Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
Is Fleming still relevant in Bond Movies?
In 1989, 2006, and 2012 we were told by the producers that Bond was going to return to his "Fleming roots". Unfortunately , this was not case in my opinion. Other than using the names and selected scenes, I have yet to see anything that I would consider closer to the Fleming roots.
I thought the final 3 movies by Moore were probably more Flemingesque in nature. These films were closer to the nature of Fleming's work. Moore's performance at times in TSWLM and MR, despite the extravagate plots, were Flemingesque. Dalton's performance in TLD, I thought was closer to Fleming-Bond, probably the most Flemingesque since 1969.
In this age of literary classics such as "Twilight", "Fifty Shades of Grey", and classic movies such as the "X-men" and "Bourne" movies, does Fleming still matter?
Are people interested in the literary roots, if not, why bother to pretend?
I thought the final 3 movies by Moore were probably more Flemingesque in nature. These films were closer to the nature of Fleming's work. Moore's performance at times in TSWLM and MR, despite the extravagate plots, were Flemingesque. Dalton's performance in TLD, I thought was closer to Fleming-Bond, probably the most Flemingesque since 1969.
In this age of literary classics such as "Twilight", "Fifty Shades of Grey", and classic movies such as the "X-men" and "Bourne" movies, does Fleming still matter?
Are people interested in the literary roots, if not, why bother to pretend?
^ 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
how come the final 3 movies by Moore were probably more Flemingesque in nature?
do you mean raise an eyebrow and make idiotic one-liner were flemingesque?
btw what definition Flemingesque to you?
Wrong, Ice. He's not a troll. Very interesting poster from AJB, actually. He knows his stuff, plus he's a member of The Bondologist Blog - such great taste and style!
OP and AVTAK had very little to do with Fleming (other than the Fabrege egg auction scene in OP). Craig's last 3 movies feel far more closer to Fleming than anything Moore ever did, with the exception of FYEO.
CR is as close to its source as OHMSS or FRWL. Quantum admittedly does not rely on any source material, but there are many moments which feel far closer to Fleming (the hard edge, a gloomy Bond getting drunk on the plane, the Tosca scene, the ending in the desert, Bond not ending up with the girl, etc.)
And SF feels very much like Fleming could have written it. The opening to SF is the closest we've had yet to the ending of YOLT and the beginning of TMWTGG, and its very apparent the film is using these books as source material. The villain has echoes of Scaramanga too.
I'm amazed you think OP and AVTAK are closer to Fleming than Craig's 3 films (particularly CR). Had it not been for someone on here saying you knew your stuff, my immediate reaction was that you were a troll - this is how ridiculous your comments are.
Getover it.
Not everyone is a troll - look elsewhere. perdogg is NOT a troll. In fact, he's one of the more erudite members of the online Bond fan community.
So much for a warm welcome and all that...
I was welcoming Bradford4 seeing as he is a newbie, but I'll welcome Perdogg too. He may have bizarre, crazy opinions on what is Flemingesque, but I'll still welcome him anyway.
Agree 100% PK.
Agreed. That's why they're so high on my list!
Well, it's only right. Don't get perdogg started on who the Bond of the books works for, though! I want to co-author an article with him on it if he'll let me. He believes that it's the MoD, not MI6 and he has the quotes to stand over it! It's great to have him on MI6 and BaB.
The Craig era is easily and by far more Flemingesque than Moore's, in myriad ways. And Fleming absolutely does and always will matter as far as the Broccoli family is concerned, as they've stated many times they pay attention to what he created and always return to his ideals whenever in doubt.
This is why I originally thought Perdogg was a troll, but seeing as he's vouched for on here by another member, then I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
Didn't have a problem with his opinions on Fleming (apart from them being wrong) but it was this paragraph that set the spidey sense tingling. If he's being ironic then perhaps put 'literary classics' in inverted commas as it was lost on me.
Welcome to the new members, this forum is usually a very nice place but we have been enduring terrible troll attacks so I think everyone is a bit over-sensitive and alert.
Concerning the OP, I couldn't disagree most however. I agree that FYEO is very Fleming, it's an amazing film and the best Moore in my opinion. I have a soft spot for OP because it's so enjoyable but there is little Fleming in there. AVTAK, on the other hand, is almost embarrassing and Fleming is nowhere to be seen.
CR, as much as there are moments in there that make me cringe, is ultimately very true to the source material. QoS doesn't retain anything from the original short story however has a very fleminguesque mood, just like @jetsetwilly very eloquently put it. Drunk, moody Bond, not getting the girl in the end, bird with one wing down, revenge, political intrigue. SF couldn't have been written by Fleming, in my opinion. It takes so much from YOLT and TMWTGG novels, someone else in another thread (I'm afraid I can't remember who) the PTS reminds of FAVTAK short story.
Of course the literary Bond and Fleming is relevant now. I would go even further and say it's more relevant now than ever because the literary character is much more fascinating than the cinematic one we've had for so many years. It's just like Sherlock Holmes, for years (a century, damn) Holmes and Watson were turned into crowd pleasing characters devoid of the original charm of the literary ones. Now they are being brought back and that makes it all the more successful. The audiences might look dumb, but there is a big chunk that craves for the real thing and that won't be pleased by raising eyebrows and winks at the camera.
Yes, I think this was irony. I hope it was irony...
Wel you're the one defending him old son!! It's not like he's covered himself in glory in the rest if the post.
It looks like his original faith is failing him.
That's cos, as I said above, I know perdogg. He's a valued member of my blog.
Not a bit of it. Old Faithful there!
Hmmm.
Dismissing CR over TSWLM and MR as being less Flemingesque?
Not sure if he means the tone of the film it the performance of the lead actor but either way pretty 'eccentric' is the kindest I can say.
That's the closest I will go to being welcoming to a new member espousing such views - but don't take it personally perdogg as I am notoriously miserable.
That I know, plus you badmouth my precious Never Send Flowers, you bad man!!
I'll make a believer of you yet, you mark my words!
I think I was more shocked at the opinion of AVTAK being far closer to Fleming than CR. Like you said, eccentric is probably the kindest thing we can say about such radical opinions.
Make that three.
I'm all for radical opinions, but when something is so clearly way off the mark (AVTAK being closer to Fleming than CR), then I'm afraid its hard to understand that POV from any possible perspective. The only real conclusion you can draw from such outlandish opinions is that this person has never read any Fleming.
Yes, but I can assure you that perdogg has.