I’m actually excited about this! I just hope it’s present day!
2 Likes
I really wish I had been at the IFP meeting where they decided the new direction would be to give the fans everything BUT Bond.
I would have had a few choice words…
7 Likes
I mean, as always they have my money.
That being said, does that mean we are actually getting two non-Bond Bond books next year? Interesting to say the least. I really hope we get a modern Higson series at some point.
1 Like
Diluting the IP until nobody cares anymore.
Way to go!
4 Likes
Another way to look at it is that while the film series has gone dark, at least the literary side of things is giving us plenty to talk about!
3 Likes
I have two questions about this:
-
Does anyone think this is in any way connected to the closing of the IFP survey two days ago? Remember that these types of spinoffs were a question in the survey. Is it possible IFP were waiting to see sufficient interest from the fanbase before officially giving it the green light?
-
I’d love some clarity on the “universe” / “continuity” in which this is set. Am I to presume that this is the same contnuity as the Sherwood trilogy? If so, is that, in turn, the same chronology as OHiMSS? Could all of these be the same timeline begun by Deaver in 2011? I’m actually fine with a firm break from the Fleming timeline, I’d just appreciate some official clarity on this from IFP, and I said as much in the survey. We are well past the Gardner or Benson days when we could imagine a (however flimsy) connection to Fleming.
2 Likes
The big problem with this is: Q is a creature of the films and regardless whether we look at the OldEon version - Llewelyn - or the rebooted Whishaw Q (probably), the time to capitalise on their respective popularity has likely passed.
For matters of convenience I just assume we’re talking Whishaw’s Q here*. His Q enjoyed a warm welcome by fans, also because Q’s return signalled at least some of what people claimed they loved about the series in the first place. Like M’s and Moneypenny’s roles, Whishaw’s part was expanded to the point where all three were regarded as central to Craig’s tenure (despite him and Moneypenny/Naomie Harris only coming on board with the third entry).
After NO TIME TO DIE these three roles will likely see either a new interpretation with the next Bond - or none at all. The films most likely will not pick up these actors and their characters again and it’s doubtful whether their next versions will be popular enough to inspire anything beyond mild indifference with the audience. The time to launch a Q book - never mind a whole series - would have been after SKYFALL.
*Because I seriously doubt they’d throw at us the adventures of a middle-to-best aged grouchy tech functionary of the SIS whose nemesis is a 00-agent making it his hobby to destroy his various apparatuses.
1 Like
While your logic here is sound, Dustin, a part of me feels IFP aren’t really catering this to casual fans of the films. Yes, it would be great if average moviegoers familiar with Whishaw decide to check this out, but IFP must realize by now that the literary Bond fanbase is more niche and, thus, less susceptible to confusion by somehow envisioning Q as the Whishaw version. Maybe this is a good opportunity for a new (but not too new) spin on Q.
2 Likes
It all started with The Barsetshire Chronicles. Damn Anthony Trollope!!
Then I look at the number of Star Trek novels and Star Wars novels, and encyclopedias, and reference manuals, and books of schematics, and think there must be some success there, since they keep writing/publishing the stuff, and when I see it at The Strand, it is usually gone the next time I look.
Isn’t this phenomenon, in a way, an example of the immersive worlds that producers of product want to suck people into?
4 Likes
Indeed, this would seem to be a mix of both worlds…
After Q (aka Major Boothroyd) is unexpectedly ousted from his role with British Intelligence developing technologies for MI6’s OO agents, he finds himself back in his sleepy hometown of Wickstone-on-Water. His childhood friend, renowned quantum computer scientist Peter Napier, has died in mysterious circumstances, leaving behind a cryptic note. The police seem disinterested, but Q feels compelled to investigate and soon discovers that Napier’s ground-breaking work may have attracted sinister forces . . . Can Q decode the truth behind Napier’s death, even as danger closes in?
2 Likes
I see what you mean - but in contrast to Bond Star Trek never was about one guy but crews. To build around that works.
In other words: I wouldn’t be interested in a Jimmy Olsen adventure, I‘m here for Superman 
4 Likes
I know. I was teasing a bit.
I revere William Faulkner, and feel his Yoknapatawpha novels are the pinnacles of English-language fiction in the 20th century (yes, I went there). And I am not trying to diss word-building in contemporary pop culture. But it is very hard, it seems, to world-build when there are so many architects, builders, and creators.
Maybe we need the Faulkner approach, who declared that he was the “sole owner and proprietor”:
2 Likes
“Move over Bond. Q is coming.”
No, no, no, no, no, no.
4 Likes
I have a very set opinion on “world building”: it´s a lack of story-telling courage to keep expanding side characters and sideplots and atmosphere and set design instead of focussing on one main plot which starts and ends.
“World building” is just an investment for stockholders to keep luring consumers back to one thing and milking it even if it has run its course.
Yes, sometimes interesting side plots can emerge. But most of the time it´s just the same thing over and over because… well, brands and marketing.
1 Like
A thought I just had: between On His Majesty’s Secret Service and Quantum of Menace, IFP seem to be leaning into spins on previous titles (OHMSS and QoS, respectively). Should we expect more of this in the future?
(I guess The Man With The Red Tattoo evokes TMWTGG, and I’ve always thought NTTD was either DAD in different words or eerily similar to High Time to Kill.)
2 Likes
Exactly. Rian Johnson dared to be different, resulting in THE LAST JEDI being retconned into oblivion, so Darth Abrams could tell the same tale yet again.
Copycats.
Trollope: Phineas Finn; Phineas Redux
Faulkner: The Hamlet; The Town; The Mansion
1 Like
I can’t say how underwhelmed I am at this news. Yes, I like Major Boothroyd, aka Q, but that mostly comes from the films where he is much, much more prevalent. Likewise, I also enjoy the other secondary characters–M, Bill Tanner, Moneypenny, James Molony etc. but mainly only on that level. I don’t read a James Bond novel or watch a James Bond movie for them. I read/watch them for 007 and HIS exploits. HE is what makes his adventures fun and exciting and worth reading and watching and worth coming back for. HE is why the literary series has lasted 71 years and film series has lasted 62 years. It’s not rocket science.
Honestly, the ONLY side characters I’d even be remotely interested in reading/watching are Bond’s allies Felix Leiter and René Mathis, but I’d still MUCH rather read and watch 007. Otherwise, books and films like the aforementioned Q story is like reading a novel about Sherlock Holmes’ world, but we only get to follow Mrs. Hudson’s exploits. 
To quote Tony Stark in The Avengers, “Not a great plan.”
This is very disappointing news and when combined with the further disappointment of No Time To Die, VERY discouraging. I want James Bond back! I want to live vicariously through him, not someone else. And judging by the responses so far on here, I’m sure most people would agree. IFP should take a page out of Tomorrow Never Dies’ script and “give the people what they want!” And THAT is James Bond 007.
2 Likes
My opinions after thinking about it all day.
Pros:
A least we’re getting a new book! And one that for sure has Bond in it!
Modern day setting. Just like Fleming did in his time.
An interesting choice for a character to follow. I wouldn’t have thought of it.
It seems like IFP might be taking that survey more importantly than we thought. Even if this was planned far before that.
While Bond is the main character, and one that want to see most, I love the idea of expanding his universe. Samantha Weinberg, Kim Sherwood, and Dynamite Comics have proven this. There’s a lot of characters that could probably drive a full book, on their own.
Cons:
As I said brather have a villain spinoff book. Another MI6 regular gets a heavy spotlight. The last 2 movies really overdid their screen time.
Now Q is on the run? EON probably has a say in this.
Hopefully it’s a physical copy eventually.
Classic character cameos that are written as fan fiction.
Only one writer can apparently write Bond at a time. I hope that doesn’t include spinoff characters.
So, I’m excited but cautious. Hopefully Blofeld isn’t behind it all! IFP, don’t forget about James Bond. He is your main money maker. Also, I wonder if Q will have a romance interest.
1 Like
I don’t want expanding universes.
I don’t want world building.
I want James Bond.
That’s all I’ve needed since I was a 10 year old in 1987.
I want Bond being sent on a mission. Killing the bad guy with some creepy deformity. Driving the cars. Bedding the girls. Drinking the drinks. Reflecting on it all over a double bourbon.
Now if you want to have a spin off series of Dolly going to university and discovering herself as a woman I might be talked into that, but I don’t want this crap.
6 Likes
This is just a natural expansion of the idea that something other than Bond is necessary for something to be considered a “Bond [movie/book/game/whatever]”. It’s a terrible idea, for sure, but given how much importance the formula has been given over the character of Bond himself, it was only natural that they would expand outward from Bond and give non-Bond characters the spotlight at the expense of the main attraction. If we can’t have a “Bond film” without Q (or Moneypenny, or M, or whoever), then the natural conclusion to that is that, one, those characters take on a greater importance than their status as supporting characters would otherwise indicate and, two, people have a desire to see more of these characters, which is exactly what IFP is doing here.
I’m almost at the point that, given that EON doesn’t consider Bond relevant anymore which is evident in their continuous need to ask that question in pretty much every film since Licence to Kill, and the rest of the people in charge of the various other aspects of the franchise (gaming, novels, whatever else there is) can’t be bothered to do a competent job with what they’re putting out, maybe Bond truly did die at the hands of Safin and it’s time to move on to another character carrying the torch for MI6.
2 Likes