Kai "the spy" wrote:
I don't think it would have been very appropriate for Bond to be 'having fun' in QoS, given his emotional state at the time.
That's why it was a terrible decision to have it as a direct sequel.
You know there is precedent, right? "On her Majesty's Secret Service" and the following "Diamonds are Forever". Now, I'm not saying they should have gone all-out wacky the way they did with "Diamonds", but some balance would have been nice. Also, the "too much" of the wackyness of "Diamonds" didn't really come from Bond's character, but from the other characters.
I don't like how DAF ignores OHMSS. Sure, you have Bond hunting down Blofeld at the start and the lines about MI5 being able to cope in Bond's absence (little in-jokes at Connery's expense). But the tone of the movies are different and not only have you a different Bond but yet another Blofeld.
I'd much rather have seen Lazenby return and hunt down Savalas' Blofeld, instead of a toupeed & flabby through-the-motions Connery (I should note that it wasn't a 'take the money' role - most of his fee went to charity) hunt down Charles Gray's camp Ernst B.