Presumably he didn't intend to be a very hands-on kind of doctor.
Edit: there's a "lay on hands" healing pun in there too, but I can't be bothered to work it out.
Rewatching Bond films
- Thread starter Morrus
- Start date
Edit: there's a "lay on hands" healing pun in there too, but I can't be bothered to work it out.
G
Guest 85555
Guest
I have always liked villains better. They have all the best lines. They get all the best acting. When I was a kid I loved people like Vincent Price. I remember I had a book of classic movie monsters and that became my bible for hunting down stuff to watch on TV and VHS. It isn't that I want villains who I am rooting for because they have a just cause or something. But I do like a villain who is evil, yet has pathos to them.
That said, one reason I like Connery's bond is he has more personality traits you expect from a villain than a hero. He is pretty ruthless and he doesn't really seem to be at all conflated about taking any lethal action. So for me something like Doctor No, was the best of two worlds when I first saw it: a hero who was as interesting to me as any villain and a villain who was just to my young eyes very 'cool'
To be very slightly fair, in the book he has metal pincers for hands which are rather more practical than cast iron hands (as in the film). You might be able to do a bit of writing, lab work, or pill grinding with those (both of the latter would have been on the medical school syllabus then) but dissection and physical examination (palpation*, percussion etc) would basically have been impossible.Now I like the character even betterHe is more determined to overcome than the one armed swordsman !
*”Your turn, Julius, palpate this man’s liver and find how large it is, also see if you can elicit hepatojugular reflux. Try not to kill the patient this time.”
(The book says that he used wax hands when at medical school so as not to disturb his fellow students - presumably during lectures or something. I’m not sure that they’d have been less disturbing.)
But yes, this is the most determinator thing ever and makes any given one-armed swordsman look positively lazy. Besides, anyone who’s done HEMA or similar knows that learning to fight with your left hand isn’t hard at all - many fighters learn just that.
Last edited:
Olgar Shiverstone
Legend
Waiting for the Never Say Never Again assessment ...
(aside from the new Danial Craig films, every other one of which is great, I'm a fan of Lazenby OHMSS and Connery's Dr No, The Spy Who Loved Me, and From Russia With Love).
(aside from the new Danial Craig films, every other one of which is great, I'm a fan of Lazenby OHMSS and Connery's Dr No, The Spy Who Loved Me, and From Russia With Love).
Hoping to be able to watch it tomorrow!
Olgar Shiverstone
Legend
You should have said "Never again."
Well, I watched it yesterday. Yep, it really is a remake of Thunderball (well, apparently more a movie based on the same book, but that's splitting hairs).
It was good to see Connery back. He's 3 years younger than Moore (52, I think, when making this movie), and they acknowledge his age in the movie with various references. He's still a much better physical actor than Moore, and the fight scenes are so much more dynamic and energetic. The hairpiece is a little too obvious though--in a couple more years Connery will be fully embracing the bald, bearded stage of his career with Untouchables, Last Crusade, etc. Is this the last time we ever see him on screen cleanshaven and with hair?
But anyway, Connery is there, and is clearly more interested in being in this film than in some of the others he did. I just find him so much more watchable than Moore.
The film definitely suffers from having the worst Bond song ever--it's so bad that I find it actually hard to listen to. And I missed the opening gun barrel and the iconic theme music. Music has always been a big part of movies for me, and many of my favourite movies I can remember the score well. Not this one!
M is Edward Fox, Q is Alex McCowen and is called 'Algy', Blofeld is Max Von Sydow! Throw in Kim Basinger, Rowan Atkinson, it's quite the cast. Pat Roach, the big guy from Raiders of the Lost Ark and other films, shows up for a lengthy brawl with Bond near the beginning.
The explosive dart pen and the laser watch were two elements I remembered well, along with the video game duel and the guard Bond leaves holding his cigarette case with a warning that it would explode if he moved.
So, it is good? Well, it's better than Thunderball. It's not top-tier Bond by any means, and it suffers from the lack of iconic Bond elements, but I'd put it slightly above average. Connery is excellent, if noticeable older (but they lean into that), though much of the supporting cast is a little bland. It's also let down by the final act--the horse jumping off the cliff into the sea and the final assault (which, though, is leagues ahead of the underwater final battle in Thunderball; at least they had the sense to set it on dry land, albeit underwater dry land).
Bond rating 005!
(I am dreading A View To A Kill....)
It was good to see Connery back. He's 3 years younger than Moore (52, I think, when making this movie), and they acknowledge his age in the movie with various references. He's still a much better physical actor than Moore, and the fight scenes are so much more dynamic and energetic. The hairpiece is a little too obvious though--in a couple more years Connery will be fully embracing the bald, bearded stage of his career with Untouchables, Last Crusade, etc. Is this the last time we ever see him on screen cleanshaven and with hair?
But anyway, Connery is there, and is clearly more interested in being in this film than in some of the others he did. I just find him so much more watchable than Moore.
The film definitely suffers from having the worst Bond song ever--it's so bad that I find it actually hard to listen to. And I missed the opening gun barrel and the iconic theme music. Music has always been a big part of movies for me, and many of my favourite movies I can remember the score well. Not this one!
M is Edward Fox, Q is Alex McCowen and is called 'Algy', Blofeld is Max Von Sydow! Throw in Kim Basinger, Rowan Atkinson, it's quite the cast. Pat Roach, the big guy from Raiders of the Lost Ark and other films, shows up for a lengthy brawl with Bond near the beginning.
The explosive dart pen and the laser watch were two elements I remembered well, along with the video game duel and the guard Bond leaves holding his cigarette case with a warning that it would explode if he moved.
So, it is good? Well, it's better than Thunderball. It's not top-tier Bond by any means, and it suffers from the lack of iconic Bond elements, but I'd put it slightly above average. Connery is excellent, if noticeable older (but they lean into that), though much of the supporting cast is a little bland. It's also let down by the final act--the horse jumping off the cliff into the sea and the final assault (which, though, is leagues ahead of the underwater final battle in Thunderball; at least they had the sense to set it on dry land, albeit underwater dry land).
Bond rating 005!
(I am dreading A View To A Kill....)
Zardnaar
Legend
View to a Kill exceeded my expectations. Wasn't good but may not be the worst one. One after that was very good. 3 movies in a row after that to look forward to.
Starmaster
Explorer
Perhaps they had to add a new wing to the school's morgue during his time there.
They're all good, even the so-called 'bad' one. QoS might be Craig's worst Bond film, but it's still way better than a lot of other Bond movies. I don't think any of the Craig films will be getting a bad rating from me. And--spoilers--there are two 007 ratings in there. I don't think I've given any of them a 007 yet.
Similar Threads
