The GEORGE LAZENBY Appreciation thread - Discuss His Life, His Career, His Bond Films

1356728

Comments

  • Aziz_FekkeshAziz_Fekkesh Royale-les-Eaux
    Posts: 403
    Even a great Connery performance in OHMSS could not bring out the vulnerability and humanity that Lazenby intentionally or unintentionally was able to.
  • Posts: 5,634
    I've always got time to give George any appreciation for his one and only appearance, and we say it every time, in that it's a real pity he wasn't able to continue for another release or two, if not for his interfering agent getting involved. I think Lazenby gets unfairly criticized often enough or the sharp end of the stick. Even if he was a virtual unknown at the time, or even having an antipodean play the iconic figure of James Bond, he had immense shoes to fill after Connery, and all said, did a very adequate job of things. I wouldn't swap George with any other actor in '69 for that particular release, gave us a fine and almost legendary Bond film to depart the 1960s after the (mostly) stellar efforts that had come directly before. I wouldn't change any of that in retrospect
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Even a great Connery performance in OHMSS could not bring out the vulnerability and humanity that Lazenby intentionally or unintentionally was able to.

    I know SirHenry won't stand for this but I think you're spot on Aziz_Fekkesh.

    Even a committed and focused Connery would still be Sean Connery movie star. You would never really fear for him like you do George when he is strangling the guy on the cliff or sitting at the ice rink.

    Perhaps the Connery of DN or FRWL might have sold it but even on the train with Grant when he is in quite a pickle you don't really have the same fears. I just think Connery is maybe too alpha male?
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,728
    As a big Lazenby fan (OHMSS is still my favourite film) I can only agree with the general portent of this thread.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Even a great Connery performance in OHMSS could not bring out the vulnerability and humanity that Lazenby intentionally or unintentionally was able to.

    I know SirHenry won't stand for this but I think you're spot on Aziz_Fekkesh.

    Even a committed and focused Connery would still be Sean Connery movie star. You would never really fear for him like you do George when he is strangling the guy on the cliff or sitting at the ice rink.

    Perhaps the Connery of DN or FRWL might have sold it but even on the train with Grant when he is in quite a pickle you don't really have the same fears. I just think Connery is maybe too alpha male?

    I am by no means Lazenby's biggest fan, but I am an OHMSS lover and I think you've both pointed out something very intrinsic to it's appeal. I have to say I completely agree.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    Taking me this long to think of something to say of appreciation for Lazenby. So I will say this: the man could really fight, move well, and looked good in action scenes.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 3,494
    Taking me this long to think of something to say of appreciation for Lazenby. So I will say this: the man could really fight, move well, and looked good in action scenes.

    Total agreement with this, that's all I have that's good to say and I haven't wavered from that opinion since 1969. And his rock star like manner as well with the ladies. The rest of OHMSS, completely different story.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 6,396
    That's what impresses me the most with GL. His unwavering self belief and his sheer bloody arrogance. And it shines through when you watch OHMSS. OK, it's pretty well agreed that in some scenes his acting does fail to deliver, pretty understandable I guess given his lack of experience, but for the most part he is terrific especially in scenes you wound't necessarily think he could pull off i.e. the barn with Tracy and the aftermath of her death. His acting for someone who hadn't acted before was right up there.

    I'm glad that GL gets a better rep these days, particularly from us within the Bond community because the level of vile that was aimed at him circa '69 was always completely overblown and out of order IMO. I often wonder whether the press in this country had in for him from the start because of the "Who is this Johnny Foreigner playing our beloved James Bond?" mentality, or whether they would have slaughtered any poor lamb that was going to take on that role after Sean left.

    I suppose things hadn't changed a great deal given the initial amount of vitriol towards DC. How quick the press forget.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    That's what impresses me the most with GT. His unwavering self belief and his sheer bloody arrogance. And it shines through when you watch OHMSS. OK, it's pretty well agreed that in some scenes his acting does fail to deliver, pretty understandable I guess given his lack of experience, but for the most part he is terrific especially in scenes you wound't necessarily think he could pull off i.e. the barn with Tracy and the aftermath of her death. His acting for someone who hadn't acted before was right up there.

    Apart from having not the faintest idea who GT is; well said Willy.

  • edited August 2013 Posts: 6,396
    Amended ;-) Where the hell did I get GT from??? Thanks @TheWiz
  • Aziz_FekkeshAziz_Fekkesh Royale-les-Eaux
    edited August 2013 Posts: 403
    Even a great Connery performance in OHMSS could not bring out the vulnerability and humanity that Lazenby intentionally or unintentionally was able to.

    I know SirHenry won't stand for this but I think you're spot on Aziz_Fekkesh.

    Even a committed and focused Connery would still be Sean Connery movie star. You would never really fear for him like you do George when he is strangling the guy on the cliff or sitting at the ice rink.

    Perhaps the Connery of DN or FRWL might have sold it but even on the train with Grant when he is in quite a pickle you don't really have the same fears. I just think Connery is maybe too alpha male?

    That's exactly what I was gesturing towards and thank you for being so articulate, Wizard. I'm not exactly sure what most critics of Lazenby's performance think that Connery would have rectified or improved on with the character as written for OHMSS, but Laz just works for this particular film. I think him in a YOLT style or even GF style film could not have worked because Bond is basically indestructible in those films. How he would've fared in later films or in a direct sequel is anyone's guess. I'm glad people are sharing their appreciation for the man and I really think that, like the rest of the actors, he was James Bond, at least for one film. What he could've brought to the series later on had he been given the chance is onlt now idle speculation.

    And Gustav_Graves, I wanted to get my opinions known in a new thread rather than contribute to one and in which my points may not expanded upon.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    I think him in a YOLT style or even GF style film could not have worked because Bond is basically indestructible in those films.

    I must disagree about the GF part. GF Connery in OHMSS would have been amazing. He's not entirely indestructible for the whole film. He gets captured and shows a great deal of nervousness when a certain laser is aiming for his center of Bond power. There's no gadget that saves him from that predicament.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 78
    George is my secret crush. However? Don't tell Vijay please.

    Smart, and handsome, powerhouse fighter, and man, and actor. On Her Majesty's Secret Service, nobody does it better, or could have does it.
  • Posts: 1,637
    "Who is this Johnny Foreigner playing our beloved James Bond? mentality, or whether they would have slaughtered any poor lamb that was going to take on that role after Sean left"

    Bit of both I spose......YOLT posters didn't help either : "SC IS JB !" , many audiences were like "he ain't Bond , where's Connery ?"
  • Posts: 135
    George Lazenby is a nobody; therefore, he took part in only one Bond picture.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Richardo wrote:
    George Lazenby is a nobody; therefore, he took part in only one Bond picture.

    Misuse of the word 'therefore'.

    'Lazenby refused to sign the massive contract EON offered him therefore he took part in only one Bond picture' would be an example of how to correctly use the word.

    But no need to let the facts or correct English get in the way of your trite postings.
  • Posts: 1,637
    A bit harsh....he could've done more if he wanted to , maybe audience would've warmed up to him more in the next one , speculation I know but possible.
  • I've always liked Lazenby and thought some of the hate he gets is a bit unfair. He was limited in the acting scenes, sure, but when it came to action I thought he was leaps and bounds ahead of Connery. I think, if he'd got to do a few more movies, he really could've grown in the role.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited August 2013 Posts: 17,728
    LeighBurne wrote:
    I've always liked Lazenby and thought some of the hate he gets is a bit unfair. He was limited in the acting scenes, sure, but when it came to action I thought he was leaps and bounds ahead of Connery. I think, if he'd got to do a few more movies, he really could've grown in the role.

    Yes, I too would have liked to have seen a few more Lazenby Bonds into the 1970s. Oh, what could have been!
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,567
    Edited the title of this thread to run alongside the other actors' threads.
  • edited February 2014 Posts: 1,637
    Was he gonna be a good guy or bad guy in Game ?

    He said that he was gonna play a "spiritual guru , Caucasian aid" that was to appear in other films as well , another theory is that he's killed in the pagoda prior to "TempIe of Tiger" (Inosanto floor) so who knows.......
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    edited February 2014 Posts: 3,157
    I take Lazenby over each Connery's performance as Bond.
  • Posts: 315
    Just watched OHMSS over the week-end and it brings up this question: When George is trying to be Sir Hillary, the sound level changes and it sounds like a voice-over to me. I wonder if they used one for the Sir Hillary sequences.

    Having said that, I'll take George over Roger Moore and his swarmy approach anytime.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,350
    George Baker, who played Sir Hillary in the film dubbed Lazenby during those scenes.
  • Posts: 2,341
    Samuel001 wrote:
    George Baker, who played Sir Hillary in the film dubbed Lazenby during those scenes.

    Lazenby was surprised to see that they had dubbed George Baker's voice over his in the Piz Gloria scenes. Peter Hunt thought this would be a good idea but personally I think t sucks.

    If you watch the film you will see a glitch in the scene where Bond meets Sir Hilary and when he says, "Tactfully given to resemble me" (or words to that effect) it is Baker's voice we hear instead of Lazenby's.

    Like others, I prefer Lazenby and his one film over Moore and his many films. Pity George did not sign that multi picture deal. By the third film he may have established himself as Bond instead of just being a footnote in an otherwise supreb film.
  • Posts: 6,396
    OHMSS69 wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    George Baker, who played Sir Hillary in the film dubbed Lazenby during those scenes.

    Lazenby was surprised to see that they had dubbed George Baker's voice over his in the Piz Gloria scenes. Peter Hunt thought this would be a good idea but personally I think t sucks.

    If you watch the film you will see a glitch in the scene where Bond meets Sir Hilary and when he says, "Tactfully given to resemble me" (or words to that effect) it is Baker's voice we hear instead of Lazenby's.

    Like others, I prefer Lazenby and his one film over Moore and his many films. Pity George did not sign that multi picture deal. By the third film he may have established himself as Bond instead of just being a footnote in an otherwise supreb film.

    If you ever heard GL trying an upper class English accent, you'd understand why Hunt chose to dub his voice with Baker's.
  • Posts: 11,189
    Why not just use his normal voice? It's not that Aussie.
  • edited February 2014 Posts: 12,837
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Why not just use his normal voice? It's not that Aussie.

    Yeah the whole thing never made sense to me. Why would Bond go to the effort of putting on an accent when he didn't even try to disguise himself, despite him meeting Blofeld in YOLT? Always seemed pointless to me. Should've just had Lazenby use his normal voice.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,567
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Why not just use his normal voice? It's not that Aussie.

    Yeah the whole thing never made sense to me. Why would Bond go to the effort of putting on an accent when he didn't even try to disguise himself, despite him meeting Blofeld in YOLT? Always seemed pointless to me. Should've just had Lazenby use his normal voice.
    What do you mean didn't try to disguise himself? He wore spectacles and a kilt!
    ;-)
Sign In or Register to comment.