Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Bond Is Forever: "Dr. No"

Welcome to the first installment of our new Café feature, Bond Is Forever, where the martinis are always shaken, not stirred. I decided to begin with the very first cinematic adaptation of Ian Fleming's superspy, Dr. No (1962).

When a British agent stationed in Jamaica disappears, MI6 agent James Bond (Sean Connery), codename 007, is sent to investigate. Bond learns that the missing agent was collecting mineral samples from Crab Key, a mysterious island from where most people don't seem to return. The spy sneaks onto the island under the cover of darkness to put a stop to Crab Key's inhabitant, the secretive and nefarious Dr. No (Joseph Wiseman).

Dr. No was actually not the first Bond adaptation. For the 1950s TV anthology series, Climax!, Fleming's first 007 novel, Casino Royale, was brought to the little screen. It starred Barry Nelson as American agent, Jimmy Bond. In 1961, Harry Saltzman bought the rights to the James Bond character, with the exception, of course, of Casino Royale, since the rights to the novel had already been sold. The initial concept for Bond's first movie was an original screenplay, not an adaptation. Fleming collaborated with screenwriters, Kevin McClory and Jack Whittingham, but the project was eventually abandoned. The novelist took the story and turned it into a book, Thunderball, which subsequently became the fourth Bond film. This all led to a prolonged legal dispute between the film's producers and the two screenwriters involved. But we can discuss that when we get to Thunderball (1965).

Dr. No is an interesting movie to view retrospectively and compare to later films, especially in light of what would become standard elements of the series. In Bond's first scene, he is gambling, one of his favorite hobbies in the book which carried over to the movies (although he utilized this "hobby" in his work, too). He also introduces himself as, "Bond. James Bond." (Ask any Bond fan to say this line, and they will more than likely speak it with a Connery accent.) When 007 is given his assignment, M has Bond turn over his much-loved Beretta for a Walther PPK (pictured), a gun that would make an appearance in nearly every Bond film. By Tomorrow Never Dies (1997), Bond would stick with a Walther but switch to a newer model, the P99. However, in Quantum of Solace (2008), he reverted back to the classic PPK. While Bond does not specifically order a shaken-not-stirred vodka martini, it is clear that he prefers the drink mixed this way.

Dr. No has neither a pre-credit sequence nor a theme song performed by a notable singer. On the other hand, the music which plays over the majority of the opening credits becomes the Bond theme for the series, and the infamous gun barrel sequence opens the film. Audiences were not treated to the Aston Martin, which will not be inaugurated until Goldfinger two years later. But there are two more things which would become recognizable in the Bond series: the Bond girl, Honey Ryder (Ursula Andress); and the Bond villain, the titular baddie. In this particular film, neither character does very much. Honey spends most of the movie cowering behind Bond, but Dr. No displayed characteristics which would become all too familiar: he was independently wealthy, concocted diabolical plots to take over the world, and had a God complex to boot. Dr. No was also the introduction to SPECTRE, an organization for which Dr. No says he works. SPECTRE would play a prominent role in most of the Connery films, as well as the Bond movie with that one guy.

While many recurring Bond characters would generally be portrayed by the same actors (Bernard Lee was M for quite some time, and Lois Maxwell was Moneypenny for even longer), CIA agent and Bond pal, Felix Leiter, was a revolving door of performers. In Dr. No, Felix is played by Jack Lord, perhaps better known from the TV series, Hawaii Five-O. Lord, like most Felix Leiters, would not reprise the role.

Sean Connery is, simply put, an outstanding 007. He's suave, sophisticated, and, best of all, completely believable as a spy. I think the Bond series has been blessed with great actors to portray the British secret agent, but Connery originated the cinematic character and is consequently the most discernible. Watch a parody of James Bond, and you won't see a comedian poking fun at Bond, per se; you'll see someone imitating Sean Connery. I mean no offense to the men who would take over the role in future films. It's just that, when people think of 007, they typically think of Connery, much like Bela Lugosi being most often associated with Dracula (and fans speaking with that well known Hungarian accent).

Dr. No has never been one of my favorite Bond films. I think it's enjoyable, with exciting action sequences and a fun plot. But I am not a fan of Andress, who was dubbed for the movie (one lady for her speaking voice, another for singing). Her performance is a bit boring, although she admittedly has little to do, other than be the damsel in distress. Likewise, Dr. No doesn't appear in the film until it is very nearly over. He has only one significant scene, in which he dines with 007 at his lair. It would have been preferable to have seen more of Wiseman (who died in October last year; click here to read more about the actor, courtesy of sazball). Additionally, the ending seems rushed. By the time Bond discovers Dr. No's plan and goes about saving the day, there is only about ten minutes remaining. The inevitable showdown between superspy and villain is somewhat anti-climatic.

I would love to hear what everyone else thinks of
Dr. No, Connery, and Bond... James Bond.

Bond Is Forever will return next month with Live and Let Die (1973).

14 comments:

  1. Sark, what a terrific start to your "Bond Is Forever" feature! I haven't seen the TV version of CASINO ROYALE (though a friend has and will hopefully comment), but I can't imagine Barry Nelson as 007...and I've seen the photos. Your points about Honey and Dr. No are spot on--I was amazed that the villain in was so little of the film. Like you, I think it's fascinating to watch DR. NO in light of the films that follow. In addition to the similarities and differences you astutely noted, it's interesting to examine the credits--you can seen the beginnings of the "Bond team." Screenwriter Richard Maibaum would work on many of the Bond scripts. Maurice Binder pioneered the opening credits sequences (though there are much more subdued in DR. NO). Dr. No's lair is the first of Ken Adam's many impressive Bondian sets. Editor Peter Hunt would eventually become a Bond director. Director Terence Young and cinematographer Ted Moore also worked on future 007 pictures. And finally there's the great John Barry, who is credited for conducting the music...but according to some accounts, actually wrote the James Bond Theme instead of Monty Norman. But, as you said about THUNDERBALL, that's a discussion for another time. Thanks, Sark, for an informative, enjoyable kick-off to the Bond discussions!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sark, I'm a huge fan of James Bond. I think Dr. No, maybe one of my favorites from my 007 list. Dr. No, is a wonderful villain. I love all the gadgets and trouble that only 007 can get himself into. I also enjoyed Ursula Andress performance as Honey. Although, Miss Moneypenny is my favorite Bond girl. I also love where the mission takes Bond to the beautiful island of Jamaica. I' m really looking forward to your future Bond film blogs.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sark and Rick, some stuff you might not know. Ian Fleming was not happy with the choice of Connery as Bond.This being a high class blog I can't repeat what he said. If you can ever find a copy of the Lp soundtrack to DR no you can see that a bad attempt was made to try to cover up Sean's Scottland For Ever arm Tattoo. which was pretty hard to do since he has his arm front and center around round Ursula in the cover photo. This was a big deal at the time.

    ReplyDelete
  4. WOW! What a superbly written commentary you have shared with us, Sark! I appreciate your meticulous research and your observations are infallible. Honey is not a strong character, though she is gorgeous, and we see far too little of Dr. No. This film paved the way for the pattern we have come to expect in a Bond film, though female roles improved significantly and the villain was utilized much more effectively in subsequent offerings as well. I also appreciated Rick's expert observations. Paul, I had not heard your information before and truly thank you for your insight, too. Dawn, I like the setting, too. Quite frankly, this is the stuff that dream blogs are made of, even if I am dangling my preposition. Well done, all!

    ReplyDelete
  5. In addition the rushed ending, Sark, Dr. No's plan for world domination is rather pedestrian. That's a flaw that carries over into several of the future Bond movies. The villain's scheme almost becomes--in Hitchcockian terms--a MacGuffin. It's there to propel the plot, but has little interest in itself. That's not true for all the series entries (Goldfinger's devious scheme is quite clever), but it applies to several of the Bond pics.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks, everyone, for the compliments. Paul, I'd heard that Fleming wasn't happy with Connery as 007, but did he change his mind once he saw DR. NO? Dawn, I, too, am a Moneypenny fan! Lois Maxwell was terrific, and I also liked Samantha Bond, who played her in the Brosnan films. Rick, Dr. No's plot is indeed a MacGuffin, and I didn't like the way that Bond foils his plans. I won't give it away, for anyone who hasn't seen the film, but it's too simple and happens too quickly. Goldfinger's scheme is nothing short of brilliant!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sark, this is a great post on Dr. NO. I love all the James Bond movies. You are right about Dr. No not being in the film much. I would have liked seeing his character more. The one thing I love about the Bond movies are the cool and cruel villains out to destroy the world in unique ways. Jamaica is beautiful setting. My husband thinks that Ursula in a bikini is a beautiful sight. She is one of his favorite Bond girls. She is not great actress but like Toto said, she is gorgeous!! Enjoyed your post very much.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Something else that really struck me about DR. NO was the modest budget, especially in light of the later large-scale Bond flicks. Ken Adam's sets still look awesome, but there's a tacky rear screen when Bond is driving. The Jamaica setting is nice, but there's no globe-hopping in this one (well, other than the hop from the UK to Jamaica). I'm not sure how much the budget increased for FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, but it sure looks like a pricier picture and the scope definitely feels bigger.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I've always wondered why they decided on DR. NO as the first novel to adapt. It's the sixth one in Ian Fleming's series. It's almost as if they picked it out of a hat, especially considering that the follow-up film was from the 5th novel, then the 7th, then the 9th, etc. It seems so random. Maybe Harry and Cubby thought they could easily produce DR. NO with the modest budget they were afforded, but that doesn't explain the subsequent selections. (Although we all know why they picked MOONRAKER, yeah? Little movie called STAR WARS...)

    ReplyDelete
  10. That's an interesting point, Sark. Because if one were to go by intriguing title alone, then better choices would have been YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE and LIVE AND LET DIE.

    ReplyDelete
  11. And why do so many Bond titles reference life and/or death? In addition to the ones you just mentioned, there's DIE ANOTHER DAY, TOMORROW NEVER DIES, LICENCE TO KILL, A VIEW TO A KILL. They should cite Bond's espionage skills, like YOU'RE ONLY A SPY TWICE or LIVE AND LET SPY.

    ReplyDelete
  12. While Dr. No isn't in the movie much, people here aren't giving him credit. His multiethnic background and "man without a country" status make him a unique 007 villain in the movies. Plus, he is the first baddie from SPECTRE.

    ReplyDelete
  13. That was our point exactly. That's why we're saying that he should have been in the movie more than he was.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I know I'm late to the party but I'll add two short comments.

    The pairing of producers Albert Broccoli and Harry Saltzman are the real stars of this film. Whatever synergy all these players brought to the screen, this pair were responsible for the machine that Bond became, starting with this "little" film of theirs. What are the modern day equivalents? I can only think of horror films that started small and got fat as time went on. Thoughts?

    Dr. No also benchmarked the humor of the film series that waxed and waned. The droll, pithy comments were here ("I think they were on their way to a funeral," after a menacing car chase when a funeral hack goes over a cliff; and "It's lovely here in the moutains," as we pan the breasts of Miss Taro).

    There is one bit of topical humor that is often lost on audiences today but was very funny at the time. Arriving for dinner with Dr. No, Bond doubletakes at Goya's painting of the Duke of Wellington. The portrait had been stolen from the National Gallery in London just before filming began.

    By the way, since it's winter, this reminds of of seeing ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE for the first time in a cold hall in college. Never watch a snowy movie in a cold room during the dead of winter! This was my Bondian Cherry. :) Thanks to my persistant college roommate...Rick29 himself!

    ReplyDelete