James Bond Books

[JakeandElwood]

Has anyone read the originals by Ian Fleming? I'm going through them now and loving them. Although it is funny to see how incredibly different the movies are. Although to be fair the plots are probably too compact for a movie. All in all the books are great reads and I'd recommend them if you're looking for something to read.

 

[tarheelgamecock]

Has anyone read the originals by Ian Fleming? I'm going through them now and loving them. Although it is funny to see how incredibly different the movies are. Although to be fair the plots are probably too compact for a movie. All in all the books are great reads and I'd recommend them if you're looking for something to read.

I have most all of them. Some publisher put them out in the early 1990s in hardback, with the original typeface and some funky cover art. They had tons of them in the bargain bin at Books-a-Million when I was a kid. I'm only missing Dr. No and The Man with the Golden Gun, I think. My favorite is On Her Majesty's Secret Service. The Fleming books were reissued a couple of years ago in paperback with some cool, noirish cover art done by a fellow University of South Carolina graduate.

 

[JakeandElwood]

I'm in the middle of Thunderball and loving it so far. From what I vaguely remember about the movie it actually seems to be pretty similar too. Dr. No was good and I haven't got to On Her Majesty's Secret Service yet.

 

[OTD]

Has anyone read the originals by Ian Fleming? I'm going through them now and loving them. Although it is funny to see how incredibly different the movies are. Although to be fair the plots are probably too compact for a movie. All in all the books are great reads and I'd recommend them if you're looking for something to read.

I've got them all. I'd had copies of them all but lost a bunch at one point. For a Christmas present one year, my wife bought me new copies of all of them, which was really cool.

Thunderball, by the way, is kind of an odd duck among the books. I think the movie was actually written first, which explains why it follows it so closely. It's also why they remade it as "Never Say Never Again" with Sean Connery, but not with any of the producers of the other movies.

 

[HejiraHenry]

I have a paperback of Goldfiger in a box someplace.

Great escapist fare.

I also read, and quite enjoyed, a couple of the John Gardner "continuation" novels (the first was published in 1981), which I rather enjoyed as well.

 

[JakeandElwood]

I have a paperback of Goldfiger in a box someplace.

Great escapist fare.

I also read, and quite enjoyed, a couple of the John Gardner "continuation" novels (the first was published in 1981), which I rather enjoyed as well.

Goldfinger was the one the only other I felt had a strong resemblance to the movie of the seven I've read so far. How do the Gardner books compare to Fleming? I like how he uses a short compact - and believable - plot to develop the characters. Is Gardner similar or did he go more elaborate as the movies do?

 

[JR]

I read them all when they were first published in the 60's. I had them all in the original British paperback editions.

I remember loving them at the time but a number of years ago went back to read one of them and discovered that Ian Fleming was one godawful writer--besides being a racist and misogynist.

 

[JakeandElwood]

The worst example of the racism is in Live and Let Die where Bond's enemy is based out of Harlem. I don't think Fleming writes brilliantly but the books are entertaining.

 

[JR]

The worst example of the racism is in Live and Let Die where Bond's enemy is based out of Harlem. I don't think Fleming writes brilliantly but the books are entertaining.

They were entertaining as hell when I was fourteen.

Sorta like Tom Clancy--fun plots but can't write worth a lick.

BTW, a first edition of Goldfinger (British edition) fetches around $40,000

 

[JakeandElwood]

The worst example of the racism is in Live and Let Die where Bond's enemy is based out of Harlem. I don't think Fleming writes brilliantly but the books are entertaining.

They were entertaining as hell when I was fourteen.

Sorta like Tom Clancy--fun plots but can't write worth a lick.

BTW, a first edition of Goldfinger (British edition) fetches around $40,000


I hope you kept it then ....

 

[slappy4428]

I read most of them about 20 years ago and still have Doctor No around here someplace, but haven't read it in forever.

 

[Rex Harrison]

I'd agree. Fleming wasn't the greatest writer, but you read them for the ideas, and now, for the nostalgia of seeing Bond's literary roots preserved. I don't care for the Gardener books too much, but Raymond Benson wrote some good ones in the late 90s. I think he did five, and the middle three are a trilogy where he tries to introduce a group to replace SPECTRE or whatever the hell it was called. I haven't read them in a long time, but I remember them being better than Gardener. You can probably find them at the library like I did.

 

[tarheelgamecock]

I have a paperback of Goldfiger in a box someplace.

Great escapist fare.

I also read, and quite enjoyed, a couple of the John Gardner "continuation" novels (the first was published in 1981), which I rather enjoyed as well.

Goldfinger was the one the only other I felt had a strong resemblance to the movie of the seven I've read so far. How do the Gardner books compare to Fleming? I like how he uses a short compact - and believable - plot to develop the characters. Is Gardner similar or did he go more elaborate as the movies do?

I recall the Gardner books as being pretty good (when I read them at 13-14 yrs old). I think I read them all except the last three and License to Kill (which was based on the screenplay). They avoided the silliness of the late 1970s, 1980s movies, and I remember them as being a little more involved plot-wise than the Fleming books. I'm thinking more Robert Ludlum than Ian Fleming.

 

[HejiraHenry]

I have a paperback of Goldfiger in a box someplace.

Great escapist fare.

I also read, and quite enjoyed, a couple of the John Gardner "continuation" novels (the first was published in 1981), which I rather enjoyed as well.

Goldfinger was the one the only other I felt had a strong resemblance to the movie of the seven I've read so far. How do the Gardner books compare to Fleming? I like how he uses a short compact - and believable - plot to develop the characters. Is Gardner similar or did he go more elaborate as the movies do?

I recall the Gardner books as being pretty good (when I read them at 13-14 yrs old). I think I read them all except the last three and License to Kill (which was based on the screenplay). They avoided the silliness of the late 1970s, 1980s movies, and I remember them as being a little more involved plot-wise than the Fleming books. I'm thinking more Robert Ludlum than Ian Fleming.

I agree. It's been forever since I read them, so the details are a little hazy. But that description sounds about right.

 

[Omar_dont_scare]

Fleming wasn't Cormac McCarthy, but he writes circles around Tom Clancy in my opinion.

Especially when it comes to the descriptive passages describing what Bond is eating. You can start reading about Bond's lobster dinner with a full stomach and still end up hungry.

Fleming also brings a good amount of depth and subtext to the Bond character lacking in the movies.

Clancy wouldn't know how to give Jack Ryan character depth if he threw his ass in the Marianas Trench.

 

[HejiraHenry]

Clancy wouldn't know how to give Jack Ryan character depth if he threw his ass in the Marianas Trench.

True, but nobody read(s) Clancy for that.

 

[JakeandElwood]

One of the main reasons I enjoy the books is his development of Bond. It's fascinating to see his home life at his flat with his maid and all of his interactions with characters like M outside of the office. Good stuff that works well for character development but probably wouldn't fit in a fast-paced Bond movie.

 

[Omar_dont_scare]

Clancy wouldn't know how to give Jack Ryan character depth if he threw his ass in the Marianas Trench.

True, but nobody read(s) Clancy for that.

But he certainly isn't a guy who "can't write a lick" as JR suggested.

 

[HejiraHenry]

Clancy wouldn't know how to give Jack Ryan character depth if he threw his ass in the Marianas Trench.

True, but nobody read(s) Clancy for that.

But he certainly isn't a guy who "can't write a lick" as JR suggested.

I always enjoyed his stuff, but certainly not for the artful writing.

 

[JakeandElwood]

Clancy wouldn't know how to give Jack Ryan character depth if he threw his ass in the Marianas Trench.

True, but nobody read(s) Clancy for that.

But he certainly isn't a guy who "can't write a lick" as JR suggested.

I always enjoyed his stuff, but certainly not for the artful writing.

I would agree with that. I think he's a good writer because he does a good job of crafting an engaging plot and strong characters even if it isn't full of flowery prose.