14 replies to this topic

[rafterman]

my least favorite, dull, kind of racist at times and idiotic with that lame volcano, it was big, but looked like crap, connery sucks in this one, just no fun for me to watch...thoughts?

[White Persian]

I wouldn't call it a complete write off (the score is great and there's some lovely cinamatography for instance), but I find YOLT pretty dull too.

I'd much rather have seen a version of Fleming's novel of the same name.

[SPECTRE]

Personally, I think its a film to watch when you're in a special mood... Its not a film I can watch at any time... But I must say that the Little Nellie sequence in one of the best in the whole series... It is so classic and original... The pre-titles sequence was very good and suspenseful.... YOLT was the inventor of the "volcanic lair" and this sequence was pretty well done... And I find the scenery to be very nice.... My only big problem is the fake looking lava coming out of the volcano at the end... But i can forgive that.

[freemo]

I feel YOLT is a little disapointing, it gets dull after the ninja school scenes in my opinion. It had a solid build up in the beginning, Bond goes to a sumo wrestling match, meets Henderson and various other people, takes a Japanese style bath, but it falls a little flat.

Still I like it, it was the first Bond film I saw, so perhaps that swings my opinon a little bit.

[James Page]

The highlight? The fight at the docks, especially when the camera cuts away to a very very very wide shot. Excellent.

Two things annoy me about YOLT:

1) Q shows Bond all the buttons he needs to press on Little Nellie, then 2 minutes later, we have to sit through a boring set piece where, guess what, Bond presses said buttons to dispatch the bad guys. Left nothing to surprise at all. Very poor.

2) As soon as Bond gets to Japan we know what is going to happen, Connery looks as bored as he must have felt, and the whole thing falls down.

[Jim]

All true no doubt, but it was made for the big screen, and before the advent of (widely available) video recorders. Sod the plot, just look at it in wonder. Think what it must have been like sitting in the cinema watching it.

TV can only shrivel the spectacle, and we're left with the story, which is problematic.

And if there's a worse delivery of a line anywhere in a Bond film than "There must be a secret tunnel", please tell me. I know she was acting in a foreign language, but it still makes me die, inwardly.

[rafterman]

oddly enough it's based on my favorite of the novels...

[Jim]

Another thought; you might say that you're bored by Thunderball, especially the underwater bits.

But consider it in context; Broccoli and Saltzman wanted to show their audience something new, something colourful. it isn't just a background to an action scene, it's a visual novelty (at the time) and again, must have been a hell of a spectacle. We've all become jaundiced by the slam bang action movies of recent years to appreciate the travelogue elements of the early Bond films. Pre-package tours, opening up the world to a cinema audience. Remember too that Thunderball opened in December 1965. All that bright sunshine and deep blue oceans stuff...must have been great.

Frankly, the newer films can't hold a candle to the epics of yore. The last one to attempt it successfully was Moonraker. The last one to attempt it was Octopussy, with marginal success. Perhaps everywhere on earth has been filmed at some point or other.

Shame.

[Dr. Shatterhand]

Ah, the summer of 1967. I was seven myself and it was early July. The local cinema (before they became multiplexes) had wall to wall posters of YOLT. Large three sheet posters of Connery in his Little Nellie, hanging upside down inside the volcano, and relaxing with some Oriental babes while taking a hot bath.

The film, on a LARGE wide screen, was a visual treat. Please keep in mind for those who did not live back then. In the U.S., the Beatles were still together, Batman was a big TV show and spy shows were everywhere.

This film is pure 'eye candy'. It still is to this day. True it suffers in some effects and plot development but it is a far better film than TWINE. To put it bluntly, I would watch YOLT over any of the last three Bond films only because YOLT does not have that dreaded 'dark side' of Bond feeling that has permeated action films during the late 1980s and 90s. Personally, I like my action heroes stronger when it comes to their lovers dying. For example, I shudder every time I see Brosnan, after killing Dr. Kaufman, going back to give Paris one last kiss. You would never see Connery do something like that when Paula killed herself in Thunderball.

That is not to say I don't like GE, TND, and TWINE. And I like Brosnan in the role. But if I wanted to be entertained with a Bond film, than YOLT delivers.

[The Admiral]

It is a shame that YOLT wasn't based on the novel - a great shame. But the film was good. It has bad points to it, but it's not a film you can never watch and hate all the time.

We see the most memorable Blofeld's and the most memorable villain's leir's - a hollowed out Volcano!

[Jay]

I always had two big problems with YOLT. The first is where did Bond have the suction cups to climb down into the volcano (not to mention why he would have them in the first place) did he have them shoved up his ?

The second is why did Helga Brandt not kill Bond at the docks instead of going through this elaborate scheme of bailing out of the plane? I know it looks cool on screen but it felt like Eon was just trying to plan a cool stunt and had to cram it into the plot somehow! But besides that YOLT had its moments: The murder of the first Japanese girl whose name escapes me at the moment. The ninja scenes inside the lair and the best was the piranha devouring Brandt. Blofeld's line and delivery was great too after Brandt went under "Kill Bond, Now!!!"

[Turn]

You Only Live Twice has probably the most continuity problems of any Bond film. To add to Jay's points in the previous reply, here's one of my favorite weird things in YOLT. Bond is supposed to meet Henderson, but being this is a Bond film, he eventually ends up in the Osato building. While he's there, why not check out the safe? And out of his pocket he pulls out just the right gadget -- the mini safecracker. It's just like the suction cup thing. Does Bond read GQ for spies or something? Never know when the well-dressed man will need to scale artificial volcanoes or end up at corporation fronting a major terrorist outfit like SPECTRE.

Anyway, YOLT is a very mixed bag. Great gadgets, sets, music. On the downside, Connery is at his worst and it just feels weird. Critics at the time said the formula was becoming a bit tired. I gotta agree. But it is a Bond movie, so don't be too hard on it.

And to the "old guys" -- I didn't see this on first release, but caught the Thunderball-YOLT double feature about 1970 or 71 when I was 4 or 5. The things I remembered most were the music and when Bond kills the fake ninja. I thought the blood looked like ketchup.

[RossMan]

Alex (12 Feb, 2002 02:11 a.m.):
And by the way, Donald Pleasence does a wonderful job of Blofeld. Of course, you wouldn't expect him to get in a fight with James Bond, but then, to me, Blofeld doesn't seem like the kind of guy who would get into fistfights.

If they'd done an adaption of the book, we'd have gotten a great sword fight between Bond and Blofeld. Though they probably wouldn't have Bond killing him the same way, a tad violent. I wish they'd snuck that scene somewhere into the movies, it'd be really good especially after OHMSS.

I've mixed feelings about this movie. I enjoyed it but some parts are really boring. I really don't care for there being a gadget for whatever problem arises. The ending, the ninja raid on the volcano, was spectacular though, that's one of my fav. Bond moments.

[Alex]

YOLT is, actually, one of my favorite Connery films (along with FRWL and Thunderball), simply because to me, at least, it's the most suspenseful.

The first time I saw it, I was called away just as Bond was attempting to board the rocket (probably the most suspenseful part), and didn't finish seeing it for a long time afterwards. There were many things that I didn't see resolved in the film (Blofeld was still infinitely creepy because I hadn't seen him yet), and when I was finally able to see it to completion, I was hanging on the edge of my seat. The volcano was breathtaking (for its time), the threat of World War III addressed for the first time (in a Bond movie) made the stakes incredibly high, the music added immensely to the atmosphere, and the plot didn't seem too zany - there was no nutcase trying to blow up the world, and in the 60's, a third party (like China) trying to eliminate both the USA and the USSR didn't seem very far-fetched.

And by the way, Donald Pleasence does a wonderful job of Blofeld. Of course, you wouldn't expect him to get in a fight with James Bond, but then, to me, Blofeld doesn't seem like the kind of guy who would get into fistfights.

The only small problem I had with it was the ending - after the volcano was destroyed, the sub popped up right under Bond and Kissy. Since M obviously knew where the volcano was, and it was apparently very close to water, why not try to fire a torpedo at it? Surely he wasn't counting on Bond alone to stop World War III at the last second, was he?

[Rolex]

Dr. Shatterhand (21 Jan, 2002 01:50 p.m.):
Ah, the summer of 1967.  I was seven myself and it was early July.  The local cinema (before they became multiplexes) had wall to wall posters of YOLT.  Large three sheet posters of Connery in his Little Nellie, hanging upside down inside the volcano, and relaxing with some Oriental babes while taking a hot bath.

The film, on a LARGE wide screen, was a visual treat.  Please keep in mind for those who did not live back then.  In the U.S., the Beatles were still together, Batman was a big TV show and spy shows were everywhere.

This film is pure 'eye candy'.  It still is to this day.  True it suffers in some effects and plot development but it is a far better film than TWINE.  To put it bluntly, I would watch YOLT over any of the last three Bond films only because YOLT does not have that dreaded 'dark side' of Bond feeling that has permeated action films during the late 1980s and 90s.  Personally, I like my action heroes stronger when it comes to their lovers dying.  For example, I shudder every time I see Brosnan, after killing Dr. Kaufman, going back to give Paris one last kiss.  You would never see Connery do something like that when Paula killed herself in Thunderball.

That is not to say I don't like GE, TND, and TWINE.  And I like Brosnan in the role.  But if I wanted to be entertained with a Bond film, than YOLT delivers.

I totally agree with all your comments Shatterhand. I have noticed most of people who write regularly on this site are late teens to mid 20s; i doubt many have seen the Bond films of the 60s and 70s on the silver screen. It is a shame because their views would no doubt be different. YOLT is an epic Bond film, its huge compared to the rest of the Bond film with the exception of TSWLM.