Skip to main content

Well, if we destroy Kansas the world may not hear about it for years.


Diamonds are Forever
(1971)

In conception, Diamonds are Forever was a retreat to safer ground for the series following the “failure” of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. In the end, it proved to be a significant break in tone and humour from what had gone before. More playfulness was evident in the heightened characterisations and settings, but simultaneously more boundaries were pushed in terms of sex and violence. Las Vegas lends the film a tarnished, glitterball quality that would quite accurately predict the excess and decadence of the coming decade. And presiding over the proceedings was a greying Bond, somewhat gone to seed and looking noticeably older than the near-decade it was since his first appearance. Somehow, the result is as sparkling and vital as the diamonds of the title, but it is understandably a curate’s egg. In many respects it bears more resemblance to the camp affectations, eccentricities and quirks of the television series The Avengers than the more straightforward heroics seen in previous Bond films (and replete with character names like Morton Slumber, which could have been plucked straight from an Avengers script).


Goldfinger became a touchstone for what the series should aspire to, and as such director Guy Hamilton was brought on board to bring some of that magic. Writer Richard Maibaum initially drafted a script featuring Goldfinger’s brother as the villain. This entrenchment came with the understanding that Bond would yet again be recast and, indeed, Psycho (American) actor John Gavin was signed up for the role (another concern of the producers was that the series should appeal consciously more to the US market). United Artists still wanted Connery back, though, and when the reluctant Broccoli and Saltzman (reluctant, as they did not wish to persuade Connery to do something if he really didn’t want to) gave the actor an offer he couldn’t refuse Gavin was nixed. Meanwhile, script problems had resulted in Tom Mankiewicz being brought in to rework it.  An American writer might have been expected not to “get” Bond, but Mankiewicz recognised its absurdities and fully embraced them.


It has been suggested that, due to Connery’s (then) enormous fee ($1.25m, about $7m in today’s money) the effects budget was scaled back. This may explain why a fight between Blofeld and Bond in a diamond mine was excised from the climax, left unfilmed. Certainly, the action is noticeably less extravagant than the last couple of Connery pictures; a car chase set piece along the Vegas Strip and the oilrig climax, and that’s about it. Instead of action we’re treated to stylisation and eccentricity. Larger than life characters abound, from gay assassins Mr Wint and Mr Kidd to hit women Bambi and Thumper to Howard Hughes by-another-name Willard Whyte.


DAF was adapted from the fourth Fleming Bond novel, which did not feature Blofeld as the villain. Notably, Connery was a big fan Mankiewicz’s work on the script; he can be seen discussing it at the time, observing that it was the best one yet. He commented that the plot was very strong, but maybe he was also thinking of the campy, humourous tone, which came in for much criticism at the time. As such, it may be the most Marmite of Bond films. Either you love it or it’s near the bottom of your series ranking.


The plot that Connery considered so strong really isn’t all that, basically a plan by Blofeld to hold the world to ransom under threat of destruction with his laser satellite (constructed using the all-important diamonds). What is undoubtedly in the script’s favour, and more than making up for the slightly mundane quest for global domination, is that almost every scene in the film is memorable; for it’s dialogue, characterisation and distinct purpose. Even the gangster caricatures make a strong impression (“I didn’t know there was a pool down there”, one opines after throwing Plenty O’Toole from a hotel window.


With that tone came a more cavalier approach to the trademark sex and violence that Bond engages in. This is the first film in the series to show bare breasts, in a scene where 007 is at his most sadistic, threatening a woman with strangulation (“There is something I’d like you to get off your chest”). Later, a double of Blofeld is shot in the head (we are privileged to see the bullet hole). 

Tellingly there is no attempt to provide continuity with OHMSS, unless one assumes that Bond’s desire to get Blofeld as the film opens is a result of Tracy’s demise at the end of the previous film. The opening echoes the pre-credits sequence in From Russia with Love, where a Bond double is killed by Red Grant. This time it is 007 shooting a Blofeld double.


The American setting was reportedly fixed on as a sop to the US audience who had been less embracing of OHMSS, and what is most surprising – largely down to Mankiewicz – is that it doesn’t feel like a forced choice. The American Bond girl, Tiffany Case, runs the biggest risk (of being a caricature loudmouthed American). And, to be honest, that’s exactly who Jill St John plays her as. But she also plays her immensely likeably, and the result is one of the most resourceful of Bond girls (sometimes too resourceful, as in the tape-swapping scene). St John also looks fantastic in a bikini, which doesn’t hurt her “case”.


One is left with the impression that Connery isn’t trying too hard to summon up the Bond of old. He’s almost too relaxed, but he does appear to be having fun. He’s also blessed with some of the series’ best one-liners. Upon first catching sight of Tiffany he comments, “Well, that’s quite a nice little nothing you’re almost wearing”. As if to emphasise the point, Tiffany’s arse-crack is showing. This is also the film where 007 notes that he doesn’t mind what colour Tiffany’s hair is, “as long as the collars and cuffs match”. DAF has little time for notions of elegance or etiquette. And Bond never looks particularly dapper in his ‘70s-cut tuxedo. Nevertheless, the film as a whole is blessed with fantastically quotable, such as 007’s classic exchange with Lana Wood’s Bond girl.

Plenty: Hi, I’m Plenty.
James Bond: But of course you are.
Plenty: Plenty O’Toole.
James Bond: Named after your father, perhaps?

Later, on being accosted by heavies in Plenty’s bedroom, he observes,

James Bond: Well, I’m afraid you’ve caught me with more than my hands up.


Even Blofeld turns lecherous in DAF. After noticing the cassette tape containing the satellite control codes nestling amid Tiffany’s buttocks, he has her placed under guard. And then waxes lyrical.

Blofeld: What a pity, such nice cheeks too. If only they were brains.


At other times, the revelling in absurdity is more akin to Connery’s successor. Bond emerges from an oil pipe at one point, much to the surprise of the workers who open the hatch.

James Bond: Thank you very much. I was just out walking my rat and seem to have lost my way…

This, after holding a conversation with said rat.

James Bond: Well, one of us smells like a tart’s handkerchief. (sniffs) I’m afraid it’s me. Sorry, old boy.


Mr Wynn and Mr Kidd make two of the series’ wittiest henchman. Their man-love is barely referred to, but it’s revealed obliquely through the performances of Putter Smith and, particularly, Bruce Glover. In their first scene, after killing several diamond smugglers, they disappear into the desert hand-in-hand. Later, Glover’s Mr Wint shoots Mr Kidd a most unimpressed look when he comments on how attractive Tiffany is (“for a lady”). Mainly, though, it is their in-tandem repartee that makes them so memorable. On sending Bond to be cremated, they eulogise.

Mr Wint: Very moving.
Mr Kidd: Heartwarming, Mr Wint.
Mr Wint: A glowing tribute, Mr Kidd.

Their presence on the periphery of the main action recalls Red Grant shadowing Bond in From Russia with Love. But in a more surreal, cartoonish form.


It isn’t just Wint and Kidd that display playfulness with ideas of gender and sexuality. Blofeld dons drag at one point, while Bambie and Thumper are deadly fighters who nearly best Bond using only their bodies as weapons.


I commented in my OHMSS review that I was unsure who was my favourite Blofeld, but it’s definitely Charles Gray. He’s just having so much fun, and he’s so witty too.

Blofeld: Well go on, go on, it’s merely a lift. Or should I say elevator?

In contrast, there’s little to say about M, Moneypenny or Q this time round. M gets sniffy with Bond over his identification of the vintage of sherry and delights in his lack of knowledge of diamonds. Felix Leiter is back to being a rather dull pen pusher, this time played by Norman Burton; it’s curious how nondescript most of the Felixs have been.


One of the most appealing characters is Willard Whyte, played with an “Aw, shucks” affability by country music singer Jimmy Dean. The (rare) likable tycoon persona would later re-emerge with Jon Glover’s performance as Daniel Clamp in Gremlins 2.


In a sense, DAF does bear comparison with Goldfinger; it isn’t the action scenes that make it such a strong entry in the canon. There are a couple of solid ones, nevertheless. The brutal, close-quarters fight between Bond and Peter Franks in a cramped elevator isn’t quite as proficient as the scrap that most likely inspired it, between Red Grand and Bond in FRWL, but it’s thrillingly messy. And it’s a nice touch that it’s initiated when Bond makes a mistake, drawing back his elbow and breaking the glass behind him.


Perhaps most famous is the fake Moon landing sequence. Bond, exploring Whyte’s research laboratory, stumbles across astronauts filming on a Moon set before fleeing his pursuers in a rover. It’s quite surprising to see such a satirical set piece in a series of films not exactly known for such elements. It’s clearly a commentary on the conspiratorial rumblings that the Moon landing of two years previously had been filmed in a television studio. The book Dark Moon: Apollo and the Whistle-Blowers even devotes several pages to dissecting the exchanges preceding the scene (the focus on radiation levels and shields; the lack of protection against harmful radiation is one of the arguments presented by conspiracy theorists that the Moon landing couldn’t have been real). Connery obviously relishes the dialogue, posing as Klaus Hergerscheimer


Elsewhere there are further strange, surreal moments thrown in. An elephant playing, and winning at, slot machines (Q also proves highly adept). A stage act where a woman transforms into a gorilla. The design of the Moon buggy Bond escapes into the Nevada Desert in, arms flailing uselessly at its sides.

A word for John Barry’s score. If OHMSS is his most elegantly classic Bond work, DAF sees him at his loosest and most freewheeling. From the wonderful funeral music at Slumber Inc to the catchy casino muzak to maybe the best Bond song, creatively he’s on fire.


Diamonds are Forever looks set to remain one of the most divisive Bond films, ironically as it was envisaged as a sure thing, a safe bet to get viewers back on side following the perceived failing of OHMSS. It was a bigger hit than Lazenby’s solo mission but fell considerably short of Connery’s three previous runs (in inflation-adjusted terms). I rate it as one of the best in the series, possibly only second to OHMSS. Perhaps I’m the wrong sort of Bond aficionado, as I tend to consider the more idiosyncratic entries to be the best ones. DAF saw Connery go out on a high. Maybe he wasn’t giving it his very best, but this remains one of his most enjoyable performances; much different to the all-round going-through-the-motions that crippled You Only Live Twice.


The man with one raised eyebrow was waiting in the wings, and for the rest of the ‘70s Bond would be a safe, known and immensely popular quantity. But Moore’s Bond would, after a couple of films, receive mounting brickbats from purists enraged at the mockery he was making of their beloved spy series. They should have looked to DAF, which is arguably where the “rot” set in.


Popular posts from this blog

I’m smarter than a beaver.

Prey (2022) (SPOILERS) If nothing else, I have to respect Dan Trachtenberg’s cynical pragmatism. How do I not only get a project off the ground, but fast-tracked as well? I know, a woke Predator movie! Woke Disney won’t be able to resist! And so, it comes to pass. Luckily for Prey , it gets to bypass cinemas and so the same sorry fate of Lightyear . Less fortunately, it’s a patience-testing snook cocking at historicity (or at least, assumed historicity), in which a young, pint-sized Comanche girl who wishes to hunt and fish – and doubtless shoot to boot – with the big boys gets to take on a Predator and make mincemeat of him. Well, of course , she does. She’s a girl, innit?

Just because you are a character doesn't mean that you have character.

Pulp Fiction (1994) (SPOILERS) From a UK perspective, Pulp Fiction ’s success seemed like a fait accompli; Reservoir Dogs had gone beyond the mere cult item it was Stateside and impacted mainstream culture itself (hard to believe now that it was once banned on home video); it was a case of Tarantino filling a gap in the market no one knew was there until he drew attention to it (and which quickly became over-saturated with pale imitators subsequently). Where his debut was a grower, Pulp Fiction hit the ground running, an instant critical and commercial success (it won the Palme d’Or four months before its release), only made cooler by being robbed of the Best Picture Oscar by Forrest Gump . And unlike some famously-cited should-have-beens, Tarantino’s masterpiece really did deserve it.

I’m the famous comedian, Arnold Braunschweiger.

Last Action Hero (1993) (SPOILERS) Make no mistake, Last Action Hero is a mess. But even as a mess, it might be more interesting than any other movie Arnie made during that decade, perhaps even in his entire career. Hellzapoppin’ (after the 1941 picture, itself based on a Broadway revue) has virtually become an adjective to describe films that comment upon their own artifice, break the fourth wall, and generally disrespect the convention of suspending disbelief in the fictions we see parading across the screen. It was fairly audacious, some would say foolish, of Arnie to attempt something of that nature at this point in his career, which was at its peak, rather than playing it safe. That he stumbled profoundly, emphatically so since he went up against the behemoth that is Jurassic Park (slotted in after the fact to open first), should not blind one to the considerable merits of his ultimate, and final, really, attempt to experiment with the limits of his screen persona.

Death to Bill and Ted!

Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey (1991) (SPOILERS) The game of how few sequels are actually better than the original is so well worn, it was old when Scream 2 made a major meta thing out of it (and it wasn’t). Bill & Ted Go to Hell , as Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey was originally called, is one such, not that Excellent Adventure is anything to be sneezed at, but this one’s more confident, even more playful, more assured and more smartly stupid. And in Peter Hewitt it has a director with a much more overt and fittingly cartoonish style than the amiably pedestrian Stephen Herrick. Evil Bill : First, we totally kill Bill and Ted. Evil Ted : Then we take over their lives. My recollection of the picture’s general consensus was that it surpassed the sleeper hit original, but Rotten Tomatoes’ review aggregator suggests a less universal response. And, while it didn’t rock any oceans at the box office, Bogus Journey and Point Break did quite nicely for Keanu Reev

Everyone creates the thing they dread.

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) (SPOILERS) Avengers: Age of Ultron ’s problem isn’t one of lack. It benefits from a solid central plot. It features a host of standout scenes and set pieces. It hands (most of) its characters strong defining moments. It doesn’t even suffer now the “wow” factor of seeing the team together for the first time has subsided. Its problem is that it’s too encumbered. Maybe its asking to much of a director to effectively martial the many different elements required by an ensemble superhero movie such as this, yet Joss Whedon’s predecessor feels positively lean in comparison. Part of this is simply down to the demands of the vaster Marvel franchise machine. Seeds are laid for Captain America: Civil War , Infinity Wars I & II , Black Panther and Thor: Ragnarok . It feels like several spinning plates too many. Such activity occasionally became over-intrusive on previous occasions ( Iron Man II ), but there are points in Age of Ultron whe

Poetry in translation is like taking a shower with a raincoat on.

Paterson (2016) (SPOILERS) Spoiling a movie where nothing much happens is difficult, but I tend to put the tag on in a cautionary sense much of the time. Paterson is Jim Jarmusch at his most inert and ambient but also his most rewardingly meditative. Paterson (Adam Driver), a bus driver and modest poet living in Paterson, New Jersey, is a stoic in a fundamental sense, and if he has a character arc of any description, which he doesn’t really, it’s the realisation that is what he is. Jarmusch’s picture is absent major conflict or drama; the most significant episodes feature Paterson’s bus breaking down, the English bull terrier Marvin – whom Paterson doesn’t care for but girlfriend Laura (Golshifteh Farahani) dotes on – destroying his book of poetry, and an altercation at the local bar involving a gun that turns out to be a water pistol. And Paterson takes it all in his stride, genial to the last, even the ruination of his most earnest, devoted work (the only disappoint

If you ride like lightning, you're going to crash like thunder.

The Place Beyond the Pines (2012) (SPOILERS) There’s something daringly perverse about the attempt to weave a serious-minded, generation-spanning saga from the hare-brained premise of The Place Beyond the Pines . When he learns he is a daddy, a fairground stunt biker turns bank robber in order to provide for his family. It’s the kind of “only-in-Hollywood” fantasy premise you might expect from a system that unleashed Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man and Point Break on the world. But this is an indie-minded movie from the director of the acclaimed Blue Valentine ; it demands respect and earnest appraisal. Unfortunately it never recovers from the abject silliness of the set-up. The picture is littered with piecemeal characters and scenarios. There’s a hope that maybe the big themes will even out the rocky terrain but in the end it’s because of this overreaching ambition that the film ends up so undernourished. The inspiration for the movie

This entire edifice you see around you, built on jute.

Jeeves and Wooster 3.3: Cyril and the Broadway Musical  (aka Introduction on Broadway) Well, that’s a relief. After a couple of middling episodes, the third season bounces right back, and that's despite Bertie continuing his transatlantic trip. Clive Exton once again plunders  Carry On, Jeeves  but this time blends it with a tale from  The Inimitable Jeeves  for the brightest spots, as Cyril Basington-Basington (a sublimely drippy Nicholas Hewetson) pursues his stage career against Aunt Agatha's wishes.

I think it’s pretty clear whose side the Lord’s on, Barrington.

Monte Carlo or Bust aka  Those Daring Young Men in Their Jaunty Jalopies (1969) (SPOILERS) Ken Annakin’s semi-sequel to Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines tends to be rather maligned, usually compared negatively to its more famous predecessor. Which makes me rather wonder if those expressing said opinion have ever taken the time to scrutinise them side by side. Or watch them back to back (which would be more sensible). Because Monte Carlo or Bust is by far the superior movie. Indeed, for all its imperfections and foibles (not least a performance from Tony Curtis requiring a taste for comic ham), I adore it. It’s probably the best wacky race movie there is, simply because each set of competitors, shamelessly exemplifying a different national stereotype (albeit there are two pairs of Brits, and a damsel in distress), are vibrant and cartoonish in the best sense. Albeit, it has to be admitted that, as far as said stereotypes go, Annakin’s home side win

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.