12 days of Bond
blueman
PDXPosts: 1,667MI6 Agent
Or thereabouts.
Thought I'd watch a Bond a day, in order, over these here holidays. Join me?
Last night was DN, of course. My how young Connery was! And how low-budget (with a few odd flashes) the whole thing looked. Really missed the torture tunnel/squid endgame, but oh well, the tunnel sequence as-is ain't too bad. Andress is still a honey and Wiseman still sets a high mark for uber-villains. Oh but for the technology to squish this film and CR together!
EDIT: And tonight was FRWL. Connery looks like Connery in this one--and Shaw looks like a stone cold killer. Great script, maybe the best in the series (not wild about some of the early SPECTRE scenes, but like how it adds a layer to the plot). And Young and Hunt are never better, just an incredibly well-put together film. Doesn't look so low-budget anymore (like DN looks like a Hammer spy film most of the time, lol): the pre-credits fool you, the titles grab you and shake you up, and the fade-in on Venice is terrific. So much in this film is so on-the-money, sets a high bar for future Bond films.
Thought I'd watch a Bond a day, in order, over these here holidays. Join me?
Last night was DN, of course. My how young Connery was! And how low-budget (with a few odd flashes) the whole thing looked. Really missed the torture tunnel/squid endgame, but oh well, the tunnel sequence as-is ain't too bad. Andress is still a honey and Wiseman still sets a high mark for uber-villains. Oh but for the technology to squish this film and CR together!
EDIT: And tonight was FRWL. Connery looks like Connery in this one--and Shaw looks like a stone cold killer. Great script, maybe the best in the series (not wild about some of the early SPECTRE scenes, but like how it adds a layer to the plot). And Young and Hunt are never better, just an incredibly well-put together film. Doesn't look so low-budget anymore (like DN looks like a Hammer spy film most of the time, lol): the pre-credits fool you, the titles grab you and shake you up, and the fade-in on Venice is terrific. So much in this film is so on-the-money, sets a high bar for future Bond films.
Comments
This film crosses over from a film about Bond to a Bond film: slick, sexy, fantastic, and good God but Connery owns in this one. Deserving of all its praise for his performance alone. Hamilton may have taken a few shortcuts, but all is forgiven by the end credits.
Style, style, style. Bond arrived bigtime. :007)
Actually you're right about GF and the one-upmanship. "You are quite right, Mister Blueman...." Not sure Auric is gay though, remember his failed attempt to make a move on Pussy when asking about her plans after the heist - she responds by saying she'll set up an island with 'no trespassers'... a rebuff that Auric takes in good humour, one of those scenes that impress without intending...
Roger Moore 1927-2017
12 Aston Martins
11 Shirley Basseys
10 Moneypennies
9 Walther Pistols
8 Octopussies
7 Oh Oh Agents
6 Dry Martinis
5 Golden Guns…
4 Roger Moores
3 Fort Knoxes
2 Thunderballs
And a spy who really loved me
Barbel: 4 Roger Moores? The mind wobbles.
Nice jingle Barbel...
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Thank you, blue! The only other name that scanned was Daniel Craig and, well...
{[] Cheers NP!
Always wondered how the two films TB and OHMSS would look like one right after the other, just skip YOLT (waste of a good Fleming story anyway
Bond starts out in the ocean in the OHMSS pre-credits, sort of shaking off all the TB underwater scenes.
Rigg looks very much like Auger, the similarity is striking. Also the HUGE upgrade in acting ability: Rigg is instantly riveting due in no small part to her acting chops/screen presence. Her white dress in the casino early in the film also mimics Domino's black-and-white costume color scheme. It's like Bond has found the Domino upgrade.
TB itself is a big fluffy ball of Bond, mostly bouncy--especially early, and only draggy in (forgivable) spurts IMO. It also has some of the most iconic Bond moments of the first four films, and Connery swaggers though ala GF, especially with the women: it's the first film he beds three.
Savalas is like Largo version 2.0, and while an effective Blofeld in some ways EON set up an awkward transition by keeping Blofeld "unseen" in FRWL and TB. Hunt and Savalas just go for it, and it's welcome IMO.
Lazenby is surprisingly effective overall, but mostly in scenes with his other principles--Rigg, Savalas, Ferzetti, Steppat, Lee. He plays very well with others IMO.
Biggest difference is Hunt's more realistic and comparatively 3-D direction, TB is more a child's adventure story with some adult overtones compared to Hunt's very adult OHMSS with the odd childish asides now and then. Very nice to see Fleming's story approached not just as a marketing ploy (again, comparatively speaking).
Also liked how both films very successfully embraced their respective worlds, Nassau and the Alps looked great and both felt very well and thoroughly used.
OMHSS also seemed like the pinnacle of 60s Bond: great story, well filmed. And the arc leading to it (sans YOLT) felt vert straight and trueish to Fleming, and I quite liked that. Miss the music and spectacle and the samari fight scene of YOLT, but not it's cartoony nature.
So next is LALD--yep, no DAF either.
Anybody interested in the Fleming-to-screen thing should check out TB-OHMSS back-to-back, highly recommended. :007)
LALD has to be the most fun Bond film ever. After the drama of OHMSS, the lighter tone and more frenetic pace goes down well. And Lazenby to Moore is a surprisingly easy transition, if a bit of a tradeoff: Lazenby was a very physical Bond, whereas Moore has the whole smooth thing going for him, but both can do either IMO, just a matter of differing proportions.
LALD also harkens back to TB, but again with proportions tipped: TB has a strong Fleming story with a gloss of moviedom, but LALD heaps on the cinematic touches over a more skeletal Fleming plot. It's a good match for Moore's skills, and Hamilton strikes his best tone for a Bond film IMO, even moreso than GF (the hammy American gangsters come off, well, hammy in GF). Also, for some reason the early 70s African-American elements don't come across as hackneyed as their counterpart Mafia types in other Hamilton Bond films, maybe because Hamilton has no frame of reference for that culture, and just goes with the status quo? I always feel like Hamilton must have seen "Guys and Dolls" at an impressionable age, and half-expect his US bad guys to break into a tap number or something, just not an agreeable reality for me. The blaxploitation facet of LALD works for me swell, and fits snuggly with TB's wallowing in the Bahamas and OHMSS's snow. Toss in the voodoo and it's a unique and very successful Bondian landscape, not duplicated since.
For introducing a new Bond, LALD does something different: Bond starts the film as a fish out of water, the New York of Popeye Doyle and John Shaft is simply not his environment. Yet there's Moore, grinning through it all and very capably carrying it off. Don't know if that was intentional, but it works very well, by the time we get to San Monique we're going along with him just fine.
Then there's poor Rosie, she gets such bad press.
Martin's score rocks, it perfectly matches Hamilton's lighter Bond film. Really, he makes so many moments work better, great fit.
Great villain, great henchmen, great set pieces. Moore as Bond works in this one (he's startlingly not fit but acts like he is, so whatever :007) ). A very good transition Bond: from the 60s, from the Bond of Connery/Lazenby, from a SPECTRE-based world reality. I would've loved for Lazenby to continue on as Bond, the early 70s could've seen some really harsh and hard-edged Bond films with him in the role. But Moore makes for a nice fluffy treat of a runner-up Bond, one looks forward to his next adventure, easy.
EDIT: then there's TMWTGG, a true Bond oddity.
Of note: both LALD and TMWTGG continue Fleming's knack of having villains with odd sexual appetites, Kanaga and Scaramanga don't just get laid, it's gotta have all sorts of baggage attached.
Speaking of sex, Bond doesn't get any in TMWTGG until one hour, twelve minutes in!
Gone is Moore's bouncy Bond, instead he's a badass, and on him it's not that great of a fit, his all-business attitude doesn't seem to go with any recent Bond film, and only rings a bit of a bell thinking all the way back to the rougher Connery in DN. Still the first 40 minutes of TMWTGG, and the last 30, are fine. It's connecting the two that's the trouble (the story of how this one came to be seems to be oft repeated, warring factions etc.). And with no YOLT it's film Bond's first trip to Asia. Uneven, overall, with some very sublime moments but with utterly embarassing ones as well (Pepper adds nothing in this one...). Whereas LALD left me wanting more Moore, TMWTGG produces more of a shrug. Too bad they couldn't build on Moore's first outing, his second feels like a needless step backwards. It's also the only Bond so far where the villain flat-out out-charismas Bond--not a good thing.
The middle half does have some neat moments, I admit I quite like the karate sisters, and the Hi Fat plotline is begging for more fleshing out and screen-time, strikes me as very Fleming and a solid update on the book...but not as executed, just too thin to engage. A very schizo Bond film.
When I realized where the next logical jump was--all the way to CR--I wasn't really down about it. After identity-crisis Bond in TMWTGG, a reboot Bond with Craig doesn't sound bad at all. But what about all the gushy excess of TSWLM? Or Dalton? Brosnan? Well now, what helps with all this...
As much as I love TSWLM, can't do it in this sequence as I just can't see Fleming signing off on a villain who wanted the world to go pop. Darn it. And so goes MR (small loss). And, while others may spin, I always leave out the 80s, Glen ruined Bond for me in that decade, and not even Dalton's considerable charms made enough of a dent in the morass. So that leaves the Brozzer, my least favorite Bond. Yet...TND strikes me as very Flemingesque, almost a straight reworking of TB really (his other 3 are each about a baddie who wants to get back at daddy, and no way is that Fleming!).
CR is the logical next stop on this Bond trip. TSWLM really really wants to seduce me into watching it. And while I feel like I should watch TND, the Brozzer is just maybe enough to put me off. Instead of choosing, I'll let the reader go his or her own way with this: embrace the Fleming, the Cubby, or the something in between.
Merry Christmas! {[]
Why not just throw logic out the window and enjoy TSWLM? It is the holidays after all. {[]
Shhh, don't tell anyone... :v :007)
EDIT: oh heck, went for it! TSWLM is still one of the frothiest Bond concoctions EON has ever made. Nice to see Moore back in a comfort zone with the character, even the few more serious moments he handles better than a lot of TMWTGG.
First two thirds zip right along, loved the Egypt scenes and Bach is fine as XXX if a tad spoofy. But nothing seems out of whack until they get to the tanker. WTF?! How many extras are in that darn set? Impressive, sure, but weird to see Bond in an all out war, the body count is numbing (foreshadows all that machine gun play in GE/TND). It all becomes too fantastic, but to Gilbert's credit he keeps things going at a good clip, although I could do without the overt comedy (Bond quipping like 8 times when Jaws is trying to rip apart the van in the desert...bleh). And Moore looks his age in this one, over the Bond-hill IMO. Pulls it off but only just.
Okay, now I'm ready for CR!
Funny how the first half on CR relies on non-Fleming material the way the last half of TSWLM relies on non-Fleming material (not that the first half of TSWLM was Fleming at all, but it was good and fit pretty well into the early 70s Bond world that EON had created IMO). By Montengro I felt I was back to Bond--after a side-trip on a tanker, a run through a jungle, and losing my luggage at the Miami Airport.
Also noteworthy: no other Bond film (in the sequence I watched
And gotta say, if EON isn't setting up the return of Blofeld with the Organization in CR, then they're fools. It's just so perfect. Really really really hope Von Sydow wasn't talking shorthand, and that we will see a revisioned Blofeld in Bond 22 (and that it's titled "007" :007) ).
So what do you think of my Fleming/Bond timeline:
DN
FRWL
GF
TB
OHMSS
LALD
MWTGG
(and, to set up the reboot...
CR