I forgot to mention in the notes: the plot of TTL's Moonraker is slightly different, given that its main inspiration is Close Encounters rather than Star Wars. As noted, there's more gimmicky shit about UFOs and apparent alien abduction (which, of course, turns out to be the work of Hugo Drax).
Full disclosure: I like Lazenby a lot. Even though his performance is sort of awkward in OHMSS, that's the result of it being basically his first acting job ever -- given time he could have become possibly the best Bond of all of them. As it is, I rank him fourth: my order of preference is Dalton, Connery, Craig, Lazenby, Brosnan, Moore. (The latter two I just find bland -- although I still like them, just not as much.)Brainbin said:You mention that Moore's reception as Bond - had he left after For Your Eyes Only - would be mixed, and I can see that. Here, he goes out on a high note (his best performance as Bond, we're in agreement there), but he still has plenty dragging him down. Full disclosure: I'm a fan of Moore and I think he gets too much flack IOTL, but I agree that just because we're spared his two later films ITTL doesn't mean that people would suddenly love him.
But what's really interesting is that the one Bond consistently judged inferior to Moore - Lazenby - has here been redeemed! I love the irony. We get a better film, even though the best possible candidate for the role of Bond - who took the role IOTL - has turned it down! But they've had to compensate for that elsewhere, and that almost always results in stronger overall films. The best actors in the world can be capsized by poor writing or direction.