Review of Dr. No (1962) by Greg R — 07 Feb 2011
Well, maybe I'm in the minority here, but I really don't understand why others look at this movie as "one of the best" out of all the Bond films out there. To be quite honest, I would rank it more towards Diamonds Are Forever, A View to A Kill, and The Man With the Golden Gun.
Hell, throw the unofficial Never Say Never Again in there for good measure. Dr. No was boring to me when I was a kid just as much as it is as an adult. I respect this film's place in movie history as the flick that got the whole spy genre off the ground, and into popular culture, put Connery (one of my favorite actors ever) on the map, and kicked off one of my favorite movie series; but that does not mean this one is "one of the best", per se.
The action is sparse, and lame when it does happen. The plot is a little too simple, and lame, as well. These attributes just make for a long drawn out movie which isn't very long to begin with. Also, just because Connery's in this one, that does not mean it's good, either.
He does make the movie watchable, but I'd rather watch one of his other Bond films instead. There are high points, however. I thought the locations were just excellent. the sets, the scenery, and the grittiness are really excellent here.
The way they shot the scenes in these locations still makes me feel like I'm there. The atmosphere that Terence Young helped create was actually quite good, and that's what makes this movie good, but not as good as what others say about it.
This review of Dr. No (1962) was written by Greg R on 07 Feb 2011.
Dr. No has generally received very positive reviews.
Was this review helpful?
