129 replies to this topic

[Fiona Volpe lover]

I like both Die Another Day and Diamonds Are Forever,so I can accept their flaws {I.E.DAD CGI,DAF weak final third}. I'm the kind of wierdo that prefers DAD to Goldeneye and Diamonds Are Forever to Goldfinger though!

[PrinceKamalKhan]

I like both Die Another Day and Diamonds Are Forever,so I can accept their flaws {I.E.DAD CGI,DAF weak final third}. I'm the kind of wierdo that prefers DAD to Goldeneye and Diamonds Are Forever to Goldfinger though!

Please feel welcome, Fiona Volpe lover! I'm a fellow weirdo that prefers DAD to GE also(although if GE had starred Dalton as Bond as was originally intended and was scored by John Barry as originally intended I admit I might have a different opinion), that prefers Dalton to Brosnan, and that prefers MR to FYEO. Sometimes, the allegedly "bad" Bond movies are more entertaining and fun to watch than the more highly regarded ones.

[R. Dittmar]

Just to sum up;

DAF: Was it that bad? Yes. Worse than DAD? No. (No movie is.)

A few reasons for the latter opinion. The fight in the elevator ("lift" for my British friends) was actually quite well done. I've always had a soft spot for the hellish bubbling mud in the teaser. The cremation scene is very disturbing and the ride atop the Vegas casino elevator is a great bit. I'm also a fan of Wint and Kidd because I've always thought the scorpion scene was memorably vicious even if their latter appearances are more comical. My problem with DAF has always been that it is dumb, dumb, dumb in a way that even Moonraker never was. It's plot is flat out dumb to the bone for a host of reasons already outlined above.

Some of my biggest problems with DAF:

(1) The whole Blofeld-in-Vegas thing makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Hmm, I've kidnapped the richest man in the world and stolen his assets and I'm now rich beyond the dreams of avarice. Just the time to draw attention to myself with some wacky "hold the world for hostage" scheme. If this is not the genesis of that Starbucks joke in the Austin Powers movies, I don't know what is.

(2) The Blofeld double thing doesn't make any sense. I'll admit that having a host of doubles could help divert attention from yourself, but they'd really need to be located in widely different locations to do so. If they are all living with you in the same apartment, it kind of defeats the point.

(3) The chase through Vegas makes no sense. Even though every diamond smuggler in the world knows my name (from earlier in the picture) and I've prevented nuclear bombs from going off in Ft. Knox (GF) and Miami (TB) and thermonuclear bombs from destroying the entire continental U.S. (YOLT), there is just no way that I can allow myself to be detained by the Las Vegas P.D. for an hour or two until they sort things out with my best friend, C.I.A. agent Felix Leiter. So why not risk the lives of law enforcement agents and innocent civilians by leading the P.D. on a high-speed, continuity-impaired chase through the heavily-populated heart of downtown Las Vegas?

(4) The "hold the world hostage" payoff doesn't make any sense. I'm Ernst Stavro Blofeld and I control a destructive satellite. My address is: Old Abandoned Oilrig, Off Coast of Baha, CA. Please forward all blackmail payments in the form of Western Union money orders and don't launch a missle an blow me to h#*l and gone.

[Blabbermouth]

I have a soft spot for this movie as well, however it would have been much better if Blofeld had made his exit in the pre-title-sequence. A better villain and a better last 30 minutes would have made this a classic. Grey is boring as Blofeld (would have made a great villain had he been given another villain role), and the final fight with Bond arriving in a air-ball is the worst of the entire series.

However Connery seems to be enjoying himself and there is great chemistry between him and St. John. Wint and Kidd are actually OK, and Jimmy Dean as WW is great. I like the the Howard Hughes idea, if just it had been Seraffimo Spang that had sat in that chair when Bond arrives at the penthouse.

So basically another villain, add the mud-scene from the novel, better casting of Leiter and a better/realistic plot and final scene and you have a great film.

[Bond Maniac]

Well, i agree that the last 30 minutes or so of DAF are weak but in the whole it is a great movie. The only two things that i really hate in it are the Moon Buggie scene wich always makes me sleepy and the now infamous Blofeld Mrs. Drag Queen scene. But saying that DAD is better than DAF is a enourmous monstrosity. DAD is so good in it

[LadySylvia]

"Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd are also terrible assassins. They meet the diamond-smuggling dentist out in the desert, intending to kill him, and choose a scorpion they happen to find on the spot...What kind of assassin is that? Where is the planning? What is Blofeld paying them for? And of course they pick the largest, darkest scorpion known to humankind, when even a schoolchild knows that the black ones are actually the least deadly ones."

It took me a while to stop laughing after reading this. My feelings about Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd pretty much match my feelings of the movie. Even though both the characters and the movie are terrible (I consider DAF to be the worst in the franchise), I rather like them. Both the two assasins . . . and the movie are funny to me.

[dodge]

What is Blofeld paying them for? And of course they pick the largest, darkest scorpion known to humankind, when even a schoolchild knows that the black ones are actually the least deadly ones."[/color]

Dude, what the hell kind of elementary school did you go to? In the milktoast school where I went, we learned that Scorpion should usually equate running - regardless of the color

Wint and Kidd.. bad assassins OR assassins would like to utilize the element of surprise? Just saying

Hey, Dudette. The article was written by somebody else. Anyway, though, W&K really were quite hapless. Good assassins don't leave superspies to die in underground pipes. In fact, the morons left before the pipe was planted!

[00Twelve]

Ok, so I watched DAF last night with my wife (well, she could only stay awake for the first bit, right up to where Bond meets Plenty...I continued, however) and I'm shocked at how bad the cinematography is. And not just the cinematography, but the production values. I know, I know, it's KEN ADAM!!! but still, other than the Oil Rig and *some* of the exterior shots, it was rather dull. I'm surprised that this film doesn't get all the crap that LTK gets. It seriously looked like an American Vegas-based TV show. It looked every bit as much like a TV show as LTK.

My wife had never seen DAF, and she kept remarking at how the cinematography and editing was just "bugging her." I understood. They made a mistake in either kicking Peter Hunt out of the director's chair or even letting him into it in the first place. I choose the former. Hamilton did well with GF, and alright with LALD and TMWTGG, but the majority of DAF looked cheap. Especially the Mustang chase. This was the golden era of car chases, and that's what they came up with? The whole thing moved at 40 mph! The rest of the cars looked as though they were going about 25 for contrast. I could go on ranting and raving, but I was just shocked. It had been a while.

At least we had a superb fight on the elevator...definitely in the top 5 of the series.

[dodge]

Ok, so I watched DAF last night with my wife (well, she could only stay awake for the first bit, right up to where Bond meets Plenty...I continued, however) and I'm shocked at how bad the cinematography is. And not just the cinematography, but the production values. I know, I know, it's KEN ADAM!!! but still, other than the Oil Rig and *some* of the exterior shots, it was rather dull. I'm surprised that this film doesn't get all the crap that LTK gets. It seriously looked like an American Vegas-based TV show. It looked every bit as much like a TV show as LTK.

My wife had never seen DAF, and she kept remarking at how the cinematography and editing was just "bugging her." I understood. They made a mistake in either kicking Peter Hunt out of the director's chair or even letting him into it in the first place. I choose the former. Hamilton did well with GF, and alright with LALD and TMWTGG, but the majority of DAF looked cheap. Especially the Mustang chase. This was the golden era of car chases, and that's what they came up with? The whole thing moved at 40 mph! The rest of the cars looked as though they were going about 25 for contrast. I could go on ranting and raving, but I was just shocked. It had been a while.

At least we had a superb fight on the elevator...definitely in the top 5 of the series.

Right, even if Connery wasn't in it! Has a stunt man in any Bond film ever been more apparent?

You're right as rain about the cinematography. Combined with the trash Vegas setting, it did as much to tank the film as Mr Kint and Mr Widd.

[Bond Maniac]

I quite like the Vegas theme on this movie. But i agree that the cinematography is bad. But not as bad as DAD.

[00Twelve]

I think it was far worse than DAD, but that's just me. At least there were some attempts at creative shots in DAD. The best visual storytelling in DAF was the shot of Plenty's head in the foreground as Tiffany thinks it's just a wig.

DAD's cinematography was unoriginal. I'll certainly grant that. But DAF's was downright amateur.

[Bond Maniac]

You may be right but what i hate in DAD is the videogame style approach to the whole scenes. To fast for me. I like my spy movies to be slow.

[Judo chop]

DAD's cinematography was unoriginal. I'll certainly grant that. But DAF's was downright amateur.

May have been mentioned already, but how about the background in the scene when W&K meet up with the old lady. Did they just step onto the set of The Wizard of Oz? You can SEE the paint smears on the backdrop! If you zoom in on DVD, you can just make out the artist's signature in the upper left-hand corner as well.

<in witch's cackle>
"Hee-heee-heee! SMILE, my Plenty!!!"

[00Twelve]

Yes, seeing Mrs. Whistler's place, I kept waiting for a little trolley to pop out of the wall and take us to the Land of Make-Believe.

Going back to the car chase...

The DAF novel didn't suffer at all (IMHO) because of a lack of showing off the Vegas locale. Some movies and shows, on the other hand, do very well by showing off the Vegas locale (Ocean's 11, Vega$). It's got nothing to do with how glitzy it is now versus how it was in '71...it's how it is chosen to be used or not.

Some of my favorite Bond films give a great sweeping shot or two of the locale then get to business, not needing to show off the famous places again. DAF wasn't there at all. They did alright showing a hint of LAX as they depart the plane, but Vegas is only shown in a few sweeeping shots, like Tiffany following Metz and a vague view of the skyline as Bond "mountaineers" outside the Whyte House. And these shots are long after Bond gets there. We go right from the desert to the cheesy funeral home to Bond's room, then a halfway decent establishment of a casino floor.

The car chase seems just very...deliberate. I don't know if that's the right word. It's like they needed to show the Vegas streets and how they're never in the dark. Decent idea. We had a car chase in the novel, too. But it was just filmed in such an amateur way...how did they actually make downtown Vegas look like a studio? It certainly didn't help that it was about as fast paced as O.J. in the Bronco. They even hired Bill Hickman (Bullitt, French Connection, Seven-Ups) to drive a bit! That kills the possible excuse that they hadn't seen Bullitt. I think they were just confused on whether or not to "take advantage" of Vegas.

I don't think I've ever been this hard on DAF before...and it's not a bad film, but I just hadn't noticed the production and location cinematography before. It's TV quality.

[Judo chop]

This is the very reason why I never watch Bond with my wife anymore!

[doublenoughtspy]

I've filed a brief in the International Court of Justice (The Hague, Netherlands) regarding Diamonds Are Forever and it's myriad Crimes Against Humanity...."particularly odious offences in that they constitute a serious attack on human dignity or grave humiliation or a degradation of one or more human beings."

[MHazard]

I remember seeing the movie when it first came out and realizing that yes, Sean, was too old to continue playing Bond. Not only does it have nothing to do with OHMSS, it really has virtually nothing to do with any previous Bond movie. It is a Roger movie without Roger. I like Sean better in that kind of movie, but if you want a real Sean Bond movie its really disapointing. Like YOLT, if I forget all the other movies and Fleming's novel, I can watch and enjoy it though, something I am unable to do with certain other Bond films.

[DaveBond21]

I remember seeing the movie when it first came out

That is cool...

[Mr. Blofeld]

The gunbarrel was enough to kill the film for me; no "bullet-down-the-barrel" gunbarrel will ever equate with seeing a shoddy replication of the YOLT gunbarrel tinted blue with sparkles, then watch as the damned thing dollies down and up without Bond properly fading away. Ugh...

[SPOTTER]

I know it has a lot of things that just don't add up but I don't think that it is the worst Bond film. I'd say that the prize goes to A View To A Kill or the last couple of Brozzer's but all the Bond films are very watchable really but some are just better or even much better than others.

The main thing that I don't like about DAF is that Connery is way out of shape and he just plays the film for laughs. It's not a patch on his first 4 films. And it's the same with Moore in anything he did after MR. It's all good fun really but what I look for in Bond now is exactly what CR was.

[HH007]

It's all good fun really but what I look for in Bond now is exactly what CR was.

Me too. In fact, CR was what I've been wanting a Bond film to be for quite some time.

As for DAF, is it worse than DAD...? Well, believe it or not, but I actually find DAD to be slightly more watchable, DAF is just a bloody bore. However, I think both movies are terrible and they certainly belong in the same garbage dump together.

[BoogieBond]

Yes, Both of these DAD and DAF would be in my least favourite pile.
But DAF I find slightly more entertaining. But I guess it would be based more on opinion than any merits of the film. As mentioned, the lack of action and focus on comedy in DAF makes it very leisurely. The DAD action is more spectacular, but I find some of the action forgettable, save for the swordfight and I admit the car chase on ice is OKish.
OK I will try to compare elements
Actor : Connery vs Brozza
Music : Barry vs Arnold
Script : Tom Mankiewicz vs Purvis and Wade
I gotta slightly give it to DAF(slightly more classic feel, cinematography, music(Barry's music I do like) and supporting cast - Bernard Lee, Lois Maxwell et al), but can't say I am a massive fan of either

Edited by BoogieBond, 18 June 2008 - 05:01 PM.

[Mike00spy]

The biggest sin for me (as I mentioned in the original post) is that they paid no attention to the character of Bond in the film, due to wanting OMHSS ignored. At least with DAD, they went for character and kept it true to Brosnan's Bond.

[Safari Suit]

Not being a revenge tale isn't that big a crime. We've had enough of those; in the franchise and certainly outside of it.

[Mike00spy]

Not being a revenge tale isn't that big a crime. We've had enough of those; in the franchise and certainly outside of it.

That was part of my original point. If you don't want a revenge tale, then DON'T BRING BACK BLOFELD. You can't have both sides clashing like they did- not to mention, Blofeld was playing a parody of himself to begin with.

[Mister E]

DAD was far,far worse then DAF. DAD actually wanted you take it's bull seriously, it didn't poke fun of it itself. DAF was perfectly aware of it's stupidity and flaunted it with witty dialogue and the fun Las Vegas atmosphere.

[DR76]

Was DAF that bad and worse than DAD?

Yep. I really think so. Despite the Iceland bit, I think that DAD had a better plot.

I remember seeing the movie when it first came out and realizing that yes, Sean, was too old to continue playing Bond.

I don't think that Connery was too old. He was only 39 years old or 40, when he shot the movie in 1970. And he was 40 or 41 when it was released. Moore, Dalton and Brosnan were all older when they first began playing Bond.

I think that Connery simply looked out of shape.

[Mister E]

Despite the Iceland bit, I think that DAD had a better plot.

I can barely say DAD had a plot at all. They just slapped together Goldeneye, Fleming's Moonraker, and DAF.

[DaveBond21]

DAD and DAF are both down near the bottom of my list. I find DAD easier to watch (although I fast-forward through the speeder chase and Star Wars/Robocop elements in Iceland).

DAF starts off well but it's all downhill once we get to Las Vegas, and there is a serious lack of action and tension.

[Gabriel]

Connery has aged badly in the film. He's got a toupee and his hair's very grey; couldn't they have used some hair dye? Roger Moore's older than Sean Connery, but you wouldn't know it here!

In the moon buggy chase scene, you see the wheel break off the buggy and bounce offscreen, although the chase continues. Blofeld takes up cross-dressing. Need we say more?

As a stand-alone campy thriller, it's amusing, if unremarkable. As a Bond film it's downright awful. I liked DAF, the novel. So did Raymond Chandler, incidentally. It was a damn good thriller with a couple of terrifying hitmen that get brutally dispatched. Tiffany Case is the traumatised victim of a gang rape, who eventually allows herself to develop feelings for Bond (and, indeed, lives with him for a year until they split up shortly before FRWL.) Fleming's book is intelligent and gripping. It appears that, with DAF, the producers and Connery had lost all respect for the material. DAF is the first film that was 'churned out.'

Maybe with some tighter editing, some of the gags would have worked better, but like a lot of Bond films (including the most recent one) it outstays its welcome by half an hour!

DAD is a loud trashy greatest hits film. I can forgive it a lot as it's an anniversary movie. And Brosnan is doing his best with the sillier bits to play is straight.

The fundamental difference between DAD and DAF is that the lead actor cares about the role. DAD is also extremely slick entertainment. Yes, it's silly, but it's well-paced and OTT fun. It also draws all the past films together neatly and works well as the finale to the 'Phase One' series of Bonds.