie. FOR YOUR EYES ONLY is the first time since Moore's own MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN that Bond was really grounded in reality. Everything that occurs in this film is within the realm of believeability. 

The secret to its success is in removing the tradtional arsenal of gadgetry and forcing Bond to rely instead on his survival skills. Right from the get-go, we know we are in for something different when Bond's new souped-up gadget car blows up before he even gets to hop in! Throughout the movie, Bond is left to his own gut instincts to survive. Nowhere in the film is this better seen than in the extended ski slope chase. From the get go, he loses his gun, and must therefore out-think and out-ski his would-be assassin through a series of fun chases down the long ski slope. 

In addition to this goodness is a fun car chase where Bond, having lost his car, has to make do with a Voklswagen Beetle to make his getaway. There is also some underwater action including a submersible vehicle fight, and a deep sea salvage dive. And the film climaxes in an amazing cliff-climbing mission to an isolated fortress! 

The movie foregoes the global domination themes of the previous two films in favor of some cold-war espionage involving a top secret device that went down with a ship. It is a race between Bond and competing agencies to recover the box first. Nice to have something more believable to follow! 

The film's only weak point is Bond girl Carol Bouqet - she is easy on the eyes, but her delivery is only a few notches above the dreadful Barbara Bach from SPY WHO LOVED ME. Also, the villain is pretty plain and boring. 

But, all that pales in comparison to the more even keeled and down-to-earth action and plotting the movie has to offer. To top it all off, you get to see Bond's final showdown with Blofeld in the movies opening sequence! It's all good, baby!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Between the overblown action spectacles of THE SPY WHO LOVED ME and MOONRAKER, and the overblown stupidty of OCTOPUSSY and VIEW TO A KILL, Roger Moore had the good fortune to be involved in this gem of a Bond movie. FOR YOUR EYES ONLY is the first time since Moore&#8217;s own MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN that Bond was really grounded in reality. Everything that occurs in this film is within the realm of believeability. </p>
<p>The secret to its success is in removing the tradtional arsenal of gadgetry and forcing Bond to rely instead on his survival skills. Right from the get-go, we know we are in for something different when Bond&#8217;s new souped-up gadget car blows up before he even gets to hop in! Throughout the movie, Bond is left to his own gut instincts to survive. Nowhere in the film is this better seen than in the extended ski slope chase. From the get go, he loses his gun, and must therefore out-think and out-ski his would-be assassin through a series of fun chases down the long ski slope. </p>
<p>In addition to this goodness is a fun car chase where Bond, having lost his car, has to make do with a Voklswagen Beetle to make his getaway. There is also some underwater action including a submersible vehicle fight, and a deep sea salvage dive. And the film climaxes in an amazing cliff-climbing mission to an isolated fortress! </p>
<p>The movie foregoes the global domination themes of the previous two films in favor of some cold-war espionage involving a top secret device that went down with a ship. It is a race between Bond and competing agencies to recover the box first. Nice to have something more believable to follow! </p>
<p>The film&#8217;s only weak point is Bond girl Carol Bouqet - she is easy on the eyes, but her delivery is only a few notches above the dreadful Barbara Bach from SPY WHO LOVED ME. Also, the villain is pretty plain and boring. </p>
<p>But, all that pales in comparison to the more even keeled and down-to-earth action and plotting the movie has to offer. To top it all off, you get to see Bond&#8217;s final showdown with Blofeld in the movies opening sequence! It&#8217;s all good, baby!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

