I know it's hard to have a good natter while you're a hundred feet below sea level, but it seemed to go on a bit whenever Bond or anyone went underwater.
It was like all underwater scenes (possibly apart from the end battle) were there just to pad it out and show off the great underwater camera angles they'd used.
---------------------------
http://www.thewrongtree.com
[deleted]
" I had to rewind one of those scenes because I was drifting off. "
You mean you had to fast forward? Rewind would just go back to the beginning, not forward. You could have said you just had to skip them (when watching movies using a computer, you don't have to 'rewind' or 'fast forward', you can just choose the exact spot where you want to continue watching from, so you can effectively skip things that are too boring).
In any case, I agree - what a boring load of crap. Thunderball is a pretty lousy movie anyway, and a relatively awful bond-movie as well.
I think it is safe to say they were dozing off, but didn't want to miss any part of the movie, so they felt compelled to rewind in order to see what they dozed through.
She gave me a smile so sweet you could have poured it on your pancakes.
Yes (as I commented earlier on the QOS forum) this movie is one of the biggest, best and most stylish of all the 007 entries but gets severely bogged down in the underwater scenes.
shareTo tears. Having the climatic fight underwater where motion is slowed down was a terrible idea.
"Worthington, we're being attacked by giant bats!"
I think the underwater battle scenes are mesmerizing.
shareYeah, I think this is one of those classic "matter of opinion" things. I loved the underwater bits and I thought the battle was one of the best ones in the whole Bond canon. When they filmed this 40 years ago there had never been underwater shots like that in a movie before so it all seemed fresh and original.
shareMuch as I love this movie, they did beat the underwater stuff to death. It was a bit too much of a "gimmick" that the movie employed, and apparently the production crew couldn't get enough of it.
"Why do celebrities think we want to watch them play poker?" -Hank Hill
Good Point! They were incredibly innovative for the time.
I wish this movie had also been "innovative" enough to show the actresses nude ( even when Luciana Paluzzi was doing her "nude" bathtub scene she was still wearing a bikini or some underwear underneath the towel!) In a bathtub and particularly in the tropics one would expect to find some female nudity, but here the series about the "fearless" 007 who thinks nothing of guns and knives finds 007s true terror- NAKED WOMEN!! ;-)
...I think this is one of those classic "matter of opinion" things.
When they filmed this 40 years ago there had never been underwater shots like that in a movie before so it all seemed fresh and original.Spot on! They are the key points.
Bingo! This was The Abyss of its day in terms of groundbreaking underwater production.
sharethankyou...I don't see how you cannot find the underwater scenes amazing, esp. the last big battle...
share'Mesmerizing' sounds about right.
Just watched this for the first time in, oh, 17 years. At age six those scenes were hypnotic; now 23, I'm still transfixed. It's honestly the only Bond I care to watch, aside from, occasionally, Lazenby's outing.
To me, it's the underwater scenes that make this the best Bond movie.
shareHaving read several of Clive Cussler's Dirk Pitt novels prior to watching Thunderball, the underwater sequences of Thunderball really looked and felt like scenes from the novels brought to life.
If you read Dirk Pitt novels, and watch Thunderball, it gives you a whole new perspective on what the diving characters are experiencing in the movie.
I agree that the underwater scenes bogged down the movie. Normally I love John Barry's music for the films, but during that scene it really dragged it down further.
shareIt's one of the most common complaints against the movie - and one which I happen to agree with.
Underwater scenes in general have two inherent problems: slow pacing/movements, long stretches without dialogue. And in a movie like Thunderball, which is well-paced when it's on land and has some of the wittiest dialogue in the series, those problems stand out more.
Maybe it's because I was 5 when I saw this on the big screen (EGAD! Am I really that old?), but the scuba fight is still one of my all-time action sequences. It looks almost like a ballet. My only complaint with it is that there was only a minimum of blood shown, I guess just to work those sharks into the scene. With as much throat-cutting and spear-gunning, the ocean should have been the color of merlot.
s to the left of me.
s to the right.
Here I am, stuck in the middle with you!
Thunderball is a pretty bad Bond Movie in my opinion and the underwater scenes are certainly a big reason. The end battle would have been laughable if it wasn't so boring- hardly any sound except the sound of bubbles! I don't find slow movements and practical silence the makings of a good action scene.
Other problems with the movie
-Weak bond girls who didn't really serve a purpose
-Disjointed narrative
-Weak villain
-Weak plot, do we really care if Britain has to give some villain £100mil?
-Simply a complete lack of anything arresting, really pales in contrast to its predecessor.
Thunderball cannot be the worst Bond movie as long as the existence of The Man With the Golden Gun is a reality.
s to the left of me.
s to the right.
Here I am, stuck in the middle with you!
The Man with the Golden Gun isn't even close to being the worst Bond film... it does have it's problems of course.
shareExactly true. I got extremely bored. It was like a torture. Worst Bond movie scene i've ever seen.
share