Action/Adventure Aficionados discussion

Goldfinger won the poll for the spy theme read.

Optional Discussion Talking Points:

1.Plot
2.Characters. How do you feel about James Bond?
3.Action: How good were the action elements out of 10? Best action scenes?
4.How does this compare to the movie versions?
5.Did the spy aspects feel authentic to you?
6.Overall verdict: out of 10 or 5 stars?
7.Other books like this you'd recommend?

I've got a copy reserved at the library!

Good idea!

Kewl.....For the group read, after I'm done...I can say I finally read a Bond book! :)

The only Bond book I've read so far is Casino Royale, which, other than his severe misogynistic leanings, was pretty darn good.

I haven't read any Bond books. I've seen all the movies, at least in part. My mother is a big fan, so we grew up watching them and became fans as well.

Yup, Bond movies were big in my house growing up too. Had all of them on VHS.

I didn't read CR until last year I think. I was looking forward to checking out the differences between book and movie. I was shocked to find out how close they were. They took a lot from the book- think torture scene.

That is interesting. I figured that they would have changed some parts a lot to make them more movie-ish.

It's enroute my Kindle as we speak. I'll have an Ian Fleming classic Bond book. (and you know how hard it is for me to resist the "bondage" puns right?)

I know you try so hard to, Hugh!

(yea, and boy, is there ever a segway from James bond, to bondage to Star Wars VI Revenge of the Jedi, but I'm not taking it! )

Alice wrote: "Yup, Bond movies were big in my house growing up too. Had all of them on VHS.

I didn't read CR until last year I think. I was looking forward to checking out the differences between book and movie..."

I read Casino Royale after watching the movie too thinking there was no way it was accurate to the book. I actually really liked it and planned to read more but never got around to it. Goldfinger is my favorite classic bond movie so I'll be reading. Going to check the library tomorrow.

Guess what I'm listening to? :)

Hi Alice. Nice to see you here.

I didn't know that about Sean Connery.

Okay, a few hundred words left on my current read, then I'll be starting Goldfinger. I hope I can catch up to you guys. Sorry for being late.

Anyone already reading or finished with Gold Finger?

Okay, just now wading into this and right off, James Bond is a lot deeper and maybe a little darker than in the movies (In a good way). I like it.

A third in, and gotta say it has the feel of the old Bond movies.

I picked up a copy today at the library. Just started the first page and very excited about this book.

I'm going to start reading Goldfinger this weekend.

I agree with Lee, the book, so far is very in keeping with the old movie. I like that we get to get inside of James Bond's mind a bit more than the moves allow and see that he's got some issues.

I think that was the reasoning behind the last Pierce Brosnan James Bond movie, the way it began. Someone thought we needed to see a more vulnerable, tender side to Bond. Not that all that came through on the moive.

Anyway, good book so far.

Ah. (view spoiler)[ Now we find out that Bond is a romantic, taken to fantasy, which makes him a chivilrous bastard, more than a male chauvinist pig. And he's got a mean golf game. (hide spoiler)]

I just started this on the plane!!

I quit reading for a few days after the golf game. Got to get back to it.

I've finished the book... just waiting for a general consensus that enough are ready to discuss to post about it. (waiting the review for that).

Its been sitting in my car taunting me. Arg! I need to pick it up soon!

Alice wrote: "Its been sitting in my car taunting me. Arg! I need to pick it up soon!"

I need to pick it up again too. I started reading 3 other things and misplaced it.

Finished it tonight. For a non-spoiler....Bond ends up in bed with a lady at the end! lol

Lee wrote: "Finished it tonight. For a non-spoiler....Bond ends up in bed with a lady at the end! lol"

Isn't that normal for him? ;-)

Yep.....

I should have my review done (and posted here) by tonight. I hope.

Below is my review, for what it's worth.

(view spoiler)[ 1.Plot – Plot? Okay, it’s James Bond. Who doesn’t know the plot? Megalomaniac wants to rule the world. James Bond Kicks his ass, then gets laid at least twice.

Oh, all right, he played golf too.

I guess I just mean to say, this is an old book, that became an old movie. There were no surprises in the plot. Sean Connery’s Bond fits very well with Ian Fleming’s book.

Bond, on his way back to England after tracking down drug dealers in Mexico gets delayed at the airport. While there, he accepts a proposition from an acquaintance on a past mission. Someone’s cheating him at a cards (Baccarat).

It turns out that the man cheating at cards is the richest English Citizen on the planet. Bond foils the cheater and blackmails him into paying his acquaintance back and meets a hot chick. He enjoys a long weekend with the Goldfinger’s then, while on duty, he spends the time researching Goldfinger.

I could go on, but the plot is rather well known, if you have ever seen a James Bond movie, you’ve probably seen Goldfinger.
I Didn’t see many differences between the movie version and the book as far as the basic plot is concern. There were some differences I noticed in what we were able to see or learn about what was going on.

First, James Bond seems to be having some issues with traumatic Stress. This is one of the amazing things in the book considering the era that it had been written. It’s not much of a nod, just a little trouble sleeping, some alcohol abuse (Self-medication) and some guilt and remorse. This did more to change my appreciation for Ian Fleming than it did James Bond. As far as Bond goes, it also explains some of his cold nature, as they say, “Indifference is a point beyond rage.” I may be a bit crazy, but I think it’s kind of cool that, through what ever exposure to men in danger or who have had to kill people (likely the second world war), Fleming or some part of him noticed how traumatic brutality effected a human being, and that little ibt of it leaked out into his book during a time when most people tended to deny combat and trauma related mental health problems unless you were a victim.

Second, we got a chance to see how much James Bond really sweat things. The golf game is a particularly good example. AN example that got tedious after a few holes. The play by play for Goldfinger Vs Bond went on too long for me, but the benefit is that we got to see how much stress went on inside his head, that never shows in the movies at least not to the degree we got to see it in the book. Again we get to see bond stress when he realizes Goldfiner and Oddjob are going to cut him in to pieces.

Third we get to see Bond’s strength of will and determination when he’s able to hold his breath until he black out. Ordinarily, I’d write that off as fictional hogwash, but I believe that’s likely developed from a firsthand account from the second world war.

Fourth, I have again been reminded of an era where there were hints of a gender revolution building that hadn’t yet been realized. Where Fleming recognized women in his books, even the most potent of them, P. Galore was still shunted off to play nurse and be a boy toy (never mind that she was a lesbian). But this was a different time. This was a place where people thought Ginger was the sexy one and Mary Anne was a cute side kick.

Fifth, of the James Bond’s I’ve seen, Sean Connery played the role the closest to what it was supposed to be.

To Sum up thoughts about the plot. I’d say I was disappointed at how little James Bond had to do with foiling Goldfinger. All he seemed to do was get captured and sit on his hands until he managed to drop a note in the lieu. Even then Felix Lighter did more than Bond did.

2.Characters. How do you feel about James Bond?

I actually like the Sean Connery Bond more after reading the book. I appreciate Ian Fleming more, but I found that, other than Bond this read more like a graphic novel or a Comic Book. The characters were more, caricatures, other than Bond, though how much this is due to the era it was written than the author I can’t say. As for the individual characters?

James Bond actually came across as more human, rather than less Human. The ability to see inside his head and register his fears and remorse allowed the character to feel deeper and more complete than any move ever could. Other than that, he was much the same as the Connery Bond.

Goldfinger turned out to more devious and diabolical, but no real differences between what we saw on the screen and what we saw in the book.

Oddjob – finally I got to see what was so frightening about oddjob that made him dangerous above and beyond the other creepy lethal villains that bond faced in other stories. This is one character that the movie did not stand up to. Odd Job in the movie was scary, but physically, not like the book version, save he was Asian.

P. Galore – Does the woman’s name clue you in on what her value to the story turned out to be? This is the strongest female, good to semi-good, to semi bad, character in the Bond gallery until Jynx comes along and, other than having a likeable wit, if not particularly beautiful personality, is to run a ring of prostitutes, show her independence by being gay and then give that up to go to bed with Bond in order to save her skin at the end of the book. Okay, sign of the times I know, but even the girl who played Goldfinger’s boy toy in the beginning of the book had more redeemable human traits and she was helping Goldfinger filch thousands of dollars by cheating at cards.

3.Action: How good were the action elements out of 10? Best action scenes?
The best action scenes came at the end of the book. I’d rate them at about a 3, maybe a 4. I realize this is how books were written in the late 50’s and 60’s but I’ve read other books from the same era that had more action. I found the action clipped and rather than taking us through the action like Matthew Rielly, James Rollins and Clive Cussler, it was narrated like a flash back. I’d reclassify this book as a suspense thriller by todays standards. I understand that this is what we called “action” stories at one time. I’d offer, for comparison, Alistair MacLean’s books, written about the same time. MacLean’s writing is exciting. This was more like Yadda-yadda-ing sex.

4.How does this compare to the movie versions?
The book was better than the movie, but only marginally so and in aspects of “action” the movie was better.

5.Did the spy aspects feel authentic to you?
It’s likely the spy aspects were “too authentic” and that is why it was more boring than the movies.

6.Overall verdict: out of 10 or 5 stars?
Out of 5 stars, I’ll give it a 3. I might skip to a Bond story from a later time and see if Ian Fleming’s writing style changed with the times. I hate to say it, because my memory of the movies is still generally good, but this was a bit of a letdown for me.

7.Other books like this you'd recommend?

I’d recommend “Where Eagles Dare” and “Circus” by Alistair MacLean before I’d recommend Goldfinger, or even “The Enemy” by Desmond Bagely, which I think is very good.

It’s only fair that I recognize the difference in the world when Goldfinger was written and how the world is now and the differences in writing styles. This is, of course, only my opinion, but, for now, I’d rather watch the movies than read the books, and for me, that’s a shocking thing. I tend to believe that the books are always better than the movies.
(hide spoiler)]

I'll be ready to write my review soon...so I don't want to read your review yet, Hugh. After I posts my thoughts then I want to see if we agree or disagree. I know the month is all most over...where did October go?

Up in smoke.

Hugh, I really appreciated your review/comments.

I'm looking forward to your thoughts, Eileen.

October flew by!!!

Thank you Lady D!

My thoughts about Goldfinger.

(view spoiler)[1.Plot

For the most part I enjoyed this story. Since I saw the movie and never read the book I pictured Sean Connery the whole time. Bond the spy and good guy and Goldfinger the delusional bad guy and his sidekick Odd Job. Whose hat I would like to have. The plot was kind of typical evil tries to take over the world and good comes in and saves the day. First I have to say I'm not a golfer. That part of the story bored me to death and to me reading about golf is worse then watching it on TV.

2.Characters. How do you feel about James Bond?

The Bond in the book I didn't like so much. He had only one use for women and if they weren't interested in him they must be a Lesbian. I know this book was written when "times were different" but I didn't like that side of Bond. For example, when Bond was thinking about Tilly and the reason girls hormones got messed up was the consequence of giving women the right to vote and sexual equality. I guess he needed a big ego in his line of work and it did come in handy at times. The other side of Bond I liked, he was cool, drove nice cars and always tried to stay a step ahead of Goldfinger. Definitely a man of his time.

3.Action: How good were the action elements out of 10? Best action scenes?

The action parts were pretty good, I did enjoy Goldfingers detailed description of how he planned to attack Fort Knox and everything that went into his operation grand slam.

4.How does this compare to the movie versions?

I'd say it followed almost exactly the same as the book. I would have to say I like the movie version better. After reading the book I now want to see the movie again since it's been a few years since I've seen it.

5.Did the spy aspects feel authentic to you?

Since my spy days are long gone I think they were pretty accurate for the time it was written. I did think of Maxwell Smart and his phone when Bond kept his knife in his shoe. Did enjoy that part.

6.Overall verdict: out of 10 or 5 stars?

I would give it 3.5 stars out of 5. I liked it, mostly because it's one of those books that I would consider a classic. A action adventure story that a lot of movies and books since have tried to emulate.

7.Other books like this you'd recommend?

I know you can guess what books I would recommend...sorry. Pick up any Joe Pike/ Elvis Cole series and you will enjoy! : - ) (hide spoiler)]

Hugh, enjoyed reading your review and your observations the effects of war had on Bond. I also agree with you that I will enjoying watching the movies instead of reading the books. I do have a idea of Bond in my head from watching the movies and some of that was shattered from reading the books.

A 5 star review!

Great Rivew by you too. I wonder (knowing what I know now about the lives of those suffering from past trauma now) if the problem with females is related to that?

Interesting question, Hugh. I would say that yes, part of it would be true. Knowing that getting close to anyone could possibly get them killed. What a hard burden that would be to carry around. Men are suppose to be the protectors. So loving and leaving them without any emotional attachments could be a way of protecting them.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Eileen. That attitude towards women is pretty hard for me to get past, so I know what you're saying.

I don't know how I'd take it if I were a woman. That's kind of hard for me to do without reincarnation and a bad accident at this point (not on my agenda). I think it's more than just "the times" Ian Fleming is likely a male schauvinist in that quiet, polite, run along little girl way.

The movies have tried to make the female charactesr stronger, but Jinx (what, three movies ago) was the strongest female character yet, that wasn't a villan and she was played by a oscar winner and still had some problems coming across strong instead of crazy.

I like the movies becuse their fun, but even I, DOS and all sometimes roll my eyes in disgust at the girls.
(except for Agent Goodnight (Maude Adams), I kind of liked her. (The man with the golden gun and one other...)

The attitudes in the book are much the same to be found in a lot of "adventure" books of the period and for some years thereafter (view spoiler)[ I mean Bond seduces a lesbian because "he's the first man she's met" (hide spoiler)]. That part of the books could side track readers today. It was a different time and it's true that Fleming was a bit of a Chauvinist even for the time. It's mostly a case of taking the books for what they are. Some will be to bothered to enjoy the books I suppose. We have libraries that have banned everything from Huckleberry Finn to Harry Potter. It's an individual thing I'd say.

I read the book(s) years ago (in the 1960s) and had forgotten how much space Fleming used it relating the golf match. LOL It's true that the movie followed the general outline of the book but the movie, and the movies in general deviated a good deal from the way Bond is portrayed in the books. He comes through this one relatively unscathed but I remember being impressed (back when) with how often he came close to death and how often he was beaten to within an inch of his life.

Not a bad read, but I didn't really get into it like I did when I was 14 or whatever.

Good points, Mike. I took into account that Goldfinger was written when times were different. That's why I enjoyed reading it (not the golf parts) and took it for what it was worth.

I don't think any books should be banned.

I'm not into banning books either, and, I said on several other posts that I recognize the era... I'd like to give for comparison another book written in the same era that had many of the same gender bias that we're talking about, yet did not come across with women in such degrading situations. (though, degrading might be too strong a word, I'm at a loss to find a better fit.)

Day of the Triffids, written by John Wyndham, an Englishman in 1959. yes, He trivialized, or, likely more appropriately stated, role-adapted, his main female character, yet, she remained self-sufficient, she remained strong, and she often spoke with a voice of reason that challenged faulty thinking and promoted the "right" thinking.

Anyway, I'm just saying, not everything can be blamed on the era it was written in, regardless of how much truth there is to an era having a certian bias to it's scociety or not.

I'm also NOT against reading a book because of it's gender bias. I liked Hounded and I still recommend it, but, once pointed out to me, I agree that it has a gender bias.

I think understanding what is going on in a book grants me the serinity accept those things I cannot change, and gives me the courage to see the value in of a story, even if it has aspects and parts I do not like.

And hopefully, the wisdome to know the difference.

There's nothing wrong with not agreeing with something in a book, even if it's part of history for people to act that way. It makes sense to take into consideration societal and cultural relevance, but some things are just offensive. It doesn't mean that a book should be banned. It just means that it bothers you and if you make note of it in your review or discussion, it's just your view on things.

I know we all have hot buttons. My hot buttons are probably different from others. No worries. I think that Ian Fleming brings a lot to the table as far as A/A and I'm really glad that we have this group to read and discuss his books, even if I don't necessarily agree with some of his viewpoints or elements in his writing.

There are some writers that manage to convey a subject that is undesirable in a brilliant way and others that don't succeed, and that will feel different to us as we read.

It's been a long time since I read these (I was like 14 around '65 or '66) they're all tied in with my spy/fi period. As I recall Doctor No was the one I liked best. I'll have to see if I can track it down... I only remember vividly his escape.

I'd just like to point out, that, though it may sound like we are "blaming" Ian Fleming for the way his book turned out that I am fully aware that books and published works are more complicated than "write it now post it."

I (we?) am not "judging" the man, Ian Fleming. We have no idea how, or why his books became like they did or what reasoning or thinking lead him to the conclusions he came to before designing his work.

Often times a writer's publisher has more to do with how a written work turns out than the writer does. (Publishing by formula). My mother wrote 5 Regency Romances and became very frustrated with "the rules" that nobody would admit to, yet, caused them to send back her work for edits, that dictated Regency Romance Heroines to be a certain way. (Which tended to be helpless and clingy.) My mother did everything she could to "push the boundaries" but, if she wanted to get published, she conformed when she had to (She one some battles).

And, John Wyndham's work has plenty of gender bias in it that is not based on fair assessment, yet, it is not as extreme and narrow in vision as the "Bond Girls." I just wanted to point out that there were other conventions of thinking about roles for women in written works of fiction in the same era that came to different conclusions.

So, though the era, and most people living during those times (including women), tended to be gender-equality challenged generally. That doesn't mean it's fair to write such things off as "flies in the ointment" as a product of the "era" which, judging by other written works, clearly had more than one point of view when it came to gender roles.

I can deal with the flies, but I'm not going to act like they aren't there.

Just got finished- phew.

A few things I liked (although my review doesn't reflect them- oops)- when by himself or with Goldfinger, Bond had an interesting internal monologue. He isn't the devil may care agent you get to see in most of the films. That aspect, to me, gives the books greater depth.

I also like Goldfinger as a villain. For the most part. He had well thought out plans and an excellent henchman.

Praise aside, Gf had serious issues as a whole. There were huge lulls in the story and the female characters were ridiculous. The ending, with Pussy, doesn't even bear talking about. Ugh.

Still, I really enjoyed Casino Royale and found, for the most part, that I enjoy Bond as a character. I will read more in this series to be sure.

I agree with the Ugh. Thanks Alice.