Nunca digas nunca jamás

MASTER PLAN: blackmail the world after stealing two nuclear warheads. Haven't we heard this plan before? Yes, in "Thunderball"(65). And, wow, two Bond films in the same year (the other was "Octopussy") - what can it mean? This is now a curiosity in the Bond film series (and not a part of the canon series), an anomaly, an oddity, a film stemming from the real-life battles between Eon Productions and their nemesis, producer McClory, who won rights to remake the earlier film. It probably would have been better if he'd succeeded earlier - say, around 1976 or so; as it is, Connery, who managed to equal Roger Moore's number of Bond portrayals with this film, is a full dozen years older since his previous Bonder "Diamonds Are Forever," and it shows. This isn't really a parody, like "Casino Royale" from 1967, though there are some too-cute moments, right up to the conclusion, a freeze-frame of Bond winking at us. There are also elements of a weird re-start, such as the first scene with Bond and M, who mentions he is new to the position, much like the Bond & female M scene in "GoldenEye." In this version, M (Fox) is still male, though he's a stuffy high-strung bureaucrat, opposed to double-0 agents, and looks a bit younger than Bond. This is a bit strange to take in, just on its own. Q is played by one of the best British actors, McCowen, so his scenes have a nice flair, though he has a silly name, Algernon.

There's no teaser sequence or fancy credits such as we're used to - in fact, the beginning is so mundane, it's as if we're watching a typically substandard seventies thriller, with a wretched song and an awful score. Many of the early scenes are perfunctory; in other words, they're presented as the stuff we're used to seeing in a Bond film (Bond shoots bad guys, Bond is eyed by the ladies, Bond is menaced by sharks), but without the style and panache of the regular film series. As in "Thunderball," Bond is sent to a health spa early in the film. In an early action scene, he's attacked by a brawny assassin/henchman in the 'Oddjob/Jaws' mold who seems unstoppable, and things appear to be picking up, until he's stopped by a silly gag. I admit I did laugh when I saw this in the theater way back when - but I don't nowadays. I also get the impression of a conspiracy by the producer to throw in some banal stuff amid the standard spy action, not helped any by what seems like in-joking involving Bond's aging hero bit, including M's comically shrill disapproval. It mirrors the problem with Moore in his last couple of Bonders, where the audience is laughing at the hero - undesirable conditions for a Bonder. Things seem to improve again in the middle half, as much of the action here is dominated by the female villain, Blush (actress Carrera in her best role). She exults in her performance as the persistent killer with some odd sexual preoccupations, anticipating the much later lethal ladies such as Onatopp in "GoldenEye."

But, the best performance is by Brandauer as the main villain, Largo - a much different Largo than the one in "Thunderball." He's almost on another, superior level from the rest of the cast, suggesting insanity better than most other Bond villains, somewhat effeminate in some of his gestures, but also magnetic when sparring with Bond, especially in their memorably electrifying video game duel, a bizarre yet entrancing confrontation. Von Sydow, always good, has a much briefer role as famous uber-villain Blofeld, staying behind the scenes for most of the movie. Basinger as Domino the Bond girl is, unfortunately, similar to many of the Bond girls of that period: nice to look at, but usually helpless and kind of an airhead, though she demonstrates fear convincingly. Connery, looking his age (early fifties), goes through the motions here, but hey, it's still Connery as Bond; he can do this kind of thing in his sleep (which he nearly does) and is always watchable, with that easy charisma. The pace is actually pretty good for awhile up until the climactic shoot-out, in spite of some cheap production values. The finale, underwater with Largo, is murky stuff, with no tension, as if the filmmakers just gave up by this point and wanted to get it over with. We kind of forget what the threat is about half-an-hour before the end. Oh, and, Atkinson is his small role is abominable, like nails on chalkboard. Connery would not return. Bond:7 Villain:9 Femme Fatales:5 Henchwoman/men:8 Leiter:6 Fights:5 Stunts/Chases:6 Gadgets:4 Auto:5 Locations:6 Pace:6 overall:6

Sean Connery returns as James Bond, in a movie remake of Thunderball. Here, mad man Maximilian Largo steals two American nuclear warheads and demands millions of dollars in ransom from the world leaders. As a result, MI6 reactivates their "00" agents and James Bond comes out of retirement to carry on the mission.

Armed with secret weapons and an armor of one-liners, Connery still shines once again as the suave 007, though, he does look rather emotionless and mellow portraying his character at times. There is lesser action in this movie than in previous Bond films, but some of the the thrills are still a little entertaining, especially the part where Bond attempts to dispatch the femme fatale Fatima Blush (Barbara Carrera).

Sorely missing is John Berry's iconic James Bond theme and score, and what we have instead is a very 80s-sounding soundtrack from Michel Legrand. The acting was just OK for the most part - Connery had some good chemistry with the Bond Girls, but much of the other cast members were forgettable. Max von Sydow gave a mediocre performance as Blofeld, Edward Fox gave a very overzealous and pompous portrayal of M and Rowan Atkinson gave a rather unfunny role as Small-Fawcett. Klaus Maria Brandauer gave a convincing villain in Maximilian Largo - slimy and sly, making you want to punch him in the face.

The film its adventurous moments, but, it's not one of the best Bond movies out there - it's more like a stand alone action flick.

Grade C+

I've always liked Sean Connery, but as James Bond I've always favored Roger Moore. Still it was Connery who set the Bond standard and while he had by 1983 established himself as something other than James Bond, the money must have been irresistible for him to make one more appearance as 007 and save the world from the evil designs of Spectre.

And what designs they are in Never Say Never Again. SPECTRE with the help of a foolish young Air Force officer who happens to be Kim Bassinger's brother stole two nuclear missiles during a war games exercise and now SPECTRE headed by Blofeld, played here by Max Von Sydow is threatening blackmail of the world.

Von Sydow's operations guy is Klaus Maria Brandauer who is also courting Bassinger and is a bit on the crazy side. And he's got a female assassin working for him in Barbara Carrera who makes Angelina Jolie as Nora Croft look like Mrs. Butterworth.

But before Sean Connery can even get started he's got to deal with a new 'M' running things at British Intelligence. Edward Fox thinks Connery is old fashioned in his methods and costs the British taxpayers too much money with his violent ways. I really did enjoy Fox's performance, he's like the great grandson of Colonel Blimp.

I also enjoyed Carrera, she's something to look at and quite resourceful in her methods. When she's scuba diving with Connery in the Bahamas, note how she puts Mr. Shark on 007's case.

Will Connery do James Bond again? He was widely quoted as saying who would they cast him as at this point, Roger Moore's father? But I think Connery would still be formidable in a wheelchair.

In 1965 producer Kevin McLory -who owns a part of the Bond cinematic rights- associate with EON Productions (Harry Saltzman and Albert Broccoli) for making "Thunderball", the fourth film of the 007 franchise. The star is Sean Connery, of course.

In 1982 McLory wins a legal battle and can produce an "independent" Bond film. "Never say never again" (NSNA) is one of the two "unofficial" 007 films made outside EON (the other is the 1967 comedy spoof "Casino Royale"). NSNA is a remake of "Thunderball" and stars the original Bond, Sean Connery -who comes back to the role after many years of absence.

The film is released some months after "Octopussy" with Roger Moore, the 13th episode of the EON series. At the time press calls it "War of the Bonds"... Both films are a big success in 1983, even if "Octopussy" earns more money at the box office.

NSNA is a luxurious film made by excellent technicians -director Irvin Kershner who led "The Empire strikes back", Douglas Slocombe -cinematographer of "Raiders of the lost Ark"-, and screenwriter Lorenzo Semple Jr -who wrote "The three days of the Condor"- among others...

The cast is excellent with Connery, a then relatively unknown Kim Basinger, Barbara Carrera, Klaus Maria Brandauer, Max Von Sydow, Edward Fox...

Although all that the film remains inferior to the original "Thunderball". It lacks many fundamental ingredients for being a real Bond movie: there's not the traditional gun barrel sequence, there's not the "James Bond theme", M and Q are not played by the traditional actors... It's a copyright reason: EON only is allowed to use these elements. Briefly, NSNA lacks the classic cinematic 007 atmosphere.

On the other hand the film is exciting and enjoyable. Brandauer is a very good villain and the women (Basinger and Carrera) are sensual and gorgeous. But the main highlight is Sean Connery! He's once again wonderful in the role, he's older but looks fitter and nicer here than in "Diamonds are forever", his last performance in the role of the British super-spy before NSNA.

"Never Say Never Again", as everyone knows by now, was the second Bond film to be released in 1983, and was nearly as big a hit as "Octopussy" was (that film was still playing in some theaters when "Never Say Never Again" was released). Lacking the distinctive gun-barrel opening and famous Bond theme among other distinctive features of the EON franchise films, this lacks not only the feel of the EON Bond series, but of Fleming's work, leaving a seriously bloated mess of an American action thriller which happens to feature Bond as the lead character.

Why? That's the first question anybody should be asking about this film. A cynic (which I probably qualify as) would say 'for the cash', others might say it was just to get Connery back as Bond and give him a proper goodbye. Some might say it was in retaliation to the direction the Moore films were headed in, although "For Your Eyes Only" is a far superior and far less bloated film than this, so that argument doesn't quite work.

Of course, there's a lot to dislike here. Connery has moments of inspiration where he slips right back into character, but for most of the film he just looks really old and slightly ridiculous, which fits the plot but doesn't make his performance any less tired. Still, I'd argue that this is a better send-off for him as Bond than "Diamonds are Forever". Kim Basinger is a terrible Bond girl, and as much as I like Rowan Atkinson he shouldn't be anywhere near a Bond film. In addition, the villains here fall flat as well.

That said, "Never Say Never Again" is not a film I can hate, even if I wanted to (and I never want to hate anything), simply because little of it comes off as especially bad yet all of it comes off as flat, bland, and uninspired, and far, far too American for a Bond film. It's just sort of... there being the bloated, over-long, but not terrible film it is. I don't count it as a 'Bond film', as it doesn't feel remotely like one, but even just as an action thriller it doesn't quite work.

5/10