›

If one reads & enjoys Fleming's novels, shall one enjoy the movies more, or less?

chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
edited November 2012 in Bond Movies Posts: 17,691
Just a question- because before I read the Fleming novels, I did not take to Dalton's version, and now he's my go-to Bond. I used to totally dismiss Dr. No, but now it's one of my favourites.
I always liked Thunderball, but have a new appreciation for it because of the book.

So, book fans weigh in if you will!

Comments

  • KerimKerim Istanbul Not Constantinople
    Posts: 2,629
    Why not enjoy both.

    I enjoy the films more, but LALD, MR and DAF were definitely better novels than films.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    I never read any of the books (Fleming or otherwise) until after I saw Casino Royale. After having read a few of them, I have to say that they haven't really changed my opinion too much. Craig was my favorite Bond both before and after I read any of the books. I find him closer to the Bond I read in the books, across all authors, but I don't know if that's because Craig plays more of a Fleming Bond, or because I've always liked Craig in the role.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Well it makes you consider the best films are the most Flemingesque ones so OHMSS, FRWL, TLD and CR all rate highly with me.

    That said I still love GF, YOLT, MR and GE for what they are as examples of the 'film Bond' and as glorious entertainment.

    TB whilst a solid mix of Fleming (well perhaps Whittingham - read Battle For Bond) and the film Bond should be up there and I know many people rate but I just can't warm to it. Apart from the scenes with Fiona it's just plain dull. And I'm not a big fan of the book either.

    It's about mood I suppose and in that sense the series is good because there's always something for everyone. If I just want to veg out and have a lazy afternoon I can slap on DAF or some vintage Rog or Brozza. If I want some substance I can go early Sean, TD or DC.

    And if I'm depressed and considering topping myself I can put on DAD to help me on my way.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    TheWizardOfIce wrote:
    And if I'm depressed and considering topping myself I can put on DAD to help me on my way.

    i picture it this way...

    sitting in a dark room, rain softly hitting the window - the faint glow from a distant street light streaming through half closed blinds.... a dried up bottle of Jack sits next to hillock of ash and depression.... a man sits in this dark abyss - the only light, is the warm glow of the television - which sits alone in a corner, playing DAD.... and so it plays, and plays.. as if mocking the crumbling shell of humanity which sits across from it... the sad soul is weak from mental anguish and depraved hope, that with a quivering lip and a single tear he loads a single round into his revolver - once bought for home defense, now used for the liberation of the mind, body and soul... on the screen, Bond comes windsufing over the tidal wave - an abomination of CGI and travesty emits from the screen - it's blasphemous imagery engulfs the man until he can stand it no more.... hand trembling, he raises the gun to his temple, eyes closed.. he squeezes the trigger - a single shot rings out..

    BANG!

    ..... the man slowly opens his eyes. He is no longer in his living room - is he in heaven?... no - just what looks to be a hospital room - his head, a numb beehive of failure, but all is not lost, for he was rescued from his cruel fate of having to watch DAD... his finger tips feel for the remote control for the hospital room television.. he grasped the remote lying next to him on the bed, and turned on the television.... "I'M GUNNA WAKE UP, YES AND NO.." .... the man's eyes grew wide, and like boiling pot, or a dormant volcano suddenly awoken - he lets a guttural cry of pain and misery... he had not eluded DAD, it sat and waited for him, like an indestructible monolith - it would've waited for him until the end of time..

    .. he was surely in hell.

  • Major_BoothroydMajor_Boothroyd Republic of Isthmus
    Posts: 2,721
    For me it enhanced the films, mainly cos I had only watched a few of the films before I read all the novels. Only Roger Moore is vastly removed from Fleming's Bond. But 007 of the novels is almost too humourless, much crueller and certainly has a pretty ordinary attitude toward women (all a product of its time.) However the toughness suits a novel a lot more. My favourite is From Russia With Love - both film and novel. But I always loved Dr No - I actually think its superior to the film. Especially the description of Bond escaping through the tunnels - far more intense than the visual representation in the movie.
  • JimThompson45JimThompson45
    Posts: 803
    I discovered the character through the books before I ever saw one of the movies, and that certainly has a lot to do with my outlook about the character, I'm sure. I can and do enjoy both, but I find I get more enjoyment out of the movies that stay closer to the character I found in the books -- and I haven't found any of the movies to be more enjoyable than the books yet (though a couple of Craig's and Dalton's come close).
  • sirseanisbondsirseanisbond
    Posts: 2,189
    Though the books and the films share a common lineage, they are both separate entities. I became a Bond fan because of the movies, and while I enjoy the books, they would not have enticed me in the same way that the movies did. Typically one who enjoys one will enjoy the other, but usually people have a favorite, and I believe for most it is the films.
  • JimThompson45JimThompson45
    Posts: 803
    sirseanisbond wrote:
    Though the books and the films share a common lineage, they are both separate entities. I became a Bond fan because of the movies, and while I enjoy the books, they would not have enticed me in the same way that the movies did. Typically one who enjoys one will enjoy the other, but usually people have a favorite, and I believe for most it is the films.
    I would imagine most people have never opened one of the Fleming novels. After all, only something like 17 percent of the population reads for pleasure anymore.

  • actonsteveactonsteve
    edited November 2012 Posts: 1,492
    I believe the books enhance the films..

    One gets a better understanding of the film through reading the book. The closest to Fleming are DN, FRWL, GF, TB, OHMSS and CR and the books put flesh on the bones of each of those films.

    For example in Dr No he gets the chance to explain his history. This is touched upon in the film ie "ie I was the unwanted son of a German missionary and a Chinese girl of good family..". The speech goes into his rise to power, what makes him tick, his sadism, who his backers are.." Stuff which just cant be put into a film.

    The same with Honey Ryder. We learn her background, we learn more about her personality, her lack of education, why she is looking for shells. Honey is much more alive in the books then she ever was on film and I think Ursula Andress did a very good job.

    The characters are more rounded in the books. We learn about Solitaires life in Haiti, Tanakas WWII exploits and how he was in the kamikaze squadron, Traceys breakdown is only touched on in the film but is fully explained in the books.

    Also we hear James Bonds thoughts. Why he thinks he is "pimping for England" in FRWL etc. The plots do move along as well. They piece together what Blofeld is up to on that Alp one Christmas eve through piecing together the clues (the wherabouts of those girls in England) rather then another quick "spill the beans" speech

    Those that don't read the books are missing out on some beautiful writing. In TB Bond swims under the awning of the eerie Vulcan and it is inhabited by hundreds of wriggling octopi, the tension of the card game in CR, or the sounds of a French forest clearing in FAVTAK. This is wonderfully evocative writing.

    Those who want to stick with the films are truly missing out. I have very little patience with those who poo poo reading anyway. It makes you more articulate and a better writer.

    If people want to just stick with the films (or computer games) that is down to them. But don't expect any sympathy from me.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited November 2012 Posts: 13,894
    I don't think they make any difference to one another. I am currently working my way through the books (chronological order starting with Fleming), i'm currently reading DAF. I very much enjoyed the book of MR, but the film is in my bottom 4.

    I don't think one necessarily affects the other.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    I like both but I don't think the films have to be close to Fleming all the time, I'd rather we had variety in the films.

    I also started reading the books after CR came out in 2006 (I've read 5 of them so far). Dalton I think is closest to the books, but he's been my favourite Bond since I saw TLD at the cinema.

    I prefer the films overall because they're what got me hooked on Bond but I like the books and I think you can enjoy both.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I enjoy both from what I have read. CR the novel and CR the film are both the epitome of their respective medias, MR the novel beats the life out of the film, and LALD is an eye opening time capsule of the 50s with a story I found decent, but not that great next to CR. I will be getting more into the Fleming novels as time permits it.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    MR the novel beats the life out of the film

    I love that novel!!
Sign In or Register to comment.