From Russia With Love & On Her Majesty's Secret Service

LegoBatman008

What do From Russia With Love and On Her Majesty's Secret Service have in common? Both movies have a title sequence with some kind of instrumental score by John Barry. The only difference is From Russia With Love is somehow exciting to say the least, and On Her Majesty Secret Service is a bit on the slow side with an uncharismatic, "actor" in the lead role.

Number24

Both are fairly close to Fleming, character and plot based and two of the best entries in the series.

Sir Miles

Not really sure what you are after here - seems really odd to pick these two films out at random...needs more thought from you...

AlphaOmegaSin

They are both very close to the Novels, along with Casino Royale they pretty much follow the Books Word to Word. With a few Differences of course.

Thunderpussy

Both really great Bond films. -{

Charmed & Dangerous

I personally prefer OHMSS to FRWL. There are parts of FRWL I found a little slow paced, for instance the great sequences aboard the Orient Express were followed by the almost superfluous scenes on the lake and shooting down the helicopters - a bit anti-climactic IMHO. Whereas OHMSS builds to a crescendo.

In terms of what they have in common - both are "hard edged" Bonds, both have some of the tensest scenes of the series, and both had excellent villains who were probably the most physically threatening to Bond. And helicopters.

Gassy Man

Both films move slower than most Bond films but when the action comes, it is swift and satisfying. Both feature plots that rely on realities of the day more than fantasy. Both ground Bond in a universe that is more plausible than in most of the films. Bond genuinely cares about the women in both films. Both rely comparatively little on gadgets. Both feature humor that seems to grow out of the situation rather than be jammed into the story for comic effect. Both feature Blofeld as a diabolical genius, though he is arguably even more cold-blooded in FRWL. Both take place primarily in Europe. Both have sympathetic male sacrificial lambs. Both require Bond to operate while cut off from help from his own people (though this is pretty common in Bond films). Both feature an evil red-headed henchwoman of questionable femininity and unappealing appearance. Both feature helicopters in key sequences. Both feature the scoped rifle. Both allow Bond to be hurt physically and emotionally. Both give Bond a chance to pull off a daring daytime heist right out from under the nose of the people he is stealing from. Both feature escape from a cave or catacombs, talk of settling down in a posh London neighborhood, and a dinner where someone is not who they claim to be.

Number24

Bravo! :007)

Blackleiter

Gassy Man wrote:

Both films move slower than most Bond films but when the action comes, it is swift and satisfying. Both feature plots that rely on realities of the day more than fantasy. Both ground Bond in a universe that is more plausible than in most of the films. Bond genuinely cares about the women in both films. Both rely comparatively little on gadgets. Both feature humor that seems to grow out of the situation rather than be jammed into the story for comic effect. Both feature Blofeld as a diabolical genius, though he is arguably even more cold-blooded in FRWL. Both take place primarily in Europe. Both have sympathetic male sacrificial lambs. Both require Bond to operate while cut off from help from his own people (though this is pretty common in Bond films). Both feature an evil red-headed henchwoman of questionable femininity and unappealing appearance. Both feature helicopters in key sequences. Both feature the scoped rifle. Both allow Bond to be hurt physically and emotionally. Both give Bond a chance to pull off a daring daytime heist right out from under the nose of the people he is stealing from. Both feature escape from a cave or catacombs, talk of settling down in a posh London neighborhood, and a dinner where someone is not who they claim to be.

Excellent! And I agree with those who consider these to be two of the best movies in the entire series.

Le Samourai

Charmed & Dangerous wrote:

I personally prefer OHMSS to FRWL. There are parts of FRWL I found a little slow paced, for instance the great sequences aboard the Orient Express were followed by the almost superfluous scenes on the lake and shooting down the helicopters - a bit anti-climactic IMHO. Whereas OHMSS builds to a crescendo.

In terms of what they have in common - both are "hard edged" Bonds, both have some of the tensest scenes of the series, and both had excellent villains who were probably the most physically threatening to Bond. And helicopters.

I'm glad you brought up the post-Orient Express chase sequences in FRWL. I thought they were totally unnecessary and interrupted the rhythm of the film to its detriment.

AlphaOmegaSin

Not really, I think they were a great Follow up to the Orient Express Sequences.

Firemass

*Both follow the Fleming novel closely.

*Both are highly regarded among fans, especially Fleming purists.

*Both are slow paced and overcompensate by adding too much action towards the end.

*Both are a bit overrated nowadays.


FRWL fans should not expect a tense cold war thriller from OHMSS, because it has the goofiest, over-the-top plot of all 007 films. Nevertheless, many fans regard OHMSS as a gritty, down-to-earth Bond because he gets married at the end. Go figure. ?:)


I would never diss Lazenby though…he's great. -{

AlphaOmegaSin

But comparing the Plot of OHMSS to MR then obviously the later will be more OTT. Bond was more Human for the first Time in OHMSS, we even got to see his Office. His Emotional Reaction to Tracy dying and then cradling her had more Emotional Depth then what had come before.

Charmed & Dangerous

Firemass wrote:

FRWL fans should not expect a tense cold war thriller from OHMSS, because it has the goofiest, over-the-top plot of all 007 films. -{

Which OHMSS were you watching? ?:)

Compared to Goldfinger, Thunderball, YOLT, DAF, TSWLM, MR, Octopussy, AVTAK, and sadly all of Pierce's films, it's like a kitchen- sink drama! :007)

Thunderpussy

+1 OHMSS, goofy ?. I think not. )

Gassy Man

Blackleiter wrote:

Gassy Man wrote:

Both films move slower than most Bond films but when the action comes, it is swift and satisfying. Both feature plots that rely on realities of the day more than fantasy. Both ground Bond in a universe that is more plausible than in most of the films. Bond genuinely cares about the women in both films. Both rely comparatively little on gadgets. Both feature humor that seems to grow out of the situation rather than be jammed into the story for comic effect. Both feature Blofeld as a diabolical genius, though he is arguably even more cold-blooded in FRWL. Both take place primarily in Europe. Both have sympathetic male sacrificial lambs. Both require Bond to operate while cut off from help from his own people (though this is pretty common in Bond films). Both feature an evil red-headed henchwoman of questionable femininity and unappealing appearance. Both feature helicopters in key sequences. Both feature the scoped rifle. Both allow Bond to be hurt physically and emotionally. Both give Bond a chance to pull off a daring daytime heist right out from under the nose of the people he is stealing from. Both feature escape from a cave or catacombs, talk of settling down in a posh London neighborhood, and a dinner where someone is not who they claim to be.

Excellent! And I agree with those who consider these to be two of the best movies in the entire series.

{[]

Gassy Man

Firemass wrote:

FRWL fans should not expect a tense cold war thriller from OHMSS, because it has the goofiest, over-the-top plot of all 007 films. Nevertheless, many fans regard OHMSS as a gritty, down-to-earth Bond because he gets married at the end. Go figure. ?:)

Actually, it has one of the more plausible plots of any of the Bond films.

Bacteria and viruses remain among the cheapest and most frightening weapons of mass destruction available. If companies like Monsanto can create strains of vegetables resistant to blight and disease, it stands to reason they can also create viruses particularly toxic to those species.

Any numbers of governments have used bacteria and viruses to their advantage, from the U.S. giving smallpox infested blankets to Native Americans to the Viet Cong coating punji sticks with feces so enemies would not only get stabbed but infected, as a friend's father did. Certainly, the Nazis and Japanese during WWII were working on scientific ways to kill people and doing their horrible experiments. Blofeld's desire to extort a pardon from the world rather than money with this sort of threat is sheer genius -- and exactly the sort of thing that someone in his position would want as nations close in for the kill.

There are only two things that potentially strain credibility in OHMSS, but I don't think either does as much as stealing space shuttles bound for invisible space stations or Bond flying through the air at a faster rate than a falling plane to catch up with it. One is the idea of mass hypnosis to create Manchurian Candidates. While the CIA gave up on MK Ultra, a program that sought similar outcomes, I will point out that not only were rumors of mind control rampant in the 50s and 60s, but even today we know there are drugs that have rather strange side effects. One is Ambien, a common sleep aid that had the curious side effect of people doing things, like driving, while in a sedated state. Certainly, a combination of drugs and hypnosis for mind control is theoretically possible, even if no one will admit they've done it. We don't know the full extent of Blofeld's "treatment" of these women, nor what will continue once the women leave his clinic, but it is reasonable to assume he could continue to drug them.

The other issue is Tracy's sudden appearances that coincide with Bond . . . but these are easily explainable within the context of the story. He doesn't just "happen" to run into her, but she plans it out, including their first meeting at the hotel. After all, if Draco is able to track her and know everything that Bond has done, he has the resources to track Bond, and she has access to those resources. When she finds him after his escape from Piz Gloria, she says this is how she finds Bond. I would also say that is the most romantic moment of the film. Here is Bond, seemingly at the end, with no cavalry coming to rescue him, and yet, there appears the woman he loves. How could he not marry her after that? It is a grand moment of wish fulfillment, but it works, and if you've ever been in love for real, you know how powerful such a moment is. So, it may seem rather convenient, but I'd argue for the story about how a woman manages to get Bond to marry her, it is completely necessary.

Are there some hokey moments in the execution? Sure, the "da-da-dah-da-dum" music from John Barry and the sped up fight sequences are cheesy. I'm not a huge fan of the rear projection work even though that was common at the time. But these have nothing to do with the plot. It works just fine.

Blackleiter

Charmed & Dangerous wrote:

Firemass wrote:

FRWL fans should not expect a tense cold war thriller from OHMSS, because it has the goofiest, over-the-top plot of all 007 films. -{

Which OHMSS were you watching? ?:)

Compared to Goldfinger, Thunderball, YOLT, DAF, TSWLM, MR, Octopussy, AVTAK, and sadly all of Pierce's films, it's like a kitchen- sink drama! :007)

+1 -{

AlphaOmegaSin

Don't forget to add the Fact that Bond does generally look Exhausted and Scared when he is sitting down on the Bench keeping his Jacket above his Ears before Tracy arrives.

L Jones

As much as I love both movies, I have to choose "OHMSS". I think the last 20 minutes of "FRWL" may have tainted it a bit.

AlphaOmegaSin

Looking back upon FRWL, it does feel very Hitchcockian in Style.

DEFIANT 74205

Charmed & Dangerous wrote:

I personally prefer OHMSS to FRWL. There are parts of FRWL I found a little slow paced, for instance the great sequences aboard the Orient Express were followed by the almost superfluous scenes on the lake and shooting down the helicopters - a bit anti-climactic IMHO. Whereas OHMSS builds to a crescendo.

In terms of what they have in common - both are "hard edged" Bonds, both have some of the tensest scenes of the series, and both had excellent villains who were probably the most physically threatening to Bond. And helicopters.

They're both brilliant, but I personally prefer From Russia With Love. There is little to pick between them when it comes to being well written and being accurately aligned with the novels (a factor which I rank very highly), but Connery at his peak is what gives it the edge over On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

But I do see what you mean about From Russia With Love being a little slow paced in comparison. However, I don't see how speeding it up, as it were, would make it any better a film (and any closer to the novels). Bond films isn't (or shouldn't) be about all-out action, there needs to be a discernible plot as well.

CmdrAtticus

I've heard complaints from different corners over the years about some of the earlier Bond's like FRWL being slow paced.

I've come to believe this has more to do with decades of frenetic editing and almost plotless action films than anything else. FRWL was a pure spy thriller and by keeping the screenplay close to the novel (which they wanted to do then because Fleming was still alive), they kept the correct pacing required to allow the audience to get to know and empathize with the characters. Even GF has the same leisurely pace - most don't notice it because there is so much location switching though the film.

The third act with all the exploding spectacle of the boat and helicopter chase was tacked on because the producers believed the audience wanted it - the same reason they blew up DN's lair at the end. Following that, it created a template that all the films would always have. It's another reason why Bond always end's up at the villain's hide out or the place of his grand scheme - just so they can have the explosions. Fleming probably laughed at the whole silliness of it - while he was counting all the money in his head he was going to get from it.

As to any plots being "goofy", well, though Fleming based many of his on real life events, he wrote them as pure entertainment and meant them to be treated as such.
The only way he could keep them grounded in any type of reality was using the product placement effect of inserting brand names, filling paragraphs with factual information on subjects such as smuggling, bio weapons, etc. and making his character an orphaned, drug abusing male suffering from years of physical abuse by his enemies and the type of psychological damage soldiers suffer from war.

Yes FRWL even had a goofy plot - any code machine stolen would cause all the intel agencies to change their codes rendering it useless. Fleming based this on the German ULTRA machine - which the allies succeeded with only because the Nazis didn't know their codes had been broken. Throw in the Russian cipher clerk falling in love with the an agent she never laid eyes on and....

OHMSS - hypnotized beauties laded with a bio weapon. Any more silly than going into Fort Knox?

FAVTAK - flooding Silicone Valley? Really? - and that didn't even come from Fleming.

The reason OHMSS and FRWL are at the tops of the series list for critics has, in my opinion, more to do with the fact the stories came from Fleming. It's a really large reason why they both have so much in common.