Patterns Followed, Patterns Compared

I am starting on my fourth Bond novel now and I have seen the movies let say around a hundred times. I think it is safe to say that I would be able to notice some sort of pattern by now. Recognizing this pattern will help me see the important points of the Bond texts and will help me develop a better paper for my literary analysis class. In the Bond films the pattern is pretty simple. In all of the films with the exception of the first film there is a pre-title sequence where either a quick action sequence is shown or something that teases the plot of the film (included here just for your enjoyment is the pre-title sequence from Goldfinger arguably the best of the Bond movies):

The opening chapters of the novels however are usually quite different. In traditional novel style the Bond books open up with a lot of exposition explaining characters and building a good background for the plot.
Moonraker for example opens with Bond's daily routines. We learn a little about him, his hobbies, what he does when he isn't chasing spies around the world. He has a desk job. In From Russia With Love we don't even see Bond till the second half of the book which I thought was an unorthodox but inspired technique by the author. This way we learn about all of the villains and their plot to destroy Bond before he even knows which builds tension in later scenes when we know something that Bond doesn't and we feel afraid for him. It is a great use of dramatic irony. Though slower than the opening scenes of the movies I prefer this form of exposition because of that tension. Bond movies after the opening sequence usually show Bond report to M which is something that is reminiscent of the novels. Here Bond learns about his mission, has some comedic banter with  Moneypenny afterwards, and then he is off to face the villain of the movie.

 There is also usually a  bad Bond girl who dies and then there is the good one that helps him a little bit throughout and they end up together at the end of the film, but she is never to be seen again in subsequent features. Basically the novels follow this structure as well though the action that takes place is definitely not as fantastical as the movies are. The Bond of the films is invincible. He is almost on the level of a superhero. The Bond of the novels though physically fit and skilled in some martial arts is far from that superhero image. In the Bond novels there is a unique pattern of danger involved. There are usually several chapters that end on cliffhangers where Bond is seriously wounded or trapped. We see some thrilling scenes like these in the movies, but there is never any question in the audience's mind that he is going to find a way out.

Not so in the novels. The Bond in the novels comes close to his death on many occasions and he comes through because of his wits not his gadgets. Anyone can use a gadget. He is human and I believe that allows us as readers to sympathize with his character more. He is someone that we could almost be if we studied and practiced long enough. Whereas in the movies though we admire Bond we know deep down there is no chance we could be him. Also Bond cares about his female counterparts more in the novels. He doesn't just move from girl to girl without any thought, but he still thinks about them after the adventure is over. He sometimes is dumped by the girls and wishes the relationship could have gone further even to the thought of marriage...gasp! Yes there is a little less of the careless womanizing in the novels, but it is still there. So by comparing these two interpretations of the character and the patterns in his adventures I have been able to learn more about him as a person. Studying someone's habits would give us a lot of information about who they are as a person. The same could be said for a fictional character and I have amassed some great information for my paper.