I'd also agree that OHMSS is a near perfect, or closest to perfect Bond film out of all of them.
But what prevents it from becoming a higher rated film is that while it's plot, narrative, performances etc. are all spectacular - there are more Bondian type films which for me are just more fun to watch...
No problem Matt S, I apologise for my attitude, at times I have a chip on my
shoulder and see a slight where none was intended. I shall try and be less
confrontational at times.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Okay so I just watched the old Special Edition DVD…wow, the PTS looks a heck of a lot better than the Ultimate Edition I usually watch. It doesn't have that weird blue tint that makes it look like night. I wonder what Lowry Digital was thinking!? Does the latest blu-ray fix this?
Haven't seen the Blu-ray but that blue tint was how the film looked in its original release. Old film stock like that started to degrade almost immediately, with the blue end of the spectrum leeching out first, why so many westerns on TV back in the day look so nice and reddish...the blue that was there has simply faded away.
Interesting. I saw a clean print of OHMSS a few years back (complete with the UA Transamerica logo), and the PTS had a mild bluish hue. Not as exagerrated as the UE DVD, but bluish. The blu-ray captured the look fairly well. One thing I have yet to see is a blu-ray or DVD transfer that gets the gunbarrel blood right. The blu-ray is close, but not quite there. I've seen them on several players and televisions as well. In the cinema the blood has a richness and thickness. It's hue is a deep, rich red. Pretty much the same with all the Binder GBs. Yet many transfers have an orangey hue. Still great to see on blu-ray OHMSS. One of my favorite films.
OHMSS is the greatest Bond ever - everything works from start to finish and Lazenby nails the character perfectly - it will never be equalled - certainly not in my lifetime.
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
What I like about this thread is that a good many of us regard this as THE best Bond film.
I like it because: it is close to the original story, the casting is perfect, the locations are perfect, the music is perfect, the editing is amazing, there are no gadgets to ruin the story - it is Bond using his wits and/or fists.
The question is...
Is the world ready for another Bond film like this, or has the series become reliant on its own tropes? CR came very close to the OHMSS formula and was a critical success so surely we can have a new Bond and a new formula?
What I like about this thread is that a good many of us regard this as THE best Bond film.
I like it because: it is close to the original story, the casting is perfect, the locations are perfect, the music is perfect, the editing is amazing, there are no gadgets to ruin the story - it is Bond using his wits and/or fists.
The question is...
Is the world ready for another Bond film like this, or has the series become reliant on its own tropes? CR came very close to the OHMSS formula and was a critical success so surely we can have a new Bond and a new formula?
Very interesting observation and comparison. A lot of folks disliked the lack of "tropes" in CR. Its been said that the lack of "tropes" was just a part of the "reboot" and the plan all along was to slowly restore or reimagine them. Ironically many disliked SPECTRE because it was sort of a "greatest hits" of tropes done Craig style. I know this may be sacrilege but I would have loved to have seen OHMSS remade (utilizing the Barry score, much like Scoresese did with Bernard Herrman's "Cape Fear" score in the remake) with Craig as Bond followed by "The Garden of Death" closely based on the YOLT novel.
I like it because: it is close to the original story, the casting is perfect, the locations are perfect, the music is perfect, the editing is amazing, there are no gadgets to ruin the story - it is Bond using his wits and/or fists.
One could say the casting, locations, and editing are perfect for any number of Bond films. I greatly admire John Glen, but I actually find the editing of OHMSS to be noticeably worse than most. All the fight scenes are very choppy to give an example.
Debatable about gadgets "ruining" the story. Many fans enjoy Q and all the gadgets. It's one of Bond's trademarks.
True about being close to the original story. Is that story any good? I didn't really care for it personally.
My current 10 favorite:
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
I greatly admire John Glen, but I actually find the editing of OHMSS to be noticeably worse than most. All the fight scenes are very choppy to give an example.
The film is quite stylised. It's got a very different look to some of the Connery 60s Bonds - in particular the usage of purple at the casino, the close-up smoking scene in the PTS and some of the clothes (particularly at the start).
I think the jumpy editing is just something that seems to be a style element that is done on purpose. Like the zooming in, echoing etc. in the fight on the way to Draco's office.
It's the choppy fight scenes, the echoing, the slight moments of sped up footage that give it the unique style that I love about it. It's like the back projection when the bob sled chase is taking place. Yes it's all over the place like a tramp on meths, but for some reason, it really works. It concentrates the viewer on the actor.
And speaking of actors, whoever cast Telly Savalas as Blofeld was an absolute genius. That is how Blofeld should be. An articulate, hyper intelligent thug. He doesn't need a Mr Hinx to do his dirty work for him.
Telly is alo my favourite Blofeld -{ He can be charming one minute and full of meance the next.
He also is a physical villain, he could match any opponent in a fight.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Ok today I watched OHMSS. So in the lead up to this coming out in 1969, I seem to recall much aghast at Lazenby being Bond. I still remember the FRYs chocolate cream add.
My elder brother refused to go and see it. By 1969 I was more independent and didn't need taking to the cinemas. I went with my best mate of the day.
On first viewing in the Cinema I remember feeling very odd about the film. Although there were many elements I did like, and having read the book, I somehow felt short changed.
There's much dialogue in the film thats straight out of the novel, the whole ending "We Have All The Time In The World" is a direct lift. But it just didn't do it for me at all.
I think I saw the film two or three times more but then as the film did the rounds I just totally fell out of love with it, and would shun any other chance of going to see it. I wouildn't watch it on TV and I felt it was definately the Black Sheep of the Bond Canon.
Then with the passage of time, and a mellowing out that being older does to you, it started to grow on me. I changed my opinion of the film, and started to cut Lazenby some slack.
He afterall had the hardest job as he had to follow Connery, which was an impossible task. I feel if they had cast another actor in the role he would have failed to, and if Lazenby was selected for say Live and Let Die I think he would have nailed the part and made it his own and gone on to make 5 or 6 Bond movies.
So not having seen the movie for a few years I rewatched it today, and boy how much did I enjoy it.
It's brilliant. Ok the over exagerated way in the fight scenes are portrayed isn't realistic, and in real life anyone fighting like that would get flattened.
I'd always loved Dianna Rigg as Emma Peel in the Avengers and she's utterly stunning in this film. So what more can I say absolutely nothing, zero to hero only 40 years in the making. This now sits in my top three all time favourite Bond films. I absolutely loved it, and have already decided that when my Bond marathon is finished I going to watch my top three favourites again, before I give 007 a short break.
He afterall had the hardest job as he had to follow Connery, which was an impossible task. I feel if they had cast another actor in the role he would have failed to, and if Lazenby was selected for say Live and Let Die I think he would have nailed the part and made it his own and gone on to make 5 or 6 Bond movies.
I 100% agree with you on this. Lazenby was just beginning to come into his own. Considering his lack of experience he did a fantastic job. The script would have been hard for even a well trained actor. Had he done more films he could have been a really great Bond.
He afterall had the hardest job as he had to follow Connery, which was an impossible task. I feel if they had cast another actor in the role he would have failed to, and if Lazenby was selected for say Live and Let Die I think he would have nailed the part and made it his own and gone on to make 5 or 6 Bond movies.
I 100% agree with you on this. Lazenby was just beginning to come into his own. Considering his lack of experience he did a fantastic job. The script would have been hard for even a well trained actor. Had he done more films he could have been a really great Bond.
I agree too, I also think his single effort creeps into our appreciation of him - almost like the benefit of the doubt.
OHMSS seems to me as if it's the most consistently, highest rated Bond film amongst fans. While it might not be #1s, it tends to be in top 10s.
I agree too, I also think his single effort creeps into our appreciation of him - almost like the benefit of the doubt.
I had never thought of it in those exact terms but it is true. I have a very soft spot for him because of the potential I *hoped* he had. Who knows really. He is kind of the Bo Jackson of the Bond world. We project a good deal on potential he could/would/should have had.
I disagree - Lazenby's performance was spot on, probably his limited acting experience actually helped in giving a sensitive performance - with Connery the film would have had a different tone, IMHO anyway. OHMSS rules thought, the greatest Bond ever -{
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
I can imagine a bit older (than he was at the time) Dalton :-)
But I agree with the fact he is under appreciated and given 1-2 movies more would have been an iconic Bond. Love him anyway.
I know trying to list the Bond films in order of preference is an impossible task which is subject to change with every Bondathon but my one constant is that OHMSS is number 1 -{
I know trying to list the Bond films in order of preference is an impossible task which is subject to change with every Bondathon but my one constant is that OHMSS is number 1 -{
{[]
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
I love OHMSS. As far as l'm concerned it's missing only one thing - Connery!
The OHMSS we know (and love) would have been rubbish with Connery.
It's pretty clear that OHMSS would have had a different tone if Connery was in it. But "rubbish"? Hardly! I believe there would have been some very interesting dynamics at play that I would like to have seen. For example, the whole "resignation" episode would have struck a different, and perhaps more urgent note given the well-established chemistry between Connery's Bond and Bernard Lee's M. Also, Blofeld as embodied by Telly Savalas would have been quite a formidable foe for Connery's Bond and I believe the interplay between those two terrific actors would have been fun to observe. In addition, despite what some may believe, I have no doubt that Connery could have pulled off the very emotional scene at the end. Although it might have played a bit differently, I think it would have been even more powerful seeing Connery's Bond in such a vulnerable and helpless state. Again, don't get me wrong, I love OHMSS just as it is and I enjoy Lazenby's performance. But OHMSS starring Sean Connery is still my dream Bond film. I'm not attempting to sway any opinions here, just dreaming out loud.
Fair enough to dream, and I admit it would be great to see Connery do a Bond of much more depth - I'm saying so many things would have to line up for him to do such a thing.
I see that he couldn't do it with the tone of the previous four Bond films (both in story and his portrayal) he'd also have to want to be there and not checked out. I could see it if OHMSS was his first film...
Fair enough to dream, and I admit it would be great to see Connery do a Bond of much more depth - I'm saying so many things would have to line up for him to do such a thing.
I see that he couldn't do it with the tone of the previous four Bond films (both in story and his portrayal) he'd also have to want to be there and not checked out. I could see it if OHMSS was his first film...
Seems to me that Connery demonstrated his ability to show depth in earlier Bond films, particularly FRWL, and I honestly don't believe anything in OHMSS was beyond his range as an actor. (As you can all see, my time away from AJB has changed nothing - I'm still firmly in the tank for Sir Sean!
@blackleiter I am not sure I saw that range in his Bond days. Granted he was perfection in "Finding Forrester."
Who else could pull off the line, "You're the man now, dog!"
If Connery starred in OHMSS, would his heart have been in it? The superior script and story to any of his Bond films since From Russia with Love may have gotten him more into the role again. My biggest concern about Connery doing OHMSS is his lack of experience in romantic roles. Robin and Marian might be the only film I have seen him do a romantic lead.
Comments
But what prevents it from becoming a higher rated film is that while it's plot, narrative, performances etc. are all spectacular - there are more Bondian type films which for me are just more fun to watch...
"Better make that two."
shoulder and see a slight where none was intended. I shall try and be less
confrontational at times.
Interesting. I saw a clean print of OHMSS a few years back (complete with the UA Transamerica logo), and the PTS had a mild bluish hue. Not as exagerrated as the UE DVD, but bluish. The blu-ray captured the look fairly well. One thing I have yet to see is a blu-ray or DVD transfer that gets the gunbarrel blood right. The blu-ray is close, but not quite there. I've seen them on several players and televisions as well. In the cinema the blood has a richness and thickness. It's hue is a deep, rich red. Pretty much the same with all the Binder GBs. Yet many transfers have an orangey hue. Still great to see on blu-ray OHMSS. One of my favorite films.
I like it because: it is close to the original story, the casting is perfect, the locations are perfect, the music is perfect, the editing is amazing, there are no gadgets to ruin the story - it is Bond using his wits and/or fists.
The question is...
Is the world ready for another Bond film like this, or has the series become reliant on its own tropes? CR came very close to the OHMSS formula and was a critical success so surely we can have a new Bond and a new formula?
Very interesting observation and comparison. A lot of folks disliked the lack of "tropes" in CR. Its been said that the lack of "tropes" was just a part of the "reboot" and the plan all along was to slowly restore or reimagine them. Ironically many disliked SPECTRE because it was sort of a "greatest hits" of tropes done Craig style. I know this may be sacrilege but I would have loved to have seen OHMSS remade (utilizing the Barry score, much like Scoresese did with Bernard Herrman's "Cape Fear" score in the remake) with Craig as Bond followed by "The Garden of Death" closely based on the YOLT novel.
One could say the casting, locations, and editing are perfect for any number of Bond films. I greatly admire John Glen, but I actually find the editing of OHMSS to be noticeably worse than most. All the fight scenes are very choppy to give an example.
Debatable about gadgets "ruining" the story. Many fans enjoy Q and all the gadgets. It's one of Bond's trademarks.
True about being close to the original story. Is that story any good? I didn't really care for it personally.
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
The film is quite stylised. It's got a very different look to some of the Connery 60s Bonds - in particular the usage of purple at the casino, the close-up smoking scene in the PTS and some of the clothes (particularly at the start).
I think the jumpy editing is just something that seems to be a style element that is done on purpose. Like the zooming in, echoing etc. in the fight on the way to Draco's office.
"Better make that two."
And speaking of actors, whoever cast Telly Savalas as Blofeld was an absolute genius. That is how Blofeld should be. An articulate, hyper intelligent thug. He doesn't need a Mr Hinx to do his dirty work for him.
He also is a physical villain, he could match any opponent in a fight.
My elder brother refused to go and see it. By 1969 I was more independent and didn't need taking to the cinemas. I went with my best mate of the day.
On first viewing in the Cinema I remember feeling very odd about the film. Although there were many elements I did like, and having read the book, I somehow felt short changed.
There's much dialogue in the film thats straight out of the novel, the whole ending "We Have All The Time In The World" is a direct lift. But it just didn't do it for me at all.
I think I saw the film two or three times more but then as the film did the rounds I just totally fell out of love with it, and would shun any other chance of going to see it. I wouildn't watch it on TV and I felt it was definately the Black Sheep of the Bond Canon.
Then with the passage of time, and a mellowing out that being older does to you, it started to grow on me. I changed my opinion of the film, and started to cut Lazenby some slack.
He afterall had the hardest job as he had to follow Connery, which was an impossible task. I feel if they had cast another actor in the role he would have failed to, and if Lazenby was selected for say Live and Let Die I think he would have nailed the part and made it his own and gone on to make 5 or 6 Bond movies.
So not having seen the movie for a few years I rewatched it today, and boy how much did I enjoy it.
It's brilliant. Ok the over exagerated way in the fight scenes are portrayed isn't realistic, and in real life anyone fighting like that would get flattened.
I'd always loved Dianna Rigg as Emma Peel in the Avengers and she's utterly stunning in this film. So what more can I say absolutely nothing, zero to hero only 40 years in the making. This now sits in my top three all time favourite Bond films. I absolutely loved it, and have already decided that when my Bond marathon is finished I going to watch my top three favourites again, before I give 007 a short break.
"Do you expect me to talk? "No Mister Bond I expect you to die"
I agree too, I also think his single effort creeps into our appreciation of him - almost like the benefit of the doubt.
OHMSS seems to me as if it's the most consistently, highest rated Bond film amongst fans. While it might not be #1s, it tends to be in top 10s.
"Better make that two."
The OHMSS we know (and love) would have been rubbish with Connery.
"Better make that two."
Ha! Another one where we disagree!! :v
Cheers, old friend!
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I'm with Higgins on this one too. Lazenby is a virtue of OHMSS.
But I agree with the fact he is under appreciated and given 1-2 movies more would have been an iconic Bond. Love him anyway.
{[]
It's pretty clear that OHMSS would have had a different tone if Connery was in it. But "rubbish"? Hardly! I believe there would have been some very interesting dynamics at play that I would like to have seen. For example, the whole "resignation" episode would have struck a different, and perhaps more urgent note given the well-established chemistry between Connery's Bond and Bernard Lee's M. Also, Blofeld as embodied by Telly Savalas would have been quite a formidable foe for Connery's Bond and I believe the interplay between those two terrific actors would have been fun to observe. In addition, despite what some may believe, I have no doubt that Connery could have pulled off the very emotional scene at the end. Although it might have played a bit differently, I think it would have been even more powerful seeing Connery's Bond in such a vulnerable and helpless state. Again, don't get me wrong, I love OHMSS just as it is and I enjoy Lazenby's performance. But OHMSS starring Sean Connery is still my dream Bond film. I'm not attempting to sway any opinions here, just dreaming out loud.
I see that he couldn't do it with the tone of the previous four Bond films (both in story and his portrayal) he'd also have to want to be there and not checked out. I could see it if OHMSS was his first film...
"Better make that two."
Seems to me that Connery demonstrated his ability to show depth in earlier Bond films, particularly FRWL, and I honestly don't believe anything in OHMSS was beyond his range as an actor. (As you can all see, my time away from AJB has changed nothing - I'm still firmly in the tank for Sir Sean!
Who else could pull off the line, "You're the man now, dog!"
If Connery starred in OHMSS, would his heart have been in it? The superior script and story to any of his Bond films since From Russia with Love may have gotten him more into the role again. My biggest concern about Connery doing OHMSS is his lack of experience in romantic roles. Robin and Marian might be the only film I have seen him do a romantic lead.