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
Mediocre. I could just leave with that and all would be well, haha! Truthfully so, NSNA is just flat mediocre. It's not horrible, and certainly not boring, but let's face it, the producers/directors bet too much on Sean Connery and the Thunderball re-make story. You've got to have more than that, which they didn't. Sloppy soundtrack, cheesy characters, and terribly lacking in plot substance. Granted, the plot is pretty simple, but I mean Thunderball did it better, with only a novel to go on! NSNA had a novel and a movie to work with, and still didn't get the job done properly enough. The villains were rather middle-of-the-road also; Fatima was a good throwback to Fiona and a nice prelude to Xenia, but at times, she was exceptionally bothersome, and I couldn't wait for 007 to blow her up, just so she could get off the screen! Max Largo was a very poor substitute for Emilio Largo, and definitely not half as menacing, just more along the lines of foolish. It's funny though, his high insanity level is more than likely the inspiration for the next Bond main villain of the same first name, Max Zorin. Well, they did better the second time on that note. Anyways, it's good this one is unofficial, so that we can choose whether to include it or not, because it is, as I said before, mediocre.
Note: not bothering to rank it, because it is unofficial
While it is in my lower ranks, I enjoyed it this time. Moore does the Job despite his age, but I think he looks fine most of the time. It's Okay. I didn't love it or hate it, but I enjoyed it. It's a guilty pleasure I guess.
6 out of 10
I felt the same, if you read my recent review.
I did, funny how things work out. :)
You Only Live Twice from the Bond 50 blu-ray set.
You Only Live Twice is a film that better exists in your memory. Prior to this viewing, I thought You Only Live Twice as a somewhat flawed but more than solid Bond adventure. Upon watching it tonight, however, I've realized that this film is about as all-over-the-place as you can get. You Only Live Twice reaches some highs, but sees a good deal of lows.
For starters, compare the 'YOLT Sean Connery' to the 'Dr. No Sean Connery' (or the Sean Connery of FRWL, GF and TB). After watching the first five Bond films in five days, I can tell you that the difference is astonishing. It is a cliche on these forums to classify Sean Connery's performance in YOLT as 'tired', but it is true. Most of his charm is gone in You Only Live Twice. Apart from the great fight in Osato's office, and a couple of zingers (mostly with or concerning Helga Brandt), Connery is on autopilot. I'm not going to say that I dislike his performance in You Only Live Twice, but after having four stellar turns as James Bond, Connery's YOLT performance is disappointing.
You Only Live Twice's supporting cast features a couple of strong players, but it is generally unremarkable. Tiger Tanaka makes for a good Bond ally, and while not being as effective as Thunderball's femme fatale, the villainous Helga Brandt is more than solid. The two other Bond girls are forgettable, however. Aki's only real strong scene is her death, and Kissy (who isn't even mentioned by name until the end credits) might just be the most uninteresting Bond girl there is. I don't mind Donald Pleasance as Blofeld, but after all of the hype that came from Thunderball and From Russia With Love, I couldn't help but feel let down.
The film feels too much like a travelogue at times, and it shows just a little too much of the Japanese culture than it should (although I realize in 1967, this was probably not the case). That being said, the duo of Freddie Young's cinematography and Ken Adam's production design makes for some of the best visuals in all of Bond. All of Adam's sets, from Henderson's Japanese home to the dazzling underground volcano are just magnificent. The money definitely showed on the screen. Now for the bad visuals - the special effects. Minus the believable pre-titles sequence in space, I have a hard time believing YOLT's special effects were ever convincing. The two biggest offenders are the helicopter battle (good idea, poor execution) and the SPECTRE rocket re-entering the Earth's atmosphere (looks like something out of a terrible 1950's 'B' movie). You Only Live Twice offers a very valuable lesson in filmmaking: if you can't pull it off convincingly, don't bother doing it. A lot of movies made nowadays should heed this advice.
I feel that the filmmakers' excessive efforts put into the beautiful sets was to counteract You Only Live Twice's preposterous and nonsensical plot. Extremely important plot points are throwaway lines; Tiger says to Bond, "Bad news from outer-space," to which Bond says (rather flippantly thanks to Connery's non-motivation), "Yes, I heard, now the Soviets are blaming the Americans." Tiger then says, "Next time it will be war." If you're not paying attention, you've missed it. When the characters don't even seem to care about the world ending, it is hard for the audience to care. Then Blofeld says something about, "seeing a new power dominating the world." What was that you say, Blofeld? The entire motivation behind the rocket eating spacecraft was a SPECTRE new world order? It doesn't matter, nobody ever mentions it again. Whatever, let's just get to the gunfight.
If Thunderball wore a little thin, then You Only Live Twice is a three foot wire stretched across a football field. The filmmakers didn't know where to stop, and a lot of the film turns out to be only a couple steps away from a complete mess. John Barry's score, Ken Adam's sets and the classic feel of the 1960s almost makes you believe that You Only Live Twice should share a shelf with Connery's first four Bond films, but upon further inspection, it really doesn't.
1. From Russia With Love (1963) - 9.5/10
2. Goldfinger (1964) - 9/10
3. Dr. No (1962) - 8.5/10
4. Thunderball (1965) - 8/10
5. You Only Live Twice (1967) - 6/10
James Bond (and my reviews) will return with...On Her Majesty's Secret Service (and I'm looking forward to it).
Magnificent, excellent, stupendous, amazing, superior, exceptional, wonderful! If there are any more adjectives out there, which there obviously are, they also apply to Roger's last Bond outing! What an outing it is! Max Zorin, Roger Moore, Roger Moore's one-liners, the PTS, May Day's executions, Stacey Sutton (attractiveness), Barry's epic soundtrack, the grand climax with May Day and the bomb, and Zorin vs. Bond on the Golden Gate Bridge, just too much greatness for one movie! The critics of AVTAK need to check it again, because there are not enough flaws to out-weigh all the positives!
Bondathon Ranking:
1. A View to a Kill
2. For Your Eyes Only
3. From Russia with Love
4. Octopussy
5. Live and Let Die
6. The Man with the Golden Gun
7. The Spy Who Loved Me
8. Thunderball
9. Diamonds Are Forever
10. Moonraker
11. Dr. No
12. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
13. You Only Live Twice
14. Goldfinger
Terrific film...only downside is Stacey Sutton's voice!
I agree with you! I find it funny every time how in the elevator fire scene, she screams "James!" at least one thousand times, with each one getting successfully louder until I'm surprised that Roger does turn around and yell "Can it! I said I'd be right back!"
He looks bored in YOLT i'll give you that. DAF? There's a tigerish aspect to his performance and in it, I think he gives one of his best performances (after TB and mayb, just maybe, FRWL)
<center>but unfortunately he looked like this
When he used to look like this
That's one reason I wouldn't pick DAF as someone's intro to Connery's Bond
What's wrong with him there?? DAF is a great film with a great bond performance by Connery. He looks and was physically fit for the part. He looks fitter and better than he did in YOLT for sure.
But I still say neither would be a good choice to show to a 'OO7 noob'
For Connery, I'd pick either FRWL or TB. For Moore, I'd pick LALD or TSWLM. For Dalton, I'd pick LTK because of its less complicated plot; wouldn't want to scare off new-comers with a more complex, intricate plot. For Brosnan, I'd definitely pick GE. For Craig, I'd pick CR since QoS is its direct follow-up.
I wouldn't touch any of the Blofeld trilogy just because I would hope an appearance in FRWL/TB would want them knowing who the man with the cat it
@00Beast spot on choices, esp with the Moore films.
On Her Majesty's Secret Service from the Bond 50 blu-ray set.
What a difference one film makes. By 1967, James Bond (while very successful monetarily) was beginning to become a noticeably tired franchise. You Only Live Twice had pushed the series further than it could go when it came to decent story telling and believability, and the producers rightfully realized that it was time to turn the films around. The result is On Her Majesty's Secret Service, a truly superior James Bond adventure.
In order to enjoy OHMSS, you must try and accept the fact that George Lazenby is James Bond. There are some folks I know (and some of you on this forum) who simply cannot do that. I cannot force anyone to change their opinion, but I personally believe that Lazenby makes for a decent 007 most of the time. His performance may be a little uneven at times, but when Lazenby is on his game, he is just about as convincing as you can get. I've always wondered if OHMSS was roughly shot in chronological order because as the film moves on, Lazenby improves. Oddly enough, his worst scene (performance wise) is the very first one he's in. "Bond, James Bond" is bizarrely delivered, and while I do love the line, "This never happened to the other fella," I could see how it wouldn't be someone else's cup of tea. (Interestingly, the second time Lazenby utters "Bond, James Bond," he is spot on.)
Then there is the final scene of the film, which Lazenby totally nails. It is not only Lazenby and the film's finest moment, but one of the best filmic James Bond moments ever. As a matter of fact - and I may offend some of you with this - I'm almost 100% sure that Lazenby sold this scene better than Sean Connery would have. If Connery's YOLT performance is anything to go by, I'd rather have had Lazenby in that car crying over his dead wife as opposed to Connery. (Perhaps an earlier Connery would have done better.)
The supporting cast is extremely strong. For some reason, Draco has always reminded me of Kerim Bay both in the way he looks and the way he presents himself (that is a good thing), and Telly Savalas' portrayal of Blofeld is my personal favorite. Then there is Diana Rigg, who is surely one of, if not THE best Bond girl of the series. She is enigmatic, feisty and proves to be just the perfect girl for James Bond. Diana Rigg interpreted her character in the perfect way, and the features Tracy has makes her final scene even more tragic.
On Her Majesty's Secret Service's plot is quite psychedelic; Blofeld is using very eccentric hypnosis methods to brainwash beautiful girls into spreading a virus which is to make all livestock infertile. And oh, he's demanding a lot of money. If it sounds a little wacky, it is. But the scheme actually is quite ingenious as no one would likely see it coming. Blofeld's plot is slightly eerie, and it is far more convincing that You Only Live Twice's SPECTRE new world order, or whatever the hell that film was about.
John Barry's score deserves a paragraph of its own, it is that fantastic. The use of a non-vocal main title was likely a risk in 1969 (especially after GF, TB and YOLT), but when paired with Maurice Binder's title work, the result is pure magic. The 'Sir Hillary's Night Out' track (when Bond is sneaking around Piz Gloria after he escapes the cable car room) is the most hauntingly beautiful track of the entire series. Both the Louis Armstrong version and the instrumental version of "We Have All the Time in the World" is wonderfully warm, and the action cues are heroically splendid. John Barry proved with On Her Majesty's Secret Service that he was the outright master of scoring these films. May that man rest in peace.
Now, for the minor quibbles. As On Her Majesty's Secret Service was George Lazenby's first Bond film, I feel the decision to extensively dub his voice with Sir Hillary's was a mistake. If Blofeld did not recognize Bond's appearance, I don't think Bond's real voice would have been a giveaway. Secondly, the editing of OHMSS is occasionally questionable. There is no doubt that the cinematography is stunning, but some of the fights employ the use of extremely harsh looking jump cuts that can be distracting. Also related to editing, there is a moment during the Piz Gloria gunfight where one of Draco's helicopters magically appears out of thin air! Maybe they just didn't get every shot they needed.
Overall, however, OHMSS is a clear improvement over its predecessor and a large breath of fresh air for the franchise. George Lazenby deserved at least one more Bond film (if not more) to wrap up his story, that is for sure. He and the film were unfairly judged in 1969 for not being like Sean Connery, but I'm happy to see many contemporary reviews giving On Her Majesty's Secret Service the credit it deserves.
1. From Russia With Love (1963) - 9.5/10
2. Goldfinger (1964) - 9/10
3. Dr. No (1962) - 8.5/10
4. On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969) - 8.5/10
5. Thunderball (1965) - 8/10
6. You Only Live Twice (1967) - 6/10
James Bond (and my reviews) will return with...Diamonds Are Forever.
Like CR, this movie was better on the second viewing but I agree with the sentiment that it's not nearly as good as CR. I don't really have a lot to say about it, other that it was just an okay film. I mean it had a lot of action but the plot just wasn't that engaging.
I must have missed something with Mathis. In CR, I could have sworn that he betrayed Vesper but now he's an ally again. So I was pretty lost there.
I expected to see more of Fields. I actually wish we would have since I have the feeling she might have been an interesting character. Actually, I liked how QOS turned the Bond girl thing on it's head. Usually, the official Bond girl is the second girl Bond meets. That wasn't the case here. As for Camille, she was a very interesting character.
“Ca-Cai-Cairo!”
Diamonds Are Forever is a brilliant film, but in terms of Bondian excellence, lags behind its illustrious compatriots. I don't blame it for not being a direct sequel to the magnificent On Her Majesty's Secret Service, I do, however, take issue with it, for introducing overt humour to the series.
The film looks cheap, and that has nothing to do Las Vegas, by the way. DAF just feels small and sweaty. Moreover, the editing, the dubbing (especially in the pre-titles sequence and during Sir Donald's speech about the security of the mines), spectacle over tension (the action sequences in Bond used to be about ingenuity and tension, not wanton destruction), and the whole, “that'll do, on to the next shot” ethos, the moon-buggy wheel is a prime example, that permeates the whole thing. In the words of Nic Nac, from the Originals Thread, “Can we blame Guy Hamilton? Yes, let's.” It's his movie, he should have taken more responsibility. I cant believe Hamilton let the shot of Willard Whyte's security car being turned over, complete with a Moon-buggy tyre. I expected Hamilton wanted to get the shots done, so he could play golf with Connery. Am I being to harsh on Hamilton? To his credit the film moves along at a brisk pace, until the climax on the oil-rig anyway.
DAF is a fun, bright, breezy, and often a quite bizarre little film, which has a more relaxed Sean Connery at it's heart. Putter Smith and Bruce Glover are Machiavellian, in their attempts to “bump” of Bond. Jill St John is intriguing and wryly seductive as Tiffany Case, as you would expect a professor diamond smuggler to be, and proves to be a good match for Connery's 007. John Barry is, of course, up to his usual high standards, and Tom Mankiewicz provides some excellent “quipage” to boot.
Diamonds, then, succeeds as an entertaining comic strip Bond adventure, but a Bond film should aim to be much more than that.
*I just thought of something last night, after watching DAF; after Bond has killed Franks, a great scene by the way, he replaces his wallet with Franks, leading Tiffany, infamously, to say; “you've just killed James Bond!”. How would a diamond smuggler know who Bond is? Well, perhaps Blofeld, by telephone (as was the case in Fleming's novel, and in the film Tiffany mentions, to Bond, that she is controlled by a telephone), is passing on Bond's name down the pipeline?
Diamonds Are Forever from the Bond 50 blu-ray set.
Here is the real first surprise of this Bond marathon for me - I actually semi-enjoyed Diamonds Are Forever, perhaps the most I've ever enjoyed it. I'm not saying that it is a superior Bond adventure in any way, but maybe after all these years, I realize I may have misunderstood what it took to tolerate Diamonds Are Forever. Let me explain.
Sean Connery no longer looks the part of James Bond in Diamonds Are Forever, and that is quite clear based on the very first frame we see him in. Not too say he looked 100% in You Only Live Twice, but his physical appearance had hit a new low in Diamonds. What half-makes up for this, however, is Connery's regained charisma for the role. He is indeed a less lethal and dangerous James Bond than he was in Dr. No or From Russia With Love, but unlike YOLT, he is not unmotivated beyond reason. He plays the role slightly lighter, and dare I say, more like Roger Moore. The difference here is that I believe Connery plays the 'Moore' Bond better than Moore himself did (if that makes any sense). Connery is also far more physically convincing than Roger Moore (as proven by Bond's great fight with Peter Franks). A lot of people say that Moore should have done Diamonds Are Forever, and while he may have looked the part more than Connery did in 1971, I'm convinced that Connery would've wiped the floor with Sir Roger from a performance standpoint. I prefer Connery's performance in his earlier films tenfold, but seeing Connery having a bit of fun in DAF is a welcomed sight after YOLT.
The supporting players in Diamonds Are Forever are mostly stereotypes and caricatures, but some of them fit with the film's flippant methods. Tiffany Case starts out more appealing than she ends up. When we are first introduced to her character, she is a sassy and somewhat competent criminal, but by film's end she has turned into a ditzy dunce. (This is particularly evident during Bond's final fight with Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd.) Speaking of Wint and Kidd, this was the first time I've ever watched DAF and had fun with their characters. They are cooky and strange beyond reason (and perhaps offensive if you ask the right person), but they are probably the film's best secondary characters. I'm indifferent to Charles Gray's Blofeld. I think he makes a very good sinister and calculating bad guy, but was he right for Blofeld? I'm not completely convinced.
Richard Maibaum and Tom Mankiewicz's script is a finely polished piece of poppycock. I must admit that I was laughing with the film throughout; the dialogue is witty and sharp, and sometimes is quite hilarious (the script is greatly aided by Connery's easygoing yet keen performance). The actual plot seems trivial by today's standards, but smuggling a bunch of diamonds in hope of creating a deadly space laser of doom is half interesting (in DAF's own little way, I suppose). The progression of the story is often messy and unclear, but I don't think that was ever Diamonds Are Forever's focus. The film knows it's a joke and often times asks you to sit back and relax. Not every plot hole slides in Diamonds Are Forever, but the script usually is there with some funny piece of writing to make you forget about how Saxby knew to kill Jimmy Dean when Blofeld talked to Bond imitating Saxby...not to Saxby himself. (This plot hole issue seen with Mankiewicz gets much worse and even sillier in The Man with the Golden Gun if I recall correctly.)
There are also some inane instances where the film crosses the line into flat out self-parody. People may say that Roger Moore was the first Bond to introduce lame sight gags, but people often forget about the elephant winning at the slot machine in Diamonds Are Forever. And what the hell was that woman changing into the gorilla about at the casino in Las Vegas? Then there is the infamous scene of Charles Gray's Blofeld in drag (no doubt a precursor to Gray's Rocky Horror Picture Show stint). I've read some DAF fans attempt to defend this one, but it's just stupid. Surely there was another way to lure Tiffany into the car?
I was surprised how much John Barry's score affected me. I always knew the score was good, but I often found myself toe tapping to much of Barry's incidental music (the opening cue of "Bond Meets Bambi and Thumper" is pure classic Bond). Shirley Bassey's theme is elegiacally wonderful, and the title sequence makes great use of it, too. Barry and the gang continue to impress, and I'm sure I'm going to miss them when I watch Live and Let Die tomorrow.
Diamonds Are Forever is not to be taken seriously, and if you're expecting it to be a lethal and sexy Sean Connery Bond film from the early 60s, then you will not like it. In order to like Diamonds Are Forever, you pretty much have to forget OHMSS even happened (it's admittedly hard to do). I used to despise DAF for not being a direct sequel to OHMSS. While I'm still convinced a direct sequel with Lazenby would have been an infinitely better film, Diamonds Are Forever occasionally entertains as a carefree standalone adventure. I do think it's still one of the lesser Bond films, but I'm going to give it one point higher than my original rating.
1. From Russia With Love (1963) - 9.5/10
2. Goldfinger (1964) - 9/10
3. Dr. No (1963) - 8.5/10
4. On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969) - 8.5/10
5. Thunderball (1965) - 8/10
6. Diamonds Are Forever (1971) - 6.5/10
7. You Only Live Twice (1967) - 6/10
James Bond, in the form of Roger Moore, (and my reviews) will return with...Live and Let Die.
Rankings so far:
OHMSS - 10/10
FRWL - 9.5/10
GF - 9/10
TB - 8.5/10
DN - 8/10
YOLT - 6/10
I wish Connery had been gone after TB and OHMSS was instead in '67, with a proper revenge film of YOLT based off of the book in '69. Then go to Moore in '71 since it sounded like Lazenby was so off the rails at the end of his tenure. Not only was YOLT the most over the top plot up to that point, but the villains (other than Blofeld) were very forgettable, Connery seemed incredibly bored at this point (not to mention far more out of shape than he was in TB), and the fact that OHMSS never got the true sequel it deserved. Lazenby may not have been the best Bond, but he was very good throughout that entire movie and I wish we'd gotten one more from him. Regardless though, that movie is absolutely flawless in my eyes. Rigg and Savalas turned in some absolutely killer performances with a script to match.
Incidentally I watched (a third) of A View to a Kill recently. It got to the part where Zorin was in his airship having a business meeting, and by that time, decided enough was enough..
Dr. No:
This is my second time watching this film, but this time around I noticed the pacing and feel of the movie felt like one of those Saturday or Sunday afternoon movies. You know, those you would casually watch and maybe fall asleep to (which happened twice!!). It's pretty straight forward story and having read Dr. No over the summer, I like seeing the similarities between the movie and book. One thing for sure was when I was reading the book, I was able to see Connery
Favorite moment(s): There are so many good ones, but I always liked it when Honey asks Bond if he is looking for seashells, and he states "No, I'm just looking." Always gets a laugh out of me.
Grade: B
From Russia With Love:
There are so many things good about this movie. Like Dr. No, this is the second time I watch this movie, but it still keeps me interested in the story and characters even though I know what's going to happen. Everyone is great, and Tania wasn't as annoying this time around (the whole "James, I love you, I love you" is still really cheesy though). Also, another thing that I noticed in Dr. No as well as in this film was the use of the James Bond theme. It seemed like it was overly used and at weird times. I could help, but think of Calvin's FRWL review (www.youtube.com/watch?v=14JpfLI3goU&feature=plcp at around 4:22) in which also comments on this.
Favorite moment(s): During the belly dance scene at the gypsy camp, there was a genuine smile on Sean Connery's face. I loved that. It didn't seem like Bond was smiling, but Sean himself - like he was having a good time and it was really nice to see.
Grade: A
One question: Regarding the scar on Bond's back, is that suppose to be the movie's version of the literary Bond's scar on his face? I don't think it was brought up in Dr. No and Bond is kinda vague about it when Sylvia mentions it.
Goldfinger:
I really enjoyed Goldfinger much more this time around. The last time I found it rather boring and slow in some parts, but today for some reason it just flowed really well. I was watching with my mom as well and we were both having fun with it. I also like those bits were Bond showed his intelligence (dissecting the brandy, figuring Goldfinger's plan), it shows he's a very smart man. Goldfinger map room was really cool as well with the rotating tables and such, although that whole scene was rather pointless considering he killed all those gangsters afterwards. At least in the novel, those guys participated in the raid, and if they were not going to do that here, it should have been a scene they could have left out.
Favorite moment(s): I have to say the fight with Oddjob at Fort Knox. I laughed at how Bond was being thrown around left and right, and it seemed like he's no physical match for him. Glad he was able to use his brain to succeed.
Grade: A-