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
For better or for worse NTTD is the culmination of nearly 70 years of James Bond, and even in the film itself there's very much the sense that Bond will keep going through the stories Madeline tells to Mathilde. Like any long running character these stories can go to many different places creatively dependent on the individuals behind it at any given time. And he'll always return. How far can it go? It really depends, and like I said it'll give us contradictory answers from fans. At any rate that's how I see this.
In-universe, sure, but there's only two times when he could really die in the reader's eyes. We all know Bond was not about to die in the circular saw scene in Goldfinger, as Fleming would never kill the hero mid-way through the book. At the end of From Russia with Love, sure, you could believe it.
If the YOLT story was taken verbatim and actually followed through with Bond and Kissy’s love child existing, would that be a step too far? Why is the existence of a child a bad thing for the Bond universe? Is it part of some Bond fan bachelor fantasy of having no kids?
People spent 40 years saying that NSNA wasn't a real James Bond movie only to realize now that there are no rules.
Well, an 'official' James Bond film I suppose (even under Amazon we'll presumably see many of EON's established tropes return, so there's still that sense of continuity to the film franchise... more so than most anyway). I don't think anyone can say it's not a James Bond film strictly speaking... It's not a very good one, but it's technically a James Bond film. As is CR' 67 I guess.
But agreed, there never have been any rules. Only conventions I suppose ;)
To be fair, it's pretty amazing he doesn't mention that Drax's plan is quite similar to Stromberg's one only in space this time. Or that Stromberg's plan was like Blofeld's space rocket plan etc...
Well, it's this change in convention that many people struggle with. Would we accept remakes now? I don't know, the return of Goldfinger.
Well, with NTTD it's not as much a permanent change in convention. It's a single break with it. From what I can see it's us, as pretty dedicated fans with strong opinions about this character, who take the most issue with certain parts of that film. Most viewers I know who are casual Bond fans seemed fine with the ending (it actually surprised me at the time).
But then again I'm sure certain fans care and take issue with a lot of stuff that's already been done in Bond media - Bond going into space, Bond and Blofeld knowing each other in the past... hell, I'm sure some devoted readers of Fleming's novels from the time may have taken issue with a Bond novel written from the perspective of a woman, or Bond getting married.
No idea how a remake or return of Goldfinger would go down (I'm personally sceptical, and ultimately it's about making the best Bond film possible. But then again what do I know? EON wanted Goldfinger's twin brother to make an appearance in the 70s).
The point about Reichenbach, while a pertinent one, might not stand. I believe the Boothroyd letters, dated near when From Russia with Love would have been written, mention a next novel. Ian Fleming wanting to kill off Bond may be just an urban myth? I'm not confident on these facts though
Secondly, I think NTTD takes clear liberties with the Fleming story in the father respect. Bond is going to be father in YOLT, but he leaves. So while it's most likely that Kissy births the child and Bond is a father, he's not a dad taking care of his child. No more a father than a sperm donator (and probably in the early 1960s there's no chance he goes back to a random Japanese island).
Thirdly, LALD has voodoo! In the novel Bond reads a long, pain-staking section from some book on it, Baron Samedi is actually Mr. Big himself and he uses the persona to control his gang. While yes, liberties must sometimes be taken, Fleming's ideas, atmospheres, and characters must be used as a blueprint.
I think as studious as most of us are about Fleming's Bond novels, as fans we tend to fixate over finding the similarities or differences with the source material in these films as a means of claiming some sort of validity. I'm not quite sure if that's the point when it comes to adapting this character in a modern film, and often the better question is asking why the films have made these creative decisions.
We don't what will happen yet, nothing is set in stone. In fairness to Amazon it's out of their hands.
We've waited how many years without a word from EON, I'd rather be patient and wait a little longer and give Amazon the best chance of getting things right, rather than rushing this.
A lot is riding on this film and they'll be well aware of that.
Maybe, I'm not 100% up to speed myself, regardless the reader is left with a strong impression and it could have ended there. Readers at the time were basically dealing with the death of 007.
Bond leaves before the child is born in NTTD too, but the film asks the question: what would Bond do if he came back? I don't think there's anything wrong with putting Bond in new situations and seeing how he'd react: the last novel was written 60 years ago, we can't just keep going over the same track over and again.
Asking a question of him which is actually based on a situation from one of those novels seems to me closer to the spirit of the books than asking how he'd react if he went into space.
He's not actually magic though, as the film hints at.
Yes, excellent points.
@mtm, beautiful and thoughtful post, and very likely close to the thinking behind this subplot in NTTD. Every line of every script, every character, every A, B, C plots, every scene and every sequence, has a reason for its existence. It’s deliberately explored in earlier drafts and further developed to move story, and characters, forward to its/their natural conclusions.
I love that reply. You’re not only handsome, but you’re pretty damn smart too, lol.
Thanks though!
I mean, these aren't fundamentally new ideas (very few, if any ideas are truly original). CR'67 gave us a retired Bond, and even Kingsley Amis at one point was planning a short story about an older Bond on a last mission (and I believe was set to die at the end?) Benson's Blast From The Past explored the concept of Bond knowing about his child (and in my opinion not as well as NTTD did). Bond's continuously gotten older in the continuation novels too. For the EON films perhaps they're left field ideas, but they're natural creative routes to take with a character that's been around as long as Bond. And we're at a point where each new incarnation of Bond is something of a new beginning anyway (if it wasn't always).
Well said.
The question room, for one thing, although I don't know quite how you would do that without the Japanese mute disguise. Maybe it would work with a one-off villain who doesn't know Bond's identity previously.
MR, I just don't know how you make those bridge scenes (and bridge in general) filmic without some drastic changes. CR did this by adding a lot of external threats and breaks in the game, so maybe they would do the same.
As for NTTD, I am firmly in the camp of those who liked it. I love that it explored Bond's retirement a bit. I admire that it turned the child of YOLT on its head and included Blofeld in that plot. Was it perfect? No. I thought the nanobot foreshadowing was laid on a bit thick but perhaps no moreso than the explanations of poker in CR.
I wasn't trying to make any comment on either of those two films in regards to Fleming.
One thing I will say (and have said) is that NTTD is more influenced by the tone of its predecessors and the overall Craig era (and thus the Fleming elements used prior) than Fleming's novels.
In terms of adapting novels, I think the main point is not pointing one-to-one of scenes (although for me that would be lovely!) but summing up the key elements of uniqueness and also a consistent ethos of the character. Someone who's read three Fleming novels at random should have a rough understanding of how the character will act and behave in the films.
1. You can put Bond in new situations, sure, but it can't be simultaneously claimed that it's adapting Fleming. Bond being a father in NTTD can't both get the "it's Fleming" and the "it's new terrain" at the same time. Eg. Blast From the Past cannot being connected to Fleming in any way.
(Note: being nitpicky, one could say the nature of fatherhood is very different as well. Bond in YOLT doesn't know how sex works, much less its product, and Bond already has sworn off kids pre-retirement (and asks for a 00 placement at the start of the novel). This being versus the conscious decision that potential fatherhood is fine.)
2. Children (and parental relationships) don't constitute the "elements" of Bond. No one knows how Bond will act with a child; take the varying (and equally valid) descriptions of Bond's fatherhood in Blast from the Past and NTTD account for that. With these new elements, distance from the source work is created.
3. In the LALD film, Baron Samedi isn't really magical until the final scene though is he? And that's just a nod to the audience like "the other fella" line is. They basically reveal him as a charlatan when the shoot him and it turns out they lift ceramic copies of the Baron all about the place.
4. With Fleming's own novels it is a bit hard to analyse inconsistencies; simply as the creator he knows the character and inconsistencies can be covered up as transitions. But take any reader of a Fleming novel and they'll recognise the character and most of the elements across other novels. (Even things like marriage and children are touched on in earlier novels)
Asking a question of him which is actually based on a situation from one of those novels seems to me closer to the spirit of the books than asking how he'd react if he went into space."
And how does the film answer it?
But the answer to the question was wrong.
:D
Or in other words Fleming did not answer that question for a reason.
Fanfic and Fleming-esque are two different things...
Is TMWTGG not his book anymore?
But something to point out here is that the recent films haven’t ‘adapted’ the novels strictly speaking. They’ve used them in some form - there are certainly noticeable threads and ideas from them. But beyond very specific elements from YOLT it’s not faithful adaptation. Again, that’s not the point.
I’m not quite sure how useful it is claiming the NTTD was more influenced by the tone of the previous Craig films than Fleming, especially when it’s acknowledged a lot of Fleming went into SF (I mean, they’re films ultimately, of course it’ll be influenced by it’s predecessors in the same medium. And with these latest Bond films we’re talking about a melting pot of influences from the span of 70 years).
Maybe some will have a ‘rough’ idea of how Bond should behave and his ethos from a few books, although it’s certainly not always straightforward, and I know people who find elements of the literary Bond quite jarring to read compared to any of his film counterparts. So there will be differences. I don’t think NTTD fundamentally clashes with any broad image of Fleming’s Bond as much as it puts the character in these specific situations.
And who’s judging this line? Is it you? Me? The many people who went to see NTTD and either liked it or didn’t? The critics who generally praised it?
Fan Fiction I’d say is only an insult insofar as the quality of the work is amateur or ‘bad’ (in this case it’s certainly not amateur, even if these decisions are subjective in terms of impact). It’s not fundamentally about hypothetical, outlandish Bond scenarios (a fan fiction can be a very run of the mill Bond adventure).
Remember there are no rules...
;)
Exactly! Only conventions, which are around for a reason, but can be broken if needed (hell, some of the best Bond films/novels arguably do so) ;)
While it doesn’t seem Fleming had any plans to revisit that plot thread in the short term, it’s also worth saying we have no idea what he’d have done if he continued writing Bond novels. Even going from his own claims (people and certainly writers change their minds all the time) there may well be a parallel universe somewhere where a Fleming Bond novel was written with the character retiring, dying, or even learning of his child. I’m sure it wouldn’t be quite like NTTD, and it’s all hypothetical, but it’s not impossible either.