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
When I consider how weak many of the subsequent villains were, this isn't a problem at all and the strength of the collection of villains in FRWL more than makes up for that. That all these villains are out there and Bond doesn't have a clear idea of who they are although we do adds to the suspense.
That Blofeld is in the background as a mysterious figure works well. Grant is still the most frightening henchman of all and Klebb is just bizarre as is Kronsteen.
Bond doesn't even meet Dr. No and Scaramanga until well into those films and their presence lingering over it works to their advantage and also builds the suspense.
Watched that last night. Excellent film but still a 4/5 scoring from me.
I'll add two to that: OHMSS, and TB (maybe just as controversial – but hey, I never get tired of it!)
But it's a great film nevertheless
"What's a gyna...geneologist"
A crude, vulgar line.
Could not agree more. I would absolutely say that CR/FRWL/OHMSS/DRNO are superior films yet none of them crack my personal top ten. Any number of things can contribute to a movie ranking higher on my list than an objectively better entry.
Like you, TWINE is one of my favourite Bond films and while I am aware of its shortcomings, it still manages to sit so high because of a number of reasons that speak to me. Critical reception or general consensus never even cross my mind when coming to a conclusion regarding any film.
You'd be more likely to see some more love for the so-called lesser entries if people weren't so susceptible to bandwagoning. Some people are more genuine with their picks too though.
EDIT: Ultimately I think characterizations are key. If I can relate to the characters, the acting and the characterizations themselves I can pretty much forgive anything. If those don't work for me, then it's a tough road for the film to convince me. Same goes for visuals and tension for thrillers. Plot has never been a huge driving factor for me.
I would say that title belongs to GF and TSWLM.
That being said, it's one of the best, I agree with that. I find FRWL better, though. Sean is a better Bond and there's not as much drag. And I prefer the villains in that one.
From Russia With Love: A great film, don't get me wrong.
But....
Lacks the sets that make DN, GF, TB, YOLT and DAF great.
Lacks a main villain, no Dr. No, Goldfinger, Largo, Donald Blofeld or Charles Gray Blofeld.
Lacks a villains lair. There's just...nothing.
Lacks a great end-game. It just ends with something that you can find in any other Bond film in the middle section. A boat chase.
I wouldn't go so far to say it's rather boring in places but OHMSS feels like a speeding bullet in comparison.
It has nothing to do with Connery or the cast, they are all very solid. The story itself is very well written, but it's suspense only, Hitchcock style.
As I said, the film is great, but I fail to see why everybody seems to have it as their No 1 or close to the top spot.
Well, the methods of the great pioneers have often puzzled conventional minds.
I agree completely!
Ultimately for me this film is very unique, for the reasons you note. In a series that has 23 other official entries, many of which borrow heavily from other films (even if they mix things up in various ways to try to pull the wool over the eyes of the uninitiated), this one is refreshingly different. As you said, it's suspenseful and Hitchcockian to a degree, and that's another reason I really like it. I love suspense thrillers. Sure, the pace is a bit unhurried compared to contemporary fare, but I contend that this allows the film to 'breathe' and develop atmosphere, as well as enabling character development. Even Barry's score has a bit more of an unusual dark staccato tone in places, which I really enjoy.
You're correct in stating that there is no one main visible villain. However, we can tell in the film that Blofeld is the top dog, and not seeing him adds to the mystery inherent in the film. In place of one main villain we have two intriguing and charismatic schemers in Kronsteen and Klebb. Double trouble! Furthermore, Grant remains the most deadly unexaggerated henchman that Bond has ever faced imho. If that wasn't enough, Kerim Bey remains one of his most endearing friends. So in place of one predictable (and potentially dull) villain we have a whole slew of dynamic adversaries and charismatic colleagues.
The film gives off an overriding romantic ambience to me as well (without being mushy like some later films) and I appreciate that aspect. I find Spectre using Bond's weakness against him by luring him in with an attractive woman to be tantalizing. The fact that he knows it's a trap and still takes the bait further adds to that element. Tatianna certainly has feelings for Bond, and her reactions after he finds out about her role on the train are moving.
Yes, there is no main villain's lair, but instead we have a thrilling finale in Venice, with Klebb being forced to come to town to finish the job that her minions had botched. Tatianna's conflict at this point is interesting to watch, as she must quickly weigh her loyalty to Mother Russia vs. her affection for James. Either choice will have significant consequence for her. Additionally, in place of a lair we have some terrific sets and locations including the incredibly atmospheric and romantic Orient Express at night. How can one complain about that! There's also the chilling sequence inside the Hagia Sophia, the Basilica Cistern sequence (standing in for the basement under the embassy), and of course the ride on the Bosphorous Ferry. On top of all of that, we have one of the top two or three fights in any of the 24 films when Bond squares off against Grant in the confined space of the train cabin. That whole sequence still gives me the chills to this day, it's so well done. That's worth the price of any number of traditional machine gun shootouts imho.
So ultimately it's all the unique attributes which you noted which make FRWL my #1 Bond film, and that's before we even discuss Sean Connery's killer performance, which I rank as one of the top two or three interpretations in a Bond film in the last 50+ years.
In a strange way, and somewhat controversially perhaps, that's one of the reasons I like SF quite a lot too. It took the rulebook and threw it out the window, shaking up the series for the 50th anniversary. There are similarly suspenseful aspects in that film, and it's also suitably different from the rest. I have that ranked around the 9 mark.
I like the Angels of Death. They're certainly better integrated into the plot than later efforts like MR or OP.
Don't really mind since Klebb and and Red Grant are two of the very best antagonists in the series. Off Camera Blofeld works really well too.
Same. There isn't a single wrong/awkward note in FRWL.
Majesty's is undoubtably one of the very best films but Lazenby's stiffness, awkward dubbing and too much back projection in places stop it from being number 1.
...and I did find myself cringing at the "gold balls" line when I saw OHMSS again on Xmas night.
FRWL drips and oozes atmosphere from every orrific. EVERY cast member is perfect.
Grant, though is one of the best villains. Shaw is a superb actor and their fight scene is a cracker! Someone mentioned about doing something different which is all well and good. For me OHMSS took the traditional elements we are all familiar with and made them seem fresh and new. (A lot of this was down to Peter Hunt. Shame he never got to do another Bond film). Poor George is still getting a hard time, but the more times i see him in this the more i like. He's certainly a more convincing Bond than a certain Mr. Brosnan!!
Agree with everything about FRWL! The only thing I'll like to add (which is probably a bit controversial as well), is that the Orient Express scenes outdo the big villain's lair scenes from other Bond films any day of the week! The confined space only add to the drama and suspense of the scenes.
Well said.
To be honest I find Irma Bunt more "cartoony" than Klebb sometimes. Klebb at least shows a bit of fear when faced with potential death from Blofeld near the end. She's utterly ruthless but also shows some vulnerability when she sees Kronsteen killed in front of her. Not to mention the smile to herself when she thinks she's got Bond cornered (you can feel her satisisfaction after all the efforts she has made throughout the mission). She's like one of those horrible yappy small dogs that clings to whatever it seeks. Bunt is good but there's not really a lot to her other than being an obvious matron-style villain. In a Carry On film she would be played by Hatti Jacques. Also, she really camps up the line "it has been so nice...to cure you".
Lazenby was an excellent choice for the film as told. While I'm sure Connery could have done a great job, I'm glad he didn't have a chance. As a result I can still view his amazing resume of Bond films and imagine him as one of only two cool unflappable Bonds (with the other being Moore). I've always believed that these personal stories are better told with a one time actor, because we can then absorb the narrative and emotional dynamic without prior baggage. So I'm happy Laz packed it in after this one.
The parts I don't like all that much in the film are the whole Hilly routine because the film slows down a bit at that point. The dining scene is a bit cheesy and dated too. After Bond is apprehended it really picks up all the way to the end.
Great film.
A lot of his lines also sound like they have been re dubbed (and I'm not talking about the Sir Hiliary Bray section).
Physically though he's great - probably one of the best - and that somewhat makes up for his stiffness.
I very much agree.