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
It did. Harold Jack Bloom.
Our next film is one of the most beloved in the series by fans. It was time for a new Bond actor! Could he deliver in this ambitious adventure.
For the second film in a row, we have a different actor playing Blofeld. Bond and Blofeld act like they haven't seen each other, even though they both met in the previous film. We have a Bond who breaks the fourth wall and makes a quip about "the other fella".
Were any of these things a missed opportunity?
Is there anything else in this film a missed opportunity? Or is it like From Russia With Love, and Goldfinger with very little to be considered a missed opportunity?
Or John Gavin ;)
OHMSS is like Jenga. Take one piece away and the whole thing might fall.
I agree!
I don't see any missed opportunities, but to nitpick:
* Telly Savalas as Blofeld, he's probably the best version of Blofeld so far, and I liked Telly Savalas' voice and his acting, but that American accent was quite misfit for a character that's meant to be European, his American accent really slipped, he's meant to be a European claiming to be a Count, but Savalas' accent contradicts that description.
It's also similar to Christopher Walken's accent as Max Zorin in AVTAK, he's meant to be a German/Nazi product experiment by Dr. Mortner, but his American accent contradicts it, I know Blofeld's have different accents and portrayals, but the case of Blofeld in here was his disguise as a European Fake Count, but he have an American Accent.
Maybe what they could've done is to dub him? I don't know, but maybe the American accent would slip once Blofeld revealed himself? After his disguise was caught.
* No follow up, Tracy killed and it's interesting to see Bond hunts Blofeld for revenge, but again, it's not a problem of this film, it's a problem of the next film.
They could have worked to have made the love affair a touch more convincing for my money- a montage is a bit naff. Agreed with Ludovico above though that they could have followed through on the slightly more dramatic angle this film ushered in but failed to. The Sir Hilary stuff is also a bit missed in terms of potentially being a bit funnier than it ended up on screen- Laz can't really handle it.
They were full of themselves.
Then so Bond Girls, that's Cubby for you folk.
Imagine how he rejected an accomplished actress like Julie Christie to hire someone like Ursula Andress or Claudine Auger, and both of them are dubbed too, or Ornella Muti for Carole Bouquet.
The worst example is rejecting Catherine Deneuve for a model like Barbara Bach in TSWLM years later.
Actually, after Lazenby, Cubby considered hiring a football player in Roger Green for DAF and Finlay Light, another model for TLD.
I'm so thankful that Brigitte Bardot never became Tracy.
I think it worked, actually moreso than Bond and Vesper's romance in CR, due to how rushed it was.
Montage is enough, especially if considering the length of the film, not the book focused on that either, as it's a lot more messed up without any build up or rationality, because 90% of the book was focusing on Blofeld, the film actually gave the romance a bit more of space, exposure and focus.
Regarding the Piz Gloria clinic scenes, it's a fault on Hunt, he could've directed it as serious as it was, but he chose not to, instead make it a psychedelic 60's style with all the colors and frills, I'll admit the Piz Gloria scenes reminds a bit of the style in CR'67, had Young directed it, probably it would've been a bit serious and not as dated 60's bizarreness with comedy.
If Moore was available back then, OHMSS wouldn't have been the film in 1969, probably they would worked on the planned faithful adaptation of TMWTGG following YOLT.
Sure, Cambodia wouldn't have been the exact location (they could've filmed it anywhere in Asia), but what kept it from being filmed was Roger Moore not being available at the time.
I just find a montage to be a cop out. Very much tell without showing.
I don't find the question of how the book did it to be terribly relevant: this is a film and it has to stand on its own two feet.
I'm saying it should have been funnier- embrace it more. But yes, Hunt was perhaps not quite up to it and neither was his star.
Probably true, but we're talking about opportunities not taken; not what would or wouldn't have happened.
I don't think there's a moment of this which wouldn't have been improved had Moore been the star.
But again, the film was a bit long for this, and Blofeld's plan or those scenes regarding him should've been explained precisely.
I don't know in what ways it could've been more touching than it is, for me, it's felt because it's developed, we've seen it more, something that I couldn't say for any of the other Bond romances in the Franchise.
Regarding the Piz Gloria scenes, for me, I think it shouldn't be that way, I liked the Piz Gloria scenes, mainly for the tension, but I don't liked the psychedelic 60's style in it, it could've been more serious than that, not with the vibrant colors and fashion that looked like it came off from CR'67.
Regarding the complaints of casting, especially Lazenby, I think it's not counted here in missed opportunities,
Again, like what have been told here before:
So casting, I think is out of question, this is about the film itself, not from a technical standpoint, perhaps.
So, this is not about outside of the film like casting, this is more about in the film itself, the story, the character decisions, the script, the dialogue or etc.
The casting is out of the question.
Again, showing us, not telling us would have been more touching, for my money anyway.
We get more of Bond falling for her, but Tracy falling for Bond we basically just have to take as read.
Great. What I'm saying is that they clearly were trying to make it funny in places but it never really takes off.
Great. I regard missing an opportunity to cast a part well as a missed opportunity. YMMV: as I'm sure you're about to repeat again.
I never liked the scene with the old gadgets. It's too fanservice.
Tracy is too posh and she is not crazy enough.
Posh? She's a rich woman, a countess and a daughter of a mafia boss.
What crazy? Like Xenia Onatopp? Elektra King? She's depressed but she's not crazy, maybe try to be more specific in this part.
She's depressed and sad, but she's not crazy like Elektra King or Xenia Onatopp, she's not manic.
That's how a depressed person acts, but by the way, I can actually do without the depression thing, though, but again, it's in the book, but if there's one thing I could change or stray far from the book, I will remove that depression thing and just make her personality more fleshed out.
And that's the thing though, people expected her to be Emma Peel in this film.
If I'm being honest, Tracy is a weak character in the book, if you've read the book, she's one of the weak written female characters, she's just there only to act as a romantic foil for Bond, and this where @mtm's statement regarding Tracy may apply, she never showed love for Bond, especially in the book, she saw Bond as an opportunity to fulfill her own desires, true, it's only Bond who loved her (more implied in the book), but yes, she never showed love for Bond.
She's pretty weak in that she's more of a liability to Bond than an asset or a relief to him, Tracy never did anything good to Bond in the book, nor in the story, she had no impact in the story due to how she's put in the backseat for most of the book, she's annoying really in the book.
She's a pretty shallow character, really, she's actually meant to be unlikeable, she's self pitying, she's a messed up girl whose actions would make you hate her, instead of be pity to her, opportunistic, arrogant and apathetic, more like a narcissist, that's why I really disliked her in the book.
The thing is though, the film changed her, they've improved upon the book by making her more likeable and nice, more competent and her banter with Bond was as respectable as it can be.
From one of worst Bond Girls in the books, she became one of the best in the film, because they've made Tracy a match for Bond in anything, Tracy became Bond's female version, and you've got a great actress playing the part.
She is too posh and clever.
Yes, but read my post above, it may give light upon the situation.
Yeah, but I don't buy the "depressed person" thing.
She looks like a bored rich.
That's it, she's still depressed, some depressed person in real life show boredom, and even inactivity or being constantly lazy.
She's a rich girl, a daughter of a mafia boss, a countess, so she had a breeding.
I might also throw in the throwback to the previous films. I guess the thinking was it was a great way to show the audience this was the same James Bond as before. I think it might have made people wish Connery was in this movie. They never did this again with a casting change and I think the series is better for it.
Those are my two missed opportunities.
Yes, I agree about the dubbing though, but maybe in the context, they're doing it to have the disguise be more effective and to not have Blofeld recognize him completely, so maybe understandable, but yes, it could've been interesting to see Bond impersonating Bray's voice without the dubbing, doing it naturally, even the accent.
The callbacks, it's not as offending or insulting as the others (Tracy's grave in FYEO, OHMSS references in NTTD), but it's a bit silly though, don't mind it that much, but yes, it would've been better without it, but in concept it's made to show that Bond is a one guy and not a codename (looking at you, CR'67).
I think both decisions are reasonable at the other end of spectrum.
I think another missed opportunity that's not mentioned here is the playing of James Bond theme in the end, why to cut the Louis Armstrong theme in favor of such a bombastic song especially with that picture of bullet hole killing Tracy? Sure, there's that James Bond will return, but it just ruined the mood, it's no different to the slide whistle ruining that stunt in TMWTGG.
The same for playing the James Bond theme in the scene of Tracy fighting Gunther, it's like saying that Tracy is James Bond, it just doesn't makes sense and silly to have it played in a scene that didn't featured Bond.
I think the James Bond theme is very much misplaced in this film.
Maybe Felix Leiter appearing in Bond's wedding at the end would've been good too, especially that he made the remark in LTK about Bond's tragic marriage, yet, he's not seen in the wedding.
Also maybe include that deleting scene that shows Bunt spying on Bond in the Jewelry store while buying the ring? Because there's no explanation as to how Blofeld and Irma Bunt tracked Bond to his wedding, how did Bunt and Blofeld knew Bond was in Portugal?
He performs it better than Lazenby though.
It was a bad idea. You miss Connery.
I think they needed to do this scene with the old gadgets because it was the very first recasting, and audiences would otherwise be confused (god help me, the "code name" theory).
Speaking of Tracy, I just realized that she's somewhat similar to Bond : Bond is half-British on his father's side, and half (french) Swiss on his mother's side. Tracy is half-French on her father's side and half-British on her mother's side. I don't care what Horowitz wrote in his last novel, those two were meant for each other.