The novel is not too padded or weighty - the film tries to do all that and more because it has to go with a bang. It has to have Bond having a rapport with Blofeld and then the big fight out. In the book it's more eerie - I think he and Blofeld meet only once, it's not so long-winded. The book seems lighter and more comical than the film - that stuff with Griffin Ore and the misunderstanding at the College of Arms is fun film stuff simply not utilised in the actual film.
To each their own, I guess, but those sections bore me to sleep really.
I'm not a fan of novel OHMSS, I ranked it at #10 out of 12 novels, overall, surprising right?
The only novels I've ranked lower than it are The Spy Who Loved Me (#11) and The Man With The Golden Gun (#12), yes, it's in my bottom three of my rankings.
I felt that the novel is way too overrated, it's over praised, overlooking its flaws.
Fleming puts some unnecessary descriptions, which to me comes off as a bit overwritten, it relied heavily too much on descriptions.
Too many foreign languages, there are different foreign languages spread over in this novel (Swiss, German, some bits of Italian and French), those foreign languages in this book makes the foreign languages count in CR seemed fewer in comparison.
The plot is disjointed without any build up, it's also rushed.
Those sections that you've mentioned almost put me to sleep, or even nearly led me putting the book down in boredom, it's so slow and too much heavy in exposition.
From Russia With Love did this whole exposition better because there's a thrill, you have no idea what's happening and you need to rely on expositions, and there's a mystery in it, there's a build up.
In this book (OHMSS), the expositions were just overemphasizing, and it's boring, it's like Fleming are putting it into the motions, one by one, step by step, it's not precised, it's like Fleming underestimated the readers of not able to understand everything, so he explained every single step detail by detail, and it's taking too much for me, it's not precised, there's no thrill, just overemphasizing.
The book is not really that great as everyone's making it out to be.
That's why I really liked the film, it improved upon the book, just like Goldfinger, but the thing is, compared to Goldfinger, OHMSS caught my heart more, I'm deeply affected by the story, it's compelling.
As you say, to each their own. I like the novel a lot. It isn't flawless and the film does improve on it in several places, but I've always found it one of the best.
when this film was first broadcast on american teevee in 1976, it was shown over two nights. I didnt see that version myself, but I understand the first night began with the whole skichase out of sequence, then somehow flashed back to the actual opening scene. (see the 007 Magazine page on the history of tv broadcasts)
Not sure where they wouldve split the cliffhanger, nor where the opening credits wouldve gone (if left in their proper place theyd be even further into the story than No Time to Die). but i presume the idea was the film was long, and the first forty minutes might be so boring viewers would switch the channel (I know people who've done precisely that, never giving the movie a chance)
...so my question is: Why would they have not edited the rooftop chase back into to this version, along with some of these other "missing bits" if they were ever filmed? I mean if they were to stretch one movie over four hours anyway, there was other material they could've used instead of simply repeating the major action sequence
The voiceover for the ABC edit necessary because of the re-ordering of events in the film was, I believe, supplied by this chap - Alexander Scourby - Wikipedia
yes of course, this was exactly the opposite of EON having creative input on what the american tv station did with their film. ABC butchered it!
but I like to imagine an opportunity for an extended cut of this film, incorporating the cut footage, and the same with a couple of the other films. I'm sure theres lots of cut scenes in EON's archives, removed for runtime or pace, but causing logical issues with the plot. imagine a special cut of OHMSS done the same way Jackson edited his Lord of the Rings movies for dvd, People watch dvd's differently than they do films in the cinema, especially hardcore fans who would buy the same film ten times over like some of us do.
Yes it would be fun. But as chrisno1 said over the page, the roof chase actually creates a plot issue, as if Blofeld had sent a spy to watch over Sir Hilary and his man had turned up dead on a Post Office underground train, he might have got a bit suspicious about Sir Hilary!
Has anyone from Eon ever commented on that sequence? Whether it still exists or anything? I get the impression that Eon never throw any of that stuff away.
Comments
The novel is not too padded or weighty - the film tries to do all that and more because it has to go with a bang. It has to have Bond having a rapport with Blofeld and then the big fight out. In the book it's more eerie - I think he and Blofeld meet only once, it's not so long-winded. The book seems lighter and more comical than the film - that stuff with Griffin Ore and the misunderstanding at the College of Arms is fun film stuff simply not utilised in the actual film.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
To each their own, I guess, but those sections bore me to sleep really.
I'm not a fan of novel OHMSS, I ranked it at #10 out of 12 novels, overall, surprising right?
The only novels I've ranked lower than it are The Spy Who Loved Me (#11) and The Man With The Golden Gun (#12), yes, it's in my bottom three of my rankings.
I felt that the novel is way too overrated, it's over praised, overlooking its flaws.
Fleming puts some unnecessary descriptions, which to me comes off as a bit overwritten, it relied heavily too much on descriptions.
Too many foreign languages, there are different foreign languages spread over in this novel (Swiss, German, some bits of Italian and French), those foreign languages in this book makes the foreign languages count in CR seemed fewer in comparison.
The plot is disjointed without any build up, it's also rushed.
Those sections that you've mentioned almost put me to sleep, or even nearly led me putting the book down in boredom, it's so slow and too much heavy in exposition.
From Russia With Love did this whole exposition better because there's a thrill, you have no idea what's happening and you need to rely on expositions, and there's a mystery in it, there's a build up.
In this book (OHMSS), the expositions were just overemphasizing, and it's boring, it's like Fleming are putting it into the motions, one by one, step by step, it's not precised, it's like Fleming underestimated the readers of not able to understand everything, so he explained every single step detail by detail, and it's taking too much for me, it's not precised, there's no thrill, just overemphasizing.
The book is not really that great as everyone's making it out to be.
That's why I really liked the film, it improved upon the book, just like Goldfinger, but the thing is, compared to Goldfinger, OHMSS caught my heart more, I'm deeply affected by the story, it's compelling.
The film is one of my favorites.
As you say, to each their own. I like the novel a lot. It isn't flawless and the film does improve on it in several places, but I've always found it one of the best.
now that @Barbel has Imaginary Conversation-ified this topic, I'm wondering...
when this film was first broadcast on american teevee in 1976, it was shown over two nights. I didnt see that version myself, but I understand the first night began with the whole skichase out of sequence, then somehow flashed back to the actual opening scene. (see the 007 Magazine page on the history of tv broadcasts)
Not sure where they wouldve split the cliffhanger, nor where the opening credits wouldve gone (if left in their proper place theyd be even further into the story than No Time to Die). but i presume the idea was the film was long, and the first forty minutes might be so boring viewers would switch the channel (I know people who've done precisely that, never giving the movie a chance)
...so my question is: Why would they have not edited the rooftop chase back into to this version, along with some of these other "missing bits" if they were ever filmed? I mean if they were to stretch one movie over four hours anyway, there was other material they could've used instead of simply repeating the major action sequence
I guess it was ABC editing it and they wouldn't have had access to Eon's unused material. Seems insane that United Artists allowed it.
The voiceover for the ABC edit necessary because of the re-ordering of events in the film was, I believe, supplied by this chap - Alexander Scourby - Wikipedia
yes of course, this was exactly the opposite of EON having creative input on what the american tv station did with their film. ABC butchered it!
but I like to imagine an opportunity for an extended cut of this film, incorporating the cut footage, and the same with a couple of the other films. I'm sure theres lots of cut scenes in EON's archives, removed for runtime or pace, but causing logical issues with the plot. imagine a special cut of OHMSS done the same way Jackson edited his Lord of the Rings movies for dvd, People watch dvd's differently than they do films in the cinema, especially hardcore fans who would buy the same film ten times over like some of us do.
Yes it would be fun. But as chrisno1 said over the page, the roof chase actually creates a plot issue, as if Blofeld had sent a spy to watch over Sir Hilary and his man had turned up dead on a Post Office underground train, he might have got a bit suspicious about Sir Hilary!
Has anyone from Eon ever commented on that sequence? Whether it still exists or anything? I get the impression that Eon never throw any of that stuff away.
I have a very vague recollection of either Peter Hunt or John Glen mentioning it years ago, but I can't remember the context or source.