The problem is the terrible execution of the scene. Had Bond struggled to escape and appeared terrified, Wint and Kidd's actions might not look so idiotic. As it is, he disables the welding machine in seconds and emerges from the pipeline – which in reality would be a terrifying, claustrophobic experience – unruffled and making a joke. Similarly, nearly getting burned alive in the crematorium is probably the most frightening thing ever to happen to Bond but doesn't seem to traumatise him in the slightest. Diamonds Are Forever is simply a very badly scripted and acted film.
Were Wint and Kidd trying to kill Bond when they buried him? Maybe they were just tasked with moving him and were told not to kill him. Or maybe they thought he was already dead and thought they just had to move the body. In any case, what they were doing in that scene isn't entirely clear when it should have been.
Wint and Kidd "try and try again" to find amusing ways to kill Bond, but by contrast they seem to settle for some straightforward way of bumping off Shady Tree. Shady is promptly assassinated in his own dressing room, albeit off camera.
In YOLT:
Bond: "If I'm to watch TV, may I smoke?"
Blofeld: "Yes, give him his cigarettes."
It's uncharacteristically generous of Pleasance's Blofeld to make this concession, especially if compared to Grant who in FRWL tells Bond there's "not a chance" he'll allow Bond his last request for a smoke (at least, not until Bond offers to pay for it). The world of YOLT is so gadget-laden that Blofeld, of all people, should know better than to allow Bond one of his own cigarettes.
In the final analysis, it's just one of those B-movie conventions of Bond films that the villain makes an error that will allow Bond a spectacular escape or a 'spanner-in-the-works' opportunity. The ego-fuelled attempts by villains to rig convoluted ways of killing Bond rather than using quick and simple methods are also pure melodrama - just part of the genre, especially with the movies where the fantasy elements are heightened generally. Lazily executed examples can still have the effect of taking an audience 'out' of the film, though, as my YOLT example does for me.
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 53 years.
Comments
In YOLT:
Bond: "If I'm to watch TV, may I smoke?"
Blofeld: "Yes, give him his cigarettes."
It's uncharacteristically generous of Pleasance's Blofeld to make this concession, especially if compared to Grant who in FRWL tells Bond there's "not a chance" he'll allow Bond his last request for a smoke (at least, not until Bond offers to pay for it). The world of YOLT is so gadget-laden that Blofeld, of all people, should know better than to allow Bond one of his own cigarettes.
In the final analysis, it's just one of those B-movie conventions of Bond films that the villain makes an error that will allow Bond a spectacular escape or a 'spanner-in-the-works' opportunity. The ego-fuelled attempts by villains to rig convoluted ways of killing Bond rather than using quick and simple methods are also pure melodrama - just part of the genre, especially with the movies where the fantasy elements are heightened generally. Lazily executed examples can still have the effect of taking an audience 'out' of the film, though, as my YOLT example does for me.