Film Review
This is the point at which the Bond movies became just a little too
silly for their own good. After a run of six generally impressive
films, the series inexplicably took a turn for camp absurdity, which
would continue throughout most of Roger Moore's period as agent
007. With an abundance of cheap sexual innuendo, implausible
storylines, cardboard cut-out characterisation and some truly naff
attempts at humour, the Bond films of the seventies are not the most
highly regarded and the format began to looking increasingly tired and
repetitive as the decade wore on. Admittedly, things would rarely
be as bad as they are in
Diamonds
Are Forever, which is considered the absolute nadir of the
series, but neither would we ever again see a film to rival the
brilliance of
From Russia with Love or
Goldfinger.
The problems with
Diamonds Are
Forever stemmed from the decision of producers Harry Saltzman
and Albert R. Broccoli to make a Bond film with a more American
flavour, in the misguided belief that this would make the films more
popular in the United States. This explains the casting of Jill
St. John as the first American Bond girl and why most of the story is
set in instantly recognisable American locations (including Las Vagas
and the Nevada Desert). Unfortunately, the end result feels like
a half-hearted American parody of a quintessentially British
institution. The film is not as dire as some make out. It
just isn't a Bond movie. Hard to believe that this was directed
by Guy Hamilton, the man who helmed the highly regarded
Goldfinger.
Another reason why the film disappoints is that it tries far too hard
to be funny. The previous Bond films had a fair amount of humour,
but this was always subtly woven into the script and never underminded
the seriousness of the plot or characterisation. In
Diamonds are Forever, and far
too many subsequent Bond films, the humour is broad comedy applied
carelessly with a trowel. Here, we have comedy henchmen, comedy
action sequences, comedy killings, an absurdly comic eccentric
millionaire (based presumably on Howard Hughes) and, to top it all, a
camply comedic version of Blofeld. If the film was intended to be
a comedy pastiche - in the same vein as the 1967 Bond spoof
Casino
Royale - it might have worked. Instead, we have a film
that can't seem to make up its mind whether it is an off-the-wall comedy or a
traditional spy action-thriller. Yes, there are some good points -
the superbly shot Moon Buggy chase across the desert
and the memorable Shirley Bassey number - but otherwise there is little that
allows the film to compared favourably with
the previous six Bond films.
By this stage, Sean Connery is looking decidedly long in the tooth and
fails to make the impact of his earlier outings in the role for which
he is best known. The actor had originally given up the part
after
You Only Live Twice (1967), and
was replaced by George Lazenby for the next Bond film,
On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969).
When Lazenby was persuaded by his agent to relinquish the role after
one film, Connery was offered a stupendous £1.2 million bribe
(plus a guarantee from United Artists to back two films of his choice)
if he would return to play Bond one more time. It was an offer
the actor could hardly decline; he would use his fee to found the
Scottish International Education Trust, which enabled Scottish artists
to pursue their careers in their own country. This was to be
Connery's Bond swansong for Eon, although he would play the character
one more time for another production company, in
Never Say Never Again
(1983). After
Diamonds
Are Forever proved to be another box office hit, producers
Saltzman and Broccoli one again faced the headache of choosing another
actor for the part of 007. The Bond films were far too popular to
end here. Audiences wanted more, and that's what they got...
© James Travers 2009
The above content is owned by filmsdefrance.com and must not be copied.
Next Guy Hamilton film:
Live and Let Die (1973)