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
That would have been really great. Goldsmith is a legend and Horner is also a great composer.
It was Connery's choice to hire Legrand. But the final score turned out really terrible. One of the weakest filmscores ever.
As much as I love Barry's 007 scores, I've always been a defender of the one-off composers. It's nice to have some wildly different music in a Bond film once in a while. In my opinion of course.
Great read!
Well, was a great composer, sadly :(
Yeah, not a bad choice in prospect but I guess it doesn't always work out that way. Still, I like it when they take chances.
It was a bit silly how McClory kept trying, but y'know, I'd have watched it! :)
Absolutely, I would've too.
I'm pretty sure the jousting pre-title idea, which had Bond dressed as a knight (not a good idea!), was only in an early draft and never got close to being filmed.
It actually has some good elements to it and Connery is really good in this.
One thing that has always stood out for me though is how cheap it looks and yet it had a similar budget to Octopussy which is sumptuous in comparison.
The 'bomb' gag with the bouncer in the cupboard is great BTW.
The direction is not tight enough during the action scenes, and the soundtrack is truly dreadful. They could easily have used John Barry for this, as long as he didn't mind working on 2 Bond projects at the same time. I doubt EON had any control over Barry.
The cast is very strong, which is about the only positive I can really think of. TB is still a far better film.
TB's PTS is good as well, though as it's the PTS it is obviously very short.
MR's château is gorgeous, but they are said to be in California (which I never quite understood why).
AVTAK's château scenes are the highlight of that film but the Paris part has some embarrassing moments ("Ma caaar!!!").
I can't think of any other (maybe GE but that is technically Monaco). So in conclusion NSNA brings me in that French mood like no other 007 film. I think that's another reason why I like it that much.
Actually it was about $5 million less than OP.
No its wasn't. It's production budget was 36 million dollars compared to 27.5 million for OP
Really? That's not what I heard from people who worked on NSNA and OP. The issue crew on NSNA had was that the budget was tighter than OP's budget.
I feel like I read somewhere they did approach Barry but he stayed loyal to Eon. I might have imagined it! :)
The cast is great, I think the other positive is the script which has some great dialogue and fun scenes and does improve on Thunderball in a few places. He actually has a a more solid reason to investigate Largo/Domino in this one!
Yes that's a fair point. I like those little bits on the balcony of their villa: you can feel the late afternoon riveria sun!
https://m.the-numbers.com/movie/Never-Say-Never-Again
https://m.the-numbers.com/movie/Octopussy
Yes, I know that's reported, all I can say is that I worked with Alex De Grunwald, who was the PM/LP on NSNA, and I remember him clearly stating they had a tighter budget than OP, about $5million less. Now it's possible he was referring to the physical production budget, and not including the above-the-line talent costs, and we know Connery wasn't cheap, plus there were other heavy weight cast as well, so that may be the answer.
Still, the bits I do like...
- The title song isnt that bad. I do like the opening melody of it.
- It has some good lines in it - “My Martini’s still dry” etc.
- Barbara Carrera as Fatima Blush is great and could belong in a “proper” Bond film.
- The film acknowledges and plays a little bit with Connery being an older “00” which is novel.
Now for the bad, sadly its a long list:
- Douglas Slocombe’s cinematography is pretty poor. Which is odd considering his work for Spielberg is excellent and still holds up today easily.
- Kim Basinger may look nice but she is pretty rubbish in this.
- The fashion is awful... especially those demin dungarees that Connery wears.
- The soundtrack (title song aside) isn’t terrible but it is a very poor fit for a Bond film. Inappropriate and undermines the action, not enhance it.
- The climatic end fight is poor and the movie just sorta ends with Domino turning up and shooting Largo. No excitement or tension, a very poor imitation of the great end fight in Thunderball.
- The film is just devoid of any momentum. Thunderball is always on a ticking clock and that is really emphasised in the film but it isnt here. Everything just seems to move along at a leisurely pace.
I cant say I care much for the movie. If it is on the TV I will watch it, but its not one I would ever make an effort to put on.
I think they tried to! :) No one makes a movie intending for it to be bad.
Gosh I can't agree there: I find Thunderball extremely languid and actually pretty boring at times. NSNA runs out steam towards the end but it's never quite as dull as some of the sequences in TB. It doesn't have a tenth of its style, though.
It does look incredibly Bond on a budget. I think the soft focus and lack of flair in the cinematography doesn't help that.
Yes, it feels like a TV movie at times.
Make a financially successful one yes.
Good ones are the ones that tend to make the most money though.
yes I believe so
I'm not sure Armstrong had been on Bond films before that though? I think it may even have been one of his very first as he started out as a horse guy.