ROTTEN TOMATOES: Bonding with Bond, Day 8: Diamonds Are Forever Comments

Bonding with Bond, Day 8: Diamonds Are Forever

by Ryan Fujitani | October 28, 2008

Summary

Community Manager RT-Ryan has never seen a single James Bond film, except for 2006's Casino Royale. To rectify the situation, he decides to watch every Bond film and write about his reaction as a 007 novice. Sean Connery returns for a final official Bond appearance with Diamonds Are Forever. See what Ryan thought about Connery's reprisal of the role. Back to Article

(1-50 of 50 posts) | Reply

buckeyes1186 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 05:07 PM

Yup. It's basically the worst Bond ever.

You pretty much had the same reaction I did when first watching this colossal turd. To me, the most offensive thing about the film is that it basically retcons OHMSS. Bond is pissed off and wants Blofeld dead, but appears to have completely forgotten that Blofeld murdered his wife (by way of Irma Bunt, of course). Not once is Tracy mentioned nor are any of the events in OHMSS.

The only reason Connery came back is because the head of United Artists essentially handed Connery a blank check and said, "Name your price," which he did. Adjusted for inflation, Connery got about $20 million to star in this piece of garbage.

And yes, Connery is terrible in it. He got bribed to come back and it shows in his performance. He's tubby and disinterested, and coasts his way through the entire movie. The movie itself is crap, but Connery deserves his fair share of criticism. While he'll always be the definitive Bond, Diamonds are Forever has tarnished his legacy a bit, I'd say.

I'd suggest getting comfortable, Ryan. Diamonds are Forever pretty much sets the tone for the Roger Moore years. If last week was Heaven for you, this coming week will pretty much be Hell.

(Reply to this)

sunsaz writes:
on Oct 28 2008 05:08 PM

This was another "lower half" Bond movie for me, but this one ranks closer to the middle than You Only Live Twice. Connery literally had to carry this one.

(Reply to this)

Windows V writes:
on Oct 28 2008 05:10 PM

Hang in there, dude! Just eleven more days and eleven more crapfests till you get to the awesomeness that is [i]GoldenEye[/i].

(Reply to this)

Geoff O. writes:
on Oct 28 2008 05:37 PM

My favorite line: "...the oddness of Blofeld's two homosexual hitmen (one of whom eerily resembles a white, human version of Rowlf from the Muppets)...."

I almost fell out of my chair laughing.

(Reply to this)

Russ K. writes:
on Oct 28 2008 05:42 PM

Hi Ryan,
You asked how much of the movie's nonsense is in the book.
I read the book and saw the movie in the theaters when I was a teenager, so that oughta tell ya how much has maybe slipped out of the memory banks.
With that qualification, the only things similar between the book and the movie were:
1. James Bond
2. Tiffany Case
3. Part of the plot was set in Las Vegas and was about diamond smuggling
but for entirely different reasons -no killer satellite.
4. Maybe the homosexual killers, but the brain cells are on the fence about that.

tc
Russ K

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 05:51 PM

I'd still see it, I'll just lower the bar. A lot. Hope you guys saw It's the Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown. Because I was watching the classic while you "got a rock."

Does the title have a tatoo like style to it. " Diamonds are Forever man!"

What about "Batman Forever". Another "I got the title while I was high" moment.

(Reply to this)

ck100 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 05:52 PM

Well call me crazy, but I like this movie. Sure, it has it's flaws, but overall I still enjoyed it and still watch it from time to time. I think the best way to enjoy it is to turn off your brain. I don't know what it is about this movie that does it for me. Maybe it's the kitsch, the Las Vegas setting, and the two silly gay hitmen.

It's obvious Connery only did the movie for the check. He's kind of on autopilot here, but still, he's watchable. Just a shame he aged so much and was out of shape. Plus, that obvious wig ain't fooling anyone. I don't understand why his Bond wasn't more mad at Blofeld. I mean this guy killed his wife and he acts like the most horrific thing he did was take his seat at the dinner table. I mean in some of the scenes they almost appear chummy. What gives?

I will say that Charles Gray is probably the worst Blofeld out of all the actors that portrayed him. He's like some sneering, prissy idiot instead of a major threat that he should be. No reason for Blofeld to have hair considering his previous portrayals didn't have hair. I'll agree that it's mind-boggling on how Blofeld had opportunities to kill Bond and didn't for some reason. How can the most dangerous thing he does to Bond be burying him underground in some pipe? Plus, I don't like how the movie leaves Blofeld's fate ambiguous. Bond could have done more than just smack him around with the crane.

Yeah, the girls in the movie are kind of twits. But for some reason I still find them appealing. Maybe because they're good-looking and have silly names. :P I will defend some of the stuff you mentioned like the car on two wheels and the voice-masking device. Sure, the stunt may not be possible, but I still thought it was cool. The car chase was entertaining if not totally plausible. As for that voice-masking device, well, the earlier Bond movies had their share of unrealstic gadgets. Is this one that far off-base in comparison to previous ones? I mean Thunderball had that jet pack.

You have to admit the fight in the elevator is pretty good. Even though Mr. Wynt and Kiss are incredibly silly, they are entertaining to watch in a guilty-pleasure sort of way. You also have to dig that dialogue between Plenty O' Toole and Bond when they first meet up. :P

Well now that you're in the 1970's Bond period, you have an idea of what you can expect. But it's not all a total loss since you get "The Spy Who Loved Me". Many consider this to be Moore's finest Bond movie. In the meantime, just change your expectations and attitude and you'll be in the 80's and 90's output before you know it.

(Reply to this)

~*Admiral Snowstorm*~ writes:
on Oct 28 2008 05:52 PM

Strange; Diamonds Are Forever is, without a doubt, my favorite Bond movie. I guess the ridiculousness of it just added to the appeal for me. I don't know.

I was waiting for this day to see what the reaction to this movie would be, and it turns out everybody hates it. Heh. Oh well. I also thought Goldfinger was rather boring, so I guess I'm just not the right kind of Bond fan in the first place.

(Reply to this)

ck100 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 05:53 PM

In reply to this comment (#2100238)
I don't hate Diamonds so you're not alone, *AS*. Sure, it has it's flaws, but I still find it to be a fun ride. You just have to be in the right mindset to enjoy it.

(Reply to this)

hitnrun017 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 05:54 PM

I was rolling my eye throughout the majority of this movie, and reading this write-up reminded me why it's one Bond movie I will probably never watch again.

And don't worry, there are a couple Moore films worth watching: The Spy Who Loved Me, For Your Eye Only and I'm one of the few that enjoys watching The Man with the Golden Gun.

(Reply to this)

omelette writes:
on Oct 28 2008 05:55 PM

I hated this movie. I never thought I'd say that about a Bond flick, even the bad ones tend to be enjoyable, but this one I really hated.

However, there's definitely some Roger Moore ones that I like. A few stinkers, sure, but even the bad ones tend to be at least amusing (For Your Eyes Only, The Spy Who Loved Me, and Moonraker all are awesome in their own campy ways).

(Reply to this)

ck100 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 05:58 PM

In reply to this comment (#2100237)
meant to say "Kidd", not "Kiss". Sorry. lol.

(Reply to this)

RT-Ryan writes:
on Oct 28 2008 06:00 PM

buckeyes and sunsaz,
Yep, it bothered me that everything seemed like business as usual for Bond, despite all that happened in OHMSS. I'm not surprised about the way in which Connery returned, based on what I saw in Diamonds. His performance was, unfortunately, largely forgettable for me. Anyone could have done what he did in the role.

Russ K,
Matt, my editor-in-chief, has actually seen all the movies and read all the books as well. He told me pretty much the same thing you wrote, and included that according to his memory, Blofeld's two hitmen were written in such a way that their homosexuality was implied. It's not really spelled out in the movie either, but it's implied, so I guess that's consistent.

Geoff - couldn't help it. Rowlf was the first thing that popped into mind when Mr. Kidd showed up onscreen.

If what I've heard about the Roger Moore movies is true, I think I'm in for a ride. My main problem with Diamonds wasn't that it was silly or campy, it's that it wasn't silly or campy ENOUGH, I suppose. If the Roger Moore films are even worse, I have a feeling they'll cross that threshold and become entertaining again. So, thanks for the encouragement, Windows. I'm sure I'll endure!

(Reply to this)

RT-Ryan writes:
on Oct 28 2008 06:05 PM

Yikes, you guys respond fast!

(Reply to this)

Sputnik99 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 06:05 PM

While it's true that Diamonds are Forever is the farthest drop of quality the Bond series goes through, a franchise of such unequaled length is bound to have its ups and downs. The only other steep quality drops are Moonraker and Octopussy, IMO.

Don't be too afraid of the Roger Moore years, Ryan. Those movies don't get bad until the 80's. Some Moore movies are pretty good, although no, they aren't as good as the Connery masterpieces.

Loving this stuff! Keep it up!

(Reply to this)

Boyo writes:
on Oct 28 2008 06:37 PM

The car on two wheels thingy, what's even more funny is that it goes into the alley way on one set of wheels, then comes out the other end on the other set of wheels! Crazy!

While I have to admit it's Connery's weakest, I still enjoyed it. I always laugh when the gay killers have a little jealous moment on the plane!

I'm surprised that no-one seems to metion Live and Let Die as one of Moores good ones, it's a great action movie.

Something that I've always found funny about Diamonds - the space buggy that was used in the movie was found rusting away on a farmers field in England about 10-15 years back, I remember thinking that I wish I had found that buggy on our farm - how cool would that have been!

And if you think that Connery looks old now - wait for Never Say Never Again, and Moore in Octopussy and A View To A Kill!

Ryan, I think your going to enjoy the Roger movies, as I think you have some idea of whats coming. These are the films I grew up watching - Moonraker was the first movie I saw (on TV at Christmas), my brother claims to be one of the extras in The Spy Who Loved Me (I don't belive him!), I had the "Airfix" model of the Lotus, with working fins etc (wish I had that now, probably get me out of debt!), so I think I have a bit of a soft spot for Roger - I hope you enjoy them, escpecially his first five.

(Reply to this)

isotonic writes:
on Oct 28 2008 06:43 PM

The law of diminishing returns (watching so many, so closely together) combined with the general downward slide in quality of these movies means you're in for a LONG ride ahead. You probably should have watched them in reverse order so they got better and better :)

You'll need to stop expecting plot constancy, continuity or realism to get any enjoyment at all out of the rest of the series. Seriously, re-evaluate your expectations and try to have fun.

If a car on two wheels is too much, there's absolutely no hope. This is James Bond!!

(Reply to this)

martinscorsese25 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 06:50 PM

gud luck Ryan... You won't be seeing anymore good bond films for a long time... Diamonds is much better than any bond moore has done(except Spy who loved me), but diamonds still sucks!..

golden eye is still a long way so you won't probably see a satisfying bond film for quite some time...

ps. Casino Royale is still one of the best bond film(others are from russia, goldfinger, thunderball, dr. no)

(Reply to this)

Makeshift Python writes:
on Oct 28 2008 07:06 PM

This is only the tip of the iceberg for the 70s films. Get ready for some wacky over the top material with Roger Moore!

(Reply to this)

Zombies happen. writes:
on Oct 28 2008 07:14 PM

from here on out the only similarity the books have to the movies are the titles and the name of the main characters, (sometimes)

(Reply to this)

indiefilmfan2 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 07:17 PM

Diamonds Are Forever sort of resembles a Joel Schumacher or Tim Burton film, a style that just doesn't work for a Bond film. I actually think this film would have been a little better if Moore was Bond in Diamonds because he embraced the campy tone through most of his films. Moore may not be the best Bond, but at least he could pull off tongue-in-cheek humor, for what it's worth.

At least there was a another great Shirley Bassey theme song.

Don't expect another decade like the 60's, but there are still some gems.

I'll be interested to hear your response to Smokey and the, sorry I mean Live and Let Die.

(Reply to this)

bondfreak writes:
on Oct 28 2008 07:41 PM

In reply to this comment (#2100248)
RT Ryan, its really cool that youre doing this, while i am still amazed at the fact that youve never seen a Bond film until you started this. Its a known fact that half the world has so now your apart of the majority. This is the second worst Bond movie ever, the worst has to be A View To A Kill which is the last Roger Moore film (thank god) he was 57 in the movie, which is wayyyyy too old, the only bright spot is Christopher Walken's villian. However your in for a treat with your next movie Live and Let Die, the stunts are great, i liked the villain and action, and theres a record breaking stunt in it for its time, and its a little obvious what it is. Anyways enjoy, i think its awesome what your doing :)

(Reply to this)

aconline writes:
on Oct 28 2008 07:44 PM

This is the worst of the Connery official Bond Films. The next 2 are decent ones for Moore, then he has 2 bad ones, his best, then he ends on 2 more crappy ones. So, Ryan, enjoy Live and Let Die and The Man with the Golden Gun before having to sit through 2 forgettable movies. I am saddened that you did not like this film at all, but I am not surprised.

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 07:47 PM

Can this really be all that bad? Or am I asking for a beating.

(Reply to this)

indiefilmfan2 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 07:54 PM

In reply to this comment (#2100320)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the stunt I think you're referring to was in The Man With the Golden Gun.

(Reply to this)

J S. writes:
on Oct 28 2008 07:57 PM

Ahh yes, the movie where Sean decided to whore himself. I agree that if you are going to do a campy Bond, you might as well make it fun, which this film is not. The only saving grace is bond girl Tiffany Case who may not be the sharpest but I find her sexy as hell.
Here's the road ahead according to me (but what do I know?):

First two Moore movies: Lackluster and feature some uncomfortably misogynistic scenes.

The Spy Who Loved Me: A vast improvement. Thrilling and fun.

Moonraker: Silly but with some imaginative action scenes (spot the influence it had on Point Break). Campy fun.

For Your Eyes Only: A classic IMO. The one Moore Bond that got pretty much everything right. Great plot.

Last Two Moore Movies: Mediocre, but better than the first two. Roger was looking a bit old by the end.

I'll submit my views on the rest later. Hang in there!

(Reply to this)

idratherbe8587 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 08:45 PM

Not all the Moore movies are stupid. Live and Let Die has some great action pieces (that's about all it has, but they're fun). And The Spy Who Loved Me and For Your Eyes Only are both first rate.

(Reply to this)

Comment writes:
on Oct 28 2008 08:59 PM

I preferred this to OHMSS, but it's obvious Connery was there just to get his paycheck, which i heard was $1 million (a lot back then). Prepare yourself for Moore's clown antics!

(Reply to this)

Shawndorman writes:
on Oct 28 2008 09:10 PM

Diamonds are Forever is, by far, the worst of Connery's Bond's (not counting Never Say Never Again). But, with that in mind, it has the most HILARIOUS opening and closing of any of the Bond movies. So much happens in the pre-credits sequence ('C-C-Cairo!' 'There's something I'd like you to get off your chest', etc.) and it's just absolutely ridiculous. Brace yourself for Live and Let Die though...it may be even worse!

(Reply to this)

RT-Ryan writes:
on Oct 28 2008 09:17 PM

You guys have touched on a lot of the points I noticed about Diamonds but didn't have room to include. And to clarify, those of you who pointed out my disappointment with the voice masking device and the car-on-two-wheels bit are right: they're not really all that bad. I think the reason why I responded to them in a more negative fashion than I normally would have is because they were couched in the context of the film as a whole, which overall I didn't like.

Don't get me wrong, I think there were still some enjoyable elements to this movie, but when compared to the earlier Connery movies, this one definitely falls way Rotten with me.

(Reply to this)

tgibfo writes:
on Oct 28 2008 09:29 PM

I'm gonna disagree with some comments here. Not with your critique of DIAMONDS, though. You'll probably enjoy HALF of Live and Let Die, most of The Man with the Golden Gun and The Spy Who Loved Me, NONE of Moonraker and ALL of For Your Eyes Only.

Why people don't give Timothy Dalton credit is beyond me - LIVING DAYLIGHTS is still one of my favorites! THEN Goldeneye. After that you can skip to the new CASINO.

(Reply to this)

SillySausage69 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 09:33 PM

Oh god... The moon buggy chase scene...

(Reply to this)

ZiGyStRdUsT writes:
on Oct 28 2008 09:52 PM

stop hating on Moore. His Bond maybe campy, but the films were lots of fun!

(Reply to this)

Steve R. writes:
on Oct 28 2008 11:01 PM

In reply to this comment (#2100272)
If you watch that car chase scene again you'll notice that once the car is up on two wheels they cut to a close up shot of Bond and Tiffany inside the car. Looking past them and through the rear window you'll see the rear screen projection image of the alley tilting from one angle to the other. This explains how the car went into a narrow alley on the right wheels and came out on the left wheels. In the middle of the narrow alley Bond was able to tip the Mustang onto the opposite wheels. It makes perfect sense...in a BUGS BUNNY cartoon!

(Reply to this)

golrush007 writes:
on Oct 28 2008 11:40 PM

Diamonds Are Forever is probably one of the weakest Bond films, but I have always found it to be a fun comic-book ride. There isn't really a Bond film that I really dislike, although my favourites tend to be the more serious ones.

Ryan - don't be too dismayed, I don't think that many of the 70s films are worse than DAF. The only one might be The Man With The Golden Gun in my opinion, but it is still enjoyable enough - Christopher Lee is a great villain.
Live And Let Die is my favourite Roger Moore film (and I rank it 5th overall) - I look forward to reading your review!

(Reply to this)

BigPopper writes:
on Oct 29 2008 04:45 AM

I have read the book and it was significantly different. The only thing that even came close in the translation from book to screen was the characters of Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd. Interestingly, SPECTRE is not the organization Bond fights in the books but this name does appear in Diamonds Are Forever (the novel) as the name of a ghost town in the Nevada desert, used for diamond smuggling. The book also included a run away train fight and escape that would have leant a great deal more action and more climactic ending.

(Reply to this)

gm1200 writes:
on Oct 29 2008 07:10 AM

Moore is the Bond God. Despite the wackiness of his films (not his fault...it was the era!) he had the most charm and wit of any of them.

As for the absence of OHMSS ramifications...I believe that was due to consumer feedback. From what I understand, the public hated that film...primarily because it showed Bond as human. Apparently nobody wanted to see Bond cry...and the public ridicule is what kept Lazenby from coming back to the role...despite being asked to return.

Guess the producers figured everyone would be happier if they pretended OHMSS never happened.

(Reply to this)

iankusc writes:
on Oct 29 2008 08:16 AM

Sure, Diamonds sucks, but Tiffany Case ranks for me as THE HOTTEST BOND GIRL. Of course it helps that she spends practically the entire flick in a bikini....

(Reply to this)

Rodger W. writes:
on Oct 29 2008 08:18 AM

and another tidbit: the actor who plays Mr. Kidd is the father of actor Crispin Glover.

(Reply to this)

BearAmerica writes:
on Oct 29 2008 08:34 AM

What I always get a kick out of during the "Roger" years is how often they recycle the same material over and over. I guess they ran out of original ideas early and couldn't find anyone to come up with some new adventures. You Only Live Twice boils down to SPECTRE steals space ships by swallowing them with a bigger space ship. Ok, weird, but ok. Later we have The Spy Who Loved Me (which I liked) which boils down to some rich guy wants to live under the sea so he steals submarines by swallowing them up with an oil tanker. Then RIGHT AFTER that, we get Moonraker, which involves a rich guy who wants to live in SPACE so he steals space shuttles. If you thought the ending of You Only Live Twice was over the top, wait until you see the climactic battle in Moonraker.

And then there's A View To A Kill. That one pretty much stands as proof that whoever plays James Bond will always make one film too many. Connery did it with Diamonds, Roger did View. You know what though? It's an outright remake of Goldfinger just with computer chips instead. It's even got several of the same plot scenes like the guy in Goldfinger's group who doesn't want to be a part of the master plan.

When I see films like that I honestly wonder how they managed to keep the series alive. There are some really horrible scenes along the way and some movies that I just skip when I do a Bond marathon. Diamonds is one of those I skip. It's just too painful to watch.

(Reply to this)

davechung writes:
on Oct 29 2008 09:48 AM

The muppet reference took me for a flight in my ROWLFLcopter.

(Reply to this)

cmsof writes:
on Oct 29 2008 10:20 AM

The record breaking stunt was in Live And Let Die. Pretty obvious, though. They could probably have used a little CGI. But just a little.

There are some enjoyable Moore Bonds. A View To A Kill is not one of them. My all-time least favorite Bond movie. It is cringe-inducing. Tanya Roberts, while hot, has got to be the WORST Bond girl ever. Think Kate Capshaw in Temple Of Doom and then amplify by 1000. And it's just creepy to see Old Man Moore trying to get all up in that. Awful.

The Dalton Bonds weren't bad. Dalton was just sort of lame as Bond. He was just too sensitive. Christ. Did he even bang anybody in Living Daylights?

(Reply to this)

apostate writes:
on Oct 29 2008 10:43 AM

To me, Diamonds is the result of a lot of talented people getting together and just going through the motions to get paid. It's not really terrible, just mediocre and forgettable.

And while Connery hadn't quite turned into grandpa Bond yet, he was right on the edge. There's a reason why studios can be skitish about using older actors and this movie is a very good example as to why.

I also think the studio behind Bond learned all the wrong lessons after OHMSS. Thus the almost complete complete lack of continuity with the remaining Bond films or any real attempt at character developement. And the few times when they did try to address it, it ended up just being confusing and strange. Such as the reference to Bond's wife in one of the Moore films.

Also, as others have said, I too grew up with Moore as Bond. And while I can look back and say the Connery films were better, I still have a soft spot for Moore. You also have to admire the way he carried himself throughout the films he was in. Escpecially considering how outlandish some of them actually were compared to what the other Bond actors were given.

(Reply to this)

Dale B. writes:
on Oct 29 2008 11:08 AM

This is by far the worst Connery Bond, but with that being said in all fairness to Connery he did not "pocket" the $2,000,000.00 he was paid. He used his fee to establish the 'Scottish International Education Trust' where Scottish artists could apply for funding without having to leave their country to pursue their careers.

(Reply to this)

markbart0305 writes:
on Oct 29 2008 11:15 PM

Really, the best part of Diamonds Are Forever was the fight scene in the elevator.

(Reply to this)

iankusc writes:
on Oct 30 2008 08:17 AM

In reply to this comment (#2102051)
Yeah, the elevator scene where James Bond kills James Bond was probably studied carefully by Paul Greengrass before he shot "The Born Ultimatum"....

(Reply to this)

dolby70mm writes:
on Nov 02 2008 10:24 AM

As a kid I watched DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER on ABC-TV's "Sunday Night Movie" a few times and always thought Mr Wint & Mr Kidd were just weird partners in crime 'til I saw the unedited version on vide for the first time. There is a scene where they hold hands after after killing a guy in the desert.

(Reply to this)

dolby70mm writes:
on Nov 02 2008 10:53 AM

WHAT THE NATION THOUGHT...

DR.NO
Budget-$1m...US Box Office-$16.1m

FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE
Budget-$2m...US Box Office-$24.8m

GOLDFINGER
Budget-$3m...US Box Office-$51.1m

THUNDERBALL
Budget-$5.6m...US Box Office-$63.6m

YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE
Budget-$9.5m...US Box Office-$43.1m

ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE
Budget-$7m...US Box Office-$22.8m

DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER
Budget-$7.2m...US Box Office-$43.8m

(Reply to this)

dolby70mm writes:
on Nov 02 2008 11:28 AM

A scene were Plenty returns to Bond's room after she was thrown into the pool. Here, she spies on Tiffany Case and Bond making love through a crack in the bedroom door. Plenty then looks through Tiffany's purse nearby and finds the address to Tiffany. This explains how Plenty gets to Tiffany's house later in the movie. Another scene has Plenty arriving the next day at Tiffany's house and letting herself in and sees nobody's around (all the characters are at the Circus Circus Casino). Plenty goes into Tiffany's bedroom, sees some of her wigs lying around and tries a few on for fun, until the frame pulls back to Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd arriving and seeing Plenty trying on the wigs, assume she's Tiffany whom they are ordered to kill.

(Reply to this)

Wooley writes:
on Nov 03 2008 10:12 AM

I actually enjoyed Wint and Kidd. The two of them, and Tiffany Case, who I just have a thing for, were the high-points of the movie.
The only thing in Bond-dom more sad than Connery's appearance in this film, is his appearance (and presence) in Never Say Never Again, and Moore's brutally deteriorating appearance in Octopussy and (yeesh!) A View to a Kill.
I worry that they hired Craig too late, and that we will either not get many movies from him before he looks too damn old, or we will just get more old-*** James Bond.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Diamonds Are Forever

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links