1

Topic: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

I know what I think, was wondering about your opinions before airing my views!

http://www.theweeweb.co.uk/images/bookthumbs/wee_20071009050859.jpg

"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

Roger Moore 1927-2017

2

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

I'm in the lucky Position of OHMSS Being both my Favorite Movie and Book,But I think The  Movie Improves on the Novel slightly.But having said that, It's Been a long Time since I read It, Gives me a good excuse to Start it again in the new year.

“I didn’t lose a friend, I just realised I never had one.”

3

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

I never really cared too much for the movie until I read the novel along with the others in order and then it made more sense to mee and I enjoyed the movie more than when I had previously seen it.

4

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

I ultimately prefer the book basically because of Bond. Bond was written as a world-weary and tired agent who just wanted to settle down after the luggage of one tragic relationship and killing one man after another. That was an excellent build up for James to wed Tracy and makes their painfully short time together all the more tragic. Bond in the film was too young and too cocky. Laz did a great job but but that wasn't the Bond that should have been on screen; That character would have been better for Goldfinger or Thunderball, films that are less concerned with 007 as a character.

5

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Defo the book, the film is good, but I'm always on the side of books, in any book to film genre.

"Yes,dammit,I said "was".The bitch is dead now."

"It's not difficult to get a double 0 number if your prepared to kill people"

6

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Ive only read OHMSS once and can't decide whether its better than the film. Although, slightly off topic, I do think the FRWL film is better than the book for 3 reasons:

1. The change of SMERSH to SPECTRE means the film hasn't dated quite as much.
2. The lesbian references in the film were a lot more subtle compared to the book
3. The Grant/Bond fight plays out in a much more believable compared to the book.

7

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

mrbain007 wrote:

Ive only read OHMSS once and can't decide whether its better than the film. Although, slightly off topic, I do think the FRWL film is better than the book for 3 reasons:

1. The change of SMERSH to SPECTRE means the film hasn't dated quite as much.
2. The lesbian references in the film were a lot more subtle compared to the book
3. The Grant/Bond fight plays out in a much more believable compared to the book.

I agree about the Grant/Bond thing. I am divided between the desicion to replace SMERSH with SPECTRE. On one hand, it was inspired plan to have SPECTRE play both sides but on the other. However, that political espionage made the atmosphere of the book enjoyably more ground in the real world was missing. Klebb's lesbian tendencies...well...does it matter ? Unless you were really grossed out by Klebb in a nightgown in the book.

8

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Well, I have started re-reading OHMSS this week, I say that but I must have skim read it before and am only just finding how evocative it is.

The opener: it's a stunner. Maybe the best of any Bond novel? 'It was one of those Septembers where it seemed the summer would never end.' Then an account of the beach with all its attendant nostalgia. You could just see this being filmed in a Summer of 42 way. It also helps contrast with the snowy winter scenes a few chapters on.

Of course, the book opens with a flash forward; Bond met Tracy 24 hours earlier, saves her at the casino, sleeps with her and gets to save her life after he trails her, worrying for her health. In the film he doesn't know her when she's on the beach - he just makes a spot decision. This is okay I suppose, and the early morning opening has a certain something, assuming you know that is the time of day.

But generally I like the feel of the book over the film, which somehow just feels a bit heavygoing for me. Totally agree with Ricardo about Lazenby, it's almost as though he and Craig should swap roles really, Craig being way too worldy for his first assignment. What's most exasperating is that OHMSS was the first Fleming novel to be penned after the author had seen Connery in the role, even namechecking Ursula Andress in the book. And you can really picture Connery in this, especially when he explodes with rage when Draco offers to bribe him into marriage. Lazers just doesn't do this, it's a very muted peformance.

Also, the book takes place over several months, so it makes sense that Bond should gradually develop feelings for Tracy. In the film it's over a few weeks if that, and frankly I don't see much chemistry between the actors. It's a flaw the film CR suffers from to, it would have been far better to have Vesper introduced early on, even in a perfunctory 2 minute scene, so when they meet again on the train, she's been bubbling under in our conciousness.

Personally I just don't like the feel of the early Portuguese scenes in the film of OHMSS, I prefer the French vibe of the novel.

"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

Roger Moore 1927-2017

9

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Napoleon Plural wrote:

Well, I have started re-reading OHMSS this week, I say that but I must have skim read it before and am only just finding how evocative it is.

The opener: it's a stunner. Maybe the best of any Bond novel? 'It was one of those Septembers where it seemed the summer would never end.' Then an account of the beach with all its attendant nostalgia. You could just see this being filmed in a Summer of 42 way. It also helps contrast with the snowy winter scenes a few chapters on.

Of course, the book opens with a flash forward; Bond met Tracy 24 hours earlier, saves her at the casino, sleeps with her and gets to save her life after he trails her, worrying for her health. In the film he doesn't know her when she's on the beach - he just makes a spot decision. This is okay I suppose, and the early morning opening has a certain something, assuming you know that is the time of day.

But generally I like the feel of the book over the film, which somehow just feels a bit heavygoing for me. Totally agree with Ricardo about Lazenby, it's almost as though he and Craig should swap roles really, Craig being way too worldy for his first assignment. What's most exasperating is that OHMSS was the first Fleming novel to be penned after the author had seen Connery in the role, even namechecking Ursula Andress in the book. And you can really picture Connery in this, especially when he explodes with rage when Draco offers to bribe him into marriage. Lazers just doesn't do this, it's a very muted peformance.

Also, the book takes place over several months, so it makes sense that Bond should gradually develop feelings for Tracy. In the film it's over a few weeks if that, and frankly I don't see much chemistry between the actors. It's a flaw the film CR suffers from to, it would have been far better to have Vesper introduced early on, even in a perfunctory 2 minute scene, so when they meet again on the train, she's been bubbling under in our conciousness.

Personally I just don't like the feel of the early Portuguese scenes in the film of OHMSS, I prefer the French vibe of the novel.

Was it a few weeks ? I could not tell but it did indeed feel like such a short period of time.

As for the additional characterizations, I think Marc Ange Draco and Blofeld suffered the most in the film adaptations. In the novel, you felt that Draco was truly at the end of his rope and he was nearly cried when Bond rejected to take Tracy's hand in marriage. Draco in the film was pleasant character but that was it, he was just pleasant. Again in the novel, Blofeld was not too interesting since he was essentially undercover but he came off as delightfully weird. In the film he was simply arrogant and though I enjoyed Telly Savalas, he was just not very interesting to play a villian as over the top as Blofeld.

I also agree about the atmosphere as well. Peter Hunt's direction was, well, rather banal aside from some noted exceptions like the PTS. He dosen't have an eye for locations. In the book, you really felt those locations.

10

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Yeah, also Draco reveals his villainous side - for he is a ruthless man - when Blofeld's name is mentioned. In the film, he could almost be in Gigi. Actually, Maurice Chevalier would have been good in the role, he seemed to have a ruthless way about him, just his countenance.

What's more, it must be months for Bond to buff up on heraldry. Admittedly, it's not a convincing ruse for our hero anyway, but in the film it's presented as one of his amazing Connery-style know-all mannerisms, which is out of keeping with what the film is trying to be anyway.

"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

Roger Moore 1927-2017

11

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Ricardo C. wrote:
mrbain007 wrote:

Ive only read OHMSS once and can't decide whether its better than the film. Although, slightly off topic, I do think the FRWL film is better than the book for 3 reasons:

1. The change of SMERSH to SPECTRE means the film hasn't dated quite as much.
2. The lesbian references in the film were a lot more subtle compared to the book
3. The Grant/Bond fight plays out in a much more believable compared to the book.

Klebb's lesbian tendencies...well...does it matter ? Unless you were really grossed out by Klebb in a nightgown in the book.

Well it was pretty OTT - not exactly subtle. By todays standards its rather laughable. Also, when I think of Klebb I think of Lotte Lenya. As brilliant as she was, the thought of her in a nightgown trying to seduce Romanava doesn't really appeal ajb007/lol

12

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

mrbain007 wrote:
Ricardo C. wrote:
mrbain007 wrote:

Ive only read OHMSS once and can't decide whether its better than the film. Although, slightly off topic, I do think the FRWL film is better than the book for 3 reasons:

1. The change of SMERSH to SPECTRE means the film hasn't dated quite as much.
2. The lesbian references in the film were a lot more subtle compared to the book
3. The Grant/Bond fight plays out in a much more believable compared to the book.

Klebb's lesbian tendencies...well...does it matter ? Unless you were really grossed out by Klebb in a nightgown in the book.

Well it was pretty OTT - not exactly subtle. By todays standards its rather laughable. Also, when I think of Klebb I think of Lotte Lenya. As brilliant as she was, the thought of her in a nightgown trying to seduce Romanava doesn't really appeal ajb007/lol

Well that was suppose to be down right comedy. Fleming did have a sense of humor. ajb007/wink

13

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Napoleon Plural wrote:

What's more, it must be months for Bond to buff up on heraldry. Admittedly, it's not a convincing ruse for our hero anyway, but in the film it's presented as one of his amazing Connery-style know-all mannerisms, which is out of keeping with what the film is trying to be anyway.

I agree that the Hilary Bray masquerade was probably done too overzealously in the film. They really should not have dubbed Lazenby's voice, it almost feels he left the picture. However I did enjoy that little episode in the film with Bond pretending not to like girls and then hitting on each of them in private. ajb007/lol

14

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Well, as OHMSS was the first Bond book I ever read, at around age 11---and really forever changed my take on the character in particular and literary thrillers in general---I'll always go with the novel  ajb007/bond  Still and all, I find the film adaptation so engaging and effective that it's forever in the upper tier of my Bond film favorites.  Quite remarkably good, despite its notable shortcomings, especially in that it falls in-between YOLT and DAD (!!) .

"Blood & Ashes"...AVAILABLE on Amazon.co.uk: Get 'Jaded': Blood & Ashes: The Debut Oscar Jade Thriller
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM

15

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Loeffelholz wrote:

Well, as OHMSS was the first Bond book I ever read, at around age 11---and really forever changed my take on the character in particular and literary thrillers in general---I'll always go with the novel  ajb007/bond  Still and all, I find the film adaptation so engaging and effective that it's forever in the upper tier of my Bond film favorites.  Quite remarkably good, despite its notable shortcomings, especially in that it falls in-between YOLT and DAD (!!) .

I agree. It's really a great film and it's the only other Bond film I care about him as a character. It's on number 3 on my list for a reason.

16

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Ricardo C. wrote:
mrbain007 wrote:
Ricardo C. wrote:

Klebb's lesbian tendencies...well...does it matter ? Unless you were really grossed out by Klebb in a nightgown in the book.

Well it was pretty OTT - not exactly subtle. By todays standards its rather laughable. Also, when I think of Klebb I think of Lotte Lenya. As brilliant as she was, the thought of her in a nightgown trying to seduce Romanava doesn't really appeal ajb007/lol

Well that was suppose to be down right comedy. Fleming did have a sense of humor. ajb007/wink

Yeah I'll give you that ajb007/tongue Suppose you can't NOT have a sense of humour and then name a character Pussy Galore

17

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

The heraldry thing is more appealing in the novel, first he meets a guy called Griffin Ore, a real old eccentric and Bond can't get a word in. It's a bit like the scene with the driver on the way to Shrublands in the previous book; you can see why any scriptwriter would cut it as it adds nothing to the plot, on the other hand it's crying out to be filmed. Next Bond meets Sabile Basilsk (?) who is a pleasant young fellow. You can almost imagine one to be Alistair Sim, the other a Simon Dee type. It's Sabile who becomes very keen on Bond's plan and it's his zealotry that persuades Bond to go ahead with it. Oddly, Bray doesn't feature in person in the book, it's just mentioned that Bond should imitate him as he's on the team and they look broadly alike.

"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

Roger Moore 1927-2017

18

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Napoleon Plural wrote:

The opener: it's a stunner. Maybe the best of any Bond novel? 'It was one of those Septembers where it seemed the summer would never end.' Then an account of the beach with all its attendant nostalgia.

Yes, yes, yes! I absolutely adore the first few pages of OHMSS. It and the more descriptive passages from YOLT account for some of my favorite writing, ever. I can re-read passages like that over and over and feel like my brain is being tickled, every time.

It really puts you in the setting, too. After reading one page from OHMSS, I forget where I am and no longer see my surroundings; I AM on that French beach...

19

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Napoleon Plural wrote:

The heraldry thing is more appealing in the novel, first he meets a guy called Griffin Ore, a real old eccentric and Bond can't get a word in. It's a bit like the scene with the driver on the way to Shrublands in the previous book; you can see why any scriptwriter would cut it as it adds nothing to the plot, on the other hand it's crying out to be filmed. Next Bond meets Sabile Basilsk (?) who is a pleasant young fellow. You can almost imagine one to be Alistair Sim, the other a Simon Dee type. It's Sabile who becomes very keen on Bond's plan and it's his zealotry that persuades Bond to go ahead with it. Oddly, Bray doesn't feature in person in the book, it's just mentioned that Bond should imitate him as he's on the team and they look broadly alike.

Fleming always did have a knack of writing episodes of humor. I was LMAO when Bond was cursing M in Thunderball for sending him to Shrublands. Or even that brief moment when Bond ripped into Hugo Drax in Moonraker.

20

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Ricardo C. wrote:
Napoleon Plural wrote:

The heraldry thing is more appealing in the novel, first he meets a guy called Griffin Ore, a real old eccentric and Bond can't get a word in. It's a bit like the scene with the driver on the way to Shrublands in the previous book; you can see why any scriptwriter would cut it as it adds nothing to the plot, on the other hand it's crying out to be filmed. Next Bond meets Sabile Basilsk (?) who is a pleasant young fellow. You can almost imagine one to be Alistair Sim, the other a Simon Dee type. It's Sabile who becomes very keen on Bond's plan and it's his zealotry that persuades Bond to go ahead with it. Oddly, Bray doesn't feature in person in the book, it's just mentioned that Bond should imitate him as he's on the team and they look broadly alike.

Fleming always did have a knack of writing episodes of humor. I was LMAO when Bond was cursing M in Thunderball for sending him to Shrublands. Or even that brief moment when Bond ripped into Hugo Drax in Moonraker.

What about those few pages of phonetic "jive talk" in LALD?? ajb007/lol (couldn't get away with that now!)

21

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

mrbain007 wrote:
Ricardo C. wrote:
Napoleon Plural wrote:

The heraldry thing is more appealing in the novel, first he meets a guy called Griffin Ore, a real old eccentric and Bond can't get a word in. It's a bit like the scene with the driver on the way to Shrublands in the previous book; you can see why any scriptwriter would cut it as it adds nothing to the plot, on the other hand it's crying out to be filmed. Next Bond meets Sabile Basilsk (?) who is a pleasant young fellow. You can almost imagine one to be Alistair Sim, the other a Simon Dee type. It's Sabile who becomes very keen on Bond's plan and it's his zealotry that persuades Bond to go ahead with it. Oddly, Bray doesn't feature in person in the book, it's just mentioned that Bond should imitate him as he's on the team and they look broadly alike.

Fleming always did have a knack of writing episodes of humor. I was LMAO when Bond was cursing M in Thunderball for sending him to Shrublands. Or even that brief moment when Bond ripped into Hugo Drax in Moonraker.

What about those few pages of phonetic "jive talk" in LALD?? ajb007/lol (couldn't get away with that now!)

Well "jive" is the 1970's, not the 1950's. Anyway, the scene wasn't meant to be humorous. Or at least, not on purpose.

22

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Ricardo C. wrote:
mrbain007 wrote:
Ricardo C. wrote:

Fleming always did have a knack of writing episodes of humor. I was LMAO when Bond was cursing M in Thunderball for sending him to Shrublands. Or even that brief moment when Bond ripped into Hugo Drax in Moonraker.

What about those few pages of phonetic "jive talk" in LALD?? ajb007/lol (couldn't get away with that now!)

Well "jive" is the 1970's, not the 1950's. Anyway, the scene wasn't meant to be humorous. Or at least, not on purpose.

I should have said "black talk" then.

I never thought the lesbian scene was meant to be "humorous" to be honest - more show how repulsive and flamboyant she was.

23

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

mrbain007 wrote:
Ricardo C. wrote:
mrbain007 wrote:

What about those few pages of phonetic "jive talk" in LALD?? ajb007/lol (couldn't get away with that now!)

Well "jive" is the 1970's, not the 1950's. Anyway, the scene wasn't meant to be humorous. Or at least, not on purpose.

I should have said "black talk" then.

I never thought the lesbian scene was meant to be "humorous" to be honest - more show how repulsive and flamboyant she was.

I personally can't  imagine anything beyound humor of a fat, ugly Rosa Klebb in a night gown trying to hit on poor Tatiana Romanova. Maybe horror though. ajb007/lol

24

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

Ricardo C. wrote:
mrbain007 wrote:
Ricardo C. wrote:

Well "jive" is the 1970's, not the 1950's. Anyway, the scene wasn't meant to be humorous. Or at least, not on purpose.

I should have said "black talk" then.

I never thought the lesbian scene was meant to be "humorous" to be honest - more show how repulsive and flamboyant she was.

I personally can't  imagine anything beyound humor of a fat, ugly Rosa Klebb in a night gown trying to hit on poor Tatiana Romanova. Maybe horror though. ajb007/lol


ajb007/lol ajb007/lol

25

Re: OHMSS: Do you prefer the book or the film?

I don't have a favorite novel, because some are so close in my rankings I don't like putting one over the other, though OHMSS, is one of my favorites.  The film is my number two favorite after CR, because of the solid story that follows the novel very closely; the quality of the photography and locations, etc.  What disappointed me and still disappoints me is the screenplay.  I realize they did a lot of fudging because they had a new actor to introduce after Connery, and I think Lazenby did a good job considering his lack of preparation, but because they filmed the stories out of sequence it ruined the whole character of Blofeld.  After the disappointing casting of him in YOLT, they turn around and give it to Savalas.  Now, I like Savalas, but he could not pull off Blofeld.  He tried to sound aristocratic, but in only made the words coming out of his mouth seem even more alien to the actor.  He was good at playing street wise types like Kojak or low life gangsters - pretty far from Blofeld.  An actor more suited would have been Peter Van Eyck.  He played a lot of German officers in WWII films during that era and his appearance would have fit Fleming's description quite well:

Bond's heart sank. This man was tallish, yes, and, all right, his hands and
naked feet were long and thin. But there the resemblance ended. The Count had
longish, carefully-tended, almost dandified hair that was a fine silvery
white. His ears, that should have been close to his head, stuck out slightly
and, where they should have had heavy lobes, had none. The body that should
have weighed twenty stone, now naked save for a black woollen slip, was not
more than twelve stone, and there were no signs of the sagging flesh that
comes from middle-aged weight-reduction. The mouth was full and friendly, with
a pleasant, up-turned, but perhaps rather unwavering smile.


http://s1.postimage.org/306asl9z8/1238047269_peter_van_eyck.jpg

Tracy aka Diana Rigg - I had a crush on this actress just like every other boy at that time and I really enjoyed her in OHMSS.  However....if they had been staying closer to the character in the novel, (blonde hair, Corisican/English), I would have liked to have seen someone like Virna Lisi in the role.  She certainly would have fit Fleming's description.


http://s2.postimage.org/1dkw6wisk/Lisi.jpg

http://s2.postimage.org/1dlcq9zqc/Virna1.jpg

I agree about Lazenby's voice dubbing.  It was totally unneccesary (making Bond an expert in voice mimickery was as silly as making him an expert on butterflies!).

I also don't know why the producers have been reluctant to use French locations (or similated French locations) in the films.  Having Bond slumming around his gambling grounds across the channel made more sense than hunting around Portugal, and there was no reason they could not have had Craig in CR going after Le Chiffre in France either.  They must really hate the French!

One last little grit in my shoe...Lazenby's wardrobe.  The producers were trying to keep the character hip and modern at the time (1969) - and did so in the seventies with Moore - I understand it, but hated it.  Bond would have never worn a white suit (let alone white shoes! - hotel entrance, beginning of OHMSS), let alone the golf outfit (kidnapping sequence), ruffled tux shirt, cravat (horse riding gear), light blue ski outfit (I know he was supposed to have stolen it in the film...but what was wrong with keeping with the novel - showing him in his inadequate clothes being chased on the skis, making it more tense knowing he was freezing as well as being shot at!).