129 replies to this topic

[Mike00spy]

It is a James Bond film, so it is still special, and it does have its moments-- but could it really be any worse? A recent viewing of the film did nothing to help its status. There are plenty of problems with it. I'll run through the list.

A) Biggest Complaint: Blofeld's return.

After OHMSS, we have a shattered Bond. Blofeld had killed his wife and escaped. Okay, so Lazenby's departure combined with a drop of box office figures from YOLT obviously made the producers do a complete 180 for Diamonds. To a point, I can understand it and almost forgive it. You want to move on and leave OHMSS behind? Fine. However, in a forehead smacking move, they bring back Blofeld. For this reason, you cannot have a care-free Bond anymore. This very move practically ruins the movie.
Too bad Blofeld didn

Edited by Mike00spy, 21 February 2007 - 02:18 AM.

[PrinceKamalKhan]

Disagree about it being the worst. DAF is a fun Bond film though as Leonard Maltin aptly put it in his review of it that he gave ***1/2 that it owed more to Republic serials than Ian Fleming.

Genrewriter has a pretty good defense of it-

http://commanderbond.net/article/2378

Perhaps it will help your enjoyment of it if you see it as a sequel to YOLT and not OHMSS.

Still, it is nice for me to see someone say "worst Bond movie" without picking on my beloved Moonraker for a change.

[Mike00spy]

Disagree about it being the worst. DAF is a fun Bond film though as Leonard Maltin aptly put it in his review of it that he gave ***1/2 that it owed more to Republic serials than Ian Fleming.

Genrewriter has a pretty good defense of it-

http://commanderbond.net/article/2378

Perhaps it will help your enjoyment of it if you see it as a sequel to YOLT and not OHMSS.

Still, it is nice for me to see someone say "worst Bond movie" without picking on my beloved Moonraker for a change.

I don't have a problem with the film's fun, Roger Moore style tone at all- had they not used Blofeld. Bringing him back and using a lighthearted tone just doesn't work. It was made directly after OHMSS, so we have to take it from there. Perhaps if Cubby had directly said it was a sequel to YOLT, it would have been different. Juggling the order of the films to overcome its weakness is just too much work for me, I'm afraid.

[Turn]

If I had a dime for everybody who has complained about DAF not being a revenge sequel to OHMSS I would have enough to film a version DAF with the revenge angle to satisfy everybody.

I find DAF a lot more fun to watch than, say, AVTAK. DAF has some camp sillieness, but it works better than that film's jumping from people being brutally killed to drunks dropping their alcohol bottles, silly cops crashing cars and such.

[PrinceKamalKhan]

If I had a dime for everybody who has complained about DAF not being a revenge sequel to OHMSS I would have enough to film a version DAF with the revenge angle to satisfy everybody.

I find DAF a lot more fun to watch than, say, AVTAK. DAF has some camp sillieness, but it works better than that film's jumping from people being brutally killed to drunks dropping their alcohol bottles, silly cops crashing cars and such.

Excellent point, Turn. I'd take DAF over AVTAK anyday. In many ways, DAF is one of the most easy to watch Bond flicks when one is just in the mood to escape and laugh. OHMSS is certainly a "better" Bond film but DAF is easily a more "enjoyable" Bond film.

[PlayItBogart]

I'd take DAF over DAD, and frankly I'd almost take AVTAK over both.

[Loomis]

It's funny how the series had not just two but three extremely different portrayals of Blofeld in just four years (1967-1971).* I wonder whether the thinking was that there should be no consistent and therefore definitive take on the character, in order to make the point that he was an elusive evil genius, or whether Broccoli and co. just didn't give a tinker's damn about continuity.

*Then again, all the Leiters were different from 1962 to 1973, so perhaps it's not so strange after all. For all the uproar in fandom about CASINO ROYALE messing up continuity, the Bond franchise has never really had it, has it?

Anyway, is DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER "that bad"? Well, yes and no. It's definitely full of flaws, but it has a certain laid-back charm. To me, it plays more like an American caper comedy than a Bond film, and Connery seems more like an early version of Brosnan's Thomas Crown than the same old 007 he used to play. Worse than DIE ANOTHER DAY? Yes, but I rate DAD very highly.

DAF's highlights: Adam's sets, Barry's wonderful score, the cinematography, and the great chemistry between Connery and Jill St. John. And the film is still an improvement on Fleming's novel, which is probably his weakest.

[Turn]

DAF's highlights: Adam's sets, Barry's wonderful score, the cinematography, and the great chemistry between Connery and Jill St. John. And the film is still an improvement on Fleming's novel, which is probably his weakest.

Good call on the Connery-St. John chemistry. So many dislike her portrayal of Tiffany, but they do work well together and that counts for something.

I think it helps I believe they were an item at the time.

[Loomis]

It isn't really all that often that there's any appreciable chemistry or acting rapport between a Bond actor and his leading lady (and it's surprising how little this absence seems to mar the films). A couple of other examples that spring to mind are Moore and Adams in OCTOPUSSY, and, of course, Craig and Green. Can't think of any others for the moment, though. (I'm sure many will cite Lazenby and Rigg, but I won't.)

[Publius]

OHMSS is certainly a "better" Bond film but DAF is easily a more "enjoyable" Bond film.

Not for me, and I'm sure I speak for many others in saying that OHMSS is both better and more enjoyable than DAF. I respect your opinion, but just wanted to mention that.

Can't think of any others for the moment, though.

Dalton and d'Abo spring immediately to my mind.

Anyway, I mostly agree with the OP. The problem with DAF is that doesn't have much of anything good, be it action, adventure, intrigue, plot, locations, etc. Its redeeming features are a good score and some well-written humor here and there, with one of the better endings to a Bond film. Other than that, I find it a nearly depressing bore and easily the worst (and by far the least Bondian) Bond movie. While watching it, it feels more like a low-budget Bond rip-off starring Sean Connery as Sean Connery, former James Bond actor.

[DavidSomerset]

I would take Sean in a bad toupee in a mediocre Bond film over Wooden George in an good Bond film.
Imagine how DAF would have been with Wooden George...The horror the horror.
DAF was Sean's DAD. AVTAK was Roger's DAD. Sadly Tim was fired before his DAD. Take everything including the kitchen sink and throw it in the formula. Rinse and repeat.
I cant wait to see DC's DAD in 2011. Will be fun. DC will do a good job of it though, Iam sure.

[Publius]

I would take Sean in a bad toupee in a mediocre Bond film over Wooden George in an good Bond film.
Imagine how DAF would have been with Wooden George...The horror the horror.
DAF was Sean's DAD. AVTAK was Roger's DAD. Sadly Tim was fired before his DAD. Take everything including the kitchen sink and throw it in the formula. Rinse and repeat.
I cant wait to see DC's DAD in 2011. Will be fun. DC will do a good job of it though, Iam sure.

If the definition of "an actor's DAD" is his late-tenure, throw-in-the-kitchen-sink extravaganza, then it was YOLT for Connery and OP for Moore. Both of those worked rather well and I often find each enjoyable to watch, as opposed to DAD.

DAF, meanwhile, was Connery's AVTAK. That is to say, a schizophrenic mess unsure of what it wants to be and not really doing anything best, or even well. I don't think Brosnan ever really got his version, but that's probably a good thing.

[DavidSomerset]

...DAF, meanwhile, was Connery's AVTAK. That is to say, a schizophrenic mess unsure of what it wants to be and not really doing anything best, or even well. I don't think Brosnan ever really got his version, but that's probably a good thing.

But wasnt AVTAK just a copy of GF, like MR was a copy of TSWLM? And DAD was all 20 flicks put in the blender...

[DaveBond21]

I agree with those who find it hard to sit through DAF.

The two best bits - the fight in the lift with Franks, and the conversation with M.


But it's down there towards the bottom of my Bond list along with AVTAK, DAD, TMWTGG and LALD.

[Publius]

But wasnt AVTAK just a copy of GF, like MR was a copy of TSWLM? And DAD was all 20 flicks put in the blender...

True, but Bond films are never straight copies of each other so much as incoherent mix-and-matches (quality be damned!), like AVTAK being a GF wannabe with the spirit of DAF, or DAD ripping plot points from DAF and adding the look and feel of...a spoof of Austin Powers.

The two best bits - the fight in the lift with Franks, and the conversation with M.

Yeah, I do have to give credit where it's due, and that was one of the better fights in the series, with some comic gold on either side (although I'm usually not a fan of the self-aware Bond moments).

[DavidSomerset]

The two best bits - the fight in the lift with Franks, and the conversation with M.

Yeah, I do have to give credit where it's due, and that was one of the better fights in the series, with some comic gold on either side (although I'm usually not a fan of the self-aware Bond moments).

Guys, you are forgetting one of the best things about the movie - Tifanny Case in a bikini for the last 15 minutes of the film. She looked more alluring than Goodnight did in a similar bikini in the last 15 minutes of TMWTGG.

And what about the classic scene with Ms. Plenty who was named after her father?

[freemo]

Everything everyone says about it is true.

But it's still pretty much my favourite.

[triviachamp]

And what about the classic scene with Ms. Plenty who was named after her father?

So the prototype for the useless Bond Girls is classic?

Does anyone find it funny that for all the stuff about the direction of the series and the character's reduction that Connery made this instead of OHMSS? And despite the huge paycheck he doesn't bother to act? Who said Connery didn't have a nose for scripts!

[DavidSomerset]

And what about the classic scene with Ms. Plenty who was named after her father?

So the prototype for the useless Bond Girls is classic?

Does anyone find it funny that for all the stuff about the direction of the series and the character's reduction that Connery made this instead of OHMSS? And despite the huge paycheck he doesn't bother to act? Who said Connery didn't have a nose for scripts!

Plenty is not , repeat not, a classic Bond girl. The way she is introduced to Bond (monkey-coconuts) and how Bond responds with a one liner (after father) is classic. Plenty is a disposable girl, and hence the writers dispose off with her in the next 10 minutes without much to do.
I hope you have seen Zardoz. Or another clunker called Meteor. DAF is like CItizen Kane compared to Zardoz. But I would rather see him in DAF than in TMWTGG.

[Publius]

Guys, you are forgetting one of the best things about the movie - Tifanny Case in a bikini for the last 15 minutes of the film. She looked more alluring than Goodnight did in a similar bikini in the last 15 minutes of TMWTGG.

And what about the classic scene with Ms. Plenty who was named after her father?

Okay, I'll give you the point about Jill St. John, who's a woefully underrated Bond girl (and by God are you right about her in that bikini), but I've never been all that fascinated by Lana Wood. You may commence the stoning.

[DavidSomerset]

Okay, I'll give you the point about Jill St. John, who's a woefully underrated Bond girl (and by God are you right about her in that bikini), but I've never been all that fascinated by Lana Wood. You may commence the stoning.

I also have the same opinion about Lana Wood. Any other bimbo would have worked with those lines(and curves). Naomi is about a million times much better.

[dee-bee-five]

I like DAF. Like DAD, it doesn't pretend to be anything other than a romp and has a great sense of its own silliness. Nothing wrong with that in my book, even if my preference is for the more serious Bonds like OHMSS and CR.

And DAF has one of the great "what if" questions. One of the early ideas for the movie was to have the villain be Goldfinger's twin brother, apparently, and some books have reported that Eon were even going to sound out Gert Frobe to play it. How far down the line this actually went is anyone's guess. But supposing that was the direction it went; would DAF have been better or worse? Personally, I find this kind of plot device horrible, like the idea mooted that Bond had had plastic surgery to explain away George Lazenby, or the ghastly code-name theory.

Edited by dee-bee-five, 21 February 2007 - 08:24 AM.

[Colossus]

DAF is my least favorite of Connery's 7 Bonds, and yet, it has some memorable scenes which i'll gladly watch over the eXtreme sports, and neo-post-modern tripe of DAD.

[David Schofield]

Yes, Diamonds is worse than DAD, much worse. For example, serious flaws such as the following set them apart (I will not point out things like Jinx v Tiffany as issues like that in all the films tend to cancel each other out):

1. Its very style jars after the relatively serious OHMSS: Connery is a physical disgrace compared with Laz.

2. Not only was any potential revenge to OHMSS jetisoned, and the very existence of that film denied, a cracking Fleming plot was wasted and totally abused.

3. DAF has Sean Connery and yet wastes any opportunity of using his knackered, ageing looks to advantage. Conversely, in DAD Brozza - for all the faults of his portrayal - actually seems like he is trying to give an interpretation of Fleming's Bond in the situations he finds himself in. The same cannot be said for Connery in DAF.

These are the crucial elements to me that set DAD as a better movie than DAF. DAF's production had all the aces - a Fleming story, Connery: DAD had a lightweight leading man perhaps slightly out of his depth, no original source material, and yet Brozza and the DAD storyline are, IMO, closer to the spirit if Fleming (OK, by way of Benson, perhaps) than anything in DAF.

For me DAD all the way.

[dee-bee-five]

I would take Sean in a bad toupee in a mediocre Bond film over Wooden George in an good Bond film.
Imagine how DAF would have been with Wooden George...The horror the horror.
DAF was Sean's DAD. AVTAK was Roger's DAD. Sadly Tim was fired before his DAD. Take everything including the kitchen sink and throw it in the formula. Rinse and repeat.
I cant wait to see DC's DAD in 2011. Will be fun. DC will do a good job of it though, Iam sure.

Personally, I think Lazenby would have made a good fist of DAF. I believe, given the chance, he would have evolved and developed as an actor. The raw talent was there, certainly.

[RazorBlade]

OHMSS is certainly a "better" Bond film but DAF is easily a more "enjoyable" Bond film.

Not for me, and I'm sure I speak for many others in saying that OHMSS is both better and more enjoyable than DAF. I respect your opinion, but just wanted to mention that.

Can't think of any others for the moment, though.

Dalton and d'Abo spring immediately to my mind.

Anyway, I mostly agree with the OP. The problem with DAF is that doesn't have much of anything good, be it action, adventure, intrigue, plot, locations, etc. Its redeeming features are a good score and some well-written humor here and there, with one of the better endings to a Bond film. Other than that, I find it a nearly depressing bore and easily the worst (and by far the least Bondian) Bond movie. While watching it, it feels more like a low-budget Bond rip-off starring Sean Connery as Sean Connery, former James Bond actor.

Do you mean that Sean Connery made a film where he did a bad impersonation of himself doing Bond?

[dee-bee-five]

OHMSS is certainly a "better" Bond film but DAF is easily a more "enjoyable" Bond film.

Not for me, and I'm sure I speak for many others in saying that OHMSS is both better and more enjoyable than DAF. I respect your opinion, but just wanted to mention that.

Can't think of any others for the moment, though.

Dalton and d'Abo spring immediately to my mind.

Anyway, I mostly agree with the OP. The problem with DAF is that doesn't have much of anything good, be it action, adventure, intrigue, plot, locations, etc. Its redeeming features are a good score and some well-written humor here and there, with one of the better endings to a Bond film. Other than that, I find it a nearly depressing bore and easily the worst (and by far the least Bondian) Bond movie. While watching it, it feels more like a low-budget Bond rip-off starring Sean Connery as Sean Connery, former James Bond actor.

Do you mean that Sean Connery made a film where he did a bad impersonation of himself doing Bond?

Yes. It was called Never Say Never Again.

[PlayItBogart]

Yes. It was called Never Say Never Again.

Oh snap.

[dodge]

One of a very small handful of Bond films I doubt I'll ever watch again. Trying to analyze what's wrong with the film is like trying to pinpoint exactly why an apple, rotten through and through, has such a funky smell. I know, I know: IMO. Still, if I had to pick three places where the worms are simply pouring out:
1) A doughy, lazy Connery's telefaxed performance--he lacked the strength to phone it in.
2) Kidd and Wint...the absolute bottom of the barrel of Bond villains.
3) Jill St. John's performance: belonged in a Rat Pack movie. Unbelievable and annoying.

Oh, hell, let's make it four:
4) Snoozer action all the way, except for the short fight with Franks.

[00Twelve]

With all the high octane, gritty cop films in America at the time, I admit I'm a little disappointed that EON didn't follow that trend (only b/c most of the film took place in America). I'm not a fan of copycat films, but instead of the light side, i.e., big car pileups, I wish they'd have taken the darker approach. Of course I wanted to see the resolution to OHMSS, but I'm not even talking about that. I would have loved to see Bond try to get in with criminals, perhaps even drop his accent, and to see the realistic views of Vegas, as Fr. Conn. did with New York. Strangely enough, Bill Hickman (stunt driver in Bullitt, Fr. Conn., and the 7-Ups) was employed in DAF, but the car chase was only what it was. He must have been grossly underused.

I'm just rambling at this point, but I think DAF would have been a great movie if they'd stuck to the criminal angle and shown a somewhat burned out Bond being unafraid of getting killed on this assignment. I'm not saying he should have been Popeye Doyle or Harry Callahan, but you know...as he was in the literary YOLT. It even could have afforded him a break before finding Blofeld in another movie.