James Bond novels vs. movies

First, I’ll say that I’ve never read any James Bond novel.

Many years ago, someone told me that the reason that most of the Bond novels don’t resemble the movies is that the producers (or whoever) only licensed the title and the characters, and not the plot–or some such thing.

I didn’t have any way to counter his point, not knowing, but I’d just assumed that it was the same way any movie is made that is “based on a novel”–that the producers, directors, etc., just pick and choose the parts of the book that they like, or at least most practical, and add their own story as they see fit.

Anyone ever heard of something weird like this???

Ooh! Ooh! One of my favourite pop-culture subjects. Novels will have their titles written in quotes, while movies titles will be in italics, to avoid confusion.

Thing to remember about the novels is that although they were a series, they weren’t really sequels in the conventional sense. Only in a few cases did Ian Fleming start a novel by including events from the previous one. “Thunderball”, “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service”, “You Only Live Twice” and “The Man With the Golden Gun” played out in series (Ernst Blofeld introduced, Bond traces Blofeld to Switzerland, Blofeld kills Bond’s wife Tracy, Bond traces Blofeld to Japan, Bond kills Blofeld but suffers a head injury in the process, an amnesiac Bond is picked up by Soviet intelligence and is “programmed” to kill M, the attempt on M fails and Bond gets therapied back to normal etc). For the most part, the novels were standalone adventures, with only the occasional recurring background character (aside from M, Moneypenny and other Secret Service staffers, of course). As a result, movies were produced with no real need to follow the book in order.

Since you’re only familiar with the movies, I’ll run them down in order:

Dr. No: Quite close to the novel of the same name, though the villian of Blofeld was introduced as a man who never faced the camera and had a Persian cat (more on this later).
From Russia With Love: Also quite close, though the ending was altered, removing the cliffhanger that finished the novel.
Goldfinger: Very close to novel, though the goofy idea of trying to rob Fort Knox is changed in the movie to detonating a nuke inside the vault.
Thunderball: Also very close to novel, with minor changes (see below).
You Only Live Twice: This represented the first really radical departure from the Fleming novel of the same name. The novel contains no rocket stuff whatsoever, no mention of an attempt to start World War III, and though a ninja school appears about halfway along, there is no massive gun battle involving hundreds of men inside of a dormant volcano. Aside from being set in Japan and using some of Fleming’s character names, the similarity to the novel is scant.
Casino Royale[sup][/sup]: No similarity at all, really. The novel is a lame attempt at surreal comedy.
On Her Majesty’s Secret Service: This is extremely close to the novel, especially the ending, though the character of Tracy is given a more active role in the film than in the book. Further, the evil plot in the novel was to unleash agricultural disaster on Great Britain, while the movie suggested the entire world was the target.
Diamonds are Forever: aside from a few character names, similarity to the novel is trivial.
Live and Let Die: Similarly, a few character names are kept from the novel, as well as Solitaire’s implied psychic abilities. Aside from that, no connection to the novel.
The Man with the Golden Gun: The villian’s name is kept, as well as some of his back story, but the novel was set in Jamaica, not the Far East, and Mary Goodnight was a respectable character in the book, while Britt Ekland plays Goodnight as some kind of idiot in the film. No similarity.
The Spy Who Loved Me: Zero similarity. The novel is the only one written in the first person, through the eyes of a young French-Canadian woman who only encounters Bond in the final chapters. It has absolutely nothing to do with Egypt, submarines, or WW3.
Moonraker: Aside from the villian’s name, no similarity. The original novel described a proto-ICBM, which may have seemed really cool and futuristicky in 1955, but wasn’t a dramatic enough element for a movie in the mid-seventies.
For your Eyes Only: Fleming used this title for a short story that involved a woman with a bow-and-arrow seeking to avenge to the murder of her parents. That element (as well as Greek smugglers getting Bond involved in their lethal rivalry, from Fleming’s short story “Risico”) formed a relatively small part of the movie. In fact, because the movie was sort of hodge-podged together, it’s one of the more disjointed films in the series, in my opinion.
Octopussy: This was the title of another short story by Fleming, one in which Bond appears but only plays a minor role. The story is really about a disgraced former Secret Service officer. In the movie, Maud Adams claims to be this character’s daughter, and is grateful to Bond that he gave her father a chance to commit honourable suicide rather than face court-martial. Also, the movie involves a Fabergé egg, auctioned off under the name “The Property of a Lady”. This was the title of yet another Fleming short story that revolved almost entirely around the auction.
Never Say Never Again[sup]
[/sup]: Essentially a souped-up remake of Thunderball and the first major Bond film not named for a Fleming story. More on this later.
A View to a Kill: No similarity to the Fleming short story of the same (well, similar; Fleming called his tale “From a View to a Kill”) name, which involved a ring of spies shooting NATO messengers.
The Living Daylights: This was the title of yet another Fleming short story and aside from a blonde cello-case-carrying female sniper that Bond is supposed to kill but instead misses on purpose, there is no similarity to the movie.
License to Kill: Not a Fleming title, though elemtns from Fleming’s work are cherry-picked. Felix Leiter’s maiming takes place in this film, when fleming had it occuring in “Live and Let Die”. Also, an oceanographer named Milton Krest is horribly killed, as Fleming described (albeit using a completely different method) in the short story “The Hildebrand Rarity”.
Goldeneye: Not a Fleming title, but rather the name Fleming gave to his estate in Jamaica, where he vacationed for at least a month out of every year. The movie contains no elements from any Fleming work that I can recall.
Tomorrow Never Dies: No elements from any Fleming work that I can recall.
The World is Not Enough: This was a Bond family motto referred to in Fleming’s “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service”, though the connection to James Bond is at best tenuous (in the novel, a heraldry expert tells Bond about the motto and some of the history of a famous English Bond family. Bond expresses little interest and doubts any connection, as his father was Scottish).
Die Another Day: Aside from a few props from earlier movies thrown in as gags, no similarity to any of Fleming’s work can be found.

Put simply, the movies up the end of the Connery era can (mostly) be said to be based on Fleming’s work, though everything after that simply uses the characters. The opening credits reflect that change, with them originally saying something like “Starring Sean Connery as James Bond 007 in Ian Fleming’s Goldfinger” and later morphing into “Starring Roger Moore as Ian Fleming’s ‘James Bond 007’ in Moonraker”, i.e. Fleming is credited with producing the character, not the story.

[sup]*[/sup]These movies were not produced by Albert “Cubby” Broccoli or Universal Artists and most fans consider them “unofficial”.

“Thunderball” came about when Fleming realized there was interest in producing major film versions of his novels (he’d sold the movie rights to his first Bond novel, “Casino Royale”, for a pittance, and it was made into a rather low-key made-for-TV movie with little dramtic punch or revenue potential. Later on the horrible comedy version mentioned above would be produced, though not until several years after Fleming’s death in 1964). Fleming worked wth writers Kevin McClory and Jack Whittingham and produced various drafts of a script that involved a criminal organization stealing a pair of A-bombs and engaging in high-stakes blackmail. The conflict came about when Fleming went ahead and used these elements as the basis of the 1961 novel “Thunderball”, setting off a variety of lawsuits. In the end, Broccoli (in partnership with McClory) was allowed to produce a film version of the novel (as well as using the “Thunderball” villian Ernst Blofeld in other movies). McClory retained the right to make his own Bond movie using the elements he’d created with Fleming with Whittingham, though he was obliged to wait at least ten years before doing so (in addition to the basic plot of “Thunderball” the trio had come up with several variations on the nuclear blackmail theme). The result was Never Say Never Again.

McClory kept making occasional noises about making his own series of Bond films, which resulted in the opening sequence in For Your Eyes Only in which a recognizable but unnamed Blofeld is unceremoniously dropped down an industrial smokestack, the message being that Broccoli et al didn’t need Blofeld or McClory.

Whoops! re: Casino Royale. The movie is a lame attempt at surreal comedy. The novel is actually a taut thriller (Fleming’s first Bond story).

Interestingly, this novel contain sadomaschistic violence, and if you read reviews of Fleming’s Bond novels, most reviewers will throw in the term “sadomasochistic violence” at some point, which suggests to me that they didn’t really read Fleming’s novels; they’re just parroting some original reviewer who read “Casino Royale” and made that observation.

Ian Flemming never wanted to sell his books to Hollywood. The ‘real’ James Bond of the books was a cold killer of the postwar era. No ‘shaken not stirred’ for him.

But Flemming’s wife died of some dread disease. His son was hospitalized after a gruesome car crash the guy needed money. Still he was sure Hollywood would ruin his master spy.

So he sold the rights to the characters and to the titles, but not to the plots.

It is also worth noting that when Flemming’s son was in the hospital recovering he wanted to read his father’s books (and short stories) but they were thought to be too dirty for a young man. So Dad wrote a new story for his son, his only other successful publication.

The story concerned a magic car that could fly. It was called Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang.

(At this point I should mention the Real James Bond. He was a bird illustrator, sort of the James Autobahn of the Caribbean. When Flemming was looking for the most average possible name for his man of mystery his eye was drawn to one of Bond’s books. For the rest of his life the bird man could walk into hotels and say “Bond, James Bond.” He loved it.)

I’m not sure about your take on this. Cubby Broccoli bought the rights to all the Fleming novels (except “Casino Royale”) in 1961, and Fleming took an active role in trying to work up a screenplay with McClory and Whittingham (resulting in “Thunderball”). Interestingly, Fleming’s later books played up the Scottishness of Bond, which I suspect was due to Fleming’s approval of Sean Connery in the first two movies. Had Fleming lived beyond 1964, I don’t doubt that he’d have played a major role in writing movie material, and possibly the movies wouldn’t have gone off on the goofy tangents that started in the Roger Moore era (the movies might have been more plausible but less popular as a result).

As I said earlier, most of the Connery movies (as well as Lazenby’s On Her Majestys Secret Service) were quite close adaptations of the Fleming novels (with OHMSS and From Russia With Love coming the closest, I guess). Fleming evidently had no problem with the movie producers adapting his plots. In fact there’s no indication whatsoever that Fleming disapproved or was indifferent to the film versions, though he only got to see the first two Connery movies. Fleming died about five weeks before the release of the third movie, Goldfinger, though he visited the production on at least one occasion. My handy-dandy The Complete James Bond Movie Encyclopedia by Steven Jay Rubin contains a picture of Fleming talking to Sean Connery and Shirley Eaton, who would subsequently “die” from having her body completely covered in gold paint.

Bryan Ekers turned in a really outstanding post. I thought I was a fairly big Bond/Fleming fan, but actually I’ve never gotten around to reading most of Fleming’s works.

I only wish to elaborate on a couple of points. First, the cliffhanger ending to the novel From Russia With Love was that Rosa Klebb succeeded in sticking J.B. with her poisoned shoe, and Bond wheels, loses consciousness, and crashes to the floor, apparently dying! Fleming revives the character in the next book (I have no idea which one) with a completely unconvincing explanation that someone reached him in the nick of time with an antidote. (Never mind if an antidote even existed for this nerve agent; how the heck could anyone figure out what antidote was needed and rush it to him in time? Remember, the other victims of this poison were dead well within a minute…) The sequence reads strongly suggests that Ian Fleming wanted to kill the character off, only to change his mind (I don’t know if that was really the case, though). A Deus ex machina rescue if there ever was one.

The other point is the so-called “sadomasochistic violence” in Casino Royale. The only thing that I recall along those lines from that novel were the French villain Le Chiffre torturing Bond in his genital/peritoneal area in an explicitly sadistic fashion, and Bond coldly dismissing a female double agent (Vesper Lynd) whom he had loved (and proposed to!) as a “bitch” after she kills herself and leaves Bond a confessional suicide note. I agree with Bryan Ekers about the charges of sadomasochism being misapplied. For all the visceral realism of Fleming’s descriptions of action and violence, there is nothing in the way this novel is written that would encourage the reader to identify with Le Chiffre or identify with his expressly sadistic impulses. As for the latter instance, well, frankly, the “bitch” had it coming, considering all the harm and pain that her treason had caused…

Just a couple of points of clarification to add to Brian Ekers excellent posts. Broccoli and Saltzman bought the rights to all of the books, titles, characters, and stories, except for Casino Royale, and Thunderball, for reasons described above. However, Fleming specified that only the title from The Spy Who Loved Me be used, the plot and characters being off-limits.

Kevin McClory continued to sue EON after his remake of Thunderball, claiming that he had the right to make his own series of Bond movies. EON had to shut down production until the court battle was resolved. This resulted in the long gap following License to Kill, and most likely deprived us of at least two, and possible three or four more Timothy Dalton movies. Although the movies were being made every two years at that point, EON has shown that they are willing to stay very loyal to their current Bond, even to the point of keeping Moore long past the time he should have been replaced. They likely would have kept Moore around for as long as he wanted the role, which would have certainly delayed, and quite possibly prevented the Brosnan movies entirely. What’s more, the projects slated for Dalton would likely have been written to “his” Bond, much like License to Kill (The Living Daylights was revamped from a script written for Moore), resulting in a more down to earth, realistic Bond.

If McClory had won the right to make his own Bond films, we might very well have gotten Dalton Bond films from EON and Brosnan films much earlier, but written and produced by McClory. That would have been interesting.

“Dr. No.” At the beginning of that book Bond has just gotten out of the hospital, with the explanation that a doctor rapidly called to Rosa Klebb’s hotel room in Paris diagnosed Bond as suffering from curare poisining and acted accordingly. Exactly how Bond survived is unclear, but there were no “other victims” in the novel. The movie showed Kronsteen getting stuck and promptly croaking, though.

Anyhoo, at the beginning of “Dr. No”, M orders Bond to give up his Beretta .25, Bond’s favoured pistol through the early novels, because it’s too lightweight and when you equip it with a silencer, it has a tendency to get stuck in holsters or waistbands, as happened in the previous novel. Bond is instead issued the famous Walther PPK for the first time. The movie has an early scene almost identical to this (including Major Boothroyd of Q branch dismissing the Beretta as “a lady’s gun”. The injury movie-Bond had recently recovered from was not attributed to poisoning or Rosa Klebb or anything else similar to events in “From Russia With Love”.

One of the niggest differences between the books and the films is who the villaisn were, or more specifically, who they worked for. In Ian Fleming’s books, the villaisn were either Russians or allies of the Russians. Fleming’s Dr. No was working for the Russians, as were Hugo Drax and almost all the other famous Bond bad guys.

In the movies, the Russians are usually portrayed as pretty decent guys. The villains are invariably wealthy businessmen working on their own, or within the sinister cartel SPECTRE.

So, was Cubby Broccoli pro-Communist? More likely, he could foresee a day when communism collapsed in the USSR, and he wanted to be able to market James Bond in Russia, too!

From the “S.P.E.C.T.R.E” entry in The Complete James Bond Movie Encyclopedia, mentioned earlier:

I’ve read in other sources that the producers wanted to avoid dating the films too much, since détente could break out at any moment, making the Cold War a thing of the past. I have to admit Octopussy is one of my favourites (and certainly my favourite Roger Moore movie) because it has such a ruthless Cold-War premise and dispenses with loopy supervillians.

To quote the green m&m, “Where do you get your gossip?”
None of the above is true about Ian Flemming–or even Ian Fleming.

IIRC in “Moonraker” Hugo Drax was not working with the Russians, but was an unreformed Nazi who wanted to take his revenge on England by launching a nuclear attack on London.

However, in the films for Goldfinger and Thunderball, there are ocassional mentions about the “Red Chinese” aiding and abetting SPECTRE (Beginning of Thunderball: No. 9 and No. 11’s report of “sales of Red Chinese narcotics in the US” not meeting projections).

Actually, Drax got the atomic warhead from the Soviets and was about to make his escape on a Soviet submarine when Bond saved the day.

Just to pile on Paul in Saudi, the real James Bond is exactly the guy who ordered his martinis shaken, not stirred.

From Casino Royale:

As discussed to death in this thread.