Saturday, 20 June 2015

IS THIS A MOVIE YOU'D JUST HAVE TO SEE? DR. NO TRAILER...



It's often interesting to see movie trailers from years
ago, because they move at a different pace from modern
ones.  Would we really rush out and see the latest BOND
film if the trailer was as  turgid as the one above?  For its
time, it may have seemed exciting, but in today's light, it
appears rather pedestrian.  What do you think - 
hit or miss?  Vote now!

10 comments:

Colin Jones said...

That was quite an enjoyable trailer - I haven't seen Dr. No for a long time. With modern films you just need to watch the trailers and the online reviews and then you don't need to bother watching the film itself. In the '80s I had an album of Bond themes and other songs from the Bond films - one of my favourites was from Dr. No which went: "Underneath de mango tree, me honey and me, come watch for de moon"...lovely !

peter dixon said...

This is exactly the sort of trailer I would respond to now. What's not to like? Ursula Andress, Sean Connery with real hair, classic grey suit, crap back projection in the car chase...I'm salivating now.
Except the Bond in the gunsight who looks exactly like my old Technical Drawing teacher, complete with trilby hat.

Kid said...

I thought the trailer dragged on a bit - could've been faster-paced in my view. I've got loads of Bond soundtracks, CJ - the one for Dr. No is a very interesting, hypnotic one.

******

Actually, PD, Connery says that he wore a partial wig in Dr. No, although I always thought it was his own hair in the first two movies. His hairline changed in Goldfinger, which is when I first noticed he was wearing a syrup. That was Bob Simmons in the gunsight (or barrel), which was used for the first three movies, before Connery stepped in himself.

DeadSpiderEye said...

Uh yeah, a few spoilers there, it's almost a three minute precis of the entire screenplay. Dr. No is still one of my favourite Bond flicks and there's plenty of material to build anticipation with a trailer. Pre release hype and publicity today, receives much more attention and is bigger portion of production budgets, so yeah this is a bit twee in comparison.

Kid said...

I think the first three were the best, DSE. Loved Diamonds Are Forever because it was a sheer romp, and Thunderball and YOLT had some good bits, but were slightly disappointing after Goldfinger.

TC said...

I wasn't bored by the trailer, but then, I didn't grow up with high speed internet, remote control TV, fast paced video games, Twitter, Instagram, and texting. Or with CGI routinely being used in TV ads as well as in sci-fi movies.

I think the first three Bond films pretty much used up the possible variations on the theme, and the series became formulaic. From Thunderball on, they tended to follow a predictable pattern. But attempts to do something different (e.g., On Her Majesty's Secret Service) were financial disappointments, so I don't blame the producers. They probably decided, "If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it."

DeadSpiderEye said...

I like You Only Live Twice, it's got this atmosphere about it, it's a outrageous adventure tinged with certain melancholy and darkness. There's a feeling of small dramas being played out against a backdrop of almost elemental forces. I'm not that big on Goldfinger myself, yeah Pussy's always nice to have around but who wouldn't say that? What spoils From Russia with Love a bit for me, is that drippy girl, Tatania Romanova, she's so wet for a Bond girl, she should have more grrrgghhh about her. From Russia... does have an excellent cast though, Shaw, Shebal and Lenya are great and of course there's that Gypsy fight, one of those girls is pretty spectacular, what's her name now?

Kid said...

Although OHMSS might have worked, TC, if it'd had Connery as Bond instead of Lazenby. Not that it was Lazenby's fault, as he was an inexperienced actor, but the trouble was that he was too much like Connery while not being enough like like Connery, if you know what I mean.

******

The trouble with YOLT, DSE, is that bloody ridiculous idea of turning Bond Japanese and the whole wedding scenario. I know it's in the book (as far as I can remember), but that's one scene that should've been jettisoned from the start. Also, Connery looks bored in the scene where he reports back to base after his helicopter battle in Little Nellie. He sounds as if he's reading his lines off a cue card and puts very little effort into them. Gypsy fight in FRWL - that'll be Martine Beswick you're alluding to. (Be still my beating heart.)

DeadSpiderEye said...

I'm gonna hold out for the turning Bond Japanese device, it's not as nutty as it sounds. Yeah, it's handled badly in the film and Connery seems to ditch his make up, which doesn't help. The reason why it's not that daft, is that there was more diverse facial structure amongst ethnic groups in Japan that is probably realised, especially amongst islanders. The problem with Connery, is that his wide forehead isn't that common in east Asia but I think it's probable he could pass for an Ainu (an erstwhile ethnic grouping in Japan) or descendant of such.

Do you mean that, scene were he's saying Little Nellie defended her honour? Isn't that supposed to be a jokey thing, I've blown some people up again ha ha, put the kettle on and don't spare the muffins.

Kid said...

It wouldn't be as nutty as it sounds if it was someone like John Mills it was being done to, DSE, but Connery, at six foot two is just too tall for it to work on - and his facial features just don't lend themselves to to the 'change'. You can disguise absurdities by the way you describe them in a book, but in a film, the cheat is all too apparent.

Yup, that scene is supposed to be humorous to a degree, but Connery's tired delivery (he actually seems embarrassed and contemptuous of the lines) kills it stone dead.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...