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 agree with that as well. After my recent viewing I have to say it shot up my rankings quite a bit, I wouldn't say I'd prefer it to Goldfinger, but on par with YOLT if not slightly higher. What worked for me in the film was its plot, I always loved the idea that Willard Whyte was basically Howard Hughes, the whole plot for the film is certainty one of the best and most original in the entire series, and on top of that, John Barry's score is phenomenal. Manhunt is probably my favorite track from it, the way the film opens with that kickass Gunbarrel theme, then straight into the action. In your review, you brought up a very good point that even though no reference to the previous film is made, you still get a sense of what is going on, and what Bond's motives are in the pre title sequence. I have to say, kudos for discovering so much more in this film than what meets the eye, and kudos for helping me appreciate this film even more! Any plans for a review of LALD anytime soon? I'll certainly be looking forward too it!
His appearance was one of my problems with the film as well. I would actually argue that Roger Moore looked better in his later films than Connery does here to be honest.
I know that if we asked Sean, he'd probably say DAF was the most fun he had on set. He finally felt like he was being paid the way he should've all along for his dramatic impact with the character (likely increasing his interest in the project), and he got to enjoy the sights and recreation of Vegas all day and night throughout shooting. Because he was happy, he didn't look miserable on screen, which is a visible change. He's not the Bond of his early films, but he's not YOLT or GF Bond either, and that's a big win for me. I think he shows less contempt to the audience because he actually cared that time, and you could see he felt motivated to do the job. Of course it was for the money, but it's not like he blew his paycheck on selfish things. He single-handedly funded a trust to help his native land reform and improve its education for people who needed a helping hand to get started in their careers, a charity which he donated every penny of that salary to. That's not the act of a selfish or contemptible man.
It's why I can't criticize Roger for anything he does, even though his Bond often isn't my thing. He's used his profile, fame and wealth gained from Bond to be a citizen of the world and help a staggering amount of people since he retired the role.
I sometimes get the impression that Connery let himself go somewhat after 1967. He must've figured that he isn't the face of a giant blockbuster franchise anymore, so why should he feel the need to keep himself looking that way.
@007ClassicBondFan, our Bondathon is in its last days and we've reached SP, so I will very soon be heading back to get the films I didn't extensively review. I'm going to post all the remaining blogs I haven't shared on my blog yet (TB, YOLT, OHMSS and DAF), then I'll move on to LALD and do the rest of the films in order, stopping to do full reviews with all the bells and whistles one at a time. So LALD will be coming very soon, the soonest of all the rest at least.
I look forward to going back to the Moore films, hoping to find new things to appreciate, and giving a great look at what they do as movies beyond their surface entertainment.
I appreciate the support and interest, as always! I write them only for the fans who "get" why the movies matter so much.
I look forward to reading it! I like reading your reviews, as not only is it always nice to see other people's opinions and thoughts on these films, but the amount of attention paid to details in your reviews. You manage to go through each film like a fine tooth comb, and I absolutely enjoy reading it. Keep up the good work!
I was looking forward to seeing this entry again, as it's one of my least watched Connery films. It went ok, but I continue to believe that this is his weakest effort. Growing up I used think much more highly of it, but these days I find it increasingly slow and tedious. As others have mentioned, it tends to grind to a halt after the Little Nellie sequence, just about the time Connery goes Japanese. From there to the end it sort of plods along, and while the big reveal of the volcano lair occurs during this period as well and is quite impressive in visual scale, it's not enough to spur my continued interest. Having said that there's still a lot to like, most notably the earlier 1/2 of the film which is very atmospheric & scenic, with some wonderful scenes in Japan. There is a lot of obvious green screen in this film though, which is quite apparent in blu ray format. Understandable given the time, but jarring nevertheless.
I actually think Connery is in excellent form in the earlier section of the film, although he does lack the killer demeanour that he so readily showcases in the three Young directed efforts. Tetsuro Tamba's Tanaka is a great ally & Akiko Wakabayashi's Aki a worthy female companion, who gets him out of a tough bind at Osato's HQ more than once. Karin Dor's Brandt is a classic Spectre female operative but sadly the same can't be said of Donald Pleasance's Blofeld, who must rank as one of the most disappointing reveals and villain performances in Bond history, despite being one of the most iconic (thanks in no small part to Austin Powers). John Barry and Ken Adam exceed themselves with score and set design respectively and altogether it's a fine effort, but Connery was probably wise to step down after this - he obviously had lost a few steps. His time away allowed him to come back reinvigorated (if a little chubbier) four years later.
I must read your blog review when it's done.
I guess a lot of people get off to a bad start with DAF, in that they are looking for a follow on from OHMSS. It was easy for me, DAF was the first Bond I saw, and I just enjoyed it with no idea about what had gone on before. It's a bit of a weird mix of romp and noir, but TM's script has so many zingers.
I love the double meaning of Bond's "holiday" being "'satisfying".
That's pretty much what I think they were doing. Forget OHMSS and move on.
Along with Connery's first three, Roger Moore's first two outings are also films in the series that I revisit quite often, and also like how Connery's first three were more unique the rest of his tenure, so does Moore's. Now, this isn't to say these two films are my favorites of his, as I actually prefer TSWLM, FYEO, and OP. However, the way the filmmakers portray Moore as Bond here is just fascinating. Moore seems very harder edged in these two films, especially in TMWTGG. However, his signature playboy manner is still here. His performance in TMWTGG reminds me of Connery in Dr. No, in the sense that this guy doesn't give a damn about anything else but getting the job done, even if it means being a cold hearted Bastard.
@vzok, I'll add you to the list and PM you when I've reached that stage with the blog.
Rewatching it and really examining it, I found a lot there to support DAF as a sequel to OHMSS in the subtext of what is going on, ie. Bond on a mad search, M allowing him to take leave for a vendetta, Bond's sadistic pleasure at seeing "Blofeld" die, etc.
You're right to compare it with a noir too. I got a lot of mileage out of that aspect of the script in supporting my points. It also has a lot of double meaning, as you say. Almost every character has a motive to hide from Bond when he reaches Vegas, playing detective following the scent of the mystery. I also love the fake out of Willard Whyte with Blofeld behind it all, and think the idea to give him multiple doubles is one of the all-time most well executed twists in the franchise. It's a damn clever script.
Great review, @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7
It's took me a while to read it all as I was really busy this week.
Very in-depth indeed and you make some interesting observations. You are a little bit generous to certain aspects that didn't really deserve such scrutiny, but a great read nevertheless.
Now that DAF has risen in my estimation i'll need another Bond film propping up my ratings list..
I agree that at times I probably made leaps most wouldn't while watching it, but there were parts of the review during which I tried to make a case of DAF being a continuation of OHMSS, using the PTS and some of Bond's moments with M and Blofeld to back it up, as well as other details. I do think a lot is there to connect to OHMSS, either by accident or in planning, and I tried to argue for a lot of the latter in that regard.
If the writing made people want to revisit the movie and see what connections they could make, then I consider the piece a success. Many thanks, again.
You could take it that way. I see it as a nice admission on Blofeld's part, saying "You've cocked up all my operations in the past few years and I hate you for it, but I respect your skill and resourcefulness." Much like how Dr. No wishes to recruit Bond to SPECTRE because he'd ruined all his plans and shown his abilities.
The hotel meeting in DAF really is a special Bond/Blofeld scene for me, a franchise high. The two know they must tussle at some point, but Blofeld takes a minute to compliment Bond on his aptitude as an agent just as Bond compliments him on the genius of his plan. For it to cap off with the nice powerplay of Bond's to use the cat to find the proper Blofeld is just genius, as is the countermove Blofeld has already made by having double cats as well as doubles of himself. It's such a well written, shot and played scene.
These two films I say are the peak of the "Over The Top" Bond films. While TSWLM sits right at #6 in my Bond rankings, Moonraker, despite being a guilty pleasure, sits in the bottom 5. Moore's performance is pretty consistent throughout both films. All leftover trademarks of the Connery Bond that slipped into LALD and TMWTGG are now gone, we have Moore's Bond here at his peak in my opinion. The villains for both films are satisfying to say the least, what makes the movies stand out from a villain perspective is the appearance of Jaws in both films. Watching TSWLM with a friend of mine, who isn't a Bond fan at all, he said that Jaws was quite a scary character. But Moonraker, which I viewed alone, the creepiness and menace of the character has vanished, replaced by a goofy idiot who falls in love with a girl and becomes a good guy. The girls seem to be quite boring, monotone, and generic, and I believe you will never find a better example of this than in Moonraker, where every single girl that appears in the film is monotone, and boring, with nothing to offer other than their looks. Those gripes aside, both films manage to entertain, and represent Roger Moore at his best.
I don't agree that Moore's performance is the same in both however. He is far more serious in TSWLM (even more so than in parts of TMWTGG), although there is the occasional humour, mainly with Anya. In MR however, he is in full on Rog mode. I enjoy both films immensely, and Moore's approach is perfect for the tone of both films in my view.
Some of the acting is bad, mostly the american actors. The girls look great but they are some of the culprits i think when it comes to bad acting.
TLD is much better of the Tim films......
And this is on of my main reasons for detesting DAF. Gone is that lethal edge that Connery had in FRWL, instead he looked like a sweaty middle aged second hand care dealer. To think we missed out on a revenge themed follow on from OHMSS, for... that.
Yes, as I stated in another thread, that film had to happen, no matter how many of us wanted OHMSS Pt. 2. It was a very clear act of self-preservation on EON's part, getting their sure-fire star back, recreating some of the Goldfinger magic, setting the story in the very country the last one under-performed to engage audiences, etc. They knew what they were doing, for better or worse, and we may have the film to thank for being here now.
I have found a way to appreciate DAF as a film of its own worth, and I call that a success.
DAF is definitely a worthy end for Sean, far better than YOLT for me, which concludes very limply after a promising first half. There's not much in YOLT I'd include in the best of Connery, but in DAF I would add the Franks fight, the Blofeld meeting in the Whyte House, the great car chase through Vegas and the overall noir mood of the movie. If the film didn't fit as a semi-sequel to OHMSS you could watch DAF as a film depicting an older Bond finally catching up with Blofeld to end him once and for all. A lot of the film backs this up, as even Felix feels older and more weary. It comes off as an older Bond venturing once more towards his enemy.
We also get to see Sean's Bond be a detective again, which we only saw to truly great effect in Young's movies. He comes off as a Spade/Marlowe type throughout, brushing shoulders with scheming smugglers and tight-lipped dames during the very labyrinthine plot of heavy connections and red herrings that are trademarks of the noir genre. This aspect of the movie really does it for me (they are my favorite films), and Sean plays that private dick type well.
Thats why you saw a 36 million increase in box office between OHMSS and DAF.