If so many people consider this the best Bond..

I think the rating is a little low because many people write this one off as "the one with Lazenby" and don't watch it, or watch it with a biased point of view because it didn't star Sean Connery. I've seen all of the James Bond films and have read some of the books, including OHMSS. This isn't even a close call for me, OHMSS is the best James Bond film. It's the film that adhered the closest to the source material. Lazenby equipped himself well in the role and played the role as it was depicted in the book, tough, yet vulnerable.

I think the film rates higher in the eyes of Bond fans, than general film fans.

If only the ratings of Bond aficionados counted, it would likely rate higher than 6.8.

As others have noted, it must be the Lazenby element. Personally, while I don't like the guy with his sub-par acting and off-puttingly smug demeanor, he's not quite that bad as to cost the film in rating.



"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

Many people have been brought up with the idea that this is one of the crap ones without ever actually having seen it.

Proud member of the Pro-film Anti-digital Society (PFADS).

While it is not my favourite Bond movie, it is definitely one of the better entries to the franchise. Criminally underrated IMHO.

It includes one of the major additions to the mythology of any Bond movie. That of Bond marrying only to find himself grieving for his dead wife. A scene that still carries emotion on repeated viewings.

I would have liked to see George Lazenby reprise his role as James Bond, especially if they continued with the character development.


You can't palm off a second-rater on me. You gotta remember I was in the pink!

The continuity errors alone drive it down let alone it not being Connery. The fact that he would try and meet Blofield face to face and he wouldn't recognize him just made no sense.

6.8 is horrible for a film of this caliber. I rate it a 10! The main problem with this film is purely Connery. It unfortunately hangs after a Connery legacy, and to add insult to injury it gets quickly followed up by another (inferior) Connery film (as if EON was erasing it). This film is so unfairly viewed, it's criminal. Lazenby was absolutely outstanding as Bond (looks a helluva lot closer to the book version than Craig), where he combined all the ingredients of the Bond character in his performance, with humor, action, romance, emotion, etc, etc. Lazenby may not have had the natural charisma or self-shuredness of Connery, but it made his character and version of Bond so much realer. A Bond of this type wouldn't be seen again until Dalton. The film's scenery and location are perfect, as is the editing (cutting edge, at the time), and cinematography (masterful). Any real Bond fan that says they don't like this film, I'd consider their views to be pretty bogus. The film is long, and from a different era, so newer Bond fans (with the concentration level of a toddler) are gonna find it boring.

Two words: George Lazenby.