The Case for From Russia With Love

It is my firm belief that movies can suffer the effects of the “middle child syndrome.”  Sequels in trilogies that don’t push the envelope enough or are forgettable for not being the beginning or end of a story, can often fall into this middle child territory.  Falling in between the first James Bond(Dr. No), and what is arguably perceived as the best James Bond (Goldfinger), From Russia With Love suffers this inglorious syndrome with no just reason other than its placement.  It is superior to Dr. No in every aspect, and if the series had ended with only two movies it would be viewed as a masterpiece.  However, the success of FRWL allowed the producers to make a third movie and with Goldfinger the series took off to the stratosphere.  Here now, let us take the opportunity to make the case for FRWL and why it should be regarded as a Bond masterpiece.

***Spoiler Alert***This article is full of spoilers, so if for some ungodly reason you haven't seen From Russia With Love then what is wrong with you?  Watch it first, or at least don't complain.  You've been warned.


Story
The story involves the Bond stealing the Lektor cryptograph, a huge intelligence boon.  However the plan is actually a plot by SPECTRE to steal the Lektor and sell it back to the Russians along with killing Bond in payment for killing Dr. No in the previous film.  The film is heavy with suspenseful espionage relying on the actions of agents and double agents rather than necessarily some expensive gadget to move the story and action along.  It does have Bond’s first true gadget in the shape of a deadly attaché case that Bond uses against the SPECTRE assassin.  However Bond has to trick the assassin into opening it.  The story has betrayal, suspense, and romance like you would expect in a Bond movie, but the story is very tight and does not suffer from trying to fit into the Bond film mould that movies after Goldfinger were seemed forced into.

Dr. No was an excellent story to start the film franchise with.  The scope of the story was focused specifically in just one area with the mystery revealing not only the plan of the primary bad guy, but also revealing SPECTRE who would stand as MI6’s primary adversary through the early films.  FRWL married the taut Cold War dramatics that pervaded the novels with an expanded view of the SPECTRE organization.  It also introduced the character of Ernst Stavro Blofeld who would stand as Bond’s arch nemesis through those early years.  In this early film Blofeld is a faceless evil known only as “Number 1” running SPECTRE and overseeing its plans.   FRWL is fraught with Cold War dramatics.  Specifically featuring the Russians for the first time, they are a primary source of angst that wouldn’t be seen again until The Spy Who Loved Me.  There’s a real sense of both sides working desperately to win, not knowing there is a third agency at work.

Setting
Dr. No featured just London and Jamaica.  Whether the film was written with only two settings because of the smaller budget or because that’s just what the story needed (which it did only need those two settings) isn’t really relevant to this discussion.  However FRWL featured London, Istanbul, Belgrade, Venice, Zagreb, and the unnamed SPECTRE Island.  Use of the Orient Express as a means to escape Istanbul provided the story element to allow for the Eastern European sites.  These days, the setting doesn’t have the impact, but in 1963 this is the heart of Communist controlled Eastern Europe that really added a depth of suspense and tension to the movie.

Gadgets
FRWL isn’t the first movie to feature Major Boothroyd, aka Q (he was played by Peter Burton in Dr. No) but it is the first film to feature Desmond Llewelyn who would reprise the role in almost every film until his death in 1999.  Not only does it feature Desmond Llewelyn, but it also features the first time Q gave a briefing on a gadget to Bond.  In Dr. No Boothroyd replaces Bond’s Beretta with the Walther PPK.  In FRWL it’s the briefcase featuring a throwing knife, tear gas cartridge, survival rifle with ammunition, and 50 gold sovereigns.  Bond also had a car phone which was quite a thought in 1963, as well as a pager and a camera with a tape recorder. 

Early on you could see the beginnings of the standard Q / 007 repartee

Bond Formula
While FRWL thrives without having to try to fit within the confines of the so-called “Bond Formula,” it does show the early signs of the formula being put in place.  It’s the first movie to feature a pre-credits action sequence, it’s the first to feature a popular song recorded by an artist, and features the first gadgetry.  However at this stage it was all fairly new and doesn’t define Bond movies as it did later.

Characters
For all that I love about James Bond, his womanizing, his drinking, his license to kill, and his witty banter, of all the Bond movies, Bond feels most like a real person in this movie.  He isn’t just a spy, he isn’t the last line of defense to save the world.  He’s not too tongue in cheek, and not too glib.  You sense his attraction to Romanova is real, and that he is doing everything he can to get her and him out of harm’s way.  Not only that but he really has to claw and fight to defeat the assassin, and it takes more than just a quick battle resolved by a gadget.  Bond is pushed to his limits in that fist fight on the train, and you can feel the edge in Connery’s performance as he pushes back.

If I was Bond I'd do everything to save her too.

Romanova is more than just a pair of legs to attract Bond.  He’s a womanizer, and his philandering ways are there.  But Romanova loves him.  Or so she thinks.   You can tell she is a naïve woman who’s easily swayed by emotions and likely confuses love for what she felt in bed with Bond.  And I think Bond can tell that, but he still cares for her, and is protective of her.  And she takes risks to help Bond.  She’s more than just a pair of breasts or legs.  She is the first woman in the Bond series to have a level of complexity to her.  She’s young, she’s attractive, and she’s attracted to Bond, and she is willing to give up the life she knows to give the man she loves what he needs.  Perhaps I’m romanticizing her some, but to me she seems a far more real character than Honey Rider in Dr. No or Pussy Galore in Goldfinger.

Conclusion
In the end From Russia With Love may not have the formulaic success of  Goldfinger, or the epic nature of Thunderball, but it’s combination of tight storytelling, excellent performances (especially from Connery before he grew tired of James Bond), and its willingness to push the envelope beyond what they did in Dr. No makes it something special.  It isn’t just one of the most entertaining James Bond movies, but is likely my favorite Bond movie of the entire franchise.