It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
The book is more an anti-Soviet propaganda piece, nothing wrong with that but the films are more escapist and fun, and they were leaving off the Russians in the early 60s. Barry's music does add much needed menace to the film imo.
The first thing that has to be said of FRWL is that I find it quite hard to see it within the 'Bond film' prefix. I know that the film established many of the knowns traits of the Bond series (pre-title sequence/ dancing girls in the main titles/ SPECTRE/ Q etc) but I feel that despite defining the 'formula' it isn't characteristically a 'Bond film'. By the mid '60's Bond had essentially become a genre within itself. This idea definitely abides to this day and people often talk about the 'Bond genre' and it's known staples. In my opinion, FRWL is in fact an Cold War espionage tale. A lot of the other Bond films seem to forget this notion but FRWL is draped with many of the great traits of spy fiction from this period.
I feel nothing more cements this point than the opening 3 minutes of the movie. Here we meet our hero trapped in the dark in a maze, a great metaphor for any espionage tale. He is being hunted by some unknown threat. This threat is Grant, a man lurking perpetually in the shadows waiting to strike, and slowly laying out a plan to capture his bate. In this case his bate is Agent 007. It's a great atmospheric moment that dosent rely on dialogue and instead evokes a great feeling of unease simply through the stunning visuals from Ted Moore, the snappy editing of Peter Hunt and the great score by John Barry, all under the careful direction of Terence Young. It's a great sequence as it establishes quite how ruthless the villains of the film are and sets up the notion that in Bond's world someone is always watching.
FRWL is a proper Cold War espionage tale, despite not dealing with the murky politics of Western and Russian relations. The films takes place in the backdrop of the Cold War and creates a fun escapism story which is still rooted in real world politics. This has been a notion the Bond films have always maintained and often done well. What I love about Bond films and it's something that Ian Fleming mined to great effect was their ability to create great romantic spy stories. FRWL probably has the best plot of any Bond film. A Russian clerk has discovered a photo of a dashing British spy inside a file and has fallen madly in love with him, so much so that she is willing to defect to the British. It just so happens she works with the much desired Lecktor decoding-device and she's willing to bring it over if said British agent comes to get her. It's all far too good to be true and the British know it. It's a great romantic plot and really adds to the glamour of the Bond world. Moreover, Istanbul as a setting adds a further romantic tinge to the story with its beautiful couples-retreat scenery. Add further to the mix a trip on the Orient Express, its clear that FRWL is a real piece of sexy spy fiction. It also helps that our hero is quite so beautiful and happens to be immaculately tailored throughout the film. The 1960's setting is also stunning as the film has a beautiful classy chic feel to it; I can't think of a more enduring image than seeing Bond and the girl lying together while she smokes a cigarette, it's a moment that's not trying to be cool, it just is.
Fleming's great skill was to balance these elements of glamour and sex appeal and marry it together with the deadly ruthless nature of Bond's work. One of the great things FRWL does is establish some first rate villains, here in the form of SPECTRE. There is a beautiful metaphor used at the outset of the film by Blofeld when he discusses the 'stupid' Siamese fighting fish. As the two fish fight the third waits to attack. This idea lingers throughout the film as we watch Grant stalk Bond throughout the story waiting for the opportune moment to strike. The Grant character really steals the show in FRWL he is such a quiet malevolent force throughout the story; efficiently disposing of anyone that gets in his way. I really liked the notion of him almost being the negative image of Bond and something of an angel of death. I love how he watches over Bond as his 'guardian angel' waiting for him to bring the Lecktor to him on a plate. Robert Shaw is really magnificent in this film as the Grant/Bond showdown is something we as the audience have been anticipating from the very first frame of the film. The confrontation scene is truly the best moment of the whole film. The highlight of the prolonged dialogue scene (aside from that great slap) comes when Grant tells Bond to get on his knees. There are obvious homoerotic undertones but I feel the moment is a perfect example of a great power-shift in the dynamic between these two men with Grant finally capturing the 'great James Bond' and rendering the man hopeless. Grant is the perfect foil for 007 as it almost seems that he has been bred from the test-tube to take down James Bond. It all culminates in the fantastic fight scene between the two, a lot has been written about the sequence, so I'll seemly confirm that it's as excellent as its ever been. The majesty of the sequence is really to do with its lack of grace, it literally feels like two men in a small contained space going after each other with lethal intent. It's a fight for the death and it really feels like it, when the fight is over Connery looks exhausted and so undeniable are the audience.
The other great thing about the villains of this piece are their masterful plan. There is a further metaphor used through Kronsteen's chess scene. Like the game, the art of spying isn't simply a battle of brawn but instead is an intellectual minefield. This element is further emphasised through the way SPECTRE pits the Russians against the British as pawns in part of their wicked game. SPECTRE are the chucklingly puppeteers throughout the film, slowly pulling the strings of the superpowers to heat up the Cold War in Istanbul.
This notion is great as it really sets the film within the backdrop of the paranoia and mistrust of the time. This is a movie where everyone is watching and keeping tabs on one another. Immediately at the outset with Kronsteen at his game, a message is delivered to him covertly, codewords are given at airports, and people can't be seen together in fear of incriminating themselves. I loved the mistrusting nature of the film; as soon as Tanya's message comes into mi6 they immediately suspect a trap and when Bond goes to his hotel he walks around his room to check if the place has been bugged. This mistrust is well placed as all the spies in the film are in fact most definitely all spying on each other. In fact in Istanbul it's all rather customary and Kerim Bey turns a blind-eye to it all. It's only when the Russians attack when the stacks really do begin to heat up. I love the way that when Bond meets Tanya on the boat he seems suspicious of everyone and when a man walks down some stairs Bond stops talking and walks away slightly. The man is clearly just a bystander but it all contributes to establishing a great atmospheric paranoid tone. Some of my favourite moments were these great atmospheric segments where the movie is silent and the visuals and music are allowed to play to full effect. For instance the movie's pre-title sequence or the scene in the Sofia Mosque, each of these scenes is plagued by a great thick cloud of mistrust and paranoia, or even simple moments like seeing Grant watch Bond walk across the platform while he's still on the train. The film's big bad, Blofeld, is also kept in the shadows which further shows the mistrusting nature of the piece. Even Bond's boss's identity is kept shrouded and all that is revealed is his codename; M.
Even Q's gadgets in this film were created as devices to evade possible detection from the enemy, hence their covert ordinary appearance. This idea was born of necessity within the espionage world but over time the notion has got lost in translation with the proceeding films. In this film, recording devices are hidden in cameras for a reason. Bond is a spy and therefore has to maintain a certain illusion and Q is the man behind the magic, later films seems to forget this idea; hence the increasingly ridiculous and unnecessary 'gadgets' (the belt in Goldeneye, exploding pens and keyring-finders) .
At the outset of this review I stated that I don't think FRWL is a Bond film in the traditional sense as it truly is an espionage thriller, but I also feel that it lacks a lot of the bombastic qualities that we have come to expect of 007 in recent years. The film is noticeably a smaller scale affair than the Bond films not only of today but also those that shortly followed FRWL's release. It may make FRWL look slightly pale in comparison, I don't mean that in a narrative sense, as the story of the film is great and the pacing is superb. But the production values don't quite seem as first class as they later became; for instance a lot of the sets in the film seem clunky and flimsily. Furthermore, the action also seems slightly chaotic and stagey with the gypsy fight scene starting to really show it's age. In addition, the entire gypsy and SPECTRE training camp sequences are also a little on the silly side of things, and for a brief moment during the gyspy-girl fight the film was at risk of losing me.
In terms of performances, the movie is first rate. The film is fantastically cast, even the smaller players. The actor playing Kronsteen is brilliantly creepy and weird-looking and Lotte Lenya is a lot of fun as the vile and small Rosa Klebb (her female authoritarian figure seems a nice contrast the Judi Dench's M). Tanya is slight window dressing but that seems to be an important part of her character, she is supposed to be a naive innocent girl dragged into SPECTRE's vicious web and Daniela Bianchi is quite beautiful. Connery is really the man we're here to see. His character isn't given much more to do than fully invest himself in the plot, but the movie really gives him some meat to chew on. Connery is truly quite beautiful and he seems to embody the suave and charismatic side of Bond with such grace and elan. The way he enters Moneypenny's office; I don't think there is a single man who dosent wish they were as cool as 007 at that point. But Connery's great ability was the way he was able to ruthlessly change his manner, often becoming extremely violent and deadly and occasionally quite frightening. Bond is clearly hurt by Kerim's death and tenderly grapes his friend's arm. However, Connery's Bond seems a man of rigid machismo and when he tells Kerim's son of the death he is blunt and matter-of-factly. However, he betrays himself of a trace of affection by giving the boy a few token belongings from his father. Their is also a trace of desperation in him when Grant has him on his knees but also a fair amount of resilience as Bond is constantly hoping for inspiration for a possible escape plan. Pedro Armindaiesz is also fantastic and slides through the film with his effortless charmisa. It's further testament to him that he was so very ill throughout filming, with reports that the crew had to often physically find ways to prop him up so he could finish his scenes. His presence is truly a treat and Kerim's death actually feels like a genuine loss.
So FRWL is a great espionage thriller that cemented the Bond formula; for better of worse. The film is fast paced, sexy, glamorous and dangerous. Despite starting to show it's age the film is still an epic first-class Bond adventure.
Also check this out:
http://skymovies.sky.com/from-russia-with-love/iconic-bond-moments-from-russia-with-love
It's great to hear these comments and it's awesome to get both Craig and Bardem's opinion on the film
I also recommend that you type in any Bond film title and then 'iconic moments; into google. You get a great three minute collection of clips from the films intercut with talking head segments featuring film critics, actors, directors, the producers etc.
35 yrs since Shaw died today , I miss him :(
Pretty cool to have his autograph and also his salary papers :D
As for the film itself, and whatever was said before, it's arguably the truest representation of the Fleming character by any of the six actors to ever play the part. It's not as much fun as Dr No, but Connery is at his most serious, and radiates all the qualities and characteristics of what James Bond should truly be. Fleming would have to have been proud of how it worked out, a year before his death. Unfortunately it gets a little dull in places, but there's an array of interesting characters to get involved in, even if the locations can seem a little mundane sometimes. It's certainly a step back from the exotics of Dr No that came before it. Matt Monro gives a memorable theme intro, and it's simply put - Connery, and James Bond at his absolute best. Only Dalton in The Living Daylights can wrestle with it for top position as what James Bond should truly resemble
Also , I presume he didn't work out much those last yrs and gained lots of calories due to booze.
I'll add to that. Shaw was just great in whatever he did. A brilliant actor sorely missed.
I don't remember Shaw playing a single role badly. He was outstanding in pretty much all he did.
FRWL reminds me less of a Bond film and much more of a Hitchcock film. In many ways it is actually a more brutal and aggressive version of North by Northwest.
It really is the Hitchcock of Bonds.
That being said, the Bind movies are usually recognised as being a genre into itself and where the movies originally did as they pleased and essentially led the way, I think even now the series should really go back to taking more risks particularly when it comes to exposition and really letting things have the time to boil before we get the big bangs. Handled with panache and with a great cast, I think Bond movies today can reassert themselves into that old ground without it being a problem. This is underscored mainly by the fact EoN are handling things more seriously to give us more Flemingesque thrillers and a quality principle cast aided by a good script writer and being overseen by the likes of Mendes. I'm definitely optimistic about the possibilities.
Also I know it's ten years after, but I really think that's a nice write up @Pierce2Daniel. FRWL is my favourite Bond film, and it's really a very different kind of movie than what comes after.
It is, however I can imagine it will take a while since we already saw it in Skyfall. Which feels like a long time ago, but is really only three films.