AboveDeepBuggy Some things I liked some I did not.

Odelecol Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

LeonLouisRicci Uneven but not the Worst Roger Moore Bond Film, and that somewhat Surprises. It Starts with perhaps one of the Worst and Worn-Out (another ski slope chase) Opening with a Ridiculous Water Vehicle (Union Jack portal) and Hair Sprayed, Cleavage Sporting Driver. Also, don't Forget the Cringe-Inducing "California Girls".Then the Iconic Title Sequence. Duran Duran Fans are Many and Mouthy about how Great the Song is, but it's just OK and Awkwardly Fits the Bond Mythos, although not the Worst it's Nowhere Near the Best either. Visually it Captures, with Day-Glo and it Works Well.The Movie, Roger Moore's Last as Bond, is Entertaining to a Point but does Retain some of the Silliness that Ruined the Worst of the Moore Movies. The Keystone Kops San Francisco Chase in a Fire Engine, among others.Christopher Walken is OK as the Villain but is Directed to Ham it Up in a Few Scenes (machine gun in hand mowing down his loyal Minions). He does, however, bring a Psychotic Presence to the Role.Grace Jones is so Strange that She draws Attention when On Screen and for the most part Pulls it Off as an Off-Beat Hench-Woman. Tanya Roberts as the "Bond Girl" is Another Story. Talent-Less and Barely Photogenic, Her Clunky Scenes are Alienating and Ruined by Sporting High-Heels in all the Wrong Places.Overall, it's an Above Average Roger Moore Bond, but an Average at Best Bond Film. Not an Embarrassing Exit and the Aging Star leaves with some Integrity Intact.

Manhattan William I'm not sure any other film depicts the excesses of the 80s quite like this one does. EVERYTHING, it seems, was thrown at this film in an attempt to make it bigger and bolder and better than what came before. As any sensible moviegoer knows, the moment one attempts to make a good movie by doing it that way the worse the result will be. The only redeeming feature of this film is the kitschy time-capsule quality it offers the viewer and even that doesn't sustain it for long. The plot is thin as a cup of tea, Roger tries to pull it off but he's given nothing to work with, it's just a silly mess. I laughed out loud at the scene where the Renault runs with it's rear end missing - IF ONLY Renault cars were that reliable! I've always been a Roger Moore fan. His "Bond" is the debonnaire gentleman and he's charming to watch. In this outing he was turned not into an action character but a cartoon one and it's disappointing. Lastly the direction is abominable. Watch the scene midway through at a gas station when the camera pans from left to right and ends up focused on the Rolls. It's literally out of focus during the panning - the words on the gas station are literally blurred and illegible. One big unhappy mess.

Mr-Fusion "A View to a Kill", besides boasting a killer Duran Duran song, is unfortunately a lame note for Roger Moore to go out on. He's very much long in the tooth here, and the silicon valley scheme is one of the sillier OO7 plots. Mostly, it just kinda stumbles along. to its credit, it does have Christopher Walken, an actor who relishes his role as the bad guy and genuinely looks like he's having a good time (in direct opposition to Moore in this case).It's not at "Die Another Day" levels of bad, and it helps that the intro song is one of the greats, but this is a snoozer. 4/10

brando647 A VIEW TO A KILL is the most frustrating 007 movie in the series because it's far from being a good film but my memory, for whatever reason, continues to paint it as one. I'll go for a while without watching it and then, one day, I'll be mulling over which 007 movie I feel like revisiting. Inevitably, A VIEW TO A KILL will come to mind and I'll think back and remember how much cheesy fun it is. On the chance I settle on the movie, I'll watch it and, not even halfway through, discover I've been conned yet again. I can't bring myself to call it a horrible movie (though I might see how others could accuse it of such) because I'm a major 007 fan. I've got a bias and I still believe that the worst of the films are still better than most other garbage out there. I can always find something to love about the movies and that includes this one. So, if you're looking for an outsider's unbiased perspective on A VIEW TO A KILL, this probably isn't the place. Roger Moore's final outing as the legendary British secret agent tries to jump on, what was at the time, at modern adventure about the technology industry. It starts with an investigation into industry mogul Max Zorin (Christopher Walken) and some potential funny business in the world of horse breeding. It's soon revealed that Zorin, a powerful man in the world of microchip production, has a plan to eliminate his competition by literally wiping Silicon Valley off the map.We'll ignore the fact that the destruction of Silicon Valley is the exact opposite of how Zorin would accomplish his goal and would, actually, ruin his business this way. Plot holes and poor research are expected often in these movies. So what are my problems with A VIEW TO A KILL? For starters, poor Roger Moore is just too old to be globe-trotting and fighting evil at this point. Just one look at the man tells you he is well past the point of successfully portraying this iconic character. I give him props for doing his best but, come on, his stunt doubles are the most blatant in this movie than in any other. It's almost distracting. Anything that isn't the most basic of movement for Moore is a stand-in. The film wastes no time in flaunting this with an opening sequence in Siberia where Bond must escape some Russians on skis. At no point is it believably Moore. And don't get me started on the use of the Beach Boys tune to the scene of Bond snowboarding to escape. It's just not right. Moving on, the film is just too long. Well, length isn't the problem. I've got no problem with a 007 movie being over two hours; my problem is that it feels it because there's so little going on to care about. The first act at Zorin's estate with the horse-breeding (which, keep in mind, has little to do with the big-picture plot of the film) lasts something like half the movie. So the movie is somewhere around half over when the microchip stuff and Silicon Valley stuff come into play. And then there's Tanya Roberts as the movie's Bond woman, Stacy Sutton. Roberts is only slightly more believable as a geologist than Denise Richards was as a nuclear physicist in THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH, and she spends most of her screen time screaming "James!" and failing to stay out of danger.So what worked? Well, Roger Moore has always been one of my top 007 actors because of the charm and humor he brings to the character. His body might be showing his age but his personality is intact and makes some of the cheesier dialogue a little easier to stomach. And then there's the fact that he's facing off in this movie against Christopher Walken. Let me repeat that: Christopher Walken. In a 007 movie. That's awesome enough. I do wish his character had been built up more. Zorin is really underdeveloped and his history is a little shady. Apparently he was genetically modified since birth by the KGB (in the same manner as his horses, I guess) and he's supposed to be a near-perfect human: vastly intelligent and above-average physical prowess. He doesn't display it much here. I mean, his plan makes little sense and he's bested by an aged Roger Moore in physical combat. He just goes the route of the psychopath. That's his one real character trait. His main "henchman" and the film's femme fatale is Grace Jones as May Day. Really, if Zorin wanted to win, all he had to do was send May Day after 007. She's an imposing woman. Her character also gets the most "character development" (I know I'm using a lot of quotes here but I want to be clear I'm using a lot of these terms loosely) in the film. She's Zorin's most trusted associate and we find she views him as more than that, culminating in a proper send-off for her character in the final act. Let's see…I loved the use of San Francisco as a location. When I think of Bond, I think of exotic locations so the juxtaposition of putting him in 80's era California still entertains me. And I would be stupid not to mention the film's title song, performed by Duran Duran. I love this song and it rates as probably my favorite title song of the entire series. When I have the urge to watch this movie, I think it's just my brain trying to tell me I need to go listen to this track.Would I recommend A VIEW TO A KILL? To the average viewer, probably not. To a 007 fan, you've probably already seen it. The real question is: can we bring Walken back for another new 007 movie or have we wasted our chance?