16 replies to this topic

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

I was wondering if after Casino Royale's succes Faulks could novelize the film. I'd like him to do that.

[Qwerty]

I'd say it's very doubtful we'll see a novelization this far after the release of Casino Royale.

[Blofeld's Cat]

Besides, there's already a published Bond novel called Casino Royale, and there's only ever been novelizations of Bond movies that don't have a Fleming title.

[Mister Asterix]

Besides, there's already a published Bond novel called Casino Royale, and there's only ever been novelizations of Bond movies that don't have a Fleming title.

Except the two.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

Well, the Casino Royale poster says "Daniel Craig as Ian Fleming's James Bond in Casino Royale" instead of "... in Ian Fleming's Casino Royale".

[Blofeld's Cat]

Besides, there's already a published Bond novel called Casino Royale, and there's only ever been novelizations of Bond movies that don't have a Fleming title.

Except the two.

Err...well....yes.

[Qwerty]

Well, the Casino Royale poster says "Daniel Craig as Ian Fleming's James Bond in Casino Royale" instead of "... in Ian Fleming's Casino Royale".

Noted, but I don't think that really factors into this. In any event, I would think they'd have wanted the novelization out a few weeks just before Casino Royale's theatrical release.

A lot of Bond fans would rush to the stores if this came out, say, next year (me included), but I don't think it would really catch on with the general public. The novelizations are rarely a "big" thing.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Of course, and I think it's very clear that Christopher Wood is no Sebastian Faulks.

[Blofeld's Cat]

Well, the Casino Royale poster says "Daniel Craig as Ian Fleming's James Bond in Casino Royale" instead of "... in Ian Fleming's Casino Royale".

Noted, but I don't think that really factors into this. In any event, I would think they'd have wanted the novelization out a few weeks just before Casino Royale's theatrical release.

A lot of Bond fans would rush to the stores if this came out, say, next year (me included), but I don't think it would really catch on with the general public. The novelizations are rarely a "big" thing.

Fleming's Casino Royale was released as a film tie-in by having the movie poster on its cover.

[K1Bond007]

I don't think they'd get Faulks to novelize Casino Royale. That would send mixed signals. I see no problem with Raymond Benson or John Gardner novelizing the movies of their time, but to get Higson and Faulks to do it.. I don't ever see it happening. They're period writers.

I think IFP would be better off hiring someone new for this job, in fact, I think it would be wise if IFP created a pseudonym to specifically handle film novelizations. (Among other reasons, this would help limit confusion over the different timelines) They could go back and do Casino Royale with this new author, but I don't think rewriting Casino Royale would be a good idea. I'd vote for an abridged version of Royale included as kind of an extended prologue for the Bond 22 novelization. Hell, it could be interesting to have that portion written as an official in-depth report filed by Villiers or M or Tanner or whatever.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Perhaps they could recruit some of the better novelization writers for such a project; i.e., ones who actually have some literary talent?

Matthew Stover comes to mind...

[K1Bond007]

Perhaps they could recruit some of the better novelization writers for such a project; i.e., ones who actually have some literary talent?

Matthew Stover comes to mind...

Stover writes Star Wars and Revenge of the Sith is the only novelization he's done to my knowledge.

Raymond Benson would be fine for the job. Any experienced author would be fine for the job. I think it would be great to make a series out of it, to be honest, which is why I mentioned the pseudonym. It keeps IFP and EON separate and allows both to have a storyline that doesn't effect each other. This opens many doors including original 'film series' books or maybe just short stories - the reboot allows for this sort of thing. (To be canon too, not like Benson's series where the novelizations can be interpreted as being in his series or outside his series.. it would be obvious to the reader that this Bond is the same as the movie Bond and vice versa)

[jaguar007]

A novelation of the film Casino Royale is pointless because the movie was fairly faithful to Fleming's book. The only movies using a Fleming book as the title that had a novelsation was TSWLM and MR, which bore practically no resembelance to Fleming's original book.

[Royal Dalton]

Of course, and I think it's very clear that Christopher Wood is no Sebastian Faulks.

They've both got curly hair and beards, so they're not all that dissimilar.

Wood does write very witty dialogue, though. I'd love to see him have a crack at another Bond script.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Of course, and I think it's very clear that Christopher Wood is no Sebastian Faulks.

They've both got curly hair and beards, so they're not all that dissimilar.

Wood does write very witty dialogue, though. I'd love to see him have a crack at another Bond script.

And give us another "Bondola"?

[Qwerty]

Well, the Casino Royale poster says "Daniel Craig as Ian Fleming's James Bond in Casino Royale" instead of "... in Ian Fleming's Casino Royale".

Noted, but I don't think that really factors into this. In any event, I would think they'd have wanted the novelization out a few weeks just before Casino Royale's theatrical release.

A lot of Bond fans would rush to the stores if this came out, say, next year (me included), but I don't think it would really catch on with the general public. The novelizations are rarely a "big" thing.

Fleming's Casino Royale was released as a film tie-in by having the movie poster on its cover.

Oh, I know (and I think that's the closest we're going to get to a "novelization" for this one ).

[OmarB]

I for one am a big fan of novelizations. Comes from getting 2 english degrees and reading way too much stuff, some good, some bad so I can usually stomach any crap. In the case of a movie I want to see, I don't mind reading one off a movie I wanna see (I always say "I'm getting the story out of the way so I can just stare ahead blankly.")

In any case, I don't think Faulks should do a novelization of CR or of anything else. The guy's a spectacular author with a great style and original ideas. We've been down that road, the book's already there, I say leave it alone.

Oh, if your a fan of media-tie-in novels you should check out this site. Ray Benson has a few articles there. http://www.iamtw.org/