Amph James Bond: Now Disc. "Skyfall" Video Blog by Sam Mendes

I refuse to not comment on Thunderball. It's quite a terrible little movie really. The underwater sequences are beyond boring; action sequences underwater are never a particularly great idea, Keaton's Navigator notwithstanding. And the final battle is the dullest final battle until Moonraker.

There is one great moment; referenced already; Volpe shows up with SPECTRE goons; she snarks at Bond about his trust, asking him if he believed that just because they had slept together that the heavens had opened and she had seen the light (slap at Goldfinger much?!). That's a great bit all by itself; this is, of course, the foundational principle of the Bond mythos; but Bond's response is even better. Sex is for 'Queen and country' and he gets no pleasure from it. Sex like a flyswatter? (and three points if you can tell me what film I'm referencing there).

As for You Only Live Twice, I'm equally unenamored of it; when you can make hundreds of ninjas attacking a volcano be utterly boring, you have reached a new low in action sequences. And while it's interesting, vaguely, to see Blofeld, it's a sad truth that Blofeld has never really been played effectively; Telly Savalas came the closest to really making the character work and any time you have to say those words, you know you're in trouble. Pleasance's turn in the role is a disappointment; lisping sissy, he is and supposedly the head of SPECTRE? Please; he can't even hold on to his pistol.

 

There's few films in which Bond actually goes on a character journey, and they're the ones I tend to enjoy the most - Casino Royale, License to Kill, The World is Not Enough and On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Whilst there's depth in, say, Living Daylights, FRWL, Dr No, TND or GoldenEye, the films I listed show Bond changing as a person. He goes on a character arc. In LTK, for example, he goes out for revenge out of loyalty, pushes people away until he realises he will need help to bring this man down, and, Yojimbo-style, brings the man down. There's a terrific cut scene from LTK after Lupe helps Bond get into town from Sanchez's place. The boat pulls up to a beach, Lupe says she's going back. Bond asks one thing; "Do you love him?" - showing a human side that very much cares.

OHMSS, obviously, shows Bond going from loner agent to vulnerable enough to marry - and we know about Vesper in Casino Royale. (You have to laugh at the insight into Fleming's mindset - love = a bad thing, he seems to scream).

And TWINE shows Bond angry at himself for failing to protect Sir Robert King, so he feels naturally protective for Elektra, esp at her claustrophobic vulnerability for example. He falls, gets betrayed twice, and resolves to never let it happen again. Stupidly named and acted Bond girl aside, it's a great character piece for Brosnan.

They're some of my favourites purely because I like seeing that very human Bond that Fleming wrote about. The superman-Bond was boring; the most exciting in my opinion was the bloodied and bruised Daniel Craig simply because he was still tough as nails but he hurt too. Just like the rest of us.

E+S

 

ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE - 1969

(Cool theme music here)

<img src=http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/21/OHMSS.JPG>

Starring: George Lazenby, Diana Rigg, Telly Savalas

There's an inherent difficulty when you write about your favourite of a particular something, in that you try to explain more why you love it than you do just talking about it. I'll try and avoid that for now, but I will put the caveat up that this is by far and away my favourite Bond film, and novel.

In 1967, producers Albert R Broccoli and Harry Saltzman had two problems. Firstly, they'd lost Sean Connery as 007, as he was so tired of being associated purely with Bond he'd decided to move on. They had also realised they'd begun to lose the soul, the edge, of James Bond 007 with the fantasy of You Only Live Twice. Peter Hunt, who's editing saved You Only Live Twice from a ponderous pace and three hour running time, was brought in to direct the next film, On Her Majesty's Secret Service. The novel is one of Fleming's best entries, and I highly recommend it to anyone.

Scripting OHMSS however, presented a huge problem. 007 and Blofeld come face to face in YOLT the film, but the novel is where they first meet. Bond, in fact, can't believe his eyes at first, as Blofeld in the novel is nothing like what he'd expect and possibly closer to Charles Gray's Blofeld than anything else.

Peter Hunt and long-time scriptwriter Richard Maibaum make the wise decision to follow the novel as closely as possible. This resolves one of their two problems. The other, is whom to cast as 007.

This would prove a double edged sword. Lazenby was well suited to the role, but I'll get to that in a moment. The downside was that the advertising had made so much of a deal over Sean Connery being Bond ("Sean Connery IS James Bond!") that they felt it was wiser to not reveal the new actor to the public. So all advertising featured a black-haired man whose face was obscured. They also added, for example, mementos to the Connery era in the film - clips in the pre-title sequence, Bond's desk has items he could not possibly own, such as Honey's knife which Dr No's guards took; Red Grant's watch which Bond never stripped from the body, and the rebreather. Similarly a janitor whistles the Goldfinger theme at Draco's office.

George Lazenby was a former Australian army commandos unarmed combat instructor, and male model - at one point the highest paid model in Europe. Hearing that Cubby Broccoli was looking for a new Bond, Lazenby bought a Rolex, had his hair cut by Sean Connery's barber in the same style, and picked up a Saville Row suit that Connery had never collected. He "accidently" meets Cubby outside a barber's shop, and recalling exploits that never happened, is auditioned and cast.

His natural athleticism and confidence in fight scenes overcome his relative youth - 28 when cast - and the producers have their James Bond.

What follows is a gadget free action-thriller. Bond is very much on his own at Piz Gloria, though still able to freely bed women of course thanks to a handful of women patients at Blofeld's faux-allergy clinic.

Aside from the raw action, superb Bond and dazzling locations, what drives OHMSS is Tracy. Bond, up until this point in the films and novels, had been very much a bachelor and he protests as much to Marc-Ange Draco, head of the criminal gang the Union Corse and Tracy's father. But her vulnerability and her ability to come through for Bond when he needs it the most make Bond realise something people seemed, inexplicably, to find "new" with Daniel Craig's Bond - that by being whom he is, he will destroy his soul.

Seeing Bond and Moneypenny share a look before they drive off in Bond's Aston Martin DBS is a fantasic moment too; it shows Bond as human and aware of the downside of Moneypenny's crush on him. You know it can't last at this point, and of course Blofeld ruins it by gunning Tracy down as Bond stops to remove flowers from the car

 

Twice -

I just love the dialogue where Bond is tied up and Helga says, "I've got you right where I want you."

And Bond replies, "Well, enjoy yourself."







OHMSS -

After having seen Casino, and then going back to OHMSS, I can definately see the similarities. The character-driven stuff with Bond falling in love and all that.

Lazenby did an EXCELLENT job in the role. Though I love Connery's Bond, Lazenby is no doubt a close second.

 

I wanted to make some comments about the more human Bond vs the superhuman Bond, but it ends up taking away from the OHMSS review, so I'll post my thoughts here.


With the two latest films we've discussed comes, basically, the line int he sand which has now become the par for Bond.

On the one hand, there's the bigger = better school of thought which YOLT's sheer scope inspired; and in it, Bond is simply the collest, best dressed, most invulnerable super-agent ever.

On the other, there's the belief that Fleming's Bond succeeded because he was so very much an ordinary man who would push himself to the edge for King and Country, and what made him succeed was sheer bloody-mindedness (determination/will), and confidence.

To be perfectly frank with you, it's not hard to be Bondian with women; he's not a magnet, he's just damned confident. Case in point - Solange in Casino Royale.

Both sides stick to the claim that "men want to be 007", but I'd submit that the superhuman crowd haven't really thought about Bond too deeply. He's alone, he's a bad guy on the side that's called good, and between missions there's no people he could call friends to count on.

The reason that I think the human Bond works better is that he's much more like what we could be, in that what separates us from Bond is not invincibility, superhuman strength and intellect; but that Bond never gives up. Beaten, broken, and seemingly done for he still finds a way to survive and complete his mission. All that stops us from being Bond is that will that refuses to allow us to give up.

As Dalton best put it; "You can't relate to a superhero, to a superman, but you can identify with a real man who in times of crisis draws forth some extraordinary quality from within himself and triumphs but only after a struggle."

So that's why I prefer the human Bonds over the superhuman ones, at least.

E_S

 

Great review and follow up post Ender. I like all the things you had to say. I considered myself a well rounded Bond fan in that I enjoy all the interpretations of Bond. The Human Bond, The Superhero Bond, The Tragic Bond and the Comedy Bond.

I like how you equated that what separates Bond from everyone else is his will and that if we would never give up, push ourselves past the breaking point, carry that confidence we could be Bond too. This is something I never did think about until Daniel Craig was cast as Bond. At first I though he wasn't right for the part, didn't look like Bond, blah, blah, blah. Upon seeing the film and how he carries himself it's all about will/confidence/attitude.

Daniel Craig isn't cool because he's handsome and looks like Bond. He's cool because he radiates that inner confidence and thus earns our attention. We don't give it too him because he looks like Bond, we give it too him because he demands it.

Looking at Daniel Craig when he's just being himself I look at him and think well that's me. I have that potential, I could be like that, if I try. It's a great confidence booster. When I'm out in public or at college and feeling depressed or self-conscience I'll start humming the James Bond theme in my head and I start to walk more upright with a slight swagger in my step and hold my head high. It sounds stupid but it works.

Now if I could just use the James Bond charm to get a girlfriend.

 

Well I think what Dalton said, and how Craig plays it, is true. Look at how he seduces Solange. Pure, ballsy confidence. (It works, by the way ).

E_S

 

On her majesty secret service is my favorite bond movie of all time!

 

Actually, given his looks and his motive for taking the role etc, he was the most Bond of all the actors to start off with.

E_S

 

What Obi Anne said.

I've watched this film a couple of times in the last few years, always hoping I would rediscover it as a great Bond; each time I've been hit by how lacking it feels, from Lazenby's charisma-free performance to the cheap nods towards the previous Bond films. There are a few bits that I feel are real quality: Dianna Rigg is good, both in acting and in depth of character; Lois Armstrong's We Have All The Time In The World; and that scene at the end of the film as Bond's attempt at a normal life and happiness is crushed forever.

 

You cannot blame Lazenby for the complete mistake of the producers. They learned from this and with Roger Moore, attempted to not push that same instance with Live and Let Die. The magnum, Bond's apartment being the venue for the assignment, no Q - all was deliberate because it didn't work in OHMSS.

As I said, so much had been made of the "Sean Connery IS James Bond" marketing that they lacked confidence to market Lazenby in the role.

As for charisma free - I can't say that I agree with that assessment. There's a couple of great moments, such as bailing Tracy out at Casino Royale-les-Eaux, when he uses his "smooth talking" on the girl who gets into his room with the quip "You're an inspiration (and you'll have to be)", and like I said, that unspoken moment between Bond and Moneypenny at the wedding.

There's no way Connery could or would have done Tracy's death scene, IMO.

E_S

 

Yes, Lazenby took the brunt of the criticism, but I think the producers are at least as much to blame. You know Saltzman hated the Lois Armstrong song

I just can't warm to Lazenby, there is something about him I don't like. I know that is an annoyingly vague generalisation, but without watching the film again I can't be more specific. I think if I had seen him in other movies and learned to appreciate his acting in other work, then perhaps he wouldn't come across as a second-rate Sean Connery.

 

The one thing that I did not like like about ohmss is Telly Savalas. I just cant see him his as Bloefield. He is just terribly miscasted as Blofield, and Bond like any good action movie depends on the villian, and in this case I was not believing the villian.

 

That has more to do with the time period of the late 1960s then the choices of the art department. The classic Connery Bonds are more stylish and timeless because the early 1960s were more stylish and timeless. It's not until 1967, 1968 as the hippie/counter culture movement takes hold that the era starts to look dated. From 1967 to 1977 was not the most fashionable for Bond or the rest of the world for that matter. You can see a bit of that late 1960s grunge creeping into You Only Live Twice, OHMSS has a full on Mod Squad look, Diamonds Are Forever in the 1970s at it's tackiest, Live And Let Day is urban blaxploitation, and The Man With The Golden Gun proves that bad fashion knows no borders. Things begin to change in The Spy Who Loved Me although the film is dated fashion and comtemporary designs are becoming a bit more cleaner, stylish and classier. Things become moreso in For Your Eyes Only and by the time Octopussy rolls around the only thing that really dates the film is Roger Moore's hair.

 

I really like OHMSS. I'm glad its reputation has recovered so much that it is now regularly cited as one of the best Bonds - and with good reason. It has some great 1960s glamour (and a bit of 60s cheesiness as well), some iconic shots (such as the first shot of Bond's face in shadow as he's driving the car), a genuine sense of humour (this never happened to the other guy), a strong cast, some innovative action scenes (the ski chase would be rather overdone in future filmsn but is fresh as powder snow here) and an emotional punch at the end. However, I tend to agree with most of the comments about Lazenby. He definitely looked the part (albeit a bit weedy next to Connery), and is at his best when he had no lines. He was surrounded by a strong cast, especially Diana Rigg, who is a skilled actor and, almost as important, generous enough to support the inexperienced Lazenby and make him look good. The producers did a good job on him as he comes off looking like a better actor than he actually is, but a lot of that is down to clever scripting, direction and (dare I say it?) dubbing his voice with that of another actor for a long section of the film. The producers probably had a lucky escape when Lazenby quit, and his solo performance here makes OHMSS all the more unique in the history of Bond films.

 

Gonk, yes, it is true the same sterio-types are played over and over again, but that's movies in general. Every summer people go to see half a dozen different movies which rea really the same movie with different titles and stars. Even the classic Star Wars lacks originality (though succeeding in giving the illusion of originality, genius on George's part). For James Bond, he does the quentisentual summer action block buster adventure over and over, which is the kind of movie people want to see over and over. This is why he remains the same and remains successful.

Now having side that, since it is the same character, the same franchise, the same series, that applies limitations. It makes it harder to get away with it forever. They got away with it far longer than any other franchise has, but it's gradually caught up with them over the years. I think what they are trying to do with "Bond Begins" is to re-invent the series to avoid this trap. It maintains much of the style and charm of the original series, but adds a layer of realism that even OHMSS and LTK didn't have. Of course, whether or not they maintain it, or if it was merely the approach of CR is yet to be seen, but I think I am right on this.


There's few films in which Bond actually goes on a character journey, and they're the ones I tend to enjoy the most - Casino Royale, License to Kill, The World is Not Enough and On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Whilst there's depth in, say, Living Daylights, FRWL, Dr No, TND or GoldenEye, the films I listed show Bond changing as a person. He goes on a character arc.

Ah, I do very much agree with you here, Ender. While I find the character arc of LTK misplaced, it does have that arc, as do the other ones you pointed out.

 

The other thing is Lazenby had no acting experience and was more than a decade younger than Sean Connery. Given how good his physical condition was in - not just looking very Bond but being able to fight like Bond, if he'd done his 7 films he'd have had plenty of time to grow into the role.

Brosnan and Dalton look far more comfortable and free to move in the role in their second outings; they really own the role by then. Lazenby never had that chance to relax into it, to be bold and take chances, and that's almost entirely not his fault.

E_S

 

This is quite possibly the best of the Bonds, for several reasons. Ender and I are of the same mind (fancy that!) about Bond as human vs. super-human. I recall reading the "Everyone wants to be Bond" line a few years ago and thinking to myself, "Not so much, no . . . sociopathic, absolutely alone, alcoholic, misogynist . . . right, every man's dream life . . ."

And this film is Bond at his most human; Diana Rigg is a perfect Tracy. She is, being Diana Rigg, dead sexy and absolutely winning.

But all the characters have added depth here; I particularly liked how Maxwell played Moneypenny in the resignation scene. A real person after all.

Telly Savalas is the only person to really make Blofeld work, in my opinion, though he isn't perfect, being, of course, Telly Savalas. Who loves ya, baby? Not me. But his Blofeld is violent, a real physical presence . . . and wouldn't the head of SPECTRE need to be?

And I still maintain that this film has some of the best action sequences ever; Barry's score stretches in all kinds of new directions and it really helps in the action bits. The luge down the mountain with Blofeld and Bond duking it out is absolutely nail biting.

But a word for the bookends of this film. Fade in on M and Q; "Radioactive lint," Q ends the scene with and we zoom onto Bond pursuing Tracy in his car. The cars skid into the ocean, Bond leaps out, is set upon by three goons and a slam bang fight sequence follows, ending with Tracy leaping into Bonds' car and stealing it. Lazenby looks at the camera and smirks, "This never happened to that other fellow."

Yes, that's right; not even to the credits and its already a five star film. I've laughed out loud (three times) and been on the edge of my seat.

As to the ending, well, words have been said enough about it; devestating. "We have all the time in the world."

And somehow, sandwiched between those two five star moments, there's a whole five star film.

Rises above the ranks; this isn't just a great Bond film. It's a great film.

 

Heh, see? Rogue gets it

E_S

 

Like it or not James Bond is a brand name. His name alone brings up certain images that have far surpassed the books in terms of success or popularity. Just about anywhere you go in the world people will know 007 and have their favorite. I think a very small number would know that the films are based on books and even less can claim reading any of them. That being said the franchise is 40+ years old and it has set a formula that people expect. Thrilling action, a suave leading man, beautiful women, exotic locales, and cool gadgets are part of the formula. What makes OHMSS work so well is that it doesn't follow the formula so striclty and concentrates on being a good movie. Peter Hunt was right when saying that he wanted to concentrate on the Bond character for his film. As good as Connery was I don't think he could have pulled off this ending, nor would the audience have wanted him to. With a new actor, Hunt was able to take Bond in a new direction.

I think the success of Spielberg & Lucas affected the Bond films and in turn the producers tried to make it more kid friendly, the result being TSWLM and culminating in Moonraker. From the opening FYEO seemed like a return to the kind of film that OHMSS was, but that tone didn't last long.

Unfortunately Lazenby had some horrible advice and even worse luck when it came to his acting career. After quitting Bond, Lazenby was to appear in several films with Bruce Lee. The contracts were signed but Lee died before filming began. Lazenby was unable to get out of the films that lost most of their funding once Bruce Lee died. He was forced to play in a number of lousy Hong Kong films which didn't help his post Bond career. Had he been given another shot at Bond I think he, and OHMSS, would be better remembered today but I think after Jaws & Star Wars Bond still would have ventured into the territory Moore's films went.

 

I strongly agree with Rogue and Ender on this issue.

 

As you can see, we now have a Bond Banner for the duration of the reviews in this thread.

Very nice banner indeed, courtesy of Dark_Jedi_Kenobi Designer, and Gabe Technical Wizard Extraordinaire. The style sheets are a mite dark, but that's just me.

Anyway, thanks.

 

Agreed, many thanks and good work.

E_S

 

Cool banner.

Anyway, I have much to say regarding OHMSS (especially since I just watched it this weekend), but will have to save my comments for tomorrow.