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
After this, I decided to venture backwards in the canon and have a go at Jeffrey Deaver's Carte Blanche, which is the novel I'm reading now. I've barely got past the first few pages, and although I'm hoping to throw my hat in the air for real this time (I bought one specially for the occasion ;) ), I'm not holding high hopes.
But you know the old adage: If you hope for nothing, you'll never be disappointed.
Think you'll be eating your hat by the end of Carte Blanche!
I can immediately say that I find Licence Renewed to be a much better book. The story is better structured, well thought out and develops more interesting than Trigger Mortis. It also feels more classic, with its basic plot and straightforward sequence of events which makes the story move swiftly along. Licence Renewed has roughly the same lenght as Trigger Mortis, but I get much more engaged in it and it's often a real page-turner for me, even though it's the fourth time I'm reading it.
Horowitz has a writing that is closer to Fleming, but that isn't quite enough for me. Gardner has a writing that feels more "for real", he's writing the book from his persepective, while Horowitz is trying to emulate Fleming. Because of it parts of Trigger Mortis almost seem like fan fiction to me.
Gardner does his own thing, which I can understand annoy some fans, but for me that's the only way to do it. You can rarely imitate another author and make it convincing, the best way is always to write from your own perspective. That is probably why I have a soft spot for Garderns novels, they just feel so "genuine". It's not Fleming, he's not even trying to. It's just his own way of writing, and I like it!
Licence Renewed also has some really great characters. To me both Anton Murik and Lavender is classic and memorable characters, much more so than Jason Sin and Jeopardy Lane. Gardner takes much more time to let us get to know his characters, I never felt that in Trigger Mortis.
Licence Renewed is a solid Bond novel, and competes with some of Flemings books as well.
You don't inject your marijuanas?
You and me both do, but normal people eat it.
That's why we're the best and brightest of the bunch!
Yes that goes without saying. There, I said it.
I only smoke bananas.
I can relate to much of this. Gardners books are very well done. He put his own stamp on them without going off reservation.
TM is a good read. I am enjoying, but I do find there is maybe a little too much effort to mimic Fleming. I appreciate the effort, but it is a hard trick to pull off. I think the key is to get the character right (which is no small task) as well as the basic background,factual context and continuity, and then put your own stamp on it.
Still, unlike Faulks and Deaver, I would like to see Horowitz continue. He's doing a worthy job IMO. I haven't completely written off Boyd either. His effort was adequate, but Horowitz writes with a little more flair.
I think the danger some of these writers fall into though, is to unwittingly incorporate cinema Bond elements.
They should really just read all of Fleming ,plus Amis and Pearson and then dive write in.
Purge the films from memory banks.
Maybe read Gardner too, if author is writing Bond in the now, just to get a sense of how to write beyond the Fleming timeline.
I second this view that it would be good to see Horowitz continue, because I found Trigger Mortis to be the most engaging post-Fleming novel so far. It would be a shame for this book to be a one-hit wonder.
Also seconded is the notion of putting aside the movies. Let the movies stay where they are. This is the literary 007 here, so let's keep him just that.
My view is that mixing the movie Bond and the literary Bond is a bit like mixing orange juice with milk. They're both delicious on their own, but when you mix them, they are just an awful curdled mess.
I suppose many writers know that only a small portion of movie-goers will bother to read the books, so they incorporate movie elements to gain wider appeal. However, this move just alienates the literary 007 fans and the appeal is actually lessened as a result.
I feel slightly bad about buying these stories for the umpteenth time, but I'm a bit of a sucker for collecting various editions of the novels.
Well, I'm about eighty pages into Carte Blanche by Jeffrey Deaver and whilst it isn't badly written, it still hasn't moved into second gear, which is not a good sign. So far, I've encountered some fairly colourful characters, but sadly none of those are Bond. Our hero at this point seems to be all but desk-bound.
Still, I guess I'll extend that benefit just a little further...
It's one of my top 3 novels in the series: it's quite humorous and shows us interesting details about SPECTRE.
I love the opening sequence with the scorpion and the beetle. On this litterary Bondathon, I have rediscovered how great all of these books are. It has been many years since I last read them.
They kept a lot from this book for the screen treatment. In terms of scenes, not characterization. More than for the previous three for sure.
I had a bad experience with Devil May Care a few years ago when it came out. My father bought a copy and regretted it. I borrowed said copy and regretted it too. Carte Blanche, however, is not shaping up too badly, although I'm going to reserve judgement on these boards until I've finished it.
I don't know why Amis didn't write more Bond novels, but his book is certainly the only one which deserves to stand adjacent to Fleming's books.
They should have made a movie based on it as well. I know they used some parts of it for TWINE and DAD, but a full movie adaptation is due.
Thanks to EON I´m reading it now.
That Donovan Grant aka Krassno Granitski is one bad card.
He's almost monster-like in the novel. Robert Shaw, in comparison, is a lot more down-to-earth.
Can't say I enjoyed it. Prefer my literary Bond to fall within the Fleming time-line. Also not a fan of Deaver's. Readable, flawed and basically not one I'd keep in my collection. But that's just my opinion :-)
Anyway, soldier on!
one of my favorite
A favourite. Strangways returns for a brief moment until those pesky chigroes turn up. Major Boothroyd makes his entrance, but is nothing like Q of course. Bond has to give up his Beretta after 15 years, and goes on a vacation-like mission to Jamaica, just like Fleming himself.
Just started it, in fact I'm the chapter entitled The Wizard of Ice. It takes real balls from Mr. Fleming to dispense with his main character for about a third-ish of the novel. Each chapter one can feel the tension almost ratcheting up. Fleming serves up the best ensemble villains in the series.
Saw someone reading FRWL on the tube last night. Wasn't you was it?