31 replies to this topic

[YOLT]

Dr.No or Diamonds Are Forever?

I say Dr.No was a great start, the suspense in the first half is great. Also Connery is great too. For a 1 million$ film it serves everything you want. James Bond is a spy and a investing detective in Dr.No which I love.

Diamonds are Forever is the worst of Connery and one of the worst in the series. Connery was not James Bond in this one I think, maybe at Amsterdam. ( I do like the elevator fight) Comedy at the top but there is no suspense.

Of course Dr.No is better

[Loomis]

DR. NO is easily the better film, but I'm quite fond of DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER and wouldn't say it's one of the worst Bond outings by any means. I agree with you, though, that Connery doesn't appear to be playing the same character he plays in the films DR. NO - YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE. DAF seems more like an American caper comedy than a Bond film.

[Bon-san]

DR. NO is easily the better film, but I'm quite fond of DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER and wouldn't say it's one of the worst Bond outings by any means. I agree with you, though, that Connery doesn't appear to be playing the same character he plays in the films DR. NO - YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE. DAF seems more like an American caper comedy than a Bond film.

Yeah, wot he said.

[tdalton]

I thought that Dr. No is the better film because it fits in more easily with the rest of the series. Diamonds Are Forever feels extremely out of place, as Bond seems to feel no extra animosity towards Blofeld than had already existed, and does not seem motivated to avenge his wife's murder. I can honestly tell you that if I were in the same room as the man who murdered my wife, that I wouldn't be joking around with him as Bond seems to be doing in this film.

[Kingdom Come]

Diamonds Are Forever - easily Connery's best. Dr No was a bore. Diamonds is anything but!

[Double-Oh-Zero]

Dr. No, surely.

Unless we're talking about camp value here, in which case Diamonds Are Forever wins by a landslide.

[Qwerty]

Dr. No for me.

[freemo]

I'm a big Diamonds Are Forever fan, but Dr. No is the better film. Infact, Dr No. is serious contender for best film of the series. I really like Connery's potrayal of Bond in Dr No. too, it's not quite as polished or refinded an effort as in, say, Goldfinger, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

[Mazinkaiser]

Dr.No is by far the better film. There are just too many things I don't like about DAF, while I like everything about Dr.No.

[00Twelve]

I love Goldfinger and have a hard time putting FRWL ahead of it as my favorite film, but the reason is that the "polished, refined" portrayal of Bond is not that, IMO. With GF, Bond is self-aware - he is aware that he is a character, if I am making sense. GF was the first "sensational" Bond movie. It hit the mix on the nose, but it was very much on purpose. That was its intention. I am really not bashing it, I love it and could watch it every day, but I realized that FRWL was the last time we saw Bond not outdoing peoples' expectations of him. It was the last "honest" portrayal of Bond before everything, Bond included, became larger than life.

But regarding Dr. No and DAF, Dr. No is vastly superior in terms of being loyal to who Bond is intended to be, and is a better film because we always take more serious situations seriously. It is the lack of intent on Bond's part and the in-joking that weakened DAF, IMO (and Blofeld, twice resurrected, with hair, in drag), although I realize that some consider that to be its strength.

[Skudor]

Dr No is definitely the better one. It may show that it was produced on a relative shoestring budget, but in terms of Bond films it really stays true to the main character. DAF ignores it

[hrabb04]

One is a James Bond film directed by a master; the other is a wannabe James Bond directed by a Joel Schumacher hack.

[DLibrasnow]

There really is no competition here. DR NO is a contender for one of the best movie in the series and DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER is one of the weakest in the series.

[Qwerty]

it's not quite as polished or refinded an effort as in, say, Goldfinger, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Great point.

[DLibrasnow]

BTW, this thread is screaming for a poll!

[Turn]

I'm a big Diamonds fan, but let's put it this way: if one of these films was left to stand alone to launch this series, which would it be? Dr. No did that and can be thanked for us being on this site now. Had it tanked or not caught on, we wouldn't be here talking about this type of topic, much less Bond 21.

[RITZ]

I think Dr. No is so underated. I love this film, it has a fantastic simplicity and charm.

Some questionable acting and naff editing/sound fx, but I'm just nit picking because I've seen it so many times.
Pussfeller looks stoned for some reason, Strangeways' secretary just can't act(nice skirt luv). The Jamaican fella doing the boogie at he club as Pussfeller walks past......wtf?

But then there's Sir Sean who is on top form, 90% of the film. Watch how he walks into M's office - I believe this is what Saltzman referred to as Connery's "cat-like" grace. His accent "goes all funny" when he's at the club with Quarrel and Leiter and starts rambling like a Scotsman.

Watch how he handles Miss Taro at her apartment - can it get any better?

Dinner with Dr No is worth watching over and over again, just for the dialogue and Connery's mannerism's.

"That's a Smith & Wesson, and you've had your six!"
"Bond, James Bond"
"OUR power? With your disregard for human life you must be working for the East"

[Qwerty]

The Jamaican fella doing the boogie at he club as Pussfeller walks past......wtf?

LOL

[YOLT]

Diamonds Are Forever - easily Connery's best. Dr No was a bore. Diamonds is anything but!

I just laugh at this statement. Dr.No a bore? You have every right to prefer DAF but Dr.No is no way a bore. Its one of the best in the series.

[YOLT]

BTW, this thread is screaming for a poll!

I dont think that we need a pool everyone knows which one gone win

[DLibrasnow]

I agree YOLT, but a poll would allow people to post an opinion, without posting an opinion - if you know what I mean.

[YOLT]

I agree YOLT, but a poll would allow people to post an opinion, without posting an opinion - if you know what I mean.

Allright I understood you. I know what you mean.

[David Schofield]

Dr No is a technical masterpiece of Bond film making, taking the character from the books and putting him on the screen. Everyone knew that and how to do it, from Cubby's insistence on the British elements, to Terence Young's understanding of the upper-class character, to both's desire to use as much of Fleming as possible, to Connery's hard work in becoming Fleming's Bond. (Plus, of course, the movie-making skills of Binder, Barry and the rest of the crew).

Diamonds, on the other hand, is lazy film making at its best, a slovenly, quick-fix antidote to the failure of OHMSS, from Connery's dreadful appearance to the non-development of the revenge plot arc from OHMSS and the jokey villainy. Hell, at this point no one even had the courage to go in a new, lighthearted direction even with a new Bond, ideally Roger.

[Scottlee]

Both films are pretty close in standard, I feel. However, after watching DAF the other night I'm swinging towards that one. It's funnier, it has a more comfortable Connery, it has a better score, more varied locations. The only things Dr No wins on are "women" and "closeness to the novel". It's a solid Bond film, even for a first attempt. It doesn't though have many of the cool series staples that were set in place by the time DAF came out.

[Mr. Somerset]

I love both films, but Dr No is the better of the two for me by far.
Sean is in top form, though it is his first outing, and he was only 31. Ursula Andress is, well..........................nuff said.
Jack Lord could whip Norman Burton in the Leiter dept.anyday. Also, Dr No is far more menacing than Charles Gray's Blofeld.
Having said that, Diamonds is a bit more polished and fast thanks to Guy Hamilton. Diamonds is more witty, has some classic dialogue: "Hi I'm Plenty....", and the great elevator sequence. I never fail to laugh when Sean is being creamed by Thumper and Bambi. Not only because it's amazingly funny, but someone had the balls to put Sean in that mindblowing pink tie, and cream suit.

[IndyB007]

Sean Connery
as
Ian Fleming's James Bond 007
in
Dr. No

[RJJB]

There really is no contest. Even with its humble stature as a $1 million dollar budgeted movie, Dr. No blows DAF out of the water. DAF is just too goofy. It is recognized as the beginning point from which the Bond series began its downward spiral, leading to the horror of the Roger Moore years. Dr. No features a better Bond, a hotter Bond girl, a better Felix Leiter, a better villain and none of the silliness of DAF. That being said, I still enjoy DAF, but it is not an important entry in the series.

[PRO-PAIN]

Dr. No, no contest, the Vegas chase scene was cool in Diamonds Are Forever, but Dr. No is a far better film.

[Genrewriter]

In terms of overall quality Dr. No takes it in a landslide but DAF is more fun to watch. Really, they represent the two extremes in a Connery Bond film just as For Your Eyes Only and Moonraker do for a Moore Bond film. Both are good for very diferent reasons.

[Almadjian]

I like them both, for different reasons.

Dr. No is a great film, period! Hardly a bore unless one enjoys all of the modern commando-like stuff Bond does now.

Agreeing with most of the above posts, Dr. No is rife with "Bondness", establishes the stereotype, as it were.

DAF is a favourite because I'm from Vegas and have been to all of the sights in the movie. I love the elevator scene! The first half of the movie is great, better than OHMSS, by far. However, once inside the space compound (a gypsum plant a few miles out of town that is still in operation, BTW) it all goes haywire. I almost expected to see David Niven and Woody Allen on cameo appearances making the whole end of the movie very "Casino Royaleish"--much too far-fetched. The Willard White thing was great, but should have been more seriously done to avoid the mockery it became. Could have been Connery's best film to date, or one of them, but failed miserably because of the ludicrous ending--soooo much footage devoted to the desert chase scene, etc.

So, I have to say that Dr. No is the better film. I still think that DAF is the better novel though.