ALL SCI-FI Forum Index ALL SCI-FI
The place to “find your people”.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Dr. No (1962)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ALL SCI-FI Forum Index -> Sci-Fi Movies and Serials from 1950 to 1969
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
John Thiel
Planetary Explorer


Joined: 25 Nov 2016
Posts: 28
Location: Lafayette, Indiana

PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 3:32 pm    Post subject: Bottled in Bond Reply with quote

Sean Connery's facial features have always seemed disproportionate to me, the various parts not working together harmoniously. Perhaps this is due to the way he mugs a reaction to something in the film that's supposed to affect him. He is always shown in the publicity fondling a gun, which doesn't make him look really admirable. In this film Ursula Andress looked dowdy and plastered rather than gorgeous, which is apparently said over the same thing I'm looking at. She also seemed awkward most of the time. For me this makes the film into an existential situation in which the characters don't relate to their environment. Also the bullets when shown always are dum-dum bullets, which don't penetrate a body with very great ease.

Most every Bond film except Casino Royale (I have a copy of the book to prove this one existed) has a science fiction element, for example the atomic bomb in Goldfinger, the machinery in Dr. No, but the only one that came really close to actually being science fiction was Moonraker, which had a sort of science fiction plot going on. Dr. No was somewhat like a horror fantasy in the Sax Rohmer tradition, with that sf element where the doctor had space program interference equipment. But the important thing, as in all espionage books, is how bad he was and how he was messing with the government.

_________________
How do you do, folks? I sure am glad to see y'alls.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
scotpens
Starship Captain


Joined: 19 Sep 2014
Posts: 871
Location: The Left Coast

PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 4:16 pm    Post subject: Re: Bottled in Bond Reply with quote

John Thiel wrote:
Sean Connery's facial features have always seemed disproportionate to me, the various parts not working together harmoniously.

Well, everyone's entitled to an opinion. But I'm sure there are millions of women -- and quite a few men, too -- who'd disagree with that opinion!

John Thiel wrote:
In this film Ursula Andress looked dowdy and plastered rather than gorgeous, which is apparently said over the same thing I'm looking at. She also seemed awkward most of the time.

To be fair, it was only Ms. Andress' third feature film role, English wasn't her first language, and she was always at best a limited actress. But "dowdy and plastered"? Were we looking at the same woman??



Well, like I said, everyone's entitled to an opinion . . .


Last edited by scotpens on Sun Mar 18, 2018 1:37 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17018
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 4:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

I'll say one thing for you, John, you certainly provide a fresh perspective on these things! Very Happy

What's the fun of message board where everybody agrees? No fun at all, I say! Laughing

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gord Green
Galactic Ambassador


Joined: 06 Oct 2014
Posts: 2940
Location: Buffalo, NY

PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well....Since I've been told a number of times that I bear a strong resemblence to Mr. Connery, I don't quite know how to take your comments! And if you think Ursula looked "plastered".....Well...give me a well plastered bird anytime! They always help to ventilate me' kilt!
_________________
There comes a time, thief, when gold loses its lustre, and the gems cease to sparkle, and the throne room becomes a prison; and all that is left is a father's love for his child.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Custer
Space Sector Commander


Joined: 22 Aug 2015
Posts: 932
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 8:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote




While Ursula Andress in her white bikini, emerging from the sea, is the iconic image in the James Bond series, I see that she later appeared as Vespa Lind... in the first "spoof" version of Casino Royale...


Last edited by Custer on Mon Jul 02, 2018 6:33 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17018
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

In my opinion, Ursula looks better in that sexy dress above than in the bikini, because her shoulders are too wide in relation to her hips for my tastes. She's built sort of like "Big John" from that Jimmy Dean song: "Kinda broad at the shoulder and narrow at the hip". Very Happy

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
scotpens
Starship Captain


Joined: 19 Sep 2014
Posts: 871
Location: The Left Coast

PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Custer wrote:

While Ursula Andress in her white bikini, emerging from the sea, is the iconic image in the James Bond series, I see that she later appeared as Vespa Lind... in the first "spoof" version of Casino Royale...

Vesper Lynd, not Vespa. Unless you're thinking of Ursula on a Vespa.



Bud Brewster wrote:

In my opinion, Ursula looks better in that sexy dress above than in the bikini, because her shoulders are too wide in relation to her hips for my tastes. She's built sort of like "Big John" from that Jimmy Dean song: "Kinda broad at the shoulder and narrow at the hip". Very Happy

Oh, come now. Ursula had a very womanly physique. Even Mr. Magoo would never mistake her for a 6-foot-6-inch, 245-pound coal miner!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Custer
Space Sector Commander


Joined: 22 Aug 2015
Posts: 932
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 6:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sailor’s belt made Bond film history

(From The Times today, by Anna Behrmann)



In one of the most famous moments in the Bond films, Ursula Andress emerges from the sea in a white bikini, approaching Sean Connery.

For one retired Royal Navy officer, this scene from the first James Bond film, Dr No in 1962, has great significance, because the star was wearing his webbing belt.

Gordon Joslin, 83, then a 28-year-old on HMS Troubridge, gave his belt to Andress, who was playing Honey Ryder, because she thought her bikini was “missing something”. Sailors from the ship had been watching the film being made in Jamaica.

He told The Mail on Sunday that an officer had ordered him to take it off. “He grabbed it off me and it was wrapped around her hips. I didn’t get it back.”

Andress sold the outfit for £41,125 in 2001. Mr Joslin said he did not receive any payment for his belt.

He added that when the film came out nobody believed him
.


Mr Joslin with a belt of the same type

Comments on the article online point out that the belt would have been Navy property, rather than Mr. Joslin's...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
johnnybear
Mission Specialist


Joined: 15 Jun 2016
Posts: 442

PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 1:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sean Connery was the best Bond by far! He was as tough as Bond in real life, could charm the beautiful ladies into bed and moved like a panther! He looked a bit rough in his early films just as Fleming had written the character! And Connery's gals were the best of the series and have never been equaled let alone beaten!
JB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17018
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

On the subject of Bond, I agree that Sean was excellent, and his portrayal inspired a generation of young guys who yearned to be cool secret agents.






In the early 1960s I constructed a crude shoulder holster out of elastic from Mom's sewing kit, cardboard from inside the package a new shirt came in, and black electrical tape. I put a pistol which used blanks to start races in it and secretly wore it under my suit coat when the family went to church a few days later.

Seriously. Rolling Eyes






As for the Bond films, the passage of time has made me less fond of the Connery era movies. As action films go, they don't fare well in comparison to more recent movies, such as the Pierce Brosnan versions of James Bond.

But that's an unfair comparison, because audiences in the 1960s would have been shocked by movies like Die Hard, and they certainly would have been horrified by the brutal action in the newer Bond films with Daniel Craig.

But the Bond films starring Sean Connery weren't meant to be action movies in the strictest sense. They were spoofs of thrillers, with tongue-in-cheek plots and loads of imagination, along with strong ties to science fiction.






They sold us on the idea that Bond battled evil men with wit and charm, relying on violence only when absolutely necessary.





The formula gelled perfectly in Goldfinger (the only Sean Connery 007 film I own) —





— but the franchise drifted away from it's true focus with each subsequent movie. Thunderball spent much more money . . . but if just wasn't as good.





The world itself changed around the fantasy realm of Bond until finally the lighthearted escapism of James Bond clashed with the reality of Vietnam and race riots.

Personally I feel that the Pierce Brosnan films did a fine job of resurrecting the Bond mythos as much as possible, ramping up the action just enough, while keeping the suave character, without making him a parody of the Sean Connery version.






And for the record, the Bond Girls were every bit a good as the ones in the Connery films.









As for Roger Moore, all I'll say is that he didn't work for me in the first film, and all he did after that was get progressively older. Rolling Eyes

But the Pierce Brosnan movies still work for me. The pre-title action sequence in Goldeneye when Bond skydives to catch up with a pilotless nose-diving plane to escape the Russian soldiers and their mountaintop fortress was . . . draw-dropping! Shocked






In short, Pierce is a great Bond, and Dame Judith Dench is a delightful M.

The lovely Samantha Bond (with her ironic name) is a sexier MoneyPenny than Lois Maxwell, even before the lady got WAY to old too play the role.

And Desmond Llewelyn managed to play Q just as well in his last appearance in the role as he did in his first. Smile

The Danial Craig films are gritty, action packed, and deliberately divorced from everything that made Bond a global sensation in the early 1960s. A line in Casino Royal says it all about the current Bond films, when Craig orders a Vodka Martini.

"Shaken or stirred, sir?" the bartender asks.

"Do I look like I care?" Craig replies.

(Oh. Okay. We get the message.) Sad

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)


Last edited by Bud Brewster on Mon Jul 02, 2018 6:51 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gord Green
Galactic Ambassador


Joined: 06 Oct 2014
Posts: 2940
Location: Buffalo, NY

PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bud, if you haven't seen Connery;s second Bond film FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE I would HIGHLY recommend it.



It was the most "spy" centric of the films as well as having a great pair of villians in an exciting story.

A reviewer on IMd site makes the perfect view "

"This has to be my favorite bond. It mixes the best aspects of an action movie with the necessary espionage. Recent Bond attempts have moved away from the "spy-game" aspect and rely more on large explosions to dazzle the viewer. Kerem Bey, the Turkish spy leader, is as much a partner and foil for Bond as there ever was. Any movie with a gypsy fight, absurd helicopter assassination attempts, and boat chase has to be great.

Also, Daniella Bianchi is my favorite Bond girl. Her truceau is as sexy as it gets, though this is a subject every true Bond fan will debate about. The only objection is that they dubbed her voice into a more coarse, Russian accent. Overall, it is a wonderful movie that spans the globe and defeats SPECTRE. James Bond will return, but never with as much intrigue, beauty, and suspense as "From Russia With Love"."



If you haven't seen it....give it a look.

_________________
There comes a time, thief, when gold loses its lustre, and the gems cease to sparkle, and the throne room becomes a prison; and all that is left is a father's love for his child.


Last edited by Gord Green on Wed Jul 04, 2018 2:45 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17018
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gord Green wrote:
Bud, if you haven't seen Connery;s second Bond film FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE I would HIGHLY recommend it. .

Gord, you CAN'T be serous! Shocked

I saw all the Bond films when they first came out, and I've seen them all numerous times since then. My sister gave me the soundtrack album of Thunderball for Christmas in 1963. I still have it, but the movie was a huge disappointment after Goldfinger.

Dr. No is fair at best, From Russia With Love is a bit better, but Goldfinger blows them both out of the water.

The big climax in From Russia With Love is pathetic "kicking fight" between Bond and a nasty old lady — after which we're treated to a quick scene in which Bond blows up a few boats with a flare pistol.

* Yawn * Sorry, but they're both boring by today's standards. Shocked

And the fight in the train with Robert Shaw was enjoyable in 1963, but it ain't a pimple on the average action scene in any of the four Brosnan films.

I have nostalgic feelings for Goldfinger (I took my high school prom queen, Lynne Bell, to see it on a date), but none of the Connery films hold up well today.

Face it, my friend . . . times change, people's expectations go up, and old action movies end up looking like quaint efforts from the past.

Sorry, but that's just the facts of life.
Sad
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gord Green
Galactic Ambassador


Joined: 06 Oct 2014
Posts: 2940
Location: Buffalo, NY

PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 7:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BUD WROTE:
Quote:
Face it, my friend . . . times change, people's expectations go up, and old action movies end up looking like quaint efforts from the past.

Sorry, but that's just the facts of life.

And that's why movies like FORBIDDEN PLANET are so lame by todays standards, as you say.

My God! It needs a serious makeover with all cgi and a more modern looking robot!

Yes....I'm being sarcastic.

GOLDFINGER is also my favorite Bond movie, but I still think FRWL is the best "spy oriented" movie of the lot.

Different tastes....but can still see the qualities of the rest of the lot!

_________________
There comes a time, thief, when gold loses its lustre, and the gems cease to sparkle, and the throne room becomes a prison; and all that is left is a father's love for his child.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17018
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gord Green wrote:
And that's why movies like FORBIDDEN PLANET are so lame by today's standards, as you say.

My God! It needs a serious makeover with all cgi and a more modern looking robot!

I'm pretty sure I never said anything like that. Yes, I know . . . you were being sarcastic. (Beware of false statements when debating an issue. It weakens your arguments. Very Happy)

My point was that the "spy oriented" aspects of the Bond films were a deliberate joke, and the more serious these films took themselves, the less enjoyable these attempts actually were.

From Russian with Love wanted the audience to be enthralled by a plot to steal a clunky old "decoding device" the Russians had. (In short, bad idea.)

Nobody knew or cared what a clunky old Russian decoding device did or why it was important! Rolling Eyes

On the other hand, Goldfinger was about an evil man who killed pretty girls by painting them gold, and who wanted to irradiate America's entire gold supply to bankrupt the nation!

Gord, EVERYBODY knew why pretty girls were important, and we ALL understood the importance of America's gold supply on the nation's economy! (In short, good idea.)

My point, of course, is that these tongue-in-check "spy oriented" movies were dull when they chose the wrong premise, but they were fun when the chose the right one.

From Russian with Love was dull. Goldfinger was fun.

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)


Last edited by Bud Brewster on Tue Jul 03, 2018 7:02 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
scotpens
Starship Captain


Joined: 19 Sep 2014
Posts: 871
Location: The Left Coast

PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 9:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gord Green wrote:

Also, Daniella Bianchi is my favorite Bond girl. Her truceau is as sexy as it gets, though this is a subject every true Bond fan will debate about.

Excuse me, but what's a "truceau"? I assume you don't mean "trousseau," since that wouldn't make any sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ALL SCI-FI Forum Index -> Sci-Fi Movies and Serials from 1950 to 1969 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group