Quote
Originally posted by: TheSessler
I read the Moonraker novel, its a pretty good cold war story.
What in the world were they on when they thought that the book had any of the things the movie had in it?
Moonraker also has the cheesiest moment and the least memorable bond girl: Jaws and the girl standing at the window waving when Bond is blasting off and Holly Goodhead(although I think she looked pretty good).
What you have to do is find a way to over look the the cheesy stuff. Don't take them too seriously. Stop comparing the Bond movies to the books. No, the Bond movies of this era wheren't anywhere near close to the Book, they weren't trying to be. . No, they weren't realistic. No, they weren't dark or serious like some of the books are. They weren't trying to be realistic,dark, or serious. They were trying to be entertaining, funny, and fun to watch, and they succeeded. They weren't trying to show the real life of a spy. They were just trying to make good spy movies and live up to everyone's fantasy of what being a spy is like. You may perfer the darker Bond, but Bond was much more popular when it was light, funny, and (IMHO) better.
Just look at Frankenstein. The Boris Karloff version is nowhere near accurate to the book. Certainly not realistic. This does not make it bad. It is considered a classic. A movie doesn't have to accurate to the book to be good. This is true with the Bond movies.
Bond doesn't need to be dark, serious or realistic. If you want that, go watch somting else. But don't change Bond. Let Bond be Bond.