3/10
A disaster from beginning to end
6 January 2008
There's not a great deal to be said about this film that hasn't been said on these boards before. With the blood, sweat and tears pour out in OHMSS, we were introduced to a new, grittier kind of Bond. I don't know who decided that it didn't work, but clearly someone did. 'Diamonds Are Forver' was the follow up, and is cemented at the very bottom of most Bond lists.

Sean Connery looks like he couldn't care less what's going on in this film. It seemed to be a case of take the money and.. stroll. The plot is all but non-existent but still manages to confuse and bore. The action is timid and dull, the locations are far from inspired and Charles Gray is nothing short of pathetic in the role of Bond's nemesis, Blofeld, who seems to have gone from uber-villain to uber-camp cabaret act. Seriously, he's about as fearsome as my grandmother.

It is important to bear in mind that Blofeld murdered Bond's wife at the end of the last film. In spite of this, Bond seems to consider him a mere annoyance in this movie, rather than the object of blind rage, as you might expect. Their confrontation is more akin to Austin Powers vs Dr Evil than it is to Bond vs Blofeld from the previous films. The performances of Connery and Gray in these scenes may as well have been shot on different days, there is that little tension between them.

Thinking about it, there is really nothing at all memorable about this tripe. Even John Barry's score felt mediocre after OHMSS. This film is a disgrace to the franchise and to Connery's career. The only small redemption is that Connery's used the whopping fee he earned for this to make 'The Offence' with Sidney Lumet. Ignore 'Diamonds' and watch that. You'll thank me later.
8 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed