An interesting Question

AlphaOmegaSin

Reading through some of the Books again has got me thinking, do you think there are People out there who love the bond Novels but hate the Films?

hehadlotsofguts

I think some people prefer the books to the films as it allows you to make a mental image of what's happening in the book. You can't do that with the films.

Blackleiter

Of course! In fact, I have even seen some posts in this group from folks who complain so vociferously about how much the movies deviate from the novels that it surprises me they bother to watch the films at all!

Thunderpussy

) My daughter loves the hunger games films, but does criticize them as they
leave whole chunks of the books out, or don't show scenes she feels are really
important to the story. Fans, what an odd bunch we are. )

hehadlotsofguts

I've only read FRWL. It was an old copy which had pictures drawn using red ink. i actually like reading the novels and watching the films. I just read less.

BIG TAM

Funnily enough I was thinking about this recently. I see books & films as separate entities which share character names, etc but have little relevance to one another. My memory of the few books I've read is that they were relatively serious (Bond particularly) whereas even the more 'serious' films have a tongue in cheek tone.

As an aside, I made a rare dip into an ITV showing of a Bond on Saturday & watched YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE. I must be mellowing as I get older as I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Thunderpussy

+1 BIG TAM, I too look upon them as different beasts. it's like Caviar and Peking Duck, I love them Both. )

BIG TAM

Thunderpussy wrote:

+1 BIG TAM, I too look upon them as different beasts. it's like Caviar and Peking Duck, I love them Both. )

That musht be why Chineshe girlsh tashte different from all other girlsh.

CmdrAtticus

I think there are those who like the novels but only hate the films that deviate from them too much or don't use the plot at all (YOLT).

There are also those of the current generation who like the films a lot but are not much into reading and if they did read any of the novels would find it difficult to relate as they are of a different time period.

There may be some purists out there who put up the novels to some high standard and think the whole series has nothing to do with them, but I think there numbers would be quite small.

There are some who think that novels and films are two different animals that have nothing in common so they should be viewed on their own merits. I'm not one of those. It's true films contain mainly the most dramatic and visually appealing parts of novels, but they still are able to capture the plot, pace and emotions of the story even though it's compressed (if done by masterful filmmakers). Novels are an author's solo performance. Films take that solo and incorporate it into a larger orchestral work performed by a combination of many talented artists.

Blackleiter

BIG TAM wrote:

As an aside, I made a rare dip into an ITV showing of a Bond on Saturday & watched YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE. I must be mellowing as I get older as I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Older and wiser, my friend! -{

Peppermill

The movies and the novels are different although I think that the novels aren't as serious as most people make them out to be. They are (IMHO) a very 'fun' read.

David Schofield

"Hate" is a very strong word.

I doubt that anyone who loves the novels could "hate", or even dislike, all films when so many of the films kick-off point is to adapt the original novels for the screen - DN-TB plus OHMSS and CR - or take the Fleming James Bond character - Tim, Brozza and Craig - and, with differing degrees of success, try build contemporary interpretation of the Fleming character.

And even when Fleming and his Bond is jettisoned totally - YOLT and Rog's efforts - the films are surely viewed as harmless, light hearted pieces of entertainment, however much a wasted opportunity...

Barbel

Being an oldie, I read the books first (in the 60s....!) and yield to no-one in my love for them. It is entirely possible to enjoy both the books and the films (I've been doing it for fifty years, more or less) and still experience some twinges when the films divert from them in poor ways and exalt when they either cleave faithfully to Fleming or extrapolate successfully.

AlphaOmegaSin

I will always love both the Books and Films, even if the Film has diverted from the Source Material quit a bit.

JamesBondBlog

They're separate entities for me. I enjoy both, and when they intersect - FRWL and OHMSS - I enjoy it even more, but to me, I view them very differently.

Flemings rich, descriptive style is so pleasurable to read. The character of Bond as depicted in the movies is no less entertaining, for the most part, but they are much different.

Redz

Anyone who goes to see the film based on one of there favorite books says the same thing ''it wasnt as good as the book''

That happens with the vast majority of films.Its all due to where reading a book can take your mind.You watch the film adaptation then feel let down by how it comes across on screen made it on screen.

Im a massive Bond FILM fan...But for me the books arnt all that enjoyable.So the narrative doesnt take away from the film version.

minigeff

I think you're always gonna get a mixed bag.

I loved LOTR but could never get into the books, but a mate who was a huge fan of the books moaned like a bitch with a skinned knee about how much was missing in the films.

Think he overlooked the fact that if everything was included the films would be extended from 4hrs to 6 years. C'est la vie.

As for bond, I love the films and have never read any of the novels, not even a page. This makes me a non-bond fan apparently.

Blackleiter

minigeff wrote:

As for bond, I love the films and have never read any of the novels, not even a page. This makes me a non-bond fan apparently.

That makes you a Bond film fan. Nothing wrong with that! I would say that I fall into the same category, although I have read a few of the novels.

CmdrAtticus

Anyone who is a fan of the films needs to read all the Fleming novels to understand the arc of the character and why most of the EON series was so different than the novels. I realize they date now, but you should still find most enjoyable because of Fleming's skill as a writer.

Fleming started the character out as basically a shadow of a man for the readers to tag along with through the first novels up to FRWL (where he got tired of him and killed him off) and fleshed him out by giving him his personal tastes. He then brings him back him back in DN & GF and gives us more outlandish villains and plots. He then penned FYEO, with its short stories he hoped would give TV or film producers the idea of putting Bond on celluloid. This is when Broccoli & Saltzman decided to make DR. Then came TB and the whole lawsuit with McClory and Fleming's failing health. He then decided to try a new tack with TSWLM but it did not thrill the public and critics, so he sent Bond back after Blofeld in OHMSS (which thrilled everyone) and now EON's making FRWL and the whole series is going to take off, but...

Fleming's health is really at it's lowest and he's tiring of writing Bond so his attitude is reflected in YOLT. He gives Bond amnesia and a life with Kissy but leaves the story open ended as to whether he will return or not. It should have given him some down time so he could relax but the public wants more because of the films and they're making GF so he does TMWTGG, but you can tell that his spirit is not in it and of course he dies before final editing. Fleming's downhill bout with his health and his on/off boredom with Bond is so reflected in the novels.

The films of course are pure escapist fun and keep Bond for the most part as the shadow we follow in the first novels. It's only films like OHMSS, Dalton's, bits of Brosnan's and all of Craig's that we see the character arc of Bond from the later novels. It's ironic, as the aspects of those films many dislike because they focus somewhat on the real personal trauma and cost of Bond's work reflect how Fleming was feeling near the end of his career and life. Most of the worldwide audience just want to have fun in the films. Oddly, Bond's novel career wasn't about fun. It was about death and pain and survival and only living well as possible because death was always waiting around the corner. EON turned those negative bits into fun by not taking them seriously. Now with the reboot they are treating a lot of those bits more serously, and I suppose that's why with the next installment many want to go back to just having a bit of fun.