quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
So did EON already use all of the original Fleming Bond novels for movies or were some skipped over?

Are the scripts now into all new material or are they adding parts of new material for the current Craig era, which is running an arc that keeps building on the last film?

Since Blofeld has popped up again, might we consider new Bond movies to be remakes or re-imaginings of films already made?

Why can't they just start a whole new series with a whole new spy? Oh wait, that was Bourne. Last one with Damon was horrible.

Not a simple question to answer:

1953: Casino Royale novel / film adaption 2006 (loose adaption)

1954: Live And Let Die novel / film adaption 1973 (loose adaption)

1955: Moonraker novel / film adaption 1979 (VERY loose adaption)

1956: Diamonds Are Forever novel / film adaption 1971 (loose adaption)

1957: From Russia With Love novel / film adaption 1963 (very faithful adaption)

1958: Dr. No novel / film adaption 1962 (faithful adaption)

1959: Goldfinger novel / film adaption 1964 (very faithful adaption)

1960: For Your Eyes Only (short story collection)
> From A View To A Kill - title modified for A View To A Kill film, 1985 (content not used)
> For Your Eyes Only - story is basis for segment for film of same name, 1981
> Quantum of Solace - title used for film of same name, 2008 (content not used)
> Risico - title not used to date, often speculated may be used at some point
> The Hildebrand Rarity - title used as name of safe-house in SPECTRE, 2015

1961: Thunderball novel / film 1965 (very faithful adaption)

1962: The Spy Who Loved Me novel / film 1977 (title used only: Fleming disliked the book in retrospect after negative reception so forbid its adaption when he sold the rights, one character is loose inspiration for Jaws)

1963: On Her Majesty's Secret Service novel / film 1969 (most faithful adaption IMO)

1964: You Only Live Twice novel / film 1967 (title and main location of Japan used only)

1965: The Man With The Golden Gun / film 1974 (loose adaption)

1966: Octopus*y and The Living Daylights (short story collection)
> Octopus*y - title used for film of same name, 1983 (story content referenced in film dialogue)
> The Living Daylights - title used for film of same name, 1987 (content adapted)
> The Property of a Lady - title referenced in Octopus*y film (content adapted for Octopus*y)
> 007 in New York - title obviously not used! (content inspiration for final scenes of Quantum of Solace 2008)

In summary:

All of the novel and short story collection titles have been used.

Not all individual short story titles have been used.

The original producers (Saltzman & Brocolli) were all over the place in choosing which films to make next (in the books Bond very much had a character arc that was discarded in the more episodic film series).

Licence to Kill (1989) was the first original film title (with plot points lifted from the novel Live And Let Die).

GoldenEye (1995) was named after Ian Fleming's home in Jamaica.

Brosnan's other films (Tomorrow Never Dies, 1997 and Die Another Day, 2002) are original titles, except for The World Is Not Enough (1999), which is the Bond family motto (mentioned in the novel On Her Majesty's Secret Service).

Skyfall (2012) is an original title.

SPECTRE (2015) is named after the organisation mentioned in the original novels.

The new producers, Barbara (daughter), and Michael G. Wilson (step-son) of original producer Cubby Broccoli have mined the original novels extensively and are purported to know them cover to cover and back-to-front and always use them as reference for each new film.

PHEW!

X is correct, but I would add this:


The 1981 movie "For Your Eyes Only" is a combination of 2 short stories-- FYEO (woman with crossbow seeking revenge for killing of her parents) and "Risico" (Bond gets involved with Greek smugglers)

The 1989 Bond film "Licence to Kill" used the character of Milton Krest and his boat from the short story "The Hildebrand Rarity", along with the stingray tail whip

The 2006 movie version of Casino Royale is pretty faithful to the 1953 book. But the first 2/3 of the movie is new material. Once Bond gets to the casino, everything from that point onwards is 80 % taken from the novel.

Thanks for the extra Tommy, it's been so long since I read them all I had forgotten those bits!

Another bit of trivia. The 1997 film was originally called "Tomorrow Never Lies" (not DIES), which would have made more sense, as the movie concerned a media mogul manipulating the news with fake stories, to start war between China and the UK. His newspaper was called "Tomorrow"

quote:

Originally posted by Tommy C:
Another bit of trivia. The 1997 film was originally called "Tomorrow Never Lies" (not DIES), which would have made more sense, as the movie concerned a media mogul manipulating the news with fake stories, to start war between China and the UK. His newspaper was called "Tomorrow"

I read somewhere that Dies was a typo. It was supposed to be Lies.

Daniel Craig stated in an interview the other day that his upcoming Bond film, his fifth outing, is definitely his last. He will be 52 next year. So if it takes them 4-5 years to do another one, he will likely be too old.

He became Bond in 2005, and next year he will have been 007 longer than anyone else. Even longer than Roger Moore, who lasted 13 years, 1972 to 1985.

quote:

Originally posted by Tommy C:
Daniel Craig stated in an interview the other day that his upcoming Bond film, his fifth outing, is definitely his last. He will be 52 next year. So if it takes them 4-5 years to do another one, he will likely be too old.

He became Bond in 2005, and next year he will have been 007 longer than anyone else. Even longer than Roger Moore, who lasted 13 years, 1972 to 1985.

Honestly, I just wanted him to finish out the big 25. Would have made my eye twitch a little if they had brought in someone new before that.

Maybe Bond can go away for a little while.

They just pushed the Bond release from next month until November 2020, due to the coronavirus

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/04...ronavirus/index.html

Just received a terrific coffee table book entitled "Bond" photographed by Terry O'Neill with text by James Clarke. It was published in March of this year. It is not cheap. It features photographs taken on the Bond film set as well away from the set with apparently many of them not previously published. Interestingly it does not have any photographs of Timothy Dalton.

regards

John

I don't know how much bad blood there is between Timothy Dalton and the Bond producers, but it seems like someone is awfully stubborn about what happened back in the '90s. The issues with Connery were discussed in earlier pages of this thread, but Dalton also avoids his Bond past, even though the two films he did were successful at the time and are generally looked at as being even better since Craig's interpretation arrived. Dalton did quit on his contract, but it was after waiting 4 years for the producers to settle a lawsuit and then they got Brosnan anyway. So I don't see why there should be hard feelings when it all turned out OK for everyone.

Autograph wise, Dalton has turned down card makers for Bond and Penny Dreadful and if he has a certified card anywhere, I can't recall it. So maybe that's just him.

But to publish an expensive photography book on Bond without one picture of Dalton can't be accidental. One party or the other had to refuse to give permission. Unless its still that old law suit, but that was afterwards and was resolved.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Raven,

Dalton gave an interview about 2 years ago in which he said that in 1994, the Bond producers wanted him to sign a contract to do 4 or 5 more films, but that he was only willing to do 1 more, Goldeneye. Still from what he's said and what I've read, there was never a problem between him and the Bond folks even after he quit. If anything, things should be sour between them and Brosnan as he wanted to do a fifth film in 2004 but they said they were not interested.

"No Time to Die" premiers today in the UK.

Anyone see it ?

I thought at some point they might adapt at least a few of the novels that John Gardner wrote in the 80's and 90's. I read some of them when they were new but only vaguely recall the stories other than the first book being good and then a couple of good ones after that. If the producers were just taking pieces of Fleming, why not do the same with Gardner?

quote:

Originally posted by Tommy C:
X is correct, but I would add this:


The 1981 movie "For Your Eyes Only" is a combination of 2 short stories-- FYEO (woman with crossbow seeking revenge for killing of her parents) and "Risico" (Bond gets involved with Greek smugglers)

The 1989 Bond film "Licence to Kill" used the character of Milton Krest and his boat from the short story "The Hildebrand Rarity", along with the stingray tail whip

The 2006 movie version of Casino Royale is pretty faithful to the 1953 book. But the first 2/3 of the movie is new material. Once Bond gets to the casino, everything from that point onwards is 80 % taken from the novel.

For those of you who haven't read the 14 John Gardner novels (published once a year between 1981 and 1996, aside from 1985 and 1995), here is a brief summary of each, going from memory:

1) LICENSE RENEWED (1981) Bond stops a mad Scot trying to cause meltdowns in several nuclear reactors.

2) FOR SPECIAL SERVICES (1982) Bond and Felix Leiter's daughter fight the new SPECTRE in Texas, which is trying to take over satellites.

3) ICEBREAKER (1983) Bond and the CIA, KGB, and Mossad battle a Nazi organization in Finland.

4) ROLE OF HONOR (1984) Bond thwarts the new SPECTRE from hacking into computers.

5) NOBODY LIVES FOREVER (1986) Bounty hunters chase Bond across central Europe, after SPECTRE organizes a competition to kill him.

6) NO DEALS, MR. BOND (1987) Bond tries to rescue the members of a spy group whose cover has been blown, which the Soviets are trying to kill off.

7) SCORPIUS (1988) Bond versus a televangelist arms dealer in South Carolina and Washington, DC.

8) WIN, LOSE OR DIE (1989) Bond fights terrorists on an aircraft carrier.

9) BROKENCLAW (1990) Bond goes up against a half Chinese / half American Indian gangster in California.

10) THE MAN FROM BARBAROSSA (1991) Bond goes to the Soviet Union and discovers a plot by Russians to nuke the Allies in Desert Storm.

11) DEATH IS FOREVER (1992) A terrorist organization tries to blow up the Eurotunnel.

12) NEVER SEND FLOWERS (1993) A series of murders leads to a deranged Shakespearean actor in a castle on the Rhine.

13) SEAFIRE (1994) A German group tries to bring about the Fourth Reich and to cause ecological disaster in the Caribbean.

14) COLD or COLD FALL (1996) A militia group with ties to a European crime family tries to overthrow the U.S. government.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Tommy C,

quote:

Originally posted by Tommy C:
"No Time to Die" premiers today in the UK.

Anyone see it ?

It went country wide yesterday, I saw and enjoyed it. Some people have been worried about the length (longest Bond film yet), but I did not find it to drag anywhere.

No Time To Die is raking it in with UK audiences. I'm sure it will dominate everything when it hits the US too, but I wonder how well it will ultimately be received here. There is often a difference in viewer attitudes between Europe and America and I now don't expect I'll bother seeing it. I could be in a very minority opinion, but if you know what I'm talking about, than you'll know why. I was looking for something else, but in a way that was just wishful thinking. When you consider the totality of the Craig era, it was only logical as Mr. Spock would say.

So far it has made only a little over 300 M when the movie cost about that amount to make. The last one grossed about 880 M. Reports are that this one needs to make 800 M just to be profitable. Maybe they should have delayed the release until 2022 for the 60th anniversary of Dr. No.

Just got back from seeing it. Wow this movie tries to do so much. There are so many story lines that 2hrs and 48m isn't long enough. Unfortunately with the way this one is laid out 2hrs and 48m is about an hour too long.

You could have an after viewing party making a list not only all what is going on within the context of the film but to the whole Bond concept.

Not going to say I hated it but it's not a waste a Saturday with Bond on TV event either. Unless you need a nap.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mykdude,

Saw the movie yesterday. I agree with mykdude that it does try to do a lot, maybe too much. However, I did enjoy it overall. I noted several easter eggs for the Bond fans sprinkled throughout the film. I would probably sit through another in-theater viewing again, mostly to catch some things I missed the first time around, but watching on TV will take most of an afternoon when you add commercials.

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
Saw the movie yesterday. I agree with mykdude that it does try to do a lot, maybe too much. However, I did enjoy it overall. I noted several easter eggs for the Bond fans sprinkled throughout the film. I would probably sit through another in-theater viewing again, mostly to catch some things I missed the first time around, but watching on TV will take most of an afternoon when you add commercials.

Oddly enough I did give it another viewing and I am not as harsh on it as my first impression. Still, looping back to the Swann sacrificial home and adding the kid into the mix seemed to be the point where I started to like the film less.