That said, two big screw-ups in a few days; Bond's character Hilary Bray being recognised up at Piz Gloria, and another agent coincidentally showing up and blowing Bond's cover by babbling away are a bit silly, like something out of a WW2 novel. And as the public are allowed access to the resort, why not post some agent undercover to venture up there as a guest, so Bond can get a message to him?
It was silly but y'know, I think it worked quite well. You can just feel being in the same position. You have the perfect cover and it's just blown to hell in minutes. Worst of all, Bond had the leave the poor soul to die which is a very bitter note.
Indeed... Choose your next cover more wisely... it is Rick Roberts isn't it?
And it seems you were undone by a woman. How very Bondian.
To me the number one difference between the movie and novel OHMSS is that in the novel Bond is contemplating resignation because he is kept on the search for Blofeld, he feels that this could be taken care of with standard police methods and would like to return back to his regular duties. In the movie he decides to resign because he is taken of the Operation Bedlam.
Yeah to be fair it's more consistent and personal in the film, but I prefer the book, I don't like it when it gets personal.
It's odd as the book is a very easy read, more than just about any of them, yet the film - which if pretty faithful - becomes very longwinded imo, quite heavygoing. In the main this is because Tracy is sketched briefly but effectively in the book; they don't get much time together, whereas a relationship has to develop in the film, and imo Hunt lacks the light touch to pull it off succinctly, I never feel there is really anything there. Sure, We Have All The Time in the World is a great song, but I don't like it in the film with the romantic montage, it's corny. A Vie En Rose type song tinkling in the background slightly would be better imo.
In the film Tracy shows up and there's another ski chase to consolidate her and Bond's relationship. He couldn't just propose the way he does in the book, it seems too hasty.
To be fair, the film's ascent to Piz Gloria, which I watched on Xmas Eve, is just stunning and better than the book deserves. Even so, Lazenby puffing his cheeks and looking nervous as Sir Hilary is misdirected; you think it's actually Bond being a bit wet at first.
That said, how can I be sure that I'm not Rick Roberts?
"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."
Roger Moore 1927-2017
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Isn't this whole Rick/Ricardo thingie a smashing way to end the year?? )
Waitaminnit---NP, you're not Rick Roberts...
...
...are you?
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
My weighing between OHMSS the book vs. movie boils down to elements that I thought were cool. I liked the somewhat world-weary, retrospective Bond in the novel, the Fleming interpretation of underworld thuggery (similar to his American gangsters in GF and DAF), Bond’s visit to M’s home (with the report from Ag and Fish), the car chase between Bond and Tracy, the Piz Gloria escape and the car chase between the enemy Mercedes and Tracy’s Lancia equipped with snow-studded rally tires. However, the two elements that to me were critical when comparing the book and movie, that were weaker in the book, was Tracy’s characterization and a Piz Gloria that wasn’t as fascinating as the one in the film.
Like those two elements (Tracy and Piz Gloria), what I really like about the film is how it managed to make itself a celebration of both the Bond film series without really making it a “greatest hits” event, while paying reverent respect to the Fleming elements of the book series. More importantly, the movie managed to flesh out, albeit with some minor and medium changes, the basic elements and essence of the books so that the two still resemble each other, IMO, unlike CR the movie, which really was left with no choice in taking the seeds of the novel to then take on a (larger than) life of its own to barely leave a semblance of the source.
Bond’s clothing was brought up, which I suppose can be a matter of personal taste, or approximations of how movie/book Bond would have/have not dressed. I think that Lazenby’s wardrobe paid close heed to movie Bond’s Saville Row heritage (his suits with waistcoats, and his military inspired blazer in Bond and Tracy’s “love montage.” Nonetheless, I actually like the “departures” like Bond’s white suit (shades of Marcello Mastroianni from the end of La Dolce Vita), his golf/leisure suit, and ruffled tuxedo shirt, which remind me of the Playboy image of the 60s that eventually merged into movie Bond’s invented style, which IMO actually began with Connery after FRWL.
Diana Rigg’s Tracy was such a great improvement over the sappy, neurotic Tracy in the book. The element is so important that it “made,” but could have broken the movie if done wrong. Same with Piz Gloria and the other Swiss locales, beginning with the discovery of that building on the Schilthorn, which made the last half of the movie an almost magical experience to watch. Don’t get me wrong, I love the book and it is and will always be my favorite of the Fleming books, but when comparing the two, I just like the movie a bit more.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
Supes, that's a pretty awesome going-over, can't help but agree on all points. To the two big ones you mentioned - Tracy and Piz Gloria - I think I'd add just one more: action. I very much like Fleming's near first-person POV on the Piz Gloria escape ski chase and bob sled finale, but overall the film notches up the action/fights/chases/stuntwork bigtime yet still leaves it all feeling pretty organic to the plot. Probably the best example, Hunt really had the touch (also with the love story, not just keeping it but like you say really making it sing). Oh, and Barry's score is outstanding!
What was that line about preferring Peking duck or Russian caviar? Why do we have to "prefer" either? The novel is easily one of Fleming's best, and the film is simply one of the finest in the series of movies. Any way you slice it, I'm a happy man!
Vox clamantis in deserto
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
Supes, that's a pretty awesome going-over, can't help but agree on all points. To the two big ones you mentioned - Tracy and Piz Gloria - I think I'd add just one more: action. I very much like Fleming's near first-person POV on the Piz Gloria escape ski chase and bob sled finale, but overall the film notches up the action/fights/chases/stuntwork bigtime yet still leaves it all feeling pretty organic to the plot. Probably the best example, Hunt really had the touch (also with the love story, not just keeping it but like you say really making it sing). Oh, and Barry's score is outstanding!
Yes, the action sequences! I forget what keeps me coming back for more, esp. the last 3rd of the movie w/back to back action sequences that are not of the "insert here" variety but which actually make sense! The music too, IMO, stand out easily from the rest; it all just seem to work together with the main theme being instrumental and coinciding well with the thematic plot and title of the story, yet living up to its worth among the early Bond movies to carry the evocative feel of the movie experience.
Great point on the love story, Blue, and going back to Tracy, Dianna Rigg really did a superb job times ten in improving on the character in making us believe that this is The Woman indeed, similar to Holmes' Irene Adler, but much more intense for 007 for him to pursue, win, whom he cannot live without, and for whom he'll invade the farthest corners of hell to avenge, vs. that of the Fleming "bird w/her wing down," charity case that in real life I personally would avoid like the plague since there really was no compelling character and plot development in the novel to persuade me to think otherwise.
But lastly, to HB's post, yes, OHMSS is both my favorite novel and movie and I can easily ignore the others if I had to limit what I could bring to a desert island. In fact, as a holiday tradition of taking in one form or another of OHMSS, I began to listen again to the audio version of the book, but was derailed after downloading the unabridged audiobook of Andrew Lycett's Ian Fleming bio, a book that I've had for a long time but never managed to read completely; there is suprisingly much about Fleming's time in Switzerland during his formative years as a young man, and therefore much of OHMSS is there too in feel and content. BTW, this is the kind of stuff in Higson's "By Royal Command," that's practically Fleming nectar, which I like the most in that novel, which IMO no other pastiche Bond novelist managed to do when featuring a snowy or alpine setting in a story.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
I have a tough time separating out OHMSS and YOLT, those two novels seem like two parts to one story (hehe, guess they are). I think that's why I respond so much to QOS, in a way it's the character-based sequel to OHMSS the film that we never got. It's surprisingly easy for me to substitute Tracy for Vesper as Bond's motivating angel in QOS, and going from Laz in OHMSS to Craig in QOS also works for me vis a vis the novels as we get to see a rather dramatically different side of Bond in YOLT as in QOS. Not a perfect fit but the best we'll ever get and can't help but be very grateful to EON they made QOS, OHMSS never got its cinematic resolution, for me cinematic Bond's been spinning around like Marlow's ghost for nearly 40 years but QOS puts that baby to sleep nicely. Sorry to go tangental but OHMSS without YOLT always feels half empty, and (for me) QOS is tied to the film version the way YOLT is tied to the novel. It's the one short-coming of Hunt's film that's always detracted, not his fault but a hole in the series which QOS - finally! - fills.
Fair point, but QoS would have worked even better in that regard had it mainly been set in the Alps rather than the desert, which the director opted for instead.
Overall I prefer the book for reasons previously stated. The film does follow it very closely (I'd forgotten about the bobsleigh ride popping up in the book finale) but any differences made by the film I don't enjoy too much. It's odd to me that the book is a light, fast read but the film is a bit indigestible imo. The ABC reedit is notorious, but actually Fleming did a bit of messing with the time frame himself, as the opener with Tracy is a flash forward of sorts. Shame about the Leslie Phillips voice over! ("I say! I happen to find myself bombing down Piz Gloria, escaping from my arch enemy Blofeld!")
It is a brilliant Christmas read!
"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."
Roger Moore 1927-2017
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
Tracy aka Diana Rigg - I had a crush on this actress just like every other boy at that time and I really enjoyed her in OHMSS. However....if they had been staying closer to the character in the novel, (blonde hair, Corisican/English), I would have liked to have seen someone like Virna Lisi in the role. She certainly would have fit Fleming's description.
Wow! Yes, Virna Lisi is a goddess! I really appreciate the physical appearances of the Bond girls and I feel that blondes were either poorly or under represented in the movies. However, as I posted earlier, I felt that Tracy was such a weakly written character, that trying to cast or interpret Tracy "faithfully" would merely be an exercise of honoring an aspect of the novel that IMO is not at all that worthy, e.g., blindly following the novel for its own sake.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
Hot edgy blonde circa '69 who could play like she's burning her candle out too soon = Faye Dunaway. Of course she woulda blown poor George right off the screen, lol. But Rigg was great, no complaints.
Comments
And it seems you were undone by a woman. How very Bondian.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Yeah to be fair it's more consistent and personal in the film, but I prefer the book, I don't like it when it gets personal.
It's odd as the book is a very easy read, more than just about any of them, yet the film - which if pretty faithful - becomes very longwinded imo, quite heavygoing. In the main this is because Tracy is sketched briefly but effectively in the book; they don't get much time together, whereas a relationship has to develop in the film, and imo Hunt lacks the light touch to pull it off succinctly, I never feel there is really anything there. Sure, We Have All The Time in the World is a great song, but I don't like it in the film with the romantic montage, it's corny. A Vie En Rose type song tinkling in the background slightly would be better imo.
In the film Tracy shows up and there's another ski chase to consolidate her and Bond's relationship. He couldn't just propose the way he does in the book, it seems too hasty.
To be fair, the film's ascent to Piz Gloria, which I watched on Xmas Eve, is just stunning and better than the book deserves. Even so, Lazenby puffing his cheeks and looking nervous as Sir Hilary is misdirected; you think it's actually Bond being a bit wet at first.
Have you seen this excellent clip on youtube?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92R6ey-yRkM
Roger Moore 1927-2017
And just to say: "I knew it", in September 2009 already!
http://www.ajb007.co.uk/topic/33891/omg-where-the-scope/
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
That said, how can I be sure that I'm not Rick Roberts?
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Waitaminnit---NP, you're not Rick Roberts...
...
...are you?
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Sometimes, NP is very funny - RR never was!
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Like those two elements (Tracy and Piz Gloria), what I really like about the film is how it managed to make itself a celebration of both the Bond film series without really making it a “greatest hits” event, while paying reverent respect to the Fleming elements of the book series. More importantly, the movie managed to flesh out, albeit with some minor and medium changes, the basic elements and essence of the books so that the two still resemble each other, IMO, unlike CR the movie, which really was left with no choice in taking the seeds of the novel to then take on a (larger than) life of its own to barely leave a semblance of the source.
Bond’s clothing was brought up, which I suppose can be a matter of personal taste, or approximations of how movie/book Bond would have/have not dressed. I think that Lazenby’s wardrobe paid close heed to movie Bond’s Saville Row heritage (his suits with waistcoats, and his military inspired blazer in Bond and Tracy’s “love montage.” Nonetheless, I actually like the “departures” like Bond’s white suit (shades of Marcello Mastroianni from the end of La Dolce Vita), his golf/leisure suit, and ruffled tuxedo shirt, which remind me of the Playboy image of the 60s that eventually merged into movie Bond’s invented style, which IMO actually began with Connery after FRWL.
Diana Rigg’s Tracy was such a great improvement over the sappy, neurotic Tracy in the book. The element is so important that it “made,” but could have broken the movie if done wrong. Same with Piz Gloria and the other Swiss locales, beginning with the discovery of that building on the Schilthorn, which made the last half of the movie an almost magical experience to watch. Don’t get me wrong, I love the book and it is and will always be my favorite of the Fleming books, but when comparing the two, I just like the movie a bit more.
Yes, the action sequences! I forget what keeps me coming back for more, esp. the last 3rd of the movie w/back to back action sequences that are not of the "insert here" variety but which actually make sense! The music too, IMO, stand out easily from the rest; it all just seem to work together with the main theme being instrumental and coinciding well with the thematic plot and title of the story, yet living up to its worth among the early Bond movies to carry the evocative feel of the movie experience.
Great point on the love story, Blue, and going back to Tracy, Dianna Rigg really did a superb job times ten in improving on the character in making us believe that this is The Woman indeed, similar to Holmes' Irene Adler, but much more intense for 007 for him to pursue, win, whom he cannot live without, and for whom he'll invade the farthest corners of hell to avenge, vs. that of the Fleming "bird w/her wing down," charity case that in real life I personally would avoid like the plague since there really was no compelling character and plot development in the novel to persuade me to think otherwise.
But lastly, to HB's post, yes, OHMSS is both my favorite novel and movie and I can easily ignore the others if I had to limit what I could bring to a desert island. In fact, as a holiday tradition of taking in one form or another of OHMSS, I began to listen again to the audio version of the book, but was derailed after downloading the unabridged audiobook of Andrew Lycett's Ian Fleming bio, a book that I've had for a long time but never managed to read completely; there is suprisingly much about Fleming's time in Switzerland during his formative years as a young man, and therefore much of OHMSS is there too in feel and content. BTW, this is the kind of stuff in Higson's "By Royal Command," that's practically Fleming nectar, which I like the most in that novel, which IMO no other pastiche Bond novelist managed to do when featuring a snowy or alpine setting in a story.
Overall I prefer the book for reasons previously stated. The film does follow it very closely (I'd forgotten about the bobsleigh ride popping up in the book finale) but any differences made by the film I don't enjoy too much. It's odd to me that the book is a light, fast read but the film is a bit indigestible imo. The ABC reedit is notorious, but actually Fleming did a bit of messing with the time frame himself, as the opener with Tracy is a flash forward of sorts.
It is a brilliant Christmas read!
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Wow! Yes, Virna Lisi is a goddess! I really appreciate the physical appearances of the Bond girls and I feel that blondes were either poorly or under represented in the movies. However, as I posted earlier, I felt that Tracy was such a weakly written character, that trying to cast or interpret Tracy "faithfully" would merely be an exercise of honoring an aspect of the novel that IMO is not at all that worthy, e.g., blindly following the novel for its own sake.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
IF thats true she put a little more than garlic in her mouth.