82 replies to this topic

[David Schofield]

It's a bit ago since I last read them both, so I'm not a hundred per cent sure. But I don't remember any reference to TSWLM in MR. Beyond the obvious fact that Bond knows Jaws from that adventure and is of course surprised to see that killer alive.

M mentions in the briefing that the folks who chucked Bond out of the plane were most likely not SMERSH as they had worked so well together over Stromberg, IIRC.

[Mr. Blofeld]

I still find the kills in Moonraker to be up there with YOLT and DAF in having the least motivation behind them and the most ludicrous attempts at killing in the entire series; we never even find out why the hell Bond is being chucked out of a plane, to begin with!

...never mind the security lockdown that would have happened when it transpired that MI6 allowed one of their top agents to be picked up in a private plane filled with enemies (the way Moneypenny just dismisses it makes it even worse) -- at least FYEO had the decency to assume a good amount of time had passed before Bond went to headquarters, explaining why the helicopter attack is never mentioned again...

[Jack Spang]

Thanks for that people. I think I will read them in chronological order. How much of a come down is MR following TSWLM? Is it much worse?

[David Schofield]

Thanks for that people. I think I will read them in chronological order. How much of a come down is MR following TSWLM? Is it much worse?

Well, TSWLM is the best continuation by far, Wood the best writer.

So yes, it is a let down, but as I've said above, what Wood achieves with it is probably what Fleming would have written in 1979 if he hadn't written his original Moonraker (and survived, obviously). I cannot give higher praise than that.

Put it this way, it's a much better book than CARTE BLANCHE.

[The Shark]

I still find the kills in Moonraker to be up there with YOLT and DAF in having the least motivation behind them and the most ludicrous attempts at killing in the entire series; we never even find out why the hell Bond is being chucked out of a plane, to begin with!

...never mind the security lockdown that would have happened when it transpired that MI6 allowed one of their top agents to be picked up in a private plane filled with enemies (the way Moneypenny just dismisses it makes it even worse)

Just take them as surreal, pop-art, opening statements, that aren't really tied to the central plot. Rationalising them in the context of reality is missing the point. Sort of like asking "Why is Bond firing through a gun barrel at the beginning of nearly every film? It's ludicrous, therefore it's terrible." That's just being pedantic and literal minded, when the subject matter is obviously not meant to be interpreted in that context.

[Jack Spang]

Thanks for that people. I think I will read them in chronological order. How much of a come down is MR following TSWLM? Is it much worse?

Well, TSWLM is the best continuation by far, Wood the best writer.

So yes, it is a let down, but as I've said above, what Wood achieves with it is probably what Fleming would have written in 1979 if he hadn't written his original Moonraker (and survived, obviously). I cannot give higher praise than that.

Put it this way, it's a much better book than CARTE BLANCHE.

Damn, can't believe it's that's good! What ever happened to C. Wood? If it's as good as Pearson's excellent biography of Bond I will be more than happy. You know, I don't think I will read them in order now that I have had another day to think about it. There are only two of them. The first time I read Fleming's and Gardner's books when I was 18/19, I never read them in chronological order but merely the order in which they arrived at the library and some I was able to buy from secondhand book shops.

[David Schofield]

Thanks for that people. I think I will read them in chronological order. How much of a come down is MR following TSWLM? Is it much worse?

Well, TSWLM is the best continuation by far, Wood the best writer.

So yes, it is a let down, but as I've said above, what Wood achieves with it is probably what Fleming would have written in 1979 if he hadn't written his original Moonraker (and survived, obviously). I cannot give higher praise than that.

Put it this way, it's a much better book than CARTE BLANCHE.

Damn, can't believe it's that's good! What ever happened to C. Wood? If it's as good as Pearson's excellent biography of Bond I will be more than happy.

I believe, from his brilliant autobiog JAMES BOND, THE SPY I LOVED, Wood is living in retirement very comfortably in the South of France, living off his residuals from Bond and his other works.

Why Glidrose chose Gardner in 1981 for LR having seen what Wood had done with his two books, I'll never comprehend. Gardner is a competent thriller writer, Wood a talented wordsmith who seemed to have a good understanding of what the world of Ian Fleming comprised and how much of that was simply essential to a James Bond novel.

[Jump James]

Well, I haven’t read any of Woods offerings but the high praise here has encouraged me to seek his books out. Were the novelizations published by Gildrose/IFP back in the day? In other words, was Wood sitting right under their noses and his work passing through their fingers?

[David Schofield]

Well, I haven’t read any of Woods offerings but the high praise here has encouraged me to seek his books out. Were the novelizations published by Gildrose/IFP back in the day? In other words, was Wood sitting right under their noses and his work passing through their fingers?

Yup. Published as bona-fide hardback firsts in 1977 and 1979. AND both firsts were exactly the same dimensions as the Fleming and Amis books, rather than being bigger as followed with Gardnder and the rest.

But yes, Wood would have been a known quantity to Glidrose.

I supsect, however, an inherant snobbery toward the films at Glidrose would have ensured Wood never entered their thoughts when they commissioned, ultimately, Gardner.

[Wade]

Anyone else wish IFP or someone would re-release this book, preferably in a Fahey-style edition?

Hear, hear! The remaining hardcover copies online sell for thousands, just because they are rare. If necessary, re-release them in an on-demand publishing version. But for compleatists like me, not having the two Woods in HC is disappointing.

[Dustin]

I supsect, however, an inherant snobbery toward the films at Glidrose would have ensured Wood never entered their thoughts when they commissioned, ultimately, Gardner.

I really wonder if that should have been snobbery. Wood was busy enough at the time and perhaps his calling price was just beyond what Glidrose was willing to meet. As publishers of the tie-ins they would have known what selling figures to expect and I think it's unlikely Wood could have been had much cheaper, especially if Glidrose wanted to sign a longer contract.

[doublenoughtspy]

I doubt Wood was on the radar at all, regardless of the quality of his 2 efforts.

Just like Deaver and Faulks, Glidrose wanted the 1980 continuation Bond to be an event.

"Hey, we've signed an author, primarily known for sex comedies, who has written 2 previous Bond adventures, to write more."

Not quite the same as the Gardner news.

[Dustin]

Good point.

Then again Wood was also the one who had a major influence/penned a substantial part of the two most successful recent Bond films. He could have been an event too, had they just tried. Especially given the stunning quality of his novelisations.

[David Schofield]

I doubt Wood was on the radar at all, regardless of the quality of his 2 efforts.

Just like Deaver and Faulks, Glidrose wanted the 1980 continuation Bond to be an event.

"Hey, we've signed an author, primarily known for sex comedies, who has written 2 previous Bond adventures, to write more."

Not quite the same as the Gardner news.

As opposed to, Charles:

"Hey, we've signed John Gardner who, you may remember, wrote THE LIQUIDATOR back in 1964 and some other books about a character called Boyise Oakes (We could have approached Christopher Wood, the author of the two excellent novelisations in the previous Bond novels and the hugely successful international movies they came from, but we decided not to).

No, Charles, I can recall first hand been totally underwhelmed by the name John Gardner in 1981, but Chris Wood, admittedly from the movies, I knew of.

[Jump James]

Look here James Bond The Spy Who Loved Me gets high collectors price. Although it is laden with signatures!

Edited by Jump James, 16 June 2011 - 08:57 PM.

[doublenoughtspy]

No, Charles, I can recall first hand been totally underwhelmed by the name John Gardner in 1981, but Chris Wood, admittedly from the movies, I knew of.

Right, David, but the key word is films. Glidrose wasn't looking for someone associated with the films. They wanted literary trappings, had a short list of thriller writers, brought back Richard Chopping, etc.

I love Wood's work, have had the pleasure of telling him so in person, and wish he had written more.

But it is hard to argue with the choice of John Gardner: 16 Bond adventures. Does anyone really think we'll see anything close to that by a single author again? I seriously doubt it.

Now granted, not every one of those 16 is a masterpiece, but it is hard to argue that Glidrose "blew it" by tapping Gardner over Wood.

[David Schofield]

No, Charles, I can recall first hand been totally underwhelmed by the name John Gardner in 1981, but Chris Wood, admittedly from the movies, I knew of.

Right, David, but the key word is films. Glidrose wasn't looking for someone associated with the films. They wanted literary trappings, had a short list of thriller writers, brought back Richard Chopping, etc.

I love Wood's work, have had the pleasure of telling him so in person, and wish he had written more.

But it is hard to argue with the choice of John Gardner: 16 Bond adventures. Does anyone really think we'll see anything close to that by a single author again? I seriously doubt it.

Now granted, not every one of those 16 is a masterpiece, but it is hard to argue that Glidrose "blew it" by tapping Gardner over Wood.

Charles, I have no real issue with Gardner as continution author, and agree that he was amazingly prolific in a way that will never be matched. I would venture, however, that this was not necessarily an advantage as some of his less enthused work would suggest.

My belief remains that Glidrose DID miss an opportunity in that Wood was simply a better writer and more understanding of Flemong-Bond and his world. I challenge anyone to compare Wood's books and any combination of Gardner's - heck, take his stand-out efforts, LR and FSS - and not reach the conclusion Wood was the master.

Then again, Wood was more skillful than Benson, Weinberg, Higson, Faulks and Deaver, and, arguably, Amis and Pearson.

[Jump James]

So far in and Bonds back! Extremely impressed.

[Mark_Hazard]

Look here James Bond The Spy Who Loved Me gets high collectors price. Although it is laden with signatures!

I hate it when people have Cape copies of the books with autographs of the actors/actresses that appeared in the films, at least there is some relevance with a film novelisation.

[Jump James]

Look here James Bond The Spy Who Loved Me gets high collectors price. Although it is laden with signatures!

I hate it when people have Cape copies of the books with autographs of the actors/actresses that appeared in the films, at least there is some relevance with a film novelisation.

It's odd I agree. I don't see the appeal of Roger MOore signing TMWTGG for example.

[Jump James]

The Spy Who Loved Me is a perverse novel-isation. I am getting a picture of Roger Moore in my head playing Ian Flemings actual lit James Bond. It's quite amazing and has given me fresh vigor to watch the film. Thanks to David for the high praise he gave it in this thread which prompted me to read it. I think it's better than Amis effort. The prose has a wonderful flow to it without seeming in anyway forced. Wood is one heck of a talent and it's the best Bond book after Fleming.

[Byron]

The Spy Who Loved Me is a perverse novel-isation. I am getting a picture of Roger Moore in my head playing Ian Flemings actual lit James Bond. It's quite amazing and has given me fresh vigor to watch the film. Thanks to David for the high praise he gave it in this thread which prompted me to read it. I think it's better than Amis effort. The prose has a wonderful flow to it without seeming in anyway forced. Wood is one heck of a talent and it's the best Bond book after Fleming.

Ditto for me. David Schofield inspired me to pick up an ex-library Cape first edition, a book rarely seen, featuring that wonderful artwork.

Fantastic work by Wood, easily replaces Colonel Sun as my favourite continuation novel.

[glidrose]

I doubt Wood was on the radar at all, regardless of the quality of his 2 efforts.

Agreed. A mistress cannot serve two masters. As far as IFP was concerned Wood would continue writing the films. No good getting an author who will give you his "second best" ideas. And would EON be happy if Wood went moonlighting writing original Bond novels while doing Bond film scripts? (Assuming of course that they brought him back for FYEO.) As DNS implied elsewhere, IFP appears not to have been overly enthused with Wood's work.

While some enjoy the two Christopher Wood novels - I can tell you that Peter & Glidrose were not very happy about them because they had no say in who the author was (He adapted his own screenplays), they didn't fit into Fleming's Bond world, etc.