Are the first two Bond films better than the last two?

JimmyBond0129

Is Dr. No and From Russia with Love better than Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace? I like Dr. No and Casino Royale equally, I've never seen Quantum of Solace but I doubt QoS is better than From Russia with Love.

wahwahkits

Tough question!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There's nothing really to choose between them but if I HAD to choose it would be Dr No and FRWL, due to Robert Shaw in FRWL, my favourite ever Bond villain.

heartbroken_mr_drax

IMO pretty equal actually. I have never been that bigger fan of FRWL but I love the feel of DN.

Apples and oranges though isn't it?

JimmyBond0129

heartbroken_mr_drax wrote:

Apples and oranges though isn't it?

Yeah but it's the same character who would've thought that Ian Fleming's creation would out live him by 45 years?

heartbroken_mr_drax

JimmyBond0129 wrote:

heartbroken_mr_drax wrote:

Apples and oranges though isn't it?

Yeah but it's the same character who would've thought that Ian Fleming's creation would out live him by 45 years?

Yes that is true, but in 45 years a lot has changed.

Mister White

I actually prefer FRWL to QOS.

Especially the relationship that Bond has with Kerim Bey. Not unlike the relationship Bond has with Mathis in the CR novel.

Having said that, I guess I do prefer CR and QOS together though.

Dr. No was really a movie where everybody was still finding their feet. Understandably so, but still.

Anyway, apples and oranges indeed.

Thunderpussy

FRWL is a far better movie than QOS IMO, where'as
CR is better than DN.

Loeffelholz

Now this is a provocative thread topic {[]

There's a generational aspect, even, to the question merely being posed...narrative style/pacing---and production standards/expectations---have, naturally, evolved between these two pairs of Bond films.

So bear in mind that this response comes from the 'old school'...

I'd say yes, certainly. DN and FRWL are superior to CR and QoS, in my opinion, and it's a no-brainer---although I am very much a fan of Craig (my current favourite Bond) and the reboot (very much needed, IMO). Check out my 'Favourites' list for a breakdown of rankings...

When Sean Connery's 007 hit the big screen, everything changed for action films. The first two Bond flicks changed the world of film. CR and QoS, on the other hand, merely changed James Bond

Quite a considerable difference, however fondly one regards the Current Bond Era.

:007)

7289

Taking these films out of there "context" as examples of the action film genre in different eras, and comparing them as stand alone movies is a difficult chore.

I would observe that DN is a very straightforward action film, and what makes it better than the run of the mill action movie is the chaecters and settings. FRWL with it's more complex plotting is more of the cinematic achievement - since in spite of it's rather convoluted story line, it still succeeds in telling the story and as in DN, havng some very interesting charecters.

The same holds true for CR'06, fairly straightforward action, with an above average love story tossed in. The strength of CR'06 is the Fleming story in the second half of the film, which is frankly a bit more interesting than the plot of DN. So I would say DN and CR'06 are roughly equal as cinema.

I am tempted to make the same comparison between FRWL and QOS, butI haven't seen enough of QOS yet. My present inclination is that QOS is really a more complex film than it appears at frst blush. So I'd like some quality time with a blue ray disc before making a final judgement on QOS.

So rather than say older is "better" than newer, I'd honestly say that within the "action" genre DN/FRWL/CR'06 all rise to the same quality of excellence.

I'll admit to really liking the first three Bonds and the last two, for me the rest blurr together into an indifferent mixture of good and bad and really bad.

LazyBee

My approach is thus: Dr. No is good, FRWL is brilliant. Casino Royale is good, QoS is awful. On an averages basis that would make the first two better. Which is what I think.

Napoleon Plural

I think most would have to say the villains are better in Connery's first two...

Alex

Not only do I view the first two, make it four...superior to the entire franchise, (including the good CR)* .. I think the period's more indicative of the book's time frames, and thus, represent better adaptions. (at least in tone and spirit, if not 50s post war attitude)

Better villains have been mentioned but I'd also add MUCH BETTER SCORES!

*Yet to see QoS

Willie Garvin

To answer the question,the original films are very different from what we see today-not so much better as unique.They are absolutely important in the history of the franchise--and equally important in the history of the cinema.Without the first 2 Bond films--plus Goldfinger and Thunderball(movies which were not only boxoffice champions, but also became the kind of events EON has never been able to duplicate).Without them it's very likely there wouldn't be a James Bond series as we know it.These 4 movies set the standards and style for action films and in doing so also helped shatter a few taboos along the way:In the Bond films the lead character sleeps with beautiful willing women(and never feels guilty about it);has a strong moral center yet is an executioner;and although charming isn't always a nice guy.This is true to Ian Fleming and very definitely ran against what most filmmakers offered at that particular time.

In retrospect it's probably easier to change the look/style/tone of 007 as a different actor assumes the role once the series itself is established.But I'll always argue that it was the first four 007 films which created that style and set down the very foundation of the franchise.Either by plan or by accident,these movies are the templates for the entire series.

Looking back, EON intentionally(or unintentionally)played with the Bond formula while also producing 4 very thematically different types of James Bond adventures.For example,Dr.No is the mad scientist film-and a kind of updated version of Sax Rohmer's Fu Manchu tales.From Russia With Love is the espionage thriller ala' Eric Ambler's "Mask of Dimitrios".Goldfinger is the impossible crime movie(ala' "Rififi" and "Topkapi"),and Thunderball is the series' first epic(it's scope may seem small today, but when this movie was first released it was the Star Wars of it's time).Overall,this is quite a variety of storylines, and it's interesting to remember that each of these films was made one year after the other without sacrificing quality.

Another element the earlier motion pictures have that sets them apart from all of the many later 007 movies is their timeframe.These were made while the Cold War was still hot.And the first two of these movies were completed while Ian Fleming was alive.There's no question that these films are now period pieces today--however,the world Fleming describes in his novels was still pretty much unchanged at the time these movies were being made.Accordingly,they give us an excellent glimpse into the world the literary 007 inhabits.

IMO These motion pictures feature some of the greatest villains and femme fatales in the entire series.Additionally,the scores EON had in their 60s films have rarely been improved upon.This was an inventive period.

The first four James Bond films gave audiences everywhere a new kind of hero and established a distinctive world filled with danger and exciting for him to inhabit.As such there are--I believe--among the most imaginative entries in the series and chronicle some of 007's most unique exploits.

Loeffelholz

{[] Great observations on the first four Bonds, Mr. Garvin. Couldn't have said it better.

Alex

The golden age of Bond was "UNIQUE" Thank you, WG!

Mister White

Very good observations, WG. {[]

But taking into account your observations, it would be impossible to ever make a Bond movie as great ever again, simply because it won't be the first time something like that has been done.

I still stand with the fruit comparison.:007)

Alex wrote:

Better villains have been mentioned but I'd also add MUCH BETTER SCORES!

Have you heard the score to Doctor No?

Alex wrote:

*Yet to see QoS

Alex

The soundtrack. My apologies for mistaking the two. (a very frequent mixup) ... But James Bond theme on one...thank you! :007)