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 mean, come on...SO CHEAP and just, utter, complete BULL****.
With Deaver's two collections of short stories called 'Twisted' and 'More Twisted' it certainly seems that is his repertoire. I have really enjoyed some other Deaver novels and was very excited for CB. After reading it though I believe this fixation with twists was to the detriment of a good book let alone a good Bond. I began to just wait for them instead of enjoying any story.
To bring this away from CB and back to topic, I like the idea of a new Author for each novel. I wasn't overly impressed with the Benson novels, while they were reasonable they came off as pastiche for me. If he'd penned a single book perhaps I wouldn't have tired so quickly.
I have a similar view with the Gardner novels, the quality just tailed off in later books. In my opinion Faulks was a move in the right direction. A literary author who tried to write Bond as he was, and while he may not have delivered a perfect Bond, I feel there were moments where he succeeded.
Yes, I'd be happy with this.
I don't want Deaver to return because of what he did to Bond. Basically, he made him NOT Bond. If I was to hear that Deaver had plans to make Bond back into the spy we all know and love, the literary character that is, then I woould be open to him writing another. If it was filled with an abundance of twists again, then, bring on the next author.
Fortunately, I still feel alot more excited about a new Bond book being released than I do a Bond film.
We don't need the chauvenism, racism or smoking but other than that there is no reason why he can't be the same person that he always was. The above facets are only minor and their absence do little to alter his original character. If I were writing a Bond book though, I'd still have Bond smoke the odd cigarette now and then when he's stressed. People pick on Bond because he's such an iconic figure which annoys me. Other literary characters are forgiven for taking a drag every now and then but not our poor Bond.
Bond feels pretty much like Bond in every 007 book by every author (and I've read them all, most, more than once) except in Carte Bol**cks.
I can't recall any direct racism on Bonds part, correct me if I'm wrong, although I agree some of the terminology used by Fleming is now, rightly, considered incorrect. As for the chauvenism, it's also perhaps a little old fashioned, and even out of fashion, to be extremely patriotic. Especially for the British. But then, that's who bond was. I think his sexism and chauvenism are core to the character he is. Many many times it was these impulses that controlled his voice.
Smoking. Let the guy smoke. Yes, it's bad for your health. He knows it quite clearly by Thunderball, and cuts down regularly when any physical exertion is required thereafter. I think this in itself communicates that smoking isn't necessarily all its's cracked up to be. If you are glamorising that is.
Fleming Bond. Why does this need to be bought to the present day? There are so many pitfalls with this concept I find it no surprise that we are feeling let down by reinterpretations such as CB.
Amis was bang on time, Gardner had just about enough time to keep Bond relevant in the 80's. Benson: I'm not convinced about his success rate. Faulks: Thankyou. Deaver: Bond in 2011....... I'm not sure we are ever going to get book Bond to be Bond in the modern era.
Haha, definitely a more accurate title!
I understand that the 007 formula sends the man all over the world, but that makes it the movie version. Fleming did more often use not as much change of scenery and did use him occasionaly as a detective (with a license to kill).
The books these days seem more about the movie version than the book version. In that aspect I rate some of the Gardner books far better.
True! CB did read like a second rate plot for a 80's/90's movie, rather than true literary 007. I have to say though, I think Gardner was equally as guilty of this. I recently re-read Licence Renewed and it's almost like reading a Roger film. "Q'ute" makes me gag, every time. I haven't read the other Gardners since I was a kid, so I'll have to revisit at some point.
I don't know if I agree that such facets are core to his character. What has always stood out to me about Bond is his brooding, loner, cynical, romantic, philosophical and sardonic nature, his low threshold for boredom leading to his longing for adventure and his inclination to melancholy coupled with his penchant for alcohol, promiscuity, Morland Specials and the finer things in life. Then we have the sadistic undertones. All these character traits still remain relevant to today's world. Having said this, I would welcome period novels with "open arms" as they say. I bet if we had period pieces the chauvenism would still be absent. We definitely need a writer with balls.
Diaries. But if Deaver is IFP's guy for the short term, then get him to work on another book. CB was crap by Bond standards, but at least it was a passable Bond read, so I'll take another please. For that matter QoS, IMO, was a pile of steaming dung by Bond-movie standards, but I have watched it well over 10 times. So just keep serving me my Bond thank-you. If it stinks, I will be happy to let you know, and then wait (only somewhat patiently) for the next serving.
I didn't say they were the only traits! I agree with your additional character profiling completely, but most of all the fact we need a writer with balls.
@timmer. After the Benson novels and CB I can't bring myself to agree with this. It's all personal preference of course, but some of those I think I would prefer not to have read. I'm all for taking the time to cook it right. Stop serving me luke warm Bond, I want it to be exactly the correct temperature!
Now what is it, crap or passable? Or passable crap? Is that maybe the same? Not to me it isn't.
I want a worthwhile read, not something where I regret having spent the time; life's too short for reading manure and it's actually pretty sad if one rather reads rubbish just because there's a few mentions of "James Bond" in it. If that's all you crave just take any book and write "Bond" instead of the main character's name, ready there you go.
My hope would be by having a new author for each new novel there's a greater chance to get one name on board who really has a knack for it. And also avoid that writers get bored of the job or run out of ideas.
And I haven't got that low standards that I'd put up with any third-rate bag of chapters either. I'd rather have no Bond book than a horrible one.
Here here! Kennon for Prime Minister!
So sue me, I can find enjoyment reading crap-Bond, as well as meh-Bond and the classic Fleming Bond. Higson was quite good and so was MP Diaries, but neither were really Bond. They were something else. Teen Bond (Higson) and Chick-lit Bond, with Bond (well represented mind you) only popping in and out of the narrative.
I have no inclination to be a purest. Just give me something Bond to read. None of it has been so bad, that I can't relax and just enjoy it for what it is, even if it is crap.
Again I do enjoy watching QoS, even if it is a big stinking pile of &*%*$ by Eon's standards. #22 on my Bond-list and with a bullet.
We haven't had a great Bond book since Pearson IMO, and that was almost 40 years ago, so I am not holding my breath. Carte Blanche Part Deux! Bring it on!
Door #3 please.Passable crap. I like that.
I think Pearson's Bond is pretty much Fleming's Bond. His biography of Bond is excellent and up there with the Fleming novels. I must have read it atleast five times. Easily the best Bond book since the Fleming series and no Bond book has reached it's high standards since. The Higson and Weinberg (I'd certainly be open to the latter writing a Bond book aswell) books are certainly very good but not up there with Pearson's. Much of what Bond talks about in this book sound like Fleming short stories or atleast pretty close.
The reason for the rebooted Bond in Carte Blanche is to attract new readers who are familiar with the Daniel Craig version of the character. Although the same could be said for Raymond Benson's version of Bond, who was largely the same as Brosnan's screen persona.
I don't believe that Higson will be offered the next Bond novel... he is best known as a children's author, and they will want a big name thriller writer for the job.
Yeah. Looking back it is a little BS.
I can't understand these comparisons between Daniel Craig's Bond and Deaver's Bond. How is the latter like Daniel Craig's interpretation? Craig's Bond is more similar to the original literary character than Deaver's.
The same goes for Benson's Bond and Brosnan's Bond. I wouldn't say the two are similar. Bensons's books as a whole are more like the films as this was how IFP wanted it at the time (unfortunate for Benson) but the book Bond has largely remained the same throughout the series, aside for the lack of chauvenism, smoking and racism which are only minor facts of his character anyway, except in CB. I've always felt like I was reading about the original literary Bond for the most part except for the film novelisations which don't count (excluding maybe Wood's TSWLM which I haven't read yet but it's sitting on my book shelf as I'm saving it due to the fact that I've heard it's really good) but Deaver's Bond isn't like any of the cinematic representations of the character or the literary man.
Just to clarify, you hate the idea of having different authors for each book?
What's happening IFP?! Throw us a bone...please! :)
Each writer should at least write 3 books or more to give them time to develop there own inturpatation of Bond.