You Only Live Twice in Review

In many ways, the fifth Bond film in the series is undoubtedly a turning point. It’s the first instalment to essentially discard Fleming’s original source material. It also sees a host of new behind-the-scenes faces join the 007 team, including director Lewis Gilbert and screenwriter Roald Dahl.

The moment where the franchise really fell in love with going over-the-top, You Only Live Twice sets the tone for so many future Bond films. A far cry from the gritty espionage of From Russia With Love and the well-balanced fun of Goldfinger, here the suspension of disbelief is racked up several notches. Cars being picked up by magnets, rockets that gobble up spaceships, piranha pools for dispensing with traitors (okay, so that’s cool), constructable helicopters - it’s all too much. And then there’s that base…

While you could argue it marks the end of his prime years as 007, Connery's Bond would live again. But only twice.

(Stephen Carty)

Bond And Beyond Rating: 6/10

...and may only want to see this twice - post your review of Sean Connery's sixth outing as James Bond as he travels to Japan.

You Only Live Twice (1967) - 7.5/10
Almost immediately upon viewing You Only Live Twice, you can tell some of the charm from his first four movies is missing from Sean Connery. That being said, Connery is still a strong Bond here and the movie itself gives you plenty to look at. While the rest of the cast is concerned, they got Blofeld mostly right with Donald Pleasance, and Bond’s ally Tiger is a worthy one. Some issues lie with the Bond girls, though. Bond’s first girl, Aki was only half interesting to begin with yet things pick up when she is unpredictably killed. We then get a replacement (Kissy Suzuki) who turns out to be the least memorable Bond girl of the series. It’s obvious the writers didn’t care much for her; she is in the movie for roughly thirty minutes and isn’t even named until the end credits. But most of the action is good, despite some laughable special effects. A note to filmmakers: if you need to fake the majority of an action scene, or any scene for that matter, it isn’t worth doing. (I speak of the “Little Nelly” helicopter fight and the scene where Blofeld’s rocket lands in his volcano, two scenes that have not aged well at all.) And yes, that volcano base is just ridiculous in nature, but I’ve always found it inventive; the set itself looks beautiful too. You Only Live Twice is preposterous and sometimes bloated, but come on: its still Sean Connery.

During its opening act, You Only Live Twice comes across as an attempt to combine the location-driven intrigue of From Russia With Love with the flash of Thunderball, and in some respects, the fifth Bond film succeeds; a moment in which a sedan full of baddies is snapped up by a magnet-wielding helicopter and deposited into the ocean, accompanied by a quip from Tetsurô Tanba's Tiger Tanaka (one of the series' best Bond allies) about Japanese efficiency, is particularly memorable.

But more often than not, You Only Live Twice fails to balance flavor and formula, favoring one or the other from one moment to the next, the absence of the lesser element is felt, and the moment itself feels flat and uninteresting. It is this unbalance that makes, for example, the sequences at Tanaka's ninja training school feel overlong, despite the fact that the training Bond undergoes there is only barely touched upon.

In fact, there are many things about You Only Live Twice that feel painfully half-baked, particularly after the promising first act, during which Bond, depicted as a fish-out-of-water to an even greater degree than he was in From Russia With Love, allies himself with Japanese SIS and meets colorful characters like Tanaka and Dikko Henderson. Bond's non-meeting with SPECTRE henchman Osato and his dealings with the utterly disposable Helga Brandt feel as though they were shoe-horned into Roald Dahl's script by some mandate from an ignorant higher power, anxious to make sure every box on a checklist derived from the previous films was given its due. This is one of the earliest instances of the series not simply referencing itself, but actually feeding on itself for nourishment—a spectacle that is every bit as distasteful to watch on screen as it is in nature.

Still, many (if not all) of these sins would be forgivable if the soulless checklist approach to acts two and three of the film was not mimicked by key elements of the cast. It is apparent here that Sean Connery—who five years earlier, presented James Bond in a way so compelling his performance has never been equaled—has remained in the role beyond his expiration date. He wears the role as a Dickensian chain he forged over the course of his life as 007, and does nothing to elevate scenes that so desperately require his presence. Other major supporting players, such as Mie Hama (as formula-necessitated surviving Bond girl Kissy Suzuki) and Donald Pleasance (as the supposedly intimidating but ultimately impish Ernst Stavro Blofeld) are nonentities.

Other than Tanaka, the only compelling character who isn't killed before the film's running time is up is John Barry's score. In moments where it is given room to shine, such as the opening moments in space, and the sequence at the Kobe docks (the way in Barry's talent works for this scene in particular can be considered a highlight of the entire Bond franchise) give certain parts of the film an energy that Connery refuses to provide. John Barry said that, in scoring On Her Majesty's Secret Service in 1969, he felt the need to punch up the score to compensate for the (perceived) shortcomings of the lead actor. Thankfully, it appears that he did the same thing here. It almost works, too.

Wasn't too fond of this one.

James Bond should never go to ninja training school and maybe it's just me, but he looked more like a Vulcan than Japanese after his makeover.

Little Nellie might have astounded audiences back in 1967...but 40+ years later, the 60s special effects make the air-battle sequence somewhat painful to watch.



The theme song remains one of my Top 3.

YOLT is the one silly Bond film whose faults I can easily accept or at least not pay too much attention to. From Dr. No to OHMSS, every successive Bond film of the 1960s is iconic in its own right and added something vital to the mythology of 007. YOLT is firmly rooted in that process, reaching new highs in cinematography, music, set pieces, and overall design. I have a soft spot for the Gilbert films in general, but YOLT is genuinely top-10 Bond film for me.

Iconography only goes so far. I think TWICE's reputation is one of nostalgia and rose tinted specs.

It's hard to say if I like this one cause every time I watch it, it's a mixed bag for me. I love the Third Act with the volcano action and I love Blofeld, and his hideout, and his plan. I also like the henchwoman but I guess she is kind of a redoing of Fiona Volpe.

What I don't like is the Japanese Bond girls are pretty weak. I also feel the movie spends too much time on Japanese culture lessons, when it should just get on with the mission. When Bond goes to other countries, in other movies, other characters, do not take so much time to teach him the culture of the country, when there is a mission at steak. And the Japanese disguise was terrible! It was so bad, it brought the movie to a grinding halt, and they should have just not have had it in the movie at all.

Plus, I thought it was pointless to have Bond get married. I suppose it helps his cover a small amount, but they actually go through with a wedding! Bond has had undercover wives before, like in Live and Let Die with Rosie Carver, but they didn't actually do an entire fake wedding beforehand. It was just too ridiculous, even for a Bond movie. So it's a mixed bag for me, and one of the hardest to decide on, whether I liked it or not.

I have to disagree with that. The immersion in Japanese culture elevated the novel and it's only proper that it have a place in the adaptation, though I'd say Fleming handled it better.

But the novel was criticized by some for doing that with one critic even saying it was too much like a travelogue.

So I thought it would have been better for the filmmakers to remove that aspect of the novel.  Plus they change so many other parts of the novel, to the movie, so why does anyone care if they keep the culture parts in there? I haven't read the book, so I can only judge the movie on it's own but I felt the pacing was bad cause of the pauses for Japanese culture elements.

ironpony wrote:

But the novel was criticized by some for doing that with one critic even saying it was too much like a travelogue.

It’s easy to forget Fleming’s context. There was no cheap air travel when YOLT was written, and Japan was still thought of as exotic, almost alien. Its recovery from the devastation of the Second World War was remarkable when contrasted with Britain’s decline and withdrawal from Empire. People wanted to read about that.

Not forgetting, of course, that for most of Ian Fleming's life, his brother Peter, the travel writer, was much the most successful and famous of the two.

ironpony wrote:

But the novel was criticized by some for doing that with one critic even saying it was too much like a travelogue.

So I thought it would have been better for the filmmakers to remove that aspect of the novel.  Plus they change so many other parts of the novel, to the movie, so why does anyone care if they keep the culture parts in there?  I haven't read the book, so I can only judge the movie on it's own but I felt the pacing was bad cause of the pauses for Japanese culture elements.

Bond novels are travelogues, and the films should follow suit. The problem with YOLT's focus on Japanese traditions such as the wedding is that it doesn't move the film forward. The idea of Bond immersing himself that much to go undercover is good, but there is no need for it for Bond to access Blofeld's lair. Hence, it comes across as a little goofy and slows the film down. 

FYI, the novel is excellent (possibly my fave) so I highly recommend it.

Erica Ambler wrote:

ironpony wrote:

But the novel was criticized by some for doing that with one critic even saying it was too much like a travelogue.

It’s easy to forget Fleming’s context. There was no cheap air travel when YOLT was written, and Japan was still thought of as exotic, almost alien. Its recovery from the devastation of the Second World War was remarkable when contrasted with Britain’s decline and withdrawal from Empire. People wanted to read about that.

Not forgetting, of course, that for most of Ian Fleming's life, his brother Peter, the travel writer, was much the most successful and famous of the two.

But when Bond goes to exotic Turkey in From Russia with Love, the writers don't really bother with being so heavy on the culture, outside of the gypsy fight. I thought that just by merely showing the Japanese buildings, and villages, and ninja's and music, that the exotica of it all, would have revealed itself in the visuals, and they don't actually need to talk about the culture in exposition, or actually have a wedding, or an undercover Japanese disguise.

The Japanese disguise is taken directly from the novel, so I can understand why it's included in the film. However, as I mentioned, all of this could have worked (more?) effectively if they were obstacles in the film that made it necessary for Bond to "become Japanese" and get married. 

As for Turkey in FRWL, many a scene is staged to place Bond as the tourist - Tanya describing the Lektor on the ferry, the gypsy camp, the dead drop at Hagia Sophia, etc. These, however, were deftly incorporated into the narrative justifying their place in the film.

Yep I agree that it was narrative justified in FRWL with love by comparison to YOLT.

Anybody notice that the SPECTRE guy Bond smokes with the cigarette bullet is also the guy Mayday serves a "drink" in AVTAK? Anthony Chinn is the actor.

I never quite realized that. I'm used to spotting him in DN and GF and he turns up in many other things including several of the Pink Panther sequels.

hegottheboot wrote:

I never quite realized that. I'm used to spotting him in DN and GF and he turns up in many other things including several of the Pink Panther sequels.

I think you're thinking of Bert Kwuok.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Anybody notice that the SPECTRE guy Bond smokes with the cigarette bullet is also the guy Mayday serves a "drink" in AVTAK? Anthony Chinn is the actor.

Heh, interesting. Poor guy never stood a chance in the series.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

hegottheboot wrote:

I never quite realized that. I'm used to spotting him in DN and GF and he turns up in many other things including several of the Pink Panther sequels.

I think you're thinking of Bert Kwuok.

He plays Chang in DN and I'm pretty sure is also the attending Korean guard of Goldfinger's who serves Bond a mint julep during the porch speech. He's in the 70's Panther films in a few different parts such as the doorman when Kato turns the apartment into a brothel and in the Oktoberfest sequence as one of the foreign agents.

Love it to bits...all of it. Ranked 2nd in my order of preference this film has everything i want from a Bond film, fantastic locations, outlandish villain, crazy plot, brilliant sets, and great action.
Many sight Goldfinger as the essential Bond movie but i would disagree, YOLT is much more outrageous and of course the inspiration for Austin powers, but it's much easier to forgive the nonsense because it is just so much fun. I have been outspoken about the silliness of the Moore era and my dislike for much of it, and some might say it hypocritical to heap such praise on YOLT but Bond is not the Comic element here which makes the silliness much more palatable. Connerys lack of interest has been widely discussed and debated but i still don't see it after another amongst many viewings of the film

I was halfway through reading your post and thought that YOLT retains a very similar tone with the Moore era. It's for this reason it rank it alongside many of the Moore films if not slightly higher because of the 60s charm and a sense of originality; it appears to the model for TSWLM and MR particularly in terms of structure, perhaps the blueprint for the type of Bond film director Lewis Gilbert wanted to create.

That said, I think FYEO, AVTAK and most of OP strike a better balance between focus and outrageousness. FYEO is only really bookended by gags. For most part it's a straight spy thriller.

silvertoe wrote:

but it's much easier to forgive the nonsense because it is just so much fun.

This is what I mean when I say I prefer YOLT/Moore-era films above the likes of the ultra serious CR06. There are just as many holes in CR as there are in the lighter stories. They're just as silly/outrageous as each other but the lighter tone makes the earlier films easier to swallow. A gritty facade distracts us from how silly CR06 is, but when you get down to how the narrative is structured/form, you see it's just as bonkers as Drax calling 'Henchmen R Us' in MR to recruit Jaws, or Bond turning Japanese with no real payoff.

You Only Live Twice is another  Bond epic, showing a production company full of confidence. Admittedly it only pays lip service to the original Fleming material but as already stated it is a lot of fun. When it was first on British TV, I was working as a waiter, not in a cocktail bar but a local football club. It was great to see the Bar full of people all sitting  and all watching Bond, I know for many younger people they probably don't know what it was like with only three TV stations, no DVD releases or streaming services. So Bond films were an Event even on Television. I seem to remember LALD had an audience of around 23 million on its first showing.
   YOLT is filled with huge set pieces the largest outdoor set ever constructed,  An over the top helicopter fight sequence. Sean is a little heavier, but I don't see the lack of interest that some do.  Donald Pleasance makes a menacing Blofeld and must be one of the most impersonated and spoofed villains of all time. Even with Jan Werich being the first choice and in one scene you can see his hair above the top of Blofeld's office chair.  the sets are amazing even the smaller ones like Blofeld's study behind the control room and Osato's office. Basically everything is dialled up to eleven with YOLT.
    Story wise, it's Dr No on a bigger scale from toppling rockets to hijacking them and as also already stated it was more or less remade twice again with TSWLM and MR.

TP wrote:

Story wise... as also already stated it was more or less remade twice again with TSWLM and MR.

And yet, I feel YOLT is still the more successful of the WWIII adventures/Gilbert films. I wish it had a bit more focus, richer characterisation and emphasis on plot- or better still, a faithful adaptation (which obviously wasn't possible at the time considering OHMSS precedes Fleming's YOLT) - but it's an enjoyable romp. The music, the location work, the set design and 60s sensibilities really click together.

And Moneypenny in that naval getup.

Love a woman in uniform !