It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I have a proposal and a dilemma to discuss with you. :-B
First of all, let's spend maybe one more day on Bond music. Anything you'd like to discuss or mention in the realm of music in Bond films.
Secondly, my dilemma is this: We have come to the last part of my first list of suggested topics, and it is one I have no recent experience with: Comparing the Bond novels with the films. If you would all like to spend a few days on this topic, that is fine with me. I have read them decades ago, and I've only read two in the past couple of years: From Russia With Love and Casino Royale.
So I am calling a time-out. :-t
Please do respond to these questions, fellow (and sister) agents: B-)
1) Do you want to discuss Bond novels compared to the films next? If so, I need for your input to be more than mine. Will you accept this mission? Or are you ready for a new assignment, dear 00's?
2) Would you like to go to different topic? If so, please let me have your suggestions soon. Even if we tackle the novels, we shall need some new topics within a week.
I don't mind delving into the novels a bit, but I really want more feedback from you about our next few topics (dear Originals especially, but also all members who enjoy reading this thread). And I am asking for your feedback this week. This thread is first and foremost for the older, more seasoned fans, the Originals. I would love to hear from more of you Originals in particular, yes. But I do welcome suggestions from everyone.
So yes, we are at a point where we need to come up with fresh topics for discussion. And for that, I do need your help. I remember SirHenry telling me how glad he was that this thread was able to have been sustained so well and for so long by reviewing the films (the Originals reviews and rankings) then a revisit to each film. He was unsure about how to keep this going smoothly until Bond 24 came out, or at least until we got more confirmed news on Bond 24.
So, let me know, at least some thoughts, this week: What would you love to discuss on here? What are your favorite points about Bond that you enjoy talking about? Is there something we have not touched on that you'd like to discuss?
I have just a couple of potential topics that I have recently thought of ...
Thanks to the thread that will not die (Nudity in The Living Daylights), I just thought that maybe we could discuss women in Bond films more, such as:
a) How women are portrayed in Bond films, a general assessment (stereotypical or not/ nudity or semi-nudity in PTS and in the rest of the film: good, bad, or meh .../sexist or not sexist/ political correctness rampant or barely existent in Bond films; etc.)
b) Miscast Bond Girls - Have your say on Bond girls, in particular those you feel were ill cast in the role, and how you would have improved that role (suggest another actress, change her character somehow, etc.) Can also mention smaller Bond girl roles along with the main Bond girl.
Also, but not related only to women:
c) The role of M through the years - a look at each M, strengths and weaknesses, the actors, if we feel this character has been shortchanged or given too much, etc.
Okay, let me hear from you and thanks! Going to make my breakfast now while listening to some Bond theme songs.
Cheers! :-bd
It seems to me that Richard Maibaum is the #1 screenwriter in the 007 firmament. He is to Bond scripts what John Barry is to Bond music and what Ken Adam is to Bond sets: the acknowledged master, a key player in developing the cinematic Bond world as we know it. But what of his various collaborators, and how do we evaluate the wordsmithing of those who have followed in Maibaum's footsteps? I think this might be an interesting topic to pursue...
First of all, I know some of you are quite busy with your real life. I am always pleased to have you pop in and participate, whenever you can ... especially for Originals and other older fans. But that goes for everyone.
And comments on directors and music are still very much welcome!
As an Original, Beatles (my short version), I appreciate your responding today and I value your ideas. I love the topic of screenwriting/scripts for the Bond films. I will add that as some point. Thanks! Great idea.
As I gather more suggestions and points on whether to discuss the novels next, I'll be making my own list of tentative topics, including of course those suggested from members here, and then I'll list them for all of us. Hopefully by Friday, give or take a few days. At least by next week.
I shall be off to work soon, but I will check the thread throughout the day.
Please do not discuss scripts yet, but do get back with me regarding suggestions for topics. We will discuss scripts as a topic in a bit.
Off to a good start ... thanks!
:bz
I think we shall begin with a discussion of the novels - in any way you'd like, such as comparing scenes that are different in the films (CR's Vesper is a great example). I will let us take a few more hours before that change; then tonight. when I get home, I'll get us going with some chat about Bond novels. But you can already be thinking about points you'd like to make, things to discuss. I'm going to find my copy of Casino Royale and take it to work. B-)
For all members: I am still wanting to hear suggestions for future topics, and you can let me know that at any time. Please think things over and let me know your ideas. What would you really like to talk about? And more Originals, please, as well as the nice mid range, not fully Original but still not the youngest set, of Bond fans here. :D
For now, here is my list of upcoming topics that I think will be fun and interesting:
Next up - Bond Novels (discuss any aspect).
Then, throughout June:
~ Scripts - their importance, the contributions of various screenwriters, flaws and gems, writers' strikes, etc. (thanks, Beatles)
~ Reboots - take a look at times when Bond has, in some sense, been rebooted. Not meaning the timeline ... a reboot meaning a film that changes what had gone before, gives a fresh start to the series, goes in a different direction or style, one that seems to bring Bond back to earth after maybe some more outlandish films. (thanks, OHMSS69)
~ The role of M - a look at this character throughout the series ... but this could also be a look at Felix - let me know which you would prefer.
Cheers! :)>-
I am thinking of not rating all the films, though. So, I am picturing not voting in each category - just a guideline of points to consider, then a straight vote for the most realistic film. I could ask the mods to set up a poll. I do like this idea ... let me hear what other members think about it. I can visualize three ways to do this:
So - let me hear from some other members, today or tomorrow would be nice ... but anytime before Friday, please: Would you all prefer ranking your top 5 most realistic films (after looking at the whole series and considering certain categories/aspects). Or ...
Rate the whole series of 23 films, using categories (like we did for the Originals rankings; which, summed up together, would give us a collective ranking) - or -
Just considering categories/points to consider then voting which you consider to be the most realistic? (one vote, and a poll put here by mods) I'd like to do this one, and then we can also list our top 3 or top 5 "most realistic Bond films" in our comments.
Thanks, chrissisall! You are such a helpful chap. B-)
Let's move onward today toward the world of the novels.
James Bond novels - Ian Fleming
Their relationship with the Bond films ~
I'm not going to go into the continuation books written by other authors because I have so little knowledge of them. Some of you may be able to point out things that may have been incorporated into the films from those books, but I am unaware of them.
So my main point of discussion is the original author, Ian Fleming.
You can talk about the Bond novels and the films in any way, any aspect you'd like.
For example, scenes that made it into Bond films but not in the film of the same title as the novel. The scene where Melina and Bond are tied together and thrown overboard, as shark bait, is in the film For Your Eyes Only (and I thought it was very well done) but it was written in the novel Live and Let Die. I am happy it ended up in FYEO. There are other examples, too. Feel free to talk about those instances.
And of course scenes as written in the novel are sometimes changed for a film. A recent obvious example of that is Vesper's death in Casino Royale. In the book, Fleming has her committing suicide by drugs and she dies alone in her room. Bond finds her the next day, with a note from her. In the book, that works fine. For a film, I do not see how that would have been the best way to present it. I completely agree with the writer/director/producers of Casino Royale in having the script give a very different version. A sinking house, with CGI, was a tad overly dramatic perhaps, but having her die because of her own decisions, on screen, with Bond there trying desperately to rescue her made for a much better film, in my opinion. It was full of emotion, suspense, and heartbreak. The whole film was superbly acted by Eva Green and Daniel Craig.
When you take a story and tell it cinematically, things do need to be changed sometimes, in certain instances, in order to do the best storytelling and to do the story justice. I do not for one moment think that being a slave to the novel, filming something exactly as written in a book, usually works. I like a lot of it to be faithful, but I agree with filmmakers that sometimes things need to be changed when made into a film.
Anyway, here we go - what would you like to say about the Bond novels as related to the Bond films? :-bd
Looking forward to reading your thoughts about these points, @CommanderRoss and @OHMSS69. Have at it! I'm interested in what you'd like to say. Good things, bad things, all points considered ...
:> :-c #:-S :-q 8-} =D>
Thanks @4EverBonded good topic. I will fire the first salvo.
Goldfinger In the book, Tilly has a more extensive role. She does not die until near the end of the novel. Pussy Galore runs a ring of female cat burglars and is not Auric's pilot or owns a "Flying circus". the film improves on the caper in the book as the plan to actually steal all the gold in Ft Knox is Flemings most fantastical caper.
You Only Live Twice is a strange and bizarre novel. Bond has gone to crap mourning the loss of his bride in the previous book, OHMSS. M sends him on a minor mission to Japan to redeem his career. Bond meets Tiger Tanaka and learns of a certain Dr. Shatterhand who the Japanese authorities are concerned about. To his surprise, Bond learns that Shatterhand is none other than Blofeld and he owns an island complete with castle and a pirahna pool. Bond goes there to extract some revenge.
The Spy Who Loved Me veers the fartest from the source novel. the book is about some woman who spends a night of passion with Bond. Bond does not appear until the last third of the book and he is on the trail of Blofeld, who had been missing after the Thunderball caper is twarted. Bond saves her from two gangsters and they spend the night together. The next day he is gone. Interesting note: the two gangsters are described as one being stocky and the other has metal teeth...inspiration for Jaws and Sandor? you be the judge.
that is all for now, I am interested in hearing other comments etc.
Dr.No
What happened to the Rosaete (Rosetta?) Spoonbill and the Audubon Society? Bond’s unwillingness to do such a stupid assignment. Yes, you can’t start with his recuperation in a first movie, but I still liked the idea of an assignment that seems a routine job ending in his narrow escape. Especially as it seemed Strangways had run off with his secretary. The birds also would have been a nice nod to the real James Bond.
@OHMSS the film Goldfinger does improve a lot on the novel. Not only Pussy's flying circus, which I love, but the contamination of the gold as well, instead of stealing it. However, that leaves for that odd taking out of the gangsters after first telling them what his plans are. That is strange and an inconvenient hickup as it is a plothole that gives Bond the info he needs.
It's interesting to see that YOLT, just as Dr. No, both are missions that, at first sight, amount to next to nothing. I don't think the diplomatic mission to go to Japan would've worked in the film to be honest.
IIRC they weren't allowed to use more from the novel then the title by Fleming when they got the rights for the film..
@4Ever, yes, I think the novel could use some improvement. I'm also quite happy they didn't use the red and blue boxes for the bomb attack, or that clumsy bomb attack itself. Indeed, the death of Vesper is far more dramatic in the film, but I think the sinking house is just too much. Bond driving after her and her then killing herself in a car acciden (off of a cliff or something) would've worked just as wel, perhaps even more dramatic.
And there's the poker scene. I'm not too fond of the poisoning. I liked the predicament Fleming wrote with the gun at Bond's buttocks. But I guess that's a tad old fashioned.
In the book, Doctor No had Honey staked out naked on a hill and left to giant crabs. They tried film this but the crabs were not as attracted to Ursula Andress as homo sapien males might have been. The crustaceans eventually died and for budget considerations the scene was re written.
Also, after Bond got out of the tunnel, he ended up in a pool with a giant squid.( Fleming, come on!)
In Goldfinger, Oddjob is sucked out of a plane and Bond later strangles Goldfinger.
Diamonds are Forever pitted Bond against an American crime family, The Spangled Mob run by the Spang brothers, Jack and Serafimo. Kidd and Wint, though homosexual lovers, are brutal and efficient killers. Not a comedic team as portrayed in the film.
FYEO uses elements of the two short stories, For Your Eyes Only and Risico. The Havelocks, and Gonzalez are in For Your Eyes Only, while the two smugglers, Colombo and Kristatos as well as the Countess Lisl are characters in Risico.
FRWL and OHMSS films despite some minor differences, stayed the closest to their source novels
I found Kidd & Wint not very comic, their rverence or rather lack to anybody his/her feelings in doing their job makes them rather chilly than funny. They did a good job with these two killers, I like when the boss tells them that they should not kill Shady Tree and they just did the deed, they did not apologize just told him he was late.
Kidd & Wint were possitivily two of the great performances of that movie. imho
O:-)
Klebb actually is not killed in From Russia with Love. She succeeds with her poisoned shoe and it is Bond who slides to the floor presumably dead.
Some of your points I remember, others I don't. It's fun to look at the differences between the novels and the films. Often enough, the changes made for the film made for a better movie. I definitely remember Honey and the crabs from the novel, but I did not realize they actually tried to film it with crabs. Nothing exciting watching a crab wander ever so slowly away from Ursula and towards the sea ... And I do remember Dr. No being buried under guano. Rather funny, that. Makes sense they decided not to keep that part of the story. I love the ending of the novel Dr. No, by the way.
I enjoy Kidd and Wint in DAF (the film) because of their cold killing while having their offbeat witticisms. It made them seem like sick psychos. I thought they were a highlight of the film. I really need to read again many of the novels and short stories. I'll try to order one a month and see if I can keep to that consistently.
I love FRWL the novel (I read that again just last fall), as well as the film. The novel's ending was great and leaves the reader in a state of suspense. Looking at villains in the novels and the films is certainly a good topic angle, @OHMSS69; so let's note that this week while we are having novels as our main topic. But we can continue to talk about the novels and films in any way that comes to us.
I do think that, just from what I can remember, FRWL was closest to the book. And I so appreciate Robert Shaw's portrayal of Red Grant and Lotte Lenya's evil Klebb - they totally fit the characters from the book. http://www.indiewire.com/static/dims4/INDIEWIRE/5baa6f6/2147483647/thumbnail/325x227%3E/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fd1oi7t5trwfj5d.cloudfront.net%2Fef%2Fb84b80276c11e2938622000a1d0930%2Ffile%2Fbond-from-russia-with-love.jpg
On a personal note, I will try to pop in over the next few days but I will mostly be away (just time commitments) - so please do carry on! Any aspect of Bond novels is welcome this week.
B-)
Solitaire is white but in the original screenplay by Mankiewicz she is Haitian and black.
The studio balked at the idea of a black leading Bond girl thus enter Jane Seymour. The scene where Leiter is eaten by the shark and the note left on his mutilated body from LTK was in this novel. Mr. BIG tries to kill Bond and Solitaire by dragging them behind a speedboat over coral so the sharks can feast on them. As we all know this scene is reennacted in FYEO film.
The Living Daylights is the title of a short story used for the first Dalton film. The opening scenes with Bond assigned to prevent a Russian sniper from killing Koskov are taken from the story for the most part with just minor changes. He is protecting a British agent in East Berlin (i believe) whose cover has been blown. And he does alter his aim choosing not to kill the beautiful cellist/sniper.
I agree that in many instances, the films improve on the written material and in others, not so much (MR and DAF come to mind).
I would suggest that FYEO, TLD and LTK comprise a third category: the “nice use of the leftovers” set. FYEO, as has already been noted, uses much of Fleming’s original short story of that name, plus a generous helping of “Risico” and one of the best scenes left out of the movie made from LALD. TLD uses Fleming’s short story nearly verbatim, and I’d almost be inclined to consider it a Minor Change film…but when I consider the number of characters and vast amount of plot that had to be invented in order to give the film a running time of more than 15 minutes, I can’t quite bring myself to do that. Call it a leftover, but a very tasty one. And LTK has a fair amount of “The Hildebrand Rarity” to it, plus Felix Leiter’s famous “disagreement with something that ate him” from LALD, so again we have some leftovers being used up here. We will pass over the Brosnan films in this discussion, as none of them have a Fleming-derived title. (Sticklers may argue that TWINE was a phrase coined by Fleming, but as there is no story or novel associated with it I feel comfortable ignoring it for the purpose of this discussion.) QoS is the only Fleming title remaining that EON has used at this point (but I still hold out hope for “The Property of a Lady,”) and as the film really doesn’t have much at all to do with the short story I think we can safely assign it to the Major Change category. SF of course is another film of primarily original material and therefore beyond the scope of this discussion.
Does all this seem reasonable? Does everyone agree that we should, in fact, make these distinctions? With the assignments of the various films into their respective categories? In my next posting I’ll go into the reasons why I think Goldfinger the film has so MANY deviations from the Fleming original…why nearly all of those changes work towards making the film a stronger piece than the novel…and why GF the movie still classifies as a Minor Change film.
The film version of GF differs from the novel in many substantial ways, and yet the film still remains largely true to Fleming’s original story. Goldfinger’s habit of cheating at cards is pointed out to Bond by Mr. DuPont in the novel, a character who does not even exist in the film. Jill travels with Bond for a few days after that eventful card game, then returns to working for Goldfinger as if nothing really important happened and no hard feelings exist over the incident -- more the fool her, and she turns up dead for it, but Bond is a continent away and can’t be held to blame for failing a woman in his care. After the classic game of golf over the bar of gold, the novel contains an entire scene omitted from the movie where Bond is invited to Goldfinger’s house for dinner, then left alone on the premises to see if he will implicate himself by doing some inappropriate snooping. Bond does just that, of course -- but arranges matters so that Goldfinger’s cat gets the blame, and the cat is given to Oddjob for his supper in punishment. Yes, Oddjob eats the cat. Thankfully, that meal is also told, rather than shown, to the reader. Bond’s ordeal before the laser beam in the film becomes a similar experience with a circular saw as the principal threat in the novel. Tilly and Bond spend substantial time working for Goldfinger in the novel, essentially as office temps, arranging the details of operation Grand Slam, and Bond does manage to tip off Felix about the operation rather than having Pussy Galore (who is not a pilot and does not have a flying circus) do the deed. In fact, Pussy’s conversion to Bond’s side is very much a battlefield conversion, and she does nothing to suggest she has earned any leniency for her part in Operation Grandslam. But Tilly’s death is due entirely to her own poor judgment -- at various points in the novel she indicates a sapphic attraction to Miss Galore, and during the climactic battle at the train station, she wrenches herself free from Bond’s grasp and declares her true affection: “I want to stay with Pussy. I’ll be safe with her.” She parts from Bond following her own desires, Oddjob’s deadly bowler hat finds its victim -- and Bond is absolved of any guilt for the death of a second Masterton woman.
There are more variations from the novel to be found in the movie -- Oddjob, not Goldfinger, is the one sucked out the broken airplane window -- but probably the most crucial yet subtle variation between film and book is that, in the novel, Goldfinger really intends to steal all that gold from Fort Knox. In the film, Bond points out the glaring flaw in this plan, namely the logistics of physically moving so much gold -- and Goldfinger’s plot shifts to irradiating the entire US supply of gold, thereby making his own hoard substantially more valuable. The Russians are the bad guys in the novel while the Chinese are behind the scenes for the movie, but hey, it's all just a Communist plot...
So there we have it: the book and the movie are substantially different from one another. The changes adapted in the movie make for what I feel to be a far more memorable storyline. (I haven’t even gone into the differences in the Aston Martin, which is indeed in the book, but doesn’t have any of the more fanciful gadgetry, including the ejector seat.) Nonetheless, GF the movie largely follows the outline set forth in GF the novel. I urge those interested in the way a film can differ from its source material while still staying true to that source to take a close look at Ian Fleming’s seventh James Bond novel. 007 really was a lucky number for Mr. Fleming!
Me, too! How can one disagree with that? @BeatlesMania all the way.
Fleming always brought up sex in the books and lets examine some of his writings:
He seems to go all out in showing the sexual orientation and in some cases what he considered to be perversions of the badguys/women.
Pussy and Tilly are most definitely lesbians, thus this explains Tilly's resisting Bond's charms in the book. Rosa Klebb goes out of her way to seduce Tatiana in the book, but the film only "hints" at Klebb's sexual orientation.
Red Grant is a narccicist (sp?) meaning he only derives sexual pleasure from himself. In the book, he is totally nude while he receives the massage from the bikini clad beauty, but he is not in the least turned on by her.
Blofeld and Irma Bunt are lovers and this is mainly brought up in YOLT. Bunt is described as being very ugly and Blofeld choosing her over his "angels of death" is another way of Fleming showing how perverse his villians are/were.
TMWTGG It is hinted that Scaramanga is homosexual and attracted to Bond.
And of course, we have Kidd and Wint...
Homosexuality keeps finding its way in Fleming's writtings. Back in the day, this was not as socially acceptable and Fleming seems to have had a field day with it.