How Would the Bond Films be Different if Fleming Lived Longer?

samurai4114

I was wondering this recently. What if Ian Fleming lived on another, say, 10 years. How would the Bond series be different if at all? Would he approve of...

- The producers taking his titles, but not using the source material, ie) YOLT

- The overall direction of the Spectre films, ie) YOLT and OHMSS out or order, no revenge for Tracy's murder

- Lazenby's Bond

- Moore's Bond

- The jokey sort of route the Moore films employed

But more importantly, how much detriment would it be if Fleming disapproved. How much pressure would the producers feel to change it, if any?

I know that Fleming originally disapproved of Connery as Bond, but was swayed. I was just wondering how much of a hinderance the franchise would feel if in the press Fleming was criticizing the decisions made by the filmmakers at the height to its popularity. I would love to hear what others think.

Firemass

Well, according to Britt Eckland:

Sir Roger Moore was the best James Bond because he was most true to Ian Fleming’s vision for 007, according to Britt Ekland.
The Bond girl, who appeared opposite Sir Roger in The Man with the Golden Gun, said Moore captured the spy’s “sophisticated” manner better than any other actor.
“I think Roger is the best Bond, of course - not just because of being my Bond, but because if you read the early Ian Fleming books describing him, that’s how he was,” said Ekland, who played Mary Goodnight in the 1974 film.
“He was a bachelor, unattached, he was luxurious, sophisticated, and he was not available for females so no long term relationships there. I think Roger really portrayed that."

MooseWithFleas

Great hypothetical question and very hard to say. Fleming died during GF production, which is the film that launched Bondmania. The huge spectacle would have made the producers stray from the straight spy thrillers that Fleming wrote and I'm sure Fleming would have preferred to stay closer to the roots of his writing. Although, it would also be hard for him to say no to ideas that were launching his ideas into a global phenomenon.

Throw in Kevin McClory and I imagine it would have gotten very interesting.

Gassy Man

I'm not sure Fleming's works were viewed as straight spy thrillers so much as something of a spoof of them. At least that's what I read many years ago. Of course, people may feel differently now. The films were generally considered spoofs of the novels.

In answer to the question, the book and film industry's interpretations of public opinion changed markedly from the 1960s to the 1970s. I don't think Fleming would have had that much impact on the direction either took, as the public had grown tired of the spy genre, and the camp and counterculture in the late 1960s had changed people's perceptions markedly of what was marketable. I will say, though, that I suspect the Fleming would have written a last novel where Bond dies.

Thunderpussy

+1

Hardyboy

I agree with Gassy Man. I think the real question is how the literary series would have changed if Fleming had lived. There are already signs he was responding to the films--giving Bond a Scottish background, having Ursula Andress pop up in OHMSS, and so on. I wonder if Fleming would have addressed how "public" being a spy was becoming, and how in the 1960s the map was changing, with the Cold War waning and cultural battles in the forefront. But, alas, we will never know. . .

AlphaOmegaSin

Fleming was done with Bond anyway, he most likely would have acted as an 'Advisor' to any Continuation Author -{

Brosnan_fan

http://www.ajb007.co.uk/topic/40045/would-the-films-have-been-different-if-fleming-was-around/

Barbel

Well spotted, Brosnan_fan, thanks for pointing that similar thread out. Closing this one.