For Your Eyes Only: Movie Vs. Book
Started by
Qwerty
, Apr 03 2005 03:22 PM
9 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 03 April 2005 - 03:22 PM
'Tis a bit tricky in this case since the For Your Eyes Only collection has five short stories, but comparing the official film of the name to perhaps the stories that we used to create it (“Risico” and For Your Eyes Only for example), which do you prefer and why?
#2
Posted 12 April 2005 - 12:03 PM
*Bump* Anyone?
#3
Posted 12 April 2005 - 01:41 PM
This is a very tricky question Devin. My favorite of the short stories is the title story but I prefer the movies setting and all to the short story. I am going to go with the movie on this one.
#4
Posted 12 April 2005 - 01:47 PM
I'm currently re-reading the book. Will comment when I finish.
#5
Posted 12 April 2005 - 02:46 PM
I'm a little behind the group on this one having lent my nephew my copy of FYEO. I promise to contribute when I get it back and re-read the stories. I'd rather do it when its fresh in my mind.
#6
Posted 08 May 2006 - 03:14 AM
I say the film because the producers and writers did an excellent job of combining two unrelated stories into a single whole.
#7
Posted 08 May 2006 - 04:01 AM
I say the film because the producers and writers did an excellent job of combining two unrelated stories into a single whole.
I'll second that motion.
#8
Posted 08 May 2006 - 04:38 AM
Yeah, movie for me too. I loved "Risico" and "From A View To A Kill" as short stories, but unless I'm forgetting one in there, I didn't really care for the rest of the short stories. FYEO as a movie, however, I find completely entertaining.
Oddly enough, during AMC's last Bond marathon, I happened to watch FYEO with a few folks I know who aren't as into Bond as I am and they all said it was the best one they'd ever seen. Go figure.
Oddly enough, during AMC's last Bond marathon, I happened to watch FYEO with a few folks I know who aren't as into Bond as I am and they all said it was the best one they'd ever seen. Go figure.
#9
Posted 08 May 2006 - 03:21 PM
I say the film because the producers and writers did an excellent job of combining two unrelated stories into a single whole.
I'll second that motion.
The sections of the film that are adapted from the short stories are actually quite good. It's really hard to argue when they use Fleming, and do it well!
#10
Posted 08 May 2006 - 03:50 PM
I'm torn between the two. The film does a great job of adapting the two short stories it uses and is one of the best in the series, but the novel has The Hildebrand Rarity, my favorite short story.