41 replies to this topic

[Harmsway]

The chapter titles are admittedly more sensationalistic, but they at least have a frisson.

They're not just sensationalistic, they're just plain terrible. Fleming's titles for the novels generally crackled (not that he had a naturally sense for 'em; there were plenty of working titles for his novels that were absolutely naff), but his chapter titles are - by and large - laughable, despite having an endearing pulp quality.

[MajorB]

THE DEVIL IN THE DETAIL gets my vote for now.

Sure. It's cool, it's Flemingish, and interesting.

The other Fleming-derived title possibility would be SHATTERHAND, though, which I think would make for a smashing title if they could find a way to work that phrase into the plot (even if it's as simple as Bond being part of Operation: Shatterhand).

Shatterhand would be perfect, in my opinion. There are so many possibilities surrounding it's potential meaning.

I totally agree. I've been rooting for Shatterhand for years.

[Revelator]

Fleming's titles for the novels generally crackled (not that he had a naturally sense for 'em; there were plenty of working titles for his novels that were absolutely naff)

No. Knowing enough to discard bad working titles and replace them with good ones is a sign of natural talent. Saying otherwise is like judging an novelist's talent by first drafts of his novels.

but his chapter titles are - by and large - laughable, despite having an endearing pulp quality.

A hostile party could just easily poke fun at the official titles of the novels--plenty have actually. ("Thunderball? What the hell's that supposed to mean?") Better I say to have that endearing pulp quality and excitement rather than a dull pseudo-Fleming title that does nothing more than repackage a cliched old saying. (Something like Live and Let Die at least manages to invert an old platitude.)

[tdalton]

Fleming's titles for the novels generally crackled (not that he had a naturally sense for 'em; there were plenty of working titles for his novels that were absolutely naff)

No. Knowing enough to discard bad working titles and replace them with good ones is a sign of natural talent. Saying otherwise is like judging an novelist's talent by first drafts of his novels.

but his chapter titles are - by and large - laughable, despite having an endearing pulp quality.

A hostile party could just easily poke fun at the official titles of the novels--plenty have actually. ("Thunderball? What the hell's that supposed to mean?") Better I say to have that endearing pulp quality and excitement rather than a dull pseudo-Fleming title that does nothing more than repackage a cliched old saying. (Something like Live and Let Die at least manages to invert an old platitude.)

Agreed. Some of the actual titles are not, as you state, particularly great either (THUNDERBALL being chief amongst those). There's a few chapter titles that would work just as well as novel/film titles, if not better than certain actual titles (such as THUNDERBALL, ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE being amongst those).

[Harmsway]

I like both THUNDERBALL and ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE as titles, and I think they far excel any of the chapter titles from that list.

[tdalton]

Well, I like both THUNDERBALL and ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE as titles go, and I think they far excel any of the chapter titles from that list.

I find THUNDERBALL to be an absolutely horrible title that has absolutely no meaning (and I do know that it refers to the operation name in the story, but it's still a horrible title), and ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE to be, quite possibly, the most bland title in the entire series (including the continuation novels). I still love the actual novel/film of OHMSS, but the title is terrible.

[Harmsway]

I find THUNDERBALL to be an absolutely horrible title that has absolutely no meaning (and I do know that it refers to the operation name in the story, but it's still a horrible title)

Since when is an meaning a requisite for a Bond title? Some of the best Bond titles have been utterly nonsensical... GOLDFINGER, GOLDENEYE, MOONRAKER (well, I do think there is something called a moonraker, but you get the point).

I think it has exactly the same cool mystique that makes those other one-word titles resound so loudly. And it feels like just the right title for its story.

and ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE to be, quite possibly, the most bland title in the entire series (including the continuation novels). I still love the actual novel/film of OHMSS, but the title is terrible.

To each his own. I think it's quite elegant, really, and makes for quite a fine title. It's clearly not the most meaning-laden title (though meaning-laden titles are a rarity as far as Bond is concerned), but it rolls off the tongue, is memorable, and has just the right bounce to it. I'll take it over most of the titles, to be honest.

[tdalton]

I find THUNDERBALL to be an absolutely horrible title that has absolutely no meaning (and I do know that it refers to the operation name in the story, but it's still a horrible title)

Since when is an meaning a requisite for a Bond title? Some of the best Bond titles have been utterly nonsensical... GOLDFINGER, GOLDENEYE, MOONRAKER (well, I do think there is something called a moonraker, but you get the point).

I think it has exactly the same cool mystique that makes those other one-word titles resound so loudly. And it feels like just the right title for its story.

Meaning isn't at all a requisite for a Bond title, but having one that at least sounds good is. THUNDERBALL is just, for me, a terrible title (as are, quite frankly, most of the other one-word titles, including GOLDFINGER and GOLDENEYE). I don't think that any of those three do any kind of justice to the films that they're attached to (especially GOLDENEYE, which may be the worst title of the entire franchise, so bad that I even forgot it when trying to think of the film titles).

[Harmsway]

THUNDERBALL is just, for me, a terrible title (as are, quite frankly, most of the other one-word titles, including GOLDFINGER and GOLDENEYE).

I can't even remotely comprehend your point of view, tdalton. I've always thought that the one-word titles were some of the best (I'd only really pick YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE above 'em, and that's just because that title has some real significance). They were just so strange and unusual, but elegant and beautiful at the same time. They're also marketing gold, 'cause they're so catchy.

[tdalton]

THUNDERBALL is just, for me, a terrible title (as are, quite frankly, most of the other one-word titles, including GOLDFINGER and GOLDENEYE).

I can't even remotely comprehend your point of view, tdalton. I've always thought that the one-word titles were some of the best (I'd only really pick YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE above 'em, and that's just because that title has some real significance). They were just so strange and unusual, but elegant and beautiful at the same time. They're also marketing gold, 'cause they're so catchy.

They just don't do it for me, that's all. SHATTERHAND is really the only one-word title that I could think of that would really be interesting to see on screen. The rest of them don't do much for me.

[Professor Pi]

I had forgotten that I really dig SHATTERHAND as a title too.

As for ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE, it fits with the theme of the book and film in that Bond's entire personal life is subject to his job. It's not catchy or clever, but it fits in an honest serious tone, and perhaps that's why Fleming chose it over THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH or ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD, both of which are in the book and could have been its title.

There is kind of a colored body part theme to some of the other titles (is it going too far to say TMWTGG is guilty of this as well?)

[bosst]

I thought that a good title for Qos could have been LOVE IS JUST A WORD [/color]unfortunately I missed the boat on that one but there is still the chance they could use it on the next film.

If you think about it Bond has just gone through an emotional arc where he has been betrayed by love and so he toughens his stance and becomes the serial womaniser we all know and love.Except it should not be a sudden transformation.

Perhaps after all the frenetics of Qos he should have another romance again whilst nursing his emotional wounds I think Daniel Craig is brilliant at it.However maybe the lady love dies or her life is put in jeopardy due to her relationship with Bond.Bond comes to the realisation that he can not have any serious relationship ever again thus "Love is just a word" cue brilliant theme tune around a title which does not have impossible lyrics.In fact this whole scene could almost revolve around an extended pre-title sequence.

I think that romance should be a staple part of Daniel Craig's Bond because he is believable and there should be some level of continuity with his films i.e.previous romances alluded to,childhood or parents etc.
The producers have done something incredible in opening up these possibilities.

I also think it would be stupid to simply use a film title just because it is in a fleming novel.We need to use something flemingesque.Fleming was always clever in his play on words e.g.You only live twice vs you only live once,live and let die vs live and let live,someone with the midas touch-goldfinger etc.etc.

I also think that a return to patriotism should return-Bond always saved the world by saving us in blighty-so lets see a bit more of his military heritage they seem to have forgotten this of late.Another good title FOR QUEEN AND COUNTRY.What do you guys think?