For Your Eyes Only: The Message We're Left With.

What's the message of FYEO?



I recently watched Calvin Dyson’s new For Your Eyes Only review and one of his criticisms is that the film is one of the few Bond films that has something to say (in this case, regarding revenge) and yet it doesn’t fully thrust a complete message onto its audience. See below video if you care too:



It’s an interesting observation - until that point the series hasn’t strived to be anything other than escapist entertainment so FYEO ventures into new territory. Perhaps it’s a by product of creating three-dimensional characters which we hadn’t really seen since OHMSS. In other words, perhaps it wasn’t the intention of the film makers to do so— the theme of revenge just happened to appear when collating unused Fleming material and fleshing out the connecting story. But I can’t buy into that: various explorations into revenge appears too frequently to be an accident.

And it’s explored from a variety of perspectives - briefly with Bond, to a degree with Columbo and Kristatos and more prominently with Melina. Calvin suggests there’s confusion around what the film makers want to leave the audiences with. Let’s break it down:

We open with Bond visiting his wife’s grave and exacting revenge on the man responsible. While treated more lightly than what Fleming does in his book, You Only Live Twice, it does in fact establish the theme of revenge for the film, despite the sequence itself being a little more frivolous than the rest of the film. Bond dispatches Blofeld and disappears from the screen so the events of the film proper can be set up. We don’t see any ill-effects of Bond exacting his revenge (though it’s true in Fleming’s You Only Live Twice, where Bond’s thirst for revenge has some horrific consequences which spills into the next book, too.).

When Melina highlights her need to avenge her parents, Bond explains that she must “first dig two graves”, underpinning the danger involved in such a pledge. Of course, Bond didn’t when he killed Blofeld and we also don’t expect him too. Well at least I thought. Because Bond’s interest in Blofeld was always professional until he killed Tracy. His job description includes a licence to kill those who are deemed a threat. So there’s an inherent objectivity laced with a personal angle that not only complicates Bond’s psyche (making him a more compelling, rounded character), but renders him a little wiser in the subject than Melina.

Because Melina is a civilian caught up in the game of espionage. Bond’s dynamic with Blofeld wasn’t just personal whereas Melina’s interest in Gonzales and Kristatos is. Calvin references Melina’s killing of the former not inciting any kind of ramifications but there’s a very real assassination attempt of her life in Cortina, which ultimately strengthens Bond’s argument. Further, it serves to convince her that putting an arrow in the backs of those responsible won’t bring her the closure she needs because they wouldn’t be able to work out why they killed her parents. So there is growth in her character when she agrees to return to Greece and let Bond investigate.

And who’s to say the ‘grave’ isn’t a metaphorical concept? Killing someone would have astronomical effects on one’s psychology. We know this manifests itself through Bond’s vices and he’s someone who is as “cool as a surgeon about death.” So even if Melina isn’t caught and arrested by authorities for murder, the death of her innocence would surely follow, and that trauma in a woman has always been something that greatly draws Bond in; the bird with the wing down.

When Bond reminds Melina of the dangers of revenge at St Cyrils, it seems to serve as a gentle warning. He understands her need to avenge her loved ones but he doesn’t want to see her cripple under the weight of such an action. Isn’t that what the audience leaves us with? Most audience members, assumedly, aren’t assassins like Bond is. We’re Melina. In the best of times we’re looking for certainty. When we grieve we look to blame someone, something, and in Melina’s precise circumstances I can only imagine I’d want to act similarly. But we can’t. We’re not thinking clearly. She’s face to face with the person responsible for her parents’ deaths and Bond has to be that voice of reason to someone who wouldn’t normally kill.

And it appears that Calvin is implying that there’s some kind of gender bias because there’s no ramifications when Bond and Columbo exact revenge in the film, and it’s “only bad” when Melina does it. But following on from what’s discussed above with Bond and it being in line with the dirty job he has, Columbo also strikes me as someone who is as shady as 007 himself. Not to mention his war history playing a part in his ability to coldly kill if necessary. And it’s not as if Columbo goes without any pain. He’s been beaten and bashed and that collapse to the side after Kristatos’ death I think solidifies Bond’s message.

Perhaps it is a simplistic take on the theme of the revenge. But I don’t think it’s the confused message that Calvin implies. Though I’ve yet to touch on Columbo’s perspective…

As a side note, if we are to treat FYEO as a quasi-sequel to OHMSS, we understand Tracy’s murder in itself an act of revenge on Blofeld’s part given Bond’s hand in destroying his operation at Piz Gloria. Blofeld, in essence, dug his own grave in addition to Tracy’s, giving personal weight to Bond’s advice to Melina.

Never really considered FYEO's meaning. I suppose there's revenge but I think espionage. It was an adventure above all. Perhaps starting our tilt into grittiness that VTAK pushed on and LTK completed.

Espionage as a theme? Or a casing by which to explore the theme of revenge?

I watched that video a while back but can't remember the point he was trying to make. Calvin's videos frustrate me-especially the supposed reviews because they're usually just surface material and plot synopsis in the mold of most video reviewers.

Bond is trying to protect Melina from killing and thus becoming less innocent. It's right out of Fleming's short story but there Bond quickly is forced to accept Judy Havelock is going to kill whether he like it or not and he'd better shut the hell up and get out of her way. Thus I like Melina in the film-but I ADORE Judy from the story.

I love the "first dig two graves" line but have never known for sure exactly what meaning it's supposed to have: Melina first taking the time to grieve properly and bury her two parents OR that Bond is saying that her quest for revenge will likely cause Kristatos and herself to die either physically or spiritually so she has to dig a grave for herself as well.

Melina is the big issue in FYEO in that she is just kinda there. Cubby's line to Binder about her never smiling is true but the biggest thing was Maibaum criticizing Glen for not directing focus into the relationship.

The issue is that Melina was written to be so consumed by her desire for revenge as is Judy in the original story that she is completely blinded to Bond's charms and thus it's a new scenario for the world's great lover. You really don't get this in the filmoutside of her being standoffish at first but you do get the one random shot of her in the casino watching Bond and Lisl walk off almost anticipating a dropped subplot a'la Plenty O"Toole in DAF being all jealous of Bond being stolen by Tiffany.

Agreed about Calvin's videos. It's a summary of the story, a few of gags and a couple of minutes at the end saying 'I like this and don't like that.' That's not a review.

HGTB wrote:

Bond is trying to protect Melina from killing and thus becoming less innocent.

Exactly! Bond kills for his job and does suffer for it (above all, he lost his wife because of it!). She's reacting to some devastating circumstances and I imagine never intends to kill again. It's not who she is and wouldn't understand the psychological consequences of kmurder.

HGTB wrote:

I love the "first dig two graves" line but have never known for sure exactly what meaning it's supposed to have: Melina first taking the time to grieve properly and bury her two parents OR that Bond is saying that her quest for revenge will likely cause Kristatos and herself to die either physically or spiritually so she has to dig a grave for herself as well.

The latter.

HGTB wrote:

Melina is the big issue in FYEO in that she is just kinda there. Cubby's line to Binder about her never smiling is true but the biggest thing was Maibaum criticizing Glen for not directing focus into the relationship.

The issue is that Melina was written to be so consumed by her desire for revenge as is Judy in the original story that she is completely blinded to Bond's charms and thus it's a new scenario for the world's great lover. You really don't get this in the filmoutside of her being standoffish at first but you do get the one random shot of her in the casino watching Bond and Lisl walk off almost anticipating a dropped subplot a'la Plenty O"Toole in DAF being all jealous of Bond being stolen by Tiffany.

I don't know if she's just there. She proves pivotal in a dramatic sense for altering the trajectory of the story on a number of occasions, which enriches her character and raises the stakes. She kills Bond's lead in Spain, complicates his time in Cortina, is able to locate the ATAC and puts Bond in jeopardy atop St Cyrils. The idea, however, that she can't be charmed by Bond due to her quest for vengeance is an interesting one, and I do think how their relationship is handled does sing out to the message of the film. Bond sees that she is that bird with a wing down, which we know is a weakness, so he doesn't spend his time trying to seduce her - but to keep her safe. And we know why, as it's so efficiently set up with Bond visiting Tracy's grave.

That said, the seeds are planted for a romance in the 'Amore!' scene in Cortina and their dynamic deepens when they reconnect in Greece ("my father loved the view from here" scene). If I was to criticise FYEO it's that too much time is spent in that two-man sub, and maybe with Bibi too, when more time could have been spent fleshing out the Bond/Melina dynamic while Lisl could have been used more.

At least Bond and Bibi don't end up in the sack ... even in the 'different times' of the early 80s, wisdom prevailed there .

Blunt Instrument wrote:

At least Bond and Bibi don't end up in the sack ... even in the 'different times' of the early 80s, wisdom prevailed there .

That and Bond didn't have any ice creams in his suite.

You know, if the whole Bibi character was created around Moore saying the 'ice cream' line... it was worth it.

Thought occurs, I wonder what Bibi would be like today. Either traumatised by her experiences or having spent the intervening years going from sugar daddy to sugar daddy whilst updating the world on her turgid Instagram and doing bewildering tiktok videos. I mean, videos.

The other day I found a deleted scene of an ageing Roger Moore buying Bibi an ice:

:

Kristatos: "May I suggest a slice of baklava, it's my mother's recipe--"

Bond: "If you'll forgive me, I find that a bit too scented for my palate... I'll have a scoop of chocolate chocolate chip."

Imagine his predecessor - 'It's, it's, double, yes double, that's what winners have, chocolate chocolate chip, absolutely tremendous, delicious ice-cream for winners, they told me they've read my books and follow my business tips, no wonder they're a tremendous success ... '

Cut to inside the ice-cream parlour and the staff looking bemused.