UNLIMITED STREAMING
WITH PRIME VIDEO
TRY 30-DAY TRIAL
Home > Action >

Diamonds Are Forever

Diamonds Are Forever (1971)

December. 17,1971
|
6.5
|
PG
| Action Thriller

Diamonds are stolen only to be sold again in the international market. James Bond infiltrates a smuggling mission to find out who's guilty. The mission takes him to Las Vegas where Bond meets his archenemy Blofeld.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Fairaher
1971/12/17

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

More
Brenda
1971/12/18

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

More
Abegail Noëlle
1971/12/19

While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

More
Scarlet
1971/12/20

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

More
Movie_Muse_Reviews
1971/12/21

It feels good to have Sean Connery back, but that's about the extent of the joy to be had in "Diamonds are Forever." Producers Albert R. Broccoli and Harry Saltzman got their man, but the "James Bond" franchise got its first stinker. What starts out a fairly promising, grounded diamond-smuggling spy film flies off the handle as Bond descends upon Las Vegas and must stop another over-the-top villainous plot."Diamonds" was clearly intended to recreate the franchise's peak, like an early "best of" film. From Shirley Bassey's second series theme song to the return of director Guy Hamilton ("Goldfinger") and the nefarious Blofeld (now played by Charles Gray), Broccoli and Saltzman hit the reset button after "On Her Majesty's Secret Service," a move that paid financial dividends, but little else. The story, for one, just kind of perpetually rolls forward without ever any setup, suspense or stakes aside from a few "how will Bond get out of this jam?" moments. Bond infiltrates a diamond-smuggling ring and teams up with American Tiffany Case (Jill St. John) in Amsterdam, unaware that a trail of bodies connected to diamond-smuggling lay in his wake thanks to the shifty and odd duo of Mr. Wint (Bruce Glover) and Mr. Kidd (Putter Smith). Bond and Case arrive in L.A. and Bond rendezvous with his CIA pal Felix Leiter (Norman Burton) before bringing the diamonds to a funeral home. Then Bond ends up in Vegas at a hotel called the Whyte House … anyway, this follow-the-diamonds story is not hard to keep track of but it feels like an endless goose chase with each scene assigned the sole purpose of putting the next scene in motion.The action meant to punctuate the various plot points falls flat under Hamilton's direction in this film despite Hamilton's success in "Goldfinger." The car chases and the climactic oil rig scene take on an almost slapstick tone — and Bond's fight with two gymnasts flat- out does. And somehow, John Barry's score is missing the iconic "Bond" music at all the most opportune times. Way too much of the action is set to silence. Then there's the laughable special effects used in the end that highlight just how badly the movie has unraveled. To be fair, "Diamonds" has its classic "Bond" touches and plenty of clever moments, gadgets and one-liners. Writer Richard Maibaum, who penned nearly every previous film, is involved yet again here to ensure that continuity. The franchise doesn't lose its mojo in "Diamonds" (if for no other reason than Connery's involvement), but these highlights are just floating adrift, unable to make themselves useful in bolstering the story.Perhaps Connery is the greatest to ever play Bond, and the role fit him like a perfectly tailored tuxedo, but his mere presence alone and our familiarity with it doesn't carry "Diamonds are Forever." He's just kind of going along with it, not that the script gives him an alternative. Everyone involved in the film seems to assume the plot is simply a vehicle for Connery and the iconic parts of "Bond" to exist again, but they prove that not just any story is fit for 007. Unfortunately, it results in a lackluster, tacky sendoff for Connery's Bond.~Steven CThanks for reading! Visit Movie Muse Reviews for more

More
gavin6942
1971/12/22

A diamond smuggling investigation leads James Bond (Sean Connery) to Las Vegas, where he uncovers an evil plot involving a rich business tycoon.While this is not the greatest Bond film, and some have said it is a sad farewell to Sean Connery, it does have its moments. For one, we have Q as a thief. I suppose being a spy agency's gadget man gives you some leeway, but I don't think you are supposed to steal from slot machines! As far as Bond girls go, Jill St. John is probably on the top half of a list running from best to worst. Strangely enough, I know her more as a mob moll than a Bond girl. Which makes the film's setting in Vegas all the more interesting.

More
KineticSeoul
1971/12/23

This is the 7th installment in the Bond franchise and it is the most campy Bond movie compared to the previous one. The whole premise and direction was just plain out silly. Of course the Bond movies in the 60's, 70 and even the 80's are iconic for having those classic campy moments. But this one was silly while also being very forgettable. It can be debatable but it's probably the most misogynistic "007" movie compared to the previous installment. It's like they thought the more of the previous Bond movies would equal better...Well that wasn't the case. After Sean Connery taking the lead role as James Bond again after leaving the role because of payment issue. The people involved in the filming probably thought "Oh we have Sean Connery, that is all we need". So they probably thought Sean Connery or one actor they wanted can save the franchise. And that shows, because there didn't seem to have cared much about carrying on the essence of the classic James Bond movies or coming up with a coherent story. The whole movie seemed like a parody of itself, instead of it being a cool 70's super spy movie. It goes from Bond's arch-nemesis gets slammed head first into hot mud while on a operating table to stealing a moon buggy to fighting off chicks called Bambi and Thumper that do acrobatic moves. To the stereotypical villains giving away their whole plan to the spy. Overall if you are a Bond fan it might be worth a watch, but it's easily a forgettable Bond movie that has Sean Connery.4.5/10

More
Manhattan William
1971/12/24

I love Diamonds Are Forever. It's the best sort of time-capsule and thoroughly entertaining. I've always been a fan of the more understated Bond films, meaning I tend towards the earlier ones with fewer extraneous explosions and more locations. Here we are taken to Amsterdam and especially Las Vegas. I love the scenes shot in the casino! The era of wood paneling is long gone but I love revisiting! Can anyone imagine a performer like "Shady Tree" today? One of my favorite puns is in the name of "Plenty O'Toole" - it's a riot! The direction is really spot-on as well. The scenes in the crematorium are amazing and eerie. The plot IS a bit off balance but that doesn't distract from the fun. The ending, as with most Bond films, if predictable but at least it doesn't linger too long. Jill St. John is a bit wooden at times but in the end just manages to pull it off and is very nice to look at. Sean is in fine form throughout. The score (aside from the title song with neither I nor Harry Saltzman liked) is very good. One of the most entertaining films you'll ever see and in the end it's about being well entertained.

More