One reason why CR'06 is better than OMHSS in my opinion.

JimmyBond0129

Casino Royale's subsequent sequel actually dealt with Bond's vengeful feelings without turning him into a rogue agent. The follow-up to On Her Majesty's Secret Service never dealt with a Bond out for revenge.

zebond

It's true QoS dealt with this to a much larger degree than DAF did (if I'm on the same page) But to say DAF never dealt with a Bond out for revenge is a bit unfair IMO. The PTS to DAF I feel handles both A) a Bond seeking revenge for his murdered wife, and the producers current shame at how unwell OHMSS faired with the general public.

The scene immediately following the song even had M imploring some hard work now that Blofeld was "dead." Implying Bond was dead-set on avenging his wife before he could return to work, (for what else would he have to do with his time but sit around and mourn?)

And I don't know that it's fair to judge OHMSS and CR based on the quality of DAF and QoS respectively. I feel OHMSS to be better than CR, but DAF and QoS is another story all together

JimmyBond0129

Daniel Craig was better at delivering dry humor than George Lazenby was but to be fair that's because Craig actually had some acting experience prior to Casino Royale.

thesecretagent

It's quite a tall order isn't it? I mean, carrying a film as successful as the Bond series, and not having any acting experience. I find it interesting that Lazenby actually gets better towards the end of OHMSS. Like he's actually learning to act...
But yes, I agree that CR is better for the same reasons.

superado

I think it's more appropriate to explore the actors in "revenge mode." Connery and Moore in DAF and FYEO respectively have done "revenge-lite." For the ending in GE, Brosnan was okay considering the situation of a best-friend's betrayal, and so was Lazenby's dogged insistance to not end Operation Bedlam, which remarkably didn't even contain a personal dimension at that point.

Craig in CR and QoS and Dalton in LTK, however, stand out. Asking myself who was better, it's difficult to say because they did their revenge mode differently, though both were compelling; Craig in character tried to cover up his true motives and it's great how he conveyed all of that in layers, being sarcastic and quipping while at times being short but immediately dismissive when it's brought up. Dalton though I think was fortunate to have gone "all out" loose cannon going in total defiance to M and the service and it was convincing that for principle and loyalty to his best friend, everything else became non-issues, including his standing (both legal and professional) as if his mission of revenge suddenly and totally consumed his life's purpose. When the "farewell to arms" scene in LTK was repeated almost verbatim in QoS, it was effective for the situation since Bond's motivation to rebel more immediately concerned success for the mission with revenge (seemingly) in the background, but it wasn't as compelling as the revenge-defining character change in LTK.

Dalton still seemed to be the "mature" professional in his full faculty who just happened to find himself in an extraordinary crisis (very Hitchcock-like) that made the worse out of his determined nature, while Craig seemed a bit irrational and immature in processing his bitterness over Vesper's betrayal, though to be fair it was in line with the "Bond begins" theme of CR and QoS.

hegottheboot

QoS was the first direct sequel. DAF was originally this way with the murder taking place as DAF's PTS and then going into the full revenge story we all craved. Sadly this was not to be, and we got that awful raunchy 1971 travelogue. (thank goodness for Tom Mankewicz's fresh dialogue!)

chrisno1

JimmyBond0129 wrote:

Casino Royale's subsequent sequel actually dealt with Bond's vengeful feelings without turning him into a rogue agent. The follow-up to On Her Majesty's Secret Service never dealt with a Bond out for revenge.

That doesn't make CR'06 better than OHMSS, it makes QOS better than DAF

Higgins

chrisno1 wrote:

it makes QOS better than DAF

...only slightly

Dan Same

Bondtoys wrote:

chrisno1 wrote:

it makes QOS better than DAF

...only slightly

You consider QOS to be better than DAF?

Rick Roberts

CR royally pwns OHMSS.

chrisno1

Dan Same wrote:

Bondtoys wrote:

chrisno1 wrote:

it makes QOS better than DAF

...only slightly

You consider QOS to be better than DAF?

not quite what I said!

JimmyBond0129

chrisno1 wrote:

That doesn't make CR'06 better than OHMSS, it makes QOS better than DAF

Like I said before Casino Royale is kind of better than On Her Majesty's Secret Service because Daniel Craig actually had some acting experience prior to Casino Royale and thus Craig was better at delivering dry humor than George Lazenby was.

Higgins

:v what specificly does acting experience help to delivering dry humor ?:)

Napoleon Plural

Well, it allows for a bit of confidence when delivering oneliners... Craig isn't brilliant at the jokes, but Lazenby was awful.

Alex

I like CR and Craig both very much, but better then Piz Gloria and Emma Peel? Not! -{

JimmyBond0129

Alex wrote:

I like CR and Craig both very much, but better then Piz Gloria and Emma Peel? Not! -{

Well when it comes down to Daniel Craig vs. George Lazenby...I think Craig probably put on the better performance in his respective film because he actually had some acting chops. Lazenby did alright under the circumstances but you could tell the studio didn't have any faith in him that's why they had George Baker dubbing some of Lazenby's dialogue.

Higgins

well, at least they had such faith to offer him another contract after OHMSS.

JimmyBond0129

But apparently George Lazenby didn't have any faith in the Spy film genre or himself because he turned down a six film contract. Lazenby said he would've gotten into illegal drugs if he was Bond in more than one film.

Higgins

JimmyBond, what is really your point?

You started this thread by finding points, why CR is better than OHMSS. You claimed, that the studio had no faith in Lazenby, which is not correct.
Now you claim, that Lazenby was not confident in himself. All that we know is, that he turned down the offer to do more 007 films which is an indicator, that his confidence in him was a little too much and this matches with many things, that I know about his character.

GL definetly his flaws but a lack of confidence in himself was definitely not his problem.

chrisno1

JimmyBond0129 wrote:

chrisno1 wrote:

That doesn't make CR'06 better than OHMSS, it makes QOS better than DAF

Like I said before Casino Royale is kind of better than On Her Majesty's Secret Service because Daniel Craig actually had some acting experience prior to Casino Royale and thus Craig was better at delivering dry humor than George Lazenby was.

Jimmy, with respect, your original point was that CR "sequel" (QOS) dealt with Bond's vengeful feelings and did not turn him into a rogue agent, while you said OHMSS "sequel" (DAF) never dealt with Bond's revenge motive.

I'm sorry, mate, but that's a comparison between QOS and DAF

Your point above relates your second post on the thread, which doesn't bear any relation to your original statement.....

Infernorhythm

Well, there in lies the main difference between QoS and DAF, QoS was a sequel, DAF was not. It felt like EON was doing everything they could to ignore OHMSS when making DAF, which was a real shame.

A lot of individual factors were to blame for him leaving, but I always would have loved to have seen Lazenby return for a sequel. I found this great fan made trailer for what it could have been like, and it is extremely entertaining.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cd0d4FtvC8I