Saturday, July 19, 2025

00 Week: We've got all the time in the world to talk about love


ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE

1969
Directed by Peter Hunt
Written by Richard Maibaum and Simon Raven (based on the novel by Ian Fleming)

Spoilers: severe


I have made a certain distinction between Ian Fleming's James Bond and Eon Productions' rendition of the same, which is of course not the only distinction, but I think it might be the most interesting one: Bond's novels are romances, and Bond's movies, with their other priorities, never are.  Or almost never, because if you fix your sights on adapting On Her Majesty's Secret Service, as Eon did for their sixth Bond movie (and indeed, even earlier, but things had kept getting in the way), and you intend on adapting it with any fidelitythough I'd suggest there could be no adaptation of On Her Majesty's Secret Service without some fidelity, or everyone would think you were a crazy assholethen you have to make a romance.  This, after all, is the one where Bonda character who, under Eon, was required to meet a literal sexual partner quota each filmsettles down and gets married to the love of his life, the widowed countess Teresa Di Vicenzo, better known as Tracy Bond even if, to spoil things right away, she was Tracy Bond for only a matter of hours.  And, knowing they had to make a romance, Eon did so, even though the Bond combine had limited institutional competence at this and they still had other priorities.

Even so, it's mainly Fleming's fault: Secret Service concerns Bond's most consequential romance*, but doesn't give much compelling inherent reason for that.  It may surprise anybody who's only ever watched the movies, but in the books Bond either explicitly or implicitly contemplates marriage in a lot of them, starting with Vesper Lynd in Casino Royale, and frequently it's a complete mystery why he didn't get married, except that a new book demanded a new woman.  (I can't presently speak to The Spy Who Loved Me, the immediately preceding novel, except I'd bet good money that Fleming wished he'd held that title in reserve.)  Yet to actually do it, that's still special; and most of Bond's loves were more appropriate (or symbolically-meaningful) partners, and for that matter more interesting fictional characters (even Vesper, who becomes interesting only with her novel's twist), than Teresa.


I know I'm stepping on toes here, but Tracy Bond doesn't work for me much at all, and the movie version of Tracy Bond works for me mostly to the extent she's played by Diana Rigg, an actual English-speaking actor for a change, and a good actor at that, which is almost as distinguishing, whereas being "Emma Peel on The Avengers" meant they could give Rigg one cool action scene of her own, albeit in a manner that still isn't exactly organic to Tracy's actual character concept.  (Much of the rest of what I approve of in Rigg's Tracy is found in our new Bond, but we'll get there.)  Then we have screenwriter Richard Maibaum (Simon Raven provided some additional dialogue) who is, at every available opportunity, compounding the problem he'd inherited from Fleming, starting with a "solution" to the non-problem of adapting a novel that goes non-linear for a spell at the beginningand Bond movies couldn't possibly do that, what are they, art films?which nonetheless offered up as its first scene an irresistible option for checking off the first box of the Bond formula with badass opening action; so Maibaum takes that option and marches through scenes that were in a different chronological order in the book for a reason.  This is on top of the fact that, thanks to the spoof version, there's not a real Casino Royale yet, and if there's a key to Bond's fixation upon poor little rich girl Tracy, it's that he meets her at Royale-les-Eaux, and Fleming placed them there, and mentioned Vesper's grave, also for a reason.

And so Secret Service opens with Bond (???) out cruising the coast, where he's passed by a woman going like a bat out of hell, which entices him but when he chases her to her destination of a lonely stretch of beach, all she takes off are her shoes.  They are very oblique about this, but this woman, Tracy, has come to the sea to die, and Bond saves her, and his reward is his attempted murder by goons, which he wards off by what is, albeit only for about twenty minutes, the most formally-wacky major fistfight so far in the franchise, this jumpy, almost disaggregated impression of strikes and counterstrikes courtesy the series' new editor and second-unit director, John Glen.  I dig itprevious Bond editor and second-unit director, and brand-spanking-new director, Peter Hunt, certainly approved toowith the big exception of the way new Bond photographer Matthew Reed is shooting it, all at dawn and still badly underexposed, mostly, I suspect, to delay answering that triple-question-mark at the top of our cast list after already filming Bond's car scenes in weird, shadowy closeups of a cigarette-smoking man who's definitely not Sean Connery.  I will quote Hunt: "We agreed, after a lot umming and ahhing, that we would not overemphasize the introduction of a new Bond."  Well, our hero wins his battle, but Tracy has used the confusion to flee into the ambiguous darkness, prompting George Lazenby to look directly at the camera and say, with a twinkle in his eyes, "This never happened to the other fella."  I have no Goddamn idea what "overemphasize" means to Hunt, but regardless, this tosses us into Maurice Binder's title sequence, a disagreeably singing-free title sequence, because nobody could figure out how to force the phrase "on her majesty's secret service" into an appropriately lyrical shape.  (Carole Bayer Sager figured out "the spy who loved me.")  Binder has one idea germane to the film we're about to watchtime, specifically not enough of it (the animated clock comes off, though I spent some of it thinking the hourglasses were martinis)but it's mainly clips of previous Bond films swirling through those hourglasses, carefully curated to not, you know, include Connery.  It's pretty bad, though the nude silhouettes are sufficiently nipply for Hunt's directorial credit, which boasts the most nipples, to have been rudely cut out by at least one country's censors.


But let's stake our position on Lazenby now: I love him in the role.  Now, I do think, had Connery not been so tired of Bond, that it's plausible this works better with him, simply because he was Bond, and we'd be watching a character we already knew try and horribly fail to build a new life for himself.  It's also the case that Lazenby is basically an industrial accident, the result of Roger Moore temporarily begging off for more of The Saint when a version of The Man With the Golden Gun got cancelled because of the Samlaut Uprising, and of Lazenby punching a stuntman so hard during an audition he broke his nose, which impressed Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzmann even though you'd think "unintentionally causing injury" is the exact opposite of ideal for the lead of a stunt-heavy action movie.  Furthermore, he's Australian.

But while appreciation for Lazenby has grown exponentially over the years, alongside appreciation for Secret Service itself, he seemed almost destined to fail (and Secret Service failed as much as a Bond movie could, the lowest-grossing of the franchise in adjusted dollars since Dr. No until 1980).  Maybe Connery himself was barely anybody in 1962, but in 1969, Lazenby was a Fry's chocolate bar pitchman following up a movie star.  On set, Lazenby felt so maltreated and disrespected by a director who, callowly enough himself, didn't want him, that he refused to return, and while Eon weren't unhappy with him, they didn't beg.  Thus Lazenby only got his one chance to shine, when even Timothy Dalton, the other Bond Without An Era, still got two; and as Secret Service does not, in a sense, complete its story, whatever vengeance would be afforded by Diamonds Are Forever shall be undertaken by some other dude.  (And against some other dude, to boot, Blofelds being even more mutable than Bonds.)  Hunt, for his part, never worked on a Bond film again, for reasons that are mysterious to me, considering how vigorously he'd lobbied to direct this one and that Eon, seeing no need to punish him for the Lazenby affair, continued to extend him offers of employment; but it doesn't seem like it could be a pure accident of history that both Lazenby's and Hunt's respective follow-ups to Secret Service1971's godawful peacenik PTSD montage, Universal Soldier, and 1974's terrific grounded Goldfinger with Moore, Goldare deliberate rebukes to Bond.


But, anyway, I like Lazenby a lot, including that fourth wall break, which is as risky a gag as any Bond movie's ever pulled, and which I find adorably cheeky.  (Isn't there a fan theory, which obviously could only be held by very casual fans, that the government killer named "Bond" is different fellows?  I might well prefer it if it were so.  I assume we're all aware of how the reshuffled sequence from the books and Blofeld's previous familiarity with Bond in the films means that Blofeld is stymied, Lex Luthor-style, by a disguise consisting of "glasses.")  He's very different from Connery, and even with Moore in the wings, I would declare him the poshest Bond, which I distinguish from the classiest, though social class actually feels like a part of Lazenby's Bond, perhaps because he was such an outsider to its British manifestation: if Connery and Daniel Craig come off like they've donned gentility as a disguise (one of them more successfully), and if Moore, Dalton, and Pierce Brosnan may come off, in their different ways, as bourgeois, Lazenby is the one who feels legitimately aristocratic.  Partly this is just because he's masquerading as an aristocrat for half the film.  Partly it's a result of being such a fashionable Bond (often in the pejorative sense, for the casual wear Marjory Cornelius arrays this Bond in can be quite atrocious, though she also gives former model Lazenby some of the fussiest and fanciest costumes in the series).  Partly it's because he's so laid-back and comfortable amongst wealth when, give or take a Moore, every other Bond radiates a certain resentment over being more cultured than literally everyone he meets yet often being required to perform subservience to them.  Partly it's because he seems cheerfully, humanely oblivious to his own condescending manner, which doesn't even need a scene partner to manifestthere's a fun line to himself about caviar, and later he'll be rude to a St. Bernard about booze.  And he rocks a kilt because he can.

So Secret Service is certainly armed with what it needs, but then we trip right into Maibaum's blenderized version of a story that wasn't great on the page: Bond catches up with Tracy, saving her from a humiliating revelation of poverty at the baccarat table, then, in between more confrontations with goons, fucks her almost as a discharge of her obligation (in a film that has some pretty neat color style, "red" takes on several different tones in regards to Tracy), which all plays somewhat better when Bond rescuing her from suicide comes afterwards.  And in either form, we presently arrive at the heart of the problem: those goons were agents of Marc-Ange Draco (Gabriele Ferzetti, dubbed by David de Keyser), head of the Union Corse, and after impressing the gangster even further by beating up his goons again (now in a completely disaggregated impression of strikes and counterstrikes that, this time, also gets bizarre cosmic sound effects, rendering a hallway dust-up one of the weirdest fights in the series), Draco reveals he's simply Tracy's father.  And there we have Tracy, the ennui-ridden party girl whose daddy attempts to buy her James Bond (the movie even makes him pushier about it), first with money then with information, and while it's not truly so transactional, Bond is delivered to her, though why she loves Bond (despite her patently false resistance and, good actor or not, Rigg's even more patent inability to make herself cry with this material), it's never obvious here.  (I can't say I like the idea of a marriage alliance between MI6 and organized crime, either.)  Finally, in book and movie alike, it's essentially a false first act anyway, only a little (and instrumentally) to do with the actual plotTracy doesn't reappear for an hour!because the actual plot concerns the information that Bond requested, the location of the fiend Ernst Stavro Blofeld (Telly Savalas).  At least in the movie the information Draco provides actually matters (providing Bond a cool spy-heist scene), so there's one little quibble that Maibaum fixed, even if it feels like I'm praising somebody for fixing a crooked painting in a collapsing house.


The actual plot still isn't very good, and somehow Blofeld might be the least well-served figure here.  (Yet, as with Lazenby and Rigg, through no fault of Savalas's.  Happily, my recollection of his performance was partially wrong: he's a menacing Blofeld and a good one for a movie that wants to reposition Donald Pleasence's diminutive schemer as a physical threat when the time comes; still, there is a certain affability that Savalas can't turn off and isn't quite right, and once Blofeld is stuck kidnapping Tracy and asking if she'd rather be his girlfriend, there's not a performance in the universe that could've maintained Blofeld's dignity.)  But, well, here it is: Bond's lead on Blofeld runs through the London College of Arms, for Blofeld's latest preoccupation is establishing himself as the rightful heir to a title of French nobility, and I simply don't know what to do with this character-degrading nonsense, and neither did Fleming besides expounding on snobbery.  (Meanwhile, we only get to hear the name "Sable Basilisk" in the movie once, which in my mind is a clear strike against it.  We do get the Bond family motto, however, even if it's presented much more provisionally in the book: "The world is not enough.")  So the actual-actual plot arrives even later: in addition to his noble pursuit, Blofeld is running a biological warfare lab in an imposing alpine fastness atop Piz Gloria in Switzerland, masquerading as a cure center for allergies where he's gathered, under the Klebbesque figure Irma Bunt (Ilse Steppat), a dozen women whom, actually, he's brainwashing to serve as vectors for infecting the world's farms with virological weapons that will destroy humanity's food supply lest, as usual, his demands are met.  It is unclear why he needs brainwashed double-agents to infiltrate the tight security of rural farms, and it's only clear as a matter of "it's a Bond movie" why they're all girls.  But Bond's own course is clear: take on the identity of the College of Arms' Sir Hilary Bray (George Baker), lineage detective, to infiltrate the villain's eagle's nest and foil his evil scheme.

This goes awry, as it must, but as much as I've just bitched and moaned about Secret Service, the instant we get to Switzerland, the approach switches from "Bond book" to "Bond movie" which, as I've noted before, is as much to say from "romance" to "pornography," and because it is a Bond movie, it's inevitably better at porno.  It's stupid but in mostly good ways now, and honestly quite excellent at providing the pleasures we expect from this series.  I'm half-convinced my favorite stretch in the entire film isn't even action this time, but the extended comic subterfuge that kicks in as soon as Bond unpacks "Sir Hilary's" kilt, which at a minimum contains my favorite beats of Lazenby's performance, my second-favorite performance in the film (Angela Scoular's loopy hot nerd Northerner, Ruby, one of the allergy girls), and by far my favorite quip in this film and potentially the franchise, as Bond has basically had to seduce all the girls at once over their communal dinner in the hopes of generating a source, and bags Ruby first, but he's actually bagged everybody, hence to keep his cover he's obliged to properly service Nancy (Catherina von Schell) when she shows up in his room as soon as he's managed to get back from the first rendezvous, and it's already very funny (even satirical) to watch Lazenby run through the same lousy woo, much less enthusiastically, a second time, though it's really funny when he declares her "an inspiration" and adds, with some exasperation and not as under his breath as Bond thinks, "you'll have to be."  Even that might not be the funniest concept, which is just the slow dissolve that indicates that "Hilly" has spent hours holding forth about genealogy, and while some of them yawn, it's because they've been hanging on James Bond's every word and they're just tuckered out from the long edge.  One also can't complain about the pretty terrific way Ruby communicates vital intelligence via Bond's exposed thigh thanks to his man-skirt.


Sex comedy that's sustained across multiple scenes yet is also across-the-board successful is unique enough in Bond, but it does benefit a great deal from the expected things, even if the expected personnel weren't behind them; Secret Service is an odd and transitional object, especially so in the positions taken here by Hunt and Glen, given that their respective tenures on Bond possibly represent more useful analytical units for thinking about the series than the tenures of Bond actors do.  But also a lot of people just didn't show up for whatever reason: stunt coordinator Bob Simmons and production designer Ken Adam sat this one out**, their functions fulfilled by what we might term, for lack of a better phrase, the B-team, particularly George Leech (stuntman on all sorts of Bond movies, including, funnily enough, Casino Royale) and Syd Cain (art director on several Bonds, and effectively production designer on From Russia With Love), though it's certainly not B-team results.

The latter's effort, anyway, is a huge part of why the "Hilary Bray" segment works so well, with the alpine health center being a real place, a restaurant in fact... that Cain basically built for its owners, thanks to their fortuitous intersection of interests, giving them a weirdly-niche Bond-themed novelty restaurant (though I assume the biggest line item would've been the damn helipad!) in exchange for using a building for a few months.  Everyone always points out that it remains in operation all these years later, whichever year they happen to be writing, so I won't buck tradition: it still is.  It of course lacks the full measure of Adam's grandiositybeing a functional outfit, it'd practically have to!but after the overwhelming scale of You Only Live Twice this more intimate, even cozy lair is a welcome change of pace, not to say it lacks in either style or spectacle, and in its hidden frozen recesses Hunt and Cain and Reed are taking Bond into a place as much akin to Italian horror (just the most flamboyant sheets of solid color lighting, some of it motivated by the virology lab) and outright psychedelia (in the women's hypno-beds).  Even in its client-facing cover, it's still quite modernist and geometric, and made slightly weird by the story's Yuletide timeframe, while Hunt never allows us to forget we really are filming (the majority of this, anyhow) at the top of a damn mountain.


This also, naturally, serves as the exigence for most of the action here, inagurating one of the grandest of Bond traditions, winter sports, a species of action that the Bond films will never stray from for very long.  (I believe the next three movies in a row after Secret Service lack any skiing sequence, but after that sometimes there wouldn't be one movie in a row that did.)  Fleming's awesome ski escape is split into two different awesome ski escapes here, captured by skiborne cameraguy Willy Bogner, a doubling-of-pleasure that's well-intentioned though it's debatable whether the necessity of differentiating the first one by way of night or "night" helped matters.  (There's some brutal skier-on-skier violence in the nighttime one, nonetheless.)  The daytime one is cool and it's easy to be disappointed because it was supposed to be beyond the impossible, with the production's own private avalanche, but it happened on nature's schedule instead of the Swiss authorities' (Hunt was disappointed because he'd been on them and they kept demurring), and hence they were consigned to cobbling together their own, which means even more of these sequences' big distraction, insert shots of Lazenby, Rigg, and Savalas (in ski gear so they're barely identifiable anyway), where approximately one-third the number would've been too many.  Glen, with Hunt's connivance, is overediting this movie; it sure feels like an editor making his directorial debut, anyway, with editing sometimes used as a very blunt tool, nowhere moreso than a jump cut between two static shots of a clock tower to effect the hands of the clock going from 1:59 P.M. to 2:00 P.M.  But it can be used well: the best action scene is as much a thriller scene, with Bond escaping imprisonment from the alpine tram wheelhouse and danglingand, as the tram wheels approach his fingers, fallingfrom the cable.  Piz Gloria demanded a "Bond's army" sequence that's less mindblowing than earlier ones, but secretly one of the most impressively death-defying, more-or-less everything about the heliborne assault being really-real except the bullets and the final explosion.  And somewhere in there is the car chase that ends up on an ice track rally and makes it a demolition derby, directed by Anthony Squire, which is as splendid an example as you'll find of the anarchic "feels good, do it" philosophy that was taking shape for Bondian action cinema, and that would serve Glen in such good stead when he spread his wings.

By this point, Tracy has reentered the story by means Fleming had only slightly camouflaged as anything besides his favorite plot mechanic, coincidence, but now, without requiring Bond to be attracted to broken birds like Tracy, in a way never suggested by the movies and only the books, the romantic approach does work, and while there are conflicting reports about how much Lazenby and Rigg liked one another, their screen chemistry is quite fine, and Hunt has some ideas about Bond's proposal in a snowstorm that would take a lot not to work.


I don't know if I'm being shitty to say that there's not a harder emotional punch than that delivered by Lois Maxwell on behalf of pining Moneypenny, who gets a farewell with Lazenby so beautiful it's taken me two days to even wonder if Connery's presence would have made it even more objectively heartbreaking.  (The movie is rather good to the Universal Exports cast: even Desmond Llewelyn's Q, barely-glimpsed otherwise, gets to open the movie by amusingly yammering about traceable radioactive lint; Bernard Lee may have more opportunity to characterize M than in any other film, determined to conceal his affection for his subordinate.)  Yet I will confess that the ending, so deeply uncharacteristic for Bond (if pretty at-home in a movie right on the cusp of the 1970s), does get me.  Lazenby brings the tragedy home with some fine understatement, and we sit with him and with that stunning, terrible final frameTracy, victim of nothing more super-espionage fantastic than a crude drive-by, her onscreen corpse only slightly obscured by the spiderwebbed bullethole in Bond's windshieldfor long enough that it becomes truly pitiful, even if it's bullying you a bit.  Then a reorchestration of Monty Norman's Goddamn surf rock blares out over John Barry's plaintive music, and the movie is phony all over again, so it's not that uncharacteristic.

Score: 8/10

*Well, he full-on got Kissy Suzuki pregnant, but I assume he never finds that out.
**If I'd made Blofeld's volcano lair and then somebody tore it down, I'd consider jumping into a real one, so maybe that's what Adam was up to in 1969.  Okay, it was just the musical version of Goodbye, Mr. Chips.  I'm also not 100% sure about Simmons's complete absence.

17 comments:

  1. I maintain that OHMSS is the James Bond movies' Original Sin. Not that it's a bad movie, but if they ever wanted to make a definitive statement on the Bond character, this was their one shot at it, and they didn't nail it.

    Long story short, the leads don't match the script. The page calls for two seasoned, weary, and disillusioned people, while Lazenby and Rigg come off immature and restless. References to prior films notwithstanding, Lazenby's Bond feels like he's fairly new to the job; and I don't buy AT ALL that Rigg's Tracy is actually neurotic and suicidal - she seems simply bored and reckless. That could all still work fine if they adjusted the story to be a *prequel*, but what we got was an odd stand-alone that doesn't even feel consistent within itself.

    "James Bond" being a collection of tropes whose sum nobody can ever agree on starts here and remains forever so. Is that really such a bad thing? Maybe not, but we had something like four straight Daniel Craig movies that felt like "let's do OHMSS without actually redoing OHMSS" with increasing desperation, so it seems there were folks in charge who knew what opportunity had been missed here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't really blame Rigg because Tracy, especially as constituted by Maibaum's script, is essentially unplayable. So if she's got chemistry with Lazenby and can hit one emotional state per scene and looks good even in an extremely tacky wedding dress, it's about as much as the role permits. I think that's an excellent point about Lazenby, though it may be one of the things I like about his Bond (even if, as you say, it's arguably not ideal for the purposes of a movie that requires us to know Bond already). Third of the way through Diamonds Are Forever and so far I like Tiffany Case more than Tracy--she has a more sympathetic connection to organized crime, *and* actually has something to cry about.

      As for the Craig movies doing Secret Service, yeah, but tonally equalized, which turns out to have some real drawbacks.

      Re: prequel--really want to emphasize how much this needs Casino Royale to have happened.

      Oh, I'm just going to ask an open question: in the novels, how do they know anything about Blofeld? Maybe it was implied that intelligence could be gathered from some SPECTRE survivors or something, but I just really don't remember that.

      Delete
    2. Well remember that he DID hijack nuclear weapons, attempt to hold a world power hostage with said weapons via a broadcast demand for ransom (with menaces), triggering an international search & retrieval operation involving at least one Superpower and then lost his Number One man (Amongst other things) in the course of that effort failing.

      I’d bet cash money that this spectacular failure persuaded at least one of Blofeld’s subordinates that it was time to go, with said subordinate presumably leaking intelligence to the Authorities (Whether they survived snitching to The Man is, of course, an interesting question).

      If I remember correctly, the THUNDERBALL gambit was explicitly intended as Blofeld and SPECTRE’s Grand Finale, win or lose (Even if they received the ransom, the organisation would have drawn down so much Heat that it simply could not continue operating in it’s present form) so it’s not hard to imagine the organisation actually going to pieces after that climactic operation was a complete failure (With all the interpersonal spite one could reasonably expect).

      Delete
    3. Oh, I think Diana Rigg acquits herself nicely here, especially since I think there was a deliberate retooling of the character after Lazenby's casting. I think the original angle for Tracy was more along the lines of "mysterious, elusive, etc," thought that's just my speculation.

      One of the things with a hypothetical prequel OHMSS is that it would serve a lot of the same function as Casino Royale on the series. Why did Bond marry Tracy and none of the other women? Well, that's before he had his lover get blown away, for one. Though admittedly moving OHMSS back in time would require moving Blofeld into the background.

      I'll also always wonder how a Sean Connery/ Brigette Bardot OHMSS would've played out, too. So many intriguing possibilities.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    5. You remember correctly re: Thunderball, it was intended as the finale for SPECTRE. I'm not saying it's a plot hole as such, just slightly weird that Fleming goes "we know all about SPECTRE now, go read the previous book if you want to know his backstory."

      Daf: yep, there's the rub. You could almost certainly fit Blofeld in, but the glamorless drive-by would be a lot harder.

      (Deleted and corrected because I am getting my book/movie wires crossed.)

      Delete
  2. I’m planning to post rather more tomorrow (Tonight it’s far too late), but for the record I have yet to read the novel and love the film.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Am I nuts or are they confusing allergies with phobias here?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. YES. It's worse and more forceful in the novel. It's sort of fun-stupid, but it's really stupid.

      And I don't like just going "here's my screenplay treatment," but if Blofeld's hypnosis treatment center were for, say, DEPRESSIVES, maybe depressives who coincidentally have connections TO POWERFUL FIGURES SUCH AS THE HEAD OF THE UNION CORSE, then we could've had Tracy in the entire book and/or movie, and wouldn't that be structurally sound for a change.

      Delete
    2. Well the problem with construction in a Bond movie is that 007 is in the demolition business… 😉

      Delete
  4. Right, this is stream of consciousness and will probably need to be broken into two or more parts: I ask no forgiveness for my opinions, but will apologise for any inconvenience when it comes to following my train of thought.


    - I like your suggestion that the Bond saga is, in many ways, a Romance: I would, however, like to qualify that by suggesting that at heart Bond does not belong to what we moderns would call the Romance genre, but to something more like the Matter of Britain (With 007 slotting rather neatly into the Knight Errant mould, given how very weird and action-packed the Arthurian myths often were - and how often the knights in them did crimes, especially under the pen of ‘Jeffrey Archer of the 15th century Sir Thomas Mallory’).


    - I’ll admit that not having read the novel always makes it easier to accept a film on it’s own terms and I really like this one: it is unquestionably a top three Bond film for me because while it does something very different, it also does that thing very well (and particularly because it allows, even encourages one to feel for the main character in a way the films only very seldom allows you too).

    Heck, Eon may not have been comfortable with a sincerely Tragic Romance but the memory of poor Tracy Bond has been given due respect by the franchise and served the character of Bond well ever since her first and only appearance (Allowing audiences glimpses of Bond’s humanity and the sense of a long, troubled history for Bonds as different as Sir Roger Moore and Mr Timothy Dalton).


    - For my money, besides the inherent charisma of being played by Dame Diana Rigg at her finest, what draws Bond to Tracy is timing (It’s not hard to imagine him feeling pretty darned lonely after five films of fly by night relationships - I’d argue outright mercenary in the case of Pussy Galore, who strikes me as too intelligent and too well prepared to have not made plans to betray Goldfinger even before a handsome slab of Scots beef offers her the ideal opportunity to square things with the Authorities to boot - three of which in close succession see Bond lose a lover or, in the case of Paula from THUNDERBALL, a friend & ally*).

    Man had a hole in his life and Tracy fitted.

    *Not to mention Aki, who falls under ‘All of the Above’.


    - My favourite ‘Watsonian’ explanation for a purely ‘Doyleist’ joke is that 007 is thinking of Prince Charming as Lazenby utters the immortal line (If I remember correctly, he’s holding Tracy’s abandoned shoes as he says it).

    Also, my pet theory is that the villains in this cold open are agents of one of Draco’s rivals, rather than his own men (I believe they’re wearing different colours to the Draco Mob, which is my key evidence for this theory - though ‘Cupid’* being fairly chill about not attacking Bind while Tracy is not only in the room, but in the mood is another key pillar of my case).


    *Yes, I call Draco’s muscle ‘Cupid’ precisely because he does not interrupt Bond & Tracy, which is very sporting of him after being pummelled by 007 - he also appears at their wedding party, which is deeply amusing.


    - It is physically, intellectually and morally impossible for me to disagree more with you about the music in this film’s opening titles: it is, quite frankly, neatly as iconic as THE Bond theme and means that poor Mr Lazenby has to be identified with ‘We have all the time in the world’ as HIS Bond theme, because the opening track belongs to all the Bonds.

    ReplyDelete
  5. (Part II)

    Having staked my claim to the title ‘Iconiclast’ with my dislike of Mr Donald Pleasance as Blofeld, I now formally condemn myself to the stake for outright Heresy - not only is Sir Sean Connery, the definitive and iconic 007, not my favourite Bond, he’s actually my least favourite.

    Please understand that I believe Eon has never yet cast a dud Bond (In terms of performance onscreen, if not always at the Box office) and that Sir Sean did more that was worthwhile for the franchise than most, but having watched and rewatched his Bond films (Especially those right before and right after the one under discussion) I see absolutely nothing that supports the eternal contention that his presence would have improved ON HER MAJESTY’S SECRET SERVICE: bored or not, his version of Bond was simply never built to support any more than the briefest flash of genuine warmth and human feeling.

    A whole movie of Sean Connery Bond as a man and not an icon is simply insupportable (Heck, just watch NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN if you don’t believe me).

    He’s not a bad Bond, just the wrong tool for the job.


    - I’m not a believer in the ‘Bond as multi generational cover ID’ theory (Not least because the film makes plain that this Bond has experienced all of Connery’s adventures): I’m more of a mind that each actor represents a distinct parallel timeline with shared features (Comic Book Multiverse style), but whatever your favoured explanation I’m more than happy we got Mr Lazenby and rather sad we got so little of him.

    I take his personal version of events with a pinch of salt, but anyone who can claim to have walked into Bond by buying one of Sean Connery’s unclaimed suits from his tailor, getting the right haircut and lying his fundamentals off to Messers Saltzmann and Broccoli about being an actor, rather than a male model with at least some support from actual history can make a serious claim to having been The Most Interesting Man in the World, however briefly.

    Also, for a completely untrained actor he’s got a lot of screen presence, genuine chops in the action scenes and a very human charm, the latter of which is something that had mostly been missing from the character to date (At least onscreen).

    The fact that, despite being asked not to, he went down on one knee for the opening gun barrel (Of the movie where 007 gets married) suggests he had pretty shrewd instincts, though he might well have been obliged to shoot a new ‘gun walk’, had he made future Bond films.

    It’s also strangely appropriate that James Bond was never the same man before or after he met the future Tracy Bond.


    - Anyway, Mr George Lazenby: one of the Bonds who looks being in a Bond movie look like the coolest thing ever (Right up there with noble Sir Roger and the Mighty Brosnan), which has to be worth something.


    - Extra credit for the “Sorry ma’am” to that portrait of Queen Elizabeth II (It’s amusingly ambiguous as to whether he’s apologising for day drinking, quitting HMs service or thinking about leaving her for another woman).


    - Also, I’m morally certain Mr Lazenby is one of the few Bonds who could show up in an Austin Powers movie without turning into a parody himself, simply by being so casual about being the manliest man in any room.

    The fact just he looks like the life model for a THUNDERBIRDS puppet doesn’t hurt either.

    ReplyDelete
  6. (Part III)

    - Watching SUPERMAN 2025 a day or two ago has left me with a burning desire to see a comic book in which a certain British superspy rocks up in Metropolis because Alex Luthor is being a bald, obscenely-rich supervillain with a history of stealing and/or building WMDs and Bond is their natural predator (Also, y’know, he’s at least a little suspicious that might be Blofeld by another name).

    Bonus points if this story is set in the SUPERMAN ‘78 universe, because OCTOPUSSY and SUPERMAN III were actually filming at Pinewood Studios near-simultaneously (meaning that there are actually photographs of Sir Roger Moore on set with Christopher Reeve and at least one anecdote that they ate lunch in the studio canteen while wearing full costume).


    - I do think it makes more sense to imagine the goons from that pre title sequence as employed by some rival of Draco pere (I don’t believe he actually claims them onscreen, so there’s some room for interpretation): it also occurs to me that it could well have been one of SPECTRE’s Union Corse members who leaked the name ‘Blofeld’ to the authorities (Which would help explain how Draco himself was able to give Bond some actionable intelligence so quickly: he’s getting in touch with a professional peer and countryman).


    - Technically speaking Bond isn’t keen on an SIS/Corsican mafia merger either: he explicitly resigns from the Double 0 section as part of his marriage.


    - Also, for my money Tracy is, like Bibd, in the right place to seriously consider marriage and Bond is handsome, manly, willing to tell her rather overbearing father “No” and make him like it, as well as completely willing to put his life on the line for her, absolutely capable of demolishing anyone who might threaten her and wholeheartedly willing to change his life to be with her.

    I suspect it would have been a tricky marriage, but one can also imagining it working surprisingly well, given time, love and tenderness.



    Of all the disappointments involving ON HER MAJESTY’S SECRET SERVICE, the greatest is that we have yet to see Irma Bunt brought to justice for her crimes (Bonus points if this occurs only AFTER Bond has demolished Blofeld, leading to the immortal line “Business before pleasure” - CUT TO CREDITS).


    - In all honesty I feel that Mr Savalas’ fundamental geniality makes Blofeld feel more unsettling than Mr Pleasance’s “Hitler in Fuhrerbunker, April 1945’ mode: if nothing else it makes his ability to sustain a cover identity in the long term more plausible and explains his hold over his followers (Some of whom he quite casually orders to keep chasing Bond & Tracy whilst he triggers an avalanche - all the better for the crash to catch his personal headache out in the open when the avalanche hits) better than mere terror would.

    As Machiavelli put it, it’s better to be feared than loved only when one cannot have both fear AND love.


    - Also, for my money Mr Savalas is the most well rounded Blofeld: the only you can imagine as Criminal Kingpin and former bureaucrat, double agent turned third party in the Cold War, a man who has physical and mental heft, whilst entertaining enough personal eccentricity to help make his weird fixation on being recognised as a legitimate aristocrat plausible enough.


    - Strictly speaking, given the de Bleachamp family tombs are in Augsburg, Bavaria the odds are that the family were cosmopolitan rather than French (My guess would be that they were French speaking but vassals of the Holy Roman Emperor, rather than the King of France, a reasonably common situation in the Low Countries after the Heirs of Burgundy became the reigning Emperors).


    - My bet is that Blofeld is chasing that peerage as his ‘retirement package’ after the fall of SPECTRE (or in anticipation of it’s dissolution): why lurk in the shadows when you can make yourself a part of the Establishment? (though his apparent enthusiasm for the project even after his cover is blown strongly suggests a personal obsession to boot).

    ReplyDelete
  7. (Part IV)

    - Sir Hilary Bray is, indeed a treasure: interestingly, Mr George Baker actually showed up in a different role later in the series (THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, to be precise): given he was actually put forward for the role of 007 at one point, it’s amusing to imagine him showing up to play 008 (Bond’s most professional colleague and actual grown up, going by mentions of him in the novels and the Eon films).


    - I suspect that Blofeld’s logic is as simple as and unedifying “Young women are less empowered to kick back against their doctors than young men and no agent is so universally acceptable as a beautiful young woman.”


    - Angie Scoular/Ruby is an absolute treasure (“It’s true!” she giggles, all tipsy) and the Clinic Sex Comedy is genuinely funny, but for my money this sequence is most useful as a case study in 007 trying to get back to business as usual and finding it very, very hard to get Contessa Tracy out of his system.

    My favourite interpretation of the film (Credit to Mr Michael May and his to date exhaustive reviews of canon Bond books & films) is that Bond only realises and/or accepts that he’s actually In Love with Tracy after the clinic, when he realises that other girls simply aren’t cutting the mustard and sees the Contessa come through in the most challenging circumstances.


    - I’m running through quite a bit because these comments are less ‘insightful’ and more ‘obsessive’ at this point, but it would be remiss of me not to note the bit during his first downhill run where 007 STRANGLES A DUDE WITH A SPARE SKI.

    It’s not the most spectacular action moment in Bond, but it’s one of the most James Bond (I have a deep fondness for such oddly-practical, yet slightly comic Bond improvisations: just wait until we get to FOR YOUR EYES ONLY and it’s ‘parasailing’).


    - My pet theory is that the poor blond fellow who tries to support Bond throughout his infiltration of Piz Gloria (and who also participates in the Great Playboy Robbery early in the film) may well have been somebody he was put in touch with by Tracy and/or her father.

    If we assume that this poor chap was keeping Tracy appraised of her beau’s current status and either put the word out or fell silent in circumstances that pulled her into action, then the Contessa’s splendid punctuality is easy enough to explain (At least in the film): she’s maintaining a lovely interest in her boyfriend and his well-being (Which, of course, does much to endear her even to case-hardened Bond).


    - I refuse to accept that Moneypenny being so happy for Bond she cries and Mr Bond losing his Mrs are anything but two halves of the same perfect, heart-breaking whole when it comes to judging the Most Tragic Moment in the whole Bond saga (Only the loss of Vesper even comes close and one can argue that, as they take place in completely different universes, they should not count as in competition*).


    *The video game 007 LEGENDS absolutely does not count: it’s non-canon twice over.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Re: aristocracy, I'll note that the De Bleuchamps (or rather De Bleuvilles, they changed it to be a direct-ish translation of Blofeld I guess, even though his name isn't "Blaufeld," it's English like the guy Fleming named him after, Henry Blofeld) were noted to be Revolutionary exiles in the book, hence taking up residence in Augsburg. I cut it, but I had wanted to query the plausibility of the whole affair: the London College of Arms probably has the personnel but by no means the institutional mission to track down purely French titles of nobility. Of course France abolished titles of nobility, at least a couple of times, though it took in Third Republic; then again, I guess all Blofeld wanted was the name, and they will give that to you, and I think Fleming outlines the proper procedure for it. Still such a damn odd basis for a plot.

      Re: Lazenby, solidly agreed.

      Re: Connery, wild take, and I cannot totally concur. Watching the early Bonds again has heavily reinforced his position as no. 2 for me, though I do agree that Connery would have had to heavily rethink his Bond to do Secret Service, and there is no indication that he would have done so. Still, he is, like, a good actor. Just to get it out there, though I like Dalton, he's probably my least favorite, very lost in Living Daylights despite it theoretically playing to his strengths (though he's great in Licence To Kill).

      Re: Hilary Bray, stray idea and goofy, but I kinda really wish Lazenby had played him too via editing. Just go for it!

      Re: Savalas, I think he's a good villain, but the combination of Fleming's biography of Blofeld in Thunderball and Pleasence in Live Twice etched a pretty permanent picture of the villain in my mind that none of the follow-ups, book or film, seem to quite match. Continually trying to fuck Bond Girls like a melodrammer villain is a BIG part of that, honestly. As for whether that Blofeld could command the kind of suicidal loyalty portrayed in books and films, you're right to imply it wouldn't, it's completely implausible, but I dunno, that's genre and that's okay.

      Re: the blond dude, I think the film makes it almost impossible not to assume he's Union Corse rather than MI6 though he's based on the book's blundering MI6 agent and iirc the filmmakers operated under the assumption he was. But he helps him with the Geneva (or wherever it was) heist, and I'm pretty sure that was Bond operating without MI6 help or even really sanction. I do rather like the idea that she's Tracy's guy not Draco's, and I wish that were explicit!

      Delete
    2. (1) I really do need to read that book, but I’m not quite finished QUENTIN DURWARD - which I’m pleased to find confirms my suspicion that Sir Walter Scott has a surprising amount of snark in his work (Even though not nearly enough for Mr Mark Twain) - and a book about LIVE AID & the 1980s.

      As for the College of Arms, it is an unusual plot hook, but I enjoy it on the understanding that this allows us an insight Blofeld’s personal vanity (Being already a Master of Men, he now wants to be legally recognised as a Lord of Men), while also suggesting his caution - given SPECTRE kept it’s HQ in Paris, it’s perhaps unsurprising that he’s reluctant to work through the French authorities (If only because he’s probably more likely to meet somebody who has at least seen him before).

      Also, without the College of Arms, how could Mr Fleming have graced us with the name ‘Sable Basilisk’?


      (2) I would never dare rank a lost of the BEST Bonds, because that demands an objectivity I simply cannot conjure, but given that THE UNTOUCHABLES, THE LAST CRUSADE, HIGHLANDER, FIRST KNIGHT and DRAGONHEART are amongst my favourite features in part due to my enjoyment of Sir Sean’s work in them, I’m always disappointed to watch his Bond films and get an Icon, rather than a character.

      Hence his place at the very bottom of my list of favourite Bonds (They’re all my favourites, but some I do love more than others).


      (3) Something I only realised today was that the films from THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS to THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH might well be my favourite stretch of films in Bond - they’re not all the Best and they’re only some of my favourite films in the series, but Messers Moore, Dalton, Brosnan and Craig also represent a succession of my favourite actors in Bond to boot (Though not in that exact order).


      (4) Having said that, I can understand why you’re not wholly fond of Bond/Dalton: while nobody could dispute that Mr Dalton is an objectively more versatile (and arguably more talented) actor than Mr Pierce Brosnan, the latter nonetheless runs rings around him as 007 because, whilst Mr Dalton was never ashamed to play Ian Fleming’s James Bond, his discomfort with the Bond Movie Machine and playing Movie Bond radiates from him in a way that hurts the films.

      Mr Brosnan, on the other hand, wears James Bond like a bespoke and OWNS it from the first to the last (Despite the films representing a clear cut case of diminishing returns to a degree even greater than the Daniel Craig sequence).


      (5) In all honesty the Blofeld origin described in THUNDERBALL strikes me as completely at odds with the Pleasance’s Blofeld, because it hinges on Ernst Stavro Blofeld being a weightlifter, a succesful double agent twice over and a man who built the most powerful criminal syndicate of the Cold War era because the members trusted his judgement as much as they feared his displeasure.

      All of which SCREAMS Telly Savalas, but is completely incompatible with Donald ‘Ax Crazy’ Pleasance.

      Still, when it comes to iconic characters we all have our own mental image.


      (6) The problem with a Spy Thriller is that of an audience known as everything then one loses many of the genre’s charms: it needs to keep us guessing quite as much as it needs to pull off the Big Reveal, after all.


      (7) Not sure where you get Blofeld as a dude repeatedly chasing Bond girls: my take is that he’s drawn to Tracy by his ego, not his gonads (She’s a bone dide aristocrat AND Bond’s lady AND a Crime Lord’s daughter, how could he resist?) and it’s even more hard to see his attitude towards Tiffany Case in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER as a product of anything but the attitude that a hostage who acts like she’s found a new Daddy is much less time-consuming to handle than a hostage who has to be kept in chains.

      Especially if she thinks that a mere bikini is enough to take Ernst Stavro Blofeld’s eye off the prize.

      Delete
  8. P.S. Forgot to add - my understanding is that it was LIVENCE TO KILL which was tailored to Mr Dalton’s specific talents, whilst THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS was drafted whilst it was somewhat unclear who the next James Bond would be.

    ReplyDelete