Dr. No - Poster
Here we go!

It has often been said that Sean Connery is the definitive James Bond. As the years have gone by, many a fan and critic have taken a liking to his quick wit and ruthlessness, but it’s easy to forget that age can take a toll on many of the defining adventures that turned James Bond into a global phenomenon. With this in mind, our examination of 007 will start with the first official film: Dr. No.

Is it dated? Somewhat.

Is it still a decent espionage thriller? Absolutely.

What Defines Connery’s Bond?

Dr. No - James Bond and Felix Leiter
Bond must be more than an a guy in a suit.

In order to understand the development of Bond, it’s important to get a sense of how Connery and the writers approached the role. In a stark contrast from some of the later films, this incarnation of James Bond is more along the lines of a hardened spy than a cheesy action hero. Sure, his traditional wit is still present, but there are several points in this film that threw me off.

For instance, the lack of gadgets forces Bond to rely on his knowledge of the spy game. Over the course of the film, he collects information, investigates his enemies, and uses some subtle moves to know what’s going on. In a pivotal set of scenes, he plucks a strand of hair and places it around a door in his hotel room, only to find it gone a little while later. It may seem insignificant at first glance, but it shows that Bond can think on his feet and figure out when he’s being watched.

It’s also important to note that there isn’t as much action in this film as the later installments, which fits with Fleming’s original characterization of the character. After all, intelligence operatives are supposed to be somewhat invisible, so it makes sense when Bond assassinates certain henchmen without waking up half of Jamaica.

Of course, all bets are off when he enters the villain’s lair. Speaking of which…

Bond And The Perpetual Now.

Dr. No - James Bond - Sean Connery
This version of Bond is surprisingly realistic.

One notable aspect of Dr. No is how it firmly places James Bond into the present day of the time. As in the real world of 1962, the space race and the Cold War are heating up, the British-American alliance is growing stronger by the day, and many wonder about the threats that are out there.

The only real difference between our world and the James Bond universe is a pinch of fantastic technology.

When an MI6 station in Jamaica is shot up, the bosses in London order an investigation into the matter. After a brief flirtation with Moneypenny (Lois Maxwell), M (Bernard Lee) orders Bond to figure out what happened. Our hero heads for the island and discovers that the assassins stole intelligence related to Doctor Julius No and Crab Key. He figures that there is a connection to the CIA and disrupted rocket launches at Cape Canaveral, so he digs a little deeper, teams up with Felix Leiter, and discovers that Dr. No is using a radio jammer.

Of course, it gets a little corny when Bond actually meets the titular villain, but the atmosphere and build-up to that final confrontation is a lot of fun.

It’s Not Flawless, Though.

Dr. No - Joseph Wiseman
Who is this guy?

While Dr. No is a fun watch, it can’t really be ranked among the best of the James Bond films due to three key issues.

Dr. No (Joseph Wiseman) and SPECTRE are a little too underdeveloped due to their introduction in the third act. While it makes some sense in context, the sudden creation of new plot threads diminishes the believability of the story, especially since it seems that NATO and the Warsaw Pact already know about the organization.

On top of that, Honey Ryder (Ursula Andress) is sorely underdeveloped. She shows up near the end of the film, blunders into the adventure because she wants to collect sea shells, and kisses James at the end of it all. Sure, it’s a bit of a harrowing experience, but the writers didn’t justify it by fleshing out her character.

And of course, some goofy moments diminish the effectiveness of the overall film. The tarantula scene may have been a little bit scary back in the 1960s, but it seems a little too simple when compared to, say, dealing with a poisoning at the poker table or a gaggle of assassins who are dressed to kill. On the other side of things, Quarrel (John Kitzmiller) is supposed to be a CIA asset, but he’s really just there to die in the third act. These two pieces are not very spy-like at all.

Conclusion.

Dr. No - James Bond and Moneypenny
Thus begins several decades of sexual tension that ultimately goes nowhere.

Dr. No is not the perfect Bond film, but it marks a solid start to the franchise. Sean Connery kills, much of the film is wonderfully suspenseful, and the Cold War-era spycraft is a lot of fun to see. If you’re in the mood for a great spy adventure, you could do a hell of a lot worse.

Give it a look!