*****

This second BOND feature is a remarkable improvement over the first film, DR. NO (1962). The Ian Fleming novel on which it is based is my personal favorite. Needless to say, the film is a bit of a disappointment, simply because the producers didn't stick with the fine Fleming original. However, the film moves very smoothly throughout the first two thirds or so. It's only when the script veers off into 'screenwriter's embellishment land' that things begin to crumble. The helicopter and boat chase sequences are handled well and are very entertaining to watch, but there simply is no suspense within these moments. Visually, these two action scenes are fine, but add absolutely nothing of value to the film's narrative. If the film had followed the denouement from the novel, this film would have been the best of the Connery BONDS. 007's confrontation with Rosa Klebb in the book is bizarre and surreal and would have suited the rest of this film's Hitchcock-like touches admirably. It is a real pity, because the rest of the film is so finely written, directed and acted overall.

But that doesn't mean that the producers must follow EVERY detail contained in the novels. The film series has several original touches and improvements over Fleming's writing to be sure. In this film, for instance, Red Grant remains rather mysterious and silent as he shadows Bond until it is time for him to confront 007. The exploding tear gas canister disguised as talcum powder in the attaché case and Bond tempting Grant with the gold sovereigns are not in the book. There is no real fight in the novel and what there is just turns quickly into a bloody gorefest of a stabbing. What we are given in the film is far more clever, for we see a ruse laid out by Bond before the slugfest ensues. And what a slugfest! My only quibble is that this fight sequence is about 30 seconds too short. Even though Bond ends up winning the battle against Red Grant by utilizing the same hidden knife, how we get to this point is remarkably superior to the Fleming novel -- plus there is no gratuitous bloodletting!

However, the filmmakers didn't use any discretion when they chose to include that ridiculous fight between the two gypsy women from the novel. On film, it is most silly, and in the book this sequence is just filler for malcontents. The subtlety of the spy game from the novel is lost within this film where Bond and Tanya are running in broad daylight, with the stolen Lektor code machine in plain view, while hopping onboard the train in front of the Russian security agents. Bond is a professional secret agent and not an amateur! In the book, Tanya is already on the train with the Lektor device and awaiting Bond's arrival. It is only after they are well on their journey that Tanya recognizes the Russian agent stationed on the Orient Express. But in the Fleming original, this plot is already complicated enough. Unfortunately, the producers chose to include SPECTRE once again, thus adding a unnecessary wrinkle to the proceedings. If the Red Chinese can be the bad guys in the very next film, why can't the Russians be the villains here? Most peculiar indeed.

On the other hand, by including SPECTRE in this film, we get to see the cleverest addition by the BOND filmmakers concerning Ernst Stavro Blofeld: the white Persian cat. This detail is not to be found in any of the Fleming novels. I find this cat to be most delightful and he is used to great effect here, especially when he eats that fish while Blofeld discusses Bond's planned demise: "May his death be a particularly humiliating and unpleasant one." Since the BOND producers decided not to reveal Blofeld's face until YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE (1967), the white cat became the visual representation of his countenance. What do we find within this visage? Elegance with an air of sophistication and a high degree of arrogance; it is also somewhat immutable, while being rather mysterious and dangerous. In short, it is something very far removed from someone like the meek-looking actor named Donald Pleasance! But speaking of choosing actors ....

This film is without a doubt one of the best cast in the whole series ( only GOLDFINGER outranks it, IMHO ). Top honors must go to Robert Shaw as Donald 'Red' Grant. His villain still makes a high impact even though he remains silent throughout most of the movie. Never in the entire series to date has James Bond faced such a darkly sinister opponent. Red Grant reveals himself as a true psychotic killer when he snarls out his plan to destroy Bond in a most humiliating manner. What is interesting here is that Grant has been presented throughout the film as 007's equal and a type of anti-Bond. When Red Grant gets the upper hand and is gloating over 007, we truly feel that Bond is in real danger here. This is the only time in the whole JAMES BOND film series that this happens and Robert Shaw is to be highly commended for creating such a impressive adversary.

Rounding out the cast are Vladek Sheybal as master planner Kronsteen and Lotte Lenya as ex-SMERSH agent Rosa Klebb. Both are most excellent in their respective roles. But unfortunately, the filmmakers insisted on dressing Klebb up as a charwoman for the finale. This is more akin to Boris and Natasha tactics from the Bullwinkle cartoon series than of Ian Fleming, and so these final scenes involving Klebb are rather ridiculous. But then there's Daniela Bianchi, who is most charming and lovely as Tatiana Romanova. She ranks among the top Bond Girls from the series most definitely. But, alas, as is the fate of many a Bond Girl, the script has her spouting insipid lines a little too often -- or should I say cooing said lines: "Oh James, James... ," etc. Now really! But this particular type of nonsense won't appear in the next 007 film.