Last Bond Movie You Watched? 2.0

OHMSS :3*:

Saw it on blu-ray for the first time. I know it sounds repetitive, but until you've seen these movies on blu-ray or other higher-definition, you're missing out on so much. It really does feel like the first time watching the movie.

For instance, I had never seen Ruby's right breast pop out from under the sheet when Bond goes into her room. But there it was! You got to see the entire nipple and aureola. I'm positive. I went back and rewound the scene and then slowed it down several times just to be able to confirm. For the first time ever I was able to see the bloody cut above Bond's eyebrow when he comes into his hotel room to meet Tracy.

Enough about that. As far as the movie goes, it still seems to me like a mixed bag. In retrospect, this type of film should never have been laid on the shoulders of a new Bond, much less a man who was new to acting period. Lazenby isn't bad, but he was a work in progress. This should have been his 3rd or fourth film, not his first. It's a heavy burden to bear, and most of that burden is carried by Diana Rigg, Peter Hunt, and John Barry's haunting score. Without any of those other factors, the final scene probably just wouldn't have been very effective at all.

But I have other problems with the movie. Some of the action sequences are great, and some are terrible. The first ski chase is obviously done in the day time. No amount of filters on the camera can cover that up. If you can't do it right don't do it at all. And the back projection on this film is the worst I've ever seen. It looks like someone with Parkinsons' disease was in charge of holding the projector on Bond and Savalas as they went down the bobsled.

One of the better action scenes in the entire series was the crash-up derby on the ice. Fantastic! One of the better lines in the series was: "I feel a slight stiffness coming on."

But overall, this movie has dated somewhat badly. The look, the hairstyles, the costumes, the set design....not much of it looks classical to me. And the storyline involving Tracy should have been saved for an actor that the audience had an established connection with.

For me it's the two signs of cowardice in a Bond fan: the need for approval and desire for conformity that comes from saying that OHMSS is the best film and that DAD is the worst.

Erica Ambler wrote:

For me it's the two signs of cowardice in a Bond fan: the need for approval and desire for conformity that comes from saying that OHMSS is the best film and that DAD is the worst.

Totally agree. Although you can replace DAD with MR and their argument would still be invalid.

I think LICENSE REVOKED is probably the worst Bond film, but I digress. I don't think OHMSS is necessarily over-rated....I think that it's basically just a movie that only a truly die-hard Bond fan could love or would sit through. Because of the unique nature of the film (Lazenby being a one-time only actor) and it's deadly, downbeat ending, coupled with the knowledge that you're not going to see Lazenby again, there's not a whole lot for the outsider to hang their hat on. Not too many people, young or old, who are going to want to sit through entire scenes of the hero prattling on endlessly about coats of arms and genealogy.

And I only really scratched the surface with my quick review. I have other bones to pick with the story. I get this question answered all the time and yet I still forget: how is it that Blofeld does not recognize Sir Hillary Bray as 007? The man was responsible for blowing up your volcano and killing hundreds of your employees and you aren't sure if that's 007 or not? And how was it that Bond wasn't sure if this was Blofeld? Why did Donald Pleasance not come back? Where was Blofeld's facial scars? Savalas was good, but the role needed continuity. We went from a Blofeld with a horrible scar down his face to a Blofeld with no scar down his face and a New York accent to a Blofeld with hair and a British accent. :roll: Sometimes it seems that EON made these movies as if they thought no one had seen the previous one, and that the current one would be the last they ever made.

Well, if I have TND at the top of my list, and DAD/MR at the bottom, am I considered a conformist? There is limited validity behind your theories, gents.

And there is plenty to like about OHMSS without being considered a conformist. And I know plenty of people who like OHMSS who aren't die-hard fans. Why? Because technically it's a fantastic film. Whether you like Lazenby or not should not a focal factor behind liking a film. Is the script, the acting of at least the supporting cast and score not worthy to be noted? How about the gorgeous cinematography? And you did mention the sets, GS, but they are beautiful. 60s, but beautiful.

And you talk about the ski chase. So maybe it was done in daytime (though it hasn't been something that has EVER crossed my mind). But look how it's shot. There is a cameraman skiing backwards, capturing all the action. And all those other tracking and aerial shots are beautiful.

It's a shame that people judge movies based on one component. Film is a collaborative effort, and if you feel something doesn't work from one angle, there are plenty of different things to have a look at.

I call FRWL the best and TWINE the worst. Istanbul must be relieved with SF if it's as good as it is.

It's hard to conform in a fan base with such diverse opinions as Bond's fandom is. Popular opinion can effectively be limited to GOLDENEYE, GOLDFINGER, and CASINO ROYALE being considered universally great. Everything else varies to either small or large degrees. Just because it's popular on message boards to have OHMSS on top and DIE ANOTHER DAY on the bottom doesn't mean that is popular opinion throughout an entire fandom.

Even on bigger boards like CB.N, AJB. and NuMI6, we are a relatively small portion of Bond fans.

I'm probably alone, but I don't really find the script to OHMSS that remarkable. I stand by my belief that they neutered the characters of Tracy (and to a lesser extent Draco) from the novel. The pre-titles sequence is practically incoherent, the De Bleauchamp and geneology plot thread is clumsily introduced, the 'internationalising' of the so-called 'Angels of Death' makes the plot itself become more absurd than Goldfinger ever was, and to top it off it is too bloody long.

And Bond and Tracy's 'romance' is every bit as rushed and shallow as Bond and Vesper's in Casino Royale. The only difference is Louis Armstrong and John Barry sound nicer than David Arnold.

You're so right about OHMSS, Jason. A director's competence shouldn't be questioned just because he casts an unknown with no acting experience as the lead in a vital and expensive reboot.

FieldsMan wrote:

It's a shame that people judge movies based on one component. Film is a collaborative effort, and if you feel something doesn't work from one angle, there are plenty of different things to have a look at.

Quote :

You're so right about OHMSS, Jason. A director's competence shouldn't be questioned just because he casts an unknown with no acting experience as the lead in a vital and expensive reboot.

And then allegedly spends the shoot living it up with his fag-hag lead actress and giving directions to said inexperienced unknown via an intermediary.

Erica Ambler wrote:

You're so right about OHMSS, Jason. A director's competence shouldn't be questioned just because he casts an unknown with no acting experience as the lead in a vital and expensive reboot.

FieldsMan wrote:

It's a shame that people judge movies based on one component. Film is a collaborative effort, and if you feel something doesn't work from one angle, there are plenty of different things to have a look at.

I actually don't mind Lazenby, but Cubby and Saltzman made the decision on casting Bond.

FieldsMan wrote:

Cubby and Saltzman made the decision on casting Bond.

Final responsibility was theirs, certainly, and they made a very bad decision. It was foolhardy to use a first time director and a lead who had never acted before in such an important film. A student project, well, fair enough, but a Bond film and the one after Connery left at that - incredible.

OHMSS should have been a lot worse all things considered.

Erica Ambler wrote:

For me it's the two signs of cowardice in a Bond fan: the need for approval and desire for conformity that comes from saying that OHMSS is the best film and that DAD is the worst.

Well I would very much agree with the latter part of that statement. Does another Bond movie come close to the horrid mess that is DAD?

For some reason, both this community and the old place massively overrate OHMSS. I still haven't quite figured out why that is. :shock:

Erica Ambler wrote:

FieldsMan wrote:

Cubby and Saltzman made the decision on casting Bond.

Final responsibility was theirs, certainly, and they made a very bad decision. It was foolhardy to use a first time director and a lead who had never acted before in such an important film. A student project, well, fair enough, but a Bond film and the one after Connery left at that - incredible.

OHMSS should have been a lot worse all things considered.

I don't think I would have ever cared for Lazenby, no matter how many films he stuck around for. There was something about his face and delivery that just didn't do it for me. There were a few scenes that "got to me" with Lazenby, and they all involved him being tender, sweet, romantic, emotionally vulnerable, and needy. If you wanted to make a 2 hour chick flick rom/com between Rigg and Lazenby, then yes, he would have been a great Bond. But the other stuff....the cool factor, the fight scenes, the one-liners....I just suspect I never would have cared for his portrayals had he done more.

It was interesting to watch the documentary on OHMSS's blu-ray. They include some footage of an interview from Feb of 1970 he's doing with a local reporter, and from that moment forward it certainly did seem like he knew he wasn't coming back and that it was over. He looked like John Lennon going through the hippy phase of his life. In this 8-9 minutes of footage, George explains why United Artists wouldn't allow him to do publiclity for OHMSS because of his beard and long hair. I imagine that by the summer of '69 Lazenby saw the whole counter-culture movement hit its peak at the Woodstock film festival and thought the 70's were going to usher in a groovy new era of peace and cooperation and the young people were going to rule, and James Bond would end up looking passe. He seems to have based his entire career fortunes on the political whims and desires of a movement full of stoners and peace activists.

The beginning of America's economic decline coincided with "Turn on, tune in, drop out". No coincidence, I think.

The Bond films as a parallel of the last 50 years would be an interesting project.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Erica Ambler wrote:

For me it's the two signs of cowardice in a Bond fan: the need for approval and desire for conformity that comes from saying that OHMSS is the best film and that DAD is the worst.

Totally agree. Although you can replace DAD with MR and their argument would still be invalid.

I think LICENSE REVOKED is probably the worst Bond film, but I digress. I don't think OHMSS is necessarily over-rated....I think that it's basically just a movie that only a truly die-hard Bond fan could love or would sit through. Because of the unique nature of the film (Lazenby being a one-time only actor) and it's deadly, downbeat ending, coupled with the knowledge that you're not going to see Lazenby again, there's not a whole lot for the outsider to hang their hat on. Not too many people, young or old, who are going to want to sit through entire scenes of the hero prattling on endlessly about coats of arms and genealogy.

And I only really scratched the surface with my quick review. I have other bones to pick with the story. I get this question answered all the time and yet I still forget: how is it that Blofeld does not recognize Sir Hillary Bray as 007? The man was responsible for blowing up your volcano and killing hundreds of your employees and you aren't sure if that's 007 or not? And how was it that Bond wasn't sure if this was Blofeld? Why did Donald Pleasance not come back? Where was Blofeld's facial scars? Savalas was good, but the role needed continuity. We went from a Blofeld with a horrible scar down his face to a Blofeld with no scar down his face and a New York accent to a Blofeld with hair and a British accent. :roll: Sometimes it seems that EON made these movies as if they thought no one had seen the previous one, and that the current one would be the last they ever made.

And also from '67 - '73 Bond goes from being Connery to Lazenby, back to Connery again, and then to Moore. Must've been an odd time to be a Bond fan.

OHMSS has been my favourite Bond since I first saw it in the 70's and being a Bond fan over that since that time I'd consider there is more than just a touch of irony in the idea that appreciation for OHMSS is somehow a conformist view or one designed to seek approval.

There are any number of dismissive and grossly generalised means to deride and devalue why someone's opinion differs from your own but the honest truth is simply that there are a lot of opinions and even when some agree still then a lot of different reasons why they are held. It is delusional to think either cowardice or bravery enter into it, it's just someone's opinion of a movie ffs.

Erica Ambler wrote:

GeneralGogol wrote:

still am awed by the special effects work.

Derek Meddings was one of the greats. I'm amazed his name isn't better known outside the industry. Everyone goes on about Gerry Anderson, but it was Meddings who delivered the vision.

It's the same with Carlo Rambaldi. There was another guy (damnit, now I forgot his name! Was it Raponi?) who was his secret weapon, and ultra-useful, just like Charles Parker was with Stuart Freeborn on 2001's ape work.

Some folks actually give Medding a bad rap for delivering stuff that looked like modelwork, but if you look at the schedules and/or budgets, what he did was miraculous.

OHMSS has always held on since the early 90s and that's despite ever frequent viewings of DAF & VTAK. All things considered it could've been worse.

Erica Ambler wrote:

The beginning of America's economic decline coincided with "Turn on, tune in, drop out". No coincidence, I think.

That and the Kennedy Round.

Vesper wrote:

Quote :

You're so right about OHMSS, Jason. A director's competence shouldn't be questioned just because he casts an unknown with no acting experience as the lead in a vital and expensive reboot.

And then allegedly spends the shoot living it up with his fag-hag lead actress and giving directions to said inexperienced unknown via an intermediary.

And produced one of the most touching and naturalistic scenes in any Bond film by wearing out said inexperienced unknown through 6 hours of filming and God knows how many takes.

Peter C*nt. Who ever let him near a film set?

Thunderball on massive special presentation big screen coming up this weekend.

I'm more pumped for this than a first viewing of SF.

TB on big-screen is ultimate Bond experience.

I'm jealous, Tiff. Have managed to see Goldfinger, YOLT and OHMSS on the big screen - would love to see the other 60s Bonds 'properly'.

Blunt Instrument wrote:

I'm jealous, Tiff. Have managed to see Goldfinger, YOLT and OHMSS on the big screen - would love to see the other 60s Bonds 'properly'.

If you saw YOLT, I can't imagine it getting much better than that. I missed both showings of YOLT last weekend, but I still have one more chance before the Designing Bond exhibit leaves in January. In the meantime we're getting all 22 films rotating through 54 big-screen showings until mid-January.

btw I've discovered that the Ursula Andress bikini on display is a replica :twisted: The real thing is apparently jealously guarded by a Planet Hollywood in London. Thus no need to pull-up a chair and hold a vigil each time I visit.

Unfortunately the blue-snuggers are authentic. We are told by the curators that Connery's blue trunks on display from TB, were the inspiration for the "tighter" blue trunks in CR. This is good curating. They did catch that the Craig ball-busting swimwear was indeed "tighter". I would of course have pointed this out, if they hadn't caught it on their own.

There is still some confusion though as to how many pairs of authentic film-worn, Craig blue-snuggers exist. I can't get a straight answer on this question. I'm hoping we can get Lindy Hemming, boss curator, to rule definitively. ie, am I looking at the CR baby-blues or the SF nut-crushers, or are they one and the same? Not that I spend much time looking, mind you. I'm sure Hemming knows the answer. The local help just wasn't properly "briefed." I may yet bring in screen shots from both CR and SF, summon the local curators and see if we can't suss this out.

Hehehe, your obsession with Dan's swimwear continues unabated. FWIW as regards the 'how many pairs' question, a screen-worn pair from CR were sold in a Bond charity auction on Oct 5th for £45,000 :o .

Casino Royale

It's a fun movie. Performances are great, some pretty good dialogue and the way they updated the novel was fantastic. Arnold's score is probably his weakest, but there are some moments in there that are beautiful. Can't be bothered elaborating...

Quantum of Solace

I prefer this to CR for a few reasons. It feels more like a James Bond film, particularly of the 60s Bond films. I also feel as though they understood the character of Bond more here than in CR. In Craig's first outing, he felt more like a thug - here as a secret agent we know from the novels. The moment he kills Slate you can tell that OO7 doesn't like killing, and the contemplation of killing Camille followed by suicide in the burning building is essentially an adaptation of MR's finale.

And you may all be surprised to know that Fields may just drop off the top spot of my ranking. She's still definitely in my top 10, but I feel like a character with much more screen time is deserving of the top spot. I'm still her man, though.

Wow, 22 films go by quickly. Now I'm ready for the Australian release of Skyfall on the 22nd November. :)

Tomorrow Never Dies
From Russia With Love
On Her Majesty's Secret Service
The World Is Not Enough
Thunderball
Dr.No
Goldeneye
For Your Eyes Only
The Living Daylights
Quantum of Solace
Goldfinger
A View to a Kill
You Only Live Twice
Octopussy
Casino Royale
Live and Let Die
Licence to Kill
The Man With The Golden Gun
Diamonds Are Forever
The Spy Who Loved Me
Moonraker
Die Another Day

CASINO ROYALE and QUANTUM OF SOLACE, just to prep for SKYFALL.