Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

Which is a worse film? YOLT or DAF?


36 replies to this topic

#1 General Koskov

General Koskov

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1862 posts

Posted 09 May 2002 - 04:30 AM

I'm pretty convinced that out of Connery's films--excluding NSNA naturally--Diamonds Are Forever and You Only Live Twice seem to be generally accepted as the two 'bad ones' that Connery did. I certainly think they're his worst!

And I'd also like to know why you dislike your choice.

#2 rafterman

rafterman

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1963 posts
  • Location:Republic of Korea, south of the Axis of Evil

Posted 09 May 2002 - 04:36 AM

I think You Only Live Twice is the worst...Connery looks bored and old in it and it's just incredibly stupid and over the top..I hate the volcano idea, Dikko's annoying, there are too many dumb little Roald Dahl touches to the film...and I also think it's the most sexist and racist of the films...oddly enough the book is my favorite, so maybe that's why I'm hard on the film...

#3 freemo

freemo

    Commander RNR

  • Veterans Reserve
  • PipPipPip
  • 2995 posts
  • Location:Here

Posted 09 May 2002 - 04:53 AM

I like them both, but yeah, they do have their faults.

YOLT - I liked it early on, looked like it was building towards sometime big as Bond followed leads and mean Henderson and went to Osato Chemicals and all that. Loved the early Blofeld scenes, its always great when the bald one doesn't accept faliure from his workers. But I thought it got boring after the ninja school scene. The raiding of the volcano was supposed to be huge and exciting, and maybe it was at the time, but it isn't now.

DAF - Surely was the film to lead into the silly seventies. No mention of dearly departed Mrs Bond, Connery looks a little old and fat, and is that supposed to be Blofeld ? Still, with the moon buggy, the casinos, those funeral gangter type dudes, diamonds, and Connery back the film has a fair bit to like about it, many may not like Vegas as a location, but I think its perfect.

In short, DAF is better than YOLT. :)

#4 zencat

zencat

    Commander GCMG

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 25814 posts
  • Location:Studio City, CA

Posted 09 May 2002 - 04:51 PM

There's no such thing a bad Bond film in my book.

#5 ray t

ray t

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1394 posts

Posted 09 May 2002 - 05:08 PM

i agree with Zencat. They may not be a Goldfinger, a Thunderball, an OHMSS or A TSWLM, but they both have their qualities and i'd much rather watch them than 90 percent of the other "action-adventure" movie EVER made.

two things i particularly love about these two are the songs and their accompanying binder titles.

#6 Bryce (003)

Bryce (003)

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 10110 posts
  • Location:West Los Angeles, California USA

Posted 09 May 2002 - 05:13 PM

I'm with you Zencat! DAF was the first Bond I ever saw and, well, 30 + years later, I'm still hooked.

#7 Hardyboy

Hardyboy

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 472 posts

Posted 09 May 2002 - 05:33 PM

I believe there are great Bond films, good Bond films, mediocre Bond films, and a few outright bad Bond films--though all of them have a few things to recommend them.

Yep, You Only Live Twice and Diamonds are the weak links in the Connery canon, but if I had to choose, I'd say that Diamonds Are Forever is the worse film. YOLT is a guilty pleasure for me. . .OK, Connery's performance does belong in "Night of the Living Dead," the plot makes no sense and seems to be only an excuse for the now-dated special effects, and Donald Pleasance is totally miscast; but it has a lot going for it. The cinematography is probably the best in the series; Ken Adam's production design is iconic (c'mon--how many people who don't know their Bond films can at least recall "the one with the rocket base in the volcano"?); John Barry's music is one of his finest efforts; and the film does move with an absurd logic of its own. And even though I'm not a fan of Pleasance's Blofeld, it has resonated with popular culture. . .when Mike Meyers appropriated Pleasance's makeup for Dr. Evil, I think most people got the joke.

But Diamonds Are Forever. . .well, it has its moments. At its best it's zippy and fun, and the dialogue is often hilarious; but it's also totally confusing, the locations are dull and forgettable, Jill St. John is annoying, Charles Gray is too fey as Blofeld (and he appears in drag. . .IN DRAG!!), and Connery looks like he needs to hit the gym. I also have to fault Diamonds for playing almost everything for laughs, setting the stage for what would follow. Of the two, give me You Only Live Twice.

#8 Blofeld's Cat

Blofeld's Cat

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 17542 posts
  • Location:A secret hollowed out volcano in Sydney (33.79294 South, 150.93805 East)

Posted 12 May 2002 - 12:30 PM

zencat (09 May, 2002 05:51 p.m.):
There's no such thing a bad Bond film in my book.

Ditto.

#9 Mister Asterix

Mister Asterix

    Commodore RNVR

  • The Admiralty
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 15519 posts
  • Location:38.6902N - 89.9816W

Posted 12 May 2002 - 12:57 PM

Blofeld's Cat (12 May, 2002 01:30 p.m.):

zencat (09 May, 2002 05:51 p.m.):
There's no such thing a bad Bond film in my book.

Ditto.


Double Ditto.

Why not ask which is the better film? No need to be so negative.

#10 rafterman

rafterman

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1963 posts
  • Location:Republic of Korea, south of the Axis of Evil

Posted 12 May 2002 - 01:06 PM

well, I don't know...there are bad Bond films, but I still love them all and watch them constantly...it's like a bad Bond film is better than a good non Bond film....

#11 Stringfellow

Stringfellow

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 21 posts

Posted 12 May 2002 - 01:35 PM

I was 7 when YOLT came out and it is a favorite of mine. When DAF came out, everyone living at the time was happy to see Connery back in the part. We were glad that the 'other fella', Lazenby, was fired and that the true James Bond as back.

Through the years OHMSS grew on me and I even feel Lazenby did a fair job. Thanks in part to Peter Hunt who physically forced a performance out of him.

But to those of you who did not grow up seeing Connery as Bond, those films were magical. More than Star Wars, Harry Potter or Spiderman.

I'm talking about a time when a movie theater was not a 'multiplex'. When a theater had a screen larger than a two story building. When a movie stayed at a theater all summer long and you could see it over and over. When the posters were drawn and stood four times larger than you.

But enough reminicing, YOLT and DAF are great Bond films and are light years away from the slow moving TMWTGG. Personally my vote for worse Bond film is AVTAK. It still had some nice action scenes, but the Keystone Kops tribute through San Francisco is a bit too far.

Oh, and to those who feel I haven't answered this forum's question - that's easy - I pick NSNA as the worse Connery Bond film. The reason - it didn't have the Broccoli touch. For years people were convinced you could not make a great Bond film without Connery. That theory was answered when he made NSNA. You need the Broccoli formula. Hopefully without the silliness that crept in during the Moore years.

'nuff said.

#12 General Koskov

General Koskov

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1862 posts

Posted 30 May 2002 - 02:29 AM

Okay, the results are indecisive so far: two dislike Diamonds Are Forever, and two dislike You Only Live Twice.

I suppose I'll explain further. I was doing a fanfic screenplay of Diamonds Are Forever because I thought On Her Majesty

#13 Turn

Turn

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6837 posts
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 30 May 2002 - 03:19 AM

I wish I knew how to better help with your question, Gen. Koskov. Personally, I've always had a soft spot for DAF, since it was the first Bond film I saw on first release. There are several elements that I can recall and just enjoy the film a lot although it could have been so much better.

As far as YOLT goes, it ranks pretty far down my list. I think it has some of the worst continuity and lack of logic of all the films (although DAF could very well give it a run for its money). Both films are really missed opportunities to follow the Fleming precedent. I'd rather see the revenge angle played out against a more serious DAF, since that may well have been the style had Lazenby returned as 007.

#14 Hardyboy

Hardyboy

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 472 posts

Posted 30 May 2002 - 06:00 AM

[quote]General Koskov (30 May, 2002 03:29 a.m.):I was doing a fanfic screenplay of Diamonds Are Forever because I thought On Her Majesty

#15 Rolex

Rolex

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 448 posts
  • Location:Surrey UK

Posted 30 May 2002 - 09:23 AM

The 60s to the mid 70s were my Bond era, in retrospect they have their faults but to a kid growing up through these decades they were great. As an adult watching Bond you become bit more critical, so for me AVTAK is the worse by far but that’s for another post.

#16 Tanger

Tanger

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5671 posts
  • Location:Mars

Posted 30 May 2002 - 09:00 PM

You Only Live Twice tends, from time-to-time, to be my favourite Connery movie. It's mainly due to the fact that I'm a huge Donald Pleasence (not Pleasance) fan and I feel he was the best Blofeld. If only he came back in Diamonds Are Forever.
The score is beautiful and has some great action cues. Space March is definitely my favourite cue from the movie and it provides some great needed energy to the slow moving space scenes.
The Little Nellie scene is arguably the best aerial action seen in a Bond film (that's not driven by humour. I mean you Moonraker!) and is definitely the landmark action sequence of the Connery era.
The characters are also well developed I feel and you can definitely feel the sadness when Aki is killed.

Overall, I think it's definitely one of the best: 9/10

#17 Tanger

Tanger

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5671 posts
  • Location:Mars

Posted 30 May 2002 - 09:01 PM

Diamonds Are Forever is also a favourite of mine, but only to unwind to. The humour is a little overdone and the story complicated, the character's under developed.
The score's glassy and features some of Barry's best action arrangements.
Not the best but a fine outing nonetheless.
6/10

#18 RITZ

RITZ

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 947 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 30 May 2002 - 09:08 PM

DAF - by a long way!

Connery's suits are awful.
Connery's been eating too many pies.
Blofeld is in drag!

Need I say anymore?

#19 General Koskov

General Koskov

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1862 posts

Posted 30 May 2002 - 10:32 PM

Hardyboy (30 May, 2002 07:00 a.m.):
 To add to the torture, Wayne Newton performs every night. . .


I think that was in Licence to Kill. :)

Anyway, I thought of having a garden of death in Nevada...do they have any hot springs? But I think that all in all, if Diamonds Are Forever were in the place of You Only Live Twice (timewise), it works well and has a more sophisticated 'feel' to it. You Only Live Twice feels phoney with the poor night-filters on the camera (admittedly On Her Majesty

#20 General Koskov

General Koskov

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1862 posts

Posted 22 May 2002 - 05:13 AM

rafterman (12 May, 2002 02:06 p.m.):
well, I don't know...there are bad Bond films, but I still love them all and watch them constantly...it's like a bad Bond film is better than a good non Bond film....


Gotta agree 100% there. :) Rather You Only Live Twice than non Bond!

#21 General Koskov

General Koskov

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1862 posts

Posted 22 May 2002 - 05:11 AM

Mister Asterix (12 May, 2002 01:57 p.m.):

Why not ask which is the better film? No need to be so negative.


Yeah, now that I think of it, I should have asked which was better, but well, y'know...okay, you don't know--hell I don't know, but answer the question:

Which is a better film? You Only Live Twice or Diamonds Are Forever?


There, problem solved. :)Sorry about being so negative, but I cannot stand either.

#22 Morton Slumber

Morton Slumber

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 268 posts

Posted 29 May 2002 - 05:47 PM

YOLT is my second favourite Connery Bond, Goldfinger being my first. DAF being the one I like least.

#23 RossMan

RossMan

    Commander RNR

  • Veterans Reserve
  • PipPip
  • 822 posts

Posted 22 June 2002 - 09:03 PM

I have to say that I like YOLT better, even if it is a horrible adaption of my favorite Bond novel. Neither are really among my favorite Bond movies.

#24 BONDage

BONDage

    Cadet

  • Crew
  • 17 posts

Posted 01 July 2002 - 10:19 PM

Greetangzzz all!

#25 PaulZ108

PaulZ108

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1569 posts

Posted 01 July 2002 - 11:18 PM

I like both films, but YOLT is by far the better one in my opinion. Barry's score is stronger, the girls are better, the location is better, Blofeld is better, and one can't help but love the volcano lair.

#26 General Koskov

General Koskov

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1862 posts

Posted 01 July 2002 - 11:24 PM

First of all, welcome to CB.n, BONDage!:)

And second of all: my questions seem to have gotten nowhere because people find faults and good points in both films. This is good for discussion, but I'd like to know which people would want remade the most. See my last post above for my two choices (although those are just my ideas, please come up with your own if possible).

#27 mrmoon

mrmoon

    Commander RNR

  • Veterans Reserve
  • PipPip
  • 939 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 01 July 2002 - 11:24 PM

I won't beat around the bush I'll just admit that I really love Diamonds Are Forever.

I never watch a Bond movie and think damn Connery is too old, or Roger's looking past it, I never have done. Whether I should I don't know, but because I've watched them since I was very young and practically every week of my life since then, I just accept this is what Connery is like in Diamonds Are Forever, whether this is me being a poor critique I don't know but its something that I do.

The main element of Diamonds Are Forever that I find most invigorating is the score. It's so over-the-top yet so classy, its rich, and gets in your gut. The Diamonds Are Forever title song is my favourite of all time I think its superb. Elements of the score I really find superb are, 'Death at the Whyte House' which is one of my all time favourite cues, as is 'Bond Smells a rat'. Also 'Bond Meets Bambi and Thumper'. so good.

Mr.Wint and Mr.Kidd, as I think I've said in a thread before, are my favourite henchman. I love Charles Gray as Blofeld, and Jill St.John is still foxy. Ken Adams set designs are as always fantastic, and DAF marks the first of the movies in which his primary material was stainless steel and metal compounds, definately the materials he works best with (see TSWLM :) ). I particularly love Blofelds penthouse and the WW map embedded in the floor and the satelite lab is fantastic. I also love WW's house (palm springs) its architecturally brilliant, I would pay

#28 zencat

zencat

    Commander GCMG

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 25814 posts
  • Location:Studio City, CA

Posted 01 July 2002 - 11:27 PM

I'm with you mrmoon. DAF was my first Bond and I still love it!

#29 General Koskov

General Koskov

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1862 posts

Posted 01 July 2002 - 11:30 PM

Yes the rear-screen projection was really awful in You Only Live Twice, not to mention in Goldfinger. *shudder*

PS. I think you mean 'sliding in to Tanaka's office', rather than Osato's office.:)

#30 007luvchild

007luvchild

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 86 posts

Posted 02 July 2002 - 03:08 AM

Although, I do enjoy both films, I think YOLT was Connery weakest Bond film. As for Diamonds are Forever, I really can't say it's Connery weakest performance as Bond. Despite, the fact he does look unfit physically, I like the way Connery portrays Bond as having a type of old pro's grace. However, that doesn't excuse the fact the film has a lot of holes. Both films are watchable.