10 replies to this topic

[dinovelvet]

I now understand what is meant by the Gardner Rollercoaster effect. After the high of Brokenclaw, with its entertaining villain and relatively brisk pace, leading to an exciting ending, we get Death is Forever which is just deadly dull by comparison.
It appears that Gardner has completely run out of inspiration by this point. The previous book (Barbarossa) recycled elements from Icebreaker, and this one just rehashes No Deals,Mr.Bond (with a hint of Win Lose or Die at the end too, with the politicians stuck on the train, as they were stuck on the ship in WLOD). It didn't help that I didn't like No Deals in the first place, so I probably wasn't going to like the wannabe version of it! It was a struggle to get through it...at the mid-point I could only take one chapter at a time and it took me about two weeks on and off to get through the whole thing Is this Gardner's longest book? Certainly feels like it.
Yup, all the Gardner cliches are here...grim European locales, long conversations in hotel rooms, leftover Cold War spies, lots of codenames, double crosses galore, and yet another Russian General type villain. Gardner brings nothing new or interesting to the table here; the Channel Tunnel ending almost gets exciting, but its all over as soon as its been introduced, really. Its as if they were using a computer program to churn out the novels at this point, or Gardner was working with a checklist of things he was required to include. He really should have been replaced by someone with fresh ideas at this point (where was Benson when we needed him? ). Anyway I'd put this book right near the bottom of the pack, hovering just above The Man from Barbarossa.

[Double-Oh Agent]

I'm afraid I have to disagree. Death Is Forver is a great read. In fact, it is my favorite book of the second half of Gardner's run. It's full of action, has great villains (the best collection of villains from top to bottom in the entire series), and good death scenes. The fiddleback spiders were creepy and I liked the idea of Bond in a knife fight. I found it very entertaining. It's not my favorite Gardner novel but it is in the top half.

[marmaduke]

Interesting post Dinovelvet!.I have yet to reach

[zencat]

You're right, Death is Forever really is a "remake" on No Deals Mr. Bond. I like Death is Forever a little more than No Deals. But No Deals is one of my least favorite Gardner books so this isn't saying much.

[dinovelvet]

[quote name='Double-Oh Agent' post='546889' date='24 April 2006 - 00:06']
I'm afraid I have to disagree. Death Is Forver is a great read. In fact, it is my favorite book of the second half of Gardner's run. It's full of action, has great villains (the best collection of villains from top to bottom in the entire series), and good death scenes. The fiddleback spiders were creepy and I liked the idea of Bond in a knife fight. I found it very entertaining. It's not my favorite Gardner novel but it is in the top half.
[/quote]

Great villains, really? What do you think was so great about them? The only thing that distinguishes Weisen from any of Gardner's other generic Russian villains is that he's not very tall. I'm pretty sure you could switch around the villains from Icebreaker, No Deals, Barbarossa, and this book, and nobody would notice! IMHO the only villain that has stood out in Gardner's run so far is Brokenclaw (probably because Gardner seems to have looked to Fleming for inspiration in that case) He obviously is going for more of a 'real world' kind of bad guy, which means shying away from the eccentrics and freaks that populated Fleming like Dr.No, Mr.Big and Le Chiffre, etc, but they all just come across as a bit dull to me.
Still, its always interesting to see someone have the complete opposite reaction to a book. I mean I really enjoyed Brokenclaw, which seems to be a "meh" book for most. Oh yeah the spiders were good though

[quote name='marmaduke' post='547034' date='24 April 2006 - 13:15']
Interesting post Dinovelvet!.I have yet to reach

[Double-Oh Agent]

I'm afraid I have to disagree. Death Is Forver is a great read. In fact, it is my favorite book of the second half of Gardner's run. It's full of action, has great villains (the best collection of villains from top to bottom in the entire series), and good death scenes. The fiddleback spiders were creepy and I liked the idea of Bond in a knife fight. I found it very entertaining. It's not my favorite Gardner novel but it is in the top half.

Great villains, really? What do you think was so great about them? The only thing that distinguishes Weisen from any of Gardner's other generic Russian villains is that he's not very tall. I'm pretty sure you could switch around the villains from Icebreaker, No Deals, Barbarossa, and this book, and nobody would notice! IMHO the only villain that has stood out in Gardner's run so far is Brokenclaw (probably because Gardner seems to have looked to Fleming for inspiration in that case) He obviously is going for more of a 'real world' kind of bad guy, which means shying away from the eccentrics and freaks that populated Fleming like Dr.No, Mr.Big and Le Chiffre, etc, but they all just come across as a bit dull to me.
Still, its always interesting to see someone have the complete opposite reaction to a book. I mean I really enjoyed Brokenclaw, which seems to be a "meh" book for most. Oh yeah the spiders were good though

For one thing, Weisen is East German not Russian. A couple of other features of his are that he is bald and has the nickname of the Poison Dwarf. Granted, Weisen isn't as memorable or intimidating as Lee Fu-Chu in Brokenclaw or even the villain in For Special Services, but he does have a bit of a sadistic streak in him. As for the other villains (or henchmen if you prefer), Dominic Jellineck and Dorian Crone are a bit underdeveloped but do have a mean torture streak. Felix Utterman and Hexie Weiss are suitably menacing. So too is Claude Gaspard to a lesser degree. But the best villainous characters are Axel Ritter, Monika Haardt, and Michelle Gris. Haardt, in particular, oozes evil as the woman behind the man--and she's pretty good with a knife too. All of them combined make for a great group of villains. Individually, they may not rank among the best in the series, but together, the parts definitely make an entertaining whole.

I don't expect you to "see things my way" but I'm just sticking up for a novel I liked. As for your remarks on Brokenclaw, I found the book to be okay--middle of the road (of Gardner's) at best. I really liked the villains and the wolf scene, but I found the climactic confrontation between Bond and Lee to be a little too "out there" and, for lack of a better word, sadistic. That wound up leaving a bit of a bad taste in my mouth and undoubtedly downgraded my feelings for the book a little. Nevertheless, to each his own.

[dinovelvet]

For one thing, Weisen is East German not Russian.

He is of Russian and German descent

I don't expect you to "see things my way" but I'm just sticking up for a novel I liked. As for your remarks on Brokenclaw, I found the book to be okay--middle of the road (of Gardner's) at best. I really liked the villains and the wolf scene, but I found the climactic confrontation between Bond and Lee to be a little too "out there" and, for lack of a better word, sadistic. That wound up leaving a bit of a bad taste in my mouth and undoubtedly downgraded my feelings for the book a little. Nevertheless, to each his own.

Ah well I do like a bit of the "out there" in a Bond story. Gardner usually avoids this kind of thing, though when he does include off-the-wall elements they come across as a bit silly, e.g. mind control ice cream

[Jack Spang]

Death Is Forever is a novel I am not a great fan of, nor Brokenclaw for that matter. Yes, that Euro tunnel scene was over before it started. It could have been great. Don't know why he ended it so quickly. He should have panned it out and built up the suspense. This is common in all of Gardner's novels but the climax in DIF is certainly way too short. I enjoy them all to an extent but I think the first half of his books are much better than the last. Gardner's health started deteriorating around two thirds of the way through the series I think. I did enjoy re-reading them all a couple of years ago. For Special Services is my favourite.

Edited by Jack Spang, 01 June 2011 - 11:36 PM.

[zencat]

You're right, Death is Forever really is a "remake" on No Deals Mr. Bond. I like Death is Forever a little more than No Deals. But No Deals is one of my least favorite Gardner books so this isn't saying much.

Having recently re-read No Deals, I not sure this statement holds up anymore. I enjoyed No Deals more than I have in the past. Maybe time for a re-read and reassessment of Death is Forever.

[Harmsway]

I'm currently reading through DEATH IS FOREVER (I've decided to go back and revisit the Gardner's, which, I must admit, look much better after the misfire that is DEVIL MAY CARE). It's not a great book, by any stretch, but it's not bad. It's Bond in the world of the Cold War spy thriller, with less of the colorful, absurd touches we expect in a Bond novel (though the spiders are terrific nightmare fodder), and I can somewhat dig that.

That said, Gardner really is an author without a strong point. His prose is bland, his characters are awkwardly drawn, and his dialogue is never more than uninspired (any attempts at humor or innuendo are cringe-inducing, to say the least). The plotting is admirably intricate, though, and that's largely what has been holding my interest.

[golrush007]

I started reading Death is Forever yesterday, and am certainly picking up a similarity to No Deals Mr Bond. NDMB is one of my favourite Gardners, so I hope I will enjoy this too. I will post a quick review when I finish.