What do you think?
Rate this book
John Gardner's Bond #15
Goldeneye: A James Bond thriller
Official, original James Bond from a writer described by Len Deighton as a 'master storyteller'.
She is beautiful. She is Russian. And she is very, very dangerous. Once Xenia worked for the KGB. But her new master is Janus, a powerful and ambitious Russian leader who no longer cares about ideology. Janus's ambitions are money and his normal business methods include theft and murder. And he has just acquired Goldeneye, a piece of high-tech space technology with the power to destroy or corrupt the West's financial markets. But Janus has underestimated his most determined James Bond.
She is beautiful. She is Russian. And she is very, very dangerous. Once Xenia worked for the KGB. But her new master is Janus, a powerful and ambitious Russian leader who no longer cares about ideology. Janus's ambitions are money and his normal business methods include theft and murder. And he has just acquired Goldeneye, a piece of high-tech space technology with the power to destroy or corrupt the West's financial markets. But Janus has underestimated his most determined James Bond.
193 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1995
39 people are currently reading
920 people want to read
About the author
John Gardner
113 books178 followersBefore coming an author of fiction in the early 1960s, John Gardner was variously a stage magician, a Royal Marine officer and a journalist. In all, Gardner has fifty-four novels to his credit, including Maestro, which was the New York Times book of the year. He was also invited by Ian Fleming’s literary copyright holders to write a series of continuation James Bond novels, which proved to be so successful that instead of the contracted three books he went on to publish some fourteen titles, including Licence Renewed and Icebreaker.
Having lived in the Republic of Ireland, the United States and the UK, John Gardner sadly died in August of 2007 having just completed his third novel in the Moriarty trilogy, Conan Doyle’s eponymous villain of the Sherlock Holmes series.
Having lived in the Republic of Ireland, the United States and the UK, John Gardner sadly died in August of 2007 having just completed his third novel in the Moriarty trilogy, Conan Doyle’s eponymous villain of the Sherlock Holmes series.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 80 reviews
June 14, 2018
Goldeneye is the original name of James Bond novelist Ian Fleming's estate on Oracabessa bay on the northern coastline of Jamaica. The estate is located in the Oracabessa Bay Fish Sanctuary, established in 2011 to protect the area's marine ecosystem. It is adjacent to James Bond Beach.
GoldenEye was the second and final Bond film to be adapted to a novel by novelist John Gardner. The book closely follows the film's storyline, but Gardner added a violent sequence prior to the opening bungee jump in which Bond kills a group of Russian guards before commencing to the famous opening Bungee jump.
John Gardner was not the first author to write a continuation novel for James Bond but he is easily the author who wrote the most 007 books including Ian Fleming. Whose 007 he transplanted into the eighties and continued to write his stories until 1996 with Cold which would be his last 007 book.
Gardner wrote two novelizations of EON movies one starring Timothy Dalton and this one with Pierce Brosnan. Both stories fall within the EON series while Gardner's 007 books are a continued timeline both of these movie books are not fitted in that timeline.
Anyhow this book/movie opened the Brosnan era and renewed the 007 Brand after 6 years of not being on the big screen. It rejuvenated the movie series easily and his fifth movie never happened due to illusions of grandeur by EON who with Daniel Craig wanted a more grown up and an emo-Bond in their movie. Funnily enough both Goldeneye & Casino Royale were directed by Martin Campbell who twice introduced a new 007 in their easily best movie of their reigns.
This story starts with 007 on a break in the South of France were he witnesses the theft of a prototype helicopter an opening that finds a continuation with this particular flying machine near an Nuclear accident that is possibly tied to a criminal organisation Janus. Bond it send to investigate and find one of the two possible survivors to find out what really took place in Siberia.
He finds himself at odds with a former 00 and friend who has taken it up on himself to avenge the fate of parents and country-men/women. In doing so he needs to get rid of 007 which he knows is going to be a serious job even for him.
An easily readable novel in which Gardner mostly sticks to the script but does add some of his bookish flavor in descriptions of St Petersburg or the South of France that would be applauded by Fleming himself.
This book is no great literature and certainly not the best Gardner has written for the 007 series but is fun. And with the movie playing in the back of my head while reading you find that Gardner has delivered a decent job.
Perhaps only for 007 fans, but I found this hardcover and found myself tempted to ignore it but the fanboy won and within two hours I had finished this particular read. Just an complement to my 007 book collection.
GoldenEye was the second and final Bond film to be adapted to a novel by novelist John Gardner. The book closely follows the film's storyline, but Gardner added a violent sequence prior to the opening bungee jump in which Bond kills a group of Russian guards before commencing to the famous opening Bungee jump.
John Gardner was not the first author to write a continuation novel for James Bond but he is easily the author who wrote the most 007 books including Ian Fleming. Whose 007 he transplanted into the eighties and continued to write his stories until 1996 with Cold which would be his last 007 book.
Gardner wrote two novelizations of EON movies one starring Timothy Dalton and this one with Pierce Brosnan. Both stories fall within the EON series while Gardner's 007 books are a continued timeline both of these movie books are not fitted in that timeline.
Anyhow this book/movie opened the Brosnan era and renewed the 007 Brand after 6 years of not being on the big screen. It rejuvenated the movie series easily and his fifth movie never happened due to illusions of grandeur by EON who with Daniel Craig wanted a more grown up and an emo-Bond in their movie. Funnily enough both Goldeneye & Casino Royale were directed by Martin Campbell who twice introduced a new 007 in their easily best movie of their reigns.
This story starts with 007 on a break in the South of France were he witnesses the theft of a prototype helicopter an opening that finds a continuation with this particular flying machine near an Nuclear accident that is possibly tied to a criminal organisation Janus. Bond it send to investigate and find one of the two possible survivors to find out what really took place in Siberia.
He finds himself at odds with a former 00 and friend who has taken it up on himself to avenge the fate of parents and country-men/women. In doing so he needs to get rid of 007 which he knows is going to be a serious job even for him.
An easily readable novel in which Gardner mostly sticks to the script but does add some of his bookish flavor in descriptions of St Petersburg or the South of France that would be applauded by Fleming himself.
This book is no great literature and certainly not the best Gardner has written for the 007 series but is fun. And with the movie playing in the back of my head while reading you find that Gardner has delivered a decent job.
Perhaps only for 007 fans, but I found this hardcover and found myself tempted to ignore it but the fanboy won and within two hours I had finished this particular read. Just an complement to my 007 book collection.
August 1, 2011
The novelisation of the movie GoldenEye represents John Gardner’s fifteenth contribution to the James Bond novels. Gardner’s previous couple of Bond novels were working upon a plotline with the hero preparing to settle down and remarry following his promotion from commander to captain. Eon Production’s movies were never meant to take into consideration any of Glidrose Publication’s continuation of the Bond canon, so the movie does not take into account anything that Gardner has written since Licence to Kill was released and this movie follows straight on from the previous film. Gardner had always taken care to ensure his Bond novels followed on from Ian Fleming’s – and Robert Markham’s – books: this lead to problems when his novelisation of Licence to Kill had to include Felix Leiter was fed to a shark for the second time! (Gardner had the shark bite off Leiter’s artificial leg!) This time Gardner just ignores his previous plotline and sorts out the discrepancy in what was his final Bond novel with just a single line at the end of chapter sixteen. This inadvertently turns Bond into the misogynistic sexist cruel bastard that Fleming originally created. There are also four occasions – I’m sad enough to have counted – where Gardner has one of the characters telling somebody not to be so melodramatic. This is obviously a criticism by Gardner of the script that he has to adapt; and totally fails to appreciate that his own lines in this and his other novels are also melodramatic as he falls into the trap of taking James Bond seriously. On the whole, unless you are a serious Bond fan, skip this novel and just stick to the film; either way, just remember it is supposed to be about entertainment and is not meant to be taken seriously.
May 8, 2020
Gardner wrote this book off the movie screenplay. It exactly follows the movie which to me is great. It does break the story in Gardner's former books of Bond going to get married. One Gardner Bond book to go. Hopefully he continues where he left off
September 17, 2020
One of my favorite Bond movies. The book follows the movie pretty close. We get to read a little more detail about why the characters do what they do and some valuable background info. All the Bond action you would want. I love all things Bond and will have to check out further John Gardner Bond thrillers.
November 28, 2011
Probably the best novelization of a movie that I have ever read.
October 29, 2015
With the communists out, Russia is changing but certain elements of the cold war remain. Blasting through the Severnaya tracking station, agents of the Janus syndicate - a powerful and ambitious gang that cares nothing of ideology - have stolen Goldeneye, a piece of technology with the power to destroy the West’s financial markets. James Bond, however, is on their trail and soon discovers that the leader of Janus, who has his own reasons to hate both the British and the Russians, is someone he once knew… This is the second Gardner Bond novel I’ve read (it’s also his second novelisation and the penultimate title he wrote in the series) and I enjoyed it, perhaps helped because I like the film it’s based on a lot. Written in a brisk and breezy style, filling in some of the blanks that the film didn’t have time for but maintaining the gritty atmosphere, this runs at a good pace and works well. There are some changes from the film - Xenia Onatopp drives a yellow Ferrari here, rather than a red one, for instance - but not enough to be distracting and it’s interesting to see how Gardner handles scenes against the way the film did. I liked this a lot and if you’re a Bond fan, it’s well worth a read
May 25, 2019
I read this in preparation for an upcoming Gardner podcast. It's most interesting when the author wanders off-piste and starts telling us about edible body paint, or dressing Natalya as a schoolgirl to smuggle her out of Russia (to be fair, the latter might be a scene that thankfully got dropped from a later draft of the script). I do think John Gardner does a magnificent job of straddling literary and film Bond; I'm just incredibly uncomfortable with the way he portrays women.
February 27, 2024
If 3.5 stars were an option that would be the rating. Enjoyable, classic sky thriller
November 9, 2022
Goldeneye is my favourite Bond movie so I had to read the novelization. It was a lot of fun to read. It is a good adaptation of the movie. It follows the movie so closely that a lot of the dialogue is the same. There are only a few extra scenes which I felt were good inclusions since they added more background. I liked the scene where they are preparing to go to Cuba. In the movies they always switch locations without any preparation on screen, so it was a nice change.
My biggest and probably only issue with this novelization was that in certain scenes the dialogue would be word for word from the movie, then all of a sudden someone replies with a totally different dialogue. If the author wanted to change it up he should've just had the characters say different things. I guess this isn't that big of a deal for most people, but for me who has watched this movie enough times to quote the dialogue it was a bit irritating when the author took out some of the best lines and replaced them with lines that were not as memorable.
The pacing in the end was kind of weird too. The fight at the end was a bit rushed. The biggest crime, though, is taking out the line "For England, James" which had such an impact on screen.
My biggest and probably only issue with this novelization was that in certain scenes the dialogue would be word for word from the movie, then all of a sudden someone replies with a totally different dialogue. If the author wanted to change it up he should've just had the characters say different things. I guess this isn't that big of a deal for most people, but for me who has watched this movie enough times to quote the dialogue it was a bit irritating when the author took out some of the best lines and replaced them with lines that were not as memorable.
The pacing in the end was kind of weird too. The fight at the end was a bit rushed. The biggest crime, though, is taking out the line "For England, James" which had such an impact on screen.
August 4, 2024
John Gardner’s 1995 novelisation of the film 🎬, GoldenEye 👩🏻🚁🛰️🖊️🚄🏝️ is his fifteenth and penultimate James Bond novel, based on the screenplay by Jeffrey Caine and Bruce Feirstein, from a story by Michael France.
Gardner tries to harmonise the story within his sequence of Bond continuation novels 📖 from Licence Renewed ☢️ in 1981 to Cold ❄️ in 1996. He also aligns the lead character with Ian Fleming’s 007, rather than the character in the films, even though the film is not a direct adaptation of a Bond novel, and references his own previous Bond novel, SeaFire 🌊 from 1994.
As with many novelisations, Gardner also provides greater insight into how GoldenEye changed from being a screenplay 📑 to a finished film. 🎬 At times, some dialogue that is absent from the film feels tailored to Timothy Dalton’s Bond, rather than Pierce Brosnan’s (this is not unusual as this was originally intended to be Dalton’s third Bond film). The Bond of the novelisation is also more brutal than the Bond of the film. 👊
However, the book is not without its faults, either due to the script or Gardner’s writing.
The Q briefing scene 🖊️ feels rushed and lightweight, especially compared with the greater detail given to M’s scenes. 👱 Some of the action sequences also feel incomplete, although some differ nicely from the film (particularly during the tank chase through St. Petersburg). The Cuban finale 🌴 also lacks detail in places, especially given that everything in the plot is leading to this point.
Nevertheless, whilst the BMW product placement 🚙 feels a bit shoehorned into the film, Gardner makes it feel more logical and natural in the book.
So there is plenty to love, but also things that could have been fleshed out more or which feel a bit out of sorts here.
Overall, it’s essential reading for enthusiasts of Bond 🤵♂️, GoldenEye 👁️ and/or Gardner. 📖
Gardner tries to harmonise the story within his sequence of Bond continuation novels 📖 from Licence Renewed ☢️ in 1981 to Cold ❄️ in 1996. He also aligns the lead character with Ian Fleming’s 007, rather than the character in the films, even though the film is not a direct adaptation of a Bond novel, and references his own previous Bond novel, SeaFire 🌊 from 1994.
As with many novelisations, Gardner also provides greater insight into how GoldenEye changed from being a screenplay 📑 to a finished film. 🎬 At times, some dialogue that is absent from the film feels tailored to Timothy Dalton’s Bond, rather than Pierce Brosnan’s (this is not unusual as this was originally intended to be Dalton’s third Bond film). The Bond of the novelisation is also more brutal than the Bond of the film. 👊
However, the book is not without its faults, either due to the script or Gardner’s writing.
The Q briefing scene 🖊️ feels rushed and lightweight, especially compared with the greater detail given to M’s scenes. 👱 Some of the action sequences also feel incomplete, although some differ nicely from the film (particularly during the tank chase through St. Petersburg). The Cuban finale 🌴 also lacks detail in places, especially given that everything in the plot is leading to this point.
Nevertheless, whilst the BMW product placement 🚙 feels a bit shoehorned into the film, Gardner makes it feel more logical and natural in the book.
So there is plenty to love, but also things that could have been fleshed out more or which feel a bit out of sorts here.
Overall, it’s essential reading for enthusiasts of Bond 🤵♂️, GoldenEye 👁️ and/or Gardner. 📖
May 28, 2018
A very average read. One of my favourite bond films, and a highlight of my childhood, I spent many hours playing the classic N64 game. Picked it up on sale. I knew it was (obviously) not by Fleming, but I was not aware that it was a novelisation. It was difficult to follow, and almost a polar opposite to the only other one I’ve read, From Russia with Love. That was full of excitement, exoticism, intrigue, and Bond was overall a very captivating character. Goldeneye had none of this charm, and despite travelling across the world as opposed from Turkey to Paris in the former, held none of the excitement.
November 9, 2022
So here's the thing. GoldenEye is MY absolutely positively favorite Bond Movie of all time.
It has a gorgeous Bond (Bronsan) Insane stunts (bungee off a dam, eject from a helicopter) the best tank chase in any movie. Russia, Cuba and a smart Bond girl.
This book is pretty much the movie printed out so I loved it too.
Does that mean it's a good book or other people will like it? No
It has a gorgeous Bond (Bronsan) Insane stunts (bungee off a dam, eject from a helicopter) the best tank chase in any movie. Russia, Cuba and a smart Bond girl.
This book is pretty much the movie printed out so I loved it too.
Does that mean it's a good book or other people will like it? No
August 31, 2024
2023 Review 136. 007 Goldeneye by John Gardner
Page Count : 184
Peirce Brosnan has always been my favourite James Bond and Goldeneye is probably my favourite film.
Goldeneye is the story of a rogue british agent (006), a russian colonel with an unusual talent, a russian general in charge of space weapons and a couple of russian programmers who design the space weapons.
This book not only involves spy action but also techno thriller vibes because of the Goldeneye satellites, Tigre helicopter etc.
I wasn't sure how different this book would be to the film of the same title, but there were slight differences which made this book really enjoyable.
While reading this book I checked to see if there were any other Peirce Brosnan bond stories available, but unfortunately there aren't.
I will definitely read this book again in the future and if you enjoy the Peirce Brosnan films, then this book will be for you.
5*
*****
Page Count : 184
Peirce Brosnan has always been my favourite James Bond and Goldeneye is probably my favourite film.
Goldeneye is the story of a rogue british agent (006), a russian colonel with an unusual talent, a russian general in charge of space weapons and a couple of russian programmers who design the space weapons.
This book not only involves spy action but also techno thriller vibes because of the Goldeneye satellites, Tigre helicopter etc.
I wasn't sure how different this book would be to the film of the same title, but there were slight differences which made this book really enjoyable.
While reading this book I checked to see if there were any other Peirce Brosnan bond stories available, but unfortunately there aren't.
I will definitely read this book again in the future and if you enjoy the Peirce Brosnan films, then this book will be for you.
5*
*****
March 28, 2021
I have never read the novelisation as a massive fan of the film and thought it just wouldn't be the same.
I was pleasantly surprised that the book adds narrative that the film doesn't require so is not just a complete carbon copy.....although removing For England James was a bit of a disappointment.
All in all I enjoyed the way the book has been written and it has lead me to now watch the film as well.
I will definitely give the other novelisations a go now too to see what the others have to offer!
I was pleasantly surprised that the book adds narrative that the film doesn't require so is not just a complete carbon copy.....although removing For England James was a bit of a disappointment.
All in all I enjoyed the way the book has been written and it has lead me to now watch the film as well.
I will definitely give the other novelisations a go now too to see what the others have to offer!
April 17, 2020
Basically, the movie in book format, with a little more context. A fun read for anyone who enjoys the escapism of a Bond adventure. Escapism is something I think we can all do with a little more of in these uncertain COVID-19 times.
March 24, 2017
Brosnans finest Bondhour and my fav Bond film
Read
November 7, 2021A novelization, showing little more than Gardner’s exhaustion with the series.
September 5, 2022
GOLDENEYE IS A GOOD BOND FILM.. THE BOOK ISN'T BAD
April 20, 2020
John Gardner's Bond series continues with the novelization of GoldenEye. Gardner is clearly working from an early draft of the screenplay, or possibly just a treatment, one that wasn't as polished as the version that was filmed. The movie was better than the book. (Although I would say the same thing about most of the Ian Fleming books as well, which were obviously written before the movies.)
I accept the Bond series's continuity is tenuous at best. I think Gardner's attempts to make the movies' and the books' timelines match in this and the Licence to Kill novelization were a fool's errand. (To be fair, this was possibly the request of the publisher.) In Licence to Kill he awkwardly had Felix Leiter being fed to a shark for a second time. This time he makes less effort at continuity, despite the big changes he had made in the book series in recent installments, including the reorganization of the Secret Intelligence Service with Bond promoted to a senior leadership position and getting engaged to a former Swiss officer, Flicka von Grüsse. At the time Gardner was writing those books, the movie series was on hold indefinitely as the producers were tied up in a legal dispute with Kevin McClory over the rights to the character. Gardner must have figured he could safely take the aging character in a different direction for the changing times. It is sad to see how quickly and half-heartedly he resets his changes in GoldenEye's novelization.
Bond's return to the field and presumable demotion since SeaFire is not mentioned at all. You just have to assume this was a result of the reorganization of SIS (what Gardner calls MI6), which led to its takeover by technocrats, resulting with Judi Dench instated as M. Flicka is not mentioned by name, but during the interlude, a chapter titled "Interlude," which takes place in Puerto Rico before Bond and Natalya fly off for the final act in Cuba, Natalya asks Bond how he seems to know the island so well, and he alludes to a recent mission (presumably the Puerto Rican finale in SeaFire) in which the woman he was with was hurt and may never walk again. So I guess that was the end of his engagement. I almost feel sorry for Gardner. Did he have a choice to turn down writing the novelization? Couldn't someone outside the official book series have written the book, like screenwriter Christopher Wood did for The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker novelizations (the first of which was actually pretty good and arguably better than the Fleming novel of the same name)? Gardner must have resented having to scrap the story line he had built up, and it is clear he had a low opinion of the screenplay handed him.
Gardner often comments on the dialogue with adjectives like "melodramatic." On page 251, Alec Trevelyan tells a guard to go after Bond and Natalya, who are attempting to infiltrate the GoldenEye operations center, "Take them out before this begins to get really stupid." As the nameless/faceless guard is fated to fail to take out Bond, we can guess Trevelyan's line, which wasn't in the movie, was Gardner inserting his own judgement of the movie's ending into Trevelyan's mouth.
The book isn't all bad. Gardner has a love for inserting technical details in his books. While this is typically boring and distracting (I remember dropping off numerous times reading Icebreaker ), here it isn't overused and lends a bit of realism that wasn't in the movie.
Overall, though, this is a book based on a movie the writer didn't want to write, so no one should read it, unless they are doing it for "completion's sake" as they read through the series.
I accept the Bond series's continuity is tenuous at best. I think Gardner's attempts to make the movies' and the books' timelines match in this and the Licence to Kill novelization were a fool's errand. (To be fair, this was possibly the request of the publisher.) In Licence to Kill he awkwardly had Felix Leiter being fed to a shark for a second time. This time he makes less effort at continuity, despite the big changes he had made in the book series in recent installments, including the reorganization of the Secret Intelligence Service with Bond promoted to a senior leadership position and getting engaged to a former Swiss officer, Flicka von Grüsse. At the time Gardner was writing those books, the movie series was on hold indefinitely as the producers were tied up in a legal dispute with Kevin McClory over the rights to the character. Gardner must have figured he could safely take the aging character in a different direction for the changing times. It is sad to see how quickly and half-heartedly he resets his changes in GoldenEye's novelization.
Bond's return to the field and presumable demotion since SeaFire is not mentioned at all. You just have to assume this was a result of the reorganization of SIS (what Gardner calls MI6), which led to its takeover by technocrats, resulting with Judi Dench instated as M. Flicka is not mentioned by name, but during the interlude, a chapter titled "Interlude," which takes place in Puerto Rico before Bond and Natalya fly off for the final act in Cuba, Natalya asks Bond how he seems to know the island so well, and he alludes to a recent mission (presumably the Puerto Rican finale in SeaFire) in which the woman he was with was hurt and may never walk again. So I guess that was the end of his engagement. I almost feel sorry for Gardner. Did he have a choice to turn down writing the novelization? Couldn't someone outside the official book series have written the book, like screenwriter Christopher Wood did for The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker novelizations (the first of which was actually pretty good and arguably better than the Fleming novel of the same name)? Gardner must have resented having to scrap the story line he had built up, and it is clear he had a low opinion of the screenplay handed him.
Gardner often comments on the dialogue with adjectives like "melodramatic." On page 251, Alec Trevelyan tells a guard to go after Bond and Natalya, who are attempting to infiltrate the GoldenEye operations center, "Take them out before this begins to get really stupid." As the nameless/faceless guard is fated to fail to take out Bond, we can guess Trevelyan's line, which wasn't in the movie, was Gardner inserting his own judgement of the movie's ending into Trevelyan's mouth.
The book isn't all bad. Gardner has a love for inserting technical details in his books. While this is typically boring and distracting (I remember dropping off numerous times reading Icebreaker ), here it isn't overused and lends a bit of realism that wasn't in the movie.
Overall, though, this is a book based on a movie the writer didn't want to write, so no one should read it, unless they are doing it for "completion's sake" as they read through the series.
November 17, 2022
This review originally appeared in full on The Reel Bits as part of my 007 Case Files. Check it out for all the spoilers, annotations, and pretty pictures. Here's an extended extract.
No limits. No fears. No substitutes.
That was the tagline for GOLDENEYE, the 17th James Bond film under the Eon Productions banner. Along with launching Pierce Brosnan as 007, it was the ship that sailed many a late night N64 session into our hearts and minds. So, there was at least one substitute. The other was this novelisation. Damn. The tagline lied.
There had been novelisations of previous Bond films, of course, not to mention a whole slew of comic book tie-ins. Christopher Wood’s adaptations, James Bond, the Spy Who Loved Me and James Bond and Moonraker, had at least nominal ties to Fleming’s Bond, albeit with significantly altered plots. Continuation author John Gardner got to play with a whole new Bond from the ground-up, breaking almost completely away from the Bond he’s crafted over the course of 14 previous novels.
Unlike Gardner’s version of Licence to Kill, which awkwardly attempted to reconcile the Fleming/Gardner universe with the film continuity, GOLDENEYE faithfully sticks to Jeffrey Caine and Michael France’s screenplay. (Bruce Feirstein also gets a credit on the final film). Save for a brief introductory scene, Gardner starts us off very much where the film does, at a Soviet weapon’s factory in 1986. As the film’s other tagline — ‘You know the name, you know the number’ — probably indicates, Bond does his heroics from here on in.
Being a novel, Gardner gives us a greater sense of interiority and character detail that enhances this version of Bond. At one point, Bond questions what he has becomes. “Was he just a killing machine? Did his superiors let him get away with all kinds of excesses…because they understood the kind of strain his work produced.”
At the very least, it’s certainly a better segue between the fight and the romance with Natalya than the film provides. Of course, Gardner being Gardner, we also get lingering descriptions of the sex scenes, many of which using climbing metaphors, some lecherous descriptions of Natalya in a schoolgirl uniform, and a conclusive topography of Bond’s dick. (For the record, it’s “thick and long”).
There is different visual language to films and books, so I kind of miss some of the big set-pieces. As a seasoned thriller scribe, Gardner describes them well, although the vision of Bond doing a bungee jump off a dam or driving a tank through Moscow is hard to replicate quite as well in print. Gardner’s novel has a few extra scenes as well, including one between the train set-piece and Cuba where Jack Wade helps smuggle Bond and Natalya out of Russia. We’re also mercifully free off Eric Serra’s baffling score.
While not consciously tying this book to his other novels, Gardner sprinkles in hints of the previous regime. Trevelyan and Bond are given their initial assignment by “the Old Man,” so that the ‘Gardners’ M gets a cameo. More significantly, Bond references a woman from his past: “She’s alive, but she may never walk again. We were dealing with a very bad man.” We can assume this is a reference to Flicka at the hands of Max Tarn in SeaFire, but evidently Bond has very much moved on!
As all Bond fans know, GOLDENEYE was the name of Ian Fleming’s estate in Jamaica. It necessarily ties this story to the past while having its sights set on the future. Indeed, at one point, Janus’ rival Valentin Zukovsky comments “I have a firm belief that we’ll be back in business within a decade.” As we look through the daily news, it turns out they were only off by a couple of years.
No limits. No fears. No substitutes.
That was the tagline for GOLDENEYE, the 17th James Bond film under the Eon Productions banner. Along with launching Pierce Brosnan as 007, it was the ship that sailed many a late night N64 session into our hearts and minds. So, there was at least one substitute. The other was this novelisation. Damn. The tagline lied.
There had been novelisations of previous Bond films, of course, not to mention a whole slew of comic book tie-ins. Christopher Wood’s adaptations, James Bond, the Spy Who Loved Me and James Bond and Moonraker, had at least nominal ties to Fleming’s Bond, albeit with significantly altered plots. Continuation author John Gardner got to play with a whole new Bond from the ground-up, breaking almost completely away from the Bond he’s crafted over the course of 14 previous novels.
Unlike Gardner’s version of Licence to Kill, which awkwardly attempted to reconcile the Fleming/Gardner universe with the film continuity, GOLDENEYE faithfully sticks to Jeffrey Caine and Michael France’s screenplay. (Bruce Feirstein also gets a credit on the final film). Save for a brief introductory scene, Gardner starts us off very much where the film does, at a Soviet weapon’s factory in 1986. As the film’s other tagline — ‘You know the name, you know the number’ — probably indicates, Bond does his heroics from here on in.
Being a novel, Gardner gives us a greater sense of interiority and character detail that enhances this version of Bond. At one point, Bond questions what he has becomes. “Was he just a killing machine? Did his superiors let him get away with all kinds of excesses…because they understood the kind of strain his work produced.”
At the very least, it’s certainly a better segue between the fight and the romance with Natalya than the film provides. Of course, Gardner being Gardner, we also get lingering descriptions of the sex scenes, many of which using climbing metaphors, some lecherous descriptions of Natalya in a schoolgirl uniform, and a conclusive topography of Bond’s dick. (For the record, it’s “thick and long”).
There is different visual language to films and books, so I kind of miss some of the big set-pieces. As a seasoned thriller scribe, Gardner describes them well, although the vision of Bond doing a bungee jump off a dam or driving a tank through Moscow is hard to replicate quite as well in print. Gardner’s novel has a few extra scenes as well, including one between the train set-piece and Cuba where Jack Wade helps smuggle Bond and Natalya out of Russia. We’re also mercifully free off Eric Serra’s baffling score.
While not consciously tying this book to his other novels, Gardner sprinkles in hints of the previous regime. Trevelyan and Bond are given their initial assignment by “the Old Man,” so that the ‘Gardners’ M gets a cameo. More significantly, Bond references a woman from his past: “She’s alive, but she may never walk again. We were dealing with a very bad man.” We can assume this is a reference to Flicka at the hands of Max Tarn in SeaFire, but evidently Bond has very much moved on!
As all Bond fans know, GOLDENEYE was the name of Ian Fleming’s estate in Jamaica. It necessarily ties this story to the past while having its sights set on the future. Indeed, at one point, Janus’ rival Valentin Zukovsky comments “I have a firm belief that we’ll be back in business within a decade.” As we look through the daily news, it turns out they were only off by a couple of years.
August 19, 2025
Why would he shoot Boris?! Why?!
A disappointmenting read which says quite a bit considering my feelings towards Gardener's (Bond) books. I had slightly higher expectations than his regular novels as I had enjoyed his novelisation of Licence to Kill; but this seemed like it was just phoned in. The writing seemed that of one who was jaded.
I'm reading Gardener's novels in order so I was curious as to whether or not Gardner would work this into the timeline of his novels, he didn't, which is fair enough; there are probably contractual reasons as to why, and it hadn't been done in LTK.
My biggest issue with Goldeneye perhaps, is what is has been a major issue in all his novels thus far; writing women. To say they are one-dimensional is probably kind, they barely even have a dimension. Natalya perhaps did more solo work than women in previous books and proved herself capable of surviving 2 minures away from Bond's loins, but this would have been written by the original screenwriters..... Gardner dismantles all that by dressing her up as a school girl to smuggle her out of Russia in plain sight all while she bemoans the fabric of her newly gifted underwear. This was totally unnecessary and added no humour to the story. Wade was described (by Bond's thoughts) as being lecherous for looking at her. Yet irony abounds when Bond himself knew all about school girls underwear material, how unflattering it it is and showed no bones bar possibly one about being aroused by her knee socks.
Bond is many things (in books and movies) but he is not into school girls and nor should that be implied.
__
I mentioned earlier that I felt this was phoned in, and I say that because at times it's like he hadn't read the screenplay. The chapter after Bond and Natalya were "smuggled out" of Russia, Wade asked Bond who Natalya was (as inlin with the movie)... yet Wade himself organised and dressed her up as a school girl the day previous.
It's at best lazy writing though I'm leaning more to incompetent.
___
I'm almost finsih, I promise you, because, I don't want to waste much more time in this.
There is a well known scene in Goldeneye where 006 holds a gun to Bonds head to persuade Natalya to give Boris the access codes to the rockets. Natalya responds with "Shoot him, he means nothing to me" in the final act. This is humours and well delivered as it's mirroring Bonds words on the train, and we know she is calling 006's bluff. (The train scene is played out as such in this novel. )
Gardner though changes this and has 006 point the gun at Boris. This is dumb for several reasoms.
Natalya has no fondness or positive emotional connection to Boris. They are not portrayed as friends as in the movie, so she wouldn't care. Bond is who she has the emotional ties with.
The humour of her retort works in the movie as it mirrors what Bond said; but here we are treated to a smug nod of approval from Bond who then acknowledges (out loud) "standard operation procedure" ie, call his bluff. because yes, you will outright say to the aggressor, that their bluff is being called.
lastly, Alec shooting Boris would also have made Natalya's plan foolproof. If Boris was killed, no one else could redirect the rocket. This is a win for Natalaya. Alec Trevelyan, formerly 006, is not an idiot, he shoud know that. Why would he shoot the one guy who could fix his problem?
To quote Benoit Blanc; it's just dumb.
Dumb, lazy, jaded writing.
A disappointmenting read which says quite a bit considering my feelings towards Gardener's (Bond) books. I had slightly higher expectations than his regular novels as I had enjoyed his novelisation of Licence to Kill; but this seemed like it was just phoned in. The writing seemed that of one who was jaded.
I'm reading Gardener's novels in order so I was curious as to whether or not Gardner would work this into the timeline of his novels, he didn't, which is fair enough; there are probably contractual reasons as to why, and it hadn't been done in LTK.
My biggest issue with Goldeneye perhaps, is what is has been a major issue in all his novels thus far; writing women. To say they are one-dimensional is probably kind, they barely even have a dimension. Natalya perhaps did more solo work than women in previous books and proved herself capable of surviving 2 minures away from Bond's loins, but this would have been written by the original screenwriters..... Gardner dismantles all that by dressing her up as a school girl to smuggle her out of Russia in plain sight all while she bemoans the fabric of her newly gifted underwear. This was totally unnecessary and added no humour to the story. Wade was described (by Bond's thoughts) as being lecherous for looking at her. Yet irony abounds when Bond himself knew all about school girls underwear material, how unflattering it it is and showed no bones bar possibly one about being aroused by her knee socks.
Bond is many things (in books and movies) but he is not into school girls and nor should that be implied.
__
I mentioned earlier that I felt this was phoned in, and I say that because at times it's like he hadn't read the screenplay. The chapter after Bond and Natalya were "smuggled out" of Russia, Wade asked Bond who Natalya was (as inlin with the movie)... yet Wade himself organised and dressed her up as a school girl the day previous.
It's at best lazy writing though I'm leaning more to incompetent.
___
I'm almost finsih, I promise you, because, I don't want to waste much more time in this.
There is a well known scene in Goldeneye where 006 holds a gun to Bonds head to persuade Natalya to give Boris the access codes to the rockets. Natalya responds with "Shoot him, he means nothing to me" in the final act. This is humours and well delivered as it's mirroring Bonds words on the train, and we know she is calling 006's bluff. (The train scene is played out as such in this novel. )
Gardner though changes this and has 006 point the gun at Boris. This is dumb for several reasoms.
Natalya has no fondness or positive emotional connection to Boris. They are not portrayed as friends as in the movie, so she wouldn't care. Bond is who she has the emotional ties with.
The humour of her retort works in the movie as it mirrors what Bond said; but here we are treated to a smug nod of approval from Bond who then acknowledges (out loud) "standard operation procedure" ie, call his bluff. because yes, you will outright say to the aggressor, that their bluff is being called.
lastly, Alec shooting Boris would also have made Natalya's plan foolproof. If Boris was killed, no one else could redirect the rocket. This is a win for Natalaya. Alec Trevelyan, formerly 006, is not an idiot, he shoud know that. Why would he shoot the one guy who could fix his problem?
To quote Benoit Blanc; it's just dumb.
Dumb, lazy, jaded writing.
January 15, 2024
Novelization of the movie, the one with Sean Bean and the train and Arecibo. The Soviet Union has fallen and Russia is in anarchy. Someone steals a stealth helicopter from the French and it is spotted near St. Petersburg. James Bond is sent to look into it and ends up in the gulag, fighting with old KGB guys and Russian thugs. He steals a tank, jumps a train, and eventually takes a Piper Cub to Cuba. As this is a book based on an action movie there are an enormous amount of splosions and crashes and shootings and not much else. Since Bond is always in action it is easy to picture him as his regular self, and only rarely are you reminded that this is snarky Pierce Brosnan Bond. He is far more in the Roger Moore mold than the Sean Connery, but from the book it could be any of them.
Some bit of fun with a book being written in 1995. The Goldeneye is a space EMP satellite and there is a lot of Hollywood computer science involved. At one point Bond's girl in this one can save the world if she can just get a 14.4 modem and 428 k of RAM. While Bond has an industrial grade laser in his watch that can cut through steel. Makes sense.
Then there is the elephant in the room. This book marks the retirement of the Admiral from the office of M, and his replacement is the most grossly incompetent and egregiously ill-placed person imaginable. And it is not going to be a surprise to anyone because the very first thing this new M does is call James Bond a misogynist and useless Cold War dinosaur. Misogynist, OK, but this is the guy that has literally saved the entire human race more than once, undergone torture numerous times, saw the love of his life killed before his eyes, and never once wavered in his loyalty or dedication to duty to Queen and Country. Who the hell are you, lady? What have you ever done to be talking to this guy like that? I'll tell you who she is, so SPOILERS! This is the M that has one of her hand trained operatives, 006, turn traitor. She also gets MI-6 headquarters blowed up. And she gets kidnapped. Eventually she even gets dead. Vice Admiral Sir Miles Messervy, KCMG, would have had an aneurism if it had even been hinted that there was the barest possibility that even one of these things could happen on his watch. It doesn't matter how well Dame Judy Dench can act, this character is irredeemable.
Gardner does a pretty decent job of fleshing out a bare bones plot, mostly concerning the state of Russia during the Yeltsin years. James Bond only gets one moment of his usual introspection, but he does get a good breakfast. Gardner is still completely attached to the ASP 9mm with the Glaser rounds, but Bond does get to drive an Aston Martin instead of a Saab so it's not all bad. I believe it may be the only vehicle in the entire book that he does not destroy, which becomes a running joke throughout the novel.
Overall, decent Bond book, but clearly made from a movie script.
Some bit of fun with a book being written in 1995. The Goldeneye is a space EMP satellite and there is a lot of Hollywood computer science involved. At one point Bond's girl in this one can save the world if she can just get a 14.4 modem and 428 k of RAM. While Bond has an industrial grade laser in his watch that can cut through steel. Makes sense.
Then there is the elephant in the room. This book marks the retirement of the Admiral from the office of M, and his replacement is the most grossly incompetent and egregiously ill-placed person imaginable. And it is not going to be a surprise to anyone because the very first thing this new M does is call James Bond a misogynist and useless Cold War dinosaur. Misogynist, OK, but this is the guy that has literally saved the entire human race more than once, undergone torture numerous times, saw the love of his life killed before his eyes, and never once wavered in his loyalty or dedication to duty to Queen and Country. Who the hell are you, lady? What have you ever done to be talking to this guy like that? I'll tell you who she is, so SPOILERS! This is the M that has one of her hand trained operatives, 006, turn traitor. She also gets MI-6 headquarters blowed up. And she gets kidnapped. Eventually she even gets dead. Vice Admiral Sir Miles Messervy, KCMG, would have had an aneurism if it had even been hinted that there was the barest possibility that even one of these things could happen on his watch. It doesn't matter how well Dame Judy Dench can act, this character is irredeemable.
Gardner does a pretty decent job of fleshing out a bare bones plot, mostly concerning the state of Russia during the Yeltsin years. James Bond only gets one moment of his usual introspection, but he does get a good breakfast. Gardner is still completely attached to the ASP 9mm with the Glaser rounds, but Bond does get to drive an Aston Martin instead of a Saab so it's not all bad. I believe it may be the only vehicle in the entire book that he does not destroy, which becomes a running joke throughout the novel.
Overall, decent Bond book, but clearly made from a movie script.
July 31, 2025
First read of a non-Fleming Bond novel - and inspired to do so as Goldeneye - thanks to my age when the film came out and the legendary N64 game - is my defining Bond film.
I'm aware this is a novelisation FROM the screenplay, so I feel bad about being negative about it, but I have come to really enjoy the contrast between the literary and film versions of Bond, rather than seeing the screen version in print. This does (expectedly) read like an action movie script and for the most part it is thoroughly entertaining and exciting - how can it not, as this is exactly what the film delivers. However, one of the main things I enjoy about reading novel that has been adapted to screen is seeing the choices made by the screenplay writer in terms of how to practically adapt it to the big screen. How they cut or add dialogue and exposition, scale back scenes that would be too hard to film, combine scenes and add new ones to make things more bombastic etc.
Being so familiar with the film (and because this book so closely follows the film) I found it impossible to not just play the film in my head. This is for the die hard fans of Goldeneye as it does give a small amount of extra insights and expansions on the story thanks to Bond's internal monologue so we are able to read Bond's thought processes (the highlight being the famous stolen tank set piece). The dialogue is a bit more fleshed out throughout this which allows for some extra exposition, helping to develop the characters slightly. Although there are some changes which I didn't like (no 'For England James?' 'No, for me' gone!?). There are a few longer scenes and a pinch of extra scenes (such as a small prelude to the damn mission) which slightly try to fill in some of the location jumps and plot holes (such as why there was a sled outside the radar station) in the film. The extra scene of a meeting between Bond and the new M (who he certainly clashes with) was one of my favourites as it helped to explain the change from the old and new M, how she had had his office renovated and a nostalgia and fondness for the original M.
On the whole I really didn't feel this added enough extra to the story to make it a worthwhile read for most people. I feel this was a very restrictive although perhaps a refreshingly easy one to knock out for Gardener - but I can't help feel his talents as a writer have probably been wasted in this. It leaves me eager to return to my read through of the original Fleming novels.
I'm aware this is a novelisation FROM the screenplay, so I feel bad about being negative about it, but I have come to really enjoy the contrast between the literary and film versions of Bond, rather than seeing the screen version in print. This does (expectedly) read like an action movie script and for the most part it is thoroughly entertaining and exciting - how can it not, as this is exactly what the film delivers. However, one of the main things I enjoy about reading novel that has been adapted to screen is seeing the choices made by the screenplay writer in terms of how to practically adapt it to the big screen. How they cut or add dialogue and exposition, scale back scenes that would be too hard to film, combine scenes and add new ones to make things more bombastic etc.
Being so familiar with the film (and because this book so closely follows the film) I found it impossible to not just play the film in my head. This is for the die hard fans of Goldeneye as it does give a small amount of extra insights and expansions on the story thanks to Bond's internal monologue so we are able to read Bond's thought processes (the highlight being the famous stolen tank set piece). The dialogue is a bit more fleshed out throughout this which allows for some extra exposition, helping to develop the characters slightly. Although there are some changes which I didn't like (no 'For England James?' 'No, for me' gone!?). There are a few longer scenes and a pinch of extra scenes (such as a small prelude to the damn mission) which slightly try to fill in some of the location jumps and plot holes (such as why there was a sled outside the radar station) in the film. The extra scene of a meeting between Bond and the new M (who he certainly clashes with) was one of my favourites as it helped to explain the change from the old and new M, how she had had his office renovated and a nostalgia and fondness for the original M.
On the whole I really didn't feel this added enough extra to the story to make it a worthwhile read for most people. I feel this was a very restrictive although perhaps a refreshingly easy one to knock out for Gardener - but I can't help feel his talents as a writer have probably been wasted in this. It leaves me eager to return to my read through of the original Fleming novels.
May 11, 2025
I love the movie. Pierce Brosnan is my James Bond. I was hesitant to read this because the other Bond movie novelizations I’ve read were at best mildly interesting and at worst pretty tedious. This falls into the mildly interesting camp, but just barely! Everything I like is from the screenplay, very few additions are worth it (though I do like some of the “deleted scenes” that bridge the gap between short time jumps from the movie). I also think the book includes way way way too many horrible “one liners” that aren’t silly and fun as much as they are eye rolling. And Bond is a huuuuge asshole in this, not even close to Brosnans characterization. Not Gardners fault I guess since he had no frame of reference yet, but he’s got nearly none of the charm of Brosnan and when he does it’s from stuff included in the screenplay (“She always did enjoy a good squeeze” and “I only pay them lip service” as examples). Just watch the movie
July 16, 2019
Quite easily the worst of John Gardner's Bond stint. The whole thing falls apart at Chapter 12, with paper thin characters, no exposition, and clunky dialogue. Garnder seems to be spinning in the wind trying to adapt the screenplay and ends up floating away, leaving behind a half-dashed, thin read. At one point he even hints at the events of his previous (and best in the series) novel SeaFire, which then negates everything that happened there leaving one scratching their head. This perhaps would have been better left unwritten or perhaps done by another writer as it falls drastically out of step with the canon Gardner created. He's much better with his own original material as opposed to adapting somebody elses. Also, a lot of the stuff that worked in the film just falls flat here (Xenia Onnatop's exploits, for example, juvenile sex scenes, and much of the final action).
July 7, 2021
I'm sure ailing health and a myriad of restrictions placed on the author from the publisher didn't help matters, but John Gardner's GoldenEye is the epitome of a by-the-numbers film novelization churned out for a nice paycheck at the end. The book slavishly follows the script with only a few moments of minor deviation or further fleshing out of details. There are flashes of creativity, like an explanation of how exactly Bond is able to slip out of Russia and make his way into Cuba - and Gardner's fondness for spouting off technical details of real-world military training techniques is on display during the opening bungee jump sequence, but ultimately the brevity of dialogue and inane action sequences tells me Gardner's heart really wasn't in this one.
Read
March 30, 2023Goldeneye is the 15th James Bond novel written by John Gardner and the second written by him from the script of a film. It is a fairly straightforward adaptation of the movie, not particularly well written but you get what you pay for with this kind of thing. I will eventually be reading more of his Bond novels and will be interested to compare the original novels to this one. Judging from this he is no Ian Fleming.
Besides being requested by Gildrose Publications to revive Bond, Gardner created his own spy series in the mid '60's featuring a character called Boysie Oakes and three novels featuring Professor Moriarty, Sherlock Holmes famous nemesis and various other titles including various series and stand alone novels.
Besides being requested by Gildrose Publications to revive Bond, Gardner created his own spy series in the mid '60's featuring a character called Boysie Oakes and three novels featuring Professor Moriarty, Sherlock Holmes famous nemesis and various other titles including various series and stand alone novels.
September 8, 2017
Not the strongest entry in the Bond series, not even the Pierce Brosnan era series. Since I've already seen the movie many years ago I knew the gist of Alec's situation and thus his reveal as Janus was not entirely unexpected, even though I had forgotten who exactly Janus was and how Alec would return.
Jack Wade's character was mildly entertaining. Seeing the new M for the first time was nice since I'm much more familiar with her after she's already settled in and gained the trust of Bond and her subordinates.
The ending felt a bit contrived, even for a Bond novel. Not all of James' lines felt quite right throughout.
Jack Wade's character was mildly entertaining. Seeing the new M for the first time was nice since I'm much more familiar with her after she's already settled in and gained the trust of Bond and her subordinates.
The ending felt a bit contrived, even for a Bond novel. Not all of James' lines felt quite right throughout.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 21, 2022
As far as novelizations go this one was decent. Didn't expound any new plots or backstory. It did manage to flush out some characters via internal dialogue. I listened to the audio which had some abridgement to it and I'm never a fan of that. The general narrative voice was decent. Foreign characters were decent but this guy's British accent was atrocious. I've read a couple other Gardner novels and they captured the character better. I think the issue here was trying to capture the film presentation of the Bond character from an author whose carried forward the literary version for some time. Overall it passed the time but you don't gain anything from not just watching the movie.
May 15, 2019
A fantastic approach to a wonderful movie. John Garnder's knowledge of the intelligence world and the current politics makes reading the novelization a delight if you want to expand the experience given by the 1995 movie. Gardner adds much more grit and a special depth to the story, something that in the film is logically missed because, naturally, an action flick has to move on and be fast paced. I certainly recommend it to you if you loved the film as much as I do.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 80 reviews