The Living Daylights, Timothy Dalton is like a breath of fresh air after View To A Kill, though I do prefer A View To A Kill soundtrack better, Duran Duran kicks A-Ha's ass.
Licence To Kill up next, playing Gladys Knight loud, love it :x
"tova Tryabva Kato Sledvashto Kato Sluzhbite Na Vidove Bez Izpŭlneniya!"
The Living Daylights, Timothy Dalton is like a breath of fresh air after View To A Kill, though I do prefer A View To A Kill soundtrack better, Duran Duran kicks A-Ha's ass.
Absolutely, A-Ha feels like a cheapo homage band to D-D.
That being said, neither of them can hold a candle to Tina Turner, Shirley Bassey or even "the Welsh Tiger" Tom Jones!!
"I mean, she almost kills bond...with her ass."
-Mr Arlington Beech
Can't agree. It was nice to see LTK on a Blu Ray widescreen presentation on telly, but it's a B movie as described in the US press, it's lukewarm bathwater. Yes, the tanker climax is nicely thought out - and fought out ha ha - but Dalton makes an uneasy leading man, like Farmer Boldwood in Far From the Madding Crowd trying to take his wedding guests with him.
In contrast, AVTAK is a great bit of fun, great locations and plenty to engage with - Walken, Macnee, Grace Jones et al. Admittedly, compared to Knight and Day, the Tom Cruise film on telly last night, it would seem genius (though Cruise sort of almost carried it at the time.)
The Blouson. There can be no excuse for the Blouson. Glad you like its embarrassing charms but for me it is Sphincter tighteningly bad. Agree it looks lovely.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
The Living Daylights, Timothy Dalton is like a breath of fresh air after View To A Kill, though I do prefer A View To A Kill soundtrack better, Duran Duran kicks A-Ha's ass.
Absolutely, A-Ha feels like a cheapo homage band to D-D.
That being said, neither of them can hold a candle to Tina Turner, Shirley Bassey or even "the Welsh Tiger" Tom Jones!!
Totally agree {[]
"tova Tryabva Kato Sledvashto Kato Sluzhbite Na Vidove Bez Izpŭlneniya!"
I'm going to view Licence To Kill today, love the soundtrack to this, back in 1989 I heard the opening bars of this song and knew it was the new Bond theme.
You have to love the hard edged Flemming Bond at his best, with that devilish look and glint to his eyes {[]
"tova Tryabva Kato Sledvashto Kato Sluzhbite Na Vidove Bez Izpŭlneniya!"
GoldenEye last night.
... Pierce Brosnans first outing as Bond feels fresh and invigorated.... all the way until that gawd awful tank chase starts......
With you on the tank chase 0073. I know a lot of people love it, but it does nothing for me.
I always had issues with the tank-chase, but only on last viewing did whats really going on sink in:
He's firing that machine gun at the local police, who are trying to do their job!
He's been arrested and in police custody, then framed for the murder of the police chief, and managed to escape and steal that tank. It is the local police who are following him, as it is their job to do, not the villain's minions, and he's spraying machine gun fire at them.
Imagine if MooreBond had fired a machine gun at Sherriff Pepper and his men in Live and Let Die? of course that would never happen. So why's it so cool when BrosnanBond shoots down local Moscow cops?
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
My girlfriend and I have moved into the country (this last end of January)...she bought five wooded acres along a winding creek, and the quiet is blissful...we've picked up a projector that mates up with our BluRay player, and are projecting movies outside at night, which is a blast. Last weekend we watched TB, projected over 100 inches across on a white bedsheet.
TB holds up well for me, except for the dreadful undercranked film aboard the Disco Volante at the end...otherwise, it's classic Bond. And one of my favorite Bond stories.
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
My girlfriend and I have moved into the country (this last end of January)...she bought five wooded acres along a winding creek, and the quiet is blissful...we've picked up a projector that mates up with our BluRay player, and are projecting movies outside at night, which is a blast. Last weekend we watched TB, projected over 100 inches across on a white bedsheet.
TB holds up well for me, except for the dreadful undercranked film aboard the Disco Volante at the end...otherwise, it's classic Bond. And one of my favorite Bond stories.
That sounds ace and good luck in your new home.
Agree, Thunderball is a great Bond film, ticks a lot of the boxes.
I watched both Goldfinger and Thunderball on Connerys 90th, I watched it online and synced up with a chat bar with a mate of mine who was in a different city. Loved it, surprisingly we both preferred Thunderball to Goldfinger. I'd forgotten how much fun it was. During the Tom Jones song my mate said it was the best bond opening he'd ever seen.
“The scent and smoke and sweat of a casino are nauseating at three in the morning. "
-Casino Royale, Ian Fleming
I watched parts of Never Say Never Again earlier. Not nearly as bad as I remembered. Connery was I think 53 and looked it but credit where it’s due, in the shirtless scenes he looked in pretty good shape.
Madeleine Swann has a touch of the Greta Thunberg's about her, doesn't she? Very cross looking.
Never Say Never Again
On widescreen on BBC telly. An unnecessarily bad Bond film with an unnecessarily old looking Sean Connery - unnecessary because in the recent Time Bandits and Outland, he looked pretty with it. He seemed to have aged 10 years for this, and indeed had more vitality in the subsequent Highlander. Unnecessarily bad because, really, McClory had just one Bond title and had 10 years to finesse it, could have come up with 10 different versions - I know his Warhead treatment got nixed by Broccoli but even so, to start filming without a finished script and to be making it up and you go along, what a wasted opportunity. X-(
Always a problematic one for me, but as ITV were showing it at 9pm on a Friday night in widescreen format, why not? It's less problematic today because, of course, Blofeld's talk about a disease sweeping Europe and wrecking the economy having been cooked up deliberately in a lab rings very true for some reason. Secondly, Blofeld's request - that he be made a Count and be granted immunity for past crimes is also voguish as Boris' Lavender List saw him grant all sorts of peerages for underserving dodgy types such as the son of a KGB officer and Evening Standard proprietor. I mean, Blofeld would be a shoe-in today.
So OHMSS is less dated than it might be and indeed also for other reasons - Lazenby is a youthful Bond in keeping with young heroes such as Cruise and Matt Damon - that said, as both are getting older now, it's Lazenby who is the odd one out again. The film's natural landscape is also a plus that ensures it really never dates. The editing and cutting are very Bourne, Barry's music rocks and Savalas seems a more natural villain than many others of the era.
But I can't help nitpick this movie and oddly, its high production values make its oddities and wrongness even more noticeable.
Firstly, I know the director Peter Hunt is responsible for much that is good about this film but even so, he just doesn't seem a natural storyteller. Like other editors that turn director, the story doesn't sing, it doesn't take off (Glen could be a bit like that at times, Spottiswoode another.) Nothing is wrong, there's no flab but no real fun either.
I've spoken before about how Bond's wooing of Tracy has no chemistry. Lazenby isn't that bad but he's not good enough, and he needs to be. Not saying it should be romantic comedy but it doesn't come off. It should be that Bond is frustrated by trying to approach Tracy and getting beaten up for his pains, sort of treat em mean keep em keen but it doesn't work. Of only Tracy were actually more physically desirable. Ring is sort of glacial hot in The Avengers but not here, you should want to grab her via Bond and give her a good seeing to, such as when she points Bond's gun at him in the hotel room, but Rigg really seems too smart to go for a loaf like Lazenby, he's be a better fit for another type, a hot fiery blonde maybe.
We're meant to think these thugs are doing... what, exactly? Because Bond just never ever queries her about what is going on. We just accept it as Spectre thugs but he never questions them. He could surmise that they are going after Tracy's past debts, for instance. But nothing.
One day I'll post my lengthy essay on the subtext in Bond films, the three-card trick, but this romantic problem is the film's main theme at this point and it just doesn't take off.
The conflict with Draco's men - who are spying on Tracy to protect her - calls out for an exciting car chase which would open out the action in the first part of the film, but nope, it's a series of punch ups.
OHMSS did not follow TB as some thought it was similar and it is - the first part is all around hotel rooms and goes back and forth.
I've seen the film many times but only in the last viewing did I twig that the gun Bond leaves in the drawer is missing the next morning, replaced by Bond's gambling chips as payment for her debts. Maybe planted by Draco's men who took the gun. I missed this because in the hotel foyer, when they say 'Mister Bond, you're missing something' I always thought they meant Tracy, who has flown the coup, when in fact the camera pans across to Bond's gun, which is to what they're referring.
Lazenby's line delivery is generally pretty bad throughout all this.
The next scene is key - we get to find out what is going on with Tracy - but tbh I'm not sure we really care. She isn't exactly enigmatic, is she? It's just Diana Rigg in a sulk because she's paired with an Aussie chocolate salesman rather than the dapper Steed.
Anyway, this scene is the dullest in the entire series, not helped by Barry's syrappy score. The makers knew this, which is why they brought forward Lazenby's line 'Why are you telling me this?' to give him something to say and break up Draco's boring monologue. Draco ignores this of course, responding to it later 'Why am I telling you this?' when it was originally said. I simply cannot recall what he says about Tracy, did she marry someone? Again, a decent storyteller would make it clear that Draco's men were to find out if Bond was yet another louche playboy after her money, but not here.
One subtext of the film might be snobbery, with Blofeld wanting to be made a Count, and indeed it is referenced. I mean, that Bond pretends to be a baronet is one element but the insidious or funny aspect of British snobbery and how foreigners react to it never gets a mention, so it falls a bit flat. The mincing Pleasance, the drawing room Gray, even the bow-tied von Sydow one could imagine wanting to be made a Count, but Savalas, not really, except when he camps it up with Rigg at the end.
It's implausible that it should really matter whether Blofeld is made a Count or not, I mean who cares, esp as with a new cast members, there's no long-standing sense of rivalry there. It's not like Moriaty being admitted to the Establishment and Holmes forced to suck it up. No reason why Bond can't bump him off thereafter anyway, but isn't it better to have Blofeld in plain view anyway? It's not clear if he intends to go straight after this, but as Bond has thwarted his worst terrorist attempts so far, the case could be made that it's Bond who has unwittingly eased his path to the straight and narrow - Bin Laden's 9/11 'success' for instance would forever deny him such an award or respectability.
Now, of course, in Blofeld and Rigg's sunrise chat, he could make it clear what he really wants to do with his 'respectability' - take over the Conservative Party with massive donations so they turn a blind eye to Russian soft power (I told you it could be topical) but it's not really made clear. Is he actually going straight, making a fresh start?
Originally, Tracy was meant to marry Bond and live happily ever after at the film's finale, with her death in the next film's pts. It's better that her death - maybe the film's best scene - ends the film, interrupted by the jaunty Bond theme of course. But perhaps because of the change there are no hints of tragedy signposted in the film, because it's not meant to end with tragedy. No 'You're quite a ladykiller' stuff or 'I know you can protect her, Mister Bond' from Draco. It might even signpost Bond's retirement if he is to marry, so it can be contrasted with Blofeld's career change, only for them both to get dragged down in acrimony again. But there's no symmetry here, and maybe a better storyteller could have brought his out.
There's actually no reason for Bond and Draco's Alpine attack on Piz Gloria, and it's that which kills her. As with TB, Blofeld's demands are to be met only this time it won't cost a penny! Tracy isn't under any threat from the charming Blofeld - a script amendment might have him say 'The amnesty takes force tomorrow evening. I have an entire day to have my way with you and force you to divulge your father's secret's' but no, he is simply wooing her and being a darn sight more fun about it than Bond, frankly. (Rigg seems to relish the chance to do a bit of acting against a real star, unlike non-actor Lazenby and stuffed shirt Draco - she doesn't get much else to spar against in the film, does she?) You could argue that there's symmetry as Bond saves Tracy's life at the beginning and she dies at the end but it isn't really made clear she was trying to top herself anyway.
I've seen the shootout finale many times, and it's about the best climax of the series, not long-winded at all. But it rarely occurs to me that Draco's men helping him are the same gang trying to kill Bond in the first 20 mins of the film. The black guy with the flame thrower is the 'gatecrasher' in Bond's hotel room. All it takes is one bit of knowing dialogue between them and Bond.
The guy who tails Bond in Switzerland is okay though you wouldn't get him to blag an upgrade on a flight, would you 'But I want to go up there! Well, alright then!' But with no dialogue exchanged between him and Bond ever, his death doesn't affect us much and shouldn't Bond either.
Again a storyteller would bring this stuff out - all it takes is one line, a bit of humour would do it. 'I picked him to help you crack the safe not because he's English but because you've beaten up all my other men!' Or in the helicopter: 'The last time we were this close it turned into quite an evening!' 'Hmmmm'. Okay, maybe something other than that.
The whole Bond shagging his way thru the Pic Gloria gals doesn't work for me because for some reason none of them come across as very attractive. In fact only one gal in the film does it for me, Tracy's mate who says 'I think there are a good many things one could learn about Mister Bond, one could attend night school' which is a great line - she's got the hots for him, and it requires a jealous double take from Tracy, but the director does nothing with it. Again, the whole thing could be stag night for Bond, or he could suddenly seem to tire of his conquests so we see why he marries Tracy but none of it really convinces. If the young blade Lazenby wants to shag away, why is he settling down?
So it's a great film to look at, no question, and admirable in many ways - but there seems to be so much wrong with it. I admit the whole book is a lot trickier to sell than a good many novels - ironic as it was written after the first film had gone out - and that's before you get to introducing a new actor as Bond - again, ironic as the book was written with Connery in mind and some scenes in it actively suggest Connery. And once you do that, you have the new Bond actor in just about every scene, with no cutaways to whatever the villains are up to. Has any other Bond film had James Bond in it quite so much, and with a 2 and a half hour running time? I contrast it with GoldenEye, which keeps cutting away from Brosnan. I suppose Casino Royale. Again, in an alternative universe it's the weathered Craig in OHMSS and young buck Lazenby in CR.
OHMSS fans will splutter, but it has much in common with OHMSS. Firstly, Bond spends a lot of time going off on his own to pursue his own foe, with an irascible M giving him the go-ahead.
Bond therefore seems to be on holiday a lot of the time. Oh that's another narrative problem with OHMSS - at no point early on in the film is Blofeld mentioned, it's not hinted that Bond is after him, he just seems a bum with no express purpose. One message in his hotel room after the credits 'Hi, it's Universal Export, no trace of your man seems he's fled Japan and he's certainly not in Europe. That makes it likely he's behind the Iron Curtain for the duration..' would nicely set up the later meeting with Draco and show us Bond isn't just some drifter.
Arguably with both OHMSS and Golden Gun both the subtext for the film and the final McGuffin don't do that much so it all falls flat a bit. The films share a distasteful casual attitude to sex, with Bond not seeming to earn it and the women not requesting he does either. The villain is a big actor but way too charming to our hero.
It's intriguing that Golden Gun appears a different kind of Bond film of course - no space hardware, few gadgets - something else in common with OHMSS, but all the same it really is quite horrible. I mean, Goodnight still willing to bed Bond after Nick Nack's alleged watery demise is pretty sick, maybe she gets off on coitus coinciding with another's slow drowning. On reflection, Ekland appeared in some of the most sexually degrading films of the early 70s - The Wicker Man (with Lee of course, that's Christopher not Bernard), Get Carter and of course this.
Also horrible is the interior of Scaramanga's hideout which looks like it was made out of some cardboard bog roll interior for a Blue Peter episode. The set designer explained in the excellent Some Kind of Hero book that he was sort of strongarmed into it as he didn't want to do it (and Ken Adam unavailable of course), it being hinted that he might get a reputation were it known he'd turned it down. This tidbit revealed some weeks before his death, the authors write, though we shouldn't maybe read too much into that.
Arguably with both OHMSS and Golden Gun both the subtext for the film and the final McGuffin don't do that much so it all falls flat a bit. The films share a distasteful casual attitude to sex, with Bond not seeming to earn it and the women not requesting he does either. The villain is a big actor but way too charming to our hero.
Goodnight appeared to show that she could stand up for herself, when she turned down Bond's offer of sex at the restaurant scene, as she doesn't want to be one of his passing fancies, but then she turns up at his hotel room and coming onto Bond, because she's weak. That let the side down a bit.
Also, Bond is quite pervy in this. Leering at Andrea in the shower, Bond's comment to Goodnight about her dress not having many buttons, etc.
Have you ever heard of the Emancipation Proclamation?"
Yesterday i watched OHMSS as a tribute to GL on his birthday. One of the best films of the series, but it's not flawless. Some dubbing issues and some jump cuts, which don't need to be there. The scene with Campbell arguing with Blofeld, when he is caught trying to climb Piz Gloria to get to the clinic. There is a jump cut when the goon hits Campbell with his gun to get him to move.
Have you ever heard of the Emancipation Proclamation?"
I was really bored watching this. I kept speeding it up. Everyone in it annoyed me, especially M! I've seen it a few times over the years but never again!
Like yourself The Spy Who Never Dies, I tend to try and watch NSNA every so often,
but always end up skipping sections. I think it's a really poor movie, not just a bad
Bond Movie ( not that I really count it as such ) but a bad film in general.
At the moment, I'm enjoying YOLT -{
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
I wouldn't dream of being so familiar
Until property introduced, with an
Exchange of cards and of course a
Chaperone for the first six months of
Exchanges ...... Standards must be
Maintained.
Spy it is -{
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Madeleine Swann has a touch of the Greta Thunberg's about her, doesn't she? Very cross looking.
Never Say Never Again
On widescreen on BBC telly. An unnecessarily bad Bond film with an unnecessarily old looking Sean Connery - unnecessary because in the recent Time Bandits and Outland, he looked pretty with it. He seemed to have aged 10 years for this, and indeed had more vitality in the subsequent Highlander. Unnecessarily bad because, really, McClory had just one Bond title and had 10 years to finesse it, could have come up with 10 different versions - I know his Warhead treatment got nixed by Broccoli but even so, to start filming without a finished script and to be making it up and you go along, what a wasted opportunity. X-(
gee, what a shocking review from one of NSNA's most persistent haters.
I wouldn't dream of being so familiar
Until property introduced, with an
Exchange of cards and of course a
Chaperone for the first six months of
Exchanges ...... Standards must be
Maintained.
Spy it is -{
Property introduced? My estate, the Property of a Lady, what has that got to do with this? )
And I think our standards might be slightly different so I’d better have 2 or 3 chaperones )
Comments
Licence To Kill up next, playing Gladys Knight loud, love it :x
Absolutely, A-Ha feels like a cheapo homage band to D-D.
That being said, neither of them can hold a candle to Tina Turner, Shirley Bassey or even "the Welsh Tiger" Tom Jones!!
-Mr Arlington Beech
The Blouson. There can be no excuse for the Blouson. Glad you like its embarrassing charms but for me it is Sphincter tighteningly bad. Agree it looks lovely.
Totally agree {[]
You have to love the hard edged Flemming Bond at his best, with that devilish look and glint to his eyes {[]
He's firing that machine gun at the local police, who are trying to do their job!
He's been arrested and in police custody, then framed for the murder of the police chief, and managed to escape and steal that tank. It is the local police who are following him, as it is their job to do, not the villain's minions, and he's spraying machine gun fire at them.
Imagine if MooreBond had fired a machine gun at Sherriff Pepper and his men in Live and Let Die? of course that would never happen. So why's it so cool when BrosnanBond shoots down local Moscow cops?
There's a title for a Bond film. -{
Roger Moore 1927-2017
TB holds up well for me, except for the dreadful undercranked film aboard the Disco Volante at the end...otherwise, it's classic Bond. And one of my favorite Bond stories.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
That sounds ace and good luck in your new home.
Agree, Thunderball is a great Bond film, ticks a lot of the boxes.
Big screens -{
-Casino Royale, Ian Fleming
Madeleine Swann has a touch of the Greta Thunberg's about her, doesn't she? Very cross looking.
Never Say Never Again
On widescreen on BBC telly. An unnecessarily bad Bond film with an unnecessarily old looking Sean Connery - unnecessary because in the recent Time Bandits and Outland, he looked pretty with it. He seemed to have aged 10 years for this, and indeed had more vitality in the subsequent Highlander. Unnecessarily bad because, really, McClory had just one Bond title and had 10 years to finesse it, could have come up with 10 different versions - I know his Warhead treatment got nixed by Broccoli but even so, to start filming without a finished script and to be making it up and you go along, what a wasted opportunity. X-(
Roger Moore 1927-2017
" Madeleine Swann has a touch of the Greta Thunberg's about her"
How Dare You !!!
Always a problematic one for me, but as ITV were showing it at 9pm on a Friday night in widescreen format, why not? It's less problematic today because, of course, Blofeld's talk about a disease sweeping Europe and wrecking the economy having been cooked up deliberately in a lab rings very true for some reason.
So OHMSS is less dated than it might be and indeed also for other reasons - Lazenby is a youthful Bond in keeping with young heroes such as Cruise and Matt Damon - that said, as both are getting older now, it's Lazenby who is the odd one out again. The film's natural landscape is also a plus that ensures it really never dates. The editing and cutting are very Bourne, Barry's music rocks and Savalas seems a more natural villain than many others of the era.
But I can't help nitpick this movie and oddly, its high production values make its oddities and wrongness even more noticeable.
Firstly, I know the director Peter Hunt is responsible for much that is good about this film but even so, he just doesn't seem a natural storyteller. Like other editors that turn director, the story doesn't sing, it doesn't take off (Glen could be a bit like that at times, Spottiswoode another.) Nothing is wrong, there's no flab but no real fun either.
I've spoken before about how Bond's wooing of Tracy has no chemistry. Lazenby isn't that bad but he's not good enough, and he needs to be. Not saying it should be romantic comedy but it doesn't come off. It should be that Bond is frustrated by trying to approach Tracy and getting beaten up for his pains, sort of treat em mean keep em keen but it doesn't work. Of only Tracy were actually more physically desirable. Ring is sort of glacial hot in The Avengers but not here, you should want to grab her via Bond and give her a good seeing to, such as when she points Bond's gun at him in the hotel room, but Rigg really seems too smart to go for a loaf like Lazenby, he's be a better fit for another type, a hot fiery blonde maybe.
We're meant to think these thugs are doing... what, exactly? Because Bond just never ever queries her about what is going on. We just accept it as Spectre thugs but he never questions them. He could surmise that they are going after Tracy's past debts, for instance. But nothing.
One day I'll post my lengthy essay on the subtext in Bond films, the three-card trick, but this romantic problem is the film's main theme at this point and it just doesn't take off.
The conflict with Draco's men - who are spying on Tracy to protect her - calls out for an exciting car chase which would open out the action in the first part of the film, but nope, it's a series of punch ups.
OHMSS did not follow TB as some thought it was similar and it is - the first part is all around hotel rooms and goes back and forth.
I've seen the film many times but only in the last viewing did I twig that the gun Bond leaves in the drawer is missing the next morning, replaced by Bond's gambling chips as payment for her debts. Maybe planted by Draco's men who took the gun. I missed this because in the hotel foyer, when they say 'Mister Bond, you're missing something' I always thought they meant Tracy, who has flown the coup, when in fact the camera pans across to Bond's gun, which is to what they're referring.
Lazenby's line delivery is generally pretty bad throughout all this.
The next scene is key - we get to find out what is going on with Tracy - but tbh I'm not sure we really care. She isn't exactly enigmatic, is she? It's just Diana Rigg in a sulk because she's paired with an Aussie chocolate salesman rather than the dapper Steed.
Anyway, this scene is the dullest in the entire series, not helped by Barry's syrappy score. The makers knew this, which is why they brought forward Lazenby's line 'Why are you telling me this?' to give him something to say and break up Draco's boring monologue. Draco ignores this of course, responding to it later 'Why am I telling you this?' when it was originally said. I simply cannot recall what he says about Tracy, did she marry someone? Again, a decent storyteller would make it clear that Draco's men were to find out if Bond was yet another louche playboy after her money, but not here.
One subtext of the film might be snobbery, with Blofeld wanting to be made a Count, and indeed it is referenced. I mean, that Bond pretends to be a baronet is one element but the insidious or funny aspect of British snobbery and how foreigners react to it never gets a mention, so it falls a bit flat. The mincing Pleasance, the drawing room Gray, even the bow-tied von Sydow one could imagine wanting to be made a Count, but Savalas, not really, except when he camps it up with Rigg at the end.
It's implausible that it should really matter whether Blofeld is made a Count or not, I mean who cares, esp as with a new cast members, there's no long-standing sense of rivalry there. It's not like Moriaty being admitted to the Establishment and Holmes forced to suck it up. No reason why Bond can't bump him off thereafter anyway, but isn't it better to have Blofeld in plain view anyway? It's not clear if he intends to go straight after this, but as Bond has thwarted his worst terrorist attempts so far, the case could be made that it's Bond who has unwittingly eased his path to the straight and narrow - Bin Laden's 9/11 'success' for instance would forever deny him such an award or respectability.
Now, of course, in Blofeld and Rigg's sunrise chat, he could make it clear what he really wants to do with his 'respectability' - take over the Conservative Party with massive donations so they turn a blind eye to Russian soft power (I told you it could be topical) but it's not really made clear. Is he actually going straight, making a fresh start?
Originally, Tracy was meant to marry Bond and live happily ever after at the film's finale, with her death in the next film's pts. It's better that her death - maybe the film's best scene - ends the film, interrupted by the jaunty Bond theme of course. But perhaps because of the change there are no hints of tragedy signposted in the film, because it's not meant to end with tragedy. No 'You're quite a ladykiller' stuff or 'I know you can protect her, Mister Bond' from Draco. It might even signpost Bond's retirement if he is to marry, so it can be contrasted with Blofeld's career change, only for them both to get dragged down in acrimony again. But there's no symmetry here, and maybe a better storyteller could have brought his out.
There's actually no reason for Bond and Draco's Alpine attack on Piz Gloria, and it's that which kills her. As with TB, Blofeld's demands are to be met only this time it won't cost a penny! Tracy isn't under any threat from the charming Blofeld - a script amendment might have him say 'The amnesty takes force tomorrow evening. I have an entire day to have my way with you and force you to divulge your father's secret's' but no, he is simply wooing her and being a darn sight more fun about it than Bond, frankly. (Rigg seems to relish the chance to do a bit of acting against a real star, unlike non-actor Lazenby and stuffed shirt Draco - she doesn't get much else to spar against in the film, does she?) You could argue that there's symmetry as Bond saves Tracy's life at the beginning and she dies at the end but it isn't really made clear she was trying to top herself anyway.
I've seen the shootout finale many times, and it's about the best climax of the series, not long-winded at all. But it rarely occurs to me that Draco's men helping him are the same gang trying to kill Bond in the first 20 mins of the film. The black guy with the flame thrower is the 'gatecrasher' in Bond's hotel room. All it takes is one bit of knowing dialogue between them and Bond.
The guy who tails Bond in Switzerland is okay though you wouldn't get him to blag an upgrade on a flight, would you 'But I want to go up there! Well, alright then!'
Again a storyteller would bring this stuff out - all it takes is one line, a bit of humour would do it. 'I picked him to help you crack the safe not because he's English but because you've beaten up all my other men!' Or in the helicopter: 'The last time we were this close it turned into quite an evening!' 'Hmmmm'. Okay, maybe something other than that.
The whole Bond shagging his way thru the Pic Gloria gals doesn't work for me because for some reason none of them come across as very attractive. In fact only one gal in the film does it for me, Tracy's mate who says 'I think there are a good many things one could learn about Mister Bond, one could attend night school' which is a great line - she's got the hots for him, and it requires a jealous double take from Tracy, but the director does nothing with it. Again, the whole thing could be stag night for Bond, or he could suddenly seem to tire of his conquests so we see why he marries Tracy but none of it really convinces. If the young blade Lazenby wants to shag away, why is he settling down?
So it's a great film to look at, no question, and admirable in many ways - but there seems to be so much wrong with it. I admit the whole book is a lot trickier to sell than a good many novels - ironic as it was written after the first film had gone out - and that's before you get to introducing a new actor as Bond - again, ironic as the book was written with Connery in mind and some scenes in it actively suggest Connery. And once you do that, you have the new Bond actor in just about every scene, with no cutaways to whatever the villains are up to. Has any other Bond film had James Bond in it quite so much, and with a 2 and a half hour running time? I contrast it with GoldenEye, which keeps cutting away from Brosnan. I suppose Casino Royale. Again, in an alternative universe it's the weathered Craig in OHMSS and young buck Lazenby in CR.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
OHMSS fans will splutter, but it has much in common with OHMSS. Firstly, Bond spends a lot of time going off on his own to pursue his own foe, with an irascible M giving him the go-ahead.
Bond therefore seems to be on holiday a lot of the time. Oh that's another narrative problem with OHMSS - at no point early on in the film is Blofeld mentioned, it's not hinted that Bond is after him, he just seems a bum with no express purpose. One message in his hotel room after the credits 'Hi, it's Universal Export, no trace of your man seems he's fled Japan and he's certainly not in Europe. That makes it likely he's behind the Iron Curtain for the duration..' would nicely set up the later meeting with Draco and show us Bond isn't just some drifter.
Arguably with both OHMSS and Golden Gun both the subtext for the film and the final McGuffin don't do that much so it all falls flat a bit. The films share a distasteful casual attitude to sex, with Bond not seeming to earn it and the women not requesting he does either. The villain is a big actor but way too charming to our hero.
It's intriguing that Golden Gun appears a different kind of Bond film of course - no space hardware, few gadgets - something else in common with OHMSS, but all the same it really is quite horrible. I mean, Goodnight still willing to bed Bond after Nick Nack's alleged watery demise is pretty sick, maybe she gets off on coitus coinciding with another's slow drowning. On reflection, Ekland appeared in some of the most sexually degrading films of the early 70s - The Wicker Man (with Lee of course, that's Christopher not Bernard), Get Carter and of course this.
Also horrible is the interior of Scaramanga's hideout which looks like it was made out of some cardboard bog roll interior for a Blue Peter episode. The set designer explained in the excellent Some Kind of Hero book that he was sort of strongarmed into it as he didn't want to do it (and Ken Adam unavailable of course), it being hinted that he might get a reputation were it known he'd turned it down. This tidbit revealed some weeks before his death, the authors write, though we shouldn't maybe read too much into that.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Goodnight appeared to show that she could stand up for herself, when she turned down Bond's offer of sex at the restaurant scene, as she doesn't want to be one of his passing fancies, but then she turns up at his hotel room and coming onto Bond, because she's weak. That let the side down a bit.
Also, Bond is quite pervy in this. Leering at Andrea in the shower, Bond's comment to Goodnight about her dress not having many buttons, etc.
" I don't listen to hip hop!"
" I don't listen to hip hop!"
I was really bored watching this. I kept speeding it up. Everyone in it annoyed me, especially M! I've seen it a few times over the years but never again!
" I don't listen to hip hop!"
but always end up skipping sections. I think it's a really poor movie, not just a bad
Bond Movie ( not that I really count it as such ) but a bad film in general.
At the moment, I'm enjoying YOLT -{
So formal
Until property introduced, with an
Exchange of cards and of course a
Chaperone for the first six months of
Exchanges ...... Standards must be
Maintained.
Spy it is -{
Property introduced? My estate, the Property of a Lady, what has that got to do with this?
And I think our standards might be slightly different
Looking for lady with a big house, ...... please send photo of the house
Well, I may have exaggerated a bit erm a lot ;%