It's about the same size and while it features a more powerful engine, it's also horribly noisy. Notice the nice fit and finish of the driver's side door! )
With regards to why I think Diamonds are Forever is miles miles miles ahead of Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace (and most likely Skyfall), I wrote a review on another Bond website which I shall publish here now enjoy and open your minds to it's greatness!
A Love Letter to a Classic: A Review of Diamonds are Forever
The year is 2008 and as I am enjoying my first months at university, I am equally anticipating the release of the new Bond movie coming out in November of that year, Quantum of Solace. Sharing halls of residence with people who haven't really seen Bond before, we embark on a Bondathon, a James Bond film every other day once we had got back from lectures in anticipation for the release of Daniel Craig's second film. Pumped and all "Bonded" up, we head to the cinema to see Quantum of Solace. As you always do after seeing a movie at the cinema, you stumble down the stairs, muttering to your friends whether they enjoyed, what they thought was good. The consensus was negative to mixed (a review for another day) generally. One friend, however, just walked casually towards me and just shrugged "Disappointing...wasn't a Diamonds are Forever, was it?"
This quote has always stuck to me and I hear it clearly in my head now as I did 4 years ago almost. What would prompt someone new to the Bond films not only to condemn a new hyped up film but to also condemn it using not just an old, an old film seen regularly by Bond fanatics as one of the weakest entries in the entire series? I asked him what he meant, and in his roundabout blunt way, he shrugged further "Well, having watched Diamonds are Forever, I felt that a Bond film should be like that. It had everything I now want from a Bond film". I remember on the walk back to our place thinking about his words..."It had everything". At this point in time, I admit that though I enjoyed Diamonds are Forever, I wasn't a taken fan by it, ranking it in the middle. I had always thought From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, The Spy Who Loved Me etc had been the Bond movies to have everything, Diamonds are Forever wasn't in consideration. I must have watched Diamonds are Forever a couple of times in that next week to review it, to see what I was missing, to find what made my friend make it his definative Bond film.
Upon those first reviews (and subsequent viewings since) Diamonds are Forever proves continuously to prove my friend right. It simply is one of the best entries in the series. Enjoyable, fun, tense, mesmerising, brilliant, visually stunning, memorable and dark, Diamonds are Forever is a banquet of great cinema and, more specifically, great Bond. It's a high point in the series. Without it, Bond simply would have died in the 1970's. IT would have been out of touch with the times, whilst the rest of cinema moved on from 60's noir to the brightness of the 70's action movies. Regardless of your opinions of Diamonds are Forever and the films before or after it, one cannot deny the importance of the film in the series.
I love On Her Majesty's Secret Service. I think that it is a terrific film let down only by George Lazenby. Cards on the table, it deserved a more suitable sequel (not better sequel, just more suitable to dealing with Tracy's death). I accept that and I believe the producers missed a trick here. But that's only in hindsight. Bond and the series was on it's knees in 1969/1970. On Her Majesty's Secret Service and George Lazenby had flopped massively. The film and star had strayed too far from the respected formula set by previous Bond films. Yes, in 2012, On Her Majesty's Secret Service is seen as a great film. But 43 years ago, it was seen as it's generation's Die Another Day. Bond needed saving, it needed to return to the type and style of film seen in Connery's later years. Bond needed saving and only James Bond i.e. Sean Connery could save it. Two things saved the Bond series: the film itself and the plot and, more importantly, the return of Sean Connery to the role of 007 that set the series on course for the success it still enjoys today. I will deal firstly with Connery's return and performance and the legacy it left in the series.
Trail through these forums and reviews of the film, you will see members and critics sniping that Sean Connery in Diamonds are Forever looks "bored, out of shape" and is "motivated by money...going through the motions at a poor rate"and that he should never have returned to a role he didn't want to return to. Has more nonsense ever been uttered? For me, Sean Connery delivers a sublime 007 performance in his last Bond movie. To be honest, he didn't need to deliver an average performance. It was all about having back that was crucial. You cannot deny Connery was needed to kick start the series again. Casting Roger Moore (who would have been splendid in the film) or continuing with Lazenby would have been a mistake and the producers and United Artists should be applauded for the courage to ask Connery back and pay him a wthen world record fee. I would rate it as his second best Bond performance and one of the very best in the entire series, justifying his large pay cheque. Regardless of what people say, Connery enjoys his final outing as James Bond very much. He shows a maturity that was missing in his other films and a sense of humour that bristles throughout the film. Connery delivers the jokes and the one-liners perfectly and perhaps this is forgotten in light of the terrific Roger Moore years. Connery's one-liners in Diamonds are Forever are always tinged with a darkness because there is a sense of violence behind every joke he delivers. This is no mistake, this is testimony to the acting ability of Sean Connery that he can tell jokes and yet appear lethal in equal measure (didn't they give Heath Ledger an Oscar for doing this in The Dark Knight). This myth that Connery is bored is nonsense. He loves every minute of his time back in the role and it shines through upon each viewing. Another myth that needs to be buried is the fact that he is out of shape. If he's out of shape in Diamonds are Forever, then God help us all. Connery is terrific and looks as fit as he did in his early days. Don't let the greying of the hair and the wrinkles fool you. He's comfortable in the action scenes. One great thing about Connery in Diamonds are Forever is his chemistry with his co-stars, noticably Jill St John, who is cast as Bond Girl Tiffany Case. Apart from Fiona Vulpe in Thunderball and a few others, Connery's bond failed at times to create chemistry with other characters, something that added to the charm of his tenure. In this film, the chemistry is dynamic and sparkling, aiding by a terrific script and Connery simply enjoy his dialogue. It's sad to think his performance is dismissed in such a way it is. Because he does do his best and his best is amazing in a fast paced action movie. A note on Connery's fashion style: inspired and brilliant...what he wears when he faces Bambi and Thumper is terrific, one which I have copied on numerous occasions. And he looks great in a balck (or white) tuxedo.
For 1969, On Her Majesty's Secret Service did not work. It was not the Bond movie the public demanded or expected after a feast of fantasy in Goldfinger, Thunderball and You Only Live Twice. Too many of the classic Bond ingredients was missing, the script and movie didn't sparkle in comparison. Diamonds are Forever employs all the Bond ingredients and isn't ashamed to show them off. For those who don't know, Diamonds are Forever sees Bond investigating a diamond smuggling operation that sees him impersonating a diamond smuggler and travelling from London to Dover to Amsterdam to Las Vegas to discover who is behind the smuggling and what the purpose of smuggling diamonds is. I won't reveal more but Bond fans will know the rest in this great movie. Diamonds are Forever is simply a visual masterpiece and a masterpiece in script writing and directing. The plot is terrific fun and is rather interesting. It pulls you one way and then the other, great blocks of dialogue and chemistry building scenes inter-mingled between some great action sequences. The film makers place the audience in a maze, leading them up one avenue before blocking it and directing them somewhere else. The shock of who's the antagonist was stunning when I first saw this. And how the villain gets away with it is simply masterful and story telling at it's best. Diamonds are Forever features one of the strongest plots and scripts in the franchise and how people can say it's weak is beyond me. It really is story telling at it's best . Fun and enjoyable whilst keeping the spy and action themes that launched the series in Dr No and From Russia With Love, there is something for every Bond fan and movie lover in Diamonds are Forever.
Having alluded to them previously, it is worth discussing in depth the action scenes littered throughout the film. The film's opening is amongst the best out of all the pre-Spy Who Loved Me films. The reintroduction of Connery as Bond in three steps is done terrifically. "Where is he?" and a kick to the face of Blofeld's Japanese stooge...brilliant. "Hit me" and a punch to the face to Blofeld's Egyptian colleague...terrific. Ultimately, one of the great Bond moments in the series comes when he meets Marie, the last SPECTRE agent. "There's something I'd like you to get off your chest" before whipping off her bra and proceeding to strangling her. It's brilliant, a classic Connery and James Bond scene. The scene buzzes with both humour and violence, always balancing the two contrasting themes. In essence, it is the story of Diamonds are Forever, setting the tone for the rest of the film.
The fight sequence with Peter Franks is terrifically put together and, in this reviewer's opinion, the best fight scene in the series. It is so much more frantic than the fight in From Russia With Love and so much more brutal than the staircase fight in Casino Royale. It is superbly choreographed by the impressive Bob Simmons, with every punch and movement prepared and as elegant as a ballet. Bond and Franks have a brutal time in that lift and it really does make an impression. It's a shame that there haven't been more of great fights like this. The chase scenes throughout the film are done brilliantly. I don't care what anyone says, the moon buggy scene is amazing. Aided by John Barry's impressive score, it is a chase in the best Bond traditions. Fun, greatly edited and tense, I am mystified to how this can be panned by so many. The subsequent car chase in the Mustang is also superb, let down only by the crowds of people watching (well, it was Diamonds are Forever after all . The police chief in this scene is how JW Pepper should have been by the way. And driving the car on 2 wheels is always amazing and one where I hold my breath. The climax is a feast of action, a frenetic countdown aided by a frantic Bond trying to save the day.
Diamonds are Forever is truly a stand out entry in the series, partly because it has so many stand out villains. Ernst Stavro Blofeld is arguably the greatest Bond villain of all time. Dastardly and evil, he is the complete antithesis to 007 and was a faithful character to the franchise. He personifies cinematic evil and though may have become a source of parody what with Austin Powers, Blofeld still is one of screen's all time great villains. In Diamonds are Forever, it is the turn of the great Charles Grey to stroke the white cat and to plot the take over of the world. Grey really is terrific in the world and brings something to the role that Donald Pleasance and Telly Savalas failed to do. Grey's Blofeld is a lot more 'fun'...that is not a criticism, it is a compliment. Bond villains like Grey's Blofeld are the best because there is a sociopathic element to them...humour mixed with murder. Grey was an outstanding choice to play Blofeld. He updated the character to fit in with the tone of the film and he does this superbly without sacrificing the dark element of the character. Grey is menacing throughout the film and it's English accent that adds to the terror of the character. Grey's Blofeld is scandalously the forgotten Bond villain (people tend to remember Pleasance more) and this is a shame because Grey brings dynamic qualities to the role of Bond villain that is surprisingly lacking throughout the entire series.
Blofeld is served admirably and tantalizingly by numerous hench people, often in small parts that contribute to the concept of a sprawling evil empire that is SPECTRE whilst keeping in line of the film's goal to entertain. Morton Slumber, Shady Tree, Dr Metz. Each bring something to the film and play there part well, leaving 007 not knowing who to trust. Bert Saxby and Peter Franks, though not having much screen time, are memorable in separate ways and each bring a great screen presence in there few short scenes. Bambi and Thumper bring deadly fun to the film with there fight scene and are a welcome sub-plot to the story.
The stand out henchmen of the film though are Mr Wint and Mr Kidd. There is a delicious element to the characters that make them the most intriguing, enjoyable and sinister characters in the Bond universe. There homosexuality is neither here nor near. They are killers who are in love. It is these contrasting themes that mirror there actions of killing and making light of it, something regularly done throughout the film. Every time Mr Wint and Mr Kidd are on screen, they light it up in there fusion of death and humour. There methods of killing are graphically horrific, there commentaries on them even more so. Stock characters? No my friends, these are classic Bond villains. There demise suits how there characters are portrayed throughout the film...dark, deadly with a touch of panache.
Tiffany Case has always been one of the most outstanding Bond girls in the series. Played terrifically by Jill St John, Case is a stunning schemer who, unlike other Bond girls, enjoys her time on screen. The chemistry between St John and Connery (as stated previously) is terrific and one which ranks high in the series. Case is interesting as not only is she fiery, she's also vulnerable. Case is also smart and knows what she wants, something that can't be said for all the Bond girls. Case is at her best for me before she finds out that Bond is actually Bond. She bristles with anticipation in every scene and is cunning. Case goes down as a great Bond girl because she had a "CatWoman" quality about her. She is by no means innocent and this helps her endear herself to the audience as someone on the wrong side looking to come good.
The soundtrack to the film is the best in the Bond series. John Barry had been on impressive form in the previous film but he surpasses himself in this classic film The gunbarrel music is strangely ominous and suggests a tone to the film that Diamonds are Forever ultimately rejects. Shirley Bassey scores her best Bond song and one of the best entries with the eponymous title song. It is a beautiful song with a great melody and memorable and haunting lyrics. Barry's music helps the movie set the tone, telling the audience when to laugh and when to hold it's breath. A lovely return (and the last true classic appearance) of the 007 theme in the climax is a terrific addition and is the best version of the theme in my opinion (credit to @Murdock for linking me to the Youtube video of it).
Overall, Diamonds are Forever is a masterpiece in Bond history. Is it camp? Maybe...but that's why I love it. It took Bond away from gritty realism and allowed the audience to enjoy Bond again after two tense films (arguably You Only Live Twice less so). Diamonds are Forever is a great of the Bond series because like my friend noted, it has all the classic elements that make Bond Bond. This is how James Bond should be: a cinematic classic which is both a visual masterpiece and a terrific, fun action movie. 2 Hours fly by when watching this because it is that enjoyable and that good. I love the film. guilty pleasure? No, by no means. It's a pleasure I am happy to have in my life and am proud to state. I enjoy every second of it and I don't think I would change a thing about it (except re-cast Willard Whyte....something about Jimmy Dean is grating). Diamonds are Forever should be praised by Bond fans alone as the film that saved the franchise. Additionally, Diamonds are Forever should be appreciated for being a classic entry that allowed the series to re-engage with the public. I implore you all to watch it again, looking for all the elements, appreciating that great bits. It is packed with it.
It's about the same size and while it features a more powerful engine, it's also horribly noisy. Notice the nice fit and finish of the driver's side door! )
Bit unsure on the inhaler, first I heard of it.
As for the car, what strikes me with your suggestion is not the ill fitting door, but the nearly symmetrical 'styling'. )
I still that little blue car was a better choice as it was smaller, adding comical value to it.
Here's some controversy;
I love the propellerheads tracks 'backseat driver', 'Goldfinger' ft Shirley bassey and OHMSS.
I still that little blue car was a better choice as it was smaller, adding comical value to it.
Actually, the wheelbase for the ZAZ-965A (Wade's little blue car) is about 80 inches and the proposed replacement ZAZ-968M is 85 inches, so the car isn't that much bigger. This is actually pretty starkly illustrated when I put one each of my 1/43 scale models of each car next to one another. However, the ZAZ-968M is quite a bit wider and has a slightly longer body. It would still be dwarfed by anything on the roads in Russia, though.
I go away for a day and the thread has erupted! I LOVE it! Thanks for all these crazy (or not so crazy?) opinions, everyone! Keep 'em coming!
A few quick points:
For those of you saying Lazenby is a great Bond...agreed.
For those of you saying that Stacy Sutton is not a bad Bond girl...agreed. (I rather like her, except for the screaming in the elevator.)
For those of you asserting that the GE score is good...I have no words! X-( It makes me want to stab out my eardrums everytime I watch the movie. But that's just me
Hindsight is a wonderful thing but Benicio Del Toro would have made LTK even more awesome if he had more scenes
Most people I know that have watched LTK wouldn't really find that controversial. I agree completely, for one, that his character was underutilized/would have preferred Dario getting more screentime at the expense of, say, Martin Krest (so long as you don't touch Franz Sanchez).
OCtopussy gets slated ONLY because Roger Moore is in it...Dalton/Craig in it and it would be considered one of the best.
I agree with most of this. As far as Moore's performance goes, the only problems I had were in the chase through the jungle. No problems with the clown suit because it's played chillingly straight, Kamal Khan is badly underrated even if he did present little threat on a macro scale, and Orlov was if anything underutilized. He had what, 32 tank divisions at the rank of Lt. General? Doesn't that subtly say "GRU" to anyone familiar with that particular branch of the Soviet Army, since they recruited heavily out of tank troops (it would also explain his hatred of Gogol easily, even putting power madness aside...the GRU and KGB mixed like oil and water and literally spied on one another.)?
Still, some of the other dislike, I think, had to do with Maud Adams being reused. My Dad would be a good example, since he liked every other part of the film. That brings up another Bond opinion of mine that's quite possibly controversial: why not cast an actress who could at least pass for Anglo-Indian (I know they wanted to cast someone else, but it was Cubby's personal choice that overrode everyone else's to bring back Maud Adams), or give said actress an Anglo-Indian background (as for casting an Indian woman, apparently, they really did try and cast Persis Khambatta and someone else whom I can't recall in the lead role [not too many Indian leading ladies at the time, unfortunately...], but neither worked)?
why not cast an actress who could at least pass for Anglo-Indian (I know they wanted to cast someone else, but it was Cubby's personal choice that overrode everyone else's to bring back Maud Adams), or give said actress an Anglo-Indian background (as for casting an Indian woman, apparently, they really did try and cast Persis Khambatta and someone else whom I can't recall in the lead role [not too many Indian leading ladies at the time, unfortunately...], but neither worked)?
Maud Adams was the only thing that I really didn't like about OP- but whatever, David Carradine played a half-asian guy...
Oh, another one from yours truly: Dr. Kauffman's HORRIBLE German accent wrecked what was otherwise the most brilliant scene in TND. My father, who is fluent in German, was literally laughing during one screening and sarcastically cussing at Dr. Kauffman in German (there were a couple people that must've been Germans in the theater, because they were laughing when he did so) during another. His latest favorite line, delivered a la Mystery Science Theater 3000, is "that shot actually came from a disgruntled German, not Bond."
Oh, another one from yours truly: Dr. Kauffman's HORRIBLE German accent wrecked what was otherwise the most brilliant scene in TND.
Dr. Kaufman was American-raised, and was a homeland German wannabe, hence the stupid accent. He was a brilliant forensic scientist, but a severely lacking linguist.
Here are some of mine:
-- The slide whistle in TMWTGG is cool, and the scene is better for it.
-- The sloppiness in the editing of TB detracts in a big way from the quality of the film.
-- Q should never be in the field, and his roles in both OP and LTK are embarrassing in that regard.
-- The boat chase in LALD is too short, not too long.
-- Kara Milovy is one of the weakest Bond female leads in the series.
-- John Terry portrays Felix well.
-- From purely a plot persepctive (not dialogue), the first hour of DAD is excellent.
-- After Tracy, the girl Bond would most likely settle down with is Melina.
-- Topol's Columbo is every bit as good an ally as Armendariz's Kerim Bey.
-- GoldenEye is soooooooo overrated.
Here are some of mine:
-- The sloppiness in the editing of TB detracts in a big way from the quality of the film.
This has reminded me of something, which I'm not sure has been discussed or not?... But basically, there's these weird transitions between some scenes in TB's editing. Do people know what I'm referring to? Either way, they slightly annoy me, and kind of make it look like a TV show rather than a movie.
Despite all its problems, and there are many, I love watching TMWTGG.
For all the guff it gets, considering the sheer amount of people here that cite Christopher Lee as the best villain of the Roger Moore era plus a number of people praising Maud Adams' first/exponentially better attempt at being a Bond girl, I bet that this actually ISN'T all that controversial.
-- The sloppiness in the editing of TB detracts in a big way from the quality of the film.
Although it didn't detract for me personally, I did find myself noticing it more than in FRWL, which is an exponentially worse-edited film. Just me personally, but I think that speaks very highly of the plot in FRWL.
As an example, I noticed right from the get-go in TB's PTS when the 1964 Lincoln Continental Lehmann-Peterson Type 53A Executive Limousine turns into a 1965 model of the exact same limo for when Jacques Bouvar opens the door and steps out. In FRWL, it took me several viewings to figure out there there were three (not two, as I'd thought) Citroen Traction 11BL's chasing Kerim Bey's Rolls-Royce Silver Wraith, even though to a person who is likely not a fan of Bond BUT a big fan of cars the latter error would be far more noticeable (although I think most of us saw the 1958 Dodge D300 [or given that this was Turkey, it could have been a DeSoto or Fargo D300 since they were fond of rebadging Dodge trucks as DeSotos and Fargos] turn into a '61 Chevrolet Apache 1-Ton Stakebed).
Here are some of mine:
-- The sloppiness in the editing of TB detracts in a big way from the quality of the film.
This has reminded me of something, which I'm not sure has been discussed or not?... But basically, there's these weird transitions between some scenes in TB's editing. Do people know what I'm referring to? Either way, they slightly annoy me, and kind of make it look like a TV show rather than a movie.
During the editing Peter Hunt swapped a few scenes when Bond arrives in Nassau. The casino scene with Largo was meant to take place after Bond finds the henchman in his hotel bathroom. That is why Largo says: "A yes, one of my associates mentioned you" (or something like that). He is referring to his henchman that he will feed to the sharks later in the movie, but that scene was also supposed to be before the casino scene. Also, at the end of the casino scene you can see Felix Leiter lurking in the background while he and Bond haven't met yet. Ever noticed that Bond is wearing the same outfit before and after the casino scene while it is supposed to be 2 different days? I have no idea why the scenes were swapped and I think it wasn't the best choice Peter Hunt ever made.
Here are some of mine:
-- The slide whistle in TMWTGG is cool, and the scene is better for it.
-- The sloppiness in the editing of TB detracts in a big way from the quality of the film.
-- Q should never be in the field, and his roles in both OP and LTK are embarrassing in that regard.
-- The boat chase in LALD is too short, not too long.
-- Kara Milovy is one of the weakest Bond female leads in the series.
-- John Terry portrays Felix well.
-- From purely a plot persepctive (not dialogue), the first hour of DAD is excellent.
-- After Tracy, the girl Bond would most likely settle down with is Melina.
-- Topol's Columbo is every bit as good an ally as Armendariz's Kerim Bey.
-- GoldenEye is soooooooo overrated.
I agree completely about Q. I also think M should stay out of the field.
I always pictured him settling down with Octopussy or Kara Milovy (your pick for weak Bond girl). I don't see Bond turning around to pick up a cello for anyone else when there isn't much time.
-- Topol's Columbo is every bit as good an ally as Armendariz's Kerim Bey.
+1 on that!
I'll add a couple more to my own list:
--Timothy Dalton is the best Bond (is that controversial these days?)
--Zorin's scheme is often compared to Goldfinger's, but it's far more interesting and better thought-out.
-Pierce Brosnan is the best of all Bonds. Despite the flak he gets on this site, I am convinced that they are just wrong. Maybe with time he will be appreciated like OHMSS or Dalton seems to be now. Which brings me to another point:
-It seems in vogue to like Dalton's portrayal of Bond. While I enjoy his movies, he seemed a bit wooden for me. Also, as another poster once mentioned, his hair seemed strange at times; especially in the casino scenes in LTK.
-Connery is overrated. Only because he was the first does everyone think he's the best.
-FRWL, while enjoyable, is also overrated. Thunderball and Dr. No are better.
-- The sloppiness in the editing of TB detracts in a big way from the quality of the film.
Although it didn't detract for me personally, I did find myself noticing it more than in FRWL, which is an exponentially worse-edited film. Just me personally, but I think that speaks very highly of the plot in FRWL.
As an example, I noticed right from the get-go in TB's PTS when the 1964 Lincoln Continental Lehmann-Peterson Type 53A Executive Limousine turns into a 1965 model of the exact same limo for when Jacques Bouvar opens the door and steps out. In FRWL, it took me several viewings to figure out there there were three (not two, as I'd thought) Citroen Traction 11BL's chasing Kerim Bey's Rolls-Royce Silver Wraith, even though to a person who is likely not a fan of Bond BUT a big fan of cars the latter error would be far more noticeable (although I think most of us saw the 1958 Dodge D300 [or given that this was Turkey, it could have been a DeSoto or Fargo D300 since they were fond of rebadging Dodge trucks as DeSotos and Fargos] turn into a '61 Chevrolet Apache 1-Ton Stakebed).
That is some pretty specific stuff that a non-car guy like me would never notice. In TB, I am thinking about more obvious discontinuities and editing errors, such as:
-- Bond's underwater mask turning from blue to black and back
-- Sloppy jump cuts in the Bouvoir fight and the final fight with Largo
-- Felix speaking in Pinder's voice when identifying the manta rays
-- Dubbed dialogue that clearly doesn't match what lips are saying (eg, Bond telling Leiter to look after Domino at the junkanoo)
-- Obvious high-speed filming of the hydrofoil weaving in and out of the rocks and ultimately crashing
-- Moneypenny wearing the same outfit on days when Bond and M have changed clothes (yes, I know she's a low-paid civil servant, but still)
The sum effect of these instances is to make TB feel sloppy and rushed.
Jarvio, I think what you are referring to is the "wipe" technique used to transition from one scene to another. I personally don't mind that, but I can understand if people find it distracting.
Jarvio, I think what you are referring to is the "wipe" technique used to transition from one scene to another. I personally don't mind that, but I can understand if people find it distracting.
Yep that's what I meant. I guess it doesn't annoy me too much, and I was nit-picking. But I guess it makes it look a bit dated / odd to me. And I don't recall it being used on any other bond film either.
No - I think Connery is the best because HE IS THE BEST!!!
Hilariously, I was wondering where the Facebook "Like" button was when I was about to respond to this. I need a cup of coffee...
By the way, some general thoughts on Goldeneye being way overrated...I would say "yes, but not on this forum" (I'd also say the same about Goldfinger, despite the fact that I have it ranked pretty high...you can really think very highly of something and still overrate it), much as I would say that both DN and LTK are underrated...but NOT on AJB.
you can really think very highly of something and still overrate it
Yep. This is how I feel with TSWLM. Love the film, but find it overrated. I don't think it's the best Moore film by a long shot (like so many do), but still a great movie nonetheless.
you can really think very highly of something and still overrate it
Yep. This is how I feel with TSWLM. Love the film, but find it overrated. I don't think it's the best Moore film by a long shot (like so many do), but still a great movie nonetheless.
Comments
As per what I read, he was using a Salbutamol inhaler for some stimulant that wasn't Salbutamol, but could be wrong.
That's exactly why I proposed the ZAZ-968M Zaporozhets...a.k.a this...thing...
http://www.motorstown.com/images/zaz-968m-01.jpg
It's about the same size and while it features a more powerful engine, it's also horribly noisy. Notice the nice fit and finish of the driver's side door!
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
A Love Letter to a Classic: A Review of Diamonds are Forever
The year is 2008 and as I am enjoying my first months at university, I am equally anticipating the release of the new Bond movie coming out in November of that year, Quantum of Solace. Sharing halls of residence with people who haven't really seen Bond before, we embark on a Bondathon, a James Bond film every other day once we had got back from lectures in anticipation for the release of Daniel Craig's second film. Pumped and all "Bonded" up, we head to the cinema to see Quantum of Solace. As you always do after seeing a movie at the cinema, you stumble down the stairs, muttering to your friends whether they enjoyed, what they thought was good. The consensus was negative to mixed (a review for another day) generally. One friend, however, just walked casually towards me and just shrugged "Disappointing...wasn't a Diamonds are Forever, was it?"
This quote has always stuck to me and I hear it clearly in my head now as I did 4 years ago almost. What would prompt someone new to the Bond films not only to condemn a new hyped up film but to also condemn it using not just an old, an old film seen regularly by Bond fanatics as one of the weakest entries in the entire series? I asked him what he meant, and in his roundabout blunt way, he shrugged further "Well, having watched Diamonds are Forever, I felt that a Bond film should be like that. It had everything I now want from a Bond film". I remember on the walk back to our place thinking about his words..."It had everything". At this point in time, I admit that though I enjoyed Diamonds are Forever, I wasn't a taken fan by it, ranking it in the middle. I had always thought From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, The Spy Who Loved Me etc had been the Bond movies to have everything, Diamonds are Forever wasn't in consideration. I must have watched Diamonds are Forever a couple of times in that next week to review it, to see what I was missing, to find what made my friend make it his definative Bond film.
Upon those first reviews (and subsequent viewings since) Diamonds are Forever proves continuously to prove my friend right. It simply is one of the best entries in the series. Enjoyable, fun, tense, mesmerising, brilliant, visually stunning, memorable and dark, Diamonds are Forever is a banquet of great cinema and, more specifically, great Bond. It's a high point in the series. Without it, Bond simply would have died in the 1970's. IT would have been out of touch with the times, whilst the rest of cinema moved on from 60's noir to the brightness of the 70's action movies. Regardless of your opinions of Diamonds are Forever and the films before or after it, one cannot deny the importance of the film in the series.
I love On Her Majesty's Secret Service. I think that it is a terrific film let down only by George Lazenby. Cards on the table, it deserved a more suitable sequel (not better sequel, just more suitable to dealing with Tracy's death). I accept that and I believe the producers missed a trick here. But that's only in hindsight. Bond and the series was on it's knees in 1969/1970. On Her Majesty's Secret Service and George Lazenby had flopped massively. The film and star had strayed too far from the respected formula set by previous Bond films. Yes, in 2012, On Her Majesty's Secret Service is seen as a great film. But 43 years ago, it was seen as it's generation's Die Another Day. Bond needed saving, it needed to return to the type and style of film seen in Connery's later years. Bond needed saving and only James Bond i.e. Sean Connery could save it. Two things saved the Bond series: the film itself and the plot and, more importantly, the return of Sean Connery to the role of 007 that set the series on course for the success it still enjoys today. I will deal firstly with Connery's return and performance and the legacy it left in the series.
Trail through these forums and reviews of the film, you will see members and critics sniping that Sean Connery in Diamonds are Forever looks "bored, out of shape" and is "motivated by money...going through the motions at a poor rate"and that he should never have returned to a role he didn't want to return to. Has more nonsense ever been uttered? For me, Sean Connery delivers a sublime 007 performance in his last Bond movie. To be honest, he didn't need to deliver an average performance. It was all about having back that was crucial. You cannot deny Connery was needed to kick start the series again. Casting Roger Moore (who would have been splendid in the film) or continuing with Lazenby would have been a mistake and the producers and United Artists should be applauded for the courage to ask Connery back and pay him a wthen world record fee. I would rate it as his second best Bond performance and one of the very best in the entire series, justifying his large pay cheque. Regardless of what people say, Connery enjoys his final outing as James Bond very much. He shows a maturity that was missing in his other films and a sense of humour that bristles throughout the film. Connery delivers the jokes and the one-liners perfectly and perhaps this is forgotten in light of the terrific Roger Moore years. Connery's one-liners in Diamonds are Forever are always tinged with a darkness because there is a sense of violence behind every joke he delivers. This is no mistake, this is testimony to the acting ability of Sean Connery that he can tell jokes and yet appear lethal in equal measure (didn't they give Heath Ledger an Oscar for doing this in The Dark Knight). This myth that Connery is bored is nonsense. He loves every minute of his time back in the role and it shines through upon each viewing. Another myth that needs to be buried is the fact that he is out of shape. If he's out of shape in Diamonds are Forever, then God help us all. Connery is terrific and looks as fit as he did in his early days. Don't let the greying of the hair and the wrinkles fool you. He's comfortable in the action scenes. One great thing about Connery in Diamonds are Forever is his chemistry with his co-stars, noticably Jill St John, who is cast as Bond Girl Tiffany Case. Apart from Fiona Vulpe in Thunderball and a few others, Connery's bond failed at times to create chemistry with other characters, something that added to the charm of his tenure. In this film, the chemistry is dynamic and sparkling, aiding by a terrific script and Connery simply enjoy his dialogue. It's sad to think his performance is dismissed in such a way it is. Because he does do his best and his best is amazing in a fast paced action movie. A note on Connery's fashion style: inspired and brilliant...what he wears when he faces Bambi and Thumper is terrific, one which I have copied on numerous occasions. And he looks great in a balck (or white) tuxedo.
For 1969, On Her Majesty's Secret Service did not work. It was not the Bond movie the public demanded or expected after a feast of fantasy in Goldfinger, Thunderball and You Only Live Twice. Too many of the classic Bond ingredients was missing, the script and movie didn't sparkle in comparison. Diamonds are Forever employs all the Bond ingredients and isn't ashamed to show them off. For those who don't know, Diamonds are Forever sees Bond investigating a diamond smuggling operation that sees him impersonating a diamond smuggler and travelling from London to Dover to Amsterdam to Las Vegas to discover who is behind the smuggling and what the purpose of smuggling diamonds is. I won't reveal more but Bond fans will know the rest in this great movie. Diamonds are Forever is simply a visual masterpiece and a masterpiece in script writing and directing. The plot is terrific fun and is rather interesting. It pulls you one way and then the other, great blocks of dialogue and chemistry building scenes inter-mingled between some great action sequences. The film makers place the audience in a maze, leading them up one avenue before blocking it and directing them somewhere else. The shock of who's the antagonist was stunning when I first saw this. And how the villain gets away with it is simply masterful and story telling at it's best. Diamonds are Forever features one of the strongest plots and scripts in the franchise and how people can say it's weak is beyond me. It really is story telling at it's best . Fun and enjoyable whilst keeping the spy and action themes that launched the series in Dr No and From Russia With Love, there is something for every Bond fan and movie lover in Diamonds are Forever.
Having alluded to them previously, it is worth discussing in depth the action scenes littered throughout the film. The film's opening is amongst the best out of all the pre-Spy Who Loved Me films. The reintroduction of Connery as Bond in three steps is done terrifically. "Where is he?" and a kick to the face of Blofeld's Japanese stooge...brilliant. "Hit me" and a punch to the face to Blofeld's Egyptian colleague...terrific. Ultimately, one of the great Bond moments in the series comes when he meets Marie, the last SPECTRE agent. "There's something I'd like you to get off your chest" before whipping off her bra and proceeding to strangling her. It's brilliant, a classic Connery and James Bond scene. The scene buzzes with both humour and violence, always balancing the two contrasting themes. In essence, it is the story of Diamonds are Forever, setting the tone for the rest of the film.
The fight sequence with Peter Franks is terrifically put together and, in this reviewer's opinion, the best fight scene in the series. It is so much more frantic than the fight in From Russia With Love and so much more brutal than the staircase fight in Casino Royale. It is superbly choreographed by the impressive Bob Simmons, with every punch and movement prepared and as elegant as a ballet. Bond and Franks have a brutal time in that lift and it really does make an impression. It's a shame that there haven't been more of great fights like this. The chase scenes throughout the film are done brilliantly. I don't care what anyone says, the moon buggy scene is amazing. Aided by John Barry's impressive score, it is a chase in the best Bond traditions. Fun, greatly edited and tense, I am mystified to how this can be panned by so many. The subsequent car chase in the Mustang is also superb, let down only by the crowds of people watching (well, it was Diamonds are Forever after all . The police chief in this scene is how JW Pepper should have been by the way. And driving the car on 2 wheels is always amazing and one where I hold my breath. The climax is a feast of action, a frenetic countdown aided by a frantic Bond trying to save the day.
Diamonds are Forever is truly a stand out entry in the series, partly because it has so many stand out villains. Ernst Stavro Blofeld is arguably the greatest Bond villain of all time. Dastardly and evil, he is the complete antithesis to 007 and was a faithful character to the franchise. He personifies cinematic evil and though may have become a source of parody what with Austin Powers, Blofeld still is one of screen's all time great villains. In Diamonds are Forever, it is the turn of the great Charles Grey to stroke the white cat and to plot the take over of the world. Grey really is terrific in the world and brings something to the role that Donald Pleasance and Telly Savalas failed to do. Grey's Blofeld is a lot more 'fun'...that is not a criticism, it is a compliment. Bond villains like Grey's Blofeld are the best because there is a sociopathic element to them...humour mixed with murder. Grey was an outstanding choice to play Blofeld. He updated the character to fit in with the tone of the film and he does this superbly without sacrificing the dark element of the character. Grey is menacing throughout the film and it's English accent that adds to the terror of the character. Grey's Blofeld is scandalously the forgotten Bond villain (people tend to remember Pleasance more) and this is a shame because Grey brings dynamic qualities to the role of Bond villain that is surprisingly lacking throughout the entire series.
Blofeld is served admirably and tantalizingly by numerous hench people, often in small parts that contribute to the concept of a sprawling evil empire that is SPECTRE whilst keeping in line of the film's goal to entertain. Morton Slumber, Shady Tree, Dr Metz. Each bring something to the film and play there part well, leaving 007 not knowing who to trust. Bert Saxby and Peter Franks, though not having much screen time, are memorable in separate ways and each bring a great screen presence in there few short scenes. Bambi and Thumper bring deadly fun to the film with there fight scene and are a welcome sub-plot to the story.
The stand out henchmen of the film though are Mr Wint and Mr Kidd. There is a delicious element to the characters that make them the most intriguing, enjoyable and sinister characters in the Bond universe. There homosexuality is neither here nor near. They are killers who are in love. It is these contrasting themes that mirror there actions of killing and making light of it, something regularly done throughout the film. Every time Mr Wint and Mr Kidd are on screen, they light it up in there fusion of death and humour. There methods of killing are graphically horrific, there commentaries on them even more so. Stock characters? No my friends, these are classic Bond villains. There demise suits how there characters are portrayed throughout the film...dark, deadly with a touch of panache.
Tiffany Case has always been one of the most outstanding Bond girls in the series. Played terrifically by Jill St John, Case is a stunning schemer who, unlike other Bond girls, enjoys her time on screen. The chemistry between St John and Connery (as stated previously) is terrific and one which ranks high in the series. Case is interesting as not only is she fiery, she's also vulnerable. Case is also smart and knows what she wants, something that can't be said for all the Bond girls. Case is at her best for me before she finds out that Bond is actually Bond. She bristles with anticipation in every scene and is cunning. Case goes down as a great Bond girl because she had a "CatWoman" quality about her. She is by no means innocent and this helps her endear herself to the audience as someone on the wrong side looking to come good.
The soundtrack to the film is the best in the Bond series. John Barry had been on impressive form in the previous film but he surpasses himself in this classic film The gunbarrel music is strangely ominous and suggests a tone to the film that Diamonds are Forever ultimately rejects. Shirley Bassey scores her best Bond song and one of the best entries with the eponymous title song. It is a beautiful song with a great melody and memorable and haunting lyrics. Barry's music helps the movie set the tone, telling the audience when to laugh and when to hold it's breath. A lovely return (and the last true classic appearance) of the 007 theme in the climax is a terrific addition and is the best version of the theme in my opinion (credit to @Murdock for linking me to the Youtube video of it).
Overall, Diamonds are Forever is a masterpiece in Bond history. Is it camp? Maybe...but that's why I love it. It took Bond away from gritty realism and allowed the audience to enjoy Bond again after two tense films (arguably You Only Live Twice less so). Diamonds are Forever is a great of the Bond series because like my friend noted, it has all the classic elements that make Bond Bond. This is how James Bond should be: a cinematic classic which is both a visual masterpiece and a terrific, fun action movie. 2 Hours fly by when watching this because it is that enjoyable and that good. I love the film. guilty pleasure? No, by no means. It's a pleasure I am happy to have in my life and am proud to state. I enjoy every second of it and I don't think I would change a thing about it (except re-cast Willard Whyte....something about Jimmy Dean is grating). Diamonds are Forever should be praised by Bond fans alone as the film that saved the franchise. Additionally, Diamonds are Forever should be appreciated for being a classic entry that allowed the series to re-engage with the public. I implore you all to watch it again, looking for all the elements, appreciating that great bits. It is packed with it.
Dedicated to my friend who "showed me the light"
Bit unsure on the inhaler, first I heard of it.
As for the car, what strikes me with your suggestion is not the ill fitting door, but the nearly symmetrical 'styling'.
I still that little blue car was a better choice as it was smaller, adding comical value to it.
Here's some controversy;
I love the propellerheads tracks 'backseat driver', 'Goldfinger' ft Shirley bassey and OHMSS.
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
Actually, the wheelbase for the ZAZ-965A (Wade's little blue car) is about 80 inches and the proposed replacement ZAZ-968M is 85 inches, so the car isn't that much bigger. This is actually pretty starkly illustrated when I put one each of my 1/43 scale models of each car next to one another. However, the ZAZ-968M is quite a bit wider and has a slightly longer body. It would still be dwarfed by anything on the roads in Russia, though.
A few quick points:
For those of you saying Lazenby is a great Bond...agreed.
For those of you saying that Stacy Sutton is not a bad Bond girl...agreed. (I rather like her, except for the screaming in the elevator.)
For those of you asserting that the GE score is good...I have no words! X-( It makes me want to stab out my eardrums everytime I watch the movie. But that's just me
Carry on!
Hindsight is a wonderful thing but Benicio Del Toro would have made LTK even more awesome if he had more scenes
Goldfinger is awful boring and just not very good (AVTAK is better)
OCtopussy gets slated ONLY because Roger Moore is in it...Dalton/Craig in it and it would be considered one of the best.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Most people I know that have watched LTK wouldn't really find that controversial. I agree completely, for one, that his character was underutilized/would have preferred Dario getting more screentime at the expense of, say, Martin Krest (so long as you don't touch Franz Sanchez).
I agree with most of this. As far as Moore's performance goes, the only problems I had were in the chase through the jungle. No problems with the clown suit because it's played chillingly straight, Kamal Khan is badly underrated even if he did present little threat on a macro scale, and Orlov was if anything underutilized. He had what, 32 tank divisions at the rank of Lt. General? Doesn't that subtly say "GRU" to anyone familiar with that particular branch of the Soviet Army, since they recruited heavily out of tank troops (it would also explain his hatred of Gogol easily, even putting power madness aside...the GRU and KGB mixed like oil and water and literally spied on one another.)?
Still, some of the other dislike, I think, had to do with Maud Adams being reused. My Dad would be a good example, since he liked every other part of the film. That brings up another Bond opinion of mine that's quite possibly controversial: why not cast an actress who could at least pass for Anglo-Indian (I know they wanted to cast someone else, but it was Cubby's personal choice that overrode everyone else's to bring back Maud Adams), or give said actress an Anglo-Indian background (as for casting an Indian woman, apparently, they really did try and cast Persis Khambatta and someone else whom I can't recall in the lead role [not too many Indian leading ladies at the time, unfortunately...], but neither worked)?
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
In a TV series...not a Bond film...
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
-- The slide whistle in TMWTGG is cool, and the scene is better for it.
-- The sloppiness in the editing of TB detracts in a big way from the quality of the film.
-- Q should never be in the field, and his roles in both OP and LTK are embarrassing in that regard.
-- The boat chase in LALD is too short, not too long.
-- Kara Milovy is one of the weakest Bond female leads in the series.
-- John Terry portrays Felix well.
-- From purely a plot persepctive (not dialogue), the first hour of DAD is excellent.
-- After Tracy, the girl Bond would most likely settle down with is Melina.
-- Topol's Columbo is every bit as good an ally as Armendariz's Kerim Bey.
-- GoldenEye is soooooooo overrated.
This has reminded me of something, which I'm not sure has been discussed or not?... But basically, there's these weird transitions between some scenes in TB's editing. Do people know what I'm referring to? Either way, they slightly annoy me, and kind of make it look like a TV show rather than a movie.
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
Ha ha ha!!! That one is hilarious! You're just trying to be entertaining, right?
I don't think Denise Rchards was as bad in TWINE as everybody thinks. No one could have delivered some of those lines she was given
I really liked Ian Fleming's novel The Spy Who Loved Me.
Despite all its problems, and there are many, I love watching TMWTGG.
When I first saw CR I really liked it, but when I watch it now I see many faults.
When I first saw OHMSS I hated it, but now it is in my top ten.
I liked Elliot Carver in TND, I thought it was a rather good likeness of Rupert Murdoch.
I wish Judy Dench would go away or have her role greatly reduced.
I thought Zorin murdering all the workers while laughing in AVTAK was too violent for a Bond film.
Roger Moore himself agrees with you on that one
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
For all the guff it gets, considering the sheer amount of people here that cite Christopher Lee as the best villain of the Roger Moore era plus a number of people praising Maud Adams' first/exponentially better attempt at being a Bond girl, I bet that this actually ISN'T all that controversial.
Although it didn't detract for me personally, I did find myself noticing it more than in FRWL, which is an exponentially worse-edited film. Just me personally, but I think that speaks very highly of the plot in FRWL.
As an example, I noticed right from the get-go in TB's PTS when the 1964 Lincoln Continental Lehmann-Peterson Type 53A Executive Limousine turns into a 1965 model of the exact same limo for when Jacques Bouvar opens the door and steps out. In FRWL, it took me several viewings to figure out there there were three (not two, as I'd thought) Citroen Traction 11BL's chasing Kerim Bey's Rolls-Royce Silver Wraith, even though to a person who is likely not a fan of Bond BUT a big fan of cars the latter error would be far more noticeable (although I think most of us saw the 1958 Dodge D300 [or given that this was Turkey, it could have been a DeSoto or Fargo D300 since they were fond of rebadging Dodge trucks as DeSotos and Fargos] turn into a '61 Chevrolet Apache 1-Ton Stakebed).
During the editing Peter Hunt swapped a few scenes when Bond arrives in Nassau. The casino scene with Largo was meant to take place after Bond finds the henchman in his hotel bathroom. That is why Largo says: "A yes, one of my associates mentioned you" (or something like that). He is referring to his henchman that he will feed to the sharks later in the movie, but that scene was also supposed to be before the casino scene. Also, at the end of the casino scene you can see Felix Leiter lurking in the background while he and Bond haven't met yet. Ever noticed that Bond is wearing the same outfit before and after the casino scene while it is supposed to be 2 different days? I have no idea why the scenes were swapped and I think it wasn't the best choice Peter Hunt ever made.
I agree completely about Q. I also think M should stay out of the field.
I always pictured him settling down with Octopussy or Kara Milovy (your pick for weak Bond girl). I don't see Bond turning around to pick up a cello for anyone else when there isn't much time.
Disagree about GE
+1 on that!
I'll add a couple more to my own list:
--Timothy Dalton is the best Bond (is that controversial these days?)
--Zorin's scheme is often compared to Goldfinger's, but it's far more interesting and better thought-out.
-It seems in vogue to like Dalton's portrayal of Bond. While I enjoy his movies, he seemed a bit wooden for me. Also, as another poster once mentioned, his hair seemed strange at times; especially in the casino scenes in LTK.
-Connery is overrated. Only because he was the first does everyone think he's the best.
-FRWL, while enjoyable, is also overrated. Thunderball and Dr. No are better.
That is some pretty specific stuff that a non-car guy like me would never notice. In TB, I am thinking about more obvious discontinuities and editing errors, such as:
-- Bond's underwater mask turning from blue to black and back
-- Sloppy jump cuts in the Bouvoir fight and the final fight with Largo
-- Felix speaking in Pinder's voice when identifying the manta rays
-- Dubbed dialogue that clearly doesn't match what lips are saying (eg, Bond telling Leiter to look after Domino at the junkanoo)
-- Obvious high-speed filming of the hydrofoil weaving in and out of the rocks and ultimately crashing
-- Moneypenny wearing the same outfit on days when Bond and M have changed clothes (yes, I know she's a low-paid civil servant, but still)
The sum effect of these instances is to make TB feel sloppy and rushed.
Jarvio, I think what you are referring to is the "wipe" technique used to transition from one scene to another. I personally don't mind that, but I can understand if people find it distracting.
Yep that's what I meant. I guess it doesn't annoy me too much, and I was nit-picking. But I guess it makes it look a bit dated / odd to me. And I don't recall it being used on any other bond film either.
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
No - I think Connery is the best because HE IS THE BEST!!! :007)
Hilariously, I was wondering where the Facebook "Like" button was when I was about to respond to this. I need a cup of coffee...
By the way, some general thoughts on Goldeneye being way overrated...I would say "yes, but not on this forum" (I'd also say the same about Goldfinger, despite the fact that I have it ranked pretty high...you can really think very highly of something and still overrate it), much as I would say that both DN and LTK are underrated...but NOT on AJB.
Yep. This is how I feel with TSWLM. Love the film, but find it overrated. I don't think it's the best Moore film by a long shot (like so many do), but still a great movie nonetheless.
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby