
Does this plot line sound familiar? You’d be forgiven for assuming every Bond film was at least loosely based on this concept- why break a winning formula?!
All of the traits of future Bond films are present. The gorgeous girls, the stunning, exotic locations, amazing cars (Dr No sees Connery driving a Sunbeam Alpine) and a cracking musical score- not to mention megalomaniacal villains obsessed with world domination. 
However, that said, there are differences between Dr No and the rest of the 007 series. Let’s begin with how Bond is portrayed. We all know how Bond developed as the series progressed. Not necessarily all the changes were good. I particularly felt sorry for Roger Moore as the character became more of a comic figure as Moore’s wrinkles deepened. No, in Dr No, Sean Connery plays Bond as a gristled, battle hardened if psychotic, killer. Yes- a cold blooded killer. The Dr No version of Bond is the closest we see to the Bond of Ian Fleming’s books than at any other time. It was a trait that not everyone took to initially- the killing of Professor Dent in cold blood caused no less than public outcry back in 1962. This was a different, sheltered world to ours.
The second way in which Dr No is different to the rest of the Bond series is the lack of gadgets. The nearest we get is a mere Geiger counter. Hardly machine guns popping out from the side of a silver Aston Martin but at least it was a start. This again shows how Dr No was closer to the true version of Bond written in the books.
James Bond was incredibly successful. It offered an escape from people’s dreary British lives as they jumped at the chance of two hours’ worth of escapism. It is debatable as to whether Bond is still acceptable in our post Me Too modern world. I’m not sure that a womanising, murdering psychopath quite fits with our politically correct worldview. Still, it was an enjoyable blast from the past on a dreary, rain soaked Sunday afternoon.


No comments:
Post a Comment