From Russia With Love=BORING

[J.Cornelius]

I simply found this movie to be excruciatingly boring. I realize this movie was made in the late 60s but some of the action scenes were downright laughable. And what is up with the train sequence, I felt like they were on the train for a week. Lastly, the uneventful way the movie ends just cements the fact that this movie is a total borefest.

[jw]

happens, older cinema was designed to be that way I guess. I am not a big fan of films from that era

[JasonR]

One of my favorite Bond films!!

[Deciazulado]

ditto ^^

probably too much slowly serious uncovering espionage and realistic action compared to today's bombastic action and thrill-A-minute for modern audiences.

Which probably is why I still like it so much

A double bill with 2001, anyone

[PA_Kid]

You should check out the original 3:10 to Yuma.

[Belloche]

I love this movie but I can understand how it may come off a little dry these days. Before you form an opinion on the Connery Bond flicks try and check out Goldfinger. For me it plays a lot more fun and lively than From Russia With Love.

[werewuf]

Sorry, this film is anything but boring, it's a classic, possibly the best Bond film (it's one of two that represent Fleming's work the best) and much better than Casino Royale which is way too long in the middle, very boring and off track with the original Bond mythology (as were most since Goldfinger) .

[Lucy Diamond]

I see what the OP is saying. I gave it a bigger chance this weekend when I had time to really sit and watch it and I loved it, but it took time for me to love it and I definitely didn't like it at all when I was younger.

Dr. No is now one of my favorite movies but I couldn't watch it at all a few years ago.

Live and Let Die was a little painful to watch yesterday.

[GregBlu5]

Are they still missing the dialogue that was snipped out years ago from the train sequence and at the end in the gondola? Those pieces of dialogue related to the film that was made of James Bond in bed?

Even in the remastered/cleaned-up versions of all the James Bond films released just a year or so ago, the film does a noticable hiccup at the clipped dialogue in each sequence, especially noticable in the gondola as he discards the film in his hands.

[J.Cornelius]

Originally Posted by werewuf

Sorry, this film is anything but boring, it's a classic, possibly the best Bond film (it's one of two that represent Fleming's work the best) and much better than Casino Royale which is way too long in the middle, very boring and off track with the original Bond mythology (as were most since Goldfinger) .

The quote below is from the Casino Royale review on this site. I totally agree with the reviewer 100% about the characteristics of Fleming's Bond.

I just found From Russia....to be quite frankly kind of hookie fluff that was hard to take seriously. I think the Bond movies of 60s played too much on the "playboy" aspect and not enough on the ruthlessness, grit of the spy.




"Or maybe it's simply the celebration of the franchise reboot starring Daniel Craig, the actor many critics believe to be closest to the original Ian Fleming character. Of all the previous Bonds, Craig is the first to have the boorish personality, ruthlessness and physical characteristics--blond hair and blue eyes--of Fleming's spy. The new Bond can still come off as charming or funny when the situation dictates it. But one cannot escape the more solitary, physical demeanor of Craig's 007. Humor, sophistication, and passion are not in his nature. Those attributes seem to come about by pure accident, unlike Sean Connery's Bond, or any of the other predecessors who focused more on charm than on the real characteristics of Fleming's spy. The rebooted series would do away with this suave charade once and for all and start the spy off where Fleming himself started: a little story named Casino Royale."

[J.Cornelius]

Also if you look really close at the Helicopter scene, when it blows up and hits the ground you can clearly see the stunt double exist "stage right" and Connery running up the hill to take his place. It is pure comedy, they almost run into each other.

[ryoohki]

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

Also if you look really close at the Helicopter scene, when it blows up and hits the ground you can clearly see the stunt double exist "stage right" and Connery running up the hill to take his place. It is pure comedy, they almost run into each other.

LOL cool. Stunt Double in HD filmed too close are great in HD

Die Hard 3 is a great example of this. A lot of the car chase it's a guy that do not look like Bruce Willis at all!

Another funny one is in Face/Off when Nicolas Cage escape the prison by jumping in the water, the guy they choose look nothing remotely like him!

[werewuf]

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

The quote below is from the Casino Royale review on this site. I totally agree with the reviewer 100% about the characteristics of Fleming's Bond.

I just found From Russia....to be quite frankly kind of hookie fluff that was hard to take seriously. I think the Bond movies of 60s played too much on the "playboy" aspect and not enough on the ruthlessness, grit of the spy.




"Or maybe it's simply the celebration of the franchise reboot starring Daniel Craig, the actor many critics believe to be closest to the original Ian Fleming character. Of all the previous Bonds, Craig is the first to have the boorish personality, ruthlessness and physical characteristics--blond hair and blue eyes--of Fleming's spy. The new Bond can still come off as charming or funny when the situation dictates it. But one cannot escape the more solitary, physical demeanor of Craig's 007. Humor, sophistication, and passion are not in his nature. Those attributes seem to come about by pure accident, unlike Sean Connery's Bond, or any of the other predecessors who focused more on charm than on the real characteristics of Fleming's spy. The rebooted series would do away with this suave charade once and for all and start the spy off where Fleming himself started: a little story named Casino Royale."

Whoever wrote that Fleming's Bond had blond hair never read the books. Bond was supposed to be a more handsome dashing version of Fleming himself, and actually described as looking like American musician Hoagy Carmichael. (out of all actors who have played Bond who looks like Hoagy the most? Brosnan) Craig's casting is way off track with what Fleming created, IMO a very bad case of taking studio and producer's liberties.
As far as hokey stuff, how about every Bond movie since Thunderball? Anyone remember Moonraker? or Jaws? I'm all for making 007 grittier and believable to an extent, however let's have a new actor that fits the mythology. What we have now is no longer recognizable as Bond, we might as well have David Spade play Superman. For me this isn't just about the current state of Bond films it's about the past thirty years of the franchise since Goldfinger. These films just got more and more ridiculous and cartoonish and now we have the ugly brute version which doesn't wash either. At this point I am not holding my breath for this to ever get straightened out.

Hoagy Carmichael:

http://www.hoagy.com/bio_short.htm

[quexos]

Personally I never really liked the arrogance of Bond, the way he gets out of impossible situations, explosions, fights to the death and his tuxedo is always impeccable and the smile on his face says "what a nice uneventful day today was".

This is why the new Bond (Daniel Craig) is my favorite because he seems to be much more human.

[jadedeath]

What do they teach kids in school these days?

If it's not a pulse pounding thrill a minute rollercoaster their ADD-addled minds can't wrap around it.

I'd hate to see what would happen if we sat them down infront of a Shakespeare play or a night at the Opera if they thought THIS was boring.

Logan

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

I simply found this movie to be excruciatingly boring. I realize this movie was made in the late 60s but some of the action scenes were downright laughable. And what is up with the train sequence, I felt like they were on the train for a week. Lastly, the uneventful way the movie ends just cements the fact that this movie is a total borefest.

Not to be annoying but FRWL was done in 1963, not the late 60's

I always loved that movie, a much closer look at what a spy would be compare with the super high gadgets/explosions happy of the other Bond films. A true classic

[JayAuritt]

If you want to see what boring looks like in a James Bond movie, check out the underwater scenes in Thunderball. Not only do they seem to go on forever, you can't tell who the good guys are from the bad guys.

[SS316SRV]

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

" Of all the previous Bonds, Craig is the first to have the boorish personality, ruthlessness and physical characteristics--blond hair and blue eyes--of Fleming's spy.

Didn't Fleming always describe Bond's hair as a "smooth black coma over his right eye."?

[RustyK94]

The older films are much slower compared to the newer movies. I can understand if younger ppl don't relate to them.

[drobswim13]

Originally Posted by werewuf

Whoever wrote that Fleming's Bond had blond hair never read the books. Bond was supposed to be a more handsome dashing version of Fleming himself, and actually described as looking like American musician Hoagy Carmichael. (out of all actors who have played Bond who looks like Hoagy the most? Brosnan) Craig's casting is way off track with what Fleming created, IMO a very bad case of taking studio and producer's liberties.
As far as hokey stuff, how about every Bond movie since Thunderball? Anyone remember Moonraker? or Jaws? I'm all for making 007 grittier and believable to an extent, however let's have a new actor that fits the mythology. What we have now is no longer recognizable as Bond, we might as well have David Spade play Superman. For me this isn't just about the current state of Bond films it's about the past thirty years of the franchise since Goldfinger. These films just got more and more ridiculous and cartoonish and now we have the ugly brute version which doesn't wash either. At this point I am not holding my breath for this to ever get straightened out.

Hoagy Carmichael:

http://www.hoagy.com/bio_short.htm

+1