IMDb > Diamonds Are Forever (1971) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Diamonds Are Forever
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
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
Promotional
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 5 of 28: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]
Index 279 reviews in total 

You never know what the future will bring.

8/10
Author: nrd515 . from Toledo, Ohio
26 November 2016

I thought this one was a lot of fun when I saw it when I was 15 years old, and it still amuses me. Of all the Connery Bond movies, Never Say Never is the worst, and Thunderball is close behind. Is it great? No. But it's not bad, and IMHO, is a lot better than some of the later ones with Roger Moore who was too old at the end of his run. I thought Mr Kidd and Mr. Wint were very amusing, Bruce Glover resembled a neighbor of mine at the time, which would have mortified the neighbor, a nutty guy that tried to stab my dog with a pitchfork once. Jimmy Dean was fine, as was most of the cast.

I never had a clue I would move to Las Vegas 1n '75, and in 1979 start working in a Hotel (Nevada Hotel, 235 S. Main, closed now, and it appears to have been bought by the Golden Nugget for some future project) built where the car chase was filmed! And then a year or so later, I was driving on the opposite side of town from where I lived and saw the "Slumber Inc" building! I thought it was just a building with a fake front on it in the movie, but it was the real thing, a funeral home, with a different name, of course. I can't remember if it was "Bunker Brothers" or something else now, But I went inside and it appeared the inside of the building was used for at least some of the scenes that took place in it.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Connery's Final Farewell

7/10
Author: rjsf96
28 October 2015

Connery decided to make one last final appearance as James Bond in Diamonds Are Forever. The first entry in the series where Bond became completely ridiculous and entered its camp stages that followed through to Roger Moore's seven outings as 007.

Bond has been given three years to track Blofeld down after the death of his wife in On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Blofeld plans to hold the world to ransom after he constructs a machine made out of diamonds that has the power to destroy an entire continent.

Many Bond fans will notice the sudden shift in tone. Where the previous six entries in the franchise took their material fairly seriously Diamonds Are Forever is completely camp in its approach. This will either shock fans or still entertain those that have a real fondness for Bond and Sean Connery.

One key example is the secondary villains Mr Wint and Mr Kidd. It is established early on that they are a homosexual couple. It's extremely bizarre and odd for a Bond film that thankfully never comes across as homophobic or insensitive. It only adds a certain strange and peculiar charm to the film that is difficult to explain. Unlike other entries however that were not affected by this problem, Diamonds Are Forever's campness comes at a cost. The girls in the film are merely damsels in distress for the sake of the plot and whenever Bond feels particularly horny. To say that they have little depth would be an understatement as by themselves they barely feel like real characters anyway.

Blofeld played by Charles Gray is more laughable than intimidating at any given moment. Most likely due to the fact that Gray starred in You Only Live Twice as an ally for Bond. Therefore it's impossible to shake off this feeling of de ja vu whenever we encounter him.

The plot this time around is flat out ridiculous and does not even try to be coherent. Diamonds that have the power to omit a laser by reflecting the sun's heat and thereby destroy the world? No. This is James Bond? No wonder Austin Powers found it so easy to parody the franchise from this point onwards as it had almost became a parody of itself.

Though for all its flaws Diamonds Are Forever zips along at a reasonable pace and it's truly wondrous to see Sean Connery in the title role again, even if this outing is one of his weaker films. There are the various stunts to keep action fans happy and enough that is different to ensure that monotony never sets in. In all fairness to Diamonds Are Forever I was never bored or uninterested.

Diamonds Are Forever is sure to keep fans of the franchise happy. But whether its outright camp approach will entertain you or leave you bewildered depends entirely on the mind-set of the viewer. After On Her Majesty's Secret Service, Diamonds Are Forever is more of a shrug than the sudden blow to the heart of the former. Still this entry should not be dismissed lightly, particularly if you are in the mood for a fun and breezy Bond adventure. You need look no further.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

A decent film but not the swansong that Sean Connery deserved

Author: GusF from Ireland
26 June 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Sean Connery's sixth and final Eon appearance as James Bond, this is not the swansong that he deserved it. That said, I thought that his performance was far better than in either "Thunderball" or "You Only Live Twice" as he's clearly having a great deal of fun with the part, which I'm sure had something to do with being paid £1.25 million to return to his most famous role. However, I don't think that he was ever able to recapture the spark and commitment to Bond that he displayed in the first three films, particularly "Goldfinger" (still my absolute favourite). That film's director Guy Hamilton returned to the Bond fold for this film but was similarly unable to recapture the old spark.

Jill St. John is good as Tiffany Case and she's clearly having the time of her life starring in a Bond film but it's not a very well written character. She starts off well as an intelligent, resourceful smuggler who seems to be Bond's equal but, over the course of the film, she devolves into a naive and perhaps even stupid character who gives Bond girls a bad name. However, as I said, the problem lies with the script rather than Jill St. John's performance. While Lana Wood may not be the actress than her late sister Natalie Wood was, she's very likable as Plenty O'Toole and, while it was hardly a shock given the series' well- established formula, it was shame that she died as I'd have liked to have seen more of her in the film. (No pun intended!)

Charles Gray, who previously played Nikko Henderson in "You Only Live Twice", makes for a very good villain but he doesn't make for a very good Blofeld. Again, the problem lies with the script rather than the actor's performance. In "You Only Live Twice", Donald Pleasence's Blofeld was a creepy psycho. In "On Her Majesty's Secret Service", Telly Savalas' Blofeld was basically a gangster. In this film, Gray's Blofeld is a gentleman villain of the old mould and his characterisation seems the most inconsistent with his previous portrayals. In all honesty though, I thought that Blofeld worked best as the faceless puppet master of "From Russia with Love" and "Thunderball". He didn't appear in the novel on which this is based and I think that the film could have followed suit. It would have allowed Gray to excel as a new character and would have made up for the fact that Tracy's death is never mentioned. Considering the events of the previous film, Bond and Blofeld are amazingly civil during their scenes together! Bernard Lee and Lois Maxwell's appearances are briefer than usual on this occasion but they both pick up right where they left off with Sean Connery, particularly the former. The interaction between Bond and M while Sir Donald is briefing them on the diamond situation is a delight. Conversely, Desmond Llewelyn has slightly more screen time as Q than usual and is as excellent as ever in the part.

Some of the other casting choices are a little...odd such as Jimmy Dean as the very thinly veiled Howard Hughes parody. Country and western music has never really been my thing so I never heard of Dean until last year when I saw him in an episode of "The Patty Duke Show" as himself. Well, I think that he should have stuck to playing himself because he's rather poor as Whyte. Norman Burton, who earned himself a place in pop culture history as the first ape seen in "Planet of the Apes", is horribly miscast as Felix Leiter. He's usually a good, reliable actor but he plays the role as if he were a rather dimwitted sitcom dad. Jack Lord, he ain't. However, the film does have some very good supporting actors such as Lawrence Naismith, Joseph Furst, perennial film and TV gangster Marc Lawrence, David Bauer, Ed Bishop, Leonard Barr, Sid Haig and David de Keyser. Like Gray, both Bauer and Bishop appeared as different characters in "You Only Live Twice".

While they're hardly the most politically correct villains to grace the silver screen, I quite liked Bruce Glover - who is Crispin Glover's dad, incidentally - and Putter Smith as Mr Wint and Mr Kidd. At first. I had the same attitude to them as I did to most of the humour in the film in general: it started off well and served as a breath of fresh air after the seriousness of "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" but got very old and went too far over the top as the film progressed such as, uh, Blofeld in drag. In fairness, some of the comic moments were great though. M telling Bond that at least there was one subject that he wasn't an expert in is his funniest moment in seven films and I loved the chase scene with the moon buggy! There were some great one-liners as well but almost all of them were in the first half of the film. It makes me a bit apprehensive of the reliance on comedy during most of the Roger Moore era, if I'm honest.

The film doesn't look as good as the previous ones. Blofeld's lair at the top of the Whyte House was the only set which really allowed Ken Adam to work his magic. The bright lights of Las Vegas can't really compare to the beauty of Istanbul, Japan or the Swiss Alps. Vegas lacks the exotic quality that I've come to expect from Bond films. Amsterdam is a beautiful city which makes for an ideal Bond film location but its appearance is too minor to make much of an impact.

Overall, this is a decent film and a very good one in its first half. However, it's less than the sum of its parts. I just wish that Sean Connery had been afforded a stronger film to go out on.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

It's All in Jill St. John's Party-Colored Bikini !

Author: ahmed elshikh (ahmed_abd_elreheem@yahoo.com) from Egypt
5 November 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

When Bond, at the very brief intro, throws the bad guy easily in the poor lair's mud saying (Welcome to hell Blofeld), you'll understand simply that this one isn't about action. (Diamonds Are Forever) is the funniest Bond yet, and originally a comedy more than anything else. I bet it was a vacation for the franchise's team in Las Vegas. So, for anybody loves Bond movies as action / spy thrillers, this could be their most provocative one in the series. And for the rest, it's the relief or the comic episode. As for me, I'm one of the "rest" because I love it very much.

I rank it also as the second sexiest Bond (after Thunderball). Jill St. John – the first American Bond girl – was one of the best ever. She's exceptionally sexy. For one reason she can be hot by only a look, and for another reason her manners were a bit outrageous compared to Bond's other girls (she said "my behind" along with the immortally ambiguous, sort of fun to think about, "Blow Up Your Pants" !). She was astonishing in that skimpy violet bikini, while (Guy Hamilton)'s naughty, oh too naughty, camera shooting her from the back side in close distances and more than once ! Especially when she was handing over the tape to Connery.. Ahhh that was sexually bold to holy extent. Over and above I'm just crazy about her intro, considering it one of the most breathtaking intros in the history of cinema! (along with Ann-Margaret in Viva Las Vegas, Marilyn Monroe in Some Like It Hot..).

This movie is as Jill St. John's loudly colored bikini; campy yet funny and hot. It's one licentious Bond, filled up with just sexual spices and sarcastic joking. They even deleted a Sammy Davis Jr. cameo (maybe to reduce the hilarity of it). The Bond stuff was in the background, since the mission this time got nothing to do with espionage. The climactic sequence seemed like an empty repetition of maybe all the previous climactic sequences with a ticking bomb in a lair, many henchmen running in uniform, Bond trying to flee, with – always – a girl in a bikini (or not too much clothes!). This is what I call a boring deja-vu already. But some comedy made it less boring and more entertaining this round.

By the way here, and maybe here only, the rocket that Bond wants to, and used to, blow near the end looks like anything but a rocket. Well, strangely this time when it comes to its shape…Austin Powers was right! And come to think of it; it's the climax of the 60's wicked metaphor that distinguished the whole Bond; beating the evil guy's attempt to penetrate the world, and rape the peace by blowing up his horny.. let's say virility! Then, for more teasing, winning the girl ! And if you have doubts just remember that (Shirley Bassey) fainted when she knew how the movie's remarkable theme song was a figurative expression about penis (it's true story, I did my researches well on that !).

(Connery) was weary; looking tired to be Bond, or trying his best to look tired to be Bond! He clearly did it for the money, but unlike (Never Say Never Again) he seems this time really uninterested (or uninteresting !).

If you want to sum up this movie then think : Jill St. John walking in front of the camera in only a panty and bra, Lana Wood as (Plenty O'Toole) going in front of the camera in only a panty!, 2 astonishing chicks trying to kill Bond in their bikinis (Oh Yeah!), 2 more violent men assassins yet loving each other gaily (!), Bond landing on a toilet seat, Q playing Las Vegas games, and Ernst Stavro Blofeld himself dressed as a woman and talking about nice cheeks !! As you see it is a gay party. Sometimes too gay to be a spoof of itself, or simply the most comic Bond. A colorful time both ways.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

In Old Las Vegas

7/10
Author: jubilee77 from United Kingdom
20 October 2009

Diamonds are Forever was Connery's assignment to reprise the role of James Bond after turning down the earlier starring role of Our Majestry's Secret Service and this was left to George Lazonby. OOMSS may have received mixed reviews but it was clear that Lazonby as Bond was completely lacklustre and it wasn't surprising that he only made one appearance as the super spy while Blofield may been played by different actors such as Donald Pleasance, Telly Savalas and this time, Charles Gray in this 1971 release. Diamonds are Forever is a highly watchable film because there are some excellent choice of locations and my favourite is Las Vegas and the Neveda desert and there is generally good levels of action and the car chases along with the humour and dialogue that adds up. But the film is not without its drawbacks by being a bit dated and it is sometimes lacking the qualities of earlier Connery-era Bond films, being more violent and also a little bit dreary and has also been hampered by production problems. Finally, compared to today's Las Vegas, its hard to imagine what it was like back in 1971 with all those frequent changes that have taken place over the years making it virtually unrecognisable.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

One of my favorite vintage Bond flicks since "Live and Let Die"

7/10
Author: charlessmith702210 from United States
1 January 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie, "Diamonds Are Forever" was probably a great prelude to the latest flick involving diamonds used in countries in war---"Blood Diamond."

The scene involving two evil dancers who fight against 007 looks like something out of a few of the fight scenes in "Goldeneye" too---the idea of "dancing and fighting" by the anti-Bond ladies.

The space weapon in "Diamonds" that goes haywire and beams a heat-emitting laser ray that burns anything in its vicinity was almost similar to that space weapon used in "Goldeneye". Especially when the ray heats up---and blows up--an entire anti-aircraft missile emplacement. Well, instead of electromagnetic pulse like "Goldeneye"---it is heat in "Diamonds Are Forever" that is used in the weapon's destructive force.

All of that leads into the final battle at an oil rig which masks as a main computer base, housing the main control area for that haywire space weapon. Well, Bond stops the main evil character by hoisting up his escape ship and slamming it into the main control area, knocking the computer out of commission. The laser weapon was supposed to attack Washington D.C. but the failure of the master control put the whole evil contraption out of commission.

I especially like the mini-fight scene involving two accomplices of the main evil character that were about to kill Bond and his lady companion with a dynamite bomb rigged on a timer. Of course, when Bond fights back by putting that bomb on the back of one of the bad men and throwing him overboard just in time (the bomb blows just before he hits the water)---you know that Bond is going to live another day.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

After Lazenby there was Connery-again

Author: Petri Pelkonen (petri_pelkonen@hotmail.com) from Finland
22 September 2000

Sean Connery returned to James Bond's role in 1971 after George Lazenby failed in the job.The plot of Diamonds Are Forever is too complicated to explain.I can't even remember it all that good.I'm pretty sure it had something to do with diamonds. Sean Connery is as charismatic as always.The good old Q is played by Desmond Llewelyn who tragically died last year. Diamonds Are Forever is a perfect entertainment movie.There are terrific action sequences so you can't get bored watching this movie.I recommend Diamonds Are Forever for every action freak out there.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

What a great Bond film.

Author: adam.kyles from adam.kyles@btinternet.com
23 August 2000

This is a fantastic Bond film! It provides humour as well as action. Tiffany Case is the most interesting Bond girl. The only problem is Blofeld is played by somebody else (again!) Apart from that, this is truly brilliant. 5 star out of 5.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

"Humility is the worst form of conceit, Mr. Bond."

Author: James Bond (hmssagent007@hotmail.com) from London, England
8 August 1998

Diamonds Are Forever represents a Bond film that simply celebrates the return of Sean Connery by losing all the emotion of OHMSS and pulling out all of the stops. A sattelite laser (thankfully not aimed at 007's crotch this time), a high speed chase where the police exhibit all of the intelligence of a non-featured J.W. Pepper, a floating fortress, and an amazing climax. A fan's only concern is wondering why Blofeld is making a habit of placing Bond in cells with holes in them! It seems that after a few years of hiding and countless plastic surgeries, Blofeld is getting careless - allowing Bond to get REALLY close to his world domination machine, so that when Bond ejects his programmed plan, he can only sigh and offer an exasperated "replace that tape immediately!" Regardless of a careless and all-too-mortal villain however, Diamonds Are truly Forever. It shines as one of the best.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Connery encore...

6/10
Author: matthew scot
16 December 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

***Warning! Spoiler Information Inside***

After George Lazenby's swift departure producers were at a loss to find a replacement. They lured Sean Connery back for one final hurrah. The price would be bloody steep , however in 1971 Diamonds are Forever was released.

Willard Whyte (Jimmy Dean ((Yeah, the sausage guy))has been smuggling diamonds from south African mines at an alarming pace and 007 is sent to Nevada to determine why. He uncovers yet another dastardly plot by S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Ringleader Blofeld.

The camp in this movie is dialed up even with good direction by returning director Guy Hamilton. Clearly a showpiece for Connery, the movie is filled with pop culture reference and inside jokes , all of which keep the flow moving. The Supporting cast is highlighted by the assassination team of Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd.

Sean Connery had large control over the film team, was paid well and given the rights to star in a Bond film of his choosing at a later time. This of course is a key development in the history of Kevin McClory's Never Say Never Again (1984).

Three stars(of 5.)

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 5 of 28: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [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