We think of Casino Royale as Craig’s first film but he’s in this one of course, as the Piz Gloria guard who eavesdrops on Bond’s bedroom schedule and later duffs him up with another and has him consigned to a makeshift prison, it’s clearly a young Craig. Explains why he looks so old as Bond.
On the big screen we can see that one of those goons is the one with the sideburns in the pre-credits of the next one, Diamonds are Forever. Possibly even a nod to continuity seeing as that is the Spectre organisation too.
One scene appears cut - on his arrival at Piz Gloria, Bond - as Sir Hilary - is instructed to take a medical and during this time his baggage is searched. What went on in the medical? We don’t know.
The seasons might be out of whack. It’s suddenly Christmas in Switzerland but was it really winter during the scenes on the beach, or the bullfighting scene? This is different to the book of course, which began around September, an Indian summer in the south of France then naturally progressed to Christmas. It’s not clear in the film how long Bond spends on his studies at the College of Arms to get into character and it might break up the idea of his romance if it’s suggested that it’s been three months or so.
One trick missed might be the shot of snow falling outside Bond’s window in Piz Gloria to emphasise how stranded he is up there, but generally it’s amazing how Hunt doesn’t really miss a trick, it’s all very good.
The film benefits from looking great, certainly far better than Thunderball. Now, one benefit is the allocation of the budget. While You Only Live Twice was filmed in the Far East, Japan, that must have accelerated costs to get all the actors and filming equipment over there. Then you had Ken Adam’s amazing volcano set, not as expensive as the producers claimed at the time, but pricey for sure, plus all those vehicular stunts and set pieces too, that would have cost a fair bit, on top of that Connery’s salary was not as much as he’d liked, but would have been higher than Lazenby’s.
This film is one of the few Bonds to be filmed exclusively in Europe (there’s just one other I think that has that claim, can you work out which one it is?) so that keeps costs down. There are fewer extras needed. Much of the action is punch ups and latterly ski chases. Essentially they are using natural locations and these look terrific.
So all the budget could go into making the film look chic and sophisticated, more so than any of the other Bonds really, certainly for that era. I mean, the first three punched above their weight in terms of budget, but the budgets weren’t high. Once Bond became a big hit, there were always trying to catch up with themselves. There are cheap bits in most of these Bonds, but not this one. This one has the big budget, but isn’t blowing it on gimmicks and tat.
I mean, I like the Ken Adam volcano but whenever I see it, I think, okay, we’re back in Pinewood now, we’re not in Japan. That sort of thing never happens in OHMSS, for once Bond is exactly where he Is meant to be, it’s not doubling for some place else.
I love the natural scenery of the Alps in this film - magnificent on the big screen - but that said, I’m the age where I would. As a kid, the mock volcano would intrigue and delight me far more. I do think a kid might not nag their parent to take them to see OHMSS a second time as it doesn’t have those WTF? Gimmick moments that kids like to process and talk about at school. The action is a bit vanilla.
There are odd snags, less conspicuous oddly on the big screen but there anyway. I think it’s the sheer cinema experience that compensates or distracts. But all that stuff about ‘bessants’ I mean what is all that? A bit distracting, a bit strange. Perhaps Hunt being a freemason found all that heraldic talk a bit familiar, more than we might. And the joke about Bond’s ‘balls’ and having three of them isn’t a great innuendo, you’d need to have Connery’s comic genius to pull that off. Ruby seems delighted and amused by it but we’re not.
Then there’s that odd stuff about Blofeld’s lack of ear lobes - did Telly have his pinned back then? What’s the deal there? It just seems a bit off kilter, a bit unwise too given Lazenby’s somewhat large jugs, unhelpfully silhouetted in the very opening scene of the film.
‘I mean, what sort of person wears a hat in a car, I mean really?’
It’s a fool’s errand wondering how this film would have fared with Connery. For a start, everyone raised their game on this because it was Lazenby’s first, it needed to be a hit. Secondly, it wouldn’t have starred Telly or Rigg, as they were relatively big names to pull in audiences to compensate for Lazenby not being a star. Connery might well have been up against Brigitte Bardot, who instead starred with Connery in Shalako. I can’t see her having much personality. Pleasance might have been more suitable as Blofeld in this, as Fleming seemed to model his villain here on Count Dracula, hiding out in a forsaken lair with angels of death, and his enemy posing as a scholar on a research project, the actor’s Hammer credentials might have worked. But Hunt disliked the actor because of his ‘mincing’ gate, he said they had to keep cutting him in YOLT to make it less obvious, and Telly poses a greater physical threat. You can’t see Pleasance taking to the skis really. And you’d still have the problem of the two characters not recognising each other despite having met already.
The film might make more of the fact that Bond is disobeying his bosses and the British state to carry out his - frankly unnecessary - demolition job on Piz Gloria; there’s no evidence that Blofeld’s hostage will come to any harm, she’s more likely to come to harm by this approach - Bond is no Richard Ratcliffe, is he - and it’s not like Blofeld is even demanding £400 million for tanks not delivered to ensure her return, oh alright, you know. Might it be that in going against Her Majesty Bond is doomed to fail and be punished? If so, the film doesn’t really stress that. Not saying it would be more enjoyable if it did, just saying…
As impressive as the film is, it becomes something of a sitting duck in that it doesn’t quite send itself up so much, it’s not trying to. It doesn’t undercut itself the way the other Bonds do, and like its predecessor again seems easy to send up; You Only Live Twice also became a bit long-winded, a bit pompous in its third act for sure. Some of the pan pipes or flutes on the soundtrack surely influenced the piss-taking Austin Powers soundtrack. Then again, the nervy urgent John Barry cues for the final scenes in Piz Gloria, all a bit Ipcress File in their styling, stayed with me days after.
The finale of the film earned a smattering of applause.
I may check in for more Bonds here (only joking, folks, about being barred for my gag - in fact the entire audience loved it and bought me drinks at the bar afterwards) - I can, however see how fans get annoyed with Diamonds are Forever. It doesn’t really follow on from this movie. In a film season or movie marathon, I wouldn’t put this in the same bracket as You Only Live Twice or Diamonds are Forever. Chronologically it comes after Thunderball but even then it doesn’t feel right. I’d put it after From Russia With Love really, both have a young actor as Bond, both seem to be taking it seriously, as are the films.
You could do Dr No, FRWL, OHMSS, TSWLM, FYEO and LTK as an all-nighter, that might work. Maybe TWINE at the end if you wanted.
Above: English national treasure Joanna Lumley in a rare shot - for OHMSS - looking hot in the film.
I know I meant to comment when you posted but musta got distracted. Your epic reviews always introduce lots of discussion points that deserve following up, and are even better because of your iconoclastic style, you make us think about our lazy assumptions.
I'd love to see OHMSS not just on the big screen, but one of those educational IMAX screens that are intended to induce vertigo. I think the sense of landscape is stronger in this film than any other BondFilm, all those sheer icy drops.
I'll have a proper read later. But one thing I wonder, are you taking notes while in the cinema? and how do you pay attention to the movie if youre taking notes?
Napoleon, re post 954- Draco's bridge partner and the one who tells Tracy about her father's plans are the same person, Olympe. She's voiced by the ubiquitous Nikki van der Zyl.
Post 258- Donald Pleasence didn't have any Hammer credentials at that time.
An insightful review as always, NP. I'm sure John Glenn would've realised (like you did) how much Tracy's death scene screams out for comic relief. A double-taking fox perhaps? I love OHMSS, we all do. But you have a point regarding the Bond girls. EON missed a trick by not hiring a Coke Zero-loving Norwegian to cast them. "Man with a hat" is actually an expression in these parts, refering to older gentlemen driving slowly in the middle of the road. Do we know if Lazenby started this trend?
See, that's crazy to me, I've seen this film a fair few times and never realised they were the same! Again, this to me is a flaw in the writing or directing, the film doesn't quite link up. She doesn't quite look the same - does she have her hair up in the bridge scene? - and it's not referenced, is it? They could have Olympe return at the end of Bond and Draco's meeting on a pretext, have her say 'You could meet in a family setting, she's always more relaxed there' or at the bullfight, 'This is a bit more physical than bridge, wouldn't you say?' or just something to tie them together. Similarly, though Draco's men are physically distinctive, there are no tip offs to connect them to the guys who storm Blofeld's lair, we aren't invited to care or be interested in them much. Bond going berserk upon seeing the blond guy dangling from the mountain doesn't quite work because the two exchanged no 'moment' together, despite the safe-cracking scene.
I know there are a lot of women in OHMSS, so maybe your eyesight was, how shall we say, suffering. But I have to disagree. It is very obviously the same actress, the rather lovely Virginia North, who was a model, but also acted, featuring in the two Bulldog Drummond efforts as well as The Abominable Dr Phibes. We see her face on, so it shouldn't be difficult. I am really surprised you struggle with this. I have never considered them a different person in all the viewings. In fact, doesn't Draco use her name: "Olympe, a martini for our guest and a campari for myself." At the birthday party, Tracy then uses her name: "Tell me, Olympe, what has Papa planned for me."
The blond guy's name is Campbell, though he's never called that in the movie. Fleming gives his full name as Shaun Campbell but obviously that wasn't going into the film. He was played by Bernard Horsfall, who also appeared in other movies directed by Peter Hunt ("Gold","Shout At The Devil" both starring Roger Moore). He gets some dialogue with Bond and Blofeld in the novel though only with Blofeld in the movie while Bond looks on.
Well that scene with Draco is in long shot mostly it seems to me, another Hunt thing, it works better on the big screen because you can see the detail better. Do we see a close up of her face in that scene? I don't know. Bond would be better off going off with her and ditching wet blanket Tracy, he only winds up getting her killed. Does she reemerge with the drinks? I don't know.
Not sure what my Kenneth Williams picture above alludes to I think I posted it late.
I can't remember if she gets a close-up in that scene. Don't think so, since the emphasis is on Draco. "Draco" translates as "dragon", just like the real name of Hugo Drax (von der Drache), another example of Fleming's obsession with dragons (DN, YOLT, etc).
Ah, Olympe! When Tracy comments to Olympe that there are many things about Mister Bond that one doesn't know, Olympe replies, "It would be interesting to attend night school, perhaps." That line makes me cringe. Always having assumed that Olympe is Draco's girlfriend as well as assistant, and yet of a similar age to Tracy, I find it rather 'off' that she should be suggesting to Tracy that she consider a sexual relationship with Bond, a man both women clearly find attractive and to whom - as Olympe seems to know and as Tracy intuits - Draco would like to marry Tracy off. Excruciantingly 'Bouquet Of Barbed War' in terms of how much needs untangling, there!
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 53 years.
@Shady Tree Olympe is encouraging Tracy to have a relationship with Bond by telling her what a catch he would be, just because a girl fancies a man doesn’t mean she will actually jump into bed with him, but fantasies do no harm. I’m sure many members on here, male and female, fancy other people, but whether they would actually carry out an affair would depend on their own moral compass.
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
@Napoleon Plural It’s been a long time since I saw OHMSS on the big screen and it’s my favourite Bond movie, so I disagree with a lot of what you wrote, but I enjoy reading other points of view, it would be boring if everyone thought the same.
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
@CoolHandBond Yes, indeed; but my point about the admittedly briefly sketched Draco/ Olympe/ Tracy dynamic is more to do with its cringeworthy cross-generational Freudian implications (the Electra complex), intersecting with the notion of an arranged marriage - not to mention further intersections with 'maybe/ maybe-not' notions of sex as payment of debt, or of phallocentric domination as a solution to a woman's suicidal depression. Although OHMSS has been latterly feted as an accessibly human story, obviously tributed by Babs's revisionist NTTD, its sexual politics, particularly in its earlier passages, are murkier, seedier and arguably more messed up even than Connery-Bond's assertion in YOLT of his intention to retire to Japan as a joking response to Tanaka's blatantly off-handed sexism. I guess that's what came of making a dramatically serious-minded adaptation of Fleming.
The scene in question somehow puts me in mind of the later, manifestly Freudian 'Bouquet of Barbed Wire', conjuring vague associations with Frank Finlay, Susan Penhaligon, Deborah Grant and James Aubrey.
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 53 years.
See, that's where ignorance is bliss because I just didn't pick up on that woman being Draco's squeeze from earlier. As seen in the bullfighting venue, she's the only woman in the entire film who I find fanciable and it's a bit part. But with this new information it is a bit cringe.
@Napoleon Plural It's only an assumption that Olympe is Draco's squeeze - but I see Draco as a similar type to Kerim Bey, a widower who had his Nadja Regin, so it's a reasonable assumption that Olympe is in that same kind of 'companion' role that Ms Regin played. Unless of course I just have a grubby mind and Olympe is nothing more than Tracy's friend - in which case it's simply a matter of a natter between girls and I take it all back!
Agreed that it would have been good to have seen more of Virginia North!
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 53 years.
The actress who plays Irma Bunt is facially quite handsome, she could be Fiona Volpe’s mother, maybe she was if Spectre is all in the family. I don’t see why Bond couldn’t have got into bed with her, they both could have had a good time.
Lookism. Theres a very narrow range of the Ideal of Beauty in these BondFilms and Irma is well outside it. Further she's a character from Fleming, and in Fleming Ugly = Evil.
But he really should have made a move when he found her in the other lady's bed. Just like he successfully turned Pussy to the side of the angels and attempted the same with Fiona, he probably could have used his Mojo superpowers to turn Irma. Then he could have saved the world a few days earlier and Tracy would still be alive. But no, he'll only Do It with Hot Chicks even though his skills of seduction are part of his job (see mission briefing dialogs in FRWL and TND).
The seasons might be out of whack. It’s suddenly Christmas in Switzerland but was it really winter during the scenes on the beach, or the bullfighting scene? This is different to the book of course, which began around September, an Indian summer in the south of France then naturally progressed to Christmas. It’s not clear in the film how long Bond spends on his studies at the College of Arms to get into character and it might break up the idea of his romance if it’s suggested that it’s been three months or so.
yes the passage of time is clear in the book
as you say he meets Tracy in September. in the book they meet in Royale les Eaux, which is northernmost coast of France, so summer ends there earlier than the Mediterranean. I think the film moves that scene to Portugal, where it could be later in the year. Later on in the book Bond arranges to visit Piz Gloria specifically on December 22nd, so all the Christmas trees and gift-giving in the film is accurate. He and Tracy marry on New Years Day, an impulse decision immediately acted on. They marry in the British Consulate in Munich, Draco is there but not M and the gang from the office. They really should have waited longer and travelled further from "that damned mountain" since Bond knew the big baddies had survived.
anyway, the explicit date Bond meets Tracy may be ambiguous but the filmmakers do suggest a longer than usual passage of time with the romantic montage, a device not used in the other films to my recollection
also, somewhere I think you mention the character of Shaun Campbell, I'm not finding that right now.
We had a bit of discussion of his role in the film in the Pros and Cons thread. His part's a bit underwritten, as if there's scenes missing, and the filmmakers don't dare touch on his real significance to the plot: Bond must choose to let a colleague die rather than blow his own cover and risk the mission.
in both cases, it helps to have read the book. This film follows the book so closely that when they skip a bit it must seem like a plot hole to someone who hasn't read the source material. But it should still work rather you know your Fleming or not, so these gaps are mistakes in storytelling. Much of the "iconoclastic" nature of your review is assessing the film on its own inherent terms, which we obsessives probably can't do so easily as we all have Fleming memorised and value this film precisely for its fidelity to Fleming. Similarly. newbie Bond fans typically don't like this film because it gets the Formula wrong, not just because of Lazenby. So is this a film that is only appreciated by those who have read the books?
It’s a fool’s errand wondering how this film would have fared with Connery. For a start, everyone raised their game on this because it was Lazenby’s first, it needed to be a hit. Secondly, it wouldn’t have starred Telly or Rigg, as they were relatively big names to pull in audiences to compensate for Lazenby not being a star. Connery might well have been up against Brigitte Bardot, who instead starred with Connery in Shalako. I can’t see her having much personality.
certainly Rigg compensates for the lack of Connery. But she might have been cast anyway. Her predecessor Honor Blackman costarred with Connery. Her presence alone does "raise the game" as she's a much better actor than the typical BondGirl til that point, Blackman and maybe Luciana Paluzzi excepted. and important to get a competent actor for this part, as Bond has to fall in love with this character and mourn her death, If the actress was the typical bikini model requiring vocal overdubs, as seen in most of the first five films, the whole point of the story would have been missed. So even if Connery had been in the film, they might have required a better than usual actress.
I do like her better in The Avengers though. Despite being written into extra scenes, she doesnt get so much to do as a typical episode of her own teevee show, so it seems a waste her having quit something so good just to make this film. She's also more likable in The Avengers, where she smiles and laughs constantly. Here she has a permafrown that gives way to unconvincing smile in that one scene at the ice rink. But thats good acting, her character's meant to be suicidally depressed. I gotta admit, til I saw The Avengers I always thought that permafrown was how Diana Rigg always looked.
the dialogue ... where the concierge is talking about Bond’s ‘special requirements’, presumably his way with the women. The script probably called for the sort of thing we see at the Miami Beach Hotel in Goldfinger, or Nassau in Thunderball - obvious shots of bikini babes sashaying across from right to left, big ass on view, a staple of the Kennedy era, the time of Playboy magazine, but we don’t get that here as it might interrupt the flow of the day to night segue. I must say, we never see Oswald and his wife Martha trying to change behind a windbreaker in these shots, their kid whining about his dropped ice cream.
It’s possible that Hunt missed an obvious trick here. But what worked in 64/65 might well not have done in 69 (you were expecting me) where feminism was on the rise and more than that, it all might have looked a bit dated by then. That not withstanding, it lends a high minded feel to the film, as we are made to concentrate on the main love interest Tracy and not what else he might be getting around the pool.
this is a big point, could almost be a thread in itself: the evolution of the pool scenes/gratuitous eye candy scenes. They were definitely a recurring image not just in the earlier BondFilms, but take up huge chunks of running time in the Matt Helm and Derek Flint films as well. Even early episodes of the Avengers (which by definition preceded Goldfinger) in the episode Cathy Gale is introduced. Death Dispatch, Steed meets his boss beside a swimming pool surrounded by bikini babes and picks one up immediately after his boss is done briefing him (and in season 1's Tunnel of Fear Steed goes undercover with a carnival troupe of bellydancers, see screencap here). Contemporary to OHMSS Jason King was routinely picking up chicks on the beach in Department S.
in OHMSS we do get something similar with the introduction of the Angels of Death. as soons they appear, there is a musical cue similar to whenever Ginger walked on stage in Gilligan's Island, and I'm sure everyone gets the idea Bond could have them all if he wanted to. So I think the lack of bikini babes during the first beach scene must be to support the deeper-than-usual attraction to Tracy, we only get that nudge nudge winkwink stuff once she's stepped out of the plot (then when they meet again she asks "what really went on, on top of that mountain", and he won't tell, it was all so traumatic)
I don't think it was due to any contemporary rise in feminism. The next three Bond films we get plenty of silly girls in bikinis "showing a bit more cheek than usual", and the big pool party scenes begin in earnest with Moore's later movies (accompanied by current issues of Playboy promoting naked BondGirls from the latest film, who turn out to be models only had nonspeaking lines in that one brief pool scene, never a real actress with a speaking part). Even the otherwise sexless Dalton films have those gratuitous pool-party scenes.
I didnt know Hunt was gay. That could explain the lesser objectification of women in OHMSS, but everyone's an individual so thats no predictable cause and effect. I mentioned earlier Jason King picking up babes in Department S, and Peter Wyngarde was also a gay man in real life. when watching that show I thought maybe that kind of brazen heterosexuality was a gay man's idea of how straight men behave
so I do agree the change in attitude to women was needed to make plot work, and what's funny is how quickly Bond reverts to form as soon's Tracy's offstage and the Angels of Death enter. If Tracy had lived, theirs would have had to be a very "open" marriage.
@Napoleon Plural I've passed on these Prince Charles screenings so far because of concerns about Covid and memories of how cramped it can sometimes feel at that venue, but your excellent posts make me realise what I've been missing (even though I last saw most of the 60s-80s Bonds on the big screen about fifteen years ago in a season at the BFI Southbank). I'm tempted, this time, to come on board for the Brosnan films when the current season gets that far.
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 53 years.
Yes and no. Was all set to see Golden Gun this afternoon - it's showing right now, as it happens, while After the Fox, the Peter Sellers film winding up on London Live Channel 8 as I type, suggests that Britt Eckland was no fool as a comic actress and misused in Bond. But I was tired and I checked out the booking on today's screening - just a few to many near the front where I sit so I cried off. Covid is a concern for me too, though it's possible the publicity on Twitter the Bond community has given to the films, not to mention my own posts on this thread, have made it more popular; it only takes 10 people to read it and think, hey, maybe I'll turn up near the front and that nixes is for me.
Even with Casino Royale 67 there were a few booked in front row, probably for greater leg room.
I hadn't read that post, Barbel - that's a good one! Copious rewrites too, some from a young recently acclaimed comedy writer.
I wish CR 67 were just a bit better, zippier in the first half with none of that rubbish with Deborah Kerr in the bath, or Niven with the lisp. Of course, Sellers went AWOL. Odd that he puts in a decent enough turn in one-joke movie After the Fox, no sign of his breakdown there. Hard to remember or easy to forget his brilliance as Fred Kite in the superb and depressingly topical comedy I'm Alright Jack.
Comments
We think of Casino Royale as Craig’s first film but he’s in this one of course, as the Piz Gloria guard who eavesdrops on Bond’s bedroom schedule and later duffs him up with another and has him consigned to a makeshift prison, it’s clearly a young Craig. Explains why he looks so old as Bond.
On the big screen we can see that one of those goons is the one with the sideburns in the pre-credits of the next one, Diamonds are Forever. Possibly even a nod to continuity seeing as that is the Spectre organisation too.
One scene appears cut - on his arrival at Piz Gloria, Bond - as Sir Hilary - is instructed to take a medical and during this time his baggage is searched. What went on in the medical? We don’t know.
The seasons might be out of whack. It’s suddenly Christmas in Switzerland but was it really winter during the scenes on the beach, or the bullfighting scene? This is different to the book of course, which began around September, an Indian summer in the south of France then naturally progressed to Christmas. It’s not clear in the film how long Bond spends on his studies at the College of Arms to get into character and it might break up the idea of his romance if it’s suggested that it’s been three months or so.
One trick missed might be the shot of snow falling outside Bond’s window in Piz Gloria to emphasise how stranded he is up there, but generally it’s amazing how Hunt doesn’t really miss a trick, it’s all very good.
The film benefits from looking great, certainly far better than Thunderball. Now, one benefit is the allocation of the budget. While You Only Live Twice was filmed in the Far East, Japan, that must have accelerated costs to get all the actors and filming equipment over there. Then you had Ken Adam’s amazing volcano set, not as expensive as the producers claimed at the time, but pricey for sure, plus all those vehicular stunts and set pieces too, that would have cost a fair bit, on top of that Connery’s salary was not as much as he’d liked, but would have been higher than Lazenby’s.
This film is one of the few Bonds to be filmed exclusively in Europe (there’s just one other I think that has that claim, can you work out which one it is?) so that keeps costs down. There are fewer extras needed. Much of the action is punch ups and latterly ski chases. Essentially they are using natural locations and these look terrific.
So all the budget could go into making the film look chic and sophisticated, more so than any of the other Bonds really, certainly for that era. I mean, the first three punched above their weight in terms of budget, but the budgets weren’t high. Once Bond became a big hit, there were always trying to catch up with themselves. There are cheap bits in most of these Bonds, but not this one. This one has the big budget, but isn’t blowing it on gimmicks and tat.
I mean, I like the Ken Adam volcano but whenever I see it, I think, okay, we’re back in Pinewood now, we’re not in Japan. That sort of thing never happens in OHMSS, for once Bond is exactly where he Is meant to be, it’s not doubling for some place else.
I love the natural scenery of the Alps in this film - magnificent on the big screen - but that said, I’m the age where I would. As a kid, the mock volcano would intrigue and delight me far more. I do think a kid might not nag their parent to take them to see OHMSS a second time as it doesn’t have those WTF? Gimmick moments that kids like to process and talk about at school. The action is a bit vanilla.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
There are odd snags, less conspicuous oddly on the big screen but there anyway. I think it’s the sheer cinema experience that compensates or distracts. But all that stuff about ‘bessants’ I mean what is all that? A bit distracting, a bit strange. Perhaps Hunt being a freemason found all that heraldic talk a bit familiar, more than we might. And the joke about Bond’s ‘balls’ and having three of them isn’t a great innuendo, you’d need to have Connery’s comic genius to pull that off. Ruby seems delighted and amused by it but we’re not.
Then there’s that odd stuff about Blofeld’s lack of ear lobes - did Telly have his pinned back then? What’s the deal there? It just seems a bit off kilter, a bit unwise too given Lazenby’s somewhat large jugs, unhelpfully silhouetted in the very opening scene of the film.
‘I mean, what sort of person wears a hat in a car, I mean really?’
It’s a fool’s errand wondering how this film would have fared with Connery. For a start, everyone raised their game on this because it was Lazenby’s first, it needed to be a hit. Secondly, it wouldn’t have starred Telly or Rigg, as they were relatively big names to pull in audiences to compensate for Lazenby not being a star. Connery might well have been up against Brigitte Bardot, who instead starred with Connery in Shalako. I can’t see her having much personality. Pleasance might have been more suitable as Blofeld in this, as Fleming seemed to model his villain here on Count Dracula, hiding out in a forsaken lair with angels of death, and his enemy posing as a scholar on a research project, the actor’s Hammer credentials might have worked. But Hunt disliked the actor because of his ‘mincing’ gate, he said they had to keep cutting him in YOLT to make it less obvious, and Telly poses a greater physical threat. You can’t see Pleasance taking to the skis really. And you’d still have the problem of the two characters not recognising each other despite having met already.
The film might make more of the fact that Bond is disobeying his bosses and the British state to carry out his - frankly unnecessary - demolition job on Piz Gloria; there’s no evidence that Blofeld’s hostage will come to any harm, she’s more likely to come to harm by this approach - Bond is no Richard Ratcliffe, is he - and it’s not like Blofeld is even demanding £400 million for tanks not delivered to ensure her return, oh alright, you know. Might it be that in going against Her Majesty Bond is doomed to fail and be punished? If so, the film doesn’t really stress that. Not saying it would be more enjoyable if it did, just saying…
As impressive as the film is, it becomes something of a sitting duck in that it doesn’t quite send itself up so much, it’s not trying to. It doesn’t undercut itself the way the other Bonds do, and like its predecessor again seems easy to send up; You Only Live Twice also became a bit long-winded, a bit pompous in its third act for sure. Some of the pan pipes or flutes on the soundtrack surely influenced the piss-taking Austin Powers soundtrack. Then again, the nervy urgent John Barry cues for the final scenes in Piz Gloria, all a bit Ipcress File in their styling, stayed with me days after.
The finale of the film earned a smattering of applause.
I may check in for more Bonds here (only joking, folks, about being barred for my gag - in fact the entire audience loved it and bought me drinks at the bar afterwards) - I can, however see how fans get annoyed with Diamonds are Forever. It doesn’t really follow on from this movie. In a film season or movie marathon, I wouldn’t put this in the same bracket as You Only Live Twice or Diamonds are Forever. Chronologically it comes after Thunderball but even then it doesn’t feel right. I’d put it after From Russia With Love really, both have a young actor as Bond, both seem to be taking it seriously, as are the films.
You could do Dr No, FRWL, OHMSS, TSWLM, FYEO and LTK as an all-nighter, that might work. Maybe TWINE at the end if you wanted.
Above: English national treasure Joanna Lumley in a rare shot - for OHMSS - looking hot in the film.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Very impressive work there, np. Detailed and thorough. I now feel like watching the film (yet) again!
And yes, I could name the other Bond film you mention above.
At last a comment! I thought everyone was miffed because of my Autoglass joke. Which I didn't actually make in the cinema of course!
'Detailed and thorough'... one of those euphemisms! 😀
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Not intended as a euphemism, just a compliment.
napster said:
At last a comment!
I know I meant to comment when you posted but musta got distracted. Your epic reviews always introduce lots of discussion points that deserve following up, and are even better because of your iconoclastic style, you make us think about our lazy assumptions.
I'd love to see OHMSS not just on the big screen, but one of those educational IMAX screens that are intended to induce vertigo. I think the sense of landscape is stronger in this film than any other BondFilm, all those sheer icy drops.
I'll have a proper read later. But one thing I wonder, are you taking notes while in the cinema? and how do you pay attention to the movie if youre taking notes?
Napoleon, re post 954- Draco's bridge partner and the one who tells Tracy about her father's plans are the same person, Olympe. She's voiced by the ubiquitous Nikki van der Zyl.
Post 258- Donald Pleasence didn't have any Hammer credentials at that time.
An insightful review as always, NP. I'm sure John Glenn would've realised (like you did) how much Tracy's death scene screams out for comic relief. A double-taking fox perhaps? I love OHMSS, we all do. But you have a point regarding the Bond girls. EON missed a trick by not hiring a Coke Zero-loving Norwegian to cast them. "Man with a hat" is actually an expression in these parts, refering to older gentlemen driving slowly in the middle of the road. Do we know if Lazenby started this trend?
Love this review @Napoleon Plural oh how I wish you'd really got banned from the Prince Charles... 😃
'I know....!'
Roger Moore 1927-2017
See, that's crazy to me, I've seen this film a fair few times and never realised they were the same! Again, this to me is a flaw in the writing or directing, the film doesn't quite link up. She doesn't quite look the same - does she have her hair up in the bridge scene? - and it's not referenced, is it? They could have Olympe return at the end of Bond and Draco's meeting on a pretext, have her say 'You could meet in a family setting, she's always more relaxed there' or at the bullfight, 'This is a bit more physical than bridge, wouldn't you say?' or just something to tie them together. Similarly, though Draco's men are physically distinctive, there are no tip offs to connect them to the guys who storm Blofeld's lair, we aren't invited to care or be interested in them much. Bond going berserk upon seeing the blond guy dangling from the mountain doesn't quite work because the two exchanged no 'moment' together, despite the safe-cracking scene.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I know there are a lot of women in OHMSS, so maybe your eyesight was, how shall we say, suffering. But I have to disagree. It is very obviously the same actress, the rather lovely Virginia North, who was a model, but also acted, featuring in the two Bulldog Drummond efforts as well as The Abominable Dr Phibes. We see her face on, so it shouldn't be difficult. I am really surprised you struggle with this. I have never considered them a different person in all the viewings. In fact, doesn't Draco use her name: "Olympe, a martini for our guest and a campari for myself." At the birthday party, Tracy then uses her name: "Tell me, Olympe, what has Papa planned for me."
Yes, both Draco and Tracy call her by name.
The blond guy's name is Campbell, though he's never called that in the movie. Fleming gives his full name as Shaun Campbell but obviously that wasn't going into the film. He was played by Bernard Horsfall, who also appeared in other movies directed by Peter Hunt ("Gold","Shout At The Devil" both starring Roger Moore). He gets some dialogue with Bond and Blofeld in the novel though only with Blofeld in the movie while Bond looks on.
Well that scene with Draco is in long shot mostly it seems to me, another Hunt thing, it works better on the big screen because you can see the detail better. Do we see a close up of her face in that scene? I don't know. Bond would be better off going off with her and ditching wet blanket Tracy, he only winds up getting her killed. Does she reemerge with the drinks? I don't know.
Not sure what my Kenneth Williams picture above alludes to I think I posted it late.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I can't remember if she gets a close-up in that scene. Don't think so, since the emphasis is on Draco. "Draco" translates as "dragon", just like the real name of Hugo Drax (von der Drache), another example of Fleming's obsession with dragons (DN, YOLT, etc).
Ah, Olympe! When Tracy comments to Olympe that there are many things about Mister Bond that one doesn't know, Olympe replies, "It would be interesting to attend night school, perhaps." That line makes me cringe. Always having assumed that Olympe is Draco's girlfriend as well as assistant, and yet of a similar age to Tracy, I find it rather 'off' that she should be suggesting to Tracy that she consider a sexual relationship with Bond, a man both women clearly find attractive and to whom - as Olympe seems to know and as Tracy intuits - Draco would like to marry Tracy off. Excruciantingly 'Bouquet Of Barbed War' in terms of how much needs untangling, there!
@Shady Tree Olympe is encouraging Tracy to have a relationship with Bond by telling her what a catch he would be, just because a girl fancies a man doesn’t mean she will actually jump into bed with him, but fantasies do no harm. I’m sure many members on here, male and female, fancy other people, but whether they would actually carry out an affair would depend on their own moral compass.
@Napoleon Plural It’s been a long time since I saw OHMSS on the big screen and it’s my favourite Bond movie, so I disagree with a lot of what you wrote, but I enjoy reading other points of view, it would be boring if everyone thought the same.
@CoolHandBond Yes, indeed; but my point about the admittedly briefly sketched Draco/ Olympe/ Tracy dynamic is more to do with its cringeworthy cross-generational Freudian implications (the Electra complex), intersecting with the notion of an arranged marriage - not to mention further intersections with 'maybe/ maybe-not' notions of sex as payment of debt, or of phallocentric domination as a solution to a woman's suicidal depression. Although OHMSS has been latterly feted as an accessibly human story, obviously tributed by Babs's revisionist NTTD, its sexual politics, particularly in its earlier passages, are murkier, seedier and arguably more messed up even than Connery-Bond's assertion in YOLT of his intention to retire to Japan as a joking response to Tanaka's blatantly off-handed sexism. I guess that's what came of making a dramatically serious-minded adaptation of Fleming.
The scene in question somehow puts me in mind of the later, manifestly Freudian 'Bouquet of Barbed Wire', conjuring vague associations with Frank Finlay, Susan Penhaligon, Deborah Grant and James Aubrey.
See, that's where ignorance is bliss because I just didn't pick up on that woman being Draco's squeeze from earlier. As seen in the bullfighting venue, she's the only woman in the entire film who I find fanciable and it's a bit part. But with this new information it is a bit cringe.
@CoolHandBond that was my more flattering review!
Off to Google Bouquet of Barbed Wire...
Roger Moore 1927-2017
@Napoleon Plural It's only an assumption that Olympe is Draco's squeeze - but I see Draco as a similar type to Kerim Bey, a widower who had his Nadja Regin, so it's a reasonable assumption that Olympe is in that same kind of 'companion' role that Ms Regin played. Unless of course I just have a grubby mind and Olympe is nothing more than Tracy's friend - in which case it's simply a matter of a natter between girls and I take it all back!
Agreed that it would have been good to have seen more of Virginia North!
napoleon sez
The actress who plays Irma Bunt is facially quite handsome, she could be Fiona Volpe’s mother, maybe she was if Spectre is all in the family. I don’t see why Bond couldn’t have got into bed with her, they both could have had a good time.
Lookism. Theres a very narrow range of the Ideal of Beauty in these BondFilms and Irma is well outside it. Further she's a character from Fleming, and in Fleming Ugly = Evil.
But he really should have made a move when he found her in the other lady's bed. Just like he successfully turned Pussy to the side of the angels and attempted the same with Fiona, he probably could have used his Mojo superpowers to turn Irma. Then he could have saved the world a few days earlier and Tracy would still be alive. But no, he'll only Do It with Hot Chicks even though his skills of seduction are part of his job (see mission briefing dialogs in FRWL and TND).
napoleon says
The seasons might be out of whack. It’s suddenly Christmas in Switzerland but was it really winter during the scenes on the beach, or the bullfighting scene? This is different to the book of course, which began around September, an Indian summer in the south of France then naturally progressed to Christmas. It’s not clear in the film how long Bond spends on his studies at the College of Arms to get into character and it might break up the idea of his romance if it’s suggested that it’s been three months or so.
yes the passage of time is clear in the book
as you say he meets Tracy in September. in the book they meet in Royale les Eaux, which is northernmost coast of France, so summer ends there earlier than the Mediterranean. I think the film moves that scene to Portugal, where it could be later in the year. Later on in the book Bond arranges to visit Piz Gloria specifically on December 22nd, so all the Christmas trees and gift-giving in the film is accurate. He and Tracy marry on New Years Day, an impulse decision immediately acted on. They marry in the British Consulate in Munich, Draco is there but not M and the gang from the office. They really should have waited longer and travelled further from "that damned mountain" since Bond knew the big baddies had survived.
anyway, the explicit date Bond meets Tracy may be ambiguous but the filmmakers do suggest a longer than usual passage of time with the romantic montage, a device not used in the other films to my recollection
also, somewhere I think you mention the character of Shaun Campbell, I'm not finding that right now.
We had a bit of discussion of his role in the film in the Pros and Cons thread. His part's a bit underwritten, as if there's scenes missing, and the filmmakers don't dare touch on his real significance to the plot: Bond must choose to let a colleague die rather than blow his own cover and risk the mission.
in both cases, it helps to have read the book. This film follows the book so closely that when they skip a bit it must seem like a plot hole to someone who hasn't read the source material. But it should still work rather you know your Fleming or not, so these gaps are mistakes in storytelling. Much of the "iconoclastic" nature of your review is assessing the film on its own inherent terms, which we obsessives probably can't do so easily as we all have Fleming memorised and value this film precisely for its fidelity to Fleming. Similarly. newbie Bond fans typically don't like this film because it gets the Formula wrong, not just because of Lazenby. So is this a film that is only appreciated by those who have read the books?
napoleon also sez:
It’s a fool’s errand wondering how this film would have fared with Connery. For a start, everyone raised their game on this because it was Lazenby’s first, it needed to be a hit. Secondly, it wouldn’t have starred Telly or Rigg, as they were relatively big names to pull in audiences to compensate for Lazenby not being a star. Connery might well have been up against Brigitte Bardot, who instead starred with Connery in Shalako. I can’t see her having much personality.
certainly Rigg compensates for the lack of Connery. But she might have been cast anyway. Her predecessor Honor Blackman costarred with Connery. Her presence alone does "raise the game" as she's a much better actor than the typical BondGirl til that point, Blackman and maybe Luciana Paluzzi excepted. and important to get a competent actor for this part, as Bond has to fall in love with this character and mourn her death, If the actress was the typical bikini model requiring vocal overdubs, as seen in most of the first five films, the whole point of the story would have been missed. So even if Connery had been in the film, they might have required a better than usual actress.
I do like her better in The Avengers though. Despite being written into extra scenes, she doesnt get so much to do as a typical episode of her own teevee show, so it seems a waste her having quit something so good just to make this film. She's also more likable in The Avengers, where she smiles and laughs constantly. Here she has a permafrown that gives way to unconvincing smile in that one scene at the ice rink. But thats good acting, her character's meant to be suicidally depressed. I gotta admit, til I saw The Avengers I always thought that permafrown was how Diana Rigg always looked.
and furthermore napoleon sez:
the dialogue ... where the concierge is talking about Bond’s ‘special requirements’, presumably his way with the women. The script probably called for the sort of thing we see at the Miami Beach Hotel in Goldfinger, or Nassau in Thunderball - obvious shots of bikini babes sashaying across from right to left, big ass on view, a staple of the Kennedy era, the time of Playboy magazine, but we don’t get that here as it might interrupt the flow of the day to night segue. I must say, we never see Oswald and his wife Martha trying to change behind a windbreaker in these shots, their kid whining about his dropped ice cream.
It’s possible that Hunt missed an obvious trick here. But what worked in 64/65 might well not have done in 69 (you were expecting me) where feminism was on the rise and more than that, it all might have looked a bit dated by then. That not withstanding, it lends a high minded feel to the film, as we are made to concentrate on the main love interest Tracy and not what else he might be getting around the pool.
this is a big point, could almost be a thread in itself: the evolution of the pool scenes/gratuitous eye candy scenes. They were definitely a recurring image not just in the earlier BondFilms, but take up huge chunks of running time in the Matt Helm and Derek Flint films as well. Even early episodes of the Avengers (which by definition preceded Goldfinger) in the episode Cathy Gale is introduced. Death Dispatch, Steed meets his boss beside a swimming pool surrounded by bikini babes and picks one up immediately after his boss is done briefing him (and in season 1's Tunnel of Fear Steed goes undercover with a carnival troupe of bellydancers, see screencap here). Contemporary to OHMSS Jason King was routinely picking up chicks on the beach in Department S.
in OHMSS we do get something similar with the introduction of the Angels of Death. as soons they appear, there is a musical cue similar to whenever Ginger walked on stage in Gilligan's Island, and I'm sure everyone gets the idea Bond could have them all if he wanted to. So I think the lack of bikini babes during the first beach scene must be to support the deeper-than-usual attraction to Tracy, we only get that nudge nudge winkwink stuff once she's stepped out of the plot (then when they meet again she asks "what really went on, on top of that mountain", and he won't tell, it was all so traumatic)
I don't think it was due to any contemporary rise in feminism. The next three Bond films we get plenty of silly girls in bikinis "showing a bit more cheek than usual", and the big pool party scenes begin in earnest with Moore's later movies (accompanied by current issues of Playboy promoting naked BondGirls from the latest film, who turn out to be models only had nonspeaking lines in that one brief pool scene, never a real actress with a speaking part). Even the otherwise sexless Dalton films have those gratuitous pool-party scenes.
I didnt know Hunt was gay. That could explain the lesser objectification of women in OHMSS, but everyone's an individual so thats no predictable cause and effect. I mentioned earlier Jason King picking up babes in Department S, and Peter Wyngarde was also a gay man in real life. when watching that show I thought maybe that kind of brazen heterosexuality was a gay man's idea of how straight men behave
so I do agree the change in attitude to women was needed to make plot work, and what's funny is how quickly Bond reverts to form as soon's Tracy's offstage and the Angels of Death enter. If Tracy had lived, theirs would have had to be a very "open" marriage.
@Napoleon Plural I've passed on these Prince Charles screenings so far because of concerns about Covid and memories of how cramped it can sometimes feel at that venue, but your excellent posts make me realise what I've been missing (even though I last saw most of the 60s-80s Bonds on the big screen about fifteen years ago in a season at the BFI Southbank). I'm tempted, this time, to come on board for the Brosnan films when the current season gets that far.
Yes and no. Was all set to see Golden Gun this afternoon - it's showing right now, as it happens, while After the Fox, the Peter Sellers film winding up on London Live Channel 8 as I type, suggests that Britt Eckland was no fool as a comic actress and misused in Bond. But I was tired and I checked out the booking on today's screening - just a few to many near the front where I sit so I cried off. Covid is a concern for me too, though it's possible the publicity on Twitter the Bond community has given to the films, not to mention my own posts on this thread, have made it more popular; it only takes 10 people to read it and think, hey, maybe I'll turn up near the front and that nixes is for me.
Even with Casino Royale 67 there were a few booked in front row, probably for greater leg room.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Maybe they just want a really good look at how much it's like NTTD? https://www.ajb007.co.uk/discussion/54920/spoilers-nttds-similarities-to-an-earlier-bond-film#latest
I hadn't read that post, Barbel - that's a good one! Copious rewrites too, some from a young recently acclaimed comedy writer.
I wish CR 67 were just a bit better, zippier in the first half with none of that rubbish with Deborah Kerr in the bath, or Niven with the lisp. Of course, Sellers went AWOL. Odd that he puts in a decent enough turn in one-joke movie After the Fox, no sign of his breakdown there. Hard to remember or easy to forget his brilliance as Fred Kite in the superb and depressingly topical comedy I'm Alright Jack.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Thanks, Napoleon. I'll incorporate your point about a young comedy writer, if that's okay.