007 Contra a Chantagem Atômica

Thunderball is directed by Terence Young and adapted to screenplay by Richard Maibaum and John Hopkins from a story by Kevin McClory, Jack Whittingham and Ian Fleming. It stars Sean Connery, Adolfo Celi, Claudine Auger, Rick Van Nutter and Martine Beswick. Music is scored by John Barry and cinematography by Ted Moore.

The fourth outing for James Bond (Connery) sees 007 assigned to the Bahamas to try and thwart SPECTRE's number 2 operative, Emilio Largo (Celi). Largo has hijacked two atomic bombs from NATO and sets about extorting huge ransoms of money. If his terms are not met he will blow up major cities.

It was meant to be the first James Bond film, but Thunderball became part of a long drawn out legal battle between Kevin McClory, Jack Whittingham and Ian Fleming. Eventually an out of court settlement was reached and Thunderball rolled into theatres in 1965. After the colossal success of Goldfinger, and Bond as a pop culture phenomenon, producers Albert Broccoli & Harry Saltzman knew that they had to try and up the ante to keep Bond on top. They were also acutely aware that many imitators were springing up on film and TV. These facts led Bond to go epic, with the producers going for a more is more approach, however, Thunderball is a considerable step down from Goldfinger.

As with many other Bond movies, Thunderball polarises opinions amongst the fans. Some are happy to laud the pure entertainment value on offer, the reliance on hardware and gadgets viewed as an aid to the Bond persona and not a hindrance to his humanistic worth. Technically the film is often exceptional, be it on or under the water, director Young really crafts some Bondian quality. The exotic Bahamas locale is beautifully realised by Ted Moore, Barry's blunderbuss score is one of his best for a Bond movie and Connery has charisma in abundance. The girls, too, are delightful, particularly Auger who positively sizzles with sexuality. Bond's by play with M, Q and Felix Leiter (Nutter very enjoyable and more charismatic than Cec Linder in Goldfinger) is well scripted and performed. While for those who adore the gadgets and daring stunts? Thunderball excels with its assortment of trick vehicles, under water weaponry and aids and radioactive pills! Without doubt the near $6 million budget is all up there on the screen.

Yet for other fans, and this is the category I fall into, it's a film of too many flaws to be considered one of the greats. Whilst it's undeniable that when it hits the high points it excites royally (the extended underwater battle is eye popping brilliance), but there's too much languid passages in the overlong running time. Young himself lamented that he couldn't get the pace right on account of the plot structure. The other major problem for me is Celi as Largo. Visually he's striking, with his white hair and eye patch, he well looks villainous, but physically he's wrong and someone you can't buy into as a man able to not only take on Bond, but to overcome him as well! While the finale lacks a grandness to reward those having sat for over 2 hours with the film. But what do I know? Film made a stunning $141 million at the box office! And the fanaticism that began with Goldfinger reached epic proportions here.

The more is more approach worked for the makers, and it ensured that for the time being Bond was going to stay in this epic, gadget effects strewn groove. Connery wasn't happy, he had voiced his concerns about Bond becoming characterless, while he hated the mania surrounding the films and his role within them. He would return for the next instalment, You Only Live Twice, question was, would it be his last performance as Bond? 7/10

Thunderball is the fourth entry in the ever ongoing James Bond franchise and in my opinion one of the better installments. This film features the secret services arch-enemy SPECTRE and I must say that in this episode of James Bond adventures it works better than in From Russia with Love. What I liked about this film, was that there were a lot of good one-liners from Connery, that there weren't too many goofy stunts / henchmen / gadgets and that the film was able to maintain exciting throughout. I've read quite a few comments stating that the underwater scenes dragged on too long, but I must say that I felt even that bit to be quite entertaining and thrilling. I actually have only one criticism and that regards the ending. I felt that the whole out-of-control boat thing was really stupid. I mean I understand that they tried to make it look spectacular, but in using the same technique they used to buff up the fistfights, they made it look cheesy and cheap. Luckily this is just one short moment in the film and the film is not ruined by something as a dreadful character or a bad actor. All in all this is one of the better Bond films and well worth watching if one sets out for 2 hours of pure adventurous entertainment with a standard-formula story.

7 out of 10

Connery is back, better and more buff than ever, as super agent James Bond 007, this time seeing him on a mission in the Bahamas to prevent a nuclear catastrophe from happening. The cinematography is beautiful, as the Bond Girl Claudine Auger, who looks smoking hot in her bikini.

For the acting, Connery is always there to take the spotlight. He zigs and zags his way around friends and foe in order to succeed. He is still the charming, witty, and deadly secret agent we have come to know him for. The villain is also good here, because not only he has one of the most diabolical plans ever, he also looks diabolical (an eye patch).

The action here is non-stop, especially the underwater scenes. Some call these scenes overlong, thus causing the length of the film to be 2 hours and 10 minutes, quite long, but to me, it's just breathless and pulse-pounding. Also, the beginning of the film will want you begging for more Connery. Most of the action sequences rely on the team's special effects, but it's no problem, since the special effects are damn good for a 1965 movie, even by today's standard. Which is why it deserved to win the Oscar for Best Visual Effects.

Crew also reigns here. Producers Brocolli and Saltzman return once again, as well as Terence Young, director of the first two Bond films. This was his final James Bond film before he went on to direct Audrey Hepburn in her Oscar-nominated performance in the 1967 thriller Wait After Dark. It shows that you have a class filmmaker at the helm. John Barry gives us a beautiful and fast-paced score that mounts up the tension every time.

Overall, probably the most entertaining Bond ever.

7.73/10

Delton

This Bond film (the 3rd best; the others being From Russia With Love, Goldfinger and 4th would be Dr. No) has exotic locale, superb soundtrack, formidable bad-guy, the hottest real Bond gal (Claudine Auger as Domino), other hot chicks - Martine Beswick and Lucianna Paluzzi, and Sean's toupee still looked good before his final three Bond adventures.

There may have been too many Bond effects underwater in this one, but everything else about it makes up for the scuba scenes, which are necessary to the "plot". Adolfo Celi (Largo) had presence, great white hair, an eyepatch, and figured out Bond almost immediately. It flows with best scenery (Bond-wise) and had no major problems, although a tad long. A 7 out of 10. Recommended for 1965!

Do you have an enthusiasm for water sports like Bond? If you do then you will probably love Thunderball. For me, however, there were too many boring underwater scenes (snorkeling, diving, or whatever he was doing), and that drags the rating down to a 6/10. This film is still a fun adventure. It just doesn't compare favorably to the other Bond films. I actually liked the remake, Never Say Never Again, more than this. On the plus side, Thunderball has more than the usual number of Bond girls. I counted four (two good, one henchwoman, and one which was not involved in the plot). The bad guy (No. 2) was also one of the more memorable Bond villains. A 6/10 is still a good score for me, so don't get the wrong impression. I still like this film. It just has some boring parts that make it a below average Bond film.