'Licence to Kill' Novelization Review | John Gardner Adapts Timothy Dalton's Bond for Book Form

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 8 ноя 2024
  • Continuity conundrums galore as the literary Felix is reunited with his greatest nemesis... The SHARK!
    Support the channel: / calvindyson
    Also follow me on other social media:
    / calvin_dyson
    / calvinmdyson
    / calvindyson
    letterboxd.com...

Комментарии • 172

  • @CodytheVictorian
    @CodytheVictorian Год назад +40

    John Gardner: It's unrealistic that Sanchez would use Stingers in his evil plan!
    Also Gardner: Felix gets mauled by a shark twice in the exact same way, and also Bond has now met two men named Milton Krest who own boats called the Wavekrest

    • @davidjames579
      @davidjames579 Год назад +6

      Sanchez: What do you know about Stingers? John Gardner: Hold my Tequila

  • @damienfenton3880
    @damienfenton3880 Год назад +82

    Haha, regarding Felix getting fed to the shark for a second time, I'm reminded of a line by John McClane in Die Hard 2, "How can the same shit happen to the same guy twice?"

    • @DafyddBrooks
      @DafyddBrooks Год назад +4

      hahahaha excellent :) I do think if Gardener should have changed anything its how felix is dealt with by Sanchez and come up with something more creative than just using Sharks again

    • @nitinranjan4935
      @nitinranjan4935 Год назад +4

      Maybe they could have used crocodiles from Live and Let Die for Felix...🤣

    • @jonathancampbell5231
      @jonathancampbell5231 Год назад +3

      I wonder if he was laughing at the end of the novel too

    • @spencerkindra8822
      @spencerkindra8822 Год назад +1

      "What are the OOOOOOOOOOOOOODS??!!" Insane haha.

    • @thechairman74
      @thechairman74 Год назад +1

      I read the novel when it came out and I was also rather perplexed that Gardner made the novel part of his series, thus having to include Felix getting the double shark feeding.

  • @BenCol
    @BenCol Год назад +48

    On John Gardner's website, it used to have an interview he did with Raymond Benson where they went through book by book and he gave his thoughts on them. It's not there anymore, but it can be found using the Wayback Machine (jump back to 2018 or so). He mentions how "there are huge jumps in the screenplay, which you can do on screen; but with a book you need to explain things. So I had to add a lot to explain how Bond got from here to there, that sort of thing." Which is one of the biggest differences between film and book I noticed (also with his GoldenEye novelisation) - for instance, when Bond flies the plane full of money away, it's never explained in the film what he does with it and I never questioned it. But Gardner's right, if a book hadn't explained that it would've been a major 'hang on a minute' moment. Thankly for Gardner he'd set Scorpius in Florida so he could bring back a minor character back to fill that hole - I do wonder what readers not familiar with Gardner's books, just wanting to read the book of a film they enjoyed, thought. Did any of them think "huh? Who's this random bloke out of nowhere?"
    (Also, the inclusion of this character and the fact Bond is still a Commander make me think this book was meant to be released before Win, Lose or Die. Indeed, this Benson-Gardner interview puts LTK between Scorpius and WLoD, which I think is the better order.)
    In the same interview Gardner mentions that he hated writing this book because the screenplay would constantly be changing and they were always couriering him new pages. Apparently when he wrote the GoldenEye novelisation he stipulated that he'd only do it if they gave him more freedom "to 'add and subtract' what he wanted and not be held to the screenplay _during_ shooting." And yeah, that's the biggest difference between Gardner's two novelisations. LTK feels, for the most part, like the film in book form - GoldenEye feels more like an earlier draft, but with more moments of Gardner going "I don't like this bit, I'm going to improve it."
    Spoiler alert: Gardner did not improve it.

    • @DafyddBrooks
      @DafyddBrooks Год назад +4

      ahhh interesting. I mean the movie went through a writers strike so it doesnt suprise me that he hated adapting the screen play into a book.

    • @TheT3rr0rMask
      @TheT3rr0rMask Год назад +2

      I get them wanting their novelization to be closer to the movie but someone should've realized since chunks of the film take directly from LALD it'd be problematic as Gardner intended it to be canon to the Fleming books.
      It's an interesting read given what it is but going through half of it so far (as well as it being my first Gardner book) it feels pretty lacking. Wonder a world where he adapted other 80s Bond films, like Octopussy or TLD would've been interesting. AVTAK I think would've been extremely interesting to see adapted, possibly expanding Zorin, Mortner and Scarpine a lot more (which is my biggest gripe with the film).

    • @jamesatkinsonja
      @jamesatkinsonja Год назад +1

      Great work, never knew that interview existed so really enjoyed reading this comment.

    • @BenCol
      @BenCol Год назад +2

      @@jamesatkinsonja Glad to hear it!

    • @olivergiggins7931
      @olivergiggins7931 Год назад +2

      @@TheT3rr0rMask Gardner was already cherry picking from the canon though. If he wasn't, Fleming's bond would be 60+ in his books, and I don't think a single strand of grey hair covers that, especially with women in their 20s ogling him at first sight. By the end of their run Gardner's books were wiping out about 20 years of Bond's life from the Fleming timeline.
      Considering his weaknesses as a writer (I consider Gardner the worst continuation writer by some margin), I think audiences would have felt short changed by his "totally improved" version of a film they must have really liked if they bought the novelisation. I get what you mean, but for both continuity and quality reasons I'd say the solution would just have been get another writer. Christopher Wood could thread the loyalty/timeline needle, but Gardner couldn't make his own plots work, let alone improve one of the most plotted Bond films ever.

  • @BenCol
    @BenCol Год назад +21

    Maybe it's the talk of pie, maybe it's the fact Killifer's played by Everett McGill, but when Felix got fed to a shark for a 2nd time, all I can think of is the Giant from Twin Peaks saying:
    "It Is Happening Again."

    • @DafyddBrooks
      @DafyddBrooks Год назад +4

      hahaha . Sherrilyn Fenn could have made for a great Bond girl for Daltons 3rd/ 3th movie i feel :)

    • @DafyddBrooks
      @DafyddBrooks Год назад +1

      sorry, '4th movie ' i was meant to write :)

  • @savethezombies
    @savethezombies Год назад +6

    9:34 "not again" Can't help but think of John Hurt in Spaceballs reliving his Alien experience in the diner.

  • @donaldanderson6604
    @donaldanderson6604 Год назад +6

    Many years ago I lived near Gardner and met him at a party. He was chatting to a guy who worked at one of the nearby airbases and asking him about flight simulators. You could see a Bond episode forming in his mind. He was very charming and I've been a fan since.

  • @Treblaine
    @Treblaine Год назад +4

    In the next novel, Bond once again marries a woman called Tracy who is murdered on their honeymoon...

  • @chris_stokes
    @chris_stokes Год назад +32

    You have been far kinder to the Gardner books than I tend to be. After such a long gap before you picked them back up again, I thought they'd done you in!

    • @calvindyson
      @calvindyson  Год назад +19

      HA! Tbh I think I’ll need to revisit a Fleming novel soon. I’ve been chaining Gardner almost exclusively for a year now so it’s becoming all I can remember

    • @chris_stokes
      @chris_stokes Год назад +4

      @@calvindyson You've got the end of Gardner in sight so if you hold your nerve you might make it through. In my opinion, Benson is an improvement without being really, really great. But still a step up.

    • @DM-kv9kj
      @DM-kv9kj Год назад +8

      @@calvindyson Regarding his 2 books a year feat, you'd be surprised how fast one can churn out garbage when some publisher's paying you a fortune for it and you don't care a jot about quality storytelling, interesting characters or saying anything at all with your work. I do appreciate how careful you are not to offend people who may like these, but let's face it - Gardener is a hack writer and these Bond books are junk spun out purely to make money and nothing else. Fleming wrote his Bond stories out of some original spark of creativity and a passion to make-believe what he had always fancied himself doing when working for SIS with his secret commando unit. He may have been horrendously racist and sexist, but at least he was original and highly creative with his stories, and he had years of genuine experience glimpsing the world of espionage in WW2. John Gardener is just some bloke cashing in on someone else's creation, nothing more, nothing less.

    • @ADcomics12
      @ADcomics12 Год назад +1

      @@calvindysonhey Calvin your my favorite RUclipsr I would like to thank you because I have a channel too and it’s hard to make a short a week I bet it’s really hard to have a really good channel with so much content bye

  • @paulgeorge3915
    @paulgeorge3915 Год назад +24

    The differences between the book and the film may not all have been of Gardner's doing. I don't know for certain, but I think it is possible that in order to have the novelisation ready for publication at the same time as the film was released, he may have had to work from an earlier draft of the screenplay.

    • @davidjames579
      @davidjames579 Год назад +4

      Yeah that's commonplace for novelisations. Years before DVD and scripts on the Internet, people would raid novelistions for deleted material. Of course some of it could be artistic license. Or authors doing internal monologue, recollections and scene setting. Which films can't do to the same extent.

  • @stevengn7245
    @stevengn7245 Год назад +3

    Also similarly to the Della scene, the mention of Tracy when Bond meets Anya in the film Spy Who Loved Me is not replicated in the novelisation by Wood...

  • @doctorvanya
    @doctorvanya Год назад +26

    Here's how Gardner should have handled the Milton Krest/ Hildebrand Rarity continuity issue; replaced Krest with a new character, but keep the Wavekrest and have Bond comment that he had encountered the boat's previous owner.
    I think it would be consistent with the whole Leiter/ shark issue.

    • @calvindyson
      @calvindyson  Год назад +13

      I love that idea! Would have been a nice touch of inventive continuity

    • @JOSH-lw2jv
      @JOSH-lw2jv Год назад +1

      To be fair,
      it could've been another person that just so happened to have the same name as the character from *"The Hildebrand Rarity".*
      It's like the three Sarah Connors
      in *"THE TERMINATOR"* (1984)
      and in real-life, there's two women
      named Alice Cleaver - they
      both have different middle names:
      Mary & Catherine - and one of
      them (Catherine) was a nursemaid
      for Trevor Allison (the infant child
      of Hudson & Bess Allison and
      brother to his two-year-old sister
      Loraine; all three sadly perished)
      and they were able to escape from
      the sinking Titanic on Lifeboat 11.

  • @dalivan
    @dalivan Год назад +9

    What a coincidence, just got this novel gifted to me from my wife today. Gonna have to read it soon.

  • @kclink1579
    @kclink1579 Год назад +7

    Don't worry Felix, John Mcclane knows what it's like to have something unlikely happen to him twice.

  • @SUK2293
    @SUK2293 Год назад +4

    Alan Dean Foster was the king of novelisations, adapting original scripts like Star Wars and Alien with all the missing bits from the theatrical releases. He wrote an unofficial sequel to New Hope called Splinter of the Mind's Eye where Luke continues to fancy Leia a lot more and first fights Vader .. Then Lucas began to distinguish between Canon and Not .. And so, who owns the Bond canon?

    • @jamesatkinsonja
      @jamesatkinsonja Год назад +1

      Ian Fleming Publications controls the novel canon, Eon the film one. Unlike most franchises there pretty independent, only collaborating for the novelisations.

  • @adotgif
    @adotgif Год назад +11

    "Oh my God, they maimed Felix!"

  • @JoaoPereiray
    @JoaoPereiray Год назад +14

    Happy new year calvin!
    Thank you for being here constantly in these past few years providing us with such good content and humour.

    • @calvindyson
      @calvindyson  Год назад +8

      Happy new year to you too! And thanks so much! I’m happy you’re enjoying the videos 😁😁

  • @berjtekerian702
    @berjtekerian702 Год назад +3

    Ha ha! "Oh no, they maimed Felix!"
    "You bastards!"
    Brilliant review of this book. I enjoyed this book and felt it was a bit more 'normal' than his previous few. I haven't got much further than this yet, though!

  • @bigfootmenaceormisundersto1479
    @bigfootmenaceormisundersto1479 Год назад +2

    Gardner got the city wrong of where Felix had his first shark encounter. It was St. Petersburg, FL, not Miami.

  • @jamesatkinsonja
    @jamesatkinsonja Год назад +7

    1:10 I remember when Quantum of Solace came out they put all the Fleming short stories into one book [for the first time] and made Quantum the title story to fulfil that idea!
    4:45 I know you've got a few more Gardner books to battle through first but I found this aspect noticeable in the Raymond Benson books as he tried to tie Fleming's 50/60's novels in with Brosnan's portrayal [which by his own admission was more influenced by the films than the novels].
    18:30 He is referred to as Captain after this novel but I don't think the discrepancy is addressed. Gardner later changes Bond's gun but has to use Walther PPK for Goldeneye so he probably wasn't allowed to change film continuity in these novelisation.

    • @BenCol
      @BenCol Год назад +1

      That's how I experienced the Fleming short stories - I was glad because it meant I got two Fleming books for the price of one! Strangely though they didn't use a movie poster for the cover like they did for the Casino Royale tie-in book two years prior - well, maybe first editions did, but the one I have has a library image akin to the rest of the Penguin Modern Classics range.

  • @spaceodds1985
    @spaceodds1985 Год назад +5

    Happy New Year, and a nice way to welcome in said year, a video on my favourite Bond film😊
    Read the novelisation some years ago when it appeared on Kindle download. It is an interesting curio on what is my favourite Bond film. I’m glad that the key lime pie passage was picked up on, not to mention M’s attitude towards Bond’s mission against Sanchez, remember scoffing at that chapter. However I want you to confirm one thing, is it my imagination or was there a chapter on Bond purchasing or borrowing a speed boat from a civilian friend of his? The reason I bring it up is because Gardner goes into detail on Bond’s doubts about approaching his civilian friend, whom thinks that Bond is a travel writer. I know a similar scene was cut from the film, although the boat owner was not a friend.

    • @calvindyson
      @calvindyson  Год назад +4

      A very happy New Year to you too! From what I remember, he buys the speedboat from some guy with some of the money he steals from Krest but I don’t think it was a friend… been a couple of months now since I read the book so I might be recalling incorrectly but I don’t think it was a friend

    • @spaceodds1985
      @spaceodds1985 Год назад

      @@calvindyson Thanks for the clear up. Tempted to read it again, really have been lacking my attention with the Gardner novels. Read Renewed, and then Icebreaker and then I just skipped to LtK and Goldeneye.

  • @olivergiggins7931
    @olivergiggins7931 Год назад +2

    Even in a novelisation of a film the reader would have already seen, Gardner tries to shove in a surprise villain twist.

  • @dannymacgyver
    @dannymacgyver Год назад +2

    Happy new year @calvindyson
    Love the first video of 2023 is about Dalton ;)
    Looking forward to all you post this year

  • @gavinmetcalfe406
    @gavinmetcalfe406 Год назад +2

    Forget Felix getting mauled by sharks in each new novel. I want Calvin to do all the characters' voices.

  • @theflash5689
    @theflash5689 Год назад +3

    Great Video, Calvin! 😊 i would in the future like to see some more ranking/re-ranking videos from you because i cannot find them on youtube. (perhaps because i live in australia) and just because i love to hear your opinions and you a a really great entertainer.

  • @markbunn4376
    @markbunn4376 Год назад +2

    I read this just a few months ago having picked it for 25p in a charity shop. I like that "Q" gets more to do in the novel after his final appearance in the film. Also loved Calvin reading the passages from the novel (loved the Moneypenny & Pam!!)

  • @BenCol
    @BenCol Год назад +10

    A thing I remember bugging me is that Gardner still refers to Bond as 007 in the narration even after he goes rogue, e.g. he uses Bond and 007 interchangeably for dialogue tags. He's lost his licence to kill, Gardner, he shouldn't still have his Double-O number! I know it's a really nitpicky point, but still, considering the whole point of the story is that he's not working for MI6 this time, referring to Bond as 007 kinda undermines that.

    • @TheT3rr0rMask
      @TheT3rr0rMask Год назад +5

      True. Even Q calling him 007 in the film stood out to me for this reason, but him being Q and referring to Bond as 007 all the time it made sense with his character.
      From an author's perspective, though, yeah it feels off in a nonsensical way.

    • @BenCol
      @BenCol Год назад +3

      @@TheT3rr0rMask Yeah, with a character's dialogue you can explain it as a force of habit. For the objective narration to do it just gives the impression that Gardner doesn't know what '007' means.

    • @Niala8419
      @Niala8419 Год назад +4

      You can't exist as a character in a Gardner Bond book unless you have about 4 names that you go by. It really is tough stuff at times 🙂

  • @zambonsfilmemporium1526
    @zambonsfilmemporium1526 Год назад +3

    enjoyed my Echo reading it to me and the GoldenEye book also. thank goodness Tomorrow Never Dies was a proper audiobook Calvin.

  • @JOSH-lw2jv
    @JOSH-lw2jv Год назад +4

    Fun Fact:
    John Gardner's *"Licence To Kill"* made a change of pistol for James Bond; replacing the PPK with a Walther P38K, and his novelization of *"GoldenEye"* has Bond use a ASP 9mm Pocket Pistol with Glaser "shotgun-like" rounds.
    Luckily, Raymond Benson's novelization for *"The World Is Not Enough"* had
    007 reusing his old PPK, which ironically replaced his brand new Walther P99 that was first introduced in both the
    film & novelization of *"Tomorrow Never Dies".*

    • @user-si9fx4xb6v
      @user-si9fx4xb6v 4 месяца назад +1

      Yeah, when I first read the novelization of Licence To Kill that was one of the things that stood out to me. I later discovered that Gardner made a slight mistake when writing his book in that he wrote the P38K is another variant of the Walther PPK when in fact it is the short- barreled version of the famous 9mm P-38 pistol in reality. As the for the usage of the ASP in the Goldeneye novelization, I am not surprised given that Gardner himself choose it as Bond's new handgun beginning in his 1984 novel Role Of Honor. This book also mentioned that Bond loaded it with the Glaser Safety Slugs for more stopping power.
      Also, I do find it odd that Gardner choose to incorporate parts of Ian Fleming's continuity as others have posted here. I know that his original novels made reference to the events in Fleming's stories, however I would think that a major of people know the film's continuity over the books a majority of the time.

  • @mryubnub508
    @mryubnub508 Год назад +2

    Another entertaining video, as always. You’re surely one of my highlight creators on all of RUclips.
    Please continue to give these book reviews, as I find them interesting, and hilarious.

  • @noxida1
    @noxida1 Год назад +2

    As I've said before, I'm happy you're pushing through the Gardner novels because I couldn't do it haha. Push on though because the modern continuation novels from Devil May Care up to present are all pretty great, including a couple I'd put up there with some of Fleming's best so there's better things to come.

  • @kryptych
    @kryptych Год назад +2

    I believe I'd commented on some of your past videos about the possibility that Della and James had been an item, or at least had a fling, and that her marrying Felix was possibly due to James introducing them. Nice to hear now that in the novelization that had been the case. =D

    • @jamesatkinsonja
      @jamesatkinsonja Год назад

      More than likely it was an element in the script in early drafts that didn't make it into the final film.

  • @MrSuperphil
    @MrSuperphil Год назад +3

    I always found the film novelisations not as much fun as his original stories. Too familiar to whats going to happen next, it spoils the read.

  • @stuartwebb7932
    @stuartwebb7932 Год назад +3

    I can't remember if Bond has used his standard later Gardner books cover identity of "James Boldman" yet, but I once saw a post on a forum say that by this point, they started calling the series the Captain Boldman books because they were now so far removed from Fleming, and that always stuck with me.
    Benson had a very different out of book continuity approach to the novelisations, he always insisted that was the only time he was writing with Pierce Brosnan in mind as Bond.

  • @tlshortyshorty5810
    @tlshortyshorty5810 Год назад +1

    I think the funniest part is that Bond rattles off several missiles that are nowhere near man-portable
    SA-8s and Chapparals are mounted on trucks and the latter was adopted from missiles fighter jets use

  • @LeonWick526
    @LeonWick526 Год назад +3

    (Bond finds Felix maimed by a shark for a 2nd time.)
    Bond: NOT AGAIN!
    Truly 1st class writing by Gardner.

  • @james__page
    @james__page Год назад +3

    Christopher Wood’s novelizations are probably better as he was working with his own material. You could argue that they are the truer version of the story he had in mind as they were not restrained by film budgets or producer overwatch.
    Whereas, Gardner here is having to polish somone else’s gold, as it were. I give props to him for correcting the Stinger error of the film. No doubt the CIA, who has script approval, would not have allowed the producers to say Sanchez has American prototypes bought on the grey market from the CIA’s off book deals in South America 😂

    • @davidjames579
      @davidjames579 Год назад +2

      Interesting Gardner mentioned that, as EON aim to stay out of politics. Maybe nobody from there read the novelization!

  • @Hammerhead547
    @Hammerhead547 Год назад +2

    I've always found that film novelizations generally end up either being a translation of the script into book form that adds very little too the story or they add a lot of extra details that had to be left out of the film script either for time or story flow reasons.
    One of the best ones I've ever read was the novelization of Jason Lives: Friday The 13th: VI because it was actually written by the guy who wrote and directed the film so he was able too put in all the details that he'd had to cut from the movie which actually did a really good job of fleshing out the story and adding depth too the characters including jason himself.
    One of the worst ones I've ever read was stephen king's storm of the century because it's literally a shot for shot translation of the script from the tv movie into book form.
    I do remember reading this one in high school and quite enjoying it becuase it struck a nice balance between being faithful too the story as seen in the film while also adding just enough new stuff too keep in intersting.

  • @RediscoveringLostRailways
    @RediscoveringLostRailways Год назад +1

    How I enjoyed your review! Please continue your reviews of the Gardner novels, nobody does it better!

  • @TheDukeofMadness
    @TheDukeofMadness Год назад +1

    It was this book that cemented Timothy Dalton as my Gardner Bond mental image.

  • @jamesatkinsonja
    @jamesatkinsonja Год назад +4

    Novelisations were big business in the 80's where some [such as Rambo: First Blood Part 2] would get on the best sellers list. They have declined in more recent years [probably due to the rise of home media] though there still around [Kingsman: The Golden Circle got a novelisation for example].
    Often they were worth a look as they would usually be based on an earlier draft of the script and scenes deleted/changed during filming would be present [The script for Terminator Salvation/4 was changed so radically during filming, author Alan Dean Foster wrote a new novelisation from scratch].
    The author was usually restricted in what they could change [Foster wanted to keep some of the characters from Aliens around for his Alien 3 book but was vetoed]. The exception was David Morrel as the author of First Blood he was able to negotiated being able to make changes when he novelised the 80's sequels [Rambo 3's novelisation is very different from the final film].

    • @TheT3rr0rMask
      @TheT3rr0rMask Год назад +1

      Been curious of the Rambo novelization given how First Blood ends. Do the Part 2 and Rambo 3 adaptations treat the First Blood book as canon with some alternate ending or did Morel just not bother and use the movie as the canon story for the sequels?
      Either way it's nice to have the real creator adapt those screenplays.

    • @DafyddBrooks
      @DafyddBrooks Год назад +1

      very well said man. and i didnt know about the terminator 4 book being rewritten from scratch so now i'll have to find that and have a read through.
      i hope all is well man, i commented on the other page with loadsa youtube links for you. you dont have to reply to all that we disscussed before but i hope all is well man and enjoy the links :)

    • @jamesatkinsonja
      @jamesatkinsonja Год назад +1

      ​@@TheT3rr0rMask All he did was put a note at the start saying 'in the book he dies, in the movie, he lives!' and he follows the movies [the Colonel+ Rambo's relationship for example]. Both novelisations are worth a look [the audio books-sadly not read by Stallone-are free on audible too].

    • @TheT3rr0rMask
      @TheT3rr0rMask Год назад +1

      @@jamesatkinsonja Thanks for the audible heads up, really curious of them.

  • @thefoxcritic1
    @thefoxcritic1 Год назад +3

    This is quite funny as Dalton is generally considered to be one of the most Fleming book-accurate Bonds lol

  • @menkomonty
    @menkomonty Год назад +2

    Man: Oh my GOD that shark is coming to eat us
    Felix: First time?

  • @deanpurdie4010
    @deanpurdie4010 Год назад +3

    When reading Gardner's own novels, I can't stop imagining Bond as Connery in his Never Say Never Again look (but not the same style). Who do you think Gardner had in mind when writing?

  • @wheatmann1601
    @wheatmann1601 Год назад +4

    Could you do a remake of your Connery bond reviews please, because they are from a long time ago and the microphone isn’t as good and I want to hear your new opinions! Thanks

  • @jamesatkinsonja
    @jamesatkinsonja Год назад +2

    Very interesting review. I think this was probably trying to appeal to a wider audience than Gardner's regular readers [I seem to recall the first edition had pictures from the film in the middle but I might be wrong] which probably was another factor in the book-hence why Q appears when Qu'te would probably have fit in better with Gardner's world. I look forward to the other novelisation's when you get around to them.

  • @johnpotts8308
    @johnpotts8308 Год назад +1

    So was there a bowl of petunias on Felix's bedside that went "Oh no, not again!" when Bond enters Felix's room?

  • @chrishewson4283
    @chrishewson4283 Год назад +5

    Wow, Gardner's Bond is a REALLY bad judge of character! Haha. I guess since there couldn't be his usual double agent this time round, he felt the need to have his Bond's naivety come through somewhere else.
    Regarding that stinger scene, that *dialogue* sounds cumbersome! 😅

  • @astrosquirrel5038
    @astrosquirrel5038 Год назад +4

    The movie kind of went ignored for me as a kid. After reading the novelization I went back and watched it as an adult. Now it’s one of my favorites.

  • @WhiteJarrah
    @WhiteJarrah Год назад +1

    Maybe a novelization ranking going into these from here on? Each of the Pierce Brosnan movies got a novelization.

  • @FairladyZ2005
    @FairladyZ2005 Год назад +1

    I remember reading this back in the day. The Felix thing was odd but at the time I found it interesting and appreciated the continuity. Then of course I had to read Live and Let Die to find out how it happened to Felix the first time. You may know this already, but just like the film the novel in the US used the UK spelling of licence, however it's still spelled license in the US version of Gardner's License Renewed.

  • @thechairman74
    @thechairman74 Год назад +1

    I think what is kind of galling about Gardner having Felix get the shark attack twice is that the film cast David Hedison as Leiter, the first time a Leiter actor reprised his role. Hedison, of course, played Leiter in "Live And Let Die". So was Gardner trying to say that, well since Leiter was injured in the novel, and he was in the film, and the guy who played in the first film is now back in the new film, that therefore he needs to re-do the attack? But the main reason why Leiter comes back in "License To Kill" is because they wanted to do the shark attack as a call-back to the film.

    • @jamesatkinsonja
      @jamesatkinsonja Год назад

      As Calvin covered in the review of the film, Hedison was brought back seemingly as he'd bumped into Cubby around the time they were casting! But the link to LALD is a nice link.
      Gardner had to tie in with Fleming's canon due to the literacy Bond being it's own entity [similar to how Christopher Wood's novelisations due] whoever was cast as Felix.

  • @bouncingbluesoul5270
    @bouncingbluesoul5270 Год назад +3

    Wait until the Goldeneye novelization.

  • @andrewb5429
    @andrewb5429 Год назад +1

    Happy New Year, Calvin!

  • @JohnSmith-zq9mo
    @JohnSmith-zq9mo Год назад +1

    Have you reviewed the Moneypenny Diaries? They are releases by the estate, but partly follow the movies by making Moneypenny-Bond have significant interactions. I liked the first one a lot.

  • @PaulBurgin
    @PaulBurgin Год назад +1

    Have not read it for many years, but do remember the eye popping bit about Felix Leiter being attacked, again, for continuity purposes. A remember for some of us that you read these novels by Gardner so that we don't have to ;-)

  • @tbc9096
    @tbc9096 Год назад +1

    I just sold a ton of my Gardner novels yesterday. I just can’t get into them at all. I did keep LTK, however, because it has Dalton on the front cover. Still have to read Goldeneye by Gardner. I just can’t justify Gardner’s books taking up shelf space because I’m an avid reader and need the space for more books. Lol

  • @candoentertainment9118
    @candoentertainment9118 Год назад +1

    Had this novel and the comic adaptation. Licence to Kill is my 2nd favorite Bond movie.

  • @DafyddBrooks
    @DafyddBrooks Год назад +6

    Oh I never knew they never released a film book version of the 80's Bond films until License to Kill!! Its weird because you'd think you want to really promote your movie in any way possible, especially since Bond came from books originally.
    Is there a moment of dialogue Calvin when Bond is captured by the Hong Kong narcotics that as Bond is lying down he tells the main HK agent "I saw you in Sanchez's office, your working for them!" and THATS why the HK agent replies in the film "We're Hong Kong narcotics you B****sterd !" . I wonder why they cut that line out and I wonder if they used that later on instead as ADR or something for when Bond confronts Pam as he's reaching for her gun. It makes sense for why the HK agent says that line to him now in the book but it doesnt makes sense why he'd say that to him in the movie, its weird.
    I do often wonder (and the same with QOS) if there wasnt a writers strike, what would Richard Maibaum have added to the script as he turned in a first draft and M G Wilson had to just write the rest himself, is that right too?
    Oh and 13:06 wonderful impression man, a spitting impression of Caroline Bliss ;)

    • @user-si9fx4xb6v
      @user-si9fx4xb6v Год назад

      Both For Your Eyes Only and Octopussy did get comic book adaptions of their respective screenplays from Marvel comics. At the time of both movie's releases, comic book adaptations were a common marketing tactic. Also, A View To A Kill got a picture story book released which like the novelizations of some of the other Bond movie screenplays included material from an early draft of the screenplay.

  • @SuperGrumpyDaddy
    @SuperGrumpyDaddy Год назад +2

    I gave up with Gardner after the second book, but bought this one a while back because I was curious. I think I read it constantly shaking my head, and when the shark went for Felix’s prosthetic limbs instead of the juicy, tasty fleshy one I think I wet myself laughing. From what I have read the Gardner books are god awful, and your reviews only enhances that opinion. But I do love these reviews, long May they continue!

  • @DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader
    @DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader Год назад +1

    We all were waiting for the reaction to shark attack Pt2. 😂
    The whole experience of Gardner’s LTK is a bit softer due to it being Gardner’s Bond and not having the more bleak focus of the film. You can tell he was a bit stuck between the various drafts and the best moments are absolutely what he added such as the aftermath of Bond escaping with the plane and money. Some of the deleted scenes are present in similar fashion.
    The film had script troubles and setbacks due to the Writers Guild strike which didn’t help. On Goldeneye Gardener was able to make a bit more solid experience overall. Both stand out as a separate entity from Gardner’s Bond novels just as Benson’s do. All the novelizations should be considered separately.
    Funny to read this and also reflect on the film sort of borrowing from Gardner in Bond being in Key West and then having Gardner write the novelization.

  • @jenner4214
    @jenner4214 Месяц назад

    Usually, the Gardner additions added some interesting tradecraft details, such as how to dispose of a hot seaplane and get back undetected to Miami. But there was onecorrection he made that was for the worse. James Bond and Pam Bouvier are in a small motor boat that has run out of fuel. In the movie, they switched it to an auxillary battery power and motored slowly but surely back to port. In the book, Gardner obviously thought having a back-up battery was a silly idea. His version was that they resigned themselves to drifting back to shore. So, presumably, one week later...

  • @billkanas6417
    @billkanas6417 Год назад +1

    Very enjoyable review! With respect to Bond still holding the rank of Commander in this book, while I do not know exactly when John Gardner wrote this book and the other one that was published in 1989, where he does indeed promote Bond to Captain--Win, Lose or Die, in the US at least, the novelization of Licence To Kill was published as early as May of 1989, and Win, Lose Or Die was not published until late July. Thus, the promotion occurred later in the literary timeline--at least omn this side of the pond! I had seen Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade the weekend it opened. It came out on Wednesday, May 24, 1989, and I saw it that Friday, May 26, 1989. Now, the next day (or possibly even before I saw the film) I went to my local Waldenbooks to pick up the novelizationby Rob MacGregor, and much to my delighted surprise they also had John Gardner's novelization of Licence To Kill, which I happened to see as, thankfully, the store employees had placed it on the shelf with the cover facing out so it immediately caught my eye. I had been a Bond fan for about ten years at that point, and had read all of the Gardner novels as they were published. While I knew that Win, Lose or Die was on its way that summer (probably by seeing an ad for it in the paperback version of Scorpius in the bookstore---I did not buy the parperback as I had the hardcover so I can't verify that), I had no idea that a novelization was in the works. While I was a member of the American fan club at that time, I do not recall it being mentioned in their magazine Bondage or their newsletter Bondage Quarterly, and aside from the British Fan Club, which I would join later, there were very few other sources readily available which would have bothered to cover such a momentous event! (You kids today have no idea how spoiled you are😉) Needless to say, I bought it right then and there, along with the Last Crusade novelization. As Licence To Kill was not scheduled for release in the US for nearly another two months, I could not resist temptation and consumed the novelization as soon as I got home, and finished it within 24 hours. I loved it, and was very happy to see Gardner take pains to keep it within his and Fleming's literary canon. While it does indeed strain credibility for Felix to be fed to a shark twice, he does pull it off and has Bond remember the horrible note pinned to Felix rather than have it appear a second time. While it is odd that there are two Milton Krests in the literary continuity, I did not have a real problem with it. I did indeed notice and appreciate how he had M subtly instruct Moneypenny to call Q in to help Bond out, as Gardner's characterization of M is a real strength of his books. Throughout his books, he continued to flesh M out as a father figure for Bond, and by having M revoke Bond's "licence within the service", Gardner maintains the fact that the 00 section had been abolished from the beginning of his tenure. As I said, I loved the book, and while this is no slight on the Indiana Jones novels--and I read all of the prequel books by Rob MacGregor--I was never compelled to delve into the Indiana Jones novelization, and it still sits on my shelf, unread. Now, having heard your review, I am really curious as to why there was no reference to Cedar Leiter. We may never know!

    • @jamesatkinsonja
      @jamesatkinsonja Год назад

      Probably both trying to avoid contradicting the film series too much [where Felix doesn't have a daughter] and keeping Gardner continuity to a minimum to appeal to a wider audience [hence why it's Q not Qu'te who's only in Gardner's books].

  • @ben8447
    @ben8447 Год назад +1

    does anyone know the exact time when Calvin abandoned his clip on bow tie and opted for the open neck shirt? It seems to be something which has happened without any fanfare. Or did Calvin ever have one on? Is Calvin's bow tie simply a false memory, residing in my memory banks along with Dolly and her braces?

  • @JOSH-lw2jv
    @JOSH-lw2jv Год назад +1

    To be fair, *"For Your Eyes Only"* did
    get a 2-issue comic book adaptation
    (even a "illustrated paperback" of
    the comic) of the 1981 film from Marvel Comics of all people.

    • @nekusakura6748
      @nekusakura6748 Год назад

      License to Kill also got a Comic Adaptation as well.

    • @JOSH-lw2jv
      @JOSH-lw2jv Год назад +1

      @@nekusakura6748
      *"GoldenEye"* also had a comic
      adaptation, but it was sadly
      cancelled after the first issue.

    • @nekusakura6748
      @nekusakura6748 Год назад

      @@user-do4nk6rb6t I tried getting a copy of the First issue of that on ebay but I lost to a Bid outside of my Budget.

  • @olivergiggins7931
    @olivergiggins7931 Год назад

    Well done for continuing this Gardner series on towards the bitter end! I started them at least 15 years ago and I still haven't got the courage to finish the few that remain:p I'm curious as to why you decided not to do a ranking video at the end though... surely that would have been a low effort way to continue using all this hard work?

    • @jamesatkinsonja
      @jamesatkinsonja 3 месяца назад

      He was ranking them as he went along in fairness. I suspect given he had a long gap between the 3rd and 4th novels maybe he felt he'd have to re-read them again for a ranking video and didn't feel like doing so which is fair enough! I think his 'gardner overview' was more interesting than a ranking video personally but each to there own.

  • @CaminoAir
    @CaminoAir Год назад +1

    Maybe Gardner felt he wouldn't meet his quota for that year......or he felt he was entitled to not have to come up with the entire plot & characters for once......

  • @patrickwilliams7741
    @patrickwilliams7741 Год назад

    Have you ever read the Fleming novel adaptations done for the British newspaper comic strip that have been reprinted by Titan Books?

  • @Guspool33
    @Guspool33 Год назад

    Calvin, will we perhaps see a Skyfall In-Depth movie review from you this year? I'd love to finally see it.

  • @olivergiggins7931
    @olivergiggins7931 Год назад

    The halfway mark has been crossed! The Calvin Gardner reviews end confirmed for 2025!

  • @davidjames579
    @davidjames579 Год назад

    The Shark "If I remove this artificial leg will you die?" Felix "It would be incredibly painful".

  • @adamcronchey7264
    @adamcronchey7264 Год назад

    Brokenclaw's up next. My favourite Gardner book. Can't wait.

  • @lifeschool
    @lifeschool Год назад

    Gotta licence to keel, and you know, I'm aiming straight...for your bed - gotta lie sense to keel.
    Lie sense to....KEEEEL.

  • @alfonsobiggers2452
    @alfonsobiggers2452 Год назад +1

    Felix, when he's about to get maimed a 2nd time:
    "Ah, sh*t. Here we go again."

    • @davidjames579
      @davidjames579 Год назад +1

      "You idiots! I've got a prosthetic leg"

  • @Reaching8
    @Reaching8 Год назад

    Why not go with some other kind of cutting device? Chainsaws are mentioned in the film, maybe you could play off that with some kind of other method for Felix to get maimed?

  • @Pikepaw
    @Pikepaw 3 месяца назад

    I think the stinger missile thing is because the props in the movie were an older launcher and not really stingers

  • @tintinbyherge
    @tintinbyherge Год назад +1

    I have to say that this and the Goldeneye novelisations should be read outside the Gardner series of books. And your complaints about the feeding of leiter to the sharks, again are quite strange to me. You have to remember for those who only read the Fleming books at this point would find it strange that he had already got injuries. So he incorporated the injuries he already had, and I felt that chapter handled quite well. In fact it's a more enjoyable read than the spy who loved me novelisation. But we all have our own tastes . Good review though. And not going to lambast you as it is your opinion and that's fine 🙂

  • @MultiCastorFiber
    @MultiCastorFiber Год назад

    Any plans on doing any more james bond comics? I would recommend Hammerhead as a slightly more brosnan-esque adventure that's amazing.

  • @davidjames579
    @davidjames579 Год назад

    "Marriage And Maiming". Just a typical Saturday.

  • @ntcnetwork9934
    @ntcnetwork9934 Год назад +1

    Why did he force this adaptation of a screenplay into his own continuity when it could’ve easily been a standalone thing is MY QUESTION.

    • @jamesatkinsonja
      @jamesatkinsonja Год назад +1

      He didn't have a choice. It seemed to be a requirement to make the novelisations tie into the novel universe rather than the films [due to the rights being owed by different companies] as the two Christopher Wood novelisation's had to tie into Fleming's continuity so Licence [and the subsequent novelisations] had to as well.

    • @ntcnetwork9934
      @ntcnetwork9934 Год назад +1

      @@jamesatkinsonja fascinating! How weird!

  • @beau5265
    @beau5265 Год назад

    Oh jeez! I’m so glad I never got around to reading the Gardner books. Sounds painful judging by those excerpts.

  • @j.st.jamesesq.9599
    @j.st.jamesesq.9599 Год назад

    0:04 I tried reading Mr. Gardner’s first Bond book, “License Renewed.” I couldn’t get through it, finding his writing monotonous and dull. I must have started reading that book 3-4 times. Eventually it wasn’t worth the effort. I’ve never bothered trying his following Bond books figuring they would be no better. To this day I wonder why Flemming’s estate chose him to write Bond novels. To me, he doesn’t have the flair to follow in Flemming’s footsteps.

  • @gregsofthefutre
    @gregsofthefutre Год назад

    I was strangely hopeful that twice maimed shark attack Felix could have had a weird crossover with Six Million Dollar Man… Gardner missed his shot 😂

  • @mylo3153
    @mylo3153 Год назад +1

    Have you watched Glass Onion yet? are you gonna review it?

    • @jamesatkinsonja
      @jamesatkinsonja Год назад +1

      There is a review on his Letterboxd page if you haven't seen it. Hopefully a video review will come eventually [as he reviewed the first one].

  • @lb6144
    @lb6144 Год назад

    Charlotte Brontë: 'Reader, I married him.'
    John Gardner: 'Reader, I maimed him.'

  • @bensneb360
    @bensneb360 Год назад +1

    John Gardner it’s a lot like Stephen King, they have a very large output with some very zany unique ideas

  • @yehhkow847
    @yehhkow847 20 дней назад

    So both mr big and Franz Sanchez left THE SAME NOTE?

  • @chrisretro81
    @chrisretro81 Год назад

    Sorry if you've covered these in the past Calvin, but what do you think of the Toby Stephens radio portrayal?

    • @nicknewman7848
      @nicknewman7848 Год назад +1

      Don't know about Calvin but I think he's really good. They can play it as period because they're proper adaptations of the books and because it's just audio obviously. He's probably closest to what the character would actually sound like with his public school accent. Like the BBC LOTR radio series, they are the closest adaptations to the original source material we have. David Suchet's Dr No was a bit mental but as a whole I think those radio plays are really strong.

    • @chrisretro81
      @chrisretro81 Год назад +1

      @@nicknewman7848 I totally agree about the character, he's less "Hollywood" and more of a public school educated agent-type. I think he actually would be like that too

  • @Niala8419
    @Niala8419 Год назад

    Gardner's books have really become a favourite of mine. Despite all my criticisms of them!
    Has anyone read Death is Forever? Goodness, the amount of characters and double crossing and general paranoia is off the charts!

  • @johnv7317
    @johnv7317 Год назад

    Calvin do you kind of wish that someone made a prequel story setting up the events to Licence to Kill?

    • @jamesatkinsonja
      @jamesatkinsonja Год назад +1

      They probably could have done that by having a chapter or two in the book detailing Felix's work at the DEA and tracking Sanchez down which is something Fleming often did [such as opening 'FRWL' with Red Grant's backstory].

  • @RighteousBrother
    @RighteousBrother Год назад

    Can't wait till you get onto the modern era of Bond continuation novels

  • @kclink1579
    @kclink1579 Год назад

    9:08 Maybe it's a shark per marriage deal.

  • @gornallbell5459
    @gornallbell5459 Год назад

    Are those first edition Bond novels on your shelf behind you in the video? 🙂

  • @joetheplummer8128
    @joetheplummer8128 Год назад +4

    Honeymoooooooon

  • @Jesse-mh6hv
    @Jesse-mh6hv Год назад +1

    you just got a subscriber ;)

  • @Aceimus1066
    @Aceimus1066 Год назад

    @calvin are you intending on doing any YT shorts?

  • @joetickle9676
    @joetickle9676 Год назад

    "Oh my gosh! They maimed Felix!"

  • @neilvarma
    @neilvarma Год назад

    Felix must have ptsd from baby shark by now

  • @99037149
    @99037149 Год назад

    If Dela was a friend of Bonds before she met Felix then Bond had definitely pumped her before Felix. I assume Felix would have known that as well...... Best to leave that detail out of the film......

  • @russellmoffett2447
    @russellmoffett2447 Год назад +1

    Why did the novelization have to maintain continuity with the book series

    • @jamesatkinsonja
      @jamesatkinsonja Год назад +2

      Because the novel Bond [Ian Fleming Publications/Gildrose] and Film Bond [Eon] copyright are owned by different groups, hence two different continuities so any books need to tie into the novel series rather than the films [hence why Bond doesn't have 'continuation books' in the same way Star Wars etc does which tie directly into the films]. The novelisations are about the only collaboration between the two groups.

  • @iamskyfall
    @iamskyfall Год назад

    I guess it goes to show how I feel about the Gardner books, that I think Licence to Kill is "his" best work?