61 replies to this topic

[JimmyBond]

Over the past few weeks my girlfriend and I have been watching the Bond films in order (she's only seen the Brosnan films) and we're up to YOLT. We didnt finish it because she was'nt feeling well and it was late, so we stopped it at the point where Bond first enters the volcano (around the 90 minute mark).

Wow, it's amazing how bad this film plays when viewing the films in order like this, last night we finished with (my personal favorite) Thunderball, she greatly enjoyed that. Now today watching You Only Live Twice it's all too apparent that Connery is bored at this point, and it's even easier to tell that the screenplay duties is being handled by someone else. This is the least engaging Bond film up to this point.

That's not to say I hate it now (I used to cite it as one of my faves) I still think it has beautiful cinematography, the score by Barry is top notch, and the film has a great travelogue feel to it. We havent finished it, but I could tell my girlfriend isnt going to say this one is better than Thunderball (that's her current favorite, out of the films we've seen together so far).

[MrDraco]

you only live twice is a strange entry indeed

[cvheady007]

I don't really understand the point of this post...there isn't really a question posted, just more of a statement...and that statement is incorrect.

You Only Live Twice is actually my best friend's favorite Bond movie...and, though it is not my favorite or even in my top 5, I feel compelled to defend it. For one, Connery is top notch in it. The story is a little lacking and there are some plot points that could have been done better, but it is a fine film. The wit is there, the charm is there...Bond is there. Case closed.

[JimmyBond]

I don't really understand the point of this post...there isn't really a question posted, just more of a statement...and that statement is incorrect.

The point of this post is that it's my thoughts on the film. Good lord, this is a discussion board, we should be able to discuss things dont you think As for that last line of your sentence, wrong. It's my opinion, and my opinion is not wrong, just like yours is not wrong either.

[cvheady007]

OKAY - point taken...thought YOLT is not a bad film. If your girlfriend hates it, I would be hard-pressed to figure out why...but I suppose that is her prerogative. But Tanaka's "I love you" makes this film a keeper in my book.



Give me that one, JimmyBond!

Take care.

[JimmyBond]

I had to reread my post to see if I implied my girl hated it. Alas, she doesnt hate it, she just finds Thunderball to be the better picture that's all.

I don't hate YOLT either, I just find it a jarring change after the first four films were more or less close adaptions of their respective novels. It's easy to tell that YOLT has a new screenwriter working with an original plot.

But Tanaka's "I love you" makes this film a keeper in my book.

Can't argue there

[cvheady007]

I had to reread my post to see if I implied my girl hated it. Alas, she doesnt hate it, she just finds Thunderball to be the better picture that's all.

I don't hate YOLT either, I just find it a jarring change after the first four films were more or less close adaptions of their respective novels. It's easy to tell that YOLT has a new screenwriter working with an original plot.

But Tanaka's "I love you" makes this film a keeper in my book.

Can't argue there

I concur, then - we are on the same page after all! It isn't the same caliber as the other Connery Bond flicks...I guess the implication that came with the statement of how "badly it was played" with the prior films is what got me. I don't find it bad within the Bond canon. I dig the movie...it could be better...but it beats the Moore films, save TSWLM.

[stamper]

For years, ever since I discovered Connery and dubbed copies of all his Bonds on video horribly pan & scanned (that was about 70 years ago), I always tought the same as you : YOLT is the inferior film to the others, even DAF being at least funny to watch.

And then years later, I watched the movies again, on high quality DVD (not as good as the forthcoming DVDs, but that is not the point of this post). And I did something only a nut would do, I watched OHMSS before YOLT. Guess what, it works much better than the reverse, and thought being different, YOLT is a nut movie, that xeroses the competitors Bond to oubond them all because :

1/ They have much more money
2/ They have Ken Adam designing the set
3/ Maurice Binder
4/ John Barry
5/ SEAN CONNERY !

I think you can these days actually more enjoy the romp of YOLT than Thunderball, because YOLT is bloody constant in the entertainment dept, whereas TB is schizophrenic (half brilliant Hitchcock like scenes, half dragging underwater stuff, not shot by Terence). YOLT is the Bond to top all Bonds and all competition. It is the genuine climax of the spy crazyness, after this, that was gone. And Connery I think looks great, act great (I don't find him bored as other says, I would say relaxed), many scenes are classic "what a nice girl like you is doing in a place like this" (girl slaps bond), the Tanaka stuff is great,the death of Bond wife is grim and moody, Barry score is one of the best, of course it's silly in part, but how can you not like the aerial shot going up when Bond fight the bad guys on the roof, with Barry's music ? Man, I keep wishing the new one would be like this...

[CowboyFunk22]

In short..nothing happened.


I've been watching it recently and its a great movie. There are a few reasons why i like it more than thunderball. First off, you don't know "who done it" well before it happens. You are going along with Bond trying to figure it all out. Japan is very foreign and works perfectly for the time and setting of the movie. Watching it recently, Connery isn't bored, he is the older Connery before it happened. DAF he slipped back into something else, but in YOLT he is pretty much how he is now, which says something about how he invisioned what he was doing.

Its an odd movie, not more of the same. I know alot more people who see the first couple of minutes of YOLT and stick with it, whereas i start TB from the beginning and i struggle to keep paying attention. YOLT isn't boring.

[Kissy]

I love it.
I think that it is strange that you love thunderball, but that you consider YOLT mediocre. Both movie's have the same line as Goldfinger.

Still I consider YOLT superior to Thunderball. Thunderball loses a lot of points thanks to the boring under water scenes.

[JimmyBond]

To me Thunderball has a more engaging storyline, the ticking clock is always present. We know Bond has to find the bombs quickly or people will die. In YOLT (at least to me) I never felt that danger, it just seems like Bond jumps from one action sequence to the next as he follows the trail of (easiliy laid out) clues.

[Mr Malcolm]

I must admit, YOLT is quite possibly my favourite Bond film. Seriously. It makes such a good use of the Japanese location, and it's just such good fun to watch. And let it be said that I want my own hollowed out volcano.

In short, it's everything a great Bond film should be!

[Napoleon Solo]

A few things happened:

-- Richard Maibaum was either unavailable or uninterested. It's the first film in the series without his input.
-- For whatever reason, Broccoli & Saltzman felt free to jettison the plot of a Fleming novel for the first time. You can attribute it to film out of order or whatever. They had definitely taken liberties (add Leiter and Miss Taro, among others to Dr. No, getting Bond off the trainer sooner and adding outdoors sequences in FRWL, etc., etc.) but this is the first time they ditched the novel entirely except for some character names. They even have Tiger address Bond as "Bond-san," where in the novel, he's addressed as "Bondo-san," for reasons that I forget (but were explained).

[JimmyBond]

Yeah, I'm aware of all that, can't remember why Maibaum wasnt brought back to do the script. Busy with something else?

It's still a beautifully shot film, but it just isnt a very interesting story (to me at least). It's also not helped by Connery's lack of enthusiasm through the whole film.

[Publius]

To me Thunderball has a more engaging storyline, the ticking clock is always present. We know Bond has to find the bombs quickly or people will die. In YOLT (at least to me) I never felt that danger, it just seems like Bond jumps from one action sequence to the next as he follows the trail of (easiliy laid out) clues.

I agree wholeheartedly. YOLT seems like the first truly self-aware Bond, although I'll freely concede Thunderball teetered on being so itself, and suffers for it. Yes, the pre-titles were good, the Japanese setting and culture captivating, and the music highly enjoyable, but most of the rest just felt weak to me.

Connery is bored-looking enough that it detracts from the experience, as he goes through the motions of yet another "biggest Bond ever." The plot was preposterous (even by Bond standards), the villain simply laughable, the henchmen pathetic (almost non-present tall blonde silent guy was painfully generic, Helga Brandt just an uninteresting Fiona Volpe wannabe carbon copy), the graphics a travesty, and there was way too much camp nonsense for its own good: super-magnets, gun-toting ninjas, secret cameras everywhere (wasn't aware Big Brother ruled Japan), boring Little Nellie sequence (in which Bond presses buttons in the order Q told him to), etc. It's no wonder YOLT ranks so low on my list. A lot of lost potential with this one.

[avl]

I loved this one when I was a child watching it on TV. I mean - Little Nellie is fun, and hollowed out volcanoes - whats not to like

Coincidentallly I also watched this last night. I still enjoyed it. I dont think Connery looks too bored - its more that he has honed his performance to an absolute minimum of Connery-style cool. Nothing phases him. Akki (is that her name?) getting offed instead of him - so what. The film makers are no longer interested in even pretending Bond is a real human being. He is Bond - worldwide icon of cool. And it works for me, on a more superficial level, it works.

This is the one that they really buy into the the fantasy that they have created - they jettison Fleming, and let Ken Adam build a small country in the back lot. It is total hokum - but come on, the ninja-storming the volcanoe sequence is a classic. There was a time, when I was young, that I was disappointed if a Bond film did not end with a big "special forces storm the villains lair" scene. OK its shallow, but when your a kid it is fun, and if you still enjoy being a kid sometimes, it's still fun.

It is also a template setting Bond - I mean they basically remade it twice with TSWLM and MR. It defines one end of the spectrum of Bond films - the "wild extravaganza" end.

If you are a Fleming buff I bet you hate it 'cos its a mile away from the book. But like it or not, it is a very influential one for the Bond films, and I'm sure its one that the average member of the public will easily remember. "The one with the volcanoe - yeah, that was cool".

[Napoleon Solo]

This is the one that they really buy into the the fantasy that they have created - they jettison Fleming, and let Ken Adam build a small country in the back lot. >>

Ken Adam and John Barry are the real stars of YOLT.

In GF and Thunderball, the order of the credits were SCREENWRITER/PRODUCERS/DIRECTOR.

In YOLT, that was changed to:

SCREENWRITER preceded by the "additional story material" credit/PRODUCTION DESIGNER/DIRECTOR OF PHOTOGRAPHY/PRODUCERS/DIRECTOR.

It is also a template setting Bond - I mean they basically remade it twice with TSWLM and MR. It defines one end of the spectrum of Bond films - the "wild extravaganza" end.

If you are a Fleming buff I bet you hate it 'cos its a mile away from the book. But like it or not, it is a very influential one for the Bond films, and I'm sure its one that the average member of the public will easily remember. "The one with the volcanoe - yeah, that was cool".

True enough.

[Turn]

Here's the thing with YOLT: It's the one where the line was crossed into more Bond as spectacular action hero mode at the expense of characterization and Fleming became more in the distance. Maybe Connery isn't bored, maybe it's that he's too busy moving from one vehicle to the next or the next action sequence to do much acting.

I guess maybe there are different ways of looking at spectacular - YOLT does it on a visual level, as John Lennon may have put it, turn off your mind, relax and float downstream type of way.

And some of the earlier films are spectacular in a lower key way. The series offers a lot of different options, which makes it nice and kind of strange some people are so unwilling to accept Daniel Craig and the new direction of CR. The changes have always been there.

[Colossus]

Best epic Bond, best Bond in Asia, best Blofeld potrayal, best cinematography (guy did Lean's films), Nancy Sinatra...

[JimmyBond]

Best epic Bond, best Bond in Asia, best Blofeld potrayal, best cinematography (guy did Lean's films), Nancy Sinatra...

I'll agree with everything except Blofeld. I think Pleasance's Blofeld is a horribly silly character (yes, I even felt this way before Austin Powers) not the least bit threatening...This is the head of a major terrorist organization!? The Blofeld of Thunderball was a cool calculating character, Bond should have confronted that Blofeld, not this guy. Incidentally I cited Telly Savalas as my favorite (onscreen) Blofeld, he's more in line with how the character should be (Charles Gray is also miscast, imo).

[Colossus]

The on-screen potrayal that comes closest to the tonality and sinister presence of the one in FRWL and TB is Pleasence.

[avl]

The on-screen potrayal that comes closest to the tonality and sinister presence of the one in FRWL and TB is Pleasence.

YOLT is kind of a mythic film - hero goes into the villains layer, real epic, almost mythological stuff. Pleasance is a memorable Blofeld-as-freak, something very hammer-horror about him, which fits the style of the film perfectly.

[Scottlee]

Well this isn't much of a contest for me, as TB is my favourite Connery Bond and YOLT my least favourite.

YOLT is perfect up until the point with the giant magnet. After that there are so many plot-holes and "it would never happen" moments that it's almost painful. I still enjoy watching the film, but its multitude of weak aspects put it far behind TB for me...

1) As already stated, the magnet. Who is doing the filming?
2) Little Nellie might be a famous Bond vehicle, but I find that whole sequence to be nothing more than a dreary follow-up to the Aston Martin chase in GF.
3) Kissy Suzuki never mentioned by name.
4) Aki's death is ineffectve. The moment it happens, Bond and Tiger seem to have forgotten about it in seconds. Literally, I mean seconds.
5) In the aircraft, how does Helga know that Bond will have his hands perfectly placed on his lap?
6) How does Bond know he will need those sucker-cup things?
7) There's no point to Bond becoming Japanese. At all.
8) It would be nice of the writers to tell us what happened to Blofeld at the end.

Apart from this it's an entertaining movie. Thunderball is also an entertaining movie, but that one doesn't have the several implausible moments that YOLT has.

[Kissy]

I think that the scene in wich Aki dies, shows Connery's Bond at his best.

1) As already stated, the magnet. Who is doing the filming?
Grabbing the car?

2) Little Nellie might be a famous Bond vehicle, but I find that whole sequence to be nothing more than a dreary follow-up to the Aston Martin chase in GF.

Uh no..

3) Kissy Suzuki never mentioned by name.

They did cute a lot of this movie. Blame the Editors. I don't care because I know her name.

4) Aki's death is ineffectve. The moment it happens, Bond and Tiger seem to have forgotten about it in seconds. Literally, I mean seconds.

No. We see Bond depresive (Connery at his finest) and they go to the next scene.

5) In the aircraft, how does Helga know that Bond will have his hands perfectly placed on his lap?
Whit the Mirror?

6) How does Bond know he will need those sucker-cup things?
He dind't know it.


7) There's no point to Bond becoming Japanese. At all.
The people of the Village must think that he is Japanese. I think that I don't have to mention the reason.

8) It would be nice of the writers to tell us what happened to Blofeld at the end.
This speaks for itself, he escaped.

@Jimmy (About Thunderball)
I dunno how you get that feel in a Bond-movie. Bond always wins, except for one movie.

Connery was already tired of Bond when he was filming Thunderball. I dunno how you can say that he was playing the character bored because he plays the character in similiar way as in Thunderball & Goldfinger.

I think that a lot of the people who don't this movie is because they dislike the epic feel or maybe because they don't like how the movie goes on. Just like I don't like how OHMSS story goes on.

I personaly love it.

[Colossus]

YOLT did not hide what it was trying to be, nevermind what the subject matter is of a film, it's how well-made it is as a story. YOLT is excellence in both departments.
TB i felt was trying to be more than it could grasp, it wanted that GF pompness and the intelligence of FRWL but each of these elements paled in comparison to their predecessors.
I remember Brocolli said once "We always wanted to do a From Russia with Love, but ended up with a Thunderball."

[Publius]

1) As already stated, the magnet. Who is doing the filming?
Grabbing the car?
How does that answer his question? The filming is clearly being done by an airborne entity not introduced to us. God?

2) Little Nellie might be a famous Bond vehicle, but I find that whole sequence to be nothing more than a dreary follow-up to the Aston Martin chase in GF.
Uh no..
I agree with him. They wanted a cliche chase sequence, decided to have it take place in mid-air with helicopters as if that was something amazing or unprecedented, and had Connery push some buttons in a predictable order. Wow. How exciting.

3) Kissy Suzuki never mentioned by name.
They did cute a lot of this movie. Blame the Editors. I don't care because I know her name.
Well, not everyone did/does. That's a rather annoying and glaring fault in a movie. Especially considering she is not only the main Bond girl, but also his "wife".

4) Aki's death is ineffectve. The moment it happens, Bond and Tiger seem to have forgotten about it in seconds. Literally, I mean seconds.
No. We see Bond depresive (Connery at his finest) and they go to the next scene.
Saddened, yes. Forgotten in seconds, yes.

5) In the aircraft, how does Helga know that Bond will have his hands perfectly placed on his lap?
Whit the Mirror?
Don't remember the exact particulars of this scene, but suffice it to say it bothers me more that she would put her faith in a plank of wood, given that her life depended on successfully offing Bond. And the graphics in that scene were deplorable...

6) How does Bond know he will need those sucker-cup things?
He dind't know it.
Exactly. Why and where would he be carrying them? This isn't Batman.

7) There's no point to Bond becoming Japanese. At all.
The people of the Village must think that he is Japanese. I think that I don't have to mention the reason.
But why? Why does he need to "hide" openly in the village? Why not just hide the old-fashioned way while he waits until the time is right for the raid?

8) It would be nice of the writers to tell us what happened to Blofeld at the end.
This speaks for itself, he escaped.
I think he's talking about how or where, rather than whether or not.

Connery was already tired of Bond when he was filming Thunderball. I dunno how you can say that he was playing the character bored because he plays the character in similiar way as in Thunderball & Goldfinger.
He looks and acts great in Goldfinger. Shows some signs of slipping in Thunderball, but not much, or enough to detract from the movie. Where it becomes apparent to me is in YOLT. More so than almost any other Bond film.

I think that a lot of the people who don't this movie is because they dislike the epic feel or maybe because they don't like how the movie goes on. Just like I don't like how OHMSS story goes on.
I like a lot of the epic Bonds. Just not the cartoony feel of this one (and a few others).

TB i felt was trying to be more than it could grasp, it wanted that GF pompness and the intelligence of FRWL but each of these elements paled in comparison to their predecessors.

I remember Brocolli said once "We always wanted to do a From Russia with Love, but ended up with a Thunderball."

I'll give you that Thunderball was somewhat self-aware and trying to live up to the hype more than ever before, but I still feel it delivered when all was said and done, as opposed to YOLT.

And that Broccoli comment never made much sense to me. Do they mean they always want to make another film like their third most successful, but end up with one like their first most? Given the style of both, I should think they'd be happy either way. In light of their recent track record, it seems to me it'd be more appropriate to say they always strive for another Goldfinger or TLD (maybe even TSWLM), but end up with another Moonraker or, yes, You Only Live Twice.

[Kissy]

Terence Young wasn't happy with the result of Thunderball. He even said that it dind't feel as Bond. But Connery has said that it's one his best Bond-movie's.

You could say that YOLT is a love it or hate Bond-movie.
I think that the epic Bond's are:
YOLT
Spy
&
Moonraker

They are all done by wellknown director Lewis Gilbert (wich is probably the best Director that has directed Bond-movie;s).

Still I have to say that I still don't see Connery's acting borring in Yolt. I see Bond at his best

[Colossus]

"Pushing buttons in random order" is an argument? Guess he just slap dashed it in the Aston Martin in GF too...

Edited by Colossus, 06 March 2006 - 09:19 AM.

[Qwerty]

You could say that YOLT is a love it or hate Bond-movie.

Not for me. Ranking the James Bond films from top to bottom, You Only Live Twice would probably be right around the middle for me. It's a well-crafted epic Bond film, but as Connery enjoyed things more with Goldfinger and Thunderball, I think it shows more in those films.

I actually don't see alot of fans (on CBn in any event) that cite You Only Live Twice as their #1 favourite. Is there anyone that this applies to?

[Loomis]

I actually don't see alot of fans (on CBn in any event) that cite You Only Live Twice as their #1 favourite. Is there anyone that this applies to?

It's not my #1 favourite, since you can't really beat THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN, but it's definitely one of the very best of the bunch as far as I'm concerned.

The first thing to bear in mind about YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE is that it's MUCH more faithful to the spirit of the novel than it's usually made out to be (as well as a far better film than most critics and fans would have you believe - quite why its vastly inferior remake, THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, gets all the glory while YOLT is often relegated to the dustbin of 007 history is beyond me). And just as the novel is Fleming's masterpiece, the movie version may well be Eon's.

Don't let the fact that YOLT boasts a villain in a volcano and scenes set in space blind you to the ways in which the film either follows the source novel or (when it can't follow it) pays sly homage to it. There is much more of the novel in the film than meets the eye.

Let's address this business of sly homages first:

In the book, Bond becomes a father (without knowing it). For obvious reasons, the movie couldn't use that bit. Oh, sure, it could have ended with a "several months later" shot of the pregnant Kissy Suzuki, but, well, it wouldn't really have worked as well as it does on the printed page, Fleming having created a moving but doomed relationship between the amnesiac 007 and the Japanese woman. So what did the filmmakers do instead? Well, they gave Bond a different kind of life-changing romantic experience: marriage! (Okay, he gets hitched purely to help his cover, but, hey, getting hitched is getting hitched!)

Here's something else that "kind of" references the novel: Fleming's Henderson is not an effeminate, artsy-fartsy Englishman, but a rough, tough, foul-mouthed, beer-swilling, ultra-macho Aussie (is there any other kind? ). Hard to believe that the filmmakers didn't deliberately make the screen Henderson more or less the polar opposite of the literary one, as a lil' joke aimed at viewers who had read the novel.

But forget the astronauts and so on - for the most part, film follows book fairly closely (Bond goes to Japan - Bond meets Tiger - Bond becomes Japanese - Bond hooks up with Kissy - Bond and Kissy set off by boat for the foreign baddie's remote lair), and the filmmakers occasionally do an outstanding job of conjuring the atmosphere of the novel (think of the fishing village scenes). Much of Fleming's YOLT is travelogue, and an enthusiatic (indeed, almost reverential) examination of Japanese culture - happily, the same is true of the Eon film. Forget the regular calls in fandom for a "proper" adaptation of YOLT - they've done it already.

Impossible (obviously) to know what Fleming would have thought of this picture, but it seems likely that he would have enjoyed the sophisticated humour injected - one presumes - by his good friend Roald Dahl. Some regard it as a goof when Henderson gives Bond a stirred-not-shaken vodka martini and asks him if he's got it right, and 007 doesn't reply: "Well, no, actually, I like them shaken-not-stirred." No way is it a goof - even more amusing than the fact that Henderson gets it wrong is Bond's immediate, unthinking decision to play by the rules of politeness observed by upper class English society, which dictate that it would be terribly bad form for him to do anything other than agree that his favourite tipple had been prepared perfectly by his host. *Sigh* If only the jokes in the current Bond films were as subtle. Nowadays it's all crude quips about being a cunning linguist and knowing where to put cigars.

To summarise the greatness of YOLT, the film boasts:

- Connery, impossibly charismatic even in a performance often slammed as lazy.

- Arguably the finest cinematography of the series (and best use of widescreen).

- Arguably the the most impressive sets of the series.

- Arguably the best score and title song of the series.

- Probably the best use of locations of the series, making for a film rich in travelogue detail.

- Arguably the greatest "epic feel" of the series.

- An "iconic" Blofeld (who talks like a Fleming Bond villain ought to talk).

- The "element of the bizarre" (obscure Japanese poisons, piranha fish, etc.).

- Excellent casting.

- Superb action scenes.

- Sophisticated wit, snobbery and connoisseurship.

- A fair amount of sadism and eroticism.

- A refusal to take itself seriously (I find THUNDERBALL a bit po-faced).

So, yes, #1 or at least darn close.