• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

A James Bond Fan Reviews the Franchise

The Spy Who Loved Me was the first Bond film that completely ejects the plot of the novel carrying the same name (although the novel does have a henchman with metal teeth). Ian Fleming made it a condition when selling the film rights that there be no direct adaptation of The Spy Who Loved Me (a most atypical Bond novel in which Bond hardly appears at all).

Moonraker, likewise, had a completely different plot from the novel. It retained the name Hugo Drax for the villain, but changed all of the plot elements.
 
And of course no discussion of TSWLM is complete without mention of that pre title sequence. From Rog's yellow jumpsuit and tickertape watch to some very dodgy back projection and the jump (you just know it would be cg today, and shite).

Concerning that sequence, I got to say.... Bond certainly was making no attempt to be inconspicuous - from the yellow and red jumpsuit to the Union Jack parachute. It's definitely campy fun, but I don't think it drags the movie down.
 
The Spy Who Loved Me was the first Bond film that completely ejects the plot of the novel carrying the same name (although the novel does have a henchman with metal teeth). Ian Fleming made it a condition when selling the film rights that there be no direct adaptation of The Spy Who Loved Me (a most atypical Bond novel in which Bond hardly appears at all).

Moonraker, likewise, had a completely different plot from the novel. It retained the name Hugo Drax for the villain, but changed all of the plot elements.


Perhaps, although, aside from the Japanese setting, YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE only borrows a few characters from the original Fleming novel. That whole business with the captured spaceships and astronauts was nowhere in the novel.

Meanwhile, as I recall, they actually issued a novelization of MOONRAKER when the movie came out rather than reissuing the original novel. Don't know if they did the same for SPY.
 
The Spy Who Loved Me was the first Bond film that completely ejects the plot of the novel carrying the same name (although the novel does have a henchman with metal teeth). Ian Fleming made it a condition when selling the film rights that there be no direct adaptation of The Spy Who Loved Me (a most atypical Bond novel in which Bond hardly appears at all).

Moonraker, likewise, had a completely different plot from the novel. It retained the name Hugo Drax for the villain, but changed all of the plot elements.


Perhaps, although, aside from the Japanese setting, YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE only borrows a few characters from the original Fleming novel. That whole business with the captured spaceships and astronauts was nowhere in the novel.

Meanwhile, as I recall, they actually issued a novelization of MOONRAKER when the movie came out rather than reissuing the original novel. Don't know if they did the same for SPY.
they did do the same for Spy. the novelization was called James Bond, The Spy Who Loved Me.
 
The more I think about it, it seems like YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE was the turning point. THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN isn't much like the novel either. My memory is hazy, but I don't recall Scaramanga having a secret island headquarters, a super laser death ray, or a midget sidekick. Nor was there any 70's-style kung fu stuff in the Fleming novel, which had Bond going undercover at some sort of underworld summit, as I recall. (I vaguely remember being disappointed by the novel, which wasn't nearly as comic-booky as the movies. Scaramanga, in the book, was more of a common gangster than a larger-than-life Bond villain.)

Not sure I ever read DIAMOND ARE FOREVER, but I'm guessing there probably wasn't a satellite space weapon or a thinly disguised version of Howard Hughes in the book.
 
Perhaps, although, aside from the Japanese setting, YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE only borrows a few characters from the original Fleming novel. That whole business with the captured spaceships and astronauts was nowhere in the novel.
Ah, right you are. I thought You Only Live Twice followed the novel a little more closely than that, but I see I was wrong in thinking that. I'm making my way through the novels in their original publishing order and have read most of them, but I haven't got to You Only Live Twice yet.

Not sure I ever read DIAMOND ARE FOREVER, but I'm guessing there probably wasn't a satellite space weapon or a thinly disguised version of Howard Hughes in the book.
The adaptation of Diamonds are Forever isn't as close as some of the earlier films, and a lot is added in, but much of the broad outline is the same, especially in the early set-up of the plot. The diamond-smuggling operation, Bond taking the place of the diamond courier, and Tiffany Case as Bond's gang moll romantic interest are from the novel. Wint and Kidd are in the novel, too, although their parts are bigger and they're quirkier and more memorable in the movie. The novel doesn't, however, have a space weapon or a Howard Hughes-esque character, nor does it involve Blofeld. The main villains in the novel are gangsters named the Spang brothers who have a cowboy fixation. The final showdown takes place at a Western ghost town.
 
Perhaps, although, aside from the Japanese setting, YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE only borrows a few characters from the original Fleming novel. That whole business with the captured spaceships and astronauts was nowhere in the novel.
Ah, right you are. I thought You Only Live Twice followed the novel a little more closely than that, but I see I was wrong in thinking that. I'm making my way through the novels in their original publishing order and have read most of them, but I haven't got to You Only Live Twice yet.

.


As I recall, YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE is a really weird book. Blofeld has basically retired but, just for his own amusement, has built a garden full of ways for the suicide-obsessed Japanese to kill themselves. Bond, who has fallen apart and lost his edge after his wife's death, is given one last change for revenge, but ends up getting amnesia . . . .

No secret volcano headquarters or kidnapped astronauts. Not too surprising the movie-makers invented a different plot, but somebody could make a really strange movie out of the original novel.
 
the novel The Man With The Golden Gun opens with Bond being re-programed to kill M. after that hes' assigned the task of finding Scaramanga. he inserts himself as Scaramanga's assistant and the novel ends on a train IIRC. also there is a shop keeper with a crow. my memories are fuzzy as well, and i just read it in early spring. i was disappointed with it as well.
 
The Spy Who Loved me is the first one I ever saw. I'll still maintain it's one of the two best films in the series. I'd agree with the criticisms that Curd Jurgens is just phoning in his performance, which is a shame as a more deliriously insane villain would make this perfection. (Fortunately, the next film more than makes up for this with the best villain of the entire series.) Moore is great in this, but then he's my favourite Bond. And you've got to love that car - people always rave about the Aston Martin, but that couldn't turn into a submarine. There's just no competition.
 
I had a toy miniature of the sub car from The Spy Who Loved Me when I was a young 'un. I also had a toy of the car pulling a horse trailer with a fake horse's behind concealing a micro-jet from Octopussy. That was a neat toy - the horse trailer opened up, the fake horse's behind lifted up and the little jet - with folding wings - could be brought out.
 
I know it has its flaws, but The Spy Who Loved Me is my favourite of the Moore Bonds. After that I think it starts to slide for Moore in fits and starts. There are aspects of Moonraker and For Your Eyes Only I quite like, but they just don't resonate the same way. After that, though, forget it.
 
I don't recall the first Bond movie I ever saw, but I know my first Bond was Moore, and he's still my favourite.
 
I think TSWLM is Moore's Goldfinger. Coincidentally, each was the third in the series for the leading man. But more to the point, each was really hitting his stride. Moreover, TWSLM set the template for later Bonds in much the way that GF did for the 60s versions. Each represents the high point of its respective decade and its respective leading man.
 
I think TSWLM is Moore's Goldfinger. Coincidentally, each was the third in the series for the leading man. But more to the point, each was really hitting his stride. Moreover, TWSLM set the template for later Bonds in much the way that GF did for the 60s versions. Each represents the high point of its respective decade and its respective leading man.

Which should give the skeptics hope for Daniel Craig. ;)

I love Casino and Quantum...but I'd imagine, if that pattern holds...the next one should REALLY get things in gear!
 
^ Wonder how Dalton's third might have gone? But my main lament has always been that we never got to see how well Lazenby might have hit his stride with a third movie. A Lazenby DAF where he's hunting down a Savalas Blofeld to avenge Tracy, then a Lazenby LALD where the slightly more funky (than Roger, anyway) George mixes it up with the Harlem crew ... could've been great.

As for Craig, I think he his his mark from his first few seconds onscreen in CR, as did Brosnan in Goldeneye, so I don't know that three is always the trick.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top