Sign In Now ►
or Create A New Account ►
Rank This Matchup or Comment/Reply Below
After "Goldfinger" introduced the tricked-out Aston Martin DB5, these two consecutive Bond movies were crafted more as commercial extravaganzas than as films. Roald Dahl's screen version of "You Only Live Twice" entirely jettisoned Ian Fleming's original novel, cementing the departure of Cinematic Bond from his literary roots. As a film, "Twice" has more flaws and requires more willful suspension of disbelief...and yet perhaps it's because it is so outrageous that it is the more interesting of the two. (Besides, how can you not vote for the film that features Ken Adam's iconic hollowed-out volcano set?)
never could stand Thunderball...
Bondathon continues...: Thunderball vs You Only Live Twice. Hmm...where to start with this one. I agree with minlshaw that You Only Live Twice is a very flawed movie, yet it is more entertaining than Thunderball. Sean Connery in YOLT though...damn. Just damn. He looks bored as all hell. I'm not even sure if he's TRYING. His line deliveries are so poor and unenergetic, no wonder he said he wanted to quit with James Bond before they started filming YOLT. I've complained about the main actors in Return of the Jedi looking bored, but they're tolerable in comparison to Connery. Wow. Anyway. YOLT also has the superior villain: Donald Pleasence as Blofeld is awesome. YOLT is without a doubt more flawed, but it is so much more memorable than Thunderball: the giant volcano set, the 'rocket-eating' satellite, the villain, the helicopter fight, Japanese Bond, the silly traps. It's just more fun.