It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I think each book came in with a certain amount of preparation, but DN really did feel like " and then Bond did this... and then he was burnt... and then he was electrocuted... and then a giant squid..."... It didn't have the usual organic build-up, for me.
I also have difficulty at times, imaging the proper environment.
Just my perception on this part of the the novel (I love the rest of DN; but this climax was not my favourite, at all!)...
Golden gun does feel less finished, but it's all relative.
I really think Fleming was a great great writer with a talent for short, evocative prose.
I might have to say OHMSS is the weakest, not sure if it's because I had such high expectations from the movie.
Besides Moonraker, that is my favourite.
The one I could do without is The Spy Who Loved Me.
I regard TMWTGG as unquestionably the worst Fleming novel, the only one written after Fleming's powers had dissipated (illness forced him to cut his writing schedule by half). Fleming intended TMWTGG to be the finale of the series, but he confessed to his editor that he was “not yet up to correcting my stupid book” and proposed giving it “another year’s working over so that we can go out with a bang instead of a whimper.” Unfortunately that year never came.
TMWTGG's opening chapters are a superb and shocking follow-up to YOLT, and its final chapter is lovely and poignant (Craig might want to steal it for his last film), but what's in between is the feeble work of an author no longer able to function at full capacity. As one critic sneered, much of the book reads like a thriller from 1910. The imagination and energy of the early Bonds is gone. Instead Fleming repeats himself (another hoods' congress, another train shootout, Jamaica is once again the location, Bond is once again hired by the villain in a fit of stupidity), and throws in an unbelievably boring plot (sugar futures!), his weakest and most forgettable heroine, Bond at his dullest (electroshock therapy apparently wiped his personality away), and a villain who is little more than a common thug (despite his dossier promising us pistol fetishism and repressed homosexuality). Even the prose is bland and bare.
By contrast, I am disappointed that some people regard TB as one of the worst books. It's one of Fleming's best. The charge that it reads too much like a film script is baseless--the summaries for the Thunderball scripts are included in The Battle for Bond and all of them are substantially different from the novel. Fleming helped himself to various plot elements (which is why TB is the best-plotted of the Bond books) but recombined them in his own inimitable way. Perhaps the problem is that most readers approach the book after seeing the movie--which leaves the book with no suspense and imposes the film's pacing--and come away disappointed . That was certainly my first reaction.
But a second reading makes the book come alive on its own terms and pacing. Fleming's Shrublands sequence has a sly comedic quality missing from the flatly directed movie equivalent, while his characters are much more vivid on the page: Largo is Bond's dark twin, Domino is Fleming's most fiery heroine, Blofeld gets an unforgettable cameo that shows the menace of Spectre, Felix is funnier and more human than ever, and even M gets to shine as a health nut. The underwater sequences are also more eerie, beautiful, gory, and thrilling than on film, especially the night battle. And as previously mentioned, the plotting is stronger than usual--Bond and Felix do actual detective work, they follow leads and investigate to build up their case. So do give Thunderball another chance: banish the film from your mind and let your imagination--not the movie--create the images and set the pace.
My least favorites are GF (too great a piss take and too much WTF) and TMWTGG (uninteresting plot developments and weak, unpolished prose). I've always rather thought highly of DAF, despite its less than stellar start, and TSWLM never really put me off either. I think I'm most interested in revisiting that one.
Then having the slow burn and anxiety inducing steps into the world of Scaramanga (being used as a secretary, is a throwback to GF), it's wonderful tension that is so visceral, it makes my stomach turn.
Yes, I believe it's the scene with the birds. Been awhile.
I will admit both of those scenes are excellent.
I do very much like both GF and TSWLM and TB is excellent
I strongly disagree with you on TMWTGG, but love your defense of Thunderball. I find the movie a complete bore, but Fleming's novel is excellent. The Shrublands sequence in particular walks all over the filmed version, and the related interactions between M and Bond, Bond and May, and then Bond and M, are absolutely hilarious. As in a lot of Fleming's work, the author seems happy to wander around different topics and different little stories (Blofeld's chapter is excellent), before reluctantly dealing with the action that needs to take place, but if one has a problem with that, they should probably just avoid Fleming generally.
Just a quick note about Doctor No...it's one of my favorites, and I'm fine with some people not liking it, but has anyone else noticed how it's the one Fleming novel that's virtually never discussed? Very odd.
Anyway, my bland answer to the question is Diamonds Are Forever. I really like the relationship between James and Tiffany, but the plot and general goings-on are very humdrum.
TB is definately one of the best novels. Thrilling storey, great villain, original plot, locations, action etc. The Gardner novels are to be avoided I'm afraid.....he made very unwelcome changes. Recent continuation novels such as DMC etc are worth a read.
Colonel Sun is also written in the spirit of Fleming despite lacking the quality of his writing.
I'd 'definately' have to refute most of that I'm afraid.
TB is far from Fleming's best. Apart from the SPECTRE meeting at the start and the characterisation of Domino it's pretty pedestrian stuff like the film. Certainly the weakest of 'The SPECTRE Trilogy' as people are wont to call TB, OHMSS and YOLT these days.
Early Gardner has some redeeming stuff despite a few duds. Licence Renewed and Nobody Lives Forever are certainly worth a look. Post Win, Lose or Die they start dropping off at an alarming rate though. He's still the second best continuation author after Amis.
DMC is an absolute atrocity written by a smug author who clearly thought Bond was beneath him and that knocking out a Bond novel was the easiest thing in the world.
CS at least feels authentic although it does sag in the middle but quite Flemingesque start and finish.
Gardner can be left unread without much loss. His early books owe too much to the films. His middle books are less cartoony and better written but don't feel very Flemingian. His later books have little do with Fleming or Bond.
I recall being excited to purchase DMC when it came out to take on a vacation and making it through about a quarter of it before giving up, putting it on a shelf and never having the desire to revisit it. It seemed like box checking without feeling fresh or anywhere near Fleming.
Here I feel just the opposite. Love the film and am always underwhelmed with the book and prefer OHMSS and YOLT. Largo is one of the least interesting villains and it all seems to conclude kind of abruptly.
What I do like are Fleming's descriptions of the underwater world and the beginning passages describing Bond's health issues for going to Shrublands.
He was a writer that created from his own originality.
He wasn't a writer that could adapt from another source material, and he certainly wasn't a writer that could adapt one craft (screenplay), into another craft (a novel).
Conceptually TB is great, and Blofeld's an amazing character, but, the novel, as a whole, is boring as watching paint dry; a criticism I would never accuse of Fleming's other stories (whether in short form, or long)
+1.
A large part of the allure for me was the exotic Bahamas setting and the scuba diving sequences (especially when Bond first checked out the Disco).
Unlike many of the Bond novels, Thunderball, had almost its entirety in the film adaptation. Of course there were additions, most notably Bond's jet pack escape at the start! But otherwise the film follows the novel with very minor changes. Overall I think because of this the film is as solid as the novel. I love the film, but then again there isn't a Connery Bond film I don't like! The film definitely shows Fleming's touch, and desire, of wanting it adapted to a film.
Yes, who evidently evolved from Fatima Blush in the original screenplay. I've always wondered why Fleming didn't put Fatima in the novel. Maybe he felt there was only so much he could "safely" adapt under his own name.