YOLT: All style and no substance?

1356789

Comments

  • DrunkIrishPoetDrunkIrishPoet The Amber Coast
    Posts: 156
    I love YOLT and consider it to be the epitome of the Connery Era.
    Sure it has its problems, well-enumerated by many here... but each movie since Dr. No was bigger and more extravagant than the one before.
    YOLT is the natural evolutionary result of that process.
    It has become the Bond archetype, and you have to respect that.

    During my annual re-watching (in chronological order) marathon, I am always sad to see YOLT end, because I know it will be a long slog until it's TSWLM's turn.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    You Only Love a Spy Twice
  • DrunkIrishPoetDrunkIrishPoet The Amber Coast
    Posts: 156
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Yes, the Gilbert films definitely have their own look, vibe and scope. Unfortunately, with MOONRAKER, EON gave us all the pomp, circumstance and broad strokes of the other two, but they forgot who Bond is, and what a Bond needs to be, at it's core. YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE and THE SPY WHO LOVED ME are outstanding Bond films.

    Definitely agree, @Birdleson; YOLT and TSWLM are outstanding. I cut Moonraker more slack than some folks do, but I don't think it is what you'd call "outstanding."
    All three of those films are essentially remakes of Dr. No, and a legitimate argument can be made that the first is still the best.
    But I still prefer You Only Live Twice.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    All three of those films are essentially remakes of Dr. No, and a legitimate argument can be made that the first is still the best.
    But I still prefer You Only Live Twice.
    I prefer DN but yeah, YOLT is so marvelously entertaining that it's not far behind for me.

  • DrunkIrishPoetDrunkIrishPoet The Amber Coast
    Posts: 156
    chrisisall wrote: »
    I prefer DN but yeah, YOLT is so marvelously entertaining that it's not far behind for me.

    Yeah, yeah, yeah - @chrisisall is right! YOLT is indeed "marvelously entertaining"!!
    And considering that it is the Source From Which All Good Things Flow, Dr. No is criminally underrated.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    , Dr. No is criminally underrated.
    It's pure, unadulterated Bond. Even my 15 year old Son sees that.
  • Dr. No is criminally underrated.

    Maybe by the "casual Bond fan" but not on these boards I don't think. Most of the people I "bump shoulders" with on here love it just as much as I do.

    Also, to answer the OP's question: No.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,690
    Gilbert basicaly made the same films 3 times, but I love all 3 of them. They each have their own distinctive style, locations, etc. YOLT is great because it's the first truly epic OTT Bond film, but I prefer the TSWLM and MR because of Moore's more invested performance.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Personally, I think TSWLM is the peak to date for that kind of movie. It was just epic but still centred somewhat.

    I really enjoy MR but it is OTT with too much comedy where it should have been serious.
    YOLT is the original, but it's dated.
    TND is ok, but not up to the same level as TSWLM imo (except for the pretitle sequence, which is absolutely up there with the best of them).
    DAD is, well, DAD. A stinker, but an entertaining one.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Still loving YOLT. It has weak elements to it, and is not as fresh as the earlier films (how could it be?) but IMO it's a step up from the lethargic TB and still extremely entertaining. If this is Connery when he's bored, then I'm fine with that.
  • Posts: 11,425
    HASEROT wrote: »
    I think EON should have been more supportive/patient with Laz instead of gooing for the gags and parody.

    can't get more patient than a reported 9 picture deal that Lazenby was offered - which he turned down on the advice of his agent..

    Yes, quite the idiot. By accepting it, he would have maintained the awesome tone of OHMSS throughout the 70's.

    Yes, was discussing this in the OHMSS thread yesterday. OHMSS set everything up perfectly for the 70s and I personally think Laz could have grown into a great Bond (infact, I'd argue his one performance was pretty epic). What an idiot, indeed. A proper revenge follow up to OHMSS would have been amazing. Although apparently Hunt originally wanted to save Tracy's death until the start of the next movie, which would have ruined OHMSS. Oh well. Swings and roundabouts.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited December 2015 Posts: 23,544
    My issues with YOLT: a brutally honest DD rant

    "We couldn't find a castle by the sea"
    It was originally intended to put SPECTRE HQ in a seashore castle, more in keeping with Fleming's novel. But since the Japanese don't build a lot of castles by the sea, that idea was changed to the hollowed out volcano... What, so you can't find a seashore castle anywhere else, give it a modest facelift to make it slightly more Japanese and tell us we're in Japan? Almost all of the Korea stuff in DAD was filmed in the UK! Besides, plenty of volcanoes in Japan but the actual interiors were stage work in Pinewood anyway. If the idea was not to sell us something that doesn't exist in reality, an extinct volcano housing a rocket launch platform for space travel isn't exactly a legitimate substitute, now is it...

    Rockets swallow rockets
    Why? SPECTRE hopes to lure the Russians and the Americans into war. So, simply shoot them out of the sky. Why actually send a manned spacecraft in orbit to "eat" the capsules and take them back to Earth, when you have no use for either the capsules or the astronauts anyway? By mysteriously picking the capsules out of space, you also make the idea of Sovjets and Americans fighting each other much less convincing. And since firing an armed missile is still a lot easier than launching a giant rocket that will manoeuvre back to Earth and be ready for immediate re-use, the plot could have been a trifle more credible.

    James Bond must die, but why?
    First of all, what's with this ridiculous set-up? No-one thought James Bond wasn't going to survive passed the OT because everyone saw the trailers, the posters and the TV clips. But okay, let's say it does fool a few people into thinking that Bond is dead, I'm still confused. Bond sleeps with a girl who's in on it. But so is Bond since he doesn't look a bit surprised aboard the submarine and in fact he had the breathing equipment on when he came in. So why does she "suddenly" hit the button, allow the gunmen to storm in while she looks all tensed up and have them perforate the bed (but none of the bullets actually goes through the bed)? Couldn't she have just said, "sorry James but it's time to pull off this charade now"? Wouldn't be very exciting for us, I agree...

    ... but then I still wonder why all this fuss? Osato and Brand "knew" that Bond was dead because they had read it in the newspapers. But the newspapers had printed his photo - because all secret agents who die draw front page attention - and yet neither Osato nor Brand, when sitting close to Bond, recognises him a mere few hours later? Not the slightest sign of suspicion? No, because the papers had told them that Bond is dead so this mysterious doppelgänger couldn't possibly be Bond... And these people work for an organisation that's all about "counter-intelligence". This unnecessary "plot twist" makes our enemies look even more incompetent. All we get out of this is a dull reason to call the film You Only Live Twice.

    What gives people the right to complain about Moonraker?
    People tell me they loath Moonraker because the entire film is just one big excuse to get to space where the money shots will be. The first and second acts are basically about Bond following simple clues to get to Drax' lair. Okay, let's talk about YOLT then.

    Bond has an ally, Henderson. He gets killed. (More about that later.) Bond follows the killer and takes his place. What does the other killer do? Hide for a while? Go to a bar and celebrate a successful mission with some sake and a geisha? Nope, it's night-time in Tokyo but the man insists on taking his partner to Osato chemicals headquarters, to the boss' office no less, so that right there half of Bond's investigating is done for him. And by sheer luck, Bond finds the bar and by sheer luck again, he spots a safe in the mirror. He's even luckier to grab that one microfilm holding some valuable clues to help him make progress.

    But don't worry, Bond isn't out of the building yet. Oh wait, he is. Because Aki had been following him all that time? She hadn't seen the killer approach Henderson's house while waiting in her car? By the way, Bond has to go through Sumu wrestlers and the embarrassing exchange of codes with Aki before he can get to Henderson, yet Henderson's house is totally unguarded. A killer can just walk up to the paper walls and put a knife in the man? Tight security.

    Speaking of security, Henderson tells Bond he can meet Tiger Tanaka "tonight". Yet Tiger can't just invite Bond into his house? Of course not. He needs Aki to perform ridiculous theatrics in that underground whatever-the-hell-that-place-is so that Bond can literally drop in through the ceiling. What if when Aki pulled over and jumped out of the car Bond had decided "enough action for one evening" and just walked away? And despite Aki and Henderson verifying that Bond really is Bond, we need to go through that I love you routine again.

    Back to the plot. Lucky Bond. The microfilm he had just randomly grabbed contains valuable information: rocket fuel and pictures linked to dead diving girls. OK, so now we know who's responsible for it. So let's raid those Osato offices and see what we can find. Even if SPECTRE is involved as Bond magically assumes, if you disable the supplier and manufacturer of the various things needed to keep the space operation going, that's half a battle won right there. Instead, Bond goes there all by himself. He's very lucky that he wasn't shot the first instance he got in.

    Aki "loves" Bond?
    Let's see. A few minutes to get to Henderson, even less time to get from Osato to Tiger... Yet later that evening Aki walks over to Bond and they hug and kiss as if they had been lovers for years but had been separated for so long. To keep a clear perspective on things, all of this takes place in one evening, from Bond getting torpedoed to the shores of Japan all the way into Aki's bed: exactly one evening. And the moments these two have shared were brief. Things went fast in previous films too but at least GF makes it obvious that both Bond and Jill just wanted a bit of fun. Aki and Bond, by contrast, make it look like there's hardcore romance involved, and Barry's music more or less emphasises that fact. Surely even Bond needs a bit more time with a girl before he genuinely falls in love with her...

    Simple annoyances
    - Henderson is stabbed with a knife but neither the stabbing nor Henderson dying comes with a sound? Any sound? Yet when Bond throws himself through the wall, the ripping makes one hell of a noise.

    - Who put the camera in space that shows the swallowing of the capsule from any desired angle?

    - We need to make Bond Japanese so he can blend in. Why? Would the islanders sell him out? Or is it so he can infiltrate SPECTRE HQ? But didn't we have Bond officially dead for that purpose? Must we also give him a makeover (that clearly didn't survive the next 12 hours)?

    But don't worry, I still like YOLT.
    Of course I do. The music is great, the sets are impressive as hell, some of the action is staged very well and iconic scenes wrote Bond film history left and right. But the quality drop from TB to YOLT, in terms of story and script, is almost sickening. In FRWL, every line served a purpose, every performance was gold, every editing decision was thought through... But YOLT went for the set pieces, the big but empty spectacle. Lines were meaninglessly dropped like horse manure, the plot moved on coasting on a lot of that GF goodwill we still carried with us. I'll say it right now: I think Roald Dahl was a terrible choice for a screenwriter. He gave us a sort of comic book version of Bond, a self-parody almost. And so yes, as I grew a bit older in my teenage years, these issues became apparent and plenty.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Definitely not. The older I get the more I love YOLT. Another one of those films that gets bizarre and inexplicable criticism in these threads.

    It's a classic. Love everything about it.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,544
    @Getafix

    What criticism do you find bizarre and inexplicable? :-)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,470
    It has for me; don't get me wrong, I still do enjoy it, no matter where I rank it, but it didn't sit that well with me the last time I watched it, and I recall loving it much more as a child.
  • edited December 2015 Posts: 11,425
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    @Getafix

    What criticism do you find bizarre and inexplicable? :-)

    Any criticism of YOLT is bizarre and inexplicable to me! It's nigh on perfect IMO.
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    It has for me; don't get me wrong, I still do enjoy it, no matter where I rank it, but it didn't sit that well with me the last time I watched it, and I recall loving it much more as a child.

    I loved it as a kid but my appreciation has grown over time. Having visited Japan as an adult I now love all the Japanese elements more than ever. It's wonderfully evocative of an amazing country. Not many Bond films since have managed to convey that same sense of place as YOLT.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,544
    @Getafix, indeed, I appreciate the travelogue qualities of the film. But the story and script lack in almost every respect. And those are an important part of a film too.
  • Posts: 11,425
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    @Getafix, indeed, I appreciate the travelogue qualities of the film. But the story and script lack in almost every respect. And those are an important part of a film too.

    May be I need to do a rewatch to appreciate what's so wrong with it! ;)
  • YOLT is, sad to say, utterly ludicrous.

    But jawdroppingly incredible sets, a killer John Barry score and Sean Connery as James Bond (even if he looks bored half the time) go a long way to redeem it.

    I sure hope there's nobody here who bashes SKYFALL and/or SPECTRE because of their plot-holes yet totally loves YOLT... If so, that person needs their head examined!

    Consider this:

    ICBM-sized rockets taking off AT NIGHT can be seen with the naked eye for a 100-mile radius, even on a semi-clear evening... So are all the Ama islanders -- not to mention everyone aboard aircraft or ships at sea in said radius -- TOTALLY FRICKIN' BLIND???

    Does Blofeld deploy some sort of insidious "blindness ray" that they forgot to mention in the script?
  • Posts: 11,425
    CraterGuns wrote: »
    YOLT is, sad to say, utterly ludicrous.

    But jawdroppingly incredible sets, a killer John Barry score and Sean Connery as James Bond (even if he looks bored half the time) go a long way to redeem it.

    I sure hope there's nobody here who bashes SKYFALL and/or SPECTRE because of their plot-holes yet totally loves YOLT... If so, that person needs their head examined!

    Consider this:

    ICBM-sized rockets taking off AT NIGHT can be seen with the naked eye for a 100-mile radius, even on a semi-clear evening... So are all the Ama islanders -- not to mention everyone aboard aircraft or ships at sea in said radius -- TOTALLY FRICKIN' BLIND???

    Does Blofeld deploy some sort of insidious "blindness ray" that they forgot to mention in the script?

    I would NEVER do that! ;)
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,421
    @DarthDimi -
    - Who put the camera in space that shows the swallowing of the capsule from any desired angle?
    I've always wanted to know that. The same people I assume who filmed the Chinook dropping the car in Tokyo Bay?

    FRWL is the most well thought out, meticulously schemed film in the Bondian cannon. A well crafted joy of a movie. Where as FRWL is complex in small way, YOLT is truly epic. One has to make certain sacrifices with the script and the story, as one gets grandiose. A perfect culmination to the Connery era.

    Or it would have been. If you indulge me, my alternative take on the plot to YOLT -

    Same set up, with the Volcano Lair. But instead of SPECTRE having to launch rockets to interfere with the Americans and the Soviet space programmes, you have SPECTRE using Dr. No's toppling technology, only on a much bigger scale. It would have been great to tie YOLT's scheme to the first film, Dr. No.

    And onto the question posed by the OP. Although I loved as a kid, yet throughout my teenage years, right up until my mid 20's I took a dim view on YOLT and all it's problems. During a Bondathon I used to look forward to YOLT. The music! The sets! The cinematography! Japan! I repressed all of YOLT's issues. For me the memory of this film is actually better than the film itself; I tend to forget just how silly the plot is, for example.

    But recently I've grown attached to YOLT. Sure I've enjoyed YOLT in the past, but never to this extent. Same with MR.

    There a lot to enjoy with YOLT; Ken Adam's stupendous sets; John Barry's melodic, beautiful music; Freddie Young's gorgeous cinematography, inventive set pieces: Lewis Gilbert's stylish direction, and the first half is imbued with a certain From Russia With Love style of intrigue and the whole film is so darn iconic.

    Ian Fleming said “go beyond with is probable, but never the impossible”, I always try to judge the Bond’s film plot by this mantra. However… it was the space race, it was the 60’s, a time when people were not so cynical. So, regrading the special effects, judging it from a 60's point of view, and not a cynical modern viewpoint, the special effects were fine. The film makers were using the tools of their time. Besides, where Adam and Barry are concerned, I can forgive a lot.

    You Only Live Twice is a flawed, yet highly enjoyable film, being exotic and innovative. Mix in a little 60's magic, and one gets an iconic entry into the Bond series.




  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,690
    YOLT has gone up drastically in my liking recently. The plot is completely ludicrous, yes, but damn is it not fun to see Sean Connery being a total badass in Japan, to see these huge sets by Ken Adams and hear some of the best work by John Barry!
  • Posts: 11,425
    YOLT has gone up drastically in my liking recently. The plot is completely ludicrous, yes, but damn is it not fun to see Sean Connery being a total badass in Japan, to see these huge sets by Ken Adams and hear some of the best work by John Barry!

    Exactly! What's not to like?!
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    There was a time (my forties) when I wasn't very fond of it, but I enjoy it a lot now. What it lacks as a serious story it makes up for in sheer style.
  • Aziz_FekkeshAziz_Fekkesh Royale-les-Eaux
    Posts: 403
    Definitely for me. It seems to get worse every time I watch it. When I showed every movie to my buddy he didn't care for YOLT right off the bat, probably because it's just so goofy and ripe for parody.
  • Posts: 5,767
    Concerning the original question, no, not at all. and the blu ray made it even better.

    For the record, I´m in my 40s ;-).
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    It's a bit of a disappointment for me. When I first saw it, John Barry's music scared the hell out of me And I was young by the way :P. That whole ship hijack combined with his music was really chilling and atmospheric. But now, it's just dull and boring for me. Every time I watch it now it about puts me to sleep. Spectre's plot with pitting the US against the USSR is typical and boring and Blofeld's reveal comes up too late. Pleasence has his moments but is ultimately wasted, plus standing side by side next to Connery doesn't help it just makes him look more like a wimp. If they had just cut out everything about the Ninja training and Bond turning Japanese and just dump him on that island with the Volcano to meet Blofeld a half hour earlier, it would have been so much better.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Love the island training bit. Marvellous.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    They should of paid more respect to the novel.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,421
    Birdleson wrote: »
    So, based on the few age ranges that I know of the respondents, it seems to work well when you're young, then as an adult you start to dislike it and in your 50s you start appreciating it again.

    Seems to be a trend doesn't it? Loved when I was 9 (ninjas! Japan! Connery! Blofeld! Volcano!) Then I entered my pretentious teenage years, where I didn't much care for it. Now I'm older, I can see through its flaws, and just enjoy the heck out of it. Although I love the current incarnation of our fav super spy, it is nice to go back to a time when films were much simple and fun.
Sign In or Register to comment.