A Few Words About A few words about...™ You Only Live Twice -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Sam Favate]

Originally Posted by JeffT. /t/324625/a-few-words-about-you-only-live-twice-in-blu-ray#post_3993584
YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE (1967) may not be top drawer Sean Connery-Bond but it is far better than most anything Roger Moore ever did to be sure. Indeed THE SPY WHO LOVED ME (1977) was especially derivative of it.

Indeed - I've always said that Spy is a virtual remake of YOLT, and a better movie too.

 

[AlanPaterson]

This was the first Bond movie I ever saw and I guess it's the one I still love the most. I must have been 9 or 10 when I saw it in the local cinema. I don't think the volcano set has ever been bettered for scale and impact. As has already been said 'The Spy who Loved Me' is very similar in storyline, yet it's the most enjoyable Moore film for me. It made a whole generation of teenagers want a Lotus Esprit. I've had one for the last 12 years.
These movies are what cinema is all about. Dreaming with your eyes open!
Alan

 

[QUOTEAs it turned out, in one shot Bond is driving a GT2000 with a left side drive and in another shot he's driving in a GT2000 with a right side drive. I can only assume that the editor must have flipped it.][/QUOTE]
Actually, You Only Live Twice is probably the only Bond film in which Bond doesn't drive a car at all. That was Aki behind the wheel of the GT2000.

 

As it turned out, in one shot Bond is driving a GT2000 with a left side drive and in another shot he's driving in a GT2000 with a right side drive. I can only assume that the editor must have flipped it.

Actually, You Only Live Twice is probably the only Bond film in which Bond doesn't drive a car at all. That was Aki behind the wheel of the GT2000.

 

[Peter Neski]

I was amazed that some of the faded shots aren't faded in the making of Ken Adam film,while overall not great looking ,there are times when the image(16mm?) looks better
than the finished 35mm film,
MGMUA seemed to spent their wad on the the first three films (the best onesIMHO)

 

[Matthew Anderson]

Thank you Mr. Harris for your review. I always enjoy your input. I watched YOLT in bluray a few nights ago and I really enjoyed the way it looked on
on bluray. The John Barry score is probably my favorite Bond score and Ken Adam's set design is so cool with the volcano setup.

 

[brioni]

Great comments from JeffT and AlanPaterson. Sean gets criticism for his performance in this film but he is as good in some scenes as his previous films it’s just that many scenes, mainly later on aren't the most interesting so I'm sure it was hard for him to get interested. The issue lies with Roald Dahl - who as I only found out the other week, needed the money and was given the job as a favour by Cubby.

 

[Spencer Draper]

As it turned out, in one shot Bond is driving a GT2000 with a left side drive and in another shot he's driving in a GT2000 with a right side drive. I can only assume that the editor must have flipped it.

Most likely. Peter Hunt would do things like that all the time to fix problems and make the film move along as fast as possible in spite of continuity. IMO that's been the biggest loss over the years.

Thanks again Robert! I just watched YOLT tonight.
Interesting that you mention the dye / color of the film. This is something that is being discussed on the Bond 50 thread too.
Any ideas why changes in color were made?
Are you seeing color or dye issues on the other Bond films as well?
I thought about looking at my old VHS copy of Thunderball and comparing it with the color on the blu ray.
Thank you!

Every old version of YOLT had this wonderful color that almost seemed as if the film had baked in the sunlight to give deep yellows, oranges, browns. I can only assume that this is what the dye transfer prints must have looked like. To my eyes YOLT suffered the most in the color department on the UE discs, and as a part of the unreleased 9 it seems an attempt was made to correct this slightly. However it isn't enough. All the old SE DVDs basically use LD/video masters so you can see what the color used to look like.

The widescreen laserdisc had far better colour, as far as I remember. The special edition DVD looked dull and had compression problems. The ultimate edition looked even more bloodless although clarity was improved. I'm hesitant to watch the bluray from what I've heard about it.

Indeed. I have both LD issues and watch this film this way, especially for the lossless mono. Despite being the same master the SE disc adds all the compression issues, so I just stick with my big CRT screen and the laser.
As for the film, it's the script that causes the most problems. Dahl seems to have tried to cram in everything from a few Bond films he had seen into one screenplay, complete with lair, exotic location, gadgets and scantily clad women. The plot is brilliant, but the handling not so much-especially when attempting to deviate slightly back to Fleming's novel. Connery is beyond tired, some of Gilbert's direction causes the audience's attention to lapse a bit, and overall it is more of an extravaganza than a spy thriller. it's the lack of focus that hurts the most. Most of these elements were bettered in the loose remake 10 years on: TSWLM. And of course its own loose remake, Moonraker.
The best things about YOLT remain Young's gorgeous photography which advances into grandeur beyond what Ted Moore did on Thunderball, and of course John Barry's stunning score.

 

[Peter Neski]

no the best thing about YOLT is the score

 

[Angelo Colombus]

Starting to see the Bond films in release order and noticed that with With Russia With Love that you do not see the United Artists logo in the begining of the film and only the MGM logo. United Artists did release all the Bond films so i think they should have put the United Artists logo on and not the MGM. It does make it look like MGM was responsible in making the films and i have seen alot of that in dvd's and blu-rays that were made under United Artists. It's time to retire that old phony lion!!

 

[Douglas Monce]

Starting to see the Bond films in release order and noticed that with With Russia With Love that you do not see the United Artists logo in the begining of the film and only the MGM logo. United Artists did release all the Bond films so i think they should have put the United Artists logo on and not the MGM. It does make it look like MGM was responsible in making the films and i have seen alot of that in dvd's and blu-rays that were made under United Artists. It's time to retire that old phony lion!!

U/A often didn't put their logo on the front of films the produced. I don't know for sure if Russia originally had one or not.
Doug

 

[brioni]

This was mentioned in the main Bond 50 thread. the conclusion was it's highly likely the 1st three films never had one.

 

[Osato]

Most likely. Peter Hunt would do things like that all the time to fix problems and make the film move along as fast as possible in spite of continuity. IMO that's been the biggest loss over the years.
Every old version of YOLT had this wonderful color that almost seemed as if the film had baked in the sunlight to give deep yellows, oranges, browns. I can only assume that this is what the dye transfer prints must have looked like. To my eyes YOLT suffered the most in the color department on the UE discs, and as a part of the unreleased 9 it seems an attempt was made to correct this slightly. However it isn't enough. All the old SE DVDs basically use LD/video masters so you can see what the color used to look like.
Indeed. I have both LD issues and watch this film this way, especially for the lossless mono. Despite being the same master the SE disc adds all the compression issues, so I just stick with my big CRT screen and the laser.
As for the film, it's the script that causes the most problems. Dahl seems to have tried to cram in everything from a few Bond films he had seen into one screenplay, complete with lair, exotic location, gadgets and scantily clad women. The plot is brilliant, but the handling not so much-especially when attempting to deviate slightly back to Fleming's novel. Connery is beyond tired, some of Gilbert's direction causes the audience's attention to lapse a bit, and overall it is more of an extravaganza than a spy thriller. it's the lack of focus that hurts the most. Most of these elements were bettered in the loose remake 10 years on: TSWLM. And of course its own loose remake, Moonraker.
The best things about YOLT remain Young's gorgeous photography which advances into grandeur beyond what Ted Moore did on Thunderball, and of course John Barry's stunning score.

Thanks for the post. Curious that a decision was made to possibly change the color of the film so much? Why?

 

[Richard--W]

U/A often didn't put their logo on the front of films the produced. I don't know for sure if Russia originally had one or not.
Doug

This was mentioned in the main Bond 50 thread. the conclusion was it's highly likely the 1st three films never had one.

I've seen original 35mm prints of Dr. No, From Russia With Love and Goldfinger projected many, many times. The prints were not in the best shape, but they always had the United Artists logo. Always. The same logo as The Pink Panther and A Shot In the Dark had. There is no doubt about this.
Fact: the original UA logo was always at the front of the original 1960s Bond films.

 

[Worth]

I've seen original 35mm prints of Dr. No, From Russia With Love and Goldfinger projected many, many times. The prints were not in the best shape, but they always had the United Artists logo. Always. The same logo as The Pink Panther and A Shot In the Dark had. There is no doubt about this.
Fact: the original UA logo was always at the front of the original 1960s Bond films.

Those films were re-released numerous times throughout the '60s and 70s, so it's entirely possible that the logo was added to the re-release prints, but wasn't present in the original theatrical run.

 

[DVDvision]

YOLT was color timed by Lowry in a "natural" color scheme. Which has nothing to do with how Freddie Yount photographed it. The UE is awful and is pure destruction of the work of the DP. The blu try to correct this to no avail. In essence it's not worse than the same thing that happened to Mad Max 2 on Blu. It's just the same misguided work by people who have no clue about the films and their jobs.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Thing about the UA logo is, it wasn't used frequently until Transamerica bought UA. I'd appreciate input from Powell&Pressburger or RAH, but I'm reasonably sure the first few Bonds prior to YOLT didn't even carry UA opening logos, and YOLT's was the UA ovoid. Anything after that up through For Your Eyes Only would've had the Transamerica T originally, Octopussy and A View to a Kill had the rotating UA logo, The Living Daylights and Licence to Kill had the "swooshing" UA logo, GoldenEye and Tomorrow Never Dies had the marble background and gathering lights logo, and The World is Not Enough was the first Bond released under the MGM banner with no reference to UA.

 

[Worth]

Anything after that up through For Your Eyes Only would've had the Transamerica T originally, Octopussy and A View to a Kill had the rotating UA logo, The Living Daylights and Licence to Kill had the "swooshing" UA logo, GoldenEye and Tomorrow Never Dies had the marble background and gathering lights logo, and The World is Not Enough was the first Bond released under the MGM banner with no reference to UA.

I just saw vintage prints of the films from For Your Eyes Only through to The Living Daylights, none of which were ever re-released. Eyes had the rotating UA logo, while Octopussy and View had the MGM lion.

 

[Richard--W]

I've seen original 35mm prints of Dr. No, From Russia With Love and Goldfinger projected many, many times. The prints were not in the best shape, but they always had the United Artists logo. Always. The same logo as The Pink Panther and A Shot In the Dark had. There is no doubt about this.
Fact: the original UA logo was always at the front of the original 1960s Bond films.

Those films were re-released numerous times throughout the '60s and 70s, so it's entirely possible that the logo was added to the re-release prints, but wasn't present in the original theatrical run.

United Artists did not strike new prints for the re-releases, not that I ever saw, and I virtually moved into the theaters when a James Bond film was playing in those days. The re-release prints in the 1970s were the original dye-transfer release prints from the original 1960s run, only dirty, raggedy and full of lines and jumps. There is no question about the logo being on the original release prints during the first run. No question.
I wish they'd put it back in place.
Sorry to disappoint.

 

[Osato]

Some rare footage from the making of yolt.

http://www.the007dossier.com/007dossier/post/2015/05/14/Rare-Behind-the-scenes-footage-from-James-Bond-You-Only-Live-Twice