It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I prefer GF over TB. The latter is just too longwinded and not as fun. GF has its problems. but Guy Hamilton at least knew how to play up a farce. When Young tries imitating that formula it's not as effective. He was much more in his element when doing straight up espionage adventures like FRWL.
That Said I rate an bored Connery over Craig every day of the week and Sunday thrice. ;)
I resent that. Connery was much more engaged in DAF than people seem to give credit. If you want a bored Connery performance, look no further than YOLT.
To add to the SP discussion, I too find the film difficult to pay attention to during. Not that it is particularly complicated, but from me there is just nothing which pulls you into the story, or keeps you hooked. It's just action scenes, which while serviceable, don't really tlstsnd out or help tell the story. There is also very little or no narrative tension, anyone can pretty much guess that Waltz is Blofeld, and after that the only surprise in the plot is that they are brothers, which doesn't actually have any impact on anything, as they treat each just like they always have. Bond takes him out in easy fashion anyway, so what was the point of then knowing each other exactly? The plot itself is extremely bare bones, with only mentions back to it verify made by the characters. I can't believe they spent so much on a film with so little of actual consequence going on. Whatever threat there is, always seems ethereal or in the back ground, and this causes me to check out very easily. Indeed, it's something of a challenge to stay 100 Percent engaged from start to finish.
Agree. He doesn't looked bored in these, that's for sure!
You don't care to listen to "the Moors" for half an hour on a loop?
Just the thought of that…
I'm currently reading the OHMSS chapter in Some Kind of Hero, I'm sure the DAF chapter mentions at what point Connery was brought on.
Interesting! Hope the book provides some information on this. The DAF production is interesting enough in itself, with Lazenby not returning, the other names considered, etc.
Perhaps, but Some Kind of Hero is the best and most authoritative history of the Bond films so far.
Interesting, I always thought that was JAMES BOND: THE LEGACY. Can you definitively say that isn't so, because before I make a purchase, I'd like to be sure. :) Thanks in advance.
I don't prefer DAD to TWINE, but sometimes MR can win TSWLM to me many times ;)
I have doubts as to whether the first edition was edited at all! Some of these new small publishers seem to have stopped bothering with copyediting, and others now introduce errors into the text, as was the case with Some Kind of Hero. But Ajay Chowdhury told me last year that the paperback edition has been corrected, so I recommend that version to DarthDimi.
Some Kind of Hero is twice as long, and Bruce Scivally, co-author of Legacy, gave it a five star review on Amazon--surely a sign that both books belong on your shelf!
And don't you forget it.
I have ordered the book per your recommendation, sir. :)
Thank you!
Nobody does it better.
And the fact that they had already signed John Gavin to play James Bond for DAF. I feel like that subject never gets a lot of coverage. Like how long had he been attached to the role and how was he going to approach it.
Looking into that, here's a timeline of what went down on DAF:
- John Gavin was signed and announced as Bond on January 29th 1971
- UA announced the deal was made with Connery to return as Bond on March 1st 1971
- Production started on April 5th 1971, with Connery shooting his first scene a week later.
Thus Connery only had a month between signing on and shooting.
That's true, it's so easy to forget that Gavin was actually signed for the role. His contract was paid out in full too, wasn't it?
The casting must have been hell for the producers, from a budgetary point of view.
No wonder Diamonds Are Forever looks like they blew the entire budget on Connery's catering.
I am not a big fan of DAF ... but it has Connery and some cool scenes in it - I like the Vegas setting and the hostage situation if Whyte. But the rest is ... well ....