Customer Reviews


13 Reviews
5 star:
 (6)
4 star:
 (2)
3 star:
 (1)
2 star:
 (1)
1 star:
 (3)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favourable review
The most helpful critical review


26 of 29 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars A 'forgotten' Bond novel makes a welcome return
Most Bond fans are familiar with the James Bond continuation novels by Amis, Gardner, Benson, and Higson, but few are familiar with this one-shot continuation novel written by John Pearson in 1973. This book claims to be the "true" story of James Bond, secret agent and colleague of Ian Fleming, who gave a one-time interview to John Pearson while on leave in Bermuda in...
Published on 23 Jan 2006 by John Cox

versus
2 of 3 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars jarring
I love the character of Bond from Fleming's books. In this book Bond constantly acts and says things that I could never see him doing. I understand the spirit and context of the book, but it can't help jarring whever the author starts a sentence like, "What Fleming didn't understand about bond was..." I didn't find the JB depicted here particularly likeable. If you're...
Published on 14 Dec 2009 by J. Webb


‹ Previous | 1 2 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

2 of 5 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Licence to write nonsense, 8 Aug 2008
By 
G. S. Juniper - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Yes, I agree with two of the previous reviewers here; this book is utter balderbash. Pearson apes Fleming's style without realising the tongue in cheek attitude the original always kept. There has been no update in style since the 1970s so we get words like negro and Roumanians jumping out on us and bottom line, the story and idea behind it are weak. In an age where Bond is selling any product he's on I cannot recommend this book to even the most ardent Bond fan, even as an enjoyable skim read.

Go for Simon Winder's book The Man Who Saved Britain if you want a read that covers the Bond era as Fleming wrote it without the nonsensical idea of interviewing a man who doesn't exist.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


4 of 11 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars there's a reason this has been out of print since the 1970's.........., 4 Aug 2008
By 
An avid reader (Newcastle upon Tyne) - See all my reviews
......and that reason is, this 'novel' is awful, almost unbelievably bad, I really can't put accross in words how terrible this is, it's an insult to any true Bond fans and, more importantly, Ian Fleming himself.

Pearson shows virtually no understanding of the Bond charachter, his attempts to link his book to the original novels are risible, unsually simply stating 'as Ian described in (insert name of any of Flemings novels here)'.

The 'new adventures'of Bond are ridiculous (Bond locked naked in a gorillas cage in a zoo anyone? no thought not), and unsually take up no more than a page of text.

Bonds supposed relationship with Honeychile Ryder (sorry, Schultz - Pearson shows virtually no imagination with charachter names throughout the book, theres even a Russian called Boris for gods sake).

The premise of the book - and it's 'clever' twist - just doesnt work, the original books were written so that the Russians would believe that Bond was a fictional charachter? - what?, what about the Casino affair? wouldnt they realise that the affair had ACTUALLY happened and one of their agents had been killed? what about everyone Bond went to school with? would they not remember someone going by that name? (Pearson cleverly dismisses this by saying that Bond wasnt at school very long so nobody remembers him - oh, that makes perfect sense then)

I really hated this book, almost to the point of giving up on it (which I never do), it was a real struggle to finsh it - dont waste your time, if your stuck for a Bond fix, go and read an original Fleming, or even a Young Bond by Charlie Higson - either will be 100 times better than this trash - honestly, I've never been so annoyed by a book since reading Dan Browns rubbish.

Should have been left firmly in the 1970's where it belongs and not been ressurected as a blatant cash in.

And if you need any more convincing not to read this.....there is a scene with Bond in Lehderhosen, and M (who Pearson seems to have a particular dislike for) is a naturist. I mean, what? seriously? why?

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEAS, PLEASE DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME READING THIS.........AND IF YOU DO DECIDE, DONT BLAME ME - I TRIED TO WARN YOU
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


4 of 14 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars For Bond Geeks ONLY, 1 Dec 2006
By 
The book has an interesting idea behind it: What if James Bond were real. What things would have happened to him? How would you explain that someone wrote books about him that were said to be fiction?

Pearson tries to be true to the Bond of Fleming, in one sense: he tries to fill in the "back stories" that Fleming spoke about. Thus, while Fleming mentions that Bond came to New York and killed a man during WWII, Pearson imagines how this could have happened and writes about it.

About 50-75 pages are, thus, new Bond stories. The rest of the book dealing with the following: Bond lives off of women he does not love, inc. one he will marry for money, he dislikes M, M almost once went crazy, Bond thinks many of the Bond girls are good-for-nothings. He3 is always carping about them.

Oh, and Fleming at first wrote the Bond stories to make SMERSH think he was a fictional being to keep Bond from being killed. Then, afterwards, when there was no SMERSH, M kept Fleming writing the books of Bond's doings to make the Service look good and because he was very vain and liked the way he was pictured.

As a fan of Fleming, I saw all this as too much and not very true to the people in the books.

At 17, Bond kills his lover and tries to kill himself because, on the basis of old pictures and bad information he was (kowingly!) given by MI6, he was told she was a spy. MI6 did this, because it was getting bad publicity!!

His reaction years later: to feel bad for the Service! They were in a jam needing to find a spy, after all, Says Bond. And if they gave him a set of misleading pictures, this is only part of the Great Game. And then a friend hires Bond - in his stints between WWII and his 00 - and later tries to have him killed because he thinks Bond and his wife are cheating. Bond is not cheating and when this happens, he lets it go. Bond does nothing to get back at him, and only quits his job. Any one who has read Thunderball and, Bond with Count Lipi, will know that this is not the way James Bond works.

Then he fight large genetic rats at the end of the book, rather than marry the girl from Dr. No. He was going to marry her for her money - not love. But adventure calls.

This is a bad book which is very untrue to Bond and the people around him. Can you imagine Bond bad mouthing the women from his past or M as vain!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


‹ Previous | 1 2 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

This product

Only search this product's reviews