137 replies to this topic

[freemo]

Another thing I love about DR. NO is that it really bring's the viewer's imagination into play all the way through. Our brains are forced to do quite a bit of the work. How many of us, when watching the film, have not imagined Bond's grisly accident with the Beretta that jammed, and the circumstances under which it came about? And then there's Honey's background to fill in (like the villain, the Bond girl isn't overexposed), the shady past of Dr. No and the shady present of SPECTRE.... and there's also, of course, the little matter of "How late do M and Moneypenny sometimes work?"

Intrigue. It's a lovely word, and DR. NO is full of it.

YES. Brilliantly spotted. One gets the feeling the feeling that the characters in Doctor No exist beyond the film. I can picture Honeys previous trips to the island to collect shells, etc. These characters have pasts, backgrounds, that we are given a taste of. Perhaps that's something lacking from say, Die Another Day, where the characters are paper thin (did we learn anything, anything at all, about Jinx ?).

[Loomis]

I feel that DR. NO is always overshadowed by FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE and GOLDFINGER, since it's with those two films that the so-called "Bondian elements" really came into bloom, with the addition of pre-credits sequences, title songs, outrageous gadgets and so on. Also, "Bondmania" was at its height with GOLDFINGER and THUNDERBALL.

So the general consensus seems to be: "DR. NO is indeed a very good film, but the Bond phenomenon we all know and love didn't really get going until two or three movies in."

Still, I don't see that FRWL, GOLDFINGER and THUNDERBALL are superior as films to DR. NO. For me, all three (while terrific pictures) have more flaws than the first big screen Bond adventure.

For instance, FRWL misses an opportunity to "kick things up a notch" after DR. NO. It basically plays it very safe, and fails to capture the magic of one of Fleming's most gripping and atmospheric novels. It's really just a by-the-numbers Bond flick, albeit a well-made and hugely entertaining one. Certainly, it ain't the THE GODFATHER PART II to DR. NO's THE GODFATHER.

GOLDFINGER makes a number of improvements to a Fleming plot (most famously, having the villain try to contaminate the gold of Fort Knox rather than steal it), but still has its minuses: a miscast Felix Leiter, some horrible special effects, a somewhat fumbled climax, and (in my book, at least) Honor Blackman. As for THUNDERBALL, I subscribe to the "it's overlong, flabby and unfocused" school of thought.

DR. NO strikes me as purer and more timeless, as well as more confident and more successful in its aims than the other Connery Bonds of the 60s.

I think, though, that many Bond fans are reluctant to award it the title of "the greatest", since doing so would be tantamount to declaring that it was all downhill for the series after the first film.

Another couple of observations: has there ever been a Bond film more sexy and more violent for its time? No. And wasn't it Jean-Luc Godard who said, after seeing DR. NO, something along the lines of "This is one of the great revolutionary films - soon, all films will be like it"?

[Loomis]

One gets the feeling the feeling that the characters in Doctor No exist beyond the film.

Right, exactly.

[Scottlee]

I don't think Dr No is the best. It lacks a lot of things that make Bond films....Bond films (Q, main titles, gadgets etc). It's still a great entry, though. Of the 20 films it might just sneak into my top 10.

[Turn]

Watch it in black and white and it becomes a different animal; absurdist film noir.

Interesting idea, Jim. Did you do this intentionally or did you just happen to see it on a black and white television and formed this impression?

[Jim]

Watch it in black and white and it becomes a different animal; absurdist film noir.

Interesting idea, Jim. Did you do this intentionally or did you just happen to see it on a black and white television and formed this impression?

Bit of an experiment; there are bits of the film which can appear quite static, but this is perhaps a perception of it as a bright, colourful spectacle. Wash the colour out and somehow, funny how the mind plays tricks, it becomes slicker, harder, considerably more violent. I suppose then one's mind is making the mental comparison to comparable black and white films rather than bright action spectaculars.

Not many of the other films do work in black and white, but the underwater bits of Thunderball, in monochrome, really become quite disturbing (especially with the sound off). That's a recommended experience too. The rest of Thunderball needs to be in colour, though.

[Bon-san]

Bit of an experiment; there are bits of the film which can appear quite static, but this is perhaps a perception of it as a bright, colourful spectacle. Wash the colour out and somehow, funny how the mind plays tricks, it becomes slicker, harder, considerably more violent. I suppose then one's mind is making the mental comparison to comparable black and white films rather than bright action spectaculars.

Not many of the other films do work in black and white, but the underwater bits of Thunderball, in monochrome, really become quite disturbing (especially with the sound off). That's a recommended experience too. The rest of Thunderball needs to be in colour, though.

Ooh, I enjoyed that commentary. I'll have to try out the black and white if I can find a suitable TV.

This opens up an excellent avenue for a teriffic Ph.D. dissertation.

[ChandlerBing]

I get a lump in my throat every time the movie starts, because this is where a lot of it all started--movie-wise.

[SnakeEyes]

As much as I enjoy the music of the other 19 gunbarrels, the DrNo electronic beeps are pretty damn cool. They add some kind of atmosphere to the whole thing that I can't put my finger on...

[Qwerty]

As much as I enjoy the music of the other 19 gunbarrels, the DrNo electronic beeps are pretty damn cool. They add some kind of atmosphere to the whole thing that I can't put my finger on...

In keeping in line with that, it fits in quite well, as a bit of trivia, when they included the exact gunbarrel cue from Dr. No, as Bond escapes from M's containment in the first half of Die Another Day.

[Turn]

As much as I enjoy the music of the other 19 gunbarrels, the DrNo electronic beeps are pretty damn cool. They add some kind of atmosphere to the whole thing that I can't put my finger on...

Also adding to the atmosphere is the gunfire, which is also louder and clearer, echos and is that much more distinctive than in any other gunbarrel sequence. I can only imagine what that must have been like back in the day.

[Simon Bermuda]

... the Dr No electronic beeps are pretty damn cool. They add some kind of atmosphere to the whole thing that I can't put my finger on...

A hint of science fiction, perhaps? I totally agree. I've always loved the Dr No gunbarrel bleeps, and the way the Bond Theme comes bursting in. And the simple, 'dancing-dot' titles. It's an amazingly confident opening for the series, and is far more evocative and exciting than some of the later, very samey Bond title sequences.

[SnakeEyes]

In some ways DrNo has the attraction of an 'unofficial' production: no pretitles, no real theme song, reasonably unique titles sequence...it's all so different. Even the gunbarrel doesn't have the theme to it.

Pity the gunbarrel didn't feature Connery in the OSS style spin (where he almost amusingly falls of course).

Not too sure about that Sunbeam either...bit cheap n' tacky

[Dmitri Mishkin]

I'll always see Dr. No as a brilliant, traditional spy thriller. It brought in everything one needed to know about Bond, from

the acerbic boss and his flirtatious secretary;

to
the fantastical lifestyle of espionage and pleasure-seeking;

to
the endless craving of the man by any woman within a few feet;

to
the bizarre, and (this time) very forthright, insulting countenance of the villain towards Bond. "Stupid policeman" indeed! One might think that P&W were attempting to replicate this with "that unjustifiable swagger". But it's not nearly the same

Monty Norman's work is not intolerable... and he did bring the Bond theme, perhaps the most classic piece of film music and themes ever to exist.

As far as being the best James Bond film ever made, a very broad question. If we're referring to fidelity to the Fleming Bond, it's probably quite close. But as a cinematic hero, I would say later films really bring together Bondian moments in a memorable way. There are more "moments" to exemplify Bond in a film such as Goldfinger. More conventional view, but that's how I would see it.

Edited by Dmitri Mishkin, 07 April 2004 - 12:32 AM.

[Onyx2626]

... the Dr No electronic beeps are pretty damn cool. They add some kind of atmosphere to the whole thing that I can't put my finger on...

A hint of science fiction, perhaps? I totally agree. I've always loved the Dr No gunbarrel bleeps, and the way the Bond Theme comes bursting in. And the simple, 'dancing-dot' titles. It's an amazingly confident opening for the series...

Exactly.

My fave is FRWL, but DN is the best. It is the template, Maltin's Movie book calls it "the first and least prententious of the Bonds." I can only imagine the impression it made in 1962. The sex in the film is not like any other movie from 1961 I can think of. (still thinking..) Bond's afternoon delight in the cabana MUST have made a few couples on a first date fidget back then. After all, he takes a second helping...then puts her in a cop car. That's casual sex!

The "fetch my shoes" line made me grimace, but I'm over that now. You can't judge the old by new standards, besides no malice was intended and that's what counts most. John Glen knows action, but Terence Young gets some subtle moments out of scenes: like when Quarrel changes his mind and Bond acknowledges that he's overcome his superstition to help him, hence the pause after Quarrel's death.

Anybody notice what film that Ken Adam interrogation room turns up in again?

[Gebruder Gumbold]

Dr. No is my favourite film tied with OHMSS. I just love how there is an absence of gadgets and seeing Bond relying on his wits. I also love how true to the novel it is.

[Andrew]

The thing I love about Dr. No is how the plot of the film is on such a grand scale but it's filmed in a manner that it's such a small, personal story.

Connery's ruthless preformance is also a great aspect of the film. I really think that his preformance in this film is where Timothy Dalton got his portrayal from. He carries himself in such a manner of professionalism for such a deadly job that it's believable.

There's still something missing about it to me though. It doesn't have the edge-of-my-seat-suspense feeling that I get from From Russia With Love or the world-rests on the shoulders of the mission feeling that I get from Thunderball.

It's also the most faithful Fleming adaption which earns it points.

It's definatly one of the best.

[Tarl_Cabot]

I read somewhere that writer/philosopher Ayn Rand thought Dr. No was the most perfect adaptation of a novel she ever saw and didn't much care for 'From Russia with Love'.Anyway, I saw Dr. No recently and I do think it's better today than I did say, 15 years ago...but I still prefer FRWL as the gold standard for 007 films.

[Carver]

I do think that Dr. No is a great Bond film, and a great entry to the series. However, I'm not one to call it a "perfect" Bond film. Loomis didn't say it was his personal favourite, but I'll disagree with him that it's the most perfect. For me, there are moments that just don't match up to other films. The lack of a title theme is one, but then again we didn't really have a true one until Goldfinger came along (From Russia With Love wasn't really used to full effect IMO), so that can be excused. Still, there are moments in the movie that are oustanding. Honey Ryder's first moment is a piece of cinema history and one of the finest scenes from the whole series, to which I doubt anyone will disagree with me . Jack Lord is the best Felix Leiter in my opinion, and I'll agree with Loomis that Connery puts in a terrific performance as Bond. However, I still don't rate Dr No as perfect- that compliment I leave for Goldfinger, The Spy Who Loved Me and The Living Daylights.

[Scottlee]

Last year I ranked Dr No 17th out of 20, so that probably answers your question already, Loomis.

However, the next time I rank the Bond films I think Dr No will place much higher. It seems to get better every time I watch it; it's just one of those. You're right when you say it's perfect film. I can't think of anything that might have improved it. I just happen to agree with Qwerty in the second post that subsequent Bond films have taken what's in Dr No and added more ingredients, thus making the 007 forumula even more potent. Well, at least the first 3 or 4 Dr No sequals added something new. After Thunderball everything kind of levelled off into a routine.

[Dalton's Wendy]

I read somewhere that writer/philosopher Ayn Rand thought Dr. No was the most perfect adaptation of a novel she ever saw and didn't much care for 'From Russia with Love'.Anyway, I saw Dr. No recently and I do think it's better today than I did say, 15 years ago...but I still prefer FRWL as the gold standard for 007 films.

Ah . . . but what did she think of the screen adaptation of The Fountainhead?

Anyway, I'm with you, Tarl_Cabot: FRWL is the better film (although I still harbour an undying love for Goldfinger.)

[Tarl_Cabot]

I read somewhere that writer/philosopher Ayn Rand thought Dr. No was the most perfect adaptation of a novel she ever saw and didn't much care for 'From Russia with Love'.Anyway, I saw Dr. No recently and I do think it's better today than I did say, 15 years ago...but I still prefer FRWL as the gold standard for 007 films.

Ah . . . but what did she think of the screen adaptation of The Fountainhead?

Anyway, I'm with you, Tarl_Cabot: FRWL is the better film (although I still harbour an undying love for Goldfinger.)

I dunno what she thought about 'The Fountainhead' but I imagine it was at least #2 on her list. The film is really more like a section of the novel but I think it's a great movie. Gary Cooper has a scene in a tux where he looks very Bondian...

[Mr. Somerset]

Dr No has always been one of my favourites. Sean is Bond to perfection, love the locales, Mr Jones, Ursula, and of course the dragon.
Dr No is also a film I never tire of, and when seen in the cinema, looks great.

[Dalton's Wendy]

I dunno what she thought about 'The Fountainhead' but I imagine it was at least #2 on her list. The film is really more like a section of the novel but I think it's a great movie. Gary Cooper has a scene in a tux where he looks very Bondian... 

YES!!!!! Gary Cooper in that movie is one of the most BOND-ish creatures on the face of the earth! (love the scene at the cocktail party!)

But . . . when he goes to her bedroom to fix the shattered marble surrounding the fireplace . . . !!!!!!!!!! . . . well . . . he simply out-Seans Sean!!!!!!!!!!!
COOP . . . as Bond;

PATRICIA NEAL . . . as his hard-to-get Bond-Broad . . .
and RAYMOND MASSEY as the brilliant-but-evil-but-good-sometimes-but-ultimately-deranged villain!

[Lounge Lizard]

To me, the true genius of Dr. No lies in Broccoli and Saltzman bringing together the talents of fighter-dancer Sean Connery, elegant wit Terence Young, innovative technician Peter Hunt, German Expressionist Ken Adam and top Big Band Man John Barry. These people invented Bond for the screen. In my opinion, none of them did their finest work on Dr. No; but it was the first time out, and they were already more or less in place!

[Stephen Spotswood]

Dr. No is not the best Bond movie because it's too derivative of the yellow-peril stories like Fu Manchu by Sax Rohmer. That would make James Bond a successor to Naland Smith. However, being the first movie in a series that has lasted over forty years has to say something about it's popularity.

The movie also over simplified the traps that Bond had to get through in the book. I suppose it was influenced by the old cliffhanger serials of the 30's and 40's, but it seemed perfect for a video game. If I remember correctly, Bond had to get through an electrified grill into a ventilation duct, that first would burn him, then freeze him, causing his blisters to burst. The turns had extremely sharp edges that would cut him. There was a section full of spiders, then a sharp slide into the waiting arms of an octupus, although I'm not sure if it might have been a squid. The entire time Bond is being observed by Dr. No's men, and Bond is screaming his head off in pain, because he was in severe pain, and he wanted the observers to know that he was still fighting. Bond kills the octupus with a smuggled dinner knife in the eye. Then he hangs on a fence to rest in an almost crucified manner, mindlessly observing his blood dripping into the ocean, and the way small fish are drinking his blood. Then he decides he has to rescue Honeychild Wilder from being killed by crabs, although that meant swimming through salt walter with open wounds caused by the octupus's suction cups.

The interesting thing was this was supposed to be a cushy assignment for Bond, because although M brushed off Sir James Mulroney's, the agency's shrink, suggestion that all the 00's were being overworked, and that 007 was close to burning out entirely, the assignment was initially simple. Bond was to investigate the disappearance of Strangways and his secretary, who the service initially felt was ran off in a simple love affair. Some British and American birdwatchers were concerned about how Dr. No's work was killing off their precious birds, and Bond felt like this was a humiliating assignment for nearly dying at the end of "From Russia With Love." To top it off the story had Bond killing Dr. No by crushing him to death with a load of bat guano on top of him, no heavy water pool.

Unfortunately, this movie started the trend of meglamaniacs out to destroy the world and massive explosions to conclude the story, that too many of the Bond movies had followed ever since.

[Lounge Lizard]

I agree with your points about simplifying the climax of the source novel, Stephen, but didn't Fleming's Dr. No fit into the Yellow Peril-subgenre as well? I can remember reading that Fleming was a Rohmer fan as a youngster, and I suppose his No character is a kind of tribute. The fact that the movie doesn't divert from this is perhaps one of its faults.

[MarcAngeDraco]

Dr. No is still my favorite Bond film, which I suppose implies that I think it is the best. Not to say that many of the later films don't have great moments and in fact some even improve on Dr. No in certain aspects. However, it's the overall package of Dr. No that sets it apart for me.

It wasn't first Bond film I saw, and it didn't really mature into my favorite until after many viewings. So many of the recent films have fallen apart for me upon multiple viewings, but Dr. No seems to improve each time I view it.

I've never seen it in a proper theater, what a treat that would be!...

[Stephen Spotswood]

To Lounge Lizard and Dalton's Wendy.

Actually, "Dr. No" fits right into the yellow-peril theme, that's the problem. Although Red-China was threatening in the latter part of the period, that was a rather rascist period in popular culture. To put it in such terms however, sounds like I'm judging a story based on modern sensibilities. However, using such terms as Chigroes--Chinese Negroes--for the killers of Strangways and his secretary (who's name escapes me), is problematic. The movie went even further with a reggae flavored version of three blind mice, instead of the now hackneyed 007 theme music. I always suspected Fleming was a pulp fan, but his being a fan of Sax Rohmer is new to me. Was Fleming also a fan of Leslie Charteris? My favorite Saint is George Sanders.

Actually according to Dave Karlen's "Licensed to Thrill," online article, on the history of the James Bond comic strips appearing in The London Express in 1957, the strip Bond was patterned after both Robert Taylor, and Gary Cooper. The result was a James Bond that looked like Sean Connery, five years before the first Bond movie, and less like Hugh Fraser, that Ian Fleming hired artist conception looked like.

[Stephen Spotswood]

In case I'm unclear, I was referring to the actor Hugh Fraser, who played Captain Hastings, opposite David Suchet's Hercule Poirot.