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 guidemessage board
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 7 of 28: [Prev][2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [Next]
Index 276 reviews in total 

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Amusing, but also one of the most uneven Bond films ever

7/10
Author: Zbigniew_Krycsiwiki from United States
29 December 2007

Film begins well, showing us Connery's return to the role (after bailing out after You Only Live Twice in late 1966/ early '67) as Bond tracks down and seemingly kills Blofeld. A perfectly done title sequence goes quite well with a great title song, before we get down to business: an initially literal adaptation of Fleming's novel, as Wint and Kidd smuggle diamonds out of Africa, after brutally killing the courier, and the deliverer. Bond, none too enthused about being assigned to what he calls "a relatively simple smuggling matter," is sent to intercept the next link, a professional smuggler called Peter Franks, in Amsterdam. Bond, after rendezvousing with yet another smuggler (gorgeous Jill St. John) ends up beating Franks' ass in close-quarters-combat in a lift, in another highlight of this movie.

Unfortunately, after the exciting and well done first forty minutes, leading this Bond fan to think I'm about to watch potentially one of the best Bonds, the screenplay degenerates into a seemingly never-ending series of gags and pratfalls and silly vignettes. Jill St. John and Lana Wood are both gorgeous, but Jill loses interest halfway through the movie and becomes a bumbling nitwit, and Lana Wood has only a cameo, played strictly for laughs. Throw in a Bullitt-inspired car chase through the Las Vegas Strip, a faked moon landing, a Howard Hughes clone Willard Whyte, and some type of diamond powered space laser(?) and that makes up the majority of the second half.

Bond, after violently fending off the attacks of several armed guards in the pre-title sequence, and the aforementioned fight in the lift, basically has his ass handed to him by a pair of female gymnasts, in what will forever be remembered as one of the dumbest and most inane scenes in any Bond film.

Charles Grey is a wonderful actor, and I do wish they had used more of him in the Bond series, but he was a terrible Blofeld, too nice of a guy to be an international terrorist set on killing Bond, and they've turned Blofeld into a cross dressing terrorist with a cat fetish? Connery's weight was obviously up and down during filming; as he is briefed by M., it looks like he needed a crowbar to fit into his suit. Likewise, by the poolside, with the body floating in it. Those thick, bushy grey sideburns only made Connery look older. Indeed, he turned 40 years old during filming, but he looked closer to 60.

The ending is anticlimactic; the fight in the lift was more exciting.

Overall, the film is enjoyable for its first third, then in a surreal way for its final two thirds, but I wish they had followed the plot of Ian Fleming's original novel more closely. That would have made the film consistently good. Or at least, not as uneven as it is now. Filming wrapped in September 1971, and it was released to cinemas in December of 1971; its rushed post production undoubtedly contributed to its randomness.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

One of the best bond films

7/10
Author: war_eagle27 from United States
17 December 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This comment contains possible spoiler. This if one of my favorite bond movies. First off it has the best bond, Connery. Second, Jill St. John is the sexiest bond girl in any of the films. The reason for this is that she is not only beautiful but, unlike many of the early bond girls she is smart, funny and an equal to James. This was not done again till much later in the series. The plot is not the greatest of the bond movies nor is the worst. The only other bond movie I liked better is Goldfinger. The movie centers around stolen diamonds and Las Vegas. If u are familiar with Las Vegas u will probably recognize the sequence in Circus Circus. This movie also has one of the best title songs. If u enjoyed this one, Moonraker is a similar movie. 7/10

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Connery's 2nd official swan song

7/10
Author: mjw2305 from England
20 January 2007

Discounting 'Never Say Never Again' (which isn't an official Bond film, just a poor remake of Thunderball) this Connery's 2nd official swan song, and probably my least favourite of the Connery outings. On his image alone it is clear why they axed Connery after 'You only Live Twice' to bring in George Lazenby; but after he was not given a warm reception by the fans, Connery is back for one last time; and his age is definitely showing.

Other than his appearance though, he still has that special something that proved he was the best choice in the first place, and Diamonds Are Forever isn't a bad film, it's merely lacking the solidity and intrigue of the previous films.

There's still plenty of good action, an interesting plot, the quite stunning Jill St. John and some wonderful scenery.

7/10

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Connery Returns, in the First Bond 'Comedy'...

7/10
Author: Ben Burgraff (cariart) from Las Vegas, Nevada
3 April 2004

Despite Eon Productions ongoing 'Spin Control' to downplay the impact, the failure of ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE was a crushing blow for producers Albert Broccoli and Harry Saltzman. Despite Richard Maibaum's literate script (the last to truly 'follow' a Fleming novel), first-time director Peter Hunt's remarkable 'vision', and a performance by novice actor George Lazenby that wasn't nearly as bad as some reviewers at the time would claim, OHMSS was spurned by many Bond fans, and had some critics proclaiming "Tracy Was Killed, but Bond Is Dead".

While American actor John Gavin had already signed on to make DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER (George Lazenby's inflated ego had gotten the better of him, and he'd managed to get himself 'fired'), Broccoli decided that the franchise needed a major overhaul. Gavin was dropped, Peter Hunt was dropped, and Richard Maibaum's revenge-driven Bond script was rewritten by Tom Mankiewicz into a light-hearted, witty spoof of the earlier 007 films, ignoring his wife's death, and concentrating on gadgets, sex, and superhuman heroics. Veteran director Guy Hamilton, who had guided GOLDFINGER, everyone's favorite Bond movie, was brought back to direct the project...and Broccoli, bowing to pressure from the 007 audience, approached Sean Connery to take the role, one more time.

Connery, who had already made four films since his last Bond outing, YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, hated Broccoli (feeling the producer had 'robbed' him of his share of the profits for the first two Bond films), and loved the leverage he now possessed. When asked about the size of his paycheck to resume the role, he joked, "I always wanted to own a golf course and a bank...I already own a golf course..." He also stipulated a hefty fee for each day the production ran over schedule (Lest he seem TOO greedy, much of his salary went to Scottish charities). As a final insult, the actor refused to get into shape for filming, appearing paunchier and grayer than ever (making Broccoli so irate that when he hired Roger Moore for the follow-up, LIVE AND LET DIE, he ordered him, immediately, to "lose weight and get a haircut!")

Broccoli's instincts proved correct, as the comedy-oriented DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER would become one of 1971's biggest hits. Connery tossed off one-liners with ease, Jill St. John 'channeled' Lucille Ball in her performance as klutzy 'Tiffany Case', and Charles Gray would be sexually ambiguous rather than threatening as Ernst Stavro Blofeld. (His two henchmen would be gay, as well, and so caricatured that the homosexual community would protest the film). Loaded with car chases, fistfights, explosions, and gadgets, Bond 'purists' were appalled by the end product, but a successful new 'formula' had been created, one that would serve Roger Moore very well during his long tenure as 007.

And Sean Connery could buy his bank...

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Did Sean Connery save the best for last,and for his final performance as James Bond-007

Author: raysond from Chapel Hill, North Carolina
21 January 2004

What more can I say about this film? For one,it is based on Ian Fleming's classic novels featuring British Secret Service Agent James Bond-007.

Secondly,when this film was released in 1971,it would mark the final bow for actor Sean Connery as the suave secret agent-James Bond. And this was Connery's final performance as Bond is considered by some the best out of the series,which is second to other Bond classics but it holds its own brilliantly and the action is non-stop.......It has the plot of some stolen diamonds being used by a villain to take over the world and to used them as a laser beam set to control Earth,but it has.........

1. Bond in a Moon Buggy chase sequence in the middle of the desert.

2. Bond with a sex-kitten goddess-Jill St. John.

3. Bond up against his old arch nemesis-Ernest Blofeld of SPECTRE.

4. A chase scene through the streets of Las Vegas in a Mustang Mach V.

5. His encounters with two amazons-Bambi and Thumper.

6. Two Homosexual assassins set out to kill our beloved hero.

7. A funeral sequence where Bond is almost in constant peril where he is in a coffin about to be buried alive!

8. The scene by the oil rig out at sea where Bond must stop Blofeld in taking over the world where seconds rely on the fate of the world.

9. The addition of actor Jimmy Dean as a eccentric millionaire,yes that Jimmy Dean-the country singer and king of the country sausage empire.Oh yeah,lets not forget all of those incredible gadgets and electrifying stunts and feats of derring-do by James Bond.

10. The brilliant theme score by no other than the great John Barry and the theme song sung by the great Shirley Bassey.

However,Sean Connery would reprise the role of James Bond again...... 12 years later in "Never Say Never Again"-(1983). However,the next James Bond will mark the exit of Sean Connery and by entering a new actor in the role---Roger Moore for the next installment of the 007 series.

"Diamonds Are Forever" was really the best of the series with Sean Connery,but the best out of the Sean Connery era were....... "Doctor No"-(1962) "From Russia With Love"-(1963) "Goldfinger"-(1964) "You Only Live Twice"-(1967) THE WORST: "Thunderball"-(1965).

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

The feeling of the 1960's is gone but Connery hasn't lost his charm

8/10
Author: Mika Pykäläaho (bygis80@hotmail.com) from Järvenpää, Finland
20 January 2003

Money makes the world go around. Or at least that's what Sean Connery was probably thinking when he agreed to make a return to the beloved role of 007 after announcing that "You only live twice" will be the last time he plays the part of Bond. I'm pretty damn glad he took a closer look at that generous bundle of bank notes and decided to change his mind. What made him to do the unofficial "Never say never again" 12 years later is a whole another story and I don't want to hear it.

George Lazenby's notorious performance in the role of James Bond in "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" was somewhat disappointing although the film was actually rather good and the bloke tried as hard as he could. Nevertheless the fact that the phenomenally charismatic Connery came back to show the moviegoers who's the one and only real Bond was more than pleasing. Unfortunately something is still missing here.

This was the first Bond movie of the new decade as well as Sean Connery's only 007 performance in the 1970's. Bond movies has always reflected their own time and that irresistible 60's feel of Connery's earlier Bond adventures is totally gone and replaced by Las Vegas glamour of the 70's. Not that I mind, I do love this one too. It's just that I do think good-old Connery was better in the spectacular 60's Bond classics like "Dr. No", "Goldfinger" and "You only live twice". Still, a stylish start to the second 007 decade.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

THIS is an underrated Bond movie...

Author: Russell Christiansen (russ@megsinet.net) from Warrenville, IL USA
19 March 2001

Why all the bad vibes about this movie?

Sure this isn't the best of Bonds, but I find myself coming back to this one quite a few times.

I didn't like Jill St. John too much...even though I haven't seen OHMSS, I hated them having to pair up Bond with her after Diana Rigg. Her character was a bit too much of a bimbo.

This is the first Bond movie that I have seen Blofeld in; later I found out that Blofeld was in all the previous Bonds except "Dr. No" and "Goldfinger." He wasn't the creep that Donald Pleasance was.

When I first saw Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd, those two characters REALLY gave me the creeps. I know some people find them as comic relief, but the two were pretty scary looking to me.

One gripe I have with this Bond movie is the scene where Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd put Bond in the coffin in the funeral parlor and try to cremate him alive. This was, in my opinion, a bit too creepy for a Bond movie.

This movie really had you guessing with the plot and all the diamonds being smuggled for unknwon reasons, but when the real reason came out, it was cool. I liked that laser satellite.

The scenes in Las Vegas have to be the best in the whole movie. It picks up when Bond goes to the Whyte House. It gave you a sense of good feeling inside afterward.

All in all, not a bad Bond flick. A good one, but not up there with "Goldeneye," "Goldfinger," "FRWL," "TSWLM," and "TND."

And some people are complaining about no tie-ins to OHMSS. I think the opening sequence well explains Bond's anger toward Blofeld (he even strangles a woman who Bond could fall in love with!).

*** out of ****

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Blofeld doesn't only steal the diamonds but the entire film

7/10
Author: Joxerlives from United Kingdom
17 March 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

So Connery is back but if we're honest by this stage he was just too old for the role, especially evident in the bathtub scenes. The real star here is Charles Gray who is just magnificent as Blofeld, oozing sinister charm and suave menace from every pore. Although most would name the great Donald Pleasance as the definitive Blofeld (certainly Mike Myers would think so) I think Gray is just superb in every way.

As for the rest well the gay hit men are certainly a novel twist on an old fashioned set of characters (Fleming's attitude to homosexuals was never good, check out Goldfinger for evidence). We have the great Ed Bishop in a small role but its' fried gold and another popular American character actor in Britain, Shane Rimmer popping up for his second appearance in the series (I wonder if he is supposed to be the same person as he portrayed in You Only Live Twice?).

The whole Willard White/Howard Hughes parallel is played extremely cleverly and I do love the line 'Ed, you're fired!'.

On the bad side another appallingly bad Bond girl, hate the way she cowers in the final fight scene. Plenty O'Toole's death is also extremely nasty in a typically Ian Fleming fashion. The inclusion of the team of Las Vegas hoods who looks as though they've just walked out of a production of 'Guys and Dolls' is truly an eye-opener, one of them will later recur as the assassin whom Tic-Tac hires to entertain Scaramanga at the beginning of 'The Man with the Golden Gun'.

Not a bad film at all but really Sean should have left it at this.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Going In Style

Author: Brian Washington (Sargebri@att.net) from Los Angeles, California
11 March 2004

This is probably my favorite film in the whole 007 series, even though it is not thought of as one of the best. This film has all the elements that made the series great; beautiful women, glamorous locations, plenty of action and even some very humorous moments. Even though Sean Connery was tiring of the role he seemed to show that he had fun making this, his final appearance (at least until Never Say Never Again) a very memorable one. Also, Jill St. John gives a very amusing performance as Tiffany Case. The thing that made her performance great was the fact that she did play it for laughs, not like the other Bond women who were either window dressing or damsels in distress. This film is one fun ride.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

The first Bond film where JB really started to have fun.

8/10
Author: roland-sinn from Sydney, Australia
19 August 2003

I don't think it's any surprise why Diamonds is a favourite Bond film of so many people (it's certainly achieved considerable cult status in Australia). The first entry for 007 in the 70s was very different from all of the 60s Bond films. It had to be. The 60s were dead and the Bond franchise had to update fast to remain in step with society.

In all of the 60s Bond flicks there's a distinct element of darkness below the surface of quip dialogue, fast cars, gadgets and pretty bikinied bodies. Diamonds set out to entertain in a light and fluffy yet more risque manner than any of the previous Bond films.

Sean Connery left the Bond franchise behind in 1967 to pursue a serious acting career. But when Australia's own George Lasenbury decided not to do another Bond film after ‘On Her Majesty's Secret Service' (big, big mistake on George's part) Sean had to be brought back in to save the production of Diamonds.

Throughout the film, Sean wears a sardonic smile. His whole demeanor says: ‘Look, I'm only back because I'm being paid a million dollars'. Frankly, this works on screen very well. Sean looks older, rougher, more world weary and ready to take the role with a good pinch of salt.

Jill St John makes for a fantastic heroin. She plays a vastly different leading lady role to the Bond chicks of the 60s. She's a smart alec, wise cracking, hard nosed so and so. Her relationship with Sean is great – more brother/sister than romantic. It's great to see a woman busy with her own strong agenda; she's more interested in getting what she wants rather than submitting to Bond's ‘incomparable charm'.

As for the hired killers – they rank as the best villainous henchmen of the entire franchise on par with ‘Odd Job' from Gold Finger. They are a seriously camp and disturbed pair.

The producers of Diamonds were either extremely intelligent or just damned lucky that they decided to use and abuse dozens of cars in a variety of smash'em'up chases and stunts. The Moon buggy chase through the desert and the police chase through Downtown Las Vegas are two of the funnest ever filmed and certainly inspired numerous copies throughout the 70s.

On a final note, if you are a person who hasn't ever seen a Bond film before (and I've met first hand a couple of these unfortunate souls), Diamonds is probably the best of the 20 to start with.

8/10

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 7 of 28: [Prev][2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [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