›

"Ahoy, Mr Bond! Ahoy, Mr Bond!": Let's discuss... Dr No (1962)/ Poll

St_GeorgeSt_George Shuttling Drax's lovelies to the space doughnut - happy 40th, MR!
edited August 2011 in Bond Movies Posts: 1,699
<img src="http://i257.photobucket.com/albums/hh215/george-in-the-smoke/dn_banner-1.jpg"/>;



So, peeps, it may not have escaped your notice that we have a new forum here ( :p ) and, in the light of both that and the fact that the official <a href="http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/483/bondathon-april-goldfinger">MI6 Bondathons</a> are now drawing to a close, methought it not a bad idea to set up a designated thread in this section of the forum where we - each and every one of us - can discuss a designated Bond film in general <i>ad infinitum</i>.

In which case, why not start at the start? Why not, indeed? So come on, let's be 'avin' you, what are your thoughts, opinions, feelings and leanings on the pros and cons of Eon's very first espionage action adventure, Dr No? Go into as much or as little detail as you like - by all means say what you think's great about it and what little niggles you've always (or only recently have) had with it.


Just to kick things off, I'll share a few quick words on where Dr No stands with me. I'll be honest, it's not my favourite Bond flick, but far from my least favourite. Sort of in the middle, I guess, if I were considering a Bond film to view. Despite that, though, I'd say its quality is unquestioned - it's rather like an old-fashioned detective adventure with very appealing elements that would later become staples of the Bond formula. It was crying out for an entire score by John Barry, though; the following 007 movies certainly lucked out there...
«1

Comments

  • CipherCipher
    Posts: 128
    I'd put Dr No in my top 10. It sets a nice, fast pace and it sets Bond up as ruthless and self-assured. In the first half Bond's almost like a force of nature in the way that he deals with the various henchmen in quick succession.

    Probably the best thing about it - and this goes for all of the early movies - is that it adapts the novel in a way that makes it work for the big screen without detracting from or messing with the plot and characters of the novel. You get the feeling they were trying to stay as faithful to the novel as possible while working within the restrictions that film as medium imposes.
  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    It's my favorite bond film because of the great acting,locations, fast paced way it moves along.
    I just keep watching it again and again more than any other bond film.
  • dragonskydragonsky
    Posts: 2,491
    i am not big writer so i wont write long text so i will just shortly say that this movie isnt bad overall,however there are other Bond movies that are worse than DN.this movie was great if we see when it was made,DAD was made in 21st century and was worse than this movie.so overall this movie have some epis scenes that we will remember,i guess that non-Bond fans didnt watched this movie but that is their mistake.If you have Connery in a movie that that movie gotta be succces
  • CoH_GHOST_007CoH_GHOST_007
    Posts: 303
    Dr No is one of my all time favourite movies, it's so much a great film, that it is still exciting, fast-paced and brilliant nearly fifty-years later, now that's something of a unique film to me. I don't think that people who don't usually watch Bond, or any other sort of spy/thriller type films would find it as interesting as we, as bond fans do, but it's still a brilliant and exciting film overall.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,350
    Dr. No is a top 3 film with maybe the best villain in the series. Not seeing Dr. No until the third act really, really helps build the tension. Some of the best locations as well and a great performance by Sean Connery. One of the best films I've ever seen.

    10/10.
  • RogueThunderballRogueThunderball
    Posts: 306
    Dr. No is a solid Bond entry but lacks some of the polished aspects that you find in other films. Currently I have it ranked at 14 on my list. I still love the hell out of it but there are just quite a few ahead of it that I prefer. Some of my favorite moments are when Bond kills Dent and the interaction with Dr. No. There is a ton to like about this movie and it was really the perfect way to introduce Bond. It's just not quite as thrilling as some of the other ones for me, but it's at least a 9/10.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited April 2011 Posts: 23,552
    Talking about Dr. No means taking Bond to his cusp right away. While a minor few things, including music, received a slightly smoother and more polished treatment in the next couple of entries in the series, it should be noted that Bond kicked off his cinematic existence with a blast.

    There was no tried formula, no template and hardly even any competition in the suave secret agent genre to use as something of an example when DN was being produced. Other than the Fleming novels and perhaps a few Hollywood films, DN had nothing but itself to rely on as a model and that, among other things, makes the final outcome all the more impressive. Many great talents separately contributed to what we still celebrate today and expect from every future Bond film. Be it Binder's gun barrel and opening titles, Norman's Bond Theme, Adam's wonderful sets, Hunt's editing, Connery's performance, Young's directing... every bit of energy invested in DN became legendary beyond our imagination. And all of this was realised on what many, including myself, perceive to be a shoestring budget.

    One point of criticism often heard in light of DN involves the film's less sophisticated and rougher nature, expressed for example in the simple plot, Connery's occasionally not-so-refined acting and the sound mix. These comments require some backlash though. First and foremost, DN was produced in '61 and its accomplishments, both technical and creative, were still above the established standards in filmmaking. Its impact on the sexual revolution may be easily ignored today, but back in those days it was more than considerable. Also, its simplicity was bliss. A more ambitious film most likely wouldn't have seen the light of day with its limited budget and besides that, would audiences have accepted more cinematic arrogance from this modest production? They kept it simple, they kept their options open and they knew that if this film made money, more of Bond was to come, with more chance to add elements and grow more clever in certain departments. Thirdly, Connery's acting was perfect for this film. His accidental roughness in certain scenes communicated arrogance, sexual superiority and honest bravado. Shooting Dent was performed by the best Connery a scene like that could have dreamed of.

    DN was huge and it still is today. Kids who nowadays reject The Matrix as being "too old" love and embrace DN because it opens up an almost real-life fantasy many of us end(ed) up stuck with for the rest of their live. With all the right ingredients in place and well balanced out, with a stable basis from where to grow in future films, with ground-braking material presented as a turn-of-the-tide in the history of cinema, DN, despite its modesty, is one of the most significant films ever made. Bond was destined to become something of magnitude but what were the odds that they'd smash some critical windows with their very first attempt right away. And to think that the following three films would rise to even higher acclaim, with GF putting DN almost to shame, makes the whole thing even more impressive. Star Wars did the trick too but 15 years later and with only six films put out. By no means am I trying to downplay SW's impressive achievements but I will not accept people doing the same with DN. Sure, it wasn't TB, OHMSS or CR, but it was a bloody good film and it still is and watching it today doesn't disappoint in any way whatsoever.

    It was the first of the lot and immediately one of the best of the lot. Shaped to near perfection, DN is worth nothing less than 9 stars out of 10!
  • RogueThunderballRogueThunderball
    Posts: 306
    @DarthDimi

    Well written essay, couldn't have said it better myself. Well done!
  • St_GeorgeSt_George Shuttling Drax's lovelies to the space doughnut - happy 40th, MR!
    Posts: 1,699
    Yup, nice points, indeed, folks and I found myself agreeing with many.

    Must say, @DarthDimi and @Samuel001, the last time I really watched DN (all of three years ago; it's been a while since a Bondathon for me), what really struck me was the strength of Conners' debut performance. The cool confidence, danger, animal magentism, cruelty and snobbery is all there. He was only 32, but he acted the part of a man genuinely outside his field of experience with true aplomb. The Connery-Bond template was laid here and it's brilliant.

    It's true, as some have pointed out, that there were arguably more polished entries to come in the series and I'd argue that DN's pace is slow compared to many (Hunt's masterly quick editing technique wouldn't really be employed until FRWL), but many of these scenes are gems, even the lesser mentioned of them among 007 fans - langurous, plot- and character-driven, such as Miss Taro explaining the route to her house as she reclines sexily on her bed in anticipation and the scene dissolves into Bond's journey in the car. It's classy filmmaking.

    Plus, lest we forget, in an era (the '50s into the early '60s), when the opportunity to travel to exotic climes was beyond the reach of many in both the UK and US, the bright, lustrously photographed Caribbean in DN (as with the description of many of the locations in Fleming's books) was a big turn on for the audience of the day. The look, colour, climate and atmosphere of Jamaica is captured wonderfully in this film...
  • MartinBondMartinBond Trying not to muck it up again
    Posts: 858
    I'm gonna be quite honest: it isn't in my top ten. I don't know why, but the plot is a bit to "soft", compared to all the others. In it's defence, though, i'm sure many members will agree that it is an easy "watcher" movie, and with that i mean that it's the kind of movie you put on on those rainy days, when you don't really want to go and sit to pay attention, but just want to see some fun... ;)

    i'll give it a place around 10-13, because of it's status as a pioneer and the beginning of a long, long era...
  • St_GeorgeSt_George Shuttling Drax's lovelies to the space doughnut - happy 40th, MR!
    Posts: 1,699
    Gotta say, ever since I first saw DN when I'd have been something like eight-years-old (and I believe it was one of the first I ever watched - and, like all the others, was riveted by, I might add), Bond's escape from his cell through the air-con tube system has always ranked very highly among my memorable moments from any 007 flick.

    It's a top, top sequence - the endurance our hero must show given what he's put through translates to the audience brilliantly, and the audience in turn can't peel their eyes away for a second. Well, I can't at any rate... ;)
  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    blockquote>Quoting St_George: Bond's escape from his cell through the air-con tube system has always ranked
    very highly among my memorable moments from any 007 flick.


    I love this scene as well,like you one of the top bond film moments for me.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,570
    Quoting DarthDimi: DN, despite its modesty, is one of the most significant films ever made
    A very pertenant point Dimi, mainly because it's true.
    And as @001 says..
    Quoting 001: great acting,locations, fast paced way it moves along.
    I just keep watching
    it again and again more than any other bond film.
    It is an easy one to watch again and again. More so than GF.
    Quoting St_George: what really struck me was the strength of Conners' debut performance. The cool
    confidence, danger, animal magentism, cruelty and snobbery is all there. He was
    only 32, but he acted the part of a man genuinely outside his field of
    experience with true aplomb. The Connery-Bond template was laid here and it's
    brilliant.
    Can't argue with that either Georgio.

    So basically I have nothing to offer other than to cut and paste everyone else :-D
  • The_ReaperThe_Reaper
    edited April 2011 Posts: 1,092
    Well said thus far, peeps. It's a great film. What I like and respect is the purity of the film. Darth said it, the film had no blueprint to build from save the novel and I think they pulled it off. The story is iconic and has been done since in homage and flat out rip off fashion. Enter the Dragon was DN but done with Kung Fu. That's pretty cool.

    DN has a purity that no other Bond film will every have. They had no idea what they created would last 50 years and going.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,552
    Imagine if DN had been produced by a different crew. Imagine it had been someone else playing Bond and someone else directing, scoring, designing and so forth. The only exception here might have been Barry, scoring the film altogether. However, and this is a delicate point, I wonder if Barry's theme had resembled Norman's if they had left Norman out of this film completely. And without the Bond Theme, how about the rest of the score(s)? Would Barry ever have captured that Bondian sound were it not for those simple but pivotal bars that Norman decided to bring to this film?
  • The_ReaperThe_Reaper
    Posts: 1,092
    They caught lightning in a bottle, Darth! No doubt about it. No matter what we'll always have the greatness of those first four, the holy quadrology, IMO.
  • 00Beast00Beast
    Posts: 4,762
    Last time I watched Dr. No, I was a little disappointed. My expectations were a little higher, and I was anticipating the same amount of, "Yeah, that was awesome!" Unfortunately, the things that killed it for me were the short time frame, the lackluster settings, the slow pace during some dull scenes, and the lack of action throughout. Now yes, the directors were doing this for the first time, but I still thought it was a little disappointing.
  • St_GeorgeSt_George Shuttling Drax's lovelies to the space doughnut - happy 40th, MR!
    edited August 2011 Posts: 1,699
    Last time I watched Dr. No, I was a little disappointed. My expectations were a little higher, and I was anticipating the same amount of, "Yeah, that was awesome!" Unfortunately, the things that killed it for me were the short time frame, the lackluster settings, the slow pace during some dull scenes, and the lack of action throughout. Now yes, the directors were doing this for the first time, but I still thought it was a little disappointing.
    Methinks one needs to take into account the era in which DN was made and the fact that as the first of the film sub-genre that is the Bond movie, it really was the original and, thus, is something of a halfway house between what the Bonds would become and the more traditional Hollywood adventure/ detective film of the '50s and '60s.

    I know you acknowledge this in your post, but truly to enjoy and get the most from DN, one needs to accept the above and, you know, move on. Besides there's so much quality and so many iconic Bond moments in DN that they always ensure it eminently enjoyable - at least for me...
  • 00Beast00Beast
    Posts: 4,762
    @St_George: Yes, I realize what they had to work with, and how the style of the movie was set to be like the other movies of the time. I just think as far as Bond movies are concerned, I was disappointed a little bit.
  • DiscoVolanteDiscoVolante Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts: 1,347
    @St_George, I edited your post to prevent the image from going bananas to the right \m/
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited August 2011 Posts: 11,189
    Re-watched it a couple of weeks ago. Exciting movie and in my top 10 but very much a prototype for whats to come. It's ironic that Ian Fleming apparently disliked it - especially since its closer to his material than many of the later films.
  • SJK91SJK91
    Posts: 1,310
    Doctor No is #4 on my Bond list...to me, it has always been the little film that could; it was low budget and action was minimal, but I find myself enjoying every minute of Doctor No.

    9/10
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    edited August 2011 Posts: 1,778
    Definatly a solid Bond film. It's musical score and limited budget hurt and date it at times but it's still one hell of a classy and important film. I'll take it over TB, YOLT, and DAF any day.

    8/10
  • Baltimore_007Baltimore_007
    Posts: 5,634
    This was were Bond 007 started, 'not' Casino Royale as they tried a year or two ago, 'let's introduce James Bond, er, he's been around nearly 45 years unless it was something else on the screen'

    Yes, this was really where James Bond started at least on the big screen. Still a good watch any chance you can get, Ursula Andress makes for a nice looking girl, one of my favorite bond women ever, the 'coming out of the ocean scene' that Die Another Day and the said Casino Royale tried to duplicate, you can't beat the original

    The late J Wiseman made for quite a convincing villian, and the West Indian scenery still looks warm and inviting all these years later. Real tension in some scenes such as when the guards come along on the boat and everyone hides and when Connery and company have to hide in the waters as more guards come searching.

    I always like the early scenes, Bond gets introduced, his Beretta is taken away for his new Walther, Q in first scene and an armory agent gives some instructions, not one of my favorite Bonds but I own it and one day will no doubt sit down again to watch how it all started.

  • thelordflasheartthelordflasheart
    Posts: 1,370
    Fantastic to see what a "force of nature" Connery was - truly a once-in-a-generation movie star.

    DN has one of my favourite Connery moments - when he loses it on the guard in the decontamination room and demands to be let out of his handcuffs. Then he yells at a guard to take them off and he starts to do it! No one but Connery could have played that scene and made it believable that he could take command in that way.
  • Baltimore_007Baltimore_007
    Posts: 5,634
    The guards were a bit of an easy touch, good job some law enforcement officials today aren't so easily swayed

    That drugged coffee was amazingly quick to take effect is all I'll say

    'It's a fire breathing dragon', NO, it's not that

    The dinner scene with Connery and Wiseman was one of the films highlights, No speaks at length about his history and what he does and works for, ending with the time honored line of 'I was wrong about you, You are nothing more than a stupid policeman'



  • barryt007barryt007
    edited August 2011 Posts: 19,339
    I was the 5/10 vote i'm afraid - i don't like the ending to it at all and it really kills the film for me.
    All the build up with Dr No and he is gone in about 2 mins,i know it set the standards for future Bond's but it's not for me.
    Maybe on the next watch it will improve if i can find the energy for it.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    The music at the end when they are at sea sounds like it came out of a 1940s war film :-))
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    If you look hard enough it probably did !!
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited August 2011 Posts: 15,690
    Sorry to break the party here, but I find DN to be horribly, horribly slow paced. I tried watching the other day - I switched it off after 50 minutes. The low-budget feel really hurts the film. I have to admit Connery is admirable in the film. But the film is just a chore to watch. 5/10.
Sign In or Register to comment.