New thoughts on Connery's last four Bond movies...

chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
edited November 15 in Bond Movies Posts: 17,835
After three incredibly impressive & relatively modestly-budgeted movies, Thunderball decided to go bigger & better, and IMO it was a hit & miss. Looked great, pacing was bad, girls were great, ending was really bad (overcranked crash & ridiculous airplane pluck from the ocean that was basically un-survivable given them being wet & in bathing suits (to say nothing of whiplash)), but it was fun.
You Only Live Twice went EVEN bigger but this time gave in to some of the 60's silly cheese excesses. Arguably the most lavishly photographed Bond ever, great girls, almost laughably OTT plot. Very fun though.
Diamonds Are Forever saw a severe budget cut, and the final helicopter attack was obviously lacking, however the witty dialogue & Barry's finest score for any Bond movie ever (IMO) made it a fine ride.
The Bond black sheep Never Say Never Again suffered by not having a Barry score, but it had a healthy budget and good FX. Pacing was uneven, but the supporting cast was fine, even if it felt like another semi-self spoof like Diamonds Are Forever.
So, my favourite list here is:
1:YOLT
2: DAF
3: NSNA
4: TB
«13456

Comments

  • Posts: 1,462
    1. TB
    2. NSNA
    3. DAF
    4. YOLT

    YOLT is not that bad but It needed a rewrite. It needed to be, well, TSWLM.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,602
    I prefer YOLT and DAF to DN/GF and TB.

    Blasphemy I know
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,264
    1) YOLT
    2) TB
    3) DAF
    purgatory
    4) NSNA
  • Posts: 28
    Very interesting question- I like Thunderball a lot more than some Bond fans nowadays, and think YOLT is let down by a wek script and Connerys bored performance.

    I would go:
    TB
    YOLT
    NSNA
    DAF
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,264
    Connery certainly looks a bit bored or shall we say frustrated in YOLT but he's still doing well most of the time. Also, the film's technical achievements more than make up for anything lacking in Connery's performance, or so I think.
  • Posts: 28
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Connery certainly looks a bit bored or shall we say frustrated in YOLT but he's still doing well most of the time. Also, the film's technical achievements more than make up for anything lacking in Connery's performance, or so I think.

    Yeah that's fair- for some reason YOLT was one of my favourites as a kid, but I've never been able to latch onto it as an adult, despite the fantastic last 30 minutes in the volcano lair.

    I think TSWLM takes the loose framework and improves on most of the elements- I think Moores more tongue in cheek performance is key to that.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,264
    TSWLM benefits from a completely relaxed Moore as opposed to a tense Connery in YOLT. Both films have tremendous sets and good villains. What makes YOLT the better film for me is its magnetic score. Hamlish did fine but he was no Barry, clearly.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,624
    YOLT looked at what made GF a hit, namely the big crazy imaginative elements, and built on them. It wasn't as slick as GF, but it was a true sequel to it. TB, I would say, didn't do that: it was a script from the 50s basically with a jet pack thrown in here and a bike with rockets there. It doesn't feel as scattergun as YOLT, but it doesn't feel like it's quite taken a breath since GF and paused to work out why folks liked it so much either.
  • Posts: 28
    mtm wrote: »
    YOLT looked at what made GF a hit, namely the big crazy imaginative elements, and built on them. It wasn't as slick as GF, but it was a true sequel to it. TB, I would say, didn't do that: it was a script from the 50s basically with a jet pack thrown in here and a bike with rockets there. It doesn't feel as scattergun as YOLT, but it doesn't feel like it's quite taken a breath since GF and paused to work out why folks liked it so much either.

    Are the credits on the 1965 film reflective on who actually worked on the script?
  • edited November 16 Posts: 1,462
    mtm wrote: »
    YOLT looked at what made GF a hit, namely the big crazy imaginative elements, and built on them. It wasn't as slick as GF, but it was a true sequel to it. TB, I would say, didn't do that: it was a script from the 50s basically with a jet pack thrown in here and a bike with rockets there. It doesn't feel as scattergun as YOLT, but it doesn't feel like it's quite taken a breath since GF and paused to work out why folks liked it so much either.

    They forgot one thing. The star Is James Bond and not Ken Adam.

    Even TB knew this.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,086
    My list is

    YOLT (but that's presently only my No. 13 overall!)
    TB
    NSNA
    DAF.

    That being said, I've always taken NSNA to be a spoof of the franchise, or at least its protagonist, rather than a regular Bond adventure, and I remember this being the overall impression from every review I read when it came out (come on, the thing with the urine sample...!). And I'd also rather rewatch both NSNA and DAF for sheer entertainment than TB, which (to say it again) has its borderline tedious stretches (too many and too long, repetitive underwater fights) and annoying scenes (e.g. the sped-up finale). But TB wins (as compared to NSNA) overall on such things as great cinematography and its Barry score, while "losing" against YOLT who has those two assets as well but is more entertaining.
  • Posts: 4,310
    1. YOLT
    2. DAF
    3. TB
    4. NSNA

    None are my favourites, but I must admit YOLT has grown on me much more recently (mainly for how well made it is, although it’s no TSWLM).
  • Posts: 7,624
    I would still rate TB above the rest, I've grown quite fond of NSNA over the years, despite hating it on first viewing. YOLT has gone down in my rankings over time, and DAF has always remained low!
    1) TB
    2) NSNA
    3) YOLT
    4) DAF
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,255
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    TSWLM benefits from a completely relaxed Moore as opposed to a tense Connery in YOLT. Both films have tremendous sets and good villains. What makes YOLT the better film for me is its magnetic score. Hamlish did fine but he was no Barry, clearly.

    The two films absolutely do share the same DNA; In an alternate universe, I would have loved to have seen a fully engaged, in shape, Connery return for "The Spy Who Loved Me". This , with the addition of a Barry score, would have taken an already great Bond film to another level.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited November 16 Posts: 17,835
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Connery certainly looks a bit bored or shall we say frustrated in YOLT but he's still doing well most of the time. Also, the film's technical achievements more than make up for anything lacking in Connery's performance, or so I think.

    Plus it has Helga. I know a lot of folks prefer Fiona, but as far as I'm concerned Helga was positively delicious. And two out of three piranhas agree with me.
  • Posts: 2,029
    Helga seems to be intended to extend Fiona, but it doesn't work me. For me there's nothing memorable or iconic about YOLT and DAF. No stand out scenes that one associates with the film. YOLT simply isn't a good script and DAF not much better.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,602
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Helga seems to be intended to extend Fiona, but it doesn't work me. For me there's nothing memorable or iconic about YOLT and DAF. No stand out scenes that one associates with the film. YOLT simply isn't a good script and DAF not much better.

    It's what one gets for jettisoning most of the source material and adding boat loads of camp
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    Posts: 699
    Remove the pre-titles sequence and all the Count Lippe stuff from Thunderball and just start off with the Vulcan being hijacked and Bond going on the mission, and you'd have a much tighter film without the false start. Terrence Young apparently left the production the moment the cameras stopped rolling and didn't oversee the editing, which explains a lot, as it's far more cumbersome than DN and FRWL. Even as it is, Thunderball is still in my top 10 for the setting, music, Bond girls, and festive atmosphere.

    YOLT takes the Bond tropes and cranks them up to 12. It's basically a comic book movie, but it's fun and lavish. DAF does the same thing, only cheaper, so there's no enjoyment in the scenery or sets. Also, Connery is not only out of shape, but out of character. There's no sense of lethality to him. DAF looks and feels like a Pink Panther movie.

    Connery was far better in NSNA, getting a lot of his swagger and poise back. Irvin Kershner's direction is also sharper, getting humor and tension out of the scenes without over-the-top gags. But tone is a problem, as sometimes the movie seems like a satire, and there's not much in the way of style. It's a better movie than DAF but I'd rather watch DAF because it's slightly more enjoyable.

    Overall ranking:

    TB
    YOLT
    DAF
    NSNA
  • Posts: 28
    slide_99 wrote: »
    Remove the pre-titles sequence and all the Count Lippe stuff from Thunderball and just start off with the Vulcan being hijacked and Bond going on the mission, and you'd have a much tighter film without the false start. Terrence Young apparently left the production the moment the cameras stopped rolling and didn't oversee the editing, which explains a lot, as it's far more cumbersome than DN and FRWL. Even as it is, Thunderball is still in my top 10 for the setting, music, Bond girls, and festive atmosphere.

    YOLT takes the Bond tropes and cranks them up to 12. It's basically a comic book movie, but it's fun and lavish. DAF does the same thing, only cheaper, so there's no enjoyment in the scenery or sets. Also, Connery is not only out of shape, but out of character. There's no sense of lethality to him. DAF looks and feels like a Pink Panther movie.

    Connery was far better in NSNA, getting a lot of his swagger and poise back. Irvin Kershner's direction is also sharper, getting humor and tension out of the scenes without over-the-top gags. But tone is a problem, as sometimes the movie seems like a satire, and there's not much in the way of style. It's a better movie than DAF but I'd rather watch DAF because it's slightly more enjoyable.

    Overall ranking:

    TB
    YOLT
    DAF
    NSNA

    Thats something I never noticed before about TB, and you're right: DN and FRWL start off with the villainous plans coming into fruition, and TB has that interlude at Shrublands before Spectres plot fully gets going.
    I guess they could've cut it out but as its based off an old film script maybe it wasn't so obvious to the writers that it should've been something that was left out, or maybe they didnt want a large chunk of the beginning without Bond like in FRWL.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited November 16 Posts: 17,835
    slide_99 wrote: »
    DAF looks and feels like a Pink Panther movie.

    Connery was far better in NSNA, getting a lot of his swagger and poise back. Irvin Kershner's direction is also sharper, getting humor and tension out of the scenes without over-the-top gags. But tone is a problem, as sometimes the movie seems like a satire, and there's not much in the way of style. It's a better movie than DAF but I'd rather watch DAF because it's slightly more enjoyable.

    Overall ranking:

    TB
    YOLT
    DAF
    NSNA
    Well, DAF is the first Bond movie I ever saw. I had no real idea what it was about, but the TV ads made it look a little science-fiction-y so I got my Mom to take me to see it in the theatre in 1971. It blew me away back then. I guess I'm always gonna rate it higher than most others here simply because it gave me the template in my head for what a Bond movie should be- witty & bizarre with a dash of realism here & there (My Mom told me as we were walking out of the theatre that real people didn't act that way, obviously referring to Bond's amorous proclivities). Later in my early teens when I saw a Bond triple feature at our local theatre I was surprised how down to Earth DN & FRWL were, but GF came through for me (A LASER! YES!).
  • Posts: 1,462
    "The false start" is quite modern. I mean, Craig's movies do it all the time.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,491
    This is an interesting idea for a thread. The last four Connery films are certainly a mixed bag in terms of tone, scope and ideas.

    TB had an un-enviable task of following up a huge hit. There is a bit of a let down here as the villains aren't as colourful, the plot is not as quick to unfold and the gadgets aren't as cool. However focusing on Connery we see an actor who is the role. He has a confidence and a charisma that jumps off the screen. A shame that we didn't get a more faithful OHMSS at this stage of Connery's arc in the character as I feel it would have really clicked. Connery does what he can, unfortunately with all the underwater action we don't see the star enough or if we do it is swimming around. I like TB and would love to see it on a big screen one day to get the full scope of the movie, but it pales in comparison to the film that came before it.

    I feel the need to defend Sir Sean in YOLT as I hear many say it's a "lazy" and "uninterested" performance. I am not sure how much of that is on Connery as the director certainly could have and should have prodded if he felt the star was phoning it in. I think the script of YOLT is what causes the performance to look uninspired. The action seems to happen to Bond. There is a lack of force or even energy to the whole plot. For all the marketing to make this appear to be the biggest Bond of all, the whole thing feels almost dream like. Doesn't help that outside of the characters the producers began to scrap the book plotlines. Dahl being told that Bond must bed three women is another indicator that this is a bit of "Bond's greatest hits" and not an engaging film.

    DAF ups the fun factor at the sacrifice of the danger that was around in the early Connery films. I give Sean credit for leaning into that fun and not trying to play it like FRWL or even GF. I would have rather had Sean in TMWTGG as I feel that script played more to his strengths as Bond. Not sure why Roger's second film feels more like a Connery Bond to me but it does. Back to DAF, Sean shows us a lighter side. The film has moments, like the elevator fight and the killing of "Blofeld" in the penthouse but these are few and far between.

    NSNA is a film where clearly Sean was invested. He has an energy to him and he has flashes of the old here. He was, or the screenwriters were, smart enough to lean into his age. We get some humour from this and we also get a Bond who embraces the smarts and downplays the physical aspects. I like the tone of Sean's performance here. The film has many things to nitpick or dislike, but Connery's performance isn't one of those things.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited November 17 Posts: 6,393
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    1) YOLT
    2) TB
    3) DAF
    purgatory
    4) NSNA

    LOL! +1.
    itsraw wrote: »
    TB has that interlude at Shrublands before Spectres plot fully gets going.
    I guess they could've cut it out but as its based off an old film script maybe it wasn't so obvious to the writers that it should've been something that was left out, or maybe they didnt want a large chunk of the beginning without Bond like in FRWL.

    While I like the Shrublands plot, this is a fascinating idea as that whole sequence tends to meander and doesn't make much sense (the double, etc.)

    What if...Shrublands was the PTS (you have to preserve the "yogurt and lemon juice" line somehow). Jacques Bouvar is Domino's brother; forget the double. Bond sees his tattoo. Bouvar stalks Bond and Bond escapes in the jet pack. Cue the titles. Then start with the Vulcan hijacking.
  • Posts: 2,029
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Helga seems to be intended to extend Fiona, but it doesn't work me. For me there's nothing memorable or iconic about YOLT and DAF. No stand out scenes that one associates with the film. YOLT simply isn't a good script and DAF not much better.

    It's what one gets for jettisoning most of the source material and adding boat loads of camp

    Indeed. There were better stories in the YOLT & DAF novels than we saw on screen. I've always thought the better films were those truer to the source material
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,835
    thedove wrote: »
    I feel the need to defend Sir Sean in YOLT as I hear many say it's a "lazy" and "uninterested" performance.
    It's a GREAT performance IMO! Laid back and near sick of the spy business. It was a perfect lead into OHMSS if he'd been enticed to continue.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,393
    CrabKey wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Helga seems to be intended to extend Fiona, but it doesn't work me. For me there's nothing memorable or iconic about YOLT and DAF. No stand out scenes that one associates with the film. YOLT simply isn't a good script and DAF not much better.

    It's what one gets for jettisoning most of the source material and adding boat loads of camp

    Indeed. There were better stories in the YOLT & DAF novels than we saw on screen. I've always thought the better films were those truer to the source material

    Only when the source material is good. While the beginning of the YOLT novel makes sense after OHMSS, the rest of that novel is rather plot-free until you get to the end. DAF has very little plot at all.

    When they got to 1970, their novel choices were DAF, LALD, TMWTGG, TSWLM, and MR. I can see why they went with DAF because American films were in vogue and blaxsploitation had not yet happened.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,602
    I'm currently doing my first read through of DAF and there's definitely aspects loosely adapted. Mud baths, Tiffany Case, Wint and Kidd implied being gay etc.

    The Spangled Mob needs to make an appearance in a future Bond film. I feel that they are the only ones who've never been adapted.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,264
    I'm currently doing my first read through of DAF and there's definitely aspects loosely adapted. Mud baths, Tiffany Case, Wint and Kidd implied being gay etc.

    The Spangled Mob needs to make an appearance in a future Bond film. I feel that they are the only ones who've never been adapted.

    You could argue that they were present at Goldfinger's meeting, even though they weren't mentioned by name.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,602
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I'm currently doing my first read through of DAF and there's definitely aspects loosely adapted. Mud baths, Tiffany Case, Wint and Kidd implied being gay etc.

    The Spangled Mob needs to make an appearance in a future Bond film. I feel that they are the only ones who've never been adapted.

    You could argue that they were present at Goldfinger's meeting, even though they weren't mentioned by name.

    Yeah but that stretches it a little
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,393
    Wasn't the Spangled Mob mentioned in GF? Or was it TMWTGG? I feel like they came up once more in the series.
Sign In or Register to comment.