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
The only continuation novel that I consider a superior work, and very much in the Fleming style is the Pearson book. I love that book! Not only a great read, but the perfect compliment to the Fleming ouevre. I notice Pearson blithley refrained from any Colonel Sun reference, at least I think he did.
As for the others, Gardner and Benson both provided enjoyable regular reads. I only have little quibbles with them. Nothing serious. Benson - maybe a bit of a fanboy, with his hamfisted efforts to link with Fleming characters decades later.
Higson and MP Diaries are both solid, although I could have done without Young Bond entirely.
The last 3 celebrity author efforts I think are the worst written. Main problem I think is that none of the authors are actual Bondphiles, so they all impose their own attitudes and style etc.
Colonel Sun is written well enough. Its just not a story that I find to be very interesting. I remember when I first read it, as an adolescent, I thought, wow Bond is sure getting lots of extra sex with this Greek chick with the un-Bond girl name. More than Fleming ever gave him. So there is that.
My 13-year-old self was impressed. But years later, as an adult, I found the book still dragged. The villain was still pathetic. The girl was still hot, but also nuts. Way too much Marxist lecturing at the end. Best parts of the book though, were when Bond finally took down the Colonel and when he sagely acknowleged the girl was better left to go her own way.
I would have dumped her, just so I wouldn't have to listen to her.
Yes I know she'd be crushed, ;) but you got to draw the line somewhere with the crazy talk.
I agree. Maybe Bond consumed such nasty things in abundance due to the fact that he was so bored with the whole affair. ;)
SOLO is by no means a fantastic book what with the absence of any real plot but there were a number of scenes (or whatever the word for the literary equivalent is) that I found entertaining with passages that evoked that Fleming feel. In terms of the latter, this is something that Faulks and Deaver were not able to achieve. As for Benson, occasionally he would partly achieve this. The problem with Benson is that he just couldn't write.
If Boyd hadn't have gone so overboard with the drinking and smoking, and crafted a good, solid plot then I feel it would have been a Bond book that I would have been proud to say is part of the literary Bond canon.
Not that he will, but I wouldn't be opposed to Boyd having another go if he were to promise that he'd scribe a proper Bondsque plot this time around.
Bring on the new Young Bond. We endure.
@timmer I agree whole heartedly.
Which is why I kind of think, that the Fleming continuation novels stopped with him. He sort of tied the Bond saga all up. We learned Bond's origins, more of his history, and of exploits post TMWTGG.
And even though Pearson finished with Bond rushing off to Australia to deal with the Bunt threat, he still pretty much had him retired, even if it was Mi6 that was trying to transition him out of field work, unless they really needed him for something that required his talents and experience, such as dealing with Fraulein Bunt.
The Pearson book seems to have been lost to posterity I think. But personally I go with Pearson's version of Young Bond. Pearson's story came first, long before Higson, and is firmly rooted in what Fleming had served up.
Higson IMO is writing an alternative pre-Fleming timeline. I'll stick with what Pearson published in 1973.
IFP really should have insisted that Higson make his YB consistent with the Pearson narrative. After all Glidrose also commissioned Pearson.
How tough would that have been, really?
Higson IMO is writing an alternative pre-Fleming timeline. I'll stick with what Pearson published in 1973.
IFP really should have insisted that Higson make his YB consistent with the Pearson narrative. After all Glidrose also commissioned Pearson.
How tough would that have been, really?"
Who knows how insistent they were but what we do know is that Higson was more than insistent on not reading Pearson's book which I felt was disappointing. He could have weaved Bond's adventures around Pearson's chronicles.
For me, the real biography is what Pearson wrote.
I very much agree. It's silly, and I'd even go so far as to say, disrespectful to Fleming's creation as each author has his own interpretations of the character. Moreover, it just means that there's too much inconsistency. Gardner updated Bond's personality subtly for the 80's, and succeeded, but the difference was that he wrote 14 books, so Bond's personality didn't change with every book.
It is certainly a bag of nuts and bolts. I'd love to know the sales numbers associated with the celebrity trilogy disaster.
My bet would be Faulks was huge due to the novelty factor - associating a literary name with the franchise and coinciding the launch with Fleming's centinarary.
Deaver good but well below Faulks.
Boyd disappointing.
Of course, IFP have trousered thousands for little effort so probably don't care. They certainly don't display the same passion for the literary franchise that the Brocoli family have for the movies and seem to have a very cavalier approach to things.
Personally, I'm not so hung up about the lack of continuity as I am with the quality.
On balance, I believe that period settings offer more possibilities for the development of the key ingredients that made the originals so remarkable. The march of technology has rendered espionage quite a dry business and successful modern practitioners tend to focus on moral ambiguity rather than good versus evil but if Silva can make Allon relevant in this day and age, I'm sure somebody should do the same for Bond.
For me, the absolute imperative remains to find the right author and this will mean IFP has to exercise more control. I'm not a huge fan of all the Bond movies (exception FRWL & SF) but it's clear that Brocoli controls the project and if they don't like the script outline it doesn't get done.
There is no reason for the books to be any different. These authors are not dealing with their own creation.
"There is no reason for the books to be any different. These authors are not dealing with their own creation."
There is no reason but it happens unfortunately. Look at Deaver, he turned the character into someone who was barely recognisable. Criminal.
Eon have improved the quality of their films as of late but they're not or at least weren't all heavenly angels. Look at what they let Tamahori do to DAD coupled with the terrible dialogue and action over kill in the Brosnan era.
I couldn't agree more. My point about the movies was that they had a perspective and were consistent. Even when they were consistently bad. I've never particularly liked the direction of the movies. Personally I loved FRWL, thought OHMSS was OK and quite liked Skyfall (more for the direction and the technical aspects than for Craig as Bond). That said, I'd never doubt eon's passion.
I do however doubt IFP's passion and intentions. They've gone for a fast buck and the outcome is a triumph of novelty over substance.
I remain convinced that it would be entirely possible to get a quality writer, get he or she to present a plot outline and then work with them throughout the process. The objective being not to stifle their creativity but rather to ensure that they deliver on their promise.
I know I sound like a broken record but Horowitz's Holmes novel is a master class in how to handle an iconic character.
If IFP go for another celebrity author for adult Bond then I will have arrived at the unfortunate conclusion that they are only interested in the money and have no interest in being loyal to Fleming's wonderful creation and releasing books that are of a high quality which don't demean our favourite spy, the latter of which has been happening. Very sad. We've been getting one crappy read after another and out of all the fictional heroes it could have happened to, it had to happen to Bond!
Certainly they could recruit a talented, suitable writer for Bond and have this author sign a 5 book contract, but will they? Or are they merely interested in continuing to use Bond like he's some generic brand of peas?
Some of you are, I think, a bit too harsh with it. It certainly is by far the best of the last three continuation novels we've had these last years.
Yes, the plot isn't very imaginative and yes Bond's infatuation with the actress is a bit astonishing but for the rest, I enjoyed the african part and the fact that Bond was really "investigating" ...
Deft observation there @villiers. So you would consider Le Carre, Furst ...etc the worthy thriller writers of today? I ask as I might just read some of them, although I have read both Le Carre and Silva.
Mon Dieu!
@CrabKey, I didn't think of that. Pray God you'r wrong - I couldn't take another of these stinkers!
Overall I enjoyed reading this novel a lot and thought it was a nice espionage thriller that, especially in the first half (the one set in Zanzarin) didn’t feel much “Bondian” though.
I did enjoy a lot the final act (Bond’s revenge plan and trip to the USA), i think it is well written, the plot seems consistent and plausible, some of the characters are “strong” and well-constructed (ex: Kobus Breed, Blessing) and I particularly liked the ending.
In fact I found ironic that the ending is the exact contradiction to the “supposed” SPECTRE movie ending.
But otherwise it is just a very fast paced, suspenseful, intriguing “African war zone” thriller novel.
I know you put part of this in spoilers but the fact that you mentioned that the ending contradicts the supposed ending of SPECTRE fills me with some ideas. Please don't mention anything even remotely related to SPECTRE on these literary threads. I don't want the movie to be ruined for myself.
Yes, sorry for that. After i posted the comment i thought about what you said. Wont do it again. cheers
If Solo lovers would like to comment it would be very interesting.
Maybe I'm just not the audience?
I much prefer the Bond books to the films and enjoy reading thrillers in general. In terms of SOLO, I just think it has some fun Bondian segments but the book as a whole, is lacklustre, with no real plot. Obviously I could never say that I am a SOLO lover so maybe I shouldn't have even made this post. :)
My parents are regular thriller readers like me and they didn't think SOLO was bad but they far from raved about it either, not unlike me. It just has some enjoyable, interesting extracts but overall isn't a good book.
As an avid reader, the only reason I slogged my way through it was because I couldn't believe how bad it was - particularly coming from William Boyd.
That said, if an occasional reader and lover of the movies picked it up and actually enjoyed it then I suppose that would be understandable. Given their lack of comparative.
One go forward question could be substitute the names of Fleming's characters and leave everything else in place — how many would he have sold and how would it have been reviewed. Hypothetical but interesting?
My view — not a lot and many critics would have said that Boyd had lost the plot!