›

Which Bond novel are you currently reading?

1…777879808183»

Comments

  • ColonelAdamskiColonelAdamski UK
    edited May 16 Posts: 1,160
    Reflsin2bourbons wrote: »
    Benson's dialogue is really the poorest part of his novels: Bond sounds like a teenager and not a pleasant one at that. It's probably the result of being a new writer; even some of his descriptions are lifted from travel brochures (or so I've heard).

    I agree about the often very clunky dialogue. I usually put it down to Benson being American. Gardner does Bond dialogue much more convincingly . I'm just about halfway through Never Send Flowers at the moment, and I'm honestly finding the dialogue a treat.
  • RevelatorRevelator
    Posts: 2,968
    I'm surprised that in the recent discussion of Bond continuation novels no one has brought up John Pearson's James Bond: The Authorized Biography of 007. While not a conventional novel, it's certainly a work of fiction, and written with more intelligence, wit, and verve than most conventional Bond continuations. Pearson knew and worked for Fleming before becoming his biographer; his simultaneously close and distant perspective on Bond was different from that of every other person who has written a Bond continuation novel. It's a neglected book that deserves a much larger audience.
  • Reflsin2bourbonsReflsin2bourbons
    Posts: 418
    Yes I've read that one too and it's quite serviceable in its job. It gives an interesting backstory on James Bond and expands on stories that Fleming only hinted at in the novels. And the present-day narrative with Honey is quite interesting as well.

    The nature of the story (as a a biography of the "real" James Bond and not the literary one) allows for departures from Fleming in ways I don't exactly believe: the complete ficitionalisation of MR, or even things such as Bond having a brother don't exactly ring true to me.

    I don't think I'd pick it up over any continuation novel though; there isn't really a narrative that drives the story and ultimately it exists as a cool companion piece (along with Amis' Dossier and Benson's Bedside Companion) to the other novels
  • rollsgoldenrollsgolden
    Posts: 10
    When I finish the Fleming run, I'll check out those books. Just started From Russia...
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,784
    Reflsin2bourbons wrote: »
    Yes I've read that one too and it's quite serviceable in its job. It gives an interesting backstory on James Bond and expands on stories that Fleming only hinted at in the novels. And the present-day narrative with Honey is quite interesting as well.

    The nature of the story (as a a biography of the "real" James Bond and not the literary one) allows for departures from Fleming in ways I don't exactly believe: the complete ficitionalisation of MR, or even things such as Bond having a brother don't exactly ring true to me.

    I don't think I'd pick it up over any continuation novel though; there isn't really a narrative that drives the story and ultimately it exists as a cool companion piece (along with Amis' Dossier and Benson's Bedside Companion) to the other novels

    I enjoy it as well. It is very meta and reads more like a commentary on the original books. Hard to take it seriously as a narrative, although the kangaroos are not far off from the plot of For Special Services.
  • SomethingThatAteHimSomethingThatAteHim
    Posts: 563
    Going to the beach for a week so I picked up Hortowitz’s trilogy to dive into some of the non-Fleming books.
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    Posts: 709
    Reading Dr No for the first time in over twenty years.

    The film adaptation is even better and you can see exactly where the producers made inroads.
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    edited June 15 Posts: 709
    echo wrote: »
    I hope that Amazon goes back to Fleming for inspiration, and doesn't just rely on Bond film history, because Fleming frequently results in a better film. Not always, but most of the time.

    I really don't.

    Applying Fleming as such is a bit like appealing to the older films of 60s lore, but Fleming's Bond belongs in the 1950s.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited June 15 Posts: 3,955
    AnotherZorinStooge wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    I hope that Amazon goes back to Fleming for inspiration, and doesn't just rely on Bond film history, because Fleming frequently results in a better film. Not always, but most of the time.

    I really don't.

    Applying Fleming as such is a bit like appealing to the older films, but Fleming's Bond belongs in the 1950s.

    I agree, Bond needs to move on with the times, I liked Fleming, I do, I'm a fan of the books, but if applying Fleming in films, it would've killed the series, the new and younger generations would likely to be turned off by the old attitudes, just from a marketing and business perspective, the box office numbers needs to maintain.

    Bond in this era is a very hard one to navigate.

    I'm fine with the films using some of unused materials from Fleming.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,675
    Translating Fleming beat for beat has never been done.

    Yes, Fleming wrote his books in the 50s and early 60s when rations were still a thing and no one had any idea what an avocado “pear” was.

    Fleming wrote the fantasy of a spy who dove deeply into hedonism, indulging in food , alcohol and women that his readers could only dream of.

    So when people say go back to Fleming, I think most are thinking of how he lives a life that’s just beyond most of us to grasp (high stakes poker games, fast cars, gadgets where guns are hidden in the tips of walking sticks, and our hero drinks pink champagne and eats like tomorrows won’t come).

    Yes, always go back to Fleming to capture the special flavour that differentiates him to the other cinematic heroes. Fleming IS what makes James Bond special.
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    Posts: 709
    peter wrote: »
    Translating Fleming beat for beat has never been done.

    Yes, Fleming wrote his books in the 50s and early 60s when rations were still a thing and no one had any idea what an avocado “pear” was.

    Fleming wrote the fantasy of a spy who dove deeply into hedonism, indulging in food , alcohol and women that his readers could only dream of.

    So when people say go back to Fleming, I think most are thinking of how he lives a life that’s just beyond most of us to grasp (high stakes poker games, fast cars, gadgets where guns are hidden in the tips of walking sticks, and our hero drinks pink champagne and eats like tomorrows won’t come).

    Yes, always go back to Fleming to capture the special flavour that differentiates him to the other cinematic heroes. Fleming IS what makes James Bond special.

    Fleming also chimed in with conservative mores of the 1950s. 'Coloured' (his words) people knowing their place, women as sexual whims and Reds under the bed. If only Britain got its teeth out....

    Attitudes the films did away with.

    Bond now is the film. Fleming is but a courtier.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,675
    AnotherZorinStooge wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Translating Fleming beat for beat has never been done.

    Yes, Fleming wrote his books in the 50s and early 60s when rations were still a thing and no one had any idea what an avocado “pear” was.

    Fleming wrote the fantasy of a spy who dove deeply into hedonism, indulging in food , alcohol and women that his readers could only dream of.

    So when people say go back to Fleming, I think most are thinking of how he lives a life that’s just beyond most of us to grasp (high stakes poker games, fast cars, gadgets where guns are hidden in the tips of walking sticks, and our hero drinks pink champagne and eats like tomorrows won’t come).

    Yes, always go back to Fleming to capture the special flavour that differentiates him to the other cinematic heroes. Fleming IS what makes James Bond special.

    Fleming also chimed in with conservative mores of the 1950s. 'Coloured' (his words) people knowing their place, women as sexual whims and Reds under the bed. If only Britain got its teeth out....

    Attitudes the films did away with.

    Bond now is the film. Fleming is but a courtier.

    But nothing of what you said has any relevance to my point: Fleming brought the fantastical. Go back to Fleming’s flavour, and you separate Bond from every hero today.

    I’m not understanding your point here, Captain?
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    Posts: 709
    peter wrote: »
    AnotherZorinStooge wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Translating Fleming beat for beat has never been done.

    Yes, Fleming wrote his books in the 50s and early 60s when rations were still a thing and no one had any idea what an avocado “pear” was.

    Fleming wrote the fantasy of a spy who dove deeply into hedonism, indulging in food , alcohol and women that his readers could only dream of.

    So when people say go back to Fleming, I think most are thinking of how he lives a life that’s just beyond most of us to grasp (high stakes poker games, fast cars, gadgets where guns are hidden in the tips of walking sticks, and our hero drinks pink champagne and eats like tomorrows won’t come).

    Yes, always go back to Fleming to capture the special flavour that differentiates him to the other cinematic heroes. Fleming IS what makes James Bond special.

    Fleming also chimed in with conservative mores of the 1950s. 'Coloured' (his words) people knowing their place, women as sexual whims and Reds under the bed. If only Britain got its teeth out....

    Attitudes the films did away with.

    Bond now is the film. Fleming is but a courtier.

    But nothing of what you said has any relevance to my point: Fleming brought the fantastical. Go back to Fleming’s flavour, and you separate Bond from every hero today.

    I’m not understanding your point here, Captain?

    It did have relevance to your 'beat to beat' point.

    Fleming was very much a political animal, firmly ensconced in the hard-right of Britain's empire thinking.

    The films wisely eschew such nonsense for the true fantastic.
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    Posts: 2,141
    AnotherZorinStooge wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    I hope that Amazon goes back to Fleming for inspiration, and doesn't just rely on Bond film history, because Fleming frequently results in a better film. Not always, but most of the time.

    I really don't.

    Applying Fleming as such is a bit like appealing to the older films of 60s lore, but Fleming's Bond belongs in the 1950s.

    That's why we want that. I don't want to see James Bond on Mars.
  • MalloryMallory
    edited June 16 Posts: 2,290
    I currently have two chapters left on a first read through of Moonraker and I have been enjoying it - its a fun read.
  • LeighBurneLeighBurne
    Posts: 64
    Currently re-reading Casino Royale, this time the beautiful Folio edition I picked up a few months back.

    Bond’s just had his testicles tenderised.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    edited June 17 Posts: 4,375
    Live And Let Die.... Absolutely love Fleming's writing in this. His descriptions of Bond and Leiter's evening shenanigans in Harlem are so detailed and drip with atmosphere. Love it!

    I also like Fleming's creation of Mr Big, as the first successful black master criminal. Who turns out to be a formidable opponent for Bond.

    Also cool are Fleming's descriptions of Mr Big's skilful operation and it's far reaching dominion over his community.

    I only intended to read a couple of chapters while enjoying a beer in the garden. But damn if i'm not going to read this all over again!
Sign In or Register to comment.