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 want to say: we can diverge and talk a bit as our thoughts on films take us in slightly different directions. As members post their favorites and their thoughts on those films, we may have some ideas or thoughts we'd like to share - that is really fine.
I don't want to limit discussion very strictly; I do want us to chat about these films and things that our members say - let's just stay positive, share our thoughts, yet not turn this into a main film critique time. We can diverge for a bit, then get back on topic, no problem. I think we are doing fine - thanks, everyone! :)>-
For me, I also think that The Living Daylights is a great Bond film, and I'd like to hear your thoughts on it if it is one of your favorites. I know @chrisisall and @OHMSS69 both talked about why they love it. I really enjoy that one.
But of course, feel free to discuss any other favorites you have, over the next several hours. Then I'll open the next topic and we'll move on. :)
Thanks!
That only started happening to me this past week. :(
Pitch perfect literary Bond- check
Barry Music- check
Engaging Bond girl- check
Awesome action- check
Great car- check
A laser- check
Bada*s henchman- check
Interesting villain(s)- mostly check (mileage seems to vary on this)
For now (Wed. late afternoon for me), we shall move on to our next main topic. We will stay on this topic about a week, also. But everybody is free to continue to post about their favorite Bond films at any time.
Without further adieu, now our next main topic here is :
Topic #2) Discuss a Bond Era ~ and I do want to start with the original; it just makes sense to me for us to start at the beginning of this great series.
The Sean Connery Era
Feel free to discuss all of Connery's films, or compare a couple, say what you feel makes his Bond special, what impact he had on the series, his strengths/shortcomings ... whatever you would like to say about Connery's entire era as Bond. :-bd
I know I will have some good things to say once I get home and have a bit more time ...
Well, I'll give it my best shot:
Sean's Era, Part 1 (I will finish my thoughts tomorrow on his entire era ...)
Sean Connery as Bond was:
1) the original, inventive, formidable, and soon truly iconic character we came to know as James Bond. He set the standard, gave us that personality, oozed a charisma and strength that was rarely seen on film, and convinced us. If the character of James Bond in Dr. No had not been truly convincing, real, and palpably exciting we would not have had any further Bond films. Important? Cannot be overstated.
2) solid and confident - truly, Sean oozed confidence and it was a kind of quiet confidence in the way he carried himself, the way he moved (panther like or otherwise), his tone and inflection when he spoke ... all it was masterful. And that is a powerful thing, almost like a drug. We could count on this Mr. Bond/Commander Bond. And we wanted more. And that is thanks to Sean Connery's own charisma and faith in himself as an actor. He didn't do this halfway; he went for broke in his portrayal right from the first and cemented it even further with the outstanding From Russia With Love.
3) a champion racehorse who could win on the longest tracks. Not forever, but his first three Bond films were really excellent and give us the very best of Connery's Bond, in my opinion. Three wonderful films in a row, and Sean's Bond made these three shine strong enough that, even today decades later, they are very worthwhile and memorable.
4) a trendsetter - easy to see my point: look at the spy explosion in the 60's in TV, films, and books. All the Bondmania - well, it was really something! (And may I add as a young girl growing up in the 60's/early 70's who loved all things British, between Beatlemania and Bondmania, I had my young impressionable mind quite full!). Nowadays we go back and forth discussing is this or that part of a Bond film strongly influenced by another film, but back in the day of Sean's era it was Bond setting the trends, oh yes.
To be continued ...
Meanwhile, please join me. :) You can talk about Sean's era any way you wish, bullet points, essays, hit on the highlights or lowlights, compare his films, etc. I am really looking forward to reading our members' thoughts on Connery's era during this next week.
Cheers!
Seems so much like heresy in hindsight, doesn't it?
Well, there is a lot to talk about when we look at the whole spectrum of Sean's era, because his Bond did change, the films' tone changed, and it covers how many years - ten? - in our culture. I'm probably going to do a highlights/lowlights list too, hopefully tomorrow.
DN,FRWL,GF-unsurpassed
TB-a step down,
YOLT-a further step down
DAF-huge step down
NSNA-bottom of the escalator
Still happy he did seven, was very fun to see him back as Bond in 83.
I think TB was a step down, too, maybe just a bit. I do think others disagree with us about TB, though. For me, YOLT was quite a departure, DAF was ... well when I first saw it in the threatre at age 13 or 14, I loved it and thought it was incredibly fun and exciting. I think that was just hormones overriding everything else for me at that time. ;) I always loved Sean. DAF is not in the same league as the early films, no.
But why is that? So many discussions about this elsewhere on this forum- well, I'd like for some talk about it this week. I think Sean's performance lost its keen edge, he became maybe too relaxed. I do not think he was really lazy as some say, but I don't feel the same vibes from him (there is my expert technical term!) after TB. Tired of the role? I think that probably hit him while making YOLT due to the ridiculous pressure and lack of privacy he had to endure. Yet I do not seem him just sleepwalking thru YOLT. The pizazz (yes, another highly accurate technical term) was gone, though. If somebody loves Sean's Bond more in YOLT or DAF than in FRWL, I'd like to hear from him or her (and give them some aspirin because obviously they have a fever and are not thinking clearly).
(As a small aside, this thread never counted NSNA as part of our Bond history. But it's fine to mention it, sure. We haven't counted Casino Royale 67 either. They stay outside the fold, so to speak. So I think we can talk about them, yeah, but they wouldn't count in rankings, for example. I liked Sean in NSNA, although I found fault with the film; but I loved Roger more in Octopussy in comparison.)
(I'm so glad he never said "groovy" though)
Thank heaven!
Agreed, dear sir. I'll post my, erm, review of the Connery era later.....
Sean so fit the part and defined who the gentleman agent was. His performances in DN-GF are well documented and contain so much vitality than what we got in his later films.
I always took issue with YOLT where he appears to bored and just going thru the motions. Also by this time the gadgets had taken over and had become the stars of the series. Sean was feuding with the producers by this time and feared typecasting. He was demanding a bigger payday and Cubby and Salzman took a hard line with him. They learned a hard lesson here.
Sean once said that he would not piss on the Bond producers if they were on fire. He also pointed out how these two men would have 15 million on the table between them and both are thinking; "That bugger's got half my money".
One would think that with the films raking in truckloads and Cubby and Salzman had renegotiated their deal with the studios giving them a bigger piece of pie, they could have taken care of the star. Both could have kicked in a million a piece giving Sean a two million payday and kept him happy for now. But in the late 60's no actor was seeing that kind of money--ever. Cubby insisted that Connery was paid what he was worth. He got $50,000 for YOLT-twice his DN salary...
It was a pity he never got to do OHMSS, a film that would have given him the chance to do some real acting and not just play second fiddle to the gadgets.
EON would meet Moore's demands for more money, they took care of Dalton and Brosnan, a very popular Bond was well compensated.
The studio stepped in and coughed up the hard cash for DAF and though Sean seemed to be enjoying himself more, he was just happy to do his part and get the hell out of there.
It was sad to see Sean, the greatest Bond of them all, end on such a low note as DAF. The movie is cheap looking, full of camp, shit humor.
Looking back a few posts, thanks @Thunderfinger for your thought about Gilbert saying that Connery was Bond and not needing direction. That makes me think twice about it; that probably did contribute to the lessening of his performance.
@Sandy and @chrisisall - I never said "groovy" even though I was in the midst of those time - ha! I do remember saying "far out" a bit, though. Hmmm. :)>- And I danced like a combination of Goldie Hawn or Joey Heatherton (depending upon my mood).
And keep in mind, everyone, that you are still welcome to make comments on the favorite Bond films already mentioned and to talk about some of your own favorite Bond films - that is still welcome, as it won't seriously derail our current topic. So yes, @royale65 and others, please chime in as we go along. Thanks!
@OHMSS69, you made some good points about the Sean Connery era. The gadgets did become bigger and bigger by YOLT. By the way, Elizabeth Taylor was paid one million dollars for Cleopatra, so you would think that paying Connery more for his by then wildly popular and iconic character that he embodied so well on the screen would be justified. :-? I guess that is one Scot you just don't want to make mad! I feel that it really hurt the series losing Sean at that time.
First we lost him because he lost his own passion for the role, for personally wanting to improve his performance. And that is one letdown. Secondly, we lost him for future films - most notably, as you mentioned, OHMSS. For me, that is the biggest disappointment of the entire series - that Sean did not make OHMSS. =(( Because if he were fully excited by that and gave it his all, it would have been perfection. (I put Dalton not getting a third film as my close 2nd most crushing disappointment with the series.)
I will list more of my thoughts on the entire Connery era later today. Thanks for joining us as we talk about the Sean Connery Era!
OHMSS
This film is one of a kind for many reasons. The choice of Lazenby to assume the role Connery had made his own was risky to say the least. Let's be honest, Lazenby is not a great actor, we might even discuss if he was an actor at all. That's why it's even more impressive what this film achieved. Based on the wonderful novel by Fleming it gives us an essential Bond adventure, stripped from most non-sense that was starting to show up in the series. I love almost everything in this film: the soundtrack is brilliant, the photography superb, the locations are amazing, from my beloved home country Portugal to the high peaks of Switzerland. Telly Savalas is unbeatable as Blofeld, along with an amazing cast that fleshes out the characters we know from the book perfectly. Diana Rigg is superb to say the least, so beautiful and so talented, she made Tracy a true icon. There are, of course, some flaws with the film but as a whole it is a top entry for me.
SF
Just like OHMSS, SF is also one of a kind (I'm starting to see a pattern here), and again it is an entry that leads us through uncharted waters in the Bond franchise. It is a deeply personal story that gives us different sides of Bond but still is able to give us a classic entry. I love so many things about the film! The acting is outstanding, te direction spotless, the title song emotional, the photography... do I need to say it's looks bloody brilliant? The story is simple and we might scratch our heads at a couple of things but that is not what is important here. We have Bond as the (and I'll borrow Holmes this one) "one fixed point in a changing age" and isn't that what we like? Even if everything changes Bond remains the same. Mendes and Co. carefully avoided clichés by detaching Bond from his own history, he is a man of action not a philosopher, he is resilient, he never quits, he survives. It is a complex film of great simplicity, the more I watch it the more layers I find. An instant classic!
I find too many flaws with OHMSS for it to be a favorite of mine, but I do respect that many many folks on this forum love this film and it is a top favorite for a lot of Bond fans. Telly was a genuinely menacing Blofeld and I thought Diana Rigg was perfection as Tracy. That story had such a tragic ending, it was always going to be tricky to pull it off. And it really left viewers leave the theatre on such a down note. Poor Lazenby, his first film and he gets one with that downer ending. I do love the snow scenes in the film, too. (Hoping for snow in Bond 24!)
Skyfall is one of my favorites, and I gave so much detail in my earlier review on this thread. Let me just say I do agree heartily with what you said, Sandy. I especially love this: your saying Bond is the "one fixed point in a changing age" and isn't that what we like? Even if everything changes Bond remains the same. Yes, that is true. He embodied that part of the Tennyson poem, didn't he? (To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield) and that reminds me of how much I loved the way this film was shot. Such great scenes, superbly photographed, some now (for me at least) iconic shots - yes, for me it is a classic Bond film. It can stand alone. I find many layers of meaning, and I can enjoy watching it over and over again. Excellent from the PTS to the final shot. Thanks, Sandy, for that lovely reminder.
I am glad to see a kindred spirit who ranks OHMSS at the top of the food chain. Though Lazenby is no Connery, he does just fine in the action scenes and the love scenes. He and Diana Rigg do have great chemistry on screen.
As for the down beat ending, I think that is what helped to make this film a cult classic.
I have not mentioned my second favorite and since we have moved on to our second topic , I would just like to say that as for my second favorite film, I fluctuate between CR, LTK, and SF.
I think the downbeat ending hurt the film's overall chances because it ended right there, with her dying. Nothing else afterwards. Just how I felt; it was depressing. I do appreciate that for others it is the perfect ending: it fits the novel, doesn't it?
Watch one right after OHMSS? I sugest the next film in the series, DAF
Guaranteed to make you appreciate the supreb film OHMSS is.
And let us not forget about the man himself. Without Sean Connery it's very unlikely that Bond would go on to be the cultural phenomenon that he is today. He captured the hearts of millions including (eventually) Ian Fleming, who made sure to include that Bond was of Scottish heritage in OHMSS. Every actor who followed him had nothing but the utmost respect for his portrayal of the character and was inspired by him in some way.
I would also like to show some appreciation for John Barry. His amazing music added something so vital to these films that it really can't be put into words. The scores that he created for the Connery era (OHMSS included) are probably the best collection of music set to film in cinematic history. Yes, I'm obviously biased so take it for what it's worth.
Included with this bunch is a little gem called OHMSS. For years it was the most controversial Bond film but time has been very kind to it. So many now sing it's praises that some people even claim that Lazenby was great in the role. Well, I can't quite go that far but I do think that it's the most unique film in the whole series and is one of my absolute favorites. I'll never forget seeing that ending for the first time. Positively shocking.
On Her Majesty's Secret Service
This again stays close to Flemings source material, but is also a great piece of cinema in it's own right. New boy Lazenby does a creditable job considering it was his first acting gig. For me this is Bond, great theme (who needs someone belting out some dodgy lyrics with music this good?!), brilliant action (love the snow scenes), great story and a fantastic supporting cast, some dodgy over-dubbing, a fistful of lovelies, wonderful locations, brilliant cinematography, a truly excellent Bond girl and the most down-beat ending to a Bond ever.
Former editor Peter Hunt does a excellent job directing and I wish he had done more (oh for DAF with Lazenby and Hunt…). A film with lots of guts. True classic. If you like this film read Charles Helfenstein's brilliant making-of book.
Pachazo, I like your points about Sean's era "covering all the bases" that is quite true - and the Barry music being such an important part of his films. Barry indelibly stamped this series with his lovely and unique music, great soundtrack throughout the films, and helped make James Bond even more iconic. I adore Barry's scores.
Lancaster007, I really enjoy reading about peoples' favorites and you summed on OHMSS very well. I will give it another go sometime in March. And I do want to get that "making of " book sometime this year.
Again, I say I would have loved for Sean to have played Bond in OHMSS; it would have been better served and could have been his masterpiece (although FRWL is near perfect for me).
Sean Connery's era - my part 2 will be posted some time today.
Briefly, I'd like to list some of my highlights/lowlights of Sean's films:
Highlights ~
Dr. No - especially the intro scene in the casino, but also the entire performance, bringing us this splendid new character with such strong presence
FRWL - the whole movie was great and Sean was outstanding, never better
GF - taking the spy world to a new level, more fanciful and colorful, Sean is in fine form
TB - his chemistry with Fiona sizzles white hot and his performance, though a tiny step down for me, is confident and serves the film well
DAF - perhaps only two really good moments for me: one is the beginning of the film especially the fight with Franks in the elevator; and at the very end when he "smells a rat" and disposes of Wint and Kidd.
YOLT - still trying to think of a highlight ... hmmm, not there yet.
Lowlights ~
DAF - His Bond segued into Bond Big Mac, or Bond-Lite a bit too far for my tastes. He seemed to be having a bit of fun with the film, but gone was any sense of strong gravitas or edge to Bond (at least for me). He was almost sort of making fun of himself/Bond a bit, and that does not sit well with me. I did not like the way he treated/acted about Plenty and his sparring with Tiffany was just okay (I think Jill and Sean did have some chemistry, though). As a teen, seeing it for the first time in the threatre, I was dazzled and thought it exciting and great fun. On previous viewings, it lost its glamour and fun for me quickly. Especially comparing it to Sean's earlier films. I don't like Sean in the campy mode at all; it does not suit him.
YOLT - A rather okay, at times bloated feeling performance from Sean. Not sharp, although I liked his camaraderie with Tiger. I don't know the right words, most people say he was "tired" in his performance. I don't find great fault with him here, but it is lackluster for sure. I found some of the story stupid and annoying, but that is not Sean's fault. We get Bond in beautiful Japan, which could have been exciting and dramatic ... yet it feels like his mind and heart are on Scotland, a golf course, and a nice hot toddy.
OK, that's my bit for now. Looking forward to reading more of your opinions and thoughts regarding the entire Sean Connery Era.
Cheers!
As for the lows, I never understood the decision to "lighten up the series and poke fun at the James Bond character" that EON choose. The subject is heavily debated among "originals" but it turned out to be the right choice financially. DAF made a lot of money and paved the way for the tongue in cheek of Roger Moore's films.
Back to DAF, I remember sitting in the theater just shaking my head while the audience around me just roared. They could not get enough of the vaudeville duo of Kidd and Wint, the crazy car chase on the Vegas strip just to name a few.
At the time we thought it was good to see him back in the fold but what we got was a mockery of his former greatness. He is overweight, bushy eyebrows not trimmed, and wearing a bad fitting toupee.
Maybe he had outgrown the role, but DAF was a poor finale to the original and the greatest Bond actor.
The only highlights I can come up with in YOLT
1. The romance and chemistry that Sean had with Aki
2. The fight with the driver at Osato's plant
3. The fight with Hans
Aside from those performances, YOLT suffers badly from the overblown plot and Sean's overweight, tired, and bored look throughout much of the film.