New 007 DVDs: Fantastic!

[AndyDursin]

Back to the Blu Ray argument and why you ought to pick up these DVDs instead of waiting:

No Blu Ray DVD that I've seen so far has done anything in terms of supplements.

Fox just issued a great, 2-disc ROCKY Special Edition with three commentaries and tons of extras.

That same ROCKY on Blu Ray has, from what I've read, virtually nothing on it at all.

Even if the 007's do end up on Blu Ray in '07, I wouldn't expect them to contain all the extras of these sets. Certainly these first group of Blu Ray discs have given you little reason to believe they will.

[Eric Paddon]

The more I hear about HD and Blu-Ray, the more convinced I am that I won't be doing any kind of upgrade on the order of LD to DVD for at least a decade or so.

[mkaroly]

This message board is going to be the end of me....after reading through this entire thread I BROKE DOWN and went out and spent two C-notes and some change on these box sets....UGH!! I'm going to be bankrupt!

Now for my two cents:

Favorite Bond films: From Russia with Love, Thunderball, OHMSS, Casino Royale, For Your Eyes Only

Least Favorite Bond films: The Man With the Golden Gun, A View to A Kill, License to Kill, and Die Another Day (whose idea was it to hire Halle Berry??? She spoiled the movie for me).

Worst Bond score ever: Goldeneye....just awful. Still won't buy it to this day.

Worst title song ever: Madonna for Die another Day, Sheryl Crow's song for Tomorrow Never Dies, Ah-Ha for The Living Daylights, and Lulu for TMWTGG.

Roger Moore stuff was a bit too corny for me at times, and while I like The Living Daylights, Dalton was given bad material with License to Kill and bad actors around him....so that one doesn't sit well with me.

If I had to pick an absolute favorite, it would be either OHMSS or Thunderball.

I think the first Bond film I saw in the theaters was The Living Daylights. I saw it 6 times with different people each time.

[Monterey Jack]

Diamonds Are Forever is bloody horrible. I just watched OHMSS again the other night, and to go from that tragic ending to the bloated, jokey tone of DAF was unforgivable. I still think of the later Moore entry For Your Eyes Only as the "real" sequel to OHMSS, with it opening with Bond placing flowers on Tracy's grave then finally getting his revenge on Blofeld ("Please, Mr. Bond! I will buy you a delicatessen, in stainless steel...!") Imagine Return Of The King having Frodo drop the ring into Mount Doom within the first few minutes, then the remaining 3 hours consist of Frodo and Sam getting chased by a pair of homosexual orcs while Saruman disguises himself in drag. That's why DAF is one of the worst Bond films. Plus, the visual effects are terrible (some of the worst explosions I've ever seen, even by 1971 standards), Jill St. John is a lousy Bond Girl (she actually says "Yeeeeeeee!" at one point! ), and Connery looks about 15 years older than his actual age of 41. Even John Barry's score isn't terribly interesting (aside from his Kidd & Wint theme). It's complete rubbish.

[mkaroly]

Just watched DR. NO.....wow. Everyone is right- I can't even imagine what the other films look like. Ya know....I am freakin' impressed. It really was like watching the film for the first time all over again. For the first time, for example, I saw the droplets of water on Zena Marshall's body when she answers the door. The water is so blue and the colors so vibrant- kudos to everyone for the work they put into this stuff. Wow.

[Eric Paddon]

The shift in tone in "Diamonds Are Forever" I think can be forgiven, in light of the fact that Connery was returning, and the less than enthusiastic reaction to OHMSS meant the production team wanted to put as much distance between the memory of OHMSS as much as possible.

Also, I think its hard for us nowadays in this day and age of being able to revisit a film so quickly when it comes out on DVD to remember the days when a film just disappeared after its theatrical run, and thus you weren't inclined to remember the details of the last film so much when the next one came out two years later. I really think much of the audience that saw DAF didn't remember too many of the specifics from OHMSS in the way that the modern viewer would in this age of home video, so that too can be forgiven IMO.

Stylishly, DAF works. Charles Gray is a terrible Blofeld, and it would have been nice if Telly Savalas could have been brought back (or at least someone in that mold). Jill St. John I think did fine, and looks terrific, though I've always felt that Tiffany Case was the one Bond girl role Raquel Welch would have been perfect for.

[AndyDursin]

Excellent points by Eric. Again, DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER is not one of my favorite Bonds at all but remember they wanted to go back to Connery and some of the more escapist fare after the Lazenby effort -- deliberately at that.

My least favorite Bonds are MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN, A VIEW TO A KILL, THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH, and GOLDENEYE (not a big Brosnan fan, have to admit), though not necessarily in that order. I realize "Goldeneye" has a decent story but I hate the score and some of the dialogue to the point where I have no desire to sit through it again.

My least favorite Connery is YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, which I feel is tedious (in spite of a relatively lean running time), then probably THUNDERBALL, mainly for the dull-as-dishwater underwater sequences which bog down the last third of the movie. Still I'd take those two instantly over any of the Brosnans.

My favorite Bonds are (basically not in any order) GOLDFINGER, ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE, DR.NO, THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS, FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, OCTOPUSSY (yes, ridiculous, but great fun as I said), and maybe LIVE AND LET DIE, though I understand the latter two would not appeal to any hard-core Fleming aficionado.

Also, I've been reading that the frame on the Lowry GOLDENEYE has been visibly zoomed in on the left and right hand sides. Someone at Home Theater Forum did screen caps and it does seem to be the case. Hopefully we'll find out about a replacement if MGM does one.

[Carlson2005]

I think its hard for us nowadays in this day and age of being able to revisit a film so quickly when it comes out on DVD to remember the days when a film just disappeared after its theatrical run, and thus you weren't inclined to remember the details of the last film so much when the next one came out two years later. I really think much of the audience that saw DAF didn't remember too many of the specifics from OHMSS in the way that the modern viewer would in this age of home video, so that too can be forgiven IMO.

I think that's giving audiences too little credit - especially since the Bonds would in those days play much, much longer (OHMSS was still playing successfully into early 1971). The problem is a fairly common one with the Bonds at the time, where Broccoli (who liked outlandish FX shows) and Saltzman (who preferred to go a bit more realistic) would alternate as lead producer on the films to keep the production line running smoothly and also to keep out of each other's way for as long as possible. Thus you tend to get huge tonal shifts from one Bond to the next until UA bought out Saltzman's share - the Roger Moore era is far more Cubby's legacy than the Connery one.

There's also the problem that no Bond film ever recaptured the huge US success of Thunderball, which took around $1b inflation adjusted. You Only Live Twice saw a massive drop in box-office, partially due to Casino Royale, and surprisingly took less than the hugely successful OHMSS on its first run (but subsequently outgrossed it on reissues).

The distance was more because of Cubby's pride, despite the alternate history that grew up once Saltzman left the series. While Saltzman had wanted to sign Lazenby to a multi-picture contract, Broccoli wanted to wait and see how it turned out in case the series died without Connery - that way they wouldn't have to pay off Lazenby if it tanked. He finally changed his mind around halfway into shooting, but by that time Lazenby had already decided he was quitting and turned down all kinds of under the table offers for a seven picture deal, much to Cubby's fury (he even removed Lazenby's face from the original US one-sheet in a fit of pique!). Even when the film was still on release Cubby was giving interviews about how much he hated Lazenby, and Lazenby wasn't helping matters by dismissing the Bond films as old hat - yet still it became the second highest grosser of the year worldwide, earning back more than ten times its cost and recouping its budget in less than three weeks (unheard of then). At today's prices it took around $489m, and even after signing John Gavin to play Bond in DAF, UA and EON were still trying to lure Lazenby back until Connery hinted he might be interested at the right price.

Diamonds Are Forever was in many ways Cubby's revenge, a way of pretending that Lazenby never happened even if EON and UA ended up making less money on it because of Connery's lucrative percentage deal. Much as he hated Connery, he hated Lazenby more (Saltzman, curiously, remained good friends with Lazenby for years, possible because of Broccoli's hatred!). By throwing away the revenge angle and going for lazy plotting and camp comedy, it was drawing a huge line between the films. In many ways the finished film feels too much like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

When I first saw it I thought it was fun, but it doesn't hold up well to repeat viewings, especially when viewed in order (and I saw all the original films in cinemas, catching their sporadic double-bill reissues). It's one of the periodic attempts to play more to the American audience, and while marginally more successful than LTK, Bond rarely fits in in an American milieu.

[MarkB]

I'd still rather watch a "bad" Bond movie than 90% (or more) of the movies being released these days.

Mark

[AndyDursin]

I'd still rather watch a "bad" Bond movie than 90% (or more) of the movies being released these days.

Mark

Amen to that. You have to keep everything in perspective...when I say "Bad Bond" it's still better than most stuff out there. Hell I'd rather sit through A VIEW TO A KILL than most 2006 releases!

[mkaroly]

I think its hard for us nowadays in this day and age of being able to revisit a film so quickly when it comes out on DVD to remember the days when a film just disappeared after its theatrical run, and thus you weren't inclined to remember the details of the last film so much when the next one came out two years later. I really think much of the audience that saw DAF didn't remember too many of the specifics from OHMSS in the way that the modern viewer would in this age of home video, so that too can be forgiven IMO.

I think that's giving audiences too little credit - especially since the Bonds would in those days play much, much longer (OHMSS was still playing successfully into early 1971). The problem is a fairly common one with the Bonds at the time, where Broccoli (who liked outlandish FX shows) and Saltzman (who preferred to go a bit more realistic) would alternate as lead producer on the films to keep the production line running smoothly and also to keep out of each other's way for as long as possible. Thus you tend to get huge tonal shifts from one Bond to the next until UA bought out Saltzman's share - the Roger Moore era is far more Cubby's legacy than the Connery one.

There's also the problem that no Bond film ever recaptured the huge US success of Thunderball, which took around $1b inflation adjusted. You Only Live Twice saw a massive drop in box-office, partially due to Casino Royale, and surprisingly took less than the hugely successful OHMSS on its first run (but subsequently outgrossed it on reissues).

The distance was more because of Cubby's pride, despite the alternate history that grew up once Saltzman left the series. While Saltzman had wanted to sign Lazenby to a multi-picture contract, Broccoli wanted to wait and see how it turned out in case the series died without Connery - that way they wouldn't have to pay off Lazenby if it tanked. He finally changed his mind around halfway into shooting, but by that time Lazenby had already decided he was quitting and turned down all kinds of under the table offers for a seven picture deal, much to Cubby's fury (he even removed Lazenby's face from the original US one-sheet in a fit of pique!). Even when the film was still on release Cubby was giving interviews about how much he hated Lazenby, and Lazenby wasn't helping matters by dismissing the Bond films as old hat - yet still it became the second highest grosser of the year worldwide, earning back more than ten times its cost and recouping its budget in less than three weeks (unheard of then). At today's prices it took around $489m, and even after signing John Gavin to play Bond in DAF, UA and EON were still trying to lure Lazenby back until Connery hinted he might be interested at the right price.

Diamonds Are Forever was in many ways Cubby's revenge, a way of pretending that Lazenby never happened even if EON and UA ended up making less money on it because of Connery's lucrative percentage deal. Much as he hated Connery, he hated Lazenby more (Saltzman, curiously, remained good friends with Lazenby for years, possible because of Broccoli's hatred!). By throwing away the revenge angle and going for lazy plotting and camp comedy, it was drawing a huge line between the films. In many ways the finished film feels too much like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

When I first saw it I thought it was fun, but it doesn't hold up well to repeat viewings, especially when viewed in order (and I saw all the original films in cinemas, catching their sporadic double-bill reissues). It's one of the periodic attempts to play more to the American audience, and while marginally more successful than LTK, Bond rarely fits in in an American milieu.

Wow- thanks for the insight. That explains a lot, as I am not really a big fan of DAF.

[Jedbu]

My first Bond in a theater was YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE when I was 9 years old. My father and I were on a camping trip and decided to see a movie in the local town that night. The town was Defiance, Ohio and YOLT was showing. I had no idea who James Bond was but I did love going to movies so we went, and I really enjoyed it. I recall it has one of the most beautiful themes Barry ever wrote, and the opening scene with 007 being shot was a bit much for me at that age but it didn't tramatize me, thank God. I then started watching the Bond films when ABC-TV started showing them-I remember the controversy about GOLDFINGER when the golden girl was shown in a brief flash, and the fight with Pussy Galore was somewhat abbreviated, as well.

I love the Connery's (even NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN, with one of the worst film scores ever written), Lazenby's sole effort, the first two Moore's, LICENCE and parts of GOLDENEYE. I only have the Brosnan's because my wife loves him-that's it. The only part of OCTOPUSSY I really enjoyed was the girl with the butterfly act (OOOOhhhhhh!!) and Jourdan's command to his henchman when they spy Bond on the wing of the plane ("Go out and get him!" "Huh?!").

Personally, I'll do with the last two set what I did with first two, keep the ones I like and sell the others at Amoeba, which paid very nicely for them, I must say.

Merry Christmas from one of the bleeding heart liberal Christians on this forum, and a joyous New Year!!

[Eric Paddon]

The only part of OCTOPUSSY I really enjoyed was the girl with the butterfly act

Actually that was in "A View To A Kill".

[Jedbu]

Thank you, Eric, for the correction. Those two films almost run together for me, so this will help. Merry Christmas!

[Carlson2005]

Well, having got the complete set now, I’m afraid that so far (I haven’t seen all of the films yet) I can’t share Andy’s enthusiasm for this set. Maybe the original US transfers were worse than the UK ones but I failed to see a huge leap in quality but couldn’t help notice that four of the films have been cropped – the first three films to 1.85:1 instead of their original 1.66:1 and that tight cropping on GoldenEye, a film that has a shortage of long shots to begin with. A couple have synch problems. Then there’s the loss of several extras (most pronounced on Die Another Day) to be replaced in some cases by very bland ones (not to mention the inexcusable loss of 55 minutes from the excellent You Only Live Twice episode of Whicker’s World).

Yes, some of the additional features are very welcome, and it’s good to have the slight trims back in OHMSS (probably the only title to truly be considered as a possible ‘ultimate’ edition), but this is a long, long way from deserving the ‘ultimate’ tag. Glad I got this set cheap.