28 replies to this topic

[Qwerty]

Which of the two do you prefer and why? The original 1965 novel by Ian Fleming or the 1974 film featuring Roger Moore as James Bond? Both are sometimes labeled as lesser parts of the literary and cinematic series, respectively - which do you like more?

[K1Bond007]

I'm probably one of the few people that actually enjoys the film. I'm not even a fan of Roger Moore (he comes in dead last on my top 5 Bond list), but I love the film. The novel is good too, but if you read them going from one to the next, The Man with the Golden Gun loses Fleming's flair. Sidestepping whether or not Fleming finished it (I believe he wrote, but never polished), it just kind of feels hollow. Kingsley Amis once called The Man with the Golden Gun "a sadly empty tale, empty of the interests and effects that for better or worse, Ian Fleming made his own." I agree with this assessment.

[dinovelvet]

Don't much care for the book. Its undercooked and the plot just isn't all that interesting. It's almost John Gardner-esque really! The fact that it follows OHMSS and YOLT makes it suffer even more by comparison. The first couple of chapters with Bond brainwashed are pretty good, but otherwise, Ian Fleming's James Bond series ends with a whimper.
The movie on the other hand, well its a good bit of fun. Very camp, of course, but Scaramanga is a great villain, nice use of locales, and er, JW Pepper is in it. I rest my case

[Jim]

Was there ever a book more misunderstood...?

http://commanderbond...es/1099-1.shtml

http://commanderbond...es/1110-1.shtml


...by me, that is.

The two are so dissimilar that comparison against each other won't achieve much. I like both of them a lot. Simply cannot choose.

[spynovelfan]

I was reading that article(s) of yours just the other day, Jim. Superb stuff. Amis shared your view on the gay stuff, of course.

I agree that it's New Bond. Who would have thought that we'd see a Jamaican sound system in a Fleming novel! And Bond likes the song!

[Genrewriter]

I prefer the book, though both versions could have benefitted from some reworking (in the case of the book it's understandable).

Excellent articles by the way, Jim.

[TortillaFactory]

The film is essentially Bond fluff, no different from any other, enjoyable but not terribly memorable. The whole prosthetic nipple business is cringe-worthy. The book is...different. Bond's weakness is almost uncomfortable to sit through, but once he gets his head back on straight it's interesting to see how he deals with it. Homoerotic subtext is....well, what it is. Goodnight is a perfectly servicable girl, if occasionally an irritating prude. Bond encouraging the smoking of weed...har. Contains one of Fleming's most unusually and loving transcribed scenes of erotica, what with the girl, giant leather hand, etc. Perhaps it was the changing times...I'm pretty sure it's the only instance where he bluntly states that Bond was aroused. And for that I have to love it.

Both plots are somewhat silly and meager. But what else do you really expect? At least there's no allergy clinic involved this time.

[Turn]

I enjoy the movie and rate it higher than some that are held in higher regard by most mainstream fans. On its smaller scale it's hard to lump in with a lot of the others, which is refreshing.

Before reading the novel, I'd read how it was probably the worst in the series and after reading it I can't say I agree. I thought it was fine and read it again a couple of years ago.

[Loomis]

I was reading that article(s) of yours just the other day, Jim. Superb stuff. Amis shared your view on the gay stuff, of course.

I agree that it's New Bond. Who would have thought that we'd see a Jamaican sound system in a Fleming novel! And Bond likes the song!

I thought you didn't consider it a proper Fleming novel or part of the literary series, spy (being as how it was never finished by Fleming).

I much prefer the film, which is my favourite Bond flick, but I also enjoy the book. I also remember Jim's articles as excellent, but I don't quite see how the book ranks as "new Bond" and an attempted restart of the series. But perhaps I should re-read both the novel and Jim's articles on it.

[Byron]

[quote name='Jim' date='16 February 2006 - 13:02' post='518801']
Was there ever a book more misunderstood...?

http://commanderbond...es/1099-1.shtml

http://commanderbond...es/1110-1.shtml


Great articles Jim!

Hearing so many negatives about this book from other forum members, i was very pleasantly surprised when i actually read it. I really enjoyed its low key plot and villain, its political messages and ofcourse the colourful Jamaican scenery and descriptions, it is my dream to one day visit Jamaica. Dare i say i actually liked this book more than YOLT.

The film also wasn't as bad as i expected or had heard, but it does rank in the lower end of the spectrum. It seemed kind of rushed and i don't believe Chris Lee was utilised to his full potential.

Overall the book gets my vote as to which is better.

[Turn]

Here's a thought about the movie version of TMWTGG. It's really not like any of the other films in the series in that you can't really classify it plotwise he way you would lump some into epics or fantasy or Bond averts WWWIII or Bond against madman who wants to dominate the world, etc.

It's Bond and Scaramanga in a cat and mouse game with the subplot about the solex and all that, which doesn't fit easily alongside many of the other bigger-scale films in the series. And that's a good thing IMO.

[spynovelfan]

I thought you didn't consider it a proper Fleming novel or part of the literary series, spy (being as how it was never finished by Fleming).

What gave you that idea, Loomis? Fleming finished it - he didn't polish it. And I see everything released by Glidrose/IFP as part of the literary series.

[Loomis]

I thought you didn't consider it a proper Fleming novel or part of the literary series, spy (being as how it was never finished by Fleming).

What gave you that idea, Loomis? Fleming finished it - he didn't polish it. And I see everything released by Glidrose/IFP as part of the literary series.

My mistake.

Off-topic, but have you read the Higsons? If so, what's your view (of their quality, I mean, not as to whether they should be considered part of the series)?

[spynovelfan]

I've just started reading SILVERFIN. Enjoying it so far.

[Loomis]

I quite like "SilverFin", and I gather "BloodFever" (which I've bought but not yet read) is even better.

[spynovelfan]

I much prefer the film...

Obviously. The book didn't have two beautiful Swedes in it!

[Qwerty]

I quite like "SilverFin", and I gather "BloodFever" (which I've bought but not yet read) is even better.

Absolutely. I recommend both to every Bond fan.

[Blofeld's Cat]

I much prefer the movie over the book. I like the book, but I love the movie.

[Harmsway]

I choose to ignore THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN a proper Fleming Bond novel. Despite an intriguing opening (which, by the way, isn't as handled as well as it should have been), it's nothing special. And having Bond just going back to business as usual cheapens the events of OHMSS and YOLT for me.

I prefer to think of YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE as the end of Fleming's Bond, with that ambiguous ending of Bond heading to Russia and likely to his death. It seems beautifully tragic and just the perfect way to send James Bond off.

[Qwerty]

I prefer the movie over the novel. While all Fleming is good Fleming, I've just never been able to call The Man With The Golden Gun one of his best. It's still a good read: Scaramanga makes for an interesting villain and the plot moves swiftly. I just always wonder how those elements would have been affected if the book was where Fleming wanted it to be.

[SecretAgentFan]

Funnily, I have the exact opposite reaction to TMWTGG (the movie) with OHMSS (the movie).

I thought OHMSS is a total masterpiece from top to bottom and TMWTGG a failure. At least that were my memories of it.

Having seen them both recently I must say that OHMSS is not that good (at least not the first half). And TMWTGG is a lot more enjoyable than I could remember it. In fact, despite its flaws (Sheriff Pepper anyone?) it is rather atmospheric and shows Bond in a real difficult situation which he barely knows how to get out of. Moore is still in his LALD-mode and not that tongue-in-cheek. And the whole enterprise has a certain feel of "hey, we

[icecold]

I put it as a tie because they're so different and I've grown to like the film more than I did when I was younger.

[stamper]

Some Bond movies ages better than others. It's true like LALD, MWGG have a "period piece" air that makes it different to watch today, and is pleasing, despite the flaws.

On the other hand, all Brozza movies looks dated and personaly I can't watch them anymore, althought I think Broz was a great casting.

[icecold]

Some Bond movies ages better than others. It's true like LALD, MWGG have a "period piece" air that makes it different to watch today, and is pleasing, despite the flaws.

On the other hand, all Brozza movies looks dated and personaly I can't watch them anymore, althought I think Broz was a great casting.

How come LALD and TMWTGG are "period pieces" but the Broz's are "dated" LOL

[marmaduke]

I read the book for the first time about 25 years ago and recall being less impressed than with I the other Fleming originals. However re reading it last year I have to say that I was forced to re evaluate those original views. Was my judgement influenced by my background knowledge surrounding the book this time around? Proberbly . Taken at

[Qwerty]

[quote name='SecretAgentFan' post='526198' date='2 March 2006 - 09:02']
Moore is still in his LALD-mode and not that tongue-in-cheek. And the whole enterprise has a certain feel of "hey, we

[BondReader 007]

I've just started reading SILVERFIN. Enjoying it so far.

Same here. About 80 pages into it and it's getting good!!! LOL

As far as MWTGG film vs book. The novel, for me anyway, wins hands down as far as entertainment. Not the best Bond novel, but better than the movie. But I do have to admit, two Swedish babes in one film ain't so bad and Christopher Lee to boot. LOL.

[MarcAngeDraco]

I prefer the novel, it's definitely a little rough (but Ian had an pretty good excuse for that...)

[Genrewriter]

[quote name='Qwerty' post='534578' date='20 March 2006 - 05:01']
[quote name='SecretAgentFan' post='526198' date='2 March 2006 - 09:02']
Moore is still in his LALD-mode and not that tongue-in-cheek. And the whole enterprise has a certain feel of "hey, we