Reviewing Bond: Octopussy

Throw on some clown paint and cue the slide whistle, it’s time to review Octopussy. For all of the flack Moore gets for some of his less serious outings as Bond, you cannot say that these ridiculous films (your Moonraker’s, your Octopussy’s – spelling ?– ) aren’t entertaining. I don’t think anyone is out here arguing they are amazing films. However, when it comes to subjective rankings, I think the fan base is far more forgiving due to their enjoyment factor. So am I a fan of the Octopussy circus? You bet! It’s not just a guilty pleasure, it’s an all time favorite. Why?

Setting & Story

Setting

The first half of our film largely takes place in India, set between densely populated city scapes and opulent bejeweled palaces. I quite like how well the film does with these gorgeous estates, as one of the standouts of any Bond setting is its immersion in luxurious escapism and both Khan’s castle and Octopussy’s seaside sprawl (“the floating palace’) deliver this experience in full. Both their interior and exteriors are just fabulous to look at, with a maximalist style that might make even Trump do a double-take (and you better believe this gold wall decor isn’t from Home Depot!). Although it takes place a full year before Indiana Jones & The Temple of Doom, it leaves me with the same vibes. They do great work of capturing an exotic India (even if it does rely quite a bit on unfortunate stereotypes). 9/10.

Story

After a clown-clad 009 is murdered by knife-throwing circus goons, having retrieved a rare Fabergé egg, MI6 suspects Russian involvement. They’re not wrong. A General Orlov (Steven Berkhoff) is behind the scheme, along with Octopussy (Maud Adams), a renowned jewel smuggler, and her co-conspirator, Kamal Khan (Louis Jourdan). Hellbent on greater Soviet conquest, and at odds with the rest of Kremlin brass, Orlov undertakes the jewel heist scheme to finance his own ambitions, while also providing cover for an attack on a US airbase. Bond is sent to India to investigate this smuggling operation, and later to the circus to put an end to it for good (even diffusing a bomb clad in his own clown suit). It’s a terribly silly outing with an unnecessarily convoluted story saved by its comedy, characters and opulence.

If you’ve read my Skyfall review, you’ll know that I went in pretty hard on my criticism of that story. So as I attempt to defend Octopussy, allow me to explain why it’s not a double standard or even a fair comparison.

Octopussy does not have anywhere near the amount of plot contrivances and holes as Skyfall (more on that shortly). This is sort of bizarre to imagine, considering how much of a try-hard effort Skyfall was; trying to turn Bond into an Oscar-worthy production. Like most films of the Craig era, the filmmakers are so far up their own ass in self-importance, they try to portray everything as grounded in hyper-realism to please impossible critics. The pretentious tone they have set, even mocking the Moore and Brosnan era, is utterly humorless and about as lighthearted as a funeral during Christmas holiday. So when the filmmakers of Skyfall try to get away with half-assed script-writing, they don’t succeed because of the bar they have set for themselves, not only with Casino Royale (next up for review), but with the expectations they have leant audiences, that no their Bond movie is a proper film. But if your film is devoid of camp, or any sort of fun and escapism, then the only thing which any audience member can invest in is the story. So if the story doesn’t work, or takes you out of it due to extraordinary contrivances or plot holes, the film becomes unenjoyable because you can’t just overlook it. It is based on being grounded, with no camp or fun to fall back on.

The same cannot be said for Octopussy. This is not just an action film, like many popular films of the 1980s, it is an action-comedy. They are not trying to create a hyper realistic spy thriller that will compete with prestige dramas. Instead they’re just trying to entertain people. So when you’re left a little bit confused over real vs. fake egg, or why the Fabergé eggs at all, you look past this because you get the gist of it and the film is so entertaining, you don’t really care! Was that poster that Bond and Vijay just drove through apart of a rotating banner of ads, or was that an ultra convenient decoy planted by MI6? Who cares? Was it a crocodile who killed that goon, or Bond’s crocodile Q-branch submarine? Who cares?! Bond tells a tiger to sit?! Who CARES?! Don’t you think it’s a bit of a contrivance for Bond to not only break into an airbase with a civilian vehicle, cops in tow, but also he loses everyone with time to put on clown makeup? WHO CARES?! No one cares, because as silly as this film is, it’s a ton of fun. 

Let’s talk about the stuff Octopussy gets right in terms of story. While often maligned for its comedy and approach to action set-pieces, the film is pretty grounded in terms of its setting and spy-fare. Orlov is a good foil, and the third act reveal, where Khan/Orlov have schemed to blow up Octopussy and Magda (because they are just loose ends now) along with the airbase is well done. It also sets up an extremely silly but satisfying justice finale where Octopussy and her merry cast of ninja Playmates scale the walls of Khan’s palace for revenge. When she gets herself captured, Bond then pursues her while clinging to the outside of an airplane in a terrific final showdown with Khan’s Hindu henchman, Gobinda. 

Despite the egg-scheme being convoluted, and with the film perhaps relying once too many times on minor contrivances, the story is otherwise buoyed by its fabulous cast of characters, and sense of adventure. Octopussy actually feels like Indiana Jones & The Temple of Doom, preceding that film by one year. Even the silly stuff, like Bond’s dinner with Khan where he eats lamb’s eyeballs (I guess chicken vindaloo was out of stock at the local market), is reminiscent of the Spielberg classic. It makes homage to other classic adventure stories of the time with the absolutely absurd Tarzan yell (they could have done without that). 6/10 for the story’s convolution and silliness, but saved from a lower rating by its entertainment value.

This film is absolutely silly, yes, but it’s also got some great characters, wonderful use of setting and overall very fun action sequences leading to a memorable adventure. 7/10 for this category.

Gadgets and Vehicles

Our pre-credits sequence introduces us to our only Q-branch vehicle of the film: the Acrostar jet. While it has absolutely no bearing on our main story, the pre-creds do a nice job of allowing Bond to inventively outmaneuver his opponents to maximum explosive effect. Pulling up at the gas-till was pretty silly.

Honorable mention to Bond’s theft of Orlov’s Mercedes E-class, converting it on-rails.

As for our gadgets, we’ve got a combination of good spy-game toys and outright gags. Not sure what the rope was for, but as it falls over mid-air, Q visibly annoyed, Bond quips: “Having problems keeping it up, Q?” Excellent. No notes. The boob joke on the LCD screen gag was a bit too childish for my liking.

Now onto the useful stuff; we’ve got a pen filled with hydrochloric acid (which will later help Bond escape). We’ve also got a radio transmitter which syncs up with Bond’s watch, allowing him to learn valuable information (in between hair dryer sessions). While not shown beforehand, Bond is also given a submersible crocodile decoy to infiltrate Octopussy’s floating palace. 

Overall, Q branch getting into the field is always good fun. This outing does not disappoint, even if it is light on overall vehicles outside the rickshaw chase (not exactly my kart of choice in Mario Kart). But the vehicle we do get is a literaly mini jet so we can hardly complain about that. This category gets an 8/10.

Action Sequences

When you think of Bond action, it’s often the marriage of cleverness, humor and unique action direction. This film has all of that, in spades. Even if not all of the action sequences are high octane, they are all extremely entertaining. Let’s look at some standouts to see how Octopussy successfully implements the three Bond action ingredients (cleverness, humor and unique action setpieces).

The rickshaw chase

Vijay takes Bond to a hotel where Mr. Khan often plays (or should I say cheats at) Backgammon when not holed up in his mountainous lair. After Bond calls out his rival for cheating, he is chased down by his dice crushing goon in a hilarious rickshaw chase that may as well be in a Looney Tunes skit; we’ve got bops with tennis rackets, crowbars, blunderbusses, throwing stars and a rickshaw full of ninjas scored to a Bop-It toy commercial. Even the beggar at the side of the road catches a lucky haul in thousands of rupees which saved Bond from a mortal stab wound. My only complaint? Not enough slide whistle. Not having fun at the circus? Now Bond finishes off the remaining ninjas using various Indian street performer’s tricks, from hot coals to a nail bed. Bond finally returns to Vijay’s rickshaw where they flee through a wall like Wiley Coyote on two wheels, as the poster on the wall refreshes itself. Fans of the Craig era have already turned this off now. We are just 38 minutes in!

Cleverness? Absolutely.

Humor? Maybe even too much for some.

Unique setpiece? Can you point to another rickshaw chase filmed like Looney Tunes?

Escape from the circus 

Bond finally escapes from Khan’s castle. Hauled out in a body bag he pops up, fully committed to the gag with a devious ghoul sound as the local henchmen flee in terror. Khan leads a hunting party though the woods after Bond, who manages to encounter tarantulas, and a tiger whom Bond successfully commands to sit. Clearly back at the circus again, Bond continues down the mountain as Khan and his party approach atop elephants. Since this circus is also in the jungle, Bond uses some hanging vines to clear a crocodile infested river while shouting like Tarzan before being saved by a tourist boat. “Are you on this tour,” a tourist asks, to which Bond quips, “no I was on the economy tour.”

Cleverness? Sure.

Humor: Out of control.

Unique setpiece: Temple of Doom (before its release) + Tarzan + a touch of the Circus? I’d say so. 

The man with the Yo-Yo Saw (& other rejected Bond titles)

Octopussy attempts to recruit Bond for her schemes; to which he refuses, always loyal to mission. No hard feelings, they simply get over it by fucking in an octopus bed. They are most rudely interrupted by a wily assassin equipped with a saw on a string, which he uses like a deadly yo-yo. A brief fight breaks out before one man has his face sucked off by an octopus and another gets eaten by a crocodile, with the third sedated by Octopussy’s helpful cast of playmate protectors.

Cleverness? You bet.

Humor: The octopus face eating is wild.

Unique setpiece: Every henchman in this film is memorable, even when it’s simple fisticuffs.

Trains, planes and automobiles 

In this outing we also get Bond engage in drawn out action setpieces in just about every vehicle imaginable. 

He takes Orlov’s Mercedes on rails to infiltrate the circus train headed to West Germany; fighting Gobinda on the top. 

Our film is capped between two stellar plane scenes; the astrojet in the pre-credits sequence and the terrific stunt work aboard the Beechcraft C-45H at altitude where Bond finally gets the upper hand over Gobinda (& Khan). 

The action in this film is what makes this film so enjoyable. Combined with terrific humor and outrageous stunts that you would only ever see in a Bond film, it’s what gives this film its high re-watchability factor. 8/10 since some of the filmmaking suffers under visible practical effects, and some very obvious misses in fight choreography amongst some other glaring goofs.

Villains and Bond Girls

Villains

We’ve got two main villains with one of the series standouts in terms of henchmen.

Kamal Khan is a sophisticated and wealthy former Afghani prince. He has fairly standard motivations for any good gentleman thief, more money of course. Never mind the fact that his palace could rival that of far wealthier monarchs (why Afghanistan?). Anyways he is a villain that is hardly that impressive considering he is easily overshadowed by all the henchmen who make up this story. 5/10.

Likewise I will deviate a bit from fans who consider Orlov to be among the standout performances in this film. While I get it’s a comedy as well as an action film, I feel that Berkoff over-acts quite a bit in this role, which consequently takes me out of the film’s story. For that reason, I don’t rate him very highly. But he is certainly entertaining, there’s no denying that. 6/10

Let’s get to the standout aspects of villainy in Octopussy: our henchmen.

Our primary muscle is Khan’s Hindu henchman, Gobinda. In a scene that pays homage to Odd-Job crushing the golf ball, Gobinda demonstrates his strength with a pair of dice. He’s an extremely intelligent, stubborn and one hard to kill mother-fucker. He is out ruining Bond’s plans at every chance he gets. Whatever Khan is paying him, it’s probably not enough. This guy is very good! If I had to make a list of best Bond henchmen, he might make my top five. 8/10.

Honorable mentions:

Yo-Yo Saw (not to be confused with Yo Yo Ma)
And the Knife-chucking circus twins.

However since the villains are overshadowed by those they employ, and one of two villains is horribly overacted, this portion of the category cannot get higher than a 7/10.

Bond Girls

Since we got two villains, we also have two Bond girls. Both are fairly decent entries into the franchise. 

First up, our secondary Bond girl is mostly playing for the other side throughout our film’s runtime. Magda, played by Kristina Wayborn, is Khan’s partner who we come to learn is also part of Octopussy’s smuggling society of beautiful women. When Bond spots her tattoo in bed, she replies “that, oh that’s my little octopussy.” At least one Craig fan has now passed out from eye-rolling. She may not have much to do apart from advance the plot, but she serves her role serviceably well. 5/10 for her.

Our primary Bond girl is played by Maud Adams, who returns to the Bond franchise this time as Octopussy (I am tired of typing this word by the way). She’s more mature in this role, and seems well cast as the madam of this smuggling operation. Her shtick with the floating palace full of playmates, and marine life is a memorable one. She’s also got agency, being part of the main plot, but she also demonstrates respect and loyalty to Bond, due to him having given her father a clean death. I enjoy her chemistry with Moore and think she turns in a convincing performance, with a believable character in spite of the fantasy world she occupies. She is very human in the end, motivated by money but also with a lust for revenge when double-crossed. 8/10 for Maud in this outing. She’s one of the better Bond girls in the franchise.

Overall we get a mixed reception here, with some strong henchmen and okay villains combined with a terrific return for Maud Adams, but a more cringe turn of action for Wayborn. For that mixed reception, this category gets a good, not great, 7/10.

Wildcard!

Can we talk about how fantastically silly this film is?

Bond travels to India to meet with an MI6 ally, Vijay to learn more about our new friend Khan and his love for Faberge. I love this introduction, as Vijay plays his flute like the Legend of Zelda ocarina to the tune of the Bond theme, until the *secret treasure* notification sound pops and Bond is alerted by Navi to the presence of this important NPC in our mission. Wonderful stuff! It’s a great bit of fourth-wall breaking in a way that doesn’t feel too winking.

Bond, with an entire airbase in pursuit of him, manages to sneak into a caravan of clowns to dress up looking like 1983’s Pennywise return. It’s equal parts terrifying and hilarious, as he sets out to diffuse a bomb; he couldn’t be more serious but as he is in clown-paint, nobody believes him. Good bit of fun, even if this portrayal of Bond irks many fans. 7/10.

Conclusion

This film is memorable because of its silliness. It might not be everyone’s cup of tea. But that’s the great thing about this franchise, there’s a Bond style for everyone. You don’t have to like Moore’s campier outings, but there’s also no need to overcompensate by ridding of its legacy. I don’t like how subsequent filmmakers have taken to making fun of the series heritage and past reliance on camp. The Craig filmmakers in particular have committed this sin repeatedly. The Dalton era also sought to overcorrect, almost killing the franchise. There’s no need to! Just make the Bond you want to make, and leave it at that. I much prefer the campy Bond, high on entertainment value, over the pretentious, drawn out, convoluted depression-fest that is the Craig era. Some people love it, I am just not the audience I suppose. For this film’s enduring entertainment value upon rewatches, and in spite of its absolute clown-town insanity, I rate it a very loving 8/10 overall.