Named After Your Father Perhaps: Diamonds Are Forever at 50 (1971-2021)

Figured that as we have the FYEO40 one up, and though it's not until end of the year, DAF50 can make an appearance. Along the way other sister threads will bubble along, i.e Favourite Frames but lately thinking that any year or month is DAF month.

Lazenby is already a scudding memory, Sir Sean returns with conditions and the humour that carry Sir Roger for years effectively start here.

Paraphrasing Shady Tree, make yourselves comfortable and knock yourselves out.

I watched it recently as part of my tribute to Sir Sean.

It truly gets better every time I watch it. People who don't appreciate it... I dunno, they must approach it with certain pretentions. No, it's not FRWL. You have to dive headfirst into the Benign Bizarre elements and the clever, often dirty humour.

The cast and characters are truly magnificent. Gray-Feld, Wintt & Kidd, Tiff 'pubes match your scalp?' Case, Plenty O' Tits, Shady Tree, Morty Slumber, Igoddabrudder, Klaus Hergesheimer, Willard 'BAJA' Whyte, Bambi & Thumper, the gorilla doctor, the kid who was told to blow up his pants, the guy whose job it was to say numbers and add 'and counting' in a generic central European accent.

With apologies to Sammy Johnson, when one is tired of DAF one is tired of life.

Nicely summed and put, CJB. Of all the Bond films probably one of the most eclectic cast of characters going.

Most definitely, which is why I don't get all the hate for it. Compare it to Connery's previous outing where the one truly charismatic character (other than Tanaka if we're being very generous) is snuffed out within thirty seconds and the actor, lo and behold, goes on to play the main villain in DAF!

As I may have said previously, if it was Rog in the driver's seat then perhaps DAF would be better regarded as everyone expects his films to be lighter.

You're right about Sir Roger being in DAF it would be better regarded probably.

DAF compared to his last outing at least has Connery doing his best or rather not looking entirely as if he'd rather be somewhere else.

A $1.25m salary and $20,000/week overtime will do that for you.

Plus, Connery admitted - upon arriving in Japan - that he didn't find Japanese women particularly attractive (cad!). So maybe his co-stars were more to his liking.

It would have been a different film indeed with Peter Hunt at the helm, but probably not so different under Lewis Gilbert.

DAF has just that weak oil rig battle going against it, everything else is top notch entertainment imo.

Entertaining it is but there's no ignoring the paper-thin story.

Good to see you posting, Ash!

Thank you, sir.

The story, they were not hot on story back then anyways. Bond had gotten a three ring circus by YOLT. OHMSS was really already the exception with sticking to the book that had deep holes itself. The mantra was that Bond must be huge and exciting on screen. They tried to make it look that way but the finale was really neither. Wint and Kidd’s last scene is more hilarious and entertaining to me than anything after Connery steps from his bubble.

But absolutely, if there was a beefier story the film would be that much better no doubt.

DAF was my first, so I have nothing to say against it.

In fact, I suppose it became my template against which to compare the other films.

Cool action? Check.
Hot women? Check.
Bonkers plot? Check.
Lavish locations & sets? Check.
Exotic villains who, try as they might, just can't match 007? Check.
Frantic, satisfying climax (ie: blowing shit up)? Check.
etc.

GF, TB, YOLT, OHMSS, LALD, TMWTGG, TSWLM & OP all qualify on the same scale. You could say Guy Hamilton set the standard for me.

Ash Enden wrote:

DAF has just that weak oil rig battle going against it, everything else is top notch entertainment imo.

Welcome to the forum and, yes, agree with this. The chopper assault is probably weakest part of the film. The SFX are atrocious even by the standards of the day.

On all of these threads I find it impossible to distill all my thoughts into a single post.
Then I realized hey wait a minute I just did a commentary!

Hey y'all after being away for a long time figured I'd start posting again here and there. I hope everyone is doing alright amidst these difficult times we're living through.

Didn't realize DAF was 50. It feels like it was just a bit ago I was buying that pretty Bond 50 blu-ray collection (which, of course, has been something like 9 years now... wow).

This movie is forever underrated. I think a lot of people refuse to get on its wavelength because of perhaps what they had come to (understandably) expect from Connery's Bond. But if you view this as a dark comedy of sorts, an absurdist take on the 007 mythos, with Connery playing along surprisingly well, this is a damn good Bond film. Horrible climax, but that's not really (unfortunately) anything out of the ordinary for the series.

Good to see you back in these here parts, Xenia. And sound words in your last paragraph. Hidden in this film is a good one.

Glad to see more faces around and especially DAF praise.

Thanks to both of you. Good to be back.

I echo the sentiments above - good to see you posting here again!

I agree DAF is underrated but I think you hit the nail on the head with:

Xenia93 wrote:

I think a lot of people refuse to get on its wavelength because of perhaps what they had come to (understandably) expect from Connery's Bond.

Perhaps not so much with just Connery's films, but the series overall. There are so many good ones in the series that, for me, the story is just a little too thin to engage me like others do... but the dialogue, music and Connery's performance really does elevate it to supreme entertainment.

The story definitely isn't all that great. Personally, I don't watch Bond films for the story, especially not since I'd be considered a superfan by most given that I've seen them all at least a dozen times or so. Some more than others.

DAF certainly never cracks the tip-top spots for me, because yeah, it is a little thin and it doesn't do much in the way of thrills, but it has so much going for it that many films of the last 20-30 years do not that I can't help but love it.

I think it is maligned not so much because audiences are "stupid," but more because they aren't really sure what it is they're seeing, and so they often judge what is clearly meant to be something of a blackly comedic action film as if it were... From Vegas With Love. And of course when you look at it that way, it's not going to seem like a very "good" film.

I felt that way about it as a kid. Dismissed it entirely. Thought it was pretty awful, definitely bottom 3. And then I remember it just clicking when I was in college and I saw it "the right way" (as I'd call it) and I've loved it ever since.

Xenia93 wrote:

The story definitely isn't all that great. Personally, I don't watch Bond films for the story, especially not since I'd be considered a superfan by most given that I've seen them all at least a dozen times or so. Some more than others.

Interesting. I feel that the story needs to work in order to justify everything else that happens. Otherwise, why am I watching what's happening? Obviously, the importance varies depending on the film's tone... but engagement starts to fade as the movie progresses if the narrative is filled with empty moments.

Xenia93 wrote:

DAF certainly never cracks the tip-top spots for me, because yeah, it is a little thin and it doesn't do much in the way of thrills, but it has so much going for it that many films of the last 20-30 years do not that I can't help but love it.

Agreed except I'd say the 90s trilogy far outranks DAF.

Reading the love in this thread makes me want to watch DAF again, even though I just watched it in December.

This is the time of year when I always want to go to Vegas again but this year I can't, for obvious reasons. Moreover Vegas is becoming less appealing as it continues to become a collection of megaresorts and vacant lots for the development of more megaresorts. I also have no desire to visit again until that gaudy gold tower west of the Fashion Show Mall is under new management and changes its name.

I never actually saw Vegas in the 70s - except in this film - but I saw what was still there in '97 (although a lot of that is gone now too). I enjoy watching DAF for those moments when I can say "I stood there!" (26 years later)

Like TMWTGG, it's like a home movie from my traveling days. It's also the only foreign place I ever got to visit more than once. So perhaps I will pop it in and do some nostalgic armchair touring (besides, I just think it's a cool movie).

I've never been to Vegas unfortunately, so what I know is based on others and I know by the early 2010s Don Rickles was saying it wasn't the same place he knew when he started out in the sixties. Aside from DAF I've seen past Vegas in a two part Starsky & Hutch and the original Ocean's 11. The latter is a time capsule I'd imagine in how it used to be (and certainly the clientele).

Maybe one day BaB can have our first convention there.

I've managed to collect season 1 & 2 of Vega$ (Robert Urich). Plenty of 'old' Vegas to be seen in that series.

Vegas Vacation was filmed around the time of my first visit. I'll FF through that for the highlights, skipping as many unwelcome intrusions by Chevy Chase as I can manage.

Vegas background is the only reason I keep the first Austin Powers movie. I won't allow the others in my home.

I have all three-there's some good spy nerd jokes sprinkled in and Goldmember has Michael Caine who gets the joke better than Mike Myers does. But when I want spy humor I go for the real great one in CR '67.
For pure Vegas feel I go the the DAF novel, DAF itself, the original Ocean's 11 and Casino.


We should have a convention. We could afford a small ballroom conference area maybe!

Lumme, I forgot about Casino, not seen it for years.

Our convention shall be glorious. A case of Vegas asking 'who the hell are those guys?'

The only venues left to host it are the Tropicana, Circus Circus and Westgate, if we're going for nostalgia.