A fake Fabergé egg and a fellow agent's death lead James Bond to uncover an international jewel-smuggling operation, headed by the mysterious Octopussy, being used to disguise a nuclear attack on N.A.T.O. forces.
SPECTRE agents under the command of Ernst Blofeld infiltrate a US air force base situated in the UK and steal two Tomahawk cruise missiles. When NATO is held to ransom, the British reactive their "00" agents and send James Bond to recapture the warheads and kill Blofeld. Written by
Dave Jenkins <firstname.lastname@example.org>
The Thunderball court case began on 19 November 1963. Ian Fleming made a settlement with Kevin McClory after ten days, on 29 November 1963, giving McClory the film rights to this movie and £50,000 damages. See more »
When Domino is being rescued by Bond from the bidders, she's not wearing her "Tears Of Allah" pendant. However, inside the naval vessel, she produces the pendant when asked for it by Bond. See more »
Is it conceivable that he could have used a false eye?
Oh, do come along, Bond! Let's think of a more logical explanation, shall we?
See more »
"Never Say Never Again", as everyone knows by now, was the second Bond film to be released in 1983, and was nearly as big a hit as "Octopussy" was (that film was still playing in some theaters when "Never Say Never Again" was released). Lacking the distinctive gun-barrel opening and famous Bond theme among other distinctive features of the EON franchise films, this lacks not only the feel of the EON Bond series, but of Fleming's work, leaving a seriously bloated mess of an American action thriller which happens to feature Bond as the lead character.
Why? That's the first question anybody should be asking about this film. A cynic (which I probably qualify as) would say 'for the cash', others might say it was just to get Connery back as Bond and give him a proper goodbye. Some might say it was in retaliation to the direction the Moore films were headed in, although "For Your Eyes Only" is a far superior and far less bloated film than this, so that argument doesn't quite work.
Of course, there's a lot to dislike here. Connery has moments of inspiration where he slips right back into character, but for most of the film he just looks really old and slightly ridiculous, which fits the plot but doesn't make his performance any less tired. Still, I'd argue that this is a better send-off for him as Bond than "Diamonds are Forever". Kim Basinger is a terrible Bond girl, and as much as I like Rowan Atkinson he shouldn't be anywhere near a Bond film. In addition, the villains here fall flat as well.
That said, "Never Say Never Again" is not a film I can hate, even if I wanted to (and I never want to hate anything), simply because little of it comes off as especially bad yet all of it comes off as flat, bland, and uninspired, and far, far too American for a Bond film. It's just sort of... there being the bloated, over-long, but not terrible film it is. I don't count it as a 'Bond film', as it doesn't feel remotely like one, but even just as an action thriller it doesn't quite work.
37 of 61 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?