IMDb > Diamonds Are Forever (1971) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Diamonds Are Forever
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Diamonds Are Forever More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 2 of 28:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]
Index 280 reviews in total 

4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Nice Bond film with spectacular scenarios mostly filmed in Las Vegas

Author: ma-cortes
6 September 2010

The movie resulted to be Sean Connery's last appearance as Bond before he returned again in ¨Never say never again¨ by Irwin Keshner . M ( Bernard Lee )assigns an under-grade mission to Bond dealing with diamonds robbing but the events go worse . This time Bond confronts Blofeld (Charles Gray) and a strange couple , Mr Kid and Mr Wint (Bruce Glover and Putter Smith ) in a intrigue about diamonds smuggling and a final with satellite full of nuclear weapons , holding of the world to ransom . Bond is helped by a Howard Hughes type recluse (Jimmy Dean) and of course Q (Desmond Llewelyn ). And the extraordinary presence of a marvelous girl (Jill St John) and secondary appearance another Bond female ( Lana Wood, Natalie Wood's sister ) in the ordinary Casino of Las Vegas .

The film contains spectacular fights , action packed , car chases , apocalyptic and overwhelming scenarios along with the typically glossy ingredients series but Sean Connery looks a little bit boring ,in fact is his Bond last film , before his surprising return . It is held together by fine acting and above all, and overwhelming level of tongue-in-cheek . Sean Connery as James Bond is cool , he has coldness and toughness , typical characters of the famous personage , but also earns in irony , suavity and smoothness . The interesting screenplay based on Ian Fleming's novel is written by Richard Maibaum and the recently deceased Tom Mankiewicz. The action is very good , the cinematography by Ted Moore is magnificent , the sets decent , but the real clincher is the fact that Bond is once more performed by a hero with the right stuff . The struggles were carefully choreographed by very accomplished athletes as a pair gorgeous killer karate female bodyguards and performed like a dance routine requiring each participant to hit their mark at the correct time . The picture is produced by habituals Harry Saltzman and Albert R. Broccoli filmed on location in Amsterdam , Netherland , Los Angeles ,Nevada and Pinewood Studios ,London,England. The atmosphere is faithful to the actual location but the interiors on a set at Pinewood Studios. Appropriate and wonderful -as usual- musical score by John Barry .Main title song is catching and marvelously performed by Shirley Bassey . The motion picture is well directed by Guy Hamilton who also directed ¨Live and let die¨, ¨the man with the golden gun¨ with Roger Moore and the best Bond : ¨Goldfinger ¨also with Sean Connery . Indispensable and essential watching for James Bond fans .

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Connery is back!

Author: Tweekums from United Kingdom
28 August 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

After George Lazenby's single outing as James Bond Sean Connery is back again. Some people think this is one of the worst Bond films; I wouldn't go that far but it is certainly a lot more frivolous then previous instalments; there was always the occasional one liner but here they come thick and fast. In the pre-credit sequence. Bond tracks down and apparently kills Blofeld, who is now played by Charles Gray. With that case wrapped up he is set to work investigating diamonds being smuggled out of South Africa. His sent to Amsterdam where he poses as a known smuggler to get the diamonds of one Tiffany Chase. In order to find out who is organising the smuggling he then takes them to Los Angeles where he is met and taken to Las Vegas. Here he learns that they aren't being smuggled for financial reasons but to be used in a satellite based weapon… will he be able to prevent it being used against Washington DC?

As said before this is less serious then the previous films; I don't think it is bad though; in fact I've always rather enjoyed it. Charles Gray does a good job as arch-villain Blofeld but Putter Smith and Bruce Glover steal the show as Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint; a pair of creepy killers who have a 'witty' line for every occasion. Jill St John does a fine job as Tiffany Case but the other 'Bond Girl' in this film, Lana Wood, who plays the appropriately named Plenty O'Toole, is rather under-used. The story is good enough although there are one or two plot holes… for example Tiffany checks fingerprints to identify Bond as the smuggler but has no photograph of the real smuggler. As one would expect from a Bond film there are plenty of stunts, action and explosions. Over all I'd recommend this to other Bond fans even though it isn't a classic.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

James Bond travels to Las Vegas to solve missing diamonds mystery.

Author: TxMike from Houston, Tx, USA, Earth
10 November 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I found the recently released 3-DVD set of Connery as Bond movies at my local public library, and this is one of them.

It starts off with a glimpse of workers in diamond mines and the way some theft and smuggling comes about. Then in a broader issue, large quantities of diamonds are disappearing.

Sean Connery (age 40), back as James Bond, is sent in to investigate. That takes him to the casinos of Las Vegas. The main Bond girl is Jill St. John (age 30) as Tiffany Case. The nemesis is Charles Gray as Blofeld, and we find out he hatched a plan to take control of a commercial satellite launch with a laser, and using the diamonds as a way to make the lasers many times more powerful, enough so that it can destroy from space. Washington becomes threatened.

The final action takes them to a Baha California offshore oil platform, where Blofeld has established a base of operations for the threat.

Looking back at this movie made almost 45 years ago it is somewhat "cheesy" by today's standard. But I never expect a James Bond movie to be any more than that, "cheesy" action and "cheesy" fights. The entertainment is to see how many novel situations the writers can imagine Bond getting into, always in suit and tie, and the novel ways they have him getting out of trouble. Often it would be easy to eliminate James Bond and solve the issue of him on the trail, but James Bond never gets killed!

I enjoyed it, I was entertained. It was fun seeing a young Lana Wood as Plenty O'Toole, she was gorgeous at 24, but her scenes were cut short in editing. It was also fun seeing Jimmy Dean as Willard Whyte, owner of the "Whyte House" in Las Vegas and the wealthy industrialist responsible for the satellite laser technology.

Was the above review useful to you?

23 out of 43 people found the following review useful:

The franchise stops at this point, from here-on in Bonds are "cloned"

Author: uds3 from Longmont, Colorado
18 September 2002

Well well, this one has really elicited some polarised opinion! Connery returned here for three principal reasons. Despite the box-office success of ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE, Lazenby's post-production antics and monetary demands cost him a job. US actor John Gavin (mercifully) declined the role in this film and thirdly public demand and an offer he couldn't refuse (something to do with truck-loads of cash), induced Connery so slap on the old hairpiece once more! Looking visibly older, though not in any way detrimental to the role, Sean revels in what obviously (to him) was his swansong as 007. Almost a complete turnaround in style from his established mega-serious British Agent in his previous five outings, Bond is having FUN! Virtually a total send up of the entire franchise to date, Bond veritably dribbles double entendres unloading on the audience probably the rudest and funniest dialog of the series. Pick of the flick? "I'm Plenty O'Toole" to which Bond quips, "Named after your father are you?"

The plot is more or less made up as they went along and is just plain incidental to the Movie. Campy beyond belief, even to the extent of having a pair of confrontingly homosexual killers who bumble their way to annihilation at the film's conclusion. Most Bond purists choked on their martinis with the release of DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER. The way to enjoy this one is to let it flow....don't compare it! Have no expectations and let Connery entertain you. One right out of the bag here. If you want it to fit a pre-conceived mould, you're in for a major disappointment. For God's sake how seriously could you take a Bond film starring singer Jimmy Dean, not to mention a couple of beefed up exquisitely proportioned female minders called Bambi and Thumper?

One of the Bonds that has improved with age AND multiple viewings. RIP James!

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

The 007th James Bond Movie Is,Well,Disappointing

Author: jordansepticeye
18 September 2016

That's exactly what this movie is,a disappointment.After the great On Her Majesty's Secret Service,everyone(at the time)was disappointed,there was no Sean Connery!So even though Sean didn't want to return,money convinced him,and,we got Diamonds Are Forever.Let's start with the pros,I like the opening,it does a great job of continuing from the events of the last,you feel genuine anger in Bond,but it ends very anticlimactically.There's also a great fight scene in an elevator,that is very well choreographed.I also like the Bond Girl,she's tough and doesn't take any crap from anyone,and the score is great as usual.It's also cool how this movie makes fun of how pop culture was at the time.My last pro is Blofeld's henchmen Mr.Wint and Mr.Kidd,they're creative villains and are creepy and entertaining to watch.Now,onto the many,many,cons.The tone of this movie is awful,it feels like a bad parody of the franchise and has many unfunny scenes,in fact,most things that happen are just to make lame jokes,the secondary Bond Girl,who's in the movie for like 2 minutes,serves nothing to the plot and is really just there to look pretty and have Connery joke about her name.Speaking of the plot,it's all over the place,and very convoluted.And the action,it's really uninteresting,besides the elevator fight and driving a car on two wheels.Blofeld is not intimidating at all,and quite boring.The last con,Sean Connery,he feels bored,lazy,and too relaxed,which I guess works for the tone,but it is still a bad performance for Sean's standards in the franchise.All in all,Diamonds Are Forever is a disappointing follow up to a great movie in the franchise,although it has a few good scenes and characters,the rest of the movie is unfunny,too campy for Sean Connery's Bond movies,and lacks excitement.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Not one of the best - too camp / Americanised / chilled out for me

Author: williamwallace-30771 from United States
7 August 2015

This bond film is bar far not one of the best, I can' decide if its one of the worst there are a couple of more modern ones that I think are worse, but this film was just not British enough, I think it was made a little too much for the American audience. Not enough action, this is probably the most relaxed and laid back bond / film there ever was. There is a storyline but it seems like it takes forever to develop and it makes the movie appear slow to get going. I should say it was good to see Sean Connery back in the role of Bond after his 1 movie hiatus and this outing I most say does seem to fit better than previous ones. But for some reason I can't fathom he looks older (he was 40 when he made it) Roger Moore looks younger when he played Bond in the film after this one, but was actually older.

Its OK take it or leave it - your choice.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Diamonds Are Forever (1971) Review

Author: vgamerdc from United States
21 December 2013

The first Bond movie of the 70's and you can already tell a difference in the picture as well as color. In this film we have the return of Sean Connery for one last film, which is because of hatred the viewers gave to On Her Majesty's Secret Service, staring George Lazenby. It is also because of that film that this review may get a better score than it might deserve, being the follow-up to that catastrophe. Please click the link above to read my raging review.

Anyways, I found this film to be actually pretty good, especially compared to its predecessor (I'm going to try to not keep bashing On Her Majesty's Secret Service, but I might just not be able to help myself.) I most of it, but there were still some goofy elements added to it. For example — oh, and if you haven't seen this 42 year old movie, then sorry for spoilers — when Bond steals the space/moon driving machine and the bad guys send 3 cars (who fail to catch Bond) and 3 motorcycles (who also fail) and the scene goes on for a good 5-7 minutes, it's hard to keep a straight face.

Anyways, I didn't like how the actors playing Blowfelt — I finally figured out his name but referred to him as Dr. Evil in my previous reviews — kept changing. This guy wasn't the same as the Blowfelt in You Only Live Twice but hey AT LEAST HE WAS BETTER THAN THE GUY IN ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE!Anyway, his performance was good and I enjoyed how he created a double of himself.

Another part of this movie that I loved was Mr. Wint and Mr. Kid. They played really good roles and I enjoyed their performance. I feel like Mr. Wint was one of those guys who would be saying something like, "Boy, this building is quite high up. It would be a shame if someone were to fall off."

I give Diamonds Are Forever a 7.5 out of 10 for having the return of Sean Connery, characters like Mr. Wint and Kid, and just being a fun film. Some of the lines and chases are silly, but hey, AT LEAST IT'S NOT AS BAD AS…. Well, you already know what I'm going to say.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Sean Connery returns as Vegas Bond

Author: SnoopyStyle
17 December 2013

Sean Connery returns and kills Blofeld in the first 10 minutes. Then he's put onto the case of missing South African diamonds. He assumes the identity of diamond smuggler Peter Franks. But his investigation leads him to Las Vegas and an unexpected nemesis.

This is probably one of the weaker Bond movie. It is just not exotic to be stuck in Vegas for so long. It's the difference between real locations and Hollywood sets. Vegas could be fun, but it's not exotic. Although, it is interesting to see the old style Vegas before the modern built-up.

The best new names have to be Bambi and Thumper. They are amazingly hot bodyguards. And then we got sexy Jill St. John firing her gun in a bikini. No matter what happens, a Bond movie will usually have great Bond girls.

There is more sly humor than ever before. There are the sarcastic killer pair Mr Kidd and Mr Wint with their dead pan humor. The sexual innuendos are thicker than ever. There is a bad Roger Moore quality to this Bond movie. Only Moore knows how to do it with a nudge and a wink. The moon rover chase is one of the stupidest thing ever. And there isn't anything superior in any of the designs either. A tiny oil platform isn't that impressive for an evil hideout.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

'If at first you don't succeed...'

Author: fidelio74 from Sydney, Australia
2 January 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

'Diamonds are Forever' marked the return of Sean Connery as British superspy James Bond for one film. The plot involves diamond smuggling and takes Bond to Las Vegas. His love interest here is Tiffany Case (Jill St. John), and there is terrific support from a pair of homosexual (very risqué for the time - 1971) hit men named Mr. Kidd (Putter Smith) and Mr. Wint (Bruce Glover), and also from Charles Gray as the villain Ernst Stavro Blofeld.

As usual, there are plenty of action set pieces on display: a close-quarters fight betwixt Bond and an adversary in an elevator, a splendidly shot car chase through the glittering streets of Vegas, and a helicopter raid upon an oil rig at the film's denouement. This helicopter raid recalls the one on Piz Gloria - where Blofeld had based his headquarters - in 'On Her Majesty's Secret Service'.

Sean Connery is in fine form. He is, and always will be, the best Bond and, as a valediction, 'Diamonds are Forever' is pretty good. It is no 'From Russia With Love' but it certainly entertains. And there is a wonderful theme song which marks the always welcome return of Shirley Bassey's powerful and bewitching voice.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

In context - it's a blast!

Author: Tony Bush from United Kingdom
1 March 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The sixties, peace, love, psychedelia and the peak of Bond mania, passed into history. The Beatles split up, Jim Morrison flat-lined in a bathtub and Vietnam was napalming the American dream to ashes in a controversial conflict that was fast starting to look like an epic fail.

The Bond movies had been spoofed, ripped-off, imitated to near death and creatively dismissed by many critics. Lazenby had jumped ship, convinced that Bond was "old hat" and had no future other than a rattling decline into celluloid oblivion. This smacks of the same type of miscalculation made by the Decca A&R exec who turned down signing The Beatles because "guitar bands are on the way out." New American cinema was starting to turn out some of the greatest genre defining movies ever made. The world was going all glam, glitter and shock-rock - Alice Cooper, Slade, New York Dolls, Sweet, David Bowie.

And the original Bond returns in a glitzy, camp, sci-fi extravaganza, that still manages to be the fourth highest grossing film in the US of it's year. Ahead of Dirty Harry, Carnal Knowledge, A Clockwork Orange, Klute, The Last Picture Show and Bedknobs and Broomsticks. No indicator of quality, but certainly of a sustained popularity.

DAF is a slyer, more-knowing, self-deprecating artifact of it's time than most give it credit for. In it's sweep, it satirises the absurdity of Howard Hughes and his eccentric reclusivity, the global obsession over the lunar landings (and accompanying conspiracy theory surrounding beliefs of their fakeness), the conquest of space, and pokes fun at the mecca of arbitrary gambling-addicts and those dazzled by the air-headed neon facade of sleazy, hollow glamour.

Beneath the veneer of such glamour, death lurks, dispensed by two gay contract killers in the pay of a criminal cross-dressing mastermind with a penchant for white cats and impersonating a reclusive kidnapped multi-millionaire industrialist. And making doubles of himself - for some reason. Are we beginning to grasp it's charm yet? There are so many continuity, plot and logic errors in DAF, that sooner or later one might suspect they are deliberate. Connery coasts through, nonchalant and laid-back and still irrefutably BOND. DAF, it's fair to say, lost the plot, in the tipsy haze of a high-tech Rat Pack hangover. But, as a kid I loved it unconditionally, and I still think it's a blast today. OK, it may not have aged as well as some of it's counterparts from the sixties and seventies, but at the time and in the climate it was released, the escapism it provided and the way in which it integrated/resonated with the mood and flavour of that time and climate, made it stellar entertainment. There's something about it's inherent sincerity and lack of forced, contrived, self-conscious cynicism that appeals.

There are some crackling one-liners and dialogue, a ferociously brutal unarmed combat episode in a lift, an eye-melting pink tie, bizarre vehicle chases and the most unconvincing toupee a leading actor ever wore up to that point. It had a bizarre life of it's own.

Oh, did I mention Connery was back as Bond? I'd pay the price of admission for that fact alone. Wouldn't you?

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 2 of 28:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history