Regarding the film adaptations, the discussion of the book versus the movie is a matter of controversy. However, when it comes to the choice of the 1979 James Bond film Moonraker, there can be no question—the novel is superior. Moonraker, directed by Lewis Gilbert and starring Roger Moore was released on June 26th 1979 with an intention to cash in on the science fiction phenomenon created by Star Wars. But unfortunately, in doing so, it deviated from the gritty realism that was inherent in Ian Fleming's 1955 novel.
Moonraker's premise is tantalizing: a space shuttle, inspired by the film, is kidnapped, and James Bond is sent to investigate the incident. Many of the film's production design elements, such as the nod to NASA's as-yet-unflown shuttle, look rather striking today. Producer Albert Broccoli claims that “This is science fiction as we're shooting it. But by the time the film's out, it will be science fact. ” Yes, the movie made an accurate forecast on the use of reusable spacecraft.
However, the film's weakness is in departing from the source material's complexity. In the novel, Hugo Drax is a nuclear rocket developer not an interstellar fanatic as portrayed by Michael Lonsdale in the film. The story of the book begins engagingly with Bond and M probing into the card shuffling scam by Drax – an initially insignificant but essentially nefarious personality. Bond's subsequent assignment to Drax's rocket site, together with the indomitable police woman Gala Brand, is a classic in tension and character building. Unlike Dr. Holly Goodhead (Lois Chiles) in the film, Brand is Bond's equal, both in terms of skill and intelligence and she rejects Bond's amorous overtures.
The storyline of the novel is quite realistic and believable, and the concept described in it was implemented decades later in the form of the SDI. It provides a much more realistic view of Bond, presenting him with weaknesses and the depth of his relationship with Brand. This grounded approach can be compared and contrasted in the movie, where Bond's visit to space and his amusement in zero-gravity dominate the plot.
Moonraker, the movie, isn't devoid of merit. It's a quintessential Roger Moore Bond flick, complete with charm and over-the-top action. The film's pivot to space was a direct response to Star Wars' success, a move that was commercially sound but narratively flawed. The decision to send Bond to space stripped away the subtlety and character-driven elements that could have made Moonraker one of the best Bond films.
When James Bond returned in 1981's For Your Eyes Only, the franchise wisely shifted back to more credible stakes and realism. Moonraker stands as a fascinating case study in adaptation, showing how a bid for blockbuster appeal can sometimes miss the deeper essence of its source material. For those willing to look beyond the camp, Fleming's novel offers a richer, more compelling Bond adventure, reminding us why sometimes, the book truly is better.
