wasted Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 Yeah, I don't know maybe the books are better. Like they are great spy thrillers but the movies aren't great spy thriller movies?The books are great spy thrillers but are fairly dated as well. In many instances the films actually improved upon the novels. Some were more faithful (OHMSS) while some just took a key sequence or character name and ran with it. Other times there are plot holes that have been corrected. In the Goldfinger novel, Goldfinger actually steals the gold from Fort Knox. In the film it was changed to Goldfinger radiating the gold supply to render it useless and drive up the price of his pure gold. A minor change, but it definitely tightens the plot to lend a sense of believability,The movies have been really popular, that's why I mentioned Roger Moore era. They added a load of excess to the books. Like updating them making Bond cooler. I have read some of the books but I'm not familiar with how they were received at the time. Are they on the level of Le Carre or Greene or Bourne Identity or are they more trashy paperbacks that have cult appeal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.