71 replies to this topic

[Della Leiter]

I'm not fond of Moore's Bond, so YOLT. But, I admit that TSWLM is a great movie.

[Bucky]

while i prefer connery as bond i feel that the spy who loved me works better for moore's bond than you only live twice does for connery.

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

while i prefer connery as bond i feel that the spy who loved me works better for moore's bond than you only live twice does for connery.

Agreed.

[Solex Agitator]

Let me first say that I love this forum and this community. It is a most wonderful venue to share and discover thought. There are a number of well-versed and extremely gifted thinkers and contributers here. It is pleasure and an honor to be part of this community.

The following are my thoughts on the subject. I wish no ill will.

I would like to add the following:

Connery's performance in YOLT is far from "lazy" or "sleep-walking." It seems to me that somewhere along the line a review of the era was taken for gospel and it is now de riguer to chalk Connery's efforts up as such. Deeming his performance as such is, in my opinion, that which is lazy. If any one Connery 007 performance is to be branded "phoned in," I would have to lean toward DAF.

I personally find Connery's YOLT performance to be one his most relaxed and genuine. World-weary, yes. But lazy? No! This is a spy who has already seen much in his career. He carries with him a genuine sense of experience as well as the well-earned tastes of a well-travelled connoisseur. His stripes have been long-earned at this point.

A couple of examples of what I love about Connery in YOLT off the top of my head...

I absolutely love the Moneypenny scene where Bond turns the interrogation light on her! It is spontaneous and playful!

The safe-cracking / couch fight at Osato's certainly displays no sleep-walking!

The wedding and the death of Aki.

"The things I do for England..."

This is a Bond that is light on his feet and not obvious.

YOLT is a dreamy fantasy and, while not the greatest Bond film, it is one the important chapters of the canon.

TSWLM is, likewise, a terrific piece of entertainment. Wildly entertaining! Tonally it is night and day from YOLT. While I do understand and ultimately appreciate a discussion of the plot comparisons, I personally do not it an "either or" situation. Yes, there are plot similarities. But the execution and tonalities are wildly different. And that is why I love them both.

Edited by Solex Agitator, 25 November 2009 - 06:27 PM.

[john.steed]

This is a difficult one for me as they are two of my very favorite Bond films. While the trend in Bond films now has strongly swung to the more realistic, gritty side, big fantasy epics have a special place in my heart. While OHMSS was my first 007 film, it was a revival of YOLT that really turned me into a Bond fan. Maybe the special effects are now dated and Connery was a bit bored, but I still see the film with the kid's eyes that marveled at them back in 1970.

That said, as much as I love YOLT,I love TSWLM even more though I am not even sure why. Maybe it is because this is Moore's best 007, or maybe I like the music a bit more.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Connery's performance in YOLT is far from "lazy" or "sleep-walking." It seems to me that somewhere along the line a review of the era was taken for gospel and it is now de riguer to chalk Connery's efforts up as such. Deeming his performance as such is, in my opinion, that which is lazy. If any one Connery 007 performance is to be branded "phoned in," I would have to lean toward DAF.

I personally find Connery's YOLT performance to be one his most relaxed and genuine. World-weary, yes. But lazy? No! This is a spy who has already seen much in his career. He carries with him a genuine sense of experience as well as the well-earned tastes of a well-travelled connoisseur. His stripes have been long-earned at this point...

Don't delude yourself, buddy; I could tell Connery was sleep-walking the first time I watched the movie, and that was looong before I started on here.

[Safari Suit]

Nah, he's right. Well, half right. At the very least I appreciate the optimism.

[Colossus]

Let me first say that I love this forum and this community. It is a most wonderful venue to share and discover thought. There are a number of well-versed and extremely gifted thinkers and contributers here. It is pleasure and an honor to be part of this community.

The following are my thoughts on the subject. I wish no ill will.

I would like to add the following:

Connery's performance in YOLT is far from "lazy" or "sleep-walking." It seems to me that somewhere along the line a review of the era was taken for gospel and it is now de riguer to chalk Connery's efforts up as such. Deeming his performance as such is, in my opinion, that which is lazy. If any one Connery 007 performance is to be branded "phoned in," I would have to lean toward DAF.

I personally find Connery's YOLT performance to be one his most relaxed and genuine. World-weary, yes. But lazy? No! This is a spy who has already seen much in his career. He carries with him a genuine sense of experience as well as the well-earned tastes of a well-travelled connoisseur. His stripes have been long-earned at this point.

A couple of examples of what I love about Connery in YOLT off the top of my head...

I absolutely love the Moneypenny scene where Bond turns the interrogation light on her! It is spontaneous and playful!

The safe-cracking / couch fight at Osato's certainly displays no sleep-walking!

The wedding and the death of Aki.

"The things I do for England..."

This is a Bond that is light on his feet and not obvious.

YOLT is a dreamy fantasy and, while not the greatest Bond film, it is one the important chapters of the canon.

TSWLM is, likewise, a terrific piece of entertainment. Wildly entertaining! Tonally it is night and day from YOLT. While I do understand and ultimately appreciate a discussion of the plot comparisons, I personally do not it an "either or" situation. Yes, there are plot similarities. But the execution and tonalities are wildly different. And that is why I love them both.

I agree with you, i never got the "lazy" thing either. In his original era, 1962-1967 when he never took a break from Bond, each performance he grew along, i'm not even talking about the books here, forget the books, i mean cinema, two different mediums. Just the cinematic phenomenon known as Bondmania of the 60s. He became such an icon, first as the nervy rougher one of Dr. No/FRWL, then the suave smug one of GF/TB and finally he went through those phases like a real agent and went through the weeds and entered a zen-like state where he didn't have to prove anything to anyone. He became laconic, the smug factor gone, which definitely is a unique change of pace from the previous movies. Oh and forget about it not being the same as the book, i love the books by themselves, but when talking about the movies, the books. After taking the break from YOLT and returning to DAF this character arc was already gone, he was just playing an amalgam/parody of his GF self. YOLT was the true ender. But to see that transformation from DN to YOLT is something i don't think any other Bond actor can do, because he didn't have the thought of being the shoulders of past actors doing the same character, he owned the role to such a degree at this point, and his character reflected it. YOLT is like a great finale to the singular character he molded and who lived in those 5 movies.

If he was having a classic Bond/Villain conversation in each phase it would go something like this:

DN/FRWL:
Villain: I will blow up the world and you won't be able to stop me.
Bond: You won't get away with this you mad lunatic!

GF/TB:
Villain: I will blow up the world and you won't be able to stop me.
Bond: Certainly an easier venue than your dart throwing.

YOLT:
Villain: I will blow up the world and you won't be able to stop me.
Bond: Eh here we go. Hopefully your liquor will still be here when this is over.

Each of these phases are essential btw, i like all of em.

[DaveBond21]

I'm not very surprised to see that TSWLM is well ahead in this poll.

[PrinceKamalKhan]

Let me first say that I love this forum and this community. It is a most wonderful venue to share and discover thought. There are a number of well-versed and extremely gifted thinkers and contributers here. It is pleasure and an honor to be part of this community.

The following are my thoughts on the subject. I wish no ill will.

I would like to add the following:

Connery's performance in YOLT is far from "lazy" or "sleep-walking." It seems to me that somewhere along the line a review of the era was taken for gospel and it is now de riguer to chalk Connery's efforts up as such. Deeming his performance as such is, in my opinion, that which is lazy. If any one Connery 007 performance is to be branded "phoned in," I would have to lean toward DAF.

I personally find Connery's YOLT performance to be one his most relaxed and genuine. World-weary, yes. But lazy? No! This is a spy who has already seen much in his career. He carries with him a genuine sense of experience as well as the well-earned tastes of a well-travelled connoisseur. His stripes have been long-earned at this point.

A couple of examples of what I love about Connery in YOLT off the top of my head...

I absolutely love the Moneypenny scene where Bond turns the interrogation light on her! It is spontaneous and playful!

The safe-cracking / couch fight at Osato's certainly displays no sleep-walking!

The wedding and the death of Aki.

"The things I do for England..."

This is a Bond that is light on his feet and not obvious.

YOLT is a dreamy fantasy and, while not the greatest Bond film, it is one the important chapters of the canon.

Great post, Solex Agitator. I'm a big YOLT fan also(see my sig). I like the points you make about Connery's performance. Those are great moments in a highly entertaining and criminally underrated Bond film.

[hilly]

This is a difficult one for me as they are two of my very favorite Bond films. While the trend in Bond films now has strongly swung to the more realistic, gritty side, big fantasy epics have a special place in my heart. While OHMSS was my first 007 film, it was a revival of YOLT that really turned me into a Bond fan. Maybe the special effects are now dated and Connery was a bit bored, but I still see the film with the kid's eyes that marveled at them back in 1970.

That said, as much as I love YOLT,I love TSWLM even more though I am not even sure why. Maybe it is because this is Moore's best 007, or maybe I like the music a bit more.

My sentiments (almost) exactly. I love the gritty "realistic" (as much as a Bond film can be classed as realistic) films of today, but let's not dismiss or underestimate the fantasy-style ones completely. TSWLM was the 1st 007 film I saw at the cinema and it was THE film (along with some minor thing called Star Wars ) to see in 1977, if you were 9 yrs old. YOLT seemed to be shown annually on tv and the big epic Bond films were what hooked us all as kids. For me TSWLM just has the edge. I think it's the combination of the big set pieces and the knowing humour. Rog looks great with his white flares and with disco music, Michael Billington and Caroline Munro, it couldn't be more '70s if it tried!

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

Ah yes, Caroline Munro, you've got to love her, wonderful as she is in TSWLM and some Hammer films (same goes for Valerie Leon).