United Artists released Dr No in the United Kingdon on 10 October 1962.
Dr No made a ton of money. And to be honest, I have no idea why. I don’t mind the film. But it’s hardly great. It seems more like a spoof than a serious effort.
Part of the appeal seems to be Sean Connery. But again: I don’t get it. He really isn’t that attractive. And that’s doubly so when he takes his shirt off. But most important, he moves through the film breezily like none of the action is real.
But I could say that of all the Bond films Connery was in. Dr No is in one way better than the rest. It at least starts as a grounded spy film. It’s really only when he gets to the island (and then especially after capture) that it descends into parody.
But parody of what?! It’s the first James Bond film!
People often point to the ridiculous surfing scene from Die Another Day as the point when Bond was just silly. But I think that was true from the beginning.
But don’t get me wrong. If you like these films, great for you! I wish I did!
The big problem is that Bond films take themselves too seriously at the same time that they don’t. And it rarely gels. No one takes the 1960s Batman TV series seriously. Yet it makes just as much sense as any Bond film. Similarly, Dr No’s island is no less believable than Dreyfus’ Bavarian castle in The Pink Panther Strikes Again. And the villains in The President’s Analyst are way better.
The whole thing is fun enough, though. I can definitely think of films that are harder to sit through. But it is galling that so many people promote this film as great (while dismissing far better films) when this is based on nothing more than nostalgia.
But I’m willing to watch it again. Here:
Dr No poster via Amazon under Fair Use.
As the resident Bond expert, I will say… the problems with Dr. No are 1: a tight budget (the movie looks like it was shot fast and cheap, because it was), and 2: it’s too close to the book. The Fleming books are trash, and I suspect he intentionally wrote them as lucrative trash, laughing his way to the bank. (Dr. No was the only one I read, and I read it in fifth grade. I think the baddie’s Secret Lair was on a bat guano processing facility, meaning the plot, and every Bond plot that came after, was literally batshit crazy.)
From Russia With Love is miles better, because it has Brecht veteran Lotte Lenya in it. Plus Robert Shaw looking creepy. (Joseph Wiseman in Dr. No just looks bored.)
Gert Fröbe in Goldfinger is pretty good, probably because he didn’t give a s**t and learned the lines phonetically (he didn’t speak English at the time). Amazingly — I just read this — the role was offered to Orson Welles first, but he wanted too much money. Now I want to write about this garbage movie!
All the Bond films are garbage movies, but some have their charms. The stunt work. The John Barry scores, especially. Daniel Craig’s doubletakes. (Moore did doubletakes, too, but Craig is funnier.) Visually, they’re all mostly hugely ugly, although Skyfall has Roger Deakins making trash look pretty pretty. I kinda like the Dalton ones in spite of myself.
There is no reason for a grown human to be into these things… but when I was a wimpy, sometimes ill kid, it was adventure, world travel, danger defeated daringly. Exactly what a kid would want.
Plus badass Barry music! The best of it’s great! That’s what makes Russia and Goldfinger tolerable, is the great scores. Really good.
If I still had money, I’d hire you to write a long article about the series. Of course, one problem I’ve found in doing this is that the film continue to get made! It’s best to pick filmmakers who are dead. My Bert I Gordon article never needs updating!