"I didn't see Dr. No for a year, but I liked it when I saw it. It was a fun movie. I don't like the Bond movies now. I hate special effects"
About this Quote
Andress is doing something sly here: puncturing the Bond brand from the inside, with the casual authority of someone who helped mint it. She praises Dr. No, but in a way that denies the machinery of celebrity nostalgia. “I didn’t see Dr. No for a year” is an offhand confession that undercuts the myth of the cast obsessively monitoring its own legend. It suggests distance, even indifference, to the product that later defined her public image. The compliment that follows - “fun” - is pointedly small. Not “important,” not “groundbreaking,” just enjoyable. That restraint matters because it refuses the sacred-cow status Bond now carries as an institution.
Then she pivots to a sharper cultural critique: the contemporary Bond films feel less like movies and more like demonstrations. “I hate special effects” isn’t Luddite whining so much as a defense of a certain cinematic contract: stunts you can feel in your ribs, danger that looks expensive because it’s real, charm that comes from human timing rather than digital perfection. Coming from the original “Bond girl” most associated with a simple, iconic entrance, the complaint reads as aesthetic self-preservation. Her image was built on physical presence, not postproduction spectacle.
Subtext: she’s not just judging films; she’s marking a boundary between eras. Early Bond sold fantasy with minimal adornment - locations, bodies, insinuation. Modern Bond sells scale, velocity, and technological sheen. Andress is saying the franchise traded its tactile flirtation for a glossy overload, and that bargain isn’t worth it.
Then she pivots to a sharper cultural critique: the contemporary Bond films feel less like movies and more like demonstrations. “I hate special effects” isn’t Luddite whining so much as a defense of a certain cinematic contract: stunts you can feel in your ribs, danger that looks expensive because it’s real, charm that comes from human timing rather than digital perfection. Coming from the original “Bond girl” most associated with a simple, iconic entrance, the complaint reads as aesthetic self-preservation. Her image was built on physical presence, not postproduction spectacle.
Subtext: she’s not just judging films; she’s marking a boundary between eras. Early Bond sold fantasy with minimal adornment - locations, bodies, insinuation. Modern Bond sells scale, velocity, and technological sheen. Andress is saying the franchise traded its tactile flirtation for a glossy overload, and that bargain isn’t worth it.
Quote Details
| Topic | Movie |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Ursula
Add to List





