The Bond Files #2: From Russia With Love (1963)

So, Bond is back.

He is indeed. The first film was such a success that there had to be a sequel, and there were plenty of Ian Fleming novels waiting to be adapted.

Why this one?

Well, President Kennedy had named the book as one of his ten favourite novels of all time in a 1961 issue of Life magazine. The book is also one of Fleming’s most compelling thrillers, with a really strong plot.

Is the film faithful to the book?

Mostly, with a few adjustments. For example, in the novel the Russians were the antagonists, whereas in the film Bond is up against SPECTRE, the evil organisation introduced in Dr No.

So what’s the story?

MI6 is contacted by Tatiana Romanova, a Russian cipher clerk who claims that she has fallen in love with a file photo of Bond and wants to defect, promising to hand over a cryptographic device called the Lektor in exchange for safe passage to England. Bond and M assume that this is an elaborate trap set by Russian intelligence, but it is in fact the work of SPECTRE, who have recruited Colonel Rosa Klebb as a Soviet mole.

Despite recognising the ruse, the chance of obtaining the Lektor is too great to pass up, and Bond is dispatched to Istanbul to escort Romanova back to England. Meanwhile, SPECTRE assassin Donald Grant secretly works to protect Bond’s life until he has possession of the Lektor, after which Grant intends to murder Bond (in retaliation for the death of Doctor No) and steal the device for his employers.

That’s quite intricate.

Yes, but the plot is really just an excuse for us to enter Bond’s crazy world of excitement and intrigue.

Who’s back from the last film?

Sean Connery is back as Bond, looking just as assured and comfortable as he did the first time round. If I had been alive to see From Russia With Love in 1963, I think I would have had a hard time imagining anyone else in the role. Also back are Bernard Lee as M and Lois Maxwell as Moneypenny, and we also get the first appearance of Desmond Llewellyn as Q, the legendary gadget-master.

Ooh, so does Bond get some gadgets this time?

He gets an attaché case, which contains a hidden knife and releases tear gas if not opened in a particular way. Actually, it’s the villains who get the most interesting gadgets; Grant has a garrotte wire that extends out of his wristwatch, and two of the SPECTRE agents – including Rosa Klebb – wear deadly shoes fitted with a venom coated blade. It makes sense that the villains are better equipped than Bond, since it gives him more obstacles to overcome.

Any supporting players of note?

There’s the totally charming Pedro Armendariz as Kerim Bey, Head of MI6 Station T and Bond’s contact in Istanbul. Kerim is a great character because you really believe that he and Bond are friends, thanks to the fantastic chemistry between Armendariz and Sean Connery. Sadly, Armandariz was suffering from terminal cancer during filming, and died before the film’s release. Also, Daniela Bianchi is really good as Tatiana, coming across as very genuine and sincere.

Are the villains as good as Doctor No?

Yes. This time we actually have a trio of villains: Red Grant, Rosa Klebb, and SPECTRE chief Ernst Stavro Blofeld, who at this point is a hand stroking a white cat. Lotte Lenya delivers a very effective performance as Klebb, but both she and Blofeld remain in the background for the majority of the film. Bond’s main adversary in From Russia With Love is Grant - a coldly efficient killing machine trained for the specific purpose of assassinating James Bond - played by the excellent Robert Shaw.

Henchmen in Bond films are often expected to have a gimmick of sorts, but Grant doesn’t need one; he is just a truly frightening man, casually disposing of anyone who threatens Bond’s life while relishing the prospect of murdering Bond himself. One of my favourite sequences comes in the last third of the film, when Grant masquerades as ‘Captain Nash’, a British agent sent to rendezvous with Bond. Grant’s attempts to come across as a jovial Englishman are painfully forced, and Bond’s suspicions gradually mount until Grant drops the pretence and reverts back to his natural state. It’s incredibly effective and somewhat chilling, even better for taking place aboard the Orient Express.

Are the production values still as high this time around?

Yes, the same level of care that was put into Dr No is applied here, with the same results. There appears to be a little less studio filming than there was last time, but the sets and lighting still look incredibly lavish, and the direction remains well-judged.

The title sequence is also noticeably more ambitious, and this time the credits are projected onto the bodies of belly dancers.

That’s a point: is there a theme song?

Yes: From Russia With Love, written by Lionel Bart and sung by Matt Monro. The full song is heard during parts of the film and over the end credits, and an instrumental version is used for the opening credits. A very nice song in a Frank Sinatra kind of style.

So, in conclusion?

Another really great Bond film, just as good as the last one. Again, it might have less action and stunts than people would expect from a Bond film today, but the sheer quality of the whole production makes it a must-watch.

Any random facts?

Well, Sean Connery and Robert Shaw would face off again in Robin & Marion (1976), where Shaw would play the Sherriff of Nottingham to Connery’s Robin Hood.  

The Bond Files #1: Dr No (1962)

  

What’s the story?

In his first ever big-screen adventure, James Bond is dispatched to Jamaica to investigate the death of a colleague, who was himself investigating a missile toppling crisis. The trail leads to the foreboding island of Crab Key, home of the mysterious Doctor Julius No.

 
What’s Sean Connery like as Bond?

Incredibly good, especially considering this was his first time playing the character. His Bond is a perfect mixture of charm and brutishness, with a bit of humour sprinkled in too.

 
How about the villain?

The villain is, of course, Doctor No, played by Joseph Wiseman. One thing I never noticed before is how little screen time Doctor No actually has, as the majority of the film is spent building suspense for his dramatic appearance in the third act. That he still manages to put in such a memorable performance is a testament to just how good Wiseman is; his commanding voice and unnerving stare serve him very well in the role, and the scene in which he and Bond verbally duel at the dinner table is a delight. He also wears a Nehru suit and lives in a luxurious underground lair, setting the standard for many a supervillain to follow.

 
Are there gadgets?

No, but Bond does receive a new gun from Q Branch.

 
Is there a theme song and title sequence?

Sort of: Dr No’s theme tune is the now iconic ‘James Bond Theme’, and it’s used a lot throughout the film. The title sequence is straightforward and low-key.

How does it stand up on a technical level?

Amazingly well. I was surprised to learn that the film didn’t have a particularly big budget, because it really looks great. The set design by Ken Adam is stunning, aided by some outstanding cinematography and lighting, and Terence Young directs with real style. There isn’t much location-hopping (the movie was filmed at Pinewood Studios and on location in Jamaica) but everything is photographed to the very highest standard.

So you’d recommend it?

Absolutely! Some might find it a bit slow compared with later films, but I enjoyed the lack of gadgets and huge stunts, as it gives the characters a bit more room to breathe. Sean Connery’s Bond is fantastic, definitely one of the most assured and confident performances I’ve seen from any actor, and the movie has a villain for the ages with Joseph Wiseman’s Doctor No. Factor in the first-rate production values and you have a real winner.

 
Do you have any useless trivia?

Yes. When Bond is about to sit down to dinner with Doctor No, he notices a painting on display and looks at it with an expression of shock. The painting is ‘Portrait of the Duke of Wellington’ by Francesco Goya, which had genuinely been stolen from the National Gallery in London on 21^st August 1961, and was still missing at the time the film was released (hence Bond’s shock). Is that useless and trivial enough for you?

Yes.



                                                                      

Bob Dylan says goodbye to Tom Petty

I was moved to see a video of Bob Dylan performing the late Tom Petty's 'Learning to Fly' at his show on 21st October, a day after what would have been Tom's 67th birthday.

Bob and Tom go back a long way: in the midst of the difficult decade that was the 1980s, Dylan teamed up with Petty and his band The Heartbreakers for the inaugural Farm Aid event in 1985. The partnership proved so fruitful that Bob and Tom stayed together, staging successful tours in both 1986 and 1987. In 1988, Petty and Dylan formed the Traveling Wilburys with George Harrison, Roy Orbison and Jeff Lynne, releasing an album that year and a follow-up (minus Orbison, who passed away in December 1988) in 1990.  Dylan and Petty shared the stage for the final time in 2003.

More importantly than what they achieved together as musicians, Dylan and Petty appear to have enjoyed a close and genuine friendship. When Bob performed 'Learning to Fly' on 21st October - putting a huge amount of care into his singing - it was as if he was saying goodbye to his friend, while fondly recalling the good times they had shared. I am sure Tom heard, and I am sure he approved.

Liam Gallagher: As You Were (2017)

As You Were is Liam Gallagher’s first solo album, borne out of similar circumstances to Keith Richards’ first solo album in 1988: he wants to make music, but his old band isn’t getting back together any time soon. Almost reluctantly, Liam took the plunge and announced his debut album late last year, and since then has engaged in an extremely entertaining press tour, where his uncharacteristically at-peace-with-the –world demeanour suggested that he was quietly confident with what he had produced. But was it just bravado? Could Liam deliver the goods on his own?

The answer is yes, but the truth is that Liam is not on his own. Openly admitting to his limitations as a songwriter, Liam has co-written half of the songs on As You Were with established pop songwriters. This is a very good move, since the last two albums Liam released (with his post-Oasis band Beady Eye) were sorely lacking in strong hooks and melodies for Liam to sink his teeth into. The remaining six songs are credited to Liam alone, including the excellent ‘Bold’ and some sneering rockers like ‘I Get By’ and ‘Greedy Soul’, but it’s the tracks that involve other writers that really push the album to the next level.

‘Wall of Glass’ opens the album and immediately gets your attention with a duel between a wailing harmonica and a screeching electric guitar; ‘Paper Crown’ and ‘For What it’s Worth’ are lovely ballads with very hummable choruses; ‘Chinatown’, my favourite song on the album, has a wonderful acoustic guitar riff that gradually becomes hypnotic and draws you into the song’s mellow atmosphere; and ‘Come Back to Me’ has a great effect where Liam’s voice comes from different parts of the speaker at different points, making it sound like Liam Gallagher trading vocals with another Liam Gallagher.

Speaking of Liam’s voice, I think this is the best it has sounded in 20 years. His vocals on the first few Oasis albums were, for me, the highlight of those discs, but as the years went by it often felt as though he had stopped trying. Here, with something to prove for the first time in years, he really unleashes his voice and puts 100% into every song. It’s like the 1990s version of Liam has awoken from some kind of deep freeze, replacing the imposter who took his place in the early 2000s.

The instrumental backing on the album is polished, but not overly so, with just the right amount of grit left in. There is subtle but very effective use of horns and strings across the album, which adds extra texture, and the playing is tight and lean with no wasted notes. The backing musicians generally stay in the background throughout, placing the emphasis on Liam’s rejuvenated vocals.

This is a really great album from Liam and I’m really happy for him, especially since not so long ago he appeared to be close to leaving music altogether. Bring on album number two!  

Impractical Jokers "Where's Larry?" Live at the O2 Arena, London

 

There are lot of funny TV shows out there, but there aren’t many that can make you laugh out loud until you’re actually in pain. For me, Impractical Jokers is one of those shows, so when I found out they would be performing a live show at the O2 Arena in London on 13th October, it was an easy decision to snap up some tickets and head on down.

If you haven’t seen it, Impractical Jokers is a show where four lifelong friends put each other in public situations and then, via earpiece, tell them what to do or say, with painfully embarrassing (and hilarious) results. With less likeable people the format could become obnoxious, but luckily the four Jokers are very likeable. Sal Vulcano, Joe Gatto, Bran “Q” Quinn and James “Murr” Murray have been performing together for over fifteen years as The Tenderloins, earning an impressive reputation as both an improv act and the writers and stars of their own very funny YouTube sketches. They know each other inside out, which gives them a great chemistry and rapport with each other. Most importantly, none of them are afraid to be the butt of the joke, and the emphasis is always on making fools of themselves rather than other people.

Even though I was already a big fan of the TV show, I wasn’t sure how well it would transfer into a live setting, or even what form the show would take. After the Jokers walked onstage to a massive ovation from the crowd, I sensed a slight feeling of unease in the audience, which I think was due to a large portion of the crowd not knowing what to expect.

As it turned out, the show was essentially a four man stand-up act, mixed with some new filmed sketches and some clips from the show. It took a little while for the Jokers to find their rhythm, but before long they were effortlessly playing off each other and the audience. In a venue as huge as the O2 it can be hard for performers to draw everyone in and make them feel included, but the Jokers succeeded, and by the end it felt like we were in a tiny comedy club in New York.

The stand-up format allowed each of the four Joker’s time to shine, but out of the four of them I was most impressed with Sal, who looked really comfortable on stage and, at times, felt like the glue holding everything together. That isn’t a knock on the rest of the guys; everyone was great (Joe is probably one of the craziest and most fearless people walking the face of the Earth), and The Tenderloins are definitely more than just the sum of their parts.

All in all, a really good show, and I’ll definitely be back next time.  

Song Family Trees

As weird as it sounds, it’s actually possible for songs to be related to each other in much the same way people are. Whether through sampling, lyrical reference or outright theft, a song can be capable of counting other songs as parents and siblings. 

This is especially true in folk music. In the days when songs would travel simply by word of mouth, it was common for a single song to spawn numerous different versions, presumably as singers either misremembered melodies and lyrics or deliberately replaced them with new ones. Sometimes the songs would change so much that they would eventually become entirely different songs, with perhaps only a basic narrative or a few key phrases to link it to its original form. A good example of this process would be the songs ‘Gypsy Davy’, ‘Blackjack Davy’, ‘The Raggle Taggle Gypsy O’ and ‘The Gypsy Rover’, all of which stand as separate pieces, but appear to be descended from the same source.

(On the subject of how folk songs are open to such a wide variety of interpretations, have a listen to Bob Dylan singing the traditional ‘Man of Constant Sorrow’ in 1962, and then take a look at him performing what is ostensibly the same song in 2002.)

Because these songs are so old, it’s impossible to to trace every step of the process; there was no real way of documenting it. However, when this kind of thing occurs today, where all music is recorded, we can see exactly how it happens. A very interesting recent example – all the more fascinating for involving just one songwriter - would be the song ‘Lock All The Doors’ by Noel Gallagher’s High Flying Birds, which was released on the album Chasing Yesterday in 2015.

This song can be traced back to an earlier song of Noel’s, also called ‘Lock All the Doors’, which was demoed by Oasis in 1992. This song was  never officially released by Oasis, but the verses eventually turned up on a B-side called 'My Sister Lover' in 1997, on which the original chorus was replaced with a completely new one. The original chorus sat unused for the for the next eighteen years until Noel resurrected it for the 2015 version, which features new verses with a different melody to the original.

The end result of all this is that we have three songs - the two versions of 'Lock All the Doors' plus 'My Sister Lover' - that are related.

Trace the family tree for yourself:

Lock All The Doors (1992)

My Sister Lover (1997)

Lock All The Doors (2015)