I write these Bond reviews with the expectation that everyone has seen all the movies, if not read the all the books. So, tread as carefully as it seems prudent.
Diamonds are Forever takes James Bond out of his usual environment of espionage and pits him against U.S. gangsters. It's a bit of a stretch and frankly Bond doesn't seem natural in this one. Tiffany Case is the usual damaged Bond femme fatale, but she does remain strong through most of this one. The gangsters aren't especially brilliant despite being dubbed "The Spangled Gang". They come off almost like baddies from Chester Gould's Dick Tracy. But Bond perhaps underestimates them.
The story takes Bond from London to NYC and then upstate New York for some horse racing and then veers to Las Vegas. It begins with diamond smuggling and then veers into all sort of crime the mobs were engaged with. When this novel was written in 1956 the mobs were dominant in the United States in places like Las Vegas and other gambling centers. In Las Vegas, Bond finds the strange world which the mob created to attract gamblers and he finds great danger as well. Bond is tracking down a smuggling ring which specializes in diamonds, and he finds danger and allies both new and old at every step.
It's against that backdrop that Bond takes up the case which gives a wonderful glimpse of what it was like to fly overseas. We get a cruise of sorts aboard the Queen Elizabeth. Listening to these guys argue over "millions" seems so quaint, a like a reverse Dr. Evil. Felix Leiter returns, a bit worse for wear and now a Pinkerton Man. Scotland Yarder Vallance returns as well, as Fleming seems to be building up a cadre of recognizable mates for our hero. Fleming is building a world around his indomitable hero.
Of the original Sean Connery Bond movies, Diamonds are Forever is easily the least of them. Connery returned to the role that defined his career after a brief hiatus and in this somewhat bleak adventure follows the trail of stolen diamonds as they wander across the globe from the mines of South Africa to Holland and eventually to Las Vegas. Along the way he encounters two gay killers named Kidd and Wint who offer up a satirical look at hit men to say the least. Also, along for the ride is Jill St. John as Tiffany Case, and if not for her presence this Bond flick would be a total bore. St. John is extremely hot in this movie, among the most delectable of the Bond girls but sadly it's a somewhat remote Bond she interacts with.
Missing from this humdrum yarn is the usual Bond tropes like an armoring by Q, though the delightful Q does make a showing. The interaction between Bond and Moneypenny is pretty minimal in this one. M does get in some funny lines as Bond demonstrates a limited knowledge of diamond lore. All in all, it's an exceedingly atypical Bond adventure and it's one which lacks the high-tech romance which had come to define the series when Connery left it the first time.
The plot, as far as I can make it out, is that Blofeld is scheming (apparently sans SPECTRE) to gather diamonds while posing as reclusive tycoon Wilbur Whyte and use them to make a satellite which will power a laser which will destroy nuclear weapons across the world. His scheme barely gets underway when it's cut short by Bond and Case working in tandem. The finale battle atop a highly-specialized oil rig falls well below the spectacle which had been entertained on earlier movies. There's a lot of location shooting in this Bond movie and sadly that give the whole affair a more realistic and mildly grubby look. Connery looks disinterested most of the time and also just a little old as the gray in his hair is evident.
As Bond movies go, it's a bit of a snooze with a few nice moments. The least of Connery's original Bonds for certain.
Rip Off
A bit of a departure in the Bond novels, I'd say. In the hands of a lesser writer, this could have easily been a disaster and relegated to the rest of the average mystery/detective novels of the time. Despite that, I think it's better than the movie in this case.
ReplyDeleteA pretty good read. Not what a Bond fan coming from the movies would expect, but that's true of most of the novels.
DeleteI quite enjoyed DAF as a fun romp, though big Sean looked about 10 years older than his 41-ish years at the time. (Whereas, Roger, who was three years older than him, looked much younger.) If I recall rightly, screenwriter Tom Mankiewicz came aboard with this movie and upped the 'camp' levels, something that big Rog inherited and seemed to get blamed for. I remember Sean saying in an interview years later that Roger had probably inherited the increasingly outrageous route the Bond movies were taking from him. Mankiewicz was also on Live & Let Die (which outperformed DAF at the box office), though that was a slightly more serious affair (for the most part).
ReplyDeleteYou make a good point that actors don't necessarily deserved the blame or credit for the tone of a film or show. The writing, direction and editing have a greater impact on the overall effort.
Delete