This is why I've always liked the Bond vs Slate scene in QOS, and one of the reasons I enjoy QOS more than CR - "he just didn't die very quickly" seems to be alluded to when Bond looks away as Slate passes.
Totally agree, that scene is very Flemingesque- but there's huge chunks of CR which are even more so and as a long-term Fleming reader I was delighted to see them onscreen, which is one of the reasons (well, the main one) I prefer CR06 to QoS.
Even with the premise of the film and a handful of characters, CR really isn't "Flemingesque"... Point out to me where in the novel that Bond storms embassies, breaks into M's apartment, sucks Vesper's fingers, makes crass jokes whilst getting his balls thumped and where M's secretary is in the male form of Villers and we'll start talking!
I read the book back in the 60s, when there wasn't any realistic possibility of a proper film version being made since the rights belonged to Charlie Feldman who made CR67. CR06 is updated (Vesper receives a fake text message from "Mathis" rather than a note, for example) and the first ?40 minutes is nothing to do with the novel except in very broad terms (Le Chiffre loses a lot of money which isn't his) but from then on the spine of the story* is pretty much intact although many details have been changed. It was a pleasure to see Fleming characters and plot elements on screen reproduced as faithfully as could be expected.
The main characters of Fleming's novel are James Bond, Vesper Lynd, Le Chiffre, M, Felix Leiter and Rene Mathis. That is not a handful, it's all the main characters and they are all in the film. Villiers is mentioned in the book, though not as M's secretary (that's Moneypenny, of course), and Gettler appears in the same plot role in both book and film (when Vesper spots him, it shatters her idyll with Bond).
*Bond's mission is to beat Le Chiffre at cards to prevent him from recouping the money, he's assisted by Mathis & Vesper, meets Leiter who funds him when Le Chiffre cleans him out, he wins, has a celebratory meal with Vesper who's lured away by a fake message from Mathis, chases the car she's in, crashes, is tortured.... etc
You don't need to repeat the events of the film/novel - I have watched and read both. You haven't actually acknowledged anything that I mentioned, save for Villiers - the most trivial of all of them. Where's the ambience of the novel in the film - the opening line sets up it up beautifully and it doesn't makes it way into the film at all.
Why is Bond a thug? Why is Bond breaking into his superior's apartment (Fleming's Bond never did that and never would have done that)? Why is Bond storming embassies? To set up that Bond is a rookie 00 agent, which isn't a factor/character arc of Fleming's novel. And it wasn't a factor because of this: Why is Bond a rookie agent, and why does this mean he's a thug - a 38 year old man; a Commander - who wouldn't have gotten to where he is without a strong sense of discipline and respect. With that, he would know a hell of a lot better than to do half of the things he did in the film. That's not in Fleming's novel because it's baseless and ridiculous, and it's a ghost that haunts Bond into the second half of the film.
And I don't recall Vesper psychologically challenging Bond. Aside from her name and sense of fashion, she doesn't quite fit the character Fleming had written. Setting up why Le Chiffre organises the card game was great, and I don't mind the switch to poker in the film, but it's the nonsensical characterisation of Bond and, to a lesser extent, Vesper which plague the film. Not to mention the falling house of Venice, while a perfectly Bondian set piece, doesn't quite have the same ring to it as suicide by cyanide as in the novel. If only for the fact that Vesper didn't have to be inside that elevator since she had the key - so she wasn't locked in. If she wanted to kill herself to free James, why not jump out in the line of fire? Why not take a gun of one of the deceased goons and shoot herself? Why not just take the cyanide as planned? (I know the reason was they wanted something more cinematic, but at the cost of story? No thanks).
Film: Tomorrow Never Dies | Girl: Teresa di Vicenzo | Villain: Max Zorin | Car: Aston Martin Volante | Novel: You Only Live Twice | Bond: Sir Sean Connery
No, it isn't accurate to say I haven't acknowledged what you said- I have acknowledged your claim re "a handful of characters" and contradicted it, and pointed out there is a large amount of Fleming in CR06 ie much more than in QoS.
So, by that logic, would you say having variations of Tanaka, Kissy, Blofeld, M and James Bond in the YOLT film make it more 'Flemingesque' than The Living Daylights or Skyfall?
You also haven't addressed everything else I mentioned - just the cosmetic appearances (in the form of their names) of the main characters and a changed card game - so I think it's safe to say that, with getting caught up in minor technicalities of, perhaps my less-than-articulate writing, coupled with you're evasive replies, you either have recognised the fact that the characterisation of Bond in CR is redundant and damaging to the film, or you just don't know how to back up your side of the argument. Either way, if you've been around for as long as you say you have, I'd imagine you know getting caught up in tit for tat doesn't quite get anyone anywhere.
I want to like CR06 as much as the next person, but I struggle to when I feel they've re-imagined what James Bond is. So I'd quite like for you to rebut my points and prove me wrong. -{
Film: Tomorrow Never Dies | Girl: Teresa di Vicenzo | Villain: Max Zorin | Car: Aston Martin Volante | Novel: You Only Live Twice | Bond: Sir Sean Connery
I haven't addressed every point you've made and won't be doing so- that would be tedious and pointless.
I resent your use of the word "evasive" which I do not feel appropriate and is beginning to sound like a personal attack and also your comments on my arguments- I have been defending CR06 as being Flemingesque by showing how much of it is from Fleming.
Let's move to PMs.
My apologies if it has come across as an attack - that wasn't my intention.
And let's not move to PMs. Someone else might want to chime in.
Film: Tomorrow Never Dies | Girl: Teresa di Vicenzo | Villain: Max Zorin | Car: Aston Martin Volante | Novel: You Only Live Twice | Bond: Sir Sean Connery
MarcAngeDraco, I fully agree with your complaints of Craig's CR film. The character of Bond in that film completely doesn't make sense, and he's not the Bond I know from the novel. I never understood how people thought that Craig was the closest to Fleming's character. It's simply another take on Fleming's character, just in a much different direction than the previous film Bonds. Barbel accurately points out that there is a large amount of Fleming in CR, and it's the largest amount we've seen in a long time. TLD was the last Bond film that had a large amount of Fleming, but not even as much Fleming as CR had. CR just doesn't have the feel of Fleming even though the heart of the story was Fleming's.
It's my feeling that QoS, which I've grown to appreciate more each time I watch it, works well as a Fleming pastiche while CR has more actual Fleming content which I genuinely enjoy.
I've never been a fan of Craig as Bond but don't let it stop me enjoying the films.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,750Chief of Staff
Here's my tuppence worth: I've grown to enjoy CR much more than I did when I first saw it, and now it's easily one of my favourite films of the series.
Part of its strength is that it interprets Fleming so well - the characterisation is pretty thin in the early novels compared with the later ones, not least Vesper's character. The smart dialogue between her and Bond on the train in the film gives me (IMO) a better sense that she would challenge and intrigue Bond enough for him to fall in love with her.
The film also updates the novel very well - to be absolutely faithful to Fleming it would have to have been a period piece, and consequently the lack of action set pieces would draw criticism from many in view of the way the Bond films have developed.
So, again IMO, the film retains the key aspects of the novel which can be successfully transposed to a modern setting and does a fine job of making the rest of the film work.
MarcAngeDraco, I fully agree with your complaints of Craig's CR film. The character of Bond in that film completely doesn't make sense, and he's not the Bond I know from the novel. I never understood how people thought that Craig was the closest to Fleming's character. It's simply another take on Fleming's character, just in a much different direction than the previous film Bonds. Barbel accurately points out that there is a large amount of Fleming in CR, and it's the largest amount we've seen in a long time. TLD was the last Bond film that had a large amount of Fleming, but not even as much Fleming as CR had. CR just doesn't have the feel of Fleming even though the heart of the story was Fleming's.
I think it (CR) walks a difficult path very well. It's a reimagening of what a 'rookie' Bond might be like. He is not the same character, in as much as he has a new Biog and has never been married etc. It preserves some of the key characters and elements but to me at least is not 'the same person'. We were promised that he would become the Bond we knew as part of his evolution. It's a matter of some debate and conjecture as to whether he did or not. For me he never quite did, but Spectre was as close as he got (assuming that there is not more from Daniel to come) I think that the Craig era has varying degrees of success in this respect but it took far too long to get to the destination, four films is an enormous arc. For me QOS was a major misstep which delayed things. Bond went from rookie to burn out by Skyfall with some resurrection in Spectre.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
CR turns the 'film Bond' more towards Fleming's 'book Bond' and that has to be applauded. The two are very different, but since OHMSS, the gap between the two has been widening for decades, so much so that in some films you can't even recognise anything Flemingesque about the Bond character in any way. CR closed that gap considerably. It's widening again now though
CR just doesn't have the feel of Fleming even though the heart of the story was Fleming's.
That's what I mean, thank you. As I said, aside from the premise, it doesn't feel like Fleming. The atmosphere of the novel isn't there in the film, and the way certain characters are characterised - Bond in particular - render it less Fleming and more generic action hero.
Film: Tomorrow Never Dies | Girl: Teresa di Vicenzo | Villain: Max Zorin | Car: Aston Martin Volante | Novel: You Only Live Twice | Bond: Sir Sean Connery
Film: Tomorrow Never Dies | Girl: Teresa di Vicenzo | Villain: Max Zorin | Car: Aston Martin Volante | Novel: You Only Live Twice | Bond: Sir Sean Connery
For a long-term fan like me, there had been a long stretch of films with negligible Fleming content. Much as I love the Brosnan Bonds, there isn't much Fleming there which is why CR06 made its impression on me as Flemingesque. Perhaps to a newer fan it might seem less so.
I have to side with Barbel here, it has been many years since I have read CR but I can see that a huge amount of the book has been transferred to the screen albeit updated, to me it is one of the closest adaptions in the canon and is a favourite of mine.
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
edited March 2016
After ignoring this thread because of its mundane sounding title, interest finally crept up on me and then I see that the past 2 pages haven't been about Bond's Best Kills...WTFun )
Well, my faves...
Films:
[list=*]
[*]Prof Dent[/*]
[*]Red Grant[/*]
[*]GF PTS[/*]
[*]YOLT Sumo henchman[/*]
[*]Sandor in TSWLM[/*]
[*]Locque[/*]
[*]Soviet guard Bond shoots in the forehead in OP[/*]
[*]Sanchez[/*]
[*]Trevelyan[/*]
[*]Carver[/*]
[*]Zao[/*]
[*]CR Miami Airport bomber[/*]
[*]Geologist in Haiti hotel room in QoS[/*]
[*]Macao thug killed by dragon in SF[/*]
[*]Important note re: SP since it's the most recent movie, not enough satisfying kills...we don't even see any falling bodies in the PTS, no dead Hinx and Blofeld lives![/*]
[/list]
In the Fleming stories:
[list=*]
[*]TeeHee via a kick in the family jewels with steel-capped shoes[/*]
[*]Donovan Grant - Ten Pints of Blood![/*]
[*]Fake-dispatch rider in FAVTAK[/*]
[*]Von Hammerstein and company in FYEO[/*]
[*]Horror and Sluggsy[/*]
[*]Blofeld[/*]
[/list]
"...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.....
Comments
1. Roger 2. Timmy 3. Connery 4. Craig 5. George 6. Pierce
I read the book back in the 60s, when there wasn't any realistic possibility of a proper film version being made since the rights belonged to Charlie Feldman who made CR67. CR06 is updated (Vesper receives a fake text message from "Mathis" rather than a note, for example) and the first ?40 minutes is nothing to do with the novel except in very broad terms (Le Chiffre loses a lot of money which isn't his) but from then on the spine of the story* is pretty much intact although many details have been changed. It was a pleasure to see Fleming characters and plot elements on screen reproduced as faithfully as could be expected.
The main characters of Fleming's novel are James Bond, Vesper Lynd, Le Chiffre, M, Felix Leiter and Rene Mathis. That is not a handful, it's all the main characters and they are all in the film. Villiers is mentioned in the book, though not as M's secretary (that's Moneypenny, of course), and Gettler appears in the same plot role in both book and film (when Vesper spots him, it shatters her idyll with Bond).
*Bond's mission is to beat Le Chiffre at cards to prevent him from recouping the money, he's assisted by Mathis & Vesper, meets Leiter who funds him when Le Chiffre cleans him out, he wins, has a celebratory meal with Vesper who's lured away by a fake message from Mathis, chases the car she's in, crashes, is tortured.... etc
Why is Bond a thug? Why is Bond breaking into his superior's apartment (Fleming's Bond never did that and never would have done that)? Why is Bond storming embassies? To set up that Bond is a rookie 00 agent, which isn't a factor/character arc of Fleming's novel. And it wasn't a factor because of this: Why is Bond a rookie agent, and why does this mean he's a thug - a 38 year old man; a Commander - who wouldn't have gotten to where he is without a strong sense of discipline and respect. With that, he would know a hell of a lot better than to do half of the things he did in the film. That's not in Fleming's novel because it's baseless and ridiculous, and it's a ghost that haunts Bond into the second half of the film.
And I don't recall Vesper psychologically challenging Bond. Aside from her name and sense of fashion, she doesn't quite fit the character Fleming had written. Setting up why Le Chiffre organises the card game was great, and I don't mind the switch to poker in the film, but it's the nonsensical characterisation of Bond and, to a lesser extent, Vesper which plague the film. Not to mention the falling house of Venice, while a perfectly Bondian set piece, doesn't quite have the same ring to it as suicide by cyanide as in the novel. If only for the fact that Vesper didn't have to be inside that elevator since she had the key - so she wasn't locked in. If she wanted to kill herself to free James, why not jump out in the line of fire? Why not take a gun of one of the deceased goons and shoot herself? Why not just take the cyanide as planned? (I know the reason was they wanted something more cinematic, but at the cost of story? No thanks).
You also haven't addressed everything else I mentioned - just the cosmetic appearances (in the form of their names) of the main characters and a changed card game - so I think it's safe to say that, with getting caught up in minor technicalities of, perhaps my less-than-articulate writing, coupled with you're evasive replies, you either have recognised the fact that the characterisation of Bond in CR is redundant and damaging to the film, or you just don't know how to back up your side of the argument. Either way, if you've been around for as long as you say you have, I'd imagine you know getting caught up in tit for tat doesn't quite get anyone anywhere.
I want to like CR06 as much as the next person, but I struggle to when I feel they've re-imagined what James Bond is. So I'd quite like for you to rebut my points and prove me wrong. -{
I resent your use of the word "evasive" which I do not feel appropriate and is beginning to sound like a personal attack and also your comments on my arguments- I have been defending CR06 as being Flemingesque by showing how much of it is from Fleming.
Let's move to PMs.
And let's not move to PMs. Someone else might want to chime in.
I've never been a fan of Craig as Bond but don't let it stop me enjoying the films.
I'll have you loving that theme tune soon
Part of its strength is that it interprets Fleming so well - the characterisation is pretty thin in the early novels compared with the later ones, not least Vesper's character. The smart dialogue between her and Bond on the train in the film gives me (IMO) a better sense that she would challenge and intrigue Bond enough for him to fall in love with her.
The film also updates the novel very well - to be absolutely faithful to Fleming it would have to have been a period piece, and consequently the lack of action set pieces would draw criticism from many in view of the way the Bond films have developed.
So, again IMO, the film retains the key aspects of the novel which can be successfully transposed to a modern setting and does a fine job of making the rest of the film work.
I think it (CR) walks a difficult path very well. It's a reimagening of what a 'rookie' Bond might be like. He is not the same character, in as much as he has a new Biog and has never been married etc. It preserves some of the key characters and elements but to me at least is not 'the same person'. We were promised that he would become the Bond we knew as part of his evolution. It's a matter of some debate and conjecture as to whether he did or not. For me he never quite did, but Spectre was as close as he got (assuming that there is not more from Daniel to come) I think that the Craig era has varying degrees of success in this respect but it took far too long to get to the destination, four films is an enormous arc. For me QOS was a major misstep which delayed things. Bond went from rookie to burn out by Skyfall with some resurrection in Spectre.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
No, not much but it is taking that turn away again
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
That's what I mean, thank you. As I said, aside from the premise, it doesn't feel like Fleming. The atmosphere of the novel isn't there in the film, and the way certain characters are characterised - Bond in particular - render it less Fleming and more generic action hero.
Your points are well taken. No need to get upset with Barbel.
One thing I learned on AJB: Don't expect to change anyone's opinions to match your own, but they might take it into consideration.
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
For a long-term fan like me, there had been a long stretch of films with negligible Fleming content. Much as I love the Brosnan Bonds, there isn't much Fleming there which is why CR06 made its impression on me as Flemingesque. Perhaps to a newer fan it might seem less so.
Well, my faves...
Films:
[list=*]
[*]Prof Dent[/*]
[*]Red Grant[/*]
[*]GF PTS[/*]
[*]YOLT Sumo henchman[/*]
[*]Sandor in TSWLM[/*]
[*]Locque[/*]
[*]Soviet guard Bond shoots in the forehead in OP[/*]
[*]Sanchez[/*]
[*]Trevelyan[/*]
[*]Carver[/*]
[*]Zao[/*]
[*]CR Miami Airport bomber[/*]
[*]Geologist in Haiti hotel room in QoS[/*]
[*]Macao thug killed by dragon in SF[/*]
[*]Important note re: SP since it's the most recent movie, not enough satisfying kills...we don't even see any falling bodies in the PTS, no dead Hinx and Blofeld lives![/*]
[/list]
In the Fleming stories:
[list=*]
[*]TeeHee via a kick in the family jewels with steel-capped shoes[/*]
[*]Donovan Grant - Ten Pints of Blood![/*]
[*]Fake-dispatch rider in FAVTAK[/*]
[*]Von Hammerstein and company in FYEO[/*]
[*]Horror and Sluggsy[/*]
[*]Blofeld[/*]
[/list]