268 replies to this topic

[Onyx2626]

Bond: "Yes, night and day. Go on about the LECTOR."

Yes, classic!!!

Love that scene, Sean's delivery is perfect.

(Also kind of funny is the look on Dalton's face in TLD after he yells at Kara that they are not going back for the cello. In the next shot we see him behind the wheel waiting... I dunno, I guess these are two scenes where Bond seems part of a couple.)

[DaveBond21]

There are so many great lines...


"Back to the saltmines...."

[bond_girl_double07]

"Red wine with fish. That should have told me something."

always loved that line

[bond 16.05.72]

Connery's best and my all time 3rd fav, CR OHMSS pip to the post I'm afraid, but for me still the best Bond performance of the series. ( will see what DC does with Bond 22 in a more confident & experienced 007)

It took Moore till SWLM to deliver his best Bond but SC did in his 2nd, while his GF & TB performances are great, his FRWL is devoid of too many gadgets save the practical attache case, the way it's incorporated into the train fight is simply genius and still my all time stand alone Bond moment.

Shaw as Grant, you can see why DC like's him so much, he easily the series all time best villian, ruthless, the moment he has SC on his knee's is gripping and Sean's peformance in that scene alone defines his Bond, even though at his lowest still with some sharp cracks and Grant's greed being his undoing, something which seperates him from 007.

Barry's superb score, great instrumental title theme and the reat of the score is Barrytastic so much better than Monty's DN score.

Armendez's Ali Kerim Bey is one all the all time best ally's, a brave and dignified performance considering his tragic fate.

Bianchi's Romanava is simply gorgeous and one of the best Bond girls, Lenya's Klebb so memeorable and sinister, the introduction of Blofeld is masterful and a pity he was so debunked of menace when finally unmasked in YOLT.

It's also a great believable espionage story, it would be a along time before we saw it's like again, all in all a solid gold classic and despite GF & TB being classic's as well, Connery would never be this good again, maybe confident & relaxed but this is his crowning glory and yet to be beat.

How could I forget as some have pointed out, a great script with so many memorable lines., delivered by an impecable cast, top PTS. Everything about FRWL screams class, I sometimes wonder why OHMSS pips to my top spot although now CR has grabbed the crown.

Edited by bond 16.05.72, 23 January 2007 - 11:58 PM.

[Turn]

I know it goes against the thread title, and that hasn't stopped others in other similar threads, but I'd like to hear from those who don't like FRWL and why. Unlike almost every other Bond film, there doesn't seem to be any real dislike for this one.

[DaveBond21]

I know it goes against the thread title, and that hasn't stopped others in other similar threads, but I'd like to hear from those who don't like FRWL and why. Unlike almost every other Bond film, there doesn't seem to be any real dislike for this one.

Fair enough point, Turn.

As far as I can tell, one of the main criticisms of FRWL is that it's "dull" or boring, or "nothing happens until the train fight".

It doesn't have many action scenes until the final 20 minutes.

[DaveBond21]

Any newbies who are fans of FRWL?

[LadySylvia]

Isn't this the Bond movie that featured Connery in a towel . . . and nothing else?

[DaveBond21]

Have you read the other replies?

[RazorBlade]

Earlier DaveBond21 asked me what I loved about FRWL and TB. I started to say I've nothing to add really. I agree that it is a top notch script with great lines delivered by a top notch cast creating great characters. The music, the atmosphere, everything.

I disagree that nothing happens until the last 20 minutes. I think a lot is happening. I think about the girl fight all the time. Surprising how many of my posts are typed with one hand...

But I do have something to say about FRWL. I reall want to credit FRWL for spoiling me of bond in the 70's even the 80's, then in the 90's. FRWL is why I looked forward to TD and DC and even Brozza just a little. FRWL is why I was frustrated with the series until Nov, '06. It isn't just the lesser bond films that suffer in comparison with it, FRWL did everything so well even compared to films like TB, LTK, OHMSS and CR which are classics too. You wish the film makers would watch the lean economy and emotional impact of the violence in FRWL and learn from it. I love the action sequences in CR but this doesn't have to be an unending thrill ride, those sequences take something away from CR's more human moments- which is not a problem in FRWL. Hemingway's critism of Flaukner is appropriate here, "Big words don't make big emotions."

I love both Hemingway and Flaukner but Pappa has a point.

[DaveBond21]

I am not sure they could ever make a movie like FRWL again, because the pace is too slow and too much time is taken setting the scene, but I love it for those reasons.

Casino Royale came close with some of its scenes, I must admit.

[Scottlee]

The only bad thing I can say about FRWL is that I didn't enjoy it as a kid. It took until adulthood for me to fully appreciate it, and now that I do it's right up there in my top five. For the younger Bond fans though I'm willing to guess it's not a great favourite. The film just isn't as easily accessible for a 12 year old as is, say, The Spy Who Loved Me, or Goldfinger.

[Turn]

The only bad thing I can say about FRWL is that I didn't enjoy it as a kid. It took until adulthood for me to fully appreciate it, and now that I do it's right up there in my top five. For the younger Bond fans though I'm willing to guess it's not a great favourite. The film just isn't as easily accessible for a 12 year old as is, say, The Spy Who Loved Me, or Goldfinger.

I know exactly what you mean. When I was a kid growing up, the Bond films would pop up on the ABC network's schedule usually on a Sunday or Friday night. I was about 12 and a FRWL rebroadcast was on and I didn't care and went and played a baseball board game instead. That was the first time I skipped a Bond on TV to do more grown-up type stuff.

My Bond interest at the time was at its lowest point as I had sports and other things on my mind. However, that same summer, I saw a film called Moonraker at the cinema and it not only revived my interest in Bond, it made me the Bond fanatic I am today, but FRWL still wasn't a favorite.

I rediscovered FRWL about 20 years ago when the VHS tapes became affordable. I still wasn't a huge fan of it or DR for years. It's been in the last five years or so that FRWL has shot up to either my top 5 or just outside the top 5, the biggest moving film in the series to do so.

[00Twelve]

LOL! Same with me. For several years as a kid, I felt like I spent an ETERNITY just getting to the gypsy camp. I wouldn't even keep watching long enough for all hell to break out there. Totally agree with the sentiment, Scott and Turn!

[DaveBond21]

I agree, I didn't realise how great it was until I got to the age of 25. Before that I found it boring.

Now, it's amazing - and the slow build-up is so important. Even scenes like the chess match are amazing - look at the set, it's beautiful, yet it is only in the movie for 2 minutes.

[draxingtonstanley]

As a youngster it was by no means my favourite but even then the rich atmosphere
and palpable sense of threat,so memorably provided by Red Grant,kept me riveted.
And the gypsy fight helped too I think...
It works on so many levels,I can't really add much to what others have said.
It's aged remarkably well;perhaps partly because,although it is in one sense a
very modern piece of filmaking and as such firmly part of the 1960s,it
still seemed to be grounded somehow in a 1950s 'classic' sensibility.
It feels almost like a Hitchcock film,with shades of North By NorthWest. It sits on a fault line between two great eras of filmaking.
If I have to pick a weak spot,it would be the boat chase,which creaks a bit,but who cares when it
delivers so much else so well?

'You might know all the right wines. You're the one on your knees!"

Edited by draxingtonstanley, 02 September 2007 - 11:44 PM.

[LadySylvia]

It's odd, but my view of FRWL has experienced a bit of a reversal. I still believe that it is one of the best Bond movies I have ever seen. But my recent view of the movie has led me to finally recognize some of its flaws. Actually, I can only think of three flaws - namely the final confrontation between Bond and Grant aboard the Orient Express, Connery's endless quips during the movie's last twenty minutes, and the two side-by-side action sequences that figured in Bond and Tania's journey from the Orient Express to Venice.

Because of these three flaws, FRWL has dropped from being my third favorite Bond film to my fifth.

[draxingtonstanley]

Why do you consider the confrontation between Bond and Red Grant a flaw, Lady Sylvia?
I'm genuinely curious. For me it's one of the best scenes in any Bond film.

[LadySylvia]

Why do you consider the confrontation between Bond and Red Grant a flaw, Lady Sylvia?
I'm genuinely curious. For me it's one of the best scenes in any Bond film.

Um . . . it was the moment after Grant had knocked Bond unconscious. Instead of instantly killing the MI6 agent, the SPECTRE assasin takes his time in donning his gloves (in order not to leave fingerprints, I guess) and waiting for Bond to regain consciousness. Personally, I find this to be a case of bad writing. Many fans have claimed that Grant, being an Irishman, wanted Bond conscious so that he could let the British agent know that he had been set up. Sort of a political thing. I realize this is true, since it also plays a part in Fleming's novel. Yet, despite being in both the novel and the movie, I think it is a very weak moment in regard to writing. In fact, I find it rather contrived reason to allow Bond to learn about the plot for SPECTRE (or SMERSH) to get their hands on the Lektor (Spektor).

From a dramatic point of view - in terms of the acting between Connery and Shaw - it is superb. Both actors were first class. But the idea that Grant hesitated to kill Bond so that he could tell Bond that the latter had been set up, because of Grant's political heritage, seems just plain stupid to me. And very contrived.

[RazorBlade]

I loved FRWL as a kid! I loved Bond in general as a kid! For years, my fav bond or fav films really were Dr No, FRWL, TB and GF. It's GF that's recently slide down the list for me.

FRWL still holds up.

[draxingtonstanley]

Have to disagree with you on the that point,Lady Sylvia. I think the
train confrontation is superb writing in both film and novel. It is entirely
consistent with Red Grant's character to take a psychotic delight in
watching Bond's reaction as he "tells him what a damn fool" he's been,
before killing him. The politics of his Irish origins (or half Irish-I seem
to recall in the book he was the result of a liason between a German Circus
strongman and an Irish lady) would pale into insignificance beside his
murderous nature.

"A paranoid schizophrenic-superb material!"

[Major Tallon]

Grant was certainly taking a chance not to kill Bond when he could, either when Bond was sleeping (the novel) or unconscious (the film). But in both versions, his motivation was the same. I'll quote the book here: "It'll give me an extra kick telling the famous Mister Bond of the Secret Service what a bloody fool he is. You see, old man, you're not so good as you think. You're just a stuffed dummy and I've been given the job of letting the sawdust out of you." Combine Grant's psychopathic need to gloat over his plan with his absolute confidence in his own ability and you've got the basis for his undoing.

[Turn]

The thing about Grant is he's a psychopath and a sadist. He's getting off on seeing Bond in such a vulnerable position. It's a simple case of the thrill of the chase being as satisfying as the kill for him. To get deeper, you could almost look at his slipping on the gloves slowly as a form of foreplay or a cat playing with a mouse before devouring it.

There's tons of different reasons for this. Just don't insult me by saying the scene between Bond and Grant either in the film or the novel is bad writing in any way, shape or form. I can't think of a more suspensful passage from Fleming or in the Bond films than this one.

[DaveBond21]

The thing about Grant is he's a psychopath and a sadist. He's getting off on seeing Bond in such a vulnerable position. It's a simple case of the thrill of the chase being as satisfying as the kill for him. To get deeper, you could almost look at his slipping on the gloves slowly as a form of foreplay or a cat playing with a mouse before devouring it.

There's tons of different reasons for this. Just don't insult me by saying the scene between Bond and Grant either in the film or the novel is bad writing in any way, shape or form. I can't think of a more suspensful passage from Fleming or in the Bond films than this one.

Well said....

[sharpshooter]

Yes indeed, you appreciate things much more as you age.

The long conversations and the character development were considered boring when I was younger, but now I love it. I have a bigger scope than I had five or so years ago. I had scope before but I was more interested in the action scenes. The art of making a layered, interesting complex movie is appreciated. FRWL has that, and Craig definately has that.

[LadySylvia]

The thing about Grant is he's a psychopath and a sadist. He's getting off on seeing Bond in such a vulnerable position. It's a simple case of the thrill of the chase being as satisfying as the kill for him. To get deeper, you could almost look at his slipping on the gloves slowly as a form of foreplay or a cat playing with a mouse before devouring it.

So, Grant, who spends most of the movie being a cold-blooded, yet competent assasin, turns into a psychopath because he has Bond prisoner? All because it would give Bond a chance to find out about SPECTRE's plans? Sorry, not buying it.

However, I still believe that FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE is one of the best Bond movies, ever. I don't think it's perfect. But I have yet to come across a perfect Bond film.

Edited by LadySylvia, 02 October 2007 - 02:57 PM.

[Skudor]

The thing about Grant is he's a psychopath and a sadist. He's getting off on seeing Bond in such a vulnerable position. It's a simple case of the thrill of the chase being as satisfying as the kill for him. To get deeper, you could almost look at his slipping on the gloves slowly as a form of foreplay or a cat playing with a mouse before devouring it.

So, Grant, who spends most of the movie being a cold-blooded, yet competent assasin, turns into a psychopath because he has Bond prisoner? All because it would give Bond a chance to find out about SPECTRE's plans? Sorry, not buying it.

However, I still believe that FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE is one of the best Bond movies, ever. I don't think it's perfect. But I have yet to come across a perfect Bond film.

Doesn't "Gogol" (for want of remembering what his actual name in From Russia With Love was) give us Grant's background in the beginning? Including his tenure in Dartmoor prison. Also, doesn't he mention some other details of Grant's bio?

I've always found the portrayal of Grant to be in line with his character in the novel.

[MHazard]

I've always liked the Bond/Grant scene (by the way in Robin and Marian Sean plays Robin Hood to Shaw's Sheriff of Nottingham) but as I've mentioned before there's one glitch. If Bond's death is supposed to be a suicide why does Grant say he's going to put four bullets in him and not finish him until he kisses Grant's boot? Few suicides kneecap themselves first. But, other than that one of the most enjoyable Bond film scenes.

[LadySylvia]

The thing about Grant is he's a psychopath and a sadist. He's getting off on seeing Bond in such a vulnerable position. It's a simple case of the thrill of the chase being as satisfying as the kill for him. To get deeper, you could almost look at his slipping on the gloves slowly as a form of foreplay or a cat playing with a mouse before devouring it.

So, Grant, who spends most of the movie being a cold-blooded, yet competent assasin, turns into a psychopath because he has Bond prisoner? All because it would give Bond a chance to find out about SPECTRE's plans? Sorry, not buying it.

However, I still believe that FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE is one of the best Bond movies, ever. I don't think it's perfect. But I have yet to come across a perfect Bond film.

Doesn't "Gogol" (for want of remembering what his actual name in From Russia With Love was) give us Grant's background in the beginning? Including his tenure in Dartmoor prison. Also, doesn't he mention some other details of Grant's bio?

I've always found the portrayal of Grant to be in line with his character in the novel.

I didn't.

I've always liked the Bond/Grant scene (by the way in Robin and Marian Sean plays Robin Hood to Shaw's Sheriff of Nottingham) but as I've mentioned before there's one glitch. If Bond's death is supposed to be a suicide why does Grant say he's going to put four bullets in him and not finish him until he kisses Grant's boot? Few suicides kneecap themselves first. But, other than that one of the most enjoyable Bond film scenes.

Good point about the kneecaps.

Although I'm not that impressed by the writing in this scene, I do believe that it featured some excellent acting by Connery and Shaw.

Edited by LadySylvia, 02 October 2007 - 06:14 PM.

[00Twelve]

They didn't really delve into Grant's physical need to kill as it was explained in the novel. However, Morzeny's reading of his file to Klebb includes the description of Grant as a "homicidal paranoiac." Now, I did get that from Shaw's performance. I love his eyes as we can easily see how much he's relishing Bond's impending doom. Other than the aforementioned need for blood, all the other aspects of his character from the novel appear intact, unless anyone can provide a point-by-point explanation as to how they don't.

I agree with Syl, Shaw & Connery's acting during the lead-up to the fight was fantastic.