j.bladesCurrently? You must be joking?Posts: 530MI6 Agent
In my oppinion most of them if not all. :007) You just can't get that level of detail, the omnipresence of a narrator and the true Fleming Bond in the movies. Its a fact IMHO.
"I take a ridiculous pleasure in what I eat and drink."
The big obvious example is Moonraker. It's damn near my favorite book in the series, and it ends up disregarded for the film, and picked over for Die Another Day. Bleh.
Live and Let Die the book actually feels like a decent story in comparison to what we got on film.
"Your orders were to shoot that sniper!"
"Stuff my orders! I only kill professionals. That woman didn't know one end of a rifle from the other. Go ahead, tell M. what you want. If he fires me, I'll thank him for it."
I have to say all of them as well. Of course, some of the books are better than others just as some of the films are better than others. Why, I even liked "The Spy Who Loved Me" in which Bond doesn't even have a major role. I would love to see it made into a film...even if only an hour-long film.
Maybe not coincidentally, the excellent movies are also v good books imo eg Dr No, FRWL and GF, would argue Goldfinger is a better film than book. Thunderball is even stevens, the film is lush but quite OTT, then again the book gets a bit silly toward the end, or should I say flawed. The book of OHMSS is better than the film imo but both have their fans.
From then on it's down to whether you like the Moore films or not, a question of taste. I'd argue the films succeed better in what they're trying to do, esp DAF, LALD, YOLT while Fleming is v much a one-man band.
I haven't read all the books, but from what I remember of "Diamonds Are Forever," I'd say that one tops my list of "films that are better than the books." Wynt and Kidd actually feel like a threat. The plot centered on down to earth spy and police work rather than Frickin Laser Beams. Bond taking on an American Mafia family was an interesting change from the usual SMERSH and SPECTRE works. And we actually get to see what happens to Leiter after the shark maiming, unlike the movies in which he drops off the map until the reboot.
The books absolutely slaughter the movies in terms of quality. That said, the movies have improved on the novels' plots in two movies, as far as I can tell:
1) Goldfinger's plot in the novels was to rob Fort Knox - by getting the gold out using trains, which is pretty ridiculous, because, you know, they run on tracks. Not a great getaway plan. The movie's 'adjustment' to Goldfinger's plan - a plot to increase global gold value, something he owns very much of, by nuking Fort Knox, is much more interesting and clever.
2) From Russia With Love - A wonderful novel, but the premise is wacky - Russia's big plan is to shame Bond by filming him screwing, then dying. For this, they're willing to risk one of their cypher machines. Not a decoy, but the real thing! Lots of risk for little reward. The movie was smart to alter the premise into a SPECTRE operation, playing two sides against each other - manipulate Bond, off him, and gather the LEKTOR for themselves.
In those two above examples, the movies repaired weaknesses in the original premises.
That said... those novels are still better than their filmed equivalents.
Q and M
IrelandPosts: 171MI6 Agent
Comments
~ Casino Royale, Ian Fleming
"Stuff my orders! I only kill professionals. That woman didn't know one end of a rifle from the other. Go ahead, tell M. what you want. If he fires me, I'll thank him for it."
From then on it's down to whether you like the Moore films or not, a question of taste. I'd argue the films succeed better in what they're trying to do, esp DAF, LALD, YOLT while Fleming is v much a one-man band.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I am also very much in the minority, but I really like the book "Man with the Golden Gun". The movie is totally different.
"It's not difficult to get a double 0 number if your prepared to kill people"
1) Goldfinger's plot in the novels was to rob Fort Knox - by getting the gold out using trains, which is pretty ridiculous, because, you know, they run on tracks. Not a great getaway plan. The movie's 'adjustment' to Goldfinger's plan - a plot to increase global gold value, something he owns very much of, by nuking Fort Knox, is much more interesting and clever.
2) From Russia With Love - A wonderful novel, but the premise is wacky - Russia's big plan is to shame Bond by filming him screwing, then dying. For this, they're willing to risk one of their cypher machines. Not a decoy, but the real thing! Lots of risk for little reward. The movie was smart to alter the premise into a SPECTRE operation, playing two sides against each other - manipulate Bond, off him, and gather the LEKTOR for themselves.
In those two above examples, the movies repaired weaknesses in the original premises.
That said... those novels are still better than their filmed equivalents.