Thunderball: Movie Vs. Book
#1
Posted 10 June 2005 - 03:15 AM
Which do you prefer? Ian Fleming's 1961 novel or the 1965 film, and why?
I'll be adding in my reply soon.
#2
Posted 10 June 2005 - 05:01 AM
The film TB is the last film to truely inhabit the feeling and period of a Fleming novel to me (with the exception of OHMSS), and was Connery's last time somewhat resembling the novel OO7 as he started to look older afterwards.
Funny that NSNA would seem to have more scenes from the novel than the film version of TB.
#3
Posted 10 June 2005 - 05:28 AM
#4
Posted 10 June 2005 - 06:00 AM
It's Thunderball vs. Thunderball!
Which do you prefer? Ian Fleming's 1961 novel or the 1965 film, and why?
I'll be adding in my reply soon.
I haven't finished the book yet but i enjoyed it. I also recall liking the movie even though it went on for a bit too long. I may re-evaluate the film after finishing the book.
#5
Posted 12 June 2005 - 08:52 PM
The plot itself is terrific. The idea, in 1965, to steal two nuclear warheads and then hold countries for ransom is massive and very effective. Comparing to most likely From Russia With Love and You Only Live Twice, in this film, you really see the entire SPECTRE organization at work with one of their most powerful operations.
The characters are excellent as well. Nearly all of them stand out as being some of the best. I've always thought Emilio Largo to be sometimes overlooked in favor of Auric Goldfinger, but he is just as ruthless and cruel. His torture sequence of Domino most certainly shows this. Fiona Volpe is without a doubt, one of the very best femme fatales in the series. Her chemistry with Connery's Bond is spot on and the dialogue between the two of them (in the car, bed, and during the chase for example) is riveting. Damsel in distress Domino is one of the best Bond girls in the series as well. She's beautiful, essential to the plot, and very important in bringing down Largo.
John Barry composes a master score for this film, with the blasting 007 theme used very effectively and many of his other cues as well. I like Tom Jones' title song, but I equally enjoy Dionne Warwick's version of the alternate theme just as much.
A negative aspect of the film is perhaps a few (much less than what some say) slow scenes underwater, the SPECTRE crew covering up the Vulcan underwater being the main culprit. Other than that, this film takes you on a ride and doesn't let up until the end.
The novel is a solid one from Fleming, but I think it's just a case of the film outshining it here.
#6
Posted 07 July 2005 - 10:17 PM
#7
Posted 08 July 2005 - 01:51 AM
I agree with Qwerty. Yes the film's underwater scenes were a bit goofy, but there were also a few errors
More than a few. Thunderball has quite alot last time I checked. But then alot of the Bond films do.
#8
Posted 26 July 2005 - 07:13 PM
I went through a phase in which I was greatly annoyed at the fact that a few of the underwater scenes slowed things down unnecessarily (can't believe Peter Hunt let it go! Guess it was so novel to see such underwater photography that they threw in the lot). But that irritation has receded to the point that I really appreciate Thunderball as one of the great cinematic statements of Bond-dom.
The novel is not so similarly placed among it's literary counterparts. It's OK, but not top-notch Fleming IMO.
As such, it's an easy nod to the film.
#9
Posted 04 August 2005 - 02:31 AM
#11
Posted 07 November 2005 - 08:51 PM
The movei is pretty terrific but bon'd blackmailing Patricia Fearing into sex has always creeped me out.
#12
Posted 07 November 2005 - 08:58 PM
It's Thunderball vs. Thunderball!
Which do you prefer? Ian Fleming's 1961 novel or the 1965 film, and why?
I'll be adding in my reply soon.
Definitely the book, which I am convinced he wrote without outside help, despite what illness compelled him to say in court...
The movie is, for me, the weakest of the Eon-Connery Bonds.