Connery was decent in YOLT. I do think he could have gotten into a bit better physical shape however. The added weight makes him appear slower and a bit ponderous.....not the lean, hungry, more formidable looking Bond of TB. I think it doesn't help his performance.
This is a big contributor to why I don't really like Connery's last 3 Bond films. Especially DAF when he was his most bloated and had those caterpillars above his eyes. But YOLT was the start of when he took less care of himself and it hindered his performance in my opinion.
I find it very interesting to be able read people’s opinions about YOLT. It was the first Bond movie I watched, so to me it is a standard by which all other Bond movies are judged – and this includes Connery’s earlier 007 movies. It was the single movie that made me a Bond fan many years ago, and I still find it fun to watch. I wonder why, but to be honest, I really don’t see all those things that some here criticise the movie for. For me it’s just brilliant, but I will happily admit I’m not very objective.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I find it very interesting to be able read people’s opinions about YOLT. It was the first Bond movie I watched, so to me it is a standard by which all other Bond movies are judged – and this includes Connery’s earlier 007 movies. It was the single movie that made me a Bond fan many years ago, and I still find it fun to watch. I wonder why, but to be honest, I really don’t see all those things that some here criticise the movie for. For me it’s just brilliant, but I will happily admit I’m not very objective.
I'm that way about all of the early era, really, but am particularly partial to DAF, which was the first I ever saw---projected on a big screen---when I was nine years old. Yes, it's the pariah of the official Connery Bonds...but I care not a bit. It will always be a fun watch for this nine year old.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
DAF is not all bad. The elevator fight in Holland is very good. It's interesting that Connery went through a period where he appeared a bit heavy in films, but around 1977-81 he appeared to slim down and looked great in A Bridge Too Far and Cuba. He would have made a great "older" Bond during that time period.
Connery was decent in YOLT. I do think he could have gotten into a bit better physical shape however. The added weight makes him appear slower and a bit ponderous.....not the lean, hungry, more formidable looking Bond of TB. I think it doesn't help his performance.
This is a big contributor to why I don't really like Connery's last 3 Bond films. Especially DAF when he was his most bloated and had those caterpillars above his eyes. But YOLT was the start of when he took less care of himself and it hindered his performance in my opinion.
But what's wrong with his shape in TB? He wasn't as toned as he was in DN, but I think he looked more than acceptable.
That's a wonderful analysis, Gassy, I really enjoyed reading it.
Perhaps YOLT feels truncated In places because it genuinely IS truncated. The original editor was having a hard time cutting the film down from 3 hours or so, and Peter Hunt had to be dragged back to cut it to its final length.
(Hunt wasn't originally editing here since he was moving into direction)
Connery was decent in YOLT. I do think he could have gotten into a bit better physical shape however. The added weight makes him appear slower and a bit ponderous.....not the lean, hungry, more formidable looking Bond of TB. I think it doesn't help his performance.
This is a big contributor to why I don't really like Connery's last 3 Bond films. Especially DAF when he was his most bloated and had those caterpillars above his eyes. But YOLT was the start of when he took less care of himself and it hindered his performance in my opinion.
But what's wrong with his shape in TB? He wasn't as toned as he was in DN, but I think he looked more than acceptable.
He's in very good shape in Thunderball. It's You Only Live Twice when he starts to show a little pudginess, though he's certainly still in good shape.
Connery was decent in YOLT. I do think he could have gotten into a bit better physical shape however. The added weight makes him appear slower and a bit ponderous.....not the lean, hungry, more formidable looking Bond of TB. I think it doesn't help his performance.
This is a big contributor to why I don't really like Connery's last 3 Bond films. Especially DAF when he was his most bloated and had those caterpillars above his eyes. But YOLT was the start of when he took less care of himself and it hindered his performance in my opinion.
The Caterpillars are a major problem in YOLT and DAF. Connery should not shoulder the blame as what we're Hair and Makeup thinking ? It's the same with DC in Skyfall. Mrs Zaphod cannot stop laughing at the light shining through his ears when he is on the boat approaching the Casino. Somebody somewhere surely should have noticed. As a young boy I do recall an article while filming DAF that Sean was not allowing hair and makeup a free reign and pretty much refused to get in shape, a kind of take it or leave it approach (don't know how true it was)
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
I as a rule don't like remakes, because the original still exists and has no need to be updated but... the Spy who Loved Me is the better film, better structured, better scripted, better executed and
Moore gives a better performance (his definitive) in his version of the story than Connery did
probs with YOLT come from the abandonment of the source material, first because the story is told out of sequence, and second because there are no clifftop castles in Japan ... they had little left to work with so had to come up with an original plot that is largely a pastiche of the earlier films
to me it looks a lot like Dr No, with the sprawling villains HQ and the plot to disrupt the space program
there's millions of films made that aren't based on Ian Fleming books, and many of them are very good, but this is the first official Bond film that they tried to make without relying on the source material so that choice alone may have left them fundamentally confused as to purpose, even if Connery was in good shape or Pleasance was genuinely scary the completed film may never have added up
all the sequences that don't add to the plot but make Japan look beautiful and exotic actually are true to Flemings book: the book is frequently critiqued as mostly travelogue with a spy story tacked on at the end
DAF is not all bad. The elevator fight in Holland is very good. It's interesting that Connery went through a period where he appeared a bit heavy in films, but around 1977-81 he appeared to slim down and looked great in A Bridge Too Far and Cuba. He would have made a great "older" Bond during that time period.
DAF is my least favourite Bond film, but I agree with the elevator fight. It is one of the best fight scenes in the series.
I as a rule don't like remakes, because the original still exists and has no need to be updated but... the Spy who Loved Me is the better film, better structured, better scripted, better executed and
Moore gives a better performance (his definitive) in his version of the story than Connery did
probs with YOLT come from the abandonment of the source material, first because the story is told out of sequence, and second because there are no clifftop castles in Japan ... they had little left to work with so had to come up with an original plot that is largely a pastiche of the earlier films
to me it looks a lot like Dr No, with the sprawling villains HQ and the plot to disrupt the space program
there's millions of films made that aren't based on Ian Fleming books, and many of them are very good, but this is the first official Bond film that they tried to make without relying on the source material so that choice alone may have left them fundamentally confused as to purpose, even if Connery was in good shape or Pleasance was genuinely scary the completed film may never have added up
all the sequences that don't add to the plot but make Japan look beautiful and exotic actually are true to Flemings book: the book is frequently critiqued as mostly travelogue with a spy story tacked on at the end
Connery was decent in YOLT. I do think he could have gotten into a bit better physical shape however. The added weight makes him appear slower and a bit ponderous.....not the lean, hungry, more formidable looking Bond of TB. I think it doesn't help his performance.
This is a big contributor to why I don't really like Connery's last 3 Bond films. Especially DAF when he was his most bloated and had those caterpillars above his eyes. But YOLT was the start of when he took less care of himself and it hindered his performance in my opinion.
But what's wrong with his shape in TB? He wasn't as toned as he was in DN, but I think he looked more than acceptable.
Absolutely nothing wrong with him in TB, in fact he looks great in that film. Its only YOLT, DAF and NSNA where his physical fitness and grooming start to fall by the wayside. Though I try not to be too critical of him in NSNA because he looks great considering his age.
...this is the first official Bond film that they tried to make without relying on the source material so that choice alone may have left them fundamentally confused as to purpose, even if Connery was in good shape or Pleasance was genuinely scary the completed film may never have added up
the completed film doesn't add up: I'm suggesting the story is a pastiche of very few Fleming elements, recycled bits from earlier films, and formulaic elements mandated by the producers, i.e. not an organic story in and of itself
its possible for a film to be all technically perfect sequences that don't add up to a greater whole, I'm sorry I can't think of an example right now, but in theory it could be done, some filmmakers are just better at specific scenes than they are at telling stories
in the case of this film, there are however a couple of sequences that really bug me:
the bit where the giant helicopter lifts the bad guys car with a giant magnet and Bond watches it all on a dashboard video-display, sourced from a camera placed ...where?
and the whole opening sequence with the faked death that serves no narrative purpose, but does establish the convention of M always having a high-concept field office complete with Moneypenny and Q
if I could edit both of those sequences out (and I think they're fairly discrete) the remaining film would work that much better
the imposed formula of the three girls hobbles the story too, they're just not that interesting characters, Aki and Kissy could have been the same character except the producers dictated there has to be a good girl who dies and a good girl who lives
This is a big contributor to why I don't really like Connery's last 3 Bond films. Especially DAF when he was his most bloated and had those caterpillars above his eyes. But YOLT was the start of when he took less care of himself and it hindered his performance in my opinion.
But what's wrong with his shape in TB? He wasn't as toned as he was in DN, but I think he looked more than acceptable.
Absolutely nothing wrong with him in TB, in fact he looks great in that film. Its only YOLT, DAF and NSNA where his physical fitness and grooming start to fall by the wayside. Though I try not to be too critical of him in NSNA because he looks great considering his age.
Ah, you said last 3 Bond films, and I don't even think of NSNA as a Bond film so I immediately thought TB.
But what's wrong with his shape in TB? He wasn't as toned as he was in DN, but I think he looked more than acceptable.
Absolutely nothing wrong with him in TB, in fact he looks great in that film. Its only YOLT, DAF and NSNA where his physical fitness and grooming start to fall by the wayside. Though I try not to be too critical of him in NSNA because he looks great considering his age.
Ah, you said last 3 Bond films, and I don't even think of NSNA as a Bond film so I immediately thought TB.
my mistake, should've clarified. But yeah NSNA can barely be called a Bond film if at all.
the bit where the giant helicopter lifts the bad guys car with a giant magnet and Bond watches it all on a dashboard video-display, sourced from a camera placed ...where?
and the whole opening sequence with the faked death that serves no narrative purpose, but does establish the convention of M always having a high-concept field office complete with Moneypenny and Q
if I could edit both of those sequences out (and I think they're fairly discrete) the remaining film would work that much better
...this is the first official Bond film that they tried to make without relying on the source material so that choice alone may have left them fundamentally confused as to purpose, even if Connery was in good shape or Pleasance was genuinely scary the completed film may never have added up
the completed film doesn't add up: I'm suggesting the story is a pastiche of very few Fleming elements, recycled bits from earlier films, and formulaic elements mandated by the producers, i.e. not an organic story in and of itself
its possible for a film to be all technically perfect sequences that don't add up to a greater whole, I'm sorry I can't think of an example right now, but in theory it could be done, some filmmakers are just better at specific scenes than they are at telling stories
in the case of this film, there are however a couple of sequences that really bug me:
the bit where the giant helicopter lifts the bad guys car with a giant magnet and Bond watches it all on a dashboard video-display, sourced from a camera placed ...where?
and the whole opening sequence with the faked death that serves no narrative purpose, but does establish the convention of M always having a high-concept field office complete with Moneypenny and Q
if I could edit both of those sequences out (and I think they're fairly discrete) the remaining film would work that much better
the imposed formula of the three girls hobbles the story too, they're just not that interesting characters, Aki and Kissy could have been the same character except the producers dictated there has to be a good girl who dies and a good girl who lives
I'm not sure I follow. In terms of bits and so forth, that same criticism could be leveled against any number of Bond films -- this one is in the shadow of the formula established by Goldfinger, for example. It has very much the same elements, reworked for a different location.
To me, the story seems organic. Bond's death is faked at the beginning for precisely the reasons stated by M -- to throw off an enemy that has become too familiar with the agent. It happens in Hong Kong, which explains why Bond is near Japan to begin his investigation, and Bond's alleged death makes it clear why no one suspects who he is except Blofeld, and then too late. Otherwise, Bond is simply dispatched on his mission as he has been three times before. The concept also serves the thematic elements of life and death threaded throughout the film -- Bond rises from the dead just as he is reborn as Japanese just as an extinct volcano comes to life as the Spectre lair, just to name a few, with the ultimate question of whether the world will be plunged into death.
What the film is not is the modern convention of trimming the story to the bone so that the scenes merely service the plot. I appreciate that this Bond film allows the time to make its fictional world real rather than in the mad dash to get the movie over with it merely pays lip service.
The problem with the film is not what it has but what it leaves out -- more time to develop the characters, for instance, and to make the confrontation with Blofeld more satisfying. Better epics like the ones I noted in an earlier thread accomplish this, but then such are often aimed at a different audience than the Bond films are.
I had no problems with Aki and Kissy. In fact, I find them more interesting that Bond films usually allow, the former being the fast girl and the latter being the judicious one. They could have used more development certainly, but then most Bond girls can, and at least they're not walking cliches like Mary Goodnight, the dumb blond, or Tiffany Case, the fiery redhead. The least interesting woman in the film, though, is Helga Brandt, who comes across as a pale imitation of Fiona Volpe.
In terms of the helicopter, though, we've already seen in Tiger's lair that cameras are everywhere -- in fact, it seems quite prescient for how the world would become, especially the UK. He is surrounded by screens and watching Bond from more than one view. I don't think it's a far stretch to simply assume there's another helicopter beyond the one we see pick up the car in this regard.
the completed film doesn't add up: I'm suggesting the story is a pastiche of very few Fleming elements, recycled bits from earlier films, and formulaic elements mandated by the producers, i.e. not an organic story in and of itself
its possible for a film to be all technically perfect sequences that don't add up to a greater whole, I'm sorry I can't think of an example right now, but in theory it could be done, some filmmakers are just better at specific scenes than they are at telling stories
The problem with the film is not what it has but what it leaves out -- more time to develop the characters, for instance, and to make the confrontation with Blofeld more satisfying. Better epics like the ones I noted in an earlier thread accomplish this, but then such are often aimed at a different audience than the Bond films are.
I think TND suffers from the same issue where villain/method reveal so early in the film means that the race to the finish line showdown is all too predictable and in the end quite boring. I find in YOLT and TND following the penultimate action sequence (Little Nellie/helicopter and bike) I could almost turn the film off, not because of the predictability, but vested interest in what happens is low.
The "here's what's going on, now Bond will resolve it before the end of the film" narrative really needs to have strong performances from the allies/villains and interactions between them to make the payoff of the film more satisfying. They can't just rely on epic lair and great locations alone.
TSWLM avoids this because the character development between romantic interest and the villain(s) is a much more satisfying payoff (TND has a satisfying payoff too with Carver). It isn't just about saving the world - we already know Bond will do that.
All of the Brosnan Bonds suffer from weak climaxes, though TND is the closest to a traditional one and therefore the most successful. But the stealth boat is a poor substitute for a volcanic lair, even if it functions in much the same way. Where I find TND the weakest, though, is in the middle. It lumbers pretty much from the parking garage chase until Bond arrives at the stealth boat.
But the raid on the volcanic lair has to happen in YOLT. It follows Chekhov's gun brilliantly, and it is a remarkable sequence. Nothing in the Bond film series eclipses it as sheer cinema to me -- not even the imitations on TSWLM and MR. Part of the issue is that I find Stromberg and Drax even weaker as villains than Blofeld -- it's the performance by Pleasence that is the most underwhelming, not the character. But Stromberg and Drax are just copies of a copy of Blofeld. What's great about YOLT is that it keeps trying to top itself visually -- for instance, the Kobe docks fight seems visually grand, but they're not done yet.
Interesting points regarding Tomorrow Never Dies. I personally love the second half as much as the first half of the film. The bike chase is one of the best action sequences in all of the series. Plus, I adore the scenes between Bond and Wai Lin, their teasing as well as their planning of their search and assault on the stealth boat. While the volcano lair is much more impressive, the stealth boat is much more practical, and it's given a reason of how it came into existence - through General Chang.
Yes, TND is much more 'by the numbers' but it doesn't try to be anything more than it is which, as we progressed to the Craig era (and latter Brosnan), appears to be the only Bond film that doesn't dwell in the personal angle. So it increasingly appears more and more refreshing despite having seen it a thousand times.
And I don't agree that GE's climax is weak. It's one of the best third acts of the series - and much stronger than TND if I'm completely honest. The fight between Bond and Alec is incredibly choreographed, the lair is classic Bondian goodness, the cinematography is excellent as is Serra's music. It just flows really well.
Interestingly Gassy Man, as I previously mentioned, your issue with TND is my issue with YOLT - it meanders in the middle, and picks up again for the volcanic assault. It's a wonderfully staged final act.
Film: Tomorrow Never Dies | Girl: Teresa di Vicenzo | Villain: Max Zorin | Car: Aston Martin Volante | Novel: You Only Live Twice | Bond: Sir Sean Connery
Haha, to each their own. I find the whole idea of the climax on a boat in TND to be too limiting -- the idea is okay but the scale is too small. And I groaned at GE when I recognized the telescope and realized we were supposed to imagine it was something else.
Interesting points regarding Tomorrow Never Dies. I personally love the second half as much as the first half of the film. The bike chase is one of the best action sequences in all of the series. Plus, I adore the scenes between Bond and Wai Lin, their teasing as well as their planning of their search and assault on the stealth boat. While the volcano lair is much more impressive, the stealth boat is much more practical, and it's given a reason of how it came into existence - through General Chang.
Yes, TND is much more 'by the numbers' but it doesn't try to be anything more than it is which, as we progressed to the Craig era (and latter Brosnan), appears to be the only Bond film that doesn't dwell in the personal angle. So it increasingly appears more and more refreshing despite having seen it a thousand times.
And I don't agree that GE's climax is weak. It's one of the best third acts of the series - and much stronger than TND if I'm completely honest. The fight between Bond and Alec is incredibly choreographed, the lair is classic Bondian goodness, the cinematography is excellent as is Serra's music. It just flows really well.
Interestingly Gassy Man, as I previously mentioned, your issue with TND is my issue with YOLT - it meanders in the middle, and picks up again for the volcanic assault. It's a wonderfully staged final act.
the finale of TND's has three of the most badass Bond moments In the series within five minutes of each other. The first is when Bond uses the mounted rocket launcher against Carver's men, the second is when he nonchalantly guns down the captain and the ship driver and the last is when he pulls the knife out of Stamper to cut himself loose.
the finale of TND's has three of the most badass Bond moments In the series within five minutes of each other. The first is when Bond uses the mounted rocket launcher against Carver's men, the second is when he nonchalantly guns down the captain and the ship driver and the last is when he pulls the knife out of Stamper to cut himself loose.
Then the wonderful kiss of life to top it all off! 8-)
I thought blowing air Into her lungs was, quite Romantic, and not as uncomfortable to watch
as when "The Transporter" did a version of it, with "The Stath" sucking the air out of a thugs
Lungs.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
the finale of TND's has three of the most badass Bond moments In the series within five minutes of each other. The first is when Bond uses the mounted rocket launcher against Carver's men, the second is when he nonchalantly guns down the captain and the ship driver and the last is when he pulls the knife out of Stamper to cut himself loose.
Then the wonderful kiss of life to top it all off! 8-)
TND's finale - motorcycle chase onwards - is great.
Firstly, the motorbike chase is probably where we see the best chemistry between Bond and Wai Lin. Plus, the music is great during the scene as well.
The raid on the stealth boat is very good too, with some awesome action-hero moments. Sure, that may not be what Bond usually is, but it's a well paced, well shot and exciting finale, that has loads of great moments; Carver shooting Gupta, Jonathan Pryce having a blast as Carver, and Stamper and Carver's deaths are both satisfying for both of them.
Comments
I'm that way about all of the early era, really, but am particularly partial to DAF, which was the first I ever saw---projected on a big screen---when I was nine years old. Yes, it's the pariah of the official Connery Bonds...but I care not a bit. It will always be a fun watch for this nine year old.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Like many of my lower ranked Bond films the start of the film is great - and it's very funny.
"Better make that two."
But what's wrong with his shape in TB? He wasn't as toned as he was in DN, but I think he looked more than acceptable.
The Caterpillars are a major problem in YOLT and DAF. Connery should not shoulder the blame as what we're Hair and Makeup thinking ? It's the same with DC in Skyfall. Mrs Zaphod cannot stop laughing at the light shining through his ears when he is on the boat approaching the Casino. Somebody somewhere surely should have noticed. As a young boy I do recall an article while filming DAF that Sean was not allowing hair and makeup a free reign and pretty much refused to get in shape, a kind of take it or leave it approach (don't know how true it was)
but...
the Spy who Loved Me is the better film, better structured, better scripted, better executed
and
Moore gives a better performance (his definitive) in his version of the story than Connery did
probs with YOLT come from the abandonment of the source material, first because the story is told out of sequence, and second because there are no clifftop castles in Japan ... they had little left to work with so had to come up with an original plot that is largely a pastiche of the earlier films
to me it looks a lot like Dr No, with the sprawling villains HQ and the plot to disrupt the space program
there's millions of films made that aren't based on Ian Fleming books, and many of them are very good, but this is the first official Bond film that they tried to make without relying on the source material so that choice alone may have left them fundamentally confused as to purpose, even if Connery was in good shape or Pleasance was genuinely scary the completed film may never have added up
all the sequences that don't add to the plot but make Japan look beautiful and exotic actually are true to Flemings book: the book is frequently critiqued as mostly travelogue with a spy story tacked on at the end
DAF is my least favourite Bond film, but I agree with the elevator fight. It is one of the best fight scenes in the series.
its possible for a film to be all technically perfect sequences that don't add up to a greater whole, I'm sorry I can't think of an example right now, but in theory it could be done, some filmmakers are just better at specific scenes than they are at telling stories
in the case of this film, there are however a couple of sequences that really bug me:
the bit where the giant helicopter lifts the bad guys car with a giant magnet and Bond watches it all on a dashboard video-display, sourced from a camera placed ...where?
and the whole opening sequence with the faked death that serves no narrative purpose, but does establish the convention of M always having a high-concept field office complete with Moneypenny and Q
if I could edit both of those sequences out (and I think they're fairly discrete) the remaining film would work that much better
the imposed formula of the three girls hobbles the story too, they're just not that interesting characters, Aki and Kissy could have been the same character except the producers dictated there has to be a good girl who dies and a good girl who lives
Ah, you said last 3 Bond films, and I don't even think of NSNA as a Bond film so I immediately thought TB.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuleOfCool
To me, the story seems organic. Bond's death is faked at the beginning for precisely the reasons stated by M -- to throw off an enemy that has become too familiar with the agent. It happens in Hong Kong, which explains why Bond is near Japan to begin his investigation, and Bond's alleged death makes it clear why no one suspects who he is except Blofeld, and then too late. Otherwise, Bond is simply dispatched on his mission as he has been three times before. The concept also serves the thematic elements of life and death threaded throughout the film -- Bond rises from the dead just as he is reborn as Japanese just as an extinct volcano comes to life as the Spectre lair, just to name a few, with the ultimate question of whether the world will be plunged into death.
What the film is not is the modern convention of trimming the story to the bone so that the scenes merely service the plot. I appreciate that this Bond film allows the time to make its fictional world real rather than in the mad dash to get the movie over with it merely pays lip service.
The problem with the film is not what it has but what it leaves out -- more time to develop the characters, for instance, and to make the confrontation with Blofeld more satisfying. Better epics like the ones I noted in an earlier thread accomplish this, but then such are often aimed at a different audience than the Bond films are.
I had no problems with Aki and Kissy. In fact, I find them more interesting that Bond films usually allow, the former being the fast girl and the latter being the judicious one. They could have used more development certainly, but then most Bond girls can, and at least they're not walking cliches like Mary Goodnight, the dumb blond, or Tiffany Case, the fiery redhead. The least interesting woman in the film, though, is Helga Brandt, who comes across as a pale imitation of Fiona Volpe.
In terms of the helicopter, though, we've already seen in Tiger's lair that cameras are everywhere -- in fact, it seems quite prescient for how the world would become, especially the UK. He is surrounded by screens and watching Bond from more than one view. I don't think it's a far stretch to simply assume there's another helicopter beyond the one we see pick up the car in this regard.
I think TND suffers from the same issue where villain/method reveal so early in the film means that the race to the finish line showdown is all too predictable and in the end quite boring. I find in YOLT and TND following the penultimate action sequence (Little Nellie/helicopter and bike) I could almost turn the film off, not because of the predictability, but vested interest in what happens is low.
The "here's what's going on, now Bond will resolve it before the end of the film" narrative really needs to have strong performances from the allies/villains and interactions between them to make the payoff of the film more satisfying. They can't just rely on epic lair and great locations alone.
TSWLM avoids this because the character development between romantic interest and the villain(s) is a much more satisfying payoff (TND has a satisfying payoff too with Carver). It isn't just about saving the world - we already know Bond will do that.
"Better make that two."
But the raid on the volcanic lair has to happen in YOLT. It follows Chekhov's gun brilliantly, and it is a remarkable sequence. Nothing in the Bond film series eclipses it as sheer cinema to me -- not even the imitations on TSWLM and MR. Part of the issue is that I find Stromberg and Drax even weaker as villains than Blofeld -- it's the performance by Pleasence that is the most underwhelming, not the character. But Stromberg and Drax are just copies of a copy of Blofeld. What's great about YOLT is that it keeps trying to top itself visually -- for instance, the Kobe docks fight seems visually grand, but they're not done yet.
Yes, TND is much more 'by the numbers' but it doesn't try to be anything more than it is which, as we progressed to the Craig era (and latter Brosnan), appears to be the only Bond film that doesn't dwell in the personal angle. So it increasingly appears more and more refreshing despite having seen it a thousand times.
And I don't agree that GE's climax is weak. It's one of the best third acts of the series - and much stronger than TND if I'm completely honest. The fight between Bond and Alec is incredibly choreographed, the lair is classic Bondian goodness, the cinematography is excellent as is Serra's music. It just flows really well.
Interestingly Gassy Man, as I previously mentioned, your issue with TND is my issue with YOLT - it meanders in the middle, and picks up again for the volcanic assault. It's a wonderfully staged final act.
Then the wonderful kiss of life to top it all off! 8-)
"Better make that two."
as when "The Transporter" did a version of it, with "The Stath" sucking the air out of a thugs
Lungs.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Firstly, the motorbike chase is probably where we see the best chemistry between Bond and Wai Lin. Plus, the music is great during the scene as well.
The raid on the stealth boat is very good too, with some awesome action-hero moments. Sure, that may not be what Bond usually is, but it's a well paced, well shot and exciting finale, that has loads of great moments; Carver shooting Gupta, Jonathan Pryce having a blast as Carver, and Stamper and Carver's deaths are both satisfying for both of them.