MovieChat Forums > Never Say Never Again (1983) Discussion > Superior to Diamonds Are Forever + Thund...

Superior to Diamonds Are Forever + Thunderball + You Only Live Twice

posted 13 years ago by Jay_Rusty
26 replies | jump to latest

The 1st three Sean-Connery-as-007 efforts (Goldfinger, From Russia with Love & Dr. No) are iconic, whereas the last 3 are mediocre - I found Never Say Never Again to be an entertaining & interesting entry in the James Bond myhtos - I especially liked the angle of the aging 007, struggling to stay relevant in rapidly moving & changing times - I think that Sean Connery was in a great shape for 53 and completely likeable & believable as James Bond - I also found the villains to be equally psychotic (Fatima Blush) and sociopathic (Maximilian Largo) in a "realistic" fashion. Like I said, Goldfinger, From Russia with Love & Dr. No ar classics, but i'll take Never Say Never Again any day of the week instead of Diamonds Are Forever & Thunderball & You Only Live Twice.

[–] Irishdrummer007 10 years ago

I would agree that Never say Never again is Better than Thunderball and maybe You Only Live twice. Don,t know about Better than Diamonds. But I do like both Films and thought Connery was very good in Never say Never.

[–] RIP_IMDb 10 years ago

"Italy invented the pizza, took it to New York...but Chicago perfected it.".

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] FridayOnElmStreet 10 years ago

The only Bond films I find worse than this are Diamonds Are Forever and Quantum of Solace.

[–] RIP_IMDb 10 years ago

This and DaF are neck-and-neck. QoS is easily the worst of the series that I've seen. I've seen all except Sf.

"Italy invented the pizza, took it to New York...but Chicago perfected it.".

[–] LeonardPine 10 years ago

Definitely miles better than DAF, don't know if it's better than Thunderball, although Thunderball has its flaws.

It's an interesting film and i think a very entertaining one. Connery looked better in this than he did in DAF.

Can't belive someone on here rated QoS as being one of the worst Bonds. Do me a favour.

"Perhaps he's wondering why someone would SHOOT a man before throwing him out of a plane..."

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] clark_gillies 10 years ago

I have always preferred this more to Thuderball, and felt it was fitting closure to the Sean Connery Bond.

Its better than arguably 80-90% of Rodger Moores Bond movies, and ties in well with the first three movies (as you said, a aging Bond living in a world that is going 100 mph faster than the one he is used to in the 60's).

I also think Connery preferred playing Bond in this movie more than he did in the previous 3 (YOLT he really just phoned in, and DAF you can see he is clearly not interested in) yet seems to be having fun in this one.

I also love just how 80's this movie is.... its over the top to the maximum, and though looks aged so much, it actually still works.

[–] PeterBlues (790) 4 years ago

well, at least i like it better than "thunderball", that is the only movie i can't sit through, the underwater scenes in that are too dragged out which even the movie makers admitted afterwards, of course what is missing in this is the regular cast except for connery himself, neat though that "mr. bean" has a part and fatima blush is a very colourful role, it would be neat if they added a regular gun barrel barrel opening to this, this feels more dated and dry than "octopussy" though from the same year, this doesn't feel as well remastered when it comes to picture and sound. about the other movies mentioned, i think "diamonds are forever" is very groovy and superior to this, and "you only live twice" very exotic and neat.

⛰ 🏍 ⛵️ 🏖 😾 🦈 🎮 💃🕺⛴ 🐫 🐎 ✈️

you can love yourself,
i wont stand in your way,
im leavin this miserable place,
for soil shed with grace.

[–] kwestmo (4385) 4 years ago

IMO, YOLT is worst Bond film ever.

I would say DAF worse than NSNA if I didn't consider it an unintentional parody.

Between TB and NSNA again I give a slight edge to TB primarily because NSNA is too 80s-ed up and looks more dated.

So I give your post a lot of merit.

I am excluding the Craig films from my analysis.