The CB.n Thread

Ahhhh, the delightful Ms. Pinder. Quite a few of us would like to be unwrapping THAT at Christmas, I daresay.

SILHOUETTE MAN wrote:

Yes, I won't go back this time! Got the message, I think!

Going back with four identities only reinforces the view they have about you.

I never went back. Never tried to go back. Never even thought of coming up with a new identity. Sometimes being right means letting someone else wrong you, or being right means being comfortable with other people thinking something wrong about you.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

SILHOUETTE MAN wrote:

Yes, I won't go back this time! Got the message, I think!

Going back with four identities only reinforces the view they have about you.

I never went back. Never tried to go back. Never even thought of coming up with a new identity. Sometimes being right means letting someone else wrong you, or being right means being comfortable with other people thinking something wrong about you.

Agreed on that one - well put!

tiffanywint wrote:

I do like the term continuation novels. It distinguishes these works from the originals. There is really no comparison IMO,with the originals. The Fleming Bonds represented Bond from Fleming's world view. It is the authentic literary Bond oeuvre. The continuation novels do continue, and do provide a form of homage to the Fleming Bond legacy but they are not of the legacy. They stand outside it.

Precisely. And that's why we don't speak of "continuation films", because the films (unlike the novels) were never the product of one person's creative vision and authorial "voice".

(That said, though, I suppose it's arguable that the films ultimately stand as products of the vision of a man or a woman with the surname Broccoli.)

tiffanywint wrote:

The continuation novelists are at a huge disadvantage too, in that they don't have latitude to tinker with the established Bond persona. Fleming was a very provocative writer. His Bond oozed personality and attitude, infused by Fleming. I find the continuation authors can't be quite as bold. They rightly need to take a more conservative approach to their portrayal of the character for fear of overreaching.

Which has tended to lead to nothing more than dull, generic, join-the-dots, box-ticking portrayals of "James Bland".

I've never really understood why the continuation novelists "don't have latitude to tinker with the established Bond persona" - there seems to be a view that an average reader picking up a continuation novel is unlikely to have read Fleming and has had his or her image of 007 shaped entirely by the films (probably true), and (and here's where I disagree) that it follows that he or she basically just wants a Bond film in book form and will fling the novel across the room in horror if there are any deviations from the safest and most conservative interpretation of The James Bond We All Know And Love(TM).

The irony, of course, is that the film series - once the home of "James Bland" - has left such mindless, formula-bound conservatism behind and is currently much bolder and more innovative than the continuation novels have ever been. The success of the Craig films has shown that Joe Public won't throw a wobbly if the Bond character and formula are shaken up a bit, indeed that Joe Public welcomes a bit of risk-taking. I hope that the continuation novels will one day follow suit.

Blunt Instrument wrote:

Ahhhh, the delightful Ms. Pinder. Quite a few of us would like to be unwrapping THAT at Christmas, I daresay.

yes, but I'm not allowed within fifty miles of Southampton alas.

Hilly wrote:

Blunt Instrument wrote:

Ahhhh, the delightful Ms. Pinder. Quite a few of us would like to be unwrapping THAT at Christmas, I daresay.

yes, but I'm not allowed within fifty miles of Southampton alas.

I'd say that was still close enough for a cheeky squeeze of Ms. Pinder's wobblers, such is their, erm ... magnitude (or magtitude, possibly).

CBn - Yes, I am disrespecting you. I'm disrespecting you to the max. Maximum disrespect.

SILHOUETTE MAN wrote:

CBn - Yes, I am disrespecting you. I'm disrespecting you to the max. Maximum disrespect.

You should upload an avatar for your profile. A pet peeve of mine is seeing a profile picture that is blank.

SILHOUETTE MAN wrote:

CBn - Yes, I am disrespecting you. I'm disrespecting you to the max. Maximum disrespect.

time to move on and revel in Club BaB

Hilly wrote:

SILHOUETTE MAN wrote:

CBn - Yes, I am disrespecting you. I'm disrespecting you to the max. Maximum disrespect.

time to move on and revel in Club BaB

Aye.

Loomis wrote:

The irony, of course, is that the film series - once the home of "James Bland" - has left such mindless, formula-bound conservatism behind and is currently much bolder and more innovative than the continuation novels have ever been. The success of the Craig films has shown that Joe Public won't throw a wobbly if the Bond character and formula are shaken up a bit, indeed that Joe Public welcomes a bit of risk-taking. I hope that the continuation novels will one day follow suit.

I am no fan of the current films. I would love to get back to the Connery persona and vibe of the early films. Bond with emotional issues and drama is of no interest to me, however I wouldn't object to someone taking on the literary Bond with a little more vigour. The author would need to understand Fleming though. He would have to have a genuine grasp of what Fleming and the original novels were all about. If so I would be happy to trust him and see where he takes the character. He would almost need a Fleming like personality. It could be done. Maybe the new guy might work out. The Faulks experiment though was a waste of time and Deaver created an almost unrecognizable Bond - Dudley Do-Right Bond.

Gotta give Deaver credit for making MI6 carbon neutral, though.

tiffanywint wrote:

I am no fan of the current films. I would love to get back to the Connery persona and vibe of the early films. Bond with emotional issues and drama is of no interest to me.

Fair points, but at least the current films attempt to push the boundaries and take risks (regardless of whether or not one actually likes the results) in a way that the recent novels don't.

Oh sure, the new films aren't an abomination or anything. They just are what they are. They are different, but at least they make a ton of money, which means the series will continue and as we've seen, the temper of the series seems to change, when the actor changes. When Craig retires his shoulder holster, a new actor will step in and likely bring a fresh attitude and approach.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

SILHOUETTE MAN wrote:

CBn - Yes, I am disrespecting you. I'm disrespecting you to the max. Maximum disrespect.

You should upload an avatar for your profile. A pet peeve of mine is seeing a profile picture that is blank.

Grav, I would if I knew how, but I don't - I'd use my Facebook profile photo if someone here would care to tell me the process through which you upload an avatar photo here on BaB.

Agreed - let's move on. The future's bright. The future's BaB!

Here's how to do it:

Go to the tab that says "profile", and from there click on "avatar." Here you can upload any photo you want from your computer, and it'll be automatically resized.

Thanks, LS, just uploaded my avatar - a flower in a gun watercolour!

SILHOUETTE MAN wrote:

Thanks, LS, just uploaded my avatar - a flower in a gun watercolour!

Don't tell me...a watercolour pistol.

A Guns And Roses fan?

SILHOUETTE MAN wrote:

Thanks, LS, just uploaded my avatar - a flower in a gun watercolour!

Me likey. Very Maurice Binder-ish.

Yes, I am a GnR fan, although I think it's quite a Bondish image there, too! The elegance of violence - a pretty neat summation of the world of James Bond.

Glad so many people like it - I used to use it over at CBn too, before I got banned in November 2012!

Yes, I imagine a film version of Never Send Flowers would feature this type of imagery - I can but dream...

Perilagu Khan wrote:

SILHOUETTE MAN wrote:

Thanks, LS, just uploaded my avatar - a flower in a gun watercolour!

Don't tell me...a watercolour pistol.

Yes, how original!

Dustin's Hitlerite email to me on banning me for life from the glorious CBn forums:

Dustin's email: "SILHUETTE MAN". Dustin said: "You're out. Do not return. Do not pull any drama queen stuff. End of."

Such a little charmer.

If anyone's a nutjob, it's him.

CBn is becoming a rump - the literary Bond forums are very much dead over there. That's why they need to build them up here on BaB. :)

SILHOUETTE MAN wrote:

Dustin's Hitlerite email to me on banning me for life from the glorious CBn forums:

Dustin's email: "SILHUETTE MAN". Dustin said: "You're out. Do not return. Do not pull any drama queen stuff. End of."

Such a little charmer.

If anyone's a nutjob, it's him.

Does he think he's writing one of M's encrypted notes to Bond. "I AM A WANK STOP DO NOT RETURN ENDIT"