SOLO by William Boyd - Reviews & Feedback

17810121318

Comments

  • Posts: 9,824
    I will check out Solo I haven't yet will probably pick it up this or next weekend however I find the comment nerve wracking to say the least.

    I've said this before but my brief view of the authors thus far

    Fleming Loved. I need to grow into him hough read all of his novels in my early to mid 20's and loved them all I still find Diamonds are Forever HUGELY underated and with a few tweaks (Jack Spang working for Quantum) could work very nicely for Bond 24.

    Amis Loved Colonel Sun great novel

    Gardner sorry gardener fans I don't hate him I don't love him either

    Benson I love He has become more and more a guilty pleasure of mine I admit as I realize 95% of bond fandom hate this guy and his books for some reason (much like Quantum of Solace is a guilty pleasure of mine)

    Higson haven't read but I will some day I promise

    Faulks Hated Devil May Care

    Deaver Hated Carte Blanc (which sucks as it was everything I wanted Modern Setting reborn Bond etc the execution sucked)

    Boyd reading the stuff here uhm yeah When will IFP get a competent writer for 007?
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited October 2013 Posts: 17,732
    Risico007 wrote:
    Benson I love He has become more and more a guilty pleasure of mine

    Surely not for his writing style, is it his plots you find excellent?
  • edited October 2013 Posts: 1,817
    Creasy47 wrote:
    chrisisall wrote:
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, wow, I thought I was alone on that.
    I like to read in strange positions sometimes, and a paperback can fit into any of them. A hard cover dictates TO ME how it will or won't be read. :))

    Couldn't agree more. It's one of the many reasons why I rarely purchase a book as soon as it comes out; can't stand hardbacks.

    To @Creasy47 and all the hardback-haters. Leaving price aside, don't you like the fact that hardbacks look better on bookshelves? I do. I'll have all my book (or the important ones) on hardbacks if I could afford it.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited October 2013 Posts: 28,694
    0013 wrote:
    Creasy47 wrote:
    chrisisall wrote:
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, wow, I thought I was alone on that.
    I like to read in strange positions sometimes, and a paperback can fit into any of them. A hard cover dictates TO ME how it will or won't be read. :))

    Couldn't agree more. It's one of the many reasons why I rarely purchase a book as soon as it comes out; can't stand hardbacks.

    To @Creasy47 and all the hardback-haters. Leaving price aside, don't you like the fact that hardbacks look better on bookshelves? I do. I'll have all my book (or the important ones) on hardbacks if I could afford it.

    I think paperbacks look just as good to be honest. Book spines are book spines.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,683
    If anything, hardbacks take up more space on my bookshelf. I can sometimes fit two books in place of just one hardback. Saves me space and money.
  • Posts: 1,817
    That's one point to paperbacks. But hardbacks take better care of books.
  • If only I'd got SOLO in e-book. Simply pressing delete would have rid me of the nonsense!
  • edited October 2013 Posts: 802
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Bentley wrote:
    It's interesting the effect that things can have.
    Just after reading SOLO, my wife offered to buy me the Bentley special edition of Casino Royale. Normally I would have jumped at the chance but such is my determination not to put another halfpenny in IFP's pocket, I declined. My wife was in shock - she couldn't believe that I would ever decline a sumptuous Bentley/Fleming.
    I doubt there will be a 60th joint celebration between Jensen & Cape - not that I'll be around to find out!

    Well in that case and assuming there are others out there who agree with your sentiments it seems that IFP need to get their act together as it were before releasing any more adult Bond continuation novels!

    The damage they have done with this will become a case study in brand management that will probably be titled; " The team that killed 007".

    Why is it that anyone with any rights to a slice of the Bond pie can't help but make a complete shambles of it? 007 Legends, Corgi ignoring the 50th, the lacklustre Bluray box set and now this hot on the heels of DMC and CB.

    Shouldn't Bond be a licence to print money for anyone with the slightest clue of what they are doing?

    At least EON seem to be competent although DAD can never be expunged from their CV.
    @TheWizardOflce makes an astute observation. Personaly I've long been of the opinion that the 'Bond' brand is suffering from the dilution that is the inevitable consequence of multiple licensing deals.The practice that led to kaos for the likes of Burberry and Ralph Lauren ( both skilfully recouped) and which killed the Pierre Cardin business.If the Bond brand is to be nurtured and developed it has to be managed and tightly controlled by one party that understand completely the qualities of 007 and the image they are looking to project.
    The problem for Bond has been, for a very long time, the multiple cast of characters involved. The dominant player is undoubtably EON and it would make great sense for them to buy IFP so that they could juxtapose and manage the literary and film Bond in tandem. They could still be appeal to slightly different audiences but they would be able to ensure a consistency of quality that would greatly enhance the longetivity of Bond.
    Imagine the situation if we'd had DAD and SOLO released in the same year - both the film and book Bond would be in question. As it is, the disastrous SOLO comes on the back of the excellent SKYFALL and happily,for the majority,it is the movie that is their latest and biggest memory of 007.
    In my opinion, Bond should be managed as a top luxury brand with quality and consistency in all things and @Bentley's refusal of his wife's kind offer to purchase the luxury Bentley edition of Casino Royale is a classic example of brand erosion. If the offer had been made prior to "The Celebrity Trilogy Disaster" I bet he'd have taken her hand off!
    EON, go for it, buy out IFP and run the brand properly.

  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited October 2013 Posts: 18,014
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Bentley wrote:
    It's interesting the effect that things can have.
    Just after reading SOLO, my wife offered to buy me the Bentley special edition of Casino Royale. Normally I would have jumped at the chance but such is my determination not to put another halfpenny in IFP's pocket, I declined. My wife was in shock - she couldn't believe that I would ever decline a sumptuous Bentley/Fleming.
    I doubt there will be a 60th joint celebration between Jensen & Cape - not that I'll be around to find out!

    Well in that case and assuming there are others out there who agree with your sentiments it seems that IFP need to get their act together as it were before releasing any more adult Bond continuation novels!

    The damage they have done with this will become a case study in brand management that will probably be titled; " The team that killed 007".

    Why is it that anyone with any rights to a slice of the Bond pie can't help but make a complete shambles of it? 007 Legends, Corgi ignoring the 50th, the lacklustre Bluray box set and now this hot on the heels of DMC and CB.

    Shouldn't Bond be a licence to print money for anyone with the slightest clue of what they are doing?

    At least EON seem to be competent although DAD can never be expunged from their CV.
    @TheWizardOflce makes an astute observation. Personaly I've long been of the opinion that the 'Bond' brand is suffering from the dilution that is the inevitable consequence of multiple licensing deals.The practice that led to kaos for the likes of Burberry and Ralph Lauren ( both skilfully recouped) and which killed the Pierre Cardin business.If the Bond brand is to be nurtured and developed it has to be managed and tightly controlled by one party that understand completely the qualities of 007 and the image they are looking to project.
    The problem for Bond has been, for a very long time, the multiple cast of characters involved. The dominant player is undoubtably EON and it would make great sense for them to buy IFP so that they could juxtapose and manage the literary and film Bond in tandem. They could still be appeal to slightly different audiences but they would be able to ensure a consistency of quality that would greatly enhance the longetivity of Bond.
    Imagine the situation if we'd had DAD and SOLO released in the same year - both the film and book Bond would be in question. As it is, the disastrous SOLO comes on the back of the excellent SKYFALL and happily,for the majority,it is the movie that is their latest and biggest memory of 007.
    In my opinion, Bond should be managed as a top luxury brand with quality and consistency in all things and @Bentley's refusal of his wife's kind offer to purchase the luxury Bentley edition of Casino Royale is a classic example of brand erosion. If the offer had been made prior to "The Celebrity Trilogy Disaster" I bet he'd have taken her hand off!
    EON, go for it, buy out IFP and run the brand properly.

    Eon Productions buying IFP? It's a bold idea, but wasn't that what the Benson era brought about already? And I gather you're not fan of his Bond novel and short stories. I think it is important that the literary anbd cinematic sides of Bond stay separate and do not converge. I can tell you quite categorically that that would lead to the fast dilution and indeed erosion of the literary Bond faster than anything else, the Celebrity Bond Trilogy quite apart.
  • Posts: 267
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Bentley wrote:
    It's interesting the effect that things can have.
    Just after reading SOLO, my wife offered to buy me the Bentley special edition of Casino Royale. Normally I would have jumped at the chance but such is my determination not to put another halfpenny in IFP's pocket, I declined. My wife was in shock - she couldn't believe that I would ever decline a sumptuous Bentley/Fleming.
    I doubt there will be a 60th joint celebration between Jensen & Cape - not that I'll be around to find out!

    Well in that case and assuming there are others out there who agree with your sentiments it seems that IFP need to get their act together as it were before releasing any more adult Bond continuation novels!

    The damage they have done with this will become a case study in brand management that will probably be titled; " The team that killed 007".

    Why is it that anyone with any rights to a slice of the Bond pie can't help but make a complete shambles of it? 007 Legends, Corgi ignoring the 50th, the lacklustre Bluray box set and now this hot on the heels of DMC and CB.

    Shouldn't Bond be a licence to print money for anyone with the slightest clue of what they are doing?

    At least EON seem to be competent although DAD can never be expunged from their CV.
    @TheWizardOflce makes an astute observation. Personaly I've long been of the opinion that the 'Bond' brand is suffering from the dilution that is the inevitable consequence of multiple licensing deals.The practice that led to kaos for the likes of Burberry and Ralph Lauren ( both skilfully recouped) and which killed the Pierre Cardin business.If the Bond brand is to be nurtured and developed it has to be managed and tightly controlled by one party that understand completely the qualities of 007 and the image they are looking to project.
    The problem for Bond has been, for a very long time, the multiple cast of characters involved. The dominant player is undoubtably EON and it would make great sense for them to buy IFP so that they could juxtapose and manage the literary and film Bond in tandem. They could still be appeal to slightly different audiences but they would be able to ensure a consistency of quality that would greatly enhance the longetivity of Bond.
    Imagine the situation if we'd had DAD and SOLO released in the same year - both the film and book Bond would be in question. As it is, the disastrous SOLO comes on the back of the excellent SKYFALL and happily,for the majority,it is the movie that is their latest and biggest memory of 007.
    In my opinion, Bond should be managed as a top luxury brand with quality and consistency in all things and @Bentley's refusal of his wife's kind offer to purchase the luxury Bentley edition of Casino Royale is a classic example of brand erosion. If the offer had been made prior to "The Celebrity Trilogy Disaster" I bet he'd have taken her hand off!
    EON, go for it, buy out IFP and run the brand properly.

    Eon Productions buying IFP? It's a bold idea, but wasn't that what the Benson era brought about already? And I gather you're not fan of his Bond novel and short stories. I think it is important that the literary anbd cinematic sides of Bond stay separate and do not converge. I can tell you quite categorically that that would lead to the fast dilution and indeed erosion of the literary Bond faster than anything else, the Celebrity Bond Trilogy quite apart.

    I'm not sure what Benson has to do with it. I don't think any of his dross was ever filmed but from a strategic perspective, I think @villiers53's idea has huge merit. As for literary dilution, I think we've already passed the rubicon on that one!
    Maybe @villiers53 could explain how he would see the two formats working together?

  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited October 2013 Posts: 18,014
    Bentley wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Bentley wrote:
    It's interesting the effect that things can have.
    Just after reading SOLO, my wife offered to buy me the Bentley special edition of Casino Royale. Normally I would have jumped at the chance but such is my determination not to put another halfpenny in IFP's pocket, I declined. My wife was in shock - she couldn't believe that I would ever decline a sumptuous Bentley/Fleming.
    I doubt there will be a 60th joint celebration between Jensen & Cape - not that I'll be around to find out!

    Well in that case and assuming there are others out there who agree with your sentiments it seems that IFP need to get their act together as it were before releasing any more adult Bond continuation novels!

    The damage they have done with this will become a case study in brand management that will probably be titled; " The team that killed 007".

    Why is it that anyone with any rights to a slice of the Bond pie can't help but make a complete shambles of it? 007 Legends, Corgi ignoring the 50th, the lacklustre Bluray box set and now this hot on the heels of DMC and CB.

    Shouldn't Bond be a licence to print money for anyone with the slightest clue of what they are doing?

    At least EON seem to be competent although DAD can never be expunged from their CV.
    @TheWizardOflce makes an astute observation. Personaly I've long been of the opinion that the 'Bond' brand is suffering from the dilution that is the inevitable consequence of multiple licensing deals.The practice that led to kaos for the likes of Burberry and Ralph Lauren ( both skilfully recouped) and which killed the Pierre Cardin business.If the Bond brand is to be nurtured and developed it has to be managed and tightly controlled by one party that understand completely the qualities of 007 and the image they are looking to project.
    The problem for Bond has been, for a very long time, the multiple cast of characters involved. The dominant player is undoubtably EON and it would make great sense for them to buy IFP so that they could juxtapose and manage the literary and film Bond in tandem. They could still be appeal to slightly different audiences but they would be able to ensure a consistency of quality that would greatly enhance the longetivity of Bond.
    Imagine the situation if we'd had DAD and SOLO released in the same year - both the film and book Bond would be in question. As it is, the disastrous SOLO comes on the back of the excellent SKYFALL and happily,for the majority,it is the movie that is their latest and biggest memory of 007.
    In my opinion, Bond should be managed as a top luxury brand with quality and consistency in all things and @Bentley's refusal of his wife's kind offer to purchase the luxury Bentley edition of Casino Royale is a classic example of brand erosion. If the offer had been made prior to "The Celebrity Trilogy Disaster" I bet he'd have taken her hand off!
    EON, go for it, buy out IFP and run the brand properly.

    Eon Productions buying IFP? It's a bold idea, but wasn't that what the Benson era brought about already? And I gather you're not fan of his Bond novel and short stories. I think it is important that the literary anbd cinematic sides of Bond stay separate and do not converge. I can tell you quite categorically that that would lead to the fast dilution and indeed erosion of the literary Bond faster than anything else, the Celebrity Bond Trilogy quite apart.

    I'm not sure what Benson has to do with it. I don't think any of his dross was ever filmed but from a strategic perspective, I think @villiers53's idea has huge merit. As for literary dilution, I think we've already passed the rubicon on that one!
    Maybe @villiers53 could explain how he would see the two formats working together?

    Well on re Benson I meant the other way round - that he had followed the changes at the time ushered in by the contemporaneous Brosnan era and as such had included many of the film tropes like Q (Major Boothroyd), Moneypenny from the films and a female M called Barbara Mawdsley. It's true that John Gardner had initiated this with GoldenEye novelisation and his last Bond novel Cold (1996), thouygh he was presumably only following orders from Glidrose.

    What I mean to say is that there is a danger that if Eon bought over IFP and had control over it that the tropes and style of the Bond films would change the literary Bond beyond recognition. It would be akin to the disaster that was the music chain HMV buying over Waterstones and just look what happened there.

    I too would like to hear more on this from the redoubtable @Villiers53.
  • Dragonpol wrote:
    Bentley wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Bentley wrote:
    It's interesting the effect that things can have.
    Just after reading SOLO, my wife offered to buy me the Bentley special edition of Casino Royale. Normally I would have jumped at the chance but such is my determination not to put another halfpenny in IFP's pocket, I declined. My wife was in shock - she couldn't believe that I would ever decline a sumptuous Bentley/Fleming.
    I doubt there will be a 60th joint celebration between Jensen & Cape - not that I'll be around to find out!

    Well in that case and assuming there are others out there who agree with your sentiments it seems that IFP need to get their act together as it were before releasing any more adult Bond continuation novels!

    The damage they have done with this will become a case study in brand management that will probably be titled; " The team that killed 007".

    Why is it that anyone with any rights to a slice of the Bond pie can't help but make a complete shambles of it? 007 Legends, Corgi ignoring the 50th, the lacklustre Bluray box set and now this hot on the heels of DMC and CB.

    Shouldn't Bond be a licence to print money for anyone with the slightest clue of what they are doing?

    At least EON seem to be competent although DAD can never be expunged from their CV.
    @TheWizardOflce makes an astute observation. Personaly I've long been of the opinion that the 'Bond' brand is suffering from the dilution that is the inevitable consequence of multiple licensing deals.The practice that led to kaos for the likes of Burberry and Ralph Lauren ( both skilfully recouped) and which killed the Pierre Cardin business.If the Bond brand is to be nurtured and developed it has to be managed and tightly controlled by one party that understand completely the qualities of 007 and the image they are looking to project.
    The problem for Bond has been, for a very long time, the multiple cast of characters involved. The dominant player is undoubtably EON and it would make great sense for them to buy IFP so that they could juxtapose and manage the literary and film Bond in tandem. They could still be appeal to slightly different audiences but they would be able to ensure a consistency of quality that would greatly enhance the longetivity of Bond.
    Imagine the situation if we'd had DAD and SOLO released in the same year - both the film and book Bond would be in question. As it is, the disastrous SOLO comes on the back of the excellent SKYFALL and happily,for the majority,it is the movie that is their latest and biggest memory of 007.
    In my opinion, Bond should be managed as a top luxury brand with quality and consistency in all things and @Bentley's refusal of his wife's kind offer to purchase the luxury Bentley edition of Casino Royale is a classic example of brand erosion. If the offer had been made prior to "The Celebrity Trilogy Disaster" I bet he'd have taken her hand off!
    EON, go for it, buy out IFP and run the brand properly.

    Eon Productions buying IFP? It's a bold idea, but wasn't that what the Benson era brought about already? And I gather you're not fan of his Bond novel and short stories. I think it is important that the literary anbd cinematic sides of Bond stay separate and do not converge. I can tell you quite categorically that that would lead to the fast dilution and indeed erosion of the literary Bond faster than anything else, the Celebrity Bond Trilogy quite apart.

    I'm not sure what Benson has to do with it. I don't think any of his dross was ever filmed but from a strategic perspective, I think @villiers53's idea has huge merit. As for literary dilution, I think we've already passed the rubicon on that one!
    Maybe @villiers53 could explain how he would see the two formats working together?

    Well on re Benson I meant the other way round - that he had followed the changes at the time ushered in by the contemporaneous Brosnan era and as such had included many of the film tropes like Q (Major Boothroyd), Moneypenny from the films and a female M called Barbara Mawdsley. It's true that John Gardner had initiated this with GoldenEye novelisation and his last Bond novel Cold (1996), thouygh he was presumably only following orders from Glidrose.

    What I mean to say is that there is a danger that if Eon bought over IFP and had control over it that the tropes and style of the Bond films would change the literary Bond beyond recognition. It would be akin to the disaster that was the music chain HMV buying over Waterstones and just look what happened there.

    I too would like to hear more on this from the redoubtable @Villiers53.

    The idea is a simple one.
    Bond is a much loved and cherished franchise but it is clear that many fans, particularly core consumers, have become very disillusioned with the literary offerings and the complete inconsistency is undoubtably having a negative impact on book sales.
    EON, with Craig have righted their ship culminating in 'Skyfall' being their most successful project ever and although the fact that literary Bond is stumbling probably doesn't particularly bother them, it doesn't work for them either.
    Purchasing IFP would probably be quite a low cost acquisition for them and in addition to giving them access to the very filmable 'Young Bond' and 'Moneypenny Diaries', it would allow them to harmonise the adult Bond franchise and in doing so optimise the literary and movie opportunity whilst strictly controlling licensing deals and co-branding activity and ensuring quality in everything they do.
    Frankly I only see upside in this and for EON it would be a slam dunk!
  • Posts: 267
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Bentley wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Bentley wrote:
    It's interesting the effect that things can have.
    Just after reading SOLO, my wife offered to buy me the Bentley special edition of Casino Royale. Normally I would have jumped at the chance but such is my determination not to put another halfpenny in IFP's pocket, I declined. My wife was in shock - she couldn't believe that I would ever decline a sumptuous Bentley/Fleming.
    I doubt there will be a 60th joint celebration between Jensen & Cape - not that I'll be around to find out!

    Well in that case and assuming there are others out there who agree with your sentiments it seems that IFP need to get their act together as it were before releasing any more adult Bond continuation novels!

    The damage they have done with this will become a case study in brand management that will probably be titled; " The team that killed 007".

    Why is it that anyone with any rights to a slice of the Bond pie can't help but make a complete shambles of it? 007 Legends, Corgi ignoring the 50th, the lacklustre Bluray box set and now this hot on the heels of DMC and CB.

    Shouldn't Bond be a licence to print money for anyone with the slightest clue of what they are doing?

    At least EON seem to be competent although DAD can never be expunged from their CV.
    @TheWizardOflce makes an astute observation. Personaly I've long been of the opinion that the 'Bond' brand is suffering from the dilution that is the inevitable consequence of multiple licensing deals.The practice that led to kaos for the likes of Burberry and Ralph Lauren ( both skilfully recouped) and which killed the Pierre Cardin business.If the Bond brand is to be nurtured and developed it has to be managed and tightly controlled by one party that understand completely the qualities of 007 and the image they are looking to project.
    The problem for Bond has been, for a very long time, the multiple cast of characters involved. The dominant player is undoubtably EON and it would make great sense for them to buy IFP so that they could juxtapose and manage the literary and film Bond in tandem. They could still be appeal to slightly different audiences but they would be able to ensure a consistency of quality that would greatly enhance the longetivity of Bond.
    Imagine the situation if we'd had DAD and SOLO released in the same year - both the film and book Bond would be in question. As it is, the disastrous SOLO comes on the back of the excellent SKYFALL and happily,for the majority,it is the movie that is their latest and biggest memory of 007.
    In my opinion, Bond should be managed as a top luxury brand with quality and consistency in all things and @Bentley's refusal of his wife's kind offer to purchase the luxury Bentley edition of Casino Royale is a classic example of brand erosion. If the offer had been made prior to "The Celebrity Trilogy Disaster" I bet he'd have taken her hand off!
    EON, go for it, buy out IFP and run the brand properly.

    Eon Productions buying IFP? It's a bold idea, but wasn't that what the Benson era brought about already? And I gather you're not fan of his Bond novel and short stories. I think it is important that the literary anbd cinematic sides of Bond stay separate and do not converge. I can tell you quite categorically that that would lead to the fast dilution and indeed erosion of the literary Bond faster than anything else, the Celebrity Bond Trilogy quite apart.

    I'm not sure what Benson has to do with it. I don't think any of his dross was ever filmed but from a strategic perspective, I think @villiers53's idea has huge merit. As for literary dilution, I think we've already passed the rubicon on that one!
    Maybe @villiers53 could explain how he would see the two formats working together?

    Well on re Benson I meant the other way round - that he had followed the changes at the time ushered in by the contemporaneous Brosnan era and as such had included many of the film tropes like Q (Major Boothroyd), Moneypenny from the films and a female M called Barbara Mawdsley. It's true that John Gardner had initiated this with GoldenEye novelisation and his last Bond novel Cold (1996), thouygh he was presumably only following orders from Glidrose.

    What I mean to say is that there is a danger that if Eon bought over IFP and had control over it that the tropes and style of the Bond films would change the literary Bond beyond recognition. It would be akin to the disaster that was the music chain HMV buying over Waterstones and just look what happened there.

    I too would like to hear more on this from the redoubtable @Villiers53.

    The idea is a simple one.
    Bond is a much loved and cherished franchise but it is clear that many fans, particularly core consumers, have become very disillusioned with the literary offerings and the complete inconsistency is undoubtably having a negative impact on book sales.
    EON, with Craig have righted their ship culminating in 'Skyfall' being their most successful project ever and although the fact that literary Bond is stumbling probably doesn't particularly bother them, it doesn't work for them either.
    Purchasing IFP would probably be quite a low cost acquisition for them and in addition to giving them access to the very filmable 'Young Bond' and 'Moneypenny Diaries', it would allow them to harmonise the adult Bond franchise and in doing so optimise the literary and movie opportunity whilst strictly controlling licensing deals and co-branding activity and ensuring quality in everything they do.
    Frankly I only see upside in this and for EON it would be a slam dunk!

    Now I'd buy shares in that but only if they'd fire the current IFP board!

  • edited October 2013 Posts: 802
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Bentley wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Bentley wrote:
    It's interesting the effect that things can have.
    Just after reading SOLO, my wife offered to buy me the Bentley special edition of Casino Royale. Normally I would have jumped at the chance but such is my determination not to put another halfpenny in IFP's pocket, I declined. My wife was in shock - she couldn't believe that I would ever decline a sumptuous Bentley/Fleming.
    I doubt there will be a 60th joint celebration between Jensen & Cape - not that I'll be around to find out!

    Well in that case and assuming there are others out there who agree with your sentiments it seems that IFP need to get their act together as it were before releasing any more adult Bond continuation novels!

    The damage they have done with this will become a case study in brand management that will probably be titled; " The team that killed 007".

    Why is it that anyone with any rights to a slice of the Bond pie can't help but make a complete shambles of it? 007 Legends, Corgi ignoring the 50th, the lacklustre Bluray box set and now this hot on the heels of DMC and CB.

    Shouldn't Bond be a licence to print money for anyone with the slightest clue of what they are doing?

    At least EON seem to be competent although DAD can never be expunged from their CV.
    @TheWizardOflce makes an astute observation. Personaly I've long been of the opinion that the 'Bond' brand is suffering from the dilution that is the inevitable consequence of multiple licensing deals.The practice that led to kaos for the likes of Burberry and Ralph Lauren ( both skilfully recouped) and which killed the Pierre Cardin business.If the Bond brand is to be nurtured and developed it has to be managed and tightly controlled by one party that understand completely the qualities of 007 and the image they are looking to project.
    The problem for Bond has been, for a very long time, the multiple cast of characters involved. The dominant player is undoubtably EON and it would make great sense for them to buy IFP so that they could juxtapose and manage the literary and film Bond in tandem. They could still be appeal to slightly different audiences but they would be able to ensure a consistency of quality that would greatly enhance the longetivity of Bond.
    Imagine the situation if we'd had DAD and SOLO released in the same year - both the film and book Bond would be in question. As it is, the disastrous SOLO comes on the back of the excellent SKYFALL and happily,for the majority,it is the movie that is their latest and biggest memory of 007.
    In my opinion, Bond should be managed as a top luxury brand with quality and consistency in all things and @Bentley's refusal of his wife's kind offer to purchase the luxury Bentley edition of Casino Royale is a classic example of brand erosion. If the offer had been made prior to "The Celebrity Trilogy Disaster" I bet he'd have taken her hand off!
    EON, go for it, buy out IFP and run the brand properly.

    Eon Productions buying IFP? It's a bold idea, but wasn't that what the Benson era brought about already? And I gather you're not fan of his Bond novel and short stories. I think it is important that the literary anbd cinematic sides of Bond stay separate and do not converge. I can tell you quite categorically that that would lead to the fast dilution and indeed erosion of the literary Bond faster than anything else, the Celebrity Bond Trilogy quite apart.

    I'm not sure what Benson has to do with it. I don't think any of his dross was ever filmed but from a strategic perspective, I think @villiers53's idea has huge merit. As for literary dilution, I think we've already passed the rubicon on that one!
    Maybe @villiers53 could explain how he would see the two formats working together?

    Well on re Benson I meant the other way round - that he had followed the changes at the time ushered in by the contemporaneous Brosnan era and as such had included many of the film tropes like Q (Major Boothroyd), Moneypenny from the films and a female M called Barbara Mawdsley. It's true that John Gardner had initiated this with GoldenEye novelisation and his last Bond novel Cold (1996), thouygh he was presumably only following orders from Glidrose.

    What I mean to say is that there is a danger that if Eon bought over IFP and had control over it that the tropes and style of the Bond films would change the literary Bond beyond recognition. It would be akin to the disaster that was the music chain HMV buying over Waterstones and just look what happened there.

    I too would like to hear more on this from the redoubtable @Villiers53. [/quot
  • Bentley wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Bentley wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Villiers53 wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Bentley wrote:
    It's interesting the effect that things can have.
    Just after reading SOLO, my wife offered to buy me the Bentley special edition of Casino Royale. Normally I would have jumped at the chance but such is my determination not to put another halfpenny in IFP's pocket, I declined. My wife was in shock - she couldn't believe that I would ever decline a sumptuous Bentley/Fleming.
    I doubt there will be a 60th joint celebration between Jensen & Cape - not that I'll be around to find out!

    Well in that case and assuming there are others out there who agree with your sentiments it seems that IFP need to get their act together as it were before releasing any more adult Bond continuation novels!

    The damage they have done with this will become a case study in brand management that will probably be titled; " The team that killed 007".

    Why is it that anyone with any rights to a slice of the Bond pie can't help but make a complete shambles of it? 007 Legends, Corgi ignoring the 50th, the lacklustre Bluray box set and now this hot on the heels of DMC and CB.

    Shouldn't Bond be a licence to print money for anyone with the slightest clue of what they are doing?

    At least EON seem to be competent although DAD can never be expunged from their CV.
    @TheWizardOflce makes an astute observation. Personaly I've long been of the opinion that the 'Bond' brand is suffering from the dilution that is the inevitable consequence of multiple licensing deals.The practice that led to kaos for the likes of Burberry and Ralph Lauren ( both skilfully recouped) and which killed the Pierre Cardin business.If the Bond brand is to be nurtured and developed it has to be managed and tightly controlled by one party that understand completely the qualities of 007 and the image they are looking to project.
    The problem for Bond has been, for a very long time, the multiple cast of characters involved. The dominant player is undoubtably EON and it would make great sense for them to buy IFP so that they could juxtapose and manage the literary and film Bond in tandem. They could still be appeal to slightly different audiences but they would be able to ensure a consistency of quality that would greatly enhance the longetivity of Bond.
    Imagine the situation if we'd had DAD and SOLO released in the same year - both the film and book Bond would be in question. As it is, the disastrous SOLO comes on the back of the excellent SKYFALL and happily,for the majority,it is the movie that is their latest and biggest memory of 007.
    In my opinion, Bond should be managed as a top luxury brand with quality and consistency in all things and @Bentley's refusal of his wife's kind offer to purchase the luxury Bentley edition of Casino Royale is a classic example of brand erosion. If the offer had been made prior to "The Celebrity Trilogy Disaster" I bet he'd have taken her hand off!
    EON, go for it, buy out IFP and run the brand properly.

    Eon Productions buying IFP? It's a bold idea, but wasn't that what the Benson era brought about already? And I gather you're not fan of his Bond novel and short stories. I think it is important that the literary anbd cinematic sides of Bond stay separate and do not converge. I can tell you quite categorically that that would lead to the fast dilution and indeed erosion of the literary Bond faster than anything else, the Celebrity Bond Trilogy quite apart.

    I'm not sure what Benson has to do with it. I don't think any of his dross was ever filmed but from a strategic perspective, I think @villiers53's idea has huge merit. As for literary dilution, I think we've already passed the rubicon on that one!
    Maybe @villiers53 could explain how he would see the two formats working together?

    Well on re Benson I meant the other way round - that he had followed the changes at the time ushered in by the contemporaneous Brosnan era and as such had included many of the film tropes like Q (Major Boothroyd), Moneypenny from the films and a female M called Barbara Mawdsley. It's true that John Gardner had initiated this with GoldenEye novelisation and his last Bond novel Cold (1996), thouygh he was presumably only following orders from Glidrose.

    What I mean to say is that there is a danger that if Eon bought over IFP and had control over it that the tropes and style of the Bond films would change the literary Bond beyond recognition. It would be akin to the disaster that was the music chain HMV buying over Waterstones and just look what happened there.

    I too would like to hear more on this from the redoubtable @Villiers53.

    The idea is a simple one.
    Bond is a much loved and cherished franchise but it is clear that many fans, particularly core consumers, have become very disillusioned with the literary offerings and the complete inconsistency is undoubtably having a negative impact on book sales.
    EON, with Craig have righted their ship culminating in 'Skyfall' being their most successful project ever and although the fact that literary Bond is stumbling probably doesn't particularly bother them, it doesn't work for them either.
    Purchasing IFP would probably be quite a low cost acquisition for them and in addition to giving them access to the very filmable 'Young Bond' and 'Moneypenny Diaries', it would allow them to harmonise the adult Bond franchise and in doing so optimise the literary and movie opportunity whilst strictly controlling licensing deals and co-branding activity and ensuring quality in everything they do.
    Frankly I only see upside in this and for EON it would be a slam dunk!

    Now I'd buy shares in that but only if they'd fire the current IFP board!

    Don't worry, that shower would be out of the door on day one!

  • Posts: 9,824
    So it's impossible to write a good bond thriller set in the modern era but keeping true to fleming's spirit....


    Good to know
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited October 2013 Posts: 18,014
    Risico007 wrote:
    So it's impossible to write a good bond thriller set in the modern era but keeping true to fleming's spirit....


    Good to know

    Not imposibble. John Gardner managed it on several occasions.

  • Risico007 wrote:
    So it's impossible to write a good bond thriller set in the modern era but keeping true to fleming's spirit....


    Good to know

    Sorry, maybe I blinked and missed this but who implies the above?

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,683
    Just checked Amazon to see the used prices, and I see there is a used copy on here for - with shipping - $45. Wow.
  • edited October 2013 Posts: 2,598
    chrisisall wrote:
    chrisisall wrote:
    Now, now. I know that not all Fleming fans will like it
    All I ask is a decent enough plot, a good villain, and most importantly, a brisk, lean writing style. When it comes out in paperback I'll find out.

    Seriously, we've had so much variance in the cinema Bond, does every novel have to be so absolutely 'Fleming'? :-?

    Only the character does. I don't mind if there is a different type of plot every now and then.

    Here we are:

    http://www.thebookbond.com/

    I'm just over halfway through the book and I'd say Cox pretty much hits the nail on the head in this review. He speaks more of Africa in this review and I'm up to the part where Bond is just about to leave Zanzarim.

    I do think Boyd had Bond drink a bit more than he did in the Fleming yarns.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,732
    Bounine wrote:
    I do think Boyd had Bond drink a bit more than he did in the Fleming yarns.
    Tracy was killed and he was brainwashed to kill M. More self-medication under these circumstances is an understandable choice for an author to make. Just sayin'.
  • edited October 2013 Posts: 2,598
    Well, I must say, I really enjoyed SOLO. I think Boyd should be invited back by IFP presuming he wants another chance. The only issue is that if he does scribe another one, I think that this time he should write a more traditional, Flemingsque type plot. I only really have two major issues with this book. The first, which is by far the biggest out of the two is the Africa affair. I don’t mind not getting your traditional Bondian style plot every now and then but it was just peculiar how M sent Bond off to Africa to end the civil war without even elaborating on anything. When Bond was there, he hadn’t any specific plan in mind. He didn’t know what the hell he had to do. There were some interesting, entertaining situations in Zanzarim though.

    The second thing is that a more colourful, cultured location could have been used instead of Washington DC. If Boyd was insistent on America then somewhere like New York as was suggested in the Mi6 review would have been much better or my preference, New Orleans, with its jazz, voodoo and a subtle hint at the paranormal. This could have been worked into the plot. Personally, I’d like to see the literary Bond in South America and Lisbon, as far as Europe goes.

    I thought that Boyd did a splendid job in digging up that old Fleming feel. There was the odd tweak here and there for the purpose of a modern audience but I suppose one has to expect this. It’s always nice to read about Bond in new situations too and discover how he reacts to them, in this case, him witnessing the starving children.

    Likes (there are a good few but here are the main ones):

    *
    Bond’s trek through the forest - Flemingsque.
    *
    Bond’s little war strategy when he helped out Kobus Breed. Most interesting.
    *
    Bond’s infiltration into the Washington estate and the action that took place – Flemingsque, although not so much in terms of how he dealt with Breed but entertaining all the same. I liked that he really gave it to him.
    * All Bond’s wonderful character development. Boyd frequently invited us into Bond's thought process which is a very important ingredient in the Bond novels.
    *
    The very end where Bond decides to end it with Bryce in order to protect her. Touching little note he wrote too.
    .
    * Loved all the scenes in London and Edinburgh.

    * Liked the way Boyd weaved Bond's war experiences into the story. Most intriguing.

    * The conversation between Bond and M in Scotland. Wonderful non-sexual chemistry. :)


    Dislikes (or should I say minor niggles):

    * I felt that Bond drunk a bit too much. If he had have drunk the same amount as he did in the Fleming books then this would have been fine. He’s a heavy drinker in Fleming’s stories but Boyd upped the ante in SOLO.

    * Boyd could have included a little more description of the locations.

    * Oh, this is more than a minor niggle but fortunately it was just a short scene and Boyd got it right with Bond for the most part:
    Bond breaking into Bryce’s house. This was weird and felt too unlike what the original Bond would have done. Upon knocking on the door and receiving no answer he would have just shrugged his shoulders and left or just skipped off to a Richmond pub (there’s a pleasant enough one right beside the river that I went into when I took a stroll along there a few years ago) for an hour to kill some time, then returned. If there was still no answer then he would have left.

    * Bond occasionally used common phrases such as “…and the rest is history..”. Not this particular one though as I can’t actually remember the ones that he did use now. Thankfully it isn’t too often though.

    *
    No more Major Boothroyd but I suppose this is more realistic. People move on. M is still there though. He is a major character however. In terms of the new chap in Q branch, there was no background history for him. There should have been. A paragraph outlining the boy's background would have been good. The same goes for Bond's new secretary.

    Boyd has an exhaustive knowledge of Fleming’s books and largely understands the character and as I said before, he did a great job in establishing that Fleming atmosphere. All he needs to do is improve his plotting. He's an established writer and composing simple, straight forward plots like Fleming's would be easy for him. I would have ranked Boyd above Wood and Amis (CS is ploddish and on the dull side) and put him up there with Gardner and Higson on this thread: http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/comment/277332 had he have written a more solid Fleming/Bond type story without the wishy washiness he gave us for the African section of the book. It's very difficult to imagine it being hard for him to achieve this. He is an established, successful writer. If Boyd is keen to grab the gig for a second time then I hope that IFP invite him back (I wonder if they've ever had plans to invite authors back for a second go) but, a traditional Flemingsque plot next time would be nice. Well, even just a more solid spy thriller type yarn. Things developed in America though and when Bond went back to Zanzarim with Felix. Also, Boyd has a very nice, elegant, smooth writing style.

    If you read these sorts of forums, then, great effort Mr. Boyd. Thanks for a very entertaining read!

    3.8/5
  • Posts: 3,291
    Bounine wrote:
    Well, I must say, I really enjoyed SOLO. I think Boyd should be invited back by IFP presuming he wants another chance. The only issue is that if he does scribe another one, I think that this time he should write a more traditional, Flemingsque type plot. I only really have two major issues with this book. The first, which is by far the biggest out of the two is the Africa affair. I don’t mind not getting your traditional Bondian style plot every now and then but it was just peculiar how M sent Bond off to Africa to end the civil war without even elaborating on anything. When Bond was there, he hadn’t any specific plan in mind. He didn’t know what the hell he had to do. There were some interesting, entertaining situations in Zanzarim though.

    The second thing is that a more colourful, cultured location could have been used instead of Washington DC. If Boyd was insistent on America then somewhere like New York as was suggested in the Mi6 review would have been much better or my preference, New Orleans, with its jazz, voodoo and a subtle hint at the paranormal. This could have been worked into the plot. Personally, I’d like to see the literary Bond in South America and Lisbon, as far as Europe goes.

    I thought that Boyd did a splendid job in digging up that old Fleming feel. There was the odd tweak here and there for the purpose of a modern audience but I suppose one has to expect this. It’s always nice to read about Bond in new situations too and discover how he reacts to them, in this case, him witnessing the starving children.

    Likes (there are a good few but here are the main ones):

    *
    Bond’s trek through the forest - Flemingsque.
    *
    Bond’s little war strategy when he helped out Kobus Breed. Most interesting.
    *
    Bond’s infiltration into the Washington estate and the action that took place – Flemingsque, although not so much in terms of how he dealt with Breed but entertaining all the same. I liked that he really gave it to him.
    * All Bond’s wonderful character development.
    *
    The very end where Bond decides to end it with Bryce in order to protect her. Touching little note he wrote too.
    .
    * Loved all the scenes in London and Edinburgh.

    * The conversation between Bond and M in Scotland. Wonderful non-sexual chemistry. :)


    Dislikes (or should I say minor niggles):

    * I felt that Bond drunk a bit too much. If he had have drunk the same amount as he did in the Fleming books then this would have been fine. He’s a heavy drinker in Fleming’s stories but Boyd upped the ante in SOLO.

    * Boyd could have included a little more description of the locations.

    * Oh, this is more than a minor niggle but fortunately it was just a short scene and Boyd got it right with Bond for the most part:
    Bond breaking into Bryce’s house. This was weird and felt too unlike what the original Bond would have done. Upon knocking on the door and receiving no answer he would have just shrugged his shoulders and left or just skipped off to a Richmond pub (there’s a pleasant enough one right beside the river that I went into when I took a stroll along there a few years ago) for an hour to kill some time, then returned. If there was still no answer then he would have left.

    * Bond occasionally used common phrases such as “…and the rest is history..”. Not this particular one though as I can’t actually remember the ones that he did use now. Thankfully it isn’t too often though.

    *
    No more Major Boothroyd but I suppose this is more realistic. People move on. M is still there though. He is a major character however. In terms of the new chap in Q branch, there was no background history for him. There should have been. A paragraph outlining the boy's background would have been good. The same goes for Bond's new secretary.

    Boyd has an exhaustive knowledge of Fleming’s books and largely understands the character and as I said before, he did a great job in establishing that Fleming atmosphere. All he needs to do is improve his plotting. He's an established writer and composing simple, straight forward plots like Fleming's would be easy for him. I would have ranked Boyd above Wood and Amis (CS is ploddish and on the dull side) and put him up there with Gardner and Higson on this thread: http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/comment/277332 had he have written a more solid Fleming/Bond type story without the wishy washiness he gave us for the African section of the book. It's very difficult to imagine it being hard for him to achieve this. He is an established, successful writer. If Boyd is keen to grab the gig for a second time then I hope that IFP invite him back (I wonder if they've ever had plans to invite authors back for a second go) but, a traditional Flemingsque plot next time would be nice. Well, even just a more solid spy thriller type yarn. Things developed in America though and when Bond went back to Zanzarim with Felix. Also, Boyd has a very nice, elegant, smooth writing style.

    If you read these sorts of forums, then, great effort Mr. Boyd. Thanks for a very entertaining read!

    3.8/5

    Nice to read a positive review for a change on here, and I know Bounine is a Fleming fan like I am.

    Along with some of the other positive reviews I have read out there, this has encouraged me somewhat to buy the book now. I did read the first few pages online, and it is nice to see Boyd returning to an essential Fleming trait which completely bypassed that previous 2 shockingly awful novels, and that is being inside Bond's head. Reading his thoughts.

    I always thought this was one of the crucial, major factors of the Bond novels, and how the previous 2 writers totally avoided this just beggars belief.
  • To be honest, I think we've all got to be a bit desperate to like this.
    A dysfunctional, unbelievable plot. No credible mission. Seedy, uninteresting and exceedingly unglamorous locations (exception England). Zero sexual frisson - Boyd's Bond is a Savilesque peeping tom. Undesirable highlife accessories - Jensen cars and Airtex shirts. Unbelievable drinking and although his smoking is consistent with Fleming - given that he is supposed to be 45 years old — if he hadn't slowed right down by then or quit, he would have been lugging his oxygen tank around with him.
    Frankly Fleming made you dream of fare away places, beautiful girls, luxurious lifestyles.
    Boyd gives you nightmares!
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Villiers53 wrote:
    To be honest, I think we've all got to be a bit desperate to like this.
    A dysfunctional, unbelievable plot. No credible mission. Seedy, uninteresting and exceedingly unglamorous locations (exception England). Zero sexual frisson - Boyd's Bond is a Savilesque peeping tom. Undesirable highlife accessories - Jensen cars and Airtex shirts. Unbelievable drinking and although his smoking is consistent with Fleming - given that he is supposed to be 45 years old — if he hadn't slowed right down by then or quit, he would have been lugging his oxygen tank around with him.
    Frankly Fleming made you dream of fare away places, beautiful girls, luxurious lifestyles.
    Boyd gives you nightmares!

    I want to put that on a poster! :))
  • edited October 2013 Posts: 2,598
    Bounine wrote:
    Well, I must say, I really enjoyed SOLO. I think Boyd should be invited back by IFP presuming he wants another chance. The only issue is that if he does scribe another one, I think that this time he should write a more traditional, Flemingsque type plot. I only really have two major issues with this book. The first, which is by far the biggest out of the two is the Africa affair. I don’t mind not getting your traditional Bondian style plot every now and then but it was just peculiar how M sent Bond off to Africa to end the civil war without even elaborating on anything. When Bond was there, he hadn’t any specific plan in mind. He didn’t know what the hell he had to do. There were some interesting, entertaining situations in Zanzarim though.

    The second thing is that a more colourful, cultured location could have been used instead of Washington DC. If Boyd was insistent on America then somewhere like New York as was suggested in the Mi6 review would have been much better or my preference, New Orleans, with its jazz, voodoo and a subtle hint at the paranormal. This could have been worked into the plot. Personally, I’d like to see the literary Bond in South America and Lisbon, as far as Europe goes.

    I thought that Boyd did a splendid job in digging up that old Fleming feel. There was the odd tweak here and there for the purpose of a modern audience but I suppose one has to expect this. It’s always nice to read about Bond in new situations too and discover how he reacts to them, in this case, him witnessing the starving children.

    Likes (there are a good few but here are the main ones):

    *
    Bond’s trek through the forest - Flemingsque.
    *
    Bond’s little war strategy when he helped out Kobus Breed. Most interesting.
    *
    Bond’s infiltration into the Washington estate and the action that took place – Flemingsque, although not so much in terms of how he dealt with Breed but entertaining all the same. I liked that he really gave it to him.
    * All Bond’s wonderful character development.
    *
    The very end where Bond decides to end it with Bryce in order to protect her. Touching little note he wrote too.
    .
    * Loved all the scenes in London and Edinburgh.

    * The conversation between Bond and M in Scotland. Wonderful non-sexual chemistry. :)


    Dislikes (or should I say minor niggles):

    * I felt that Bond drunk a bit too much. If he had have drunk the same amount as he did in the Fleming books then this would have been fine. He’s a heavy drinker in Fleming’s stories but Boyd upped the ante in SOLO.

    * Boyd could have included a little more description of the locations.

    * Oh, this is more than a minor niggle but fortunately it was just a short scene and Boyd got it right with Bond for the most part:
    Bond breaking into Bryce’s house. This was weird and felt too unlike what the original Bond would have done. Upon knocking on the door and receiving no answer he would have just shrugged his shoulders and left or just skipped off to a Richmond pub (there’s a pleasant enough one right beside the river that I went into when I took a stroll along there a few years ago) for an hour to kill some time, then returned. If there was still no answer then he would have left.

    * Bond occasionally used common phrases such as “…and the rest is history..”. Not this particular one though as I can’t actually remember the ones that he did use now. Thankfully it isn’t too often though.

    *
    No more Major Boothroyd but I suppose this is more realistic. People move on. M is still there though. He is a major character however. In terms of the new chap in Q branch, there was no background history for him. There should have been. A paragraph outlining the boy's background would have been good. The same goes for Bond's new secretary.

    Boyd has an exhaustive knowledge of Fleming’s books and largely understands the character and as I said before, he did a great job in establishing that Fleming atmosphere. All he needs to do is improve his plotting. He's an established writer and composing simple, straight forward plots like Fleming's would be easy for him. I would have ranked Boyd above Wood and Amis (CS is ploddish and on the dull side) and put him up there with Gardner and Higson on this thread: http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/comment/277332 had he have written a more solid Fleming/Bond type story without the wishy washiness he gave us for the African section of the book. It's very difficult to imagine it being hard for him to achieve this. He is an established, successful writer. If Boyd is keen to grab the gig for a second time then I hope that IFP invite him back (I wonder if they've ever had plans to invite authors back for a second go) but, a traditional Flemingsque plot next time would be nice. Well, even just a more solid spy thriller type yarn. Things developed in America though and when Bond went back to Zanzarim with Felix. Also, Boyd has a very nice, elegant, smooth writing style.

    If you read these sorts of forums, then, great effort Mr. Boyd. Thanks for a very entertaining read!

    3.8/5

    Nice to read a positive review for a change on here, and I know Bounine is a Fleming fan like I am.

    Along with some of the other positive reviews I have read out there, this has encouraged me somewhat to buy the book now. I did read the first few pages online, and it is nice to see Boyd returning to an essential Fleming trait which completely bypassed that previous 2 shockingly awful novels, and that is being inside Bond's head. Reading his thoughts.

    I always thought this was one of the crucial, major factors of the Bond novels, and how the previous 2 writers totally avoided this just beggars belief.

    Oh yes, I forgot about the fact that Boyd invites us into Bond's thought process. Shame on me as it is a major, necessary ingredient in the Bond books and thankfully Boyd dishes this up in generous portions. I'll add this to my list above. :) I remember criticising Deaver's Carte Blanche for heavily lacking this.
  • edited October 2013 Posts: 2,598
    Villiers53 wrote:
    To be honest, I think we've all got to be a bit desperate to like this.
    A dysfunctional, unbelievable plot. No credible mission. Seedy, uninteresting and exceedingly unglamorous locations (exception England). Zero sexual frisson - Boyd's Bond is a Savilesque peeping tom. Undesirable highlife accessories - Jensen cars and Airtex shirts. Unbelievable drinking and although his smoking is consistent with Fleming - given that he is supposed to be 45 years old — if he hadn't slowed right down by then or quit, he would have been lugging his oxygen tank around with him.
    Frankly Fleming made you dream of fare away places, beautiful girls, luxurious lifestyles.
    Boyd gives you nightmares!

    The plot is no more unbelievable than what Fleming gave us. LOL. It's just a different type of plot. It is a bit dysfunctional though and I have mentioned this already. I still find the book a page turner though. I really enjoyed it. It's not perfect but it was a good effort.

    I'm glad Bond went to Africa. I found it interesting. As I said though, I wished he had have gone somewhere different to Washington as it does lack glamour obviously. I've never found London particularly glamorous. The odd part of the city has a bit of it. It aint Paris though.

    The peeping tom incident wasn't right but thankfully Boyd got it right most of the time in terms of Bond's personality. For the most part, Boyd did a great job in developing Bond's character. This is part of the reason that I liked this book.

    The impression I got was that Bond didn't smoke near as often in SOLO than he did in Fleming's books.

    Clothes: Bond wore hand knitted silk ties and silk shirts. Airtex? Can't remember. Are they made of cotton like the sea island cotton shirts Fleming had Bond wore? If Bond only wore them in the bush then this is fine.

    Another thing I forgot to mention is that I loved how Boyd weaved Bond's war experiences into the tale.

    If Boyd were to have another go, if he were to just give us a traditional, Flemingsque plot and send Bond to exotic, glamorous locations next time I think we'd be on to a winner. Whether he would actually be interested in writing such a plot though, I'm not sure, presuming he's even keen to write another one. What IFP actually plan to do though, who knows. Time will tell...
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,353
    Sorry to say but Boyd has already said he won't write another Bond novel.
  • edited October 2013 Posts: 2,598
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Sorry to say but Boyd has already said he won't write another Bond novel.

    I really hope then that IFP get someone to write 4 or 5 next time. This way the author can learn from his/her mistakes and improve upon them. One author per book just isn't an effective plan. An established author but a less famous one who doesn't have his own strict set of ideas and is willing to adapt would be a good idea.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited October 2013 Posts: 17,732
    Bounine wrote:
    I really hope then that IFP get someone to write 4 or 5 next time.
    I kind of like one offs due to the new voice of each author.
    But we've had that now.
    Yeah, another such as Gardner would be good.

    And IMO the only place to go continuing from Fleming directly is Bond's retirement. It might be good to leave SOLO as the finale for that timeline, eh?
    What do you think?
Sign In or Register to comment.