Excellent commentary, including about what Mr, Connery contributed to the Bond Series. Diamonds does not rank as the worst of the Bond Series for me. That honor (or dishonor) goes to Never Say Never, Quantum of Solace and Die Another Day. You point out all of Diamonds flaws for sure as well as its strengths. I must admit I find myself watching it fairly often because it is very entertaining as a stand alone Bond film. I wish they connected it directly to OHMSS. Then again, I wish Connery stayed in the role long enough to play Bond in this film instead of Mr. Lazenby. I guess the pre-title sequence in Diamonds refers to Bond searching for Blofeld in full revenge mode. I love Connery’s reaction upon seeing Blofeld alive. You’re right, it really is the best scene in Diamonds that sadly could have been made more of dramatically had the filmmakers gone in a stronger direction. Wint & Kidd are memorable, n my top 10 henchmen, Jill St. John is good, especially in the first half. The script and direction does her no favors by turning a tough, no nonsense, smart, alluring character into well….dimwitted. It’s unfair. Lots of funny lines still hold up. A wonderful John Barry score, the Bambi & Thumper scene, the fight with Peter Franks, great M, Q, Moneypenny scenes and the presence of Connery, well worn he is a bit, keep me watching. If they had tied Connery’s Bond to being worn out due to the trauma of his wife’s murder and relentless pursuit for Blofeld, think of how much this could have added. The best locations are in Amsterdam. Great title song too. More fun for me than Quantum, DAD, even overwrought tediousness of SPECTRE.
I was a teenager when DAF came out in the theaters in December 1971. Before the internet and streaming, there were typically long lines of people waiting to buy tickets. DAF was a huge hit back then. Mostly because movie goers wanted to see Sean Connery’s return as 007.
Interesting take that Connery elevates this. I agree he does, however that 1 million spent on production would have elevated the film more! Also agree, I love Jill st John, and Tiffany, particularly in the first half! Wint and kidd are great! And what a score!
4:45 that’s a good way of summing it up. To me, Bond films exist on a bell curve, and basically all the top 20 are at least “pretty good”. Diamonds is on the lower end of what I’d say the “pretty good” Bond films are, but it’s still a 7/10 movie.
Rest in peace sean, you did a great job getting the bond series going. And for others like roger, timothy, pierce and daniel they would not have made there names in the content they do without sean.
What a way to start my Friday. I’m glad to see another Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint fan. Are they the only main henchmen to never interact with the main villain?
Depends on who you count at the main villain for Russia, but yes. I think the only other people to never interact with the main villain are Primo/Logan Ash in No Time to Die.
The intention of this outing was to recapture the success of Goldfinger. That’s why they brought back Shirley Bassy to sing the main song, and Guy Hamilton to direct. Initially they wanted to bring Gert Frobe back to play the Auric Goldfinger’s twin out to get revenge on Bond.
True. However, Charles Gray was quite good in YOLT(1967) as a James Bond's ally. I think the biggest problem was that overall light tone of the film. I didn't believe for a second that the world was really in danger! In YOLT(1967) or TSWLM(1977): yes! In spy-comedy DAF(1971): definitely not! And that's a shame! And Connery looked 55 not 40. He was in much better shape in NSNA(1983). By the way, NSNA(1983) was a much better movie!
The early 1970s were a strange time for the James Bond franchise. Its identity crisis. Because all 3 movies were incredibly weird, to put it mildly. Actually, LALD(1973) was quite good in some places.But DAF(1971) was a pure spy comedy and in TMWTGG(1974) they turned Bond an unpleasant brute... Yeah, although Guy Hamilton had made 1 great Bond movie: Goldfinger(1964), his last 3 were very weak mediocre entries..........
I love Diamonds but I do agree it can't compete with the best movies. Thankfully, The Spy Who Loved Me was the course correction the series needed and it's truly one of the great Bond movies.
I'm an unabashed fan of DAF and accept it as fun, but with the characters playing with panache. It's less silly than YOLT and a lot brisker than TB. If Lazenby had not let EON know he was not returning before OHMSS's premiere, it is easy to think they would have ended with the wedding, had Tracy's death the pretitle sequence of the next film and followed it with a revenge plot (having filmed it knowing Rigg wouldn't return). But once they knew he was done, they ended the storyline and seemed to want to distance from it completely. DAF is what I watch when I want to just enjoy my couple of hours, smile at the clever lines, scoff at the "special effects" and enjoy Plenty of Tiffany. I don't need it to be something else, and I'll take it over any of the other 70s films (yes, even TSWLM) any day. But I understand the derision it gets and accept it's a minority view I have.
8:40 Had Sir Roger Moore actually acted in Diamonds Are Forever, this movie would have been slated. But since Sir Sean Connery, the Bond fandom usually give it a "mixed" response.
6:24 it really is a tragedy. We never really got a satisfying pay off with Bond and Bloefeld. They fumbled even in the Craig era. I guess the buildup far exceeds the realistic outcomes.
A funny film that gets too much unnecessary hate. For me, these are the only issues: 1. Gray as Blofeld fit the tone of the film but I would have preferred someone more threatening. 2. The finale should have been more exciting. 3. A better Felix Leiter
I actually liked this film and was crazy for Jill St. John. I think the Lazenby film was bringing Bond into a new era and this was supposed to be continuing that with Lazenby. The fact that Connery came back made it not really a Connery Bond film. Oh and did I say Jill St. John is HOT
2:40 I thought UA wanted Connery back for 2 movies. Thats what they stated in the EON documentary that he came back for a 2 picture deal but Connery quit after Diamonds due to Sean having existing rift with Harry Saltzmann and then new rifts with Cubby Broccoli.
The deal was to produce any two pictures of his choosing as part of the deal to get him back for Diamonds. Only one film was ever made from that. I'm sure UA would have loved to get Connery back for another Bond film, but Connery made it clear during contemporary interviews that it was only ever going to be the one movie.
It's not surprising that American reviewers find the locations in this film underwhelming. I'm from the UK though, so 1970s Las Vegas seems an interesting setting.
I'd like to think it's simply because I'm American, but I'm not sure. I've been to a few of the other American locations (like New York), and I don’t have the same reaction. I've heard some people dismiss the Bahamas as a location, while I think it's perfect. I guess it's a personal thing.
I always enjoy Diamonds are Forever. I can ignore the campy nonsense, dated special effects and lack of continuation for an enjoyable film with memorable characters, an awesome score and a really witty script. I’ll be the the first to defend Charles Grey as Blofeld and Norman Burton as Felix, as I think they do a pretty good job, even if they may not be similar to other portrayals of their characters.
''Diamonds Are Forever'' is a sequel of ''You Only Live Twice''. In the first scene after gunbarrel, Bond is still in Japan looking for Blofeld, only as the head of a global criminal organization. There is no mention to Tracy, to his marriage and there is no Draco and Irma Bunt. Connery here is aged and heavier, but if was a revenge film he's perfect, as Bond after Tracy's death. The film has similar style with ''Live and Let die'' and ''The Man with the Golden Gun''.
Not for me. Especially because we never really got a sequel to On Her Majesty's Secret Service where an enraged Bond would go on a hunt for Bloefeld. The producers fumbled it to be honest. I agree with DutchBondFan, why would you do such a downgrade in menace and intrigue in Bloefeld?
Greatness of amazing awesome James Bond movie adventure review in my opinion diamond are forever one my favorite guilty pleasure James Bond movie adventure because of campy fun of it sean Connery James Bond he is amazing in it Charles Gray as blofeld he is campy God fun in the movie Mr wint and Mr kit greatness of amazing fun henchman gimmick character I like them in the movie entertaining character fun I like Bond girls Tiffany case she is fun character plenty of tool she is very fun on the scenes she's on it I really do like the dialogue John Barry soundtrack music and I like some of the side characters in it I understand why people don't like this one no I'm a big fan of guilty pleasure campy type bond movies of fun greatness of amazing awesome review
DAF has always gotten my vote at the worst in the official series - the whiplash change in tone from OHMSS is glaring. I agree with most of your critique, though I disagree with the idea that Connery looked like he was enjoying himself in this one. He looks paunchy and bored, and is very clearly just cashing a check.
When I was a kid, I loved the goofy, fun nature of this movie, but as an adult, I find it a rather disappointing end to the Blofeld story arc and Connery's tenure as Bond.
Your thinking on how the Connery era films have too many incidents that make you uncomfortable because you cannot help viewing them through a modern day lens is something you maybe need to work on as a ‘you problem’. Hearing you say it here reminded me of the great Richard Griffiths as ‘Uncle Monty’ opining about his sensitivity in the film ‘Withnail and I’ (‘As a child, I used to weep in butchers shops’). I’ve enjoyed a lot of your content here, so I know that you know that Bond’s job is literally to murder people his Government tell him to. Getting squeamish about the aspects you have here therefore seems a bit redundant.
Let me just say that most articles and criticisms lobbed at the movie are a bit unwarranted. I love the movie, especially Alan Silvestri's score. But the thing I can't quite get past is Jenny. She's abused as a child, has crappy tastes in boyfriends, engages in protests and seems to be a free-thinker, and yet she contracts AIDS and seems to come back to Forrest only when she has nothing else. She is easy to see as a horrible person, and the film seems to condem her to tragedy, yet Forrest is ignorant to much of this and is still in love with her. I have a hard time following Forrest in his choices with her because I'm armed with information and an understanding about her that makes me question the relationship. That's my one big problem with the film, otherwise it's one that I love rewatching.
@@stephenjarvis534 I think I maybe read it as Jenny IS a horrible person, and Forrest can’t see that, and that is the tragedy of the situation. Idk if we are meant to 100% sympathize with her, but I completely get your read of the character! I think how you feel about Jenny depends on how you feel about the whole hippie movement she was apart of as a whole.
I like 2 things in this film. The title song is by far the best of the 3 from Shirley Bassey, and I wish the film lived up to it. Also, Jill St. John. Her scenes in Amsterdam perfectly capture the character from the book. After that, however, she falls apart along with everything else. This film is an insult to the characters, the series, the previous film... I once watched this uncut with my Dad, and he told me he couldn't understand how the first half and second half were connnected at all. And I agreed with him. That's REALLY sloppy writing. For me, DIAMONDS and GOLDEN GUN would tie as worst, except for MOONRAKER, which is jaw-dropping in its sheer overwhelming awfulness. I thought Norman Burton had more personality than any of his predecessors. He fares better in THE GUMBALL RALLY. Jimmy Dean might have made a good Felix! 😄 I forget how MANY times I saw this thing before I suddenly realized that when Bond sneaks into Whyte's penthouse, and discovers Blofeld, that that was a plot point borrowed from Fleming's "You Only Live Twice". But disguised so heavily and done so badly, I never noticed it over multiple viewings. Charles Gray is MAGNIFICENT in "THE DEVIL RIDES OUT". He proved there he could have made a great Bond villain. He certainly DIDN'T in this atrocity. Just for fun, try watching the films in this order and see if they wind up making more sense this way: THUNDERBALL ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER
Easily one of the worst of bonds, or certainly down at the bottom of the list. They should have begged and pleaded for Lazenby to return and moved in the direction of revenge caper. Lazenby would have ruled the 70s had he not been stupid and walked away.
There are three reasons why Diamonds ranks as the worst for me, 1. Sean Connery’s almost lacklustre performance 2. Charles Gray’s Blofeld is just insulting to the character 3. The rubbish special effects.
Didn't even think to talk about the effects, as they are about on par with You Only Live Twice and I believe I talked about them there. Plus, I've been really torn on effects, as I'm willing to overlook crappy effects if a story is working. Yet if the film is something like Superman IV, the lackluster effects just become another easy target to pin on it.
Does Connery seem to age back and forth in this movie as well? In some shots, he looks like Bond from 67, and it others he's greyer and looks more worn out.
I unironically rank Charles Gray as my favourite Blofeld. Pleasance has the look, but Gray has the best mix of camp and menace. He’s not the biggest insult to the character, especially since we have the daft caricature in FYEO’s pre title sequence and Brofeld in Spectre.
Wint and Kidd make the movie. Some of the best henchmen in the series.
Diamonds isn’t a great Bond, but it is a fun Bond, and most of the time that’s adequate
I love Diamonds are Forever. I do enjoy a more light-hearted Bond films. I guess that's why I love Roger Moore. I love Connery as well.
I just love how bizarre Diamonds is
I love listening to your voice on these videos!
Excellent commentary, including about what Mr, Connery contributed to the Bond Series. Diamonds does not rank as the worst of the Bond Series for me. That honor (or dishonor) goes to Never Say Never, Quantum of Solace and Die Another Day. You point out all of Diamonds flaws for sure as well as its strengths. I must admit I find myself watching it fairly often because it is very entertaining as a stand alone Bond film. I wish they connected it directly to OHMSS. Then again, I wish Connery stayed in the role long enough to play Bond in this film instead of Mr. Lazenby. I guess the pre-title sequence in Diamonds refers to Bond searching for Blofeld in full revenge mode. I love Connery’s reaction upon seeing Blofeld alive. You’re right, it really is the best scene in Diamonds that sadly could have been made more of dramatically had the filmmakers gone in a stronger direction. Wint & Kidd are memorable, n my top 10 henchmen, Jill St. John is good, especially in the first half. The script and direction does her no favors by turning a tough, no nonsense, smart, alluring character into well….dimwitted. It’s unfair. Lots of funny lines still hold up. A wonderful John Barry score, the Bambi & Thumper scene, the fight with Peter Franks, great M, Q, Moneypenny scenes and the presence of Connery, well worn he is a bit, keep me watching. If they had tied Connery’s Bond to being worn out due to the trauma of his wife’s murder and relentless pursuit for Blofeld, think of how much this could have added. The best locations are in Amsterdam. Great title song too. More fun for me than Quantum, DAD, even overwrought tediousness of SPECTRE.
Replace Never Say Never Again with SPECTRE and you have my trinity of James Bond Pain.
I haven't done it in a few years but every December I watch one bond movie a day as a countdown to Christmas
I was a teenager when DAF came out in the theaters in December 1971. Before the internet and streaming, there were typically long lines of people waiting to buy tickets. DAF was a huge hit back then. Mostly because movie goers wanted to see Sean Connery’s return as 007.
Interesting take that Connery elevates this. I agree he does, however that 1 million spent on production would have elevated the film more!
Also agree, I love Jill st John, and Tiffany, particularly in the first half!
Wint and kidd are great!
And what a score!
4:45 that’s a good way of summing it up. To me, Bond films exist on a bell curve, and basically all the top 20 are at least “pretty good”. Diamonds is on the lower end of what I’d say the “pretty good” Bond films are, but it’s still a 7/10 movie.
That's an excellent way to describe the series. If I may, I might use that in a video, giving you credit of course.
You’re absolutely right about it being the first Roger Moore film, it’s a bit too silly for Connery, Moore would have fit in better here.
Yeah. I think if Charles Gray had been a villain in a Moore outing, it would have fit him like a glove.
I think Moore would've been more comfortable and at home in this than Man with the Golden Gun.
One of my guilty pleasure bonds l like this cause its the first one I saw as a kid and therefore I have a fondness for it.
Rest in peace sean, you did a great job getting the bond series going. And for others like roger, timothy, pierce and daniel they would not have made there names in the content they do without sean.
Great Bond Film Diamonds Are Forever
What a way to start my Friday. I’m glad to see another Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint fan. Are they the only main henchmen to never interact with the main villain?
Grant never interacts with Blofeld in From Russia With Love. Also, I don't think Locque does with Kristatos in For Your Eyes Only.
Depends on who you count at the main villain for Russia, but yes. I think the only other people to never interact with the main villain are Primo/Logan Ash in No Time to Die.
The intention of this outing was to recapture the success of Goldfinger. That’s why they brought back Shirley Bassy to sing the main song, and Guy Hamilton to direct. Initially they wanted to bring Gert Frobe back to play the Auric Goldfinger’s twin out to get revenge on Bond.
"Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in." - Sean Connery, 1970
The most jarring part of the film is the mis-casting of Blofeld's character.
True. However, Charles Gray was quite good in YOLT(1967) as a James Bond's ally. I think the biggest problem was that overall light tone of the film. I didn't believe for a second that the world was really in danger! In YOLT(1967) or TSWLM(1977): yes! In spy-comedy DAF(1971): definitely not! And that's a shame! And Connery looked 55 not 40. He was in much better shape in NSNA(1983). By the way, NSNA(1983) was a much better movie!
I would have preferred a more threatening Blofeld.
6:45 desperately unfortunate that we didn't get that story.
The early 1970s were a strange time for the James Bond franchise. Its identity crisis. Because all 3 movies were incredibly weird, to put it mildly. Actually, LALD(1973) was quite good in some places.But DAF(1971) was a pure spy comedy and in TMWTGG(1974) they turned Bond an unpleasant brute... Yeah, although Guy Hamilton had made 1 great Bond movie: Goldfinger(1964), his last 3 were very weak mediocre entries..........
I love Diamonds but I do agree it can't compete with the best movies. Thankfully, The Spy Who Loved Me was the course correction the series needed and it's truly one of the great Bond movies.
I agree it was a weird time. However, LALD is one my favorite Bond movies and a really notable high point until TSWLM
Very informative welcome didn't know these facts?
I'm an unabashed fan of DAF and accept it as fun, but with the characters playing with panache. It's less silly than YOLT and a lot brisker than TB. If Lazenby had not let EON know he was not returning before OHMSS's premiere, it is easy to think they would have ended with the wedding, had Tracy's death the pretitle sequence of the next film and followed it with a revenge plot (having filmed it knowing Rigg wouldn't return). But once they knew he was done, they ended the storyline and seemed to want to distance from it completely.
DAF is what I watch when I want to just enjoy my couple of hours, smile at the clever lines, scoff at the "special effects" and enjoy Plenty of Tiffany. I don't need it to be something else, and I'll take it over any of the other 70s films (yes, even TSWLM) any day. But I understand the derision it gets and accept it's a minority view I have.
8:40 Had Sir Roger Moore actually acted in Diamonds Are Forever, this movie would have been slated. But since Sir Sean Connery, the Bond fandom usually give it a "mixed" response.
Kinda Silly Grey is miscast as Blofeld Connery is obviously there for the $$ But Jill is gorgeous and Wint and Kidd are fun
6:24 it really is a tragedy. We never really got a satisfying pay off with Bond and Bloefeld. They fumbled even in the Craig era. I guess the buildup far exceeds the realistic outcomes.
Sean was the highest paid actor in 1971, and he donated his salary to the Scottish Education....what a guy !
Love your videos
I always thought this one was perfectly fine film in the series.
Only good thing about this is the elevator fight and Jill St John. One of the worst Bond movies, it’s embarrassing. Oh and the title song.
17:28 While Goldfinger gets all the attention, I really do think Diamonds Are Forever is the best Bond song Dame Shirley Bassey ever sung.
A funny film that gets too much unnecessary hate. For me, these are the only issues:
1. Gray as Blofeld fit the tone of the film but I would have preferred someone more threatening.
2. The finale should have been more exciting.
3. A better Felix Leiter
Sean Connery’s last Bond 007
I actually liked this film and was crazy for Jill St. John. I think the Lazenby film was bringing Bond into a new era and this was supposed to be continuing that with Lazenby. The fact that Connery came back made it not really a Connery Bond film. Oh and did I say Jill St. John is HOT
2:40 I thought UA wanted Connery back for 2 movies. Thats what they stated in the EON documentary that he came back for a 2 picture deal but Connery quit after Diamonds due to Sean having existing rift with Harry Saltzmann and then new rifts with Cubby Broccoli.
The deal was to produce any two pictures of his choosing as part of the deal to get him back for Diamonds. Only one film was ever made from that. I'm sure UA would have loved to get Connery back for another Bond film, but Connery made it clear during contemporary interviews that it was only ever going to be the one movie.
@@stephenjarvis534 I see okay
@@stephenjarvis534 Broccoli and Saltzman tried to convince Connery to return in ''Live and Let Die'', but he declined.
It's not surprising that American reviewers find the locations in this film underwhelming. I'm from the UK though, so 1970s Las Vegas seems an interesting setting.
I'd like to think it's simply because I'm American, but I'm not sure. I've been to a few of the other American locations (like New York), and I don’t have the same reaction. I've heard some people dismiss the Bahamas as a location, while I think it's perfect. I guess it's a personal thing.
I always enjoy Diamonds are Forever. I can ignore the campy nonsense, dated special effects and lack of continuation for an enjoyable film with memorable characters, an awesome score and a really witty script. I’ll be the the first to defend Charles Grey as Blofeld and Norman Burton as Felix, as I think they do a pretty good job, even if they may not be similar to other portrayals of their characters.
''Diamonds Are Forever'' is a sequel of ''You Only Live Twice''. In the first scene after gunbarrel, Bond is still in Japan looking for Blofeld, only as the head of a global criminal organization. There is no mention to Tracy, to his marriage and there is no Draco and Irma Bunt. Connery here is aged and heavier, but if was a revenge film he's perfect, as Bond after Tracy's death. The film has similar style with ''Live and Let die'' and ''The Man with the Golden Gun''.
I agree that Diamonds feels more like a sequel to Twice than Majesty's.
Not for me. Especially because we never really got a sequel to On Her Majesty's Secret Service where an enraged Bond would go on a hunt for Bloefeld. The producers fumbled it to be honest. I agree with DutchBondFan, why would you do such a downgrade in menace and intrigue in Bloefeld?
Greatness of amazing awesome James Bond movie adventure review in my opinion diamond are forever one my favorite guilty pleasure James Bond movie adventure because of campy fun of it sean Connery James Bond he is amazing in it Charles Gray as blofeld he is campy God fun in the movie Mr wint and Mr kit greatness of amazing fun henchman gimmick character I like them in the movie entertaining character fun I like Bond girls Tiffany case she is fun character plenty of tool she is very fun on the scenes she's on it I really do like the dialogue John Barry soundtrack music and I like some of the side characters in it I understand why people don't like this one no I'm a big fan of guilty pleasure campy type bond movies of fun greatness of amazing awesome review
Plot Spoiler… it’s Not the same Bambi and Thumper as the Disney film!
DAF has always gotten my vote at the worst in the official series - the whiplash change in tone from OHMSS is glaring. I agree with most of your critique, though I disagree with the idea that Connery looked like he was enjoying himself in this one. He looks paunchy and bored, and is very clearly just cashing a check.
When I was a kid, I loved the goofy, fun nature of this movie, but as an adult, I find it a rather disappointing end to the Blofeld story arc and Connery's tenure as Bond.
The Bambi and Thumper scene was the worst scene in the movie
Your thinking on how the Connery era films have too many incidents that make you uncomfortable because you cannot help viewing them through a modern day lens is something you maybe need to work on as a ‘you problem’. Hearing you say it here reminded me of the great Richard Griffiths as ‘Uncle Monty’ opining about his sensitivity in the film ‘Withnail and I’ (‘As a child, I used to weep in butchers shops’). I’ve enjoyed a lot of your content here, so I know that you know that Bond’s job is literally to murder people his Government tell him to. Getting squeamish about the aspects you have here therefore seems a bit redundant.
What was problematic in Forrest Gump? I legitimately can’t remember anything and am curious!
Let me just say that most articles and criticisms lobbed at the movie are a bit unwarranted. I love the movie, especially Alan Silvestri's score. But the thing I can't quite get past is Jenny. She's abused as a child, has crappy tastes in boyfriends, engages in protests and seems to be a free-thinker, and yet she contracts AIDS and seems to come back to Forrest only when she has nothing else. She is easy to see as a horrible person, and the film seems to condem her to tragedy, yet Forrest is ignorant to much of this and is still in love with her. I have a hard time following Forrest in his choices with her because I'm armed with information and an understanding about her that makes me question the relationship. That's my one big problem with the film, otherwise it's one that I love rewatching.
@@stephenjarvis534 I think I maybe read it as Jenny IS a horrible person, and Forrest can’t see that, and that is the tragedy of the situation. Idk if we are meant to 100% sympathize with her, but I completely get your read of the character! I think how you feel about Jenny depends on how you feel about the whole hippie movement she was apart of as a whole.
I like 2 things in this film. The title song is by far the best of the 3 from Shirley Bassey, and I wish the film lived up to it. Also, Jill St. John. Her scenes in Amsterdam perfectly capture the character from the book. After that, however, she falls apart along with everything else. This film is an insult to the characters, the series, the previous film... I once watched this uncut with my Dad, and he told me he couldn't understand how the first half and second half were connnected at all. And I agreed with him. That's REALLY sloppy writing.
For me, DIAMONDS and GOLDEN GUN would tie as worst, except for MOONRAKER, which is jaw-dropping in its sheer overwhelming awfulness.
I thought Norman Burton had more personality than any of his predecessors. He fares better in THE GUMBALL RALLY.
Jimmy Dean might have made a good Felix! 😄
I forget how MANY times I saw this thing before I suddenly realized that when Bond sneaks into Whyte's penthouse, and discovers Blofeld, that that was a plot point borrowed from Fleming's "You Only Live Twice". But disguised so heavily and done so badly, I never noticed it over multiple viewings. Charles Gray is MAGNIFICENT in "THE DEVIL RIDES OUT". He proved there he could have made a great Bond villain. He certainly DIDN'T in this atrocity.
Just for fun, try watching the films in this order and see if they wind up making more sense this way:
THUNDERBALL
ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE
YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE
DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER
A revenge film with lazenby I liked it ok
Diamonds is one of my least favorite Bonds. I never pick this one to watch, and only watch it when I marathon the whole series.
They still paid other guy and dalton still got paid for his 3rd movie, that's never got made
Diamonds is a B+ Bond film.
Easily one of the worst of bonds, or certainly down at the bottom of the list. They should have begged and pleaded for Lazenby to return and moved in the direction of revenge caper. Lazenby would have ruled the 70s had he not been stupid and walked away.
The producers did plead with Lazenby to return as Bond. They even offered him 1 million dollars under the table, but he refused it.
20:31 For Your Eyes Only is a great film. Diamonds is not tbh. Its just bland and so comedic its hard to get invested in the story.
There are three reasons why Diamonds ranks as the worst for me,
1. Sean Connery’s almost lacklustre performance
2. Charles Gray’s Blofeld is just insulting to the character
3. The rubbish special effects.
Didn't even think to talk about the effects, as they are about on par with You Only Live Twice and I believe I talked about them there. Plus, I've been really torn on effects, as I'm willing to overlook crappy effects if a story is working. Yet if the film is something like Superman IV, the lackluster effects just become another easy target to pin on it.
Does Connery seem to age back and forth in this movie as well? In some shots, he looks like Bond from 67, and it others he's greyer and looks more worn out.
I unironically rank Charles Gray as my favourite Blofeld. Pleasance has the look, but Gray has the best mix of camp and menace. He’s not the biggest insult to the character, especially since we have the daft caricature in FYEO’s pre title sequence and Brofeld in Spectre.
@@joshslater2426 Did I miss something? When was Gray's Blofeld menacing?
I don't agree about Connery's performance. He was playing it easy and comical and it worked. Good for him.