That's another thing Roger Moore comments on in the same documentary.
"He always liked saying that word. Octopussy"
My Journey Through Bond
- Thread starter jcoffman99
- Start date
- Status
That's another thing Roger Moore comments on in the same documentary.
"He always liked saying that word. Octopussy"
Pretty sure Jeyl means he recently re-watched it.
I saw Moonraker on the big screen last night (been seeing them all, even AVTAK). It's DEFINITELY in the bottom 3. :lol
What a stinker!
Solo4114
Master Member
So, on my own journey, I'm now wrapping up OHMSS.
I have to say that this is one of THE best Bond films ever, in my opinion. Lazenby's portrayal is a bit...hmm...of a blank slate. I don't actually see him aping Connery. I don't see him really aping anyone. His character is far more subdued than Connery's quippy ladies man (which he'd become by YOLT), but isn't the cold, ruthless agent of Dr. No, either. Actually, Bond seems largely business while pursuing Blofeld, and then shifts dramatically to love with Tracy. I really love the dichotomy there.
The stunts in this film are also nothing short of spectacular. Really, it's just some top-notch work. Likewise, I LOVE that Bond has NO GADGETS this time. He could've escaped on his special ski rocket shoes or whatever, but no. He's got to rely totally on himself.
I also have to say that this is one of the most visually beautiful Bond films. Sure, the clothes are awful, particularly Bond's fluffy tuxedo shirt, but the colors in this film are just gorgeous, from the purple walls of the casino, to the explosion of flowers in Bond's hotel room, to the amber sun that Draco's Hueys fly out of on their way to assault Blofeld's lair. It's just gorgeous all around, and the restoration by Lowry is fantastic.
Easily a favorite for me. I think much of the problem with Lazenby's reception is that he just wasn't Connery -- and the film was a little too on-the-nose about that. The opening credits (which, by the way, have one of my favorite Bond themes), the 4th wall breaking of the pre-credit sequence, the wandering through his office and looking at bits and bobs from past adventures, it's all just a little too in-your-face about how this is not Sean Connery. It seems they learned from this by the time they got to Roger Moore in Live and Let Die. You don't lampshade your actor changes. All you need is one good "Bond. James Bond" moment and that's it.
I have to say that this is one of THE best Bond films ever, in my opinion. Lazenby's portrayal is a bit...hmm...of a blank slate. I don't actually see him aping Connery. I don't see him really aping anyone. His character is far more subdued than Connery's quippy ladies man (which he'd become by YOLT), but isn't the cold, ruthless agent of Dr. No, either. Actually, Bond seems largely business while pursuing Blofeld, and then shifts dramatically to love with Tracy. I really love the dichotomy there.
The stunts in this film are also nothing short of spectacular. Really, it's just some top-notch work. Likewise, I LOVE that Bond has NO GADGETS this time. He could've escaped on his special ski rocket shoes or whatever, but no. He's got to rely totally on himself.
I also have to say that this is one of the most visually beautiful Bond films. Sure, the clothes are awful, particularly Bond's fluffy tuxedo shirt, but the colors in this film are just gorgeous, from the purple walls of the casino, to the explosion of flowers in Bond's hotel room, to the amber sun that Draco's Hueys fly out of on their way to assault Blofeld's lair. It's just gorgeous all around, and the restoration by Lowry is fantastic.
Easily a favorite for me. I think much of the problem with Lazenby's reception is that he just wasn't Connery -- and the film was a little too on-the-nose about that. The opening credits (which, by the way, have one of my favorite Bond themes), the 4th wall breaking of the pre-credit sequence, the wandering through his office and looking at bits and bobs from past adventures, it's all just a little too in-your-face about how this is not Sean Connery. It seems they learned from this by the time they got to Roger Moore in Live and Let Die. You don't lampshade your actor changes. All you need is one good "Bond. James Bond" moment and that's it.
Agreed! Easily in my top 5 Bond films of all time. However there are a couple gadgets although only one from MI6... Radioactive lint. :lol
Bond fans take note. "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" BluRay and Ultimate Edition DVD has some slight alterations to the film when compared to the MGM Special Edition and VHS tapes.
Changes:
Changes:
- Bond's fight on the beach is now a day for night shot instead of being in the day.
- Extra dialogue for Blofeld. "Oh, come now, Tracy. Don't be so proud. Your own father's profession is not entirely within the law." On the previous editions, this is where it would cut to the helicopters, but the UE and BluRay adds one more sentence. "His brotherhood have exotic ways to keep it a closed shop."
Here's a video showing the comparison. The person who uploaded the video is pretty vocal about his disdain towards this decision.
I always prefer the original theatrical release whether it was intended that way or not. Can't say I'm outraged but I'll definitely be holding on to my old version as well.
Solo4114
Master Member
This raises the question, though, of whether that WAS the original theatrical release. With many movies, we've been through so many iterations of home video that it's tough to really say. I had similar experiences watching other restorations, even by Lowry itself. North by Northwest, for example, looks a lot less "red" than it did on DVD, and I did a side-by-side comparison. Other DVDs have had similar treatments, like Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Terminator, Big Trouble in Little China, etc.
I've come to think that the VHS/DVD era was one where home releases were simply color-timed brighter/redder, perhaps because we lacked sufficient resolution to really view the detail in the shadows or somesuch. So, the choice was made to brighten things or warm them up or something. I don't know what the rationale would be exactly, but that was a theory I came up with, for what it's worth.
Regardless, the main point is that what we've all been watching for the last 30-odd years may not, in fact, be "the theatrical version," but rather "the version we all thought was the theatrical one."
Agreed. But I've seen it in the theatre on a really old scratched up print so I have seen the original.
Now do I remember if that line was there or not? Nope. :lol
IIRC the opening was a really poor day for night.
It definitely has a "dawn" feel to it. Hence a really poor day for night. :lol
I find that's the case in a lot of Bond films, the Moore ones were notorious for it.
Solo4114
Master Member
So, I slogged through Diamonds Are Forever last night.
Connery looks like he just doesn't give a damn anymore. The outfits are godawful, too. The whole thing just has this veneer of grime and sweat that I tend to associate with the 70s for some reason. Maybe it's the film stock. And there's just so much damn silliness.
Anyway, in spite of that, it does have its fun aspects. The car chases are great (well, not including the embarrassing dune buggy sequence). There's relatively little over-the-top gadgetry. Wint and Kidd are indeed funny.
But really, I think my issue with this film is one of tone. It begins and ends with awful shifts in tone. This film comes on the heels of the incredibly emotional climax of OHMSS. But you wouldn't know it at all to watch Connery mug for the camera in the opening shots. No, no. We're back from seriousness to full-on goofy-mode, and it sucks. The guy just lost his wife but he's trading quips with Lana Wood and hopping in the sack with Jill St. John? Yeah, they're gorgeous, both of 'em, but YOUR WIFE IS DEAD AND YOU DON'T SEEM TO CARE. And then there's the very end, which veers between truly goofy and horrific. I'm sorry, but the sequence where the one guy gets LIT ON FIRE is NOT funny. It's gruesome. And the other guy who gets blown apart, yeah, gruesome again. But we'll just brush it off with a quip and Jill St. John wondering how she'll get the diamonds down from space. Ugh.
To me, this film heralds all that ended up going very wrong with the Bond franchise. It's where the "formula" is really cememnted. The hacky humor, the over-the-top villain, the know-it-all Bond... Coming on the heels of OHMSS, it's really a disappointment. It's fun, sure. But it's fun in a fluffy way and the series can do SO much better.
Connery looks like he just doesn't give a damn anymore. The outfits are godawful, too. The whole thing just has this veneer of grime and sweat that I tend to associate with the 70s for some reason. Maybe it's the film stock. And there's just so much damn silliness.
Anyway, in spite of that, it does have its fun aspects. The car chases are great (well, not including the embarrassing dune buggy sequence). There's relatively little over-the-top gadgetry. Wint and Kidd are indeed funny.
But really, I think my issue with this film is one of tone. It begins and ends with awful shifts in tone. This film comes on the heels of the incredibly emotional climax of OHMSS. But you wouldn't know it at all to watch Connery mug for the camera in the opening shots. No, no. We're back from seriousness to full-on goofy-mode, and it sucks. The guy just lost his wife but he's trading quips with Lana Wood and hopping in the sack with Jill St. John? Yeah, they're gorgeous, both of 'em, but YOUR WIFE IS DEAD AND YOU DON'T SEEM TO CARE. And then there's the very end, which veers between truly goofy and horrific. I'm sorry, but the sequence where the one guy gets LIT ON FIRE is NOT funny. It's gruesome. And the other guy who gets blown apart, yeah, gruesome again. But we'll just brush it off with a quip and Jill St. John wondering how she'll get the diamonds down from space. Ugh.
To me, this film heralds all that ended up going very wrong with the Bond franchise. It's where the "formula" is really cememnted. The hacky humor, the over-the-top villain, the know-it-all Bond... Coming on the heels of OHMSS, it's really a disappointment. It's fun, sure. But it's fun in a fluffy way and the series can do SO much better.
I have the same association! You're not alone...
Agree on all accounts. This film could have and SHOULD have been so much more!
- Status
