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
Two murdered wives in successive films..? Doubt it!
"He was married once. It was a long time ago. And his wife got murdered on their wedding day; good thing that's not going to happen to us!"
:))
I think this is a really good way of describing Bond's priorities incidentally. I'd say this is pretty much how he behaves through the whole series.
Not the exact same plot, but tone-wise. If ever we were to have a gritty revenge flick with Bond going out on a limb for vengeance, it was in the wake of Tracy.
Instead we got the Bond film I hate more than possibly any other.
Oh, i see. The way you wrote it, it literally was LTK..!
But yes, ideally it should have been a direct sequel, with George Lazenby, directed by Peter Hunt in which Bond is on the warpath to find Blofeld and Irma Bunt. With a similar tone to OHMSS.
Ideally it should be yes - but after reading those early DAF drafts written with Lazenby in mind, I’m not sure how “harder edged” that film would’ve been.
I understand Ian Fleming tolerated FRWL, if I'm not mistaken?
Anyway, Ernest Hemingway's motto about movies adapted from his work: take the money and run. I think it goes for many authors. Anthony Burgess was no fan of A Clockwork Orange, although he respected Kubrick, Stephen King's dislikes many great movies adapted from his novels, etc.
Yes, I think he was a lot nicer about FRWL. Not to say he was overly discouraging about DN, but he did of course say that if someone had read the novel they may not be as sold on the film compared to someone who hadn't read it beforehand.
It makes sense that an author would have complicated feelings towards film adaptations of their books. The example that comes to mind for me is Roald Dahl disliking Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (which is a film I really like and have more fondness for than the book personally, and I suspect it's the case for many people). When your work is twisted, pulled apart, and put together again for a different medium by people with different perspectives, I can understand an author feeling betrayed. The Shining, for instance, is a wonderful horror film that puts things like obsession and how creative ambition can be self destructive to the forefront. It's slightly different to King's story of how alcoholism can fuel trauma and self destruction. Two different takes on the material (effectively a story about Jack's capacity for evil) by two different creatives, Kubrick likely channeling some of his creative frustrations as a filmmaker, and King drawing on his own alcoholism and early years as a husband/father. I don't think it means either the book or film is superior for what it's worth. It just means they're different, and King has a natural personal connection to his own material. It's the same to whatever extent for any author, probably even Hemingway, although I suspect he had the right idea there!
I don't think Fleming was anywhere near as bitter about the first two Bond films for what it's worth (although I get the sense he was a bit melancholic about it, even if he knew those films were out of his hands after a point). I'd even say the Bond films have been quite deferential to Fleming's work on the whole, hard as it is to believe sometimes! That said I have a difficult time imaging Fleming would have been keen on something like YOLT, MR or LTK. Again, it doesn't really matter. When it gets to the point of movie adaptation they've become their own thing.
In a sense, Glen was forever remaking or following up his OHMSS experience. His sacrificial lambs hit a lot harder than most.
The next Bond should make an effort to grunt and/or make those distinctive sounds or facial reactions during action sequences (think Moore's 'ooofs' when he got hit or Craig's occasional grunts, and even Brosnan's 'pain faces'). This friend mentioned that they liked this aspect of Patrick Gibson's performance in the First Light demos with him grunting and making certain breathing sounds etc. I watched it recently and I must say it works. So if the next Bond has a similar distinctive 'war cry' I think that'd be cool.