I'm new here, and have only recently become interested in 007, but I have a question. I know many, if not all, of the early fims, (Dr. No, OHMSS) were based on Fleming novels. Recent films, such as Brosnan's films (which I love) have all been original stories. When did the change occurr, and why? Thanks.
Novels
Started by
DavidFries
, Jul 19 2001 05:10 PM
1 reply to this topic
#2
WhitePersian
-
- Crew
- 50 posts
Midshipman
Posted 19 July 2001 - 08:18 PM
The basic reason is that the producers started to run out of Ian Fleming novels, but it's probably more complicated than that.
The first Bond film title not derived from a Fleming story title was "License To Kill", but the films had ceased following Fleming's story lines much earlier, usually borrowing a few character names, or settings or the odd incident here or there. "The Spy Who Loved Me " for instance had nothing in common with Fleming's novel (generally considered his worst, and unfilmable) apart from a heavy with metal teeth.
The last movie based faithfully on Fleming was "OHMSS", though as recently as "The Living Daylights", the first 15 minutes or so are pretty soundly based on Fleming's short story. Even before"OHMSS", the writers had jettisoned all but a few names and the Japanese setting when they filmed "You Only Live Twice".
Part of the reason is also that the film Bond started to go off in a different direction from the book Bond quite early on. The emphasis grew on stunts, gadgets, jokes and spectacle. Since audiences loved this, that's the direction the films took. The more serious book Bond, with the focus on suspense and intrigue and character got forgotten.
Also, as time passed, the Fleming books, with their Cold War setting were deemed old fashioned, so the film versions of even first rate Fleming books like "Live And Let Die" or "Moonraker" were radically changed to bring them "up to date".
Ironically, when the supply of Fleming titles ran out (with "Daylights") and the producers started to make up their own, the flavour of the movies started to return more towards what Fleming had originally written.
The first Bond film title not derived from a Fleming story title was "License To Kill", but the films had ceased following Fleming's story lines much earlier, usually borrowing a few character names, or settings or the odd incident here or there. "The Spy Who Loved Me " for instance had nothing in common with Fleming's novel (generally considered his worst, and unfilmable) apart from a heavy with metal teeth.
The last movie based faithfully on Fleming was "OHMSS", though as recently as "The Living Daylights", the first 15 minutes or so are pretty soundly based on Fleming's short story. Even before"OHMSS", the writers had jettisoned all but a few names and the Japanese setting when they filmed "You Only Live Twice".
Part of the reason is also that the film Bond started to go off in a different direction from the book Bond quite early on. The emphasis grew on stunts, gadgets, jokes and spectacle. Since audiences loved this, that's the direction the films took. The more serious book Bond, with the focus on suspense and intrigue and character got forgotten.
Also, as time passed, the Fleming books, with their Cold War setting were deemed old fashioned, so the film versions of even first rate Fleming books like "Live And Let Die" or "Moonraker" were radically changed to bring them "up to date".
Ironically, when the supply of Fleming titles ran out (with "Daylights") and the producers started to make up their own, the flavour of the movies started to return more towards what Fleming had originally written.