› ›

Would you rather the next novel be set in contemporary times OR set in the 50's and 60's?

1…139140141142143145»

Comments

  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    Posts: 1,264
    Live.

    It is less used than Gold.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 8,983
    I'll be glad if the title doesn't include "kill" or "die". They should have retired those words after the Fleming titles had been used up.

    But I guess "gold" seems more overused to me than "live". "Gold" always gives the impression of cashing in on the memory of Goldfinger.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited October 15 Posts: 1,958
    I think those words are now officially Bondian words. So I think they should be kept. That's why other films hardly use it, because they now associate them with Bond and Bond only.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,056
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    I'll be glad if the title doesn't include "kill" or "die". They should have retired those words after the Fleming titles had been used up.

    But I guess "gold" seems more overused to me than "live". "Gold" always gives the impression of cashing in on the memory of Goldfinger.

    Goldfinger, The Man With the Golden Gun and GoldenEye. It's more than some, but I don't think it's overused.

    That said, I still think there's other words that imply glamour, luxury and wealth that can he used.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    edited 1:55am Posts: 5,342
    Good stuff and yes when you deep dive into the titles you do see some words come up more often.

    Lets dive into literary Bond. We have been waiting since 2022. The Ian Fleming Publications has not announced or hired anyone to write a new novel.

    I have a question about the next literary adventure and book:

    Would you rather the next Bond novel set in contemporary time OR set back in 1950's-1960's?

    Since Benson, most of the authors have set Bond in the 50's and 60's. Jeffery Deaver was one of the few recent novelists who have tried to base in modern times. He even created a new back story that fit with the times.

    The most recent author Anthony Horowitz based his trilogy in the 50's and 60's mainly due to his using abandoned Fleming written works.

    What would you rather see happen next with literary Bond?
  • ArapahoeBondFanArapahoeBondFan Colorado
    Posts: 46
    Contemporary. I want to see some creative ways Bond can adapt or stay relevant in this world.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,537
    Personally, contemporary.

    Wouldn't mind a period TV series adapting the novels more closely though.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,907
    Do as the films do, put him in the present without recreating his history, which is why I didn't care for Carte Blanche. The less I know about Bond's past, the better. I don't want more of Higson's Bond.

  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited 3:41am Posts: 4,550
    Contemporary. That's how Fleming wrote him. When authors (namely Sebastian Faulks) set Bond in the past, there's less creative risk with the story. A Bond book's legacy is more of a challenge when it's set in the present day. It's always a bolder choice. And I like Solo and the Anthony Horowitz trilogy. At least the spinoffs are present day.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,056
    I'm really of two minds about this. I'm not big into continuators to begin with. I read both Carte Blanche and Trigger Mortis and found them both underwhelming.

    On the one hand, I find contemporary Bond novels redundant as we have the films already. But period pieces lack authenticity and they easily risk becoming bad historical fiction rather than spy thrillers. By default, I'd say contemporary, because then the novels suffer less from comparison with Fleming.
Sign In or Register to comment.