19 replies to this topic

[Blofeld]

I realize I may be stepping on alot of toes with this thread but I wanted to make my personal opinions known to all of the members this once and then dropping it. First off, let me say that I believe a Bond film can only be good if you like the actor portraying the character of Bond. It's like building a house, you need a good, strong foundation, otherwise the whole structure will collapse upon itself. I felt that Lazenby was too young and too inexperianced to play James Bond. It shows in almost every scene he was in. It seems that the producers hired him because they were in a terrible bind and figured they'd try an unknown so they could pay him little and replace him if it failed, or turn him into the next Sean Connery (who was basically an unknown when they hired him) if it was sucessful. They gambled, they lost. It made money, but didn't become the boxoffice winner EON had hoped it would be. The 2 main scenes in the film I enjoyed the most however, where the pre-credit sequence and the end when Tracy is killed. It's too bad, beacuse the rest of the film would have been great, it had all the main ingrediants to make a classic Bond film:an excellant leading lady, Telly Savalas was fine as Blofeld, a great score by John Barry which included one of my favourite themes "We Have All the Time in the World", and a fresh, new location for Blofeld's lair. Thank you for taking the time to read my feedback on OHMSS.

[License To Kill]

You have some very good points there, Blofeld. I agree with you that Lazenby was too young when he stepped into those ENORMOUS shoes of Sean Connery. I also agree the music and Diana Rigg kept it together and imagine if Sean Connery was Bond! Wow, would be one of the best ever, guaranteed.

[IrishCrown]

It's ironic, because I feel the same way about Dalton as Bond the way you do about Lazenby. I, however, don't like any of the Dalton movies, so you have a few points on me for that.

[DLibrasnow]

You are right, you are stepping on my toes. But, I respect your opinion.
For me, this is one of my favorite Bond movies for several reasons.
The story is a good solid story with an interesting structure.
The score is amazing, probably my all time favorite.
The skiiing -- nuff said.
Switzerland -- always loved the land of chocolate and cuckoo clocks.
Diana Rigg -- a truly gorgeous Bond girl and a great actress.

I really don't care who plays Bond in a particular movie. I think the role of Bond is bigger than any one actor.

[David Somerset]

I just love OHMSS. Great atmosphere, great score, best Blofeld and despite whatever his critics may say, I thought Lazenby made a potentially great Bond. I would love to have seen him do DAF.

[Spectre001]

I agree with David Sommerset here. The more I watch OHMSS the more I like it, especially the energy thrust into it by Lazenby (just look at the fight scenes). I also believe that DAF, LALD and TMWTGG would have been better movies with Lazenby in them.

[Trevelyan]

I personally feel that Lazenby is one of the weaker Bonds, inferior to Connery anyway. I love "OHMSS," mainly because it follows the book basically verbatim (not to the same annoying extent as "FRWL," but still very closely), and the book is one of Fleming's best ever.

The rest of the movie is superb. The plot is without flaw, the music is superb, the action is fantastic. In my opinion, it is undeniably a 4-star Bond movie, which could only have been made better by using Connery instead of Lazenby.

[deth]

I think the trouble with Lazenby is that he seemd to be trying to be Connery. It didn't work. At least Moore, Dalton and Brosnan are their "own" Bonds.

[ShakeNotStirred]

So what it Lazenby tried to be a little like Connery?? That aint a bad thing. Its not like Dalton as Bond and Moore as Bond were anything too special, even though Moore wasnt too bad. OHMSS was an awesome movie, and the girl in tracy is awesome, the villian is once again awesome, and skiing and Blofelds fort atop that mountain is cool also.

[White Persian]

I think it's inevitable that Lazenby tried to imitate Connery's Bond.
Connery WAS Bond in the sixties, and Lazenby was chosen largely because the producers thought he had similar qualities. For continuity's sake they tried to make the changeover as seamless as they could, rather than making the casting of a new actor with a new take on Bond a selling point.

It's interesting to speculate how Roger Moore might have fared in OHMSS. I have a 1968 copy of TV Times (Australian) announcing mistakenly that Moore had been cast. Since Moore's best non-Bond performances were for Peter Hunt, in Gold and Shout At The Devil, the results might have been really something. Of course Moore wouldn't have had the physical athleticism of Lazenby in the fight scenes, but an editor of Hunt's experience could have worked around Moore's weaknesses in that area. Moore's well edited fight scenes in Gold work very well.

I'm sure Roger would have impersonated Sir Hillary Bray nicely without the need to resort to dubbing, and his less menacing take on Bond would have suited the disguise.

For the scenes where a tougher Bond is needed, I'm sure Peter Hunt could have coaxed what was needed from Roger, as he later did in Gold.
Nevertheless, I have no real problems with Lazenby's performance. I think he looks older than his twenty nine years (he doesn't look noticeably younger that Dalton or Brosnan in their first films).

He lacks the sheer charisma of Connery or the charm of Moore or Brosnan. He might lack the acting technique of Connery or Dalton, but his performance is sincere, and likable. If he lacks anything its the sense of irony that Connery and Brosnan have. But that matters little since of all the Bond films, OHMSS is the least tongue-in-cheek.

[kevrichardson]

It is the best Bond novel ( yes it's a little over written ) still Fleming at his best . It is one of the best films that closely follows the books. The first is FRWL , the change is in FRWL the introduction of SPECTRE and Blofeld . Other than that it follows the book . Best score by John Barry, Best action sequences ,Best photography by Michael Reed , Best Maibaum screenplay , Best first time Bond Director Peter Hunt. Best Bond girl , Diana Riggs . bset location Schilthornbahn ,switzerland. If the producer and Eon wheir not so quick to score in the box-office ,it might have work and laid the ground work for want they have been tring to return too. In other word we would have not been given the Moore years. as too whether Roger Moore would have worked in the role of Bond in 1969 . I do not know , if you need further "what if's". There is a great article on the HMSS website www.hmss.com . It is a speculative piece on if Connery had stared in OHMSS in 1967. It's very good reading ,and has some interesting opinions on casting and directors for the film. Last Brosnan , wants to remake the film , it 's just that good . And after the shock of Lazenby on screen accent and all after 10 minutes into the film he just growns on you. The film can't be to bad it is playing the "Art Movie House Circuit" here in America.

[11 11]

To be completely honest Sean Connery could not have been in that movie. Piz Gloria and Sir Hillary Bray should say it all. Sorry Sean would have not pulled that off. Personally I think the ending, the marriage of all that, not good with either Connery or Moore. Just my opinion though.

Actually one of the things that makes it special is Lazenby I think.

Anyway, this movie is easily in the top 5 Bonds of all time. I am not sure if it as classic a Bond as say GF or FRWL, DN, but it right there.

All in all I believe this is either the best or 2nd best Bond movie.

[Mr. Kidd]

Had OHMSS been Roger Moore's first outing as Bond I think it would have been a better film as Moore was a more seasoned actor at the
time than Lazenby, and would have made the series better as the
continuity with Moore revenging Tracy's murder in DAF would have
worked better than the "Bond-switching" that occurred with Connery's
return. Also by the time he did LALD, Moore probobly would have been
more comfortable with the role and given a more relaxed performance.
I still thoroughly enjoy OHMSS on it's merits, but oh,what might have
been!!!

[Red Grant]

Originally posted by Mr. Kidd
Had OHMSS been Roger Moore's first outing as Bond I think it would have been a better film as Moore was a more seasoned actor at the  
time than Lazenby, and would have made the series better as the  
continuity with Moore revenging Tracy's murder in DAF would have  
worked better than the "Bond-switching" that occurred with Connery's
return. Also by the time he did LALD, Moore probobly would have been
more comfortable with the role and given a more relaxed performance.
I still thoroughly enjoy OHMSS on it's merits, but oh,what might have  
been!!!

NO, NO, NO, NO, NO! This would be like colourising a black and white film. Leave well alone. OHMSS is perfect as it is. Lazenby was no Connery but that was one hell of a reputation to live up to. Whoever had got the role would have had the same problem. It is just unfortunate that the blame still gets laid at Lazenby's feet all these years later. I agree with most of what has been said before. Best story, Best score, Best Girl etc. etc. The fact that most Bond fans think it is the best of the series (or well up there) isn't a bad record for a Bond with only one film to his credit. OHMSS was out of step but has grown better with age like a fine wine and as such should be savoured. There is no point in debating "what if's....". The fact is OHMSS is there on it's own - THE BEST, THE LONGEST, THE MOST FAITHFUL, THE MOST REALISTIC. I don't even think the film would have been any better with Connery judging from his performance in YOLT he was really bored by then. If it had been made earlier as was originally planned then that may be a different story. But it wasn't ....

[Scottlee]

Connery got bored in YOLT because he was fed up of the emphasis on gadgets etc, so we're led to believe. If EON wanted him to stay, why didn't they show him an idea of what OHMSS was going to be like? He might have loved the chance to take the character a different direction. Who's to say he would have ponced around Piz Gloria looking bored?

[Red Grant]

Originally posted by Scottlee
Connery got bored in YOLT because he was fed up of the emphasis on gadgets etc, so we're led to believe. If EON wanted him to stay, why didn't they show him an idea of what OHMSS was going to be like? He might have loved the chance to take the character a different direction. Who's to say he would have ponced around Piz Gloria looking bored?

Connery left the role as he was fed up with all the press attention and the fact he couldn't do other movies due to the shooting schedules of the Bond films. If he was fed up with gadgets why does he look so relaxed in THUNDERBALL - possibly his most assured performance as Bond? He also appear to be having fun in DAF surrounded by gadgets. Can't have been the money...he gave that away!

[ray t]

he gave away his "salary"...his share of the profits, which, *AHEM*, were a multiple of his $1 million salary, he kept (and quite rightly so...)

[kevrichardson]

Originally posted by ray t
he gave away his "salary"...his share of the profits, which, *AHEM*, were a multiple of his $1 million salary, he kept (and quite rightly so...)

This proves that Connery is full of ****. He was a 3rd rate actor , thrusted into international film stardom. because of Bond. He is the world biggest "cry baby" . Every other man who has played Bond , has dealt with the fame,fortune and some of the unplesantness of the role. Broccoli and Saltzman must have made it clear to Connery that Bond was to be "International".

[1q2w3e4r]

I don't think people quite understand the scope of how big Bond was in the 60s. Goldfinger was essentially the first real blockbuster of ALL TIME. It was huge, ran 24 hours a day. Back then, even before there were really only 5 or 6 ''movie stars'' such as Cary Grant, Bogart, Flynn, Gable.

Connery quit simply because he was bored with what they were doing with the character. He thought Thunderball was a good script, with good characters but was as large in scope as they should go. He felt they should have toned down the gadgets and gotten back to a good story. Pretty smart man.

The fact he quit after YOLT. Im sure is in part to do with the Japanese press hounding him 24 hours a day so he couldn't eat or go to the bathroom alone without someone trying to take his picture. Cubby had to tell the Japanese press to piss off and give Sean some time alone.

He was Bond in the 60s. Still is to many, and people will always compare a new Bond to Connery. Not Roger Moore, Lazenby, Dalton or Brosnan. He set the benchmark. He deserved every penny he got, probably more. If the producers had taken him on as a partner there wouldn't have been any dramas.

[kevrichardson]

Originally posted by 1q2w3e4r

Connery quit simply because he was bored with what they were doing with the character.  He thought Thunderball was a good script, with good characters but was as large in scope as they should go.  He felt they should have toned down the gadgets and gotten back to a good story.  Pretty smart man.  

This may be true. Still he walked away from OHMSS. And Connery became a "International Star" because of Bond.