Hope you all get out to see the new Casino Royale--quite a well-done film--but keep in mind that it is set in 2006.

Eli, I'd forgotten about Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang. You're right, the book was far better than the movie. I'm going to have to dig up a copy and re-read it.

Dutch: excellent point. I guess what I found most surprising about the books is that Bond's fears and vulnerabilities generally didn't make it into the films. The film Bond loves all the mini-airplanes and sky-diving and stuff. The closest that we've seen Bond be to the mortal, vulnerable book Bond is in the last movie, in which his captors beat the crap out of him for months on end. (Oh, and I should disclose that our fox terrier is named Miss Moneypenny--the kids' suggestion, actually...)

I think Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang the book is much better than
the movie version. There are recognizable Bond-gadget elements
in the book, too. (Yes, CCBB is also by Ian Flemming.)

I adore the Bond books - the offhand sexism and racism is appalling, in a hugely readable way.

UkeGap: Of course James Bond is afraid of flying. Even Mister T is afraid of planes. "I ain't gettin' on no plane," etc. It's a necessary part of the super-macho that sub-super-level fears be included. This clicks with the reader, because they might be afraid of getting hit in the nose, but they definitely wouldn't back down if someone threatened them with an AK-47!

I wish I could go back to that time sometimes, when people smoked and drank constantly, over dressed, and were blatantly mysoginist racists. The closest thing I've experienced is the Kentucky Derby.

I really like the idea of "men are men and women are women," but the only place I can think of where that holds true is Texas. The "men" and the "women" in Texas both offend me. It's like a crude, unrefined version. What I want is the Ayn Rand version of masculine and feminine -- very purposeful and conscious choices on the parts of individuals. Call it "enlightened mysoginy."

Most of my morality comes from watching gangster movies, but (aside from Sean Connery Bond films) the only movies I see which depict a world I could feel comfortable in are from Japan. Sometimes I feel like I would be completely at peace with the world if I just moved to Japan. That's how I feel when reading Ian Flemming novels.

As bad as they are sometimes, on the unintentional humor front, they really do feel like the world of a superman. Have wondered about this for some time -- I may be wrong -- but I think Sonny Chiba movies are more like the Bond novels than the Bond movies are. It's just a world where any man, who thinks of himself as a secret agent or some kind of unrealistic badass (as all men should IMHO), can feel completely at home. Sean Connery is there; Frank Sinatra and Dean Martin are definitely there; and JFK is your personal drinking buddy. It's like Heaven.

Edited by author 04-27-2003 12:45 PM
I've just been reading the Bond novels for the first time. I'm struck by both the fact that Bond is afraid of many things (he hates flying) as well as Fleming's rampant racism.

"Moss, follow that car."

The really interesting thing is that Flemming was seeking to make a spy modeled on Dashiell Hammett's Continental Op, a hardboiled "blunt instrument of the state".

"Timothy Dalton had edge. In License To Kill he was a rogue agent. That's edgy!" -Andrew from Buffy the Vampire Slayer

Casino Royale was one of my favorite Bond books as a kid, and it always ticked me off that the movie Casino Royale was a comedy spoof, and not based on the book really.

The review was of a book, and it was well written. I have read most of Flemming's Bond stories, and it's true, each of the movies is much more removed than the last from their original source material. There are some common elements, to be sure; the character in the movies is recognizably Bond from the books in a great many personal characteristics aside from the trappings. I find the books enjoyable because they place him in his element (50's/60's spy thriller milieu) where he really fits best.

Bond movies--ugh. The misogyny, the stupid gadgets, the completely unintentional humor. And 100 years from now, they'll be making them starring Kate Hudson's grandson, and they'll be every bit as bad and people will still go see them.

what's my point? I dunno.