2121 replies to this topic

[Righty007]

I can't say that this appeals to me. IMO Jeffrey Deavers James Bond isn't Ian Flemings. Flemings was born in the 20's and served during the 2nd world war. Deavers on the other hand was born in the 60's and has served in Afghanistan and Iraq. Ive said this before and I'm gonna say it again 'Think they have taken the reboot a little to far'

And the title just doesnt have that Bond vibe to it

Deaver's James Bond was born in approximately 1982 not the 1960s.

I think i'm the first to point this out I love the title and i'm kinda sad Deever thought of it before EON productions.

DEAVER, not Deever.

[Quantumofsolace007]

I can't say that this appeals to me. IMO Jeffrey Deavers James Bond isn't Ian Flemings. Flemings was born in the 20's and served during the 2nd world war. Deavers on the other hand was born in the 60's and has served in Afghanistan and Iraq. Ive said this before and I'm gonna say it again 'Think they have taken the reboot a little to far'

And the title just doesnt have that Bond vibe to it

Deaver's James Bond was born in approximately 1982 not the 1960s.

I think i'm the first to point this out I love the title and i'm kinda sad Deever thought of it before EON productions.

DEAVER, not Deever.

Changed and it still stands it would be nice for Bond 23 rather then DeAver's book

[zencat]

I think i'm the first to point this out I love the title and i'm kinda sad Deever thought of it before EON productions.

Screw 'em! They snooze, they lose. They should have sent Bond to Dubai, they should have put Bond into a Bentley, they should have discovered the Caspian Sea Monster...they've missed a lot of boats and have been beat by many inferior franchises (bullet train action - formula race car chase?). If I've said it once I've said it a million times, thank goodness for the books. Waiting on Eon to find the cool is no way for a Bond fan to live.

[volante]

Let the countdown begin

[Quantumofsolace007]

I think i'm the first to point this out I love the title and i'm kinda sad Deever thought of it before EON productions.

Screw 'em! They snooze, they lose. They should have sent Bond to Dubai, they should have put Bond into a Bentley, they should have discovered the Caspian Sea Monster...they've missed a lot of boats and have been beat by many inferior franchises (bullet train action - formula race car chase?). If I've said it once I've said it a million times, thank goodness for the books. Waiting on Eon to find the cool is no way for a Bond fan to live.

True and I like the return to fleming they are currently doing with their titles anyways (Bond 23 = the Hildebrand rarity perhaps )


I don't think i've been more excited for a bond novel then i've been fore Carte Blache it's been to long Welcome back Mr Bond!

[Matt_13]

Ah there we go, thanks for the poll zen.

[zencat]

Yes, poll is up. VOTE!

[marktmurphy]

Top title, yeah I like it. Not as instantly grabbing and pure Bond as 'Devil May Care' (not sure that'll ever be bettered) but it works and isn't cliched. I especially like the way the press release suggests it's about something: what happens if an officer is given carte blanche?
Cover's pretty poor though; just not stylish enough.

A bit worried about the apparent product placement in the press release; is Bond going to have tell everyone he flew EMIRATES on the way out and really likes EMIRATES. Perhaps the girl will be an EMIRATES hostess?

Bentley's a bit rubbish too. Sorry, but Bond shouldn't have the cheapest anything; not least the cheapest car a company make. Should have been the Brooklands at least; much more Bond. At the very least make it a GT Supersports. Bond shouldn't follow footballers and Essex wives.

[zencat]

I think Emirates is sponsoring this book fair, so that's why all the references. But, as with Fleming, I want to know what airline serves the UAE, and if that's Emirates, then mention it by name. Tell me all about it!

You've lost your Bentley test drive, MTM.

[David Schofield]

I can't say that this appeals to me. IMO Jeffrey Deavers James Bond isn't Ian Flemings. Flemings was born in the 20's and served during the 2nd world war. Deavers on the other hand was born in the 60's and has served in Afghanistan and Iraq. Ive said this before and I'm gonna say it again 'Think they have taken the reboot a little to far'

And the title just doesnt have that Bond vibe to it

Deaver's James Bond was born in approximately 1982 not the 1960s.
not Deever.

Righty, I wonder if this might not have changed now.

[coco1997]

Never judge a book by its title.

Case in point, Barney Gumble's touching black and white unfortunately titled short film, "Pukahontas".

[marktmurphy]

I think Emirates is sponsoring this book fair, so that's why all the references. But, as with Fleming, I want to know what airline serves the UAE, and if that's Emirates, then mention it by name. Tell me all about it!

I just hope they don't mention it on the blurb on the back of the book!

You've lost your Bentley test drive, MTM.

Nah; Bond and his chavvy mates can drive the old GT; I'll take the much better, more powerful and more exclusive Brooklands It even looks like something Bond would drive.

[Jim]

Bond shouldn't follow footballers and Essex wives.

Not even to Dubai?

Strikes me the Bentley may be entirely suitable for that location.

[marktmurphy]

Heh; fair point! A slightly tacky car for a slightly tacky place!

[Loomis]

I love it that CARTE BLANCHE looks as though it's actually going to be about something. From the BBC News site: US writer Deaver said the novel - to be published in the UK on 26 May - posed "the looming question of what is acceptable" in security matters.

Bring on May! (The month, not the housekeeper.)

[Harry Fawkes]

I don't know any James Bond fans that would be against having 007 smoke in CARTE BLANCHE. It's an important part of his character IMO but Jeffery Deaver has told us that his James Bond would no longer smoke.

I don't think it makes sense in a modern context for Bond to smoke. Sure, Fleming's Bond smoked, but nearly everyone in the 50s and 60s smoked. It's a different world now, one in which smoking is no longer equated with glamour and sophistication. Quite the opposite. If anything, smoking has become more associated with the poor and the weak-willed.

True.

But those who actually do see smokers as poor and weak-willed individuals are simply simple-minded themselves in my opinion - which is an opinion of a smoker of course. I smoke not because I am poor and weak-willed. I smoke because I enjoy smoking. It is great at the worst of times and at the best of times. Just because other people don't smoke doesn't give them the right to label people who do smoke and enjoy doing so.

James Bond smokes.

Fact.

Fleming created a character who had his cigarettes specially made.

He loved smoking, unashamedly. (Most people who smoke today do so too - smoke unashamedly that it is and love smoking)

Fleming's Bond is a heavy smoker.

He gets through some sixty cigarettes a day. Under great stress or at times of keen concentration he smokes even more.

That is Bond. James Bond. As Fleming created him.

Take that away from the characteristics of the man and you've removed one important feature, in my opinion of course.

One is supposed to enjoy Bond's idiosyncrasies as Fleming gave them. To take them away is like taking away Sherlock Holmes' pipe and daily fix of morphine.

That's my opinion anyway. Could be wrong of course but there you go. I wouldn't mind James Bond brought into the 21 st Century. But Don't touch his strong likes and dislikes; his faddy attitude.

As Bond puts it himself: 'I'd say it is rather pernickety and old-maidish, but I take ridiculous pleasure in what I eat, drink and smoke. It comes partly from being a bachelor, but mostly from a habit of taking a lot of trouble over details...'

[marktmurphy]

I mean, really? CARTE BLANCHE? That's it? There is NOTHING, ABSOLUTEY NOTHING about the title or jacket that even remotely hints at it being a Bond novel (even the lettering announcing it's "A James Bond novel" doesn't exactly stand out. That may be on purpose, though. Perhaps the publishers are trying to lure readers in not by using Bond's name, but by using Deaver's name.

No; that's not fair: it's a name which suggests sophistication (s'French, innit?), and it's also a term often used when someone has the power to act entirely according to their own will. It's the classy version of 'Licence To Kill', basically.

That it also has echoes of French cheques (and therefore casinos) doesn't exactly hinder it. It's a Bond-y title. It works.
And lets not pretend that there won't be a massive marketing campaign behind this; people will know it's a Bond novel. Oh look: there it is on the BBC News page now

I love it that CARTE BLANCHE looks as though it's actually going to be about something.

C'mon Loomo; you can't just lift entire sentences from my posts!

[Righty007]

ATTENTION GARDNER ENTHUSIASTS/PURISTS:

CARTE BLANCHE is reminiscent of AVANTE CARTE, which can be seen on the Hebrew cover of 1988's Scorpius.

 Scorpius.jpg   48.9KB   8 downloads

I don't know any James Bond fans that would be against having 007 smoke in CARTE BLANCHE. It's an important part of his character IMO but Jeffery Deaver has told us that his James Bond would no longer smoke.

I don't think it makes sense in a modern context for Bond to smoke. Sure, Fleming's Bond smoked, but nearly everyone in the 50s and 60s smoked. It's a different world now, one in which smoking is no longer equated with glamour and sophistication. Quite the opposite. If anything, smoking has become more associated with the poor and the weak-willed.

True.

But those who actually do see smokers as poor and weak-willed individuals are simply simple-minded themselves in my opinion - which is an opinion of a smoker of course. I smoke not because I am poor and weak-willed. I smoke because I enjoy smoking. It is great at the worst of times and at the best of times. Just because other people don't smoke doesn't give them the right to label people who do smoke and enjoy doing so.

James Bond smokes.

Fact.

Fleming created a character who had his cigarettes specially made.

He loved smoking, unashamedly. (Most people who smoke today do so too - smoke unashamedly that it is and love smoking)

Fleming's Bond is a heavy smoker.

He gets through some sixty cigarettes a day. Under great stress or at times of keen concentration he smokes even more.

That is Bond. James Bond. As Fleming created him.

Take that away from the characteristics of the man and you've removed one important feature, in my opinion of course.

One is supposed to enjoy Bond's idiosyncrasies as Fleming gave them. To take them away is like taking away Sherlock Holmes' pipe and daily fix of morphine.

That's my opinion anyway. Could be wrong of course but there you go. I wouldn't mind James Bond brought into the 21 st Century. But Don't touch his strong likes and dislikes; his faddy attitude.

As Bond puts it himself: 'I'd say it is rather pernickety and old-maidish, but I take ridiculous pleasure in what I eat, drink and smoke. It comes partly from being a bachelor, but mostly from a habit of taking a lot of trouble over details...'

[marktmurphy]

Bleh: Sherlock Holmes just gave up smoking in one of the best-received TV series in years (and he's much more famous for his smoking than Bond ever was) and nobody blinked an eye.

If you think that smoking is an interesting facet of a character, then that character can't be very strong.

Making Bond skulk outside to have a crafty fag in the beer garden does not help his image as a sophisticate, in my opinion!

[coco1997]

But those who actually do see smokers as poor and weak-willed individuals are simply simple-minded themselves in my opinion - which is an opinion of a smoker of course. I smoke not because I am poor and weak-willed. I smoke because I enjoy smoking. It is great at the worst of times and at the best of times. Just because other people don't smoke doesn't give them the right to label people who do smoke and enjoy doing so.

I don't associate smoking with being poor of 'weak-minded', although, coming from someone whose grandfather died after a long, terrible bout with lung cancer, I feel people who take up the habit are foolish, especially given everything we know about its health consequences nowadays. But that wasn't an issue to Fleming or Fleming's Bond of the 1950s. Given the very nature of his occupation, I'm sure Bond was rarely concerned with anything equatable to his pension plan or Medicare.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

So what would ol' Grav have titled a new Bond novel then?

I don't know. I'm not getting paid to write or market the novel; I'm the one paying for this thing. I think the cover art, so far, is grossly inadequate (which is unusual, since the international versions of movie posters and book jackets have always been better than the North American versions), and the title is CARTE BLAND.

I mean, really? CARTE BLANCHE? That's it? There is NOTHING, ABSOLUTEY NOTHING about the title or jacket that even remotely hints at it being a Bond novel (even the lettering announcing it's "A James Bond novel" doesn't exactly stand out. That may be on purpose, though. Perhaps the publishers are trying to lure readers in not by using Bond's name, but by using Deaver's name.

And I've never read Deaver and know nothing about him, his style, his philosophy, his politics, but based upon the press release, I'm concerned we're going to get a Bond that is even more stiflingly politically incorrect than the one we've gotten on the screen the past few years, with Bond and M constantly whinging on and on about whether or not 'there is a line 007 should cross' in order to save Her Majesty's government.

Here are some suggestions that are as absurd as CARTE BLAND:
DINNER CHECK
SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES
WAKE UP SERVICE
DRIVER'S LICENSE
BLEEDING HEARTS

Where are the action-oriented verbs from the Fleming/Gardner titles? Like ICEBREAKER, LIVE AND LET DIE, FROM A VIEW TO A KILL???

The mysterious titles: THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS, YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE

Body parts or suggestive titles/characters: SHATTERHAND, GOLDFINGER, OCTOPUSSY

This title is absolutely dull as dish water and I wouldn't be surprised if the publishers rename it for the American market.

Spot in Grav, spot on! But you're forgetting more absurd titles. Maybe Mr Deaver should pick this up for his next novels...

YELLOW PAGES (Think he has already chosen it)
MAITRE D'HOTEL
SOUP A L'ONION
MONSIEUR CHAMPAGNE
LE CHAPEAU VERT
CARTAS AMARILLAS (like the Nino Bravo song)

On the other side, I think Dubai is a good choice for a location.

[Loomis]

I love it that CARTE BLANCHE looks as though it's actually going to be about something.

C'mon Loomo; you can't just lift entire sentences from my posts!

Did I? Oh, well, great minds....

[jaguar007]

I'm in the minority that I'm not crazy about the title. I think it is a phrase that may be a bit too common to use as the title for a Bond novel. If they took the phrase and changed it up a little bit (I don't know what) that would be a different story.

example
Its like if Fleming had titled "Live and Let Die", "Live and Let Live"
or "You Only Live Twice", "You Only Live Once".

Fleming took commonly used phrases and changed them up a bit to make them uniquely Bond.

The phrase "CARTE BLANCHE" is too common and when people hear it, they will never directly think "James Bond".

[Loomis]

You know, I don't like any of the contination novel titles apart from this one and maybe COLONEL SUN. Gardner, Benson, Higson, Faulks.... all of their titles - or at least the overwhelming majority - are wretched, if you ask me. The so-called "Flemingian" titles always come across as fanboyish, clumsy and embarrassing, and about as Flemingian as Stephanie Meyer. HIGH TIME TO KILL, ZERO MINUS TEN, DEVIL MAY CARE, SILVERFIN, NEVER DREAM OF DYING, NOBODY LIVES FOREVER, BROKENCLAW and so on and on and on.... horrible titles that if anything sound like Austin Powers-style parodies. It's impossible to imagine Fleming himself putting his name to any of them, but it is just possible, I think, to picture one of his novels or stories bearing the title CARTE BLANCHE.

[TheREAL008]

It's a good title, and the cover art is pretty cool. Looking forward to this. Bring on New Bond!

[marktmurphy]

Fleming took commonly used phrases and changed them up a bit to make them uniquely Bond.

Ah yes; like 'The Living Daylights' and 'For Your Eyes Only'

You know, I don't like any of the contination novel titles apart from this one and maybe COLONEL SUN. Gardner, Benson, Higson, Faulks.... all of their titles - or at least the overwhelming majority - are wretched, if you ask me. The so-called "Flemingian" titles always come across as fanboyish, clumsy and embarrassing, and about as Flemingian as Stephanie Meyer. HIGH TIME TO KILL, ZERO MINUS TEN, DEVIL MAY CARE, SILVERFIN, NEVER DREAM OF DYING, NOBODY LIVES FOREVER, BROKENCLAW and so on and on and on.... horrible titles that if anything sound like Austin Powers-style parodies. It's impossible to imagine Fleming himself putting his name to any of them, but it is just possible, I think, to picture one of his novels or stories bearing the title CARTE BLANCHE.

You'll never get me to hate 'Devil May Care' as a title- that's a cracker. Most of the others are terrible, although I don't hate Zero Minus Ten (despite being dreadful it at least isn't trying to be like a Fleming title); and I think Brokenclaw is quite successful.

[Righty007]

Carte Blanche is now on Wikipedia.

[marktmurphy]

'The thirty-seventh James Bond novel'. Good heavens.

[jaguar007]

Fleming took commonly used phrases and changed them up a bit to make them uniquely Bond.

Ah yes; like 'The Living Daylights' and 'For Your Eyes Only'

Some of Fleming's titles were better than some of his other ones. Those were also both titles to short stories he wrote, not originally intended as titles for novels.

[marktmurphy]

So far the publicity seems to be working. When even my newspaper, The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, has an article about the new book, it means it is serious business:

http://www.accessatl...cxntlid=thbz_hm

But how will people know it's a Bond novel??!!

Some of Fleming's titles were better than some of his other ones. Those were also both titles to short stories he wrote, not originally intended as titles for novels.

Of course: so when you say that his titles were like that, you actually mean that they weren't all like that... I see