Reviewing Bond: A View to a Kill

When I watched For Your Eyes Only about a week ago, I knew it would come down to that film and this one for my least favorite Roger Moore film. It’s a shame really, because the casting of Christopher Walken provides such hype. While he mostly delivers as you would expect, the rest of this movie is a real slog to get through. So who’s going to wind up lower on my ranking, FYEO or A View to a Kill?

Setting & Story

Most of our story is split between palatial French country homes and the city of San Francisco. In terms of villain locales, we have Zorin’s French country estate, his blimp and the mines near San Andreas Lake (which is much smaller than what is pictured here). It is in fact Amber Lakes in the UK which is used for both the Mines scene (supposed to be Bay Area) and also the Rolls Royce drowning scene (supposed to be France). We do get a bit of travelogue glimpses of both San Francisco and Paris, hardly exotic stuff (along with some of the most stereotypical French behavior and accents imaginable as presented by the English). However the film nicely incorporates some major set piece work at both the Eiffel Tower and Golden Gate Bridge, and also City Hall in San Francisco. However, while the French country estate feels pretty true to a Bond film, the scenes in San Francisco made me feel like I was watching a Dirty Harry film without the casual racism and opinions on condiments on hot dogs (mustard, no ketchup in this house). Although apart from the one liquor chugging bystander during the City Hall scene, it was nice to see a San Francisco not full of mentally unwell homeless people (sad for all involved really). Perhaps if Max Zorin succeeded in his plans, maybe San Francisco would still be affordable, however I find that quite unlikely. 

3/10, for even Paris looks dull here.

The story in this one is largely what contributes to the slog of this film. We open in Siberia (on location in Iceland) where Bond recovers a special microchip from the dead body of 003. Turns out this microchip has the potential to withstand an EMP attack, and this recovered chip is a replica of UK technology, which means there is a leak in the operation. Intelligence suggests Max Zorin’s enterprise, since it is Zorin, a wealthy Anglo-French chip magnate that recently took over production. Bond is sent into the field alongside Moneypenny, M to watch Zoran at a horse race. This is where things fall off…

We are led to believe this film will be about Bond investigating stollen military technology, and that Zorin is implicated in this treason. Instead we spend the next 50 minutes of this film investigating horse doping and cheating. To what end? We spend close to 30+ minutes of our film at the French estate and its surroundings, maybe longer, to confirm a microchip has been implanted into a thoroughbred to allow Zorin to cheat at races. Did we need a 00-agent for this? I understand Bond is ultimately snooping around for information on Zorin and whether he may be involved in the chip-theft, but that’s not what he winds up investigating. We literally have Bond investigating the horse scandal. At no point is it clear that he is still focused on finding the source of the chip leaks outside making a copy of a check with a nifty Q gadget that might be hard to explain to anyone younger than 35 (or George HW Bust at a grocery store).

Ultimately Zorin figures out he is being tracked by a British spy, and sends Bond to certain death trapped in a sinking Rolls Royce beside his dead partner, Sir Tibbett. Meanwhile Zorin meets with KGB including a recurrent character, Russian General Gogol. We learn Zorin is in fact KGB, confirming suspicions over the microchip theft. Not only is he KGB, we later learn he is also the product of genetic experiments where eugenics were employed to create super high-IQ children. While most died in the womb, those who were born were naturally gifted… but prone to psychopathy.

After horsing around for nearly half the film, Bond makes his way to the Bay Area where he learns more about Zorin’s chip business and ambitions in the region (couldn’t we have done this 40+ minutes ago?). By happenstance, he also finds the woman who is the recipient of the check in City Hall. Turns out she’s geologist Stacey Sutton. Without her help, it’s unlikely Bond would have ever foiled Zorin’s plans in time. Turns out he is attempting to flood Silicon Valley through a man-made “natural disaster.” After fleeing a flaming death trap in City Hall after hours, Bond and Sutton escape incompetent American police (a theme in the Bond series) via fire truck. Somehow night turns to day, and Bond/Sutton pull up to the mines in their bright red fire truck to the villains lair with nary an eyebrow raised. They infiltrate the mines and stop Zorin, with the help of his former henchwoman, Mayday (spurned by Zorin leaving her to die).

The story upends viewers expectations with a false MacGuffin (stolen chip technology) and then has us horsing around for an hour before moving onto what feels like a shoe-horned in plot of Zorin trying to achieve monopoly power through a covert terrorist attack. The reason this story doesn’t work is because it feels like we have three different missions, none of which are cohesive. Specifically the reveal that Zorin is planning to flood Silicon Valley. It feels out of left field because prior to the scene on the blimp where he attempts to extort competitors to go along with his plans, we never see any planning or indication of this. I felt we needed more setup, because this felt very unearned. 

While the film takes its name from the Fleming short story From a View to a Kill, the screenplay was entirely original, written by series veteran Richard Maibaum and future series custodian, Michael G. Wilson (half sister of Barbara Broccoli). Despite that, the story is just bad, and on top of that it lacks witty dialog as well.

Overall the story here feels like a hodgepodge of different ideas that never really allow one to stand out as especially enjoyable. Add to that the relative lack of humor and an older Moore phoning it in at this point between stunt doubles and it fails to live up to the epicness of its title song. 3/10 story.

3/10 overall.

Gadgets & Vehicles

This another outing where Bond doesn’t have a vehicle of his own, instead borrowing a shitty French taxi and a San Francisco fire truck. Our gadgets are also light in this outing, although we do see Bond using some gadgetry in his mission at the country estate. It’s fairly standard spy stuff, even if well implemented.

The standout gadget is Q’s “pet,” a robot-dog with cameras for eyes that feels very much a tribute to ET which came out a couple years prior. While the introduction at MI6 is silly and rather endearing, the send off is deeply cringe and an unfortunate sendoff for Moore as 007.

3/10 on this one, it’s not a memorable outing for Q branch.

Action Sequences

This film is pretty light on action overall, although its pre-credits sequence is fairly traditional Bond fare on skis.

After recovering the microchip from 003’s body, Bond flees armed Russians on skis. After he blows off his own skis and commands a snow mobile from another goon, Bond improvises with the wreckage of that craft, turning it into a snowboard to the needle-drop of the Beach Boys. It’s a rather unusual thing to hear a needle drop of popular music in any Bond film. I struggle to recall another time offhand where a major song was licensed. Usually they rely on score, or the insertion of John Barry’s 007 theme as a needle drop (which I’ve referred to as such in older reviews, but it’s technically just score). Anyways, it’s super cringe and the action direction isn’t that great either. Cobbling together a snowboard from spare parts with no ability to be buckled in strains credulity as well (reminiscent of Die Another Day’s kite surfing on junk bit). Yet having been a decent boarder myself, I once took a plastic rocket sled, balancing it as a board down a pretty long, steep hill not buckled in. Yet can’t say I’ve ever done park stunts without being strapped in… also I was dumb and 16. It’s all a rather silly and forgettable opener for the notorious beach boys song and obvious stunt double use (a theme that will become evident soon). The escape in the iceberg sub is the silliness we expect from Moore-Bond, but this opening sequence is about as silly as this film is willing to ever get.

Although we do get some more silliness as well in our French car chase through Paris, where in typical Moore-Bond fashion, he’s sent through busy cities with civilians in awe of his destruction and near impossible ability to keep going with half a car that shouldn’t be operational. 

The real standout for me in Paris is the incredible base jump off the Eiffel Tower. Mayday flees Bond after assassinating Aubergine (which means eggplant in French, in case anyone cared). She makes her way up the Eiffel Tower and I’m surprised 57 year old Moore didn’t use his stunt double for the stair run too. That’s not a knock on age, being 57 in 1985 is very different from being 55+ in 2025/26. He was just not up for the task here, and it impacts a LOT of the action we do get in this film. Nonetheless Mayday’s leap off the actual Eiffel Tower, a stunt performed by B.J. Worth, a renowned skydiver, is a standout in this film and the series. That stunt was super dangerous, and pulled off immaculately. It sets up an interesting car chase premise as well, with Bond following her in the air. The chase itself is pretty silly, but that base jump is iconic.

The latter half of our film sees another silly car chase, this time with more incompetent American cops and Bond on a fire engine with a loose ladder. He flies around the outside, as Sutton takes the wheel. It feels very Benny Hill to me, and unlike real American cops who would have pumped that engine with lead, the movie ones are just led by another incompetent fat American sheriff stereotype with underlings who don’t respect him. The whole climax at the bridge was 70s police procedure gag stuff. It’s a chase pretty derivative to a lot of other Moore car chases throughout his tenure, and despite a unique vehicle, it’s still lacking creativity overall. The French car chase, while briefer, was more creative even if it was also very camp. His stunt double is once again visible throughout both of these chases.

Outside of those few scenes, the action is few and far between. There is of course the horse steeple chase where Bond is captured at the end. It’s basically like a Looney Tunes episode, where Zorin is setting booby traps along the way. I still don’t understand why we had to spend so much time with horses. 

Our climax atop the Golden Gate Bridge is a neat idea, and the death of Zorin is very satisfying. However, the fight between Bond and Zorin, who swings around an axe at Bond atop the iconic monument, is a bit disorienting at times. I suspect like a lot of the action in this film, it is to hide the obvious use of stunt doubles. The insert moments are great though.

Apart from the iconic Eiffel Tower base jump, most of the action in this film is just overall uninteresting and lacking in creativity. It’s also evident that Bond is stunt-doubled for most of these sequences. As such, there’s a tremendous amount of insert work which sort of breaks the action as well as the immersion. Moore was just too old for this outing, and it shows in these very phoned-in sequences.

4/10 for the action we do get, even in spite of some incredible stunt work.

Bond villain & Bond Girls

It’s interesting to learn that David Bowie was initially sought for the role of Max Zorin. You can clearly see the influences of style there, at least in terms of hair/glasses. Of course the role eventually went to the superb Christopher Walken. He’s a fantastic actor, and is appropriately icy in this role of a businessman-psychopath. What makes him so memorable is in the way that he can be at once charming and in the next instance ruthless and without soul. He really pulls this off well, especially when giving up his own men to the explosion in the mine (& Mayday). He really enjoyed pumping automatic gunfire into those men, without whom he would never be this close to enacting his plans. He’s a great Bond villain, it’s just unfortunate that he’s in a not so great Bond film. Nonetheless I think he’s one of the more iconic standalone villains of the series, and gets a strong 8/10 for me given the story and film around him definitely bring down what is otherwise an outstanding performance.

Mayday is the primary henchman, albeit she is a super strong 6’2” henchwoman. She was an interesting cast choice, but nonetheless remains iconic for this series being willing to go there to have a woman in this role. While I find myself cringing a bit watching her take top with Bond, making her both a villain/Bond girl, she is mostly stellar. I love the style of her character, I am a sucker for henchmen with an interesting angle or notable style and Mayday definitely has all of that going for her. While mostly silent throughout the film’s runtime, I do love how she is so angry that Max betrays her, thinking he loved her. Although outside the karate scene, and some public appearances together, I felt like the film could have used a bit more between them to really have that betrayal pay off. Nonetheless I think it was still pretty good, and without Mayday’s sacrifice of her own life, our hero wouldn’t be successful. 7/10 for a memorable character only stunted a bit by the writing.

I haven’t really spent a lot of time on minor Bond girls for brevity. We do get one here, with Russian agent Pola Ivanov who appears occasionally throughout the film. She’s got history with Bond, and attempts to use this to her advantage but of course Bond pulls one up on her, knowing what she’s attempting to do. She flees with what she thinks is a tape recording of Zorin’s plans. Instead, Bond swapped the tapes. She’s too minor for a rating.

Our main Bond girl is often loathed by many fans for the amount of screaming she does. That’s Stacy Sutton, played by American actress Tanya Roberts. Let’s give her the benefit of the doubt here! Our first screaming fit is while she is stuck in a burning elevator shaft, the next major screaming fit is while she is dangling from the Golden Gate Bridge. I think both instances more than warrant that type of screaming. That said it does feel excessive for a Bond film, and is a bit high pitched. Add to that the more minor screams and scares, and I can see why she starts to become annoying. I think where as a character she falls apart is in her believability as a geologist in addition to being an oil heiress (that feels about right). Similar to Dr. Christmas Jones, it just feels like a sexy woman line-reading smart science stuff. I don’t hate her performance here, as I actually kind of find her a bit endearing in a corny way. However she is way too young for Bond, and while she certainly tries to be helpful in the field, she’s mostly a bit of a comic relief character like Mary Goodnight in …Golden Gun albeit nowhere near as annoying. I don’t think she’s an especially talented actress either, but she is stunning. Yet without her science knowledge, it’s unlikely Bond would have spoiled Zorin’s plans. 4/10, she’s not the worst but she is also far from the best of the series.

That puts this category at 6/10. Lower ranking Bond girl aside, both primary villains are outstanding and make up for an otherwise dull affair.

Wildcard!

I’m sure it will come as no surprise that the theme for this wild card is Moore’s age. Moore was set to retire after For Your Eyes Only in 1981 at the age of 53. However it became apparent to EON productions that Connery was returning to the part in 1983’s unofficial Never Say Never Again Bond film, produced by writer and Fleming/Broccoli nemesis Kevin McClory (who owned the rights to SPECTRE and also wrote the story for Thunderball). At the time James Brolin had a successful screen test and was close to being signed on for Octopussy. With the news of Connery returning, the producers chose to stick with Moore. His relationship with Maude Adams in that film felt age appropriate. The same cannot be said for his relationship with Sutton here.  I am hardly one to criticize age difference. If I told you the age of the man I adore and would do anything to have, anything to make love to, your jaw would drop. Admittedly age difference doesn’t matter when it is backed by real affection and adoring love. Pardon my personalizing this for a moment (feel free to skip the very personal italics): Pick up that phone James and reach out as only you can, and I will be there, because you — and yes my gut says you’re still out there even if I have zero evidence other than instinct — know how explosively good it would feel after so many years, to just imagine the release of that tension...

Alas when it pertains to a one-night stand not built on a decade+ of cat and mouse, I’m not sold on Bond-Sutton here. Unlike 55+ folks today who often look considerably younger and are in great shape, 55+ back then was far different. Lifestyles caused people to visibly age faster and that was evident with Moore, who was not only pruned and wrinkled, but visibly tired throughout this film. For that reason, it takes you out of the immersion of the world his character exists in. To be fair to him, even Roger Moore admitted that last film was a film too much. A View to a Kill also feels like it would have been a great debut for Dalton’s style of Bond. 4/10 because the age of Moore-Bond is one of the biggest issues apart from story in the reception of this film.

Conclusion.

Overall I think this is yet another of the more serious Moore entires. I prefer my Moore films to be more outlandish. Yes we get some inevitable silliness, but just as For Your Eyes Only overcorrected for the tone and camp of Moonraker, A View to a Kill overcorrected for the tone and camp of Octopussy. I think this film was more of a vehicle for Dalton, and obviously Roger was too old for this character, who is supposed to be at most in his mid-40s. The story is poor and overall the film really drags. Recently on r/JamesBond, someone asked which Bond film makes you really check the time remaining, i.e which film drags the most for you? I think I would answer A View to a Kill. This film had me pausing and checking the remaining time on several occasions. That’s never a good thing because it means I am bored. This is a boring Bond film with few outstanding things to love, earning it a low 3/10 overall. This means it is lower than For Your Eyes Only and is likely to find itself in my bottom five.