Pretty Good

Fresh and Exciting

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

"Diamonds are Forever" is the seventh in the James Bond series of films, and the sixth for Sean Connery in the lead role. Connery was brought back two years after the producers tried an unsuccessful replacement with George Lazenby in 1969. The public didn't take to Lazenby. "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" did okay at the box office, but well below the expected showing for a James Bond film. So, the studio heads hoped to revive the series with Connery's return. This film two years later fared just a little better. But, it also showed that Connery's Bond had changed. Connery was 31 when the series premiered in 1962 with "Dr. No." Nine years later, he clearly shows his age. For a dashing James Bond, Connery has slowed way down. A number of telltale things in his film point to the need for a younger replacement. Bond doesn't have near the normal physical challenges in this film. He's just so-so in a brawling scene, and he has a scene in which two martial arts girls utterly do him in. Thumper and Marie have some acrobatic skill but they are very slow and amateurish with their martial arts. And, Bond is even slower to react. This clearly is not the James Bond that everyone knew and enjoyed from the 1960s. There is some good gadgetry in this film, but little introduction to it by Q. The plot doesn't seem as beguiling either. The character of Willard Whyte is clearly based on Howard Hughes, and the location of much of the film around Las Vegas doesn't do anything to life this film. The variety of exotic locations is absent here. The Netherlands, London, Los Angeles and the Nevada scenes hardly add to the allure of the Bond legend. Finally, Connery seems tired in his role. The script is missing the zip and witty quips that pepper most Bond films. About the only real satisfying part of the film is the justice in the demise of the two unsavory characters who are supposed to be Bond's nemesis. Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint meet their end in typically strange and unusual ways. It's a strain to rate this film six stars, but the usual superb job of showing highly technical wares deserves the credit for this. That, and the overall production qualities of the film, which speak well for the series continuing in the future.The best line in the movie is from Jill St. John as Tiffany Case. After she and Bond are put under guard by Felix Leiter of the CIA, she says, "Well, that's a switch." Bond says, "What's that," and Case replies, "The wolf being guarded by the three little pigs."

It feels good to have Sean Connery back, but that's about the extent of the joy to be had in "Diamonds are Forever." Producers Albert R. Broccoli and Harry Saltzman got their man, but the "James Bond" franchise got its first stinker. What starts out a fairly promising, grounded diamond-smuggling spy film flies off the handle as Bond descends upon Las Vegas and must stop another over-the-top villainous plot."Diamonds" was clearly intended to recreate the franchise's peak, like an early "best of" film. From Shirley Bassey's second series theme song to the return of director Guy Hamilton ("Goldfinger") and the nefarious Blofeld (now played by Charles Gray), Broccoli and Saltzman hit the reset button after "On Her Majesty's Secret Service," a move that paid financial dividends, but little else. The story, for one, just kind of perpetually rolls forward without ever any setup, suspense or stakes aside from a few "how will Bond get out of this jam?" moments. Bond infiltrates a diamond-smuggling ring and teams up with American Tiffany Case (Jill St. John) in Amsterdam, unaware that a trail of bodies connected to diamond-smuggling lay in his wake thanks to the shifty and odd duo of Mr. Wint (Bruce Glover) and Mr. Kidd (Putter Smith). Bond and Case arrive in L.A. and Bond rendezvous with his CIA pal Felix Leiter (Norman Burton) before bringing the diamonds to a funeral home. Then Bond ends up in Vegas at a hotel called the Whyte House … anyway, this follow-the-diamonds story is not hard to keep track of but it feels like an endless goose chase with each scene assigned the sole purpose of putting the next scene in motion.The action meant to punctuate the various plot points falls flat under Hamilton's direction in this film despite Hamilton's success in "Goldfinger." The car chases and the climactic oil rig scene take on an almost slapstick tone — and Bond's fight with two gymnasts flat- out does. And somehow, John Barry's score is missing the iconic "Bond" music at all the most opportune times. Way too much of the action is set to silence. Then there's the laughable special effects used in the end that highlight just how badly the movie has unraveled. To be fair, "Diamonds" has its classic "Bond" touches and plenty of clever moments, gadgets and one-liners. Writer Richard Maibaum, who penned nearly every previous film, is involved yet again here to ensure that continuity. The franchise doesn't lose its mojo in "Diamonds" (if for no other reason than Connery's involvement), but these highlights are just floating adrift, unable to make themselves useful in bolstering the story.Perhaps Connery is the greatest to ever play Bond, and the role fit him like a perfectly tailored tuxedo, but his mere presence alone and our familiarity with it doesn't carry "Diamonds are Forever." He's just kind of going along with it, not that the script gives him an alternative. Everyone involved in the film seems to assume the plot is simply a vehicle for Connery and the iconic parts of "Bond" to exist again, but they prove that not just any story is fit for 007. Unfortunately, it results in a lackluster, tacky sendoff for Connery's Bond.~Steven CThanks for reading! Visit Movie Muse Reviews for more

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.

After the flaws with George Lazenby, and his unwilling mood to sign for more 007 jobs, the team bought back one Sean Connery for record money.Well, his work here feels a little bit uninspired - sometimes he seems to get in a light mood, and play it for laughs. Maybe I had done that myself, knowing that the 007-stage door was to be closed for good after this.They actually tried to buy him back once again for "Live And Let Die". (Connery this time demanded way out fantasy money, and was never considered.)This is not as much a legendary classic as his 60's flicks, but good entertainment on the way, with the Vegas environment and so. But the "avenging his murdered wife" thing could have been developed, and stretched out for a while. That part is treated very shallow, almost just skin-deep, I think. The vicious planning of blackmailing the world (via a laser-gun satellite) from Blofeld is wearisome - feels like a flimsy development of the Virus Omega in OHMSS, and the hijacking of spaceships in YOLT - and Charles Gray's portrait of him isn't that memorable at all. The whole movie seems to me pretty flashy and airy compared to it's forerunners, but hey, the 70's just begun....the decade when sideburns and flares was to rule the world for a while. Red super-car (Ford Mustang Mach I) and red head girl (Jill St. John) adorns the movie good, but feels a little second grade still, to what we could have been presented if they had used some more skill in the script plans.I place this Bond movie somewhere in the lower-middle ranking among all the others, but can very well bear to revisiting it when it somehow comes in my way from time to time. There was a whole new era of James Bond on the way...with a guy who's marathon session none could have predicted at the time. J.B Mk. III.