The Mitchell translations sounds awful, like the dialogue of one of those computer generated films set in antiquity. Of course, its been done before and better by Lord Buckley who use to do the Beat version of Shakespeare's Julius Ceaser.

Last edited by Maximilien de Robespierre (2011-10-19 22:01:34)

Last edited by Maximilien de Robespierre (2011-10-20 11:21:30)

On a semi-serious followup to our Iliad talk - I read a few chapters in the eXtreme new Mitchell translation over the weekend. I found it studiously bland rather than shocking or extreme; it was like a re-imagining of the Fitzgerald translation prepared specially for eighth graders. The plot came through exceptionally clearly; on the other hand the poetry and awe of the story were rather muted. Mitchell works the verses into a more prose-like meter, while Fitzgerald clearly took pains to make the sentences musical. If I were teaching the Iliad to, say, eighth graders I think the Mitchell translation might work very well.

I noticed while comparing passages that Fitzgerald's hoary old translation uses the word "bitch" as much or more than the new one, so Mitchell doesn't even own that questionable honor. Not a bad version, but not terribly necessary or innovative. The marketing campaign exaggerated Mitchell's daring.

Re. "Boomerang"
Also recommended: "Reckless Endangerment", a slightly different take, looking at the policy side.

The Birth and Death of the Cool by Ted Goia.

The Bond of the books was born out of Fleming's desk-bound Wavy-Navy wartime experiences, controlling field agents and an obituary in the Daily Telegraph suggested that Bond's character maybe based loosely on Fitzroy MacLean, who was a founding member of the SAS and worked behind enemy lines in WWII, including asssisting Tito in his resistance against Nazi advances. He was Scottish (as Fleming made Bond) and well versed in assassination and saboutage. One thing that these wartime agents were asked during the recruitment process was "Do you have any moral objection to murder?" Fleming himself once said in The Times that Bond was a highly romanticized version of a true spy and that Sir William Stephenson (head of British intelligence in the west during WWII) was 'the real thing'. Fleming said that Bond looked like Hoagy Carmichael and even did a drawing of Bond: http://br.bing.com/images/search?q=james+bond+sketch&view=detail&id=7ED6FD630F2E25F891C4BD6CB84F10B9AB943417&first=0&FORM=IDFRIR

The Bond of the books smothers his feelings: regrets and any sense of loss are immediately crushed - but that was normal for his generation; although there is expression of feeling for Sir Winston Churchills Flem spoon. Case and Teresea di Vincenzo (Tracy) of course; the other women in the books are subject to a much slower seduction than the girls in the films, who go down like nine pins.

The early films are in a lighter mood than the books  (apart from some of the names - e.g. 'Pussy Galore'); almost like cartoon-strips, with the silly puns and humour and the sex is depicted as just a roll in the hay (indeed, in Goldfinger, it is exactly that). Possibly this was to swing the underlying subject matter past the censors and find the broadest audience (I remember, as a small child, seeing Goldfinger on its release). The lightness of touch was introduced by the early director, Terence Young, and continued by the later screenwriters, including Roald Dahl.

Connery was James Bond for me at the age of five and so, for me,  he will always be Bond in my mind's eye. Moore (one of Fleming's early choices) was terrible. Dalton was excellent. I remember an interview with him and he said that, during the filming of the last scene in which Tracy is shot by Blofeld's agent, he was on the verge of tears but the director told him that 'James Bond didn't cry.' If there is any untramelled emotion in the books it is a thirst for revenge, which is most evident in For Your Eyes Only, following the brutal murder of an old couple in Jamaica (probably modelled on Fleming's real ex-pat friends there, whose servant used to announce the rum punch sun-downer with the words 'Vespers are served').

Craig isn't as bad as I thought that he might be but I think that he portrays Bond as a brick-shit-house-thug which he was not: the Bond of the books just got on with an important and essentially nasty job for (as he saw it), a greater good.

Moreover, how on earth did Green as Vesper Lynd suddenly produce a 'tailored' DJ for Bond in Casino Royale?!

I think that it was the popularity of the books (kick-started by JFK's express enthusiasm) which brought the film-makers in and the early films have a gripping appeal and novelty: especially Dr No and From Russia With Love. I have seen them so often that I can do the dialogue; much to the annoyance of 'er indoors.

Last edited by NJS (2012-01-15 04:59:37)