Bond Heresy?

chrisisall

Of the solid, excellent first four Bond movies, I find From Russia With Love to be the least enjoyable- so much so that I don't even own it.
Yes, great performances, nicely told tale, awesome baddies, beautiful Bond Girl... just, I don't know, very dated, and it was dated when I first saw it in the cinema in the Seventies.
Truthfully, I find it slow moving, and pedestrian in many ways. Take Robert Shaw out of the equation, and I probably never would have seen it the twenty or so times I have through the years.
Make no mistake, FRWL is a great movie. But I would easily rank Dr. No (groundbreaking), Goldfinger (smooth & stylish) or Thunderball (big yet convincing) above it for overall Bond excellence.

Am I alone in this heresy?
And, what other heresies can fans here come up with? :v

calhounite

Russia was slow paced, but generally considered top notch due to the villains. Kleb and Shaw. Would rate it 3rd (after Goldfinger and DAF). Also, probably the most realistic of all Bond adventures.

chrisisall

calhounite wrote:

Also, probably the most realistic of all Bond adventures.

Oh, definitely. But for me personally, that does not work in its favour. If I want 'realistic,' then I'll watch Guinness' Tinker Tailor.
Or even, McGoohan's Danger Man (US: Secret Agent).
Oh, and it's nice to meet another DAF fan here- most seem to throw that one under the proverbial bus. I like it as much or more than any of the 'comic book' Bonds (YOLT thru TSWLM).

calhounite

Yes, There's a fine line between realistic and drab. Can see how Russia is not everyone's cup of tea.

Saying anything nice about DAF does border on heresy around most fans. Bond was supposedly bored. If so, that only made him better. Boredom magnifies the Bond presence and his attribute of supreme and utter confidence. This is his critical trait. DAF is brilliant in every respect as is Bond. Jill St John is great as the Bond girl and is the girl who played Plenty. And Bond's greatest nemesis, Blofelt. has the longest screen time in any Bond movie and makes the most of it. So why shouldn't it be one of the best.

Loeffelholz

FRWL is my favourite Bond---and not just because it's fairly close to Fleming's source material. I like it precisely because of its more languid, 'old school'-style narrative pacing. The novel was that way as well---just be thankful that Bond doesn't show up until Act 2, LOL, as he did in the book.

Still, not at all heresy to say otherwise. We all have our favourites and non-favourites. All's good!

DEFIANT 74205

Heretic!!! Just kidding

From Russia With Love is my favourite Bond if for no reason other than the fact that it is pretty close to the original Fleming novel, with only a few modifications for film. To me, everything about it was brilliant - yes, some might call it slow but that's the way it was meant to be. That's the way the novel was written. I must say I find it odd that you would rank Thunderball above it. Thunderball was just as slow in some parts.

To me, Fleming's work is the "bible" of what Bond is meant to be. From Russia With Love and On Her Majesty's Secret Service are my top two favourite Bond films because they follow Fleming's story more closely than any other Bond film. I tend to judge Bond films by its adherence to Fleming, and based on that criteria, From Russia With Love is THE best.

Loeffelholz

DEFIANT 74205 wrote:

To me, Fleming's work is the "bible" of what Bond is meant to be. From Russia With Love and On Her Majesty's Secret Service are my top two favourite Bond films because they follow Fleming's story more closely than any other Bond film. I tend to judge Bond films by its adherence to Fleming, and based on that criteria, From Russia With Love is THE best.

Always nice to run into a fellow Flemingist^TM -{

Moore Than

From Russia With Love is one of my favourite's. It is so well written and acted that it easily holds my attention from start to finish. It never seems slow to me. I particularly enjoy the mutual friendship and trust that builds between Bond and Kerim Bey, the real shock and sadness when Bond is confronted with Bey's dead body on the train. Robert Shaw's portrayal of Red Grant is awesome. Totally menacing, you believe he can kill Bond.

Napoleon Plural

chrisisall wrote:

Truthfully, I find it slow moving, and pedestrian in many ways. Take Robert Shaw out of the equation, and I probably never would have seen it the twenty or so times I have through the years.

Like the joke about the 90 year old couple who can't get to have sex so much. When did you discover that, asks the doctor. "Twice last night and once again this morning," comes the reply.

Thunderpussy

One of the great things about the Bond series is that there is a film for all Moods.
If you want a big fantasy story you've got YOLT,MOONRAKER, TSWLM and when
you want something a little more realistic then you've got FRWL, OHMSS, CR
I think FRWL has a great story and characters -{ But we all have our own
favourites and those we don't watch as often. With Me I try and avoid QOS. :007)

Jamesbondjr

DEFIANT 74205 wrote:

To me, Fleming's work is the "bible" of what Bond is meant to be. From Russia With Love and On Her Majesty's Secret Service are my top two favourite Bond films because they follow Fleming's story more closely than any other Bond film. I tend to judge Bond films by its adherence to Fleming, and based on that criteria, From Russia With Love is THE best.

I agree with this, with one addition. While the film follows the novel very closely, I think the character is a little different. I think the character is more movie friendly than the one of the novels. For me, the closest portrayal of Fleming's Bond comes with Dalton's performance in Licence To Kill and the film suffers because of it to a certain extent.

I don't think that Fleming's original character would translate well to screen if he was exactly as we see him in the novels, I think the version or versions that we have seen on screen work very well but that the book and film versions should be a little different from each other and work well that way.

Napoleon Plural

Yeah, FRWL is more lighthearted, I mean compare the two Klebbs. Tortures people for kicks in the books. And the whole duplicity thing of Bond taking advantage of the girl to get the coding machine; it's played down in the field but draws angry tears from Tanya in the book (Mind you, why is she in tears? It's all a set up anyway).

chrisisall

DEFIANT 74205 wrote:

I must say I find it odd that you would rank Thunderball above it. Thunderball was just as slow in some parts.

Yes, you're right... I suppose it's not really the pace as much as the realism. I'm a middle guy. The poles don't entertain me as much... FRWL is at the realistic end, and DAD is at the unrealistic (However I will ALWAYS at some point revisit FRWL, I will NEVER see DAD again in my life).
Thunderball is definitely closer to FRWL than DAD, but it's still in the delightfully outrageous middle area for me. B-)

Napoleon Plural

A past member, MBE, said FRWL lacked the 'smirk' factor, where Bond is doing something outrageous and arrogant in terms of stunts or derring do. Of course, that's what others like about it.

I love it, but found it suffered on the large screen, as you know what happens next and different rules for different formats. I also like it on ITV with a commercial break, didn't like it on BBC2 on its one showing.

Loving DAD is another heresy, or saying the films that have nothing to do with Fleming are more enjoyable than those that do, (not heard anyone venture that).

chrisisall

Napoleon Plural wrote:

Loving DAD is another heresy

Well, you won't be getting that particular heresy from me.

But how about this: I liked Denise Richards in TWINE.... there, I said it.

Maybe it was just that after Lynn Holly Johnson in FYEO & Tanya Roberts in AVTAK, no other Bond actress could ever annoy me again... )

thesecretagent

FRWL is excellent. You are completely and utterly insane.

chrisisall

thesecretagent wrote:

FRWL is excellent.

I agree completely.

You are completely and utterly insane.

You are not the first to posit that sentiment. )

Sir Hillary Bray

Napoleon Plural wrote:

chrisisall wrote:

Truthfully, I find it slow moving, and pedestrian in many ways. Take Robert Shaw out of the equation, and I probably never would have seen it the twenty or so times I have through the years.

Like the joke about the 90 year old couple who can't get to have sex so much. When did you discover that, asks the doctor. "Twice last night and once again this morning," comes the reply.

) Precisely. chrisisall, your dislike for FRWL is all relative, isn't it? How many other films have you seen that many times?

You're no heretic, although we disagree on the film in question. It's one of the best IMO.

Thunderpussy

Sir Hillary Bray wrote :

You're no heretic

you mean I've been heating up all this Tar and feathers, sharpening pitchforks and lighting
burning torches, For Nothing.

http://youtu.be/qLvGnro4Cgw

chrisisall

Sir Hillary Bray wrote:

How many other films have you seen that many times?

A few... but DAF & TND are at the top, numerically. Seen each one near 50 X.

You're no heretic

Not even for liking Denise Richards?

Blackleiter

That seals it - you're officially a heretic! )

chrisisall wrote:

Sir Hillary Bray wrote:

How many other films have you seen that many times?

A few... but DAF & TND are at the top, numerically. Seen each one near 50 X.

You're no heretic

Not even for liking Denise Richards?

chrisisall

Blackleiter wrote:

That seals it - you're officially a heretic! )

MUHUHUHAHAHA! :v