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.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

Must the duck be here?

The Favourite (2018)
(SPOILERS) In my review of The Killing of a Sacred Deer, I suggested The Favourite might be a Yorgos Lanthimos movie for those who don’t like Yorgos Lanthimos movies. At least, that’s what I’d heard. And certainly, it’s more accessible than either of his previous pictures, the first two thirds resembling a kind of Carry On Up the Greenaway, but despite these broader, more slapstick elements and abundant caustic humour, there’s a prevailing detachment on the part of the director, a distancing oversight that rather suggests he doesn’t feel very much for his subjects, no matter how much they emote, suffer or connive. Or pratfall.

Whoever comes, I'll kill them. I'll kill them all.

John Wick: Chapter 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) There’s no guessing he’s back. John Wick’s return is most definite and demonstrable, in a sequel that does what sequels ought in all the right ways, upping the ante while never losing sight of the ingredients that made the original so formidable. John Wick: Chapter 2 finds the minimalist, stripped-back vehicle and character of the first instalment furnished with an elaborate colour palette and even more idiosyncrasies around the fringes, rather like Mad Max in that sense, and director Chad Stahleski (this time without the collaboration of David Leitch, but to no discernible deficit) ensures the action is filled to overflowing, but with an even stronger narrative drive that makes the most of changes of gear, scenery and motivation.

The result is a giddily hilarious, edge-of-the-seat thrill ride (don’t believe The New York Times review: it is not “altogether more solemn” I can only guess Jeannette Catsoulis didn’t revisit the original in the interven…

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.

I don’t know if what is happening is fair, but it’s the only thing I can think of that’s close to justice.

The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017)
(SPOILERS) I think I knew I wasn’t going to like The Killing of a Sacred Deer in the first five minutes. And that was without the unedifying sight of open-heart surgery that takes up the first four. Yorgos Lanthimos is something of a Marmite director, and my responses to this and his previous The Lobster (which I merely thought was “okay” after exhausting its thin premise) haven’t induced me to check out his earlier work. Of course, he has now come out with a film that, reputedly, even his naysayers will like, awards-darling The Favourite

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …