Which Bond novel are you currently reading?

17475767779

Comments

  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited July 8 Posts: 18,348
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Just read Devil May Care again. If I wanted to wedge this book into my Bond canon, I guess the continuity gaffes and general passiveness of Bond could be put down to him still suffering from amnesia from the end of You Only Live Twice. But I've decided for the moment it doesn't fit the bill.

    It's quite well written, but the plotholes and in-universe factual errors don't leave me with that satisfied "That was an amazing story" feeling I get from say OHMSS or Moonraker or Dr No or Thunderball. I think the difference is Fleming managed to make his outlandish plots fit exactly into a real world with real physics and genuine people who reacted with fear, love, passion and excitement. Just take a read of the plane being hijacked in Thunderball. It feels like your are sitting in an actual RAF plane in the year 1959 flying over the Atlantic and to the Bahamas. Fleming describes the tension and atmosphere so bloody well. Same for the Piz Gloria clubhouse in OHMSS. He gives a fantastic essence of actually being there. Faulks got close to this with the Paris sections of DMC but failed to sustain for the last two thirds. Amis got it pretty bang on in CS. Horowitz did a pretty good job too. Gardner achieved a decent level of it in the first three he did.

    I honestly feel that DMC should have followed Colonel Sun. Not just for honoring Fleming’s 100th birthday, but the 40th anniversary of CS. Continuity wouldn’t be a big issue. I’m happy we got the novel, but even happier that it was a one time thing for Faulks. His successor Bond authors had more interesting things to say with their books.

    I suppose that in a sense Devil May Care did follow Colonel Sun, at least chronologically. Although Colonel Sun was published in 1968 the story itself actually took place in 1965, the following year after the events of TMWTGG which are referenced in the novel. I know that Faulks didn't reference the events of Colonel Sun in Devil May Care and I think even tried to say that DMC was Bond's first mission since TMWTGG but as it was set in 1967 during the "Summer of Love" it must have occurred after the events of Colonel Sun, whether he acknowledges it or not. To my mind Colonel Sun has a much better claim to being part of the Fleming Bond canon than Devil May Care has.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,703
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Just read Devil May Care again. If I wanted to wedge this book into my Bond canon, I guess the continuity gaffes and general passiveness of Bond could be put down to him still suffering from amnesia from the end of You Only Live Twice. But I've decided for the moment it doesn't fit the bill.

    It's quite well written, but the plotholes and in-universe factual errors don't leave me with that satisfied "That was an amazing story" feeling I get from say OHMSS or Moonraker or Dr No or Thunderball. I think the difference is Fleming managed to make his outlandish plots fit exactly into a real world with real physics and genuine people who reacted with fear, love, passion and excitement. Just take a read of the plane being hijacked in Thunderball. It feels like your are sitting in an actual RAF plane in the year 1959 flying over the Atlantic and to the Bahamas. Fleming describes the tension and atmosphere so bloody well. Same for the Piz Gloria clubhouse in OHMSS. He gives a fantastic essence of actually being there. Faulks got close to this with the Paris sections of DMC but failed to sustain for the last two thirds. Amis got it pretty bang on in CS. Horowitz did a pretty good job too. Gardner achieved a decent level of it in the first three he did.

    I honestly feel that DMC should have followed Colonel Sun. Not just for honoring Fleming’s 100th birthday, but the 40th anniversary of CS. Continuity wouldn’t be a big issue. I’m happy we got the novel, but even happier that it was a one time thing for Faulks. His successor Bond authors had more interesting things to say with their books.

    I suppose that in a sense Devil May Care did follow Colonel Sun, at least chronologically. Although Colonel Sun was published in 1968 the story itself actually took place in 1965, the following year after the events of TMWTGG which are referenced in the novel. I know that Faulks didn't reference the events of Colonel Sun in Devil May Care and I think even tried to say that DMC was Bond's first mission since TMWTGG but as it was set in 1967 during the "Summer of Love" it must have occurred after the events of Colonel Sun, whether he acknowledges it or not. To my mind Colonel Sun has a much better claim to being part of the Fleming Bond canon than Devil May Care has.

    I agree with you. Some people may think that With a Mind to Kill is now the proper continuation novel after TMWTGG. There is a piece of me that considers Anthony Horowitz's novels canon with Fleming's. Either way, Solo is the true finale in that timeline, in my opinion.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,348
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Just read Devil May Care again. If I wanted to wedge this book into my Bond canon, I guess the continuity gaffes and general passiveness of Bond could be put down to him still suffering from amnesia from the end of You Only Live Twice. But I've decided for the moment it doesn't fit the bill.

    It's quite well written, but the plotholes and in-universe factual errors don't leave me with that satisfied "That was an amazing story" feeling I get from say OHMSS or Moonraker or Dr No or Thunderball. I think the difference is Fleming managed to make his outlandish plots fit exactly into a real world with real physics and genuine people who reacted with fear, love, passion and excitement. Just take a read of the plane being hijacked in Thunderball. It feels like your are sitting in an actual RAF plane in the year 1959 flying over the Atlantic and to the Bahamas. Fleming describes the tension and atmosphere so bloody well. Same for the Piz Gloria clubhouse in OHMSS. He gives a fantastic essence of actually being there. Faulks got close to this with the Paris sections of DMC but failed to sustain for the last two thirds. Amis got it pretty bang on in CS. Horowitz did a pretty good job too. Gardner achieved a decent level of it in the first three he did.

    I honestly feel that DMC should have followed Colonel Sun. Not just for honoring Fleming’s 100th birthday, but the 40th anniversary of CS. Continuity wouldn’t be a big issue. I’m happy we got the novel, but even happier that it was a one time thing for Faulks. His successor Bond authors had more interesting things to say with their books.

    I suppose that in a sense Devil May Care did follow Colonel Sun, at least chronologically. Although Colonel Sun was published in 1968 the story itself actually took place in 1965, the following year after the events of TMWTGG which are referenced in the novel. I know that Faulks didn't reference the events of Colonel Sun in Devil May Care and I think even tried to say that DMC was Bond's first mission since TMWTGG but as it was set in 1967 during the "Summer of Love" it must have occurred after the events of Colonel Sun, whether he acknowledges it or not. To my mind Colonel Sun has a much better claim to being part of the Fleming Bond canon than Devil May Care has.

    I agree with you. Some people may think that With a Mind to Kill is now the proper continuation novel after TMWTGG. There is a piece of me that considers Anthony Horowitz's novels canon with Fleming's. Either way, Solo is the true finale in that timeline, in my opinion.

    Yes, there are so many different continuities now with the Bond continuation novels published since 2008 that it's gotten quite messy. That's one of the reasons I've always preferred the Fleming-Amis-Gardner-Benson continuity I grew up as a Bond fan under. It did keep things that bit simpler.
  • I've read two Gardners, Win Lose or Die and Cold. The former (and Nobody Lives Forever) as preparation for the returning characters

    Win, Lose or Die is interesting with the concept of Bond going back to the Royal Navy. But I find that the villains, an organisation called BAST, don't work quite well. Gardner tries for the best of both worlds: a crazy set of idealists who want anarchy and are also the coldly cerebral terrorists we expect from SPECTRE. Add a bunch of ex-PLO leaders and mostly Middle-Eastern names and you get a mess of motivations. We are also introduced to them through a horrible failure of them trying to attack a ship in Iraq with comical plan of them hang-gliding down to the ship.

    Bond then gets sent back to the Navy for 8 months before anything happens (preparation for a big wargame), where BAST try to kill him. He also has dinner with the chief of the Wrens on board, and nearly sleeps with her, but then she's a bit leaky with him and he completely shuts her out.

    Then through the bugging of a public conversation (surely a phone conversation would be more believable) and the tacky use of BAST's catch-phrase Bond gets sent on holiday where he's to wait for an assassination attempt. Then we Bond falling in love in quite an unbelievable and heavy-handed way (we've got the "this is serious" too many times from Gardner). And then boom! Bond's bodyguard, the woman he loved, is actually BAST and was killed by her own car-bomb, turned against her by the dodgy Wren. (why she wouldn't have killed him before then I don't know).

    Bond then gets sent somewhere to lay low before rejoining the Navy. We learn later that this actually BAST cover. BAST have gone through all the effort of setting of car bomb in Bond's villa in Naples to try to kill him, but when he's in their hands, they decide "no thanks." This is also when we believe that BAST have penetrated MI6 and their security codes.

    Then Bond is sent back onboard for the war game, but sometime later we learn that the wargame is cover for a meeting between Thatcher, Bush Snr. and Gorbachev. Bond learns this even before going on vacation, but Gardner keeps this hidden from us in a twist that honestly isn't very effective, especially because this appears on certain synopses of the novel and also just isn't very shocking in itself. Then murders occur on board to the security team and Bond has to figure out who's responsible.

    The rest of the story runs in an interesting manner, except for two things: we are supposed to see the Wren officer actually being BAST as a twist, even though Bond's bodyguard was still alive and we also know that she was sent by M. One of the Wren officer and the bodyguard had to be lying, Bond believes the bodyguard, so why doesn't he suspect the Wren? And also, the BAST leader is a fraudster who just wants to run away with the money and leave BAST high and dry, which is info that doesn't change much and also doesn't feel exactly credible.

    Moving on to COLD, I can't really be bothered to do an in depth review but the pacing is quite off and I don't exactly understand what's going on.

    The major issue that I have is that the Bond girl from Nobody Lives Forever, Sukie Tempesta, is actually a fascist who wants to live in a police state and kills 400 people in a plane bombing so she can live the reality. We don't see any of the same breezy, adventure loving girl that we saw in the earlier story.

    In this book there also isn't really much work done by Bond. He gets sent over to America to examine a plane crash, then meets an FBI agent, gets sent for a sting operation, fails, and then gets invited 4 years later to parachute in and stop a COLD meeting, fails, gets captured and then saved firstly by Sukie keeping him around for her wedding to the COLD leader and then later by a gangster with cold feet.

    Like BAST, COLD tries to have both the wacky ideology but also the cold operating procedure. But I don't see how the Tempestas, gangsters in every sense, gain if they can't run their normal operations based on vice (drugs, prostitution, murder, etc.) in a world were that sort of thing is clamped down heavily upon. A poor finale for Gardner.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 951
    The Man with the Golden Gun
  • ArapahoeBondFanArapahoeBondFan Colorado
    Posts: 72
    On FYEO atm.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,694
    Scorpius. So far so good. Just finished the car chase back to London. It looked great in my head, with all the headlights in the dark. Classic old school chase, firing at each other, sans gadgetry. Bond being chauffeured in his own car.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,348
    QBranch wrote: »
    Scorpius. So far so good. Just finished the car chase back to London. It looked great in my head, with all the headlights in the dark. Classic old school chase, firing at each other, sans gadgetry. Bond being chauffeured in his own car.

    I hope that you enjoy that one, @QBranch. I think it's John Gardner's best Bond novel from the 1980s. It has a great Flemingesque villain in Vladimir Scorpius. Definitely one of my favourite Bond continuation novels.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,694
    @Dragonpol Great to hear you think it's quality. I'll share more thoughts on it soon. Into chapter 5 now.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,348
    QBranch wrote: »
    @Dragonpol Great to hear you think it's quality. I'll share more thoughts on it soon. Into chapter 5 now.

    That's good. It's definitely one of his best Bond stories in my opinion. Having a great villain always helps. There's a nice Fleming reference with "Father Valentine" too. 🙂
  • Posts: 2,029
    Just finished OHzMSS - A most unsatisfying read.

    On to the Penguin edition of QoS which contains all nine short stories.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,800
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Just finished OHzMSS - A most unsatisfying read.

    On to the Penguin edition of QoS which contains all nine short stories.

    Guess you're talking about the new one?
  • Posts: 2,029
    Yes, the Higson book. It reads as if the source material was the films instead of Fleming.

    M - "Don't make me spell it out, James. We both know what your Double O prefix means." M calling Bond James and saying what they both know seems odd. As does
    earlier when M slaps the table irritated. (It had been 16 years the government banned smoking in the offices.) No mention of reaching for an imaginary pipe. Is that the source of his irritation and feeling ill at ease, something that has been in effect for sixteen years?

    It's not the kind of writing and work I want to see more of.
  • The Man with the Golden Gun. I tried to like it but there's too much that just doesn't work. Bond does a good job finding Scaramanga, but then does nothing for most of the story. I get leaving FS alive if there's some world-shattering conspiracy that will move on without him. But why leave him alive if he's just bad failing at building a hotel and doing light organised crime stuff that barely involves him?

    Fine Bond can't kill in cold blood: but Fleming has run with this narrative to the point of ridiculousness. Shooting Scaramanga in the car would be cold blood, shooting him as his cover burns away and he and Hendriks plan to kill him is self-preservation, where I'd believe Bond at the top of his game would see and utilise. What was his plan getting on the train? That he'd get a fair fight?

    Bond is just stupid in this one: he also eavesdrops on the gangster meeting for no reason: Leiter's already bugged the room, why risk your cover and the operation for curiosity that will be absolved in an hour anyway?

    Sadly Bond loses all personality: and no not back to CR. In CR we learn Bond doesn't have the time to have a personality, he's too much of a professional, and then Vesper's death sort of show him the pointlessness of being so high strung, so he cools the professionalism a bit and becomes more and more human. Here, Bond's at zero professionalism, but he doesn't show much of any humour, or interest and his banter with Felix isn't as good as before. He's got the worst of both worlds. Maybe because he's playing Mark Hazard for much of it, but the only interesting bits of Bond are him turning down the knighthood, and him wishing he took Scaramanga alive.

    Scaramanga is similarly stupid. Why hire a "copper" that's involved in the burning of crop fields if that's your plan? And why do so when the guy clearly believes you're a criminal? Why shoot some guy if you're telling the copper everything is respectable? This novel (apart from Goldfinger) also has the highest "just shoot him" quotient. When Hendriks informs FS, why not act immediately and stop Bond from reporting straight away? Does not he think Bond maybe already reported to Goodnight in the hotel room? That he hasn't been consistently reporting?

    And never mind the villain plot. If Moscow wants Cuba sugarcane prices down, then why does Hendriks get involved in the scheme? I was thinking the guys in The Group who where betting on it going up where going against the grain as well, Hendriks acts as if they've betrayed the rest of them.

    The rest is just disappointing. Sabotaging bauxite mines and smuggling marijuana aren't even Scaramanga's ideas, he's just doing it off of the KGB's wants. The only stuff Scaramanga is up to by himself is the casino business. And he's trying to get funding for his failing hotel (from a human trafficker to become investor #7). That's it. Quite underwhelming for the world's best assassin.

    Could have been back to basics, but is ultimately a sad conclusion to the Fleming novels with probably the worst of the 12
  • edited August 5 Posts: 6,023
    I'm reading now the last Bond book I've bought (last year), Kim Sherwood's Double or Nothing, and already, something jumped at my face. There's a character named...

    Lucky Luke ???

    51OUJQ-u7GL._AC_UF1000,1000_QL80_.jpgDid she know about the famous cowboy ? Is it happenstance, a coincidence, or enemy action ?
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    A few weeks ago, randomly picked up TMWTGG to read again.

    Then, last week, I randomly chose GF ( probably my best read of this novel, marveling at Fleming's imagination), and as soon as I was done that, I plucked TB off the shelf, which I'm also enjoying immensely (whereas in the past, I have had issues with this novel)...
  • Posts: 349

    He also has dinner with the chief of the Wrens on board, and nearly sleeps with her, but then she's a bit leaky with him and he completely shuts her out.

    .

    Not surprised Bond didn’t want to sleep with her…
  • Troy wrote: »

    He also has dinner with the chief of the Wrens on board, and nearly sleeps with her, but then she's a bit leaky with him and he completely shuts her out.

    .

    Not surprised Bond didn’t want to sleep with her…

    Well depends on the man I suppose. Felt out of character for Bond though.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 951
    Just finished listening to Live and Let Die. I think I preferred the film.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,703
    Just finished listening to Live and Let Die. I think I preferred the film.

    They are both truly unique adventures in Literary Bond and Cinematic Bond. For better or worse. At times, I feel that Fleming wanted LALD as a screenplay, even before MR. I would like to see the scuba diving scene in a future movie. Maybe the broken finger too.
  • Posts: 2,029
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Just finished listening to Live and Let Die. I think I preferred the film.

    They are both truly unique adventures in Literary Bond and Cinematic Bond. For better or worse. At times, I feel that Fleming wanted LALD as a screenplay, even before MR. I would like to see the scuba diving scene in a future movie. Maybe the broken finger too.

    LALD begins what I think of as the Moore is Less era. Big ideas and production values, but always leaves me disappointed. LALD is my favorite Moore Bond film, but the less comes with the silly Mr. Big/Kananga nonsense and of course the final explosive demise of the villain. I like the novel and wish the film had used more of the original story.

    As for reading, I just completed the Penguin Edition of QoS that contains all the short stories. Very much of a mixed bag with Bond often a minor character. The ones I liked best are The Hildebrand Rarity, The Property of a Lady, and The Living Daylights. Bits and pieces of these stories have popped up in several films.

  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,703
    CrabKey wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Just finished listening to Live and Let Die. I think I preferred the film.

    They are both truly unique adventures in Literary Bond and Cinematic Bond. For better or worse. At times, I feel that Fleming wanted LALD as a screenplay, even before MR. I would like to see the scuba diving scene in a future movie. Maybe the broken finger too.

    LALD begins what I think of as the Moore is Less era. Big ideas and production values, but always leaves me disappointed. LALD is my favorite Moore Bond film, but the less comes with the silly Mr. Big/Kananga nonsense and of course the final explosive demise of the villain. I like the novel and wish the film had used more of the original story.

    As for reading, I just completed the Penguin Edition of QoS that contains all the short stories. Very much of a mixed bag with Bond often a minor character. The ones I liked best are The Hildebrand Rarity, The Property of a Lady, and The Living Daylights. Bits and pieces of these stories have popped up in several films.

    I also wish the film used a bit more from the novel. It is overly silly at times. I wonder what a faithful adaptation would have looked like if Richard Maibaum wrote it and Peter Hunt directed it. That would have made an already unique Bond movie more unique!
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,593
    I’m deep-diving into Octopussy, because I’m planning to produce a 1:1 adaption of it on film. Hoping to commit to celluloid in 2027.
  • Posts: 2,029
    I’m deep-diving into Octopussy, because I’m planning to produce a 1:1 adaption of it on film. Hoping to commit to celluloid in 2027.

    Since Bond has such a small role in this story, will Bond be in your film?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,593
    CrabKey wrote: »
    I’m deep-diving into Octopussy, because I’m planning to produce a 1:1 adaption of it on film. Hoping to commit to celluloid in 2027.

    Since Bond has such a small role in this story, will Bond be in your film?

    Yes! It will feature the flashback (with a young Bond for a moment, I’m hoping), bookended by the conversation in Wavelets with Bond and Smythe. But as he’s not the protagonist in story, it will be a shorter, though important, amount of screen time for Bond.
  • ArapahoeBondFanArapahoeBondFan Colorado
    Posts: 72
    Doubleshot
  • K2WIK2WI Europe
    Posts: 11
    For Your Eyes Only. First real read (first time I picked it up, I finished "From A View to a Kill", then put it down expecting I could pick it back up later...4 years later, I have!). Currently almost halfway through "Risico".
  • Posts: 1,462
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Just finished listening to Live and Let Die. I think I preferred the film.

    They are both truly unique adventures in Literary Bond and Cinematic Bond. For better or worse. At times, I feel that Fleming wanted LALD as a screenplay, even before MR. I would like to see the scuba diving scene in a future movie. Maybe the broken finger too.

    LALD begins what I think of as the Moore is Less era. Big ideas and production values, but always leaves me disappointed. LALD is my favorite Moore Bond film, but the less comes with the silly Mr. Big/Kananga nonsense and of course the final explosive demise of the villain. I like the novel and wish the film had used more of the original story.

    As for reading, I just completed the Penguin Edition of QoS that contains all the short stories. Very much of a mixed bag with Bond often a minor character. The ones I liked best are The Hildebrand Rarity, The Property of a Lady, and The Living Daylights. Bits and pieces of these stories have popped up in several films.

    I also wish the film used a bit more from the novel. It is overly silly at times. I wonder what a faithful adaptation would have looked like if Richard Maibaum wrote it and Peter Hunt directed it. That would have made an already unique Bond movie more unique!

    Sometimes I think about why they didn't choose this novel to adapt first. They wanted to make Thunderball after all.

    Maybe it was problematic in the early 60s.
  • edited November 8 Posts: 2,922
    Sometimes I think about why they didn't choose this novel to adapt first...Maybe it was problematic in the early 60s.

    Like all commercial filmmakers, EON played it safe with potentially controversial content, and by 1954 the civil rights struggle had already begun with Brown vs. Board of Education. The Bond films were still Hollywood product, being bankrolled and released by United Artists, and Hollywood had no wish to rock the boat in racial areas. Occasionally you'd get a semi-daring film like Intruder in the Dust or The Defiant Ones, but the idea of filming a thriller with a white hero and cast of all-black villains, complete with a black master villain with a white mistress, would have been rejected in the 50s or early 60s. By 1973 things had radically changed, and the Blaxploitation craze gave EON a fresh angle to approach LALD from.
Sign In or Register to comment.