by Joseph Smits
Based on Ian Fleming’s 1957 novel of the same name, this film sees James Bond, once again played by Sean Connery, sent on a mission to Istanbul to steal a decoding device. While there, he runs into some trouble, most notably with the secret crime organisation, SPECTRE.
There are plenty of quips, puns, and glamourised charm, but this one just feels more like a spy movie than its predecessor, Dr. No. It doesn’t bounce around between different tones and its moments of perceived silliness are contained to only a handful of scenes, including one with an oddly placed periscope and a fantastically ridiculous SPECTRE training sequence. Experts from the best safest online casino would say that this is probably the most serious and grounded of the Bond films until the Daniel Craig era.
This film introduces us to some more Bond tropes that have become classic and expected staples in the franchise. Probably the biggest example of this is the introduction of spy gadgets given to Bond by none other than Q. In Dr. No, Bond was pretty much on his own when it came to getting out of situations, but this movie marks the first appearance of Desmond Llewlyn as Q. And although his inventions enter the realm of absurdity only a few years later, his contributions here are believable and add to the coolness of the spy aspects of the film rather than distracting from them. This movie also dives headlong into the world of SPECTRE, which is an organisation that will be central to the franchise for decades after this movie.
This movie suffers from some of the same pacing issues as its predecessor, with some exceedingly dragged out sequences, but in general it’s a much more active story which keeps it compelling throughout. There’s also notable improvement when it comes to the Bond Girl. She’s still not the strongest female character and frequently feels more like a pawn than an active player in the story, but at least she has a somewhat interesting role and functions as more than just eye-candy.
And despite the fact that the two movies share both a director and a cinematographer, From Russia With Love just looks miles better and features some really nice cinematography, especially when it comes to the framing of shots. One other brief thing I want to mention about these first two movies is the fantastically casual way that the title of the film gets featured near the beginning of the movie.
In Dr. No, we see the title on a file containing information about the titular character. Here, the title shows up on a hastily scribbled note between Moneypenny and Bond.
Alright let’s talk about the pros and cons. Pro number one is the tone. This movie is just classic spy thriller. Secret criminal organisations, assassins, double agents… it’s the kinda stuff you think of when imagining an espionage story.
While retaining that glamourised sheen of a Bond movie, From Russia With Love still manages to capture a Cold War believability. The plot, while a tad convoluted, is never silly and the espionage tactics and spy gadgets all seem reasonable too. Although there aren’t actually that many Bond movies like this one, this is the type of story that comes to mind first when I think of Bond.
The second pro is Tatiana Romanov. Even though we see a few stronger and more involved Bond Girls later in the franchise, Tatiana is definitely the first good one we get. She isn’t just eye-candy for Bond and the audience to ogle at. There are certainly still moments where her character is used in that way, but she actually has stuff to do in this movie other than just run around behind Bond as a damsel in distress. Her character’s central to the plot and without her, the film simply wouldn’t work.
On the con side, my only major issue is that the movie really drags at points. As a whole, the movie’s actually quite compelling, so unlike with Dr. No, it’s easy to stay engaged through the third act. Unfortunately, there are a few scattered dull segments that are oddly lingered upon. The scenes aren’t terrible and really wouldn’t be bad if they were shorter, but they just go on and on. We would say the most egregious example here is an extended sequence that occurs at a gypsy settlement. It doesn’t add much to the plot and it drags on for far too long.
We’re gonna give From Russia With Love 4 out of 5 stars. This is a wonderful spy thriller and one of our personal favourite Bond films thanks to its grounded tone and strong plot. We would recommend From Russia With Love to fans of spy films that feature realistic espionage. It’s a Bond movie, so it’s still more glamourised than it is gritty, but it features a really interesting story and the final act, which takes place on a train, includes some great espionage sequences, and a good deal of suspense.
If you’re just getting into Bond, we would recommend Casino Royale (2006). It’s the 21st James Bond movie and is another 007 film that takes on a more serious, espionage-based approach, although it is quite a bit grittier and more action-oriented.
best online casino nz
