I didn't realise how disliked Vargas is. I've seen a few comments about his uselessness lately. I suppose he is a bit forgettable but he's around such a good cast of villains that it doesn't matter.
Most of the cons fall right at the feet of the director and screenwriters. As far as the editing - the editor only does want the director wants so I put all editing decisions back on the director. By the time they made this film it had gone through a lot of changes and the director was forced to make it has coherent as he could given the size of the production, but I think the whole thing sort of overwhelmed him and for the most part he just to decided to have as much fun as he could making it, and when you let that take over your mind set as a director you end up not caring so much for the integrity of the character or the script. At the point in time this film came out he was almost guaranteed it would make big box office, so although I'm sure he still worked it as a seasoned professional director, it's obvious on repeated viewings that the whole film wasn't taken as seriously as the first two he directed. A lot of that attitude had to do with GF. EON made film history with that entry and cemented the Bond formula, so Young did only had to follow the chalk line put down by Guy Hamilton.
Actually directors rarely have much influence once a film has wrapped. The editor spends weeks sifting through hours of footage finally compiling a rough cut for the producers. Famously, the first cut of YOLT was over 4 hours long and OHMSS was approaching 4 hours.
It is unfortunate that Peter Hunt was not available due to his working on The Ipcress File otherwise we would have a much tighter cut for TBl.
Having said that I still think TB is a top Bond film I will add my pros and cons at a later date to each of the threads as it's been some time since I have seen them.
The director's influence on how the film appears on release depends on whether they have the final cut in their contract. This was unusual for director's like Young to have since studios like UA and EON did not like the practice. Usually only auteur directors who often also produced their films have this power - Spieberg and Lucas are examples of this.
The rough cut is not assembled for the producers - it is the first pass (assembly edit) of what the final film will be when it reaches picture lock. This is the point where the director is responsible for creating the "director's cut" - the time that is set aside where the film editor's first cut from the rough cut is molded to fit the director's vision. While collaborating on this stage of the editing, the director and the editor go over the entire movie in great detail; scenes and shots are re-ordered, removed, shortened and otherwise tweaked to obtain the director's vision.
In the final cut stage, sometimes subsequent edits are supervised by one or more producers, who represent the production company and/or movie studio. In normal cases, these are usually quite minor tweaks dealing with such things as maintaining the rating of the film (overseeing the violence and sex and pc situations) so it keeps in line with how they want the film to appear to conform to the corporate image of the people financing the project.
It is rare for producers at this stage to demand so many changes of the final cut to the extent that it would be totally unlike the director's vision. The main influence EON held over their director's and writers was making sure all the films after GF had all the cliches in them (Q gadgets, meglomaniac villain with lair, large explosive third act, casino scene, etc). Outside that they usually let the director's do their job.
I still maintain most of the negatives points about TB that people point out and agree on were the responsibility of Young's direction - including his choice of his edits in his director's cut. The script itself may have had some weaknesses, but it does not inform the director how to cut a film. He was responsible for the overuse of undercranking in scenes (such as the Disco Volante finale) and the overlong running time due to uneven, often too slow pacing of scenes. Ernest Hosler was the film editor and yes, Peter Hunt was his supervising editor, but Young was the the man who decided whether the pacing and edits in his cut were how he wanted it to look.
Nice copy and paste job about film making, CA.
Where do you have the proof that Young oversaw the editing process because I remember reading that he left the TB shoot to helm "Danger Grows Wild" immediately after wrapping the movie?
I don't have any proof of this only what I remember reading - I still maintain that TB is slower than it should be due to the lack of Peter Hunt's input not anything else - just my opinion of which I am entitled to
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
One of the things I find odd about the movie making process, is
the "Story board" which is supposed to have, the story, ideas on
Editing, camera angles etc.
Yet even today you read of movies coming in at three or four hours
and having to be edited down to only 140 or 120 minutes.
I maybe wrong ( not for the first time) but isn't the idea of the story board
Supposed to stop this from happening ?
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Yes, in theory, they are supposed to - and they do help a lot in figuring out how to trim a film down to a reasonable running time - but this mainly works with action and animation films.
I was a storyboard artist on a few independent films. The amount of the script that's boarded depends on how much the director wants. Initially I produced them so they could get a clear idea of how some action scenes would play out visually. In most instances, this was usually the only scenes I did the boards for. For the regular "talking head" shots that make up a large piece of non-action films, the boards are not really necessary if one has a good director and DP. Naturally, with films like the Bond series, there can be a lot of boards produced because there are so many location changes and so many action shots and stunts. Director's like Hitchcock and Spielberg always loved a ton of board work on many of their films because they get very detailed as exactly how they want the whole film shot and framed. Putting up an entire sequence on a wall to see how it flows really helps them to see if something can be cut out that might hinder the pace. Hitchcock loved this process so much (he started out as an artist designing the title cards for silent films) that he felt once the script and boards were done he felt the movie was finished. The whole filming of it to him was just work. I always thought he would have loved animation today as he could have boarded and directed a digital animated film and not have to deal with the filming process. Spielberg relied on the boards on most of his big action films, but as he started to feel more confident in his ability of setting up scenes over the years by the time he got to films like Schindler's List, he felt he didn't need them for he thought if they were over planned he wouldn't get the spontaneity he needed.
The boards are great if you know exactly how you want a scene to look and want it to come out as close to that vision as you can. The nice thing is they can be modified a lot or even discarded if during the actual shooting better ideas present themselves. This happens more than one might think as drawing the idea on paper - which seems to look right when initially presented - sometimes just doesn't seem as good once it's shot and reviewed. It might not even look right when duplicated on set and viewed through the camera. Still, they're great for giving one the idea of what it should look like and they're also great for visually explaining the scene to actors and other crew members as to what the director and DP are aiming for.
Watch TB for the first time ever over the weekend. While there were some aspects I liked, for the most part I did not care for this film.
Pros:
- The PTS was great. From Bond's suit to the revelation about Bouvar and subsequent fight. Of course, the silly but it works escape via jetpack!
- The cinematography during the Bahama scenes was phenomenal. Makes me yearn to return soon!
- Bond's quips.
- The skyhook rescue at the end. I wonder if the Hong Kong scene from The Dark Knight was influenced by this.
Cons:
- The pacing was too long and slow. By and large I found this installment to be boring and even dosed off once or twice.
- Didn't care for the underwater battles.
Speaking of the ending, what happened to Ladislav, the guy who rescued Domino? We see Bond hand him a life saver, then push him into the water. Yet only Bond and Domino get into the life raft. Did 007 just leave him to fend for himself?
- The skyhook rescue at the end. I wonder if the Hong Kong scene from The Dark Knight w influenced by this.
Very possible considering that Chris Nolan is a Bond fand and explicitly confirmed that the beginning of "The Dark Knight Rises" was influenced by LTK.
Now I have to watch TB soon as I don't even remember that scene well...
"I'm afraid I'm a complicated woman. "
"- That is something to be afraid of."
So onto TB and my first viewing in probably 5 years.
PROS:
PTS especially jet pack and Aston Martin - great fun
Titles - Theme Song
SPECTRE meeting
Health Clinic scenes
Junkanoo
Q gadget scene
Underwater Battle
Boat fight
Music
Largo
Leiter
Pat Fearing
Paula
Fiona
Cons:
The underwater scenes stealing the bomb and other underwater scenes are too long
Speeded up film on the boat finale is ridiculous
Vargas is an uninspiring henchman after Grant and Oddjob.
Observations:
Angelo still hasn't got impersonating Derval properly even after demanding extra money.
Going against general opinion I actually like Rik Van Nutter as Leiter - looks wise he is the closest to what Fleming describes in the books.
Conclusion:
This was the biggest Bond event ever - I was just 9 when I saw this at the cinema and the queues were enormous. The whole Bond mania thing was everywhere you looked and I can remember collecting the bubble gum cards and having a Bond vs Largo board game as a Christmas present.
How does it fare today? Sean puts in a great performance as does Celi. Luciana Paluzzi is the hottest villain ever. But the underwater scenes needed tighter editing they get a little boring even with John Barry's great score. The ending is ruined with the speeded up back projection but the fight finale on the boat is excellent.
Overall a good effort but certainly not in the class of the first three.
CHB will return reviewing YOLT
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
I have such mixed views about TB. No doubt from all I have read it was certainly a huge event when it was released. I love the overall feel, and being a watersports enthusiast myself I love the Bahamas scenes - especially the Kiss Kiss Club.
However, we all seem to agree on the underwater scenes being far too drawn out and the ending too silly for words.
Calvin Dyson does a great review on YouTube - I agree with most of what he says (he is not a fan of TB).
Angelo still hasn't got impersonating Derval properly even after demanding extra money.
How does it fare today? Sean puts in a great performance as does Celi. Luciana Paluzzi is the hottest villain ever. But the underwater scenes needed tighter editing they get a little boring even with John Barry's great score. The ending is ruined with the speeded up back projection but the fight finale on the boat is excellent.
I mostly agree with your points. I want to like it but the scenes drag on way too long. It's not even the underwater scenes themselves, the finale is quite unique. I'd cut the movie by about an hour and you have one of my favourite Bond films. The score and villains and script (best one-liners in the series) is fantastic. Unfortunately at it stands it is near the bottom.
I think cutting the film by an hour may be a little drastic ) some editing of the scenes hi-jacking the bomb - Bond under the Disco Volante and a bit of tightening of the underwater battle would suffice - say maybe 5 minutes in total to quicken the pace would have paid dividends. I believe Peter Hunt came in to do some pre-release work after Ernest Hosler completed his editing duties but apparently there was not enough time to do a full re-edit of it before the release date.
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
I may be wrong, but I thought I read in some Bond docu-book that one of the reasons there was so much underwater stuff is that Kevin McClory as the nominal producer had such a huge influence over Maibaum & Hopkins script, that he virtually insisted there was a huge battle scene, various underwater fights / chases etc. It is how he imagined the film.
TB has a complicated production history which is always worth remembering when attempting to assess its success. Essentially while it was an Eon Production, much of the ground work (locations, stunt ideas, etc) had been mooted for years by McClory: this allowed Broccoli and Saltzman to make the 4th OO7 quickly. Had they needed to do all this research, planning & development themselves TB probably wouldn't have hit cinemas until mid-1966.
For the brief record I agree with the posters who say you must see TB in the cinema. I was lucky enough to see the cleaned up print at the BFI and it looks and sounds amazing on the big screen. It has, like many modern blockbusters, an ability to overpower the audience; you are taken on a thrill ride with OO7 and the film makers never let you forget it. While there are a lot of flaws in continuity, the only real drag is the final underwater battle which is probably five minutes too long. Watching in Panavision you even forgive the cranked up/down back projection in the climatic fight.
P.S. great score, great one liners, Luciana Palluzzi is a class-A babe, Connery is magnificent, PTS fight gloriously brutal, credit sequence erotically sexy, Celi smoothly menacing, SPECTRE inventive, story line still relevant, Junkanoo tension filled, Claudine Auger mmmmmmmm.....
I met a guy who owned a dive shop in the Florida Keys. We started talking about TB (he had a big poster up in the shop). He said he was one of the extras in the big underwater fight scene at the end, and the bit where the shark comes swimming through was totally unplanned. The shark just showed up and somebody shot it with a spear gun out of self defense.
Saw Thunderball in '65 in a big movie palace (1000 plus seats, balcony, 50 ft screen) when I was 8 years old on a Saturday afternoon with a bunch of my friends. We were mesmerised, enthralled, and thrilled from the top of our heads to the tips of our toes. We cheered and applauded our hero 007 for two plus hrs then we stayed to see it again (you could do that back in '65) and loved it even more.
Thunderball is my favorite Bond film to this day. Even with its faults I just plain enjoy this film the most. Other folks have done such a great job of detailing its highlights and lowlights that there is no need to repeat them. -{
Youtubers Calvin Dyson and MrTardis11 both dislike this movie (the former had it at #22, while the latter at #21, if I remember well).
Alan Caylow loves it and has it as his #1 Bond film.
"Hostile takeovers. Shall we?"
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
-Domino is a BG with some character.
-Largo is a tough-looking BV.
-The score rocks.
-Fiona Volpe is very well acted.
-The plot is easy to understand and is a solid one.
-We have a nice Leiter.
Cons:
-Largo's death is anti-climactic.
-The stretch from Bond's first scene near Nassau to Paula's capture kinda drags for me.
-Connery's performance here feels rather average (I'd say I give him a solid C for this performance here).
-The final underwater battle doesn't really get me pumped and I think it could've been trimmed a bit.
Overall, I like TB but I'm not crazy about it, and give it an 8/10.
"Hostile takeovers. Shall we?"
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
Calvin Dyson dislikes the movie - well thats a plus point in its favour
Ha, so true. While the guy does make me chuckle, his tastes are rather strange; his ranking of all 23 films made me cringe. TWINE in the top 5... and above Goldfinger. Wow.
Calvin Dyson dislikes the movie - well thats a plus point in its favour
Ha, so true. While the guy does make me chuckle, his tastes are rather strange; his ranking of all 23 films made me cringe. TWINE in the top 5... and above Goldfinger. Wow.
Weird opinions are common within Bond fandom.
"Hostile takeovers. Shall we?"
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
Comments
1. Thunderball 2. FRWL 3. Casino Royale 4. TLD 5. OHMSS 6. SkyFall 7. GF 8. TSWLM 9. GE 10. FYEO
You do have a point
Of course he was. He didn't DO anything..according to Largo (does not smoke, does not drink..).
Nice copy and paste job about film making, CA.
Where do you have the proof that Young oversaw the editing process because I remember reading that he left the TB shoot to helm "Danger Grows Wild" immediately after wrapping the movie?
I don't have any proof of this only what I remember reading - I still maintain that TB is slower than it should be due to the lack of Peter Hunt's input not anything else - just my opinion of which I am entitled to
the "Story board" which is supposed to have, the story, ideas on
Editing, camera angles etc.
Yet even today you read of movies coming in at three or four hours
and having to be edited down to only 140 or 120 minutes.
I maybe wrong ( not for the first time) but isn't the idea of the story board
Supposed to stop this from happening ?
I was a storyboard artist on a few independent films. The amount of the script that's boarded depends on how much the director wants. Initially I produced them so they could get a clear idea of how some action scenes would play out visually. In most instances, this was usually the only scenes I did the boards for. For the regular "talking head" shots that make up a large piece of non-action films, the boards are not really necessary if one has a good director and DP. Naturally, with films like the Bond series, there can be a lot of boards produced because there are so many location changes and so many action shots and stunts. Director's like Hitchcock and Spielberg always loved a ton of board work on many of their films because they get very detailed as exactly how they want the whole film shot and framed. Putting up an entire sequence on a wall to see how it flows really helps them to see if something can be cut out that might hinder the pace. Hitchcock loved this process so much (he started out as an artist designing the title cards for silent films) that he felt once the script and boards were done he felt the movie was finished. The whole filming of it to him was just work. I always thought he would have loved animation today as he could have boarded and directed a digital animated film and not have to deal with the filming process. Spielberg relied on the boards on most of his big action films, but as he started to feel more confident in his ability of setting up scenes over the years by the time he got to films like Schindler's List, he felt he didn't need them for he thought if they were over planned he wouldn't get the spontaneity he needed.
The boards are great if you know exactly how you want a scene to look and want it to come out as close to that vision as you can. The nice thing is they can be modified a lot or even discarded if during the actual shooting better ideas present themselves. This happens more than one might think as drawing the idea on paper - which seems to look right when initially presented - sometimes just doesn't seem as good once it's shot and reviewed. It might not even look right when duplicated on set and viewed through the camera. Still, they're great for giving one the idea of what it should look like and they're also great for visually explaining the scene to actors and other crew members as to what the director and DP are aiming for.
Pros:
- The PTS was great. From Bond's suit to the revelation about Bouvar and subsequent fight. Of course, the silly but it works escape via jetpack!
- The cinematography during the Bahama scenes was phenomenal. Makes me yearn to return soon!
- Bond's quips.
- The skyhook rescue at the end. I wonder if the Hong Kong scene from The Dark Knight was influenced by this.
Cons:
- The pacing was too long and slow. By and large I found this installment to be boring and even dosed off once or twice.
- Didn't care for the underwater battles.
Speaking of the ending, what happened to Ladislav, the guy who rescued Domino? We see Bond hand him a life saver, then push him into the water. Yet only Bond and Domino get into the life raft. Did 007 just leave him to fend for himself?
Very possible considering that Chris Nolan is a Bond fand and explicitly confirmed that the beginning of "The Dark Knight Rises" was influenced by LTK.
Now I have to watch TB soon as I don't even remember that scene well...
"- That is something to be afraid of."
He is fantastic at the reviews, and also hilarious. Although I agree, there are worse Bond films that TB.
1. Dalton 2. Moore 3. Connery 4. Lazenby 5. Craig 6. Brosnan
PROS:
PTS especially jet pack and Aston Martin - great fun
Titles - Theme Song
SPECTRE meeting
Health Clinic scenes
Junkanoo
Q gadget scene
Underwater Battle
Boat fight
Music
Largo
Leiter
Pat Fearing
Paula
Fiona
Cons:
The underwater scenes stealing the bomb and other underwater scenes are too long
Speeded up film on the boat finale is ridiculous
Vargas is an uninspiring henchman after Grant and Oddjob.
Observations:
Angelo still hasn't got impersonating Derval properly even after demanding extra money.
Going against general opinion I actually like Rik Van Nutter as Leiter - looks wise he is the closest to what Fleming describes in the books.
Conclusion:
This was the biggest Bond event ever - I was just 9 when I saw this at the cinema and the queues were enormous. The whole Bond mania thing was everywhere you looked and I can remember collecting the bubble gum cards and having a Bond vs Largo board game as a Christmas present.
How does it fare today? Sean puts in a great performance as does Celi. Luciana Paluzzi is the hottest villain ever. But the underwater scenes needed tighter editing they get a little boring even with John Barry's great score. The ending is ruined with the speeded up back projection but the fight finale on the boat is excellent.
Overall a good effort but certainly not in the class of the first three.
CHB will return reviewing YOLT
However, we all seem to agree on the underwater scenes being far too drawn out and the ending too silly for words.
Calvin Dyson does a great review on YouTube - I agree with most of what he says (he is not a fan of TB).
I mostly agree with your points. I want to like it but the scenes drag on way too long. It's not even the underwater scenes themselves, the finale is quite unique. I'd cut the movie by about an hour and you have one of my favourite Bond films. The score and villains and script (best one-liners in the series) is fantastic. Unfortunately at it stands it is near the bottom.
Me too, there's lots to like but it's a chore to sit through. I rewatched his video and agree with it too.
greatly helped the pace of the film.
TB has a complicated production history which is always worth remembering when attempting to assess its success. Essentially while it was an Eon Production, much of the ground work (locations, stunt ideas, etc) had been mooted for years by McClory: this allowed Broccoli and Saltzman to make the 4th OO7 quickly. Had they needed to do all this research, planning & development themselves TB probably wouldn't have hit cinemas until mid-1966.
For the brief record I agree with the posters who say you must see TB in the cinema. I was lucky enough to see the cleaned up print at the BFI and it looks and sounds amazing on the big screen. It has, like many modern blockbusters, an ability to overpower the audience; you are taken on a thrill ride with OO7 and the film makers never let you forget it. While there are a lot of flaws in continuity, the only real drag is the final underwater battle which is probably five minutes too long. Watching in Panavision you even forgive the cranked up/down back projection in the climatic fight.
P.S. great score, great one liners, Luciana Palluzzi is a class-A babe, Connery is magnificent, PTS fight gloriously brutal, credit sequence erotically sexy, Celi smoothly menacing, SPECTRE inventive, story line still relevant, Junkanoo tension filled, Claudine Auger mmmmmmmm.....
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Thunderball is my favorite Bond film to this day. Even with its faults I just plain enjoy this film the most. Other folks have done such a great job of detailing its highlights and lowlights that there is no need to repeat them. -{
Alan Caylow loves it and has it as his #1 Bond film.
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
-Domino is a BG with some character.
-Largo is a tough-looking BV.
-The score rocks.
-Fiona Volpe is very well acted.
-The plot is easy to understand and is a solid one.
-We have a nice Leiter.
Cons:
-Largo's death is anti-climactic.
-The stretch from Bond's first scene near Nassau to Paula's capture kinda drags for me.
-Connery's performance here feels rather average (I'd say I give him a solid C for this performance here).
-The final underwater battle doesn't really get me pumped and I think it could've been trimmed a bit.
Overall, I like TB but I'm not crazy about it, and give it an 8/10.
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
Calvin Dyson dislikes the movie - well thats a plus point in its favour
Bond: Pierce Brosnan Villain: Hugo Drax Girl: Pam Bouvier
Weird opinions are common within Bond fandom.
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS