63 replies to this topic

[Guy Haines]

This film introduced me to James Bond. I'm hardly likely to condemn it. It is one of my top five Bond films.

[The sniper was a woman]

sorry, I just had to say it, I love this film and George is the best Bond......Peter Hunt's direction is wonderful, the screenplay is great, everything works and Diana is the best Bond girl......anyone agree?

In second on my list. The score by The Master John Barry is divine. Personally I think Yul Brynner would have been a tremandous Blofeld.

[Skudor]

OHMSS is permanently in my top five - it's a timeliess classic that stands out as a unique installment in the franchise. And it's great despite Lazenby (who frankly isn't great, although he adds a decent physicality to it).

It is one Bond film that I will snap up as soon as its out on BR.

[sharpshooter]

And it's great despite Lazenby (who frankly isn't great, although he adds a decent physicality to it).

Agreed. If Lazenby is such an overbearing nuisance to some, all I ask is this: what do you think about the other aspects of the film? Even the biggest hater must admit they more than hold up their end of the bargain.

[The sniper was a woman]

what do you think about the other aspects of the film?

Well...It's a shame Lazenby was dubbed by George Baker when OO7 became Sir Hilary ! And allow me to say Catherine Deneuve would have been a good choice for Teresa...

"Will you marry me James ?"

[AMC Hornet]

OHMSS has its place in my top six favorites, which I cannot rank in any particular order. I like it partly because of George Lazenby, rather than in spite of him. I can identify with a man who got one shot at the title, was not widely accepted at the time (for that most heinous crime of not being Sean Connery) and who was subsequently not missed. Any of us, given the chance, would cling tenaciously to the role and put up with the less than stellar treatment Lazenby complained about.

I am not a director, acting coach or film critic, so I have no complaints about George's performance (or whatever other pundits want to call it). He had an incredibly tough act to follow, yet Peter Hunt successfully made his point: the Bond films could go on without Sean Connery. Connery's return, older and heavier and less satisfactory to some, made the transition to Roger Moore easier to make and accept.

Another element that sets OHMSS apart from almost every other entry in the series is that it actually tells a story - it's not just another action episode in the adventures of 007. Instead of just coming along and happening to the villain's plot, something happens to the protagonist that affects him. This was also attempted in LTK, GE and TWINE, but was not really accomplished until the reboot Casino Royale. That was truly a story about a man affected by his profession and the choices he has to make in order to achieve his objective. In this regard OHMSS runs a close second, with the others I mentioned trailing behind, as the personal elements seemed to have been written in to placate the lead actor.

BTW, I'm delighted at the way Daniel Craig's performance so far has renewed interest in - and quelled criticism of - George Lazenby and Timothy Dalton. There's nothing like an actor successfully shaking up a series with a new interpretation to make people recognize and appreciate those who'd attempted the same thing - in the face of stern opposition - in the past.

Good on yer, George. If you'd been a little more experienced going in (and a little less of an anti-establishment hippy) we would be comparing your performance in OHMSS to your work in DAF and possibly even LALD. How might that have turned out?

[dinovelvet]

Interesting points, AMC.

Laz's presence in OHMSS makes Bond a bit of an underdog again. If you look at Connery in TB and YOLT, he's just breezing through like nothing can touch him and he's already won. Laz makes Bond more "alive" than he had been lately.

[Biggy1954]

I like George Lazenby as Bond and rank him higher than Dalton and Brosnan. However, I still think OHMSS would have been the greatest of all Bond films if Connery had played Bond. I can imagine the Bond from Dr. No and From Russia With Love in OHMSS. Connery was always a great actor as evidenced from The Man Who Would Be King, The Untouchables, and Finding Forester. He could have easily pulled off a great performance in OHMSS.

I do think OHMSS, although flawed, is one of the most interesting Bond films. It is certainly more interesting than Goldfinger. Goldfinger is fun, but OHMSS is far more engaging, colorful, and full of life. I find Piz Gloria, the love story with Diana Rigg, the Swiss location, cinematography, and the action sequences to be far more fascinating than what we see in Goldfinger and most Bond movies.

Edited by Biggy1954, 12 January 2011 - 05:41 PM.

[Doctor Whom]

I like George Lazenby as Bond and rank him higher than Dalton and Brosnan. However, I still think OHMSS would have been the greatest of all Bond films if Connery had played Bond. I can imagine the Bond from Dr. No and From Russia With Love in OHMSS. Connery was always a great actor as evidenced from The Man Who Would Be King, The Untouchables, and Finding Forester. He could have easily pulled off a great performance in OHMSS.

I do think OHMSS, although flawed, is one of the most interesting Bond films. It is certainly more interesting than Goldfinger. Goldfinger is fun, but OHMSS is far more engaging, colorful, and full of life. I find Piz Gloria, the love story with Diana Rigg, the Swiss location, cinematography, and the action sequences to be far more fascinating than what we see in Goldfinger and most Bond movies.

I agree. OHMSS stands alone as the most unique entry in the entire series.

[Gothamite]

I like George Lazenby as Bond and rank him higher than Dalton and Brosnan. However, I still think OHMSS would have been the greatest of all Bond films if Connery had played Bond. I can imagine the Bond from Dr. No and From Russia With Love in OHMSS. Connery was always a great actor as evidenced from The Man Who Would Be King, The Untouchables, and Finding Forester. He could have easily pulled off a great performance in OHMSS.

I do think OHMSS, although flawed, is one of the most interesting Bond films. It is certainly more interesting than Goldfinger. Goldfinger is fun, but OHMSS is far more engaging, colorful, and full of life. I find Piz Gloria, the love story with Diana Rigg, the Swiss location, cinematography, and the action sequences to be far more fascinating than what we see in Goldfinger and most Bond movies.

OHMSS is hand-in-hand with CR as my favourite Bond film, but I certainly agree that it would have been an unabashed masterpiece if it had been made with Connery (provided he had the same enthusiasm he had for GF and TB). As effective as I believe Lazenby is (he's not particularly suave, but he is charming, charismatic and tough); watching his Bond almost feels like we're watching another character different to the one Connery played (in spite of the tireless efforts to make it seem like he's the same guy).

People go on about how Lazenby's upbeat, youthful Bond in this film was more effective than Connery's tired, ageing bulldog would have been. I argue that that was the whole point of the character by the time Fleming wrote this novel. He was broken down from the blunt instrument he had been before. He was tired and miserable and needed to fall in love. Getting to see the cocky badass of Goldfinger and Thunderball finally fall in love, only to lose it all would have been a treat. Whether or not Connery would have actually had the acting chops (or even the enthusiasm) required is just going to down as one of the great mysteries of cinema.

Nevertheless, OHMSS as it is, is a practically perfect film and I don't fault Lazenby's performance for one second. Bond's proposal and his heartbreaking final words about Tracy are amongst the finest in the entire series.

[O.H.M.S.S.]

Nr. 1 Bond film for me.

Nr. 10 in my all time movie favourites.

Says enough, doesn't it? And no I would not rank a film so high if I didn't think the lead actor did a brilliant job. So yeh, Laz is great.

[Sir James Moloney]

Just got the two disc ultimate edition. OHMSS is really a good film by itself. No other Bond film, except maybe FRWL, makes me want to read the books all over again. And George brings a new dimension to it, his physicality and swagger really sell his take on Bond. The way he handles the Gumbold affair is priceless and the courting scenes betweem him and Diana are reminiscent of the beach/venice scenes in CR, only, lets admit it, better - the Armstrong tune is unbeatable. One of my top5 Bond fims, definitely, along side FRWL, CR, TB and TLD.

Edited by Sir James Moloney, 20 January 2011 - 12:52 PM.

[RufusCobb]

I like George Lazenby as Bond and rank him higher than Dalton and Brosnan. However, I still think OHMSS would have been the greatest of all Bond films if Connery had played Bond. I can imagine the Bond from Dr. No and From Russia With Love in OHMSS. Connery was always a great actor as evidenced from The Man Who Would Be King, The Untouchables, and Finding Forester. He could have easily pulled off a great performance in OHMSS.

I'll agree with that. I always saw Bond settling down and getting married as the end of a cycle and it seemed a shame that we didn't get to share that end with the person we had followed for the rest of the journey. All the emotion of 'Hey Bond's getting married!' 'Oh no! she's been killed!' would have been much more deeply felt I think, if we saw it happen to the person we had embraced as James Bond. Sean could then have retired from the role and George/Roger could have come along and rebooted the character as a new Bond. It would have been a great film to end on.

As it was we got some new guy, who wasn't Sean Connery and couldn't act well, acting out one of the most important moments of Bond's life. (Please don't anyone bite back at that statement, you must understand that I am expressing my feelings as they were AT THAT TIME. I have since come to appreciate the film and George and they have combined to put it in my top 5 Bond movies.) Would still have been better with Sean in though.

[Doctor Whom]

sorry, I just had to say it, I love this film and George is the best Bond......Peter Hunt's direction is wonderful, the screenplay is great, everything works and Diana is the best Bond girl......anyone agree?

I really like this film. It’s directing, photography, editing, supporting cast and general mood are unique in the series. But I can’t consider it THE best because of George Lazenby. I’m sure he gave it his best, but he’s basically ineffective in the part and that’s a fatal flaw in a picture like this.

[Matt_13]

Before Casino Royale yes, it definitely was.

[Chief of SIS]

I think it's fantastic because there is nothing really to complain about. Though I must say nothing really blows my mind about the film. Everything presented is just all around good. I would have loved to see a few more risks taken in some places and if they did, maybe, just maybe, it would be the best Bond film.

Edited by Chief of SIS, 20 January 2011 - 03:59 PM.

[elizabeth]

sorry, I just had to say it, I love this film and George is the best Bond......Peter Hunt's direction is wonderful, the screenplay is great, everything works and Diana is the best Bond girl......anyone agree?

Agree. 100%.

[BoogieBond]

OHMSS is permanently in my top five - it's a timeliess classic that stands out as a unique installment in the franchise. And it's great despite Lazenby (who frankly isn't great, although he adds a decent physicality to it).

It is one Bond film that I will snap up as soon as its out on BR.

Agree with you here. Fantastic film and in my top 5. It has a few weaknesses, an actor with no previous acting experience as James Bond is one for me.
But the strengths easily outweigh them and are pretty damn good. The action scenes are still exciting, the supporting characters still great, it has an interesting plot, close to the Book and it has great locations.

[00Twelve]

I am rather fond of the film.

Would never have imagined.

Once I get some of that sweet tax return cash, I'm getting your book. Bet on it.

[jaguar007]

the courting scenes betweem him and Diana are reminiscent of the beach/venice scenes in CR,

I would say the beach.venice scenes in CR are reminiscent of George and Diana, not the other way around

But I can’t consider it THE best because of George Lazenby. I’m sure he gave it his best, but he’s basically ineffective in the part and that’s a fatal flaw in a picture like this.

Is that why you have Laz as your image and avitar?

OHMSS for me is not #1, but definitely top 5.

[TheREAL008]

I like the movie solely because it sticks closely to the novel. Other than that, it's a wonderful movie with a great atmosphere which could have possibly have been Sir Connery's swan song for his tenure if he had been alittle bit wiser.

[The-Other-Fella]

YES! I agree that "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" was indeed the best James Bond film. Can you imaging the courage it took for George Lazenby to persue such a daunting task like becoming the next James Bond actor after Sean Connery? He deserved the roll, and I am forever gratefull that he was the man selected. It would be an honor to meet Mr. Lazenby and shake his hand... even though he has stated that "... this has gone on for 40+ years, and is rediculous!" He is a good guy, and I can hardly wait for his book to be officially published.

[AViewToAPussy]

It can be very slow, this one. There are only so many shots of Hilary Bray in a kilt that one can take before dropping off to sleep. Unfortunately, not much happens until Bond's escape from the mountain. The speeded up fighting also annoys me.

[Dustin]

It can be very slow, this one. There are only so many shots of Hilary Bray in a kilt that one can take before dropping off to sleep. Unfortunately, not much happens until Bond's escape from the mountain. The speeded up fighting also annoys me.

Can't agree there. The plot follows the novel closely, but that's not a bad thing in my book. There's a tremendous atmosphere in the Portugal and Swizzerland scenes and a great arc of suspense. People who don't know the book are intrigued as to what Blofeld is up to and fascinated by the mountain scenery. Bond for the first time working under cover for a significant part of the film adds to the excitement and the entire setting is spectacular in itself. Frankly, to me there isn't a slow moment in the entire film.

There initially was a scene where a Blofeld agent listens in on Bond and Bray's meeting at the College of Arms. A chase across the London roofs follows, ending in a tube station. The entire sequence was planned to give a first glimpse of Blofeld's actions a bit earlier. I'd have loved to see that part too. But overall I'm happy with the film just as it is.

[Perry]

This is the best one.

[Bucky]

has anybody downloaded the hd version on itunes? been tempted to buy it myself to hold me over until the bluray release.

[MarkD]

Personally I think Yul Brynner would have been a tremandous Blofeld.

Brilliant suggestion!

[MarkD]

I think the last 45 minutes to an hr of OHMSS is magnificent stuff, from the time he escapes from Piz Gloria to the end credits. It also has one of if not the best scores in Bond film.


Unfortunately I think the first hour is very static and drags unmercifully, mostly because it's drama and not action based and George Lazenby is just not an actor capable of holding center stage and supporting that drama. He's far more at home with his fists (and I could do without that speeded up motion, I know heresy) than with dialogue. He has very limited facial and vocal expressions. Not for a moment do I believe Bond is actually in love with Tracy b/c GL's range is so limited. Yes he has one good moment at the end of the film but a good moment does not a performance make.

Compare and contrast to the talented and luminescent Diana Rigg, her face first masked by pain later glows with love. But in many scenes it's almost as if she's acting alone. GL may have been game and willing but he wasn't skilled enough for this film. He'd have been better of in a more action intensive Bond, at least for his first few films. The pacing and the dramatic impetus of the film just isn't condusive to his limited skill as an actor.

And the film grinds to a halt for 1/2 an hr when he's being dubbed as Sir Hillary Bray. (exceddingly cheesy concept) Not to mention Bond's "great love" looks decidely less great when he's making it with the allergy chics and he's doesn't exactly look like he's just closing his eyes and doing it for Queen and Country.

Thats' why for me OHMMS while a great idea, with many great elements is more promise than execution. But that last action packed hour is as I said magnificent stuff.

MBE

A good critique, one with which I agree. It's a great story, and could have done with a stronger and more convincing Bond - however when I watched it recently I was with Lazenby, rather than expecting of him, and he just about held up.

What really lets the movie down, as you say, are the speeded-up fight scenes and the scenes with George Baker dubbing. Neither make any sense, and worse, take away from the movie. Compare to the fight scene in the train in FRWL or in the air base jail in TLD - it's slow, as a struggle between evenly matched adversaries should be.

A great finale to the film though, and what a change in pace from what had gone before. A candidate for a re-make?

[00 Brosnan]

I watched OHMSS again just a couple days ago and my view really hasn't changed. The story is great, the locations are absolutely beautiful, the film has some pretty good action sequences, and there are hotties present throughout most of the story. The only elements the film suffers from in my opinion are the villain, Lazenby, and the pacing is a little slow and uneven.

There just wasn't anything I found particularly menacing, evil, or interesting about this incarnation of Blofeld (I say the same thing about the DAF/Charles Gray version). His plan was good, but the man himself lacked the fear and mysterious evil of earlier versions. Lazenby is decent in the role, but he was no Connery. Of course, it was his first..and only film so we'll never know if he would have found his groove eventually.

Everything said it's one of the better Bond films, but it could have been so much better with Connery. That is the films biggest downfall in my opinion b/c Lazenby just lacks the same kind of presence that Connery had.

EDIT: Wanted to add that the score is wonderful.

Edited by 00 Brosnan, 22 May 2011 - 04:54 AM.

[The Shark]

There just wasn't anything I found particularly menacing, evil, or interesting about this incarnation of Blofeld (I say the same thing about the DAF/Charles Gray version). His plan was good, but the man himself lacked the fear and mysterious evil of earlier versions.

What was mysterious or evil about Donald Pleasence's comedy dwarf?

What I find sinister about Sevalas's Blofeld, is how utterly convicted his performance is. His supreme snobbery, his athleticism, his wit, his psychopathy. It all makes him a eerily convincing, yet oddly likeable villain.

Lazenby just lacks the same kind of presence that Connery had.

Of course he does, and so do all the other Bond actors. But even then, he's still pretty damn good. His performance actually gets improves as the films moves on. Thank a well planned shooting schedule for that.