A James Bond Retrospective: Dr. No

Dr. No
1962
Runtime: 1hr 49mins
Directed by Terence Young
Produced by Harry Saltzmann and Albert R. Broccoli
Screenplay by Richard Maibaum, Johanna Harwood and Berkley Mather

Starring:
Sean Connery as James Bond
Joseph Wiseman as Dr. Julius No
Ursula Andress as Honey Ryder
Jack Lord as Felix Leiter
and John Kitzmiller as Quarrel




There is a certain type of person who likes James Bond.  They are usually men of a certain age and social, or aspire to be like men of a certain age and social class, who think various things about various subjects, like to associate political correctness with insanity, and are generally not the sort of people I like to be around. 
Yet, I own each film in the series on DVD, and enjoy occasional marathons. I try to cringe my way though the objectionable parts to the bits I can enjoy without embarassment, and have to keep it all hidden away from all the cool people I know.  Perhaps it is my own political hang-ups, but admitting a liking for James Bond films can feel like owning up to a prediliction for child pornography.  Well, no more.  I'm going to review them all, and bear my scarlet letter for all to see.

Right.

With that out of the way, here we go.  This is the first of Bond's silver screen adventures, and establishes the general formula early on. James Bond is agent 007, and the top gun in the British secret service.  He can't be that good, when he's six below 001, but let's go with it.  After the murder of another secret agent in Jamacia, Bond is sent to investigate, and ends up on the trail of the eponymous Dr. No.  Along the way he is helped by Quarrel, shoe-fetcher of great import (more on that in a bit), and Felix Leiter from the CIA, who is like a really rubbish version of James Bond, who makes phone calls and waits on boats.  He also tries to have his way with Honey Ryder, a convenient love interest who appears out of nowhere near the end of the second act, and has to fight through all manner of dangers on his way to the main villain, including, but not limited to, tarantulas, the least convincing dragons of all time, and the assassins known as the 'three blind mice'.



Although the series has a reputation for busy plots, with plenty of globe trotting, diabolical schemes and big set pieces, this plays out much more like a detective story.  Even by the standards of the time, this film had a very low budget for an action film, which meant that the focus on the character's powers of investigation were born out of necessity as much as anything else.  In the few occasions the film decides to try and stage a big set piece, such as a car chase, the lack of money becomes very noticable.  The same can be said of certian sets in the film, especially once the action reaches Dr. No's lair.  As such, there's a distinct lack of action, and a low body count, in this film.  Whether that's a problem will be a matter of personal preference.

With that being said, the simpler approach really does work wonders.  Stripped of the campy gadgetry and other sundry nonsense, we get a very enjoyable unravelling.  Whilst it's obvious that Dr. No will be the villain (it's not like the film is called 007), and there is never any doubt that good will triumph, it's still quite a thrill to see it all unfold at a rather languid pace.  Dr. No isn't even fully revealed to the audience until the third act, which, by the later standards of the series, is really quite something.  Of course, there is only so much a film of this type can surprise you, and so it sinks or swims on the strength of the main players.  Sean Connery is, obviously, fantastic as the lead.  Tongue in cheek just enough that the film can acknowledge some of the more ridiculous elements, but still with enough of a presence that he convinces as a man of action.  The other great thing about this performance is that it is mostly free of some of the more horrendous examples of casual misogny that would creep into later installments.  Mention must also be made of Joesph Wiseman as the villain of the piece, who manages to put across such an aura of calmness and general creepiness that, despite having very little screen time for a Bond villain, he is easily one of the more memorable.

There are problems with the film, of course.  There is still sexism, and some casual racism, which is impossible not to cringe at.  My understanding is that it was toned down from the book considerably, and if you are not sensetive to such issues, and just want a romp, such things may pass you by.  Personally, I felt quite embarassed by such occurances, and a little annoyed, as such things do matter to my viewing experience.  The other main problem is the limited production values.  Whilst the film does manage to avoid it, for the most part, it's impossible not to notice some of the big empty sets that start appearing in Dr. No's lair, or the obvious back projection during a vigourous car chase halfway through the film.  The worst example, though, the the crudely painted tank that the locals believe to be a dragon.  It's literally a tank with teeth painted on.  Horrible.

These are nitpicks.  Dr. No is an extremely enjoyable film, and a fantastic example of what was the height of high octane action at the cinema 50 years ago.  Whilst later Bond films would increase the scope and scale, it all comes back to this one, and it sets a high bar that, for all the flash and bang, the series has arguably never beaten since, and it still holds up as a superior example of its genre today.

9/10