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 think a lot of people do overthink Laz's performance BUT to, his credit, he does have a physical edge to him as well as a solid supporting cast around him. I was watching DAF the other night and, to be honest, I think I would take George's underwhelming performance in OHMSS over Connery's virtually non-existant performance in DAF. The only line of his that made me smile while I was watching it was "I'm afraid its me...sorry about that old boy".
Wow, I'm defending Laz and bashing Connery :-S .
I think Connery does perform in DAF, in fact more so than YOLT, but he performs badly, playing a different Bond that he previously was and that Bond should have been after the events of the previous movie.
But a 'physical edge' isn't enough to sell the character to me. DAF Connery is still enormously charismatic and he still commands any scene he's in, despite being a tad stolid. As I've said on previous occasions, I look in Lazenby's eyes and there's just nothing going on behind them.
Lazenby wasn't horrible and had quite a few pluses--he looked great, was very fit, the fighting looked more real, less choreographed and Lazenby did have a certain vulnerability to him, like when he meets up with Tracy when she's ice skating and he tells her that she's in trouble. It also helped that everything else about OHMSS was great--the cast, the score, the plot, locations, etc.
The problem for me is that Lazenby lacks charisma and comes off as being a bit generic. Even if Dalton didn't exude charisma, he made up for it with his hard-edged take on the character. Lazenby is just sort of "blah" at times.
Connery and Dalton had done a lot of acting before playing Bond, Moore had played Simon Temple so he could just slide right into the role, same with Brosnan as he was in Remington Steele and Craig as he played a similar type character in Layer Cake.
What experience did George Lazenby have before playing Bond?
As for Connery's performance in DAF--he does look a bit bored at times, as though his heart wasn't 100 percent invested, but he still gave a fairly solid performance. He was probably just really bored with the role at that point. By comparison, I felt that Moore always gave 100 percent. Even if he was too old to play Bond in AVTAK, he took it seriously and didn't just phone it in.
You see I'm not sure I'd call Connery "enormously charasmatic" in DAF. In his earlier films I could watch him all the time. Here Jill St. John easily upstages Connery when she's walking round in her underwear.
I'm not saying Laz's performance is brilliant but I do at least sort of believe he's an athletic spy. The thing is in DAF I don't really believe Connery is still James Bond. He just seemed to be on autopilot almost the entire time. If he's not interested why should we the audience devote time to watching him? I say that as someone who loves him in the early films - especially GF.
If one has to peel the onion to the extent that you do, the so-called "political messages" are so subtle, diffuse or even illusory that one could just as easily argue that the critic is simply projecting his own fantasies upon the artifact in question. What you are doing is more make-work for critics than it is useful analysis. But yes, many (most?) films, literature and art, particularly in the modern era, are saturated with politics, much to the discredit of their respective fields and genres. Overwhelmingly, however, the Bond films are not among them.
Sometimes the political messages are subtle and sometimes they are not, but they are there. Yes, there is always a danger of reading too much into anything, but I don't feel that I have done so with the examples that I gave.
Again, I would refer you to Chapman's book, which is excellent:
http://www.amazon.com/Licence-Thrill-Cultural-History-Society/dp/1845115155
It would have been nice to see Dalton do another Bond as i think it would have been his best.
An evil corporation (SPECTRE) stealing nuclear weapons for extortion/profit is not so political, but an evil corporation (Quantum) stealing water for extortion/profit is somehow 'Leftist'? :O
Well, in keeping with the title of this thread I guess that may be controversial... :))
Also, I really like the TND PTS. It's tense, exciting, action packed and it subtly leads into the rest of the film (the encoder) while also working as a stand alone mini Bond movie (the only other film I can think of that does this is TLD, unless you count Bond going to Miami as setting up the rest of Goldfinger).
That's funny because it's my favorite part in the film XD I thought the surprise of the dude in the dress was great, and the jetpack just made me laugh happily. It was a bit stupid, but still amusing for me.
I fully agree.
The fight I'm somewhat okay with. I guess there's some spark in the editing and music but it's basically one man diving over another, or over a fallen clock, ... The joke with the flowers, which was later repeated with the grapes, doesn't stand as great comedy for me but I have no problems with it. My problems begin with the henchman firing a gun without seriously aiming it. It's a child's concept of a cowboy shoot-out.
The jetpack was indeed a cool stunt, very cool in fact, but it poses so many logistical questions. Let's assume Bouvoir's car took him from the funeral at normal speed and perhaps even via a few lovely alternative routes. Then still we are to presume that Bond flashed over there in the Aston Martin, park it where everyone can see it yet get a really heavy jetpack out the trunk and drag it, without anyone noticing, all the way up to the roof of the castle and then have time left to find himself a nice chair? By the way, anyone attending a funeral naturally anticipates the necessity of a jetpack.
The water cannons distract me quite a lot. From the looks of it, large volumes of water are hosed out. How can a sports car transport those? Or perhaps the Aston is connected to the chateau's water pipe system? That would be another technical achievement for Bond and the French lady while Bouvoir is very slowly returning home... Plus, if it's supposed to be comedic that those henchmen are faced with a wall of water, I can safely say it's not at all funny. And the transition with the opening titles is terrible. Firstly, why can't we see Bond drive off and get some kind of closure in this microstory? Secondly, how come the sound mix was done so poorly when the rest of the film does things so well?
I love TB but to be fair, the parts I love start after the opening title sequence. The PTS feels like an afterthought, something that was devised with the purpose of giving the jetpack a chance to shine.
There are often political undertones that are very carefully decided to be missed, it seems.
PK does refer QoB lefist agenda, as I understood him, because of the role the US plays in the movie, as an active partner of the baddies out of self interest. Read Solo and you'll find a similar attitude only this time aimed at the British empire.
It's tremendous. It's well scripted, acted, shot and edited. Complimented by a great bit of Arnold score. While I think the SF PTS is decent, TND shows how to pull off a cross-cutting sequence to maximum effect. I think it's genuinely superior. It helps that Brosnan, Dench, Salmon and Palmer are all damn near perfect.
I have a 'realism' agenda. That means, if it's real you can use it. I have no use for the polar spins of the left or the right.
I prefer the concepts of conservative & liberal myself.
Bond is a conservatively leaning liberal working for a liberally leaning conservative establishment. :))
As I understand him making US a baddie in itself is something lefties do. But I could be wrong in understanding him at an earlier time when he was involved in a discussion of this movie.
QOS is unique because it portrays the West in a negative light, as they are shown willing to overlook the Bolivian coup, thinking that it will be in their economic best interests. However, because they are duped by Quantum (led to believe there that there was oil) and because Beam (a corrupt CIA agent) is fired and replaced, in the end the US and UK are let off the hook.
and again, the truth is a little greyer than that IMO. And one would think that reading Fleming would make those grey areas at least a little clearer to see...
:-??
-as Largo's mistress and the sister of the murdered pilot, she's intimately relevant to the plot
-her character has some depth but they don't try to give her a dubious arc like many modern Bond girls
-she's the nicest Bond girl IMO
-she's the second most beautiful Bond girl (behind Solitaire, of course) though I feel the way she looks in the movie doesn't do her justice
I think she's often overshadowed by Volpe.
Domino is a superb Bond girl; for me easily one of the best parts of Thunderball. TB in generally had some of the most attractive ladies IMO. Some of my other favorite Bond girls include Vesper, Tracy, Solitaire, and Honey.
1- Sean Connery, while very good for 4 outings out of 6, is overrated as James Bond.
2- While I appreciate Diana Rigg play of Tracy, they could have pick a prettier woman to play the part.
3-While we're on the subject of prettier woman, Jenny "The Irish Girl" Hanley from OHMSS should have landed a bigger role, maybe that of Angela Scoular.
4-I find Dr No as slow-pace as TMWTGG
5-Please don't ever use underwater scenes in a Bond movie again, the're very dull.
6-You only live twice is the Bond movie who aged the worst.
7-DAF makes me laugh, it's the most humour-filled Bond movie.
8-They could have dumped Herve Villechaize, he's annoying.
9-Barbara Back isn't sexy. She looks rather plain to me.
10-Timothy Dalton is the best that ever was.
11-I wish Pierce Brosnan only did one Bond, the first he ever played in.
12-Marc Forster should be handed a life sentence for his horrible work on QOS.
Ok, you can pick me apart now.
:))
I'll take a stab since you asked me:
1- I assume you mean he wasn't as good in YOLT and DAF; that is agreed on, but I don't agree there's any way to overrate Connery as Bond.
2- Hmmm... I kind of get what you're saying. I loved Rigg's portrayal of Tracy, but I also don't think Mrs. Bond needs to be ultra-pretty per se.
3- Agreed; she was better in every way over Scoular IMO.
4- Given they're both fairly slow-paced, but DN works much better still; it can afford to be slow-paced and still be a good film. TMWTGG was ok, but definitely dragged sometimes.
5- Mostly agree, at least TB-wise. However I thought TSWLM had a great underwater scene with the underwater car.
6- Disagree; MR like the person above said.
7- DAF is the second-most humor-filled Bond film to me; LALD wins out there.
8- I agree he's annoying, but still entertaining to me.
9- Agreed.
10- Timothy Dalton was my least favorite Bond, so completely disagreed.
11- Brosnan wasn't the problem, it was the movies themselves. But I could still kinda see where you're coming from.
12- I find QoS to be one of the most underrated Bond films so nope.
Some agreements, some disagreements there.
1- SC is brilliant even if DAF & YOLT were lesser entries
2- Dianna Rigg was a brilliant choice as Tracy, she was the dreamgirl in those days by playing Emma Peel in the Avengers. SHe has easily more sexapeal than any orther woman in OHMSS.
3- a matter of taste and actiong skills perhaps.
4- Doctor No is a great installment
5- Underwaterscens dull? Go and dive yourself, they were by the way cutting edge when TB was released. Nobody had done something so spectaculair untill then.
6- All Bondmovies are a product of their time, as are the actors in them. And as for the pointing fingers to MR, its special effects are easily better than anything in the recent Bonds as well. The minature work is still brilliant and stands up. There is nothing dated about MR except the taste of a few critics.
7- DAF has its funny moments
8- Villechaize plays his part good as he comes across being annoying, the contra part of Scaramanga who is just a 00 without a license.
9- BB is slavic looking which is kind of the point when playing Russian. But you seem to be hung up about your own taste in women instead of enjoying teh variety offered in the 007 franchise.
10- TD is an acquired taste, but in my humble opinion a let down after the brilliant Roger Moore.
11- PB should have had one more movie after DAD, his very own FYEO as he had done the franchise a great service.
12- agreed.
Agreed on this. Whatever people's misgivings are regarding MR (and I'm not going to argue with people who dislike it) it has in no way aged worse than other films (DAF, LALD and TMWTGG would be obvious examples).
Not only do the special effects and miniatures still look great today, but the cinematography is absolutely sumptuous.
It's an absolutely brilliant score and used very very well.