Casino Royale, by Ian Fleming, was a quick read. The plot was much simpler than most of the James Bond movies I've seen, and much less flashy. Fleming is sparing with words and is, dare I say, a typical male storyteller. Details are only mentioned when they matter, although Fleming is extremely articulate when it comes to Bond's car, dress, drinks, and food. He's much less articulate in describing Vesper Lynd, who is a believable character only when you view her as Fleming/Bond view her. Moneypenny is more believable and more interesting in her brief appearance in the novel.
I haven't read Fleming's later works, but one can tell that Casino Royale was written by an undeveloped author with lots of potential. It will be interesting to read something Fleming wrote later, say You Only Live Twice, to see how much he developed.
There are definite hints to Bond's chauvinistic tendencies, and considering the time the book was written, some of those tendencies are understandable.
I would say go read the book before you watch the movie, if only to notice how much Hollywood polluted the story. I still think Craig is a good choice for Bond, and I like how the Bond girls in the new movie are all brunettes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Another great review! I think you've found a niche.
Thanks Don!
Someone mentioned Bond's shallowness as a character last night, and I'd have to disagree, at least from the book perspective. A great deal of the end of the book is devoted to Bond worrying about if all his bodily functions work. Which, in his situation, is what any normal man would worry about.
Ha ha ha! I don't know the story but it probably is true about men. Might actually make him kind of shallow however.
Perhaps, but then again you really can't afford to have deep, meaningful, and lasting relationships if you choose spying as an occupation.
Post a Comment