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
So how did he regret directing it?
Why did Young regret it ?
The only thing negative I have to say about it is that I found it takes too long for Bond to end up going to the Bahamas. Almost half the film has passed before Bond actually begins to make headway in his investigation. The clinic stuff held it back, in my opinion.
That being said, there's enough great stuff there for Thunderball to be considered a great film.
Not many people mention the dialogue and banter throughout TB which is one of the best of the series IMO.
PS--I understand the criticisms of the underwater scenes, but personally, I like them. Granted, the retrieval of the bombs from the Vulcan and disguising the aircraft was a bit draggy, but I thought the Battle of Miami was quite marvelous.
Indeed, particularly this scene:
Q :-: "Here's a Perri pistol, it fires a distress signal. You should keep it on you day and night"
Bond :-: "I resent that remark"
I can get why people are saying TB is boring. The scene when the frogmen are nailing a net in place is quite tedious. It comes at a crucial time in the movie; the plot is up and running, the Vulcan scene is a treat, and then we come to this. A dozen frogmen nailing a sodding net in place. Young's direction, in this case, exacerbated by being underwater, becomes anal.
Still, everything before that, and after that, is bloody brilliant. Young is trying to tell a story, and each time I watch TB, it just sweeps me up in it's epicness.
Going back to the main question--is Thunderball overrated? I don't know about this specific forum, but to the general public it's generally regarded as one of the classic Connery Bonds and ranked moderately highly (though back in the Brosnan years Entertainment Weekly ranked TB as #2), with caveat that the underwater scenes drag.
I don't have much of a problem with the underwater stuff, and I'd rank TB as the third best Connery film, after GF and FRWL. (It's hard to rank DN, which is crude but also the founding father of the series--tie with TB?). It has one of the best fight scenes in the entire series--Bond versus Bouvar (Peter Hunt's cutting at its best), a terrific villainous scheme, Spectre at its finest (the Paris meeting triumphs through Ken Adam's sets and the best, most menacing version of Blofeld), and an epic sense of scale. It's a great adventure and you get your money's worth.
But it's also a bloated, decadent film that paves the way for the excess of YOLT and DAF. With TB the producers began the gonzo task of trying to top themselves--everything had to be bigger, more expensive, more elephantine, more gadget-laden, more explosive, more sexy. And the strain shows onscreen. TB's script is needlessly overcomplicated. Instead of merely bribing the Vulcan pilot, now he gets a surgically-created twin. New, pointless characters like Paula are allowed to suck up screen-time and lead to unnecessary scenes such as Bond breaking into Largo's house. Perhaps the underwater scenes feel long only because it took so long to get to them!
Moreover, the film shows the Bond series growing blander as its bloats. Fleming's novel was notable for its characterization, but the film is a disappointment in comparison. Movie Largo is the most boring villain Connery ever faced--a fat old man with an eye patch and no real personality. The original was a sleek scoundrel closer to Bond's age, with the personality of a satyr, a sort of twisted evil version of Bond. And while the film does well with Fiona, it's at the expense of Domino. The original Domino's fiery character was split between Fiona and film-Domino, but the former got all the best parts, and the latter ended up bland in comparison.
I also miss the book's more desperate version of Largo's death, but I accept that in the mid-60s audiences did not want to see that level of vulnerability from Bond.
Verdict: a classic Bond, but one already showing signs of the decadence that would overtake the series.
I never had any problem even with the retrieval of the bombs. It had to be long, we are talking about a slow, carefully carried operation. The long bits of TB, including Shrubland, the underwater scenes, they all bring an atmosphere, a sense of danger, sometimes impending doom and of authenticity. TB is the most believable of the outlandish plots of the series. Far more than GF.
I agree with your entire post and this one sentence sums it up beautifully.
" I really honestly don't know why I did Thunderball. I don't particularly like it. ... It was very successful, but to my mind all that underwater stuff was anti-James Bond, because it was slow motion.
People swim slowly and you couldn't have them going very fast.
On the whole, I would say it's not my favourite picture by a long way. It's a very efficient picture, but already the hardware was creeping into the stories. "
Sources: Licence to Thrill and Screenwriters' Masterclass: Screenwriters talk about their greatest movies
I can understand Young's self-criticism, regardless he still made a strong movie, far more exciting IMO than Goldfinger. Bond may swim a lot, but he is far more active in TB than in GF.
I've seen TB twice in the last year and a half, in the big screen digital format. Blew me away both times. It looks and sounds so good on the massive screen. The underwater stuff doesn't drag at all, rather one feels satsifyingly immersed in the film.
I think all things considered, TB is the best Bond of them all. For pure entertainment enjoyment my favourite will always be DAF, but I do think TB is the best on-screen presenatation of all the Bonds.
The series peaked with film #4 IMO.
Whoa! Stop the presses! You used to be a DAF man in toto.
We must never forget that this film was released in '65. Whatever issues people have with the film today usually come from viewing it under the looking glass of the 21st century.
My assesment as well.
I need to remember this when I criticise DAF.
DAF is hands down, slam dunk, my favourite Bond film of all. If I could take only one Bond to the desert island, Tiff, Ernst, Wint, Kidd, Plenty, Willard, Bambi and Thumper, and heavy Sean get the invite, no questions.
Rather, TB I rate as maybe the most perfectly crafted Bond film of all time.
I think it is the "best" Bond of all!
And as I said earlier I think it presents best big-screen, of all the Bond films of epic scale.
I do make distinction between favourite and best.
Although even in a best ranking, DAF still cracks top 7 with the other original Connery-Lazenby classics.
Would just have to really ponder the order.
Probably for starters: 1:TB 2: FRWL 3: OHMSS.
Not my fav, but I find it to be the funniest, craziest, Bond ever! Add one fan to the list.
Thanks for that @Walecs ,i hadnt seen that before.
:)
I feel bad that he didn't like the final product though. I can understand where he's coming from but I don't think that he made anything to be ashamed of.