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
Guy Hamilton was back for this one and he gives us something completely different to what we saw in DAF. It could be argued that the campy era of Bond had begun with that movie but, no, he turns it around with Live And Let Die and we are treated to a decent Bond thriller.
Opening title design
Very fitting to the movie as they all are. A little shorter, as I believe that LALD is a shorter song than we’ve had before. Certainly feels that way anyway. They are good, the first woman we see certainly has that voodoo look about her, and it’s the eyes that do it. Yeah, they’re good, but I’m generally happy with most of them.
Script
Good. Tom Mankiewicz gives us a good thriller, the right amount of humour etc. I’ve read on here about the similarities to DN and, until now, I’d never actually noticed it before. A good start for Moore’s reign.
Cinematography
Some good shots but I don’t think we really see the splendour that we have seen before in, say DN or YOLT. It is well shot though.
Music
George Martin takes on the music for this and does a good job. I really enjoy his use of the Bond theme throughout, especially when 007 is introducing himself to Solitaire when they first meet. Also enjoy the use of the main theme. With regards to the title track, it’s one of my favourites. When Guns N’ Roses covered it I was very happy.
Editing
As I’ve said before, these are not subjects that I am an expert on but the movie seems very well edited and I don’t remember seeing anything that caused too much of an issue.
Costume design
This must have been a costume designers dream. The 1970’s, Harlem, New Orleans and then the exotic San Monique. Absolutely superb throughout, every looking very authentic. As for Moore, well he looks dapper in anything they put him in. I especially liked his look arriving in America; the suit, the overcoat and the leather gloves suited him to a tee. I think it’s great that, while he’s the same character, he can have a look that Connery may not have pulled off as well. Also loved the reversible suit, although, why he need to change the colour still baffles me, haha.
Sets
The underground lair is ok. After being spoilt in previous movies this could be seen as a down point. At least we get a monorail in the place, that’s a bonus point surely?
A one off George Martin score and Paul McCartney theme. As a result we have more of a rock vibe to the score, which isn't a bad thing, all things considered.
Macca delivers an instant classic as you would expect from a writer reaching the peak of his powers outside of the Beatles.
The script is most definitely sparse, and alarmingly full of those early 70s blacksploitation movie one liners ("What's happening man?" ).
When Bond is travelling through New York it seems that everyone, not just Solitaire, knows who he is and why he is there. We are never sure if it's Mr Big's people or Strutter's CIA contacts, but everyone has a walkie talkie.
Love the way Bond's line "Make your choice" falls into line with the theme music.
The cinematography is ok, but never captures the vibrancy of New Orleans or New York, which is a missed opportunity to be sure.
The groovy 70s clothes and stacked heels are on display, and get those sideburns worn by the taxi driver!
Moore's clothes are superb. His silk black shirt in New Orleans, his black polo neck (lovingly reproduced for Spectre), the long coat, leather gloves etc. He looks stylish and utterly magnificent.
There are no major sets, maybe Kananga's underground lair. But don't the rocks look a little unrealistic?
Live And Let Die is a curious Bond film. Always popular amongst the wider public it has taken up a position of being almost exempt from criticism. Roger Moore is terrific, the action is frothy but engaging. The villains are plentiful and well thought out, Bond gets to bed three lovelies, the music is great.
So why does it never hit the top of Bond fans' list? What does it lack that On Her Majesty's Secret Service and Goldfinger clearly has?
Well the script is built more around the action scenes than the other way round, the story is almost by the by and the centre piece boat chase loses impetus due to the need for some comic relief. But these criticisms are not enough to lose sight of the fact that Live And Let Die is a fun and engaging entry in this great series.
MI6Community Bondathon:
1.) DN
2.) OHMSS
3.) GF
4.) YOLT
5.) FRWL
6.) TB
7.) DAF
I have to confess that Roger Moore has never been my favorite Bond -- nor my second or even my third favorite. Consequently, unlike some of us, I’ve never been that big a booster of LALD. I can enjoy it well enough if I’m in the right mood -- but I have some fairly substantial bones to pick with this film as well.
First off: Moore himself as Bond. I’ve never really been able to see him as a dangerous fellow. Charming, sure; cultured, debonair, appealing to the ladies, no doubt. But lethal? I’ll die laughing before Moore can kill me any other way. So: while I acknowledge that Roger Moore absolutely made the role his own, I just can’t see him as a deadly guy with a license to kill. Still, if my choices are Lazenby, a man who can fight onscreen but can’t really act, or Moore, a man who can act onscreen but can’t really fight, I’ll go with Moore and hope the stunt men can do a real good job of convincing me that they’re really Roger Moore. But please: let’s not see Roger with his shirt off so often, okay? Those pipe cleaner arms of his don’t look like they’re capable of very many chin-ups. And let’s REALLY not see him threatening women anymore, alright? Sean could pull it off as easily as if he were pulling off a lady’s bikini top to use on her as a garrote; with him it works. He can charm a lady or slap her with equal ease. That route just doesn’t work for Roger. You can probably guess from these two caveats that I really don’t like TMWTGG. You’re right, but we’re getting ahead of things here.
It could be that a fair amount of my problems with this film have to do with my own expectations. I expect James Bond to look and act a certain way, that is: like Sean Connery. Okay, I’ll have to work on that particular set of expectations. But also: I come to Live And Let Die the movie expecting it to be fundamentally like Live And Let Die the novel. There’s another set of expectations that needs to be adjusted. The first time I saw this movie, I was REALLY disappointed that two of the best scenes in the novel had been excised from the film. I refer, of course, to Felix Leiter’s disagreement with something that ate him…and with Bond & Solitaire being towed through the coral reef by Mr. Big’s boat. Those incidents have since resurfaced as some of the best moments in two other Bond movies, so I suppose my expectations are somewhat mollified in this regard…but still, I would have rather had one fewer humorous chase scenes in this film (there are three by my count, and that’s one too many.) Sorry, Mrs. Bell, but if I had been the director of this film you and your potty mouth would have ended up on the cutting room floor.
This brings us to my main objection to this film: the rather childish approach to humor prevalent throughout the proceedings. Now, I can take a quipping Bond as well as anybody, and with Moore in the lead role I’m pretty much assured of a Bond who quips as often as he kisses if not more so. But this film brings the humor to cartoonish levels. Let’s take for instance one of the most impressive stunts in LALD: Bond’s escape from the island of alligators…by running across the backs of a conveniently posed pack of the beasts. I know this stunt was done by an actual human being, running across actual alligators that had been physically anchored into place…but still: this is a stunt that Bugs Bunny would have done had he been in a similar predicament. I submit to you, my friends: if James Bond has become Bugs Bunny with a Beretta then he has become a character that Ian Fleming would not recognize. But the cartoonish elements of this film don’t end here, and I’m not even talking about Mrs. Bell. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you: the death of Mr. Big -- popped like a balloon. Ha. Ha. And No. “He always DID have an inflated opinion of himself”? No, no, no. A death in this style can be done if necessary -- I refer you to the pressure locker death of the filmic Milton Krest in License to Kill -- but it should be horrific, not humorous. These are supposed to be people, not cartoon characters. Milton Krest’s death is shocking and effective. Mr. Big’s death looks like that of a Looney Tunes character…Wile E. Coyote receiving a fate he had designed for the Road Runner. Or, finally, let us consider the final scene in this movie…Baron Samedi (who had supposedly died a few scenes back, falling into a coffin filled with poisonous snakes) is perched on the front of a moving train, laughing at the camera…and fade out. SMASH CUT TO: the Looney Tunes logo. Samedi’s face crashes through the logo, just as we have seen Porky Pig do so many times. “D-d-d-d-dat’s all, Folks!” Samedi laughs uproariously. James Bond will return, in…. oh, who cares? Let me out of this theatre! If this is going to be what the next several Bond films are like, just count me out!
I am overstating the point, but I trust my point has been made. For many people, Moore is their favorite Bond. I am not one of these people. What can I say? I had a hard time with the Seventies...
BeatlesSansEarmuffs will return with a discussion of some of the things he actually LIKED about Live And Let Die.
As a result they have taken umbrage with the Moore years where the novels (especially Live And Let die and Moonraker, ) have been lost to 70s movie excess.
I tend to have no such issues, being a Bond film fan first and foremost. The films, reflecting the times they were made in, are a fascinating record of the action/adventure genre. Every 10 years or so we see massive changes.
How else would we have OHMSS in 1969, Moonraker in 1979 and Licence To Kill in 1989? What other film series could show such diverse swings like that?
And isn't it true that if we didn't have these inherent changes then the series would have died when Connery left?
Eon have always tried to bring Fleming into the films, eventually adding the sequence of Bond being dragged through the water from LALD the novel, into FYEO the film.
Plenty of ideas from the short stories have been integrated into the films as well. So where Cubby left the novels behind in order to find an audience in the late 70s, we saw plenty of respect for Fleming after that.
Either way for me, the films are my passion, especially analysing the actors who play Bond. I'm afraid Fleming never gets in the way of that in my eyes.
I do though respect Barbara Broccoli when she says that when they are stuck for ideas they go back to Fleming. They must never lose touch with that basic principal.
You are a man of taste and expertise.
I do to. The Connery films are my favourites for sure.
But what we have is what we have, and I think some people bemoan the drift away from Fleming to such an extent that they will say things like 'I'm only interested in Connery and Dalton and maybe Casino Royale. the rest I'm not interested in, and haven't watched in years'
And it does make me think that if I disliked more than 50% of a film series I would most certainly have stopped being a fan years ago.
But I do see your point
The main problem with this film and the next one, to my eyes, is that Roger and Eon were groping for the best approach to take with HIS Bond. The shadow cast by Connery was a massive one, and while the public was ready to accept Moore as Bond pretty much from the get-go (we'd had Lazenby and realized that Connery had said Never Again, so we were ready to go with Saint Moore rather than seeing the series end) the film-makers really weren't sure how exactly to play this "new" Bond. They finally found the right tone with TSWLM...but it took them a few tries to really get it right.
I try and find the good in all of them, although some are clearly harder than others :D
SP
TLD
TWINE
2 GF 10/10
3 DN 10/10
4 FRWL 10/10
5 YOLT 7/10
6 TB 6/10
I'm ok either way, but it's their thread so their call.
:-bd
If that would be no issue to some here, I think that would help me and maybe @Creas47, if he wants to post some general thoughts. A few week's back around Thanksgiving I was distracted by some family and job stuff and haven't been able to get on top of this since.
I will probably watch Golden Gun and make notes, but write it up when everyone is on a par.
I'm also conscious of Christmas coming up, although in truth that may give us more time to watch films. ;)
You need the distraction, been there myself in the past. Nothing beats a Bond film - they are like a massive comfort blanket.
I agree too @NicNac. I prefer the films you mention. But I am a massive fan of suave Moore....he is a national treasure and a British icon. He helped Bond become this too.
I must say I was wholly staggered to realize just how much I enjoyed this movie this time around. It's been years since I saw it, and remembered it being far more silly and campy than it is. There's elements of silliness, but nothing like I imagined it being from the memory of my last viewing. It's got a great noir mystery style plot with diamonds at the center, and if the finale we got was scrapped for the original idea of Bond chasing Blofeld in a sub before fighting him to the death on a salt mine, this could be a top ten contender. I far and away prefer this movie to You Only Live Twice, because Sean actually got to have interesting material to work with, his character wasn't robbed by the plot and there wasn't an obscenely bad moment that tarnished the film like Bond "going Japanese" in that film.
Most shocking (positively), I have to give this film the edge over the first Hamilton film, Goldfinger. What edges it is the mystery aspect of it, a better Bond (who acts, not reacts), superior location shooting, more interesting villain interactions, a rougher mood and style and a subtle yet satisfying hint of a revengeful 007.
Bondathon Ranking (2016-2017)
1.) From Russia With Love
2.) On Her Majesty's Secret Service
3.) Thunderball
4.) Dr. No
5.) Diamonds Are Forever
6.) Goldfinger
7.) You Only Live Twice
You mean my post?
There's few things GF does better, like costume design and maybe Bond girls (performance-wise), but I'm grasping for straws to think of more. It just gets too much wrong to stack up mightily enough to contend, especially when it was even preceded by two far more classic and perfect films in DN and FRWL.