Dr. No (1962) :
Brief Review -
Not thrilling, but too HOT to handle as the first James Bond film on silver screen. 9 years after the British novel, James Bond came to the silver screen to wow the audience. To start with, it's not a thrilling or extraordinary affair by any means, but it's definitely too hot for a Bond film. People didn't know what kind of sex appeal James Bond's persona would have because they had only read him on paper and not seen him on the screen. It must have been quite a shock to see such high sex and glam appeal in the early 1960s film (2 decades before movie code changed) and what a lavish affair it was. If I were a young boy in the 1960s and saw Dr. No in the cinema hall, then I would have hated Bond for destroying the male and that studboy ego of the entire generation. Every 15 minutes, he has a new dame beside him, and all were super hot chicks. His first conversation with them would be an intro, or just hi, or him trying to seduce them, and then the next moment they were both either half naked or entangled in an intimate moment. Surprisingly, it had more surprises with dames than with the with the villain and his tasks. Somehow, that kept the stimulation on, and I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. The way Honey Ryder asked him, "Do you have women of your own?" I tell you, I had my sultry moment there, even though they didn't do any such thing on the screen at that moment. Honey and James' first kiss took place in the last frame of the film, but the sexual tension was built very nicely until that moment. Dr. No lacks trademark Bond thrill moments and plays with an overprotective nature, losing its repeat value. Yet, it was an entertaining affair as a whole for the first film in the world-famous James Bond series, followed by even better scripts. Terence Young gave Sean Connery a stamp never to be erased from our memories.
RATING - 6.5/10*
By - samthebestest.
Not thrilling, but too HOT to handle as the first James Bond film on silver screen. 9 years after the British novel, James Bond came to the silver screen to wow the audience. To start with, it's not a thrilling or extraordinary affair by any means, but it's definitely too hot for a Bond film. People didn't know what kind of sex appeal James Bond's persona would have because they had only read him on paper and not seen him on the screen. It must have been quite a shock to see such high sex and glam appeal in the early 1960s film (2 decades before movie code changed) and what a lavish affair it was. If I were a young boy in the 1960s and saw Dr. No in the cinema hall, then I would have hated Bond for destroying the male and that studboy ego of the entire generation. Every 15 minutes, he has a new dame beside him, and all were super hot chicks. His first conversation with them would be an intro, or just hi, or him trying to seduce them, and then the next moment they were both either half naked or entangled in an intimate moment. Surprisingly, it had more surprises with dames than with the with the villain and his tasks. Somehow, that kept the stimulation on, and I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. The way Honey Ryder asked him, "Do you have women of your own?" I tell you, I had my sultry moment there, even though they didn't do any such thing on the screen at that moment. Honey and James' first kiss took place in the last frame of the film, but the sexual tension was built very nicely until that moment. Dr. No lacks trademark Bond thrill moments and plays with an overprotective nature, losing its repeat value. Yet, it was an entertaining affair as a whole for the first film in the world-famous James Bond series, followed by even better scripts. Terence Young gave Sean Connery a stamp never to be erased from our memories.
RATING - 6.5/10*
By - samthebestest.