Live and Let Die vs. Octopussy.

After watching LALD again I found it similar and comparable in the sense that both entries are full of camp and concentrate a lot more on action compared to others.

I think I would say Octopussy is the better one cause even though the plot may not hold together at least it has a thread pulling plot. By that I mean Bond starts out with a murder, and has to figure out what happened and he pulls on a thread that just unravels more and more, like other entries.

Where as in LALD, there really is no thread. He goes to New York and tries to get to Kananga but fails, and then has to re-catch up in San Monique. This isn't too bad, but when meet up with Solitaire, he takes her away, then she is re-kidnapped, then he saves her again, and that's the whole movie. It didn't even feel like a whole movie but more like a second act, that never reaches an effective climax or pay off, unlike other entries.

There is the whole bit about Kananga distributing heroin which is an interesting idea, but they don't go anywhere with it. Bond destroys the heroine fields, and then Kananga tells him that it was hardly all of it and that Bond's efforts were a minor inconvenience. So I feel that the movie just goes autopilot after Bond hooks up with Solitaire.

But on the other hand, some of the material in Octo does not feel as fresh, such as Bond having dinner with the villain again, like we saw twice before that, and then crushing of the dice by the henchman, may have been too much like the crushing of the golfball before.

As for the camp factor, some of the jokes in both are quite cheesy, but not so much in a good way, but cringe-worthy perhaps. Like the Ku Klux Klan cookout comment, or the Felix Leiter cigarette lighter. Or the tennis pro gags in Octo, which kind of felt desperate by that point. I don't know how so many people are bothered by the Tarzan yell or the clown costume, yet it seems that the tennis gags get a pass, it seems.

But the action is solid in both of them with Octopussy having better action. But what do you think?

The storylines for OP and LALD are incomparable in my opinion. Kamal and Orlov's scheme is one of the most plausible and threatening of the Bond stories, whereas LALD's is one of the weakest. Structurally OP does meander in India to promote the gags however the moment Bond touches down in East Germany, the story and action picks up to become of the strongest second acts in the series.

With Fieldsy, they're not quite the same. LALD harks at the blaxploitation and OP is something else. I prefer Octopussy, the odd gag aside.

LALD really is just a basic action film that is more focused on selling you Roger Moore on his debut, which is perfectly fine for what it is. Put him in a bunch of different scenarios and see how he plays to them, however mildly connected they are. By OP there was nothing for Moore to prove, so a lot more thought was put into the plot which makes it a more engaging entry.

It took me years to realize this but LALD is a brilliant streamlined reworking of DN in many ways. It is also perhaps the birth of the modern one man vs. the enemy straight action film. I don't understand the criticism that there is no plot thread. In fact it is the most tightly plotted and simplistic of the entire series outside of DN.

OP is overplotted by a factor of 9000 and then seemingly underwritten. It was based on the MacDonald Frasier draft and then Maibaum-Wilson wrote around it and were heavily inspired by the success of RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK and topping NSNA.

They are really incomparable. I love em both of course. One of my fondest college memories was trying to explain the plot of OP to roomates who turned it on and had never seen many Bonds. Imagine their faces when I got finished.

hegottheboot wrote:

It took me years to realize this but LALD is a brilliant streamlined reworking of DN in many ways. It is also perhaps the birth of the modern one man vs. the enemy straight action film. I don't understand the criticism that there is no plot thread. In fact it is the most tightly plotted and simplistic of the entire series outside of DN.

Tightly plotted? Hmmm... Simplistic, sure. Because Kananga's scheme is tightly summarised in one scene without any real build up. As opposed to something like DN, where the mystery is tightly plotted so you get a good sense of the danger and where you're privy to information as Bond stumbles across it, piecing it together right until the final showdown. In LALD, you have no idea what's going on until the "Did you touch her!?" scene, but that's perfectly fine because George Martin's score is so good.

Quote :

OP is overplotted by a factor of 9000 and then seemingly underwritten. It was based on the MacDonald Frasier draft and then Maibaum-Wilson wrote around it and were heavily inspired by the success of RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK and topping NSNA.

I'd love to read MacDonald Frasier's draft. As I've said elsewhere here, Octopussy is one of those films that truly could have been a top 5 Bond film, had there been a little more focus.

https://bondandbeyond.forumotion.com/t3044-what-could-have-made-it-the-best

Quote :

They are really incomparable. I love em both of course. One of my fondest college memories was trying to explain the plot of OP to roomates who turned it on and had never seen many Bonds. Imagine their faces when I got finished.

LALD does feel like a conscious return to DN in a sense probably because it was used as a reference for how to debut a new actor unlike OHMSS. It's also a considerable scale down in stakes compared to the latter Connery films.

hegottheboot wrote:

They are really incomparable. I love em both of course. One of my fondest college memories was trying to explain the plot of OP to roomates who turned it on and had never seen many Bonds. Imagine their faces when I got finished.

Was there a bong involved? Or harder stuff?

Nope. Just pure eyebrow raising goodness.

The scaling down in LALD also ties in with the novel not being one of the bigger setpiece driven adventures-being after all only the second-and the conscious desire on all involved to not adapt it as it was felt to be the problematic one. So I'm surprised Mank put in as much of Fleming as he did given that no one wanted to make the book. Again LALD as a film is likely part of the birth of the modern actioner.

Sure it may be a bit loose in places but it is the first and last time 007 went on a straight adventure. This is likely why Maibaum actively disliked it. (That thought still kills me.)

OP done straight about the Cold War and Orlov could have been more Gardner flavored, more serious and directly followed FYEO's distinct grounding in reality.
So of course we didn't get that. ;)

hegottheboot wrote:

Sure it may be a bit loose in places but it is the first and last time 007 went on a straight adventure. This is likely why Maibaum actively disliked it. (That thought still kills me.)

That thought makes me feel a little better. LALD has always been the one that seemed a notch below the others (pre Craig era, now it's a notch below the others but light years above CR, QOS and SP).

Can you elaborate on/link me to Maibaum's thoughts on LALD?

It was an old Starlog article if I recall correctly. Essentially he disliked it because it was too down to earth and lacked what he felt should be the requisite larger than life qualities of a Bond adventure. I presume this along with Cubby taking over TMWTGG is what led to the emphasis on globetrotting and the large villain lair etc.
Since the partnership had fractured further it generally is held that Harry took the reins on LALD and Cubby on TMWTGG.

Notch below? Ahh, you wound me! ;)
I feel LALD is sort of more traditional in a sense of being a straight ahead detective thriller, but in other ways is a quintessential Bond tale that does appropriate Fleming's narrative sweep from the novel quite well despite the switch from pirate gold to heroin smuggling. It is an ideal starting point if not going chronologically and you're talking to the wrong person because I could sing its praises until past the end of time.

Funnily enough, I find that, despite the two narrative threads, TMWTGG is more of a straight detective thriller than LALD, enhanced by the mandatory Bondian conventions - just as DN did, albeit more successfully (mostly due to story focus).

LALD to you is what TND is to me. I still appreciate LALD, and it boasts great music and one of the best titles sequences. But I never warmed to it as much as the others. I just happen to prefer exactly 20 other films. The other three (soon to be four I imagine) I rank below LALD, if that means anything.

I follow you and think every fan has at least one or two that don't connect with them. Though it pains me to hear of anyone not adoring LALD.

To use television vernacular, LALD is like the weird TV pilot of Moore's run. That's probably why it's not as adored by many, because it looks so out of place from what many would think of as a Moore Bond film, especially when compared to the later bigger adventures.

That's a pretty good description actually.

I still think LALD wouldn't be held in such high regard if it wasn't for the music (the theme song, particularly).

HGTB wrote:

I follow you and think every fan has at least one or two that don't connect with them. Though it pains me to hear of anyone not adoring LALD.

Just as it does me for TND!

Sems like they felt that aspects used to introduce Connery (villain holed up on a Caribbean island and keeping the local populace in check with supersitious/supernatural trappings, gadgetry kept to a relative minimum (with the not-Q-as-such 'Major Boothroyd' in Dr No and Q not even putting in an appearance in LALD) a rare glimpse at Bond's home and a helpful local contact (Quarrel/Quarrel Jnr) ) would do just fine for introducing Moore too.

Yeah, it's a weird mix of bringing all the elements that made DR. NO successful as Connery's debut while at the same time dropping a lot of the expected Bond conventions in order to make Moore stand on his own. That's why he never wears a tux, orders a vodka martini, there's no briefing in MI6 HQ, no army backup storming during the climax, etc.

Fields don't get me wrong, I love TND as I do the entire original series. I just tend to over-analyze every last aspect of them and the Brosnan era in particular as they fell more victim to modern cinema trends. It's kinda my thing.

Overall I think it's hard to decipher these films in particular outside of the original release years. DAF was loved by audiences simply for bringing Sean back and being a fun ride in '71 and not closely examined. LALD is still a well made film that has aspects that haven't exactly dated to the same degree across the board like others. I think the parallels to DN are there, but not made to stand out. Q is a big missing element but that was only due to Desmond still being stuck on publicity for DAF.

It is interesting to see how Roger's first two outings are designed to both show up differences and promote him as tough-ish instead of playing to his strengths. The decline of the series in popularity and market share was prominent but I wish someone would one day go into how the producing partnership had frayed to the point of Harry overseeing one and Cubby the next. I do think LALD has that certain spark to it that Harry had and that the series lost after he left. A hundred bad ideas for every wild fantastic life changing one that no one else would have dreamed of.

And I'm sure there's still a closet at Pinewood full of Harry's elephant shoes. I would absolutely love that.

You are not alone. The first time I watched it I was bothered by silly elements like Pepper and a few other moments but it's a solid 9/10 for me now. One thing I really like about it is the simplistic plot as I love seeing Bond going on these types of missions as a break to all the Spectre and world domination plots. I like QoS for the same reason. and that they made the plot to LALD so deliciously weird really puts it over the top for me Solitaire giving the reading while Bond in on the plane on his way has to be one of the coolest moments ever. The Funeral procession. Voodoo, Tee Hee..the bizarre never seems to end in this one and what a great ending on the island and confrontation with Kanagna. he has exceptional charm for a villain and is more than a little bit menacing. 
the score is excellent
the atmosphere as good as it gets
a true gem and quite a start for Roger

So Maibaum did not like LALD cause it didn't have a global stakes type plot. However, Maibaum wrote From Russia with Love, if I am correct and that one is low stakes and not global, or megalomaniacal, right?

ironpony wrote:

So Maibaum did not like LALD cause it didn't have a global stakes type plot.  However, Maibaum wrote From Russia with Love, if I am correct and that one is low stakes and not global, or megalomaniacal, right?

I dunno. FRWL's plot feels far more consequential than LALD's.

FRWL at least feels like it has a plot, a tight one at that. LALD has one but it meanders and you give up towards the end sometimes.

FRWL's plot plays on real life tensions and so the thought of the decoding machine falling into the wrong hands is palpable. LALD, with all its voodoo elements and action sequences unfortunately loses its edge with Mank's wit the sole provider of any enjoyment of that film. It makes the narrative less formidable.