It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I 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.
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.
The film adaptation is even better and you can see exactly where the producers made inroads.
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.
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.
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.
That's why we want that. I don't want to see James Bond on Mars.
Bond’s just had his testicles tenderised.
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!
TM was a decent read. Horowitz is an impressive mimic of Fleming, but at times too self-consciously so dropping too many Fleming-isms to try to come across authentically that it made the book enter the uncanny valley at times. This also made the elements that Fleming would never write stand out all the more in contrast, but I suppose that’s to be expected given Horowitz is not Fleming no matter how close he can write him.
I think my biggest complaints with the book are how disjointed it could be. I liked seeing the Pussy Galore relationship deteriorate but incorporating her into a Goldfinger revenge scheme and the love interest at the race track felt like too much stuffed into an already overly-plotty book that has too many references to past Fleming titles. With the tenuous connection between the race and rocket there’s just too much exposition I found and little time to breathe as plot points need to be setup or explained or paid off constantly, leading to more dialogue than there should be at times.
Horowitz excels, apart from matching Fleming’s style to a fairly high degree (sans Fleming’s elegance and deftness of language), with the setpieces which are by and large very exciting and appropriate. The race was fantastic and I could have easily read another chapter of it ala the bridge game from Moonraker, the Starlite motel felt very Fleming, and the live burial was incredibly gripping. Sin was a decent villain with some creepy gimmicks let down again by too much, and not good enough, dialogue.
Overall I found it an enjoyable read and about as good as I might have hoped for a non-Fleming Bond book, but I’m not sure I’ll return to it as I have the Fleming’s. In terms of how it stacks up to Fleming’s books I’d say maybe it matches some of Fleming’s weakest, sitting somewhere alongside Man with the Golden Gun and Goldfinger (probably another reason I don’t like it more is it’s connective tissue to GF, a novel I’m not as fond of as it’s a bit too tongue in cheek for how I like my Fleming books). Though even Fleming’s weakest I think have higher highs than what was achieved here, even if the quality of TM was maybe more consistent.
I’m six chapters into Forever and a Day though and already liking this far more, however. It feels a lot less self-conscious and more confident and the story is immediately captivating, especially since so far it fits in with the more serious and smaller scale CR vs Trigger Mortis’s more over the top Goldfinger extravaganza. Ironically this one feels more Fleming to me despite Horowitz not cramming in as many Flemingisms, just reads like a more natural novel than something trying very hard to prove its authenticity.
Glad to see another LALD novel fan on here! The action in the book is great. Also, I highly recommend the Dynamite Comics Graphic Novel by Van Jensen.
FAAD is one of my favorite Bond novels in general. I think that Amazon should look at it for influence for the next movie. I told Horowitz on social media that it should be the next movie. He said thank you, but it's extremely unlikely! This was when EON was truly in charge. Maybe things have changed. Also, it wouldn't be too hard to modernize FAAD's story. I think Anthony Horowitz should be looked at as a possible future Bond screenwriter! Like you said, TM is fun, but FAAD gets to stand on it's own.
I agree about Benson. HTTK was one of the first Bond novels I read when I was young after Casino Royale. I thought it immensely readable and enjoyable. After coming back to Benson after years and have read through his work I found his prose... cringe worthy. Great plot, but he tells rather than shows. His high point for a plot I believe were the first three (at least involving Bond and not other characters). Afterward, it seemed as though the excitement for stunning stunts, and action with Bond in it, and great locales died. Maybe, the first three set an unrealistic bar to continuously meet trying to match the Brosnan films but I was bored by the time Red Tattoo came about and grew bored with that but slogged through.
It's the reason why it's my favorite among the Bond books, I just love it, from the beginning it made me laugh, then the descriptions added to the intrigue and mystery, there's a great build up and also an equally great pay off, it's just great from start to finish.
The book is also very strong in characterization. Domino and Largo are far more memorable than their film counterparts. She is one of the best later Bond girls, and has both a fiery and a vulnerable, wistful side, while Largo is a "dark mirror" version of Bond--a cruel, dashing adventurer with a fatal weakness for women.
Incidentally, I lent the book to a friend who'd never seen the film, and he raved about how suspenseful the lead-up to the underwater battle was, when Bond and company are swimming through the deep and unsure of what they'll find. It made wish I could also approach the book with no memories of the movie.
Couldn't get past the racism, personally.
Fleming's Bond was wisely eschewed by the oroginal producers.
Bezos bringing back the 1950s via lovable cinema character...dangerous.
I don't think they will, mind.
Hope to high heck not.
TB is one of Fleming's best books, that's for sure. Perhaps only FRWL and OHMSS are better.
Having finished my Folio edition of Casino Royale, I’ve (somewhat predictably) followed it up with Live and Let Die. I’ll echo the love shared above. Mr. Big might actually be one of my favourites out of the novel baddies.
I think he's a formidable villain for Bond. You really feel the danger Bond and Solitaire are in as they travel to Florida, thanks to Mr Big's far reaching network of informants and spies.
Fleming describes train journeys so well
Really enjoyed re-reading it...
Yeah I’ve always enjoyed LALD. It’s true the racial elements sometimes get in the way, but overall I think it’s the most exciting of the more travelogue focused Bond books, and features a bit more brutal action than a lot of them. I especially love everything from Jamaica to the climax, it’s shame that whole chunk of the book hasn’t been lifted wholesale by the movies because it would make for one hell of a third act.
Absolutely. The scenes they took from the novel in LTK didn't really do it for me. Although the keel haul sequence in FYEO was very well done.
I like the fact that Fleming is obviously very fond of his character Quarrel and brought him back for Dr No. Strangways also turns up in this and became the catalyst for the events in that book.