You Only Live Twice- a mess of a film?

chrisisall

1967
To me, THIS is where the problems for the Bond films started. Yes, the Ninja stuff was cutting edge back then, and the stunts, cinematography and score were all absolutely top shelf, but the story was total comic book, and Connery was clearly bored.
So, a beautiful movie with great music was crafted, missing a heart at its center.
This would be corrected briefly in the following installment, but swiftly abandoned in favour of nonsense once again in the next.
1987 would be the next time a Bond movie would trade silly for serious. That was a long wait for us old timers....

*looks for his laser-sighted 9mm cane* )

moonraker84

Yes it is well over the top like a lot of the R Moore films (which admittedly i love) but i really enjoyed this, you are right the score is fantastic, and after Thunderball (which i thought overall was still quite good but compared to the first 3 a bit of a letdown) this was a return to form entertainment wise IMO.

chrisisall

moonraker84 wrote:

this was a return to form entertainment wise IMO.

Oh, highly entertaining, nearly as much so as TSWLM! -{
I just favour serious, doesn't mean I can't have fun with silly now! But back in the days of my youth, I demanded serious! X-( )

BIG TAM

It's a fun romp with plenty to commend it. Music, cinematography, set design & an overall sumptuous air mark is as a big Bond epic. You certainly can't say you don't get your money's worth.

But its qualities are all on a technical level. It almost completely dispenses with any form of logic & seems the first film to fall victim to its success in its need to give the audience more. One also wonders whether the producers were worried by the success of OUR MAN FLINT, feeling the need to compete on an OTT level. Though obviously YOLT far exceeds that film in its technical ability & budget.

And of course there's Connery's palpable boredom.

But perhaps I'm being churlish. It is the '60s after all. Yeah, baby! )

Moore Than

You Only Live Twice is a guilty pleasure. Yes, it's overblown, has a weak Blofeld, and Sean Connery does not perform (for the most part) and also wears a ridiculously silly Japanese disguise. Having said that, I really like all the main Japanese characters, the locations and sets, and especially John Barry's superb score. I have never been to Japan but Barry's music perfectly captures the essence of what I imagine it to be like.

Virgil37

chrisisall wrote:

1967
1987 would be the next time a Bond movie would trade silly for serious. That was a long wait for us old timers....

*looks for his laser-sighted 9mm cane* )

I would say 1969 would be the next time a Bond movie traded silly for serious, I don´t see the comic side of OHMSS, with Tracy dying and all. But I agree on the main point.

chrisisall

Virgil37 wrote:

I would say 1969 would be the next time a Bond movie traded silly for serious, I don´t see the comic side of OHMSS, with Tracy dying and all. But I agree on the main point.

'69 to '87 is still quite a wait... :007)

GordoLeiter

The only reason why its a mess is that the fact that it was shot out of order and causing confusion when OHMSS was released. BUT, if you reverse the movies and ignore the scene where Blofeld introduces himself to Bond in YOLT then it would be alright.

Napoleon Plural

Overblown, but the first Bond to be in competition, as in the upcoming spoof Casino Royale, which turned out to be a dog of a film, but they weren't to know that. So they had to throw everything at YOLT. In a way, OHMSS had to be big too cos it had a new Bond.

Others that went the same way were MR - competing with Star Wars and Superman for the kids' vote, so make it big, and OP, competing with NSNA so it raised its game. Also, DAD tried to outdo XXX and maybe the overblown Lord of the Rings type films, so that went OTT.

chrisisall

Interesting....

Blackleiter

Say what you will about YOLT, but for all of it's flaws, I love this film! I hope I don't lose all credibility here by saying that! (Assuming I ever had any! ))

chrisisall

Blackleiter wrote:

I hope I don't lose all credibility here by saying that! (Assuming I ever had any! ))

Nah, you're cool, even after dumping on TMWTGG. )

Blackleiter

That's what I like about this group. Our opinions range all over the place, but somehow we remain a family! Thanks!

chrisisall wrote:

Blackleiter wrote:

I hope I don't lose all credibility here by saying that! (Assuming I ever had any! ))

Nah, you're cool, even after dumping on TMWTGG. )

Higgins

I have to disagree, that the movie is missing its heart!

The movie shows so much passion for details, Cubby was simply throwing around with $$ and to me it's one of the epitomes in the Bond history.

The production on the japan locations must have costed terrible money, the climate was horrible, the country is captured with so much attention that it almost sucks you back into the 60s into a barely discovered world for western people.

Ken Adam delivered his masterpiece, the volcano set, Barry - then a well respected and expensive composer - delivered a phantastic track.
Although some of the action may look outdated (the knee-suckers for the Ninjas come to mind) in parts and Connery is admittedly bored, no other movie of that age ( it's now 45 years!, 45 YEARS!!!! old) gives you such incredible food for the eyes.

Blofeld may not be the best - but still better than in DAF and the aerial shots are simply stunning!

I love that movie and will always do!
It motivated me to visit many locations in Japan in person:

Tokyo:Osato building and the park around it,
Kagoshima: Tanakas spa & garden the road where Little Nellie takes off)
and in the second attempt within a year the fisherman village Akime, which is a totally different world!

Hardyboy

I agree with what Bondtoys says, but I have to say that the script really is a mess. No characters for the actors to build upon--just animatrons that go from set to set; and possibly the most contrived storyline of the series. Let's see: Bond flies over the volcano and sees nothing; but never fear--SPECTRE sends a squadron of helicopters after him to GIVE him something to report (and to show off all the gadgets in Little Nelly). . .the cave entrance to the volcano is filled with poison gas, which is conveniently forgotten when the good guys need to escape the exploding volcano. . .etc., etc. Still, for the film's specs--and maybe even for its overall goofiness--I have a soft spot for it.

Bodie

I love YOLT as a couple of hours escapist fun but it is definitely when Fleming was jettisoned and the just believable became the totally impossible. DN, GF and TB stretched creditibility but they were within the bounds of possibility. YOLT required that you suspend all belief.

There were a number of reasons for this:

The book was unfilmable.

With the sucess of GF the pressure was on for the producers to outdo themselves and make each movie bigger than the previous one.

As has been pointed out the rival CR was due out and they had no idea what it was going to be like.

The competition from other spys such as The Man from UNCLE, Flint etc. who were coming up with far fetched plots on much lower budgets.

It was the time of spy mania at the cinema and on telelvision and Bond had to be bigger and better.

Thunderpussy

IMHO, it's great escapist fun, when you're in the mood.
as others have pointed out, Great music, Brilliant sets
and "Little Nellie "

Barry Nelson

I have always enjoyed YOLT and consider the ninja assault on Blofeld's volcano hideout one of the great action scenes of the entire series. The score is fantastic and Tiger is an interesting ally. My main fault with YOLT is Karin Dor, along with Eva Green, the least attractive Bond girl of all time.

Higgins

I totally agree with BN re. Karin Dor. Though I am german, I never understood the fuzz* about her.
Still today, she's an icon here, I find her plain boring looking.

*She once said in an interview that Cubby himself absolutely wanted her in the movie

Moore Than

Hardyboy wrote:

...the cave entrance to the volcano is filled with poison gas, which is conveniently forgotten when the good guys need to escape the exploding volcano. . .

I've just had a big DOH! moment. In all the years and countless viewings I had completely overlooked that. ;% )

Virgil37

Bodie wrote:

There were a number of reasons for this:

The book was unfilmable.

.

Why was the book unfilmable? well, maybe back then it was in the context of the type of movies they were making (GF, TB, bigger, noisier, more gadgets, impressive sets...), and the competition they were facing. Now CR has proved how well a Fleming original that is in principle difficult to adapt can be adapted into a great Bond movie.

Thunderpussy

In my mind ( which I'll admitt doesn't work like others ) the exploding
volcano pushed the poison gas out of the tunnel to sea. :007)
In a Disney happy ending kind of way. )

Moore Than

A brilliant deduction, Thunderpussy. You have saved my blushes.

Blackleiter

I agree also. In my opinion she is one of the least attractive of all the Bond girls.

Bondtoys wrote:

I totally agree with BN re. Karin Dor. Though I am german, I never understood the fuzz* about her.
Still today, she's an icon here, I find her plain boring looking.

*She once said in an interview that Cubby himself absolutely wanted her in the movie

Vampfox

I like YOLT but I really don't know why. The script is a mess, and there's really nothing that stands out about the movie.