|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 12 posts ] |
|
Author |
Message |
Algren
now we know
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm Posts: 68359
|
 Thunderball
 Quote: Thunderball (1965) is the fourth spy film in the James Bond series after Dr. No (1962), From Russia with Love (1963) and Goldfinger (1964), and the fourth to star Sean Connery as the fictional MI6 agent James Bond. It is an adaptation of the novel of the same name by Ian Fleming, which in turn was based on an original screenplay by Jack Whittingham. It was directed by Terence Young with screenplay by Richard Maibaum and John Hopkins.
The film follows Bond's mission to find two NATO atomic bombs stolen by SPECTRE, which holds the world ransom for £100 million in diamonds, in exchange for not destroying an unspecified major city in either England or the United States (later revealed to be Miami). The search leads Bond to the Bahamas, where he encounters Emilio Largo, the card-playing, eye-patch wearing SPECTRE Number Two. Backed by the CIA and Largo's mistress, Bond's search culminates in an underwater battle with Largo's henchmen. The film had a complex production, with four different units and about a quarter of the film consisting of underwater scenes.
Thunderball was associated with a legal dispute in 1961 when former Ian Fleming collaborators Kevin McClory and Jack Whittingham sued him shortly after the 1961 publication of the Thunderball novel, claiming he based it upon the screenplay the trio had earlier written in a failed cinematic translation of James Bond. The lawsuit was settled out of court and Albert R. Broccoli and Harry Saltzman, fearing a rival McClory film, allowed him to retain certain screen rights to the novel's story, plot, and characters.
The film was a success, earning a total of $141.2 million worldwide, exceeding the earnings of the three previous Bond films and breaking box office records on the first weekend of opening in France and Italy. In 1966, John Stears won the Academy Award for Best Visual Effects and production designer Ken Adam was also nominated for a BAFTA award. Thunderball is, to date, the most financially successful movie of the series, and, adjusting for inflation, made the equivalent of $966.4 million in 2008 currency. Some critics and viewers showered praise on the film and branded it a welcome addition to the series, while others complained of the repetitively monotonous aquatic action and prolonged length. In 1983, Warner Brothers released a second film adaptation of the novel under the title Never Say Never Again.
_________________STOP UIGHUR GENOCIDE IN XINJIANG FIGHT FOR TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE FREE TIBET LIBERATE HONG KONG BOYCOTT MADE IN CHINA
|
Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:39 pm |
|
 |
Maverikk
Award Winning Bastard
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am Posts: 15310 Location: Slumming at KJ
|
Fiona Volpe might be my favorite Bond girl of all time. Yummy!
I never get tired of this one.
A
|
Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:22 pm |
|
 |
jb007
Veteran
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:47 pm Posts: 3917 Location: Las Vegas
|
Fantastic movie. The action scenes, especially the underwater sequences are briiliant for a movie made in 1965.
A+
_________________ Dr. RajKumar 4/24/1929 - 4/12/2006 The Greatest Actor Ever. Thanks for The Best Cinematic Memories of My Life.
|
Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:43 pm |
|
 |
zennier
htm
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 2:38 pm Posts: 10316 Location: berkeley
|
Not a huge fan. I have trouble sitting through this one, though I like the underwater scenes. The scenery wasn't as sweeping for the most part. My least favorite Connery bond (unless we count Never Say Never Again)
B-/C+
|
Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:20 pm |
|
 |
Jmart
Superman: The Movie
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:47 am Posts: 21230 Location: Massachusetts
|
It works for me up till a certain point. In the last half hour the film becomes tedious and boring. That saying, the first two hours or so more than make up for it. I'd say this was Connery's last great outing as Bond.
A-
_________________My DVD Collection Marty McGee (1989-2005)
If I’m not here, I’m on Letterboxd.
|
Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:42 am |
|
 |
trixster
loyalfromlondon
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 6:31 pm Posts: 19697 Location: ville-marie
|
A big step down from the previous two in the series. Connery is great, as always, but the story is mishandled and the supporting characters are mostly weak. It also suffers from some of the worst editing I've ever seen in a major motion picture. Some scenes are completely out of order, characters appear and disappear, and huge leaps of logic are made in the plot. Other than the bad Bond girl, there isn't a single intriguing character - other than Bond himself, of course - and the villain isn't especially threatening. Still, the action scenes are terrific, especially the underwater scenes, even though this was the beginning of gadget overload in the series (ex. the jet pack). It's a deeply flawed film but still fun to watch.
_________________Magic Mike wrote: zwackerm wrote: If John Wick 2 even makes 30 million I will eat 1,000 shoes. Same. Algren wrote: I don't think. I predict. 
Last edited by trixster on Thu Nov 06, 2008 1:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
|
Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:57 pm |
|
 |
Atoddr
Veteran
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:07 am Posts: 3014 Location: Kansai
|
Not as good as Goldfinger, but entertaining enough. I thought the underwater battle at the end was just a little too long.
My grade: B+.
|
Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:09 pm |
|
 |
Jmart
Superman: The Movie
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:47 am Posts: 21230 Location: Massachusetts
|
 Re: Thunderball
Let's just cut right to the chase with this one. As pretty as it is to look at, there's way too much underwater footage. I think I read somewhere that 1/4 of the film uses underwater footage. That's just too much. That's not to say that all of it is bad though. The climax of the film doesn't really work though. We've got two armies fighting each other underwater and yet everything.....just.....moves.....so.....slowly. I think that could be the reason why Peter Hunt (the editor) chose to speed up the film and make quick cuts. Well, that doesn't exactly work out well either. It becomes too distracting in the end. The last 30 seconds of the film though when Bond and Domino are on the raft is just pure James Bond.
Yet despite my complaints I still like the film thanks to Connery. And Claudine Auger as Domino is certainly easy on the eyes. And most of the film is good. But compare it to the three films that came before, and it's a step down. It just needed to spend a little more time out of the water.
***
_________________My DVD Collection Marty McGee (1989-2005)
If I’m not here, I’m on Letterboxd.
|
Wed Nov 12, 2008 6:58 am |
|
 |
Darth Indiana Bond
007
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:43 pm Posts: 11616 Location: Wouldn't you like to know
|
 Re: Thunderball
In my personal opinion, this over Goldfinger is the quintessential Bond due to its plot
A
_________________
|
Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:20 pm |
|
 |
Jmart
Superman: The Movie
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:47 am Posts: 21230 Location: Massachusetts
|
 Re: Thunderball
Jmart wrote: Let's just cut right to the chase with this one. As pretty as it is to look at, there's way too much underwater footage. I think I read somewhere that 1/4 of the film uses underwater footage. That's just too much. That's not to say that all of it is bad though. The climax of the film doesn't really work though. We've got two armies fighting each other underwater and yet everything.....just.....moves.....so.....slowly. I think that could be the reason why Peter Hunt (the editor) chose to speed up the film and make quick cuts. Well, that doesn't exactly work out well either. It becomes too distracting in the end. The last 30 seconds of the film though when Bond and Domino are on the raft is just pure James Bond.
Yet despite my complaints I still like the film thanks to Connery. And Claudine Auger as Domino is certainly easy on the eyes. And most of the film is good. But compare it to the three films that came before, and it's a step down. It just needed to spend a little more time out of the water.
*** Yeah, my opinion didn't really change on this one. The only thing I have to add is this is what sometimes happens with excess. Thunderball apparently had the budget of the previous three films combined. Yet it does very little with it. We get underwater scenes that go...on....forever.....and.....ever, and the plot just meanders there in the middle. Yet as I said before, it's still fun. *** (B)1. Goldfinger (1964) - ***** (A+) 2. From Russia with Love (1963) - ****½ (A) 3. Thunderball (1965) - *** (B) 4. Dr. No (1962) - *** (B)
_________________My DVD Collection Marty McGee (1989-2005)
If I’m not here, I’m on Letterboxd.
|
Wed Oct 31, 2012 2:41 am |
|
 |
Mannyisthebest
Forum General
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 3:53 pm Posts: 8642 Location: Toronto, Canada
|
 Re: Thunderball
Thunderball is one of the biggest hits and most popular Bond films...
I think this is a very nice to watch film with great locals and pretty women in all directions.
The storyline is pretty grand and the underwater scenes are pretty cool at FIRST..
The film is pulled down by the water scenes going on far far too long. Even, so I like this and Goldfinger the most of the older Bond films.
B+
_________________The Dark Prince 
|
Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:56 pm |
|
 |
Algren
now we know
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm Posts: 68359
|
 Re: Thunderball
I prefer Never Say Never Again.
_________________STOP UIGHUR GENOCIDE IN XINJIANG FIGHT FOR TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE FREE TIBET LIBERATE HONG KONG BOYCOTT MADE IN CHINA
|
Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:37 pm |
|
|
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 12 posts ] |
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 37 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|