Spectre
The James Bond movies were among the most formative of my film journey, hence making the effort to get out and see Spectre (2015) on opening day. I didn’t take notes as I wasn’t planning on writing a full review, so hopefully these thoughts aren’t too scattered.
A lot of reviews of the film seem to boil down to, ‘well it’s no Skyfall (2012).’ It’s not, and that’s not the worst thing in the world if you ask me. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge fan of that film, despite feeling that it doesn’t deserve a lot of the plaudits that it received. But what Spectre does so well is return to the roots of the series. Roots that have been more or less ignored since Daniel Craig assumed the tux (which you may think is a good thing, and which I don’t think is wholly bad). The pre-credits sequence is an absolute cracker, Mexico City playing host to explosions, a Day of the Dead foot-chase and a duel in a tumbling helicopter that is legitimately breathtaking. Perhaps no sequence in the rest of the film is a slickly constructed and executed as this.
Where the film falls down, if anywhere, is a pretty patchy script. It does some things well. The Bond nerd in me adored the origin story the film lays down for an iconic villain I won’t name. In fact there are numerous little homages to Bond flicks past for fans to pick up on, without them ever feeling too wink wink or taking you out of the world of the film. But the script does lag at points and the film lacks narrative thrust for much of the run time. The film is hurt by being too long and for the plot being a pretty underwhelming retread of ideas we have seen in other films of late. For me though, this just felt like such a fun remix of so many of the past films I adored so much. There is a fast car, quips, Q, creative chases, silly henchman and a really excellent central villain. Though the film is hamstrung by trying to shoehorn that villain into the mythology that the series has been building up throughout the Craig era. It is unnecessary, and frankly part of what makes the film stand apart is that it is not wedded particularly to the Bond character built up over the last few films, one that does not really resonate with the folklore of the character.
Performance wise it is the villains who stand out. Christoph Waltz is really good, especially given he has begun to feel like he is constantly playing the same character of late and here he offers something a little different. Dave Bautista wordlessly brings his pro-wrestling physicality to bear on the film in a couple of excellent sequences, including one aboard a train that is one of the better hand to hand combat sequences the series has ever offered up. Elsewhere, Andrew Scott is his typical excellent self, though it does feel like he is channelling his Moriarty from the Sherlock TV show a little too much. Lea Seydoux is very good as Dr Madeline Swann, a Bond girl straight out of the 60s. In the world of this film, that does not really bother me. You don’t watch this series for the progressive politics (though the film is an extended, though simplistic, jab at surveillance culture), but what frustrates me is the marketing obsession every time one of these films rolls around to assure us this is a very different Bond girl. Make no mistake Seydoux’s character is exactly the same as a majority of the Bond girls the series has ever brought to the screen. Ralph Fiennes as M and Naomi Harris as Moneypenny continue to impress as reinterpretations of those classic stock characters and I’m hoping they continue to play bigger parts in future films.
Verdict: This is the most Bondy feeling Bond film of all the Daniel Craig entries into the series. The story is neither here nor there. But the characters are fun, the chases thrilling enough and the set-pieces, though perhaps needing one more, are certainly thrilling enough. Pint of Kilkenny
Related beermovie.net articles for you to check out: Bondfest: Thunderball and Bondfest: Moonraker.
Like what you read? Then please like Beermovie.net on facebook here and follow me on twitter @beer_movie
Bondfest: A (hopefully noble) Failure
You may have already guessed as my progress has gone along, but I will not be finishing Bondfest as I had hoped. I am really disappointed that I will not be able to do so, and feel pretty genuinely like I have failed actually. Here are the reasons why I could not make it in the end.
Firstly, the plan was not well through at all. Some of the best adventures are those that you don’t really think about before embarking. But that is not always the case. It was always going to be really hard for me to complete what I set out to do. I was in Sydney on the first day, so was going to be behind from the get go really. And 22 movies in four days is a whole lot.
Also, when I was pushing myself to complete all 22, I found that I was not enjoying either the watching of the films or the writing about them. Plus I thought my writing was suffering, I definitely do not want to put people off reading my site by posting a bunch of shitty reviews. I still love the James Bond films, but there is no doubt that watching them back to back amplifies the repetitive nature of some of them. Plus like any series, there are definite ups and downs. As much of a joy as watching Dr No through Thunderball is, it does not make it a whole lot easier to sit through You Only Live Twice through Diamonds are Forever. But Bondfest will return. Like I said, I really enjoy the Bond films so will finish off the reviews on a more laidback basis.
I found that once I accepted I would not finish, I started enjoying myself a whole lot more. And in the end, that’s what movies and this blog are all about. You know I probably could have made it, if I gave up everything else in my life for four days. But I enjoyed celebrating a friend’s birthday Monday night, and I enjoyed cooking my partner dinner tonight. Films enhance life massively, but they are not life.
On that note, I have to take off. I have just decided to take myself off to the midnight screening which is on at the cinema just down the road. I have shamefully never been to a midnight screening so will be a nice new experience for me.
Thanks to everyone who has read or enjoyed any of these Bondfest posts.
Peace.
– Tim
Bondfest: For Your Eyes Only
Mission Dossier: For Your Eyes Only
The Year: 1981
The Director: John Glen
The Bond: Roger Moore
The Girl: Carole Bouquet as Melina Havelock
The Baddie: The devious Aristotle Kristatos
The Scene
Late night start on this one. Spiced rum and V (separately mind you) were in order.
For Your Eyes Only is based (somewhat) on one of my favourite Ian Fleming Bond books, a collection of short stories with the same title. Coming on the back of the exhilarating Moonraker though, the film is far from a favourite of mine.
The film does open on a very interesting note, with Bond seen leaving flowers at the graveside of his late wife. This is not really revisited though, despite a suggestion of it later on when Bond is unable to save a woman that he cares for. The film sees a British surveillance ship sunk, a ship with a very important piece of equipment onboard. It is the ATAC device which coordinates British submarines. The Russians, who else, are pretty keen to get their hands on the device. And so begins Bond’s race to get to it before them. He gets involved with Melina Havelock, the daughter of a man murdered whilst assisting the British on the case, who is understandably keen to avenge the death of her parents. It all comes to a head during the final showdown at an incredible mountain rocky outcrop. But despite the awe-inspiring setting, this is one of the most tedious of Bond conclusions, seeming to really drag on.
Much of the film drags on really. The only sequence that really engages is a snowbound chase sequence, which are becoming increasingly familiar features as the series wears on This one is a cracker, managing to incorporate one of those huge ski jumps, a bobsleigh run and a couple of motorbikes. Less engaging though is the sheer lack of fire in the relationship between Bond and Havelock. Their interactions are exceptionally wooden, something which plagues much of the film actually. There are a couple of more things that really plague the film too. The music is woefully dated 80s style, some of the worst 80s synth you would ever have the displeasure of hearing. It is even more jarring because music is usually such a strong suit of the series, with John Barry’s brilliant use and invocation of the theme song throughout many of the films matching Bond action so perfectly, whilst this is quite the opposite. The frustrations really add up in the film. This one also sees a return to the horrid special effects that marred films such as You Only Live Twice. Effects that had happily not been present for a number of films. The script is poor too, the criticism of Roger Moore efforts being too jokey is really borne out by this film. The constant, terrible one-liners make this one very difficult to watch without hoping, even just a little bit, that Bond cops a bullet at some stage.
The listless central couple of the film.
This is definitely one of the weaker Bond films. Somewhat similar to On Her Majesty’s Secret Service there is little to recommend it when you compare it to the other films in the series. Very little excitement and a not very little good villain leave this as one of the more anaemic efforts. A silly entry to the series that is not worth bothering about.
Verdict: Schooner of Tooheys New
Bondfest Leaderboard
- Thunderball (1965)
- Goldfinger (1964)
- Moonraker (1979)
- Dr No (1962)
- From Russia with Love (1963)
- The Spy who Loved Me (1977)
- The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)
- Live and Let Die (1973)
- Diamonds are Forever (1971)
- You Only Live Twice (1967)
- For Your Eyes Only (1981)
- On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969)
Like what you read? Then please like Not Now I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie on facebook here.
Bondfest: Moonraker
Mission Dossier: Moonraker
The Year: 1979
The Director: Lewis Gilbert
The Bond: Roger Moore
The Girl: Lois Chiles as Holly Goodhead, a CIA agent.
The Baddie: Hugo Drax, with more than a little help from the returning Jaws.
The Scene
It was my partner’s turn for the TV, so I shipped out to the ‘cave’ at our place, and tried not to get too distracted by the in progress LOTR puzzle.
I loved Moonraker as a kid, but these days Bond in space makes me suspect horrifying cringeworthiness. Horrifying cringeworthiness with lasers of course.
The film does not start in the cringeworthiness vein. In fact the first hour of the film is really quite excellent, with not a hint of space travel involved. The prologue section is one of my favourites in the series. Subtle it is not, but delightfully action packed it is. First of all, a space shuttle is stolen, managing to simultaneously destroy the huge airplane that was carrying it in one fell swoop. Then Bond is tossed out of a plane parachuteless and has to flog a parachute off another dude as he tumbles to earth at great pace. Then Jaws shows up, just for good measure. His parachute does not open, but luckily for him he lands on a circus tent so survives. That may all sound like Bond at its worst, but it is really fantastic. Following this, Mr Bond gets on to the main part of the film involving the villainous Drax. Drax’s company constructs space shuttles, including the one that was stolen. The devious plan is another with a Nazi-esque feel to it, just like The Spy Who Loved Me. This time the idea is to wipe out the human race. Oh except for Drax and the other members of his perfect class of people, they will be up in space getting ready to repopulate the world.
One of the great features of Moonraker, as with a number of Bond films, are the hilarious methods for attempting to kill Bond. This time we have attempted death by centrifugal G-force trainer and death by python in the Amazon. The latter one is actually a really cool and tense scene. The script flirts with breaking the fourth wall but manages to remain nicely self-referential. Late in the piece Drax exclaims with disappointment to Bond that he has managed to “defy all my attempts to plan an amusing death for you”. Drax is a vicious bastard, and there was one point early in the film that really shocked me. When dealing with a lady who assisted Bond, Drax releases his two dogs on her. What follows is the most beautifully filmed scene in the first 11 James Bond films. The woman desperately tries to flee through the forest, with light slanting through the trees. A piano tune builds and there is even the slightest touch of slo-mo used. It comes out of nowhere, but is a stunningly filmed piece of beautiful violence. Overall, the non-space elements of this film are excellent – there is a good villain, a great mystery and a deft touch to the whole thing. And of course it has Jaws, a whole lot of Jaws, including the beloved (by me at least) cable car scene. He also features in that great plot swerve late on when Bond points out the incompatibility between Drax’s rather Aryan view of the future of the human race, and Jaws’ physical appearance. That of his beloved girlfriend too.
Jaws and his lady.
Now to the vexed question of Bond in space. To be fair, it must be said that only the last half hour of the film takes place in orbit. Some of the space effects in earlier films have been to put it bluntly, woeful. Worse than that, they have been so bad that they have seriously compromised enjoyment of the films in which they feature. Moonraker though has really convincing space effects when it finally heads into orbit. To my mind, they are on par with those seen in Star Wars (1977), a film of similar vintage. One of the issues some may have with the film is the fact that the final 15 minutes belongs almost exclusively in the sci-fi genre. Frickin lasers and all. But for me, it works well, and if you can let go of the fact that this spy series is dabbling in the all of a sudden popular genre of sci-fi, then you will find much to like. I think that people who take issue with the space elements of the film are barking up the wrong tree anyway. Without a doubt the worst part of this film is the appearance of the shittiest hovercraft ever seen on film, which unfortunately closes out an otherwise cracking boat chase through Venice. The whole film just has a delightful randomness that more often that not works really well. Take for example the Aikido fighter that pops out of nowhere in Venice. No lead up, but then he and Bond put on a fantastic fight scene. There are ‘fun’ Bonds films, and then more serious ones. This definitely belongs in the ‘fun’ camp, and is one of the very best of them.
Plenty of the aspects of this film just should utterly not work, Jaws’ relationship for example, but they do somehow. By far and away the best Roger Moore Bond film so far, and for me, one of the best of all the Bond films. Take a look at this one.
Verdict: Longneck of Melbourne Bitter
Bondfest Leaderboard
- Thunderball (1965)
- Goldfinger (1964)
- Moonraker (1979)
- Dr No (1962)
- From Russia with Love (1963)
- The Spy who Loved Me (1977)
- The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)
- Live and Let Die (1973)
- Diamonds are Forever (1971)
- You Only Live Twice (1967)
- On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969)
Like what you read? Then please like Not Now I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie on facebook here.
Bondfest: The Spy Who Loved Me
Mission Dossier: The Spy Who Loved Me
The Year: 1977
The Director: Lewis Gilbert
The Bond: Roger Moore
The Girl: Barbara Bach as Anya Amasova, the Soviets’ best agent.
The Baddie: Karl Stromberg, along with that coolest of all henchmen, Jaws.
The Scene
The Spy Who Loved Me time was also mid-afternoon beer time.
The Spy Who Loved Me sees the finest spies from either side of the East/West ideological divide go head to head. On the Pommy side is our very own James Bond, whilst on the Russian side is Anya Amasova, otherwise known as Agent Triple X.
The film opens with one of the Brits’ nuclear submarines getting into trouble and going missing. In a really clever end to this little sequence, one of the sailors looks into the periscope and simply mutters “oh my God”, without revealing to the audience what they have seen. As a result of the disappearance, James Bond is dispatched to Egypt to establish what is happening. It turns out that the security of the British network of nuclear subs has been compromised. This sees the Russians enter proceedings. First as adversaries and then quite quickly as allies against the unknown enemy. There is so much scope for really clever things to be done with Bond and Amasova sparring with each other. Initially, the subjugation of and condescension toward the Russian are frustrating. Bond easily gets the upper hand, for the mere fact that he is a male. The filmmakers seemingly want us to forget that Amasova is the USSR’s finest spy, surely she would have a fair fight to put up, even against the great James Bond. Gradually though the filmmakers get to grips a little with the great opportunity they have on their hands and they do something rather clever. Amasova appears to fall easily to 007’s sexual charms which had me up in arms. But really, she is playing Bond and in fact utilises her seducing charms to get a big one-up on him. His smugness, believing that no woman on earth can resist his charms, comes back to bite him on the arse bigtime. So that was a nice moment, but the film is a mixture of doing the premise justice and coming up short. Most disappointingly, despite touching on it briefly, the film does not examine in great detail the ideological divide the two when they become allies and eventually lovers, which if done well could have really made the film really stand out from the Bond crowd.
The main villain of the film is Karl Stromberg, whose goal is the slightly Nazi-esque idea of killing off most of society so that he can create a new undersea utopia. Unfortunately though Stromberg is not a very strong villain, actually one of the more forgettable ones in the Bond films. As sheerly forgettable as Stromberg is, the film introduces the only henchman to go any where near matching Oddjob’s popularity in the series – Jaws. Seeing Jaws in Moonraker was one of the things that made me fall in love with the Bond films as a child. And even today, he is such a fantastic character. Richard Kiel is a huge dude, and conveys a lot through his physicality. Plus he has deadly metal teeth so that is pretty darn cool. Fully kitted out gadget laden cars have not really featured in the series so far except for Goldfinger. So it is great to see one of my favourite of all the Bond cars here, the Lotus Esprit submarine car. The car is awesome, on land it seems lightning quick and when it gets wet, it turns into a sub which comes in rather handy.
Jaws and Bond, doing their thing.
This is the best of the Roger Moore films thus far. I can’t help feeling that a little more could have been done with the phenomenal premise involving these two spies. But there are some fine moments and definitely a fine car. Plus for me, any Bond film featuring Jaws is a Bond film well worth seeing.
Verdict: Stubby of Reschs
Bondfest Leaderboard
- Thunderball (1965)
- Goldfinger (1964)
- Dr No (1962)
- From Russia with Love (1963)
- The Spy who Loved Me (1977)
- The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)
- Live and Let Die (1973)
- Diamonds are Forever (1971)
- You Only Live Twice (1967)
- On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969)
Like what you read? Then please like Not Now I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie on facebook here.
Bondfest: The Man with the Golden Gun
Mission Dossier: The Man with the Golden Gun
The Year: 1974
The Director: Guy Hamilton
The Bond: Roger Moore
The Girl: Britt Ekland as Goodnight
The Baddie: The world’s greatest assassin Francisco Scaramanga and his small offsider Nick Nack
The Scene
Didn’t watch the film out here, but thought it would be nice to do some writing in the sunshine and fresh air after a couple of days getting square eyes in front of a screen.
Opening with a close-up of a third nipple, as you do, The Man with the Golden Gun is a globetrotting Bond adventure flying around between Thailand, Macau, Hong Kong, Britain and more. Thankfully this film is far more respectful of Asian cultures when compared with the horrific effort of You Only Live Twice, incorporating some cool martial arts sequences and providing some handy local allies for our hero. The film was critically derided upon its release; however I recall quite liking it on my first viewing, so let’s check out if that verdict remains accurate.
The film continues the upward swing of the series with Moore at the helm, with the interesting story and a nice man to man battle between James Bond and the film’s main villain Francisco Scaramanga. Whilst the film does expand out the narrative as it goes on, it remains essentially a battle between Bond, and the world’s greatest assassin, the titular man with the golden gun. Having Christopher Lee play the role of Scaramanga is a great boon for the film. He really is a fantastic actor and brings a calm menace to his role, an excellent and worthy adversary foil for James Bond. Lee perfectly conveys an egotistical man who happily toasts “To us, for we are the best”. Roger Moore continues to grow into the role of Bond decently if not spectacularly. It is great to see a really amusing scene between he and M early in the film, with M happily providing a list of parties who would be willing to pay for Bond’s assassination. No other Bond would ever have the rapport with Bernard Lee’s M that Connery had, but Moore does a pretty good job working with him.
One of the other strengths for me is the supporting characters, who add a lot to the overall experience. Despite her rather bumbling manner, Britt Ekland’s Goodnight is a pretty good Bond girl who adds a spark to proceedings throughout. Nick Nack, played by Herve Villechaize, is Scaramanga’s midget offsider. Whilst it would have been easy for the character to descend into a figure of ridicule and endless midget jokes, he manages to be a serviceable henchman mainly due to Villechaize’s excellent performance. Undoing a lot of this good work is the inexplicable return of the most annoying character in Bond history, Louisiana Sherriff JW Pepper as played by Clifton James, who finds himself on holidays in Thailand spending most of his time spouting racist epithets at the locals. When he is “deputised” to assist Bond, the audience is on a hiding to nothing. He only features for 10 or 15 odd minutes, but I simply cannot comprehend what the makers of the film were thinking when they decided to bring JW back for a second time round.
Christopher Lee really is fantastic as Scaramanga, the man with the golden gun.
The Man with the Golden Gun gets by on the strength of its core villain, supporting cast and a storyline that pits Bond off against a cracking enemy. Like its predecessor, the film is not in the league of the series’ first four efforts, but is definitely an enjoyable enough watch.
Verdict: Stubby of Reschs
Bondfest Leaderboard
- Thunderball (1965)
- Goldfinger (1964)
- Dr No (1962)
- From Russia with Love (1963)
- The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)
- Live and Let Die (1973)
- Diamonds are Forever (1971)
- You Only Live Twice (1967)
- On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969)
Like what you read? Then please like Not Now I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie on facebook here.
Bondfest: Live and Let Die
Mission Dossier: Live and Let Die
The Year: 1973
The Director: Guy Hamilton
The Bond: Roger Moore
The Girl: Jane Seymour as Solitare
The Baddie: Dr Kananga/Mr Big, a Prime Minister/drug dealer, ably supported by his clawed henchman Tee Hee Johnson
The Scene
After another pretty short sleep, this was definitely a coffee film.
Despite the initial murder at the United Nations, once again a change in Bond results in a change in atmosphere with Live and Let Die featuring voodoo, the Caribbean and New Orleans very early on. The audience is even given a glimpse into Bond’s apartment, a radical departure from the Connery films which kept this side of Bond’s life hidden from view.
Rather than a tale of world domination, Live and Let Die is essentially a story concerning the drug trade and one player’s intention to flood the market with free heroin in order to both drive out his competition and massively increase demand. Presumably wishing to tap into the popularity of blaxploitation of the time, the filmmakers attempt to shroud the story in numerous elements of the sub-genre – African American lingo, the music utilised, use of some questionable racial terms. There are also some questionable characters in this. The unnecessary presence of Quarrel Jr takes the viewer outside the world of the film and gets them thinking about Dr No rather than the one they are watching. Also, the presence of an infuriating Louisiana Sherriff threatens to ruin one of the best chase sequences in any Bond film.
I mentioned the notability of the couple of chase sequences in Diamonds are Forever and how they would dictate much of what would follow, and that comes to fruition in Live and Let Die. In fact, the numerous chase scenes in this film are possibly its most enjoyable aspect. They are well thought out, exhilaratingly shot and best of all have a creative range of vehicles. We see Bond attempting to outrun his enemies in a plain old car, a plane, a speedboat and best of all a double-decker bus. And like any self respecting double-decker bus scene, there is a run in with a low bridge. The entire film actually is distinguishable by a newfound focus on spectacle, Mr Bond’s run-in with a pool full of crocodiles and alligators another prime example. Refreshingly the emphasis on really poor special effects of the last couple of films appears to have fallen by the wayside, with a satisfying, legit explosion bringing the extended boat chase to a satisfying conclusion. Jane Seymour as the tarot card reader Solitaire gives one of the best performances by a Bond girl thus far. She gives a look of ethereality and backs that up with the use of her mannerisms and voice. Her performance is convincing, with the acting chops to convey fear and a wide range of other emotions really effectively. Despite some of the voodoo elements of the film being hit and miss, I think that the parts involving her work well and bring something to the film overall.
The principal cast of the film
Live and Let Die is a return to form of sorts for the series, whilst not being in the same league as the first four Connery films. The storyline is pretty small in scope and the blaxploitation elements generally jar. But the focus on really well shot, creative chase sequences and the excellent performance from Jane Seymour means that there is a fair bit to enjoy in this one.
Verdict: Stubby of Reschs
Bondfest Leaderboard
- Thunderball (1965)
- Goldfinger (1964)
- Dr No (1962)
- From Russia with Love (1963)
- Live and Let Die (1973)
- Diamonds are Forever (1971)
- You Only Live Twice (1967)
- On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969)
Bondfest: On Her Majesty’s Secret Service
Mission Dossier: On Her Majesty’s Secret Service
The Year: 1969
The Director: Peter R. Hunt
The Bond: George Lazenby
The Girl: Diana Rigg as Countess Tracy di Vicenzo
The Baddie: SPECTRE’s big guy, Ernst Blofeld is back for more in this one
The Scene
A new Mexican place opened up near my house. So I thought it would be wrong not to try a burrito from there for lunch. Thought it would be even more wrong not to have Mexican beer along with it.
Our Aussie George’s only film in the Bond hotseat On Her Majesty’s Secret Service has long been my least favourite Bond flick. The film was not particularly well appreciated critically upon release. Recently the film has undergone reconsideration though, with Christopher Nolan a notable fan of the film, mentioning it as an influence whilst discussing the creation of The Dark Knight Rises (2012). I hate to disagree with the esteemed Mr Nolan, but I do not see the attraction to this film.
I was wrong about Goldfinger, but I struggle to see that another film from the series will displace On Her Majesty’s Secret Service from the bottom of the Leaderboard. It really is a woeful, unexhilarating experience. More than that, it is rather incompetently made, generally not a hallmark of any of the Bond series, even the poorer ones. The film’s rather strange narrative sees Blofeld attempting extortion by gaining control of the world’s food supply. Oh and Bond falls head over heels in love and gets married. Though the film does forget about this rather important subplot for a fair percentage of its running time. You can see that the filmmakers are trying to do a little something different with the character, which is understandable given the change in lead actor. But the whole thing does not ring true. I’m not sure how much of that is attributable to Lazenby, for one he definitely cannot deliver the zingy one-liners that Connery was so adept at dishing out. Connery somehow managed to take lines that would have been utterly stupid in the hands of others and make them sound convincing. This really well illustrated by Lazenby’s efforts at delivering them.
Mind you Lazenby is not helped by a woeful script that is so full of shit one-liners it at times feels like a piece of pseudo-comedy. Early on Lazenby’s Bond breaks the fourth wall, turning to the camera and saying “This never happened to the other fella.” It is a technique that fails completely. Even if you are going to have a Bond film with a silly plot, it should at the very least maintain a facade of seriousness. Even worse is another moment that toys with the boundaries of the film’s world. After attempting to quit MI6 Bond is packing up his office. As he goes through his belongings, he comes across artefacts from his previous film missions. Each time he picks up one of the items the theme song from that film blasts out. It is just a truly horrid scene. It is actually pretty difficult to choose the worst moment in the film. The lovesick montage of Bond and his bride to be is right up there with the worst in the series, not just the film. Another letdown are the fight scenes. Gone are the gritty realistic efforts of Connery. In their place we get sequences that are infuriatingly sped up and shot in a very choppy manner, suggesting that they could not get them right without tweaking them in this way. Whilst it goes close, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is not entirely without merit. The ski chase is somewhat exhilarating, especially when Bond breaks one of his skis and races down the mountain at great pace on one leg. Similarly some of the mountain scenery is really beautiful to look at. But let’s face it, when those are the major positives of a Bond film, you are digging deep for the good points.
Mr and Mrs Bond
Everything that this film does has been done far better in the five films that preceded it. The ending, whilst an infamous one, is ineffective because what has occurred beforehand does not make you believe that it is genuinely a big deal. There is nothing to make the audience believe that this relationship is any more genuine than Bond’s numerous other flings, so the reason they would marry is unclear. Lazenby failed utterly to put his stamp on the character of Bond like no other actor who played him. Which goes a long way to condemning this to being one of, if not the worst of all Bond films.
Verdict: Schooner of Tooheys New
Bondfest Leaderboard
- Thunderball (1965)
- Goldfinger (1964)
- Dr No (1962)
- From Russia with Love (1963)
- You Only Live Twice (1967)
- On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969)
Bondfest: Thunderball
Mission Dossier: Thunderball
The Year: 1965
The Director: Terence Young
The Bond: Sean Connery
The Girl: Claudine Auger as Domino Derval
The Baddie: SPECTRE’s Number 2 Emilio Largo and his frickin sharks.
The Scene
Even though I am posting this review about midnight on day 2, this was in fact my breakfast film for the day. Strong black coffee, muesli and Bond.
Often when Bond films start with a really absurd prologue, they stay rather absurd and a little rubbish. Thunderball bucks this trend though. The prologue features a funeral, cross dressing and a jetpack of course. It also features a cracking fight scene which sets the tone for the rest of the film in my opinion.
Previous viewings of this film had left me feeling a little underwhelmed, with the extensive underwater sequences in particular not impressing me. However this time around, my thoughts are very much different. I really do love seeing the continued presence of the SPECTRE organisation as Bond’s villainous foil. Especially the gradual building of Blofeld as arch villain, with the obscuring of his face continuing throughout this film. Also continuing are the organisation’s bizarrely low percentage assassination methods that they attempt to bring to bear on Mr Bond. This time it is not the deadly spider of Dr No, rather death by spinal stretching machine. As absurd as both of these are, it has to be said that both of these sequences are shot with aplomb and a whole lot of tension. The opening half an hour odd of this film is really something else. Bond faces off with a number of different foes in a health retreat as the main plot gradually reveals itself. SPECTRE this time are inserting themselves into the business of NATO, flogging an entire fighter jet along with the two atomic weapons onboard. Their plan is to hold NATO to ransom, demanding 100 million pounds in exchange for the two nukes. SPECTRE’s number 2 Emilio Largo makes a great villain in this film. The character has an inherent theatricality, with his eye patch and mannerisms, which fits the film well. Whilst there are no really standout henchman to support him, Largo does have a frickin pool with frickin killer sharks in it. He puts it to fantastic use throughout the film too.
The underwater sequences that I mentioned at the start of this review actually work fantastically well and are deployed in a number of different ways. There is something almost hypnotic about watching the wordless action taking place as SPECTRE’s finest camouflage a jet under the sea. Likewise the beautiful violence of the repeated underwater fight scenes which should be slow and unwieldy but are actually intriguing and suspenseful is a rare treat to behold. Especially cool is a large scale showdown at the end, a good old fashioned gunfight with spear guns. It is quite the effort to make underwater fight scenes actually look believable, but this film achieves it. Along with these fantastic underwater scenes, Connery continues to show just how adept he is at the land based combat too. The raw physicality of the hand to hand combat scenes is great, avoiding the attempts of later films to make it look too over the top. Overall the film is an evolution rather than a revolution. What I mean by that is that it is not reinventing the wheel for the series; rather it is just taking what has already been laid down and improving on it. A great case in point is the ‘ticking clock’ structure which works well at heightening the tension and also differentiating the film from the first three in the series, as Bond and friends race desperately to save the day.
In my review of Goldfinger, I suggested my doubts about whether or not it would be topped as my favourite Bond film. Well it has been, very quickly too. Goldfinger has a special place in my heart, but if I am honest, I think that Thunderball is the superior film. Whichever way you put them, they are probably the greatest back to back features of the series. The underwater sequences, which I thought did not work on previous viewings, really are a point of difference for the film and elevate it above anything that the series has produced thus far.
Verdict: Longneck of Melbourne Bitter
Bondfest Leaderboard
- Thunderball (1965)
- Goldfinger (1964)
- Dr No (1962)
- From Russia with Love (1963)
Like what you read? Then please like Not Now I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie on facebook here.
Bondfest: From Russia with Love
Mission Dossier: From Russia with Love
The Year: 1963
The Director: Terence Young
The Bond: Sean Connery
The Girl: Daniela Bianchi as Tatiana Romanova
The Baddie: Rosa Klebb of SPECTRE, ably assisted by buff henchman Red Grant
The Scene
Dinner, beer, James Bond. An awesome Sunday night.
The success of Dr No (1962) ensured a sequel followed only the year after in the form of From Russia with Love, one of the most beloved films of the series, especially in critical terms. The film opens with what I think to this day is one of the best opening sequences of all the Bond films. James Bond himself is seemingly killed in the sequence. However it turns out that it is merely an enemy training mission using live adversaries.
Once again SPECTRE are up to their old tricks in this film. The central premise of the script is a clever one, with the evil organisation playing the Brits and the Russians off against each other in order to get their grubby little paws on a cipher decoder thingamajig. This brings together Bond and Russian spy Tatiana Romanov, played excellently by Daniela Bianchi. Their relationship is a pretty developed and deep one when compared to most of Bond’s romantic liaisons over his 50 years onscreen. The SPECTRE arc is probably the most convincing and best of all the multi-film arcs in the entire series and this film fleshes out the organisation a lot more. We get to see more of the scope of their organisation with their training camps and weaponry suggesting they are a fair match for MI6. The main villain is SPECTRE’s Number 3 Rosa Klebb who has recently defected from the Russians. The film is at pains to make clear that SPECTRE is not the Russians. In the books the adversarial organisation went by the name SMERSH which was the USSR secret service, but the filmmakers were not keen to inflame any tensions whatsoever. This film also gives us our first glimpse of Ernst Blofeld, who will go on to become the series’ greatest ever villain. It is only a brief cat-stroking glimpse, but a glimpse nonetheless.
The other iconic character to make a first appearance in From Russia with Love is Desmond Llewellyn’s Q. There is none of the joking with 007 that will eventually make him a fan favourite, rather he just drops off Bond’s high-tech suitcase to him and then goes on his merry way. Once again, this is another cracking early Bond script. It is a bit of a slow burn, there is not too much action in the first half hour. But it ramps things up after that, especially in a large scale battle at a gypsy camp which has the epic feel of a final showdown but comes not even halfway through the film. Bond’s one-liners are a lot more prevalent in this film and Connery seems to have a whole lot of fun delivering them. Actually I was surprised by how genuinely funny this film is and not just in terms of one-liners. There are some nice jokes built up throughout, especially in Bond’s interactions with M’s secretary Moneypenny. Performance wise Connery is once again excellent in the role. The villains are really good in this too. Especially menacing is Lotte Lenya as Rosa Klebb who gives quite a chilling turn despite not being onscreen particularly long. Robert Shaw, who would go on to play Quint in Jaws (1975), brings a terrific physicality to the role of Red, a SPECTRE henchman and his fistfights with Connery’s Bond are raw, painful looking and believable.
The two main women of From Russia with Love
From Russia with Love continues on in the excellent vein of Dr No whilst also showing how the series would be able to remain relevant by changing up its output. The film is more grounded and character driven than the first film, conveying more a sense of the realities of The Cold War as opposed to maniacal taking over the world schemes. Not that there is anything wrong with that, I think for me Dr No is still a very slight favourite over this follow up effort.
Verdict: Pint of Kilkenny
Bondfest Leaderboard
- Dr No (1962)
- From Russia with Love (1963)
Like what you read? Then please like Not Now I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie on facebook here.
Beermovie.net 