Yeah, but is Connery upset over Tracy's death in YOLT movie, since those events have happened already since it did before the YOLT novel? It's the same line of thinking that doesn't work in either situation. There is no sorrow in Connery's Bond films. In the novels Bond seems to have forgotten Vesper after Live and Let Die.
Again, the timeline of the movies is not the same as the timeline of the novels. Bond is upset in the YOLT novel about Tracy's murder. Not so in the YOLT film, because they chose to alter the timeline. After OHMSS, the Bond of the movies is upset about Tracy's murder. It's there even if it's not mentioned. When it's mentioned as in TSWLM, FYEO and LTK he's clearly upset.
EON always use the Fleming novels as template for the character. Whenever they're in trouble, they go back to the novels. They define the character. Consequently, both Vesper and Tracy are the cornerstones of Bond's love life, same as M, Moneypenny and Q are the cornerstones of his work life.
The film character often is quite different from Fleming's character. I still don't think it's fair to say the Bond is always upset over the loss of his two loves. I certainly don't think the films have gone back to the novels whenever they're in trouble. One of the most successful Bond films, Moonraker, was the least Fleming-like. And there's no sorrow over any girl's death in that film.
I'm not making that up about going back to the novels. I'm paraphrasing a quote from the making of documentaries in the DVDs. EON always makes clear that the films are Ian Fleming's James Bond 007. Also, I'm not talking about stories or plots, but the character. The novels are James Bond's character bible. He's not supposed to grieve over Vesper or Tracy (same as I'm not grieving over my highschool girlfriend), but those relationships are in his past/future love life as established in the novels.
What I mean is that in my view it's simply wrong to assume that "in Craig's universe there's no Tracy" or "in Connery's universe there was no Vesper". It's not Craig's or Connery's, it's Bond's universe,Ian Fleming's Bond. He's not there in every credit by chance.
Comments
I'm not making that up about going back to the novels. I'm paraphrasing a quote from the making of documentaries in the DVDs. EON always makes clear that the films are Ian Fleming's James Bond 007. Also, I'm not talking about stories or plots, but the character. The novels are James Bond's character bible. He's not supposed to grieve over Vesper or Tracy (same as I'm not grieving over my highschool girlfriend), but those relationships are in his past/future love life as established in the novels.
What I mean is that in my view it's simply wrong to assume that "in Craig's universe there's no Tracy" or "in Connery's universe there was no Vesper". It's not Craig's or Connery's, it's Bond's universe,Ian Fleming's Bond. He's not there in every credit by chance.