S M G

other_stuff

STEPHEN'S MOVIE GUIDE

Dr No  

ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND ON DR NO

It was back in an era of the Iron Curtain, the Cold War in its depths and the shock of discovering traitors in the heart of MI5 (Philby et al) that Ian Fleming was inspired to start writing Bond novels, back in 1952. In effect, this was the anti “old boy network” hero. Flawed, a rogue even, but faithful to his country. The books, starting with Casino Royale, became a runaway success, and interest in making a movie version grew almost immediately. Indeed, there was an American TV version of Casino Royale in 1954, just over a year after the books publication.


It was Albert “Cubby” Brocolli who had the most interest and in 1958 approached his partner in his production company at the time.. however he retorted that the books were not even good enough for TV. The rights (or “options” in movie business speak) were therefore acquired by Harry Saltzman. These two eventually met, and agreed to become partners, and formed two companies – one (DANJAQ, after their wives first names, Dana and Jacqueline) to keep the rights to the movies, and the other EON (standing for “Everything or Nothing”) to be the production company to make the movies. The books available at the time were reviewed, and Dr No picked as the book which could most easily convert to a screenplay. The screenwriters were Wolf Mankiewiz and Richard Maibaum, who would be associated with Bond for some time. Indeed, the family of filmmakers brought together to work with EON really did stay with Bond, as Cubby had a loyal streak.. even to this day sons and daughters of the original crew on Dr No are still working on Bond movies.


Apart from Connery himself, it was the director who was the inspired choice. Terence Young brought the style and panache to Bond. He himself lived the live, making sure only champagne was drunk on set, and imparting his knowledge on all things sartorial to Sean Connery. He had the best tailors put together his wardrobe, and explained to Connery how the suits could be treated with disdain, and they would still look good. Young would make a movie, spend the money on fine living, then go back to work again.. he really created a huge amount of what we now think of as Bond.

For the lead role, Cary Grant and Roger Moore were considered, but the role would go to relative unknown Connery, who won over the studio execs largely on the way he moved and his manner. It was felt he could convey the right mixture of ruthlessness combined with a degree of sexual magnetism. The rest of the cast were filled out, including the role of the orphaned seashell collector, Honey Ryder, who was hired on the basis of a photograph. Her heavily accented voice was later dubbed. Ian Fleming came to the set and was so smitten by her he namechecked her in his next novel, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.


There were two other key contributors.. John Barry, and Ken Adams. Although Monty Norman had been hired to do the music and wrote the songs associated with the movie, it was John Barry who was hired to finalise the score. He took Norman’s theme and orchestrated it into the James Bond theme we know today, and infused the whole movie with that brassy sound that came to be associated with Bond. And then Ken Adams was hired to do the set design. A German by birth, Adams was, in my opinion, one of the key contributors that made the Bond movies unique and stand out. The moment for me when Bond suddenly became something different was when we first see Dr No’s lair, a cell with an overhead round grill, and we hear the disembodied voice of Dr No. Adams created sets which were expressionistic and flouted convention – extravagant yet stylish, and while the Bond movies never lingered much on back story, his sets helped fill in what we needed to know about the characters.

Dr No arguably does not have all the ingredients we would come to recognise as quintessential Bond, but with Connery, the music, the sexiness, Maurice Binder and certainly Ken Adam’s and Terence Young’s contributions, the mould had been set. So how does this 50 year old movie play now? Does its style keep it enjoyable, or does it seem just too old fashioned? Ahead of its time, or past its time? Watch again, and make up your own mind..

dr no
clapper




Return to Top | Home Page | Reviews A-Z






© Stephen's Movie Guide

Inverurie Website Design