FRWL is a great great film.
Lazenby
The upper reaches of the AmazoPosts: 606MI6 Agent
I just watched FRWL last night for the first time in a while and I was struck by how well it has dated. I mean, the film is now 44 years old (which places it firmly in the Medieval era of action movies) and, wonderfully remastered, it has lost very little of its suspense, coolness and overall appeal. (I'm not just writing out of sentiment here, I wasn't even born until 12 years after it was originally released). Among other things it was reaffirmed to me why Sean Connery is almost universally regarded as the best James Bond-- in FRWL he perfectly embodies all the most cherished Bondian qualities: toughness, alertness, resourcefulness, sex appeal, smoothness and just the right amount of tenderness when called for. There are so many things to like about this film! Kerim Bey is a wonderful character, easily the most successful of all Bond's allies, the whole Gypsy camp sequence almost seems out of place, but it works wonderfully, Daniella Bianchi is very beautiful and wonderfully cast, Red Grant's plot and how it only gradually becomes apparent to both the audience and Bond, and the way Grant is just lurking in the shadows without any dialogue for the first 2/3 gives him just the right aura of cold creepiness. The whole plot of this movie is subtly complex and the best part is that it doesn't become ridiculous and unbelievable as one scrutinizes it. And then there's the whole train scene-- culminating in what is still one of the top 3 fights of the whole series-- easily one of the masterpieces of 60s cinema. Anyway, yeah. FRWL is awesome.
Comments
I am surprised you don't rate OHMSS higher (than at least FYEO and TSWLM).
Also, the Instanbul is a rough town line always cracks me up--coming from Bond, I mean, whoa. How does he manage to stay alive for 5 minutes with that kinda thinking, lol.
That's probably because it was, I think. I read somewhere that they just tacked it on because they felt they needed one more action sequence. It's probably my least favorite part of the film, to be honest, but like you say, minor minor quibble. (I agree with your comment about the music as well.)
Oh, I'm not blind to OHMSS' charms, mind you, It can be the crown jewel of the franchise when it wants to. -{
That's how I feel about Moonraker. It's hated by many for its entirely inappropriate slapstick, but there is a wonderful Bond film lurking in there somewhere.
That was only done because John Barry had left by then and Peter Hunt re-used "Death Of Dr No" to plug the gap.
Incidentally, this re-use of Monty Norman's music later became a minor point in the famous "Who Wrote The James Bond Theme" court case, as did the brief snippet of "Under The Mango Tree" heard in OHMSS when 007 cleans out his desk drawer.
Pound-for-pound the best movie in the series and, on a personal note, the first Bond I ever saw (on a triple bill (!) with DN and GF in 1972. What luck!)
I would also point out that FRWL is really the first modern action movie as we lnow it.
I defy anyone to tell me about a movie that has action as good as FRWL before 1963.
FRWL is a revolution in movie mayhem and light years ahead of its time.
Excuse the hype, but FRWL is the Birth of a Nation of action movie history.
"How about a cigarette?"
"Not a chance."
The filmakers were lucky enough to draw on excellent source material and a superb eye for casting..
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
How did it lack logic?
I consider it to be as perfect a film that any Bopnd film (aside from GF) is likely to get. Everything about it (the performances, the action, the dialogue, the script, the plot, the gadgets, the look and feel of the film, the PTS, the villians, the allies, the Bond girls, Bond himself etc...) is IMO flawless.
I can not enthuse enough about how much I love FRWL. I consider it to be the greatest Bond thriller of all time (I consider GF to be more of an adventure film), and if I could prevent just two Bond films from being destroyed, they would be GF... and FRWL. :x -{
All my favourite Bond movies are low on gadgets and have a cold-war element, and this is the cold-war Bond par excellence.
Not sure I understand what Fish means when he says that the scene with Red Grant lacks logic.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
As to the Fish's claims about too much action and one liners: just what do you exepect from Bond movies? Gee, a quiet trek ater getting off the Orient Express to Venice would be very exciting. Maybe you a nice travelog highlighting the country would be more to your liking, but this is a Bond movie. And I don't know where you get this idea that there are too many one liners. Any comments are interspersed with the action, usually after the resolution of the tension in the scenes.It's a structure of the movies that has always existed. I've said it before and I repeat it. I don't think you understand Bond movies at all.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
In reference to the "aircraft" line, how would you choose to end the scene? As you said, it stands out more after the tension that precedes it and for my tastes isn't too much of a joke.
And I think it serves its purpose well, much better than something such as "Gosh, that was a close one" could ever do. Bond is supposed to be relieved that the threat is gone, as is the audience.
As the series progressed, there were times when the lines became weak and badly executed. For instance in YOLT after Hans is eaten by the piranhas, Bond utters "Bon Appetit". I always winced when I heard that line. Years later when Bond uses the same line in LTK, I winced again.
And since FRWL preceded Austin Powers by quite a few years, any lines are of a Bond type, certainly not of an Austin Powers broad type of humor.
Yes, I know it's a thoroughly bizarre reason to take against a film, but I do think the rest of it's very good!
@merseytart
I agree about the polo sweaters, but don't forget it was the 60s. What was considered "fashion" then will most definitely be outdated and drab by today's standards.
You can read Fish's thoughts, and others', here:
http://www.ajb007.co.uk/index.php?topic=27803
These are all fair comments IMO, kinda like my minor quibbles post.
I think in the book (if I remember it correctly), Grant is waiting for the tunnel to shoot Bond, so the sound of the gunshot is covered over by the tunnel roar. That doesn't get mentioned in the film (does it? or does Grant mention it...). Either way that's the logic for Grant waiting to shoot Bond IMO, even if mentioned it's not presented as what's driving Grant. Dramatically Grant lording it over Bond works, but agree with Fish that it also feels kinda funny, logic-wise, at least as played in the film. Not that I mind though, really, it's a great device, to have Grant speak after being silent all through the film.
And the last part of the film, as someone else pointed out, was even an afterthought as admitted by the filmmakers! Not surprising then that it's a bunch of escapes and one-liners, there's zero plot going on--might as well cut from getting off the train to the hotel room in Venice. Yeah Bond films are all about action, but FRWL was so expertly plot-driven, the helicopter bit then boat chase feel like the action-padding that they are. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it kinda is what it is IMHO, and detracts (if ever so slightly, because of it's sore-thumb nature) from an otherwise uniformly awesome spy adventure.
In my mind, thinking about FRWL, I always cut out the helicopter scene; they get off the train very near the water, and thus the boat chase happens at night (as it was originally planned to). Never understood why they've just had dinner on the train, Grant and Bond have their fight--and then it's morning when Bond and Tania get off the train! Bit of a lapse there, I imagine it had to do with the expense of night shooting...morning should be when they get to Venice IMO, even if the geography doesn't support it (not like that endless night on the train that abruptly ends less than an hour after dinner makes much sense, but oh well, quibble quibble quibble, about what I'm sure were budgetary constraints). These are the kinda things fimmakers regularly don't prioritize, and the scenes on the train flow so well one simply doesn't notice the wonky timeline in the viewing.
Random thoughts.
One aspect that I particularly enjoy is the relationship between Sean Connery's Bond and Pedro Armendariz' Kerim Bey. If you will forgive the pun, there is a real bond between them. In fact, a stronger and closer bond than many 007 has with women.
Every scene featuring Bond and Kerim Bey is a joy to watch, loaded with wonderful dialogue, "Find her technique too violent?" "She should have kept her mouth shut". Connery and Armendariz are both excellent.
One of those great little moments of the series occurs when Bond leans down over the dead body of Bey (in the train compartment) and squeezes his upper arm with his hand. A wonderfully tender moment.
It annoys me intensely when respected film reviewers and or magazines who should know better, parade Goldfinger as the greatest Bond movie. Now I wouldn't argue that it changed the series, but when it came to re-buying the UE dvd's last year, the first Connery film I bought was FRWL. Why? just read the positive comments above.
Sorry positivelyshocking, but I have to say that I personally agree with these film reviewers and magazines.