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
2. NSNA
3. DAF
4. YOLT
YOLT is not that bad but It needed a rewrite. It needed to be, well, TSWLM.
Blasphemy I know
2) TB
3) DAF
purgatory
4) NSNA
I would go:
TB
YOLT
NSNA
DAF
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.
Are the credits on the 1965 film reflective on who actually worked on the script?
They forgot one thing. The star Is James Bond and not Ken Adam.
Even TB knew this.
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.
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).
1) TB
2) NSNA
3) YOLT
4) DAF
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.
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.
It's what one gets for jettisoning most of the source material and adding boat loads of camp
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.
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.
LOL! +1.
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.
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.
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