The filmmakers opted first for the books that were recently on the best seller lists and so would be familiar to the public (YOLT was a bestseller in 1964 and the movie emerged three years later); that were very much in the news (the novel Dr. No had created a major controversy, while the literary FRWL was a critical smash); and which the producers deemed simply the best in the series.
From what I heard, they made Dr.No first because it would be the easiest money wise. Only one main location.
It would have been similarly easy to make Casino Royale, but the rights had already been bought in making an american film about "Jimmy Bond" played by barry nelson.
“Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to a better understanding of ourselves.” - Carl Jung
Legal reasons mostly. Casino Royale was supposedly cowritten by Kevin McClory, but Fleming didn't credit him for it. McClory sued, and got the rights to Casino Royale, and Thunderball. This is why Broccoli and Saltzman were forced to make Dr. No first, thinking it would make the most money. Soon enough, Thunderball was licenced for one film only to B&S, and Casino Royale was made into a parody. Fast forward 20 years, and Thunderball is remade into Never Say Never Again, produced by McClory. It flops at the box office, and McClory is left scrambling for cash. He sells the rights to Thunderball, but doesn't sell Casino Royale for another 20 years before FINALLY selling them to Sony Pictures, who help make the 2006 film we know today.
Legal reasons mostly. Casino Royale was supposedly cowritten by Kevin McClory, but Fleming didn't credit him for it. McClory sued, and got the rights to Casino Royale, and Thunderball. This is why Broccoli and Saltzman were forced to make Dr. No first, thinking it would make the most money. Soon enough, Thunderball was licenced for one film only to B&S, and Casino Royale was made into a parody. Fast forward 20 years, and Thunderball is remade into Never Say Never Again, produced by McClory. It flops at the box office, and McClory is left scrambling for cash. He sells the rights to Thunderball, but doesn't sell Casino Royale for another 20 years before FINALLY selling them to Sony Pictures, who help make the 2006 film we know today.
Don't take the above seriously, it's full of inaccuracies.
(Only noticed the above today, in relation to another thread)
A number of the choices are easily explained. The circumstances of the time dictated what film would be made.
1. DR. NO - Cubby and Saltzman could not do the first Bond novel as the first Bond film because Cubby and Saltzman did not own the rights to "Casino Royale." "Thunderball" was to be the first Cubby/Saltzman Bond film, but legal holdings prevented that. The book "Dr. No" was then selected for a few reasons. 1. topical...US rockets were being launched and always in the news, Dr. No's plan to topple rockets would be perfect for the audience. 2. budget-wise it was one of the easiest of books to make...essentially one location
2. FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE - simple reason, JFK had just named "From Russia With Love" as one of his favorite books. If you owned the rights to that book, wouldn't you make the film as soon as possible?
3. GOLDFINGER - once again "Thunderball" was to be made...legal reasons still prevented that. So Cubby and Saltzman went for a film that would please the huge American market - a film set in America...they chose "Goldfinger."
4. THUNDERBALL - "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" was to follow GOLDFINGER, but here Cubby and Saltzman had no choice. McClory had just won his legal battle and was given rights to make a THUNDERBALL film. McClory knew it would be a tough slog going against the official Bond films with Connery, and Cubby and Saltzman also did not want any competing Bond film just as their series was exploding. So you know the rest of the story. Deal was struck between EON and McClory, THUNDERBALL got made.
5. YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE - the next film after THUNDERBALL was to be ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE just as "OHMSS" followed the "Thunderball" in the books. The sequencing of the Blofeld/Spectre book storyline was to be followed in the film series. The end credits of THUNDERBALL did indeed say, "James Bond will be back in On Her Majesty's Secret Service." However, due to weather and not finding suitable locations in Switzerland, the idea was scrapped and the Blofeld story was to be continued with YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE.
6. ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE - the producers were to do "Man With The Golden Gun" - it was the most recent best-seller, most fresh in audience's mind. The plan fell through (I don't know why) so they finally got around to making OHMSS.
7. DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER - no idea why this was next film. Possibly because of the poor box-office of OHMSS, the producers once again wanted to tap into the rich American market and chose a title that was set in America.
8. LIVE AND LET DIE - chosen simply because of the black exploitation films being so prominent at that very time. It was the perfect time to finally have black villains in a Bond film.
9. MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN - Cubby and Saltzman always alternated as to who would be the top producer of the film. This time it was Saltzman's turn and he went with "Golden Gun" - a book he had wanted to film five years earlier.
10. SPY WHO LOVED ME - no idea why this title was next
11. MOONRAKER - yes, we know that "For Your Eyes Only" was to be adapted after SPY WHO LOVED ME, but something called STAR WARS got in the way. Cubby was lucky enough to have a space-sounding title to work with and "Moonraker" replaced "For Your Eyes Only" as the next book to be filmed.
The rest of the films came about simply because they were running out of titles to use. Short story titles became the way to go ("Octopussy, "From A View To A Kill," "The Living Daylights"), and then titles they simply made up.
the above silly post confuses Casino Royale with Thunderball, its like a parody of Bond history
in the real world Casino Royale rights were held by a competitor, just not McClory, rather with a completely different third party
so Brocolli/Saltzman could not have made that their 1st film had they wanted to
I guess they could have made Live and Let Die their first film, but opted to go for a later book
probably a good choice, as LaLD was even then controversial for its racist stereotyping, it would not have been a smooth start to the series
howd that 1954 tv special go over? presumably it was not a huge ratings hit (doubt Fleming's name meant anything in America at the time), but was there ever expectation of a followup when it was made?
_________________________________
edit: chula made his post while I was typing, its was not silly, it was very good and I learned a few new things
we might add: the experience of collaborating with McClory so soured Brocolli/Saltzman that they opted not to try a similar collaboration with Feldman(?) the Casino Royale rights-holder, which is why we got the nonseries parody version in 1967
howd that 1954 tv special go over? presumably it was not a huge ratings hit (doubt Fleming's name meant anything in America at the time), but was there ever expectation of a followup when it was made?
Of course there was talk of a television follow up. Fleming was asked to come up with a James Bond TV series. He wrote plot lines, incomplete drafts, character studies... Films were not the way Bond was to go. Television was where Fleming was to take Bond and Fleming started work in that direction. It is because of this that the whole "Thunderball" legal fiasco happened. "Thunderball" was originally a draft for a TV show.
6. ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE - the producers were to do "Man With The Golden Gun" - it was the most recent best-seller, most fresh in audience's mind. The plan fell through (I don't know why)
7. DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER - no idea why this was next film. Possibly because of the poor box-office of OHMSS, the producers once again wanted to tap into the rich American market and chose a title that was set in America.
Partially. The use of diamond smuggling as the plotline paralleled that of gold smuggling in GF, and Eon/UA wanted to make the film after OHMSS as close to GF as they could.
Short story titles became the way to go ("Octopussy, "From A View To A Kill," "The Living Daylights"), and then titles they simply made up.
Again, not accurate. CR and QoS are both Fleming titles.
No kidding. But for three movies in a row, short story titles were the way to go and then they went to made up titles. As far as CASINO ROYALE goes, you do realize that Craig's CR was a reboot of the series. Thus the appropriate use of that first Fleming title.
Cripes, there are more inaccuracies in these last few posts by new members than I've seen in years. What a load of dumplings.
Are you out of your mind. My post above was the most accurate and scholarly thing ever written here. You should have said, "Thanks, Chula, for such good work."
"Thunderball" was originally a draft for a TV show.
No, that's not accurate. A few of the short stories did begin life that way, as did DN, but TB was always planned as a movie.
Debatable. Being that McClory, Bryce, Cuneo, nor Fleming had a film deal in place, "Thunderball" was written as a treatment for anything -- TV, film, or, as it so happened, a full length Bond novel (much to the chagrin of McClory and Whittingham).
Read that incredible "The Battle For Bond" book. I hesitated for years reading that -- I thought it would just be dull legal proceedings. Boy, was I wrong. Entertaining as hell book.
"Thunderball" was originally a draft for a TV show.
No, that's not accurate. A few of the short stories did begin life that way, as did DN, but TB was always planned as a movie.
Debatable. Being that McClory, Bryce, Cuneo, nor Fleming had a film deal in place, "Thunderball" was written as a treatment for anything -- TV, film, or, as it so happened, a full length Bond novel (much to the chagrin of McClory and Whittingham).
Read that incredible "The Battle For Bond" book. I hesitated for years reading that -- I thought it would just be dull legal proceedings. Boy, was I wrong. Entertaining as hell book.
I am very very familiar with that book, I've read it several times. TB was intended as a movie.
Debatable. Once again, being that no film deal was in place...uhh, how exactly could it be written for a film?
A Bond film at that time was a pipe dream of that Don Quixote Kevin McClory. If you want to think pipe dreams are legal binding contracts, so be it.
No film deal in place so essentially what Fleming was writing with that underwater stuff was a first draft for a Bond novel. And guess what, that's what it turned out to be.
Short story titles became the way to go ("Octopussy, "From A View To A Kill," "The Living Daylights"), and then titles they simply made up.
Again, not accurate. CR and QoS are both Fleming titles.
No kidding. But for three movies in a row, short story titles were the way to go and then they went to made up titles. As far as CASINO ROYALE goes, you do realize that Craig's CR was a reboot of the series. Thus the appropriate use of that first Fleming title.
Do you honestly think that I do not realise that CR06 was a reboot of the series?
You stated that the titles after TLD were "simply made up"- this is not accurate... again.
Debatable. Once again, being that no film deal was in place...uhh, how exactly could it be written for a film?
A Bond film at that time was a pipe dream of that Don Quixote Kevin McClory. If you want to think pipe dreams are legal binding contracts, so be it.
No film deal in place so essentially what Fleming was writing with that underwater stuff was a first draft for a Bond novel. And guess what, that's what it turned out to be.
It was not "originally a draft for a TV show" which is what you wrote above. Therefore, inaccurate.... again.
I'd recommend some members read the novels and cross reference their publishing dates with the dates films were made, also helpful if you read the books, as some film titles will become clear as to their origins.
I also recommend watching "everything and nothing" this documentary goes into the legal rumblings and the film productions.. To me a must see for every bond fan.
Typical case of a newbie who's read a book and thinks that he knows it all {[] {[] {[]
Chula, what's your opinion about Dalton?
A newbie? Uhhh, I happen to be the biggest Bond fan probably on Earth. A newbie? Uhh, did you see OHMSS in the theaters? I did. Heck, I even saw YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE in the theater. What was your first Bond film in the theater...SKYFALL?
As far as reading a book goes, yup, there are hundreds and hundreds of Bond books out there today. Everything from making of books to the drinks of James Bond! I go back a looong way with Bond and I remember those days when these were the only two books about Bond:
That's all we had kids. So you know how we learned about Bond? We joined fan clubs and we watched the films. Hell, we taped the films...not on video, but on audio cassette! Yup, back in the day we LISTENED to Bond films over and over and over (that habit created a real appreciation of Barry's scores, by the way).
You kids have it too easy with Bond. And being that it is too easy that leads to a less passionate love of Bond. When you are placing a tape recorder microphone next to your tinny TV speaker so you can record just the sound of FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE off the TV, man, that is passion and love. I have had that passion and commitment to Bond for fifty years. Most Band fans nowadays have that passion since SKYFALL.
As far as Dalton goes...are you serious? Jimmy Dean, Willard Whyte, in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER was a better actor than Dalton. Dalton had zero idea on how to play Bond. Just watch the scene when he is hanging by his wrists on the conveyor belt in LTK. Oh, man, did he play that wrong. All squirming and panic and nearly in tears over desperation to save his own life. Dalton played Bond in that scene the way a common man would react to being in that situation: afraid and desperate and out of control. Now compare that certain-death-to-come conveyor belt scene with a similar scene of Connery's -- his laser table scene in GOLDFINGER. See the way Sean played that scene? No crying and whining like a baby like Dalton. Just super-cool, can see his mind working a way out of it, even a bit nasty towards his abductor. Dalton was horrendous, played Bond like a panicky little girl. I still can't believe he played Bond the way he did in that scene.
Q and M
IrelandPosts: 171MI6 Agent
Comments
Don't take the above seriously, it's full of inaccuracies.
(Only noticed the above today, in relation to another thread)
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
1. DR. NO - Cubby and Saltzman could not do the first Bond novel as the first Bond film because Cubby and Saltzman did not own the rights to "Casino Royale." "Thunderball" was to be the first Cubby/Saltzman Bond film, but legal holdings prevented that. The book "Dr. No" was then selected for a few reasons. 1. topical...US rockets were being launched and always in the news, Dr. No's plan to topple rockets would be perfect for the audience. 2. budget-wise it was one of the easiest of books to make...essentially one location
2. FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE - simple reason, JFK had just named "From Russia With Love" as one of his favorite books. If you owned the rights to that book, wouldn't you make the film as soon as possible?
3. GOLDFINGER - once again "Thunderball" was to be made...legal reasons still prevented that. So Cubby and Saltzman went for a film that would please the huge American market - a film set in America...they chose "Goldfinger."
4. THUNDERBALL - "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" was to follow GOLDFINGER, but here Cubby and Saltzman had no choice. McClory had just won his legal battle and was given rights to make a THUNDERBALL film. McClory knew it would be a tough slog going against the official Bond films with Connery, and Cubby and Saltzman also did not want any competing Bond film just as their series was exploding. So you know the rest of the story. Deal was struck between EON and McClory, THUNDERBALL got made.
5. YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE - the next film after THUNDERBALL was to be ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE just as "OHMSS" followed the "Thunderball" in the books. The sequencing of the Blofeld/Spectre book storyline was to be followed in the film series. The end credits of THUNDERBALL did indeed say, "James Bond will be back in On Her Majesty's Secret Service." However, due to weather and not finding suitable locations in Switzerland, the idea was scrapped and the Blofeld story was to be continued with YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE.
6. ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE - the producers were to do "Man With The Golden Gun" - it was the most recent best-seller, most fresh in audience's mind. The plan fell through (I don't know why) so they finally got around to making OHMSS.
7. DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER - no idea why this was next film. Possibly because of the poor box-office of OHMSS, the producers once again wanted to tap into the rich American market and chose a title that was set in America.
8. LIVE AND LET DIE - chosen simply because of the black exploitation films being so prominent at that very time. It was the perfect time to finally have black villains in a Bond film.
9. MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN - Cubby and Saltzman always alternated as to who would be the top producer of the film. This time it was Saltzman's turn and he went with "Golden Gun" - a book he had wanted to film five years earlier.
10. SPY WHO LOVED ME - no idea why this title was next
11. MOONRAKER - yes, we know that "For Your Eyes Only" was to be adapted after SPY WHO LOVED ME, but something called STAR WARS got in the way. Cubby was lucky enough to have a space-sounding title to work with and "Moonraker" replaced "For Your Eyes Only" as the next book to be filmed.
The rest of the films came about simply because they were running out of titles to use. Short story titles became the way to go ("Octopussy, "From A View To A Kill," "The Living Daylights"), and then titles they simply made up.
in the real world Casino Royale rights were held by a competitor, just not McClory, rather with a completely different third party
so Brocolli/Saltzman could not have made that their 1st film had they wanted to
I guess they could have made Live and Let Die their first film, but opted to go for a later book
probably a good choice, as LaLD was even then controversial for its racist stereotyping, it would not have been a smooth start to the series
howd that 1954 tv special go over? presumably it was not a huge ratings hit (doubt Fleming's name meant anything in America at the time), but was there ever expectation of a followup when it was made?
_________________________________
edit: chula made his post while I was typing, its was not silly, it was very good and I learned a few new things
we might add: the experience of collaborating with McClory so soured Brocolli/Saltzman that they opted not to try a similar collaboration with Feldman(?) the Casino Royale rights-holder, which is why we got the nonseries parody version in 1967
Eon had planned to shoot TMWTGG in Cambodia, but revolt in the country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samlaut_Uprising put them off that idea.
No, that's not accurate. A few of the short stories did begin life that way, as did DN, but TB was always planned as a movie.
Again, not accurate. CR and QoS are both Fleming titles.
Partially. The use of diamond smuggling as the plotline paralleled that of gold smuggling in GF, and Eon/UA wanted to make the film after OHMSS as close to GF as they could.
Read that incredible "The Battle For Bond" book. I hesitated for years reading that -- I thought it would just be dull legal proceedings. Boy, was I wrong. Entertaining as hell book.
Please be more polite in your responses.
It certainly was not. I pointed out some inaccuracies above.
Again, inaccurate.
I am very very familiar with that book, I've read it several times. TB was intended as a movie.
A Bond film at that time was a pipe dream of that Don Quixote Kevin McClory. If you want to think pipe dreams are legal binding contracts, so be it.
No film deal in place so essentially what Fleming was writing with that underwater stuff was a first draft for a Bond novel. And guess what, that's what it turned out to be.
Do you honestly think that I do not realise that CR06 was a reboot of the series?
You stated that the titles after TLD were "simply made up"- this is not accurate... again.
It was not "originally a draft for a TV show" which is what you wrote above. Therefore, inaccurate.... again.
Unless you can tell me precisely what film deal was in place when Fleming began to write THUNDERBALL as a film.
I'll await your answer.
Still waiting.
Now, any response to the points you have not been dealing with?
And once again, please be more polite in your responses.
Typical case of a newbie who's read a book and thinks that he knows it all {[] {[] {[]
Chula, what's your opinion about Dalton?
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
You do realise that people write film scripts all the time without having a film deal in place ?
It's incredibly rare to be given money for a film when no script exists....
I also recommend watching "everything and nothing" this documentary goes into the legal rumblings and the film productions.. To me a must see for every bond fan.
As far as reading a book goes, yup, there are hundreds and hundreds of Bond books out there today. Everything from making of books to the drinks of James Bond! I go back a looong way with Bond and I remember those days when these were the only two books about Bond:
That's all we had kids. So you know how we learned about Bond? We joined fan clubs and we watched the films. Hell, we taped the films...not on video, but on audio cassette! Yup, back in the day we LISTENED to Bond films over and over and over (that habit created a real appreciation of Barry's scores, by the way).
You kids have it too easy with Bond. And being that it is too easy that leads to a less passionate love of Bond. When you are placing a tape recorder microphone next to your tinny TV speaker so you can record just the sound of FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE off the TV, man, that is passion and love. I have had that passion and commitment to Bond for fifty years. Most Band fans nowadays have that passion since SKYFALL.
As far as Dalton goes...are you serious? Jimmy Dean, Willard Whyte, in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER was a better actor than Dalton. Dalton had zero idea on how to play Bond. Just watch the scene when he is hanging by his wrists on the conveyor belt in LTK. Oh, man, did he play that wrong. All squirming and panic and nearly in tears over desperation to save his own life. Dalton played Bond in that scene the way a common man would react to being in that situation: afraid and desperate and out of control. Now compare that certain-death-to-come conveyor belt scene with a similar scene of Connery's -- his laser table scene in GOLDFINGER. See the way Sean played that scene? No crying and whining like a baby like Dalton. Just super-cool, can see his mind working a way out of it, even a bit nasty towards his abductor. Dalton was horrendous, played Bond like a panicky little girl. I still can't believe he played Bond the way he did in that scene.