Is Literary Bond Superior!?
The epitome of secret agent, the British spy James Bond, is adapted from the literary spy novel which to many of his true fans like me is superior to the movie adaptations. This spy was made popular among crowd by the Bond movies. Unlike other adaptations, the historic Bond movie versions have next to no affinity with the adapted text. In my opinion, the books are exciting, has more depth to it and has way less loopholes compared to movie instalments. Those who have read Flemming’s Bond novels have a different and more rational perspective of James. It seems that the movies historically have had very little or nothing to do with Flemming’s Bond other than titles and character names. In my opinion the Ian Flemming’s Bond is described a lot like the piano player from the old days, was lean and did not fill out the shoulders of his jackets so that they hung off him like Sinatra's coats did, seemed thuggish, often more American-looking than British, but certainly a man who had been born and bred of the upper classes. Quite different from the movies where Bond was a ladies man who seldom ever even got his hair messed up, dressed classy, drove exotic cars, and had an endless supply of gadgets. But recent movie installments attempts to start over and are adapted closely from Flemming’s work. From examining the literary text and the bond films, one can say that books depict the charming 007 agent more realistic. The film adaptations were made keeping in mind the taste of viewers and other movie selling factors. But as years passed by and generation of movie viewers changed, the keen eye for details was necessary. The literary bond has more realistic image of an agent, has a flawless plot, has more grip to it, and undeniably enhances the understanding of adapted movies. Works Cited
Flemming Bond Vs. Movie Bond. James Bond Wiki. Web. 17 Nov. 2008
Cited: Flemming Bond Vs. Movie Bond. James Bond Wiki. Web. 17 Nov. 2008
Please join StudyMode to read the full document