Post by Gilberto on Feb 3, 2012 17:51:58 GMT -5
I just finished reading "Moonraker", the third of the original Ian Fleming Bond novels. Like it's predecessors, "Casino Royale" and "Live and Let Die", it bears little resemblance to its film incarnations.
While the Daniel Craig adaptation of "Casino Royale" is surprisingly true to the novel, the original was a non-canonical spoof of spy movies and "Live and Let Die" is ridiculous in the way pretty much all the Roger Moore Bond films are.
The book "Live and Let Die" does find some voice in the films. The second (and unfortunately final) Timothy Dalton Bond film, "License to Kill", actually portrays the maiming of Felix Lighter very accurately. The shark attack and the note that says "he disagreed with something that ate him" were elements of that book. It was more powerful in the film considering that he'd been a recurring character for 30 years whereas in the books it was only his second appearance, but it's nice to see something from a Bond book make it to a movie.
"Moonraker" is another story, though. The book is about a sleeper agent launching a nuclear missile at London, but the movie is a farce that ends with Bond in a space suit having a raygun fight with bad guys. Holy Christ.
But despite the fact that the books are clearly a product of the time they were written, the stories hold up better than the movies that tried to make an extravaganza out of every installment. I'm reading them incrementally, but I'm enjoying them better that way. I'd definitely recommend checking them out.
While the Daniel Craig adaptation of "Casino Royale" is surprisingly true to the novel, the original was a non-canonical spoof of spy movies and "Live and Let Die" is ridiculous in the way pretty much all the Roger Moore Bond films are.
The book "Live and Let Die" does find some voice in the films. The second (and unfortunately final) Timothy Dalton Bond film, "License to Kill", actually portrays the maiming of Felix Lighter very accurately. The shark attack and the note that says "he disagreed with something that ate him" were elements of that book. It was more powerful in the film considering that he'd been a recurring character for 30 years whereas in the books it was only his second appearance, but it's nice to see something from a Bond book make it to a movie.
"Moonraker" is another story, though. The book is about a sleeper agent launching a nuclear missile at London, but the movie is a farce that ends with Bond in a space suit having a raygun fight with bad guys. Holy Christ.
But despite the fact that the books are clearly a product of the time they were written, the stories hold up better than the movies that tried to make an extravaganza out of every installment. I'm reading them incrementally, but I'm enjoying them better that way. I'd definitely recommend checking them out.
