Besides the bad script, with spaceships, volcanos, and a bald, pirate scarred super-villain is strictly comic book, even in 1967. Not much to get excited about.
How could you NOT get excited about volcano bases launching space rocket swallowing rockets that gets attacked by a ninja army if you're twelve years old?! )
And while it's interesting to dwell on what could've been, I'm going to say that the current Bond movie franchise would be very different or not even be here today if You Only Live Twice didn't deviate a fair bit from the Fleming novel it was based on and if Lazenby didn't try to replace Connery.
Easy, then as now I had read and enjoyed the novels. While the previous Bond's had deviated from the thrillers, YOLT took a wide left turn. I recall '67 very well, the horrifying Casino Royale and the disappointing YOLT. I was looking for the reveal of Blofeld, the mysterious dark haired man who was a combination of Anthony Dawson and Eric Pohlman. When the bald, scarred Donald Pleasence appeared, it was like watching an episode of Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea.
Even today's "return to Fleming" is a pretty loose, though welcome adaptation. Surprisingly, these days I find Feldman's Casino Royale a much more entertaining film than YOLT.
Just because the movie version of YOLT deviates significantly from the novel doesn't mean it couldn't an entertaining film in its own right. I can certainly understand why YOLT might not be your cup of tea considering the tone of the novels, as well as the four previous Bond films. But not as entertaining as the abomination known as Casino Royale '67??? Wow!
"Felix Leiter, a brother from Langley."
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,652MI6 Agent
Besides the bad script, with spaceships, volcanos, and a bald, pirate scarred super-villain is strictly comic book, even in 1967. Not much to get excited about.
How could you NOT get excited about volcano bases launching space rocket swallowing rockets that gets attacked by a ninja army if you're twelve years old?! )
And while it's interesting to dwell on what could've been, I'm going to say that the current Bond movie franchise would be very different or not even be here today if You Only Live Twice didn't deviate a fair bit from the Fleming novel it was based on and if Lazenby didn't try to replace Connery.
I was only a year old in 67, so I can only imagine how it was like for the Bond moviegoer to see the spectacle and scale of YOLT unfold on the screen, which might have been like watching Star Wars for the first time...seeing Bond start "small" with DN and FRWL, progressing to gadget vehicles in GF, more of those in TB along with its sophisticated underwater sequences, then graduating to that that cavernous, hollowed-out volcano...wow, talk about upping the ante!
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
That's why I still love YOLT and can easily forgive its flaws like the wiggly Spectre rocket doors etc.
For the same reason I love Moonraker, they are visually spectacular! Just switch off your common sense (waiting for a snide remark from Sir Miles on that ) and enjoy the ride!
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,562Chief of Staff
That's why I still love YOLT and can easily forgive its flaws like the wiggly Spectre rocket doors etc.
For the same reason I love Moonraker, they are visually spectacular! Just switch off your common sense (waiting for a snide remark from Sir Miles on that ) and enjoy the ride!
Actually, Bondtots, I don't have many issues with either of those films as they don't take themselves too seriously - they play-up to the silliness without going over-the-top....unlike yourself
Lazenby put in a Decent Performance, yes he was a bit Wooden because it was his first real Acting Role.
I didn't find Lazenby wooden. I thought he did a pretty damn good job . . . especially in scenes that required Bond to be very human - proposing marriage to Tracy and his quarrel with "M".
Lazenby put in a Decent Performance, yes he was a bit Wooden because it was his first real Acting Role.
I didn't find Lazenby wooden. I thought he did a pretty damn good job . . . especially in scenes that required Bond to be very human - proposing marriage to Tracy and his quarrel with "M".
Part of the problem is how much of them movie is dubbed -- and I'm not just talking about when he's pretending to be Bray. It's clear they did a lot of voiceover work that doesn't always match up with facial expressions and lip movements. It's one of the reasons that Lazenby seems more confident and capable in the action sequences. Perhaps his line delivery in the original wasn't as good, but inconsistencies give some of his speaking scenes an off kilter quality.
Perhaps his line delivery in the original wasn't as good, but inconsistencies give some of his speaking scenes an off kilter quality.
The dubbing throws a deflection into the mix which in some ways compromises one's ability to judge the line deliveries, which works in Mr. Lazenby's favour IMO.
Anyone bothered by his accent in this? It sounded like an Aussie/English hybrid.
I'm American, and while I have an ear for accents, I'll admit to never having found anything strange about Tim Dalton's.
But Lazenby? Oh Hell yes. Very Aussie moments. But Sean had some very Scottish ones, Pierce had some very Irish/American moments.
As to bothering me? Not really. It's all good to Yanks. )
"You were just in time, things were about to turn NASTEH!" )
Hah ha, see, to my ears, never having lived in the UK, I don't hear a thing UN-ENGLISH in that. It gets sited all the time as his Welsh coming through, but do people in the UK hear a difference between a Jersey & Brooklyn accent from American actors? ?:) )
He grew up in Derbyshire, which is near Manchester,so maybe that's what we hear sometimes. I can tell the difference between Bruce Willis's accent and somebody like Judy Scheidlin. (she's not an actor. It's just an example.) She has that stereotypical "noo yawk" sound to her, but if you go somewhere else in NY, you will hear someone speak in an entirely different way. Bruce Willis is from NJ and his accent is entirely different as well.
Have you ever heard of the Emancipation Proclamation?"
Bruce Willis is from NJ and his accent is entirely different as well.
I love his accent. It's so... earthy.
I'm from Long Island, NY, and I'm told I have no accent. On 'Lawned Giland' you routinely hear girls ask, 'Due you no huh?" (do you know her?). )
I'm always mistaken for a Mackem, which is a person from Sunderland in the North East of England. I am from Durham and i tend to round my vowels loads ("out" sounds like "oat"). People from Sunderland don't do that. They also have Irish influenced sounds because of migration.
Have you ever heard of the Emancipation Proclamation?"
OHMSS still my favorite because they stuck to Fleming's novel, but yes, the dubbing was just silly. There was no logical reason for doing it (unless Lazenby kept flubbing his lines and they figured they'd just cover it in the post work). However, I doubt it's the case as his lines in the rest of the film were fine.
Comments
Just because the movie version of YOLT deviates significantly from the novel doesn't mean it couldn't an entertaining film in its own right. I can certainly understand why YOLT might not be your cup of tea considering the tone of the novels, as well as the four previous Bond films. But not as entertaining as the abomination known as Casino Royale '67??? Wow!
I was only a year old in 67, so I can only imagine how it was like for the Bond moviegoer to see the spectacle and scale of YOLT unfold on the screen, which might have been like watching Star Wars for the first time...seeing Bond start "small" with DN and FRWL, progressing to gadget vehicles in GF, more of those in TB along with its sophisticated underwater sequences, then graduating to that that cavernous, hollowed-out volcano...wow, talk about upping the ante!
That's why I still love YOLT and can easily forgive its flaws like the wiggly Spectre rocket doors etc.
For the same reason I love Moonraker, they are visually spectacular! Just switch off your common sense (waiting for a snide remark from Sir Miles on that
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Actually, Bondtots, I don't have many issues with either of those films as they don't take themselves too seriously - they play-up to the silliness without going over-the-top....unlike yourself
I didn't find Lazenby wooden. I thought he did a pretty damn good job . . . especially in scenes that required Bond to be very human - proposing marriage to Tracy and his quarrel with "M".
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
" I don't listen to hip hop!"
But Lazenby? Oh Hell yes. Very Aussie moments. But Sean had some very Scottish ones, Pierce had some very Irish/American moments.
As to bothering me? Not really. It's all good to Yanks.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
" I don't listen to hip hop!"
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
" I don't listen to hip hop!"
I'm from Long Island, NY, and I'm told I have no accent. On 'Lawned Giland' you routinely hear girls ask, 'Due you no huh?" (do you know her?).
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
" I don't listen to hip hop!"