'Skyfall' best of the Original Screenplay Bond films? [A comparison]

edited October 2012 in Skyfall Posts: 11,119
Off course 'Skyfall' isn't out yet. And off course I don't know if it's a Good or a bad Bond film either. But what's wrong with writing down the differences between the original screenplay Bond films and the (partially) adapted screenplays? Moreover, 'Skyfall' could prove us that the Bond producers and screenplay writers finally give us an true Ian Fleming thriller that isn't really based on a previous novel. 'Skyfall' could be the Bond film that has everything in well-balanced doses: A back to basics Bond 'that's finally funny too, A bit of larger-than-life settings, but still realistic, exquisit Bond music, that is only fitting for 'Skyfall', believable drama Ian Fleming-esque drama that isn't actually part of his novels. If that's the case, if 'Skyfall' starts getting those rave reviews, then I think it's a unique turning point in the history of Bond film making. Then Barbara and Michael show us that other non-Fleming Bond books are really not needed.

Having said that, I want to make a listing of 'Best Original Screenplay Bond films', 'Best Adapted Screenplay Bond films' and 'Bond films based on more than one of Fleming's stories'.

First of all, this is my rating of 'Best Adapted Screenplay Bond films' (The Bond films that were for the most part inspired by one of Ian Fleming's novels. The ones rated higher are in my opinion more loyal to Fleming's source material, but moreover they come across on the screen as very Fleming-esque and not as too 'slapstick'):
01) 'On Her Majesty's Secret Service' (1969)
04) 'From Russia With Love' (1963)
03) 'Casino Royale' (2006)
04) 'Thunderball' (1965)
05) 'Doctor No' (1962)
06) 'Goldfinger' (1964)
07) 'Live And Let Die' (1973)
08) 'The Man With The Golden Gun' (1974)
09) 'Never Say Never Again' (1983)
10) 'Diamonds Are Forever' (1971)
11) 'Casino Royale' (1967)

My rating of 'Best Original Screenplay Bond films' (updated after seeing 'Skyfall'. They too can include a worthy Fleming atmosphere. But they can also include Bond films who only had a Fleming title, but were using a (mostly) completely original screenplay. The Fleming-esque thrillers from this category are rated slightly higher):
01) 'The World Is Not Enough' (1999)
02) 'The Spy Who Loved Me' (1977)
03) 'Quantum Of Solace' (2008)
04) 'Tomorrow Never Dies' (1997)
05) 'GoldenEye' (1995)
06) 'You Only Live Twice' (1967)
07) 'Moonraker' (1979)
08) 'A View To A Kill' (1985)
09) 'Die Another Day' (2002)

This is my TOP 4 of 'Best Bond films who at least faithfully use one whole story/plot from Ian Fleming's series of short stories'. (These original stories were rewritten into a new screenplay in which a Fleming plot was ingeniously mixed with original storylines. Again, the films in this category with the best Fleming thriller atmosphere are rated higher):
01) 'For Your Eyes Only' (1981) (Uses both Ian Fleming's short stories 'Risico' and 'For Your Eyes Only', as well as the torture scene from 'Live And Let Die')
02) 'The Living Daylights' (1987) (Uses Ian Fleming's short story 'The Living Daylights')
03) 'Octopussy' (1983) (Uses both Ian Fleming's short stories 'The Property Of A Lady' and 'Octopussy')
04) 'Licence To Kill' (1989) (Uses Ian Fleming's short story 'The Hildebrand Rarity' and elements from 'Live And Let Die')




«1

Comments

  • Posts: 12,506
    Will have to wait until i have seen the movie? From what positive reviews spoiler free that i have heard about? It could well be? :-?
  • Posts: 11,119
    RogueAgent wrote:
    Will have to wait until i have seen the movie? From what positive reviews spoiler free that i have heard about? It could well be? :-?

    Damn, I am following that hot topic now. I think I'm fainting. 'Skyfall' the best Bond movie ever. Even better than 'Casino Royale'??? OMG.

  • LTK had the best screenplay imo.
  • Posts: 11,119
    LTK had the best screenplay imo.

    It's really intriguing to see certain fans love the old, classic Bond films and others prefer the newer Bond films. Tell me, I am curious what you love about LTK.

    By the way, this I found out about Silva in 'Skyfall':
    Review 'The Mirror': And, believe it or not, there's even some playful flirting between him and Bardem's openly-gay villain.
  • @Gustav_Graves I love LTK for lots of reasons. I'm gonna go on a bit of a rant now so bear with me.

    *Dalton. For me, he was Bond and nobody will ever be better than him. He was great in TLD but in LTK I think he was even better because he really showed his darker side.

    *Story. This is where the screenplay comes in. The story of Bond going for revenge and then taking out Sanchez's organisation from the inside is just great, and there's some great dialouge on top of it all, especially with Bond and Sanchez. And that brings me too...

    *Villian. Sanchez is really menacing and different. He doesn't want to take over the world, he just wants to get more money. And even that doesn't matter to him as much as loyalty. He's really menacing, he blew up somebodys head when he thought he was being disloyal! And him and Dalton work great together.

    *Action. Tanker chase, plane water skiing, plane fishing, the warehouse shootout, some of the best action of the entire series.

    *Feeling. LTK is dark, different and it feels really 80s. But it still feels like a Bond film. You still have the gunbarrel, the one liners, the amazing stunt in the PTS, the gadgets, the hot girls, M, moneypenny, and

    *Q! Maybe the best Q scenes of the series. Him going to help rogue Bond shows he cares, and he gives some comedy to the film.

    *The girls. Both are hot and Pam works well with Bond without taking away from the spotlight or trying to be his "equal"

    There. I could go on but, rant over.
  • James143James143 Banned
    Posts: 2
    Thank you so much for an amazing and informative post which you have posted here for all of us...
  • Posts: 501
    @Gustav_Graves I love LTK for lots of reasons. I'm gonna go on a bit of a rant now so bear with me.

    *Dalton. For me, he was Bond and nobody will ever be better than him. He was great in TLD but in LTK I think he was even better because he really showed his darker side.

    *Story. This is where the screenplay comes in. The story of Bond going for revenge and then taking out Sanchez's organisation from the inside is just great, and there's some great dialouge on top of it all, especially with Bond and Sanchez. And that brings me too...

    *Villian. Sanchez is really menacing and different. He doesn't want to take over the world, he just wants to get more money. And even that doesn't matter to him as much as loyalty. He's really menacing, he blew up somebodys head when he thought he was being disloyal! And him and Dalton work great together.

    *Action. Tanker chase, plane water skiing, plane fishing, the warehouse shootout, some of the best action of the entire series.

    *Feeling. LTK is dark, different and it feels really 80s. But it still feels like a Bond film. You still have the gunbarrel, the one liners, the amazing stunt in the PTS, the gadgets, the hot girls, M, moneypenny, and

    *Q! Maybe the best Q scenes of the series. Him going to help rogue Bond shows he cares, and he gives some comedy to the film.

    *The girls. Both are hot and Pam works well with Bond without taking away from the spotlight or trying to be his "equal"

    There. I could go on but, rant over.
    I couldn't agree less with you.

    Dalton, is nowhere near the best Bond IMO. He is the best and most underrated Bond ACTOR, but not the best BOND. Which is different.

    The story is quite of the 80, it could have been easily any action movie in the 80s. For example Die Hard.

    The villain is good, but not the best. He's menacing and different, I'll give you that. But he is NOT as good as you claim. He was caught in the first scene. How on Earth could that be good? The only thing that makes him come out of there is that he has enough money to get out of there. I really do think that CR and QOS villain IS better, because le Chiffre and Greene were not the real villains, those were only henchmen, we still don't know who the real villain of these two films is. the same way we didn't know who the real villain in Dr. No, FRWL, and TB was. IMO

    It has great action, I'll give you that too, the PTS is great, and the best scene in the movie.
    As for the feeling, it lacks any kind of Bond feeling. It's just one cop, it doesn't have to be Bond, it could be any, that seeks revenge. Where do you get the Bond feeling? Moneypenny,Q? That's a small part. Q does give a bit of feeling, but just in the briefing he gives about the gadgets, in the rest of it he's not Q, he's just a senior agent. (very senior).

    I don't like the girls in this one, I like Pam in some of the scenes, but just some. Being hot doesn't mean being a good bond girl, it's like saying that if you present a car show, you must know a lot of mechanics. Sometimes it's just not like that (Jeremy Clarkson)
  • I began reading the Fleming novels when Dalton helmed Bond, and for me, he IS the book Bond. Lazenby gets a very honorable mention. Craig has to be my favorite, mostly because of his physical resemblance to my grandfather- he's almost his own genre, it's a completely different animal than what we've seen from Bond before.
    As soon as anyone knows of an online location of the Skyfall script, do post or mssg me, please.
  • I don't see FYEO mentioned in the top Bond films very often, but it's one of my favorites and very suspenseful- love the solo climb up the cliff face- and one of the best Bond girls, Carole Bouquet (Melina Havelock).
  • 00Smith wrote:
    I don't see FYEO mentioned in the top Bond films very often, but it's one of my favorites and very suspenseful- love the solo climb up the cliff face- and one of the best Bond girls, Carole Bouquet (Melina Havelock).
    Agreed, I think it's the hidden gem of the franchise. Now I'm not a huge Moore fan, but I think that was his best performance and all around film as Bond.
  • Best Bond is down to opinion, but I think I gave good reasons for why I think Dalton is the best.
    0iker0 wrote:
    The story is quite of the 80, it could have been easily any action movie in the 80s. For example Die Hard.

    By that logic LALD could've been any blaxpoitation film, QOS any noughties action film, etc.

    Die Hard was about a New York cop in LA who went to his wifes Christmas party to win her back and ended up trapped in there, forced to launch a one man war against a team of German terrorists/robbers.

    If you honestly think LTKs story could've been Die Hard then, well, you haven't seen Die Hard. LTK feels really 80s but I like that.
    0iker0 wrote:
    The villain is good, but not the best. He's menacing and different, I'll give you that. But he is NOT as good as you claim. He was caught in the first scene. How on Earth could that be good? The only thing that makes him come out of there is that he has enough money to get out of there. I really do think that CR and QOS villain IS better, because le Chiffre and Greene were not the real villains, those were only henchmen, we still don't know who the real villain of these two films is. the same way we didn't know who the real villain in Dr. No, FRWL, and TB was. IMO

    He got caught, so what? Carlos The Jackal got caught, does that make him a crap terrorist? He got caught, he escaped. Yeah it was down to money but then you could use your argument against almost every villian in the series "he could only do that evil plan because of money!!!"

    Le Chiffre was average and Greene was crap. Even if we use your logic and say they weren't the real villians, you still can't say CR/QOS had a better villian because you know nothing about that villian!
    0iker0 wrote:
    I don't like the girls in this one, I like Pam in some of the scenes, but just some. Being hot doesn't mean being a good bond girl, it's like saying that if you present a car show, you must know a lot of mechanics. Sometimes it's just not like that (Jeremy Clarkson)

    She's hot, she works well with Dalton, she's good in the action scenes, she has a personality, etc. And Lupe was just an eye candy Bond girl like we've had before and after LTK, nothing wrong wit thatmo.
  • Posts: 11,119
    00Smith wrote:
    I don't see FYEO mentioned in the top Bond films very often, but it's one of my favorites and very suspenseful- love the solo climb up the cliff face- and one of the best Bond girls, Carole Bouquet (Melina Havelock).
    Agreed, I think it's the hidden gem of the franchise. Now I'm not a huge Moore fan, but I think that was his best performance and all around film as Bond.

    I do fully agree with you on this one. FYEO is an instant Ian Fleming classic. And allthough Roger did not think he was at ease on throwing a car off that cliff....it worked. Moreover....I usually see this movie straight after OHMSS. As some kind of double bill.
  • Posts: 501
    Best Bond is down to opinion, but I think I gave good reasons for why I think Dalton is the best.
    0iker0 wrote:
    The story is quite of the 80, it could have been easily any action movie in the 80s. For example Die Hard.

    By that logic LALD could've been any blaxpoitation film, QOS any noughties action film, etc.

    Die Hard was about a New York cop in LA who went to his wifes Christmas party to win her back and ended up trapped in there, forced to launch a one man war against a team of German terrorists/robbers.

    If you honestly think LTKs story could've been Die Hard then, well, you haven't seen Die Hard. LTK feels really 80s but I like that.
    0iker0 wrote:
    The villain is good, but not the best. He's menacing and different, I'll give you that. But he is NOT as good as you claim. He was caught in the first scene. How on Earth could that be good? The only thing that makes him come out of there is that he has enough money to get out of there. I really do think that CR and QOS villain IS better, because le Chiffre and Greene were not the real villains, those were only henchmen, we still don't know who the real villain of these two films is. the same way we didn't know who the real villain in Dr. No, FRWL, and TB was. IMO

    He got caught, so what? Carlos The Jackal got caught, does that make him a crap terrorist? He got caught, he escaped. Yeah it was down to money but then you could use your argument against almost every villian in the series "he could only do that evil plan because of money!!!"

    Le Chiffre was average and Greene was crap. Even if we use your logic and say they weren't the real villians, you still can't say CR/QOS had a better villian because you know nothing about that villian!
    0iker0 wrote:
    I don't like the girls in this one, I like Pam in some of the scenes, but just some. Being hot doesn't mean being a good bond girl, it's like saying that if you present a car show, you must know a lot of mechanics. Sometimes it's just not like that (Jeremy Clarkson)

    She's hot, she works well with Dalton, she's good in the action scenes, she has a personality, etc. And Lupe was just an eye candy Bond girl like we've had before and after LTK, nothing wrong wit thatmo.

    I've seen Die Hard, I'm just saying that John McClane could have replaced James Bond in any part of the film, and I wouldn't feel the difference. Because if you take out the name Bond out of the equation, you just have the good cop who seeks revenge but as the case is too personal he is taken out of it, however he continues investigating with a little help of his friends in the office gets the baddie and kills him destroying every single part of the organization.

    LALD and QOS have a special feeling that not every movie has, the Bond feeling IMO.

    The fact that he got caught in the first scene of the movie makes me feel he's not as dangerous as other villains. I'm not saying he's a crap villain, he's menacing, different and sometimes fun to watch, he's good I admit, but not the best, or even near.

    The real villain behind QUANTUM, makes me feel afraid of him, he's so good, Bond didn't even come close to him in two films. How many villains can say that? Bloffeld, and that's it I believe. He has sophisticated plans, such as controling the water -which I believe is one of the most intelligent realizable plans Bond has ever had to face to-, he leaves no trace and has an insider in every intelligence agency in the World. I mean you have to be really good to achieve this.

    The thing about the girls, I'll give you that they are not the worse, but there are better, far better, far far far better, bond girls, such as Vesper, Tracy, Pussy Galore, Tatiana Romanova, Andrea Anders, XXX, Holly Goodhead, Octopussy, Aki, Natalya Simonova...

    LTK is the 20th film in my ranking, just before DAD and MR.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 12,837
    0iker0 wrote:
    I've seen Die Hard, I'm just saying that John McClane could have replaced James Bond in any part of the film, and I wouldn't feel the difference. Because if you take out the name Bond out of the equation, you just have the good cop who seeks revenge but as the case is too personal he is taken out of it, however he continues investigating with a little help of his friends in the office gets the baddie and kills him destroying every single part of the organization.

    That's how I feel about QOS. It's like Mark Kermode said in his review "if you take out the character of James Bond, most of this could be a Jason Statham film"
    0iker0 wrote:
    LALD and QOS have a special feeling that not every movie has, the Bond feeling IMO.

    Can you please tell me what this Bond feeling is? Because LTK has all the Bond elements LALD has and QOS doesn't have.
    0iker0 wrote:
    The real villain behind QUANTUM, makes me feel afraid of him, he's so good, Bond didn't even come close to him in two films. How many villains can say that? Bloffeld, and that's it I believe. He has sophisticated plans, such as controling the water -which I believe is one of the most intelligent realizable plans Bond has ever had to face to-, he leaves no trace and has an insider in every intelligence agency in the World. I mean you have to be really good to achieve this.

    But we don't even know who he is. He could be a guy who wouldn't land one punch on Bond in a fight and who's terrified of everything.

    It's like saying the next Bond actor will be better than all the others, you can't know that.
  • Posts: 501
    0iker0 wrote:
    I've seen Die Hard, I'm just saying that John McClane could have replaced James Bond in any part of the film, and I wouldn't feel the difference. Because if you take out the name Bond out of the equation, you just have the good cop who seeks revenge but as the case is too personal he is taken out of it, however he continues investigating with a little help of his friends in the office gets the baddie and kills him destroying every single part of the organization.

    That's how I feel about QOS. It's like Mark Kermode said in his review "if you take out the character of James Bond, most of this could be a Jason Statham film"
    0iker0 wrote:
    LALD and QOS have a special feeling that not every movie has, the Bond feeling IMO.

    Can you please tell me what this Bond feeling is? Because LTK has all the Bond elements LALD has and QOS doesn't have.
    0iker0 wrote:
    The real villain behind QUANTUM, makes me feel afraid of him, he's so good, Bond didn't even come close to him in two films. How many villains can say that? Bloffeld, and that's it I believe. He has sophisticated plans, such as controling the water -which I believe is one of the most intelligent realizable plans Bond has ever had to face to-, he leaves no trace and has an insider in every intelligence agency in the World. I mean you have to be really good to achieve this.

    But we don't even know who he is. He could be a guy who wouldn't land one punch on Bond in a fight and who's terrified of everything.

    It's like saying the next Bond actor will be better than all the others, you can't know that.
    I usually agree with Kermode but this is the exception. I can understand you to hate this movie for the poor editing, I don't like the editing much either, but, it has something special. I can't explain you what that feeling is, it's like trying to explain what a color is like to a person who has never seen it. You might get the same feeling with LTK, but I don't.

    Not being able to punch means it's a bad villain? I don't care how he's physically, I just want him to be smart, intelligent and for now, he has proven that he is. There are henchmen to fight with Bond. Stromberg for example, he was a great villain, but he wouldn't land one punch on Bond in a fight, he had Jaws for the dirty work. Heath Ledger's Joker couldn't stand in a fight against the Batman, without dogs or help, did that make him a bad villain for the film?
  • What do we think after some weeks of its premiere? I am honest. Babs and Michael made their best original screenplay Bond film ever. No doubt. They have found the 'mojo' to make Fleming-esque Bond films that is not directly based on a novel by Ian Fleming. BUT the knowledge of Fleming's work is now, with 'Skyfall', mastered completely, in a skillful way.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 3,279
    What do we think after some weeks of its premiere? I am honest. Babs and Michael made their best original screenplay Bond film ever. No doubt. They have found the 'mojo' to make Fleming-esque Bond films that is not directly based on a novel by Ian Fleming. BUT the knowledge of Fleming's work is now, with 'Skyfall', mastered completely, in a skillful way.
    Great thread Gustav. I am not in agreement with you regarding the short story Bond movies though. LTK is by far and above on the No.1 spot, without a doubt. I feel this is as Fleming as it gets, up there with SF and CR for a modern take on Fleming.

    And yes, SF is without doubt the best non Fleming film. I feel EON may have finally discovered their Mojo too with SF. I'm just hoping Logan goes back to squeeze in unused material from the novels for the next one, rather than attempting to recreate a Flemingesque type film, as there is still plenty of unused material out there.

  • Posts: 3,279
    @Gustav_Graves I love LTK for lots of reasons. I'm gonna go on a bit of a rant now so bear with me.

    *Dalton. For me, he was Bond and nobody will ever be better than him. He was great in TLD but in LTK I think he was even better because he really showed his darker side.

    *Story. This is where the screenplay comes in. The story of Bond going for revenge and then taking out Sanchez's organisation from the inside is just great, and there's some great dialouge on top of it all, especially with Bond and Sanchez. And that brings me too...

    *Villian. Sanchez is really menacing and different. He doesn't want to take over the world, he just wants to get more money. And even that doesn't matter to him as much as loyalty. He's really menacing, he blew up somebodys head when he thought he was being disloyal! And him and Dalton work great together.

    *Action. Tanker chase, plane water skiing, plane fishing, the warehouse shootout, some of the best action of the entire series.

    *Feeling. LTK is dark, different and it feels really 80s. But it still feels like a Bond film. You still have the gunbarrel, the one liners, the amazing stunt in the PTS, the gadgets, the hot girls, M, moneypenny, and

    *Q! Maybe the best Q scenes of the series. Him going to help rogue Bond shows he cares, and he gives some comedy to the film.

    *The girls. Both are hot and Pam works well with Bond without taking away from the spotlight or trying to be his "equal"

    There. I could go on but, rant over.

    Well said. Couldn't agree more.
  • What do we think after some weeks of its premiere? I am honest. Babs and Michael made their best original screenplay Bond film ever. No doubt. They have found the 'mojo' to make Fleming-esque Bond films that is not directly based on a novel by Ian Fleming. BUT the knowledge of Fleming's work is now, with 'Skyfall', mastered completely, in a skillful way.
    Great thread Gustav. I am not in agreement with you regarding the short story Bond movies though. LTK is by far and above on the No.1 spot, without a doubt. I feel this is as Fleming as it gets, up there with SF and CR for a modern take on Fleming.

    Neil McNally wrote a perfect piece about the influence of Fleming on 'Skyfall' on our beloved website MI6.co.uk. As I mentioned before there are very clear links to Fleming's novel 'You Only Live Twice' in 'Skyfall'. But now read this: http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/literary_skyfall_and_fleming.php3?t=&s=&id=03385
  • Posts: 3,279
    What do we think after some weeks of its premiere? I am honest. Babs and Michael made their best original screenplay Bond film ever. No doubt. They have found the 'mojo' to make Fleming-esque Bond films that is not directly based on a novel by Ian Fleming. BUT the knowledge of Fleming's work is now, with 'Skyfall', mastered completely, in a skillful way.
    Great thread Gustav. I am not in agreement with you regarding the short story Bond movies though. LTK is by far and above on the No.1 spot, without a doubt. I feel this is as Fleming as it gets, up there with SF and CR for a modern take on Fleming.

    Neil McNally wrote a perfect piece about the influence of Fleming on 'Skyfall' on our beloved website MI6.co.uk. As I mentioned before there are very clear links to Fleming's novel 'You Only Live Twice' in 'Skyfall'. But now read this: http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/literary_skyfall_and_fleming.php3?t=&s=&id=03385

    Great read that. Thanks. I also started another thread on here - 10 most Flemingesque moments in SF. Did you manage to look at my list?
  • What do we think after some weeks of its premiere? I am honest. Babs and Michael made their best original screenplay Bond film ever. No doubt. They have found the 'mojo' to make Fleming-esque Bond films that is not directly based on a novel by Ian Fleming. BUT the knowledge of Fleming's work is now, with 'Skyfall', mastered completely, in a skillful way.
    Great thread Gustav. I am not in agreement with you regarding the short story Bond movies though. LTK is by far and above on the No.1 spot, without a doubt. I feel this is as Fleming as it gets, up there with SF and CR for a modern take on Fleming.

    Neil McNally wrote a perfect piece about the influence of Fleming on 'Skyfall' on our beloved website MI6.co.uk. As I mentioned before there are very clear links to Fleming's novel 'You Only Live Twice' in 'Skyfall'. But now read this: http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/literary_skyfall_and_fleming.php3?t=&s=&id=03385

    Great read that. Thanks. I also started another thread on here - 10 most Flemingesque moments in SF. Did you manage to look at my list?

    Can you post the url here? I...think...I have missed it. I want to read it :-).
  • Posts: 7,653


    This is my TOP 4 of 'Best Bond films who at least faithfully use one whole story/plot from Ian Fleming's series of short stories'. (These original stories were rewritten into a new screenplay in which a Fleming plot was ingeniously mixed with original storylines. Again, the films in this category with the best Fleming thriller atmosphere are rated higher):
    01) 'For Your Eyes Only' (1981) (Uses both Ian Fleming's short stories 'Risico' and 'For Your Eyes Only', as well as the torture scene from 'Live And Let Die')
    02) 'The Living Daylights' (1987) (Uses Ian Fleming's short story 'The Living Daylights')
    03) 'Octopussy' (1983) (Uses both Ian Fleming's short stories 'The Property Of A Lady' and 'Octopussy')
    04) 'Licence To Kill' (1989) (Uses Ian Fleming's short story 'The Hildebrand Rarity' and elements from 'Live And Let Die')
    05) Casino Royale (2006) It did borrow parts of the novel, but far too much is newly added material

    For me CR (2006) has some parts of the source novel but has added so much and took so much away from the novel I would say they did have a look at the novel, took some stuff and that is that.

  • Posts: 3,279
    SaintMark wrote:


    This is my TOP 4 of 'Best Bond films who at least faithfully use one whole story/plot from Ian Fleming's series of short stories'. (These original stories were rewritten into a new screenplay in which a Fleming plot was ingeniously mixed with original storylines. Again, the films in this category with the best Fleming thriller atmosphere are rated higher):
    01) 'For Your Eyes Only' (1981) (Uses both Ian Fleming's short stories 'Risico' and 'For Your Eyes Only', as well as the torture scene from 'Live And Let Die')
    02) 'The Living Daylights' (1987) (Uses Ian Fleming's short story 'The Living Daylights')
    03) 'Octopussy' (1983) (Uses both Ian Fleming's short stories 'The Property Of A Lady' and 'Octopussy')
    04) 'Licence To Kill' (1989) (Uses Ian Fleming's short story 'The Hildebrand Rarity' and elements from 'Live And Let Die')
    05) Casino Royale (2006) It did borrow parts of the novel, but far too much is newly added material

    For me CR (2006) has some parts of the source novel but has added so much and took so much away from the novel I would say they did have a look at the novel, took some stuff and that is that.
    I don't agree at all. Pretty much the entire novel remains fairly intact throughout the second half of the film, just updated to modern times in parts (quite amazing, when you think the story was written in 1952).

  • Posts: 7,653
    SaintMark wrote:


    This is my TOP 4 of 'Best Bond films who at least faithfully use one whole story/plot from Ian Fleming's series of short stories'. (These original stories were rewritten into a new screenplay in which a Fleming plot was ingeniously mixed with original storylines. Again, the films in this category with the best Fleming thriller atmosphere are rated higher):
    01) 'For Your Eyes Only' (1981) (Uses both Ian Fleming's short stories 'Risico' and 'For Your Eyes Only', as well as the torture scene from 'Live And Let Die')
    02) 'The Living Daylights' (1987) (Uses Ian Fleming's short story 'The Living Daylights')
    03) 'Octopussy' (1983) (Uses both Ian Fleming's short stories 'The Property Of A Lady' and 'Octopussy')
    04) 'Licence To Kill' (1989) (Uses Ian Fleming's short story 'The Hildebrand Rarity' and elements from 'Live And Let Die')
    05) Casino Royale (2006) It did borrow parts of the novel, but far too much is newly added material

    For me CR (2006) has some parts of the source novel but has added so much and took so much away from the novel I would say they did have a look at the novel, took some stuff and that is that.
    I don't agree at all. Pretty much the entire novel remains fairly intact throughout the second half of the film, just updated to modern times in parts (quite amazing, when you think the story was written in 1952).

    In that case MR & DAD are fairly updated versions of Flemings book as well, since a nuclear rocket on London is so outdated.

    Nope CR did change the cardgame, kept Vesper and Le Chiffre. It lacked the best bits of CR by not updating them but dumbing them down. I did miss the parkour and airplane attack or the sinking house in Venice in the book. Daltons license to kill had a similar amount of Fleming in the movie perhaps even more than CR had.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 11,119
    SaintMark wrote:


    This is my TOP 4 of 'Best Bond films who at least faithfully use one whole story/plot from Ian Fleming's series of short stories'. (These original stories were rewritten into a new screenplay in which a Fleming plot was ingeniously mixed with original storylines. Again, the films in this category with the best Fleming thriller atmosphere are rated higher):
    01) 'For Your Eyes Only' (1981) (Uses both Ian Fleming's short stories 'Risico' and 'For Your Eyes Only', as well as the torture scene from 'Live And Let Die')
    02) 'The Living Daylights' (1987) (Uses Ian Fleming's short story 'The Living Daylights')
    03) 'Octopussy' (1983) (Uses both Ian Fleming's short stories 'The Property Of A Lady' and 'Octopussy')
    04) 'Licence To Kill' (1989) (Uses Ian Fleming's short story 'The Hildebrand Rarity' and elements from 'Live And Let Die')
    05) Casino Royale (2006) It did borrow parts of the novel, but far too much is newly added material

    For me CR (2006) has some parts of the source novel but has added so much and took so much away from the novel I would say they did have a look at the novel, took some stuff and that is that.

    True, but that is because the first Bond novel 'Casino Royale' is the shortest story. If you really adapted the novel accurately on the screen, then you end up with a 70 to 90 min. Bond film. All the original source material from the novel IMO has been used in the movie, whereas the first attack on Bond's life by the French Union at the start of the novel, is completely reworked into a cat/mouse chase for a terrorist that in return wants to kill Bond too. In fact, the terrorist attack on Bond's life in the novel is reworked into one of the central themes of the movie: How to finance terrorism.
  • Posts: 7,653
    For me CR (2006) reeks just too much of missed opportunities and throwing in everything that did make DAD a similar movie. CR & DAD both suffer of a way TOO much over the TOP ending, where CR had the opportunity to end the movie with acting instead of an overkill of action that took away the dramatic choice of Vesper.

    And indeed CR is a very short story hence that I consider the movie getting the plot close but left too much of the story out in favor of action. Why Poker instead of Baccarat??? I always loved the bit with the attack on Bond by the Bulgarians with those coloured cameras and how distrustfull Le Chiffre and his organisation were over their own people. I loved the scare 007 wears the rest of his life because the smersh agent did mark 007 for a future occassion.
    For me the book CR was raped American style and it left not enough Fleming to call it an adaptation of the likes of DN, FRWL, GF, TB, OHMSS.
    I even find FYEO a more faithfull adaptation of two 007 stories than CR with one. FYEO is in my humble opinion an almost perfect script and they were very faithfull to Flemings character James Bond.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 3,279
    SaintMark wrote:
    For me CR (2006) reeks just too much of missed opportunities and throwing in everything that did make DAD a similar movie. CR & DAD both suffer of a way TOO much over the TOP ending, where CR had the opportunity to end the movie with acting instead of an overkill of action that took away the dramatic choice of Vesper.

    And indeed CR is a very short story hence that I consider the movie getting the plot close but left too much of the story out in favor of action. Why Poker instead of Baccarat??? I always loved the bit with the attack on Bond by the Bulgarians with those coloured cameras and how distrustfull Le Chiffre and his organisation were over their own people. I loved the scare 007 wears the rest of his life because the smersh agent did mark 007 for a future occassion.
    For me the book CR was raped American style and it left not enough Fleming to call it an adaptation of the likes of DN, FRWL, GF, TB, OHMSS.
    I even find FYEO a more faithfull adaptation of two 007 stories than CR with one. FYEO is in my humble opinion an almost perfect script and they were very faithfull to Flemings character James Bond.

    I guess we have to agree to disagree on this one then. I find CR just as close an adaptation as Dr. No, FRWL, GF, TB and OHMSS. I have outlined many times before the similarities between book and film (there is quite a lot of them) to the point I cannot be bothered anymore.

    As for FYEO, as much as it uses Fleming material, I find it one of the weaker Moore films, in that I find him too old in this one, miscast, and the direction lacklustre and dull. I can see what Glen was trying to achieve, but the film had too many of the silly Moore hangover moments in the film, particularly in the first half. Maggie Thatcher, the parrot, the silly CV car chase, the silly OTT PTS take any of the serious Flemingesque moments out of the film for me. The ice rink scene is just another action tick list that would plague the later Brozza films. I find FYEO and GE to be the most overrated Bond films in the franchise.

    The two strongest scenes are the cliff top ending and Bond being dragged along the coral by the speedboat. Both these scenes are very well done, but Glen didn't get the Fleming tone direction properly right until TLD and LTK.

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,979
    0iker0 wrote:
    I've seen Die Hard, I'm just saying that John McClane could have replaced James Bond in any part of the film, and I wouldn't feel the difference. Because if you take out the name Bond out of the equation, you just have the good cop who seeks revenge but as the case is too personal he is taken out of it, however he continues investigating with a little help of his friends in the office gets the baddie and kills him destroying every single part of the organization.

    That's how I feel about QOS. It's like Mark Kermode said in his review "if you take out the character of James Bond, most of this could be a Jason Statham film"
    0iker0 wrote:
    LALD and QOS have a special feeling that not every movie has, the Bond feeling IMO.

    Can you please tell me what this Bond feeling is? Because LTK has all the Bond elements LALD has and QOS doesn't have.

    The Bond feeling is actual Fleming material.
  • @echo If it is then LTK has much more Bond feeling than QOS. The only real Fleming material in QOS was the title (and that was terrible).
Sign In or Register to comment.