Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
DAF an overlooked masterpiece, OHMSS overrated
Aziz_Fekkesh
Royale-les-Eaux
Not sure if I'll find anyone who agrees with this, but I find DAF such a well-written book and having such a good story that the film version really raises my ire. Likewise, I never found Fleming's OHMSS to be that great--the film improves on many plot points and the love story with Tracy is so sidelined that it kind of comes out of nowhere, unlike in the film.
^ 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 understand that fans of the DAF novel will likely consider the film script an abomination. I do too when I think about it. But then, the same goes for the scripts of MR, TMWTGG, TSWLM and YOLT. That said, DAF (the movie) brings some hidden gem to the party. I'd say we have it both ways: we keep the movie DAF and beg our future screen writers to incorporate thusfar unused material of the novel in the next Bond script.
Mind you initially I assumed you were talking about the films and I leapt in here to give you both barrels. As its the books I'll cut you a little more slack as the book version of DAF isn't quite as bad as the film.
However it is certainly the weakest of the early period novels (CR-FRWL) and to be honest if we exclude the short story collections there's only really TSWLM and TMWTGG that are worse as novels.
OHMSS smashes it out of the park in every respect and whilst DAF has some good scenes and a good heroine it's villains are extremely weak, the plot isn't the most thrilling and overall it just doesn't hang together that well.
OHMSS on the other hand has a very strong leading lady and villain, an epic plot, sensational action and a classic ending. I have a constant dilemma as to which is the best OHMSS or FRWL (with MR occasionally biting at their heels) but DAF isn't in the same league at all.
Bond's first meeting with Tiffany Case parallels their initial book meeting, especilly the scene with Case wearing very little and staring into the mirror. Bond in Vegas is fully milked. The desert scenes involving the dentist, the murder of the dentist, the presence of the scorpion, the exploding helicopter are all in the film. The diamond smuggling pipeline angle is very much incorporated.
The final oceanliner showdown with Bond, Wint, Kidd and Tiffany is there, and at the back end of the movie, just like in the book.
Bond standing in for Peter Franks is taken from the book.
And of course many of the book's characters are in place, such as Wint and Kidd, Shady Tree, Franks, Leiter and T.Case
It's not a bad homage to the Fleming novel considering the timeline was advanced almost 20 years.
And yes some of the "elements" may have made their way into the film but the book and the film felt about as similar as a house brick and an opel fruit (where the hell did that come from? To hell with opel fruits)
Frankly in DAF nothing seems to work. Lacklustre plot, poor villains, disinteresting setting ....
It's one of three Bond novels that I've only read once.
OHMS on the other hand, is the dogs bollocks and completely rocks and is one of the best constructed Bond novels with a great beginning, middle and end.
Although this is a literary thread, I'm driven to comment on the movies. It's no surprise that the best three Bond novels; FRWL, OHMSS & CR make the best films and the aforementioned worse were complete balderdash!
I agree, that FRWL, OHMSS & CR are right up there as the best for both novel and film versions. I enjoyed DAF the novel more so than the movie version unsurprisingly.
OHMSS is quite literally on a different page to DAF.
Still I like the job Eon did with getting so much of FYEO and Risico into the FYEO movie. In fact the entire Risico story was worked into the movie. Every book scene from Bond and Kristatos initial dinner meeting (with Columbo and Lisl taping them), to Lisl's pick-up of Bond, to the beach stand-off with the fishing spear-guns, to the Bond/Columbo boat meeting, to the raid on Kristatos' smuggling operation, complete with big rolls of newsprint, were included in the film. There's virtually nothing left to do with this story, filmwise.
I often wonder why some Bond fans keep suggesting it for a new film title. I think Eon would consider it fully milked.
DAF also worked in the mudbaths from the DAF book with its pts - a radically different scenario from the book, but I can't help but think the mudbath passage in the book inspired the mudbath scene in the movie.
Very well stated Villiers53! Personally I would also include "Dr. No" in that list, as it is also one of my favorite books and films.
A popular misconception. The Sean of DN and FRWL maybe but not post YOLT.
As it is Laz has the everyman qualities of the Bond of the books and has a vulnerability that Sean never did. In the scene where he's strangling the guy on the edge of the cliff I'm genuinely frightened for him. With Sean the only time you ever get that is when he's on his knees with Grant.
I genuinely think that not only would Sean have done a worse job, he may even have ruined the film. By that stage he was just playing Sean Connery but this film needed a realistic and human Bond - which thankfully it got. The only actors I think who could have done a better job would be Dalton and Craig.
===As for the Bond books. I've read them all, several times, and am currently deep into another Flemingathon (reading them all again in order -midway thru TB at this point)
I've got a couple that might be favourites, namely DN and GF, but otherwise I'd say they are all great. Each one oozes Fleming. He's got something real interesting to say in all of them. I love revisiting anything from the collection.
Books on tape is another fun way to re-visit the original stories.
Yet again, I am moved to agree with the great "WizardOfice".
The Connery of DN & FRWL could have done it but by the time we got to OHMSS he had become a parody of himself and introducing Lazenby got us back to Fleming's Bond for the realisation of one of his greatest novels.
I often wonder how things would have played out if the Blofeld trilogy (TB,OHMSS,YOLT) had been filmed chronologically with either Lazenby or Dalton as Bond and helmed by Hunt. I think we would have had a very strong mini series.
As it was, although introducing Blofeld and Spectre into the movie version of FRWL worked it meant that the thrill of Bond's biggest battle was diluted.
Non of this however has anything to do with DAF - a book that should be avoided by any fledgling Bond afficianado.
Even so, I reread OHMSS and I don't understand what so special about it. Blofeld is pretty weak in the book (I might get lots of flak for this) and Fleming just can't seem to reconcile the love story with the main scheme. It's a pretty bizarre book and Fleming's descriptions aren't even nearly up to par with the early novels.
I'm currerently having a literary Bondathon of my own, and i'm in the middle of reading DAF. What you said there is exactly how I feel about DAF. I must be about 3/4 into the book, and i'm just not enjoying it as much as the 3 previous books. I too am struggling to maintain my interest, but I am determined to finish it so I can the move on to FRWL.
Count me in. Just started Goldfinger and enjoyed every book thus far immensely. CR has always been my favourite but Moonraker, OHMSS and FRWL come very close.
But DAF was a real let down. I too struggled with it. It's strange that it came after the brilliant MR and was followed by the brilliant FRWL.
For the life of me I wish I could understand what so many people find so great about MR. For me it was a total bore! I much prefer "Dr No."
Funny, while I loved MR...I struggled a bit with Dr. No ;-)
Though I find the last chapters fantastic!
I know MR is a bit more out there than the others but it still gets nowhere near Pepper-quality imo.
(Though I admit that I find Pepper in LALD partly very amusing... )
I haven't read the Diamonds novel, but it's a safe bet it's a better entertainment than the movie release. Agreed the title seems questionable from a film perspective, but as I haven't read the books yet I can't really comment on their content. Let's just say that as far as the film releases go, OHMSS is a winner over it's rival here. The only saving graces it has, (DAF), is the inclusion of Jill St John, the Wint and Kidd characters and some decent sporadic action here and there, that do nothing to cover what is essentially a poor release and an embarrassment for Sean Connery, and his former greatness
OHMSS is anything but best ever, but at least Lazenby makes for a tangible James Bond, and it is after all, a 'timeless classic' in some eyes. Savalas Blofeld, against the Charles Gray Blofeld.. You do the math