The Man with the Golden Touch
Dan Same
Victoria, AustraliaPosts: 6,054MI6 Agent
I recently came across a book called The Man with the Golden Touch: How the Bond Films Conquered the World, written by Sinclair McKay, in a local bookstore. It's about the Bond films, and it looks quite good. I wasn't able to buy it, as I was only browsing, but I was wondering if anybody else has read it and whether they would recommend it.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Comments
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Likewise, you can happen upon an post almost exactly a decade ago that you simply never recall writing. I picked up The Man With The Golden Touch at a knockdown price, and it really is very good, one of the best books about Bond ever written imo.
Now, I can sort of see why I dismissed it, as it's sold as a sociological study of the films, or rather exploring the fashions and trends that influenced them along the years, and we'd had some of that in the fairly recent coffee table book The Legacy, that came out at the same time as DAD. But really, this book is just an excuse by McKay to write his brilliantly witty reviews of the films. I know we can all do that, but this is highly readable.
In many ways it's a follow-on from John Brosnan's excellent book James Bond In The Cinema, which came out in 1971 and had a follow up a decade later I think, taking us up to Moonraker. Of course, Sinclair McKay has a name that sounds like a Bond villain, or even Moore's character in The Persuaders.
I like his book because he's clearly a fan of Roger Moore and is roughly of the same generation as me, having grown up with him. This makes a pleasant change, and I'd certainly recommend this book for Moore fans such as Higgins. However, it may be possible I don't need to.
One great description is of Louis Jordan in Octopussy 'less a wicked Afghan prince, more a petulant French hairdresser trying to persuade Madam into having a perm.'
Photographs in the book are unofficial but all the better for it as there are some rarities here, such as the FRWL cast at a premiere, with Lotte Lenya gazing up at Connery with an expression of delight that we never see in the film, of course. Some info I'd never known before, such as Len Deighton being in on very early drafts of FRWL, albeit briefly.
Though I agree with McKay a lot on stuff, he really hates Thunderball more than any other Bond I think, but his reasons are interesting. He points out that it may be because it wasn't really Fleming based, so lacks that sense of the bizarre. And he may be right, because much of the quirky Bondian stuff in it - the gadgety Aston Martin, the Jet Pack, Fiona in her catsuit on a black motorbike, even the Spectre meeting room and setting, inc the manner of the traitor's demise - are from EON and not from the novel which, if adapted from straight, would most likely be just another a humdrum action film.
McKay also chooses Brosnan's TWINE as the one he really likes, as I do, but does hold back from totally trashing DAD, which appears somewhat suspect; writers tend to do this with more recent films to avoid looking too miserable or negative in a way that might deter fans.
Anyway, it's well worth a read and it takes us up to Craig's Casino Royale. Apols to Mister McKay for having doubted him (or indeed Higgins if it turns out to be really you all along!
Roger Moore 1927-2017
No, Thunderball is definitely Fleming-based. It's a far closer adaptation of Fleming's novel than of the Whittingham/McClory screenplay. And the Spectre meeting and execution are in fact from the novel. Were the novel adapted straight it would have much greater characterization than the film, but its plot would still be the same. McKay is merely trying to rationalize his dislikes.
But wasn’t the novel based on the screenplay and earlier screen treatments worked on by Fleming, Whittingham, McClory and even Ivar Bryce? Several of the key plot elements did not originate from Fleming, particularly the techno-terrorism.
For his stories, Fleming usually drew from personal knowledge of WWII, the Cold War, (smuggling, International and American crime organizations via paid research), Jamaica and of course his own travel experiences.
TB stood out for being comparatively modern and of course the centrality of the Bahamas was McClory-centric. Arguably, OHMSS followed suit in the TB vein with the SPECTRE cadre, though everything else that followed TB reverted back to the said stock Fleming elements.
The novel borrows several basic plot elements from the screenplay/treatments (such as hijacking the bombs in air), but still has a different plot line--summaries of the Whittingham/McClory material are included in the appendix of The Battle For Bond book, and reading them should dispel anyone's idea that Fleming just novelized the script.
Yes, and Thunderball is no exception. The Shrublands sequence (entirely Fleming's) was inspired by his own experiences. The Disco Volante's underwater hatch derives from Fleming's WWII knowledge, and Spectre (whose first mention in writing is by Fleming) derives from his knowledge of international and American crime organizations. Even the Bahamas scenes are based on Fleming's knowledge of the island, gained from visiting Ivar Bryce and his own mother there. And Domino herself is a classic Fleming heroine, miles away from the obnoxious Gaby of the screenplays.
There’s no doubt about the Fleming elements in the various iterations of TB, obviously, but neither can his collaborators’ input be negated, resulting in a story with an observable departure from Fleming’s usual fare particularly if the documentation (and not necessarily the conclusions) of The Battle For Bond book is to be believed. Of course, the material differences in contributions were the subject of their contentious court case that allowed McClory to assert his legal ownership literally for the rest of his life.
They can't be negated, but the truth remains that Fleming selected what ideas and concepts he liked from the material and left behind or transformed what didn't suit him. So I don't think the idea that TB is somehow un-Fleming has much merit, and I don't think the book has many departures from Fleming's usual fare--it's not as if Fleming hadn't handled storylines with nukes before (MR and GF) or techno-terrorism (Dr.No's missile fiddling). In any case, McKay's contention is problematic, like several of his other opinions.