77 replies to this topic

[FlemingBond]

I don't feel the end of OHMSS feels tacked on at all. Not in the slightest.
As for Bond sleeping with other women in the film. It does feel a bit strange. I think someone brought up what would Tracy's father think of it? Well , probably not much. Men like Draco have mistresses, so that's not really suprising to him. After all, this is a man who said to a prospective son in law , "she needs a man to dominate her. a man like you." Even though most of us have a more romantic, modern view of marriage, it's probably unlikely James Bond would have been totally faithful to a wife.

[Bondian]

They’ve been stuck up on a mountaintop for god knows how long, and they’re horny.

Figures why John Barry used Alpine Horns in the score.

[HildebrandRarity]

As for Bond sleeping with other women in the film. It does feel a bit strange. I think someone brought up what would Tracy's father think of it? Well , probably not much.

I never brought up what Draco would think of it. I asked a hypothetical question of everyone here what *they* would think of it if they had a daughter.

But who cares anyway. People's positions are entrenched.

[DR76]

I think QoS is better than OHMSS. OHMSS was my favourite Bond film for decades (I'm old enough to have seen it in cinemas on its initial release), then CR came along and pipped it. As I think QoS is at least as good as CR, that means that OHMSS has slipped to third in my rankings, with CR and QoS battling it out for top slot. At the moment, I'm minded to put QoS just ahead of CR.

I don't think I agree. I feel that QoS is the inferior of the three films. One, there seemed to be a great deal going on in the story, but the movie's pacing made it nearly impossible for me to fully enjoy it. And MI-6's discovery of Yusef seemed rushed to me. I suspect that Greene may have told Bond about him . . . but Forster or the screenplay never bothered to show or even hint this. Perhaps they wanted to surprise the audience, but it just didn't work for me.

I never brought up what Draco would think of it. I asked a hypothetical question of everyone here what *they* would think of it if they had a daughter.

But who cares anyway. People's positions are entrenched.

From "OHMSS":


DRACO: "Such things should be left to a girl´s
father, who knows what is best for her."



TRACY: "But what can be better than being in love?"



DRACO: "Mr Bond, he´s... he´s in love with you?"



TRACY: "That may come too... some day."



DRACO: "Life´s too short for ´´some day´´, Teresa."


Judging from the above conversation, I suspect that both Tracy and Draco believed that Bond was not in love with her . . . and that he was merely squiring Tracy to fulfill a deal between himself and Draco for information on Blofeld.

Edited by DR76, 10 December 2008 - 05:29 PM.

[HildebrandRarity]

I think QoS is better than OHMSS. OHMSS was my favourite Bond film for decades (I'm old enough to have seen it in cinemas on its initial release), then CR came along and pipped it. As I think QoS is at least as good as CR, that means that OHMSS has slipped to third in my rankings, with CR and QoS battling it out for top slot. At the moment, I'm minded to put QoS just ahead of CR.

I don't think I agree. I feel that QoS is the inferior of the three films. One, there seemed to be a great deal going on in the story, but the movie's pacing made it nearly impossible for me to fully enjoy it. And MI-6's discovery of Yusef seemed rushed to me. I suspect that Greene may have told Bond about him . . . but Forster or the screenplay never bothered to show or even hint this. Perhaps they wanted to surprise the audience, but it just didn't work for me.

I never brought up what Draco would think of it. I asked a hypothetical question of everyone here what *they* would think of it if they had a daughter.

But who cares anyway. People's positions are entrenched.

From "OHMSS":


DRACO: "Such things should be left to a girl´s
father, who knows what is best for her."



TRACY: "But what can be better than being in love?"



DRACO: "Mr Bond, he´s... he´s in love with you?"



TRACY: "That may come too... some day."



DRACO: "Life´s too short for ´´some day´´, Teresa."


Judging from the above conversation, I suspect that both Tracy and Draco believed that Bond was not in love with her . . . and that he was merely squiring Tracy to fulfill a deal between himself and Draco for information on Blofeld.

So what are you trying to say? Are you agreeing with me that the story told by Hunt of Bond 'falling in love' and asking Tracy to marry him is either a conceit or not told convincingly enough?

Are you suggesting that Bond's not really in love and when Tracy gets the bullet after the wedding, LazenbyBond might actually even be relieved...that he can go on with life given he has a bachelor's taste for freedom?

As i've become older, the thought has periodically crossed my mind that LazenbyBond might actually be relieved that he's a widower. Perhaps it's because he was a poor actor, an unconvincing one.

[DR76]

So what are you trying to say? Are you agreeing with me that the story told by Hunt of Bond 'falling in love' and asking Tracy to marry him is either a conceit or not told convincingly enough?

Are you suggesting that Bond's not really in love and when Tracy gets the bullet after the wedding, LazenbyBond might actually even be relieved...that he can go on with life given he has a bachelor's taste for freedom?

As i've become older, the thought has periodically crossed my mind that LazenbyBond might actually be relieved that he's a widower. Perhaps it's because he was a poor actor, an unconvincing one.

No. I'm trying to convey that I can't see Draco getting hot and bothered over Bond sleeping with Ruby or any other patient at Piz Gloria, because he didn't believe that Bond was in love with Tracy in the first place.


The more I see OHMSS, the more I'm convinced that Lazenby was a better actor than many believe.

Edited by DR76, 10 December 2008 - 06:26 PM.

[Revelator]

I get what your saying. But I think you're putting more into it than is there. I think he was just doing his job and being Bond to find out what he could by using the girls, which is one of his talents.

Part of the problem is that in the novel Bond beds only Ruby and doesn't feel particularly good about doing so, especially when she asks if he loves her just a little. It leaves a bad flavor in his mouth, and when Bond proposes to Tracy it's partly because he's sick of untidy love affairs that leave him with a bad conscience--as in Ruby's case.
The film changes things quite a bit by having Bond go through several girls and not manifest much guilt. But these changes are not fatal: movie Bond is more of a hound than book Bond, and having him indulge himself with the girls is pretty much in character. Bond isn't even engaged to Tracy at this point, and I don't think he'd feel he was really doing anything wrong. It doesn't vitiate his feelings for Tracy, who he genuinely cares about, and, unlike those girls, views as more than a quick lay.

...It all turned when he ran into Tracy in the village after his escape. She not only shows up in the nick of time, but shows bravery in helping him escape SPECTRE.

Yes, Bond realizes how much of a "good girl" she is after she shows her full mettle and demonstrates that her affection for him has cured her. This is when he realizes he wouldn't mind spending his life with this woman.

But the film itself doesn't lay a strong enough foundation for it, largely because it's such a jovial, silly film in many respects.

You make it sound as if it was Moonraker. OHMSS is fine even with the humorous touches, which help to vary the mood and offset the more serious bits.

As a result the ending just feels kind of detached from the film we've been watching. It doesn't feel necessary (I'm not sure that's the right word, but it gets the idea across) like it does in Fleming's novel.

The movie is considerably superior to Fleming's novel in almost every respect. The ending feels quite valid considering that the filmmakers developed the romance more than Fleming by adding the pivotal scene at the bull-fight, where Bond is forced to prove his affection for Tracy, and by switching the barn scene for Fleming's airport scene and lengthening it beyond the original. And by fully integrating Tracy into the Blofeld plot, by having her get captured, they indicate the dangers that await her in Bond's world. All of this helps to better prepare for the tragedy at the end of the film, and creates a better love story than the original, where Tracy's character became rather flat after she was cured.

As i've become older, the thought has periodically crossed my mind that LazenbyBond might actually be relieved that he's a widower. Perhaps it's because he was a poor actor, an unconvincing one.

So much for wisdom arriving with age. Lazenby's acting is occasionally stiff, but not much more so than Brosnan's in GoldenEye. And Lazenby was at his best in the final scene, where he managed to neither over or underplay the drama. His voice is held at precisely the right sort of dazed, shellshocked tone, his face is shaken, and he even gives off a subtle, muffled sob at the very end, when he bends over Tracy's face. I fail to see how any other Bond would have improved on it or what they would have done to do so.

[Harmsway]

But the film itself doesn't lay a strong enough foundation for it, largely because it's such a jovial, silly film in many respects.

You make it sound as if it was Moonraker.

For all the talk about ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE being a more down-to-earth Bond flick, it's remarkably silly and camp. Not to the MOONRAKER extent, but it's still there. Bond's as much of a swinging, silly superhero as ever, dropping daft one-liners all over the place. It doesn't help that there are a number of moments in the Piz Gloria section of the film where one feels like they could be watching IN LIKE FLINT.

Heck, ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE has an opening that opens with radioactive lint and closes with Bond breaking the fourth wall.

The movie is considerably superior to Fleming's novel in almost every respect. The ending feels quite valid considering that the filmmakers developed the romance more than Fleming by adding the pivotal scene at the bull-fight, where Bond is forced to prove his affection for Tracy, and by switching the barn scene for Fleming's airport scene and lengthening it beyond the original. And by fully integrating Tracy into the Blofeld plot, by having her get captured, they indicate the dangers that await her in Bond's world. All of this helps to better prepare for the tragedy at the end of the film, and creates a better love story than the original, where Tracy's character became rather flat after she was cured.

Those things are all generally good adaptive choices, especially as to how they integrate Tracy into the finale, but they don't change the fact that ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE has a sillier tone than most of the Connery flicks that preceded it, or the fact that the relationship is never taken dramatically enough to merit such a shockingly dark ending.

And while Fleming's ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE isn't perfect (for example, I think Diana Rigg's Tracy is a vast improvement on the character in the novel), it benefits from having Bond's inner monologue and an overall deeper understanding of the character relationships. The film fails to compensate for the lack of this, and thus Tracy and Bond's romantic relationship feels touching, but also somewhat light, merely flirting with some of the dramatic aspects, and that's its mistake. To justify such a bitter, dramatic ending, you need to have the relationship have a more dramatic, deeper edge throughout.

That said, I feel like I'm being too negative. I do think ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE is, on the whole, terrific stuff. But I feel like I can love it while being honest about its problems.

[Revelator]

For all the talk about ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE being a more down-to-earth Bond flick, it's remarkably silly and camp...Bond's as much of a swinging, silly superhero as ever, dropping daft one-liners all over the place. It doesn't help that there are a number of moments in the Piz Gloria section of the film where one feels like they could be watching IN LIKE FLINT.

The film has a slightly campy section, but that does not make it overall camp. Bond's oneliners don't bother me too much and seem mostly appropriate. (The guts line is wonderful black humor.) That leaves the girls in Piz Gloria. The situation was already slightly silly in the novel, whereas the movie has Bond indulge in serial bedhopping, which, as earlier noted, is done to align him with what we'd expect of movie-version Bond. Aside from this element, OHMSS on the whole is mostly down to earth. There are no aston martins with ejector seats or other magnificent gadgets that come in very handy when Bond needs them, no mad doctors with fake hands falling into nuclear reactors, no volcano sets or rockets, no Spectre board meetings, etc. What fantastic elements the film does have tend to be downplayed, such as the infertility virus, while the bed-hopping is confined to the Piz Gloria sequence. The rest of the film--Bond and Tracy's courtship, the casino scene, Drako's explanation, both ski chases, Bond and Tracy's meeting, the barn scene, the Piz Gloria battle (which is less bombastic than similar scenes in TB and YOLT), and the wedding, are mostly played straight, with any humor saved for end-of-sequence relief (such as the St. Bernard at the end of the bob-chase scene. A good thriller alternates tense sequences with light-hearted tags, and OHMSS does this quite well.

Heck, ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE has an opening that opens with radioactive lint and closes with Bond breaking the fourth wall.

But those are less goofy than satirical, meant to acknowledge to the viewer that even the filmmakers cannot deny this will be a different sort of Bond film. Those are self-reflexive touches rather than purely comic ones.

And while Fleming's ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE isn't perfect (for example, I think Diana Rigg's Tracy is a vast improvement on the character in the novel), it benefits from having Bond's inner monologue and an overall deeper understanding of the character relationships.

Most of the important elements of Bond's inner monologue were spoken out loud during the barn scene, which was considerable improvement over the novel's airport scene. And I think the filmmakers had a better understanding of the character relationships than Fleming ever did. This comes through strongly in the bullfight scene, which forces Bond to prove his interest in Tracy. The barn scene also recasts the engagement scene as more of a dialogue between two people planning their lives together, rather than the Bond-centered scene from the novel. There's little of emotional worth from the novel that wasn't retained in the film, except for the scene of Tracy telling Bond he's a "goddamn lousy lover," which I admittedly do miss. Perhaps they can use that line in one of Craig's films.

To justify such a bitter, dramatic ending, you need to have the relationship have a more dramatic, deeper edge throughout.

I don't think so. It's only a "bitter" ending in the sense of giving the audience what it ultimately wants. The logic of the Bond films dictates that Bond cannot be married, and so Tracy has to die, and the scene plays off the regret of the audience at this necessity. This is the final self-reflexive element of the movie. What is required for the ending to carry emotional weight is for us to see Bond happy and to like Tracy and feel that she's right for him. The film accomplishes this. I really do not know how the relationship could have more of a "dramatic, deeper edge." This is an unstable woman Bond has rescued from suicide, and who's gunned down before she can enjoy her second chance at life, and the film does a thorough job of suggesting this, just as Lazenby's performance in the final scenes shows how much she had meant to him, and that her sudden death is more than he can process.

Just for the fun of it, here's Fleming talking about Tracy, and why she had to go:

Last year -- in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service -- I finally became annoyed with your disposal of a heroine I liked. Bond actually married her, then pffht -- she was dead. How important is his bachelorhood?

Fleming: Well, James Bond couldn’t really be married. I can’t have him settling down. His wife would be irritated with his constantly going abroad, she’d want to change his way of life and all his friends, and Bond would worry about the measles epidemic back home and his own faithfulness and -- no, it can’t be done.
This same problem faced Raymond Chandler. In the last book he started to write, just before he died, he was going to have Marlowe marry a French countess. Well, he was very amusing when he told me about this, about how it really would be the end of Marlowe because she’d change all his habits and friends, he’d take to the bottle, and between her wealth and his faults the personality of Marlowe would be quashed. So in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service I took the easy way out. Tracy is no more.

[Harmsway]

(The guts line is wonderful black humor.)

It's one of the worst one-liners in Bond film history, IMO. Terrible in concept and especially terrible in delivery (Lazenby's delivery of humor is consistently dorky). In fact, there are very few one-liners in ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE that are of any value at all.

The situation was already slightly silly in the novel, whereas the movie has Bond indulge in serial bedhopping, which, as earlier noted, is done to align him with what we'd expect of movie-version Bond.

And that was a mistake. ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE tries to do a more serious romance with the superhero Bond, and frankly, it just doesn't fit too well. Like many films in the franchise, ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE finds itself awkwardly trying to do more of a serious thriller and then deliver on the previously-established audience demands for the EON Bond. They're not particularly compatible.

I daresay that Bond needed to be more human than he's presented here (the little bits of development presented throughout don't do much to assuage the cartoonish feel of the character), and that the film needed to be significantly less lighthearted. Heck, until its ending ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE feels more jovial and jaunty than DR. NO, FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, and even THUNDERBALL, when it should feel more weighty than any of those.

But those are less goofy than satirical, meant to acknowledge to the viewer that even the filmmakers cannot deny this will be a different sort of Bond film. Those are self-reflexive touches rather than purely comic ones.

Eh, that only applies to the breaking of the fourth wall. Such nonsense like the radioactive lint is just silly pap (same goes for Bond's knowledge of lepidoptery later on in the film).

I really do not know how the relationship could have more of a "dramatic, deeper edge." This is an unstable woman Bond has rescued from suicide, and who's gunned down before she can enjoy her second chance at life, and the film does a thorough job of suggesting this, just as Lazenby's performance in the final scenes shows how much she had meant to him, and that her sudden death is more than he can process.

I don't think the film does a good job dealing with Tracy as a suicidal individual with real problems (it's talked about in the first part of the film, but never with the necessary weight, and it's soon forgotten afterwards).

Again, this has to do with the more jovial approach to tackling these problems, when ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE ultimately required a tone more resembling what we've gotten in the past two Craig outings. I think the ending works in Fleming just because Fleming's novel is so much more straight-faced, not jumping into silly gags and camp, and having that darker, "thriller" feel. The ending has a consistency of tone.

It's only a "bitter" ending in the sense of giving the audience what it ultimately wants.

I think it's a cruel, nasty, punch-in-the-gut ending. I don't think it gives the audience what they want. I daresay the audience would have been much more satisfied had the film closed with Bond and Tracy driven off from their wedding. Every time I've shown it to someone who doesn't know the ending is coming has walked away somewhat angry, and I don't blame 'em.

The film has been a jovial, frivolous, silly, fun ride so far, and then it smacks them in the face with that ending. It's a nasty trick.

[doublenoughtspy]

The film has been a jovial, frivolous, silly, fun ride so far, and then it smacks them in the face with that ending. It's a nasty trick.

As opposed to the ultra realistic YOLT, and "gritty" DAF?

OHMSS might have some silly moments, but it's monumentally more serious than its predecessor and successor.

[Harmsway]

As opposed to the ultra realistic YOLT, and "gritty" DAF?

No, as opposed to, say, DR. NO, FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE or THUNDERBALL, which I mentioned in my post. Do try to actually read my posts before commenting on them.

OHMSS might have some silly moments, but it's monumentally more serious than its predecessor and successor.

But that's irrelevant, and fails to address much of anything I'm talking about. ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE's success does not depend on how it compares to its predecessor and successor. My point is that ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE is too lightweight for its ending, regardless of how it compares to its immediate context.

The comparison between films is simply there to emphasize how wrong the tone really is for its ending. ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE is more jovial, jaunty flick than the majority of films that precede it. That's absolutely backwards. To keep Fleming's ending, ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE needed to be a more straight-faced flick than any of the films that preceded it.

[Loomis]

Eh, it's not that lightweight. And I don't think a more, erm, heavyweight flick would have been any more entertaining or deep or whatever. It's not as though OHMSS plumbs the depths of Austin Powersish lunacy to be found in, say, MOONRAKER or DIE ANOTHER DAY.

[Santa]

I don't really see the problem. Sex and love are not the same thing. Ruby is sex, Tracy is love. End of.

[Harmsway]

Eh, it's not that lightweight.

Again, in the scheme of things it isn't. It's not MOONRAKER, and I don't mean to make it sound like it is. But my argument is that to earn that ending, the film needed a much more straight-faced tone. That ending demands Fleming's tone, rather than the silly, jovial tone we got.

And I don't think a more, erm, heavyweight flick would have been any more entertaining or deep or whatever.

I do, in the sense that I think the ending would "fit," and probably be more emotionally involving, to boot. With the current film we have, I think Tracy's death would have been best left out of the flick, allowing it to be the generally well-crafted piece of entertainment it is, without that drag of an ending.

And I recognize I'm being pretty negative, so I want to clarify yet again that I love ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE.

[Loomis]

With the current film we have, I think Tracy's death would have been best left out of the flick, allowing it to be the generally well-crafted piece of entertainment it is, without that drag of an ending.

With her death, presumably, opening the next film?

[dee-bee-five]

For my money, the two most perfect endings in the series - ones which have been earned, are emotionally satisfying and are just right - are OHMSS and QoS. End of.

[doublenoughtspy]

I'm still confused. You would honestly put OHMSS in the same column as DAF / Moonraker / Octopussy / etc. as in the "humorous silly Bond film" category?

How on earth can you describe Thunderball, where Bond fights a man in drag, zooms around in a jet pack, shoots men with a giant squirt gun, has a dog peeing right on screen, has the sex act represented by bubbles, etc. etc. as serious?

Is Lazenby a jovial Bond for most of OHMSS? I would say so yes. But to me, that makes the ending that much more tragic. Had there been a somber, serious, depressed Bond throughout OHMSS, it would have been "woe is me. She died. My life continues to suck..."

[Harmsway]

With the current film we have, I think Tracy's death would have been best left out of the flick, allowing it to be the generally well-crafted piece of entertainment it is, without that drag of an ending.

With her death, presumably, opening the next film?

Precisely.

For my money, the two most perfect endings in the series - ones which have been earned, are emotionally satisfying and are just right - are OHMSS and QoS. End of.

I'd suggest CASINO ROYALE has a more satisfying finale than either.

You would honestly put OHMSS in the same column as DAF / Moonraker / Octopussy / etc. as in the "humorous silly Bond film" category?

I've actually said quite the opposite in previous posts:

It's not MOONRAKER, and I don't mean to make it sound like it is. But my argument is that to earn that ending, the film needed a much more straight-faced tone. That ending demands Fleming's tone, rather than the silly, jovial tone we got.

Now, to further nuance all this:

There are very few Bond films that don't fall, in some sense, in the "humorous, silly Bond film" category. Most Bond films have been quite comedic, with only a few exceptions, and even the ones often claimed as "serious" have generally had a serious humor component.

ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE falls on that spectrum. No, it's not in the league of a campfest like MOONRAKER or DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER or THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, and it would be ridiculous to put it there, but it's hardly up there with the more straight-faced CASINO ROYALE or QUANTUM OF SOLACE, either.

How on earth can you describe Thunderball, where Bond fights a man in drag, zooms around in a jet pack, shoots men with a giant squirt gun, has a dog peeing right on screen, has the sex act represented by bubbles, etc. etc. as serious?

I didn't say THUNDERBALL was serious, in and of itself, just that it was tonally more serious than ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE (though not by any major degree). Yes, THUNDERBALL has punctuated moments of silly content, but on the whole, it plays things with more of a straight face than ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE.

[dee-bee-five]

Thunderball more serious in tone than OHMSS? Hmmmm, not the versions on my shelf, I have to say...

[doublenoughtspy]

Yes, I'd like to see this serious version of Thunderball myself...

[dee-bee-five]

For my money, the two most perfect endings in the series - ones which have been earned, are emotionally satisfying and are just right - are OHMSS and QoS. End of.

I'd suggest CASINO ROYALE has a more satisfying finale than either.

It's a good ending, there's no doubt. But, for me, it doesn't come close to the endings of both OHMSS and QoS; they are perfectly written, perfectly acted and much more emotionally satisfying.

[Harmsway]

Thunderball more serious in tone than OHMSS? Hmmmm, not the versions on my shelf, I have to say...

Well, you'll be hard pressed to convince me that THUNDERBALL isn't more serious in tone. For all of the silly moments in THUNDERBALL - and there are more than a few - it never quite dips into the campy tone that ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE indulges in. You don't see Q talking about radioactive lint, Bond breaking the fourth wall, Bond in a kilt in IN LIKE FLINT mode in Piz Gloria, nor do you see Bond showcasing an intimate knowledge of lepidoptery, or throwing a knife and almost hitting the date on the calendar, etc. and so on.

But, for me, it doesn't come close to the endings of both OHMSS and QoS; they are perfectly written, perfectly acted and much more emotionally satisfying.

I don't quite agree. I've already commented on OHMSS' ending, so I won't touch that (but I will say that as a scene, in and of itself, it is pretty much perfect, aside from the awful swap over to the Bond theme that follows).

But QUANTUM OF SOLACE? It's a very, very good ending, but lacks a sense of iconicism. It's furthermore marred by carrying one too many echoes of THE BOURNE SUPREMACY, and it makes the unfortunately move of stooping to include the "I need you back" line (a line we've seen in countless action flick franchises before). Excellent last shot though.

I think CASINO ROYALE tops both of 'em. I think it's more iconic, and is "perfectly written, perfectly acted" and perfectly satisfying given the film that precedes it. I daresay there's no more satisfying scene in the entire franchise.

[dee-bee-five]

Thunderball more serious in tone than OHMSS? Hmmmm, not the versions on my shelf, I have to say...

Well, you'll be hard pressed to convince me that THUNDERBALL isn't more serious in tone. For all of the silly moments in THUNDERBALL - and there are more than a few - it never quite dips into the campy tone that ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE indulges in. You don't see Q talking about radioactive lint, Bond breaking the fourth wall, Bond in a kilt in IN LIKE FLINT mode in Piz Gloria, nor do you see Bond showcasing an intimate knowledge of lepidoptery, or throwing a knife and almost hitting the date on the calendar, etc. and so on.

Well, with respect, I think I might be more tuned in to camp more than most on CBn and if there's one thing OHMSS isn't, it's camp.

As for comparing the endings, it's all subjective. OHMSS, CR and QoS are my three favourite Bond movies. In terms of endings, I would put OHMSS and QoS the two best with CR just behind.

[doublenoughtspy]

Well, you'll be hard pressed to convince me that THUNDERBALL isn't more serious in tone. For all of the silly moments in THUNDERBALL - and there are more than a few - it never quite dips into the campy tone that ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE indulges in. You don't see Q talking about radioactive lint, Bond breaking the fourth wall, Bond in a kilt in IN LIKE FLINT mode in Piz Gloria, nor do you see Bond showcasing an intimate knowledge of lepidoptery, or throwing a knife and almost hitting the date on the calendar, etc. and so on.

Did you notice how M pushes away the lint dismissively?

In the novel, Bond is among the girls "In Like Flint" style, although not in a kilt.

The knife scene is straight from the novel as well, Chapter 4:

Bond rose to his full height. He smiled back. He couldn't help it. The man had such a delightful face, so lit with humour and mischief and magnetism that, at least in the man's present role, Bond could no more have killed him than he could have killed, well, Tracy. There was a calendar hanging on the wall beside the man. Bond wanted to let off steam against something, anything. He said,' September the sixteenth,' and jerked his right hand forward with the underhand throw. The knife flashed across the room, missed the man by about a yard, and stuck, quivering, half-way down the page of the calendar.The man turned and looked inquisitively at the calendar. He laughed out loud. 'Actually the fifteenth. But quite respectable.'


I know we won't convince the other which is more serious, but I bet if you had 100, 1000 people or whatever sampling you want, had them watch the two films and ask them which was the more serious film, a large majority would choose OHMSS.

[Major Tallon]

Just to comment on a couple of Harmsway's points about the PTS, neither the radioactive lint nor "This never happened to the other fella" transformed the film into a silly one. The filmmakers, rightly in my view, felt that they needed to mark the transition from Connery to Lazenby. Casual filmgoers expected Connery. In one of my early viewings, Lazenby's announcement that he was "Bond, James Bond" was met by an audible audience response, "No, he isn't." Remember, Lazenby was unknown and unexpected in a lot of places, and Connery's absence needed to be accounted for. "This never happened to the other fella" was a quick line, a little nod to the changed casting that had occurred. In fact, it was a clever way of acknowledging that the big Scottish guy was gone. It was delivered at the start of the film so as not to disrupt its narrative flow, and if it reminded the audience that they were watching a movie, the impact of OHMSS was none the worse for it.

As to the radioactive lint, it was ridiculous, intended as such, and understood as such. When M waved it impatiently aside, so did the audience. Again, it was right at the start of the film and represented a literal casting away of the silly trappings with which the Bond films were beginning to surround themselves. There was never an audience expectation that the lint was going to reappear and be the means whereby James Bond saved the world. For that, we were going to have to rely on Bond, his resourcefulness, and his courage. In numerous viewings of OHMSS, in theaters and at home, I never had any doubt on that score.

[Harmsway]

Well, with respect, I think I might be more tuned in to camp more than most on CBn and if there's one thing OHMSS isn't, it's camp.

I don't know how else you'd describe the tongue-in-cheek, IN LIKE FLINT-style Piz Gloria nonsense (made complete with the arousal gag in Barry's score).

Did you notice how M pushes away the lint dismissively?

Sure, but it's still silly. If we saw that kind of thing in a Craig Bond film there'd be uproar.

In the novel, Bond is among the girls "In Like Flint" style, although not in a kilt.

It's not written the same way it plays in the movie, if I recall.

The knife scene is straight from the novel as well, Chapter 4:

Bond rose to his full height. He smiled back. He couldn't help it. The man had such a delightful face, so lit with humour and mischief and magnetism that, at least in the man's present role, Bond could no more have killed him than he could have killed, well, Tracy. There was a calendar hanging on the wall beside the man. Bond wanted to let off steam against something, anything. He said,' September the sixteenth,' and jerked his right hand forward with the underhand throw. The knife flashed across the room, missed the man by about a yard, and stuck, quivering, half-way down the page of the calendar.The man turned and looked inquisitively at the calendar. He laughed out loud. 'Actually the fifteenth. But quite respectable.'

I'd forgotten. It reads better than it plays in the film, though.

The filmmakers, rightly in my view, felt that they needed to mark the transition from Connery to Lazenby.

Maybe so, but breaking the fourth was a terrible way to do it.

[Safari Suit]

Did you notice how M pushes away the lint dismissively?

Sure, but it's still silly. If we saw that kind of thing in a Craig Bond film there'd be uproar.

Really? Blimey, doesn't take much does it?

[Loomis]

With the current film we have, I think Tracy's death would have been best left out of the flick, allowing it to be the generally well-crafted piece of entertainment it is, without that drag of an ending.

With her death, presumably, opening the next film?

Precisely.

Well, I don't like the idea of that. Surely it would have been a huge blow against the film's (generally impressive) fidelity to Fleming?

And the whole point about OHMSS is not that Bond marries Tracy, but that she dies.

Given that Laz had already publicly left the Bond role before OHMSS premiered (unless I'm mistaken), DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER (or BOND 7) would have had to open with John Gavin or Sean Connery or someone replacing Laz for the PTS in which Tracy got killed. Most awkward.

Either that, or Bond would have remained a married man in the one-film Laz alternate universe. Again, most awkward.

Basically, I think Eon got it absolutely right with the ending that they went with for OHMSS. (And I don't see how the Bourneish and cliche-tastic conclusion of QUANTUM OF SOLACE, with M even resorting to the same "We need you back" line that's been in everything from COMMANDO to MERCENARIES: DEATH WARRIOR IV*.... I don't see how the ending of QoS even remotely rivals it, to be honest.)

I think your idea for Tracy's death to be carried over to the PTS of the next flick is as revisionist, as crazy and as Tamahori-esque as anything I've ever suggested on CBn! But even I cannot accept it.

But this does prompt a question, which I'd be grateful if doublenoughtspy or someone could answer:

Was there ever any serious consideration of using a different ending for OHMSS? For example, Bond and Tracy not actually get hitched, Bond pursuing Blofeld and Bunt after Tracy's death and getting his revenge before the closing credits? Or something else?

*Not an actual film - at least, not as far as I'm aware - but you know the kind of DTV dreck I'm going on about.

[Major Tallon]

With the current film we have, I think Tracy's death would have been best left out of the flick, allowing it to be the generally well-crafted piece of entertainment it is, without that drag of an ending.

With her death, presumably, opening the next film?

Precisely.

Well, I don't like the idea of that. Surely it would have been a huge blow against the film's (generally impressive) fidelity to Fleming?

And the whole point about OHMSS is not that Bond marries Tracy, but that she dies.

Given that Laz had already publicly left the Bond role before OHMSS premiered (unless I'm mistaken), DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER (or BOND 7) would have had to open with John Gavin or Sean Connery or someone replacing Laz for the PTS in which Tracy got killed. Most awkward.

Either that, or Bond would have remained a married man in the one-film Laz alternate universe. Again, most awkward.

Basically, I think Eon got it absolutely right with the ending that they went with for OHMSS.

I think your idea for Tracy's death to be carried over to the PTS of the next flick is as revisionist, as crazy and as Tamahori-esque as anything I've ever suggested on CBn!

I absolutely agree with Loomis. Even non-fans would have known (or would have been informed by reviewers) that Tracy died shortly after the wedding. Leaving the couple married, with the murder impending, would have given OHMSS an unfinished feel and diminished its emotional impact. It was much more emotionally satisfying to experience Bond's tragedy at the end of OHMSS, being left to wonder how it would affect him and how he'd take his revenge in the next film, than to await the next film knowing that the murder was still to come.

If the filmmakers had wished to start the next film with a big emotional whallop, they could have shown a shattered Bond emerging from the Aston Martin spattered with his wife's blood. They could have shown a funeral scene. They could have had a PTS of him bungling a mission because of intrusive memories of Tracy's death. They could, as in the novel of YOLT, have shown him "going slowly to pieces."

I cannot fathom what possible advantage would have been gained by carrying Tracy's murder over to the start of the next film. To end the story with a happy ending would have fatally wounded "On Her Majesty's Secret Service."