NO-ONE and I mean NO-ONE tops Sean Connery's portrayal as bond. Bond movies suited the 1960s decade. Trying to carrying it on nowadays and with bloody Daniel Craig is pointless and inane.
@tungnguyen12292 Connery was the first to play Bond on film in 1962 . In 1956 however, Bob Holness played James Bond in a radio production of Moonraker, making him the first ever James Bond.
In 1954, there was a TV production of 'Casino Royale' that cast Barry Nelson as James Bond. Only in that he was called "Jimmy". 1954 is before '56, so Holness wasn't the first Bond ever.
@Kessler1996 It was a low budget ep of Climax! Mystery Theatre adapted by Charles Bennett. It starred Peter Lorre as Le Chiffre, Linda Christian as Valerie Mathis & Michael Pate as Clarence Leiter [not Felix]. It was heavily Americanised & "Jimmy" might as well have been in CIA. Holness's radio play was true to the Fleming original hence my accrediting him as the 1st Bond. Bennett's play was so bad it became a mention in [& some say inspiration of] the Peter Sellers spoof.
To me, Dr No is the first James Bond film that was so terrible and umcomfortable to watch never ever liked the picture at all, it looked funny to me I find.
@Marshalsify Dr No WAS the FIRST James Bond film for starters and also why do you find it unconformable to watch? The acting is great, the story is okay and its classic Bond. What do you mean you don't like the picture? Just because it looks a bit rusty because it was made in 1962 does not mean it's a bad film. Your comment sounds very immature and I wouldn't be surprised if your a 14 year old who loves Steven Seagal films.
@ChocolateFrogPrince it may be fiction but its trying to be realistic. MI6 does not tell its agents to kill anyone they please, where they please, and when they please.
@MrClassicDoctorWho Yes of course it's trying to be realistic. Megalomaics building nuclear facilities inthe Carribean, launching satelite lasers to destroy all and sundry, creating a "stealth boat" so they can sink a Royal Navy shp of the line and steal it's atomic weaponry, assasins with steel teeth, masterminds who clone themselves, others who plan to irradiate Fort Knox, cars that become invisible, and best of all a "secret" agent known by name and sight the world over
@ChocolateFrogPrince yea well if someone wrote about 9/11, you wouldn't think that was realistic would you. Two jumbo jets crashing in to the world trade centre, destroying them both killing thousands of people, then another crashes in to the pentagon, while the other crashes in to a field because of a revolt on the plain.
No wait your right all of the above sounds totally believable.
@MrClassicDoctorWho Well. No. Not really. It doesn't take much to crash a plane just as it doesn't take much to crash a car. Frankly it wasn't the most imaginative thing to bring down the Towers with a jumbo. That was just about recognising the opportunity given the lack of security at that time. However the stuff of Flemming's novels and the movies they inspired are almost complete fiction and if you think this cartoon character is aiming for realism then you perhaps have a larger problem.
@ChocolateFrogPrince If you want something close to realism you should read Le Carre [who himself worked for government intelligence agencies and so knows of what he writes]. Flemming created a fantasy he named after a carribean based ornithologist whose name he happened to like. The only difference between Boond and Batman frankly is the black rubber suit. Or do you believe that Gotham City was intended to be "realistic" as well?
@ChocolateFrogPrince well during the second world war Fleming was involved in top secret operations. One of which was called "OPERATION GOLDENEYE". Okay The Nazis never had anything like Iccarus, but when it comes to some of the other films like "Dr. No, how are they so hard to believe? A maniac who is connected to SPECTRE (which could be a play on the real life SMERSH) who intends to destroy the main bases of leading world powers...
@MrClassicDoctorWho ...im not sure if i got the story line just right, i havn't seen it in ages. My point is how can you prove any of it is fiction? Do you work in the secret services? If you think all that is going on in the world is what they print in the newspapers then me trying to tell you all this is pointless.....
wait.....you mean Gotham city IS NOT REAL? So this is where i have been going wrong all these years!
@MrClassicDoctorWho Flemming was a lietenant in the Royal Navy and was later given command of 30AU, a commando unit whose brief was intelligence gathering. it was hardly "top secret". SMERSH was a Soviet counter intelligence agency, hardly the syndicate of criminal gangs that SPECTRE was supposed to be. Fleming dealt in fiction, pure and simple.
@ChocolateFrogPrince The Licence to Kill is an exageration of Diplomatic Immunity whereby any diplomat is exempt from prosecution and can only be deported under escort even for a capital crime. The gadgets that became so overblown in the later movies which had little to do with his books were surely inspired by such things as the assassination of Georgi Markov by the Bulgarian secret police and the KGB using ricin fired from an umbrella gun at a bus stop in Waterloo in 1978
@ChocolateFrogPrince More recently one might recall the assassination of Alexander Litvinenko, a former officer of the FSB and KGB who found assylum in the UK but was hunted down and poisoned with polonium in november 2006 causing some to state that "Litvinenko's murder represents an ominous landmark: the beginning of an era of nuclear terrorism".
Like all fiction, Bond represents an unlikely, even improbable extreme of current circumstance. That is what fiction is. However you might recal that during the Lybian Embassy seige of 1984 PC yvonne Fletcher was shot and killed by a diplomat from inside the Embassy. That person was never named investigated or prosecuted. Diplomatic immunity. Or as Fleming would have it, a licence to kill.
@ChocolateFrogPrince Bond is a fiction. He is not intended to reflect or represent anything realistic in the way that George Smiley, Harry Palmer or Alec Leamas are.
Bond is a comicbook entertainment and only the most ridiculous would take it as representing real life and then denigrating it for its failures.
Now I think it is time for this exchange to finish as it serves no purpose and is becoming singularly boring.
Out of all the Sean Connery bonds I've seen, Dr. No was definitely the best one. I know it sounds funny (since it's the first bond) but that's how I feel, lol. Sean was the best bond, too! :)
@TheRitchardgaleHater Oh I doubt that. The trailer for Green Lantern is bloody awful, as is the one for the upcoming Musketeers which someone described as "soft porn for fifteen year old girls" Big on my list of all time hates is Castaway which condensed the entire film including the rescue into a couple of minutes making watching the movie obsolete. Bridge to Terabithia is another. A beautiful little film utterly missold. Those responsible should be taken behind the chemical sheds and shot.
@ChocolateFrogPrince Yeah but don't you think that trailers between the 60's - 90's kinda spoiled the whole movie? Sure there are a couple of trailers nowadays that are horrible but you can't deny that trailers nowadays are way better than back then
@TheRitchardgaleHater Not really. I think they're different stylistically and in some cases are definitely more sophisticated, but overall they're often as bad as the movies. In some cases they blow the whole plot, in others they have nothing to do with the actual movie at all and completely missell it - probably because whomever knitted it together didn't watch the actual movie. Generally films - and the trailers that sell them - are no longer made by storytellers. They're made by accountants.
@TheRitchardgaleHater: Trailers back then are actually better, and seldom do the fade-in, fade-out cliché technique seen in WAY TOO MANY film trailers nowadays. Anyways, I'd pick this or Goldfinger as the best Bond film. I love this film beacuse it relied, especially in the first half, on a PI-esque story and a Humphrey Bogart-like atmosphere rather than over-the-top action sequences which would be evident in later installments, even under Connery's tenure.
@DNchap1417@TheSparkyG Well, I guess it comes down to a matter of opinion, they only thing I thought is that many old movie trailers never do the movie any justice at all.
@TheRitchardgaleHater nah mate, Trailers back then were good. The trailers now are shit cos they give away the whole plot. There is no surprise, and you can basically walk into the movie knowing what to expect.
@TheRitchardgaleHater actually I have to disagree, yeah movies were awesome back then but like today it just depends when it comes to the trailer. I can't stand most new trailers, they're ridiculous. and I like this trailer, it's pretty slick for 1962.
@TheRitchardgaleHater Honestly, I actually really enjoyed this trailer, all it gave you was the character, the scenery, and nothing else, no spoilers whatsoever. I think trailers back then were actually better than most today, especially since films were mostly better back in the day.
I did, it's very unclear as to what exactly happened to him. Best as I can tell they either got turned into black something by evil radiation, or they got stiff but super strong. Or he actually lost them and got them replaced with robotic prosthetics.
All we know for sure is that they are less articulate than regular hands, but he can crush small metal objects with them.
The first 2 films by Terance Young were so original Dr. No and From Russia With Love each had such style,yet in a sense both had two completely different styles.Dr. No Im sure was like nothing ever seen before,a complete fun joy ride while From Russia With Love took a more real feel to the spy genre that played like a chess game.In my opinion these two are my favorite Bond films along with Goldfinger which launched the series into what it is now.
@WiseGuy02 ah, yes, the good ol' trailers 5 minutes long and determined to spoil absolutely every bit of the movie. They sure don't make 'em like they used.
@HalfLifeHalfDead You mean as opposed to the trailer for... oh I don't know... Castaway for instance, which not only exposed the whole stranded bit but what happened when he got home.
They still make crappy trailers. The only difference is that usually today there's little plot of consequence to reveal.
@ChocolateFrogPrince Spare me the elitist hatred for modern cinema. Over the years I've come to understand that usually the people who say this go to the cinema twice an year and have no bloody idea what's going on out there. I'm not saying you are like that, just saying you sound like it.
@HalfLifeHalfDead Oh stop writing like a proslethizing halfwit. The fact of the matter is that the majority of mainstream cinema - especially from the US - is made not by creatives but by accountants. Listen to Jeff Bridges on the making of Iron Man. A $60million and they improvised alamost all of it because there was no bloody script. The best movies are made by small indepenents now. They may not have the budgets and CGI but they have plot, theme, structure - silly but important things.
@ChocolateFrogPrince However, my response was to your assertion that this trailer was inferior to modern trailers. My point was that they still make trailers like that. Or others like the trailer for Bridge to Terabithia - one of the best films for a decade - the trailer of which was so utterly misleading that the producers of it should have been taken out behind the chemical sheds and shot. Since you are unaware of the practices and trends in both in film making and trailer construction...
@ChocolateFrogPrince it beggars the question of how you feel qualified to weigh in. People who bang on about how wonderful all modern cinema is are more likely to be those who goes to the cinema once a year - possibly on their birthday or when someone they know wants to give them a treat - and that what they go to see is almost certainly something from the incredible stable of Michael Bay which they will wholeheartedly enjoy, though they might get lost during some of the trickier plot twists.
@ChocolateFrogPrince Oh, so there are good movies? I thought there were none? Stick to what you say and don't twist it at every turn. You are obviously a hater who actually even fails to understand the difference between modern cinema and Hollywood, but figures. Enjoy whining, in the meantime I'll be enjoying the movies Boyle, Nolan, Aranofsky, Inaritu, Cuaron, Kaufman, Tarantino, the Coens, Fincher and so forth make. Dumb movies with no story, yeah. And some of them with quite the budget.
@HalfLifeHalfDead Don't be such a chimp. If you don't understand the difference between a generalisation in commentary and a literal definition then you have no business offering up opinions on anything. You're just a troll looking for a fight. You reel off names as though you read them in a book somewhere. The trouble is you clearly aren't capable of proper comprehension, but merely seek to put others down in order to make yourself feel better about your own intellectual shortcomings.
@ChocolateFrogPrince And had you learn even just a wee bit of movie history you would've known the worst year for cinema in terms of quality was 1929. But it's always easier to whine for the sake of it, right? And give obscure examples that don't really illustrate anything.
This is my favourite Bond film of the series besides From Russia with Love and Goldfinger; what sets this one apart is that it's more of a detective story akin to the Maltese Falcon than an outright action pic. In this film, James Bond is a secret agent sent to track down a missing man and his secretary, and the investigation lands him into more trouble than what he bargained for.
A top 5 Bond movie that still holds it's own today. It's more of a travelogue than the later Bond movies but it's great to watch with an awesome ensemble cast in Jack Lord, Eunice Gayson, John Kitzmiller, etc!
I just watched the first two Bond films, Dr. No and From Russia with Love. I'm not sure why Dr. No is so highly regarded, it felt so unfinished. I don't blame them, they had a limited budget, but the movie is nothing compared to From Russia with Love.
@jessc1979 Two Bonds? Connery, Moore, Lazenby, Dalton, Brosnan, Craig, Sellers/Niven in the spoof Casino Royal, Barry Nelson on TV and Bob Holness on radio.
Best Bond Girl? Oh. that's a toughie..... You'll never get a difintive answer on that one.
@ChocolateFrogPrince I'd advise watching the films in order, preferably not back to back, and try watching other films of the era around them to give you an idea of what was going on cinematically. Google and ImDB are your friends here.o was released in 1958
For instance. Dr No was released in 1958 so type Movies 1958 into Google and IMDB list will be the first entry and there will be a bunch of others to follow.
A year or two either side will show you bond was unique of its time.
@jessc1979 Doesn't make it right . Traditionalists generally say so but others disagree. She looked great but she was no actress at that time and Honey Rider was a poor character though typical of the helpless victim female of the time.
I look forward, Daniella Bianchi - Tania Mallet - Lana Wood - Jane Seymour - Sophie Marceau - Rosamung Pike... How on earth is a lad to choose?
@ChocolateFrogPrince I know you didn't say I did. I also never said that you said that I did.
When you counter with, "Doesn't make it right," it sound like you're suggesting that I think its right because the lists said so. Why else would make that 'observation' unless you think I held that position? Making your intentions as well as your words clear is part of conversation also.
So it should not be *you* lecturing me about conversation, it should be me lecturing you.
@ChocolateFrogPrince Clearly not since comprehension is part of conversation. Taking meaninf from the tone of the whole piece and not just one ssentence that, if you decide to see it from only one perspective will put your nose out of joint. It was a discussional phrase which examined the schools of thought and ended playfully.
@ChocolateFrogPrince If you choose to see a comment aimed at lists and traditionalists as a person slight then I'd suggest you should consider thinking seriously about what that means in terms of your self confidence.
In any case this is neither the time nor the place for any such discussion, nor is it the place for any kind of flame war. It's my patch and I can't be doing with arguments over bugger all.
Casino Royale was a live television play in 1954 with Barry Nelson as James Bond and Peter Lorre as the first James Bond villain. Michael Pate played Felix Leiter
who was a character in all the other films but always played by different actors except
@oprep3 Close. Though the story was Flemming's, Nelson's character was actually an American named "Jimmy Bond". Flemming never intended him to be American.
Originally broadcast live, the show was believed lost until a kinescope was discovered in the 80s. It can now be found on DVD as a bonus feature with the 1967 film adaptation.
The first Bond as we accept him was played by Bob Holness in a radio play produced in South Africa.
Connery is the first cinematic Bond, and Dr No the first film.
@Haxku Dr No was made in 1962, a full four years before Casino Royal which was made in 1966. Dr No was the first full Bond movie. Casino Royal was Peter Sellers' spoof reply.
It's usually a good idea to check facts before making claims
@ChocolateFrogPrince Casino royale is the first one, it came in 1954. You must be thinking of the parody which I'm not refering to. So now who my claim was right.
@Haxku That was a radio play with Bob Holness in the lead. It was not a film. Bond was portrayed on radio and briefly on television [where he was seen as "Jimmy Bond" but he did not make it to the cinema until Cubby Broccoli cast the then relatively unknown Sean Connery to play him.
@vote4carlitosway We all have our preferences. I prefer silly things like plot, theme, charactrisation, you know, the basics of telling a decent story well. If I want to see things blow up I'll turn on the news or watch my girlfriend try to cook.
@TheFilmist Certainy true of the later films because they oversimplified. Early Bond was adapted from Flemming's novels and so had a wee bit behind the pulp action.
Still if that's all you get from them then no harm and no foul.
Oh my god you have no idea how stupid you sound. The new Daniel Craig James Bond movies aren't anywhere near as good as the classics. They're just all about the action and not so much about the actual spying part. And maybe you didn't know, but James Bond is a spy, not a mercenary.
lol I know, But I'm not into old movies so I just said daniel craig was the best, I've downloaded everysingle james bond movies, I'll watch them later.
yes, you are extremely old and remember the times Connery was Bond, sure. I've watched ALL the Bond movies and I must say Craig is right below Connery - a great depiction of the character, much deeper and more interesting, not to mention it's closer to the source material.
Damn, I could watch this movie every week, it's so much damned fun. But the best Bond movie by far is From Russia with Love.
SpyengoEen 2 days ago
Watching this, I can't stop thinking of the Leslie Nielsen voiceovers from 'Police Squad!'...
Kessler1996 1 week ago
bond invented the modern day action genre.
BroyhillVideo 2 weeks ago
first James Bond in Blue Jeans!
k3nzh1n082 2 weeks ago
I LOVE BOND !
McKolikko 2 weeks ago
NO-ONE and I mean NO-ONE tops Sean Connery's portrayal as bond. Bond movies suited the 1960s decade. Trying to carrying it on nowadays and with bloody Daniel Craig is pointless and inane.
rankingtrevor 3 weeks ago
@weezyismyidol586 Actually the original James Bond was a man named Bob Holness.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 month ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince why Bob Holness ?? film edit Sean Connery ?
tungnguyen12292 3 weeks ago
@tungnguyen12292 Connery was the first to play Bond on film in 1962 . In 1956 however, Bob Holness played James Bond in a radio production of Moonraker, making him the first ever James Bond.
ChocolateFrogPrince 3 weeks ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince I'm gonna correct there:
In 1954, there was a TV production of 'Casino Royale' that cast Barry Nelson as James Bond. Only in that he was called "Jimmy". 1954 is before '56, so Holness wasn't the first Bond ever.
Sorry to break it to ya!
Kessler1996 1 week ago
@Kessler1996 It was a low budget ep of Climax! Mystery Theatre adapted by Charles Bennett. It starred Peter Lorre as Le Chiffre, Linda Christian as Valerie Mathis & Michael Pate as Clarence Leiter [not Felix]. It was heavily Americanised & "Jimmy" might as well have been in CIA. Holness's radio play was true to the Fleming original hence my accrediting him as the 1st Bond. Bennett's play was so bad it became a mention in [& some say inspiration of] the Peter Sellers spoof.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 week ago
LOl green screen
jcudal32 1 month ago
Your vid is a favorite on Mauritius
lavernlarsen48 1 month ago
If this film was a pancake, it would be a good pancake!!!!!
pedrewz95 2 months ago
People can say what they want about this movie. I think it was one of the best Bond films created.
FourEyedGamer 2 months ago 2
1:26 I want that arrangement!
martinbond1993 3 months ago
the way he shoots in intro is vv funny and vv different from wat we see latest 007 films
omkaar786 3 months ago
To me, Dr No is the first James Bond film that was so terrible and umcomfortable to watch never ever liked the picture at all, it looked funny to me I find.
Marshalsify 3 months ago
@Marshalsify Dr No WAS the FIRST James Bond film for starters and also why do you find it unconformable to watch? The acting is great, the story is okay and its classic Bond. What do you mean you don't like the picture? Just because it looks a bit rusty because it was made in 1962 does not mean it's a bad film. Your comment sounds very immature and I wouldn't be surprised if your a 14 year old who loves Steven Seagal films.
MrDataCode 3 months ago 2
@Marshalsify It's an old, unmastered film. Go watch your shit CGI movies with a recycled plot already spoiled by piracy and the internet.
Hitmonchan107 2 months ago
dam this is the longest movie trailer i have seen.........
shake838 3 months ago
"007. License to kill whom he pleases. Where he pleases. When he pleases."
I don't think so actually.
MrClassicDoctorWho 6 months ago
@MrClassicDoctorWho So not big on the whole concept of fiction then?
ChocolateFrogPrince 6 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince it may be fiction but its trying to be realistic. MI6 does not tell its agents to kill anyone they please, where they please, and when they please.
MrClassicDoctorWho 6 months ago
@MrClassicDoctorWho Yes of course it's trying to be realistic. Megalomaics building nuclear facilities inthe Carribean, launching satelite lasers to destroy all and sundry, creating a "stealth boat" so they can sink a Royal Navy shp of the line and steal it's atomic weaponry, assasins with steel teeth, masterminds who clone themselves, others who plan to irradiate Fort Knox, cars that become invisible, and best of all a "secret" agent known by name and sight the world over
Silly me..
ChocolateFrogPrince 6 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince yea well if someone wrote about 9/11, you wouldn't think that was realistic would you. Two jumbo jets crashing in to the world trade centre, destroying them both killing thousands of people, then another crashes in to the pentagon, while the other crashes in to a field because of a revolt on the plain.
No wait your right all of the above sounds totally believable.
MrClassicDoctorWho 6 months ago
@MrClassicDoctorWho Well. No. Not really. It doesn't take much to crash a plane just as it doesn't take much to crash a car. Frankly it wasn't the most imaginative thing to bring down the Towers with a jumbo. That was just about recognising the opportunity given the lack of security at that time. However the stuff of Flemming's novels and the movies they inspired are almost complete fiction and if you think this cartoon character is aiming for realism then you perhaps have a larger problem.
ChocolateFrogPrince 6 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince If you want something close to realism you should read Le Carre [who himself worked for government intelligence agencies and so knows of what he writes]. Flemming created a fantasy he named after a carribean based ornithologist whose name he happened to like. The only difference between Boond and Batman frankly is the black rubber suit. Or do you believe that Gotham City was intended to be "realistic" as well?
ChocolateFrogPrince 6 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince well during the second world war Fleming was involved in top secret operations. One of which was called "OPERATION GOLDENEYE". Okay The Nazis never had anything like Iccarus, but when it comes to some of the other films like "Dr. No, how are they so hard to believe? A maniac who is connected to SPECTRE (which could be a play on the real life SMERSH) who intends to destroy the main bases of leading world powers...
MrClassicDoctorWho 6 months ago
@MrClassicDoctorWho ...im not sure if i got the story line just right, i havn't seen it in ages. My point is how can you prove any of it is fiction? Do you work in the secret services? If you think all that is going on in the world is what they print in the newspapers then me trying to tell you all this is pointless.....
wait.....you mean Gotham city IS NOT REAL? So this is where i have been going wrong all these years!
MrClassicDoctorWho 6 months ago
@MrClassicDoctorWho Flemming was a lietenant in the Royal Navy and was later given command of 30AU, a commando unit whose brief was intelligence gathering. it was hardly "top secret". SMERSH was a Soviet counter intelligence agency, hardly the syndicate of criminal gangs that SPECTRE was supposed to be. Fleming dealt in fiction, pure and simple.
ChocolateFrogPrince 6 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince The Licence to Kill is an exageration of Diplomatic Immunity whereby any diplomat is exempt from prosecution and can only be deported under escort even for a capital crime. The gadgets that became so overblown in the later movies which had little to do with his books were surely inspired by such things as the assassination of Georgi Markov by the Bulgarian secret police and the KGB using ricin fired from an umbrella gun at a bus stop in Waterloo in 1978
ChocolateFrogPrince 6 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince More recently one might recall the assassination of Alexander Litvinenko, a former officer of the FSB and KGB who found assylum in the UK but was hunted down and poisoned with polonium in november 2006 causing some to state that "Litvinenko's murder represents an ominous landmark: the beginning of an era of nuclear terrorism".
ChocolateFrogPrince 6 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince
Like all fiction, Bond represents an unlikely, even improbable extreme of current circumstance. That is what fiction is. However you might recal that during the Lybian Embassy seige of 1984 PC yvonne Fletcher was shot and killed by a diplomat from inside the Embassy. That person was never named investigated or prosecuted. Diplomatic immunity. Or as Fleming would have it, a licence to kill.
ChocolateFrogPrince 6 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince Bond is a fiction. He is not intended to reflect or represent anything realistic in the way that George Smiley, Harry Palmer or Alec Leamas are.
Bond is a comicbook entertainment and only the most ridiculous would take it as representing real life and then denigrating it for its failures.
Now I think it is time for this exchange to finish as it serves no purpose and is becoming singularly boring.
ChocolateFrogPrince 6 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince i knew it was pointless
MrClassicDoctorWho 6 months ago
@MrClassicDoctorWho Then shush
Grown-ups are talking.
ChocolateFrogPrince 5 months ago
So why did they dub Eunice Gayson's voice? She sounds fine here in the trailer.
leftcoaster67 6 months ago
Out of all the Sean Connery bonds I've seen, Dr. No was definitely the best one. I know it sounds funny (since it's the first bond) but that's how I feel, lol. Sean was the best bond, too! :)
aaronasina 6 months ago
i am a very big bond fan, dr. no a very old film (and the first bond film) but a good one ! (sorry my english is not so good)
33GoldenEye 7 months ago
"She thought I was dead but i continued to prove her wrong" zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzip. win
227060 7 months ago
this movie is awesome
badwolf456100 8 months ago
Sean Connery is the coolest narrator ever!
TheRitchardgaleHater 8 months ago
Movies back then was AWESOME, trailers back then were horrible.
Movies today are HORRIBLE, trailers today are awesome
TheRitchardgaleHater 8 months ago 57
@TheRitchardgaleHater Oh I doubt that. The trailer for Green Lantern is bloody awful, as is the one for the upcoming Musketeers which someone described as "soft porn for fifteen year old girls" Big on my list of all time hates is Castaway which condensed the entire film including the rescue into a couple of minutes making watching the movie obsolete. Bridge to Terabithia is another. A beautiful little film utterly missold. Those responsible should be taken behind the chemical sheds and shot.
ChocolateFrogPrince 8 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince Yeah but don't you think that trailers between the 60's - 90's kinda spoiled the whole movie? Sure there are a couple of trailers nowadays that are horrible but you can't deny that trailers nowadays are way better than back then
TheRitchardgaleHater 8 months ago
@TheRitchardgaleHater Not really. I think they're different stylistically and in some cases are definitely more sophisticated, but overall they're often as bad as the movies. In some cases they blow the whole plot, in others they have nothing to do with the actual movie at all and completely missell it - probably because whomever knitted it together didn't watch the actual movie. Generally films - and the trailers that sell them - are no longer made by storytellers. They're made by accountants.
ChocolateFrogPrince 8 months ago
@TheRitchardgaleHater: Trailers back then are actually better, and seldom do the fade-in, fade-out cliché technique seen in WAY TOO MANY film trailers nowadays. Anyways, I'd pick this or Goldfinger as the best Bond film. I love this film beacuse it relied, especially in the first half, on a PI-esque story and a Humphrey Bogart-like atmosphere rather than over-the-top action sequences which would be evident in later installments, even under Connery's tenure.
DNchap1417 5 months ago
@DNchap1417 @TheSparkyG Well, I guess it comes down to a matter of opinion, they only thing I thought is that many old movie trailers never do the movie any justice at all.
TheRitchardgaleHater 4 months ago
@TheRitchardgaleHater nah mate, Trailers back then were good. The trailers now are shit cos they give away the whole plot. There is no surprise, and you can basically walk into the movie knowing what to expect.
TheSparkyG 4 months ago
@TheRitchardgaleHater Na, Notlan is the Atlas of the movie industry.
drnogood59 4 months ago
@TheRitchardgaleHater actually I have to disagree, yeah movies were awesome back then but like today it just depends when it comes to the trailer. I can't stand most new trailers, they're ridiculous. and I like this trailer, it's pretty slick for 1962.
aboyintheband 3 months ago
@TheRitchardgaleHater Honestly, I actually really enjoyed this trailer, all it gave you was the character, the scenery, and nothing else, no spoilers whatsoever. I think trailers back then were actually better than most today, especially since films were mostly better back in the day.
MrAVEREX 1 month ago
So like... did Doctor No have robot hands or something?
EdouardDubois 8 months ago
@EdouardDubois so... like... you know... watch the movie dude
ChocolateFrogPrince 8 months ago 4
@ChocolateFrogPrince
I did, it's very unclear as to what exactly happened to him. Best as I can tell they either got turned into black something by evil radiation, or they got stiff but super strong. Or he actually lost them and got them replaced with robotic prosthetics.
All we know for sure is that they are less articulate than regular hands, but he can crush small metal objects with them.
EdouardDubois 8 months ago
Got to love how horrible trailers were back in the day xD
Sbrff 9 months ago
@Sbrff You say that as though things have changed!
ChocolateFrogPrince 9 months ago
The first 2 films by Terance Young were so original Dr. No and From Russia With Love each had such style,yet in a sense both had two completely different styles.Dr. No Im sure was like nothing ever seen before,a complete fun joy ride while From Russia With Love took a more real feel to the spy genre that played like a chess game.In my opinion these two are my favorite Bond films along with Goldfinger which launched the series into what it is now.
William72087 9 months ago
Damn thats the whole entire movie in a 3 minute and a half form
MrSherlockWatson 10 months ago
@MrSherlockWatson Pretty much.
There's laods of them and they aren't limited to the bygone era
uk. movies. yahoo. com/blog/article/151601/trailers-that-spoil-movies. html
[just be shure to get rid of the spaces in the url!}
ChocolateFrogPrince 10 months ago
my name is BOND JAMES BOND
xbox36155 11 months ago
classic and beautiful !!!
argyroulamou 1 year ago
the only bad part about this movie is the scene where James Bond gets attacked by the spider
thevideogamenerd100 1 year ago
I think Thunderball was actually going to be the very first movie. Its amazing Dr No so timeless and brilliant even today
Englishsea24 1 year ago
underneat the mango tree me honey and i look for the moon! i love this song lol
0kwhoisnext 1 year ago 11
Once you've seen this trailer, you've seen the movie.
WiseGuy02 1 year ago
@WiseGuy02 ah, yes, the good ol' trailers 5 minutes long and determined to spoil absolutely every bit of the movie. They sure don't make 'em like they used.
Thank God!
HalfLifeHalfDead 1 year ago
@HalfLifeHalfDead You mean as opposed to the trailer for... oh I don't know... Castaway for instance, which not only exposed the whole stranded bit but what happened when he got home.
They still make crappy trailers. The only difference is that usually today there's little plot of consequence to reveal.
ChocolateFrogPrince 10 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince Spare me the elitist hatred for modern cinema. Over the years I've come to understand that usually the people who say this go to the cinema twice an year and have no bloody idea what's going on out there. I'm not saying you are like that, just saying you sound like it.
HalfLifeHalfDead 10 months ago
@HalfLifeHalfDead Oh stop writing like a proslethizing halfwit. The fact of the matter is that the majority of mainstream cinema - especially from the US - is made not by creatives but by accountants. Listen to Jeff Bridges on the making of Iron Man. A $60million and they improvised alamost all of it because there was no bloody script. The best movies are made by small indepenents now. They may not have the budgets and CGI but they have plot, theme, structure - silly but important things.
ChocolateFrogPrince 10 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince However, my response was to your assertion that this trailer was inferior to modern trailers. My point was that they still make trailers like that. Or others like the trailer for Bridge to Terabithia - one of the best films for a decade - the trailer of which was so utterly misleading that the producers of it should have been taken out behind the chemical sheds and shot. Since you are unaware of the practices and trends in both in film making and trailer construction...
ChocolateFrogPrince 10 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince it beggars the question of how you feel qualified to weigh in. People who bang on about how wonderful all modern cinema is are more likely to be those who goes to the cinema once a year - possibly on their birthday or when someone they know wants to give them a treat - and that what they go to see is almost certainly something from the incredible stable of Michael Bay which they will wholeheartedly enjoy, though they might get lost during some of the trickier plot twists.
ChocolateFrogPrince 10 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince I'm not proposing that you are like that, just that you seem to be.
ChocolateFrogPrince 10 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince Oh, so there are good movies? I thought there were none? Stick to what you say and don't twist it at every turn. You are obviously a hater who actually even fails to understand the difference between modern cinema and Hollywood, but figures. Enjoy whining, in the meantime I'll be enjoying the movies Boyle, Nolan, Aranofsky, Inaritu, Cuaron, Kaufman, Tarantino, the Coens, Fincher and so forth make. Dumb movies with no story, yeah. And some of them with quite the budget.
HalfLifeHalfDead 10 months ago
@HalfLifeHalfDead Don't be such a chimp. If you don't understand the difference between a generalisation in commentary and a literal definition then you have no business offering up opinions on anything. You're just a troll looking for a fight. You reel off names as though you read them in a book somewhere. The trouble is you clearly aren't capable of proper comprehension, but merely seek to put others down in order to make yourself feel better about your own intellectual shortcomings.
ChocolateFrogPrince 10 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince The thing is no one is biting here.
Now be quiet. Grown ups are speaking.
ChocolateFrogPrince 10 months ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince And had you learn even just a wee bit of movie history you would've known the worst year for cinema in terms of quality was 1929. But it's always easier to whine for the sake of it, right? And give obscure examples that don't really illustrate anything.
HalfLifeHalfDead 10 months ago
Amazing how this trailer manages to spoil every interesting bit of the entire movie.
Pissantloser 1 year ago
what a long trailer
trig1907 1 year ago
this is the greatest of all james bond
Wiggling 1 year ago
I know this is old, but I have to say,
If I saw this trailer now, I probably would've thought this movie sucked.
ghjiop23 1 year ago
the movie that started it all
hondahp18 1 year ago
most faumouse movie person in the world you tell anyone who james bond is (14 or older) and they will know
abc12319525 1 year ago
Great introduction to the world of bond.
bobgrantsbus 1 year ago
Wonder how many std's bond has...
bigbilly29 1 year ago
This is my favourite Bond film of the series besides From Russia with Love and Goldfinger; what sets this one apart is that it's more of a detective story akin to the Maltese Falcon than an outright action pic. In this film, James Bond is a secret agent sent to track down a missing man and his secretary, and the investigation lands him into more trouble than what he bargained for.
DNchap1417 1 year ago
A top 5 Bond movie that still holds it's own today. It's more of a travelogue than the later Bond movies but it's great to watch with an awesome ensemble cast in Jack Lord, Eunice Gayson, John Kitzmiller, etc!
rjl13martin 1 year ago
This is more like a documentary on Doctor No, rather than a trailer... lol.
AndyJThomasFILMS 1 year ago
Believe it or not Sean Connery was only 32 years old in Dr No, he looked like a man in his 40's.
ANOTHERHOLEINYOHEAD 1 year ago
I just watched the first two Bond films, Dr. No and From Russia with Love. I'm not sure why Dr. No is so highly regarded, it felt so unfinished. I don't blame them, they had a limited budget, but the movie is nothing compared to From Russia with Love.
On to Goldfinger...
jessc1979 1 year ago
@jessc1979 Because it was the first of its kind. There hadn't been anything like it.
And of course, Ursula, emerging from the sea, all dripping and dusky and....
Excuse me.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince Ha! Yeah, between the two Bonds, Ursula is the best Bond girl.
I think you have a point. Dr. No wasn't the first Bond I saw so maybe that's why it was hard for me to like it.
jessc1979 1 year ago
@jessc1979 Two Bonds? Connery, Moore, Lazenby, Dalton, Brosnan, Craig, Sellers/Niven in the spoof Casino Royal, Barry Nelson on TV and Bob Holness on radio.
Best Bond Girl? Oh. that's a toughie..... You'll never get a difintive answer on that one.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince I'd advise watching the films in order, preferably not back to back, and try watching other films of the era around them to give you an idea of what was going on cinematically. Google and ImDB are your friends here.o was released in 1958
For instance. Dr No was released in 1958 so type Movies 1958 into Google and IMDB list will be the first entry and there will be a bunch of others to follow.
A year or two either side will show you bond was unique of its time.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince I meant to say 'Two Bond films' of Connery's that I've seen so far (Dr. No, From Russia with Love).
Most lists put Ursula as #1.
jessc1979 1 year ago
@jessc1979 Doesn't make it right . Traditionalists generally say so but others disagree. She looked great but she was no actress at that time and Honey Rider was a poor character though typical of the helpless victim female of the time.
I look forward, Daniella Bianchi - Tania Mallet - Lana Wood - Jane Seymour - Sophie Marceau - Rosamung Pike... How on earth is a lad to choose?
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince I never said it was right. I'm just the messenger.
jessc1979 1 year ago
@jessc1979 If you reread I think you'll find that I never said that you did.
You said most lists put ursula at 1. I replied that that doesn't make it right and then expanded on that.
It's called conversation. You make an observation, I counter and you respond with your own thoughts and observations. It's how these things work.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince I know you didn't say I did. I also never said that you said that I did.
When you counter with, "Doesn't make it right," it sound like you're suggesting that I think its right because the lists said so. Why else would make that 'observation' unless you think I held that position? Making your intentions as well as your words clear is part of conversation also.
So it should not be *you* lecturing me about conversation, it should be me lecturing you.
jessc1979 1 year ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince Clearly not since comprehension is part of conversation. Taking meaninf from the tone of the whole piece and not just one ssentence that, if you decide to see it from only one perspective will put your nose out of joint. It was a discussional phrase which examined the schools of thought and ended playfully.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince If you choose to see a comment aimed at lists and traditionalists as a person slight then I'd suggest you should consider thinking seriously about what that means in terms of your self confidence.
In any case this is neither the time nor the place for any such discussion, nor is it the place for any kind of flame war. It's my patch and I can't be doing with arguments over bugger all.
Play nice or don't play at all please.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
The EVIL DR NO.....Dosen't understand the word NO...
forYourEyesOnly43 1 year ago
Loove bond films! Watch it all the time!
19GirlBad 1 year ago
How can a trailer be over 3 minutes long?
Lufttygger306 1 year ago 2
I like the old school Bond films they are good!
TAhowardrocks 1 year ago 2
48 Years ago this film was realesed wow
InternetSurfer1996 1 year ago
my best Movie :D
ericgonzalez9410 1 year ago
Casino Royale was a live television play in 1954 with Barry Nelson as James Bond and Peter Lorre as the first James Bond villain. Michael Pate played Felix Leiter
who was a character in all the other films but always played by different actors except
when David Hedison played him twice.
oprep3 1 year ago
@oprep3 Close. Though the story was Flemming's, Nelson's character was actually an American named "Jimmy Bond". Flemming never intended him to be American.
Originally broadcast live, the show was believed lost until a kinescope was discovered in the 80s. It can now be found on DVD as a bonus feature with the 1967 film adaptation.
The first Bond as we accept him was played by Bob Holness in a radio play produced in South Africa.
Connery is the first cinematic Bond, and Dr No the first film.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince It's also worth remembering that the TV play was intended as a pilot for a series but it was not commissioned.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
It is'nt the first film, that is casino royale. But this is the most famous one and is considerd to be the first one eve if it is'nt.
Haxku 1 year ago
@Haxku Dr No was made in 1962, a full four years before Casino Royal which was made in 1966. Dr No was the first full Bond movie. Casino Royal was Peter Sellers' spoof reply.
It's usually a good idea to check facts before making claims
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince I have u noob
Haxku 1 year ago
@Haxku and yet still you managed to get it wrong and have descended into pointless and groundless insults to cover your embarrassment. How quaint.
Check IMDB you fool.
Dr No
/title/tt0055928/
Casino Royale
/title/tt0061452/
Now shush. The grownups are speaking.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince Casino royale is the first one, it came in 1954. You must be thinking of the parody which I'm not refering to. So now who my claim was right.
Haxku 1 year ago
@Haxku That was a radio play with Bob Holness in the lead. It was not a film. Bond was portrayed on radio and briefly on television [where he was seen as "Jimmy Bond" but he did not make it to the cinema until Cubby Broccoli cast the then relatively unknown Sean Connery to play him.
Seriously matey, you are wrong.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
2:25 xD jim carrey xD
anubiszot 1 year ago
shee ..with ursula andress i would have been Dr. Hell-Yes
nealadams70 1 year ago
i think the bond movies that come out in these years r better...... more action
vote4carlitosway 1 year ago
@vote4carlitosway We all have our preferences. I prefer silly things like plot, theme, charactrisation, you know, the basics of telling a decent story well. If I want to see things blow up I'll turn on the news or watch my girlfriend try to cook.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
@ChocolateFrogPrince Well, to be fair, if you're looking at Bond films for those things you're probably turned around a bit.
TheFilmist 1 year ago
@TheFilmist Certainy true of the later films because they oversimplified. Early Bond was adapted from Flemming's novels and so had a wee bit behind the pulp action.
Still if that's all you get from them then no harm and no foul.
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
@vote4carlitosway well bond isn't much about action, It's more sophisticated with gadgets and using your mind and stuff
fidan2fast 1 year ago
Best bond
kdotmj 1 year ago
i really want to see these movies! classics<3
bballqu33n13 1 year ago
I'm finally going to watch this for the first time tonight. The trailer is certainly paced differently to modern ones.
therealenkc 1 year ago
@therealenkc From the days when Bond was about more than special effects and bikinis.
Enjoy
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
Gee d'ya think it'll work?
Jemmer1000 1 year ago
cCnnery was the best Bond by virtue of being the first.
None of the actors have really looked like the Bond of the book with his unruly hair, English everyman look, and facial knife scar.
However, Connery DID look like the comic strip James Bond where the newspaper The Daily Express ran adaptions of the novels.
The one most like the character in the book in personality was Timothy Dalton, dark brooding, not superheroic.
Craig seems more like Sgt Rock or Nick Fury.
ysbaddaden2003 1 year ago
Connery is simply the best James Bond of all times
nickobauer 1 year ago 2
@nickobauer I thoroughly second, all the way to MILLIONTH that.
Juliaflo 1 year ago
Connery's natarration is awesome.
dcn8933 1 year ago 7
A trailer with the whole movie in it. lol
ksilveira 1 year ago
This came first.
hangemhigh2000 2 years ago
And does that make it a chicken or an egg?
ChocolateFrogPrince 2 years ago
its the chicken and then it laid a shit load of great eggs,21 of em!!!
connery is bond!!!
jesse1970ss 2 years ago
Surely by that token Ian Flemming and Cubby Brocolli are the chickens?
ChocolateFrogPrince 2 years ago
this is the one and only JAMES BOND to me
PIEEATER617 2 years ago
I want to be james bond
plutao 2 years ago 40
I think thats every guys dream
jstanyer91 2 years ago
Get laid with hot girls mor easy that drinks water
plutao 2 years ago
@plutao
Haha!
What a pitiful remark....and yet, I sympathize
Zappafan5150 1 year ago
my father hates the other bonds he only like sean connery
Movies688 1 year ago
@Movies688 yes sean was very very good the better bond
plutao 1 year ago
@plutao I want to be Honey Rider
argyroulamou 1 year ago
@plutao every guy does
94TahoeDude 11 months ago
@94TahoeDude yes
plutao 11 months ago
Was their a Dr. Yes followup movie?
l2a3sterling 2 years ago 2
Dr. Yess was a Supervillain Bond Girl from the movie Lederhosen
ChocolateFrogPrince 2 years ago
This was the very first james bond film i saw. To this day its still my favourite. Sean Connery is James Bond!
robthestoner001 2 years ago
Daniel craig is the best one =/
FPSManiacGaming 2 years ago
Oh my god you have no idea how stupid you sound. The new Daniel Craig James Bond movies aren't anywhere near as good as the classics. They're just all about the action and not so much about the actual spying part. And maybe you didn't know, but James Bond is a spy, not a mercenary.
robthestoner001 2 years ago 2
@robthestoner001 I know I know, But I like the action in the james bond movies! I havn't even seen the old ones LOL
FPSManiacGaming 2 years ago
@FPSManiacGaming You make no sense. First you say that Daniel Craig is the best Bond. Yet you have'nt even seen any of the old ones.
isaac000016 2 years ago
lol I know, But I'm not into old movies so I just said daniel craig was the best, I've downloaded everysingle james bond movies, I'll watch them later.
FPSManiacGaming 2 years ago
@FPSManiacGaming You're missing out. James Bond movies even old ones are like the most beloved movies.
dcn8933 1 year ago
You have to understand that your young.
So you really dont know wants really
going on yet.just do your research.Dont
claim craigs the best because you dont
lnow about the others.Plus its to early
to tell if craig is the best!
58fenix 2 years ago
I'm only 6 years younger than you, I was raised in the pierce brosnan james bond era, But I didn't watch those movies :(
FPSManiacGaming 2 years ago
I was too.But you have to understand that
the old ones are want brought brosnan
alive.Connery and moore are the classics.
and ten years from now brosnan will be
too.Watch the old ones.Learn your roots.
58fenix 2 years ago
Well said
ChocolateFrogPrince 1 year ago
yes, you are extremely old and remember the times Connery was Bond, sure. I've watched ALL the Bond movies and I must say Craig is right below Connery - a great depiction of the character, much deeper and more interesting, not to mention it's closer to the source material.
HalfLifeHalfDead 1 year ago
Want do you mean extremely old.Cause
that sounds like an insult.And you saying
craig is under connery is your opinion.
Even though craig is a very good bond.
But want are you really saying!
58fenix 1 year ago
That was good.. very good
MrRuneball 2 years ago
hmm dr no i would love to watch it
47mrcool 2 years ago 2
Was Sean Connery the James Bond who took his shirt off the most?
ysbaddaden2003 2 years ago 2
i think he slept with like 4 women in that movie
gigglesmile36 2 years ago 22
1.) Sylvia Trench
2.) Miss Taro
3.) Honey Rider
who is the fourth?
TheSunmanho 2 years ago 2