Skip to main content

Russian clocks are always correct.


From Russia with Love
(1963)

The second Bond film cements the success of the first, and with Terence Young returning as director, Peter Hunt as editor and Richard Maibaum as writer, you’d have thought it might have been plain sailing. There were production and script problems from the off, however, and Hunt’s freehand in the editing suite did much to hide the joins. Indeed, there’s little evidence of the concerns on screen; the finished film standards head and shoulders above Dr. No in terms of quality and, outside of its status within the Bond canon, as a high quality spy thriller in its own right.


The reason I emphasise the latter aspect is that FRWL is atypically small scale in terms of action, villainy and set pieces. It works as a Cold War romance/thriller without needing to attach global domination to the list of narrative requirements. Notably, SPECTRE was not part of the original story and finessing their scheming into the proceedings caused a fair bit of pain. The MacGuffin isn’t very grand either; the procurement of a Russian cypher machine (the Lektor).


The SPECTRE plan is terribly convoluted. A SPECTRE double agent (Rosa Klebb, played by Lotte Lenya) requests a SMERSH operative (Tatiana Romanova, Daniela Blanchi) to trap Bond, enticing him to steal the Lektor at which point,

Red Grant: We were keeping you alive until you could give us the Lektor.

And the plan is to then sell the Lektor back to SHMERSH. Presumably the overriding aim is, as Grant suggests, to escalate tensions between the British and Soviets but it seems riddled with holes (even if the plan was a success, wouldn’t the Russkies be suspicious of how SHMERSH just happened to gain possession of the Lektor?)

Nevertheless, one of the pleasures of FRWL is that Bond is one step behind SPECTRE most of the time. Yes, he smells a rat. But he’s being shadowed by Red Grant throughout; someone else is calling the shots. Robert Shaw’s casting as Red Grant is a touch of genius. Although smaller and stockier than Connery, he has the physical presence and the charisma to make him every bit Bond’s equal. Their eventual meeting aboard the Orient Express sizzles because we have anticipated it for the first half of the film. Grant has already killed a Bond-a-like in the pre-credits sequence (itself a remarkably early recognition of the iconographic status of the series and star) and it’s a nice touch that he saves him when Bond is hanging out with gypsies.


Perhaps the greatest strength of this film is the casting. If Shaw is unstoppable (until he isn’t), just think how it might not have been so (Sean Bean’s lacklustre showing as a similarly matched opponent in Goldeneye). Lenya is likewise perfect, because her screen presence is so extraordinary. Diminutive and in no way a striking beauty, she uses her averageness to her advantage; playing up Klebb’s severity and suggesting a sense of inferiority too, when the occasion demands it. Oh, and lesbian tendencies. Also making a strong impression is Pedro Armendariz as Kerim Bey, who buddies up with Bond for a surprisingly long stretch of the film (Armendariz sadly found that he had terminal cancer during the making of the film, struggling valiantly to finish his work on it before he died). As for the Bond series’ reliance on former beauty queens, Daniela Bianchi brings a reserved elegance to Tatiana (her gauzy bare bottom is that of a body double), ironically since he character is instructed to prostitute herself for mother Russia.


Elsewhere, the film establishes its status as part of a series very firmly. Dr. No is referenced at the outset, Bond’s still canoodling with Sylvia Trench, M and Moneypenney are back (one of the most amusing scenes has them listening to Bond’s taped discussion with Tatiana  concerning the Lektor ), Bond again throws his hat onto the hat stand with precison and Q Branch is introduced.


Something that would never happen now; the story is given time to breathe. It’s 45 minutes before Bond has a fight. The showstopper, the brutal, face-crunching duel with Shaw is well-past halftime. Peter Hunt’s editing of this sequence is outstanding, and it remains supremely gripping today. The actors' chemistry is so strong  (“Red wine with fish”) prior to the dust-up that you hardly notice that Grant is blithely telling Bond every single thing he needs to know (in classic Bond villain fashion).


Unfortunately, this sequence is so effective that when it comes to the big spends, a helicopter chase (filmed in Scotland) followed by a boat chase, it’s somewhat anti-climactic. Which isn’t to say these sequences aren't well-directed and edited, but we’ve been spoiled by the action relating to the characters rather than faceless foes shooting at out hero. It’s appropriate, therefore, that the epilogue has Rosa Klebb attempting to take Bond out personally.

Bond: She’s had her kicks.

FRWL gets almost everything right that was still nascent in Dr. No. The balance between character, plot and action would rarely be so perfect again. Certainly, following the next outing, Connery’s Bond would stray into the trap of throwing money at the screen in the hope it would solve all other problems.


Popular posts from this blog

You were this amazing occidental samurai.

Ricochet (1991) (SPOILERS) You have to wonder at Denzel Washington’s agent at this point in the actor’s career. He’d recently won his first Oscar for Glory , yet followed it with less-than-glorious heart-transplant ghost comedy Heart Condition (Bob Hoskins’ racist cop receives Washington’s dead lawyer’s ticker; a recipe for hijinks!) Not long after, he dipped his tentative toe in the action arena with this Joel Silver production; Denzel has made his share of action fare since, of course, most of it serviceable if unremarkable, but none of it comes near to delivering the schlocky excesses of Ricochet , a movie at once ingenious and risible in its plot permutations, performances and production profligacy.

He’ll regret it to his dying day, if ever he lives that long.

The Quiet Man (1952) (SPOILERS) The John Wayne & John Ford film for those who don’t like John Wayne & John Ford films? The Quiet Man takes its cues from Ford’s earlier How Green Was My Valley in terms of, well less Anglophile and Hibernophile and Cambrophile nostalgia respectively for past times, climes and heritage, as Wayne’s pugilist returns to his family seat and stirs up a hot bed of emotions, not least with Maureen O’Hara’s red-headed hothead. The result is a very likeable movie, for all its inculcated Oirishness and studied eccentricity.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Well, something’s broke on your daddy’s spaceship.

Apollo 13 (1995) (SPOILERS) The NASA propaganda movie to end all NASA propaganda movies. Their original conception of the perilous Apollo 13 mission deserves due credit in itself; what better way to bolster waning interest in slightly naff perambulations around a TV studio than to manufacture a crisis event, one emphasising the absurd fragility of the alleged non-terrestrial excursions and the indomitable force that is “science” in achieving them? Apollo 13 the lunar mission was tailor made for Apollo 13 the movie version – make believe the make-believe – and who could have been better to lead this fantasy ride than Guantanamo Hanks at his all-American popularity peak?

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

You think a monkey knows he’s sitting on top of a rocket that might explode?

The Right Stuff (1983) (SPOILERS) While it certainly more than fulfils the function of a NASA-propaganda picture – as in, it affirms the legitimacy of their activities – The Right Stuff escapes the designation of rote testament reserved for Ron Howard’s later Apollo 13 . Partly because it has such a distinctive personality and attitude. Partly too because of the way it has found its through line, which isn’t so much the “wow” of the Space Race and those picked to be a part of it as it is the personification of that titular quality in someone who wasn’t even in the Mercury programme: Chuck Yaeger (Sam Shephard). I was captivated by The Right Stuff when I first saw it, and even now, with the benefit of knowing-NASA-better – not that the movie is exactly extolling its virtues from the rooftops anyway – I consider it something of a masterpiece, an interrogation of legends that both builds them and tears them down. The latter aspect doubtless not NASA approved.

Drank the red. Good for you.

Morbius (2022) (SPOILERS) Generic isn’t necessarily a slur. Not if, by implication, it’s suggestive of the kind of movie made twenty years ago, when the alternative is the kind of super-woke content Disney currently prioritises. Unfortunately, after a reasonable first hour, Morbius descends so resignedly into such unmoderated formula that you’re left with a too-clear image of Sony’s Spider-Verse when it lacks a larger-than-life performer (Tom Hardy, for example) at the centre of any given vehicle.

He doesn’t want to lead you. He just wants you to follow.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022) (SPOILERS) The general failing of the prequel concept is a fairly self-evident one; it’s spurred by the desire to cash in, rather than to tell a story. This is why so few prequels, in any form, are worth the viewer/reader/listener’s time, in and of themselves. At best, they tend to be something of a well-rehearsed fait accompli. In the movie medium, even when there is material that withstands closer inspection (the Star Wars prequels; The Hobbit , if you like), the execution ends up botched. With Fantastic Beasts , there was never a whiff of such lofty purpose, and each subsequent sequel to the first prequel has succeeded only in drawing attention to its prosaic function: keeping franchise flag flying, even at half-mast. Hence Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore , belatedly arriving after twice the envisaged gap between instalments and course-correcting none of the problems present in The Crimes of Grindelwald .

So, you’re telling me that NASA is going to kill the President of the United States with an earthquake?

Conspiracy Theory (1997) (SPOILERS) Mel Gibson’s official rehabilitation occurred with the announcement of 2016’s Oscar nominations, when Hacksaw Ridge garnered six nods, including Mel as director. Obviously, many refuse to be persuaded that there’s any legitimate atonement for the things someone says. They probably weren’t even convinced by Mel’s appearance in Daddy’s Home 2 , an act of abject obeisance if ever there was one. In other circles, though, Gibbo, or Mad Mel, is venerated as a saviour unsullied by the depraved Hollywood machine, one of the brave few who would not allow them to take his freedom. Or at least, his values. Of course, that’s frequently based on alleged comments he made, ones it’s highly likely he didn’t. But doesn’t that rather appeal to the premise of his 23-year-old star vehicle Conspiracy Theory , in which “ A good conspiracy theory is an unproveable one ”?

I have done some desperate, foolish things come 3 o'clock in the morning.

Sea of Love (1989) (SPOILERS) It’s difficult to imagine Sea of Love starring Dustin Hoffman, for whom Richard Price wrote the screenplay but who bowed out over requests for multiple rewrites. Perhaps Hoffman secretly recognised what most of us don’t need telling; there’s no way he fits into an erotic thriller (I’m not sure I’d even buy him as a cop). Although, he would doubtless have had fun essaying the investigative side, involving a succession of dates on the New York singles scene as a means to ensnare a killer. Al Pacino, on the other hand, has just the necessary seedy, threadbare, desperate quality, and he’s a powerhouse in a movie that, without its performances (Ellen Barkin and John Goodman may also take bows), would be a mostly pedestrian and unremarkable entry in the then burgeoning serial killer genre. Well, I say unremarkable. The rightly most-remarked-upon aspect of the murder mystery side is how unsatisfyingly it’s resolved. Sea of Love is so scant of r