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
Goldfinger and Largo are a different type of villains so Bond reacts to them differently as well.
Dr. No is wealthy but Bond recognizes that money is not his primary motivator, but rather a desire to prove his superiority despite the challenges he has faced - not so with Goldfinger and Largo.
Both men are extremely wealthy individuals who live in luxury and enjoy the good things in life, something Bond equally appreciates and can relate to.
Connery may show less overt animosity towards them but what's never in doubt is how he relishes every opportunity to upstage them, another aspect of Bond's character Connery mastered better than anyone that followed.
I always recall the quote of Connery being like a panther. Light on his feet and ready to unleash at any moment. I can see that in a lot of his performances. He elevates DAF and basically carries NSNA.
My dad probably influenced me too, telling me Connery was the Bond from the books, and Moore just wasn't Bond. He was The Saint.
And that was my experience through the 70's and 80's until Dalton came along. The `other fella' from OHMSS didn't really register with me as a child, until I saw the film properly mid 1980's. My earliest memory of OHMSS was probably late 70's, seeing the scene on TV when Lazenby escapes on the cable car wire, and saying to my Dad `who's this?'
'Dad, there's James Bond!'
'But Christian, I'm James Bond.'
'No, dad, I mean the real one!'
That yarn never gets old. Moore had a great line in self-deprecating humour, it's one of the things that was endearing about him.
On ABC in the US, the first time that OHMSS was shown on American TV, they split it into two nights, and started it mid-story, then went back and caught up. Ugh ! How could the producers have allowed such nonsense ! Please, don't ANYONE complain any more about Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson and their choices as producers !
Would they have had a say in how that was televised by ABC?
I've seen some TV airing when they put the PTS after the credit for some reason. And they really badly cut it. The result was jarring to say the least. In YOLT, you see the gunbarrel, then the space shuttle for a second, a glimpse of Bond shot, then the credit/song, the a second of the funerals, then space shuttle again and full pts, the back to funerals.
In Britain, yes, but in the U.S. and likely many other countries, they didn't sell well. The early novels had changed titles and it wasn't until President Kennedy named FRWL one of his 10 favorite books, which was around the time the films were being made and then they exploded in popularity. The character was obscure enough distributors considered releasing DN on the drive-in circuit, but somebody got the good sense to give it a proper release.
Understood, but please note that Drive-Ins back were GREAT places to enjoy a Bond film ! Seriously, though. Those rather tinny speakers ? When the Bond music blared through them it raised those speakers to the highest level of their experience ! And - BIG screen ! Screens that large would not be seen again until the IMAX theaters opened. While the IMAX theaters are known for their superb sound - and I know a lot of this is rooted in nostalgia - those drive-in speakers helped make a Bond film exciting !
Oh yeah, I agree. I meant they were going to bury the film so it didn't have a real chance at an audience. I saw LALD and FYEO the first time on a drive-in screen. Would also see rereleases and OP after I had seen it in a theater. Great memories.
DAD? TWINE? No one was more smarmy than Brozz... Connery had more presence in his little finger, than most actors have in their entire being. He carried poor films on his shoulders. Magnetic, most can't keep their eyes off of him... A genuine movie star.
Connery looked effortlessly cool and self-confident, but Brosnan’s smugness and pretty boy mannerism just plain irritate me.
If Connery's many dark one-liners were dumb in your opinion, please share which Bond actor's one-liners you preferred, and we can debate from there. His DAF comedic lines were a nice stretch, actually.
Part of the problem with Brosnan taking over as Bond was the whole born to play Bond preconceived notion. I don't disagree he was the right man to play the role at that time, but in delivering the hybrid of Connery and Moore without improving on them then he gives you what you expect and nothing more and therefore doesn't especially stand out.
He was fine, but of the other five, there are things they did that you can pick out that makes them stand out.
FRWL and GF - think of these 2 and they don't get much better.
As for versatile - have you seen The Offence? And Connery is still the only Bond to have won an Oscar.
Horrendous opinion.
You’re just singling out two of his very worst Bond films just to make your point. Connery from Dr. No to Thunderball is just unmatched by any other Bond actor period.
Agreed. And I doubt this will ever change.
Craig rivalled Connery when CR was first released, but sadly it was short lived. His tenure went downhill rapidly, cementing his legacy as probably the worst Bond of the entire franchise with NTTD.
I personally think that’s a bit of a stretch but I respect your opinion.
I wouldn’t say NTTD cements him as the worst Bond. Even his films that I despise like QOS, and Spectre, he’s been a highlight of them. But then again, I hold all of the Bond actors in high esteem.
It’s a considerably stronger performance than the ones he gave in both YOLT and DAF, but that film always puts a sour taste in my mouth due to the circumstances behind its production. It just comes across as such a cynical attempt to shove a Middle Finger in the face of Cubby Broccoli and EON, and Connery plays a huge part in that cynicism.
Yes I agree. And some of the creative choices were abysmal (song and titles over the opening action sequence, the awful soundtrack, the action sequences weren't tightly paced, etc.)
Neither were smarmy.