Who Should Write the Next Bond Continuation Novel?

12346»

Comments

  • Campbell2Campbell2 Epsilon Rho Rho house, Bending State University
    edited October 2014 Posts: 299
    Picked up Stormbreaker yesterday, halfway through already. It's fun so far, a slick read, I'm pleasantly surprised. Gives me hope for Horowitz trying his hand on Bond.
  • DragonpolDragonpol The Crazy World of David Dragonpol
    Posts: 14,718
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    Congratulations to all that rooted for Anthony Horowitz !
    A splendid result that will doubtless see 007 regain his literary momentum.

    Indeed, I'm ready to give myself a good pat on the back with the advent of this most glorious news for the literary James Bond and the Continuation. ;)
  • edited October 2014 Posts: 4,622
    If he's got @villiers53 won over, we must really be on to something. ;)

    All kidding aside, there is real upside potential here.
  • DragonpolDragonpol The Crazy World of David Dragonpol
    Posts: 14,718
    timmer wrote: »
    If he's got @villiers53 won over, we must really be on to something. ;)

    All kidding aside, there is real upside potential here.

    Indeed - that's one tough nut to crack, plus thanks for liking my avatar @timmer!
  • Villiers53 wrote: »
    007InVT wrote:
    My clear choice for this right now is Charles Cumming.

    He's ex-MI5; has written cracking spy thrillers with 'Trinity Six'; 'A Foreign Country'; 'Typhoon' and 'A Spy By Nature'; he's a fan of Fleming and all the great spy novelists such as Greene, Le Carre and Ambler.

    I think @007InVT has it cracked with Cumming if it is going to be a contemporary Bond.
    I say this because Charles knows the modern technology of spying and he manages to incorporate it into his works without loosing suspense, character or narrative flow.
    If Bond is to continue in the '60s, I would go for Andrew Horowitz (the 'House Of Silk' is fabulous) or Alan Furst who is, without doubt today's Eric Ambler.
    All of that said, the best idea for the next adult continuation is to have Charlie Higson take us through Bond's war and up to 'Casino Royale'. There must be a trilogy in that?
    As for another one from Boyd - I'll die with my leg up before he'll see any more of my money after the last debacle!

    Not that this is a competition but @villiers53 has been shouting for Horowitz from the get go!
    As has @CraigMooreOHMSS.
  • The Evening Standard reported that Horowitz wanted to do a Bond novel but heartily disliked Faulks and Deaver's efforts and in any case wasn't sure he would as the other two had mucked about with it too much. Which I agree with, so some hope there.

    Also it was reported that his Bond book would be set in the world of 1950s motor sport. Therefore it takes place in between the Fleming adventures and avoids the whole Bond getting old guff of Devil May Care and the last one.
  • DragonpolDragonpol The Crazy World of David Dragonpol
    Posts: 14,718
    The Evening Standard reported that Horowitz wanted to do a Bond novel but heartily disliked Faulks and Deaver's efforts and in any case wasn't sure he would as the other two had mucked about with it too much. Which I agree with, so some hope there.

    Also it was reported that his Bond book would be set in the world of 1950s motor sport. Therefore it takes place in between the Fleming adventures and avoids the whole Bond getting old guff of Devil May Care and the last one.

    Indeed, that sounds like very good news. Thanks for sharing, Nap! :)
  • The Evening Standard reported that Horowitz wanted to do a Bond novel but heartily disliked Faulks and Deaver's efforts and in any case wasn't sure he would as the other two had mucked about with it too much. Which I agree with, so some hope there.

    Also it was reported that his Bond book would be set in the world of 1950s motor sport. Therefore it takes place in between the Fleming adventures and avoids the whole Bond getting old guff of Devil May Care and the last one.

    Good that our man Horowitz agrees with the more discerning Bondologists who haunt this hallowed cyber hall.
    I also think it makes great sense that his book is set in the '50s albeit I would have loved him to make it a prequel to Casino Royale. That IMNSHO (in my not so humble opinion) would have been perfect albeit I do find the idea of that era's motor sport incredibly glamorous.
    I wonder if Andrew will signal which Fleming adventures his book is between?

  • edited October 2014 Posts: 2,531
    The Evening Standard reported that Horowitz wanted to do a Bond novel but heartily disliked Faulks and Deaver's efforts and in any case wasn't sure he would as the other two had mucked about with it too much. Which I agree with, so some hope there.

    Also it was reported that his Bond book would be set in the world of 1950s motor sport. Therefore it takes place in between the Fleming adventures and avoids the whole Bond getting old guff of Devil May Care and the last one.

    Indeed it is encouraging that Horowitz dislikes DMC and CB. I wonder if he's read SOLO. There were some good bits in this book I felt but overall, obviously a pretty lacklustre story.

    I like how it will supposedly be set between the Fleming stories. Time for a change from the usual pre and post Fleming adventures.
  • Posts: 7,642
    Bounine wrote: »
    The Evening Standard reported that Horowitz wanted to do a Bond novel but heartily disliked Faulks and Deaver's efforts and in any case wasn't sure he would as the other two had mucked about with it too much. Which I agree with, so some hope there.

    Also it was reported that his Bond book would be set in the world of 1950s motor sport. Therefore it takes place in between the Fleming adventures and avoids the whole Bond getting old guff of Devil May Care and the last one.

    Indeed it is encouraging that Horowitz dislikes DMC and CB. I wonder if he's read SOLO. There were some good bits in this book I felt but overall, obviously a pretty lacklustre story.

    I like how it will supposedly be set between the Fleming stories. Time for a change from the usual pre and post Fleming adventures.

    Mr Horowitz is tumbling down in my appreciation if he really said something negative about his fellow writers, a long time before we can judge his effort. I am just not a great fan of writer who feel that they need to put their colleagues down.
  • edited October 2014 Posts: 2,531
    I do agree. Some professionalism is always required. For me, and now that he has supposedly said it, it is encouraging that he doesn't like these books as they are pretty poor in my opinion. Still, as I've said, I won't be getting my hopes up. Just because he doesn't like them, it doesn't necessarily mean that he's going to write a cracker of a Bond book. Of course, I would never write anyone off before reading the final result either. Moreover, the fact that a number of fans have always been keen on having H for the gig gives me a little more confidence. We shall see, however...
  • SaintMark wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    The Evening Standard reported that Horowitz wanted to do a Bond novel but heartily disliked Faulks and Deaver's efforts and in any case wasn't sure he would as the other two had mucked about with it too much. Which I agree with, so some hope there.

    Also it was reported that his Bond book would be set in the world of 1950s motor sport. Therefore it takes place in between the Fleming adventures and avoids the whole Bond getting old guff of Devil May Care and the last one.

    Indeed it is encouraging that Horowitz dislikes DMC and CB. I wonder if he's read SOLO. There were some good bits in this book I felt but overall, obviously a pretty lacklustre story.

    I like how it will supposedly be set between the Fleming stories. Time for a change from the usual pre and post Fleming adventures.

    Mr Horowitz is tumbling down in my appreciation if he really said something negative about his fellow writers, a long time before we can judge his effort. I am just not a great fan of writer who feel that they need to put their colleagues down.

    He didn't say anything remotely derogative about them as writers. He merely said that he disliked their Bond books.
    How can this be wrong?
    In this politically correct world are we not allowed to express our views on anything simply because we are in the same profession?
    Personally I have nothing against Faulks, Deaver or Boyd.
    From a literary perspective I appreciate most of Faulks and Boyd's work - Deaver is not at all to my taste. I've tried a couple of his books and I failed to enjoy them.
    As Bond authors however, they all failed in a spectacular fashion. They all produced complete, unadulterated belly flops of the highest order!
    Now I can't understand what is remotely wrong with saying this? Particularly when, like Horowitz, you are an acclaimed novelist in your own right and a Bond afficionado to boot!
    What I can't stand is when people express a view about an author or a book when they clearly haven't read the work or works in question.

  • Posts: 2,531
    Oh, if he only said something negative about the books themselves then that certainly isn't as bad but I personally still wouldn't have said it.
  • Posts: 7,642
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    SaintMark wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    The Evening Standard reported that Horowitz wanted to do a Bond novel but heartily disliked Faulks and Deaver's efforts and in any case wasn't sure he would as the other two had mucked about with it too much. Which I agree with, so some hope there.

    Also it was reported that his Bond book would be set in the world of 1950s motor sport. Therefore it takes place in between the Fleming adventures and avoids the whole Bond getting old guff of Devil May Care and the last one.

    Indeed it is encouraging that Horowitz dislikes DMC and CB. I wonder if he's read SOLO. There were some good bits in this book I felt but overall, obviously a pretty lacklustre story.

    I like how it will supposedly be set between the Fleming stories. Time for a change from the usual pre and post Fleming adventures.

    Mr Horowitz is tumbling down in my appreciation if he really said something negative about his fellow writers, a long time before we can judge his effort. I am just not a great fan of writer who feel that they need to put their colleagues down.

    He didn't say anything remotely derogative about them as writers. He merely said that he disliked their Bond books.
    How can this be wrong?
    In this politically correct world are we not allowed to express our views on anything simply because we are in the same profession?
    Personally I have nothing against Faulks, Deaver or Boyd.
    From a literary perspective I appreciate most of Faulks and Boyd's work - Deaver is not at all to my taste. I've tried a couple of his books and I failed to enjoy them.
    As Bond authors however, they all failed in a spectacular fashion. They all produced complete, unadulterated belly flops of the highest order!
    Now I can't understand what is remotely wrong with saying this? Particularly when, like Horowitz, you are an acclaimed novelist in your own right and a Bond afficionado to boot!
    What I can't stand is when people express a view about an author or a book when they clearly haven't read the work or works in question.

    He might not like them which is his prerogative, but for somebody having the same gig I just find it less classy for him to dump on his direct colleagues before we have seen his product.

    As @Villiers53 correctly stated that any quality of the past writing does not guarantee any good product in the future.

    I agree that with 007 all three previous writers kinda missed the boat for me and Boyd and Deaver were self confessed Fleming-fans too, perhaps as a professional writer it is tough to write a good continuation novel with the whole IFP and family looking over their shoulders and their view of what would be good.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    Personally, I appreciate him even more because he was honest about his feelings.
  • Villiers53 wrote: »
    SaintMark wrote: »
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    SaintMark wrote: »

    "IFP does not own the fans anything to begin with, that is making yourself more important than you really are."
    " imho "
    Not surprisingly I find your argument lacks merit and given the tone doesn't warrent a serious reply.
    Perhaps IMNSHO (in my not so humble opinion) would be a more appropriate acronym for your use?

    I read a lot and never have I ever felt that any writer or publisher owes me anything, if anything I am glad that publishers, producers, directors generally ignore their fans and their need
    That said I am sad/glad that other characters like the Saint have not been continued in a literary way as I am not sure if without the writer reviewing the new material it would have become a watered down version of Charteris.

    Great news for you @SaintMark, the Saint books were actually continued by other authors.
    Leslie Charteris actually stepped away from the character after 1963 (The Saint In The Sun). All of the Saint novels baring his name that followed were actually ghosted by a multiplicity of other writers. For instance 'Vendetta For The Saint' was writ
  • edited October 2014 Posts: 7,642
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    SaintMark wrote: »
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    SaintMark wrote: »

    "IFP does not own the fans anything to begin with, that is making yourself more important than you really are."
    " imho "
    Not surprisingly I find your argument lacks merit and given the tone doesn't warrent a serious reply.
    Perhaps IMNSHO (in my not so humble opinion) would be a more appropriate acronym for your use?

    I read a lot and never have I ever felt that any writer or publisher owes me anything, if anything I am glad that publishers, producers, directors generally ignore their fans and their need
    That said I am sad/glad that other characters like the Saint have not been continued in a literary way as I am not sure if without the writer reviewing the new material it would have become a watered down version of Charteris.

    Great news for you @SaintMark, the Saint books were actually continued by other authors.
    Leslie Charteris actually stepped away from the character after 1963 (The Saint In The Sun). All of the Saint novels baring his name that followed were actually ghosted by a multiplicity of other writers. For instance 'Vendetta For The Saint' was writ



    I know all that and also that Charteris remained involved in a editor sort way with these books.
    My point was that with the Saint Leslie Charteris remained involved except for the two Burl Barer books, one novelization of the movie which read more like who's who for Saintly fans which the special written book for the fanclub seems to be as well. I have yet find a new official published novel, even if there was a new Burl Barer at one point on the horizon. But I feel about him like Benson was for 007, he knows a lot about the character but is that enough to write a decent continuation novel?
  • Continuation lovers,
    Given that the silence from IFP is deafening it could be that the partnership with Horowitz has either broken down or on hold.
    For many of us, this would be very bad news - TM was absolutely the best since CS.
    %
  • aises the perennial question of who should write the next one.
    As things stand PussyNoMore would recommend either Charles Cumming or Daniel Silva.
    They both have the espionage chops for the job and the only caveat he would lay down is that they continue Horowitz's time line. We really need some continuity in our continuity.
  • Posts: 1,296
    Anthony Horowitz
  • Posts: 8,673
    Let silva do a modern bond thriller
  • Posts: 4,622
    Continuation lovers,
    Given that the silence from IFP is deafening it could be that the partnership with Horowitz has either broken down or on hold.
    For many of us, this would be very bad news - TM was absolutely the best since CS.
    %

    IFP are utterly useless if they don't have the sense to renew Horowitz
  • DragonpolDragonpol The Crazy World of David Dragonpol
    edited September 2016 Posts: 14,718
    Ross Kemp?
  • timmer wrote: »

    IFP are utterly useless if they don't have the sense to renew Horowitz

    I couldn't agree more but unfortunately they have form.
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ross Kemp?

    He would probably be better than Benson and the latter part of the Gardner catalogue.

    On a constructive note, if they have failed to resign Horowitz or if the timing simply doesn't work for him, now could be the time to unleash the FYEO strategy and have four 'names' contribute novellas.
    Maybe Alan Furst, Daniel Silva, Charles Cumming and Philip Kerr could be persuaded ?
    Commercially I think it could be huge.
  • edited September 2016 Posts: 4,622
    @pussy
    Is there some of holdup that Horowitz is causing. I though he was on board and wanted to do another book
    If IFP has offered him another book and he's dithering, then I take back my snark.
  • DragonpolDragonpol The Crazy World of David Dragonpol
    Posts: 14,718
    timmer wrote: »
    @pussy
    Is there some of holdup that Horowitz is causing. I though he was on board and wanted to do another book
    If IFP has offered him another book and he's dithering, then I take back my snark.

    They usually reveal the new adult Bond novel news in October so there's still time yet.
  • timmer wrote: »
    @pussy
    Is there some of holdup that Horowitz is causing. I though he was on board and wanted to do another book
    If IFP has offered him another book and he's dithering, then I take back my snark.

    I don't know anything other than the fact that AH intimated at the launch that he would be open to offers but went on to say that he was busy and had multiple projects lined up. Fingers crossed because I'd much prefer continuity with the continuity rather than risk another misfire.
Sign In or Register to comment.