MovieChat Forums > In Like Flint (1967) Discussion > This one killed the series

This one killed the series

posted 13 years ago by anneandwalt-1
16 replies | jump to latest

It's hard to guess if more success would have meant more Flint films, but even when I first saw this entry back in 1967 it disappointed - and time has not been kind to Flint Opus II.

Parodying Bond, the series was going to be challenged due to lower budgets - all those obvious bits of stock film but they kind of made it work the first time.

This time the strengthes are again Coburn - who would have been amazing with stronger support in the Flint films, Lee J Cobb and the great musical score. The action scenes work quite well, but the pace, supporting cast and direction are right out of the worst of the Matt Helm flicks. The studio aimed low and that's basically what we got.

[–] vpilutis 13 years ago

One other factor certain scenes at the end looked too much like "You Only Live Twice" which came out that same year.

See some stars here
http://www.vbphoto.biz/

[–] snsurone 13 years ago

Re the Matt Helm movies:

At least Dean Martin was a handsome man.
Which is more than can be said of James Coburn!

[–] vpilutis 13 years ago

True but Coburn just had a way about him that just made very likeable
As if Danny Craig is such a good looking man compare to the other five actors in the 007 series.

See some stars here
http://www.vbphoto.biz/

[–] Wuchak (8737) 4 years ago

At least Dean Martin was a handsome man.
Which is more than can be said of James Coburn!

Coburn may have lacked Dean's looks, but he was the king of cool at the time with his masculine & intelligent charisma. It wasn’t his fault the script & general filmmaking were below par.

[–] dgates64 11 years ago

Well said. The film was pretty bad.

[–] [email protected] 11 years ago

Was this 20th Century Fox's modus operandi at the time? Just like 1968's "Planet of the Apes", they have a big hit on their hands, so they make a sequel and slash the budget on the production, because, profit!

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ddc300 10 years ago

Yes, they slashed the budget and also made it too goofy. I guess 20th-Fox wanted everything to go campy like their hit TV series, "Batman" (which is referenced in this movie, BTW).

[–] IMDbeans 10 years ago

I thought it was better than the first film, and good fun. I don't know why he series was dropped. There are many possibilities other than mere audience reaction.

I have to say in general that Coburn was a bit old for the role even when he began, so that was always going to be an issue.

[–] hockeyhrs 10 years ago

I think the 1967 Flint sequel is better than the 1965 Flint original.

The Flint series died because the "carefree, swinging 60's" gave way to the "serious 60's" in 1967-68 due to

(a) the Vietnam war got very serious (500,000 troops)
(b) worldwide youth/student rebellion
(c) two more assassinations was a gut-punch on top of JFK

For me, the Bond series was also over by then for the same reason. Yes, I know the public has lapped up endless more Bonds played by endless more non-Connery actors, but to me, the only Bond movies that matter are those made from 1962-67.

[–] talisencrw 10 years ago

I thought its scenes, ideas and script were just as good as its precursor, but its direction was lacking. It wasn't tight enough. Parts of it dragged. I would have been very pleased with more in the series. Cobb was outstanding! =)

[–] rfwhiteaker 9 years ago

You know this was a film for children really and families. When Ebert gets down on it being sexy but not really sexy... That's what this film was.

I was a child at the time these two movies came out and I will tell you... Derek Flynt was WAYYY badder than James friggin Bond to me.

He had three or four women on the leash... really? I was 6 and 7 and I could totally see the advantage in that.

He was independent and too good to be CIA or MI6. He was an expert at everything.

As far as he was no Robert Redford or Paul Newman did anyone see him in The Magnificent Seven? When he says "Simple, I don't compete with them" and sweeps the gal off her feet in answer to the query "How do you do it Mr. Flynt"..... that is a classic and I used that philosophy all of my life.

It sounds like the people that critique the movie for being underdeveloped and campy do not get the flavor.

The music gets you. The telephone ring gets you. His understanding of the human body and controlling himself, living off the land for weeks (he could make some money on tv now) and ballet and literally everything made anyone with any common sense realize that he was superman and it was a comedy. A comedy spy spoof for kids and families and Americans who had no James Bond equivalent.

I can never get the music out of my head. I love this movie and Our Man Flint. Make a movie for that kind of money today.

[–] HugeDaiCottermee 8 years ago

Verily I say unto thee..the character's name Is Flint and not Flynt. The clue lies in the titles of the two movies.

[–] crood 8 years ago

Bond parodies had become commonplace. Get Smart had been on the air for several years, the Matt Helm films were around, and Casino Royale came out the same year as this.

Add into it that Bond films were beginning to become parodies themselves with more and more gadgets, over the top plots, etc. You Only Live Twice, also 1967, had Bond going undercover as a Japanese fisherman. How serious can you take that?